HomeMy WebLinkAbout2013-09-17 TranscriptionPage 1
ITEM 2. PROCLAMATIONS
ITEM 2b National Hispanic Heritage Month — September 6 through October
15
Hayek: (reads proclamation)
Karr: Here to accept the proclamation is Human Rights Commission Member, Jewell
Amos. (applause)
Hayek: Thank you, Jewell! Thanks for being here!
Amos: I'd like to thank all of you, and um, the reason why I wanted to accept this for the
Commission is because my mom was from Puerto Rico and she moved here in
1959 with my dad after they got married, and she dealt with a lot of
discrimination while I was growing up, and it has changed a lot, um, in her
lifetime and it just means the world to me to be able to hold this. Thank you.
Hayek: Thank you, Jewell. (applause)
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of September 17, 2013.
Page 2
ITEM 2. PROCLAMATIONS
ITEM 2d 20th Anniversary of National Public Lands Day — September 28
Hayek: (reads proclamation)
Karr: Here to accept, representing the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Jeff Peck.
(applause)
Peck: I'll just keep it really short and sweet. Um ... 20 year anniversary of National
Public Lands Day, we couldn't do the things that we do out at Coralville Lake
with all the public lands that we manage if it weren't for the community of Iowa
City and all the volunteers and ... the, and everything that they put forth in helping
us to maintain those lands, and for you to provide us with this proclamation, um,
recognizing 20 years of National Public Lands Day means a lot to everybody. So
they are your lands — please come out and enjoy them and we'll continue to
protect them and make them viable for this community for a number of years to
come. Thank you.
Hayek: Thank you! Thanks for coming.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of September 17, 2013.
Page 3
ITEM 3. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS
ITEM 3a Iowa City Kickers Club
Karr: We'd like to ask Mike Moran from the Parks and Recreation Commission to join
Sam Abusada, President of the Iowa City Kickers Club, and Roger Lusala, past
President.
Lusala: My name is Roger Lusala. My daytime job is the Director of the Mayor's Youth
Empowerment Program and my fun job is a volunteer coach for the Iowa City
Kickers, a Board Member, and a past President so I'm here with Sam!
Abusada: Thank you very much. Uh, on behalf of the Iowa City Soccer ... uh, Kickers Club
and the 1,900 community players and their family, we would like to present a
check to the Park Recreation Service and the City for their dedication to our
community and kids. Thank you. (several talking)
Hayek: ...wanted to say, I ... as a former Iowa City Kickers player for one glorious year
way back in the day (laughter) I want to thank you, and uh, what your group does
to provide athletic opportunities for the youth of this community is ... is
remarkable. It's a great partnership with the City, and we hope to support, uh,
soccer in this community for many decades to come. Thanks for everything you
do! (several responding) (applause) We should also indicate that this is a ... a
check for $10,000 and represents a substantial contribution to this effort. Thank
you.
Throgmorton: Hey, Matt, do you still relive all those kicks you made as a soccer player?
(laughter)
Dickens: He was more like Peanuts (laughter and several talking)
Dobyns: I don't hear an answer, Jim! (laughter)
Hayek: I was more like that Columbian, uh, soccer player in the early 90s who, uh, kicked
the (can't hear) goal and scored one on his own team! (laughter)
Dobyns: And what happened to him, Mayor?
Hayek: Yeah, he did not live to play the next season, as I recall! (laughs) That's why I
got out!
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of September 17, 2013.
Page 4
ITEM 4. CONSIDER ADOPTION OF THE CONSENT CALENDAR AS
PRESENTED OR AMENDED.
Throgmorton: So, Matt, I ... I'd like to pull items 4d(1) and 4e(3) from the Consent Calendar, and
have staff explain briefly what's involved and so on, with regard to those two.
Hayek: Okay.
Karr: And that's a motion to accept minus those two?
Champion: Yes, it is.
Throgmorton: Okay, sure.
Champion: Second.
Throgmorton: Thank you.
Hayek: Moved by Throgmorton and seconded by Champion. Again, this removes 4d(1)
and 4e(3) for separate consideration. Uh, discussion?
Throgmorton: Yeah, so we're discussing the Consent Calendar?
Mims: No.
Champion: No.
Throgmorton: No? What ... what are we discussing?
Dilkes: We're discussing the Consent Calendar minus the ... the two items that you (both
talking)
Throgmorton: Right, so there are a couple things I wanted to mention on the Consent Calendar.
Um ... let me find `em. Uh, sorry, gotta get my notes clear here. Uh, I ... I... in
4d(5), um, concerns an agreement with South Slope Cooperative Telephone
Company to use the roof of the Library to install equipment that will enable free
Wi -Fi service in the entire downtown, but the two ... two hours free every 24-
hours. I ... I just want the public to be aware of that. I think that's probably a very
good thing. Uh, the second has to do with item 4e; no, what is it? Uh, 4,
um ... 4e(2). Uh, and I just note that we're setting a public hearing for the October
1 st meeting, uh, October 1 meeting, which involves a request to amend the current
plan for Saddlebrook to permit 13 apartment buildings with 142 multi - family
units and six duplexes with 12 dwelling units on roughly 20 acres of land, located
south of Paddock Circle. I just want the pub ... the interested public to know that
we're setting a public hearing for that.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of September 17, 2013.
Page 5
Hayek: Further discussion? Roll call, please. Passes. So now why don't we take up
4d(1), uh, and put it on the floor first.
ITEM 4d(1) CITY STREET FINANCIAL REPORT - APPROVING THE
CITY STREET FINANCIAL REPORT FOR THE FISCAL YEAR
ENDING JUNE 30, 2013.
Champion: Move 4d(1).
Mims: Second.
Hayek: Moved by Champion, seconded by Mims. Discussion?
Throgmorton: I was hoping that Dennis could explain ... help us and the public know what
substantively is involved in this particular resolution.
Bockenstedt: Uh, good evening, Dennis Bockenstedt, Finance Director for the City. And I put
up on the overhead for you to see the, uh, a copy of the report, and what I've got
up here is the summary page of the report. It's actually about a 10 -page report,
but I think this is the one that probably has the, generally the most questions and
most interest as far as the report goes. Um, and I'll just kind of walk (mumbled).
There's three major columns of this report, and the first one is the, uh, Road Use
Tax Fund column. Uh, the second one is the Other Street Monies column, and the
third one is the Street Debt. Uh, this is a report that's, uh, mandated by the State,
and essentially it's the way for the City to report all of its street maintenance,
construction activities throughout the year. So this is something that they require
us to report to them, so they compile the information and ... and as kind of, um,
way to ... to ensure that we do it, if we do not do this in a timely basis, they
withhold our Road Use Tax money until we do file this report. So on this report,
this first column, um, it starts with a balance and it reports all the Road Use Tax
collections that are distributed from the State to the City throughout the year.
And, uh, on the expense side of that same ... as column 1, the Road Use Tax, it
explains how we use those Road Use Tax funds throughout the year. So we
received about $6.5 million in Road Use funds and, uh, we use the bulk of that for
roadway maintenance activities, um ... we also used about $600,000 for snow and
ice removal, and then you can see the ... the next largest amount is $586,000, uh,
for street and bridge construction. And so, uh, that column really reports just the
use of that specific revenue source, uh, that is more or less gas taxes, uh, that we
get from the State. Uh, the second column, the Other Street Monies is more or
less a catchall and that reports any other monies that the City has spent on, uh,
street maintenance or construction activities. A little bit of that is from property
taxes. That's really from the employee benefit tax levy, um, $13 million under
Miscellaneous, uh, represents a wide range of revenues, from grant revenues to
parking revenues to a whole host of ever ... other things, but the bulk of that, about
$10.5 million, is bond construction funds. Um, and really the ... the primary
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of September 17, 2013.
Page 6
activities for this second column are in the Capital Projects fund, uh, for various
projects that have affected streets, storm sewers, sidewalks, anything that would
fall under the Road Use Report. Uh, just as under column 2, uh, it has a
breakdown of where all of those monies were spent, so the bulk of that was in the
Capital Project fund ... in the Capital Project funds. Uh, and the majority of it, uh,
about 80% of it was from, uh, bond construction activity. Uh, the last column, the
third column, represents the, uh, the debt service on street- related bonds. So if we
issue debt that we use for street construction, this represents the amount of that
debt. There were four streets that we repaid over the previous year, over last year.
So all the revenues versus repaying those bonds came from property taxes out of
the Debt Service Fund, and then you can see that the only thing in the Expense
column is the, uh, principle repayment and the interest repayment on those bonds.
So, that is really the ... the report in a nutshell, and then there's balances at the end
to represent the remaining funds on... still on hand for street and street - related
activities. Do you have any other (both talking)
Throgmorton: No, great! Thank you for doing that.
Bockenstedt: Okay.
Hayek: Appreciate it, Dennis! Further discussion? Roll call, please. Passes 7 -0. So why
don't we take up 4e(3) at this time.
ITEM 4e(3) OFFER RE CITY -OWNED LAND NORTH OF COURT
STREET TRANSPORTATION CENTER -1) APPROVING THE
COMPETITIVE CRITERIA AND PROCEDURES FOR DISPOSITION OF
CERTAIN PROPERTY LOCATED WITHIN THE CITY - UNIVERSITY
PROJECT I URBAN RENEWAL AREA; 2) DETERMINING THAT THE
OFFER SUBMITTED BY HIERONYMUS SQUARE ASSOCIATES, L.L.C.
SATISFIES THE OFFERING REQUIREMENTS AND DECLARING THE
INTENT OF THE CITY TO ENTER INTO AN AGREEMENT FOR THE
SALE OF LAND FOR PRIVATE REDEVELOPMENT WITH
HIERONYMUS SQUARE ASSOCIATES, L.L.C. IN THE EVENT THAT
NO COMPETING PROPOSALS ARE SUBMITTED; AND 3)
SOLICITING COMPETING PROPOSALS.
Champion: Move 4e(3).
Dobyns: Second!
Hayek: Moved by Champion, seconded by Dobyns. Discussion?
Davidson: Good evening, uh, Mr. Mayor and Members of the City Council. I'm Jeff
Davidson, the Director of Planning. Uh, in the mid -2000s when we constructed
the Court Street Transportation Center, uh, we bought the entire half block where
the Court Street Transportation Center is located. At one point we were
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of September 17, 2013.
Page 7
negotiating with the then -owner of the Mod Pod building to also purchase that,
and do a project at the north end of the Court Street Transportation Center that
would have been a private building, mixed -use building, uh, that they would have
demolished the Mod Pod, um ... uh., parcel and once the Transportation Center
was constructed, our parcel would have been combined with the Mod Pod parcel,
uh, and used to construct an office building. About that time, the ... the financial
crisis of 2007, uh, hit and we had the flood in 2008, and basically we decided to,
uh, and ... and most importantly, the ... the Mod Pod property owner decided, uh,
that they did not wish to sell. Uh, and so rather than force the issue, we just
decided well, that was fine. At some point in the future, uh, we would ... would
use that area as a redevelopment parcel. Uh, we used the parcel that you have on
your agenda tonight for a construction lay -down area during the construction of
the Court Street Transportation Center, always with the intent that it would
eventually be sold for private development, put back on the tax rolls, uh, as is
suggested tonight. Um, what we're basically doing tonight is creating a
redevelopment parcel that is consistent with the Downtown/Riverfront Crossings
Master Plan, will enable a ... a project to go forward that is consistent with that
plan. Our parcel separate, or the Mod Pod parcel separate, you cannot proceed
consistent with that plan. This enables that to occur.
Throgmorton: Thank you, Jeff. Uh, I ... I'd like to ask you two questions, uh, if I understand
correctly, the... the... the dollar value presumed is something like $670,000?
Davidson: 670.
Throgmorton: Yeah. Uh, but there's also a figure of $100,000 that's cited in the, I think in the
resolution, about air rights. I...
Dilkes: That's... that's in the Purchase Agreement, as well.
Throgmorton: So... so is that in addition to the 670?
Dilkes: Yes.
Throgmorton: All right, and that said 20 -feet of air right.
Davidson: Right.
Throgmorton: Over...
Davidson: What that would enable, Jim, is a high -rise building with windows of a certain
dimension on the south side of the building, over the Court Street Transportation
Center (both talking)
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of September 17, 2013.
Page 8
Throgmorton: Yeah, okay ... okay. (mumbled) be clear about that, thanks! And then the other
question is this — uh, would approving this resolution commit us, the City that is,
to providing any tax subsidy to whatever developer is...
Davidson: No. That would ... that would be according, uh, to our normal gap analysis
process and come to you for separate consideration.
Throgmorton: Okay. Okay. Good.
Davidson: If requested!
Throgmorton: Thanks!
Hayek: Thanks, Jeff! Any further questions or discussion? Roll call, please. Passes 7 -0.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of September 17, 2013.
Page 9
ITEM 5. COMMUNITY COMMENT (ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA)
Hayek: This is the opportunity at each City Council meeting for members of the public to
address the Council on items that are not on the agenda. So if there's something
not on the agenda you'd like to bring to our attention, ask that you come forward,
sign in, and also verbally give us your name, and please keep your comm .... your
comments to five minutes or less.
Gravitt: My name is Mary Gravitt (noises on mic) My name is Mary Gravitt and I have a
Masters in Library Science, and I'm here today to talk to Council about the Iowa
City Public Library, based on mor ... morality beyond the law. I've come here to
talk before because a 10 ... for 10 years I've been complaining to the Iowa City
Library about its ... its public conven ... veniences for the handicapped, because
first I had to start with the clock. The clock didn't work. So the only way I can
get them to fix the clock was to embarrass `em. They had this big group, talking
about how wonderful they are, so they fixed the clock. Only way I could get them
to put the handicap - accessible things on the bottom, the first floor, I complained
and complained and complained. And my, uh, as you can see by that letter, that I
was told that they didn't have to adhere to ADA law when it came to letting
handicapped people with weak upper body strength to come in, but when does the
law leave off and the public section... sector and decency begin? Because if I'm
going to speak about decency, I gotta speak about the Bible. I'm not talking
about religion, word of God, I'm talking about morality. Because in Matthew
23:27 it says, white washed tombs which will look beautiful on the outside but
inside (mumbled) filled with bones of the unclean and dead men, or so forth to so
forth. But the thing is, the I ... the Library wants to look nice. It wants to
redevelop itself. It wants to fix things that does ... do not need to be fixed. It
wants to remodel, give all the space, have a... a space where the teenagers
upstairs, but they said nothing about a security guard. You're going to have a
bunch of teenagers together, you're going to have a bun ... a lot of noise. So
according to that letter, the Librarian says that she doesn't... that's not under ADA
law to let people in to the bathrooms. But, according to the la ... American Library
Association, she has to do those things. Now I'm assuming because it's a public
library, it's a member of the American Library Association, and the American
Library Association said you have to have these conveyances for people to get
into the toilet! You know, you ... it ... it's a shame, but it ... but, to say this, but
handicapped people have a right to urinate and defecate in privacy. Like the
Bible say, they shouldn't be urinating against the ... against a wall in the Library.
So why not have the handicap- accessible on the second floor? The two
bathrooms and the snack bar. She claims there's 11 other toilets. I don't care!
I'm interested in handicapped people being able to get into the bathrooms and the
snack bar on the second floor. And even if ADA doesn't say it, ALA says that
she has to do it. Now I'm speaking from, as a professional, because I have a
Masters in Lis ... Library Science and how libraries, especially public libraries, is
meant ... they're meant to serve their communities, and that's the public library's
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of September 17, 2013.
Page 10
job! Not to send, and the second part, she's talking about ... low shelves and free
books. I'm not about free books. It was a person that works at the Library, he's a
senior citizen, somebody told me he fell off his house and broke his back. I don't
know about that. But I know he has hip replacements and he can't bend down to
put the discards on the shelf. He's a volunteer, and he wants to be a volunteer!
But when I was writing this, uh, person about was senior abuse. He asked for a
higher shelf. Now it wouldn't bother them. They took the shelves down, and
they did a stupid thing. Why would you put free books on the other side of
reference books? It looks like the reference books are free too! So it's not a
matter of free books. It's a matter of senior abuse. Now, she has to do what's
right, and the ... the City Council may be separate from the Library and so on and
so on and so forth, but I'm talking about morality. Morality beyond ADA, and
adhering to ... to the American Library Association. And, furthermore, I was just
going to talk about this one thing.
Hayek: Miss Gravitt, you're up ... your five minutes are up, so I'd ask you to wrap up.
Gravitt: Okay, I'm wrapping up with this. My friend has no cartilage in his hips. He sent
his application to, uh, SEATS. SEATS told him no because his days were up or
something like that, in February. He sent his application in August! And he's a
senior citizen, so ... so are we going to be treated decently cause we disabled and
old in this city that's... claims to be, you know, UNESCO? Thank you!
Hayek: Thank you for your comments.
Karr: Motion to accept correspondence.
Throgmorton: So moved.
Payne: Second!
Hayek: Moved by, uh, Throgmorton, seconded by Payne. Discussion? All those in favor
say aye. Opposed say nay. Motion carries.
Cole: My name is Rockne Cole and I'm here to speak about the Hieronymus Square
project at the corner of Clinton and Burlington. I'm speaking on behalf of the
Executive Committee of the Iowa Coalition Against the Shadow. As many of you
know we had concerns about the Chauncey development related to the scale of
that particular project. What's encouraging to us about the Clinton/Dubuque...
I'm sorry, the Clinton, uh, Street project for Hieronymus Square is that particular
parcel is zoned CB -10. It's consistent with the surrounding density of the area. It
complies fully with the Comprehensive Plan. So at least based upon what we
know at this point, we would remain neutral on that particular pro... proposal, um,
however, as the Council goes forward, we'd like to see the Council incorporate
Gold LEED certification or higher, and in that particular project, also include
adequate workforce housing. So with those things in mind, we'd ask the court
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of September 17, 2013.
Page 11
to ... to think about those key factors a lot of the members of the community care
about at the early part of the ... of the process. And with, if those two things could
be taken into account, um, we could move from neutral to possibly supporting
that project. We believe that particular parcel calls for higher development in that
particular pal ... parcel. All of the concerns that we had related to the scale of the
Chauncey, which we continue to oppose, are simply not present for that particular
parcel and we'd ask the Council to take that into consideration. Thank you!
Hayek: Thank you.
Dunlap: Hello and good evening. I'm Dr. Laura Dunlap and I happen to be a Member of
the local Pilgrim Chapter of the Daughters of the American Revolution, and I
wanted to come here today because we've always been invited every year to come
and speak for a few moments about Constitution Week. And, I wanted to just
remind everybody that on September 17th in 1787 our U.S. Constitution was
signed. In 1955 to celebrate this great event, Constitution Week was initiated by
the Daughters of the American Revolution and officially declared by President
Eisenhower in 1956! The D.A.R. is a non - profit organization that encourages
education, historic preservation, and patriotism, and D.A.R. members across the
United States study, teach, and discuss the Constitution at this time of year. We
all, uh, encourage all citizens everywhere to take time during Constitution Week
to appreciate the principles of our freedoms, equality, and justice, which were
committed to us by our forefathers. The D.A.R. was founded in 1890. Today,
among other things, we support schools for the underprivileged and award over
$150,000 annually in scholarships around the United States. The Pilgrim Chapter
of D.A.R. in Iowa City has celebrated over 110 years of service to this
community, and we as Daughters very much appreciate this Constitution Week
proclamation that you have made in the past, and hope you do so again, and we
thank you very much!
Hayek: Dr. Dunlap, uh, thank you. Uh, I do have a proclamation and .... and why don't I
sort of break from the agenda and read it. It's for Constitution Week and ... and
I'm glad you're here! (reads proclamation) So thank you for being here!
Dunlap: Thank you very much!
Hayek: I can give this to you! (applause)
Knight: Sorry about that. There was no traffic lights! Um, hi, I'm Roger Knight and I just
have a few little points for ya! Um ... the sidewalks still haven't been fixed
downtown. Um ... there's still some with real big potholes. I don't know if I'm
supposed to look for these for you or ... not (mumbled) you guys. I don't think
you, Mr. Mayor, are going to go out there with a shovel fixin' these (laughs) no
offense! Um ... but I would like to call the Streets Department but I've tried `em
before and it's ... talk to the Supervisor, Mr. Answering Machine. Um, gets real
frustrating when that's what it is. Um ... like in front of Iron Hawk I think it is. I
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of September 17, 2013.
