Committee Minutes

PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
MEETING MINUTES
City of Grand Forks, North Dakota
May 7, 2008


At 6:30 p.m., prior to the regular meeting, commission members met for coffee and cake to wish Dr. Robert Kweit farewell and good luck. The mayor presented him a desk set and city logo sweatshirt. Dr. Kweit retired from the University of North Dakota and is moving to Portland, Oregon.


1. MEMBERS PRESENT

The meeting was called to order by Paula Lee at 7:00 p.m. with the following members present: Steve Adams, Doug Christensen, Robert Drees, Al Grasser, Tom Hagness, Dr. Lyle Hall, Bill Hutchison, Dr. Robert Kweit, Gary Malm, Frank Matejcek and Marijo Whitcomb. Absent: Mayor (Dr.) Michael Brown, John Drees, and Curt Kreun. A quorum was present.

Staff present included Brad Gengler, City Planner; Charles Durrenberger, Senior Planner, Ryan Brooks, Senior Planner; and Carolyn Schalk, Administrative Specialist, Senior, Planning and Zoning Department; and Bev Collings, Building and Zoning Administrator (Building Inspections Office). Absent: None.


2. READING AND APPROVAL OF MINUTES FOR APRIL 4, 2007.

Lee asked if there were any corrections or changes to the minutes of April 4, 2007. There were no changes noted and the minutes were accepted as presented.

Brad Gengler presented Dr. Kweit with a plaque from the planning and zoning commission and staff for his 27 years (1980 – 2007) as a commission member.


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

3-1. (PUBLIC HEARING) MATTER OF THE REQUEST FROM GARY MOLSTAD, ON BEHALF OF NORTH DAKOTA CONCRETE PRODUCTS COMPANY, FOR FINAL APPROVAL OF THE PLAT OF MOLSTAD’S SECOND ADDITION TO THE CITY OF GRAND FORKS, NORTH DAKOTA, LOCATED AT NORTH 42ND STREET AND 16TH AVENUE NORTH.

Brooks reviewed the plat request by describing the location on the map. Property owners want to have 16th Avenue North paved. They need to own 50% or more of the area to get the paving process started. Cretex (North Dakota Concrete Products Company) owns 50% of the area. They were not in favor of the road paving and would have the ability to protest and stop the paving project. Mr. Molstad purchased a portion of unplatted property (140 feet deep) from the concrete company that would be assessed for the roadway paving; however, to complete the transaction, the property needed to be platted. Staff recommendation is for final approval.

Hagness asked who would be taxed for the paving. Brooks answered it would be Mr. Molstad and other properties to the south who are in favor of the paving.

Grasser noted for information that the sanitary sewer would have to be installed before the road is paved. The sanitary sewer installation would create another district that would include other properties between the subject property and Gateway Drive.

There were no other questions from 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 WHITCOMB TO APPROVE THE PLAT REQUEST SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING TECHNICAL CHANGES SHOWN ON OR ATTACHED TO THE REVIEW COPY:
1. Submit title opinion.
2. Plat requires a street and highway ordinance.
3. At the time of platting, the city of Grand Forks cannot guarantee all utility services to this site.
4. Add “Block 1” to Lot 1.
5. Add access control along all of North 42nd Street and 120 feet on 16th Avenue North.

MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.

3-2. (PUBLIC HEARING) MATTER OF THE REQUEST FROM THE CITY OF GRAND FORKS PLANNING DEPARTMENT FOR FINAL APPROVAL OF AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE ZONING MAP TO REZONE AND EXCLUDE FROM THE A-1 (AGRICULTURAL PRESERVATION) DISTRICT AND TO INCLUDE WITHIN THE R-1 (SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE) DISTRICT, AUDITOR’S RESUBDIVISION NO. 40, LOCATED ALONG BELMONT ROAD AND BELMONT COURT.

