Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Good afternoon. I will now call the July 14th Planning Commission meeting to order. May we have roll call, please?

Merle? Merle? Merle? Merle. Sorry.

Merle, yep.

Merle?

Merle.

Merle.

Yep.

Got it. Sorry.

That's all right.

I forgot. It's been two months since you've been here. Shonak? Present. Tengquist?

Present.

Siegel?

Present.

Kasper? Present. McDougall?

Here.

Krabenhoff?

Here.

is there a motion to approve the july 14th agenda so moved second all those is there any discussion all those in favor by signify by saying aye aye all those against the same sign and the agenda has been approved is there a motion to amend or approve the minutes of the may 4th meeting is there a motion motion to approve and second second any discussion All those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Against, same sign. And those minutes are approved. Regarding items not on the agenda for this evening, are there citizens here to be heard on other subjects? Any citizens here to be heard for items not on the current agenda? Seeing and hearing no one, we will move along to public hearings. Yes.

So, Robin, I want to make sure I have a lot of this printed out, but what I have on the screen is July 14th, and this is July 15th, what I brought. Is anybody else seeing that? And I just want to make sure.

Printed out the agenda?

Yep.

Yeah, the agenda should still say July 14th. What's up on the screen is the correct agenda.

Okay.

Very good, good OK. That brings us to public hearings are 1st. Is a request of Lowry Engineering for preliminary and final plat for Prairie Parkway 5th edition. Is there a motion to open the public hearing?

So moved.

Second? Second. Those in favor may signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Opposed, same sign. And the hearing is now officially open. City Planner Houston, would you please provide the commission with an overview of this particular item?

Chair Siegel, Assistant City Planner Brittany Cameron will present this item.

Thank you, Chair and Commissioners. Lowry Engineering on behalf of Prairie Parkway 2 LLC is requesting a preliminary and final plat related to Prairie Parkway 5th Edition, which is a reconfiguration of Prairie Parkway 4th Edition, approved by Planning Commission in February, but not recorded or built. Also in April, a portion of 41st Avenue South was vacated for the configuration of the street that originally went through this proposed stormwater pond lot. This proposal will redesign the two vacant lots originally intended for multifamily units into lots for a mix of single family detached homes, twin homes and town homes. No public comments have been received to date. Staff is recommending the planning commission recommend approval of the preliminary and final plat to the city council subject to the four conditions listed in the report. Please let me know if you have any questions.

Are there any Commission questions or comments regarding this particular item? I do have one question myself. Looking at, under the proposal review as distributed, access streets and mobility, access to this area will be available from the new 23rd Street extension and 28th Street. What extension of 23rd Street would that be?

If you look on your screens, this is 23rd, the new 23rd Street extension. It's not built yet. And it goes to 40th Avenue right here.

It will join 40th Avenue?

Yes, it will. So there is one. This development has access off of 40th and 28th Street.

On the plat, I did not see engineering notes noting that there will be a joining of those paved surfaces.

It's because it's already platted and it's part of second edition. So the plan, I can pull it up in the packet if you like. Let's see. This is the plat. This is actually the fourth edition that we approved earlier this year, and this is the 23rd Street that connected to the 41st Avenue. And then the new plat is very similar. Just the lots got laid out differently, and the 41st Avenue got rerouted, or excuse me, vacated. So this is the fifth edition, so 23rd Street that goes to 40th Avenue here. 41st Street ends here, and then it goes down and around these new parcels, and then there's a new street called Dragonfly Lane, and both of those circle around to 41st Avenue again, and then to 28th Street.

So there will be both a north access and an east access to that particular planted area?

Correct.

Okay. Other questions from members of the group here? Are there public comments to be made?

Yes. Is there any impact to public utilities or anything? I think there's an increase in lot size. Was that investigated?

Yeah. So with fourth edition, they had already installed some of the utilities for second edition. So I don't believe you were on the commission when we approved fourth edition. So the sewer pipe, there is a sewer pipe that was extended through this area and that will be abandoned because now they're gonna place a stormwater pond here. But these, all these new parcels, they're slightly reconfigured from the fourth edition, but they will have access, all of them will have access to public utilities. And there's just some have been installed already with second edition. It's hard to keep track of all the additions.

