00:00:06,900	Monday, September 15, 2025, and we’ll call the meeting of the technical advisory Committee, um for the MPO to order. We’ll start by, uh, calling the roll please, Steven. Daniel Nairnn Dan Schriock here Deidre Hewitt Gabe Joe. Loretta Marshiek Yeah Jarek Wigness John Zaki Logan Bay. Mitch Flanagan speaking here. Natalie Pierce.

00:00:57,730	Will Hutchings here Chair of Thank you. Uh, at this time I would give the opportunity to any of our participants online to uh go ahead and speak up if you would like your attendance at the meeting recorded in the minutes. Are there any attendees online who would like to be known at this meeting.

00:01:23,270	Kim, this is uh Sherija from Upper Great Mains Transportation Institute, um, I’m not sure if I should be considered as an attendee or panelist, but yeah, um I just want to mention that. All right, no, perfect. Thank you, Sherry Jan.

00:01:40,870	Is there anybody else that is participating online who would like their name in the minutes as being in attendance at the meeting. Good morning, Kristiansburg with Federal Highway. Kristian. Thank you. Is there anyone else at this time that would like their minute their name recorded on the minutes. for this meeting to be in attendance. OK, hearing none, um. we will move on to the first item on the agenda, which is public comment.

00:02:11,870	All right, now we are offering a public comment opportunity where members of the public can come up and speak on any non-public hearing items on the agenda or on any items on the previous month’s agenda. Uh, this is also available to anybody who is attending online. This is the first call for comment.

00:02:37,470	Second call for public comment. and 3rd and final call for public comment. hearing and seeing none, the public comment opportunity is closed. Our first action item on the agenda is a review and possible approval of the minutes from the August 18th, 2025, meeting of the tac.

00:03:07,600	Are there any additions or corrections to the minutes of August 18th. If not, would there be a motion to approve the minutes as is, Mrs. Deidre. I’ll move to approve. Thanks, Deja. We have a motion to approve. Is there a second? Loretta, I’ll second it. Loretta. We have a 1st and a 2nd roll call, please. Daniel Nairn. Hi, Dan Dareo. Deidre Hughes, Gabriel, Laura Marcy.

00:03:39,900	Gerre Wigness Yes. Logan Beijing, Mitchitch Flannigan. Yes. Will Hutchins. Chair Rebel Yes, minutes are approved as presented. The next pardon me, excuse me, I yelp up my voice.

00:04:14,230	Holds out through the rest of the meeting, um, the next item on the agenda is a public hearing for the draft 2026, 2029 transportation improvement program for the Bismarck Man and MPO and um. uh let’s see, Steven will be presenting the information on that particular item for us, but at this time I would open the public hearing. Is there any comment on the draft 2026, 2029 tip as it was contained in the packet.

00:04:41,870	Second call for public comment on the draft 2026, 2029 tip. and third and final call. hearing and seeing no public comment. The public hearing is closed and we’ll look to Stephen for some information on that document. Thank you, Chair. Um Yes, the MPO has developed its draft 2026 through 2029.

00:05:10,870	Transportation program as is shown in exhibit A in your packets. The tip shows federally funded projects in the region scheduled over the next 4 fiscal years and includes other relevant information about transportation funding in the MPO area.

00:05:34,170	We make a practice of updating this document every year, um so I will note that there were no major textual updates to this year’s document, but the draft contains the usual updates, uh, to references, years, projects, and maps. all sections have been updated to reflect current projects and funding amounts for the MPO area and for Bizan Transit, uh, North Dakota Department of Transportation has not yet provided updated numbers for their portion of operations and maintenance or

00:05:56,070	for the project phase cost estimates, so this information will be added to the tip when it is available to us. Um, so we advertised the document, the draft for the required 15-day public comment period.

00:06:13,230	We received 4 public comments, as well as comments from the Federal Highway Administration, so I will summarize these briefly for you. Uh, first, we received two comments from a member of the public. One of these mentions that the road surface in the area around the state capital due to the construction of the new lab building.

00:06:29,800	has been very challenging for users of Transit’s black bus route, and she is hopeful that this will be repaired once construction is completed. Her other comments suggests that there should be reduced uh taxi fares available during early and late hours when transit service is not available to the public.

00:06:50,000	Um, we received a comment from the State Historical Society, reminding us of their review process for roadway projects under North Dakota law. And we also received comments from Department of Water Resources reminding us of their permitting process and the local flood plain. And then, as I mentioned, Federal Highway Administration provided a number of comments on the draft document, so I am working on addressing these comments.

00:07:10,870	Some will require minor textual changes. Others will simply require clarification from the MPL office. There will be a minor change to our um and I can scroll to the correct page for this to the TTIP amendment process.

00:07:32,430	We will be removing the requirement for amendments to be performed on a project changed negatively impacts air quality or environmental justice areas because it is not clear how this threshold could be tracked, and so it is really not relevant for us to continue to maintain this bullet point.

00:07:50,330	So, um, otherwise, uh, Federal Highway and DOT have noted that there’s a, a project that is missing from the draft program Um, and there are some other minor project, uh, tweaks that we will be making when before we bring this document back as the final. uh next month. But, um, for today I will be presenting on the draft program of projects for everyone.

00:08:18,070	and I will note too none of the changes resulting from other public comments we received will be substantial enough to require an additional public comment period. So we will incorporate all the public comments we have received into the final tip document and bring it back to the boards for possible adoption in October.

00:08:36,330	But in the meantime, I will review the draft program beginning with 2026. So, beginning in 206, we have a safety project on Bismarck’s 19th Street and Century Avenue, uh, to reconstruct the east, West and north-south turn lanes. Uh, this is a project with an estimated 1.4 million cost.

00:09:01,600	We have another Bismarck safety project for rectangular rapid flashing beacons in Bismarck at Centennial Road and Jericho Road. 234,000 estimated cost for the project. We have an urban roads project in Bismarck on Washington Street, uh, Burleigh Avenue, uh, to drainage ditch and Burleigh Avenue from South Washington to Boston.

00:09:26,370	This was a widening and reconstruction project that was advanced constructed in 2024 and is being receiving 2026 funding of about the total cost was about 18.5 million. The Bismarck has a project of local importance. This is the Bismarck Tyler Parkway Extension from Century Avenue to Ash Cooley Drive. Um, there will be traffic calming improvements. They will extend Tyler Parkway from Valley Drive to Cogburn Road, and there’ll be lighting installation as well.

00:09:47,800	Um, this is a $16 million project. Um, no federal funds involved. City of Mandan is doing a transportation alternatives project. Mannan High School Trail from Eighth Avenue North on 8th Avenue northwest from 24urth Street to 27th Street. This is a new pedestrian trail, about 484,000 cost.

00:10:12,330	The urban Mandan is doing an urban grants project for their Mand Dan Downtown Phase One. Various streets downtown, including First Street, uh, Fifth Avenue, and 4urth Avenue. This is a reconstruction project with beautification elements, and it is about 4.5 million for the cost. DOT is going to be leading a bridge project on I-94. Tyler Parkway interchanged to the Mookan Interchange.

00:10:38,470	I will note this is a project that will be removed from the final version. It was a mistaken project, uh, that we included, um, through an oversight, um, the next project for DOT is an urban regional. Bismarck Expressway, Main Avenue to the end of the asphalt. This is a microsurfacing project estimated cost of about 130,000.

00:11:00,900	They are also doing another microsurfacing project from the expressway from 12th Street to Main Avenue for about 1.5 million. Uh, another microserving scene project on Bismarck’s ND 1804 from Expressway to 4-Eighth Avenue. about 2.1 million.

