00:00:10,470	Commission meeting to order and go through a roll call. So Marla, if you could take us through a roll call. Yes. OK. Comm Bitner. Here Comm Connelly. Here. Comm Jarratt. Comm Munson. Comm Patrick here. Comm Risch. Here. Comm Streifel. Commissioners are off here. Chair. Here we have a quorum. Thank you, Marla. All right.

00:00:51,230	Quorum is Established, uh, we’ll move into the approval of the February 12, 2025 minutes, uh, these were in your packet agenda. If there are any changes that are needed, uh, please call that out now or we can, uh, um, Move into approving them. Moved to approve as presented. OK. Good.

00:01:12,370	It’s been moved to approved by Comm Zuroff, uh, seconded by Comm Risch, and, uh, Uh, all in favor of proving the minutes from the February 12, 2025 meeting. Say hi, I any opposition? Hearing none minutes are approved. We have nothing on the consent agenda tonight, so we’ll move into our public hearings.

00:01:40,300	Our first public hearing is the Summit Point 2nd subdivision short plat and uh looks like Marla will be taking us through a few details of this, and then we’ll open the public hearing, and if, uh, to, uh, allow the public to speak. He’s going to put that on the screen for me. So Kate, good evening, Comm.

00:02:02,170	It’s just the public hearing for Summit Point’s 2 subdivision, and it is a short plat. It’s uh the petitioners are John and Sarah Lanenberg. And Toman Engineering is doing the engineering and the location is block 3 and 4. Block 2, Summit Point subdivision. OK, the project is. 2.05 acres. Um, the petitioner’s request approval of summit 0.

00:02:42,770	2 subdivision, and I do pass recommendation to the board of Burleigh County Commissioners. Notifications were in the Bismarck Tribune, February 28th and March 7th, surrounding property owners were notified February 28th, and it was on the Burleigh County website on February twenty-eighth. John and Sarah, um, approached Burleigh County because they purchased lots 3 and 4, block 2 of Summer Point Summit Point first.

00:03:09,900	And they would like to combine the two lots into one lot. Planning and review committee found no issues of concern for this subdivision. staff findings, the subdivision fulfills the requirements of Article 33 of the Burleigh County Jordan Zoning Ordinances. This subdivision is a short plat subdivision under Article 33, Section 12.

00:03:38,770	The final plot has been submitted to all reviewing entities, all Kerns and concerns and corrections have been addressed. The zoning is a PUD. The subdivision is covered under the PUD and the Covenants of Summit Point first subdivision.

00:04:03,670	This summit subdivision meets the goals and intents of Burleigh County Comprehensive Plan for the orderly development of Burleigh County. The petition meets all the administrative requirements of the Burleigh County zoning ordinances, staff recommends approval of the final plot and giving a due past recommendation to the board of Burleigh County Commissioners.

00:04:28,500	You can approve the final plot and give a due pass, approve it with conditions and give a due pass after recommendations, conditions are. Matt, you can deny the final plot with reason or tabled the final plot for more information. OK, are there any questions for Marla? Uh, yes, Comm Patrick just a, uh, clarification on the first page of. Uh, you have 205. Did you say it’s 2.0.05.

00:04:53,200	Is that for both lots or or individually, each lot. That’s what the combined, I think, is of this. OK. Thank you. Comm Risch. Thank you, Mr. Chair Marla. Is the intent they’re going to build a single family dwelling? Yes. OK. They’re going to combine them and the house is going to be situated. Uh, probably pretty close to the middle of the lot.

00:05:14,300	Mr. Zuroff, uh, might be a really dumb question, um, so, uh, the summit point, uh, area and stuff, they’ve gone through a whole bunch of master planning and I’m assuming they have other documents that have summit point first, some at 0.

00:05:35,730	2 some at point 3rd with them coming in and all this is is a very simple lock combination. Um, so it doesn’t mess with any other master planning should it be called something different like Wanenberg first or well, then we run into, uh, subdivision. Kind of within the subdivision. OK. Um, they can adjust the master plan.

00:05:56,500	They’ve already adjusted it a little bit. So when they come for the second phase, it would be some point I’m thinking ahead and like knowing that there’s that master plan in place. I don’t want, you know, all of a sudden this conversation would be like. like, oh, the, you know, 83 acres in Summit Point 2nd and here John and Sarah are going.

