00:00:10,500	I’d like to welcome everybody that is seated in the Baker meeting room and to those that are visiting this meeting online and of course to the commissioners and staff that are here this evening. So with that I’m going to open the call the meeting to order and ask Sarah to please call her roll.

00:00:27,630	Comm. Bittner You Comm. Field, Comm. Johnson. Comm. Larsson. Comm. Lukins. Comm. Shell. Comm. Schmitz. Here Comm. Seak here. Comm. Wangen. Comm. and Schwartz here. Thank you.

00:01:00,770	With that, we’re going to move on to the first item in our agenda this evening, which is approval of minutes, and I would ask you to consider approval of the minutes from our June 26th meeting. Commissioners, what are your wishes? Motion to approve. We have a motion motion to approve from Comm. Johnson. Uh, 2 from Comm. Zent. Any discussion? And I’m not saying you’re hearing any, so Sarah, would you please call roll Comm. Wangen. Yes. Comm. Field, Comm. Johnson. Comm. Schell. Comm. Schmidtz? Yes. Mr.

00:01:32,330	Sek? Yes, Comm. Bittner. Yes. Comm. dissent and Cher Schwartz. Yes, the motion is approved. With that, we’ll move on to our consent agenda this evening. There is one item in our consent agenda, which is Meadow Village edition first replant and uh staff recommendation is to schedule a hearing.

00:01:53,570	Uh, commissioners, what are your wishes? Motion to move or a motion to approve the consent agenda. Thank you, Comm. Wain. We have a motion to approve. Do I hear a second, we have a second from Comm. Johnson without any discussion. Sarah, would you please call Roll Comm. Seak. Comm. Field. Comm. Johnson, Comm. Wangan. Comm. Schell. Comm. Schmitz.

00:02:25,200	Yes, Comm. Bittner. Yes. Comm. Zent and Schwartz. Yes, the motion is approved. With that, we’ll move on to our regular agenda this evening. An item number item A in our regular agenda is Hay Creek Township section 25, auditors lot, South 3, and Jenny is gonna provide us with the staff report this evening. Thank you, Chair Schwartz.

00:02:50,270	Commissioners Lonnie and Deanne Bart are requesting approval of a zoning map amendment from the Agriculture and RR residential zoning district to the Culture zoning district on auditors Lot S3, Section 25 in Hay Creek Township. The request is located west of Bismarck between Interstate 94 and Wilderness Cove Road along the west side of River Road.

00:03:13,170	It consists of 71.2 acres. The majority of the property is zoned agriculture, however, approximately 7.5 acres of the northeast corner of the property is owned rural residential. Portions of the area, um, were zoned R1 residential by Burley County prior to 19. 73. In 1973 when this area became part of the city’s ETA.

00:03:34,630	The property was formerly zoned rural residential. The city’s, um, designation for rural residential that is similar to the county’s designation of R1. You considered this request at your June 26th meeting and called for a public hearing. The auditor’s lot was created and recorded for this property in 2007 and includes portions of both the agriculture in our zoning districts.

00:03:54,830	The owner intends to zone the entirety of the property to agriculture and construct one. Single family dwelling and accessory buildings. Adjacent land uses include rural residential to the north, a combination of office and urban residential and parks and open space to the east across River Road and the Missouri River floodway to the south and to the west.

00:04:13,570	The public has been notified of this request. A notice was published in the Tribune on July 12th and 19th and 15 letters were mailed to the owners of nearby properties on July 12th. To my knowledge, we have not received any written comments for or against this request.

00:04:30,100	I have received one phone call from an adjacent property owner who was curious and expressed any reasoning that would allow for commercial uses they wouldn’t be in favor of this proposed zoning request would not allow for commercial uses. Hay Creek Township was notified of this request on May 31.

00:04:50,930	The quest was evaluated according to the standards contained in the comprehensive plan, our code of ordinances and state law. As a result of all the findings contained in the staff report, staff find that the proposed zoning map amendment would not adversely impact the public health, safety, and general welfare, and is consistent with our comprehensive plan, the Bismarck Code of Ordinances and Relative State law.

