Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Planning Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning commissioners review ag minimum-lot proposal and administrative lot-modification rules
Summary
City planning staff presented a proposed change to the agricultural (AG) minimum lot-size from 5 to 10 acres and led a discussion about lot-modification procedures (lot splits, combinations and adjustments). Commissioners asked staff to draft minor clarifying ordinance changes, including adding planning sign-off for administrative combinations.
City planning staff briefed the Planning and Zoning Commission in a work session on two non-action items: a draft amendment to raise the minimum lot size in the agricultural (AG) district from 5 to 10 acres, and a review of the city's administrative lot-modification process, which covers lot splits, lot line adjustments and lot combinations.
Natalie Burczyk, city planner, said the AG minimum-lot amendment is intended to bring Dickinson's standard more in line with neighboring communities; most nearby jurisdictions use a 10-acre threshold. Burczyk asked commissioners whether they wanted additional code changes before the item returns as an action item at the July meeting.
On lot modifications, staff reviewed current municipal-code language and compared Dickinson's administrative lot-modification approach to processes in Bismarck, Williston, Fargo and Grand Forks. Burczyk and City-County Planner Steve Josephson noted the city's existing process allows administrative combination of platted lots and administrative lot-line adjustments without a public hearing, and that the city engineer's sign-off is already required under Century Code procedures. They also noted there is currently no explicit cap on how many platted lots may be combined administratively.
Commissioners raised two consistent concerns: that the city planning office should formally sign off on administrative lot combinations (to ensure planning input and consistency with the comprehensive plan), and that unlimited combinations of small lots could change neighborhood character without public review. Several commissioners emphasized the need to keep routine simple administrative adjustments fast while preventing potential circumvention of the public- hearing subdivision process.
Assistant City County Planner Steve Josephson confirmed the administrative process was adopted after county and recorder's-office interpretations of state (Century) code changed the acceptable recordation practices. Josephson and Burczyk agreed staff would draft a limited ordinance amendment for review that would: add the planner's review/signature to the lot-modification sign-off process and consider a reasonable cap or threshold for administrative lot combinations to trigger minor-plat review.
No formal action was taken at the work session; staff said the AG-minimum-lot proposal and proposed lot-modification clarifications would be returned to Planning and Zoning in July with draft language for formal consideration.
