00:00:10,570	Good evening everyone. I would like to welcome all that are in the baker meeting room here this evening and those that are online today is September 25th, and it is 5 p.m. and I’d like to welcome you all to this meeting, the Bismarck Planning and Zoning Commission.

00:00:27,870	And with that I’m gonna call the meeting to order. Sarah, would you please call Roll? Comm. Bittner Sure. Comm. Field. Comm. Johnson, Comm. Larsson. Comm. Lukins. Comm. Michell. Comm. Schmitz, Comm. Sevak here. Comm. Wangen. Comm. Zent and Cher Schwartz here. Thank you.

00:01:00,800	With that, we’re gonna move on to the first item in our uh meeting agenda this evening, and that is approval of the meeting minutes for August 28th meeting. Commissioners, what are your wishes? Motion to approve. We have a motion to approve from Comm. Lukins. And a second from Comm. Johnson. With that, Comm. is any discussion. And I’m not seeing any, so Sarah, would you please call Roll? Comm. Field. Comm. Johnson. Comm. Lukins. Comm. Schmitz Commission Se Comm.

00:01:36,230	Bittner. Yes. Comm. Chair Schwartz. Yes, the motion is approved. With that, we’ll move on to item 2 on our agenda, which is this evening’s consent agenda, and we have two items on the consent agenda. First item A is the 2024 amendments to the growth phasing plan.

00:02:01,770	And uh staff recommendation is to schedule a hearing and then item number B in the consent agenda is part of Lincoln Township Section 22, and that is a future land use plan amendment and again staff is recommending scheduling a hearing. We can either pull items out of this agenda or approve it as presented.

00:02:23,600	What are your wishes? Moved to approve the consent agenda and call for the public hearings. Thank you, Comm. Schmidt. We have a motion to approve a second from. Comm. Bittner, thank you. With that, is there any discussion? And I’m not seeing or hearing any, so Sarah, would you please call Roll? Comm. Sivak. OK Yes, yes. Comm. Field. Comm. Johnson, Comm. Lukins. Comm. Schmitz. Comm.

00:02:52,270	Bittner. Yes. Miss, uh, excuse me, Comm. Zent. Yes, and Cher Schwartz. Yes, the motion is approved. With that, we’ll move on to this evening’s regular agenda and the first item which is item A on our regular agenda is East Century Avenue and 52nd Street Northeast, and it’s a major street plan amendment, and Isaac is going to provide

00:03:16,170	us with staff briefing. Yes, uh, good evening, Chair Schwartz and commissioners. So this first, uh, regular agenda item on our uh commission agenda this evening is a continuation of one that you have seen before, but I’ll repeat some things just for the sake of consistency.

00:03:34,770	So, uh, the community development department is requesting approval of a major street plan amendment in the area of Hay Creek Township sections 24 and 25, uh 139 North Range 80 west and Gibbs Township Section 19 and 30 T139. 79 West. So this product is located northeast of Bismarck and. Don’t see it on the screen yet. Got it. OK.

00:04:01,270	So this project is located northeast of Bismarck as we will see on the screen shortly and It starts, uh, kind of just to the south of the Silver Ranch area before extending south into city limits in the aforementioned sections.

00:04:24,730	There we go, of Hay Creek and Gibbs Township along East Century Avenue and 52nd Street Northeast, uh, between I-94 and East Calgary Avenue. That was the original portion between I-94 and East Calgary, and then as you can see, it extends south uh beyond Interstate 94 to 17th Avenue Northeast. at its southern boundary of the project area this time around.

00:04:47,200	So, again, the intent of this request is just to maintain consistency between future facing city plans and an existing uh construction product that is in design by the city engineering department that would specifically extend East Century Avenue and 52nd Street north of East Century Avenue and connect the two of them. The only proposed change would be that to the major street plan itself would be the inclusion.

00:05:10,130	Of the fifty-second Street Northeast portions both north of fifty-second Street, uh, East Century Avenue and then south 2 17th Street Northeast. So if we can go to the uh next slides, please.

00:05:34,200	The existing zoning is a combination of agricultural land, some land that is own uh Zone CA as well as to the south land that is Public either owned by the City of Bismarck or Burley County and the Future facing plans cause this area, a combination of urban neighborhood, neighborhood mixed use, uh, a lot of different things, strictly because it is traveling a longer distance, but the only portion that um. Well, Let me, let me adjust myself here for a moment at.

00:05:58,200	The July 24th, 2024 meeting which we first saw this, uh, the, uh, the public hearing was held by the Planning and Zoning Commission, and the commission voted to continue the hearing to address the connection of Fifty-second Street Northeast, uh, as it would travel south and connect to another street that was already in the major street plan just for the sake of

00:06:15,530	consistency. So this would have it continue south crossing Interstate Interstate 94, either with an overpass or underpass, undecided at this point, nothing. South of East Century Avenue is proposed for construction at this time, um, the proposed revision, however, and update required new public notifications.

00:06:42,470	And all portions of Fifty-second Street, as shown are uh future collectors, and there’s again, no timeline for their uh construction or reconstruction as some parts of Fifty-second Street, uh, are, uh, currently constructed. And of course the proposed changes would not prohibit any landowners from developing any local roadways throughout the area in the future.

00:07:07,170	The public was notified originally about this 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 as a letter to the North Dakota Department of Transportation.

00:07:28,430	Uh, Gibbs Township was notified of this request on July 9th, and then once the public hearing was continued to include those portions to the south of East Century Avenue, um, new notices were put in the Bismarck Tribune on September 13th. And 20th and 68 letters were mailed to nearby property owners as well as to the North Dakota Department of Transportation again.

00:07:47,130	To my knowledge, staff has not received any written comments regarding this request and as a cumulative result of all findings contained in the staff report, City Bismarck staff find that the proposed major street plan amendment would not adversely impact public health safety and general welfare and that it is consistent with the comprehensive plan, uh, major street plan, Bismarck Code of Ordinances and relevant state law.

00:08:07,400	Therefore, uh, staff recommends approval of the major street plan amendment in the previously described sections of uh Gibbs and Hay Creek Township as displayed on the screens before you. Does the commission have any questions for me at this time? Commissioner’s questions for Isaac. Comm. Johnson, the jog. Like it’s jogs to the east to align with century in a more perpendicular way. So yes, there’s two reasons for that.

00:08:31,970	One is to align with century Avenue in a more perpendicular way like you said, and the other is to more closely align with other municipal services that are either in the area or proposed for the areas such as water and sewer lines. Thank you. Thank you, Comm. Johnson. Comm. has additional questions.

00:08:51,130	I’m not saying you’re hearing any Isaac, so thank you. Thank you. With that, I will open up the public hearing, reopen the public hearing on this agenda item. Are there is either the. Requester or representative here. And I’m not saying you’re hearing any, but, so with that, the podium is open. Are there others that would care to address this agenda item.

00:09:15,730	And once again I’m not seeing anybody. So with that I’m going to close the public hearing on it and uh. Isaac, any additional comments from staff? All right, thank you. With that, Comm., this is a major street plan amendment, staff’s recommendation is approval. What are your wishes? Move to approve as presented.

00:09:38,070	We have a motion to approve from Comm. Schmitz from Comm. Zand. Any additional discussion, commissioners? And I’m not seeing any. Sarah, would you please call roll? Comm. Field. Comm. Johnson. Comm. Schmitz. Yes, Comm. Lukins, Comm. Siva, yes. Comm., Comm. Bittner. Yes. Joe Schwarts. Yes. The motion is approved.

00:10:09,530	With that, we will move on to item B on our regular agenda, which is Landsberger’s 2 subdivision. It’s a request for a major subdivision final plat zoning map amendment, major street plan amendment, and I believe Isaac is once again going to give us staff report. Yes, hello again, Chair Schwartz and commissioners.

00:10:31,530	So for this next project, it is a 3 in 1 type project in which Marlene Lansberger and family are requesting approval of a major subdivision final plant titled Landsberger. 2nd subdivision, as well as a zoning map amendment from the agricultural zoning district to the RR residential district.

00:10:50,370	Additionally, they are requesting approval of a major street plan amendment which partially joins the area of the latte and zoning map amendment request, uh, as seen by the longer uh yellow project area there. The project is located in uh northeast of Bismarck along the east side of 52nd Street Northeast, between Fifty-seventh Avenue Northeast and 71st Avenue Northeast.

00:11:18,600	The major plant and zoning map amendment portion of this project consists of a one lot in one block subdivision with about 5.38 acres when including the uh right of way along the northern edge, excluding that right away, it’s about 4.23 acres. And the plant in the uh future land use plan is identified in the area that is referred to as urban reserve, midterm or URA for short.

00:11:41,130	These areas are thought to be suitable for urban development at some point in the future, but are not projected to be annexed by the city, uh, by the year 2045. Typically standard procedure for plotting and zoning areas within this urban reserve midterm, uh, area would typically require a minimum of 8.5 acre lot sizes.

00:12:02,800	However, in order to balance the needs of the major street plan in this area, planning and engineering staff were comfortable with accepting a smaller lot size given the the circumstances here just to balance the, the wants of the applicant along with the major street plan, the major street plan portion of this project, uh, shifts the.

00:12:23,670	as you can see the existing alignment there in that dash blue line, it’ll shift that line up into the uh. Black box project area instead and just shift that future collector proposed roadway further to the north and this does include some dedication for Ride Away on the northern portion of that plat.

00:12:46,670	The public was duly notified of the request via publications in the Bismarck Tribune on September 13th and 20th and 53 letters were mailed to nearby owners uh of nearby properties on September 13th. Gibbs Township was originally notified of the zoning change.

00:13:06,330	Major plan request on July 8th, and they provided a resolution which is included with the staff reports and then once the major street plan amendment was included, um, after the initial application, uh, that. Uh, major street plan portion extended into Hay Creek Township to the west, so we uh sent out new notices to both Hay Creek and Gibbs Township on September 13th and Gibbs Township provided an updated resolution, which is also included in your staff reports.

