HomeMy WebLinkAbout2015-09-01 TranscriptionSeptember 1, 2015 Iowa City City Council Work Session Page I
Council Present:
Staff Present:
Others Present:
Botchway, Dickens, Dobyns (arrived 5:25 P.M.), Hayek, Mims, Payne,
Throgmorton
Markus, Fruin, Moran, Dilkes, Karr, Andrew, Bockenstedt, Boothroy,
Morris, Hightshoe, Ford, Yapp, Howard, Ralston, O'Brien
Neal (UISG)
Questions from Council re: Agenda Items:
Hayek/ Okay, it's 5:00. I want to welcome everyone to City Hall. We'll start our September 1,
2015 work session. First bullet point is questions regarding agenda items.
ITEM 3f(10) Traffic Engineering Planner: Installation of 5 on -street metered
parking spaces and establishment of parking meter terms on the east side of the 300
block of North Linn Street, and installation of 2 on -street metered parking spaces on
north side of the 200 block of East Bloomington Street. Establish a 2 AM — 6 AM
TOW AWAY ZONE for both banks of metered parking spaces. (deferred from
August 18 meeting)
Karr/ Mr. Mayor, I'd just like to note that Consent Calendar Item 3f(10), uh, on the (mumbled)
regarding parking meters on Bloomington Street will be pulled off the Consent Calendar
and deferred indefinitely, and come back to Council at a later time.
Hayek/ All right. That's 3f(10). I will, uh, tee up the motion...
Karr/ Thank you.
Hayek/ ...in that respe... in that way.
ITEM 3d(2) SENIOR CENTER FIRE ALARM - RESOLUTION ACCEPTING
THE WORK FOR THE CITY OF IOWA CITY: SENIOR CENTER FIRE
ALARM SYSTEM PROJECT.
Payne/ I have a question on 3d(2). It's the Senior Center fire alarm. It has the project bid, but it
doesn't say the cost. Is the cost the bid?
Morris/ Yes it is.
Payne/ Okay. Thanks!
ITEM 3f(4) Andy Johnson, Johnson County Executive Assistant: Minimum Wage —
Ordinance Establishing Local Minimum Wage — Draft 8-19-15
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of September 1, 2015.
September 1, 2015 Iowa City City Council Work Session Page 2
Hayek/ So ... 3f(4) is the memo from Andy Johnson, um, minimum wage. So looks, you know,
we've talked about this briefly without getting into it as a Council. Looks like the County
is going to complete its readings of the ... of the ordinance, um, which as I understand it
will apply to the entire county, except any municipalities that take other action. Um, and
I think we need to get that scheduled for some work session, uh, discussion here. Urn ... I
would suggest we do that, but I ... I think I ... what I'd also like to see ... I mean given
the ... you know, in light of the County Attorney memo, and then the commentary we're
hearing from the State, at least as far as I've read through the, um ... through the media, I ... I
think the ... the legality or the perceived legality of this ordinance is in question ... and I
think, uh, I mean I would recommend that in advance of whenever we talk about this we
get from our ... from Eleanor's office, uh, an opinion as to, uh, their assessment of the
likelihood that this County ordinance would be upheld if it's challenged.
Mims/ I would agree. (noises on mic)
Botchway/ Me too.
Throgmorton/ Well, clearly it's going to be contested. Uh, and ... I assume that Eleanor could
provide, uh, very useful legal feedback. Uh, I'd be surprised if that feedback said it's
unclear what (mumbled) the, uh, contestation would work out legally. Depends on the
judges, etc., and the decisions they render, but ... I'm not the attorney.
Mims/ You say, Jim, that clearly it's going to be contested. Have you, I mean, have you heard of
(both talking) businesses (both talking)
Throgmorton/ Well, you know, colloquially I would say dollars ... I'd bet dollars to donuts ... that it
wou... that it'll be contested in the courts. Do I know that as a fact? No.
Botchway/ Well and ... I won't speak to that point, but kind of (mumbled) related ... I .... I received
communication from I know one business that wanted to talk to me and I didn't have a
chance just because the ... the start of school and everything. Urn ... so I mean (clears
throat) as we think about it, you know ... I know that they didn't necessarily have any
conversations with any area businesses, along those lines, and so ... I ... I think it would
behoove me (both talking)
Hayek/ I think you all need to speak louder (both talking) picking us up. Is it all of us or just
Kingsley?
Karr/ No, it's all of it coming through the speaker. I can ... record it but we can't hear it within the
room. (several talking, noises on mic)
Markus/ I think Kingsley's was working (several talking)
Botchway/ ...pretty loud right there!
Hayek/ Sorry!
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of September 1, 2015.
September 1, 2015 Iowa City City Council Work Session Page 3
Karr/ We're adjusting it right now.
Botchway/ Oh! Okay. I ... I just think it would behoove us a little bit to have some type of
conversation, at least, I mean I don't know where the Chamber stands on this, and again, I
just want to kind of...since they would be directly affected, I mean, I would want to kind
of know their... feelings on the matter, along those lines. Again, this is just from the
email, you know, I received and ... and I read it. I haven't responded to it, but ... Urn, it just
brought up some good points that I ... I know publicly from just the reports haven't been
considered. So...
Throgmorton/ I received a similar email and I assume it's from the same business person. I don't
know that, but uh... uh, I replied something like, um, we have not had any substantive
discussion about it, uh....it...it seems to me that we would benefit from hearing your
particular views, and uh.... the ... the business owner conveyed his general views pretty
clearly, I thought, in that email, but not the particulars, so...
Hayek/ Yeah.
Throgmorton/ Yeah, I think course we'd want to hear particular details.
Botchway/ In one of the points that was brought up in some of the public discussion, urn ... that I,
and I don't know if it got past over or whatever the case may be, um, was in working with
people with disabilities and the Medicaid requirements and along those lines, and ... there's
a couple of organizations and one that I (mumbled) particular 'Reach Your Potential' that,
um, you know, there's ... I ... there, I don't know if there was a lack of consideration in ... in
talking with those... Systems Unlimited, uh, Reach Your Potential, those organizations
that would have ... a ... a detrimental effect with people with disabilities, and so you know
there's.... there's different levels of it and you know, um...
Hayek/ Uh huh.
Botchway/ ...I just want to make sure that we're, you know again because it's within our city
limits, we're making sure that we're paying attention to those things, especially when it
comes to ... well, obviously because I had a job there, I feel personally biased in that way,
but .... there's some considerations there that ... I just ... I just would hope that ... I just ... I wish
would hope that (mumbled) wouldn't have to close down or we would have to have other
people ... there would be people with disabilities that wouldn't necessarily have the,
um ... um ... supervision, whatever... whatever comes from that, in that part.
Dilkes/ Well... there... there are a number of...the ... the County ordinance adopts the State code
provision, which adopts essentially the federal, uh, exemptions from the Minimum Wage
Act and then lowers some of the requirements. So I thought as part of my memo I would
give ... I would explain what those exceptions are.
Botchway/ Great!
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of September 1, 2015.
September 1, 2015 Iowa City City Council Work Session Page 4
Dilkes/ Um, cause that may handle a lot of the conversation, and then just ... one clarification. I
mean I .... I don't have to do a memo to tell you I think an argument can be made. I'm
assuming you want an opinion from me as to how ... likely I think it is...
Hayek/ Yeah!
Dilkes/ ...will succeed.
Mims/ Yeah.
Hayek/ I think it'd be helpful.
Mims/ I do too.
Hayek/ (mumbled) (several responding) Okay! Other ... agenda items?
ITEM 5a REZONING BENTON ST / RIVERSIDE DRIVE — ORDINANCE
REZONING APPROXIMATELY 1.45 ACRES OF PROPERTY FROM
COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL (CC -2) TO RIVERFRONT CROSSINGS - WEST
RIVERFRONT (RFC -WR) ZONE LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER
OF BENTON STREET AND RIVERSIDE DRIVE (REZ15-00015)
Payne/ I had a question on 5a, which is the Kum n' Go. Can I ask about that or ... (both talking)
Hayek/ Uh, that's ... uh, that's formal only.
Payne/ Okay! I can ask at the formal. It's not a big deal. It's not a huge question.
Hayek/ Stop talking about 5a please! (laughter) Other agenda items?
Mims/ No. Really short!
Hayek/ Well we've whittled away some of our, uh, vacancies on those commissions, which is
nice to see.
Throgmorton/ Except for the Airport, which now has a new vacancy I guess. (several
responding)
Hayek/ And... Jefferson Street, which...
Payne/ Never has been (laughter)
Hayek/ I'm not even going to ask how long that's been open!
Throgmorton/ Sorry, I ... I don't know whether to speak loudly ... or speak in normal voice to you?
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of September 1, 2015.
September 1, 2015 Iowa City City Council Work Session Page 5
Markus/ That's pretty good right now. (several talking)
Throgmorton/ So project some, right? Yeah, okay.
Review recommendations from the Ad Hoc Riverfront Crossings Inclusionary Housing
Work Committee.
Hayek/ Okay, let's move on to, uh, the second item, review recommendations from the Ad Hoc
Riverfront Crossings Inclusionary Housing Work Committee.
Boothroy/ (mumbled) ...icon up there. (noises on mic) Well tonight we're gonna be talking, uh,
two items on your agenda about affordable housing. The first is the inclusionary housing
piece, uh, and the recommendations from the Ad Hoc Work Committee. Just as a little
bit of background, if you'll recall back in January (clears throat) excuse me! Back in
January, uh, you gave direction to staff to proceed, uh, to look at, study the possibility
of...of, uh, inclusionary housing, as a requirement, uh, in only the Riverfront Crossing
area, uh, and the recommendation that has come back from the Committee is a
unanimous recommendation, uh, and it is only for the Riverfront Crossing area, and that
was important to, uh (mumbled) to a consensus that it be limited to only that particular
area. Urn ... the, um ... one of the things I wanted to point out is the membership of the
Committee again. Uh, it was a diver ... it's a diverse group. Uh, we had representatives
from various, urn ... uh.... individuals that are both in the for-profit and non -for, uh, profit,
uh, construction of residential, development of residential, uh, properties. Tracy
Achenbach with the Trust Fund; Maryann Dennis is a non-profit with the Fellowship; uh,
Chad is a representative of the Home Builders Association, past President. We had
somebody from a ... a banker involved so that we could deal with the aspects of financing,
because this all comes down to money at the end of the day in terms of whether you can
afford to provide the affordable housing, and Brad has worked with the City, as well as
some of these other, uh, folks in the past with regard to, uh, tax credits and different types
of projects that have affordable housing, he had a good understanding. Scott with the
Iowa Valley Habitat Humanity Chair. Sally Scott with the Affordable Homes Coalition,
and Glenn Siders, uh, now with Siders Development, but ... before that for ... decades with,
uh, Southgate Development and, uh, they have experience, uh, with various types of
affordable housing, and we've worked with them on Broadway and some other places in
town, uh... where they've done some development. So this was a very good group, with
lots of experience, lots of expertise. We came together, uh, we had about six or seven
meetings and we came, as I said, uh... uh, to a unanimous decision about the principles
we're going to talk about in just a moment. I wanted to start tonight by giving a, uh, for
the record a little background about, uh, we have documented the need for affordable
housing. We have documented the need that, or the idea that inclusionary housing is one
option for, uh, beginning to develop and meet that need for affordable housing, and for
the record, uh, the 2013 Comprehensive Plan and the Riverfront Crossing Plan both
support measures to increase the supply of affordable housing. So this discussion tonight
is consistent with some of that. Those recommendations and those findings. It's also
consistent with the 2016-2020 City STEPS. Um, it's also what 2014 analysis,
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of September 1, 2015.
