00:00:06,430	Well, good morning, everyone. Thank you for attending, uh, today is November 18, 2024. It is 10 o’clock, and I will call to order the Bismarck Mandan. MPO’s technical advisory committee meeting. Uh, we’ll start with roll call. Ben Ereth here. Antrio He Deirdre Hughes. Game show. John Sacke. Here. Andrew Stromie. Here. Jarek Wiickness. Greg Faser.

00:00:43,300	Mitch Flanagan. Natalie Pierce Dean Schloss. Wayne Zacher, Chair Lukaszewsky. The first order on the first item on the agenda is review and possible approval of the minutes. What are the wishes of the board? This Ben, I moved to approve the minutes as presented Ben. Is there a second? This is Jericho second. Thank you, Jarek. Roll call.

00:01:18,530	Ben Earth Datria. Yes. Deirdre Hughes. John Zaki. Yes. Andrew Strommi Jarek Wigness, Greg Fraser, Mitch Flanagan. Dean Schloss, Wayne Zacher Cher Lukaszewski, are approved. Item 2 is the 2025 to 2028 transportation improvement program amendments with Steven. Thank you, Rachel. Give me one moment to share a screen with you.

00:02:26,530	Oh Mhm All right, so this month, The MPO has processed a one amendment to the both the 24 through 27 and the 25 through 2028, transportation improvement programs, since we are currently under both, uh, and this is exhibit A. It was advertised for the required fifteen-day public comment period. We did not receive any public comments on this.

00:02:53,600	The amendment adds a project to the tip in fiscal year 25 for pavement markings on various US and North Dakota highways throughout DOT’s Bismarck district, which includes locations in the MPO area, the cost for the entire project is estimated at 1.

00:03:16,470	4 million, and the amendment form has the details of that, uh, are there any questions from the board on this amendment? Thank you, Steven. Any questions? I don’t see any questions, um, this was advertised as a public hearing, so I will open the public hearing. If there’s anyone from the public who would like to comment on the project? You may do so.

00:03:38,170	Colleen a second time for public hearing. And a 3rd time Closing the public hearing, are there any further comments or wishes of the board? Seeing none is their emotion to uh accept the. Um Amendments to the tip And make a motion to approve the Amendment. Thank you, Andrew, is there a second? This is Jerry I second.

00:04:12,170	Thank you, Jarek. Roll call Stephen. Ben Ereth? Yes, Dan Trio? Deidre Hughes. John Sacke. Yes. Andrew Stram Jarek Wigness, Craig Faser, Mitch Flanagan. Dean Schloss, Wayne Zacher. Char Lukaszewski. Yes Uh, the motion passes. Item 3 on the agenda is. Uh, the FY 27. Transportation alternatives projects with Kim. Thank you, Chair.

00:04:52,600	Good morning, members of the TAC, uh, exhibit B, beginning on page 11 is a summary sheet of the transportation alternatives applications that were received by the Bismarck Mandan MPO for the fiscal year 27, um, funding. I will share my screen for our viewers at home. All right. Everybody able to see the summary sheet very clearly.

00:05:39,700	Uh, this summary sheet, as I said, does contain the, uh, Brief descriptions of all 5 of the projects that were submitted to the NPO for consideration. They are listed in no particular order on this summary sheet, by the way.

00:06:04,130	Um, I will tell you that, uh, of the 52 of these were preservation projects and 3 were construction, uh, in the past, the MPO has gone through, um, several different iterations of scoring and prioritizing these projects, uh, at some turns we have done preservation and and construction separately.

00:06:30,900	However, in recent years, the attack has, um, They’ve indicated, uh, a desire that we put them all into one pot and that we review them and score them all as, uh, uh, the same whether they’re preservation or construction projects. And so that is how this scoring took place this year.

00:06:54,930	Uh, it is a two-tiered scoring whereby the bike ped subcommittee of the Bismarck Mandan MPO reviews and ranks the projects according to their technical expertise and Those rankings are translated into a score, which then is, um, Combined with a staff scoring, uh, to achieve a combined score and an overall rank.

00:07:18,400	So it gets a little bit confusing because sometimes you want to grab that combined score and and take the highest score as, as the number one rank, but it’s kind of like the game of golf where the lowest is the most favorable. So when we get into the overall ranking, we can see that on this, uh, summary sheet we had um. The 3rd Street Southeast sidewalk installation. Come in with the lowest score, along with the Highway 1806 pedestrian trail.

00:07:43,670	They both scored similarly and were put into a number one rank. Uh, followed then by the Memorial Highway pedestrian ramps submitted by City of Mandan, and then the US 83 State Street multi-use trail submitted by the City of Bismarck and followed by the sunrise Trail connection submitted by Bismarck Parks and Recreation District.

00:08:06,470	So now that we’ve kind of just provided an overview of the scoring and the ranking process, um, we will get to the applications and the projects themselves, um, starting with the Bismarck Parks and Recreation Districts of Middle for the Sunrise Trail Connection. That those extents will be from East Century Avenue up to Sunrise Park.

00:08:31,530	It is for a 10-foot wide shared use contract concrete trail extension from Sunrise Park to the future extension of Century Avenue, which is, I believe, being constructed. Gabe, you can correct me if I’m wrong, but Century Avenue construction is taking place in 25? That’s correct.

00:08:56,600	OK, um, so by the time that the FY 27 projects would be under construction that East Century Avenue extension would already be in place. Um, I’ll take you to that application, um. I don’t know why I can’t. How do I get rid of this banner up here? Oh Oh, I messed it up.

00:09:28,600	Steven, do you know how to get rid of this banner and get me back into my page? I don’t know why I don’t either. See Well, I do. I just wanted to. Change pages in the banner was in the way. And I really don’t want that there. OK, well, maybe we can just stop and do it again. I guess I’ll have to. Let’s try that. That’s really strange. Mm.

00:10:10,770	Can we, um, try that? Barrow up in the top. Maybe that’ll just make it bigger for us and then we can get back to our screen share. We can share. I broke the system. That OK, stop share one. Alright Now we’ll go back to Cher. Let’s try it again. We really should be able to make this bigger.

00:10:50,330	by hitting those arrows there. Yeah, this will expand it. should Mm Sure that No. OK I don’t wanna have to scroll through. 80. If you exit full screen, you mean get out a presentation mode. Yeah OK So You want to share this, right? Uh-huh. OK. But see, I want to be able to get in here and.

00:11:53,870	change my page numbers, and that’s the banner was there, so. I can do, I should be able to do it now if are we sharing. that OK OK, we were up on screen before on this page, so if you do a stop share. Um Go back. To Mm there. It’s up there.

00:12:33,030	I’m just gonna leave it there. I should be able to go up here and. And grab page numbers, right. We’ll, we’ll just do it this way. They can’t see it. OK OK. Yeah, so this Yeah, OK, you can move through this will work. Sorry about that. Sorry as well. My apologies.

00:13:06,930	Thank you, Steven, for your assistance and we’ll work with it this way. It’s not ideal, but. Um Oh OK, so here is the um sunrise Trail application that was submitted by the Bismarck Parks and Recreation District, um, They provided an image on their cover page and it shows you the um existing, uh, Sunrise Trail up to the north and in pink, it

00:13:39,070	shows the extension that would connect to East Century Avenue and. This particular project is, um, a total cost estimate of $591,800. Uh, the Bismarck Parks and Rec is asking for $473,440 for this. This would add approximately 0.16 miles to the current trail system in Bismarck for them. Uh, the city of Bismarck Pro, uh, was.

00:14:10,000	was for the uh rehabilitation of the State Street multi-use trail, uh. This is a 10-foot wide shared use path, and it would be it would be an asphalt overlay and approximately 5700 linear feet. The trail is located along the west side of State Street from the Capitol grounds at Divide Avenue and it terminates at Calgary Avenue.

00:14:33,000	Um We have cost estimates of. $437,000 for total project cost? They are asking for an amount of $349,600. This, uh, let’s see. Mhm Well, now that I’m scrolling, I’m. Very much apologizing for this.

