HomeMy WebLinkAbout2011-05-02 TranscriptionMay 2, 2011 City Council Work Session Page 1
Council Present: Bailey, Champion, Dickens, Hayek, Mims, Wilburn, Wright
Staff Present: Markus, Dilkes, Rummel, Miklo, Karr, Helling, Fay, Davidson, Ralston,
O'Brien, Moran, O'Malley, Knoche
Others Present: Patel, UISG
Planning and Zoning:
Hayek/ This brings us to the work session for the evening. First bullet point, uh, Planning and
Zoning items, f, g, and h.
~ CONSIDER A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY AND
FINAL PLAT OF MACHINAW VILLAGE PART 3, IOWA CITY, IOWA.
(SUB10-00014/SUB10-00015) (DEFERRED FROM 4/19)
Davidson/ Good evening, uh, Mr. Mayor and Members of the City Council. I'm Jeff Davidson,
the Director of Planning and Community Development for the City. Uh, we have three
plats this evening, uh, actually two projects, total of three plats. Uh, the first item here, I
don't know how much time you want me to spend with you. You have seen this one.
I've gone through it with you. It was deferred last time. It's a, uh...uh, request,
uh...from Craig Hasenmeyer on preliminary and final plat for, uh, Mackinaw Village, uh,
Part 3. This was a preliminary plat that expired. The first two parts were built, uh,
and...and are out there, if you've had a chance to visit the area. Uh, the part that you see
here is Part 3. Uh, it consists of a 13-lot subdivision with 12 lots in townhomes and 1 lot
with amulti-family building. There you see it. Uh, the, uh...the townhomes in this area,
and then the multi-family building here. Uh, and I think you'll recall that, uh, you know,
basically everything that they complied with the first time, they are complying with this
time in terms of the special environmental features that were important to the area.
The...the difference that I highlighted last time was in terms of there being a change in
the zoning code, uh, for some of the design standards for the subdivision, and specifically
the street width and sidewalk width. The former standard was a 50-foot right-of--way for
local streets, and a 4-foot sidewalk. The new standards area 60-foot right-of--way and a
5-foot sidewalk, and what is proposed is that the existing streets that you can see are
constructed here, Arch Rock Road, Algonquin Road, and Mission Point Road, um, as
those are extended into the subdivision, they will be allowed to continue at the old
standard, but at this junction right here of, um, Algonquin Road and Mission Point Road
is where we will start...this...this street will eventually extend up into additional property
and...and be, you know, part of the collector street system, and we wanted to make sure
that at some point we started using the new standards. So the new standards will start at
this intersection for Algonquin Road here, but the other ones will be, uh, continued at the
old standard. That was really the most significant thing about this. Um...was
recommended for approval, uh, by the Planning and Zoning Commission and staff. Did
you have any specific questions about any element of it? Okay.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of May 2, 2011.
May 2, 2011 City Council Work Session Page 2
Dilkes/ Legal papers are not complete, so we may have to defer that again.
g) CONSIDER A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY PLAT OF
WINDSOR RIDGE -PART TWENTY-TWO, IOWA CITY, IOWA. (SUB10-
00017)
h) CONSIDER A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE FINAL PLAT OF
WINDSOR RIDGE PART TWENTY-TWO, IOWA CITY, IOWA. (SUB11-00005)
Davidson/ Uh, the final item then is a preliminary and final plat, and there's two separate items
on your agenda tomorrow night, uh, for, uh, Windsor Ridge Part 22 and we can go
through that. Um, you...you have had the zoning on this before you, and in fact the
zoning, uh, for a portion of it is on your agenda tomorrow. Um, the...the CN-1 to MU
area, oh, and just to orient you here. Uh, Huntington Drive is an existing street. Court
Street...Taft Avenue...um, the proposed two lots are lot 1, which is here, and is proposed
to go from CN-1 to MU, mixed-use zone. Lot 2 is, uh, here and is proposed to go from,
uh...uh. CN-1 to OPD/RM-12, multi-family zone right here. Uh, the zoning for this lot
has been pulled while we...we work through some details. The zoning for this lot is
what's on your agenda tomorrow night, and if you approve that then we'll consider the
plat. Uh, and the plat then, as I said, you can see the two lots here, and um...you know,
just real quickly, in the conditional zoning, which of course we're not going to talk about
this evening, but basically this is what you'll be approving, the...the four buildings here,
uh, construction of these new interior, uh, streets and driveways, and significantly some
parking along the...remember this is the...the green area, public area, and there is some
parking along here that the developer would be required to continue maintenance of. Uh,
but otherwise, the four buildings and uh...that's...they're required to look like this. Any
questions about, uh, the plats?
Dilkes/ And on this item we received legal papers today, so they may not be done by tomorrow
either. So I'll let you know.
Davidson/ That's it! Any questions? Thank you.
Hayek/ Thanks, Jeff!
e) CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE CONDITIONALLY REZONING
APPROXIMATELY 12.72-ACRES OF LAND LOCATED AT MORMON TREK
BOULEVARD AND DANE ROAD FROM COUNTY AGRICULTURAL (A) TO
INTENSIVE COMMERCIAL (CI1). (REZll-00004) (PASS AND ADOPT)
b) CONDITIONALLY REZONING APPROXIMATELY 10.39 ACRES
LOCATED AT 1725 NORTH DODGE STREET OWNED BY THE PRESS-
CITIZEN COMPANY FROM RESEARCH DEVELOPMENT PARK (RDP) TO
NEIGHBORHOOD PUBLIC (P1). (REZll-00006)
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of May 2, 2011.
May 2, 2011 City Council Work Session Page 3
Dilkes/ Oh, and a couple more on the, things on the zoning items, um...e, which is the
annexation on Mormon, or the rezoning on Mormon Trek. The City Development Board
will not meet til May 11th to finalize that, so that will have to be deferred...cause we
can't finally zone it until the annexation is complete. And on b, we received, um, a call
from the School District's attorney this afternoon and the School Board has not yet
authorized signing of that CZA, so we are likely going to have to continue that public
hearing and, um, defer the first consideration.
Council Appointments:
Hayek/ I'll call you and Marian tomorrow and get a final read on what's being deferred. Thanks!
Okay, thanks, Jeff. Next up, Council appointments. We have a vacancy on the...or two
vacancies on the, uh, Library Board of Trustees. You can see there are three applicants.
Champion/ Well, I would think we would let Martin and Chappell, um, both consider doing a
second term.
Wright/ I would agree. I think those two are both (mumbled) strong contributions to the Library
Board.
Mims/ I just...have a question. Is the length of those terms, is that set by the City, or is that set
by State code? Is that State? It is? Okay.
Hayek/ It does create a long 12-year stretch.
Mims/ Yeah, that's...that's really concerning to me, I mean, I know, and I agree with the idea of
normally letting somebody go to a second term, but... and I feel good about these two, but
12 years is a long time. It doesn't give us much opportunity for turnover and to let other
people in the community who want to be involved, to be involved. I'll support those two,
but it's just a question for the future.
Hayek/ It's a (several talking). It doesn't help that the, uh, odd person out submitted a good
(several talking).
Bailey/ There were three good applicants, without question!
Hayek/ Okay, Martin and Rich-Chappell. Also a, uh...couple of vacancies on the Telecomm
Commission.
Champion/ (mumbled) Isn't there a gender balance problem on that commission? Yes. (several
talking)
Karr/ Gender balance would be one female. And you have two vacancies.
Hayek/ Right.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of May 2, 2011.
May 2, 2011 City Council Work Session Page 4
Champion/ Well, Homewood is a female. And she'd be good.
Wright/ She had a good application.
Champion/ Uh-huh. And I'm open on the other two. (several talking)
Bailey/ Well, one has previously served two 3-year terms, which goes a little bit to Susan's
concern about getting a little bit more turnover, but...and one is...served an unexpired
term. So I'm not sure. (mumbled)
Champion/ Can we support Nolan? I can't pronounce the last name.
Wright/ Klouda.
Champion/ Klouda?
Bailey/ (mumbled)
Champion/ Klouda.
Hayek/ My recollection is this individual had tried to get on commissions for a little while. The
name (mumbled).
Wright/ But I think he applied for this one the first time around (several talking)
Bailey/ Right.
Hayek/ Well, is there support, uh, for Mr. Klouda and Ms. Homewood? (several responding)
Okay. That does it for appointments. Next is agenda items.
Agenda Items:
Karr/ I'd like to note the change in your, um...consent calendar. We now have approval for the
new license for the Summit, and that would be, um, 3.c(2) and 3.c(4), the dancing permit.
The recommendation was to deny based on, uh, Building and Inspection Services, and
that you now have before you their recommendation to approve, so...that could be part of
your consent calendar's approval tomorrow night then.
Champion/ Okay.
ITEM 17. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE EXPENDITURE OF
ADDITIONAL FUNDS TO MEET OBLIGATIONS OF THE CITY OF
IOWA CITY RECAT AGREEMENT 11-RECAT-003-TERRY
TRUEBLOOD RECREATION AREA.
Bailey/ (mumbled) question on Item 17.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City (;ouncil work
session of May 2, 2011.
May 2, 2011 City Council Work Session
Hayek/ Okay. Terry Trueblood Recreation Area.
Moran/ Good evening!
Bailey/ Hi!
Hayek/ Mike!
Page 5
Bailey/ Can you just...I mean, I see that $100,000 of the $400,000 gap has been raised to date.
Can you just give us a general update on...um...
Moran/ Where we're at?
Bailey/ The fundraising plan, are you working with a consultant, and those sorts of things.
Moran/ We made 37 contacts, uh, for fundraising. We decided that we would go after, uh,
bigger donors instead of a smaller, uh, appeal at this time, uh, of those 37 we've had six
that have just flat out said, "No," and we have six that we haven't yet made contact with,
as far as setting up appointments. Uh, of the remaining 25, uh, they're all good and
active, uh, we've made presentations for `em and those are the ones that we're waiting on
and sort of going back. We've done second interviews, if you will, and discussions. So,
I feel very confident that the money will come in, uh, it's just been taking a lot longer
than what we've...what we were given.
Bailey/ What do you anticipate for the timeline?
Moran/ Probably about another two months. About 60 days.
Bailey/ And...you know, often in fundraising campaigns there's a smaller, uh, more public
campaign. Is that going to be a component of this, or are you really just going to focus
on (both talking)
Moran/ We're going to do that afterwards. We're trying to focus on major ones right now.
Bailey/ And so, when would you kick off the smaller public campaign?
Moran/ Uh, we're in the throes of making a...a campaign, uh, kickoff, if you will, on Terry's
birthday, which is August 29tH
Bailey/ Okay.
Moran/ And we're going to combine that with the groundbreaking of the lodge in phase 3, and
then do that together, and then do a thing so people can go walk around the trail and do a
cancer walk and stuff like that.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of May 2, 2011.
May 2, 2011 City Council Work Session Page 6
Bailey/ You know, I...I support, you know, this. I believe the...the funds can be raised, but I
would like to, and I'll mention this tomorrow night, if...if we do approve this, have
regular reports to Council from the Parks and Rec Foundation, so we are tracking on that
fundraising. I don't know how others feel about it. I just think it makes sense.
Moran/ We meet every (both talking) every other week, every other Thursday, so I can certainly
do that after the meetings.