September 1, 2015 Iowa City City Council Work Session Page 6
'Impediments to Fair Housing,' and the, uh, 2014 Metropolitan Planning Organization
update to 2007 market analysis. So there's been a lot of studies, recent studies, that have
supported that we ... that affordable housing is a growing need and that there are different
options to get there and the option we're talking about tonight is one of those options.
Uh... in getting to the recommendation, I just wanted to mention also the fact when the
Committee was getting in ... prepared to have their conversation, uh, I think everybody
recognized it was important to increase the production of affordable housing and that it
be relatively permanent, and you'll see that in the recommendation, that it be as
achievable, uh, and that, uh... uh, that it be achievable in a way that would be, uh, no
significant net increase in cost to the developer. So the recommendations are ... are a
consensus that we believe, as a group, are, uh, workable and uh, make sense. I also
wanted to go back to the staff ...the staffing of this also. This Committee included Sara
Hektoen from the Legal Department and John Yapp, so we had legal counsel, uh, at the
meetings as well, so I wanted to make sure you knew that. So let's ... step through these
principles and, uh, if you have any, uh, questions, uh... we'll talk about them as we go
through them. Uh, the Committee has recommended that ... that you move forward with
the inclusionary housing provision in the Riverfront Crossing area only, and that it be
based on the principles that they've recommended. This, uh, there are other things that
can be done. These are general principles. As we get into writing the ordinance, a lot of
detail is going to have to be flushed out, uh, getting to some, you know, getting these in
place, uh, so that they can work. So first principle is ... is that it ... uh, we already have a
policy that, uh, when we use public financing, TIF, that we require a 10%. This would,
uh, make it, uh, official in the sense that there would be a document, uh, memorializing
that when TIF is being used for developments, any development — whether it's student
development or elderly housing development or any development in the Riverfront
Crossing area, where the City is providing public dollars, there will be a requirement for
inclusionary housing. So, all residential development, uh, is covered, and then the other
thing is that when property is zoned to Riverfront Crossing designation, uh, that ... at that
point in time if there's any development under that designation, cause not all the property
in the Riverfront Crossing is zoned Riverfront Crossing at this point. Some of it's still
CI -1. Some of it's still ... maybe CC -2, but when they rezone to take advantage of the
density, and advantage of the uses allowed in the Riverfront Crossing and some of the
other setback and flexibility, at that point in time one of the requirements would be that
part of that zone is that they have inclusionary housing, uh, as....as a standard they have
to meet.
Payne/ (several talking) I have a question (several talking and laughing)
Boothroy/ One at a time (laughs)
Mims/ My guess is we might all be the same one! (laughs) Um ... as a Council we rezoned ... part
of that area already to Riverfront Crossings.
Boothroy/ And this would apply to that area as well.
Mims/ Okay! That was my question.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of September 1, 2015.
September 1, 2015 Iowa City City Council Work Session Page 7
Payne/ My question is ... the first bullet up there, does it mean if it's in the Riverfront Crossings
area, or is it apply to the entire city?
Boothroy/ We were just dealing with the Riverfront Crossing area.
Payne/ Okay.
Boothroy/ That's the ... that was our charge. It was only ... now we have I think as a policy, uh,
have... expanded it outside, such as the project across the street, but ... but, uh, in general
it ... uh, we were just looking at the Riverfront Crossing area. That's what the
recommendation is dealing with.
Payne/ My question is is will somebody read this in five years and not be able to interpret it
because it doesn't say...
Boothroy/ Well, we're going to codify this and so it's going to get more specific.
Payne/ Okay!
Boothroy/ Yeah.
Dilkes/ Just one note in response to your question, Susan. It'll apply if there's been no, you know
(both talking)
Boothroy/ ....yeah, if you've already approved something, it won't be retroactive. Yeah.
Throgmorton/ There was a third question, Doug.
Boothroy/ (both talking) Well Susan said you were all (both talking)
Mims/ I thought we might have the same one! (laughs)
Throgmorton/ No, turns out we don't! (laughs) Uh, you ... you mentioned, I don't know, housing
for disabled people or whatever in your statement, and you said ... uh, this applies to all
forms of residential housing, but it....later in the document there's an explicit exemption
of disabled and elderly housing.
Boothroy/ That would be for non -financed, uh, publicly financed.
Throgmorton/ For just rezoning?
Boothroy/ Uh, yes. If there were no public dollars involved, that's where that exception... and
we'll talk about that when we get to it, but...
Throgmorton/ Okay.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of September 1, 2015.
September 1, 2015 Iowa City City Council Work Session Page 8
Boothroy/ ...but any time the City is giving dollars... providing financing to make up that gap, and
having a Developer's Agreement, there's going to be a requirement. Okay? Regardless
of the type of residential use. And we expect a lot of the density, uh... uh, that's how a lot
of people are going to get to some of their ... being able to build some of this density down
there because they're going to be bigger buildings, taller buildings, and they're going to
be seeking some kind of, uh, gap financing ... in many areas. So one of the things ... our
policy now is 10%. One of the things that the Committee looked at is ... is, uh... uh, that,
uh, as a floor, uh, for-uh, that would be in the ordinance, that when the City, uh, is
involved in doing any kind of financing, that instead of a 10% floor or ... or standard, we'd
have a no less than 15% of the residential units must be affordable and for not less than
20 years. The idea was that, uh... exactly what I said — it's a floor during the Developer's
Agreement or as you look at each project on a very specific base, and look at the financial
cap ... capacity of that project, you could go more than 20 years. You could go 30. You
could go like we did with The Rise, uh... uh... for an indefinite period of time, but the
feeling was that ... that flexibility should be built in and it would be up to the Council at
the time to negotiate the Developer Agreement if they wanted to go beyond these
minimums. So these are just minimums, uh, to get us to (mumbled) 15% is ... is a number
that, uh, we came up with that ... which is a number that's not uncommon throughout the
country for requiring affordable housing. Uh, and that ... that's kinda how that number
came about.
Dickens/ If the TIF's paid off ahead of time, it still goes back to the minimum of 20 years then?
Boothroy/ It can't be less than 20.
Payne/ (several talking) ...whichever is longer. (several talking)
Boothroy/ Or if you... negotiate something longer than that, uh, it could be...it could be even
longer than that, depending on what the Developer's Agreement looks like.
Hayek/ Was there any analysis done of...of what, you know, any financial forecasting of...of the
TIF, uh, cost to us or the subsidy required to get ... to a 15% versus a 10 or a 20? (both
talking)
Boothroy/ Uh, Tom Jackson was ... was in our meetings to look at some of the ... we did look at
numbers and stuff like that. It is going to cost you more, uh... I, you know, my
recollection is that it...it...we believe that the gap, the City was just going to have to
pay ... make up that difference, uh, for that 15% if a TIF is involved. I don't have any
numbers for you to talk about, but we did talk about, you know, the longer it goes and uh,
in particular, even the percentage's is maybe not as critical as the length of time, uh, then
that gap is going to increase... significantly. So, uh... that ... that I think becomes part of the
Developer's Agreement and your negotiation at the time, in terms of, you know, if you're
going to require indefinite period of time, then that cost for that unit is going to go up and
you're going to have to pay for it.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of September 1, 2015.
September 1, 2015 Iowa City City Council Work Session Page 9
Hayek/ I'm just suggesting that, you know, whatever percentage is selected will have an impact
on (both talking) on the cost and the viability of.. of projects we hope to incent.
Boothroy/ Right.
Hayek/ Um ... and so I would hope there's... sort ... an ... an intelligent calculus of what those factors
might (both talking)
Boothroy/ All I can say is it was ... with him involved and Brad involved, I think the feeling was
that that is a ... that is a reasonable number and it can be done. And that's how we got
there. We didn't ... there was discussion of going higher, uh, and, uh... uh, the conclusion
was that this was a number that we could work with. I just don't have those ... those
numbers in front of me tonight.
Throgmorton/ This raises a general concern that I have, which we can come back to later, but it
has to do with the interaction of density bonuses, TIF, and the affordable housing fee in
lieu of. I ... I see it, the possibility of, kind of like, um ... shifting peas around under a pod,
so to speak. Um ... moving ... moving the pea (laughs) I'm trying to think of the right
analogy or ... moving the pea around? You know, so hide the pea, hide the bean — that's
what I'm after — hide the bean.
Boothroy/ Sounds better! (laughs)
Throgmorton/ Yeah, it...it (laughter) Thank you, it does sound better, doesn't it? (laughter) Uh,
so um ... uh, I ... I worry that with a density bonus for affordable housing, that will induce
developers to build more, higher density, taller, etc., which will lead them to ask for a
TIF, which ... they will then use as just ... and they'll use the affordable housing fee in lieu
of or committing themselves to, uh, building affordable units, as further justification for,
uh, a TIF, uh, and ... and then they ... or they may end up making a payment in lieu of, uh,
affordable housing units, which in the end we would be paying for full stop!
Boothroy/ Well I think it's fair to say that ... that, uh, in our discussions, uh, the expectation is that,
uh, in many cases, uh, the City'll probably pay for the affordable housing.
Throgmorton/ So when one talks about a developer making a payment in lieu of affordable
units ... there is the risk that that will sound as if the developer's making a payment, but in
fact the City would be making a payment that in turn would become a payment in lieu of.
Hayek/ And I had that concern. I'm looking at the note I made. It's, you know, if pay fee in lieu
and get TIF, is that an efficient approach, because we're essentially...
Boothroy/ (several talking)
Hayek/ ...potentially supplying the money with which they make the pay (both talking)
Markus/ It fall ... it falls into the gap potentially (both talking)
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of September 1, 2015.
September 1, 2015 Iowa City City Council Work Session Page 10
Boothroy/ Yes!
Markus/ ...there's a way to address that. You ... this is just a discussion item at this point. We still
have an ordinance to pass.
Throgmorton/ Right.
Markus/ One thing you could do is you could control how much of that payment in lieu thereof
would be eligible for gap. Pay a percentage of that. As a part of your ordinance.
Throgmorton/ Well, I raise it as a concern, not ... not something we can resolve right here and
right now.
Boothroy/ And remember that the ... the, uh, the way this is set up. The rental is ... is (several
talking) is required to provide on site, uh, whereas the owner -occupied, uh, have the
option, and so, uh...
Hayek/ Right.
