Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes-02/14/2011February 14, 2011 The Council of the City of Waterloo, Iowa, met in Regular Session at City Hall Council Chambers, Waterloo, Iowa, at 5:30 p.m., on Monday, February 14, 2011. Mayor Ernest G. Clark in the Chair. Roll Call: Cole, Jones, Greenwood, Schmitt, Welper, Hart. Absent: Getty. Moment of Silence. Pledge of Allegiance: Paul Huting, Leisure Services Director. 135933 - Hart/Schmitt that the Agenda, as amended by moving items 1.b.7,11,12 to 2a and amending the wording on item #11 and #12, for the Regular Session on Monday, February 14, 2011, at 5:30 p.m., be accepted and approved. Ayes: Six. Absent: Getty. Motion carried. 135934 - Hart/Schmitt that the Minutes, as proposed, for the Regular Session on Monday, February 7, 2011, at 5:30 p.m., be accepted and approved. Ayes: Six. Absent: Getty. Motion carried. CONSENT AGENDA 135935 - Hart/Schmitt that the following items on the consent agenda be received, placed on file and approved: a. Resolutions to approve the following: 1. Resolution approving Schedule AP642, pp. 1-102, dated February 14, 2011, in the amount of $2,695,164.92, a copy of which is on file in the City Clerk's office, together with recommendation of approval of the Finance Committee. Resolution adopted and upon approval by Mayor assigned No. 2011-94. 2. Acceptance of Acknowledgment/Settlement Agreement in the amount of $300.00 with Isle Casino Hotel of 777 Isle of Capri Boulevard, for sale of tobacco, tobacco products or cigarettes to persons under 18 years of age - Submitted by David R. Zellhoefer, Assistant City Attorney. Resolution adopted and upon approval by Mayor assigned No. 2011-95. 3. Acceptance of Acknowledgment/Settlement Agreement in the amount of $300.00 with National Cigar Store of 617 Sycamore Street, for sale of tobacco, tobacco products or cigarettes to persons under 18 years of age -Submitted by David R. Zellhoefer, Assistant City Attorney. Resolution adopted and upon approval by Mayor assigned No. 2011-96. 4. Acceptance of Acknowledgment/Settlement Agreement in the amount of $300.00 with Walgreens 7455 located at 111 W. Ridgeway Avenue, for sale of tobacco, tobacco products or cigarettes to persons under 18 years of age - Submitted by David R. Zellhoefer, Assistant City Attorney. Resolution adopted and upon approval by Mayor assigned No. 2011-97. 5. Request of Jerry Grier for tax exemptions on improvements totaling $180,000.00 for property located at 23 Lafayette Street and located in the Consolidated Urban Revitalization Area, and rescind Resolution No. 2011-70 in its entirety -Submitted by Shane Graham, Planner II. Resolution adopted and upon approval by Mayor assigned No. 2011-98. February 14, 2011 b. Motion to approve the following: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Page 2 Travel Requests Name & Title of Personnel Class/Meeting Destination Date(s) Amount not to Exceed Mayor Buck Clark Attend Main Street Waterloo monthly board meetings Waterloo, Iowa 2011 Calendar Year $120.00 Todd Wilson, Planner/Analyst; Joseph Saunders, Investigator National Fusion Center Conference Denver, Colorado March 14-18, 2011 $2,860.00 Investigator Chris Morley; Investigator John DeKoster Marijuana Identification Class Ankeny, Iowa April 11-14, 2011 $710.00 Investigator Stacy Hesse Internet Crimes Against Children National Conference San Jose, California May 16- 20, 2011 $1,690.00 Investigator Eryn Hageman; Investigator Stacy Hesse Wicklander- Zewlawski Interview & Interrogation School Sioux City, Iowa February 20-25, 2011 $290.00 Appointee Board/Commission Expiration Date New or Re - Appointment Patricia Sass Board of December 8,2014 New Appointment ppointment Craig Holdiman Board of December 8,2014 Re -Appointment ppointment Sandy Goldsberry Board of Adjustment December 8, 2014 Re -Appointment Beer License Permit Application Class C 7.City Liquor & Tobacco, 508 Broadway Street (Includes Sunday Sales) 8.Kmart #4158, 3810 University Avenue (Renewal) Sunday Sales) 9.Jim Lind Standard Service, 230 E. 4/6/12) (Includes Sunday Sales) Liquor License Permit Application Class C 10.Lone Star Steakhouse & Saloon, 4045 (3/11/11) (Includes Sunday Sales) Liquor License Permit Application Class E 11.City Liquor & Tobacco, 508 Broadway (Includes Sunday Sales) (Renewal) (Expires 2/28/11) (Expires 2/29/12) (Includes Ridgeway Avenue (Renewal) (Expires Hammond Avenue (Ownership Change) Street (Renewal) (Expires 2/28/11) Wine License Permit Application Class B 12.City Liquor & Tobacco, 508 Broadway Street (Renewal) (Expires 2/28/11) (Includes Sunday Sales) 13.Kmart #4158, 3810 University Avenue (Renewal) (Expires 2/29/12) (Includes Sunday Sales) Ayes: Six, with items 1.b.7,11,12 moving to Item 2a. Absent: Getty. Motion carried. February 14, 2011 Page 3 OLD BUSINESS 135936 - Greenwood/Welper that the following Class C Beer, Class E Liquor, Class B Wine License Permit Application for E 4th Liquor Store, 735 Logan Avenue (transfer from 1027 E. 4th)(Expires 8/2/11), be approved. Prior to a vote on the above items, the following comments were heard. Mayor Clark, I just want everybody to know that I'm anticipating that in just a minute there is going to be a motion to table that item. There are several administrative issues regarding that particular license that we're going to have to look into before we are going to approve that. We will make the motion and discuss the reasons why. If you still want to speak after this you are more than welcome to, but we might put your issues to rest with this motion. 