Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2023-09-19 Transcription Page I Council Present: Bergus,Dunn (via Zoom),Harmsen, Taylor, Teague, Thomas Council Absent: Alter Staff Present: From,Jones, Goers, Grace, Platz,Davies, Ogden, Sitzman, Russett, Lehmann,Knoche, Sovers Others Present: LeFevre,USG Liaison, Monsivais,Alternate Liaison 1. Call to Order Teague: Well, it is 6:00 P.M. and today is September 19, 2023. Welcome to your City Hall and we're going to start-uh,we're going to call the meeting to order. Roll call please. (Roll Call) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of September 19, 2023. Page 2 2. Consent Calendar: 5.c.Bus Rapid Transit Feasibility Study—Resolution authorizing the procurement of consulting services to develop a Bus Rapid Transit Feasibility Study. Teague: All right. Well, it look like we have a full house, so we'll get started right away. Item Number 1 is- I'm sorry, Item Number 2 is going to be-through seven is our consent agenda. Could I get a motion to approve please? Taylor: So moved, Taylor. Thomas: Second Thomas. Teague: Would anyone from the public like to address this topic? Seeing no one in person or online,this is for the consent agenda items. Roll call please-well, Council discussion. Bergus: I'm super excited about Item 5C,which is the Bus Rapid Transit Study proposal contract -contract that we're finally signing. So hopefully by June of next year we will have the results of that bus rapid transit feasibility study. TeagueYes. All right. Roll call, please. (Roll Call) Motion passes 6-0. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of September 19, 2023. Page 3 8. Community Comment Teague: Item#8 is Community Comment. This is an opportunity for anyone that would like to speak on an item that is not on our agenda,uh,to speak at this time. I want to get a raise of hands of who all would like to speak. So I see four people who want to speak on- so, um, I see you. Yep. So I think I see about five or six. All right. I'm going to allow,um, for three minutes each. If that number should change,uh, of the individuals that want to speak, I might change that. But we'll go ahead with,um- anyone that wants to speak we'll ask you to come up to the podium. There is a sign in sheet here. There are also sign in stickers at the back of the room,which you can place in the basket. But everyone will be allowed three minutes. And we ask that you state your name and city you're from. Ross: Brandon Ross. I'm from Boston. Oh- I live in Iowa City. Sorry. Teague: Welcome. Ross: Uh,uh,we're in the, uh-we're in a year and a half now of uh- of being out in Ukraine,US is, and there's about 400,000 people who have died,uh,Ukrainians, about 55,000 Russian people who have died. US citizens have had to pay tax money for $135 billion in weapons. The only winner in this game is the arms company: Raytheon,Boeing, Lockheed Martin. They're the only winners in this game. Everybody else loses. And,uh, over the weekend there was 100,000 people who protested in Czechoslovakia,which is a NATO country, against NATO and their actions. They do not want to send weapons in. There have been mass protests in Sweden, and Norway, Spain, Italy, Ireland, Scotland, uh, and- and many other countries. And these are all NATO countries. I don't have to mention the ones that are not. All the BRICS countries are against this. The US right now is basically supporting a right wing nationalist rogue government attacking Eastern Ukraine and it's not helping. Over the weekend,there was a poll taken in France and Germany. Amongst those people,these are NATO nations,who is to blame for the Ukraine crisis? In France and Germany both voted USA. USA is the one who is responsible. Can you imagine that?You can look this up,uh,that the US is responsible. In 2014,the US helped overturn a president who was democratically elected,Victor Yanukovych. Uh, a rogue government of nationalists were put into power and they armed fascist neo-Nazi militias who attacked Eastern Ukraine for eight years. Eight years, okay. "The US was arming those people. During Donald Trump's four years he was arming Ukraine. Okay?And so was the-the Obama administration, and so is Biden's administration. Uh, in 2019,uh,Zelensky was,uh-was voted in to stop the attacks on Donbas. He did not and it instead escalated. The US could have negotiated because Russia asked to negotiate in late 2021. However,uh,the US said no,they would not negotiate to put in the means to agreements. Uh,then in- in March of last year,Russia and Ukraine came to the,uh,bargaining table and the US said that-that negotiations would not be accepted. What I am asking Iowa City people is to call your-your senators and congressmen in the White House,write them,be in the streets and demand that we have negotiations. We are-right now,we're just- we're just playing with oblivion right now. Russia is a fellow nuclear power. We are in their backyard. We have something This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of September 19, 2023. Page 4 called the Monroe Doctrine. It means that people,you know, other countries,will not arm the borders,uh, of the USA. Russia has the same right. They went in there on a security issue. And,uh,right now,we should be telling our country to negotiate,negotiate, negotiate. Teague: Thank you. Ross: Thank you. Please do it. Teague: Whoever else wants to come up and speak,you can just,uh, start a line right here. Welcome Senator Weiner, former Councilor. Weiner: I've never done community comment before. Hello, everyone. Janice Weiner, Iowa City. I just wanted to come up to raise awareness about the bankruptcy proceedings regarding Mercy Hospital. Mercy is an important asset to this community. It's a true community hospital with an ER and about 180 beds. At the end of this process,we cannot afford for it not to be a hospital. We need the healthcare workers,we need the staff. They are all incredibly important to this community. UIHC's role is that of a regional hospital that serves all of southeast Iowa. It's also a resource truly for the entire state. And it's really hard to imagine what it would look like in addition to the 65-70,000 ER visits UIHC already gets every year, if they had to absorb somehow the 30,000 that Mercy gets. It wouldn't be good for this community, it wouldn't be good for healthcare outcomes. So as a community,we really need Mercy to remain as a hospital,whoever runs it,not as real estate to be divvied up. We need the access to care and we value the healthcare professionals and staff who run it. Thanks very much. Teague: Thank you. Welcome. Vollenweider: Good evening. My name is Megan Vollenweider. I live in Iowa City. I'm here tonight in my capacity as Vice President of AFSCME Local 183,the union that represents non public safety and non administrative or confidential staff here at the City. I come before you with a few colleagues and supporters—you can wave if you are here to support AFSCME 183,thank you-with an invitation to collaborate with us in addressing a pressing matter that resonates deeply with our shared values and the essence of the City's identity. Our values are anchored in the belief that public services are inherently valuable. They are what make Iowa City not just a city,but a destination within the state. From our beautiful parks to our efficient public transportation, our services reflect our commitment to enhancing the quality of life for all residents,visitors, and businesses in the city. Our City employees take pride in our role as stewards of Iowa City,knowing that our work directly impacts the lives of our friends and neighbors. The existing contract between the City and union is something to be proud of,but also happens to have been negotiated prior to COVID 19 and everything that came with it. The City employees are now grappling with wages that have failed to keep pace with the shocking inflation rates of the past few years and the increased health insu-health care insurance costs that have hit families particularly hard. The gap between our earnings and the cost This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of September 19, 2023. Page 5 of living threatens our ability to make ends meet. It's a challenge that affects not just our livelihoods,but the quality of the services we provide. High turnover is compounding this issue. With fewer hands to bear the load, our dedicated employees are stretched thin, compromising the excellence we strive for. Moreover,they are missing out on precious time with their families, a loss not just to them but-but to our community. The City's Strategic Plan calls for the City to be an employer of choice, one that values its employees, invests in their well being, and recognizes their dedication. Our request today is simple. Let's make good on that commitment. Let's work together to ensure that City employees receive the support they need to thrive. As we discuss this request, let us keep in mind our shared values and the extraordinary challenges we face. Let us unite to work towards this common goal, affirming our commitment to our employees and to our city, together,we can ensure that Iowa City remains a place where everyone can thrive,where our public servants can provide for their families, and where the work we do reflects the values we hold dear. Thank you. Teague: Thankyou.Welcome. Sterling: Thank you. Greetings,uh,David Sterling from Iowa City. Uh, I feel a bit nervous. I'm not used to speaking on my own behalf like this,but,uh, I'm here to stand with my fellow City employees and AFSCME bargaining unit members. Uh, I'd invite the Council to imagine the life of an employee who over the past five years has been forced to uproot their family and home not once,not twice,but three different times. Picture an eight- year-old child,who instead of finding stability in their environment, faces constant change and uncertainty. This is the harsh reality that some of as City employees have been living. The cause of this upheaval is the growing disparity between our wages and the ever increasing cost of housing in Iowa City. As a result, families like mine are caught in a relentless cycle of moving,trying to find affordable accommodations, or moving entirely out of the very city they work for. It's not just about finding a place to live, it's about seeking stability and security for our families. For that eight year old, moving could mean changing schools, leaving behind friends, and adapting to new surroundings. It means missing out on the sense of belonging and continuity that every child deserves. It's a burden that no child should bear. Additionally,these persistently low wages have helped to fuel high turnover among City employees. When talented individuals leave for better paying opportunities elsewhere,they take their skills, knowledge, and experience with them. Those of us who remain face burnout as we take on additional responsibilities to compensate for the loss of our colleagues. This in turn, hampers our capacity to effectively serve the public and implement the City's long-term goals and initiatives. It's a cycle that affects not only our individual lives,but also the collective progress and vision of our city. So as we discuss the pressing matter of wages, let us remember the real human stories behind these statistics. Let us recognize the toll it takes on our employees,their families, and our ability to shape the future of Iowa City. It's not just about numbers, it's about the lives and well being of those who serve this community. Thank you for your consideration. Teague: Thank you. Welcome. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of September 19, 2023. Page 6 Shoppa: Hello? Teague: Hello. Shoppa: Oh, can we all hear me? Teague: Yes. Shoppa: Perfect. My name is Vincent. I've lived in Iowa City my entire life. Uh, I've walked downtown hundreds of thousands of times. And I particularly love walking past Ralston Creek. For those of you who don't know,that's the little creek that runs right by this building, also through Hickory Hill and Riverfront Crossings Park. What I don't love is the tremendous amounts of trash I always walk past in it.Not just that, it's the same trash that remains unmoved for months at a time. It's unbelievable to me that the Council members sitting here who walk past the same creek,have plans tonight to discuss the allocation of tens of millions of dollars towards capital improvement projects,when our City's Public Works department budget,which is supposed to cover the sanitation of our natural resources, sits at $3,200,355. Cleaning up the creek would take a small fraction of that money. How much would it really cost for two to three full-time employees to be dedicated towards making sure our ecosystems are clean, $500,000?Not only is that the small fraction of the amount planned to be put towards these capital improvement projects, it's also the same amount of money we'd like to increase our police budget from the year 2023 to 2024. This budget currently sits at a whopping $16,391,387. When I reached out to City Council over email about this, I was given a reply that stated,the City is actually "investing dollars and staff time,maintaining,preserving, and enhancing natural areas and resources around the city." I was told about the Parks and Rec Forestry Division that has plans to get more money towards gear and staff. Even if we would like to push this problem off to our Parks and Recreation department,their budget is still only two thirds of our police departments. Why does a Department that infringes on our citizens rights deserve more than both the Parks and Rec and Public Works Department combined while there is a constant flow of trash that is threatening our ecosystems around us. All my points have been stated,but I would like to share one more part of the email response I was given from Council Member Harmsen. He sympathized with me about how he too was frustrated by "people who do things like litter and don't respect nature around us."He encouraged me to contact the City when I personally see people littering. While I appreciate the sympathy,this is the government's job.No citizen should feel as compelled as I have to do this themselves. Cleaning a creek is easy, even I could do it,but I shouldn't have to. I shouldn't have to grow depressed and disheartened by my City's government's lack of environmental action. Ignore my pleas and others about the environment, if you will. But I assure you it will not change the quick and concerning decline of our city's ecosystems. Thank you for your time. Teague: Thank you. Welcome. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of September 19, 2023. Page 7 Dahinden: Thank you. Good evening Council members. My name is Brian Dahinden. I'm a 12- year Iowa City resident. I'm here this evening to advocate on behalf of municipal employees and also City employees. Basically the whole lot. We've been hearing some testimony already this evening about the plight that those workers are in. I happen to also be a member of the Electricians Union Local 405,which services Cedar Rapids and Iowa City area. I'm actually currently working on the North Liberty Hospital at the University's building,which is great. I love this community. I've lived here for 12 years and I think one of the things, as we've already mentioned this evening,that makes this community great is the services that Iowa City offers. It's great, great services here, a really wonderful town. And I think a big part that you've already heard this evening of a way we can support and continue to really build our community is to address the needs that our municipal and City employees have. So as a member of a building trades private union, one of the things that I still have available to me is to collectively bargain on all of the issues of conditions that apply to my working environment. And not that many legislative sessions ago,the state,the majority group there, and also our governor,took heinous action to significantly limit the ability for public workers who are both working under collective bargaining and, let's be candid,most agreements follow collective bargaining agreements because they're inherently intended to be fair. The baseline of a quality healthy economic system is allowing the people who do the work for money to negotiate fairly on all the conditions that they work under for the people who pay the money to respect that. And right now with the given landscape in this state,that's not available,people can only really bargain wages only. And so I mentioned that detail because as the Council moves forward, I would hope, I would implore you actually,to reach out to AFSCME members,reach out to union leadership and ask them what's fair. What are these people who do this work for us, for our City,what do they need to not just,you know, get by,right? To live a quality life that reflects the values of being a member of this great community of Iowa City. I would implore the Council to please reach out to union members to use all of the tools that you have available to you right now. We don't have to wait for another collective bargaining agreement. You all could reach out right now and make a very impactful change to increase the wages for municipal and City workers. And I really hope that you all choose to do that. Thank you for your time this evening. Teague: Thank you. I'm going to have you sign in though. Dahinden: I have already signed in. Teague: Oh,thank you. I appreciate it. Welcome. Sherer: Good evening. My name is Jennifer Sherer. I am also an over 25-year now Iowa City resident, and I'm here tonight both as a very proud and grateful Iowa City resident and in my role as President of the Iowa City Federation of Labor,which is the local branch of the AFLCIO,the federation bringing together unions representing private and public sector workers across Johnson and Washington Counties to address issues of shared concern. So on behalf of Iowa City Federation of Labor, I want to start by acknowledging This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of September 19, 2023. Page 8 the important leadership that Iowa City City Council has shown in maintaining productive bargaining relationships with City staff. You heard Brian allude a little bit to this. This is important at any time, but has become especially important since 2017 when as you all know, our state legislature took a wrecking ball to workers rights,nullifying our local minimum wage increase,which was just beginning to bring some of our lowest wage workers in our community out of poverty, limiting workers compensation benefits, and trampling on public employees collective bargaining rights. So these and other state law changes have created a very unlevel playing field across the state for workers and also placed new discretion in the hands of local elected officials like all of you. So on behalf of City Fed, I want to be very clear that we are grateful for your continued leadership in negotiating in good faith with your City employee unions on a full range of workplace issues. And unlike, as Brian was alluding to, some jurisdictions in the state where folks have really,uh, lost their entire contract language,uh,we are proud to be,uh, in a community where you have made sure, along in partnership with the City unions, that those contracts have remained largely intact. Tonight, I'm excited to be here to support members of the Council and AFSCME 183 members who are here in kicking off an important new round of discussions,particularly to address lagging wages and ensure that Iowa City can meet its Strategic Plan goals,to become an employer of choice in the region with pay benefits and flexible options that attract and retain high quality and motivated public service employees. I love that part of your Strategic Plan and kudos to all of you who crafted that language to ensure that all city employees feel welcome, informed, involved, and engaged at work and to build a diverse talent pipeline,which is a challenge for all employers right now in our tight labor market,but particularly a challenge for folks who are working to recruit and retain diverse staff in public service. So I want to be clear. These are three goals that our Federation of Labor shares on behalf of all the unionized workplaces represented in our organization,but we feel a special responsibility to support our City Council in modeling best practices for employers across Iowa City. So tonight we are here to acknowledge that action on staff wages is needed to ensure that the City can move toward these goals. Like local government workers all over the country, Iowa City front-line staff kept critical services running safely through the pandemic. From transit to wastewater, library, streets, parks, and so much more,while their wages continued to fall behind the rising cost of living. Teague: Thank you. Sherer: So looking forward to further discussion with all of you. Teague: Thank you. Thank you. Anyone else like to address Council at this time on items that are not on our agenda? Teague; Seeing no one else in person or online, I'm going to close the public comment period. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of September 19, 2023. Pate 9 9. Planning& Zoning Matters 9.a. Zoning Code Amendment—Housing Choice, Supply, and Affordability - Ordinance amending Title 14,Zoning Code,to improve housing choice, increase housing supply, and encourage housing affordability (REZ23-0001). Teague: We're going to move on to Planning and Zoning matters 9.a. Zoning Code Amendment- Housing Choice, Supply, and Affordability- Ordinance amending Title 14,Zoning Code, to improve housing choice, increase housing supply, and encourage housing affordability. I'm going to open the public hearing and welcome-well,before you,maybe we'll have our City Attorney,Eric Goers,just kind of start us off. 1. Public Hearing: Goers: All right. Thank you,Mayor. I thought I'd take the opportunity to have a quick reminder on procedure for something like this. This, of course, is uh, a zoning code text amendment,not a map amendment. However,the same rules apply in-so-far as taking action either consistent with or contrary to the Planning and Zoning Commissions work. And so procedurally what we'll have is opening the public hearing,which the Mayor has just done, staff presentation followed by questions for staff from the Council,then public comment will take place, and then there will be an opportunity for an informal consensus. Either the consensus appears to be to approve the zoning matter as recommended by Planning and Zoning, in which case you move forward to Council discussion and ultimately a vote, or if that consensus is not present,then a deferral for a consult with Planning and Zoning at your next Council meeting. Great,thank you. Teague: Thank you. And now welcome,Danielle. Sitzman: Thanks Mayor. Danielle Sitzman,Neighborhood Development Services. This presentation is a shorter summary of the detailed information that was presented both to the Planning and Zoning Commission in multiple meetings that began in February and proceeded through August, and most recently,what you all received at your City Council work session on August 16. Joining me this evening is also our Urban Planning staff, Anne Russett and Kirk Lehmann, and so as we go through this presentation at the end, if you have questions, I will definitely rely on their expertise to help answer those. So why these updates? This slide is from one of our poster boards that we recently used at an open house and is a great summary of why these updates. Housing affordability is a complex issue. In Iowa City is influenced by continued growth driven by high quality of life and strong economic base and a housing supply that is not meeting the demand generated by the growth that results in an unmet demand for housing,high prices and high rents. How did we get here?For these specific code changes tonight, it started with City Council adopting its fust ever, its first Affordable Housing Action Plan in 2016. That plan identified 15 action steps, including changes to zoning regulations. The This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of September 19, 2023. Page 10 changes in the zoning regulations were the only remaining action item not yet completed, and so it's been on our worklist. In 2019,the City adopted a Fair Housing Choice study, which reviewed impediments to accessing housing because of protected class such as race, gender or disability, as codified in the Federal Fair Housing Act. That study included recommendations and actions to affirmatively further fair housing in our community. It did include an extensive public input,targeted feedback from stakeholder interviews, a focus group,Fair Housing Survey,public events and a public adoption process. One of the most significant fair housing issues identified was a lack of affordable rental housing and improving housing choice is one of the many strategies recommended to help address that issue. The City did update its Affordable Housing Action Plan in 2022 and built off previous efforts in support of affordable housing. A number of public input sessions were held through that process, including a survey, general outreach activities, and targeted stakeholder meetings and other events. At the end of 2022,the City Council did adopt, as you know,your Strategic Plan, and one of the action steps included in the Strategic Plan is advancing and prioritizing recommendations out of the 2022 Affordable Housing Plan,which did have specific zoning code changes recommended in there. So as I said,we've been working towards this and have had several meetings leading up to this one. The proposed amendments are tied to the City's core values, shown here in the graphic for racial equity, social justice, and human rights, removing and addressing systemic barriers present in all facets of City Government. It does include our land use decisions and our land use regulations. The specific impact area of housing and neighborhoods,updating the zoning code encourages compact neighborhoods and diverse housing types and land uses, and addressing the unique needs of vulnerable populations and low to moderate income households. Again,the City Council's action plan specifically recommend advancing prioritized recommendations from the 2022 Affordable Housing Action Plan. As mentioned,there are multiple plans that support the proposed changes. The most important among them is the Comprehensive Plan. The proposed amendments tonight do align with the adopted land use policies of Iowa City 2030 Comprehensive Plan direction. Meaning that they can be adopted through a text amendment process. Other zoning code changes with more wide ranging impacts could be considered in the future. But we have identified as staff that those would require a more extensive engagement with the public and community because they would need to have Comprehensive Plan tie-ins that are not currently found in the code. The primary finding for adopting a code amendment is the consistency with the Comprehensive Plan. The Iowa City Comprehensive Plan encourages a mix of housing types within each neighborhood to provide options for households of all types and people of all incomes. It encourages development on smaller lots that conserve land, and allows for more affordable single-family housing options and promotes identifying and supporting infill development and redevelopment opportunities in areas where services and infrastructure are already in place. The City's Zoning Code implements the vision of the Comprehensive Plan, as well as the adopted policy direction, adopted actions, and recommendations of the studies that I've mentioned. So why didn't you engage with neighborhood associations is a question that we fielded? The proposed changes are based on existing policies and goals, and plans and studies reviewed and adopted by Council over the course of several years. These plans were developed after This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of September 19, 2023. Page 11 multiple rounds of outreach, including surveys,public meetings, focus groups, interviews. They were also reviewed and adopted through a public process. So the proposed amendments are meant to execute these adopted policies and goals. Why talk about zoning? Obviously,zoning is not the only tool available to the City, as we discuss things like housing choice and housing affordability. But it is a tool and it has a very specific process in which to be amended. Zoning regulations can restrict development and act as a barrier to creating a diverse housing stock or they can support and allow a diversity of housing options for our community. We are proposing amendments to the code that help ensure we have a zoning code that doesn't act as a barrier,but instead allows and encourages a diversity of housing types. The approximate 14 proposed changes included in this amendment can be grouped into five categories. The categories of the proposed zoning amendments include increasing flexibility for a range of housing types. By removing those barriers for housing types, it generally cost less than single- family detached homes. Things like townhomes, duplexes, accessory apartments, or dwelling units. They incentivize the development of income restricted affordable housing. Some of our proposals do talk specifically about income restricted housing and addressing fair housing issues to ensure persons with disabilities have equal access to housing. Um,there are-these are a prerequisite to enable the construction of housing units that are more affordable than what is currently allowed. The zoning changes complement other programs and directly- other programs that directly subsidize lower income households, including direct subsidies. There are still other barriers to affordable housing, such as cost,but what is proposed in this group of amendments tries to make sure that the zoning code is not one of them. So how does this help affordable housing? We're thinking about affordable housing in two different ways. First,housing affordability is a wicked problem. There's no one solution to the housing crisis, as there are many factors that contribute to it. Wages, cost of healthcare, cost of transportation, as well as the cost of housing. Although not the only factor,housing supply is one major contributor to the housing crisis. The construction of housing in Iowa City is not keeping up with demand. Some of the proposed amendments tonight are specifically focused on making it easier to build housing to help with the supply issue. The types of units that we are encouraging, like duplexes and attached single-family, are typically smaller units and cost less than the typical detached single-family home. Second,while we're proposing regulatory incentives for income restricted housing units is the other way sorry. These incentives,which come in the form of more units, i.e., density, increased heights and reduction in parking,will most likely be utilized by developers who specialize in building affordable housing. In our experience in other communities, density bonuses and other regulatory incentives for affordable housing are used in multifamily zones for multifamily projects where they can take advantage of the density bonus more fully by getting more units and the height is typically needed to accommodate those extra units. And the parking, again,reduction helps with the overall cost of the project. So let me walk get through those five different types of housing changes. You've seen these before in more detail, so I'll probably go through them more superficially than before. Um,but the fust round-the fust group having to do with increasing flexibility, includes four subcategories that include allowing duplexes more in mid block locations. Currently, they're restricted to corner lots only. Allowing townhome style multifamily uses where, This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of September 19, 2023. Page 12 um,townhome single-family uses are already allowed. Increasing the ability for second story multifamily and more commercial zones. And making the process to allow ground floor residential and commercial zones easier. And finally, treating assisted group living more similarly to multifamily uses. So these might look a little familiar. This is talking about duplexes. Again, as I said,we-the proposed amendments would allow these in mid block locations. Staff feels that these would likely be most readily utilized in greenfield development,meaning where there is no existing development now. A developer could include more duplexes in their proposed developments. Talking about townhome style multifamily,this is a, uh, apartment essentially which emulates,uh, attached single- family or a true townhome style development. Um, from these pictures, it's virtually impossible to tell one from the other just by simply looking at them. So the proposal encourages the development where it would have virtually no impact on what's already allowed to be built simply under the single-family style. So is the City proposing to get rid of single-family zoning and therefore single-family neighborhoods?Most single- family neighborhoods in the city already allowed duplex units and accessory apartments, also referred to as accessory dwelling units. However,the standards that need to be met to build these housing-to build these housing types are part of the reason we don't see many of them being built. We're proposing modifications to the standards for duplexes and as you'll hear later on in another meeting, accessory dwelling units to help-to help ensure that the City's zoning regulations, again, are not a barrier to these housing types. In short,we want to make it easier for these housing types to get built to help increase this housing choice and options in our community. Why aren't you restricting rentals? Zoning provides the rules for how land can be used and developed. It outlines what structures can be built and where. For housing,zoning regulates the type of housing that can be built. For example,zoning identifies where apartments, duplexes, and single- family homes can be located. Zoning does not regulate who occupies the units and whether they are owner-occupied or rented. In other words,zoning can regulate the use but not the users. The concerns staff has had around rentals are specifically regarding student rentals. Regulations aimed at restricting rentals in our community could have the unintended consequence of having a disproportionate negative impact on persons with lower incomes, special needs,persons with disabilities, and others. We want to make sure that our land use regulations advance inclusive policies that address housing needs for all. As I mentioned, one of those changes in this group has to do with assisted group living. Um,these are commonly called nursing homes,that,uh,the non jargon zoning term for those. This would simply be changing our regulations to regulate them more like the housing type that they are. The second group of standards have to do with modifying design standards,um,there's three main,uh, changes in this category. One of those is tied to duplexes,the middle one here. If we're going to change the standards about where duplexes can be allowed,then we need to also change the design standards that regulate which way the doorways face. If you're not on a comer lot, our current code would not make sense. It would also be eliminating,uh, some of the design standards for building materials while still retaining the design standards for building materials that actually have the most impact on a- on a building's design, ones that more directly address visual interest. So while we would be changing the base building materials for some multifamily buildings,we would retain the large number of other standards that are already in place. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of September 19, 2023. Page 13 And finally,we would simplify the waiver for townhome style multifamily parking standards. Um,this graphic shows where parking is limited currently. It would basically be changing those internal parking stalls amongst all the units to be treated equally instead of the end unit having additional regulations on it. The third category includes two proposed amendments. Um,they're largely related to lot width and sizes, as well as bedroom limits. Um, lot width and sizes--we have the intended impact of this code change would be to reduce some of the non-conforming lots that have-that are in existence now by changing the conventional zoning standards to be more similar to the form-based code zoning standards that we've most recently been adopting. So it would be slightly reducing lot sizes, lot widths, slightly reducing setbacks and changing and making those changes. In areas outside of the University hnpact Zone,there would be an increase in bedroom- on the number of bedrooms allowed in structures. The number of bedrooms are limited for duplex, attached single-family, and multifamily uses. Um,this would allow construction of additional bedrooms outside of the area closest to the University. Don't these changes undermine the City's neighborhood stabilization efforts? The City has invested a significant amount of resources and created all sorts of regulations to help stabilize neighborhoods within close proximity to the University. These efforts focused on the root causes of issues that may affect neighborhoods. Things like noise,upkeep, etc. The proposed changes do not affect those regulations, and there's actually an extensive list of things the City has engaged in over the last decade or so to address stabilization.Not least of which has been investing money in housing directly through the UniverCity Program to help reestablish owner occupancy in some neighborhoods. Um,we've also seen the historic-historic and conservation districts as a way to stabilize and,uh,preserve neighborhoods. There's been code changes related to parking, code changes related to the caps on number of bedrooms, also code changes regarding requirements for minimum open space and rear setbacks in districts most impacted. There's been code changes regarding the definition of bedroom sizes to ensure that minimum sizes obs- are observed in bedrooms. There's also been changes to the housing code. Um,the housing code is what regulates building and rentals. So annual inspections for many rental properties requiring,uh,permanent physical separation and duplex units,um,required shared living space for household living uses, and again, some of the other nuisances that can be generated are being addressed in the nuisance code for things like exterior maintenance. So that's just a short summary of the many things that also go into addressing those issues. The next category is the one most closely,um, associated with,uh, affordable housing when it is income restricted. This would be creating a bonus for affordable housing units in conventional zoning districts. A conventional zoning district would be the ones that are not form-based code districts. They're the ones that have been in existence the longest. Um,things like single-family, uh,zoning districts. This would be creating,uh, a bonus,uh, available in that district uh where there isn't currently one. Uh, it would be a bonus for allowing increased density if a certain number of units are provided as affordable housing for a certain period of time. So it's a 20%bonus for 20% of the units when they are reserved for 20 years. It would also be eliminating the minimum parking requirements for affordable housing. So is the City proposing that no new-that new housing no longer needs to provide on-site parking? We're proposing that income-restricted affordable housing units would not need to This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of September 19, 2023. Page 14 provide on street parking. The market rate units would still be subject to the on-site parking requirements in our code. So,uh, in previous meetings,Kirk walked you through the math on these. Essentially, as I said, these are for conventional zoning districts to have an option for utilization for increased density if- if affordable housing is provided, similar to what we've seen and implemented in Riverfront crossings and in our form- based code districts, andnd again,reducing the parking to eliminate the need for parking provision and the impact that has on a bottom line that makes-perhaps makes a project that was not affordable to a developer to undertake to actually undertake. And the fifth category has to do with fair housing. Uh,there are two standards here proposed to change. One is to create a simpler request for reasonable accommodation,which is a federally mandated uh,process that cities have to observe. And also to reclassify community service long term housing as a residential use. As I mentioned,reasonable accommodation is a federal process. We currently do allow for these in various ways through our code,but this would standardize it and make it more apparent as an option, and then reclassifying community service. So community service long term housing operated by a nonprofit currently are treated as institutional even though their actual function is actually just as a residence for someone to live. Finally, we're not-we're not- not only were the proposed code amendments identified in our local action and Strategic Plans,but they fit with national best practices,which have been tested and refined in other cities and counties, as well as being supported by research from multiple po-public policy institutes. What will happen if these changes are made?As we know,no one can predict with 100% certainty what will happen in the future. The analysis of the proposed changes included possible impacts of each based on a comparison with current regulations and a knowledge of past trends. Allowing a use does not necessarily mean it will be selected. By design,none of the proposed changes are expected to motivate drastic change to neighborhoods,they do increase opportunities and possibilities. As they occur gradually,there will be time to adjust standards as needed. For example,the City already has a single-family zone that currently allows duplexes throughout the block, that's the RS-12 zone. Staff recently have reviewed redevelopment within that zone to identify how the proposed change is related to dupex- duplex and attached single-family zones might impla- impact redevelopment in other single-family zones, especially those near downtown. What we found is that over the past 30 years, five single-family homes, which represents roughly 1% of lots zoned RS-12,were redeveloped into duplexes. That's similar to the number of properties in the same zone redeveloped from single- family to larger single-family. Over the same time period, 51 duplexes were converted back to or into single-family uses, compared to 31 single-family uses converted to duplexes across the entire city. In short,within the RS-12 zone,which is a zoning district that only exists in the core of the city,we've seen very few conversions. The consistency with the Comprehensive Plan, as I mentioned, is the primary factor or finding for a review of code amendments. The vision of the Comprehensive Plan supports creating attractive and affordable housing for all people,housing that is the foundation of healthy, safe, and diverse neighborhoods throughout our city. To that end,the plan discusses the need for a mix of housing types within neighborhoods to provide residential opportunities for a variety of households, along with integrated affordable housing options,that infill development should add to the diversity of housing options without compro- This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of September 19, 2023. Page 15 compromising neighborhood character or overburdening infrastructure, and that narrow- narrower lot frontages and smaller lot sizes are important to create opportunities for more moderately priced housing. Reinforcing those policies,the Comp Plan future land use category on the future land use map,which is the lowest density of residential class in an urban environment, does allow up to eight dwelling units per acre. The proposed changes to allow uses and a minimum lot requirements support that vision. The plan also mentions that when interpreting the future land use plan map, a diversity of housing types should be considered as one of the neighborhood design principles that applies to all developments. Overall,the proposed amendments are consistent with the City's current policy direction, including the Comprehensive Plan. So as far as development steps. I know-I'd like to show you guys this slide when it comes to all of our zoning actions, keeping in mind that IC2030 was adopted in 2013. The blue highlights this code change suite that we're proposing right now. Looking ahead,the City does anticipate revisiting the Comprehensive Plan in a more holistic way, and that's tentatively scheduled to kick off later this year or early next year and take a couple of years to complete. Obviously, as I mentioned,zoning is the implementation of Comprehensive Planning. So we would anticipate, if there's a Comprehensive Plan,there might be additional zoning code updates that would follow. So grounded in the goals of the Comprehensive Plan and directly supported by input received through actions as Strategic Plans, staff proposed the code changes as presented tonight. The Planning and Zoning Commission at their August 2, 2023 meeting,reviewed the zoning code amendments and recommended approval by a vote of 5-0. There were proposed changes to accessory dwelling unit regulations initially discussed,but the Planning and Zoning Commission has separated those out and those regulations would be considered at a later date under a separate ordinance.And that concludes my staff report, and I'm happy to answer questions. Teague: Thank you so much. And staff- councilors just jump right in. Harmsen: First of all, thank you for all the materials and the details. I just wanted to clarify,you had mentioned, I think you mentioned this in your presentation, I had it down as a question to ask, about the process that started back in February. Do I remember that right from my notes, I was scribbling pretty fast. So, could you speak a little bit more or could somebody speak a little bit more to that, like where these started and how they've gotten to here tonight. Russett: Um, sure, we can speak to that. Um,this actually started back in 2016 with the adoption of the Affordable Housing Action Plan,which identified action items related to zoning code changes to improve housing in our community. So that's where we,kind of, see this starting. And that was several years ago. But since then there were more plans that were adopted;the Fair Housing Choice Study in 2019,the update to the Affordable Housing Action Plan in 22,the Council Strategic Plan. But in terms of the meetings with the Planning and Zoning Commission, our conversations with them started in February of this year,where we introduced the proposed changes. We got more specific at a meeting in August, I believe, and then there was another meeting in wait,not October, July-July and August. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of September 19, 2023. Page 16 Harmsen: Thank you. Thomas: Thanks for your presentation. One question I had would be-would be with the University Impact Zone. When was that map,the limits of that area last evaluated? Russett: Was it 2005? Lehmann: It was a little later in 2005. I want to say it might have been around 2012, it might have been slightly before that. So it was after 2005 when the initial zoning code was adopted. It was adopted in one of the suites of neighborhood stabilization efforts that the City adopted after that point. So it could have been 2008, it might have been 2012. But it was around the time that the City Council increased parking standards for properties within that area specifically. That's really what it was focused on at that time,were the parking issues affiliated with it. Dunn: I got a quick question for you guys, a couple of them actually. The fust one is for you, Eric. And it's just to better understand the boundaries of our discussion today. Given that the proposal for ADUs started out in this whole tranche of changes but has now been removed, is discussion about the pros and cons of ADUs and all the technicalities of that, would that be considered germane to our discussion? Goers: Only if it relates to the ordinance that is presently before Council for consideration. I would say the more-the bulk of the substantial considerations for that will follow once that item comes through Planning and Zoning separately, as Planning staff has mentioned. Dunn: So for the most part,no? Goers: I think that's a fair characterization. Dunn: Yeah-yeah. The second question I have is in relation to the bonuses for affordable housing. I'm interested in getting a better understanding on how affordability is defined in this proposal. Lehmann: Sure. So we are using the terms of affordability that are generally used for most of our federal programs that we administer. So for owner-occupied properties, it would be 80% of the area median income. Usually I've got a feeling for what that number is and I can't think of it off the top of my head, so I apologize for that. For renter-occupied households would be right around 60% of the area median income. And then depending on the property type, it would affect either a price that housing would have to be sold for, for owner-occupied housing, or there's a rental cap that they would have to abide by that would include both rent and the price of utilities as well. So it's basically using what we use for our federal programs as standards. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of September 19, 2023. Page 17 Dunn: Do we have any authority to-to change that number or is there a reason for why that number particularly was chosen or those standards were particularly chosen? Lehmann Sure. So we wanted to stay consistent with our other federal programs. Um,those are maximums within federal programs. Uh, I know that that's been discussed before. As far as I understand,those are the federal maximums for those generally. Thomas: I have another question on the 4A,the create density bonus for affordable housing units in conventional zoning districts. The 20% density bonus,when 20% of the units in a development are income restricted,um,how would that apply to a duplex? Lehmann: Sure, so 20% of the units would have to be affordable. In the case of a duplex, it would be defined on the size of the project. If it's a duplex,then one of the units would have to be affordable, one of the units,uh,would not be affordable. So that 20%would be the minimum. Of course,they could always go above that if- if that was part of the project. Harmsen: Also, a question of 4A,uh, 20% for 20% for 20 years is kind of what I got from that. But as I was going through,um, some of the other materials,the county's report, I forget the exact name of it,uh,but they actually had mentioned I'm pretty sure I saw in there something that more typically 30 to 39 years,uh,was a number that that threw out, if I read that report correctly. So where does the 20 years come from? Lehmann: Sure. So there's a number of different ranges that different communities use. Many communities are also able to mandate a percentage of affordable housing,which is something that's not possible in Iowa. Uh,when it comes to affordable housing incentives like this that are voluntary, it is the case that you do need folks to opt into it. Developers, whether they be nonprofit or for profit would be opting in to use that incentive. So it needs to be an incentive that people will actually voluntarily use. Otherwise, it does not produce affordable housing. So it's a delicate act of balancing more of an art than a science. Uh, so at this point,uh,that's what we think might be an attractive bonus for those uses. Um, it could be changed in the future or at some other time as well. Teague: I have a question for Eric,uh,related to that. So,the affordability period that we have typically is 20 years. If we were to engage-well,we already have some contracts with some developers that are abiding by that-is there any,uh,possibility that the state could come and change that,um, language in an existing contract and have us remove it. Should they preempt us from affordability? Goers: So are you asking whether the State could come in and change the law mandating or essentially eliminating some aspect of a currently in place contract we have? Teague: Yes. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of September 19, 2023. Page 18 Goers: Well, in- in incumbent with any contract is that it's legal-that is that it's legal to enforce. And if- if I understand your hypothetical correctly,the State were to essentially make it illegal for us to enforce that provision, I think that the other party to that contract would have a pretty good argument that they no longer had to do so. Yes. Teague: Okay. Dunn: I had another question. Um,this one is specifically relating to the whole concept of public engagement. And I apologize sincerely if- if this was, uh,what was discussed in response to Councilor Harmsen's fust question. I was digging into some of our zoning code to get a better understanding of 4A and the changes that it brings about. But that is just to say, um, I'm interested in hearing a little bit more about the public engagement that was gone through to this point. We have a lot of folks, I presume, in the audience there and in the community who feel as though,um,this is something that has come out of nowhere,that they have not been consulted. Um, and I just want to have a better understanding of your perspective on how that's gone,whether or not there are things that can be improved on in the process in the future. General thoughts from you. Russett: Yeah, I can take that one. Um, I guess the -the position that we're coming from is that we have adopted several plans since 2016 that have included their own,uh,public outreach process. All the plans that Danielle spoke of. The Affordable Housing Action Plans,the Strategic Plan,the Fair Housing Choice Study, all of those plans were adopted by Council and had a public outreach process, either through,you know, surveys attending events,uh,the public process itself before Council. And there were specific action items and policy goals within those documents that were identified as important and as City Planners,you know,we're kind of responsible for our zoning code,we felt it was important to move those action items forward. So that's why we are proposing the changes that are before you tonight. Dunn: So my understanding is,uh,that essentially,the outreach has been done in years prior. So in the immediate term, and I'm not trying to characterize this in any particular way, I'm just trying to understand. Uh, so in the immediate term,there was less public outreach done because of that prior outreach in years past? Russett: Yeah,that's accurate. We're-we're kind of seeing this as implementing those plans and moving forward with those action items through these proposed changes. Dunn: Okay. Thank you. Taylor: Several times, uh,the parking requirement came up in your discussion and presentation. I had a couple kind of a two part question related to that. Was there any correlation with the transit department as far as how that might affect available routes if you're not requiring, if they're parking on the streets, and we all know parking is at a premium in Iowa City on the street parking. If you're encouraging them to take the bus, is that really truly going to be an option?Did you kind of assess that and look at that?And the other This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of September 19, 2023. Page 19 part would be that we've had a number of multi units built over the last few years with parking included. Have you noticed a lesser need for folks in those buildings to