Boothroy/ ...it's not all residential, uh, construction in that area.
Throgmorton/ Right.
Boothroy/ Then number two, and we had a long ... we had discussion about this is ... if there's no
public financing or anything like that, uh, then the ... then the 10%, 10 years was
considered to be something that could be worked into the, uh.... uh, financial analysis of a
private project, but to go more than that, uh, it may ... it may make the project financial...
financially infeasible. And so that's how we came up with that.
Payne/ Expanding on that infeasibility, so let's say that putting in the... residential affordable
units, the 10% then creates the need for TIF. Now they could jump up into the 15% so
we could have people say that this isn't feasible for me to do because ... I can't go up to
here and this doesn't make sense financially.
Boothroy/ And we have to ... we have to develop the standards for what is fina... there ... there
would be criteria by which they could either opt out for fee in lieu of, or even maybe
possibility, if it's not financially feasible on the site itself, but those are details that we'll
have to work out when we draft the ordinance. I mean we ... those are common issues in
communities that have this, to make sure that people aren't double-dipping or taking
advantage of the system, and uh, inclusionary housing has been in place for ... I don't
know, maybe 20, 30 years and so there's a lot of experience out there.
Throgmorton/ Uh huh.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of September 1, 2015.
September 1, 2015 Iowa City City Council Work Session Page 11
Boothroy/ And I think we can get the right kind of language to fit the community, and to ... to deal
with these issues.
Dilkes/ I think also, I mean I wasn't ... I didn't sit in at the Committee — Sarah did — but I don't see
the TIF requirements being included in an ordinance. I mean that's a ... that's a policy that
the City, um, follows with respect to ... to TIF financing. An ordinance is a policy that
governs the behavior of third parties and so that's where the .... where the up ... or the, you
know, up -zone (both talking)
Boothroy/ ...it's an option ... (both talking)
Dilkes/ Yeah, but I don't... but ... I don't see us leg ... requiring ourselves to ... in an ordinance to
adhere (both talking)
Boothroy/ ...we weren't suggesting that.
Dilkes/ ...standards, so...
Boothroy/ We weren't suggesting that TIF would be codified or anything like that.
Dilkes/ Right, I assume not.
Boothroy/ Yeah. Next principle, this is fairly straightforward, uh, you have to have a threshold
size, uh, 10 or more units would be the trigger, uh, based on, you know, the feasibility of
actually making it work. Uh, and it's actually a pretty common standard nationally, uh,
for getting the units, and we expect because of the density changes in the ... in this area,
uh, that 10 is not going to be an area ... people aren't going to be building nine units.
They're going to be trying ... the land values are going to go up; they're going to be trying
to maximize. So I don't think this is an issue, but we have to start somewhere. Um ... this
is, uh, requirements should be appropriate to the type of rental versus owner -occupied.
Rental projects are required, and I mentioned this earlier, provide affordable units within
the development unless they can come up with a (mumbled) exemption, which we'll have
to figure out what that looks like. You'll have a chance to review it and we'll ... we'll, I'm
sure, have a ... a discussion about that. Owner -occupied may choose to pay fee in lieu of,
uh, for their affordable housing obligation or may offer for -sale units to non -profits or
etc. Uh, the proceeds from the fees can be used for such things as downpayment
assistance or other types of...of assistance type programs, uh, as we create a pot of money
that can be used for affordable housing. One thing it's important to know and we'll see
this later is that legal counsel stated that ... that all of the money that was generated from
fees in lieu of must be reinvested within the district or the area where it came from.
Much like our parkland, uh, fees. So we can't collect money here and go to east Iowa
City and use the funds. That's not legal or advised.
Neal/ Do students qualify for affordable housing in the rental projects?
Boothroy/ They could.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of September 1, 2015.
September 1, 2015 Iowa City City Council Work Session Page 12
Neal/ Okay, and how would they go about that?
Boothroy/ Well I think ... well, they'd have to be income -qualified, and ... and uh, we would qualify
them under the same, uh, rules and regulations that we use for Section 8 or that type of
existing programs.
Throgmorton/ So would it be the students, or would it be the students' parents?
Boothroy/ Well ... in the Section 8 program, uh...it...it depends.... they could qualify if the
student's parents were low-income, but if the ... if the student parents were, uh, wealthy,
uh, and the students were still living at home, they would not qualify... under the Section 8
program.
Dilkes/ And we ... in our development agreements to date we've incorporated that...
Boothroy/ Yeah we've got some (both talking)
Dilkes/ ...qualification language so ... it ... if the student because they get .... are getting income from
(both talking)
Boothroy/ Their parents.
Dilkes/ ...their parents, would be disqualified for Section 8. It would be the same thing.
Boothroy/ So they come from a low-income family, yes. If they come from a wealthy family,
probably not.
Dilkes/ And that's why there's a fee in lieu option for students because your ... a lot of typical
undergraduate students are not going to qualify.
Boothroy/ Right. Um ... this just explains this and we'll have to get more detail on that, uh, the
last sentence is that this may be provided off-site, but only within the Riverfront Crossing
area, and we ... you know, there's a lot of different ways you can use this pot of money as
it grows, uh, downpayment assistance was mentioned earlier. it's ... it's an opportunity, uh,
to do some more creative things, uh, in the area, uh, even than maybe, uh, buy some
housing in a, uh, a project that may have already met the 15% but you want to have more
affordable housing in there for some reason. So ... there's a lot of things you can do with
those fees.
Botchway/ Question.
Boothroy/ Yeah?
Botchway/ Downpayment assistance wouldn't be able to be used in other areas. You'd have to
use (both talking)
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of September 1, 2015.
September 1, 2015 Iowa City City Council Work Session Page 13
Boothroy/ Yep. Uh, funds (mumbled) create an affordable housing fund for the sole purpose of
supporting affordable housing in the Riverfront Crossing area. It's kind of a repeat
of...what I've covered already. Um, and a number of different ways that that can be. Uh,
I think it would really be a good source of funds for owner -occupied households. Uh, it's
more difficult to make owner -occupied units affordable, and uh, I think that'd be a
good ... uh, great use of those funds.
Payne/ I have a question on that.
Boothroy/ Yeah!
Payne/ Um, in discussions with the School District we've talked a lot about concentrating low-
income in the same area.
Boothroy/ Uh huh.
Payne/ Isn't this doing just that?
Boothroy/ I don't think so. I think it ... it's a different model. It's ... it ... what it's saying is that in
these ... these high-density, and this is going to be a high-density area we're
talking... you've seen some projects already. We've seen some others that are on the
drawing board that have, uh, you know the development itself is ... is a community in and
of itself, and I don't think a 10 or 15% requirement is a concentration that is going to be a
problem.
Payne/ But if you have it in building after building after building after building, and there's lots
of families with K through 12...
Boothroy/ But the overall dens ... well, I don't know that they're gonna ... I mean that's the thing
that we haven't worked out, whether there'll be a lot of family housing in this area
anyway because it's going to be vertical versus, you know, single-family detached. That's
not the housing you're going to get down here. This is all going to be apartment/condo
type of housing.
Payne/ But don't low-income people live in that kind of housing?
Boothroy/ (both talking) They do. It may not be quite at the same as the area that you're
thinking about, the South District, uh, but overall (both talking) the ... the thought is with
inclusionary zoning, the overall area would not exceed a 10 to 15% range, and I think
that's a very reasonable range for mixed housing, mixed income housing in this area.
Throgmorton/ Doug, wouldn't you say (both talking)
Boothroy/ And I think this is like three different elementary districts, as well. (both talking)
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of September 1, 2015.
September 1, 2015 Iowa City City Council Work Session Page 14
Payne/ Well, across the river is one, but then on ... on this side, on the east side (several talking) is
two (both talking)
Boothroy/ ...two and then one on the other side, is that the way it was or ... yeah.
Hayek/ On the...
Payne/ ...west side...
Hayek/ What are they?
Payne/ Do you remember, Geoff, when you sent it to me?
Fruin/ Uh, it's Horn on the west side of the river and then it splits between Longfellow and
Twain.
Payne/ Yeah. And most of it was Twain, wasn't it? If I remember right.
Boothroy/ But those boundaries are never static.
Payne/ Well, unless you live in Iowa City! (laughs) Then ... then for 20 years they're static!
Boothroy/ Could be! I mean they're not ... they're not, you know, I understand they're politically
static but they're not really...
Markus/ At the end of the day it's still (both talking)
Boothroy/ 10 to 15%.
Markus/ ...10 to 15%!
Payne/ Right.
Boothroy/ It's minimal.
Throgmorton/ Yeah, so wouldn't you say...
Payne/ It's (several talking)
Throgmorton/ If I understand Doug correctly, he's saying that the consequence would be
precisely the opposite of...of what Michelle is concerned about. Instead of concentrating
lower income people in one part of the city, it would enhance dispersion and ... and, uh,
and ... in a more equitable kind of (both talking)
Boothroy/ Every property would share the same responsibility.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of September 1, 2015.
September 1, 2015 Iowa City City Council Work Session Page 15
Hayek/ But, uh... but doesn't that assume you're starting from scratch?
Boothroy/ We are here.
Hayek/ Well, but you already have levels of poverty anywhere, including within Riverfront
Crossings. Now my understanding is that the census tract data we have for that area is
probably skewed...
Boothroy/ It is!
Hayek/ ...by student data.
Boothroy/ Right.
Hayek/ Right? So I don't know what it looks like if you can (both talking)
Boothroy/ But you've driven around that area. It's pretty much a blank pallet at this point
because of the way the zoning and the development has occurred in the past ... over the last
20 or 30 years.
Hayek/ Yeah.
Boothroy/ What we've done is we've... through the improvements we're going to put in place, the
park and the ... the form based code, as well as ... we're creating a whole new neighborhood.
We're bringing back a neighborhood that existed in 68, except at a higher density. Uh,
and you don't have, uh, the families that were living down there, the HyVee goo ... food
store, the AP ... A&P grocery store that was there on ... there were two grocery stores there.
There was a neighborhood park where the County building is sitting. There was a
neighborhood there back in the 60s. We don't have that anymore down there.
Hayek/ So is that the distinction though, or one of the distinctions, that... that... and you know, this
leads us to the affordable housing location model (both talking)
Boothroy/ We'll get there in a minute.
Hayek/ But ... but that... that... levels of poverty within this area are... are... are more attenuated, visa
vie the School District, because they are ... they tend to be college la..college-age students
(both talking)
Boothroy/ That's part of it.
Hayek/ ...that's what drives the numbers.
Boothroy/ Plus we're bringing in a whole new... we're... we're creating a whole new population
base here too.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of September 1, 2015.
September 1, 2015 Iowa City City Council Work Session Page 16
Hayek/ Yeah.
Boothroy/ We're starting, I think, almost from scratch in terms of building a neighborhood, and
so you don't have some of those issues that you have in some of the existing
neighborhoods.
Payne/ But ... if I understand right, the idea is to bring ... all kinds of diversity (both talking)
Boothroy/ Absolutely!