Brooks reviewed the request for rezoning. Two lots existed prior to the flood and were zoned A-1. The plat for the property was given final approval at the April planning and zoning commission meeting. The intent now is to have two single-family lots. In order to allow the two single-family lots, the property needs to be rezoned to R-1. The lots will have a 50-foot building setback as noted on the plat. Staff recommendation is for final approval.

There were no questions from commission members.

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

MOTION BY CHRISTENSEN AND SECOND BY HAGNESS TO GIVE FINAL APPROVAL TO THE ORDINANCE TO REZONE THE AREA. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.


3-3. (PUBLIC HEARING) MATTER OF THE REQUEST FROM ADVANCED ENGINEERING, ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF GRAND FORKS, FOR FINAL APPROVAL (FAST TRACK) OF THE REPLAT OF LOTS A & B, BLOCK 1, OF THE REPLAT OF LOT 5, BLOCK 1, AUDITOR’S RESUBDIVISION NO. 17 TO THE CITY OF GRAND FORKS ND, LOCATED AT 1ST AVENUE NORTH AND RIVERBOAT ROAD.

Durrenberger reviewed the request, stating the area is located behind the Dakota Hotel. Lot E is the parking area for the building. He also indicated the floodwall protection area. There is no right-of-way involved. Staff recommendation is for final approval.

Christensen asked who owned the property. Durrenberger answered the Dakota Properties own Lot E and the city owns Lot D. Before the city acquired Lot D for the floodwall, Dakota Properties owned that area also. When asked about the zoning, Durrenberger said it was B-4, the zoning for the downtown area.

Christensen asked if there was a parking plan for the properties. Grasser stated during negotiations with the Dakota Hotel after the flood, the city acquired property for the floodwall but it is labeled as an easement in order for the city to control it. The Dakota Hotel wanted to retain as much property as possible for parking. Grasser further explained that once the apartment complex across the street is completed, diagonal parking would be constructed in order to increase the number of parking stalls.

There were no more questions from commission members.

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

MOTION BY DR. KWEIT AND SECOND BY GRASSER TO GIVE FINAL APPROVAL OF THE PLAT SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING TECHNICAL CHANGES SHOWN ON OR ATTACHED TO THE REVIEW COPY:
1. Correct plat title in title block and in owner’s certificate as shown.
2. Show monuments set at all corners.
3. Check the bearing of the southwest line of Lot E.
4. Include labeling of Block 1.
5. Include document numbers for vacated 2nd Avenue North and the flood protection easement.
6. Add Curve Number 1 along 1st Avenue North on Lot “D” and include a curve data chart.
7. Use shortened version of city council approval as no street and highway ordinance applies.
8. Include proper signers for the planning and zoning commission.

MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.


3-4. (PUBLIC HEARING) MATTER OF THE REQUEST FROM NEWMAN OUTDOOR ADVERTISING FOR APPROVAL OF A PROPOSED OUTDOOR ADVERTISING SIGN (BILLBOARD) TO BE LOCATED AT 3325 SOUTH WASHINGTON STREET, AS PROVIDED FOR IN SECTION 18-0301 SIGNS: SUBSECTION (CC), RELATING TO OUTDOOR ADVERTISING SIGNS LOCATED ON THE SOUTH WASHINGTON STREET CORRIDOR, SOUTH OF DEMERS AVENUE.

Gengler reviewed the request for approval of a billboard sign at 3325 South Washington Street. Notification of the request was sent to property owners within 200 feet of the proposed location. One letter was received from the owners of the Ameriprise Financial business located just south of the proposed location. The owners have indicated they will appeal if approval is given for the billboard sign. Gengler showed where the sign might possibly be located although it has not been definitely decided. The parking lot has a five-foot setback from the adjoining vacant property so the sign structure would not fit between the vacant lot and the parking lot. Pictures of superimposed images of the sign were shown to the commission. Gengler also noted that nine billboard signs from DeMers Avenue to the southerly limits of the extraterritorial zoning jurisdiction were agreed to when the sign code was amended. There are four existing billboard signs with two other locations approved but the signs are not yet erected.

