Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2019-03-12 Transcription Page 1 Council Present: Cole, Mims,Teague,Thomas,Throgmorton Council Absent: Salih,Taylor Staff Present: Fruin, Monroe,Andrew, Mikes, Fruehling, Bockenstedt, Fleagle, Sitzman, Heitner, Russett, Knoche, Sovers, Havel, Ford, Nagle-Gwynn, Hightshoe, Ralston, Campbell, Dulek, Carman Others Present: Stewart,Wu(UISG); Martin, Hensch, Baker,Townsend (P&Z) Joint Meeting with the Planning& Zoning Commission: Throgmorton/All right, so we can begin Iowa City's City Council work session for Tuesday, March the 12th, 2019. First item on the agenda is a joint meeting with the Planning and Zoning Commission. So, I'll say like two sentences right at the start. First of all, thanks to the Commissioners for coming. I think four of you are here, right, and....three cannot be. So as you know, at, uh, our February 19th meeting we, a majority of our Council, tentatively indicated that we did not agree with your recommendation regarding, uh, this particular rezoning, uh, the one at 2130 Muscatine Avenue. So....we are required to invite you to consult on that and we certainly want to consult. So, what we try to do, and some of you have experience with this, is engage in dialogue with you. So maybe we can begin with....Mike, you're the Chair, right, begin with you kind of summarizing for us ....why you all made the deci....recommendation you did, and I know the vote was 3-3, so....and that defeated the motion, but...let us in (mumbled) Hench/ It's actually pretty straightforward. It was at our January 17th meeting at the Iowa City Planning and Zoning Commission. The vote was 3-3, with one person absent,uh, Mrs. Townsend was absent, I believe. (several talking) Dyer...Dyer, sorry(several talking) Um....uh,the vote was 3-3, which of course it ends up being in the negative,urn, rather than a tie. There's no such thing as a tie. Urn, I think there...there were a couple main points that were of concern and I'll just go through what those concerns (mumbled) I voted in the affirmative, so I'm just speaking actually for Commissioner Signs, who couldn't be here tonight. He sent an email and, um, couple other people voted in the negative are here, so they can speak up,but I think, um, there's a couple concerns, and it's concerns we have pretty regularly. Um, one is the good....good neighbor, actually for the good neighbor meetings. They're not required, they're optional. Um, actually in the good neighbor pamphlet, it just says that the good neighbor program is not a requirement, but rather a recommended, and one of our concerns is we feel pretty strongly as a commission (mumbled) gone on for all my years I've been on it, that we really think that's something that should be a requirement so that we can identify and resolve...some of the issues could be identified and resolved prior to coming to the Commission, and our belief that it's best to engage your neighbors, communicate with your neighbors rather than not, cause in this particular rezoning, the applicant specifically did not take advantage of it. They said, uh, no to the good neighbor meeting. Um, one other issue, and this didn't This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of March 12, 2019. Page 2 necessarily come up then, but it's a continuing thing is a....a belief of the Commission that we need to expand the radius of notifications for the rezonings. Right now it's at 300-feet and we hear this all the time, and I'm sure you folks do too, where people say, 'Well I never knew anything about this,'because if you live at 310 feet away then you're not going to get a notification. Now I don't pretend that there's some magic number that you're going to notify all the people around,but you know, 300 feet, 100 yards seems slightly small,but I just wanted to bring that out...other issue up, and then the other point is, and this is something that...two things we talk about all the time about,uh, good neighbor meetings is the issue of elevations or drawings, uh, specifically in the good neighbor pamphlet, which the people didn't have to do, they ask like, 'What information can be, can you provide your neighbors that they'll find helpful,' and it says site plans, elevation models, air...aerial photos, drawings, etc., that will help them visualize the changes you wish to make. Well we feel the same way. We would like to be able to visualize the changes that these people wish to make, and without a....an elevation or sketch, it's very difficult, particularly in this particular rezoning. When they said that they actually had three different options and they're all quite different that they wish to follow. One was demolition of the existing building and develop it into a duplex, or hire a consultant and conduct an intensive survey of the site to determine historic significance and then potentially seek funding for historic rehab, or renovation of the existing structure for a residential use. So I think overall we just felt like there wasn't enough information provided for us to make a....a, uh, an adequate study, because we do think the role of the Commission is to study, question, recommend, and maybe even criticize when necessary, and we just felt there was an absence of information. I think now in retrospect that vote, if we took it again, would probably turn out differently. It'd turn out in the affirmative, but those are the things that we had discussed (laughs) I just wanted to share those items with you, and some of the other members who voted in the negative may have different comments. Throgmorton/Great! Before I ask you all to weigh in, I need to say something else that I should have said right at the start, and that is that Mazahir Salih cannot be with us. It's my understanding she can hear us, but cannot....no? Fruehling/No,just...with the testing she could hear us but she....she's thrown in the towel. So.... Throgmorton/Okay. Maz is in Tunisia, so cannot be with us today, and Pauline Taylor cannot be with us also. She's in Chicago. So we have a five-person Council today. Okay! So, any other Commissioners wanna say...Larry! (laughs) Baker/Yeah, and I wanna make sure you understand I'm speaking just for myself, only Phoebe might have a different interpretation of her rationale. Uh, but I did want to ftrst....Iet you, Jim, know that I have provided,um, I talked to the Police Department and I have provided immediate....EMT care because I may send you into cardiac arrest (laughs) because for the first time in my public life I'm going to admit that I was wrong. Throgmorton/Whoa! This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of March 12, 2019. Page 3 Baker/Yeah. (several talking) Alert the press. Urn, that being said (several talking and laughing) Urn, let me go back a little bit cause Mike has laid out the issues involved,but when I first looked at this staff report, I thought this was going to be a short proforma meeting, seemed pretty clear-cut. Urn, we might have some questions, but it looked like it would be an improvement to the....to the lot in particular. Urn, but as the meeting started, uh, and we started asking questions, um, it became clear to me that....that the applicant was....was herself not able to answer the questions that we were asking. Uh, we weren't getting a clear picture about what her plans were. Urn, we weren't getting a clear picture about the....the neighborhood involvement, urn, and the more I thought about this I thought, you know.....we need to start sending her some signals that perhaps we might want to defer this, get these things resolved, come back in a couple of weeks, um....that did not happen. So when it came time to vote, I thought....you know what, there are enough issues here that they oughta be highlighted by a negative response. At the time, I just assumed I was gonna be the only negative vote....that the issue would pass. Urn, and then when it became a 3-3 vote, I think at least one other Commission Member,he looked at me and I looked at him and we...thought to ourselves, 'What just happened?'because I don't think that was our intent, but it was the result. So, um....in that regard, as Mike said, if we reconsidered this, the outcome very probably would have been very different. So I would encourage the Council to support this proposal. Again, that's just one perspective. Martin/I wouldn't. (laughter) So I think that(several talking and laughing) For myself, when the applicant's representative came forward, they were not well informed at all. And...I had a lot of questions, still, regarding what they were really wanting to do, what the thought was, what's the end result. Um, it is my neighborhood. I did not get a letter. I'm probably 310 feet away. That's all right. But I do drive by there all the time, so....as I do in the entire community....as I'm out and about, and it's important to note that Planning and Zoning is not a rubber stamp, and just because they have pretty pictures of something that it could look like. This is a project we've done before. To me that is not substantive enough. I want to know really what are you thinking for this particular area, how does this particular idea benefit this part of the community. I take that same perspective into every meeting that we have. And....historically we've asked for, uh, drawings and, you know, it doesn't have to be a million dollar plan, you know, hiring some humongous firm, but something that gives us a little more information as to....why does this person, other than money, why does this person believe that this particular project, on this spot, makes sense, for the community at large, for the other residents there, for the other commercial. So I still wouldn't change my vote at this point. Townsend/And I voted for it. Urn, in my opinion there wasn't too many other things they could do with that property since it was so small of a lot, so small so they couldn't make it into another retail, uh, area. So it had to be residential, either a single-family or a duplex. Um, and right now it's sitting empty and it's a....it's an eyesore. Um, so anything would be an improvement. Ur....they seem not to have a lot of extra money for someone to come in and survey it. Urn, so...I thought, in my opinion, I thought it was the right thing to do to let them...let them do it. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of March 12, 2019. Page 4 Hench/And....and Billie's point was actually the reason I ended up voting yes, because it's 6,700 square feet, plus or minus something(several talking) There's really not much else they could do with it, other than being RS-12, cause CC-2 and, uh,just wouldn't work so that was the final reason I voted yes. Throgmorton/Yeah, fair enough! So I wonder if Council Members wanna ask the Commissioners any questions? Or make any observations. Teague/ So did they have any type of drawings, like from other properties that they've done in the past? Martin/Yes. Teague/ So you all saw that, and that....you didn't think that that was sufficient enough? (several talking) ...get an idea of what they might do (both talking) Martin/But that's just it, it's completely subjective. Yes they might do.....who knows what. You know what I mean? There's just too....for me there were too many questions that were unanswered. They may have had a very successful project in one area that worked great. Does that mean they're going to give the same regard to that particular property? You know if you look around that area, they're not....there are no new homes. There's no homes built after, uh, probably 1980 was probably the last home over there built. So to me I wanna know what are you really gonna do there? You know what I mean? I don't want it to end up being something that was, 'Well we're just gonna put up something really inexpensive cause we're going to rent it, we're going to make a lot of money. I don't know! I want it to impact the community in a positive way. So what does that mean to them? Because that's a subjective question. What does that mean to me? Townsend/As I recall, there was, uh(mumbled) place had been empty for quite a while(both talking)had been leaking. So everything depended on whether or not they could actually save the structure. They really wanted to save the structure. But if it wasn't, if they weren't able to do that, that's when they would take option 2 or 3. Um, which makes sense to me. Throgmorton/Maybe the daylighting,the hole could be daylighting and used as, to sell the house. (laughter) Only kidding! Only kidding! (several talking and laughing) Rockne, John, Susan? Anything? Thomas/I'm trying to recall why(clears throat) the applicant didn't have a clear notion of, um, what direction they were going. They just hadn't had an opportunity to do a thorough inspection of the building, so therefore..... Hench/Well they(mumbled) presented to us that, uh, the dilapidated condition of the building, so I believe they are aware of that. And actually was just in staff report the three options that I reiterated to you. So I think they...at the time they presented, I don't think they This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of March 12, 2019. Page 5 knew what they wanted to do. It was one of three options. And....you know, urn, Phoebe's got a pretty strong point there. We wanna do what's right for the neighborhood, and so three options is...leavin' it pretty wide open. Mims/I'll just comment. What I find interesting and...I don't know, to me we've been heading more and more in this direction all the time, and I think....I guess from my perspective even troubling is I look at....I look at P&Z and...and zoning as land use. And when we start....evaluating the individual projects that are going on that land, to the extent that it seems like we're doing that now. Urn....where....where is that line in terms of the subjectivity of P&Z or Council on these approvals versus what is actually land use, in terms of, 'Gee, I don't like the design,' 'I don't,' you know, 'like what that looks like,' I mean we've got design standards for multi-family. We've got design standards in the Towncrest area at least for, uh, commercial and, you know, in other areas of the community. So that's....that's where I get concerned with some of these is where is this....where (sighs) where's that line of really looking at these, from the standpoint of rezoning of what is appropriate land use versus....do we as Commission and Council Members approve of your particular project on this piece of land, and I think that uncertainty is something that can be very, very frustrating, uh, for developers,particularly if they're developing in an area where there's already design standards. Um, and again, depending on the project, how much money that means they have to put into schematics and that sort of thing. So, that...that was one of the reasons that this one in particular.... one it was a down-zoning, and to residential, um, and the only real options were either single-family or duplex, um, that I was just kind of surprised. So.... Hensch/I agree. That's...it's always that subjective thing of where is the line, you know. This is a little tiny parcel. So if you're too explicit, I mean are we getting to the point of spot zoning? And...and it,but I just think that when somebody comes forward they at least need to give us the data for us to make a decision from, and that was (mumbled) they really gave us nothing, other than, 