Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2002-04-01 Transcription April 1, 2002 Work Session Page 1 April 1, 2002 Work Session 6:30 PM Council: Lehman, Champion, O'Donnell, Wilburn, Pfab, Kanner, (Vanderhoef arrived 6:40) Staff: Atkins, Helling, Kart, Dilkes, Franklin, Fosse, Davidson, Grosvenor, O'Malley TAPES: 02-31 BOTH SIDES; 02-32 SIDE ONE Addition Lehman/Okay Planning & Zoning items Karin. Marian Karr/Mr. Mayor we have the one addition. Lehman/Oh I'm sorry Marian has an addition. Karr/George if you would like to step to the podium over here. George would like to add something to the agenda. George Barlas/Hello, I'm George Barlas and I'm buying the Union Bar here in Iowa City, I'd like to be, my liquor license application be made a late addition to the Council Agenda. Lehman/Okay. O'Donnell/Thank you. Karr/Class C liquor license and a dancing permit will be added, okay. Lehman/Okay. Planning & Zoning A. PUBLIC HEARING ON AMENDMENTS TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, SOUTH DISTRICT MAP TO SHOW THE GENERAL ALIGNMENT OF A FUTURE EAST-WEST ARTERIAL STREET AND TO AMEND THE TEXT OF THE PLAN TO REFER TO THE ALIGNMENT. Franklin/You have a number of public heatings on tomorrow night, the first one is a comprehensive plan amendment to the South District. The reason for this is if you recall some time ago we adopted the South District Plan and there wasn't an alignment for collector in this district. After that, that was in 1997, after that the Council adopted as part of the South Central District the alignment for Mormon This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of April 1, 2002. April 1, 2002 Work Session Page 2 Trek Extended which comes down by the Airport and across 921 Riverside Drive across the river to Gilbert Street. With that decision it predicated the need to look at the alignment of that road as it crossed Gilbert Street into the South District. The existing alignment in the adopted South District Plan is down along Gilbert Street and across the Sycamore L and then follows the top of the conservation easement through Sycamore Farms and then eventually connects up with Scott Boulevard. We knew that when, at some point in time we were going to have to formally change the South District Plan to make it consistent with the decision had made in the South Central District. What has happened is that we have development proposals now that are coming in and the decision about where this alignment is going to be and exactly how the road is going to function needs to be made. So we brought a couple of options to a neighborhood meeting and then also to the Planning & Zoning Commission, and those options were one to come down kind of along the sewer easement, well not kind of along, actually along the sewer easement down to the Sycamore L and then continue to follow the alignment that had previously been set for that arterial street. The other option that was suggested which the staff proposed was a more direct Option B which as you can see from this illustration is a more direct alignment across the district and again picks up just north of the conservation easement and over to Scott Boulevard. The advantages of Option B have to do with the fact that it is more direct, therefore there is less right of way that needs to be acquired, it also provides for development on either side of it with the previous alignments either the existing or Option A, it's pretty close to the south part of the growth area because south of there is the, there's the conservation easement at Sycamore Farms, there's the waste water treatment plant and the soccer fields, some development in t his area but it basically isolates this area. And then our growth boundary comes up pretty close here such that we don't have a lot of property that's south of the development. So there's a couple of reasons for looking at this Option B, it went through the Planning & Zoning Commission and the Plarming & Zoning Commission recommended Option B with language highlighting cautions about environmental features as the actual aligranent of this road is set, engineered and designed. The vote by the Planning & Zoning Commission was 5-1 with Jerry Hansen voting no. One thing to keep in mind here, well two things to keep in mind, one is that the intention is not to create a belt-way here or a by-pass or a ring road or whatever terminology that you might use for a road that is at the extremity of the city limits and you don't expect to have development on either side. We tried that years ago with Highway 6, it obviously didn't happen, development happens on both sides of roads and it does not create a belt-way. So this will be a street that is part of our arterial street network, the intention is that it will be a two lane street, it will have limited access, the right of way will be extra wide like Scott Boulevard so we could go four lanes at anytime if we wish to but it would be built two lanes and it would be part of the internal arterial street system of the city. The other thing is that what we're talking about here is long range planning, the intention is not to build this anytime soon. Although as development occurs parts of it can be built, and by setting the alignment at this This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of April 1, 2002. April 1, 2002 Work Session Page 3 point in time or the general alignment we are able to preserve the corridor so that we know that right of way can be acquired at some time. As we get closer to it actually being a public project then we would hire an engineering firm to do the environmental assessment to do the actual design and we would be looking at construction. But at this point it's at least five years out because it's not in your capital improvements program or it would happen as development occurs. And the area where we've had inquiries of course is what's on the rest of your agenda which has to do with Napoleon Heights, the subdivision of that property and then the zoning question regarding D. J. Hammond and Associates, so that's the first public heating on a comp. plan amendment that would change the arterial street alignment for this east west road in the general comprehensive plan. It would also change it within the south district, and it would also go before the JCCOG Urbanized Area Policy Board for inclusion in the arterial street plan if you choose, whatever you choose to finally settle upon. Just to reiterate the Commission has recommend Option B with language that highlights the environmental concerns and how it's necessary to take those into consideration when we are at the point of doing design. Pfab/Are questions in order? Franklin/Certainly. Pfab/I'm concerned about the street, Gilbert and where it crosses as it looks there, it's not a 90 degree angle. Franklin/Okay it would be a 90 degree angle Irvin when we actually engineer it. Pfab/So any of those streets would end up being 90 degrees? Franklin/Two arterial street intersections will be 90 degrees, yes, and Gilbert and this street would be such and also Sycamore. With Scott it is likely to curve up and then hit Highway 6 at 90 degrees and continue on. Pfab/Okay so any time that there's a cross a street it will be at a 90 degree angle? Franklin/Yes. Pfab/Okay, I, what is the purpose of this street? You say it's not a by-passer or a heavy arterial street why do we need four lanes then? Franklin/We don't know that we will need four lanes, we would get right of way to enable us to have four lanes because it's in the arterial system. It's very similar to Scott Boulevard, it's similar to Melrose Avenue, it's similar to Mormon Trek Boulevard, but at the time that we build it, it is unlikely that we're going to need This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of April 1, 2002. April 1, 2002 Work Session Page 4 four lanes, I mean we just build very few lanes at four lanes. Highway 6 and Mormon Trek are the only ones we have. Pfab/Are we shooting ourself that it will not be this type of heavily traveled arterial street or by-pass very similar to a by-pass? Franklin/It will be a heavily traveled street and that's why and that's why we're designating it as an arterial and looking at it as an arterial, that's what arterials are, that's where most of your traffic should be. It won't be for some time because development's not there and it probably won't be totally around it like Highway 6 for many, many years to come. Pfab/Okay now what about there's some sand prairie and one other thing. Franklin/Right, that's. Pfab/Now what happens if the sand prairie's in the way of the road as it is here? Franklin/It is not. Pfab/It is not, okay. Franklin/This alignment takes it south of the sand prairie, that was the whole intention and there was language in the proposed amendment that indicates that the city will in determining the exact alignment take those environmental features into consideration. Pfab/Okay so if, as of now what your saying if it's sand prairie no road, Franklin/That's right. Pfab/Okay. Franklin/Ready for the next item? Lehman/Yes mam. Kanner/I've got a question, Richard Rhodes seems to think it does continge on the box turtles at least, the proposed road, proposed Road A or B. Franklin/Okay, this is a plan, this is not an engineered alignment, the language in the plan indicates that environmental features which would include sand prairies, box turtles, wetlands, all of those features that have been identified either on the comprehensive plan of the sensitive areas ordinance would be taken into consideration when the engineering is done for the road. The intention here is to This represents .only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of April 1, 2002. April 1, 2002 Work Session Page 5 avoid the sand prairies, it goes in an area where if you look here Steven as I'm pointing, right here is where we did that big sewer project that went down to the waste water treatment plant. That land has already been disturbed, when we went through there and did the sewer project, there was fencing that was put up along the ditches for the sewer project to make sure the turtles didn't go in the hole. The same sort of caution would be taken that would avoid the sand prairie, that's the whole point. Karmer/Where's appendix A that's mentioned here as part of the resolution? This would be in the comprehensive plan Appendix A that's already, it will be unchanged. Franklin/The Appendix A in the South District Plan are, that's describing sensitive, environmental features and archaeological sites, it's part of the South District plan already, and that's a reference to that Appendix A. Okay. Kanner/So that's not being changed at all? Franklin/No, no. And in the South District there is reference to box turtles and sand prairies. Vanderhoef/Karin, I understand the arterial need in this area, I still would like us to take a look at a further south area to do a second east west and is this the appropriate time that we should be putting that on the plan? Franklin/It's already in there. In the South District Plan in the original, there is reference to an arterial that would come across at this point and go across the 218 interchange and that is where we still have it, now if your talking about farther south there that's outside our growth area. Vanderhoef/No I'm not. But is this on our regional transportation plan? That's the piece that I think we need to get it. Franklin/Jeff, yes it is. Vanderhoef/Okay. Franklin/So that was in the South District Plan before and that's not being changed and it was in the way out years. Vanderhoef/Oh yea. Franklin/Did you have something else Steven? This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of April 1, 2002. April 1, 2002 Work Session Page 6 B. PUBLIC HEARING ON AMENDMENTS TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TO PROVIDE FOR THE LOCATION OF LARGE APARTMENT 1N NEW NEIGHBORHOODS AND TO AMEND THE SOUTH DISTRICT PLAN LAND USE MAP TO DEPICT MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT ON THE EAST SIDE OF SOUTH GILBERT STREET EAST AND SOUTH OF NAPOLEON PARK. Franklin/Okay the next item is a public hearing on amendments to the comp. plan to provide for the location of a large apartment in new neighborhoods and to amend the South District Plan specifically to depict multi-family development on the east side of Gilbert Street east and south of Napoleon Park. Now just ignore this picture for a minute because what I want you to think about first is the philosophical shift that we're talking about here. When the comprehensive plan was adopted in 1997 there were statements, there are statements in the plan about developing new neighborhoods. And that was about developments that are on the developing edges of the city, not the downtown, the developing edges of the city. And when those new neighborhoods were developed they would be developed with a diversity of housing types to match the diversity of households that we saw as a consequence of the consensus. In order to integrate multi-family into new neighborhoods, the decision at that time and also in the South District when the citizen workshops went on with that district was that the way you integrate multi- family into single family neighborhoods is you do it by having small scale apartment buildings that will work in with duplexes, single family development in a neighborhood. So the first issue for you is whether you are changing that philosophy such that large apartment complexes in new neighborhoods are okay. If you do that that is a philosophical shift and as we work through our district plans we will need to make that clear to the neighborhoods that the philosophical shift has occurred in terms of a policy city wide and that new neighborhoods may include large multi-family complexes. So that's the first question, the second question has to do with the South District specifically and it builds upon your first decision. That second decision has to do with what is on the map for the south district expressly in this area which this is Gilbert Street with the new alignment for the arterial that would be coming over following kind of down here and onto the east so what your seeing on this drawing is the old alignment is existing alignment or Option B, A I'm sorry. What the South District Plan currently shows on this future land use scenario is that there would be some small apartment development at the comer of these two arterial streets. That the remainder of the area here would be developing for duplex or small lot single family, there would be some other apartments up at this intersection of this street. What is being proposed as a way, if you are going to approve the application before you from Hammond and Associates or Dinerstein is that this entire area be this dark color of apartments. Okay so the first thing is large apartment complexes anywhere in the city in new neighborhoods, and the second decision is about whether you change specifically in the South District to allow this to happen at this intersection. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of April 1, 2002. April 1, 2002 Work Session Page 7 Lehman/How large is that where your arrow is at I think? Franklin/About 17 acres. Lehman/The portion that's dark. Franklin/Oh right here. Lehman/No, no, move over, other way, the large. Franklin/This. Lehman/Is that open space or is that apartments? Franklin/No that's open space, that's the sand prairie. Lehman/Okay fine thank you, okay. And how large is that? Never mind it's not relevant, it doesn't make any difference. Franklin/I don't know. Kanner/Karin when the decision was made in putting this the appropriate use in that case the apartments and the duplex from small lot, was the consideration about the second arterial coming in made at, was that factored into that or was there an assumption for? Franklin/No when this decision was made this was a collector street. But the principle of, the principle for the multi-family complexes was larger than this area or what those streets were. It was when you developed new neighborhoods you'll have multi-family as a part of new neighborhoods but it would be on a scale that would work in with the single family and duplex of the more traditional neighborhoods that we've built in the past in order to get that mix. And that was a way that it was palatable to people to have multi-family, you know how many times have we had rezoning requests that are somewhere near single family neighborhood in which we could not get approval of the multi-family because of concern about either scale or size or density or occupancy or something. And so the effort was to try to make the mix more palatable. And we've seen it play out at areas like Court and Scott Boulevard where we have a mix of apartments, town houses, single family, duplexes, all in a relatively small area. Pfab/I have a question. I am questioning, the first question you have to ask should large complexes be built out in neighborhoods. Franklin/In new neighborhoods, because right now the policy in the comprehensive plan is to focus that large apartment complex construction in our downtown, in an This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of April 1, 2002. April 1, 2002 Work Session Page 8 around the campus, and that is for transportation reasons, you have the high density near where the destinations are, that whole thing. Pfab/Okay but it appears that we have a need here where the large apartment complexes be built this enough to how many the needs of the student. Franklin/I would question that. Pfab/And so what we're seeing is the overflow goes into older neighborhoods and housing with character is chopped up to allow to be used as student housing. This is, this was why this thing was appealed to me. We have, we can't deny that we have a population that is unique to a lot of cities, we have a lot of students here. Franklin/Yea. Pfab/So is it wrong to say that they are a, they are a part of our community that maybe has some unusual needs or special needs? I don't know, to me if there's no University or a place where high concentration where students are this would not be in place but if the fact that it is here and the University isn't building enough places, and we can hardly tear down enough stuff downtown to put up more apartments, we can't seem to do it fast enough. Why and we've tried to preserve the inner close to downtown and close to downtown area I'm wondering if we're not suppose to look at one individual complex, but isn't this kind of a god send to the community? Franklin/Well first of all I have to, I think caution you to discuss this in a context of a multi-family development. Students are not a protected class, students are young people, there may be students, in terms of this proposal it is presented as student housing. When these buildings are built they may be student housing for a long time or they may not, they will be apartments. Pfab/Okay. Franklin/And you need to look at it from a land use perspective as apartments because they can be lived in ultimately by anyone you know. Pfab/Right. Lehman/Yea but I'm not sure this discussion shouldn't take place at the public hearing, I mean these are items that the public should here. Franklin/That's fine. Lehman/The relative merit. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of April 1, 2002. April 1, 2002 Work Session Page 9 Pfab/But we're trying to figure out a place to put these. Lehman/Well but I think the discussion that we need to put forth to the public because I happen to have the same questions that you have but I think they should be presented publicly. Pfab/Okay, that's fine, but when we have a public hearing we don't get to ask many questions. Lehman/Well we only have the heating, but we have three considerations or at least one. Pfab/All right that's fine. Kanner/I have a question. Franklin/Okay. Kanner/Three I think, one was, it appeared from reading the minutes of the P & Z that it was a long night they were having and that there was suggestions to making amendments to make this more specific perhaps for just the south district, one of the fears is this will open the flood gates for anywhere. Franklin/! think that was a proposal from the developer's attorney. Kanner/And discussions in general, I thought it was about this issue about being, putting in some safeguards to make it more specific and it seemed that people were just maybe nmning out of steam and just wanted to vote it up or down. So it seems that perhaps that's something that we can consider, some specific amendments just for this area, if it's something we want to consider or encourage something similar or slightly different. Franklin/So you would be looking at encouraging multi-family complexes in the south district but not elsewhere? Kanner/Perhaps, and it gets to the second question, what is the definition of large? What would staff feel is acceptable? What's less than large? Franklin/Well first of all let me make it real clear that the position as far as large and small is something that was a consequence of a lot of public discussion and citizen input. There's a definition of it in the code and or in the code, I'm sorry in the plan in both the comprehensive plan and the South District Plan that's about 24 units on a comer. So when we look at these areas here we're looking at fairly small collections, it would be a couple of 12-plexes or three 8-plexes and that was the whole idea that the scale of development is small. And I would challenge Irvin's point that we can't build enough of them. The vacancy rate right now is This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of April 1, 2002. April 1, 2002 Work Session Page 10 about 5 percent, which is a healthy vacancy rate, and it depends upon where you are in the city as to where that vacancy rate prevails but that's an overall, you get close to the downtown and it's 100 percent occupied, you get farther out from the Pentacrest and it drops and as the market gets sorer that's where it drops first. Pfab/When did the vacancy rate come to 5 percent? Franklin/It's been within the last two years and that's, I'm getting that information from apartment owners and managers in town. Pfab/That's quite loose. Kanner/Karin walk me through compared contrast. Franklin/But I, that vacancy rate, I'm not sure that that's an issue but I want to make it. Pfab/I, my point wasn't to be argumentative or to be confrontational I'm just saying this is what's in our lap here and how do we make it work. Franklin/Okay. Kanner/Looking at the scale of the proposed project talk to me about magnitude to relative points around town where there are two arterials in the area. How much larger or equivalent size does this project to points at other arterial (can't hear). Franklin/Arterials. Kanner/Two arterials since we have one. Franklin/Rohret Road and Benton, not, Mormon Trek. MTV, Mormon Trek Village that area, it's a hard comparable because that's a mix of apartments, and it's duplexes and townhouses all together there. Vanderhoef/How many are there on that comer? Franklin/I don't know (can't hear). Kanner/Isn't that what your saying that might be the model for what might be allowed here? Franklin/But it's a mix. Kanner/But (can't hear) and Mormon Trek might be the model for what we want out here. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of April 1, 2002. April 1, 2002 Work Session Page 11 Franklin/I don't know if you'd want to do a Mormon Trek Village but that's a matter of your decision making. Lehman/The comer of Melrose and Mormon Trek is also a pretty good size complex. Franklin/Where? Lehman/Across from Finkbine, Mormon Trek and Melrose. Franklin/Oh yea, and that's been there for years, years. Lehman/A long time. Franklin/Oh there's a number of older ones that have been around for a long time. There's that one at Mormon Trek and Melrose, there's Seville Apartments on Benton Street. Lehman/Oh Seville. Franklin/I mean there's Lakeside on Highway 6, there's a number of them that are comparable as to the number of bedrooms. Kanner/Okay. Franklin/But I don't know that they're, in terms of at the comer of two arterials, that's what stumped me, and I don't know what MTV is. Pfab/But the apartments or the units that are sitting on the south east quadran of Mormon Trek and Melrose, that density would be a lot higher than this is. This is as far as density I don't see this as a high density. Franklin/ You know that can be a very subject, subjective kind of thing, what's high and what's low, and so that's part of the judgment that you have to make. Kanner/In terms of sprawl, it appears in some ways that this proposed large development and (can't hear) say we allow that we'd be better off in the services that we look for in a neighborhood would be there, more likely to be there, transit of sorts, it's almost a public transit of sorts for residence, recreation areas, and there's a proposal for some commercial there. But if we were to go with individual homes it would take a lot more to develop all those other items, wouldn't that be the case? Franklin/By putting a relatively instant population there of 624 people obviously you do create a market so I guess that is tree in terms of transit unless it's privately This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of April 1, 2002. April 1, 2002 Work Session Page 12 provided that would not, that number of people would not immediately bring the transit system to that point. It would take more than that. Kanner/Well the reason for, for private transit, isn't that possible to add that as an amendment about the south district that anything that would be put there would have to provide some of these services as part of it? Couldn't that be part of the comprehensive plan, South District Plan? Lehman/It would be a conditional zoning. Kanner/Well not necessarily that but we see that's our goal, if we're going to allow large complexes outside the downtown, we're saying it has to provide transit. Franklin/What does transit mean to you? Kanner/Well let's say something equivalent to public transit. We would define it and we would have to work that out, I mean we could say something equivalent to a bus route to Towncrest. Franklin/I suppose you could. Kanner/We could put that in the South District Plan. Franklin/That if you, that your amendment is such that you permit large multi-family complexes as long as they provide a private transit system from wherever they are to somewhere. Kanner/Court area or downtown area which is where our transit goes through, our public transit goes through. Vanderhoef/If your going to talk about transit then I think we need to look at the possibility of incorporating this into our transit and get support from the complex, they obviously are planning this as a cost to them, cost of doing business which would be reflected in the rents there so I'd like our transit people to take a look at something like that if it were to happen and see if the same kind of support were given to the city if we could have transit for that complex and everything in between. Kanner/And that could be written in, it could just like open space you could either give open space or payment in lieu of that and that could be part of any proposal if we wanted to put that in. Vanderhoef/In their proposal they had talked about doing, buying bus passes for their residents, some of those kind of things. Karin, changing subjects a little bit. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of April 1, 2002. April 1, 2002 Work Session Page 13 Franklin/I mean your talking now about the specific project which it's hard not to. Vanderhoef/Well I'm getting back to, I'm getting back to the (can't hear). To the west side of Gilbert at the northwest comer, that's where we gave some commercial, there's two acres in there. Franklin/Convenience store size. Vanderhoef/Different owner and so forth. The rest of that red strip, what is that? Franklin/Public Works. Vanderhoef/All of that is Public Works? Okay and to the west of that orange, there isn't any buildable land because of the topography or not? Franklin/Well there's a lot of flood plain land in there but remember you can build in the flood plain if the habitable floor is one foot above the 100 year flood plain. So this would all have rezoning attached to it because this is all IDRS or IDRM in this area now. So it, there would be some changes, there's no zoning in place that would give you that by right now, and I think we'd want to look very closely at that in any zoning change. I mean, property rights aside which of course we can't do, but if we could the best thing for this land to be undeveloped because it's all flood plain. Vanderhoef/Well that's sort of where I was going. Okay now let's go east of Gilbert Street and you have the light orange there that is to be the whole complex if it were to go through. Now someplace else there, they're talking about some commercial property, is that on the south side of the arterial? Franklin/And remember this road here is not the alignment, or is not a point it will be but it was, it was in this area here for commercial, north of the pit, I mean the excavation business. Vanderhoef/So how many acres would be in that piece right in there before you got into the pond and so forth? O'Donnell/It's hard (can't hear). Franklin/Jerry's saying 10, on Barker's property too? No just Southgate, so the corporate limits are right here and I think that defines the property line which would be 10 acres above that, and then Barker owns the excavation business and the land around there. There's a storm, there was a storm water detention facility proposed at one point down there. There was some deal between Barker and Southgate and so that 10 acres of commercial there which was another amendment that was being considered by the Planning & Zoning Commission This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Cotmcil Meeting of April 1, 2002. April 1, 2002 Work Session Page 14 which the Planning & Zoning rejected and Southgate withdrew their commercial rezoning application, so that whole thing is off the table right now. Vanderhoef/Okay that, because I wasn't thinking that I wanted anymore commercial at that particular coruer or at least on that side of the street. Franklin/Well in the South District Plan the commercial that had been envisioned was more centralized and was suppose, was the concept was it would be more focused on the neighborhood with Option B with the arterial coming through it was to come through right about there where the commemial was intended to make it economically more feasible. Champion/Karin where do you envision the neighborhoods that are there converging with this undeveloped area? Franklin/Well we have Southpointe and this is, well Pepperwood is up here, there's these areas in here around Wetherby which we would expect to develop so that this would all be one large neighborhood and then if we have the arterial street coming through here that kind of makes a boundary and so then you have another neighborhood down in this area and the Mikada subdivision and then further development of the Gatens Trust land, you've got our South Sycamore Detention Basin in here and then you've got the existing neighborhood in this area coming south and Sycamore Farms in here, more development in there. So does that answer your question? Champion/ Yea it does, but with the kind of the ridge that's behind that property. Franklin/Okay here we're talking about the sand prairie, if you, if you parked over here by the quasant huts and looking across, you can see all the way over to the Sycamore because your at the south end of the sand prairie but you can't see into this area of the city because of the topography so development that happens in this portion assuming that the sand prairie is preserved as opposed to developed would have this kind of buffer. Champion/Right. Franklin/Between the two land uses, such that this would be fairly isolated. Champion/I've been out there twice and I get that feeling too, and I know we're not suppose to talk about particular projects but. Franklin/Well you can it's just that the large issue is an important one. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of April 1, 2002. April 1,2002 Work Session Page 15 Champion/I just feel that if we want neighborhoods that intertwine that expand and remain neighborhoods I know we already have some problems in those neighborhoods and I really feel put 600 and some students. Franklin/624. Champion/Your right there's no guarantee that that's going to remain student housing, but we're talking about putting a huge number, an instant number of a very noisy population into eventually where I'd like to see neighborhoods expand into, and I think that's got to enter into my decision that this is, this is going to add to the problems that we have with into town with apartment complexes we have right now. And I see that, that to me is a barrier that I would have to deal with if we're going to allow this particular or any apartment complex to go in there. That it's not, it would be like putting, I don't know like putting this large apartment complex to house students over by Walden Place, I mean I don't know it fits into this area. Franklin/Well ifI could just speak a moment to that notion of separation of isolation. One of the main precepts of the comprehensive plan is that as we build the city, we build places where there is a mix of people in an area. Champion/Right. Franklin/That we accept that as what our community is about, that diversity is a good thing and we mix it up. If we talk about isolating certain populations, that is a whole different philosophy, and if that's your choice that's fine, but I just hope it's a very conscious choice. O'Donnell/How far is the closest housing from this proposed spot? Franklin/Right now? O'Donnell/Yea. Franklin/Oh South Pointe is over here and Pepperwood is up here. O'Donnell/Are we talking a quarter mile are we talking a half mile? Franklin/It's probably at least a quarter of a mile or more, half, well. O'Donnell/A quarter of a mile. Franklin/I can't. Kanner/The question is can Ross Wilburn hit a home run to that complex? This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of April 1, 2002. April 1, 2002 Work Session Page 16 Franklin/It would hit the complex easy. O'Donnell/I don't think (can't hear). Wilburn/My reputation precedes me. O'Donnell/If someone were to buy this? Well we're getting into stuff we shouldn't. Franklin/Well we can go onto the next item which is the rezoning item if you want to since we're kind of. O'Donnell/I think we should. Franklin/They are intimately intertwined. C. PUBLIC HEARING ON AN ORDINANCE REZONING 17.64 ACRES FROM INTERIM DEVELOPMENT SINGLE FAMILY (ID-RS) AND INTERIM DEVELOPMENT MULTI-FAMILY (ID-RM) TO PLANNED DEVELOPMENT HOUSING OVERLAY-12 (OPDH-12) TO ALLOW 168 DWELLINGS IN 18 BUiLDINGS LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF GILBERT STREET SOUTH OF NAPOLEON LANE. (REZ01-00024) Franklin/Okay this is the project, the Hammond Project which you know I think you've probably read most of the material here on this in terms of what we're talking about here, the 168 units, 624 bedrooms. And the bedrooms we point out because that's the way it's going to be leased is by bedroom. There's an entrance off of Gilbert Street and also one off of the new roadway that would precede to the east here. And you know I just want to say that we have worked, and I think we have worked well with the developer of this project, they've been good at working with us and trying to come up with a design for this project that's going to work i£you get past the philosophical questions. There's an entrance here on Gilbert Street with the club house, the pool, they've integrated some townhouses with the apartment complexes at our request. The orientation here along Gilbert Street is good in that what your presented with on Gilbert Street is a positive image of people living there, more townhouses along this area and then you can see the apartments, another sprinkling of townhouses here, apartments along this back area. They have agreed to dedicate the shaded area as park land and put in a trail connection, I think, you agreed to that didn't you Jerry? Jerry Hansen/(Can't hear) With the entire (can't hear). Franklin/Okay, so at some point this trail would go in along here. Let me see I just want to make sure I. Okay the issues we've talked about is that we would include in a conditional zoning agreement if this were to go forward, and we don't have one This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of April 1, 2002. April 1, 2002 Work Session Page 17 drafted now because when it came out of Planning & Zoning we had a denial. Gilbert Street improvement, and there's been some debate about that which I think stems partly from a misunderstanding of what we are about with this. This is not an issue of capacity, it is an issue of street standard, our point was not that this development in and of itself is going to require a 4-lane highway. In the future as Gilbert is improved from a rural cross section to a an urban cross section, we would take it as a 4-lane road from it's current point of being 4-lane down to the intersection with the new arterial and have it be 4-lane tot hat point and then narrow it to two as it goes into the county. Because it is a rural cross section and we're talking about putting an urban density population at this point, I'm trying to go back here. Okay, at this point right now it's 4 lanes I think to the railroad tracks. Wilbum/No it goes past that to the softball complex I think. Franklin/Okay, to Napoleon Lane, it was to take it from the rural cross section here to an urban cross section. If it is going to be improved it ought to approved to the dimensions and the standard at which we would want it improved rather than doing two lanes now and four lanes five years from now. I mean I think your right whoever said Steven I think that this will be a catalyst to more development here. And so the need for that road is going to increase as development and so that was one issue was the improvement at Gilbert Street. As we have talked to people about development of this area in the past, we have told them that improvement of Gilbert Street will be one of the requirements for developing along Gilbert Street if your on the rural cross section it's got to be improved to the urban cross section. Wilburn/How far can the improvements go, I'm thinking of the intersection of Gilbert and the highway? Franklin/This is just about going from two lane. Wilburn/Yea, I understand. Franklin/from the urban, yea I think that's got to be a city project. The other issue was transit service which Steven has alluded to in which the developer has provided in many of their other developments around the country and that would be part of the conditional zoning agreement also that a specified transit service would be provided. And that is because we're talking about 624 students or thereabouts going to classes downtown, or across the river which ever, but the only way tot get there unless you are a very hearty soul which people have trouble walking two blocks in our town so I don't know that they're going to walk to downtown, that they're going to drive so there needs to be some alternative provided. When the trail system is in they'll have biking opportunities but it is Iowa and you don't always want to bike, like today. One of the issues was the trail that we've already talked about, and then the protection of the ornate box turtles. We have been This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of April 1, 2002. April 1, 2002 Work Session Page 18 asked since this came out of the Planning & Zoning Commission by the Department of Natural Resources to work with them on not issuing any permits or approvals until the issue of the ornate box turtles is resolved. We believe we can do that with rezonings, we can not do it with building permits and we can not do it with (can't hear). (END OF 02-31; SIDE ONE) Franklin/Code. But with rezonings, and because this is a rezoning and it is on a comprehensive plan that in this area there is the issue of sand prairies and the box turtles and that one of the conditions of any conditional rezoning would be that we receive a letter from DNR indicating that the box turtle issue has been resolved before this thing takes off. Pfab/One of the things that sort of puzzles me is that because of the requirement of the ground space to the number of people living there, this is a pretty big footprint. And my question is does it need to be that big, and that if it wasn't that big would it still get up in the box turtle area? Franklin/You mean could you condense it by building different buildings that went higher? Pfab/Right. Franklin/You could but I don't think that's their. Pfab/I'm not saying that it's, but that looked to me like it was an alternative, is this, are we getting into questions that we shouldn't? Okay. Because when I went down there and looked at it, it looks like it does, there's a potential that the box turtles are pretty close. But if you condensed it you know, that was a question that puzzled me, why did it even have to be that big ora footprint? Franklin/I think that's a question that needs to be answered by the developers. Pfab/Great. Kanner/Karin, we're not having the switching from CC to NC proposal? Didn't P & Z look at the proposal to? Franklin/For commercial zoning? Kanner/To go from C, commercial, or to go from neighborhood commercial to CC? I saw that they voted on that. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of April 1, 2002. April 1, 2002 Work Session Page 19 Franklin/They looked at a proposal to amend the comp. plan to provide for commercial at the intersection, the 10 acres ofcommemial that we talked about earlier. And the whole discussion was about that in relationship to the neighborhood commercial that had already been planned along Sycamore. And the central locality of that neighborhood commercial. The Planning & Zoning Commission chose not to amend the south district plan to either add a commercial district on Gilbert Street or move the neighborhood commercial from Sycamore to Gilbert. When they defeated that plan amendment the application to rezone to commemial was withdrawn by the developer and that was Southgate. Lehman/And so it's not part of what we're looking at? Franklin/No it is not, no, that's off the table. And also that was not a Hammond and Associates proposal, that was a Southgate Development proposal. Kanner/Do you know if Southgate plans on bringing this back at some time? Franklin/I don't know, I don't know. Vanderhoef/Karin when you said that we're talking about, we could do this by zoning? Franklin/The turtle thing? Yea. Vanderhoef/Yea. Has there been any discussion about zoning a protected area and leaving this other area alone making it a preservation area? Franklin/Any discussion, not formally. We don't have a zone for protected areas. If we want to protect an area, that is make it a no build area, and the city wants to impose that we have to buy it. What we have talked with Southgate Development about is transferring density such that they stay out of the sensitive area, they can then retain their density, the number of units, it often becomes a different housing type which then becomes a housing issue. And we've talked about that with them both in conjunction with this project and with further development to the east and that's still out there. When I said we could deal with the box turtles with zoning, zoning is the exercise or the process that you have the greatest discretion in, and because the turtles as a sensitive feature and the sand prairie's a sensitive feature were identified already in the comprehensive plan in the south district, that gives you the basis to talk about it. And the point at which you can pull that into the process is in the rezoning process. Vanderhoef/With the conditional. Franklin/With the conditional zoning, yea, if it was just a subdivision such as Napoleon Heights, there's nothing in our subdivision regulations that speaks to the issue of turtles or any other sensitive features, okay. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of April 1, 2002. April 1, 2002 Work Session Page 20 D. PUBLIC HEARING ON AN ORDINANCE REZONING 5.45 ACRES FROM RURAL RESIDENTIAL (RR-1) AND INTERIM DEVELOPMENT SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (ID-RS) TO LOW DENSITY SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (RS-5) LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF ROHRET ROAD AND PHOENIX DRIVE. (REZ02-00001) Franklin/Okay this is a proposal to rezone about 5 and a half acres from RR-1 and ID-RS to RS-5, this was brought in by the owner of this piece right here and this particular piece of ground is not part of the Southwest Estates subdivision, and is not part of the Southwest Estate covenants as you will see in some of your background material. Southwest Estates includes three, lot 3, 4, 5 and 6, 3, 4 and 6 are owned by the Korean Methodist Church, lot 5 is owned by another individual. When Kevin Hanick brought this piece of ground in and suggested to us that he wanted to rezone it, we told him that it would be surrounded by RR-1 since there is RS-5 on this side of Phoenix Drive on the east of Phoenix Drive, what you need to do is incorporate some of this other ground into it such that your not doing a spot zoning. He spoke with the Korean Methodist Church as well as the owner of Lot 5, they have agreed to this rezoning and we have a signed conditional zoning agreement, that conditional zoning agreement provides for a sewer easement to come from two some place down to lots 3 and 4, 6 is not developed, 3 is the location of the church, 4 is the location of the church's parking. What we were concerned about is that if this property changes hands, it is redeveloped, it is subdivided that sewer be provided down to these two lots. The other condition of the conditional zoning agreement restricts access onto Rohret Road such that Lot 4 would go through Lot 3 and to Phoenix Drive. This piece of property would have a shared drive to the two lots that may form there and this lot would continue to have one access point. So that conditional zoning agreement is in and you can then close the public heating. Oh last item, the public heating on the Hammond rezoning, you need, if there are going to be four of you who are going to seriously consider that rezoning which I was heating that from your discussion tonight then you need to have a consultation with Planning & Zoning. We need to put the conditional zoning agreement together and we need to have a signed conditional zoning agreement before the public heating is closed, I would recommend you keep that public hearing open tomorrow night. Vanderhoef/Karin is the original house on this project already on city sewer? Franklin/No, this one in here. Vanderhoef/Yes. Franklin/I don't think so because that was not part of the subdivision, I doubt that. Vanderhoef/But 4 and 6 have. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of April 1, 2002. April 1, 2002 Work Session Page 21 Franklin/I'm not, oh 6 has nothing on it, this is 5, that right now is an out building, there's not a house on there, they are intending to put a house on there, they could then connect to city sewer and Rohret Road. I think it's in Rohret Road or it's maybe it's back here. Where is it Larry? Larry Schnittjer/(can't hear). Franklin/Okay so right there. Pfab/And so going. Vanderhoef/And that requires putting out the septic that's with the old farm house. Franklin/I don't know if you have to pull it out or not, it means it would go onto city sewer for any development on these lots but whether you have to pull it out of the ground. Vanderhoef/Don't we require it? Lehman/Probably not, fill it up. Franklin/I don't know, I don't know. Vanderhoef/Sort of like old wells. Franklin/Well you have to cap them, old wells, I don't know that's a public health, I don't know the answer to that. Vanderhoef/I'd like an answer to that. Franklin/Okay, do we regulate septic tanks? Vanderhoef/Well we're getting into the business of annexing some of these things. Steve Atkins/Dee and Karin, septic tank guy back here knows. Franklin/Oh of course. Vanderhoef/Oh yes, super flush. Rick Fosse/For an old septic tank like that you'd just fill it with sand or fill it with the mortar or something and the leach fill can just be left as is out there. Franklin/Thank you Rick. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of April 1, 2002. April 1, 2002 Work Session Page 22 Lehman/There'd be no point in taking it out. Vanderhoef/That was easy. Kanner/Karin, I look at the map here and it seems that it might be natural to make the rest of the little curve in there RS-5. Franklin/Okay let me tell you that you'll be hearing from folks in here who do not want this rezoning to occur, and there is a covenant in Southwest Estates that these lots can not be further subdivided. So with this, one of the things that happened at Planning & Zoning was this concern about whether this rezoning was going to be a violation of the covenants. The rezoning grants a right to the property, it does not grant an obligation, the property owners still have to comply with the covenants that they have signed as being property owners there. From our perspective, from a city perspective in terms of density and there isn't any reason you'd want to keep that RR-1. But I don't know that you want to take that on because the people who live there don't want to do it. Kanner/Well they don't but as it was pointed out at Planning & zoning their covenant is going to hold fast and they would need a two-thirds vote of their membership to overturn that and allow a subdivision. Franklin/Well if you want to suggest it as a Council initiated rezoning. Kanner/We'd get the same uproar as with three as with the rest, it just seems if, like when we talk about annexation we talk about sort of natural areas, this seems to be a natural area too for making it all RS-5. Franklin/I don't disagree, it's a political question that I'll let you guys wrestle with. Lehman/Okay. E. PUBLIC HEARING ON AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL, CN-1, ZONE TO BROADEN THE USES ALLOWED AND TO REVISE THE DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS AND DESIGN PROVISIONS. Franklin/ Okay this is wait, we don't want to go there yet. The next item is a public hearing on amendments to the CN-1 zone. This zone is being brought before you now because we understood that was what you wanted. The CN-1 zone in that zone we tried to balance the commercial opportunities with neighborhood compatibility, and the way that you do that is through and scale. What this zone does, it allows greater flexibility in terms of the uses that are in the zone, it has certain restrictions on the size, it increases the sizes of certain uses such as retail This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of April 1, 2002. April 1, 2002 Work Session Page 23 and office to 2,400 square feet from 2,000. Drugstores and hardware stores go from 2,000 square feet to 15,000 to acknowledge modem trends. It takes away a provision that we currently have in our CN-I zone that says that if you have an office it can be no greater than a certain pementage of all of the office space that might ever exist in the zone which was an extremely difficult cumbersome and I don't know why we ever did it provision of the code because it has been just hilarious to deal with it. So this just says for each establishment, there's a ceiling in terms of the number of square feet you can have for that establishment. There are provisions to go to the Board of Adjustment to bring that up a little bit for office and for restaurants but then there's a ceiling that applies there too. It allows residential uses by right, above the commercial as opposed to having to go through the special exception process. And then there are design provisions, there are design provisions which have built two lines that as you bring those buildings up to the street as opposed to having the parking lots along the street. One thing that's very important with the design provisions and the ones particularly that require those buildings be close to the street is that that's only for new CN-1 zones or ones that haven't already started to be built. Okay, so if you had something that was zoned CN-1 and there's nothing that's built there those design provisions would prevail. However if you've got one that's already start to be built out like at Court and Scott, we're not going to require the buildings be close to the street when everything else is farther back. Champion/Right, good. Franklin/So that's kind of it in a nutshell unless you've got some specific questions about it. Kanner/Karin just for future readability, could we, when we're changing something, making some major changes in the code, could we get a red lined copy? Franklin/Yea. Kanner/It's hard to see what's being changed. Franklin/Sure I understand that. F. PUBLIC HEARING ON AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING CODE, ARTICLE O, SIGN REGULATIONS, TO PERMIT PORTABLE SIGNS IN THE CENTRAL BUSINESS SERVICE, CB-2, CENTRAL BUSINESS SUPPORT, CB-5, AND CENTRAL BUSINESS, CB-10, ZONES. Franklin/Okay the next one is a, what is it? Public heating on sign regulation to permit portable signs in the downtown area essentially. We did this a number of years ago and it had a sunset clause on it, what is being suggested at this point is that we reenact it, and drop the sunset. What it allows is portable signs on private This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of April 1, 2002. April 1, 2002 Work Session Page 24 property, like Bremmer's used to have one that kind of sits up there. Adiago has one, not on the public sidewalk, not in the public right of way unless it's in a sidewalk cafe, and that's one thing we have to be careful about in enforcement because they tend to creep out. Yea. Vanderhoef/Well they tend to keep that sign after the cafe gets closed down too. Franklin/Yea well these are suppose to bring in, and obviously that's, it's an enforcement difficulty because the cafe's might close at 9:00 and we don't have people doing enforcement at 9:00 or whenever. Vanderhoef/But they seem to be out after say October. Franklin/But they're suppose to be, oh I see what your saying. Vanderhoef/Throughout the rest of the months that the sign gets set out with a daily menu board and all these things and they're ugly. Excuse me but I'm really not sure that we want any on public right of way, period. Franklin/Those that your talking about that are out there when the sidewalk cafe's are not up, they're not suppose to be out there and we can bring those in. Vanderhoef/I understand but the enfomement piece is a problem. Franklin/Well what's the pleasure? Champion/Why is it a problem? Does it have to be enforced all the time? Vanderhoef/Because they're in the way, they're ugly. Champion/(Can't hear) problem. Vanderhoeff They're ugly and they're in the way. Lehman/Well yea but what, I think what I'm hearing is that those signs are legal, if they're within the designated area of the sidewalk cafe, when the sidewalk cafe is open. Franklin/Right but what Dee's talking about is after the sidewalk cafe is closed for the season. Lehman/But if they're still in the same area they're illegal. Franklin/Yea and your suppose to bring them in every night too. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of April 1, 2002. April 1, 2002 Work Session Page 25 Champion/Oh that's crazy. Kanner/Well and I also, I don't know ifI agree but I hear Dee saying that she wants to perhaps not allow them at all anytime in the cafe, outdoor cafe. Champion/Well maybe we could come up with some other ways that you could really keep people from doing any business downtown, I think that sounds like a great idea. O'Donnell/I don't have any trouble with these signs. Champion/Me either, it's so petty I can't believe it. Lehman/Well they can't be on public property, I understand that. O'Donnell/No. Champion/They're not. O'Donnell/(can't hear). Vanderhoef/They are on public property. Champion/They pay money to have an outdoor cafe and if they don't take their sign in at night they get fined, that's ridiculous. Lehman/We're going to have a public hearing tomorrow night on signs. Franklin/Okay. Kanner/Let me ask you Kafin another question about this. Franklin/About signs, no. Kanner/Everywhere signs, signs, signs. Lou Henri, what does that sell, where the restaurant is on Iowa and Dodge I think? That's not CB is it? Lehman/R for restaurant. Franklin/You know I don't know, I think it might, no, I don't know what it's zoned. Kanner/Well he's asking for. Franklin/It's a nonconforming use. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of April 1, 2002. April 1, 2002 Work Session Page 26 Kanner/He's asked for being able to put a sign in there and it seems reasonable that he should be able to put a. Franklin/What a portable sign? Kanner/A portable sign and he was told that he's not allowed to do that and I was wondering if there was any way that we can allow a sign there. Lehman/We're about to get hammered by the City Attorney. Dilkes/No your not because (can't hear). Lehman/Oh okay. Franklin/I think Lou Henri's is a nonconforming use that it's in a residential zone then it's not conforming because it was, you know it was a restaurant for umpteen trillion years and hasn't changed so that would be really hard. Kanner/Is there a way to put a special exception that would have to go through the Board of Adjustment for something like that, because it seems appropriate that that would be a place, especially on Dodge where people are coming to put a little sign there? Franklin/To get a, what would be a variance to the sign regulation and I know this sounds really beauracratic but this is kind of what the law is, to get a sign variance you have to show that you can not make a reasonable use of your property if you don't have that sign, it's almost impossible to get it. It is impossible to get it, not almost, it's impossible. Lehman/Thank you, what's the next one? We, this really isn't dealing with the. Franklin/There are other sign options that they have it's just that they can't do that portable sign, I mean you know. Lehman/I just got the signed, this discussion is over because it's not irrelevant, go ahead. Kanner/Well it. Lehman/No it isn't because this is the central business district only. Kanner/Right that's what I'm saying a proposed amendment. (Can't hear). This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of April 1, 2002. April 1,2002 Work Session Page 27 Kanner/Well can't we talk about proposed amendment to it to include other districts that's what I'm talking about. Pfab/Another work session. Kanner/No, well, I'm talking about a proposed amendment. Dilkes/Your talking about an amendment to this portable sign ordinance. Kanner/Yea to possibly allow it in other zoning areas, isn't that allowed to talk about? Lehman/Sure you just forgot the word amendment. Pfab/Take you to Scott Boulevard while your at it. Kanner/Is there any way to, I mean is there anyway to make that work, an amendment to this that would allow? Franklin/To allow Lou Henri. Kanner/Yea. Franklin/Let me check into the status of Lou Henri to make sure about what the zoning is and everything, I mean if that's what your focused on, might as well figure that out first. Kanner/It's close to, it's close, right to CB-5 you know it's only a couple blocks away and it's not a busy arterial. Franklin/I'll look into it. Kanner/Thank you. G. CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE REZONING 18.2 ACRES FROM LOW DENSITY SINGLE-FAMILY, (RS-5) TO SENSITIVE AREAS OVERLAY LOW DENSITY SINGLE-FAMILY (OSA-5) AND A PRELIMINARY SENSITIVE AREAS DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR HICKORY HEIGHTS, A 20-LOT RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION LOCATED WEST OF SCOTT BOULEVARD NEAR ITS INTERSECTION WITH DODGE STREET. (REZ01-00028/SUB01- 00031) (F1RST CONSIDERATION) Franklin/Item G is first consideration on the rezoning for the SOA for Hickory Heights, I'm assuming you've had enough discussion of that the last time you don't need more. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of April 1, 2002. April 1, 2002 Work Session Page 28 Lehman/Yea probably right. H. 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/H is an ordinance to vacate the north 182 feet of the alley in block 102 or Burlington west of Dubuque Street. The conveyance is on the agenda so you can go ahead and do the pass and adopt on this. I. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE FINAL PLAT OF STONE BRIDGE ESTATES, PARTS 2-4, A 13.98 50-LOT RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION LOCATED EAST OF CAMDEN ROAD NORTH OF COURT STREET. (SUB02-00001) Franklin/Item I, you will have three different resolutions for Stone Bridge Estates because parts 2, 3, and 4 were submitted separately and so your going to have I-1, 1-2, and I-3. Lehman/Oh and we got, there it is we got it tonight, we got it in a. Champion/Great. Franklin/It's just a little technical thing. O'Donnell/It came, it's in the (can't hear). Franklin/And you all remember where Stone Bridge is because this has been deferred a few times, this is out in Windsor Ridge, single family subdivision. Lehman/Okay. Franklin/Okay. J. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE EXTRATERRITORIAL PRELIMINARY PLAT OF LACINA MEADOWS, AN 80.13 ACRE, 23-LOT RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION LOCATED 1N FRINGE AREA C WEST OF DANE ROAD, EAST OF NAPLES AVENUE AND NORTH OF OSAGE STREET. (SUB02-00004) Franklin/and the last item is a resolution approving the extraterritorial preliminary plat of Lacina Meadows which is southwest of Iowa City off of Dane Road and it's a little rural subdivision Okay. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of April 1, 2002. April 1, 2002 Work Session Page 29 Lehman/Okay. O'Donnell/i think so. Lehman/Yea, we're going to take a short break. BREAK. AGENDA ITEMS Lehman/Items. ITEM NO. 9. ASSESSiNG A $300.00 CIVIL PENALTY AGAINST NORTH DODGE EXPRESS, 2790 NORTH DODGE STREET, PURSUANT TO IOWA CODE SECTION 453A.22(2). Karr/Mr. Mayor, I'd like to note that Item number 9 on page 9, the penalty and the waiver have been received today and so we'll not be conducting that hearing instead we'll be doing resolution and accepting payment. ITEM NO. 15. THE IOWA CITY HOUSING AUTHORITY'S UPDATED ANNUAL PLAN. Atkins/Emie and Maggie's here if you have any questions concerning the Housing Authorities plan, I understand there's no substantial changes. O'Donnell/No. Atkins/If you don't have any so I can send her on her way. Lehman/Any questions for Maggie? O'Donnell/No. Lehman/Your done, thank you Maggie. You made a very concise presentation (can't hear). Champion/But your not allowed to watch the meeting (can't hear). Lehman/Better ones, one of the better ones that we've had. Other agenda items. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of April 1, 2002. April 1, 2002 Work Session Page 30 ITEM 4(D) 3. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION DETERMINING THE NECESSITY AND SETT1NG DATES OF A CONSULTATION (APRIL 15) AND A PUBLIC HEARING (MAY 7) ON A PROPOSED LOWER MUSCATINE ROAD AND HIGHWAY 6 URBAN RENEWAL PLAN FOR A PROPOSED URBAN RENEWAL AREA IN THE CITY OF IOWA CITY. ITEM 4(D) 4. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION DETERMINING THE NECESSITY AND SETTING DATES OF A CONSULTATION (APRIL 15) AND A PUBLIC HEARING (MAY 7) ON A PROPOSED iNDUSTRIAL PARK ROAD URBAN RENEWAL PLAN FOR A PROPOSED URBAN RENEWAL AREA IN THE CITY OF IOWA CITY. ITEM 4(D) 5. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION DETERMINING THE NECESSITY AND SETTING DATES OF A CONSULTATION (APRIL 15) AND A PUBLIC HEARING (MAY 7) ON A PROPOSED HEINZ ROAD URBAN RENEWAL PLAN FOR A PROPOSED URBAN RENEWAL AREA IN THE CITY OF IOWA CITY. Kanner/Yea I'm going to be asking for removal of three items from the consent calendar, urban renewal, setting the public hearing on the urban renewal districts that are listed in the consent calendar, let me find where those are. Atkins/D(3), (4), and (5) Dilkes/D(3), 4 yea. Kanner/D3, 4 and 5 thank you. Lehman/Okay. ITEM 4(D) 1. CONSIDER A MOTION SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING FOR APRIL 16 REGARDING THE PROPOSED COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG) AND HOME iNVESTMENT PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM (HOME) BUDGETS FOR THE FY03 ANNUAL ACTION PLAN, THAT IS A SUBPART OF IOWA CITY'S 2001-2006 CONSOLIDATED PLAN (CITY STEPS), AS AMENDED. Wilbum/Also with the consent calendar I will be requesting that Item D1 related to the Community Development Block Grant be removed from the consent calendar, I consulted with the City Attorney and I have a conflict of interest and should not partake in that. Lehman/Okay. Franklin/(Can't hear) something on the consent calendar if I might. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of April 1, 2002. April 1, 2002 Work Session Page 31 Lehman/You may. ITEM 4(E)l. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION RATIFYING THE FILiNG OF AN APPLICATION WITH THE IOWA DEPARTMENT OF CULTURAL AFFAIRS FOR IOWA COMMUNITY CULTURAL GRANT FUNDS. Franklin/Item E(1) which is the filing of an application to the Department of Cultural Affairs for a grant, this has been amended in terms of the amount since we put it in the packet. The total grant request will be $24,000. The local match would be $20,000 which would be from the public art funds and would go toward the actual sculptures or whatever the art is. And then there's a $5,920 in kind contribution that is our local match, they require a 50 percent match, thank you. Vanderhoef/Local match is $20,000. Atkins/$25,900 really. Franklin/The local match with cash and in kind is $25,920. The cash is $20,000. Lehman/Okay. ITEM 4(F) 1. CORRESPONDENCE. BECKY SOGLIN: SENSITIVE AREAS ORDINANCE. Kanner/Question for Steve I guess and for Karin, we had a letter in our packet 4(F)l on inquiring the status of the sensitive areas ordinance revision in regard to wetland and using a new definition. Franklin/We've had one pass at that at our joint staff meeting, there's something that we have to verify with the Corps of Engineers in terms of what their practice was prior to Swank and then we will be going through the Planning & Zoning Commission. Kanner/When do you anticipate it going to Planning & Zoning? Franklin/Maybe the second meeting in April. Dilkes/I think so. Franklin/It depends on how soon we can get that information from the Corps. Dilkes/We have to get the information from the Corps they have to joint staff it again and then we'll get it to P & Z. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of April 1, 2002. April 1, 2002 Work Session Page 32 Kanner/So we could be looking at it in May as Council? Atkins/Second meeting. Franklin/Yea second meeting in May potentially. Lehman/Any other agenda items. Pfab/There was one, minor one, it was in the consent calendar on page 47 in the computer, my computer kind of cracked up a little bit. But it was just a typo, one of the places there it says "Life, Live on Learning" or something I can't remember the. O'Donnell/Well I'm going to 47 as you speak, I can't get there. Lehman/Is it just a typo? Pfab/Typo yea, Life on, I mean Live on Learning and it's suppose to be Life long I believe, Learning. Atkins/Is that from the Senior Center? Pfab/47 in the, on the. Atkins/Yea it's "Life Long Learning" Senior Center program. Lehman/Okay. Pfab/Find it okay. I can't remember where it was, I was just going through. ITEM NO. 8. AMENDiNG TITLE 3, "CITY FINANCES, TAXATION AND FEES," CHAPTER 4, "SCHEDULE OF FEES, RATES, CHARGES, BONDS, FINES AND PENALTIES" OF THE CITY CODE, TO INCREASE PARKING FEES IN IOWA CITY, IOWA. Vanderhoef/Okay I have one also. Item number 8, 8. Lehman/8, okay. Vanderhoef/Talking about the raising of the hourly meter rates, but hey put the whole rate schedule in for parking permits and everything else in there and I looked at the fines for overtime parking which are still at $3.00 and I called Joe today and he will be here tomorrow night to talk about it but I would like to put an amendment on to raise the fine to the maximum that is allowed by state law which This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of April 1, 2002. April 1, 2002 Work Session Page 33 is $5.00 for a parking ticket for overtime parking. The other thing that goes along with this that I don't know whether I should mention this here or Council time but it all fits together is that this is one of the things that takes a legislative change and I guess it has been offered by Senator Bolkcom in a previous year and it didn't get much interest and if this Council is interested in we might send it up to the legislative policy committee for League of Cities for next year as a possible priority for cities to get that tap on $5.00 because our fines are different than what the fines are at the University of Iowa and that is because we are under a different rule than the University of Iowa and if they can do what's reasonable and prosperous and so there's quite a difference in this and it might be something (can't hear) to look at for next year. Lehman/Okay. ITEM NO. 7. PUBLIC HEARING ON AN ORDINANCE REGULATING AND RESTRICTING THE USE AND HEIGHT OF STRUCTURES AND OBJECTS OF NATURAL GROWTH IN THE VICINITY OF THE IOWA CITY MUNICIPAL AIRPORT BY CREATING APPROPRIATE ZONES AND ESTABLISHING BOUNDARIES THEREOF; DEFINING CERTAIN TERMS USED IN SAD ORDINANCE; REFERRING TO THE IOWA CITY MUNICIPAL AIRPORT ZONING MAP AS PART OF THE ORDINANCE; ESTABLISHING AN AIRPORT ZONING COMMISSION; ESTABLISHING AN AIRPORT ZON1NG BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT PROVIDING FOR ENFORCEMENT AND IMPOSING PENALTIES. Atkins/Karin you want to update them on number 7? Airport zoning. Franklin/Yea the airport zoning you had on for public heating I think that was continued. That's going to be closed and will reset it, Ron will reset it at a later date. We're doing some revisions to the ordinance. Lehman/I understand that, so we'll close the hearing, P & Z's going to hear it again and it will come back and we'll have another public hearing. Franklin/It actually, it doesn't go to P & Z at all, that's a mista3ce in the comment but. Lehman/Oh, but it will come back to us for another public hearing so we'll close this one. Franklin/It will, close that one and it will be reset when it's ready. Kanner/Steve could we get a colored map on that outside of the computer? Atkins/Karin I think (can't hear). This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of April 1, 2002. April 1, 2002 Work Session Page 34 Kanner/It's hard to read. Franklin/Yea. Kanner/Just to see how far it goes. Franklin/To West Branch. Kanner/Wow. Lehman/And that's the western runway. Atkins/And yes we'll get you a better map. Franklin/Yes. Atkins/We just want to make sure the map is accurate with what's going to be officially be in front of you but we will get you a new one. Did you hear that? Franklin/Yes I did. Council Appointments Lehman/All right we're to Council Appointments, Airport Zoning Board of Adjustments, we have one application. O'Donnell/Carl Williams would be excellent for that. Lehman/Is that okay with folks? Champion/That's good. Wilbum/Sure. Lehman/All right. How about Historic Preservation Commission? Vanderhoef/Amy Smothers is a wonderful applicant in my mind. O'Donnell/I would second that, good one. Champion/Yea, good one. Vanderhoef/Home grown gal. Lehman/Okay. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of April 1, 2002. April 1, 2002 Work Session Page 35 Karr/I'm sorry what was decided on that one? Lehman/Amy Smothers, efficient numbers of us we think that's okay. Kanner/Well she's the only one applying. Lehman/Yea but. Pfab/ A ringing endorsement. Lehman/The chief elected officials, Dee what is it? Vanderhoef/Chief elected official is the governing body and oversight for the dollars that come in to the region from federal work force development, chief elected officials have to keep the oversight on it and vote on the use of those federal dollars. Lehman/Dee has indicated an interest, you've been doing that. Vanderhoef/I've been doing that for five years and. O'Donnell/It sounds like a great place. Champion/Sounds like for (can't hear) to go. Vanderhoef/Well I'm already at that same meeting with. Champion/Oh yea. Vanderhoef/Work force development so it's easy for me to participate and if anybody else wants to do it be my guest. Champion/No thank you. O'Donnell/Dee. Update 64-1A Lehman/Kafin, oh wait a minute, update on 64qA. Franklin/You asked that I give a little update on this, I think, I don't know two or weeks ago I sent you a memorandum saying that we had engaged an appraiser and Ahlers Firm in Des Moines to help us with this project. We've had a number of meetings with the Moen Group and just last week I got the draft from the Ahlers office and so the staff committee which consists of myself, Joe Fowler, Kevin O'Malley, and This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of April 1, 2002. April 1, 2002 Work Session Page 36 Susan Craig and Sarah Holecek are going over that to make any changes we need to make. And today late I received the appraisal from the company in Des Moines and so we're working through it, I can't tell you exactly when we'll have the development agreement before you because of the tax increment financing it's complicated and so I just ask for your patience but we're moving along. Lehman/Think what 60 days? Franklin/Oh I hope. Lehman/I mean that's reasonable. Franklin/I would like to have it by the middle of May it just depends on getting people getting together and moving. Vanderhoef/Where does this put us then on when they will start since originally we were to get this in January and the start date on that project was to be one year from the time of the signing. Can we still start next January? Franklin/Probably not, it will be a year from the signing according to the architect that they need, that's the window that he gives is a year. Given the library project, that puts a little bit of pressure off of them in terms of trying to work those two projects together but they're going to try to get it done obviously as soon as they possibly can but Kevin Monson has said that you need to count on about a year from the time they can go because Kevin is not going to be anymore design work until the agreement is signed. Vanderhoef/This disappoints me that it's going so slowly and that we had received this as a go in January and now we're talking April or May and then that much later before we get anything happening on that. The library folks said they would be off of there in January for us to start so why can't we start I mean? Franklin/Because we need an agreement that is going to hold. I think regardless of what project we would have done we would be in the same circumstance, it has not been a matter of difficulties with any of the parties but when you bring in outside help with this it adds to the mix in terms of trying to get everybody's schedules together and get product out. I don't know what else to tell you Dee at this point. Dilkes/This is a really complicated transaction and those kinds of agreements take a lot to put together and I think it just you know it needs to be as right as we can get it. Lehman/Well this is a really big project. O'Donnell/Huge. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of April 1, 2002. April 1, 2002 Work Session Page 37 Vanderhoef/I understand it's a big project but I guess what I gets really disappointed in is the fact that we're going to get it in January and start the following January and then it doesn't happen. You know ifI had been told May to begin with. Franklin/I am as frustrated as you are Dee probably a little bit more. Vanderhoef/It really frustrates me that this isn't happening. Pfab/My as a word of caution or suggestion in order here? Franklin/Always. Pfab/I'm concerned that the value of the land that's suppose to go to Iow income housing that not be compromised. Franklin/Whoa let's back up a minute there. Lehman/We're going to get the contract. Franklin/The value of the land is suppose to go to low income housing. Pfab/Isn't that HUD money that's suppose to go? That's the. Kanner/CDBG money. Lehman/CDBG money but we can send it wherever we want. Franklin/Yea, but it can, it doesn't need to be low income housing, okay that was what kind of threw me there. Kanner/But I think the point that I hear Irvin making I was thinking the same thing I think it's good actually Dee that we're taking our time because we're making sure we get what we're legally obligated to get out of this, this is federally mandated that we get the fair market rate and it's complicated because we put some conditions on it, the land, but we want to make sure we get as much as we can so we can put that money to help low income and moderate income people in our community through CDBG. (All talking). Vanderhoef/That is not a question for me Steven and the question is I still don't know whether the financing units in place for this project. Wilburn/I would, if I could just give out a reminder and staff correct me if I'm wrong that these negotiations, are they not based on t he request for proposals that was This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of April 1, 2002. April 1, 2002 Work Session Page 38 put out and accepted is that I mean? Steve when I hear you say or Irvin when I hear you put that emphasis on the amount of cash or money that is going to be get there were other conditions to that RFP and I pointed this out even just in considering which project that if the most dollars we can get to go for CDBG or whatever was the consideration and that should have been highlighted, bold, yellow or something in the RFP. There are other considerations. Franklin/You should have picked another project. Wilburn/Yea. Kanner/Well correct me if I'm wrong staff but we have legal obligations to get the most we have including those incumbrances we put on that. That is part of the negotiation and that's why part of the appraisal my understanding is we do get the maximum amount which is required by the federal government. Franklin/The law does not say that you get the maximum amount. Lehman/I didn't think so. Franklin/Once the law. Kanner/ You get fair market value. Franklin/Fair market value and that's what the appraisal is for is to determine the fair market value given the encumbrances that are placed upon the property. Kanner/So to get the maximum amount of the fair market value is what part of the I think the issue here and we're making sure we're getting it and that's a good thing and we should take our time. Wilburn/When you say encumbrances does that include the other conditions as part of the RFP? Vanderhoef]Yes. Kanner/Sure. Lehman/Sure. Well I think the point. Wilburn/I mean I'm not saying, I'm not saying. Karmer/We're saying I was wrong Ross I'm saying that that is the law and that's what I just said before that that's part of what's happening in negotiation those This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of April 1, 2002. April 1, 2002 Work Session Page 39 encumbrances are something that the appraiser has to look at and it takes time to do that and it's a good thing we're taking that time. Wilburn/The sense that I get, my reaction to that and past media counts of statements about the amount of money we're going to get for that tells me that there's an expectation that these other factors are not being considered and that's the only point I'm making is if you, before you decide to hammer the rest of Council or staff about that one criteria, I'm just putting out a reminder that there were other criteria. Lehman/Well I think point Ross, your exactly right, we've got an RFP, that was a, we had a request for proposal, we got a proposal now we're in the process of working details of that proposal which includes anyone of a number of things not the least of which is the value of the land, the encumbrances, all of those sort of things and if we can get that back in another 30 or 60 days this is a incredibly huge project, I mean it's something we're so fortunate to have and I have no problem in taking the time that it takes to put this together correctly. Wilburn/The reason that I'm saying that I'm putting that emphasis on is because when it comes down to saying yes or no for the project accepting the project if the no is based solely on we're not the impression that may or may not have been created that we're not getting the value of that property or whatever that there are other factors that go into it besides the amount of cash that we get for the property. Lehman/And we'll have that discussion when we get the contract. Pfab/I'd like to ask Ross a question. Are you saying and I'm not sure I mean I'm asking this for clarification. Are you saying that the RFP we accepted compromised that? (Can't hear). Wilbum/Compromised, you know maybe. I mean when we talked about this earlier I went from you know I had said that I didn't want to sell the property, Council decided they did and then okay let's talk about the contents of the RFP and I said this before that if cash is what you want you need to communicate that to the people that are filling out the RFP suggesting these projects. Pfab/I agree with you, I mean that was why, I think we're agreeing on. Lehman/Well I think though that it should be very clear that the RFP that we selected certainly did not offer the highest cash for the property and we also made it very clear that the value of that property was going to be determined by other factors including the value of and use of the building that was going to be constructed on it and obviously your in the middle of working that out so go for it. Champion/Keep working on it. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of April 1, 2002. April 1, 2002 Work Session Page 40 Kanner/Just to clarify what Dee was asking. Is there some problem with the financing of the proposed developer? I've not heard of that? Franklin/No. Lehman/Thank you. Pfab/Good answer. Lehman/Okay that's probably about as much discussion on 64-1A as we should have until we get the contract. 25 % Capital Improvement Debt Levy (ITEM NO. 22. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE FINANCIAL PLAN FOR THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA, FOR FISCAL YEARS 2003 THROUGH 2005 AND THE MULTI-YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM THROUGH FISCAL YEAR 2006. (IP1 OF 3/28) Lehman/Steve the capital improvement debt levy. Atkins/We brought this back to you at your request folks, it's really pretty straight forward, we have a long standing policy of the 25 percent, our FY03 budget is within that policy. The bottom line is that with extremely large debt associated with the library and in addition to our other capital projects it's going to push us over that 25 percent policy for a while. To bring it down is rather dramatic, we're taking about taking 12 million dollars in estimate out of the capital plan to get within that policy. Given the nature of many of the projects and the effort that's gone into them I'm certainly not in position to recommend to you now. We will be able to bring it back down in a few years. Champion/I (can't hear) many years, I mean just roughly, two years, you mean ten years. Atkins/I'm hoping that sometime in the maybe eight, and for capital planning that's not that far out. Now so you have some idea in what we did in order to improve our, we just had our credit review, one of the things that Kevin did which I think is going to be very helpful to our position is that, although we have a $29 million dollar issue which you'll be dealing with at the next meeting, Kevin and staff fashioned it whereby the library is a 20 year pay out because of the long term nature of it, the other debt is 10 year, very short term, it allows us to turn it very quickly, that improves our credit position and also allows us to retire debt more rapidly. That again will improve our position in the out years. Unless your willing to really go back into that plan and do the number. Champion/Steve the money that the library is raising. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of April 1, 2002. April 1, 2002 Work Session Page 41 Atkins/Yes. Champion/I mean I know we don't know that number and so we have to bond for the whole amount. If the library, and also that money could be used if the library costs more is that correct? Atkins/We need, the City Council and the Library Board and Susan and I have already talked about this, you need to put together some understanding of what that and I think it was $1.5 million dollar fundraising, there are provisions that you could put within the bond sale, you could use it for interest payments, there's a variety of things you also need to put an agreement together on the. (END OF 02-31 S1DE TWO) Atkins/Enhance that with, that's a whole different sort of financing obligations we have because we're going to be making money off of the commercial component, and we need to put an agreement together, Susan and I have talked about it briefly, we want to get these bonds sold, have the permanent financing in place then we'll be bring those things back to you but she is aware of it. Yes Steven. Kanner/A couple questions. What are you making a 10 year bond instead of a 20 year bond? Atkins/We have $29 million dollars worth of financing, just using round numbers, $20 million dollars is associated with the library. What we will do because of the nature of that capital asset that's created with this funding, we believe a 20 year bond pay out schedule is reasonable, that's what we did last time. The other portion of this bond sale will be a much shorter term pay off 10 years, and so for street improvement and parks and rec. and that nature we intend to pay off that debt more rapidly than we would pay off the debt with the library. That improves our, when your evaluated for debt purposes they look at your total debt but they also look at the speed which you retire that debt and if you retire it in a short term basis that's a much more favorable measurement of your credit. Lehman/Your saying in the packet this time 02 you show $29 million dollar and in. Atkins/That's the total bond sale. Lehman/Right and you show 18.4 and what your saying approximately $20 million will be 20 years and the other 9 whatever is going to be 10 years. Atkins/Yes that's correct, and it's the way we schedule it for payments. Lehman/Right. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of April 1, 2002. April 1, 2002 Work Session Page 42 Kanner/Well how much does that raise our levy 10 years versus 20 years, how much more taxes are the people going to be paying per year? Atkins/Without, until the bonds are bid it's really difficult to calculate that Steven we don't believe it should be dramatic because when we did the estimate on the levy I believe we used a 20 year. Where's Kevin? Five and a half projection, we have our fingers crossed we're going to do far better than that. Now that just simply means that this levy. Kanner/Whoa, (can't hear) the figure whatever percentage your going to estimate your going to estimate 10 versus 20 so you have to have an estimate of what it would figure out for an additional taxes. I don't like the idea of these things are going to last more than 10 years. Atkins/Well if has important to do with your credit and if your credit rating is better your going to get a lower interest rate, that's the call you have to make. Pfab/I would not agree with you on that Steven, I would much rather have it paid off sooner. Lehman/But it costs more. Atkins/Not necessarily Emie, not necessarily, it will cost, you will get a lower interest rate likely because of the rapid repayment. Lehman/Oh I see what your saying. Atkins/That's risk, that's risk, that's right so if we can give them a high quality credit rated debt paid offin a short term then we're likely one to purchase it and secondly the interest rate is going to be lower for us. Pfab/You'll probably end up with a better bid because of(can't hear) competition. Atkins/You do get a better bid Irvin, absolutely, I mean that's what we're hoping for. Vanderhoef/When Moody's came in did they give us any indication of how credible we are on that line or were there any comments or will we get a written report? Atkins/We will get a written report but it won't come out Dee just until the bond sale, they surprise you a couple days in advance and so we, that's when we'll know. Secondly we raised the issue with them, you know it's difficult, I wanted them to be aware because one of the things they were looking at they actually look at the capital projects and one of the important components was an $18 million dollar investment in a new library which was supported overwhelmingly by us, This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of April 1, 2002. April 1, 2002 Work Session Page 43 substantially by the community almost a 70 percent and it's an investment in the downtown creating a new destination point, that helps property values, that's how they view all of these projects is land open for development. Are you meeting maintenance responsibilities? And we can say clearly we meet our maintenance responsibilities and in fact the money that we have proposed in here improves the capital investment the municipal plant in town. Vanderhoef/Okay. Atkins/Yes sir. Kanner/I still have some concerns then and your making a case for the other side, I think though it isn't that hard to estimate figuring okay 5 ½ percent at 20 and t hen you would put a figure that your best estimate that you think you would get with 10 year versus 20 and you say that would be five and then you figure out what the extra taxes are. We're already projecting tax levy up to 17 in the out years, and that's getting pretty high. Atkins/Well the one to look at is the debt service, that's the important one. Kanner/What? Atkins/Just the debt service is the important levy right now, the other. Kanner/But it's all part of the total package. Atkins/This is true. Kanner/And the total package is going up to 17 in a few years. Lehman/Almost 18. Kanner/Almost 18 and I think if things are going to be lasting 20 y ears expected to last capital improvements, we should not put, we should try to lessen the burden on the people now and spread it out as much as possible. I realize what your saying about the rating but I think we can get an estimate of what the costs are going to be if there's going to be an addition because of the 10 versus 20. $10 million is a significant bond to put out there. Atkins/And what you will notice is that when we finally get the number on the bid, that's the 2004 debt service levy that would be affected because that will be your first year of payment. So that may go down, may, now that assumes you don't add any more projects. Champion/Well ! don't see that happening. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of April 1, 2002. April 1, 2002 Work Session Page 44 Lehman/Well just for the record, we've approved a couple of them for this year which I will not support when the contracts come in. Atkins/I tried to (can't hear). Lehman/Pardon. O'Donnell/There's a couple (can't hear). Atkins/We tried to fix the cost of this capital debt by a high credit rating at the lowest possible interest rate we can believing in the long term, that's what benefits the tax payer the most. Champion/Okay. Pfab/And also in I guess in opposition of what the Mayor is saying here, we the kind of, the times kind of dictate some of these other projects because of low cost of money, a minimum amount of construction activity and probable cost increasing if we put them off. Atkins/Irvin those are all legitimate points, that's a matter of I assume. Lehman/You pick those points when I vote against it (can't hear). Pfab/I'm just putting you on notice. Kanner/Do you think we can get an estimate of that of that $10 million and 10 years versus 20 years? Atkins/I'm not sure how I'd do it, I mean I'd have to think about it because then I'd have to calculate, we have to go back what's the tax base going to be, what's the roll back factors? I mean I can, it would be a guess, I mean it would be a reasonably educated guess but it would still be a guess. Kanner/Well at the least perhaps to say what the payments would be for 10 years. Your estimating. Atkins/Steven not, not to try to fix this debt because of the size at the lowest possible interest rate I'm truly having a hard time understanding why we'd want to do otherwise. Kanner/Because our tax rate will go up for people now for something that other people will be using 20 years down the road. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of April 1, 2002. April 1, 2002 Work Session Page 45 Atkins/Your tax rate may not necessarily go up if we were to take the whole $29 million and run it out for 20 years we're likely to pay a higher interest rate which would cause the tax rate to go up. Karmer/Right and I'm trying to get a sense of how much that would be. Atkins/Oh, I. Kanner/And your making a case that makes sense that 10 years we'll get that certainly we'll get a lower interest rate, you do a shorter term you get a lower interest rate but 20 years your able to spread it out obviously in a lower time so people that are using it 20 years from now pay for it and it's doesn't affect, it's not as great a burden perhaps now unless you get a real big break and that's what I'm trying to get your best estimate and give us a figure so that when I make a vote on this I have (can't hear). Atkins/I'll fuss around with this I just am not sure, there are so many unknowns. Lehman/No but I think what he's saying is if you get $10 million at 5 ½ percent over 20 years and $10 million at 4 percent over 10 years you'd obviously have a difference of what it would cost per year. Atkins/But I don't know those numbers Emie, I don't know (can't hear) dramatic difference. Lehman/No but it would give indication but I think that the philosophy of (can't hear) there are two, and I hear what your saying but there are two things if you extend everything over the life of the item that you are that your borrowing for we're going to be in a situation before too many years where your going to be borrowed up. I mean are you going to borrow for a bridge for a 100 years? Kanner/Perhaps if you can, but you can't get that. Lehman/No that's probably true. Champion/! don't think that anytime you borrow money if you don't get the lowest interest rate you can your not a very good borrower especially when your dealing with tax payer dollars, I'd much rather pay for capital improvements in that interest. Lehman/Well tomorrow night we're going to be discussing this, we have a resolution is that correct to approve the? Atkins/Yes, you've had that for two meetings and you've heard it. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of April 1, 2002. April 1, 2002 Work Session Page 46 Lehman/Yea we've heard it twice so tomorrow night should be, are there questions that we have about it that we're? Kanner/I had some other, another clarifying questions. On, so Item 1, fiscal year 06 a reduction of $7.2 million would be necessary. Atkins/Yes. Kanner/Could that not be spread out by the (can't hear) since we've got a huge capital expenditure for 05 and basically. Atkins/The best way to look at Dee is $12 million dollars over the life of the current plan. Lehman/Right. Atkins/Now if you stagger it you know there's, yea we can accomplish some of those goals for you. I was just trying to demonstrate the magnitude of trying to bring it down. Vanderhoef/This is where we have presently placed all of these things. Atkins/Yes, and we may move them around, Camp Cardinal, your still out, the court's still out on that you still have to discuss that, we show that in the plan and there may be other changes, yea. There may be a project that comes along that you wish to add too. Kanner/But you show on your chart here $7 million in 05 not 06. Atkins/No it's on 06 read it straight down. Vanderhoef/It jumped from 04 to 06 in his memo. Kanner/Oh it's in the 06, okay, I got it. Vanderhoef/And that's more than what we've even got in 06 and so that was why the question about. Atkins/But again you can. Vandcrhoef/We can spread it all out. Atkins/We can spread it all out but it's $12 million dollars over the life of the plan now how you want to come up with that we can fashion a policy, yea that's not easy. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of April l, 2002. April 1, 2002 Work Session Page 47 Kanner/So these figures that you have here listed for the different projects and what they're currently budgeted for. Atkins/Yea, that's our estimates right now. Kanner/Okay. Lehman/Okay. Board and Commission child care. Pardon. Capital Proiects (I]79 of 3/14 Info Packet) Atkins/No, Capital Projects, yea. Lehman/I'm sorry. Atkins/At the last meeting Steve had a couple questions I've got Rick here to be able to walk through. Did you all bring this with you or did you need extra copies? Because Rick can hand them out to you. Champion/I'm going to need one. Atkins/I want to take a minute or two with you, we provided a report to you that indicated the calendar year activity for the Department of Public Works so you understand how we not only finance but how we make field decisions. The projects for that particular year totaled $39.7 million dollars in estimated costs, we received bids of $33.4. Pfab/Where are you at? Lehman/Second page. Atkins/Second page right at the bottom, got it now. Now the rest of these, these numbers are my arithmetic but if you add 10 percent which is an informal policy that we have internally, Rick knows in the field if he has to make a decision, he has 10 percent of the value of that project he runs into bedrock or in one of the cases the contractor didn't do something on top soil removal or whatever. He has the ability to make those decisions in the field. What I try to do is when I take the estimated cost I take the bid, we add a 10 percent factor that's what we also use to have some measure of what our debt is going to be. That's why we borrow after, more often than not we borrow after the bid has been awarded because that has a beating upon the amount of money we need, but the important thing is the 10 percent policy. Now it's going to vary, but even adding 10 percent we're well under what our estimated cost would be. Rick. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of April 1, 2002. April 1, 2002 Work Session Page 48 Rick Fosse/With that I'd be happy to field individual questions on projects, I would like to point out a couple projects that don't appear on here because what this represents are projects which there were Council action during the last calendar year and both the water and waste water plants started before that and they're continuing. The waste water plant, we'll start with the water plant, so far we've done about almost $23 million dollars worth of work out there and we've only got $60,000 worth of change orders total on that project to date. If you look at an industry average for project at that magnitude you might expect somewhere in the $800,000 to a million dollars. The waste water plant, they've constructed $24 million dollars of the project to date and so far we're $89,000 to the good, that is we've had more deducts than we've had additions in our change orders so that, I think that both Tim Randall at the Waste Water Plant and Shawn Bradbury at the Water Plant are doing phenomenal jobs of managing those projects and they were good designs and we're seeing that reflected in that construction phase. Kanner/Yea I guess the question, I brought this up because you throw the numbers around a different way, there were I think about 9 projects that went over 10 percent and in the law of averages you would think it would be close, the number that went down by an unequal amount perhaps but there weren't there were just a couple that went down in equal amounts. So I look at those nine and say that's quite a lot that went over that 10 percent as opposed to the gross figures of $39 million and $33 million. And is this an unusual year perhaps that nine seems like a lot to me, that's what sticks in my mind? Fosse/Nine projects that your saying that the final cost was more than 10 pement of the awarded cost? Lehman/Right. Kanner/Yea of the bidding. Fosse/Okay, do you have specific ones that you want to talk about? Kanner/Well no, just nine seems like a lot to me so I don't know individual ones but why are there so many? Is it usually that many each year that they go over 10 pement? I could see one or two going over that 10 percent, and this is also along with, we had a registered complaint about someone saying that there's underbidding going on, people get the bid, underbid and then after they get the contract there's all these add Oh'S and the prices go up and so someone who maybe had a more realistic price in their bid was not given the project even though it ends up being close to it, that was what was said. And so that, then I counted these and nine again seemed like a lot so I'm wondering is that more than usual that you would have that many projects go over 10 percent? This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of April 1, 2002. April 1, 2002 Work Session Page 49 Fosse/I think that if we look at some of those, you might find there were changes in scope that made that change, for instance let's take the Iowa Avenue project, for instance, Phase I, there were a couple of changes in scope there between when we set the public hearing and the estimate was established and when we ultimately built the project. The storm sewer was redesigned to accommodate some easement prices, we found out it was cheaper to redesign the storm sewer go a different route than to build it the way it was originally designed. And those costs, the additional cost of construction is reflected in the what you see here, but what this doesn't reflect is the savings in the easement costs. We also added the Literary Walk on the Iowa Avenue project and there was also some work along Linn Street that was added in there. I think that, oh lrvin you have a question. Pfab/I think what Steven might be talking about, or the suspicion he has and I went through this so I already asked this question and walked through it and that is as if, when you get into the thing and got everything opened up and the contractor says well you know I decided it's going to cost me more to haul this ground out for dump than I estimated so I need a raise, at that point you just tell them take a walk it's over right. Fosse/Yea the unit prices are established by the. Pfab/Yea the unit prices is just when something changes that over, different than what the engineer had estimated or anticipated, at that point then you can talk but as far as unit cost, no, there's no give. Fosse/Yea those are fixed, yea. Lehman/Well and all bids are on the same document, I means all bids are, we have 10 bidders they're all bidding precisely the same papers, they're bidding the same work all of them, whether high or low it's the same bid. Fosse/And I think the point Steven brought up is some contractors are more apt to ask for change orders than other contractors and that's one of the more difficult parts of construction administration is judging each request and looking at it's merits how valid it is and making a determination on that, some contractors are very helpful, they help you take care of that, and they do it, other ones they want additional money to do anything that's not precisely spelled out. Vanderhoef/There were a couple of paving projects that seemed to be sort of out of line, and one of them was the landfill paving, was that additional? Fosse/That was change in scope. Vanderhoeff Change in scope. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of April 1, 2002. April 1, 2002 Work Session Page 50 Fosse/That one, yes that one started out with an area that was going to remain gravel and after the bid the decision was made to expand the area that was paved. Vanderhoef/Okay. And then the other was our transit parking lot that keeps sinking on us, that one went way up. Fosse/Yes, that took more tonnage than what was estimated. Lehman/If you'd use light weight concrete down there it wouldn't sink as fast. Fosse/Well, actually we did look at that, we looked at taking some of the material out and putting in basically Styrofoam blocks, it's a new technology in underground work, lightens the load so it doesn't congress as much afterwards. Champion/Have they used the Styrofoam besides packing and filling landfill, great. Lehman/Are there other questions for Rick? Pfab/Just to make a point though, it's, no matter who would have did it the unit cost for ton or whatever it was didn't change. Fosse/Right we just put more down. Pfab/Yea and that's something that can anticipate but the unit cost, there's no bargaining on that once you get started. Fosse/IfI remember the transit one too, if you look at the unit prices we got they were quite low and I think we did some more area as well as thickness to take advantage of that. Vanderhoef/Okay and the sprinkler system at the Senior Center was just a nightmare to get in there is that what did it? Fosse/I don't remember the details on that one other than. Atkins/That's exactly what it was Dee, it's a 100 year old building and they kept running into something every time, yea, rehabs are always worst than new construction because you don't know what's behind the wall. Fosse/Yea. Thank you. Lehman/Thank you Rick. Pfab/Thanks Rick. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of April 1, 2002. April 1, 2002 Work Session Page 51 Child Care (1172 and IP3 of 3/28 info.) Lehman/Okay child care, Steven. Kanner/We got in our package some memo's from staff, one was, they were both addressed to me, one was from Steve Nasby and the other one was from Keri Neblitt and if you look at the Keri Neblitt March 25 memo that might be the most pertinent one. I've had people tell me that (can't hear) to consider going on the Board because of the issue of having children and not being able to make the commitment for the cost of child care and so I asked Linda Severson if she had any information on what other cities are doing, and what other places are doing around town. So she came up with a list of a number of places that don't offer child care, there is one city here that you might note here that does offer reimbursement for baby-sitting or child care, Berkeley California and locally the Empowerment Board offers reimbursement for child care costs of consumers. So I wanted to bring up this idea to Council to see if we might want to kick around the idea of setting aside budgeting perhaps the first year of $5,000 or less for the idea of reimbursing commission members and City Council members if they so choose and if they meet criteria for low or moderate income perhaps the same criteria that we use for people applying for discounts or utilities or our recreation centers. And use something like the Empowerment Board model where they give reimburse an hourly rate of $5.00 for one child up to $9.00 up to three and it's limited to two meetings of two hours each and I so I think this would be a way that we could attract greater diversity of people to our boards and commissions to help them out a little bit so I throw that out to the Council for some discussion. Wilburn/Before we decide yes or no on reimbursement or per child care expenses, as I looked at, because we initially brought this up at and you were talking about on site child care you know way back and because of licensure and those other type of things I didn't think it would be practical for us to pull that out. But as I read through some of the staff notes I thought it might be more helpful for us to think about and agree on what the policy question is because (can't hear) child care is a solution but it may not be a specific answer that we were looking for because I was thinking as I was looking and thinking about well if some board members wanted child care a thing that I picked up from the Berkeley thing was about reimbursement for