The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2019-08-06 TranscriptionPage 1 Council Present: Cole, Mims, Salih, Teague, Taylor, Thomas, Throgmorton Staff Present: Frain, Monroe, Andrew, Dilkes, Fruehling, Bockenstedt, Hightshoe, Sitzman, Russett, DeLoach, Havel, Sovers, Nagle -Gamin, Ralston, Platz, Seydell-Johnson Others Present: Wu (UISG) Continue discussion on the development review process 1I1`21: Throgmorton/ Okay, folks, we should probably begin our work session, Iowa City City Council work session for Tuesday, August the 6th, 2019. First topic on our .... work session agenda is to continue discussion of the development review process, but before we do that I wanna again welcome Mazahir Salih back from Sudan. It's great to see you, Maz. Salih/ Thanks! Throgmorton/ I'm glad you returned safely and all that. Salih/ (laughing) Yeah! I'm glad I'm here! (several talking) Throgmorton/ I bet! Okay, how are we gonna proceed, Geoff? Frain/ I thought I'd just give a quick overview of the staff memo, uh, and hopefully allow you all to have a discussion and.....and staff is here to help, uh, answer questions and guide you through that. You do have a memo in your August 1 st information packet, under the work session heading. Um, this follows the joint work session that the City Council had with the Planning and Zoning Commission on July 24th. That was facilitated by Tony Perez of Opticos Design. I thought that was a .... a great discussion that the Council and the Planning and Zoning Commission had and we wanna just take this opportunity, while that's fresh in your minds, to dive a little bit deeper into the, um, specifics of. ... of our development process here in Iowa City, and .... and start to learn from you, um, what changes you may want to make to the process or clarifications you may wanna make to the process. So the memo that you have in the packet, um, starts by giving a very brief summary of the land development process. Uh, there's a figure there that takes you from comprehensive planning, all the way to final permits and inspections. Uh, I would encourage you to look at the attachment to the memo, if you haven't had a chance to already. Um, but that will give you a much more detailed rundown of what takes place in each of those steps, and I think that's just a handy reference for you to bookmark on your computer, or to keep. Um, as you see different projects come and go at different stages, you can always refer back to that to know exactly what you're looking at when you're reviewing that and what staff is looking at when we have administrative reviews. Uh, in the memo, uh, we gave a very brief overview, uh, kind of the takeaways that .... that we had as staff, uh, from that July 24th work session. Um, I .... I'll let those speak for This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of August 6, 2019. Page 2 themselves, and you all can share your insights and thoughts on how that meeting went, if you wish. Uh, but really the crux of the .... the, um, issue today is .... is really getting that where we might have some misaligned expectations on the development process, and we're talking about expectations. We have to realize that there's multiple stakeholders in the process. Uh, there's staff, there's developers, there's Planning and Zoning, there's Council, and then there's the general public as well, and our observation as staff is that, um, in the last couple years some of those expectations for what is required at various stages and .... and what applications are going to be judged on are, again, misaligned, um .... uh, at times. So we end the memo with, um, three questions that we'd like you to focus on tonight, and of course if you think that you need to spend some time talkin' about other related issues, we'd encourage you to do that, uh, but the .... the, um, first question would be .... urn, given what is required by code now for applications, and that's contained in the memo, and we're gonna.... primarily focus on rezonings cause I think that's where probably 90% of the .... the issues are. Um, if you look at what we are requiring for those applications, are there certain instances where you want more information? And can we clarify that upfront with the developers, with the public, with... in the Planning and Zoning Commission and staff. Uh, Tony talked a little bit about this in his presentation, uh, but it's not always that two.....two rezonings aren't always equal and, um, it may be that for some rezonings the Council, uh, expects a higher level of detail, and that's not uncommon, uh, so ..... so don't think that the .... don't think that that would be an unusual step for a .... a city council to take. Uh, for example, most cities have higher level of scrutiny on (unable to hear, person coughing) that take place in their central business district. Some will have design review elements, uh, some have design review committees, um, but there's oftentimes a higher level of review. Uh, during the meeting, the gateways came up. I think a .... a Planning and Zoning commissioner, uh, mentioned that there should be higher level of scrutiny as you're coming in off of I-80 or maybe if you're coming in off, uh, Highway 1 or 6, uh, into our community, maybe there's a higher level of scrutiny. Could be projects of a different scale, um, or a different land uses. Maybe you wanna give higher level of scrutiny to multi -family projects over a certain size. Um, those .... one of the discussions we want you to have, what do you feel are those thresholds, and what types of situations do you find yourself really wanting more information, and .... and in what situations are you comfortable making your decision on the current requirements. Is that the Crime dog just walked by? Teague/ It was! Frain/ Okay. All right (laughter) McGruff the Crime Dog just walked by! (several talking and laughing) Urn .... that's question number one. Uh, question, uh.....uh, number two, um, drills at, um, specific issues that may be causing some consternation, uh, either at the Planning, uh, and Zoning review or the Council review. So some of the staffs observations, uh, frequently there's, uh, conversations about the open space standards for multi -family projects. If that's the case, then I'd encourage the Council to give staff some direction on what you'd like us to .... to review and let's actually amend the code, so that those standards are known upfront to the developers, and I think they'll be more than happy to comply with those and to work with staff to get those done. What .... what gives This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of August 6, 2019. Page 3 them heartache and .... and, uh, some financial concerns when they have to address those during the process, through conditions that are made at the table, whether again that be at P&Z or Council. They'd rather address those upfront in the design. So we talked about minimum open space standards. Sometimes it might be our building standards. So what does the building look like, what type of materials, uh.....uh, what kind of, um, you know, transparency needs to be built into a structure. So we have multi -family design standards. We have commercial design standards, and staff applies those during the, kind of the tail end of the review. That's part of the administrative review process. After you do the rezoning, we will look at those design standards and apply them. So if you're seein' projects built and you're not happy with the way they're looking, or you notice some common flaws in buildings, then I'd encourage you to .... to let us know and .... and let us see if we can amend our design standards to address those. So again it's known upfront and not, it doesn't have to be done through conditions during the process. Another question we've.... we've, um, asked of you at the end, and .... and it may be premature to....to put this on the table tonight, depending on how long this conversation goes, uh, but what are .... what are some of your priorities for staff and where do some of these text amendments or zoning code changes on application materials fit in with some of your other priorities, and we mentioned a few on here. We still have, um, an affordable housing review, uh, which frankly may or may not be in conflict with .... with, um, some of the review as we get into talkin' about things like design standards. Um, we also have, uh, what I think will be stemming from your adoption of a climate resolution tonight. We need to examine our .... our, uh, code and look at how we could enhance our code to meet, uh, the climate challenges ahead of us. So, uh, again just helping us prioritize and let us know what is your.... what.... what your top priorities are for the Planning staff would be, uh, would be very helpful. So with that I think I'll tum it back over to you, Mayor, and um.....we have NDS staff here, and I'm .... I'm happy to chime in if you need, uh, any clarifications or questions answered. Throgmorton/ All right. Well we .... we will do the best we can, as these questions are difficult. I think the priorities question in particular is a challenge for us. Uh, but uh, we'll do what we can, and maybe not be completely definitive tonight, but explore these topics. I wanna present one topic that is .... has been of concern to me for quite a long time, and it relates to the questions that the staff asked, though I don't know that what I'm gonna say would answer the questions that the staff asked. So (clears throat) for a long time my sense has been that zoning itself and following the processes involved in rezoning almost always.... gives insufficient attention to the, to urban design or physical design, at more ....at a scale larger than the individual building on a lot, and therefore tends to be insensitive to context, the physical context of...in which a proposed development, or a rezoning, is located. (clears throat) One clear example of that, I believe, is the .... this had nothing to do with the rezoning as such, but it has to do with, uh, the multi -unit building at Washington and Van Buren that was so controversial, oh I don't know, five years ago, and how the claim was, I think rightly so, it was just pretty badly out of scale with the neighborhood in which it was gonna be embedded. So .... how to deal with that kind of... development becomes a .... a considerable interest, and with regard to rezonings then, often one doesn't know what the buildings are gonna be actually, so one might not know whether they are out of scale with the surrounding context or not. But I believe we need This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of August 6, 2019. Page 4 to have a better urban design or, well, I'll just use that term, better urban design capacity built into our zoning code. So, and I think some people in, on the Council, and Geoff as well, know that I distinguish between architecture, which pertains to individual buildings, uh, urban planning, which involves sort of, you know, land uses and transportation in larger scales, and urban design, which is more about the ensemble of buildings. It's more about what's going on, how will a particular proposal affect the block, how will it affect the neighborhood, and how will .... will it enhance the whole or not? I mean those are urban design kinds of questions. So anyhow, I don't wanna monopolize the situation here, but that's been a concern for me, for quite a long time. Thomas/ Well, Jim, following up on that, I think one .... one of the issues, uh, under this heading of urban design that I think has always been challenging is where transitions occur. So where you have an interface of a residential area with the commercial district, which in a sense is I think one of the aspects of the, you know, the Washington -Van Buren project is the .... the failure of that building to gracefully make the transition between the College Hill neighborhood and the commercial area. Um, so I think looking at .... this interface, which I think probably applies in a lot of instances, but that's one example, uh, where having a better understanding of. ... of the impacts, uh, at these transitional zones, because it seems that's where often, uh, you know, the design challenge occurs is .... is how do you ....how do you make that smoothly, rather than abruptly. Um, in general I think one of the .... issues that I keep struggling with is .... is trying to understand and .... and it .... it's sort of on the .... this notion of threshold projects. What .... what the impacts of the project ....a project, will