Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006-05-23 Transciption May 23, 2006 May 15, 2006 Council: Staff: City Council Work Session Page 1 City Council Work Session 5:00 PM Bailey, Champion, Correia, Elliott, O'Donnell, Vanderhoef, Wilburn Atkins, Davidson, Dilkes, Helling, Karr, Moran, Morris, Rocca, Williams TAPES: 06-40 Side 2; 06-44 Side 2; 06-45, Side 1 Planninl! and Zoninl! Items Davidson: job as Karr: Davidson: Elliott: Davidson: Iowa City Correia: Davidson: Let's proceed then, in the boss lady's absence, so I'll try and do as best a We need your mic up. Can't hear you. Is that better? Yes. a) CONDITIONALLY REZONING 11.36 ACRES OF LAND LOCATED EAST OF SOUTH RIVERSIDE DRIVE FROM GENERAL INDUSTRIAL (1-1) TO HEAVY INDUSTRIAL (1- 2) (REZOS-OOOOS) Ok. First item we have is conditional rezoning of 11.36 acres in South This is better known as Ace Auto Recyclers. You see the location there. That's what the site looks like currently, and there's the site plan, which we'll talk about in a little bit here. I got a little history on this today which I think was helpful, so I think I'll just really quick, quickly run through this. In 1974, this area ofIowa City was annexed to the City. And at that time there were no salvage yards in this area. Shortly thereafter a request was made for a 5 acre salvage yard, which was approved, and later grew in size to roughly what you see here before us, which, all in all is approximately 14 acres in size. There are actually, this salvage yard here is the one, is Ace Auto Recyclers. That whole bit? I'm sorry - this one right - that line to the south is Ace Auto Recyclers. This is Bekin's Moving and Storage. It's kind of carved out of the parcel here. This area here is a separate salvage yard, Gordon Russell Salvage Yard. My understanding is originally the two were partners, they had a falling out and so it was split into two salvage yards and, as I mentioned, grew from the original approved 5 acres in size to approximately 14 acres between the two right now, Ace Auto Recyclers is approximately 10 acres This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of May 23,2006. ---,---~_._.__._,---_._-_.~_.~_., May 23,2006 City Council Work Session Page 2 of that. There were conditions placed on this, on Ace Auto Recyclers when it was established, which were in large part not complied with. This surfaced recently when Ace Auto Recyclers came in for a building permit to do some expansion on their facility and it was pointed out to them that they had not complied with these conditions of the original rezoning and that that would need to happen before the City would be willing to entertain any further action. I'm told that that has occurred, and so the action that you see before you is proposed. So the proposal here is to take the existing 10 acre site plus an area down here, which currently does not have any salvage on it, plus a small area up here, which includes this building. And I believe that building is where they take vehicles and then take parts off of them which are then put on the shelf so that when you come in you don't have to actually go out to the yard and tear an alternator offthe car; it's there on the shelf for you. And so the total then is 11.36, slightly more than the 10 acres that is there currently. There is a conditional rezoning, which you have in your materials. We can, you know, run through the provisions if you'd like of what is being suggested. They are things that are typical to this type of operation, and the conditions you would like to see. The first thing is that the development has to comply with the site plan which you see here. You will note that that includes some spruce trees in this area here, which are designed to provide screening from Riverside Drive and provide an attractive entranceway. It also includes a provision that all the salvage will be set back 300 feet. All the landscaping and screening improvements will be made prior to a building permit issued. The spruce trees that I mentioned, and also then you'll note that there's a blue line stream, top of the property, which, under the sensitive areas ordinance and as a condition of this rezoning, that has to essentially be protected. And so you can see that the fence that is proposed there, basically is designed to separate the salvage yard from the blue line stream here. So those are the conditions that have been placed on the proposal that you have before you. One other thing, that I had a conversation with a member of Council earlier today and I did just want to mention there was, there was some question about what happened to the remainder ofthe site, in terms of any screening. There is a fence that is proposed around the remainder of the site here, and I did find out from Bob Micklow that the current zoning ordinance does require screening along the back of the site, where it might be visible from the river, and so that is just, that's not in here as a special condition of the rezoning because it's required of the zoning, the underlying zone, the 1-2 zone requires that, so that is something the applicant will have to comply with. It also is mentioned in your comment there that approval would allow this property to expand, the salvage operation subject to a special exception. That special exception has gone through the Board of Adjustment and was approved with the conditions that you have in your conditional zoning agreement. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of May 23,2006. ^~-_._-----~~~--~_._-------'_._- May 23, 2006 City Council Work Session Page 3 Elliott: Jeff, the bottom line is, this is simply going to make it a more attractive place or, if you're left handed, unattractive. Davidson: Well, it has resulted in the property having the rezoning conditions placed on it previously, having those been brought to current, and obviously you have a condition then Bob that it will be required for the subsequent action which is the construction of a building, that's what the applicant wants. Elliott: But it's going to look nice? Davidson: I imagine that's in the eye of the beholder, but certainly one could draw that conclusion, yes. Bailey: What about environmental considerations? I mean, I assume that we don't take, that's another Davidson: Well, you have the sensitive areas ordinance Bailey: Right. Davidson: and obviously it has to comply with that. And the stream corridor issue up here, I mentioned. Bailey: Right, but a fence doesn't protect a stream. Davidson: Yeah, there's a fence and a buffer as well, if! didn't mention that, please Bailey: What kind of a buffer? Davidson: I don't know. I can try and find out. Vanderhoef: Ok. When you showed me on the aerial view of all of this, I didn't realized that the Russell piece was cut off this whole thing. Davidson: This does not include the Russell piece. Vanderhoef: Ok. This is for Council as something that I'd like to look at in the future. There's two things that are happening here. We're working close to the river, so there's environmental concerns about the water quality. And Lou . Licht did some work a couple years ago, about 6 or 7 years ago, actually, with poplars, and using them as cleaning for runoff, so I'd like to put on a work session taking about that in particular. I'd like to see some poplars planted on this project, along the backside closest to that creek and then the other, sand quarry is close there. But this leads me into saying I would like to talk about some sort of a policy of how we treat the backs of any properties that are backing up to waterways, and how they would look This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription ofthe Iowa City City Council meeting of May 23,2006. -~--~--,._----_._--~"---_._----------~--_._~-_.._. May 23, 2006 City Council Work Session Page 4 from the opposite side of the waterway. So if we could put that on a work session I'd like to investigate that further. Dilkes: But you're not Vanderhoef: But on this project I want poplar trees, if we can all across the back part of that intermingled with the spruce. I did speak with the city forester to be sure that they were compatible trees, and he said that they were compatible. In fact, the only thing that he said was the spruce trees, if they're close to a very wet area and stay very wet, they are susceptible to a fungus, and so there may be kill-out in this kind ofproject. So I don't know whether there's another alternative to the spruce. I like the looks of spruce ifthey will grow there, but if we end up with a constant fungus concern, it might have to be something else, I don't know. Wilburn: At this point they've already signed the agreement, correct? Davidson: That is correct. Wilburn: And so, if we were to make that change, they would need to Vanderhoef: Defer. Wilburn: Defer. Davidson: That is correct. Wilburn: Ok. Vanderhoef: I'll be asking for the deferral tonight. Bailey: Ok. Correia: But you're talking. The screening requirement. So the fencing requirement is for the fence for the viewing from the river. Are the trees also along the fence required or that's more from the street? Davidson: The trees, the trees around the back of the facility, Amy, are required on the outside of the fence, to essentially provide a screening of the salvage area. Correia: Ok, I see what you're saying. Ok. And there's also screening requirements from the street? Davidson: Yes. That is the spruce trees that you see. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of May 23,2006. May 23, 2006 City Council Work Session Page 5 Bailey: Screening but no berming, right? Davidson: Ah, the, for these, the highlighting here, Regenia, it is spruce trees called for in the conditional zoning agreement. Now, my understanding is, that for the area around the back here, the applicant has some alternatives. They can put arborvitae in, which grow tall, or they can make a berm and then have shorter vegetation on top of those - that's an alternative that's left up to the applicant. Bailey: So they don't have to do the spruce is what you're saying. That's not required. Davidson: No, in fact, arborvitae are what actually are called for in the zoning ordinance for the backside screening. Vanderhoef: Ok. And does anyone know how they do in wet conditions? Davidson: Well, you see them all over. I certainly can't speak for the City forester, but they are quite a prevalent type of vegetation all over town. Vanderhoef: Well, I'd like that question also asked then. Davidson: And of course the City can enforce, if it's a parking lot tree or anything, if you plant it and it dies, the City can then force that to be replaced if it's a condition of the rezoning. Vanderhoef: Which this whole thing O'Donnell: Was this brought up during the discussion at Planning and Zoning? Davidson: Yes, we discussed this. Vanderhoef: The type of screen? Davidson: No, the issue that if the plant dies it can be replaced. Yeah, I don't, couldn't tell you for sure about the type of plant at P & Z. Vanderhoef: Ok. That I think we need to do more in working with our forester, just to get information when we're talking about screening, we don't. Davidson: Just to be clear - what's called out in the conditional zoning agreement in front of the facility viewed from Riverside Drive are specifically spruce trees. What's called out for the backside ofthe facility, which would be the view from the river, there are some options in the zoning ordinance that the developer can decide one way or another. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of May 23,2006. May 23, 2006 City Council Work Session Page 6 Bailey: Did - I'm just going back to environmental. Our storm water runoff plan doesn't make distinctions about properties that are closer to waterways, right? We don't have any? Davidson: Sorry. I can't tell you for sure, Regenia. Bailey: Ok. It just seems interesting that you would put this so close to a river. Vanderhoef: Well, I think this is one of those things that in our discussion about Davidson: I did want to, I did want to just, excuse me, Dee, I did want to point out, I put this view up so you can see that it isn't directly adjacent to the river. The river is over here. Bailey: But the stream that it's very close to. Davidson: Ok, here's Willow Creek, and then it goes right into here, and there's a blue line stream right here that cuts across a comer ofthe property. Bailey: Right, and Ijust - I think that merits some concern. Davidson: This is the area that is optimistically known as Mesquakie Park. It's not really a park, as all of us know, it's more of a landfill, but that is the area that is pretty much between the river and the property we're talking about. And this is a sandpit that's in the County. All of this area is in the unincorporated County. Vanderhoef: Which is, in my mind what, the poplars, if we could do anything to help the environmental situation on Mesquakie Park area, which I thought we could take in part off of that property, that it was just a piece of City property, since we, for all the years that I was on Parks & Rec. and on Council, we haven't been able to grow anything on that area other than a few weeds survive on that whole area. One other thing that this whole project brought up for our future discussion is how building inspection keeps in touch with the CZA's on the various properties, because, in my mind, we shouldn't be waiting for complaint process. We should be automatically somehow have that with each property so when they go out to inspect, they know what that CZA is and ifthere's something that they should look at and check to see. (cell phone ringtone) Wilburn: I had it turned on silent! (laughter) Bailey: Apparently not. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of May 23,2006. May 23, 2006 City Council Work Session Page 7 Wilburn: Somebody take that call. Vanderhoef: I'll call in a minute. (laughter) Wilburn: Davidson: Wilburn: Bailey: Wilburn: Bailey: Just to clarify a couple things. They're expanding existing operations - it's not a new thing, right? That is correct. I'm not trying to take away from any environmental concerns or argument but, My concern is Let me finish, please. All right. (cell phone ringtone) Wilburn: It is also, I mean, Mesquakie is there and so, ifthere's concern about environmental, it can include what to do about Mesquakie Park and its, perhaps, ongoing, creating environmental issues down there. The second thing is this, in terms of the screening, what exists in this project now, the evergreen, I believe, is a year-round screen and a wider tree. The poplar tree is not, I don't believe, from what I've seen, like what was tried out at the landfill and other landfills, they grow really tall and that there's not much screening. They can grow straight up very quickly and so I don't. If it will help with some environmental thing, then that's great. In terms of screening, the poplar tree is not, is not going to be an effective screen. (all talk - can't hear) Davidson: Wilburn: Correia: Davidson: I think that's why the spruce was called out, Ross, for exactly the reasons you. I agree. Are there, are there, do we inspect industrial properties for environmental? I wouldn't say it is a high priority, Amy. Typically these, a lot of these inspections are done on a complaint basis, and in an industrial zone you're less likely to have a complaint made. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription ofthe Iowa City City Council meeting of May 23,2006. ----"-,_._--~----~-_._-----_._---'------"-- May 23, 2006 Correia: Bailey: Correia: Bailey: Wilburn: Elliott: Correia: Wilburn: Bailey: Correia: Davidson: Correia: Bailey: Davidson: City Council Work Session Page 8 Complaint. Ok. Well, and that's exactly my concern about this. They have been not been in compliance; they're willing to come into compliance to get something from us. What guarantee do we have that they will maintain the CZA? Yeah, that's what my complaint was. Trees die and things change. I have some real concerns unless we have something in place that's not only complaint driven, that this will not necessarily make it look nicer. It will be nice for awhile, or nicer for awhile, and then it will go back to not compliant with the CZA, and so, if Dee makes a motion to defer, I would be willing to do that, but if we vote on this tonight I'm not so sure I could support it. Any other questions about this project? I appreciate what Dee and Regenia have said, but this has been ongoing for so long and the staff and the property owner have worked together for so long, I would like to pass this and get the place looking better and we can address other concerns at a later date, so I hope we do pass it. So how? . Any other questions about this project? Yes, go. I think Amy must have. So how, how long, you're saying they were in noncompliance with current zoning for how long? Many, many years. Man, many years. Ok. Well, didn't they open in the mid-70s you said, and shortly thereafter it was a problem? It was the late, yeah, mid to late 70s. There was, again, just for purposes of historical documentation, there was an enforcement action attempted by the City in the 80s through the court system, and, from what I can tell, it just kind of fizzled out. It's not clear if either side actually prevailed, but I think there was a change of City attorneys at the time and it kind of, it just fizzled out, but it was at least attempted. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of May 23,2006. _.__.~--_.,'_.._------~--------_._- May 23, 2006 Elliott: Davidson: Correia: Bailey: Correia: Davidson: Correia: Davidson: Correia: Davidson: Correia: Bailey: Dilkes: Bailey: Dilkes: Atkins: City Council Work Session Page 9 What were the noncompliance factors? In what way they not compliant? I think it was expanding beyond the boundaries that were originally delineated for it, and it was bigger than it was supposed to be. Salvage was too close to the, to Riverside Drive. The screening had not been put into place as it was supposed to be - that, things taking place outside that were supposed to be within buildings, that sort of thing. Can I ask one more question? Well, then I get to ask one. You can. So, what they want now is they want to be able to build a building. Yes. Ok. And to have this screening thing that is required, is there a, something comes first? I mean, can we say? Yeah. It'll have to comply with the CZA before they get their building permit. Ok. So they'll have to do all of that screening and that before the building permit. Yes. That will be the condition of the building permit, yes. The building permit. Ok. Is there anything, legally, that we can add on as a 6 month check-in, a year check-in and an 18 month check-in to ensure continued compliance with the CZA? Given this history? I mean I know. You can just do an inspection, I mean. I mean how can we ensure that? If I vote for this rezoning, how can I be assured that it's not going to be basically the complaint driven situation that we have, that something will flag and they will get an inspection at 6, 12 and 18 Well, you would direct staff to do that. I would just do it. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of May 23, 2006. ^"~-,----~~-._~_._----_..._._-_._"-----,-----^_.--'---------_._.~_._--,---------- May 23, 2006 City Council Work Session Page 10 Bailey: So is that an amendment to the motion? I mean a contingent upon that, or how do we, just direct it? Atkins: I think you can, yeah, direct it's going to be done and what I would do, assuming that the CZA were to pass and the issues behind us, one ofthe things that we would inform the Ace Recycling folks is that administratively you can expect an inspection on date certain and just put them on notice. Dilkes: And enforcement action, inspection if you're not in compliance. But I don't think it's adding anything to the CZA really. Bailey: Ok. Elliott: Just administratively a tickler file. Atkins: Yeah, a tickler file, I think that's. Champion: And then what happens if they're not in compliance in a year? And the building is up and? Atkins: That's. Dilkes: You do a municipal, you do a municipal, you give them notice of violation and you do a municipal infraction and Bailey: $100.00? Dilkes: No, there's a fine, but you can also seek compliance through the courts. Bailey: And that's, that's as far as we can go with it? I mean we seek compliance through the courts so that we bring them back into compliance, they comply for a period of time, I mean, it's a nice little dance. Dilkes: I suppose you could seek a contempt remedy ifthey didn't comply. Bailey: Ok. O'Donnell: I think we're asking a lot of what ifs. I think this is a very positive thing he's doing now. Bailey: But I don't ask what ifs unless somebody has a history, and I mean, these are not concerns that I have for everyone that's in town, and they have a history of noncompliance, and that upholds latent noncompliance. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of May 23,2006. May 23, 2006 City Council Work Session Page 11 O'Donnell: But I question, but this thing has been through Planning and Zoning, it's approved by staff, and I think it's going to be a tremendous improvement to that area. Bailey: If they comply with it. O'Donnell: And, but then, you know, we'll have to, then set up regular checkpoints on everything. Bailey: No. O'Donnell: Ifwe do that, yes we will. Bailey: People who don't have a history of problems I don't have concerns about. I'm willing to have our complaint base, but there's a history of flaunting. O'Donnell: I have a problem with sensing out anybody like that, but I understand what you are sa)'lng. Bailey: With a history of flaunting? O'Donnell: I have a problem of thinking that history will continue, yes. Bailey: You know, you do business, that's what follows you, how you do business. O'Donnell: I've been in business a long time, so I'm well aware of that. Wilburn: Any other questions for Jeff about this particular item? Bailey: Aren't you glad that it's you tonight and not? (laughter) O'Donnell: (can't hear) Vanderhoef: I apologize to everybody about that phone. It's a problem. Just one question for Eleanor. I got in on the tail end of that remedy situation. Is there any way that occupancy can be discontinued until they're in compliance? Dilkes: Well they have, is this a new building? Davidson: I believe so, yeah. Dilkes: I mean so, would they need an occupancy, would they need an occupancy permit? This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of May 23,2006. _._-~,-"--------"-,_._----~--_._---_._.__._-"----'_.--_.._,.-.~~-----"-~ May 23, 2006 City Council Work Session Page 12 Vanderhoef: Well, for this, this particular thing, it says in the agreement that they wouldn't have to. Dilkes: Well, they're not going to get their building permit until they're in compliance initially, so, and that would come before an occupancy permit. So then after they make the initial compliance and they get their building permit, I think the only thing that you can do is direct that there be more intensive enforcement with respect to the conditions of the agreement, and that can include things such as seeking a fine for every day that they're out of compliance. You know, typically we don't do that, I mean, typically the effort is to bring them back in compliance, that's the goal. But there are certainly more harsh enforcement actions that you can take, and I think you would just have to direct that that be done. Vanderhoef: Well, I'm just thinking of a hypothetical, anyplace with an inspection, at some place, and see that they're not complying with the CZA. Davidson: I might be able to clarify this a little bit here on the site plan. Ok. They're required, as a condition of getting their building permit. They're going to build their building, I believe in this area here, and as a condition of getting their building permit, they have to put all the screening in to about there. Vanderhoef: Yeah. Davidson: And then they pick it up here and then they have to put it in all the way down here. Then they get to build their building, and before they get their occupancy permit, they have to put the rest of it in right here, the idea being they're not going to, they have to put that in before they build the building and then they'd have to tear it out. Vanderhoef: Yeah. That I understand. What I'm asking is, on a hypothetical, different case then this. Dilkes: Ok, that's what I'm not following. What's the hypothetical? Vanderhoef: So, building inspection goes out, they find Dilkes: At what point? After the building permit, occupancy Vanderhoef: I get through property, a hypothetical property Dilkes: Ok. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of May 23,2006. -..-..--------.-------..