00:11:25,470	They have a bridge project 2 miles west of US 83, um, for 520,000, this will be approached slabs, spa repair and expansion joint. Work, um they have another bridge project, 5 miles east of ND 25. Actually, two of them that are paired on the eastbound and westbound for structure repair on those bridges for 500,000 apiece. Uh, the, there’s a rural project on ND 1804 for various locations along that in that highway.

00:11:48,970	This is culvert rehab that they will be performing 775,000 is the estimated cost here. Um. they have another, uh, a rural statewide ITS project for some ITS, uh, maintenance, uh, at 3 locations along I-94 within the MPO area, as well as a number of other locations statewide. So statewide that cost is estimated at 1 million.

00:12:15,170	And then finally for 26 we have the Lincoln Park District. They will be, uh, heading up a project for transportation alternatives, 66th Street Southeast, a new gravel pathway with ADA compliant crossings along 66th from Santee Road to just south of Humbert Road, estimated cost of 129,000 This was an RTP grant that they just received for that project.

00:12:41,800	So, uh, are there any questions, uh, from the board on the 2026 program. Just a couple of questions are all the, the Bismarck projects that are on the top of the page, the first one and the second one, we have our, our plans are signed on the shelf and two DOT, um, we’d have cost participation

00:13:07,470	maintenance agreements with them or they’ll be on the agenda of our commission to approve at the next meeting, but the numbers for federal aid are just slightly different from what might have been in the tip as we got to our 90% plants when we typically lock in that number.

00:13:21,070	Uh, so maybe my question for you, Steven, and maybe it’s goes to Will also is at what point does that number or should that number be reflected in the tip, um, they represent the cost not to exceed federal dollars, um, like I said, one of them went up a little bit, one of them went down a little bit what you

00:13:33,370	have on, on that first project and then actually for these two projects, these numbers are DOT send us updated numbers from their draftsip. So these are the updated federal numbers that they provided to us if there are have since been other additional changes.

00:13:51,900	Um, I guess I would refer to Will if that’s something that needs to be reflected. From time to time there will be updated numbers that may come out while the draft tip has been released and then we continue to work on design and engineering work and get a more updated bid number, um, so, uh, there’s a high probability that those have

00:14:09,100	just been put on hold until the tip has been adopted and then they’ll amend both the tip and the sip to reflect, um, uh, when did you get your numbers, Gabe? Do you know when that bid opening was? Oh, we haven’t opened the bids, but we, we got the car, the, the construction or the cost participation,

00:14:25,430	construction and maintenance agreements earlier in September, like a week ago. Yeah, those are going to be newer than, yeah, um, which project was that again, Gabe? Uh, that would be for 26101. The Safety Pro on uh 19th Street in Century Avenue as well as 2601.

00:14:47,970	02, the Safety Project for the rectangular rapid flash beacons. um, and, and alert the appropriate authorities. Thank you. And then my last comment or question in the similar vein, the Urban Roads program of our Bismarck South Washington Street Project, Project 26.1.03.

00:15:07,700	Uh, we did receive a request from the DOT, um, to fund some of those dollars uh, uh, to that they, they moved some of their funding would presumably into the 25, um, year, uh, so the 26 amount for that project on Washington Street will not be the $4.

00:15:27,170	5 million at a noted here will be slightly less than that or I should say slightly 1 million or 2 million less than that, um, so probably same question then will to you is just process wise if that’s something that we approve this here and it just gets updated as those numbers come through and and work their way through the system. Yeah, correct.

00:15:39,230	And then there’s gonna be a bunch of projects we might have advanced this year, uh, hoping that the funds would be available and then if we don’t get those funds, then we just put them back in the year that they were originally scheduled to be programmed. OK.

00:15:54,530	So no changes then sounds like we’ll fix someone’s that makes its way through the rest of the process. Thank you. Thank you Stip is in place and we have final numbers, then we’ll amend both documents is my understanding. Yeah, typically you’ll have a round of amendments after the SIP is approved and kind of brings everything back into sync again. All right. Any other questions or comments on the 2026 program projects. Not go ahead, Stephen.

00:16:17,000	We’ll talk about 27. Yes, thank you. So 2027, we have started off with a Bismarck Safety Project, South Washington Street and Bowen Avenue intersection. removing the existing traffic signal and installing a raised median island in RRFB crossing for pedestrians.

00:16:39,900	This is a $140,000 estimate, um, following up with an urban grants pro uh pro project in Bismarck, Front Avenue, 3rd Street, and 5th Street. Um, this is Mellannover Ley and various other improvements for both, uh, auto drivers and pedestrians, uh, with an estimated $3 million price tag for that.

00:17:04,530	Um, we have a Bismarck Transportation alternatives project, Sunrise Trail, East Century Avenue to Sunrise Park, a new trail connection with drainageway crossings, uh, close to 600,000. This is a recent award that the city of Bismarck received for the TA program, um, moving to a Mandan project. They also got a recent award for TA for FY 27. This is, uh, 3rd Street Southeast sidewalk.

00:17:26,100	Uh, they’re going to install sidewalk from 6th Avenue to 3rd Avenue for about 250,000, um moving into the DOT projects for 27. We have a Uberro on Andy 1806 for a chip seal coat. This is about, uh, from I-94 North, north, approximately 10. miles, uh $650,000 project that affects parts of the MPO area.

00:17:52,000	Um, there’s an urban regional project on Bismarck’s 7th Street and 9th Street, uh, for concrete pavement repair, grinding, and curb ramps, about 1.7 million. Um, we have another urban regional Bismarck State Street. Actually, it is tied to the next project.

00:18:10,630	These are both, um, projects, um, one of them is on state, one of them is on Boulevard Avenue, concrete pavement re pa ir projects, um, the first one is about 1.5 million. The second one is about 330,000 lesser extent there Um, then we have an urban regional project on Mandan’s ND 1806 from Third Street Southeast to 19th Street Southeast, Mellon Overlay, uh, about 2.2 million.

00:18:34,170	We have a bridge project 4 miles west of US 83, um, for spa repair and incidentals. This is just a $27,000 estimated cost. We have a safety project, uh, Bismarck Expressway and Main Avenue.

00:18:56,600	The intersection here will be getting North and South Barn right turn lanes and signal and lighting improvements, 934,000 is the estimate. There’s an urban regional on 7th and 9th Street, Bismarck, uh, from microsurfacing and pavement marking, and that actually is also there’s some microservicing on 9th Street as well. Uh, the first project there is 814,000 Second one’s about 163,000.

00:19:21,730	Um we have a bridge project 2 miles east of Man Dem The ramp next to Memorial Highway interchange for structure paint, 175,000 We have a number 3, the next 3 projects are all structured paint, structure item, bridge projects on I-194, um, 2 on the Memorial Highway interchange, one on the Burlington Northern Railroad overhead separation, costs, uh, are in the program there for you. Um.

00:19:51,000	we conclude with um several other bridge projects. There are 3 structure repair projects on bridges along the I-94 route, 312,000 is attached to each one of those three. And then finally, a memorial Bridge between Bismarck and Manda will be receiving deck overlay structure paint and other repairs. This is a 6.

00:20:18,730	5 million project and yeah, so that is the 27 program as we have it right now. Are there any questions from the board on 27? Any questions, Jarek Yeah, um, the one project is missing that I was expecting to see in 207 was the Eighth Avenue Northwest and 27th Street Project You are correct, Jack.

00:20:38,000	That is indeed one of the pro projects that DOTN Fed Highway both let us know we missed, uh, in our process and that will be coming back and included in the final draft. So good, good catch. Yes, that is going to be in there.

