Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-19-2011 Planning and Zoning CommissionPLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION Monday, May 16, 2011 - 6:00 PM Informal Meeting Iowa City City Hall Lobby Conference Room 410 E. Washington Street AGENDA: A. Call to Order Thursday, May 19, 2011 - 7:00 PM Formal Meeting Iowa City City Hall Emma J. Harvat Hall 410 E. Washington Street B. Public Discussion of Any Item Not on the Agenda C. Comprehensive Plan Item CPA11-00002: A public hearing to amend the Comprehensive Plan to change the land use designation from Single-Family/Duplex Residential to General Commercial for property located at the northeast corner of the intersection of Highway 1 West and Hudson Avenue. D. Rezoning Item REZ11-00008: Discussion of an application submitted by Ranshaw Limited Partnership for a rezoning from Medium Density Family Single (RS-8) zone to Community Commercial (CC-2) zone for approximately .69 acres of property located at 1014, 1016 & 1022 Hudson Avenue. E. Code Amendment Item Discussion of amendments to Title 14, Zoning Code, Chapter 4, Use Regulations, Article D, Temporary Uses to add the new temporary use "football game day commercial vending" to provide specific approval criteria for football game day commercial vending and Chapter 9A, Definitions to define tailgating. F. Consideration of Meeting Minutes: May 2 and May 5, 2011 G. Other 1. Presentation on Form Based codes (Informal meeting) 2. Report from American Planning Association Conference (Informal meeting) H. Adjournment U com ng Planning & Zoning Commission Meetings Informal May 30* June 13 Jul 4* July 18 Formal June 2 June 16 July 7 July 21 * Meeting cancelled due to holiday City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM Date: May 19, 2011 To: Planning and Zoning Commission From: Christina Kuecker, Associate Planner RE: Comprehensive Plan amendment to change the designation of 1014, 1018, & 1022 Hudson Avenue from Residential to General Commercial (CPA11-00002) The applicant, Ranshaw Limited Partnership, has requested a Comprehensive Plan amendment to change the designation of 1014, 1018, & 1022 Hudson Avenue from Residential to General Commercial to correspond with the requested rezoning of these parcels from RS-8 to CC-2. In 1991, residents of the Miller -Orchard Neighborhood submitted an application to amend the Comprehensive Plan to show the subject parcels as residential instead of commercial. This was as a result of the neighborhood feeling threatened by commercial rezoning requests to 1014, 1018, & 1019 Hudson Avenue. The neighborhood felt that the commercial rezoning requests for these properties would have a negative impact on the neighborhood. Prior to 1991, the subject properties had been designated for General Commercial in the Comprehensive Plan. The residential designation was also transferred to the Southwest District Plan adopted in 2002. The text does not mention this specific area, but on the map on page 33, the parcels are shown as Single- Family/Duplex Residential. The 1997 Comprehensive Plan does not specifically mention this area. The minutes and staff report from the Planning and Zoning Commission consideration in 1991 are included in your packet. At that time, Staff recommended against changing the designation from General Commercial to Residential. However, the Commission and City Council chose to make the amendment. Staff opinion is the same as in 1991 — that the subject properties are appropriate for commercial development and the designation as such is compatible with the principles of the Comprehensive Plan. The general principles of the Comprehensive Plan encourage commercial development along major arterial streets. High volumes of traffic are conducive to successful commercial enterprises and can be detrimental to successful low density residential uses. The subject properties are surrounded by commercial uses on the east, west, and south. In additional the properties are adjacent to Highway 1 and can be accessed from an already existing curb cut on Highway 1. Therefore, in Staff's opinion, the subject properties are appropriate for commercial uses. The Comprehensive Plan also recommends focusing commercial development in commercial centers in order to discourage sprawl. In addition a good planning principle is to zone both sides of the street with zones that are similar in use. In general it is a better land use transition to change zoning designation at the side or rear lot lines rather than down the middle of the street. Neighborhood residents have expressed a concern that changing the land use designation and zoning of these properties from residential to commercial may lead to further rezoning requests and erosion of the residential character of the neighborhood. Staff believes that the current zoning boundary to the east between the CC-2 and RS-8 creates a clear demarcation and the proposed commercial land use designation for 1014, 1018 and 1022 Hudson would be a logical extension of this pattern. Further rezoning requests to commercial farther to the north on Hudson would not be appropriate. As previously recommend any zone changes that follow a comprehensive plan amendment should be subject to conditions for buffering and design that would further reinforce the transition from residential to commercial. May 13, 2011 Page 2 The Miller Orchard neighborhood has taken great effort recently to preserve and improve their neighborhood. However, the long term viability of these properties as residential is questionable. The properties are surrounded by commercial uses and are extremely close to a major highway, which has a traffic count of approximately 22,000 vehicles per day. The negative externalities of the surrounding commercial uses and traffic on these properties do not favor long term residential uses in the area. In fact, none of the three properties have been owner occupied for at least the past 25-30 years. Staff feels that these parcels are appropriate for commercial uses and with proper design and buffering will be compatible with the neighborhood. Despite the removal of 3 single family properties, the residential neighborhood will be preserved and will remain intact as a viable residential neighborhood. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Comprehensive Plan and the Southwest District Plan be amended to designate the land use for 1014, 1016, and 1022 Hudson Avenue (Lots 16 -19 of Bailey and Beck Addition) as General Commercial. ATTACHEMENTS 1. Location Map 2. Southwest District Plan Roosevelt Subarea Plan Map 3. Staff report from June 20, 1991 4. Planning and Zoning Commission minutes from July 18, August 1 and August 15, 1991 Approved by: Robert Miklo, Senior Planner, Department of Planning and Community Development Will rcus 1tIMP J,n I STAFF REPORT To: Planning & Zoning Commission Item: Hudson Ave - Comprehensive Plan Amendment GENERAL INFORMATION: Applicant: Requested action: Purpose: Location: Existing land use and zoning: Surrounding land use and zoning: Comprehensive Plan: BACKGROUND: Prepared by: David Schoon Date: June 20, 1991 Residents of the Hudson Avenue Neigh- borhood. Contact: Karen Hradek Comprehensive Plan Amendment from General Commercial to Single -Family Residential, 2-8 dwelling units per acre. To retain single-family residential use of the subject properties. Lots 16-19 & 22 of Bailey and Beck Addition. (See attached location map.) Single-family residential: RS-8. North - Residential, RS-8. East - Commercial, CC-2. South - Commercial, CI-1 & CC-2. West - Commercial, CC-2. General Commercial. In January, 1991, the City received a request from Iowa City Landscaping to rezone Lots 22 and 23 of Bailey and Beck Addition from RS-8 to CI-1. In recent