00:13:27,370	To my knowledge, staff has not received any written comments regarding this request, um, excluding, of course, the resolutions from Gates Township, and as a cumulative result of all the findings contained in the staff report, City of Bismarck staff find that the proposed subdivision final plant.

00:13:48,470	The zoning map amendment and the major street plan amendment would not adversely impact public health, safety and general welfare, and that they are generally consistent with the comprehensive plan. Bismarck code of ordinances and relevant state law. Therefore, staff recommends approval of the major subdivision final plot titled Landsberger Second Subdivision, as well as approval of the zoning map amendments from the agricultural zoning district to the RR residential district.

00:14:11,400	As well as the major street plan amendment in the surrounding area. Does the commission have any questions for me at this time, Comm., questions for Isaac. I’m not seeing or hearing that. Thank you. With that, I’m going to open up the public hearing for this agenda item is either a request either the requester or representative here and I see Landon is stepping up, so.

00:14:36,000	Thank you, Jerry Schwartz. Yes, Leon Schwarzenegger Engineering, uh, representing Rick Lansberger, who’s right behind me, uh, who is the spokesman for the rest of his family on this matter.

00:14:53,070	Uh, nothing significant to add to what Isaac had had presented to you just a little unusual in the sense that it’s, it would be a fairly typical rural residential development, but needing to reconfigure that east-west collector road is just kind of changed the size requirements and and how we’re going about it. But, uh, other than that, uh, fairly straightforward, but I can answer any questions if you have them. Commissioners, questions for Landon. Comm. is out. I that crosses that. that over. Uh Comm.

00:15:24,770	, anytime there’s stormwater issues we would have to put cots in place. Um, luckily the placement of the existing home right now is at the high point actually up the road, so there isn’t a covert necessary for for that area, but anytime we’re going to have any crossing issues. We’ll have to deal with that, yes.

00:15:39,070	Thank you, Comm. Zan. Other questions, Commissioners. Comm. Johnson, a better question for Isaac, but the, the other adjacent landowners, they own the other property affected by this plan, or? That they’ve been engaged to. Thank you, Comm. Johnson. Yes, the, the family does own the land to the north and the east of this property.

00:16:00,330	Um, so yeah, they’re, they’re aware of what’s going on is to be a separate sale for that which is basically still agricultural land. Thank you. Thank you, Comm. Johnson. Comm., additional questions for Landon while we have him up there. I’m not seeing or hearing any Landon. Thank you.

00:16:19,800	With that, the podium is open for others that would care to address this agenda item. And if you would please, would you add your name to the log and introduce yourself. Sure. My name is John Shaffner, that Just Finding out now that street pro goes right across my land.

00:17:06,700	Um How does that happen with? That I I didn’t want to know more about that and I’m not very happy about that. If we could put a map where We’re right Just, just a moment, John, and we’ll. On the west side. On the west side Yeah, it goes straight, it goes. That double line goes straight across our land. Are you located before the creek or afterwards? Before.

00:17:41,330	Just right above where that hand is right there, yeah, OK. I understand. And were you notified by letter? We will notified that there’s a. This meeting about the Landsberger edition, which I assumed didn’t affect us because they’re on the east side of the road and now I’m finding out the street’s gonna go across my land.

00:18:05,000	I don’t think so. Yeah, I mean that. That’s gonna have a major effect on my property. So I, I. Gonna contest that way I can be honest with you. OK. While we have you up there, commissioners, do you have or? Other questions for John.

00:18:41,600	I mean, I, how, how much, John, how much of your land is on either side of, uh, where we have a 40 acre piece of land there and that goes up all the way. Looks like it goes all the way across it over to Endicott. And then, yeah, it. It affects a big portion of my land, OK.

00:19:00,770	And it’s yeah not only gotta take up some land that’s going to increase the traffic right across our yard, I mean. Wow. OK I, I, yeah. I, I guess I don’t understand why that that major changes. Got to happen and go. Yeah, I And offset, I guess. OK, but you were notified. Well, just at this. There was a meeting about the Landsberger. Uh, plotting which.

00:19:35,100	Yeah, I, I, I mean I pulled up the map on my. On my Phone, buddy. I mean, you, unless you’re an engineer, you can’t really make heads or tails out of that. I mean, I, I’m just yeah, just, you know. That’s pretty big. Pretty hard to understand and. I mean, yeah.

00:20:00,600	OK All right, very good, thank you. Landon, would you like to? Please. Thank you, Chair. I’m sure the staff will want to weigh in on this as well. So when we see that roadway configuration, uh, in particular with the Landsberger piece right now they’re dedicating half of that right away for a future road construction.

00:20:22,000	And they’re showing that projection of the road heading west for when the city would develop that far out. So this doesn’t mean we’re building the road tomorrow or any time in the near future. That roadway wouldn’t happen until any of the other neighboring properties actually plot their land as well.

00:20:36,400	That’s at the time that the roadway we can would continue on at that point and that could be never if they so choose. OK Thank you. All right, the podium is open for others that would care to address this agenda item. Cern if you’d add your name to the log and introduce yourself that would be appreciate it. Thank you. Thank you, Commissioners, appreciate it, the time.

00:21:13,800	So I live, I live in country north of states which, um, could I slow you down for just a minute, uh, could you give us your name, my name is Eric Kilzer.

00:21:31,400	I’m sorry, yeah, so I live in country north of states, which is just north of where the western edge of this proposed road is projected to go. And I get, I get that the city is expanding and we’re looking at future development and everything, but. Um, my struggle is, is you start dealing with private property owners and Punching a road across their property. Most of these people to the.

00:21:51,130	East of me around 40 acres, they got horses and and some other livestock that they maintain, um. That would, that would Bother me Pretty Pretty significantly, I guess. My concern is, is that once this is proposed, they’re also going to at some point talk about bringing a road north and south, which would extend Endicott, which would bring four-way traffic.

00:22:17,400	From the south up through our development, which then becomes a safety concern in my opinion. I mean, we’ve already got issues with people coming through the development, the speed limits are posted, but very few, very few people other than the residents in that development follow that speed limit. We get kids out on the street. I mean, I’ve had uh.

00:22:34,270	I’ve had to I’ve been in the front yard mowing the lawn when cars are blowing by and they’re coming by way too fast. Well, now if you open this up from the south. It becomes a drag race from 71st Avenue down to 43rd or 40.

00:22:53,230	7th or whatever the next street is that they’re gonna punch this up from, so. Um, You know, I don’t know what the future expansion is. To me they’ve got a north-south corridor already. Um, that takes them to 71st and to 43rd on the corner of their property that’s being proposed developed, those are two major arterial roadways already.

00:23:14,070	They’ve just expand or they just widened 71st last year to accommodate for more traffic where we’re at. And now you got 43rd on the, on the edge. So the road going west terminates then. It goes, it’s a road to nowhere. So you’re gonna cross people’s property.

00:23:31,000	And you’re gonna punch that through and at some point, at some time down the road potentially there could be a road that that goes out to Centennial at that point. Well, now you’re gonna pull traffic from Centennial over. It gets to be a, a, a lot of traffic coming from major arterial ways crossing private property owners’ properties and then ending up in our subdivision potentially, you know.

00:23:48,630	So I guess that’s where I would, I would have. Issue with Um, the proposal, I guess they’ve already got a north-south corridor there. Um, and that corridor again takes you to 43rd and to 71st, so to get into into town, you can.

00:24:08,470	Jump out on the road right next to their proposed development, go to 43rd, take you right over to Silver Ranch and into town or you can go north on. That same road and and head up to 71st and catch 83 out of town if you want. So there’d be no need to have a road going west in my opinion.

00:24:26,470	OK Eric, just before you walk away here, I’m just gonna ask the rest of commissioners if they have any questions for you. Commissioners. I guess not. thank you, thank you. the Uh, yeah, because I have a question either for staff or engineer because I suspect there is not even any easements acquired.

00:24:49,600	That would drive this road, so that is a long ways from even happening, but I tell you what, Comm. Smith, let’s finish the public hearing here and then we’ll jump into that, uh, the podium is once again open.

00:25:06,630	Are there others that care to address this agenda item? And I’m not seeing or hearing any, so with that I’m gonna close the public hearing on this agenda item, and I’m going to ask uh Isaac for additional comments. Yes, thank you, Chair Schwartz and, uh, commissioners as Landon touched on, the only actual portion that would have a platted right of way would be along the northern boundary of this plant.

00:25:26,870	The rest of that proposed, um, major street plan roadway, there is no right of way that is being dedicated there. There is no set timeline for the construction of anything as folks have noted, this is a good distance away from city limits right now, so there’s no timeline on when or if the city might extend out that way and roadways would only extend beyond what is potentially being dedicated

00:25:46,530	with this plot if other adjacent landowners either at some point in the future, choose to dedicate roadways for that as well. So officially, the only thing that would change is this.

00:26:07,330	Plat boundary as far as roadway dedication, the rest of that is just to try have a guideline for the future, um, given the fact that we’re the major street plan right now further to the south that east-west portion that is further to the south on the existing plans, there was no right of way that it was dedicated there. Comm.

00:26:27,730	Schmidt, did you have a question? So Which parcels of land have dedicated roadway on them because there’s a a major street plan goes east and west from this particular. Piece of property. I’m assuming that’s coming in there to give them access to their property, is that correct? For someone to answer that because I think that drives Schwartz.

00:26:48,000	I, I can, I can take a stab at the internet and maybe I’ll, if, if, if it’s OK, I’ll share my screen so you you can see, uh. OK, there we are, um, you know, as both Landon and Isaac did state that this plan really only takes effect upon development by the adjoining properties.

00:27:10,100	Um, I think you can see the existing major street plan, uh, which was actually that line was set back in 2013, 2014 with the fringe area and master plan, um, and so I think really the reason this came up for us and one of the things that staff had um was hoping to try to accomplish with this change.

00:27:28,700	was to avoid the nearby homes that were close to that alignment, um, and the existing plan. So by jogging north, uh, we would not be putting a road very close to existing homes, um, but as we mentioned, these, this road would never be built until the, the property owner decides to develop their own property.

