Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2021-10-05 TranscriptionPage 1 2. Proclamations 2.a. Careers in Construction Month Teague: (reads proclamation) And accepting this is the Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association GT Karr, Super Exciting and Remodeling, Young Professionals Network Co- chair Brogan Messer, Kitchens by Design, Executive Officer Karyl Bohnsack, the Greater Iowa City Area Home Builders Association. Welcome. Karr: Thank you, Mayor Teague, and thank you, Council. My name is GT Karr, and I'm serving as the president of the Greater Iowa City Home Builders Association. Just wanted to briefly thank you all for the proclamation, and everything that you read, Mayor Teague is- is spot on. I don't think we have to tell anyone that we have some labor shortages in just about every industry, but I do wanna very much thank the city for being proactive. In the past year, city staff and council has made it a priority, and we've been able to kind of spread the word, and through some pretty exciting partnerships with the City of Iowa City, get some opportunities for some of our local high school kids to work on a remodel on some city -owned properties. So there's more projects in the works, and it's just a fantastic partnership, and I think it's exactly where we need to be all working together, and it's getting kids from lots of different backgrounds involved. And as I look at where we're trying to get to with just the labor shortage and also the ambitious goals that you as a council have outlined with the affordability, sustainability, the climate action plan, our goals that we have with our existing housing stock, this is to me, where the rubber meets the road. If we don't have trained professionals getting into the trades, and learning, and pushing the envelope with the building science, none of this is going to happen. So I commend you and I thank you. Teague: Thank you. Any more comments? Bohnsack: I was wondering if we could get a photo. Teague: Absolutely. And I have a proclamation for you. [LAUGHTER] Yes, let's give them a hand for all that they do. [APPLAUSE] One more, please hold. [LAUGHTER] No, you are totally kind. Karr: Thank you, Mayor. 2.b. Indigenous Peoples' Day Teague: (reads proclamation). And here to receive this is Human Rights Commissioner, Siri Bruhn. Welcome. Bruhn: Hello. I wanna begin by thanking Mayor Bruce Teague and the City Council for affirming and directly recognizing the fundamental importance of this founding group within our community through a proclamation. I'm honored to accept that proclamation This represents only a reasonably accurate closed captioning transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of October 5, 2021. Page 2 on behalf of the Human Rights Commission who drafted the land use statement on which this proclamation is based in collaboration with the Ad Hoc Truth and Reconciliation Commission. On a personal note, I come to you as the newest member of the Human Rights Commission and as a public school teacher who strongly believes that young voices must be sought out and heard in conversations that ultimately craft our community here in Iowa City. Also, as a teacher, I understand that in order for learners of any age to internalize a message at a level that motivates action, we need to hear that message more than one time, and in more than one place, and in more than one voice. Um, I sincerely thank City Council for joining this group of voices that works to amplify this critical message of historical understanding. I ask my community members, though, educators, and parents, and commissioners serving on other City council commissions, members of really any local group. In order for these words to move off the page and become the basis of understanding upon which our community makes its decisions and approaches its relationships, to please speak these words that acknowledge the true history of this land in as many venues and conversations and meetings as possible. Thank you. Teague: Thank you. And I have a proclamation for me. [APPLAUSE] This represents only a reasonably accurate closed captioning transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of October 5, 2021. Page 3 7. Community Comment (items not on the agenda) [UNTIL 7 PM] Teague: We are on to item number 7, which is community comment. And this is for any agenda item- for any item that is not on our agenda. And we ask people to keep their comments to three minutes or less. If you wish to address us at this time, please step to the podium. There's also a sign-up sheet on the side table. Teague: Please give your name and your address please. Welcome. Michaud: Hi. This is- I 'm Pam Michaud I live at 109 South Johnson on College Green Park in the College Green Historic District. Um, I've been active in this neighborhood and helped circulate the petition for historic district 31 years ago. And I've been kind of watching out for the park and its temporary residents ever since. I've been a landlady and had a huge variety of people, uh, in my houses from different countries, continents, and backgrounds. Um, most recently this last winter, because I had empties due to COVID, I [NOISE] attempted to do a year lease with, uh, Shelter House resident. Um, he was not able to, um, understand or conform to non-smoking in the house and things like that. Uh, and he put at risk several people that lived in the house, uh, with various shouting and violence. So, um, I've worked in a psychiatric situation. I'm- I'm aware of the needs of homeless and acutely sympathetic to the, um, incoming migrants from Central America and Afghanistan. I see there's very strong rising need for housing immigrants and even climate refugees from hurricanes, droughts, uh, forest fires. Okay, so that's my community orientation. Um, and I have, uh- it come to my attention and my neighbors that, uh, the Catholic Worker house would like to buy the, uh, bed and breakfast next to mine. Um, I've done this rental housing for 31 years with permits from the city. And, uh, they would assume the bed and breakfast category for their work. Uh, that would require them to have their clientele change over every 30 days, if not less. And I don't know how they're sustainable because I can't see a family of three or five coming in from a hot climate like Central America or Afghanistan, I don't know how their winters are. And then having to leave 30 days later in the middle of winter, that's just not sustainable. Uh, the- the house would not be a rental because our neighborhood already has about 70, 75 percent rental right now. And they're- the city is not granting any new rental permits. Um, also, the Catholic Worker house is located on Sycamore, [NOISE] they would keep that location. And they would have hourly showers. Teague: Thank you- thank you. Michaud: Yeah. Thank you- Thank you Teague: Thank you. Welcome. Gravitt: My name is Mary Gravitt. And I'm here about the economic future of Iowa City. I wanted to go to the post office. So I got on the bus, I didn't know where I was going with all these new bus stops. 1 got on the bus and I told the bus driver I wanna go to the post office. So he was, you know, the new route, some of that I knew and some other I didn't This represents only a reasonably accurate closed captioning transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of October 5, 2021. Page 4 know. And then he stopped and he said, "Oh, here's your post office stop." And we're on - I didn't see any post office and I didn't even see Buttonwood mall- Buttonwood Plaza, rather. And- so he said, "Well, you go down that way." Now I'm used to go on to Buttonwood Plaza to the post office, two buses went there; the Cross Park and the Broadway. What is so important about Buttonwood Plaza is that it taxed down the South side of Iowa City. Walmart taxed down the North side of Iowa city. So we got economics going there. No buses are going into Buttonwood Plaza. There are new stores establish there, and even small stores establish there, small businesses. Coralville is eating Iowa lunch. When I first came here to Iowa City like 20 years ago or more I- things were lively. And then Coralville slowly stole all our funder. It was a person that served on city council when he left city council, uh, the store, Von Maur soon followed him to Coralville where he lives now. You have to think and all of this boils down to these new bus stops. These new bus stops are not economically viable because I was on my way over here and one woman ex- explained to me, she works at the library, she said- and she lives on- used to live on the lake side route. She said, "They changed their route, you gotta walk like across town and then when you wait for the bus, uh, you have to wait in the grass." Now, when I got off the- the- the bus to go to, uh, Buttonwood Plaza, I got off under a tree. And when I had to wait to come back, I got under the tree. Now we have thunderstorms in Iowa- Iowa City and getting hit by lightning for standing under tree is not very nice. I was so stupid one time a friend of mine told me his father got struck on - by lightning in the field. I said, "Oh, how is he?" He told me he died. But it never occurred to me from being from the city that anybody would die from lightning. So these bus stops have to be reevaluated. And the- and people must understand that nothing is permanent and- and we just can't lose our economic value [NOISE] for a place like Buttonwood Plaza. Thank you- thank you. Would anyone else like to address a topic that is not on the agenda tonight? Welcome. Petersen: My name is Noah, I lived in Iowa City, not run docs myself. Um, I have a couple things to speak on here tonight. Uh, the first is u, I- I would like to know why the city is removing benches and tables from our parks and bus stops around the city. Um, most recently, the picnic tables from river front- river front crossings that have gone missing with no explanation and I would like an answer to why that's happening. Why buses- no, sorry benches and tables are being removed from public property for people to use? Teague: This is your opportunity to speak to council and we're listening. Petersen: But you're not answering, so you're really listening? That's a very simple question. You can answer that in two sentences. You're choosing not to. Teague: We're listening. Petersen: No you're not. [OVERLAPPING] This represents only a reasonably accurate closed captioning transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of October 5, 2021. Page 5 Teague: Any other comments? Petersen: I'm asking very simple question. I want a very simple answer. Any of you want to answer? No- no one in the city knows why our public property is just going missing without an explanation to anybody? Teague: Noah, this is your opportunity to speak to council. Petersen: Yes. I'm speaking and I'd like you to answer very simple questions about why. [OVERLAPPING] Teague: If you want to reach out to us outside of the meeting, we'll talk to you. Petersen: Second question. Motion of the question, more of a was that- work with Johnson County to fund excellent workers to fund the 15 million they're asking for. And do that now, and why has it not happened yet? Come on answer that question, why you are not funding skilled workers? Nothing? Any of you have an answer to that? Mims: I'll just comment for the general public, Noah you've been here plenty of times and know that we do not answer comments or respond in these settings it is for us to listen. You can- anybody can reach out to any council member of staff to get answers, but we do not engage in conversation here. Taylor: I would explain that. Also echo along with our, Councilor Mims said it's comment time, not question -answer time. Petersen: Yeah, that's a weak excuse. Do you have no shame? How do you like you all sleep at night, is all I want to know. You all just let this trash up in your city and you did nothing about it? You talk about equality and equity and do nothing to actually advance it. You should be ashamed. Teague: Thank you. Would anyone else like to address Council? Welcome. Kauble: Hi. Um, good evening. I would just like to address uh, something that Noah said. It's - you all say that it's good to reach out to you, but a lot of the members of council are really terrible at message- email- replying to emails. That's part of the reason why I don't email most of you -all. Um, but- my name is Dan Kabul and I live in Mandel heights. Uh, before I begin, I'd like to do something that I don't really ever do and that's thank council. Um, we don't agree on much, but uh, I do feel lucky that I can be able to come here and call it as I see it. Um, a lot of people in Iowa are not that lucky. Today, a man named John Noble, was convicted in Des Moines on one charge of trespassing and one charge of interference of official acts. His crime. Speaking before the City Council, the Des Moines city government has taken draconian steps to cut public criticism, using security checks and complicated registration forms to make it difficult for people to be able to speak before them. Tonight, I'm asking the Iowa City Council to condemn these moves by the This represents only a reasonably accurate closed captioning transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of October 5, 2021. Page 6 Moines. And specifically it's Mayor and it's City Administrator for curtailing the First Amendment rights of its residents. So um, If I was in De Moines, I probably would have been arrested a few times because of City Council- City council conduct, but I'm not and you all are pretty chill on that regard. But I'm here to do some more call -outs and set of doing- doing what is best for Iowa City by supporting the commisioner- by supporting the commissioners of the TRC. The majority of the city council has continued to hamstring their work instead of allowing the commissioners to do what is best for the community. Many of you councilors have put the egos of your political allies ahead of the welfare of Iowa cities, BIPOC community, it's a disgrace. The TRC is composed of some of the most brilliant people I've ever had the privilege to meet Moe, ML, Eric, Kevo, Cliff and the other commissioners, our local treasures, who had been working their butts off to improve this town. These folks know what they are doing and what it takes to fight the systemic racism weighing down our community. Every step they have taken this for the people they were appointed a fight for, and they're doing a damn good job of it. At the last council meeting of the Council decided to reject the point- the appointment of the facilitator, the TRC picked to help them with this mission. One of the main reasons used by council to justify this was that the firm would have difficulty connecting with Iowa City's BIPOC community. That is incredibly ironic given that the same city councilors uh, embraced former TRC facilitator- facilitator Jesse Case, who was even less qualified than the firm the TRC wanted you all to approve. Uh, to anyone observing this process it Is clear that your problem was not with the facilitator as mayor Teague has previously stated, his problem is what the TRC as a whole, I wonder why this is. Maybe it's because he's very tight with Royceann Porter who was booted from the TRC after abusing other commissioners and members of the public. I have a lot of respect for. Teague: Thank you. Kauble: Thank you. Teague: Would anyone else like to address a topic that is not on the agenda? This represents only a reasonably accurate closed captioning transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of October 5, 2021. Page 7 8. Planning & Zoning Matters 8.a. Comprehensive Plan Amendment — South District - Resolution to amend the South District Plan, a part of Iowa City's Comprehensive Plan, to facilitate development that follows form -based principles. (CPA21-0001) 1. Public Hearing Teauge: I'm gonna open the public hearing. (bangs gavel) Fruin: Uh, thank you, Mayor, uh, this is Geoff Fruin, City manager. Just a quick way of introduction, uh, the city has been working on this project in some way, shape, or form since 2015, uh, when the South district plan was updated. Uh, tonight we have two public hearings, a comprehensive plan amendment and a Zoning Code Amendment that our staff is going to uh, lead you in the- in the public through. To help with that presentation, uh, we have our staff are senior planner Anne Russett an associate planner Kirk Lehman, and we also have uh, the consultant team from Opticos who's been there to uh, help lend expertise to this situation. So uh, with that, I1.1 thank you for your time and introduce, uh, Anne you're gonna- Tony uh, Tony Perez from Opticos is gonna get us started. Uh, again uh, Tony is with the consulting firm Opticos, who we contracted with in 2019 uh, to- help develop this draft code. Welcome. Perez: Good- good evening, city council members of the community, uh- Let me see if I can do this so you can hear me better. Is this better? Teague: Yes, thank you. Perez: Okay. Great. Feels better too. Um, good evening everyone. Uh, yeah. Very excited to be here to, um, to start this process of the public hearings, to consider the foreign-based code, uh, for the south district. Uh, just by way of introduction, um, I have 34 years of public or- of public and private planning experience. The first 13 were working for cities as a planner, in the last 21 I've been doing what we're talking about tonight. Um, our experience is across the country for cities small and large, and, uh, all I work on are codes like this. So I've learned a lot, keep learning a lot, but all that experience, uh, and the experience of our firm, um, goes into this- this work that you- you're reviewing. Uh, first of all, what is a form -based code? The code that is for you- before you is called a form - based code or form Bay zoning, as you might have heard. And the short description is that, it's a code that focuses first on form, and second on use. And that's a big difference from the regular way that zoning codes work. They focus on use, and they have little to say about form if they do it at all. So it's a big departure from the conventional zoning, you'll hear that term tonight a lot, conventional zoning compared to form -based zoning. And the idea is that the form -based code says, "Hey, what are the forms that we'd like here, what are the forms that we'd like there, and what are the- the things that help make those forms work and what would keep that from working well?" And all of that information goes into the zoning as opposed to the conventional system, which just says, This represents only a reasonably accurate closed captioning transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of October 5, 2021. Page 8 well, what kind of uses would we like here, and what's the maximum height? And we'll figure the rest out through the process. So the general comparison, and I'm sorry for the, um, it's hard