Station #2

Key Issues and Trends

What issues are front and center in the core neighborhoods?

And what do we know about those issues?

Based on input from committee volunteers and the general public, as well in-depth data analysis, a series of key issues have emerged during the planning process…

Homes in need of repair or updating

What we’ve heard…

_______

30% of respondents to an online survey in April identified homes in disrepair as the priority problem to solve in their neighborhood— the most common answer received and one that ranked highly in all core neighborhoods.

_______

Small or outdated homes that are difficult to market and costly to repair was the third most common “turn-off” about core neighborhoods mentioned in the April survey.

_______

The presence of at least some distressed properties was identified by committee volunteers as something that was “not working” about their neighborhood.

What we know…

_______

1 in 6 residential properties in the core neighborhoods (or just over 1,500 properties) is considered to be ‘slipping’ according to a spring 2020 field survey of residential conditions. This means that deferred maintenance is plainly visible and the property appears to be on a downward trajectory.

_______

Smaller single-family homes of less than 1,250 square feet are the dominant housing type on most blocks within the core neighborhoods. The smallest of these are less likely to be owner-occupied and more likely to be showing signs of deferred maintenance.

Condition and quality of life impacts of rental housing

What we’ve heard…

_______

18% of respondents to an online survey in April identified blighted rental properties as the priority problem to solve in their neighborhood--the second most common answer received and one that ranked highly in most core neighborhoods.

In six of the nine core neighborhoods, problems at rental properties (maintenance- or nuisance-related) were cited as significant turn-offs for existing or potential residents.

_______

A range of concerns about rental housing have been expressed by committee volunteers, from the transitioning of single-family homes into rentals, to the location of higher-density infill housing, to conditions at older rental properties.

What we know…

_______

Of the 286 apartment buildings in the core neighborhoods, 20% are slipping in condition according to the spring 2020 survey of residential conditions. These tend to be smaller and older properties (86% built before 1980) than apartment buildings in better condition.

_______

For apartment structures in declining condition, Fargo’s median gross rent of around $800 is unlikely to motivate substantial investments without intervention of some kind.

_______

16% of single-family homes in the core are absentee-owned. These properties, on average, are 10% smaller, worth 17% less, and in noticeably worse condition than their owner-occupied counterparts. While this is most concentrated around NDSU, where student rentals skew the market, single-family rentals have been on the rise in many other parts of the core.

Safety, quality of life, and land use impacts of traffic and major roadways

What we’ve heard…

_______

16% of respondents to an online survey in April described a combination of concerns about traffic and streets—speeding, noise, conditions—as neighborhood detractors.

The effect of major roadways on the walkability and bikeability of core neighborhoods, and their impact on the marketability of properties along major roadways, has been a subject of discussion in all three Sub-Area committees.

What we know…

_______

Traffic counts from NDDOT show several corridors in the core with at least 10,000 and upwards of 20,000 vehicles per day.

_______

Observations confirm that modern traffic calming techniques (especially those using physical design to influence driver behavior) are generally absent along major corridors in the core.

_______

The current reconstruction of Main Avenue represents a possible model for future arterial re-designs in Fargo—both for the engagement process that yielded wide support and for the careful approach to design that creates sense of place.

Incompatible development and uncertainty in transitional areas

What we’ve heard…

_______

Concerns about the design, density, and/or land use of infill development has been expressed in a number of ways by volunteer committee members in most of the core neighborhoods. Specific concerns have included

Multi-family housing being developed in unpredictable locations
The design of new homes, garages, or rental infill being out of step with established neighborhood character

What we know…

_______

The biggest concerns about unpredictable and incompatible development have been raised in the Roosevelt/NDSU neighborhood, where the majority of new residential infill projects in the core have been located since 2015.

_______

The Land Development Code (LDC) Diagnostics work now being performed for the City has found multiple incompatibilities between the current code and goals expressed in Go2030 and numerous other plans. This includes the absence of design standards in base zoning districts.

_______

Planned Unit Developments (PUDs) have been used on several occasions in recent years to negotiate the details of development projects. This is a tool that can add flexibility to the development process, but it also poses a risk of ad hoc and unpredictable decision-making.

Additional key issues that have been expressed or observed include…

Uneven levels of resident leadership capacity and engagement

Some areas in Fargo’s core neighborhoods appear to have relatively high levels of resident leadership and organization. Others have much smaller levels or no readily apparent capacity to mobilize neighbors.

This level of unevenness is not unusual and likely derives from a combination of factors, including the perceived need to organize (or lack thereof), levels of owner-occupancy, and resident turnover rates, among others.

Concerns about the long-term status of schools as neighborhood anchors

While schools have been singled-out as critical assets in the core neighborhoods (see Station #3), concerns have also been raised that schools in the core have been falling behind newer schools in newer neighborhoods. If schools in the core (and those neighborhoods) have a harder time competing for young families, there are fears that certain facilities may not be viable in the long-term.

Crime and public safety — reality and perceptions

In the April online survey of core neighborhood stakeholders, crime and safety were identified as priority problems to address in Jefferson / Carl Ben and Madison / Unicorn Park. But it was also among the range of issues noted by participants in a few other neighborhoods, including Horace Mann and Roosevelt / NDSU.

In some cases, crime was raised as an issue that influences neighborhood quality of life. In other cases, it was raised as more of a perception problem, where the external image of crime does not align with reality.

Housing costs and taxes

While the affordability of the core neighborhoods has often been mentioned as a key asset (see Station #3) concerns about housing costs and taxes have also been raised. Rather than concerns about housing prices, those raising this issue have tended to focus on the maintenance and repair costs related to older housing and Fargo's practice of placing special assessments on properties to pay for infrastructure improvements.

Provide your feedback below for Station #2!

Now that you've learned about the issues and trends that have emerged during the planning process, add your voice to the conversation about Fargo's Core Neighborhoods.

Ready for the next station?

Thanks for spending time exploring Station #2. Head to Station #3 to learn about assets and building blocks in Fargo's core neighborhoods.

Page updated

Google Sites

Report abuse