00:06:14,670	It’s just our two like, you know, or, you know, or one, I guess, but the next subdivision, whether if somebody else comes along and wants to combine two lots, it will be 7.3, and then when they go to the 2nd phase of the master plan. Yeah. It will be wherever we’re at on the summer points. OK.

00:06:36,170	So, we’re planning for that. to avoid any, any future con, you know. Conversation about confusion and so on, OK. And that’s why we also, um, made the stipulation that they would be under the PUD and follow the covenants. OK. Uh, Mr.

00:06:58,470	Connelly, you have something? Yes, well, maybe that answers the question right there is why the PUD designation versus some of the residential designation is that just it, or are there other, um, Extenuating circumstances that when we get more of these come through that we have to have in the back of our mind as we, uh, make decisions.

00:07:18,200	Well, we gave it to PUD designation because it is a lot combination in the summit point for subdivision, but the way Article 33, Section 12 is written. We do a short plat subdivision, so we’re keeping the zoning the same under the PUD umbrella, and that’s why we specified they had to stay under the PUD umbrella. OK.

00:07:42,000	That’s good for clarification. I appreciate it. OK, thank you, Marla. Uh, any other questions from Marla before she steps away? OK, seeing none, thank you, Marlo. We will open this public hearing on Summit Point 2nd subdivision short plat. So if anyone would like to speak, uh, in, uh, concerning this, uh, this subdivision, please approach the uh left turn.

00:08:04,100	Tell us who you are, where you’re from, and sign in. Anyone like to speak. At this public hearing. And one last call if anyone would like to speak, this is the last call.

00:08:28,130	Seeing none, we will close the public hearing and move into discussion and action on Summit Point 2nd subdivision Short plat. Moved to approve is presented. OK, it has been moved to approved by Comm Zuroff, seconded by Comm Patrick, uh, to approve this as presented, any discussion on the motion. Mr. Chair. Yes, Comm Bitner. Um, uh, for the record, um, the applicant is a relative of mine.

00:08:52,570	And I’m just pointing that out in case anybody thinks that we should have a discussion about conflict of interest or anything like that. Um, I have no financial interest in it, but He is my nephew. OK, well, thank you for pointing that out.

00:09:12,470	If anyone has any concern of that, uh we can uh I’ll make a motion that, uh, Comm Bit would be allowed to vote. OK. It has been moved by Comm Patrick and seconded by, we’ll say, Comm Connelly, uh, to, uh, allow Comm Bitner to vote in this matter, uh, all in favor. I. I.

00:09:37,000	Any opposition? Hearing none, so we will, uh, we will keep you in the on the voting roll, uh, Comm Bitner. Thank you. Seeing, uh, no other discussion on this. We’ll move into a vote on the motion to approve as presented the summit Point 2nd subdivision short latte. So Marla, if you could take us through a roll call vote. OK, the motion is to approve the summit 0.

00:09:56,270	2 short plot, yes vote means you agree. Um, Comm Zuroff. Yes. Comm Bitner. Yes. Comm Connelly. Yes. Comm Risch? Yes. Comm Patrick? Yes. Comm Jarratt? Yes. Chair. Yes. All approved. OK. Uh, that approved, uh, um. is approved and will move to the county commission with a recommended recommendation for approval.

00:10:28,900	We’ll move into our 2nd public hearing of the night, uh, Article 8, special uses solar farm, uh, this is a continuation of the February 12, 2025 public hearing. Uh, I guess, is there anything, uh, that you would like to say before we continue this, uh, public hearing, Mitch. At all Comm, Mr. Chair, uh. The um.

00:10:54,100	There have been some changes that I added. Yes, we see that in your packets, you go to the ordinance. The, um Uh Basically I included A um Off-grid definition. Number 8 under Article section 2.

00:11:32,770	Section 2? Uh, section I, Section 1 cap of Roman numeral 18 is on grid, off grid solar systems, and an active, active energy solar system that converts solar energy directly into electricity. Unlike on grid systems, off-grid systems do not connect to the to the uh national utility grid. Basically a simple The definition. The other one or the size classifications. Under Section Roman numeral 2. 0.1B. The size classifications. We’re um We have no definition of of residential commercial, industrial.

