HomeMy WebLinkAbout1997-05-20 Bd Comm minutesNOTES -- NO QUORUM
DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING
MONDAY, APRIL 21, 1997 - 4:00 P.M.
CIVIC CENTER - LOBBY CONFERENCE ROOM
Subject to Approval
MEMBERS PRESENT:
Daryl Woodson, Martin Haynes, Bill Nowysz, Gary Nagle
MEMBERS ABSENT:
Clara Swan, Karyl Larson, Randy Rohovit, Phil Reisetter
STAFF PRESENT:
David Schoon, John Yapp, Traci Howard
CALL TO ORDER
Haynes called the meeting to order at 4:12 p.m.
CONSIDERATION OF PROPOSED SIGN REGULATION AMENDMENTS
Yapp said staff is proposing various sign code amendments and would like the Committee's
feedback on the different types of signs so staff can fine tune their recommendations, and
report any recommendations from the Committee to the Planning and Zoning Commission.
Portable Signs
Yapp said there have been complaints in the past about these signs impeding pedestrian traffic
in downtown Iowa City. Technically, they are not included in the sign code, but staff feels they
are appropriate for a pedestrian area. Staff has come up with some criteria for the signs,
including limiting the size to six square feet per sign face, limiting the height to six feet tall,
requiring the sign is only placed on private property or in a designated sidewalk cafe. They also
would need to be moved indoors overnight, and would be weighted so they don't blow or fall
over into the sidewalk. The signs would only be permitted in the CB-5 and CB-10 zones.
Woodson noted that businesses in the CB-2 zones will also want to have the signs.
(Nowysz arrived at the meeting at 4:15 p.m.)
Nagle asked what would happen if three stores wanted to purchase a sign and split the face up
three ways. Yapp said that would be possible, as long as the maximum size of six square feet
per sign face is adhered to. Woodson said he was not in favor of the policy because few
businesses could use it because they do not have entryways that are large enough. He also
said that if the regulations are enacted they will need to be enforced. Yapp said that the
enforcement staff cited the businesses with illegal portable signs, leading to Joe Murphy
requesting a code change to permit portable signs. Yapp said that there were originally not
many portable signs, but more and more were found in the pedestrian right-of-way.
Nagle said he had no big problems with the proposed regulation as long as the signs were only
allowed in setback areas. Haynes agreed as long as it is enforced.
Design Review Committee
April 21, 1997
Page 2
Awning Signs
Yapp said this is prompted by the appearance of illuminated translucent plastic awnings in
downtown Iowa City. Currently, the sign ordinance does not limit the maximum awning size, but
it does limit the maximum sign size on the awning to 25 percent of the awning surface. The
primary function of an awning should be to provide shelter and shade, and advertising should
be secondary. Staff considered various code changes, including limiting the percentage of an
awning that may be devoted to signage, limiting the size of a sign on an awning, limiting the
awning size, more restrictions on awning placement, doing away with illumination all together,
restricting illumination to the part of the awning with the sign, and requiring illumination be
downcast toward the sidewalk by using cone-shaped light bulbs or placing a shield over the
bulbs. He passed around photographs of current translucent awnings. Yapp noted that
translucent materials would still be permitted.
Woodson asked if there was still a fire code regulation against the non-retractable awnings.
Yapp said no, because of new ladder technologies. Yapp said that presently there are no
awning-specific zoning restrictions. It must meet the building code and be structurally sound.
Woodson noted from a photograph that the current awnings have egg crate grates, which does
not give much shattering protection for pedestrians.
Woodson asked if staff considered setting a standard for a lumination amount. Yapp said the
current standard is measured in footcandles, and the illumination cannot be more than one to
one-and-one-half footcandles at the barrier of a residential use. In downtown this would be the
apartments above the retail establishments. He said staff felt that this standard was adequate.
Nagel asked if this is enforced, and Yapp said yes, but only on a complaint basis. Woodson
said he would like to see a relational awning limit. Yapp said some codes he researched had
percentage restrictions on how much of the building wall an awning could take up. Staff felt that
it was good to have an awning as long as it provides shelter along the pedestrian way.
Nowysz asked if the awnings will be approved on an individual basis. Haynes said as long as
the awning complies with the building code it will be approved, and projection and percentage of
the awning assigned to a sign will be regulated. Yapp said there is no restriction in the zoning
code on the mass of an awning. Nowysz suggested not allowing backlighting on the awnings to
reduce obscure building views or features. Woodson said that some translucent awnings
overtake the streetscape light and skew the standards of streetscape lighting. Nowysz
suggested requiring non-glaring bulbs or some type of diffuser. The Committee agreed that
they wanted a restriction on how much of the building face an awning could take up. Yapp said
currently, the sign code states a facia sign can only take up 15 percent of the building face.
Changeable Copy Signs
Yapp noted that this is the only proposed change that Committee asked staff to look at. He said
a changeable copy sign is any sign that has changeable content. They can be in the form of
marker boards, chalkboards, marquees, etc. Staff proposed there be no change to the current
code, and if the signs should be subject to design review, it should regulated by this Committee.
Staff prefers not to regulate design by code, and would prefer to have Committee regulate it
under a design review district.
Haynes and Woodson noted that the Committee has had difficulties coming up with regulations
in code form. Schoon noted that this code only affects signs located on the outside of buildings,
not anything that is displayed from inside. He suggested a proposed amendment could regulate
Design Review Committee
April 21, 1997
Page 3
some design issues by including or excluding certain materials for the signs. That would not
regulate design, but instead how the material is presented. Woodson suggested enclosing the
changeable copy signs in a glass case. Nagle said that he did not mind the changeable copy
signs as long as they were inside the building. He asked how many business owners, excluding
the movie theaters, would be upset if stationary changeable copy signs were done away with.
Yapp said he would be talking to the Downtown Association about changeable copy signs.
Projecting Signs
Yapp passed around photos of the current Uncommon Grounds projecting signs, projecting
signs in the Iowa City downtown area in the 1970s, and projecting signs in a small California
town. He said projecting signs were prohibited in the mid-1970s during urban renewal. The
current Uncommon Grounds projecting sign was allowed as a time and temperature sign. Yapp
said staff is currently giving a recommendation that projecting signs continue to be prohibited in
the downtown. If they are to be allowed, there should be some strict size, location and
projection standards. Specifically, staff proposes that the sign should not extend further than
five feet out from the building face, no part of the sign should be farther than 12 feet above
grade, and no sign face should be larger than eight square feet in size. Staff also recommends
that no projecting sign be internally illuminated, and with the exception of time and temperature
signs, no projecting sign may have any blinking, neon or other light source attached to them.
There should only be one projecting sign per store front, which is for the first floor business,
and signs should be fixed and not permitted to swing. The signs would be subject to Design
Review Committee approval.
Woodson asked about the awnings, regular signs, and projecting signs; if every business would
be able to have all three. Yapp and Schoon suggested making it regulation that only one be
permitted. Haynes said that as long as the signs are tasteful in size and design, he has no
problem with projecting signs. Yapp pointed out in the historical photographs that the
businesses were much larger, making it easier to space the projecting signs, but now
businesses are much closer together, and it might be too cluttered if each business had a
projecting sign.
Haynes had no problem allowing the signs, but said that limitations and specifics need to be
written in the code and enforced. Nowysz also said they should be allowed, but with definite
size restrictions and used in lieu of an awning sign. He said that he did not want to totally
restrict the presence of these signs.
Nagle said the signs cause streetscape clutter and domination, and he is against all of them.
He said there is plenty of room for other signage on the building face. Woodson said that the
signs could be externally illuminated, causing glare in the streetscape. He stated that the
downtown area is fine without the projecting signs.
Yapp said that since there is no informal consensus, the notes and ideas will go on to the
Planning and Zoning Commission either on May 1 or May 15. Schoon said it would be best for
the Committee to have a quorum, and vote to officially recommend the changes to the Planning
and Zoning Commission. He said he would try to schedule a meeting for next Monday to do
this.
Design Review Committee
April 21, 1997
Page 4
DESIGN SURVEY FORMS FOR DOWNTOWN DESIGN REVIEW DISTRICT
Committee members paired up to form survey teams. Each team received a binder
representing a section of the CB-10 zone. The binders included photos and assessor records.
The survey teams are as follows: Nowysz and Swan, Nagle and Rohovit, Reisetter and
Woodson, and Larson and Schoon.
Haynes announced that he is resigning from the Committee due to job relocation. He stated
that another member will need to step forward to become chair.
DISCUSSED 1997 DESIGN REVIEW AWARDS PROGRAM, UPDATED BROCHURES AND
APPLICATION PACKET
Nowysz said he did not think there were any projects that warranted giving out an award.
Schoon said the subcommittee agreed at its last meeting to hold off having an awards program
until next year. Haynes suggested doing something in conjunction with the Iowa City Arts
Festival, but other members in attendance said the survey project was enough to keep them
occupied.
Schoon showed members two updated brochures. One brochure discusses what design review
is. The other outlines the components of the Design Review Overlay Zone Ordinance. The
design review application packet was updated to be more user-friendly.
CONSIDERATION OF THE MINUTES FOR THE MARCH 17, 1997, MEETING
There was not a quorum, so minutes could not be approved.
ADJOURNMENT
Haynes adjourned the meeting at 5:45 p.m.
ecodev\mins\drc4-21 .min\doc
MINUTES
DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING
MONDAY, APRIL 28, 1997 - 4:00 P.M.
