00:00:10,100	It’s 5 o’clock. I’d like to welcome everyone here to this, uh, meeting the Bismarck Planning and Zoning Commission, and with that, I’m going to call the meeting to order and uh ask Sarah to call Roll. Comm Bitner. Comm Field? Yes. Comm Johnson. Comm Larson. Here Comm Lukens. Comm Schell here.

00:00:37,470	Comm Schmitz. Comm Sivak. Comm Wangen here Comm Zent, excuse me, Chair Schwartz. Thank you. With that, we’ll move on to the first item on our agenda this evening, which is consideration of the approval minutes for our March 26th meeting. Commissioners, what are your wishes? Motion to approve.

00:00:58,400	We have a motion to approve from Comm Zent. Second, we have a second from Comm Wangen. Any discussion? And I’m not seeing or hearing any, so Sarah, would you please call roll? Commission Yes, Comm Field, yes. Comm Johnson, Comm Larson. Yes, Comm Schell. Yes, Comm Sivak, yes, Chair Schwartz.

00:01:23,000	Oh me, Comm Zent. Yes, Chair Schwartz. Yes. Thank you. The motion is approved. Thank you. We’ll move on to our consent agenda this evening, and we have 3 items in our consent agenda, the first being Schaffer Heights, Block 2, lot 1, Le lot 1A and lot 2 less

00:01:43,570	lot 2A, and it is a request for a zoning map amendment and uh staff’s recommendation is to call for a public hearing. The second is daybreak’s 2nd edition, Block. One, lot one, and block 6, lot 1. And this is a request for a zoning map amendment.

00:02:05,470	And future land use amendment and staff’s recommendation for both items is to call for a public hearing. And then finally, the 3rd item in our consent agenda. Is Silver Ranch 5th edition, and this is a request for a preliminary plot and zoning map amendment and staff’s recommendation is to once again call for a public hearing on

00:02:25,470	both items. Commissioners, what are your wishes for the consent agenda this evening. Motion to approve the consent agenda. We have a motion from Comm Wangen to approve. We have a 2 from Comm Johnson. Any discussion? And I’m not seeing or hearing any. Sarah, would you please call roll? Comm Seva. Yes.

00:02:50,470	Comm Field? Yes. Comm Johnson. Yes, Comm Wongan, Yes, Comm Larson.

00:03:02,370	approved. We will now move on to our regular agenda this evening and the first item on that is a a a briefing from Hillary on uh our HUD Consolidated plan. Hillary, welcome back to the meeting. Hey, thank you. It’s been a few minutes. Thanks for having me.

00:03:23,630	Good evening and chair Schwartz and Comm. Thank you for having me. For those of you who may not be as familiar with me. My name is Hillary and I’m a planner and the CDBG program administrator for the Community development department.

00:03:38,370	Included in your packet for the agenda item number 3A is a general overview of the community development block grant or CDBG for short program that is administered as part of the planning division of community development. The city of Bismarck participates in the CDBG program as an entitlement community receiving an annual allocation from the United States.

00:03:55,470	Department of Housing and Urban Development, or HUD for short, which is then used to meet one of the three national objectives set by HUD which must include either a benefit to low to moderate income persons, the removal of summer blight or an urgent need typically associated with a declared national disaster.

00:04:12,500	The city of Bismarck has historically aligned its CDBG goals and objectives with activities that accomplish the national objective of a benefit to low to moderate income persons. A requirement of continued participation in the CDBG program is the development of a 5 year consolidated plan. This plan serves as the framework for the city’s goals and objectives and the implementation of activities over that 5 year period.

00:04:30,730	Goals and objectives are then implemented yearly through the CDBG annual action plan and what you’ve been provided with in the memo in your packet is a link to the draft 2025 to 2029 CDBG consolidated plan, which is now available for viewing and comments during its 30 day public comment period until May 11th, at which time public

00:04:47,730	comments received will be reviewed and considered for implementation into the plan. The plan consists of multiple major sections, including a market analysis, needs assessment, strategic plan, and the 2025 Annual Action Plan.

00:05:06,470	One notable item is that the annual action plan section of this plan has been drafted based on an estimated 2025 allocation with the expectation that the city will receive approximately $350,000. The sub recipient amounts in that section will be adjusted accordingly in the event a higher or lower allocation is issued by HUD.

00:05:20,470	We expect to have our final formula for this amount by the end of May with consideration of the final plan by city commission in June and submit all to HUD for final approval immediately after. No action is needed by this commission.

00:05:36,830	I wanted to simply notify you and those listening or watching of the opportunity for your review of this plan, and if you wish to do so, you may submit comments or contact me directly with questions or for discussion. Do you have any questions for me now? Comm questions for Hillary. I’m not seeing or hearing you answered my question, so thank you. Very good. Have a good night. Thank you.

00:05:56,630	With that, we will move on to the 2nd item in our regular agenda, which is Bowden edition, block one, lots 1 through 23, and Daniel is going to provide us with staff briefing this evening. Good evening, Chair Schwartz Commissioners.

00:06:14,270	Uh, so Boden Development LLC is requesting, uh, the zoning map amendment, uh, as you mentioned, it is lots 1 through 23, block 1 of both in edition. Uh, you may be feeling a little bit of deja vu, uh, that we did have a public hearing on this request, uh, at the last meeting. However, uh, there was an error in the legal notice in the newspaper, uh, the some of the lots of this legal description were omitted from that notice.

00:06:30,400	So because of that, our, our ordinance requirements were not met for the notice, so we are holding this hearing to make sure anyone who may have been relying on that new super has the opportunity to be heard on this topic, uh, the staff report presentation, the things that were in your packet were

00:06:44,470	all, we’re all correct. Uh, the mailings were correct, but the legal notices a requirement of ours, so, uh, we’ve opted to hold this hearing. Uh, this is on a portion of the request, uh, as you recall, there were 3 items.

00:07:02,870	There was a zoning map amendment from our 10 to RT zoning districts serve as a future land use plan amendment and there were some text revisions to the RT residential zoning district, uh, this public hearing is on those text amendments. That was what was missed in the in the legal ad. Uh, so just to get your bearings on the site again. uh, this is in North Bismarck.

00:07:19,030	It’s on the east side of North North Washington Street in the south side of East La Salle Drive, just south of Liberty Elementary School. Uh, so the, the changes that I have referenced are in the packet. I’ll outline them right now though.

00:07:39,100	Uh, essentially the sizes of the buildings are limited in the ordinance today to 4000 square feet plus an additional 1000 square feet for a garage, um, in each of the structures. Uh, the, this change would not increase the overall footprint, but it would just create a flat 5500 square feet, whether there’s a garage or not.

00:07:58,000	So essentially from the outside, it would look the same. However, there’d be more flexibility in how the interior space could be used. That’s one change. The second change is that the sizes of the signs would be calculated differently.

00:08:16,100	Currently, uh, 60 square feet of signage is allowed total on a lot and signs and lots that have a right of way, um, on the public. Have a frontage and a public right of way and the interior roadway would be allowed up to 2 signs. That is changed to 45 square feet per sign. So some of the lots would have a little less signage.

00:08:28,730	Some of them could have a little more signage, but the 45 square feet would be applied per sign. And, uh, thirdly, A commercial parking lot would be allowed, uh, within the conditional RT zoning district, uh, the property owner has signaled an interest in additional overflow parking, uh, the different lots would all have their own parking for

00:08:51,730	their uses, however, for events and in certain special occasions they wanted to have a commercial lot that could be utilized by all the offices within the subdivision. Uh, there is also in this sort of in a landscape buffer requirement on the east side. However, that would be outside of the area we’re referring to today.

00:09:10,770	However, you’ll notice that in, in the changes of the landscape buffer would need to be planted on the east side of this, of this RT residential zoning district.

00:09:28,570	The So based on the findings that are in your, in your staff report, we are recommending approval to these revisions to the conditions of the conditional RT district in lots 1 through 23 B block one of Bowden Edition as outlined in the attached draft ordinance. We did receive 4 new comments that were distributed to you this morning.