00:12:11,300	There are no definitions for that for size wise. is basically just uh size uh contingent on the zoning. Um, but these are, are sizes that are based on national averages, um. The residential is 1 to 20 kilowatts accessory use and connected to the existing load, small commercial is 20 to 50 kilowatts.

00:12:38,000	And large commercial is 50 to 100 megawatts. Um, so it’s depending on depending on the size, uh, most homes in in America are around 15 solar panels and they averaged 30, 30 kilowatts per day, so this is. A conservative estimate we, we don’t, these are not restricting the size of these units.

00:13:04,100	What they’re doing is giving you a guideline to ask. All right, I want 1000 kilowatts on my residential property here, so then you say, well, how is that going to fit into this property. Where are you going to place all these solar panels and Light rays, so it’s kind of.

00:13:23,830	Gives you a guideline, gives me a guideline when we review these applications. It’s not, like I said, it’s not a maximum of 100 megawatts for a large commercial. We don’t want to, we don’t want to restrict any of them, so it’s it’s just basically a guideline. Mr. Chair.

00:13:43,930	Oh, yes, yeah, Comm Risch so the 20 kilowatt is plenty adequate for a very large home. Yeah, uh, the average, yeah, it’s, it’s like I said, I found it as a national average. It’s um You know, these, you could probably have 50 kilowatts on there. It depends on, you know, the type unit type system you buy.

00:14:06,030	I mean, the more expensive ones could probably produce much more kilowatts and a much smaller area than that. These things are changing. Uh, industry and so, but for us to consider this and give it a guideline when you guys are up here and they wanna do a large commercial. Solar system and they say we’re gonna do. 100 megawatts, well.

00:14:27,400	That’s a big, very large solar array. Uh, yes, yeah, Comm Patrick Mitch. You got queer something in my mind probably isn’t matching, but why do we have residential up in B and then down in C, we exempt the rooftop solar panels. Uh, that’s in the residential districts only.

00:14:56,770	If they want to have ground mounted in an accessory as an accessory unit or accessory use in a residential area, they can’t. But that was discussed at the last meeting and it was made by motion that you guys wanted to exclude.

00:15:16,670	Solar, uh, arrays on rooftop mounted solar rays in residential only fits in and correct me if I’m wrong, Mitch, is that you can have a residence in a uh in a in a zoning that is not an R, a a resident an R1 R2. You could have a residence in an ag zoning, and that would then fall into that residential 1 to 20 correct? Well, we’re talking two sections, two different sections here.

00:15:41,770	Well one is the same thing is that it’s, it’s called out under BB uh Roman numeral 1, residential 1 to 2 um KDWAC and then under C, the exemption, that the exemption is rooftop mounted solar panels in a residential district.

00:16:04,670	So I think that’s, it’s, is that the difference between a residence and and a a residence in a residential district. I, I believe is is that. The difference. The intent was to, to exempt residential houses. I’m having solar panels. On the roof mount as roof mounted units. So if you want to say all residential housing. If you want me to change that, that’s certainly up to you.

00:16:29,270	I think just the question was, was just around, um, if there’s a residential sizing, but then we’re exempting. Uh, roof mounted solar panels in a residential district, do we need Do we need the one, the, to call out the residential 1 to 20 if we’re exempting it. I don’t, I don’t know.

00:16:47,530	I’m not sure. Or is there, is there a? Um, maybe, uh, an example of where. That would You could put it in, there would be something residential, but it wouldn’t be in a residential district. I I’m trying to kind of maybe draw is there a There’s something there that’s not covered don’t need BI.

00:17:06,130	I don’t think you need it. I mean, that’s very clearly. You’re exempting them. B is just explaining the sizes. There’s multiple sizes levels. That’s all it is. It’s just saying the size.

00:17:33,370	If it’s 1 to 20, it’s it it’s qualified as residential, um, and then if they’re gonna do a rooftop, they’re, they don’t need to. Worry about a So you could, uh, I guess maybe with what you’re saying and I, I don’t know, Mitch, if that’s if that’s kind of the way this is written is that, uh, the residential sizing could be used on a commercial building.