00:05:08,530	Therefore, staff recommends approval of the zoning map amendment from the Agriculture and RR residential zoning districts to the agriculture zoning district on auditors lot S3 in section. 25 Hay Creek Township. Do you have any questions? Commissioner’s questions Virginia. I’m not seeing or hearing any Johnny.

00:05:30,300	I have a question for you because the uh the property has been identified as parks and open spaces and the future land use plan. Does that affect anything going forward? No, thank you, Mr. Chair. Comm., that’s a really good question.

00:05:49,630	Um, rezoning it down to the agriculture will not um advance the goals of the comprehensive plan, but it won’t impede them either, that big broad brush stroke is um the Parks and open space for the floodplain and adjacent to the Missouri River. That’s all. OK. Thank you. Mhm. All right, any other questions, commissioners? I’m not seeing you here. Thank you, Jenny.

00:06:08,870	With that, I’m going to open up the public hearing on this agenda item is there either the requester or a representative here to speak to this agenda item. And I’m not seeing or hearing anybody. Are there others that would care to speak to this agenda item? And again, I’m not seeing or hearing any with that I’m going to close the public hearing. Uh, Commissioners, uh, Jenny, any additional comments? All right, thank you.

00:06:34,030	With that, commissioners, this is a request for uh a zoning map amendment, um, and staff recommendation is to approve what your wishes. Motion to approve. We have a motion to approve from Comm. Waggen. The second we have a 2nd from Comm. Field. Commissioners, any discussion. And I’m not seeing or hearing any. Sarah, please call roll. Comm. Field. Yes, Comm. Johnson. Yes. Comm. Schmidtz? Yes. Mr. Michelle.

00:07:04,400	Yes, Comm. Seak. Comm. Wangan Comm. Zent Comm. Bittner. Yes. And Chewars. Yes, the motion is approved. With that, we’ll move on to item B under our regular agenda, which is Fairview Cemetery edition, and I believe Lauren is going to provide us with uh staff report this evening.

00:07:39,030	Good evening, uh, Chair Schwartz and commissioners, uh, Fairview Cemetery edition is requesting approval, uh, Excuse me, Fairview Cemetery Association is requesting approval of a special use permit to allow a funeral home a lot 2, Block 1 Fairview Cemetery edition.

00:08:02,500	This request is located in northeast Bismarck, north of Interstate 94 and west of Centennial Road in the southwest quadrant of the intersection of East Century Avenue and Hamilton Street. This type of special use would be permitted in this location’s existing RT residential zoning district, adjacent land uses include condominiums to the northwest across East Century Avenue, single family dwellings to the south, industrial warehouses and offices to the northeast and east, uh residential manufactured home park to the southeast and Fairview Cemetery

00:08:27,570	to the west. The property has been identified as institutional in the future land use plan. institutional areas are places of cultural, political, or administrative significance to the general public. The public has been notified of this request.

00:08:48,100	A notice was published in the Bismarck Tribune on July 19th, and 12 and 13 letters were mailed to the owners of nearby properties. On July 12th. Stafford received one call from the public asking um if the funeral home would have a crematorium to staff’s knowledge, um, based on the application submitted and discussion with the applicants uh consultants, um, there’s no plans at this time for that.

00:09:14,200	Um, there were no comments received by staff as well. Uh, this request was evaluated according to standards contained within the comprehensive plan, Bismarck Code of ordinances and relevant state law.

00:09:35,070	Based on the site plan submitted with the application and with the inclusion of the ingress and egress condition, uh, all funeral home requirements in the Bismarck Code of Ordinance will be met. The lot size, um, lot width setbacks, height limits, and lock coverage requirements of the RT residential zoning district, um, will be met. Uh, the required amounts of parking will also be met.

00:10:02,100	Um, this would include, uh, Uh, this would include, uh, having the on street parking, um, not included within the parking calculations um as the use for the funeral home would not, uh, would not be considered for that. Um, horizontal separation from residential buildings will be met.

00:10:23,670	Uh, additionally, having a condition for a recorded non-access line release of a 40 ft portion of Hamilton Street, um, as a condition, will ensure that the ingress and egress requirements will be met. For this, um, all adjacent property owners within 300 ft as indicated within the public.