have parking? Is there any way to track that? Lehmann: Well, I mean, I can speak from the perspective of for this parking reduction, it would only be for those units that are affordable and regulated for 20 years. So in most cases, you might see a Li-Tech project, a low-income housing tax credit project that might utilize the parking reduction. Ah, if you're building a multifamily building,that's market rate,there would be no parking reduction affiliated with it. Ah, if they provided a certain percentage as affordable, like 20%to get the bonus, for example, and then 20% of those affordable units wouldn't need to provide a parking reduction,um,you know, it is generally the case that those affordable units are less likely to, ah,to have independent vehicles or need those parking spaces that are on site. There is still on-street parking that's available in many circumstances. Ah, it's also the case that those are the users who are most likely to use transit and that we would want to encourage to use transit and so we really see this is, um,you know, allowing those developers who are providing those income-restricted units as a way of saying this is the parking that we know we need. We know that the minimum standards that apply to market rate units don't apply to us and so they can continue to provide parking,but they don't or have to provide parking for those affordable units. Um,there is a second part of that question. Taylor: Have-have you noticed any like with a number that we've been building and supplying out there and including parking,uh, is there a decreased need for that parking that they've provided? Lehmann: I- I do believe that we've heard from developers that if they could provide less parking,they would. They've indicated that when they have parking on site,that it hasn't been fully utilized and that's what we've heard. We don't track that independently though. Fruin: Yeah, and I'd like to just ju-jump in on this one because I hear about it frequently. Matter of fact, I had a discussion with a- a prospective developer today that was,um, saying that our parking requirements are too high for those larger multi-family. So, um, I- I think that's a common refrain that I hear is that our parking requirements for- for multifamily units that-I'm talking particularly large multifamily units-are,um, very expensive and a huge driver of cost for those,uh,multifamily structures. Taylor: Thank you. Teague: All right. Thank you all. Yes.Now this is an opportunity for anyone in the public that would like to speak on this agenda item. I wanted to,uh, get a sense of how many people wanted to speak. If you can raise your hands,please. All right. We're going to,uh, start with three minutes and,um,we'll, if I need to adjust, I think I saw about 10 hands, so that'll be about 30 minutes. But if I need to adjust, I'll let us know along the way. There are stickers in the back that could help save a little time if you wanted to write your name out and then place it in this basket. But at this time I'll ask people to stand,uh,kind of in This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of September 19, 2023. Page 20 a line or keep the line moving and come to the podium and speak and please state your name and city you're from. McGuire: Hi. I'm- I'm Linda Mcguire, and I'm from Iowa City. And I've lived here nearly 50 years,uh,mostly in the neighborhood. I- I wanted to ask the Council to,um, slow this process down as much as you can. Whether that's we'll leave it up to Eric to how to do that to continue the hearing. Um, I want to acknowledge the wonderful work that the staff has done in bringing together the research and the package and the possibilities to address issues that we really need to address here. Um,the reason I'm asking you to slow this process down is that it's very hard to say no when there's such a good effort that has come through, and Planning and Zoning,um,has done it. But,um, the public found out about the particulars of this-correct me if I'm wrong-but in July, and it's so complicated, it's so big, it's so fast, it's so confusing,that it's very hard for us to e- even if we don't have input to know what to expect o- out of this. And,um, and so unfortunately,there seems to be a little bit of an adversarial tone here between the staff and the public, and I really want to try to diffuse that. I think that,um,we all want to have good development, address the issues that we have,but this process has been too fast. So whether,um,you know,how- however you can slow that down,um, I think, I- I think, ah, I'd ask you to do that and give us more time for consideration,particularly about how these changes are going to affect different neighborhoods. Um,we-we've been trying to suss that out amongst ourselves in the neighborhoods and we're having a hard time and we haven't had a chance to engage with staff about that. What can we expect on a certain block the changes would be?And we-we really, ah,would-would like to know that. So I would ask to-to slow us down in whatever way that we can. Teague: Thank you. And Linda, did you sign in by chance? Okay and all those that have their hands raised, if you're able to stand and if and you're not able to stand,you can maybe raise your hand. And then I'll call you up. We'll take anyone at the podium at this time. Welcome. Please state your name and the city you're from. Creech: My name is Jonathan Creech and I am originally from Frankfort, Illinois,but I am currently residing in Iowa City. Um, I do believe that all of the proposed amendments will to some degree, facilitate the creation of affordability housing opportunities, and enhance housing choices within neighborhoods, focusing on equity and low,um, income households. With this being said, I believe that Amendment 3 will accomplish these goals most effectively. The central ideas behind this proposed amendment is shrinking dimensional standards,removing barriers to the construction of accessory dwe- dwelling units, and conforming lots, all of which are reasonable and beneficial. The Urban Institute published an article March 29 of this year, explaining through the use of quantitative data analysis. They found adding land restrictions tends to increase median rent prices while loosening restrictions is associated with an increase in supply of new houses. Similar to what the Urban Institute found, implementing these changes, amendments,um, excuse me, similar to what the Urban Institute found, implementing these changes will lead to a dramatic decrease in cost per person. If amendment 3 is passed, a total of 16.7% of current non-conforming lots will conform to Iowa City code. From an economic This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of September 19, 2023. Page 21 standpoint,this is great news. In the free market, Iowa City is a part of,there will be a few crucial impacts that are extremely likely to occur if more houses are built on the land that was previously non-conforming. The event of having more houses than before will set the market into a temporary surplus and if housing price is consistent with the values of the previous homes sold,to prevent this surplus,the prices of homes will likely be lowered,helping make the new neighborhoods more affordable to low-income households. The market will soon reach a new equilibrium of quantity of houses demanded and prices sellers are willing to give their houses up. For this movement will be effective in reaching the goals to create affordability housing opportunities while enhancing neighborhoods with-with a special focus on equity and low-income households. But I would like to warn against the fact that we are shrinking land size, and this could decrease value that home purchase owners often look for. They like a lot of land, and this would decrease land size by a sufficient amount. Thank you. Teague: Thank you. Welcome. Millbrook: Hi, my name is uh, Chad Millbrook, and I'm a resident of Iowa City. Um, I came here tonight to voice support for the proposed zoning amendments. I believe these changes are an important small step in beginning to address many issues that cities like ours face today such as limited housing choice, infrastructure,resilience, environmental sustainability, and the racially exclusive history of mandatory single-family zoning. The ability to more broadly introduce duplexes and zero lots with their lower costs within the existing fabric of the city's single-family neighborhoods, increases the opportunity for all Iowa City residents to have freedom in choosing where they live. It also allows local stakeholders, such as individual homeowners and small scale developers,to choose to alter their properties to meet housing demand in an incremental, cost effective manner, rather than relying on large developments. Um,the simpler the zoning code and development process becomes,the lower the barrier of entry for creating housing become. Incremental Housing development within the existing network of streets, utilities and services, as opposed to new greenfield development,reduces the financial burden of infrastructure maintenance on city funds. This allows for a more financially resilient city that has more budgetary flexibility for other programs that can improve the community. Last, I wanted to touch on the too often overlooked history of exclusionary single-family zoning code and the racial segregation of our cities. The US Supreme Court forbid racially explicit housing ordinances in 1917,however, cities adopted single-family codes to prevent integration in neighborhoods, as black Americans were unable to access the federal mortgage programs that provided homeownership to white Americans. While the present zoning amendments, or any zoning changes for that matter, can do little to rectify the immense damage caused by segregation and red lining, allowing exclusive single-family zones to continue to endure in our communities as untenable. Thank you. Teague: Thank you. And Chad, did you have a sticker or? Millbrook: Yeah, sticker. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of September 19, 2023. Page 22 Teague: Thank you. Welcome. Recker: Uh,my name is Laura Recker. I'm a freshman at the University of Iowa, and I'm speaking on behalf of my microec,uh,microenomics group. Um,we believe adopting amendment Number 4, create regulatory incentives for affordable housing, is the best possible change to Title 14. Adopting the policies laid out in amendment Number 4,will help alleviate pressure on the housing supply and the wallets of residents. By making new, affordable,multifamily housing projects cheaper for develop- developers,the city can increase housing supply, lessen the current-,the current market shortage, and drive prices down. Multifamily developments should be encouraged in the current housing market, as they are not only cheaper for residents,but also make more efficient use of space. The creation of cheaper and more abundant housing for residents should be a priority for the city during the ongoing housing crisis.Not only will the construction of these new units reap economic benefit for residents,but the city and local businesses as well. For example,nonprofit Habitat for Humanity states more affordable housing leads to higher tax revenues,more local employment opportunities, and higher job retention within the city. Thank you. Teague: Thank you. A familiar face. Welcome. Sullivan: Hello, Mayor and Council,uh,Rod Sullivan,uh, 514 North Linn Street in Iowa City. I'm a 40-year resident of Iowa City and have been working on affordable housing issues almost as long. Um, I want to start out with a very sincere compliment. I mentioned 40 years here Iowa City, and that's 40 years of, I think, fairly closely watching City Councils. I think this seven person Council is the most committed to affordable housing of any that I've ever seen in that 40 years. And so I want to start out by thanking you for that. I think that's great. I think we have a lot of work that remains to-to be done. I am concerned about a couple of- of the proposals here. Item 4 that was brought up makes a lot of sense to me because you are uh,talking about a quid pro quo,there's a requirement. Uh, I think if you lower the cost to developers,you've done one thing,you've lowered the cost for developers. The idea that they will somehow out of the kindness of their heart turn around and turn that into more affordable housing is a bit of a stretch. And again, we've got 40 years of watching to see that that doesn't necessarily happen. I think you get affordable housing one of two ways. You incentivize it,you require it, and both work, and I know that Iowa City has a history of doing both, and I would encourage you to continue to do both. But any of these things that are put forward that do not, in fact, require affordable housing, as a result, I would say you are not going to get affordable housing as a result. So I want to encourage you with these uh-uh,recommendations, and any recommendations that you have in the future,to think about making the affordability piece a requirement. If it's not required, I think we have to assume you will not, in fact, get it because the market has failed,uh,to provide affordable housing here in Iowa City for at least the 40 years I know of And I would assume it's going to continue to fail to do that unless we have some sort of government intervention requiring it. So,uh, I just hope that you folks will consider making the tweaks necessary to make uh, affordability a requirement of all of these conditions. And I thank you for all your efforts. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of September 19, 2023. Page 23 Teague: Thank you. Welcome,Mayor Throgmorton. Throgmorton: Good evening, friends. My name is Jim Throgmorton. I put this down here I guess? Teague: Yes,please. Throgmorton: All right. Could I ask you a question without getting into the time thing?A question for clarification? Teague:No Thogmorton: Is that okay? Teague:No. But we can-you can speak whatever you want to the Council at this- at this time. Throgmorton: How can I ask my question then? Teague:Not during this time. Outside of the Council meeting. Throgmorton: Sorry. Okay, good. Okay. The cost of housing in Iowa City is high and escalating, I commend the City staff for considering how amending the zoning code can help alleviate the problem. I agree with and generally support most of the propose,how do I get into this thing,most of the support,help. Thanks. I can't see that. Great. Russett: There you go. Throgmorton: Thanks. I-I-I can't see the thing. It's a vision problem. Sorry. Okay. I apologize. Um, I agree with and generally support most of the proposed amendments. I especially support efforts to open up existing and future low density residential zoning districts to a more diverse range of housing types,but I am not fully on board. The amendments constitute the largest changes in the zoning code in 20 years. If adopted,they are likely to affect every residential neighborhood in the city. I wish the City staff had involved the general public early in the process of developing the proposed amendments. Doing so would have demonstrated the City's commitment to democratic governance,while also enhancing the legitimacy of its final actions. Consider a residents- a neighborhood residents point of view. The fust challenge residents face is to understand the staffs reports. This is no easy task,partly because the technical language of zoning is so unfamiliar to most people. Adding to the difficulty is that the changes vary by zoning category. My own neighborhood,which is shown up there, contains at least 12 different types of zones,plus three historic overlay districts and one overlay conservation district. The second challenge residents face is to determine how the changes might affect their neighborhoods on the ground. This is a daunting task that exceeds the capabilities of normal people trying to live their lives. It calls for collaboration and dialogue between the This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of September 19, 2023. Page 24 neighborhood leaders and the City's Planning staff. To help me understand, I decided to focus on the medium density residential RS-8,parts of the North side that lie outside the historic preservation districts. Teague: Thank you. Throgmorton: I get two more minutes. Teague: Sorry. Thank you. Throgmorton: Can I come back after everybody's spoke? Teague:No.No. Yup. Throgmorton: All right. Throgmorton: Thank you. Teague: Welcome. Yes. Ferree: Hi. I'm Kelcey Patrick Ferree. I'm an Iowa City resident. Um, I have been coming before Council,uh many times to talk about zoning issues. It's something that I've been talking to you about since probably at least 2015,when Iowa City was found to be the 14th most economically segregated small city in America. Um,the City has been working on that since then, and I really appreciate all the changes that have happened in that time. There have been multiple studies,there have been multiple input opportunities,but the fact is that there hasn't been a large systemic change like this one, for this large systemic problem. Um,what got me started on this in the first place is my kids. My kids go to one of the very high FRI, schools in Iowa City,Alexander Elementary. And the fact that the city is economically segregated has been a huge burden on the school system. So I'm asking you to make changes that will allow the city to become desegregated. I know this code change by itself isn't going to do that,but the way things are zoned right now, economic desegregation isn't even a possibility. So I am thanking you today for considering a systemic solution to a systemic problem. Thank you. Teague:Thank you. And you don't have to take it off the sticker,you can just put it in the basket up there. Tim F. That would be nice to know,the're kind of hard to get off. Teague: Yeah-yeah-yeah. Tim F. So my name is Tim, I'm an Iowa City resident. I want to kind of- I just want to reiterate a couple of points that I've heard earlier um, from other students who are speaking um, as well as from other members of the community. Um,the proposal that staff has put in This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of September 19, 2023. Page 25 front of you is not some brand new policy idea that they came up out of the blue. These are textbook evidence based policy choices that we are now trying to implement within our community to catch up with other communities that have already implemented these to address the systemic issue of affordable housing. One point that hasn't come up that I think is kind of interesting, is that these policy changes aren't only going to impact housing affordability. They