Planning Commission

PLANNING COMMISSION Regular Meeting March 26, 2018 Page 1 of 11 Regular Meeting: Planning Commission Location: City Hall, Council Chambers, 515 2nd Avenue SW, City of Minot, ND Meeting Called to Order: March 26, 2018 at 6:57 p.m. Presiding Official: Chairman, Tyler Neether Members in Attendance: Randy Bartsch, Wallace Berning, Jody Bullinger, Charles DeMakis, Jon Hanson, Pam Karpenko, Tim Keller, Tyler Neether, Todd Wegenast, Bob Wetzler Members Absent: Todd Koop, Jynette Larshus City Staff Present: Principal Planner, City Attorney, City Clerk, City Engineer, Assistant City Engineer, Fire Chief, Building Official, Public Information Officer Others Present: Aldermen Jantzer, Olson, Podrygula, Straight, Wolsky, Mayor Barney Meeting Called to order by Chairman Tyler Neether Approval of the February 26, 2018 Regular Meeting Minutes. Motion by Commissioner Berning, seconded by Commissioner Wetzler, to approve the February 26, 2018 regular meeting minutes and was carried by the following roll call vote: ayes: Bartsch, Berning, Bullinger, DeMakis, Hanson, Karpenko, Keller, Neether, Wegenast, Wetzler. nays: none Motion passed RECOMMENDATIONS Item #1: The City Council approve an application by Pamela Keller to change the zone from R1 (Single Family Residential) District to MH (Manufactured Home) District in order to keep an existing manufactured home on Keyes Amended Plat, Block 6, Lots 3 & 4. The Planning Commission approved a variance to the rear yard setback from the required 10’ to approximately 6.8’ on Keyes Amended Plat, Block 6, Lots 3 & 4. This property is located at 1004 39th St SE. Finding of Facts: 1. The subject property is zoned R1, Single-Family residential. 2. In 2011 the City Council approved a Special Use Permit to allow a single-wide trailer to be located on this property for a period of five (5) years with specific conditions attached. 3. The permit has expired and the manufactured home is still on the lot. 1|Page PLANNING COMMISSION Regular Meeting March 26, 2018 Page 2 of 11 4. The applicant has applied for rezoning from R1 to MH and a variance for the rear yard setback so that the trailer can remain in place as is. Recommendation and Conditions (if approved): 1. Not sufficient space on site to meet the required rear yard setback of ten feet. 2. Must be securely attached to a permanent foundation. If piers are utilized, they must be at least 18 inches in diameter; extend to a depth of 4 feet below grade; be squared no greater than 8 feet on center. Home must be permanently anchored to piers. As a minimum, anchoring shall be ½ inch cable securely embedded in the pier, wrapped tightly around the frame of the home, and secured with two ½ inch “U” bolts. Anchoring shall be at four equally spaced points on each side of the home, minimum. Alternative foundation/anchoring designs based on data submitted by the manufacturer of the home may be considered by the Building Official. Principal Planner, Lance Lang explained, a Special Use Permit was issued when the structure was placed in 2011 and the permit expired in 2016. It went unnoticed until it was found by the Assessor’s Office. He said, there is no record of similar permits, although there are several other manufactured homes in the area. He described three possible solutions. The owner could move the house, which is not what the homeowner wants to do. They could apply for a variance, however, it would not cover the use and since a manufactured home is only allowed in Manufactured Home zoning, it would not be proper protocol. Lastly, the property could be rezoned to MH (Manufactured Home). He stated, there are about 36 manufactured homes located within a two block radius. Mr. Lang said, staff suggested the applicant speak with their neighbors to present and circulate a petition in support of a allowing the manufactured home to remain on the lot.. He demonstrated on a map, the residences who signed in support. No comments were received in opposition to the zone change. Mr. Lang explained the requirement for a variance due to the size of the lot and the space available in the rear yard. He also said, one of the requirements listed on the Special Use Permit in 2011, was that a permanent foundation be constructed so if the rezoning is approved, staff recommends the condition be fulfilled. Lang continued by saying, one more issue for discussion with the rezoning application is the potential instance of spot zoning. It is a precedent the City tries to avoid but considering other examples in the area, there are several parcels that are zoned different than the zoning that surrounds them. Staff is basing this recommendation for approval on the fact that the manufactured homet has been there for several years, the neighbors seem to be okay with it, and there are other manufactured homes in the neighborhood. The applicant’s sister came forward to speak on her behalf. She said, when the location was discussed in 2011, it was a vacant lot. Due to the size, it would not be possible to build anything else. Upon questioning, she said they are agreeable to the conditions. The applicant’s mother also came