City of Grand Forks, North Dakota

Employment - City Directory - Contact Us


	PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES City of Grand Forks, North Dakota April 2, 2008 1. MEMBERS PRESENT The meeting was called to order by Paula Lee at 5:30 p.m. with the following members present: Steve Adams, Doug Christensen (reported late to the meeting at 6:43 p.m.), John Drees, Robert Drees, Al Grasser, Tom Hagness, Bill Hutchison, Curt Kreun, Gary Malm, Frank Matejcek, Dana Sande and Marijo Whitcomb. Absent: Mayor (Dr.) Michael Brown and Dr. Lyle Hall. A quorum was present. Staff present included Brad Gengler, City Planner; Ryan Brooks, Senior Planner; and Carolyn Schalk, Administrative Specialist, Senior (Planning and Zoning Department); and Bev Collings, Building and Zoning Administrator (Inspections Office). Absent: Charles Durrenberger, Senior Planner. 2. READING AND APPROVAL OF MINUTES FOR MARCH 5, 2008. Lee asked if there were any corrections or changes to the minutes of March 5, 2008. MOTION BY WHITCOMB AND SECOND BY JOHN DREES TO APPROVE THE MARCH 5, 2008 MINUTES AS PRESENTED. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Gengler asked the commission to suspend the agenda and consider the following two related items that would be added to the agenda: MATTER OF THE REQUEST FROM TONY KOBETSKY, DOUGLAS EARL AND JOHN R. MCDONALD, 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. MATTER OF THE REQUEST FROM TONY KOBESTSKY, DOUGLAS EARL AND JOHN R. MCDONALD, FOR PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE ZONING MAP TO EXCLUDE FROM THE A-1 (AGRICULTURAL PRESERVATION) DISTRICT AND INCLUDE WITHIN THE BISON INDUSTRIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) ALL OF THE BISON INDUSTRIAL SUBDIVISION TO THE CITY OF GRAND FORKS, ND, LOCATED AT DEMERS AVENUE AND COUNTY ROAD NO. 5. MOTION BY MALM AND SECOND BY MATEJCEK TO SUSPEND THE AGENDA AND ADD THE TWO ITEMS TO THE AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 3. PUBLIC HEARINGS, FINAL APPROVALS, PETITIONS AND MINOR CHANGES. 3-1. (PUBLIC HEARING) MATTER OF THE REQUEST FROM PRIBULA ENGINEERING, ON BEHALF OF FRANCES L. BERTHEUSON, FOR FINAL APPROVAL OF THE PLAT OF FRANTASTIC ACRES FIRST RESUBDIVISION TO THE CITY OF GRAND FORKS, NORTH DAKOTA, LOCATED AT SOUTH 69^TH STREET AND GRAND FORKS COUNTY ROAD NO. 6. Gengler reviewed the request. Some months ago the commission approved a plat for Frantastic Acres. The plat was recorded. The buyer then asked to include a row of shelterbelt trees in with the previous property purchased. The previous lot was approximately 7.5 acres and the additional property is approximately 2.5 acres. Nothing has changed except to increase the acreage. Staff recommended final approval of the request. Lee opened the public hearing. There was no one to speak ad the public hearing was closed. MOTION BY WHITCOMB AND SECOND BY JOHN DREES TO GRANT FINAL APPROVAL TO THE PLAT REQUEST. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 3-2. (PUBLIC HEARING) MATTER OF THE REQUEST FROM TIM CRARY, ON BEHALF OF SPROULE, CRARY AND CRARY, FOR FINAL 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. Brooks reviewed the request, stating the ordinance changes two areas under the Year 2035 Land Use Plan. The first one on 47^th Avenue South was left off the plan and is included as a cleanup to designate the area as commercial. Another area along South Washington Street is located south of the Valley Dairy Store. Currently the land use plan shows the area to be residential and the request is to change it to commercial for a planned commercial storage facility. Staff recommendation is for approval since the area is between two existing commercial areas. Malm questioned the exclusion of the 140-foot strip of white area along South Washington Street. Brooks explained the change in the land use plan included only the extra-territorial areas outside the city limits. Lee opened the public hearing. There was no one to speak and the public hearing was closed. MOTION BY HAGNESS AND SECOND BY MALM TO APPROVE THE ORDINANCE REQUEST FOR CHANGES TO THE YEAR 2035 LAND USE PLAN. Adams asked to be recused from voting on agenda items No. 3-2, 3-3 and 3-4. MOTION BY MATEJCEK AND SECOND BY MALM TO RECUSE ADAMS FROM VOTING ON AGENDA ITEMS 3-2, 3-3, AND 3-4. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. MOTION FOR APPROVAL OF THE REQUEST CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 3-3. (PUBLIC HEARING) MATTER OF THE REQUEST FROM TIM CRARY, ON BEHALF OF SPROULE, CRARY AND CRARY, FOR FINAL APPROVAL OF THE PLAT OF MEADOW RIDGE SECOND ADDITION TO THE CITY OF GRAND FORKS, NORTH DAKOTA, LOCATED IN THE 4900 BLOCK OF SOUTH WASHINGTON STREET. Brooks explained the plat is for the area just south of the Valley Dairy store and is proposed to be commercial storage business. South 11^th Street ends as a cul-de-sac since it cannot go across the southend drainway. Lee opened the public hearing. There was no one to speak and the public hearing was closed. MOTION BY KREUN AND SECOND BY SANDE TO GRANT FINAL APPROVAL TO THE PLAT REQUEST SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING TECHNICAL CHANGES SHOWN ON OR ATTACHED TO THE REVIEW COPY: 1. Submit title opinion. 2. Plat requires street and highway ordinance. 3. Add note for basis of bearings. 4. Add floodplain note and 100-year flood line. 5. Show and dimension break in the access control line along the Southend Drainway lot and note that it is for bikeway/pedestrians only. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 3-4. (PUBLIC HEARING) MATTER OF THE REQUEST FROM TIM CRARY, ON BEHALF OF SPROULE, CRARY AND CRARY, FOR FINAL APPROVAL OF AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE ZONING MAP TO EXCLUDE FROM THE MEADOW RIDGE PUD (PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT), CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 1, AND TO INCLUDE WITHIN THE MEADOW RIDGE PUD (PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT), CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT PLAN, AMENDMENT NO. 2, ALL OF MEADOW RIDGE FIRST AND SECOND ADDITIONS TO THE CITY OF GRAND FORKS, ND, AND ALSO TO INCLUDE UNPLATTED LANDS LYING BETWEEN 47^TH AVENUE SOUTH AND 51^ST AVENUE SOUTH AND BETWEEN SOUTH WASHINGTON STREET AND THE WESTERLY PLATTED BOUNDARIES OF NORTH PINES RESUBDIVISION AND SOUTH PINES ADDITION. Brooks reviewed the concept development plan. He indicated where the storage development would be with an underlying zoning of B-3. Parcel three is the area of R-4 zoning that can include apartments. Parcels four, five and six will be R-1 and R-2 areas and will buffer the existing single-family homes. Brooks pointed out the internal roadway and access for the area. Grasser stated the concept plan is a good example of the type of plan the city wants from developers. In the past, some of the concept plans did not give city engineering staff enough detail to plan our infrastructure layouts. The current plan lays out the various land uses as well as the road system. Matejcek said he was concerned about any density change and asked what would happen if the R-1 and R-2 districts were changed to apartments in the future. Brooks said that type of change would require a zoning change and notification to the surrounding neighborhood. Traffic would increase if the area were changed to more apartments with less family dwellings. The local roads are made to handle the local traffic and roadways and traffic would have to be addressed with any changes in density. Lee opened the public hearing. Tim Litzinger, 933 49^th Avenue South, said his concern was the extension of 48^th/49^th Avenue South to South Washington Street. He did not have a problem with the road be extended to the Valley Dairy facility but why the need to open the roadway to South Washington Street? Brooks stated that people in the area could go to the Valley Dairy store without going to 47^th Avenue South and people could go to the Valley Daily store from South Washington also. It also allows another way out onto South Washington Street for those residents living in the general vicinity. People will stay on the arterial roadways as long as possible before turning onto the local streets. Mr. Litzinger said he understood when he bought his home that the roadway would be extended to Valley Dairy and then end. There would be no through street to South Washington Street. He also noted that Pines Circle does not have a stop sign and people drive through the intersection to Cherry Street. Keven Maddock, 963 49^th Avenue South, stated his concern is that 48^th/49^th will become a speedway through the area. There will be bus traffic and South Middle School traffic and his concern is for the safety of small children playing in and around the street with the increased traffic. Richard Abar, 5056 South Pines Court, asked for a better map that included the South Pines Court area but was pleased with the development. He did ask for a more definitive answer of how close the cul-de-sacs are to the drainway and how close the South Pines area is to the No. 4 area. How much buffering would there be between the two areas? He also expressed concern on flooding and if the drainway is enough to take care of the water in the area. He also asked for earlier notice when areas 4, 5 and 6 are developed. Brooks answered Mr. Abar’s questions on the distances between the South Pines area and the cul-de-sacs and to