00:10:49,670	Uh Uh, public section of your uh staff report uh were notified, um, as a result of findings contained in the staff report, City of Bismarck, uh, staff find that the proposed subdivision would not adversely impact the public health, safety and general welfare. Therefore, staff recommends approval of a special use permit to allow a funeral home on Lot 2, block 1, Fairview Cemetery Edition with the condition that the release of a 40 ft section of non-access line adjacent to Hamilton Street, uh, allowing adequate access to the site is recorded.

00:11:09,900	Do you have any questions for me at this time, Comm., questions for Lauren. Comm. Z. That’s for, um, who’s the owner of this? Uh. Uh, uh, so the property is currently owned by Fairview Cemetery.

00:11:36,630	Um, the funeral home, I’m unaware who would be building it or who would be owning the actual funeral home, but the lot itself is owned by Fairview Cemetery. funeral director there, do you think? But That would be my understanding, but you, uh, I believe the applicant is here if you have any additional questions. OK, thank you, Comm.. Wait till he get there. Commissioner’s additional questions for Lauren. I’m not seeing hearing Lauren, thank you. Thank you.

00:11:59,030	With that, I’m going to open the public hearing on this agenda item is the requester or a representative here to speak. Thank you chair Schwartz, Lana Naimler Swarzenegg in Engineering representing Fairview Cemetery in this, um, yeah, nothing significant to add to what Lauren had said just maybe some more details.

00:12:16,030	Um, I’m sure you saw on the zoning map sort of the mix of uses that are in the same area. We got industrial and residential and all these things going on. Obviously a funeral home fits well with the cemetery right there.

00:12:31,600	It’s really an accessory used to the cemetery, um, in, in answer to Commissioner’s question before, um, yes, the, the Fairview Cemetery actually owns a lot, but it will be leased out to another organization that that manages and and and runs the facility for them. But if you have any questions, I can, uh, commissioners, do you have questions? I’m not seeing a hearing anyone. Thank you. Thank you.

00:12:53,970	With at the podium is open for others that would care to address this agenda item. And I’m not seeing or hearing any, so with that I’m gonna close the public hearing, um. With that, I’m gonna ask Lauren if you have any additional comments. No additional comments at this time. Thank you. uh, Comm., this is a special request for a special use permit for a funeral home. Staff recommendations are.

00:13:18,500	A conditional approval or approval with a condition. What are your wishes? You’re shaking your head, Comm. Sevik. Oh, I make a motion approve. Thank you. We have a motion to approve from Comm. Sevik. We have a 2nd from Comm. Z. Any additional discussion commissioners. And I’m not seeing or hearing any, so with that, Sarah, please call roll.

00:13:47,970	Comm. Wangen. Yes. Comm. Field Comm. Johnson. Comm. Schell, Comm. Schmitz. Yes. Comm. Seak. Comm. Bittner. Yes. Comm. Zent and sharecharts. Yes, the motion is approved. With that, we’ll move on to item C in our regular agenda, which is Capitol Electric headquarters edition, Lot 1, block 1, and Jenny is gonna provide us with uh staff report this evening.

00:14:21,570	Thank you, Chair. Commissioner’s Corner View LLC is requesting approval of a special use permit for a drive-through in conjunction with a fast food restaurant on Lot 1, Block 1 Capitol Electric headquarters edition. The proposed special use is located in north central Bismarck in the southeast quadrant of the intersection of State Street and 43rd Avenue Northeast.

00:14:41,370	And it is 1.46 acres. Adjacent uses include commercial uses and storage to the north across 4 3rd Avenue Northeast, vacant commercially zoned property to the east. Office and storage units to the south. And a municipal pump station to the west across State Street.

00:14:59,100	The property is zoned CG commercial and a drive-through is allowed in the zoning district as a special use permit approved by the planning and zoning Commission based on certain criteria. According to the site plan submitted with the application, the proposed drive-through will meet criteria for approval. The public has been notified of this request.

00:15:16,200	A notice was published in the Tribune on July 12th and 19th and 11 letters were mailed to the owners of nearby properties on the 19th. To my knowledge, we have not received any written comments regarding this request. However, we just did receive one inquiry um via email, neither for or against the request.