135937 - Schmitt/Hart To table the application for further administrative review. Prior to a vote on the above item, the following comments were heard. Councilperson Greenwood, how long is this item going to be tabled? Mayor Clark, it is tabled indefinitely at this point. We got into a deep discussion after last Monday, February 7, 2011 council meeting. There are several relatively serious administrative issues regarding the building and some other issues with this particular license being transferred that we need some very definite answers to before we agree to do this. It will be tabled indefinitely as of tonight unless we get the administrative answers that we want. Russell Tidwell, 937 Conger Street, I am here to speak on the license transfer. And I also would make available to the council members some improvements that we are going to do to the building. And hopefully everybody got a copy of that because I think that question came up last week about security and being able to see into the building. So those who have seen this know that we are making an improvement on the building. Not on the outside physical part of it but we're making a major investment there. And also I'd like to bring it to your attention that the location has been a bar for a number of years. And so the transfer from a carryout to a place where you can sit down and drink liquor I think it's a no brainer there. But we are willing to accept the ruling of the council. So far we've been investigating and had some legal advice on it. And they see no reason for us not to transfer from East 4th Street to Logan. Some incidents have happened beyond our control. Some people think that they have the right to take other people's property. And sometimes there is a consequence for that. Those happened at 1027 and we apologized to the families. Not that we should apologize because we did nothing wrong. But we are still trying to upgrade the Logan Avenue with a major investment. And I hope you take that under consideration during your deliberation. And hopefully when you say table for an indefinite period of time that puts us at a disadvantage too because we are in the process of doing some construction on the inside of that building too. To have us make improvements and have it tabled indefinitely people are out of work. And we still have out of pocket monies that we spent and no income. So I don't know what the table is for. Mayor Clark, let me clarify it for you if I can. It's clear in the Alcohol Beverage Regulations that to have the type of license that you are asking for requires a certain percentage of your floor space to be dedicated to non -alcohol sales. So with the floor plan that you've submitted that doesn't show us what that is. We are going to require for you to have a very definitive floor plan outline showing how much of your sales are going to come from and where they are going to be laid out in your floor plan. You also have to have a certain amount of visibility from the outside. So what we are going to require of you is to show us in some kind of a development agreement that you intend to do those things that are going to comply with the requirements from the Alcohol Beverage Division. And I'm sure you'll have conversations with Sergeant Greenlee and the Clerk's office. So somebody will be in touch with you very soon Mr. Tidwell that will explain to you what you are going to be required to do. Mr. Tidwell, and I also invite any councilperson that would like to come in and tour that building. I don't know if you've been in there prior to it being a bar. But if you come into that building now and look at the interior of it now you will see where that space is going to be made available. The other thing that I'd like to address according to financing you can look at our invoices of liquor versus non-perishable product. We doubled in non-perishable products we spend per week. On liquor we probably spend on an average about $4,000.00 per February 14, 2011 Page 4 week. Non-perishable products we spend $6,000.00 to $8,000.00 per week. So the majority of our income doesn't come from alcohol. So if you'd like to see those records. Renee Carson, 713 Logan Avenue, I have some research that I would like to pass out to the council so while you are considering you can look at these please. We've been researching study after study about the effects that the convenience of alcohol outlets and bars have in our neighborhoods. And one of them is what you have now. The neighborhood can tell you more then the studies can tell you because we live and work in them. We the people who have been on the front line and want to keep reminding you of how hard we worked to keep our neighborhoods safe of the negative effects that these establishments pose on us. We have clusters of these establishments already in our neighborhood. This is the residential area where this is. And when the bars was there we didn't like the bars because our doors were kicked down and everything else over there. It don't make a difference what it is. Whether it's alcohol related stuff is going to happen. And all of these establishments are in a very close range. Two of which are right across the street from each other on Broadway there. And we