00:27:48,330	As far as dedication of right of way, the, uh, this has not been dedicated anything on this east-west. You can see if, if I zoom out, uh, the ultimate goal of this plan is to provide collectors and arterials, uh, through the sections, so at the scale of a section, we typically have an arterial at the on the sexual line and the collectors go

00:28:05,930	through the middle. And so as, as this place does build out, that provides the adequate transportation service. Um, so you can see we’re still staying fairly close to the, the, the half section line, um, on this property.

00:28:23,530	Um, does that answer any of your question, Mayor, or are there other, its part of it, so I, I think the problem that I see and feel from the landowners adjacent is is that they feel like all of a sudden we’re dropping a road in there even though. Can’t happen until a lot of things happen including their consent.

00:28:43,830	Um, it, it certainly raises concerns, I think, to put a major street plan in when. You don’t have consensus from the rest of the landowners. Thank you, Comm. Schmitz. I don’t know if that helps you, Comm., Comm. Field, you looked like you were gonna ask a question. The original where the blue line was, seems more reasonable cause that’s basically following property lines.

00:29:10,400	And if you’re gonna go onto his property and cut it in half, I totally would vote no on that. Because when he bought that land, there was nothing out there, I’m sure. And if you did that in my place, you’d probably need armed people to try to do it. So I’m, I’m a hard no on this one.

00:29:25,500	I think you can come up with a better plan and. Get more people involved that are supportive. OK, thank you, Comm. Field. Um, Comm., is any additional questions? Yes sir, evening Comm. Casey Annam with the Burley County Highway Department. Part of why we looked at where the rollway mash plan is currently with the 2013.

00:29:49,100	That’s where the blue line is. Part of why we suggested maybe look at different areas where that blue line is the house on the east side, you’re going to go through that house. So if you want on the property line, we can do that.

00:30:03,670	But it’s gonna go through somebody’s house, so the city and county are willing to buy a house, relocate somebody, that can be done, but that’s what it takes to do it. Then on the west side, all those trees were taking them all out. They’re clear cut gone. In my experience, that’s the number 2 problem I have on every single project is taking out trees. Mailboxes are one.

00:30:20,400	That’s just how it is. So it’s we can look at taking homes out on the south and north side, take all those trees out, or do we look at potentially moving that roadway. We didn’t just throw a dart and say, hey, let’s do this.

00:30:36,600	We did try to put some thought into it, going through there. Is it ideal? No, but we have to have a rollway match plan network. I can’t just say, hey, you got to drive 2 miles and I hope you get around. Good luck. We have to be able to move people and this is part of it.

00:30:53,000	And it’s, you have the arterial roadway network system that’s basically on the section lines, then you basically make a cross and you cut people in the middle. I, I’m very stout on saying the section lines need to be followed because that’s the backbone of the roadway system.

00:31:08,930	Now, once you get inside of a section, pretty flexible if you need to move a little bit here and there. There, there’s good reasons to move them at times, terrain, existing houses, different things like that. When they do the rollaway master plan, you’re looking at 30,000 ft view. Once you get to the planning and zoning level, If you’re getting more at that 5000 ft view and it’s OK.

00:31:25,070	Let’s, we’re getting into the details more. Someday when they plant it, now we’re figuring it all out at that point. So this is, even in the future somebody comes in on the west side and they want a plat, something might get shifted around a little bit, something on the east side might get shifted around a little bit and it’s

00:31:40,000	just looking at those types of things for the right away on the north side, they went to the county board and they were granted a roadway construction waiver. So that way they don’t have to construct the roadway at this time, but that would only be for the area that’s being plotted.

00:31:56,000	Anything to the east, you don’t have to build that road. It’s just a master plan, something it’s not gonna be 100% like that. Once you have to cross that low area, you’re gonna have to figure out culverts, everything else, that alignment’s going to tweak a little bit on there. It just guaranteed it just well.

00:32:13,870	So part of it is, yes, so you, you have every right to tell us, hey, no, we want it straight east and west. Let’s just make sure we know all the information before we make that decision. Thank you, Comm. questions for Casey. Comm.

00:32:31,870	Johnson, so the benefit of doing this now on this one property that’s uh in front of us today is that you’d have an easement in place. For the road, uh, in the future, is that correct? Is that, am I understanding that correct? Yep, so when there’s a roadway master, when plats happen and the rollway master plan shows there’s a roadway.

00:32:51,130	We basically say now is the time, right, dedicated rideways being going to happen in the government entity is going to own it. It’s not uh like sometimes easement right away gets interchanged a little too much, but. Like an easement can be you still own it, but I have a right to build the road.

00:33:07,630	Dedicated right away as we as a government entity actually own it at that point. So that that’s when it first came in, it was, well, you’re gonna have to build the road on the south side. That’s gonna be, be, uh, not as ideal with.

00:33:25,700	Affecting homes on their soils, OK, how do we try and address this and how do we try to look at moving this forward in a reasonable way while trying to minimize impact. Thank you. Yep. Commissioner’s additional questions. Comm. Z That gives the, you mentioned about staying on sex lines. It was to S curves on either side of the east and west. I’ve never seen a curve. like that Yep. I.

00:33:58,200	for speed and safety, I understand, but not, I, I understand what you’re saying, uh, those S curves, that’s cause that’s a quarter line, that’s not actually the section line. Section lines further north and further south. So with quarter lines we do S curves, we do those all the time. So that proposed alignment isn’t actually sexually, that’s quarter line.

00:34:15,500	That That corner is gonna affect. Mr. Chair, Yes, Comm. Bitner. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Pikey, um, when, when you guys were looking at this um road realignment. Were you talking to any of the other landowners around there because the Guy that got up just shortly before you said this is the first he’s heard of it.

00:34:34,570	So apparently the notices that we send out. Probably don’t have complete information. Because I think that if we’re moving a road that affected all of those landowners.

00:34:55,470	We’d probably be hearing from more people, wouldn’t we? I, I think potentially, um, I know they wanted to, it was proposed to do both of them simultaneous and so the notice went out for the plating and the rollway master plan amendment simultaneous that on a one lot that is something that happens if you guys want to do something different. I mean, we’ll, that’s no problem, we’ll do what you guys want. Right.

00:35:14,230	Well, the reason I mentioned it, it seems like it affects a lot more people than just this one lot, you know. the that road is gonna go basically across his land. And I can, I know how this works that if he ever decides to develop, he’s not going to be able to get a plat approved unless he um agrees to that.

00:35:32,800	And maybe that would be in its benefit in the future, but today he doesn’t see it that way. Yeah I’m just wondering, you know, I’m just wondering if we should be looking at this as two separate items. I guess the the more accurate question would be. Can this um lot, um. Platt be approved without the road amendment.

00:35:56,270	I, I think that would be a challenge because where you dedicate the right way. is one of the questions. You Potentially Could split it into two, do the rollway master plan amendment first, and the lat after.

00:36:19,200	I’m not saying you can’t do it the other way on there just where you dedicate right away, I think is the question that we look at on that part. So it With that landowner, uh, landsberger, would they be able to access this property? From an existing road. Without any amendment? Uh, they have an existing approach today off the North-South Road. OK, thank you. Thank you, Comm. Bittner. Comm. Zan, I apologize because I cut you off.

00:36:43,770	Did you have more? OK, thank you. Comm., additional questions. Casey, my only question is how hard is this? In other words, as far as the road being in that place, I’m not a, I’m not a. A lands or a road person, so I guess I need to understand a little bit more of how, uh, solid that is.

00:37:06,770	We say it’s, it’s potentially going to go there. But Yeah, so once the rightway is dedicated, you’re really getting it narrowed in that it’s gonna be at that portion.

00:37:27,170	And we had initially talked to you, we have 80 ft feet dedicated because the whole road’s locked in at that point, or is it half and in the future, whatever landowner has to dedicate half also. So that’s. Part of what we look at. So once that portion’s in that narrow area is locked in. The curves aren’t because we’d have to look at all the different design factors you got to go through. OK.

00:37:52,330	Thank you, yep Any other questions? OK, I’m not seeing or hearing any. Uh, commissioners, you know, this is a request for uh major subdivision final pla a zoning map amendment and a major street plan. Amendment and staff is recommending approval on all three. What are your wishes? Mr. Chair, uh, Comm., excuse me, Comm. Field. Comm.

00:38:21,530	Bittner, I, I honestly don’t have any problem with the um the plaque in the zoning change and what not, but that that major street amendment. It just seems like that’s just dropped on everybody last minute here. And I think that residents out in that area would want to weigh in on that.

00:38:40,670	So anyway, what I’m saying is I’m OK with the first, you know, 2 of the 3, but not the 3rd part. Thank you. OK, thank you. Comm. Field, I cut you off, so. I would agree with Bittner, but I think we should just table it until more people have a chance to come forward. OK, is that a motion? Yes. We have a motion from Comm. Field. And I OK, Comm.

00:39:05,330	Bittner seconded it. So we have a motion in a second to table this agenda item. Comm., any additional discussion? Comm. Schmidt. So my concern is that my, I don’t know that I, I, I agree with Comm. Bittner’s first comment. I think the. Zoning changes fine.

00:39:24,200	I would like to know if we can’t split this. So that the property owner can actually move forward with their plans, otherwise if we table this and push it out, I mean, we’re gonna be down the road. Pro 2 more months and we may be putting some. Putting the property owner in. Some harm’s way, I guess. Uh, I am concerned about the roadway.

00:39:44,730	Plan, I don’t think that that should be approved, so I would like to split it, but. We have a motion on the table, so those are my comments Mr. Chair, Comm. Bitner.

00:40:04,470	You know, I, I’d be OK with amending that or removing the second if the, if the motion um You know, if the original motion was looking to be changed. Because I think that I agree with uh Mayor Schmidt’s on that, that I would like to see them go ahead and move forward with their project, but the road. Master plan change is kind of a big deal up there. So I guess the question would be for staff is, is.

00:40:22,200	Can we do that? Isaac, would you care to address that? Sure, I can, I can, I can address that. OK, thank you. I’d say and I’m looking to Ben here if he has any other thoughts, but I logistically you can, um, the subdivision and the zoning change or standalone projects.