to read that on the screen. But what this is trying to say is that basically the conventional approach leaves a lot to be answered and a lot of questions to be asked. And so the- the predictability in the certainty of that process is very low. And so people have to come to meetings, they have to attend workshops or whatever it is on every project to figure out what's going to come out the other end of the process. And the form -based approach, which is on the side there on the yellow, is the opposite. It says, well, we still might have meetings on individual projects, but let's avoid all the things that we can actually agree on and meet on those up front. And that information goes into the standards that will regulate projects. And so that way, the- the issues that we- that need to be discussed and clarified are fewer than current system and- in your city and in many cities, is the issues that need to be clarified and discussed are many. And they changed from project to project, right? So the form -based system isn't perfect, nothing else. But the idea is that you are putting more work into it up front so that you have less work down the road, and more clarity and predictability. The other big distinction is that the zoning map that the conventional system uses is again, focused on uses and then secondarily on height and then usually not at all on form, and that needs to be figured out through the process. Along with that, that conventional process doesn't yield very much inter -connectivity between projects. You know, sometimes people say, hey, I wanna be able to get from this neighborhood to that neighborhood without going all the way around or ride my bike through or even walk through. And the- the conventional system leaves that to the negotiation of every project, the form -based systems as well. Wait, that's part of the process of making more city, making more neighborhood. Every time you do that, you need to connect it to the rest and provide for those connections. And I just have to say by- by way of- of- of- of explanation here, across the country, over and over and over, plenty departments, neighbors, and developers all are same, a similar thing about their conventional zoning. It causes too many meetings, it leaves too many things uncertain. We have to do basically a unique approach every time to a project. So you'll have a meeting tonight on a project. Two months from now, you'll have another set of meetings on another project using the same zoning code, the conventional zoning code. So what a lot of cities are doing is they're saying, Hey, we- we just can't devote that much staff time anymore to this, to administering these kinds of projects. So we're gonna- we're gonna see where we can use one of these foreign-based codes because you can't use them everywhere, but where we can use them, we wanna use that to try and minimize how much time our staff spending on administering projects. And flip side is for the owners and developers, how much time they're having to figure out what the standards seem to be, and then for the neighbors, they don't have to come to every meeting because in a form based approach, they know the outcomes that they can expect from the standards. This form -based code, uh, is the kind that is informed by a principle called the transect. And very simply the transect is a continuum of- of form, um, from lowest to most intense. So on the left you have nature, which you have out there by Terry Trueblood park. You have T2, which is the country farms and things like that. And then T3 and T4, which this code focuses on, which are different forms of how scale neighborhoods. And then T5 and T6 are what you have here in downtown Iowa City. So I wanna be very This represents only a reasonably accurate closed captioning transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of October 5, 2021. Page 9 clear. This code, the standards that it- it contains are aimed at the center of that continuum, the- the middle, the- the lower scale intensity and not that upper scale on the right-hand side. And by using this tool, it's- it's very easy to identify, well, this is where - this is the kind of intensity that we're gonna pursue through the standards as opposed to what we're not gonna pursue. So a couple of things I wanna show you a sequence here of how the- the- the thinking that were behind what you see ultimately in the, um, future land use map. So first of all, you have these big pieces of, uh, uh, adjacent nature to the south district. Then you have the large open space. And so that remains, that's something to work with, right? It's a feature. The next thing was McAllister and all the other sycamore and all the other major roads that are already out there in Gilbert. All those things that are, uh, you- you wanna build with them, you wanna- you wanna work with them, you wanna- you wanna, uh, organize neighborhoods around them. Along with that, it's- it's hard to see I'm sorry for the- the- this- the blurriness here on the screen. But you see there- there are a couple like fi- five circles down there, and what those things called - are called the pedestrian sheds. You might have heard that term or walkability shed. And what that's doing is it's saying, Hey, instead of just pouring more houses all over this place, why do we organize some nodes where if somebody wants to- if there wants to be say, an open space, a small park or green, or maybe the possibility of some neighborhood, commercial or non-residential in the future, then these neighborhoods all have their own place that they can be organized around instead of just more houses as someplace to go. And over time that might develop into something non-residential. And so that informs, um, the layout of- of the, um, of the block system. And so that's what this slide shows is now the blocks are creating a network. So people talk about walkability, they talk about bikes, they talk of all these networks. The best way you can do that is to build a network of blocks, and streets that connects more than less. And so by having that structure of those- those pedestrians sheds, that walkable air- those walkable areas, that starts to inform how blocks can be organized, um, and then lastly, uh, using the idea of, uh, more intensity along the bigger roads and then keeping the neighborhoods inside less intense than the- the colors on that maps are to show that. And you can see that the zones in a form -based code express physical character by the darker the color. The darker the color means the buildings are a little more intense in that zone, relatively of- of all- of those, T3 and these T4, and the lighter the color means- means, uh, lighter intensity. So for example, in the darker color, there might be a six-plex or a four-plex, or a courtyard with eight units in it. In the lighter colors, maybe that's only duplexes and houses or cottage courts. And there's a mix, and that's the other big thing here, is that this code requires that you have a mix that- that- for a lot of good reasons that- you- you want- if you look at existing neighborhoods that are older and valued, they tend to have a mix of housing choices. The, um, the other big thing to- to point out tonight is that through the process, we, um, had meetings with owners and developers and the public, and we explained the- the- the benefits of a, um, of a lower- lower impact approach, let's say less regulation, less detail on the future land use map in exchange for more meetings and figuring it out along the way. And people said, "No, we don't want that one. That's sort of like what we have right now." The moderate approach, option 2 would say, "Okay, well, let's put a little more detail there about where things might go, and what you can do, and, uh, and then have- have- have meetings in the process," and people said, "No, we- we This represents only a reasonably accurate closed captioning transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of October 5, 2021. Page 10 really want less to figure out later in exchange for a clearer process." That clear process means a lot of different things to different stakeholders, whether they are neighbors, investors, or, um, or builders. Uh, but the option number 3 with the most detail on it, the most information m the code, uh, with flexibility, of course, uh, that is the option that was chosen, uh, pretty clearly. Switching gears. This- this code, the kind of- of housing that it - it produces is what's called missing middle housing. So in addition to single-family detached, which still- is still part of this code, there's a mixed that houses would be part of, and that mix consists of missing middle housing. And missing middle housing, which Dan Parolek in our office, he coined that term on- on the observation about 12 years ago. He said, "You know, I grew up in a neighborhood that had duplexes and fourplexes mixed in with houses, and there was a courtyard down the street". And that just doesn't happen anymore. And that's because after World War II, the zoning changed and- and it was harder to do what now was being called multifamily development. And so then people said, "Well, if a multifamily building is that big apartment building, you know, I don't want that intensity near my house." And so it became harder and harder to do multifamily. And so we- we present missing middle house- missing middle housing as, uh, basically this one sentence to walk away with tonight. House -scale buildings with multiple units and walkable neighborhoods. So multifamily housing, sometimes is one or two of those, but missing middle housing is always those three. And let me just go over that one more time. So house -scale, that means it can be no bigger than the biggest house and it can be as small as a cottage. Okay. That's the size of it. Multiple units. Okay. So it's the size of a house, but it might be have- have two units, it might have six, it might have eight designed to- to include those. Number 3, walkable neighborhoods. It's that walkability, that- that proximity that- that connectedness of the blocks and the- and the street and the bike network. Those three things are what missing middle hinges on and how it works best. So your code also has strategies in there through the zoning, the standards has strategies like this where missing middle can happen through the neighborhood. Um, or like in the bottom, maybe it happened say at McAllister and down the side street, it's mostly single-family detached and maybe some duplexes. There's variety that you can mix in there. Or in this case the top -left, you have say a McAllister or a Sycamore with a little more, say four or sixplexes, or something like that. And then down the side street you might have fourplexes or a courtyard and then transitioning to single-family detached. So the- the form -based approach to new neighborhoods, uh, begins with really understanding building size and scale. So on the left, you have what's called block scale buildings. Buildings that are individually or together form what is most to all of the block. You look at it and you say, "Well, that is- that is an entire- that building is the size of an entire block." If you look here downtown Iowa City, you can see buildings like that, right? They're either individually as large or collectively, as large as a block. On the right-hand side, are what we're talking about here in the South district, house -scale buildings. Again, buildings that are as small as the smallest cottage and as big as the biggest house, it just happens to have multiple units in it. The other big thing to understand is that the, uh, that- that this code addresses is- is this barrier of residential maximum density. There's a lot of great reasons why maximum residential density is something that- that cities deal with and regulate and- and- and people talk about. However, it's turned into something that really, uh, is producing unintended This represents only a reasonably accurate closed captioning transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of October 5, 2021. Page 11 consequences. People fight over the number, and yet, if you show 'em pictures and you say, well, what about this building? They'd say, "Oh, I like it" Well, guess what? The number is not a number you'd like. As an example of that, the building on the left is longer than you can see in the picture and it has 49 units in it, and it's 30 units to the acre. The building on the right, you can see the whole thing. It's a house -scale, what we call a multiplex or a mansion apartment has five units in it. And the lot that it sits on calculates out at 29 units to the acre. So as an example, if you had a meeting and you were just talking about density, and usually it comes down to, well, what are you comfortable with? If somebody at that meeting said, "You know, I saw 30 units of the acre building and I'm against that and all- all our neighborhood is." Well, what can you support? I don't know, 20, 25, something like that. That building on the right, but it's just fine with five units, it just got left out. So it's hard to identify the right density number. It's easier to identify the bill outcomes that you want and then regulate them and allow them, and that's what this code does. So a few examples of how this- this kind of approach is applied on the ground. This is a project that we designed that it's under construction probably about I'd say a fourth under- underway. Uh, it is, uh, Papillion in Nebraska, a small town outside of Lincoln. Uh, which is- Lincoln isn't in metropolis either, but anyway, uh, it's a, uh, 50 acres, um, and, uh, the developer here is an apartment developer who specifically wanted to do missing middle project and manage it as a- an apartment project all under his, uh, all his management and- and approach. And he, uh, explained to us that he wanted an approach where he didn't have space that wasn't leasable. Like in apartment buildings you have corridors, you have lobbies, you have other things. He said, "I don't want any of that. I want it all to be what we call walk-up." You walk-up, there's your unit. It's all leasable space, and I can manage the whole thing, uh, as- as one project even though it's an individual blocks. If you look back at this, there's an individual blocks that look like many people could own individual buildings, um, but he- he owns and manages the whole thing. The second project is, um, outside of Jackson, Wyoming. And this one, um, is in the process, 230 acres that this family has out there. And again, you see those circles in those yellow dots. That's what I was talking about with that- the walkability and- and connectedness, those circles and those dots are informing where those notes, um, go and how to organize these neighborhoods, uh, from lower intensity to more intensity. Then the last one is, uh, a project that is just a little smaller than, uh, than, uh, than what we're talking about tonight by about 150 acres. This is outside of St. Louis, Missouri, New Town, St. Charles. And, uh, this has been under construction, I wanna say 2004 something like that. Uh, I know that, uh, it got approved in 2003, but I think they started the next year. And I wanna say they're probably, uh, a third built, something like that. So just three examples, uh, of this approach, um, being applied. And, uh, the, uh, the next thing we wanna talk about is just the benefits of- of this form -based approach. You know, you'll hear a lot of- a lot of- a lot of talk about well, this is more detailed, this is more information, this is, you know, I- I guess I'd ask you to compare, what kind of level information do you have when you go through the every- do every project, do it over again, do it over again, do it over again? How much information do you compile at the end of one of those processes? Stack it up, and the a- and then ask yourself, okay, we have to do that again entirely for a new project. And so yes, this approach requires more information up front. But once you have it in place, the amount of questions is fewer. So This represents only a reasonably accurate closed captioning transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of October 5, 2021. Page 12 yes, uh, you know, no- no argument. It's a very different way of doing things, and it takes some getting used to and some- some learning and training. But I have to tell you working with your staff over the past few years, they're fully engaged. They know this code, uh, very well. They're- they're- it's- they've internalized it to Iowa City. It- It's, you know, it's part of it's- part of, um, their approach now. Uh, and if it gets approved, this isn't something they're gonna go, "Oh my gosh. Now what do I do? How do I use this?" Um, so they're- they're very conversant in it. I just want to say with this slide, you know- a- a big like if you say, okay, you just said it was different and it's- it's gonna be a challenge, yes. But this diagram shows you our experience of 20 years of writing these - these codes. We wouldn't- like a lot of firms are getting into this. And, you know they say, "Oh yeah, we do form these codes because it's- it's the thing". And they have two years of doing it for five or six. We've been doing this for 20. We can tell you what works and what doesn't work. And we apply that to our- to our. We apply that experience to our work. On the left-hand side, it says clarity about outcomes in plain English. What can we expect? On the bottom it says predictability and the review process, is it low or is it high. In the conventional zoning because of all the unique negotiations that need to happen, and all unique meetings that need to happen because the standards don't answer so many questions, and there are a lot of questions to be asked. The conventional zoning ranks low because it's a low predictability. It's low clarity on what you can expect. By extension because of all the work that you put into a Form Based Code the opposite is true for the Form Based Code is, very high on clarity, it's very high, um, on predictability. And then last couple slides here, you know, you're gonna hear about your expect that you'll hear, ah, concerns about regulating building size. I can tell you everywhere we work - everywhere that we might work you always hear the same thing. Can you guys help us with controlling how big buildings are because we've got this FAR thing, we've got this density thing, we've got this lock of cover thing and it's not working. And the best way to control building size is to control how big buildings are and to say, certain buildings can't be beyond x and it can't be wider than y. And- and what - what works for one kind of building doesn't work for all. So you have to understand what works for different kinds of buildings. And this code has that information. If you don't do that, you're on the right side of this diagram where it shows the smaller buildings in the blue. That's what this code does. It says, hey, there are different sizes of buildings and