When asked the size of the sign, the city planner said it would be 300 square feet as allowed along the corridor with B-3 zoning. He was also asked if the proposed billboard sign blocked the view of the Ameriprise building; Gengler answered it would not according to the photo.

Grasser asked if the billboard extended into the right-of-way. Gengler said it might appear to on the superimposed photo but according to the site plan, the sign would have to be situated outside of the right-of-way. Grasser noted the city has agreements with the Department of Transportation on the right-of-way that is unique from other areas and the sign cannot encroach into the right-of-way.

Lee asked about the height of the billboard sign as compared to the FPM sign. Gengler replied the height of the billboard sign could be up to 50 feet but was told by Newman representatives as being approximately 32 feet; the FPM sign is about 20 feet to the top. Christensen said the FPM business has been sold and they would be vacating the building.

Discussion continued on signage in the planned unit developments (PUD) as opposed to the business and industrial districts. The PUD areas are only allowed ground monument signs. Gengler stated there was a transitional area from Washington Street going west on 32nd Avenue South. Pylon signs are allowed on 32nd Avenue South at Washington Street and then the signs get smaller and progress to ground monument signs.

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

Gengler asked that a time frame be included in the motion for appeal from the opposing party.

Christensen said if the commission approved the billboard sign, the party opposing the billboard sign could appeal before the city council.

MOTION BY CHRISTENSEN TO APPROVE THE BILLBOARD REQUEST AND SITE. IF APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION, HE DIRECTED STAFF TO GIVE MR. HODNEFIELD NOTICE THAT HE COULD APPEAL THE FINDING BEFORE THE NEXT REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING. HAGNESS SECONDED THE MOTION AND STATED HE WANTED TO MAKE A FRIENDLY ADDITION, IF SUPPORTED BY CHRISTENSEN, THAT THE LETTER BE RECEIVED AND FILED. CHRISTENSEN AGREED.

Malm spoke on the 90 total billboards that are allowed in the town. Gengler said the inventory is now at 90 billboards and before any billboard sign can be erected, another billboard has to be removed.

MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.


4. COMMUNICATIONS AND PRELIMINARY APPROVALS:

4-1. MATTER OF THE REQUEST FROM PRIBULA ENGINEERING, ON BEHALF OF RALPH APPLEGREN, FOR PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF THE PLAT OF BRETON’S 2ND SUBDIVISION, BEING PART OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER (NE-1/4) OF SECTION 3, TOWNSHIP 150 NORTH, RANGE 51 WEST, GRAND FORKS COUNTY, NORTH DAKOTA.

Gengler reviewed the plat, stating after discussion at the April meeting, the issue was tabled. The applicant resubmitted another plat that resembled the initial plat of April, 2006. It is one of three plats allowed after the moratorium was in place. The area is located in the Allendale Township on the southwesterly fringe of the extraterritorial zoning jurisdiction. The plat comprises a total of 78 acres and include 6 lots – two existing lots with homes and four single-family lots on the east side of the plat area with 3.3 to four acres each. The large undeveloped lot in the center is 54 acres and will remain in an agricultural status. Gengler pointed out the access spacing on the easterly side of the plat and said they fit within the level four access spacing. Staff recommended preliminary approval of the plat.

Malm asked if the plat ended all development in that area. Gengler answered yes. The plat shown encompasses what is to be developed for non-farm single-family. The applicant will be unable to do further development until the ordinance is changed. After the plat is approved, it will be subject to the new rules such as one dwelling per 40 acres, etc.

Christensen asked why the plat changed. Gengler said the southwest quarter quarter is entirely within the county’s jurisdiction. The residual of the area is under a different ownership.