impact a lot of other things that are part of the Strategic Plan from the City Council, and that especially includes environmental issues. The more dense our neighborhoods are,the closer they are to public transportation,the less people who are relying on personal cars for transportation,the less carbon we're emitting in our city. I think that's a good thing, and it's kind of an impact that we haven't discussed so far today. Um, so I just wanted to bring that up. Um, one last point, it seemed like there was some interest on the Council about parking policy. If you are interested in that,there's a great book by Donald Shoup called The High Price of Free Parking. Um, it's a long book,but it's a page turner, and if you are interested in parking policy, I would highly encourage you guys to go there. It's at the library, I checked it out last year, it was a great policy book. All right,thank you. Teague: Thank you. Welcome. Kubby: Hi, it's a great wonky book suggestion. I'm really excited that there are so many people from the student body here speaking at a City Council meeting. There are a couple of things I really want to say yeah too, about these changes. Teague: Give us your name in the city you're from? Kubby: Oh, I'm sorry. My name is Karen Kubby and I live in Iowa City. Teague: Thank you. Kubby: Um, one of them is the smaller lots, that's something that City has talked about for a really long time, and the other one is increasing the time frame for the affordability. A lot of projects I know about in our community are 10 years, and that decade comes around really quick. I wouldn't mind the 30-39 years that Sean was referring to, so I hope that you'll have some discussion about that. The other thing that I hope that you'll have discussion about is having the definition of affordability, especially for the rental units to be 50% of median income. The median income in Johnson County is pretty high, and if we really want to create units that are going to help people that need the most help with housing switching from 60-50 will help in that regard. There are three things I hope I will hear Council discuss a little bit. One is,how do these regulations help us get--there was one picture where there was a blue duplex on the top that looked really great,because I know sometimes affordability and kind of neighborhood integrity and design that fits in are two high values that are in conflict. And so how do these regulations help with those design issues so that when there is increased density, it doesn't change the experience on the street? So I hope that you'll have some discussion about that.Number 2,um,how does the community help relieve development pressure to re- if you have higher density, This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of September 19, 2023. Page 26 to relieve the pressure of developers offering large sums of money for lots to re-develop? And thirdly,how do the accessory building discussion that has been taken out by planning and zoning and talked about separately,how-how does that impact how you think about these regulations? Should they be talked about together?And continue the public hearing so that you can understand how these two things work together, and make them work together really well. Thanks. Teague: Thank you. Welcome. Weiner: Thank you. I'm back. Teague: Yes. Weiner: Janice Weiner, Iowa City. I wanted to speak to this item briefly this evening because it's something that I've been advocating for for a number of years. It's been a long standing action item left over from the original Affordable Housing Plan. And I really want to thank staff for their excellent presentation. We all know, and a number of people have mentioned,that affordable housing is,has been the elephant in the room here in Iowa City for many years. We have commissions and plans,we've-we've made good progress, and it still remains stubbornly difficult. In my view,the items in this ordinance are the result- are the result of extensive work aimed at continuing to expand affordable housing solutions. And I think we won't really know who will be able to take advantage of it unless we try it. And then you'll need to give it some time. I can imagine it could reap benefits that you may not even have considered. So down the block from where I live, east of City High, an older couple bought the ranch house next door. They gutted,redid it,refurbished the inside, and moved in. They wanted to stay in the neighborhood,but they didn't need as much house as they had. Then they sold a house next door, and a younger couple with kids moved in. I could imagine that the- for about the same money they could have gutted the ranch,built a duplex with zero entry,been able to age in place, had their kids move into the larger house next door, and had an affordable unit there next to them,that would help their-them in their o- older years get some income,but also help a younger family that doesn't have so much money and help the school district as well getting more kids in there. So there is-we need to encourage this density in different housing options in our non core neighborhoods,much as we really did with the form- based code. Every effort improves the situation. You have the luxury to experiment in a good way. You're local government,you can always change it down the line. You can- you can-you can have this as a-you can pilot it, see how it works, and pursue other ideas simultaneously. How do you eat an elephant? One bite at a time. I urge you to take this bite, I urge you to pass this ordinance,whether now or in the future, if you decide to delay,because we really need these changes for density, and affordable housing in our future. Thank you. Teague: Thank you. Welcome,please state your name and city you're from? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of September 19, 2023. Page 27 DeGraw: Sharon Degraw and I'm from Iowa City. Um, so I too would like to thank staff for putting the time into this-the proposal. Um, I can tell it took a very long time to put together and it's well thought out. But there are parts that have me a little anxious. I have been following the zoning code amendments recommended for Council to approve. The code amendments are a major- are major, and can have destabilizing effects for our most walkable neighborhoods near the downtown and close to the UI campus. Making the code changes available to the public in early July, approximately two-and-a-half months ago, is too short a time to reveal to us and to begin the process of passing them. It's unfair to the 30-50% of owner-occupied residents living in the University Impact Zone. And I would say long term resi- long term renters also, especially to people in the areas that are unprotected by historic or conservation districts. Please ask staff to take the time to meet with neighborhood association leaders, and concerned residents. There is time for conversation, and room for improvement. It's not an issue of nimbyism, it's an issue of giving a gift in the form of an upzoning to landlord developers who stand to profit greatly. And I think when we get to the stage of the ADUs being in the discussion,that's what I'm referring to also. I trust that Council and staff are truly interested in creating affordable housing. Our best chance is to work with the nonprofit organizations that specialize in housing that is affordable to find ways for non profits to buy lots and develop the affordable housing that's needed. For now, I would like to ask Council to remove the University Impact Zone from the areas being considered for the rezoning code changes. Thank you. Teague: Thank you. Can I get a motion to receive correspondence? Dunn: So moved. Teague: Moved by Dunn. Harmsen: Second Harmsen. Teague: Seconded by Harmsen. All in favor say aye. Aye. (Voice Vote)Any opposed?Motion passes 6-0. Welcome. Carlson: My name is Nancy Carlson. I live at 1002 East Jefferson Street, in the RS-12 zone in the University impact area. And I would like to talk about affordable housing because in my area, affordable housing is very important. The vast majority of us who now live there probably rented for a long period of time, and when we finally were able to buy a house,we were very excited. We made a commitment. For most of us a commit-the biggest commitment we will ever make in our life, and we want to honor that commitment,but we're asking the City to honor that commitment with us. I gave you two sheets,uh, one is the uh,the construction,the development that has gone on in my neighborhood. If you notice, a lot-there has been a lot of development in my neighborhood. There are 19 instances. Of those 19 instances, all of them are aimed towards students. The houses that were torn down and the duplexes were put up,were, are now occupied by students. There is only one instance uh, it's- I call it the pumpkin This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of September 19, 2023. Page 28 house, it's over on the right hand corner. That is the only house that was moved in by Max Yokum that has managed to maintain its status as an owner-occupied house. So I know what the target audience is in our area. It is students. We have large houses, little houses,tiny houses, expensive houses, less expensive houses, apartments, duplexes. We have every kind of housing that you can have. But the vast majority of it is aimed toward students. For us,we already have what the other neighborhoods should be working toward, and we are trying to protect that. If you look at the little photograph that's in the folder,that is the other part of the development in our neighborhood. That is the 700 block,the north side of the 700 block of Jefferson. All of those houses at one time could have been bought as affordable. They are now all owned by one developer. They will be rental units for students for 40 or 50 years until he dies. I would please ask that you consider the University Impact Zone separately from the rest of the city simply because we are already where the city wants to go and we are fighting to stay there. Thank you. Teague: Thank you. Would anyone else like to address this topic?Welcome. Knote: Hey there. Thanks. I'm Jarod Knote. I live on Market around the comer from Nancy. Um, I think I'll just reflect some of the comments that others have said uh,you know, as a relatively new uh,resident in Iowa City, I love it here, it's fantastic uh, and while I try to think of myself as an engaged person in town,there is -as I have-you know,I do work 70 hours, 80 hours a week, as many people do. And so it's a little bit difficult to sometimes find uh,the opportunity to fully digest big substantial changes like the one that's being put forth. And frankly have dialogue with other folks who live in all different neighborhoods. Uh, and so I think uh, I guess my ask,my request is perhaps to provide a little bit of time for- for those of us who seek to be engaged and are engaged and are talking with our neighbors and talking with folks to have a little bit more time just to,to speak to one another,to talk to staff,to figure out and have a more robust conversation. Because I think,you know,what I'm hearing are uh, some really great points some- some- some- some frankly as a quantitative uh, financial person myself, I think some misguided interpretations of- of where markets work and where they don't work,uh, and lots of extant examples of that. And so I think applying models where they don't actually work uh, is a good example.Nancy, I think you do a nice job of commenting uh, on extant examples in. And the other gentlemen were uh,required-making requirements uh, as part of a trade uh,to get to a particular outcome. That sounds really reasonable. Uh, so I guess uh,the-to kind of sum it up, I'm super excited by-by some of the content,but it's a lot to get through. Uh, and so I guess what I would just echo is a request for a little bit more time,to, to- for us to engage uh, collectively on what feels like a really important topic. Uh, so thanks and good to meet y'all. Teague: Thank you. Anyone else like to address this topic? Seeing no one else in person or online,before I close the public hearing uh, Councilors,we've heard from staff,we've read P&Z. Grace: Mayor,Andrew uh,has his hand raised. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of September 19, 2023. Page 29 Teague: Has his hand? Grace: Yes. Dunn: I just want to talk when it- when it gets to Councilor discussion. Teague: Great. Um,we've heard from staff,reviewed P and Z materials,heard from the public at this time. So want to know if people are inclined to uh,vote along with P and Z. And then Councilor Harmsen,you're going to have to speak your vote if you are inclined or well inclined or not inclined. Goers: Councilor Dunn. Oh. Teague: Yes, Councilor Dunn. Dunn: I am inclined. Teague: Okay. Uh, if I understand correctly,we are through uh,4-2. So I'm going to close the public hearing. 2. Consider an Ordinance(first consideration) Teague: Could I get a motion for fust consideration? Bergus: So moved Bergus. Harmsen: Second Harmsen. Teague: All right. Council discussion. Dunn: If I could take it away, I'd appreciate it. Teague: Yeah. Dunn: Uh, so I have quite a bit of thoughts uh,here, so my,my apologies if this isn't as organized as I would otherwise want it to be. Uh, I want to start with two I think of the easier things to address. One part is a question uh, for staff for clarification. Uh,the fust part is though,to acknowledge, again,the student engagement that we have seen in,uh, in today's meeting,uh,both in terms of what we have seen with contact uh,on line,uh, as well as people actually coming in and talking with the Council uh, and giving their thoughts on- on this really important uh,proposal before us. Uh, I really love to see that. Thank you to all of the students in the room that are participating in this project- in this process,um, it's, it's absolutely vital that everyone in the community take part in and in making sure that our community is as good as it possibly can be. And you're making an immense contribution, especially as many of you are studying economics. Uh, an This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of September 19, 2023. Page 30 immense contribution that some of us uh,may have less of experience with. So thank you again for that. Uh,my second point is just to ask a question uh, on behalf of uh, former Mayor, Throgmorton. In his comments to us that he emailed,uh, let me pull this up through, apologies. Uh,there was one clarification question for us. Okay. So at the bottom of his-his document,this is the one in the packet,uh,he writes, "during the second of the recent open houses about ADU, I spoke with Kirk and Anne Russett about whether the height bonus and other incentives for new affordable ADUs could apply to new developments containing,uh, one or two units" Uh,he writes that he might have misunderstood but thought that he heard one of them say yes and the other say no. Um, could staff clarify this-uh,this question? Teague: Yes. Staff is going to come up. Sitzman: Thank you for that question. My apologies. I meant to actually touch on that in my,uh, presentation about the,um, incentives. The way staff would interpret the way the incentives are structured,they would not apply to ADUs. They would only apply to the principal structure. So if the principal structure were the single-family home or duplex, that would be the math on which that percentage would be calculated. An accessory unit can exist as a principal, so therefore it's not a unit on its own, and density is calculated by-by units per acre. So the ADUs and the incentives would not,uh,mix,the incentive that could not be used or calculated or attributed to the accessory dwelling unit. Dunn: Okay. Thank you. Uh,the next question I have,uh, is for Eric. Um, Eric, I'm wondering if you could go over,uh, City's authority to require affordable housing just,you know, based on the world that we live in,the context of our legislation. Goers: Certainly. Thank you. Uh, as Council is aware,the State, from time to time,uh,preempts things that we do or wish to do and this is one of those occasions. The City made an effort to limit,uh,rental caps. That's one example. You've, Councilor Dunn,asked about affordable housing. Um,we,uh, as you know, do require it in certain circumstances. It is in Riverfront,uh, Crossing district, in which that's a form-based code and whenever folks are coming to us,they are inevitably looking for an upzoning,that is the requirement is going to be, or their new zoning will make their property more valuable for their ability to develop at a higher density and so forth. And often that is in a redevelopment setting in which there are,um,units of older housing, older dwelling units that are being demolished. Presumably those dwelling units are affordable,not because they're mandated to be,but just because they're older and smaller, and so consequently are often cheaper. Our office has felt that we are justified in requiring,uh,uh, affordable housing percentage in those kind of rezonings,much like we believe that is sustainable and when we're annexing new property, and voluntary annexations and greenfield development and so forth,we feel that that's appropriate there because again,you've got a significant upzoning, and so there's not a constitutional taking kind of argument,uh,there, or at least that would be a difficult argument to make. So I'm sorry for the long-winded response Councilor Dunn,um,but in- I know there was one commenter who said you should just This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of September 19, 2023. Page 31 require affordable housing,period. And,um,unfortunately, I don't believe that we can do that in- in every case. Thank you. Dunn: So I guess my-my question then becomes,you know, if- if we are in- in a sort of effect upzoning a large portion of the community,um, if people choose to make changes to their-their properties or if they were to take down,uh, and redevelop a property,um, are you saying that there's-there's likely not an avenue for us to require affordable housing in this context, similar less- similarly to how we would with repair costs. Goers: I would agree with the last part that I don't think,uh,we can require it here,uh,because I'm not sure I would agree that we would consider this and upzoning. If the zoning rule remain the same,um, for the properties unless, of course,they're seeking a rezoning. Um, but otherwise, it's just the requirements and the allowances,uh, for each zone will be changing and- and you know, in some instances,we'll be becoming more generous in that more,uh, density can be used. But in answer to your kinda underlying question, I