00:15:15,170	There you can see the extents of the trail, um, Again, starting down here in the South End on Divide Avenue by the Capitol grounds, extending up to Calgary Avenue, there is a new trail extension that has just recently been completed, that connects Calgary Avenue to Forty-Third Avenue Northeast and the greater trail system from there. Image shows you the current conditions of the trail and the need for rehab.

00:15:43,470	Uh, the next application was submitted in conjunction by the city of Mandan and the Mandan Park District, um, this project is for Highway 1806 pedestrian trail improvements. This is a current 10 ft wide asphalt pedestrian trail that runs from 14th Street Northwest past twenty-seventh Street North. Let me see if I can get you a Map with the. There we go.

00:16:17,800	Um So, um, yeah, it runs from 14th Street Northwest down on the south. It does run under the, um, The overpass right now, the I-94 bridge overpass and continues on up to twenty-seventh North. On Highway 1806.

00:16:45,470	They will be installing overlay and drainage improvements throughout and pedestrian safety enhancements consisting of a separation barrier underneath that I-94 bridge, as right now there is no barrier between the pedestrian trail and the, um, driving lanes of the traffic. Um Project costs submitted for this particular project. Uh, of the estimated 925,000 plus costs, uh, that would be eligible. They are asking for 624,0112. We must remember that with the TA applications only costs of construction are eligible for that funding.

00:17:19,000	And so any right of way, any underground utilities, things of that nature need to be backed up. And uh they have done that there. The next project that was submitted was by the city of Mandan. It is the 3rd Street Southeast sidewalk installation that is on page 53 of your packet.

00:17:53,270	Hm This project would be a 6 ft wide new concrete pedestrian sidewalk on the north side of 3rd Street southeast from 6th Avenue southeast to 3rd Avenue southeast, approximately 830 linear feet. This would be an important connection, um, and would eliminate this current sidewalk gap. It is a construction project estimated to cost $254,689 and the city of Mandan is requesting 206,120.

00:18:21,400	In federal funding. And again, just some, some extents 6 6th Avenue Southeast. Um, 850 ft west. of that. And the final project that was submitted. It is on page 61. And that also was submitted by. p s o dy of Moundown. That is for um.

00:19:00,470	The replacement of the Memorial highway pedestrian ramp to realign it. It would replace the existing pedestrian ramp with a realigned ramp connection right at Liberty Memorial Bridge and Memorial Highway. This will connect to a future trail that’s being constructed as part of the Memorial Highway re reconstruction project.

00:19:27,670	This particular project is estimated to cost a total of $49,534 and the city of Manan is asking the 80% amount of 40,000. $88. Again returning back to our Uh Summary page. This does give the brief descriptions of each of those projects, um. It does Notate whether they are construction or preservation, and then the final rank is in the green column to the far right.

00:20:00,900	And you can see that the 3rd Street Southeast sidewalk installation tied for a number one priority ranking with the Highway 1806 pedestrian trail improvements. Now, um, in the past. We have Determined that it’s fairly important to provide a ranking to North Dakota DOT when we’re forwarding these projects on to help them, uh, in, in their selection of projects, um.

00:20:27,070	And that was the reasoning behind tax request to Rank all of these projects. As a whole, simply, uh, to avoid any confusion when it hits the DOT selection team in, you know, if there’s, if we’d be submitting two priority 1 projects, um, you know, that that might cause confusion on their end.

00:20:54,670	However, this year we are faced with exactly that situation where we have 2 #1 priority projects. So it would be at the tax discretion to prioritize those two. number one projects, or you could choose to recommend them.

00:21:22,930	Uh, to the policy board as is, uh, and let the policy board at their discretion either determined to allow the submittal of 2 #1 priority projects to North Dakota DOT or they can re-rank. So this goes through several iterations, um, with the possibility of re-ranking from the rankings that we’ve provided on the summary sheet. To the decision of the TA or the recommended recommendation of the TA today, and then also policy board has the discretion to change anything that comes before them.

00:21:47,670	So given that information, um, we do have members here, um, from the submitting jurisdiction, and I’m just, let’s see, we don’t have anybody from Bismarck Parks and Rec, but we do have City of Bismarck, also City of Mandan, and I’d, I’d welcome any comments or additional information on these projects that you might Think are pertinent before we Um Continue with discussing the

00:22:10,100	prioritization. City of Bismarck, Gabe Schell, do you have any information that you’d like to add? Sure, thanks, Kim. I can actually add to Bismarck Parks and Rec.

00:22:25,530	Um, as well, um, the, the Sunrise Trail connection, obviously there’s, there’s not a, it doesn’t make sense to do that project right now because there’s nothing to connect to, but after the city’s 2025 construction of Century Avenue, um, where we’re just stubbing off the trail and kind of just leaving it as a dead end at that point in time, um, you’ll look from, um, at the end of that sidewalk or trail and wonder how do you get over to that park over there

00:22:38,830	and so that’s kind of the point of this project would be to um make that connection and it’s more than um just a a sidewalk connection because it’s, it’s the additional, um, crossing of a coolie that. adds to the cost that makes it a little more cost prohibitive for parks to take that on by themselves.

00:22:52,970	So that’s kind of the concept, uh, definitely harder to envision that one if you stand out there now, you’re in the middle of a field, so I can see like why the committee would look at that and not see necessarily an issue today, uh, but it would be a more pressing issue, obviously, um, as time

00:23:08,230	continues, I would mention too that that project, I believe last year was the #2 project that came out of tax vote, uh, with the number one project being a sidewalk, I think on 8th.

00:23:26,200	Street to 8th Avenue, um, was that funded Jarek, that one, OK, so just making sure that that was the number 2 priority last year and I guess now this year it seems to make its way to the bottom of the prioritization list, so I don’t know if there’s an aspect of, um, continuing or having some sort of, uh, You know, How many years it’s applied for some sort of, you know, I don’t know

00:23:40,770	how to take a #2 project and put it to #1 on some of these and and understand we went to the um Safe routes to services that I think spun up some of these other concepts that are here and then we even in in Bismarck, we didn’t really attack.

00:23:57,470	That concept until that project is done and then we’re gonna use some of those, uh, ideas for for future solicitations, but long and the short of it, that Sunrise Trail connection, I, I do believe has some value to it.

00:24:15,400	I would even put that above the, the cities’s multi-use trail, State Street Rehab project, um, as far as the city of Bismarck’s concerned, um, that is a project that whether it’s funded through TA or funded through the DOT’s urban regional program, uh, we’d be asking for, um, that to be looked at just uh through multiple. ing packages and giving the DOT hopefully some flexibility to look at whatever makes the most sense for them.

00:24:32,630	So at least from Bismarck’s perspective, I would put our or Parks and Rex trail above um the State Street Rehab project, um, within Bismarck, but then maybe we can save some conversation for the end on how those all rate relative to the other ones in this program. OK, thanks, Gabe.

00:24:54,930	Anybody from Mandan want to give us any additional information on the Mandan projects? Um, yeah, I guess, um, between the two. Uh, number one ranked projects. I think that we would, I would expect. Um, our commission. To prioritize the 1806 pedestrian trail improvements more out of those two. Um But there might be a good question for Mayor Frelich.

00:25:25,270	Yeah OK, um, so just given those comments, uh, I guess. We’d be open to discussion, um, from the members of the TA, um, that’s to. Whether you are satisfied with the rankings that are provided on the summary sheet. I, if those would. Be suitable to promote to the policy board for their consideration.

00:25:53,670	Um, of approval or do you feel that there should be alternative rankings assigned to promote to the policy board. I maybe just add also that um. The bike pad subcommittee A ranking was pretty tight amongst the four that that aren’t the, the Sunrise Trail connection with every single project in there had at least a first place vote in just about every single one

00:26:12,570	had 1/5 place vote too. So I think it’s, it’s always difficult when we get into these sort of, you know, subjective exercises that if you’re from Bismarck, you’re probably gonna value that Bismarck product that you can see that issue if you’re in Ferman, you’re probably gonna value that.

