Skip navigation
 
 

Wednesday, September 10, 2008 at 8:00 a.m.

Fargo Planning Commission Regular Meeting

City Commission Chambers, City Hall

Agenda

8:00 a.m. to 8:45 a.m.  Items A through C

A:   Approve Order of Agenda

B:   Minutes:  Regular Meeting of August 13, 2008

C:   25th Street/64th Avenue South Corridor Study Update by SRF Consulting Group, Inc.

Public Hearings 9:00 a.m. to 9:45 a.m. Items 1 through 6

1.   Continued Hearing on a Petition requesting a Zoning Change from SR-2, Single-Dwelling to SR-4, Single-Dwelling on an unplatted tract of land on a portion of the southeast quarter of Section 36, Township 139 North, Range 49 West. (Located at 1141 48th Avenue South) (Curt Reeff) (jh) CONTINUED

2a. Continued Hearing on a Petition requesting a Plat of Riverwood 1922 Second Addition (Major Subdivision) a replat of a portion of Lots 1, 2, and 3, Block 3; and Lots 12, 13, and 14, Block 1 of Riverwood Subdivision; a vacated part of 10th Street North; together with a part of the northwest quarter of Section 18, Township 140 North, Range 48 West of the Fifth Principal Meridian to the City of Fargo, Cass County, North Dakota. (Located at 4791 University Drive North) (Roger C. Hagen) (jh) CONTINUED

2b. Continued Hearing on a Petition requesting a Vacation of part of 10th Street North between the proposed plat of Riverwood 1922 Second Addition and 48th Avenue North.  (Located at 4791 University Drive North) (Roger C. Hagen) (jh) CONTINUED

3.  Hearing on a Petition requesting a Plat of Capital Square Addition (Minor Subdivision) a replat of part of Lot 3, Block 1 of Isaak-Dosch Addition. (Located at 4310 15th Avenue South) (Jeff Zeltinger) (nc)  

4a. Hearing on a Petition requesting a Plat of University Motors Second Addition (Minor Subdivision) a replat of Lot 1, Block 1 of University Motors Addition together with an unplatted portion of part of the east half of Section 27, Township 139 North, Range 49 West.  (Located at 3525 38th Street South and 3520 39th Street South) (Roger C. Hagen) (mw)

4b. Hearing on a Petition requesting a Zoning Change from AG, Agriculture to LI, Limited Industrial on a tract of land located in the east half of Section 27, Township 139 North, Range 49 West. (Located at 3525 38th Street South and 3520 39th Street South) (Roger C. Hagen) (mw)

5.   Hearing on a Petition requesting a Conditional Use Permit to erect a 66-foot tall monopole telecommunication support structure (TSS) on an unplatted part of the southeast quarter of Section 22, Township 139 North, Range 49 West.  (Located at 3030 41st Street South) (Rob Viera) (mw)  WITHDRAWN

6.  Hearing on a Petition requesting a Sidewalk Petition for Lots 29 through 32, Block 12 and Lots 1 through 5, Block 14 of Osgood 1st Addition. (Located at 4238 through 4262 66th Street South and 4340 through 4384 66th Street South) (Donald and Denise Hastings) (nc)

Other Items

Brown Bag Luncheon – Wednesday, September 24, 2008.

BOARD OF PLANNING COMMISSIONERS

Minutes

 

Regular Meeting:                     Wednesday:                     September 10, 2008:

The Regular Meeting of the Board of Planning Commissioners of the City of Fargo, North Dakota, was held in the City Commission Room at City Hall at 8:00 o'clock a.m., Wednesday, September 10, 2008.

The Planning Commissioners present or absent were as shown following:

Present:         John Paulsen, Kristi Fremstad, Peggy Palmes, Rich Slagle, Kelly Steffes, Jan Ulferts-Stewart, Claire Vigesaa, Catherine Wiley

Absent:          Jeff Morrau

Chair Paulsen called the meeting to order.

Item A:           Approve Order of Agenda

Chair Paulsen noted Item No. 1 will be continued to the November 12, 2008 Planning Commission meeting and Item Nos. 2a, 2b, and 5 were withdrawn by the Petitioners.  Ms. Ulferts-Stewart moved to approve the Order of Agenda as amended.  Second by Mr. Slagle.  All Members present voted aye and the motion was declared carried.