00:15:33,830	This request was evaluated according to standards contained in our comprehensive plan, Bismarck Code of Ordinances and Relative State law and a result of all the findings contained in your staff report. Staff find that the proposed special use permit would not adversely impact the public health safety and general welfare and is consistent with the comprehensive plan, Bismarck Code of ordinances and state law.

00:15:51,230	Therefore, staff recommends approval of the special use permit for the drive-through for a drive-through in conjunction. With a fast food restaurant on 1, block 1 Capitol Electric headquarters edition. Do you have any questions, Commissioners, questions for Jenny. I’m not seeing or hearing any Comm. Zan. OK, um, We know what’s gonna go in there. Comm., I have no idea. No idea either, OK. Thank you, Comm. Van.

00:16:17,670	uh, commissioners, any additional questions for Jenny? I’m not seeing or hearing anything. Thank you. With that, I’m gonna open the public hearing for this agenda item is either the requester or representative here to speak to this agenda item.

00:16:38,300	I’m not seeing or hearing anybody stepping up, so with that, uh, the, the podium is open for others that would care to address this agenda item. And again, I’m not seeing. So with that, I’m going to close the public hearing on this agenda item. Uh, Jenny, any final comments? OK, thank you.

00:17:00,370	With that, commissioners, this is a request for a special use permit for a drive-through, and staff recommendation is to approve. What are your wishes? Motion to approve. We have a motion to approve from Comm. Wangen. Second, we have a 2nd from Comm. Sevik. Any additional discussion? Sarah, would you please call Roll? Comm. Sevak. Yes. Comm. Field. Comm. Johnson, Comm. Wangan. Comm. Bittner. Yes. Comm. Schell, Comm. Schmitz. Yes. Comm. Schwartz.

00:17:36,430	Yes, a motion is approved. With that, we move on to item number D in our regular agenda. Daybreak medical edition first replant lot 2 block 1. And I believe Isaac is going to provide us with staff briefing this evening. Yes, uh, good evening, Chair Schwartz and commissioners. You’re perhaps noticing a trend of special use permits here tonight.

00:17:56,830	This particular one comes to us from Thomas Bry on behalf of the Enrichment Garden Incorporated, who is requesting approval of a special use for a child care center on Lot 2, Block 1 Daybreak Medical edition first replant.

00:18:17,530	This project area is located in North Bismarck, north of East Greenfield Lane and between North Washington Street to the west and Saints Drive to the east. And it would be located within an existing building just to be clear, um, the area itself is zoned as a planned unit development or PUD for short, and adjacent land to the east and south is still within that PUD to the north on

00:18:35,230	the screens, as well as in your staff reports, it is a agricultural land and to the uh directly to the west is RT with some RR rural residential further to the west. The PUD that it is located within is.

00:18:56,100	Generally, a mixed use type of developments, uh, where many things are currently present and in general we would be seeing some multi-family residential there and a combination of retail services and offices including health medical related offices, and one other note uh on this particular, uh, project is that the enrichment garden offers both child care services as well as some other health-related therapies as well, including physical therapy and uh occupational

00:19:18,000	therapy, things like that and. This PUD permits health medical uses by right, and the childcare center as a special use so this request is specifically just for the childcare center aspect of this uh project.

00:19:43,600	The area is identified in the future land use plan as community mixed use, and this is described as places of commerce, employment, and residence for the Bismarck community, and if we can go to the next slide here, just for a Point of reference, this was also included in your staff report a broad layout of of the floor plan itself of the building, uh, be on the first floor of an existing building and uh child care centers, uh,

00:20:02,770	go through special criteria as part of their review, and that was outlined in your staff report, including such things as minimum indoor and outdoor recreation space which is dependent upon the number of children that would be present at any given time, and the project meets all relevant criteria according to staff review.

00:20:21,900	Uh, the was notified of this request via publications in the Bismarck Tribune on July 12th and 19th and 18 letters were mailed to nearby property owners on July 12th as well. To my knowledge, staff has received one public comment on this request, which I believe was forwarded to the commission prior to this meeting.