forward and said, they owned the lot prior to moving the home there and it doesn’t make sense to move it. 2|Page PLANNING COMMISSION Regular Meeting March 26, 2018 Page 3 of 11 Commissioner Karpenko moved to approve the request based on staff’s findings of fact and conditions. Motion seconded by Commissioner Wegenast and was carried by the following roll call vote: ayes: Bartsch, Berning, Bullinger, DeMakis, Hanson, Karpenko, Keller, Neether, Wegenast, Wetzler. nays: none Motion Passed Item #2 The City Council approve an application by Colby 2018, LLC, represented by Tyler Oliver, to subdivide Minot Partner’s Addition, W400’ of Lot 1 less Evenson’s Addition plus S40’ of W100’ of Lot 2 less Hwy into 2 lots to be known as Minot Partner’s 2nd Addition, Lots 1 & 2. This property is located at 717 27th St SE. Finding of Facts: 1. The applicant would like to subdivide a roughly 200 feet by 200 feet lot from the remainder for commercial development site. 2. A two-lot subdivision plat has been prepared and submitted to the City. 3. The property is already zoned commercial. 4. All public infrastructure is available to the site. 5. Required easements are shown on the plat. Recommendations and Conditions (if approved): Staff recommend approval of this subdivision plat, Minot Partner’s 2nd Addition, Lots 1 and 2, subject to the following conditions: 1. Erosion Control practices will need to meet State of North Dakota requirements and approved by the City Engineer. 2. Developer’s Agreement will be in place prior to the plat being recorded. 3. Sidewalks will not be required until the road is upgraded to an urban section. 4. Public Utility Fees will be required. Mr. Lang described the location of the property and said the subdivision will split off a site of approximately 200’ by 200’ for commercial development. The land previously had a permit to be used as a campground and it is already zoned C2. The surrounding properties are zoned Commercial and Industrial. Utilities are in place and there are adequate access points from Burdick Expressway and from the north. Stormwater requirements will be handled to the Engineering Department’s satisfaction but there should not be any detention issues. He then described the plat that has been prepared by saying, the irregular shape is due to a piece of land containing a billboard which will remain with Lot 1. The owners requested the sidewalk requirement be reconsidered but that is up to the Engineering Department. Tyler Oliver, the applicant came forward to answer any questions. He said they are building a Dollar General at the location. 3|Page PLANNING COMMISSION Regular Meeting March 26, 2018 Page 4 of 11 Commissioner DeMakis moved to approve the item based of staff findings of fact and conditions. Motion seconded by Commissioner Wegenast. Upon questioning by Commissioner Karpenko regarding public sidewalks, Mr. Meyer said, on rural section roadways such as Burdick Expressway, sidewalks are typically required once the roadway is brought up to urban road standards, otherwise the sidewalks if constructed at this point would be located in a ditch. Whereupon a vote was taken on the above motion by Commissioner DeMakis, seconded by Commissioner Wegenast and carried by the following roll call vote: ayes: Bartsch, Berning, Bullinger, DeMakis, Hanson, Karpenko, Neether, Wegenast, Wetzler; nays: none; abstain: Keller Motion Passed Item #3 The Planning Commission held an application by Mark Gagner to change the zone from R1 (Single Family Residential) District to C2 (General Commercial) District on Outlot 14, Section 21-155-83. The property is located on the north side of 11 Ave SW, approximately ¼ mile west of Hwy 83 Bypass Frontage Road and 1,000’ north of Hwy 2 & 52. Finding of Facts: 1. The current zoning of the subject property is R1, low density residential. 2. The applicant has requested rezoning to C2, General Commercial. 3. There was some abutting C2 zoning to the south of this property but it was recently rezoned to RA Agricultural Residential. 4. The access to this property is across a mostly unimproved section line road not designed for commercial traffic. Approximately one-quarter mile of road would need to be improved to support truck traffic. 5. This property is located in the 100-year floodplain of the Souris River. 6. Anticipated amendments to the FEMA hazard maps will designate the majority of this property as in the floodway. 7. The use the applicant is requesting is an industrial use, not a commercial use. 8. If commercial zoning is not appropriate at this location, or at least questionable at best, industrial zoning certainly should not be considered. 