-----------" May 23,2006 City Council Work Session Page 13 Vanderhoef: if they go out and find that a property is not in compliance or, say the trees haven't been replanted. Is there anyway that you can go direct to no occupancy until the CZA is being met? Dilkes: Well, that would mean evicting, because they already have an occupancy permit, so no. Vanderhoef: Ok. That was exactly Dilkes: What you do is you give them notice of violation, you file a municipal infraction, you ask the court to order them to come into compliance. We have had situations where they don't comply, long term enforcement actions where there's no compliance, and we've sought contempt orders. I mean, it can get to that point. Another thing that you can also do is technically, the fine can be leveled each day that they're out of compliance. We typically don't do that, but that can racket up a fine quickly if you do that. Vanderhoef: Ok. Thank you. Wilburn: 7B. Davidson: Shall we move on, Mr. Mayor? Wilburn: Yes. b) REZONING PROPERTIES ASSOCIATED WITH THE UNIVERSITY OF IOWA TO INSTITUTIONAL PUBLIC (P2) [THESE PROPERTIES INCLUDE: 511 SOUTH MADISON STREET AND 620 AND 624 SOUTH MADISON STREET FROM INTENSIVE COMMERCIAL (CI-I) TO INSTITUTIONAL PUBLIC (P2); LOTS 14 AND 15 IN GRAND AVENUE COURT ADDITION AND 320 MELROSE AVENUE FROM MEDIUM DENSITY SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (RS-8) TO INSTITUTIONAL PUBLIC (P2); LOT 4 IN MELROSE COURT ADDITION, 223 LUCON DRIVE, 609 MELROSE AVENUE, AND 3 OAK PARK COURT, FROM LOW DENSITY SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (RS-5) TO INSTITUTIONAL PUBLIC (P2); 322 NORTH CLINTON FROM PLANNED HIGH DENSITY MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (PRM) TO INSTITUTIONAL PUBLIC (P2); 430 AND 530 NORTH CLINTON FROM HIGH DENSITY MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (RM-44) TO INSTITUTIONAL PUBLIC (P2); AND OLD CAPITOL MALL FROM CENTRAL BUSINESS (CB- 10) TO INSTITUTIONAL PUBLIC/CENTRAL BUSINESS (P2/CB-l 0).] (REZ06-00008) This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription ofthe Iowa City City Council meeting of May 23,2006. May 23, 2006 City Council Work Session Page 14 c) REZONING PROPERTIES ASSOCIATED WITH THE CITY OF IOWA CITY AND THE IOWA CITY PUBLIC SCHOOL DISTRICT TO NEIGHBORHOOD PUBLIC (PI) AND THE IOWA NATIONAL GUARD TO INSITUTIONAL PUBLIC (P2) [THESE PROPERTIES INCLUDE: BENTON HILL PARK, WHISPERING MEADOWS WETLAND PARK, OUTLOT ASSOCIATED WITH EAST HILL SUBDIVISION, OUTLOT ASSOCIATED WITH LONGFELLOW MANOR, AND OUTLOT ASSOCIATED WITH WALDEN WOOD FROM MEDIUM DENSITY SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (RS-8) TO NEIGHBORHOOD PUBLIC (PI); PROPERTIES ASSOCIATED WITH GLENDALE PARK, HUNTER'S RUN PARK, WINDSOR RIDGE PARK, GRANT WOOD ELEMENTARY SCHOOL AND IRVING B. WEBER ELEMENTARY SCHOOL FROM LOW DENSITY SINGLE F AMIL Y RESIDENTIAL (RS-5) TO NEIGHBORHOOD PUBLIC (PI); PROPERTIES ASSOCIATED WITH WEATHERBY PARK AND THE SYCAMORE GREENWAY TRAIL FROM INTERIM DEVELOPMENT SINGLE F AMIL Y RESIDENTIAL (ID-RS) TO NEIGHBORHOOD PUBLIC (PI); PROPERTIES ASSOCIATED WITH COURT HILL TRAIL FROM MEDIUM DENSITY MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (RM-20) TO NEIGHBORHOOD PUBLIC (PI); AND PROPERTIES ASSOCIATED WITH HARLOCKE HILL PARK FROM OVERLAY PLANNED DEVELOPMENTIHIGH DENSITY MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (OPD/RM-44) TO NEIGHBORHOOD PUBLIC (PI); AND FIRE STATION #4 AT THE INTERSECTION OF SCOTT BOULEVARD AND NORTH DODGE STREET FROM RURAL RESIDENTIAL (RR-I) TO NEIGHBORHOOD PUBLIC (PI). PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF MELROSE AVENUE, WEST OF HIGHWAY 218 FROM NEIGHBORHOOD PUBLIC (PI) TO INSTITUTIONAL PUBLIC (P2).] (REZ06-00008) Davidson: Items b and c are rezonings to public under current zoning ordinance. Obviously, publicly zoned properties should be zone P. There are now two classifications, PI and P2. Item b pertains to P2, which is state and federal property over which we do not have authority. PI, which is item c is property under the jurisdiction ofthe City, the County, the school district, which is equal to the City's authority, so that's why they're separated out, and under item b there is also one parcel, Old Capital Center, which is due, proposed to be zoned P2 - CB -10, and that's because it's partially privately owned and partially owned by the University. You This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription ofthe Iowa City City Council meeting of May 23,2006. May 23, 2006 City Council Work Session Page 15 know, we can, you've got these all in your packet. We can run through them if you want, but, do you need to do that? Champion: No. Elliott: Yes, last time. This is what we talked about at the previous meeting, there's nothing really changed, you're just identifying it more appropriately? Davidson: Yes, yes. This is the actual rezoning. Any questions about any of these? Any more questions about that at all? Ok. Wilburn: No. d) VACATING THE ALLEY LOCATED NORTH OF BENTON STREET BETWEEN CLINTON STREET AND DUBUQUE STREET. (V AC06-00001) Davidson: The final item then is at your last, at your May 2nd meeting then, the public hearing was continued on the County's alley vacation request. Wilburn: I had encouraged several of the supervisors and the County attorney if they had any concerns or wanted to know what specific questions Council members had for them to contact you directly, and I believe they did. Some of them did that. Karr: And I can also note that in your handout tonight you have a response. Wilburn: Yeah. From the Chair. Karr: Correct. Champion: Well, I am willing to pass first consideration of this tonight. As you know, I talked to, we all talked to, the County Board of Supervisors and I think our idea was great, but I don't think it's going to work out, and I'm not gonna hold up their building, they want to start some stuff on this land, and I'm going to (can't hear) first consideration so they can get going on it, and then if we have the votes to do that, be willing the next time to expedite it so they get going. Wilburn: Any question for Jeff about this item? Davidson: Ok. Thank you. Colle!!e Street traffic calmin!! between 7th Avenue and City Hi!!h This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription ofthe Iowa City City Council meeting of May 23,2006. May 23,2006 Wilburn: Davidson: Elliott: Davidson: Elliott: Davidson: City Council Work Session Page 16 Traffic calming? Anissa and I were contemplating the next step in the traffic calming process which was requested by the block of, couple of blocks on College Street between 7'h Avenue and City High, and we are at the stage where Anissa showed me the results of the traffic data collection, and as you saw from the materials that you received, it was very, very close to meeting the threshold. The volume threshold was just barely met; the speed threshold was just barely not met. So, because it was so close and that our next step is the neighborhood meeting where we actually discuss the specific possibilities for traffic calming on the, on the street, they're very likely to be speed humps because the adjacent streets have speed humps and I think those streets were the genesis ofthis street requesting traffic calming. Before we had that neighborhood meeting, because of the closeness of meeting the traffic threshold and because of the concerns that Council has had regarding some of our traffic calming projects this year, we just wanted to meet briefly with you. Anissa can answer any questions you have about the data that leads us to determine that it is reasonable to traffic calm on this street. But we just wanted to make sure you were ok with us going the next step to have the neighborhood meeting before we actually did that. Anissa, my question would be that the, on the average, if you had one foot in boiling water and one foot in ice water on the average you would be comfortable. So on the average, this doesn't quite meet and just barely does meet on the one hand, but are there times, I think I was persuaded in other instances, that oh, for maybe 22 hours of the day it wouldn't meet, but perhaps there is a certain time every day or every weekday when the traffic is somewhere close to out of control or dangerous or, you know, inappropriate? Is that one of the? We. We anticipated that question. Wonder why. And Anissa did put together a summary here. And I would also add, Bob, that what you just characterized occurs with virtually everyone ofthese. That's not unique to this location in that, for the vast majority ofthe day there's no need to do traffic calming. But there are certain times ofthe day _ what I had Anissa pull out for me was the times of day where there were vehicles consistently over 35 miles an hour. The posted speed is 25. And those occur - big surprise - the morning peak, the evening peak, and when school lets out. The morning peak coincides with when school starts. The afternoon doesn't, they're separate. And so during those times you do have a preponderance of vehicles going greater than 35, and that is the neighborhood specifically. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of May 23,2006. May 23, 2006 City Council Work Session Page 17 Elliott: I'm not a fan of these, obviously, but I think there are instances and situations where perhaps it is, if not necessary, it would at least be helpful. Bailey: I spoke with a couple of school board members and Lane last night about the possibility of having some kind of meeting, probably when school starts again, with parents, students. Have you done that, to talk about the traffic around, this is around City High. I mean, I'm sure that there are traffic challenges around West High. It just doesn't have the impact because of the way West High is situated. So how? Williams: We certainly can do that. I believe that Marcia has done that in the past, at the direction of the Vice Principal. The Vice Principal I have spoken with on each and everyone of these proj ects surrounding City High and he's in full support. I gave him the survey, because his property is adjacent to where' we've putten in the speed humps, so I believe that Marcia has met with him and they have met with the kids and the parents under the Vice Principal's direction, but if not, I certainly can. Bailey: Well, some of our discussion talked about, you know, parking permits and this you know, understanding that appropriate driving around the school should be part ofthat parking compliance. I mean, you know, we were just throwing out ideas so, you know, probably would be helpful to do on a fairly regular basis, making students know that they have a school that's in a neighborhood. Williams: That would be the issue, that they keep changing, but Bailey: Right, right, you need to get a new crop of drivers every year. Williams: We'd have to do that every year. Bailey: Right. It might not be a bad thing. Vanderhoef: 1. Elliott: 1. Excuse me Dee - you go ahead. Vanderhoef: As you know, I talked about College Street before and the diversion of traffic that I suspect will become even heavier on College Street. And with this idea of meeting with the students and the families, I would personally like to slow this down and in the fall get the counts on College Street as they are now, with the student, well, in the fall. Bailey: Isn't that? This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription ofthe Iowa City City Council meeting of May 23,2006. -"~----"-'-'~'.'''-''-'-------'~~"----''''''''----------._..,-,-----_.~---_._~--_...__._-_.__._._.~--_.,,_._"~----~-_.~---- May 23,2006 City Council Work Session Page 18 Vanderhoef: Because right now the seniors are all gone, so a lot ofthe drivers are all gone from City High. Correia: But when you did this, was not, the seniors were, the seniors were? Davidson: No, school was in session. Correia: So school was in session. So this should be essentially the same. Vanderhoef: But College Street was not done at that time. Correia: No, this is College Street. Bailey: On College Street between Momingside Drive and Correia: No, I know, but Vanderhoef: Oh, you've done College Street now along with Morningside Drive. Williams: Yeah, yeah. Vanderhoef: Ok. Excuse me. Williams: The humps in, yeah, so there would be no diversion issues. Vanderhoef: All right. Ifwe Williams: This is the number now, before Vanderhoef: So this is (Vanderhoef & Williams together - can't hear) Davidson: We're in the process right now of constructing the speed humps on Momingside Drive, Kennedy Parkway and the alley off of 7'h Avenue. Anissa is just making Vanderhoef: I misread it - sorry about that. Wilburn: Do you have a Davidson: These counts were done on College Street in April - the 1 st week in April. Vanderhoef: Ok. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription ofthe Iowa City City Council meeting of May 23,2006. -,,--,,-,~---,-~-~----"-----"-----'."-'---'----'-'---_._--~._."---_.,---_._.