City of Grand Forks - Print Friendly Form

Committee Minutes

PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
MEETING MINUTES

City of Grand Forks, North Dakota

October 6, 2010

1. MEMBERS PRESENT

The meeting was called to order by Paula Lee at 5:30 p.m. with the following members present: Steve Adams, Jim Bollman, Doug Christensen, John Drees, Jim Galloway, Al Grasser, Tom Hagness, Bill Hutchison, Gary Malm, Dana Sande and Mike St. Onge. Absent: Mayor (Dr.) Michael Brown, Robert Drees and Frank Matejcek. A quorum was present.

Staff present: Ryan Brooks, Senior Planner; and Carolyn Schalk, Senior Administrative Specialist (Planning and Zoning Department); Bev Collings, Building and Zoning Administrator (Building and Inspections Office) and Mike Flermoen, Fire Department. Absent: Brad Gengler, City Planner; Charles Durrenberger, Senior Planner and Roxanne Achman, Planner (Planning and Zoning Department).

Lee welcomed new member Mike St. Onge, representing the school board, to the commission.

2. READING AND APPROVAL OF MINUTES FOR SEPTEMBER 1, 2010.

Lee asked if there were any additions or corrections to the minutes of September 1, 2010. There were no comments or changes noted. Lee said the minutes would stand as presented.There were no corrections noted and Lee said the minutes would stand as presented.

3. PUBLIC HEARINGS, FINAL APPROVALS, PETITIONS AND MINOR CHANGES.

3-1. (PUBLIC HEARING) MATTER OF THE REQUEST FROM CPS, LTD., ON BEHALF OF SATURN DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, LLC, FOR FINAL APPROVAL (FAST TRACK) OF THE PLAT OF RYDELL SECOND RESUBDIVISION TO THE CITY OF GRAND FORKS, ND, LOCATED AT 2700 SOUTH WASHINGTON STREET.

Lee reminded the commission a fast track item is only heard one time.

Brooks announced he was the only planner presenting items at the meeting. Brad Gengler, Charles Durrenberger and Roxanne Achman were attending the North Dakota Planning Association conference being held at the Alerus in Grand Forks, ND this year.

Brooks reviewed the replat. Showing a picture of Rydell complex, he pointed to the area on the north side of the property designated to build a car wash. The replat would cleanup and reorganize the property. There is no right-of-way involved in the replat. Staff recommendation was for approval of the replat.

There were no questions from the commission members.

Lee opened the public hearing. There was no one to speak on the issue and the public hearing was closed.

MOTION BY MALM AND SECOND BY CHRISTENSEN TO GIVE FINAL APPROVAL TO THE REPLAT REQUEST SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING TECHNICAL CHANGES SHOWN ON OR ATTACHED TO THE REVIEW COPY:
1. Submit title opinion.
2. Correct plat title as shown in the title block and the owner’s consent.
3. Add a distance and bearing for the short north-south line segment in Lot 2.
4. Note vacated 26^th Avenue South and include date.
5. 28^th Avenue South is not a collector street.
6. Add a 30-foot by 50-foot ingress-egress easement on the lot line between Lot 1 and Lot 2.

MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.

3-2. (PUBLIC HEARING) MATTER OF THE REQUEST FROM DAKOTA COMMERCIAL AND DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, ON BEHALF OF DARYL ANDERSON FOR FINAL APPROVAL (FAST TRACK) OF THE REPLAT OF LOT A OF THE REPLAT OF LOTS 3,4,5,6,7,8,9 AND 10 OF BLOCK 1, LANDER SUBDIVISION OF BLOCK 10 IN WHITE CLOVER SUBDIVISION TO THE CITY OF GRAND FORKS, ND, LOCATED AT 2475 SOUTH WASHINGTON STREET.

Lee reminded the commission a fast track item is only heard one time.

Brooks reviewed the replat by stating it is a simple replat. The building used to house the Planet Pizza and there is currently an auto body sales store located in the building. The owner is selling off a portion of the building as the new buyer wants to own that portion outright. The replat is necessary to accomplish that and the fast track indicates there is no right-of-way involved. Staff recommendation is for approval of the replat.

Hagness asked what type of business would be placed in the building. Brooks replied the only thing he knows is that it is retail in nature. The parking is adequate for the business.

Lee opened the public hearing. There was no one to speak on the issue and the public hearing was closed.