Item B:           Minutes:  Regular Meeting of August 13, 2008

Ms. Fremstad moved to approve the minutes of the August 13, 2008 Planning Commission meeting.  Second by Ms. Palmes.  All Members present voted aye and the motion was declared carried.

Mr. Slagle declared a conflictofinterest with Item No. 6 and asked to be excused from voting.

Item C:           64th Avenue/25th Street South Corridor Study Update by SRF Consulting Group, Inc.

Rick Lane, SRF Consulting Group, Inc., gave a power point presentation summarizing the 64th Avenue/25th Street South Corridor Study.  He noted the key objectives of the study include public input, comprehensive review of existing conditions and analysis of the issues, development of creative yet feasible alternatives, an evaluation matrix, an implementation plan, phasing and associated costs, and providing the basis for future environmental documentation.  He summarized corridor alternative matrices and preferred alternatives and concluded with implementation measures.  

Item 1:            Continued Hearing on a Petition requesting a Zoning Change from SR-2, Single-Dwelling to SR-4, Single-Dwelling on an unplatted tract of land on a portion of the southeast quarter of Section 36, Township 139 North, Range 49 West. (Located at 1141 48th Avenue South) (Curt Reeff):  CONTINUED TO NOVEMBER 12, 2008

A Hearing had been set for July 9, 2008 on a petition requesting a zoning change on a portion of the southeast quarter of Section 36, Township 139 North, Range 49 West.

At the July 9, 2008 meeting, the Hearing was continued to August 13, 2008.

At the August 13, 2008 meeting, the Hearing was continued to this date and hour; however, the Petitioner has requested the Hearing be continued to November 12, 2008.

Item 2a:         Continued Hearing on a Petition requesting a Plat of Riverwood 1922 Second Addition (Major Subdivision) a replat of a portion of Lots 1, 2, and 3, Block 3; and Lots 12, 13, and 14, Block 1 of Riverwood Subdivision; a vacated part of 10th Street North; together with a part of the northwest quarter of Section 18, Township 140 North, Range 48 West of the Fifth Principal Meridian to the City of Fargo, Cass County, North Dakota. (Located at 4791 University Drive North) (Roger C. Hagen):  WITHDRAWN

Item 2b:         Continued Hearing on a Petition requesting a Vacation of part of 10th Street North between the proposed plat of Riverwood 1922 Second Addition and 48th Avenue North.  (Located at 4791 University Drive North) (Roger C. Hagen):  WITHDRAWN

A Hearing had been set for August 13, 2008 on petitions requesting a plat of Riverwood 1922 Second Addition and vacation of part of 10th Street North between the proposed plat of Riverwood 1922 Second Addition and 48th Avenue North.

At the August 13, 2008 meeting, the Hearings were continued to this date and hour; however, the petitions have been withdrawn by the Petitioner.

Item 3:            Hearing on a Petition requesting a Plat of Capital Square Addition (Minor Subdivision) a replat of part of Lot 3, Block 1 of Isaak-Dosch Addition. (Located at 4310 15th Avenue South) (Jeff Zeltinger):  APPROVED

(9:22 a.m.) Nicole Crutchfield presented the staff report for the proposed plat and stated staff is recommending approval. 

The Petitioner declined commenting on the application.

Ms. Ulferts-Stewart moved the findings and recommendations of staff be accepted and approval be recommended to the City Commission of the Capital Square Addition on the basis that it satisfactorily complies with the Comprehensive Plan, Standards of Article 20-06, and all other applicable requirements of the Land Development Code.  Second by Ms. Wiley.  On call of the roll Members Palmes, Vigesaa, Fremstad, Steffes, Ulferts-Stewart, Wiley, Slagle, and Paulsen voted aye.  Absent and not voting:  Member Morrau.  The motion was declared carried.

Item 4a:         Hearing on a Petition requesting a Zoning Change from AG, Agricultural to LI, Limited Industrial on a tract of land located in the east half of Section 27, Township 139 North, Range 49 West. (Located at 3525 38th Street South and 3520 39th Street South) (Roger C. Hagen):  APPROVED

Item 4b:         Hearing on a Petition requesting a Plat of University Motors Second Addition (Minor Subdivision) a replat of Lot 1, Block 1 of University Motors Addition together with an unplatted portion of part of the east half of Section 27, Township 139 North, Range 49 West.  (Located at 3525 38th Street South and 3520 39th Street South) (Roger C. Hagen):  APPROVED

(9:25 a.m.) Mark Williams presented the staff report for the zoning change from AG, Agricultural to LI, Limited Industrial on a portion of land located in the east half of Section 27, Township 139 North, Range 49 West and the proposed plat of University Motors Second Addition.  He noted a point of clarification that the zoning change only applies to the unplatted portion as the remaining portion is currently zoned Limited Industrial.  He stated staff is recommending approval.