__._~--- May 23,2006 City Council Work Session Page 19 Wilburn: Do you have any reports on the effectiveness on the humps on 4th Street? My impression is that it's just as busy but they seem to have slowed down. It doesn't deter the students from coming down the street. Williams: Exactly. Wilburn: Yeah. Williams: We do have the results from 4th and A and shortly, in the next month or two, we'll be getting the results - I think we defer that 'til fall because the students - to get the counts on the section on 4 th Avenue between Court and the parking lot, because those were just installed last year, in the summer. I believe that was in June. So we wait a year, we'll recount that, and then we'll have results from that, but if I remember correctly, the 4th and A numbers came down between 5 and 8 miles per hour. Davidson: Yeah, these things are effective. They do slow vehicles down. Wilburn: I was just - the question about diversion of traffic continues to come up and it's just my, I was just thinking, coming over here, I don't recall seeing anymore traffic as a result of. Champion: We've had a lot of streets like (can't hear) Williams: Yeah, that's what I was going to say. Bailey: How many streets do we have left to put down? Williams: We only have the piece of Morningside that would be between College and Court and that would be. Champion: Well, I think that Correia: I think there are pretty much people coming up 7th - I mean they're not going to go all the way around to the other Morningside to divert from those traffic humps. Davidson: I wouldn't expect they would. Correia: It doesn't make any sense. Wilburn: Any concerns to not have staff meet with the neighborhood? Champion: I don't have any. Vanderhoef: It doesn't end. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription ofthe Iowa City City Council meeting of May 23,2006. ----_.,-~--,~,----_._--~._-- May 23, 2006 City Council Work Session Page 20 O'Donnell: I don't. Bailey: I'd like to see a meeting with students on a regular basis as part of the education part of our traffic calming. Students and parents. Champion: I figure that's nice, but I'm not so sure it's effective. I mean, I think that when students have meetings, they have meetings during the year, assembly type of things, that that's the time, the principal should be telling them that they are in the neighborhood. Correia: Well I wonder if this is something Bailey: Well I'm sure - I'm sorry. Correia: I was just going to say, I wonder if this is something that is sort of separate from this. That the school, there might be a recommendation that when a student gets a parking permit, that there's a required component that includes education around you're driving through the neighborhood. Bailey: Yes. Wilburn: Ok, but there's no objection to proceeding forward with it? Correia: No. Bailey: No. But Ijust think we should be trying to address some of these things at the root instead of always putting in humps. Elliott: I agree with, I think that these kinds of driving situations are existing and they are out of hand, that the parents should be informed and I would, it would be nice ifthe school were able to do something about, but the people in schools have so much to do right now other than teach that I don't want to add another thing. Secondly, the parking permits, I think if you jerked a parking permit, they're simple going to park down the streets aways. Bailey: But we're assuming that this is all students. I'm not assuming that. I'm also assuming the education for the parents as well, because parents drive, I mean, students learn their driving from somebody. Wilburn: Can you touch base with the school district as part of this, as to what they are willing to do? Thank you. Davidson: Thank you. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription ofthe Iowa City City Council meeting of May 23,2006. May 23,2006 City Council Work Session Page 21 ITEM 16. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION AWARDING CONTRACT AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO SIGN AND THE CITY CLERK TO ATTEST A CONTRACT FOR CONSTRUCTION OF THE ROBERT A. LEE RECREATION CENTER EXTERIOR GLAZING AND PANEL REPLACEMENT PROJECT. Wilburn: Lost my place. O'Donnell: Robert E. Lee Rec. Center. Wilburn: Robert E. Lee Rec. Center. Atkins: I'm gonna have Kumi come up to the microphone. While she's coming up, this one's a little unusual. Normally, a bid is pretty straightforward: you like it or you don't. In this, in this case, the bid numbers are dramatically higher than the estimate. But there are a number of circumstances associated with that bidding process that the memorandum hopefully outlined for you. We have not to date settled with the insurance issue, which would provide some additional funding, particularly with the notable gap between what the estimate was and the bid. A couple of observations we would point out is that the bids are very close, which is a reflection of market. And Kumi is here to give you sort of a thumbnail sketch. We are inclined to recommend favorably on this project. Elliott: This is item 16. Atkins: Yes. Item 16. Kumi? Morris: Ok. Well, as Steve Atkins has said, the two bids that are submitted are within 5% of one another. What we found was that our engineer's estimate was quite low compared to what had actually come in. We found that there were a number of factors due to the discrepancy between the engineer's estimate and what the actual bids that came in were. The first factor is that there was a 60% rise in aluminum in the last 6 months, something that the, that our engineer had missed in his accounting. And, in most projects aluminum would not, that kind of change in market scale would not effect a project as dramatically as it has this one, but considering that a majority of this project is aluminum storefront frame and glass, it has effected it dramatically. As you can see the two bids are, one is from a local contractor that is presently within the school district replacing different systems, and that's REEP Construction, and they're the current low, and the second bid is from Unzeitig. They're, they're the higher bid. They are a general contractor and they're working with Mid-West Glass. Champion: So Steve, you think some of this will be covered by our insurance? I mean, we will apply insurance? This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of May 23,2006. May 23, 2006 City Council Work Session Page 22 Atkins: We will, yeah. As you know, we were planning to do this work before the storm. Champion: Before. Atkins: Before the storm, and then the issue of aluminum, it was just. Just a bunch of bad luck all at once. Champion: Maybe manna from heaven for the Rec. Center? Atkins: I don't know. Again, we've talked about this and talked about this and we truly don't believe we're going to get it any better if you send us back to re-bid it. Champion: No. Don't reopen. Bailey: I thought your memo was really clear. Morris: I did speak to Kevin O'Malley about if, where we were at with insurance on this particular claim. I worked with the insurance company to walk them through the damage to the different facilities and what we do know at this point is we are expecting some resultant effect from the south situation of the facility, what is now considered boarded up, but to what end we're not certain yet. We're still getting an estimate. Atkins: Normally an insurance company would actually, they would replace what was there. We don't want that, we want to put in the new, and again, it's just a matter of timing. You know, we wanted to take some time to walk you through this because it's again, contrary to what we normally would do, but this, as far as recommending, we do recommend that you award. Elliott: I have an observation and a question. The observation is I'm just, the first thing that hit me is that the estimate was, the bid came in almost half again higher than the estimate and that really concerns me, that an estimate is off that far. And secondly how much, I don't recall from the memo, how much of this is covered by insurance? Atkins: Well we. Bailey: It's offset. Atkins: Yeah. It'll be substantially covered by insurance, but what they'll cover is a replacement of what's there, a value will be applied to that, that's what it looks like before. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of May 23,2006. May 23,2006 City Council Work Session Page 23 Elliott: Maybe half? It's tough to say. Atkins: Yeah, it's really tough to say, because if we were not satisfied with the estimate either, if you look at that, there's a good third difference between that and what we're going to get. Elliott: I guess my only thought is the estimate being off that far is really obvious. Atkins: We were not satisfied with that either. Vanderhoef: But we can't put this one off either, really. Elliott: No. Bailey: No. Vanderhoef: We're between that rock and. Atkins: No. We really believe it's time has come. And we told the guys, you know, until April the 13th, we were chugging right along and planning to, to do this work anyway. It's just circumstantial. Champion: Will the pool be open at all? Morris: The pool is already opened. Atkins: The pool is open now. Champion: It is? Ok. Morris: It's just darker. Champion: It's just darker. Vanderhoef: The fence will stay the same? That new fence? Atkins: There's a different fence than the (cut off - end oftape) Vanderhoef: There's a question between privacy where people are out in the sun right beside a very busy street. Champion: Oh, that's the (can't hear) of it. Vanderhoef: Yeah. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of May 23,2006. May 23, 2006 City Council Work Session Page 24 Dilkes: I'm assuming the fence will stay until replaced. Champion: Right. Morris: That is correct. And also, that is another insurance item at this point, as well. Champion: You do not have a bid for the alternate for the new fence? Morris: No, I don't believe I have it with me. I apologize. Vanderhoef: But is that a hard to find item? I'm with you Connie. I think we should be changing fences if that is hard to. Champion: Would it be difficult to get, before the meeting? Morris: I'm sorry, I do have it here. I was looking at another thing. The screen panels on Gilbert Street, we were looking at, there were two numbers that were submitted - 17,5 and 19, 697, so $17,500.00 and that was the apparent low bid and then $19,697.00. Champion: Well, I would like to see that fence changed, and if we're going to redo this building, let's don't do it halfway. Vanderhoef: Do you have a picture of that fence? Is it equally as private at least? Cause I still would like that privacy piece. Morris: Yes it is. It is private. It's a com, it's not a wooden fence as it is now, it's a metal screened fence. It's a design that goes with the component of the replacement of the glass. Champion: Right. Morris: But we didn't include it within the base bid of submitting just due to the fact that the numbers were so different. Champion: Well I'd like to change that in the meeting tonight. Let me include that fence so that building looks great. Atkins: If we include the fence the low bid, that's REEP's bid - Morris: That's correct, the lower number will be. Vanderhoef: Same contractor. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of May 23,2006. "_.._....._.._._~. -~_._-~-_.._._,---,-,--_.~,,_._---~.__..~ May 23, 2006 City Council Work Session Page 25 Atkins: So it's still, REEP remains the low bidder with the fence as well? Morris: That's correct. Atkins: Ok. So if you're interested in doing that. . Vanderhoef: REEP's the low bidder, even putting the 17 in, versus the other one that's there. Morris: That's right. Correia: Well, does the cost of that fence go up if we wait? Morris: Yes. It's a possibility. Champion: Plus we'd have construction on the building taking place a second time. Atkins: It's true. Morris: Right. O'Donnell: This is really going to be a hard one to support being $200,000.00 over estimate. Atkins: Yeah. Bailey: But the memo makes it really clear, don't you think? O'Donnell: The memo clears it up, but it's still a difficult number to swallow. Champion: And we're going to apply any insurance that we get to that. Vanderhoef: The, I'm presuming there's a lot of aluminum in that fence, too? Morris: There is, the metal screening is a perforated metal, yeah. Champion: Oh, neat. Vanderhoef: So it's the aluminum again, which, that price isn't going to go down in the near future. Morris: Right. One of the things that we did request of the engineer in the design was to have something that was maintenance free, and aluminum was one of those materials that does not corrode over time, unlike steel and other types of metal materials. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription ofthe Iowa City City Council meeting of May 23,2006. May 23, 2006 City Council Work Session Page 26 Correia: That should keep the costs down. Morris: That should keep the long-term costs down, but it's a high cost for the design. Champion: Well, I think it's long overdue for a facelift. Correia: Oh yeah. Maybe it will increase usage. Champion: Almost as overdue as I am. Elliott: The fence would be attractive and provide privacy, correct? Morris: That is correct. Vanderhoef: And maintenance free. Wilburn: Thank you, Kumi. Vanderhoef: I think we've got a winner there. Elliott: Just, in, I've said it already, and I hate to repeat myself. Mike, I'm not so concerned with the bid as I am with the estimate. I think it's the estimate that's the problem, not the bid. Champion: Right. Take a magic marker and mark through it. O'Donnell: The estimates are normally much closer than this. Morris: I guess I should comment on that a little bit. To the architect and the engineering firm's credit, they had recently used similar numbers from projects that had been done within the City from the different schools that were done in last fall, and so the numbers are, the estimates they were using and the compounded interest was from doing the school systems and so that type of increase is something they should have caught but did miss. Wilburn: Ok. Atkins: If it's ok with you, Kumi can go home, you won't need her for later on? Wilbum: Bye. Morris: Just, the one other item that's on there. Atkins: Go ahead, what's that. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of May 23,2006. ...~---_._-_._--~~----~----_._._-_..""----~--"._~-_._-.-. May 23, 2006 Item 15. Morris: Correia: Atkins: Elliott: Wilburn: City Council Work Session Page 27 CONSIDER A RESOLUTION FINDING THE NECESSITY TO INSTITUTE EMERGENCY PROCEEDINGS, AND APPROVING THE WORK FOR EMERGENCY REPAIR PROJECTS AT THE ROBERT A. LEE RECREATION CENTER, COURT STREET TRANSPORTATION CENTER, DUBUQUE STREET RAMP (B RAMP), CAPITOL STREET RAMP (A RAMP), CHAUNCEY SWAN RAMP, CITY HALL AND THE IOWA CITY PUBLIC LIBRARY. There's one other item that's also on a resolution, I know it's not here in the work session, but let me just bring it up really quickly here, and that's a resolution on emergency proceedings for the emergency repair on, for different facilities. Were there any questions on that? Where's that? The emergency, the resolution authorizing us to exercise emergency bidding processes, that's, it's a whole series of projects. I, I'm in favor of this. I also hope that if there are private citizens who have similar situations, we'll be as understanding with private citizens. Thanks, Kumi. JCCOG Emerl!:encv ResDonse Svstem Wilburn: Atkins: Davidson: JCCOG Emergency Response System. Why don't you? This item is on your agenda in response to a, I guess some discussion that Regenia and I had, Regenia in her role as Chairperson of JCCOG this year. I think all of you, including the mayor, even though he was not present at the meeting, are familiar with the discussion that occurred at the last JCCOG meeting. There appears to be a groundswell of support with the going ahead with the further evaluation - and I think that's how it needs to be couched - the further evaluation of this County going with a single emergency response communication system in lieu of the two systems that we have currently, one operated by Iowa City and one operated by Johnson County. And there seems to be a certain level of frustration in terms of just getting going, and Iowa City has indicated that they would like an answer by next April in terms of being able to proceed one way or another with the upgrade of Iowa City's system. So, there seems to be a great deal of momentum that I think we need to take advantage of, and Regenia and I discussed one thing that we could do prior to the June JCCOG meeting, when I think a lot of this will actually be put into action. It was for me to meet individually with you today and last week I met with Johnson County Board of Supervisors. And that is This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription ofthe Iowa City City Council meeting of May 23,2006. -~-'--'---'~---_._'-'---~~~----~" - ----~--_._-------",.__.------,._.__.._~--_._-----_._---_.----...--,------.-..- May 23, 2006 City Council Work Session Page 28 another thing that everybody seems to have a clear understanding on, and that is that this is something for Johnson County and Iowa City to decide. The other entities that are part of this radio system have said "go ahead, evaluate it, single system sounds good, but it's really up to you two to decide what is to be done" and everyone else is sort of sitting back and watching. There does seem to also be a desire to have JCCOG involved in a coordination role and I'm here to tell you that's all it's going to be, because I am used to standing here before you and knowing what I'm talking about. You're used to that, I'm used to that. This is not that way. Fortunately you have some experts such as Chief Rocca who is in the audience, ChiefHargadine, those are the people who really will be your resource people. On the County side it'll be Sheriff Pulkrabek, Ambulance Director Spenler, it will be those types of people as well. So, what we thought today is real quickly just outline where we're going. I started to say JCCOG would provide the coordination of this. I'll be happy to do whatever the entities that belong to JCCOG would like. There does seem to be a level of comfort for the everybody else in JCCOG not including the County and Iowa City, everybody else seems to like that idea because then they can kind of keep track and monitor what's going on. You know, this is a big deal. The consultants' estimate for the system, very preliminary cost estimate for just building the system, is around 7 million dollars. I think Steve has determined that the combined operating expense right now ofthe County and City systems is about 1.5 million dollars armually, so we're talking about some fairly big numbers here and a fairly significant matter to evaluate. Regenia and I have put together a list of next steps. We also used the materials that Steve prepared for the last meeting that he presented at JCCOG. Obviously, what are we going to build is a big issue. There are some federal compliance issues associated with that. Where will it be located? That's something that's gotten a lot of buzz since Steve's presentation. Steve presented a location, I think it's one location that would be good to evaluate, but there are clearly some others and that will be part of how that issue proceeds from here on out. How will it be governed? I have had comments from several people that they see that as being the prime issue. Right now, Iowa City's running their own show, Johnson County's running their own show. Everybody loves to run their own show. This will require some cooperation in terms of a governance model that will have to come out of this further evaluation. How will it be operated? I think that's actually a model that's not going to take us too long to get through. I think everybody sees this as being organized either under the County or under the City, Iowa City, or a stand-alone organization - could be - with a Director who would report to a Board of Director. That Board of Directors is likely to be people like Chief Rocca, Chief Hargadine, and people like that in the community who understand the workings of something like this. So I think we'll get through that one fairly easily. How will we pay to construct it? How will we pay to operate it? Clearly huge issues that are going to have to be worked out. And, are there This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription ofthe Iowa City City Council meeting of May 23, 2006. ----_._--^._-~------------_._----- May 23, 2006 City Council Work Session Page 29 other possible users of the system? There have been some, there has been some interest expressed by the transit systems, Johnson County SEATS, by the University, by the Public Works Department, so that will be part of the evaluation. The one other thing that I wanted to do today, and I did it with the County last week is just to have you express any concerns you have with the proceeding forward, anything specifically. I did get a nice list from the County. Nothing particularly earth-shaking or that you wouldn't expect. A lot of the things that we've been outlining here, it was suggested by the County Board of Supervisors, and Sheriff Pulkrabek did concur, that at the JCCOG meeting in June we form a subcommittee to specifically get into these nuts and bolts issues. Now, I've discussed this with Andy, and he feels there's the expertise that you have with your staff people such as himself, ChiefHargadine, Sheriff Pulkrabek and those folks, to get through this list of issues that Ijust presented, and basically get to a point. I asked Chief Rocca "do we need to hire a consultant now?" And his opinion was no, that we could work through some ofthese issues with our local folks, get to where we've decided what we're going to do and at that point spend some money and hire a consultant to design the system and come up with a cost estimate for us. And that would likely be, you know, hopefully into wintertime, springtime. In the meantime, I would be happy if it's everybody's desire, to organize meetings, take meeting minutes if necessary, but keep it on task, and that we would try and do that. So quickly then, anyone wish to have Chief Rocca come to the microphone, but any concerns you'd like to express? Elliott: My initial reactions is, and we said this before at JCCOG, but I would like the public to know that at least, I think most of us who are interested in having this move forward recognize that it was initially mentioned as perhaps a cost saving, and it becomes now much more a matter of public safety than a finance, and I would like this to be one of the things that we hold up - this is a public safety activity, not a means of saving some money. Champion: There would be, I don't have any concerns about going forward, and I'm not so sure, and I think JCCOG can be the kind of mediator that gets everybody information, I'm not so sure that anyone from JCCOG needs to be on that committee, but I'd like to see a report to JCCOG every time we meet about what's happening. I would think that police chief, fire chief, ambulance people, sheriff - those are the people that need to iron out those details and not me, frankly. So I would like to see this move forward and keep us well informed on what is happening. If they run into snags, who do we get to help solve that problem? Wilburn: I guess probably just, top of the hat, you as Director of JCCOG can help be the visible person to keep the process moving forward and visible at the meeting and public and that type of thing. I would also just in terms of, This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of May 23, 2006. May 23, 2006 City Council Work Session Page 30 from the consultant report that we did have from the initial, that executive summary and that presentation that we had in Council chambers, for, since that time, a couple of times I've had some Cedar Rapids City Council members express an interest in seeing the results of whatever we come up with down here and the consultant mentioned the possibility of backup should something go down here, and they would be interested in, possibly interested in that technology and serving as backup and vice versa. Davidson: That's a good point, Ross. I neglected to mention that. It does appear that Linn County is moving along the same parallel as us with a signal system in Linn County. Supervisor Hamey did report that he's had some discussions with Linn County folks and it had been expressed, sorry I don't know who it was, it had been expressed that Linn County would like us to be their backup, they would be glad to be our backup. That model of using another county as your backup rather than someone within your county that could get knocked out by the same tornado that knocked you out seems to be a model that's pretty common. Wilburn: I'm just mentioning that in terms of follow-up and making sure that happens. Vanderhoef: Is Linn County looking at adding anything more than Linn County? Davidson: I have not been told that, Dee. Vanderhoef: Ok. That's one of the things that I would like the people who are putting it together to keep in the back of their mind that we may be setting up a system for Johnson County; however, from what we heard in that report earlier was that add-ons were possibilities in the future, from other counties, other cities and so forth, and I just want that kept sort of on the back burner, that we could offer those kinds of services later, after we got up and running. The understanding that I got from, all I can say is GeoComm, is that right? Atkins: That's right. Vanderhoef: Ok. From GeoComm is that it entailed basically some more towers, them getting their own individual hand-held equipment kind of thing and then working them into whatever the governing