be, which .... I would ..... I would agree with you in that sense, as well, paying close attention to how a project will impact the surrounding context .... is a very important piece of this, and .... and looking forward, as I was, um .... you know, looking at that response by the City of Vancouver to its declaration of a climate crisis, uh, how.... issues related to climate and heat island effect could fall under that category, that, you know, there're questions regarding solar access, for example, um, that I think could be added to the list of urban design issues that we need to be paying more attention to. Uh, so that the solar access rights of a property owner in the vicinity of a development project, uh, their solar access rights are preserved through that.... through the .... as.....as one considers the impacts of the project. Um, we don't have, in my view, a very rigorous assessment process. You know, I've looked at some other cities.....development application, uh, procedures. For example.....San Francisco has a, uh, pretty rigorous sun shadow analysis for any building over four stories. They also have a .... a very rigorous analysis triggered on, um, on the impacts on winds if a building's over eight stories. So ....in some respects (laughs) it sort of speaks to me of, you know, the .... when we add to the complexity of a project, there .... there needs to be a mindfulness of. ... of how the .... the impacts of that project are going to be ratcheted up, um, as a result of that intensity that will come with .... with that development. Uh, so I'll .... I'll stop there for a minute. I don't wanna.....go any further at this point. Throgmorton/ Yeah. How bout the rest of you? Cole/ I .... I'd be, I'll jump in here. Um, I .... I really wanna key in on this concept of threshold. Um, as far as I'm concerned, the more routine the project is, the less we need to be This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of August 6, 2019. Page 5 involved in terms of scale. If we have concerns about, um, or .... or, obviously we need to have the input, but if we have concerns about the urban design, um, we need to communicate those on the front end as opposed to the back end. Um, I'll use one very specific demonstration in terms of what we do in Riverfront Crossings. I .... I frankly like where we are at this point. If we have a taller building, over a certain number of stories, the Council has to weigh in on that. Um, one project that was not a zoning issue was of course the Kinnick, uh, house, but I think that's another example of we had discussions in terms of the permitting process. If you essentially double the size or some significant disruption in terms of what the ordinary flow is, we need to have those triggers in place so whether it's Council reviewing anything along those lines, and I .... I think frankly those sorts of thresholds.... so in other words these would be where, um, events that would not be occurring very frequently. Um, I don't think that we should be involved in terms of the granular detail, unless we get these larger and larger projects. Um, one project that comes to mind — I know we've talked about a lot of the frustrations that we've all had, but I think the Forest View project is a good example. We all knew that this was a monumental project of enormous amount of complexity, and so I think because we knew that, the developer reached out to individual Councilors, uh, they reached out to individual members of the community. I think certainly one of the things I think we could have done better on was the neighbor, uh, the good neighbor policy, and I think we're doing better on that. Um, but I think those.... that.... that process, I think, is actually working pretty well. So to the extent that we need to have feedback to .... to staff, I would encourage us to think about this threshold in terns of, you know, if there's a height issue that needs to trigger a .... a review process, I think that might be helpful. If we're talking about a building that's much larger, you know, in terms of square footage, we might wanna think about that as something, but the other thing, and this maybe would be more informal, if there is a significant concern expressed by the developer, um, I .... I guess I would .... I know at some point with our Augusta project, I don't know if that was pre- ....I don't know if we really had to rezone it, but the Augusta Place project, I believe we had a work session where the developer wasn't really sure we were gonna move forward with it, and they just sort of showed us some general concept in a public setting. Um, certainly that's not something they have to do. I mean they can utilize the rezoning process, go through staff, but to the extent that there is that uncertainty.... on the back end, um, I at least think we should have, to the extent the developer wants to, one to gauge Council sentiment, but two, to project it to the public so they're not surprised, because it's not only the Council, um, the public needs to be able to weigh in, and you know, they're part of this process too, and I know the developers sometimes can be very frustrated, um, with the process, but of course citizens can too and residents can be as well, when all of a sudden they're surprised, and so I think the more we can sunshine, the more we can daylight these at the very earliest process I think the better, and I think to a large degree we have been doing that, at least that's been my observation. I think Geoff has been able to sort of anticipate much more effectively, um, when he thinks there may be a very complicated issue, either in terms of the public or on Council. You know, he can reach out to us individually. We can have work sessions. Um, so those are sort of my general observations, but I think, uh, specific, uh, triggering for review and work sessions could be something in those sort of rare circumstances, but otherwise I think the extent that we wanna, uh, have more design review, you know, again, I like where we're going with This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of August 6, 2019. Page 6 Riverfront Crossings and form based code. We're trying to embed some of our form preferences on the front end, so we are more predictable and so .... that, what's also more predictable for us too and so we know what we're getting, and we don't just all of a sudden find ourselves with, you know, like a Kinnick 2.0, cause I'm assuming that would not be authorized in a form based code, but .... that's all I have to say! Mims/ You know, Rockne, with what you've said, I'll just kind of follow up with that. I think we .... I do think we need to look at threshold projects, because I think if we .... if we can define what those thresholds are, and I don't think we can do it tonight, but I think if we can define what those thresholds are, then hopefully that gets us to the point then in also looking at existing code, what kind of text amendments we need there, so that we can get away from, um, what .... what developers probably feel is micro -managing or whatever in terms of their design of buildings, and I'm thinking of multi -family buildings, okay? We've had a number of those that have either had difficulty making it through P&Z, um, or, you know, difficulty here, or both, whatever, but if we could get to the point, if this is just a standard multi -story building that doesn't meet any threshold requirements. It's not, you know, at a specific gateway area or it's not over some particular size or whatever those thresholds are, that it's really cut and dried for that developer, what the standards are for that kind of development, and that can be design, it can be the open space. We've had discussions about open space as well, but I think if we can define what those thresholds are and make the necessary adjustments to text so that we are comfortable, it....it frees up developers, and I think that's what they're after. I think they feel like there is so much uncertainty now and so many conditional zoning agreements that are negotiated that if we can say, okay, if you're not meeting any one of these thresholds, here's your design standards. Here's your open space standards for your multi -family, and I know we have those now.....but P&Z is not accepting those as enough. And P&Z is pushing them and getting conditional zoning agreements, which is, again, as Geoff mentioned, also then in conflict with our effort for affordable housing. I mean one of 'em that was done on the west side, near Highway 218, that added $300,000 or $400,000 to the construction of that building because of conditional zoning agreements. So to me... we need to get more, um, we need to be more definitive in what those requirements are. So I think if we can identify thresholds where we think it needs more review, fine, but then if it doesn't meet one of those thresholds, we've got it really cut and dry, and P&Z is just gonna let .... they're not gonna be looking for all the .... the, uh, elevations and all that sort of stuff. It's pretty .... it's pretty cut and dried if they're gonna meet those standards. Throgmorton/ I think a key issue is whether or not a proposed development is out of scale with its context. Mims/ And that's where a threshold maybe is (both talking) Throgmorton/ Yeah, yeah, so the analysis we went through with regard to the Lusk Avenue house, uh, the one we did six months ago or thereabouts (clears throat) uh, presents a good model, it seems to me, because it's all about comparing the mass, scale, I don't know, height, etc., square footage, of that building, relative to other .... uh.... new in -fill developments in comparable neighborhoods, and it really stood out. That was the thing This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of August 6, 2019. Page 7 that struck me, and I think it did you all as well. So if. ... if there's some way we can have thresholds.... more than one threshold cause it's not just height. It's not just square footage (both talking) Cole/ ...square footage.... Throgmorton/ ...uh, if we could have more than one threshold that is about .... that focuses on the difference between the.... whatever building or buildings would be proposed as part of a rezoning, relative to the context in which that building or buildings would go. I think that would go a long way. Cole/ And, Jim, just quick footnote to that. I think that also illustrates the perils of not having any discretion at all. Of course, again, that was not a rezoning, um, but you know ultimately we did not have the regulatory tools in that context. So, um, we can't be too, uh, you know ..... ob..... we can't over-correct here I guess is what I'm getting at. That was something we didn't foresee and we just didn't have the regulatory tools to be able to do that. Teague/ I appreciate the conversation happening, uh, especially with staff, um, really comin' and sayin', hey, we need you to, you know, help us here and give us some direction. I think they did a great job of laying a lot of groundwork for us. Um .... one of the things that I would.... definitely like to mention is that we don't wanna get, you know, too specific, um, to allow, you know, creativity and that type stuff, of course. That's where conditioning, you know, um, zoning come in and all that other stuff, but .... urn, I do believe that if we can figure out in the beginning how to .... really get away from some of these bonuses that we, you know, that we have. If we can have it up .... up front, like this is what we want, this is the max square footage, max you know height, um, because then that, for developers, just decrease, um, a lot of problems, as well as for our citizens or residents within our community. Um, that can be a part of that conversation up front, so that once the development starts to happen, everybody's on the same page. And so from my perspective, you know, when we're goin' through this process, if we can kind of keep that in mind, knowin' what our limits would be and really settin' that up, but there's also that part of, you know, urn .... creativity and allowin' people to come and present to us, you know, some of their thoughts and ideas, and if we're too restrictive then that can be a .... a bad thing, but, um, from my perspective I think, urn .... you know, definitely, you know, threshold projects, all that sounds good. Um, but if we can even from the beginnin' really try to figure out .... what do we .... what do our community want, and from the beginning set up those square footage, height bonuses, all those other stuff, from the beginnin' as much as we can. Throgmorton/ Yeah you mention height bonuses. So, uh.... Teague/ Well gettin' away from height bonuses (laughs) Throgmorton/ Yeah. Well .... (both talking) here's what I wanna say. They appear in Riverfront Crossings for the form based code, right? I mean that's one key place, but not just there. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of August 6, 2019. Page 8 There are other height bonuses that are permissible with regard to certain kinds of developments or rezonings. I'm not sure exactly which. I've never been clear about that, but there....they exist. So .... if you mean we should get rid of height bonuses full stop, uh, that's a big step. Maybe we should do it. I'm not advocating, but you know, maybe we should do it. What I do believe is .... uh.....a reasonable thing to do is look carefully at the height bonuses we currently offer in the Riverfront Crossings District and my recollection is that Tony, uh, Perez drew attention to that for some of the sub -districts in Riverfront Crossings. He....he did not express any objection to two-story height bonuses for several of the sub -districts, but he .... he did worry about much larger height bonuses in some sub -districts. So .... uh.....yeah, so I just wanted.... Teague/ And a part of what he stated there was, you know, we have on the back end, you can get these height bonuses, and what he stated was put it up front, that this is the max.....size of the buildin' that you can have and then hopefully people will build, you know, some will build up under that, but they would know that this is the max and so I think that's my point is ... um ... you know we started with the six stories and then you say you can get eight, and then you can go up to whatever. Um, what Tony said was start with the whatever, the max, and then, you know, go from there, but .... it's a major undertakin', uh, changin' thought process for the City, and I'm not suggesting that we need to do this, do this, do this, but I do know that we need to have a conversation and consider it. Throgmorton/ What do the rest of you think about any aspect havin' to....anything havin' to do with this general topic of. ... (both talking) Salih/ I haven't reviewed this very much but I thinks .... I don't know, for some how like case by case basis, so we can implement like our value, but this is, uh, and also I understand that the staff need to have consistent message to applicant for the people who apply, uh, you know in term of what is required (unable to understand) yeah, I understand that. But .... uh.....talkin' about the height bonus, for example, I think that (unable to understand) so we can have the room to implement our value for that building. So, yeah .... yeah, we have some .... a lot of things standard for every building. That's fine. Threshold. But I really still agree that to have height bonus because this is like kind of room where the Council can come and lay their value — if we need affordable housing, if we need like certain thing from the developer, uh, to do or if we need the building to look like the way that maybe blend with the rest of the area or you know, just like room for us to lay in and talk about something, but (unable to understand) but also this .... I don't think this something can be just done like that. We need to do our homework and come back and talk about this, because we have to go to specific projects and see what we wanna see when ... (unable to understand) like really implement and make it part of the code. And come back. I agree with Susan when she said that. Thank you. Taylor/ Susan also mentioned micro -managing and I think .... I'm recalling that there was one project, I think it was on .... originally on the South Gilbert, where P&Z was nit-picking right down to what kind of playground equipment they were going to have, or should have, and green space, and I think that's going just a little bit too far, uh, I don't think as far as a standard, uh, that's not one of the cut and dried standards that needs to be in there, This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of August 6, 2019. Page 9 but having green space, uh, should be, and we should be more definitive about, uh, what we require for that and .... and not, uh, pass that off as something they could, uh, do something else and not require the green space. Uh, and Rockne mentioned, uh, triggers, and I think one, since we've been so involved in environmental discussions that the environmental impact on the building, uh, what it has on the surrounding area. That should be one of the triggers, that should be....be important, somethin' we should keep in mind. Cole/ I'm wondering in terms of the take -away, Jim, is that if we do have an agreement that there should be these sort of threshold sort of, um, quantitative thresholds, that then the marching orders to staff would be, um, you know, come back with their own expertise and maybe propose some thresholds to us, um, that we could maybe have further discussion on, and they may just say, hey, certain parts of town it's not going to make sense at all. Um, other parts they may be able to come back with very specific recommendations, as a starting point, um, much in the same way we did with like affordable housing and TIF. We said, hey, we'd like more affordable housing, and then Doug Boothroy comes back with a very specific proposal, based upon their own expertise. Um, so both as to height and square footage. Throgmorton/ That .... that sounds like a pretty reasonable idea to me, and I'd be curious to know how Geoff responds, from a staff point of view, uh, but I'm thinking of a few other things I hope I can keep track of what I have in mind here. One is in the Riverfront Crossings District, or any other area that has a form based code, I think we gotta get to a position where the form based code determines.... should determine the basics of the architectural design for any proposed building, and we shouldn't be nit-picking that. So I'm hopeful we'll get to that point. Another thing I think about is, uh, a small building, and here I'm thinking about, uh, what is that, uh, out.....out Muscatine Avenue, near First Avenue, where we were considering a rezoning for one .... one specific building and the Commission wanted to look at renderings I think for that building. I think that... such, such an instance like that does not rise to the level of requiring, uh, rigorous aesthetic or, um.....uh, architectural analysis. So I .... that ... that's where we needed clear set of criteria establishing a threshold that does require more careful analysis. Yeah, and there's one other point that I wanted to make, but I knew I was gonna forget it, so maybe it'll come up to me in a second. Thomas/ A couple of things I would add would be, uh.... and maybe I'm jumping a little bit into question two here, but .... on the ..... on the questions of, um, related to open space requirements. It.....it really became clear to me in looking at how the open space was, uh, provided for the, um, Forest View project, that the....the outcomes, um .... with respect to the usable as.....the usability of that open space that was provided, uh, was.... did not reach a .... a threshold in terms of its usability. You know, they .... they.....they tended to be, uh, areas that were .... the only way I can try to describe it would be what was left after the building and parking lot requirements had been established, and then you had this small piece, uh, of land, uh, of a shape and location where, you know, as someone who designed public outdoor usable spaces, really didn't have much to build on because of its location and configuration. So it seems to me .... that some.....some better criteria need to This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of August 6, 2019. Page 10 be developed. Maybe it's more on the policies and procedures as to how one evaluates how that usable open space is developed so that it's more integral to the project, rather than what's left after the parking and building requirements have been determined. Throgmorton/ Yeah. I personally agree. That's part of what I mean by urban design. Thomas/ Yeah, it's kind of a .... a, so there's that and, uh, in terms of site development, uh, in a similar way I felt Forest View revealed to me, looking forward in terms of questions, uh, particularly as it relates to storm water runoff and heat island effect, that we needed to revisit our parking lot requirements so that the, uh, those lots have, um, essentially better canopy cover, um, both for storm water detention and, uh, reducing the heat island effect that's generated by .... these large, uh, paved areas. Uh, and I think, you know, in my short looking online there are lots of best practices that I found in terms of cities that have, uh, minimum lot coverage when the trees are at maturity for example, um, roughly in the 50% range. So I think there are ways .... ways that will address that issue, and I ... I would argue make for a better project. You know I .... I'd like to think these things are not onerous, um, but in terms of the use of the building, that, you know, when your vehicles are parked in that lot, there, you know (laughs) um, they're going to be protected from these weather extremes, uh, through the day, whenever they're parked there. So ... uh, I think there are opportunities to .... to address and improve on the minimum open space and development standards, uh, as we move forward. Cole/ One other issue that may be a good idea is right now, it's my understanding, good neighbor is not required, is that correct? Throgmorton/.Correct. Cole/ Um, have we thought about making that mandatory? And secondly, related to that, um, I know a lot of times residents will come in and say'I wasn't notified.' Sometimes that means they were just weren't paying attention (mumbled) sort of notify people, but sometime that's a function of what the sort of the mandatory notification zone is, correct me if I'm wrong. There's a certain square footage. So I think we also might wanna think about expanding that, in terms of notification, because (mumbled) um, to some degree when we have a group out in the audience — not always — but to some degree if they're all mad at us and they're all saying that they were surprised, I think we have to look at ourselves and say, 'Hey was there....' It's a failure in some respects. Um, and I think the more open we've been, the more, you know, wider the notification is, and then we don't get the pushback at the podium, I think that's successful. So I think the quieter the better in the most cases, and I think the more we have ... I know, Maz, in that one project you did not support in the South District, you weren't necessarily against the project. You were concerned that the residents hadn't been notified or engaged enough, and I think they did have a .... a good neighbor policy, but it wasn't.... wasn't fully implemented. So I think that may be something else that we could tweak sort of structurally, um, and I think the more engagement there is, the less likely we're to have someone at the podium mad at us or mad at Geoff. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of August 6, 2019. Page 11 Mims/ I think listening to what people have said, it seems to me like we're in agreement, and I don't know if staff feels like they have anywhere near enough (laughs) guidance at this point, but maybe for staff to come back with some ideas and more recommendations on what those thresholds might be. And then .... I would kind of guess that just from some of the P&Z stuff that's gone through over the last 12 months, you'd probably have some pretty good ideas of where some of that zoning text needs to be maybe cleaned up in terms of. ... multi -family units and stuff, and design standards, and open space that if they don't meet the threshold, folks, you're not gettin' the CZA out of the developer, I mean they've.... they've met the threshold and they oughts be able to get through without jumping through a lot of extra hoops, regardless of who's sitting on P&Z. I mean I, and if they can't then they should feel comfortable coming to the Council and we should approve it. I mean that's the whole idea of this is trying to make it easier for them to know exactly what those standards are and if they've meet those standards, then it should be kind of slam-dunk. Now (mumbled) I see you kind of shaking (both talking) Throgmorton/ Not disagreeing. Mims/ But .... but I agree, that we've also talked about some things in terms of, you know, the urban design and how it fits in with the context and .... and those kinds of things that.... may add more text changes than what we've really discussed before. So I don't (both talking) Throgmorton/ (mumbled) sort of shaking my head, but not in disagreement with ya. I .... I think it would be good to have .... for developers to have greater assurance that projects can move ahead and .... if they meet the criteria and that kind of thing. Uh, but I think they... the projects also need to have some predictability for people who live in the general area. So that's where this good neighbor policy could come to bear. So I wonder if a .... a good neighbor, uh, a re .... we could require good neighbor meetings when, in those threshold kinds of situations. Cole/ Yeah. Throgmorton/ Yeah, so that's part of what I think, and I think also that a .... a key part of. ... what we need to be thinkin' about has to do with transitions. So .... and when I use that word I'm thinking about the development on South, on South Gilbert Street, down by McCollister, the one you just referred to. Their, uh, the neighbors were objecting mainly because the transition was so abrupt between the existing single-family housing and then just to the left of the, sort of a prairie/ravine sort of, uh, there would be apartment buildings. So .... and, uh, there was .... some of us expressed a desire to see missing middle housing in that development, so that the transition could actually be accomplished deftly. So if we could .... not just identify threshold conditions, but also, uh, ways to enhance the....the transition between proposed projects and .... uh, the existing context. I think that would be helpful. Thomas/ Yeah, I .... just quickly try to build on that, because I think part of what I think we're trying to address is what the expectation of existing residents will be with a project, and This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of August 6, 2019. Page 12 um, I think particularly with the planned development overlay process, you know, and... particularly PDOs which are influenced by natural areas which can constrict the development area. That, uh, once the project begins considering and applying building types that would not normally be allowed in the underlying zones. Say if you have an RS -5 or an RS -8, and um, it becomes a PDO, um, you know, we've seen projects in various locations in the city where, uh, with.... even with the underlying zone being RS -8, that... buildings are proposed that are three stories and 200 -feet long kind of expressions of building size, which I think, you know, to anyone living out there is shocking because, you know, if they .... you know, we get responses from people, residents, who are familiar with zoning. They know what RS -5, they know what RS -8 is, and so I think they .... they do have a reasonable expectation that the development that would occur around them, um, would be consistent with that zoning. And so, and I don't mean to suggest that it's not possible to design with those buildings, larger buildings than would be allowed under the underlying zoning, but I think it does raise questions about expectations and how, as ... to use Jim's term, we deftly, uh, respond to the design challenge (both talking) Throgmorton/ That's a legal term, incidentally. Deftly (laughing) Thomas/ (laughing) I thought so! Throgmorton/ Geoff, I wonder if you or anybody in NDS staff and/or Danielle or Tracy, you know, would like to ask us questions, based on what you've heard us saying up here? Would it be helpful to have that kind of dialogue? Frain/ I'm comfortable but I'd .... I warm give Ann, Danielle, and Tracy a chance to get any clarifications that you may need. It's probably going to be a process where we're back and forth a few times. (several talking) Throgmorton/ Yeah, I'm not trying (several talking) Fruin/ But some of my take-aways, we can definitely develop thresholds. I think we're all in agreement that the multi -family open space. I'm not hearin' a whole lotta concerns on the commercial side of things. Um, seems to be multi -family. I hear in transition, context, um, those are all things that we can work on. If there are commercial issues, uh, or...or issues you've identified with commercial rezonings or buildings, let us know, cause that's a whole other (both talking) Throgmorton/ I can imagine the situation where commercial zone abuts a residential zone and you've got a transitional edge problem. Frain/ Correct. Yeah. Okay. Mims/ I think .... I'll just add one comment. I think....I think the transitions sometimes are difficult, um .... and like John, because of expectations .... but also I think sometimes those expectations aren't reasonable and that's why I think we have a challenge as a city, and as we develop code, I mean when I look at that one that's the one closest.... we've looked at This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of August 6, 2019. Page 13 two on South Gilbert, but the one closest to McCollister, where they were going to have single-family homes, and they were going to have townhouses, and then further to the north I think there was going to be apartment buildings, if I'm right, and as I recall at the time neighbors in there on Wagon Wheel and .... and that area, they were not at all happy about that development because they made comments about who was going to live there, I mean low income housing is what they were saying, and these houses were going to be worth a whole let less than theirs and they were concerned. And really when you looked at that, it went from single-family to townhouses, to apartment buildings. So from my perspective, that was a very reasonable transition from a totally single-family neighborhood. So .... I ...... I just raise that point because what one person says is not a reasonable transition, and maybe specifically because they live in the neighborhood, is not what somebody with a more objective and more clinical or, you know, urban design perspective would say, would agree .... would necessarily agree that that's not a reasonable transition. So I think that's gonna be.....can be a challenge as we move forward. Throgmorton/ We haven't addressed the third question at all. You want us to try to .... dive into it? Fruin/ Well I don't know if we're there quite yet. I think we probably need to get you some more information and then let you decide. Mims/ That sounds good. Throgmorton/ I'd like to ask maybe three questions that I have with regard to setting priorities. So, I think it's pretty difficult to answer that in the abstract, so then I find myself wondering.... how long would it take to complete each of the actions, like identifying various affordable housing.... identifying amendments to the zoning code and, uh, that would help meet climate action goals and so on. How long would each of those take? Don't answer the question, I mean it's just .... I find it hard to answer the priorities question without havin' some sense of how long it's going to take to do the various things, and then likewise, um, what might interrupt or delay the staffs efforts? I can easily imagine some big project comin' along and suddenly Danielle or whoever, uh, has to spend (laughs) a month or whatever workin' on that project, instead of these other things. Uh, and then I'm wondering if there are any specific reposa... proposals in the, already in the works that would justify immediate action on any of those possible priority areas. So you don't have to answer any of those questions, but those come to my mind. Okay well we're.... we're off anyhow with initiating a discussion. That's a good thing. Yeah! Shall we move on? Okay. So .... the next topic would be clarification of agenda items. Clarification of Agenda Items: 17. Deer Management Plan — Resolution approving the Long -Term Deer Management Plan for the Years 2019 to 2024, rescinding Resolution No. 19-167, and authorizing the City Manager to sign an agreement with White Buffalo, Inc. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of August 6, 2019. Page 14 Throgmorton/ And.... I know there's at least one I wanna bring up, havin' to do with deer management, which is Item 17, the Deer Management Plan that we are proposing to adopt. So .... my question.... you're.....you're kind of puzzled, Geoff. Do I have the wrong (both talking) Fruin/ No, I'm just lookin' for it here. Sorry! Throgmorton/ So .... my question is this. When I read the text of the Deer Management Plan, I found myself wondering will property owners need to provide permission to use their property for the bow hunting? I don't think the text is clear about that. Fruin/ Yes. Throgmorton/ Okay so it might be worthwhile lookin' again at the text, when you get a chance. It's very clear at the start but that seems to apply only to the sharp shooting. If I read it correctly. I'm not sayin' I really did but.... Dilkes/ I don't have (mumbled, speaking away from mic) Fruin/ Yeah, it doesn't .... it doesn't specify what properties will be used or .... it just says that we have to work in cooperation with the .... with the DNR to .... to establish those boundaries, and .... and of course we expect the Council to have to sign off on whatever parameters we develop. So that'll be somethin' we'll have to work on this fall and winter, but .... but absolutely we would want the property owner's permission and require that. Dilkes/ Yeah I think you couldn't be there without.... Fruin/ And... and there may be people that want to allow hunting on their property and we don't want to allow it on their property. So it kinda works both ways, right? We .... we have to define where we want it and there has to be property owners within that area. Assuming there's some private. We may target all public grounds too. We haven't really gone through that analysis and we probably need to sit down with White Buffalo and have some of those conversations about the best places, um, or .... or kind of where the deer are located. Uh, and the DNR will have some .... some advice for us too, but I would say those details are yet to come, but absolutely we won't force hunting on a property owner. Throgmorton/ Okay, any other questions about agenda items? 6.e. Tree and Stump Removal Services Contract — Resolution authorizing the procurement of tree and stump removal under the Tree and Stump Removal Services Contract. Teague/ I had a question about 6e, and that's the tree and stump removal service contract. Um, so .... the initial cost was 17,000. Is this related to the ash trees? The big difference in the ....in the cost, because it's a....$113,000 difference. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of August 6, 2019. Page 15 Seydell-Johnson/ Hi, Juli Seydell-Johnson, Parks and Rec Director. Related to two things. First of all, um, over the last year we've had a couple big wind storms that have knocked down a lot of large trees and added cost we weren't expecting, but the largest bulk is due to Emerald Ash Borer, yes. Teague/ And how much over 150,000 are you anticipatin' because from the 17 to .... 131 is already significant. Seydell-Johnson/ Yeah, it is very significant, and I don't have a number .... the exact number, but it will continue to rise. Um, I mean it'll be like a bell curve. We'll have a few more years where we have many, many more coming out because of that and then it will, uh, cut back again after that. So I don't have the exact number though. Fruin/ And just to clarify, we should of. ... we should of clarified this better in the report, but if you look at the resolution itself, it notes that the contract with total .... Total Tree Care of Iowa City was actually $95,000. So oftentimes what we'll do is ... it'll .... it'll be a multi- year contract. We may only do, you know, 25 in a given year, but we'll do a larger contract with these companies, uh, through an RFP process. So the jump's not actually from 17 to 150. It's actually the .... the award was from 95, which falls under my authority to spend, and as you get to 150, that's when your authority to spend is required. So .... it was one of those awkward situations in which we didn't think the spending threshold was going to reach your level, but due to what Juli just mentioned, the contract had to grow to where it required. So we're mid -contract and we need .... we need your approval to move .... move that number up. Teague/ Thank you. Throgmorton/ Any other agenda items? 