the No. 4 area. Grasser addressed the questions on the drainage. Gengler addressed the concern about the extension of 48^th/49^th Avenue South to South Washington Street. Some of the original concept plans for areas north and south of 47^th Avenue South were not well developed. Two years ago, the developer submitted more detailed plans regarding roadways and utilities and the extension was planned at that time. Gengler said when the area showed as No. 4 is platted, the planning office will inform the neighborhood. Pam Demmers, 1590 South Pines Court, said she had some of the same concerns as Mr. Abar. Brooks showed her on the map where her property was in connection with the cul-de-sacs. Lee closed the public hearing Hagness asked if access onto South Washington Street was necessary. Brooks said it was necessary for ingress and egress for the planned development of parcel nos. 3, 4, 5 and 6. Parcel No. 2 is for commercial uses and will access onto South 11^th Street. He noted that the Valley Dairy site has two access points – one from South 11^th Street and one to the rear of the property on 48^th/49^th Avenue South. The commercial businesses will not have direct access onto South Washington Street. MOTION BY KREUN AND SECOND BY GRASSER TO GRANT FINAL APPROVAL TO THE CONCEPT PLAN AS PRESENTED. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 3-5. (PUBLIC HEARING) MATTER OF THE REQUEST FROM THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT, ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF GRAND FORKS, ND, FOR FINAL 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. Gengler reviewed the ordinance for the corridor overlay district. There were two questions raised at the March meeting. One of the questions was regarding building materials and percentages and if roofing systems were included or excluded. After researching minutes, it has been determined that roofing systems are not accounted for. He referred members to page 40 (5) Standards, (A) Building Design, No. 2. The second question raised was why the extension of Merrifield Road (I-29 east to the river) was not on the map. After researching it, staff found it was never identified as being part of the corridor. The commission could add that now. Gengler went on to say that the corridor overlay district was advertised as a news release and as a legal notice in the Herald. Malm asked why the Merrifield Road was not identified all the way to the river. Gengler said he did not know but it could be added now. He suggested it be added in the motion to approve the ordinance. Lee opened the public hearing. There was no one to speak and the public hearing was closed. MOTION BY MALM AND SECOND BY WHITCOMB TO GRANT FINAL APPROVAL OF THE ORDINANCE WITH THE ADDITION THAT THE CORRIDOR ON MERRIFIELD ROAD/12^TH AVENUE NE BE CONTINUED TO THE RIVER. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 3-6. MATTER OF THE REQUEST FROM DONALD F. BARCOME, FOR APPROVAL OF A PETITION TO VACATE OLSON DRIVE RIGHT-OF-WAY NORTH OF 25^TH AVENUE SOUTH. Gengler reviewed the vacation request by stating the city had been in talks with the property owner (Dr. Barcome) of the home located at 2424 Olson Drive. Dr. Barcome’s son, Donald Jr. resides in the home. The petition is to vacate a portion of Olson Drive. The city of Grand Forks, ND and Dr. Barcome entered into a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) that if Mr. Barcome is the successful bidder of the property and the right-of-way is successfully vacated, the area would revert back to Mr. Barcome. The MOU also established that at no time could Mr. Barcome develop or subdivide the remnant parcel. Gengler stated he had contacted leaders of the Myra Museum and was told they were aware of the request for the vacation and they were not objecting to it. Staff recommendation is for approval of the petition to vacate but Gengler stated the provisions of the MOU must be completed prior to the vacation being finalized. Kreun asked if the vacation process would be completed by May 30, 2008 as shown as provision No. 8 in the MOU. Gengler said he discussed the issue with the city attorney’s office and was told the date of May 30, 2008 meant that the vacation process had been approved by then. If the commission approves the vacation, that date would be met. The other provisions of a new replat, new deed recorded, etc would be finalized at some point in the future. Kreun asked what would happen if he did not follow through with the remainder of the purchase after May 30, 2008. Gengler said the vacation petition would not be recorded until everything in the MOU had been completed. Grasser said the lot as of today is not a buildable lot and the vacation could potentially create a buildable lot. The biggest concern on the part of the city was that they did not want to afford someone a buildable lot based on a vacation petition. Grasser also wanted to publicly acknowledge the work of Mark Walker, Assistant City Engineer, who spent many years and hundreds of hours of staff time on the project. MOTION BY MALM AND SECOND BY KREUN TO APPROVE THE VACATION REQUEST. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 4. COMMUNICATIONS AND PRELIMINARY APPROVALS. 4-1. MATTER OF THE REQUEST FROM JERRY PRIBULA, ON BEHALF OF MICHAEL L. MARCOTTE, FOR PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF THE PLAT OF SHADYRIDGE ESTATES EIGHTH RESUBDIVISION TO THE CITY OF GRAND FORKS ND, LOCATED NORTH OF ADAMS DRIVE, SOUTH OF DESIREE DRIVE AND EAST AND WEST OF MORGAN STREET. Brooks reviewed the plat request and also indicated the location of the flood dike. The proposed development shows 56 lots in the area. He talked about the stormwater issues and pointed out where ponding may occur on the development. A variance is required for the plat to allow Lots 9 through 15 to have direct access from Adams Drive. Lot 16 would access off Terrace View Drive. Brooks said what is driving the development is the specials which are substantial. Grasser said the plat is a good example of a development where a detailed concept was not presented early in the process. The area has been developed in a piece-meal fashion and the infrastructure has not been under a master plan. The infrastructure was based on lots as they sold which made the costs very high. The asphalt road is not in the center of the right-of-way as it exists today. Homeowners who built on the north edge did not have a good idea of where the property lot lines were located. When a project was started last year and showed where the sidewalks and curbs would be located, homeowners were shocked. The problem has been having someone to fix the problem because it makes lots bigger, moving the right-of-way and that means changing lot or giving land to other lots to make it work. As confusing as that is, Grasser said he was glad to have a plat on the table. At times, it has seemed to be an unsolvable issue in meeting the needs and expectations of the existing homeowners and how to supply infrastructure. He feels the plat reflects what will be acceptable to the current residents. Grasser continued by stating that one of the problems has been that the city was imposing specials on farmland due to development on one-half of the street and that created heartburn to the owner. The problem is allowing people to start building before infrastructure is in place and all the costs are known. There is sanitary sewer and water on the south side of Adams Drive and that allows the very basics of services. Adams Drive requires improvement and storm sewer needs to be in place. When interest is shown to build in the area, it triggers a proposal to get the storm sewer in place. The lots are not very deep. If someone has a 25-foot setback and the city is putting in a 48-inch storm sewer, it might be 15 feet from someone’s home. That causes political, emotional and financial problems for all concerned. If a road system is put in post-development, it raises the cost of development 30% to 50% due to existing accesses, replacing yards and landscaping. He said he did not want homeowners surprised when a project is started. Although he is happy to see something going on in the area, there are unique challenges for the area. The plat can work but he wants everyone to know up front what the impacts and repercussions might be. Malm asked Grasser if the issue should be tabled. Grasser said 90% of the plat is great and he would be comfortable letting the plat move forward. There will continue to be meetings between staff and developer between preliminary and final approval. He wanted to bring up the issues at preliminary rather than waiting until final approval. Jerry Pribula, surveyor, stated the property has had historic problems. The storm sewer issues can be worked out. He said he represents both LaVonne Adams, the seller and Michael Marcotte, the developer. Mr. Marcotte wants to develop the property if economically possible. The biggest problem is the specials. Mrs. Adams has no interest in dealing with the property and if not developed, it will end up back with the city. There is now three years of delinquent specials. Mr. Pribula said Mr. Marcotte is not opposed to donating land to the existing property owners. He asked that the commission and city bear with them as they plan out the area. They are asking that seven lots be given individual direct access onto Adams Drive. If they are able to do that, he feels