Any other commission questions?

Question about 23rd Street South. Is it only go to 41st Avenue South coming off of 40th?

It goes to the ditch. So it currently there is not an access over the ditch. So it it dead ends. So 23rd Street, there will be, you know, some pavement past 41st Avenue. And then that's how you get into the development is here. Um, When we did second addition, which is not shown on this, but I can show you on the GIS map, there is planned, there was a planned connection for 23rd Street to go west. If I turn on... So this purple area is a easement, and this was meant for a private driveway, so 23rd Street was going to extend or you could access going west from this private driveway, but second addition is kind of up in the air, so we're not sure exactly what's gonna get built there yet, but for now, 23rd Street will dead end at the ditch, and then you can go to 41st Street, circle around, and go out to 28th Street.

Thank you. Any other Commission questions? Questions from those present in the public?

So, Robin, real quick, is there only one way in and out of that parcel then right now, just on 28th? Because you said 23rd is not crossing.

There's actually no way in because it's not built yet. I think it's in the process of being built. They did the utilities last year. So once they, I think 23rd Street may have been started. I don't know, Clay, you can maybe answer that. Do you recall what got started for 2nd? not started so yeah there's actually no access so once this plat gets formalized they decide to record it then those streets would get built um and then obviously have to update um utility placements for the new lots as well but if you go out there that corner you can see there's some there's been some work happening since last year i believe um when when the second edition was So second edition got approved last year. Fourth edition got approved earlier this year. Now we're doing fifth edition, which is really fourth edition, just redoing fourth edition.

Other questions from either members of the commission or the public? Hearing none, is there a motion to close the public hearing? So moved. Second? Second. Those in favor may signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed, same sign. And that hearing is closed. Is there any more discussion or is there a motion for the item that was under discussion?

I'll make a motion to approve with the four conditions that are stated in the packet.

Second. Second. Is there any further discussion? Hearing none, those in favor may signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed, same sign. Motion is passed. We have a motion now to recommend approval to the City Council, the preliminary and final plat for Prairie Parkway fifth edition, contingent on the items that you see listed in your packet.

Oh, sorry, Chair, they already made a motion.

Yes, okay.

You just didn't- That'll move us along to the- Spell it all out, yeah.

second request this comes from houston engineering for preliminary and final plat and zoning map amendment for partridge creek second edition is there a motion to open the public hearing so moved second second all those in favor by signify by saying aye aye opposed same sign public hearing is now open city planner houston would you provide the commission with details and an overview on this particular item

Thank you again, Chair. Assistant City Planner Brittany Cameron will take this item as well.

So thank you, Chair and Commissioners. Partridge Creek LLC is requesting a preliminary and final plat and a zoning amendment to rezone two parcels from transitional to residential low density three for proposed Partridge Creek second addition. The developer intends to reconfigure approximately 24 acres south of 40th Avenue 40th Avenue ditch and west of Partridge Creek addition and replant block four of Partridge Creek addition by extending these lots 20 feet. The proposal creates 100 lots for single family residential development and one lot for the ditch to meet market demand. The proposal is similar and compatible with the surrounding land uses. After the packet was posted, some discussion took place about a required second access point for this area that will now have 164 residential lots. Staff has updated the conditions of approval for access that now states one access in and out of the development is not permitted. A PERMANENT SECOND ACCESS FROM 28th STREET SOUTH IS TEMPORARILY WAIVED FOR THE SECOND EDITION WITH THE CONDITION THAT EITHER A TEMPORARY ACCESS, AN EXAMPLE, GRAVEL ROAD THAT CAN ACCOMMODATE PUBLIC SAFETY VEHICLES MUST BE PROVIDED WITH THE SECOND EDITION AS APPROVED BY THE CITY ENGINEER OR A PERMANENT ACCESS IS PROVIDED VIA 23rd STREET SOUTH WITH THE SECOND EDITION. No public comments have been received to date. Staff suggests the planning commission recommend approval to the city council, the preliminary and final plat and zoning amendment for Partridge Creek second edition contingent on the conditions outlined in the packet. Please let me know if you have any questions.

