Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2015-02-09 TranscriptionPage 1 ITEM 2. PROCLAMATIONS ITEM 2b Sertoma's Freedom Week — week of February 16th Hayek: I'm told we have someone here, uh, for the second proclamation and so I will read it. (reads proclamation) Karr: Here representing the Sertoma Club is Dennis Mitchell. (applause) Mitchell: On behalf of the, uh, Old Capitol Sertoma Club, I'd like to thank the City Council for passing the proclamation. Uh, as noted in the Proclamation, uh, the thing that our club does to support Sertoma's Freedom Week is to sponsor an, uh, essay contest that's open to 81h grade students in Johnson County. Uh, the topic this year was on the First Amendment. Uh, we asked students to discuss and explain, uh, the freedoms protected by, uh, the First Amendment to, uh, to the U.S. Constitution. We had, uh, students from all three, um, Iowa City junior high schools, uh, participate, as well as from Clear Creek Amana. We actually have a luncheon that's scheduled for February 19th that, uh... uh, Mayor Hayek and the other mayors from Coralville and University Heights plan to attend. It's a great opportunity for the students to get to read their essays and, uh, get to meet some of their government officials. So, on behalf of Sertoma, thanks again! Hayek: Thanks, Dennis! This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council special formal meeting of February 9, 2015. Page 2 ITEM 3. STUDENT LEADERSHIP AWARDS — Shimek Elementary Hayek: Would the Shimek Sharks please come forward! (several talking in background) Well how you guys doing tonight? Good? Guess who else in this room went to Shimek? (several talking) I did! (laughter) Proud 1982, uh, I'll volunteer, and everybody up here's heard me tell this story before, but I have to say it again. Do you know that the Shimek Sharks weren't all .... weren't always the Shimek Sharks? I'll give ya a ... here's a ... here's a question: do you know what motto, or... or, uh... uh... (person responding in background) mascot they used to have way back in the day? (several responding) The Squirrels! Oh, somebody... somebody told you! (laughter) You got my story! (laughter) That's right! When I was at Shimek, there ... we got a new principal that thought that Sharks were a little too aggressive and violent, and changed us to the Shimek Squirrels. (laughter) And it was terrible, and we revolted, and we convinced the principal to change it back, and they've been the Sharks ever since! (laughter) So ... anyway, we're really proud to have you here tonight. You are, uh, the ... the elementary school of the evening and ... and we're ... we're excited to have Shimek represented here. What we do at our City Council meetings throughout the year is invite the student leaders from the schools in Iowa City, uh, and you get nominated by your schools, and, uh, it's a chance for us to get to know you and show you off a little bit to the community, and so I see you've each brought a piece of paper. That's the first step, and what I'd like to do is just hand you the microphone and have you read your piece! Missall: Hi, my name is Maggie. To help our community I participate in `sleeping out for the homeless' and I sell breakfast burritos at the `cancer walk.' I am also involved in 4-H. We clean up the fairgrounds at almost every meeting, and we do something to help our community. I help (mumbled) community by ... by participating in safety patrol. I participate in reading buddies and help my partner learn to read. Being a good citizen to me means helping others. To become a better citizen I would like to join the Sierra Club and join a club that helps kids with different types of disorders. (applause) Weckmann: Hi, my name is Victoria. I want to thank my teachers for selecting me for this award, and my family for their support of my efforts. Through my community service with the `backpack project,' I learned that one in every six kids in Iowa are hungry or don't know where their next meal is coming from. Girl Scouts has also been in an important influence in teaching me about community service. There are many others who donate time and money to benefit the community. I would like to thank them for their service and want to challenge everyone here to work a little harder toward the benefit of others. (applause) Case: Hi, my name is Nolan. I serve our community by helping in church activities and donating funds to both my schools... school and my church. I also participate in protests against wage theft and other community causes. I serve our Shimek community by participating in safety patrol and reading buddies, which also helps This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council special formal meeting of February 9, 2015. Page 3 the younger kids with their education and safety for later generations. Being a good citizen to me means supporting or helping the greater good. I plan to help Shimek garden and fundraisers even more so we can provide food to people everywhere. (applause) Hayek: Well those are really impressive, and I have to say you kids are doing more than we did when I was a kid. I was on the safety patrol, but that was just so I could get a free ice cream sandwich every Friday (laughter) You guys have done incredible things and you're not even out of elementary school yet, and that's just wonderful, and ... that's why we're ... we're bringing you here because we want to show you off to the community and we also want to thank your families and your teachers and everyone else who ... who have played a role in your lives, but I congratulate you on ... on all the things you've accomplished. So we have what's called a Student Leadership Award and I'll read it. It says: for his or her outstanding qualities of leadership within Shimek Elementary, as well as the community, and for his or her sense of responsibility and helpfulness to others, we recognize you as an Outstanding Student Leader. Your community is proud of you. Presented by the Iowa City City Council, February 2014. So, Megan, here's yours! And, Victoria! Mr. Case! Congratulations! Let me shake your hands here! And you guys can (someone speaking in background) oh, we're honored to have you here! And you can sit around.... stick around if you like (applause) or go and do some homework! (applause) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council special formal meeting of February 9, 2015. Page 4 ITEM 4. CONSIDER ADOPTION OF THE CONSENT CALENDAR AS PRESENTED OR AMENDED. Mims: Move adoption. Botchway: Second. Hayek: Moved by Mims, seconded by Botchway. Discussion? ITEM 4e(3) AMEND DOWNTOWN URBAN RENEWAL AREA PLANS - RESOLUTION DETERMINING THE NECESSITY OF AND SETTING DATES OF A CONSULTATION (FEBRUARY 20, 2015) AND PUBLIC HEARING (MARCH 9, 2015) ON A PROPOSED AMENDMENT NO. 13 TO THE CITY -UNIVERSITY PROJECT I URBAN RENEWAL PLAN IN THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA. Throgmorton: Matt„ uh, Item 4...I think it's 4e(3) is a Resolution of Necessity for Amendment #13 to the City University Project Urban Renewal Area. I think I have the number right. Hayek: That's cor... that's right! Throgmorton: Yeah, anyhow, if ..if I understand correctly, this is to ... basically an amendment to accommodate financial support for a proposed project at 328 S. Clinton Street. So I just want to say that, uh, I ... I'm going to ... you know I'll vote for the Consent Calendar and this thing'll move ahead. Uh, but I'm pretty skeptical about the need to provide financial assistance for that particular project. So, when we get to that meeting ... things'll be, you know, other things'll be said. Hayek: Any other discussion? Roll call, please. Passes 7-0. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council special formal meeting of February 9, 2015. Page 5 ITEM 6. PLANNING AND ZONING MATTERS ITEM 6a REZONING 608 AND 610 S. DUBUQUE STREET LANDMARK DESIGNATION — ORDINANCE TO DESIGNATE PROPERTIES LOCATED AT 608 AND 610 S. DUBUQUE STREET AS LOCAL HISTORIC LANDMARKS. (REZ14-00024) 1. PUBLIC HEARING Hayek: I'm going to reopen the public hearing, which was, uh... uh, deferred from the, uh, or continued from the January 201h meeting (bangs gavel) Uh, and... let's... do we need to ex parte between ... the continuance and today. Is there any ex parte communications involving interested parties? Mr. Yapp! Yapp: Uh, staff does not have much to add for tonight. Just to reorient you, uh, this is a application to designate historic landmarks for the properties at 608 and 610 S. Dubuque Street. Uh, the structure at 614 S. Dubuque Street has been demolished. Uh, the properties are located on south Dubuque Street, south of Prentiss Street. Uh, the two remaining properties are identified with the ... the green, uh, box on the overhead. Uh, this is an aerial photo of the properties, and a street view, uh, of the properties, and here is 608 S. Dubuque Street and 610 S. Dubuque Street. Uh... you had a work session with the Planning and Zoning Commission earlier tonight, uh, regarding, uh, this application. Both Historic Preservation Commission and Planning and Zoning Commission have recommended approval of the landmark designation. Be glad to take any questions. Throgmorton: Uh... Hayek: Go ahead, Jim! Throgmorton: ... I'd like to get a ... a couple points on the record, uh, by restating them, and then ... then ask you a question, John, which I think you know to expect. So in the last meeting I asked you how the land currently is zoned, what the developer initially wanted to rezone it to, and whether the land owner could sell the historic preservation development right, and ... tell me if I'm wrong, uh, you told me that it's currently zoned Community... Community Commercial 2, CC -2. The developer wanted to rezone it to Riverfront Crossings, Central Crossings, uh, RFCCX, uh, and the landowner can sell the historic preservation development rights. Yapp: That is all correct. Throgmorton: Good! Okay, so I have one, uh, one more question. Uh, why did the staff not... uh, make a recommendation on the proposed rezoning? That's a very rare thing, as best I can tell. So... This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council special formal meeting of February 9, 2015. Page 6 Yapp: Uh, in this case it is ... it is because staff had already started enforcement action on the properties, uh, when they were found to be structurally unsound by a structural engineer's support submitted to staff. Throgmorton: Okay. Thanks! Mims: Jeff ...er, John, can you answer one question for me, and that is ... on the transfer of development rights, what is ... what is the ratio of that and .... and exactly how does that work? Yapp: It's a ... it's a 4 to 1 ratio, based on square footage. (both talking) Mims: Square footage of the ... building or of the property? Yapp: Of the development potential of the property. Mims: Okay. Yapp: Uh, and the ... that transfer of density can be transferred on site, uh, in other words allowing increased square footage on a building, on or ... or next to the same property as was done with the Tate Arms' proposal. Or ... I should say and/or, uh, those development rights can be transferred to any other property in the Riverfront Crossings District. Mims: Okay. Thank you! Payne: So ... if the... square footage of the property would allow a five -story building to be built on it, then they get to transfer 20 stories? Or ... I know it goes by square footage (both talking) Yapp: ...good... good question! Uh, no, just of...the one story. I believe. I'll have to double check the actual language. Payne: Okay. Dobyns: John, can you comment on the qualifications of the individual from the State Historical, um ... group that submitted an analysis of the properties? I mean is that person ... do we know anything about them in terms... are... are they historian? What is the level of their, uh... (both talking) Yapp: I do not specifically ... of the ... of the person we received the letter from, but it is from the State Historic Preservation Office. Dobyns: Do we have any sense of the due diligence that that office puts into their evaluations in terms of (both talking) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council special formal meeting of February 9, 2015. Page 7 Yapp: They typ... they typically do ... conduct due diligence, yes. Dobyns: Thank you. Hayek: Any other questions for John? Okay, thanks. We may need you to come up. So, this is a public hearing. Um, and I ... I will ... our typical thing is five minutes. I sense that we may be able to do that, um ... yeah, if you could ... (mumbled) sign in (both talking) Um, but let me ... let me encourage the audience, we ... you know, we ... we had our Planning and Zol... Zoning consultation earlier this evening. We've been through multiple rounds of public input, and so my strong encouragement to anyone who wishes to address the Council, uh, during this public hearing is to say something new. Give us some new information and... and try not to repeat what we've already heard. That will help us make our decision. Thank you! Swaim: Hi, my name is Genalie Swaim. I live at 1024 Woodlawn and chair the Historic Preservation Commission. Thanks for continuing this conversation. This is a critical decision for this town. Um, to answer, um, Rick's question, uh, the people who work at the State Historic Preservation, um, are professionals, professional architects, professional architectural historians, professional historians. They are the, urn ... they are in fact a sub -set ... not a sub -set but much of their expenses of salary are paid by the federal government because they are part of the national, um, Interior... Office of the Interior, which officiates over the National Register. So whatever goes to them, um ... it has ... let's see. If you are submitting something to go on a National Register, or have any other kind of state or national legis ... um, designation, it goes to them before it goes on to the .... to the Secretary of Interior. So they take ... and I have often seen many, um ... nominations and such sent back to the applicant to say this isn't good enough, this doesn't hold water and such, so ... um, I believe they are totally ... uh, right (laughs) The second point, um, I believe that in terms of the transfer rights, and I'm ... I don't have this information, but I believe it is more than one floor, um, and I hope someone can clarify that. Less ... as ... as John Yapp mentioned. Um ... I want to respond to one quo ... quote from the last meeting, from someone who opposed this. The person said the properties are nowhere near any previously designated historic districts. My response is that's not pertinent and it's really all the more reason to save the cottages. Historic design... designations apply to individual buildings as well as to districts, and they're being next to each other doesn't matter in this case. Another point is that other than these two brick cottages there are very few modest buildings of this age in Iowa City. Perhaps six. And only three of those are brick. And none of those three are in this section of town. So this is another reason why these particular brick buildings, 1870s, are very important. These cottages offer an opportunity for small buil... businesses to locate in unique buildings. We have seen in the Northside Market Place how this can work. There are over 24 businesses in that area, many of them located in small, older buildings and some in buildings designated as historic. The buildings at ... businesses are thriving and they're stabilizing the surrounding areas, and Riverfront This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council special formal meeting of February 