can tell you that these establishments breed crime, threaten public safety and the quality of life. It affects our property value, it brings filth and liter, congestion. We have had murders, assaults, drive-bys, gang activities, burglaries, and this is just to name a few. They become a local gathering place with little or formal social control. They act as magnets for illegal activities. We find ourselves becoming angry, frustrated and disappointed that the system seems not to work for us. We have worked hard to enjoy the quality of life. And it is our children that suffer. Our children deserve a healthy and safe neighborhood. You have the authority to govern and regulate these establishments. Especially in this residential area. We pray you govern the peoples choice and vote this down. These establishments need to be regulated because there's too many in a cluster. All they do is take out a neighborhood. They don't put nothing into it but filth and all the other stuff that comes along with it. So we ask that you please govern these things so we don't have to deal with it so our children can enjoy a safe and healthy neighborhood like everybody else's child like to do. Mayor Clark, thank you and I didn't mention prior but I will now that since last Monday's meeting we've had two different meetings. One with a number of people -City Attorney, Councilpersons, Police Department, Planning & Zoning Department. And we are trying very hard to do exactly what you are saying to regulate and govern these issues. Unfortunately, we are extremely constricted with what we can do by state law. They won't let us do certain things that we'd like to be able to do. So what we are looking at trying to do is to put maybe some overlays on certain parts of the city so that we can govern and control as you are saying. So we have to be careful as we do that that we don't do a blanket policy for the City of Waterloo, which might stifle business in another area where we want multiple convenience stores or restaurants that serve alcohol and so forth. So we are working very hard as a city with the legal staff to come up with a viable solution to take care of your problems. And I hope that we're close to doing that. One of the issues that we've been dealing with is this 12 month grandfathering in of prior licensed establishments. And we are looking if we can have some effect on that. So that if a license moves out its done and you don't get to go back in there. But we have to do everything that we do based on what we are allowing to do by state law. But we are trying very hard to work on that. Obviously we are not deaf to your issues and to your problems. Following comments a vote was taken on the above motion with the following result. Ayes: Six. Absent: Getty. Motion carried. 135938 - Greenwood/Welper that the following Class C Beer, Class E Liquor, Class B Wine Permit Application for City Liquor & Tobacco, 508 Broadway Street (Renewal)(Expires 2/28/11) (Includes Sunday Sales), be approved. Prior to a vote on the above items, the following comments were heard. Ryan Madison, 650 Dawson Street, I am not here today to persuade you guys to vote yay or nay because you've already made up your mind. What I will say for one is in this city history and lifetime give us a fighting chance. Even though my Sketchers are only $50.00 and not high priced loafers put your feet in my shoes. Ms. Cole if you live within a half mile radius of an establishment that sold alcohol how would you feel? What kind of opportunity Mr. Jones would your kids have if they lived on the eastside of Waterloo? How would they be looked upon when knowing that they lived within the circles of nine liquor establishments? Mr. Weber, would you not use every fiber in your body, every being to fight against this type of establishment to make sure your kids have a good upbringing or to protect your home? I'm not even today going to talk about the ordinance because I feel it's not worth the paper that it's written on. What I will say and I do question quite often who is this suppose to protect? February 14, 2011 Page 5 Because it sure is not my neighborhood. Because we have seen a vast growth of liquor stores and places that sell alcohol in my area. What I will say though is give us an opportunity. Give us that fighting chance to turn our neighborhood around. We want you to have our back for a change. I have not seen it yet. I've been waiting on the final information about New World Lounge and when you are going to investigate to see how much they have sold. We have almost 10 establishments that sell alcohol in our area. We've got 16 bars on the eastside of Waterloo. I try to put a park on the eastside of Waterloo and Mr. Anderson you told me to go tell my kids to throw a football in the Water Works building but your willing to put more liquor establishments within these areas? This is not fair and it's not right. When people on the westside say we don't want it you guys don't give it to them. You go lobby for $5 million dollars worth of money to redo Hammond Avenue and we can't get you to lobby the state? To say we don't want this in our area anymore. It's time for a change, it's time for something to happen and something needs to happen now. Because more and more of these that get in this area the more people that are moving out. You see it even in your reports that about 400 people left this city