Are there any commission questions or comments regarding this particular item?

Who's the authority for the ditch that goes through that?

Well, let me double check. I think it's a city ditch, but I thought I saw there was a county label on it as well. Yeah, I think it's ours. I believe it's ours.

Very good.

yeah now that i think about it the partridge creek first edition platted a lot and they have to deed that ditch portion to us and they'll have to do the same for the second portion because it will be uh this this section of the ditch will now get platted as a lot of partridge creek second edition and they will deed that to the city um first like for storm water

Will that be act as retention or just part of the stormwater plan?

It's part of the stormwater plan. I honestly don't know like how much water it holds, but it probably serves as kind of a cleaning mechanism as the stormwater flows through the area.

Right. Thank you. Could you what? Excuse me? I'm sorry. Thank you. Could you walk us through the entrances as they are now on this and the proposal? Or the options?

Yes. So right now, this is Partridge Creek first edition. So when this this sick, these 64 lots were approved, they were approved with one access point from 28th Street south here. In that condition, did require that we would waive a permanent second access if they would provide a second access with a future phase. So this second addition, which you're considering tonight, is a future phase. And that's why you should address that's where we're going to address that second access. We don't recommend that it's a permanent access going to 28th Street because we won't know how the rest of these lots are laid out until he's ready to plat the third phase. The second alternative for access is to put a culvert over the ditch so that 23rd Street here could be extended to the north to exit off of 40th. So right now, these lots have a permanent access if they go out through here to 28th Street. THEY COULD POSSIBLY DO A TEMPORARY GRAVEL ROAD SOUTH OF THIS IS A CITY PROPERTY SOUTH OF THE WATER TOWER TO GET TO 28 OR THEY COULD DO A PERMANENT ACCESS CROSSING THE DITCH. THEY ARE GOING TO TALK ABOUT THE CITY ENGINEER WILL TALK ABOUT THAT WITH THE DEVELOPER TO SEE WHAT HE WANTS TO DO.

OTHER QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION?

Does the city engineer communicate with the fire and ambulance service about a temporary gravel road?

Yes. So I talked to the fire chief yesterday, and he is okay with the language as it's spelled out in the report. That's why there's language in there about it has to be adequate to hold the weight of a fire truck. You can't just put a gravel path from 28th Street on those soft ag land. They would sink. So it will have to be built up to a standard that could hold those trucks.

And they're saying that that's temporary?

That would be temporary until the rest of the property and the phases are kind of laid out so we could see where that, when it's a permanent access for the development, the Partridge Creek master plan area, then they would create a permanent access off of 28th Street for those developments.

How was it, I know I wasn't part of this one for the first phase, but how was it worded for the access?

So for the first edition, it was worded. So in the subdivision, the subdivision code requires two access points and it's mostly for public safety. So if a developer doesn't want to provide that second access point, they ask for a waiver. So in the first edition, we did give them a waiver temporarily, but then the condition of approval was in the next phase, you would have to provide a temporary access point for if you're going to add more lots. The first phase was only 64 lots, so they were okay with having the one access, but now it's going to be 164 lots, so now we feel like it's important to get at least a temporary second access. We've done this in other parts of the city, particularly Tessa Terrace has a gravel second access for some of their development, and that's actually been there for a while. So it does work, but we just, you don't know what the economy is gonna do. We can't force him to master plan the rest of the property south of these first two additions. We feel like based on conversations, he's gonna continue to do single family development, but we just don't know how fast. So we're just kind of waiting to update a master plan to see where that second access will be permanently. He's got quite a bit of, This is all of his frontage here, south of the Watertower property. This is a private residential property that's in the township. So it'll be somewhere here, the permanent access, once they figure out if it's going to come up, you know, where it's, it'll probably come off from here, I would assume, or it could possibly come up one of the streets over here, too. Once we get more information, we'll lay that out, like, Next year, you'll probably be seeing him for third edition, and maybe he'll have a little further understanding of how he wants those lots to lay out.

Thank you.