9, 2015. Page 8 Fros ... Crossings also can have old buildings with the mix of new buildings. It attracts different kinds of businesses and different kinds of customers. Not nearly enough attention has paid in this conversation ... has been paid to the actualist poetry movement and the cottages historic significance as the birthplace of that movement. As a City of Literature, we should capitalize on that. That thread of literary history. Actualism was a counterpoint to the Writers Workshop, the big giant in this community, of which we're proud, and the Kornblums, as part of the actualist, were the first ... a first publisher, which evolved into a nationally recognized publisher of that sort. I want to believe that this town honors and recognizes not only the major literary stars, like Vonnegut and O'Connor, Flannery O'Connor and the work... Writers Workshop, but also at the minor players, like the actualist poets in the cottages. Finally my fifth point is we need ...to look at the specifics of the tax credits for rehabbing in (mumbled) properties like these can be. They are up to 45% of state and fax ... up to 45% through state and federal tax credits, and all of the specifics are things that we could see being done on these cottages. These are what are eligible. Repairs to walls, partitions, floors, ceilings, windows, and doors; HVAC systems, plumbing, electrical, chimney, stairs, sprinkler systems. So if we consider that these tax credits are tools just as the transfer of property rights, I think we can see that there are concrete ways that we can make the plan work to save these cottages and similar buildings. Thank you. Hayek: Thank you for your comments. Fry: Hello, my name's Janice Fry and I have, uh, lived in Iowa City for almost 30 years and I'm not going to really add anything new; however, I am just going to read something that I wrote because it should fit in the timeframe. The Historic Preservation and Planning and Zoning Commissions both heard public comment and voted unanimously to recommend historic preservation status for the cottages on south Dubuque. The historic significance of these buildings was not determined subjectively, but was guided by specific criteria, which the buildings met. The planning efforts undertaken and the resulting comprehensive plan known as the Iowa City 2030 Plan was adopted by this City Council on April 16, 2013. This included much input from the public. To quote from one of the pages in the report, there was a strong and vocal desire to preserve what is unique about Iowa City, older neighborhoods and buildings. The Riverfront District master plan cites possible development of this area in a section labeled `Cottage Preservation.' Given the review the... given the review the (mumbled) has received in the reports and recommendations issued from public input and Council would be wise to approve the, um, landmark designation. So let's not make a mockery of public forums by ignoring people's wishes. Thank you. Hayek: Thank you for your comments. Baldridge: My name is Tom ... Thomas Baldridge. I'm a ... native of Iowa City, and a former member of the City's Historic Preservation Commission. And I attended the This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council special formal meeting of February 9, 2015. Page 9 meetings of both the Planning and Zoning Commission and the Historic Preservation Commission when they voted unanimously to attempt to save the cottages. And I think (clears throat) if you don't support them, what's the use of having citizens participate in the... government and helping you, uh, in issues of this type. They have the time and the interest in investigating issues like this, and adding to your background. I urge you to vote to save the two remaining cottages. Hayek: Thank you for your comments. Elliott: My name's Bob Elliott. I've lived in Iowa City for about 50 years. Um ... I spoke earlier about my opposition to this. I wanted to say two things. One, I very much appreciate the respect that I sensed among the opposing people on this project, and two, the almost distressing thing that I got from listening to your informal session with P&Z earlier was the almost absence of any thought about the property owner. I heard people saying I ... at least a couple times, that this would be a win-win situation, and I thought, what is the property owner? Chopped liver? Uh, I would hope ... I don't know the legalities, but I would like to see the City ... uh, sit down with a very conscientious, sincere people who make up Planning and Zoning and Historic Preservation, and indicate that there needs to be some way to include the property owner in this whole situation. To talk as if the property owner isn't involved doesn't make sense to me, and, uh, I would not be in favor of taking away any other rights from a person without even considering, and that's what we're doing in a situation like this. But again, I thank everyone involved for what I thought was a, uh, an open and respectful discussion and I hope things will stay the same when your vote is taken tonight. Thank you. Hayek: Thank you for your comments. Allen: Hi, I'm Jan Allen. I've been here before. I own a historic property that I'd like to put a donut shop in, just kidding! (laughs) I know this isn't all about historic preservation. It's about Ted, bless your heart, settling up things, tidying up for his kids. I understand. I'm older than Ted and I'm just about as ill, and today I donated my body to the medical school (laughs) That's tidy! (laughter) Anyway, I'd like to say that this is just not ... about what we've been talking about. It's about businesses that have moved there because this is a ... adorable, historic neighborhood! I'd like to see it kept. I love to go there! It's cute! It's adorable! It's a shopping destination! I don't want to see it destroyed! I'd like to see it enjoyed! I enjoy it! I hope you will too! Thanks! Hayek: Thank you for your comments. McCallum: My name is Mark McCallum. I live at 113 S. Johnson Street in Iowa City. Um, earlier this evening, uh, one of the speakers a ... advocated that this is a taking of property rights, and I would argue the opposite of that. Uh, several years ago I... the applicant is essentially a... asking for an upzoning, and he's not being taken This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council special formal meeting of February 9, 2015. Page 10 property rights, and I would argue the opposite of that. Uh, several years ago I... the applicant is essentially a ... asking for an upzoning, and he's not being taken away any of his rights by the underlying zoning code that was in place by the Riverfront Crossings, uh, District. He's fully able to, my understanding, is able to develop under the old zoning code, should he choose to do that. So this is not a taking of property rights at all. And I'll reinforce that with I'm a local developer as well. Several years ago I sold an apartment building on College Street and I did make an inquiry with the Planning Department about the Riverfront Crossings District, and ... I met with at least two City planners, on three different occasions, and we explored different options in the Riverfront Crossings District, and I, you know, I had some capital and I had a loan commitment from a bank, and in no uncertain terms when these types of properties came up, Ta ... Tate Arms or the cottages, and I want to say there were some other properties that we had discussed, uh, it was made clear to me, very clear to me, that you did not benefit from any of the upzoning advantages of the Riverfront Crossing, uh... uh, zoning code, unless you preserved those buildings. So this is actually a granting of special rights to this applicant. And I think this is consistent with what happened with the Tate Arms, uh, another property owners. Do you think the Clarks would have saved the, uh, the ... the house, uh.... the Tate Arms building, had they not been required to? No, they ... they are just doing what was in their best interest and they took advantage of the ... the zoning code by adhering to the vision of the Riverfront Crossings code. So I would submit that this is not a property taking at all. Any representation to that effect is totally untrue and anyone knows that in zoning situations that when you're asking for a rezoning, you're asking for additional property rights, not ... it's not a taking whatsoever at all! And ... and I take offense to the fact that some people are expecting to get special property rights to one applicant. Thank you. Hayek: Thank you for the comments. Adams: Good evening, Adil Adams, American Taxi. I will not talk about, uh, the regulations and what they going to do today, but uh, I want to be a good citizen (unable to understand) something about property and I hear some people they talk about they want to destroy their property for what reason. I really ... I will not support any kind of this destroying. Uh, couple of years ago I used to drive taxi in Chicago, and my instructor.... they gave us class and while he training us, we come through one of the theater. He told me the city give the theater (mumbled) dollars just to rebuild and to be more (mumbled) theater, for the benefit of the old people. So now I hear some people talk about historical and some properties they want destroyed. I will not support that but we can, as a city, the city ... Iowa City is a good city, and the city has a lot of money. They can support these people to rebuild this properties by give them loans or any compromise, but not destroy them. Thank you. Hayek: Thank you for the comments. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council special formal meeting of February 9, 2015. Page 11 session. I just want to comment on a couple things there. I mean, I know there's been a lot of discussion about the property rights and the transfers, and I know I mentioned this to you before, but it was mentioned specifically about the Clark family. There is a family that obviously has the ability to take rights and redevelop something down the road with their property rights. Just because they can be sold, it's not an easy function to do that. There's certain things — you have to find a buyer, you have to find a... a property that that buyer can take advantage of. Um, the other thing that was really disturbing for listening to in the joint meeting was... practically the threat by the P&Z to say that if this doesn't get it zoned historic, they're practically saying whoever buys it, they're not gonna work with `em to rezone it! And I think that is threatening to Ted when you talk about taking his property rights away. Um, you know, this property... the... the City went through a whole Riverfront Crossing District, and ... and designated areas for certain zonings, and I don't remember exactly what is this, but if...for some reason these cottages weren't here, the request to rezone would be what is form based code, and if I remember right, approximately six months ago, the City elected to rezone about 25 acres downtown into form based code. So that was all done. So that ... I just want to kind of go on record and we'll have to get the transcripts of Ted, but I feel like some of the comments made at that joint meeting were practically threatening to Ted about that. And then as far as ... to ... to speak further on the property rights, if you look at what's in the green, you know, the thing is if those stay historic, when you say you're not taking property rights away, if those stay historic, notice the two properties to the north? Those two small buildings there. Well, I can tell you that that lot is pretty much undevelopal ...able to do something different with, to a buyer, ha ... if these stand in their way. So to say that rezoning this or ... or denying the, you know, going through historic doesn't take his property rights, those corner two buildings, those lots are not big enough. By the time you figure side yards, those things probably wouldn't comply with today's standards. So you really are taking his property rights away, besides just this, you're taking that corner lot away and he's not gettin'... wouldn't get any benefit from those either. So ... um, and then ... and then also when it talks about the community. Everybody talks about what's best for the community. I ... I still want to reiterate wh... when I talked to a lot of people out there, you know, people could care less about these things. I mean, there's a... there's a group of people that feel very passionate about it; I understand that, but a majority of the people I talk to just don't understand the big deal, say tear it down, let's build up our tax base, um, for everybody's sake. So ... thank you! Hayek: Thanks for the comments! Pacha: My name is Ted Pacha. I don't have a lot to ... more to say tonight. Four ... four and a half months and a hundred thousand plus into this situation. I only ask that you once again talk about what we talked about months and months ago and that's the process that got us here. It's absolutely unbelievable what it can do to a family and to a person. I'm not a developer. Councilman Throgmorton, I don't care if they gave me a hundred extra stories, that is no concern to me. I'm a This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council special formal meeting of February 9, 2015. Page 12 property owner. I'm looking to sell the property. God bless somebody if they buy it and want to put more stories on. That has no effect on me. I don't understand that constant reminder to me because I don't have any intention. I'm not asking for money. I'm not asking for incentives. I'm not asking for TIF. I'm asking to be allowed to do with my property as I should be able to do in 30 to 40 years ownership. Dr. Dobyns, I just wanted to mention to you, I reached out to Paula Mohr, M -o -h -r, from the State Historic Society cause I kept hearing these stories that these were historic. The bottom line is, she said they could be. They're, you know, 1860 to 1870, so forth and so on, but this is what I liked, in her email, "Our comments are advisory and are nonbinding." That hasn't been mentioned tonight! So, keep that in mind. I mean, I know the State can't... couldn't come in here necessarily and... and convince the Council to vote because they said they were historic, but that's ... a comment that I think is very, very important to this discussion and this vote tonight. Cause this is critical! I can't take much more of coming to these meetings and being beat up and told these things, and as Bob Elliott said so well, it's like the property right guy is totally irrelevant! I respect those commissions for what they do and so forth, but most of those decisions I still will claim on my deathbed... (mumbled) unfactual and sometimes untrue and inadequate information! It happens! I thank you for your time. Hayek: Thank you for your comments. Adderley: Hello! My name is Eva Adderley. I lived in Iowa City my whole life. When I first got involved with the preserving the cottages effort, it was mostly out of nostalgia because the cottages have always seemed very beautiful and unique to me, but once I started researching it, I learned that they weren't only significant to me but to the community and to the history and identity of Iowa City. They've housed writers and bookshops which are an important part of our identity, and like the working class people whose history often gets just like totally overridden, which is very unjust, lived there. It's an almost extinct type of architecture for the exact reason that the history of the poorer classes is not respected as much of that as the wealthy minority, and like all the people that I've