00:17:50,630	But it’s, it’s a, you, you would just have that size, it’s, it would be a residential size, but you potentially could put it on a commercial building, but then you wouldn’t be exempted. I think it would be? No. No, no. It’s not OK. It’s exempts, only exempts residential districts from having solar panels roof mounted, that’s all it is. OK. We’re not talking about size.

00:18:10,100	We’re not talking about it’s, it’s the, the solar panels on the roof only if it’s, if it’s on a residence and it’s roof mounted, not, not ground mounted. My grandmother. Correct. OK, OK, got it. Uh, yeah, Comm Risch. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

00:18:27,030	So Mitch, if I had a residential rooftop one, I could go beyond the 20 kilowatts because I’m exempted. Undersea. Well, those, those, those are not, those are not maximum levels of, of, of kilowatts, megawatts, those are not maximum levels that you cannot exceed. Those are suggested levels when we review these special use permits. It’s up to this boy because every one of these things are gonna be different.

00:18:52,170	You’re gonna have such a, a massive amount of differences in each one of these systems that you, we don’t wanna start. Reducing or eliminating, not eliminating but uh putting a maximum amount on these systems because if it’s a smaller unit, smaller system that creates more electricity, why would we limit it? It’s what we’re trying to do is in these considerations

00:19:14,730	especially years is what is the effect on the neighbors? What is the effect on on the property values and and overcrowding and sort of thing.

00:19:31,200	Comm Connelly, did you have something? Oh yeah, go ahead, I think it was is that, um, With the exemption and things is it gives a guideline, but the beauty of the special use permit, it’s always be reviewed by either the board or the county, and then I think Comm was right as this, um, there’s no fee associated with the residential, I believe, right? under the exemption.

00:19:50,170	They just yeah, there, there wouldn’t have to, they wouldn’t even have to get a permit. Yeah, that’s. But that’s why I think it’s written in here is to delineate that difference and it’s roof mounted on a residence. Got, Mr. Chair, let me rephrase that. They, they would still need a building permit.

00:20:07,000	Because if they’re mounting these on the roof and they’re adding a load onto that existing roof. And they still need a building permit. OK. Yeah, no, thanks for that clarification that that’s it’s definitely a lot clearer in my mind, definitely. OK, we’re clear on that? I think so, yes. Um We included size classification for the community solar size classificates for solar farms.

00:20:38,930	Um Did not change anything on the site plan. Chair, yes, yeah, Commissioners are off, yeah. Only thing I’m gonna recommend, uh, 120 is what I’m sorry, which one? Uh, on, uh, the site plan required. OK, digital copy, uh, 1 to 2, um.

00:21:06,730	That’s gonna be fine and I’m gonna say that scale is probably gonna be fine in a residential application, but if you start getting into larger commercial stuff, a 1 to 20 when you’re talking say a uh 1000 ft by 1000 ft commercial farm.

00:21:27,000	Be 1 inch per 100 ft, so yeah, so I could just, I, I’m just trying to save you a headache from having to flip from, cause I, I, I know what 1 to 2 looks like when you start talking large like large scale site plans and excuse me, but it does say or larger scale. OK. That be OK? Yeah. Good.

00:21:56,470	We’ll let that true experience personally, again, personal opinion, I don’t like the or larger because or larger can mean, oh, it’s 10 to 200 or it’s 1 to 10 because 1 to 10 is technically a larger scale. It shows things at a larger scale. 1 to 10 ft. 1 inch equals 10 ft is technically larger than one in 20. Yep.

00:22:13,930	The higher the number, the smaller the detail. Oh yeah. Just trying to avoid confusion. Right. OK, so moving on, any other questions? And I’m just, I’m trying, I’m thinking of you in the future, Mitch. Not right now. You’re you’re my hero, Brian. Thank you. Oh, now it’s getting deep.

00:22:42,300	I’m I’m right I get a small prints tough though. Right. Yeah. So on page 8, the next changes, Uh, change minor is on item 9 additional standards. Um, in parallel with service provider. That was, um, I included that in. It wasn’t in their last. That was pointed out by uh. Light source, I think spring, spring.

00:23:16,470	Um The other minor changes on, um, under section 9. Additional conditions or specific allowances to this ordinance may be considered in the review and approval of the special permit. So that’s basically saying that.