00:20:50,800	And then I did notice, um, I don’t know if this is programmer 25 or something like that, but there isn’t the West half of Memorial Highway represented in either of these years. I’m not entirely sure if that’s appropriate or Memorial Highway reconstruction. Yes, that has been moved into 25 with the redistribution, so yeah, until we.

00:21:06,430	yeah, for right now that is in 25 if that changes, obviously we will be amending it back into the current tip. OK, that’s all I had. Thank you. Thanks to the questions, Jarek. Any other questions or comments? To to your credit, you found one that I had sent you in the list that I didn’t mark up.

00:21:24,000	So, yeah, it was that that um I-94 Burlington Northern project, so good catch. All right Uh, Gabe. Maybe just a comment and then a question. So the comment being on 27.1.03, the transportation alternatives, Sunrise Trail, uh, says lead agency is Bismarck, and we are definitely the ones receiving the dollars, but that project is, uh, being spearheaded by Bismarck Parks and Rec, as most of those are,

00:21:45,330	I shouldn’t say many of those TA projects are, uh, Parks and rec thing so just I don’t think we’ve maybe clarified that on the tip itself, but just maybe for the record and someone’s wondering well what that’s about. The other thing is probably just a little um typo uh project 27.6.15.

00:22:05,270	I think it meant to say bridge, but it says bride. I’m guessing that that’s not, we’re not buying a bride or selling a bride. I’m not sure exactly, but yes, that is correct. We will make that correction for the final. Definitely not a bride project, no. All right, thanks.

00:22:24,430	Any other questions or comments on the 27 projects? OK All right, Steven, 28. All right, moving into 28, um, we have a start with the Bismarck safety project I-94 eastbound ramps, uh, Schaffer Street, Divide Avenue, and Tyler Parkway intersection here.

00:22:47,730	pavement markings, signage, left turn, realignment, signal replacement, and $80,000 project there and then Bismarck Urban Roads, South 12th Street and Burleigh Avenue, uh, Milan Overlay project for 942,000. Then we head into DOT’s projects. They have a safety project Jaegen wrote and University Drive, um, and the ND 1804 intersection. This is Intersection lighting, 165,000. So that’s in Bismarck, and then uh urban regional on Bismarck Expressway from Washington to 26th.

00:23:15,070	Uh, these are traffic signals that will be constructed along with the next project on the list. uh, which is Washington Street and Denver Avenue, who are specific traffic signal installation, so uh, those two projects are going together and have a combined price tag of about $6 million.

00:23:36,330	Um, DOT is doing a bridge Project I-94, 2 bridge projects actually on uh, the one mile east of US 83 at the Hay Creek Railroad, Westbound and eastbound, about 394,000 apiece for structure paint. Um, and then we actually concluding the 28 program with just a bunch of structure paint projects.

00:24:02,100	We have 4 328,000 structured paint projects, uh, two of them are Collins Avenue Overpass, Eastbound and Westbound. Two are at the Mandan Avenue and refineryold interchange eastbound and Westbound. And then we have, well, actually 4, excuse me, there’s a 4 of those projects that were separated out there for structured paint. And then final project also structure paint 3 miles west of US 83 North eastbound, uh, 324,000.

00:24:23,370	So yeah, a lot of bridge projects for 28 that we have so far. So, any questions or comments on the 28 program? Comments on the 28 projects. It doesn’t look like any thanks, Steven. 29th. No more bride projects anyway All right Then we’re concluding with 2029, we have our urban regional project in Bismarck to start this off.

00:24:50,000	Um 7th and 9th Street, the intersections of 7th and Boulevard and 9th and Boulevard. This will be traffic signal, work, and it’ll be at 1.2 million about Pro, another safety project for Bismarck, Lincoln Road, and Jain Road. This will be the construction of a roundabout estimated 3 million for that project.

00:25:13,530	Um, Mandan is doing in urban Roads, uh, project on Olded Trail from 40th Avenue to 56th Avenue. This is reconstruction, uh, about 5.7 million. Uh, they are also doing an urban regional project, Mandan ND 1806, uh, the 1806 and Sixth Avenue Northeast Railroad underpass. This is for drainage improvements, about 5.7 million.

00:25:39,100	DOT will be doing in urban regional uh Mandan I-94 business. Uh, they have from the West Urban Limits to ND6 Selective grading and widening, a 1.5 million project. Um, they will also be doing a rural project on the I-94 and Mandan side, uh Junctional 10 to West urban limits of Mandan selective grading and widening 7.1 million estimate, um, we have a rural project on US 83.

00:26:03,230	This is from 5/7 Avenue, Northwest all the way to Wilton and northbound. And also there’s next project is Same Extents, but Southbound, these are chip seal coat projects, each about 1.3 million.

00:26:22,870	And then we have another rural on ND6 from Junction 21 to Hart River, Man Dan, a chipseal coat for 1.6 million. uh rural project on Indy 25 from Junction I-94 north to Junction 48 Center. Um, 1.9 is about the estimated cost for that. And finally we have a rural project ND 1806 near Fort R Ri north to the Mandan limits. Another chip seal coat or about 1.75 million.

00:26:46,900	and uh that concludes the 29 program. Are there any questions or comments from the board on 29. Comments on 29? Sure, that first project 29.1.01, the urban regional signal Replacement Project on Seventh Street, 9th Street, uh, typically the lead agency on the urban regional projects would be the DOT, so I’m not sure if that was directed that

00:27:10,530	the city would be leading that one, looking to you, Stephen, or, or Will if you have an answer to that one. No, I, some of these lead agencies I have to sort of guess depending on what kind of project it is and what’s going on with it.

00:27:22,370	So I guess I, I should make a note that for future urban regional I, I assumed that there would just be Bismarck since it was definitely, you know, it was a Bismarck Applied project, but I that can be changed in the dra in the final.

00:27:36,100	I think that’d be more appropriate to all the other traffic signal projects, even the one that’s active in the stip here that on the urban regional system, the DOT is taking the lead on those. That’s good. I can make that change for the final.

00:27:49,370	OK, and then my other question, uh, for the chip seal colts on Fi on US 83 from 5/7 Avenue Northwest to Wilton, um, it shows a zero cost for Bismarck or Burhleig for the local, um, maybe just my question and it’s to Steven, but me, it’s also to Will on that one too, a portion of that, I mean, at least a half mile is

00:28:04,000	annexed into the city of 3/4 of it is annexed into the city, um, so I don’t know if we would be brought in as a local cost share for that 1 mile of improvement or or not.

00:28:17,900	I’m just maybe offer that we are our expectation would be yes, but if for whatever reason if you’re using rural funds and that doesn’t bring in the local participations, that’s fine with us too, but just offer that as a, as a concept to explore. Yeah thank you Thanks for your comments, Gabe.

00:28:41,630	Any other comments or questions on the 29 projects? I think I meant to be Mm. Yeah, I guess I’m not 100% sure what the selective grading, and I mean, I know the widening part, obviously like if the off the roadway needs to be widened That’s the language that the DOT has in their steps, yeah, so I guess that’s where we kind of go for 26.

00:29:18,530	602 and 01 and Yeah, FDOT is using incorrect terminology here, then maybe, yeah, might be something. something to look into, but yeah, that’s, that’s why we put it in there is that’s the language we get for what kind of improvements are going to be made.

00:29:36,170	Um, I’m not sure if that just means that they’re only going to be grading on certain parts that are necessary. Maybe that’s what the selective means. Uh OK Uh, we can check a little further into that, Logan and see really what’s up with that terminology, so if necessary, it can be changed out. Any other comments on the 29 projects? All right, well, thanks.