MOTION BY HUTCHISON AND SECOND BY HAGNESS TO GIVE PRELIMINARY APPROVAL TO THE PLAT SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING TECHNICAL CHANGES SHOWN ON OR ATTACHED TO THE REVIEW COPY:
1. Submit title opinion.
2. Provide right-of-way reservation along west line of Lot 5, Block 2.
3. Show and dimension break in access control along north-south quarter-quarter line.
4. Move access control line to near south right-of-way line of 12th Avenue NE.
5. Include square footages for all lots.
6. Plat requires 8% park dedication.
7. Submit an acceptable stormwater drainage study for all platted lands.
8. Submit a grading plan for all platted lands to include roadway, ditch and backyard drainage grades.
9. Plat requires a street and highway ordinance.
10. Add 20-feet drainage and utility easement along the east line of Lot 2, Block 1.
11. Plat requires a water plan and roadway maintenance plan.

MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.

Christensen offered his appreciation to Mr. Applegren and staff for the resubmitted plat that indicated the development council thought the plat would show.


4-2. MATTER OF THE REQUEST FROM PRIBULA ENGINEERING, ON BEHALF OF GLEN GRANSBERG, FOR PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF THE PLAT OF MERRIFIELD INDUSTRIAL PARK SECOND ADDITION TO THE CITY OF GRAND FORKS, ND, LOCATED AT COUNTY ROAD 6 AND SOUTH 55TH STREET.

Robert Drees asked to be recused from voting on Items 4-2 and 4-3.

MOTION BY MALM AND SECOND BY DR. HALL TO RECUSE ROBERT DREES FROM VOTING ON ITEMS 4-2 AND 4-3. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.

Gengler showed aerial photos of the plat area located north of Merrifield. He noted there were a few houses in the general area known as the Merrifield Original Townsite, along with industrial warehousing activities associated with farm related products. In 2000, the Merrifield Industrial Park First Addition was platted and rezoned to I-2 (heavy industrial) District. Mr. Drees desires to purchase lots in the area to accommodate additional warehousing for agricultural products. Staff also talked to Mr. Drees on how to appropriately zone the area. Staff reviewed the new subdivision regulations as it relates to agricultural platting situations versus the non-farm single-family. Currently the subdivision regulations revolve around residential platting. The plat does not really fit the larger scale farm operations previously discussed so in addition to the plat, the recommendation is to establish a planned unit development (PUD) and to include the original existing I-2 area. That will create an agricultural PUD that allows specific uses being proposed.

Robert Drees stated the survey/engineer could not be present at the meeting so he was speaking to the issues. He noted Mr. Gransberg, the current owner of the property is present if anyone had questions of him. He explained he is purchasing the land soon to expand the farming operation. They currently own the existing Merrifield Industrial Park First Addition. At one point, they thought about selling the property and thought the industrial zoning would be better than agricultural for that reason. After discussion with staff, he discovered that different bufferyards apply when any other use is close by. The original facilities were rented out until recently but he is planning on fully utilizing the facility for his farm use. He plans to build additional machinery storage and grain storage on the property across the road. By letting it all go into an agricultural PUD, it will encompass his needs in his farming operation. He stated he is landlocked between the railroad and South 55th Street and there is no place to expand on the current site.

MOTION BY DR. HALL AND SECOND BY WHITCOMB TO GIVE 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. Name avenue rights-of-way as shown.
3. Correct plat title in title block and in owner’s certificate.
4. Plat requires street and highway ordinance. Use longer city council approval certificate.
5. Realign west line of Lot 1, Block 2, to match existing platted lands south thereof.
6. Plat acceptance recognizes a variance to Land Development Code 18-0907(3)(L)(C) relating to level four access control.
7. Plat requires the following:
Street right-of-way, drainage and grading plan
Wastewater treatment plan
Water plan
Roadway maintenance plan
8. Align north portion of South 55th Street to be east of BNSF lands or provide sufficient documentation that existing road can remain on railroad lands.
9. Enlarge utility easement along east line of 55th Street to 20-feet of width.

Matejcek asked what the zoning would be. Gengler answered with the PUD zoning, the specific uses can be determined.

MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.