CIVIC CENTER - LOBBY CONFERENCE ROOM
PREL! I !ARY
Subject to Approval
MEMBERS PRESENT:
Clara Swan, Randy Rohovit, Daryl Woodson, Gary Nagle, Karyl
Larson, Phil Reisetter
MEMBERS ABSENT:
Bill Nowysz, Martin Haynes
STAFF PRESENT:
David Schoon, John Yapp, Traci Howard
RECOMMENDATIONS TO PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AND COUNCIL
Recommended by a vote of 5-1 (Woodson voting no), that the Sign Regulations be amended to
allow portable signs as a provisional sign in the CB-2, CB-5 and CB-10 Zone subject to the fol-
lowing:
One portable sign per first floor exterior store front business provided:
· it is placed only on private property or a designated sidewalk caf~ area,
· it does not block access to any doorway,
· it is moved inside the business when the business is closed,
· it is anchored at the base to provide stability as approved by the Building Official or
designee,
the maximum area of the sign face be limited to six square feet,
· the maximum height of the sign be limited to six feet above grade,
· and the design of the sign receives Design Review Committee approval, according
to the procedures and guidelines established by the Design Review Committee, prior
to obtaining a sign permit.
Recommended by a vote of 6-0, that the Performance Standards Section of the Zoning Ordi-
nance be amended to add the following describing glare regulations:
All lighting used for the purpose of illuminating the area underneath an awning shall be
downcast and shielded in such a way that the light is only directly illuminating the area
beneath it. All such lighting shall also be shielded so that no bare, exposed bulb is visi-
ble from the public right-of-way.
Recommended by a vote of 5-1 (Swan voting no), that there be no change to the definition of
changeable copy signs.
Recommended by a vote of 5-1 (Swan voting no), that projecting signs continue to be prohib-
ited.
COMMITTEE DISCUSSION PRIOR TO CALL TO ORDER
Since there was not quorum, attending members agreed to discuss the issues until they had a
quorum and could vote. Schoon reviewed the April 24, 1997, memo and the staff recommenda-
tions the Committee is considering. Nagle asked how many signs could fit in a foyer, and how
many portable signs there currently are. Yapp said staff is recommending that there be a limita-
tion of one sign per first floor business in CB-2, CB-5 and CB-10 zones. Yapp said he did not
have information on how many portable signs there current are. The Committee came up with a
DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE
MONDAY, APRIL 28, 1997- 4:00 P.M.
PAGE 2
list of current or potential sign sites outside the following businesses: Old Capitol Mall, the
church on Iowa Avenue, Vito's, Bremers, The Kitchen, the Holiday Inn, some businesses in the
Northside Marketplace, Jimmy's Bistro, New Pioneer Co-op, or any place with a sidewalk caf6.
Rohovit asked if the anchor and stand counted as part of the square footage of the sign, or if it
was only the signface. He also asked if any specifications had been made regarding acceptable
materials to use. Yapp said that only the signface counted as square footage, and staff was not
recommending any materials specification. Swan asked if the owner wanting a portable sign
would have to come before the Committee, and Yapp said that as staff is currently proposing, a
property owner would have to apply for a sign permit but would not have to come before the
Design Review Committee.
CALL TO ORDER
Swan called the meeting to order at 4:45 p.m.
CONSIDERATION OF PROPOSED SIGN REGULATIONS AMENDMENTS REGARDING
CHANGEABLE COPY SIGNS, AWNING SIGNS, PROJECTING SIGNS, AND PORTABLE
SIGNS
Portable Signs
Rohovit drew an example of one portable sign, and said it could be an eyesore. Yapp noted
there has to be a clear definition between the sign face and the stand, but there are no detailed
specifications concerning the sign quality. He stated staff was asked to review the amendment
and to propose appropriate size and location restrictions, and was not looking specifically at
esthetics. Illegal signs have been used by businesses in the past, because the sign ordinance
has not been thoroughly enforced.
Larson asked if the portable sign would be taken inside after business operating hours. Yapp
said yes. Swan asked if the Committee should consider creating sign face standards. Woodson
said that since few businesses will actually be able to use the signs in the proposed pedestrian
areas he did not see the need to allow them at all.
Rohovit moved to recommend that the Sign Regulations be amended to allow portable signs as
a provisional sign in the CB-2, CB-5 and CB-10 Zone subject to the following:
One portable sign per first floor business provided:
· it is placed only on private property or a designated sidewalk caf(~ area,
· it does not block access to any doorway,
it is moved inside the business when the business is closed,
· it is anchored at the base to provide stability as approved by the Building Official or
designee,
· the maximum area of the sign face be limited to six square feet,
· and the maximum height of the sign be limited to six feet above grade.
Larson seconded the motion.
Nagle said that before this meeting he thought the signs were fine because not many people
could take advantage of them, but after listing all the businesses that could have one he was
not sure. He said that he did not approve of the signs in sidewalk cafes or at gas stations, so
the Committee should either set sign design standards or require the design of the sign be
approved by the Committee. Woodson said that these types of signs would be less profes-
DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE
MONDAY, APRIL 28, 1997 - 4:00 P.M.
PAGE 3
sionally constructed, and the ordinance would not be enforced. He did not see why they are
necessary.
(Reisetter arrived at 4:55 p.m.)
Schoon suggested as a possibility, that the design of the signs be reviewed and approved by
the Committee as proposed by staff for projecting signs. Woodson asked how many portable
signs would Old Capitol Mall be allowed to have. Yapp said technically as many as there are
first floor businesses under the proposed ordinance.
Rohovit moved to amend the motion changing the language to say, "One portable sign per first
floor exterior store front." Woodson seconded the motion. The amendment to the motion
passed 6-0.
Nagle moved and Rohovit seconded to add, "... the design of the sign receives Design Review
Committee approval, according to the procedures and guidelines established by the Design
Review Committee, prior to obtaining a sign permit."
Larson said that she was not convinced that Committee approval should be required. The
amendment to the motion passed, 4-2 (Larson and Reisetter voting no).
The amended motion that the Sign Regulation be amended to allow portable signs as a provi-
sional sign in the CB-2, CB~5 and CB-10 Zone subject to the following:
One portable sign per first floor exterior store front provided:
it is placed only on private property or a designated sidewalk caf~ area,
· it does not block access to any doorway,
· it is moved inside the business when the business is closed,
· it is anchored at the base to provide stability as approved by the Building Official or
designee,
o the maximum area of the sign face be limited to six square feet,
· the maximum height of the sign be limited to six feet above grade,
· and the design of the sign receives Design Review Committee approval, according
to the procedures and guidelines established by the Design Review Committee, prior
to obtaining a sign permit.
The amended motion passed, 5-1 (Woodson voting no).
Awnin.cl Signs
Reisetter moved, and Woodson seconded to recommend that the Performance Standards Sec-
tion of the Zoning Ordinance be amended to add the following describing glare regulations:
All lighting used for the purpose of illuminating the area underneath an awning shall be
downcast, and/or shielded in such a way that the light is only directly illuminating the
area beneath it. All such lighting shall also be shielded so that no bare, exposed bulb is
visible from the public right-of-way.
Nagle suggested taking the word "or" out of the text. The Committee discussed that only
shielding the light may not achieve the intended goal of the ordinance.
Nagle moved to amend the original motion by striking "or" from the original text. Woodson
seconded the motion amendment. The motion passed, 6-0.
DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE
MONDAY, APRIL 28, 1997 - 4:00 P.M.
PAGE 4
The amended motion passed 6-0.
Chan.cleable Copy Si.qns
Schoon noted that it would be difficult for the Committee to regulate the sign but the Committee
could recommend regulating the materials used. Larson noted that some of these signs tend to
be more permanent, such as office directories. Yapp said that staff recommended that, if these
signs have design review, it should be done by the Design Review Committee as part of a
design review district.
Woodson moved to recommend that there be no change to the definition of changeable copy
signs. Rohovit seconded the motion.
Swan mentioned that since the Committee brought the issue to staff's attention a few years
ago, they should attempt to provide a recommendation regarding how to make them more
attractive.
The motion passed, 5-1 (Swan voting no).
Proiectin.q Si.qns
Nagle moved to recommend that projecting signs
seconded the motion.
continue to be
prohibited. Woodson
Reisetter noted that he was in favor of the signs because they diversified the downtown area.
Swan also agreed, saying that the signs could be allowed if they were small and directional.
She in particular thought it would be historic, if one optometrist had a projecting sign in the
shape of eyeglasses. Nagle stated that there are already enough signs in downtown, and that
we didn't need to add more. Reisetter said he has strong reservations about allowing projecting
signs because he is afraid the streetscape may become too busy like a dashboard. Woodson
had concerns about ending up with signs in the shape of a shoe six foot in size and bright yel-
low. Woodson said that without tight standards, he would not want the signs.
The motion passed, 5-1 (Swan voting no).
CONSIDERATION OF THE MINUTES FOR THE MARCH 17, 1997 MEETING
Woodson moved to approve the minutes, and Reisetter seconded the motion. The minutes
were approved, 6-0.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA
There was none.
COMMITTEE DISCUSSION
There was none.
ADJOURNMENT
Swan adjourned the meeting at 5:45 p.m.
ecodev\min\drc4-28.doc
MINUTES
IOWA CITY BOARD OF APPEALS
MONDAY, APRIL 7, 1997 - 4:30 P.M.
LOBBY CONFERENCE ROOM, IOWA CITY CIVIC CENTER
MEMBERS PRESENT:
BUSS, CARLSON, ElAMAN, STASKA, ROFFMAN,
WERDERITSCH
MEMBERS ABSENT:
MAAS
STAFF PRESENT:
BOOSE, CATE, ZUCKWEILER
OTHERS PRESENT:
MARTiN GAFFEY, AARON GWINNUP, WENDY MOSS
1. CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order at 4:40 p.m. by Chairman Carlson.
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF MARCH 3 MEETiNG
Roffman moved to approved the minutes of the March 3, 1997 meeting as submitted. Staska seconded.
The motion carried unanimously 6-0.
HEAR REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE FROM SECTION 14-5E-17 OF THE IOWA CITY
HOUSING CODE (CEILING HEIGHT) FOR THE PROPERTY AT 1329 KIRKWOOD AVE
Cate indicated that the second floor of the home has a ceiling that is six feet eight inches in height, two
inches short of the required seven feet. Cate stated that the ceiling is uniform in height for the entire floor
space. Boose said that the building in question is a single-family dwelling and had probably been owner-
occupied for some time. Gaffey stated that the home had been rental property prior to Gaffey purchasing
the property. Carlson asked if any of the Board members had any objections to granting the variance
requested. None did. Carlson moved to grant the variance as requested. Staska seconded. The motion
carried unanimously.