00:23:43,270	Everyone is these things that comes in different, there’s special conditions, special situations that That we can’t cover in the ordinance, but it’s up to this board to evaluate on a on a case by case basis and on their on its own merit. Like last when he was talking about it was like. Having an exemption for areas that are swampy or non-usable Ag land that sort of thing.

00:24:08,830	Yeah All right, well, thanks for taking us through the all those uh changes and uh thanks for making those. Uh, any other questions for Mitch before we, uh, continue with this public hearing. Alright, seeing none, Mitch, thank you.

00:24:30,830	Uh, we will, uh, we will continue with the public hearing for the Article 8 Special uses solar farm, uh, from the February 12, 2025, uh, public hearing. So if anyone would like to approach and speak on this matter, uh, please approach the lectern. Introduce yourself, tell us where you’re from, and sign in.

00:24:50,200	I see no one in the uh gallery, so I don’t think there will be anyone, but, uh, next, uh, I’ll do a second call for anyone who would like to speak. And a final call for anyone who would like to speak on the public hearing regarding Article 8, special uses solar farm, uh, the continuation of the February 12, 2025, 2025 public hearing.

00:25:13,370	See none, we will close the public hearing and move into uh discussion and action on the, on Article 8 special uses Solar farm. I would move to approve with just to mention the extra underlining that you did that you didn’t highlight, I think it does draw attention to some of those key derivatives and just might improve the quality of the reed for people using it.

00:25:31,830	So thank you for that. Yeah. One second. OK, so it is a move for approval uh with the uh with the changes shown by Comm Connelly, seconded by Comm Patrick.

00:25:57,300	Is there any discussion on the motion? And Uh, with the, uh, with the changes made or with the changes that are shown, I guess is is what was the motion, yeah, as presented. Being that there were changes from the, from the first part of the hearing to the second part of the hearing, so. Any, uh, discussion on the motion. Seeing none, Marlow, if you could take us through a roll call vote.

00:26:25,570	OK, the motion is approved with, uh, changes showing. And is presented. Yes vote means to approve. Um Comm Patrick, yes. Comm Risch? Yes. Comm Zuroff? Yes. Comm Bitner. Yes. Comm Connelly. Yes. Comm Jarratt, Chair? Yes. All approved. Thank you, Marla. Uh, that is approved, so it will, uh, pass to the county commission with a recommendation of approval.

00:27:03,900	And that can that uh finishes up our public hearing agenda, uh, but in other business, we do have uh a line item about uh non-access lines, and Mitch, if you could, uh, kind of introduce us to that, take us through some of the detail and, uh, uh, Chair Agnew, before I get started, I was wondering if I could add to the uh another

00:27:22,030	item to the uh other business. You me I present it now the uh. At the last meeting, it was recommended to table the data center ordinance until June. I’d like to see if we can revisit re uh consider that or table it until April’s meeting.

00:27:41,830	There are many reasons for that. Um, one of them is the, um, if we don’t have an ordinance in place. And there’s so many knocking at our door. We have to let them build. We can’t stop them from building.

00:27:58,130	So I guess that that is my question is, is that if there is no ordinance called out in our uh in our ordinances, uh, for a use or or an accept uh what is it an allotted use or or a special use either way.

00:28:16,500	Our is our ordinance prescriptive, I believe is the, the term where if it’s not mentioned in there, then it’s not allowed or is it is it out specific item. That is not in there. If it’s, you know, well, wind tars are in there, but Data centers, I believe, um, are coming.

00:28:40,500	And there’s some activity, uh, some question about, you know, purchasing land here and that sort of thing. So it’s, it’s fine, but the idea is that um why do we need to wait till June? When this ordinance that I presented last month, I thought was pretty well written. It’s pretty standard, a lot of other counties in the state.

00:28:59,370	The only thing that we did not have on that was to define a different sizes of them. Which this is a large for a large scale data center crypto mining center. Uh, the smaller ones for residential, that can be addressed at a later date.

00:29:22,630	Uh, the, uh, uh, Senate bills, I can’t think of it right now, 12:39 or so for the data centers did not go, did not pass the House vote, so it’s going to go back to committee. But believe me, they’ll be back. And so those are for residential use and and commercial use. So that’s where they were talking about allowing a data center in that is using more than one megawatt of power.