00:09:44,130	A comment did come in afterward that that missed the deadline and I hope they’re here today to express that comment, uh, but we did have 4 written comments that were that were distributed and uh and you were able to see those. Hopefully by this time. So if you have any questions for me, I can attempt to answer them. Commissioner’s questions for Daniel.

00:10:00,570	Comm Schell, Daniel, just maybe to clarify the, the zoning change that happened at the last meeting that was recommended was for some of the RT excuse me the R10 lots to switch to RT.

00:10:16,730	Those that decision has already made what’s before us today is the stuff that was already RT to change the conditions with that, is that correct? That is correct, yes. You voted at your last meeting at a 6 to 1 vote to recommend approval and two of those things were valid recommendations because it was a valid hearing, including the R10 to RT. It’s the text changes that we are doing today. OK, thank you. Um-hum. Thank you.

00:10:36,100	Commissioner’s additional questions for Daniel. I’m not seeing or hearing any Daniel. Thank you. Thank you. With that, this is a public hearing, so I will open the floor to either the requester or a representative to come speak to us on this agenda item. Jason, could I get you to put your name on the log there, please.

00:10:56,670	You bet. Thank you. Good evening, Chair Schwartz and Commissioners. Today we’re here again, uh, but specifically to talk about the uh text amendment to the conditional part of the RT zoning.

00:11:38,630	And so, as Daniel said, there’s 4 components to that text change and I’d just like to maybe talk a little bit about each of those 4 components. The first component that we have is the, uh, square footage. Change specifically to the garage portion of the text amendment, so we have a total square footage of 5500 square feet.

00:12:00,270	Currently as it exists, 1000 square feet, or up to 1000 square feet can be garage, and so this, uh, change would then just be 5500 square feet total for the building. Allowing then uh those users to use that in any manner within the building, um, whether it’s a garage or if it’s internal use, um, for the commercial aspect of, of what they’re bringing in.

00:12:28,000	Um, the second part is the square footage to the signage, and so we were kind of caught off guard a little bit and it happened at the point where we were in construction with some of the first site plans.

00:12:48,230	Um, We were looking at putting some signage, of course, um, you know, on the interior side and also the exterior side of Washington Street and what we found out was that that 60 square foot didn’t allow for realistic signage to have, nor did our text of that conditional RT allow for that.

00:13:13,900	So, uh, working with staff, we were able to come to a compromise to allow for 45 square feet of signage on the side of that Washington perimeter and LaSalle perimeter, but then also be allowed some small signage on the interior aspect of that building too. Um, the third component of that is the portion of the property that is Converted last month from the R10 to the RT zoning.

00:13:40,030	Uh, those twin homes that were, uh, looked at at that time in that area, just kind of got to be really dense, um, there’s some storm sewer easements that run through that property.

00:14:01,630	And so we didn’t have a real good opportunity to come back to try to relock those areas out to try to, you know, bring that density down a little bit from those 10 units to maybe 8, and so we had done some planning to see what it would cost to, you know, do storm sewer and all those types of things to move it, but we were just really having a struggle trying to get

00:14:16,900	that to work. And so, um, just working with all the different groups within that area. Everybody just kind of got to a point where they’re like, you know, we feel we’d like to just get away from that.

00:14:37,770	So, kind of re-swinging around and trying to pivot on what to do with that area now, um, we started to get comments from those groups of, hey, you know, we’ve got, you know, Christmas parties or maybe we’ve got people that come in from town for a big meeting and stuff, it sure would be nice.

00:14:55,370	If we had some areas for some additional parking for this group in this area and so, um, we put together some concepts for that and it kind of seemed like that could fit, um, had some meetings with the city and So that’s something that uh possibly could be in the works to cite, um, a communal parking lot and so.

00:15:15,100	through that process, number 4 came in, which is Because of the change and because of the use, um, how we deal with that buffering between the single family residences and that commercial aspect. So came up with concept for a buffer yard to be placed all the way along that eastern side of that zoning change, um, that area is about 530 ft long.

00:15:41,230	And so we would end up with a buffer yard that would, uh, According to zoning, two shade trees. 3 large conifers, 10 small conifers, 14 shrubs, uh, every 100 ft, and so that would, according to the buffer in the city’s ordinance would suffice for that. That that would be the density of that planting material.

00:16:05,800	So if you guys got any questions, I’d be happy to answer anything you guys may have. Commissioners, questions for Jason. Jason, you talked about, uh, trees for the buffer. Willows, trees be full grown trees or How, how will you start them, what size will they be? There are size requirements within the ordinance.

00:16:29,870	And so, um, whether they’re 2 gallon, 5 gallon, or 2-inchklers, there, there is some guidelines that follow through with that. OK. Thank you. Again, Commissioner’s questions for Jason. I’m not saying you’re hearing any Jason. Thank you. With that, the podium is open for others that would care to address this agenda item. And I’m not seeing or hearing any.

00:16:53,870	Oh. You can’t think that I wasn’t gonna be here. OK Um, thank you, everybody who has put time and thought into this. Um, I just have a few things that I wanted to ask. Some of them relate to our last hearing because you please introduce yourself again? Oh, I thought everybody would remember.

00:17:16,730	Um, my name is Dawn Ulmer, and I live in Boulder Ridge on the first edition. Dawn, thank you. Yeah, so I’m adjacent to Bowden Development. Um, if it was possible if Dawn wouldn’t mind putting that picture up. I just like having a picture of it as we talk.

00:17:32,270	There were some things that were brought up after I sat down at the last meeting and then I couldn’t address them because it was past the public hearing part, so a few things I just wanted to maybe get clarification on for those people in Boulder Ridge who couldn’t be here.

00:17:50,670	Some of them said they felt like it didn’t matter if they were here and, you know, if they put in their written comments, they said they’re never. red out loud, so they felt like those were dismissed, so I just wanted to get some clarification on a few things.

00:18:08,500	For one thing, um, The first thing that was mentioned was adding the garage space so that it’s gonna be a total of 5000 square feet for each building, so in other words, by adding a big parking lot, they can extend the building and make it a bigger office building, basically is what’s happening.

00:18:26,900	And when this first came up for a zoning change, the whole plan was that these would look like homes, they’d be small, and the garage would be, there wouldn’t be parking lots. There would be just something where people can come and go and there was no need for cars to be sitting out there. So that was in our original.

00:18:45,400	Commission meeting and I just wanted to point that out because that was something that we had discussed before. The other thing that was brought up just now is really ironic because when we first went to the zoning commission meeting on this property and the zoning was changed, one of the things that we brought up was that twin homes was too much density, that businesses

00:19:04,830	and twin homes would be too much density for that property, but we were told that we. were wrong. And that the twin homes would be fine. So can you understand the confusion of the taxpayers in Boulder Ridge that our first argument was it was too dense, and we were told, no, it’s not.

00:19:23,370	And now we’re told, oh, I guess it’s too dense. Does, does that make sense that that’s confusion? Is there anybody that can clarify the

00:19:36,630	we can certainly ask Jason that question after. OK. And you can, you can kind of see where this is headed. There’s a little disillusionment with public comment. When public comment is made and then dismissed and nobody really seems to take action on it.

00:19:57,630	And so these are some things we had concerns about. Another thing, and I realized we’ve already, you’ve made the decision to rezone and, I mean, you’ve probably made that decision, most of you, as you’re sitting here today, you know what’s going to happen, but originally we were told the signs would be small. There wouldn’t be a lot of lights.

00:20:15,630	There wouldn’t be a lot of pavement. There wouldn’t be parking lots. And now we’re in the position where that’s changing. And so when I go back to look at the plot, one of the things that was brought up last time after I spoke.

00:20:33,230	was that this was a piece of egg property that just went to commercial, but that wasn’t really the case because in the original plan, we looked at the original plan and you probably have it on file. It was residential homes, single family homes, 32 of them.

00:20:51,100	And the complication was brought up that you can’t have homes, you can’t sell homes alongside Washington, but if you look on the map. Right alongside Washington, that’s where Boulder Ridge is. Those are all homes alongside Washington, so that wasn’t a valid argument. The other question, our neighborhood has is right across the road, there is commercial property that Knutsons are selling.