years, Ken Ranshaw has attempted to rezone Lots 16 and 17 of Bailey and Beck Addition from RS-8 to CC-2. The neighborhood has objected to both rezoning requests, because the neighborhood wants to preserve the residential neighborhood and also believes that the rezoning of property in the southern portion of the neighborhood will have significant negative impacts on the remainder of the neighborhood. The Ranshaw's rezoning request was denied by both the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council. The Iowa City Landscaping rezoning request was recommended for denial by the Planning and Zoning Commission at its April 4, 1991, meeting. However, at its April 18, 1991 meeting, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted to reconsider the rezoning request. Consideration of the rezoning request has been deferred until the Comprehensive Plan issue has been resolved and/or a compromise has been reached between the applicant and the neighborhood regarding the rezoning request. As a result of these recent rezoning requests, the neighborhood has requested that the Comprehensive Plan be amended to show residential uses as the preferred uses on the subject properties. 2 Though residential uses presently occupy the subject properties and have occupied them for a number of years, the area of the subject properties has been designated for general commercial use in the Comprehensive Plan since at least 1978. The following analysis examines the rationale behind designating the subject properties for commercial uses and the continued validity of that rationale. ANALYSIS: The 1989 Comprehensive Plan lists a number of policy statements which are to assist policy makers in making decisions (pp. 2-7). A number of these policies specifically apply to the location of commercial uses and the location of residential uses. Since the Comprehensive Plan designates the subject area for commercial use, it is appropriate to begin the analysis with the policy statements which relate to the location of commercial uses. The general policies of the Comprehensive Plan encourage commercial development along those major trafficways within the community that are designated as part of a commercial core. It is assumed that exposure to highway traffic is desirable for many commercial activities. The Comprehensive Plan also assumes that new businesses should be located "in existing core areas where appropriate, to facilitate the provision of city services and maximize efficiency," therefore, it is important that land located in designated commercial cores be utilized for commercial purposes. Due to the fixed amount of land in existing commercial cores and the pressure to expand commercial uses into non-commercial designated areas of the city, it is important for the city to continue designating land located in commercial cores for commercial uses. The subject properties are located in an area designated as a commercial core and are surrounded to the east, west, and south by commercial uses. The subject properties are also located near a major trafficway, Highway 1 West, and can attain easy access to this major trafficway. The subject properties, therefore, are ideally suited for commercial uses as presently designated in the Comprehensive Plan. If the subject properties continue to be used for residential uses in the long-range, continuity of the commercial core would be interrupted and pressure commercial development elsewhere. The general policies stated in the Comprehensive Plan also provide guidance on the location of residential uses and the preservation of existing residential uses and neighborhoods. The Comprehensive Plan states that "the housing needs of low -moderate income households and special populations such as people with disabilities and the elderly should be accommodated" and that consideration must be given to the "diverse needs of renters and homeowners in making residential development decisions." The Comprehensive Plan goes on to state that: "Rehabilitation and investment in existing neighborhoods should be encouraged to maintain housing stock and preserve desirable neighborhood characteristics, particularly in older neighborhoods. Older neighborhoods provide a considerable portion of the City's affordable housing stock and should be preserved for that, among other reasons." The Hudson Avenue neighborhood is recognized as providing affordable housing for both renters and homeowners. Property owners have taken the effort to preserve their neighborhood by rehabilitating and investing in their homes and neighborhood through not only private funds, but also public funds. There is no doubt that, as a whole, the Hudson Avenue neighborhood has developed a desirable character. However, the desirability of the conditions in which the subject 3 properties exist is questionable. The subject properties are surrounded by commercial uses to the east, south, and west. The properties are extremely close to a major trafficway which has a traffic count of over 18,000 cars per day. The negative externalities of surrounding commercial uses and traffic on the subject properties on the south end of Hudson Avenue do not favor residential uses in this area. In fact, owners of three of the five subject lots have made attempts to rezone their property from a residential use to a commercial use. The location of commercial activities and a major trafficway near residential uses has negative impacts on the remainder of the neighborhood. The Comprehensive Plan states that efforts should be made to "minimize the negative impacts of arterial traffic on residential neighborhoods" and efforts should be made to "preserve to the maximum extent possible, the desirable characteristics of existing residential neighborhoods through appropriate street design." In conjunction with the most recent rezoning request in the area, an effort was made to preserve the residential character of the neighborhood by recommending a street design for Hudson Avenue that would reduce the negative impacts of nearby arterial traffic and commercial activities. The neighborhood presently does not support the plan, but has indicated that they might consider it in the future. Also, any rezoning of property to a commercial use should require suitable architectural or natural buffers between the commercial uses and the low density residential uses to further separate the two uses. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the 1989 Comprehensive Plan Update continue to designate the land use for Lots 16-19 & 22 of Bailey and Beck Addition as General Commercial. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Location Map. 2. Comprehensive Plan Map. 3. Map of lots and existing zoning designations. Approved by: q, nC- , %aeh" Monica Moen, Senior Planner Department of Planning and Program Development s •' i:"viiu • • �.W.rr�t.aw'.�•.,t..?