Payne/ And I'm not saying that I'm suggesting that it will happen. I just want to make sure that
we've thought about it and tried to alleviate it from happening, that we have a
concentration in this area.
Markus/ You know, I think you have to remember (difficult to hear, noises on mic) as to how we
shifted to Riverfront Crossing in terms of this inclusionary zoning. We've been having
this debate as long as I've been around here about inclusionary zoning across the entire
community. And so we talked about this area as kind of a test area to look at it in that
fashion. And so like ... and I ... one of the things that I've kind of known throughout my
career is people get into ordinances. They think an ordinance is forever, and legal
counsel and the staff will tell you that ordinances get tweaked and changed constantly.
So if we see some aberration, you know, that goes to your kind of concern, we can move
back into this ordinance and deal with it. Um ... but I think we're trying to test this area,
not just for ourselves but the whole metropolitan area and see if this works.
Payne/ Yeah, I ... I'm not saying that it's a poor idea. I'm just trying to point out that, you know,
everything has unintended consequences and that's exactly why everything's a living
document and you have to tweak as you go.
Hayek/ And it's a legitimate concern, I mean, Twain is one of our higher FRI, schools. You
know, and...and...but I .... I gather the anticipation is ... you're not gonna ... you're just not
going to get that many families, probably, because of the type of housing and the
location.
Markus/ I suppose where a problem could occur ... is if your ... you know if the affordable units
were to attract a concentration of school kids, and the balance of units attracted young
professionals and students only that that could create a number beyond 15%. So...
Payne/ Yes! Yes, that's...
Boothroy/ Just by market along (both talking)
Markus/ So I think you have to kind of watch, you know, the demographic of this area to see
how it evolves, and that's why you can move back into this ordinance.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of September 1, 2015.
September 1, 2015 Iowa City City Council Work Session Page 17
Botchway/ I'm interested in the fee in lieu of, and so ... for the fee in lieu of you're only allowed to
use in the particular area and is there a minimum, um...
Boothroy/ It would be based on the gap between the ... for market and the low market rate, uh,
value, and so, uh.... that would be adjusted on a regular basis, based on cost of
construction and things of that nature. So, one of the things we have to do is figure out
what that's.. looked at .... gonna look like. What we did was in our conversations, Tom
Jackson took a number of projects that were being built in the near downtown area,
looked at the cost of construction, and....and what it would be at 60%, 80%, or 120%
area median income in terms of what that gap would look like and, uh, and we got some
numbers. It could be 50,000, it could be more, it could be a little bit less depending on
how affordable you were making the unit. Uh, at the end of the day, that's a discussion
that you all will have when we start putting the ordinance together in terms of what that
fee's going to look like, uh, and what that gap ... how that gap is going to be ... uh, I mean,
even if it were let's say hypothetically we ... we're looking at 60%, which is what we're
proposed here, and the gap ended up being let's say 65,000, you could always adjust it to
a lower number if you felt that was too high or whatever, but uh, we will have a
methodology, we will have a recommendation, and like we do with our parking fees and
stuff like that, we will have a process by which it can be adjusted based on the market.
Throgmorton/ Doug, I want to ask a question (both talking)
Boothroy/ ...but the... that's...
Throgmorton/ Oh, sorry!
Boothroy/ Go ahead!
Throgmorton/ I ... I think the previous one referred to 60%, uh, area median income (both talking)
Boothroy/ This is ... this also does too.
Throgmorton/ Oh this ... yeah. So if I remember right ... rightly that's equivalent to about $44,000 a
year?
Boothroy/ Um...
Throgmorton/ 60% is, uh, and I was just remembering (both talking)
Boothroy/ I can look that up here in a minute. Go ahead.
Mims/ (several talking) That's what it says for three person, yeah.
Throgmorton/ I'm just remembering a fact that came out of the, um, affordable housing update
that Tracy and others put together for us a year or whatever ago, and if I remember
rightly, it said that approximately 36% of Iowa City households headed by individuals 25
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of September 1, 2015.
September 1, 2015 Iowa City City Council Work Session Page 18
or older had incomes below $44,000 a year. So there's a big swath of people in Iowa City
who are in this 60% area median income or below. Uh, and I just want to draw attention
to that. There's a ... a big group of people who need, uh... uh, housing that they can afford
to live in.
Boothroy/ And we thought the 60% would make a real difference, uh, we did talk about whether
it should be 80% and the conclusion was that that doesn't really address the need like it
should, particularly for rental property, and to that ... that's how we came to 60, and again
we did an analysis of that with Tom Jackson in terms of what that looked like. Uh, it was
his recommendation as well that it be set at 60%, um, because it was felt that that was a
number that ... that the development community and the City could work with.
Payne/ And is that net or gross? Can you remind me?
Boothroy/ Uh, 60% ... well there are some ... I think there are some exceptions in terms of how you
compute that, but it's gross.
Payne/ So the median ... AMI is the gross and then the 60% is off of the gross, so obviously these
people... there's still a net income here, not a gross ... the gross income. So when the ... so
when you're figuring the 30%, do you figure that off net or gross? (several talking)
Okay, but do you figure the 30% off net or gross?
Boothroy/ Off gross.
Payne/ You figure the 30% off gross also.
Boothroy/ Right!
Payne/ Okay.
Boothroy/ But when you ... well, like for the Section 8 program, there are some things that don't
count as income, even though you might think of it as income.
Payne/ Right. Okay.
Boothroy/ So the...
Payne/ I just could never .... I never can remember if it's net or gross.
Boothroy/ No, it's gross.
Payne/ Okay.
Mims/ Doug, going back to, um ... on principle #4, just if...since we've gotten through all of 'em.
How are we going to ... the difference in terms of the fee in lieu of, we're saying that the
rental properties... rental projects cannot do that, owner -occupied can. We've worked with
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of September 1, 2015.
September 1, 2015 Iowa City City Council Work Session Page 19
some projects where we have not necessarily known ... if they're going to be rental or
owner -occupied, um, or they might plan to be owner -occupied but they're going to hold
some of them off the market for a while. I'm assuming there's going to have to be
something in the ordinance to address this uncertainty (several talking)
Hayek/ Some may be commercial on the ... and some may be residential on the ground level.
Boothroy/ (several talking) We're going to have to figure out how we ... how we nail that down.
Mims/ Okay!
Boothroy/ It's to their advantage, uh, to try to be owner -occupied if they want to pay a fee
obviously.
Mims/ Right!
Boothroy/ Um, and we'll have to make sure we figure out how to make that...
Mims/ Okay.
Boothroy/ You know it ... again I'll look to other models to figure out what that language might
look like. It may ... it probably isn't going to be perfect. There's always a way ... I've been
in the enforcement business for 40 years. There's always (both talking)
Mims/ There's always loopholes! (laughs)
Boothroy/ There's always a way to find the crack in the wall, let me tell ya!
Throgmorton/ This is where my concern about the fee in lieu of relative to TIF comes in.
Boothroy/ Uh huh.
Throgmorton/ If developers are able to say they want to make a fee in lieu of, pay a fee in lieu of,
and pay it with the TIF they get from the City, then they're just moving around.
Boothroy/ Yeah, but that's a developer's agreement that you have, and like Tom was saying
earlier, you've got control of the developer's agreement and we can also write in the
ordinance how much they can use of that. So I think where the City's financially
involved, I think that's pretty controlled.
Payne/ Well and now that we're doing rebates, I think it might be more difficult because they're
really paying and then getting a rebate. So it's not like we'd be giving them money (both
talking)
Boothroy/ Yeah!
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of September 1, 2015.
September 1, 2015 Iowa City City Council Work Session Page 20
Payne/ ...and then they'd be taking that and putting it over here, but it ... you could still play games
with it, you would .... you would think! (laughs)
Boothroy/ Well, these are the concepts, these are the basic fundamentals. The ... the real work is
in drawing up the ordinance (laughter) let me tell ya! So (laughs) uh, if it was this easy
(several talking) it would be...it would be...it would be great. Now I ... I should address
the last one again cause it could come up as an email. Remember if it's a TIF project or a
City, it would be required to, uh, have, uh, affordable housing, even if it's elderly or
disabled. We didn't really talk about this in great detail. Um, you know, most of what I
see or Tracy sees that comes in with elderly housing, there's usually tax credits and so a
lot of it is subsidized. There aren't many Oaknolls around that ... that are ... that are for
profit. Urn ... I get the principle of the thing, that, uh, just as a matter of principle, maybe
they shouldn't be accepted, uh... uh, but as a practical matter, I don't think there's a lot of
elderly projects that would ... that would slip through the cracks on this. Urn ... so ... it was
part of the recommendations, urn ... you know I don't know that the Committee feels that
strongly about this one, uh, and I think that's one that we could .... we could negotiate
maybe as we go forward. So let me get to the recommendations.
Botchway/ Wait a minute. So you're saying that you would ... you could possibly change that one
to be required?
Boothroy/ Yeah, I think we need to talk about that. I can talk ... I can do a telephone thing
(mumbled) so...
Botchway/ Okay.
Hayek/ But the ... yeah, but...you need to make a recommendation ultimately that you think is
best, you know, I mean it's clear that the Committee either didn't discuss it or did to the
extent of reaching that conclusion.
Boothroy/ Well I think (both talking) here's my gut feeling about it, I guess, is that ... and it was in
my initial, um, memorandum to the Committee about talking points is that, uh, we were
covering it with TIF cause a lot of the more expensive projects with elderly... elderly can
be an expensive project because of the design considerations, it most likely would
probably have a density that would justify a gap that would end up having to TIF or they
would come in as tax credit, and so what I didn't want to have happen is to discourage a
for-profit, uh, middle-income, uh, elderly project from going ... going into the Riverfront
Crossing area cause I thought it was critical that we have that nice mix of...of individuals
and so ... given the fact that you have, uh... uh, a project that takes more planning and more
expense to develop to meet the needs of elderly, disabled, uh, I thought we were covered
under the existing situation. So I would leave it in, frankly, but I don't think it's a deal -
breaker one way or the other.
Hayek/ And all I would suggest is in response to one email, you know...
Boothroy/ Yeah. We let the process (both talking) unfold.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of September 1, 2015.
September 1, 2015 Iowa City City Council Work Session Page 21
Hayek/ ...would recommend ultimately... this as well as any other item what you think or what
the Committee thinks is ... or staff thinks is the best approach and it may or may not
change this, I have no idea.
Boothroy/ Well I want the ... would like the Council, number one, I'd like the Council to ... to, I
mean this is ... this is a ... to bring this group of people together and to have us all agree, uh,
with different points of view and different passions about this I think is remarkable and
so, you know, I think we should take this moment in time and move forward, uh, with
drafting an ordinance that's applicable only to the Riverfront Crossing area and based on
these fundamental design principles. Um, and the second one, of course, is to look at the
affordable housing location model and what we're suggesting is that in this area, uh,
because of the way it's ... we think it's going to develop, uh, there's going to be high,
expensive type of buildings that are going to have a gap and TIF is going to be requested.
