Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2011-11-01 TranscriptionNovember 1, 2011 Iowa City City Council Work Session Council Present: Bailey, Champion, Hayek, Mims, Wilburn, Wright Council Absent: Dickens Staff Present: Markus, Helling, Howard, Dilkes, Karr, Jennings, Craig, Bentley, Andrew, Holecek, Davidson, Knoche, Bollinger, Slattery Others Present: Graham, UISG Council Appointments: "Recording starts at point below, in mid - conversation." Human Rights: Page 1 Mims/ I would certainly support Shams Ghoneim. She's been very active in the community. I've known her for more years than I care to (laughter) former neighbor from a long, long time ago. Wright/ I agree (several talking) Bailey/ Yeah, I think that would be great. Mims/ Then we've got... Bailey/ I appreciated Anna Nelson's application, as well. Thought she would be a ... (several talking) yeah ... hard choice, but I thought Anna did a good job of articulating her interest and urn ... her familiarity with the community. (unable to hear who is speaking) Mims /So did I. Bailey/ I can't hear you ... at all. Hayek/ Everybody mic up! Wright/ It helps when you bring your microphone in. I like Kim Hanrahan's application. She had a lot of experience that I thought might be useful on the commission. Champion/ I agree with you. Mims/ I did as well. Bailey/ Yeah, I could support that as well. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of November 1, 2011. November 1, 2011 Iowa City City Council Work Session Page 2 Bailey/ Yeah, I could support that as well. Hayek/ Before we, uh, select a third, is there consensus for those two names? (several commenting) Yes? Okay. Okay, there's a third spot. I think Henri would be a nice addition. Mims/ I was going to say too. Wright/ My third choice! Mims/ Henri's been, again, very active in the community (mumbled) Wright/ He's got such a good (mumbled) Bailey/ Yes! Hayek/ Rest of you okay with that? (several commenting) Okay, we'll put all three up for a vote. Next is Parks and Recreation Commission. We have an opening for one female. Parks and Recreation: Mims/ I thought Cara Hamann looked good as an applicant. Wright/ Yeah, I agree, uh ... this is a slot for a female applicant, uh, we have a couple good male applicants as well, but I think (mumbled) Bailey/ (several talking) ...brings a nice perspective. Youth Advisory Commission: Hayek/ Yep. Okay. And then, uh ... Youth Advisory Commission, we have one application from a young woman from Regenia. Mims/ I could support that. Katherine Rapp. Champion/ Yes. Hayek/ Okay. All right. Takes care of that. Uh, next is the joint meeting, consultation with P &Z regarding the rezoning on Linn and Bloomington. Want to welcome the Planning and Zoning Commission. Thanks for being here. Joint Meeting With Planning and Zoning Commission: Davidson/ Good evening, Mr. Mayor and Madame Chairperson, and Members of the City Council and Planning and Zoning Commission. On October 18 at the City Council meeting there was a Comprehensive Plan amendment for the intersection of Bloomington This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of November 1, 2011. November 1, 2011 Iowa City City Council Work Session Page 3 and Linn, specifically proposal for this project. Uh, the Comprehensive Plan amendment was recommended for approval by the Planning and Zoning Commission on a vote of 5 to 1. It was subsequently approved by the City Council on a vote of 4 — 3. Following this item was condition, uh, consideration of a rezoning of the same property from residential neighborhood stabilization, RNS -12, to central business service, CB -2. This was recommended for approval by the Planning and Zoning Commission on a vote of 5 to 1, and the first consideration was defeated by the City Council, on a vote of 2 — 5. Um ... on, uh, the zoning ordinance allows the opportunity for the Planning and Zoning Commission to consult with the City Council on matters that they recommend approval on, which are defeated by the City Council. That's why we're here this evening. Uh, you have received the minutes from the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, so you understand, uh, what the Planning and Zoning Commission's, uh, perspective, which you'll hear more about tonight. Uh, following your discussion, the City Council needs to indicate to staff if there is anything you wish to reconsider, uh, and if so we will let you know what the process would be for doing that. Any questions? Thank you. Freerks/ Okay, well, do I need to use the mic? I suppose so, yeah. (laughter) Um, so we're not really here to discuss the Comp Plan amend, but the rezoning, and so two things that are (both talking) Karr/ Mr. Mayor, could we ... I'm so sorry, could we please introduce... Freerks/ Sure! Karr/ ... P &Z members so that the audience (both talking) Hayek/ ... cameras running. Freerks/ Oh, yes. (mumbled) Uh, I'm Ann Freerks, Chair of the Iowa City Planning and Zoning Commission. Koppes/ Beth Koppes. Dyer/ Carolyn Dyer, Planning and Zoning. Weitzel/ Tim Weitzel. Eastham/ Charlie Eastham. Freerks/ And Michelle Payne is not here. She had a ... a prior commitment this evening, and she will not be with us, although she did have to, uh, step out of this because of MidAmerica so she (mumbled). I'm sure you know as you read through the minutes. Um, so what we're here to, uh, first I appreciate you giving us the opportunity just to kind of discuss this with you, and um ... it kind of seems like we've dug a little bit of a hole or I'm a little confused maybe in some ways because we have now a Comp Plan designation that says one thing, and a zoning that says something else, and so that's why I think we're This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of November 1, 2011. November 1, 2011 Iowa City City Council Work Session Page 4 interested in just kind of having some conver ... conversation with you about what you envision and what you think the best, uh, land use designation is for this, uh, these pieces of property here. Um, cause really that's truly what we were looking at, um ... as we went through this, and um ... you know, I've committed a great deal of time and energy to preservation, including the Northside. I've been part of the neighborhood housing relation task force, um, the UniverCity neighborhood partnership. I've been part of the Historic Preservation Commission and voted in favor of historic districts, and ... and I support, uh, near - downtown walkable elementary schools, all of those things, but I have to say that, um, sometimes there are small pockets of redevelopment that actually make sense, uh, after a great deal of deliberation and ... and thought, and um, I think that this particular piece in my mind, and I think in what the Planning and Zoning Commission has seen is not detrimental to, um, the neighborhood, but actually, um, can be, um, a ... a really, uh, can do a great deal to support the community and to bring some vitality, additional vitality, to the Northside Market Place. Um, I know, you know, there's been talk about a domino effect, um, I don't know if Karen or Jeff, if you can bring up the slide, uh, with the North ... the North Place ... Market Place plan (mumbled). Uh, yeah! That one! And this was something that I just wanted to mention that, you know, we did discuss in the Planning and Zoning Commission, and I'm sure you've read about, but there, uh, the red line shows the Northside Market Place area, and um ... in a way I think we've kind of sent, um ... a message that maybe this ... this is, uh, an area which we could see redevelopment because it's part of the Northside Market Place area. It continues over to the Gilbert Street where there's some, uh, the light pink area. Those are actual, um, commercial... what is it, commercial, uh ... commercial office there, and actually there are homes and some historic structures along there. So there's a wide variety, what we see here. It's a very complicated, as many of our downtown areas are, it's a really complex puzzle, you know, that we see. And what we, um, felt that in the future we'd like to see the ... the three northern properties, which have ... are not in a historic district. The historic district actually starts just north of there. So there's no historic, um, protection there, but we'd like to um ... in the future talk about actually removing those top three, uh, properties that are gold, blue, and gold from the Northside Market