00:30:03,370	uh, well then, in closing, I will do what I typically do for these and everyone a view of the maps at the end of the document that do show these projects, um and I will get there when we get there here OK, yeah, we kind of need to zoom out a little bit.

00:30:32,730	So, yeah, we have our, our 2026 or in-year map, um, where we have projects shown, uh, lines and dots on our within our MPO area. Same thing for the out years 2027 through 2029.

00:31:00,630	Um, and then we also have the projects for all years overlaid against our census-based populations in poverty and minority populations. and that is the, uh, those are the maps that go with these projects and of course changes that I make, uh, to the in between now and the final version will also change the maps. Um, so everything will be incorporated, that needs to be changed here and brought back for the final.

00:31:22,900	presentations in October. At this time we would be seeking a motion of recommendation to approve the draft, uh, and move forward with that. process OK, thank you, Steven. Are there any other questions or comments on the document overall? just like question more on process.

00:31:44,270	Can you detail, um, how the Bismarckman and NPO process goes. You have a draft now, you’re gonna, you’ve released it, you’ve had a public hearing. We have 30 days until the next meeting. What, what are the expectations within that 30 days and at the next meeting.

00:31:57,700	So yes, we have to, according to our PPP, we have to I mean, we would have to consider, we have to consider, you know, during the period of public comment window and public hearing where any comments received substantial enough in nature to require a re-advertisement for public comment.

00:32:17,000	It will not require that all of the changes that have been required are going to be minor and type mostly typological in nature, um, so now we have to process all changes that are necessary and also incorporate public comments received into the final draft. cause the final tip needs to have all public comments received included in the document itself and uh and you know, like I said, yeah, all corrections will be made.

00:32:36,630	Um and included as well. So, we’ll be bringing this back in October for final review and approval. There won’t be a public hearing on that date. Correct, not a public hearing, just consideration of approval. Thanks, Stephen. Any other questions? Oh sorry.

00:32:57,530	I did just want to respond to the black route detouring around the Capitol. Um, we aren’t informed of when work is going to be done. So it’s kind of um on a day to day basis, but the last I heard, we will be detouring around the Capitol through the end of the month, um, trying to get more information on that.

00:33:16,100	Um, unfortunately, yes, we’re having some riders impacted by that because we’re unable to actually enter the the uh Capitol grounds. Um, the other item I did have was uh, our safety targets on page 41 for Bisman Transit. We do have updated safety targets as of May.

00:33:32,630	I don’t know if we want to swap those out because those would be for, thank you, thank you for noting that, dear. I completely forgot we because we had had to do two updates so quickly together. I will, uh, yeah, we’ll make note of that to also update those for final. Thank you for those comments Thanks to the comments. Any other comments? or questions OK.

00:33:55,700	If not, uh, we would be looking for a motion to approve the draft tip as presented with the changes noted to the program of projects, also, uh, the comments that were received from the public, FHWA and NDDOT as well as responses from.

00:34:22,870	Bismann Transit to the public comments and the addition of the or I’m sorry, the swap out of the safety targets. Yeah Would there be such a emotion? Some of this Gabe Gabe, thank you for the motion. Is there a second? This is Deidre’s 2nd. Thank you, Deidre. Roll call, please. Daniel Nairn Yes, Dan Schak Yes. Deidre Hughes, Gabe Schell, Loretta Marie. Yes.

00:34:51,170	Jarek Winess. Logan Bay, Mitch Flanagan. Mitch, are you still online OK. Will Hutchings? Yes. Chair Ripple. Yes the motion is approved. Uh, next item on the agenda is a fringe area Roadmaster plan and Stephen will be presenting some information on that for us.

00:35:26,430	Yes, and I’ve also shared screen on my computer as well for this, um, so, um, let me get to my notes here. Oh yeah. So, the MPO held interviews uh for the Fringeer Roadmaster plan update on September 4th, 9th, and 10th. We interviewed four firms KLJ, SRF, uh, Bolton and Mank NHDR.

00:35:54,730	The selection committee consisted of representatives from all 5 MPO jurisdictions, and I served as the moderator for this interviews. The voting was close, but the selection committee has promoted Bolton and Meck as the preferred consultant for this project.

00:36:12,330	I really enjoyed the interview process and I do want to put it on record that I thought all the consultants did an excellent job, put together very good proposals for this project, but unfortunately only one can be selected. So the uh MPO is requesting approval of Bolton and Mank as the selection for this project and permission to pursue contract negotiations. We will execute the contract after legal and NDDOT review. Um, so I have provided you on the screen here is a copy of the QBS letter.

00:36:32,800	This is provided for informational purposes. It’s certifies that we will be complying and half complied with DOT’s qualifications-based selection requirements and a copy will be signed by the policy board chair tomorrow’s meeting. Um, so that’s just an FYI for everybody.

00:36:57,270	Um yeah, any comments or questions? Otherwise, we would be seeking a motion to approve uh Bolt and Mink, as I indicated. Thanks, Stephen. Any questions or comments on the selection process regarding the Fringerry Roadmaster plan update. You just got 4 total and you interviewed Oar. That is correct.

00:37:23,370	Well All right, we would be looking for a motion to approve the selection of Bolton Mek Incorporated for the consultant of choice for this? Is there such a motion? As Jerikal moved to approve Bolt and Mink as the recommended consultant for the Fringe area Roadmaster plan update. Thank you, Jarek. We do have a motion. Is there a second? Gable Thanks, Gabe. Roll call, please. Daniel Nairn. Yes, Dan Schriock. Yes. Deidre Hughes, and Gabe Schell, Loretta Martin.

00:37:53,330	Yes, Jarek Wigness Logan Bezy Will Hutchins, and Chair Rebel. Yes, the consultant has been, uh, recommended for approval. Um, moving on to number 5, we have an update on the 2025 safety policy study with Luke Champa of SRF. Luke, are you with us online? I am here, Che Ripple.

00:38:15,230	Can you hear me? Yes All right, great. I will, uh, keep this update short and sweet today. uh, we’re, we’re moving forward, um, we have in, uh, next week actually we have our next steering committee meeting, um, so we’ll provide some updates on our uh public engagement we

00:38:38,630	met with uh a few more stakeholders since last time we met and then uh we also have uh discussion around our, our leadership commitments and goal set ting of the plan.

00:39:00,000	Um, updated safety analysis results, including a deeper dive into the high injury network, um, specifically looking at some of the preliminary uh high injury network characteristics and uh potential crash profiles and then, um, I think most of the media next week will be in regards to uh feedback on the countermeasure strategies, um, we have a pretty comprehensive list and want to get the steering committee’s feedback on those strategies which are not recommendations at this

00:39:27,630	point, but just, uh, uh, you know, the full list and uh your reaction on that and then we’ll talk a little bit more um about the uh the way in which we’ll um start sorting those strategies, um you know, urban versus rural cross section um intersection versus mid-block, things like that, um, and, and

00:39:51,870	our recommendation on, on how we might start to sort those things and then how, how the steering committee would like to see things changed. So, uh, it should be another, uh, action pack meeting next week looking forward to it.

00:40:09,330	Please expect some material to come out um in the next few days here, uh, to prepare for that meeting. Great thanks for the update, Luke. Any questions for Luke on the safety policy study. All right, thanks a lot. We’ll move on to item number 6, the 2025 ITS Regional Architecture update with Sherried Hassan. Uh, thank you, Cherry. Can you hear me? Yes.