HEAR REQUEST FOR A MODIFICATION OF SECTION 1006.4 OF THE 1994
UNIFORM BUILDiNG CODE (WINDING STAIRWAYS) FOR THE PROPERTY AT 522 N.
LINN STREET
Boose stated that an unfinished attic area exists in this house that has evidently not been used for a long
time. The stairs do not comply with width requirements, have illegal winders, inadequate headroom, and
insufficient rise and run measurements. Boose indicated that the owner wishes to finish the attic area and
make it part of the existing apartment below, but in order to do so must have a permissible stairway to the
attic space. Gwinnup indicated that he and the owner feel that there is no way to resolve the problem
without using winding stairs, and that they still have not resolved the rise/run and headroom problems.
Boose stated that ascending the stairs, the narrow run does not pose a problem, but that descending the stairs
is potentially dangerous with a narrow run and winders contribute to the problem. Boose noted that a
landing would improve the situation. After some discussion of alternate remedies, Carlson suggested
building over the top of the existing stairway. Carlson moved that an attempt be made to correct the run,
Iowa City Board of Appeals
April 7, 1997
page V, vo
but that the existing variation in the rise is acceptable, and a winder that is close to the requirement be
included. Werderitsch seconded. The motion carried unanimously.
5. DISCUSSION OF AMENDMENT TO THE DEFINITION OF GRADE
Boose indicated that this amendment stems from a request by the Board of Appeals and the Director of
Housing and Inspection Services. The amendment is for discussion only, as it needs to go through Planning
and Zoning Commission to ensure consistency with the Zoning Ordinance. Boose noted that the only
change was to the second sentence, which reads, "When the finished surface of the ground is artificially
raised with fill to create a higher grade around a building, the fill shall not be retained by a wall and the
slope of the fill shall not exceed 50% within 10 feet of the building." Boose stated that this amendment
applies to man-made grade only, not to natural slopes. It affects the determination of number of stories in a
building under the zoning ordinance and the height of a building in a particular zone. Roffman asked if this
would be an amendment to the UBC. Boose replied that the first sentence in the definition of grade is from
the UBC and the second sentence is a local amendment. Boose also indicated that this is a preliminary
amendment and any ordinance that would be considered would come to the attention of the Board of
Appeals.
6. OTHER BUSINESS
Haman asked ifa response had been drafted to the Homebuilders letter. Boose indicated that he was
working on a response that would go before City Council April 2 I, 1997.
7. ADJOURNMENT
Staska moved for adjournment at 5:19 p.m. Roffman seconded the motion. The motion was unanimously
approved and the meeting adjourned.
Minutes submitted by Kathy Zuckweiler.
Approved:
Robert Carlson, Board Chair
Date
IOWA CITY HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION
MINUTES
April 28, 1997 Meeting
COMMISSION MEMBERS PRESENT:
Diane Martin, Pat Harvey, Jan Warren, Derek Hall,
Joan Jehle, Aan Shires, Mary Theisen, Mel
Dautremont
COMMISSION MEMBERS ABSENT: Tom Dickerson
STAFF PRESENT
Heather Shank, Eleanor Dilkes, Kaci Carolan
GUESTS PRESENT
Alison Ames Galstad, Diane Finnerty
CALL TO ORDER:
Chairperson Harvey called the meeting to order at 7:08 p.m.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: The March Minutes were approved. Dautremont/Jehle.
RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: None.
DIVERSITY TEAM UPDATE - Alison Ames Galstad and Diane Fim~erty were present to bring
the Commission up to date on where the diversity teain stands.
Galstad reported that the Diversity Teton met pretty regularly last year and came up with
a Mission Statement, Membership Statement, name, letterhead, etc. They also identified a list of
constituencies from whom membership of the actual Diversity Team should be drawn. Galstad
noted that this is a broad list, in keeping with the concept of a Diversity Team, drawing people
from every aspect of the community. The list was formed with the foreknowledge, however, that
a core group probably will emerge and function as a steering committee. The idea is from the
core group you can branch out into all these areas and involve these other people on various
levels. This is the structure that the cm'rent Team is contemplating.
Galstad went on to explain that the group that has been involved in getting this framework
set up for the Diversity Team contacted solne of the people and organizations on the list to see
if they had any interest in forming the formal Diversity Team. The response was overwhelmingly
positive. The next step is probably to have an initial meeting with the current Team and the
people they'ye contacted. Galstad said they can do this pretty much any time. After more
discussion, it was decided that she would go ahead and do this; she will let the Coinmission know
when that meeting will take place.
Commissioner Warren asked about student involvement, and Galstad indicated that they
wished to include both University and high school students on the Team. Commissioner Shires
indicated that, while she will continue to work with the Tealn tl~'ough this initial phase, she feels
other commitments preclude her from talcing a permanent position on the Team. If someone else
from the Coinmission wants to get involved, she would happily step aside now. Warren and
Harvey indicated their interest, contemplating a "tag team" inembership depending on when the
meetings are held and who is available.
There was a brief discussion regarding the need to keep the Diversity Team's area of
concern separate froin the responsibilities of the Coinmission--to make sure that if the Diversity
Human Rights Commission
April 28, 1997 Minutes
Page 2
Team was cornacted by someone on a matter that really should be a complaint under the Human
Rights Ordinance, that that individual be directed to Shank's office immediately. Some discussion
was had over the fact that the Diversity Tealu might be an ideal body to address some of the
concerns the Commission has had where Commission action was deemed inappropriate, such as
racist and sexist commentary in local media. The question of how such a group would be funded
was also raised. In some other communities, the Mayor's Office has provided the majority of the
funding. Shank said she would contact the State to inquire how other teams were funded.
Finnerty discussed two recent training/conferences she has attended on study circles and/or
dialogue groups. There are various approaches to these sorts of circles, some very structured and
others geared more to simply getting people to sit down together and talk. Firmerry described
each of these approaches in some detail. She also shared some excellent materials she received
at these conferences, and agreed to let Shank borrow them to review for possible future use.
Finnerty expressed her belief that Iowa City absolutely needs to open some cross-racial dialogue,
and talked a little about various ways we could implement these approaches community-wide.
Fi~merty indicated that she would be more than happy to help train/facilitate or otherwise be
involved in helping to get groups set up.
HUD SUBSTANTIAL EQUIVALENCY UPDATE - Vote number two will be next week (week
of May 5). Shank and Dilkes did not thi~zk any of the Commissioners needed to be present.
TRANSGENDER MOVIE UPDATE - Shank indicated that two out of the tlu'ee individuals who
had previously wanted to pull out of the project have now indicated they are willing to proceed.
Shank will be proceeding with the editing.
REPORTS OF COMMISSIONERS:
Everyone agreed that the showing of Gentleman's Agreement was successful, especially
given that the weather was so nice. Many thanks to all who helped, including Mayor Novick for
providing the wonderful macaroons. Shm~k expressed her desire to show several more movies,
and will accept title suggestions.
Jehle presented a few articles she clipped out of the paper. One was on the "Coming Out"
special on Channel 9. Shank related the information she had gotten from Mike Wagner about the
special. Jehle also passed around an editorial from the Gazette about how children learn
prejudice.
Warren passed aroand an e-mail she'd received about the Ellen coming out episode and
the controversy over the Gay & Lesbian Resource Center's advertisement. The Ames station has
refused to show the ad, but KCRG has agreed to (provided the money to pay for it can be raised).
Warren suggested that the Commission might want to write a letter of thanks and/or support to
KCRG. Warren also wondered if someone could contact the Ames Commission to see what's
going on up there. Shank pointed out that if there's any kind of an active complaint about the
situation, no one will be able to disclose anything to her, but she agreed to call and see what
information she could get. It was suggested that in addition to writing KCRG, we might want
to copy that letter to other media, Press-Citizen, Daily lowan, Gazette. Since timeliness is of the
essence, it was suggested that the letter be drafted and mailed shortly after the episode airs.
Human Rights Commission
April 28, 1997 Minutes
Page 3
Dautrelnont reported that Davenport is going to move to add sexual orientation to their
human rights ordinance. On May 15, NOW in conjunction with Planned Parenthood will show
the video that health care providers must show pregnant juveniles (Public Library).
Max'tin suggested that m~y Commissioner who has not done so should read Osha Gray
Davidson's book Best of Enemies.
OLD BUSINESS:
Harvey reminded everyone of the Human Rights Iowa City gathering on May 1 at Old
Brick. Hall, Harvey, Dickerson, and Jehle had previously indicated they would attend. Theisen
indicated she would go as well.
Theisen reported on the fact that the proposed handicapped law had been changed and
passed. The two provisions that the Commission had found objectionable were changed before
passage. Therefore, the letter Theisen had drafted on behalf of the Commission will not be sent,
although a draft copy is being sent to Independent Living for their files.
NEW BUSINESS:
Shank reported that Cambridge, MA, has added "gender or gender expression" to their non-
discrimination ordinance.
Martin asked if the Commission should do anything to publicize/disseminate information
on the Youth Leadership Institutes.
Harvey asked about the National Association of Hm~an Rights Workers materials that were
included in the agenda packet. Shank explained the Association was soliciting resolutions for
national lobbying efforts.
Shank discussed her involvement in the University's 50th Am~iversary of Human Rights
organization.
Harvey asked if ICHRC had ever sent anyone to the Des Moines Human Rights
Symposium. Shank said no, but we usually did and should continue to send at least one
Commissioner to the Lt. Governor's Faces and Voices conference.
STATUS OF CASES: Team A has a case to read; this is on an expedited schedule so it needs
to be handled swiftly. There's still one case in Legal that will eventually go to Team C. There
should be a case ready for Team B by the end of this week or early next week.
NEXT COMMISSION MEETING: Monday, May 19 at 7 p.m. in the Civic Center Lobby
Conference Room.
ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjoin'ned at 8:34 p.m.