Place so that they are residential in ... in designation and also residential in terms of not, uh, being planned for the development and commercial area. But we did see that these three prop ... the three properties we're talking about here actually, um, seem to be, um ... to make sense in terms of continuation of the, uh, commercial corridor along Linn Street, and at some point, Pagalia's, um, will be redeveloped and there will be, um, additional, um, buildings put in there and um, we really do not see, um, a continuation further on Bloomington Street. We would never support that in any of our minds, I think, from what we said, and I'm going to let everybody else here from Planning and Zoning speak to some of those issues. Um ... also existing commercials within the areas, one, two, and three, uh ... stories and um, so I think a three -story building here, tastefully done, um, can actually fit in well. I think also, uh, for me one point was that, um, this is an excellent opportunity for a variety of housing. To actually have, um, a handicap - accessible, um ... um ... piece of property that is available for purchase that's not at a price of the Towers or something like that, near downtown, um, that ... urn ... is an efficiency, that has its own parking space, is something that you rarely see. And I think to open up a few of these opportunities, uh, in a few small areas, um, you know, would be beneficial. So, um, I have other comments, This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of November 1, 2011. November 1, 2011 Iowa City City Council Work Session Page 5 but I think I'm going to pass it along and let some of the other Commission Members speak, and then we'd like to have a dialogue, question and answer, whatever you want to say. Dyer/ Um, several points that, um, interested me about this property, I have to say I agonized over my position, but one is that this proposed building in effect may serve to stabil ... to serve in the function of stabilizing that end of the, uh, district (mumbled) the buildings that are there are ... or at least one of them, perhaps two of them, characterized as party houses, um. A building that's suitable for, urn ... adults to use a better (mumbled) for want of a better term, um, to live in that area is ... is very unusual. Um, there's such a shortage of housing in the downtown, in the northside, um, for people other than students, usually because they're so big and too expensive (mumbled) because of the kinds of people who would be nice neighbors. So in a sense, it may serve the function of the University program of buying up houses an making them buyable by, um, families and other people who would (mumbled) single - family homes. These homes are either too big or perhaps unfeasible for doing that with (mumbled) in that condition. Those are my (mumbled) and that ... and the design of the building as proposed is perfectly compatible with the businesses (mumbled) it's not like bringing in something that would be (mumbled) Weitzel/ Well I wanted to ... reiterate everything that's already been said and what's in the minutes. I want to just say that I agree with the majority opinion on almost everything that was said, if not everything. And um ... I wanted to point out that there are a lot of beneficial (mumbled) in this building. Um, that current ordinances will somewhat regulate and exclude negative externalities and some of the possible ... a lot of the big box apartments we see in town have liquor stores and that's excluded here because of the proximity to other, um, liquor establishments. And ... but mostly I wanted to focus on, um, there was a lot of comment from the public about these being historic properties or the effect these historic properties might have on the historic district and just to reiterate that there was a survey done and these are not historic properties. It's been determined they are not historic, so um ... and that's really important to keep in mind and ... with regard to the domino effect. Again, I think in addition to removing, uh, the three historic designations above, uh, Bloomington Street from the North Market... Market Place plan, that we also maybe take a look at other protections, conservation districts or extending the historic district, depending on ... on will and interest in that, but that would be a way to provide protection from a domino effect, if the zoning isn't enough ... as it is. Eastham/ Um, my name's Charlie Eastham. Uh, I agree with all the statements that have been made so far, and in ... in reaching a decision about this particular rezoning application and I tried to look carefully at both the Comprehensive Plan and the 2007 Downtown Market Place Analysis and see what kind of housing types, uh, those planning documents provided for. And uh, to me they do provide for a mix of housing types so it would include a number of, uh, of folks that are ... that are living in this area now and could live there in the future. I think the building design is, uh, one thing we looked at very carefully. Uh, we were particularly, uh, wanting to pay attention to what the building looked like from Bloomington Street because there is obviously... Bloomington Street This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of November 1, 2011. November 1, 2011 Iowa City City Council Work Session Page 6 is ... is now... reasonably (mumbled) as a residential area. So ... the uh, staff and the applicant, I think, worked carefully to put the building design on the Bloomington Street side, uh, in such a ... to make that a design that has residential character to it, although it's not residential uses on the, uh, street level. Uh, those are, uh, commercial uses, but there's no access on the street level. There's also (mumbled) consideration in these three lots, uh, in part because of the location of the MidAmerican, uh, subway... sub... substation in that to get enough land area to do ... to put all the features together, commercial uses, uh, good residential uses, and parking off - street, out of sight parking, um, I think the ... the staff and developer made a reasonable decision to do the parking entrance from Bloomington Street ... one of the parking entrances from Bloomington Street (mumbled) ideal to me, I think it's reasonable under the circumstances. Uh, the streetscape would be preserved from Bloomington Street. I also walked this neighborhood before I made a decision, uh, about this so (mumbled) so the streetscape itself, I think would be...at least the landscaping part along the building front on Bloomington Street would look very much like it looks now, uh, with, you know, more recent, uh, shrubbery and grass and things like that so it'd look better. So I think this is actually a ... a reasonable building design that meets all of the functional things we're trying to accomplish here as well as, um, has, uh... sensitivity to the compatibility with the, uh, rest of the street to the west. Freerks/ So ... there's our ... there are our initial comments. Um ... go ahead and ... fire away! (laughter) Mims/ Well, my concern ... I voted for the comprehen ... for the change in the Comprehensive Plan, and I voted against the rezoning. And ... the rationale there for me was not the zoning per se. It was the size of the building. And ... I'm hearing more of where you're coming from and ... and obviously the extensive amount of time and ... and effort that you've put into looking at this and evaluating it. And I guess as I ... I looked at this, um, and again, as you've said, from the Bloomington side being very concerned because you've got residential on the other side of that street, and the ... the three stories, and when you're looking at these three stories, this is higher because of your commercial on the first level. It's higher than any ... than a standard like three -story house. Because, I mean, I don't know what your clearance is on that first level with ... with commercial, but you're probably ... I don't know, 12, 14 feet at least with, um, you know, with your commercial. So, that ... that additional height was, um ... kind of a conundrum I saw, because I think from the Linn Street perspective, it looks perfect! But you get around the corner and you've got the residential... and it's a little big, but I don't know that there's... everything else about it I really like. The usage, the ... like you said, the different housing types, the commercial on the first