Committee Minutes


PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
MEETING MINUTES
City of Grand Forks, North Dakota
November 3, 2004

MEMBERS PRESENT

The meeting was called to order by President Gary Malm with the following members present: John Drees, Al Grasser, Tom Hagness, Bill Hutchison, John Jeno, Curt Kreun, Dr. Robert Kweit, Paula Lee, Sheryl Smith and Marijo Whitcomb. Absent: Mayor (Dr.) Michael Brown, Dr. Lyle Hall, Dorette Kerian, and Frank Matejcek. A quorum was present.

Staff present included Dennis Potter, City Planner; Charles Durrenberger, Senior Planner; Brad Gengler, Planner; and Carolyn Schalk, Senior Administrative Specialist.

2. READING AND APPROVAL OF MINUTES FOR OCTOBER 6, 2004.

Malm asked if there were any additions or corrections to the minutes of regular minutes of October 6, 2004. There were no corrections noted and President Malm declared the minutes approved as presented.

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

3-1. (PUBLIC HEARING) MATTER OF THE REQUEST FROM MICHAEL BENSON, ON BEHALF OF RICHARD NOVAK AND RAYMOND GORDON, FOR FINAL APPROVAL OF AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE ZONING MAP TO REZONE AND EXCLUDE FROM THE B-3 (GENERAL BUSINESS) DISTRICT AND TO INCLUDE WITHIN THE R-4 (MULTIPLE-FAMILY HIGH DENSITY) DISTRICT, THE WEST FIVE (5) FEET OF LOT 12 AND ALL OF LOTS 14, 16 AND 18, BLOCK C, BUDGE AND ESHELMAN’S 2ND ADDITION, LOCATED AT 1215 AND 1217 6TH AVENUE NORTH, GRAND FORKS, NORTH DAKOTA.

Gengler reviewed the rezoning issue and explained that the two properties (1215 and 1217 6th Avenue North) presently are zoned as B-3 (General Business) District. The request is to rezone it to R-4 (Multiple Family Residence, High Density) District. It is an appropriate use of the property and staff recommends approval of the request.

Malm opened the public hearing. There was no one to speak and the public hearing was closed.

MOTION BY WHITCOMB AND SECOND BY DR. KWEIT TO GRANT FINAL APPROVAL TO THE REZONING REQUEST.
Kreun asked if it would be more appropriate to rezone to the R-2 (One and Two Family Residence) District than R-4.

Gengler answered since the existing zoning area to the east was already R-4, the request for R-4 zoning would be appropriate, unless a spot zoning was considered. R-4 zoning would accommodate R-1 type uses.

MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.

3-2. (PUBLIC HEARING) MATTER OF THE REQUEST FROM SERVICE OIL, INC., FOR APPROVAL OF AN APPEAL TO THE GREEN MILL RESTAURANT DETAILED DEVELOPMENT PLAN, COLUMBIA PARK PUD (PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT), DESCRIBED AS LOT 1, BLOCK 1, COLUMBIA PARK 17TH ADDITION TO THE CITY OF GRAND FORKS, NORTH DAKOTA, LOCATED AT 1930 SOUTH COLUMBIA ROAD. THE APPEAL IS FOR A REDUCTION IN THE MINIMUM PARKING LOT AND LANDSCAPING SETBACK REQUIREMENT ADJACENT TO 19TH AVENUE SOUTH.

Gengler spoke on the history of the property. He said when the Columbia Park PUD was established, there were several areas included along Columbia Road and connecting side streets. The setbacks were established at 25-feet for standard bufferyard and landscaping on both the north and south sides of Columbia Road. In researching the appeal, Gengler noted there were 10 subsequent amendments of the original version with Amendment No. 5 no longer designating the 25-foot setback on the plans. After further research, he found that although the plans did not indicate the setback, it was still in effect. When the previous owners of the Chinese restaurant requested a reduction in landscaping setback, it was not allowed. Recently, a fire destroyed the restaurant and the owners are seeking to rebuild on the same lot. They have submitted a request to reduce the minimum parking lot and landscaping setback requirement from 25 feet to 10 feet. The request requires approval from the planning and zoning commission. Staff’s review and opinion was that the reduction would not have a negative impact on the surrounding area.