8.g. Betsy Potter: Updates on Black Hawk Mini Park Thomas/ I wanted to ask about, uh, on the correspondence, 8g, the updates on Black Hawk Mini Park. Uh, the .... there was a .... shade structures that were illustrated, uh, and I .... I'm not sure if anyone else on Council was aware of that, but I wasn't, um, aware of it. I was just wanted to better understand the story behind that. Fruin/ So it started with the Washington streetscape project, um, in order to help, um, continue to drive people downtown during that disrupted process, or disruptive project, we contracted with the Downtown District on place -making activities downtown, and uh, I'm not recalling exactly what they used funds for the first year, and then as we got into the ped mall project, we decided to continue it because we found that it was successful. Matter of fact I think the first year they did more events. They had a rock climbing wall. They did paddle boarding. They did things of that nature to get people downtown. Um, last year they transitioned to the Prairie House. Remember the Prairie House structure that was built downtown? Um, and they might have also done a few smaller events, uh, this year is what Betsy's memo is detailing is what their efforts are .... are looking at this year, and This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of August 6, 2019. Page 16 this year they wanted to focus more on the seating, which is the picnic tables that you see down there now that are painted the bright colors. Uh, they've.... they've introduced some planter boxes and .... and are maintaining those planter boxes to try to create a .... a sense, um, a different sense of place down there, and then the shade structure is one more component to that. Obviously that's one thing that that area is ... is lacking at times is ... is shade, um, and instead of doing a traditional umbrella, they wanted to do something a little bit more artistic. So I think they worked with a local, um, architecture firm and developed, uh.... Thomas/ So does that replace .... I remember there was a .... structure proposed for (both talking) Fruin/ This is a temporary installation, uh, so it could come back, but it's not meant to be a permanent (mumbled) much like the Prairie House, where those picnic tables (both talking) Thomas/ So there would .... what is the status of that shade structure then? Fruin/ We did not .... that was an alternate on the bid and we did not accept that. So there are no plans to bring that back. It's not in the CIP right now. The, um, correct me if I'm wrong, Scott, but the foundations are installed. So if we wanna go back in and do it, the foundations are there to put that shade structure on, but we do not have the funding in the budget to do that. Thomas/ Okay. Taylor/ That's like .... John, I was confused on that too, cause I thought, uh, that the.... footings were already in place and then to see these more leaf -like sort of umbrella, rather than the box structure, like the Prairie House, and I was confused (both talking) Fruin/ These won't require footings. These aren't of a size and scale to .... to require any disruption underground. Again they're workin' off of $25,000 budget, so that's where we get the picnic tables (both talking) Throgmorton/ I think it's a good experiment (several talking) the lack of (both talking) Thomas/ ....direction, I just (laughs) was confused (several talking) how it related to the, what I understood to be the direction there. Throgmorton/ Okay, any other agenda items? 14. Bikes, E -bikes, E -scooters, E -skateboards — Ordinance amending Title 9, Entitled "Motor Vehicles and Traffic," Chapters 1, 3, 4, 8 and 10 to enhance bicyclist safety, to prohibit dooring, to expand the definition of electric assist bicycles, and to provide for the operation of electric scooters and electric skateboards. (First Consideration) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of August 6, 2019. Page 17 Wu/ (mumbled) I had a couple questions. Uh, first was on Item 14, for, um, the bikes, e -bikes, e - scooters, and e -skateboards, uh, ordinance amendments. Um, I guess how does this ordinance relate to the University of Iowa campus moratorium on e -scooters, as well as, um, what provisions exist in the code for these vendors, such as like Lyme or Uber? Nagle -Gamin/ Darian Nagle -Gamin, Transportation Services. And to your first question, um, this will legally enable e -scooters to operate within the City of Iowa City. Um, it's the University's moratorium I guess doesn't necessarily have a bearing on whether we are able to legally enable them, but this will legally enable them to operate on the City public right-of-way. And could you repeat your second part of your question? Wu/ Um, I guess what provisions it has for like regulating vendors, um, I guess I'm .... I'm thinking the practice where like sometimes they'll just come in the middle of the night and like dump a lot of scooters on the ground and just leave. Nagle-Gamm/ This specific ordinance doesn't address that. It's more about the operation of the vehicles and whether they're legally enabled and, um, on our roadways. So this doesn't address that specifically, but um, to your point, we are in the final stages of, um, negotiating a contract with, uh, with a e -bike vendor for the City of Iowa City. Um,and... which we hope to have out on the streets this fall. So we're probably within days of having a contract signed, and that will be e -bikes, which have been enabled by this ordinance and a previous ordinance that came before you a few months back. We've expanded the ordinance, um, the version you see in front of you to, uh, to include all classes of e -bikes. There's three manufacturer classes and we wanna make sure they're all included. Wu/ Thank you! Fruin/ If I could clarify real quick, um, on the campus. What the University does with their, on their campus is their decision, so this has no bearing on the walkways through the Pentacrest or other areas on campus. They govern those. 18. Transit Study Consultant Agreement and 28E Agreement — Resolution authorizing the Mayor to sign and the City Clerk to attest to an agreement between the City of Iowa City and Nelson Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. for the contracting of transit planning services for a comprehensive transit operations analysis and a 28E cost-sharing agreement between the City of Iowa City, the City of Coralville, and the University of Iowa. Wu/ And then the second one was for, um, Item 18, on the transit study consultant agreement. Um, does the agreement set specific dates for the beginning and conclusion of the study? Or is that still, um, TBD? Nagle-Gamm/ We will, uh, negotiate a start date, um, as soon as we have a .... a signed contract with, uh, with the vendor, with the consultant team. Um, we expect that the, uh, project will kick off within the next few weeks, and then it will begin in earnest, the actual study This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of August 6, 2019. Page 18 will begin, um, upon the start of the University session and the School District session. So, um, it's going to take the better part of the next year to complete, um, but uh, yeah, we're looking forward to, um, getting started and getting those dates (mumbled) but those are probably the closest general estimates I can give you right now. Wu/ All right, awesome. Thank you. Information Packet Discussion ]July 18, July 25, August 11: Throgmorton/ Any other agenda items? Okay, shall we turn to the information packets, July 18. And ... as you're looking, I note that we have five items that the staff would ideally like to get Council decisions about, and they are all on the August 1 st information packet. Uh, okay so, um, July 25th packet. Anything there? Dilkes/ I had a comment on .... one of these. I think on the July 25th packet. So the, um .... the letter that came in from the residents who live next to the area, um .... uh, that Mid Am just got a special exception for. Um, and there's a letter from Sue in the packet. We had miscalculated on that reconsideration issue. Um, so essentially we are taking their request as a request for reconsideration and we are setting, um, up a .... a meeting with the Board of Adjustment, um, to see if they want to make a motion to reconsider. So, I just wanted to let you know that. Throgmorton/ Uh.... and it's completely out of our hands because it's the Board of Adjustment (both talking) Dilkes/ It is, but I just wanted to .... (mumbled) that. Throgmorton/ Okee doke. Shall we turn to the August 1 st packet. Okay so why don't we just, uh, start with the first, uh, IP #4. The memo from the City Manager, uh, concerning Blackbird Investments and the Forest View Tenants Association's request for financial incentives regarding the new housing that will be built out there. Salih/ I was trying to request that to defer this item to next time, if you can. Throgmorton/ Uh, could you just explain why? Salih/ I just think we .... we need to do more investigation and talk to more people about this and some people they have a lot questions and we need to collect some informations before we can .... and some people they wanna come present here or this and maybe they can do it during, uh, public comment and after that maybe we can have a decision about this. Cole/ Is that a motion? Throgmorton/ Well let's see (both talking) Salih/ I haven't put a motion yet but (both talking) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of August 6, 2019. Page 19 Throgmorton/ ....there's not gonna be a motion as such. Um.... Taylor/ I would agree with Mazahir, cause it seemed like we didn't have a lot of information as far as where tllis request was coming from. (mumbled) all along from day one been very supportive of this Forest View project, uh, but this raised some other concerns as far as, um, the request for public ownership of the green space, uh, and then, uh, larger homes and $1.2 million, that's a lot and how many of those homes need to be larger, do they all need to be larger? So it seems like there's a lot more questions than answers. So I .... I'd appreciate more, and .... and, uh, input from the actual residents, the potential residents. Throgmorton/ That's the way it seemed to me as well. So.... Fruin/ No .... no time crunch on my end. Throgmorton/ Uh, without objection then we'll .... defer discussion about this to, uh, I guess our next meeting on the 20th. Fruin/ We'll just put it in the following packet and.... Throgmorton/ Yeah. Salih/ Please. Thank you. Throgmorton/ All right, the next one has to do with IP #5, a memo from NDS, Neighborhood and Development Services, from Tracy Hightshoe, the Director, concerning the strategic plan item review of the affordable housing action plan and new strategies. Tracy, do you wanna guide us through this? Hightshoe/ Hi, Tracy Hightshoe with Neighborhood and Development Services. So there was a memo in your July 29th, well dated July 29th. The memo was to update you on our affordable housing action steps, those 15 action steps for affordable housing, where we were at with those. So the memo starts off just giving an update on those steps, basically we're done with 13 out of the 15. We're working on the last two. One was a tax exemption committee, um, that goes to HCDC for review. Um, I think you've seen the recommendation, HCDC's gonna comment. It'll come back to you probably late August, early September, and then the other item is reviewing code changes to .... to encourage affordable housing or to ... to make the cost lower. After the memo there's discussion about, um, with these actions steps, certain time has to go by so we can evaluate. Um, one of'em is like the form based code. We won't approve form based code until 2020. Others were to enable certain things to happen, like through TIF, to build affordable housing. Those'll take .... could take multiple years for us to find out what's an effective, viable tool, what produces the most affordable housing for the targeted groups that you wanna see. So just....just remember that this is a long-range plan. You're not gonna see all ways immediate results, just because affordable housing, I mean by the time you assemble the parcels, find your financing, apply for programs, build it, lease it —just This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of August 6, 2019. Page 20 takes some time. Um, in the memo I also talked about the importance of the private sector, that we subsidize less than 10% of the private market. So supply issues are important. So 90% of our rental market is unsubsidized, so working with the private sector to increase supply, um, will assist