'We think we might do this,' and so, urn, is it gonna be a single-family dwelling? Is it gonna be a duplex? What exactly are you gonna do, and .....and for the sake of the neighbors. Neighbors are very concerned. We have to, I think it's our responsibility to evaluate that it's gonna fit in with the character of the neighborhood, as we see it, and so I think as the voice of the public, that's our responsibility to ensure that the neighborhood feels that there's somebody that's representing, um, them, and the applicant, in an impartial way. Mims/Given it's an infill, I can understand that more,but it's also interesting because we do rezonings for residential all the time, you know, like single-family and maybe duplexes and stuff, and if we get into form based code in more residential areas, you know, there's gonna be none of that, I mean(mumbled)just interesting quandary, I think, that we have. Hench/Well I think your observation's valid, and subjectivity is always very difficult. Throgmorton/ So, Mike, when you began speaking, you mentioned three main reasons why you, the Commission,voted against, or voted 3-3 and there....thereby defeated the motion. So This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of March 12, 2019. Page 6 one had to do with, uh, the distance req....minimum distance, uh(laughs) no, the maximum distance at....at which notification was required, right? Hench/Cause the way the current rules are, if you...somebody's gonna rezone, then the neighbors within 300 feet of that rezoning need to be notified, but....we have the same thing you get all the time where people say, 'We didn't hear about this.' Throgmorton/Yeah, yeah, uh, I just wanna make sure I....I list these and get them on the table again. So the second has to do with good neighbor meetings. Again, it's not required but you....you thought it'd be appropriate, and the third has to do with elevations, or renderings of the buildings, so that you'd have a sense of what it would really look like, and neighbors would have a sense of what it would really look like. So what I'm thinking is those are all completely legitimate concerns, and we should follow up on'em. I...it seems to me it would be helpful if the Commission would recommend to us....specific changes about those three items. All right? And we may agree, we may not, but....make some recommendation,but I don't think the first two, in particular, are valid reasons for denying, uh, the, uh, rezoning, because they're not required! Right? Uh, then the other thing I think about is I know,uh, Geoff Frain, our City Manager, is, uh, he and I have talked several times, and I think with other Council Members as well, that....that we need to think through when elevations or renderings should be required, and that's a legitimate question. Susan raised a legitimate response to that and you just presented a different response, but my own feeling is...or thinking, is that...there are circumstances when such renderings or elevations should be required,but the rules oughta be given ahead of time. (several talking) So we need to revisit that and I know, Geoff, wherever you are...in the crowd? Yeah. (laughter) I know we have talked about scheduling,um, a specific work session on that topic. Uh, our Planning staff is pretty busy. We haven't been able to get to it. Uh, but we should do that, so we all get on the same wave length, and....and when I say'all' I mean neighbors, Commissioners, Council Members, and developers and so on, and property owners. So....yeah, so that's my main thinking about those three points. Martin/Jim, can I back up to what Susan had asked, talked about land use? Um....so....I get what you're saying about that, but at the same time, when someone is coining to Planning and Zoning to talk about a rezoning item, originally it was zoned something else. So.... my understanding of what our position is is to really look at why does that old zoning not work and....what is it about this new zoning request that benefits the community. So...I get the....I totally understand the,yes, this is land use. It makes sense. It's down-zoned, whatever,but originally it was that way, so why? You know, we...I just wanna kind of ....make it understood the way that I look at being on Planning and Zoning and have to look at asking those questions and understanding why the next zone makes better sense. So...if that's helpful. Cole/To follow up on what Phoebe said, I guess...I'm trackin' you, Phoebe, I hear what you're saying,because I think this is a quintessential political question, um,we're not dealing with development in an existing zoning area in which we have existing guidelines (clears throat) We do not have the authority to interfere with land use decisions in that context. Is...the question is is when we change those, that is political, and that's gonna involve This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of March 12, 2019. Page 7 some uncertainty,because we're gonna get the beliefs, the opinions, the preferences of individuals as we make those decisions. So while I think our political philosophy should be as consistent as possible, and we shouldn't arbitrarily deny reasonable rezoning requests, I think certainly just given the political nature of both bodies, and at least for now we still have the Home Rule authority over land use decisions, um, it has not been taken quite yet. Um, I...this is something I think is very important, and I wanna make one quick comment about something that has not been talked. I'm a big neighborhood commercial guy, and it's my understanding the original zoning designation here was Community Commercial 2, um, and I actually don't wanna lose those sort of willy nilly. However, uh, this question of parking,um, as it was explained by the developer. I think he brought up some very good points. That if you do redevelop it as a Community Commercial zone, the number of mandatory parking requirements would essentially make it unfeasible. So that's almost, as Jim said, there's some issues that were raised by you that we'll address another day. For now we apply these standards as they are, and given the fact that remodeling to that commercial, uh, with the parking requirement would make the footprint so fa...so small that it'd be basically unfeasible. I get back to this residential use, and I think the designs that we saw in response to some of the concerns that you had raised, urn, were very good, and I think especially when we're talking about changes within neighborhoods (clears throat) We do need to proceed very carefully, and Larry, to defend your waffling, um, I wanted to, uh, I'm gonna defend your waffling. I wanted to vote yes so we could have this very discussion. Um, even though I'm still gonna support it. So I'm going to be a little more consistent,because I thought this was a....a land use decision, that it would be good to talk with you about what your individual decisions, um, were,because we are gonna lose this Community Commercial zone. I am gonna support the rezoning, but I think that's an issue for another day in terms of what we do with parking in our neighborhoods for Community Commercial. Throgmorton/Okay, does anybody elf...else have anything to say? Thomas/ I'll just mention that I...I do appreciate your comments about the, um, the good neighbor policy. I too feel...you know, requiring that, um, would be helpful. You know, there's physical context and then there's also the people who actually live in that context, and I think they can bring insight and concerns to the....to the project. Expanding the notification, I think, is....is a worthwhile thing to do...to discuss, and then the elevation and site plans, uh, you know, that has been an ongoing issue. I know when I started with Planning and Zoning, when there was a rezoning we always saw plans, site plans, elevations, that were conditional on the approval. And what we're moving more toward, at least in some cases, uh, seeing drawings but they're....they're defined as 'conceptual,' so we...there isn't really any certainty that that's in fact what will be built on the site, and I think (clears throat) in this particular case, since it was a down-zoning, on a small site, the....you know, the direction the design could go is very limited. So I....I'm less concerned in this situation, um....but in other situations, where the project has more scale and magnitude, I...I do think, uh,you know, the question of elevations and site plans... become important and as we've said, I think it's....we need to define when we trigger that as a,uh, requirement of the...or conditional to the approval. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of March 12, 2019. Page 8 Throgmorton/ Okay! Any other comments from anybody? Good deal. Thanks so much for coming, sharing your views with us (several talking) Uh, Larry, irony! (laughs) (several talking in background) Don't get 'em mixed up there(mumbled) (laughs) So as, by way of transition from the previous discussion to the present, I would suggest that we add to our pending, list of pending work session topics this topic about elevations—when should they be required and so on. Fruin/We're getting close with our....you know you asked me to frame that issue up and work with the NDS staff on that, and I think we're....we're hopin' for one of the May, uh, work sessions,uh, for that,but we'll put it on the pending list. Throgmorton/ Good deal. Okay, so our next topic is a discussion about the 400 block of North Clinton, uh, how do ya wanna proceed? Discussion on 400 Block of North Clinton 11P31: Froin/Yeah, uh, Danielle's gonna present on it. I thought I'd,uh,just frame it up a little bit for you. Urn, and I don't have the(mumbled) in front of me right now but, uh, a few weeks ago,uh, I guess few meetings ago I'll say, uh, the Council considered the designation, uh, of 410,412 as a historic landmark. Uh, that ultimately failed, although a majority of you, uh, voted to....to, uh, landmark that it required a super-majority. So ultimately there was no landmark designation. Uh, as you know we explored the transfer of density rights concept, um,prior to you making that decision and unfortunately could not find a workable solution there. However, we didn't want to,uh,just stop after that vote. We reached out to the property owner and said is there....is there anything that we could do, um, that would lead you to voluntarily designating that, uh, as a local landmark and the developer was more than willing to come to the table and have that discussion, and it turns out, uh, they may have an option to buy, uh,property directly adjacent to that, and uh, if they can achieve a density that is higher than what is currently allowed in our code, uh,they would be, um,willing to, um,potentially, you know....they'd be willing to explore that with us. So,what we thought we'd do today is,uh, have Danielle present to you a very rough framework. We don't have a proposal for you. We wanna just put the idea out here, get your opinions, uh, and hopefully get a....um, a nod from you on whether, um, this type of solution that we're presenting would be workable. Um, what we don't wanna get into is a situation(mumbled) what we have with the transfer of development rights where we spend a couple of months exploring this. The developer spends time and money exploring it, and then find out there's....there's really no appetite for it. So we're not askin' for a hard yes or not from ya,but just generally if you're okay with the concept. Sitzman/Good evening. Danielle Sitzman, NDS. So I'm just going to provide a high overview (mumbled) little bit of a refresher for where this property is. Um, it's outlined here in yellow. The upper portion of this is the property that was previously considered for landmarking, and the lower portion is the area that the owners of the northern property are considering acquiring. Um, that'd be....in the 400 block of North Clinton Street. Um, what they proposed,just kind of very, um, back of envelope sketches of possible four- This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of March 12, 2019. Page 9 story building composed of three-bedroom units. We are guessing at about 20 units, urn, and we're again kind of sketching out densities of 73 units per acre. Urn, this again, like I said, is very preliminary. It could be more or less kind of as that, uh, discussion goes on. This is a view of the, uh, 410, 412 property, again the property just to the right of it on the screen here is the property they're considering. A view from the corner looking back towards it. A side view from the Davenport side of the block. Um, essentially our comprehensive plan,um, recommends a higher density in this portion of the, uh, city—25 units plus is identified on the comprehensive plan. More specifically in the Central District Plan,um, it's called out for,uh, high density,multi-family,but that's kind of in the 16 to 49 dwelling units per acre. The current zoning is an unfortunate choice of brown and brown for two different districts here,but it's currently zoned RM-44, which is this block here, and directly across the block is a PRM zone, which is a planned RM-44. So it's, uh, in a....in neighborhood that does have higher density zoning currently applied to it and/or adjacent to it. Urn,however the City does not have a residential zoning designation for the 73 units per acre,um, that the kind of concept sketches, uh, coming out at, urn, as a.....as an RM-44 property. Um, this table kind of summarizes the basics of some of the maximum heights, which would be 35 feet; the lot coverages; and then a range of density, which is over-simplified here as if the building were built entirely of either one-bedroom, two-bedroom, or three-bedroom units. It would show...allow a density anywhere from 29 to 87 units per acre, depending on the mix of bedrooms actually built, and that potential rezoning to planned, uh, RM-44 or planned high-density, uh, multi-family, um, would bump up that density somewhat, anywhere from 33 units to...an acre, uh, up to a hundred. Urn, essentially the planned high-density,multi-family or PRM has similar dimensions as RM-44,but it does allow for some flexibility in design, urn (mumbled) allow for greater density through height and lot coverage and things like that. Projects that, urn, would be in the planned high-density zone must demonstrate certain public benefits to achieve that flexibility, and that's accomplished through a point scoring system that's already built into the code. Essentially those projects earn points according to this, uh, table,based on the elements on the left-hand side,um....um, masonry, building materials, increased open space, preservation of historic buildings,providing, urn, assisted or affordable housing units, urn, going above and beyond in streetscape and landscaping and....and some specific designs for windows would earn pro...points, urn, and then those points are spent by the developer at their discretion on a table of, uh, available, uh, of bonuses for density, um, essentially. So staff has looked at or would look at,proposed looking at, if we were to rezone to a PRM, there would still be code changes that would be necessarily.... necessary in addition to the rezoning, essentially to allow for additional density above and beyond,uh, what a PRM would allow,um, doing that through several mechanisms that, um, site dimensions, also looking