4/30/97 transcribed by ldcc
HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION
MINUTES
March 24, 1997 Meeting
COMMISSION MEMBERS PRESENT: Diane Martin, Pat Harvey, Jan Warren, Derek Hall,
Tom Dickerson, Joan Jehle
COMMISSION MEMBERS ABSENT: Ann Shires, Mary Theisen, Mel Dautremont
STAFF PRESENT
Heather Shank, Eleanor Dilkes, Kaci Carolan
CALL TO ORDER:
Chairperson Harvey called the meeting to order at 7:03 p.m.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: The January Minutes were approved as amended. Martin/Jehle.
One correction was noted to the February minutes, under Report of Commissioners: Warren
has contacted Mary Sue Coleman to ask whether she would serve as our keynote spealcer for
the '97 Human Rights Breakfast. Coleman has accepted. The Breakfast is scheduled for
October 30. The February Minutes were then approved with this one addition.
Dickerson/Jehle.
RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: None.
PUBLIC FORUM - GENTLEMAN'S AGREEMENT. The Commission will be showing the
film Gentleman's Agreement on Saturday, April 26, 1997 at 1:30 p.m. at the Iowa City Public
Library. Shank has arranged for a popcorn cart, and will be purchasing Passover candy/treats
to serve as well. Martin agreed to bring pop and cups (for which she'll be reimbursed).
Commissioners who are helping were asked to be at the library by 1 p.m. Dickerson agreed
to film a PSA about the movie for the government channel, and Jehle indicated she'd put up
fliers when they were ready.
HUD SUBSTANTIAL EQUIVALENCY - April 8 will be the public hearing on the
mrtendments to the Human Rights Ordinance, as well as the first consideration by City Council.
Dilkes indicated that she had sent m~ explanatory memo to Council members (essentially the
same as the one she had prepared for the Commission) and had received a few calls from
Council members with questions. It was determined that the Commission should be
represented at the April 8 Council meeting; Warren, Harvey, and Jehle agreed to attend. Shank
indicated she would advise them where on the Council agenda the matter falls, so
Commissioners could time their attendance accordingly.
TRANSGENDER MOVIE - Shank explained that, as part of the transgender trainings sessions
she has been conducting with various entities, she had been showing a film entitled What Sex
Am I? Some attendees have found this film to be offensive, so Shank decided several months
ago to put together her own video on transgenderism to use in trainings and show on the
government cham~el. She has interviewed an UIHC endocrinologist, a psychologist, and four
Human Rights Commission
March 24, 1997 Minutes
Page 2
male-to-female transsexuals, and was ready to begin editing and storyboarding the film.
Unfortunately, she has encountered a glitch in that certain interviewees have now indicated an
unwillingness to participate. Shark is attempting to resolve the situation and will keep the
Cormnission posted.
REPORTS OF COMMISSIONERS:
Dickerson: Circulated a newspaper article which outlined events the University is
organizing to celebrate the amfiversary of the passage of the Universal Declaration of Human
Rights. He also reported that he has given three in-service trainings at his place of
employment, and that they have gone so well that the class will become a regularly-scheduled
event, and will be required of all existing and new staff there (Systems Unlimited). The
training pertains to the Consttmer's Bill of Rights and Dickerson has made sure all of the
protected categories in the Humm~ Rights Ordinance are included in the Consumer Bill of
Rights.
OLD BUSINESS:
Human Rights Iowa CiW: Previously, Theisen (the Commission's liaison to Human
Rights Iowa City) had indicated there would be a discussion held on April 3 at the Public
Library. Recently, however, an mmouncement was made that there would be a discussion on
May 1 at Old Brick. The question was raised as to whether there were to be two discussions,
or whether the April discussion had merely been rescheduled to May. Unfortunately, as
Theisen was not present, no one really kaew. Harvey said she would contact Dorothy Paul to
find out for sure. Assuming it is May 1, Harvey, Dickerson, Jehle, and Hall all indicated they
would attend.
Disability Legislation: Shank reported that Theisen had picked up all the literature and
was going to draft a letter.
Death Penalty Letter: Shires had said she would contact the Commissioners absent
from the February meeting to inquire whether they felt a letter should be written from the
Commission as a whole opposing the death penalty on human rights grounds. Harvey has the
literature necessary to draft such a letter.
Diversity Team/Study Circle: Shmzlc explained the study circle concept, and that Diane
Fim~erty (the University's representative to the Diversity Team) feels study circles are a great
way to go, since they can focus on one issue and promote in-depth discussion. Shank indicated
there was a training for the Study Circle concept on April 3, 8:30 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. Although
Alison Ames Galstad (former Commission member) has indicated her continued interest in
being part of the Diversity Team, she indicated to Shm~c that she could not attend the training.
Shank asked if someone else from the Commission could go. There was discussion regarding
whether and what interplay there was between the study circles and the Diversity Team.
Warren indicated she would check her schedule to see if she could attend the training.
Investigator: Carolan will increase to fulMime status as of April 1.
Human Rights Commission
March 24, 1997 Minutes
Page 3
NEW BUSINESS:
Shaak: Passed around a news clipping regarding a recent assault in Iowa City which
was motivated by animosity based on sexual orientation. She also pointed out a news story
about a Wisconsin man who reported he'd been robbed by two African-American men, and
that report later turned out to be false. Shank noted that this was the second incident in the
recent past where a person has told police a story involving minority perpetrators and that story
was later found to be fictitious.
Shank: also reported that the Human Rights Office had recently purchased a copy of
the A & E Investigative Reports on same sex marriage, which she intends to use as part of
trainings and forums. Any interested Commissioner was invited to borrow it for viewing.
STATUS OF CASES: Team A has one case. One case is in Legal. Shank is awaiting
paperwork on one closure. Paperwork was received on the last case in conciliation, payment
was made to the Complainant, and that case is now closed. Harvey requested that, in the
future, dates and a brief explanation of the bases for administrative closures be included on the
status list.
NEW STATE COMMISSIONERS: A brief discussion was held regarding the new
Commissioners named to the state Civil Rights Commission. Warren questioned why there
were no Commissioners from either Iowa City or Ames, the only two communities who
include sexual orientation as a protected category in their local ordinances.
NEXT COMMISSION MEETING: Monday, April 28 at 7 p.m. in the Civic Center Lobby
Conference Room.
ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjourned at 7:49 p.m.
3/28/97 transcribed by kkc
MINUTES
IOWA CITY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
THURSDAY, MAY 1, 1997
CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS
· l' li~,., .......... ....... ....... ,~,f
Subject to Approval
MEMBERS PRESENT:
Ann Bovbjerg, Benjamin Chait, Pam Ehrhardt, Dick
Gibson, Philip Shive, George Starr, Lea Supple
MEMBERS ABSENT:
None
STAFF PRESENT:
Sarah Holecek, Bob Miklo, Scott Kugler, John Yapp, Traci
Howard
OTHERS PRESENT:
Jim Clayton, Dave Long
RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL
Recommended, by a vote of 7-0, approval of SUB97-0003, a final plat of Meadow View
Subdivision, a 31.5 acre, 10-lot extraterritorial residential subdivision located on the west side of
Buchmayer Bend at its intersection with Highway 1, subject to the approval of legal papers and
construction drawings prior to City Council consideration of the plat.
Recommended, by a vote of 7-0, approval of SUB97-0011, a final plat of William Woods
Subdivision, a 22.99 acre, 4-1or extraterritorial residential subdivision located north of Highway 1
West approximately one mile west of Sharon Center Road, subject to approval of legal papers
and construction drawings prior to City Council consideration of the plat.
Recommended, by a vote of 7-0, that the proposed amendment to Title 14, Chapter 6, entitled
"Zoning," Article N, entitled, "Off-Street Parking and Loading," Section 1 entitled, "Off-Street
Parking Requirements," be adopted as written without the need for special exception approval.
Recommended, by a vote of 7-0, approval of amendments to Title 14, Chapter 6, entitled
"Zoning," Article P, entitled "Fences and Hedges," as presented in the memorandum dated
May, 1, 1997.
Recommended, by a vote of 6-1, with Chait voting no, that no change to Title 14, Chapter 6,
entitled "Zoning," Article O, entitled, "Sign Regulations," be made at this time and that projecting
signs continue to be prohibited.
Recommended, by a vote of 6-1, with Supple voting no, approval of amendments to Title 14,
Chapter 6, entitled "Zoning," Article O, entitled, "Sign Regulations," to allow portable signs as a
provisional sign in the CB-2, CB-5 and CB-10 zones as presented in the staff memorandum
dated May 1, 1997, except that paragraph 2, section d in 14-60-5F and 14-60-5E should be
revised to add the word "non-illuminated" in front of "portable sign" in CB-2, CB-5 and CB-10
zones.
Recommended, by a vote of 7-0, that there be no change to Title 14, Chapter 6, entitled
"Zoning," Article O, entitled, "Sign Regulations," for changeable copy signs.
CALLTO ORDER
MINUTES
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING
THURSDAY, MAY 1, 1997 - 7:30 P.M.
PAGE 2
Chairperson Starr called the meeting to order at 7:35 p.m.
PRESENTATION OF CERTIFICATE OF APPRECIATION TO RETIRING COMMISSIONER
JANE JAKOBSEN
Starr presented Jakobsen with a certificate and thanked her for her many years of service on
the Planning and Zoning Commission. He also introduced the new commission member, Phil
Shive, who was recently appointed by City Council.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA
There was none.
ANNOUNCEMENT OF VACANCIES ON CITY BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
Starr announced the following vacancies: one vacancy on the Historic Preservation
Commission for a 3-year term ending March 29, 2000 with the appointment to be made at the
May 6 City Council meeting; three vacancies on the Library Board of Trustees for 6-year terms
ending July 1, 2003; one vacancy on the Design Review Committee for a 3-year term ending
July 1, 2000; and two vacancies on the Historic Preservation Commission for a 3-year term
ending March 29, 2000 with the appointments to be made at the May 20 Council meeting. Starr
encouraged everyone interested to apply.