Bailey/ I...I don't know how others feel about that (several talking)
Champion/ ...good idea!
Bailey/ Thanks!
Moran/ Yep!
ITEM 9. ADOPTING IOWA CITY'S FY12 ANNUAL ACTION PLAN WHICH IS A
SUB-PART OF IOWA CITY'S 2011-2015 CONSOLIDATED PLAN (CITY
STEPS) AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO SUBMIT SAID
PLAN AND AMENDMENTS AND ALL NECESSARY CERTIFICATIONS
TO THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN
DEVELOPMENT, AND DESIGNATING THE CITY MANAGER AS THE
AUTHORIZED CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
Hayek/ I got a question on the annual action plan.
Davidson/ By way of explanation, Mr. Mayor...um...uh, Steve Long was unable to make the
meeting tonight. I said I would, I mean, there is a very slight probability I may be able to
answer a question (laughter) but if not, that I would take the question, and Steve is going
to be in attendance tomorrow night, and he can answer the question before your, uh,
consideration.
Hayek/ Well, my question, uh, follows on I think what we discussed last year when we voted on
the annual action plan, which was, um, the...the contents of this voluminous set of
documents, and...um...whether every last word is essentially, uh, gospel upon adoption
by the Council, um... as I recall last year, think there were a number of policy positions
that were embedded in the document that the Council had not taken up, and there...
they're there again this year. There's a little caveat before those items that says that these
were the recommendations of the 2008, uh, housing study, so I think there's a slight
distinguishing, uh, of this section of the document, versus what we had last year, but I
just wanted to raise that again because there are thing...there are policy recommendations
in that section of this document that we really haven't, as a Council, weighed in on.
Davidson/ Yeah, and...and I will give Steve the opportunity to respond, um...tomorrow night,
but clearly it is the case that this document is supposed to represent the broad vision of
the City Council in terms of policies, uh, for the allocation of CDBG and Home funds,
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of May 2, 2011.
May 2, 2011 City Council Work Session
Page 7
and so if you feel that there is something in there which is certainly inconsistent, uh,
with...with Council's vision for the distribution of those funds, um, that is something that
you may wish to consider amendment, uh, tomorrow night. What...what you have is, of
course, the document that is recommended by the, uh, Housing and Community
Development Commission, uh, to you and it is intended to be the broad vision of the City
for, um, you know, for those policies. So, um...I...I...I will have Steve elaborate for
you tomorrow night exactly how much, uh, it's intended that that tie your hands, so to
speak. Uh, clearly Council has full discretion on what projects are...are approved when
they come before you, but this is supposed to be what the applicant take, uh, and use as
guidance when they are developing their projects.
Hayek/ Well, and the biggest and best example I can...I can bring out is...is that embedded in
the barriers to affordable housing section, there's a bullet point that says adopt a
mandatory inclusionary zoning ordinance, which we all know is, you know, is a
controversial subject. We've talked about it, but not come down on one side or the other
of it, um...and so I, you know, I don't think it's the policy...the Council's policy to...to
pursue something like that, at least not at the present time, um...but it's all those policy
bullet points are prefaced by the...by the following statement, "The following
recommendations were identified in the 2008 Affordable Housing Study," which waters
it down a little bit. I just raise that because...
Mims/ It's important!
Hayek/ It's an issue we haven't decided as...
Champion/ Well, we actually did decide that we were not going to discuss it. There were four of
us that took it off the table.
Davidson/ That's right! That's right! I'll have Steve address that tomorrow night at the hearing,
prior to you taking consideration, and you can ask...if his clarification isn't enough, you
can ask him any questions at that time.
Hayek/ Okay, thanks!
Wright/ (mumbled) point of concern. I read that as well.
Dilkes/ I have some confusion about whether the resolution is actually adopting the bigger
document or simply the allocations too, so we'll clarify that tomorrow. It may just be the
allocations.
Hayek/ That would make sense.
Wright/ (mumbled) background information.
Hayek/ Yeah. Anything else on the agenda? Okay. Uh, downtown planning!
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of May 2, 2011.
Ma 2, 2011 City Council Work Session Page 8
Y
Downtown Planning (IP2 of 4/28/11 Info Pkt.):
Davidson/ Kent is running across the hall to Planning and Zoning, oh, and here comes Bob now!
You should probably be sitting over here. (noises on mic) Good evening, again, uh, I
think you all know Bob Miklo, Senior Planner. Uh, what Bob and I would like to discuss
with you, um...this evening, there are a couple of dynamics occurring right now
involving downtown. Uh, obviously one is that in the wake of the 21-ordinance change,
um, there are some changes in terms of, uh, development, um, sort of the attitude towards
development downtown. Um, at the same time we are starting to see some recovery in
the economy to the point that, uh, financial institutions seem to be loosening up a little,
that we are at least starting to get a lot of interest, a lot of inquiries. Um, the...the 21-
ordinance has had an effect of putting, I think last count, four of the large bar spaces, uh,
on the market, uh, either formally, or informally. Um, on your agenda tomorrow evening
is a project dealing with one of those spaces, and I will tell you that there has been
interest in the other three as well. Um, so there, you know, this is all very exciting, um, I
mean it's...it's what we wanted to see happen, um, you know, the project on your agenda
tomorrow evening will remove a large bar space from ever being a large bar space again,
uh, because you now have the 500-foot spacing requirement for alcohol establishments
downtown. So, uh, what we wanted to see happen, establish a retail or office use in that
space, and we have a lot of interest in that sort of thing. Um, with those changes in land
use, however, comes some concern as to what things are turning into, uh, basically and
we have also had, uh, people come to us with concerns and...and we're going to go
through some of those tonight, but what we're trying to do this evening is get a little bit
of direction from you in terms of trying to steer the ship, okay, that is downtown, to the
degree that we are able to steer it. Um, at the same time, and of course here you see
the...the boundaries of the downtown district. Uh, and along with downtown, the
boundaries of the Riverfront Crossing district, which you see here in the light blue, uh,
the...the orange outline there is the sub area that we took a specific study of, and now
have a physical development plan for, and Bob, did you have a copy of that? Uh, there is
the...the framework plan that's been developed. And this brings me to the second item
that's creating the need for the discussion this evening, and that is that our 1997
Comprehensive Plan needs to be updated. And you're familiar with the smaller district
plans that look at a small area of Iowa City, and have the full force of the Comprehensive
Plan in terms of the land use decision making that...that are made in those districts. But
we also have broad framework and broad policies of the City called out in that 1997
Comp Plan, which was authored by, uh, myself and Bob and Karin Franklin, my
predecessor. It's time to look at that again, clearly. Um, and we have obtained a grant
from the State to assist us in doing that, although we still intend for it to primarily be an
in-house, uh, process. It will be an extensive, extensive public input process as part of
that, I mean, there's no point in having a Comprehensive Plan, uh, for the City that does
not have the buy-in of the, uh, the businesses and residents of the City, uh, and so we will
be taking our time and ensuring that. Um...and we...we see the two things here, the
focus on downtown and Riverfront Crossings, and that comprehensive planning effort,
clearly downtown and uh, Riverfront Crossings will be the focus of redevelopment
activity, uh, in this community, certainly for the next ten years that that Comprehensive
Plan would be in effect. So, what we wanted to do to kind of kick that process off is raise
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of May 2, 2011.
May 2, 2011 City Council Work Session
Page 9
the concerns that we intend to address, as part of that process, and you have eight of them
listed, and we're just going to step through them quickly this evening. Make sure that
they are in fact concerns, and these...these eight items are a combination of things that
the seven of you have raised, either individually or as a group, or things that in other
issues, uh, or in capital project's discussions have come up, and that there've been some
concern and not clearly defined notion of how we're going to move, uh, forward.
Obviously a very important thing is if there's something we've missed that is a collective
concern of the City Council that you want to make sure is addressed when we do this
comprehensive planning effort, and focus on a more specific physical development plan
for both downtown and Riverfront Crossings. We want to get...get that on the table so
that we have the proper, uh, proper direction. We're not here this evening to resolve
issues. Hopefully what comes out of that comprehensive planning, um, effort in terms of,
um, visions, goals, and objectives for downtown and Riverfront Crossings, will identify
the policies and strategies and...and potentially changes to the zoning ordinance that we
need to have in place, in order to fulfill that vision, okay? So, what we want to do is
simply identify issues tonight, get any input you'd like to give us, and then of course
anything that we may...we may have left out. Does that explain it well enough? And
any questions about how we'll be moving forward with the comp...comprehensive
planning effort, we'd be happy to answer that, as well. So, uh, and I did want to
emphasize that the eight items are not in any priority order. They're...they're just simply
listed 1 through 8, and could be...could be taken in any order. So let's just step through
these real quick, and we've got a couple of graphics, uh, to show along the way. Um...
the first item is student housing. Uh, obviously we're all aware the University's
commitment to on-campus student housing is approximately 20 to 25%, uh, of the
student body, and the remainder of that, which amounts to about 20,000 to 25,000, uh,
students, uh, is taken care of by the private sector. And so clearly the way that the private
sector, uh, fulfills that obligation for the University is...has a tremendous impact,
especially on downtown, and potentially Riverfront Crossings, and certainly our
neighborhoods that...that surround downtown. Um, as it pertains to downtown, the
proliferation of student housing buildings, and in particular the three, four, and five-
bedroom units that...that the buildings that are...are full of those units and have caused
us some concern in terms of the atmosphere around some of those buildings. Uh, there
are no longer four and five-bedroom units allowed in...in downtown, does that include
threes? Threes, fours, and fives or...
Miklo/ No, threes are allowed.
Davidson/ Threes are allowed in the downtown zone, but fours and fives are not. However, uh, a
couple of the zones, the PRN zone and the RM-44 zone around downtown still do allow
the four and five bedroom, uh, units, and these are clearly set up to be student apartments.
They're...they're, if you've ever been through one of those units, they're rented by the
bedroom and they're clearly intended to be student, uh, apartments. So, um...again, the
notion of these buildings occupying spaces in the downtown is something that has been
raised as an issue, uh, and is something that we would intend to...to look at. Do you
have any further direction for us in terms of that?
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of May 2, 2011.
May 2, 20] 1 City Council Work Session
Page 10
Hayek/ Uh, I'm g1ad...I'm glad to see this, uh, on the list. I think, um...for two reasons,
primarily. Uh, first I think we've seen an erosion of office and retail, um, in spaces that
are now occupied by these large structures, um, and...and those are two sectors that have
been identified by our consultants as, uh, in need of attention and...and uh, support. Um,
and then...the other, uh, reason has to do with, uh, as we look at balance downtown
and...what we think are the elements for a...a thriving, vibrant, uh, corridor, um, owner-
occupied housing, uh, is, um, something we...we can and should focus on. We've been,
um, some very beneficial results from, uh, the recent increases in owner-occupied
housing. Plaza Towers being the example. Um...and I think there's a potential for...for
more of that, and I think that the spin-off of that, whether it's people patronizing our arts
and culture venues or our restaurants or our shops, or being able to walk to employment
centers, there's just great potential there. So, I'm...I'm glad to see that.