00:26:27,830	So it’s always a difficult ask of that committee in particular that has representatives from, from all sorts of people. Um, I think if we had a project in here. that was all number ones across that entire committee, like, oh my gosh, that is probably universally accepted as the number one priority, we should follow that, um, what I see a lot of smattering of ones and

00:26:41,670	fives mixed in the group, um, I probably don’t put a lot of weight or as much weight to that prioritization, um, as if it was a unanimous selection, um. So I just wanted to just offer that comment. Well, go ahead, go ahead. No, that that’s all right, go ahead, Ben.

00:27:01,630	Yeah, I guess I just had some questions, Kim, and, and maybe, maybe it’s Jarek or others that need to answer some of these questions or that would be better suited to answer, but, um, The, the 1806 project, uh, called out a critical need to connect the the high school, um, as one of the justifications for the project.

00:27:24,400	Do, do, do you know, are there, are there sidewalks or pedestrian facilities that would link to 1806 along, I guess it’s 24th or 4th or even 8th Avenue that would kind of bring folks to the high school. Um, yes, there’s are, I think there might be two RFB crossings at 24th and 4th, yeah. C currently installed, so yes.

00:27:50,070	And there’s sidewalk facilities on the other side of the. Correct. Sure. Got you. Yep. Yep, that makes sense. Um You know, I, I, I guess when I think of TA projects, I, I, I tend to think of.

00:28:14,070	An actual alternative transportation rather than a recreational type movement is how I would prioritize it in my mind and that helps me in knowing that there is actual connectivity to the trail to the high school, which I could see is important, but, you know, even when I look at 1806 versus State Street, and I’m on 1806 personally probably.

00:28:33,930	Once or twice a week, you know, in the summertime on my bike, and I see a lot of other users like me using it recreationally, um, when I see the users on State Street, for instance, there’s not a lot of other folks wearing Lycra or workout gear there, they’re looking like they need to get to work or like they don’t have another option to get to work, and so I

00:28:50,800	was curious if you could kind of speak to like the the selection committee, Gabe talked about a tight scoring, but if you could kind of speak to to where the conversation was at with.

00:29:09,730	ikeped subcommittee and how, how maybe State Street got rated so low and maybe what I would consider a large portion of the 1806 project to be more recreational in in need. All right. Thank you, Ben for asking that question. I appreciate it, um, the The ikeped subcommittee looks at a couple of different things when they’re evaluating these projects that come in.

00:29:33,600	Um, number one, they’re weighing them against the MTP and the, the Metropolitan plan overall, but they are also, um, taking into consideration the, the objectives and goals of the bike ped, um, A plan that was Uh, adopted in 2017 by the NPO. Um, and along with that, um, there was considerable conversation about the current safe routes to services study.

00:30:02,430	In fact, um, You might, uh, if, if you’re reading through the, the applications themselves, you may notice as well that the sunrise Trail connection, um, ties into its narrative, the need to supply these types of connections to services like the mall area over at Sunrise, um, town center, um. I think we’ve become more cognitive of, uh, the.

00:30:32,800	Connections that are being made with some of these trails, uh, the 1806 pedestrian trail improvements, I think the biggest waiting factor for that particular project was because there is a major safety issue underneath that overpass where pedestrians and bicyclists are utilizing the trail, but it’s not separated from, you know, fairly fast moving traffic in any way.

00:31:00,070	Um, there’s not even a curb right there, so, um. I think that was probably one of the biggest factors that were, um, waiting on the side of that pedestrian trail, whereas we do feel that it is very important to maintain our existing facilities as the bikeped plan does put forth that maintenance and maintaining a state of good repair is extremely important

00:31:24,200	and one of the objectives of that plan, and so, of course, um, the. The city of Bismarck State Street, Malta-use trail Rehab, um, You know, it definitely got points for that, uh, because If we don’t have a, a navigable. rail. It’s basically a gap in the system as well.

00:31:50,800	Um, I think it just Like I said, um, You know, it just comes down to some, some technical preferences. They do a pair wise scoring through the bike ped subcommittee where each project is weighed against every other project, and then hopefully, you know, the one that is meriting uh the highest scores is coming to the top.

00:32:14,800	Thank you. I did have one more question and I was very encouraged actually to see the 3rd Street Southeast sidewalk installation as a As a project, uh. For consideration, um, and maybe either Jarek or Andrew, you, you have some more detail, but I know when we were kind of looking at this corridor through the safe routes to

00:32:35,100	services study, there was some maybe questions about how to get through the, the parking lot, which I think backs right into the, to the right of way.

00:32:50,600	Um, it, with the sidewalk carry through that parking lot area at the gas station on the north side of the road, so there would be a sidewalk there instead of parking or or how how would that work? Correct, yeah, I think we had uh proposed. other parking, um. Other parking arrangements on the private side, and so that they, they weren’t backing into that, uh. pedestrian walkway. if we accept the grant funds, the resulting product. it Extent. Thanks.

00:33:17,470	So I guess just my two cents, I thought that was the. Probably the most project in need and just based on some of my experience with some of the other studies that we’re doing in the area, but also through my personal observation of riding around Man down and I do see.

00:33:33,930	Regularly people on that goat path on the north side of 3rd Street, and it does seem to be serving an area that maybe folks don’t have an option uh for an automobile to be getting just basic needs met.

00:33:55,230	I’m Kim, could you tell me like historically how, how many projects get awarded through this program to the NPO? Um, so every project that is submitted um through the Bismarck Mandan MPO goes to North Dakota DOT for their selection, and it competes amongst all the other projects, so the TA funding is split amongst um, Several different categories within the state, so, um, in fact.

00:34:23,030	Um There’s funding that’s designated to rural, which is, uh, less than 5000 in population, urban 5000 to 50,000 in population and then urban 50,000 to 200,000 in population. That’s our group. So we get 8 approximately $823,000 in funding and just keep in mind those are estimates right now because we’re talking about fiscal year 2027 and the current federal highway bill only goes through 2020.

00:34:49,130	6, but, um, it’s anticipated that the funding will remain approximately similar, um, and then TMAs have their own funding pot, uh, and then they have kind of a, a catch all that. they say is available for any area. So basically we’re, we’re working with this 823,000.

00:35:15,370	Um dollar amount for our area and to let you know, last year, uh, Mandanw’s Project got awarded and it was, um, it was under 400,000, about 3,092,000. Does that sound right? Um, and that was the only project from this area that got awarded some years we have several projects that may rise to the top.

00:35:37,400	It just depends on how everything plays out when it hits North Dakota DOT and their selection team. And I might also add that. Uh, for the funding at our level, that funding is also shared amongst the other, um, To smaller NPOs, which would be Grand Forks East Grand Forks, and my not, so the representative cities and park districts of those two NPOs would also be eligible for our the same approximately $800,000.

00:36:02,670	Correct. Right, there used to be a $290,000 cap on these project applications, meaning that they would not award any funding over 290,000 no matter what the cost was, uh, that cost or that cap has been removed for the last, um, 2 solicitations. So, um, It has changed the submittals a little bit.

00:36:35,430	Um, this might be a drop in the bucket, but, um, with the Memorial Highway pedestrian ramp Reignment being the cost being less of a barrier, I think that it might make sense to prioritize that for the applications, and I know that maybe doesn’t do much. We’re talking about dollars. But um To me that might make sense.

00:36:56,270	I know that’s a, it’s a really good project and it’s a really big need, but, um, I think that we might be able to find other ways to get that project constructed outside of this program. Maybe. Just a thought. Uh, that seems uh rather generous of you. Jarek too. To deprioritize a project, um.

00:37:19,700	With that in mind, I think I also heard that Gabe. prefer to to. Up prioritized, um, uh, Bismarck Parks and Rec Project. Um, and with that in mind, um, I, I would submit to the tech that you have the ability to adjust the overall ranking, however you choose.