00:21:16,000	And we were told that this is good land use to change our residential area into commercial property. So is there any clarification? On how that was in the best public interest. Just for the people who are listening. And they’ll watch the video later. So how can we rezone this when you can see right across the road.

00:21:39,570	It’s all zone commercial. I just, if somebody could just tell me. What is the reasoning? Well, again, we can have a planner step, step up after you present. OK. Then will I get to talk after them because these are questions that you have to get answered as, as you look forward, um, another one.

00:22:08,170	What’s the other question? Um, OK, so we covered that. In my opinion, and I would love, I would love to work with, I’ve talked to Kim already and we’ve talked about working on that watershed area and doing something really good with it.

00:22:25,400	So that’s something we’re already talking about, but I would just like to take into consideration. for the public interest What, what is the purpose of bigger signs, bigger buildings, and now a big parking lot. And you can see where our homes are. And I appreciate the fact that there will be single family dwellings behind my house. That’s awesome.

00:22:46,170	I’m, I’m very thankful for that. But still from my deck, I still see the entire property. And I still look across the road and see commercial property for sale. And yet we’re being told that Beside this elementary school, beside our homes. It is the best use of land.

00:23:09,730	To change it from residential to commercial. Where if you want to decrease the density of twin homes, couldn’t we just put single-family dwellings there, like it was originally planned. You know, we, we knew it would be too dense. And I appreciate. That you spoke up at the last meeting. I appreciate that.

00:23:31,170	It’s just really frustrating as taxpayers to really have a really good argument and be told that you sympathize with our argument. But you’re still gonna go ahead and do What you plan to do.

00:23:50,400	And decisions are feel like decisions are made before we ever get up here and talk, so I just have those questions and if anybody can answer that. Um, one more thing, at the end of our meeting, um, our mayor, who I’m voted for. Made the comment, this is a good use of land because we need more businesses in North Bismarck. And I thought that was just kind of a strange comment considering what we’re looking at. We have businesses.

00:24:13,800	We’re surrounded by businesses now. Our specials go up, up, up all the time. Our taxes go up. There’s a lot of businesses. There’s a lot of commercial property that’s not being used. So that’s a comment I would like clarification on. And I think that’s all I have.

00:24:36,730	Um, is there going to be a problem selling homes between commercial property and a watershed area. You know, what, what if there is problems selling those homes or selling those lots. What’s going to happen to us then? So those are things to think about. So with that on the table, if somebody could just answer and clarify.

00:24:55,900	Why this is OK to do. Especially after in the original rezoning, the specifics we were told is a limit to the height of the building, limit to the size of the building, no parking lots. And no big commercial buildings. And now we’re being told. OK. Those twin homes too dense.

00:25:18,370	We need big parking lots. And so from our house on our deck in the summer, we’ll look out at the parking lot. And Another group that is concerned is the families that drop off kids at the elementary school.

00:25:38,500	So we could have sold homes for kids that could go to that elementary school, and now we have commercial. And we have commercial zoning across Washington, so I’m sure we’ll get more businesses there. But if there’s just somebody that could explain and clarify why this was in the public’s best interests. I would really appreciate it.

00:26:02,270	And I think all of the taxpayers in our neighborhood would appreciate it, and this is not, nothing personal. The Knutsons all do great work. We know that. I just need some clarification on some of those things and how your decisions are made. And you can see if you look back at the last meeting and the meeting before that.

00:26:21,530	You can see that there were points brought up that are now being used on the side of changing zoning again, where when we brought them up, we were told we were concerned over nothing. So I would appreciate that if you would. Just help us understand the homes all over in this area.

00:26:40,100	And then over here commercial, why couldn’t we have just finished off Boulder Ridge? And kept it residential and that’s all I have for today, but if anybody else has questions for me, I’d take them. Commissioner’s questions for Dawn. I’m not seeing or hearing any time. OK. Thank you. Thank you. And thank you for being patient.

00:27:02,470	I remember that you did stand up at the meeting last month after the public hearing. With that, the podium is open. Jason, Chair, Commissioners, just to address a few of the questions that were asked, um, In regards to the building size, the building size is not getting larger, so the 5500 was in the original text.

00:27:33,030	Of the beauty it is going to stay the same. The only difference is, is. They do not have to have a garage potentially. Where it would have been 4500 square feet. With up to 1000 square feet of garage. So that footprint doesn’t change.

00:27:56,900	Um The the comments in regards to the density is more of a spatial issue. And so when we worked with some of the, uh, building, uh. Development companies in town as far as. Uh, starting to look at twin homes and things like that. They are saying to us that, you know, hey, these units. What people want are much larger than the lots are.

00:28:24,630	Which is why we were trying to figure out how to redo the lots to get Less buildings in that area, but we ran into difficulties with that stormursement, so. Just with the lack of interest in that. Everyone was saying. It’s not really working for us with that, so.

00:28:49,400	That’s where that pivot became moving that over to the RTU. Um, as far as the signs go, being too large, um. It Without this amendment? Actually, the signs would be allowed to be larger.

00:29:16,000	The only signs that are the areas that get two signs are the ones along Washington Street and LaSalle, and those signs are going to phase out towards the projection of the street. So actually this would be a reduction within the development for overall square footage of the signs. So, we did think that was a good thing. So some of them along there would be a little more area of total sign. All the others are going to be less area of total sign, all the interior stuff.

00:29:38,830	Um, and then just uh uh point of, uh, on the R5 zoning. Um, we actually are starting some single family structures this spring and hoping to get those up and and going and done before fall, so we can start uh getting.

00:30:04,000	Some residents in there we’ve got people that are interested in that area and so we’re, we’re kicking that off here pretty soon. So, uh, if there’s any questions I can address any questions you may have. Comm Field. So from the last meeting, This was originally gonna be Holmes, where you’re putting a commercial now.

00:30:29,570	So the people that bought the house or the lots and built homes that are going to be looking at the backside of this commercial development. What are they gonna see? They’re gonna be dumpsters, storage, what’s back there? Is that the face of the building or the back of the building? So there is a landscape buffer.

00:30:48,770	That borders all of the commercial area that bounds onto any residential area. Um, any of the dumpsters by code would be required to be within a fenced enclosure.

00:31:13,870	Um, typically those are up front by the streets so they can be accessed by a truck, uh that would pick those receptacles up, and then, of course, there is additional landscaping that all the commercial products have for, uh, landscaping for perimeter parking and and things like that, so. So the The actual face of the. Businesses is facing Washington. Um, on the Washington portion, those face the interior street.

00:31:40,630	Um, so there is an interior loop within there and then those buildings would typically face those interior looped streets. OK, thank you, Comm Field. Commissioner’s additional questions for uh for Jason. I have one for you, Jason. You’ve been with this project from the beginning, right? Yes. How’s the footprint of the buildings changed over that time. Have they gotten? Larger, uh, what, what, what was the initial? Promise.

00:32:08,370	Uh, Chair Schwartz, Commissioners, uh, when we brought the original project in, we came in with the PUD that You have Pre-change here. So the changes that we are asking for. Everything other than that is what we came in at that time when we brought Bowden Edition in. So it all came in together.

00:32:31,870	It was the conditional RT. The R10 It was the Platte zoning change, future land use amendment. So that all came in together. Nothing has been changed since we came forward last month. OK. OK. Thank you, Comm Johnson. Do, is there any initial thoughts on how much.

00:32:59,200	How many lots will be allocated towards the parking that’s allowed now since you can, you can build the independent parking lot, so, um, The lots that are there, uh, the 3 individual twin home units, not buildings, but just units, right? So a twin home and a half, lot.

00:33:21,000	That was the size of the preliminary parking that we had sketched up. Thank you. Thank you, Comm Johnson. Comm, additional questions for Jason while we have them up there. I’m not seeing or hearing any, Jason. Thank you. Thank you. With that, the podium is open for others.