The Petitioner declined commenting on the application.

Ms. Wiley moved the findings and recommendations of staff be accepted and approval be recommended to the City Commission of the zoning change from AG, Agricultural to LI, Limited Industrial on the unplatted portion of the proposed plat and the proposed University Motors Second Addition as the proposal complies with the adopted Area Plan, the Standards of Article 20-06, Section 20-0906.F (1-4) and all other applicable requirements of the Land Development Code.  Second by Ms. Fremstad.  On call of the roll Members Vigesaa, Ulferts-Stewart, Steffes, Fremstad, Wiley, Palmes, Slagle, and Paulsen voted aye.  Absent and not voting:  Member Morrau.  The motion was declared carried.

(Mr. Slagle absent.)

Item 5:            Hearing on a Petition requesting a Conditional Use Permit to erect a 66-foot tall monopole telecommunication support structure (TSS) on an unplatted part of the southeast quarter of Section 22, Township 139 North, Range 49 West.  (Located at 3030 41st Street South) (Rob Viera):  WITHDRAWN

This was the time and date set for a Hearing on a petition requesting a Conditional Use Permit to erect a 66-foot tall monopole telecommunication support structure (TSS) on an unplatted part of the southeast quarter of Section 22, Township 139 North, Range 49 West; however, the petition has been withdrawn by the Petitioner.  

Item 6:            Hearing on a Petition requesting a Sidewalk Petition for Lots 29 through 32, Block 12 and Lots 1 through 5, Block 14 of Osgood 1st Addition. (Located at 4238 through 4262 66th Street South and 4340 through 4384 66th Street South) (Donald and Denise Hastings):  DENIED

(9:30 a.m.) Nicole Crutchfield presented the staff report for a sidewalk petition for Lots 29 through 32, Block 12 and Lots 1 through 5, Block 14 of Osgood 1st Addition.  She stated two petitions were received which were signed by seven of the nine property owners. She said numerous reasons are cited within the petition, but primarily the petitioners have indicated they believe the sidewalks are not necessary due to the fact that pedestrian and bicycle traffic will simply travel across the entrance of the cul-de-sac.  Ms. Crutchfield reviewed the requirements for sidewalks and stated it is apparent the Developer intended sidewalks would be installed on both sides of the street per Land Development Code requirements as stated in the amenities plan.  She also noted the record owner/agent at the time of issuance of the building permit of four of the properties included in the petition, signed a release waiving their right to protest the construction of sidewalks along the property and authorized the City to begin construction as soon as possible.  Ms. Crutchfield cited Article 10-02 of the Municipal Code and Section 20-0906 of the Land Development Code which address the waiver of sidewalk installation.  She stated the Petitioners’ request is in sharp contrast to the general policies and guidelines provided by the Planning Commission.  She continued stating these policies, coupled with the City’s Comprehensive Plan to promote safe and convenient linkages between schools, parks, and residential neighborhoods do not support the requested sidewalk waiver.  She noted a key component of a walkable neighborhood is the sidewalk which designates a separation and buffer between pedestrians and motorists, which is especially important for small children and people with disabilities.  Ms. Crutchfield concluded stating staff is not in support of the petition and is recommending denial.

Donald Hastings, 4246 66th Street South, stated as a point of clarification, he and other homeowners were told by the City of Fargo Engineering Department that sidewalks are not required in cul-de-sacs.  He said people jog and walk using the street and do not follow the cul-de-sac.  He also stated snowplows miss cul-de-sacs for days after a snow event.  He stated the covenants say sidewalks where required by the City and noted he and others received a letter from the City of Fargo stating either the City or the homeowners will need to put sidewalks in.  Mr. Hastings stated, if this is a safety issue, he would like all cul-de-sacs in Fargo to be required to have sidewalks.