00:37:45,330	Um Are there any additional questions on Gabe, go ahead, you have an additional question that 106 project um hearing that the, the pot of money is, you know,, $800,000 or or whatever that number was within our multiple MPO sized communities.

00:38:04,070	Is there a smaller version or a different version of that 1806 project that could be maybe more cost competitive statewide, I guess I, I just hate for us to go through this exercise and say this is our number one project and then they say that’s too expensive and then they don’t give us anything. Because They give mine up a $400,000 trail and they give Grand Forks a $400,000 trail because we asked for a. $800,000 thing that is just maybe pushed them to the, the brink. I think that’s possible.

00:38:21,400	It’s kind of awkward where, where we’re kind of the middleman in that, in that application, but we did, we had identified needs that we asked the parks to include in.

00:38:35,530	The application, so I think that there is probably a world where it splits, but I just don’t know where that split happens at. And, and I’d have to talk to Cole for, yeah, before I’d be able to give a definite answer on that. And maybe if a follow up outside of the TA, but I, I think it goes back to some of our other programs that we try to, to.

00:38:58,400	fund that it’s easier if you know that the project on let’s say your side of the river or north side of town, south side of town, wherever that geographic location is, um, as it makes its way up the prioritization, it might be the 5th right now and then it’s the 4th, then it’s the 3rd, and then eventually it gets funded at

00:39:09,370	some point. Um I, I think we’re seeing that we have a lot of needs in the, the transportation alternative, the trail, the wreck, the pedestrian world. I know in our MTP we talked about.

00:39:27,900	You know, carving out specific dollars for those types of things and not rely on this one state grant to fund this entire thing if there’s urban roads dollars, if there’s other funding that we would want to use for those purposes. So maybe it’s a camera, maybe it’s a Rachel question, um.

00:39:45,400	Is there anything that precludes us from including I’m gonna say any of these projects we’ll start with that as an urban roads solicitation type project or can you maybe speak to that I’m thinking those that may don’t get first place here could, if they are important to us as a community, become the number one priority. Urban roads Project, as we get through that solicitation process next.

00:40:04,100	Um, I think with regards to urban roads, we’re seeing a reduction in the expected amount of funding for urban roads, so a program that has historically been extremely competitive for expansion or maintenance of roadways themselves is now becoming, uh, I guess smaller, um, so there’s two ways you could think of that. Uh, the first would be if there’s not a lot of money, maybe a very small.

00:40:23,830	Trail project would be a good fit, um, because it’s not going to be enough to fund a roadway project, um, or the, the bag is even smaller and the competition for that roadway project becomes even greater, um. Uh, I know with this last solicitation, uh, the last program for 2020. 8 that we received word on the urban.

00:40:50,000	Rhodes program, what we were expecting was about 4 million, but through shifts and and uh effects of inflation, we’re currently looking to receive less than a million, um, there may be a chance that there will be additional funds. Um So the long of the short of the long is that we don’t know, um.

00:41:14,000	The best that we can do is have a unified voice for DOT to say, here is our priority, this is what we want you to look at most, um, so if that is the direction that tack and Policy board wants to go NPO staff can certainly share that in our response to the solicitation, um.

00:41:40,230	MPO staff has no, no issues with uh prioritizing the Ah, the bikeped projects over a roadway project um if we have substantial reasons, um, and if that’s what the board is directing us to do. So Uh Short of tabling this entire program and bringing it back next month after there’s been. More discussion by TA members, more discussion by staff, um.

00:42:08,470	I think we are far enough along in the process that it would be beneficial to us to have a direction and go with that. Um But if the board wishes that they want to look at prioritizing.

00:42:34,330	Pedestrian projects for urban roads, as well as reprioritizing our current list, we would have one more month to bring those uh applications back to the boards for consideration. Now For my history with the TA program, the committee does like to spread the wealth and give as many different agencies a chance at improving their networks as possible, so with that in mind, I think it does make more sense.

00:43:00,830	um, I think we are more likely to receive funding on a smaller project, uh, than on a larger project that uses the majority of the funding. However, each year that committee at the state does change and Um, if we have a very strong desire to promote a very large project, we, we can do that, um.

00:43:25,530	Are there any thoughts or reservations about moving forward or holding off a month? I said I think we can come out of this group with a a discussion and a decision on the TA program. I would just offer that.

00:43:44,530	How I guess to maybe C Mandan, Mandan Parks in Iraq that 1806 pedestrian, if that is a State highway, I mean, that, that’s another funding opportunities to look through the urban regional program for that improvement, whether it comes to the top of the list or not. We’ve been asking for the State Street multi-use trail for a couple of years and haven’t got it, but we also did the same thing with the State Street extension from Calgary to Forty-third.

00:43:56,300	As for that for a couple of years and how it’s constructed this year. So sometimes it takes a couple of swings before it rises to the level of, of a higher priority, um. So, and I would say the same thing for really any of those, um, Fat 3rd Street sidewalk is important.

00:44:13,530	We could fund that I would support funding that through the urban roads program, if that’s a set aside for the $250,000 in federal aid. Maybe you don’t feel that as much on the $3 million.

00:44:31,830	04 million dollars overlay project that there’s $300,000 less in that bucket, but it definitely makes a whole heck of a lot of difference for this type of project that is a a go no go based on the fundings that are available. Um, so I guess that’s, that’s my, my take on it. Um I think we could, we could find something, anything that doesn’t make it through here.

00:44:49,170	Uh, from the city of Bismarck’s perspective and, and even if it is the number one priority, we’ll be applying in multiple funding streams and multiple funding, um, programs, um, to attempt to. Find other resources to to get those done. Oh, Christian. Because transportation alternative. OK.

00:45:27,130	Um, because the the people online can’t hear that, um, our partner from North Dakota Federal Highways suggested looking at the funds through the carbon reduction program, um, right now, carbon reduction is, um, at the discretion of the state, uh, but we are allowed to promote projects for their consideration, um, so. I think any of these projects, um, as a Christian points out, ah, under TA funding would also be recognized under carbon reduction funding, and we could promote these as well for the state to consider.

00:45:51,370	in that Up Pot of funding. I think that’s a very good suggestion. Thank you. Sorry, I had another question too. Do, do you all remember Wind does wreck and Trails program solicitation come out? I mean, I guess that would be another obvious option for any of these. Sure, thanks, Ben.

00:46:12,900	The, uh, North Dakota Parks and Rec, uh, re recreational trails programs, solicitation happens in the spring of each year, so we would anticipate um that coming out probably late March, early April of 2025.

00:46:38,930	Well, I am not hearing, I’m sorry, any, any further discussion? Um, I, I, I just want to point out that I’m not hearing a desire to hold off on this program, um, there is it seems to be a desire to move the program forward for policy board’s consideration tomorrow, um.

00:47:03,970	I think I, I may, I, I’ve heard from Bismarck that there might be a priority to uh increase the Sunrise trail over the State Street multi-use trail, um, from City of Mandan, I’ve heard that, uh, Mandan and me promote the Highway 1806, uh, but overall, our tech board may promote. Third Street So Uh, I’m seeing. I’m seeing possibly 2 or 3 alternatives, um, and maybe from Mannan’s perspective, I’ll ask again if you think that Mandan has a, a different. priority than what is listed for the 11 and 2. Of those projects. Um No, I.

00:47:39,170	I would expect that the 1806 project, it has pieces that I know that the commission is interested in in addressing, so I feel like that would be the highest priority from the commission’s perspective, um.

00:47:59,970	And out out of this is our, is our goal to not Um, recommend even prioritization for the 3 projects that were just mentioned we don’t want to do that. Is that, is that I’m asking a question, is that, is that what we are avoiding right now? Oh, no, I, I don’t think we’re avoiding prioritization, or equalization of multiple projects.

00:48:22,400	Um, historically, it’s been in our benefit to give direction to the state for which ones we feel are most uh important, but it’s always an option to promote all projects unprioritized. How specific would our recommendation, uh, what would be, how specific. What a recommendation need to be to the policy board we’ve done a range of items, uh, we’ve done 1 through 5 in the past. We’ve done 1sts and seconds.