00:33:46,000	And if you would put your name on the log and introduce yourself, that would be wonderful. Hm Uh, Chair and Commissioners Parker Platson with Epic, part of the Part of the development and development team builder over at Bowden. Um, just wanted to Quickly point out a couple of items, so.

00:34:14,370	Mostly just so nothing’s changed in terms of parking lot requirements since the beginning of this. I mean, we’re, we’re bound by it. by the size of the building which Deems What we have to have for parking lot size, so there, I mean, there’s really nothing that we can.

00:34:34,100	changer that we’re asking to change as part of that with the exception of Having this additional parking space for overflow. Um Sorry, I think that was outside of what Jason already answered. I think that was really. Only point I came up here to make. I can also answer probably some. Additional questions if anyone has any. Regarding the development in general. Commissioners Questions for Parker. I’m not seeing any Parker. Thank you.

00:35:16,300	Good afternoon, Commissioners. My my name’s Pamela Sharp. I’ve been a resident of Boulder Ridge for 12 years. Loved the community, um, moved there because I wanted to live there. I wasn’t here at your meeting a month ago. I was not able to be here. I was at the first meeting when you approved Bowden.

00:35:35,570	I testified against it. I actually truly felt like I was not listened to at all, um, all the points and I would reiterate every point that Ms. Ulmer, uh, just made. It’s the school, it’s the residential. We don’t want to look at parking lots.

00:35:55,300	Feel like you’re just like taking an inch and you just want us to give a mile. So I mean we’ve kind of adjusted to the, um, commercial buildings that are, they’re not unattractive. I’m not complaining, but we have adjusted to that. We don’t want it to get bigger.

00:36:15,300	I don’t care if they use their space for a garage or commercial, we don’t want to look at a parking lot and I don’t want, um, I don’t want this to keep on creeping up on us. We are a residential area. Um, we want to be residential.

00:36:33,730	We don’t want a commercial buildings in the middle of us and we don’t want it to grow. We don’t want to acquiesce to something and then um be told a few years later, oh no, now we need to take more and make it bigger, um, I would just. Respectfully ask that you reconsider the decision you made in your head last month.

00:36:54,500	And just leave it as is right now. Thank you. Thank you, Pam. Just really quickly, um. I realized that the the actual footprint of the building isn’t getting bigger, but the point of having a certain size, uh, office building and attached garage was because there was the promise that there wasn’t

00:37:23,870	going to be cars sitting out in the parking lot or on the street and so that’s why they set it up that way so that the office building would be a certain size, and then if there was somebody that needed the garage for space, they could use the garage. So that was the original thought process.

00:37:40,900	that went into that and And that made sense, you know, we thought at least they’re trying to, to do this, so as mentioned before, With adding a big parking lot, a big commercial building, you’re going beyond what we were originally promised, and I realized us talking may not make a big

00:37:59,030	difference to what your decision is, but I would really like to think it did. And in public interest, I’d love to just work with the developer and find ways to have it fit into the residential system as it is. And I think there was one other. One other thing I was going to say anyway.

00:38:18,830	So we appreciate your time. We appreciate your consideration, and I just hope you’ll take this into. Really seriously, because we’ve watched in the past few meetings that it just seems like no matter what points we bring up and no matter how valid we’re just overruled even though nobody has ever answered the question.

00:38:42,400	Why couldn’t it have been across the street where it was already his own commercial. That was our question from the very beginning. And that’s our question now. And when it comes to water flow, you know, we don’t have a whole lot of green space there and now we’re going to add more cement.

00:38:59,370	The water flow issues are, are issues that, and we’d love to work with the developer and make something that fits into the Boulder Ridge plan just as we were promised, you can look back at the original plan, and they had some agreement with the previous owner of that piece of property that when, if they were to purchase it,

00:39:15,000	they’d purchased it, I think it was, they can, I’m sure Ron can, you know, clarify this, but when they were ready to develop, they, the purchase would go through. But it was all set up as a re residential for homes.

00:39:32,500	I think it was 32 homes that were supposed to be there, which would have been wonderful and fit right in. But anyway, just take that into consideration and, and we’d appreciate it if there was some more conversation on what can happen with that property, and maybe we can find some really good solutions where both the residents and the developers are happy with it, so that’s my

00:39:49,300	request. Thank you. With the podium is open for others that would care to address this agenda item. I see Jason’s coming back. Um, Chair, Commissioners, uh. Just to clarify two things, um. The parking. Ordinance is set in a commercial application by size of the building.

00:40:22,770	Um, Parker did allude to that a little bit. Um, so, The garage space was to allow for if needed. Couple of vehicles to park in, but. Uh In office building gets parked at, uh, I believe one space per 360 square feet, so.

00:40:50,030	Quick math, you can take 5500 and divide that by 360 and, and that could tell you, you know, about what your parking could be, um. What we have had.

00:41:07,470	In reality, since we’ve started this project is, you know, we came in here and we had these lots and we’re finding that people are like, well, you know, I would like to actually have two lots and so we’ve been on most of these sites combining two lots. For a site. That doesn’t allow us to get any additional building square footage.

00:41:29,470	It doesn’t allow us to have any other things separate buildings or anything, so I mean, by taking these lots and combining them, we’re actually taking square foot of space out of there. Um Stormwater there are impervious limits that we have for this area, um, and we did go through that with the initial Bowden edition stormwater plan. Um, every one of these lots, there’s a.

00:41:54,500	Impervious calculation to make sure that we’re not going over that. So there’s a certain set of, uh, green space that’s set aside and every single lot, um.

00:42:17,130	So in effect, uh, one of the things that we had to do when we brought this request in first is we did a calculation and said, If we’re looking at twin homes, and we took twin homes out and it became commercial product. And based on what we’re seeing in reality, what are, what are we averaging and we’re actually finding out that we are averaging more perviousness, more grass space.

00:42:36,570	Across the board, then our calculations had assumed in the beginning. And so that’s what was one of the factors that was saying, OK, you know, from a storm water aspect, check the box, we’re good there. We’re not making this any worse. It’s actually being, uh, more. Pervious. More grass space, so.

00:43:01,370	Um, just a couple points, so if you have any questions? Again, Commissioners, questions for Jason Comm Johnson again, that’s only allowed in RT zone lots, is that right? Or is it any lot within this development commercial? the parking lot. I believe that that that additional parking lot standalone is only. within the RT zones, that is correct, which would include the ones that were just rezoned. Correct.

00:43:26,900	OK. Yeah, it would be classified as a, a, a communal parking lot. In in the ordinance of the city. Thank you for the clarification. Additional questions for Jason. I’m not hearing you saying any Jason. Thank you. Without the podium is open.

00:43:50,730	Or anyone that would care to address this agenda item. And I’m not seeing or hearing any, so with that, I’m gonna close the public hearing on this agenda item and uh Daniel, and he finally final comments? No, thank you, chair. All right. With that Commissioners, this is a request for a zoning map amendment.

00:44:13,370	He and staff’s recommendation is to approve. What are your wishes? Motion to approve. We have a motion to approve from Comm Johnson. Second, we have a 2nd from Comm Zent. With that, the floor is open for discussion. Comm Schell. Thank you, Chair.

00:44:35,530	It’s that’s a question for staff actually in response to the question asked on on how is this in the public’s best interest, or, or do we, do we take into account. Opportunity of of adjacent commercial property when we weigh the the staff recommendation on, on the subject property.

00:44:48,730	Can you maybe walk through the findings of fact and the process that you go through when when making a recommendation. Sure, I’d be happy to. So, as, uh, the applicant alluded to, there, there were discussions before this ever came to the table for this.

00:45:05,730	We, we knew this site being adjacent to residential had sensitivities and so that, that’s really the reason for a lot of the elements that are in the conditional RT district you see today, uh, some things weren’t discussed today, but were in the original one. There’s building design standards, uh, to have a residential character limiting the garage door heights, limiting some of the elements of the of the design.