met through this have been kind and smart and passionate, and exemplify all that I think makes our community worth saving, and there's been a lot of talk about the property owner's rights and I don't want anyone to get ... like, you know, have bad things happen and I hope that Ted can find a way to not be totally screwed over by this, but it sort of disturbs me that it's ... we act like it's taboo to talk about the tenant situation because like the people that live and work in those buildings are like not super well off. They're not going to have an easy time finding a new place to move into, and I think that that matters too, and I think the fact that I feel like we're not supposed to talk about that exemplifies the same attitude that makes the lower income buildings more difficult to preserve, and that's disturbing to me, but even if you leave out ... any discussion of the character and importance of anyone involved on either side, they're just undeniably historically significant, and since This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council special formal meeting of February 9, 2015. Page 13 that's what we're here to discuss tonight, I hope you will take that into consideration. Hayek: Thank you for your comments. Trimble: Hello, my name's Alicia Trimble. I am Executive Director of Friends of Historic Preservation. I had a slideshow presentation presented this eve ... or to present this evening, but um, after the joint meeting with the Planning and Zoning Commission, I'd rather just state some facts for the record. First, the language in the Riverfront Crossings' plan that says, uh, the decision to redevelop is ultimately up to the property owner was put in the plan after City staff was inundated with calls by property owners who currently ru... own the property, who believe their property had to be redeveloped. That was not the case! It was never intended to be used by a developer to buy that property and then avoid the goals of the Historic Preservation Plan, which you voted on! I know this because a friend of mine, and her husband, own a vet clinic, and when she first saw this Riverfront Crossings' plan she was devastated! She was so distressed she called me crying. So I in turn called the Planning Department, and I was told word for word this language was going in this Comprehensive Plan. The goals of the Comprehensive Plan were voted on and adopted by the City Council, and voting against them st... sets a dangerous precedent for all... everyone who worked on this Riverfront Crossings' plan... has... they've put so much work into this! This means that any developer would no longer have to follow the goals of the Comprehensive Plan, whether that's pedestrian right-of-way or what we hope to do with the park down in that area. That means that this Riverfront Crossings' plan is for not. After all, all Comprehensive Plans are goals. Every plan is aspirational, and you as a City Council have the tools ... to make this plan a reality, and zoning is your tool! The truth is, the precedent for the City Council is to vote for landmark status. When the Carnegie Library was to be demolished, six brave Councilors voted against the ... the selling, even though the Glasgows and the Clarks prop ... who were the proposed developers ... uh... strongly, strongly objected. If they had not done so, if that City Council had not voted to preserve the Carnegie Library, we would be looking at a massive student apartment building on that corner. Further, Jeff Clark was told unequivocally that he could not redevelop the Tate Arms. It was not take -and -give. It was not a decision. Also, the Northside... Historic District, the Jefferson Street Historic District, and the Goose -Mann Conservation District were all voted in by this Council, over the objections of property owners, with a super -majority! By voting the precedent you yourselves have set, and the goals ... the goals, uh, the goals the community has asked you to vote on and which you did, you're voting against the com... community. I don't know if you realize how many people attended P&Z meetings. I don't know if you realize how many people, how many citizens of Iowa City worked on this Comprehensive Plan. There's a few other matters I'd like to clear up as well. Regarding the cost of restoring the cottages, we kept hearing at the last meeting it would be several hundreds of thousands of dollars. Rob Owen, who's probably the best preservation mason in the state of Iowa has This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council special formal meeting of February 9, 2015. Page 14 looked at the cottages and he estimated they would be $5,000 to $15,000 per cottage. $5,000 just to repair them, $15,000 each to totally restore them. Friends of Historic Preservation will pay for this, if a landmark designation is given to these cottages. We will also help with any tax credit work and any other financial assistance a property owner would want. To address the fact that not every building is historic, um, just because it's old, I think this gets back to what we were talking to with SHPO and Paula Mohr. The federal government set up a system by which the State Historic Preservation Offices are the goal to decide if a building is historic or not historic. Whether it is significant. In this case, the State Historic Preservation Office has determined that the cottages were significant, and they did so on December 24th, the day before the third cottage was torn down on Christmas night. Their ... their resolutions are nonbinding because that is the job of the City, to make local landmarks. Even if this didn't become a local landmark and was still preserved, the State Historic Preservation Office would still send the application forward to the federal office, and a ... a designation could be made, probably would be made, because a determining factor in those is what the State Historic Preservation Office says. Um, to answer the question you asked John Yapp, it is four stories — not one. To address Mr. uh....is it Dougman's comments? Um ... what Ann Freerks was referring to was not a threat against Ted Pacha. He ... Hodge Construction presented a ... a conceptual drawing at the November 20th meeting that also, even if that space was a vacant lot now, did not meet the Comprehensive Plan! And since the P&Z Commission has done their due diligence and has followed the Comprehensive Plan, they stated that they could not vote that design ... they could not approve that design. Hayek: (mumbled) ...you're over five minutes so you'll need to wrap up (both talking) Trimble: All right ... well thank you. Hayek: Thank you for your comments! McCarragher: My name's Jim McCarragher. I'm the attorney for Theo Resources LLC. Just a couple of comments, uh... uh, you heard me before talk about property rights. Uh, I think we've had enough about that, uh, tonight, but I do concur with the fact that the City ordinance does show exactly how much strength they put in property rights when they ... makes a super -majority when the property owner protests it. But ... but tonight we've heard that these, uh, structures that have been, uh, declared to be unsafe and dangerous by VJ Engineering, uh, and are currently under municipal infraction to be dangerous and unsafe, uh, would cost a mere $15,000 to be repaired. Uh, Theo Resources has had quotes from a mason in Kalona of $310,000 and $315,000, uh, if the ... if they could be repaired, but you've also heard from VJ Engineering that if...if in fact these buildings could be repaired, it would be a long process, fraught with potential injury and substantial, uh, risk of liability. Uh, these buildings are unsound. They're unsafe. They're beyond their useful life. If tonight you vote these buildings historic, you're voting a landmark historic for buildings that are unsafe and dangerous, and beyond their This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council special formal meeting of February 9, 2015. Page 15 useful life. Uh, I believe ... the other thing I would like to comment on — it's a fact that, uh, this is in ... only conceptual. This is not a requirement under the Comp Plan. I think you already know that, and you've said that, but it's only conceptual. It's visionary. It's conceptual. Uh, for all of these reasons, uh, I would hope that you would vote not to declare 610, 608 historic structures tonight. Thank you. Hayek: Thank you for the comments. Moorice: Good evening! I'm Dave Moorice and I'm one of the actualist... actualist poets. In 1969 I moved from St. Louis to Iowa City to be in the Writer's Workshop. The first house I lived in was located at 214 E. Court Street. My roommate was Chuck Miller, a poet influenced by the beats. After Chuck moved out, Allan and Cinda Kornblum moved in with me. It was the perfect place to read, write, and publish poetry. We had an open door policy. Lots of poets. Workshop and non - workshop people came over. We became great friends, and our poetry movement — actualism — was born there. Recently, Allen Kornblum passed away. He began his rags to riches publishing career by putting out a mimeographed magazine called "Toothpaste." A few years later, he changed the name to "Coffee House Press" and moved to West Branch, and later to Minneapolis, where he published dozens of new titles and became one of the leading small -press publishers in the United States. Many writers agree that he changed the way publishing is done. He encouraged women and minority groups to submit their work to him. Allan was one of the founding actualists. Epstein's Bookstore became a favorite hangout, and Glen and Harry Epstein encouraged experimentation with poetry. They led ... they let actualist and workshop poets have readings in their stores. They let me write poetry marathons there, including one marathon that wrapped the bookstore in paper. Donnelly's Bar also became a favorite hangout. We would take a booth, order a pitcher, and talk about poetry. Friendship was the most important key to the door of actualism. These three wonderful places had one thing in common: 214 E. Court Street. Destroyed by urban renewal. Epstein's Bookstore. Destroyed by urban renewal. Donnelly's Bar. Destroyed by urban renewal. In fact, much of the downtown area was destroyed. It was replaced by a crazy quilt of different styles of buildings. Still, the actualists thrived. Now we come to the cottages. The middle cottage, 610 S. Dubuque, was one of the most important actualist hangouts. Under Jim Mulac's ownership, Jim's Books sponsored poetry readings galore! Here's a poster of one. (clears throat) In fact, one year Jim had a total of 52 readings. One per week. Jim's Books filled the gap left by urban renewal, which hadn't reached its claws that far out of the main part of town. Today, believe it or not, there are plans for erecting a 40 -story building in the downtown area! A 40 -story building? That is height, the height of stupidity! Iowa City isn't New York! How strange it will be to see the downtown at its current height, plus one building jutting up four times the height of the Jefferson Building. Here's my sub... suggestion: scrap the big building and preserve the town's heritage by repairing the cottages! We don't need an Empire State Building in Iowa City! Urban renewal ravaged the town This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council special formal meeting of February 9, 2015. Page 16 about 40 years ago. Now the cottages are the latest endangered species. As the song goes, "I can't believe we're on the eve of destruction!" Thank you! Hayek: Thank you for your comments. Dane: I don't have anything to add. I'm just back up. I'm, uh, Mary Jo Dane. Um, yes, Matt was a student of mine a long time ago, and I said, `Oh, are you one of those higha-kia-kia-kia-kia-kia-ki-hayeks,' and he says, `I guess so!' (laughter) Anyway, um ... I just wanted to add that I've spent my whole life in Iowa City. I was born on the ... on the Dane Farm just, uh, west of the Airport, and my dad is ...is, uh, bequeathing, um, all of his part of the property. His brother also owns some of it. All comes down from our grandfather. To be a park, and ... he said that he went through the City, the County, and the State ... every place he could, to make sure that that property was locked up tight! That nobody could undo that, and build a trophy house on the top of the hill up there. Um, and I said, `Oh, I didn't know they couldn't undo things,' and he said, `Yes, they can!' And now I'm learning that they can. But he spent his career as trust officer at Iowa State Bank and um ... he knows about these things. So, um ... I just wanted to ... to add that, that I've learned a lot during this time. Hayek: Thank you for the comments. Is there anyone else? Carlson: Hi, my name is Nancy Carlson, and I'm here as a voice for the working class. I am of the working class, and when my ancestors came to this country, they were of the working class. I ask each of you on the panel, when your ancestors came to this country, did they come with pockets full of money? Or did they come looking for a chance? To build... a better life, and to build a community. These cottages were built in the 1850s when the population of Iowa City doubled. They provided homes for the workers who helped to ... initiate and have this go forward. I am proud of my heritage. I am proud of the fact that my ancestors, three of my ...three of my grandparent... two, my two grandmothers worked as maids in houses when they came. My grand... fathers worked as hired hands. They did not come with money. But they came with a dream, the dream that every immigrant still does come to ... to the United States with today. It is very easy to save large, luxurious, elegant homes. Is that the legacy that we want to pass on to the ... the generations that go ... come after us? Do we want to say that ... the, in the generations before them, there were no poor people. There were no working people. We erase that history and we save the history of the people with money! I would like to see ... uh... residences that my ancestors might have lived in saved. I would like to see Iowa City and you people in ... on the City Council whose pare ... er, ancestors came to the United States to say, `We are proud of our heritage. We are proud that we come from immigrants, from another continent, who came to the United States to build a democracy which gives sup ... gives protection and support to all, um ... classes of people, not just the rich. Are we ...do we want, are we ... uh, so ashamed of the fact that our ancestors came as maids and laborers? Do we want to forget that? We are standing on their This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council special formal meeting of February 9, 2015. Page 17 shoulders. We are where we are today because of what the vast majority of working people did. Without the working class, our city would have never grown. I would like to see us pay homage to those people who are so easily forgotten and discarded when they are done. So that we can move forward. I would like to see you work to ... with Mr. Pacha to see if we can't come up with a solution where he can have his ... rights protected, but where we can honor the working class people who came to Iowa City to help build the city that we live in today. Thank you. Hayek: Thank you for the comments. Parkes-Pooret: Hello, my name is Airiane Parks-Pooret. I live on Market Street. Um, one of the issues I guess was, um ... that was brought up was with the structural soundness and everything. Um, although this building has nothing to do with structural soundness but... about 10 years ago a beautiful historical building in downtown