9. If commercial rezoning were granted the applicant will require several variances to make this property acceptable for the proposed use. Commercial zoning requires the following standards which the applicant would like to seek variances for: a. Shall have a principal structure on the lot where the open storage area is located. It is staff’s understanding the applicant does not want to construct a building. b. All open storage shall be one hundred percent (100%) screened, at a minimum of six (6) feet in height, or to the height of storage racking, (up to a maximum of ten (10) feet), at the time of installation. The screening must be from ground level view 4|Page PLANNING COMMISSION Regular Meeting March 26, 2018 Page 5 of 11 from public streets, along any property line abutting a residential district, or in the event the storage faces the abutting lot’s front yard or the entrance area of an adjoining building. It is staff’s understanding the applicant is willing to fence the perimeter of the site for security purposes but chain link fencing does not qualify for 100% screening. c. All open storage shall be paved with concrete or bituminous surface (no recycled materials permitted) It is staff’s understanding the applicant does not want to hard surface the property. d. Commercial Landscaping required as set forth in Chapter 24. It is staff’s understanding the applicant does not intend to install commercial landscaping. Staff Recommendation and Conditions Staff recommends denial of this rezoning request for the following reasons: 1. The proposed use is an industrial use type, not a commercial use type. Whether commercial or industrial rezoning is pursued, staff finds the following consideration make this site unsuitable for the proposal regardless: a. The site is in the 100-year floodplain and soon will be in the floodway of the Souris River. b. There is no other commercial zoning except for that along the Highway 2 and 52 frontage. c. The abutting parcel to the south is currently in process to rezone from C2 to a residential district. d. The other nearby parcels in the floodplain are zoned AG, RA, R1 or MH. e. The Future Land Use Map of the Comprehensive Development Plan depicts this area as “Conceptual Greenway.” The proposed use is not compatible. f. The roads leading to this parcel are unimproved and not compatible with truck traffic. Mr. Lang said, staff does not support the zone change to C2 zoning. He reviewed the information that was provided during the previous meeting where the item was discussed. The applicant, Mark Gagner, came forward and stated, due to a change in circumstances, he would like to revise his request in order to change the zoning from R1 to RA. He said the intended use would be for pasture property and he may seek a building permit in the future to build a barn. The City Attorney confirmed, the application would need to be sent back to the Planning Department to be re-noticed. Mr. Lang invited Mr. Gagner to resubmit his application by the April 15th deadline. Commissioner Wegenast moved to hold the item. Motion seconded by Commissioner Karpenko and was carried by the following roll call vote: ayes: Bartsch, Berning, Bullinger, DeMakis, Hanson, Karpenko, Keller, Neether, Wegenast, Wetzler; nays: none Item #4 5|Page PLANNING COMMISSION Regular Meeting March 26, 2018 Page 6 of 11 The City Council approve an application by Power of the Purse Inc., represented by Kristen Boen to adopt a resolution for a Conditional Use Permit to allow a transitional living facility for up to 16 people plus staff on Summit Park Addition, Lot 13 & S10’ Lot 14, Block 6. This property is located at 24 14th Ave SW. Finding of Facts: 1. The applicant would like to start a group home for persons and families that need help. 2. City code requires a Conditional Use Permit for a group home of more than six persons. 3. The applicants have provided all the information required for processing of the CUP. 4. Staff has prepared conditions to be part of the CUP. Recommendations and Conditions (if approved): Staff recommends approval of this Conditional Use Permit request with the following conditions: 1. The maximum number of occupants shall not exceed sixteen (16) persons, including staff members. 2. There shall be no more than five (5) vehicles parked on the premises at any time, not including on-street parking. All vehicles must be licensed and in operable condition. 3. A floor plan will need to be prepared but it does not have to be prepared by a licensed design professional. 4. Fire sprinklers are not required, as long as the IFC R3 occupancy type applies. However, a change in use to a higher occupancy classification will require fire suppression sprinklers. 5. A Code Review is required anytime a change of occupancy is made to an existing building. That change must correspond with meeting current building codes as per that occupancy. If fire suppression is not required, the following fire resistive assemblies are required: a. Walls separating sleeping units in the same building- one (1) hour b. Horizontal assemblies serving as sleeping unit separations- one (1) hour c. Corridors serving sleeping units- one (1) hour 6. Permits required for construction. a. Any changes to the structure, egress of the occupants, proposed room dimensions, ceiling heights, etc. would have to be reviewed by the Building Division with a floor plan and submitted construction documents and will require appropriate building or remodel permits. 7. Smoke detectors required. Interconnected smoke detectors required in each sleeping room, outside each sleeping room, and each story of the building. 