there are different standards for different buildings, okay? But if you don't do that, it's very easy to wind up with a building on the right, and the neighbors will be right when they say, " that things too big." Last slide. The- you know, you might say, "well, okay", the- this sounds good there's so much information in there, but, you know, you can't think of everything and you might miss something. That's true. You- you can't. Seven years from now somebody might say, hey, what about adding this? And it might be a good idea, maybe three or four years from now. But there's this other part were intentionally we add flexibility into the code. And it's through this- through- through two items. The first one is about the alignment of- of streets that aren't there yet- blocks that aren't there yet. There's- there's provisions in the code that say, "hey, you might have a different idea about how this block should be shaped or how that street might align." Maybe you wanna make that street in your neighborhood curvy. You can make it curve. You can, ah, rotate the block, you can change it. All you do is just meet the standards. And if you can meet the standards, you This represents only a reasonably accurate closed captioning transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of October 5, 2021. Page 13 can curve a street that's not currently curvy. You can change a block that's not currently changed. That's flexibility it's already in the code. Second thing is what's on the chart there on the- on the screen which says, hey, there might have been a situation with either archaeological resource or utility that- that was in wrong spot that- that now we have to work around or the property line wasn't what we thought and we have less land than- than we do- other than we expected to. And so we need a break on a standard. We can't comply with the standard, we'd like to, but we can't because of these situations. So this chart anticipates those type of situations and says in these scenarios, then flexibility is allowed to be given to reduce a standard or whatever it is. I wanna say for everybody, this does not- this is not intended, and it- it is not function as, oh, you know, I'm the developer of the day and I don't want to do the standards are in the code. That's not what this is. This is simply situational, and if the fmdings are there to support the situation, then the adjustment is allowed to be granted. Um, with that, I'll turn it over to the next speaker, but really excited to be, ah, before you with this tonight. Thank you [NOISE]. Teague: Thank you, Tony. Russett: Thanks, Tony. Ah, good evening council and mayor Teague. Anne Russett with neighborhood and development services. I'm gonna just bring up my presentation here. Okay. So Tony gave you some background on form -based coding. I'm gonna get into the two agenda items that are- are, um, your- in your agenda packet tonight. Both of these items require public hearings. The first is an amendment to the South District Plan. The second is a text amendment to the zoning code to create form -based zones and standards. These items go together, so we are gonna present on both of these together. I'm gonna cover the proposed comprehensive plan amendment, and then Kirk is gonna cover- cover the text amendments. So you have a full understanding of what's before you tonight. First, I'd like to start with some background. In 2015, the South District Plan was adopted, and that's South District planning area includes a lot of land that is undeveloped. The plan recommended a form -based code for the area to manage new development and share a mix of housing and encourage compact and connected neighborhoods. And since January of 2019, we've been working with Tony and Martin who are here tonight to develop this form -based code. And as part of that process, we determined that in order to adopt a form -based code for the South District, we also had to look at an amendment to the comprehensive plan and specifically the South District plan. As part of that work we've reached out to a variety of stakeholders. This table summarizes the outreach process. We talked with local builders, the development community, property owners, architects, affordable housing advocates, and others. We met with the school district to better understand their land use needs. We met with the Johnson County Affordable Housing Commission, the South District neighbors, neighborhood association and others just to give you, ah, kind of a sampling of the groups that we've been working with over the course of the past two years. There are several goals that we hope to achieve through this project. One is to implement the comprehensive plan. We wanna ensure that areas are safe for people to walk. We wanna preserve environmental resources and create highly interconnected streets. And we wanna allow for a variety of housing types. Lastly, we hope to apply this code to other Greenfield sites in the city, like the Southwest District, This represents only a reasonably accurate closed captioning transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of October 5, 2021. Page 14 which is shown here on this slide. As I mentioned previously, the- the plan amendment is coupled with the proposed amendment to the Zoning Code. And the proposed code-, uh, the proposed code, the changes to the code align well with the existing goals of the South District Plan. But staff has proposed amendments to the South District Plan to make those connections more explicit. Many changes are- are intended to provide additional context. The largest changes to the future land use map, which I'll discuss in detail. The proposed plan amendment includes some updates to the historical context. It includes some recent growth in the district that happened after the plan was adopted in 2015, including the extension of McAllister Boulevard and Alexander Elementary School. And it also includes a new chapter on form -based codes. It also includes some new goals and objectives that more explicitly link broader plan goals to form -based coding. These are related to the adoption of a new form -based code to help achieve goals related to housing diversity, walkable neighborhoods, and commercial nodes. As I mentioned, the biggest change proposed is to the South District Plans future land use map. The map that you see here is the current future land use map. The predominant land use shown in this map is low, medium density, single-family residential. The light yellow that you see on this plan is generally intended for single-family residential development. This future land use map makes it difficult to achieve the planned goals related to including neighborhood commercial nodes and, uh, achieving housing diversity. The map does show one mixed use neighborhood commercial center, and some multifamily. But for the most part, the vision is for single-family residential development. This is the proposed future land use map which highlights the area that will be subject to form -based principles that's identified here in gray, and directs you to a more detailed land -use plan, which is this one. This is still a conceptual map, even though it is more detailed. It provides one example of how the area could develop in a way consistent with form -based principles. The amendment also includes form -based land use designation, which are represented on this map by the colors ranging from pink to the dark purple. Something that Tony spoke to and something that we've heard throughout the process, is that landowners and neighbors want more certainty and predictability in the land development process. Through the development of a more detailed future land use map, staff hopes to create more certainty in the land development process, but also allow some flexibility. In terms of flexibility, applicants can still propose shifts and streets adjusting a rotating blocks. The main thing is that the proposals still complies with the form -based standards. Additionally, the code clarifies when it's appropriate to modify the future land use map. Maybe there's sensitive features present, maybe a storm water needs to be accommodated. Maybe there's a new transit stop. The code also clarifies things that cannot be changed, like single loaded streets along open space areas. At this point, I wanna walk through the future land use map and the various land use designations to help you better understand where these designations are placed in the context of this 900 acres. The pink highlighted on this map is the lowest intensity designation. This designation has been applied mainly to areas next to existing single-family development. It's called the T3 neighborhood edge, which you can see it's kind of located at the edge of our planning area. And even though it's the lowest intensity designation, it still allows duplexes and patch courts. The next designation is the T3 neighborhood general. And this allows a few more different building types such as multiplex, small, and town homes. This represents only a reasonably accurate closed captioning transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of October 5, 2021. Page 15 And this designation makes up the bulk of the interior of the neighborhoods in the planning area. T4 neighborhoods small was applied in areas with single loaded streets that fmd open space areas. These arestill a max of 2.5 stories, and these are still the house scale missing middle housing, uh, that- that Tony spoke to. The next land use designation is T4 neighborhood medium, and this- this 3.5 stories. And you can see that this designation is applied along major courtier such as McAllister, as well as some of the open space areas where there are single loaded streets. And finally, there's the main street designation which is applied to the center of the community. Uh, it's a small- it's a small area. This would allow for up to four stories and, um, more blocks scale buildings as opposed to the- the house scale buildings that, um, are throughout the rest of the planning area. This map shows the neighborhood centers. These are the centers of the pedestrian sheds. So the idea here is that each little neighborhood within this 900 acres has something to walk to, whether it's a commercial center or an open space area. The area is shown in yellow, that are highlighted in ye- in yellow are either the open zone areas which allow non-residential uses, or the main street area, which is at the center. There's also new civic and open space areas that act as centers of the community, and these are circled in green. And council member Taylor, when you are asking about neighborhood centers earlier, the areas in yellow are the areas where, um, you could have non- residential and some commercial uses. This map shows both existing and proposed civic space areas. The South District has a lot of park land and open space. However, there are some strategic places where the map proposes additional open space areas. First, the bicycle master- master plan envisions a multi -use trail that will connect Sycamore Street and McAllister Boulevard. So if you can kinda see on the left side of the map here, this linear green space, that is identified there to extend the existing trail network that starts here. The map also shows additional public green space within the main street area. And based on conversations with Parks and Rec staff, there's a need for an additional playground area on the east side of the Greenway, so we've identified that here. This last map is the thoroughfare map, which demonstrates the proposed hierarchy of streets. It is a concept of what the street network could look like based on the new block standards and thoroughfare standards that Kirk is going to cover in his presentation. So that actually concludes my presentation at this point and I'll turn it over to Kirk to discuss the code. Lehman: Thanks Anne. Kirk Lehman, associate planner. So I'm gonna talk a bit more about the actual, uh, form based zones and standards that are included, uh, predominantly in Title 14 of the city code, but it will also be somewhat in Title 15, which is the subdivision code. So different parts of it fit into different pieces, uh, and I'll go through all- all the nuts and bolts about how these things work. So first, I wanted to talk generally about the changes to Title 14, uh, where you'll see these changes are mostly in, uh, Title 14-2H, so that would be a new section of the code. That's the bulk of what you have in your packet tonight. There all- are also minor code sections throughout that would be slightly modified to ensure that the standards work with the foreign-based zones. Uh, I won't cover as much of those, I'll be mostly covering that 14-211, uh, which is titled foreign- based zones and standards. Now, Tony and Anne did talk, uh, already somewhat about that overall paradigm shift moving from use based standards to form based standards. So really what I wanted to talk about are- are some of the larger changes that exist and really This represents only a reasonably accurate closed captioning transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of October 5, 2021. Page 16 highlight things, uh, that have happened in this proposed zoning code. So some of these are evolutions of current standards. Uh, for example, it will utilize a similar process to our current zoning code, uh, will modify certain standards to try to achieve some of council's goals, such as affecting parking, which I'll discuss in a little bit. Uh, or in other cases, it takes current standards and tries to further them towards council's goals. So, for example, thoroughfare types really takes our standards that are under subdivision code and adds additional design elements in the ways that we designed streets in those public spaces. In, um, some cases, these concepts are newer. So design sites are something that I'll be mentioning tonight. So I would like to- to describe that briefly. That is essentially a piece of land that accommodates one primary building type. Um, so it is similar to a lot in that way, uh, but it is not identical to a lot because a lot can have multiple design sites. So the reason that we incorporated this idea is when we're talking about flexibility and changing markets over time, especially related to missing middle housing, uh, you can plat lots, but once those are platted, they are platted. Uh, in this case, you can have- plat a block and have design sites on it, but those design sites could then be changed administratively, uh, through processes that I'll describe. Uh, and that allows more flexibility to react to changing market characteristics over time. Uh, in addition, civic space types are something that Anne had mentioned and it's really formalizing some of our, uh, open space requirements, but it also adds private spaces, uh, and really a lot of the things that we're trying to do tonight is strike that balance between certainty and flexibility. So we have a more detailed future land use map, uh, that can change, uh, with the standards in the code. But there are also standards for rezoning that should provide more certainty as to how those changes can be made to ensure that we're still meeting the goals that we're trying to seek. And so as I go through the individual sections of the code, I will try to highlight major changes throughout. And first and most important is the creation of five new form based zone districts. Um, Anne somewhat talked about how those function in terms of future land use. Uh, in this case, these zones do correspond directly to those future land use categories, uh, but they are really based on the form of the district, the desired physical character, uh, they are not so much focused on use though they do regulate use secondarily. As part of that because we're looking at form, a lot of the standards are built to the building types that are allowed within each zone. So as I go through the individual zone, I'll really be highlighting those building types that are allowed. Uh, but that is not to say that the building type has to include, for example, a residential. So if you have a house, you could have a commercial use in it, uh, it's really just the form and it's not tied to the use specifically. As part of that, uh, within each zone, there are also frontage types that are part of the building and the primary entrance, and there are dimensional standards which would be used to- in- in any regular zoning code. So again, regulating by building type, we do have minimum lot sizes or minimum design sites sizes, but we also have maximum design site sizes and that's a pretty substantial change from our current zoning code. And that's really to try and encourage compact neighborhoods because we are looking at these T3 and T4, uh, neighborhoods, suburban, and- and neighborhood general, uh, areas. We also do have standards related to building bulk, so building height and that includes both limit in terms of stories and in terms of feet, uh, and- and other standards such as setbacks and- and things that you'd be used to. Uh, another departure is that our form -based zones are actually where parking is This represents only a reasonably accurate closed captioning transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of October 5, 2021. Page 17 regulated within this code, um, so there are setbacks related to parking, others minimum parking included here, uh, and there's also land- some landscaping standards that are included, uh, within this form based zones and standards section. Uh, however, there are some-, again, some departures from what we currently do, so for example, one of our goals is to create really vibrant urban spaces. Uh, we don't want, uh, streetscapes filled with garage doors and so we have setback requirements where the garage doors actually have to be set back from the front facade of the building. Uh, we don't require alleys, which is another way that you can do that, but this is another way to try and create those - those vibrant streetscapes. Another change is that our minimum parking standards are slightly reduced, uh, for some use types, uh, and for some types of units, uh, mostly the supplies to non-residential uses. So if you have a small-scale commercial use, for example, uh, you may not need to require parking if you have a small enough square footage because the assumption is that you are serving the neighborhood, you're serving those who are already passing through and so surface earth so on street parking should help meet that need. There are also some changes to, for example, two-bedroom units is probably the other more substantial change where that's more similar to a one -bedroom unit instead of a three-bedroom unit like it currently is categorized. And then also approaches to landscaping are different, so one of the goals of this is to really regulate, uh, parkings that we don't have large expanses of parking, uh, large open lots, and so as parking lots get bigger, they have to provide additional