00:20:39,700	As a cumulative result of all the findings contained in the staff report, City of Bismarck staff find that the special permit would not adversely impact public health, safety, and general welfare, and that it is generally consistent with the comprehensive plan, Bismarck Code of ordinances, and relevant state law.

00:21:00,400	Therefore, staff recommends approval of the special use permit for a childcare center on Lot 2, block 1, Daybreak medical edition first replant. Does the Comm. have any questions for me at this pointer questions for Isaac. Miss Michelle Isaac, just because this is a multi-story building, are there opportunities to have an additional.

00:21:21,170	Uh, daycare center in this building at some point in the future and if so, should it be clarified of what, what would be considered now compared to what would be considered in the future with a special use permit language saying approved, like what is it that we’re approving today and then into the future. Sure, thank you, uh, Chris chell and commissioners.

00:21:40,970	So the, the planned unit development does specify sort of what regions of each building or building on the PUD land would allow uh both the regular uses and special use permit related uses, this would be, to my knowledge, um, an approval of the use in general, and if they were to expand to another portion of the building or elsewhere, it would not need to go through another one, or a revised

00:21:59,270	process, but I, uh, could have to check with uh other colleagues to make sure that interpretation is correct. OK, thank you. Thank you, Comm. Schell. Commissioners, additional questions. Not seeing or hearing any Isaac, thank you.

00:22:22,500	With that, I’m going to open up the public hearing on this agenda item is either the requester or a representative here to speak to this agenda item. And I’m not seeing or hearing anyone, so with that I will ask the with the podium being open, are there others that would care to address this agenda item? And I’m not seeing or hearing anyone. So with that I’m going to close the public hearing.

00:22:44,470	Isaac, any additional comments? Not at this time, thank you. All right, thank you. With that, commissioners, this is a request for a special use permit for a child care center. Staff recommendation is to approve what are your wishes. Motion to approve. We have a motion to approve from Comm. Bittner. I have a second from Comm. Johnson.

00:23:07,370	Any additional discussion? And I’m not seeing or hearing any, so Sarah, would you please call Roll? Comm. Field. Comm. Schmitz. Yes. Comm. Shell. Mr. Sek, yes. Comm. Wangen, Comm., Comm. Bittner. Yes. Jerry Schwartz. Yes, the motion is approved.

00:23:39,500	With that, we move on to item number E in our regular agenda, which is countryside estates subdivision, lot one, block one, and once again, Isaac is going to provide us with staff briefing on this. Yes, thank you, Chair Schwartz. Would the commission like to guess what this request is for? I’ll, ah, thank you, Comm..

00:23:57,630	It is indeed another request for a special use permit this time for Kelly Grins, who is requesting approval of a special use permit on Lot 1, block 1 countryside estate subdivision to increase their total accessory structure size to 3200 square feet. This project is located east of Bismarck in the southeast quadrant of the intersection of 52nd Street Northeast and Ridgewood Drive, and it is directly adjacent to city limits, but.

00:24:20,570	Outside of city limits, just so we are clear. The property is zoned rural residential and land that is adjacent to the north, east and south is also zoned RR rural residential and land to the west is zoned A agricultural and land to the west and south as of right now is generally undeveloped and to the east and north is developed in a rural residential style.

00:24:42,500	As the commission may already know from previous projects, properties that are zoned for residential that have at least 65,000 square feet, uh, generally have a, a permitted size of 2400 square feet for accessory structures without a special use permit, and then that gets increased to 3200 square feet with the special use permit.

00:25:05,900	This property in particular is 2.095 acres or approximately 91,000 square feet, so it meets that threshold. The applicant intends to use the entirety of the 3200 square feet to place a single accessory building on their property, according to um the application and information provided by the applicant.

00:25:25,900	Again, the parcel meets the the size requirement there, and there appears to be plenty of room to allow uh the structure to meet the necessary setback requirements as well. So there’s no conflicts there. The area is identified in the future land use plan as transitional rural, which is described as existing rural residential subdivisions that are in close proximity to city limits.

