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.