MOTION BY GALLOWAY AND SECOND BY SANDE TO APPROVE THE REPLAT SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING TECHNICAL CHANGES SHOWN ON OR ATTACHED TO THE REVIEW COPY:
1. Submit title opinion.
2. Submit a copy of the common elements agreement with the adjacent lots (roof, firewall, parking, etc.).

MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.

3-3. MATTER OF THE PETITION FROM THE GRAND FORKS PUBLIC SCHOOLS FOR APPROVAL TO VACATE A PERPETUAL RIGHT-OF-WAY EASEMENT LOCATED AT 2^ND AVENUE NORTH AT NORTH 5^TH STREET.

Brooks stated the item was the first of three items concerning Central High School. The first vacation will allow expansion of the physical education (P.E.) area. The second vacation allows the addition of a fine arts area and the third item is a replat showing the changes with the vacations and easements.

The first vacation is the area between the school and existing P.E. gymnasium built in the mid-1980’s.

Brooks introduced Randy Leiberg, JLG Architects. Mr. Leiberg stated what originally started as a renovation to the existing auditorium was expanded to include an addition to the gymnasium and fine arts area. The plans now include a single story addition to the gym and a two-story space for the performing arts. With the additions, there will be a street vacation on 2^nd Avenue North. That area is already closed off from traffic. For the vacation on 1^st Avenue North, there will be narrowing of the existing street, a change in parking spaces and the traffic signals. Although narrowed, the street will remain open for traffic in both directions.

Mr. Leiberg showed a rendering of the proposed arts addition. Materials that mimic the existing building will be used. He explained there would be a stair entrance on North 5^th Street and an accessible elevator entrance on 1^st Avenue North. He also explained where the various departments would be located during the renovation process for the auditorium/fine arts.

Mike Korman, civil engineer with CPS, Ltd., and a sub-contractor to JLG Architects, spoke on the civil engineering aspects of the renovation. He also introduced John Schlieman, lead designer on the project, and the survey manager, Mike Sansom. Mr. Korman said the fine arts addition had several civil related items such as right-of-way, roadway alignments, street widths, traffic signals and utility locations. The addition of the fine arts area expands into the middle of the roadway so some changes have to be made. He explained what changes would have to occur intersection by intersection. Parking would be removed in some areas. There would be a drop-off lane of 50-60 feet long that would accommodate three cars or a bus. On the west side, the proposal is for diagonal parking from North 5^th Street west to the alley in order to mitigate the parking lost on 1^st Avenue North. On the south side of North 6^th Street, parallel parking will be maintained to the first driveway. The alignment changes also create traffic signal issues. Three of the four traffic standards would have to be replaced. Mr. Korman said there were significant utility relocations and they are working on those issues with the city engineering department as well as other private utility companies. The civil issues for the 2^nd Avenue North vacation will be for utility relocations.

Brooks said 2^nd Avenue North was vacated in 1984 and a perpetual easement was reinstated in 1985 when it was determined none of the utilities would be moved. The street was closed off to traffic on the North 5^th Street side when the gymnasium was built during the mid-80’s.

Mr. Leiberg stated there would be a 25-foot plus width between the existing high school building and the proposed gym addition. The existing skyway remains in place between the original high school and the gym building. There will still be complete access through the 2^nd Avenue North vacated area.

Hagness asked if the fire department had approved the ingress/egress with the narrowed widths on 1^st Avenue North and also if the replacement cost of signal lights would be part of the project by the school district. He was answered in the affirmative.

Commission members questioned the loss of parking. Mr. Korman said there would be a loss of 28 parking spaces between 4^th and 5^th Streets on 1^st Avenue North and possibly six between 5^th and 6^th Streets. The loss of parking spaces was due to the alignment of the streets. The net loss of parking spaces would be 31.

Sande said the net loss of parking spaces appears to be significant especially considering that existing parking is a major issue in the downtown. He asked if an assessment had been made around the school to determine if additional parking was available elsewhere.

Mr. Korman said North 5^th Street is a classified roadway and the North Dakota Department of Transportation (NDDOT) has authority of the roadway so no additional parking could be created. He noted the change to diagonal parking in some areas of the downtown several years ago helped with the parking issue.

Grasser (city engineer) said they could look and see if diagonal parking could be made in other areas of the downtown but the city took an aggressive approach to maximize parking in the downtown several years ago. There might be opportunities further west but that is getting further from the downtown and might not be convenient enough to make it work.