00:48:44,300	So a group of 1 and a group of 2 and Kim, I’ll, I’ll let you continue. I would just like to add that in the past, I’m not necessarily with the TA program, but with some of our other programs we have had, um, kind of this toss up for prioritization and we have done say like a 1A 1B, so, um, again,

00:49:03,200	I, it, it doesn’t differentiate a whole lot, but it would say between these 2 #1 ranked projects, um, we would. We would prefer that the A project be funded, but if that is not possible, than to fund the Bee project, but they would both be like our number one priorities.

00:49:24,830	I don’t remember what program we did that with, but we have done that before. Thank you, Kim, Gabe. Rachel, I think what I would promote. Um, let’s see if I can make this into a motion then, is that the 1806 pedestrian trail improvements project is the number one priority. Um, I would.

00:49:44,570	Then put the sunrise Trail connection as the #2 priority. And then I guess the rest can be through the um the overall ranks that you have, so followed by the 3rd Street, excuse me, sidewalk installation. Um I guess I’ll, I’ll defer to Jarek on the Memorial Highway PE ramp Reignment if that’s. 4th and then the State Street multi-use trail rehab is the 5th. Project.

00:50:06,630	Um I don’t think we’re gonna get all of those anyway, so I’m not too worried about once you get down to 4 versus 5, I don’t think it really matters a whole heck of a lot, um, but if 1806 is important, that’s, that’s strong, um, desire to have that completed, great, but I guess

00:50:22,500	there could be a concern of the costs and that that’s just coming into high and if that’s the case, if they can find. At Parks and Rec One in Bismarck is a suitable filler, great, and that’s even too expensive, OK, come down to that 3rd Street one and please at least fund that, give them at least

00:50:35,900	in that order of operation is kind of how I looked at that. So it’s a really long-winded motion, but I believe that’s a motion. Thank you, Gabe. So just to clarify, the motions from top to bottom on exhibit B would be, uh, 2, 5134. Can you say that all again? I’m not sure what you just said.

00:50:59,830	Um, 25134 OK. You’re saying it that way. Got you. 2. Yep, agree. Um, is there any discussion? I’m. I’m sorry, I have a 1st. Is there a second? I second. Second for discussion, further discussion. No further discussion. Uh, we’ll take, uh, roll call vote. Ben Harris.

00:51:38,370	Yeah, maybe the long dissenting vote here, but it’s probably just my philosophical use of those funds, so no. Daria. Yes. And Deirdre Hughes? Yes. Gabe Shell. Uh johnsacki. Yes. Andrew Strami. Yes. Ja Winess, yes, Greg Fraser, Mitch Flanagan? Yes, Dean Schloss? Yes. Wayne Zacher Lukrazewski. Uh yes, motion passes. We will promote this to policy board tomorrow. Thank you for the great discussion.

00:52:16,300	Uh, item 4 on the agenda is the fiscal year 2029 Highway Safety Improvement Program projects. Kim, I’ll let you describe those. Thank you. This is going to just be so much more succinct than the last discussion that we had, but I really appreciate everybody’s input on the TA program.

00:52:36,630	So moving to the highway safety improvement program, or HSIP, um, you’ll find that in exhibit I on page 69 of your packets. We had one project submit this year. These will be for, uh, FY 29, um, Highway Safety Improvement funds, and the project was submitted by the city of Bismarck. It will be, uh, for the construction of a single lane roundabout on Yegan Road and Lincoln Road intersection.

00:52:59,000	It will include 2 westbound approach lanes to replace the current allway stop control, and it will improve intersection traffic control and geometry at the intersection of this Yein Road and Lincoln Road intersection. The total estimated cost for this roundabout would be $3 million City of Bismarck is requesting the $2.7 million available funding, um.

00:53:26,170	Just for informational purposes. It was scored against the goals and objectives of the Metropolitan Transportation Plan by MPO staff. It received a score of 11.3, and it is consistent with the MTP with meeting objectives 1A 2 B, and 4A, um.

00:53:49,230	The detailed cost estimate has since been provided to me by the city of Bismarck, although it was not included in your packet and I would be happy to answer any questions or perhaps Gabe can provide us with additional information on this project.

00:54:10,300	thinks Kim, um, uh, the only thing I’d wanna add is just a random musing that we have on this as we start collecting data to understand how much traffic’s going through here, um, we included in one of the attachments in the PDF, um, there’s actually more traffic that, um. As you’re on Lincoln Road heading west that uh goes south or takes a left, then there is that takes a right or it’s a pretty even balanced but slightly more, um.

00:54:30,500	Uh, southerly traffic leaving Lincoln Road. Um, so just interesting because. I didn’t, I didn’t, we didn’t know that until we started looking into that. We have people that live down there, so we ask them every day when they come in, how, how far did you have to stop as you, as you came into it, um, but it operates

00:54:42,130	underway stop control and that works most of the time, obviously, but um trying to improve safety and operational, uh, concerns at that intersection is kind of the main drivers of this project. Thank you, Gabe. Um, are there any additional comments from uh Greg or Possibly from Dan Um OK. Right.

00:55:05,430	Um Fairly easy here, uh, staff is just looking for tax recommendation, uh, that policy board approved this to be submitted, uh, to be forwarded to North Dakota DOT for their approval. And possible selection. Ca so moved. Thank you, Gabe. I have a first, is there a second. This is Ben Ben Roll. Banner, yes, Andrea. Yes.

00:55:32,300	Deidre Hughes Gabe Schell, John Sai. Yes. Andrew Strambi Jare Wiigness, Greg Fraser, Mitch Flanagan, yes, Dean Schloss. Wayne Zacher, chair of Lukaszewsky, motion passes. Uh, item 5 on the agenda is fiscal year. 2028 Urban Grants Program projects with Kim. Thank you, Chair Lukasevski.

00:56:02,670	OK, the final Federal funding program that we’re going to be taking a look at today is the Urban Grants program. Uh, this is for funding year 2028. We received a total of 2 project applications. These are actually, uh, resubmittals of applications that were not awarded funding, uh, through the last go around. These projects were scored by MPO staff against the goals and objectives of the MTP, um.

00:56:26,930	And points do not indicate any recommended prioritization by staff, but they are provided to you and to the policy board for your information, discussion, and your potential prioritization of projects, um.

00:56:49,270	So just a brief description of each of these, the Bismarck project is a reconstruction project on Main Avenue from 7th Street to 9th Street, and will be a reconstruction of Main Avenue Roadway from a four-lane section with parking on the north side to a 3 lane section with on-street parking, new concrete pavement, curb, and gutter, street and pedestrian lighting, pavement markings, and ADA compliant pedestrian facilities will be included. Storm sewer running east west on Main Avenue will be replaced and upsized to meet current storm water requirements.

00:57:09,900	Safety improvements include wider sidewalks, boulevards for snow storage, and multimodal access and considerations for Kubra extensions and high visibility crosswalks at intersections, landscaping will be placed in the new boulevards. This has a total, uh, project cost of $3.

00:57:36,100	4 million they are asking for federal funding in the amount of $2 million so, um, this is uh the Urban Grants program is an 8020. Funding ratio and you can see that um even after the, the Um, extraneous costs are backed out, um, and they’re including only the eligible funding amount, um, City of Bismarck is requesting slightly less. The MTP objectives that are supported by this project are 18282B2C, 3 C 5 C, and 7B.

00:58:03,900	And if you’re curious to know which objectives those are, they are on the following pages that have the objectives and the scoring of each of these projects. The project that was submitted by Mandan is also a reconstruction project. It is the Downtown First Street and Avenues reconstruct phase 2.

00:58:23,500	This will be from 1st Street Northwest from 2nd Avenue Northwest to 4th Avenue Northwest, and then on 3rd Avenue Northwest from 1st Street Northwest to Main Street, and then also over on 2nd Avenue Northwest from 1st Street Northwest to Main Street.