00:45:23,370	some lighting standards that are above and beyond what would typically be in an RT district, uh, because of the adjacency of residential this is also adjacent to North Washington, uh, at Arturo Roadway and a collector Roadwayvi LaSalle, and as we heard as well on the, on the West side, this mirrors the similar zoning of the RT

00:45:42,000	all along North Washington, including in inside of, um, on the south of Slate Drive, just south of the site on the east side of North Washington Street also has RT. Zoning as well, so when we were looking at this, it didn’t seem out of character for the corridor as a whole of North Washington Street.

00:46:00,800	And so given the, uh, Additional standards that were included in this and the location and the fact that it was accessing directly from the collector and not sending traffic through the, through the local roads in in the neighborhood. Uh, we were comfortable recommending approval at that stage. Thank you. Thank you, Comm Schell.

00:46:22,300	Additional discussion commissioners. Chair Schwartz, um, Commissioners, I have another question for staff regarding Um, I think some of the comments we’ve heard with RT also across the street, um, across Washington and um specifically thinking about the long term care facility across Washington in a similar zoning district and being familiar with the size and um parking

00:46:57,230	looks of that, I think that probably brings on some of the concern. of citizens in that area, not to speak for them, but as I hear them, I, I hear some reflection of what surrounds them and especially across Washington.

00:47:15,900	So I guess my question and all of that is to staff, what specifically could you point out within how um this. Development is written that. Um, could sway some of those concerns for, for, uh, resident who looks across Washington and sees a similar zoning with a building of that size and parking up that size. Sure, I’ll, I’ll dress up. Thank you, Comm, um, Larson.

00:47:41,500	So, so that is correct. It is a conditional RT district on the other side of Washington. The conditions are quite different, and, uh, some of the stemming from the fact that the lot size is different. It’s just a different context.

00:47:57,000	Probably the, the biggest one that you, you alluded to is that this, the, the height and size is much larger of that of that building. So this, this RT district in in Bowden edition you wouldn’t see anything like that.

00:48:15,400	It’s limited to 35 ft in height and stories maximum for the buildings, which is of residential character and of course the 5500 square feet of footprint. So it’s it’s a, so, so yeah, if there is a concern that you would see something like that on this side that, that certainly would be not allowed by the zoning. Does that answer your question, question, Comm Larson. Yes, thank you very much, Daniel. Thank you. uh, with that commissioners. Additional discussion or questions.

00:48:41,830	And I’m not seeing or hearing any, so with that we have a motion on the table to approve. Sarah, would you please call roll? Comm Field. Yeah Yeah, Comm Johnson, Comm Larson. Yes. Comm Schell? Yes. Comm Sebak, Yes, Comm Wangen, yes. Comm Zent? Yes. Schwartz. Yes, the motion is approved.

00:49:10,730	With that, we move on to item C in our regular agenda, which is North Star Commercial Park, 3rd subdivision. Blocks 12, and 3, and I believe Jenny is going to provide us with staff report this evening. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

00:49:31,500	Um, Comm planning staff are requesting approval of a zoning map amendment that would add temporary fireworks sales as as an administrative special use to the existing conditional MA industrial zoning district for blocks 12, and 3 North Star Commercial Park Third Subdivision. This is located north of Bismarck, east of US Highway 83 between North Star Drive and 71st Avenue Northeast and consists of 33.5 acres.

00:49:54,100	It is also in an area identified as. industrial flex in the land use plan. Industrial flex areas provide flexible employment centers for a range of businesses. You considered this request and called for a public hearing at your meeting last month on March 26th.

00:50:14,230	The existing conditional MA industrial zoning has been in place for about 20 years, and temporary fireworks sales have occurred within this subdivision and have been permitted for a number of years. Recently, it was brought to our attention that this use is not included in the conditional zoning district.

00:50:31,830	It’s unclear if temporary fireworks sales were purposefully or accidentally left out of the conditional district when it was created and approved in 2005. Staff anticipates that it was the latter as other uses, including temporary Christmas tree sales and circuses are permitted within this district. Our records indicate that temporary fireworks sales have been incurring within this, these blocks for close to 15 years. The zoning ordinance specifies administrative approval for temporary uses based on certain criteria.

00:50:55,300	Fireworks sales are permitted to occur outside city limits for a period of no more than 30 days in the MA industrial and B industrial and agriculture zoning district. The public has been notified of this request.

00:51:13,100	A notice was published in the Tribune on April 11th and 18th and 51 postcards were mailed to the owners of nearby properties on April 11th. We have received two phone calls regarding the amendment. One was in favor and one was not, um, written requests were also submitted to you this morning prior to our meeting today.

00:51:28,530	The request was evaluated according to standards contained within the comprehensive plan, Bismar Code of Ordinances and state law, and as a result of all the findings contained in the staff report, staff find that the proposed zoning map amendment would not adversely impact the public health, safety, and general welfare and is consistent with the comprehensive plan, code of ordinances and state law.

00:51:45,100	Therefore, staff is Re recommending approval of the zoning map amendment that would add temporary fireworks sales as an administrative special use to the existing conditional MA industrial zoning district. For blocks 12 and 3, North Star Commercial Park 3rd subdivision. Do you have questions? Commissioner’s questions for Jenny. I have one.

00:52:06,900	Did Hay Creek Township, uh, have an opinion or take a stand on, on their thoughts of this. Thank you, Comm, Comm Wangen and Hay Creek Township was notified in February. We have not yet received a resolution for this project. Thank you. Thank you, Comm Wangen. Comm Schell.

00:52:25,900	Jenny, can you clarify what happens if something is an administrative special use, what process it goes through after that is completed, um, thank you, Comm Schell. Comm is an administrative is, is really that it’s administrative, um, it gets reviewed by staff, and a permit can be issued if it meets the criteria outlying the ordnance, very different from the special use permits that you commonly see here for like

00:52:43,270	oversized accessory building, so no public hearing. Thank you, Comm Schell Comm, additional question, Comm Johnson. I’ve got one kind of comment, but some of these uses, like when you’re talking about temporary uses and you’re going from someone having a shop condo that has one vehicle parked in

00:52:59,170	it to a place on fireworks, even if it’s only for like 23 weeks. Um, you might have a dozen cars out there, 2 dozen cars, and, and that seems to be more of like a, a broader concern with some of these temporary uses popping up in spaces that were really not intended to handle much.

00:53:16,830	Traffic, um, not really a comment specific to this, what’s in front of us, but just a general temporary use comment. Thank you. Comm Additional questions for Jenny.

00:53:42,030	Jenny, I noticed that one of the, uh, out of a couple of the letters that were sent in, the uh complaint was about fireworks being discharged out in that area. Now it is allowable to do that, correct? Yes, it is during a certain time period.

00:53:59,030	It is allowed to be discharged, um, I read those complaints as well and I, I, they will be part of the public record and I’m assuming that the applicant will take a look at that and provide any kind of, um, cleanup necessary that was recommended by the applicant. the excuse me, the, the person who submitted comments. OK, and one more question for you, uh, how many temporary stands usually get set set up out there. Do you know? I can double check with Brady.

00:54:17,770	I, I know of one when I drive by in that subdivision. However, I’ve seen permits for Four lots within the last 15 years. OK. Thank you. Comm Schell.

00:54:41,100	One more type of question and maybe it’s playing off of Comm Johnson’s thought process is if it is an administrative special use, what are the criteria that staff would look at to say, yes, this is appropriate if it’s a tent or if it’s inside a building or if it’s, there’s no room to park any of these cars or, or, or potential customers can maybe walk through that piece or Brady could.

00:54:57,470	I’m sorry, I can’t hear you Sorry, um, Brady Bliskowski building official for the City of Bismarck, um, there really is no, uh, conditions or, or special criteria. It’s just a limited time frame that’s a temporary use, uh, each of those temporary uses has a different, uh, term, I guess these are 30 days. So Thank you.

00:55:16,000	Commissioner’s additional questions. If not, I will open up the public hearing on this agenda item is either the uh Actually Anybody can step up to the podium and speak to this. Sir, if you’d put your name on the log and announce yourself. Uh, good evening, Chair of Commissioners, um, my name is Lance Holden.