8. Carbon Monoxide detection required within the building. 9. Egress windows with minimum 48- inch escape clearance from floor are required in all sleeping rooms in the basement. 10. ADA Compliance may be required. Further review of the interior floor plan and scope of construction is required before this can be analyzed. 11. Licensing a. The Conditional Use Permit (CUP) shall serve as the license from the City of Minot to operate this facility under the terms of the permit. 6|Page PLANNING COMMISSION Regular Meeting March 26, 2018 Page 7 of 11 b. Upon issuance of this permit, the applicant shall be deemed the permitee or permit holder and agrees to the terms of this permit and to follow all ordinances and regulations of the City of Minot and all county, state, and federal laws and regulations. c. The permit shall be non-transferable and shall expire if the transitional home ceases operation. A change in occupancy shall be cause for a amended or new CUP. d. The CUP can be revoked at any time by the City Council following a show-cause hearing. 12. Residents of the property must abide by the following restrictions: no sex offenders, no persons with violent criminal history, no persons requiring “personal care” such as daily personal assistance to function normally, no residents under 18, no weapons are permitted on the property, and no unprescribed or illegal drugs or alcohol are permitted on the property. Mr. Lang said that Planning Staff has been working with this group for several months. He described the application and commented that there is a need for this type of facility for transitional living in Minot. The property is zoned R1 and there is a mixture of uses in the area including residential and commercial properties. The application initially specified a sober living house for women but since that time they have taken a broader approach and rather than targeting a specific need, they are requesting a transitional facility that could benefit any of several groups. They decided on a maximum of 16 residents because Fire Codes allow up to 16 people for the occupancy class. He described the available parking for the house and said there are five spaces of off-street parking. He concluded by saying, the applicant presented all necessary information for a CUP, although it is difficult to write conditions without knowing exactly what type of use will take place in the house. The applicant said they would comply with any conditions requested by the Planning Commission or City Council. Kristen Boen, representing Power of the Purse, Inc., came forward on behalf of the application. She said, the organization is a ND non-profit corporation organized in December, 2017. They are affiliated with Power of the Purse, A Giving Circle, under the Minot Area Community Foundation. Their mission is to focus efforts toward programs that benefit women and children in the Minot community. They are committed to projects that have the support of the Minot Area Community Foundation and this particular project has their support but owning a building does not fit into their guidelines. For that reason, Power of the Purse, Inc. was formed to carry out this project. She said their goal is to provide a community based, group home setting for residential and transitional housing that provides room, board and services to individuals with disabilities and difficulties, in a family environment. The mission is to address a significant defined need in the community and provide a program that does not need to be funded by the City of Minot or at any public cost. She described the house by saying it currently has four bedrooms and two and a half bathrooms. They plan to add one wall, a door, and a closet to make a fifth bedroom and it already has an egress window. She said the house was chosen in part because of the mixture of uses in the neighborhood, including walking distance to Broadway. The location is compatible with a transitional neighborhood. She explained that all individuals in the home are required to be employed or attend school so the commercial neighborhood provides opportunities within walking distance. Power of the Purse, Inc. has control over the rules and regulations in the home and will not accept any individual in need of hands on personal care or any children under the age of 18. She welcomed the Commission to add any of these restrictions as conditions of the permit. She addressed parking by saying the majority of the residents will not have vehicles. She reiterated 7|Page PLANNING COMMISSION Regular Meeting March 26, 2018 Page 8 of 11 some of the regulations they require of residents including, no individuals with a violent criminal history and no sex offenders. Power of the Purse has been negotiating with a local group to lease the home but without a permit have not been able to commit to a lease. She said, the privacy of the future female disabled residents is crucial and it is important they remain anonymous on the public record. The group they would like to see as residents in the home have additional rules and regulations including a zero tolerance policy. Power of