Lee asked if the 10 feet would be a bufferyard with plantings. Gengler said it was a double setback; it would function as a standard 10-foot setback for paving as well as a 10-foot landscape bufferyard.

Malm opened the public hearing.

Brian Conneran, 28 Sandy Hills Lane, stated he was the owner of the Subway restaurant located on Columbia Road and 19th Avenue South and the AmericInn Motel located north of the Subway Restaurant. He spoke on the problems associated with the opening of the Green Mill in 1999. His main concern was the parking. Mr. Conneran said the Green Mill employees and guests would park at the Subway and AmericInn when they could not find a parking spot at the Green Mill. There were many times when guests at the restaurant and motel could not find parking spaces and it became a full time job to have patrols in the area to eliminate the problem. He said 19th Avenue South is narrow and during the winter snow removal becomes a problem. He had spoken to the fire and police departments several times about the situation and stated he had appeared before the planning commission before about the problem. Mr. Conneran said the Green Mill owners approached him about requesting to have 19th Avenue South widened so there would be a turn lane. The street should be made wider instead of allowing the Green Mill any reductions. He stated he and the Green Mill owners had been involved in a civil action in District Court because of the parking problems that had not been addressed. The street cannot handle the traffic.

Gengler said the planning department was aware of the correspondence and problems over parking but he stated he was unaware of any remedies. As far as he knew, there were no plans to widen the street. The overall parking count for the Green Mill required 76 parking spaces under the original site plan. The new site plan shows 81 stalls and a shared parking agreement with Borrowed Bucks. He said he could not speak to the issues in the public right-of-way.

Mr. Conneran said Borrowed Bucks is presently utilizing all of the parking stalls on both lots on Friday and Saturday nights without the new building being in place and also continues to utilize some of Mr. Conneran’s space at Subway and AmericInn.

Dirk Lenthe, 1718 East Main Avenue, Fargo, ND, owner of the Green Mill, said the cross-over parking agreement with Borrowed Bucks works well because their business starts up around the time the restaurant’s business starts fading. He said he was unaware of both parking lots being full at the same time. The former restaurant (Chinese) had a basement that was put in to avoid being over 5,000 square feet and being required to put in a sprinkler system. If a sprinkler system had been in place, the building might still be standing. The previous basement space is to be moved on the main floor and a sprinkler system would be installed.

Malm stated the request before the planning commission was the setback; not the parking issue.

Malm closed the public hearing.

Hagness asked Mr. Lenthe what he would gain by the 10-foot setback versus the 25-foot setback. Mr. Lenthe answered that it would provide a couple more parking spaces plus re-locating the building to the southwest corner allowed better access to the parking lot.

Hagness asked if the size of the new building was similar to the old building as far as parking. Mr. Lenthe answered yes. He also stated the former basement in the Green Mill Restaurant was around 1500 square feet and was added to the main floor. The overall size for customers would be approximately the same.

Hagness asked Mr. Lenthe if there was something he could do to settle concerns of the neighboring businesses on parking. Mr. Lenthe answered that employees were told not to park on Mr. Conneran’s property and signs were placed on Green Mill property that additional parking was available on the Bucks property.

Hagness asked if Bucks would allow Mr. Lenthe’s employees to park on their lot to address some of the parking concerns. Mr. Lenthe said he thought so but would check it out again. He also said there was an agreement made with Mr. Conneran to put up signage to divert customers to the Bucks property for parking.

Hutchison said he got the impression from Mr. Conneran that 19th Avenue South should be changed at some time and asked if there were plans for that. Mr. Lenthe answered that as part of the civil suit, there was an agreement to support any attempt to widen the 19th Avenue South.

Hutchison said it appeared to create a problem if the reduction was approved. Mr. Lenthe stated the reduction would not affect the right-of-way. The property line would still be located back far enough to allow the street to be widened.

Al Grasser, City Engineer, stated the street would have to be contained within the existing right-of-way. The setback would not have a direct impact on how wide the street would be. The process for widening a street would be a petition from adjacent property owners and support and special assessments for the project. Grasser said the street was installed at the density and requests of the original developer and if the street was not sufficient in width, the city would consider a project to widen the street. However, street paving would be a special assessment and also would be protestable. The city seeks support from those adjacent to the street so that time and effort would not be wasted drawing up plans and specs and then having the project protested out.