Iowa City was about to get converted to yet another bar. But, Iowa City members came together and ... decided to raise money to make the Englert, I mean, that's basically just what happened to the Englert. I mean, community members got together and decided to raise money and (mumbled) has hosted a wealth of like shows and it's just been an amazing opportunity to be able to see art and to be able to experience local as well as international talents. Um ... and my concern, I mean, with the recent years, especially like with, you know, with the... I mean, I still remember the ordinance that was made about five years ago with panhandling, and ... how it, you know, it didn't really entirely restrict or completely forbid, um, busking or you know having an opening case and allowing for free, spontaneous performance art to happen, but a lot of artists were very alienated by the fact and um, in order for art to grow, there needs to be some way of being able to incubate that and to be able to forward those ideas and given just the wealth of history that these cottages have, like why not, I mean, the possibilities are endless. Like why not have it be like a space where we can have poetry readings or you know ... you know, spontaneous art things happening. I mean it's just ... there's just so much ... there's so much potential in these tiny little buildings where artists, you know, and people... also people who can't afford a lot to be able to, you know, just to be able to share a space and there's, you know, public spaces or something that's just ... I mean, disappearing, and ... another thing I'd like to bring up, um, when people talk about trees. These houses are, I mean, are surrounded by trees and one of the things that, you know, develop ... that happens when development happens (laughs) Sorry, I'm being (laughs) incoherent. I have a lot of things to say in a little amount of time, but um... is that a lot of trees have already established root systems, which when ... when it comes to like flood mitigation, um, the root systems help reduce soil erosion, so there's these trees that are already, you know, that already offer shade and you know maybe even the little area that's next to the, uh, the ... the house that has been demolished already could become like a little performance space. You know, just like little, cute, small like ... you know, houses and places (mumbled) small businesses. Like I remember 10 years ago ... a friend of the families was about to This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council special formal meeting of February 9, 2015. Page 18 open like a ... a photography studio in one of those places. So I mean, you know, why not have those buildings there and keep them intact to allow that to happen in the future? Thank you very much. Hayek: Thank you for your comments. Karr: Ma'am, would you sign in? Just open (mumbled) Parkes-Pooret: Yeah, the uh book is (several talking and laughing) Hayek: (several talking) ...take it out? (laughter) Throgmorton: Oh no! Lost book! (laughter) (several talking in audience) Frey: Good evening. My name is Kirsten Frey and I'm here on behalf of a group of developers, and I was here last time so I will try not to take too much more of your time. I just wanted to respond to a couple of points and add a couple of... a few pieces of information that I think are important. One of the questions that has been asked tonight is what of...is the point of the ... the Comprehensive Plan if we're not able to designate this as a landmark building, and I think the point is balance. The point is we need to balance the interest in historic preservation with the property owner's rights. The Historic Preservation, um, Friends have argued that this has been identified in the Comprehensive Plan for years as a potentially historic site, and if that is the case, my question is why are we waiting until now to seek this landmark designation? Why did we wait until Ted Pacha spent tens of thousands of dollars in connection with the development? Why are we hearing for the first time tonight that they are offering to pay the cost of...redoing the brickwork and helping with the tax credit? I would submit, uh, that the Friends of Historic Preservation ought to diligently seek out properties that they believe are landmark status and have an obligation to engage in good faith negotiations with a property owner, before they spend tens of thousands of dollars in connection with developing plans for their property. One of the arguments that has been made is that Mr. Pacha can simply carve out the cottages and develop the remainder of his property. As the potential developer has talked about tonight, it's not quite ... that simple! Uh... the lots go all the way back, significantly past the rear edge of the cottages and the entire lot would be submitted to the landmark designation status. If it isn't, you still can't build more than one property on a single lot without going through a significant City process to allow more than one improvement on a lot. In addition, given the structural integrity of the buildings, if we're going to do construction that close, there's significant concerns about how that construction pre ... to ... can progress. Importantly I think, uh, it's also important to note from the Friends of Historic Preservation web site, I note for you that the Friends in response to a question indicates that historic districts offer protection from demolition, alternation, or construction by a neighbor. In fact district designation is intended to protect you from inappropriate neighborhood busting development or on the property adjacent to yours. I believe that this makes it very This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council special formal meeting of February 9, 2015. Page 19 clear that one of the goals of the Historic Preser... Friends of Historic Preservation is to make sure that development doesn't occur, and that if these are designated as a landmark, it will im... they will have control over what happens on the surrounding property as well. It's not simply a matter of designating hotches... the cottages and the remaining properties can proceed as planned. Uh, and so I... with those, uh, comments (mumbled) I would ask that this Council, uh, vote no on the designation of the ... the properties as a landmark. Thank you. Hayek: Thank you for the comments. Clark: Good evening. Sarah Clark, Brown Street, and I don't want to get into a tit for tat back and forth between, uh, testimony, but actually indeed, um, the cottages were referenced in the, uh, document that was passed unanimously by City Council in March of 1992, and Bresco, Courtney, Horowitz, Covey, Larson, McDonald, and Novick all voted for it. It's the Near South Side Redevelopment Plan. If anyone would like a copy, I can give it to them. Um, and they are referenced as, um, possible, urn ... should be considered for ... (mumbled) ...and I'll quote it exactly. Um ... it's ... thank you very much! (laughter) Urn ... other structures which may have significance, and there's a whole list. It includes 608 to 614 S. Dubuque Street. Um ... I do want to say, and I do think it's been a bit of a red herring, uh... um, all the discussion about, gee, 11th hour, blah, blah, blah; why don't they if they've been that worthy of them why don't they ... why haven't they been coming forward ... been brought forward for designation earlier than this. Um ... well, the public does not normally know what has been going on in discussions. We are not privy to discussions that the Planning Department is having with developers. We don't have any idea until something suddenly becomes public and on the agenda, most times, if something is actually going to take place. And that's when you have to kick into action. Unfortunately, and I'm going to make a pitch right here, urn ... there used to be, I believe, at least a half-time staffer, uh, devoted to historic preservation matters, working through the, um, what was then called I guess the Planning and Zoning Department, or the Department of Planning. That position has not been filled, um, so to expect citizens to just constantly be (laughs) like checking in, trying to figure out, go through the back door, what's going on, what's getting developed and what not I don't think is realistic. Um, no one wants to work in a rear -guard kind of action. Everybody would love to be proactive and get out in front of it, but that is just not realistic in lots of times, and I'm afraid that was the case here, the way I understand it. Thanks a lot. Hayek: Thank you for the comments. Pettit: My name is Joseph Pettit. Um ... I've been here to most of the meetings. I have a few questions I've jotted down, listening to other people speak. I don't know if I'll be able to get through ... if all the questions will be able to answer ... be answered. Um, there was a point brought up by ... was it, uh, Bob Elliott, I believe, about a ... in the work session meeting beforehand about it. The ... a win- win situation. Um ... being ... I believe with the Historic Preservation, it being This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council special formal meeting of February 9, 2015. Page 20 talked about. Um, was there any other context to this, urn ... well, to this statement? To ... would anybody remember how that statement was made, for those of us who weren't in the ... the, um, at ... well, present at the session. (several talking in background) Hayek: I don't know, I mean ... we were present there, but what ... we're really not set up, sir, to ... to kind ... to ... to do a back -and -forth. So... Pettit: Okay. Hayek: ...what I would ask is that you make your comments to us and ... and, uh, advocate for your position. Pettit: Well, okay. Thank you. Well ... I will ... I will make my position clear. I would like to see the cottages preserved, but also ... to not leave, uh, Mr. Pacha in ... twisting in the wind. He ... he or somebody else, I think it was Mr. Pacha, emphasized that he was just a property owner and not a developer. I think the actions that have been going on since November are ... have been maybe done out of fear of what will happen if the cottages are sold to a developer who would then knock the cottages down. Is ... maybe a ... maybe also the fear that the ... that Mr. Pacha would demolish the cottages in order to, uh, satisfy the, uh, re... requirements of structurally deficient buildings. Uh... let me check my note... check my notes here quickly. Uh, I'd also like to add that there was a op ... a letter to the editor or... in the Gazette a few weeks back by somebody who said that the cottages should be kept because of their insignificance. They're not the ... they're not Plum Grove or they're... they're not other sorts of...of Victorian or turn -of - the -century era houses that we have preserved, that it would serve as a reminder of working class, as others have said. The ... another part about the working class thing is that... there's, well, people (mumbled) can tell you that, yes, there were poor people, there were working class people who built Iowa City, but then that would be it. There would be no frame of reference to describe how those people lived or what life was like in Iowa City. Pictures would do some service, but... it might not be enough to show what sort of bricks, what sort of construction was used. Uh... another ... another thing that came up in this meeting was sort of the... well at first there were ... there's been the sort of, um, sort of dueling structural reports. One on side says that the cottages are sound. Other side says they're not. Now we get to dueling masons. One side says that they can be ... that the cottages can be repaired for relatively little cost. Maybe the cost of a .... a car these days. Other side says that you'd have to spend the equivalent of a super -car in order to keep, get the cottages back up to ... get back to snuff. It's... just... I ... I just have to just make note of that, is ... it's not the time for jokes, but I wonder if it's going to be dueling banjos next. Uh... uh... that's all I have tonight. Uh, I hope that you vote for historic preservation. Hayek: Thank you for the comments. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council special formal meeting of February 9, 2015. Page 21 Bennett: My name is Mary Bennett. I was mixed up about this meeting. I thought it was tomorrow night, but I was sitting at home watching the proceedings and realized I did want to come out and risk the ice to come make a few comments. Except for your early morning meeting, I've been at every one of these meetings to discuss this issue. I've been thinking about it cause I realized you have a dilemma before you. But we can document that this has been something this community wanted to do since 1992. People like Molly Naumann, Marla Spenson, two historic preservationists, that special reconnaissance surveys of these areas. I see when I look at the little village that we're even promoting a little market area called The Depot, uh, Shopping Area. I go to the Soup Kitchen to eat. I like that neighborhood a lot. It reminds me of the past. And I've looked recently at the smart planning principles that were passed by the Iowa Legislature, Iowa Code 18B, and there are very strong principles in there that I think are very forward thinking and that you have the opportunity to go above and beyond. One of `em is protecting the character of the community, the distinctive look of it, like we have in this neighborhood is one example. And also your planning should reflect the values of the community. (mumbled) demonstrate through all these public meetings that there's a core segment of our community that has values that need to be honored. These are the values that remind me, again, of Irving Weber walking down the street, or Will Hayek walking down the street. What kind of vision did they have? How can I remember them? How can I honor them? Other aspects of that plan talk about protecting historic resources. We're supposed to reuse. We're supposed to keep ... in favor of destruction and destroying. I recognize there's property values here, but there's also community values that have to be protected, and you have the tools of zoning in order to do that. When I looked at the Des Moines Register, a couple of weeks ago, and they talked about a poll with millennials, they said 75% of millennials would prefer to live in the suburbs than to live in condos downtown in mixed-use areas. So some of your forecasting is very difficult to make and you really can't predict what people are going to want in this community, 10, 20, 30 years down the road. But if you obliterate this memory that we have down here, that we have the chance to preserve, and we'll never know will we? So I urge you to use your wisdom, if not in this instance, in future instances to preserve what's important about our town. What's the difference between making a high-rise apartment place that houses 50 people who enjoy magnificent view and those of us down at the street level that number in the thousands who now have had our sky blocked, our character removed, and a million other problems that can never be erased once you go this direction? There are plenty of places in Iowa City for development, for capitalists to make a lot of money, and as I said in the first Planning and Zoning, excuse me, the first, yeah, Planning and Zoning, you have a choice. This town's going towards greed, leaving people out that are disadvantaged, that can't afford high - rent commercial places, low-income housing, or do you want to go the direction where the elite capitalists make all the money and all the profit