because they are tied up and fed up. Keep it up and your not going to have anybody. So its time for a change, it's time for something and it needs to happen today. Also, I know this liquor establishment has had several reports against it for violence. But also they've been busted once or twice for selling to minors so I don't think they need a liquor license if they can be selling to our kids. Mayor Clark, thank you and just for your information there is two legislators that are trying to change the legislation at the state level that are going to give us more opportunity to control these so we can see if we can get that done. You should lobby your legislator for that and hopefully we can get a change at the state level. Raquel Harman, 2028 E. 4th Street, on behalf of the youth I would have to say that I don't agree with the license even though it's outside of my hands. But I can speak on it because it is my freedom of speech. I believe that if we are going to keep putting these things into our neighborhoods, I believe that there should be a requirement that they put into our neighborhoods. I was looking up on the computer earlier today at work and I was looking at some research. And it should be in the research that Ms. Carson passed out to you all. It says annually that there is at least $500,000.00 to $1 million annually in liquor sales. So if all of this money is being made off of liquor what are they putting into our community? I don't see any parks being built, I don't see any recreational centers being built, not even putting into our very own Boys and Girls Club here in the Black Hawk County community. Which is sad to say is right down the street, around the corner from the Boys and Girls Club. There is a lot of teenagers that come from broken homes and that's the last thing that they need is to walk down the street to another liquor store. I mean, the way that I look at it and excuse me if it sounds kind of disrespectful but if you are willing to renew licenses and continue to put liquor stores in our community you might as well put a crack house in our community. Because it's an open outlet for people to go in there to do whatever they please because the door is not going to be closed. We say that they are selling chips and different things like that but that's only to satisfy their appetite after they do whatever they do from smoking, drinking and different things like that. So I really hope that you take this into consideration and really think about these things. Not wishing bad luck on anybody but what I'm saying is that instead of worrying so much about how much money we can put into our pockets we need to worry about who we can help save in our community. Reverend Loggins, I just want to piggyback off of what the young lady said. I must commend her for doing her research. And I think that we need to seriously look at what are these convenience, liquor stores and bars putting back into the community? Now I think we understand that your hands are tied as far as what you are able to do. There is no doubt about that. But then like the young lady said what are you doing as far as helping our high schools, our students? What are you doing as far as making our parks a little bit better? What are you doing to improve the community? Other than what we hear that's negative that maybe the t.v. stations and some of the radio stations will say. So seriously, lets try to make them better citizens if nothing else. Say to them, hey look if we give you this then you've got to give something back that's positive to the community. That's what I say and I again am grateful to the young lady that came up here and to be bold enough to say that. And I would hope going forward that the council would seriously consider that. Mary Potter, Church Row Neighborhood Association, this is not my neighborhood problem but we've had the same problem. And I feel for these people. I think Waterloo needs to somehow make a start and say we have to make a difference in this community by what we do. And whether it means we have to create a new ordinance. Whether it means we need to find ways to get our state to react. I think something really needs to be done. This is not new to Waterloo. We've been addressing these problems for a couple of years. I don't know if there's February 14, 2011 Page 6 anything we can do. Can we change the hours of operation? Can we change the limit of how many people can be in the store at a time? Is there something that can be done? I think we're all wise enough to know that these liquor stores are not making money by selling snacks. And they are not making money by selling to the person who goes home and wants a can of beer at night. These are being things that are being corruptive in our community. And we're known already as the armpit of Iowa. I'd like to see that change. And I'd like to see our young people have some faith and hope here. And I think it needs to fall upon those of us that can be leaders. To say what can we do to bring about this change? What can we have happen in the state? Who do we need to address this to? I really think there is a problem and I feel for these people. They have it much worse than we even had it. And you know how we battled it. So is it possible there can be a little group put together that can study ways that we can get around all of this? Is there something we can do to help? Mayor