00:29:41,570	OK, uh, and I believe the reason that it was tabled, uh, they was because of items that were going on in in the legislature, uh, of that, uh, well, there may be changes and uh that that could potentially make us want to reconsider things that we had in the ordinance or potentially negate the ordinance, uh, I believe

00:30:01,770	that was, that was why it got tabled, uh, but I, I guess maybe just back to my question, I just want to get, make sure I have the the right answer here.

00:30:17,200	that if, if it’s not called out as a, as a either acceptable use or a special use now then, I mean, if you, you know, you say you’ve got, OK, there, there may be uh activity going on on this, that, that would tell me that it’s that. That it’s not allowed in the county, correct? at all it would cause problems for the county.

00:30:38,500	If they came up here and knocked on our door for a building permit for an industrial type building that houses Day Center, we would have a problem with that. We could, we could probably try to deny it. And then they have to appeal it and then they take it to district court, and they would see the Burleigh County is out of line here.

00:30:57,200	It’s the idea is that Um, those, those uses that are in that ordinance or the uh the new legislative bill is not in this ordinance. That, that needs to be an entirely different ordinance. As for residential and commercial use.

00:31:19,730	This is for a large scale, um, Data centers And I, we can get to work on the residential smaller ones that state legislators is looking at, which I intend to do, but I think that um. That we, I thought it was a further well written ordinance. It wasn’t asking for too much is many, many jurisdictions have identical ordinances to it. And so we’re.

00:31:41,730	I mean, it’s up to you. You want to table it until June, that’s fine. I, I. Don’t think we need to because we can, we can visit those other concerns in June or, you know, May, whatever.

00:31:58,030	OK, I, I appreciate the feedback because uh that, that, that gets me, I guess aligned and uh I guess I had it in my head is that if it’s not, if it’s not now not called out in our ordinance, then it just wouldn’t be allowed, so there’s no, there’s no risk if we would table it for that extended period of

00:32:09,730	time, but if you’re saying that there is a risk, then that changes my thinking, I know that. But uh I guess I’ll just open it up to the board for uh kind of questions to Mitch, so I guess we’ll start here, Comm Patrick, well, 1st, 1st of all,

00:32:23,670	I don’t have anything for Mitch. I would just say, I would be, I’d be. Uh, receptive to bringing it back earlier. With one qualification and I talked to you, Mr. Chair, about that before the meeting is that. If we have, uh Mr. Phil comes back again.

00:32:40,930	Uh, we would like his comments in writing before the meeting. So that we can review them. Without going through another 2 hour discussion. And that’s my comment, Comm Risch, uh, thank you, Mr. Chair. I think Mitch is right. I think if they, somebody comes up with a plan for a data center. We don’t have any ordinance.

00:32:59,500	We either give them a permit or they might challenge it in court and whatnot and being able to build it. So I, I, I, I, I think moving it up to April makes sense to me. Wish was rough, uh, only I guess.

00:33:18,200	for full transparency on the question, I’ll just ask the question, is there somebody immediately knocking on the door right now or. Have you, have you, have you had, have you had somebody in your office, uh, inquiring about getting a permit to build a data center. No. OK. Mr. Chair, uh yes, Comm Bitner.

00:33:36,400	They make a motion to remove that from the table and move it up to the April meeting. I’ll check that. OK. Uh, that, it’s been, it’s been moved by Comm Bitner and seconded by Comm Patrick to uh remove that uh from the, remove the, uh, I guess it would be the motion to table the data center ordinance

00:33:57,400	of and move it up to the April meeting, or to get it on the April meeting agenda for this commission. Is there any discussion on that motion? Uh, my question is, what is the proper procedure for Moving something up that was tabled. Just, what were you do it? Absolutely, that’s that’s it.

00:34:17,730	Yeah, that’s the motion. Remove it. Remove it from the table is the motion to do that. Any other discussion on the motion? I just want to state that I think that again if Mr.

00:34:40,170	Phillips is going to come or anyone else that they number one come with comments that are written or get comments written comments to us ahead of the, the uh hearing. And in addition, I think that we need to limit the amount of time that these people speak. We definitely will be putting a time limit on uh on. On these, uh, these ordinance changes, um. So that we can uh not have the runaway train.