Brooks said there had been discussions internally to allow the school district to take over the city employee parking lot (36 parking spaces) if the school district would provide the paving and buffering area for city owned property located on 4^th Street for city employee parking. This would be a trade-off and would raise the cost to the school district. The new gym addition will block the sidewalk that city employees use to get to the city parking lot so it will become more inconvenient for city employees. Brooks also stated that Jane Williams, city traffic engineer, had recently expanded parking by the YMCA along 2^nd Avenue North and the city will continue to search for more parking areas. The school district is also looking at parking in the city ramp across the street from the high school.

Hutchison stated the school district has had a number of meetings with city staff and city council on trying to settle the parking issues related to Central High School. They are looking at areas within a block and a half of the high school to purchase parking spaces that would replace more than the 30 spaces lost with the renovation. They are also in discussions with the city on additional spaces to lease in the ramp. He indicated there are also two privately owned lots within two blocks of the school that might be available for purchase. The school district continues to address the parking issues.

Malm said he taught at Central High School for 15 years. In addressing the proposed crossing on North 5^th Street, Malm said the students would walk into the traffic; they would not walk to the corner where the crosswalk is located. Students always will take the shortest route. He also commented on the drop-off area by saying it will become backed up for half an hour, especially in the summer when parents are picking up students who are not licensed to drive. Malm said he did not know how to solve it but there is a major problem with traffic on the street and the students entering and exiting the building. The students walk into the street in front of traffic now and he felt the proposal will magnify the problem.

Brooks said the proposal narrows where the students can exit from the building; they will be exiting at the crosswalk on North 5^th Street and 1^st Avenue North. There is no place for the school to expand except as noted on the plan. The gym addition is being added to an open green space area and can be accommodated easier than the fine arts area. The design is the best option for the area available.

Sande said he went to Central High School and the option for narrowing 1^st Avenue North does not look safe.

Brooks said from a traffic safety standpoint, the narrowing of 1^st Avenue North is an improved situation for pedestrians and students. There will be no parking allowed along 1^st Avenue North. Crossing 29 feet of traffic versus 51 feet (and weaving through parked cars) will be an improvement.

Sande said parents would be blocking traffic when they stop in the middle of the road dropping off or picking up students. The proposed change will slow traffic considerably.

Brooks said some parents probably do that today with double parking. The hope is that the change will slow down traffic. Some people are going to make bad decisions regardless of the situation.

Christensen questioned the location of the fine arts addition. Why could it not be built on 2^nd Avenue North where the street is already closed off? The green space and small street area, as well as the Fire Hall Theatre, could be utilized for the addition.

Mr. Leiberg said it might be an option if the addition only included the fine arts area. However, the auditorium connection to the fine arts addition is important. The idea was to keep like uses in a similar location. That was the driving force in the location of the fine arts area. The proposed gym addition next to the existing gym made sense. He understood that negotiations with the Fire Hall Theatre did not go well.

Christensen said the school district has the same powers as the city – the power to acquire that which they need for the public good. He asked how much space is being utilized for the fine arts addition. Mr. Leiberg said it was approximately 20,000 square feet total and the addition is approximately 10,000 square feet.

Christensen said they could go up two stories and attach it to the building in the existing green space between the school and the gymnasium.

Mr. Leiberg noted that one of the amenities of the high school is an abundance of windows. The view is good out of most of the classrooms and was one of the factors to minimize the size of the addition and block the minimum amount of views. The higher the addition, the worse the views are affected. The addition in the proposed location started out much larger and has been minimized to the point of being as small as possible and still meet the needs of the school. The area is two stories of space but only a story and a half out of the ground.

St. Onge, school representative on the commission, stated the school district hired professional people to come up with a plan to optimize the efficiencies of the building and yet cause the least consternation. The city has had to deal with traffic flow issues in the downtown for years. At one time there were all one-way streets and other different ideas have been tried to make the traffic smoother in the downtown. The proposed plan makes more sense for the handicapped accessibility of the elevator to the theater and takes the existing theater and optimizes the use of it. The idea was to have like uses together. The traffic on 1^st Avenue North will function basically as it does now except there will be no parking allowed along the street. The idea of the students not going to the crosswalks is not new. Students tend to go in the direction their hormones take them at any particular time. More parking space and more open area would be nice but they have to work with what they have. The proposed plan appears to be the best possible solution.