00:55:48,000	I am the owner of one of the said stands that has been in that, uh, area for. I have been there for about 5 years now, and I uh bought out the Guy that had been there in that area before.

00:56:02,470	I’m also inadvertently somewhat the initiator of all this because um. It has taken a long time to try and find areas to set up a stand, uh, just because of um. Yeah, it’s a difficult thing and then limited usage for uh. uh fireworks use.

00:56:22,130	Um And there was a stand that was set up last year that was on a piece of property that I had been informed in the past was not usable for fireworks, so I brought up the issue uh to see why.

00:56:38,270	I couldn’t do it and somebody else could and that one has been uh resolved, I think, but then they said, oh, by the way, uh, you’re probably not supposed to be doing it where you’re at either. Great, OK. Um.

00:56:54,130	So I guess I’m in favor of it, uh, the owners of the price of property that I use, which is right along 71st on the north side, are new this year, they purchased the property last year and uh I know that I’ve dealt with them, uh, just a little bit now to do that, but I know, uh. A lot of the things that we do and try to.

00:57:09,630	Make sure that it’s not a burden to the community or the area, I guess it’s not a huge residential area there, obviously, but, uh, to make sure that everything’s cleaned, um, the grass is mowed and all that type of stuff and that we’re cleaned up afterward, um, some of that is required by fire department as well, so, uh, we’re.

00:57:28,830	We’re bound as much by them as by some of the city, uh, temporary use permit, uh, things, but as far as uh. Fire, um Prevention and that is both the mowing of the grass and then having fire extinguishers and. And they know where we’re at and access and all of that type of stuff.

00:57:49,730	Um, in this area, I personally have never had any complaints as far as lighting off fireworks or um any garbage that was left behind or anything like that, um. I know in other areas that I have set up tents we have and generally we just make accommodations with whoever’s in the area, uh, if they don’t like the.

00:58:09,100	The use of fireworks or especially after a certain time of night, uh, we always try and abide by those and so there’s places where we don’t shoot off any at all in our stands, um, that’s. Both because of requests by the community or in places where uh. Uh in center we have a tent right in town so uh we don’t shoot anything off there, obviously, but.

00:58:30,800	Yeah, so I guess I don’t have much to say, although we’ve been doing it for a long time and I hope that we haven’t made too many people too frustrated there. It always has treated us well and I’d be open for any questions that you have for me. Comm questions for Comm Zan.

00:58:48,730	Um First of all, suppose uh we don’t get any rain and uh fireworks are banned. Is that? A big issue just don’t set up, right? I just don’t set up. So, fireworks sales have never been actually banned as far as I know, but use has been and I have set up before when they were banned and financially, I will never do that again because it was not a wise

00:59:09,630	decision on my part. And second of all, I want to applaud you for making it right, not only for yourself but for other people that want to do it, and then I also want to thank you for your information and warning based on your t-shirt.

00:59:22,200	So. Oh, yes. Thank you. It was, I kind of found out about the meeting last minute. It wasn’t an intentional shirt that I wore. It was just what I happened to be happened to be wearing today, so. Anyway, Thank you, Comm Zent Comm Schell.

00:59:41,170	Las do, do you operate out of uh one of the structures out there, do you bring out a tent and then can you speak to maybe the other operators in this area from your knowledge of how they operate in this site, um, I operate out of the tent at that location. Um, I don’t have any permanent buildings, uh.

00:59:57,270	I guess in Wilton in my hometown we operate out of a shop, but that’s not a permanent like we bring in the product every year, and bring it back, uh, the only. As far as I know, the only permanent ones would be maybe memory and. Uh, Way down on the south side, Bob’s. Bob’s Fireworks at city.

01:00:16,470	I don’t, I honestly know how they store those, but memory is just down 71st from us and they have their own large facility and, and sprinkler systems and all that type of stuff. Uh, we use a tent.

01:00:34,800	Um, and that again dictated by the fire department based on the square feet, uh how many entrances and exits and fire extinguishers we need and. how far the grass needs to be cleared and all that type of stuff. Uh, the one other that has been active recently in this area operates out of a semi-trailer. And so they have.

01:00:51,100	Um I believe one for storage and then one where they are are selling out of and so they don’t have any tent on site. Um And there have been some others in the past. I know they’ve been out of tents and. And trailers some one at one point brought in sort of a.

01:01:08,200	Almost like a little trailer house unit type of thing and set it up, uh. So it’s been different structures thank you, but not, none of them using the buildings that are within the subdivision. Correct. Yeah. Thank you. Thank you, Comm Schell. Commissioner’s additional questions for Lance. And Lance, you answered my question. I was curious about complaints. Sure.

01:01:30,170	And, uh, so thank you for addressing that. Yeah, and not that the others haven’t in that area, but yeah. So Certainly thank you, thank you. Without the podium is open for others that would care to address this agenda item.

01:01:48,900	And I’m not seeing or hearing any, so with that, I’m going to close the public hearing on this item, um, Commissioners, this is a request for a zoning map amendment and the staff’s recommendation is to approve what he wishes. Motion to approve. We have a motion to approve from Comm Zan. Second, we have a 2nd from Comm Sebach. Any additional discussion.

01:02:15,530	And I’m not seeing or hearing any, so Sarah, would you please call Roll? Mr. Wangan. Yes. Comm Field. Comm Johnson, Comm Larson. Yes. Comm Schell? Yes. Comm Sivak. Comm Zent Chair Schwartz. Yes, the motion is approved.

01:02:41,170	With that, we’ll move on to item D, which is Southland 3rd edition, and, uh, I believe Isaac is going to provide us with staff briefing this evening. Yes. Thank you, Chair Schwartz and Commissioners. So this next regular agenda item comes to us from Sattler Homes Inc.

01:03:01,500	who are requesting approval of a minor subdivision final plant titled South on 3rd edition in the location shown on the screens before you, as well as a zoning map amendment from the current RM 15 residential district to the PUD plan unit development on the entirety of the same project area. Uh, this project is located in South Bismarck, east of South Washington Street.

01:03:21,770	West of Peachtree Drive and on the south side of Santa Fe Avenue again, as shown on the screens, this project consists of about 5.87 acres and will change the existing 7 lots in one block to 28 lots in one block as part of that replat portion of the request.

01:03:44,900	The PUD portion of the request comes with uh the request from the applicant to help facilitate the development of single family homes on lots. that would have a lot sizes and a lot widths, that would be a little bit below or smaller than the existing dimensional standards for our 5 or R 10 residential districts.

01:04:07,170	The surrounding land uses to the northeast and south is some variety of different residentially zoned lands, both single family, two family and multi-family, and then to the West, we have some partially developed commercial land as well as shown on the screen right now, the areas identified as neighborhood. mixed use in the future land use plan, which are considered areas for social and commercial gathering spaces for the immediate surrounding residential areas.

01:04:27,470	The public was notified of this request via publications in the Bismarck Tribune on April 11th and 18th and 41 postcards were mailed to owners of nearby properties on April 11th as well.

01:04:50,830	To my knowledge, staff has not received any, uh, written comments regarding this request, staff has received a few, uh, inquiries about the requests, but after talking with the, the folks on the phone a little bit, let them ask their questions. They have not submitted any formal comments to the best of my knowledge. Uh, one other thing I will note, if we can go to the next slide here.

01:05:10,230	So for the sake of transparency, uh, this slide here is, uh, the Platte of Southland 2nd edition with the area on the West side there highlighted of, uh, what the Re Platte area is.

01:05:27,170	The reason I bring this up is, uh, staff noted after the staff reports were sent out to the commission, but while we were creating uh this presentation that the version included in the staff reports incorrectly identified the area of the project, rather the block to the south, block 6th of Southlands 2nd edition when it should be the block to the north there. In your staff Report B block 7 of Southland’s 2nd edition. All other maps and identifiers in the staff report were correct.