Is the long-term plan to connect to 23rd at some point?

So when we when we talked to the developer with the first edition, he wasn't interested. It's very expensive to put a bridge or in a culvert over the ditch. So he wasn't interested. City, the city staff, we talked about like, you know, maybe in the future, we could look at at least doing a ped bridge over the ditch. Or if it's problematic, only having accesses off of 20th 28th, we could take a look at a permanent It's just kind of unknown at this point. So with the two options presented to the developer, he can kind of decide, because a gravel road for that length, it won't be cheap either. So he can kind of look at the cost. And there might be some cost sharing available between the city and the developer to put it over 23rd Street, because it does make sense. It's just extra costs that he was not interested in with the first addition.

Yeah, I don't want to beat up on this, but I'm all for the growth, so you know where I stand. But how long has this happened in other areas? Is this sort of a new thing with one without having another temporary?

We've had other situations, like I mentioned earlier. Tessa Terrace does not have a second permanent access. They still have a temporary gravel road. So it just kind of depends on what you're platting, what the developer has control over, because he could have, you know, maybe he wouldn't have control over that south parcel. So then we would probably have to, he would have to reconfigure his parcels to get a second access now, a permanent second access, because he doesn't, control it, unless maybe in the future he had plans to buy it and we just don't know that. There's always scenarios for that.

Yeah, and we can't predict the future. That's what I was thinking, too. The only one I could think was TEFSA.

That's personally, like, that's the only one I know about. There may have been others. And they could have been corrected by now, like, you know, when they started. Like, Horizon Shores is huge. That could have easily happened up there, too.

but with that is there a uh i want all the success in the world out here but is there a a time frame that you give them guidance to or is it just kind of left very vague and we can give guidance in the developers agreement and that's probably what we'll discuss um when they did tessa terrace they did not put a sunset on that gravel road and it's

It's been there for a while. So that's something we'll discuss with the developer. You know, the city engineer may want it with the next phase. Once they plat, maybe once they plat this area, then yeah, you have to put in the permanent access. But he may have intentions of platting this area next. We just, I don't, we don't know. So if it makes sense to plot this area next, we could probably get the permanent access in with the next addition. We just kind of have to wait and see what the economy's doing next year.

Yeah, I get it. Thank you. Other questions from the commission? I have a couple questions. Go ahead.

Nope, sorry. How many, I know we're going over this, but with Tessa Terrace, how many developments are over there in that?

area because this has 164 and if this is the ground the temporary road for tessa terrace right here which goes off of third street southwest and then it connects to can't read that of course 50th, okay, 50th, yeah, my eyes are, or 50th Avenue. So it serves these larger lots, and then it also serves some of these lots over here. So definitely less lots. I don't know the total lots for these two developments. There's also still developable land in this area that the owner hasn't, he's spoken to us about it, so he could be adding additional lots here, but...

I'm just curious. It seems like a lot of lots to only have one exit in and out.

So yeah, it is. And that's why we think it's important. They got to get that temporary access in before second edition starts selling lots, because the plan is to put in utilities this fall. And then the streets would go wouldn't go until next year. So they could be working on that temporary access road when they're doing the permanent streets as well.

Thank you. Other questions? Just a point of information, this temporary compacted road that would handle equipment, similar to that of fire equipment, who maintains that road?

It's a private, it'd be considered a private driveway, so the developer would be required to maintain it.

And just to go over material we've already covered, but the concern I have here is we're relying on access through 28th Street only. Tessa Terrace. You have two points of access, at least River Haven Rd and 50th Ave South. Here, for some reason, 28th St is blocked. You know 9 feet of snow overturned school bus. You have to drive to 50th Ave South, turn left and go north. To get on 28th St. That is some little trip from the South Side Fire Station.

But it meets the subdivision code to have the two accesses. So that's not something we can bear our decision on if it doesn't have access off of 40th.

Any other questions? Do we have questions from the public in attendance?

I have one more question. Yes. It was around the intersection angle waiver, though. I think on 23rd and 43rd. I just wanted to ask if, I'm not familiar with the background on why the angle. Is there a safety-related topic that drives that angle? And have we talked about that?