Davidson/ Well clearly we've...we've already taken it as a policy to try and increase the non-
student type of residential housing that is located downtown, and I think this will be, you
know, a part of that, is that...student housing units basically supplant the...the
opportunities for that other type of housing. That's something that we need to take into
consideration. Do you have anything to add (mumbled)
Bailey/ And...I think as we look at residential downtown, one of the things that I'm hearing from
a lot of people, um, is the interest in living downtown, and as we address the proliferation
of student housing, also making sure...Plaza Towers is a great project, but making sure
we have a range of options for people. Affordability is really important. I've heard a lot
of people, you know, express the interest in, you know, when I retire I want to live in a
condo downtown, and these are people of, you know, reasonably modest income, but
certainly looking towards that...the Riverfront Crossings, um, planning has really gotten
a lot of people excited. So as we proceed with that, thinking about that market, as well,
or a broader market...I think would be a really... great, great opportunity.
Champion/ I'm not sure how you approach this whole thing because frankly...I wouldn't be here
if the students weren't here, so...I mean, I have to consider where they're living also.
Uh, I would like to see some more owner-occupied, um, apartments, condos, whatever
you want to call `em, throughout...throughout the downtown area and River Crossings.
Uh, I agree with Regenia, uh, some more moderately priced would be nice, um...but I
think Hieronymus Square, I mean, I think that is going to have some condominium aspect
to it, and I know...I already know people who are saying they're going to buy one when,
if it's ever built, so um...I think the demand is there. I think we have to be careful that
we don't say we don't want students living downtown.
Davidson/ That's an excellent point, Connie, and one that...that I think bears clarification, is that
this shouldn't be interpreted as aanti-student initiative because clearly keeping student
housing, as much of it as possible, walkable to the University I think is an incredibly
important, uh, part of our land use decision making around the University and downtown,
and I think it's also a goal of the University, as well. So we need to...we need to figure
out I think somebody, Mayor or Regenia, said balance and I think (several talking)
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of May 2, 2011.
Ma 2, 2011 City Council Work Session Page 11
Y
Wilburn/ Well, and there's a range of that too, with non-traditional student and, um, folks doing
residencies and those type of things and (several talking)
Bailey/ Well, mixed buildings, I think, I mean like....like the Northside neighborhood is...is
essentially a mixed neighborhood and it works very well, so I think what we're talking
about here are buildings that are completely full of this type of living environment, and
I'm sure that there's students who don't appreciate that, you know, as well. So I think the
mix, the balance, is really what we're aiming for, like we have throughout our
community.
Wright/ And we actually already have good examples of mixed-use buildings in the downtown.
Bailey/ Mixed-use and mixed, yeah, mixed living opportunities, yeah.
Davidson/ Okay, that's good. Uh, one of the phenomena that's occurred, um...with the strength
of our, uh, market downtown basically is the aspect of teardowns, and we are starting to
see some of that. We are going to see more. Um...and..and some of those are buildings
that probably appropriately, in terms of our vision for downtown, should occur, but there
are others, uh, that are clearly, uh, historic, have historic significance, and I'm going to
have Bob outline kind of what the existing situation is, in terms of historic buildings
and...and basically, um, you know, just see what additional direction you want to give us.
Miklo/ This, uh, map illustrates buildings that are historic and are listed on the National Register,
and also protected by our local landmarks. So those that are in green are on the National
Register. Those that are striped in green, uh, or striped in another color, are, um...also
local landmarks, which gives the City some ability to protect those from demolition. Uh,
the buildings that are in purple are eligible for the National Register of Historic Places.
So they meet all the national criteria, uh, as historic buildings, but there is no zoning
protection for those. Um, the buildings that are...are in, uh, blue aren't individually
eligible. They're nice historic buildings, but they would not be, um, eligible for the
National Register unless they were included in the larger district. So the...the purple are
key buildings in terms of their historic value. The blue are nice historic buildings, but not
as...they wouldn't stand alone as historic buildings. Um, so in argue the...the buildings
that are purple are...are more essential to...to be preserved. It'd be nice to preserve all of
them, but that may not be the case. The, uh, properties with no color on them are non-
historic, uh, or have been altered to such an extent that they...they don't have a value, in
terms of, uh, historic properties. Um, given our current zoning, uh, downtown and what
it allows, uh, if the building doesn't have a striped pattern to it, it can be taken down
tomorrow and a building could replace it. So one of our concerns, which would be as we
examine the zoning, what can we do to provide some incentives to, uh, preserve, uh, at
least the purple buildings, if not the blue buildings, uh, to identify sites where we would
want to encourage redevelopment, where there are non-historic buildings that we'd want
to, uh, allow to come down and be replaced with more intense development. One tool
that could be used would be a...a historic district and a number of years ago there was a
study done, and this was the possible, uh, boundary for a historic district. Uh, the
Historic Preservation Commission discussed that with the Downtown Association and
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa (:ity t;ity C:ouncll worx
session of May 2, 2011.
May 2, 2011 City Council Work Session
Page 12
there wasn't a lot of support, at the time, and so the Commission said they weren't going
to go out in front unless there was property owner support. Given that, I don't know if
the attitude has changed about creating a historic district. If it...if it hasn't, there may be
some other zoning tools that we can use to preserve those key buildings, and that's one of
the things we would explore through this process.
Davidson/ Yeah, preserving the key buildings is kind of what this is all about, the buildings that
really provide the character, uh, for downtown Iowa City. Uh, while allowing the, you
know basically the new buildings that were...are going to enhance us and get us to, you
know, down the road where we want to be, you know, we want to see both happen,
basically. So, any thoughts about historic buildings?
Wright/ I would hope that there's some interest in trying to preserve those historic buildings.
That's...the scale of our downtown has developed around late-19tH century or early 20tH
century architecture, uh, and obviously that's going to change in some places, but I think
our...some big swaths of downtown we're going to see on the map that have managed to
keep the original buildings, and I think that's important for the character of our
downtown and for the character of the community. Cause once an old building is gone,
it's gone. The other element to bear in mind is, uh...we try to encourage green
development in Iowa City, and historic preservation is a very green development. Um,
some of the buildings are under some kind of ugly facades right now (laughter)
but...underneath that there are some real gems!
Davidson/ What we would anticipate is you're going...you're going to have some options
presented to you as a City Council for perhaps providing some additional pro...
protections. You know, as you can see, everything that's non-striped there, uh, could be
torn down in fairly short order, and so if...if we feel like, and when I say we -the City
Council -feels like there is some enhancement of that needed to get some protections in
place, we'll try and bring that to you for your consideration. That'd be our...our
intention.
Champion/ I think that's a good idea!
Bailey/ I actually think (both talking)
Champion/ ...would love to see taken down. But not of the older buildings.
Davidson/ Um, let's move on then to parking, um, always an issue downtown. I'm always
telling people that, uh, having parking "problems" is a good thing because any downtown
that doesn't have parking problems is a dead downtown. So, we always want to have
issue associated with parking, cause that means your...your downtown is healthy and
lively. Um, we have a situation, and I'm going to have...I'm going to have Bob
elaborate on it a little, where we...we changed, we basically instituted a residential
parking requirement downtown when we started getting these residential buildings of a
scale that, you know, before ten years ago or even five years ago were really unheard of
in...in downtown. The zoning ordinance never anticipated, uh, residential development
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of May 2, 2011.
May 2, 2011 City Council Work Session
Page 13
of that scale, and so it became apparently...apparent that we did need to have some type
of a parking requirement. There was no parking requirement for any uses downtown,
prior to that, other than maybe a hotel, I think, had...had some. Uh, but otherwise, there
was no parking requirement for any use. The intention being that the City would provide,
uh, parking downtown, and we put the residential, um, how long ago was it, Bob, that we
put that...
Miklo/ 2008.
Davidson/ Okay, so 2008, um, and it basically established that for, and it was a lower parking
requirement than for your typical res...residential use, but it did establish that...a
requirement to provide parking, either on-site, or if you couldn't provide it on-site, you
had the ability to go to the City and essentially request parking in our facilities, and that's
what we've seen happen. We've had a couple, two, three of these, and we of course go to
the, uh, Parking Division, Transportation staff, and say do you have adequate number of
spaces here to accommodate this development and...and they've every time said, yes, we
do, and finally by the time we got to the second or third one of these, they were kind of
saying, are you guys going to keep coming back and asking this, because if so, we really
need to rethink the long term view of doing this.
Miklo/ Currently if you build a... a residential building downtown, uh, you're required to have
parking, as Jeff said, and it's based on the number of bedrooms. If you're doing an
efficiency or one-bedroom it's a half space. If you're doing atwo-bedroom it's one
space. If you're doing athree-bedroom it's...it's two spaces. Uh, ideally the preference
is that the parking would go under...underground, and we've had a few of those. Uh, if
it...if it can't be fit underground, then there's an option to put part of it on the surface in
the back of the building, and we've had a couple of those. And then if you can't fit the
requirement for the zoning code, uh, you can, as Jeff said, seek, uh, a special exception to
have some of that parking satisfied in one of our...our public facilities. We've, uh, just...
the Board of Adjustment just reviewed one recently where the professional building is on,
um, Washington Street, and in that case, 13 parking spaces are going to be in the back of
the building, um, and then 19 of the required spaces are going to be in the Chauncey
Swan, um, parking facility. The Board of Adjustment approved that arrangement, but did
raise a concern, uh, that that might not be the long-term solution for handling all of the
residential parking. Uh, if they hadn't approved that special exception, it would have
meant fewer...fewer units in that particular building. I think the...the off-site
arrangement allowed them to do ten more units than they would have, um, by providing
the parking on their...on their own property. Uh, so we're...we're going to, through this
process examine that arrangement, uh, see if there are, uh, alternatives, uh, see if there's a
more equitable way for paying for those...for those parking spaces. Currently if...if the
applicant, uh, receives the special exception, the tenant pays the going rate, yet the
parking is set aside permanently in those spaces. So that's...that's parking that's taken
out of our supply for the general public and devoted to, um, those residential units. Um,
so there is some value to those spaces that the City isn't collecting that we may want to
look at.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of May 2, 2011.
May 2, 2011 City Council Work Session Page 14
Davidson/ So what we would like to do, again, in terms of what we'd like from you this evening
is, take a look at that parking requirement, even though it's fairly recent, uh, how we're
doing it. Let...we would like to reexamine it and maybe, uh, bring you some better ideas,
uh, at least, for your consideration, uh, as Bob has outlined. And are there any other
concerns about downtown parking that you want to make sure we hit, as part of this
process?
Champion/ Yes, of course there's always problems with downtown parking! There are instances
where development downtown, they could not possibly provide parking, but I do think
that wherever possible, they have to do it, or pay the price, and...we just can't keep
building parking ramps, and somebody's got to help us out there, I mean, I know they
don't really cost the taxpayers money, but we don't want our central part of Iowa City,
it's starting to look like a parking ramp, but we already have one, two, three, four,
building a fifth.
Davidson/ Basically what we've done since the original ramps were built in the late 70s is every
five years we try and add 500 to 600 spaces, essentially a new facility. We went down as
low as 450 one time, but essentially every five years; that's enabled downtown to
continue to grow.
Markus/ In terms of efficiency, uh, building decks is a more efficient way of handling the
parking.
Champion/ I know.
Markus/ Yeah.