Uh, we think that TIF should be an exemption from the affordable housing location
model. It doesn't really impact other areas of the community. You look at the South
District area. I can't imagine there would be projects down there that would generate a
gap that would justify you extending TIF into this area. I don't think it opens the door,
uh, to, uh, significantly changing the affordable housing location model, just based on the
exemption for TIF, and so I would strongly recommend that you do that, otherwise
I'm ... I'm concerned that you get a project, uh... that has two units of affordable housing in
it and then somebody comes in within 500 -feet and they can't ... they can't do anything.
Uh... and I don't want to go down that road if we don't have to.
Mims/ Why not take a different approach and maybe a simpler approach and simply exempt the
Riverfront Crossings area from the affordable housing location model?
Boothroy/ Well that's good for me too! (laughter) I like that approach.
Mims/ 1, I mean I ... to me that is just simpler. It doesn't get into the different funding streams or
anything else. It's simply Riverfront, you know, the affordable housing location model
does not apply to the Riverfront Crossings area (both talking)
Boothroy/ I agree with you 100V
Mims/ Did the Committee talk about that? Was there disagreement within the Committee?
Boothroy/ (both talking) No, we didn't get into the, uh, affordable housing location model (both
talking)
Mims/ Okay.
Boothroy/ ...in details. This is at a staff level. Uh, the...it...it was recognized that this could be a
problem, but our ... our charge was to deal only with inclusionary housing...
Mims/ Sure!
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of September 1, 2015.
September 1, 2015 Iowa City City Council Work Session Page 22
Boothroy/ ...not to talk about the merits of...of this model.
Mims/ Okay.
Dilkes/ Susan, I think it's really six of one, half a dozen of another, because the ... the affordable
housing model only applies to City funding. So...
Mims/ I just wonder from a public standpoint and an understanding of what it is we're trying to
do, because when I was reading through this and I was, you know, I was reading Tracy's
memo, which you know I appreciate all the detail, and then I'm trying to figure out, okay,
what are ... what are the different funding models, what are the different funding sources,
so what does this really mean, and so if it doesn't jump off the page to me, in terms of
what it means, when I have at least some semblance of understanding, I can't imagine
somebody in the general public... understanding it, whereas if you simply said ... the
affordable housing location model does not apply to Riverfront Crossings ... I mean if
there's reasons that doesn't work I'm happy to ... to listen to that and understand, and (both
talking)
Boothroy/ That's kind of what we're saying whether it's exempt (both talking)
Dilkes/ So in other words why would you ... you would apply it to everything, CDBG and Home,
as well, which is what they (both talking)
Boothroy/ Right.
Dilkes/ I think Tracy needs to explain that.
Hayek/ (several talking) Hey, Tracy!
Mims/ Thank you, Tracy!
Hightshoe/ I have no problem exempting Riverfront Crossings from the whole affordable
housing location model, just because it'd be easier. Um, what we were trying to do is
some people still had a concern that ... um ... that the model still had to play citywide, so we
wanted to try to find a way that, you know, to be honest, River... inclusionary housing and
the affordable housing location model do not work well together.
Mims/ Agreed!
Hightshoe/ So we were trying to figure out a way that we could still ... have the model citywide,
but ... but allow inclusionary housing zoning to work. Do you know what I mean?
Mims/ Yep. I hear ya!
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of September 1, 2015.
September 1, 2015 Iowa City City Council Work Session Page 23
Hightshoe/ I have no problem with exempting the model from the Riverfront Crossings (both
talking)
Mims/ And that is my preference.
Throgmorton/ Well it sounds like (both talking)
Mims/ ...cleaner.
Throgmorton/ ...suggestion tome. I ... I don't know if there are any ramifications that we can't
think of at the moment, but in principle I think that's a pretty good suggestion.
Boothroy/ And we would ... we would of course, when we come back with, if...if you agree to go
forward with the ordinance, then we would bring up this conversation at the same time.
Mims/ Sure!
Hayek/ I'm ... I'm with you, I mean, you know the ... there are individuals, some individuals and
some groups who don't like that model. I think it's an important model. Two of the three
components are goals, were to alleviate the pressure on the school system, um, and from
my perspective, the source of funding for a subsidized housing project is ... is not ... entirely
relevant to ... to my concern of...of where it might be going, whether it's TIF or ... or
through Home funding or ... or something like that, and ... and it...it seems to me that
the ... that the reason we're talking about this pilot project in this particular part of town is
because... among other things, the ... the higher poverty levels we see now at our ... as we
just talked about five minutes ago, associated with students, college-age students or
graduate level students, and not ... students or families who are attending the ... the school
district.
Hightshoe/ Yeah, my concerns were not huge in the Riverfront Crossings because historical
development with the vertical development. What we've seen in the past economic
development or TIF projects are efficiency, one -bedrooms, and very few two bedrooms.
This is not the type of housing that families with a lot of children, so you're not gonna
have a huge concentration of families with children, based on high-rise development that
I've seen so far in any of our economic development projects. So I wasn't worried so
much about the concentration and ... in this neigh ... in the Riverfront Crossings.
Mims/ Well, certainly this is not all gonna develop overnight, that this is a living document. So
if we were to start seeing that happening, I'm assuming we could come back and try (both
talking)
Boothroy/ Well that's what number 3 is, is that the Committee felt very strongly that ... that,
uh... course not knowing when it would start it's hard to know, but that at least on an
annual basis or some regular basis as determined by the Council, that you look at it to see
if it's having the intended consequences, or if there are unintended consequences you
don't like that we take care of it. So...
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of September 1, 2015.
September 1, 2015 Iowa City City Council Work Session Page 24
Botchway/ I'm a little bit confused, because it feels like a lot of the conversation has been
focused on the fact that this area won't necessarily have the, um, potential for growth that
would incorporate families, but before when we were talking about the Riverfront
Crossings District, that was one of the things that we were talking about it ... looking for, I
mean obviously there's a student component. I think we addressed that in some of the
buildings that are closer to the University and closer to downtown, but I ... I believe, and I
could be wrong so that's why I'm (mumbled) help me out, that we were thinking that
further along that there would be the potential for, you know, developments that would
include more families, but I'm hearing more differently now.
Boothroy/ We're not precluding that. I think we're just speculating that ... that, uh, with one and
two bedroom apartments that the number of, uh, school age, elementary kids, is going to
be less than if you have, you know, standalone, single-family houses. Uh, we expect
families to be in here. I think certainly new families, people that are getting started,
trying to get a home of their own. I think the goal is still out there, at least I hear, is that,
you know, even if you start in an apartment, the goal is to be able to move to a suburb or
some place in town where you can have your own lot and yard, uh, that's a very common,
uh... uh, reference for families cause they have a place for the kids to play. So, I do think
there will be kids down here, but they may not ... they may not, it may be different than
some of the like Windsor Ridge and some of the other places in town, because it'll be a
different development style.
Throgmorton/ (coughing, difficult to hear speaker) ...referring to the whole Riverfront Crossings
District, which is a fairly large area (both talking)
Boothroy/ ...there are some places where you can have (both talking)
Throgmorton/ So closer to downtown is more likely that we're going to see the student, influx of
students or you know preponderance of students. Farther south, it's more likely that we'll
see a greater mix, right?
Hightshoe/ Or assuming smaller families. I mean, by historical growth (mumbled)
Botchway/ Also to go back to the point about the elderly. So ... and you used that example as far
as, you know, you weren't trying to, um, have a situation where kind of a middle-income,
elderly development would be built, or would not be built, for that ... for the particular
point that you had the requirement, but isn't that why we're doing what we're doing? So
in theAn the event that we do have a middle-income development that they do still have
affordable housing ... 10%, 15% (both talking)
Boothroy/ Well, keep in mind that ... that, uh... uh, all residential development in this area is
required to, uh, have affordable housing. So just because ... not everybody wants to live in
an elderly housing facility. Personally I don't. And um....
Hayek/ You're a young, happenin' guy, Doug! (laughter)
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of September 1, 2015.
September 1, 2015 Iowa City City Council Work Session Page 25
Boothroy/ I know! Well 69 might be defined as elderly, but uh... I ... so I think that, you know,
you can live in lots of different places. You could live near the park. You ... so
what..what I was saying earlier was that ... that elderly housing is usually designed to meet
a lot of different... it's designed differently than ... than multi -family, market -rate housing
and it costs more to design it and so I think we've covered through TIF. I think we've
covered it through some other requirements in there because lot of times they are looking
for tax exempt status and so I think this just gives a break to ... to a project that might want
to come in and not go to that additional expense of providing affordable housing.
Payne/ But (both talking)
Boothroy/ You know it's a ... I understand the principle of it. I don't think it's a big deal one way
or the other. I think what we can do is work through the process. If it's a huge issue, I
don't think this would be an issue for the Committee. That's all I'm saying.
Payne/ But ... even if it's elderly housing and it's zoned Riverfront Crossings, they still have to
provide 10%. Are you saying they would be exempted period?
Boothroy/ Unless they're getting TIF or ... or they're getting other public dollars ... like tax inc ... tax
credits.
Payne/ Because I thought originally it said on ... on principle I ... inclusionary zoning is mandatory
when property is zoned at Riverfront Crossings zoning designation.
Boothroy/ It is mandatory, but... it's... but they have an exemption for that ... from that ... that one,
part two there. That's what that last bullet is, #7. So...
Payne/ That's hard to follow.
Dilkes/ I ... I think when the drafting of the ordinance is going on we can look at accomplishing,
you know it sounds like Doug is saying if they're getting tax credits and that kind of
thing, they've already got that then ... I mean we can do some kind of middle, you know.
Boothroy/ Yeah. I think as a practical matter, all elderly housing will probably have, uh... uh,
affordable housing in it because in this area I don't think you can afford to build it
without some kind of tax credits or TIF financing, but ... you never know.
Mims/ I would just say ... number one, thank you to all the Committee members, um (both
talking)
Boothroy/ That's my next ... (both talking)
Mims/ I cannot imagine, you know, the amount of time that was put in and people with such
diverse backgrounds and opinions coming together, and coming up with what I think are
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of September 1, 2015.
September 1, 2015 Iowa City City Council Work Session Page 26
seven really, really good principles on which to base an ordinance, and obviously, um,
now legal staff will have the fun (laughs) probably (both talking)
Dilkes/ Planning first.
Mims/ Planning first? Um, in putting together, um ... the ordinance and, you know, I ... I just look
forward to seeing that. I think we've asked ... it's been a lot of good questions and
concerns brought up, but in general it certainly sounds to me like Council is very
supportive of...of the seven principles.
Boothroy/ Do we have four? (several talking) Okay, just wanted to make sure before I walk out
of here! (laughs)
Hayek/ I would ... (several talking)
Dobyns/ What about the exemption? Uh (both talking)
Boothroy/ Well I think we'll address it as we go through the process (several talking)
Mims/ Yeah, let's see the ordinance.