with our affordable housing goals. Then the rest of the memo talks about a recommended programming change. This memo was meant to talk.... with the funds that we were allocated for fiscal year 20, what should be the focus, and what we would recommend after .... since we've had this action plan since 2016, based on the results and what we've seen, what would we change, and so .... um, we looked at the affordable housing fund. We are recommending that... right now we give 50% to the Housing Trust Fund to allocate. We're increasing.... or we recommend increasing that by another 200,000. Right now the Housing Development Commission reviews LIHTC projects, low income housing tax cru ... tax credit projects. We're basically hoping to combine that into one body that reviews. They're.... they're usually large projects. They're very complex. Um, the Housing Trust Fund board has a lot of expertise. They review complex projects. It also simplifies when a project needs more money or needs to be reviewed again. One body is reviewing that. We've already combined our review, our allocation process, with the Housing Trust Fund. This would just simplify. So we would allocate 700,000 to the Housing Trust Fund, with the caveat that if the IFA, or the Iowa Finance Authority changes their allocation plan, where they give more points or you score better by getting a direct city contribution, we would take that 20 .... that 200,000 back and we .... we'd directly allocate that. Um (mumbled) another one was, um, we dedicate 75,000 to a dedicated opportunity fund. Um, this means, this includes our, um .... I was looking to see where our land banking fund is. We'd reallocate the land banking funds, uh, we'd probably still give money to land banking, but we'd be more flexible how we use that money. So 7....7.5% would go to the opportunity fund. That would be, if we have collaborations that we don't know about, if they come up, we would use those funds. Urn .... we have approximately 800,000 in the fund right now. We're acquiring a property, it's on your agenda later tonight. After we allocate those funds we have about 600,000 remaining, so we'd still have those funds in that pool. This would just be added to it. We'd also have 7.5% to the City's healthy homes program. Um, we give 50,000. We apply through the Housing Trust Fund. Right now we would .... we wanna stress improving our existing housing stock to make it healthier, and so instead of applying every year to get .... we would just, we would just internally allocate it and that gives a .... that way the money that we give to the Housing Trust Fund is unencumbered. They don't have to look through the City applying for their own funds that we give them, if that makes sense. Um, we'd also use those funds .... if we don't use them in direct, um, healthy homes applications. If we're doin' CDBG/Home (mumbled) and one of the owners has any type of, um, impairment such as COPD, asthma, we could invest those funds there too to increase the amount of funds (coughing, unable to hear speaker) to improve the indoor air quality of that unit. Um, we've dedicated 10% to, um, security deposits at ... well sorry! 30,000 would capitalize the landlord risk mitigation fund that there's a not -profit agency in Iowa City workin' on that right now, to make it easier to .... um, to give some assurances to landlords who rent to people who might have some difficult, um, difficult things in their past that make it, uh, kind of like, uh, criminal history, low credit score, different things that might make it harder to rent to that person, so it gives some security to that landlord about either lost rent or damages. And then This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of August 6, 2019. Page 21 70,000 dedicated to a security deposit. Um, for years we've heard how difficult it is to get into housing. This would provide a security deposit. We take an RFP out to the local non -profits. They would apply. We'd provide funds to them to run programs, uh, there's a couple non -profits that I know already have this program. We can see if we can expand that use in Iowa City, to get people into housing. Another large change, well not a large change. None of these are huge changes. It's what we're doing now, we're just focusing on existing housing stock and makin' that housing stock healthier, basically. Um, also we'll look at our CDBG and Home, how we're spending those funds. What we wanna do is to encourage applicants that are either gettin' a grant or low-interest loan, how they could rent to people lower than that fair market rent, because to be honest there's parts of town where the fair market rent is higher than market rate, and so we wanna subsidize housing in ... they keep a lower rent, so we're increasing the availability of affordable housing to people at lower ends of the income spectrum. Um, one is just administrative change regarding our equity that's required in our rehab program for emergencies. So if you run out of heat in the winter, your water heater breaks, right now we look at the equity to make sure our loan's covered, and if you don't have it we can't help you. So we would waive the equity requirement. We'd still put a mortgage on the property and recover what we could in case of default. But that way we can assist people when they're having crisis, um, and have healthier housing. We're also puffin' a focus on ... unless.... subsidizing new construction is expensive.... subsidizing new construction targeting people below 40, 30% of median income is very high. So unless we have other community resources, such as a LIHTC, low income housing tax credit, or state funds, we're gonna concentrate on rehab and, um, acquisition. So moving away from new construction, unless we have another source of funding to helping us, from the state, from the federal government, um, that's one of the changes. And then I believe the last change is .... oh, right now the Housing Trust Fund, we allocate money to them annually. What we would do is .... and it, they have to go through the Aid to Agency process, which is a competitive process. They're never quite sure what they're gonna get funded each year. Um, with that funds we'd take a 5%, we would just out of the funds that we're allocating them, it would just be 5% for administration and we would just enter an agreement so they would know each year that they're gonna get administrative fee and they're coming out of that Aid to Agency money.... for that pot of funds. So .... those were the major changes. And I'm here for any questions. Cole/ The only question I have is you had talked about a change moving, um, decision making authority away from HCDC to the Housing Trust Fund for like a level of review. Could you elaborate a little bit more on that? Hightshoe/ That's only for LIHTC applications. Cole/ Okay (both talking) Hightshoe/ The only thing that we would be changing, HCDC would still be reviewing all the CDBG and Home projects. It's just before that portion that we give to the Housing Trust Fund, or .... right now we keep 20% of the affordable housing fund and we dedicate it to a LIHTC project. It only can be used for a LIHTC project. So ... we would just send that This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of August 6, 2019. Page 22 directly to the Housing Trust Fund, and then they .... their board would make those recommendations and they would allocate money out, because to be honest we're funding the same projects. So, um, when the Housing Trust Fund funds a LIHTC project, we're also typically funding it with CDBG and Home funds too. So just simplifying the process and having it under one body. Fruin/ So from the .... if you think about Del Ray, and you think about the .... the project that's under construction on Sand Road, or from Sand Developers on Herbert Hoover, uh, Rochester extended, um, those developers went to the Housing Trust Fund and got money, then they came and they went through the .... the City's CDBG process, through HCDC and through Council to get funding as well. So it's.... and.... and if you think about the .... the funds that the trust fund's using to award those, they're just using the money that we're giving them to award. So the developers a sense .... in a sense applying for City funds through two different avenues and it just didn't make a whole lotta sense to us and ... and what we found is that the review criteria, the Trust Fund's, and Simon's on the Trust Fund board so he probably wants to comment on that, but um, you know, the... the Trust Fund and then through the, uh, City staff and .... and CD ... I'm sorry, HCDC and Council, we're not necessarily, urn .... uh, comparing notes with the Trust Fund on those awards too. So we think it makes sense that one body is looking at the complete financial picture, and making that award. Uh, we recommend that be the Trust Fund, uh, because they do the lion's share of that .... that work, uh, re .... regionally. But if it's not them, I ... I think we need to figure out a better process than what we have right now. Cole/ Has HCDC weighed in on this? Fruin/ No, no, the memo came out on ... Thursday, and came directly to Council. Andrew/ And currently through the state IFA process for how they score projects, you get points for, uh, Housing Trust Fund allocating dollars but you don't for the City. So for instance we had a project that wasn't approved initially that would have been had those dollars gone through the Trust Fund and not come directly from the City. So it makes it more likely that those projects will move forward. Salih/ You mean the 20% that we been allocated to the LIHTC project. Now we give it to the House Trust Fund, which is gonna be equal to 200, right? Hightshoe/ It's the same amount of money, whether we provide it or (both talking) Salih/ Yeah, but he said if we process it we give it to them and they give it to them and they don't apply to us. Hightshoe/ Yes. Salih/ But....when they come here and ask for that money, we as a Council, we ask'em for something.... to do, like we implement our value at that time. You know? Each time they came here, they ask for that, we request something else. (unable to understand) Housing This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of August 6, 2019. Page 23 Trust Fund, they gonna do the same thing, because they have like set of requirement and it will be applied to everyone. Andrew/ Uh, the LIHTC projects generally meet the requirements by the state. We haven't put additional, with the City dollars, uh, requirements on those. We try and make sure that they maximize the points to make sure that they get approved for funding, through the state, and those point scoring systems are very defined by IFA. So when you see the 30% AMI, 60, all those numbers, those are to maximize the likelihood that the project gets approved from IFA. We had a project that didn't get built because the dollars came from the City and not from the Trust Fund, and so they didn't get points for it. Salih/ But I remember one of them, the project was here and we even give them more money and we ask them to do more things. Am I right or I .... (several talking) Froin/ We considered it with the Herbert Hoover. It was a recommendation from HCDC that we put additional money into that Sand project to ... to further lower the rents. Um, and ... and, uh, another example of us going above and beyond the LIHTC money would be, uh, the Del Ray sewer, um, enhancement that we gave them, if you remember they had some infrastructure costs that weren't anticipated with the .... with the sewer relocation and we gave them an additional 150, um, so there's still an opportunity with .... with, um, the opportunity fund that Tracy described, um, to .... to supplement those LIHTC projects or any other projects that come up. Uh, we wanted to give Council that flexibility. But again we think those dollars are better placed in the .... at the Trust Fund level. Mims/ That makes sense to me, I mean particularly with Simon's explanation that if they're getting more points, if those dollars are coming through the House Trust Fund than if they're City dollars, then there's a better chance of getting the LIHTC project approved by the state, and as Tracy said, there's language in here that if there was a reason to pull that money back and allocate it directly through the City for more points, we can always do that. And I can't find it at the moment but my sense was, from what I read in here, that we've also got people on the Housing Trust Fund board that have been there a