Hutchison said the people most affected by the changes was the staff and students and they have had input in the plans. The proposed plan puts like uses together. There is not enough green space area between the existing building and the gym for both additions. Although parking is reduced, eliminating the parking along 1^st Avenue North and narrowing the street does make it safer. The school district will continue to address the parking issue.
Grasser said when the project was brought before city staff, the building expansion was larger and there was a discussion of vacating the street and closing it off completely. Staff had concerns about that. There have been at least six months of review and compromises. The addition was minimized and that allowed the street to remain open. The changes do not mean concerns still exist but all parties have worked together to make the best plan possible.

After hearing all the comments, Hagness said the benefits of the athletics and the arts outweigh the detriments of the traffic and other concerns.

MOTION BY HAGNESS AND SECOND BY CHRISTENSEN TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE VACATION REQUEST.

Galloway asked to be excused from voting on items 3-3, 3-4, and 4-1. MOTION BY SANDE AND SECOND BY ADAMS TO EXCUSE GALLOWAY FROM VOTING ON ITEMS 3-3, 3-4 AND 4-1. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.

Sande asked if consideration had been given to turning 1^st Avenue North into a one-way street. Brooks answered that a one-way street would cause more speeding and there would be a traffic flow issue in the downtown. Narrowing the street causes the speeds to decrease.

Grasser spoke to the one-way street issue and the full closure of the street. The concern was that it would push the turning movements to DeMers Avenue and also to University Street. After looking at the various traffic scenarios, it made sense to leave the traffic link through 1^st Avenue North in order to minimize additional changes to the turning movements.

Christensen said he agreed with Hagness but felt he had to make an observation. The school district has made a decision to build the additions and in the process, parking spaces have been sacrificed. The school district has the same powers the city has to take property (condemnation) if they can’t buy it. The city has offered assistance to the school district with the parking ramp. The professionals provided a plan and the school district is agreeable with the plan.

Hutchison said the school district is aware of the condemnation factor but the school district wants to settle it the right way by not going that route. Condemnation is not the way they want to go. That would only be a last resort.

Lee asked for a vote.

MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.

3-4. MATTER OF THE PETITION FROM THE GRAND FORKS PUBLIC SCHOOLS FOR APPROVAL TO VACATE PART OF 1^ST AVENUE NORTH BETWEEN NORTH 4^TH STREET AND NORTH 5^TH STREET.
The vacation was discussed with the previous vacation request.

MOTION BY BOLLMAN AND SECOND BY HUTCHISON TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE VACATION OF PART OF 1^ST AVENUE NORTH BETWEEN NORTH 4^TH AND 5^TH STREETS.

Malm said he was not against the project but would vote against the vacation because it was not a good idea. It would be improper planning to vacate a portion of the street.

Sande agreed with Malm. He supports the project but not the street changes.

Hagness said after listening to all the comments and adjustments to the traffic and streets, he is going to support the plan. The plan is necessary for the advancement of the arts and athletics. It is a good project and should be supported.

MOTION CARRIED WITH MALM, SANDE AND JOHN DREES VOTING NAY.

Lee thanked all parties for their presentations.

4. COMMUNICATIONS AND PRELIMINARY APPROVALS:

4-1. MATTER OF THE REQUEST FROM CPS, LTD., ON BEHALF OF THE GRAND FORKS PUBLIC SCHOOL DISTRICT, FOR APPROVAL OF THE PLAT OF CENTRAL HIGH SCHOOL ADDITION TO THE CITY OF GRAND FORKS, ND, LOCATED AT NORTH 5^TH STREET BETWEEN UNIVERSITY AVENUE AND 1^ST AVENUE NORTH.

Brooks reviewed the request by stating the replat will clean up the property lines after the vacations and renovation changes

MOTION BY CHRISTENSEN AND SECOND BY HAGNESS TO RECOMMEND PRELIMINARY APPROVAL TO THE PLAT REQUEST, SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING TECHNICAL CHANGES SHOWN ON OR ATTACHED TO THE REVIEW COPY:
1. Submit title opinion.
2. Remove park district approval as park dedications only apply to residential subdivisions.
3. Use shortened version of the city council approval. Amending the street and highway plan is only necessary with new right-of-way dedications.
4. Adjust the legal description in the title block and in the owner’s consent as shown.
5. Revise metes and bounds description in owner’s certificate to include all lands within the plat boundary.