00:40:38,730	And I also have shared my screen. Uh, please let me know when you can see it. Perfect. Thank you so much. And good morning to all acch members. Uh, um, uh, thank you again for your continued support and uh uh for those who are the stakeholder of these IE’s architect initiative.

00:41:02,170	I’m pleased to share, uh, that we have made, uh, substantial progress across several key areas of these uh update. Um, this is the um update task and uh we have already completed uh um uh collecting data on, uh all ITS elements as well as the service packages and uh those have already been uh successfully uh checked and uh put into the uh Reddit program.

00:41:30,430	And uh uh also we uh I we have worked with the user needs and uh they are now fully aligned with the current operational and technical standards. However, um, I’m still working on the functional requirement part.

00:41:48,800	So and then I’ll talk a little bit about uh the user needs and functional requirement because that’s one of the biggest part where I, I’m going to uh request some feedback from our um uh respective uh stakeholders.

00:42:13,900	Uh, however, as part of the identifying um uh architecture changes, uh, we have already included um to uh two project architecture which um which was, um, uh, uh, which was I think DOT projects uh, on, um, uh, on, on Bismarck, a root system, and both of the projects were fiber optic interconnection, uh, for a couple of roadways and uh those uh are also included, um, uh, in this architecture update.

00:42:34,100	Now, before I start, uh, diving into uh detail of each, each of this project. I want to uh bring your attention to some of the corrections that should be on the, uh, on, on Appendix C.

00:42:55,370	So on page 90, uh, page 69 on line 13, um, there is, um, the mention of front in, uh, maybe I can bring it uh right over here so that uh it would be easier for all of us. to go with together. Um, I’m sorry, I’m just trying to get it. in line there.

00:43:23,870	So that’s page 69 on your packet and, uh, there should be, it should be, there’s two front, uh, one would be from Front Avenue to Avenue C. That’s one of the uh pro projects I just mentioned. Uh, there’s one more correction on page 73, uh, which is uh this uh service package that I have mentioned in my exhibit.

00:43:47,100	It’s not a, it’s no more um future service package whether it would be an existing service package and the final correction is uh page 82. where we have the PT 09, which is the transit signal priority and uh we are not keeping these service package, uh, based on our discussion, um, based on my discussion with Deidre, uh, the director of, uh, transit

00:44:12,330	facility. Uh, we are taking that out of the service uh of our service package list. So sorry for uh this uh changes. Now, uh, I’ll come back uh to my original presentation, so, um, as, uh, probably some, um, you remember that uh for this IS architecture update, we had 5 service areas and uh I’m,

00:44:39,070	I’ll go with each service areas like uh what are the uh basic changes that uh that has taken place. So first of all, the number of stakeholders, this is the biggest group of stakeholders that we have, uh, in our, um, in our architecture update initiative, so we had a total of 15 stakeholders over

00:44:56,600	here and uh there is uh for the sake of keeping the architecture uh a little bit simple on the emergency management side. We uh create a stakeholder group which will identify.

00:45:20,070	all the emergency stakeholders into one group because there are certain services that they provide, uh, uh, with the, with the similar action or the similar ITS element being involved. Uh, one of the, um, there are total 6 service packages, uh, about these, uh, emergency service area and the 4 of them are existing in the existing status, uh, one of those that I just talked about, uh, is PS 02, that emergency response.

00:45:40,070	It was previously identified as future, which is going to, uh, the existing status as of these uh these year sub, uh, since there are some function flow happening um on the Reddit end and uh there are the, the two, service packages which are future status, they are mainly the disaster, they’re disaster related ones like disaster response and recovery and evacuation reentry management

00:46:02,270	that goes more under the state, um, architecture umbrella, and that’s why we still, uh, want to keep it with each of the regional architectures so that uh in future if, if it’s needed, we can make the connection.

00:46:26,270	The next uh user service area is the maintenance, uh, where we have 5 stakeholders and, uh, um, the total number of service packages are 6 out of that 5 are in existing status and only one is uh in the future status, uh, previously in my, uh, I think in one of, in my August update, I, um, uh, I mentioned that uh the MC09 that was a service package for infrastructure protection that

00:46:50,270	we wanted to include based on uh my um discussion with Steve Selvi. Uh, however, the MC 09 that uh specific service package, uh, or the the way F HW uh define it, it does not qualify for the uh for the, I mean it only qualifies for the transportation related infrastructure protection and

00:47:12,730	uh that’s why, um, uh, that we, uh we have been ident ified these uh service package that has to be changed, however, that services can be identified using an additional functional requirement under an exi existing service package and that is uh MC 02, which is the maintenance and construction

00:47:35,100	vehicle maintenance. So, um, we will still, uh, include Steve’s um input about these, uh, about the changes that’s, uh, that’s going to come, uh, but we’ll put it under a planned functional requirement, since it’s, it hasn’t been um deployed yet and the uh only one future state, uh, one with future status, that’s the weather data collection, which

00:47:58,530	is a WX01. Uh, I have kept it over there because there are lots of uh maintenance related ITS elements, especially the maintenance vehicles, they have the capability of using the um weather related information for the improvement of transportation services in the region.

00:48:25,270	However, um, I haven’t heard of uh having them used for specifically in terms of whether um or um taking uh weather information from the vehicles. And uh this is very normal, uh, for the uh ITS elements, it’s not necessary that you will use all the uh options that you have, but uh I want to keep it uh in our architecture objects so that um eventually if there is any new

00:48:47,100	technology that comes in the future, uh, we can, uh, use these, um, service package to uh get the connection. The next service area is the traffic service area which is, uh, I didn’t, um, the smallest because most of the uh work is done using uh by the Bismarck Engineering, the Mandan

00:49:09,630	Engineering department and the uh North Dakota district, uh, the Bismarck district of um in North uh NDDOT Bismarck District and uh over there we have 8 total service packages and out of 85 are in the existing status, 2 are in planned and 1 is future, um, uh, both the, um, planned are

00:49:36,270	related to management system actually all three planned and future ones are related to the management system, so, um, uh, I, um, I really appreciate, uh, the trafficking and trafficking of Bismarck Engineering.

00:50:00,900	Uh, he mentioned, uh, when we were talking about the TMO6, which is the traffic Information dissemination, um, uh, he mentioned that, uh, AA can be a part of this one and that’s how I have, uh, I’m going to keep it for these um for uh for this architecture update and uh the way we can uh do some uh uh input over there is by creating some dashboards and that, uh, you will see in the uh in, in,

00:50:19,100	in the report that will uh come as part of this architecture update. The other two systems, which is the management system one is uh the traffic incident management system we had uh a very, uh, not, not a very detailed discussion about this, but this is something uh that the stakeholders feel that can

00:50:39,900	be a part of the um uh part of the region in the coming future. However, the idea of regional traffic management um is not, um, is, is something that will, we, we’ll be looking at the um for the future.

00:51:00,630	Uh, the last service or, uh, the second last service area is the um transit service area. Actually this is the um where we have the least number of stakeholders. It’s only the um Bismarck Mandant, uh, Mandin transit system and uh um however, it has um the most number of uh service packages.

00:51:22,630	Uh, it has total 9 and all 9 service packages are in the existing status, uh, but, uh, as I mentioned previously, it was 10 and we have removed the PT 09, which is the uh transit signal uh priority uh or the TSB, um, and also the PTO7 that was uh one of those uh service package, uh, that was in the um planned status in the previous uh architecture

00:51:46,530	which we are moving to existing because of the patio tablet that allows driver to input the passenger counting. Now, um, about the upcoming coordination, uh, that, uh, I’m going to, uh, that I’m currently working on is uh I am preparing a list of user need and functional requirements based on the service packages and stakeholders.