Page 12
can't remember. It's somewhere down there by one of those businesses. (laughs)
I don't know if you can say `em here ... oops! (laughs) Urn ... they
screwed ... some wood into the cement, which covers the holes, but then you just
reversed the holes to go the other way. Because these aren't flat little things, I
mean ... there has to be some thickness, I understand, or it's gonna break,
but ... here we are again, we're just havin'...what could be temporary fixes, but
they're not fixes. Um ... over by ... where the Coralville buses stop. There's a
pothole about ... I don't know, maybe 3 inches wide, but it's ... dang near half the
...the width of the sidewalk. That's just one right there ... that it will tear my chair
up if I run over these things, and sometimes the students, they don't care. They'll
just walk wherever. I mean, I'm sure most of you, if not all of you, have seen
this. Urn ... just that, I just want to bring that up. I didn't mean to complain too
much about that. And then the other one is Mediacom. You guys have a legal
monopoly with them. So you guys should either look for someone else, or force
them to do what is right for their customers. And, one little issue I have is ... I'm
low income. There's not much money, and I understand it's a want not a need,
but can't they do, or you guys force them, to do something for low- income. It's
just something that would be greatly appreciated. You know, the ... for lack of
(laughs) yeah! Um, it does put a little bit of light into a sometimes gloomy day.
Um... so I mean, it's just things like that. And um ... I know it's going to be
brought up later, but I don't know if it's today, but ... an idea for this, uh,
downtown, the ped mall. Looks beautiful. There's a lot of great intentions, but if
you sit there and actually look at it, it's like let's put a tree here, put a tree here,
but it wasn't kept up. If you guys would trim `em up a little bit, then you'd have
light coming in. It looks better. Um, there's some spots, and I don't want to say
where so then if any of the students are listening or another bad person, there are
loose bricks in the ped. I've ran `em over. I know where they're at. If somebody
wants to talk to me after or somebody want to follow me out I can tell you where.
Um ... but that could easily be pulled up and go through somebody's window or
used as a weapon, uh, assault or somethin' like that. So it can ... somebody also
look into that. Thank you and have a good night!
Hayek: Thank you. On your last point, we have a comprehensive, uh, remodeling for lack
of a better word of the ped mall in the works. We're going through a process to
design that so stay tuned (mumbled) to the ped mall.
Knight: Cool! I knew it was coming up. I just wanted to...
Hayek: (both talking) Yep! Appreciate it! Anybody else during community comment?
Ayati: Hi, my name is Bruce Ayati. I live on north Linn Street and I wanted to make
some comments about the Gateway project. Uh, the first is the nature of the cost
estimates. If I was to understand the presentation correctly, the do nothing option
was $31.7 million, and the 100 - plus -1 elevation was, uh, $40 million minus $8
million, which put you at $32 million. Is it really the case that those two things
are roughly equivalent in cost, and if they're not, what does that ... you know, does
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of September 17, 2013.
Page 13
that bring into question the estimation process that's being done. The, uh, second
question I have, or point, is the old growth trees along, uh, the bluff. Is it really
the case that they can be replaced so simply? Hundred and fifty years is a lot of
time to grow a tree. I don't know if you can really just haul in trees like that.
Um ... and then the third thing I ask you to consider is the fact that there's a
vibrant neighborhood in that area, and it's one that's been, you know, built up
over the last few years, and is it really in the interest of the City to destroy that
neighborhood, uh, by, uh, an excessive, uh ... uh, construction project? Um...
perhaps maybe consider something like the 100 -plus with the uh... suspension
bridge, something with you know tremendous aesthetic appeal. We all, you
know, all of us who live along there also use Dubuque. We understand a need to
get access to the road. Hundred -plus, what is six, maybe over next 20 years we
will be out of the road six, seven times, compared, you know, compared to the
500- plus? And you're talking about estimates that are about $8 million. That's if
you believe those estimates! If you understand a big dig and how other things are
priced, you know, we're talking in all likelihood much, much more than $8
million. How many millions of dollars per day over the next 20 years are we
spending to have a road open? Are we $3, $4 million per day to have a road
open? It doesn't make sense to 500 -plus financially, compared to the 100 -plus.
You could take that money, use it to put a beautiful bridge, something that's going
to be on postcards, you know, the world over for the City of Literature, and you'd
have something really, really spectacular, and something that everyone along this
community could enjoy. If you put, you know, a freeway bridge and a big giant
concrete slab up into our backyards, you're going to destroy our neighborhood,
and this is not that big of a city that you can sit there and just destroy a
neighborhood. Thank you.
Karr: Sir, did you sign in? (responds away from mic) Please? Thank you.
Hayek: ...catch. Thanks, Marian.
Ross: Just a few words about our celebration of the Constitution, which uh, which is
probably the greatest governmental document since the Magna Carta. Uh, I'm
from Boston so I said Carter, didn't I? Not Carta. Uh ... (laughter and several
responding) Urn ... so uh ... a big word in some... probably the controlling word
that's used when referring to the Constitution is that word, liberty, which Mayor
Hayek referenced and uh, the woman who spoke before, and uh, big question
comes up about, uh, what that word really mean. Does it mean, uh, for instance
that, uh, people can do whatever they want or is it that, uh, people who, uh, who
control, can control as much as they want. Does it mean that you can compete for
everything you can get, uh... and does it mean that, uh, sort of like a Monopoly
game for instance where you can try to get everything and everybody else gets
nothing, or does liberty refer to ... uh, the majority of the people living with a
sense of dignity. Uh, does it mean that people can live without fear, uh, without
...without unreasonable interests on debts, uh, where people can go to school
without having to mortgage away their, uh, the rest of their lives, uh, does it
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of September 17, 2013.
Page 14
mean, for instance, that people can afford to live in apartments without being
charged exorbitant, uh, rents, uh ... and giving all their monies away to a particular
party. I'd like to think that the, uh, the framers of the Constitution when they said
liberty really were talking about a liberty where people can have a sense of self -
respect and dignity, and have a place to live and not have to worry in life.
Regarding our... our city, I would like to think that we have that respect for
people, but we can do better. I think that, uh, if we would pay attention to
affordability of housing, for one thing is a big issue. We have high -rises going
up, yet we have no affordable housing. We talk about workforce housing. Uh,
but in my way of thinking, workforce housing is sort of like, uh, is re ... in relation
to affordable housing is like green spaces in relation to sustainability. Uh,
workforce housing doesn't necessarily mean everybody can afford to live there, or
anybody can afford to live there. These apartments are expensive. People are
coming to the Council lately with concerns about that they can't afford, uh,
where, you know, to find a place. Uh, just like in green space may mean that
there might be a lawn out there, but is that good for the environment? Well, not
necessarily. So I encourage the thought about liberty and what liberty really
means in our Constitution, and to think of it as a case of the great majority of
people, and in this town trying to provide things for that great majority of people,
and I appreciate your allowing me the time. Thank you.
Hayek: Thank you. Anyone else during community comment? Okay, we will move on to
Item 6, Planning and Zoning Matters.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of September 17, 2013.
Page 15
ITEM 6. PLANNING AND ZONING MATTERS
ITEM 6a REZONING WESTWINDS - CONDITIONALLY REZONING
1.31 ACRES LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE
INTERSECTION OF MELROSE AVENUE AND WESTWINDS DRIVE
FROM LOW DENSITY MULTIFAMILY (RM -12) ZONE TO PLANNED
DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY/LOW DENSITY MULTI - FAMILY (OPD-
RM12) ZONE. (REZ13- 00019 /SUB13- 00012) [Discussion only at formal
meeting]
1. PUBLIC HEARING
Hayek: This is a public hearing. The public hearing is open. (bangs gavel) Any ex parte
communications? Jeff!
Davidson: Good evening again, Mr. Mayor and Members of the City Council. Item 6a as the
Mayor has indicated is a request from Willow Wind Properties of Golden Valley,
Minnesota. Uh the request is for a rezoning action and preliminary plat approval
for a property that is located south of Melrose Avenue and west of Westwinds
Drive, and you do see it highlighted here on the map. Uh, just to orient you... uh,
West High School is here in this area. Melrose Avenue, uh, University of Iowa
Finkbine property over here, Westwinds Drive where right at the corner of
Melrose, uh, and Westwinds Drive. Uh, I think ... here's an aerial view and we'll
talk a little bit more about this in just a second. Uh, some photographs of the
prop... well... actually let's go back. Um, this is ... this is a complicated (laughs)
action that you're being asked to, uh ... uh, take tonight, but uh, I think it...it has a
lot of benefit in terms of cleaning up some things, and rectifying some things that
occurred that would no longer be allowed to occur, but the bottom line is they
occurred and... and we need to deal with them now. As well as, uh, providing for
an in -fill development that's consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, that's
consistent with the neighborhood, and in -fill development is something, of course,
that we always try to encourage. We don't have to extend utilities. We don't
have to extend roads. It's ... it's a positive thing in that aspect. Um, a little bit of
history ... oh, the property is 1.31 acres in size. Um, what ... what is before you...
in terms of the rezoning action, is a planned development action, and this is
certainly a property that is perfect for the planned development, uh, process
because of the flexibility to, uh, modify things according to what otherwise would
be, uh, allowed because as I said of some things that have occurred, uh, in the past
and the fact that this is a very tight site in terms of being fully developed, uh,
around it. So we do need that, urn ... uh ... that flexibility in terms of dealing with
it. At one time, uh, in 1979 when this was platted, this was a single lot. In fact it
may ... I believe it even extended a little bit further down here, and it was
approved for, uh, 48 condominium units, and you can see here the units that were,
uh, these are 24 units right here. Additional units to the south that were, uh,
platted and then the private street, uh, put in here. Uh, as part of that
development, there were tennis courts of which you can barely see sort of the
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of September 17, 2013.
Page 16
remnants of those tennis courts in this area, and a large storm water basin in this
area. Uh, this was a clubhouse facility for the tennis courts, uh, for the larger
condominium development. At some point following, um, that ... that approval in
1979, uh, this larger lot, if I can get my arrow back here, was split right here, uh,
by an auditor's parcel process that did not involve the City. Um, the State
legislation has since been changed, uh, so that that would not be allowed to occur
any more. Those auditor's parcels now have to be approved by the cities so that
basically we know, uh, what's going on. Subsequently then, this, uh, clubhouse
was converted to a duplex unit and I've got some photographs, we'll show that,
and basically what's been allowed to happen is that the tennis courts that
originally, uh, served the larger unit have been basically designed, uh, allowed to
decay, uh, and the storm water basin has been neglected as well. In fact in the
photographs you'll see it; barely looks like a storm water basin! Uh, let's see
...let's see, there's the storm water basin. Um, so you can see it's not really a
storm water basin, and there's the tennis courts, uh, right now. Here is the former
clubhouse that was allow, uh, that was converted to a duplex. (mumbled) slides
back here. Uh, there's the, again, the clubhouse that was converted to a duplex.
Uh, there's the condominium units to the south that you saw in that private ring
road, and I guess that's all of the photographs. Um, what ... oh, here, I guess
there's one more. That ... that again... there... there I think you see just the edge of
the duplex, uh, and the condominium development that's to the south. Uh, what's
proposed then ... excuse me. Okay, what's proposed is to allow a 7 -plex apartment
building to be constructed, uh, in where the tennis courts are currently located,
and for the storm water basin to be basically reconstructed and as part of what
you're being asked to consider tonight, the condominium regime that would then
consist of now two lots, lot one which is where the duplex is located, and then the
larger lot two, which includes the 7 -plex building and the storm water basin. That
condominium regime would be in charge of the storm water basin, so that the City
would have the ability to go out and enforce that it basically didn't turn into what
it is, uh, currently. So that's a condition of approval. Um ... there are a couple of
other things in terms of the, uh, flexibility. The, uh, there is a, uh, minimum of
40 -feet of lot frontage on a public street. Uh, obviously this duplex doesn't have
any frontage on a public street, so that is one of the conditions that we would...
would allow as to ... is to allow that to, uh, become, uh, a legal duplex without the
frontage on a public street, and also the minimum lot width, uh, be reduced,
excuse me. The lot width here be reduced from 55 -feet to 51. That's basically to
allow the storm water basin and the access drive that you see here to the parking,
which would serve the 7 -plex building, that results in a ... in 51 -feet being left
here, so four feet less than ... than what our requirement, uh, would otherwise be.
Um, as I mentioned, uh, otherwise the dimensional requirements are adhered to as
we ... as I mentioned, you know, the Comprehensive Plan does encourage in -fill
development, uh, we do feel that this is compatible with the remainder of the
neighborhood in the vicinity. Uh, in terms of access, obviously not ... not perfect
in terms of access either. There's a private drive, uh, which terminates here, and
then the dr ... the driveway into the facility. There would need to be an easement,
uh, that would be provided so that there was access provided, uh, to Westwinds
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of September 17, 2013.
Page 17
Drive here for both the duplex and the proposed 7 -plex building. Um... storm
water management, I ... I mentioned that the condominium regime would now be
in charge of that. In terms of neighborhood open space, there is a, uh, payment in,
uh, a fee in lieu of actually providing open space. You can see there's, uh, there's
no usable open space that would, uh, result once the ... the project is put in, so
there'd be a fee, uh, in lieu of that. Uh, so the conditions, I always try and
mention the ... the Conditional Zoning conditions because this is what the
developer would have to, um ... adhere to would be restoration and on -going
maintenance of the storm water facility, an easement to share the ... the driveway
here, and there's also two parking spaces in this vicinity that serve this condo
development. So, there's an easement then to allow those two parking spaces to,
uh, serve this condo development, that that's also part of the, uh, conditions of
approval, uh, should you decide to approve this. So, uh, again, kind of a
complicated project. Do you have any questions about that explanation?
Payne: Can you put the picture up there with the front of the build ... the proposed
building?
Davidson: Okay.
Payne: And there's adequate parking provided for the seven units?
Davidson: They meet the parking requirement, yes.
Dobyns: It's a little unusual cause most of the other apartments, the side faces Melrose.
This is one where the broad fagade'll actually face the road.
Davidson: Right, and you know ... again, we're dealing with a constrained site and there ... I
think one of the... oops. One of the things that we do want to try and create, uh,
because of the slight, you know, slightly, you know, odd configuration of this is to
at least put a sidewalk system in here that would connect then to the sidewalk on,
tun ... uh, Melrose Avenue. Uh, I'm told there have also been some iss ... issues
periodically with the maintenance of this sidewalk, uh, during the winter time,
and again, this will establish the condominium association that will allow the...
the City to enforce that more easily than has been done in the past.
Dobyns: So, Jeff, the sidewalk there is dilapidated at best, but, um, it's continuous with the
sidewalk all the way in front of, uh, West High School, but that sidewalk doesn't
get improved. It would be just a sidewalk in front of this development?
Davidson: Uh, right. Now the City does have an ongoing program to make sure the
sidewalks are adequately maintained when you have a certain amount of
separation, I mean, those of us who live in Iowa City have gotten the flyer from
the City periodically to correct those, and I ... and this would be subject to that, as
well, Rick, at some point.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of September 17, 2013.
Page 18
Throgmorton: Jeff, I think I heard you say that the developer would be responsible for the
maintenance of the storm water retention facility?
Davidson: Yeah, I should clarify that. If I said that, it would be the condominium
association.
Throgmorton: Okay, and I know the Planning and Zoning Commission had considerable
discussion about...
Davidson: Yes they did!
Throgmorton:... how that might actually work out.
Davidson: ...that that's quite an obligation, I think, if you read the P &Z minutes. The point
made was that that's quite an obligation for basically was a 9 -unit condominium
association. This storm water base ... basin does drain more than just this
property. Um, a... a larger regional area. But the bottom line is the only ability
the City has right now to get, um ... uh, better, basically reestablish the storm water
basin and get better ongoing maintenance of it is through this condominium
association and that's why it's proposed that way.
Throgmorton: Is there anything we can do to require, uh, owners of condominium units or the
initial developer to inform prospective buyers of... of that specific responsibility?
The storm water retention basin management.
Champion: It'd be in their by -laws I think. (both talking)
Dilkes: Let ... let me just (both talking)
Throgmorton: ... really gets their attention is what I mean (laughs)
Dilkes: Let ... let me make a couple comments. Number one, the ... the Conditional Zoning
Agreement requires that prior to the issuance of a building permit there be a plan
for restoration of the storm water facility.
Throgmorton: Right, so I'm talking about ongoing maintenance (both talking)
Dilkes: I know ... I know. Um, and... so that's going to be done as part of the building
project. And I think the minutes reflect that once that work is done, the
maintenance obligation is not substantial for the storm water detention facility.
With respect to condominium owners understanding what, um ... what their
obligations are, those should show up in their, um, in their abstract and should be
brought to their attention by the examining attorney when the title opinion is
done.
Dobyns: And it should be reflected in the cost of each individual unit, I would assume.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of September 17, 2013.
Page 19
Dilkes: Presumably, yes.
Payne: And ... I guess I have a question... when you're saying condominium association,
you mean the stuff on the lot to the south because this says this is going to be an
apartment building.
Davidson: No, this ... this is the condominium association right here. Two units here, seven
units here. That ... this is now a separate lot under separate ownership, Michelle.
Payne: Okay, but ... okay, so what it says in ... in the agenda is that this is a 7 -unit
apartment building, which is not the same as a condo in my mind. An apartment
is something you rent; a condo is something you buy.
Dilkes: Yeah, no that's a misconception. Anybody who builds apartments these days
structures them as condominiums for tax purposes. So it will be most likely (both
talking) a condominium.
Payne: ...interchangeable today. Okay. Because when I read it I thought it was the
people to the south would be maintaining that. Okay.
Davidson: Any other questions before you continue your hearing?
Hayek: Thank you, Jeff.
Davidson: Thank you.
Hayek: Anyone from...
Dilkes: Oh, I should note, we don't have a signed, uh, Conditional Zoning Agreement
unless something has changed that I'm not aware of, so we need to continue the
public hearing.
Throgmorton: (both talking) Yeah.
Hayek: Okay. Anyone from the public?
Musser: Duane Musser with MMS Consultants on behalf of the applicant. Uh, the
applicant is aware of the ... the CZA not being signed and ... and is aware that we
will be continuing this. I'd be happy to answer any questions you might have.
Throgmorton: So, uh, Duane, in... in the Planning and Zoning Commission meetings, uh, I think
you indicated that, uh, maintenance of this storm water retention facility just
involves mowing basically. (noise on mic)
Musser: Yeah, once it's...
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of September 17, 2013.
Page 20
Throgmorton: So ... so what ... I don't have the right language, uh, at hand, but uh ... ponds can fill
up, silt up, and putrefy or ... whatever ... whatever the right language is.
Musser: Correct.
Throgmorton: So why would that not potentially happen in this instance?
Musser: One of the reasons it won't happen because everything upstream is already
developed. I mean, you're... there's no construction activities. It's not a brand -
new subdivision where you have all the bare ground and all the new houses and
basements being dug. So you're talking very little silt. Obviously what drops on
the street or the parking lots, sand, rock, debris, will eventually work its way into
the basin. The applicant is responsible once we get through this preliminary
rezoning to come up with construction plans to show the City that the basin will
meet current standards, um, and then he will have to construct it to those approved
construction plans, seed it, get it up and maintained, and then the condo
association for the seven townhouses, um, will have verbiage in their documents
where they will set aside money for maintenance of that, mowing, snow removal,
and things like that, so that will be established before any of the units are sold or
rented, um, so that ... and again, it's just like any other basin in any subdivision,
um, periodic inspections by the City may require maintenance. (both talking)
Payne: A storm water detention, it's not a pond.
Musser: Correct. Yes, it's a dry -bottom basin, yes.
Payne: So it's like the one over on Scott Boulevard, north of, um, Court Street. It's just
this big open ground that (both talking)
Musser: Yes! And if it's mowed and maintained, all the trees and things won't grow up,
and if it's graded correctly, the cattails and stuff like that, there won't be ponding
water so... it'll... should look like a... something you mow three or four times a
year to keep the trees and weeds down. Uh, the ... the access easement, um, for
the shared driveway is agreed upon. It's just not signed with the adjacent
property owners. Um, the applicant is aware of the parking spaces that are on his
property for the condos to the south, so we have easements that we will create
with the ... the two -lot final plat. So all that'll be addressed with the final plat and
(clears throat) construction of the basin and all those things will be addressed with
the final construction plans ... once we get through this process.