REZONING ITEM
REZ97-0003. Public discussion of an application submitted by James P. Glasgow for a
rezoning from RM-20, Medium Density Multi-Family Residential, and RS-5, Low Density
Single-Family Residential, to OSA-20 and OSA-5, Sensitive Overlay Zone, for 1.9 acres
located at 1122-1136 N. Dubuque Street. (45-day limitation period: waived to May 1,
1997).
Miklo said the applicant asked for the item to be deferred until May 15.
Public discussion.
There was none.
Public discussion was closed,
MOTION: Bovbjerg moved and Supple seconded the motion to defer
consideration of REZ97-0003 to the May 15 Commission meeting. The motion
carried unanimously on a vote of 7-0.
DEVELOPMENT ITEMS
SUB97-0003. Public discussion of an application submitted by Dean Oakes for final plat
approval of Meadow View Subdivision, a 31.5 acre, 10-lot residential subdivision located
MINUTES
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING
THURSDAY, MAY 1, 1997 - 7:30 P.M.
PAGE 3
on the west side of Buchmayer Bend at its intersection with Highway 1. (45-day
limitation period: waived to June 1, 1997).
Kugler said all the plat deficiencies have been taken care of; the plat is ready for
approval. Staff is recommending approval, subject to approval of the legal papers and
construction drawings prior to Council consideration of the plat. He noted that he talked
to County staff after the Commission's Monday informal meeting about how the funding
for the reconstruction of Buchmayer Bend would occur. They said they do not intend to
put anything in the legal papers obligating adjacent property owners to pay through an
assessment; that it would be a County-funded project. The applicant has questioned
why the County is not improving that roadway now since he is giving them the right-of-
way. This issue will be reviewed at the next County Board of Supervisors meeting.
Ehrhardt asked about the City recommendation that the developer be required to
contribute a fair share toward the improvements. Kugler said that was the staff
recommendation, and it was resolved at the county level by having the developer
dedicate the right-of-way at this time in case it needed to be improved in the future.
Public Discussion.
There was none.
Public discussion was closed.
MOTION: Chait moved to recommend approval of SUB97-0003, a request for final
plat approval of Meadow View Subdivision, a 31.5 acre, 10-lot residential
subdivision located on the west side of Buchmayer Bend at its intersection with
Highway 1 subject to the approval of legal papers and construction drawings
prior to Council consideration of the plat. Gibson seconded the motion. The
motion carried unanimousIv on a vote of 7-0.
Bovbjerg commended staff for all the hard work on the project.
SUB97-0011. Public discussion of an application submitted by Ed Williams for final plat
approval of William Woods Subdivision, a 22.99 acre, 4-1ot residential subdivision
located approximately 1.5 miles southwest of Iowa City. (45-day limitation period:
expires May 26, 1997).
Kugler said the plat meets the City's subdivision regulations and is ready to be
approved. He said staff is recommending approval, suSject to the approval of legal
papers and construction drawings prior to Council consideration of the final plat.
Public discussion.
There was none.
Public discussion was closed.
MINUTES
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING
THURSDAY, MAY 1, 1997- 7:30 P.M.
PAGE 4
MOTION: Bovbjerg moved to recommend approval of SUB97-0011, a final plat of
William Woods Subdivision, a 22.99 acre, 4-lot residential subdivision located in
Johnson County on the north side of Highway I West approximately one mile
west of Sharon Center Road, subject to approval of legal papers and construction
drawings prior to Council consideration of the final plat. Supple seconded the
motion.
Bovbjerg said the plat design looks good because of the clustering and open space. She
said she hopes it will work. Starr noted that the Commission is creating minimal access
to the highway, and the Commission will stand strong on minimizing any future access
points.
Gibson asked about the outlots and if they are foreclosed from development. Kugler
said Outlot B will be limited to agricultural access only along Highway 1, and any
development would require a rezoning and replatting that would be reviewed by the
Commission. He said the applicants needed that amount of land in order to plat the four
lots.
The motion carried unanimously on a vote of 7-0.
CODEAMENDMENTITEMS
Public discussion of an amendment to Title 14, Chapter 6, entitled "Zoning," Article N,
entitled, "Off-Street Parking and Loading," Section 1 entitled, "Off-Street Parking
Requirements," to allow by special exception, existing fraternity/sorority houses to be
converted to rooming houses without having to provide additional parking.
Kugler said the ordinance is currently being reviewed by Council, and there has been
some opposition from north side residents worried about the negative parking impact
within their neighborhood. Council asked the Commission to determine whether or not a
special exception should be required for the conversion. He said staff is confident that
the parking generated by a rooming house would be no worse than that of a
fraternity/sorority, and in fact could be considerably less. Kugler said that that there are
many other uses of a vacated building (i.e. apartments) that would likely increase the
parking problem in that neighborhood.
Regarding the need for the special exception, staff feels that if the Commission agrees
with staff's assessment of the parking issue, there should be no need for the additional
review associated with a special exception request. While the special exception would
notify neighbors of the conversion, staff feels the use of the residence is the same and
the only difference is the type of tenants living there.
Kugler said staff recommends that the ordinance be adopted as it was originally written
not requiring a special exception approval. He said due to recent conversations with
Council members, Commission members and the public, staff has taken a closer look at
the interpretation and enforcement of code provisions that apply to a situation like this.
Although this issue does not affect the issue of whether or not there should be a special
exception, staff feels that the code may have been interpreted incorrectly when
calculating building occupancy and parking. Currently, the lot size limits the level of
MINUTES
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING
THURSDAY, MAY 1, 1997 - 7:30 P.M.
PAGE 5
occupancy in a building, but the full building size is used to calculate the required
parking. The Zoning Code Interpretation Panel will review the situation and give
feedback to staff.
Starr asked if this was a deferrable issue, and Kugler said the Commission should try to
make its recommendation to Council tonight. Gibson asked if there were any
established criteria for a special exception in this situation. Kugler said while that would
be difficult, the issue is parking, so the applicant would have to prove that the amount of
parking generated by the new use would be equal to or less than that of the current or
past use. Kugler said in the current fraternity situation, the fraternity was
"grandfathered." The building could be occupied to its full extent. When the conversion
takes place, staff will be using the size of the lot to determine how many occupants can
live in the house. This will probably be less than the house can actually accommodate,
so there will be fewer people and those people will be less likely to have cars.
Gibson said in some information received at the meeting, it said there are only two legal
spaces associated with the building on North Dubuque Street. Kugler said there are two
legal spaces, but they can realistically park six cars in the driveway. Ehrhardt noted the
North Side Neighborhood letter received by the Commission, and asked about the
specific numbers of occupants and rooms. Kugler said based on the current
interpretation, parking is determined based on the 7200 square footage of the building,
not on the number of rooms in it.
Ehrhardt said residents she spoke with are concerned about parking and the building
use. She said there is no legal criteria to say a particular area has too many group
homes or low-income subsidized housing. Kugler said zoning could not control that.
Starr noted that the type of occupants is not the issue; the parking special exception is
the issue that Council has asked the Commission to consider.
Supple asked what is meant on page 3 of the staff report when it says, "Because 24
spaces are essentially 'grandfathered' for the current use, 12 additional spaces would be
needed for the rooming house," when there are only two existing spaces. Kugler said
the fraternity house contains 7200 square feet and 24 parking spaces are required for
that use (one per 300 square feet). So the fraternity, regardless of the number of
occupants, is required to provide 24 parking spaces, but because the building was built
before those zoning provisions were adopted that use and its parking requirements are
"grandfathered."
Supple asked where the 24 spaces were, and Kugler said they are phantom spaces,
because they are grandfathered. He said the building can be converted to another use
as long as it does not require more than the 24 spaces; those spaces can remain
classified as "phantom" spaces. Once it is converted to a use that requires more than 24
spaces, the owner would have to supply the additional parking spaces required over and
above the 24 spaces. Under the current interpretation of the Zoning Chapter, 36 parking
spaces would be required for the rooming house, so the owner would have to provide
the extra 12 spaces before they could occupy the building as a rooming house. The
proposed ordinance would eliminate that requirement, because it appears to be
unnecessary, and it would provide more opportunities to save these buildings.
MINUTES
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING
THURSDAY, MAY 1, 1997 - 7:30 P.M.
PAGE 6
Chait asked how staff came up with 36 spots. Kugler said there are 7200 square feet in
the building and one parking space is required for every 200 square feet of floor area for
a rooming house. Bovbjerg asked about the parking available associated with the sports
arena. Kugler said that it was a separate, private lot that the fraternity was leasing or
using to park on, and the owner of that lot has decided to put the property to a different
use,
Bovbjerg asked about the conversion interpretation. Kugler said the current policy is to
take the size of the lot and determine how large the rooming house would be. The
parking standard applies to the house's gross floor area. It does not seem fair to limit
the use of a building to a certain level of occupancy and then require parking as if the
building was occupied to its maximum extent. He said 36 parking spaces should not
have to be provided for a 21-room rooming house.
Ehrhardt asked, hypothetically, how many parking permits this rooming house would be
given if the city implemented a permit plan for on-street parking. Kugler said he did not
know, because the idea has not been discussed in much detail before. Supple asked
what would happen if the rooming house was converted back into a fraternity/sorority.
Kugler said that he would have to talk to a City Building Official, because generally after
a use has been vacated for more than one year, it loses its "grandfathered" rights. They
may be able to occupy the building, but not to its fullest extent.
Public discussion.
There was none.
Public discussion was closed.
MOTION: Bovbjerg moved that a recommendation be forwarded to the City
Council that the proposed amendment to Title 14, Chapter 6, entitled "Zoning,"
Article N, entitled, "Off-Street Parking and Loading," Section 1 entitled, "Off-
Street Parking Requirements," be adopted as written without the need for special
exception approval. Supple seconded the motion.