00:25:46,500	And this area is also identified in the growth phasing plan as transitional rural as well. So in general, this just means that it is possible that in the somewhat near future city limits will continue to grow and possibly surround these areas or, you know, go around them on, on various sides, and they might see effects of urban developments at some point in

00:26:05,300	the future, but there of course is no exact timeline for when that might be. So this is just broad brushstroke thinking here. The public was notified of this request via publications in the Bismarck Tribune on July 12th and 19th and 31 letters were mailed to nearby property owners on July 12th as well.

00:26:26,570	Gibbs Township was also notified of this request on July 8th, and they provided a resolution of support which was included in your packets. To my knowledge, other than the resolution from Gibbs Township, we have received no public comments on this request. So as a cumulative result of all the findings contained in the staff reports before you.

00:26:44,230	The City of Bismarck staff find that the special use permit would not adversely impact the public health safety and general welfare and is consistent with the comprehensive plan Bismarck Code of ordinances and relevant state law.

00:27:05,770	Therefore, staff recommends approval of the special use permit for increased accessory structure size up to 3200 square feet on lot 1, block one countryside estates subdivision. Does the commission have any questions for me at this time, Commissioners, questions for Isaac. Comm. So is this just private or this wouldn’t be commercial, correct? This is just for Comm.

00:27:31,530	Zent and and commissioners, this would be just for personal uses, although technically with the home occupation ordinance that has been passed could in theory be used for that, but according to the information provided to staff, this is just uh private personal use as far as we are aware. OK, thank you. Thank you, Comm. Zent. Comm., Comm. Shell. I can you confirm that all access to that building would come from the north and not off of 52nd itself. Uh, Comm.

00:27:50,600	Schell and Comm., yes, that is correct. The access point would, uh, uh, be to the north there, um, that is where the house itself gets access from at this time, no access is proposed to 52nd Street Northeast as far as staff is aware. Thank you. Thank you, Comm. Schell. Comm., additional questions for Isaac.

00:28:11,170	I’ve got one question for you, Isaac. I noticed down in the picture down here, it looks like there’s a building down in the lower corner. Did you address that at all? Uh, Chair Schwartz and commissioned, yes, so I, I did reach out to the applicant about that because the special permit would again

00:28:26,870	increase the total size to 3200 square feet. That could be in one building or it could be in multiple buildings. Uh, they are proposing a single structure that would use up all of that 3200 square feet size that existing structure around 100, 120 square.

00:28:44,530	According to the applicant, they will be removing that structure and then, you know, just using the larger one. Thank you. Any additional questions, Commissioners? I’m not seeing or hearing any Isaac. Thank you. With that, I’m gonna open the public hearing on this agenda item is either the requester or representative here to speak to it. If you’d like, sir.

00:29:08,230	I get you to when you step up there, if you put your name on the log and uh let us know who you are. That would be wonderful. I’m Kelly Granz. I’m the owner. I just came to see if you had any questions for me. That’s fair enough, Kelly. Thank you. Bear with me. I don’t have my glasses on.

00:29:37,870	Yeah, that’s all right. OK. Very good. Um do you have any questions for me, Comm., Commissioners, do you have questions for Kelly while we’ve got him up at the podium? I’m not seeing or hearing any uh again, just verifying, uh, is the small building going to come down? Yes, it’s one of those uh plastic assembled ones,

00:29:58,230	so we’re just leaving it up and as soon as the building’s done, it’s be simple to take away. It’s just on, on, uh, those cement papers, so yeah. Very good. And I’ll ask one more time. Questions for Kelly. I’m not seeing you hearing any, Kelly. Thank you for stepping up.

00:30:19,400	Without the podium is open for others that would care to address this agenda item. And I’m not seeing or hearing any, so with that I’m going to close public hearing and uh Isaac, any additional comments? No additional comments. Thank you, Chair. Thank you. With that Comm., this is a request for a special use permit for an oversized accessory building.

00:30:40,730	Staff recommendation is to approve. What are your wishes? Motion to approve. We have a motion to approve from Comm. Zent. Comm. Bitner, is that a second? Yes, it is. All right, thank you. With that, we have a motion in a second.

00:31:03,030	Any additional discussion? And I’m not seeing or hearing any, so Sarah, would you please call Roll? Comm. Wangen. Yes, Comm. Field. Comm. Johnson. Comm. Seabak. Yes. Comm. Bittner Yes. Comm. Schell, Comm. Schmitz. Yes, Comm., yes, and chair Schwartz. Yes, a motion is approved.