Hayek: Thanks, Duane.
Musser: Thank you.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of September 17, 2013.
Page 21
Hayek: Anyone else from the audience? Okay, so we need a motion to continue the
public hearing and first reading.
2. CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE (FIRST CONSIDERATION)
Mims: So moved.
Dickens: Second.
Hayek: (mumbled) moved by, uh, Mims, seconded by Dickens, uh...
Dilkes: The next meeting.
Mims: ...next meeting.
Hayek: ...to our next meeting (mumbled) All right. Uh, discussion? All those in favor
say aye. Opposed say nay. Motion carries.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of September 17, 2013.
Page 22
ITEM 6b REZONING N. DODGE AND CONKLIN LANE —
CONDITIONALLY REZONING APPROXIMATELY 2.19 ACRES
LOCATED EAST OF DODGE STREET, NORTH OF CONKLIN LANE,
AND WEST OF DODGE STREET COURT FROM COMMUNITY
COMMERCIAL (CC -2) TO LOW DENSITY MULTIFAMILY (RM -12).
(REZ13- 00020) [Discussion only at formal meeting]
1. PUBLIC HEARING
Hayek: This is a public hearing. The public hearing is open. (bangs gavel) Any ex
parte?
Dobyns: I discussed this with Jody Theobald from Planning and Zoning, regarding the
differences being RS -12 and RS -8, and implications which I'll discuss later in my
questions to Jeff.
Hayek: Okay.
Davidson: Uh, the requested rezoning is from CC -2, community commercial, to RM -12,
low- density multi - family. Uh, it is requested by Southgate Development
Company of Iowa City. It is to allow for the development of residential uses,
obviously a change from CC -2 to RM -12. Uh, the location you see here. This is
opposite... here's the north Dodge HyVee property, the Palisades subdivision that
is also on your agenda, uh, and of course further to the south here, Hickory Hill
Park. Uh, the size of the site that you see crosshatched here is 2.13 acres. Here
you see an aerial, uh, the white area here is just an old concrete area of, uh, well at
least my most recent recollection was Mayor's Youth being located here. Um...
and the property is vacant, uh, as you see. Uh, this property in 2005 was rezoned
conditionally, um ... to CC -2, and a lot of, uh, thought was put into that at this
time. And this is the approved plan that is there, uh, currently. Uh, Dodge Street
Court here, uh, with, um, uh, there's an old house here on the corner and then,
um, a single - family duplex development down here. Uh, Dodge Street Court is a
relatively unimproved street. It meets our rural design standards. Basically it's a
chip - sealed street. Um, Conklin Lane here, and then of course Dodge Street has
been reconstructed fairly recently, uh, and Dubuque Road here. Um, the ... the
approved plan was for a commercial building here, uh, parking as you see, and
then a building that would have been commercial on the first floor with residences
above it, uh, in this area. There was a lot of concern at the time of the impact of
the commercial development and all the things that are associated with
commercial development, traffic, noise, etc., um ... on the, uh, residences here on
the south side and so a lot of, uh, basically the requirements that you see here for
a substantial amount ... this was a mixture of a permanent wall and, uh, vegetation.
Uh, concern about lights and that, you can see the parking here, lights and that
sort of thing that would have shined into the, uh, spaces. Uh, with the ... the
concern about commercial development is obviously reduced, uh, with the
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of September 17, 2013.
Page 23
proposal to go to multi - family development, basically the applicant has indicated
that they have not been successful in selling the property as commercial
development and so the desire now is to allow it to be marketed as 100%
residential development. There's no commercial development allowed in the, uh,
proposed RM -12 zone. Um ... we do however have concerns about the impact of
even the multi - family development on the low- density single - family development
down in this part of the site, uh, and a number of the conditions that are now
proposed for the Conditional Zoning Agreement that you have before you for
consideration address those, uh, specifically. There's also not a specific, uh, oh, I
guess I have some photographs of the site. There you see in the background the...
the duplex units on, uh, Dodge Street Court. Again, the subject property, uh, view
from Dodge, or from the property to Dodge Street. Uh, there you see Dodge
Street Court, uh, the subject property is on this side. Uh, and again, a view
showing the old house at the corner, the cemetery there in the background. Um,
there is not, as you probably have noted by now, a new development plan to show
you and that is because the applicant has indicated that until the rezoning is
completed, they don't wish to go to the expense of a specific development plan,
and so one of the conditions that, uh, the ... the, what's before you tonight would
be subject to is that a design review and Planning and Zoning Commission, uh,
approve the, and this would be done just by the Planning and Zoning
Commission. It would not come to you. Basically your control is on the
proposed zoning action that you have before you tonight and the subsequent
readings. You would not see the site plan, but that would go to the Planning and
Zoning Commission, uh, to ensure sensitivity to the adjacent residential
development. Um ... environmentally sensitive areas are not an issue with this
site. Uh, in terms of traffic, uh, again, as I mentioned even though some of the
concerns are allayed, uh, with no commercial development, there are still
concerns about the amount of traffic with multi - family development and again,
proposed CZA conditions. Uh, the ... the property owner, either the current one or
any subsequent sale, would have the option under what is suggested for access via
Dodge Street Court, but if...if they chose that option, they would be required to
improve Dodge Street Court to our residential street standards. That would have
curb and gutter and sidewalks. Um ... if they don't, they still will be required, uh,
to have sidewalks along Conklin Lane, uh, and along Dodge Street, and they...
this would remain in its current, um, current configuration and all of the access
would then come off of Dodge Street. Uh, and again, that will be up to the
property owner to determine ultimately that design with approval by design
review and the Planning and Zoning Commission. Um ... and we would require,
uh, right -of -way to be dedicated along the entire frontage here, uh, to get 50 -feet
of right -of -way for Dodge Street Court, and that would enable the City not to
have to purchase property for future improvement, uh, of the street. Um... in
terms of pedestrian facilities, uh, we also have a conditional zoning condition that,
as I mentioned, sidewalks being installed along Conklin Lane and Dodge Street.
Uh, the final CZA condition, uh ... uh, pertains to storm water management. Uh,
we want to make sure that the... the... the, uh, redevelopment of the property does
not have, uh, water draining onto the si ... the properties over on this side of the
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of September 17, 2013.
Page 24
street. So basically the storm water plan has to drain water out to Dodge Street
where it'd be captured by the storm water, uh, system. Uh, so again, those are
...those are all of the CZA conditions. Um ... are there any questions?
Throgmorton: I thought there was some conditions with regard to where the row houses or
townhouses would be located...
Davidson: Um, that'll be part of the site plan review, uh ... oh, and that, yeah, excuse me, Jim,
there was ... I went over that quickly. Uh, there will be...it will be required to be
single - family and duplex units or townhomes, not large multi - family building, uh,
within 80 -feet of these units, uh, here. So uh, for example, uh, we have estimated
that there could be, and by the way, the ... the site will accommodate 34 units, uh,
under the...the density if you chose to, uh, approve this. That for example, I
mean you could obviously put single - family or ... or duplex, uh, units here, but
more likely would be townhomes, uh, for example we estimated you could get
three groups of four townhomes, uh, and they'd be limited in ... in height, uh, and
... and basically be something that it was felt would be more, uh, compatible with
the duplexes across the street than a large multi - family building. So nothing
within 80 -feet that was a large multi - family building.
Throgmorton: Okay. So if...if, just for the sake of discussion we assume like three people per
household.
Davidson: that's the maximum allowed.
Throgmorton: 0 ... o ... okay. So ... how many people would probably live in this area?
Davidson: Well hypothetically the maximum, hypothetically if you had three persons per
unit times 34 units, roughly 100.
Throgmorton: Okay. So what I'm wondering about is ... crossing the street, crossing Dodge
Street.
Davidson: Uh huh.
Throgmorton: Got 100 new residents. Who knows what's going to go in where the HyVee
currently is located, but something'll go in there, I suppose, I hope! How ...how
are these additional... residents going to cross the street easily and safely?
Davidson: Yeah, this is ... this is obviously an uncontrolled intersection. It could be,
possibly, signalized at some point in the future. There are no plans to do so
currently. Um, right now basically the gaps in the traffic stream are controlled by
the signal that's down at Scott Boulevard, and the signal that's down at Prairie du
Chien Road. Where you have two signals like that on either end of a corridor,
you generally get good gaps in the traffic stream. We haven't had any complaints
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of September 17, 2013.
Page 25
from... from pedestrians in this area. If we started to, if those gaps started
becoming inadequate, we'd look at this for additional control.
Mims: I would follow up on Jim's ... I guess I would hope that Southgate would look at,
and the City through P &Z and design review would really look at not adding, um,
additional access directly onto Dodge Street. It just seems to me with the ... the
development in that corridor, and Dodge Street being such a main entryway into
the city, and the development on the other side of Dodge with Palisades going in,
um, and more vehicles coming from that direction that it certainly does make
sense that at some point that is going to be a signalized intersection right there
where north Dubuque comes out, and to ... to add another driveway just... probably
not even a few hundred feet, uh, to the north of that, but to have all that traffic
coming out on Conklin where that could be aligned long -term seems like it would
make a lot more sense.
Davidson: It is always desirable to minimize the number of access points on an arterial
street. We always try and do that with our access control policy. It's basically,
Susan, a matter of the trade -off of having direct access from Dodge Street Court,
versus the encumbrance that an access point would ... would be on the arterial
street. This ... the spacing would be required, I mean, I'm using this diagram
which is ... which is in effect if you approve the action tonight, but basically from
the point of where, uh, the intersection is here, we would require at minimum
150 -feet of separation to ... to address exactly what you're getting at. There is a
turn lane as ... as well on Dodge Street so, you know, we ... we feel like we're in
pretty good shape here in terms of adding an access point, even though as you
say, it's not really desirable.
Dickens: I thought (several talking)
Hayek: But if it is desirable, and we're going through a CZA...
Davidson: It's allowed! It will be allowed.
Hayek: No, I ... I understand, but if we're going through CZA and staff deems it desirable
why not ... im ... why not prohibit entry onto Dodge Street and instead require
access off of Conklin and...
Davidson: Because of the sensitivity with the residences down here, putting all the traffic
onto Conklin Lane, adjacent to these residences.
Dickens: I thought the State didn't allow us off Highway 1 cause we own, my family had
owned property for over 60 years just down from there, my grandparents, and
we'd looked into developing it at one time and they said you could not come. Did
that change?
Davidson: No, the State...
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of September 17, 2013.
Page 26
Dickens: Because it is Highway 1. I knew there was some restrictions and (both talking)
Davidson: Yeah, the ... the State will not typically take away an existing access point, um...
Dickens: Cause I didn't know there was one.
Davidson: Right, and ... and there ... there is one there and I think that's probably why it
would be allowed, Terry.
Dobyns: Jeff, could you go back to the zoning plat a few slides back? Um, my concern is
that, you know, this is a real junction area where we're having, uh, growing
commercial at the new HyVee across the street, but there's also a residential
development on either side. Um, my concern is that I wonder if the RS -12 is the
most appropriate, because... because of the single family houses so close to it...
Davidson: Uh huh.
Dobyns: ...and I guess I would have to ask, what specifically ... I'm concerned that an RS-
12...
Davidson: This is ... this is developed property, Rick, here. I mean, these are ... there's units
on all these lots.
Dobyns: Okay. (several talking) But they're... they're there, and they exist.
Davidson: They're there. Uh huh.
Dobyns: Uh, but the developer on the site that we are considering RS -12...
Davidson: RM -12.
Dobyns: RM -12 is not constrained, I mean what is the ... I'm just wondering what the
difference is. Could they build a development that would be fairly dense on that
site? Um ... I guess (both talking)
Davidson: ...the applicant...
Dobyns: ...trying to visualize what to the extent that the 12 would be allowed, how dense
could it possibly be?
Davidson: There are 34 units approximately that ... that would ... could be allowed, um, the
applicant is here tonight and may be able to ... to, uh, to express, you know, more
what they have in mind, but basically the constraints, Rick, are the, uh... single -
family duplex or townhouse within 80 -feet of the RS -12 that you see here.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of September 17, 2013.
Page 27
Otherwise it... it would allow a larger buildings on the remainder of the property,
up to the maximum density allowed.
Dobyns: If it was an 8 ... what would that look like?
Davidson: Um, that's mainly a single - family and uh ... wait a minute. R ... RM -12 is the
lowest density multi - family residential zone.
Dobyns: Okay. All right.
Davidson: Yeah. You go down to RS -8, that's single family and duplex on the corners.
Dobyns: I guess I'd like to hear from the developer what they, yeah.
Davidson: Any other questions for me before you continue your hearing?
Hayek: Stick around, Jeffl
Davidson: Okay. Thank you. (laughter)
Hayek: I suspect there are, uh, some neighbors here but... Glenn, if you wouldn't mind
coming forward.
Dobyns: Uh huh.
Siders: Oh, I never mind coming forward!
Hayek: Great!
Siders: (several talking) My name's Glenn Siders. I'm with Southgate Development
Services. I'm representing the owner of this complex, Cobrin Development. I'd
like to ... I ... I think the best way to go about this probably... answer some of your
questions (laughs) so I don't waste a lot of your time. I do want to ... make one
correction in a statement Jeff made. The 80 -foot restriction in the Conditional
Zoning Agreement is from the edge of the new right -of -way line. It's not from
the houses that are there. So you have the 50 -foot right -of -way, then you have the
80 -foot zone that's restricted to single- family dwelling, duplex, or townhouse
style development. Um ... access ... appears to be a concern. I will be quite honest
— we intend on accessing off of, uh, Dodge Street. We do not, uh, intend to access
Dodge Street Court at all, and make those improvements. Both this zoning
request and the request that, uh, we got our current zoning in 2005, uh, there was
a lot of neighborhood concern about the traffic on Dodge Street Court, uh,
additional traffic on Dodge Street Court. We do have one existing access point.
It's always been there. This is the old sanitary dairy site. Um, when Dodge Street
was improved, the uh, DOT promised that we would be able to retain that access
point. We are restricted and the location was ... that was on that previous site plan
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of September 17, 2013.
Page 28
will be about the area, uh, because of the turn lane, uh, situation and there are also
some storm sewer intakes along that portion of the road that we need to avoid. So
it will be close to that area. I call it the northeast corner, but it's kind of a goofy
... goofy angle. Um... so I...I guess maybe the easiest thing to do would be try to
respond to your ... to your questions. Take them on individually.
Hayek: What other (both talking)
Dobyns: My, well I ... I guess my, Eleanor, a clarification question. If, um ... we approve
after three considerations zoning it to RM -12, and the developer puts together a
project and P &Z feels that it's too abrupt, it's not a suitable transition adjacent to
these single - family houses, can Planning and Zoning reject that or are they not
allowed to at that point in the deliberation?
Dilkes: I think Planning... Planning and Zoning will be considering the ... the role of
Planning and Zoning will be to ensure compat ... compatibility with the adjacent
residential properties and appropriate development appearance, etc., but if you
think the density is not appropriate at RM ... (both talking)
Dobyns: Well my sense is it was (both talking)
Dilkes: ...multi - family then you should not approve the rezoning.
Dobyns: Well if it was (mumbled) it sounds like there would be single - family housing, and
I don't think ... I think that's overly constrained. So...
Dilkes: You're talking about RS -8?
Dobyns: RS -8, uh (mumbled) I'm not a P &Z wonk I'm afraid. Um but my (both talking)
Dilkes: I guess I should say, you should not expect the ... by these conditions, Planning
and Zoning will control ultimately density on the (both talking)
Dobyns: No, no, and I'm thinking ... it ... it's not so much the density but I guess the
aesthetics and the transition, um, and I don't want to overly constrain the
developer by making them have single - family housing or something close to it,
but yet again, within the constraints of, uh, RM -12. If it ... if it appears
aesthetically that it's too abrupt, my sense of reading the Planning and Zoning is
that they can reject it. I mean, if they look at the development...
Dilkes: That it's too abrupt? I ... I don't...
Dobyns: Um...
Dilkes: I don't know what ... I think ... I think you'd have (both talking)
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of September 17, 2013.
Page 29
Dobyns: Too severe a transition between, you know, adjacent to these single - family houses
south. Uh...
Payne: You're saying there is no transition, there's...
Dilkes: If mult ... if...if, no I don't think they could reject it because multi - family is ... is
not appropriate for this site when there is ... when you have just rezoned it to
multi - family.
Siders: Rick, I ... I might be able to help you out a little bit.
Dobyns: Yeah, please.
Siders: The... approximately from this point here, straight across, roughly is that 80 -foot
area.
Dobyns: Okay.
Siders: Uh ... this is a unique site because we're bordered on streets. First of all, it's kind
of a triangular- shaped lot. We're bordered on streets on three sides. That creates
a set -back regulation that we have to, um... adhere to, and on the, uh, Dodge
Street ... I keep losing my arrow! On the Dodge Street area, that set -back, because
it's an arterial street is 40 -feet.
Dobyns: Uh huh.
Siders: We're giving up approximately 20 -feet of the site for right -of -way. So the site
begins to narrow ... you give up that 20 -feet for right -of -way. It takes it to under a
2 -acre site, and then you have your set -back restriction, you have that 80 -foot
restriction, so you've got this area to work for an apartment complex.
Dobyns: So it might be dense, but it's not going to be very large.
Siders: It's not going to be very big, and ... and the best (both talking) the best scenario I
think we could ever hope to come up with would be a maximum of like 24 units
on this total site.
Dobyns: Okay.
Siders: You try to ... by the time you meet your set -back requirements, get your required
parking in there, uh, get your drainage on the site and everything else that's there,
and then adhere to that 80 -foot limitation there, you're very limited on what you
can do...
Dobyns: Okay.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of September 17, 2013.
Page 30
Siders: ...with (both talking) multi - family apartment building.
Dobyns: ... set -back restraints constrain it so much...
Siders: That and the... and the odd shape of the lot, you're right. You can't get your
parking and building and everything in there.
Dobyns: Anything less than an RM -12 would make ... it very difficult to develop (both
talking)
Siders: It's not conducive to split up into single - family lots or anything because you got
those three ... three sides you can't go in and subdivide this property into lots, uh,
so you gotta go with some type of overlay plan or something like that. That's
what we're hoping to do with this approach.
Dobyns: Right.
Siders: But we're not objectionable to anything in the CZA. Matter of fact we've signed
it and submitted it to the City. Um ... we don't really know what to expect from
design review, uh, I have a ... a fair amount of feedback from the Planning and
Zoning Commission. I kind of know what ... what they're anticipating or
inspecting. They have design approval, I guess, be a fair way to put it, uh, to
assure compatibility with the neighborhood. We're comfortable... use that term
woos... loosely, but we're comfortable going through that process, working with
the City design review committee and Planning and Zoning Commission.
Dickens: Who owns the property right next to ... the corner there?
Siders: Right here? (both talking)
Dickens: I don't remember...
Siders: Mary... Hitchcock Rupert.
Dickens: Okay, the Ruperts still own that. And ... cause I live just down the street and I'm
actually looking forward to something happening on that corner after tons of
years. There used to be a house there and sanitary dairy so (both talking)
Siders: Yep! My dad used to work there.
Dickens: It's been empty for ... quite a few years so...
Siders: Fortunately I go back, I remember that!
Champion: (laughs)
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of September 17, 2013.
Page 31
Siders: I might comment, this area right here ... there's some drain... current drainage and
water issues, and that's why the ... that's why the City wants to see some type of
drainage heading north and we're aware of that, uh, I think we can contour this
site to get all the drainage (mumbled)
Dickens: Cause it curves down into Hickory Hill Park, just below that.
Siders: Yeah, there's a huge ravine (laughs) that goes right down this ... this way there.
Throgmorton: Glenn, I ... I'd like to make sure that I have a fact, uh, right. Uh, do I understand
correctly that the lot, or that property currently is zoned CC -2, and that by right
you have the, uh, the legal right to develop it in... in... in a manner consistent with
that particular, uh, zone. Meaning ... what you proposed earlier that commercial
stuff and a mix of commercial and ... and residential, uh, but you know, you found
that it's ... you weren't able to market it that way, but by right, it's already zoned
CC -2 and you could develop it in ... in principle you could develop it this ... this
other way.