they can possibly make? Thank you! This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council special formal meeting of February 9, 2015. Page 22 Hayek: Thank you for your comments. Okay. I think we're ... at the end of the comments. I am going to ... close the public hearing at this time. (bangs gavel) 2. CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE (FIRST CONSIDERATION) Dobyns: Move (several talking) Karr: Could I have a motion to accept correspondence? Dobyns: Move to accept correspondence. Karr: Thank you. Botchway: Second. Hayek: Moved by ... Dobyns, seconded by Botchway. Discussion? All those in favor say aye. Opposed say nay. Throgmorton: Move approval of the ordinance. Payne: (several talking) Second! Hayek: Moved by Throgmorton, seconded by... Payne. Throgmorton: So there's a lot to say, Matt. I'd like to make a few opening comments and then other people chime in and then we can keep on going for a while. It's really easy to construct this controversy in stark either/or terms. When I look out in the audience I pretty much see that. Most of the property owner, developer folks are over here, except for Sarah. Big surprise (laughter), and most of the preservationists are over here. Uh, so property rights versus public values. Us versus them. Good versus bad. This stark construction has led to increasing polarization, which we all feel, and to increasingly personal attacks on individuals. This does not serve us well. We're all in the same room! We're in the same town! It does not serve us well! It would be much better to work together to resolve our shared problem; to treat everyone with respect, as Bob Elliott, uh, advised; and not to attack or demean any of the individuals involved. With this in mind, I want to acknowledge Mr. Pacha's health concerns. Having experienced similar health problems myself, I know how distressing such difficulties can be. I also want to express my respect for his son's spirited guest opinion recently in the Press -Citizen. So as I see it, three major questions must be answered with regard to the proposed landmark rezoning. Would the rezoning violate the owner's property rights? Have preservation advocates disrupted the process by intervening at the 11th hour? And are the cottages significant enough historically to warrant preservation? I'll just touch on the first one now and then This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council special formal meeting of February 9, 2015. Page 23 maybe come to the others later. Several people have condemned the ways in which the owner's property rights have been trampled upon. There is some truth to that! The owner does in fact have several important rights. Most important, the owner has a right to use his property in a manner consistent with existing zoning, which is Community Commercial 2, and he has a right to apply for a rezoning. Moreover, the owner of the property does have, and has had for the past 18 years, the right to demolish the buildings, but he can demolish them only if doing so would not violate contractual obligations to his tenants, or any other legal constraints on the use of the property. However, ownership does not entail the right to have his land rezoned to whatever he wants. Or to have it rezoned without conditions. Ultimately, this such a rezoning decision must be made by this City Council, which represents the people of Iowa City. Nor does the owner have in inherent right to benefit from the possible five or maybe even 10 -fold increase in the value of his property that would result from a rezoning to RFCCX. This potential ... uh, god, just skipped. Sorry! This potential... sorry! Frustrating! This potential increase in ... in value has not been produced by any investments the owner has made to improve his property. It has instead been produced by very recent public action, especially the City's adoption of a new form based code, and the density bonuses that it permits. Furthermore, the owner does not have a right to decide by himself whether or not the buildings on his property should be designated as historic landmarks. Again, this is a decision for the City Council to make. But, the owner does have a right, it's one of the reasons we're here, the owner does have a right to object to a proposed designation. As is his right, the owner has filed a petition, which has the legal effect of requiring a super -majority of this Council to vote for the landmark designation in order for it to take effect. If in the future the owner applies for rezoning to RFCCX, there is no guarantee that the request would be approved. It's not a threat. It's a statement of fact. But the owner could preserve the cottages and then use the resulting density bonus, or else sell it to another landowner, sell the density bonus to another landowner in the district. So ... that's the way I see the property rights situation, and I think it's quite different from many of the ways it's been presented so far. But other things to say and ... maybe I can stop at that point and ... y'all can talk some and I'll bring up some other points or whatever. Payne: I guess I don't see how that has bearing on what we're doing tonight, Jim. I mean what we're doing tonight is ... whether to grant it local historic preservation status has nothing to do with... Mr. Pacha or anyone else asking for a rezoning. Throgmorton: Yeah, that's a very interesting point. Uh, I would like to agree, and if that were the question, the answer would be obvious. But that's not what's been raised by virtually all the statements that people have made. (both talking) Payne: But that's what's still in front of us. That's what we are voting on! Throgmorton: Oh yeah (both talking) ...if you want me to I'll go on, cause I ... I'd certainly address that and other things I've been thinking about. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council special formal meeting of February 9, 2015. Page 24 Payne: You're going to say it all anyway! (laughs) So, you might as well say it! (laughs) Hayek: Get it out! Throgmorton: Fair enough! Okay! Diverse ... the diverse publics of Iowa City also have rights. Rights that belong to a people who live in a democracy. The most important right they have is the right to express their concerns, advocate what they value, and have their voices heard. In this case, the concerns have focused on three, now two, small working class cottages which have stood on that ground for roughly 140 years. Did preservation advocates express their concerns about these cottages at the l lth hour? To a degree I'd say yes they did. But this 11th hour objection overlooks the fact that the staff, the owner, and a potential developer had been engaged in private discussions about the property's redevelopment ... uh, for a few months, prior to the possibility ever being revealed to the public. As best I can sell... as best I can tell, preservation advocates were neither privy to nor notified of those discussions, even though the Riverfront Crossings' plan explicitly states, "Preservation of these structures should be a goal." Consequently, preservation advocates were shocked to be told at the 11th hour that those cottages would be demolished. And they were stunned to see one of the cottages torn down before 8 ...before 8:00 ... before 8:00 A.M. on Christmas, on the day after Christmas. As an elderly neighbor of mine who lived in Iowa City, has lived in Iowa City for almost 50 years said, "This is not how we do things in Iowa City." So, despite being compelled to intervene at the 1 lth hour, Friends of Historic Preservation and others have amply documented that the cottages embody a uniquely important part of Iowa City's history and identity. The State Historic Preservation, Preservation Iowa, our Historic Preservation Commission, and our Planning and Zoning Commission have all recommended designation. And by intervening when they could, advocates did precisely what we should want them to do! They drew our attention to the value of Iowa City's history, and some of the built structures that embody that history. But this does not mean that we should d exactly what they advocate. It does mean we should respect their right to promote what they value. In brief, the owner does have many rights, but he does not have the right to do just anything he wants with his land. And his rights are not being trampled upon. Preservation advocates did intervene at a late hour, but they had no other choice. And the record amply documents the case for preserving the cottages. So with these thoughts in mind, I'm going to vote yes. There's a surprise! Other Council Members are likely to vote differently, but regardless of how we vote tonight, the underlying conflict's going to remain! And it's likely to become increasingly polarized and virulently unless we find a satisfactory way for us collectively to re ... to resolve the conflict. I believe the way out begins with everyone understanding that first the owner does not have a right to have his property rezoned to RFCCX without conditions. Second, the cottages face a perilous future unless the owner chooses not to demolish them. And third, our This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council special formal meeting of February 9, 2015. Page 25 shared lives are going to be worse... together are going to be worse if we don't collectively invent a mutually satisfactory solution. (noises on mic) Mims: Well I'll ... give my perspective on this and try to be brief. Um ... the ... the State code, which the Iowa City code follows, um, requires that if 20% of the property owners, or if 20...I hope I'm right with this, Eleanor, or if 20% of the property owners within 200 -feet file a protest, it triggers a, uh ... requirement of the City Council to have a three-quarters positive vote to pass. Okay? So the State code by the nature of that recognizes the importance, in my mind, of property owners rights. Um, that ... that it takes a super -majority, um, to ... to require that rezoning if the property owner, um, disputes that. The Historic Preservation Commission and the P&Z, as I read their minutes, and I ... I do, I want to, you know, express my appreciation to the members of both of those groups and the Friends of Historic Preservation. We have a lot of very passionate people in this community, and I think it's one of the things that makes Iowa City ... you know, a really strong community. We also sometimes have really strong opinions that oppose each other! And I think this is ... is one where some of us get into that. But their focus as I read their minutes, legally were narrow and it was focused specifically on the merits of historical designation of these buildings. The Council has to, and I think is expected to take a broader perspective, um, as we make our decision. If we weren't, then there would be I guess no real reason to have a three-quarter majority and we would basically be rubber-stamping what the others did. From my perspective we have to look not only at the merit of that historical preservation, which I think has been shown, but the rights and wishes of the property owner. I think the value to the community in terms of economic development or lost economic development opportunities. As we've heard many times tonight, um, and you can ... you can parse it whatever way you want, but it has been in planning documents and Comprehensive Plan documents for years that these cottages have historical value and we should look at opportunities to preserve them. But again, as many people have said, those have been goals. Uh, I think the fact when the ... when the, uh, form based code was written, it was written in there to give incentive to property owners for historic preservation. To give them density bonuses, if in fact they would be willing to, uh, preserve historic buildings. Did not demand it, but gave them incentive to hopefully encourage them to do it. Uh, just quickly a couple of other things. There's ... a number of comments were made early about... earlier about the City Council and ... and property owners, uh, protesting, and this was particularly our ... our consultation with P&Z. I see this as a very, very different situation than, um, a historic district or conservation district where you have many, many property owners. Um, I believe in both our Jefferson Street Historic District and I think also maybe in our Mann-Goosetown Conservation District there were property owners who protested that and at least in the Jefferson Street, I believe it was a... had to be a super -majority, and maybe in the conservation district as well. And we did that, because we felt the benefit to the community for those districts was very, very important, and the burden for any one property owner was not that significant when you compared it to the benefit of the entire community for those This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council special formal meeting of February 9, 2015. Page 26 areas. Here we're talking about historic designation for one property, two properties if you will, with one property owner. I see that as a very, very different, um, situation and really raises the bar in terms of the ... the onus that that is putting on that property owner. I believe that the City Council is very committed to historic preservation. I think we've shown that through previous actions, but I think as somebody said earlier tonight, in this situation — in all of these situations — there has to be a balance between the historic preservation and the overall benefit to the community. And in this case, I come down on the side that we need ... that I will vote no, that I think the benefit to the community, um, by not giving the historic preservation and allowing the property owner to do as he pleases with these is of the higher benefit to the community. Dickens: I'm gonna ... pretty much follow what Susan said. Uh, it's a requirement... if it was a requirement, then it would be a different story. It's a ... it's a goal. It's a vision! It's a call for special attention. Uh... it isn't a requirement. So the owner has, I believe, the right to do what he wants with his property. He's not gonna be able to do exactly what he wants. It's gonna have to go through zoning, which isn't a guarantee! But he has the right not to have it designated a historic district, if he does not want it to. And ... I think it's very important, uh... uh, I look back at all the people that have spoke and I kept notes on every person. Nancy Carlson said `the working class.' My ... my grandparents, my parents, they ... they came here to Iowa City during the depression, my grandparents. They took any jobs they could. They were working class people. They did whatever it could to ... to better themselves and better the next generation. I'm a benefit of what ... their hard work. I'm not ashamed of it. I'm happy that they ... they worked as hard as they do. I think we all work hard and it ... it's not a matter of...not loving history. I ... I was going to be a history major in college. Uh.... I have all the, uh, Irving Weber books. I refer to `em on a regular basis because I think history's very big part of Iowa City. I think it's very important. In this case, I don't believe... this particular area ... is that, doesn't deserve the designation that it does. I think the property owner rights outweigh on this particular piece of property. Payne: I think that, urn ... one thing has to be clear. The property owner is not asking for a change in zoning here. I think many people have said that. It's what I said to Jim. That's not what's before us tonight. That will probably come before us at some time in the future. Urn ... the Comp Plan has been, urn ... discussed at length by many people. It talks about what should be a goal and, um, conceptual in nature. Um, we want to pick those words out, but we also have to ... we also have to pick out the words, the rest of the words that says it bears emphasizing that development opportunities identified on the following pages are conceptual. And it goes on to say the decision in redevelopment is ultimately up to the property owner. We can't pick and choose which words we want to use. We have to use the whole thing, regardless of how it got into the plan. So, the property owner's rights are very important and we put that into our district plan. So I think that, urn ... that because Mr. Pacha's... is opposed to this, that that outweighs the ... the benefit at this point in time. My vote will be no. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council special formal meeting of February 9, 2015. Page 27 Botchway: I can appreciate both points of view and I've made comments about the nature of the process on both sides. Um, I also can appreciate the process that the developers go through, um, and I think we need to take a look at that process, um, so we can still encourage development, which I love and want to see in Iowa City. Especially as a young person and just be many things to many people. With the contentiousness of this issue and the amplica... amplification of the issue between the rights of the pro... development, um, rights to development and preservation, it seems that one side will not like my vote. Uh, however, I see this as opportunity. Uh, Iowa City's different than many other places that I've lived. And I've come to appreciate the slow drivers, the interesting people, but more importantly the historic buildings that I've come to know and want to learn more about. Um, I'm very interested in the new and the old, and I'm very interested in what Mr. Rockne Cole talked about at the last meeting, but also the Planning and Zoning Commission discussion as well, regarding seeing the two sides, working together to where both economic development can thrive in historic and iconic images of Iowa City can be preserved. So I'll be voting yes for the landmark status. I will say, just based on some of the comments tonight, um, when we talk about goals, visions, and plans, I do have a problem with how we are splicing what we determine as requirements and what we determine as plans. Um, you know, my understanding when I, uh, ran for Council, my understanding as I've been on Council, is that we have consistently always talked about following plans. A lot of those plans are goals, and I'm even ... even when hearing some of these comments I'm thinking about our strategic goals that we are ... that we consistently talk about av... as we make ordinances or as we, um, do resolutions, as we ... um, you know, put ordinances into law, whatever the case may be. I don't like the ... I don't like the argument because I worry about the slippery slope of us ... deciding that, you know, this is a goal and this is a vision, um, for this particular situation, and then doing it differently when it's advantageous, um, to particular groups. I just ... I don't ... we might need to revisit it, and I actually might bring it up at the next Council meeting or whenever. If we're talking about this in that type of context, I think it's important because I think people consistently in the past, and even present, have brought up things in our Comp Plan and said `This is in the Comp Plan,' and we're saying that they might be different, or this is not what we meant. I think we need to be very clear going forward in the future because I think it's ... I think from, just in this conversation in and of itself it's been confusing. I agree with Michelle, um, when she talked about the landmark designation. If we are focusing on this particular issue at point, and none of the other issues that were addressed, then I don't have ju... excuse me, Jim's laundry list of, um, different commissions and organizations that have said that this landmark needs to be designated as historic, but if that's the case, if we're basing it on the expertise of the Preservation of Iowa, the Historic Commission, the Planning and Zoning Commission, and whichever one the State... Historic Preservation Commission, then that determination in and of itself would lead me to believe that we would say yes to this landmark designation. I understand there's different parts to it as well, and so that's why I spoke, um, This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council special formal meeting of February 9, 2015. Page 28 briefly about the other parts, but again, if we are focusing on that particular question, um, then I ... I feel like based on some of the things that, um, were previously mentioned from a lot of different, um, evidence or commissions that have spoken about this from 7-0 votes to, um, majority, whatever the case may be, it seems very clear that we should be voting yes. Hayek: I've been struggling this one ... with this issue, uh, for weeks and uh, in my seven years on Council I think I've established myself as ... as very pro -preservation. Uh, I mean, I ... I remember those super -majority votes. I was a proud, uh... uh, yes vote on ... on the Jefferson Street and on the ... on the Gilbert, uh, Linn District. Um, I've pushed hard for expansion of our brick streets budgeting. I was part of the group that saved the Englert Theater. In fact I led the charge to go out and get, uh, preservation tax credits, and I worked with Mary Bennett on my college thesis, which was about Johnson County during this exact period of time. Um, I ... it's clear my vote's not going to impact the outcome this evening because there... there's already... sounds like at least three, um, no votes. Um ... uh, and so it's tempting to cast a free vote, um ... um, consistent with what I've described, but I ... I can't support the landmark request on ... on this one. Um, and I ... I want to explain why. I want to initially say, I think this has been an unfortunate, uh, experience, on both sides. I think, uh, I think it's shameful that these properties have been allowed to deteriorate substantially over many decades. I think the timing of the demolition of the southern structure, southern most structure, is, uh, relative to Christmas, is ... is regrettable. Um, I think it's, uh, shameful that certain members of the pro -preservation side have ... have demonized the property owner to some extent. And I think some of the repre ... representatives, uh, of...of that effort, we ... we've seen some grandstanding and I think some wearing of multiple hats, uh, at least from ... from my perspective, potentially conflicting hats. Um, so this is not a community moment that I am proud of. Um, I will say that I think over the last meeting or so things have calmed down. Uh, and we've had some very good, uh, input, but it started out pretty ugly. Um, I ... I think these cottages are worthy of preservation, but I ... I don't think that means we should force preservation under these circumstances. And we talk about our Riverfront, uh, Crossings' plan. You know, that plan was the product of a lot of public input, um, from ... from the Council on down to ... to ... to the average citizens, um, and ... and, uh, through that very public planning process, we created an incentive program for this district, where we reward historic preservation, uh, through a density bonus. Um, and that ... that incentive program is roughly a year old. It has produced, as I indicated earlier this evening, two test cases so far. One was Tate Arms and one was this. And it worked there and it's ... it's not working here in terms of encouraging the property owner to avail himself, herself, itself of the density incentive. So we're one for one thus far. Um, in this situation we're being ... where there's... where there's clearly a ... a decision by the property owner not to avail himself of what we built into our plan, uh, a year or so ago, um, we're being asked to override a... an incented, or an incentive -based voluntary approach. And... and... and, uh, that matters to me because ... it's what we set up, and ... and ... and I... and I don't think that furthers the cause of... of historic preservation. I This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council special formal meeting of February 9, 2015. Page 29 think in fact it...it hurts the cause, um ... um, and ... and I don't say that to suggest that I would never support, uh, overriding, um ... what ... what's in that plan, but I think it depends greatly on the circumstances surrounding it. Um, and I... and I think the circumstances here with the ... with the investment, uh, and ... and the process suggests to me that the ... the imposition of...of...of, uh, preservation status, uh, over the objection of the property owner, when we've created an incentive -based voluntary plan is ... is just not there. So, what I would say is ... is we should step back. This is not going to pass this evening. We should step back and ... and look at that incentive program, whether it's here or anywhere else. Um, because if the...that carrot -based system is not producing the results that we as a city, uh, want to accomplish, then ... then we should reexamine it. And I think at a minimum, we should engage in a more proactive examination of structures in districts around the community that need preservation. I understand that it's a thankless task. It's under -resourced, you know, it's ... there's a lot of volunteer effort, etc., um, but the City can play a role in that. Um, and I'm happy to see that the Historic Preservation Commission is in fact taking up, uh, at its meeting later this week a number of historic structures, including the very important, uh, church on the corner of Iowa and Gilbert. Um ... uh... uh, and a number of other structures! That's the way this should, uh, take place, and I think that proactive approach, uh, although it obviously cannot, you know, eliminate the controversy regarding historic preservation, at least it mitigates the I lth hour, um, arguments against it. Um, and again, I think historic preservation, uh, imposed by the Council is warranted in some circumstances. I don't think it's ... it is ... it is in this case under these circumstances, and I ... and I would close by saying I ... I consider historic preservation to be a public good. Um, which is why I've supported it, uh, in ... in past circumstances, but ... but here, I ... I struggle with placing the ... the burden of that on ... on the owner, um, and ... and as I've said with other community objectives, for example affordable housing, if...if it's a public good perhaps the public should pay for it, and ... and uh, that can be accomplished through any number of approaches, including for example tax increment financing. Um, and maybe that's a ... that's an analysis we should engage in with respect to historic preservation, and earlier ... and I think it was maybe at the ... at the P&Z consultation, mention was made of, uh, the incentives in the plan for affordable housing in the Riverfront Crossings District. That is also an incentive and there is a ... carrot or ... or ... or a bonus that we ... that we provide to encourage that. But ... we also are in the process, the front end of a process, to examine, uh, housing in Riverfront Crossings and inclusionary zoning, which would be the top- down imposition by the City of a requirement for affordable housing in connection with qualifying, uh, development. If we adopt that, it's because we as a Council determine that affordable housing is a public good, and it's worth... worthy of us saying `You have to do it!' We haven't said that in our plan (coughing, unable to hear speaker) but with what we're looking at on inclusionary zoning is ... is, you know, and we signaled this to staff, if we're going to say `You must include inclu, uh, affordable housing in a ... in a development under these circumstances,' we're going to also come up with a way to pay for it, probably with public dollars, and I think that's the ... you know, that's where we're headed This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council special formal meeting of February 9, 2015. Page 30 with ... with affordable housing, and I ... and I would classify historic preservation as potentially of comparable public good. It serves, uh, a ... a public function. It carries out an objective of the community. Um, it has adverse, uh, implications for, uh, the property owner and that's why in the case of housing we're suggesting that we use public dollars to ... to follow up with ... with the imposition of...of a public, uh, requirement for something like that. So, uh, I ... I've struggled with this. This was a very hard one, even as recently as ... as the last few days I ... I was, uh, teetering on ... on ... on this issue, but I can't support it in this situation. Dobyns: Three years ago when I walked the area, I felt visually that these cottages were compelling. When I saw that an objective and professional historian, um, from the State applied a narrative of history to these cottages that verified my visual impression, um, I felt that, urn ... I needed to support the recommendation that these be, uh, designated an historic area. I will be supporting, um, the, uh, vote. Botchway: I just want to make one more quick comment. I know I just said it, but I just want to reiterate it, that we need to seriously look at our plans, our goals, our visions because I...I can speak for myself at least when we're talking about goals, that I strongly believe that those goals would be something that, um, we would be striving towards or adhering towards. I'm not saying that ... well I guess I am saying we're not doing this in this case, but um ... I just have a problem with that slippery slope argument standpoint because ... now I have a ton of questions! Uh, as far as what are goals, what are requirements. I ... I just ... I would like to look at a lot of stuff, I mean, particular to the Riverfront Crossings' plan because now I'm a little confused, but um, I will bring that up at a later time. But I just wanted to make sure that was clear. Hayek: Yeah, I mean, I ... our plans can ... there's a lot of text in those plans... Botchway: (mumbled) Hayek: ... and ... and the arguments on both sides of this issue... identified differing sections of those plans in support of their arguments and ... um, that ... that's a challenge I think with the ... with the Comprehensive Plan is that there's so much text in there it can be read in multiple ways. Not in all cases but ... but at least on this one. Throgmorton: Yeah, so ... toss out a couple words here. The ... the real meaning of the plan lies in the actions. And we're taking an action right now, which gives real meaning to the plan. Hayek: I ... I don't disagree, Jim, but I would also say that we gave real meaning to it when we adopted the ... a plan that was premised on the voluntary, uh... uh, incentive -based, uh, approach to historic preservation. I mean, that was ... that ... that's ... that was real meaning to the plan. So ... anyway ... this was a very difficult topic. It ... it has, uh, engulfed the community. We've had, you know, so This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council special formal meeting of February 9, 2015. Page 31 much input, uh, and ... and uh, you know, emotional pleas on both sides. I think that's one of the hallmarks of a strong community and I'm grateful for that. Um, these are not easy decisions for councils to make. Any further discussion? Roll call, please. Dilkes: Um, Mr. Mayor, before you vote, I just want to clarify one part of the record. There was a question about the density transfer and how that works and I just want to make sure that's clear. Uh, regardless of whether it's relevant or not (laughs) Um ... the ... the formula is the number of stories allowed, which in this case would be four, times the acreage of the ... of the site that's being preserved. Um, and then when it transfers, the only limitation is, um, the maximum height for the ... the district to ... the sub -district to which it, the transfer, is made. (takes roll call) Hayek: Uh, fails 3-4, Hayek, Mims, Payne, Dickens in the negative. It is now 10 of 9:00. Do we want to take a quick break or keep going? (several responding) Push through? (several talking) Okay! This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council special formal meeting of February 9, 2015. Page 32 ITEM 6b REZONING SADDLEBROOK, PADDOCK CIRCLE AND HEINZ ROAD — ORDINANCE CONDITIONALLY REZONING 21.24 ACRES OF PROPERTY FOR A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY/HIGH DENSITY SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (OPD/RS12) ZONE TO ALLOW 72 MULTI -FAMILY DWELLING UNITS LOCATED SOUTH OF PADDOCK CIRCLE AND WEST OF HEINZ ROAD. (REZ14-00010) 1. PUBLIC HEARING Hayek: I'm going to reopen the public hearing at this time. (bangs gavel) It was, uh, deferred from the January 20 ... 