�6sli n wAt! w ;�, I �Z I Hudson Avenue Comprehensive Plan Amendment s Z O !s = 7—T � I I 1 I I s s I I I I x • R t s R RSA 8 - • f ( I s I ` � • I s I co f to I r N f 1 N I Q M f t� a N s et f to 1 N N N f to f tn N i f O to N f CO ti CC 2 CI 1 0M CC2 Planning & Zoning Commission July 18, 1991 Page 5 3 Public hearing on an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan to change the land use designation from General Commercial to Residential (2-8 dwelling units per acre) for Lots 16-19 and 22 of Bailey and Beck Addition located north of Highway 1 West along the south end of Hudson Avenue. Schoon stated that this item was the result of a request from the neighbors in the area to have the Commission consider the re -designation of this area in the Comprehensive Plan for residential uses. Schoon reviewed the staff report dated June 20, 1991. Staff recommended that the 1989 Comprehensive Plan Update continue to designate the land use for Lots 16-19 and 22 of Bailey and Beck Addition as General Commer- cial. Public discussion was opened at 8:05 p.m. Norval Tucker, 1600 Prairie du Chien, indicated that he and his wife own the property at 1022 Hudson Avenue. He noted that all of the neighbors understand the considerable time and effort staff has put into its analysis, although they might disagree with staff's conclusions. He stated that with each rezoning request in this area, either staff or a member of the Commission has referred to the Comprehensive Plan. He indicated that this has lead the neighbors to make a formal request to amend the Comprehensive Plan to show residential use as the preferred use in the area. He said this should help the neighbors avoid having to come before the Commission at fairly frequent intervals to present the reasons to retain Hudson Avenue as a residential street. He noted that the Comprehensive Plan suggests that major trafficways should be designated as part of a commercial core and in his opinion this seems to be the primary issue. He indicated that it seems to him that the City staff looked at the map and saw a highway while ignoring the residential street in the area. He said that the effect of this was to recommend that the commercial uses should be imposed on the residents of Hudson Avenue. Tucker stated that the Comprehensive Plan recommends that commercial uses be located in existing commercial cores for efficiency, but he indicated that he does not understand how this would relate to Hudson Avenue. He stressed that the property he owns on Hudson Avenue only has access onto Hudson Avenue and not onto Highway 1 West. He expressed his disagreement with staff that changing the land use designation for these lots would force commercial uses to develop elsewhere in the City. Tucker informed the Commission that the preservation of the residential character of Hudson Avenue is the primary concern of the neighbors. He said staff has indicated that the land on the southern end of Hudson Avenue is not desirable for residential use, but he noted that after living in the neighborhood for 30 years, he finds this conclusion to be presumptuous. Tucker said they successfully gardened on their property and to say that the land is ideally suited for commercial use is wrong. He stated that while covering a site that is well suited for agricultural use with asphalt may be legal, it is far from ideal. Tucker pointed out that staff has indicated that the owners of three of the subject lots have requested rezoning in recent years. He stressed that it needs to be mentioned that these lots were purchased with the intention of requesting rezoning and that this justifies the neighbors' concern. He Planning & Zoning Commission July 18, 1991 Page 6 emphasized that the practice of people buying property in a residential neighborhood with the intention of changing the character of the neighborhood is a hazard many people in Iowa City face. Tucker noted that staff mentioned the proposal to redesign the streets in the neighborhood, but he stressed that there are still questions about the acceptability of this alternative to the neighbors and its effects on fire protection. He noted that the proposal contradicts the purpose of the neighbors' request because it removes access from the properties at the south end of Hudson Avenue from the rest of the neighborhood so it would require revision before it could be considered acceptable. Tucker stressed that continuing residential zoning on the subject properties would be the best buffer against commercial encroachment and he reminded the Commission of the need for moderately priced family housing. Tucker said he recently received multiple inquiries without advertising for his property from people who are in need of moderately priced rental housing near a good school. He stressed that the need exists in Iowa City and asked the Commission to support the neighbor- hood's efforts to fulfill some of that need. Karen Hradek, 924 Hudson Avenue, stated that the neighbors care about protecting their boundaries and are sincere and persistent in their efforts. She noted that when this issue was first discussed earlier in the year, staff did a turnaround on the issue and began favoring the development of a commercial strip in this area. She indicated that it seems to her that politics became an issue. Hradek stressed that the neighbors take pride in both their homes and their yards and that the families who live within viewing distance of the subject properties have 325 years of continuing habitation in their homes. Hradek emphasized that there is a need to distinguish between people who live in the area and those who have businesses in the neighborhood. She stressed that businesses tend to leave a site once they have outgrown a location. Hradek reported that one result of having businesses next to neighborhoods is that the residents become walled -in because of screening requirements. She noted that on the Hudson Avenue side of the Iowa City Landscaping property, there is a maintenance area which includes equipment and supplies which is not an attractive sight for those living in the neighborhood. She stressed that increasing the number of businesses in the neighborhood will increase this problem. Hradek noted that the neighbors want a nice place to live while the businesses are only desiring to make money over the short-term and will move out of the neighborhood when there is a need to expand. Hradek indicated that the Council is in favor of affordable housing and she said affordable housing currently exists on Hudson Avenue. Mary Sweetina, 915 Hudson Avenue, stated that she does not want to have commercial designation in the Comprehensive Plan for this area. She asked if anyone had information regarding when the traffic light would be installed along Highway 1 West. Ken Ranshaw indicated that the bids for the traffic light will go out after the project has been approved by the Council and lights will be located at Miller Avenue and Orchard Street at Highway 1 West. Planning & Zoning Commission July 18, 1991 Page 7 Mary Ann Gerard, 921 Hudson Avenue, stated that she has lived in the neighborhood for 23 years. She stressed that it is a pleasant neighborhood to live in and that she wants it to remain this way. She expressed the opinion that changing the Comprehen- sive Plan designation for the area to RS-8 would be appropriate. Jeff Kern, 820 Hudson Avenue, stated that he has lived in his home for 15 years. He indicated that he feels the Comprehensive Plan land use designation for the area as, commercial doesn't offer an incentive to property owners to maintain residential homes if they desire to have a commercial use in the area. Helen Jahnke, 942 Miller Avenue, informed the Commission that she and her husband purchased their home in 1954. She said they moved to the neighborhood because it was close to their employment at the hospital and was near a school. She reported that all the structures on Miller Avenue are single-family homes except for one structure. She stressed that the subject properties provide moderately priced single- family housing and asked that the situation be retained so that other properties in the area will have a buffer from commercial uses. Jahnke stated that he is also speaking for Elizabeth Reynolds who has recently improved her home and for Bob and Effie Rettig who are a young couple working to buy their own home. Jahnke stressed that she would like to keep the neighborhood residential for as long as is possible. Elmer Ferrel, 952 Miller Avenue, stated that he has lived in the neighborhood since 1950 and built his own home over a two-year period. He reported