Botchway/ I would echo those comments as well, I mean, this is obviously something I'm really
excited about. Not saying that I'm not excited about all the other wonderful things that
we do as well, but um, you know, just at least testing this out and you know there... there's
been a lot of discussion about affordable housing (coughs) Sorry! Not only in, um, Iowa
City but just Johnson County as a whole, so knowing that we're taking these steps is I
think a really good step in the right direction.
Hayek/ I will say, cause I can see their faces out in the crowd, I hope (both talking)
Botchway/ (mumbled)
Hayek/ ...that the proponents of...of affordable housing continue to make the case on a regional
basis because ... uh, this is another example of Iowa City taking unilateral action, which I
think we historically have done on this and other issues, not just in the area of housing,
um, housing is a .... affordable housing is a regional issue. It requires regional solutions.
Uh, I have yet to see a lot of movement outside of our community on this issue, and I
hope we do!
Boothroy/ Well this will be the only inclusionary housing ordinance in the state of Iowa.
Hayek/ Anyway, but thank you. This is a lot of work.
Throgmorton/ 1'd like to echo what Susan and Kingsley said, uh, I'm really ... as you stated, really
pleased to see, uh, what the Committee's come up with. I'm especially happy to see the
mix of people involved. It's a really terrific mix of people, uh, and ... and I think ... it's the
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of September 1, 2015.
September 1, 2015 Iowa City City Council Work Session Page 27
kind of collaborative work that I personally really admire and would like to see more of
with regard to ... the most controversial kind of topics we face. So bravo to, uh, the
development community that was involved, Glen and others, and to Sarah and others
within the not for profit group, and uh, you Doug and Sarah and so on.
Boothroy/ Thank you!
Hayek/ Thanks, Doug.
Mims/ Thank you.
Hayek/ So let's move on. It's already 6:00. Uh, I don't know how much time (both talking)
Throgmorton/ Sarah ... I said Tracy, I mean I said Sarah — I meant Tracy. I apologize! (laughs)
Hayek/ Next item is, uh, follow up presentation on regulations impacting lot and housing unit
sizes.
Staff follow-up presentation on rep-ulations impacting lot and housinp, unit sizes UP # 4 Info
Packet of 8/27 info packet]:
Yapp/ Uh, good evening. Karen Howard, uh, will lead this discussion and it's a follow up to a
discussion you had earlier this summer, uh, on small lots and small houses, and what
opportunities currently exist in Iowa City, uh, and some suggestions for, uh... future
improvements.
Howard/ Uh, this is a really interesting conversation cause I think it's a continuation of a
conversation that we had about 10 yeas ago when we adopted the new, uh, zoning
ordinance. I guess it's not new (noise on mic) new so much anymore since it's about 10
years old. Um ... uh, but we did a bunch of things and I just wanted to go ... remind, uh, I
actually pulled some slides from the presentations at that time about how we were trying
to create more opportunities for, uh, lower cost housing, using some of our single-family
zoning strategies. Um, and you know, as it pointed out in the memo, from the Council
Members, one way to do that is to lower the lot sizes, uh, lower the house sizes to get that
lower cost housing. Um, you can always go larger than the minimum lot sizes, but, um,
by lowering our lot sizes, we do provide that opportunity for lower cost housing. And
this just is an illustration from a group in Minnesota, an affordable housing group in
Minnesota, to show, you know, this is 15 years old now, but that relative lot, the
infrastructure costs for different sized lots, an analysis that they did showing how much
infrastructure costs you could save by, um ... by lowering the lot sizes and the lot widths.
So you can see that as you lower those lot widths down to a 40 -foot lot, um, even with
the cost of an alley, it's considerably ... and this is just the infrastructure costs that goes
into development.
Mims/ (both talking) Karen, is that a paved alley?
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of September 1, 2015.
September 1, 2015 Iowa City City Council Work Session Page 28
Howard/ Right, that's a paved alley. They did an analysis in Minnesota for ... for this affordable
housing group to show that (mumbled) as you lower those lot withs, you know (both
talking)
Mims/ ...water, sewer (both talking)
Howard/ ...garages and all that, that uh... um...
Mims/ Well I find it interesting because it goes to a flipside of...I read, was reading something
not too long ago, people starting to criticize that model from an environmental standpoint
because of putting down more concrete, and so (both talking)
Howard/ ...you can see the driveways there, how much concrete do you put in the driveways
when they're in the front versus having the garages right on the alley in the back. So an
analysis we did 10 years ago, we did quite an analysis even in our community and I didn't
put those slides in there (both talking) they got pretty complicated but we did land costs.
We did infrastructure costs. We compared the alleys and um, even without calculating
the, um, the dri ... the cost to pave the driveways...
Mims/ Uh huh.
Howard/ ...you know, which is a considerable pavement cost as well, urn ... it came out about
similar to this.
Mims/ Okay! That's good just to know then!
Howard/ So ... of course the benefits of compact development, we've touted this for years in our
Comprehensive Plan. The developer has more lots to sell, the housing consumer has
lower cost housing, um, uses less land, um, so it slows the outward growth of the city,
and then it also provides that opportunity to cluster housing to, uh, preserve sensitive
areas or open space for the community. So our charge in 2005, and this was from the
Duncan Associates, the consultant hired to analyze our zoning code at the time for
affordable housing opportunities has said one possible barrier is that we had relatively
little, uh, land, vacant land, zoned for higher density, single-family and multi -family
development, but in Iowa City, as in many communities, there's often strong resistance to
that zoning, and so what we looked at that time was ... why is there this community
resistance to the higher density housing and urn ... that analysis, really the private spaces in
the community, um ... we have parts of the neighborhood. You have the private spaces
and you have the public spaces, which are the public streets and the ... and the parks ... and
then just to acknowledge that the neighborhood streets are really some of the most
important and well -used public spaces in our neighborhoods, and the private market
doesn't always do a great job of respecting those public spaces. So what people are
reacting to in a lot of cases when they see higher density housing, these are the kinds of
concerns is that you have these narrow frontages, which allows less room for the
residential home, aspects of the home, there's little space on each lot for pedestrian
entrances, street trees or fro ... front yard landscaping, um, it interrupts the public sidewalk
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of September 1, 2015.
September 1, 2015 Iowa City City Council Work Session Page 29
so you have these wide driveways and a lot of paving in the front. Um, also that means
you have the loss of on -street parking. Um, so the need to widen our streets in order to
have, you know, lot of paving. So it...it has a lot of unintended consequences. Um, so
what we tried to do in 2005 is to reduce that community resistance to higher density
housing, um ... uh, to address our goals in our Comprehensive Plan and now here's... here's
examples of higher density housing where you have, uh, neighborhoods that respect that
residential character. This is what we want. This is what we wan to achieve, and I think
that's some of the things that were in the memo is that we need to be careful about how
we achieve the affordable housing, um, so that we maintain, uh, that good neighborhood
quality. Uh, we want that room for front yard landscaping. We want homes that address
the street. We want, uh, unin ... uninterrupted sidewalks. So ... instead of the picture on the
left, what we really ... on the right, what we really want is the picture on the left. So it's
not all about reducing costs, but also about ensuring that long-term value in those
neighborhoods. So we took sort of a two-pronged approach in 2005, um, we found some
strategies to reduce the community resistance, um, but then lowered some of our lot sizes.
One of the things that was mentioned in 2005 as well as ... as today is we have that
planned development option for developers to go through, to master plan in communities,
um, to do small ... small lots and townhouses and cluster development, but those plans are
subject to review by the public at rezoning hearings before... before you all and the
Planning and Zoning Commission and so it...it really, there's a lot of developer upfront
costs that they incur in design and engineering costs, upfront, without really the assurance
that the planned development will be approved through that legislative process. So the
developers have used that as a ... as a con really to the planned development process.
Um ... so sometimes that process is longer and lengthier and it's not always approved. Um,
and then the give and take of the upfront design process does sometimes result in a higher
quality development and then you also have the master plan, which becomes the zoning.
So there's a real assurance from the public's perspective that what you see is what you
get ... when it's all said and done. So there's pros and cons to the planned development
process, but we wanted to streamline that and so we ... we did some things to our single-
family zones to allow by right without having to go through that planned development
process. So ... um ... in the single-family zones we did, um, propose bonus provisions,
density prov... provisions and those are typically if there's an alley available, this could
apply in an in -fill situation in some of our existing neighborhoods. It also can, uh, apply
in new developments, so that you can actually have more density, and here's ... I think
there was ... this was in the memo that we sent to you. So standard lot size in our low
density RS -5 zone is 8,000 square feet. If you put in an alley, you can go that ... that much
further. So you can see the differences in the lot sizes and the lot widths. So you can
substantially increase the number of lots you can achieve if you put in that ... that rear
access. So that's allowed by right in those zones, um ... as a density bonus without having
to go through that rezoning process. The other thing we did was we allowed duplexes on
the corner lots in the ... in all our single-family zones. So to provide more of a mix, and
then we also liberalized the rules for ... for encouraging accessory apartments in owner -
occupied, single-family homes, and then we established some standards to help those
duplexes blend in better with ... a single-family neighborhood. So for example, the reason
we say corner lots is so, um, the units ... here's a duplex where the front door and the
garage face one street, one unit, and the other one faces the other street. So it...it really
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of September 1, 2015.
September 1, 2015 Iowa City City Council Work Session Page 30
blends better into a single-family character neighborhood. Here's one where there's
actually an alley and the front door faces this street, and the front door of this unit faces
the other street. Um, and that's a model that's used in a number of communities where
they have corner -lot duplexes. So these are all things that we allow currently. Um ... we
have had some accessory apartments built. The Peninsula's a good example of that. Um,
and this ... these are allowed in any single-family zone in the city. And then we did
establish a small lot, single-family zone, the RS -8 zone is our... considered our small lot,
single-family zone, which also allows duplexes on the corners in the same fashion the
RS -5 does but smaller lots. And then, um ... so basically it's similar to the RS -5 except
it's ... it's basically smaller. And then with our, um ... uh... what do we have here? So in our
high density single-family zone, this is the RS -12 zone. We have three ... three single-
family zones and this zone, this is where we allow duplexes, townhouses, and single-
family homes, um, they all ... it is a single-family zone, so they're all on separate lots,
except for the duplexes. It's two units on one lot. So what we did in this zone ... before
there was un ... unreasonable lot sizes required, so we reduced those down to make it
easier for people to develop those housing types in the RS -12 zone without having to go
through a planned development process. So ... instead of, um, the units on the right, the
standards will require, uh, rear access alleys for townhomes and you see those going up
all over town.
Hayek/ What is our approach to the alley cost and then on-going maintenance? I mean
those ... those are not...