00:58:42,800	This is a full reconstruct on First Street Roadway with concrete due to the exceedingly poor pavement condition and the need to replace water main, which precludes a mill and overlay. Also, sidewalk and sidewalk ramp improvements to replace poor curb gutter, and sidewalk conditions and to bring up to 8DA compliance. There will be curbba boats at First Street intersections. Signage and striping, beautification elements such as benches, bike racks, LED, and pedestrian lighting.

00:59:04,700	Potential reverse angle parking trial may occur on a portion of First Street, along with this project. Signalization warrants and potential roundabout placement at Street intersections will be examined during preliminary design, but is not part of this um estimated cost or the, the, um, detail on this project.

00:59:26,000	This phase 2 project is a stand-alone project, meaning it is not dependent on phase one, which has already been awarded funding or the following phase 3 project. Uh, the total cost estimate for this project is a little over $4.7 million. The city of Mandan is requesting a little over $3 million for this again, um, this is less than their 80%. It meets the MTP objectives of 182A2B2C3C 5.

00:59:50,630	and 7B. Um, we’ll start with Moun down this time Mandan, is there any additional information that you would like to add to your Project description. Um, is partial award typical in this program? Uh, it would be my understanding that that is at the discretion of North Dakota DOT.

01:00:16,130	Do we need to indicate that we would be Open to partial award or is that something that’s just assumed? Well, so typically with the urban Grants program, if there is any change in the scope that that is included with this application, um, it kind of nullifies the, um, the Project itself.

01:00:39,300	So typically I think that they do try to um award the full amount, um, and I will let you know that there is $4.6 million that is available for funding through the, the program for fiscal year 2028. OK. Uh, Kim, if I could, I would just add the planning level recommendations for street configurations are kind of inspired on the 2018 Downtown plan that was done for Man Down.

01:01:03,870	I believe with the NPO’s participation. Um, so, Face to face reconstruction would include Significantly wider sidewalks reconfigured parking and more of an urban streetscape for those blocks, and, and while, as I understand it, the infrastructure components are.

01:01:29,900	Pretty, um, phase dependent, there is um a great amount of thematic consistency that this project in phase two has with phase one, so while the pipes and things are different. Um, it will look like one project when it is all done. OK. Yeah. If I can add just maybe something to the partial funding comment, Jarek.

01:01:49,100	I know we’ve had it in the past a project that was partially funded, um, but it was a smaller cost mill and overlay type project that we asked for a million dollars and it was funded at $500 million or something along those lines.

01:02:05,100	Um, so I, I do think though, if you are receptive to Some money but not the full money, I think that would be worthwhile to explore and, and to state out loud so that the DOT knows that um in our past iterations, I think last year, obviously both of these projects were in here, um, neither of them were funded, um, and it was entirely one project in another community in North Dakota got the entire funding for this program, um, based also because there was also a really big project, and

01:02:18,900	this was just a small portion of Urban Grant that went to a very larger, much larger project, um, but I think giving those that are on the selection committee, any insights as to what. We would feel as a success, I think it’s beneficial to do.

01:02:40,370	Jarek, I, I might also offer that uh there might be a temperature at which your commission is is willing to take additional risk and put additional money into the project, um, so if you have a handle on what that level is, it’s a, you know, 30% local match or something more or something less, um, adding that would be to your benefit because it’s not always easy

01:03:00,630	for the state to know which jurisdiction has that capacity in which jurisdiction chooses not to have that capacity. Mhm Um, and if If you choose to. Uh, submit a, a revised application as long as it’s not materially changing.

01:03:25,870	The, the overall request, um, or the scope of the project we could replace that out um if. If the change is larger than that, then we would need your board to reapprove. Um I, were there any other comments from From Mandy, any other questions, comments? OK, I’ll turn it back to Kim then, uh, if there is no other discussion, staff would just be looking for a motion of

01:03:50,300	recommendation that the policy board approve these, um, projects to be forwarded to North Dakota DOT for their consideration in selection. And Kim, remind me in past practices, we, we haven’t prioritized these projects above each other or.

01:04:09,570	And or just gave them to the state and let their urban grant committee decide based on whatever the merits of their program, is that correct? That is correct. However, it would be at the discretion of tack and then also policy board if you should choose to prioritize. And well, I would make a motion to forward both of these projects and and prioritized fashion to the state. Thank you, Gabe.

01:04:26,530	I have a first. Is there a second? Jericho 2 Jarek Roll call. Ben Eth Dan Triak. Yes. Deirdre Hughes, game shelf. Yes, John Zaki. Yes. Andrew Strammi Jare Witness? Yes. Craigaser? Yes, Mitch Flanagan. Yes, Dean Schloss, Wayne Zacher. And Cher Lukaszewsky. Yes, motion passes.

01:04:57,000	Um, item 6 on the agenda is, um, the government partners program MOA. Kim, I might ask you back. OK. OK, so the memorandum of agreement for the government partner program is on. Uh, page 119 of your packet. It is exhibit P. We’ve been talking a lot about the government partner program, which is, uh, being offered through the big Sky passenger rail Authority, um.

01:05:54,700	To assist with supporting communities along the proposed, uh, reinstated North Coast Hiawatha passenger rail line. Uh, we know that the North Coast Hiawatha previously ran through the Bismarck Man and Burley County, Morton County area and Big Sky passenger rail has submitted and been awarded, uh, mons through the federally funded corridor ID program to, uh, Reinstate this particular

01:06:21,670	passenger rail line. Um As part of that, uh, the NPO is willing to facilitate and be a financial partner in the government partner program. However, um, we would definitely need to enter into a memorandum of of agreement, uh, to basically outline the responsibilities and roles of all the participating parties and the NPO in this program,

01:06:49,200	and that’s what this Mloy does. So, uh, the first article, Article One, is the purpose and authority. it basically goes through and sites, um, the US Code and federal, um, code of regulations, um, that establishes and charges the NPO to Maintain a continuing cooperative and comprehensive metropolitan Transportation, uh, planning process and, um, It

01:07:20,100	also talks about uh. The, the provision of entering into agreements to do such. So, um, there’s a lot of words in there, but basically that’s what Article One boils down to Article 2 is the scope which kind of delves into the BSPRA government partner program membership, what it’s designed to do and how, uh, BSPRA has

01:07:48,370	proposed that they, uh, may roll that out for us, um,,, 11 item of note is that this is a membership term in that program for a one. year, time period, it begins from the time the membership is received, and it expires 12 months from that date. There is no automatic renewal.

01:08:08,830	So as we approach the end of that 12 month period, we’ll, we’ll be able to assess how the program has worked out for us and determine if it’s something that we want to continue on with or not, uh.

01:08:33,230	Also, um, of particular note is that supplemental agreements to this MOA may ensue, and those supplemental agreements would be for things like consultant services that, um, are determined to be necessary to study maybe something like the location and placement of a rail station or, um, any other, um. Uh, lead in grant funding, um, those would be outside of this agreement. Article 3 talks about interagency communications, and it just states that each participating, uh, party.

01:09:04,700	Whether it’s, uh, and, and again, I’m, I guess I should back up this memorandum of agreement is between Bismarck Manda and MPO, and the parties which are identified as Burley County, Morton County, City of Lincoln, City of Bismarck, City of Mount Down, OK, so getting back to Article 3 in the interagency communications, um, each party

01:09:26,570	under this MOA will appoint a principal representative to serve as its central point of contact. Article. For talks about those supplemental supplemental agreements that I had, um, alluded to. It does say that um, Uh Those are again outside of the memorandum of agreement.

01:09:56,500	Article 5, kind of nails down the responsibilities of the participating agencies beginning with the BMMPO. The MPO will secure the membership on behalf of the parties as outlined in Article 6, we will act as a liaison between the BSPRA GPP and the parties, we will facilitate that coordinated and comprehensive planning process.

01:10:24,200	The MPO will inform all principal representatives of the parties of activities, forums, guidance materials, webinars, or any other resources offered by BSPRA through the GPP in a timely and coordinated manner. Bismarck Manda and MPO will convey and coordinate training or funding opportunities to the parties and the BMPO will provide detailed periodic progress, financial and other reports to the parties as it’s made available through the government partner program and the BSPRA.