level, office space, whatever it might be. Um ... the out of sight parking, all those things I think work really, really well and my main concern was the height of that building, the mass of that building, from the Bloomington Street side. Freerks/ And I just want to say I ... I read through a lot of the minutes very carefully before this and ... and looked at some of your comments as well at the meeting you voted on, and there was ... I believe it was, uh, there was a staff member ... the question was asked about scale and height, you know. Typically in a ... in a CB -2 you can go up to 45 -feet, you This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of November 1, 2011. November 1, 2011 Iowa City City Council Work Session Page 7 know, and this is something that part of the CZA agreement was that it would, uh, be limited to 35 feet here, and uh, a question was asked, well, what are the surrounding homes, what's the typical height, and the figure that was given in the minute meetings, and correct me if you think this is wrong at all, please. I know Bob's not here, but um, was 25 to 30 -feet. So we're talking 5 to 10 -feet then, which you know, I think all of those things should be looked at very carefully, but for us, for the quality of the project that you get then with three stories it seemed to be, um, in this area, a reasonable, um, compromise. Wright/ One of the problems that I had with this project, as you probably noticed, was the (mumbled) corner of Bloomington Street. I don't mind redeveloping those two houses that are on Linn Street. Um, I think they're ripe for some kind of a redevelopment. Um, when we turn that corner, I really do feel (mumbled) despite the good intentions of everybody who's sitting here and over there at this point in time, um, that can change, and that can change relatively quickly. Urn ... the remaining properties, I believe there would be five, four or five lots, between the new line and um, Dubuque Street. And I believe there would be intense pressure then to redevelop those lots. And, that's a road I really don't want to go down. In addition, I do have some concerns about the scale of the building. It's big! And I know it may similar in height; it is not necessarily similar in mass to the other properties in that neighborhood. It's a substantial difference in the mass of the structure. Weitzel/ Yeah, there's no doubt the mass is larger than a single - family house. Um, some of that's for the efficiencies, for the parking and the apartment configurations. Um, and that's kind of unavoidable. Um, as far as the other properties, I ... I'm not going to tell you to go walk down the street again, but um... Wright/ I do it about four times a week so... Weitzel/ Well, at least from a historic preservationist point of view, they're done. Nobody's going to bring `em back, you know, and the backyards are all gravel. So it's really hard for somebody to come back in and do a UniverCity partnership with anything there and actually expect to have a house with a yard and actually live in it as a single - family house at this point. So, I'm not saying that it would happen, but if it did ... you know, I think we ought to protect north of Bloomington, and you know, be careful of that, but... Wright/ (both talking) south of Burlington. Weitzel/ Yeah! Eastham/ I ... I heard... Champion/ (both talking) everything you've said, but I didn't vote for either one. I just ... I'm really leery about this! I just have a gut feeling. I ... I think the structure is good looking. My house is 30 foot tall so the height doesn't really bother me. But the massiveness of it, and just the fact that it's encroaching again on the north side, going further and further This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of November 1, 2011. November 1, 2011 Iowa City City Council Work Session Page 8 north. And, I've seen it happen in other neighborhoods and I just cannot support it. I'm sorry! I ... I agree with everything you've said, but I can't agree with it. I can't support it. Freerks/ Charlie, did you have a comment? Eastham/ Uh, to Mike's concern I think about, uh, redevelopment in this area. I think during the public discussion I heard people from the neighborhood indicating that... that... as I understood their comments, that we all are, uh, concerned about how to redevelop the northside neighborhood in such a way that we accommodate a number of functional uses in terms of providing housing for all types of ... of, uh, potential occupants and residents. Uh ... I think there were some interesting comments about looking at, uh, row houses and town homes as potential... as a potential housing type that would integrate well appearance wise within what is already present there, as well as serve as an attractive housing type for, um, for non - student. I personally think the student market is an important market in Iowa City. It's one that needs to be addressed and accommodated, but I think there are other markets too in areas like the northside that, uh, should also be accommodated. And I think they might be accommodated with other types of homes, uh, other types of housing than single - family detached homes. Wright/ I certainly agree with that. Freerks/ And beyond residential, I think the commercial acts ... excuse me ... the commercial aspect of this seemed appealing to us in terms of the market place corridor along Linn Street and um, you know, having some nice, quality small, uh, storefront areas, um, that can cater to the walking traffic, as well as having some parking spaces, which is really something that, um, seems... seems to us to be in demand, and I think they would not have a problem filling these spaces and um, you know, creating opportunities there. Hayek/ What's your thought process right now on ... on the three structures to the north ... of the intersection? Freerks/ Um, not the three up for redevelopment, but the three ... north of there (both talking) Hayek/ ...cutting them out of the, uh, the red zone, so to speak. Freerks/ Right here .... uh, number 33 and ... yeah, with the asterisk. Uh, you know, I .... we have to have a public comment and you know have some conversation about it, but I think it would be beneficial to take those three out and that's something that we said publicly during the meetings. You know, I think that we need to look at that, because they are, um, considered historic properties, but they do not have a historic preser... any historic designation overlay, and I think that that, you know, usually you have to have the combination of the two if you actually want to see something, you know, survive when it has, um, a ... a number of pressures upon it. Hayek/ Well, my concerns were well put by ... Mike Wright. So I'm not going to reiterate what he said. I ... I do have ... this turns the corner, heads west, goes beyond the red line, This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of November 1, 2011. November 1, 2011 Iowa City City Council Work Session Page 9 uh ... given the three- year -old plan we came up with, um, those are the concerns I voiced a couple of weeks ago, um, and I appreciate the commentary about using that corner as ... as a bookend, uh, in terms of avoiding further encroachment into the north end, but until those homes on the north side of the street are in fact protected in some fashion, whether it's taking them out of the district or some sort of historic overlay or both, I don't ... I don't know, um, I'm really reluctant in the ... in the essence of RSM -12 is ... is to put the brakes on this kind of thing in a supersensitive, uh, neighborhood, which is why we've ... this has slowed down. I'm not sure what more I can add to what I said (mumbled) Freerks/ Well, I'm not sure what the next step would be, and I'm not sure what ... haven't heard from everybody here necessarily but urn ... you know, because what I do ... what I do see is that we have a Comp Plan ... um, a Comp Plan looking one way and a zoning looking another way, and so I don't know if you want to um... spend some time thinking about it or if you want to, uh ... create some action with those three properties to the north. (mumbled) asked for that, and then ... and then (mumbled) but eventually we're going to need to, um, go one way or the other on this. Mims/ That's the question I was just going to ask. For the people who, and myself included, who voted against the zoning change, or even people who