they can go forward with the plan. They looked at different options but if they can’t get the direct access for the seven lots, it may not be a worthwhile project. They want to go forward with the project and work out the issues with city staff. Christensen reported to the meeting at 6:43 p.m. Hagness asked about why River Ridge Road ended in a cul-de-sac and did not continue through to Adams Drive. Mr. Pribula answered it was because of the grades and going over the dike. Grasser agreed with Mr. Pribula and also stated that staff had a short reaction time to the plat but felt they could work through the issues. He wanted to see the plat go forward. He did mention the area is not currently in the floodplain based on the current FIRM maps. FEMA will be updating the flood elevations. The proposed plat area elevation will be 836 feet and will be coming into the floodplain. MOTION BY MATEJCEK AND SECOND BY ADAMS TO GRANT PRELIMINARY APPROVAL TO THE PLAT REQUEST, SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING TECHNICAL CHANGES SHOWN ON OR ATTACHED TO THE REVIEW COPY, AS WELL AS APPROVAL OF THE STREET AND HIGHWAY ORDINANCE: 1. Submit title opinion. 2. Shade vacation areas of Morgan Street and Desiree Drive. 3. Complete all curve data on curve chart. 4. Identify all monuments found. 5. Use a single line type to show the 100-year flood line. 6. Include access control. 7. Identify and include distances for small tract of land within Lot 18, Block 1. 8. Include a survey line along the Red River or bearing and distances along the plat boundary. 9. Shade all of plat area within the vicinity map. 10. Update the floodplain note to reflect the most current flood map. 11. Remove shaded areas of previous LOMAR-F’s as they are no longer current. 12. Plat requires vacation of streets and easement. 13. Plat requires street and highway ordinance. 14. Plat requires 8% park and open space dedication. 15. On page 2, include all appropriate mortgagees as signers, per title commitment or submit letters of ratification. 16. Include easements from stormwater pond area to right-of-way. 17. Submit master utility plan for all lands within the plat boundary. 18. Plat acceptance recognizes a variance to the land development code 18-0907(L)(b) with regards to access onto Adams Drive. 19. Address proper street-naming issue. 20. Include slope easement for drainway and tree right-of-way as shown on plat of Shady Ridge Estates Third Addition. 21. Enlarge the 15-foot strip of land being part of Lot 1, Block 1 between Lots 6 and 7, to 20-feet of width and add a 10-foot wide utility easement on both sides. 22. Create a 25-foot wide strip of land along the east line of Lot 11, Block 1 to become a part of Lot 1, Block 1 for access to the rear portions of Lot 1. 23. Update ground contour lines to reflect current conditions. Lee asked if staff was agreeable to the seven individual lots accessing onto Adams Drive. Brooks said that is one of the issues to be worked out between preliminary and final approval. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 4-2. MATTER OF THE REQUEST FROM BRANDEN BARTHOLOMEW, ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF GRAND FORKS, ND, FOR PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF THE PLAT OF AUDITOR’S SUBDIVISION NO. 45 TO THE CITY OF GRAND FORKS ND, LOCATED AT SOUTH COLUMBIA ROAD AND 62^ND AVENUE SOUTH (SE-1/4, SE-1/4 OF SECTION 29). Gengler reviewed the plat, stating it was related to the city’s flood protection project and part of the ponding system. Staff recommendation is for final approval subject to the technical changes. There were no questions on the plat. MOTION BY HAGNESS AND SECOND BY KREUN TO GRANT PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF THE PLAT SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING TECHNICAL CHANGES SHOWN ON OR ATTACHED TO THE REVIEW COPY: 1. Submit title opinion. 2. Include two-foot ground contours and spot ground elevations. 3. Add access control and driveway locations. 4. Enlarge right-of-way width along Columbia Road to 80-feet with a 10-untility easement to 60-feet with a 10-foot utility easement along 62^nd Avenue South. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 4-3. MATTER OF THE REQUEST FROM BRANDEN BARTHOLOMEW, ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF GRAND FORKS, ND, FOR PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF THE PLAT OF AUDITOR’S SUBDIVISION NO. 46 TO THE CITY OF GRAND FORKS, ND, LOCATED IN THE 2000 BLOCK OF 62^ND AVENUE SOUTH (NE-1/4, NE-1/4 OF SECTION 33). Gengler reviewed the plat, stating it was related to the city’s flood protection project and part of the ponding system. Staff recommendation is for final approval subject to the technical changes. There were no questions on the plat. MOTION BY JOHN DREES AND SECOND BY WHITCOMB TO GRANT PRELIMINARY APPROVAL TO THE PLAT SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING TECHNICAL CHANGES SHOWN ON OR ATTACHED TO THE REVIEW COPY: 1. Submit title opinion. 