organization sits there. So looking at that as a potential future thing when they write up any kind of agreement. Davidson: Yeah, that came up, Dee, at Board of Supervisors as well. You know, if there's a tower down by Lone Tree then it doesn't make sense to have Lowisa County; ifthere's a tower up by Shuleyville, does it make sense This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of May 23,2006. May 23, 2006 City Council Work Session Page 31 for Linn County and Johnson County to share that tower. And those issues I assume will be addressed by a committee. Bailey: Right. Well, and also the point of bulk bidding on equipment, potentially, is also a possibility. Vanderhoef: That's great, potential. Bailey: I think so. Elliott: It's nice with Carol Spaiani? sitting here, I think we need a tip of the hat to the League of Women Voters - they provided a lot of the impetus for getting this going and I certainly appreciate that. Wilburn: Any other concerns for Jeff? Bailey: I, do you have any comments, Andy, about how this is moving or what you need to see from us or JCCOG in the meantime? Rocca: I really don't have much to add to your discussion, but if you had specific questions for me I'd be happy to answer those. Bailey: Ok. Rocca: I can tell you that the Fire Mutual Aid Association met recently, I believe it was last week, and there was some concerns expressed about not moving forward, or visibly signs of moving forward, and I know that we initiated a bit of a letter writing campaign to encourage our elected officials, City Council, Board of Supervisors, to keep dialogue open and to keep this process forward, and their commitment to do the same. Bailey: And those people are aware ofthe June 28th meeting? Rocca: Very much so. Bailey: Great. Rocca: Anything? Thank you. Council Annointments Wilburn: Council appointments. We have the Historic Preservation Commission - there is one Woodlawn district representative, one applicant and one College Green district representative and one applicant. Bailey: I think both Ginalie and Pam will be great. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of May 23,2006. -.-.---- --..----------.-.----.--..........-- May 23, 2006 City Council Work Session Page 32 Vanderhoef: I do too. Correia: Yeah, me too. Bailey: Pam, right? O'Donnell: Sounds like you filled them. Wilburn: We will make it so. Agenda items? Al!enda Items & Council Time Item 8. Correia: Atkins: Correia: Atkins: Correia: Atkins: Wilburn: Correia: Atkins: Correia: Atkins: Correia: Atkins: AMENDING THE FY2006 OPERATING BUDGET I had a question about the budget amendment? I'm sorry. I didn't hear you Amy. Budget amendment, whatever. Yeah. I was at a Board of Supervisors meeting where Tom Kriz was talking about an effort on behalf ofthe Treasurer's office to get unpaid taxes, delinquent taxes from some 20 years ago paid, and he reported success in having unpaid taxes come in. I was just wondering, in '06, in the line of delinquent property taxes it says O? County has an obligation to pay us, to pay taxes. Say again? County in effect has an obligation to pay. If they're successful. No, but they were successful, what I'm saying is I, what I What is our share in that? Yeah, why isn't it included in delinquent taxes paid back in? I've never had that question. I don't know. Oh. I'll find out. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription ofthe Iowa City City Council meeting of May 23,2006. May 23, 2006 City Council Work Session Page 33 Correia: I guess what I'm wondering about is how do those taxes get accounted for, or does it just go into the pot of taxes paid in which we're not able to? Atkins: My inclination is that it is the latter. Correia: And that's, I called Tom Kriz and that's what he thought, but why would we have the line on there then? Wilburn: Well, it would show for us on our audit, not the budget, the end of year report. Atkins: Yeah, right. That shouldn't hold you up dealing with this, but I will find out, Correia: No, no, that's just a question. Atkins: I'll find out about that for you. Vanderhoef: Unpaid taxes are sold at auction. Atkins: Sheriffs sale. Vanderhoef: At the sheriffs sale. Correia: Having some sales, certainly, but I think they're. Vanderhoef: I think what they're probably trying to collect are the ones that don't sell at the sale. And those. Correia: Well, they're trying to collect unpaid taxes and in fact, after the meeting where Tom Kriz was reporting, somebody came in the next day who hadn't paid their taxes in ten years and paid their taxes, so I mean those are identified unpaid taxes that somebody paid. So some of those are going up for sale I believe, but some of them are going through. Dilkes: And even when they go up for sale there's a redemption period so it's just that someone purchased them and the interest rate is high and they're paid. Correia: Right. Champion: Sometimes they buy the taxes. Vanderhoef: 80% is. Atkins: People do that, and actually it's a business. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription ofthe Iowa City City Council meeting of May 23,2006. ~---"- -_..._-_.__.--~-"'....-_._------"-------~_.-.__._----_._~ May 23,2006 City Council Work Session Page 34 Correia: Right, right. I mean, he reported that about $285,000.00 has come back that had been unpaid. Some 25. Atkins: Let me find out more for you and I'll prepare a report and get back to you, ok? Correia: Ok. Wilburn: Other agenda items? Bailey: I have multiple questions about correspondence, so, and I'm sure others do as well. Wilburn: Ok. Karr: I'm sorry, about which one do you? Bailey: About correspondence. Item 4g(9). City Park Pathway Bailey: Item #9 in correspondence, the City Park Pathway repair, what's the time, the timeline for that? Atkins: I don't think Terry has a timeline yet. This was coming about the time we were devoting a lot to cleanup. Bailey: Right. Atkins: I will get you one because we have talked about this and he does know this has to be repaired. Correia: Is that something that there should be, do we have yearly inspections or? Atkins: We usually don't have any trouble getting folks to call in. As far as inspection, if there's a crackdown we certainly hear about it, yeah. Item 4g(1l). Weed Ordinance Bailey: Ok. And then item 11, the weed ordinance. Vanderhoef: Yes. Bailey: I'm interested in removing the dates of weed ordinances. Is anybody else interested in changing the ordinance? This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription ofthe Iowa City City Council meeting of May 23,2006. -~-----_._~- ... _._._------_.~~----_._---_.~---~~-_._-~ May 23, 2006 City Council Work Session Page 35 Vanderhoef: I second. You bet. (can't hear) Elliott: Yeah. Bailey: Well, considering that it's in our neighborhood, we're kind of (can't hear) about the height of grass. We are. I have a bunch of daisies growing in my yard right now. If somebody in our neighborhood is complaining it's tall. It's very tall. Atkins: You'd like to remove the dates. Ok. Elliott: Yes. Vanderhoef: Yes. Bailey: Yes. Atkins: We'll bring something back to you. Elliott: If it's bad, it's bad. Atkins: I'd say it's almost unanimity on that? Vanderhoef: Absolutely. Atkins: Ok. We'll bring it back to you. Item 4g(13). Givanni's Conversion oC a public right-oC-way to private use Bailey: And then, has somebody responded to Jim Ephgrave's letter about Givanni's? Atkins: Yeah. Item 4g(16). Shoe Doctor Repair Shop Bailey: Ok. And then, what are the options for Shoe Doctor Repair Shop? Has somebody talked to him? Champion: About parking? Atkins: Yes. That's, he wants. Bailey: Somebody has communicated with him? Atkins: Yes, yes. We've had. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of May 23,2006. ..____._......____.___ .m.'_..._.__~_____.__,__.~__"_~_.____'__.,___.____.__.__.___.______..._~__. _m .---.----,-----..--- ,------.---'.. May 23, 2006 City Council Work Session Page 36 Bailey: Which department is working with him? Atkins: That would be Chris O'Brien in Parking. Bailey: Ok. Champion: I think we need to spend some time in actually talking about parking in that area, because there's so much growth. Atkins: Yeah. The man lost his business and there, really whacked it, and he wants basically free parking, and if you do it for them you do it for, well, you understand. Well yeah. Bailey: I think it's a good (can't hear). I have one other item. Vanderhoef: 15 minute Bailey: Oh. Vanderhoef: 15-minute parking meter down in the vicinity might help with that. Correia: What? Champion: 15-minute parking meter. Correia: Having a 15-minute parking meter? Atkins: Timing. Change the timing on it. Wilburn: A suggestion, a compromise, as opposed to no parking now, for short term. Bailey: Right. Atkins: I realize 1. Vanderhoef: If they really care about it they'll call in and, if somebody's abusing the privilege of a parking meter. Elliott: Are you still looking for the. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription ofthe Iowa City City Council meeting of May 23,2006. May 23,2006 City Council Work Session Page 37 Item 4e (5). CONSIDER A RESOLUTION OF INTENT TO ENTER INTO A LEASE AGREEMENT FOR THE LEASE OF THE BUILDING LOCATED AT 2401 SCOTT BOULEVARD TO IOWA VALLEY HABITAT FOR HUMANITY AND SETTING PUBLIC HEARING ON SAID LEASE FOR JUNE 13, 2006. Bailey: I've got it, I've got it. And then on 4e(5), this Habitat building. There's no mention of the other entities that are going in. It's. Atkins: 4e(5). Dilkes: Where are you? Bailey: 4e(5). Yeah. Wilburn: You threw us off because you were going in order and then you jumped back. Dilkes: Now we're going backwards. Vanderhoef: There's a couple more. Bailey: I'm going in order of my list. Atkins: Ok. I found it, go ahead. Bailey: So, where are we with the Salvage Barn and getting? Atkins: We had a meeting. It was late last week. Brought the architect in, laid out the buildings, Salvage Barn and all that's being done. We weren't real satisfied. It wasn't a matter of didn't like, we just had a whole bunch of new ideas setting back, it was due back this Thursday; again, we're trying to get a formal project proposal together for you. Bailey: Ok. And so, we're moving along in salvage? I mean, there was a lot of concerns from Salvage Barn with this move, and are those being addressed? Atkins: Yes, they will be. Bailey: Because I don't thing they really cart afford much. Atkins: I, I've already suspected that the landfill will be underwriting a good bit of this. But remember, why are we here? And the reason is to recycle and remove from the landfill. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of May 23,2006. May 23, 2006 Bailey: Atkins: Bailey: Atkins: Correia: Bailey: Correia: Bailey: Atkins: Bailey: Atkins: Elliott: Bailey: Atkins: Bailey: Atkins: Dilkes: City Council Work Session Page 38 Right. No, they made it clear don't make it too painful. So they've been involved in these discussions and the design? Not in those details, because we have, we need to get something where we're actually going to show them here's this building, here's how it's laid out, so we can bring all the groups together so we can all talk about it at once, and we have not finished that yet. What is the Salvage Barn concerned about? I don't know. The Salvage Barn has some concerns because in other communities Habitat for Humanity Re-store stores are successful because they combine new and salvaged, and that's always been, the Salvage Barn and Friends of Historic Preservation, that's always been there thing, and they generate some funds from that. Sure. And there has been some concern that this intent, and the City's intent is to have Habitat sort of pull in the salvage operations, and so I just want to make sure that as we move forward this is on track and we're not going to see a packet with reuselhistoric preservation. And I hope that, that's not the intent, that's not the intent at all. Right. Re-store has their thing, Salvage Barn has their thing. We think the thing we're offering the public is the advantage of it's all on one site. One stop shopping. So, they're coming, but. Yeah, I will bring, I will bring the formal proposal to you as a layout. We sent it back last week and hopefully we'll know a little more about it. I'm just trying to avoid the sort of explosion right before we're ready to do something. Flap. Yes, we don't want that. And the only. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription ofthe Iowa City City Council meeting of May 23,2006. .~---,-,.-~._----~.._,.~_._"_."--_.