landscaping. And then there are also trees standards that are associated with that and other standards to try and help break up those larger areas, uh, of asphalt. Uh, and then finally, I just wanted to touch on a sub zone and I'll touch on this later. Uh, it's tied to those neighborhood nodes that Anne had mentioned, but it really allows a variety of non residential uses, uh, to also take place. Um, so those are just some overall zoning code, uh, ideas that are incorporated throughout, but I really wanna start to touch on the- the actual zones themselves now. So first I'll start with the lowest intensity zone. This is the T3 neighborhood edge. So we're looking at primarily how scale detached buildings that are approximately 2.5 stories tall. It's pretty common to what you might see in a lot of neighborhoods today with maybe house large, a cottage court arranged around a central green where instead of having your individual backyard, you can share a- a front green space or side-by-side duplexes. So it is in the third transect that suburban transect, so it is the lower intensity use, uh, and again, the uses are named- or the zones are named based on the desired neighborhood character. So you're not talking about it in terms of the uses, you're talking about in terms of these are at the edges of neighborhoods, uh, where you would want these types of uses located on. Um, so I'm showing the future land use map again, this is one way that it could exist, but that's kinda the rationale, uh, as to how these things were placed. Next is the T3 neighborhood general zone, uh, which is still how scale detach buildings at 2.5 stories, but you start to introduce a larger variety of building types that might be allowed within these zones. So in addition to the same as the first zone, we have side-by-side duplexes, cottage courts, uh, it introduces a smaller housing variants, uh, and then you also have stacked duplexes, small multiplexes with up to 60 units and town homes in rows of 2-3. So with the neighborhood general, uh, it does provide some more uses and they're generally located in the center of neighborhoods, uh, kind of away from those major corridors and away from existing development. The first of the transect for urban This represents only a reasonably accurate closed captioning transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of October 5, 2021. Page 18 zone is the T4 Neighborhood Small. Um, it is still predominantly house -scale detached buildings, but there are some attached buildings as well, but you're still looking at 2.5 stories. Uh, and this is where you are completely m the missing middle housing category, where you're looking at small multiplexes of up to six dwelling units, cottage courts still, uh, courtyard buildings, uh, would- should allow to 16 units, but it's similar to a cottage court and then it's arranged around a central green, and then townhomes that are in a -a larger row of 4-8 dwelling units. And these T4 Neighborhood Small are located in areas that are still appropriate, uh, for that smaller house scale development, uh, but that where you want some more intensity. So examples are around collector streets, along- around some single -loaded streets, and you're also looking around some neighborhood nodes, or in areas around major intersections. So it's really where you want more intensity, but you still want that house scale, uh, due to adjacent development. And the next step up is the T4 Neighborhood Medium Zone, which is still primarily house scale, though it does allow some block scale buildings. And so it is a mixed of attached and detached buildings. But this is where you start to get up into 3.5 stories and the building types that you might see are the multiplex large, which allows up to 12 dwelling units, courtyard building small, which is up to 16 dwelling units, and town homes in rows of 4-8. And as you get into neighborhood open zones where you might start to allow non-commercial uses, uh, this zone does also allow stacked town homes, which would let you have up to three town homes stacked on top of each other where they might be one story. And those are located primarily along major streets and single loaded streets. So areas that are appropriate for higher intensity uses. Then finally is the T4 Main Street. This is the one that allows a broader variety of commercial uses. Uh, but you're looking at block -scale, attached buildings that are up to four stories. So things such as the main street building, or the courtyard building, large interest up to 24 dwelling units and then town homes, which are in rows of 4-8, but they might be stacked up to three on top of each other. So you might think some older elements, uh, small town downtowns, for example, often fit this- this topology. Uh, and it's really only located at the corner of Sycamore and McCollister. So it's the center of the neighborhood, uh, and it's that primary neighborhood hub for the area. But as I had pointed out, there are also other neighborhood nodes that might allow non-residential uses. They don't require non- residential uses, but they are accommodated through a sub -zone that gets applied to the five individual zones, and they're at those centers of the walk sheds that were touched on earlier tonight. So those are also incorporated into the future land use map along with possible locations of these zones, uh, just to provide some certainty about where these types of uses may be appropriate and how they might be arranged. Teague: I have one question for clarification. Lehman: Yes. Teague: So T4 could also be a part of the five that you just pointed out? Do you go back to that slide. This represents only a reasonably accurate closed captioning transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of October 5, 2021. Page 19 Lehman: So- so there are T3 zones and T4 zones, both of those are incorporated in the zoning code text amendment. Teague: So on these five nodes, it can be T3 or T5, I mean, I'm sorry, T3 or T4? Lehman: Yes. The- the two category- the two zones that don't have open sub -zones are the T3 neighborhood edge and then that T4 Main Street. The rest of the three do have open zone variants that would allow, uh, fighter- wider variety of uses. Teague: Thank you. Lehman: And I also did want to touch on building types. I know when I mentioned what- a lot of them were individually with the zones. But there are some- some general things that I want to cover in terms of how they're structured and- and how they're regulated. So as we've been talking about tonight, there is a difference between how scale and block scale buildings, but these are not tied to use. It- what you're tying the different building types to is the desired character of a given zone at a given time. So how scales- how scale buildings are what you're really looking for in the T3 and T4 districts for the most part, except for the main street district. And so that's really what, uh, these regulations are built around. Now, to ensure that buildings don't- don't get too large where you have the large multiplexes, uh, that we were talking about earlier tonight, uh, there are building size requirements and massing requirements that help ensure that they don't get too big. So as part of that, there are body sizes, which is the main body of the building. And then there are also wing standards that get, uh, as you build on additions to the sides of the buildings, um, those provide additional space. However, there are maximum widths and that works with the maximum heights to ensure that your buildings are not getting too big to, uh, encroach on the- the given neighborhood character. Uh, they're really designed to - to help ensure that character. Now, there are also, uh, private space requirements. So these are similar to what you might see in our- in our current zones, uh, where there's a minimum amount of private- open space required on each slot. Uh, but in the form base zones, the way that we have dealt with that is that, uh, there are also civic spaces that can be private. And so if there are civic spaces nearby, you might be able to use that as a- a shared common green, uh, that can help meet some of those requirements. So- so that is something that is new to- to this code. And then in addition, there are standards related to visual interest which you might, uh, think of typically as a multifamily site development standards. Uh, but that is separated through a couple of different sets of standards located throughout this- this, uh, zoning code text amendment, uh, first in terms of building types, uh, you see it as the way that the massing is constructed where, uh, you're not going to have a large open face building, for example, that is a blank wall. Uh, there are also visual interests provided by creating a mix of building types. And that- that means that within each block there's required to be at least two primary building types. So you couldn't have a block that just contains single-family homes. You would also have to include a duplex, which also helps ensure that there's a diversity of housing types, uh, within each neighborhood. In addition, there are frontage types which provides the interface between the public and the private realm. Uh, there are also- there's also This represents only a reasonably accurate closed captioning transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of October 5, 2021. Page 20 required that there is a mix of frontage types on each block as well to provide visual interest. And there are architectural standards, uh, that- that come into play if there are larger buildings. Now I did also want to touch on the carriage house building type, which I hadn't mentioned to this point, uh, that is similar to the accessory dwelling units, uh, that you might be familiar with uh, within our- within our current zoning code. Uh, the difference is that this is not a primary building type, it's accessory building type. So it can be used with other building types and it's not just restricted to single-family detached homes. Uh, it can provide an additional dwelling unit, uh, for- for a variety of- of different building types a- as allowed in the zone. And now I just want to touch briefly on some of those points of visual interest in the ways that these buildings interact with the public realm. And that's primarily through the frontage types, which is that primary entrance into the home. And it's the- really the interface between the public realm, which is the streetscape and the private realm, which is the home. So like in the river front crossings district, each building type does require a frontage type with it. And those frontage types vary on the desired character of it's own, and on the building type itself. So I'm not going to go over the individual frontage type, but there are 10 different front edge types that are allowed. They provide a range of different options, ranging from your typical suburban front porch to your more urban uses, such as shop fronts. You can have galleries, you can have stoops, all of the above. But like building types, it is not regulated by use. So you could have a commercial use that has porch, as long as it is allowed by that building type. Really, these are just the way that the frontage type is constructed. It's that physical form. It's not tied to the individual use. And again, like I said, a mix of frontage types is required within each block, just like there's a mix of building types required within each block. And as you move into larger buildings, typically over two stories, as you start to get into wider buildings, additional architectural elements come into play that help provide visual interest. So things such as tripartite articulation, which creates a def- defined base, middle and top. You have things like architectural recessions which provide a step back on the facade if the facade is wide. And then you have optional elements such as a corner element or a rooftop room, which are allowed with various building types. And they provide additional visual interest and some additional space within each- within each standard. So really what it boils down to is it very much depends on the type of building that you're using and that the different factors within the zoning code help ensure that that is not just a blank facade. For example, you have a visually interesting space and a visually interesting neighborhood. I also wanted to touch briefly on civic spaces. These are both public or private open spaces that are dedicated for public use. So as Anne had pointed out earlier, they're built into the future land use map, and they're also built into additional planning documents that would be required as part of this- of rezoning or re -planning to these districts. So for example, the neighborhood plan would incorporate a lot of these elements, and I'll talk about that in a minute. Again, there are a range of different civic space types classified by natural, urban, all those different things that are based on the zone and the desired physical character. And they add on to the existing public space. So it's not just the existing public space that'll be in the south district, there are additional areas where we would like to see additional civic spaces, whether that be as a neighborhood center, whether that be as trails, whether that be as other uses as well. Another change is that thoroughfares are incorporated through the This represents only a reasonably accurate closed captioning transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of October 5, 2021. Page 21 zoning code, which are basically your street cross-sections. So whereas currently most of these standards are housed in the subdivision code, where there are some basic standards about right-of-way width, some basic standards about pavement width, maybe sidewalk width, in this case, there's a typology setup where there's a hierarchy of streets, and it's more specific than it is in our current standards. So for primary streets, you're looking at McCollister, Sycamore, Gilbert in Lehman, uh, you're looking at pretty much arterial street standards, maybe some collector street standards, uh, that have some wider sidewalks on one side of them. Some of them incorporate bike lanes, medians, parking depending on the- the circumstance and the location. Now one standard that is new with these, uh, thoroughfare types is that street trees would be required every 30 feet within both the primary streets in those neighborhood streets, which is pretty much everywhere else, that isn't one of those major streets. Uh, so with the neighborhood streets, those are similar to our current neighborhood street standards again uh, but in this case that right of way is slightly wider, so it's 70 feet instead of 60 feet and that's really to accommodate the addition of street trees along all of those streets. Now there are also two special thoroughfare types that I briefly like to touch on. Uh, one is the Alley which provides rear access to an individual design site. Um, so that does come with the benefit that the lot length can be reduced, and the lot width may able to be reduced. But it is generally not required except for areas along major streets where you don't want access directly on a street. So I'll talk about that as I get to- to the thoroughfare map in a second. Then there are also passages which provide pedestrian access through a block and that is an exchange for larger block sizes. So the pedestrian passageway is also a civic space type, uh, if you notice that earlier. So it is a unique- it is unique in that it is multiple things at one time, but it's really to encourage that pedestrian connectivity throughout the neighborhoods. As we talk about the thoroughfare map, again, you can see that proposed hierarchy of streets. Uh, as far as where alleys would be required, it would be along major streets, specifically South Gilbert and McCollister as long as access was not provided elsewhere. However, if access can be provided from side streets, that's fine. You don't need an alley. Really, the reason that the allies are required along these areas are so that access isn't provided directly on McCollister because that'll be a major thoroughfare and the same with South Gilbert. So it's similar to some of our standards today. And then fmally, for Title 14, I wanted to touch on some affordable housing incentives that are incorporated into the zoning code text amendment. And these affordable housing incentives are really supplemental to some of the mandatory incentives that we have within our current codes. Things such as our annexation requirement, about half of the land in the South district is in the county currently. So as that land comes in, they are subject to that 10 percent, uh, affordable housing requirement. But in this case, there are additional standards if affordable housing is provided voluntarily, and all of that would have to be on-site affordable housing to utilize these standards. So with regards to these standards, then we are talking about renter -occupied housing. So if a household is making less than 60 percent of the area median income, they could- they could qualify for some of these homes with rent restrictions at fair market or light tech rent limits, similar to a roof crossing standards, but that would be for a 20 -year compliance period. And then for owner -occupied housing, they could be up to 80 percent of the area median income, which is considered low income. And they would be subject to this HUD sales price This represents only a reasonably accurate closed captioning transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of October 5, 2021. Page 22 limit and again, a 20 -year compliance period. Now, what those incentives look like, it depends on if it's a mandatory or voluntary affordable housing unit. [NOISE] One, that all affordable housing would be able to utilize is a parking reduction where no minimum parking would be required for affordable units. The second is a density bonus, where there could be a 25 increase to the units within a building type. But all of those additional units would have to be affordable. So that would only be for voluntarily provided affordable housing. And then there's also some flexibility built into the zoning code for affordable housing, where you could choose one change to a zoning standard, and one change to a building type standards. So for book- for zoning standards, you're talking about design site depth or width changes, or areas within the facade zone and with building types, uh, you're talking about potential increase in the building width up to 15 percent or up to a half story increase in building heights. Now, if as an incentive to provide housing that's more affordable as well to households less than 50 percent AMI, uh, then you could choose an additional standard for each of those. So again, this is supplemental to some of those mandatory standards. But the goal is that we really want to be able to provide affordable housing