while and... and are really into this and have maybe more experience. Simon's nodding his head in terms of these can be some very complex projects in terms of the financing that we're getting through.... through the state and the way the developer is doing their financing, and so to have a group of people that really understand that complexity, um, and do it just through one process makes a lot of sense to me. So I would agree with the recommendation. Teague/ (several talking) Does the $200,000, um, because I know that the 500,000 that we give the Trust Fund kinda is matched somewhere else. Does that also get matched as well? Hightshoe/ The 200 .... well, when we look at a LIHTC, yes it brings in a lot of funds. So the 200,000 is the same amount of money. It's just now who ... who recommends funding. Um, LIHTC applications are so competitive. Developers are gonna do whatever they can to maximize their score. So if we wanted to .... like Sand did come back to us and ask the, you know, HCDC asked if we provided extra money would you do this or this. Um, This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of August 6, 2019. Page 24 Council didn't approve that so ... it's still the same LIHTC project that you approved before. Um, we could use those opportunity funds if we wanted to do something above and beyond, and then that would come back to HCDC and Council. Teague/ I do wanna make comment about the plan, the strategic plan in general. Um, I'm excited! (laughs) I think there's a lot of, uh, good opportunity that we see here, um, that's bein' suggested. Um, you know the private sector that you talked about, I think ... was it 10%? Now? Um .... I think subsidizin', tryin' to figure out a way, especially since we have so much, um, we're .... we're seein' vacancies throughout our community. Um, now would be the .... very opportune time to try to figure out how to engage the private sector into creatin' more affordable housin', and so I really do believe that this is an opportunity that we should be focusin' on, and you know you talk about the $75,000 security deposits. In the world of (laughs) um, disabilities, that is a huge concern for a lot of people, and I think just in general for individuals that have, um, limited, you know, livin' paycheck to paycheck, to come down with a .... even if your security deposit is 400 and your first month rent, $800 can be very hard, especially if you're on a fixed income from social security or somethin' like that, and you know the $30,000 for landlord risk mitigation. I mean there are so many people that I know, um, you know, they're travelin' from community to community because, you know, somethin' happened and .... and they can't get rental, you know, a rental agreement. So there are some great things happenin' here that I do feel will increase, um, one our housing stock through the private sector, as well as just opportunities for more individuals within our community that could use affordable housing and this is makin' pathways for those that have had traditionally a hard time. One question I do have, and I'm sorry to keep going, is ... um, overall just the .... do we have better data on .... for example how many affordable housing units do we really need. I didn't see any of that in here, in what you presented. Hightshoe/ No, we had an affordable housing market analysis that Mullin and Lonergan did back in 2007. We updated in 2015. That does talk about, um, gaps in affordable housing, what we need in the community, so we do have that data. I didn't put it in here, but this plan addresses, it's meant to address those gaps. Teague/ Do we even have it down to how many apartments we need, for example there's a, um, there is a need for four-bedroom apartments or .... you know, affordable housin' rental units. Hightshoe/ I know what you're saying. Um, no. The study basically reported units, whether that meant single-family detached, multi -family, townhomes — it doesn't go to that specie... specificity. (several talking and laughing) Um, but it does talk about units. Um ... the other, we are talking about.... whenever we go through City STEPS input, there's always that concern that we need four-bedroom, multi -family and right now our code doesn't allow new construction of four-bedroom multi -family units. So we're gonna look at that when we look at the zoning code changes, cause we know larger families need that and it's more expensive to live in a single-family detached. So you're gonna pay a lot more in rent than you would in an apartment unit with four .... four bedrooms. So we're ... we will be looking at that with the zoning code changes. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of August 6, 2019. Page 25 Teague/ Awesome, and the private sector opportunity! Hightshoe/ Yep! Salih/ I still have question for the .... going back to the LIHTC and 200. Um, is this .... there is in the language something saying that the 200 have to be used only for LIHTC by Housing Trust Fund? Hightshoe/ Yeah, it can only be used for LIHTC (both talking) Salih/ If we ... if they don't use it for, if there is no project for LIHTC (both talking) they have to just keep using it for that. Hightshoe/ It can only be used for LIHTC, so that happened to us the first year, cause you don't always get a LIHTC project. They're that competitive. We don't always ... we were lucky last year we got two. Salih/ Yes! Hightshoe/ I've been here for almost 20 years and that's the only time I remember that happening. There's years that we won't get any applications. We will apply and nothing, um, so if it doesn't happen then that money goes to the next year. So that's what happened with Del Ray. They got two years worth of our LIHTC. Salih/ But can we pull that money if we have something else to do with it? If there is no LIHTC project. Hightshoe/ It'd go back to you. Salih/ Okay. Fruin/ Yeah, so every year the Council, um, it requires a resolution, uh, to .... to fund the trust fund. We'll bring a resolution to you. Um, and at that time if we ever notice, and we do have a seat on the board with .... with Simon currently filling that, um, if we ever notice that, you know, for instance the LIHTC pot of money has grown to, you know, a million dollars or somethin', we might suggest not giving them a year's worth of those LIHTC dollars and repurposing them for another affordable housing purpose. Throgmorton/ So I'd like to draw attention to the last two sentences of the concluding paragraph in your memo. (clears throat) And express my support for the objective. So the ... two sentences I'm referring to read: This memo outlines a few changes that we feel will help focus the City's efforts on more cost-effective strategies that will benefit those on the lower end of the income spectrum. This will necessarily require a shift in focus away from new construction and toward the community's existing housing stock. I think it's a smart move to make. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of August 6, 2019. Page 26 Taylor/ I .... I agree and I .... I really like this, uh, these proposed changed cause I think, uh, they appear to be very well thought out and especially like if you do A how is that going to effect B and C. It all just seemed to flow very well. Cole/ But just .... at least for me, I think it all looks great. I also like the repair piece of it. We've talked about that a lot. You get a new place and all of a sudden you have a huge bill, whatdaya do and .... and what restrictions do we have (unable to understand) At least before we do, um, change the review process with HCDC, I would either like .... I would like to just get at least HCDC's input and they may have the same opinion, um, on that, but at least that's still .... I'm not supportive of that until I hear more. So I don't know how everyone else feels on that, but at least for that piece of it, even though staffs, uh, reasons seem very sound, um, I would at least like more information before I would support that particular change. But everything else looks very, very good. Throgmorton/ I wouldn't want our decision to be based on what HCDC thinks. Cole/ No, I don't either (both talking) But I .... but I would like their .... I would like input, because we're .... as I understand it, we are changing a level of review that currently does reside with them, unless I'm mistaken, um, so they may say, you know what, you're right. We don't want any of that and we may disagree with them, but I would at least like that input before I'm going to support a change to the decision making authority that currently resides within them. That's just my (mumbled) Maybe no one else agrees. Hightshoe/ This might address it, but when HCDC, when we go through each year and we .... we review the projects and the applications, which come out in December. So it'll be in October. HCDC will have a new ranking criteria. So at that point they can bring that rating criteria to you to review. So that would be their recommendation coming back to you about how they're going to score projects. So each of our projects — public facilities, housing — we have that criteria that HCDC comes up with. So that hasn't been done for fiscal year 21 projects. So they will be doing that, and .... the suggestion they consider it, they can make recommendations back to you, because we get the application materials approved anyway. (mumbled) HCDC and we can put that ... at that time they have the recommendation. It can go through you and you can look at it as well. Throgmorton/ So, I don't know, does that satisfy your objection, Rockne? Cole/ I mean again, I would still like the feedback. That's.... that's my opinion. You guys may disagree. Throgmorton/ So, uh, can we .... can we agree to support all that's been recommended so far. We'd like to get some feedback from HCDC about this particular component of it, just to get feedback, which does not necessarily mean that we would agree with HCDC or not, I mean we just (both talking) Cole/ We may get their feedback and disagree with their feedback. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of August 6, 2019. Page 27 Salih/ I just would like to add a sentence on .... number two, for the scoring. Like A. The sentence that ending with low than the SUD maximum limit. Mims/ Where are you at? Salili/ Number two, right? (several talking) Mims/ Yeah! Salih/ Before the .... the, before this (mumbled) Mims/ Okay! Yep! (several talking) Salih/ Okay? Like it's maximum limit, can we just add like in addition increasing (unable to understand) score for rent and housing costs that are no greater than the (unable to understand) for household with below property income. Hightshoe/ I don't know if I .... can you repeat that? (several talking) Salih/ You know I'm talking about the scoring here. Throgmorton/ You're at Item two, CDBG and Home, paragraph A, is that where you are? Salih/ Uh huh. Throgmorton/ Okay so which sentence are you lookin' at? Salih/ After the fust sentence. I just wanna....say an additional increase available scoring for rents and housing costs that are no greater than the cost burden threshold. For ho ... for household with below poverty incomes. Mims/ I can't (both talking) I can't agree or disagree cause I don't know what it means. Salih/ But the people are like below the poverty (mumbled) Mims/ I'm sorry, for me throwing a sentence in the middle of that paragraph right now, I can't comprehend what the actual impact of that is. So I can't agree or disagree. Throgmorton/ Yeah I guess (both talking) Salih/ ...because they said here lower than the (unable to understand) Throgmorton/ Maz.... Maz, here (both talking) here's my own personal thought about this. What I know about housing policies and programs is that they can become very complex. I don't wanna be a person making detailed judgments about really detailed specifics of...of This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of August 6, 2019. Page 28 those kinds of things. So I trust Tracy. I trust NDS staff, uh, I think they're tryin' to figure out a way to use the limited money we have in the best way possible, and .... I'm willin' to go with what Tracy is recommending, you know, and .... rather than you or me tryin' to invent some language on the spur of the moment. Salih/ Yeah, but they recommend something and we will talk to them and (unable to understand) what we need. If you don't agree with me that's something else (several talking) Hightshoe/ ...to Housing and Community Development Commission, cause we technically would have anyway for the rent criteria. So taking 2A through HCDC and getting their recommendation is not an issue because we would have been doing it anyway. If that makes sense. Throgmorton/ Okay so Item 2a can go to HCDC (both talking) for advice from them, right? Hightshoe/ Yeah, our allocation, like I said (both talking) don't even come out until December, so it's not an issue. Salih/ And I know that's not (unable to understand) HCDC, that's why, you know, I'm doing it ... and that doesn't mean I'm not trusting staff, by the way. Staff will bring recommendation and we are here not to just rubber stamp the ... the staff recommendation. We are here to talk to you back and forth. Sometime I might be wrong and you correct me. Maybe I go like outside the limit of the law and maybe Eleanor can correct me. That what it is. Throgmorton/ Well, I get the point. So we have two things we warm send to HCDC, for some feedback. Is that correct? Hightshoe/ No I think it was 2a is the one we need the HCDC feedback on. Fruin/ And the LIHTC. Throgmorton/ And the LIHTC (several talking) Hightshoe/ The LIHTC, we have to ... well it depends on ... I can issue a check to the Housing Trust Fund for 500,000 now (both talking) Fruin/ Yeah, that's what we would do. So we'll do the 500,000 and then we'll wait for HCDC... for you to consider HCDC's recommendation. If you still decide to send the 200 we'll just cut a separate check for that at a later date. Throgmorton/ Okay. Does that sound reasonable? (several responding) Hightshoe/ For the administrative fee, so you're okay with us removing that from the Aid to Agency process and doing that 5% administrative fee, yes? (several responding) Okay! All right. That's all I have. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of August 6, 2019. Page 29 Throgmorton/ Okay. LaTasha, you're up! But we have like .... eight or at the most like 12 minutes. Yeah. Taylor/ Let's give her a shot (several talking and laughing) Throgmorton/ Sorry we didn't get to you a little bit earlier, but it's good to see you and this, you know, coming here to speak to us as the Senior Center Director and all that. So.... DeLoach/ This is startin' to feel real familiar! Having like five minutes (laughs) That's okay! All right. So I have a memo about the kitchen that you all requested. Um, it took a little bit of time to get all the pieces together because as you all know, the kitchen has not been, um, operating at the level it has been for multiple years. So, um, as you see before you, there's some equipment that we are working to acquire, to just go ahead and absorb and keep in our kitchen until we're able to make some changes. Um, are there any specific questions, maybe I'll do that for time purposes. Or would you like me to just walk through the memo? Froin/ Well I think we just frame .... let's frame the question to them. We've got a quick -fix solution and we have a longer-term vision, because there's a lot of building needs, uh, at the center. So that's kinda the question that we're framing to you, do you want a quick fix and let's try to get this up and running, um, or do you wanna wait for this pending building study that LaTasha's gettin' ready to .... to dive into, so that we have a bigger picture of the needs of the building and we can prioritize the various projects. Salih/ I just wanna ask you about the quick fixing, if that gonna make the kitchen licensed, like every.... DeLoach/ Um, potentially. There's.... there's some public health things, there's some policy changes. So when we say quick fix, we mean that in .... quick but not exactly quick (laughs) um, so we have a couple of permits (several talking) Yeah, yes, we have some changes we would have to make sure that we have been, uh, certified that it can be used in a commercial.... there's some pieces that we have to do. There's some changes, there's some equipment that hasn't been used, our stove — I don't even know if it works. Um, so some of those things have to be replaced. Uh, we just have to really kind of look into it. We have to make sure we don't have any pest issues, uh, which happens in our building. Um, so you know there's a couple pieces there when we say quick fix there's some major things that we have to address, which would be, uh, the refrigeration and freezer, um, the stove, uh, needs to be completely replaced. The other thing that can be costly is the hooding, uh, making sure that, you know, we don't have any fires, and that hasn't been used in years, so we haven't even had a chance really to have someone really get in there, um, because it would cost additional.... it was just costing more and more assessment fees to get this looked at. So we have some money in a year to be able to really dig into this to make sure that we're getting it right, but we could get some basic things done, where people could potentially use it, after we go through a process of makin' sure that it's safe and good for, uh, consumption (both talking) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of August 6, 2019. Page 30 Throgmorton/ LaTasha, do I understand correctly that the, uh, building assessment study would be completed by spring of next year? DeLoach/ That's our hope is that we have someone come in who will be able to look at the entire building, but specifically they would be able to, um, look at the kitchen and to make sure that it can be used, uh, for public, cause for the last 35 years it's only been used by an organization to prepare meals for outside. It's never been used .... the Senior Center staff has actually never been the staff who have been the folks running that kitchen. So it's... it's new for us, so we have some work we'll have to do on our end to .... to make that happen. Teague/ Do you think the 40 to 60,000 may not be accurate? I did a tour of that kitchen. Urn ... I ....I think it might be, from my perspective, wise since we, you know, have the potential of just getting' a whole collaborative look at the Center, um, to do that first and then make a decision from there. DeLoach/ Yeah, I think ... I think it would just be helpful cause there may be some things that we need to change, for instance in the room next to it, that we might need to get some assessment about that before we do any major things in there. I just think .... I don't wane us to be in a situation where we fix some things and then later we have to come back and we have to redo some things and then it costs us more money. That was my biggest concern was like we can ... we can do this and change some things up, but then you know, what other repairs are we not .... one thing I know about the Senior Center is when you open the wall (laughter) things are different (laughs) so .... it's an older building so, you know, it can look like this on the front, but then as we get into it it can have some more costs. (several talking) Throgmorton/ ....like to see the kitchen used, but (several talking) for several months. Yeah. DeLoach/ I think the kitchen renovation will actually hit on a lot of your strategic goals, once we can get (several talking) Taylor/ ...idea of cost too then, a better estimate. Then we can hopefully budget, uh, to help out with .... with funding of that, or find sources to help with that. (mumbled) could be a lot more. Salih/ I guess it makes sense, but you know really this kitchen, the people been waiting for it since they are like (unable to understand) the Ree Center. At that time this come up, so they can have kitchen there, and City Manager said no, they can use the kitchen of the, you know, of the Senior Center. And now this is like take years without any action, until the people start coming here and talk about it, and still wanna defer it. To me it's really concern that we are not doing this quick, even though I (unable to understand) and we don't need to do the job twice. But I hope this will be like ready next spring really. This is taking long. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of August 6, 2019. Page 31 DeLoach/ I think once we get a better look at what we need to do, we'll be able to come back with some different numbers. Regardless it's gonna take time (both talking) Salih/ ...not talking about like fixing things, just assessment, what the building need, right, and gonna take all this long? DeLoach/ It's gonna .... it's gonna take a while for the assessment, cause it's a full building assessment. So we have to look at the entire building to make sure that we're compliant in all the areas, and that's just something that hasn't been done over there for a while, but the kitchen is included in that, so that we can kinda figure out what we need to do. Now we're offering' the quick fix that we could potentially get the freezers and refrigerators going and get some folks in there and try to make that happen, but I'm just not sure. I mean regardless it's gonna take some time, because like I said, the Senior Center staff has never been the folks who run that kitchen, so in some realities, we almost need another staff person to operate the kitchen, because it's always been operated by the director from Elder Services for the last 30 -plus years. So our staff is not even currently equipped to run that kitchen in the way that it's bein' proposed to use for community consumption. Sc there's.... that's some of the .... some of the delay as well is what we have to come back and request for another position or half-time position to specifically make sure that that is being able to be used to the level that we want it to be used, for revenue purposes, but also for the community to be able to use it appropriately and safely. Salih/ Fair enough, yeah. Throgmorton/ So I think we're in general agreement here? Cole/ For what it's worth, I would like to explore the basic option, realizing that if it turns impractical we could defer, but that would be my .... my choice. It looks like the noses aren't lining up with my view, so .... (several talking) for the basic. I do support the evaluation of the basic, as opposed to deferring for the more long-term. But that doesn't seem to have the support. Throgmorton/ Yeah, I think the amount of time in deferring to spring is not very much. So.... DeLoach/ It just ... it just is somethin' that it really (both talking) Cole/ (both talking) same amount of time anyway. DeLoach/ ....huge plaster project goin' on and so we just have to .... we'll get it done. It'll get done. Salih/ (mumbled) have to give (unable to understand) Cole/ To your point I think that was a really good point of I was concerned that all of a sudden you'd have all these outside users that would come in and then, you know, how would that affect the other Senior Center users. So it's a balance. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of August 6, 2019. Page 32 DeLoach/ Yeah, it is. I mean the reason I'm bringing up the plaster piece is because the plaster is right near the kitchen, and so we have to think about our consumers, and that's already going to be a major project, and if we have two major projects going, that means we're gonna have to .... what are we gonna do with the folks who need to eat lunch every day? So we really have to be thinking about consumers of the space as well, about how we make that happen. Now a study is not gonna shut anything down. They're just gonna come in and look, but if we start movin' things around we really have to .... we can .... we can make it happen if that's what you all want us to do, but just lettin' you know that there are some other pieces we have been waiting for some .... some changes and some updates. Throgmorton/ Okay, I think you have a decision. DeLoach/ Okay! All right. Throgmorton/ Good deal. It's 19 till. Let's, uh, adjourn the work session to after the formal meeting, and .... so we'll see y'all at 7:00. [Break to Formal meeting 6:40 Pm — Returned to Work Session 10:45 a.m.l Throgmorton/ So I have a suggestion and mainly it's that we not consider items IP7 and IP8, that we defer consideration of them to our next meeting. Because it is a quarter to 11 and I think we also have to figure out a listening post, that's another thing I know of that was on, in that package that we could mention. I suggest we not do that either tonight (laughs) So is there anything anybody thinks we really need to consider before we go home? (several responding) Maybe I spoke too quickly. (several talking) Yeah, I'm basically saying it's late, we're all tired. Let's not do any more work session (several talking and laughing) Work session's adjourned! This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of August 6, 2019.