Davidson/ Okay. Well, we'll bring some things back. I think items 4 and 5 we can maybe take
together, um, the mix of uses in downtown buildings, um...obviously the new model here
now is a much-more heavily residential building. You know, if you...if you go back far
enough, the model downtown was retail primarily on the first floor, office or you know,
second storage and those kind of uses on the second floor. There are certainly
exceptions, but basically that was the model. The Ewers Men's Store has retail on three
levels. Um, but clearly the residential aspect is what's the big...the big change now, and
um, that dominance of residential uses has caused some non-residential spaces, and they
have been in a variety of things from storage or office or whatever to convert to
residential. Um, there have been some buildings taken down that were predomin...or
planned to be taken down, that were predominantly office, uh, that have been, um,
residential, essentially residential buildings constructed. They've had commercial on the
first floor, that the ground, the zoning ordinance requires. Uh, there are a couple of
adaptive reuse projects of historic buildings downtown being considered, and chiefly the
interest seems to be in converting these former, uh, well, obviously the Jefferson Hotel is
one that...that's had some interest, and some fairly significant office buildings,
converting them to residential structures. So, you know, we kind of wanted to get your
input on...and you've already talked about balance, and maybe there's nothing more to
give us other than you want to try and strike a balance and would like some information
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of May 2, 2011.
May 2, 2011 City Council Work Session Page 15
to do that, but are there concerns about the...the conversion of retail, uh, commercial and
office space, to...to residential, that you want to make sure we consider?
Wright/ I think you just hit it with (several talking) balance.
Bailey/ Yeah, I think...I think we need to anticipate the...what we're seeing, because the market
will bear it. I think we need to anticipate that this could cause us a problem of imbalance
down the road. It may already be in a situation of imbalance, and do some things to
address that now, rather than giving it to somebody in ten years to say, fix it! Because, I
mean, there's a captive market for residential. It's...it's harder to provide office space
because it takes longer to fill.
Davidson/ Yeah, and I wanted to talk just a little long...more about the office space aspect.
We...our...our downtown market study that we did, uh, a couple years, I guess it's been
a couple years ago by now, uh, office sector was clearly identified as one where there was
pent-up demand, that we needed to try and grow, and what we hear repeatedly, uh,
from...from realtors is that I have a client interested in class A office space; they're
interested in downtown, at least considering downtown, but there is none to show them.
Uh, or nothing that really meets that definition. So that is clearly a sector we are trying to
grow, and I think one that...that realistically the City is going to have to be involved in
providing some incentives, at least until it becomes (mumbled), until the banks are able to
loosen up a little bit about it, uh, and it would be our intention to continue along that path
of trying to grow that... grow that sector.
Bailey/ I'm very comfortable continuing to provide incentives until the market proves itself,
because I think that's the role of public dollars is to...to lead, when the market isn't
moving along quickly enough.
Davidson/ Well, one of the things that we've, you know, for...and I just want to give you an
example so that you understand what we may be coming back with is, you know, right
now the zoning ordinance requires commercial on the first floor, uh, and it may be that
we want to consider requirements, either...whetherthat be for retail or for office,
requirements within the zoning ordinance that, you know again, the financial institutions
are going to be less comfortable than they are with residential, because residential is such
a proven commodity, especially student residential, um, but in order to strike that
balance, we may be coming back to you with some zoning ordinance recommendations to
try and grow those sectors...by requiring it in the zoning ordinance.
Champion/ (mumbled) with that.
Bailey/ ...also look at some carrots, as well (several talking)
Hayek/ I think...but I think the market is moving in that direction, I mean, I think...I think we're
at...one of the most exciting junctures in downtown in downtown's history in...in 30
years, and um, the...the private sector interest in downtown, uh, for development and
redevelopment is very strong, and Jeff, I think you understated it at the beginning of your
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of May 2, 2011.
May 2, 2011 City Council Work Session Page 16
comments. I think it's quite strong, uh, and this mixed-use concept is...is, I think,
definitely part of that, uh, trend. Um, it will help us with balance; it will help us with,
um, quality office space, which is lacking, um, and everything else we've discussed.
Dickens/ I'm just worried about our interpretation, though. You talk to contractors and
developers, they're worried about how we interpret our zoning codes and zoning laws,
and hearing from them, they tend to call their people who will call me then. They're
worried that they...they don't want the process stopped, but they're worried...they have
to go elsewhere cause there...they're not being able to follow through on their plans,
when they have their plans approved by zoning or our inspection people come back and
change their interpretation, so I think we need to be very careful that we're positive about
where we're moving forward and...and what we can do, not what we can't do. It...I hear
that on a regular basis, and I know contractors and everybody tend to complain a lot, but
uh, I think it's very important that we look at that as well, that it's a positive thing
moving forward.
Hayek/ You're right, and...and you're really referring to process (mumbled) of that, but I've
talked to some of the developers and... and they cite this mixed-use concept as what they
think is best for downtown.
Bailey/ (several talking) opportunity for them.
Wilburn/ And the fact that the, uh, especially the...the office space available, I mean, that's been
out there. It was reflected in the study, and so this is just a way for us to respond to, um,
the demand and requests that have been out there in the community.
Davidson/ Okay. Uh...
Champion/ Could we make a...I don't know, you' 11 come up with something, but can you make
a zoning law...we know we have to have, um, retail or something on the first floor, can
we make a law that the second floor also has to be, cannot be residential?
Davidson/ Yes you can.
Champion/ I mean, that would handle...but I don't know if you'd want it for every building.
Davidson/ Yeah, and there are some things you can do, I mean, not to elaborate too much, but for
example, you can require a second floor space to at least be designed to accommodate a
commercial or an office, make sure it's wired, it has adequate ceiling heights, has
adequate HVAC equipment, and then if in fact the market is such, that it is still
advantageous to have that fit out as a residential space. At least it's been designed
because so much of the second floor spaces, you know, they're...it requires an enormous
amount of money to fit them out to...for an office or...or something like that. So, there
are some things I think we can bring you to at least give us better options for...for
growing those sectors, if...if in fact the market is not great right now, maybe in three
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of May 2, 2011.
May 2, 20] 1 City Council Work Session Page 17
years, in five years, in seven years we'll at least be prepared by having our buildings
designed appropriately, our new buildings. So...
Bailey/ That makes a lot of sense.
Davidson/ Okay. Um, item 6 is appropriate building heights, and this is something that is going
to be coming back, whether we want it to or not. Uh, some of the negotiations that we're
in right now, uh, there's concern about building height. To put this in perspective for
you, we are governed the...all of the entire downtown is...is governed by a height
limitation from the Federal Aviation Administration, and Plaza Towers I'm told is built to
within an inch and a half (laughter) so basically the height of Plaza Towers is the
maximum height of any building in downtown Iowa City, unless you decide Iowa City
doesn't need an airport anymore, and then that ceiling goes away. And believe it nor not,
that has been suggested. But, clearly, our policy is...is, we're not considering that at this
time. But that is the height limitation right now. Now within that, there are some other
requirements, and maybe Bob, you can just real quickly in terms of FAR and that sort of
thing.
Miklo/ Um, the...we have an FAR of 10, which basically means you can take your...your
property and you can build aten-story building over the entire, uh, property, or you could
take half your property and build a 20-story building, except for the height limit, uh, and I
think we've seen from Plaza Towers and some of the other buildings downtown that tall
buildings have a lot of benefits. Uh, they bring a lot of benefits in terms of the variety of
housing, the great views, um, by the same token, if all the buildings, uh, or all the
properties downtown were covered with ten...ten-story buildings, that value goes away.
Your great million-dollar view is ruined by the building next door. This also ties in to the
historic buildings, in that allowing an FAR of 10 is a real incentive to take those
buildings down. So, I think what we would look at is where is it appropriate downtown
to have the taller buildings, and where should we have a lower, uh, height limit possibly.
Um, one of the things you notice if you look at downtown, the corners tend to have the
taller buildings (noise on mic) that may be a pattern we want to...to focus on as we look
at the details of downtown.
Davidson/ And we're clearly into a dynamic here, that our existing zoning ordinance did not
anticipate, uh, of the...of the taller buildings. That's clearly the trend; the scale
economies of those buildings, the property tax generated by those buildings, is an
incredible opportunity for the City of Iowa City, and so definitely something we need to
encourage, but clearly something that we need to give more thought to, because the
notion of downtown Iowa City, notwithstanding the preservation of our historic
buildings, being covered by ten-story buildings is probably not appealing, uh, that's
something that we need to give more thought to, and we would intend to do that through
this process and come back to you with some revisions to the zoning ordinance.
Wright/ I think sited appropriately aten-story building can really be an asset downtown. But
that's sited appropriately (several talking)
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of May 2, 2011.
May 2, 2011 City Council Work Session Page 18
Davidson/ But clearly the scale of Plaza Towers, the Hieronymus Square building that's planned,
there are some other buildings that...that people are, uh, doing some concept planning on,
it's all tall. It's all tall stuff.
Miklo/ Just for comparison, uh, the FAR of 10, uh, there is not one building that... downtown
that approaches that, uh, Plaza Towers is an FAR of about 5, because a lot of the site is...
is not fully developed. It's 2 or...or, 1 or 2 stories or there's some open space.
Wright/ Could you define FAR, please?
Miklo/ Um, it's floor area ration, so for every...uh, a floor area ration of 10, you can build the
entire footprint of the build, or the property, ten times. So it's a fairly intense, uh, level
of development that our current zoning ordinance allows. It hasn't been achieved
anywhere downtown, and so we're thinking (both talking)
Davidson/ ...it's actual building, Michael, so if you have balconies, for example, that's
subtracted out of the equation, uh, if you have terraces, those come out of the... the
equation, and that's why we don't have any that achieved the, uh, like Bob said, Plaza
Towers is...is 6 1/2 didn't you say?
Miklo/ Uh, it's around 5.
Davidson/ Or 5, okay (both talking)
Miklo/ I think the...the greatest FAR we have is the Vogel House, uh, which is roughly 7.
Davidson/ Building right...there. So, anyway, we...we want to try and do a better job in terms
of the zoning ordinance and height, and we'll bring them back, and if there is a majority
of Council that's interested in no longer having an airport, let us know (laughter) because
that would have a big difference in terms of how the zoning ordinance is set up.
Wilburn/ There's financial consequences to that.
Davidson/ There certainly...there are a lot of consequences!
Markus/ Couple more decks! (several talking)
Davidson/ Um, the final two items then kind of get us a little bit out, well, I shouldn't say that.
Item 7 gets us a little bit out of downtown, in terms of Burlington Street, and this is
something that we've had a number of issues, uh, oh gosh, going back 10 or 20 years, but
clearly now with the growth of downtown, with the Riverfront Crossings district to the
south, is something we...we just need to finally get serious about. We...we have the
median project, of which we had hoped to have the first phase down by the new
University Recreation and Wellness Center already constructed. Because of some of the
post-flood work that they're doing, that project has been delayed. I think it's really going
to be a great project in terms of indicating what a nice feature that median can be, both in
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of May 2, 2011.