Siders: You're almost correct.
Throgmorton: Okay.
Siders: By right it is zoned CC -2. It has a conditional zoning. We cannot sway from that
site plan that you saw up there in any way, shape, or form without rezoning the
property.
Throgmorton: Okay. Okay.
Siders: So, and ... and believe me, Jim, we have tried to market that site plan and it just
isn't going to market.
Throgmorton: Sure.
Siders: And we've even, in anticipation of rezoning to other commercial stuff, we have...
umpteen drawings on the board, trying to speak with prospective commercial
tenants, and they do not want that site.
Throgmorton: Got it. I was just trying to be clear about the facts.
Hayek: Other questions for Glenn? Okay, thank you.
Mims: Thank you.
Hayek: This is a public hearing. If there's anyone from the audience who wishes to
address us, we invite you forward.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of September 17, 2013.
Page 32
Young: Hello, uh, my name's Clifton Young. Uh, I and my wife live in a house at the
corner, before, uh, Dodge Street Court turns. Um, there's some other houses
down farther, after the turn. Um, if you go down there and then go a little to the
left, uh, that's our house. It's a small house, but it's our home. We've lived there
for 20 years and uh, we've gone through everything from, you know, trouble with
the water running through our basement and coming in from the street, uh, to
sewer problems where we have to be hooked up, and you know, we've uh ... been
dealing with this, uh, you know, before and we ... the concern has always been for
us the traffic, the amount of cars that are going to be there, and the density of the
houses that are going to be there. Right ... right now we don't have much. You
know, a few duplexes, a few single - family houses, um ... I ... I know the place is
going to be developed and I'm not against that. I just don't want it to be
developed to the extent that we start running into problems with larger numbers of
people and larger numbers of cars. Um, if...if I was living there, I would
probably park my car on the street, rather than try to ... to leave onto north Dodge
and just leave on Conklin. Um, when you're dealing with 30 or 40 other cars, uh
(laughs) at a bottleneck, I mean, you get creative and find other ways of dealing
with it. Urn ... I used to walk across the street to HyVee, uh, I hope I'll still be
able to do that. I know my wife has to leave by the SEATS bus and you just have
to wait there at Conklin until traffic allows you to cross, you know, or go out into
the flow. (laughs) I'm not being too clear (laughs) but I'm just trying to say
that ... that, you know, this is where we live. This is our home. We're just trying
to preserve as much of it as we can, you know, without interfering with someone
else's rights to develop their own property. We ... we just want to keep it, you
know, uh ... to ... to where it is, you know, similar to where we have it now. Uh...
and similar but ... I ... I understand, you know, people want to make money.
They ... they want to develop what they have. Uh, but we also want to keep our
home. Thank you.
Hayek: Thank you for your comments.
Furman: (clears throat) Mr. Mayor and the Council, thanks for the opportunity to speak to
you tonight. I've spoken to the P &Z meetings, uh, and I ... I've said the same
thing, kind of like Cliff, uh, I'm concerned about traffic and safety. By the way
I'm Tim Furman. I live at, uh, 1263 Dodge Street Court, right here. Um... and
I'm opposed to this because of the traffic and the safety, and also because I don't
believe it's compliant with the City's Comprehensive Plan, urn ... the wording
there is pretty specific for this parcel. It says that the preferred use, if they cannot
achieve the commercial development, is residential similar to the existing
residential development in the area. And if you look here, you'll see that this is
all single - family, uh, zoning classification and all of the houses are either single -
family detached, single family attached, or duplexes. So just based on the
Comprehensive Plan itself, and I don't know how legally binding that document
is or if it's a living document that can be formally amended, but um, to put a
multi - family property here seems like it would be, uh, contrary to that document.
So that's kind of on principle one thing that I'm against but also cause of the
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of September 17, 2013.
Page 33
traffic and ... and the safety concerns as well. Um ... just really, really bothers me,
the whole process and actually I have a question for you guys regarding the City
staff and their reports. How ... liable for the accuracy of those reports are they,
because after sending a couple emails to the staff about my concerns with the
wording of the Comprehensive Plan, I noticed in their report to the, uh, P &Z
Commission that the, uh, the ... the citation of the plan, it seemed a little different
to me and I looked closer and it looked like the most specific sentence had ... had a
couple commas inserted and a word omitted and I was just wondering if that is
kind of a negligent act or is that substantial or is that just me kind of making a big
deal out of nothing. So can anybody comment on that?
Hayek: We're ... well we're really not set up to have a back - and -forth in this forum...
Furman: Okay.
Hayek: ...um, and I don't know if this was a rhetorical question on your part, uh (both
talking)
Furman: No, I really ... I really ... (both talking)
Hayek: Well anyway...
Furman: I really want to know. I hope it doesn't have to come to that, but it's kind of a
technicality because, you know, I ... I am not opposed to the residential
development. I would rather see residences there than the commercial stuff.
But ... I ... I don't want this to be RM -12. I don't think it should be RM -12. I think
it opens the door to a three -story apartment building, which is in no way
consistent with the existing residential development that's there! You know, you
can do with RS -12 which is already here and I ... I would totally support Southgate
going RS -12 on this. You can do up to like 28 attached single - family units, which
are townhouse style, which would be no problem with being abrupt or... or
something like that. Um, I ... and I appreciate what Glenn's gone along with, with
this 80 -feet thing from Dodge Street Court, uh, but still if you listen to what
they're saying, they don't want to improve Dodge Street Court and have access
off there, cause they'd have to pay for that! They want to plop down a 12 -plex,
come off of Dodge Street, throw up detached parking structures like garages, and
probably leave the 80 -feet just sitting there, um (mumbled) I don't know. I don't
want to speak too much for Glenn, um ... cause he's not a bad guy. I realize that.
We're just on opposite ends here. So, um ... anyway, the ... the accuracy of the
P &Z thing has been bothering me though I've typed up numerous drafts of emails
and then stopped short of sending them cause I don't know who I'd send them to,
but it really bothered me cause I was thinking why would staff feel compelled to
change that sentence, the most critical sentence and the most relevant paragraph,
you know, it's just two commas and a word omission, but it really does kind of
change the meaning and I just don't know why that would happen and I don't
want to imply anything but ... man! Frustrates me! So...
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of September 17, 2013.
Page 34
Hayek: Well I would encourage you to ... to send that draft email to the Council.
Furman: Okay.
Hayek: We will see it. Staff will see it. So we're not responding on the fly to, uh, an
editorial, uh, what could be an editorial (mumbled) I don't know.
Furman: Okay, I appreciate the direction there. Um, I would also like to point out that the
P &Z Commission did defer on this the first time it was presented, and there was a
discussion of, well, maybe RS -12. Glenn, what do you think RS -12? And I
was ... I was encouraged by that, and then two weeks later, you know, it's just ... I
feel like we're being railroaded, you know, I really do, um, with ... with the staff
and with Southgate, and um, I hope that's not the case, but I was encouraged and
then depressed and now I'm just rambling and people got places to go so I will
close with that and thank you for the time.
Hayek: Thank you. Anyone else from the public? Okay. Before I close the public
hearing we need to take Council's temperature. Again, uh, P &Z voted 6 -1 in
favor of it so...
Mims: Can I ask one ... I'm sorry.
Hayek: Yeah!
Mims: Um, Jeff, can you help me out, please? Under the current zoning with the current
CZA, can you tell us what would be the (mumbled) guess actually have got the
plan up there. What would be ... what would be the maximum number of
residential units and what ... what were the parking requirements based on the
anticipated commercial use?
Davidson: Is it 10 units, Glenn? That's what I'm counting here. Was that 10 units on the
second floor of the commercial building there? Cause that was the only
residential aspect to it.
Siders: Actually I think it was more than 10. I think that we were looking at two floors of
residential and a floor of commercial. That ... the parking regulations for the
residential has changed since this plan, um, I think it's more or less two stalls a
unit for a two - bedroom unit. Commercial's pretty consistent, and I think an
average of that'd be 300 -feet a square foot?
Davidson: Probably for an av (both talking)
Siders: ...space for (both talking)
Davidson: ...for an average probably one per 300.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of September 17, 2013.
Page 35
Siders: ...but then those have changed also and allow a little bit for a mixed use, allow a
little bit to ... to average some stuff.
Mims: What I'm trying to get a sense of is ... is the difference in potential traffic and
parking requirements under the current zoning and CZA versus what's in front of
us tonight.
Davidson: There would be more traffic with the current CZA.
Mims: More traffic, more parking requirements?
Davidson: I mean, commercial typically generates much more traffic. (both talking) ...you
had a drive -in bank here, I mean, that would have generated a lo ... much more
commercial traffic (both talking) you know typically we use, uh, six or seven, uh,
trips per day, per unit, uh, for this density of development, and commercial has
much higher traffic generation than that.
Mims: And potentially if you had the two floors of residential over that office space or
commercial, then potentially there were 20 unit ... 20 residential units.
Davidson: Sounds like it, yeah.
Mims: And... Glenn, you were saying earlier that while this could potentially under
zoning have 34, you're anticipating about 24? I know we can't ... hold you to that,
obviously but...
Siders: (away from mic) ...and I don't know what design review's going to ask of us.
Mims: Sure.
Siders: But in the ... in the little triangular area we're looking at probably sitting like a 12-
unit apartment in there. Apartment building. Along the 80 -foot thing would be...
a maximum probably of three, four unit townhouse structures. So, you'd have 24
units total, if we can get the parking in. I know there's a concern about a
walkway system through the development, so I'm not sure what all's going to be
in there for regulation.
Mims: Okay.
Siders: But I, 24 would be maximum, Susan, I think.
Mims: Okay. Thank you, that helps.
Champion: Yeah, it does.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of September 17, 2013.
Page 36
Throgmorton: Jeff, uh, one other thing. I ... I don't recall reading anything about RS -12 versus
RM -12 in the Planning and Zoning Committee... Commission meetings.
Davidson: I don't either.
Throgmorton: Can you help me out? What's... why...
Davidson: I was not at the Planning and Zoning Commission, uh, I can try and, you know,
for ... you're going to have subsequent readings of this. Unless Glenn wants to
paraphrase, I can also find out and report to you at the next meeting.
Siders: I ... I don't want to paraphrase cause I can't remember, and maybe Tim can
remember better than I, there was some discussion. I won't say it's a lengthy
discussion, but they had some discussion about an RS -12 versus an RM -12
zoning, but there was never any decision made on that and it was just a general
discussion. I'd say it probably lasted five to 10 minutes... which is relatively short
because this is kind of a lengthy discussion overall on this site. Uh, but there was
never, I don't believe, a motion or any action to go to an RS -12 zone.
Hayek: All right. Um ... what's the Council's sense?
Mims: I'll approve it.
Champion: It's fine.
Hayek: Jim?
Throgmorton: Well I ... (laughs) it's hard to discuss it without getting into discussion (laughs)
but... so...
Hayek: Well we ... we need (several talking)
Throgmorton: Yeah, I'm inclined...
Hayek: If we close (both talking)
Throgmorton: I'm inclined to support it. Okay. But...
Hayek: ... CZA is locked in.
Throgmorton: Yeah.
Hayek: Which... and as I understand it, means that we can still vote it down, but
you ... you up or down the locked in CZA once the public hearing is closed. Okay,
so ... over here. Same? Okay. Uh ... I will close the public hearing at this time.
(bangs gavel)
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of September 17, 2013.
Page 37
2. CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE (FIRST CONSIDERATION)
Dobyns: Move first consideration (several talking)
Karr: Can I have a motion to accept correspondence first?
Payne: So moved (several talking)
Hayek: (laughter) Okay, we're gonna ... call this a motion from, uh, Payne and seconded
by Champion to accept public, uh, to accept correspondence. Discussion? All
those in favor say aye. Opposed say nay. Motion carries 7 -0.
Dobyns: Move first consideration.
Mims: Second.
Hayek: Moved, uh, first consideration moved by Dobyns, seconded by Mims.
Discussion?
Champion: Well I like this zoning. I think it's better for the neighborhood than what was
going to be built before. I think it's going to be less traffic. People aren't going
to be driving down that there ... other residential street, and I think it's a
compatible ... I think it's much more compatible with the neighborhood than what
was going to be built before.
Mims: I'm going to support it as well. I ... I ... do have significant concerns about using
access directly onto Dodge Street instead of using Dodge Street Court and
Conklin. I understand the reasons for that in terms of the neighborhood, uh,
neighbors' concern about the additional traffic, etc., um, I use north Dubuque
Street every single day cause I live back in on Oaks Drive, so I come out right
there across the street, um, and fortunately most of the time I'm ... I'm turning
right to go into town so it's not quite as much of a hassle, but see people sitting
there, um, and trying to get through ... I ask the questions that I just asked about
current zoning versus this rezoning to try and get a sense of what are we doing to
the neighborhood that couldn't already be done under current zoning, and I realize
that they're not having success marketing under cur ... current zoning, but the
potential really is for more traffic and probably just about as much parking under
current zoning, um, as what we would be approving with this new zoning, and so
uh, I'm willing to support the change.
Payne: I do agree with you, Susan, on the, um, access to north Dodge Street, which is
always a concern on a arterial street, how close it is to an intersection and are they
actually going to be able to get out onto the street and turning in later, but I think
this is a good kind of in -fill development in this area.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of September 17, 2013.
Page 38
Mims: I think in 10 years we're really going to regret having given them access on
Dodge Street.
Dickens: (several talking) ... it was already there from sanitary dairy.
Mims: I know! But I ... I think we're going to regret it.
Payne: The traffic was different in those days.
Dickens: Yeah, it was quite a bit different. (mumbled) single highway, two lane.
Throgmorton: Well I feel pretty ambivalent about this. I think, uh, the ... the proposed dens...
residential density is a reasonable density for this particular location, but I think
we're setting ourselves up for a problem in the future. Partly for the access
reasons and partly for the ... the need that residents would have ... will have to cross
the street. So at some point there'll have to be a light put in, but what about the
period between now and then? So ... and...
Dickens: It's already tough getting across there so...
Throgmorton: Yeah! So I ... I think we're settin' ourselves up here, but it's a reasonable use of
the land, it seems to me, and the CC -1 that currently exists already permits...
Mims: CC -2.
Throgmorton: ... CC-2, it already permits certain kind of development. So...
Champion: Yeah, I ... I don't know, I mean, I disagree. I mean, I don't think pedestrians are
stupid. They're going to have to cross the street. They ... there's going to be
pathways or paths. It's not up to me to say well you can't build a house there
because it's going to be not easy to cross the street. I don't think that's my
decision!
Dickens: There is a light about two blocks (both talking)
Champion: Right, I mean, it might be my decision later to put something there, but it's not
my decision to decide that somebody can't build something because I don't like
the way they're going to have to cross the street.
Throgmorton: But some residents are children and that light's a pretty long walk away.
Champion: Listen, it takes one car. You can live on a dead -end street. It takes one car.
Every street should be considered dangerous. And you just have to be careful.
Throgmorton: Well maybe I misunderstood ya!
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of September 17, 2013.
Page 39
Champion: I've lived on busy streets all my life and I've never had a child hit by a car.
Hayek: Well the, uh, I fully appreciate the ... the concerns of the neighborhood and it ... I,
you know, this is an important one for us to get right, not only for the
neighborhood's, uh, benefit, but ... but also as, you know, as a developing
commercial area and as the entryway into the city. Um, on balance I'm
comfortable with this because of, uh, the CZA terms, um, and what we've
charged, uh, design, the design review committee and the P &Z Commission, uh,
with doing to ensure compatibility, um, and also just our design review process,
and ... and ... and the set -backs and ... and the other restrictions, so that in the
aggregate, um, I am comfortable with this and uh, will support it. Further
discussion? Roll call, please. First consideration passes 7 -0.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of September 17, 2013.
Page 40
ITEM 6c RIVERFRONT CROSSINGS C112 ZONE — AMENDING TITLE
14: ZONING TO ALLOW ADDITIONAL BUILDING HEIGHT AND
FLOOR AREA, ALTERNATIVE GROUND FLOOR TRANSPARENCY
AND BUILDING ARTICULATION STANDARDS, AND LOWER
PARKING REQUIREMENTS FOR PROPERTIES ZONED CENTRAL
BUSINESS SUPPORT (CB -2) THAT ARE LOCATED IN THE
RIVERFRONT CROSSINGS DISTRICT.
1. PUBLIC HEARING
Hayek: This is a public hearing. The public hearing is open. (bangs gavel)
Davidson: You probably recall at a fairly recent City Council meeting, uh, there was a
presentation from Midwest One Bank on their proposed, uh, Riverfront Crossings
office tower, uh, an image of which you see here. Uh, and uh, that did receive a
favorable, uh, reaction from, uh, the City Council. We are currently working with
Midwest One Bank to ... this is basically the, uh, I guess probably be accurate to
call it second phase. Their ... the rehab of their, uh, historic building downtown is
probably the first phase, which is actively ongoing. This will be the next thing,
uh, that they do, and they are anxious to get going yet this fall with the
construction of this building. It would be four floors for Midwest One Bank and
two spec office floors, which I understand are, uh, being received very favorably
in terms of their, uh, occupancy. Um, what ... what you have before you this
evening, uh, on this item is ... are some text changes to the zoning code to allow,
uh, this building to proceed with construction this fall. We had originally
anticipated in our discussions with the bank that this building would commence in
the spring. Uh, our form -based zoning code, which is an enormous undertaking
which we are wrapping up, truly an enormous undertaking, should get to Planning
and Zoning, um, in October and to you in November. Um ... they would like to be
moving on this ahead of that, and so what's proposed tonight are some, uh,
modifications to the CB -2 zone in Riverfront Crossings that would allow this
building to go forward, anticipating the form -based code and ultimately what it is
going to call for. Some additional, uh, views of it. This is the Harrison Street
side ... uh, the Clinton Street side, and then the street level, and ... and we've really
worked hard, uh, with the bank to get a good compromise in place in terms of
what we want to see, in terms of, uh, visibility and transparency in creating a good
environment for pedestrians at the street level, and some of the concerns they
have about privacy and office type uses, uh, inside the building, and ... and, uh,
what you have before you is basically the compromise that's been, uh, arrived at,
and um ... uh, the architect and bank representative's here tonight and may wish to
answer questions that you have, uh, regarding that, and then here's the, uh, the
floor plan for the building. Um ... the, I guess maybe the essence, or the ... the
clearest thing to do ... um, this ... these proposed modifications will apply only to
this site, because it's the only CB -2 zoned property, uh, in Riverfront Crossings.
It was zoned CB -2 to accommodate the drive -up in the temporary location, uh, of
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of September 17, 2013.
Page 41
the branch bank that's in Sabin School right now. That's why it's CB -2. There's
no other CB -2 zoning, uh, in Riverfront Crossings, so, uh, these changes would
apply only to this site. And, uh, let's just walk through `em real quickly. Um,
maximum building height of six stores, not to exceed 85 feet. Uh, floor area ratio
maximum of five. Uh, the building facades in terms of Clinton Street and
Harrison Street are required to have, uh, a certain number of openings and trans,
uh, parent windows consistent with the... the... the design, the building design that
you just saw. Uh, and then finally that ... that private off - street parking shall be
required at the same ratios required in the CB -10 zone. Obviously the CB -10
zone intends to have parking for a building like this provided off -site in a City
facility. That's exactly what we have planned here in terms of the project. I think
it's slightly visible ... uh ... well maybe not! I thought it was slightly visible in one
of the slides. Well, you see just the edge of it there off to the left, but basically
the townhouse project with the City parking ramp that would be on the adjacent,
uh, site. So, uh, that's what's, uh, planned, again, consistent with the presentation
that you heard from the bank a couple of Council meetings ago, late in the
evening.
Payne: So ... two things. The first thing is, is they're starting their project a little early,
like when you said spring (both talking)
Davidson: They hope to!
Payne: ...you meant spring of 2014, not spring of this year.
Davidson: That's correct. Yes.
Payne: And the second thing is, is ... then will this lot get rezoned again when you get
done with the form- based...