00:40:43,970	The, the only downside that would occur is that this plant would now have a right of way on the northern edge, named Rocky, named the same street that would be the intended to be the continuation of that collector.

00:40:58,570	Uh, and so if the major street plan does not change that right of way would not be necessary on the north end of the plat. So that’s the only. downside to proceeding without the major Street plan amendment, but, but there’s no legal reason, but if in the future that roadway didn’t go in, we could release that. So it’s.

00:41:20,900	And I guess my question Daniel would be, well the requesters want to proceed with this if it’s not a package deal. It’s I’m landing Mhm All right, with that we have a motion and a 2nd on the table, Comm.

00:41:47,030	Bittner, you offered to withdraw your second? Right, if, if, um, If the rest of the commission feels that, that would be a good move because I think it would be, you know, approving the the plat request and the zoning changes is. Not a problem. But obviously that that main uh master plan changes is a concern to the, to the neighbors that spoke, so. If we could If if the motion, if, if Comm. Field would want to change the motion some way I’d, I’d be OK with that.

00:42:09,970	OK, Comm. Bitner, so you’re withdrawing, Comm. Field, you’ll withdraw. And pardon? Comm. Bittner, you want to make the motion for this? Sure, um, motion to approve. The uh the The, the plat. And the rezoning request. And obviously to accept the right of way on that plat. But not the Road master plan as presented.

00:42:45,330	OK We have a motion on the table. Second, we have a 2nd from Comm. just wanna make sure that we, Comm. B, I just wanna make sure we got it right, so we did what we’re trying to do, um, and Ben is shaking his head, so I think we’re good. Thank you. OK.

00:43:05,430	And I guess my question before we proceed is uh Ben, what happens with the major street plan amendment. Uh, Chair members of the commission, if, if you, if the motion passes, uh, we could take direction from you, but uh, I would assume from what I’m hearing is that you’re maybe looking for us to do a standalone.

00:43:29,670	Uh, Broadway, uh, master plan amendment, uh, that’s, that would, uh, again notify all of those individuals previously, I should point out we, uh, everybody who was, who was a property owner that this amendment impacted, did receive a notice.

00:43:50,930	But as was pointed out, it was likely packaged, it was packaged with the plat and the rezoning so people may not have observed what what was happening, but, uh, from what I’m, what I’m understanding, you want us to consider uh a standalone roadway. Uh, master plan amendment, uh, to, to be noticed, uh, again, uh, to allow individuals to come out and provide input on it.

00:44:10,000	OK, and you’d like separate action on that? That that would be my thought on it, yeah. Uh, I, I think we don’t need a motion on that part of it. I, I think I’m comfortable. I think we’re comfortable with the direction.

00:44:25,930	It’s I’m getting a lot of head nodding from the commissioners, so I think we’re comfortable proceeding that way, uh, with a standalone, uh, roadway master plan amendment. Very good thank you. Without commissioners, do we have any additional discussion? We have a motion in a second. Then I’ll have Sarah please call roll. Comm. Field. Comm. Johnson, Comm. Bittner. Yes. Comm. Lukins. Comm. Schmitz. Comm. Seak. Comm.

00:45:00,730	Schwartz, a motion is approved for the major subdivision final plant and the zoning map amendment, the uh third item, the major street plan amendment will be going to staff and. At another time. All right, thank you.

00:45:20,000	With that, we’ll move on to item C in our agenda, which is parts of Riverview Edition and McKenzie edition, and I believe this is a rezoning map amendment request and Jenny is gonna provide us with staff reports just just before we finish Comm. I’m going to recuse myself because the applicant is a client and I’m just gonna avoid any. Problems. OK, thank you for letting us know. Jenny, please proceed. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Comm.

00:45:42,500	, the diocese of Bismarck and Saint Mary’s Sisters are requesting approval of a zoning map amendment from the R5 residential zoning district to a planned unit development on parts of Riverview Edition and Mackenzie edition. This request is located in West central Bismarck, west of North Washington Street between West Avenue A and West Rosser Avenue along the east side of Raymond Street and consists of 29,235 square feet.

00:46:04,030	You considered this request at your August 2 meeting and called for a public hearing. The proposed PUD would allow for the development of two convent buildings in two phases and demolition of existing dwellings on site.

00:46:23,700	Phase one will occur in the southwest portion of the property and include the demolition of two single family dwellings and the construction of the Leonto convent. The Lepanto convent includes classrooms for resident sisters earning their teaching certification. Phase 2 includes the demolition of a dwelling currently being used by the Saint Mary’s Sisters as their Primary residence and the construction of Saint Joseph Convent. The proposed PUD includes standards for landscaping, buffering, and building setbacks, lot coverage and building design.

00:46:47,070	All buildings would be designed and constructed to create and maintain a high visual quality and appearance that is comparable and complementary to the surrounding neighborhood. A 15-foot landscape buffer is required along the entire length of the east side of the property, adjacent to the existing single-family residential uses.

00:47:06,200	All buildings would be set back 15 ft from the front property line, that 15-foot front yard setback matches the context of the neighborhood. Um, lot coverage would be limited to 40%. The property has been identified as urban. Neighborhood in the future land use plan, the urban neighborhood areas are places of quiet employment.

00:47:27,130	And home life are quiet enjoyment of home life, um, adjacent uses include a religious facility with office uses to the north across West Avenue A, residential to the east and south across West Rosser Avenue and residential and cathedral church and grade school to the west across Raymond Street. The public has been notified of the request. A notice was published in the Tribune.

00:47:46,300	On September 13th and 20th and 49 letters were mailed to the adjacent property owners on the 13th. We have received written comments. Those comments were submitted to you prior to this evening’s meeting. The request was evaluated according to standards contained in our comprehensive plan, the Bismarck Court of Ordinances and State law.

00:48:02,930	As a result of the findings contained in the staff report. Staff find the proposed zoning map amendment would not adversely impact public health, safety and general welfare, and is consistent with our comprehensive plan, Bismarck Code of ordinances, and state law. Therefore, staff recommends approval of the proposed zoning map amendment from the R5 residential zoning district to a planned unit.

00:48:22,000	Development on lots 5 and 6, Block 1 Riverview edition, and Lot 7 in the east, 75 ft of lots 8 through 12 block 28 MacKenzie edition, as outlined in the draft ordinance. Do you have questions, Comm. questions for Jenny. I’m not seeing any, Jenny. Thank you. Thank you.

00:48:44,070	With that I’ll open up the public hearing on this agenda, you know, is either the requester. Or The applicant here to visit with us. Sister, and if you’d put your name on the log there, that would be wonderful. Sorry, my name is long. It’s a medieval. They add too many things. And we thank you for your time.

00:49:18,130	I was just here to answer any questions, but real quick, not many convents get built, um. And they’re usually a little unique and so I was hoping that if I can answer any questions for you because it’s a little different, it’s not an apartment complex. It’s not a dorm. It’s not quite a family residence.

00:49:37,430	So the tricky part is you have the Le Ponto convent is proposed to have 12 sisters living in that house, but we all have separate bedrooms, but we have one big kitchen, one big dining room, one big chapel. So our lifestyle is very united and so we do a lot of teaching.

00:49:54,400	And if you know anything about Teaching its tie to time very tightly because of other families being affected. But this building is not a school. So it has classrooms on the floor plan, but that’s just for the individual training of the sisters because Dominicans have been teaching for like 800 years and we have our own style and to pass that on century

00:50:15,270	after century, you have to have some sort of classroom. So if you were to look at other mother houses of the same, um, Community you’d see they all have classrooms, so that’s why I just wanna make sure to clear that’s up, clear that up there, but other than that, um, just hoping. All goes well. Commissioners, questions? Comm.

00:50:35,870	and. so I know where it’s at. It’s right across from the school. A little bit down the road, so Rosser and Raymond, but it is, we’re sharing the Raymond. Yeah.

00:50:56,370	I Yeah, I don’t want people to think it was a school either because we’re like two football fields away from another one and then there’s the public school, like two blocks up too, so yeah. But you’re welcome. Commissioners Other questions? I’m not seeing any sister there based on the pictures, the renderings that were there, uh, they’re nice looking buildings and they look like they’ll be a compliment to the ear or trying to make it look like it’s sticking around,

00:51:20,430	so colonial style, yeah. Very good. All right, thank you so much. The podium is open for others that would care to address this agenda item. Thank you, commissioners. My name’s Elizabeth Roller.

00:52:01,400	I am one of the individuals in the neighborhood that received a letter and I just wanted to voice my support um for the sisters in building. The convents here. My kids go to the school across the street where parishioners at Cathedral and um a couple of the houses that have been demolished at this point in time from the by the diocese, uh, were points of concern for me just based on individuals living there and

00:52:20,370	there had been a lot of issues with individuals and lots of drugs in and out of the homes and so we have a family there’s lots of families in the neighborhood and so I welcome a change coming too.

00:52:36,800	That portion of Raymond and Rossa right there, so just wanted you to hear a voice from someone in the community. We live between Manden and Washington and this will be a great asset. So thank you. That’s good to know, Elizabeth. Thank you. Anybody have questions for Elizabeth while we have her up there? I’m not seeing you here. Thank you. With at the podium is open for others that would care to address this agenda item.

00:52:57,530	And I’m not seeing anybody, so with that I’m gonna close a public hearing, uh, commissioners, uh, this is a request for a zoning map amendment and staff recommends approval. What are your wishes? Motion to approve. We have a motion to approve from Comm. Bittner, the second from Comm.

00:53:19,530	Field, um, Any additional discussion? And I’m not hearing or seeing any, so, uh, Sarah, would you please call roll? Comm. Sak. Yes, Comm. Comm. Bittner. Yes. Mr. Lukins. Yes, Comm. Zent Cha Schwartz, yes, the motion is approved.

00:53:49,870	With that, we’ll move on to item D in our regular agenda, which is a lot coverage and our 5 residential zoning districts and uh Lauren, it’s a zoning ordinance text amendment, and Lauren is going to provide us with the staff briefing this evening. Chair Schwartz and commissioners. The community development department is requesting approval of an amendment to Section 14-4-03 of the Bismarck Code of Ordinances. Related to lock coverage requirements of the R5 residential zoning district.