4-3. MATTER OF THE REQUEST FROM THE GRAND FORKS PLANNING DEPARTMENT FOR PRELIMINARY APROVAL OF AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE ZONING MAP TO EXCLUDE FROM THE I-2 (HEAVY INDUSTRIAL) DISTRICT, ALL OF MERRIFIELD INDUSTRIAL PARK FIRST ADDITION AND ALSO TO EXCLUDE FROM THE A-2 (AGRICULTURAL URBAN RESERVE) DISTRICT, ALL OF MERRIFIELD INDUSTRIAL PARK SECOND ADDITION AND TO INCLUDE WITHIN THE MERRIFIELD PUD (PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT), CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT PLAN, ALL OF MERRIFIELD INDUSTRIAL PARK FIRST ADDITION AND ALL OF MERRIFIELD INDUSTRIAL PARK SECOND ADDITION, ALL LOCATED IN SECTION 31, TOWNSHIP 151 NORTH, RANGE 50 WEST OF THE FIFTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN.

Gengler reviewed the concept development plan and said the existing I-2 zoning will be incorporated into the overall PUD. The uses under the PUD would include all the uses in the A-2 District as well as storage warehousing. Between preliminary and final approval, staff will meet with applicant to finalize the land uses, with the exception of residential uses. Another reason for the PUD was to consider the density issues and the surrounding land uses. Staff recommended preliminary approval.

Dr. Hall asked how the bean company managed to obtain the land from the railroad to have the easement that is so close. Mr. Drees stated the land in the Industrial Park First Addition is owned by him. Walhalla Bean Company and AGP Grain are south of his property along the railroad site. In 1991, the railroad made a quick one-time offer for people in Merrifield to buy the property. Up to that point it was a certain factor of the annual rental right. He took the offer from the railroad and purchased the property from the railroad. The two businesses to the south did not take the option at that time and as far as he now knows, that option no longer exists.

Mr. Drees explained the railroad right-of-way through the townsite of Merrifield is 200 feet. When it gets to the north quarter at the end of the proposed plat, it goes down to 75 feet. It was widened to 200 feet through the townsite of Merrifield but south of Merrifield it narrows to 75 feet all the way to Thompson. Grasser said the township road is outside the right-of-way and safe from vagaries of the railroad. Mr. Drees stated when they expanded their business in 1991, they purchased an easement from Mr. Gransberg and dedicated it to the township so the road could be moved to the east.

MOTION BY HAGNESS AND SECOND BY DR. KWEIT TO GIVE PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF THE REZONING TO A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT, CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT PLAN. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.

4-4. MATTER OF THE REQUEST FROM THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT, ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF GRAND FORKS, ND, 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 18-0206 A-1 (AGRICULTURAL PRESERVATION) DISTRICT AND SECTION 18-0207 A-2 (AGRICULTURAL URBAN RESERVE) DISTRICT.

Brooks explained the ordinance adopted earlier in the year needed to be amended to remove one sentence that read “A written notice of zoning and subdivision authority shall be recorded with the Grand Forks County Recorder’s office providing notice of the city’s zoning and subdivision ordinances.” The purpose for the change is not to penalize the original farmsteads on properties that were never subdivided onto their own platted lot. The original farmstead would not be penalized on density in the future.

MOTION BY MALM AND SECOND BY DR. KWEIT TO GIVE PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF THE ORDINANCE AS PRESENTED. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.

4-5. MATTER OF THE REQUEST FROM PRIBULA ENGINEERING, ON BEHALF OF FRANCES L. BERTHEUSON, FOR PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF THE PLAT OF FRANTASTIC ACRES ADDITION, BEING A PORTION OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER (NE-1/4) OF SECTION 35, TOWNSHIP 151 NORTH, RANGE 51 WEST, GRAND FORKS COUNTY, NORTH DAKOTA.

Brooks reviewed the plat by showing where the original farmstead was located on the map. The area started out with 160 acres, but three or four years ago they sold a three acre parcel that was subdivided from the original 160 acres, leaving 157 acres. The original farmstead was never separated out from the farmland. The request is to separate the farmstead (seven acres) from the remaining farmland. The city is getting the right-of-way for 69th Street (section line road) which will be a classified street in the future.