that he and his wife have raised five children in their house and he would like to have the neighborhood kept as it has been in the past. He indicated that he feels changing the land use designation in the Comprehensive Plan would help in achieving this goal. Paul Dykstra, Iowa City Landscaping, stated that they originally wanted to rezone Lot 22 and still might request that this be done in the future. He stressed that he feels the number of vehicles that travel on Highway 1 West will greatly increase when Walmart is constructed. He indicated that originally, their business was accused of wanting to buy all of the houses along the street which would not be financially feasible, and they are now being accused of planning on leaving the neighborhood when they outgrow the current location. Dykstra stressed that by tradition, nurseries stay in one location and he indicated that he would like to see the business stay at its current location. Larry Schnittjer, MMS Consultants stated that staff's position has always been consistent and any changes have been in the interpretation based on what staff has been asked to review. He emphasized that staff has consistently recommended that the Comprehensive Plan not be changed while it has recommended that specific rezoning requests be denied as inappropriate at that time. Planning & Zoning Commission July 18, 1991 Page 8 Ken Ranshaw, Paul's Discount, stated that he supports the staff recommendation and the current Comprehensive Plan designation for the subject properties. He stressed that he maintains his rental property which he owns in the area. Jeff Kern responded that he did not intend to imply that Ranshaw does not maintain his property, but he merely meant to say that the land use designation in the Comprehensive Plan does not offer incentives for maintenance. Public discussion was closed at 8:36 p.m. Scott stressed that staff has consistently recommended retaining the commercial designation for these lots in the Comprehensive Plan. Reid moved to continue the public hearing on an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan to change the land use designation from General Commercial to Residential for Lots 16-19 and 22 of Bailey and Beck Addition located north of Highway 1 West along the south end of Hudson Avenue to August 1, 1991. Gibson seconded. The motion carried 4-0. 4. Public hearing on an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan to change the sequence of development from Phase II (2000-2010) to Phase 1 (1989-1999) for an approximate 315 acre undeveloped area generally located south of Wetherby Park and Grant Wood School, along both the east and west sides of Sycamore Street, and within the corporate limits. Schoon stated that he could answer any questions that the Commission might have on either the June 20, 1991, staff report or the staff memorandum dated July 18, 1991. Information regarding bonding by the City was distributed at Cook's request. Cook suggested that line one on page two of the staff memorandum dated July 18, 1991, instead of reading that "additional neighborhood parkland may be needed to serve the needs of the projected residential population," this section of the amendment should read that "additional neighborhood parkland will be needed to serve the needs of the projected residential population." He noted that this language is supported by the Comprehensive Plan. The public hearing was opened at 8:51 p.m. There was none. Gibson moved to close the public hearing at 8:51 p.m. Cook seconded. The motion carried 4-0. Gibson moved to approve the adoption of the Comprehensive Plan text amendments as stated in the staff memorandum dated July 18, 1991, to change the sequence of development from Phase II to Phase I for an approximate 315 acre undeveloped area in the South Area of Iowa City. Cook seconded. MINUTES PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION AUGUST 1, 1991 PAGE 2 Public discussion was opened at 7:44 P.M. There was none. Public discussion was closed at 7:44 P.M. Gibson moved to approve S-9114, the preliminary Large Scale Non -Residential Development (LSNRD) plan for Maher Brothers for a warehouse and office expansion located at 2470 South Riverside Drive, subject to the condition that no occupancy permit be issued until the water main has been extended to the site for fire protection. Cook seconded. The motion carried 4-0. ZONING ITEMS: 1. Public hearing on an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan to change the land use designation from General Commercial to Residential (2-8 dwelling units per acre) for Lots 16-19 and 22 of Bailey & Beck Addition located north of Highway 1 West on the south end of Hudson Avenue. Schoon referred to the staff report dated June 20, 1991, wherein staff recommended that the Comprehensive Plan continue to designate the preferred use for Lots 16-19 and 22 of Bailey & Beck Addition as General Commercial. Public hearing was open at 7:45 P.M. Norval Tucker, 1600 Prairie du Chien, stated that one reason that the Commission deferred to the rezoning request of Iowa City Landscaping was to allow for a compromise. He stated that this is really not possible because there is not an intermediate zone available for the area. He noted that Iowa City Landscaping has indicated that they anticipate some changes to occur within the next ten years. He said if the business is sold, then the expanded commercial area could be used by other commercial uses that would be less desirable in a residential neighborhood. Tucker noted that the Commission recently worked out a compromise with the developer on the Peninsula area to permit an area to remain at RS-8 zoning as long as the development retained the density that would be allowed under RS-5 zoning. He stated that now the property has been sold and a proposal is before the Commission that does not need to abide by that agreement. Tucker said that with that as an example, the neighborhood feels it is necessary to have more protection than they currently have. Karen Hradek, 924 Hudson Avenue, stated that at the last formal meeting, the Commission heard a number of neighbors speak from their hearts. She reviewed the names of the people who have sent notarized letters to the Commission and Council to support the amendment to the Comprehensive Plan. She said that the people who have sent letters to the Council have lived in the neighborhood for a total of 327 years. Hradek said that the residents choose to live in this neighborhood for the quality of life and noted that it is close to schools, MINUTES PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION AUGUST 1, 1991 PAGE 3 employment, and shopping areas. She reminded the Commission that the Council believes in the concept of organized neighborhoods and affordable housing and she asked for the Comprehensive Plan designation to be changed. Linda Dykstra, Iowa City Landscaping, verified that the only change proposed for the future may be the need to move the construction aspect of Iowa City Landscaping to another location. She stressed that this would not be a detrimental change for the neighborhood. Dennis Dykstra, Iowa City Landscaping, stated that they purchased two properties fully aware of the Comprehensive Plan designation as commercial. He said that they asked the realtor if they could make an offer subject to the zone change, but were unable to do so because of a competing bid. He explained that the purpose of purchasing these lots was to get more functional space to operate the business. Bovbjerg moved to close public hearing at 7:55 P.M. Cook seconded. The motion carried 4-0. 