00:34:59,170	Any other comments, uh, any other discussion? And I think, uh, you know, just what I, what I said before, the motion, but as discussion on this motion is that uh I guess I was under the impression that uh that they, that this would not be allowed in the meantime, and it sounds to me like they’re.

00:35:18,500	There is, uh, likely some, some potential loophole or way around that, so that, uh, definitely changes my mind, Mr. Chair. Yes. That, that is a big legal question, but in my mind, if somebody came here and wanted to build. We, uh. I just leave it where it is, right, right, you know, where, where it is.

00:35:41,000	It’s that’s a good legal question, and I’m, I’m not a legal scholar on this stuff, so it’s, you know, it, it’s, I’ve always been on on this on its understanding, excuse me, that if you don’t have something on your books, it’s difficult to stop it from happening and to go proactive after the fact too are reactive basically it’s

00:36:01,000	it’s, you know. Yeah, and I, I guess I’ll reiterate what I said, uh, last time, uh, at the last meeting is that I would rather have something in place that we can adjust farther down the road, do we, if we do want to change it, I think having something in place is better than having nothing in place,

00:36:18,130	uh, I guess like you say, I’m, I am no legal scholar either, but uh I, I appreciate the kind of maybe the scenario playing, uh, or the scenario layout for me that helps me kind of think

00:36:33,630	think it came, I mean, we listened to the gentleman for a long time, and I think it kind of came from a request from him, and we conceded to that request, but now after further thought, I think this is the right.

00:36:50,630	Call Yes, uh, I guess one question would be and and uh I think just to put in people’s mind to get them, get them thinking, and we can do that, uh, when we, when we uh re bring this up at a, at a hearing is that what, what are the changes that we, you know, would want to make,

00:37:05,000	and that’s, it’s always, always the question when we bring these things up at at a hearing, uh, or any consideration is that uh what are those, what are those changes? I know that we had um a person here that was from the industry. And I think that’s, that’s great, uh, to educate us.

00:37:22,800	Um, I do also on the flip side of that coin, uh, we’ll see that the industry doesn’t write the regulations, the industry being regulated, shouldn’t be writing the regulations, but it’s nice to have them here to educate us, so, um, you know, by no means there is that uh.

00:37:40,370	Is that a plan to, to bring every one of those uh recommendations or thoughts into our ordinance, uh, maybe some, maybe none, maybe all, but that’s, uh, we will make that decision.

00:38:04,930	Uh, any other, any further discussion? All right, uh, seeing none, I’ll just go into a uh a voice vote on this, uh, uh, all in favor of the motion, please say aye. Any opposition. Hearing none, uh, we will bring the uh data center consideration for the uh data center ordinance onto the April, uh, the April agenda.

00:38:26,730	All right, moving into uh other business, uh, for the non-access lines, uh, Mitch, if you could take us through a little bit of uh what your, what your thoughts are on this. OK, uh, Comm, uh, non-access lines are selectively drawn on a plat to limit high speed, high traffic volume, roadways, and at intersections to lower traffic accidents.

00:38:50,100	County staff reviews these non-access lines, uh, locations and make recommendations on the latte to the county commission for their approval for the county board’s approval. Once non-access lines are recorded on a plane, it becomes it currently requires the owner to replat the allowed access to a new location. Um, staff’s intentions are to be able to make an administrative change to non-access lines on the platform while not compromising the important safety concerns of the latte or the non-access lines themselves.

00:39:13,830	Minor changes to an ion access lines can be completed in a less complicated method by use of a resolution and affidavit, which is in your packet. Copies are in your packet. Which would proceed as follows $250 non-access line fee. Applications reviewed by the county planning and zoning staff County Highway Department and additional staff as needed.

00:39:37,730	After the petition is presented at a public hearing to the planning Commission, the resolution and affidavit are submitted to the county board for their approval. Auditor stamps and signs the affidavit and documents were recorded by the county staff and filed with the original subdivisions.

00:40:01,730	Um Using this method policy would would shorten the time and reduce costs for applications, surveying and recording. So there are a list of some of the uh properties that were affected by the platted non-access lines. You may recall, uh, the, uh, I think it was not Riverside, might have been Riverside.