Gibson said he feels the Commission should be doing everything possible to increase
the availability of low-cost housing in Iowa City, and parking requirements should not be
used to reduce that inventory. The idea that good housing would be not used because
of some unrealistic parking requirements really troubled him. He said there is a limited
community-wide impact associated with this issue. Gibson said that it is critical to list
criteria under which a special exception would be rendered, and he had heard nothing
discussed except the parking. He said he will vote in support of the motion.
Bovbjerg said parking is the critical factor. She said there have been good arguments
that the North Side parking will be no worse and may be a little better under the
proposed amendment. She said it is a good way to create affordable housing using
residences that are already there and structurally sound. She said if it doesn't work, the
issue can be revisited.
MINUTES
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING
THURSDAY, MAY 1, 1997 - 7:30 P.M.
PAGE 7
Ehrhardt said that she would vote in support of the recommendation, because she could
not come up with criteria for requiring a special exception.
Starr said he concurred, and will be voting in favor of the motion.
The motion passed unanimously by a vote of 7-0.
Public discussion of an amendment to Title 14, Chapter 6, entitled "Zoning," Article P,
entitled "Fences and Hedges," to change the vision triangle requirements at
intersections.
Yapp said the Board of Adjustment at its October 9, 1996, meeting, requested that the
Commission consider amending the vision triangle requirement. This request followed the
Board's consideration 'of a special exception and variance case involving a fence that
technically violated the required vision triangle. However, the Board felt the fence did not pose a
realistic safety concern.
Yapp said staff researched the vision triangle requirement, and recommends that the vision
triangle be reduced on local streets only, with the leg of the triangle measured 30 feet from the
curb on local streets instead of 30 feet from the right-of-way. Staff also considered other
options, including measuring the vision triangle differently depending on traffic control, and the
speed limit, but found measurement from the curb on local streets would be the best solution.
Staff recommends that fences less than 20 percent solid be permitted within the triangle,
beeause they do not pose a practical vision concern for drivers.
Yapp said staff also looked at the possibility of creating a vision triangle for alleys, but felt that
there is sufficient reaction time based on American Association of State and Highway
Transportation Officials (AASHTO) standards. He said if the vision triangle is opened up to be
greater at alleys, cars will be more likely to speed and use the alleys as cut-through points.
Yapp said staff recommends that Title 14, Chapter 6, entitled "Zoning," Article P, entitled
"Fences and Hedges," be amended as presented in the staff memorandum.
Ehrhardt asked about vegetation in a fence. Yapp said that would be included in the hedge
provision. Bovbjerg asked if enforcement is complaint driven, and Yapp said yes, most often it
is. A City employee may also notify the enforcement staff about a fence or hedge that is in
violation.
Public discussion.
There was none.
Public discussion was closed.
MOTION: Supple moved to recommend approval of amendments to Title 14, Chapter 6,
entitled "Zoning," Article P, entitled "Fences and Hedges," as presented in the staff
memorandum dated May, 1, 1997. Shive seconded the motion.
MINUTES
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING
THURSDAY, MAY 1, 1997- 7:30 P.M.
PAGE 8
Ehrhardt said these new vision triangles are good for the intersections, but she still has a
problem with visibility coming out of alleys. Ehrhardt noted that she measured what the
distance looked like thirty feet from the curb, and feels it is adequate for a local street.
The motion carried unanimously by a vote of 7-0.
Public discussion of an amendment to Title 14, Chapter 6, entitled "Zoning," Article O,
entitled, "Sign Regulations," Section 5, entitled "Signs Permitted by Zone; Regulations,"
to permit projecting signs in the CB-5 and CB-10 zones.
Yapp said a projecting sign is a sign that extends more than one foot out from a building. He
said this type of sign has been prohibited from the downtown area since urban renewal in the
1970s. Staff recommends that projecting signs continue to be prohibited, because they tend to
cause a visual clutter, and may cause distraction in the downtown area. Yapp said staff had met
with the Downtown Association and the Design Review Committee on all the proposed sign
code amendments. The Downtown Association did recommend allowing projecting signs with
similar restrictions to what staff has proposed. The Design Review Committee recommended
against allowing projecting signs.
Staff recommends that projecting signs continue to be prohibited, but if projecting signs are to
be permitted, staff recommends that Title 14, Chapter 6, entitled "Zoning," Article O, entitled,
"Sign Regulations," be amended to permit projecting signs as a provisional use in the CB-5 and
CB-10 zones, subject to certain conditions as outlined in the staff memorandum.
Yapp noted that both the Downtown Association and the Design Review Committee agreed with
allowing awning signs provided the business does not have a projecting sign as a way to
minimize clutter in the downtown area should projecting signs be permitted. Ehrhardt asked if a
business could have a projecting sign and an awning with no sign, and Yapp said yes. Bovbjerg
asked if this change ruled out having awning signs, and Yapp said no. Starr asked if this
addressed time and temperature signs, and Yapp said no.
Chait said with regard to the awning sign, he understood that staff had defined an illuminated
awning with nothing written on it as an awning sign. Yapp said that staff has not done that with
this memo. Chait noted that under this amendment there could be an illuminated awning with
nothing written on it and a projecting sign. Yapp agreed. Chait asked if Yapp defined illuminated
as internally lit or as light shining on the sign. Yapp said it is defined as internally illuminated or
a light mounted on the sign directly shining onto the sign. A streetlight shining on the sign or the
building would be considered ambient light, and would not be restricted.
Starr asked if there were restrictions about the grade or height of an awning. Yapp said he
believed the awning must be at least eight feet high and can extend seven feet from the
building wall, but can be no closer than two feet to the curb. There are no zoning restrictions on
the mass of an awning, and they may be on the second floor of a building. Starr said he
assumed that there was no limitation on awning projection because it served as shelter for the
pedestrians, and Yapp said that was correct, except they may not project more than seven feet
from the face of the building.
Yapp said this proposed amendment is trying to create a framework in which individual
businesses or properties would have some flexibility. It is also meant to avoid creating a
MINUTES
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING
THURSDAY, MAY 1, 1997 - 7:30 P.M.
PAGE 9
situation of businesses competing with bigger and brighter signs. Starr agreed, and asked if that
same competition could occur with awnings. Chait said if projecting signs are allowed, the
distinctions would depend on the size of the building. Starr said he did not agree, because there
could be multiple businesses in one building creating multiple projecting signs.
Public discussion.
Jim Clayton, 119 E. College Street, owner of The Soap Opera, said he is disappointed that staff
is not being firmer on this issue. He noted the recommendation from Design Review is that
projecting signs not be allowed. He said he was in the sign business a while ago, and knows
from experience that when a new business opens there will be someone waiting to give them a
projecting sign with a product logo on it (i.e. Pepsi-Cola, Coca-Cola, etc.). He used the example
of the spread of neon signs in the downtown area that all advertise national brands of beer sold
inside the business, and how the character of the downtown could change rapidly if projecting
signs are allowed. Clayton said he did not see how the Commission could separate the
discussion on projecting signs from consideration of how awnings and awnings signs are
defined. He used the example of the former Pizza Hut awning, small awnings, and awnings
underneath overhangs. He urged the Commission not to allow projecting signs in the
downtown.
Public discussion was closed.
MOTION: Bovbjerg moved to recommend to Council that no change to Title 14, Chapter
6, entitled "Zoning," Article O, entitled, "Sign Regulations," be made at this time and that
projecting signs continue to be prohibited. Gibson seconded the motion.
Gibson said the Commission is in danger of getting onto a slippew slope with this issue,
because it tends to be a very controversial one. He agreed with Clayton that the sign ordinance
has been well accepted. He said he does not see a need to change it. He urged voting in favor
of the motion on the table.
Chait said he is against the motion, because projecting signs would add an element of texture
in the urban environment. He noted that many of the urban renewal decisions have proven to
be questionable. He thought there should be some diversity in the area. He noted that Clayton's
concerns could be addressed in standards created for projecting signs.
Bovbjerg said one reason the downtown is hospitable to pedestrians is that there is not much
clutter, and the downtown has benefited from getting rid of that clutter. She said taste and style
are involved in determining sign standards, and taste and style can be changeable over the
years, depending on who is in charge. She felt there do not need to be any changes. She said
she will vote in favor of the motion.
Ehrhardt said if the Commission prohibits the projecting signs, then they should prohibit signage
on awnings and canopies. She said she will vote for the motion.
Starr said he will vote for the motion, because he sees no compelling reason to change the
current sign ordinance; it is working and there have not been many complaints.
The motion carried on a vote of 6-1 with Chait voting no.
MINUTES
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING
THURSDAY, MAY 1, 1997 - 7:30 P.M.
PAGE 10
Public discussion of an amendment to Title 14, Chapter 6, entitled "Zoning," Article O,
entitled, "Sign Regulations," Section 5, entitled "Signs Permitted by Zone; Regulations,"
to permit portable signs in the CB-2, CB-5 and CB-10 zones.
Yapp said a number of downtown businesses have made use of small portable signs for many
years to advertise menu items, specials, sales and other changeable messages. There have
been complaints recently about the portable signs encroaching into the public right-of-way.
They are especially a problem for pedestrians with disabilities. These signs have not been
permitted in the past by code, but enforcement has generally only occurred on a complaint
basis. Yapp said Joe Murphy of Bremers had submitted a letter requesting that the sign
ordinance be amended to permit portable signs.
Yapp said staff believes that portable signs should be permitted within the CB-10, CB-5 and
CB-2 zones with some restrictions, including: the signs should remain pedestrian oriented,
should not block the public right-of-way or any doorway, only one sign should be permitted per
first floor business with an exterior storefront and that allowing pod:able signs citywide would
create too much sign clutter in areas that are not pedestrian oriented.
Yapp said staff recommends that Title 14, Chapter 6, entitled "Zoning," Article (:3, entitled, "Sign
Regulations," be amended to allow portable signs as a provisional sign in the CB-2, CB-5 and
CB-10 zones subject to the conditions detailed in the staff memorandum.