00:52:12,100	I’ll, I’ll be very brief on this one, so the, the user need that we have identified that it’s always assigned by the service package and the user need is essentially the capability of an ITS system to accomplish a certain uh uh certain service or a specific goal or solve a problem.

00:52:31,430	So we have already identified those user needs and uh uh in my, um, as I’m uh still preparing those documentation, uh, by the end of this month, I’ll be done with that and I’ll send a um a comprehensive, uh, comprehensive report to each of the stakeholders, um, mentioning which service package they, uh, they belong to and uh based on that, uh,

00:52:56,530	what are the service or user uh need uh and they will, they just need to go through it and verify that uh those information are correct in case they’re, they’re not correct, they will be given uh a month of time.

00:53:17,270	Uh, so by the end of, um, October, I, I would be expecting some feedback and uh I will be making any changes that should go into the final report. Similar thing is the uh uh one more uh aspect is the functional requirement. Now we assign it for every element, every IS element, and also the stakeholders.

00:53:40,900	Uh, so it is essentially um your ITS element should have some kind of um capability um or uh some kind of uh services it should um complete and, uh, um, so that it can uh help the public.

00:54:02,800	Now, uh, those specific functionalities we have already, uh, we are in the process of identifying those and again these will be in the same package, uh with the user need which will go to the stakeholders. There is one more service area, and I haven’t talked about it with my, uh, all, uh, with my 44 other service areas because this is the service area where lots of uh margin happens. So, uh, like from a system perspective, the individual services are functioning are functioning optimally.

00:54:26,870	Uh, however, we have identified there are certain key areas where, um, uh, we need uh further uh attention. And uh one of those areas is this uh communication service area where we have 11 stakeholders and uh please note that uh all these 11 stakeholders.

00:54:52,330	they are, um, uh, the, some of these stakeholders are also part of the uh other um uh the other service areas, like there are uh some service uh uh like in this communication service area, we have stakeholders from the traffic area maintenance area, um, even transit, uh, can come in some places as well as the, the biggest part will be coming from the uh emergency um

00:55:11,600	service area. Now, uh, under this, we only have two service package s and it was already in the existing status and uh we are just adding uh one new stakeholder, uh, over there, um, which, which will be AEC because ATEC is already creating some um um traffic, uh, information dissemination

00:55:29,000	system, uh, for Bismarck Engineering, so that, uh, will be included over there. um, and, uh, with that, I am also going to include some suggestions this time with my uh with my final report.

00:55:50,630	So one of the um suggestion would be, uh, what are the challenges that we have identified as part of these, uh, IT architecture updates. So the first challenges that we have, um, seen is the interagency data exchange. So these challenges are coming from the new network security protocol that has been mandated by the State IT department, uh, and these protocols are designed to enhance the cybersecurity procedure or uh cybersecurity part of across the uh agencies,

00:56:16,230	uh, which is a goal that, uh, we all, all of us uh support. However, uh, implementing those, uh, has introduced some um procedural overhead for cross agency data flows. So in practice, this means that uh our current technology holds the data but restricts the information flow when it comes for interagency sharing.

00:56:41,270	So, uh, because information sha sharing between uh agencies and now requires multiple layers of, uh, approval. firewall, uh, exceptions and uh also compliance checks. Uh, while these measures are important for security. They have created some latency and friction in our coordination work uh of workflows. So these ITS update definitely is not suggesting a um rollback to these protocols.

00:57:08,000	Instead, we see a great opportunity to collaborate with the state IT department to explore the technical solutions such as uh what can be a secure API for sharing the information or uh is there any uh federally recommended uh access model that we can follow.

00:57:29,330	So these, uh, which can definitely preserve the security as well as um enable the smoother interoperability of the uh among agencies. Now, um, again, it is not part of the archi architecture of the scope, but as we have identified it within the process of this uh project we pro pose form, uh, forming a technical working group, uh,

00:57:50,270	with a representative from concerned agencies and the state IT team. and this group can identify specific um challenges or proposed architecture level adjustments and uh develop a roadmap for secure, uh, data exchange. Uh, the second one that I, uh, I just included actually.

00:58:13,070	I was listening to the uh to the meeting and I identified that uh there are certainty projects, for example, that uh um uh rapid rectangular flashing beacon, which was 26.1.02, and there was one project for the ITS maintenance, which is 26.6.11.

00:58:38,170	So these kind of projects, um, I understand that, uh, this does not need the check for the systems engineering compliancy because these are not uh funded with the Highway Trust Fund because only for those uh those projects I get, uh, I get to work with, um, with the system engineering and uh update it in as part of the architecture. So the NDDOT statewide architecture has a, um, has a big list of those.

00:59:01,100	However, since we have um uh identified projects on Teep, uh, I believe it’s a great opportunity to include those, not this year, but when we’ll be uh updating the, uh, next, uh, architecture, the these steep projects can be a good resource for including uh in our um architecture of it.

00:59:24,170	Uh, that was a, the long one, but uh that’s, um, I mean, this is the technical group which uh probably understands some or most part of uh part of these zones, so I, I really appreciate uh your listening to me and uh your continued support and your technical insight. If there is any comment or questions, I’m happy to answer. Thank you, Sher Jan.

00:59:41,700	Um, that was a a really good report and thank you for addressing the cybersecurity protocols issue. I know that’s been an ongoing concern with a lot of our jurisdictions. Um, are there any questions right now to Sherry Judd regarding the information that he’s provided or the update overall.

01:00:00,900	No, other than I appreciate the cybersecurity update as well. I know that that’s been something that’s been talked about more than one NPL. All right. Thank you, Sherry Jen. Uh, thanks everyone. We’ll be moving on to item number 8. It is a tip administrative modifications presented by Stephen Larson.

01:00:20,700	Did I? I’m sorry. Um, how about we go back to 7 and we’ll do the 2025 monitoring report update also with Stephen Larson. We’ll just keep you up there for a while, Steven. Thank you. Uh, yes, very brief again today, just the MPO and HDR continue to work on the draft monitoring report document.

01:00:42,530	We have made good progress, um, I expect to receive the first draft of the document this week, and I will begin my review, and we will work on editing and finalization over the next several weeks, so that project is con continues to be on track and on schedule.

01:01:00,270	and I will move right into, uh, oh, I’ll just ask if there are any questions on that? Any questions on the mon monitoring report update. OK, short and sweet, thanks. Yeah, I go right into, uh, Exhibit E, which is, uh, yeah, this month, uh, we processed 6 administrative modifications to the 25 to 28 tip, which is the current one.

01:01:21,000	So last month at DOT’s request, we removed 12 projects, 6 from 27 and 6 from 26 into funding year 2025 in case additional 25 funding came available to DOT as part of the August redistribution at the end of the current federal fiscal year.

01:01:40,730	So we received word from DOT that 6 of those projects that were moved from 27 are going back into 27. These include an urban grants project in downtown Bismarck, a Microsofting, a microservicing project in Bismarck. 3 concrete pavement repair projects in Bismarck and One Mill and Overlay in Mandan.

01:02:05,270	The details are included in the uh program that is part of the exhibit, um, but yeah, um, obviously, we received word on any of the 26 moves. we will, um modify accordingly and future drafts. So, any questions? Any questions for Stephen on the tip uh administrative modifications. see and and hearing none, Stephen, thank you very much. OK, we’ll go on to item number 9, Big Skyrail government partner program.