Hutchison asked if widening the street had been considered and if the reduction request would affect any proposed street widening.

Grasser answered that the reduction request would not impact widening the street unless the width of the street would be considered and constructed beyond the existing right-of-way. Grasser said the engineering department had not received any requests for widening 19th Avenue South. He noted that it is a busy street and there are many cars parked along the road, but also pointed out that there are multi-family apartments in the vicinity. Proximity to apartments would impact street parking.
Malm reminded members that the parking is not the issue under discussion; only the bufferyard.

Kreun asked if it would be feasible to remove the island that separates Green Mill from Bucks. Would removing the island add enough parking to help with the parking concerns?

Gengler stated that Bucks has a surplus of parking spaces and the Green Mill plan shows 81 parking spaces. Gengler showed the aerial photo of the businesses and stated the island functions as a traffic barrier. Eliminating the island would not gain much.

Further discussion continued on the size of a restaurant and the formula that establishes the parking ratio.

MOTION BY DR. KWEIT AND SECOND BY DREES TO APPROVE THE APPEAL. MOTION CARRIED WITH HUTCHISON VOTING NAY.

4. COMMUNICATIONS AND PRELIMINARY APPROVALS:

4-1. MATTER OF THE REQUEST FROM THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT 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 ARTICLE 2, ZONING, SECTION 18-0204, RULES AND DEFINITIONS, SUBSECTION (2), DEFINITIONS; AND APPENDIX F, ALL RELATING TO GROUND MONUMENT SIGNS.

Gengler reviewed the request stating the planning department has received requests for
electronic reader-boards on ground monument signs in planned unit development (PUD) areas. After reviewing the definitions, staff felt the definitions were not specific enough to determine if the reader-boards could be electronic or not. The Sign Subcommittee met and discussed the issue. The discussion led to an interpretation that there could be electronic reader-boards permitted on ground monument signs. Staff was directed to establish the do’s and don’ts of the electronic reader-boards. He suggested preliminary approval of the ordinance and whatever discussion took place plus what the council might decide, he would submit to the Sign Subcommittee. Gengler referred commission members to the draft ordinance and the changes that were suggested from the existing code. He also referred members to drawings on page 12 of the packet that showed examples of allowable ground monument signs. Gengler stated the verbage was vague in the existing code and the new wording would make the definitions more clear. He showed the drawing of a ground monument sign surrounded by bricks and said the intent was to incorporate that type of sign with the new language so there would be no confusion. The new drawing would allow more flexibility and design. Gengler said there was confusion for signage on corner lots and the new language would allow two ground monument signs on corner lots. The ordinance also would include what would and would not be allowed on ground monument signs containing electronic message centers in PUD areas. They would be subject to the following provisions:
1. Electronic message centers shall not occupy more than fifty (50) percent of the allowable sign surface area.
2. Electronic messages and images may not change more frequently than once every four (4) seconds.
3. The sign message shall not consist of flashing, oscillating or chasing lights.
4. The intensity of illumination must be constant.

He explained the provisions above and said the city wants to regulate the intense flashing signs. He gave as an example the flashing sign at the La Campana Restaurant. What is not wanted are the Las Vegas type signs. Gengler stated he was told by sign company representatives that the intensity of the light could be programmed to be constant.

Grasser said a flashing sign or message sign would be considered a direct light source and questioned the wording of the ordinance on page 10 of the packet. Gengler said that part of the ordinance could or should be changed because it creates some ambiguity.

Grasser talked about the intensity of illumination and said with the new technology laser light intensity can be created. He felt it would be beneficial to define a maximum intensity that would be allowed.

Jeno remarked on a sign on South Washington Street that shines very bright and red. He also suggested possibly two definitions for No. 4, one for the intensity of each light and one for the total illumination of the board. Gengler said there were two electronic signs that are very bright on South Washington Street – Happy Joe’s Pizza and La Campana Restaurant.

MOTION BY DR. KWEIT AND SECOND BY LEE TO GRANT PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF THE TEXT ORDINANCE CHANGE. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.