May 2, 2011 City Council Work Session
Page 19
terms of the aesthetics it provides and for the pedestrian accommodation it provides, uh,
in the north-south movement. Uh, the intention is to do that all the way down to Gilbert
Street. I certainly have detected wavering support on the City Council's part when we've
discussed it at, uh, CIP. I think it's something we need to give better thought to, and then
the overall strategy, uh, with...with Burlington Street. It is State Highway 1. It is
governed by Iowa DOT, maybe we need to rethink that designation, uh, and...and
evaluate if that would in fact, I mean, if you take the designation off, and just as many
vehicles use it, you haven't really accomplished anything, but if there are some strategies
to, even though we don't typically use it with arterial streets, calming that street so that
the mix of pedestrians and bikes and transit vehicles and emergency vehicles and...and
cars that use it can all be accommodated. We just need understanding that it's not ever
going to work perfectly for any one of those modes, but that hopefully...there's that
balance word again, you know, hopefully we can strike that balance. It's something that
we would intend to do, as part of this process.
Champion/ Well, I've been one that's been kind of against that median down the road in...on
Burlington, and (mumbled) the reason is I don't see us maintaining those things very
well. And they turn out to be really ugly, I mean, if we can put a median in like Chicago
does on Michigan Avenue with these gorgeous, well-maintained plants all year round, I
could totally support it, but when I look at our medians, they're really badly maintained
and they're actually quite ugly.
Bailey/ Uh-huh.
Hayek/ So maybe Lower Wacker Drive is...a better place!
Champion/ Yeah! Yeah, we look like Lower Wacker Drive, or maybe we need to build a Lower
Wacker Drive!
Wright/ I think it'd be nice if we could have more control over Burlington Street. I know the
State weighs in pretty heavily on that, and...you know, could we see some ways to re-
route Highway 1, maybe get it on to 218 and up to 80, and pick it up on Dodge Street
again.
Bailey/ I think that's (several talking) I don't know if it'll change the traffic count on it, though.
Wright/ Even if it didn't change the traffic that much, it would give us better control over what
we...how we can call the (both talking)
Bailey/ ...how we design it. Okay.
Davidson/ We'll at least evaluate that.
Hayek/ Okay.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of May 2, 2011.
May 2, 2011 City Council Work Session Page 20
Davidson/ Anything else in terms of Burlington Street that you'd like to provide in terms of
input? Okay. Final item then...
Bailey/ Not a lot of overpasses, what are those things called that they (both talking) Des Moines?
Davidson/ Pedestrian overpasses?
Bailey/ Walkways, those...the things (several talking) skywalks!
Davidson/ We have at least accommodated the possibility. There are clearly some downsides to
anything that's not at grade. Uh, anybody who's been in...anybody who's been in
downtown Des Moines understands that it's just...it's moved so much of the retail up to
that second level, and then there's nothing down on the street grade (several talking) I
don't think that's anything any...any of us, uh, think is a good idea, but you know, to the
degree that a single overpass gets...gets you across Burlington Street from one logical
origin to another logical destination, you know, we would at least consider it.
Bailey/ Sure, but I mean...all along the way, every business or every entity is going to have
perhaps interest in that, and then you get six or seven, and then you get...you get so many
people up. I'm just weighing in that I don't...I don't like `em. They kill the street action.
Davidson/ The...the final item is, uh, having to do with Washington Street, and this is an issue
that's come up in terms of, uh, getting bicyclists through downtown, specifically from the
east to the west, very difficult to do, uh, on a bicycle right now, and...and what's been
brought up for discussion is putting Washington Street back to two-way. There are a lot
of one-way conversions from the 70s, if you look at the whole nation, that have been put
back. Washington Street is our only one-way street that's not paired with another street,
that goes in the other direction like Jefferson and uh, Market and...and Dodge and
Governor. Um, and we have in fact already evaluated some of the pros and cons of doing
this, and I will tell you there are some positive aspects to...
Champion/ Yeah, there's a lot!
Davidson/ ...there would be a little bit of expense. The block, uh, of Washington Street between
Clinton and Dubuque would need to have some reconstruction to orient the parking
differently, uh, but otherwise that's really the only significant reconstruction expense
there would be. Clearly something that if you're interested in evaluating it, we would
want to vet with the downtown, I mean, they're...there are a lot of people with a lot at
stake downtown, in particular the businesses, and we would want to take this through the
Downtown Association and...and get it out there for discussion, see what people thought,
but it does appear to us to be an idea with some merit, if you're interested.
Champion/ I think it'd be great (several talking) I'm very interested. It's so confusing for
people, trying to get downtown with that silly one-way street right there (several talking)
Wright/ ...confusing and...
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of May 2, 2011.
May 2, 201 I City Council Work Session Page 21
Bailey/ I would think businesses might be supportive because it is confusing (several talking)
Wright/ Lends itself to being (several talking) double parking and...
Bailey/ Yeah.
Dickens/ There's an average of three cars a day that turn the wrong way.
Champion/ Well, yeah!
Dickens/ You know, we're on the corner there, we see it every day, so it's...it's a safety factor
too. There are people always turning and they don't think a pedestrian's coming because
pedestrians aren't looking for cars coming that direction so...
Davidson/ Well, I'm hearing a clear majority for taking a look at it so we'll go ahead and do that,
and again, this is something that'll ultimately come back to you for a decision on, so...uh,
are there any issues we have not covered, that you want to make sure we address, as we
approach this effort?
Mims/ Well I would just comment, you talked about a lot of public input and...and you know
information with people as you go through this process. I think that's really, really
important because any time you make zoning changes, we are impacting the value of
those properties. Um, either increasing or decreasing the potential value, uh, based on the
kinds of zoning changes that are made. And so I think it's really important to get as
much public input and...and information to and from property owners, um, I realize
we're looking...trying to look at the big picture, and some people are going to be happy
and some may be unhappy with changes that we might make, but I think it's really
important to include them as much as possible in the process.
Miklo/ For those of you who participated in the Riverfront Crossings meetings, we would
probably follow a similar program.
Bailey/ What's the timeline, what are you looking at? (mumbled)
Miklo/ Hoping to start, um, this summer at some point.
Hayek/ Thanks, guys!
Wilburn/ (mumbled) student liaison comprised of the public process so that...he can invite
students, but I would also encourage you to figure out a way maybe you can make a
bridge with the University, um, Faculty Center to see if those folks live here too.
(mumbled) process.
Hayek/ Okay, thanks, guys. Uh, okay...I'm getting the `let's take a break look,' so let's take a
break (laughter) and uh, come back in... (BREAK)
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of May 2, 2011.
May 2, 2011 City Council Work Session Page 22
Court Street -Summit to Muscatine (IP3 of 4/28/11 Info Pkt.):
Hayek/ The next item is Court Street, uh, Summit to Muscatine.
Davidson/ Yes, you have a memorandum from John Yapp in your materials, and John sends his
regrets. He was not able to be here this evening, so Kent and I, Kent Ralston from
MPOJC, formerly known as JCCOG (laughter) uh...you all know is here, and we're just
going to kind of, uh, walk through this issue with you. Um, this is something that
certainly goes back to my tenure at JCCOG, in that at least a couple of times, uh, through
the years, uh, worked with the neighborhood on developing some possible strategies, uh,
we did just, I'm sure you're all familiar with this, but we did...Kent actually went out this
afternoon, you can see the beautiful spring afternoon, uh, and took some photos. This is
from Oakland Avenue looking west, uh, from just beyond Oakland Avenue looking down
to the intersection with Muscatine, uh, and then this is from the intersection. That's Clark
Street in the foreground there, looking down toward Summit Street, and uh, I never
noticed the nice, uh, the nice vista, end of the vista pine tree there at, uh, and then, uh,
and then looking back to the east, uh, down Oakland, excuse me, down Court Street, uh,
from uh...Clark Street. Uh, so, um, those are really the only pictures we had, just to
orient everybody. We may want to refer to a couple of these, but otherwise, um, there's
no need to keep the lights down, Marian. Um, you know, we have a situation here that
I...I think most of you are familiar with, in that you know a lot of us who live in the
neighborhood, excuse me, the neighborhoods in and close to downtown, and I know
several of you do, uh, as well, um, it's very easy to feel threatened, and I think that's
probably the appropriate word to use, by the increased amount of traffic, uh, that...that
affects our residential streets in the areas, uh, you know, fairly close-in areas, and Iowa
City, of course, has the wonderful distinction of having our inner-city neighborhoods
around downtown being, you know, I would even go so far as to say among the best
neighborhoods in the whole state, I mean, they're marvelous, marvelous older
neighborhoods that have retained their vitality, retained their property value certainly, uh,
and they're great places to live. However, the dynamic of our major employment and
activity centers still being downtown creates then the pressure from the traffic on these
neighborhoods, and...and this street here, Court Street between Summit and Muscatine is
specifically where the neighborhood has asked us to again give some consideration, uh,
you know, to their concerns about traffic, and so we did, uh, one of the first things we did
was update the traffic study, and Kent, real quickly what...what happened there?
Ralston/ Yeah, um, I just want to briefly discuss some of these traffic characteristics that Jeff s
been mentioning, uh, and if you refer to that memo that's in your packet, uh, dated April
26 from John, um, in that...that's included as the...the, uh, ADT map that we put
together, and this is the most recent data we've collected, and it was from May, uh, 6t"
through 8`" of 2009, um, and you'll see there that the average daily traffic is about 3,800
vehicles per day. Um, this is a little bit higher than we would typically see on a lot of
collector streets in town, um, normally it would be maybe in the 1,500 to 2,500 vehicle
per day range. This is what we would call a higher volume collector street, and rightfully
so. Um, just to kind of give you some background too. Sheridan Street, uh, which I'm
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of May 2, 2011.
May 2, 2011 City Council Work Session
Page 23
sure you're all familiar, would be the first, uh, collector street basically south of Court
Street, and collect some of that same cut-through type traffic that heads toward the
Summit Street bridge. They have about 2,200 vehicles a day. It's a little bit different.
Uh, Sheridan's not as wide as...as Court Street is in this case, which is 31-feet wide.
Um, so it's not an apples-to-apples comparison, but they're about 2,200 again. Um...in
regards to the speeds, uh, speeds on Court Street are fairly typical for what we see. Um,
for...for better or for worse, uh, the 85th percentile speed is...is roughly between 29 and
33 mile per hour. So what that means then is 85% of traffic is basically traveling at about
30 mile per hour or a little over, or under that amount. Um, I was just curious, um, this
isn't in your packet, but I have some, uh, our...our next most recent study, which was
from 2005, um, the speeds are almost identical. The speeds haven't changed a lot. Uh,
the volumes did creep up just a little bit. In 2005, uh, the counts were more around the
3,400 to 3,500, uh, vehicles per day. So, you know, 300 or 400 vehicles more. Then I
thought to myself, okay, has this...has this kept increasing, you know, over the last ten or
twenty years, and I actually looked back at a...a JCCOG count, uh, from 1990 and it was
3,200. So this hasn't really been a trend. I'm not sure why the difference between 2005
and 2009, but there was, you know, 300 or so vehicle difference and that could have been
an event or something we were picking up, so...