MOTION CARRIED WITH MALM VOTING NAY.
4-2. MATTER OF THE REQUEST FROM THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT, BUILDING INSPECTION DIVISION, ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF GRAND FORKS, FOR PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE TEXT OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE CHAPTER XVIII OF THE GRAND FORKS CITY CODE OF 1987, AS AMENDED, AMENDING SECTION 18-0204 RELATING TO RULES AND DEFINITIONS AND 18-0220 F-1 (FLOODWAY) AND F-2 (FLOODPLAIN) DISTRICTS.

Collings said the request is the first process to adoption of the remapping for the final digital flood insurance rate map for the city of Grand Forks. FEMA requires that the ordinance be updated to go along with the adoption of the map but most changes in the ordinance are grammar and corrections to agree with the new map. The new adoption date of the map is December 17, 2010. The actual affects of the map will not be noticed by most people because the Letter of Map Revision was accomplished on August 2, 2007. The ordinance is the final paperwork and makes it official. The LOMR (Letter of Map Revision) is included in the mapping.

Grasser stated the city of Grand Forks is a participating community in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). By adopting the ordinances, the city continues to keep its eligibility in the NFIP.

MOTION BY SANDE AND SECOND BY CHRISTENSEN TO RECOMMEND PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF THE ORDINANCES AS PRESENTED. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.

4-3. MATTER OF THE REQUEST FROM THE GRAND FORKS PLANNING DEPARTMENT, ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF GRAND FORKS, ND, FOR PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, AMENDING CHAPTER XVIII, ARTICLE 8, COMPREHENSIVE PLAN; SECTION 18-0802, ELEMENTS, OF THE GRAND FORKS CITY CODE OF 1987, AS AMENDED, PERTAINING TO THE YEAR 2035 LAND USE PLAN (MAP AMENDMENT NO. 4 – WELLNESS CENTER VILLAGE).

Brooks stated the wellness center plat and zoning was final last month and at that time staff was looking at only the wellness center on the site. Since then it appears the wellness center is becoming a wellness center village. There are limited categories in the land use map. There is no parks or park facilities section in the land use map because parks and parks facilities have always been allowed in residential areas in the land use map. Staff felt the wellness center area was turning into a village instead of just the wellness center. They changed the area to commercial uses. Brooks said the zoning would prevail on the type of uses that can be allowed in the development. The ordinance changes the land use map to reflect the wellness center village on the 2035 Land Use Plan.

Brooks said he had heard from residents on Great Plains Court located directly east of the site regarding bufferyards. Staff is working with the city forester in terms of the bufferyards to reduce the mass of the building and parking lots. Whatever is decided, bufferyards will be reflected on the site plan. Staff recommends preliminary approval of the ordinance.

Christensen suggested giving the center its own identification rather than placing it in the commercial category. Brooks said the site has a zoning of wellness center but the ordinance is changing the category on the land use map.

Christensen also spoke on lighting at the facility and in the parking lots. The lighting should not be a problem for the surrounding neighborhood. Brooks said that is being considered by the staff at the park district and will be reviewed as part of the site plan.

There were questions regarding other commercial uses on the site. Brooks reiterated that the zoning controls what can be built on the site. The ordinance allows the neighborhood to know the intensity of use going on the site.

Further discussion continued on the commercial uses and the need to limit what can be built on the site.

Bollman spoke as the commissioner representing the park district. He stated the park district would be very fussy about what commercial will be allowed by the wellness center.

Brooks said the site is a high level commercial but the zoning will determine what will be allowed there. If the commission wants to change the planned unit development, that can be done next month.

St. Onge stated it should be clearly defined so that there is no confusion in years to come.

MOTION BY MALMS AND SECONDED BY CHRISTENSEN TO RECOMMEND PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF THE ORDINANCE. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.

4-4. MATTER OF THE REQUEST FROM KYLE ANDERSON, ON BEHALF OF SERVICE OIL, INC. FOR APPROVAL OF AN APPEAL TO THE CORRIDOR OVERLAY DISTRICT FOR LOT 3, BLOCK 4, AIRPORT ADDITION, TO THE CITY OF GRAND FORKS, ND, LOCATED AT 1100 NORTH 47^TH STREET.