Davidson: Yes.
Payne: Okay, so this is really just temporary so that they can start their construction...
Davidson: That is correct.
Payne: ... and be issued a building permit.
Davidson: That is correct. Any other questions...
Hayek: ... questions for Jeff.
Davidson: ...before you continue your hearing? Thank you.
Hayek: This is a public hearing. If anyone from the audience wishes to address us, I
invite you forward. Eleanor, do I need to take ... temp? Okay. It indicates that,
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of September 17, 2013.
Page 42
but I didn't think I needed to. So ... okay, I will close the public hearing at this
time. (bangs gavel)
2. CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE (FIRST CONSIDERATION)
Mims: Move first consideration.
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
formal meeting of September 17, 2013.
Page 43
ITEM 6f PALISADES SUBDIVISION SENSITIVE AREAS PLAN -
REZONING 13.07- ACRES OF LAND LOCATED AT 1729 DUBUQUE
ROAD FROM LOW DENSITY SINGLE FAMILY (RS -5) TO PLANNED
DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY LOW DENSITY SINGLE FAMILY (OPD -5)
ZONE. (REZ11- 00010) (SECOND CONSIDERATION) [Discussion only at
formal meeting]
Mims: Move second consideration.
Dickens: Second.
Hayek: Moved by Mims, seconded by D ... uh, Dickens. Discussion? Any ex parte since
the last reading? Okay. Uh, any further discussion? Roll call, please. Second
consideration passes 6 -1, Throgmorton in the negative.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of September 17, 2013.
Page 44
ITEM 6g REZONING FIRST AND ROCHESTER — CONDITIONALLY
REZONING 1.05 ACRES OF LAND LOCATED ON NORTH 1ST
AVENUE, NORTH OF ROCHESTER AVENUE FROM LOW DENSITY
MULTI - FAMILY (RM -12) ZONE TO PLANNED DEVELOPMENT
OVERLAY/LOW DENSITY MULTI - FAMILY (OPD/RM -12) ZONE.
(REZ13- 00004) (PASS AND ADOPT) [Discussion only at formal meeting]
Payne: Move adoption.
Mims: Second.
Hayek: Moved by, uh, Payne, seconded by Mims. Discussion? (mumbled) (both
talking)
Throgmorton: (both talking)
Hayek: Go ahead. I was going to invite the public to ... provide their comments (both
talking)
Throgmorton: Yeah, and I want to ask the developer a question too.
Hayek: Okay! Um... so why don't we invite the members of the public who would like to
address us, if there are any individuals. (mumbled) ...we'll get your questions
answered, Jim.
Wasserman: Hello, I'm Ed Wasserman. I live at 555 N. First Avenue, directly ... oops! Oh
geez! Directly next to the proposed ... lot and development. I just wanted to
rehearse some of the neighbors' concerns and to raise a few numbers for you to
consider before your final vote. Uh ... the proposed development is going to go in
this plot of land here. You can see the trees that come ... most immediately on this
side, from our building and north to Hickory Hill Park. This is an overhead where
you can see the, our building and the trees that are here, all the way across to
Hickory Hill Park, and these trees here. Uh, this is the planned building, uh, that
would go in. You can see the 20- foot ... 22 -foot drop from the basement level of
our building to the basement level of theirs. I just wanted to rehearse the ... the
critical questions with respect to us tonight, and that's the, uh, regulated slopes
ordinance. The purpose of this ordinance is to regulate development on sensitive
land, sensitive areas, which this is, near steep slopes. The reason for these
regulations is to minimize flooding, landscapes... landslides and mudslides; to
minimize soil instability, erosion, and downstream siltation; and to preserve the
scenic character of the hillside areas, particularly wooded hillsides that I tried to
show you at the beginning. Our neighbors' main concerns are that it ... this
development would in fact destroy the scenic woodland hillsides that exist,
destabilize the steep slopes by extensive excavation and the complete removal of
trees, and the disruption of existing stream corridors. And, just to try to make
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of September 17, 2013.
Page 45
your task simple, here are some numbers: 100, 100% of the trees, many mature
trees on this lot, would be destroyed by the project. The tree removal would not
only be aesthetically destructive, but it would mean deep root damage and the
unsettling of the soil, the sub -soil, which is immediately next to our building,
where we've already had si ... significant sub -soil movement, a shifting of the
foundation of the building, and have already paid upwards of $50,000 in repairs
with more in the immediate future. 88, 88% of the steep slopes on this lot will be
impacted by construction of the building. 88 %. 53, 53% of the critical slopes
would be impacted by construction of the building. So let's look at those three
numbers together. 88, 100, and 53. The proposal would remove 100% of the
mature trees, disturb 88% of the steep slopes, and 50% of the critical slopes. This
would all be upset by this project. This cannot easily be reconciled with the
regulation to minimize the risk of flooding and mudslides; to minimize soil
instability; and to preserve the scenic character of the wooded hillsides. We
certainly hope you will not approve this project. We see it as quite inconsistent
with the regulated slopes ordinance and violating the letter and spirit of those
ordinances. Thank you.
Hayek: Thank you, sir! Anyone else from the public?
Buddenbaum: Good evening. Um, I want to thank you for giving me this time to vent some
more. My husband and I are in strong opposition to Mr. Miller's rezoning of the
First Avenue lot, that 1.05 acres. This lot is designated a sensitive area, and is
protected by the Comprehensive Plan and the Sensitive Areas Ordinance, Section
14 -51 -8, Regulated Slopes. And secondly, there are many mature trees in his plan
to be removed. Uh, see ... the developer's plans included... includes newly planted
trees, but these will take dec ... decades to mature and they will not be the varieties
that only nature's wisdom can ... decides. Commissioner Throgmorton was
assigned burden of proof when he was uncertain of his `yes' vote at the last
meeting, September 3`d. If the sensitive area overlay is a guideline to protect
natural amenities, then all regulations of this section on regulated slopes should be
studied and adhered to, in order for the plan to be valid. It should be a guideline
for all of us. Mr. Miller's plan does not adhere to any of this. It is contrary to the
plan. Please consider the parking of the construction equipment and the vehicles
of the workers. Stewart Court and Hickory Hill parking lot are the only options.
Consider also the added congestion of 64 more cars on First Avenue, and this is
only between Rochester and the park. That's not a very long distance. Mr. Miller
and his legion of a lawyer, engineer, real estate agent, and a representative from
the Regina Foundation have worked to persuade your vote. However, we the
neighbors have relied solely on the Comprehensive Plan and the Sensitive Areas
Ordinance, brought into place to protect steep slopes from development. We are
the only ones not in this for profit. A smaller building design would preserve
some of the open space and minimize the disturbance of the lot's sensitive
features, such as the slopes and natural resources, such as the trees. Allowing Mr.
Miller's plan with this ... his extreme excavation will make it easier for the next
developer and the one after that and the one after that. Thank you.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of September 17, 2013.
Page 46
Hayek: Thank you. Anyone else from the public?
Jacob: Good evening, I'm Jim Jacob, structural engineer with, uh, VJ Engineering. I'm
here to speak, uh, on behalf of the applicant. I have looked at the, uh, site with
the applicant and I've prepared a letter addressed to Mr. Miller, uh, regarding the,
uh, the concerns of some of the, uh, particularly the property to the south, 543, uh,
N. First Avenue. Uh, there's a three-tiered ... I don't know if I can get back to the,
uh... if I can get (mumbled)
Davidson: Excuse me, yeah (mumbled) ...need to help me here. (laughter)
Throgmorton: Bring in the troops!
Champion: (laughs) (mumbled) ...want anybody to laugh at me and my technology skills
anymore!
Dickens: We're laughing along with them! (laughter)
Dobyns: Notice the young man comes up and helps (mumbled)
Davidson: ...support. Let's see ... there!
Jacob: (mumbled)
Davidson: Let's see ... I don't know if I put `em all ... oh, that was (mumbled) should have left
his up. I probably don't have (mumbled) I'm sorry, I took that one (mumbled)
but...
Jacob: Okay.
Davidson: ...but if you ... if you need any of these, they're all right here.
Jacob: Okay. (mumbled)
Davidson: (mumbled)
Jacob: Yeah, that's fine!
Davidson: Okay.
Jacob: Okay. In ... in this area ... the existing, uh ... north building line is ... is 20 foot south
of the lot line, and there are three tiered CMU, uh, segmented block walls that, uh,
drop the slope from a ... on the west side 537, down to, uh, 525 at the lot line here
... at the lowest point. Uh, Mr. Miller's plan will actually end up filling about
2.75 feet along this low point in front of that, uh, lowest tiered wall. By adding 2
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of September 17, 2013.
Page 47
1/2 feet of fill in front of that wall, we're actually going to ... enhance the stability
of that wall. Uh, obviously the differential slope is ... is what creates the lateral
force and... and by filling in front of the wall, we're actually going to enhance the
stability of that wall. So their concern of...of the wall, uh, instability is ... is
unfounded. Uh, there will be, uh... a wall on the back side of the property that...
that curls around the southwest corner of the building here. And that wall in the
installation of it, it will be a... a geo -grid, reinforced earth wall and so that wall
will ... will stabilize the earth in that corner of the structure. Uh, the building is 20
foot north of the property line at this corner, and... and ends up being about 26 to
27 feet north of the property line at this corner. Uh, so we have more than 40 feet
between the two building foundations, which for the ... the differential slope that
we have there is ... is com ... completely out of the zone of influence. Our
foundation will be completely out of the zone of influence of the existing, uh,
building to the south. So, if there are any questions on ... on structural concerns,
I'm here to address those.
Throgmorton: I ... I need to apologize. I didn't catch your name.
Jacob: Jim Jacob.
Throgmorton: Jim, yeah, uh, thank you. Um, I ... I do have one question.
Jacob: Uh huh.
Throgmorton: For how many years will the retaining wall be effective?
Jacob: Well, it's a rein ... are you talking about the ... the (both talking)
Throgmorton: The one behind ... the one (both talking)
Jacob: ...or the ones that...
Throgmorton: ... the one on the west side is what I'm thinking of (both talking)
Jacob: Yeah, the one on the west side and that curls around...
Throgmorton: Yeah.
Jacob: ...on the southwest corner here.
Throgmorton: Yeah.
Jacob: That would be a ... a reinforced earth, segmented, uh, wall. Those are ... the facing
units of those are made of concrete block. It's a ... a plastic geo -grid that's laid
into the soil in layers so that the soil itself acts as the restraining unit and... and so
its... the... the concrete block is just a facing. The ... the length of that concrete
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of September 17, 2013.
Page 48
block is ... is usually estimated at 40 to 50 years. The ... the geo, the plastic geo
grid that's in... in the earth is going to have a longer life than that.
Throgmorton: What's a plastic geo grid?
Jacob: Well, it's ... it's a ... it's a reinforced plastic fiber that ... that's laid in layers
horizontally as the wall goes up and... and it goes back, depending on the height
of the wall, it goes back different, uh, horizontally, and... and so that's laid in
layers and... and the weight of the earth holding that geo grid is what keeps the
lateral force from pushing the wall over. So it's really a ... a reinforced earth
concept. Where you have this large block of earth that's stabilizing the ... the wall
from moving forward.
Throgmorton: Thanks, that's very helpful. At some point certain components or parts of the
retaining wall will probably have to be repaired, I suppose, maybe ... maybe parts
of it replaced, like 50 years from now.
Jacob: Well...
Throgmorton: Is that what you're saying?
Jacob: Yeah, potentially any ... anything that we build today, you know, within 50 years
you would expect to do some maintenance on.
Throgmorton: Yeah. Okay. Thank you.
Jacob: Uh huh!
Dobyns: Matt, could I have Ron come up and speak to us? I had a question for him.
Hayek: You could have ... you could ask anybody to come up!
Dobyns: Okay, Ron, you want to ... (laughter) Just being polite! Ron, this is basically what
I asked you last time, but I just want to do it for, um, the public. Um, I'm
concerned about the water drainage burden from the Regina athletic fields, um,
going into the Ralston Creek drainage basin, and urn ... flooding the east entrance
to Hickory Hill Park. And the City engineer, staff's, uh, opinion, do you feel this
development will increase the frequency of that happening, decrease it, or no
effect?
Knoche: I ... I believe it'll have no effect. And ... and it has the potential of decreasing it.
Now with the drainage system that's installed, um, to capture that water as it
comes off that back slope, uh, you know, it has a potential of decreasing it, but I
mean ultimately it'll be no effect.
Dobyns: Thank you.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of September 17, 2013.
Page 49
Throgmorton: If.. if I could follow up on that. So (laughs) I know we've gone over this ground
before, literally, uh, but ... I need to be clear. So the water's going in ... will be
going into the storm sewer, not into Ralston Creek, is that correct or not?
Knoche: Ultimately the water ends up in Ralston Creek, uh, but it ... but the storm sewer
outlets into the creek itself. So there's storm sewer along First Avenue that drains
to the north and drains into Ralston Creek.
Throgmorton: Okay.
Champion: It'll be slower, isn't that the whole concept?
Throgmorton: (mumbled)
Dobyns: Controlled.
Payne: It'll be controlled (several talking)
Knoche: It'll be controlled.
Payne: So the same water will go to the same place, just through a different path.
(several talking) ...controlled path.
Dobyns: It won't go to the entrance.
Champion: But I have to point out again that that was the object of that basin. That was what
it was put there for.
Throgmorton: How ... how can water that's collected and sent into a storm sewer and directed to
Ralston Creek get there more slowly than water that's just ab ... partly absorbed
into the hillside and running off the hillside?
Knoche: The ... I ... I won't say it'll be more slowly, but ... but it is ... it's directed
underground, so it won't be over land flow across the street, which ultimately
affects the entrance to Hickory Hill Park, um, but it ... it'll be piped to the stream,
and then goes to the detention basin that's in Hickory Hill Park.
Mims: Isn't there also like a swale at the front of the property between the building and
the street that will hold some of the water before it goes into the (both talking)
Knoche: Right, so ... so the water that's on the front side of the building will be collected.
It'll still run over land in that area and ... and tie into that, uh, depressed area.
Mims: Okay. Thank you.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of September 17, 2013.
Page 50
Hayek: Other questions for Ron? Okay. Thank you.
Knoche: Thanks!
Hayek: Okay, uh, Council discussion.
Throgmorton: Matt, I ... I want to say that, because I should have said this before, uh, I did have a
brief email exchange with Ed Wasserman, uh, wherein Ed said... sent an email to
Rick and I saying, and it's an email that you all eventually received as well, and
Ed said I've been trying to send this, uh, to, uh, Marian but she's not responded so
my ... my response to Ed was ... the City's servers been down since about 10:00
this morning. I'm sure she'll reply as soon as she can. So I did have a ... an
exchange like that but nothing beyond it.
Hayek: Okay, thanks! (unable to hear person away from mic) Yes! Very briefly!
(unable to hear person away from mic)
Buddenbaum: (unable to hear, away from mic still) ...have, uh, new construction further north,
farther north on First Avenue, and the water all came back down and you can see
it in the street. All the sediment was carried from that site. Course it's ... you
know, they're digging and there's a lot of mud, lot of silt, but it is traveling
toward Hickory Hill.
Hayek: Thank you. Council discussion. Can't tell if there's... (laughs) conversation
(mumbled) I'm watching people's...
Champion: I'm tired!
Hayek: ...faces!
Throgmorton: Mental gyrations going on! So I ... I'll bite the bullet. So here's what I'm going to
say. Two weeks ago I indicated that sufficient evidence had been presented to
make me doubt that the proposal had been, urn ... no, to doubt that the proposal
contains the features required to minimize soil instability and erosion, to prevent
flooding, and to preserve the scenic character of the hillside. However, my own
personal doubt does not give ... give me, does not provide sufficient legal grounds
to reject the ordinance before us. Consequently I said I'd vote yes tonight, unless
I saw legally persuasive technical evidence that the proposed development would
violate specific portions of the ... of the, uh...uh, sensitive natural areas ordinance.
With due respect to Ed Wasserman and others who have spoken, other neighbors,
who have worked so hard on this, I'm going to have to vote, uh, in favor of, uh, of
the, uh, of the proposed rezoning.
Hayek: Other Council discussion? Roll call, please. Or wait, wait, wait! I need to take
temperature, but it sounds like we have a super majority. So, okay, roll call,
please. Passes...
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of September 17, 2013.
Page 51
Karr: Motion to accept correspondence.
Payne: So moved.
Dobyns: Second.
Hayek: Moved by Payne, seconded by Dobyns. Discussion? Those in favor say aye.
Opposed say nay. Motion carries 7 -0 and 6g carries 7 -0.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of September 17, 2013.
Page 52
ITEM 6h AL -IMAN CENTER CEMETERY — LETTER TO JOHNSON
COUNTY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT FOR A CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT FOR A CEMETERY ON SHARON CENTER ROAD.
Payne: Move that we send the letter of approval to Johnson County.
Mims: Second.
Dickens: Sec...
Hayek: Moved by Payne, seconded by Mims. Discussion?
Throgmorton: I noticed that the letter's dated September 6th. Uh, so...
Karr: We can change that.
Throgmorton: ... that should be changed.
Hayek: Sound ... sounds good! This has to do with allowing a cemetery, uh, on roughly
six acres of land on Sharon Center Road in the Iowa City /Johnson County fringe
area. Further discussion? Roll call, please.
Dilkes: Motion.
Karr: Motion.
Hayek: Oh ... yes! All those in favor say aye. Opposed say nay. Motion carries 7 -0.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of September 17, 2013.
Page 53
ITEM 7. AMENDING FY14 OPERATING BUDGET - AMENDING THE FY2014
OPERATING BUDGET.
a. PUBLIC HEARING
Hayek: This is a public hearing. The public hearing is open. (bangs gavel)
Bockenstedt: Uh, good evening, Dennis Bockenstedt, Director of Finance for the City. Tonight
is a public hearing for the first budget amendment for the fiscal year 2013 -14
budget. Uh, this budget amendment has revenue, uh, amendments totaling $49.6
million and expenditure amen... amendments totaling $63.5 million. Uh, this
amendment primarily covers the carrying forward of capital projects from last
fiscal year. Uh, this amendment does not affect property taxes and only uses new
revenues or current fund balances to cover expenditures. Uh, major revenue
amendments are carrying forward of, uh, grants for the Airport, grants for Lower
Muscatine Road, uh, for the west side levee, uh, Rocky Shore lift station, and
Terry Trueblood. Also amends other financing sources for the, uh, sale of the
2013 GO Bonds and the transfer of sales tax funds from the general fund to the
gateway project. Uh, for a pie chart for the expenditure amendments by type you
can see that, uh, the biggest portion of that is for governmental capital projects,
about $28.5 million. Uh, the business type and enterprise, uh, portion of this, uh,
also primarily represents capital projects, uh, but just for the water, sewer, uh,
Airport, and other enterprise funds. And of course the ... the third largest portion
of this is the, uh, transfers out of the sales tax funds, uh, for the gateway project.
Uh, major capital projects, uh, being carried forward from last year in this
amendment include the Animal Shelter, Terry Trueblood, uh, the west side levee,
and, uh ... (mumbled) for the largest, uh, projects being carried forward. And I'll
answer any questions if you have any on this amendment.
Hayek: Any questions for Dennis? (laughter) Any comments from the public? Public
hearing is closed. (bangs gavel)
b. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION
Mims: Move the resolution.
Dickens: Second.
Payne: Second.
Hayek: Moved by Pa, uh, Mims, seconded by ... Dickens. Discussion?
Mims: Just want to thank Dennis, um, and his staff. I'm glad I'm not the one keeping
track of... all the different funds and all the carry forward numbers and everything
else, but you explain it in a way that makes a lot of sense. (laughs)
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of September 17, 2013.
Page 54
Hayek: Ditto! Yeah, we ... we appreciate it. Further discussion? Roll call, please. Passes
7 -0.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of September 17, 2013.
Page 55
ITEM 8. NORMANDY DRIVE RESTORATION — APPROVING PLANS,
SPECIFICATIONS, FORM OF CONTRACT AND ESTIMATE OF COST
FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE NORMANDY DRIVE
RESTORATION PROJECT PHASE 2 PROJECT, ESTABLISHING THE
AMOUNT OF BID SECURITY TO ACCOMPANY EACH BID,
DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK TO PUBLISH NOTICE TO BIDDERS,
AND FIXING TIME AND PLACE FOR RECEIPT OF BIDS.
a. PUBLIC HEARING
Dobyns: Move the resolution.