voted against the Comp change, but we've gotten that change, if those three houses to the north of Bloomington were taken out of this district, could people see their way to supporting the zoning change? Bailey/ And I want to just piggyback on that, I mean, my concern and my ... one of my strong feelings of support for this project were the opportunities it provides for small commercial. I think that fits into the neighborhood, and I think it's a need that our community has. It's what we're seeing with, um, and people who are interested in going into business all the time looking for small spaces, small affordable spaces. This would be a great place to launch a business, so I too would like to hear what would make this possible because I think that there are some important aspects to this project and I'm concerned that we're going to lose this opportunity, um, because something else may come there, but it might not have the small commercial aspect to it. Mims/ And I think, as we talked last time, I think taking the commercial north to Bloomington makes complete sense with that ... with Pagalia's parking lot there, which will someday be developed, um, just taking that whole commercial corridor to Bloomington with the commitment to stop it there, other than obviously, you know, the Pagalia's building and the others going east that are on ... on Bloomington. It just makes sense to complete that, uh, commercial corridor north to Bloomington. Freerks/ I mean, in just a little bit of ... trivia or history, the area that's brown there is I believe RM -44, is that right, Karen, I think, along, um, Dubuque Street, and the reason that that hasn't all been redeveloped is because of the narrow nature. I mean, these are just the things often times different tools are used and to ... to try to create ... um, hospitable or inhospitable environments for something that otherwise would be available. I mean, This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of November 1, 2011. November 1, 2011 Iowa City City Council Work Session Page 10 that's just the ... the nature of zoning sometimes, um, and, um, so maybe taking those three par ... you know, really being honest about this, taking those three properties out of the Northside Market Place and saying this is where we draw the line. This is what we believe might be done, should be done, um, and supporting that, you know, would be good. Wright/ I think that would be a good step. That's not going to change my mind! Freerks/ I know! (laughter) Wright/ Um, the RM -44 along Dubuque Street, I really do see intense pressure on the remaining properties on Burlington. And that's just ... that's a line I don't want to cross. Freerks/ I don't either! I don't see it happening... Hayek/ Well, my sense then is that ... uh ... assuming those three properties to the north are protected as we've discussed, um, and we're only talking about the properties (mumbled) it seems like there would be support for rezoning of that. I'm looking at Mike; I can't read him. Okay! Mims/ You say the properties on Linn, you're talking all three of these properties. One on Bloomington? Hayek/ Not the one on Bloomington (several talking) excluding... Wright/ If the one on Bloomington were left off, yes. Hayek/ That ... that's what I'm referring to, and that ... that's what I'm picking up on. Freerks/ Well, and this building won't happen if that's the case (several talking) Wright/ (several talking) ...about a smaller, less- massive structure. Bailey/ And we're probably talking residential, and that's ... goes to my concern. We're talk ... I mean, townhouses are a nice concept, but it doesn't get at that commercial. It doesn't get at the small commercial. Yes, you can talk about live -work spaces, but they wouldn't be that. So, I ... I think that we have to also when we think about economic development, think about all aspects of it. Freerks/ I mean, the benefits of what you get with those three properties, I mean, I think just taking a careful, you know, everybody taking a little breather and thinking about what you could really get with (mumbled) versus ... well, it'd be four, you know, cause we're talking about MidAmerica too, but with the three homes versus, um, the two homes and MidAmerica. Um, and believe me, I thought very hard about this. It's not an easy thing for me, as well, because you know I support the northside and I, um, but I ... I think there This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of November 1, 2011. November 1, 2011 Iowa City City Council Work Session Page 11 are small pockets and areas where sometimes it can make sense to ... to create change when it seems like a positive thing. So... Hayek/ Well, this ... um, you know, the context behind this is that I think it's fair to say that this Council has by and large been supportive of almost every rezoning which comes before us. This is an area that draws a lot of attention. You all, um ... worked your way through a very deliberate process. It's clear from the records that we received, and I think we all reviewed those carefully, as well. I guess this is a hard, uh, a hard issue, but I think you see where we are, that ... you've got the issue of north of Bloomington. You've got the issue of the ... the size and that property on Bloomington. I don't, you know, you can talk about taking a breather, and may ... maybe we do. I'm not sure ... that kind of leaves it just hanging out there without an action step. I'm not sure I have something more to offer. Freerks/ No action isn't my favorite thing to do either, but I mean, I do think we need to go one way or the other fairly soon, just so that there's direction for the developer and the community, and people just know what they're getting into. So ... whatever your... Wilburn/ I ... I mean, I support the Comp Plan change. I ... because of the concern and the intensity of some of the conversation from some of the Council Members, um ... I was wanting to ... let's have the developer come back with something a little different (mumbled) uh, for me was that universal design concept and some aspect of commercial. If those, uh...three were (mumbled) I would be ... if no other proposal's going to come forward, I would be supportive. I'm not sure what the numbers are here. (several talking) Hayek/ Yeah, I'm with Mike ... and... until that Bloomington Street property is removed, and the scale is reduced, um, even if you throw in those, the protection of the three on the north, um ... I ... unless I see something new that changes my mind, that's where I stand right now. It sounds like you would... Wilburn/ Yeah, with that protection that no other ... if we're not going to take a look at some other notion, I ... I guess there would be certain economies of scale in term of whether a commercial space would fit in something smaller. That... Bailey/ I don't think so, I mean (several talking). I don't think so, and I'm sure that people have talked to Jesse about that, but... Freerks/ They're 1000 square foot right now, per (both talking) much smaller than that. Hayek/ But there's, I mean, we talk about this being a mix of housing use and owner- occupied, I mean, there's no guarantee that it will be. Uh, I mean, from what I saw it was a mixture of sizes and a potential for owner- occupied, but certainly no guarantee of it. Right? Freerks/ There's never a guarantee (several talking) Hayek/ It could be rental (several talking) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of November 1, 2011. November 1, 2011 Iowa City City Council Work Session Page 12 Bailey/ But it's still a universal design, which is still, I think, a step in the right direction in this area, urn ... I don't know. Dyer/ It's not exactly universal design. Doorways are wide, um (several talking) it's not entirely (several talking) handicapped accessible. The bathrooms aren't universal design by any means. Freerks/ But it could be (several talking) Wilburn/ If that were something that ... were in the realm of possibility then... Freerks/ I see, or (both talking) Wilburn/ ...that with the three taken out. Freerks/ The three to the north... Wilburn/ Yeah. Champion/ I have to just strongly object to the four people who are going to support this. Um, I... Wilburn/ I ... I don't think we need to (both talking) there were strong feelings that were expressed last time. I don't think we need to revisit that, um ... I think people made their feelings known. I think