at, urn, reductions in private open space, urn, there would have to be some parking,uh,ratio changes, and then there'd be an emphasis on design review. So that's just kind of the thumbnail sketch(coughing, unable to hear speaker) zoning considerations, uh, even to just kind of kick off some discussion. Fruin/Yeah, so if I could just....at a high level frame it. So what we're, uh, what we're really lookin' at here is a....a concept in which we maximize density on a four-story building, with four stories bein'roughly equivalent to what, urn, Currier Hall is across the....across This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of March 12, 2019. Page 10 the street there. Urn, so....it would be a very narrowly tailored code amendment, within the PRM zone. Urn, we would, urn, basically give additional density bonuses for the la ....for landmarking of an adjacent property. Uh, more than likely this would be the only case in which it would apply. Urn,but again, the developer would be able to maximize density, with a four-story building, and until we get into deeper discussions with the developer, urn, and....and they have a chance to do some preliminary engineering, we don't know exactly what that density will be, but as Danielle said, it could be 79, 80, or more units per acre. Throgmorton/Questions, folks? Cole/If we had landmarked this property, the adjacent property, the developer would have lost the ability to....to.....uh, develop a certain portion of the property. Is the loss in value of the landmark...approximately equal to the increase in value that the developer will get here, urn, with the proposed rezoning? You don't have to do an exact figure, but is it roughly the same, or is it significantly higher? Sitzman/I don't know that we've done that comparison. I know we....compared some square footages on,just on the property to the north with those, but we haven't compared it to the (both talking) Cole/ ...whether it's of greater value than what would have been lost to the landmark? Okay. I also have a question related to parking. Urn,how much greater, if at all, is the parking gonna be required,urn, with the greater density that's proposed here? Sitzman/We wouldn't be able to know that until we had a specific mix of units that they would want to achieve, urn, it could be significant. Urn, they're talking about one, potentially one lower level of parking available on the site. So that would not necessarily....that would not, it would...that would require some additional parking ratio changes. Fruin/So I think the developer would like to maximize parking on-site, under ground, which is, as Danielle said, one level. It's not gonna meet the requirements, so as part of this text amendment that we would have to, uh, create in the PRM zone,we're gonna have to provide some additional flexibility with those parking standards. Throgmorton/ On that point, one of the things I think about is....the, Ion gonna assume the project would be oriented toward students, if in fact it gets built, and that site is located on a Cambus line. So that greatly minimizes the typical....extent to which a person would need and use a private automobile. So, I....I think we oughta take that into account as well. So, uh, are there other questions or observations? Thomas/What was the, when we were talking about this during the historic designation, there was some calculation of what....development potential would be lost here. Sitzman/Yeah, and I recall that we did that calculation,but I don't know that I recall the...the comparison off the top of my head. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of March 12, 2019. Page 11 Thomas/Uh huh. Sitzman/We can get that to you. Cole/An architect would be used as opposed to sort of a draftsman on this proposed site, is that the plan, is that your understanding? This would be a high-quality design? Frain/Yeah, we haven't talked through specifically what design review would look like, uh,but, uh, you know, we have required design review there. I've mentioned that to the developer, whether that's,uh, staff design review or we'd involve Historic Preservation in looking at that because of the adjacent...we haven't really gone down that path yet,but if it's gonna be a four-story building of this mass and scale, I think design review is....is important. We haven't talked about, you know, architect requirements or anything like that. Teague/And the current property would just be demolished, is that the thought? Frain/Correct. The, uh....the corner, uh, lot there and the lot...the one on Davenport as well. Throgmorton/Has....has anybody in Historic Preservation been consulted to see if they really wanted to get that on the list of potential landmarks, I mean the building that would be demolished, and if not, you know,that....that's important to know. Sitzman/Yes, we've reached out to the Historic Preservation planner to double-check to make sure that the adjacent property was not already identified. I don't know that the HPC has had a chance to do any more research into the property to identify that,but it's not already identified(both talking) Throgmorton/It's not on their priority list, I know that. Yeah. Yeah, so one of the things that strikes me as bein'real important is the fact that Currier Hall's right across the street. It's, I think, four stories in height. It has a certain architectural....appearance to it,uh, which I think is quite admirable, and then there's the historic building that we wanna preserve. So I think it'd be crucial to have high-quality design review with regard to any particular building that we proceed with. It could be a great asset to that area, and it could really undermine the area if it....if the quality of architecture's really not compatible with those two existing buildings. And I don't mean identical with. I just mean compatible with. Any other thoughts, folks? Thomas/Well I....you know, I'm feeling, um....pretty good about this actually. I think, you know, the movement, and we're seeing this, at least where we have form based code. Form based code is....is form driven rather than dens....you know, unit driven,uh, so, you know, we....we've....we don't pay as much attention in those instances to what the actual units per acre are...anymore. It's more what....what's the size of the building becomes the, uh, critical, uh, critical concern, and as we've mentioned, I think it, the four stories seems to....the context seems to support that....as long as the, as you said, Jim,the This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of March 12, 2019. Page 12 quality of the building design is,uh, consistent with what we see across the street. Uh, I think it could be, urn....you know, I don't know if improvement is the right word,but consistent with the character of the neighborhood and, um....potentially a very nice addition, not to mention that we save 410, 412 Clinton. Throgmorton/Yeah, it gives us a viable pathway to accomplishing that. Thomas/Right, I mean it's....it's similar in some ways to, you know,Tate Arms, you know,right next door, urn, which I think is one of the nicer buildings in Riverfront Crossings. Throgmorton/I think the owner did a great job (both talking) Thomas/ ...think that....that's a good example of,urn, you know, well designed. I think that's a five-story building, so...um....yeah! I think this, um....you know(laughs)you know we went through that whole TVR exercise and it didn't...materialize, but um.....we seem to have an opportunity right next door to achieve the same(both talking) Throgmorton/Yeah. Cole/And just to clarify, the PRM would be a form based code? (several talking) You just mentioned the form based code(both talking) Thomas/ ....I mentioned the...so we're establishing a maximum building height of four stories. Cole/ Okay. Mims/I'm willing to have staff move forward and see if we can work something out. I think the design is important, as other people have said, given the location and the context. So and I think the four-story ballpark, and.....I think it's important that we look not just at four- story,but at height in feet. Throgmorton/Good point! Mims/ So just....I'm not saying it can't be higher than Currier, if the main floor's a little higher, but should, in my opinion, should be somewhere in that same ballpark. Teague/Well I appreciate,um,just havin'them come back to us with an option to even do the historic preservation, urn, as an option. I don't know that(laughs) that's somethin'that we'll typically see,um,because they had all the right to do whatever they wished. So I do appreciate that opportunity. And I think this is, urn, what's been proposed so far sounds like it's worth lookin'into and, you know, I'm lookin' forward to what comes out! Cole/I think the other key point for me is is that(clears throat) you know we were looking at this area in the first instance. I don't know that I would want this level of density,but given where it already is in terms of density, calling for multi-family, it's already starting out and they already have a right right now to develop at RM-44, correct? Um, if we didn't This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of March 12, 2019. Page 13 change this, and so I think what this allows us to do,because I actually....I love that... that structure that's there right now, so I wish it didn't have to go. Teague/It's a beautiful home(both talking) Cole/ .....I do love that structure, and I'm also always concerned, especially in our inner-core neighborhoods when we change that fabric,urn, you know, I've talked about before in some of the other parts of some inner-core neighborhoods,we didn't get that fabric quite right,but in this particular case, Jim, I think you bring up a very good point. Given its proximity to Currier,the student....it's a perfect place for that, uh,high density, I'm willing to do, to the extent we can with our code, to reduce that parking footprint to the max feasible that staff thinks is necessary, and um, I appreciate the developer reaching out to us. I think that's a very good thing, where so often in our community we're sort of stu...two ships passing in the night,then we get all mad at one another and we don't actually reach out and try to resolve these, so I also wanna really commend them for doing that. Um, if it were another part of the community I don't know if I'd be as supportive,but given its proximity,urn, I'm gonna be supportive of this,but I do really want that high-quality design. I really wanna make sure that it's compatible with the adjacent structures, and that we continue to daylight this, and also (mumbled) staff daylighting this as early as possible because it does involve a historic area, even though it's not formally historic, is my understanding,um, so I....I'm gonna be supportive of it moving forward, and we also of course get to preserve the treasure that we were concerned about losing, which....which means a lot to me. Thomas/I think (both talking)is important(both talking) Throgmorton/Absolutely! Thomas/ ...cause it,urn,you know, it's ineffect transit-oriented development. I mean it,this.... this corridor is the perfect location for, uh,reducing the parking requirement. Throgmorton/Yep. Okay, Geoff, I think you're getting a green light to,uh,proceed with further discussions with the developer. It looks like a reasonable solution on the face of it to us. So...tell us more later on. Frain/Will do! Thank you. Clarification of Agenda Items: Throgmorton/Okay. Excellent! That means we can move ahead to the next item on our agenda, which is clarification of agenda items. Does anybody wanna draw attention to anything in particular? I note we're setting public hearings for the(coughing, difficult to hear speaker) amendment and for rezoning considering the area around Forest View. That's a huge thing. It's been in the works a long time now and I understand it went through Planning and Zoning, what? Last Thursday.... This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of March 12,2019. Page 14 Fruin/Yes! (both talking) Throgmorton/ ....voted 4-2 in favor of it,right? Yeah, so that's a pretty big deal. Very complicated project too. I guess I wanna mention Item 9.a., which had to do with the Eastern Iowa Community Bond Project. There was correspondence pertaining to that and I just wanna note that Geoff wrote,uh, I think an excellent response to an email from the Bond Project,uh,outlining our City Council's, and City government's,perspective on the topic,that they raised,and I would note as well that....in 15 minutes, a visual at the Church of the Nazarene will be conducted and I want everybody here to know that,uh, upon request from Pastor Tony Smith, I sent to him a statement to be read on my and therefore really on the Council's and City government's behalf,uh,presenting our perspective about....our distaste and so on for....the scribbling on the side of Church of the Nazarene and other posters that have been displayed around town and that kind of thing. I just wanna make sure y'all know that. Teague/I don't see this on our,um, a...a part of any of our packets,uh, it was the email from Greg Hearns,urn, about the,urn, from the Iowa City Federation(both talking) Throgmorton/It's in the late handout. Teague/It was in the late handout? Throgmorton/Yeah. Teague/Oh, okay! Throgmorton/And I'm not sure when we should discuss that. I don't know if we can discuss it to a degree now or whether we should wait until we get to the...uh...to the formal meeting and the motion about....approving the budget. (several talking in background) So, kind of seeking some advice from Eleanor(laughs) on that point. Dilkes/ I remember this one, I'm just trying to (mumbled) Throgmorton/ It's basically an email to us. Dilkes/Yeah. Throgmorton/Yeah. I....recommending a....a certain kind of action with regard to the hourly, temporary hourly employees and...and asking us to take immediate action with regard to it. So it's a topic that we will need to discuss but I don't know that(both talking)work session's appropriate(both talking) Yeah. Okay. Dukes/I mean you can discuss it under Council (mumbled) agenda items now, I think it's related to the budget. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of March 12, 2019. Page 15 Throgmorton/Do you wanna...is it legitimate to discuss the substance or the process, cause he's kind of raising a process question. Dilkes/ I think you can talk about it. You can talk about agenda items, and it's related to an agenda item. It's related to the budget. Teague/I...I guess I have an understandin' that he may be here, um, for the formal meetin'to give comments, so maybe we'll want to wait until after he comes and gives comment. Throgmorton/ I don't have any objection to that. We just need to discuss it before we vote (laughs) Teague/ Sure! Throgmorton/Okay, so we'll hold off on that. Cole/Related to the can we discuss it topic, um, Mayor, you had brought up the question of taking a formal position on the,uh, for lack of a better term, sort of a solar tax, um, that's considered before the Legislature at this point. You included an article from Mid American Energy. Throgmorton/No it's not from Mid American. Cole/Oh, I'm sorry! From Mid, uh(both talking) about Mid American's proposal in the legislature. Thanks for catching that! Did we, has this been....is there enough notice here to substantively talk about that? Yeah, so that's where I wanted to...we'll defer then for next meeting. We don't have the 24-hours notice prior to, for public meeting purposes. That's the problem. Throgmorton/Right, and all I intended to do with that email is say assuming we can do it before the Legislature acts, that we should discuss whether we want the City to take a position on that particular bill. Cole/So I'll bring that up at pending work session topics, to the extent it's not moot by the time we bring it up in two weeks, or the next meeting. It may be moot. Information Packet Discussion [February 21, February 28, March 71: Throgmorton/Okay. All right. Any other agenda item...questions? I don't have any. All right, let's move on to the info packet discussion, February 21', that packet. Anybody wanna bring anything up there? Thomas/Uh, 1P2, uh, it's funny when we have three weeks of a break, cause it seems like (laughter) was a long time ago, but uh, yeah. I included that....that,uh, study that Minneapolis is doing on its snow removal procedures and um....you know, this...this past winter has kind of been the exception, but I think it highlighted, for me, the....the issues This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of March 12, 2019. Page 16 we have in Iowa City,uh, with snow removal. Uh, it wasn't until this year that I learned, uh, from, uh,report in either the Gazette or Press-Citizen that, uh,the....the snow mounds that gener...you know, accumulate on the corners are no one's responsibility, according to,um....uh, Stan Laverman I think was quoted in the article that because it's a nat...not....not generated by natural event, it's the snow plows that generate that snow. Throgmorton/Yeah. Thomas/It's no one's responsibility, which I hadn't realized. Um,but in any event,what...what I would like to ask is if we could have this as a work session topic, and I am interested in understanding better....you know,what we,you know, what we might do,uh, how we might approach this. I, you know, I think it seems especially to me an issue in the Central District,where you have more,um,more people walking that,uh, the conditions, um....really break down, I mean it's....it's just not possible to safely walk through the center(both talking) Throgmorton/Not just walking either,right? I mean if you're in a...in a wheelchair(both talking) Thomas/Oh, in a wheelchair's even worse,um....yeah, if you're among the,you know, vulnerable populations, elderly, persons with disabilities,um, this winter I can imagine, I mean I was feeling housebound. I can't imagine how, you know, a more vulnerable person would have felt. So....uh,you know, I found the report from Minneapolis interesting, especially, you know, some of the,um,what...where they looked at what other cities are doing, um....so I....I think it's worthwhile having the discussion of how we can improve things, cause I just don't think the current system is working. Teague/This season we certainly did hear from a lot of people within the community,uh, pertainin'to snow, and Geoff had sent an email,uh, to Council,uh, Members,uh, statin' that we're currently at 1,280 snow complaints for the season, and order 368 times the clearance and then,uh,just for a point of reference,459 snow complaints, uh, is what was last year and this year we're at 12...1,280 so it...it has been a very hard and significant winter on, um, our....our residents and, um, people tryin'to walk throughout the community, as well as our City staff tryin' to keep up,um,with all of the, you know, uh, complaints, which my assumption is that this kinda took everybody,uh, in the moment by surprise, uh, with the consistent snow. So I appreciated what you sent,just for some comparison, because,um, I....I was definitely hearin'the complaints,um, from citizens within our community and so,um, we're not the only one that has, you know, some challenges when it comes to snow, and ice. Ice is very difficult to manage(laughs) um... Throgmorton/(both talking) ...fell down almost four or five times this year, walkin'my dog. Teague/Yeah! Throgmorton/Yeah, so I....I think clearly, uh, cross-walks are almost virtually impassable in many parts of the city, over the past many weeks, and question becomes what, if This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of March 12, 2019. Page 17 anything, can we really do about that. I don't know that we need to schedule a work session as such for it, but I...I would like to know what the staff thinks is possible to do and what's being done in Minneapolis may provide a model for doing something somewhat differently from what we're doin'now. So....that.....that's my take on it. Thomas/Yeah, I think a memo's a good place to start and if we, you know, need to go further.... Throgmorton/That's what I had in mind. Anything else on that packet? Okay, February 28th. IP2, listening post update from Kellie. Seems to me given the schedule that Kellie lays out, we should schedule a listening post for late May or early June. Teague/I wanna be a part! Throgmorton/Kellie sugges...uh, indicated, I don't know, four or so suggested sites. One area we have not gone into over the past three years, I think, is the northeastern part of the city. I'd suggest we try and find a place in the northeast....maybe at Blackstone's, maybe at one of the schools. I...I'm open, of course,to possibilities, but....somewhere in the northeast. Anything else on that packet? I'm hearing a lot of silence(laughs) Thomas/Well I did appreciate the, uh, notes from the...listening post at the IMU. Uh, where concerns about lighting, uh, and transit service were....were highlighted. I think...gets back to the, you know, the....the transit routes that we have and uh, you know, are they adequate,urn,particularly where you have, with the students, urn, you know, they have a different schedule,um, so nighttime service. Again vulner...what I would call vulnerable populations, uh,that that sort of ties into the lighting question, um.....you know I don't know where I would suggest we go on that but they were definitely, you know, I....I heard those concerns. They're valid concerns. Throgmorton/Okay. Okay, how bout the March 7th packet? Teague/I do have one item(both talking) sorry about that, and that's from the Community,uh, Police Review Board,um, there was an item that was,uh, suggested, um,by one of the members that they...it was regardin'the City policy on requestin' Council attendance at board, commission meetings, and so I just wanted to just bring up that that,um, has come up for the Community,urn, Police Review Board,um, and they even,um, mentioned if there was a way for, um, maybe a Council Member or liaison who could meet with the board members. So I'm not sure that's somethin' that comes up often (several talking) Cole/ ...at every meeting or.... Teague/Urn, it doesn't state at every meeting, um.... Fruehling/I think they're working on a proposal to go back to the board. There's a committee that's going to do that,urn, it....it wasn't ready for this packet. They're also meeting tonight, so it'll probably be at the next meeting(mumbled) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of March 12, 2019. Page 18 Teague/ Okay. Great! Throgmorton/Okie dokie. All right, how bout the March 7th packet? Thomas/ On the, the March 7th, I guess I'll tuck this into the, urn, pending Council work session topics. I sent out late last night, uh....to the City email the.....this question of the parent drop-off at Horace Mann and to....to try to simplify I think what...what I see the issue as being (clears throat) is the....the current plan has a proposal for parent drop-off on Fairchild, which would provide parking for what I estimate to be around six vehicles. Um, that plan, as I indicated in my email,has some significant impacts on the entry to North Market Square Park, and so what I've suggested,uh, as an alternative approach, uh, would be to...maintain....parking on the, um, on Fairchild for three vehicles, which would be three less than they're provided now, uh, on that...in that location and....three vehicle, a drop-off zone for three vehicles along the, uh, east frontage of North Market Square, and preserve the entry in between those two parking areas to the park, which also serves as an entry, uh, to....uh, Horace Maim from the south. So it's....it's essentially in other words, urn, trying to identify a location for three parking stalls, urn,that would not in effect turn the entry into a....a par...a parent drop-off zone along the frontage of the park. Uh, so we preserve three in the existing design and then look at alternatives for, urn, the three that would be relocated, I'm suggesting they could be placed along the east edge of the park. The, urn, in looking at some of the District's own documents included parking along that east side of the park as one option. Urn,but it doesn't have to be there. It seemed like a, you know, that....that places the....the six more or less in the same location, but there are other....other possibilities where it could go. Um...(both talking) Mims/ So....sorry! Thomas/ So I'm....I'm (several talking) I'm suggesting, you know, that we schedule a work session to, urn, to look at that in more detail. Throgmorton/Yeah, so it would be, could be an item on the April 2"d work session, right, because it...it, John's memo or email came a little bit late,just like mine, about the solar interconnection (mumbled) came a little bit late, but it seems to me it'd be appropriate to talk about that, see if Council has a view it wants to share and....but we can't do it now. Yeah. Fruin/That's fine. I just wanna...make sure you're all aware, it...it is part of the current plan that John referenced, as part of an approved site plan, so the District has all the approvals they need to proceed. Urn, when we were out there looking at the site, John, it looked like they had utility locates done and the excavation area marked. So I don't want....I just don't want anybody to be surprised if that work is already scheduled, and happens, before your next work session. Um, we have shared, urn, the documents that John provided with the District and asked them to consider it, and they did and got back to me and said that they'd prefer what the approved site plan has. So, you're.....you're free to talk about it April 2"d. I just don't want anybody to be surprised if....if work is done before that. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of March 12, 2019. Page 19 Thomas/ So we cannot request them to....to put a hold on that work? Fruin/We can request it,but....I mean we don't(several talking) Dilkes/ ...can't compel it. Fruin/Can't compel it,thank you. Throgmorton/Given our desire to discuss it on the 2"d, it seems to me to be appropriate to request that they put a hold on it until we at least have a chance to discuss whether we have a view,uh, you know, about it and want to share that view with them. Mims/When was the site plan approved? Dilkes/June 18d1. Mims/June 186? Fruin/Thank you. Dilkes/Of 2018. Mims/Then no. I would not, I mean(several talking) Throgmorton/June 18 of 2018? Mims/We're talking....we're talking eight months, almost nine months since that site plan has been approved. I don't think it's appropriate at this time for us to be going back and asking them to,urn,potentially make changes or hold off on work that they may have scheduled. Cole/(mumbled) Throgmorton/Well, are there four people who would like to ask them to defer action until we have a chance to discuss it, as a Council? Cole/Can we do that, for public meeting's purposes,to deliberate as a body since we didn't get the 24-hours notice? Dilkes/I think you can give redirection to staff. That's okay. Throgmorton/About just asking them to defer their action until we have a chance to discuss it? Dilkes/Yeah. We have to start bein'though a little careful about these late things that we're(both talking) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of March 12, 2019. Page 20 Throgmorton/Yeah, I'm not tryin' to get us into a(mumbled) discussion about it. Dilkes/Yeah. Throgmorton/Yeah. Thomas/Yeah, I mean one thing I would say is the plan that I....that I had sketched out, uh, is consistent, uh, with a significant portion of(several talking) Throgmorton/ ...we're not gonna have a substantive(several talking) Dilkes/ ...conversation about this. Throgmorton/ So what I'm wondering is are there four people at the table right now who...who want to ask the staff to ask them to defer action until we have a chance to discuss it. And I understand you say no, right? Teague/I'm gonna say no, and I would just encourage whoever has those thoughts to reach out, uh, themselves personally and have that conversation. Cole/I'm gonna say no, we can't get into details, but I think we're too close to September. I think that's the opening date. So.... Throgmorton/Okay. Well that decision's made. All right, moving ahead. Any other items in the March 7th packet? Cole/I wanted to bring up 1P4, pending work session topics, IPS, uh,my old memo, and IP6, the memo from staff. Um,just a little bit of background in terms of what I'm proposing, um, as many people know, the community recently learned,uh, that the Lucky's, uh, Grocery Store is closing. Um, of course many people in the community, uh, also know that the City of Iowa City does have a tax increment financing agreement with the developer and not with Lucky's. Urn, tonight I did not want to discuss all of the details,um, it's very difficult to get into the details. The, um, developer may not wish to amend the existing agreement, um, with the City of Iowa City, um, and if so, uh, we would not be able to change it because we have an existing agreement. Um, I think where Council potentially would be able to weigh in in the future is if the developer expressed an interest in modification and so,urn, tonight I just wanted to, urn,have a brief discussion about at least some things that I would like to see at least explored, um, and then have a discussion, um, 45, 60 days from now. Urn, it may be that the developer does not wish to modify. In which case there's not a lot to discuss, urn,but it does strike me that the original agreement requiring, uh, 33,000 square feet of grocery store space, urn....uh, frankly....was a mistake, urn, and then I think staff should have additional flexibility to, urn, lower the footprint of the food-related, uh....uh, store in that location, and secondly, at least to explore the possibility of a food-type market along the lines of a NewBo. Urn, it may be that the developer has no interest in that,urn,but again what I do not want to This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of March 12, 2019. Page 21 see happen is we're three or four months down the line, we get a proposal and it's not really what we want to see, um, or essentially could be repeating, in my view, the same mistake twice. So that's sort of what I wanted to do,um, I know a lot of people have expressed a lot of interest in this, um, and I think it wold be helpful, urn, if there's that interest to allow more time to explore that as an opportunity, and also to engage, um, with them. Um, of course the developer probably has a lot of details that would,urn, not necessarily wanna get out in the public eye at this point,um,but again I think in terms of our position, I think we should, um, telegraph as much as we can at an early stage what we would like to see. Uh, so that's sort of where I'm coming