2. Public discussion of an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan to change the land use designation from General Commercial to Residential (2-8 dwelling units per acre) for Lots 16-19 and 22 of Bailey & Beck Addition located north of Highway 1 West along the south end of Hudson Avenue. Cook moved to defer to August 15, 1991, public discussion of an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan to change the land use designation from General Commercial to Residential (2-8 dwelling units per acre) for Lots 16-19 and 22 of Bailey & Beck Addition located north of Highway 1 West along the south end of Hudson Avenue. Bovbjerg seconded. The motion carried 4-0. 3. Public hearing on an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan to change the land use designation of approximately 50.32 acres of property from Intensive Commercial to Residential (8-16 dwelling units per acre) and to change the land use designation of approximately 6.97 acres of property from Intensive Commercial and Highway Commercial to General Commercial. The subject properties are located north of the Highway 1 and U.S. 218 interchange, on the north side of Mormon Trek Boulevard. Schoon indicated that the applicant has requested a deferral of the zoning item to August 15, 1991. The public hearing was opened at 7:59 P.M. There were no public comments. Bovbjerg moved to continue the public hearing to August 15, 1991. Gibson seconded. Planning & Zoning Commission August 15, 1991 Page 3 c) Lighting which relates to the scale of adjacent development to maintain adequate security and to prevent a nuisance or hardship to adjacent property. d) No part of a filling station site located within 100 feet of the residential zone. e) Any free standing sign must be located on the east one-half area of Lot 1. 4. Recommend by a 4-0-1 vote (Scott temporarily absent) that the City Council forward a comment to the County Board of Supervisors finding that CZ-9124, an application to rezone 32.48 acres located on Buckmayer Bend from A-1, Rural, to RS, Suburban Residential, is not consistent with the mutually agreed upon Fringe Area Policy for Area 4. 5. Recommend by a 5-0 vote that the City Council forward a comment of no opposition to the Board of Supervisors for CU-9105, an application for a temporary ready mix plant located north of Interstate 80, West of Dubuque Street, provided that a one year time limit is placed on the permit. 6. Recommend approval by a 5-0 vote of S-9122, the final plat of Regina Subdivision, a 49.18 acre, 2-lot subdivision located north of Rochester Avenue and west of First Avenue, subject to legal papers being approved by the City Attorney's office prior to City Council consideration. 7. Recommend approval by a 5-0 vote of S-9119, the final plat of Hickory Hill Ridge, an 8.05 acre, 16-lot residential subdivision, located north of Winston Drive and south of Hickory Hill Park, subject to, 1) Council approval of the final plat of Regina Subdivision; 2) the conveyance of that 10-foot wide portion of the existing 60-foot wide access easement which runs the length of the North Seventh Avenue right-of-way extension; and 3) construction drawings being approved by the Public Works Department and legal papers being approved by the City Attorneys office prior to City Council consideration. CONSIDERATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE AUGUST 1 1991 MEETING: Cooper moved to approve the minutes of the August 1, 1991, meeting as circulated. Cook seconded. The motion carried 6-0. ZONING ITEMS: 1. Public discussion of an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan to change the land use designation from General Commercial to Residential (2-8 dwelling units per acre) for Lots 16-19 and 22 of Bailey and Beck Addition located north of Highway 1 West along the south end of Hudson Avenue. Planning & Zoning Commission August 15, 1991 Page 4 Schoon reported that staff continues to recommend that the Comprehensive Plan continue to designate the subject lots for general commercial use. He reminded the Commission of its commitment to resume consideration of Z-9101 after the Compre- hensive Plan issue has been resolved. Public discussion was opened at 7:43 p.m. Norval Tucker, 1600 Prairie du Chien Road, made comments based on the Commis- sion's informal discussion on August 12, 1991. He indicated that it had been stated that the neighbors need to enumerate the underlying rationale for their desire to have the Comprehensive Plan designation change for this area. He explained that this was an established residential neighborhood before commercial development occurred in the area. He stated that the neighbors fear that the side effects of commercial develop- ment will extend further into the residential neighborhood and that he feels it is reasonable to want to keep these side effects limited. Tucker said he feels that the Comprehensive Plan encourages commercial development to encroach into the residential neighborhood. He explained that the apparent sacredness of the Comprehensive Plan amazes many people in the neighborhood and that he finds appalling a comment that was made at the informal meeting that if the Commission supports the needs of the residents of the neighborhood then they are being narrow minded. Tucker indicated that he feels business is necessary, but should not automatically take precedence over the daily lives of Iowa City residents. Tucker explained that he feels that there is nothing inherently wrong about an established residential neighborhood extending into an area that some non-residents have decided should become commercial. Karen Hradek, 924 Hudson Avenue, explained that the reasons the neighbors come back time and again is because they care about the quality of life in their neighbor- hood. She stated that this is the fourth time that a rezoning request has come up in the neighborhood and this triggered the request for an amendment to the Comprehen- sive Plan. She stressed that there was a constant threat to the quality of life and property of residents of the neighborhood. She reviewed the names of those who have written and/or have come before the Commission to support the proposed amendment to the Comprehensive Plan and noted that these individuals have 327 years of combined residency in the neighborhood. She asked the Commission to vote to change the Comprehensive Plan in order to assure that the neighborhood can maintain its quality of life and so that the neighbors are not continually threatened by whoever decides they would like to do something else with the neighborhood. Public discussion was closed at 7:48 p.m. Cook moved to amend the Comprehensive Plan to change the land use designation from General Commercial to Residential (2-8 dwelling units per acre) for Lots 16-19 and 22 of Bailey and Beck addition located north of Highway 1 West along the south end of Hudson Avenue. Cooper seconded. Planning & Zoning Commission August 15, 1991 Page 5 Bovbjerg moved to amend the main motion to refer to Lots 16 through 19 only and not to Lot 22. Reid seconded. Scott clarified that the amendment to the motion would change the designation on the east side of Hudson Avenue and leave the designation for general commercial on the west side of Hudson Avenue. Bovbjerg explained that she feels the Comprehensive Plan should look to the future, but should not be totally inflexible. She stressed that it's important to consider the present uses of the land, the concerns of the neighbors, and how the area will be vital in the near future. She said she feels it is necessary to preserve the best of what is in the neighborhood. Reid expressed her support of the amendment because she feels it is what is best for the parties involved. She noted that Lots 16-19 have been used for residential uses while Lot 22 had been used for commercial use, although this use was not legal. Cook stated