Howard/ Well, a lot of the ... a lot of the developments, the newer developments are on private
property and a lot of 'ern they want to do the condominium regime instead of...and I think
that's why we're continuing to see planned developments. It's more of an ownership thing
than it is, um ... uh... it reduces, helps reduce the cost for maintaining the whole property
and also for, um, maintain those shared spaces. So the ... they're not actually public alleys
in those ... in those cases they're private. So they're treated more like driveways. So the
next steps and ... and to the memo that we received, um, there are some things that we can
do ... to improve what we already have on the books. Um ... we've looked at, uh, our
ordinance. We can eliminate the 2 -acre minimum size requirement for our planned
development process. We have currently a 2 -acre minimum, so that would allow more
in -fill situations to occur, and we don't see a big downsize to that. That's a simple code
amendment that we could do. Um ... it, the planned development would still be required to
go through that legislative process, but it would allow it (noises on mic) in -fill sites. And
then adopt, uh... there is an idea about adopting a new zoning or subdivision standards for
cottage clusters. Something that's called cottage clusters, cottage (mumbled), cottage
housing. Different communities have adopted ordinances and I'll ... I'll describe that in
just a moment. The third item listed in our memo was to adopt a form based zoning code
and a regulating plan citywide. And you're all familiar with Riverfront Crossings, what
we've done there. The Peninsula development's also regulated by a form based zoning
ordinance. Cities have ... more and more cities are doing form based ordinances citywide,
um ... the entire city of Miami is under a form based code. Um, there's a lot of smaller
towns too that are ... have adopted it citywide. Um, there's a lot of smaller towns too that
are ... have adopted it citywide, but it is a ... it is a ... a major legislative, um, process to
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of September 1, 2015.
September 1, 2015 Iowa City City Council Work Session Page 31
accomplish that. I mean with Riverfront Crossings, and with the Peninsula, there
was ... there was planning that went on originally to talk about how we wanted that, the
neighborhood to be ... uh, formed, where the streets should be. Everything is dictated in a
form based code ahead of time, including the placement of the streets and the lots,
urn ... uh, the block sizes, everything, and that's all dictated through the regulating plan.
So, if...if you wanted to go that direction, it would certainly be a much more involved
process.
Mims/ How ... do you know, Karen, with places who've had a city like Iowa City where you've
got the bulk of the city's already developed, under a more traditional zoning code, and
then you go in and try to apply a form based code to the entire city, I mean ... how well
does that work, how ... how much does it change what can happen say in a standard single-
family development, I mean...
Howard/ So ... I would guess that, I mean that would be something we'd have to investigate how
you retrofit, um, or whether that even needed to occur. I mean a lot of our older
neighborhoods of course look very similar to what a form based code would ... would
dictate. You know, a lot of the older neighborhoods built before 19 (noises on mic,
unable to hear speaker) urn ... in ... so the code would apply then to new ... new subdivisions
and new areas of the city as it developed, going forward, but we would do a lot of upfront
work, just like we did in Riverfront Crossings, um, well Riverfront Crossings is actually a
pretty good example. We already had the street network in place. We already had the
gridded street pattern. So it was fairly easy to overlay a form based code in that area
because we didn't have to create the street system and the street network. It would be
more ... even more involved than a greenfield site where, like the Peninsula where we
really had to figure out the lots and block sizes and it dictates, you know, which type of
housing is allowed on which blocks, and can get pretty prescriptive, um, but then you
really do know what you're getting in the end. Um ... so ... so it's just a different approach.
Throgmorton/ (several talking) Sorry! I didn't mean to interrupt ya! I ... I would guess that a
form based code should also apply to built-up neighborhoods, because there are,
especially in older neighborhoods, situations where somebody buys a piece of property.
They want to tear a particular building down, replace it with something else. So ... that's a
design kind of thing the form based code would address.
Howard/ Exactly.
Throgmorton/ Yeah, so ... and ... and then there are other developments kind of on the edge, uh, of,
uh, those kinds of neighborhoods, like Jessie Allen's building up there on north, uh, north
Linn Street, uh, that ... could be part of a form base code. So anyhow I ... I .... (both talking)
Howard/ Yeah, I think (both talking)
Throgmorton/ You know, they're kinda like...it...it could in principle apply to both new areas and
existing ones.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of September 1, 2015.
September 1, 2015 Iowa City City Council Work Session Page 32
Howard/ Right. Just like we did in Riverfront Crossings. It's an old area that already has some
of the infrastructure in place. So I think definitely you would just have to take the .... city
by areas and say what's going to work as far as codifying the form based zoning
standards and create a regulating plan, whether it's based on the existing street pattern of
blocks or whether it's something created new. Um, in the form based code dictates, you
know, streets, blocks. It dictates, you know, where the open spaces are, urn ... you know,
everything has to be within a certain walking distance of a, you know, public open space,
for example, but you'd ... you'd come up ... you'd go through that process ahead of time with
the whole community to figure out where the density should be, you know, this is the
downtown area. The buildings look much different than out on the edge of town where
you're expecting... still expecting single-family neighborhoods. It's just that it's, uh, it's
arranged ahead of time rather than having the streets and lots and blocks dictated through
the sub ... the regular subdivision process.
Hayek/ You know there's... there's definitely some appeal to ... to this. Uh, I agree with you with
respect to existing neighborhoods. I mean, often you see new housing in older
neighborhoods that is completely inconsistent with the ... the theme or the feel of that
neighborhood and it would be great to have lots of neighborhoods that look like the
Peninsula, quite frankly, but ... that was a huge undertaking. It was ... it took years to ... to
really catch some steam, urn ... and it'd be a big undertaking for the City to get into this,
and I ... and I would worry about... perception of difficulty of developing property. Um, I
think we're making progress back toward a ... a reputation of being a place where things
can get done. I ... I can see a criticism of this, but on the other hand there are ... I ... you
know, the Peninsula (both talking)
Howard/ It provides some certainty to the market, yeah, and uh, I think even ... there's been
enough of these new developments that have occurred across the country that there's been
an analysis about, that some ... like the Peninsula it takes a while to take off because until
people kind of see what the general character of the neighborhood is, um, once they do,
um, the analysis of all these kinds of new development is that it...it takes off and then
increases in value and has a premium over standard subdivisions.
Payne/ I mean what started this whole thing was affordable housing. The Peninsula is not what I
would call affordable housing. (several responding) There may be some affordable
units, but it's not affordable overall. Um...
Hayek/ They're subsidized.
Payne/ Yes. So, I ... I think that yes it sounds very, urn ... interesting to have that plan and
everybody knows (coughing, difficult to hear speaker) be where, um ... specifically rather
than generally like we have with our, um ... why can't I think of the name of it? What
governs what goes where. (several responding) No, not zoning, the other thing. The
Comprehensive Plan, that's what I'm thinking of (laughs) Thank you (laughs) Um, you
know, I mean that's more general. Then this would be very specific, um, it sounds like
from your description.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of September 1, 2015.
September 1, 2015 Iowa City City Council Work Session Page 33
Howard/ Right and then you could dictate, for example, in other words you can put a large house
on a small lot. So just making small lots doesn't necessarily mean that you're going to get
affordable housing either. (both talking) So ... so, um ... in the case of a form based code,
you can develop building types that are more affordable and basically dictate where those
might go or how they might be mixed in to a neighborhood, so...
Payne/ I think the first two bullet points seem very ... to me, let's see what we can do to pursue
those, in my mind, um, as it ... as it looks at affordable housing. One of...one of the things
I thought was interesting about tonight is we're talking about affordable housing with two
very different things — Riverfront Crossings and this, and ... I mean, one of the, um,
Comm ... things the Committee talked about for Riverfront Crossings was to ensure the
amount of below market -rate housing leverage results with no net cost to the developer
and I think part of your memo indicated that, you know, this really hasn't gone anywhere,
even though we already have this stuff in our zoning code that people can do this, but I
think it's because ... we don't have an incentive. Riverfront Crossings we're making an
incentive, and that's probably the biggest thing is developers want to make money.
They're not going to do something that's going to make them less money. So what can we
do to incent them to do some of this stuff?
Throgmorton/ So I'd like to echo a little bit of what Michelle just said, uh, the initiative behind
this, the thing that Kingsley, Michelle, and I put together really was about stimulating the
production of, uh, more housing that people can afford to live in. So I agree also that
the ... the first two items looked to me like ones that we could act on and should move
ahead with. I'm really excited, actually, about the cottage... thing. Uh, the form based
code, you know, I ... in general I like moving in that direction, uh, but I ... I don't see how
it's going to help us with affordable housing in the short -run, but I do want to mention
something that, uh, goes back to the memo that we wrote. There were a couple items in
that memo that, uh, the memo you and John wrote, does not address. Uh, and ... and those
really have to do with the City identifying privately owned land that is for sale, uh, the
City buying that land using City funds to buy the land ... issuing an RFP to a ... to, uh,
potential developers, potential private developers, that clearly indicates how we want that
property redeveloped. This is what we did with regard to the Peninsula, uh, and then
choosing the best developer and moving ahead, and ... and doing that ... largely to increase
the supply of affordable units and provide a model for how such things can be done.
So...
Howard/ And I think the reason we didn't put it in our memo is that really is a policy decision for
you all to make as far as purchasing land and making those commitments in our capital
budgets to ... to do that sort of thing. Um ... and then as far as how that's developed after
you would purchase such a piece of land, we can help with, but... ultimately that decision
lies ... lies with the Council (both talking)
Throgmorton/ Of...of course, uh, and so that's why I'm mentioning it, uh, it is a policy decision
and it's one I think we should consider, uh, because it would enable us to ... to do
something concretely in one particular part of the city, wherever that might be. I don't
know where, uh, and to do it by working with private developers and by ... and doing it in
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of September 1, 2015.
September 1, 2015 Iowa City City Council Work Session Page 34
a way that would produce a model for how we think more affordable, uh, how ... how we
think the supply of affordable units could be increased, in ... in a well-designed way. So
I ... so I can imagine that being done in accord with the far ... with a form based code. So
(laughs) there's a linkage there but uh... you know, without going to the city as a whole
immediately.
Payne/ I was a little disappointed the in lieu of for Riverfront Crossings couldn't be used
someplace else because I thought there was ... I was hoping there was some way it could
be incorporated into this.
Throgmorton/ Uh huh.
Dobyns/ You mean a buy out? They could actually buy out to another part of the city and
actually put in some cottage clusters?
Payne/ Yeah.
Howard/ So I do have some slides of the cottage cluster, but maybe you all already know what
that kind of is. It basically is an incentive so you would take maybe several standard
single-family lots in an RS -5 zone and you would basically double... double the density
that you could achieve because you'd have two cottages instead of one house. And so
you'd set up the ordinance and ... to ... to double whatever the base zoning density would
allow, but then there would be these standards that would apply, um, and there's been a
number of communities that have adopted these kind of cluster, uh, housing ordinances,
with the same kind of concerns that you would probably likely get from ... from neighbors,
which is how does this fit into our neighborhood, you know, concerns about, um, the
design and, um, the clustering and how it affect, you know, if you're ... you have your
single-family house right next to one of these clusters and I think ... so all the standards
that would be developed would have to be kind of addressing that, but the idea is that
the ... the housing, the cottages, are clustered around a shared open space or courtyard and
then the parking, of course, is tucked behind, so it's not, um, right out front of the street.