Payne: Second.
Hayek: Uh (several talking) need to (several talking)
Throgmorton: Hold on, Rick! (laughs)
Hayek: The public hearing is open (laughter) (bangs gavel)
Dobyns: Some day I'll get away with it! (laughter)
Hayek: Not on our watch! (laughter)
Geerdes: Good evening, my name is Gregg Geerdes. I live at 890 Park Place in Iowa City,
which is part of the Normandy Drive, mosquito flats area which (mumbled) use
that name. Um ... before I talk about some concerns, I do feel a need to talk about
some very good things that the ... that the City is doing in our neighborhood. I
think that ... that the general first step in the landscaping project has turned out
quite well. I think the Ashton House is going to be a gem. Um, recently there's
been some landscaping work going on. It ... it sounds simple but you need to see it
to appreciate it. Um, but the City has moved a lot of dirt from the area north of
the Ashton House to better slope down that area into the river. It's really
improved the access and the visual appeal of the river. And I would encourage
you to drive down there and see it if you've not... if you've not because it's, uh,
it's, uh ... uh, worth the trip. Um, I'm here primarily because of an anticipated
problem that I've talked to you about in the past, and that is the City's apparent,
or at least the staff's apparent obsession with extending Normandy Drive into City
Park. I looked at the plans, uh, again, urn ... last week and I still see on the plans
where Normandy Drive is projected to extend into City Park. I think we've talked
about that before. The neighborhood certainly does not want that. It was
originally sold to us with the idea that this was going to be an emergency road that
would provide a way out in the case ... in case of, for example, a tornado warning
during a baseball game or something like that, where we needed to, um, get
people out in a hurry. Certainly we understand that. We've got no objection to
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of September 17, 2013.
Page 56
that. But we don't want to see a street built into City Park, and I ... my perception
is that you folks didn't die there. Increasing my concern is when I look at your
capital improvement budget, underneath Item #4177, uh, I see where there is a
projected expenditure of some $270,000 to build this street, and importantly, the
description says that it is to be a secondary access road for better traffic flow, and
emergency access. So what I would like you folks to do is take off the table any
idea that we're going to be extending a street into City Park. I know that we're
not bidding for that street underneath this current item that is before you, but I
think you and I both know what's going to be coming at us in the future, and I've
been around long enough to know that once things get written on a plan, they are
sort of like creeping Charlie, where they never quite go away unless you really,
really eradicate them, and I'd like to eradicate this issue once and for all, because
quite frankly other than some folks at City staff, I don't know anybody who wants
this deal. Uh, but again, out of fairness, I've got to compliment the City staff for
what they've done. It's a remarkable improvement. Um, but let's head this issue
off at the pass. Thank you.
Hayek: Thank you. Anyone else from the audience? Public hearing is closed. (bangs
gavel)
b. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION
Payne: Move the resolution.
Dobyns: Second!
Hayek: Uh, moved by, uh, Payne, seconded by Dobyns. Discussion?
Throgmorton: We ... we need to hear from Mike Moran, don't we, about that?
Markus: I think we could help clear it up if you would ask Mike to come forward.
Hayek: Okay. Yeah!
Throgmorton: Come forward, Mike! (laughs)
Moran: Greetings! Uh, we ... we have had discussions with the neighborhood and ... and
they do not want that, and um, we have not taken it off the CIP plan yet because
we haven't gone through that process. Uh, we'll start that process, uh,
budgetarily, I think, next month and then as you all know we come to you in
December, January and go through that plan again. Uh, at that point in time staff
will make a determination and give you a recommendation on what to do, or how
we will handle, uh, any access into the park, or not ... at that time.
Markus: It's not at risk between now and then.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of September 17, 2013.
Page 57
Throgmorton: Um ... Gregg was asking us to take it off the table tonight. Um, I ... and I, what I
hear you saying basically is ... you ... you don't ... well, it's up to us really but
you ... you're not picturing that it will be taken off the table tonight because it will
be considered when we get to the CIP process, uh, in ... December/January.
Moran: Correct. Yeah.
Mims: We redo that list every year when we do our budget so...
Hayek: Okay.
Markus: We'll flag it.
Hayek: Okay. Thanks, Mike! Further discussion? Roll call, please. Item passes 7 -0.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of September 17, 2013.
Page 58
ITEM 10. PERSONAL PROPERTY IN THE DOWNTOWN - AMENDING TITLE 8,
ENTITLED "POLICE REGULATIONS," CHAPTER 5, ENTITLED
"MISCELLANEOUS OFFENSES," TO LIMIT STORING PERSONAL
PROPERTY ON RIGHT OF WAY, TO PROHIBIT SOLICITING BY
PARKING METERS AND AT CITY PLAZA ENTRANCES, TO
PROHIBIT LYING ON ELEVATED PLANTERS, TO PROHIBIT LYING
ON BENCHES DURING CERTAIN HOURS, AND TO RESTRICT USING
ELECTRICAL OUTLETS. (PASS AND ADOPT)
Champion: Move adoption.
Dobyns: Second!
Hayek: Moved by Champion, seconded by Dobyns. Discussion? There was a woman
who indicated she needed to leave by 9:30 and I want to make sure she ... has a
chance to speak. Did she leave? (unable to hear person away from mic)
Throgmorton: I think a variety of people want to speak to (both talking)
Hayek: No, I know, and she'd flagged me and I'd encouraged her to jump first in line.
She said she had to leave by 9:30 but ... I don't see her so we'll just go with first
come, first serve, so...
Knight: Um, I was just going to say, um ... I'm somewhat friends with her. I don't know
what points she was going to have but...
Hayek: Would you give us your name for the record?
Knight: Oh yeah, sure. Sorry! Um, my name is Roger Knight. Um ... in the eyes of her
and her friends, um, it seems kind of ..we're going to put it on the later part of the
City Council meeting so then those who want to talk are too bad. If they have
somewhere to go where the bus has to take `em. And that's exactly what
happened tonight. They have a bus to catch. They wanted to say something, and
once again, it's item 10, 12, somewhere in there. It's ... (mumbled) You know,
then the way of I understand that the businesses want it cleaned up. The, uh,
downtown. And urn ... maybe there's a little bit more of a ... nicer way to do it than
just ... that's too bad, so sad. You know, there're individuals that ... times are
tough. Times are tough for everyone, but it kind of seems a lot of times where
...those who have rule on those who don't, and ... for those who don't have, if you
don't like it — tough! You got somewhere to go? Cool, I'm glad you do. Oh, but
you wanted to talk, oh, I'm sorry. That's too bad. You know, it's hard to say that
item 10 isn't going to get here in 45 minutes, cause it is possible, maybe. But it's
not going to happen. You got all of these different items. You ... once again, rule
from this Council. You don't ... you're not out there looking at some of the
problems on the other side. You know, the ... sure you can say at the ... you know,
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of September 17, 2013.
Page 59
for this particular item, sure you can stay at the homeless center. But you have to
leave your stuff behind, and if it happens to get stolen, oops! Sorry! Not our
problem. And that's just kind of the attitude, and some of it. Um ... the whole
idea of...I know I should of came up maybe, the um... item with the retaining
wall. You know, let me uh ... say this once again. It's from a song but it is true,
those things, you know, like unbendable steel will not bend. You know...
Hayek: Hold on a second. You're... you're kind of getting' off the...
Knight: Oh, yeah, right, I know. I'm just saying.
Hayek: ...need to have your comments address this item (both talking)
Knight: I'm going somewhere here! Um, that unsteel ... unbendable steel bends, won't
bend, or unsinkable ships won't sink. Well, items just like this where, oh, this is a
good idea and then you find out, oops! Sorry! You know, where you gonna...
where's the sorry gonna end ... stop and ... maybe come up with some good
solutions. And I just would like to see where maybe this isn't voted ya or nay
tonight. But maybe postpone to two weeks from now and maybe instead of item
10, maybe item 4 or item 5 or something like that where those who want to speak
about it can. Thank you.
Hayek: Thank you. It's probably all right!
Britt: There we go! Greetings, Mr. Mayor and uh, Members of City Council. My name
is Robert Britt. Um, I just moved back to Iowa less than two weeks ago from, uh,
after living in Oregon for a few years. Um, and while I was in Oregon I worked
for a non - profit that works with individuals experiencing homelessness for about
two years. Um, and I'm sad to say that as soon as I moved here, um, I've been
immediately disgusted with the, uh, what's taking place with regards to these
proposals. To restrict, uh, sitting and lying in the pedestrian mall, and I'm asking
that City Council vote to oppose items 10 and 11 tonight ... on tonight's agenda.
The, uh, the impact of passing item 10 will do little but criminalize homelessness
in the pedestrian mall. Does nothing to do ... nothing to address the issues being
used to warrant its passage, and so far as I've seen, nothing in the proposal even
resembles a solution. What Council is proposing isn't even a bandaid as some,
uh, have said during the discourse around this. Um, rather it's just criminalizing a
syp ... a symptom of a, uh, extremely complex issue of homelessness in our
society. Excuse me. This is my first time I've ever, uh, addressed City Council
(both talking)
Hayek: You're doing great! You're doing great!
Britt: I'm a little nervous here! Um ... uh, furthermore this ... this item will impose a
misdemeanor offense and a fine that will cause undue burden on members of an
already struggling population. While $65 might not seem a lot ... like a lot to, uh,
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of September 17, 2013.
Page 60
many of us in this room, it can quite easily further the despair, uh, for our brothers
and sisters who are struggling to survive, um, with that ... without adequate shelter.
Um, additionally I find it disheartening at best, and despicable at worst that
Council Members with business interest at stake in the pedestrian mall are
publicly supporting this, um, and voting for these changes. So those of us in the
public who are paying attention to this issue, there is at a minimum the perception
of conflicts of interest at play here. And for that reason, in addition to overall
social responsibility to help our fellow man, I feel it's necessary to stop progress
on these resolutions. So again, I want to implore City Council to reject items 10
and 11, the amendment which will make sitting and lying in public ... a
miscellaneous offense and its associated adoption of the policy for personal
property that's been seized. And also since the issue of homelessness has now
been raised before this body, I urge Council to publicly commit to planning and
executing whatever actions are in its power to actually address homelessness in
our community. I believe it is your duty to first do so before Council should ever
again consider proposals that are perceived as valuing business interests over the
welfare of an entire segment of city... citizenry. Thank you for your time.
Hayek: Thank you for the comments.
Kemp: Good evening, Mr. Mayor, and City Council Members, my name is Phil Kemp
and I live in Iowa City, and I am a Board Member of Trinity Episcopal Church,
and I am here to speak on behalf of Trinity's Board to oppose items 10 and 11,
and to suggest alternative strategies. Now, Trinity Church has been a part of our
community here downtown for many years and we consider (mumbled) the ped
mall our parish. And we have served the homeless over many years in many
different ways. We feel as the previous speaker said that these ordinances are
wrong on moral grounds. They criminalize the homeless, but also they are
extremely impractical because if you're going to fine people $65 for a
misdemeanor, and they cannot pay the fine, what are you going to do? You're
going to send them to jail, and then the cost falls back on the citizens of Iowa
City, have to pay for those people to be put in jail. I would suggest that if you
want to have a misdemeanor offense that instead of jail time, how about
considering community service? How about if you have to criminalize such
behaviors, what about (mumbled) give something back to society? Also, um, the
other part of this is that (noises on mic) this seems to have been a problem that
has gotten more acute because of the building of the tower, and the associated,
um, lack of space because of the construction equipment. Now, my
understanding is that tower is due to be finished, um, the construction equipment
moved away in December. So why not wait until we have a little more space in
the ped mall to see if these problems are really as acute as they appear to be now.
I mean, why ... why not wait until spring at least to see if, you know, these
problems go away as there is more space for people to, um ... uh, move around and
(mumbled) and perhaps these behaviors that are now acute might become less
oppressive and, uh, fearsome with that kind of space. So ... I am asking you to
oppose items 10 and 11, but I am also asking you as the City Council to take the
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of September 17, 2013.
Page 61
lead and to follow the examples of many other cities around the country that have
attacked the problem of homelessness in a very, um, constructive way. As part of
what I, uh, sent out to the Council, I sent a link to the web site of the National
Alliance to End Homelessness, which highlights a number of initiatives with that
cities across, um, the country have taken to address the issue of homelessness, and
I want to commend those solutions and talk a little bit about those solutions to you
tonight. Now, I would say that Iowa City has a particular problem that's probably
more acute than other cities of our size because we have the three hospitals here
and we have ... they attract a number of patients and patients who not ... do not
necessarily have a place to live, and end up on the streets. So we probably have a
bigger problem than many other cities of our size and so we should look at what
other cities have done and one of the solutions that really struck me was the
solution adopted by the city of Denver. Um, the Mayor of Denver appointed a
commission on homelessness to create a program called "Denver's Road Home."
This commission consisted of a number of stakeholders, including members of the
downtown business district. They created a public, non - profit agency to, um,
implement the strategy. The city raised over $46 million in private funding,
including support from downtown business owners, philan ... philanthropists, and
community leaders. And 1, as a Member of Trinity's Board, would say that
Trinity does stand ready to work with, uh, the various stakeholders involved, with
City Council, with the Downtown Business Association, with the local agencies
working with the homeless, with other religious communities in the city to find
not just a bandaid or not just a temporary fix, but actually to address the roots of
homelessness, and to work together, and to provide a forum where we can all
come together and find solutions that will be beneficial to the whole community,
and avoid us having to criminalize behaviors, and in fact give people a ... homes!
I mean, another example of the kind of (mumbled) that I'm talking about is called
"Housing First." This is an approach that has been pioneered in over 40 cities.
The essence of the approach is that you give a home to everybody, no matter their
condition, no matter if they've got an alcohol issue or a mental health issue, you
find a home for them because when people have their own spaces, they are less
likely to have, uh, problems, to cause problems. I know that in some of the cities
where this has been done, their (mumbled) have plummeted dramatically, and so
again, I commend, um, "Housing First" as an option we should be considering
before criminalizing the homeless.
Hayek: Mr. Kemp, you're going to need to wrap up. You're... you're well over five
minutes.
Kemp: Okay! Um ... I ... we see an opportunity here to create a livable community that
benefits everyone from downtown businesses (mumbled) community and so we
need to oppose resolutions 10 and 11 and let's work for a different strategy.
Thank you very much!
Hayek: Thank you for the comments.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of September 17, 2013.
Page 62
Bird: Uh, thank you Council Members and Mayor for, um, having us tonight. I'm
Nancy Bird with, uh, the Executive Director of the Iowa City Downtown District
and I appreciate the time that you all have taken to listen to community feedback
on this issue. Um, and there are some very good comments, um, on the need to
address homelessness and we appreciate those comments. We completely agree,
the Downtown District. Um, one of the things that I wanted to, um, talk about
this evening was the fact that, um, you know, the ... the ordinance proposal that
has come, uh, to play has really raised the level of attention on the need to help
address homelessness in the ... in the community, and we think that's a good thing
because it's a ... an item that needs further conversation. Um, but I also want to
bring it back down to the proposal, um, and the ordinance at hand, and what
they're intended to address. Um, the Iowa City Downtown District legislative
committee has worked very carefully with City staff, um, that also includes
inviting Officer David Schwindt into that, um, process to help discuss
opportunities to create a clean and safe environment downtown. And we've had
very good discussions. We've reached out to some of the churches, uh, we've
talked to Shelter House. We've tried to invite feedback on what we can do as a
downtown district to help promote change and civic health. Um, and I think
we've had some really, really good, um, movement in that area, especially with,
um, understanding, uh, enforcement, and there's a lot of, uh, individuals, and this
is a very hard thing for us to public message and I think for the City as well to
distinguish the fact that we're not trying to establish an approach to homelessness
with this one ordinance. What we're trying to do is provide a tool to, um, law
enforcement and a community policing strategy that David Schwindt has done a
very good job of going out, talking to individuals that are down in the ped mall,
understanding their issues, communicating to them the-need to keep the area tidy
and to be respectful of those walking by, and I think it's working very well. Um,
through our conversations, um, we've discussed that we need ... there are a few
more tools that we need, and one of the goals that, um, I've spoken with Officer
Schwindt with personally about, his goal as well as mine, and we hope that this is
an enforcement strategy that we can talk about is that, um, there's not a lot of
clarity right now about the citation piece, and it is truly our goal, um, and we hope
to see this continue that there are very, very few citations related to this ordinance.
Um, that there are warnings given out and there is plenty of opportunity to
communicate what we're trying to do, is just to ask people to please stay out of
the planters. If you need to plug in your phones to recharge, please do it at the
Public Library; there's access there. If you need a place for storage in the short-
term, and I recognize that storage is a big issue for some people with personal
property they don't know what to do with, please use the free public, uh, storage
facilities at the Rec Center that's currently available. I realize it may not be
enough, but there ... there are places for people to put things that they need to keep
safe. Um, and continue to ... this dialogue of how we work with people who are,
um, on the streets for the majority of the day, and we've even heard good
feedback from people who are against this ordinance to say this is working. Um,
we think it's going to continue to work. We just need a few more tools to make
sure that we can help use them as reminders, um, and ways to, uh, communicate
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of September 17, 2013.
Page 63
with everyone on the pedestrian mall, and that's not just, um, the folks on the
streets. It's not people that are just homelessness, or homeless, it's also people
like children, my own (laughs) that like to clam ... uh, climb up lampposts. People
who like to play in areas that we're trying to protect and preserve to make the
downtown a nice place. It's also events, organizations ... it's really across the
gamut, including students, and I think it's a reminder when we get more and more
people downtown we have over 9,000 people walking through the pedestrian mall
every single day and as more people come, as more development comes, as more
people work downtown, as more people play downtown, we quite frankly need,
uh, additional standards to help provide a safe and inviting place for everyone,
and we really, really depend on our, um, the ... the community police strategy to
make sure that it's enforced with the proper intent, and our intent is to make sure
that the individuals who enjoy the pedestrian mall during the day, the people that
hang out down there that, um, that really communicate with all the business
members, that they can continue to do so and everyone can respect each other's,
um, space and ... and rights. Um ... so I guess with that I will conclude to say the
Iowa City Downtown District asks you to approve this ordinance and to put it into
effect immediately. I think it's something that we've got the right, um, the right
people in place to help enforce and we appreciate your support.
Hayek: Thank you for the comments. (laughter, people talking in audience)
Van Horne: I'm Amanda Van Horne. You've heard from me before, um, speaking on behalf
of Trinity Church, um, when um ... you were looking at building the Chauncey,
and at that time, um, we spoke about the issues of poverty, um, the need for
affordable housing in our community, and the need to maintain public spaces as
truly accessible to the public. We're concerned that the public space, the public
square, is being regulated, um, in such a way that it's discriminating against
people of low socio- economic status. Um ... it seems as if we are attempting to
move people away from the pedestrian mall that make us uncomfortable so that
we don't have to see or experience things like poverty and homelessness that we
don't have immediate, easy solutions to. Out of sight fails to solve the problem,
um, we believe that the City really needs to put in place the economic and social
supports first and then move to regulate the behavior. Much of the behavior that's
being criminalized, leaving your stuff around, um, using outlets is stuff that if you
had a home, if you had a space that was your own space, would not be criminal.
It wouldn't be criminal to leave your stuff sitting next to you in your own living
room. Um, or even just in a dormitory room where you have a door that closes.
That amount of space gives enough personal space to make many of the behaviors
that are being criminalized on the pedestrian mall perfectly appropriate, socially
acceptable behaviors. We urge the City Council to focus on the problems of
poverty and homelessness, and once everyone has access to a place to store their
personal belongings; a safe, warm indoor space to be during the day; and enough
food to eat to be, um, adequately full then I think it's appropriate to move toward
these sorts of regulations if the problem behaviors continue. At the moment, Iowa
City and Johnson County don't have a comprehensive strategy to address the
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of September 17, 2013.
Page 64
problems of poverty and homelessness. We urge City Council to oppose items 10
and 11 and instead to come up with a plan and a strategy for promoting solutions
to poverty and homelessness in our community.