in addition to providing a diversity of housing types within the south district. Now, as we move on to title 15, which is the subdivision code, most of the changes that you see are related to process. So this includes- uh, including additional detail and preliminary plats such as things like the building types, the civic space types, the thoroughfare types, making sure that they are meeting the standards that are within the zoning code text amendments. And then with the final plat, they would also submit a neighborhood plat- a neighborhood plan, which would also lay out these elements for the future. So there is some flexibility in what these things or how these things can change over time as well. For example, a neighborhood plan, parts of it can be administratively changed if allowed within the code. Uh, but they generally provide that document that shows you what is supposed to happen in this area. Now, in addition to that, the subdivision code also includes new block size standards to ensure a highly connected street network. So the table at the bottom here talks about the block lengths. So it is an evolution of one of our current standards. But as you'll notice, for lower -density zone- or for lower intensity zones, you see longer block lengths and as you get into the T4 general urban zones, you have shorter block lengths. Now one way that you can increase block lengths is by providing a pedestrian passage through the middle, which allows you to provide pedestrian connectivity and also have a wider block as well. So there are standards that are built to ensure that there's pucker- excuse me, pedestrian connectivity throughout. There are also standards related to the perimeter of blocks as well. And then finally, another portion of the subdivision code is that development must comply with that comprehensive plan for thoroughfare map, with variations as allowed from the future land use map as detailed or within the code itself. So alignment may change, blocks may shift, but as long as you're meeting these block standards, as long as you're meeting the other standards in the code, then you can make those changes as well. Now, in terms of the benefits, uh, of foreign-based zones, we've talked about that a little bit, but I really wanted to touch on how it relates to social justice, uh, and equity, and then also how it relates to climate action and adaptation. So for one, uh, as it relates to social justice and equity, conventional low-density zoning can indirectly lead to racial and or class segregation. So you see this through exclusionary practices like single-family This represents only a reasonably accurate closed captioning transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of October 5, 2021. Page 23 only zones, large, minimum lot sizes, uh, which can lead to exclusive communities. Uh, and currently within Iowa City, about 81 percent of land or residential land is zoned for single family and over half of that is low density. It can also be challenging to zone land to multifamily, uh, for a variety of reasons or- or higher density family- higher density zones. Uh, and so one way to approach that, that foreign-based code approaches that, is by diversifying housing choices, ensuring that there are a range of housing types and building types allowed within each zone, uh, so that there is the opportunity, uh, to- to mitigate that particular barrier to affordable housing into exclusivity. And even, uh, with the mix of building types as well, requiring that that exists. Uh, as it relates to cli- climate action and adaptation, conventional low-density zoning, uh, can contribute to higher greenhouse gas emissions, because as you spread out density, as you spread out housing, it makes it more difficult to navigate by anything other than a car, which in turn reinforces auto -oriented development and increases traffic congestion. In addition, higher parking minimums, uh, assume car ownership, they can increase, uh, the price of housing. Uh, and they also do contribute to more spread out locations because if you're accommodating more parking, it leads to lower -density housing, uh, as a result. In addition, uh, the- the based zoning code, uh, proposed amendment, and the comprehensive plan amendment are consistent with the plans of the city. And that's not just the comprehensive plan and the south district plan, that includes council's strategic plans, that includes the Climate Action adaptation plan. Uh, so by ensuring a mix of housing types within each neighborhood, promoting walkable neighborhoods, and encourage multiple modes of transportation by planning for commercial development and find commercial nodes and preserving open space, environmentally sensitive areas. Uh, it aligns well with council's policies. So after reviewing, uh, these proposed amendments based on the relevant criteria, staff had recommended approval of the proposed comprehensive plan and Zoning Code Text Amendment. Uh, and that the September 16th, 2021 meeting, the Planning and Zoning Commission concurred with staff by vote of 5-0 to also recommend approval of both items. Um, so I have those items, uh, up on the- the screen for you today. Uh, and that does conclude staffs report on this item. Uh, and thank you so much for your time. Uh, it is a long and complicated process, uh, and we are happy to answer any questions. Teauge: All right. Well, thank you, Tony, with Opticos and Ann and Kirk. [LAUGHTER] Any questions by councilors? Bergus: I do have a question. Um, given that we know this will be kind of a learning curve both with staff, and thank you, Tony, for mentioning that staffs been, uh, really engaged in coming along, which is clear from the presentations tonight. Um, but given that it'll be a learning curve for the property owners and developers, do we have any sense of, um, [NOISE] steps the city might take to help with sort of educating or, you know, helping the process on the front end so that people can feel more comfortable, make it less abstract, um, knowing what they're signing up for? [NOISE] Russett: Um, I guess we don't really have anything formally established, but staff is always willing to work with, you know, developers and landowners who are interested in- in This represents only a reasonably accurate closed captioning transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of October 5, 2021. Page 24 applying this code to their land. Um, we also are looking at creating, uh, a grant program, um, where property owners could apply for grants that could help go towards, um, the funds could be used for design costs. Because like you said, this- this is, uh, a very- very different code, and, um, it's- it's new to everybody. Bergus: Thank you. Teague: All right. I know I have some questions, but I want to open it up to other people. Weiner: I ju- I mean, I'd just like to get a- it- it was discussed some during our work session, but I'd like to get some clarification for, um, for the people who are here in attendance about the different- the- the fact that couple of things. One is that not all land is currently in the city and what would a plot- what would- what sta- what standards would apply to land that would be annexed into this area and that land that's currently there isn't automatically apart of the Form Based Code? Russett: Yeah. So th- the proposed plan amendment and the proposed, uh, amendment to the Zoning Code actually doesn't change the- the zoning map. So any development in this area, um, to use these standards would have to go through a rezoning at a minimum and a subdivision process which would go before the Planning Commission in the city council. The land that is not in the city right now would need to be annexed. And- and that would also come before Planning Commission and council. Um, there is some land within the planning area that already has a single fam- family residential zone, that could move forward with developing under that zoning district. Um, but the rest of the land would need to be- would need to be rezoned. Weiner: And- and, um, that is any land that came in through annexation would be under the annexation standard that was created, I think, in 2018, which would include a certain portion of dedicated to affordable ho- housing? Russett: Yes. That's- that is correct. Yes. Ten- 10 percent of the units would have to be affordable either on-site or fee in lieu for any land that's annexed. Thomas: Uh, one- one question I have and is with the, um, you know, there- there's so many moving parts in this process. It's, uh, kind of almost mind-boggling, trying to- to see where- what would th- what would the, uh, the code, um, result in in terms of an actual development proposal? And so one of- one of my questions would be, did staff in developing the code, in a- in a sense, test how, uh, how the code would actually work? You know, sort of take- I'm gonna take these two blocks that have been established by - by the plan and apply the code as we've written it and see what- what results from that. Trying to identify, in my mind, perhaps cases where people may fail, the- the code is allowing too high a density or arguably not sufficient density. But, you know, kind of that sweet spot where we- we have the higher density which we understand has value. But that the code, as we've written it, [NOISE] uh, we've tested it to make sure that that's what the outcome will be. And- and that would also apply to the affordable housing This represents only a reasonably accurate closed captioning transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of October 5, 2021. Page 25 component because, you know, you have a number of variables there, um, do the variables work, you know, financially in terms of generating affordable housing units. You know, kind of doing the math up front on what's necessary to financially bridge the gap, so to speak, so that affordable housing can be constructed, um, and that these various incentives that we've outlined will provide that bridge and fill that gap. So did you test the- these ideas -in that one? Russett: Yeah. Russett: So to the first question, we test the code. We tested the code in terms of, um, the parking requirements, in terms of the minimum and maximum, a building sizes and parking standards, um, and lot size, design site standards. In terms of the location of the actual designations on the ground, there- there was a strategy behind that and we applied the - we applied the lower intensity zones next to existing single-family, or we applied open space to existing single-family to provide a transition. Um, and as you get to those quarters, um, the intensity goes up. So there was a strategy behind the placement on the map. Um, in- in terms of your question on the affordable housing incentives, I'm not sure we can answer that. I mean, these- these are just regulatory incentives. There's no fmancial incentives associated with this. Any developer of affordable housing would probably say the regulatory incentives on their own are not enough, they would need financial incentives as well. Our hope is that if there's a -an affordable housing developer that is doing a LIHTC project m this area, that they could use these regulatory incentives kind of as a- as a boost in addition to- to the funding that they got from the state. Thomas: Yeah. Because- I mean, that last scenario we're describing I- um, you know, the- the incentives you've identified where more regulatory, you know, I know many cities will use rebate- tax rebate strategies, uh, for to cover financial incentives as well. And that's why I was asking about the testing because I mean, we can- we can claim that we are - here we are, we're- we're providing our affordable housing program and we've identified these ways to achieve it, and I'm- I'm sure will obviously be observing to see if it, in fact, has done that. But my concern would be it- does it- will it work? You know will it actually achieve it? Russett: Yeah. You know, and I think, you know, this is something that staff spent some time thinking about, and our code currently doesn't have any regulatory incentives for affordable housing in it, except for parking reductions. So we felt it was important to at least try it out and see how it works. If it needs to be tweaked, we can certainly- we can certainly look at that in the future. Fruin: If I could add to that, um, we do have financial incentives that are possible as well. We could- we clearly have our affordable housing fund, uh, but several years ago we did enable tax abatement for affordable housing, uh, that has to go through a separate process, but we created a framework for that. And we have, um, with the foster road extension dipped our toes into providing subsidy for residential infrastructure. And when you do that through Tax Increment Financing, there's a state requirement for some of that This represents only a reasonably accurate closed captioning transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of October 5, 2021. Page 26 increment, uh, in our case, about half of that increments to go into affordable housing projects. So some of that frameworks in place and that'll, as Ann answered, kinda come up on an individual basis as we talk with, uh, interested property owners. Salih: I guess when I ask you with them. Like for example with adding all this like density on the- on that side, have we really, um, look into our emergency services like, uh, the police and the fire, if that is still going to be like the ratio will be okay, or we have to add still like on the station there. Fruin: Yeah. So, um, the city did purchase a lot for a future fire station at the corner of Gilbert and Cherry. That's the recent extension that was, it comes down near Napoleon, um, softball fields and our parks and rec, ah, maintenance operation there. So we do have plans in the future, um, to build a- a fire station deeper into that South district, if you will. And then from a police standpoint, um, we don't think that the increase in density will necessitate the addition of officers. Certainly as our population grows, calls for service will increase. But this isn't the level of density that in and of itself would- would create a need for additional officers. The other thing to keep in mind is this isn't going to develop overnight. Um, when you look at- when you look at the amount of acres that we're talking about, this development could take place over several decades. And- and it's really not at our- our pace. Necessarily you have a lot of property owners that have to either Annex into the city or decide it's time that they wanna develop. So, um, I would really encourage the council to look at this as a- a multiple decade type of endeavor. Salih: And also giving the fact that the bargains really limited. Are we thinking about extending the transportation there out? What do we gonna go about that? Fruin: Yeah, so anytime we, uh, developed new neighborhoods, we're evaluating our public transit- transportation. Um, that usually will follow demand. So we're not going to send our buses into a lowly populated neighborhood, you know, when there's two or three homes built, as that density builds up, we know that demand will be there and that's when we re-evaluate our routes. So as the city has grown to the East and to the West, we've lengthened routes, uh, in order to, uh, serve those households. But over time as this area develops, yes, I fully expect that we'd have to re-evaluate our routes and either reconfigure what we have or add additional routes. The same goes for, uh, the property on the West side of the council's, uh, thought about annexing this past year, we refer to as the Carson farm south of Rohrot Road. It's not something that we would develop plans for in advance, but as the- um, uh, as the development occurs, that's demand that we would closely monitor and then at some point, you'd have to dive into to transit service in those areas. Salih: Okay, last question. Like Council Taylor earlier in our work station she has ask about this school. Have, um, for the public, you know, on information, have we- can like discuss this with the school district? This represents only a reasonably accurate closed captioning transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of October 5, 2021. Page 27 Russett: Yeah, we did have a, um, few meetings with the school district to get a better understanding of their needs. And for the area that- the planning area that we're looking at, the 900 acres. So they did not have a need for additional land within that 900 acres, but they probably will outside of that, um, outside of that area in the future. Salih: Thanks. Teague: Had a couple of questions, um, so is my understanding like the T4, you can only have a max of four stories unless you have an ascent of, to like affordable housing, is that correct? Russett: The four stories is limited to the T4 Main Street zone. The other T4 district allows three and a half story max. And then there's also a T4 that actually allows two and a half story. So it depends on the zone. It's a range. Teague: Okay. I- I'm curious, um, why four? Uh, because I think I've heard like six or lower, is where you don't trigger still usage. Is there a reason why a is four and not six? Although it could be if they have the incentive. Russett: Yeah, with the incentive, they could get up to four and a half stories with the affordable housing incentive. Um, I guess the- we kept it at four. And this was kind of a discussion that we had amongst staff. Before it was actually at three and a half story max and we bumped it up to four. Just because the rest of the zones have that two and a half, three and a half story range. So we- we are applying a height limit that's I guess, similar to the other zones in the- in the code. Teague: Okay. Russett: Yeah. Perez: Yeah. Mayor- Mayor I just wanted to add to that, um, to what Anne was saying. In addition to that, the ideal is that as soon as you get to five or six story buildings, their footprint, you know, meaning their width and their depth, wants to get bigger. And it usually does. And so right away that- that that told us. That kind of footprint is that blocks too big of a block skill building, it's not gonna be compatible with anything down here. So that is a big reason why not? Teague: Okay- okay. Thanks. And then for the civic space, when we're talking about prom, public's usage, we would have to acquire that from a landowner, is that correct? Russett: It would be- it would be- it wouldn't be an acquisition. It would be through our neighborhood open space standards, which is either- which is a current requirement that we have at the subdivision stage where developers either provide a fee in lieu for neighborhood open space are dedicated land for open space. Um, and some of the land will be made privately maintained as well. This represents only a reasonably accurate closed captioning transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of October 5, 2021. Page 28 Teague: Okay. And then refuse pick up, um, what does that look like as well as mail delivery? Fruin: We- the city picks up, um, uh, your single family residential, um, refuse. So that's your recycling, your compost and your waist. Believe it's up to four units. So as long as it's a single-family house, a duplex, or some type of small multifamily of four or less units, we would service those. Otherwise, those would be served privately. And then your second question was - Teague: Just mail delivery, just is that door to door or- Fruin: No, the USPS has shifted everything to the clusters that you might see in- in neighborhoods that are actually retrofitting older neighborhoods, uh, with those clusters as well. So, uh, um, you probably have a little bit of interaction and planning with the postal service on where those cluster boxes go. Russett: Yeah, But those, um, those mailbox clusters are identified as the set the subdivision stage, so there's outlets identified for now boxes on the- on the fmal plat. Teague: Thank you. And I'm assuming that the refuse would be in the front of the residents even if there's an alley. Fruin: Who depending on the situation, we do utilize alleys, uh, uh, when we can for refuse pickup. But if the alleys are built too small, then we have to, uh, ask the folks that we'll amount to the front. Teague: Last question. Thank you. This is related to the commercial property where it can be flexible, it can be residential, or it can be used for commercial. I did hear that some of these commercials properties, um, could have a porch. So I just wonder if there's any- if there's been any consideration for like a percentage or something related to which properties are most likely to be converted to commercial. If- if we're gonna kinda take into account. Like these could be commercial. And the reason I mentioned this is because of accessibility is pretty important that if a house is going to be converted, you know, grandfather days on businesses, you know, we have that right now. Well, for these properties where we have the intention that they can't have that flexibility, they - accessibility must be considered in the beginning. Russett: We- we heard a lot of concerns about accessibility in the outreach process. And so we changed our- we modified our frontage type standards. So the porch standards, for example, to kinda have two different options, where you could have a raised porch, or you could have an add grade porch. So I- I think, uh, the option is in the code. Um, there's nothing that would require a certain type of porch in those open zone areas, but there are frontage types that could be applied in those areas that would ensure an accessible front. This represents only a reasonably accurate closed captioning transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of October 5, 2021. Page 29 Teague: So if property they wanna be commercial, bottom line, they would have to have accessibility requirements even if they built a ramp? Russett: I guess if it was built as a residential use and then convert it, I'm not sure exactly how that would work. Um, if there would need to be an accessible entrance or not, that's kind of something that's addressed at building code. We could look into that and follow up with you on it at the next meeting. Teague: Yeah. I would be very interested in just learning about that. Thank you. Mims: Yeah. I would agree with that. I was concerned in looking at some of those images with the porches, how many things had steps? And I think, you know, for a lot of people, whether it's, you know, aging in place, or commercial and making sure it's accessible for anybody, you know, with any kind of mobility issues, making sure that that's covered. Taylor: I was going to ask and from Opticos experience. But Geoff, you touched on this, ah, in answer to my question, ah, and maybe your- your experience with Opticos. How long do you really think that this would come to fruition? Geoff mentioned perhaps decades even before it would all be into place? Perez: Oh, yeah, Councilor Member Taylor, that's- that's correct. I think a multiple decade approach is a- a best way to think about it. I think the, uh, the new TLC Charles example, it's- it's almost the same size, 730 acres to 900. And now it's been under construction since 2004, and they're about a fourth of the way- a third of the way- it's the- a third of the way, sorry. And that's- yeah. I mean- I think- yeah, 25 years? 30 years? Fruin: And- and that's not really different than our traditional zoning. That's not- I mean, we're just talking about the size of development area and really the- the demand for growth here. Um, you- you could think back to, like, the Windsor Ridge Subdivision, which is still finishing its build out today. That's- that's probably 25, 30 years in the making, somewhere there. So, ah, it's- it's more a function of just the large land area that we're planning here as opposed to the- the type of code that you're considering. Taylor: So Geoff, would you, ah, think that, ah- would you anticipate that m the future, future councils are going to need to anticipate perhaps some effects on our budget that we'll have to increase as far as, like, the emergency services, the road services, the transit service, those kinds of things could- fairly- fairly large for their area there? Fruin: Yeah. The- you know, as we look at the- the rate of growth, we consider that every year, um, what I would say with- with this is when you're getting the increased density, um, that- that- that kind of trigger point is going to be a lot more delayed. So you can just think of your refuse, you know, your refuse drivers. If- if you can pick up 50 houses going down one street, um, you can do that fairly efficiently. If- if you have to go, you know, up and down five streets to get those 50 houses like you might in a conventional, ah, neighborhood, uh, that may take you, you know, 20-30 minutes longer. And that, you This represents only a reasonably accurate closed captioning transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of October 5, 2021. Page 30 know, you do that over and over again. And all of a sudden you're adding a lot more staff to pick up that waste than you do in this compact models. So the idea is that you get more density m here and the strain on your public services, m your public infrastructure is much less. Taylor: Thank you. Thomas: I- I wanted to also comment on the, uh- the thoroughfare standards which I think are an interesting aspect of this. I know most of us have- now the primary focus is on the housing component, but I think the- the thoroughfare standards are important as well. I- I did watch, uh, some of the P&Z videos, it's good to have access to those. And if I'm not mistaken, it did call for, uh - the standards did call for a wider, uh, parking strip, I guess you might call it between the sidewalk and the curb, seven feet, if I'm not mistaken. Is that right? Russett: I think it depends on the thoroughfare type. But yes, some of them are a lot wider than you typically see. Thomas: So, you know, that I think is, uh, you know, for the tree guy in me. [LAUGHTER] It's one of those numbers, you know, that is being generated by this code that will, I think, significantly advance our tree canopy because there will be more space than in our conventional subdivisions for street trees. Many of our subdivisions really are not- you don't see planting- tree planting along the street. So this- this will provide more space for them. And also, if we maintain that 30 foot on center spacing, you know, this notion of continuous canopy, um, in the south district could become a reality. Councilor Bergus and I were talking earlier today about- there's- there's a need for additional tree canopy in the south districts. So- so these two things combined, I think, would make a big difference. One- one other thing I did want to comment on m looking at those standards, the street- the paved street widths will be the same as m our subdivision. And I know I've- you know, when we've had our traffic calming, um, projects come before us, you know, I've expressed concern about that standard because it's four to work from a controlling vehicular speeds. You really have to have a fair amount of parking on the street to narrow the roadway so that it functions m that yield manner that I think is the intention. If there aren't cars parked on the side and the parking bays, ah, you end up with roadway widths which drivers tend to drive at higher speeds because it's- it's a fairly wide open condition. So- so it seems to me, and I don't know if Opticos says any thoughts on this but, you know, the fact that we basically have just this continuous parking bay condition, ah, that we can't seem to adequately, uh, occupy with parked vehicles, uh, seems like we- it needs to be looked at more carefully m terms of at least maintaining the- the dimension of the parking bay. Meaning if you had kind of an undulating curve, for example, so that the curve would project out and establish what that parking dimension actually is, at least sufficiently enough that cars wouldn't feel like they have the whole roadway. Tony, do you have any thoughts [LAUGHTER] on this? This represents only a reasonably accurate closed captioning transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of October 5, 2021. Page 31 Perez: Yeah. Council Member Thomas, I think- uh, if I understand you right, you're saying that if- if a couple blocks are aligned and the parking doesn't jut out, that people could drive faster. Is that correct? Thomas: Right. So I mean if- let's say we have a 28 foot wide roadway with- which allows parking on both sides of the street. And if we assume that the parking bays or maybe seven feet, so that allows 14 feet. If- if people are parked in the- in the parking lanes, that would- that would result in 14 feet of roadway for two-way traffic. Perez: Yes. Thomas: That's great. Perez: Yes. Thomas: But often, what we end up, if you drive many of our subdivision streets is there's virtually no cars parked on the street. So you end up with a 28 foot wide roadway with in effect 14 foot lanes which are wider than what you see on the interstate. So- so we see in some instances anyway, ah, cars traveling at a- at a speed faster than we would like them to travel. Perez: Right. Yeah. The- you know, the- the- the traffic engineers always say the less obstructions there are, the faster people go. Thomas: Right. Perez: It's true, you know. So I think one of the reasons you see no parked cars in a lot of your subdivisions is because there's abundant parking behind in- m your- parking lots. And, uh, as- as- as city staff has been talking about this, the- the approach here- sorry, I'm just gonna pick this up. I can't bend over that long. The approach here is to- is to have smaller parking lots and to also use on -street parking for that double purpose. Thomas: So two purposes: one, to help the property owner with that on -street parking let the count toward the project requirements. And Number 2, to act as a traffic calming, um, device. Perez: Yeah. Thomas: That was- I was thinking that that might have been the intention with revising the parking standards, that it might- it might require using, uh, the street parking, uh, more frequently than we now see. Perez: Yeah. This represents only a reasonably accurate closed captioning transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of October 5, 2021. Page 32 Teague: Thanks. Any more questions for Staff? Because we certainly want to hear from the public. Okay. Okay. We're going to invite the public up to the mic to speak. At this time, there is a sign -in sheet on this side table there. And we ask that you keep your comments three minutes or less, and there is a timer over here. [NOISE] Please give us your name and address. Welcome. Barron: Good evening, Council. I'm Sarah Baron with the Johnson County affordable housing coalition in Iowa City. I'm here tonight to remind you of what I think are three key community values that residents of Iowa City have told you time and again, are what we want to think about when we think about development and our city. And those values are affordability, accessibility, and environmental healing and sustainability. So the plan you have before you tonight is an ambitious rethinking of how we build residential housing and commercial spaces in our city. It moves us away from exclusionary practices that allow people who have more money to spend on their homes to determine how our city grows. That allows people to come to believe that they are entitled to property rights that extend beyond their property lines if they live in expensive homes. And Instead, determining a vision, the things about how we build inclusive neighborhoods that reflect those three values that I've talked about; affordability, sustainability, and accessibility. Um, I'll tell you my board is a bit agnostic about every detail of the form -based code. I imagine I will be back here at some point to ask you for other things that we can do to work on the affordability of housing in this area and other areas. But there are a lot of things to celebrate here about moving away from single-family exclusionary zoning, about moving away from the ability of people who only in to determine what gets built next to them. Not because of any reason other than simply, um, self-centered reasons that are concerns about property values or exclusion. Um, you'll probably hear some sophisticated arguments tonight that try to catch those in different ways. Um, But I think that you all are smart enough to clock a nimby argument when you hear one. And so I just really want you to think about crafting this policy tonight in a way that reflects what you know are those three values: affordability, sustainability, and accessibility and- and see this as a first big step toward re -imagining how we build a community that does include everyone. Thanks. Teague: Thank you. For anyone else would like to address this topic, please come to the podium. Welcome. Patrick -Ferree: Hi. I'm Kelsey Patrick -Ferree for and live on Sandusky Drive. Um, I have a lot of hats in our community, but kind of the two for today are that I'm a member of the leadership committee of the South District Neighborhood Association and the Alexander Elementary PTO. Um, but fm only here speaking for myself today. Um, I just want to say that I really appreciate the way that city staff has worked with us on this whole process. Um, I've been to so many meetings about this leading up to today. Russia has come and talked to the South District Neighborhood Association more than once. Um, she came to our leadership committee meeting and she came to the main group meeting and talked about this process and how people could get involved. I really appreciated that. We- ah, I think I can safely say we all appreciated that. Um, one of the things that I This represents only a reasonably accurate closed captioning transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of October 5, 2021. Page 33 really like about this is the focus on the missing middle housing. I've been in front of you before asking for that kind of inclusionary zoning and so I really like this plan. Um, I'm sure I too will be back in the future having specific things to talk about as the process of building happens. Um, but one of the things that I would like to ask you to think about is how to start to implement these policies in other parts of town on an infill basis. Thank you. Teague: Thank you, and please remember to sign. Thank you. Yes. Anyone else like to address this topic please step up to the podium. I also invited people to kind of line up so you can start signing- sign -in in advance. You can address us now and then go and sign after. Welcome. Domsic: Thank you. Hi, I'm Robert Domsic, one of the directors of the Sand Hills Estates homeowners association. I'm speaking today on behalf of the residents of the Sandhills States neighborhood. We are a neighborhood of 126 homes adjacent to the proposed south district plan. On July 29th, 2021, our board of directors submitted to document to the disk- to the city discussing the five most common concerns from our homeowners regarding the proposed plan. When we collected signatures, 64 homeowners or a 100 percent of the homeowners who spoke with our door-to-door volunteers sign the letter of concern. Tonight, I will discuss one of those concerns. Our request for a better transition between the existing neighborhood and the area immediately south that McAllister court. The area in question is the small triangular parcel of land accounting for only 22 acres of the 900 included in the plan. Tonight, we ask the city to revise the south district plan to include T3 neighborhood edge and T3 neighborhood general transitional zoning in this area. These transitional zones are defined in nearly every other established nature- establish- establish neighborhood, but are absent in this area. Members are- members of our neighborhood, have expressed these concerns of council meetings dating back to 2013. On December 5th, 2017, the city council rejected design using nearly identical plotting road and zoning maps to those and the currently proposed south district plan. Design where the developer worked with Opticos, and Shive Hattery, and the city using structural form compliant with this plan. Transcriptions from the meeting note the city council's desire for- for better transition to be established between our existing neighborhood and any new development. On that night, former mayor Throckmorton summed up the council's decision stating, "Development should enhance and be compatible with the existing neighborhood. It should also make a transition from single- family housing on the east to some higher density structures at the far end of the West, near the intersection of McAllister and Gilbert. In-between, there should be a full range, abroad range of missing middle type housing. So you see and feel a transition. The core idea is it's got to feel like a neighborhood. It does not feel like a neighborhood now when I look at it." The current proposal prevents this vision from becoming reality. When you vote, please vote for a revision to- to the plan to include T3 Neighborhood Edge, and T3 Neighborhood General, within these 22 acres. Thank you. Teague: Thank you. When anyone else like to address this topic? Welcome. This represents only a reasonably accurate closed captioning transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of October 5, 2021. Page 34 Hachtman: Good evening and thank you. So my name is Alex Hachtman, and I'm 843 McAllister Court. And I'm the president of the Sandhills state Association and just wanted to, uh, thank the City Council for hearing us this evening, as well as for all that you do on behalf of the city. Um, members of our community and neighborhood, um, as it can see by many of those that are in attendance to love our community. So