01:10:51,530	And finally, the Bismarck Mandate MPO shall advise the parties of all potential necessary action required by governing bodies, elected officials or governmental departments and the deadlines associated with such action in accordance with the purpose, terms and conditions of this memorandum of agreement.

01:11:14,970	The responsibility of the parties is quite similar that uh the parties will pay all costs associated with the BMPO’s provisions of goods or services under this memorandum of agreement. The parties will convey to the NPO the name, address, and all pertinent contact information for each of its principal representatives of which they may have more than one if they desire. The principal representative of the parties shall convey all BSPRA GPP.

01:11:39,070	activities, forms, guidance materials, webinars, or other resources offered by the GPP in a timely manner to the appropriate persons within its agencies to ensure sufficient opportunity for participation because Of course, that’s what this agreement is all about is that we’re all, um, participating and working together on this.

01:12:04,270	The principal representatives of the parties will ensure all appropriate personnel elected and or governing body officials are adequately and appropriately apprised of activities, resources, or other actions of the BSPRA GPP, which may or may not directly impact the parties and these may include public presentations or presentation of items to elected or governing officials.

01:12:31,400	The parties agreed to participate to the extent practicable in all GPP activities forums, guidance materials, webinars, or other resources and to seek to assist in the coordinated comprehensive approach to planning, uh, for the restoration of passenger rail service in the Metropolitan planning area. The principal representatives of the parties shall develop announcements, correspondence, interdepartmental and public notices or ensure that our developments specific to the principal representative’s agency requirements.

01:12:59,670	Article 6 details the funding and the responsibility for costs, uh, the breakdown that is shown, um. All these amounts have been previously approved by the party’s governing bodies, and they are as follows. B Bismarck will pay $720 man and 240 Burleigh 180, Morton, 30, and Lincoln 30, while the NPO will pay the 400 the. $4800 80%.

01:13:29,700	Um, it details that. The Bismarck Manda and MPO will pay the membership. We will invoice the parties and they will pay their participant amount. Article 7 is public information and it just, uh, basically details that.

01:13:58,900	Um any justification or explanation of the party’s participation in the GPP before other agencies, departments or offices shall be the responsibility of the parties. The NPO may provide upon request any assistance necessary to support the party’s justification or explanations of the GPP conducted under this memorandum of agreement. In general, the parties are responsible for all public information relating to their respective agency and participation in the GPP.

01:14:23,400	The parties and the Bismarck Mandate MPL shall make its best efforts to give the other party advance notice before making any public statement regarding work contemplated undertaken, or completed pursuant to this, uh, memorandum of agreement. We don’t want anybody being blindsided by what somebody else might be doing unbeknownst.

01:14:50,730	Uh, articlee is just miscellaneous relationships and obligations, uh, this agreement shall not affect any pre-existing or independent relationships or obligations between the parties and the NPO will have no impact on any of our, um, Uh, on any of our existing contracts or, um, activities. The provisions of this agreement which require performance after the expiration or termination of the MOA shall remain in force, notwithstanding the expiration or termination of this MOA.

01:15:15,230	So if a supplemental agreement were contracted between the NPO and A or all on participating parties, uh, the termination. or expiration date of that particular supplemental agreement is not affected by the termination of this memorandum of agreement.

01:15:46,230	Uh This this MOA will be sent to each of the party’s governing bodies for signature and, um, The approvals have already been vetted and provided through previous, um, commission council meetings. And so basically, this is just a formality of each governing body, putting their signature to what they’ve already approved. Once it comes back and has been signed by all 5 of our parties on the NPO will sign it, um.

01:16:10,700	And that will allow us to get payment made for the GPP membership. All that is only going to take place um based on recommendation of approval by the TAC to the policy board policy board, um, of course, has. Final final say and discretion as to whether to approve this MOA or not.

01:16:32,230	Are there any questions on the agreement itself. Or the process. Thank you, Kim. Uh, Gabe, question. One of the statements in here was, you know, periodic updates to the parties, do you envision that being at the policy board and just using that as it or specific to the boards like the entire boards of the all the political subs.

01:16:56,100	Um, OK, so specific updates would be, uh, anything that any type of new activity that’s coming down the pipe from, uh, BSPRA and given the fact that Our boards only meet once a month. It may be beneficial to get that information out to the representatives for each of the parties prior to that, um, and especially if um.

01:17:18,070	You know, some, some kind of action needs to be weighed or measured in advance, so yes, we’ll definitely be using the Ta and policy board as an open forum to provide information on this, uh, GPP and any activities associated with it, but, uh, some of the information is bound to come to the representatives of each of the

01:17:38,970	parties sooner than those meetings occur. Thank you and my other, other question is more of a curiosity. Uh, are there any other NPOs that have the similar role in the government, uh, partners program regarding the. The rail Thanks Gabe. No, there are not. In fact, we are being trailblazers.

01:18:03,000	Um, I’ve talked to Dave Stromeyer at GPP, and he said, we are the first MPO. So. Yes. With that Fargo has been approached. By multiple agencies where there’s more than G GPP or they’ve been approached by a few of the passenger rail. That Mor to on that one.

01:18:43,970	I Jamestown joint Any additional comments or questions? Um A If there are no comments or questions, is there a motion to approve the MOA for. GPP Make a motion to recommend approval of the MOA. Thank you, Andrew. I have a first is there a second? A second. Thank you, Mitchitch. We’ll take roll call. Ben Ereth? Dan Treat. Yes. Deirdre Hughes Gabe show John. Yes.

01:19:13,870	Andrew Strami? Yes Jarek Winess? Yes, Greg Vasser, Mitch Flanagan. Yes, Dean Schloss? Yes. Wayne Zacher. Cher Lukazewsky. Yes, motion passes. Item 7 on the agenda is a progress update on the arrived 2050 MTP with Jason Kirby. Jason, are you still with us? Yes, can you all hear me? Yes, we can. OK, perfect.

01:19:38,970	Yeah, so really quick, um, we did uh receive all of the comments that you provided have worked those, um, into the final document. I’m currently updating that document into a more kind of graphically oriented reader friendly format. Um, rely on the appendices maybe for a little bit more of the technical data, um. And, but, uh, we were getting be documenting kind of the comment response to all this week.

01:20:00,870	Um, did have the North Dakota DOT Man meeting um October 25th and then we are going through approvals on the document we’ve gone through 4 of the 5 plainning and zoning commissions.

01:20:21,670	Um, we have Martin County playing zoning Wednesday and then Um, soon after we get into the uh city and county planning commission or sorry, city and county commissions approvals, um, essentially for the next probably about 3 or 4 weeks. So that’s kind of where we’re at. I know when we come talk to you. Um, next month will be, um, I think we’ll be dealt with through all of the jurisdictional approvals.

01:20:44,830	And then Rachel, anything you wanted to add? Um, no, thank you, um. I guess, uh, maybe just to point out that we’re nearing the end of our Um Haning and zoning meetings and we’ll be going to commission meetings starting next week. Um Any questions or comments on the MTP progress update. Gabe, go ahead. Rachel or or.

01:21:14,500	Potentially, Jason, was the DOT management team meeting was that to their executive boards or any, I guess discussion or or comments that came out of that that we as the tech or policy board would want to know about. Uh, thank you, Gabe, um. Uh, there was some discussion, um, curiosity on some cost estimates, uh, they were cleared up, um.

01:21:37,430	Uh, I don’t recall there being any, ah, difficulty or heartburn over our projected plan of pursuing maintenance projects, um. Uh, the. Management meeting went very well overall, um, Jason, is there anything that I am missing that you can recall, uh, the primary thing that I recall was the question on the cost of uh the Northern bridge estimate.

01:22:03,670	Right, yeah, no, I think that was the primary one, and then there was some interest in um some of the AA uh traffic forecasts on the Grant Marsh Bridge related to um the northern Bridge.