00:54:17,370	The proposed amendment would create an administrative approval process to increase the lot coverage in the, in this district from a maximum of 30% up to 40%. 40% provided a surface study of the property and vicinity is prepared and submitted for review.

00:54:39,530	The purpose of this amendment is to provide flexibility to property owners while still ensuring the intent of the stormwater management plan of each area is met. Uh, stakeholder group comprised of members of the development community and city staff met on July 18th to discuss existing development concerns related to lock coverage requirements in this district. Uh, in this zoning district and, uh, to suggest changes to that.

00:55:03,600	This administrative approval process that would be part of this amendment would be eligible for lots in subdivisions that already have a post-construction storm on our management permit, um, which would limit this option to lots where the site stormwater management has already been reviewed by the city engineer.

00:55:26,000	This administrative approval process would require a surface study indicating and containing at a minimum, a narrative explaining the increased lock coverage, a scaled survey of the proposed law coverage and an exhibit and analysis of the lock coverage and drainage path of all other lots in the stormwater subbasin. Um, and that would be defined in the conditionally approved, uh, post construction stormwater management permit, uh, for that site.

00:55:49,470	Uh, additional offsite or on-site uh stormwater drainage easements or an updated and approved post-construction stormwater management permit may be a requirement of approval as determined by the community development director and the city engineer. Um, community development staff would also create an administrative process for this review just to keep track of that and to manage it more efficiently.

00:56:12,400	The public has been duly notified of this request. A notice was published in the Bismarck Tribune on September 13th and 20th. To my knowledge, staff has not received comments regarding this request. Uh, this request was evaluated according to standards contained within the comprehensive plan, Bismarck Code of ordinances and relevant state law.

00:56:35,330	Two goals of our comprehensive plan, uh, would be advanced through the proposed amendment. Goal S4D, uh, which is to allow greater residential lot coverage to promote efficient utilization of land and align with building types and market demand. And the second goal I5A achieve the goals and requirements for stormwater runoff from existing development, redevelopment and new development areas in accordance with the city stormwater design standards.

00:57:01,000	Amendments to the section of the zoning ordinance have been made regularly in the past for various reasons, um, conditions have changed, uh, which justified the proposed revision.

00:57:24,000	Uh, as a result of all findings contained in the staff report, City of Bismarck staff find that the proposed amendment to the store, uh, to the zoning ordinance would not adversely impact public health safety and general where welfare. And is consistent with the comprehensive plan Bismarck Code of ordinances and relevant state law. Therefore, his staff recommends approval of an amendment to Section 14-04-03 of the Bismarck Code of Ordinances related to lock coverage in the R5 residential zoning district.

00:57:46,700	Do you have any questions for me at this time? Comm., questions for Lauren. Allen, I’ll put you on the spot since we don’t have a city engineer with us here this evening. What, what does the city engineering usually design. There’s stormwater. That’s a great question.

00:58:09,870	We actually do have a member from our city engineering department, uh, who would be able to answer that question for you. Thank you. Uh, good evening, Chair Commissioners, uh, Mike Greer with the Eng engineering department. I’m one of the design and construction engineers actually typically end up reviewing most new development stormwater management plans, so I have one or two things that landed know about. So, um, for this, generally speaking with.

00:58:40,630	The R5 zoning, we assume, um, a impervious coverage. Now that’s to be, that’s a different impervious than what the land use is looking at, uh, planning, uh, is typically looking more at the buildings and required parking. I’m looking from a Stormmart perspective at all impervious. So we, we have two different.

00:59:06,370	Coverage numbers that we’re looking at, but from the. Standpoint of in our design standards manual for stormwater. We have kind of some clear. guidance as far as. The impervious amount to assume for a new development.

00:59:32,370	And so we looked pretty hard at this and kind of with the study that we’re requiring the applicant to do, we feel confident that we’ll have enough information to look at the adjoining area within that subwatershed and whether or not we can allow a. And if it’s approved for administration approval, um, allow. A single home or couple of them to be cover more than what they typically would be allowed.

00:59:53,170	So we’re, we’re We went back and forth a little on this one, but, uh, we think we have a good process in place and with review from both community development and engineering we’re confident we can. Come to good conclusions on that.

01:00:15,200	Mike, so what is your standard normally? Oh, typically for an R5, it is, um, 40% impervious coverage and for an R10 zoning, we go up to 50, we assume 50% impervious is sorry I never forgive my ignorance, but uh, so does that mean you size your drain culverts and things like that downstream or sized for those assumptions, yes. OK, thank you.

01:00:36,600	And uh street flow criteria Neborhood drainage inlet locations, all that is based off of street grades and what will be developed there. And so we assume more runoff from commercial development than a rural residential in that, you know, kind of thing, so. Answer questions? You did, you did, thank you, uh, Comm. Johnson.

01:00:57,300	I think there was mention that there would have to be a an overall plan in place for the development that’s been approved is there have those been done for a certain amount of times I go back, yes, uh, Comm. Johnson, that goes back to 20 January 1st of 2018, any development that started after that would have a conditionally approved, uh, post-construction management permit. So this option is basically. Pretty much newer available to newer developments not older.

01:01:22,000	Thank you. Thank you, Comm. Johnson. Comm., any additional questions for Mike? I’m not seeing or hearing Mike. Thank you so much. And then I’ll ask the question, any additional questions for Lauren before she sits down. And I’m not hearing or seeing any, so with that, I’m gonna open up the public hearing for this agenda item.

01:01:46,430	Is there anyone here that would care to step up and speak to it. And I’m not seeing or hearing any, so with that I’m going to close the public hearing. Commissioners, this is a request for a zoning ordinance text amendment. Staff recommendation is for approval. What are your wishes? Motion to approve.

01:02:08,400	Motion to approve from Comm. Zan. Second. And we have a 2nd Comm. Seva. With that, any additional uh comments commissioners. Comm. Johnson, just that, you know, that’s. Really focused on the the outer edges of our community. I don’t have any issue with approving this, but it’d be interesting to see is there opportunities within.

01:02:33,500	More of the core of Bismarck to look at something like this as well, um. But I know it’s more complicated since you don’t have approved plans. For stormwater in those locations. But that’s it, just a quick comment, OK. Thank you, Comm. Johnson. Any other comments? I’m not hearing any. So with that we have a motion and a 2nd on the table.

01:02:55,230	Sarah, would you please call roll? Comm. Field. Yes Comm. Johnson. Comm. Schmitz. Comm. Lukins. Comm. Bittner. Yes. Comm. Se. Comm. Chair Schwartz. Yes, motion is approved. With that, we’ll move on to item number E in our regular agenda. Sonnet Heights subdivision, 10 replant.

01:03:24,630	It’s a request for a minor subdivision final plat and Isaac is gonna provide us with staff briefing on this. Good evening again, Chair Schwartz and commissioners for this regular agenda item, uh, Evan and Kayla Hermanson, as well as Lucas Bostead, are requesting approval of a minor subdivision final plat titled Sonnet Heights Subdivision 10 replant, as shown on the screens before you.

01:03:47,130	The project is located in north central Bismarck, north of Forty-3rd Avenue Northeast and to the west of Ottawa Street along the north side of East La Salle Drive there.

01:04:05,900	This minor plat uh consists of a replant of All of Lot’s 49 through 52 of block 2 Sonnet Heights subdivision first replant and the adjacent East La Salle Drive right away, as I believe is shown on the next slide. Yes, good. So, uh, that is the area of the, uh, current minor subdivision final plat request compared to what was plotted there previously, and this plot would change the number of lots in the project area from 4 to 8 to facilitate future development.

01:04:29,500	The existing R 10 residential zoning permits single and two family dwellings, most commonly, and this zoning district is not being proposed to be changed as a part of this request. Adjacent land uses include A variety of single, 2, and small small scale multifamily residential development, as well as some commercial uses and undeveloped land either zoned CG commercial or Public

01:04:52,200	on the north and east sides of the project area, as can be shown here on the screens that the area is identified as urban neighborhood in the future land use plan, which are generally described as places for quiet enjoyment of home life.

01:05:13,100	The public was duly notified of this request via publications in the Bismarck Tribune on September 13th and 20th and 121 letters were mailed to nearby property owners on September 13th of 2024. To my knowledge, Steph has not received any written requests regarding this uh project, and as a cumulative result of all uh findings contained in this staff report, City of Bismarck staff find that the proposed minor subdivision final plant does

01:05:36,670	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. Therefore, staff recommends approval of the minor subdivision final plant titled Sonnet Heights Subdivision 10th replant. Does the Commission have any questions for me at this time, Comm., questions for Isaac.

01:06:01,100	I’m not seeing or hearing any Isaac. Thank you. 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. Hello Commission. Good evening, sir.

01:06:36,900	Uh, my name is Kyle Dollinger of Burs Engineering, and I am representing Lucas Boustead and Kevin, I mean, Evan and Kayla Hermanson on this one. we are proposing just to relot the area for the construction and continued development of Sonic Heights. Commissioner’s questions for Kyle. Comm. Zent Yes, um, 8 blocks Quite long Mhm. I don’t see any elevation. That flat or it.

01:07:07,500	It, uh, as soon as it starts getting really long, especially over there on the west side of it, it’ll drop down significantly. OK, thank you. Thank you, Comm. Zent. Other questions, Commissioners. I’m not seeing or hearing any Kyle. Thanks for stepping up. Thank you. With at the podium is open for others that would care to address this agenda item.

01:07:31,300	And I’m not seeing or hearing any, so with that I’m going to close a public hearing, uh, commissioners, this is a request for a minor subdivision. Actually, I should ask staff, uh. Isaac, any additional comments? No additional comments at this time. Thank you. Thank you. Commissioners, this is a request for a minor subdivision final plat. Staff recommendation is for approval.