MOTION BY HUTCHISON AND SECOND BY MATEJCEK TO GIVE PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF THE PLAT SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING TECHNICAL CHANGES SHOWN ON OR ATTACHED TO THE REVIEW COPY:
1. Submit title opinion.
2. Show access control along all of South 69th Street except the existing driveway location.
3. Identify parcel north of Lot 1.
4. Use complete city council approval certificate as street and highway ordinance is required.
5. Include square footage of Lot 1, Block 1.
6. Plat also requires:
Street right-of-way, drainage and grading plan
Wastewater treatment plan
Water plan
Roadway maintenance plan
7. Identify north and east lines of Section 35.
8. Plat title should read: Frantastic Acres Addition.

Robert Drees asked how many more lots the landowner could sell under the current code? Brooks answered three new housing units (including the existing two) could be added but they would have to be on 40-acre lots.

Grasser stated that access control would control placement of any further lots sold.

MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.

4-6. MATTER OF THE REQUEST FROM THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT, ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF GRAND FORKS, ND, 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, ENACTING SECTION 18-0224 CORRIDOR OVERLAY DISTRICT.

Brooks explained the Land Development Code Revision Committee meets every Thursday morning and one of the ordinances from the committee is the Overlay District. The ordinance is presented for preliminary approval. The ordinance is consistent with the 2035 Land Use Plan and will aid in cleaning up the entrance points of the city. The transportation corridors are very critical and are generally the first thing that gets developed. In the rural areas, they are developed first and as the city grows out, we have to incorporate what is in the rural areas into the city. The overlay district will aid in that respect as the city moves out. The purpose of the district is to ensure high aesthetic quality of development along the important transportation corridors. This encompasses minimum roadway sections, right-of-way requirements, access spacing, as well as the high standards for buildings, landscaping and other improvements constructed on the properties along the identified corridors. The establishment of development requirements will encourage substantial capital investments for the development of those properties and promote the quality, scale and character of development consistent with the identified corridor’s existing and planned uses.

Brooks stated the following corridors boundaries will extend 600 feet on either side of the right-of-way:
1) South Columbia Road, from 32nd Ave S to Merrifield Rd
2) South Washington St, from 32nd Ave S to Merrifield Rd
3) Gateway Dr. from I-29 to the edge of the city’s zoning jurisdiction
4) 32nd Ave S from County Road #5 to I-29
5) Merrifield Road from I-29 to the edge of the city’s zoning jurisdiction
6) Columbia Rd from Merrifield Rd to the edge of the city’s zoning jurisdiction
7) South Washington St, from Merrifield Rd to the edge of the city’s zoning jurisdiction
8) County Road #5 between Gateway Dr to the edge of the city’s zoning jurisdiction
9) North Washington St to the edge of the city’s zoning jurisdiction
10) DeMers Ave to the edge of the city’s zoning jurisdiction

There are no uses specifically listed in the overlay district. The base zoning along each of the above corridors will remain the same.

Brooks explained that all buildings for the corridors listed above must meet the requirements of the Corridor Overlay District. Building expansions are exempt unless the expansion is more than 25% of the total square footage of the building. The percentage cannot be broken up into various expansions to avoid the standard requirements. Once the 25% is met for a building, it must be designed according to the standards. The standards are in three different areas: roadway, building design and site design.

The roadway standards provide increased standards for right-of-way size, signal spacing, access, side street setbacks, intersection geometrics and posted speed limits depending on type of roadway.

The building design standards provide a substantial change from what is currently allowed. Exterior building requirements will not allow metal buildings, and exterior design requirements will be in place for minimum glass, drainage pipes, mechanical equipment, building entries, etc (aesthetic design). Building facades that exceed 100 feet will need some type of design or architectural element to break up the expanse. Brooks also added there will be a catalog of buildings and building materials in the planning department office to be used as a reference. There will be consideration for special corridor features as well such as a specific design feature for a specific corridor (example: specific tree along the berms).