01:05:44,830	The legal ads and notifications were correct, but it was just a clerical error on that one particular portion. So I just wanted to bring that up for transparency and in case anyone saw that and was confused by that, but um, yes, I wanted to clear that up, but then, um, other than that, as a cumulative result of all

01:06:00,370	findings contained in the staff reports, City of Bismarck staff find that the proposed minor subdivision final plot. And the accompanying zoning map amendment would not adversely impact public health, safety, or general welfare, uh, of the public and is consistent with the comprehensive plan, Bismarck Code of ordinances, and relevant state law.

01:06:23,230	Therefore, staff recommends approval of the minor subdivision final plot titled Southland 3rd edition, as well as approval of the zoning map amendment from the RM 15 residential district to the PUD plan unit development for the area of Southland, 3rd edition. Does the Commission have any questions for me at this time. Commissioners, question for Isaac.

01:06:46,800	Comm Johnson So you mentioned that uh it doesn’t fit. R 10 Lot standards. So what was the You know, why not just say no, you got to go with our 10 or some other already delineated zoning standard versus PUD just thinking is PUD is, uh, um.

01:07:10,630	An option to not follow zoning, you know, I guess what was the city’s thoughts there of allowing a PUD here versus just saying no, it’s got to be our 10 or or something else. Sure, so Comm Johnson, uh, Sher Schwartz and Commissioners, the specific request in this case was to have lots for single family homes have a minimum size of about 5500 square feet, as well as a width of about 40 or 44 ft

01:07:31,000	wide, uh, as of right now, single family homes in either an R5 or. 10 would need at least 7000 square feet in a newly plotted area or replatted area and a width of um 60 ft wide, and therefore, uh, this request would not meet either of those.

01:07:51,470	So we looked at different options, PUD being a more of a customizable district to try address certain things that might not fit in standard zoning districts. Uh, this is also a, a broader conversation that staff are having as we are redoing our whole zoning code, of course, the land development uh Code, which you are aware of, but in the meantime, this was

01:08:11,030	the path that would, uh, best work for the applicant, ah, in this case. Thank you, Comm Johnson. Commissioners, additional questions for Isak. I’m not seeing or hearing any Isaac. Thank you. With that, I’ll open up the public hearing on this agenda item. And I see Landon is stepping up.

01:08:35,570	Thank you, Chair Schwartz. Yeah, just a few, uh, items to add to what Isak, Isak had presented uh maybe give you a little bigger picture of what’s going on here. So he had mentioned before that this was is existing at 7 lots right now.

01:08:47,830	Um, those lots are our size to be approximately used for 4 unit condos, 4 unit town halls, that type of thing. So we’d end up with, with effectively 28 units in this, this particular block.

01:09:03,100	We’re knocking it down to single family homes, trying to help the city with our our ongoing problem of affordable housing and for people who still want that single family home. and not to be in a condo, so this gives us, we’re going from 28 units as a condo down to 28 units as a single-family units.

01:09:19,900	To do so, to make this a little bit more affordable in Bismarck, Smaller lots, smaller buildings, smaller setbacks, so that’s where we’re at today. I can try to answer any questions if you have them, Comm. Questions for Landon. Comm Schell Landon we’ve had previous discussions on the utility stubs that were placed for what was going to be the, the 74 unit buildings or, or lots, uh, with the developer.

01:09:41,800	Um Acquiesce and have a development agreement be a condition for approval that assigns the responsibilities of those utilities. I know we talked about that. I don’t think I made it into the staff report as a condition, but with the developer find that agreeable. Comm Schell, yeah, thanks for bringing that up.

01:09:55,730	I, I mean, that would be fairly standard practice with any development in Bismarck where you have shared utilities and and things like that and HOA is almost certainly going to be needed to handle this and then a development group agreement to go with that so that the city can be sure that it’s not their responsibility to handle these sort of internal water

01:10:14,030	questions for Landon. I’m not seeing any. Thank you, Landon With that, the podium is open for others that would care to address this agenda item.

01:10:38,370	And I’m not seeing or hearing any, so with that, I’m going to close the public hearing, um, with that commissioners, this is a request for a minor subdivision final Platt, and I guess I should ask, Isak, any additional comments? Not at this time. Thank you. All right, thank you. This is a request for a minor subdivision final plat and a zoning map amendment. Staff’s recommendation for both is to approve. What he wishes.

01:10:55,630	I would move to approve with the condition the developer enter into a utility agreement with the city prior to Platt Recordation. Thank you, Comm Schell. Do I hear a second? Second, we have a 2nd from Comm Zent. Any any additional discussion, commissioners? Chair Schwartz. Yes, Comm Larson.

01:11:21,100	I have a, I have a question that might be for Isak might be actually for for Gabe or I’m not sure of who of city staff, but pulling on my past. Mandan City Comm experience sitting on the portfolio for public works, these tighter developments, um, as a PUD like this while they’re Excellent to address affordable housing can create challenges in terms of garbage and snow removal as well as parking, on-street parking.

01:11:49,900	So I’m wondering if there’s any concerns or consideration from the city relative to that and any Conditions that need to be added relative to those services. Uh, thank you, Comm Larson. I will begin and if others want to join in, they certainly can.

01:12:16,200	If the development were to continue without the PUD and sticking with the existing zoning of RM 15, any development that would happen there would go through the site plan process, um, but going into the PUD there would not be a standard site plan review process, um.

01:12:36,930	But certainly they would still need to follow all relevant ordinance requirements for off-street parking, um, and, and things like that. So staff uh did not have any specific concerns with the developments that I can recall off the top of my head uh when we discussed this in the initial review of the application.

01:13:00,300	Thank you, Isaac, Comm Schell, do you have anything that you’d like to add to that? Maybe the only thing I would add that, uh, That Isak didn't cover is that the for this size structure, the, the two stall garage of parking inside the structure as well as.

01:13:18,200	I guess I don’t know if they have what sort of setback they have from the public right of way, but Isaac, can you speak to the parking on site compared to what would be on the street because I’m, I’m thinking that there’s probably not a lot of opportunity to park on the street, but if that’s satisfied within the site, uh, then it should be a moot type issue.

01:13:33,300	Yeah, so Comm Schell and Comm, the existing uh off-street parking requirements for a single family homes would be two spaces per single family home, typically we would see that in a garage and um Depending on the width of the driveways leading up to those garages, there could still be space for um off street on street parking as well. Yeah, that’s all.

01:14:00,300	Thank you, thank you. With that, any additional discussion, commissioners. And I’m not seeing or hearing any, so with that we have a motion on the table to approve with a condition. Sir, would you please call Roll Comm? Yes. Yes. Comm Field. Yes. Comm Johnson. Yes. Comm Wangen? Yes. Comm Schell Comm. Comm Larson.

01:14:32,270	Yes, Comm Zent Chair Schwartz. Yes, the motion is approved. Moving on to item E and our regular agenda, Midwest Business Park, 2nd edition. This is a request for a minor subdivision final plant, and Jenny is going to provide us with staff briefing this evening.

01:14:56,930	Thank you, Chair Schwartz, Comm, Mid-continent Communications is requesting approval of a minor subdivision final plot titled Midwest Business Park 2nd edition. This request is located in East Bismarck, east of North Bismarck Expressway and south of East Main Avenue in the northwest quadrant of the intersection of Fifty-Second Street Northeast in Tandem Drive and consists of 6.25 acres with two lots in one block.

01:15:16,100	The proposed plant is a replat of lots 4 and 5, block 1 minute, Midwest Business Park Edition. If approved as proposed, the plot would move the east-west property line separating lots 4 and 5 north.

01:15:35,230	Add an additional 15 ft wide storm water and drainage easement along the east side of proposed Lot One and include a modified non-access line along the south side of the latte adjacent to Tandem Drive. This was approved at last night’s city commission meeting as a separate plat modification and again moves the southern access point to the property west. Further west away from 5Second Street.

01:15:53,530	The platted 50 ft wide buffer yard will remain as shown on the original plot. The property is zoned conditional MA industrial conditional conditions include specific development requirements for all properties, including design and aesthetic standards for buildings. Materials and colors and increased landscaping for outdoor storage areas.