we should move on with the (mumbled) Eastham/ I just want to pick up on Matt's comment. We don't know exactly who's going to occupy this structure or any other structure, and I certainly agree with that. If the Council has some idea about how to, uh, to direct (laughter) occupancy, that would be great! (laughter and several talking) Hayek/ That's not my point. In fact, who's going to live there has not ... has not driven my thinking on this at all. It's, uh, it's the size of the building. It's the mass of it. The ... the fact that we talked about the Linn Street commercial corridor, and yet we're moving west. I mean, those are the things that drive me, and I just pointed out that there's no guarantee of who lives there because there seems to be this interest in who does live there as a pas ... as a positive aspect, and I think it's fair to point out that we just don't know. Freerks/ Right. It's just kind of a ... an opportunity to try something different, you know, that we ... that isn't always given to us ... on Planning and Zoning. We don't always (several talking) yeah. But I mean, I ... I appreciate all your comments. I ... I agree with a ... many of them, and I understand, believe me! It was a difficult decision and um, I'm sure I didn't make any friends. (laughter) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of November 1, 2011. November 1, 2011 Iowa City City Council Work Session Page 13 Hayek/ No, that's not the case! So I think ... I think you have a better sense of...of the tealeaves here, um... Freerks/ Do you know (mumbled) a sense of what... Davidson/ Well, the developer's present, so the developer's heard all the discussion. Um ... what, just to summarize, and remember that the Comp Plan line now runs down ... this boundary, here, so these are all in the Northside Market Place district. What I heard, uh, the group say was that you want to commence a process to move this line over, oops. So that it basically does not include these three properties ... in the Northside Market Place district. That as a Comp Plan amendment will initiate. Uh, all right, is there, I mean, is there any more specific guidance for the developer, since he is present. He can hear it directly in terms of reconsideration of the proposal. Freerks/ I heard something about universal design perhaps, in some of the units. Davidson/ Okay. Anything else you'd like to impart, I guess, before we... Hayek/ No, but I would like to ask you, Jeff, I mean, removing those three properties to the north from the ... the northside district. Just removes it ... removes it from the northside district. It does nothing to stop a (both talking) Davidson/ Basically the potential... the potential commercial use of those properties is what would be going away. (several talking) Bailey/ How far could we get on some ... you talked about a historic overlay, I mean, is that a possibility? Davidson/ You can always reconsider ... I mean, again, there's a process... Bailey/ Sure! Davidson/ ...for going through, considering the extension of the ... the historic district down to include those properties. It is adjacent so I believe (both talking) Bailey/ Right! That seems to, I mean... Freerks/ That would have to go to, uh, it would have to come from Historic Preservation Commission but, and all property owners would need to be, you know, would have to be a discussion with them, but it certainly ... I believe right north of there is a historic overlay. Is that correct? Davidson/ (several talking) ...the alley. Freerks/ So, I mean, it wouldn't be unheard of. It wouldn't be like we would be creating, um, you know, some kind of pocket zoning there. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of November 1, 2011. November I, 2011 Iowa City City Council Work Session Page 14 Davidson/ No, it's adjacent so it can certainly be done. (both talking) Is that something you'd like to initiate as well? Hayek/ I ... I don't know, but back to my question though, those three properties are zoned commercial now, correct? Or, no, the overlay (several talking) Davidson/ No, they are not. They are a ... the Comp Plan (both talking) designation is for... Wright/ Those are RNS -12, aren't they? Davidson/ Right. (several responding) Hayek/ Okay. Freerks/ It's kind of a conflicting message right now, the fact that we have them in this zone and I think it would be beneficial to take them out if we really don't want to see redevelopment there. It's a first step. Hayek/ Okay. Howard/ Just a point of clarification, the yellow on the map here is what's in the Comp Plan. So while we drew the line around the Northside Market Place is the red dash line, the yellow shown on the map is designated residential. So it's already, the properties, three properties to the north and the blue property is an ... is an institutional... Hayek/ Right. Howard/ ...designation. So, those three properties are currently designated as residential in the Comp Plan. They're included in the boundary of the Northside Market Place, but they're designated residential currently, um, and ... and listed with the stars mean that they're eligible to be, uh, designated historic. So that's ... and right now what the change was at the previous Council meeting was making the properties that were requested to be rezoned, those would now shift to a red designation on this map, with that Comp Plan change. Hayek/ Got it! Thanks, Karen. Okay. Freerks/ Thank you for (both talking) Highway 1 Bike Trail; Miller- Orchard Sidewalks (IP4 & 4.g(9): Hayek/ All right, so we're not missing any time here, why don't we ... as these guys shuffle out, why don't we go ahead and move forward with the Highway 1 bike trail, Miller -Or... Miller- Orchard sidewalks... item. Hi, Marcia! This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of November 1, 2011. November 1, 2011 Iowa City City Council Work Session Page 15 Bollinger/ Good evening! Uh, there was a memo in your packet that hopefully was pretty self - explanatory. I'll spend a few minutes just to go through it very quickly. Um, the Miller - Orchard Neighborhood Association's been very active over the last several years, um, attempting to make some substantial improvements in their neighborhood, and one of those, uh, processes they've gone through has been a neighborhood plan. That was completed back, um, in 2008, 2009, and presented to the City Council, um, more for information than anything. Um, part of that neighborhood plan included a variety of components, um, it talked about just general beautification, um, the social environment of the neighborhood, um, but also the safety and pedestrian access and those limitations that are in the neighborhood. Um, one of the focuses they really wanted to see, um, achieved was to, um, see the trail that was in the unfunded projects for the capital improvement project moved in to the funded project, which occurred, um, a couple years ago for funding this particular year, and to also just improve the pedestrian access throughout their neighborhood, um, along the residential streets. There's essentially three residential streets that run from Highway 1, um, up to Benton Street, and those are Miller, Hudson, and Orchard. We right in the middle of the process of designing that, um, that sidewalk, uh, network, and the original, um, design concepts included a 10 -foot trail on Highway 1, on the north side of Highway 1, um, an 8 -foot trail on Orchard, because it was going to serve as kind of a connection from the Highway 1 trail up to, um, the Iowa River Corridor Trail network, and then 5 -feet trail ... 5-feet sidewalks on Hudson and Miller. Um ... there was a neighborhood meeting, um, end of September and there was some opposition expressed, um, by some property owners within the neighborhood about the sidewalk number, particularly those, um, that were south connector sidewalks, and um... in order to be able to keep this project moving, um, fairly efficiently, and to, you know, save resources if it's all possible, um, basically we're asking City Council to give some indication as to how staff should proceed, particularly Public Works' staff. Um, the, um, initial neighborhood meeting has occurred. There's been some, um, initial surveying work that's been completed, but at this point now there needs to be some one -on -one conversations with all the property owners that are going to be impacted by the ... by the sidewalk and the trails, and that gets to be very time - consuming. Um, the plans and specs, obviously, need to be, um, drafted, um, and reviewed by the City Council, and that's scheduled to occur, um, I believe in March, um, April or March. And if there is some idea given as to how, um, you would like to, um ... what level of support you could provide to the sidewalks at this point would be helpful for... for the consultant to proceed accordingly. Champion/ I think our main concern was the (mumbled) small lots, um, I think we were all concerned about the width of the sidewalk, and I (unable to hear person speaking away from mic) ...and... Hayek/ I'm sorry, we're ... we're interacting with our staff right now so ... it's just a conversation we have to have first. Champion/ But the staff (mumbled) go to 4 -feet wherever possible? Isn't that correct? Bollinger/ That's part of the recommendation. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of November 1, 2011. November 1, 2011 Iowa City City Council Work Session Page 16 Champion/ (mumbled) Bollinger/ Um, that was pretty ... that was a pretty consistent comment through all the, at least the correspondence that's been sent to you over the last few weeks, that the 5 -foot, because I think the size of the, um, the properties, the residential properties are fairly small, there's not a whole lot of front yard, um, and, yeah, to put a 5 -foot sidewalk in would ... was considered to be somewhat in... invasive. There are ADA requirements from what I understand that suggest to keep it at a 5 -foot, but there could be alternatives in the design so that it would still meet ... meet the intent of the requirement. Um, but not require the 5- foot (mumbled) Hayek/ I don't see a request from staff on Council confirmation regarding the 8 -foot on Orchard. Bollinger/ That has been left as is. Hayek/ Okay. Bollinger/ As ... there's mostly, um, there's a couple... properties, residential properties. There's some that back up to the 8 -foot. They're required, um, the adjoining property owners are only required to remove 5 -foot of snow width, and that's primarily the biggest concern with any sidewalk installation by property owners. Um, so that didn't seem like (mumbled) we had one property owner that expressed concern about that. But because it's serving as a connector. Dilkes/ Are you certain about the removal of the snow? Cause that's not my understanding from Housing. Bollinger/ I'm going to defer to Public Works' staff, cause that's what I understood. Champion/ (mumbled) Bailey/ (mumbled) Knoche/ My understanding is that it's full width of the sidewalk has to be removed of snow, but it is on a complaint basis. So, you know, if they would remove 5 -foot and nobody complains then there wouldn't be a requirement to go the full width, but ... but if they would go out and get ticketed or, you know, marked up by HIS, it would be for the full sidewalk width. Mims/ Eleanor, is that an ordinance ... is that a City ordinance that we have, uh ... ability to change or is this... Dilkes/ You could change that requirement. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of November 1, 2011. November 1, 2011 Iowa City City Council Work Session Page 17 Mims/ Okay. Cause I think that was something that we all sat here and shook our head a little bit about last time was, if somebody had an 8 -foot sidewalk requiring... clear 8 -feet! Champion/ And why are they 8 -feet? Dilkes/ I think ... I caution you about... Champion/ Right! Dilkes/ You need to consider that, um, particularly when we're talking citywide, cause there are a number of issues there. Hayek/ Okay, so ... you want, uh, you want some direction from Council on the 5 to 4 on Hudson and Miller. Bollinger/ I think it would help, just for ... to know where to proceed, most efficiently. Wright/ I think that 5 to 4 makes a lot of sense. Champion/ Me too! Wright/ I was glad to see it in there. Bollinger/ Well, and again, if that's possible. We're talking some requirements there and we discussed a few options (mumbled) being considered and looked at (mumbled). Mims/ So under what kind of circumstances would it not be possible to go from 5 to 4? Bailey/ (mumbled) Knoche/ The requirement that the ADA has is ... is there has to be 5 -foot areas for passing or for turning of wheelchairs, and so the ... the intent would be the 4 -foot sidewalk would be, for the main length (both talking) Hayek/ ...hey, ma'am? You know what, if you're leaving the meeting I just wanted to let you know that although in, in these work session meetings we don't have an opportunity for the public to give input, in a ... a little less than an hour we have our regular Council meeting, and there's a time called "Community Comment," which is ... which is where you or anybody else who cares about this issue can ... can speak to the Council and ... and give us your view on it. So ... okay. Thank you. Knoche/ So ... and the main line it would be 4 -foot, but through the driveways we would widen out to 5 -foot to allow for those passing areas. Mims/ Okay. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of November 1, 2011. November 1, 2011 Iowa City City Council Work Session Page 18 Knoche/ Whether it'd be paving or (mumbled) we just would make sure that it met their (mumbled) requirements for the ... the ADA requirement. Mims/ Okay. Thank you! Hayek/ Okay, what's the sense of the Council? Champion/ Well I like the 4 -foot sidewalks, um, whenever possible. I think that's, um, I think that's adequate (several commenting) I have problems with 8 -foot! I guess I don't quite understand why they have to be 8 -foot. Maybe if you could explain that to me. Knoche/ The 8 -foot sidewalk along Orchard actually works as the connector... the trail along Highway 1, to the Iowa River Corridor Trail, so that ... that's the reason for having the wider width along Orchard Street. Hayek/ A lot of bike traffic. Wilburn/ Well, it's multi - purpose trail too (several talking) Bailey/ Pedestrians (several talking) Hayek/ Okay. Okay, well, you've got the input you need from us, I think. Is there anything else you need from us on this one? Okay... all right. Davidson/ Thank you! Hayek/ Thanks... thanks to both of you! And I see there are, I see at least one person I know who cares about this issue in the audience, uh, again, if you care to address us on it. It is not on tonight's agenda, so you can speak to us, uh, at "Community Comment" time in about 40 minutes. Thank you. Okay! Agenda items. Agenda Items: ITEM 10. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION RESCINDING THE 2005 PERSONNEL POLICIES AND THE 1981 AFFIRMATIVE ACTION POLICY AND ESTABLISHING AMENDED PERSONNEL POLICIES. Dilkes/ On agenda items, uh, item 10 is the, uh, resolution considering the new personnel policies. We've got Karen Jennings here, who's the personnel administrator, and Sarah Holecek from my office who does a large ... bulk of our personnel work, so if you have questions now (mumbled) Hayek/ You know, I don't know if there are going to be questions on this, but if there are, why don't we ask them now so they ... we can free them up to go home if...we don't need them. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of November 1, 2011. November I, 2011 Iowa City City Council Work Session Page 19 Dilkes/ They won't be here! Hayek/ (laughter) Very delicately put! Wright/ I did not have any questions (several responding) Hayek/ Do I understand this correctly, we're just revising our ... our policies to conform with changes in federal law? More or less? Wright/ And for some internal... cleanup of language. Holecek/ Uh, we're doing that. We're also updating them somewhat to make them, uh, more appropriate to the practices that we want to see happen, but we're also revising them to comply with federal law, and state law. Hayek/ Okay. Have a great evening! (laughter) Champion/ I did not read every word! Wright/ I didn't see anything on there (several talking) ITEM 12. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION APPROVING A CONTRACT WITH JOHNSON COUNTY FOR LIBRARY SERVICES TO RURAL RESIDENTS. Hayek/ Okay, other agenda items? Champion/ (mumbled) Hayek/ I'm going to have a question about the Library services' contract, if we can talk about it now, or later ... I don't know if your intention, Susan, is to ... is ... do you fall in the same boat, uh (laughter and several talking) My ... here's my question. We have spent some time in recent months talking about the cost Iowa City incurs to provide services that benefit non -Iowa Citians throughout the county, um, and I see in here what looks to me like some sort of cap on any increase in levee expense that would go to Johnson County? Craig/ That's correct. Hayek/ Urn ... and I don't know, it looks like it can't increase by more than 3 -cents on the levee at... Craig/ The rural levee, which is what funds library service payments. Hayek/ Right. Um, I don't know what our historic increase is... This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of November 1, 2011. November 1, 2011 Iowa City City Council Work Session Page 20 Craig/ The historic increase ... the first time, uh, the last contract which was negotiated in 2007 is the first time that the supervisors ever requested a cap, and that was at 5- cents, and tracking since that time, um, no levee increases ever gone over 3- cents. And so ... in this cycle they've come back and wanted the cap set at 3- cents. I reluctantly agreed to that. The Library Board approved this at their meeting last Thursday, reluctantly as well. Philosophically ... we have no control over the use that rural residents make of the library, and that is what the fee ultimately is based on. Rural residents' use, combined with property tax report from Iowa City; however, since the cap has been meaningless and our out, so to speak, is that we say to them, we're not going to take less for library services. This contract is no longer satisfactory to us. That is what we can ... come back with. Hayek/ Well, I was, I mean, it was a relief to see that this is a year -by -year contract, which we can get out of, you know, whatever the notice provision, but to me that begs the question, if...if we've never hit a 3% or a 3 -cent increase, why the interest in reducing the cap from 5 to 3? What is driving that, that you know? Craig/ My conversations with the supervisors, ever since ... very lengthy conversations in 2007, much, um, fewer and shorter conversations this time around is ... they are very concerned about sudden spikes, as they describe them, in, uh, property tax rates and they are trying to control that, to some extent. They see their library services, which again as I... is explained here, don't ... the money doesn't just come to Iowa City. It goes to all the libraries in the county, and as libraries have grown in Johnson County, opened new buildings, um, they've seen increases that they feel are out of their control, and ... they're just trying to have some control over something that they see they have no control over! Hayek/ But if there is a spike, or there's an increase in our operational expense... Craig/ Correct! Hayek/ ...and we go over that, what they would normally pay, if, you know... without, absence a cap. Aren't we then in that, under that scenario subsidizing that gap? Craig/ If you chose to continue the contract, but I would point out that there have been significant increases since 2007, and they've all been accommodated within a 3 -cent cap. Markus/ But what if they were not? Wouldn't we be stuck for a year? Craig/ No, we can ... we can ... at budget time... well ... I..I'd have to go back and read it again to see. I think we only have to give 60 -days notice. Um ... so we could ... the first of May say ... we're not going to ... um, we are not going to fulfill this contract for the fiscal year starting July 1. Markus/ And their consequence at that point is (mumbled) Craig/ Correct. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of November 1, 2011. November 1, 2011 Iowa City City Council Work Session Page 21 Markus/ That's not much of a choice! Hayek/ Hey, Tom, I think you're going to have to be closer to the mic. We're not ... picking up anything. Markus/ It's not much of a choice! Craig/ I hear ya! Wright/ (several talking) ...to the county at that point. In theory! Markus/ How effectively do you do that? Bailey/ Well, it's trackable. Craig/ How effectively? Um, all of the library cards are coded by the resident... that's how we track the circulation, and we can put a stop on every library card for every rural resident and they can't use `em! Champion/ Oh, wow! Hayek/ Well, L.I think we're ... I don't want to (both talking) Craig/ ...we can do that! Hayek/ We're not looking for a ... a .... a conflict here, but ... but that just jumped out at me at a time when we're (both talking) acutely aware of this, looking at our... Craig/ Yes, and ... and I would just advise you that in conversations that I had a the meeting with the supervisors, they are keenly aware of it, as well. And there was one supervisors interested in holding up the library contracts until all other issues with Iowa City were, um ... settled, and that opinion did not prevail among the supervisors, so... Champion/ It is only a 1 -year contract. Bailey/ Right. And I think the nice thing about this is we can track, and we know about usage and we ... I mean, these things are easily tracked and controlled... versus some of our other services that we share, I mean, this is at least ... you can report, you have this information, you can ... you can stop services. It's ... it's more manageable than some of the other services feel. So... Craig/ I do think that it is ... I mean, that it is historically a fair contract, and that it is based on use and property tax support from Iowa City. Um, I can't think of a fairer formula. So... Bailey/ And when we have things that are working, they can lead the way for other things that we're trying to get done, so I think that's one way we could approach this. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of November 1, 2011. November 1, 2011 Iowa City City Council Work Session Page 22 Hayek/ Yeah, and... and I (both talking) single... single person from the county and I'll be supportive of this. I just ... you know, this ... this is inconsistent with the steam we've struggled with, in light of our budget situation, and so that ... but the year, the ... the year by year aspect of this, giving us an out, if it ever came to that and so ... I'll be fine with this. I just wanted us to (both talking) Craig/ I understand, and I share your reluctance! (laughter) Hayek /All right, thank you. Is there anything else for Susan? We'll let her go home for the night. Bailey/ No! (laughter) Information Packets: 10/20/11: Hayek/ Any other agenda items? Okay. Info packets, uh, one from October 20tH 10/27/11: Hayek/ Going once, going twice... October 27th. Wright/ Just a quick thing on the radio schedule. Um, Connie, can you trade me days? Champion/ Sure! Wright/ 23rd for the 30tnq Champion/ Sure! Wright/ Thank you! Champion/ I better write it down... Mims/ I had a question, IP15, the letter um ... regarding flood mitigation work. Ron, can you... have you seen this? Can you, I've got a question for you though, I hope ... maybe it's better for Rick but (mumbled). I ... the letter basically concerns the idea of .... of flood mitigation work being done upstream and a lot of the modeling that's been done with the University has looked at all of these various mitigation plans together, uh, raising Park Road bridge, you know, etc. If...if certain things are done upstream, and let's say that we don't raise Park Road bridge or we don't get to it as soon as other things are done, what, I mean, theoretically that has the potential then to worsen flooding downstream? If water can't go out into the flood plains, is that an accurate... Knoche/ I think there's that potential, but I think it would be minimal compared to what they see today, um ... but the concept I think that's out there is, uh, if you ... the water's got to go This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of November 1, 2011. November 1, 2011 Iowa City City Council Work Session Page 23 somewhere but it ... it's not a big bathtub. The water is flowing through so I mean it would flow in the same pattern that it does in ... as it did in 2008, just maybe a little bit higher velocity. So I ... I don't ... the modeling that's been done, it's minimal, I mean, it's ... there's not a lot of elevation difference in the flooding that would occur, with what we see, you know, Coralville (mumbled) is doing, um, along the strip, um, the work that we're doing, uh, along the Crandic Railroad and the Rocky Shore Drive, and the study that we actually had done on Rocky Shore was ... if you put the flood gate in at Rocky Shore, and Coralville's work is in upstream, the water would