__._._'----_._-~---.,..._--,--~----,-----"-,,,---~----"-'---'--'- May 23,2006 Elliott: Wilburn: Dilkes: Bailey: Dilkes: Bailey: Atkins: Bailey: Dilkes: Atkins: Dilkes: Atkins: Bailey: Correia: Bailey: Correia: Atkins: Correia: City Council Work Session Page 39 I, I'm a little concerned about the 8 pages of copy from a candidate from Senate. Great. Can you hold on that - Eleanor had something else related. The only reason that lease is coming for Habitat is cause of their moving Issue. Ok. They have to get out of there. Otherwise I think it would proceed with everything else. It's kind of early because they have to be out of their space. As long as they understand that, as long as everybody understands. Habitat understand that they will run Re-store and we will call upon them to do because of that they will have full-time staffing in there to do certain oversight. But they are not running the Salvage Barn. Ok. But they do take salvage stuff, cause I've. Not the Re-store. Yeah, yeah, well. All my cabinets went over there. Oh. Ok. Yeah they do. Right. I think they do take some. But I think there is that real market. So will there be, could there be, with this new arrangement, could there be some understanding that when salvage comes in, if it's historic in, ifthere's an understanding that? Bottom line, we own the land, we'll own the building, you can have it any way you want. No, but I'm just saying, if we negotiate, we're essentially trying to negotiate a collaboration between. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of May 23,2006. ------~_.~-----_._----_._._._-_._------~-_._~-~-_. May 23, 2006 City Council Work Session Page 40 Atkins: We have not started this negotiation and collaboration. Correia: Not official negotiation. Champion: We should really help the sales barn or the Salvage Bam, because you're going to have more people coming. It's going to be easily accessible, easy to get to and it will have regular hours, which is going to be a real plus. Correia: Oh I agree, I just. Atkins: Yes. Bailey: See, I don't have any problem with this. I'm just trying to avoid the misunderstanding at the end. Wilburn: I think Steve, I think Steve said Bailey: It sounds like it's on the back Atkins: I don't want you upset anymore than anyone else. Wilburn: Yeah, give him a chance to go out there. Yeah. Bob. Elliott: I don't need an answer, but I wish we'd look at candidates. Correia: Oh, I don't think we're done yet. Eleanor was going to say something. We're not done with the Salvage Bam issue. (laughter - can't hear) Dilkes: I just wanted to make sure that we're clear that if we are going to lease to Re-store and we want some limitations on what they're going to do, then obviously we have to put those provisions in the lease. Atkins: I'll take care of that. Item 4g(3). New Economic Proposal and Request for meeting Elliott: I'm not going to say it again. Just, will you do it. Another thing, could we have status of the litigation in Des Moines on utilities, because I think we need? Karr: I'm sorry Bob. Can we do what? Bailey: She didn't get the first one. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of May 23, 2006. May 23, 2006 City Council Work Session Page 41 Karr: I know what your issue is, don't repeat the issue, just tell me what you want done with it. Elliott: What's that? Wilburn: You had brought up the issue of candidates. Dilkes: Campaign stuff. Elliott: I'd just like staff to let us know, do they think that's appropriate? Does anyone? I think it's totally inappropriate. Karr: Yes. We put it in there. We talked about it at great length. Atkins: Oh we did? Dilkes: The question came, it was correspondence to the Council and we forward correspondence to you all, so I couldn't decide that because it was political that it shouldn't go. Elliott: I just think it's inappropriate, whether it's something to work on or not. I could just see it happening more and more often. Correia: But how could we limit it? I mean? Champion: You can't. Dilkes: Yeah. Ijust think that the line drawing that you'd be required to do if you didn't forward it on would be. Elliott: That's fine. We were at a meeting, public meeting last night about the local option sales tax. I would like for that to be a discussion topic for the Council in the very near future. Correia: What. What do we need to discuss? Wilburn: Well, actually. Elliott: Whether or not we'd like to jump in. Correia: Well, how, what do you mean by jump in? We all vote because. Elliott: Well, the school is looking very seriously at it. I would like for the City to look very seriously whether we would like to join with the school and share with the school in local option sales tax. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription ofthe Iowa City City Council meeting of May 23,2006. May 23, 2006 City Council Work Session Page 42 Bailey: Don't they have to invite us? Correia: They would have to invite us, but yeah. Vanderhoef: Not necessarily. Elliott: But I think they would need an indication from us. Bailey: Shared penny - we have to be invited. Correia: Do you think they think we'd say no if they offered us money? Elliott: No, but I think the Council needs to, are we interested? Wilburn: We have, we have not had a formal discussion about whether or not we would accept or not or participate or not, and I think Bob's just asking can we have that. We did have the meeting, the joint City/County/School Board - the taxing bodies - where we expressed individual opinions about it, but, I believe that's what you're asking for Bob? Elliott: Yeah. Vanderhoef: And there was Correia: Is there? Oh. Vanderhoef: some interest, so I think we should have a Council discussion. Correia: But does there need to be discussion or indication before we would even know if, it has to go before the voters and we would have to know whether it was even available. Wilburn: I think also, and correct me if I'm wrong Bob, since the school board needs to make a decision about whether or not to place it on the ballot, their decision, individual school board member's decision about that may hinge upon whether or not it's just them or shared penny. Correia: Does it have to be (can't hear) Wilburn: I Bailey: No, (can't hear) last night that it didn't. Champion: The problem was with that, now the law has changed, isn't that correct? This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of May 23,2006. May 23, 2006 City Council Work Session Page 43 Bailey: Right. Champion: They get all the money from 5 years. Vanderhoef: Didn't you hear that it has to? Wilburn: Well, regardless of that. Bailey: I think we need a meeting to know what the law is. Elliott: That's my understanding. Vanderhoef: That's right. Elliott: Whatever it is, if there is a referendum, then that referendum is for not only shall there be but how specifically and precisely will it be used and we need to make a decision whether or not we'd like to be a part of it. If, at least let the school board know. Champion: Well we don't, we're not sure they want us to be part of it. Bailey: I think it's fine just to discuss it so we understand what the laws are. Elliott: Yes. Bailey: Cause its clear there's some gaps here. Elliott: See, Eleanor, I didn't interrupt you once. O'Donnell: Were you going to say anything about MidAmerican Bob? Was that in? Elliott: I was. Oh yeah, I was asking that, I'd like to get an update on litigation in Des Moines about the utilities, because I think we need to start working on an agreement with MidAmerican as soon as possible. Dilkes: It's under consideration by the Supreme Court. That's the best I can tell you. Elliott: Are we talking about two years? Dilkes: I. I don't think so. It's been submitted, it's been, oral argument has been made and it's just, they're waiting for a decision. You know, two years would be at the outside. I don't think so. They've made a decision in the, there were two cases argued on the same day, the franchise fee one and the liquor license fees that Des Moines had put in. They were argued the same This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of May 23,2006. May 23, 2006 City Council Work Session Page 44 day. The liquor license one is out. I think the franchise one is a more difficult decision, so it's probably taking more time. Wilburn: I had told MidAmerican Energy, I had a conversation with them, that ifby June we hadn't heard one way or another, they have some decisions they are going to have to make, that at a minimum I would ask the Council when we got to June, do you want to give MidAmerican a chance to come and talk with us, and then we can deliberate whether or not we want to give direction. Elliott: Yes. I think there's an issue of fairness, and there's an issue of fairness not only to MidAmerican but to Iowa City. Wilburn: Again, I'll just say I had told them when we get to June I would bring it before Council as to whether we want to hear some presentation about where they need to go. Any other agenda items? Item 4g(6). City inspection on rental units Vanderhoef: Yes, going back to correspondence, #6, the City inspection on rental units. Atkins: Yes. Vanderhoef: I would like us to take a look at this. Atkins: Excuse me, Dee, I'm, that and the, items 6 and 16 are both being prepared, just haven't gotten finished yet. Item 4g(12). Ban Smoking Vanderhoef: Ok. And I wish we would have just a stock reply that goes back. Every so often we get some student group wanting us to put in a smoking ban. And they obviously have not understood the state law. Bailey: Well they just moved here, probably. Vanderhoef: That's just it, and every time we get one of those, if we just had a stock answer, that you're talking to the wrong legislative body, that it has to go to the state, the statehouse, not to the City Council, and we could certainly put in there that we had one and it was ruled. Atkins: Nixed it. Dilkes: I think we have that response, because we responded before. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of May 23,2006. ---,-----,_..._,_.,---_.~~-----~---- May 23, 2006 City Council Work Session Page 45 Vanderhoef: Yeah. So if those show up periodically, if you'd just bazoom that back to them I think it would help. Because they deserve a response and Bailey: Absolutely. Vanderhoef: and ifthey're misinformed, I think we ought to inform them. Wilburn: Any other Council items? Agenda items - sorry. Karr: We're already in Council. Council time already. Champion: We're having Council time right now. Bailey: No, I just have one thing. I have items. Can we please ask all commissions, boards of commissions, to have a sign-in sheet so we get last names and first names? I mean, the Historic Preservation minutes for the last couple of times have had, you know, consultant for such and such and Cindy from Alpha Chi - it's just, it's not how we. Karr: If the majority of Council would wish that, we can certainly ask. Vanderhoef: That's right. Bailey: I just think it's a little more appropriate. Vanderhoef: And while you're speaking of that. Wilburn: Ask away. Vanderhoef: I noticed once again we had three different commissions that were in our information packet, that their minutes, even their draft minutes are late. So. (all talk - can't hear) Item 4e(1). CONSIDER A RESOLUTION OF INTENT TO CONVEY A SINGLE FAMILY HOME LOCATED AT 2667 INDIGO COURT TO A PUBLIC HOUSING PROGRAM TENANT AND SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING FOR JUNE 13, 2006 Item 4e(2). CONSIDER A RESOLUTION OF INTENT TO CONVEY A SINGLE FAMILY HOME LOCATED AT 617 BROOKSIDE DRIVE TO A PUBLIC HOUSING PROGRAM TENANT AND SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING FOR JUNE 13, 2006 Comeia: I see in the consent that there are at least two or two tenant to owner in the public housing This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription ofthe Iowa City City Council meeting of May 23, 2006. May 23, 2006 City Council Work Session Page 46 Wilburn: There's three. Atkins: Three. Correia: Three? Ok. So is that a policy, when we sell public housing homes that we build, as part ofthe? Atkins: No. That we replace it? No. Correia: I don't mean replace for, to be part ofthe public housing pool, but I thought there was a policy around building for home ownership, using the proceeds of that sale, that they go into more affordable home ownership programs? Vanderhoef: We have done that with the Affordable Dreamhouse Program. Correia: That's what I mean. Vanderhoef: But that money goes back to the Housing Authority, and because those houses that we sold were originally purchased with federal housing money, it's required that that money go back and be used for housing. Correia: Right, well that's what I mean, so what I'm saying is, what's, then this is just trivia for me, with these three sales, is there a plan with the Housing Authority to do more affordable, housing like the Affordable Dream built? Atkins: I think it's more Amy, we