01:07:55,900	What are your wishes? Motion to approve. Comm. Johnson makes a motion to approve. We have a second from Comm. Field. Any additional discussion? And I’m not seeing or hearing any. Sarah, would you please call roll Comm. Bittner. Yes. Comm. Field. Comm. Johnson, Comm. Seva. Comm. Lukins. Comm. Schmitz, Comm., Chair Schwartz. Yes, motion is approved.

01:08:23,630	With that, we’ll move on to item F and our regular agenda, olive tree subdivision lots 14 and 15, block 2, and it’s request for a special use permit and uh Lauren is gonna provide us with staff report this evening.

01:08:50,830	Uh, good evening, Nick and Chair Schwartz and commissioners kill and Rachel Wagner are requesting approval of a special use permit for an accessory dwelling unit or an ED8DU on lots 14 and 15, block 2, olive tree subdivision. The parcel is located northwest of Bismarck, west of Burnt Creek Loop, south of Olive Tree Drive, at the end of Green Tree Loop. Uh, the project area includes 2.607 acres, uh, give or take.

01:09:15,630	Uh, the property has been identified as rural residential in the future land use plan. These areas are places for country living with convenient proximity to city life. Adjacent uses are rural residential to the north and east, and undeveloped and residential land to the south and west.

01:09:41,270	The applicants, uh, intend to place the accessory dwelling unit within a 2400 square foot accessory structure, um, this accessory structure has already had a building permit approved for it. It’s just not built out this time. Uh, lots 14 and 15 were combined prior to this request to permit the proposed location of that accessory structure as shown in the site plan, uh, on the screen here.

01:10:00,370	Building inspection staff have noted that a building, an additional building permit will be needed for the construction of the accessory dwelling unit within the accessory structure for this project. Um, Hay Creek Township was notified of this request on August 27, 2024. Additionally, the public has been duly notified of this request.

01:10:21,170	A notice was published in the Bismarck Tribune on September 13th and 20th and 68 letters were mailed to the uh Jason property owners on September 13th. To my knowledge, staff has not received comments regarding this request, although staff has received um some requests, uh, for additional information on the project. However, they didn’t indicate if they were for or against the project.

01:10:44,700	Um, this request was evaluated according to standards contained within the comprehensive Plan Bismarck Code of ordinances and relevant state law. As stated earlier, lots 14 and 15 were combined into one parcel prior to this request. Um, the parcel conforms to the minimum lot size requirements for this underlying zoning district, um, for our, our residential, um.

01:11:09,070	Only one accessory dwelling unit will be constructed on this parcel and will be occupied by no more than one family as is noted in our, uh, ordinance. The accessory dwelling unit will not be larger than 800 square feet as noted within the site plan submitted, um, and we’ll be completely contained within that accessory structure.

01:11:31,570	Um, the location of the accessory structure, um, that it will be located within um meets all setback requirements for the zoning district, um, based on the site plan submitted an additional off-street parking space for the accessory dwelling unit will be provided, and only one bedroom is included within the accessory dwelling unit.

01:11:52,370	Um, additionally, based on the site plan submitted, the parcel is currently serviced by a drain field to the southeast of the principal dwelling, a secondary additional drain field uh is proposed to be placed to the southeast of the accessory structure as, uh, noted on the site plan.

01:12:13,470	As a result of our findings contained within the staff report Bismarck code of ordinances, uh, uh, uh, 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 relevant state law. There for staff recommends approval of a special use permit for an accessory dwelling unit on lots 14 and 15, block 2, olive tree subdivision.

01:12:33,600	Do you have any questions for me? Comm. questions for Lauren. Comm. Field, is that a wave? Oh, alright, thank you. All right, I guess there are no questions, Lauren. Thank you. Thank you. With that, I’ll open up the public hearing for this agenda item is the requester or representative here, Land and you’re racing for the podium.

01:12:55,530	It must be you. Thank you chair Swarth. Yes, and I’m Schwarzenegger Engineering representing Cale and Rachel Wagner. Nothing significant to add to what Lauren had commented. This is an accessory dwelling unit within an accessory building.

01:13:11,470	They have a 40 by 60 building out there and then that just that 800 square feet would be dedicated as an ADU, but I, I can answer any questions if you have them, Comm., questions for Landon. Thank you. With at the podium is open for others that would care to address this agenda. And I’m not seeing anybody, so with that, I’m going to close the agenda item or close a public hearing, uh.

01:13:34,300	This is a request for a special use permit. Staff recommends approval. Commissioners, what are your wishes? We to Go ahead. Motion to approve Motion to approve from Comm. Field. I Second Second from Comm. Schmidt. Any additional discussion? And I’m not seeing any. Sarah, please call roll. Seva? Yes. Comm. Field. Comm. Johnson. Mr. Lukins. Comm. Schmidt. Comm. Bittner. Yes.

01:14:11,170	Comm. Chair Schwartz. Yes, motion is approved. Moving on to item number G in our regular agenda. TJ ranch estates, replant lot 1 and 2 and lot 1A and block 1 special use permit once again and Isaac is gonna to brief us. Yes, hello again, uh, Chair Schwartz and commissioners.

01:14:34,100	So this special use permit request comes to us from Stephen Schultz who is requesting approval of a specialties permit on Lot 1A, block 1 of TJ Ranch Estate’s relat lots 1 and 2, to increase the total accessory structure size upon the property to 3200 square feet as the screen shows here, uh, the project is located northeast of Bismarck in the southeast quadrant of

01:14:56,030	the intersection of 71st Avenue Northeast. And 66th Street Northeast, the area is zoned rural residential and adjacent to land adjacent land to the west, south and east is uh also zoned uh rural residential and then the land to the north across 71st Avenue is outside of the city’s ETA and the county zoning ordinances, uh,

01:15:18,100	currently a rural residential style development as well. Rural residential properties with at least 65,000 square feet uh may have a permitted size, total size of 2400 square feet without a special use permit, and 3200 square feet with a special use permit. The property in question today has approximately 3.

01:15:41,270	63 acres or approximately 158,000 square feet. So it is over that threshold. The applicant intends to use, as you can see on the the screens before you, the applicant intends to use the extra space to place a lean-to style structure on the.

01:16:00,100	Side of an existing pole barn structure, and given that the parcel meets the minimum size requirements, and it appears to have uh plenty of room to meet various setbacks, um, staff has no major concerns with the request. The area is identified as rural residential, uh, in the future land use plan which are described as places for country living with convenient proximity to city life. Additionally, the area is not identified in the growth.

01:16:24,730	raising plan as urban reserve, so urban style redevelopment of the area within the next 50 or so years is unlikely. The public was duly notified of this request via publications in the Bismarck Tribune on September 13th and 20th, and 36 letters were mailed to nearby property owners on September 13th as well.

01:16:44,630	Gibbs Township was notified of this request on September 13th, and they provided a resolution that was included in your packet. To my knowledge, those staff have not received any public comments regarding this request with the exception of course of that resolution for Gibbs Township.

01:17:01,500	And therefore as a cumulative result of all the findings contained in the staff report, City of Bismarck staff find that the special use 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.

01:17:25,100	Therefore, staff recommends approval of the special use permit for increased accessory structure size up to 3200 square feet on lot 1A, block 1 of TJ Ranch Estate’s lots one. To Does the commission have any questions for me at this time? Commissions Comm. questions for Isaac. I’m not seeing a hearing aid. Thank you, thank you. With that, we’ll open up the public hearing on this agenda item is either the request or a representative here.

01:17:48,970	And I’m not seeing anybody, yeah, are there others that would care to step to the podium to address this agenda item. And once again I’m not seeing anybody. So with that I’m gonna close the public hearing on this agenda item. Commissioners, this is a request for a special use permit and staff recommendation and I should ask Isaac any additional comments? No additional comments.

01:18:09,300	Thank you, Chair, um, staff is recommending approval commissioners. What are your wishes? Motion to approve approve from Comm. Bittner. 22 from Comm. Seva. Any additional discussion. And I’m not seeing or hearing any. Sarah, please call roll. Comm. Field. Comm. Johnson. Comm. Schmitz. Comm. Lukins. Comm. Bittner. Yes. Comm. Se.

01:18:44,500	Commissionerent Chair Schwartz, yes, motion is approved. With that, we move on to item 8 in our regular agenda, Meadow Village edition first replat and it’s a planned unit development amendment and Jenny is going to provide us with staff briefing this evening.

01:19:06,000	Thank you, Chair Schwartz, Commissioners, REI Holdings LLC in Dakota Pioneer Land Company are requesting approval of a major planned unit development amendment for Meadow Village First Meadow Village edition first replat. This request is located in South Bismarck, um, east of South Washington Street along the west side of Boston Drive and north side of East Burley Avenue and consists of 24.33 acres. You considered this request at your July 25th meeting and called for a public hearing.

01:19:27,170	The proposed PUD amendment Modify landscaping requirements and reduce the required building setback for accessory structures on lot 40 and 41, block 2 of the plat. A landscape buffer easement along the north and west sides of the lats were originally dedicated when this area was initially plotted to ensure a buffer or separation between single family uses to the north and

01:19:47,100	west of the latte and proposed multi-family uses. However, lots 1 through 31, block 1 on the northern portion of the plat will be developed a single family dwellings. And lasts 1 through 39. to on the western side of the plat will be developed as single and two family dwellings.

01:20:03,600	As such, a landscape buffer would no longer be required as lots adjacent to the north and west are also being developed with the same, um, use single and two family dwellings. The applicant has requested and City commission has approved a modification to formally remove the plotted landscape, buffer easement along the north and west sides of this property.

01:20:23,300	I should note that the amended PUD includes landscape areas throughout the development and along the west side of the property. The adjacent property. to the north has also added additional landscaping on their property.

01:20:39,330	The western portion of the property has been identified as urban neighborhood and the the eastern portion has been identified as neighborhood mixed use in the future land use plan. The urban neighborhood areas are places for quiet enjoyment of home life and the neighborhood mixed-use areas are for are the social and commercial gathering spaces for the immediate surrounding residential areas. Adjacent uses include developing two family residential, single and two family residential to the North Parks and open space to the.

01:21:01,100	across Boston Drive, developing multi-family residential to the south across East Burley Avenue, an existing single family uses, um, to the west. The public has been notified of this request. The notice was published in the Tribune on September 13th and 20th and 60 letters were mailed to the property property owners on September 13th.