that he had vacillated on this issue. He said it is possible that a vote to change the Comprehensive Plan as it affects Lots 16-19 would be to foreclose the options of this and future commissions regarding the use of these lots. He noted that Highway 1 carries approximately 18,000 cars per day and this number will probably be increasing in the near future. He said that it would make sense to leave the Comprehensive Plan as it is, so to leave the options open for the current and future owners of the subject lots. He said the easy political choice would be to change the Comprehensive Plan and stressed that this is a very difficult decision. Cook stated that listening to the concerns of the neighbors is a legitimate planning function and that he will be voting in favor of the amendment to the main motion. Cooper stated that he lives in the neighborhood and has mixed feelings because of traffic concerns, but he will be voting in favor of the amendment. Gibson limited his comments to the issue of the amendment to the main motion. He said this is a difficult decision and he does not feel that splitting the neighborhood down the middle with residential uses extending to Highway 1 is a desirable result. He expressed concern that there would be ambiguity about the neighborhood's boundaries and its future. He stated that while it is clear this is a compromise, he is not sure that it is a good compromise. Scott noted that Lot 22, which is the only subject lot on the west side of Hudson Avenue, has been utilized for some time for commercial use. He said changing the Comprehensive Plan on the east side of Hudson Avenue recognizes the existing residential uses. He indicated that if the Council affirms a positive recommendation from the Commission, then the City will be saying to the property owners on the east side of Hudson Avenue that this area should remain residential. He said that while this may be a compromise, it is not necessarily a bad compromise. Scott said that he did not hear a comment made at the informal meeting and if one was, in fact, made, he would hope that it was not intended or meant as Mr. Tucker interpreted it, that the neighbors were narrow minded in their belief in the legitimacy of changing the Comprehensive Plan. The motion to amend the main motion carried on a 5-1 vote. (Gibson voting in the negative.) The main motion carried on a 6-0 vote. City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM Date: May 19, 2011 To: Planning and Zoning Commission From: Christina Kuecker, Associate Planner RE: REZ11-00008 — 1014, 1016, & 1022 Hudson Avenue At the May 5 meeting a question came up regarding the lighting on the existing commercial, including Paul's Discount, and the lighting on the proposed commercial at 1014, 1016, & 1022 Hudson Avenue. Staff checked with the Housing and Inspection Services Department (HIS) on the requirements for lighting. In regards to the lighting on the existing commercial, if it can be made compliant by re -aiming the fixture, it must be brought into compliance. HIS is checking to see if this is a possibility. Any new lighting is required to meet the current lighting standards when installed. From: Bob Miklo Sent: Wednesday, May 11, 20119:44 AM To: Christina Kuecker Subject: FW: REZ11-0008 at Hwy 1 and Hudson Avenue Attachments: 1012 Hudson2 jpg; 1022 Hudson at Hwy 1 corner lot with 1012 Hudson in background 2 jpg; 1014 & 1016 Hudson Ave2 jpg; Property line between Pauls and Douglass Ct properties2 jpg; Douglass Ct view - Pauls in background2 jpg; Hudson Ave looking south to Hwy 1_4 jpg; Hudson Ave looking south to Hwyl_3 jpg Include in P&Z packet. From: Paula Swygard [mailto:pswygard@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 10, 2011 7:02 PM To: PlanningZoningPublic Subject: REZ11-0008 at Hwy 1 and Hudson Avenue Members of the Planning and Zoning Commission, I attended the public hearing on May 5, 2011 regarding the REZ11-0008 and have some concerns about several issues discussed. 1. I would not be in favor of a curb -cut allowing access on and off Hudson if it were rezoned CC-2. People already exit from the Paul's complex by turning right onto Hwy 1, going west to Hudson, and turning right from Hwy 1 onto Hudson Avenue. I believe this would potentially bring even more traffic into the residential area as people could avoid Hwy 1 altogether by traveling through the Paul's complex parking to turn right onto Hudson to cut -through to Benton. Also it could possibly create a lot of traffic congestion at the the corner of Hudson and Hwy 1 if people wanted to use a curb -cut along Hudson to get in and out of that commercial area. If a curb cut were permitted, it would probably need to be located far enough away from Hwy 1 to avoid traffic congestion, but that brings vehicles in closer to the residential area. 2. Parking along the west side (Hudson side) of any building should not be part any new commercial design. Cars parked there would be highly visible to Hudson residents. This would also bring additional noise into a residential area with car doors slamming and the normal activities of commercial use. Lighting would also be a concern. The same applies to placing windows on the north side of any building bordering residential property on Hudson as there would not be enough privacy between buildings and their uses. 3. Some sort of dense vegetative (arborvitae) or fencing screen must be put into place to buffer the homes from commercial building should the property be rezoned. 4. The house at 1012 Hudson, which will become the first house next to the property if rezoned, is set back further from Hudson Avenue than others (see photo 1 below). This will allow more of any new commercial building to extend out into full view of residents on Hudson. Any building higher than the existing Paul's complex on this property would visually dominate the Hudson / Hwy 1 corner and further dwarf the home at 1012 Hudson. Building scale and design should promote a smooth transition with the small -sized, adjacent homes on Hudson and Douglass Ct. 5. The Paul's building along Hwy 1 is located behind Douglass Ct. and is close to the property line. There is a perception that there is a large mass of a building next to the smaller scale, affordable homes prevalent in the neighborhood. Photos 4 and 5 below show the distance between the Paul's complex and the back yards of homes on Douglass Ct. Applicant drawings presented show plans to continue new building along that same line, bringing new construction again very close to residential homes. The revised Iowa City Zoning Code states the rear lot line requires a setback at least equal to the required setback in the abutting Residential Zone which for RS-8 would be 20'. While I believe this will be more space than currently exists between the Paul's building and neighborhood homes, given the scale of the building compared to the homes, it doesn't feel like it's enough. I thought it would be helpful for the commission to see photos of the area being considered for rezoning as you decide whether to allow 1014, 1016, and 1022 to be rezoned from RS-8 to CC-2. It is difficult to get an accurate mental picture of the dimensions and spacing involved when just looking at a zoning map of the plats. If you are unable to see the photos or would like paper copies, please let me know. Photo 1 - The property at 1022 Hudson, which is part of the rezoning request, is the corner lot on Hwy 1 and Hudson Avenue. The house there, along with the vegetation except for the large tree, has already been demonlished. The photo above is that corner looking north into the Miller Orchard neighborhood from Hwy 1. 