Dr. Hall questioned the requirement of no metal buildings. Christensen said the definition is included in the ordinance and architectural flat metal panels are allowed. Dr. Hall asked about the Furniture Row Building. Brooks said the Furniture Row building type would not be allowed in the future. The Morton type buildings will not be allowed along the corridors within or outside the city limits.

The site design standards relate to buffers and setbacks, natural features, functional site elements, building and parking lot placement, pedestrian accommodations, bicycle and transit use, lighting and stormwater and drainage elements.

Brooks explained there is an appeal section included in the ordinance. The appeals are submitted to the planning commission and then to the council.

Lee asked for verification on the 600 feet (two blocks) on each side of the corridor. Brooks said it was 600 feet in each direction. Including the right-of-way, there would be a 1300-foot swathe where the guidelines would apply. This should extend to backage roads parallel to the main corridor.

Robert Drees asked if metal buildings for machinery storage would be denied for farming operations located along one of the corridors. Brooks said they would have to apply for a waiver or appeal. The ordinance does not state that farm operations are exempt.

Hagness said he agreed with Drees that farming operations should have exemptions. Brooks said some of the decisions would depend on the slabs but the ideal place for those types of buildings would be 600 feet back or at least to push the building back as far as possible. There will have to be some give and take as the city moves out to the rural areas. The committee can consider some changes in the ordinance regarding farm operations.

Hutchison stated the committee wanted to make sure that in the future the city does not have another Gateway Drive. If appropriate for a farm operation, the waiver process might be a better mechanism than trying to include everything in the ordinance.

Matejcek said storage of agricultural products and farm crop production is allowed in A-1 and A-2. When the pressure is on to develop farmsteads, the other buildings will disappear. He referred to the former Greenberg grain bins located by South Middle School; they have been removed and it is mowed grass. The Quonsets will be gone in the future also. He also referred to the Birkholz Farm that used to be located in the middle of town and it has disappeared. He further stated he did not agree with the 600 feet on each side or the restriction of metal buildings. Consideration should be given to metal buildings when it no longer looks like a metal building.

Malm questioned the 600 feet from right-of-way. He noted there are places with a two-lane right-of-way and in other places there is a four-lane right-of-way. That will make a difference on the 600 feet. He felt there should be an easier way to deal with it. Malm talked about farms that are going to the GPS mode and wondered where those would be allowed. They have to be placed every few miles or they do not work. Brooks said there are tower regulations in the code. He also noted that a four-lane road is even more important than a two-lane road and they need to keep the 600 feet setback. Malm stated on Washington Street the two-lane road starts at All Seasons. When asked what a normal four-lane roadway is, Grasser replied there was no normal. There are things that change on right-of-way. On South Washington, it is purchased right-of-way. The variety of roads currently is the very reason for the 600 feet.

Christensen said the committee has been meeting on the code revision for months trying to respond to the charge they were given. The appeal section will help to resolve some of the issues, but the intent is to be mindful of the charge to preserve and protect the corridors. Allowing for 600 feet preserves the buffer area to make sure the city has the necessary corridors. He remarked that in visiting other areas developed in the 1980s and 1990s, there are wide-open corridors and expansive areas where people want the gateway to their cities very presentable. The idea is to get back on track and for the corridors that are left, the intent is to preserve them the best way possible.

MOTION BY CHRISTENSEN AND SECOND BY WHITCOMB TO GIVE PRELIMINARY APPROVAL TO THE CORRIDOR OVERLAY DISTRICT ORDINANCE. MOTION CARRIED WITH MATEJCEK, DR. HALL AND ROBERT DREES VOTING NAY.

5. REPORTS FROM THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT:

There were no reports from the planning department.

6. OTHER BUSINESS:

None.



7. ADJOURNMENT.

MOTION BY DR. KWEIT AND SECOND BY HAGNESS TO ADJOURN THE MEETING AT 8:26 P.M. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.