Hayek: Thank you for the comments.
Nusser: Good evening, my name is Bill Nusser and I'm a business owner downtown and
I'm the President of the Iowa City Downtown District, um, and I'm, uh, happy to
be talking about this and I want to say that ... that I am a big fan of the, uh, conger
... or the Episcopal church. I think they do incredible things for a lot of different
challenged populations in this town, so I am very much, uh, supportive of that...
of that organization and grateful for the things they do. Um, I ... I sort of...uh, the
fact that this is becoming ... or that there's an attempt to make this a homeless
problem. This is not a homeless problem that we're talking about here. This is a
problem of behavior, and there ... of ..of behaviors that are not acceptable really
and that are causing problems for other people, and it's not homeless people. It's
people who are in this particular area, some of whom have homes, some of whom
don't. Um, it is not ... and ... and in terms of, um ... uh, and ... and being depicted as
criminalizing homelessness I think is a little harsh. I think that ... that in terms of
the Downtown District, we have uh .... worked very hard to understand this
problem, as Nancy Bird elucidated and, uh, and I think our goal is to not
criminalize this. I mean, there has ... as Nancy said, there have been very few
citations and ... and uh, our ... when we talked to Dr. er, Officer Schwindt about
what we would like from him as ... we wanted to avoid confrontational issues and
avoid um ... him being the policeman who's going to give out tickets for every
little thing, and I think that's the opposite of what we're looking for. Our ... our
hope is to have a compassionate, um, enforcement on the ... in the ... in the ped
mall, and I think that ... that Officer Schwindt, who has requested these and was
involved in ... in drawing up these ordinances, has requested this for, uh, to help
him do a job, a good job of being compassionate with the situation down there,
and avoiding arrests, tickets, and all this and ... and um, and helping regulate the
behavior to be more within a range that's acceptable and less threatening to other
people in general, and I don't think it's about people's looks or anything else. I
think it's about the things that ... that are being done and they were, um, I think,
Connie, you might have (mumbled) described it last week (laughs) and ... in ... in
your planning meeting more, uh, vividly than I can but they're activities that are
really not acceptable anywhere, let alone the ped mall that are happening down
there and ... and um, so I think this is a question of do we want to give Officer
Schwindt the ability to do his job as ... as best as he can. Um ... I think that,
uh ... uh, but again, I want to stress the fact that we are ... are trying to avoid, uh,
criminalization. We're trying to avoid harsh... harshness and ... and ... and
penalizing. We're trying to find ways of encouraging good behavior and giving
Officer Schwindt the teeth to be able to do this, and do it with a ... with a great
deal of understanding and compassion. Uh, so I ... I thank you for, um,
considering this and I... and I urge you to vote, uh, in favor of... of these
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of September 17, 2013.
Page 65
ordinances as they stand and um ... uh ... uh, and hope for the best! Thank you
very much.
Hayek: Thank you for the comments.
Nichols: Hi, um, my name is Karen Nichols and um, I also understand, um, that there are
real issues downtown that, um, that you know need to be addressed. I think a lot
of the more egregious, um, behaviors we already have laws against and this, uh,
particular ordinance raises con... some concerns in my mind. Um, what... for one
thing something, uh, that the first speaker brought up was that all three times that
this ordinance has been discussed, um, the vote has been too late for people who
are Shelter House residents, um, who might be affected by this ordinance, um, to
be able to attend and give their voice. Um, it's my understanding that Shelter
House closes at 9:00 P.M., or at least they've got to be on the bus, um ... uh,
headed that way by 9:00. Um, and uh, secondly is the issue of, uh, personal
belongings. I know that there are, um ... um ... storage facilities in the Rec Center.
Those are very small, um, you have to either ... if...it's been a while since I've
been there, but you have to, um, either I think pay for those or have your own
lock. Um, but they also are ... are pretty small and I would like for you to put
yourself, um, in the shoes of someone who has no home, who must carry all their
most precious belongings with them at all times to avoid having them stolen. Um,
this ordinance forces them to chose between having no personal possessions and
having their freedom of movement curtailed with ... within a public space. And I
think that that's problematic. Um, we might want to remind ourselves that this is,
um, indeed a public space. It's not, um, a private shopping mall, a privately -
owned shopping mall, and these citizens have a right to enjoy the ped mall, and so
I'm asking if you do pass this ordinance, um, to perhaps alter it so that, um, the
part about personal belongings doesn't go into effect until you make some kind of
um ... uh, alternative available for people to be able to store their stuff and enjoy
the ped mall, and um ... uh, in the letter that I sent to you earlier this week I
mentioned some experiences with those types of things, um, when I was
backpacking through Europe as a student and... and I think that sort of storage,
um, facility, if it's near downtown, would be very helpful, not just to people who
don't have a home but to, uh, perhaps, uh, parents that have, you know, lot of kid
gear or s hoppers or anyone who might want to store their stuff for a little while
while they enjoy downtown. Um ... also my third concern .... uh, concern pertains
to what's next. Um, we've tried regulating the use of public space downtown for
similar reasons in 2008 and 2010 and this ordinance won't solve the problems
downtown. It'll only move them elsewhere in the city, and I think we're just
going, especially if the economy, uh, continues to be an issue, we're just going to
see, um, this kind of thing crop up again, and so my question is, when it does crop
up again in a couple year ... of years, what's next? And we can kind of see some
hints that the more serious, uh, sorts of ordinances that follow these (noises on
mic) these, that we began with that we say we're not really criminalizing
homelessness, but um, just to point to some things that a few cities are ... are going
toward, um, Columbia, South Carolina, is giving the homeless now a choice
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of September 17, 2013.
Page 66
between going to shelter or going to a jail. And um, Raleigh, North Carolina is
now arresting charitable volunteers for feeding the homeless. So we have to ask
ourselves like where does this sort of bandaid approach just become, you know,
worse and worse. Um, so I ask that the City work with the Johnson County Local
Homeless Coordinating Council to explore the root causes of transient and
chronic homelessness in our community and to seek real solutions beyond, um,
these same sorts of, uh, just criminalizing and, um, and like what she said, you
know, behaviors that, you know, at home would be okay. Um, and also Housing
First is one approach, um, that's been mentioned, um, that's been, uh, followed
with success in 40 cities across the nation to reach those who don't, uh, respond to
sobriety first programs, which you could say is what, uh, mostly what the
programs at Shelter House, uh, are. So Housing First would complement Shelter
House's current programs and help some who might not otherwise be helped. So
if you'll, um, work with, uh, the LHCC to maybe explore that, that could be a
good thing. I thank you for your consideration!
Hayek: Thank you for the comments.
Bennett: How fast does one write?
Throgmorton: (laughs)
Bennett: We're all tired! I'm Astrid Bennett. I'm with Iowa Artisans Gallery and I'm a
long -time Iowa City resident. Um... and an active participant in downtown. I've
actually frankly been very energized by a lot of the conversations that are
happening on either side of the issues. I think we're due to have some pretty, um,
frank and ... you know, um ... productive conversations on this issue. So I think
everybody... everybody that's spoken here and in the last few weeks, I think it's
been useful. Um ... last month I wrote a letter to all of the City Councilors and it
was later published in the Press - Citizen on August 22 "d, regarding the complex
situation we find ourselves in, the intimidating behaviors that downtown visitors
experience, which I, uh, experience daily with our population that ... our customer
base. Um ... while migrating through the hub of downtown mainly on the corner
of Dubuque and Washington there has always been a problem, but it became far
worse following the institution of the no- smoking policy on the ped mall, which
drove everyone into a narrow region on the sidewalks on Washington Street, and
left the plaza area relatively empty. No one is happy about it. I wanted to report
to you that since the publication, I have been approached daily by many people
who felt that the piece I had written presented a thoughtful analysis of the
situation. They have taken the initiative to call our store, as well. We have
agreed to participate in any community service, uh, plans that could be in...
initiated by offering whatever needs are ... are called upon. As ... as gallery
owners, one of our owners, uh, serves breakfast weekly and has for decades at
Agave Cup Cafe. Um, we are compassionate citizens who support a regional
dialogue and action on mental health issues in the entire region. We support
looking at seating for all communities, even if it means looking at the wisdom of
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of September 17, 2013.
Page 67
the no- smoking ordinance. We support musicians. We see this as an issue on the
ground. We are on the ground. It is not an abstraction to us and it is not an `us'
or `them' or about certain individuals. Let's work together and use our
constructive const ... criticisms to generate positive change, in a place where all
people feel welcome and downtown retailers can thrive, driving our local
economic engine. Again, to repeat, downtown is primarily small businesses. We
give back to our community and we are vested in the solutions. We are not really
national franchises, so we are very invested in the solutions that come about in
our local town. Thank you very much!
Hayek: Thank you. How's everyone doing?
Throgmorton: Great!
Webb: Reverend Ben Webb, Trinity Church, uh, your neighbor across the street. I don't
know how you do this Tuesday after Tuesday (laughter) I say that honestly with
great admiration for the many issues you focus on. Thank you on behalf of all of
us for that. It's been an interesting year for me in Iowa City. Um, I sense this
community growing up and being forced to grow up in so many ways. Uh, from
the... complexities of the Chauncey and so many other issues you're faced like
those tonight, uh, as well as the pedestrian mall challenges, which are only
skimming the top of a huge issue that needs to be, uh, focused on with much more
attention. I'm aware at this very moment that probably Roland, who somehow
manages to get himself over into the showers most every day at the Rec Center
where I see him after my swim, is probably sleeping on Trinity's Church ramp at
the front door. Uh, Nate is either down in the ped mall with his belongings, or
maybe has hauled them up to the back fire escape, right outside our back door at
the Masonic Temple. Patrick, who calls himself the Archbishop, uh, who Michael
Langer and I helped to get into some care we hoped would be, uh, a sustaining
help in some fashion, managed to get himself out and uh, is either still at Shelter
House or maybe making good on a promise to leave our community. I don't
know where he is. Uh, Michael is an amazing guy, as you all know. Nancy Bird
is an amazing resource for the business district community. And urn ... Dave
Schwindt, I'd do anything he told me to do! (laughter)
Champion: I would too! (laughter)
Webb: Yep! (laughter) He deserves ... he deserves some support for what he does, uh, he
deserves access to more personal storage space if that's what's really needed, and
I think what the City really needs to do is elevate this whole... hot... moral topic,
uh, to a high place on your agenda. Uh, somehow you need to help convene a... a
homelessness summit, which... Trinity would help you organize, uh, to put
together a really top- flight, blue ribbon panel that brings the best of our leadership
and minds and hearts from all three sectors to focus on this and to look at other
potential solutions and models from around the nation. Somehow need to take
this from the downstream challenges that currently face the ped mall and walk it
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of September 17, 2013.
Page 68
upstream to really sort out things closer to the source of the problems. Um,
Trinity has amazing resources. We're not tapping all the leadership that I think
we need to have on this one, and the City, and Mayor, you're just the perfect
person, you know, you're the perfect person to lead the charge on this and Trinity
will be there right with you! Thank you all so much!
Hayek: Thank you for the comments.
Palmer: My name is Jan Palmer. I'm a resident of Iowa City and it's a little hard to
follow, um ... people who've gone before me. Um ... I am grateful that this...
resolution has come before Council because of the debate that it's created, and the
consciousness that it's raised. And, I ... want to see a win -win situation for
homeless people whose legitimate needs have been made... that... this has made
me more aware of, and store owners that have very legitimate concerns, urn ... but
my sense is that for several reasons a little more time gives us a bit better op, ... a
bit better chance at a win -win solution. That, um, and I also want to say that I'm
grateful that this issue has brought to my attention the work of David Schwindt.
Um, I was not aware that he was doing as he is doing, and I am so grateful he is.
Um ... it's my understanding that, um ... the construction will give more space in
the near future, you know, the resolution of the construction will create more
space for all of us to breathe on the ped mall, that there have been requests for
locker space and that that is something that would be probably a great, uh, boon to
a lot of the people involved. That there are already laws on the books, that will
allow much of what these two resolutions propose to be implemented. So it
seems that ... time is on our side, if we follow through on some of the proactive
things that could improve people's situations. In a conversation recently held at
my church, I made the comment that I understood that perhaps the people on the
ped mall that these resolutions address makes some people feel threatened, but I
feel far more threatened by the large groups of drunken and lewd behavior that I
see. And I went home and I reflected on that, and it wasn't long before I realized
that I had misspoken. I do not feel threatened by the large crowds of drunk and
lewd behavior. They're a bloody nuisance! And I consider them a far greater
nuisance than the people who gather and have a lifestyle that I don't particularly
find appealing on the ped mall. And the more I thought about it, the thing that I
really feel threatened by is the possibility of Iowa City losing its capacity to
cherish diversity. And I feel every bit as threatened by the people who are going
to get thrown off of the ped mall, if we are moving towards an Iowa City where
decisions favor realtors, business people, and people who can afford expensive
condominiums. This is public space. I personally cherish the bohemian lifestyle,
and what makes Iowa City so precious is that in the past, we seemed to have
found a way to mingle, mix ... and have a win -win situation for everybody. And
so I appeal to the Council to act on behalf of the entire community by in this
instance giving a little more time to seeing if we can find a win -win solution for a
couple of its components. So thank you.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of September 17, 2013.
Page 69
Hayek: Thank you for the comments. Okay, I'm going to close it down for Council
discussion.
Payne: Move adoption of item 10.
Karr: We (both talking)
Hayek: I think it's on the floor.
Karr: We have motion on the floor (both talking)
Payne: Oh, we already did? Okay. Can't remember!
Dilkes: Can I just say one thing because it's ... it's been brought up last time and ... and...
and this time tonight about the ... the idea that people will be put in jail if they
don't pay a $65 fine. That's just not the case. Um ... that won't happen.
Hayek: Thank you for that clarification.
Champion: And I'm going to tell a little story. I ... I'm going to support this ordinance, and
it's not one that I'm happy to be supporting. I've been a ... a great supporter about
fighting homelessness and fighting poverty since I was probably about 16 when I
did my first volunteer work. Um, just to make sure people know that I mean it, I
actually ran the campaign for the new shelter. I'm not against homelessness.
They don't frighten me. I'm not against poverty. They don't frighten me either.
What frightens me is the behavior of some people on the pedestrian mall. It is not
only embarrassing, it is uncomfortable. It's rude and it's obnoxious! And as most
of you know, Chrissy who runs Shelter House is also for this policy. That she
sees a different kind of behavior down there that is just not acceptable to her
(clears throat) and she's been down there, and some people you can change their
behavior by making rules and ... and I think part of this whole new rules, yeah,
there're already things that cover this stuff, but part of this is that this policeman
that the Downtown Association is partly paying for, let's these people that are
causing the problems knows it's going on, and it's already improved their
behavior. Just the fact that these rules are now out in front. And ... and when I
had a store on the ped mall, well, I guess I do have one now, but when I had one
before, I had a group of young men who were very disruptive. Uh, they ... the
leader of the group was called "Rage" and I ... I think I told this story to a couple
other people, and it was actually very disruptive to our ... to our business, and we
were planting flowers in the planters out there and every week somebody would
pull them out. And I thought this is ridiculous. So I went out one day and I went
up to Rage and I said, "Rage, you're going with me." And I had this cute little
truck and I said we're going to go and buy some flowers, we're going to get some
dirt, and you're... they're going to be your responsibility. You're going to plant
them. You're going to take care of them. You're going to water `em. And I'll
tell you right now, nobody ever touched those flowers again, and also, the bad
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of September 17, 2013.
Page 70
behavior stopped, but this group is not amendable to that. They're very
obnoxious. They're ... they scare people! They scare me! And I tell ya, I ... I've
broken up fights on the ped mall. I'm not afraid of most things. But these people
frighten me, and I... and they would really frighten my 20 grandchildren if they
were down there. So I'm not against poverty. I'm not against homelessness.
This is not what this is about. This is about truly unacceptable bad behavior that
none of you that are speaking against this ordinance would tolerate near your
property. This is not against homelessness and poverty. This is ... I'm not going
to go into details of the bad behavior. It's horrible. It's just not acceptable.
Thank you. I'm sorry. I'm going to vote for it.
Hayek: Um ... I ... I agree. We certainly have a homelessness issue in the community. We
have a housing issue in this community. Um, these are things we have worked on
for years, um, both as a city and in collaboration with the private sector. Um, and
I ... and I think Iowa City's track record is very strong in that area. I think in terms
of our funding and ... and of our general support, uh, for the groups who ... who try
to address, uh, an inscrutable issue, a very di ... difficult, complex, uh, issue. Um,
and ... and that support and that funding will continue. We've tried to raise the
issue of housing to a more regional, uh ... uh, level. Uh, it is in fact a regional
issue and I think only regional solutions, um, can be affective, um, and in any
event, we need help from our neighbors and ... and thus far that has been a
frustrating, uh, conversation. Um, but we continue that, and in fact we ... we're in
the ... we're preparing to go back, uh, down that road once again with, uh, with the
other, uh, local entities, uh, in the Johnson County area. Um, but our track record
is strong, uh, as a community and I... and I think it will continue. So those issues
are not going away. Um, and... and... and we have to keep working on them.
But ... but those issues aren't the issue from my perspective as it relates to this
ordinance. It has been said several times already, um, this... this... this addresses
behavior in a very public space, a heavily used space, uh, downtown, and ... and it
...one common theme I'm hearing and have heard for three readings now is this,
uh, almost universal praise for our community policing efforts in the area and, uh,
and Reverend Webb referenced, you know, numerous individuals by first name.
Well, our community policing officers are able to do the same thing, because
they've established a relationship with... with... with, uh, individuals of
homelessness and other ... and not homeless, or homeless and not homeless, who
...who frequent our, uh, our public spaces. Um, these community policing
officers were part of the process that brought this ordinance to us, and ... and had a
role in it, and ... and ... and um, and they ... they, our officers are ... are lauded for
their efforts, and they should be because they're doing amazing things and that's
perf...that's absolutely what the intention of the City was when it ramped up its
community policing and got officers, you know, out of their cars and onto the
...onto, uh, foot patrols and bicycles and ... and whatnot. Um, this ... this
ordinance which ... which our police, community policing officers played a role in
... in crafting, gave a lot of input as we went through the process of... of
developing. Um, this ordinance gives them some assistance, as... as they work to
ensure that the multitude of uses in and users of, uh, our pedestrian mall can co-
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of September 17, 2013.
Page 71
exist. Uh, this is a quintessential public space and um ... uh, and ... and 9,000
people a day use it and... and you have people of all walks of life who there for all
sorts of reasons, um, and ... and ... and balancing those interests, um, while
maintaining (mumbled) to our ... our legal obligations as a city, um, is tough,
and ... and I think this is a carefully crafted, thoughtful approach, uh, to, uh, to
managing the various interests in ...in the pedestrian mall. Um, and for those
reasons I'm willing to give it a try. The conversation does not end, uh, assuming
we pass this. Uh, we have to address these other issues. It's been something we
have focused on ... I've been on the Council for almost six years now, um, and...
and am no stranger to this conversation, uh, and I ... and I'm confident, uh, that
....that this Council and ... and City staff are interested in working on those issues
just as we have all along, um, and, uh, for those reasons I will support this.
Payne: I ... I actually am grateful that this ordinance has brought the increased awareness
for the homeless population in our community to the forefront. I think it needs to
be discussed, but I don't think that these ordinance is necessarily are ... are going
to ... hurt or hinder that conversation. That needs to happen regardless of what
happens with these ordinances. And this is not a loi ... a loitering ordinance.
People are still going to be able to sit in the ped mall. It's just they're going to be
able to sit on a bench. They're not going to be able to sit in a planter, somewhere
where normally... normal peop ... normally we don't sit anyway. It's truly about
what Connie said. It's about poor behavior. Um, I think this week we made a
proc ... a proclamation that it's Constitution Week and we had a speaker earlier
talk about liberty. And I think that, you know, we're talking about the liberty of
the homeless population and what are liberties for them, but we have liberties for
everybody in our community, not just ... not just one small population in our
community. Um, and I think that ... that that means that we have to make it less
threatening for everybody that want to enjoy the ped mall, and I mean everybody
in our entire community, in our entire region. So for that reason I do support
these ordinances, because we want ... we want everybody to be able to en ... to
enjoy the ped mall and not feel threatened.