Clark, there is a group and we are studying that. And we are going to have to attack this issue and revise all of the ordinances. Its really the only way we can do it because we have to be prudent with the way we apply our abilities to the zoning with those areas where we want growth. And in a lot of the growth they will serve alcohol whether it's a bar, restaurant, or convenience store. There are areas where we want that development the right way. So we have to be prudent as we develop that. But to address this issue it has to be done through the zoning both at the city and state level. As I mentioned you know who the local legislators are they are working on this. They are going to present a bill to the legislation that needs support. So I would encourage all of you to contact your local legislators. Ms. Potter, if we could write letters of support to changes this I think it would be a step in the right direction and give us some positive input to the state house. I think they're open to us and I think we just need to make our legislators know that we strongly urge them to do something. Councilperson Hart, right now probably a majority of Thursday night and Friday morning I spent time talking to Representative Berry and staff people on the state level. Because right now we have a law that was put in place in July 2010 that focuses on businesses that are on-site consumption. Where you go in, sit down, have a drink, you have a good time or whatever. Those places have to secure their perimeters. They have to make sure that there is no loitering. They have to take care of what takes place on the outside. What we've been seeing is some of the places, not all of them, that have off site consumption where you go purchase and you leave they are not put under the same parameters in regards to state law. And so that situation that we just had, how responsible are those locations to make sure that their parameters are properly secure. No loitering, all of those things. And so there was a bill that was submitted on the Senate side that focuses on convenience stores. And then on the House side there is another bill that was just submitted that focuses on any establishment that's under a certain square footage. That you have to take care of your parameters. Your not allowed to have activity placed outside and you have a level of responsibility. So we have been working and we have been with the city staff to take a look at what we can actually do according to our zoning that's also legal. Because that's what we need to watch out too as we are seeing we'll say no, the state will come back and say yes. So we need everyone in here that has a concern Representative Berry, Senator Danielson and Dotzler. All of our local legistlators we need to make sure they are on board and they are hearing our concerns. That is my advise to everyone and folks we do care but our arms are tied in some instances. That's the situation. There have been two bills that have been submitted. One to the Senate and one to the House for this period. Ms. Potter, I think we elect people who will lead and I think we elect people who are bright. And people that are able to address concerns. So I think we have a good group here that if they put their mind to it we could probably come up with something and have it forwarded down. And be willing to make the try to get things to change. Mayor Clark, thank you and to all of you who are concerned about this issue this is not necessarily fun for us either to have you concerned. We know there is a huge concern out there and we are really trying to address this probably. Our hands are tied in so many ways so we have to try to go back to who originated the legislature in the first place to give us the opportunity to do this. Because we want what's best for you guys and it's difficult sometimes to address the problem. So we are really trying to address this through some zoning changes and I think we are going to get it done. I know we've asked you this before but give us a little time to work through this and I think what you're going to see is some change. Councilperson Schmitt, I was wondering if we could get a report on how this facility has performed last year? February 14, 2011 Page 7 Councilperson Hart, is it an active place in regards to police? Daniel Trelka, Director of Safety Services, I ran the numbers for this location in the past year and we have responded to this establishment 38 times. Eight of them have been business checks, five suspicious calls, six disorderly conducts, three shopliftings and the other calls are varied traffic stops, motor vehicle accidents. In the past year there have been no violations on the records I've been given that show that the establishment itself has been cited. However, going back further there have been situations where it has. I looked at the renewal period of the past year. Councilperson Hart, you said 38 calls and this may be hard to answer but in relation to a location with the same square footage with a permit is this a normal number? Are we busy in regards to the square footage with the amount of calls that we see on the premises? Or is this just 38 calls that's all and that's normal? Mr. Trelka, without analyzing all of the establishments it is difficult to say but it does appear that an establishment with this square footage does occupy a lot of time. Councilperson Schmitt, the