Gibson asked how many faces an allowable sign would have. Yapp said he did not think there
were limits, as long as each sign face was limited to six square feet. Miklo noted that language
could be included to limit the number of faces per sign if that is a concern, but he said most
signs would only have four faces at the most. Bovbjerg noted that since these are pedestrian-
oriented signs, it would be silly to have a sign face facing the building. She said since the sign
would have to be carried in and out every day, there would be some practical concerns with
multiple sign faces. Ehrhardt asked if this type of sign would be permitted without Design
Review Committee approval. Yapp said that is correct as the ordinance amendment is
proposed by staff. The Design Review Committee recommended they have review over
portable signs, but that is not the staff recommendation.
Public discussion.
Jim Clayton, 119 E. College Street, The Soap Opera owner, suggested including language to
prohibit illuminated and motorized signs. He asked if the sign would be in the outdoor care area
and if the sign be allowed to block the doorway so people could not get out of the business. He
was also concerned about sharing points and alcoves between businesses and how the signs
would be arranged between them. He noted that if the business is going to block private space,
it should be their own space and not that of a neighboring business.
Public discussion was closed.
Yapp suggested adding the wording "one non-illuminated portable sign" to the proposed
amendment. Miklo said except for barber poles, there is a general prohibition concerning
motorized or moveable signs in the overall sign ordinance.
MINUTES
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING
THURSDAY, MAY 1, 1997 - 7:30 P.M.
PAGE 11
MOTION: Bovbjerg moved to recommend approval of amendments to Title 14, Chapter 6,
entitled "Zoning," Article O, entitled, "Sign Regulations," to allow portable signs as a
provisional sign in the CB-2, CB-5 and CB-10 zones as presented in the staff
memorandum dated May 1, 1997, except that paragraph 2, section d in 14-60-5F and 14-
60.5E should be revised to add the word "non-illuminated" in front of "portable sign" in
the CB-2, CB-5 and CB-10 zones. Gibson seconded the motion.
Gibson said he is in favor of this amendment, because it adds some animation on a human
scale without really detracting from the environment. He said this is different from projecting
signs because of the location, size and temporary nature of portable signs.
Supple disagreed, saying that she sees it as more clutter and will vote against it for the same
reason as she did on the projecting sign amendment.
The motion passed on a vote of 6-1, with Supple voting no.
Public discussion of a proposed amendment to Title 14, Chapter 6, entitled "Zoning,"
Article O, entitled, "Sign Regulations," to adopt criteria for changeable copy signs.
Yapp said a changeable copy sign is currently defined as "a sign, such as a reader board,
which has components which are easily changeable by physical and not electronic methods."
Any sign which is permitted in the respective zone can be a changeable copy sign. For
example, a fascia sign or a portable sign can be a changeable copy sign. In the past, the
Design Review Committee expressed concerns regarding changeable copy signs attached to
the exterior of the Field House restaurant/bar. The Planning and Zoning Commission asked
staff to do research about placing design considerations in the Zoning Chapter regarding
changeable copy signs.
Yapp said staff recommends against any changes in the regulations regarding changeable copy
signs, and any design provisions built into the code. If design review is done, it should be part of
a Design Review District. Council recently passed legislation enabling a district, but has not yet
designated a specific area as a district. The Design Review Committee would review the sign
context within a Design Review District. Design is difficult to regulate by code. Yapp noted that
the Downtown Association and Design Review Committee both agree with staff's
recommendation against making any changes to the current ordinance regarding changeable
copy signs.
Public discussion.
There was none.
Public discussion was closed.
MOTION: Shive moved to recommend to the Council that there be no change to Title 14,
Chapter 6, entitled "Zoning," Article O, entitled, "Sign Regulations," for changeable copy
signs. Chair seconded the motion. The motion 13assed unanimously by a vote of 7-0.
MINUTES
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING
THURSDAY, MAY 1, 1997- 7:30 P.M.
PAGE 12
Public discussion of an amendment to Title 14, Chapter 6, entitled "Zoning," Article S,
entitled "Performance Standards," Section 8, entitled "Glare," to require that exterior
lighting underneath awnings and awning signs be downcast.
Yapp said in 1993, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted to add the definitions of
awnings and awning signs to the pending list for staff research. This was prompted by the
erection of the Pizza Hut awning, an internally-illuminated, fixed, translucent awning with the
words, "Pizza Hut" taking up slightly more than 14 percent, or 106 square feet, of the surface
area. It was later determined that the awning was not legal, because it did not provide shelter.
The signage was legal, because it can cover up to 25 percent of the awning.
Yapp said the dictionary defines the word "awning" as a "roof-like cover extending over or in
front of a place (as over the deck or in front of a door or window) as a shelter." Because the
Pizza Hut awning was not in the shape of a traditional awning, and was internally-illuminated, it
appeared to function as a regular fascia sign and not an awning. It was much larger than a
fascia sign would be allowed to be.
He said staff considered many alternatives to changing the definition of an awning and an
awning sign. These considerations included: limiting the percentage of an awning that may be
devoted to signage, limiting the size of an awning, defining the permitted shape of an awning,
defining shelter, counting any illuminated portion of an awning as a sign, and/or requiring that
an awning be made of heavy canvas or some other material traditionally used for awnings. Staff
concluded that the current definition of an awning is sufficient, but the methods of lighting
awnings needed to be reviewed. Lighting is being put under the awning to light the awning, not
to light the sidewalk below for pedestrians. Many lights are only directed upward, or fluorescent
bulbs are used emitting light in all directions.
Staff believes that awnings and awning signs do have an important function in the downtown
area by adding color, shelter and variety to the streetscape. Most of the plastic illuminated
awnings are lit by a bank of fluorescent light bulbs fixed to the building wall, and it appears that
the entire awning serves no purpose other than to call more attention to the individual business.
Staff proposes that any illumination of the awning be required to be downcast. This means that
any fluorescent bulbs or other lights attached to the building wall underneath awnings may not
emit light in all directions; the light must be downcast to light up the sidewalk and doorways
below. While some light will spill over and light up the awnings, it would not be directly emitted
toward the awning surface.
Staff recommends that Title 14, Chapter 6, entitled "Zoning," Article 5, entitled "Performance
Standards," Section 8, entitled "Glare," be amended to add lighting standards to the paragraph
on glare regulations.
Yapp noted that the Downtown Association recommended that there be no changes to the
current ordinance regarding awnings, awning signs or related illumination. They feel the current
method of backlighting the awnings is not detrimental to the streetscape. The Design Review
Committee recommended similar language to what staff is proposing.
Chait asked Holecek if he had a conflict of interest on this matter, because he has illuminated
awnings on his buildings. She said there was no conflict, because there is no strong connection
MINUTES
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING
THURSDAY, MAY 1, 1997- 7:30 P.M.
PAGE 13
between the amendment and the affect it would have on Chait's property. She said there would
no monetary conflict or appropriation of funds.
Gibson asked about the direction of the light casting. He thought the amendment should
prohibit illumination of the awning's underside instead of directing the light toward the street. He
also asked how much light would be allowed to diffuse from the awning. Yapp said the amount
of light diffusion would depend on the awning and the brightness of the light. Gibson said the
interior of the awning would have to be in shadow as far as the light source is. concerned, and
Yapp said it depends on the light placement. Bovbjerg noted that a regulation might be more
easily written and interpreted if it says what the lighting should look like, instead of where it
should not go -- unless you regulate by lumens or footcandles. Gibson said the lighting could
be installed so that the awning underside is in the shadow of the direct light source.
Chait asked staff what purpose they are trying to further by this ordinance. Miklo said the staff
intent is to control awning brightness. Supple asked if this ordinance is city-wide, and Miklo said
yes. Starr noted that all current illuminated awnings would be "grandfathered" as a non-
conforming use if the illuminated awnings were prohibited. He asked what would force them to
come into compliance. Holecek said an illuminated awning could not be expanded, or if it was
abandoned for a period of time, the sign would lose its "grandfather" privilege. Starr noted that
the business could change and a new business could come in and use the non-conforming
awning.
Ehrhardt asked if there was a history of bulb vandalism downtown. Yapp said he is not aware of
such vandalism. Gibson asked what a bare exposed bulb is. Yapp said if you could see the
bulb, and it is exposed to the elements without a covering, then it is an exposed bulb. The
purpose is to limit the vandalism potential and to promote stereoscope aesthetics.
Public discussion.
Jim Clayton, 119 E. College Street, The Soap Opera Owner, said he would like to see a
compromise to limit or reduce the amount of lumination in the current signs downtown. He
noted if the light is brought down to the bottom of the awning, you will increase the vandalism
chances, and if the bulbs are placed higher up, you will decrease illumination to the sidewalk.
Clayton noted there may be some design considerations that include light to make the building
more appealing. He did not think having a grating covering every bulb would solve the
aesthetics problem, because people might feel like they are inside. Also, he noted that there
should be no reflective surface to reflect the light upward. He said if the purpose is to limit the
amount of light coming through a translucent awning, then a footcandle number should be
assigned to the sign. He felt that limiting the illumination should be the goal of this ordinance.
Dave Lona, 4848 Sand Road, said he is currently in the awning business. He pointed out that
while he did not construct the Pizza Hut awning, he does find it appealing as an awning and
noted that there are many other awnings in the city that project less than the Pizza Hut awning
does. He said this code amendment would virtually eliminate illuminated awnings, because
there is a lot of interpretation needed for the code and downlighting is no lighting, as far as he is
concerned. He gave some examples of backlit awnings he had constructed, and ones that he
did not do. He noted by prohibiting internally-illuminated awnings, Iowa City would be saying
that some national chains, e.g.T.G.I.Fridays, Applebees, could not use their trademark
MINUTES
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING
THURSDAY, MAY 1, 1997 - 7:30 P.M.
PAGE 14
awnings. This could cause a loss of business for Iowa City. He noted that many awnings not
internally illuminated, such as porch light awnings, would have to be downcast.
Ehrhardt asked Long if illuminated awnings were prohibited, what would happen to awnings on
businesses. Long said that it would wipe out the backlit awnings.
Public discussion was closed.