our board members, uh, compiled these concerns and as Bob just mentioned, the number 1 concern, uh, that I'd like to reiterate is that lack of transition, uh, to the existing neighborhood and the area immediately south of McAllister Court. So as we've heard this evening, so the T3 zone can be applied to existing single-family housing. And this is the area that resides on McAllister Court and in the south district plan that was proposed to you can- you can see the light green- or light pink, excuse me, um, coloring. And this area right behind McAllister Court is found lacking this T3 transitional zone. Um, we're grateful for, um, many of the concerns that we've brought forward that have been discussed already and that we're echoed by many members of the City Council this evening, such as kinda the impacts of reduction in the required parking for safety of the children in our neighborhoods, as well as the impact on education, um, my children also go to Alexander Elementary, and I'm grateful, uh, for that wonderful school. Um, also, the access to emergency services was another concern that was brought forward, uh, by the homeowners. And so once again, just wanted to reiterate, uh, kind of that concerns and hope that the city council takes these into account as they look at the long-range planning. So we are grateful for our neighborhood and love our neighborhood deeply as many of you care deeply about, I would say as well. And we just, um, please respectfully request that you kind of extend that transitional T3 housing, uh, or T3 zone excuse me, uh, to McAllister Court. Uh, thank you very much. Teauge: Thank you. Welcome. Shaw: Hello and first one, I want to think, uh, the Council for allowing us to speak on this topic. My name is Joleah Shaw and I live at 785 McAllister Court, um, in Iowa City. So I'm kind of wearing two hats tonight, as I did at the Planning and Zoning Commission. I am a member of the Board of Directors for the Sandhills state's homeowners association. As Bob mentioned, we have 126 homeowners in our subdivision, um, that borders, um, the new development that's being proposed tonight. And, um, I too went door to door and spoke to many of, er, the homeowner's association members there. And not going to list all of the concerns that Bob and Alice already mentioned. But, um, the big one I want to kinda discuss is, again, we've talked about this as a plan for 900 acres. Um, we've asked Ann and Kirk, um, kinda what the potential numbers are for the dwellings. Uh, we were told it was gonna be anywhere from 4,000-8,000 dwellings in this 900 acres. Iowa Cities average right now is 2.5 people per dwelling. So we're looking at increasing, Iowa Cities population anywhere from a low-end of 10,000 to a high-end of 20,000 people. To give you an idea of what to compare that to where looking at either adding Tiffin, Solon, Lone Tree, and University Heights, all in this 900 acres. Or high-end, you're looking at North liberties population of 20,000 all in this 900 acres, which is in my backyard. So I also again, as I stated, live in- on McAllister Court, um, I've also been told that my, uh, property is actually adjacent to probably the closest to the T4, um, development. So if This represents only a reasonably accurate closed captioning transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of October 5, 2021. Page 35 you look at the form -based code map that Ann and Kirk presented tonight, um, all of the existing development, all of the housing and neighborhoods, the school, everything has a neighborhood edge. They afforded that transition from the single family homes to a more densely populated development or building. Um, my home, unfortunately, is looking at possibly being 40 feet. My backyard, the property line in my backyard, 40 feet to the street, that will line with a T4, uh, development. We're asking that the Council, uh, recommend changing that to a T3, which would allow a- a smoother transition to the bigger buildings and the more dense- [NOISE] densely populated buildings. Thank you. Teague: Thank you. Teague: Would anyone else like to address this topic? Welcome. Trimble: Hello. I'm Alicia Trimble. I live at 2232 California Avenue, directly across from Councilor Burgess. Um, I just want to compliment city staff on this plan. I think it has been a longtime in the working and I think it- it really represents what our neighborhood wants to be. I also think when we're worried about density issues, the older part of the neighborhood that I live in would be very close to some of this density. And I would like to say it works very, very well. And I think we have a very good close relationship with our neighbors. We also have very big backyards, so, uh, we didn't have to compromise much. But again, I think this plan is- is wonderful, I think that a foreign-based neighborhood will get us away from that post -World War II model of separating us from where we- where we shop and where we live, and where we work and where we play, and allow everything to come together in our neighborhood, and to create a better sense of community. Thank you. Teague: Thank you. Anyone else like to address this topic? Seeing no one, I'm gonna ask the Council if they are inclined to vote- or to concur with a vote of P&Z. Goers: Mr. Mayor, this is the comp plan amendment and that- that part of the discussion isn't required. It is for the second part that we're gonna be doing. Teague: Thank you. All right. So I'm gonna close the public hearing. Can I get a notion to approve, please? 2. Consider an Resolution Thomas: So moved, Thomas. Bergus: Second Bergus. Teague: Council discussion. Taylor: I am still concerned, uh, what- with that section, a property that the speaker spoke about because I- I as well as few other that council members were on the council at the time This represents only a reasonably accurate closed captioning transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of October 5, 2021. Page 36 that discussion. And- and do remember that there was quite a bit of talk about, uh, the absence of a buffer, uh, between the, uh, residential houses and the development. And so that was voted down because of that because we were concerned about that lack of that, uh, so I don't know what we could do. I mean, I'm in favor of it all in favor this. I think it's a wonderful idea and I appreciate the staff and optical axis time that it has been a longtime corning in and- in the works for a long time. But with just that one little aspect, that corner of that property, I- I am concerned about that, but I don't know what we can do. Bergus: I- I think it's important to know, um, and- and emphasize this maybe during the work session more that it's not a budding, um, the T4 transect it is -there is that designated open space and then a single loaded street. So when you look at the, I think it's 18 houses that would be impacted on McAllister Court, it looks like there's that designated open space. There's a trail existing there now and landscaping there now and then a single loaded street. So the width of that right away and then to the development. Taylor: So it will be a different situation than what we, um, saw before us a few years back then. Bergus: I don't know if that's the case, but it's... Weiner: Is it possible to put up the map so that, um, so that we can see what we're talking about - we're talking about right now. Weiner: Okay. Russett: Let's see. Can I use your pointer? Fruin: You want to just walk them through that part real quick? Russett: Yeah. So McCollister court is right here. That's where you can see those brown dots. Those are the existing single family. And when we were looking at the area to the West which about Gilbert and McCollister Boulevard. We did recognize that a transition was important as council member Bergus mentioned we are proposing a transition of open space here. It's about 40 feet of open space, plus an additional 70 feet of proposed right of way for that single loaded street before the- the- the designations that you see here. Salih: You mean like 40 plus 70 feet. That's what you're talking about between the - Russett: Forty feet- approximately 40 feet width of the open space, and then 70 feet for the proposed right of way. Taylor: Thank you, Anne. That's helpful to actually see the visual. Thomas: In- in response to that particular area, I mean, you know, it did come before council previously um and the council rejected the proposal which was considerably higher This represents only a reasonably accurate closed captioning transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of October 5, 2021. Page 37 density than this. Um, I mean I think it is important to remember that the housing type and correct me if I don't have this correct. But the- the- the zone maxes out at two and a half storeys, is that correct? Russett: The lighter purple maxes out at two and a half, the part that price McCollister would be three and a half storeys. Thomas: Okay. And they are house form buildings? Russett: That's correct. Thomas: So- so this is a very different proposal than what we saw before which was, as I recall, a preponderance of larger multi -family buildings that there wasn't referenced to a house form as I recall it was- it was really more what we would typically think of as a multi- family. Taylor: Multi -family? Correct. Okay. Weiner: I mean, it sounds like Councilor Thomas what you're saying is [NOISE] when- when we were shown the- the picture of the- of the two different ways to get density of 29 or 30 units. You've had the one long- big long piece that meant that most of us would- would associate with multi -family housing. And then you had a house form building that was probably part of a series of separated buildings but each one perhaps with five units in it so that it had a much different. Thomas: Right. So the grain- the grain or the scale of the- the streetscape is very different with house form than it is with block form buildings. Which I think- what one of the strengths of this plan in my view is it's really limited the range of building size uh in a way that, you know, we haven't seen in Iowa City. So we have seen in my view uh a significant number of large multi -family buildings occurring all over Iowa city as well as Coralville uh so this is saying no to that. It's saying no to the block form buildings. So I think that is a very important aspect of this plan. You know, yes we do have the main street concept, but that's a very- a very limited application of it. So I, you know, that's one of the great blessings of this approach is that it's- is that the buildings are at a very different scale and character than we're accustomed to thinking of multi -units. Mims: Were there are a couple of 16 plax- 16 unit buildings [OVERLAPPING] in this previous plan? Thomas: I think so, yeah.Well, I'm, you know, I- I do think this is um a great leap forward in terms of our uh planning policy, in terms of uh the built forms, the, as I mentioned the thoroughfare standards, the creation of a civic realm. That's- that's sort of my background, is trying to create civic realms at least when I was working professionally. And, you know, many of our neighborhoods have no civic realm. It's- it's- if it does, it's - it's not as intentional as it could be. It may be kind of the residual after the subdivision This represents only a reasonably accurate closed captioning transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of October 5, 2021. Page 38 was- was laid out. And that's not just in neighborhoods with low income, that's in neighborhoods of high income. Uh, so I'm- I'm really pleased that this- this plan shows an intentionality uh with- with the notion of the civic realm and with the thoroughfare standards and making some adjustments which I think will advance the environmental aspects of this. And in terms of creating a continuous canopy which in- in looking forward with the impacts of climate change, you know, that's one of the key factors is the increased temperatures due to increased temperatures but also the heat island effect. Um, so in terms of realigning our code so that it matches up more effectively with our comprehensive plan in terms of creating human -scale environments that are walkable and sociable. Providing a range of affordability within a neighborhood and diverse housing types within a neighborhood. I mean, we've talked- I've heard people talk about, um, you know, this is my forever home. And uh you know it's like- I'm reaching a point in my life where I realize no home is forever you know. You may have a forever neighborhood where you would like to reside in that neighborhood for the rest of your life. Uh, and many of our neighborhoods want to accommodate that. You know, you really almost have to consider moving to another part of Iowa City if you're- if you're looking uh for different type of housing. So providing all of these options within neighborhood is a novel approach. Uh, and I think it will be very well uh received by the community. Uh, yes, as I- you know, in my questions, it's- it's- it's a big leap forward and we uh, you know, it's covering a lot of acreage. There may be certain situations that need to be fine- tuned a little bit further. Um, but you know this is in on itself, just a huge step forward. So I'm- I'm very supportive of it. Mims: Yeah, I would agree. I think this is, you know, in 12 years I've been on council. Maybe one of the most impactful things we've done something we get this past in terms of really moving away from, you know, acres upon acres of single-family homes and hopefully having that uh diverse type of housing, hopefully, a variety of price points with -within the neighborhoods, and a very kind of different design than what we've had. Um, I would agree, I think, you know, I'm sure there will be tweaking that needs to be done on this as we go forward. But hopefully, any of that tweaking still keeps the character that we are, you know, trying to develop and the- and the nature of these neighborhoods. Um, I won't repeat everything that Council Thomas said, I agree with, you know, everything. The one thing that I would just throw out here to council and staff. Um, this is different for developers. This is very different as somebody said earlier I think, you know, maybe, for obstacles, the idea that you know, a lot of developers, what they're really good at is developing single-family homes and that's what they've done and that's what they know and everything. I would encourage us to think about, Anne mentioned a grant program potentially to help with design. But even- maybe even going further than that and putting some significant money into helping develop a- a portfolio of designs that have all that detail done. That could almost be, for developers, they could- could pick from these floor plans and the designs are all done. And they can change facades, they can change window treatments, they can change colors, they can change the- the- the siding that they use, etc to give different looks. But just think as a developer, if you didn't have all those design costs. If you're putting up a duplex or a triplexer or townhouses or a four-plex and a lot of that architectural design work was already done for you. And you could pick from This represents only a reasonably accurate closed captioning transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of October 5, 2021. Page 39 four or six different designs that somebody had already done, but you can still make it unique to your- to what you want. So I would encourage the staff, the council, uh to think about working with developers to potentially pay for or parti- you know, jointly participate in kind of developing a portfolio of designs that would really help with some of those costs. I think that could help developers. Um, and again, we have a need for housing in this community and that might also, you know, push things along a little bit faster as well. Thomas: There are also uh architectural firms that specialize in missing middle. Mims: Sure. Thomas: So I- I've tried to- tried to encourage developers to- to reach out to architects who are skilled in- in missing middle compositions. You know, that may be another way of- of achieving this. There's also a group called the incremental development alliance, which offers workshops for developers. That might be something we might want to consider bringing to Iowa City for the development community. Taylor: I do like this plan and I- I think it's, um, a boost that the South District, uh, has been needing for a long time and I look forward to it. I- I hope it doesn't take decades and decades to- to accomplish it all because they- they really could use that boost. Uh, it's- it's just a great plan, I think with the diversity for income levels and the housing types. The missing middle, John has been preaching about that for a long time, uh, and it's- it's a wonderful concept and it- it does ensure the visual interest. I think that's- that's the good thing, um, Councilor Mims mentioned the- the rules and roles of houses that we've had in development. If you drive around town, they- they almost all look the same and- and there's just such a nice, uh, interesting variety in some of these, uh, pictures that- that we've seen. So I'm in favor of it. Bergus: I had the pleasure of, um, being involved in the South District plan process long before I ever thought about being on council, but, you know, back in those meetings that Kelsey was referring to over a number of years. And it's so neat to see honestly how- how much the vision, um, for the area has stayed the same in terms of this comprehensive plan and the amendments that we're adopting hopefully tonight. Um, I- I think that what Sarah Baron said about the values that we're putting into practice here is really important to me and I'm very excited about this being kind of a- a next step and extension of the acknowledgment of the exclusionary practices that we've had, which certainly are manifest in the South District and as, you know, one of the more racially segregated parts of our community. So I'm very, very excited about just being able to, um, have this policy as set forth in this more detailed future land use map in particular, to show really the diversity of types of uses and the potential for these commercial nodes, the- the five commercial nodes within the area that will really lower the barriers, um, for a variety of types of commercial uses, which is something that we've been talking about recently as well. So very, very excited and wholeheartedly, um, I'll be supporting this comprehensive plan amendment. This represents only a reasonably accurate closed captioning transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of October 5, 2021. Page 40 Salih: Um, and really what it also exciting about this for a plan, I think the first time I heard that word form -based code while I was running 2017, I was trying to understand what the heck is form -based code. So