00:31:34,330	With that, we’ll move on to item F in our regular agenda, which is East Century Avenue and 52nd Street Northeast, and Isaac is going to provide us with staff report this evening. Hello again, Chair Schwartz and commissioners.

00:31:51,270	I sure hope you’re not sick of me cause this is my 3rd time up here at the podium, um, and I, I hope I don’t disappoint you that this one is not a special use permit, uh, also, but for this particular one, it is a major street plan amendments that the Community Development Department is requesting approval of in the area of Hay Creek Township, uh, sections 24, uh, Township 139 North Range 80 West and Dibbs Township, uh, Section 19139 North range 79 West. The project.

00:32:11,970	Area as you can see on the screens before he was located northeast of Bismarck in the aforementioned sections of Hay Creek and Gibbs Township along East Century Avenue and 5-second Street Northeast between I-94 to the south and East Calgary Avenue to the north.

00:32:35,500	The intent of this request is to just maintain some consistency between the future facing city plans that is the major street plan and an existing construction project that is in design by the city engineering department as of right now. And so that project would extend east Century Avenue, and then. Uh, also extend fifty-second Street Northeast and connect the two of them. And If we go to the next slide.

00:33:01,170	Uh, the existing zoning of the area is just agricultural land right now, uh, undeveloped, uh, as of this moment, and they proposed change, if we go to the next slide, you can see here this is the existing form of the major street plan that dashed red line kind of on the southeast side of the project area is the current sort of envisioned extension of East Century Avenue, the construction project that is in design would

00:33:21,430	not go. that far, but eventually we sort of expect to see it go that far out and then connect up to the north there where there’s uh envisioned extensions of East Calgary as well as 5 2nd Street Northeast there and actually if we just go to the next. Slide.

00:33:41,100	So here we have the the left side there is the existing plans and the right side, the proposed plans. The only difference here, if you can kind of see it in the on the the proposed plan side.

00:34:00,900	Perhaps not Perfectly visible on the screens given the size here, but it is just the inclusion of a single future collector roadway to connect other parts that were already in the major street plan, um, and of course, this would not prohibit any landowner or developer from adding in other local roadways throughout the area as well, just trying to connect two areas that were already envisioned in the major street plan with what is being proposed and this item was considered on May 22nd by this

00:34:21,770	board, and the reason There was a gap between meetings I was to make sure we had enough time to notify the townships. And again, zoned A agricultural right now.

00:34:39,070	In general, there is urban development to the west and sort of to the north, northeast, uh, the Silver Ranch area up there, and then some undeveloped agricultural lands to the east and south, and the public was notified of this uh request via publications in the Bismarck Tribune on July 12th and 19th and two letters were mailed to nearby property owners on July 12th as well, and Township was notified of this request on July 9th, and I believe their resolution is included in the packets here.

00:34:59,630	So to my knowledge, staff has not received any written comments regarding this request prior to this meeting. And as a cumulative result of all the findings contained in the staff report, City Bismarck staff find that the major street plan amendment as proposed here would not adversely impact public health safety and general welfare and is consistent with the

00:35:19,730	comprehensive plan Bismarck Code of ordinances, and all relevant state law. Therefore, staff recommend approval of the major street plan amendments in the previously described sections of the townships. Does the commission have any questions for me at this time, Commissioners, questions for Isaac. Commissioner’s and The win construction take place.

00:35:45,230	Uh, I believe, uh, and I would invite, uh, Krier Schell to add some more detail on this, but the construction to my knowledge, Comm., Zan and commission is that they would begin in next year, next summer, but I would invite Chris Richell to offer more details as he can, Comm., Comm.

00:36:05,300	Zent, uh, the Schedule that we’re on right now would have plans done sometime this late fall, winter bid and constructed with the majority of that work occurring in 2025, um there’s still some hurdles to go over right away acquisitions and permitting with pipelines, etc.