01:22:22,800	Um, I think that those, those patterns that kind of may be updated and we’re a little different than the 2045 version, um, but, um, and, you know, things that we presented to the tech previously, but yeah, I don’t, there wasn’t really, um, items of substance that came up, um, during those discussions.

01:22:39,970	Uh, we did, we a little bit with the funding of some of those discretionary programs, um, that, that, that the DOT kind of guides that we will kind of eliminate those from the final document because again it’s, it’s a, you know, uh it it it goes from Obviously area to area across the state, there there’s, you know, limited guarantees on some of, you know, some of those programs like in in HPP, um, and so I think

01:22:56,070	there’s some thought that maybe we’ll just remove the, the projections there. We didn’t really show any projects that go with them either, so I think that’s probably um OK, but I think that’s probably one of the biggest changes. OK. Thank you. Thank you, Gabe. Any further comments? I don’t see any. Thank you, Jason.

01:23:16,300	Thanks everyone. Um, item 8 on the agenda is a progress update on the safe routes to services, complete streetste with Cody Christiansen. Coy, I’ll let you have the stage. All right, thanks, Rachel.

01:23:38,100	Uh, yeah, so happy to be here guys to kind of go over some of the progress we’ve had on the Safe for the services project, um, noting that I’ve, I’ve heard that name called out a little bit earlier in in this meeting. So, um, we did have a public engagement event last month on October 21st at the Mandan Morton Public Library.

01:23:59,230	Um, so we were there presenting kind of our uh priority area, um, projects as well as the kind of priority, um, Strategies, uh, so we got some, some feedback on uh the, the Bismarck locations, um, you know, largely being, uh, you know, she’s paths would be beneficial, um, but I wanna make sure we pair them with safe crossings, um, road diets are, are great as long as they can still accommodate the

01:24:20,970	traffic volumes. Um Mandan locations, uh. The, the BNSF overpassed, though difficult, would be a community game changer, um, and then again, the pedestrian elements throughout Mandan would be extremely beneficial, uh, primarily with the addition of the future affordable housing over in the shady Acres neighborhood.

01:24:45,970	Um, we also got some good feedback on kind of like I mentioned the priority strategies um are transitive improvements, mobility hubs, and um Complete streets Uh, you know, general feedback being, uh, you know, Bike infrastructure supported, um, more hesitation towards any on-street bike facilities.

01:25:14,430	Um Support again, support of road road diets as long as they’re, they’re combined with making sure that uh traffic is accommodated, um, and then some, some positive feedback on the circulator route of the transit improvements. Um, so that was kind of the, the general feedback we got there. Um, we also had our, our last steering committee in early October.

01:25:35,730	Um, Where again we got good feedback from, from all in attendance, um, again on those priority area kind of recommendations, uh, as well as those priority strategies. Um, we’ve also had some more engagement, um, specifically on the, on the Bismarck side with our mob with the mobility hubs and, and how that could be um advanced in the future and even getting into some more um Pilot project type of implementation

01:25:55,300	of, of those mobility hubs. So, um, that is all in our draft report, which uh was provided to NPO last week. Um, so we’ll be getting that over to our steering committee here later this week.

01:26:16,830	Again, that kind of covers everything from our public engagement, are issues identification, um, you know, looking at walking, biking, transit, uh, we got into, uh, identifying the activity nodes and barriers and also some, some origin destination. ana ly s is um, and then how that um Those priority areas and strategies uh were developed. Um, also included in there is a, a funding plan and implementation plan, um, so kind of identifying.

01:26:38,670	You know, some of the programs that were discussed earlier today along with some other ones and how the various projects could be um implemented either as, as a stand-alone project or even potentially combining a few things depending on what that that grant program is.

01:27:00,100	Um, and then lastly, um, we also will be doing our final report presentations next month, so, um, we will be uh presenting to the Mandan City Commission on December 3rd, Bismarck City Commission on December 17th, and then we’ll be back giving our final presentation to tack and Policy Board on the uh December 16th and 17th, respectively.

01:27:21,500	Um, so, it’s all coming together, um, so with that I can Hand it back to Kier. Answer any questions? Thank you, Cody. Uh, question and comment from Ben. Thanks for the update, Cody, and uh apologize if I missed an email in my inbox, uh, but, uh, is there an estimated time frame for when a draft of the plan might be available for

01:27:42,300	the, the public and others to react to. Yeah, we’ll have that out this week. OK, thank you. Yup. Any additional comments, questions? I don’t see any. Thank you, Cody.

01:28:08,370	Um Item 9 on the agenda is a progress update on the 2024 pavement condition collection and analysis Project, um, I see Kurt Kuier is no longer online. I think he might have had to drop off. Uh, but I can give the update. The project is currently 15% complete, um, that is less than what we would be expecting uh since the NPO portion is due at the end of the year, uh, but I have spoken with Kurt.

01:28:26,370	Uh, we spoke last week, uh, and we’ll have a follow-up meeting this week, um, he informed me that the collection is complete, it took a little longer than they were anticipating to do, um, but that he thinks they will be able to. make up the um.

01:28:47,770	Whilst time, uh, through the data analysis and he currently has his staff working on that data analysis right now. Um, he is hopeful to set up. A meeting with our jurisdictional partners to go over some of those findings and um possibly discuss the paver software if there are any questions on that, and that should be occurring here within the next month or

01:29:05,830	so. Um, uh, also, um, Uh, we had, uh, a successful meeting with the press, uh, we had a um interview with both the newspaper as well as the news, and there was a news article, um. Uh, on the news of the paver vans that, uh, take the that capture the data of the roadways.

01:29:33,700	Um, this is something that we typically try to do with every pavement condition collection because we think it’s interesting to the public, and there are physical vans on the roadways that we use, so it’s a very visible project, um, I’m happy that that was so successful.

01:29:54,700	Um, and, uh, I think that is the end of of my update. Are there any questions on the project? Kate, see, none, we’ll move on to other business. A staff did not have any other business. Uh, was there anything that the board would like to bring, uh, Wayne I saw your hand. Um, urban section is finally full again at the DOT.

01:30:16,370	Well, Hutchins has joined us and as our MPO coordinator, so he will be our voting member from here on out. I know many of you know him. Just wanted to mention that we will be voting for the DOT social office here.

01:30:35,230	Well, thank you, Wayne, and I welcome Will and uh thank you Wayne also for sitting on our tech board and being our coordinator for these last several years, um, we know we will be in touch, um, beyond this, you’re not going too far from us, um, but thank you again. And welcome, Will. Uh, Ben. Yeah, thanks, Rachel.

01:30:59,670	I’ll, I’ll echo too, thanks, Wayne for your uh service and and input with us and welcome Will, um, but I did want to recognize that this is our executive director’s last technical advisory committee meeting, um, Rachel will be Uh, too bad for us, we’ll be moving on to another opportunity with her family and wanted to thank Rachel and just Um, have appreciated uh what she has brought to this position, the leadership she’s brought to

01:31:22,270	this position and just appreciated her as a, as a fellow team member and you’ll be missed uh by both the city of Bismarck and I’m sure others on the MPOtac.

01:31:39,430	And if you want to uh participate in a celebration of with Rachel as well, um, I think we’ll be having an open house for Rachel from 3 to 5 this Thursday at the the day BlacksteadRoom, so I’m sure we’ll have refreshments and treats of some sort, so thank you, Rachel. Well, thank you so much, Ben, um, as I’ve been telling your um. Commission members, uh, you make the MPO wonderful.

01:31:59,570	You make the MPO wonderful to work at and to work for. Thank you for being wonderful partners to us. Uh, you make our job, and I’m sure the MPO staff will agree you make our office and our job.

01:32:16,530	great to work for and I’ve been very happy to do that for these last many years, so I appreciate the, uh, opportunity to work alongside you and, um, I know whoever has this position next will be in very, very good hands among many, many friends. Thank you. Um, uh, with that, is there any? Additional other business? Then I will count us Adjourned. Have a great day, everyone. Thank