Brooks reviewed the appeal to the corridor overlay district. He showed the aerial photo of the site located near Gateway Drive and I-29. It is a site proposed for an office building. He explained the commission had agreed to certain materials, windows, etc. on certain corridors in order to improve the looks along the corridor. This is one of the corridors where the rules apply. However, someone can appeal the process. He said the visibility from the corridor is reduced significantly. He pointed to the public works facility that has a very tall building where gravel and other materials are stored to keep them dry. This building is located to the south of the proposed office building. The proposed site is 340 feet from the corridor and must be 400 feet back to avoid the corridor overlay district requirements. The developer wanted to appeal the no more than 50% metal siding on the building, the number of windows required and the sloped roof of more than 100 feet without a change. Brooks noted that future expansion on the property would completely screen the building from the corridor as well as the existing truck parking. The property will be noticeable on the I-29 ramp however. Although the building faces North 47^th Street, the back of the building with overhead doors will be towards I-29. Brooks noted the commission is the final appeal body but the developers have the ability to also appeal it to the city council.

Christensen said a committee spent 18 months designing the corridor overlay district requirements and staff is deviating from it.

Brooks said he was presenting the appeal on behalf of the developers. Staff denied the request based on them not meeting the corridor overlay district.

MOTION BY CHRISTENSEN AND SECOND BY GALLOWAY TO SUPPORT STAFF’S DENIAL OF THE APPEAL.

Lee opened the meeting to the public.

Kyle Anderson, representing Service Oil Company as well as the partnership that owns the land and plans to build the 11,000 square foot office building, noted a state agency, Bureau of Criminal Investigations, is planning to lease area in the building. Their offices and evidence rooms would be on the back of the building and they do not want windows on the evidence rooms. Mr. Anderson said traffic along the corridor moves at 75 miles per hour and the building would not be visible at that speed.

Sande agreed with Christensen and said they should follow the requirements.

Brooks said the developers have talked about fencing and would do whatever buffering the commission required. The building is not seen from the south but can be seen on the southbound overpass on I-29 over Gateway Drive. Any fencing would not prevent that.

Mr. Anderson said the windows would be shielded by the fencing and the agencies leasing from them require security so they question the need for the windows.

Bollman asked if the building could be redesigned to make it 400 feet from the interstate and avoid having to meet the corridor overlay requirements.

Brooks replied the lot is wide enough but with the parking in front of the building, it would be difficult to meet the 400-foot requirement. It might be possible to reorient the building and meet that requirement.

Christensen said that was what the developers should do. The rules are in place and the commission needs to preserve the integrity of the corridor overlay district. The developers must build to meet the rules.

Brooks said the appeal was part of the ordinance to allow some tweaking of the rules. If they were building right next to the corridor with no ability for expansion, staff would definitely be against the changes they wanted. However, the building is in the corner of the site and windows might not make sense for this building. There have been discussions before that windows do not make sense in storage buildings and although this is not a storage building, the uses in the building might reflect the need for less windows. Brick along the bottom of the building might not make sense if a fence surrounds it. Staff feels the roofline would definitely have to be broken up.

Christensen asked if the issue could be brought back next month. Maybe the developers could review the siting of the building and the other comments made to have a different design. He reminded the commission they had turned down a storage building on South Washington Street and it was designed much better than the proposed office building under discussion. Another building was turned down on Highway 2 west of the Perkins Restaurant. The idea is to improve the integrity of the corridor and stick with it a longer time than the staff seems to be willing to give it.

Hutchison stated he was part of the meetings that established the requirements for the corridor overlay district. He also said they had decided if windows were not appropriate, they were given the exception not to include them. They do not appear to be appropriate in the subject building and he would be willing to remove that design requirement. He was more concerned about the long roofline. Hutchison asked if the developers were planning to start construction yet this year. He was told yes. The agencies were planning on being in the offices in March. Hutchison asked the developers to return in November with a plan that showed the screening.

Galloway said he sits on the Board of Adjustments where they hear requests for variances. The rule in granting a variance is hardship. He does not see the hardship of not meeting the requirements.

Brooks said the developers could start building but before the certificate of occupancy is granted, the building must meet the requirements. The I-29 corridor requires no more than 50% metal on the building. If the commission is willing to overlook the glass windows, that might help them before they return.

Christensen stressed the need to enforce the regulations for the corridor overlay district.

Sande asked if they have the appropriate screening, do they still have to meet the corridor overlay district?

Brooks replied that was up to the commission to determine.

Christensen said the best option for them is to reorient the building and be 400 feet back from the I-29 corridor and they would not have to worry about the requirements.

Christensen called the question.

MOTION FOR DENIAL CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.