think that no- I don't think we can require it in every instance, I think it needs to be on a voluntary basis. Dunn: Okay. Thank you. All right. I promise on getting to the end of- end of my comments here, I just wanted to get some of those questions answered fust. Um, so the final two things I want to discuss are,um,the economics of- of this proposal and the whole question that we have before us,this whole problem of affordable housing,um, and a discussion of- of public involvement. I think the discussion of public involvement is going to be a little bit easier to address, so I'm going to start with that. Um, I- I certainly understand the frustrations all around,uh,that we're-that we're dealing with. Likely frustration from staff,uh,who-who feel,um, and can demonstrate that public,uh, involvement has been a part of this policy development process nearly the entire way,uh, as well as members of the community who feel,um,that they have not been included in this process. I understand how,um,the thinking for all of those-those separate groups,um, comes to be. That being said, I think that,um,public engagement,uh, is something that needs to be,uh,very deliberate,uh, for things,uh, like what we do here in- in government. It needs to be,uh, a governance prerogative and priority. Uh, so that being said, I think that, um,you know, it may have been better if- if we were to have,uh, included,uh, neighborhood associations towards the very end. Um, I can understand how-how people get- get frustrated,um,you know,having been involved with the process,um, in some cases, I think,you know for three- for between 3-5 years prior,that-that got us to where we are today. Um, if people don't have a consistent reminder of what's going on, it's- it's very easy, especially at this level of government,uh,to become disengaged,to become uninformed,uh,with-with the progress,uh, and- and the work that is going on. So,um, I think that what I would like to see in the future is just a bit of a more,um, deliberate,uh, active engagement at every step in the process. Um, and I was thinking,uh,while this conversation was going on as to how that would look because at fust, I didn't really know. Um, I didn't really have any idea what staff could have done different aside from, you know, doing everything in public and-uh and making sure that,you know, everything was-was kosher in that regard. Um,but I- I did eventually come to the This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of September 19, 2023. Page 32 conclusion that,um, a lot of the concerns seem to come from, going- going to an official body before, or pardon me, let me think about this. Going to an official body for,uh, asking for public input in the final step. That- that seems to be to me where a lot of this public discontent comes from. Staff proposed the changes to the Planning and Zoning Commission and subsequently the Council. But the public was not aware before the meetings and proposals about,um,what exactly the specifics were. I would just say that in the future, it might be good for us to experiment with some ways that we can get neighborhood associations and other people more actively engaged in that as early in the process as possible. Because we can and reasonably should assume that public consciousness will drift and degrade over time. That being said, I don't want to-none of this should be considered a denigration of the immense work that the staff has-has done. The immense important and really great work that staff has done to have public engagement in this context. Um, I think that that should be,um, commended. I think that this should also be a potential learning opportunity for how we can avoid these things in the future. And this is just one guy's idea. I don't know everything. This was just how I was thinking about how we could solve this conflict in the future. The last part of my comments regards economics,um, and I think it's really the most difficult thing that we struggle with in- in this community. Because really,no matter what happens tonight, whether it's approved or denied or deferred,the impacts are going to take a very long time for our community, our staff, our economists,to actually be able to quantify them. Development takes a long time-building a building takes a long time. Uh, and at the same time, Iowa City struggles with-with an immense deficit uh in housing units. It is hard for me to believe that this change alone is going to make a significant dent,uh, in our deficit of housing units,which is a major contributing factor,not the only contributing factor,but a major contributing factor to our communities affordable housing crisis. Uh,that being said,not making a huge dent is not an excuse for not trying um and trying to move in the right direction. Um, I believe based on what we've heard here today that,um, City staff and the other fellow Councilors are working with the best of intentions and working with the communitues oocketbooks is really what we're talking about here,you know, affordable housing in mind. And I- I think that this is going to move us in the right direction. But I would also like to see,um, more action on affordable housing. Of course,we need to make more investments. Um, all this is to say,uh, it's going to take a long time for us to understand the impact of this policy. And I think that um,that is going to be very frustrating,both to Councilors,to members of the community,um,but it also gives us time for- for transition if there are any changes that people see in their neighborhoods. It allows us to-to react to those changes, as well as address any problems that arise as they come. So policymaking is an ongoing, eternal process. Engagement is something that is an ongoing and internal process. And as I believe we're about to pass this tonight, and I believe that we should. I- I would encourage the folks in the audience that have been frustrated by this process or who maybe disagree with the premise that it operates on,to stay involved,um,to continue sharing your thoughts with the Council,with Planning staff,with the City Manager's office. And also let us know in real time what you see. We can't be on every street corner, we can't every single development in this community. Um,that being said,the This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of September 19, 2023. Page 33 information is still important and you're involved. So I will be supporting this, I believe. Yeah, sorry things were a little bit messy and- and drawn out. Thomas: I'll make a few comments,um. This is a very-very interesting in that I'm- in- in complete support of the idea of applying missing middle in Iowa City. In fact, I believe I was the fust person at one of these Commission-Council meetings to bring up the idea of missing middle back when I was on Planning and Zoning. I've been familiar with the concept for a long time and I've been looking forward to how can we apply this notion of what I'd like to think of as the next increment. In fact,that's what I campaigned on in 2015 was development at the next increment,which is in effect what missing middle is. Um,but what I've been frustrated by, on this- on this particular application is what seems to be a failure to acknowledge the-the pressures within the University Impact Zone, which creates a distinct market quite different than the rest of Iowa City. There was some reference- staff made some reference to this being consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Well, the Central District Plan which was adopted in 2007, spoke very specifically about the concerns with the balance between short and long term residents. Because it is unique to the Central District. It's been an issue that has plagued the Central District for decades. And it's not something, as Andrew said,that happens overnight. Um,when I arrived here in 2010,the District C Representative,Mike Wright referred to this phenomenon as the death of 1,000 cuts. It's one house at a time over decades. One house after another, after another.Nancy's photographs and- and graph on the buildings that have been impacted in her neighborhood,that-that occurs over time. It's not something that happens in a short period,but there's an inevitability to it because of the economics. Student rentals are rented by the person. They are an aggregate rent. There is no way that a conventional household can compete with a student rental because it's aggregating the rents of each occupant,which far exceeds what is typically affordable to a conventional household. So there-there's an inherent economic challenge there that has resulted over time, and we haven't talked about the percentages that apply. Where are we with respect to this imbalance? It's people in the central neighborhoods who look at the NDS annual report because it gives some percentages in the different areas of the central district. And they vary. But to the northernmost central district neighborhoods,the single-family duplex percentage of rental is over 50%. If you include the apartment buildings, it's probably 70-80%. The center, College Hill areas in the single-family duplex are around 60% and again,you'd add on to that the apartment buildings. When you get down into the Bowery,the-the number of single-family duplex units that are rentals is 70%. So that's the reality on the ground. And the question in my mind is as Nancy noted, it's clear what the target of any increase in density now,whether we call it an up zoning or not, it is significant increase in density, if you- if you can allow single-family property to go from one dwelling to three,which is in effect what we're talking about,that's a tripling in density. Again, add- do the math on each person living on that property what that can result in in terms of rent. So- so the question in my mind is how do we-how do we insist that the-the-this change to the code will result in affordable housing because if it's- if it's simply left to market forces,market forces are driven by profit. There is no profit in affordable housing. The profit is in finding how you can get the most rent. And so there's- there's a natural gravitation toward the center of Iowa City because there's no-no real This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of September 19, 2023. Page 34 estate market more lucrative than in the central area of Iowa City. So that's the area of concern, I think that's what I kept hearing tonight was yes, if you look at the rest of Iowa City,what kind of activity are we expecting?Looking at Minneapolis,they did away with so called,they did away with their single-family zoning, and there really wasn't much activity that it generated except near the University of Minnesota. So I- I think when I heard that, I thought,well,that's- that's kinds of what I'm sensing is the money to be made from increasing densities on single-family properties is going to be in the center of town.You know,that's my concern. You know,we have three readings. Uh, I certainly hope we can sort this out because uh,my sense, and I know there are others in the audience and- and elsewhere who-who live in the central neighborhoods and are concerned that this could, again, over time, do considerable damage to the center of Iowa City,uh,which is the center of Iowa City. The image of Iowa City is, I- I would argue, conveyed by the central neighborhoods,the downtown,the University,that's-that's what Iowa City is uh, in terms of its public image. And it's important how we manage it. Uh, I do find it interesting you know, in terms of these pressures,uh,that-that apply to this area. The-the City Council just approved uh,the purchase of a property on the corner of Lynn and Washington for $4.5 million. Why did they do that?Why did we do that?We did it because of the student housing market pressures. One piece of property, four and a half million dollars. I agreed with it because that's an important corner in terms of strategic planning in the downtown. If that site where the City Hall used to be becomes a student high rise,how does that reflect on the downtown?Um, so I supported it. I think we,we need to find a better use for that property,but that's a reflection of the pressures that we're talking about. And you know, I certainly hope we can find a way forward. Because if not,uh,the death of 1,000 cuts that Mike Wright talked about 10 years ago or more uh,will continue in the central neighborhoods. Taylor: I uh, echo my fellow Councilors and commend the staff uh, for all the work that you put into uh,this document. It was obvious, it took a lot of thought,uh, and you have the right idea with the purpose and mission to improve housing choice, increase housing supply, and encourage housing affordability. Uh, I'd like to see a little bit stronger language than encourage. I think incentivization can,uh, can lead to more affordable housing with bonuses and such. And I think more than height or the parking requirement, I think there needs to be a little more thought on that process. Uh,my-my real point is that we really need to get this right,we need to get zoning right,uh,we have to avoid any pitfalls that might come along. Danielle,herself, said that uh,you can't be 100% sure of the future, and that's-that's really true. We don't know what's going to happen, or we,we can't predict. Uh,but I think another point was that,uh, I think Andrew uh,Dunn stated,uh,he wanted more of a deliberate engagement. And that's obvious by the number of folks that came to speak before us about, and feel really strongly about this issue, and wish that they would have had a little more public engagement about this. And that,uh,might truly have avoided some of these questions and concerns. If they'd been involved,they could've raised this all along rather than now when this item is before us. Uh, so that's all I have to say. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of September 19, 2023. Page 35 Bergus: I'm hearing a lot of different things tonight, so just trying to kind of process it all. I think,uh,what I want to comment on is thanking everyone who's been involved in the process. And just reiterating that you know,this moment and this meeting is really important,public engagement.No matter how the votes,this is the process that we currently have. And we're all,we're hearing you, and we're seeing you, and we're understanding the effort and time and energy that you put into being here tonight and not planning and zoning. Uh, I just want to respond a little bit also along those lines relating to the democratic process and what Mayor Throckmorton said about that. Because I think in our city and at this level of government,we have really accessible experts. We have members of staff who,uh,you know,their contact information is readily available. All of us are readily available. And I don't want people who work 70 or 80 hours a week to have to know the details of technical changes to the zoning code. I think the,the reason that we're here and the reason that we have these processes that have been going on for years- -and I- I echo what Senator Weiner said about you know,what we've been talking about implementing this last piece of that 2016 plan longer than I've been on Council and I remember those conversations. So I think for those who are engaging now and thinking about or feeling that it's too late,you know,kind of part of the process. Our obligation as representatives of the entire community is to take those plans and to take those recommendations and to implement them in the way that we believe is best for the entirety of the community. And that may mean,you know,taking-that may mean not knowing what's going to happen in the future. That may mean taking some chance to implement what really are not drastic changes,but changes that incrementally could move us towards enabling a little bit more supply. And I, I agree with Councilor Dunn in that,you know,uh,having it not be sort of guaranteed to fix the issue is not a reason not to do it. We know that affordability is a very complex problem. We also know that increasing density and having compact neighborhoods with diverse housing types is right there in our Strategic Plan. We know that climate action is one of the lenses through which we have to make every single decision. And that infill development is one of the most responsible ways we can develop when it comes to our responsibility to try and protect uh,the environment and our climate. Uh, it doesn't require you know, additional streets being laid, it's not more miles of, of water mains, it doesn't require additional buses. Establishing a little bit more supply in existing neighborhoods is a well understood time honored way of incrementally addressing some of these issues that we have committed to trying to address. And I just- I want to really urge us to consider the fact that inaction is a choice that has consequences. Slowing down a process to provide for more engagement can be fruitful and it can directly impact the people who are missing out right now,the,the tens of thousands of housing units that we know we are short in Johnson County. Every month that we delay in allowing or enabling some incremental increase in supply,we're widening that gap. Every month that we delay,we are saying to those who can't find a home or can't find an affordable home, or can't you know, live in the neighborhood that they want to live in,you just need to wait. And I'm an un- unwilling to do that. I think we really do need to act with urgency. And this is a very carefully crafted,well thought out uh,proposal that,that has been vetted and discussed for, for a very good amount of time. So I- I do just want to acknowledge that,you know, we shouldn't have the expectation that every person in the community fully understands This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of September 19, 2023. Page 36 at the level of our planning staff or of the elected officials even,you know,what,what the impacts of something could be down the road before we can make a decision on it. And I think we have an obligation to consider the entirety when we're making a decision like this. And that may mean we go with something that we think is 85% awesome instead of 100% awesome. And that means 15% of people might be really upset,but that is the balance that we're tasked with deciding. So that's why I'm in favor of uh,this proposal this evening. Harmsen: You go first. Teague: I want to uh, say thanks to everyone for being here tonight, and of course,thanks to the staff,thanks to P&Z,the-my fellow Councilors. As I think about this,uh, I was elected in 2018 and I was asked,what are you going to put on your cowboy cards?What are the three things that you're going to do?And of course, I knew what others have said and done, and I wanted to do something different. What what I realized was affordable housing, transit, and climate action were the things that were necessary in our community. And so I went with what I saw other people go with knowing that that was really what we needed to do. And today, again,we're in 2023 and we are still trying to figure out affordable housing supply because we have a deficit for people to live here. I talk to people all the time that live in our neighboring communities that would love to be here in Iowa City,but they can't afford it. Or,you know,we went to do- every community at one point went through uh, a low supply at one point and we've rebounded from that to a certain degree, except we still have uh, a huge deficit of uh,really affordable housing as well as uh, supply. Uh,the missing middle is something that I learned once uh, I got my cowboy cars together. And I learned about the missing middle and what that really means for our community. Ah and for me, it means diversity. It means having uh, folks with lower income,persons with disabilities, students, elderly families, individuals. So when I think of this opportunity before us, it is not perfect. We're going to,you know,try something that I hope this Council would agree to vote for, that will give us more opportunities to really-to live out our Strategic Plan. All the work that people have been doing for years. There's some affordable gurus out there that have really invested their time by attending meetings,talking about the need. And so today, I'm going to support this. I- I do understand that,um,there's individuals that may not- and I do understand,you know,kind of some of the areas of the University zoned where there is an increase of student housing. This is a reality. It's not made up. It is- is a reality. The City tried to address it a couple of years ago, and we know how that turned out. But we have a huge need in our community that we have to do something. So I'm going to take a step and go this route and just believe that it will make a big difference in allowing people to live in our community where they want to be. And many people want to be here. I say it all the time. Um,when I moved from Chicago, I lived in Coralville,but I continued to say my address was in Iowa City. And I did everything possible to get back to Iowa City. So I'm going to vote for this tonight. And I believe that, um, as we move forward with this,there will be opportunities to tweak it should that need arise. So it's not a once and done. As the years go on, far beyond my being on this Council, future Councils will be able to review this. So I'm going to support this tonight. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of September 19, 2023. Page 37 Harmsen: Thank you. I don't want to repeat too much of what other people have said,uh, except I do want to repeat the gratitude to everyone involved in this process. Um, members of the public coming out and speaking from a variety of different perspectives is always very important. In addition to the many emails that we've received. And I've,uh,you know,not only spent time reading through all of the other documents,but also as many emails that had come to me by this weekend as I was prepping for this meeting. Um, those are read and- and taken into consideration. Also,thank you to staff. One of the things about this that even when I was running for office two years ago,the idea of getting at some of these zoning issues,with something that--because I'm kind of a wonky nerd--kind of was something that was appealing to me and I talked about then. Because, uh, I am aware of some of the historic issues that were brought up here tonight. Affordable housing is one of them,but also the way that zoning codes over the last century have caused de facto segregation in our neighborhoods. So the-the idea that we- the staff has taken the direction of this Council,that predates my time on the Council and includes some of the people who are here speaking tonight to take all of what we've been doing since 2016 and coming up with some proposals. Much gratitude for that because I- I really appreciate that we are having this discussion if for no other reason than because these are vitally important issues on multiple levels. So- so I appreciate that we are-we are at a place where we were talking about this. Um, one of the other things I wanted to mention,uh,that-that one of my fellow Council,just kind of-that's in a different territory--also, I actually do feel very- I share some of the concerns about things like predatory investing and out of state, out of community sorts of groups that come in and buy up property--something that's had an impact on my own family as some of you,uh, some of you know. Um, so that is a very real problem. The thing is,though, I'm not sure that by-well, and I know that by not approving this zoning,we will not be preventing that from happening. It's already happening. So trying to weigh out like what will be gained by blocking this zoning in order to get at those people who I also don't have any love for. That's probably about the nicest way I can say that. Um, and also,keeping in mind that- so we talk about what's going to come,there is, I think, a risk. By considering what might happen with this, I think we also have to understand the harm caused by the status quo. And I think that is something too that weighs into my decision-making process. And I think that's kind of a- sort of a recap of what some of the other Councilors had said. My concern is also that we need to be taking steps, even if they aren't big steps, which I think depending on who you ask,this is either going to be a major change or a minor change and whether or not that's a good or bad thing, depends on who you talk to as well. But I think it's important as part of what we move forward. And then the final piece,um, for me that makes me feel like moving this forward makes sense, is also because of the time frame involved. There is time to react to things, change,things modify as we go. You know, one possibility is we'll do this and it'll be a giant thud. Like it may not change a whole lot right up front or immediately. On the other hand,we might see some of that infill development which all of the things that were mentioned earlier about,you know,the reasons why infill is so good. And not only will this be important for infill, but also for future green space development,where we see,um,you know,new places being developed and maybe being developed from the very beginning with this This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of September 19, 2023. Page 38 greater density,which will make those developments more affordable in the long term for our community,because we will be serving more population,more population density. So there's a lot of advantages,possible advantages,with this. So that's why I'll be supporting this fust reading of this tonight. 2. Consider an Ordinance(First consideration) Teague: If no other comments,we're going to go to roll call,please. (Roll Call)Motion passes 5- 2. Could I get a motion to accept correspondence? Bergus: So moved. Bergus. Teague: Moved by Bergus. Thomas: Second, Thomas. Teague: Seconded by Thomas. All in favor say aye. (Voice Vote)Aye. Any opposed?Motion passes 7-0. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of September 19, 2023. Page 39 9.b.Rezoning—715 N.Dodge Street—Local Historic Landmark—Ordinance rezoning property located at 715 N.Dodge Street from Medium Density Single- Family Residential with a Historic District Overlay (OHD/RS-8)to OHD/RS-8 in order to designate the property as an Iowa City Historic Landmark. (REZ23-0006) Teague: 9.b.,Rezoning - 715 North Dodge Street-Local Historic Landmark- Ordinance rezoning property located at 715 North Dodge Street, from Medium Density Single- Family Residential with a Historic District Overlay (OHD/RS-8)to OHD/RS-8 in order to designate the property as an Iowa City Historic Landmark. I'm going to open the public hearing and welcome,Danielle. 1.Public Hearing: Sitzman: Thank you,Mr. Mayor. As you said,this is a rezoning case. It is to designate 715 North Dodge Street as a local historic landmark. In an effort to tell a more complete history of Iowa City and in conjunction with the 50-year anniversary of the forming of the Emma Goldman Clinic, former Historic Preservation Commission Chair Kevin Boyden, representatives of the Emma Goldman Clinic proposed local landmark designation for this property. City staff contacted the owners of the property,who have voluntarily requested this rezoning to be designated as an Iowa City Historic Landmark. The basic purpose of a landmark historic designation is to ensure the preservation of historic resources and require historic review for exterior modifications. Just a little quick refresher. There are such things as historic districts which are adopted for a larger geography than a single property, landmark rezoning allow us to have the flexibility to designate individual properties where appropriate. In this case,the property is already in a historic district, and so it's already protected largely from the changes that might have come if it were not. This is just an escalation of the recognition of this particular property. The subject property is a gable front house with craftsman-style detailing,built 1920- 1926. The house was designated as a key contributing property, and as I mentioned, it is located in the Brown Street Historic District. The Brown Street Historic District was established in 1994 through the assignment of an overlay district, a zoning overlay district,to the area on top of the base zoning district,which is medium density single- family or RS-8. Um, as a result of the historic district rezoning in 1994,the building has been-has been required to go through Historic-the Historic Preservation Commission for an approval of significant changes to the exterior of the building. The rezoning at that time also made the property eligible for special exceptions granted by the Board of Adjustment for waivers and modifications to historic properties to help support their continued relevance and use and- and also makes them eligible for grants and funds through the federal programs and the city programs. Landmark status requires the same review and carries the same opportunities. In 1973, following the landmark US Supreme Court ruling,Roe versus Wade, a group of young women formed the Emma Goldman Clinic to provide feminist healthcare. They formed this clinic in a neighborhood house to provide a new kind of healthcare. One that was welcoming, and unlike traditional medical offices of the day. As they expanded,they acquired the home next door and then expanded to the-to the location on North Dubuque Street. The role of the Historic This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of September 19, 2023. Page 40 Preservation Commission is to conduct a public hearing to review and evaluate the historic significance of the property. The Historic Preservation Commission did determine that the property is significant for its role in local feminist history and women's healthcare as the location of the founding of the Emma Goldman Clinic. That it is an intact example of craftsman detailed house from the 1920s and therefore meets the criteria for a landmark designation. As I mentioned, landmark designation is a type of zoning overlay and requires a recommendation also from the Planning and Zoning Commission to you. The Commission's role is to review the proposed designation based on its relation to the Comprehensive Plan. As the historic preservation component of the Comprehensive Plan does call for identification of resources significant to Iowa City's past,with the objective of designating individual buildings as landmark,the Planning Commission has reviewed the historic landmark designation zoning, and found that it is consistent with our Comprehensive Plan for those goals. As far as the development history, or the land development process for this property, as I mentioned, it already has been in a designated historic district, and subject to those regulations,this is simply a rezoning to the same overlay designation,but for landmark designation. So based on the applicable review criteria, staff did recommend designation as a landmark to the Historic Preservation and Planning and Zoning Commission. Both bodies have recommended that to you this evening. The Planning and Zoning Commission,most recently, at their August 16th meeting, found that it met the proposed rezoning standards for the Comprehensive Plan and has forwarded this unanimously, 7-0. That concludes staff report. Teague: Great. Any questions?All right. Thank you. Anyone from the public like to address this topic?Welcome. Boyd: Good to be here. Teague: Yes. Boyd: Hello. I'm Kevin Boyd,the former chair of the Historic Preservation Commission. At my last meeting in June I gave my going away statement to the rest of the Commission. I was talking about the importance of telling a more full history of Iowa City and making sure that what we preserve and share about our history reflects our values in our community. Um, one of the historic preservation work plans-plan goals is identifying opportunities to highlight Iowa City's history as a leader on social justice,racial equality and human rights, and preserve the stories and structures that help define that history. This nomination fits that objective. It was a project that got started before I left the Commission. It's an opportunity to add uniquely Iowa City story. The story of these founders radical college aged feminist bad asses,who 50 years ago this month had just opened the Emma Goldman Clinic for women to try to shift the power dynamic in health care. As I re-researched the history of the Emma Goldman Clinic, ah, for this project, I was really in awe what these founders were able to accomplish together and how radical it really was, and- and yet how relevant it is for the fight, ah, of women's health care remains today. The founders story, along with the property at 715 North Dodge,which is now a residential home, again, is so much part of that history, it deserves to be among the This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of September 19, 2023. Page 41 properties listed on the list of Iowa City local landmarks. And I urge you to support this landmark nomination. I also want to thank the property owners,Jennifer and Benton, for their open mindedness and support of sharing their property history. Thank you. Teague: Thank you. Anyone else like to address this topic?Welcome again. Kubby: Hi,my name is Karen Kubby, I live in Iowa City and I hope that you will support this designation with some enthusiasm. So the Emma Goldman Clinic is not only a historic- of historic significance locally,but nationally. The clinic just celebrated its 50th anniversary and through I- I've been involved with the clinic for one way or another for 40 years. And when I have gone to other communities or gone to conferences of other reproductive healthcare providers, and they knew that I worked at the Emma Goldman Clinic,they just had all these stories to tell about staff who had been trained at the Emma Goldman Clinic,moved to Seattle,moved to Mesa,Arizona, and worked at a clinic. And what they brought from-brought the Emma way we call it,to other communities. And it is a nationally known clinic and it- it is a revered clinic. And so we're not only recognizing the local historic value,but the national value. So please say yes. Thanks. Teague: Thank you. Mayor Bailey, good to see you. Bailey: Good evening. Um, I want to echo what Karen and Kevin have said. It was pointed out by staff that this is important to local feminist history,but feminist history isn't history with an Asterix. It's our history. It's everybody's history. And so by recognizing this as a local landmark,we are acknowledging that social justice theme. We are acknowledging the national-,um,the national reputation that the clinic has developed over those 50 years, and we are noting that it started here and it's our history, and we want to,we're proud of it. So I urge you to vote yes. Teague: And please state your name and city for the record. Bailey: Oh,Regenia Bailey, Iowa City. Teague: Thank you. Anyone else would like to address this topic? Seeing no one,before I close the public hearing, I want to just check in with Council to see if you're inclined to support P and Z. Okay. All right. And I'm going to close the public hearing. 1. Consider an Ordinance(First Consideration) Teague: Can I get a motion to give fust consideration,please? Taylor: So moved Taylor. Bergus: Second Bergus. Teague: Council discussion. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of September 19, 2023. Page 42 Taylor: All I can say is how can we say no. I- I'm very much in favor of this and I'm very happy to see this. Thomas: Yeah,me too. Thanks for everyone's who work on this. Harmsen: I think this is a landmark recognizing those who not only believe that women deserve full medical access in including reproductive care,but they did something about it which is always near and dear to my heart. Um,proud of this herit-heritage in our community, and to honor what Kevin called those bad ass women. So right on. Bergus: I think it's so important to elevate not just this, ah, structure but the-the history behind it. And thank you so much for reminding us that it was a group of young women who came together and were able to make such radical, significant change. That's such a good lesson for us to remember. Harmsen: It's a great time to do it. Bergus: Yeah. Teague: So I'm going to get excited. This is exciting. Um, it was great to see Deborah Nye, one of the founders, letter in support of this. And this oftentimes,when we get a local historic landmark,um, sometimes the owners aren't or neighbors aren't always in agreement,but this owner of this property is in agreement. So this even makes it extra special that they would acknowledge and,um, allow their home to be historic. Um, and in 50 years,that's kind of the perfect the milestone to mark this designation. So I'll be supporting it. Dunn: I'm not going to beat a dead horse. There's no other Right vote,but yes. Teague: Roll call,please. (Roll Call) Motion passes 6-0. Could I get a motion to give to accept correspondence? Taylor: So moved Taylor. Second, Thomas. Teague: All in favor say aye. (Voice Vote). Aye. Any opposed?Motion passes 6-0. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of September 19, 2023. Page 43 10.Regular Formal Agenda 10.a. Utility Rate Public Hearing- Ordinance amending Title 3,entitled "Finance, Taxation and fees," Chapter 4,entitled"Schedule of Fees,Rates,Charges,Bonds, Fines and Penalties",of the City Code to increase or change charges and fees. (First consideration: Teague: Item number 10.a. Utility Rate Public Hearing - Ordinance, amending Title 3, entitled "Finance, Taxation and Fees,", Chapter 4, entitled "Schedule of Fees,Rates, Charges, Bonds,Fines and Penalties", of the City Code to increase or change charges and fees. I'm going to open the public hearing. 1. Public Hearing Teague: Welcome. Davies: Good evening,Mayor and Council. This one's a pretty easy much easier than the last couple. Ah,this is just clean up of a couple of code items that came to our attention as we were implementing the beginning of the year. First being when the carting fee was removed in 2020 and the late fee was increased from 5-10%. It was changed in the water rate section. It came to our attention that it's also the same exact language is in two other places and it was not updated to the 10% in those. So the fust item is to change that to 10% in those two places. The second is the minimum tipping fee was raised to $14 at 300 pounds,while,the regular tipping fee is $45 a ton. So to get that to work out with the minimum fee that we need to increase that 300 pounds to 600 pounds to align with that minimum. So like I said,just two kind of clean up items with the code. Any questions. Teague: Hearing none. Thank you. Anyone from the public like to address this topic? Seeing no one in person or online, I'm going to close the public hearing. 2. Consider an Ordinance(First Consideration) Teague: Could I give a motion to give fust consideration? Bergus: So moved Bergus. Harmsen: Second,Harmsen. Teague: All right. And Council discussion. I think it's pretty straightforward. Clean up. All right. Roll call, please. (Roll Call) Motion passes 6-0. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of September 19, 2023. Page 44 10.b. FY24 Budget Amendment Public Hearing—City budget amendment and certification resolution—FY 2024—Amendment 91. Teague: Item 10.b.,Fiscal Year 2024 Budget Amendment Public Hearing - City budget amendment and certification resolution -Fiscal Year 2024 -Amendment#1.And I'm going to open the public hearing and welcome again,Nicole 1.Public Hearing Davies: I'm back. Okay. So this is our fust budget amendment for FY24. The original budget was approved April 4, it started July 1,runs through June 30. Our City policy allows for amendments in the following situations: emergent, transfer from contingencies, expenditures with offsetting revenues, or carry-over of prior year budget authority. And we can amend anytime in the fiscal year other than the last 30 days. Uh,typically,we've averaged three amendments a year,um, one right about this time, one in the spring with the budget, and then two,usually early summer,which is really May. Um, with the new property tax legislation,we won't be approving the budget until April, so we probably will just have this amendment and the amendment with the budget unless there's something that comes up that would require us to amend in April and turn around and amend again in May. I don't foresee that,but it's possible. Um, and then, like I said,the next planned amendment will be with the FY25 budget process which will be approved in April of`24. So this fust budget amendment is mostly carry forwards. Um,these are submitted by the departments,reviewed by the City Manager's Office and the Finance Department. The budget policies that carry forward must be $5,000 or 1% of the budget. Um, and then a lot of the- a lot of the carry forwards are capital improvement um, projects. Um,the CIP tends to align more with the calendar year than the fiscal year, which is why we see a lot of carry-over there, and then just a few miscellaneous items of things that we need to amend into the budget. So the revenues,uh,the largest increases is the intergovernmental revenues. And again this is mostly state and federal grants that's from the CIP carry forwards. Um,the couple other big things--the other financing sources--uh,447 is just carrying forward,uh, sales proceeds from University and South District homes, and then miscellaneous is mostly contributions and grants. As far as the expenditures,the largest again,the capital-the governmental capital projects of 36 million. Um, some of the major projects that we're carrying forward some funding are the Rochester Avenue construction,the Gilbert Street Bridge replacement, and then the Senior Center building improvements. Um, and then also with the business type and enterprises, about 24.5 million. Again,that's mostly made up some major CIP projects including the Rohret South sewer and the new landfill cell. And then also with community and economic development,we're still carrying forward um, some of the CDBG home and then a lot of ARPA dollars still. And then one of the additional expenditures with the Southland Street purchase that has been referenced earlier today. So again,the fust budget amendment--he overall impact is a decrease to fund balance of about 74 million and it's covered through either excess fund balances and bonds. It will not affect the property tax levy. Any questions? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of September 19, 2023. Page 45 Bergus: I have a couple of questions. Um,Nicole, so the-you gave the three reasons why the budget can be amended and it sounds like these are all within the expenditures with an offset that are in fund balances. Is that how you would classify them? Davies: I would say 90% is carry forward. Begus: Okay. Davies: Um-then of the stuff that's being added,most of it is offsetting um, or we're using fund balance. Bergus: Okay. I was just wondering how do we get a $74 million reduction in fund balances when it's- Davies: Because it's mostly carry forwards. Bergus: Okay. Okay. Maybe we can go on. Davies: It's mostly CIP projects too. Bergus: Yeah. Yeah. Davies: Where we already have the bond proceeds but we haven't spent the dollars. Bergus: Okay. So the money is just sitting there. So it's not- it's not like you're spending down a fund balance unexpectedly, it's just that... Davies: Right. It was budgeted in prior years, it just hasn't been used yet. Bergus: Okay. And then my other question was the $5,000 minimum, did you say for carry forwards? Is that per division? Davies: Yep. Bergus: Okay. So if a- if a particular division had multiple smaller items,they could aggregate that? Davies:No, it's per item. Bergus: Okay. There's just a couple of items that are below $5,000 in the detail list. Davies: Oh, it could be too, if there's a purchase that was already started that just hasn't completed,which we've definitely ran into more recently than we have in the past,right? With supply chain issues. Something that we-we normally have in a month or two is taking 6-8 months. So- This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of September 19, 2023. Page 46 Bergus: Okay. Davies: - if a purchase was already started,we would carry that forward too. Bergus: It's just passed that July 1st date, is that what you mean? Davies: Right,but it was just received probably in July or possibly early August. Bergus: Okay. Thank you. Davies: Yep. Teague: Any other questions? There are none. Thank you. Anyone from the public like to address this topic? Seeing no one in person or online, I'm going to close the public hearing. 2. Consider a Resolution Teague: Could I get a motion to approve,please? Thomas: So moved, Thomas. Harmsen: Second,Harmsen. Teague: Council discussion. Bergus: So the other, a few meetings ago,Mayor Pro Tem Alter threw out this idea of a protest vote. So I'm just going to let you all know that I will be voting against this. I had some questions for our City Manager before the meeting relating to the about a half million dollar increase that's shown in the public safety line. And I'm confident that the amendment is going to be successful,but I'm just letting you all know that I'm uh,voting consistent with the values that I articulated in- in the spring until I can get some better clarification on that. Teague: Roll call,please. (Roll Call) Motion passes 5-1. Could I get a motion to accept correspondence? Harmsen: So moved,Harmsen? Thomas: Second, Thomas? Teague: All in favor say aye. (Voice Vote)Any opposed?Motion passes 6-0. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of September 19, 2023. Page 47 10.c.Discrimination against Section 8 Tenants—Ordinance amending Title 2, entitled "Human Rights," Chapter 1,entitled"General Provisions,"to eliminate the prohibition on landlords discriminating against Housing Choice Voucher(aka, Section 8) holders. (Pass & Adopt) Teague: Item 10.c. Discriminating against Section 8 Tenants - Ordinance amending Title 2, entitled "Human Rights," Chapter 1, entitled "General Provisions,"to eliminate the prohibition on landlords discriminating against Housing Choice Voucher holders. Could I get a motion to pass and adopt. Dunn: So moved. Harmsen: Second. Teague: Moved by Dunn, seconded by Harmsen. And we'll get Eric Goers to our City Attorney. Goers: Just very briefly, as a reminder, Council did a motion to amend from the floor last time around at the second reading for this to allow for the protections Council has previously offered to folks with federal housing choice vouchers for that protection to spring back into place, should it either- should the State preemption either be repealed or a court overturned that in any similar language. And so I've drafted language to that effect and it's been included in the packet. And hopefully it achieves what Council will sought. Teague: Any questions for Eric?Hearing none. Anyone from the public like to address this topic? Seeing no one in person or online, Council discussion. Taylor: Thank you,Eric, for doing that because I appreciated Councilor Dunn's comments and concerns uh, about this shameful practice of- of landlords refusing to rent to Section 8 folks. So I- I was wondering what we could do making a statement, or what we could do to reflect that, so that it doesn't get lost in the shuffle. So thank you. Dunn: I would just say that I was also very happy with what the City Attorney was able to produce with regard to our instructions. So, I think this is,you know, given the circumstances,the-best possible thing that we can do. Teague: All right. Roll call, please. (Roll Call) Motion passes 6-0. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of September 19, 2023. Page 48 11. Council Appointments 1I.a.Housing& Community Development Commission—One vacancy to fill an unexpired term,upon appointment—June 30,2025. (Jennifer Haylett resigned) Teague: Item Number 11 is Council Appointments. So we have two appointments, and that is Housing and Community Development Commission,um,which is l l.a.. There is one vacancy to fill unexpired term upon appointment through June 30, 2025, and that has no gender balance requirement. And then we have l lb.,which is our Parks and Recreation Commission. One vacancy to fill unexpired term upon appointment through December 31, 2026. And that-that also has no gender requirement. And we'll start with housing and community development. Um, anyone who has a suggestion? Thomas: Well, I was looking at Saranya, I can't read my own writing here. Teague: Subramanian. Taylor: Yeah. Subramanian. Teague: Any other nominations?Um, I- I can support her. Teague: Yeah. All right. So I heard four, so we're good. All right. We're going to move on to the next Commission nomination,which is for Parks and Rec., and there are, again,no gender balances. Dunn: I would support either sharing Sharon DeGraw or Caleb Recker. Bergus: I had Caleb Recker as my top choice. Teague: Okay. Any other nominations? Thomas: Well, given what we've heard, I would support Sharon DeGraw. Teague: Okay. Yeah. I mean, I can go with probably either one. I thought both- Taylor: I- I was going to say that I have to go with almost all of them. I- I. Teague: Yeah. Taylor: I'd- I'd be agreeable to appoint any one of them there. So many of them and so many of them had-had a great knowledge of boards and commissions and what it means to serve on that. And a lot of years of experience in- in the city. And I know a couple of them that I- I know Sandra Armbruste. I worked with for many years. She's very dedicated to whatever she does. She's retired,has lot of time to do things,but any of them would- would have been very good. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of September 19, 2023. Page 49 Harmsen: Yeah, I agree. A lot of good candidates there, 14 candidates for those that don't- don't- aren't looking at the packet,members of the public, so,you know, I think the two names have been mentioned. You know, obviously, Sharon DeGraw comes with some experience being on the History-History Commission and stuff like that. I think Caleb is very interesting. I think as somebody has experience in working for the UI Rec services brings kind of interesting, I'm kind of intrigued by that. I think that's kind of an interesting connection to this-this whole topic. It might be kind of an interesting perspective. Teague: So are you. Harmsen: I'm leaning Caleb. Yeah. Teague: Okay. And I can support Caleb as well, so I think he has the majority. All right. Ready for voting. So for a roll call for Housing and Community Development Commission Appointing Saranya Sub- Subramanian and for the Parks and Recreation Commission Sharon Degraw. Harmsen:No, Caleb ecker. Teague: Oh, I am- Caleb Recker. Bergus: I'd make that motion. Teague: All right. Bergus: Is that what we're doing?Making a motion? Teague: So moved by Bergus. Dunn: Second. Teague: Seconded by Dunn. Roll Call,please. (Roll Call) Motion passes 6-0. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of September 19, 2023. Page 50 14. City Council Information Teague: And we are at item Number 14,which is City Council information. Taylor: Over the past week, I attended a number of gatherings that have really shown to me the essence and importance of neighborhood cohesiveness in Iowa City that's so characteristic of Iowa City. I just felt a sense of community in all the events that I went to. Uh, a couple of them you were present at Mayor Teague. You spoke at uh,the,uh, Successful Living anniversary party,block party. It was amazing. Twenty-five years of Successful Living helping those peop-people out. And a number of people spoke on how it's been helpful to them and it was just really a great event. Uh, then I attended North Side Neighborhood Party. Thank you John for inviting me to that. That was uh, a lot of great people that live in that neighborhood and it really showed the pride in-in their neighborhood and their park and how they'd all sort of took the time to help develop that park and help it be in uh, cohesiveness with-with the school there. So it was really,that was a nice one. Uh, of course,the Miller Orchard uh,Neighborhood party uh,was great too. Uh, and there was also an event that it wasn't more neighborhood, it was kind of a community thing. They welcome festival that was held at Mercer Park. It was a focus on immigrants and refugees. And there was a really large, I mean,there were a couple hundred people that was very diverse group in- in ages and nationalities and just people having a great time. Music and good food. And- and just a really nice event. So it was just a week-weekend full of- of community which was great. It was good to see. Thomas: I'll just add a couple of comments On the north side,uh, I think it was called the neighborhood gathering. Uh, one it started raining while that event was going on and it actually,people just hung in there. Um,we-we kind of embraced the weather,the rain, and it made it all that much more memorable. And also you might, if you're in the neighborhood,take a look at the-the new public artwork by Thomas Agran in the center of the square. Um, it's a horizontal mural in the center- center point of the park,uh,which is a pretty interesting piece. Like I encourage you to check it out. Teague: I have a question. Is it raining now? Bergus: I think so. I believe that's what that sound was. Thomas: Right on cue. Yeah. Teague: Yes. Um, I just wanted to mention that this week that Mayor Pro Tem and I, along with Redmond,we're going to be at the Iowa League of Cities hosted in Cedar Rapids. And then I know the Metro Coalition we have,they kind of combine their annual meetings there as well. Other than that,this is Climate Fest week, so there's quite a few things going on. And then the CPRB, they have their community forum October 3 at 5:30 which will be located at the Public Library Room A. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of September 19, 2023. Page 51 Bergus: Just two more events that I would highlight,um, on both on Saturday coming up the Farmers Market this Saturday is the Kids Market. So that I think will be fun. All the vendors, children vendors selling their things at the market and then the same day,but at noon is the South of Six. So our South district SSMID community input session to help develop the master plan. So that's happening in the South District Market, which is in that building adjacent to the post office down in Pepperwood Plaza at noon on Saturday. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of September 19, 2023. Page 52 15.Report on Items from City Staff Teague: All right. We're going to go onto item Number 15 and that's report on items from our city staff. We'll start with our City Manager's Office. Fruin: Yeah. Real quick. I think a couple meetings ago Darian shared some preliminary fare-free data with you. I thought I'd just provide a little bit more now that we've put the wraps on um,August's data. That was the fust month of fare-free. So as Darian reported,the month of August,year over year 22-23,we were 53%up system-wide in ridership. That is about 46,000 additional rides.That were provided. That's very significant amount. We actually had three routes that were 70%up,which again, is just tremendous figures. We always like to look at the cost per ride that it costs to provide the service. And with those increased numbers,that cost per ride dropped 21% from August of 2022 to August of 2023. And then on the paratransit side,uh,we saw ridership increase about 26%which is another fantastic statistic there. So we'll keep reporting that out as we continue to get more data on the fare-free. But so far,very encouraging signs from that service level enhancement. Teague: Great. Bergus: Awesome. Teague: Our City Attorney. Goers: Thank you.Nothing from me,Mayor. Teague: And our City Clerk. Grace:Nothing from me. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of September 19, 2023.