1016 Hudson, also part of the rezoning request, is the gray house on the left. Most notable in the photo is the house at 1012 Hudson Avenue, the small yellow house in the background with the car to its right, which is NOT part of the rezoning and would become the new division line between RS-8 and CC-2 if the rezoning takes place. To the far right is the Paul's complex and fencing dividing the current zonings. Photo 2 - The photo above shows the homes at 1014 and 1016 Hudson, owned by family connected to the applicant, which are currently zoned RS-8 and are properties in the rezoning request. You can see the current commercial property in the far background behind the van, but these homes have large back yards (see above photo for reference) which provides a better buffer between the RS-8 and CC-2 zones. Photo 3 - This yellow house is located at 1012 Hudson Ave and would become located next to commerical zoning along it's south side (right side of photo) if the rezoning is approved. Note the close proximity of the house at 1012 and the house to its right at 1014 which would be rezoned commercial. Also 1012 is set much further back to the rear of the lot away from the front property line. Photo 4 - The above photo shows the property line between the commercial zoning (the back of the Paul's Discount building) and the backyards (delineated by the fence) of homes on Douglass Ct. I'm guessing it is approximately 10-12'. Photo 5 - This photo was taken looking south with homes along Douglass Ct in the foreground. Paul's building dominates the background. Photos 6 & 7 - And finally, the next two photos are of Hudson Avenue. It is a heavily traveled cut -through with an average daily traffic volume of 775. These traffic study figures are available in the September 2010 JCCOG transportation study of the Miller Orchard Neighborhood. Cut -through traffic is not limited to autos. Photo 7 - Looking south on Hudson, the corner of Hwy 1 in the far background, and with cars parked along Hudson Avenue. Thank you for taking the time to look at the information and photos, and I hope this helps you consider all aspects of the impact that rezoning to CC-2 will have on the residential area adjacent to this rezoning proposal. Paula Swygard Date: To: From: Re: CITY OF IOWA CITY MEMORANDUM May 12, 2011 Iowa City Planning and Zoning Cot Douglas Boothroy, Director of Hou; Changes to Football Game Day Cc I have included in your packet the revised Football Game Day Approval Criteria. The revisions are minor and the changes have been underscored. Approval Criteria No. 5 has been changed to insert provisions requiring vendors to provide trash containers. This provision was accidentally deleted in the previous version. Also, in No. 12 language has been added to clarify the meaning of "cooking tents." I am not recommending any changes concerning an exception for live music venues with alcohol (e.g., The Magic Bus). No other changes have been made to the Approval Criteria. hisadm/mem/pz-05121 1.doc ARTICLE D, TEMPORARY USES — PROPOSED AMENDMENTS 1. 14-413-2 Temporary Uses Allowed Amend the Iowa City Zoning Code Title 14-4-D-2, Temporary Uses Allowed, to add the temporary use: L. Football Game Day Commercial Use 2. 14-4D-3 Permit Required Amend the Iowa City Zoning Code Title 14-4D-3, Permit Required, to insert the following: A temporary use permit is required for all temporary uses listed in subsection B, above, unless specifically exempted. Tailgating and tailgate parking held on home Iowa football game days do not require a Temporary Use Permit. Procedures for obtaining a permit are contained in Article 14-813 of this Title, Administrative Approval Procedures. 3. 14-4D-4 Approval Criteria Amend the Iowa City Zoning Code Title 14-4D-4 to add additional approval criteria for football game day commercial vending. H. Football Game Day Commercial Use 1. Display permit. Vendors must prominently display the permit and it must be clearly viewable from the public right-of-way. 2. Assignment and use by others. A vendor may not assign its space/permit to any other vendors. 3. Location. Vendors are only allowed to locate along the Melrose Avenue street frontage between the Iowa Interstate Railway right-of-way and Melrose Circle. 4. Setup/Teardown. Vendors are not allowed to set up before 12:00 p.m. the day before game day and must tear down/remove all equipment and materials after each game. 5. Clean-up responsibility. All vendors must keep any area where they vend litter -free and shall remove litter from any adjacent public property/right-of-way. Vendors shall provide a trash container with unfilled capacity at all times. Vendors with liquid waste (oil, grease, grey water, etc.) must provide disposal units for the waste. Commercial liquid waste shall not be placed in gutters, port -a johns or on the ground. 6. No blocking of sidewalk/right-of-way. No vendor shall block or obstruct the free movement of pedestrians or vehicles on a sidewalk, street, or other public right-of- way. Tents/stands must be set back at least 2 feet from the back edge of public sidewalks. 7. Signage. Vendor signage must be approved by the City. Vendor signage is only allowed on the vendor's stand/vehicle/tent and is not allowed on utility poles across the public sidewalk, on buildings or as yard signs. No electrically lit signs will be allowed. 8. Sales tax permit. Each vendor whose sales are subject to sales tax must provide a copy of their sales tax permit. 9. Insurance/indemnification. All vendors must provide to the City evidence of comprehensive general liability insurance of $500,000 per occurrence and $1,000,000 aggregate and must indemnify the City against all damages that may result from the vendor's permitted temporary commercial use and/or the vendor's use of the public right-of-way. 10. Fire extinguishers. All vendors must provide at least one five pound, 2A 10 BC extinguisher that is functional and accessible at all times. 11. Health permits. All food vendors must secure necessary health permits from the Johnson County Department of Health and prominently display the permit so it is clearly viewable from the public right-of-way. 12. Cooking tents. All tents used for cooking (regardless of size) must be approved by the Fire Code/Building Official. Cooking tents will be required to be separated from other tents, parked vehicles and lot lines. LP containers exceeding 96 pounds require approval from the Fire Code/Building Official. 13. Tent size. All tents and membrane structures having an area in excess of 400 square feet shall not be erected or operated for any purpose without first obtaining approval from the Fire Code/Building Official. 14. Alcohol. No alcohol is allowed to be sold, dispensed or otherwise made available to the public in conjunction with any temporary commercial use. 15. Utility Location. Any tents and membrane structures using stakes or similar ground attachments must call the City for utility location at least 24 hours before setup. Vendors must comply with "one -call" utility location requirements. 16. Violation of these provisions. Any violation of the temporary use permit conditions will result in a civil citation and loss of the temporary commercial use permit for a minimum of seven home games. The City also reserves the right to deny a temporary use permit for the same location for a minimum of seven home games. 4. 