Davidson/ So, you know, to generalize then, volumes are higher than typically we would see on
a street like this. Speeds are about what we would expect to see. Now the other factor,
um, that you may want to bring into the discussion of options this evening is the City's
adopt a traffic calming policy. And that policy was considered very carefully when we
originally, um, developed it and adopted it by the City Council. You were getting a lot of
requests for this type of thing. People wanted you to do something about traffic in their
neighborhoods, and you said, all right, if we're going to consider this, and this is a really
important thing with anything involving traffic engineering, is that you try and bring as
much...as many objective criteria to it as possible, and so that you're sending consistent
messages to motorists, uh, out...using...using our streets, and that's what the traffic
calming policy, uh, has tried to address, that under certain considerations, we will
consider certain items for trying to calm traffic, uh, and we've done that in a number of
locations around town over the 10 or 15 years since that's been in place. One of the
things that's constrained doing things on this stretch of Court Street is the fact that it
exceeds 3,000 vehicles a day, and what we've said is with vehicles, a street that exceeds
3,000 vehicles a day, that we have some concerns about trying to either divert or calm
traffic on a street, that that's high volume, that you're really getting into almost
borderline arterial-type, uh, volumes with that, and you run it, certainly the diversion of
traffic, sending 1,000 vehicles a day, uh, over to another street is something that would be
a concern for the people living on that street, and something that we want to temper what
we do. However, that traffic calming policy is 100% the City Council's policy. If you
want to change any of the provisions of that, we'd probably want to schedule that for a
work session and have you reassess it, but the reason we have not suggested some of our
more typical traffic calming features for this stretch of Court Street is that it exceeds that
3,000 vehicle a day volume for doing traffic calming, and that is something that you
would have to direct us differently if you wanted to see done differently. Now, the other
thing we wanted to do this evening, uh, certainly Kent and I can answer any questions
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of May 2, 2011.
May 2, 2011 City Council Work Session
Page 24
about anything you've heard so far is that the...the neighborhood did send a letter and
ask that certain items be considered. We can run through those very quickly if you'd
like, um, they are things that the neighborhood's requested, and the Mayor, by the way,
uh, attended the neighborhood meeting that we had, uh, with the neighborhood, and he
may want to elaborate on some of the things as well. Uh, there are some things that may
have some merit. There are some things that we really believe will not work, and that we
should not consider, uh but if you want...shall we walk through these real quickly and
just have any discussion you'd like to have before your consideration?
Hayek/ Yeah, quickly though (several talking)
Davidson/ Uh, the brick paving, I think we can dispense with real quickly. The, uh, the Public
Works' Director had a discussion with you several months ago, and basically you made a
commitment, uh, and I asked the Mayor, was I interpreting this correctly, and he
indicated I was, in terms of, uh, our effort will be to not establishing any additional brick
streets in Iowa City while we're having such difficulty maintaining our existing streets,
and that's where our commitment will be. What the...what the letter was suggesting,
which was shaving the asphalt off and basically exposing the brick layer underneath, that
street would be a gravel road within a matter of time. Uh, you really have to go back and
reconstruct the street properly in brick, uh, and that would be about $1.7 million and we
are under the impression you do not wish to consider that at this time.
Champion/ I do like the idea of the on-street parking on both sides. I think that would slow
traffic down.
Davidson/ Well, let's talk about that next, Connie. Shall we? Uh, one of the things that is
effective at slowing vehicles down, although it does have an effect on motorists, is
introducing on-street parking. Uh, and...and the example that Kent gave of Sheridan
Avenue is a very good example of that, where the street's 25-feet wide. It has, uh,
parking on one-side, and it's relatively heavily used, uh, parking because fairly
constrained there in a high density neighborhood. What that results in is, and Kent, I
don't know if it's possible to bring that back...it looks like...you will recall looking at
that picture of Court Street, even with the on-street parking with the 35...31-foot wide
street, you have two full travel lanes. There's no friction for vehicles passing each other
on that street. On Sheridan there is! And what it does is it brings, uh, brings volumes
down. It would...it brings speeds down, excuse me. It's not that critical (mumbled) um,
one of the things the neighborhood has suggested, and as City staff we are willing to
consider. We would probably want to do a neighborhood survey, is putting, allowing
parking on both sides of Court Street. It would involve taking the center line off. You' 11
recall there was a center line. The center line would be removed, and it would basically
be in a situation where you had cars parked on both sides, and there's not a tremendous
demand for on-street parking on this street, so we'd have to see in effect how many
vehicles were actually parked, but it would introduce enough friction that there might be
some reduction in vehicle speeds.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City c;ouncit worx
session of May 2, 2011.
May 2, 2011 City Council Work Session Page 25
Bailey/ Do we have an idea of bicycle travel on this, um, street, because on-street parking has a
huge impact on bicycle traffic.
Champion/ Oh yeah, you're right about that.
Ralston/ I don't have that number off the top of my head, but we..:
Bailey/ Do you have a count? I mean...
Ralston/ I would assume we have a count, either at Court and Muscatine, or at Summit and
Court, which we...which we do now when we do our (mumbled) consideration so we
(several talking) numbers.
Bailey/ I mean, I'm supportive of on-street parking. I think it does do a good job of slowing
traffic down because of the friction, but I do...I don't want to do it without consideration
of its other impacts, because we are, you know, we're acomplete-streets community, and
we have to consider those other impacts.
Champion/ There are a lot of people riding bikes in that neighborhood too, Regenia, a lot.
(several talking)
Dickens/ Is there more accidents...because of the parking on both sides? Will there be a greater
chance for that?
Davidson/ You know, probably in general, there would be, but I don't know that it creates a high
crash situation, Terry, I mean, we wouldn't recommend even considering it if we thought
it did.
Ralston/ I looked in the collision history, um, it was six or so months ago, I think, for an
unrelated topic, but I think there was like three or four different sideswipe collisions over
a three or four -year period, which is not untypical...or atypical I guess, um, I think it
certainly could increase rear-end accidents and things like that (several talking) that it
would become more, you know...
Dickens/ People are used to going a certain speed...
Davidson/ We wouldn't anticipate it's going to create a high collision situation.
Mims/ Does on-street parking typically affect the volume? Or just the speed?
Davidson/ Again, to the degree that it provides friction for a motorist, and they perceive another
good alternative, then it will. I'm not sure in this situation, uh, Susan, that people do
preserve, uh, perceive another good alternative. One thing I wanted to add, we are now,
believe it or not, commencing the First Avenue railroad overpass project. We are having
the first neighborhood meeting, uh, related to that project coming up here in the next
couple of months. I don't even know if it's scheduled for sure, but it will be coming up.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of May 2, 2011.
May 2, 2011 City Council Work Session Page 26
We are starting that, and that'll be a couple of year duration project. Once that's built,
that is going to help the situation. I can tell you my own personal experiences. After
you've been caught by that train a couple of times (several talking) you use the Summit
Street bridge, and if you use the Summit Street bridge, you create volume on this street,
and so that is going to help some, a couple of years from now.
Champion/ It will! And...cause if you think about it, you have Summit and then you
have...what's the street down by the Union? That has a bridge, uh, Gilbert has an
overpass.
Davidson/ Gilbert, underpass.
Champion/ And then...the one down there by the jail. That has (several talking)
Davidson/ Capitol Street, yeah.
Champion/ And that's it! That's the only roads that you can go that there's not going to be a
train stopping you.
Wright/ In terms of... Court, uh, one of the things that I wonder about as reading is how much
traffic would actually be diverted do you think to say Burlington? If we did something to
help.. .
Bailey/ Yeah, that's what I was...
Davidson/ ...we can't say for sure, Michael...
Wright/ ...I don't think Sheridan's going to pick it up, because Sheridan doesn't even really go
anywhere.
Davidson/ Yeah, basically you...you try something, uh, you know, you investigate it, you try it,
and then you measure how much (several talking)
Bailey/ ...understand the use of Court Street, because why don't you go to Burlington. You've
got that mid...midway stop sign.
Mims/ That was my question, do we have any count of how many people who are going west on
Court to Summit, turn right, versus turning left?
Davidson/ We would probably have that information.
Ralston/ If we don't, we can obtain it very easily.
Davidson/ Yeah, I mean, one would expect, Susan, that the majority of people are turning left,
because if you're turning right, you can just use Burlington Street.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of May 2, 2011.
May 2, 2011 City Council Work Session Page 27
Mims/ That's my question too, yet there was something in here that kind of said that there's
people doing that, and (mumbled) you wouldn't think you'd have a very high percentage
going that way.
Davidson/ Right.
Champion/ I think they're going left.
Davidson/ You do have the all-way stop at Oakland, but from my experience, and some of you
are in the neighborhood as well, you just stop and go. I mean, there's never traffic
queued up at that intersection. (several talking)
Ralston/ Something else we'll want to make sure, that if...if we further discuss this parking
arrangement, this adding of on-street parking, is that we'll need to float this still to Public
Works and make sure City services won't be adversely affected. We...we did this kind
of once, but want to make sure we have a deeper discussion with them, to make sure that
garbage collection, snowplowing, all these other issues can be dealt with effectively.
Champion/ I mean, I...I also think that Jeff is right. There's not a great demand for on-street
parking, so it might not make any difference.
Davidson/ It might not make any difference.
Hayek/ You know, it doesn't...doesn't take that many cars to...to do that (several talking) you
know that Jeep that parks on Glendale, out kind of where you are, um, right at the bend
(several talking and laughing) he leaves his Jeep there because it slows cars down as they
come around the bend, and he doesn't care, you know (several talking) and it hasn't got
hit, that's the other thing, but it (several talking) yeah!
Markus/ If the price of gas keeps going up, there should be plenty of, you know, available
vehicles (laughter)
Davidson/ Um, well we can come back to this in terms of if you'd like us to pursue a
neighborhood survey to see if they're interested in it (several talking) uh, let's go
through the rest of these real quick. Lowering the...the truck embargo weight limit, um,
we do have...currently this is one of the streets, one of I think three or four that we have a
weight embargo on, in the name of trying to reduce the amount of traffic. Uh, it's a
1600-ton embargo, which all the streets are that same 1600-ton embargo, and it's
intended to keep semi trucks, or a large straight truck, uh, off of the, uh, off of the street,
um, it is certainly subject to periodic enforcement. We don't do a lot of enforcement, um,
we...we certainly hear of...it's pretty easy for someone to talk their way out of it, if a
police officer stops them, because if you have a reason to be on the street, you're making
a delivery or something like that, then you're allowed to be on the street. What the
neighborhood has asked is that we reduce that down to a 5-ton limit, which would
basically be everything from apick-up truck on up, uh, would...would require
enforcement, uh, certainly...they...they would like to keep the delivery-style trucks, uh,
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of May 2, 2011.
May 2, 2011 City Council Work Session Page 28
off of Court Street, and embargo's a way to do that, uh, we would anticipate other
requests, uh, from other streets in the city, uh, if... if that was implemented, and we may
want to look at the whole ordinance and keep it...keep it consistent...it`shasically
Kirkwood, Lower Muscatine, First Avenue, and Court Street. Those are the ones that
have (both talking)
Champion/ ...Jeff, then you're making a law that's not enforced.
Davidson/ Not voluntarily, Connie.
Champion/ Those things...
Davidson/ Not voluntarily enforced, no.
Champion/ No, it...it bothers me to have laws that aren't enforced.
Wright/ I guess my question would be how much truck traffic...
Champion/ I don't see any big trucks on that street.
Wright/ I used to walk down it twice a day and I don't remember trucks.