other thing I was going to mention in talking about change in our ordinance I think I saw in the paper that both the City of Dubuque and the City of Iowa City attorneys are working with the legislature to establish something that deals with the questionable character of the owner of the establishment. Because I know in the past some of the places we had voted down because of the activity. I don't have that list in front of me but assuming there is some violent issues. I mean those wouldn't be happening in the parking lot of a hardware store or accounting firm. So what they're working on is where we've refused people and then it's gone down to Des Moines, Iowa and these people have had bad records and then Des Moines is over turn us. That's what they are trying to get resolved. And I think ultimately trying to get some of the power back to the people to be able to control their own neighborhoods and their own destiny. Which is obvious I think of what we all want to do. So I don't know if Mr. Walsh is aware of that maybe we could partner up with Dubuque and Iowa City. Maybe that would help us in this endeavor and maybe too save us a little bit of money. Following comments a vote was taken on the above motion with the following result. Ayes: Three. Nays: Cole, Schmitt, Hart. Absent: Getty. Motion failed. PUBLIC HEARINGS 135939 - Hart/Welper that proof of publication of notice of public hearing on F.Y. 2011 Downtown Wayfinding Signage, Contract No. 783, as published in the Waterloo Courier on February 9, 2011, be received and placed on file. Ayes: Six. Absent: Getty. Motion carried. 135940 - This being the time and place of public hearing, the Mayor called for written and oral objections and there were none. Hart/Welper that the hearing be closed and oral and written comments be received and placed on file. Ayes: Six. Absent: Getty. Motion carried. 135941 - Hart/Welper that "Resolution confirming approval of plans, specifications, form of contract, etc. in conjunction with F.Y. 2011 Downtown Wayfinding Signage, Contract No. 783", be adopted. Ayes: Six. Absent: Getty. Resolution adopted and upon approval by Mayor assigned No. 2011-99. 135942 - Hart/Welper that "Resolution ordering construction in conjunction with F.Y. 2011 Downtown Wayfinding Signage, Contract No. 783", be adopted. Ayes: Six. Absent: Getty. Resolution adopted and upon approval by Mayor assigned No. 2011-100. February 14, 2011 Page 8 RESOLUTIONS 135943 - Schmitt/Welper that "Resolution approving award of bid to Zephyr Aluminum Products of Dubuque, Iowa in the amount of $30,895.00 in conjunction with Livingston Hangar Window Replacement Project at Waterloo Regional Airport -Submitted by Bradley Hagen, Airport Director", be adopted. Ayes: Six. Absent: Getty. Resolution adopted and upon approval by Mayor assigned No. 2011-101. 13594 - Schmitt/Welper that "Resolution approving Contract, Bonds and Certificates of Insurance with Zephyr Aluminum Products of Dubuque, Iowa in the amount of $30,895.00 in conjunction with Livingston Hangar Window Replacement Project at Waterloo Regional Airport; and authorize Mayor and City Clerk to execute said documents - Submitted by Bradley Hagen, Airport Director", be adopted. Ayes: Six. Absent: Getty. Resolution adopted and upon approval by Mayor assigned No. 2011-102. 135945 - Schmitt/Welper that "Resolution approving modifications to Cedar River Boat House fees and policies -Submitted by Paul Huting, Leisure Services Director", be adopted. Ayes: Six. Absent: Getty. Resolution adopted and upon approval by Mayor assigned No. 2011-103. 135946 - Welper/Schmitt that "Resolution approving Bonds and Certificates of Insurance with Advanced Environmental Testing and Abatement, Inc. of Waterloo, Iowa for asbestos abatement services in conjunction with Public Assistance demolition activities of the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program Property Acquisition Project -Submitted by Aric Schroeder, City Planner", be adopted. Ayes: Six. Absent: Getty. Resolution adopted and upon approval by Mayor assigned No. 2011-104. 135947 - Welper/Schmitt that "Resolution approving Contract for the Disaster Recovery Business Rental Assistance Program for CU and The Cellar, LLC at 320 E. 4th Street, in the amount of $19,497.30 -Submitted by Aric Schroeder, City Planner", be adopted. Ayes: Six. Absent: Getty. Resolution adopted and upon approval by Mayor assigned No. 2011-105. 135948 - Welper/Schmitt that "Resolution approving request for Metropolitan Enhancement Funds; and authorize Mayor to execute said document -Submitted by Jeff Bales, Associate Engineer", be adopted. Ayes: Six. Absent: Getty. Resolution adopted and upon approval by Mayor assigned No. 2011-106. 135949 - Hart/Schmitt that "Resolution approving endorsing the use of Metropolitan Enhancement Funds for the development of F.Y. 2011 Lou Henry Hoover Sculpture Garden, Contract No. 803 located adjacent to U.S. Highway 218 between West 4th Street and Park Avenue -Submitted by Jeff Bales, Associate Engineer", be adopted. Ayes: Six. Absent: Getty. Resolution adopted and upon approval by Mayor assigned No. 2011-107. 