00:40:20,400	It’s down on, on South Fork Junction uh that had 4 lots in a row. Uh, that’s those, those plaques are important that we have lawn access lines because they, they combine the access points 2 lots to 2 lots, and so it’s, it’s important to have stuff like that drawn on on flats but um.

00:40:42,370	On the, on this, it’s basically if somebody comes in, such as the riverside uh Island Road uh property. In that situation, the um The surveyor made a mistake of the location of the of the line. And they discovered it after the fact, after it was recording and they wanted to move it over about 1015 ft. Well, that would have taken a plat.

00:41:05,800	A Replat so This, in this case, county staff would be able to review that and we’d make their recommendations to the county board. So that’s where we’re at with, with this. So, the Motion is to advise the county Commission on Staff and recommendations to allow administration of changes to the platted non-access line.

00:41:30,470	Mitch, um, when, when we say minor changes, um, you know, what would you consider minor? Is there, is there some sort of a quantitative, uh, you know, I guess, uh, number that we would want to put on there, whether it’s a, um, Of foot measurement or if it’s a percentage, uh, I don’t know.

00:41:48,500	Does, does that make sense or not, um, when we say minor changes, I guess is there, do we need to qual, you know, qualify what is that? What is a minor change and what’s not, or is that, is that OK? Well, I would, I would mostly be on a, a singular singular application. It wouldn’t be for an entire subdivision.

00:42:12,000	Um It’d be Basically one lot they would like to move it because they can’t. Drive through, they want to have access to this accessory building and from this point and so it’s kind of. It’s not any major change, it would be the entire latte. Or multiple access lines at one time.

00:42:31,900	Um I can guarantee you that the County highway department’s not going to want to do a major change on these access lines without a plan. I knew a replay. OK. Um, any, any questions for Mitch? you guys have any? And we have agreement. Yeah. Uh, any questions for Mitch? OK.

00:42:58,770	Uh, seeing none, uh, is there any discussion or action that we would like to take on this. Yeah, Comm Patrick, I move approval, um. Well, afterwards I’ll indicate why. OK, go ahead. OK.

00:43:17,030	Uh, so, it’s been moved for approval, uh, by Comm Patrick, uh, seconded by Comm Connelly, uh, to, and the, the motion is uh the what the action requested is uh that is presented here to advise county Commission and staff on recommendations to allow administrative changes to a plaited nod-access line.

00:43:34,230	Any discussion on the motion for talked with Marla earlier about this, and she described it as what happens is I’ve got 10 ft basically on each side of a lot, which is access, and if I wanted to move it over here because I want to park, uh, in this case, it was a motor home,

00:43:45,030	um. I could do that. You know, and, and as long as the county engineer, which it already says in here, is, is reviewing it and saying it’s OK. There shouldn’t be a problem. Yes Any other discussion on the motion. I I, I definitely like this.

00:44:08,370	This is a, a nice thing to where we’re not forcing people to go back fully through the process and spend a bunch of money and waste a bunch of time on something that doesn’t, I don’t believe requires it, so, uh, any further discussion? Seeing none, uh, you know, Marla, why don’t you take us through a roll call vote just for old times’ sake.

00:44:35,100	OK, the motion was advised County Commission and staff on recommendation to allow administrative changes to platted non-access lines. Yes, well means you agree, Comm Bitner. Yes. Comm Risch? Yes. Commissioners are off? Yes. Comm Connelly. Yes. I didn’t hear you, is that a yes? Yes. OK. Sorry, Comm Jarratt. Yes. Comm Patrick? Yes. And Mr.

00:45:06,100	Chair, yes. All approved. OK. The, uh, the change to the, uh, the change regarding non-access lines, uh, is approved. And we’ll go to uh that will go to the county commission for final approval, correct? move into a double. Or, OK, so it will go to a public hearing at at the County Commission. Or not.

00:45:28,630	For this, no, no, OK. Not access The non-access one, correct? OK, sounds good. Uh, any further business, any that anyone would like to bring up? We’ll do a jour. It. Is there a second? OK, all right, Commissioner Zuroff, moved to Adjourn. Comm Connelly seconded it. Is it, is there any is there any opposition to