the Purse is helping to get this significantly needed program in place to help a group of disabled area residents in Minot. Commissioner Berning asked about the maximum number of residents to which Ms. Boen responded by saying, 16 residents will include staff. The group they are hoping to secure for the location includes a manager who will train assistant mangers. All residents pay to stay in the home so in exchange for their effort, managers and assistant managers have reduced rent. She explained that the model is used in Bismarck where they have three successful homes. She also said the typical stay for a resident will be about nine months. Upon further questioning by the Commissioners, Ms. Boen said, part of the model is to intentionally provide close quarters which prevent residents from being alone and possibly hiding something. The Manager for this facility will be from one of the Bismarck homes and will have experience in this setting. Mayor Barney came forward and said he has been working with Power of the Purse on this project for a number of months. He mentioned that the Mayor’s Committee on Addiction met earlier that night to review a comprehensive plan which includes this type of sober living housing as a priority in Minot. He commended the Power of the Purse for taking the initiative to bring this forward on their own volition. He commented on Commissioner Berning’s questions about why are we emulating Bismarck by saying, we need to go where there’s experience and Bismarck has examples we can use to help address this issue. The Committee on Addiction was able to secure a grant where they are looking at programs across the country, using Vermont as an example where they have a very comprehensive program. He stated, he is in support of this request and the City needs to be creative and look at all options available for people to recover from addiction. Brian Hankla, with McGee, Hankla, Bakkes Law Firm, spoke on behalf of the application. He said, he has been working with the Power of the Purse organization. He referenced the ordinances that provide for community based residential homes and said, this application fits within those ordinances. It also fits within the defined conditional use permit as described within the ordinances. The request meets the definition of a group home and R1 zoning permits a group home of no more than six persons plus staff. It does not require information on who is living there although the conversation has discussed those details. A group home serving more than six people requires a conditional use permit but also does not specify details on the individuals in the home. It should not matter what type of individuals reside in the home, only the number of individuals. He then addressed the concerns expressed by neighbors. One of which was the requirement that other offices be notified such as the State Health Department, Police and Fire Departments. As mentioned by staff, those offices have been contacted. One of the concerns from a neighbor stated, there should be periodic or annual follow up. He said there is follow up for any conditional use permit. The issues brought up about the staff, wages, and hours that will take place at the property are business decisions and are not the concern of the Planning Commission and are not relevant to their decision whether or 8|Page PLANNING COMMISSION Regular Meeting March 26, 2018 Page 9 of 11 not to grant the permit. Bonnie Humphrey, of 1344 S. Main Street, said, as a neighbor of the property, she believes they were not given enough information in their notification from the Planning Department. She raised concerns about liability on the City. She said, she believes this is a much needed facility but requested more detail be given to the neighbors. Ms. Boen responded by saying, without the permit they have not secured an agreement with any particular group. The application was written vaguely to protect their identities in the best interest of the residents. She also mentioned, they will hold liability insurance. She further explained the need to have a certain number of residents at any given time in order to afford to pay for the house. Alderman Wolsky came forward as an adjacent property owner. He said he supports the mission of the Power of the Purse and acknowledged the need for this facility in the community. He said, he had conversations with his neighbors who brought up concerns about the ambiguous nature of the application. He suggested the Power of the Purse set a meeting with the neighborhood in order to alleviate concerns. Ms. Boen said, in Bismarck, the owner of their homes visits with the neighbors and distributes her phone number in case there are any issues that need to be addressed. Similar actions will be taken at this property. Commissioner Karpenko moved to approve the item with conditions 1-11 and added condition 12. Motion seconded by Commissioner Wegenast and was carried by the following roll call vote: ayes: Bartsch, Bullinger, DeMakis, Hanson, Karpenko, Keller, Neether, Wegenast, Wetzler; nays: Berning Motion Passed Item #5 The Planning Commission denied an application by Southwest Crossing Partners, Jerome Kuechle, for a variance to the paving requirement to allow approximately 350 lineal feet of asphalt milling, as an interim parking lot surfacing until permanent paving can be installed, on Southwest Crossing Addition, Block 1, Lot 2. This property is located on the east side of the garages for 3819-3823 Crossing ST SW. Finding of Facts: 1. The applicant received Certificates of Occupancy in April 2015 for all the apartment buildings in this phase of Southwest Crossing with the exception of one – 12-plex building due to lack of sufficient off-street parking. 