135950 - Hart/Schmitt that "Resolution approving updated Standard Specifications for Municipal Public Works Construction, Sanitary Sewers and Construction material -Submitted by Dennis Gentz, P.E., Assistant City Engineer", be adopted. Ayes: Six. Absent: Getty. Resolution adopted and upon approval by Mayor assigned No. 2011-108. February 14, 2011 Page 9 135951 - Hart/Schmitt that "Resolution denying the request from Wayne Claassen Engineering & Surveying, Inc. on behalf of Young Development for a variance to the 2001 Waterloo Code of Ordinance to allow low -profile curb for the proposed Klingaman Park Fourth Addition Subdivision -Submitted by Dennis Gentz, P.E., Assistant City Engineer", be adopted. Prior to a vote on the above items, the following comments were heard. Councilperson Schmitt, the question I have is that we had a work session on this. And staff apparently feel that this denial is being done in other parts of the state in the Midwest. It's not something that we've done a lot of but we have done some. I guess if they are denying it I'd like to hear a little bit more about it. Bill Claussen of Wayne Claassen Engineering & Surveying, Inc., we are the design engineering for Young Development on this project. And the request for this low -profile curb is to save costs for the subsequent property lot buyers when they build their homes about $500.00 to $600.00 to not have to cut the curb for their driveway. A similar request was made for a previous part in 2003 and was approved on a trial basis. I am not aware of any problems that's associated with William Drive so we are requesting that it be allowed in this subdivision. Councilperson Jones, I went out and took a look at Winghaven that has that low profile. Mr. Claussen, you are right that's the name of the division. Councilperson Jones, Winghaven has an older neighborhood that doesn't have the low profile and a newer section that has the low profile. There was some runoff with the snow and I was able to see how it works with a low volume of water. With a large volume of water I suppose it could back up a little bit. But probably my bigger concern was if 30 years down the line or whatever we do an asphalt overlay then its really going to cut down on the curb substantially. Mr. Claussen, well you have a 31/2" curb versus a 6" curb so an overlay wouldn't have much curb left. Councilperson Jones, will that cause a problem for the homeowners down the line? Mr. Claussen, well drainage would not be entirely within the street. Drainage would be somewhat within the grass about 30 years down the line. Eric Thorson, City Engineer, I gave a pretty lengthy correspondence on this listing various reasons that we believe it shouldn't be allowed. We really didn't find that its used very often in Iowa. We didn't check outside of Iowa but found its not used often in Iowa. And quite frankly the specifications that most cities use don't include a specification for this. Some of the things that we pointed out was that we believe that there's a loss of access control. It's much easier for folks to drive over the curb and into yards. And drive kind of wherever they want. If your parking along the streets you can get over the edge easier and that can cause rots and other damage. There are some issues with snow plowing and street sweeping. Potentially with this is it could be worse once it's overlayed. I guess that's probably one of our bigger issues was down the road really is probably where you have more issues than you do up front. Those were some of the main issues. There were a few other minor things. It can possibly encourage folks to park in the front yards or other non -paved surfaces. Typically folks tend to park pretty close to the curb and with a wider curb it could push them out of the street a little further. Which maybe makes a little bit less width for the traveling traffic. There are just some issues along the way that we feel that it's not really appropriate. Most of them come more down the road when it does get overlayed. So we are kind of pushing those issues off in the future by approving that. Councilperson Jones, one the one hand the homeowners need to know that there is going to be some problems. And it wouldn't be their problem it would be a city problem. Councilperson Schmitt, I need to follow up with what Councilperson Jones said and part of that presentation is trying to figure out what we can do to make housing more affordable, competitive, desirable and more cost effective. Especially in what we've seen in our most recent Census. Following comments a vote was taken on the above motion with the following result. Ayes: One. Nays: Jones, Greenwood, Schmitt, Hart, Cole. Absent: Getty. February 14, 2011 Page 12 135964 - Hart/Greenwood that "Resolution preliminarily approving plans, specifications, form of contract, etc. in conjunction with F.Y. 2011 River Renaissance Upper Plaza, Contract No. 808", be adopted. Ayes: Six. Absent: Getty. Resolution adopted and upon approval by Mayor assigned No. 2011-114. 135965 - Hart/Greenwood that "Resolution setting date of hearing and bid opening as March 7, 2011 and instructing City Clerk to publish notice of plans, specifications, form of contract, etc. on the F.Y. 2011 River Renaissance Upper Plaza, Contract No. 808", be adopted. Ayes: Six. Absent: Getty. Resolution adopted and upon approval by Mayor assigned No. 2011-115. 