look for like the Longfellow, where you look for an opportunity and Dee is correct, the money must be used for housing. At the most you know it's being held in a reserve for that. And I know staff shops - there are lots available, we prepare proposals and bring them back to you. Correia: So do we have, I guess I'm wondering then is there a target for you know, we sold 3 houses, there's so much money in this pool. In this year we're going to have a goal of 3 units built. Atkins: We have not done that. Correia: Ok. Well, I'd be interested in that. Vanderhoef: I'd like to, since we're right into construction season right now, to see if there's a unit or two that we might purchase that's in the building already. Correia: Sure. I mean I guess I'd like to be more strategic than that. Ifwe have this program in place that we might say, during each construction season or This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of May 23,2006. May 23, 2006 City Council Work Session Page 47 whatever, that we have, if we have a certain amount of money we're going to be proactive and. Atkins: It would seem to me Vanderhoef: We've been proactive, actually. Atkins: that when you're finished with your scattered site, I'm assuming that when we're done with that you're going to develop a list of, here's the things that. I think that would be a perfect opportunity for you to make those decisions. Correia: Great. Vanderhoef: But we may already have some opportunities out there. Atkins: The staff have been Champion: We're watching for it, right. Housing Fellowship is watching for it too. Bailey: That's not their, those aren't their funds. Wilburn: Other agenda items? Elliott: Ross has been very quiet. ITEM 6. PUBLIC DISCUSSION - PROPOSED TRANSIT ROUTE CHANGES Correia: You know I actually had another agenda item. We're having the bus public hearing? Wilburn: Public discussion. Correia: So I see that there's a recommendation to cut out the Peninsula from the Champion: Cut it out? Correia: Cut out the Peninsula from the route because of Forest View. Atkins: Forest View I thought we took care of. Elliott: Yeah. Vanderhoef: But that meant This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of May 23,2006. -,----_._---,-_._----_.._----,.~----_._------- May 23, 2006 City Council Work Session Page 48 Correia: It's back in, but the Peninsula is out. That is, I'm just wondering, but nobody's here from Transit. Atkins: But they will be. They will be at the hearing. Correia: We're not, this is just, we're not taking any action yet. Atkins: No, this is just a hearing. Tonight, we'd like you to have some understanding Correia: Because I'd like to try and put the Peninsula back in and keep Forest View. Atkins: Joe and Ron will both be here. Bailey: That and physics and time and space. Correia: There's other routes that seem to be, they're doing things with time on other routes, 40 minute loops and what not. I mean. Wilburn: What you can ask Amy is what will be the time and fiscal consequence of that. Correia: Ok. Bailey: Yeah, what's the balancing route. Correia: They've taken out the late night. Are there any? Bailey: I'd like to talk about that and. Atkins: We really have to have that discussion settling in. Wilburn: We have the public discussion, we have a work session on the 12th about it and then we take action on the 13th. Bailey: Ok. Vanderhoef: And when we talk about late night, I think we want to be sure that we're talking in conjunction with the JARC, and unfortunately JARC isn't quite ready to come forward, and those moneys are for next year, so I'd like to just get a feeling from Joe and Ron what's coming and whether that late night belongs with that discussion maybe 6 months from now, when we get done with the MAPS programs through the DOV. Correia: If our work session, I mean, the public hearing tonight and our work session's not until the 12th and we're supposed to vote on it on the 13t\ This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of May 23, 2006. May 23, 2006 Bailey: Atkins: Dilkes: Atkins: Dilkes: Atkins: Correia: Atkins: Correia: Bailey: Atkins: Bailey: Atkins: Correia: Wilburn: ITEM 11. City Council Work Session Page 49 there's a sense ofthe, if there's 4 people who want to put the Peninsula back in but we don't talk about it until the 12th, do we have time to do that? I think aren't we directing them for a final proposal for the lih? Yeah. We'd like to have some indication from you tonight, I mean, we're not expecting, because we had the meeting on the 18th and had pretty good turnout on that, most of those issues resolved themselves. There will be a few folks that were not satisfied on the 18th, but ifthere's clearly a consensus that, we at least want a recommendation that we'd be prepared coming in on the lih to say "here's how it would work." Ifthere are things that you definitely want to add by consensus. Well, they can talk tonight. We're not asking for, what's that? They can talk tonight. Yeah, we're not asking for a vote tonight. And once we pass it, just for my recollection, when will the new routes go in effect? Usually in August. August. So why are we passing it in June? To give? Well, because we anticipate Do we have a couple weeks leeway? Yes, that's the idea. We didn't think it would get nailed quickly. Have to get the word out. Any other agenda items? CONSIDER A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO SIGN AND THE CITY CLERK TO ATTEST A LEASE AGREEMENT FOR THE LEASE OF APPROXIMATELY 760 SQUARE FEET OF COMMERCIAL SPACE LOCATED WITHIN THE COURT STREET TRANSPORTATION CENTER. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription ofthe Iowa City City Council meeting of May 23,2006. May 23, 2006 City Council Work Session Page 50 Dilkes: I have one. Item 11, which is the lease with Heronymi Partnership and the transportation center, that needs to be deferred - we don't have a signed lease yet. Bailey: Ok. (can't hear) Dilkes: Yeah, let's defer it to June 13th. Vanderhoef: We're way ahead of Wilburn: To June 13th. O'Donnell: To what? Wilburn: June 13th. Any other agenda items? Council Time? O'Donnell: I have one thing. Who owns the building on the southeast comer of Market and Gilbert? Bailey: I already complained about it today before the meeting. O'Donnell: About the long grass. Bailey: Yeah. O'Donnell: That's ridiculous. Bailey: It's Clarks' building though, so it's uncharacteristic. Didn't Clarks' just purchase it? O'Donnell: I don't know, but they need to mow the grass. Elliott: Where is it, Mike? O'Donnell: It's on the comer of Market and Linn. It's on the southeast comer. Atkins: Market? Correia: And Linn. I thought you said Gilbert. O'Donnell: It's Market and Linn. Atkins: Across from Brewery Square. Oh, ok. Bailey: I talked to Housing right before this. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription ofthe Iowa City City Council meeting of May 23,2006. May 23, 2006 City Council Work Session Page 51 Champion: All you have to do is call. Atkins: We usually get next day service on that. Bailey: That's what I figured. I mean, it's not characteristic. Vanderhoef: But they've been a little busy right now too. Bailey: But it's 12 squares, tops. Vanderhoef: I don't disagree with that part. Bailey: And actually, it's at an intersection. Wilburn: Regenia, any Council time? Bailey: I have a question about the schedule of pending discussion items. Can we get a list and start scheduling these? I looked at our summer schedule and I have concerns. And I really don't want to schedule any more meetings this summer, but. (cut off - tape ended) Atkins: The one I'm concerned about is Tuesday the 13th we start on, that's housing. Karr: No, the 12th is housing. Champion: The 12th is housing. Atkins: Well what's the 13t\ if! don't Karr: My understanding is the 12th is housing, followed by an agenda of a typical work session if time permitted and then what you didn't get through on Monday you would start with Tuesday. Correia: Come early. Bailey: Can we all agree to schedule a long evening so we're not leaving at 8:00 on Monday the 12'\ because we do have quite a few, transit is coming up with that, there may be a lot of discussion. Karr: I think the only thing that concerns staff is what time you want to start Tuesday. Monday you know you're starting at x and you go 'til whenever you want to quit; what time do we schedule Tuesday not knowing what you're going to get done Monday? This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of May 23,2006. May 23, 2006 City Council Work Session Page 52 Champion: Maybe it would help if we scheduled on Monday night our housing discussion and also the transit. Correia: Yeah, I think so. Champion: The people are here. Correia: Yeah, yeah. Bailey: That's a great idea. Atkins: Two days under. Champion: Nobody else has to be here but transit people, that may take some discussions. Correia: Yeah. Atkins: That's fine. Karr: Rather than the whole schedule that you talked about. Bailey: And I think we should, should we. Vanderhoef: 6:30 - 9:00. Champion: It's Council time, so no problem. Bailey: Should we designate time so if people are just coming for transit? Champion: Yeah. Dh, yeah. Atkins: Well, the housing one is continuing, I mean you can continue it until, the clock is determining that because you'll pick it up. Transit you got to decide. Correia: We do transit first. Champion: Can we do that right Bailey: Do transit first. Wilburn: Switch the order. Bailey: Yeah. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of May 23,2006. May 23, 2006 City Council Work Session Page 53 Atkins: Ok. Champion: And that takes a little bit of the weight off for the agenda for the next night. Bailey: Clever. Correia: Very clever. Karr: Ok. so you want transit at 6:30 followed by continued housing discussion followed by Council time. Champion: We have that done with so (can't hear) Karr: So you don't want Council time put on the 13th. Champion: No. Karr: Ok. Vanderhoef: But if we've done most of it Monday night. O'Donnell: I can live with that. Champion: We have Council time at the meeting too. Wilburn: Yes we do. Champion: We don't need two, twice in one week. Atkins: I would encourage you to always keep Council time. Dilkes: Yeah, if you don't have Council time then you can't bring things up. Atkins: You don't have to use it, don't use it. Bailey: Do we have a sense of our Planning and Zoning docket for that meeting at all? Atkins: No. Wilburn: Ify'all would like to eat we have sandwiches. Champion: I'm hungry. I'm not very nice if! don't get to eat. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription ofthe Iowa City City Council meeting of May 23,2006. May 23, 2006 City Council Work Session Page 54 Atkins: Let's take a break. Vanderhoef: Ok. And are we agreed that we'll go to at least 9:00 on Monday night the 12th? Champion: It might not go until 9:00. Vanderhoef: Well, at least. Atkins: You need to think about this. The school board is probably going to target some time in July for making their decision on the sales tax, and if you're going to weigh in, you need some time to not only go through the. Correia: We have that on our agenda the 26th work session. Atkins: It's getting a little late. Bailey: We have an info-packet memo on (can't hear) made columns. Champion: Ifwe're going to find a date for another meeting, we're probably going to have to find it today. Atkins: You're going to have to find it today. Bailey: Well, just the local option sales, there's the SILO, the City can also call for this and the new laws, I mean I've heard these presentations 3 times and I still don't understand all ofthe decision points I suppose is the issue. Champion: At Council time in the meeting we can find another date for a meeting to discuss the sales tax issue. Elliott: Yeah. Karr: Today? Champion: Yeah. Today. Karr: Why don't you, I have the schedule. Why don't you stop, one by one and let me know what open days and check to see and we'll see if we can maybe rather than coming up with different days we'll find one that pops up. Bailey: I still had the 6th and 7'h until today, so. Wilburn: Sounds good. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of May 23,2006. May 23,2006 City Council Work Session Page 55 Elliott: The mayor says it's time to eat. Dilkes: Connie, did you get my memo, the SILO tax memo? Yes? Bailey: I think I did. Vanderhoef: It's not what we're hearing or what's being printed in the papers. Correia: No, you don't understand it. Last night. Vanderhoef: The school is saying something different. Karr: Are we adjourned? Are we adjourned or not? Wilburn: We're adjourned. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription ofthe Iowa City City Council meeting of May 23,2006.