I can, like talk to the people on forum and everything. I'm glad that to see that there's something coming in reality before I get off from the council so I can vote for it. I- I really love it.Uh, it is, uh, bringing like variety of housing types, which is really great. Er, the only thing that I really concerned about is the affordability on affordable housing. Uh, I think because it is still a volunteered here it is still that it's no- I understand that is nothing and the code will make them like doing this except the annex- annexation which is the 10 percent. I- I just believe that we talked before about, uh, strengthens our extension policy and changing the code. I don't know where would that stand right now, but I hope, you know, we can do that because that's the only way that we can get affordable housing o- on this. And also, uh, you know, Geoff mentioned it is maybe kind of using affordable housing money to get otherwise I hope that will be like under the radar for implementing affordable housing in this area. And also, like as a, you know, Councilor Mims said, we can- if we can help the developer figure out the design, also, she encourage the council do that. I will also encourage the council and staff to find a way to as, you know, to- to make the developer do an affordable housing, whether by looking, again at our existing annexation policy or by guess working with like for example, affordable housing coalition to come up with ideas about how we can implement affordable housing in this area. So, uh, I will support their plan and I like it. Weiner: So I'm really struck, Um, when- when- when you look at this as- as co- as compared to many of the developments in the city in recent years at the pervasiveness of the post - World War II in development model, uh, that- that really- that really did create exclusion. And- and an all too often is based on- on privilege and racism. Um, and in some ways, um, we're having to reinvent the wheel here. Because what is, um, what- what does everybody like about the towns and cities of Europe? They're walkable. They have neighborhoods, they have- they have community spaces. And that develop essentially organically because people walked back then they needed to be able to get to, um, to a market or a church, or a- a green space or whatever it was. So that's sort of that- I don't think- I don't think that when the European, most of the European towns were created that there was- there was zoning in place. But in order to create- in order to replicate that in some way, um, we need to put in place a- a model, um, such as this. Um, I'm really happy to see that, er, and I hope we will move forward with this. But those are spaces that create place. They create family, they create neighborhoods just because of the way they are formed and what- whatever we need to do. And it appears that- that a form -based code is the way to get there. Now, um, I think it's an enormous positive. Salih: Mayor if you don't mind, I forget to add one thing which is I heard areas there is- if there is a way of tweaking things a little bit, I hope we can work with the resident to figure out the transitions and, like those kind of things during the implementation of the plan. Teague: Well, I have to say this is awesome and amazing. I am pretty impressed with what I'm seeing. Um, it's not just because the values, I think, um, we- we just heard the This represents only a reasonably accurate closed captioning transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of October 5, 2021. Page 41 affordability, the accessibility, as well as the sustainability. Those are super important things that we meet. Um, but it's- the missing middle, it's the- just the integration of a neighborhood where you'll- where you'll have that multifamily, single units, um, commercial space, public space, um, some public parks. That is super exciting, um, and I like the idea that it- at each block will have two different types of buildings. Uh, we also have, um, which I think is super important when it comes down to predictability. Um, is this allows it to be predictable for the staff, for the residents, that, um, are neighbors to this, the developers, as well as to the council and to planning and zoning. So oftentimes we get projects and has been talked about we are making considerations over and over again, kind of from ground zero. And this takes a little bit of that away where it's very predictable. Do you know what to expect? And so I love this part of it. Now there are some things that I think need to be tweaked, um, when it comes down to affordab- affordability. If we're saying this is going to be 30 years down the road, potentially, that 20 -year affordability period. You all already know that I personally- personally don't like, um, because what happens in 20 years. A family that has grown up there. Now the rents change, they can't be there. So what we've set up to be, um, you know, really trying to make sure there is the missing middle, financially affordable for people, that goes away. And so how we combat that, I think that this community knows, um, ways to combat it. We just have to talk through it a little bit and we'll get there. When it comes down to, um, the commercial spaces, I think it's pretty imperative that they are with accessibility, um, where they're accessible. And maybe we can create, um, some requirements for those to have aging in place model type of buildings. Um, even though I know that there may be a new term that we're using instead of aging in place, um, properties. But overall, I'm pretty excited for this and I'm going to vote, um, in favor of this comp planned amendment. Teague: Any other comments? Roll -call, please. Teague: Motion passes seven to zero. This represents only a reasonably accurate closed captioning transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of October 5, 2021. Page 42 8.b. Zoning Code Amendment — Form -Based Zones and Standards - Ordinance amending Title 14, Zoning Code and Title 15, Land Subdivision, to create form - based zones and standards consistent with the South District Plan. (REZ21-0005) (First Consideration) Salih: Okay. I'm gonna take over I think it would be Zoning Code Amendment form, base zoning, zones and standards ordinance amending Title 14 zoning code entitled 15 land subdivision to create four base zones and the standards consistent with the south district plan. Uh, and this is first consideration. I'm going to open the public - public hearing. A staff comments, please. (bangs gavel) 1. Public Hearing Fruin: Uh, staff covered everything that we needed to with the current plan uh, presentation. So you think you can move directly to the public comment. Salih: Okay. Um, public comment. Anyone would like to say anything about this matter- this item? Salih: Okay. Before I close the public hearing, I would like to ask the council if they are inclined to vote in according with planning and zoning recommendation. Okay. Close- public hearing close. Um, may I have a motion to give for its consideration. 2. Consider an Ordinance (First Consideration) Mims: So moved, Mims. Taylor: Second Taylor. Salih: Moved by Ma'am, Mims, seconded by Taylor. Discussion? Roll call please. Goers: First member is, uh, Mayor Teague. Would you uh, like to wait just a moment till he can return? Salih: Oh okay. If [NOISE] we can wait for Mayor then he's - Goers: Probably went faster than- [LAUGHTER]. Weiner: While we're waiting. I just like to add- add some, um, comment on real- real appreciation for the long and hard work that staff have put into this. Okay. Any discussion Marty that was this item? Okay. Roll -call please. Salih: Motion passes seven to seven. This represents only a reasonably accurate closed captioning transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of October 5, 2021. Page 43 Teague: Seven to zero. Salih: Seven to zero, fm sorry. [LAUGHTER] This represents only a reasonably accurate closed captioning transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of October 5, 2021. Page 44 9. Rochester Avenue Speed Limit - Ordinance amending Title 9, entitled "Motor Vehicles and Traffic," Chapter 3, entitled "Rules of the Road," Section 6, entitled "Speed Restrictions," Subsection B, entitled "Exceptions," to modify the 35 MPH speed zone for Rochester Avenue. (First Consideration) Teague: Could I get a motion? Salih: So moved. Weiner: Second. Teague: Moved by Sally, seconded by a Weiner and staff comments, please. Fruin: Uh, Mayor, I don't think we have a staff presentation. This is, um, uh, corning to you after a- a review uh, that our traffic engineering and engineering staff conducted on Rochester after getting some, uh, concerns raised to us from folks along that corridor. This is near their Regina, uh, school entrance just east of- of that area. So, uh, our staff took a look at it and is recommending, um, a, uh, uh- a broader transition, uh, uh, which would include a lower speed limit and a portion of the street. Teague: Okay. Would anyone from the public like to address this topic. If so, please step to the podium. Seeing no one, council discussion. Thomas: Well, I think this is a good idea. Uh, certainly expanding or moving the- the limit of the 30 mile per hour zone, moving it further west. Um, I guess my concern would be that usually when people drive, they drive, uh, in response to what the road conditions are telling them is a safe speed to drive at. So, you know, they may look at the speed limit sign, but, uh, probably what's more influencing their driving behavior is the actual roadway conditions. So well see, uh, if- if changing the speed limit has any impact on their behavior. But would be- in my mind what would seem to be preferable will it be once you move from a 35 mile per hour zone, which would be limited, you know, stop further west, and you enter into a 25 mile per hour zone, the road conditions change and suggest to the driver that they should be show- slowing their speeds. Um, I- I don't know that. That's in the- the works. We are doing- we are reconstructing Rochester, are we not? Is there any [OVERLAPPING]. Fruin: That's portions from the roughly the Seventh Avenue Bridge area up to the intersection with First Avenue. So that doesn't quite get into- into this range, but that project, um, uh, does look to enhance the pedestrian environment through additions of sidewalks, except in one area where the council directed us not to. Um, but this area extends a little bit further east of First Avenue where the reconstruction won't be taken place. Bergus: And just to be clear, this is extending the- this is- this is creating a lower speed zone on the east side of the intersection, correct? This represents only a reasonably accurate closed captioning transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of October 5, 2021. Page 45 Fruin: That's correct. Bergus: Okay. So when you're traveling from the east like Herbert Hoover highway, you're coming in and goes to 35 and I'll go to 25 before you hit the intersect or sooner. Fruin: Sooner. Bergus: Sooner. Okay. Thank you. Teague: Any other comments? Roll -call, please? Teague: Yes. Motion passes seven to zero. This represents only a reasonably accurate closed captioning transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of October 5, 2021. Page 46 10. Council Appointments Teague: Climate action commission one vacancy to fill an unexpired term upon appointment through December 31st, 2022. And we're gonna have council discussion on this item.Um, I did want to make mention that this has no gender balance. We had eight applicants. And 111 open it up. Weiner: I- I would just like- I would throw out three names, all of- all of whom I think are extraordinarily well-qualified, each in- in a somewhat different way. And all of whom are pretty recent applicants. They're not from last year. One- they're- they're quite within the last month or two. Um, and- and those three are, um, Clarity, Gara, Michael, I know Lynch and Mathew Walter. And I'm- I'm at- I don't, you know, feel strongly about any one of those. They just struck- all three of them struck me as having- having really deep knowledge, interest, passion. And would- each of- each of them would bring a tremendous amount to this commission? Taylor: I agree with Mathew Walter. He'd been a part of the Equity Working Group with the commission for he- I believe he said that last past two years, so he's very familiar with their work and, uh, I think he would be a good addition to the actual commission. Bergus: I agree we had a number of really qualified applicants and super excited to see climate ambassadors applying to be on the Climate Action commission. I think that speaks really well to that program. Um, I agree with your names Janice, and I think just as far as representation, I liked, uh, Clarity who indicated she's a Latina woman, a member of LULAC. Weiner: I think she's also a climate ambassador? Bergus: Yes. Mims: Yeah. I would agree with Clarity. It should be good one. Teague: Yeah, I think I'd- I have to agree there was quite a few people. Um, I, kind of, had stars by a few other names, um, and so Clarity definitely had a couple of stars, so I can go with Clarity. Salih: I can go with Clarity too. Thomas: Yeah, I can as well, but I would certainly encourage some of the other names that we mentioned to maintain their interest and - Weiner: And the other person that I named who I hope when she moves to Iowa- she moves to Iowa City will become active is Alina Swenson. Thomas: Oh, yeah. This represents only a reasonably accurate closed captioning transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of October 5, 2021. Page 47 Teague: Because they were not an Iowa City. Weiner: They're currently in Cedar Rapids. [OVERLAPPING] Taylor: Cedar Rapids right? [OVERLAPPING] Thomas: Until the end of the year. Weiner: But plan to move here and- and all of these people could be really great additions to- to - to this commission at some point. Bergus: It looks like we've got three terms ending at the end of this year. Weiner: Right. Teague: Uh-huh. I was pretty impressed that we had, um, eight people apply what great qualifications. It sound like we have majority that would appoint Clarity Guerra. And I'm going to take, um, a just a voi- voice vote. All in favor say, aye. All Council: Aye. Teague: Any oppose? Motion passes, seven to zero. Item number 11, announcement vacancies new - Goers: I'm sorry, Mayor, if we can step back, I think we need a motion and a second before the vote. I'm sorry to get out of order. Teague: I never did mo- okay. I'm- I'm used to doing that- I'm sorry. [LAUGHTER] Can I get a - [LAUGHTER] all right it could I get a motion, please? Weiner: Sure. I move that- that- that we appoint Clarity Guerra as, uh- to fill this vacant position on the- on the Climate Commission. Salih: I second that. Teague: Okay. Motion by Weiner and seconded by Salih. All in favor say aye. All Council: Aye. This represents only a reasonably accurate closed captioning transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of October 5, 2021. Page 48 13. Community Comment [IF NECESSARY] (ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA) Teague: We're at item number 13. Welcome USG. VanHeukelom: Hi Council. Um, so last Tuesday, we had joint session between the Undergraduate Student Government, and the Graduate Professional Student Government, and we pass legislation, um, asking the university to make Juneteenth a university holiday. Um, we confirmed a lot of new senators, and we- the university- er- USG and GPSG also, um, pass legislation urging the university to require a vaccine mandate, and ga- gather booster shots. So those all passed. Um, and then President Wilson was also there to make some remarks as well, so that was cool. Um, also, our Director of Sustainability, let us know that battery and e -recycling in dorms will be implemented in coming months. Um, also starting in the spring, some UI courses can earn a community - engaged course designation, so students will be again, partnering with like local non- profits in classes, and things like that, which will be interesting. Then also, uh, next week is homecoming. Thank you. This represents only a reasonably accurate closed captioning transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of October 5, 2021. Page 49 14. City Council Information Teague: All right, Thank you all. All right. We are at item number 14, city council information. So any type of update? Taylor: Not really update. I just- kind of, want to go back to item 11 just quickly, but it, kind of, relates to this also. Uh, there's quite a list of term expirations over the next month or so, a quite a few people, and I just wanted to thank each, and every one of those folks, those individuals, for their service that, ah, they've been on the commissions. That's all. Teague: Great. Weiner: I- I meant to do this couple of weeks ago, but forgot. I really did want to mark the passing of Dr. Charles deProsse who was re- really important fixture in this community, so, er- in -incredibly, um, important in supporting the Emma Goldman clinic, and was just, uh, was, um, was there when he was needed. Salih: You remember that.. You and went to. Oh sure. You can still do it. Teague: Okay. Weiner: Just to- and just to say we've had some great events recently. I mean, you can talk at greater length about it, but, um, Pride this past weekend, the,um, the Northside Oktoberfest, um, was also one of uh- a few of us to attend the- the, uh, presentation on the the Oracles of Iowa City, the- the two numerals, so all excellent events. Teague: Uh-huh. In addition to what you just mentioned, of course, um, the Oracles was a great event, um, as well as, Pride, this weekend, it was a three-day event. Uh, well, as from me, three a day event of celebration, was super cool to, uh, really celebrate downtown the 50th year of Pride exists in this community. Mayor Pro Tem, and I, we did attend this fabulous event where we met some great individuals from Kenya. It was a reception in honor of distinguished delegation from the Judicial Service Commission of Kenya and it was hosted by the International Programs at the University of Iowa. What we just learned a lot of information about some of their, uh, customs, and it was just a fun event to just getting to talk to them. They were here for at least a week and a half, and they had a great opportunity, uh, to not only be here locally, but they also went to see the rapids, um, and they get even to meet with our County Attorney, Janet Lyness, and so they had a wealth of information, and they were really curious about, um, our elections here and all that good stuff, so I got to tell them a little bit about council elections and some other local elections that's going on here. So it was just a great event in term of connection. This represents only a reasonably accurate closed captioning transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of October 5, 2021.