dependent care, someone else may say well I'm having trouble with transportation. And somebody might just have trouble coming from work to getting to the meeting having time for dinner and you know so I was sitting and thinking before pitying one person's area or something like that for not joining, I thought for me the questions what are the barriers to citizens participating on boards and commissions because beyond child care we periodically have lots of openings that go from time to time not being filled so maybe Council might consider that question before you decide yes or no, especially since we're not, I mean we've already discussed the budget about getting a policy to address what This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of April 1, 2002. April 1, 2002 Work Session Page 52 this and then maybe for the next budget cycle thinking about that so I guess I'll just throw that out there too. Pfab/I'm not as concerned as the timing, but I think to define what are the barriers to serving and what kind of an income level your looking at. I think your idea definitely has merit now but like it was brought up here is it a dependent, is it an adult dependent, is it a handicap situation, a transportation, is it child care or whatever, and I think we need to look at that and kind of develop a policy and then come up with some kind of general statement and I think it's something we really should address and it may have to do with income levels of percentage of average income or something like that as you get down lower it might, a person with a lower income might have a greater need than a person with a medium income or something like that where on the scale's you can plug it in. Wilbum/Because for me I mean one specific example you know Berkeley offers it, I'd be curious to know if they were trying to increase participation from low to moderate citizens, you know did it work? And so that might be, I'm looking at trying to address the specific problem as opposed to just throwing a solution out there. Pfab/I was with an organization here in Iowa City that did this and it was interesting what it developed, it, I was very impressed what the, offering child care on site did to get people that you needed and wanted to come, how much easier it made it for those people decide to do it. Lehman/Well my suspicion is that offering child care on site would probably not be a possibility. Pfab/No I. Lehman/And I think what you say is exactly, I mean I do think there's far more to this than child care, I think there are probably a number of other issues that if we're talking about barriers for people serving on boards and commissions or whatever are we willing to look at all of those things or is this the sort of thing that we don't wish to address? Pfab/I would encourage looking at it and trying to develop an overall policy and I would say this, I would like to see that happen as soon as, relatively soon. Champion/Well I think Ross is right, I think the idea of child care expenses could be a factor, but I think there could be other factors and I'm not so sure that people that even if we had baby-sitting here would still want to be on a board or commission because it's a lot of time and I think there are other factors. And so I like the idea of trying to explore the other factors that make it difficult, I don't think it's always just child care, that's an easy target. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of April 1, 2002. April 1, 2002 Work Session Page 53 Pfab/Well it's idemifiable and it's common. Champion/Yea it's very easy to identify but is it really a problem? Pfab/Well I would imagine it is from the experience I had it definitely was it changed the tenor of a lot of things but that was just child care but it was, I think it's maybe more than that. Lehman/Well you have child care, and your here, I mean obviously I think that generally speaking folks who wish to participate in something that will find a way to do it, and obviously you find a way to do it I suspect when I look at folks who come to our Council meetings and come to various agents to address the council many, many times those folks have arranged with their families, their neighbors, their friends, or child care folks to look after their children. Wilburn/Well my point is that may not be the reason, I mean. Lehman/No that's my point. Wilbum/I mean because for me, ifI wanted Council the issue isn't going to be the availability of child care necessarily or bringing them if it were an on site thing but again I don't think that's feasible. For me it's like well is it fair for me to drag my kids to another meeting? I mean that's more of a consideration for me but it could be that just there are other reasons in the example I brought up that low to moderate income people aren't interested in being a board or commission you know. Pfab/Again I'll go back to what the experience that I saw was, it (can't hear) low income people, it opened up an opportunity that they just did not have and the results was really amazing to me, I just kind of stood there kind of awe struck how that changed that whole dynamic, it was very positive. Lehman/Well I guess the question are there four people who would like to pursue looking into, well I suppose at this point we really should just say more than just child care, barriers for people serving on boards and commission or Council which would include items such as you referred to. Wilbum/Because it may not be, but I mean, it may end up being a child care or just a stipend for a parallel to the Berkeley thing would be with a certain income level a stipend to take care of whatever those barriers might be. It might be seeing that somebody gets a bus pass to make it to a meeting, or there may be, if there are other reasons, it may not be budgetary reasons as well you know with the number of people that we have on commissions it could end up being a significant budget consideration so. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of April 1, 2002. April 1, 2002 Work Session Page 54 Lehman/At this time I guess I'm not particularly interested in pursuing it but how many are interested in pursuing this? Pfab/I'm interested. Lehman/I see three. Champion/I don't think I am. Vanderhoef/I don't think at this point. Wilburn/What about. Vanderhoef/To be adding. Pfab/I believe your missing a point if you don't. Wilburn/What about within the next budget cycle is there enough interest in staff devoting some time to, there's a limited number of cities in this brief, I think Keri Neblitt a limited number of cities that she explored, just to see what's out there in terms of stipends for boards and commission members, what those communities do with it and then just do they notice an increase in participation? Do they notice then an increase in diversity with enough interest in? Vanderhoef/How often is it being used? Wilbum/Yea. Champion/That would be a good question to ask. Lehman/We could write to Berkeley and find out. Wilburn/Well again Berkeley is one example, there might be some other communities, I don't know if that would be something the State League or, well I don't know Iowa but the National League might have some more information if we give staff the go ahead to start collecting some more information with possibility implications for next budget cycle and then as they go to different conferences they might pose the question to some other communities, that type of thing, if any of you end up going t the National League of Cities or that type of thing to at least begin gathering a little more information about the things that we just discussed SO. Pfab/I think to close the door on not doing something, that doesn't mean we, I think to study it a little bit and come up with some ideas, but whether we proceed after that then that's a different story. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of April 1, 2002. April 1, 2002 Work Session Page 55 O'Donnell/Irvin it's not closing the door, there's probably people out there that need child care that would like to come down and listen to a Council meeting every other Tuesday, now they've got to get here, they want to participate in their city, they take an interest in Council actions, how do you deal with that? Pfab/Well see that, well they can, their televised they can watch them. I mean that's for Boards and Commissions, no they have to be there. O'Dormell/No but not everybody has television and not everybody has cable. You know I'm just. Champion/And that's not participating, that's just (can't hear). O'Donnell/Yea, and they may want to come down and deal with council meeting do we at that point in time provide a bus pass or well (can't hear). Kanner/Well I think you consider it, but I think Mike there's different levels, I think that you say what are barriers in our society and our city and are there ways that we can offer help to get around those barriers. And we look at what's maybe most important, and we prioritize, and we say our Commissions and Boards mean a lot to us and we want to get a fuller range. We have in our comprehensive plan and how we do zoning and development, we say we want mixed use, or mixed levels of income and I think we want to say we want the same thing on our Boards and Commission and I think we would wan to study it a little bit to see if there are those barriers out there and what are other communities are doing. What's Iowa City like and put it all together and make a final decision to see if we can help overcome some of those barriers. O'Donnell/Well I think we've had four people with. (Can't hear). Atkins/Yes. Pfab/The board what's going on at the. Atkins/We can do surveys but I'm hearing four of you don't want us to do surveys. If you want us to survey other communities then we'll do that. Champion/Well not an official survey but I guess I kind of like the idea has it made a difference in doing that. Pfab/Well let me tell you my own personal experience, no more, no less. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of April 1, 2002. April 1, 2002 Work Session Page 56 Champion/No you've already told us that Irvin. Pfab/But if what you found out is everybody that is low income doesn't mean that they don't, that may be a very temporary thing and some of the things that these people brought to the table was just absolutely astounding. Atkins/If your asking limiting it to just the Iowa League of Cities, I can arrange that fairly easily, just give a board member. (Can't hear). Atkins/Okay. Lehman/Just see what's happening in Iowa, see if there's anyplace else in Iowa doing it. Is that all right? Pfab/Sure. Lehman/Staffgive us a memo on it and see. Champion/I mean I don't, yea, I don't, I don't think that's the big barrier. Lehman/Well I don't either but it will be interesting to see if anybody else. Atkins/Okay so through the board, League Board you want me to do that? Wilbum/Sure. Atkins/Okay I'll do that. Council Time Lehman/Council Time. Champion/I need to go to the game. O'Donnell/I would like to, let's have Council time tomorrow night. Vanderhoef/I just have one thing, could I real fast? O'Donnell/Absolutely. Vanderhoef/Okay thank you. I wondered if anybody around the table was interested in having the staff review the performance of the developer's that we have had for This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of April 1, 2002. April 1, 2002 Work Session Page 57 our CDBG projects for our low and moderate income housing and the senior housing, assisted living all those kinds of things before we get into discussing the projects for this coming year I personally would like a little review of how those people have performed. You know timeliness, the use of their money, the completion of their projects, the upkeep of their projects, how much price per unit that their spending out there, what developer fees are and how maybe that compares to other recipient cities in Iowa and maybe in full of those in our region. Lehman/We're asking staffto evaluate these? Vanderhoef/Just to give us a little staff review of the performance of these folks that have done projects for us before and some of them are applying for projects again this time. Lehman/Well the standards then would be the standards that staffwould establish as to how they perform. Kanner/Or what perhaps they've been doing, every project gets evaluated, maybe to summarize those evaluations. Are you talking about for profit, or non profit or all? Vanderhoef/The ones who receive, who do projects with CDBG money and home funds. Kanner/Whether they're for profit or non profit. Pfab/But isn't that what CDBG, when I sit in on those meetings those are the questions they're asking them, they say what did you do last time, what did, and. Vanderhoef/But I want to see their final product and. Lehman/How well did they do it. Vanderhoef/How well did they do it and at what price and, basically. Pfab/What's the purpose of it? Vanderhoef/To see whether they should be awarded projects again. Pfab/Again, well when they come to those CDBG meetings that's what those board members ask them. Kanner/But maybe a summary, a one or two page summary and a chart for them and with Steve Nasby there I think that would be helpful. Pfab/I think that's already done. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of April 1, 2002. April 1, 2002 Work Session Page 58 Vanderhoef/I think it would be helpful to me. Lehman/No I don't think it is. Vanderhoef/No it's not, not the financial reviews of a project. Lehman/We've got organizations that do not perform particularly well and they get funded every time and nobody questions how well they spend their money and I think that's what Dee's saying. Champion/And I have to agree with you but I don't know if we have time for staff to be doing that. Lehman/Well I think it would be nice to mn that past Steve Nasby and just get his. Atkins/How about leave it with this, let me ask the questions, let me see what's involved and I'll get back to you with that answer for sure. Champion/Great idea. Vanderhoef/Thank you. Kanner/Well when's our heating on? Lehman/No this is for next year, this year's too late. VanderhoefJ We're just setting public hearing this time, two weeks from now we will have public hearing. Lehman/You're not talking about using that this year? Pfab/Yes she is. V anderhoeff I'm talking about just finding out what's up. Lehman/I have no problem with that for doing next year but I think for us to start doing it at this point for this year's funding is probably too late. Vanderhoef/The only think I would consider is deferring any project if we still needed more information. Pfab/See so basically she's trying to make up for conditions for this year and I then I believe it's (can't hear) for next year. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of April 1, 2002. April 1, 2002 Work Session Page 59 Vanderhoef/No we have not approved it, that's what I'm saying. Kanner/We have to vote on it and I think that Steve actually does though, I mean the committee, they do those things, we just need it in a summarized form and to be able to talk about it and I think it would be apropos at our next work session to have that, I don't think it's that hard to summarize it into a page or two. Atkins/I don't know now but at the very least let me ask the question. Lehman/Ask the question. Champion/Ask the question. Atkins/And I'll get back to you promptly. Vanderhoef/Good, thank you. Adjourned 8:55 PM This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of April 1, 2002.