2. The required parking could have been installed in 2015, in 2016 or in 2017. 3. In late 2017 the applicant did install some black top and later found that it was not sufficient to meet the required amount of parking to obtain a Certificate of Occupancy for the last building. 4. The blacktop asphalt that was installed does not meet City standards. 9|Page PLANNING COMMISSION Regular Meeting March 26, 2018 Page 10 of 11 5. The applicant then used asphalt millings for the remainder of the area which do not meet City standards. 6. The applicant is now requesting a variance asking the City to accept asphalt millings as an interim allowable surfacing until the parking can be properly constructed. The applicant cannot provide a date when the proper paving will be installed. Staff Recommendation and Conditions: Staff recommends denial of this variance request due to the following reasons: 1. There is no hardship other than a claim of financial hardship. 2. The work that was done does not meet City standards. 3. The work could have been completed over the course of three construction season dating back to 2015. 4. There is no timeline or completion deadline associated with this variance request. Mr. Lang stated, at last month’s Planning Commission meeting, this variance was denied, however, the City Council remanded the item back to the Planning Commission for reconsideration. Staff discussed with the applicant, the possibility of submitting a performance bond for 120% of the bid value to install the parking lot to the specifications of the approved plan including all curb and gutter, paving, landscaping, striping and sidewalks. He continued by saying, it is the position of the staff that the request does not meet a hardship required to receive a variance and this option to bond is more of a financial agreement bwtween the City and the applicant than a variance request. The City Engineer said it would be a highly unusual situation for the City to enter into such an arrangement. If the City pursues the request, it would require a bond and if the work is not completed by an established date, would use the bond to pay for completion of the project. The City would then be responsible for finding a contractor and ensure the costs are covered by the bond. Mr. Kuechle told the Planning Commission, he is working to secure enough money to pay for completion of the parking lot but is unable to get a loan. The reason it was not finished before was a misunderstanding and he would like to work with the City to find a solution. Commissioner Wegenast moved to deny the application. Motion seconded by Commissioner Wetzler and was carried by the following roll call vote: ayes: Bartsch, Berning, Bullinger, DeMakis, Hanson, Karpenko, Keller, Neether, Wegenast, Wetzler; nays: none Motion Passed Other Business The City Council pass an ordinance to amend the Minot Zoning Ordinance, Chapter 19, Agricultural District, Section 19-4, Conditional Uses, pertaining to campgrounds and also to amend Chapter 2, Definitions to add a definition for “campground.” 10 | P a g e PLANNING COMMISSION Regular Meeting March 26, 2018 Page 11 of 11 Mr. Lang explained the proposed changes to the ordinance including an added definition for “Campground,” a distinction for “Recreational Vehicle Campground,” and a reduction in the minimum site area requirement for a campground, from twenty acres to two acres. Commissioner Karpenko questioned whether two acres is large enough for a campground and asked if it was deliberately changed to accommodate an applicant’s request. Chairman Neether stated, the Steering Committee believed the issue of campgrounds was an area of the ordinance that needed to be addressed. During their discussions, they realized twenty acres would accommodate hundreds of campers, which seemed like too large of a requirement. They referenced the requirements in other cities and decided that two acres seemed like a sufficient minimum size. The members of the Planning Commission discussed the size requirement and the possible configurations of RV campgrounds. Commissioner Karpenko moved to approve the proposed ordinance with an amendment that the minimum size requirement for the site area of a campground be four (4) acres. Motion seconded by Commissioner Wegenast and was carried by the following roll call vote: ayes: Bartsch, Berning, Bullinger, DeMakis, Hanson, Karpenko, Keller, Neether, Wegenast, Wetzler; nays: none With no further business before the Commission, the meeting was adjourned at 8:10 pm. 11 | P a g e