00:36:20,770	um, through this area, so it might be delayed or maybe portions of it are constructed earlier, portions later on, uh, but the schedule that we’re looking at right now is 2025. Great. Thank you for the clarification, Comm. Shell. Um Comm. additional questions for Isaac. I’m not seeing or hearing any Isaac. All right, thank you. With that, I’m going to open the public hearing on this agenda item.

00:36:43,330	Yeah With the, with the podium open, is there anyone that would care to address this agenda item? And I’m not seeing or hearing any buddy, so with that I’m going to close the public hearing, commissioners, this is a major street plan amendment and staff is recommending approval. What are your wishes, Comm.

00:37:05,730	Schell, maybe just a piece here before emotions made, um, as part of the analysis that we’ve done is, is this project for Century Avenue. We also looked into ways that we would cross the interstate with either an overpass or an underpass at some point in the future, not that that would be constructed now as part of this 2025 project, but laying out the the the grades of Century Avenue in

00:37:22,130	a manner that we would conceivably be able to to tack on a road to the south and eventually connect that um to the landfill property and the other. segments of 50 seconds that we have south of here, um.

00:37:39,830	So I guess as as the city engineer now as we’re doing construction projects and grateful for all the forefathers and for mothers of our community that put Washington Street and put 4th Street and 19th Street into our uh roadway network that gives us another opportunity to cross the road, not through an interchange. Um, so we wanted to be able to preserve that ability in the future here too.

00:37:56,830	So with that all being said, I would move to continue this um item to the next meeting so that we can add that connection to the south. don’t exactly know where it would be, um, but having it on this major street plan showing a connection of 52nd near the landfill in Divide Avenue.

00:38:14,430	Crossing the interstate with with once again a dotted blue line is all it’s gonna show on the map today, um, but putting that on the map and connecting to Century Avenue, I think would be beneficial to have that as part of this major street plan as well, um, but I would want to make sure that we notify the landowner, um, of

00:38:26,770	that change in the major street plan. We’ve had communications with that landowner throughout our development of this project, um, but just ensuring that they’re not uh feeling like we did a bait and switch by advertising one thing and then changing at the table um is why I would move to continue this to the, the next meeting.

00:38:42,230	Second. We have a motion to continue in a second from Comm. Bittner, I believe. Yes. With that Comm. is any discussion? Right. Comm. and, so Gabe then In the future when we go across the interstate we’d have the federal highway on that, wouldn’t we? Comm., Comm.

00:39:09,430	Zent, uh yeah, any, any crossings of the interstate would would require coordination with Fed Highway and the Department of Transportation, there wouldn’t be an interchange planned here. It just be a great separation for us to be able to cross this road similar across the interstate similar to 19th Street crossing above the interstate or Washington Street or 4th Street crossing underneath the interstate, uh, we’d look for just another

00:39:25,030	opportunity here, especially as Bismarck grows to the north and the east of of another way to cross that. That interstate connection. Thank you, Comm. Z. Comm.. Additional discussion. Comm. Schell, uh, my question to you would be, are you confident that we would have enough information available by the next meeting to uh. Consider this item.

00:39:52,200	Chair Schwartz Comm., I, I would be like I said before, there’s lots of different options where this road could be and this really just lays out that we want a connection there and if there’s a better location it can be amended in the future as is more uh understanding is is known of where the best

00:40:06,300	location, um, through that analysis, we have yet to rule out exactly where it should tie down at, and it should be an overpass or an underpass. There’s a lot of considerations to be had and really until we start developing that a little more seriously, we’re probably not going to have any more information than what we have

00:40:19,400	right now. Thank you. With that any additional discussion. If not, we have a motion and a second on the table to continue. Sarah, would you please call roll? Comm. Sivak. Yes Comm. Field, Comm. Johnson. Yes. Comm. Wangen. Comm. Schell, Comm. Schmitz. Yes. Comm. Bittner Yes. Comm., Schwartz. Yes, the motion is approved.

00:40:52,070	With that, we move on to other business and I ask the question, is there anything else that we need to talk about for the good of the commission? And I’m not hearing or seeing, so with that, our next regular meeting is scheduled for August 28th. I thank you, uh.

00:41:11,700	Staff and commissioners for your time this evening and those attending and with that I’ll