Yes. It's this intersection here. So in our subdivision code, all intersections cannot be less than 75 degrees, and that one is less than 75 degrees. So we put kind of looser language in the conditions of approval because engineering is talking to the developer about either straightening that out so it meets the 75 degrees or possibly doing like a small roundabout there they just have to determine if there's enough room to do that so they they will fix that before this gets this plat gets finalized because it does it has to meet code and it doesn't meet code right now and that's why we have all those other comments that um to clean up the drawing and um you know they have to vacate a 10-foot easement so there's there's a there's a few things that they have to work on the drawing and those will all get worked out through planning and the engineering departments

Thank you. Further questions? Hearing none, is there a motion to close the public hearing?

So moved.

Second?

Second.

Any discussion? Those in favor, say aye.

Aye.

Opposed, same sign. Public hearing is closed. Is there any more discussion or is actually, this has been put in the form of two motions. FIRST MOTION WOULD BE TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE ZONING MAP AMENDMENT FROM TZ TRANSITIONAL TO RLD 3 RESIDENTIAL LOW DENSITY 3 FOR PARTRIDGE CREEK SECOND ADDITION EXCEPT FOR BLOCK 5. IS THERE A MOTION TO APPROVE? SO MOVED. SECOND?

SECOND.

ANY DISCUSSION? THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE. AYE. AGAINST? SAME SIGN. BRINGS US TO A SECOND MOTION ATTACHED TO THIS PARTICULAR DETAIL. Recommend approval of the preliminary and final plat of Partridge Creek second edition contingent on the following items that you have expressed on your distributed agenda Is there a motion to approve? Move for approval there a second second any discussion? Those in favor may signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed, same sign. That motion is approved. Brings us to our third public hearing. It is a request of Houston Engineering for zoning map and comprehensive plan amendments for 801 10th Avenue South, 1022 8th Street South, and 1102 8th Street South, Concordia College. Is there a motion to open the public hearing?

So moved.

Second?

Second.

Discussion? All in favor may signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed? Same sign. City planner Houston, would you provide the commission with an overview of this item?

Thank you, Chair. Assistant City Planner Ethan Jonk will present this item.

Thank you chair and commissioners. Houston Engineering on behalf of Concordia College is requesting a comprehensive plan amendment from public institutional to mixed use and a zoning map amendment from institutional to MU2 neighborhood mixed use at 801 10th Avenue South, 1022 8th Street South and 1102 8th Street South. These sites have historically served as student apartments and administrative offices but no longer meet the needs of Concordia, so they are now proposing to redevelop this site into one large site with a four-story building with three stories of new student housing and a first floor with commercial services that will better serve both the student body and the community at large. The building will be no more than 55 feet tall and will meet all other MU2 zoning requirements. No public comments have been received, so staff is recommending that the Planning Commission recommend approval to the City Council of the following for 801 10th Avenue South, 1022 8th Street South, and 1102 8th Street South, both the zoning map amendment from institutional to MU2 neighborhood mixed use, and the comprehensive plan amendment from public institutional to mixed use. Please let me know if you have any questions.

Members of the Commission have questions or comments?

I know it said that the density would be dictated by parking, but that there's also parking available on campus. I know that that can get kind of problematic with permitted parking for residents and then having commercial traffic for people visiting the first floor businesses as well. Have we done any investigation into what the parking situation is currently and how well that'll be covered?

So the mixed use two zoning district for multifamily, which is what the student housing would be classified as, does not have a density cap. And the comment in there about how the parking will dictate the density is more related to the commercial uses. Because this is on the Concordia campus, they can also utilize other parking lots on the campus. That will be, since it's student housing, it will not be rented out to the public. That will be left up to Concordia to figure out how, if they're going to provide parking for these units. I think it's going to be geared towards upper class people. So that'll be up to Concordia. But we are very confident they have plenty of parking because, you know, the college campuses are... over parked in my planning opinion. So I don't think that's gonna be an issue. It's more of an issue of like how many parking spaces can they provide for the first floor businesses and then what's left over on this lot for some of the housing units and then the other housing units will go to other campus properties.