01:21:20,670	I have received one phone call from an adjacent property owner who was curious about the request but was neither for or against the request. This request was evaluated according to the standards contained in our comprehensive plan, the Bismarck Code of Ordinances and State law, and as a result of the findings contained in your staff reports, Staff recommend that the proposed zoning map

01:21:38,000	amendment would not adversely impact public health, safety, and general welfare and is consistent with the comprehensive Plan Bismar Code of Ordinances and state law. Therefore, staff recommends approval of the major planned unit development amendment for Meadow Village edition first replant is outlined in the draft amendment document included in your packet.

01:21:55,370	Do you have questions? Commissioner’s questions for Jenny. I’m not seeing you here. Thank you, thank you. With that, I’ll open up the public hearing on this agenda item is either the requester or representative here to speak to it. Nothing to say? OK, then I’ll open the podium to others that would care to address this agenda item.

01:22:18,100	And the room is looking pretty sparse, so with that, I’m going to close the public hearing on it, um, any Jenny, any additional comments from staff? No, thank you. All right, thank you. With that, commissioners, this is a request for a planned unit development amendment, staffer recommends approval. What are your wishes? Moved to approve as presented.

01:22:39,430	We have a motion to approve from Comm. Schmitz. So we have a second from Comm. Johnson. Any additional discussion? And I’m not seeing you hearing any. Sarah, please call roll. Comm. Field. Comm. Johnson. Comm. Bittner. Yes. Lukins. Comm. Schmidt, Comm. Seva. Comm. Chair Schwartz, yes, the motion is approved.

01:23:09,270	With that commissioners, we’re on to other item number 4, other business and our agenda, and we have two items there. First is presentation on the land development code from Daniel, and he’s promised to keep this brief. We’ll see if he can, uh, good evening, Chair commissioners.

01:23:26,100	I will keep it very brief because I’m, I’m just here to introduce, uh, our consultants, so you, you’ve heard from staff on a number of occasions on our land development code we have a project underway. Place all of Title 14 zoning and subdivision, uh, Clarry Associates is, is, uh, on the team that has been hired to work on that project. They’ve done an initial assessment.

01:23:42,930	They’ve got some ideas to share this evening and so, uh, we’d like to give them the opportunity to do so and give you the opportunity to give any questions or comments or help provide direction at this phase of the project. So Maggie Squire, uh, from Claire and Associates will, will talk to us about this. Thank you Daniel. Maggie, welcome. Thank you.

01:24:00,700	Um, good afternoon, Cha and commissioners, as Daniel said, my name is Maggie, and I’m an associate at Clarion Associates for a Denver-based um land use and planning firm, and, uh, we are partnering with Madden planning from, uh, Fayetteville, Arkansas, and, um, local consulting firm SRF, as well as the city of Bismarck on this effort to, uh, review and

01:24:23,670	update Title 14, which are the city’s current zoning and subdivision regulations, uh, We’re going to create a land development code or an LBC which guides how development should occur in Bismarck. So, um, one of the key objectives of this project is to implement the Together 2045 comprehensive plan.

01:24:46,970	And so, um, From our perspective, that means uh the regulations we provide should encourage the creation of attractive and well connected neighborhoods that provide access to a variety of housing types and outdoor spaces, and then make efficient use of the cities, um, existing infrastructure.

01:25:12,730	We also understand it to mean that, um, this plan will include objective standards that, uh, strike a balance between providing flexibility and predictability for residents, property owners, and developers. And then finally the new land development code will be a user-friendly document, not only for city staff and people who use it every day, but for those um in the community that need to just reference it from time to time.

01:25:33,170	So this is our project timeline, the land development code project is about an 18-month project. Um, and it will be informed by conversations with the community as well as conversations with a project steering committee and members of a technical advisory committee, which, um, actually representatives from Bismarck City staff.

01:25:55,500	I’m here today because we’re in phase two, and we’ve recently created um an issues assessment. Which means we’ve reviewed Title 14. We’ve looked at together 245, um, we’ve reviewed other recommendations from, um, other documents that we’re reviewing your titles, and we’ve talked to these uh Advisory committees and, uh, we basically compiled all that information into this document and it contains our recommendations for how the LDC

01:26:22,170	can be written to meet your goals. Um, and so it’s basically a document of our recommendations and we’ll walk through that together now. So first, Um, we included a recommendation for how best to organize the content of this document.

01:26:47,130	Um, if you’re familiar, typical American zoning ordinances are designed to regulate and separate land uses, um, and so what you’ll see in this traditional zoning approach is a large use box because use is the most prominent concern. On that opposite end of the spectrum there are form-based zoning codes, and these are zoning ordinances that really prioritize the way um.

01:27:08,530	Property is designed and how properties within an area work together, um, you know, what, what’s the building scale, um, how does the open space work together to create a certain feel for our neighborhood.

01:27:28,770	We believe that as part of this update, Bismarck should be shifting, um, to combine those two approaches to balance the use of property with the form or design of property to create one hybrid zoning ordinances. And there are some really strong benefits of that approach that we think will uh benefit your community first and foremost is that the um hybrid approach allows you to tailor your zoning, um, based on the context of the surrounding area, whether you’re in a more rural part of Bismarck or a more um urban

01:27:50,330	part of Bismarck, such as your downtown area. It also, um, will result in high quality development outcomes that um still provide a comprehensive approach to reviewing zoning proposals on the staff and then on your end as well.

01:28:18,370	Taking a closer look at existing Title 14, um, we are proposing to reorganize the residential districts to better reflect the recommendations of Together 2045 and a big part of that is making sure that we are creating um Regulations that do not act as a barrier to creating um Housing variety, so just making sure a broader spectrum of housing is easier to be constructed by right, within your community.

01:28:39,830	We’ll also be recommending a foreign-based district for downtown Bismarck. Um, again, acknowledging that the look and feel of that part of your community is really important and should be reflected in future projects. And tweaking existing commercial and industrial districts to allow for um mixed use developments by right.

01:29:01,730	Uh, as many of you are probably familiar with the existing zoning ordinance, it is kind of text heavy, so we are proposing to make some updates that make it more user friendly, including graphics, um, including shifting some content into tables and charts that are easier to digest. Um, this, um, Issues assessment in this LDC rewrite is also going to address land uses, so.

01:29:26,230	When you’re currently looking through Title 14, land uses are housed within each zoning district. Um, there’s pros and cons with this, but we believe that this does make it harder for a user to flip from zone to zone to find out uh where certain uses are permitted by rights.

01:29:46,570	So we would recommend, um, shifting as you see on your screen to this um consolidated land use table and as we go through the process to create that type of table, um, we be asking questions like, are uses missing from the table that um we should be including such as short term rentals, um, or wireless communication facilities.

01:30:07,830	And also are there uses that are obsolete, no longer relevant, um, that could be taken out. We’ll also be asking questions about where um use permissions could be expanded and how? So are there uses that are allowed in some zoning districts and not in others, um, that we should be adjusting to make more permissive.

01:30:30,300	And if so, are there standards that need to be added to certain uses to make them more palatable, um, make them less disruptive to their neighbors. Um, as part of this effort, we’re not only looking at use, but also, um, development standards.

01:30:55,900	These are your parking, um, your landscaping, really how a property looks, um, how it’s designed, and so we believe that we are recommending that um these standards could be tailored to the context of your community. Again, this is talking about um development in the center of your, um, city is probably gonna look and feel different than development on the edges. We also want to make sure that design standards are objective, um, and easily reviewed by staff.

01:31:15,170	Um, and we want to support Together 2045 by acknowledging that um there may be more resiliency components that we can incorporate into the land development code. And within that same vein, if there are gaps in the existing title that um needs to be incorporated, um, when, um, example that might be outdoor lighting standards.

01:31:37,030	This is time to um incorporate those as well. And then finally, we are going to take a closer look at how um different land use entitlements are run through the process of being reviewed, um, and approved by you and by City commission and, um, this includes, um, today, the ordinance might be a little disjointed or trickier to read.

01:31:58,170	It might not be clear if you don’t regularly run, um, an application for a zoning map amendment, how you go through those steps. So we’d like to clarify not only the common procedures that are associated with different requests such as public notice requirements, um, or if you need a pre-application meeting, but also provide clear and concise,

01:32:20,330	um, steps for if I do need to apply for a special use permit. Here’s ABCD, all the steps I need to take to get through that process. So All of those recommendations are kept in the issues assessment.

01:32:42,130	And Jenny and I have been here for a few days, um, we’ve hosted two different community open houses and we’ve met with you now, with the city commission. um, we’ve also met with the steering committee and the technical advisory committee, and prior to our arrival, um, some members of the SRF team and city staff, um, hosted a booth at the street fair.

01:32:59,230	So it’s early stages of the project, but we are really excited to share what we’ve done so far and um, get plugged into the Bismarck community to hear what they have to say.

01:33:20,800	So, this document will be posted on our project website, which you can access through the city’s website, um, or directly and it is open for public review and comments through through October 21st. So, um, Open call to whoever is interested, please get in there and leave us your thoughts. Otherwise, um, I appreciate you having me and I’m happy to answer any questions. Comm., questions for Maggie. Comm.

01:33:44,500	Johnson, are you Will you be writing the new land development code or you going to be guiding city staff and. Writing a code Um, we have, uh, we’ll be working closely with city staff, but Claring Associates will be writing the document, and so it will be released in 3, modules or sections, the first of which will be addressing zoning districts and land uses, and we anticipate that coming to the public, um, probably right

01:34:06,030	after the holidays. So at the beginning of 2025. Do you have, do you see, I, I like the graphic. Change going to more graphics and tables. Is it easy, just as easy to update for staff? And the the graphics if they change something about the graphics, is it, is it hard to change that? One of our

01:34:26,970	approaches, that’s a great question, and I’ll try to. Jump back to So what you’ll notice on this graphic is um. Well, the staff might not have the software to adjust the literal building type, the callouts, the ABCD, um, we don’t reference measurements directly on the graphics so that staff would have the ability in a

01:34:48,170	word version to edit the text associated with the graphic. Thank you. Thank you, Comm. Johnson. Comm., other questions? Maggie is a wealth of knowledge, so. Maggie, would you put up again where the site is? I would encourage commissioners that if you get a moment to go out and actually look at what has been put together out there.