2. Include two-foot ground contours and spot ground elevations. 3. Add access control and driveway locations. 4. Enlarge right-of-way width along 62^nd Avenue South to 60-feet with a 10-foot utility easement. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 4-4. MATTER OF THE REQUEST FROM BRANDEN BARTHOLOMEW, ON BEHALF OF THE CI6TY OF GRAND FORKS, ND, FOR PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF THE PLAT OF AUDITOR’S SUBDIVISION NO. 47 TO THE CITY OF GRAND FORKS ND, LOCATED AT 62^ND AVENUE SOUTH AND GRAND FORKS COUNTY HIGHWAY NO. 8 (NE-1/4 OF SECTION 34). Gengler reviewed the plat, stating it was related to the city’s flood protection project and part of the ponding system. Staff recommendation is for final approval subject to the technical changes. There were no questions on the plat. MOTION BY ADAMS AND SECOND BY SANDE TO GRANT PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF THE PLAT REQUEST SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING TECHNICAL CHANGES SHOWN ON OR ATTACHED TO THE REVIEW COPY: 1. Submit title opinion. 2. Add two-foot ground contour lines and spot ground elevations. 3. Include access control and driveway locations. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 4-5. MATTER OF THE REQUEST FROM BRANDEN BARTHOLOMEW, ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF GRAND FORKS, ND, FOR PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF THE PLAT OF AUDITOR’S SUBDIVISION NO. 48 TO THE CITY OF GRAND FORKS ND, LOCATED AT GRAND FORKS COUNTY ROADS NO. 6 AND 8 (SOUTH ½ OF SECTION 34). Gengler reviewed the plat, stating it was related to the city’s flood protection project and part of the ponding system. Staff recommendation is for final approval subject to the technical changes. There were no questions on the plat. MOTION BY GRASSER AND SECOND BY SANDE TO GRANT PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF THE PLAT REQUEST SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING TECHNICAL CHANGES SHOWN ON OR ATTACHED TO THE REVIEW COPY: 1. Submit title opinion. 2. Include 2-foot ground elevations and spot elevations. 3. Add access control and driveway locations 4. Make corrections to legend as shown. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 4-6. MATTER OF THE REQUEST FROM MIKE YAVARROW, ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF GRAND FORKS, ND, FOR PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF THE PLAT OF AUDITOR’S SUBDIVISION NO. 49, TO THE CITY OF GRAND FORKS, ND, LOCATED AT 27^TH AVENUE NORTH AND HIGHWAY NO. 81. Gengler reviewed the plat stating this plat is not a holding pond, but is related to the city’s flood protection project. Staff recommendation is for approval of the plat. Matejcek asked if everyone was aware the area was once a city landfill back in the 40’s and 50’s. He wanted that information to be part of the record. Grasser stated that when the Red River floods, the gates are closed on the English Coulee. There is a pump station and is designed to allow some ponding. The city talked to property owners about purchasing ponding easements but property owners sold the property instead. Robert Drees asked Grasser if there was any plan to replace the bridge on 27^th Avenue North across the English Coulee. Grasser answered that it was not on any of the long-range plans. The city could qualify for some federal bridge replacement monies but the city has to be able to pay the local match. The bridge is presently closed. Matejcek spoke on the history of the bridge. He was part of the annexation review commission when the property was annexed. He wanted the city to annex the property and take it in to Highway 81 in order to take in the bridge. The city did not take it in. He wondered why the city closed the bridge when it wasn’t theirs to close. Grasser said it was probably due to the fact that the bridge was unsafe and nobody else closed it. MOTION BY CHRISTENSEN AND SECOND BY HUTCHISON TO GRANT 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. Add plat boundary line to drawing and legend. 3. Include curve data for all curves along Highway 81. 4. Label the north lines of sections 32 and 33. 5. Dedicate 50 feet of right-of-way along 27^th Avenue North. 6. Show existing stormwater drainage easement on Lot 1, Block 1, Johnson-Rustad Addition. 7. Correct square footage of Lots 1 and 2. 