Heather Slagle, 4238 66th Street South, voiced her concerns and encouraged the Board to visit the area.  She stated she was told by the City of Fargo that sidewalks were not needed in cul-de-sacs.

Stuart Stockmoe, 4262 66th Street South, stated he is confused about this being a safety issue. He stated the only motor vehicles entering the cul-de-sacs are ones going to their driveways.

Nicole Crutchfield stated crossing a cul-de-sac is similar to crossing a street and said staff is concerned about maintaining safe pedestrian access.

In answer to a question posed by Ms. Wiley, Planning Director Jim Gilmour stated the Land Development Code (LDC) was adopted in 1998 which set up standards for sidewalks and laid out a waiver process.  He noted, prior to the LDC, sidewalks may not have been required, but the City has not gone back to install them in previously developed cul-de-sacs.

There was discussion regarding the letter homeowners received from the City of Fargo regarding installation of sidewalks.

City Engineer Mark Bittner stated homeowners would have received from him an order to install sidewalks as required, or the City of Fargo will install them.  He noted sidewalks were only required in cul-de-sacs with certain provisions in the past, and stated it is very clearly stated in the amenities plan that the Developer intended to install sidewalks in the development.  He said he feels bad about the confusion caused when homeowners were given misleading information when they called the City of Fargo.

Ms. Wiley expressed her views on sidewalks stating they separate pedestrians and vehicles.  She stated, if you look at the mouth of the cul-de-sacs, they are about 100-125 feet across at the mouth and noted the cul-de-sacs in question are almost twice that distance.  She said she thinks the petitioner made a good point that they do not create a lot of activity.  Ms. Wiley stated the current homeowners cannot speak on behalf of future homeowners and noted if there is not a sidewalk in place, you preclude that option to walk the cul-de-sac.  She said she appreciates that the residents do not want to lose frontage.  She concluded by saying she is in favor of the sidewalk, not just for the residents, but for anyone that would be walking through the neighborhood.

Ms. Ulferts-Stewart stated she is a firm believer in sidewalks and said it is unfortunate the homeowners were given differing answers from the City of Fargo.  She apologized on behalf of the City of Fargo for the lack of clarity.

Ms. Ulferts-Stewart moved the findings and recommendations of staff be accepted and denial be recommended to the City Commission of the Sidewalk Installation Waiver on the basis that the proposal does not meet the intent of the Comprehensive Plan or the policies of Section 20-0609.1.b (1-7) of the Land Development Code.  Second by Ms. Wiley.

Mr. Vigesaa stated he is struggling with the decision and understands how the homeowners feel.  He said personally, he would like to look at the site.

Ms. Steffes noted that people park in the middle of cul-de-sacs, which can become a hazard when people have to navigate snow banks and vehicles.  She said she feels sidewalks will benefit children and homeowners.

Ms. Fremstad stated she is concerned and struggling with the decision.  She said she feels it is more of a safety issue and children would be safer on a sidewalk; however, she is concerned with what residents were told.  She said she is concerned about developers presenting something to land owners and the City of Fargo presenting something different.  She noted the regulations were very vague.

Heather Slagle noted her concern regarding sidewalk maintenance, particularly snow removal.

Mark Bittner stated the City of Fargo has been directing more efforts at sidewalk maintenance in the winter, but does not focus on lots that do not have a sidewalk.

Mr. Vigesaa said he would like to see this item delayed in order to have more time to study it.

There was discussion regarding snow removal of sidewalks.

Chair Paulsen stated he feels sidewalks are necessary.  He said despite the fact there are many that do not have them, the City cannot fix all of the cul-de-sacs in Fargo.

Mr. Vigesaa offered a substitute motion to continue the Hearing to October 8, 2008.  Second by Ms. Fremstad.  On call of the roll Members Fremstad and Vigesaa voted aye.  Members Steffes, Wiley, Ulferts-Stewart, Palmes, and Paulsen voted nay.  Absent and not voting:  Members Morrau and Slagle.  The motion failed for lack of a majority.

On call of the roll of the original motion to deny Members Steffes, Wiley, Ulferts-Stewart, Palmes, and Paulsen voted aye.  Members Fremstad and Vigesaa voted nay.  Absent and not voting:  Members Morrau and Slagle.  The motion was declared carried.

The time at adjournment was 10:20 a.m.

Other Items

September 24, 2008 Brown Bag Luncheon

Topic:  University Mixed-Use District