Okay, thank you. Other questions or comments from members of the commission?

Is there a plan to have underground parking with this facility?

There's not. Any further comments? Do we have comments from the public in attendance this evening? Hearing none, is there a motion to close the public hearing?

So moved.

Second? Second. Discussion? All those in favor signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Opposed, same sign, and the public hearing is closed. As a result of this, we have again two motions to act upon. FIRST MOTION IS TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL TO CITY COUNCIL OF THE ZONING AMENDMENT FROM INSTITUTIONAL TO MU2 NEIGHBORHOOD MIXED USE FOR 801 10TH AVENUE SOUTH, 1022 8TH STREET SOUTH AND 1102 8TH STREET SOUTH. IS THERE A MOTION TO APPROVE? SO MOVED. SECOND?

SECOND.

IS THERE DISCUSSION? Hearing no discussion, those in favor may signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed, same sign. Motion is approved. Second motion is to recommend approval to the city council the comprehensive plan amendment from public institutional to mixed use for 801 10th Avenue South, 1022 8th Street South, and 1102 8th Street South. Is there a motion to approve?

So moved.

Second? Second. Any discussion? Those in favor may signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed, same sign. Motion is approved. We have before us a request from A. Morris for zoning text amendment related to off-street parking surfacing in Title 10, Chapter 20 of the Moorhead City Code. Is there a motion to open the public hearing? So moved. Second?

Second.

All those in favor may signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed, same sign. City planner Houston, would you provide us with the details on this particular motion?

In chair system, the other assistant city planners here tonight for Steinhoff will present this item.

Perfect. Thank you, Chair and Commissioners. A. Morris has requested a zoning text amendment related to off-street parking surfacing to permit other materials than pavement for his commercial property at 1921 11th Street North. Currently, off-street parking surfacing is limited to asphalt or concrete with gravel permitted only in the transitional RLD1 and industrial zoning districts. While analyzing this text amendment for the applicant, we researched other alternative parking surfacing solutions because Moorhead has limits on our impervious surfaces or hard surfaces which prevent water from infiltrating or soaking into the soil. Currently, we do offer lower density residential property owners the ability to replace impervious surfaces with a pervious pavement or pavers if they are having difficulty meeting impervious maximums for their parcel. Because these have only been policies, we are now proposing to codify current practices while also offering new ones for some zoning districts or areas. Some of the proposed code updates include impervious and pervious pavers as provisional uses for single and two family parcels in RLD zoning districts, adding gravel or crushed concrete in community commercial and institutional zoning districts for some parcels north of 15th Avenue North, which is the former Oakport Township area. pervious concrete as provisional use in all zoning districts, and then pervious grass pavers as provisional uses in the institutional zoning district for lots that are over 10 acres. After the packet was published, some additional discussion took place about requiring provisional use permits for impervious pavers. And that was so staff could confirm whether the correct materials and pavers are being used to ensure that personal vehicle weight is met for those pavers for all one or two family residential driveways in the RLD, RMD, RHD, and MU1, 2, and 3 districts. So they could also utilize impervious pavers with that provisional use permit. We haven't received any public comments to date and staff is recommending that the planning commission recommend approval to the city council, the zoning text amendment related to Moorhead city code, title 10 chapter 20 off street parking. And I'd be happy to answer any questions you may have.

We have questions or comments from members of the commission. Are there members of the public present who wish to comment on this particular offering? Hearing from neither group, is there a motion to close the public hearing? So moved. Second? Second. Discussion? All in favor may signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed? Same sign. Is there any more discussion or is there a motion to recommend approval to the City Council the zoning text amendment related to Morehead City Code Title 10 Chapter 20 Off Street Parking Surfacing?

I move to approve the recommendation of city council.

Is there a second?

Second.

Any further discussion? Hearing none, those in favor may signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed, same sign. Is there any other business to come before the commission?

No other business or information tonight, Chair.

Seeing as there is no other business, is there a motion to adjourn? So moved. Second? Second. Those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed, same sign. Meeting is adjourned. Thank you.