Throgmorton: I ... I don't think the proposed ordinance ought to be adopted and ... and that comes
as no surprise to anybody up here. I stated my reasons in the last two meetings
and I don't want to repeat them again now. It's just excess. (clears throat) Other
than to say ... I don't see how the particular elements of the proposed ordinance
deal with the reprehensible behaviors that Connie and others have drawn attention
to. I ... I don't see the connection. So, just set that point out there (clears throat)
As you know I intended to offer some non - substantive amendments to the
ordinance, but after our discussion during the work session earlier, I'm not going
to do that. What I will do is after the vote is taken I'm going to make those two
motions that are on the second page of the document I gave you earlier.
Mims: I'm going to do something that, um, I haven't done before in almost four years on
this Council, and that is I voted yes at the first reading (laughter) I voted no at the
second reading, and I'm going to vote yes tonight. And let me explain why. Um,
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of September 17, 2013.
Page 72
I ... I think the community deserves that. People have been, uh ... lots of comments
tonight, kind of all ... all over the board. I think the key thing is that this is... this
is attempting, uh, to address behaviors, not a specific category of people. I think
one of the things that ... that is compelling to me, and was when I ... when I voted
yes the first time was, as Connie mentioned, uh, Chrissy Canganelli's support for
this. There's nobody in this community that is more ... that has worked harder I
don't think over probably decades in terms of the homeless issue than Chrissy.
Um, I've heard nothing but positive comments from everybody on all sides of this
issue for Officer Schwindt, and he's been very much involved in helping to craft
this and ... and what strategies that he thinks would help him in doing this, and so
for somebody like that to be supportive of this I think is also, um, is also very
critical. Like some of the members of the audience have said, and Michelle has
said, I think one of the real positives of this whole, uh, ordinance and this whole
issue is that it has brought, uh, the homeless issue that much more to the forefront
and to ... to the top of the conversation, and as Matt indicated, the City has already
done a lot. I think we need to continue to do a lot, and to do a lot more. I think
the idea of a, uh, I can't remember the exact wording that was used, but kind of
convening a homeless convention or something of that ... that sort to really talk
about some of these. There was a thing in one of our packets, um, talking about
this FUSE program, uh, looking at frequent users who, uh, other cities have kind
of developed these programs and looking at some of the people who use our ... our
services the most and the most frequently and costs our society the most in doing
some kind of unique programming and strategy... strategies with these folks to
help them. Uh, kind of relates to the ... the Housing First. Once somebody has
housing then you can start dealing with some of those other issues. I think those
are all things that we need to continue to talk about, um, and really bring to ... to
the forefront in terms of our discussion. But at this particular moment given the
support that some of those key people have ... have indicated for this ordinance,
um, I am going to support it. I also think it's important though as we move
forward as a Council and as City staff and as the Downtown District, that we also
look at the unintended consequences which is one of the things that was really
brought up at our last meeting. Um, the ... the smoking ordinance was mentioned.
I think we need to go back and look at some of those kinds of things that we have
put in place that have caused people to congregate in certain areas and had ... has
concentrated that congregation. I think we need to look very carefully at the
design elements of the ped mall. We're going to have that open house tomorrow
night to start looking at some ofthose things. What can we do in terms of that
design that will allow us maybe in six months or a year to just get rid of some of
these ordinances? You know, we design the placement of benches. We design
benches in certain locations that have arms so if we don't want people sleeping in
those particular locations, you can't, but maybe there's other benches in other
locations that don't have arms in the middle of them, and that's fine if people
sleep there at night or during the day. Um, you know, we design the planters and
the curbs so that if there's planters we don't want people on or sitting on the-edge
of, you can't do it because they're just not comfortable! So we don't have to have
an ordinance that says, oh, I can sit on this curb but I can't sit on that curb. I think
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of September 17, 2013.
Page 73
a lot of those design elements can help us minimize ordinances because people
will just have those behaviors based on the design of the space. So, I think we
have a lot of work to do, but I am going to vote yes for this tonight.
Dickens: I will also be voting yes for these items, uh ... pretty much growing up downtown,
the behavior that I see is ... is totally unacceptable. It's a very small group that are
causing these problems. Most of the people that I talk to out on the ped mall
show me respect and I show them respect, and that's what we ne ... what we need
to work for. I know we've heard people say that people have lost their respect.
I ... I think you can gain it back. You just have to show respect to each other. As
far as public service, we're already doing that with Officer Schwindt. He has a
problem that sometimes they don't know what day they're supposed to be there to
do their public service. I know we've offered at our store ... we ... we're kind of a
lightening rod. We're right there on the corner where all this is happening.
We've offered to supply water and things that people need. Uh, smoking has
been a problem, and I think if we change that ... urn ... I think we do need to look at
that again, because it has caused everybody to come to one area. They can only
smoke in a certain area. The reason we put that in was to try to keep them away
from the restaurants. Now there's a lot of areas that don't have restaurants, so I
think that that really needs to be looked at. Uh ... places to put their items, that's
very important. I know in a lot of major city — we're not a major city by any
means — but we are ... we are a fairly diverse city with a lot of action downtown,
having stuff stored is ... is dangerous sometimes. So I think we need to ... to pass
these ordinances and the dialogue that's happened tonight, I think will just
continue and it's not going to stop here. It's just going to evolve and hopefully
we can ... we can find some resolution here.
Hayek: Any further discussion? Roll call, please. Pass (both talking)
Throgmorton: Matt, I'd like to make two motions, uh, I think I'd like to make them separately,
uh, so that, um, if...if you chose to vote for one and not for the other you could do
that. And I distributed these, or Marian did actually, earlier so I ... for the benefit
of the audience, I'll read them aloud. So the first motion is this: I move that we
instruct staff not to enforce the personal possessions provisions of the ordinance
until a location for safe, secure, and accessible temporary storage of personal
possessions is provided. Uh, let me read the other one, I guess, or...
Hayek: Well why don't we ... why don't we (both talking)
Throgmorton: .... deal with that one first? Okay.
Mims: I'll second it to get it on the floor.
Hayek: Okay.
Throgmorton: Thank you.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of September 17, 2013.
Page 74
Hayek: Moved by Throgmorton, seconded by Mims. Discussion?
Dobyns: I would be ... regarding the, uh, saving personal possessions, I think this is
operationally difficult. Um, I'd welcome City staff talking about it, but I don't
think I want to make the motion at this time about something that I think the
devil's in the details. I think there's problems with it. Regarding the second
paragraph...
Hayek: Well we're not on that.
Mims: (mumbled)
Hayek: ...taking up the first paragraph.
Dobyns: Well just the first paragraph (both talking)
Hayek: ...on this first one.
Mims: I'd be interested, Geoff, I mean, what have you guys even looked at or thought
about or see as possibilities at this point?
Fruin: We've uh ... we've discussed a ... a couple different possibilities. Um, you know,
we do as was mentioned before have some limited, uh, space available at the Rec
Center and um ... uh, through conversations with Mike Moran and Dave Schwindt,
looked at different possibilities, locations, physical locations where lockers could
be accommodated, urn ... the operational details are ... are very difficult, um, in
terms of how you would manage that type of operation, assuming it's a 24
operation and there ... would be, uh, fairly sizable lockers, at least relatively
speaking, to what's available at the Rec Center. So um ... really just preliminary
cost and location analysis.
Mims: Thank you.
Hayek: Jim, I guess where I am on this is ... I have ... I have two concerns and they're why
I probably won't support the motion. The first is I'm just not comfortable passing
a motion on the heels of adoption of a ordinance, uh, saying we're not going to
enforce it, and I know that it would be enforced as soon as these things are in
place.
Throgmorton: You understand why I'm doing it this way. (both talking)
Hayek: No, I ... I do.
Throgmorton: ... it's a substantive...
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of September 17, 2013.
Page 75
Hayek: No, and I ... and I do understand that, but I'm ... but I'm still ... I'm nevertheless not
comfortable doing that. Um, but ... but secondly, and this is really the ... the bigter
issue is, you know, I may be in favor of this, um, but I want to learn more about it
and we're being advised by staff that it's ... it's not as ... it's not a simple concept.
There are issues to contend with, and as we do with most things, we schedule it
for a work session and I'd be happy to move a work session up so we're dealing
with it sooner and not putting it on the pending list where it ... where it languishes.
Um, but ... but go through the normal route, give staff a chance to come back to
the City and if, you know, right now we ... I think we have probably seven people
who would agree to put it on, uh, as a work session item.
Mims: Uh huh.
Hayek: And ... and deal with it soon, but in the regular fashion.
Throgmorton: If I might just say a word, um, in support of my own motion (laughs) uh ... when I
try to imagine myself being homeless, not that everybody who's engaged in these
offending behaviors is homeless, as Eleanor's told us over and over again. When
I try to imagine myself in that situation, I imagine that I've got stuff and what am
I gonna do with my stuff? Where am I going to put it? I have to have it near
where I am or it's gotta be in some safe, secure place. All right? Where's the
safe, secure place? Near me? (laughs) All right, so if I'm told I cannot have that
stuff near me, if I'm downtown, that's telling me I cannot be downtown. And that
seems to me, to me, to be, um, com ... a completely unfair action for us to take. So
if we're going to require people not to leave their stuff downtown, we have a duty
to make sure there' s a place where they can put their stuff. That's the way it
seems to me.
Hayek: Further discussion? All those in favor say aye. Opposed say nay.
Throgmorton: Okay, so I had a second motion.
Hayek: Fails 1 -6, I think.
Throgmorton: Yeah. Uh, the second motion is this, uh, I further move that we acknowledge
receipt of the Johnson County Local Homeless Coordinating Board's recent
working paper, thanks to Geoff, concerning the Housing First option and the
frequent user service enhancement, or FUSE, model and that we direct the staff to
assist the local Housing, uh, Coordinating Board in, I'm sorry, Local
Homelessness Coordinating Board in developing the details of how Housing First
and the FUSE model can best be applied to the problem of homelessness and
associated ills in Iowa City.
Mims: Second.
Hayek: Moved by Throgmorton, seconded by Mims. Discussion?
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of September 17, 2013.
Page 76
Throgmorton: So lots of people said good things about — rightly! — about the, uh, the paper that
Geoff sent to us.
Champion: But you don't need a motion to get that done.
Throgmorton: I think we do.
Champion: No! You don't. I don't think you do. I mean, I ... I think this is something we
discuss. We just got it in our packets, that we discuss at a work session, and then
we can just ask them (mumbled), ask 'em ... it doesn't have to be a formal motion.
Dobyns: And, Connie, I would agree. I mean, if you took a look at September 12th
Information Packet (both talking)
Champion: Right!
Dobyns: ...it describes for the community this program. You mentioned (mumbled) House
First. This is one particular, and I think very specific, form that goes after, uh,
resource, uh, you know, service- resistant people. You know, Jim, the City is
already involved in this.
Champion: Yes!
Dobyns: And Reverend Webb, you mentioned somewhere where Trinity, in fact the whole
affiliation of religious communities (mumbled) I think... religious communities
can work, um, right now with a community that's already looking, um, at this
FUSE program. Um, Jim, my concern, I took a look at the language and you say
assist in developing. I'm really concerned that overly constrains the City, which
is currently evolved in evaluating this program, with a whole host of very relevant
stakeholders in our community, and it basically sort of forces our hand to not go
beyond evaluation, but make a commitment that I don't think they're ready for the
process. Um, I think we have about 10, um, levels that this moving through, and I
think we're on about level 3 at this point. So I think at this point, the City is right
where it needs to be. Um, I think it's relevant to a lot of the concerns that people
are addressing on both sides of the issue, and I ... I think this, uh, this motion is,
um, over ... overly (noise on mic, unable to hear) at this time.
Mims: Well and I ... I think your point, Rick, you know, in reading through this, and
again, we just ... you know, for the public's knowledge, we just got this before the
meeting tonight, so we haven't had a lot of time to ... to really read through it or
react to it, and I think when you do look at this and it ... and the language of, you
know, assisting, um, you know, in developing the details, you know, of how the
Housing First and the FUSE model can best be applied to the problems of
homelessness in Iowa City, to me that locks us into that we are in fact going to do
these programs here. And we may in fact find that ... these don't fit us perfectly or
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of September 17, 2013.
Page 77
there's some tweaking that we want to do that wouldn't fall necessarily under
these exact programs, but would better suit our area in terms of dealing with
homelessness. So I think from that standpoint, I would prefer that as we discuss
kind of under the first one that we really move this up onto a work session, um, to
talk about the, all of these issues and kind of the direction we want staff to go in,
urn ... in the very short term.
Champion: And I think that's a good point, Susan. I think staff might also have some
recommendations (both talking)
Mims: Right!
Champion: ...what directions we should go. I think we should be totally directing them.
It's ... it's obviously a lot of people in town are interested in this and the City's
been interested in it for a long time.
Mims: (both talking) And, Jim, I ... I mean, I commend you for ... for the idea of what
you're trying to do is make sure that this is pushed to the top of the agenda, and
I... and I think we're all saying that we want to do that and... and I think
everybody in the audience who's spoken on either side of this is very committed
to that, as well, and I think we can do that without ... I think as Rick pointed out,
very wisely, that this in fact could be constraining in a way that we don't want.
So as long as we agree that we want to get it on, um, on a work session in the very
near future, then I think we can continue moving this forward.
Hayek: You know, it's interesting that, you know, we talk about issues bubbling up
and ... and one positive result from, you know, a very contentious issue, uh, is ... is
this conversation we're having on... on a very important set of issues. Um, you
know, the ... so the homelessness issue is now before us again and you know my
sense is once, you know, Shelter House opened, the collective attention moved to
...to something else.
Champion: Yes.
Hayek: ...um, though the problems, uh ... uh, persist, you know, and ... and it's interesting
to see this develop as we're preparing to take on the broader issues of housing on
a more regional basis, and ... and Jim, we've talked about that, but where I don't
know that ... that that issue bubbling up is coincident really or related to this
particular ordinance, but the timing is such that they're both coming up, and ... and
so, um, I'm ... I'm not supportive of this for the reasons mentioned, you know, I
believe we will look at this. I want us to look at this, and the other issues, um, but
going forward we have to engage our neighbors on a more regional basis, on... on
these and other issues. It's just clear as a bell to me. So ... okay, further
discussion? All those in favor say aye. Opposed say nay. Motion fails 1 -6.
Karr: Motion to accept correspondence.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of September 17, 2013.
Page 78
Champion: So moved.
Mims: Second.
Hayek: Moved by Champion, seconded by Mims. Discussion? All those in favor say
aye. Opposed say nay. Motion carries 7 -0. I think we're close to the end. Can
we just soldier through or do you guys want to take a quick break?
Champion: We haven't done 11, have we? (several talking)
Hayek: Okay! (several talking) We're moving along!
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of September 17, 2013.
Page 79
ITEM 11. POLICY FOR UNATTENDED PROPERTY - ADOPTING A POLICY FOR
UNATTENDED PROPERTY THAT IS SEIZED.
Payne: Move adoption ... of the policy.
Mims: Second.
Hayek: Moved, uh, by Payne, seconded by Mims. Discussion?
Throgmorton: We can provide a place for seized property, but we can't provide a place for the
temporary storage of property? That's what I ... that's the way I interpret this.
Mims: No, I don't at all. I think ... when you talk about a place for people to put it,
you've got to have locks, you've got to have security, they've gotta be able to
have access to it at any point in time. My sense was that this was probably going
to be brought into the Police Department, is that right?
Markus: Right.
Mims: And... and... so, I mean, that's... it's a very different situation. I agree we need to
look at the storage that ... that people have access to.
Markus: And we may look at this option at the same time.
Mims: Yeah.
Markus: As a part of that solution.
Champion: (mumbled) clean out my basement and bring it to the Police Station! (laughs)
Hayek: Further discussion? All those in favor say aye.
Dilkes: It's a resolution!
Karr: It's a resolution!
Hayek: (several talking) I'm getting confused at this late hour! (laughter) Further
discussion? All right. Let's have a roll call, please. Passes 6 -1, Throgmorton in
the negative.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of September 17, 2013.
Page 80
ITEM 13. CITIZENS POLICE REVIEW BOARD BY -LAWS - APPROVING THE
BY -LAWS OF THE CITIZENS POLICE REVIEW BOARD, INCLUDING
A NAME CHANGE FROM POLICE CITIZENS REVIEW BOARD AND
REPEALING RESOLUTIONS 97-394,98-52,98-303,01-10,01-251, AND
03 -189.
Mims: Move approval.
Dobyns: Second.
Hayek: Moved by Mims, seconded by Dobyns. Discussion?
Champion: Well the Rules Committee did meet on this.
Dickens: Yes we did.
Champion: And we totally approved the changes.
Dickens: Connie and I did.
Hayek: Good to know. Thank you (several talking) Roll call, please. Passes 7 -0.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of September 17, 2013.
Page 81
ITEM 15. COUNCIL APPOINTMENTS. Applicants MUST reside in Iowa City and be
18 years of age unless specific qualifications are stated.
Hayek: We don't have any appointments to make, but I do have a number of commission
vacancies, uh, to read for the public. Um, there are two vacancies on the Airport
Zoning Board of Adjustment; one vacancy on Historic Preservation for a
Jefferson Street representative; and one vacancy on Historic Preservation for a
North Side District representative. Um, we also have, uh, a vacancy on the
Human Rights Commission and a vacancy on the Public Art Advisory
Committee. Uh, those two spots we must receive applications for by 5:00 on
Wednesday, September 25th; and then we have some new announcements here.
There is one vacancy on the Board of Adjustment; one vacancy on the Board of
Appeals; two vacancies on the Human Rights Commission; three vacancies on
Parks and Recreation Commission; one vacancy on Public Art Advisory
Committee; and two vacancies on the Senior Center Commission. Applications
for those spots must be rec ... received by 5:00 on Wednesday, November 6th.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of September 17, 2013.
Page 82
ITEM 18. CITY COUNCIL INFORMATION.
Hayek: We'll start down with you!
Dobyns: Nothing.
Payne: Nothing.
Dickens: Soul Fest was great time this weekend. Uh, Friday night Buddy Guy had `em all
the way down to Washington Street. If you didn't get a chance to be out there on
Sunday, after the rain, there was some great gospel, um, the uh, Hargrove Family
from Chicago, I believe, and Jerry Hargrove, I thought it was, uh, reincarnation of
some of my favorite greats from way back then, but they are ... they are
wonderful!
Mims: Nothing.
Champion: I just wanted to ... bring up two things. The dirt in the road, they were talking
about the construction on First Avenue. I thought we made all kinds of
ordinances to keep that dirt off the road. People had to put barriers up (several
talking) The other things was, I know it's been a lot of minutes from the crim
... Criminal Justice Coordinating Committee, and I did resign myself from that
committee when the jail bond didn't pass and they told me it was fine, but if they
want another person, I think Jim would be very good on it because he was against
the jail and it might be a good experience for him! (laughter and several talking)
Dickens: Second! (laughter)
Hayek: Do you have anything?
Throgmorton: Uh ... no!
Hayek: Okay! Uh, two quick things, uh, I met with a Japanese delegation to the State
Department this morning over at, uh, on the University campus and they brought
a very nice little plate from the, um, the Japanese (mumbled) which is their
version of Congress over there and I give those things to Marian. You're
probably wondering what was sitting on your desk. Those ... that's what they are,
but interestingly, they were most interested in the Detroit bankruptcy, uh, of all
things to ask (several responding) uh, somebody in Iowa City (several talking)
Yeah! (laughter) I know it. That's first thing. Uh, second thing is Oktober Fest
is coming up on September 28th, uh, Saturday, uh, starts ... I think it's all, just all
in one day — Saturday, uh, Market Street in the vicinity of Pagalai's. It's a great
event. I encourage people to go!
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of September 17, 2013.
Page 83
ITEM 19. REPORT ON ITEMS FROM CITY STAFF.
a) City Manager
Hayek: City Manager?
Markus: We received a $4.8 million grant, uh, for the Rupert property, uh, to protect the
clear zones at the Airport. That was connected to that purchase, uh, hearing that
we set earlier. So ... it was announced by Representative Loebsack.
Hayek: Wonderful!
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of September 17, 2013.