Davidson/ As far as we're aware, Michael, the percentage is typical for a...for a street. It's not
unusually high or low.
Hayek/ No, but this was particularly noted by the neighborhood, as a concern on that street.
(several talking)
Ralston/ And I think...when we met with the neighborhood, um, I think one of their concerns too
was the...which isn't typical, is the noise from these larger vehicles. It's...they're
clanky, you know, they create a lot of excess noise, more than a normal vehicle would.
Uh, they bounce around a lot more and squeak and so forth so that was a concern of
theirs as well.
Davidson/ Uh, electronic speed limit sign would be a sign that would be permanently affixed in
the right-of--way, similar to the mobile speed trailer that the Police use, and in fact, it
might be...the newer versions of these, and you've seen `em in some of our neighboring
communities, actually have if you exceed the speed limit the flashing lights go off, and
this is something that would be...I'm not sure it would be a great asset to the
neighborhood (laughter and several talking) especially after everyone got used to the fact
that you were not going to get a citation off of it, and of course, you are considering
having...uh, both red-light running and...and speed enforcement cameras, but...as things
stand right now, you have no ability to...to do a citation off of something like this.
However, it is...it is an option, for your consideration. Um...physical traffic calming,
again, I don't think we need to spend a lot of time with this. You would need to change
the criteria that we use for that, but uh, once you do that, the notion of speed humps or
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of May 2, 2011.
May 2, 2011 City Council Work Session
Page 29
chicanes or traffic circles all become options that we would look at, and there are some
even more benign things. For example, someone suggested that pulling the curb line out,
uh, at that Oakland intersection, making the stop line more visible...stop sign more
visible, might be a kind of a benign way of traffic calming that might keep vehicles
slowed down. Um, reducing the posted speed limit was something the neighborhood
suggested. I can tell you from our school zone speed limits, the 20-mile-an-hour speed
limit, there's probably 95 to 98%, uh, the people do not obey, uh, that is kind of my
definition of a bad law, uh, when we have a law that 98% of the population does not
obey, uh, this would clearly require constant enforcement to get, uh, a lower speed limit,
but it would be possible. You could do it in the name of a historic district or...or
something like that. Uh, and we would need to do a traffic study and...and all that to
evaluate it. Uh, we do not feel it would be effective. Uh, additional signage, we talked
about, you know, we hate to, especially in a historic district like Court Street is, uh, we
hate to put up additional signage if we don't need to. The one sign that we have thought
might have some value would be at the Muscatine Avenue intersection, uh, for
westbound traffic, some sign directing people to downtown perhaps, uh, might...might
get them on to Burlington Street a little more. Don't think it would be a huge difference,
but it might have some effect, something like that wouldn't be a huge amount of sign
clutter associated with that. And then, increased enforcement, this is something that we
have done periodically, going back to when I was at JCCOG, uh, we've, you know, the
Police Department does a certain amount of traffic enforcement throughout the city, and
we've asked them to target enforcement to this area. They haven't found a lot of
disobeying of... of traffic speeds, uh, or uh... or people not stopping at the stop sign, but
again, it's something that we can continue...continue to do. So, uh, with the presentation
of all those, I guess...we're interested in knowing if there's anything that you would like
us to pursue further, in terms of this street?
Champion/ Well, I'm totally willing to, um, do the on-street parking, but I also think that the
bicyclists might...that might be a problem. I don't know how many bikes...
Hayek/ We already do it on one side of the street.
Champion/ Yeah.
Hayek/ So it'd be doing it on both sides.
Davidson/ The north side has...has parking already. What we would be doing is adding it to the
south side.
Ralston/ (mumbled) is not only...that traffic has to weave in and out a little bit more and pause
for ongoing traffic, but the dooring accidents that bikes have (several talking) doesn't
realize they're coming (both talking)
Champion/ ...yeah, I think that's a...yeah, exactly, that's a...that's a problem.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of May 2, 2011.
May 2, 2011 City Council Work Session Page 30
Hayek/ I...I'm in favor of trying on-street parking. First of all, it is, um, low-cost, and it's
reversible! (several responding) If we don't like it, we can...we can easily change that,
if it doesn't work out, but um...in my experience, uh, living in urban areas, or even on
Brown Street, like I'm...where I used to live, on Sundays and holidays, I could tell it
when there was parking on both sides of the street. It made a difference.
Bailey/ Gilbert Street, when there's parking on both sides, I mean, it's (several talking) a lot
slower, I mean, people don't avoid it for sure, because you can't but it's slower.
Hayek/ And...in some, you know, I'm intrigued by reducing the speed limit. I'm intrigued by
traffic calming. The problem is, we'd have to change our policy, or at least create a
precedent, which would be cited to by everybody else who wants to, you know, and I'm
worried about what...what that would...
Bailey/ Well, and changing the speed limit without enforcement, without consistent, regular
enforcement.. .
Hayek/ Yeah.
Bailey/ ...I mean...
Wright/ ...post an officer to keep track of the...
Bailey/ Yeah, I just don't think....if people aren't really paying attention now...why would they
pay attention then?
Champion/ In this, and I...I think a lot of the traffic on Court Street is people going to the
Summit Street bridge, and I do think the...the First Avenue thing will help alleviate a lot
of that.
Mims/ I think starting with the parking on both sides, and like Matt said, it's reversible and see
what affect that has. And then go from there.
Wright/ As somebody who gets around town primarily on a bicycle, I don't...I certainly don't
avoid streets with parking on both sides. I exercise a lot more caution when I'm (several
talking) doors opening up (both talking)
Champion/ ...anybody who's on atwo-wheeler, whether it's a motorcycle or bicycle. You have
to drive very defensively.
Davidson/ Before Kent and I ask to make sure if there's a majority or not for that, would that be
to install parking on the south side, or to do a neighborhood survey to see...if they
wanted it? We would do...the survey would be both sides of the street.
Wright/ I think we always want to check with the neighborhood.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of May 2, 2011.
May 2, 2011 City Council Work Session Page 31
Bailey/ Yeah, I do too. I mean, it would be good to talk with this, I mean...you know,
communicate with this group and then do a survey.
Wright/ (several talking) down the road, like you say, it's an easy thing to reverse. And we
could look at more physical traffic calming. I'm not necessarily against changing our
policy on that...to allow for, um...
Bailey/ ...I just think we're going to have to budget for more then, if we change our policy and
take it to streets that have that kind of traffic count.
Champion/ Well the only...my problem with that is the whole basis of that was designed to do,
and that's not take a 1,000 cars off of Court Street and put `em on another street. I mean,
that's the problem. That's a big problem with traffic calming. You're taking somebody
else's problem and giving it to somebody else.
Markus/ But why is it Court Street's problem?
Champion/ Well...it's a...it's a collector street. I...
Markus/ Only because of the volumes on it. (several talking) It was never built to be a collector
street. (several talking)
Wright/ Absolutely, uh...
Bailey/ Well I mean, let's make it less of a collector street by putting some parking in and
narrowing it, for one thing. That will help.
Champion/ It's because we had bad road design in the beginning, cause people use Court Street
to get to Summit. They're not going to take Burlington to go to Summit.
Wright/ Yeah, but the (both talking)
Champion/ ... if they're coming from that direction, if they're coming from the east.
Markus/ So it (both talking)
Hayek/ ...back in 1870 didn't, uh, didn't anticipate...
Bailey/ But the volume hasn't dramatically increased on this street either. I mean...
Champion/ It's one of the only streets too to get to Longfellow.
Bailey/ Yeah.
Hayek/ It seems to me if we're going to survey the neighborhood, I would like to be able to
broadcast what options really are not on the table. Because otherwise, you know,
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of May 2, 2011.
May 2, 2011 City Council Work Session Page 32
whether it's brick streets or something else, um, I think narrowing the...the universe of
realistic options for this street would help, um, get the feedback, it seems to me.
Bailey/ At this time I'm only interested in pursuing the on-street option (mumbled)
Mims/ That's where I'd like to start.
Champion/ I certainly don't want some traffic, uh, what do you call it, speed limit sign, blaring
red lights if you're going, I mean, that would drive me crazy if I lived in that
neighborhood to have that going on!
Davidson/ We...want us to step through these really quickly, Mr. Mayor, and see if there's a
majority?
Hayek/ (mumbled)
Davidson/ Uh, brick paving, I guess you decided already, there was not. Lowering the truck
embargo from 16-tons to 5-tons? Okay. Uh, on-street parking.
Hayek/ Hold on a second, um, what's the thought on that truck embargo?
Mims/ But again, that's one that we've got to change policy, right?
Davidson/ Yes, you'd have to adopt an ordinance.
Mims/ I don't really want to start with something that we've got to change policy, that opens it
up for a lot of other areas.
Bailey/ (mumbled)
Wright/ I can't think that that's a huge percentage of their traffic though. It may be some noise
factor coming in but...
Bailey/ (mumbled)
Wright/ Yeah. Brick streets make a lot more noise!
Bailey/ Yeah, no kidding!
Davidson/ Okay, so not a majority for that. Uh, on-street, and this would be to do a
neighborhood survey to see if they wanted to add on-street parking on the south side.
Majority, or...or to go ahead? And...and install on-street parking? Which way do you
want to go?
Wright/ (several talking) neighborhood meeting to talk about it.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of May 2, 2011.
May 2, 2011 City Council Work Session Page 33
Davidson/ Neighborhood survey? Okay.
Ralston/ And I think we still will need to make sure that that can be implemented safely and
make sure we talk to (both talking)
Davidson/ Yeah, we' 11 talk (several talking) we' 11 talk with Public Works.
Champion/ Where are we at now?
Davidson/ Uh, electronic speed limit sign.
Hayek/ I mean...
Mims/ If they want it, I don't care.
Champion/ Oh, I don't care if they want it (several talking)
Davidson/ So if the neighborhood was interested in it, you'd consider it. Okay.
Bailey/ No, I wouldn't.
Mims/ I think they've got to be understanding that it doesn't (both talking) more enforcement.
Davidson/ Oh yeah, we'll make clear they know that people aren't getting a citation from this.
It's just to try and warn them to slow down.
Markus/ Where I've seen `em, they become a challenge. (several talking)
Davidson/ Yep, we've seen that (several talking)
Hayek/ ...City High senior, uh, try to set the record for (several talking) I know I would of!
Champion/ I've done the same thing on the interstate. Haven't you? (mumbled)
Davidson/ Uh, is there a majority to consider changing the traffic calming criteria at this time?
Champion/ No.
Bailey/ No.
Davidson/ Okay. Uh, reducing the posted speed limit?
Hayek/ Wait, now on traffic calming, I mean, you could do...it's not just necessarily speed
humps. I mean, you could (several talking)
Bailey/ ...we would have to change the policy on (both talking)
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of May 2, 2011.
May 2, 2011 City Council Work Session Page 34
Davidson/ ...to consider anything, Matt, yeah, the way we would typically do that...
Hayek/ ...bumping out the curb, the, uh...
Davidson/ The way we typically do this is we have a neighborhood meeting, and we discuss all
the possible ideas, and even going to that step would be inconsistent with your policy.
Hayek/ Okay.
Wright/ I really don't want to slam the door on the policy, but (mumbled) so...