01:35:15,970	I think you’ll find it very interesting. All right thank you so much. Chair, you know, if I can just, I mean, so the reference it briefly but there is a wide group of individuals that has been put together to be part of this assessment or state I I don’t call a stakeholder team, but.

01:35:36,230	The there’s a wide group from builders to developers to. Uh, other users of property. That is giving input as they work on developing this knowing that we have some. Archaic portions of the building code. Thank you, Comm.

01:35:59,700	Schmitt, and I guess to your, to your point also, I guess anybody that goes out there and looks at this, you have the opportunity to comment. So, uh, please, you know, if you see something that you think is missing or uh should be added, please, uh. Please comment on it. And uh Maggie will make sure that it gets, uh, gets looked at and considered. So All right, thank you so much.

01:36:21,630	With that, we’re gonna go on to the second item in other business, which is, uh, kennel ordinance discussion and uh Daniel. Good evening, chair, uh, commissioners. So as, as Maggie mentioned, that project will take quite a while. We’ll be working on the land development code for the next year and a half, uh, estimated finish in 2025.

01:36:41,970	Now we have a request that you’ll be hearing soon from a small business owner who has a more immediate desire, and so, uh, to change something very much more specific in our ordinance related to dog kennels, uh, so I’ll, uh, introduce Brandon Schmidt. Um, if you’d like to come up and then I can be available.

01:37:00,570	If you have any questions about how the ordinance could be written to to help them out. OK, thank you, Daniel. Thank you, Dan. Chair and commission, um, my name is Brandon Schmidt. I’m currently working on starting up my own um small business.

01:37:25,330	Uh, dog daycare and boarding facility and um centered more on the holistic treatment of dogs and in this market, people are really personalizing their pets or a part of your family and there’s not a whole lot of facilities available in Bismarck.

01:37:44,370	For this and the facilities that are available, a lot of them are booked out and trying to find a property that works for this has been a little challenging and I feel like that could be maybe a little easier for myself and others that want to do this in the future because. Half Americans are dog owners and I’m sure a lot of you are too. You might want a place like this where you could bring your dogs and uh.

01:38:05,100	The special use permit being required is Kind of tough to deal with when you’re trying to. Acquire a property. These properties can go fast. And having a 33 day deadline prior to being able to submit it because it’s a special use permit, um.

01:38:24,370	Has been tough because you know for instance if I found a property now I couldn’t even get in front of you by October 3rd for the next meeting. Um, so, uh. Other places are doing kennel license fees and things like that, finding a. Place with appropriate land use, um, some way to make that easier. I’ve figured out.

01:38:46,370	What I need to look for now, but it’s not going to be as easy for others and then once you find a place to submit for a Kennel license. Would sure make things a lot easier, you know, to be able to provide facilities like this around here. I think That’s kind of my main concern is trying to revise ordinances and. Work with um planning and zoning all that I can to.

01:39:11,830	Figure out what’s. What’s fair and what makes this, you know, not so difficult to get done. OK Uh, commissioners, do you have questions for Brandon while we have him up there? Comm. Field System because if you don’t want to do, you know, a special use permit because of the timing.

01:39:37,970	And you know, on the flip side, there’s a dog kennel about 1 mile from my house. And it bothers my dog. And I’m out in the country on 16 acres. So I can see where people want to know if you’re building a dog kennel near their property.

01:39:57,970	That’s gonna have Just 40 dogs that hang out in Lincoln at the one there. At times So In the perfect system. What do you think you do an application and we have to.

01:40:21,770	Decide everything including your kennel license or? I, no, I think once a land use is established on a property and that it is OK for a kennel to go on that property than applying for a kennel license. So that it’s not, uh, I have to have that application in for a special use permit 33 days prior to bringing it to you folks. So once I find a property that is zoned appropriately for that usage.

01:40:42,630	It should be able to submit for a kennel license to be able to set up because it’s, it’s once a property is acquired, it’s still gonna take a lot of legwork to install and construct everything needed. Comm. Schmitz, you look, my question is gonna be to staff, so. I understand where he’s coming from and obviously to the extent we can. Make it Reasonably. Easy.

01:41:11,530	I’ll use that word to establish a business that’s. That’s a goal With all Disrupting Private property around and the benefits that they may be acquired their property for in the first place, but how can we get to, can we get an ordinance drafted that would allow for some of this and what’s the timeline to that

01:41:30,900	and. What groups do we need to involve? To get benefit of info because I don’t think input from one person is appropriate, so you know, builders, home uh.

01:41:52,030	I mean, I Developers, uh, industrial park owners, whatever the case may be, what, what’s our timeline for that and how do we go about it? I mean, I got an idea, but just so the public knows. Sure, so, uh, Chair and Mayor, uh, Schmidt, the this, we, when we hear these requests we bring them forward to you just to get get direction from you on whether to even pursue this at all, if we were to pursue an ordinance change, it, it would

01:42:10,700	take a number of months at the soonest it would be December, January, however, to allow time to hear from a number of individuals who would be affected. Uh, it may take another couple of months just to work, work through that process. Of course, we would work with Mr. Schmidt and.

01:42:27,370	And others who would be looking to start a business. We would also work with community members who may be impacted in the areas, um, one thing I should add is there are a number of different types of businesses in this realm. There, there’s dog daycare, there’s grooming, uh, and kennels.

01:42:48,630	And if we were to do this ordinance, we would want to differentiate between the different types and make sure. Or we’re using a little bit more of a fine tune, um, approach and and we would look at other communities as well. So there’s a lot of research and and work that would go into this.

01:43:04,100	Um, and of course, you would all see the final results and have a public hearing before anything would be ever adopted. My goal would be is that if we can get and obviously we’re in the midst of rewriting the entire. Cold right now, Title 14, but.

01:43:25,100	Um To the extent we can get to some way of having a, a place that is designated for land use that’s appropriate so we can get more to a licensing versus a full special use permit with all the hearings, that would be awesome. I just don’t know if we can for this use, so I’m interested to see what we can do because I think it’s.

01:43:41,970	I mean We know that there are certain uses that cause other neighbors to be concerned and. So that that is our struggle, so I, I would like to direct staff to start working on it. But We’ll see where we go. Thank you, Comm. Schmidt. Brandon, what is your time frame? What are you looking for? I ideally wanted my doors open this year before.

01:44:04,430	Before holiday season, but it’s just pushed back now. I’ve had a couple of properties fall through and it couldn’t. Meet application deadlines. But yeah, ideally, I was trying to open up this year. Yeah Then the next question is, uh, are you willing to work with staff to come up with something? Absolutely. OK Uh, Comm., any other questions? Comm. Z.

01:44:32,770	Quite a while ago on at our township level where I was. Comm. We did allow a short term. Dog Can Um, Without any restrictions, really. Um, to get it done quick. The problem was this was in a residential area.

01:45:01,130	They were promises that they wouldn’t be dark and they’d be barking, they would be up early feeding, taking care of them at night. Um, Overall, we ended up not doing it after this 6 month period, the residents were not happy with it. Um, they weren’t leading up to their promises. I’m not sure, Brandon.

01:45:23,100	He’d probably be good at it, but we didn’t, I didn’t see a good experience with rushing something like this, so, um, I think we. Have a better time. Looking at it, talking about it and and seeing what, what could be done. But definitely not in a residential area. Thank you, Comm. Z. Commissioners What Mr. Johnson. Industrial districts, but they’re specially used permit right now, probably.

01:45:49,270	Isn’t that big of a deal if that were to find its way into allow use in those those areas, but. other areas should be at least a special use probably, and that would probably help you so you don’t have to if you knew it was. MMB. You can go find a property in there and not have that.

01:46:08,830	Yeah try to work through quickly through a due diligence phase, but. Yeah, correct. I’ve, I’ve found some properties and then I have to do a little more leg work to make sure they meet feet requirements and things like that and I, my feeling is that if it’s zoned MA and approved for a dog kennel, um, they

01:46:26,130	should be able to get the license and it should be up to me as the business owner between me and the property owner means I’m looking at leasing a place. Or if you own the place, it should be up to the owner.

01:46:40,970	To decide how to make that facility work, you know, whether you’re gonna use indoor or outdoor. And if there’s requirements for outdoor use. I, I’ve seen some facilities that you have a requirement for. Kind of a soundproofing type barrier that’s in, and that’s in your ordinances also, um, which is something to consider and I wouldn’t be opposed to having to figure that out. Additional questions, thoughts.

01:47:10,230	Cher Schwartz, if I may. Uh I just adding a a clarification sort of to Comm. Johnson’s point. So just to clarify for everyone that right now it is a special use permit for a kennel in the agricultural district as well as the MA and MB industrial districts and the ordinance, um, Sort of combines kennels with

01:47:33,770	animal hospitals such that the criteria for the special use permits are. Intertwined in a way, obviously a most kennels are not animal hospitals, so there are some criteria that are not relevant to a kennel specifically, but uh it is those criteria in the ordinance right now that the special experiment would be based off

01:47:52,030	of, so I just wanted to clarify that. OK. Thank you. Additional thoughts, commissioners. If not, Comm. Schmidt said something that almost sounded like a motion. I don’t, I don’t know if we need a motion to give staff direction, so no, I don’t think so.

01:48:19,100	We don’t, we don’t normally, so I think if staff can begin the process it’s not gonna be as fast as Brandon wants, I get it, but if he found a space where it would work and we get, we get a special use permit done or help guide that through at a more expeditious fashion, I would encourage that. That sounds good. Thank you.

01:48:38,400	Thank you, Brandon. Thank you very much, folks. I appreciate your time. All right, with that, that wraps up our other business for this evening. Uh, our next regular meeting is scheduled for October 23rd. Uh, commissioners. Thank you for your time this evening, staff, likewise, uh. And I’ll adjourn