20th Council meeting. Uh, are there any ex parte communications with interested parties ... since the last time? Okay! John! Yapp: Uh, good evening, John Yapp, and (both talking) Hayek: I've got ... I guess it's not really one. Steve Gordon and I traded voicemails and we never linked up. (laughter) Proceed! Yapp: Uh, thank you! Uh, we presented this at your last Council meeting, so I'll be brief. Uh, this property is at the south end of the Saddlebrook development. Uh, this slide shows how the, uh, property was originally, uh, laid out and approved, uh, for 73 manufactured housing lots, uh, at that south end of the development. Uh, this shows the location of the proposed planned development. And an aerial photo. Uh, this is a graphic of the proposed development. It would take, uh, those 73 manufactured housing units and cluster those into 72, uh, condominium units in four buildings. Uh, one and two-bedroom units. Uh, the benefits of the property, uh, that ... that have been identified both by staff and through, uh, discussion at the Planning and Zoning Commission, uh, include, uh, clustering the 72 units into four buildings of one and two-bedroom units, uh, the same overall density as the previously approved manufactured housing park. Uh, the inclusion of trail connections„ street connections, and a future public street network for better connectivity, uh, higher quality of buildings, and a large amount of open space and trails included in the planned development, which are open and available, uh, to the surrounding neighborhood. Uh, a question came up at your last Council meeting, uh, regarding the construction of Shire Lane. Uh, staff and the Planning and Zoning Commission had recommended, uh, Shire Lane be constructed to the future McCollister Boulevard, uh, right-of-way, and we had some discussion of, uh, whether the applicant, uh, could escrow for that if they chose not to construct the southern portion of it. Uh, the applicant proposed a Letter of Credit. Uh, we have a memo in your packet that ... that if that is not, uh, a portion of that is not constructed, staff does recommend escrow, uh, consistent with how we do most other, uh, developments. Uh, escrow funds are far more secure than a Letter of Credit. Uh, since that time the applicant has agreed to sign the Conditional Zoning Agreement as recommended, uh, by the Planning and This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council special formal meeting of February 9, 2015. Page 33 Zoning Commission, uh, including construction of Shire Lane. With that I'd be happy to take any questions. Hayek: Any questions for John? Payne: So the CZA's not signed yet? Yapp: It is signed! Payne: Oh, it is signed! Yapp: By the applicant, yes. Hayek: And to summarize the issues we were grappling with last time have been resolved. Thank you, John. Anyone else from the audience? Gordon: Um, I'm Steve Gordon from Iowa City. I'm representing, um, the, uh, the developer and um, I won't take much time. Thanks for giving the opportunity to speak. I ... um, spoke last time so I'm just mainly here to answer questions. Just a few quick comments. Um ... uh, Jim, you mentioned that you were on the Council when this ... when this development originally started, and um, you know thanks for those comments and I was not with the company at that time but I ... but I knew that you were ... you were on the Council, and um ... uh, you know, we agree that we feel that this development's been a positive influence, um, on the area of... of Iowa City that has had some challenges over the years and um... and we are certainly excited to be a part of all that's going on, uh, in the area, and the... and the positive growth and activity that has happening. Um, we believe that, um, what we're ... what we're ... what we're proposing here is an opportunity, uh, to improve the design of this particular piece of ground. Uh, the basic use is the same, um, which is a ... a quality rental units, um, whether as ... as we discussed before, the manufactured housing, uh, for... for various reasons, um... is no longer a viable as ... to build and sell, especially the high-end, uh, type that we have in the current development. So whether... whether it was, um, the rental manufactured homes or what we're proposing here, um ... we feel those, you know, that type of housing is needed, as evidenced by the high ... or the low vacancy rate, high occupancy rate, uh, throughout Iowa City. Um, what this plan offers as ... as John just mentioned was what we feel is less density, less traffic, um ... uh, improved infrastructure for future connectivity, less rooftops, um, less concrete, uh, better aesthetics for ... for the whole entire area, and more green space, um, a higher tax base clearly, and um, and, um ... we have ... we've got the support of the neighbors. We've worked a long time with them on this. We've got the support of City staff. We have the support of the Planning and Zoning Commission. Um, and we would hope to gain your support, uh, tonight, as well. So, I appreciate the opportunity and here to answer any questions you may have! This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council special formal meeting of February 9, 2015. Page 34 Hayek: Thank you (both talking) Thanks! This is a public hearing. Is there anyone from the audience? Okay, before I close the meeting, are uh... we inclined to go with the P&Z recommendation? Okay. I'm going to close the public hearing. (bangs gavel) 2. CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE (FIRST CONSIDERATION) Dobyns: Move first consideration. Dickens: Second. Hayek: Moved by Dobyns, seconded by Dickens. Discussion? (mumbled) just reiterate, I ... I am not enamored of the zo... of the RS -12 zoning in here, in this area for school related and other issues, but that's not before us and uh, I am comfortable with the ... with the approach here. Botchway: I would agree, as well, Matt, but I ... I actually, um, I like Saddlebrook area. I think I ... stayed there when I ... my second year of law school, and um, it's just a really nice area and I can really appreciate the work that they do, and they were really helpful in, um, my ... um, large rent situation so, uh, this is, uh, I like the work they do and I think they do a really good job. Hayek: Further discussion? Roll call, please. Passes 7-0. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council special formal meeting of February 9, 2015. Page 35 ITEM 6c REZONING EXPANDING NORTHGATE CORPORATE PARK — ORDINANCE REZONING 34.21 ACRES OF PROPERTY FROM INTERIM DEVELOPMENT RESEARCH PARK (ID -RP) ZONE TO COMMERCIAL OFFICE (CO -1) ZONE LOCATED NORTH OF NORTHGATE DRIVE. (REZ14-00023) 1. PUBLIC HEARING Hayek: This is a public hearing. The hearing is open. (bangs gavel) Any ex parte communications? Mr. Yapp! Yapp: Uh, this rezoning is a request fro ... for a zoning from, uh, Interim Development to Commercial Office. Uh, this property was annexed to Iowa City in the early 1970s. Uh, the property to the south is, uh, Northgate Corporate Park, also zoned Commercial Office, and this would be an extension of Northgate Corporate Park. Uh, there was some discussion at the, uh, Planning and Zoning Commission level related to screening and ... and buffering, uh, for this property. The City does have commercial site development standards that do require street trees, parking lot trees, and screening of parking lots. Uh, the ... the Commission did not recommend any additional screening requirements, uh, beyond the normal screening requirements in the Commercial Office zone. Uh, initially the only access to this property will be from Northgate Drive. Uh, however ... uh, as the property is subdivided, uh, staff has discussed with the applicant the need to provide street connections to the east and west property lines, as well as future Oakdale Boulevard right-of-way, uh, on the north end of the property that as adjacent properties, uh, redevelop would provide that street connectivity. Uh, this property will develop, uh, incrementally, as the remainder of Northgate Corporate Park has over the past several decades. Uh, we have had some public comment related to increased traffic volume, uh, on Northgate Drive. Uh, Transportation staff have completed a traffic study, and have concluded that traffic volumes can be managed at the Northgate Drive, Highway 1 intersection through sig ... traffic signal timing changes, uh, as the traffic patterns change. Uh, there is some delay at that intersection at the 5:00 hour, uh, as employees all... all leave the, uh, leave the office park, similar to many other intersections in Iowa City. Uh, Kent Ralston from Transportation Planning is here if you have any specific questions about the, uh, traffic study. Uh, Commercial Office zoning is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan for this area, and both staff and the Planning and Zoning Commission, uh, have recommended approval. Mims: John, do we have ... um, any idea where Oakdale Boulevard will eventually... go through here? Is that a... Yapp: We do. Uh, we do have a, uh, long ... long-range arterial street plan showing the alignment of Oakdale Boulevard and the, uh, preliminary plat for this office park, uh, was just at the Planning and Zoning Commission at their last meeting. You'll be seeing it at your next meeting and that will show the Oakdale Boulevard right - This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council special formal meeting of February 9, 2015. Page 36 of -way. It's a ... it's across about the north end of this property, in an east -west alignment. Mims: Okay. So it would fall within this property a little bit or... Yapp: Uh, the part within this property will be within this property. Uh... Mims: What was that again? (laughter and several talking) Yapp: That was poorly stated (laughter) Let me show you with the mouse! (laughter) Uh, Oakdale Boulevard would ... uh, intersect with Highway l ...approximately where my mouse is. Mims: Okay. Yapp: And ... cross the north end of this property... Mims: Okay! Yapp: ... and then head further, uh, east.. Mims: Okay, all right. Thank you! (laughs) Payne: Oh, and it's the road that goes through the middle of this subdivision then that would line up to Moss Ridge Road. Yapp: That is correct. Payne: Got it! Hayek: Other questions for John? Throgmorton: Yeah, I ... I have a few. Uh, can anybody walk to it from their home? Yapp: Uh, there is a residence to the north. Throgmorton: One residence? Yapp: That is very close. Throgmorton: And maybe the Fuhrmeister's farmhouse to the east? Yapp: You know and the City did add a pedestrian bridge over Interstate 80, uh, at Highway 1. Uh, part of which to ... was to facilitate, uh, bicycle and pedestrian traffic to ... to this area, knowing that a lot of employees do ride their bikes to this area. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council special formal meeting of February 9, 2015. Page 37 Throgmorton: Right (mumbled) Dickens: To the northeast there's a ... Johnson County residential area. On this one picture here (mumbled) Throgmorton: (mumbled) Dickens: Fairly close. Not on that one. It's on the... Yapp: ... go to the aerial. Dickens: ....conceptual layout. Right up there! Throgmorton: How far is that, John? Do you know? Yapp: Oh, from this ... comer to this corner? Probably about a quarter mile. Throgmorton: Okay, well that's within a reasonable walking distance, you know, assuming there are trails or roads or whatever. Yapp: Yes. Throgmorton: But ... not many people could do that. Uh... are ... are there any food establishments within walking distance of this? Payne: Yes. Mims: Yeah. Yapp: There's a convenience store (both talking) Throgmorton: ... north Dodge. Yapp: ...I'm sorry? Throgmorton: On north Dodge. Yapp: Yes, right across north Dodge there's a convenience store. (several talking) Mims: ...there's Jonesy's and there's Jimmy Johns in there. Yapp: Yeah, Jimmy Johns to the south. Hayek: Plus the Highlander. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council special formal meeting of February 9, 2015. Page 38 Mims: It's in Northgate. Throgmorton: Really? Mims: Yeah! Hayek: Yeah Mims: Jimmy Johns. Throgmorton: All the times I've gone out there to doctor offices that I haven't seen (several talking) All right, good deal! Is it easily accessible by public transit? Yapp: Yes. It's a public street. Mims: Well and public transit runs out to Pearson, don't they? Yapp: That ... that's correct. Throgmorton: Yeah, see then you'd have to cross north Dodge Street and walk ... down and around Northgate and ... up to the top or whatever (several talking) I hope ... you understand what I'm gettin' at... Yapp: I do! Throgmorton: Right, so it has to do with design, and so what we have here is, uh, another pod of, uh, single -purpose development, which I would argue ... and virtually everybody in the urban planning world that, you know, the people who write about this kind of stuff, would say is ... inconsistent with ideas about long-term sustainability and resilience of...of cities. Payne: Well I would argue that most of the people that are out here used to be in Towncrest, which lots of people could walk to and they all left. So... Throgmorton: Yeah, be ... because the owner of Towncrest dis-invested. Payne: (laughs) Throgmorton: I mean if money had gone into Towncrest, private money had gone into Towncrest, and maybe public money too, would people have moved? I mean my ... my dentist is in Towncrest. Right? I've been goin' there for 20 years! Others have moved. You're abso... no question about that! Mims: If this were a totally new development, I would ... I would tend to ... be more in... inclined to see where you're going with it, Jim, but when you already have a significant development out here with a lot of businesses. To me, I see this as This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council special formal meeting of February 9, 2015. Page 39 simply an addition to ... to a core that's already there and with major employers out there, I mean, I can see where this is very close and very convenience for potentially a lot of those employees to be able to go to doctor's appointments during the day, etc. Um, and I also think that it's really important, I mean, I don't know how these new ... what the new business will be that are out there, but we also have a significant... segment of healthcare offices out there, and... Hayek: Remember we're in a public hearing, so let's maybe focus on questions and then (both talking) Mims: Yeah. Okay. Hayek: ...once we close it. Mims: I'll be quiet! Hayek: So ... just my little antennae going up! Mims: Yeah! Hayek: This is a public hearing. Is there anyone from the audience who ... wishes to address the Council? Hughes: Good evening, my name's Joe Hughes. I'm with Southgate Companies. We are the developer, um, that is, uh, seeking this rezoning. So we thank you for your consideration. Uh, we have been, uh, building out this office park for, uh, quite a while now and we're down to one remaining lot. Uh, we want to bring quite a few more jobs to the Iowa City area so that we continue to thrive. Um, so, uh, we'd like to continue developing this office park, uh, into this area. Um ... we do have a nice, uh, trail running through the office park, and at times in the past there has been, uh, public transit. Um, when ... when Pearson had a building here, which they just left in the last year, the bus came and they had it come through their parking lot, uh, and there was a drop-off there and they've left. That building has ... has switched tenants and I believe that has gone away, but I ... I think people would be in favor if... if the bus started coming out there again. Um, we've also looked at, uh, potentially, um, both sides, uh, working on some additional... additional screening to screen a little bit of the farmhouse for the benefit of...of both sides. Um, we prefer that that not be dictated at the City Council level, but something that both sides work at in ... in good faith. Um ... so ...yeah! Thank you for your consideration! Hayek: Thanks for your input! Anyone else from the audience? All right, before I close, take the temperature. Are we inclined to go with the P&Z recommendation? Appears to be the case. I'm going to close the public hearing. (bangs gavel) 2. CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE (FIRST CONSIDERATION) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council special formal meeting of February 9, 2015. Page 40 Payne: Move first consideration. Dickens: Second.. Hayek: Moved by Payne, seconded by Dickens. Discussion? Back to you guys! Mims: Well I just, again, I think, you know, the good addition to what's already there, expanding that. I think as we look at, uh, expansion on Moss Ridge Road, um, to the west of Highway 1, um, good office development, etc., within the community, with jobs, increasing our tax base ... you know, I think ... as Chris O'Brien has said looking at our whole bus service and how we do it, um, I think is kind of on the horizon here and so I think that's one thing that'll have to be certainly considered but very supportive! Hayek: Yeah, we ... we only have two... Mims: Two intersections (both talking) Hayek: ... some intersections with Interstate 80 and this is one of them. We want to get it right, um, I ... I think it's great to have this kind of vitality out there on ... on a commercial office park level. Um, and certainly what we're doing across the street with Moss has ... has a lot of promise as well. Um, and this is consistent with the first phase of this, uh, so I'm ... I'm okay with it. Throgmorton: So I recognize that the proposed rezoning's compatible with the existing Comprehensive Plan and that, uh, it's been recommended by Planning and Zoning unanimously and that as Susan and Matt just said that, uh, it's consistent with the built-up portion of Northgate Park. I totally get that. So I'm going to vote in favor of it, but I think the questions I asked make it very clear that I'm very skeptical about the long-term trend associated with, uh, the ... this particular development. You know, when you kind of imagine it continuing in some fashion or another on out, but we don't need to get into that. Hayek: Further discussion? Roll call, please. First consideration passes 7-0. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council special formal meeting of February 9, 2015. Page 41 ITEM 7. UNIVERCITY SALE, 936 EAST BLOOMINGTON - RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING CONVEYANCE OF A SINGLE FAMILY HOME LOCATED AT 936 EAST BLOOMINGTON STREET. a. PUBLIC HEARING Hayek: This is a public hearing. The hearing is open. (bangs gavel) This is, uh, through the UniverCity, uh, Neighborhood Partnership Program. Yet another ... fix -up and flip project. Anyone from the audience? Public hearing is closed. (bangs gavel) b. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION Mims: Move the resolution. Dickens: Second. Hayek: Moved by Mims, seconded by Dickens. Discussion? Roll call, please. Passes 7- 0. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council special formal meeting of February 9, 2015. Page 42 ITEM 8. 2015 LANDFILL GAS FLARE REPLACEMENT — APPROVING PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS, FORM OF CONTRACT, AND ESTIMATE OF COST FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE 2015 LANDFILL GAS FLARE REPLACEMENT PROJECT, ESTABLISHING AMOUNT OF BID SECURITY TO ACCOMPANY EACH BID, DIRECTING CITY CLERK TO PUBLISH NOTICE TO BIDDERS, AND FIXING TIME AND PLACE FOR RECEIPT OF BIDS. a. PUBLIC HEARING Hayek: This is a public hearing. The hearing is open. (bangs gavel) Uh, estimated construction cost is, uh, $482,500 and will be funded by Landfill revenues. Is there anyone from the audience? Public hearing is closed. (bangs gavel) b. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION Dickens: Move the resolution. Payne: Second. Hayek: Moved by Dickens, seconded by Payne. Discussion? Roll call, please. Passes 7- 0. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council special formal meeting of February 9, 2015. Page 43 ITEM 9. REVISION TO TAXICAB - ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 5, ENTITLED "BUSINESS AND LICENSE REGULATIONS," CHAPTER 2, ENTITLED "TAXICABS," IS AMENDED TO PROVIDE FOR THE REGULATION OF RIDE SHARING SERVICES OPERATING VIA A WEB BASED APPLICATION SYSTEM, TO REQUIRE THE CITY TO ISSUE IDENTIFICATION CARDS, TO ELIMINATE THE EXCEPTION FOR DISPATCHING FROM A LOCATION OTHER THAN THE OFFICE FROM MIDNIGHT TO 6:00 AM, TO REQUIRE COLOR SCHEMES, TO REVISE THE DEFINITION OF DESTINATION RATES, AND TO REGULATE SHARED RIDES. (PASS AND ADOPT) Mims: Move adoption. Dickens: Second. Hayek: Moved by Mims, seconded by Dickens. Discussion? Andrew: Hi, Simon Andrew, Administrative Analyst. Uh, the next three items all have to do with taxis. Uh, the first one is the third consideration of the ordinance that we've been reviewing the last couple of meetings. Uh, the second one is an amendment to that ordinance, uh, based on the discussion at Council ... at the second reading of the proposed ordinance, which, uh, amends the shared ride and extra passenger fee provisions, uh, based on, uh, Council's wishes, and the third item is a resolution adopting new fees with the new, uh, regulatory system. We have several staff members on hand here tonight if you have any questions! Hayek: Okay. Thanks. We may have questions. Uh, if anyone from the audience wants to address us on, uh, this or the other two topics, I ... invite you forward. Okay! I'll close it down ... close it down to Council, uh, discussion. Mims: I just want to thank staff for, um, kind of the creative way of moving us forward with some of the concerns we had without having to start over. Um, I think it addressed some of the shared ride concerns that some of the, uh, taxicab owners, uh, indicated last time, um, and still provides for the safety issues that we had, but um ... makes the business end of it a little easier for them, hopefully, to deal with. Hayek: Um ... I just want to ... point something out. We ... we received I think well in excess of a hundred... Mims: Probably. Hayek: ... emails from people who were, um, encouraged through a... an Uber solicitation to communicate with the City Council, and this went out ... I saw it on somebody's smart phone. Urn ... uh, and ... and I think the only reason he had gotten it was that he had used the service in another city and was apparently part of their system. But the, uh, the solicitation said that `City leaders have been reluctant to include This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council special formal meeting of February 9, 2015. Page 44 us in conversations.' Uh, us being Uber, uh, and the conversations being this and the related ordinances. Um, and so, uh, that wasn't my recollection and so I asked staff to look at this and ... urn ... uh, I can tell, uh, the Council and anyone watching that, um, between September, uh, and, uh, past the holidays, the City ... City staff had multiple communications with Uber. Uh, they met with them in person. They met with them by telephone. They exchanged information and answered questions and received materials, uh, on multiple occasions. I had a list created, and the communication back and forth is exhaustive. So I think it's a bit disingenuous to suggest that `City leaders have been reluctant to include us in conversations.' Um, there's a... a very well written staff memo, uh, in our packet if anyone cares to, uh, explore that further, but it also clarifies this issue. I take umbrage at it, uh, by it a little bit because, uh, I ... I think it misrepresents what the City did. I think what the City did was reach out to the ... to the cab community and reach out to the network based, uh, community, which at this point I ... I think is primarily Uber, although I know there are other plat ... there are other competitors on the horizon, uh, to try to come up with, uh, a system that would accommodate both types of, uh, service, and, uh, we've come up with something. Uh, Uber's not thrilled with it. I think the cab industry is not thrilled with it. Probably suggest that we struck a pretty fair middle ground, and as we've been... as we have since... since the dawn of cabs, back when they were pulled by dinosaurs (laughter) um, we have tweaked our ordinances relating to cab service from time to time, to accommodate changes in the industry or ... developments that weren't anticipated and so on and so forth, and I have no doubt that we'll be doing that with this over the years to come, but I think this ... this and the related ordinances, um ... uh, is ... represent a ... a fair approach to a ... a complex issue. So ... I wanted that out there. Payne: I think that it's important to say that the majority of the reason why we're doing these updates right now isn't to accommodate network based companies, such as Uber. It's to address safety issues. So these changes are going into place to address safety issues and we just happen to ... update them so that Uber can ... or network based companies can operate also and not be against our ... our code. So... Hayek: Anyway... Mims: Yeah, just ... real quickly. Earlier this evening I was looking for a document while we were talking about one of the other topics and I went... started back in January of 14. Came across taxi ordinances (laughs) This seems to be an annual... Hayek: Oh, yeah! Mims: At least an annual event that we go through. Hayek: Any further discussion? Roll call, please. Passes 7-0. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council special formal meeting of February 9, 2015. Page 45 Karr: Motion to accept correspondence. Throgmorton: So moved. Botchway: Second. Hayek: Moved by Throgmorton, seconded by Botchway. Discussion? All those in favor say aye. Opposed say nay. Passes 7-0. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council special formal meeting of February 9, 2015. Page 46 ITEM 10. SHARED RIDES REVISION - ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 5, ENTITLED "BUSINESS AND LICENSE REGULATIONS," CHAPTER 2, ENTITLED "TAXICABS," SECTION 4, ENTITLED "DRIVER REQUIREMENTS," TO REVISE THE PROVISION ON SHARED RIDES. (FIRST CONSIDERATION) Mims: Move first consideration. Payne: Second. Hayek: Moved by Mims, seconded by Payne. Discussion? Throgmorton: Well... (both talking) Hayek: Is there anyone from the audience on this one, first? Okay. Jim! Throgmorton: I think I'd just say I had a conversation with my wife, Barbara, about this, and you know we were talking about the revisions to the taxi ordinances... ordinance, and ... and uh, about how ... how it'd work if, uh, a passenger was in the taxi, a female, uh, passenger was in the taxi and ... and the taxi driver wanted to stop and pick up another passenger and all that (mumbled) Item 10 (laughter) changes that and we talked about it a little bit and she said, `Yeah, spot on!' So... Mims: Well, and thank the students for that! Hayek: Any further discussion? Roll call, please. Passes 7-0. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council special formal meeting of February 9, 2015. Page 47 ITEM 15. CITY COUNCIL INFORMATION Hayek: Start down with you! Payne: Yeah, I just want to give a shout out to our Police Department. I was talking to one of the, uh, fellows that I work with that actually got a... a call to go on a fire call, uh, last night and uh, the Fire Department was there and so was the Police Department, and it was an older woman whose, uh, smoke alarm was going off. And what she really needed was a new battery, the battery was low, and the policeman that had responded to the call, um, went to a convenience store, bought a new battery, put it in her smoke alarm so it would quit going off. So I just wanted to make sure everybody knows that our police ... our policemen are very customer -friendly, or people -friendly, um, to ... to our residents and that was a very nice thing to do! Dickens: Just a re ... want to remind everyone with the ... the snow is melting now but if you can clean out so that the sidewalks are clean, especially for the handicapped areas, I think it's still very important that we continue that, uh, it's something that the City can't do by itself. Also, Top Chef, uh, tickets just went on sale, which is an annual event downtown that features some of the top restaurants and, uh, tickets are on sale right now. Mims: Nothing! Botchway: Um, kind of echoing, uh, Michelle's comments, there was a recent article in maybe the Press -Citizen about, um, our Police Department and um, working with the Kappa Kids, which is an organization out of, uh... uh, Kappa League is Northwest Junior High and the Kappa Kids are Kirkwood Elementary, and just a good event, you know, really something that hopefully people in the community talk about other than some of the other stuff that's been going on. So I really was impressed, uh, by that and also the kids, you now, wanting to facilitate that type of, uh, environment. Hayek: Echo your comments that, uh... if you're a downtown business, uh, operator, uh, shovel those sidewalks. It is a huge courtesy to everyone else on the block. Um ... enough said! City Manager! This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council special formal meeting of February 9, 2015. Page 48 ITEM 16. REPORT ON ITEMS FROM CITY STAFF a) City Manager Markus: Uh, yes, this is Alec Bramel's last evening with us. Um ... (several talking) last meeting with us, and so we wish him well. He was a wonderful student liaison and he's done a great job for us as an intern, so ... best of luck to you, Alec! (unable to hear response away from mic) Hayek: You've matured a lot, Alec. You still look like a 15 -year-old (laughter) You've been great to work with, both inside City Hall and when you were representing Student Government. Mr. Fruin? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council special formal meeting of February 9, 2015.