Markus/ I'm not a member of the Council, but I gotta tell ya, one of the things that I see here in
the community is, I think some things are being done as a part...Kent and I have had this
discussion, and he and I totally disagree with, um, the way you've set up your traffic
calming policy here. Um, I think some of these streets have, uh, evolved, morphed into
collector streets. It was a grid street pattern to begin with. Um, I think, you know, that
some of the one-ways have created some of the demands ~on your street system in this
community, and...from my perspective to preclude people from being able to use traffic
calming, and it usually occurs on these collectors. It's a volume issue. So what we've
done is we've said, oh, well the volume is all gone there, and therefore, you're not
eligible for any of the traffic calming provisions. I guess what I'd say to you is, try the
on-street parking, see how that works, but keep an open mind about coming back and
considering altering some of these traffic calming provisions. I mean, you've got folks
that have invested, you know, in the core of this community, you got a lot of money into
it. This is a beautiful street, I mean, it's great houses on this street. You know, for those
values to be impacted because we won't' let them even consider some traffic calming, I
mean, if all it did is reduce the speed on the road, I think you'd find that your neighbors
would be a lot happier about that, even if it didn't alter the volume. And, you know,
if...if because they're going certain places, then the volume isn't likely to be reduced, but
if you could reduce the speed, I think you'd make a lot of people happy. Just for a policy
decision, to make that determination seems to me to be a reasonable thing to consider.
But try the...
Bailey/ ...huge budget implications though, Tom!
Markus/ What's that?
Bailey/ The...the challenge that I have with this is we've had this discussion before and, you
know, I mean, and maybe they're minor budget implications now, but it would certainly
increase if we changed the policy. And so...I mean, we have to be aware that if we
change the policy we have to be able to change the budget for this. Because there will be
more requests.
Wright/ They'll probably be some more; I don't think it's going to be huge.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of May 2, 2011.
Ma 2, 2011 City Council Work Session Page 35
Y
Bailey/ Oh, I don't know. It's a lot of...
Champion/ There aren't very many streets that are like Court Street (both talking)
Bailey/ ...complaints all the way back from Cedar Rapids, a couple weeks ago I was listening to
people complain about traffic on their streets, I mean, there are lots of people who want
to see less traffic on their streets.
Markus/ But if budget is in issue then we' d have to budget so that we couldn't all... do `em all at
the same time.
Bailey/ I'm just...
Wilburn/ Well, and the other thing is, uh...budget is one issue. Um, but this policy has evolved I
would say to a neutral thing that's just accepted into the community, I mean, I have
flashbacks to the, uh, I can see, uh,...because the same...because the complaints about
the traffic calming procedures are, um, obstacles, obstructions, uh, will increase in
volume too, because they work, and I...I'm hearing that voices from the past. I'm
hearing, uh, Ernie, uh, former Mayor Lehman say his trouble with them was because
we're, you're asking people...it's people in their own neighborhood to slow down, to
obey the law, and then I'm...I'm having a vision of, uh, Dean Thornberry, uh, saying, uh,
his chicanery comments, um...because they work, I mean, it's not...yes, they make some
people happy, but because they work, they force you to slow down, the voices of dissent
also become present, but you know over the years...you know, it's...it has evolved into a
begrudging medium that, well, that you know...and I...maybe the public is willing to
revisit that, but um...I still remember the issue with the chicanery, uh, the chicanes came
out because they work!
Davidson/ Ross is referring to Highland Avenue, where we (several talking) we basically
exceeded the 3,000 vehicle per day, um...uh, threshold on that, and installed a chicane
that, it was bumpouts from the curb, and uh, it lasted about two weeks, and then the
public opinion was so overwhelmingly opposed that...that (several talking) directed them
to be taken out.
Wilburn/ Yeah, and even the...even the gates that we have on...Lexington, the...dissent has,
over the years, kind of waned. There's still people that aren't happy with it, but at least
people know now what to expect with that (several talking)
Davidson/ We hear hardly anything now (several talking)
Wilburn/ I'm just putting that out there.
Bailey/ I should have asked you this at the beginning of the discussion, Matt, um, it seems like
the volume on this street has not substantially increased over the years. What ...what is
the concern now, I mean...why now?
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council worx
session of May 2, 2011.
May 2, 2011 City Council Work Session Page 36
Hayek/ I...1 think in the neighborhood's defense, they've been concerned for years (several
talking) ...multiple, uh, documented complaints to the City, um, over this, so this is not a
new complaint from the neighborhood. They've been concerned about this for years.
Champion/ (mumbled) complaint. I think the other idea that I think might help is that you
mentioned something about moving that stop sign out into the road a little bit?
Davidson/ Well, if you did bumpouts from the curb, yeah.
Bailey/ Which would be a traffic calming measure.
Davidson/ That's a traffic calming...
Champion/ I think that would...that would not be obtrusive, but it would slow traffic down there.
Wright/ But that would require us to change our policy.
Bailey/ Yeah.
Champion/ Oh, it would?
Bailey/ Cause it's a traffic calming measure.
Champion/ It is?
Hayek/ I'm with...I'm with Tom and Mike on this. I'm not...I'm not sure that it's appropriate
for this street, but I'm not, uh, I don't want to draw a line in the sand on...on our traffic
calming policy. I...I...I could look at it.
Mims/ Well, hearing what Tom has said, you know, being new to the community, and I think it's
always good to have fresh eyes on these things, and I wasn't on the Council when...when
this policy was put in place and if Kent has some of the same concerns about the way
some of this has developed, then, yeah, I...I'm more open minded than I was two minutes
ago (laughter) well, just by hearing that, from those perspectives, that they have some
real concerns about it, then they're more knowledgeable than I am and so if they think it
ought to be relooked at, then I'm more open minded to maybe taking a look at it, but I
would like to start with the parking.
Ralston/ Yeah, and I don't disagree with what Tom says about traffic calming. It's just that, um,
I was not here either when this was developed and just in my own defense when talking
to public, I've made clear that I personally cannot do anything without the Council's
permission on certain streets because of volume issues and speed issues, and there's...
there's a policy set in place and I've just made that clear that until the Council wants
the... to relook at these items that basically my hands are tied and so are Jeff's and
whoever else (several talking)
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of May 2, 2011.
May 2, 2011 City Council Work Session Page 37
Markus/ And...Kent and I had this discussion beforehand. He knew where I was coming from
(laughter) This is not a surprise to him.
Wright/ I'm fine with trying the parking first, like I said, I just don't want to shut the door
on...on the policy. I think that's something I...we ought to be willing to reconsider.
Davidson/ Well let me ask point blank: is there a majority at this time that wants us to bring you
back in another work session the traffic calming policy to reexamine?
Champion/ Well I hired him. I guess I'll have to think about it. (laughter)
Dickens/ I'm fine with it.
Davidson/ You would also agree to it, Terry?
Mims/ Yeah, I mean... if we've got people who have looked at it and are experts in it and think
we ought to relook at it, then I'm willing to do that.
Davidson/ Was it three (mumbled)
Hayek/ Yeah, and I'll (both talking and laughing)
Karr/ Is that even... (several talking)
Ralston/ ...is it the volumes and the speeds...we're reconsidering?
Davidson/ We'll bring the whole thing (several talking) We'll bring the whole thing back,
so...okay, reducing the posted speed limit then was our next item for Court Street.
Wright/ No.
Davidson/ We really don't believe that will work so...
Mims/ Yeah, why don't we skip it.
Davidson/ Additional signage, additional, this would be directional signage...
Champion/ I don't think that will work.
Hayek/ If you're going...if you're going to poll the neighborhood, I suppose you could ask them
about that.
Davidson/ We'll give it some more thought.
Dickens/ If they think redirecting'll make any difference.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of May 2, 2011.
May 2, 2011 City Council Work Session Page 38
Davidson/ And then increased police enforcement. This would...this would probably be just
trying to get some periodic spot enforcement in the neighborhood. You know they...they
try and do it scientifically enough that it's not the same time on this day every day,
because people get used to that, uh, we would try and move it around a little. Would you
like us to request that of the Police Department?
Bailey/ Yes.
Wright/ Sure.
Davidson/ Okay. All right, we will pursue those things. We'll also get a...we'll get a...a letter
back to the neighborhood, well, we'll be doing the neighborhood survey. We'll fill `em
in on everything that was discussed (mumbled). Okay, great. Thank you!
Information Packets:
Hayek/ All right, thanks, guys! Okay. Uh, let's try to wrap this up. We have, uh, two Info
Packets, one from April 21St, and one from April 28th. Anything on the Apri121 Sty
Anything on the one from April 28th
Karr/ Joint meeting agenda. Any items for the joint meeting?
Dickens/ That's on the 18th in Coralville? So I don't drive to Coralville again! (laughter)
Council Time•
Hayek/ Okay. Council time?
Champion/ Oh, I just have...a quick question about when they talked about brick streets, I did
drive down Dewey Street this weekend, and it's really horrible! It's really horrible.
(several talking) No, Dewey Street (several talking)
Hayek/ Yes, yes, and I think that was identified as being the worst one...when we looked at our
policy.
Champion/ It's really horrible!
Wright/ It's a nightmare.
Mims/ You drive very slow.
Dickens/ It's a traffic calming (laughter)
Markus/ Used to really be nice! (laughter)
Wright/ Take that real slow on a bike!
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of May 2, 2011.
May 2, 2011 City Council Work Session
Champion/ Oh my gosh, I don't how you could ride a bike on it.
Mims/ 1 would have to also assume that there's not a whole lot of traffic on that, I mean...
Champion/ I was on it.
Mims/ Not to use it as an excuse, but I mean...it's not...
Wright/ No, it's a low traffic street.
Mims/ It's a very low traffic street, and...I don't know if it was put in our plans in terms
of... going through out brick streets (several talking)
Wright/ ...that's pretty high priority, I think (several talking)
Markus/ We'll check it.
Champion/It's really horrible.
Page 39
Hayek/ Other Council time? Excuse me. Raj, I want to welcome you to (mumbled) working
with you. Uh, budget, anything on budget?
Budget:
Hayek/ Pending work session issues?
Pending Work Session Issues:
Hayek/ Just added one. (laughter) Upcoming events, uh, there's a grand opening with Walmart,
uh, and they asked for someone to be there. Ross is going to check his calendar. I can't
be there. I've got to be up in Cedar Rapids that morning.
Upcoming Events:
Wilburn/ (mumbled) is there someone I should call?
Dickens/ What day is it?
Hayek/ It's basically a ribbon cutting...18r"
Karr/ I'm sorry...could we talk a little bit louder?
Hayek/ Yeah, sorry, uh, on...on May 18t", uh, they have the grand opening of Walmart's new
facility, ribbon cutting, 7:30 in the morning. They'd like somebody there, if we can
manage it...for the ribbon...
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of May 2, 2011.
May 2, 2011 City Council Work Session
Dickens/ I can, yeah. Need to call somebody?
Hayek/ Yeah, I'll...
Wilburn/ Just take, cause I'm not sure.
Hayek/ Yep!
Wright/ I love the irony of things...work this all the way down to me but (laughter)
Bailey/ I'm sure they'd enjoy that too!
Meeting Schedules:
Page 40
Hayek/ Meeting schedules? Okay. Anything else? Good meeting. We'll see you all tomorrow
evening.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of May 2, 2011.