MOTION: Bovbjerg moved to recommend Title 14, Chapter 6, entitled "Zoning," Article 5,
entitled "Performance Standards," Section 8, entitled "Glare," be amended to add
lighting illumination standards to the glare regulations.
The motion died for lack of a second.
MOTION: Bovbjerg moved and Ehrhardt seconded the motion to defer consideration this
code amendment.
Gibson said he would have voted against the first motion if it had received a second. He said
the entire issue is not clear as to its intent or how it could be enforced. There needs to be a
clear intent before worrying about the technicalities.
Chait asked what the purpose of this amendment is. He suggested following the format used to
describe the vision triangle for this issue to provide detailed information. For example, defining
where the area beneath the awning actually is.
Gibson suggested redefining what an awning is to prevent signs flying under the guise of
awnings, because that is what is happening now. Chait suggested crispening the definitions and
regulations to prevent gray areas that need to be interpreted. He noted that there can be an
awning with or without words that is designed to attract attention, and if that is not acceptable,
then the Commission needs to say so.
Starr concurred and said he would have voted against the amendment, as proposed. He said if
the lighting is the problem, then it should be controlled through standards related to wattage,
footcandles or lumens.
Bovbjerg asked what would happen if this matter was not decided now, but was put on the
pending list. Miklo said something like Pizza Hut will not happen again, but something like
Moovies store awning could still be erected. Chait said he was concerned about putting the item
on a pending list and letting it sit there. Starr suggested keeping the amendment as number two
on the pending list.
MOTION TO AMEND THE MAIN MOTION: Supple moved to amend the main motion until
such time as staff has finished its research and put the item back on the agenda. Chait
seconded the motion to amend. The motion to amend the main motion carried
unanimously by a vote of 7-0.
The amended main motion to defer carried unanimously by a vote of 7-0.
CONSIDER THE APRIL 17, 1997, PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES
MINUTES
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING
THURSDAY, MAY 1, 1997 - 7:30 P.M.
PAGE 15
Chait moved and Bovbjerg seconded the motion to approve the minutes from the April 17,
1997, Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. The motion carried by a vote of 6-0-1, with
Ehrhardt abstaining because she did not attend the meeting.
OTHER BUSINESS
Holecek reminded the Commission that she will be gone May 8-20, and that Dennis Mitchell will
be sitting in for her. Starr also reminded the Commission that he will also be gone until the first
meeting in June.
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION INFORMATION
Supple noted the list of things to discuss from the recent APA convention was inserted into
everyone's agenda packets. She said she would like to discuss the items on the list. Miklo said
this could be discussed under the Other Business section at the next informal meeting, because
the agenda is not long.
ADJOURNMENT
Bovbjerg moved and Gibson seconded the motion to adjourn the meeting at 9:45 p.m. The
motion passed unanimously on a vote of 7-0.
Lea Supple, Secretary
Minutes submitted by Traci Howard
ppdadmin\mins\p&z5-2.doc
¥:30
MINUTES
IOWA CITY PUBLIC LIBRARY BOARD OF TRUSTEES
REGULAR MEETING
2ND FLOOR ADMINISTRATIVE CONFERENCE ROOM
THURSDAY, APRIL 24, 1997 - 5:00 PM
Members Present:
Members Absent:
Staff Present:
Margaret Cox, Philip Hubbard, Mary McMurray, Jesse Singerman,
Anne Spencer, Jim Swaim (arrived at 6:00 pm)
Stephen Greenleaf, Mark Martin, Chuck Traw
Barbara Black, Maeve Clark, Susan Craig, Larry Eckholt, Debb Green,
Martha Lubaroff, Liz Nichols, Bridget Quinn-Carey
CALL TO ORDER:
Vice President Singerman called the meeting to order at 5:15 pm
APPRQVAI QF MINUTIZS:
A motion to approve minutes of March 17, 1997 was made and seconded. McMurray/Cox
UNFINISHED RUSINESS
A. Rtdlding Pmj¢. e.t
The Board discussed the activity of the past week regarding the meeting of City Council,
and their decision to postpone any vote on a building referendum until more is known about
the City's financial future. Newspaper articles were distributed to the Board. Some
financial statistical reports were distributed that had been circulated at the Council meeting
which was attended by three Board members and Craig. They included expenses presented
to Council by the City manager and the Finance Director demonstrating the depletion of
financial reserves in the next 10 years. The projection is that there will not be enough
revenue to handle the expenses. The question for the Council is how to deal with it?
Adjust expenditures or raise more revenue. This discussion has frozen any decision Council
might make about putting the building project on the agenda fora referendum. Craig thinks
that there still could be a way to put it on the ballot in November and identify the revenue
streams after the referendum. The building would not be ready for two years. The
operating funds are only a very small part of the City's budget issue.
A Council Work Session has been tentatively scheduled for June 3 from 4-6 pm. The topic
is Financial Issues. Possibly this discussion could include organizational/financial/scheduling
issues related to the multi-use project. This is a tentative date and topic. Hubbard
commented that the operating cost for the new facility is ,~350,000. One third is to operate
the Library, the rest is for CenterSpace. The fact that the structure is being priced out as
one presents a real problem for the Library since CenterSpace has not presented any figures.
He also pointed out that there is a 2 million dollar difference between the 22 million quoted
in some reports and 20 million which is stated in the financial reports. Craig pointed out
that Karin Franklin addresses this issue in her memo and suggests including the cost of the
ICPL BOARD OF TRUSTEES
APRIL 24, 1997
PAGE 2
parking in the cost of the structure. It was pointed out that whether or not the building
project goes forward, financial problems facing the City would not be affected substantially
one way or another. Singerman asked if there was anything the Board could or should be
doing. Hubbard suggested we should be aware of issues in order to respond to questions.
For example, this financial crisis has not been created by the new project. The problem
existed before the library expansion became an issue. Hubbard questioned the adviseability
of the Board's support of a 1% sales tax to be used for general City support. Craig
informed the Board members that they could support the idea and promote that support to
the City Council. She asked Trustees if there was any information she could get for the
May meeting prior to the Council Work Session. Should the library Board discuss and make
a formal endorsement to put sales tax on ballot? The Board agreed that the matter should
be discussed on the next Board meeting. Craig's assumption is that we will not get any
additional information between now and June although she will attempt to get information
in particular the financial plan from CenterSpace.
Craig reported on a meeting she attended with Traw, the Chamber Board, their Library
Committee and CenterSpace Committee. Craig said the purpose of the meeting was to
identify questions they felt needed to be answered. Many dealt with financial and
organizational issues of CenterSpace. This is part of the financial model scheduled to be
completed by the end of May. Questions concerning the Library were answered as before.
There will be followup with Board members who are involved with CenterSpace. They are
working with Karin Franklin in order to better define what the space will be used for and a
financial plan.
STAFF RFPQRTS
Contract cleaning_bid. Craig reviewed for the Board that our contract cleaner had been
bought out by another service. It is time to rebid and we plan to send a bid out by May 1.
We will take proposals and award a contract early in June for services to start in July. A
Committee of Craig, Lubaroff, Arensdorf and a City representitive will be working on
reviewing the bids, etc. The language of the contract states the Board be part of the
negotiations. Craig recommends that we remove the Board from this review process and
award process and substitute the Library in the documents. There was unanimous approval
from the Board.
Sh~.lving pJ:Qject. There is money in next years budget for new shelving. They are
designated for several collections that we have been unable to shelve because of lack of
space. The new shelving will be for collections on the first floor and will be ordered in late
spring for summer installation.
13¢,v~,lnpm~.nt Qffic~. report was included in the packet. Eckholt added that the Foundation
Board approved the expense of a new fundraising software package. The Foundation
Board gave the go ahead to look into the possibility of an off site location in which to house
the used books for sale on a permanent basis.. An arrangement like this could allow us to
explore the possibility of a drop-off point or even an electronic access point. This would be
mostly volunteer operated. Eckholt will be looking into this project during the next few
months.
ICPL BOARD OF TRUSTEES
APRIL 24, 1997
PAGE 3
State Legislative News: Battles over education appropriations bill are taking place today in
the Iowa legislature regarding funding for State Libraries. Nothing has been passed yet.
Articl¢.s nn internat access issues were included in the Board's packet. They pertained to
Internet blocking software.
PRESIDENT'S RFPORT
Applications for Library Board openings. A copy of the Job description and application were
included in the Board Packet. The deadline for applications is May 13 with appointment on
May 20.
COMMITTFF RFPORTS
The Director evaluation form was distributed. The committee consists of Swaim, Martin
and McMurray with Singerman as Chair. The packet included Craig's self evaluation with a
form for Board members to complete and return to Lubaroff by May 22. They will be
compiled and presented to Craig with a recommended salary increase in June.
FINANCIAL REPORTS
Financial reports for the first 9 months of the fiscal year were included in the packet.
Receipts and expenditures are right where they should be at this time of year. There were
no unusual discrepancies.
Other Repnrt.~
The Output Statistics and Circulation reports by type and format were included for this nine
month period. One area which has grown is the number of interlibrary loans. It is expected
that they will continue to grow due to the new use of the State of Iowa Libraries Online
(SILO) database.
Another statistic of note concerned electronic access. Netscape use, since last July, which
is monitored by the number of people who sign up through the Information ~age station is
4000. Remote access activity showed 40,000 calls to the library catalog.
Circulation by type and format shows the areas in circulation that account for the 6% rise.
Questions were raised regarding the variability in some of the statistics like the decrease in
certain items such as publications, pamphlets, Johnson County use.
DISRURSFMENTS
Review VISA expenditures for February and March.
Disbursements for February were approved unanimously. McMurray/Hubbard
Disbursements for March were approved unanimously. Spencer/Cox.
ICPL BOARD OF TRUSTEES
APRIL 24, 1997
PAGE 4
SFT AGENDA ORr~FR FOR MAY MFETING
Building update. Discussion on possible financial revenue streams for City of Iowa City.
ADJOURNMENT:
Spencer moved to adjourn meeting. Cox seconded.
Minutes submitted by Martha Lubaroff.
6:05 pm