4-2. MATTER OF THE REQUEST FROM THE GRAND FORKS-EAST GRAND FORKS METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION (GF-EGF MPO) FOR PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE GRAND FORKS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TO INCLUDE THE GRAND FORKS-EAST GRAND FORKS 2030 TRANSPORTATION PLAN UPDATE, (2004 ALTERNATIVE TRANSPORTATION MODES ELEMENT) TOGETHER WITH ALL MAPS, INFORMATION, RECOMMENDATIONS AND DATA CONTAINED THEREIN.

Commissioner Hutchison left the meeting.

Earl Haugen, Director of the Grand Forks-East Grand Forks Metropolitan Planning Organization (GF-EGF MPO), explained that transit, bike and pedestrian elements for the city’s Comprehensive Plan - Long Range Transportation Plan have been combined under the heading of Alternative Transportation Modes. The new updates carry the plan to the horizon year of 2030. He gave a power point presentation of the transit element covering the cost, ridership and challenges for making the transit system more efficient but offering more service.

Lane Magnuson, Planner for GF-EGF MPO, gave a power point presentation for the bike and pedestrian elements. He explained the differences of bike paths, bike lanes and bike routes and the cost of each. He also discussed the greenway for biking and walking and the need to connect bike routes not currently connected. Magnuson showed a map of the city that indicated where the bike paths, bike lanes and bike routes were located or planned for the future.

MOTION BY DR. KWEIT AND SECOND BY WHITCOMB TO GRANT PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF THE ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE CITY’S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TO INCLUDE THE YEAR 2030 TRANSPORTATION PLAN UPDATE (2004 ALTERNATIVE TRANSPORTATION MODES ELEMENT). MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY,

4-3. MATTER OF THE REQUEST FROM CPS, LTD., ON BEHALF OF CRARY DEVELOPMENT, INC., FOR PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF THE REPLAT OF LOT 2, BLOCK 1, CURRAN’S THIRD ADDITION TO THE CITY OF GRAND FORKS, NORTH DAKOTA, LOCATED IN THE 4600 BLOCK OF SOUTH WASHINGTON STREET.

Durrenberger reviewed the replat, stating the developer wanted to divide the one large lot into three lots. Currently, a site plan for one senior apartment building is being reviewed by planning staff. Two more buildings are planned for the other lots. The concern was for access. In 1997, access was moved to the west property line for Stone’s Mobile Radio business. The new plat also has a 20-foot access adjacent to Stone’s Mobile Radio access. The other access to the property is located in the northeast corner of South Washington Street. Durrenberger referred to the technical conditions and said one of the conditions required access to be provided for Lot B from Lots A and C to prevent the lot from being land-locked. Engineering comments address the need for additional utility easements along 47th Avenue South and South Washington Street. Staff recommendation was for preliminary approval subject to the conditions shown on or attached to the review form.

MOTION BY HAGNESS AND SECOND BY WHITCOMB TO GRANT PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF THE REPLAT, SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING SPECIAL CONDITIONS:
1. Submit title opinion.
2. Add dimensions to the south lines of Lots B&C.
3. Show 47th Avenue South as a minor arterial.
4. Show South Washington Street as a principal arterial.
5. Label surrounding lands as shown.
6. Include existing access control lines along 47th Avenue South and South Washington Street.
7. Include easements for all common utilities to Lots A, B and C or submit copies of appropriate agreements.
8. As Lot B has no legal access, ingress-egress easements should be shown across Lots A and C.
9. Use shortened version of city council approval.
10. Include appropriate easements in all lots adjacent to 47th Avenue South and along South Washington Street.

MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.

5. REPORTS FROM THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT:

Potter announced that the American Planning Association National Convention would be earlier than normal and was scheduled for March 19-23, 2005 in San Francisco, CA. He asked that two members be chosen, at the December meeting, to attend the APA Convention.

6. OTHER BUSINESS:

7. ADJOURNMENT.

MOTION BY DREES AND SECOND BY KWEIT TO ADJOURN THE MEETING AT 8:15 P.M. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.



___________________________
John R. Drees, Secretary



___________________________
Gary K. Malm, President