Um, so it sort of fits into then, right into a single-family neighborhood so it could be right
along a street, and you have a couple lots that are then developed with these cottages, um,
clustered around, uh, that space. Um, usually they're a smaller footprint, smaller square
footage, so you control the density of those so you're not really getting ... like I said, you
can always build a big lot on a small lot. That's not what we're trying to achieve here.
We're (mumbled) trying to achieve something smaller and more affordable. So that's all
dictated by the ordinance itself and here's some cottage developments that were, some
photos from other places, uh, that were developed in cottage ordinances. Lot on the west
coast (several responding) northwest, Seattle, some of the areas that have really
affordable problems, um, with affordability, uh... some of those neighborhoods are
extremely unaffordable. Silicone Valley and some of that, uh... and then there's also ... it's
modeled based on older cottage clustering that happened years ago. So here's an older
development with that same idea. And again, something that was built some time ago.
So that idea of clustering the cottages around a courtyard has ... has been done in other
places in ... in eras past as well. And I think that is something because we have a lot of
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of September 1, 2015.
September 1, 2015 Iowa City City Council Work Session Page 35
model ordinances out there, something more doable for staff as far as our, uh, resources
and time, um ... if you get into the form based zoning for citywide, that would... require
quite a bit of extra work that we'd probably need a consultant to help us with. So with
that, I mean, I can answer any other questions you have.
Botchway/ So ... Matt had mentioned the process, um ... kind of the process before had been that,
um, you know, maybe coming to develop here, and maybe you weren't saying this.
Maybe you alluded to something else. Maybe coming to Iowa City and developing
(mumbled) labor intensive process, um ... has ... was there any ... I mean, was there any
consideration where we could ... figure out some ways so the,developer doesn't have to put
as much money forward so ... they can save costs on that end so they can then apply the
costs later on to the renter or owner, whatever the case may be (mumbled) later on in the
process? So for example (both talking)
Mims/ I mean I think we've already done quite a bit of that, Kingsley, just with ... I mean they're
meeting, they're coming in and meeting with all the staff from different areas now —
Engineering and Planning and stuff in one group — so they're, you know, they're not going
so far down the road and then like Engineering comes in and says, 'Oh, time out, can't do
that.' So I mean we've done that. Uh, they're doing the electronic submission of plans
and stuff now, so they're not having to have all that stuff printed up, so I mean ... I think
staff ..I'm not saying there's not more that can't be done, but I think staff has already been
working on a lot of those things to take some of those roadblocks, or at least perceived
roadblocks, out of the way and make it much ... either quicker, easier, less expensive to do
some of those planning things but I mean I think when Tom came in one of the things
that we, you know, really encouraged him to do and he ... and maybe is still doing, was to
have a developer roundtable where he was meeting just with developers, without staff, so
he could get very candid input on things that they were seeing and things that they'd like
to get changed and I know a lot of those have, you know, been implemented since then.
Markus/ To the point where we don't need that roundtable any more. (several talking)
Howard/ And I think to the extent that you should realize too that Iowa City has some of the
smallest lot sizes in the state. I think we have the smallest lot size in the state of Iowa.
So I think comparing it to ... North Liberty and Coralville and some of those other places,
which is our regional area where housing is getting built, when you do the really narrow
stuff you do the really small things. You have to think more about how those are
developed and how they integrate into the neighborhood. So we have some standards
that Coralville and North Liberty don't have, but they also don't allow those lots at all.
So ... um, you know, they're not allowing, uh, single-family homes on lots that are as
narrow as 30 -feet wide.
Hayek/ Okay. So, John, you're circling here.
Yapp/ Uh (laughter) lurking! Uh, to follow up on Kingsley's question with the, uh, idea of the
cottage design subdivision. The goal there would be to create standards where a
developer did not have to go through the planned development process. Uh, and would
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of September 1, 2015.
September 1, 2015 Iowa City City Council Work Session Page 36
be able to do that, by right ... uh... without all the upfront design costs. The key is
developing the criteria and the standards ahead of time. Which would fall on staff, uh, to
do that. Uh, is there consensus to proceed with numbers 1 and 2?
Hayek/ I think so. (several responding)
Yapp/ Amendment to the planned development and the cottage design subdivision. (several
talking) Okay. Thank you. (several talking)
Hayek/ Thanks! It's a very interesting presentation, Karen.
Throgmorton/ So, uh, at the risk of. ... seeing what time it is and running out of time, uh, I did
raise a question, uh, a policy -oriented question about... potentially purchasing some land,
etc. And it was in the original memo, but for reasons Karen articulated was not directly
addressed.
Payne/ I think that's something we could put on a work session agenda to talk about ... in a future
meeting or something?
Dickens/ (several talking) ..sooner than later if we're gonna consider it in the next budget year
too.
Mims/ And I would just throw something out — the only ... I would be interested if we were going
to do anything on it and getting some input from staff in that ... if we were to try and do
that, I would like to see it done where we potentially optioned property ... um ... subject to
getting a successful response to an RFP, so we're not going out and spending, you know,
a million or $2 million on property and then can't get a successful response to an RFP to
get somebody to develop it and we were ... we've spent this money and ... we're sitting on
bare land.
Dobyns/ Like an industrial park, yeah (laughter and several talking)
Mims/ So I mean, if...if we were to do it at all...
Hayek/ I wouldn't mind maybe getting some staff input in the form of a memo or something...
Mims/ Yeah!
Hayek/ ...just on this issue generally, I mean ... you know, you ... you can maybe make that case in
the residential area, but ... but you can also in terms of commercial development and ... and
other communities in our area play master developer, uh, and ... and buy up land and ... and
rack up a lot of debt to do so and ... and approach development in a very different way
than ... than we do. We're, for example, with Riverfront Crossings trying to incent it
through zoning and other, uh, measures, as opposed to buying it, but I think if we're
going to open up this conversation, it really ought to include that analysis as well, but
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of September 1, 2015.
September 1, 2015 Iowa City City Council Work Session Page 37
before we kick into gear a bunch of machinery on this, you know, maybe we ought to
hear from you guys generally speaking.
Markus/ Well, I can give you my initial reaction (laughter) That's just not my style, uh, or my
history in terms of management anywhere, um, and ... and you see that happening ... in
other jurisdictions and I think that that is ... a risk best born by the private sector, uh, not
necessarily us and I think if you write your ordinances, um ... with the input of developers,
you would hope that developers would respond (mumbled) and make the investments that
the private sector (mumbled) should be making to begin with. (noises on mic)
Botchway/ Tom, the difference I see in other jurisdictions doing it, I mean it's almost ... I mean, I
mean, it's almost like ... the stars in which they're thinking about it and economic
development, and I feel like we're moving more towards the residents — that people are
here, more to the affordable housing element, where we're looking at it particularly
to ... change the dynamics of it and without ... I feel like without our input in those
particular areas, um, the developers have not wanted to do affordable housing. So
without us having the RFPs or changing our particular policy focus, I mean, we ... we
would be, you know, we wouldn't have the discussion we were having about Riverfront
Crossings. We wouldn't have the discussion that we're having with some of the buildings
that we're building, where there's going to be affordable housing, um, put in.
Markus/ So I responded to a specific suggestion. Us as a city buying property for the purposes
of cottage or affordable. And I'm saying to you that I think what you did tonight, giving
direction in terms of inclusionary zoning, um, and ... and some of the direction you gave
on the smaller lot size and the form based, that sort of thing, I think that should create
plenty of incentive to accomplish what you want to do, and those things aren't being done
in our neighboring jurisdictions or the majority of communities across the state. So, if
there is an ... you know, it ... I don't know what else you can do at this point, um, besides
buying land and then giving it away and I'm not sure that that's ... a path you really want to
fall down.
Payne/ Is ... is there a way to give incentives... for this affordable housing in other areas than
Riverfront Crossings? I mean, is there a way to explore doing that, so that it makes it
that ... more realistic for a developer to do it? I mean, we obviously said it doesn't make
sense for them to do it in Riverfront Crossing without an incentive. Well why would it
make sense for 'em to do it someplace else without an incentive?
Hayek/ Let me jump in here. It's 6:35.
Payne/ Sorry!
Hayek/ Um, I really think we've gotta ... we've got five more minutes then we have to disband
and ... and set up (several talking) We're getting... we're drilling into a lot of content here,
it seems tome. So ... all right! (several talking) Uh... Info Packets. We've got August 20`1'
is the first one.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of September 1, 2015.
September 1, 2015 Iowa City City Council Work Session Page 38
Information Packets:
Mims/ KXIC is on there, Marian. I'll take, uh, October 28th. (mumbled)
Hayek/ Uh, four.
Payne/ Four.
Karr/ I put that in more as an update to what you decided last time. I'll be happy to populate
more dates, um, as need be. So, and Matt took October 14th (mumbled)
Hayek/ Thanks, Dennis, for the quarterly investament ... investment report.
Mims/ Yeah!
Hayek/ We need to be reading these things. (several talking) ...but we need to be reading them.
(several talking) Okay, Info, uh, Packet from the 27th.
Dickens/ (mumbled)
Payne/ Yeah, we did!
Hayek/ Yeah (several talking)
Dilkes/ I had just a comment on IP ... 7, the invitation from, uh, Susan Craig ... to the discussions
that are going on about, um..."Just Mercy" and Bryan Stevenson. I don't think there are
any open meetings' issues with his talk, Brian Stevenson's presentation, but that smaller
discussion, um ... given the issues that are going on in our community, I think we prob... we
don't want a quorum there and ... or if we have a quorum there, you're gonna have to kind
of sit mute.
Throgmorton/ So for three of us it won't matter cause there's a candidate's forum that night.
Dilkes/ Well that leaves four.
Throgmorton/ That leaves four, so I just mean for three of us it doesn't matter, right?
Dilkes/ So just...
Hayek/ Thanks!
Dilkes/ ...keep track of it I guess (mumbled) if you're gonna attend. That's the way to go!
Meeting Schedule:
Hayek/ Um, thank you. Um, meeting schedule. Anything on that? Council time.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of September 1, 2015.
September 1, 2015 Iowa City City Council Work Session Page 39
Council Time:
Throgmorton, Uh, well, Susan and I had an excellent meeting with members of Black Kids Play
Too, and maybe some of you also met, but (coughing, difficult to hear speaker) but it
went really well on August 20t. So I was very happy about that. I have lots of other
things on here, but I'll just say one other thing. I also had a chance to staff a City table at
the Soul Festival, and I just wanted to express my admiration for Evette Doazal, Shannon
McMahon, and Serena Moore, uh, who I worked with that night, and Geoff too but I
don't need to ... Geoff s kids! They were great! (laughs) So it was really fun to do that.
Botchway/ Can they do that? Can they work? (laughter)
Payne/ The baby too, I'm sure! (several talking and laughing)
Hayek/ Uh, okay! Pending work session topics. Got that. And ... upcoming events or invites.
Mims/ (mumbled)
Hayek/ Yeah! (several talking) Okay! Good meeting. We'll break and see you back here at
7:00.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of September 1, 2015.