8. In the city council approval, include street and highway language 9. Include 15-foot utility easement along 27^th Avenue North. 10. Consider reducing text size to more easily include all necessary information 11. Add access control. 12. Correct plat title as shown. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 4-7. MATTER OF THE REQUEST FROM TONY KOBETSKY, DOUGLAS EARL AND JOHN R. MCDONALD, 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. Gengler reviewed the request for the added agenda item. This is an amendment to the land use map for the Bison Industrial PUD (Planned Unit Development), the next agenda item to be discussed for rezoning. The owners assumed the county had zoned the area as industrial. Gengler named off the various businesses such as agricultural chemical business, trucking firm, AK Ag Services Inc. Since the city had taken over zoning jurisdiction, Mr. Kobetsky approached city staff about adding another building to his operation. In researching the county zoning, the area was zoned as agriculture. They were designated as legal but non-conforming and it had not been an issue over the years. Staff suggested converting the area to a PUD for industrial land uses and to accommodate the current uses in the area. After approval by the commission, staff would designate the proper land uses appropriate for the area. If the area were in a conventional industrial area, it would open the doors for any type of industrial activity. Staff recommendation is for approval of the land use map amendment. Lee asked if the change creates non-conforming uses currently in the area. Gengler stated by going through the PUD process, the businesses would be conforming. The request involves three property owners: Mr. Kobetsky, Mr. Douglas Earl and Mr. John R. McDonald. There are currently some residential platted and developed properties to the south, but additional residential would be inconsistent with the current uses in the area. Mr. Kobetsky said they wanted to construct a cold storage building for their equipment. The building they have is 20 years old and they are running out of room and need to expand. Christensen suggested changing the corridor to light industrial. Gengler stated the land use plan does not establish the entire corridor to be industrial. Since it is already a platted area, it made sense to establish it as a PUD with the underlying zoning of industrial. Christensen said he wanted to create a more attractive corridor when citizens drive into town. Gengler said he informed Mr. Kobetsky of the corridor overlay and those rules would apply with the development. Matejcek reminded commission members that the area is now under the city’s zoning jurisdiction because the city extended their jurisdiction to four miles. There will be growing pains and various problems will occur. This is the way to clean up an area. The area includes the English Coulee Diversion, farmland and other farm uses. The property is platted through the county and it was agreed that existing uses would be grandfathered in. This might put some new restrictions on them but it will be done in a nice way. MOTION BY MATEJCEK AND SECOND BY CHRISTENSEN TO GRANT PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF THE AMENDMENT TO THE LAND USE MAP. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 4-8. MATTER OF THE REQUEST FROM TONY KOBETSKY, DOUGLAS EARL AND JOHN R. MCDONALD, FOR PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE ZONING MAP TO EXCLUDE FROM THE A-1 (AGRICULTURAL PRESERVATION) DISTRICT AND INCLUDE WITHIN THE BISON INDUSTRIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) ALL OF THE BISON INDUSTRIAL SUBDIVISION TO THE CITY OF GRAND FORKS, ND, LOCATED AT DEMERS AVENUE AND COUNTY ROAD NO. 5. Gengler stated this is the rezoning for the property discussed under the previous item. MOTION BY MALM AND SECOND BY KREUN TO GRANT PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF THE CONCEPT AS PRESENTED. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Christensen asked that staff bring it back next month for the whole corridor. 5. REPORTS FROM THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. Gengler announced an entry level planner had been hired and she would be starting on April 28, 2008. 6. OTHER BUSINESS. Matejcek asked the chair about discussion on the new starting time. The chair responded that the discussion would have to be started by someone on the prevailing side. Since he was not on the prevailing side, he could not start a new discussion. 7. ADJOURNMENT. MOTION BY MALM AND SECOND BY WHITCOMB TO ADJOURN THE MEETING AT 7:15 P.M. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. ____________________________ Lyle A. Hall, Secretary ____________________________ Paula H. Lee, President