5. REPORTS FROM THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT:

None.

6. OTHER BUSINESS:

6-1. MATTER OF DISCUSSION REGARDING A SHARED PARKING AGREEMENT WITHIN THE B-4 DISTRICT BETWEEN A POTENTIAL HOUSING COOPERATIVE LOCATED AT 405 SOUTH 4^TH STREET AND A COMMERCIAL PROPERTY LOCATED AT 404 SOUTH 3^RD STREET.

Brooks stated a potential housing cooperative is being handled as a multi-family unit. For every bedroom over and above what was in the code prior to 2006, there must be one off-street parking space. Currently there are five off-street parking stalls in the back of the unit and they need at least five more parking spaces. The owners want to create more bedroom areas in the unit and they propose to enter into a shared parking agreement with a neighboring commercial property to gain the additional parking spaces needed.

Caylan Larson, 405 South 4^th Street, stated there are four parties involved in the housing cooperative. The first party is the current owner of 405 South 4^th Street who is selling the home to a second party. The third party would be the owner of the corner lot that would be sharing parking. The fourth party is the housing cooperative, a corporation forming under the non-profit corporation status. They already have five parking stalls and need only three or four more. They are requesting to share four parking stalls. The agreement is being drawn up between Tracy Shimpa and the people purchasing the home.

Sande asked what they would be doing with the building. Mr. Larson stated the current residence is a four-plex or four individual rental units. It will continue that way until adequate parking is available to expand the number of bedrooms to nine. At that time, they will be rented out. The housing cooperative (non-profit) will establish a master lease with the current homeowner that allows the actual tenants of the home to be their own landlords. The purpose of the Grand Forks housing cooperative as a non-profit is to provide low to middle income housing for minority students and workers in the community, especially downtown workers that make small wages. It is an alternative housing style. Many of this type housing exist in Minneapolis, Madison, WI, and Chicago. The cooperative is working with the Quentin Burdick Center for Cooperatives at NDSU. The lawyers with the center helped to set up the non-profit as well as the North America Student Cooperative in Ann Arbor, MI.

Brooks stated from a planning standpoint the unit is a multi-family unit and they are allowed by code.

Collings’ only comment was that one parking stall has to be available for each bedroom.

Christensen asked how many people occupy the house at the present time. Collings said it was confusing because the current owners were reserving the basement or the main level for themselves. It is not a certified unit because it was owner-occupied.

Mr. Larson said they would have a shared parking agreement for five years and hope to eventually purchase the property.

Christensen suggested a conditional use permit for five years. What if they have not purchased the property in the five years? Mr. Larson said they would pursue rewriting the code to allow the use of the shared parking as well as on-street parking.

Christensen asked Brooks about allowing a conditional use permit for five years. Brooks said the conditional use permit was not necessary. Staff is proposing allowing the shared parking agreement. If they have not made other arrangements in five years, they lose the potential for some of the rooms to be rented. Staff’s concern is not to make the parking situation worse. The developers have to provide one parking stall per bedroom in the area.

Christensen said he wanted to help them by granting a conditional use permit for five years. Brooks said a conditional use permit was not necessary. They would approve the shared parking agreement for five years. The use is allowed so a conditional use permit is not necessary. The shared parking agreement is the vehicle to handle the situation.

Christensen asked what the city needs to enforce so that it does not slip through the cracks. Brooks replied the share parking agreement that would be approved for five years. After that, they would have to renew it or purchase the property. If they renewed the shared parking agreement, they would have to come before the commission again.

Malm asked Mr. Larson to bring the shared parking agreement to the commission next month.

Grasser said he did not have a problem with a shared parking agreement but did have a problem with one that lasted five years.

Mr. Larson said he wanted to meet with the commission to make sure they did not have any concerns about the shared parking agreement prior to the house sale.

____________________________

Brooks announced the North Dakota Planning Association was taking place at the Alerus starting tonight with the social and ending Friday at noon.
____________________________

It was announced that tonight is Mr. Hagness’ last meeting. Everyone wished Mr. Hagness well. He said Mayor Brown had offered him another five years on the commission but he decided it was time to step aside. Being a planning commission for 30 plus years has been a good experience.

7. ADJOURNMENT.

MOTION BY SANDE AND SECOND BY MALM TO ADJOURN THE MEETING AT 7:40 P.M. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.

____________________________
Dana Sande, Secretary

____________________________
Paula H. Lee, President