rise faster, but the ultimate elevation that we saw in 2008, that elevation wouldn't change. It just ... that peak would occur quicker, but it ... but it wouldn't raise the actual peak of the flooding. Mims/ Okay. Thank you. Appreciate it! Hayek/ Thanks, Ron. Any other items from IP, uh, or Information Packet from October 27th? Okay. Uh, Council time? Council Time: Wright/ I wanted to just throw out something to see if there was interest in putting this in a work session at a later date, regarding RM -44 zoning. Um ... we've got ... pockets of this. I've become acutely aware of RM -44 just virtue of where I live, um, and if you look at where we've got packet... pockets of RM -44 zoning in the city, we usually also have, um, complete degradation of the neighborhood surrounding RM -44. I'm wondering if that's a zone we want to keep, for the future. Hayek/ I'd look at it. Interest? Mims/ Sure, I mean, I'm not... Hayek/ Okay. Wright/ Okay. Hayek/ Add that to ... the list. Okay, thanks, Mike. Other Council time? Okay, summary of pending work session issues. Pending Work Session Issues (IP2): Bailey/ I've looked at this, um, and I'm just going to throw out a suggestion. I'm very interested in talking about all of these; however, um, it's quite a list for the number of meetings that we have left, and there are some things that maybe more naturally flow post- strategic plan, which would bring them around to the next year, um ... and ... like I said, I'm more than happy to look at all of these, but I'm skeptical that we will find the time, I mean, that loads up, I mean, if you look for example at the 21St...it's quite a hefty meeting. And so I'm wondering if some of these don't more logically flow to ... post-strategic plan after the first of the year. Um ... just a thought, I mean, there are certainly some things I would This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of November 1, 2011. November 1, 2011 Iowa City City Council Work Session Page 24 like to do before I'm gone, um, they're not on here, but ... um, one is the Economic Development policy resolution. I'd like to see that before the end of the year, and then I'm hoping that we'll have a lobbyist contract before the end of the year. Is that accurate, Tom? Markus/ Should. Bailey/ I mean, those are two things that I'm very interested in ... in seeing done before I'm done with this group, but uh ... the rest of `em... Champion/ Throwing us out, are you? (laughter) Bailey/ Well, no, I'm just suggesting that, you know, we have a strategic planning process. Some of these things have good linkage with that and also some of these things are rather large, will involve a fair amount of staff time for the reporting, and will involve the ... a pretty hefty meeting. So it might be something to look at, Mr. Mayor, um... Hayek/ Well, the ... I mean, if you go to ... there are four items on here, I assume the space needs study ties pretty closely into our strategic planning, otherwise I think it would be something we could take up after the first of the year, but that's my sense on that. Um... Bailey/ But I mean maybe it is something that ties in with budget and after we have a plan developed, but (both talking) I don't know. It was just a thought to consider. Helling/ Yeah, we will have some information for you, from the space needs study, uh, that I think will be helpful, as you have your strategic plan discussion. Uh, however I think, yes, after the strategic plan is completed in, you know, and the implementation of the space needs study and the planning for that will certainly be guided somewhat by the Comp Plan, or the strategic plan, as well. So that (mumbled) both ways. Hayek/ Do you anticipate spending a lot of time on the 21St on the results of the, uh, draft report? Helling/ I'm thinking they said about 20 minutes for the presentation. Karr/ I think there is a presentation from the consult to the plan. Helling/ Yeah, and I think that was... Bailey/ I'm fine with it, I just ... I mean, I'm perfect, I'm interested in seeing the results. I just wondered if people had concerns about... Hayek/ For sure! Bailey/ ...the list, I mean, I'd love to get this all done. I'd love to (mumbled) working through them but ... so ... just a thought. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of November 1, 2011. November 1, 2011 Iowa City City Council Work Session Page 25 Hayek./ Okay. Well, the partnership issues, I mean, we could push out, but we're under a lot of pressure from that community to get to this. Um... same thing with immigration, I mean, I ... that's not ... (several talking) Okay. So Parks (both talking) Bailey/ Yeah! Hayek/ How time sensitive is that? Bailey/ (mumbled) Markus/ I think they'd like a discussion with you, Parks Commission, but I think it could wait. Bailey/ I don't want to put anything off that people are waiting for discussion. I just looked at that and, um ... but happy ... happy to have all of those too, so that's just (mumbled) Helling/ The one issue there is that whatever happens, they'd like to see implementation the next season, so that's (several talking) Bailey/ All right, give it a shot! Wright/ We'll just be busy! Bailey/ That's fine. Hayek/ Anything else on work session issues? Okay, meeting schedule? Meeting Schedule: Karr/ Mr. Mayor, I wanted to follow up on the discussion, in your packet, IP5 is, uh, the remaining meeting schedule, in light of your discussion. Um, and especially in conjunction with the strategic planning. And, I wanted to confirm those times, and also the importance of, as we enter this project, of incoming and outgoing Council Members' participation. And we have a couple of conflicts on ... on December 5th. The 29th seems to be, um ... firm, and workable for everyone. I haven't heard it isn't. It's the December 5th Bailey/ And I'm teaching during that time, and I don't know why I didn't think ... I think I thought we were in finals' week and I dismissed it. And I'm not done until 4:00. I'm sure I could be done at 3:00. They would love that. But I do have to at least spend an hour with them. Hayek/ What if we, uh, pushed back the strategic planning a little bit to accommodate Regenia at least part way (both talking) and then push the work session to Tuesday the 6 th Karr/ You can. We can do that. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of November 1, 2011. November 1, 2011 Iowa City City Council Work Session Page 26 Bailey/ (mumbled) sorry I didn't get that on the (mumbled) Karr/ What about, um, if we did that, uh, so we'd go like 4:00 to, that's 3 % hours so ... do you want to go 3 %2 hours starting at 4:00? Hayek/ Or start at 3:00 or... Bailey/ I can be here by 3:15. Karr/ Okay. Let's ... why don't we aim for 3:00, okay. 3:00 to 6:30... Champion/ She can't be here until 3:15 so ... why don't we say 3:30. We're not going to start without you if you're coming. Hayek/ I've got a conflict in the evening, so I don't want to go too late. Champion/ Okay. Is 4:30 too late for you? Karr/ Why don't we compromise and go with 3:15 and make every effort to start on time, and we'll also work with, um, Jeff to be sure that we ... see if we can wrap it up at that time. Okay? And then on ... on, um... Hayek/ At what time? Champion/ Yeah, what time? Karr/ Well, 6:30? Hayek/ That's fine. Karr/ Does 6:30 work for your conflict? Does that work? Hayek /More or less, yeah. I can make it work. Karr/ Let me talk to Jeff... Hayek /I can make it work. Karr/ Okay, alrighty, and then we'll start the December 5th to be announced, um, with a ... with a work session, and possibly work in a very, very small reception for outgoing Council people ... that same evening, cause that'll be the last Council meeting. Champion/ Oh, it will be! Oh! Hayek/ Sure (several commenting) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of November 1, 2011. November 1, 2011 Iowa City City Council Work Session Page 27 Karr/ Please? Thank you. Wright/ Gifts welcome! (laughter and several talking) Upcoming Events /Council Invitations: Hayek/ Probably the only time I'll ever mention his name at a City Council meeting! Okay. Got what you need, Marian? Okay, upcoming events, Council invites? The, uh, Veterans Day function will be on Friday, 11 /11 /11, um, I'll be at that, but you're all welcome (mumbled) Okay! Uh, why don't we take a 15- minute break and we'll start up at 7:00 with the formal. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of November 1, 2011.