01:02:34,070	I’ll just provide a little bit of information regarding that, um. as you all recall the Bismarck Mandan MPO did become government partner program members in the Big Sky Passenger rail authorities, uh, membership program last year, late last year, uh, this, this conference that was held by big sky passenger rail is one of the benefits of being a

01:02:58,230	government partner program. It was, um uh, part of the conference, the 4th annual conference for the Big Sky Passenger Rail Authority. um just wanted to kind of affirm what we’re doing here at the MPO and uh kind of tie that in with the the bigger picture regarding the big sky passenger

01:03:21,270	rails, uh, corridor ID program, of course they’re trying to reinstate the North Coast Hiawatha line, um, that was the rail line passenger rail line that ran from Chicago, Illinois all the way east, uh, or sorry, West to Seattle, Washington.

01:03:50,470	Um, that’s approximately a 2300 mile long distance passenger rail line that’s been, um, recommended by the Federal Railroad Administration for restoration in our area. Um, we’ve been excited about the prospect of the return of passenger rail to our area and of course um we have kind of an historical perspective on, on rail running through here and perhaps um looking at having some some station terminals, uh,

01:04:16,270	you know, captured here in the Bismarckandan area, um, we’ve provided funding and uh a work program identification for passenger rail service, um, station siding. as part of our 2627 work programs. So we’re making some efforts here on the Bismarckandan MPO front.

01:04:44,370	We’re kind of wondering, you know, are we doing the right things? How is our timing looking? Um, so I just wanted to share that after attending the 4th annual conference, September 8th through 10th in Montana. It looks like our timing is, is actually pretty good on our passenger rail siding study.

01:05:07,530	Uh, we will be embarking on that mid 2026 and concluding, um, mid 2027, the big sky passenger Rail authority will be right in the middle of their service development plan for the corridor ID project.

01:05:36,800	um that that service development plan is going to be pretty comprehensive and pretty arduous for them and so they aren’t looking at uh um station uh sightings and locations until probably late 2027, so that aligns really well with our our station sighting study.

01:05:58,430	Um, that was encouraging to hear, um also one of the things that was was uh a resounding note throughout the conference was, yes, the, the passenger rail stations are important, and yes, we have to plan for them because, you know, these things do take time, however, the most important thing is that we need to get a train. The train has to come before the passenger rail station, uh, and this can be a pretty long drawn out project, um. we did have a representative, uh, Ross Knox.

01:06:18,370	He was very instrumental in getting the Mardi Gras line, uh, going down in, in the southern part of the United States, um, that was a tri-state initiative between the states of Alabama, Mississippi, and Louisiana. The passenger rail line was proposed to run from uh New Orleans to Mobile, Alabama.

01:06:48,800	and uh it had uh Department of Transportation support in both the states of Mississippi and also Louisiana, but Alabama’s DOT refrained from supporting the project, um. with, with funding, um, and so the city of Mobile had to step up and and provide that match portion. So, um while this initiative began back in 1982.

01:07:17,700	It was just finally realized this last, uh, this last year, and in fact it’s only been in service for the past 4 weeks. They did report an astounding 10,000 riders being served on this service in 4 weeks’ time of operation. So it far exceeded what they had projected.

01:07:41,800	Everybody is very excited and engaged with this particular project, but again, the resounding, uh, takeaway from this is uh we need to make sure that we get passenger rail service. We need to get the train here before we’ve really, um, work as you know. on getting the station, he said, really what you need is a, you can have an aluminum platform for your station, but you need to have a train coming through.

01:08:00,370	So, um one item that was was also mentioned several times was that we need to be contacting our uh our congressional delegation for the state of North Dakota.

01:08:24,370	We need to make sure that our senators and our representatives are aware of the fact that passenger rail restoration is very important to us in this region, um, and, uh, you can, you can certainly go on the Big Sky Rail, um website and get a plenty of information, but they also do have a link there where you can click on it and within 2 minutes you can send a message to your senators or your state representative and let them know um how important passenger

01:08:47,270	rail restoration is to our area. very quick, very easy, um, just by going to Big Skyrail.org and um they have a nice button right there on the, on the conference page that you can click and um be done in just a couple of minutes.

01:09:08,100	um so those were kind of the big, the big takeaways is that we need to keep planning, we’re doing the right things, we’re moving in the right direction, uh, it, the note is that we could, you know, feel a little discouraged at times, uh, because this does seem to be um kind of a um.

01:09:30,170	two steps forward, one step back process by all accounts, um, but, but the message has been put out there that you know you just got to keep plugging away, um, hopefully we are not going to be looking at as long of a time frame as the Mardi Gras line experienced, uh, you know, 1982 to today, um, we’re still

01:09:49,270	hoping as Big Skyrail is that we’re going to have a return of service here in our area by 2032. So that’s what we’re working forward to, um, I’d be happy to take any questions. That’s just kind of a high level oversight of the conference. Thanks, Ken. That was great.

01:10:06,870	I actually have two quick questions, and, and one is kind of a, uh, herded to the grapevine type thing, so I don’t know how much credit, uh, should be given to it, but there’s some talk about Bismarck passenger rail authority doing the sighting work, um, or providing resources that, has that been

01:10:22,330	off the table? Are they just too focused or it is I just share that completely wrong, yeah. um, Big Sky Passenger rail won’t be doing any anything in this area.

01:10:38,330	We need to kind of do our own homework, um, form ul ate our own recommendations on whatever basis that might be and hopefully that study is going to do that for us and that will allow us to bring those recommendations to the table when Big Sky passenger rail is looking at their, their, uh, um, station locations along the, along the line.

01:10:57,630	um, and then related to this, I’m just thinking not the story you just told about 31 years in development, um, is a, is a kind of premature to look at a station at this point cause sounds like there may be, or they are more on advanced timeline than they are done in so that was, that was kind of

01:11:12,000	my uh my question was, uh, well, if, if Big Sky is moving into phase two and its service, uh, development plan. Are we lagging behind on our station identification.

01:11:31,170	Our station location identification, or are we too far ahead and know the message that I got there, um, like I said, it was an affirmation that we’re doing everything right and in the right time. um, we certainly should be looking at this.

01:11:48,870	We need to be able to, as I said, come to the table when they are looking at those locations with, uh, some very firm recommendations as to, you know, what we need to see in our in our communities, uh, in our region, uh, and we don’t want to be left out of those discussions by any means. So, um, no, our, our timing is good on this, um.

01:12:08,700	and they did, they did outline, uh, their proposal for moving through this phase to, um, and, you know, hopefully some of the um some of the uh. federal regulations as far as environmental, uh, perhaps like, uh, NEA regulations, uh, that play out in the phase three portion of this project, um, maybe won’t prolong this anymore than necessary, and we’ll still be able to get to that 2032 benchmark as far as, uh, having

01:12:32,070	service returned, but yeah, they’re, they do have a very ambitious, um, aggressive face to um. uh plan as far as the timeline goes, so we’re we’re spot on with what we’re doing.

01:12:49,730	Yeah, and of course, you know, the best thing to plan is, you know, a long time ago, so the more sooner we can get on that and start looking at those places, uh, the, the better. So, so, yeah, my, my big takeaways we need to, uh, contact our congressional delegation, um, also, it, it really wouldn’t hurt for us to start having conversations with our, our, uh, state DOT at this point, um, and getting on the same page,

01:13:08,970	uh with. where we might be looking at passenger rails, so. we can probably look forward to some of those discussions as well. Anything else, Daniel? Thank you for the update on this, and I, I think, um, it sounds like the timing is pretty good and I think there are obviously things within their service development plan

01:13:26,630	that would impact the decision of where the stations will be located, but on the other hand, are there any uh, ways that might go the other way around where the station locations may be something they would be useful to know for their service development.