135966 - Hart/Cole that "Resolution setting date of hearing for the FYE2012 budget as March 7, 2011 and instructing City Clerk to publish said notice", be adopted. Ayes: Six. Absent: Getty. Resolution adopted and upon approval by Mayor assigned No. 2011-116. ORAL PRESENTATIONS 135967 - Joyce Wilder, 226 Bates Street, I've got a letter I want to read. And it's called a judgment call. Mayor, who are you to make a call like you did February 10, 2011 at 5:15 p.m. on Friday? City maintenance men flushing out sewer lines in front of my address in June, July, August and September of 2010 causing my basement to flood with water shooting up out of my toilet and up from my shower drain. When I asked the Mayor about it he sent out a plumber to check out my backflow preventer to find out that that was not the problem or the cause. After he found out that that was okay the Mayor changed his whole attitude when I called him February 9, 2011 he returned my call February 10, 2011. I asked him what he had planned? He said, "that was a act of God". But city men were on both ends of Bates Street, Merriman and Shilliam while they were flushing out the lines from the water coming up through my toilet and my drains. Now if I had a line that burst in front of my house to the street then that was my responsibility and how would you like for me to say that was an act of God? There are three houses on my block and all three were damaged. And the Mayor tells us that it was an act of God. Once again the city maintenance men may visit your neighborhood and it might happen to you. And that might be an act of God. I've had all kinds of excuses from the Water Works, from the city sewer people blaming the churches in our area. There are seven churches in my area. So that tells me that if I'm getting sewer backups from them flushing the lines that's telling me that the sewer line can not maintain the seven churches in our area. And this needs to be investigated. I pay $1,587.00 a year on taxes and I cannot afford to have my basement damaged for a problem that was caused by maintenance men out flushing the lines. And that was not an act of God. Charles Miles, 627 Adams Street, another thing I want to ask you as far as the water. You just asked that the storage shed be built. And I came to a meeting to try to stop that but you approved that. Its poor water drainage in that area all together. Another thing I want to ask you is why we are being taxed for the water rate for $8.30 but we have these here drainage sewer? On the water bill its $8.30 we're being charged for the drainage. Mayor Clark, no you're not being charged for the drainage. I will ask that Mr. Thorson explain the storm water management fee that you are referring to. Eric Thorson, City Engineer, about this time last year the council passed an ordinance for storm water management that included a storm water fee. That fee was put in place and that is what Mr. Miles is talking about. It comes through the water bill as a fee to the city for storm water. And that's primarily being driven by the fact that the EPA and the Iowa DNR put regulations on the city that we have to follow to try to clean up our water. It's water quality that we're trying to deal with. We have a number of things in our permit that we have to accomplish. We did that for many years with existing staff and funds. And it just finally came to the point with all of the regulations and things that we have to do that we needed another funding source for that and council approved that. So that fee is used primarily to work on water quality. We hope that there'll be some of that fee left to also look at other water quantity issues. We'll have to look into those but it's primarily driven by the unfunded federal mandate that we have to clean up our water that goes into the streams and rivers in the city. And it's across the Nation. We're not alone and everybody in the Nation is doing that. February 14, 2011 Page 13 Mayor Clark, Mr. Miles that fee comes on your water bill because the way we schedule it is that everybody that owns property gets the water bill so that's how we chose to assess that as the vehicle. It affects everybody in the city and not just you. Mr. Miles, like when we pay property taxes not being paid through that? Mayor Clark, no it's not. Mr. Miles, well I still want an answer on why you approved those storage sheds to be built in the water drainage down there. Because I know its effect the people down there. The water is getting in their basements. And it's because of the drainage down there. Mayor Clark, the council passed that with the thought that it was beneficial to the neighborhood and to the people that requested for that to be approved. And there was no issues brought up by Planning & Zoning or by our Engineering Department that would indicate that would increase any of the water issues that might be in that neighborhood. I can't speak for the council, they are the ones that voted. Mr. Miles, well I was at the Planning & Zoning and its still not fair that they couldn't get no grant or anything for having it down there. Mayor Clark, well the council acted on it, voted for it and approved it and that is kind of where it stands at this point. Ryan Madison, 650 Dawson Street, I just want to thank you guys even though it was an even vote thanks for voting that way. I appreciate it. But also I couldn't think of the word but audit. Hart/Cole that the above oral comments be received and placed on file. Ayes: Six. Absent: Getty. Motion carried. ADJOURNMENT 135968 - Hart/Cole that the Council adjourn at 6:46 p.m. Ayes: Six. Absent: Getty. Motion carried. c Suzy SchAres City Clerk tcrt-e,z,;)