14-9A Definitions Amend the Iowa City Zoning Code Title 14-9A, Definitions, to add the definition of tailgating. Tailgating: A home football game day informal social gathering that is non-commercial and may include eating and drinking beverages (alcoholic or non-alcoholic) as part of the activities. Tailgating events do not involve the sale of alcohol and/or payment of an admission charged for alcohol and/or giveaways of food, beverage or promotional item(s) or the sale of any goods and/or services and/or providing services. Temporary parking on unimproved surfaces located on private property is allowed during tailgate events. hisadm/amend 14-4D-3.doc Bob Miklo From: Butler, Amy C <amy-c-butler@uiowa.edu> Sent: Thursday, May 12, 2011 10:53 PM To: Bob Miklo Subject: Vending on Football Saturdays Dear Bob Miklo and members of the Planning and Zoning Commission — I would like to communicate to you my feelings about the issue of vendors on Melrose Ave. on football Saturdays. I live on Melrose Court. The amount of trash that is left in the neighborhood on football Saturdays increases each year. Much of the trash may not be from the vendors, but the vendors certainly contribute to the problem. This is clear to from the number of times my dog has rooted out turkey legs from bushes and I've had to pry them from his mouth. I attended a meeting in March during which Doug Boothroy listened to the views of neighborhood residents and vendors on the vending issue. I was upset at the attitude of some of the vendors. One of the vendors told me that if I didn't like the vending situation, I shouldn't have moved into the neighborhood. I moved into my house in 1996, before the football trash, drunken behavior, and destruction got out of hand. One of the vendors said that neighborhood residents should leave town for football weekends if they don't like the situation. I am a hard-working member of the University of Iowa faculty and my teaching and research responsibilities do not allow me to leave town seven weekends during the fall semester to avoid the bedlam that takes place outside my house. I do, in fact, go out of town for what's likely to be the worst of the weekends, but still must clean up the trash (and worse) upon my return, as well as spend the rest of the week trying to prevent my dog from eating the bones he find on our daily walks. The vendors are one of the factors that have contributed to making football Saturdays a nightmare for many of the residents in the Melrose neighborhood. I request that the members Planning and Zoning Commission limit the number of vendors that sell items that contain the wrappers, sticks and bones that inevitably end up littering the Melrose neighborhood. Thank you for considering my perspective on this issue. Amy C. Butler 326 Melrose Ct. Iowa City, IA 52242 Bob Miklo From: Jean Walker <walkersic@yahoo.com> Sent: Friday, May 13, 2011 12:48 PM To: Bob Miklo Cc: Jean Walker Subject: To: Planning and Zoning Commission Attachments: P&Z11 05-05.docx Dear Planning & Zoning Commission Members, As you work to make your decision concerning the regulations for vending on Melrose Avenue on football game days, I hope that you will keep in mind the comments I have already made (see attached). In addition, I would like to point out that all but one or two of the vendors do not live in the neighborhood and they come into our neighborhood to make money. So they should be respectful of the wishes of the people who do live in the neighborhood, such as not selling anything on shish -kabob sticks, which could endanger resident's pets, and to ensure proper disposal of turkey legs. I repeat that I think the shish kabobs should be banned as the food can be cooked on the stick and then placed in a dish before serving. The vendor then responsibly disposes of the sticks. I have been told that this is done at other events in Iowa City. Thank you, Jean Walker 335 Lucon Drive Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting May 5, 2011 Submitted by Jean Walker, Melrose Neighborhood Representative The Neighborhood is, of course, not against having vendors at football games, it's their location (currently illegal in an RS5 residential area) that's the problem. People say that the residents knew what they were getting into when they moved in next to the Stadium and should accept the status quo. The answer is that football game days were a lot pleasanter when we moved in, without the current congestion, trashing, urinating, vomiting, defecating, and destruction of property. We have a serious problem here. The memo from City staff to the Council, suggesting that the vendors be removed from their current location, was an attempt, as the City's highest priority, to protect the neighborhood, but the Council did not accept this attempt. The neighborhood suggested to the Council alternate locations for the vendors, on University of Iowa property. However, without an exploration of alternate locations, the Council requested City Staff to draw up regulations for vending in the current location in time for the next football season. The neighborhood responded that in doing so there should be an understanding that, in the meantime, exploration of alternate locations (outside the historic Neighborhood) should be undertaken by the City, the University and the Neighborhood. So these regulations, while welcome to help alleviate some of the neighborhood's game day problems, need to be seen in the context of the possibility of the vendors eventually being relocated. However, the disrespect and incivility shown the neighborhood in general on football games is a much larger problem than the vendors. For example, it is heartbreakingly depressing to have our neighborhood turned into a disgusting mess and to drive down Melrose Avenue after a game and see our beautiful historic neighborhood trashed. But it's not just a trash concern. It's about congestion, destruction, and total disrespect of our neighborhood. Football games are University events, yet the University has been strangely silent for the last couple of months. Where a the University in this? They need to be good neighbors and step forward, show concern for the Neighborhood, and offer to help, rather than wait in the background and have the City, neighbors, fans, and vendors solve their problems. If it was a neighborhood event that impinged on the University, with the accompanying congestion, trashing, urination, vomiting, defecation, and destruction of property, I think the University would have expectations that the situation be improved. I repeat, we have a serious problem here. It is time that the City, the University, and the Neighborhood sat down together for a comprehensive review of football game days and see how it can be made a more pleasant experience for everyone involved. As regards the regulations themselves: 1. We ask that, while in the present location, vending be curtailed to the area of Melrose Avenue between the bridge at University Heights and 711 Melrose Avenue, where 24 of the current 25 vendors are located. 2. The University needs to supply an ample and adequate number of port -a -johns and trash cans along Melrose Avenue and throughout the neighborhood so that we do not have to endure urination, vomiting, and defecation on our properties. 3. For the protection of our pets and the neighborhood wildlife, we ask that the shish -kabob sticks (or any other life - threatening foods) be banned, especially as the vendor could come up with an alternate way to serve that food. 4. For the same reason, we ask that if the turkey legs are not banned, the vendor places a prominent notice on his stand reminding people to dispose of the remains responsibly. S. Our preference would be to have all foodware items and beverage containers be biodegradable/compostable and that recycle containers be provided for their disposal, either by the vendors, the City, or the University of Iowa. 6. We ask, to be added to regulation #4, that there be no selling except on game day. 7. Clear up by noon the day after the game (rather than by Monday morning). B. Mandatory vendor/property owner meeting with the Housing/Building Inspection Services for new vendors (so that they understand the new regulations).