01:13:42,470	I’m thinking in terms of how, how the train passenger rail will interact with our own local infrastructure. You get off of the train. How do you get to your final destination from that point, and is there anything that those two plans would need to be working together to inform each other. Thanks, Daniel.

01:14:01,470	That’s a good observation and um yeah, I’ll definitely comment on that, so it is important to BSPRA, um, in their service development plan to know where those station locations are going to be. Um, initially they’ve proposed about every 50 miles.

01:14:26,470	We feel like or rural, uh, North Dakota residents needs, especially when you’re talking about critical healthcare, um, access and things of that nature. 50 miles is too great a distance. We’d like to see that shortened up. Also, we have some, uh, some tourism, um.

01:14:46,070	uh options in North Dakota that, you know, occur maybe a little bit more frequently than every 50 miles, and so when we start looking at destination packages and things of that nature. We would like to shorten the distance up between the stations a little bit and and whatever distance the stations are placed at along this passenger rail route are definitely going to impact BSPRA’s surface plan development because they have to plan for twice daily um service is what they’re

01:15:06,970	proposing. and then they have to know how long it’s going to take the train to get from one station to the next, how long the train will be at that station for, um, you know, boarding, uh, for fueling needs, whatever it might be. Um, so that, that all works into their service plan development.

01:15:25,800	Yeah, very critical information. So it’s almost like, you know, what comes first, the chicken or the egg, um, but it, it starts kind of happening simultaneously almost, but, uh, and then I do want to just mention, uh, your, your final comment was about um kind of that first last mile, you know,

01:15:44,900	uh, that’s going to be very critical to us as far as making sure that we have all the appropriate, uh, transportation connectivity for passengers of um of the rail system, uh, wherever the station or stations may be located.

01:16:06,800	We want to make sure that uh we can get them to their destinations and uh get them back to the station. We’re not gonna leave anybody stranded anywhere and we want to also make a uh you know, it’s, it’s probably gonna segue into uh land use development and things of that nature, so, um, very far reaching impacts involving this passenger rail restoration.

01:16:24,870	Anything else right now All right, well, thank you very much. Um, we’ll move on to item number 10 on the agenda, which is an update on roadway projects. I, let’s see, why don’t we just kind of start down the line with Logan. We always have you going last, so that’s just not fair.

01:16:46,170	Alright thank you. Uh yeah, Exit 161, they’re, uh, still plugging away at that, finishing up the Stormurwer today. The rain this weekend kind of slowed things on a little bit, but they’re still plugging away. Um, they’re paving concrete on the interstate and that’s going pretty well.

01:17:01,800	And then I don’t know if Man Dan’s gonna have more updates on, on Memorial Highway, but they plan on bringing in some more crews for help expedite some of that underground work. really all the updates I have for Pro time OK. Thanks, Logan.

01:17:22,000	How about? Reistmark Sure, I’ll update on our one project that’s funded through some state flex fund dollars that’s our e-entry Avenue extension from um Centennial Road out to the east of Fifty-Second Street. Uh, work is continuing, um, we’re, we’re past Roosevelt Drive and then connecting into more of the extension area.

01:17:37,500	So we’ve replaced the rule that was already there and now we’re working on kind of building the new segments of road, uh, contractor doesn’t have any concerns, um on timeline and being able to meet their substantial completion, but that was obviously before we got 3 inches of rain the other day, um, but I think there’ll there’ll still be fine to be able to get it done before um

01:17:49,730	freeze up this year. Thanks, Gabe. We’ll hope for a long fall. I’m Jarek Mandan. Um, we are currently scheduling walkthroughs for our old ed Trail shared use path mill and overlay project, and our rapid rectangular flashing beacon project.

01:18:10,000	So those are both at or near completion, and then, yeah, as far as Memorial Highway goes, I think that the, the intersection at 46 is still closed right now. It should be opening sometime in the near future, but, um, just completing underground utility installation on the south side of the road right now, so. about all I have Coming along too.

01:18:31,330	Uh, do we have Danreacon for Burleigh County. Yeah, uh, I don’t have anything to really update right now. Our federal, only federal job we have this summer was our Highway 10 job, and that wrapped up last month, so. All right. Sounds good.

01:18:48,430	Loretta, do you have anything for the City of Lincoln? No, we don’t have, um, any ongoing projects right now. So we’re working to get our CIP program updated and evaluate a number of projects, so hopefully in the future, I’ll have something more to share. All right, sounds good. Thanks so much. Um, all right, well, we have item number 11, other business.

01:19:13,000	Anybody have any other business for the good of the order? I just have a very quick note for everyone. I will be releasing our MPO final TA solicitation, transportation alternatives, solicitation, uh, this week, um, so please keep an eye out for that if you are, had submitted an application for the

01:19:34,470	preliminary or you are just considering submitting an application at all, um, details will be coming. All right, thank you, Steven I did have one thing that uh I thought was of interest, um.

01:20:01,600	the North Dakota Department of Transportation is seeking public comment on their draft public and non-metropolitan local official participation plan. Uh, it says that this plan provides guidance for public involvement in NDOT statewide planning and programming activities. Additionally, this document serves as a guide for including non-metropolitan local officials and interested parties in the statewide transportation planning and programming public involvement process.

01:20:27,170	So we all know how important our public participate participation plans are to us, um, the DOT has released theirs now for public comment, and you can find that on the DOT website at www.ddot.n.

01:20:57,170	gov and then uh click on construction and planning at the top of the page and go to transportation plans and programs where you will find the draft 2025 Public non-metropolitan local government official participation plan link. You can look that over, provide comment if you so desire, um, we like to help our, our partners out and things of that nature because they help us as well. Any other business, Gate. You may be introduced, Daniel and his role on the tack.

01:21:12,630	Yeah, I’m sorry. I was remiss in in yeah, yeah, who is, who is this stranger, um, because you, you’re so familiar to us, uh, to a lot of us, I guess, you know.

01:21:29,630	didn’t, didn’t think about it, but, uh, we do have a new face at the table, uh, this morning. It’s Daniel Nairn. He is the uh interim director of the City of Bismarck Community Development Department.

01:21:59,100	Uh, he is uh Ben Ereth has uh has spirited off to um actually the Grand Forks MPO and so Daniel Naren is his replacement, um, and will be our, our tech representative for the city of Bismarck Community Development Department. So I’d like to welcome you, Daniel, and offer you the opportunity to just, um, say a few words if you, if you’d like to do that. Uh, sure, thank you, Kim, and yes, I’ve worked with many of you and I have for many of years, so I, I understand.

01:22:15,100	Uh, the, yes, I’m, I’m director of community development at Bismarck right now, uh, Bennett left his last day was actually Friday, so he’s now on his way over to Grand Forks. I’m just happy to be here.

01:22:29,900	I’ll just be learning as we go and, um, thank you for all the information, uh, Steven and others provide, and I just appreciate that. Well, thanks Daniel, and I just want to provide another little nugget of information because what, what goes around comes around. Daniel was actually on the technical advisory committee. Quite a number of years ago as the Morton County Planner, so he’s not unfamiliar with the BismarckMandan MPO.

01:22:52,000	He’s, um, he actually kind of started, um, here with us as he moved to our community. So welcome back. Thank you. And my very first job was with an NPO in in Virginia, but I saw so very near and dear to my heart. Well, thank you and thank you, Gabe for um.

01:23:10,600	yeah, reminding me of that. Any other other business. All right, well, with not with hearing nothing, uh, we will Adjourn the meeting. Thank you,