from that. Frain/If I can add,the, um, so going back and looking, um, the history of this one. The grocery store was not something that staff insisted on at the time. That was the tenant they brought to us and we....we put that in the development agreement. So, um, what we have told the....the mall ownership group at this point is that we would be willing to consider any range of tenants that they bring, um,but the tenants have to,um, be of a quality that is not only going to allow for their own success, but allow for the....the surrounding businesses in that neighborhood to,um, to grow and prosper as well. So it has to have a net positive impact on the entire, kind of southeast region, where that mall is located,uh, but we....we have already signaled to them at the staff level that we are open to uses other than grocery. Uh, obviously that will require an amendment of the development agreement, and you will have a say,uh, so if there are preferences that you'd like to express, it's important to get those to the mall ownership group as soon as possible. Cole/That's primarily, Geoff, and I'm glad you brought that up, is at least from my position, and I don't know if there's support on Council for this,just as a first step, I would like to explore the food-related market concept. It may be that that's not feasible. It may be the developer does not have an interest in that, and it may be that the alternative uses that you've explored and identified, and they may identify,prove to be more practical, but at least in terms of a first step, um, to me, uh, this has a ton of potential. We have a template in Cedar Rapids. Uh, we have board members in the City of Iowa City that serve on that,urn, and so I think there could be some real synergy with that area. Again we can't cover all those details,but I'd at least see the first step to at least explore that. I want it to be food-related but not that and so, again, I think it would make sense to give us a little bit more time to just signal this as an issue, see where we are 60 days from now, um, and hopefully be able to have a little bit more of a substantive discussion because we are early on,but I've said enough. Mims/Well what I would suggest is I...I like the fact that staff has indicated to them that we're not wedded to a grocery there. Urn,but something that is positive for the mall and also kind of net positive for that whole part of the community, the southeast side of town. Obviously....hopefully something that helps generate foot traffic in there for the other businesses as well,but just positive economically for that whole region. Given, to me, given that staff has already done that with the mall owners, what I would encourage, Rockne, is rather than us taking time to get into nitty gritty, why don't you try and get those people who've done that kind of work and are on that board for NewBo connected This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of March 12, 2019. Page 22 with the mall ownership through Geoff and let them just start having some conversations.... Cole/Yep! Mims/ ....and(both talking) Cole/There's already been some discussion, but I think....I didn't wanna necessarily do that until Council could signal that they even had any interest in at least exploring that, as an option. Mims/I don't think we need to get into that kind of nitty gritty. I mean I think if....I think if (both talking) staff comes back and says this is the proposal of who they're going to bring in. We feel that it's positive for that area. Then....and meets that various criteria....I guess I don't want to sit here as a Council Member and try and tell them....I'm not retail expert. I don't wanna sit there and try to second guess what businesses could go in there and meet the rent requirements that they have and help draw the foot traffic. So,to me if we leave it more general and maybe make those connections, if you're comfortable with that part of it, Geoff, I.... Fruin/Yeah, I mean we...we're gonna do that anyway. Anybody that contacts us with an idea, we're gonna put 'em in touch with the developer. Teague/Well I do love your idea, Rockne. I think it's,uh, a...you know,the NewBo concept, and I don't know their financials (laughs) and how that works (both talking) Cole/(mumbled) Teague/Okay. Yeah, okay,but I mean I love that community,uh, aspect of various,um,vendors bein'in one location, um, like the NewBo concept. So,urn, I would,uh, agree with Susan to, you know,have the developers connect with some NewBo people and start havin'that conversation. Throgmorton/Putting them in contact with(several talking) Cole/ ...facilitating that with staff(several talking) Okay,just wanted to be....okay! Throgmorton/Okay, so I'm conscious of the time and I want to make sure that before we get to the formal meeting we have a chance to discuss the,um, controversial Mormon Trek four to three-lane conversion. I wanna make sure staff has a chance to speak to us about it. Mims/Yeah, I guess I'd like to propose one other thing though real quick. The next one on the agenda is deer management. Throgmorton/I don't think it'd go quickly. That's....that's my concern. And we...we (both talking) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of March 12, 2019. Page 23 Mims/Well we have staff here that won't need to be here for the rest of the meeting, except for that one item. Throgmorton/I (both talking) that could well be for the four to three conversion too. I'm not sure about that. Mims/ I don't know. Most of our Streets' staff is here all night (laughs) Throgmorton/Ur....well.....I.....I think we need to do the four/three. So.... Mims/ I'd rather go deer management. What does everybody else want to do? Cole/I'd agree, four/three. That's a big issue. Throgmorton/He's silent(laughter and several talking) Mims/We lost Bruce! (laughter) Throgmorton/ It's a(several talking) or 3-1-1 something. Okay, so...with regard to the, which item is this? Item 9 in the March 7th packet. Has to do with conversion of Mormon Trek, uh, from four lanes to three, with bike lanes on either side. So, Kent.....would you be able, willing and able, to...oh no! (laughter) Cole/Kent must have been biking or somethin'! Fruin/(several talking) Throgmorton/Maybe he's not willing(laughs) Ralston/ I am willing! (laughter) Throgmorton/Yeah, so I wonder if you could, uh, walk us through that memo. Ralston/Yeah. Throgmorton/And especially drawing attention to your responses to the factual claims that have been made by residents and other users of Mormon Trek. Ralston/ Sure, be happy to. Kent Ralston,Transportation Planner. So in your info packet from March 7th was a memorandum from myself; as well as the City Engineer and, uh, Senior Engineer, uh, about the Mormon Trek four to three-lane project. Uh,just some quick background. This project has been, uh, at least discussed by staff, to some degree, for about 10 years and discussed by, I think,the Council and staff,um, more seriously for about five years, when a Transportation Safety Improvement program, uh, grant was received from the DOT in 2015. Um, as far as the background goes, um,the original This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of March 12, 2019. Page 24 concept with the Transportation Safety Improvement program grant was for a four to three-lane conversion, or what's known as a'road diet,'urn, essentially from Highway 6 to Melrose. Uh, little shorter than that,but that's the essential bounds of the project. Uh, since that time the project has grown,urn, to some degree based on needed maintenance. So along with the four to three-lane striping, uh,has been some work that's already been completed last year. Um, and the Engineering group can tell me if I've missed something, but basically ADA curb ramp, uh, work will be done,uh,pavement patching, uh, overhead streetlight replacement, and signal,uh, traffic signal equipment replacement, as well as the recently installed northbound, uh, dedicated right turn lane at Benton and Mormon Trek. So....(both talking) Mims/Kent,just quickly to clarify. In question#7, when the ques...the question was how much will the project cost. The 1.5 million is for all of that stuff, and only 30,000 of that 1.5 million is for the restriping to go from four to three(both talking) is that correct? Ralston/Correct, and I would also add that the restriping will need to be done regardless,uh, because of the pavement patching and the other work that's....the associated work, so, um, that 30,000 really...will essentially be spent regardless (mumbled) stripe it the way it is today, or stripe it as a four to three lane, and there might be some margin there but that's....yes, that is correct. Mims/ Okay. Thank you. Ralston/Uh huh. So...so yes, the....the project's grown, as Susan just mentioned, but again, the four to three lane, part of it is very, very small. Um, and in terms of maintenance, to give you an idea of what we're talking about, some of those maintenance activities may have been accelerated a little bit, um,but the fact remains that we've even had some overhead street lights tip over,uh, in recent history. Actually rot out and fall over. So you know (both talking) Throgmorton/Not on Mormon Trek, but somewhere else,right? Ralston/No, actually on....this'd be part of the project that...that's just north of Mormon Trek. So that is, um,basically between the railroad viaduct and Melrose. So I mean...a lot of this work is necessary,regardless of; uh, the four to three-lane project. It's all necessary regardless of the project. Um, as far as, uh, the question answers,uh, would you like me to go through those sort of one by one or do you want me to just...answer the questions (both talking) Throgmorton/Most of'em. Ralston/Okay. (both talking) Okay. Throgmorton/I think it's really crucial for the public to know that we heard the questions that have been asked. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of March 12, 2019. Page 25 Ralston/ Sure! Throgmorton/We've gotten the data that's necessary to respond accurately to the questions. Ralston/Uh, that's a good point! So let's start with#1, cause I think this is one that, urn,the Council had some discussion on I think at maybe your last work session. There was unfortunately an error in the consultant's study. So Snyder and Associates was hired to basically review the City's work and the DOT's work, to make sure we're getting the project we need or the project we want. Urn,unfortunately there was a typo essentially where they had said they collected data January 12`s. It's actually January 2151 in fact, when both public schools and the University of Iowa were in session. Um, so that's an unfortunate typo. The.... Throgmorton/Kent, how can you verify that? Ralston/Uh, the data's actually included in the....in the memo. So....to the extent that it's, I mean it's actually the....the computer-generated information that's got a data and time stamp on it. Throgmorton/Yeah, thanks. Ralston/(mumbled) other than that it might be hard to prove,but yeah,no, we're confident that Snyder and Associates did it when they....when they should of. Further,that count itself was only used to validate the counts that the City had already taken. Um, some of them are a year or two old because it took us a while to get the data collected and some of that was collected for the Traffic Safety Improvement program grant, uh, application. So... so basically what they did is they took a...a count and compared the counts that we had previously taken,just to make sure they were close. You know, if they're within two or three or five or even 10% of the ones we took, they were confident then that our counts were good. Had they taken that count and said, 'Oh, we're 20, 30, 40% off; we would have had issues. So that count was really just to validate the information anyway. Uh, but it was taken at a correct time. Urn, as far as....I'll just(mumbled) question 2, uh, in terms of vehicle collisions, the data's in the memo. Uh, the data we're seeing for collisions is pretty much, urn, has pretty much not changed in the last decade. We're looking at between 30 and 40 collisions a year, uh, on that stretch of, uh, Mormon Trek. Uh, average daily traffic volumes, there's been a question, you know, are the traffic volumes still what they have been and can they still be supported by a four to three-lane project? Uh, the answer is yes. Um, they really haven't changed all that much,uh, in the last decade or so, so this is average daily traffic volumes on Mormon Trek. Uh, in fact we were seeing a downward, sort of a downward trend in average daily traffic, up until sort of recent times, and that's for Mormon Trek as well as the rest of the community. Um, and we're well within the thresholds for what the Federal Highway Administration tells us, urn, works for a four to three-lane conversion. They say that upwards of 20,000 you really start to need to take a hard look at these. Uh,we're more in the 10,000 to 15,000 range,uh, on the high end it'd be 15 so,urn, we're confident that we're still well within that threshold. Uh, as far as the vehicle delay in the corridor, um, there was a study done This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of March 12, 2019. Page 26 by Snyder consultants. We....Snyder Consultants...we really don't think there's going to be a whole lot of additional delay. I would say in the magnitude of maybe a minute,uh, north to south or south to north during peak hours but, urn, I think all along as we've brought this project to the Council, we've mentioned that four to three-lane projects do add a slight amount of delay, or they can add a slight amount of delay,but it's just that— it's very slight. So we're not concerned that it's gonna, um,become a major issue during peak hours. Let's see....um....traffrc diversion has been brought up by some of the community members,uh, that live sort of west of the project, in the Shannon,Dublin, Tipperary area. And, you know, I don't think that's gonna be an issue because we think the capacity is there on Mormon Trek. The actual theoretical capacity of the street to handle the traffic. However,um, we're more than happy to collect some data and we will already,uh, collect some data pre-project opposed so we can kind of see if there's a, um, a....a major uptick in cut-through traffic in that neighborhood. I don't anticipate it,but we'll definitely collect the data so we'll know. Um....l think we've already touched most the rest of these. Uh...oh,how, you know,how will we measure the success? I think we'll, again,besides measuring cut-through traffic in some of the adjacent neighborhoods, uh, or lack thereof hopefully, is well is to take a look at the level of service to the corridor. So we always talk about this level of service,uh,A being good, F being bad. Um, we can at any given time collect more data, go back and make sure the level of service is where it needs to be,uh, I think we'll find that out quickly,because if it's not where it needs to be,we'll all hear from the public about that. Uh, so I think it'll actually become apparent,but we can actually go in and...and,uh,use some software and look at that again and make sure things are working,uh, for vehicles, as well as pedestrians. Uh, but I don't...we don't anticipate any issues. Throgmorton/Thanks, Kent, and thinking about level of service, and that's, uh, a partial measure, isn't it, because it measures the....the......the freeness with which automotive, or motor vehicular traffic can flow, right? It doesn't take into account pedestrians. It doesn't take into account bicyclists. It doesn't take into account anything that could happen along the roadway, meaning any kind of economic development opportunities. It doesn't take any of that into account. It's just about traffic. So it's a valuable measure,but it's very limited. Ralston/Sure! Throgmorton/Yeah. Ralston/Yeah, no, I agree with that. We can measure pedestrian level of service now as well, um...primarily we see these as (mumbled) cause you're actually not crossing as many lanes of traffic,uh,but that remains to be seen and that'll all sort of be,uh, you know, measured after the fact if we(both talking)think it needs measured. Throgmorton/Okay and you have a paragraph in here as well that says,responds to the question basically what are you gonna do if you discover it's not succeeding,that it's a real problem. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of March 12, 2019. Page 27 Ralston/Right. Throgmorton/So what's the answer to that? Ralston/Yeah,that's a great question. I think if it doesn't succeed, it'll become very apparent to all of us very quickly,urn, and along with our annual striping plan. So every year,uh, either all or, or we try to get all of the City's pavement markings repainted. Uh, it can be restriped back to a four-lane. Um, I don't know this,but I would anticipate that again that's probably in the neighborhood of$30,000,but we would be doing that regardless, either as a three-lane or as a four-lane. So....so if it's not working, we can shift back to a four-lane section. Urn, we hope we won't need that,but I...that is always a...an option, and we've mentioned that, uh, to the Council before. Same as what we had said on First Avenue,the recently completed project, is that if it doesn't work, you know, we can always switch back,but we don't believe that'll be necessary. Cole/Kent,we've talked a lot about the projected reductions in accidents as somewhere between 19 and 47%. We don't have data on the projected, urn,reductions in personal injury or fatalities, correct? Ralston/Right,yeah. Cole/Urn,but do we have data in terms of how many personal injury accidents have already been there and then presumably if we can do that, can't we then correlate that if there is... maybe not exactly,but if there's been X number of accidents in this time, and we're expecting a 19 to 47%reduction in accidents,maybe that will sort of correlate downwards. Ralston/Yeah, that's how I would do it. Uh, I actually talked to the Department of Transportation's office of safety about this mode of traffic safety, and even they say it's ....every roadway is so much different it's hard to predict the number of, uh, or reduction in fatalities, for instance, and in our case, fortunately, we don't have a lot of fatalities anywhere in the community, which is a good thing. So it's hard to...it's hard to measure those. Um,but the actual severity of collisions is on attachment B in the memo, and it actually shows the severity of collisions. Primarily they're property damage only, you know, we don't have a lot of severe accidents,but also any...I would argue that any one of...number of those accidents could be severe. So when we're reducing the number of overall accidents, you're also therefore presumably reducing the...the severity of those. Cole/(both talking) ....35 or 25 along there? Ralston/35. Cole/35, yeah. Throgmorton/Any other questions for Kent? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of March 12,2019. Page 28 Teague/If....if like the....the lights, you know, during, urn,high traffic time, will the lights have longer green lights so that traffic can flow through or will there be any adjustment there? Ralston/Right, so the whole corridor will be retimed as part of the project. Urn, the nice part about this is you've got that center left turn lane then, where you'll actually get a permissive, uh,protected,permissive left signal. So all through the corridor rather than sort of hanging out there in traffic, you'll actually have refuge and that's the, uh, the major plus about a road diet. Uh, yeah, but the whole corridor'll be retimed. And that's another benefit. So....because the timings now might be a little bit stale or a little bit, uh, off so to speak, um, we hope that we won't, you know, with the off-set and a little bit added to the light because of the....the four to three-lane conversion, we might actually make that back up again,um, with the added northbound right turn lane, that adds capacity, and then also the retiming of all the signals. Teague/And are those lights sig....uh, sensored, like when you get to the...it....it detects your car and then it(both talking) Ralston/Correct. Right, they're video detection, so it looks like a little camera. Uh, they're not actually recording anything, but they're....they're actual video detection. Teague/That's good to know! Ralston/Yeah! Teague/(laughs) Thank you! Throgmorton/Anything else? Thanks so much, Kent(both talking) very helpful. Ralston/Thank you! Throgmorton/Maybe we have time to do the deer management. So that would what, Item 8? No. Item 7. Mims/7 I think. Throgmorton/Item 7, deer management. Uh....Geoff, are you gonna speak to us (both talking) Froin/I've got some good backup in the audience if...if needed. Urn.....you know we've been workin'on this for about a year now and we've, uh, we've been strugglin',uh, to get the approval that we had hoped to get from the, uh, from the State of Iowa. So, um,twice in 18 we applied for a sharpshooting permit from, uh, the Natural Resource Commission, and twice we were denied. Urn, you have a memo in the packet, uh, from me that I had a lot of help with putting together,uh, from the staff whose been working on this, and that's Captain Bill Campbell and Assistant City Attorney Sue Dulek, who are both in the audience. Urn, the....the short of it is, after the denial in December,we have had,uh, conversations with Department of Natural Resources staff who work with the This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of March 12, 2019. Page 29 Commission. Again, the Commission is a politically appointed body. So, uh, the staff, just much like we staff, urn, commissions. That's the role of the DNR staff. They give us the best guidance that they can, urn, and the guidance that we have received,uh, is contained in the, uh, staff memo there. Urn, essentially we think that it is,uh, plausible that they will approve a one-time sharpshoot if we commit, uh, to a five-year management plan, that includes some type of hunting, presumably bow hunting. Um,but that they will not permit any long-term plan that, uh, is reliant on sharpshooting,beyond year one. Uh,because the, uh, some members of the public have asked about sterilization, we also, uh, inquired about that as an option and were told, um, that that is very unlikely that we would get approval for sterilization. Urn, that actually does not come from the Natural Resource Commission,but from the DNR Director. So State code gives the authority,um...uh, on sterilization to the Department of Natural Resource Director and the feedback that we got is that it is highly unlikely,urn, that the DNR Director would...would ever allow a sterilization option. So, really I....I think there's a couple of....a couple of paths. There's always the 'do nothing' path, um, which in this case is, uh, becoming tougher, uh, because of the....the explosion of the deer population we've had in the last couple of years. Uh, so I think really what we need is....is some input from you, some direction from you, on whether you would like us to proceed with another application to the Natural Resource Commission that would include a sharpshoot in year one,uh, followed by public hunts in years two through five, and we don't have details on what those public hunts would look like, where they would take place. Uh, we would work with DNR staff. We would look at Coralville, Cedar Rapids, other cities that do it, and....and put one together that we think is right for our community. Urn, but without that piece, I'm not sure it's worth going back to the NRC. So....that's kinda where we're at and hoping to get some direction from you. Mims/One of my questions when I looked at this is...and I don't know that you've got any answer from them on, uh, the target population. They indicated that the 25 per square mile was too high. I mean if we put together a five-year plan and say, okay, we'll do one year sharpshooting and we don't have the right weather, we don't have whatever and we can't begin to get it down to that 25 per square mile, anything I've read, and I think there was stuff in either your memo or theirs that you're not really going to decrease the population with like bow hunting. You might....might sustain it, I mean you might be able to keep it even, but if we're still at say 25 and they want us down to 18, it would seem like we're not gonna make progress with that. So I guess part of my question is, one, if we don't reach that goal in year one of the sharpshoot, what....are they gonna give us flexibility to have more than one year of sharpshooting, to get it down to that target level, and number two, I don't think we had a single person come in front of us that had any appetite for bow hunting(several talking) Throgmorton/Nobody? Fruin/The, uh, I can't....I didn't.....the second piece aside, the first piece on the, urn, the goal for deer reduction, um, you're correct. We did get feedback that 25,uh, deer per square mile is too high. Um, the...don't have a magic number that we would land on,but it's probably under 10, uh....uh, is what they would suggest. Urn, so,um....I..... This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of March 12, 2019. Page 30 Mims/How do they expect us to get there then with just one year of sharpshooting? Fruin/Well (laughter) Mims/It's a rhetorical question (several talking and laughing) Froin/ ...work with our contractor(several talking) to try to get there, but I...what I would say is I think probably our....our best option would be to proceed with that hunt in year one, with the commitment to hunt, and then we're gonna have to do annual counts, and if those annual counts prove that we didn't get there, and those hunts, you know, we don't believe the hunts are gonna really keep us at that level, much less make progress towards it, then at least two or year....two or three years down the road we have data to say 'this just isn't working,' and....and could potentially convince them at that point to go back to a sharpshoot, but I don't think we have the standing with the NRC to...to go there and really make a case for anything beyond what they've kind of hinted they would approve. Cole/Geoff, and I...I, to me the big question is this: Are....are we gonna expect, um, I'm not a deer hunter,but are we gonna expect that if deer hunter is shooting with a bow and arrow, there is not an immediate kill is my understanding in the typical deer hunt,unless I'm mistaken. Are we gonna have deer, injured deer running throughout our community and....and bleeding as we try to track down....is that a possibility? Fruin/I think we would...we would structure the hunt to try to minimize that possibility. Is it a possibility? Yes,particularly if we're hunting in and around residential areas (both talking) Cole/ ...locations be? Do we.... Fruin/Well we'd have...we'd have to get into that, um, what I can say is in Coralville, in Cedar Rapids, I don't think they have that problem, but....but again, every city's gonna be different cause your hunting areas are gonna be different. So, we would need to look for hunting areas,be it public or private, that would minimize the chance of, you know, wounded deer walkin' into somebody's yard. Cole/ So I...I guess what I would like to see, even though we don't have a great opportunity to do it, is I would like you to at least see, uh, and explore the sterilization option. Um, I don't think sterilization is ideal, but I would at least like you to explore that, urn, cause.... because frankly I do not want to see deer hunting, um, in the....in the city limits, and I...I'm frankly outraged that we're having this sort of problem. Um, none of us wanted to do the deer hunt. I think that's clear in the sense of we all viewed it as a tremendoutly ....tremendously tragic thing that we had to do, but we were concerned about human life and so this commission is inhibiting our ability to protect our residents from, um, you know, from danger. So, that's my....that's gonna be my vote. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of March 12, 2019. Page 31 Mims/(both talking) Yeah, I'm not interested. I think the information we got from,uh, from White Buffalo and....and he's a wildlife biologist and works all over the eastern part of the country at least, that sterilization would not work in this environment. I mean you just have too many deer in and out and....all it takes is one buck that you don't get and you got 40, 50 does impregnated or more, I mean so....they were....they were gonna spend, what is it, $1 or$2 million to try and sterilize all of'em on an island, Staten Island, and again, all you gotta do is get one buck swimmin' across the river and there go all those plans. So I....I think the idea of sterilization from what they said, and just...I mean I grew up in a family of hunters in Vermont and deer travel and we don't live in any kind of an isolated environment that, um, that they indicated would be at all practical for sterilization. So I....I just don't wanna have staff wasting their time on it. Throgmorton/Yeah, I'm pretty skeptical about sterilization too for precisely that reason. Uh,but I'm wondering if....if....if we do a sharpshoot in the first year and get below whatever the target is in terms of density,why do a bow hunt the next year, unless we know that the count and density have increased. Why would we wanna....why would they want us to do that? So, it would seem to me you do a count, and if the count shows there's a growth in the, uh, density and it's a problematic growth, then do something different the second year, after, you know, skip a year and then do...(both talking) Fruin/I think it's viewed....I think it's,there's a,um, a pretty safe assumption that the population will grow and they....they look at the hunt as....as trying to maintain your numbers. Not necessarily continue to draw 'em down,but maintain'em, and then you do do the counts every year to make sure that you're able to maintain, um, but I....I don't think that they, you know, I think if they said,well, if you're just gonna wait a couple years, you're gonna find yourself right back in the same population, or the same(both talking) Throgmorton/Okay,here's another,uh, topic,uh, for me, and many months ago, Geoff, I shared with you a recommendation from a friend of mine who lives in a rural area and he says basically don't just let anybody go out there and start using a bow and arrow and try to hunt for deer. Have some kind of way of....I don't know the verb he used,but some way of sort of culling (laughs) the....the.....the people who would be permitted to go out there and do some bow hunting. So I....if we can set something like that up, I think that makes it more tolerable, cause otherwise I just hate the idea. Cole/Could we have professional bow hunters? I mean that's a good point, Jim, actually. Could we do a professional......bow hunting organization to do it? Frain/I don't know if that's been breached, and Bill or Sue,would you mind helpin'me out on that one. Did you hear the question? Campbell/Bill Campbell, Police Department. Throgmorton/Hi, Bill. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of March 12,2019. Page 32 Campbell/Urn, I think the answer to that's going to be no. They're really very, very protective of the private hunter, the non-professional hunter. Urn, we got no sense that there would be involving a professional in those years two through five was really not an option. (both talking) Throgmorton/Do any of those conunissioners...do any of the commissioners live in cities? Campbell/I....I don't know the answer to that. Uh, it's a commission of seven. I do not know where they're from. Mims/Well it just seems to me in reading some of the documents we've seen from them that...it just seemed like a very pro-hunter approach,not so much concerned about what our issues are in the urban area really,but more of a pro-hunter approach(both talking) Campbell/The idea, uh, and we were very specific in asking this question of staff, um, it really needed to be a public event in years two through five. So to have it be a private sharpshooting year one was acceptable,but to have it be a private hunt, if you will, was not something that was....that was specifically addressed. Throgmorton/Does anybody here have a magic wand? (laughter) Teague/It's a hard one! (laughs) Cole/It's ridiculous. Mims/I'm not willing to go forward and commit to a public hunt. I....I think we, which means we don't do the sharpshooting, which(several talking) Thomas/ ...I mean the population.... Mims/Well, let me finish! I...I mean I think....I was here for the public forum on the deer hunting, and I will tell you of the 40-plus people that were here that night for the public, every single one of them said regardless of what we ended up doing, well I won't say everyone. There were a couple hunters here. Yeah, do not do bow hunting. It was incredibly, incredibly strong view of the people that came. I would say there were maybe two exceptions of people who spoke publicly in favor of bow hunting. Everybody else was....typically....some were in favor of the sharpshooting, some wanted, urn, you know, to try and sterilize, etc. Some didn't want any shooting, any killing, no matter what. Urn, but there was....98, 99% of the people do not want bow hunting, and I, you know, I respect that opinion and um....I'm not gonna....I don't like the idea of not doing a sharpshoot because the population is just incredibly large, but I....I will not support, um, a commitment to public hunting. Teague/I guess for public hunting if Coralville is doin' it, I....I haven't heard any negative things about bow huntin'personally from Coralville. Urn, definitely, you know, sharpshootin', I mean it's not ideal, but I think we do need to respond to the deer population, um....I This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of March 12, 2019. Page 33 guess if we say yes to this, the bow huntin' is kind of along with the package deal. I guess we don't have to do it if we don't want to but.... Thomas/I mean one....one thing I kind of gleaned from the memos was first of all that the....the counts with the sharpshooting would come way down. Urn, which I think means the remaining population is significantly less than I think we were anticipating, and I was...I was also, um,while I didn't really care for the idea of....of hunting either, in reading the memo from DNR I felt more open to the idea that, you know, managed hunts of a much smaller population, um, which is done from what I gather all over Iowa,um,may be a possibility, you know, I was at least open to the, having that discussion....to see if managed hunts,uh, especially with the idea that we'd be working off a population that was significantly reduced would be worth considering. Mims/And...and I still have that question is will one year of sharpshooting be significantly, give usu a significant enough reduction, cause I know at least one year that we had sharpshooting, they didn't get anywhere near their goal in terms of the number. So that still comes back to my question of what happens if we have that first year and we don't really get anywhere near where we wanna be. Campbell/We have not, uh, approached White Buffalo with that question specifically. I think your observation's accurate,but we have not specifically asked,uh,White Buffalo. If we were to ask you to get to this level, would you be able to do that in one year,how long would it take, what would cost be—any of those questions, we have not asked those questions. Mims/Okay. Thank you. Throgmorton/ So it seems to me we're pretty stuck, uh, if I understand correctly. We clearly need to do something with regard to managing the deer population in our city,but our public is overwhelmingly against doing what the State is telling us we must do. So... Cole/ So I guess I'm trackin' Susan on this. Urn....should.....should this be a....Mayor write a letter to them and express our concerns, I mean this is about(both talking) Throgmorton (laughing) I don't know that that would get us very far! (laughs) Cole/It....it may be,but it's sort of'here I stand,' I mean it's just sort of....the only reason we're doing this—protecting the life. That's it. And we're letting essentially a lobby affect our ability to be able to do that (mumbled) and I support hunting in certain places. I'm outraged that we don't have this tool, and that we're essentially in a position where we... we have a situation where we cannot address a....a peril that affects our residents. Um, I don't know that we have....I'm not gonna support bow hunting. Throgmorton/All right,here's what I wanna suggest. I don't know if the rest of you will go along with this,but given the time— 16 till—I suggest that we....let this sink in until after the formal meeting, when we'll have to come back to the work session anyhow. I don't This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of March 12, 2019. Page 34 think Bill needs to be here. I don't think (laughs) I don't think Sue needs to be here, but we'll have time to process the discussion that we've just had and then see if we have some clarity about what we, five people, think should be done. Mims/I would also....suggest that we might wanna put this back, put this on the agenda for our next meeting, in terms of getting this out to the public that we're having this conversation, because a lot of people don't read the info packets. They read agendas. Throgmorton/I agree with that! Mims/And so if they didn't happen to go through the info packet, they wouldn't necessarily know that we were having any kind of a substantive discussion about this issue, the deer population issue tonight. So I would encourage that we think about coming back. Is that an issue if we wait till early April? Is that....a problem (both talking) Fruin/ ...next opportunity to be on the NRC agenda was April. Um, but what we're really lookin' at a....a hunt in the fall or winter of next year at this point so.... Campbell/We discussed this, staff has, and I think that it would be reasonable thing for us to have some request to them by fall, is really what we need to be shooting for. To go any later than that into the winter would probably not be wise. But to do any type of sharpshooting at this point is probably unlikely until (both talking) Throgmorton/Okay, so we can revisit this at our next meeting on April the 2nd, right? Yeah, let's do that, and I think Susan's exactly right. The public needs to know how we feel— trapped in a situation that is not of our making and is not, there's no good resolution to it. Mims/ (mumbled) get more input from them. Throgmorton/Okay, it's 14 till or whatever, so let's take a break and we'll, uh....(recording stops) (BREAK FOR FORMAL MEETING) (RECONVENE WORK SESSION) Information Packet Discussion IFebruary 21, February 28,March 71 (CONT).: Throgmorton/Okay, so....we stopped at the March 7th information packet. Had discussed several items and now we just need to finish up that packet. So....does anybody have any other items they want to bring up? Cole/Jim, you wanted to let the deer management thing sort of sink in. I....I guess Susan's (both talking) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of March 12, 2019. Page 35 Throgmorton/Yeah,but I heard the suggestion that we move to defer it to April the 2nd Cole/Oh, okay. I thought you were (both talking) Mims/Yeah I mean this was not an action item. It was in the info packet, so....we either need to specifically put....ask to have it put on the agenda or in the info packet again so that we don't forget to.... Froin/Well....I think if....if your intention is to draw, you know, the public in,then we'll just put it on the work session agenda. (several talking) more attention there. We'll just copy the memo back to the info packet. Mims/ Okay. Throgmorton/Yeah, that probably, I don't know, that announcement to the public. Mims/Yeah, I think that'd be a good idea too (both talking) Throgmorton/ Otherwise it'll just disappear. Froin/Okay! Mims/Cause if we make a decision on this without making sure the public really knows about it, we're really going to hear about, cause people were very, very vocal about it before. So.... Throgmorton/ I agree! Fruin/Well maybe that's a good topic to talk about is that....that,the pending work session list there, which is your IP....4. Right now we already have two items, tentatively scheduled for that, uh, that would be the, um, the 101 Lusk. So revisiting, you guys wanted to revisit the, uh, 101 Lusk property and talk about our next steps. And then the Northside Market Pace form....Northside Market Place form based code, you asked for that to be placed on the next possible agenda. So, you'd have deer, 101 Lusk, and Northside Market Pace form based code all in one. That's a loaded work session. Mims/But I don't....do do people think that we need to have much of any discussion ourselves at the work session? I mean to me we need to wait until we hear the public, I mean....and they're not gonna have opportunity to comment at the work session. So their first real opportunity to comment is during community comment, after the consent agenda. So.... Throgmorton/ So is it possible, oh I'm sorry(both talking) Mims/ ...I mean, I don't know that we need to take formal action, so I don't know if it makes sense to have it on the formal agenda,but it almost seems like we need an opportunity to This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of March 12, 2019. Page 36 have some discussion after the public has had the opportunity for input at the community comment. Throgmorton/On that point, so I was wondering if we could put it on the formal meeting agenda, or whether....such agenda items require some action. I was just thinking we could schedule a public hearing and have it on the formal meeting. Dilkes/(several talking) ...you don't have to take a formal action to have something on the formal agenda. Throgmorton/And we'd need some kind of presentation by the staff to, so that we're all on the same wave length about what we're hearing from the NRC in Des Moines and that kind of thing. Cole/Yeah, that makes sense, so people could then weigh in. Right? (several talking) ....during the formal, yeah. That makes sense. (several talking) Throgmorton/ So for...for the 2nd of April. Fruin/We'll just do it right after the Planning and Zoning items and... Cole/Sounds good to me! Throgmorton/Wait a minute, cause we've got those two big public hearings (mumbled) about Forest View basically. Uh, the second one for rezoning's gonna attract probably hundreds of people, it seems like (laughs) or(both talking) Cole/ ....first,to get that over with? Fruin/ It's your call. There's going to be a lot of people here for both issues (several talking) Throgmorton/Yeah (several talking) Froin/We could move it to the April 231d. You know, at this point we...we're not gonna get a sharpshoot done this spring. The season's past. So we're lookin' into the fall. What I don't want to happen is for us to just keep pushin' it to the back burner and then come fall we don't get the permit from the State and we're right back at it,but movin' to April 23`d would be (several talking) Throgmorton/ ...sense to me. Yeah. Fruin/Still on the formal? Cause you're....as long as Forest View's on there, you're still gonna (several talking) Throgmorton/ .....people know that we're asking them to....share their views with us. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of March 12, 2019. Page 37 Cole/Yeah! Throgmorton/You know, presumably there'd be some....some brief memo, brief enough, from the staff, so that people can read that and have a sense of the background information that we now feel we have. Fruin/Yeah, I think based on your conversation today we can take the existing memo and then add a few....we can talk with White Buffalo and get....get some thoughts on can they get the numbers down in one season, you know, maybe give us a rough estimate of cost, uh, we can start to explore some of the, um, ways in which a public hunt, ways we can mitigate, you know, wandering deer, uh, during public hunts, uh, that sort of thing, so.... we'll work on that. Throgmorton/All right. Good deal. Thomas/ So on April 2nd I just want clarification. We talked about discussing Horace Mann and the drop-off condition. Wasn't that what we talked about,April 2"d? Fruin/I thought the direction was not to put that on the work session(both talking) Thomas/ I thought that was the....notifying the, um.... Throgmorton/Yeah, I think we said we'd like for you to notify....I think a majority of us wanted you to notify them that we were gonna have it on the....we're gonna have a brief discussion on April the 2"d, and just ask them to defer action until at least(both talking) Mims/No, that failed. Throgmorton/ Sorry, okay. I'm wrong about that. Dilkes/ It wasn't a vote so I mean you can....you can do whatever you want. Fruin/ Clarify what you want now (several talking and laughing) Dilkes/ So my recollection of what happened is Geoff wasn't going to.....you said to Geoff don't say anything to the School District, but you're gonna have it on the April 2nd agenda. Thomas/Yeah,that was my understanding. Dilkes/Like I said it...whatever you wanna do is fine. Cole/ ...not gonna delay action, we're not gonna ask them to delay action. Right? Mims/Right, that did not(several talking) We did not agree to do that. Throgmorton/Okay, I'm okay with that of course. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of March 12, 2019. Page 38 Fruin/I just wanna clarify. I think it's....I think I should notify the School District that you're gonna talk about it, so they're not surprised by the conversation. We just...I'm just gonna stop short of asking them to...pause their project, right? Throgmorton/So....so little more clarification. Lusk Avenue and the Northside Market Place would be itemized as the first two work session topics. This one, tell me if I'm wrong, would not be itemized,but it would be one of the topics that can be discussed, or do you want to have it like number three in...in itemized stuff right at the start? Am I clear about the question? Dilkes/As opposed to just under info packet? Throgmorton/As part of an information packet. Dilkes/Yeah, I mean I think generally, and we've started doing this, is when it's clear you're gonna talk about a particular item,we call it out specifically on the agenda, as opposed to just saying information packet. Throgmorton/ Okay(both talking) Is that okay for all of you then? Okay, so that'd be like the third item, I guess (both talking) Dilkes/ Sure. Yeah. Stewart/I wanted to mention IPI 1, um, the thing I sent to you all. Uh...excuse me, about, urn, the lease disclosure informational packet, and I wanted to get your, uh, your thoughts on it. Um, essentially to give you a background is that, um, if you remember to the fall, um, we sent a, um, a memo, urn, regarding the idea of a housing information packet. Um, through conversation with a City staff; um, it was apparent that regulating, um, move-in, um, points would be, uh, too difficult, from my understanding, um, and then we felt, urn, that adding some adjustments to the informational lease disclosure, um, was necessary, um, on our view. For example, urn, excuse me! I have something in my throat! Um, changing, uh, the rental deposit section, urn, of the lease, informational lease disclosure, urn, to have that, um, the law regarding, urn, that you have to have a written statement so tenants are more informed. Urn....and then changing the link, urn, to a more comprehensive and, urn.....site that has more information, and also, uh, that has, urn, is owned by the University, because currently the link is kind of this third-party web site that the University partners with, urn, and....pretty much the....the, um, web site that it currently goes to basically says 'go to student legal services,' so it makes more sense, and then the....another item was to add, urn, information about if a tenant has health and safety issues that they have the right to use Legal Services, and has....and um, contact the housing chief inspector and added on to that was information on the rent,um, abatement ordinance, urn, so that tenants could be, urn, informed and be,urn, more inclined to reach out to the City,um,but also stating that rent abatement is only granted by the City and it's only grant....limited (mumbled) situations (coughs) excuse me! Urn, and then the last thing was, um....having a mechanism that,urn, and this isn't well thought out,but having This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of March 12, 2019. Page 39 a better mechanism to, uh.....when you're....to better distribute the lease information disclosure packet, urn, because curr....urn, and possibly add, urn, an item that essentially, this was the suggested item that we thought about, um, that it could be explored. Urn, the time of getting a rental permit to, uh, show that you have signed the lease information disclosure packet, and that's just one more,urn,mechanism to, urn, ensure better distribution,but ideas....other ideas can be explored and...as well, and then wanted to get your thoughts on it. Teague/ So this would be in a requirement for all renter, uh, landlords within Iowa City, is that correct? Stewart/ So currently the lease, uh, so currently there is an informational lease disclosure, urn, and that's, urn, currently under City ordinance. It says you have to, urn, distribute this, and this would essentially, urn, be modifying that informational lease disclosure. Teague/Okay. Stewart/Urn.... Dilkes/It's an acknowledgment and lease disclosure basically, intended as a way at the beginning of the lease to put down basic information about, you know, housing code provisions, that kind of thing, so that....with the hope that the landlord and the tenant will be on the same page. I mean it's not a part of the lease. It's signed by both the tenant and the...and the landlord. But....and that already exists right now, but urn, Gustave is proposing amendments to it. Mims/From a legal perspective, what's your reaction to it, Eleanor, cause I...I don't personally have any problems with it. I just....I don't(both talking) Dilkes/We can convey to you what....Stan and I met with Gustave and, urn, I think both Stan and I felt pretty strongly that this form is way too crowded with information already. Urn, it's long. It's dense. It's given out at a....at the beginning of the lease, not at a time when somebody's having a dispute, you know, when they may think about going to Legal Services, etc. It comes at the beginning of the lease. Urn, I have some concerns about using it as a mechanism to tell one party....where they should get legal advice as opposed to the other, and we really encourage the students....the web site, the link to the good web site is....is fine, because that's what we would encourage the students to do is beef up their ways of getting this information to students, urn, whether that be through Legal Services or through their web site, etc., but....to continue to kind of....add to the form and put more information in the form, I....first of all I think a lot of it, it's just a piece of paper at the beginning of a lease term, but it....the information that the students wanna get to the tenants is not relevant to them at the beginning of the lease term when they get this piece of paper. It becomes relevant down the road, and there's a lot better ways to get that information, in my mind, whether that be from Legal Services, whether it be from the web site that, uh, the students set up, etc. So, and....with respect to the rent abatement, urn, I think it's....it's dangerous to put that on the form because it is used in such....so This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of March 12, 2019. Page 40 rarely. It's a Rose Oak's kind of remedy that is just not going to be applicable (mumbled) So those are....those are my thoughts and Stan's thoughts, and I can't....I've got his email up here. Is there anything I'm missing? Froin/ I think you covered those concerns as well. Again the...the link to the new web site seems to be agreeable by all parties,but as Eleanor stated, we're just...we're just afraid that this is gettin' a little too unwieldy as it is and that it's not....it's not timely. So,um, I don't think there's incorrect information that UISG is suggesting, but, um.....we wouldn't recommend putting it in there. Cole/That's sort of my thought, and um, but I think really where the students come in is to daylight existing parts of the process. I mean so for example how to file a complaint, right, I mean...or if they don't have heat or there's a problem with their landlord, or whatever, we have an inspection process for off-campus apartments. So I think that would be thought, is try to identify those positions and daylight them as much as possible, so the students can know how to utilize the resources that are already available. Is my thought. Mites/I should say, we have add...with....with previous student liaisons there have been suggestions to add information and we have....staff has, you know, agreed with that and Council has approved it. It's just....it's....it's becoming....too big, too unwieldy, and I don't think particularly an effective way of getting information out. Mims/Well I just (mumbled) yeah, I...that's good to hear,because not, you know, I'm not involved with it, so not knowing(mumbled) I'd even look at number six,trash and recycling, and it's....(several talking) you know it's...listing all these various City code sections that....the students aren't gonna care about at that point in time. I mean it's more, if you wanna know more about trash and recycling, go to this web site. I just, yeah. Kind of being able to pick and choose what they need, um.....and I think I would agree. By the time you get to two full pages, very dense text, you know, it may get filled out right, it may not. They sign it, and if it's being done at the time of the rental, it's...I wouldn't wanna bet how many of'em end up with 'em in the trash can or the recycling container, because they're just so busy trying to get moved in, um.....but I think if you had a better web site that, you know, you're acknowledging....is that something that through the Student Government or in conjunction with staff at the University that you can....that you have some input to the content of that web site and stuff? Okay. I think (both talking) Dilkes/ ....a better link and I think that's great if that.... Mims/Yeah, I would think even taking some of the things that are on here, um....and shortening them up and referring them to.....a,you know, to the web site could be more positive. I don't think you wanna get more than two pages. Stewart/Yeah, and I think kind of the idea behind at least the,urn, the first part of the issues of health and safety is really kind of identifying and letting individuals and tenants know This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of March 12, 2019. Page 41 that you can reach out,because I think that's the important, urn, component there. Urn, that it's not necessarily....like the rent abatement, that...that was just kind of tied in there because it was related to health and safety, but really if there's some type of short statement,urn, in my opinion, urn,just saying that these are available, and if you encounter an issue, if you are a tenant, you can go to these, um, or seek out, for example, the City,urn, and Legal Services as (mumbled) can't say specific Legal Services or anything like that, but urn.....yeah! That's in terms of....kind of that follow up. Throgmorton/ Sounds like the proposal needs to be fine-tuned (laughter) especially focusing on this link, and that's what I'm hearing from other Councilpeople. And strengthening what's at the link, at that web site. Stewart/ Sounds good! Throgmorton/ Is that what I'm hearing from everybody(several talking) Mims/Yeah,just try to keep it to the two pages, you know, and maybe some of these other sections can be shortened up a little bit with the reference to various...even some of our City web sites, um.....I think that....I think people would get more out of that, at least if they've got an old title here when they have an issue down the road and they....they have a web site link to go to to get more of that information, rather than trying to keep it all (mumbled) so long, I think would be helpful. Cole/I guess I'll just shift gears here if I could and briefly talk about IP8, the memo from City Attorney regarding alcohol priced specials. Urn, you know I think that the wisdom of previous Councils in terms of identifying, it is a complicated issue to regulate price. Urn, that said, I mean....this arose in the context of an alcohol special during a weather-related emergency, and maybe I would throw it back at Eleanor. Is it even possible to....do a price regulation in a weather emergency context? (laughter) I mean, you know, maybe common sense should be our guide here (laughter) but what happened just should.... shouldn't be allowed and maybe just have to rely on common sense in the future, and hopefully they were shamed enough,based upon what happened, but it was outrageous. We won't name the institution,but it really was outrageous, and urn, so I guess we can sort of leave it as is for now, but it just.....it just really made a lot of people angry, and it was extremely dangerous and uh, so....I assume we can't tie it to weather emergency. It'd probably be too difficult and complicated, I mean... Dilkes/(laughter) ...post-traumatic stress syndrome from going through those(laughter) Cole/No one wants to touch happy hours or stuff like that, but...so I guess (both talking) common sense be our guide,right? (several talking) Don't do it again! Throgmorton/ I was pretty happy I was not part of those conversations. (several talking) Yeah. Dilkes/Urn, yeah I think(several talking) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of March 12, 2019. Page 42 Throgmorton/Okay, any other items? Thomas/ I did enjoy reading that, uh, quarterly report from the Climate Action Advisory Board. Throgmorton/I think they're determined to do what we asked 'em to do, and that's a very good thing. I sat in on their,urn, most recent monthly meetings. Pretty much just listening in, except when they asked me specific questions, and yeah. I was very impressed with that. We're lucky they're there! Okay, I think we can go to the last item, which is....the, urn, updates on assigned boards, commissions, and committees and all that kind of stuff. So, John, let's start with you and go to the left. Council updates on assigned boards, commissions, and committees: Thomas/ I don't have anything to report. Cole/The only thing I would report is the City of Literature met. I got a terrifc update on One Book,Two Book. Urn, I've never been able to actually make that,but it always gets rave reviews, and I think what John Kenyon really reports, for those of you that don't know, One Book,Two Book is an opportunity for young, aspiring writers to read their work publicly and probably the most gratifying thing that John points out is the growth that he sees, even from the practice reading through the time they do the actual reading, in terms of their elocution, in terms of how they present, everything is....is total growth, and it really showcases how, um, talented our young people are, and as Bob Elliott said, how talented these kids are that read in front of us. I hear half of their writing, I'm like goodness gracious, you guys are....you guys are terrific! They all write snappy prose and have such good moral character. Urn, so it was another fantastic event and I think we're going to go a little bit into the planning stage now for, uh, you know, some of our events this summer, like the music festival, IAC Music, and then of course the Book Festival in the fall, and John continues to really put us on the map in terms of the world literary scene, so we're continuing to connect with the other UNESCO Cities of Literature, so always terrific things that he has (mumbled) particular,urn, committee. Throgmorton/Bruce? Teague/Nothing! Throgmorton/ Susan? Mims/Urn,JECC hasn't met I don't think since last time, but we have, uh, the Access Center, continuing to work on that, uh, had a meeting with some staff members,uh, last week to start working on the 28E agreement. So, kind of plop that in Eleanor and Janet Lyness's hands to kind of be working on that piece of it, and uh, we continue with Steering Committee meetings twice a month. Executive Committee meetings twice a month. Steering Committee meetings once a month. So just started to get into the weeds of all the details of actually having a building come together so.... This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of March 12, 2019. Page 43 Throgmorton/Okay. Good deal. Well, the Convention and Visitors Bureau board was supposed to meet on the 21st of February,but the meeting was canceled. I guess some people pulled out at the last second, so they didn't have enough people. Uh, Partnership for Alcohol Safety meet on the 5th of March and I thought we had a very productive discussion about the Partnership's overall vision and about creating committees to pursue particular aspects of that vision. So tryin'to put a little more life into it. Would you agree, Simon? Simon was there. Yeah. Yeah, that's what I can say. Mims/Pauline? Throgmorton/Pauline's gone. (both talking) I think, folks, we're done! Thank you! This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of March 12, 2019.