01:16:17,470	Additionally, this property is located within the transition area, which means it is located within 400 ft of the center line of Fifty-Second Street Northeast. Additional requirements for developed within the development within the transition area include a maximum setback of 75 ft from the east property line adjacent to 5 2nd Street, a building height limit of 25 ft in a requirement that all loading areas shall be oriented.

01:16:39,830	away from Fifty-Second Street Northeast. As site plan and building permit for the project have been submitted and are being administratively reviewed by staff. It should also be noted that prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the technical operations center for midcontinent.

01:17:01,170	All site improvements including landscaping for the proposed site outlined in our ordinance as well in the as in the conditional MA ordinance must be installed. This includes replacement of all plat material that is. missing or dead within the existing 50 ft wide landscape firm planted when this property was originally plotted and zoned. The public has been notified of this request.

01:17:22,000	A notice was published in the Tribune on April 11th and April 18th and 44 postcards were mailed to the owners of nearby properties on April 11th. We have received one email inquiry, neither for or against, just looking for more information.

01:17:41,470	The request was evaluated according to standards contained within our comprehensive plan, code of ordinances, and state law, and as a result of all the findings contained in the staff report, staff find that the proposed minor subdivision plot would not adversely impact public. health, safety, and general welfare and is consistent with our comprehensive plan, code of ordinances, and state law.

01:17:58,370	Therefore, staff recommends approval of the minor subdivision final plot for Midwest Business Park 2nd edition. Do you have questions? Questions for Jenny. I’m not seeing Jenny, thank you. With that, I’ll open up the public hearing on this agenda item is either the requester or representative here to speak. Good evening, Mr. Chair and Commissioners. I’m Abe Ulmer with Independent Land Surveying and Engineering.

01:18:31,500	I’m the engineer on the site plan I’m working with Midcontinent on on. this project Uh, this, this minor platt request is. Only moving, well, it’s currently 2 lots we are proposing to move the lot line between the two lots 120 ft north. Um Currently, it.

01:18:54,930	They bought both lots and aspect of they didn’t know exactly how much space they needed for their uh technical operations center, they’re building their office space and and their contractor’s yard and storage space exterior.

01:19:13,500	Once we laid out the property, we realized we did need a little bit more than just the south lot, the additional 10 120 ft, I believe it was just moving that line to the north is what we’re asking for, um, to speed up the process, I guess we have done a or uh.

01:19:30,100	Lot combination for the site plan approval, so right now those two lots are 1 lot, but we are looking at since since then we have determined that line and we would like to split that into two lots and and just move that so that North thought was approximately 3 acres is down to. Or I’m sorry, the South lot that we’re keeping was originally 3 acres.

01:19:45,770	We’re moving that to 4 acres and, and the remainder will be on the north side, I think it’s 2.5 on that North lot when we’re done, uh, all the zoning ordinances and everything, we’re not asking for any changes.

01:20:03,800	We, we are looking at, uh, meeting all those zoning ordinances for uh the building colors, the building fascia, uh, all the setbacks, everything else, all the landscape. We do have a landscaper going out there to count all the missing trees in the buffer and. anything like that to replace it because we know that they’re that that is an issue of the property and and the neighbors, um. Any questions that you guys would have possibly.

01:20:20,270	Commissioner’s questions for. Abe, thank you for being sensitive on the

01:20:33,370	non-access line all the way along 52nd, that Southern non-accent that we did move in in yesterday’s commission meeting, uh, the access was centered on the south property line along Tandem Drive. Sorry, I don’t have it in front of me, um.

01:20:51,000	There’s a little hill down there and and there’s a great issue, so we asked to move that further to the West, uh, just to help with that grade issue, so we closed off that. That old access point that we could have had in the middle and and just shifted it to the West with this new platform. Thank you, Comm Zent. Comm, additional questions for Abe.

01:21:12,130	Abe again, thank you for being sensitive to that buffer side of things when we’ve had public hearings before, the neighbors have been concerned about that, so. It’ll be. Great to take, get it taken care of. OK. Thank you. Thank you. Without the podium is open for others that would care to address this agenda item.

01:21:44,100	Chair, Comm, I’m one of the neighbors that have expressed concerns with the, uh, lack of maintenance or care of yourself. Oh, Donovan Voller, um, I live pretty much uh right across the street right across 52nd from, uh, uh, what we’re talking about here, uh, a couple of questions, uh, some concerns

01:22:04,200	that that I have and the neighbors have out there is when the conditional MA was put into place, we were told that any buildings that were going to be built on these lots that Run a parallel to 5 2nd Street, the buildings were going to be put up as close to the landscape of Burma as they

01:22:21,100	could be, so that there could be no storage behind the building and we wouldn’t have to look at, uh, what I heard contractor equipment, storage, that kind of stuff, um. You know, that was, has been one of our concerns since the get-go is, is equipment storage and, and stuff like that out there.

01:22:38,170	And it probably wouldn’t be as big of a concern had the landscape buffer been maintained and taken care of like it would be, then it would probably have it probably be effective.

01:22:53,530	I mean, it’s been there for over 10 years, and it’s been a disaster this entire 10 years, um, which, you know, when they were talking about the landscape buffer with the, with the other uh development uh earlier, you know. I almost got up and and made reference to what we’ve been dealing with with the landscape buffer. It’s, it’s a great concept. Provided it’s enforced. And taken care of.

01:23:09,170	And that and that’s where one of the issues. And with the enforcement side of things, when we talk about the conditional MA, uh, you know, with the, the building colors and just uh sizes and those kind of things.

01:23:24,570	Like I mentioned earlier, it was actually part of that was those buildings were supposed to be built up against that landscape buffer, the back of the building so that nothing could be stored behind them. And the neighborhood wouldn’t have to look at trees. I have no idea what they’re planning out there.

01:23:40,000	Just wanted that to be, you know, something to be aware of, um, those, those promises were made to the neighborhood to make this, this whole uh development more um palatable to, to those of us that live out there and call that area home.

01:23:58,200	The other questions I have is I’ve seen the, uh, the, the maps that you had up here with uh transitional rural residential and, uh, flex MA. Tittles on The Midwest Motor Development has, has something changed here that we as a neighborhood are not aware of, or is there a proposed change coming forward. We’re, we’re zoned, we all residential right now. Now I’m seeing transitional, um, No idea what that means. Can somebody explain all of that to us.

01:24:21,670	We, we have some concerns because of the unknown. Um And I’m willing to answer any questions you all have for me? Questions for Donovan. I’m not seeing any Donovan. Thank you for giving me the we’ll have somebody from planning here, uh, address your question. All right, I appreciate it.

01:24:40,300	Thank you and thank you for giving me the opportunity to talk. The podium is open for others that would care to address this agenda item. Good evening. I’m losing volume, so I apologize. I’m Jan Wangler. I live at 115 52nd Street. I am directly across the street from what’s happening here, um.

01:25:17,730	The concerns that I have and though they might be many, I’ll Narrow it down a little bit. Um, I did attend the city commission meeting last night where they jumped ahead of you by asking for a change, um, with the driveway.

01:25:40,670	The fact that this plat um had no notification before it comes up for final plat is kind of a concern because If we were to be able to address some of these things at the beginning, it might change things for anybody doing the development and I appreciate the engineer being here last night because he explained more than the city had really no idea what was

01:25:59,870	going on with this ahead of time, other than these folks are trying to, and I, I don’t blame them a bit. I’m pro-business, um, they’re, they’re trying to shorten the amount of time it takes to get everything accomplished, and you know, Gold star and and pat on the back to them for, you

01:26:17,170	know, trying to shift things. However, it didn’t give us a chance to address the fact that the driveway was going to be on the south end of this latte. Which means that they Building facing south and their garages facing west, I have no problem with the grudges facing west.

01:26:37,230	The back of the building was supposed to be up against 52nd Street. Now the front will be south, which make, if that’s south is the front that automatically tells you the back is to the north. That gives them the opportunity to have their construction equipment, etc. outside and visible. To the residences across the street.

01:27:03,830	This has been more than a 10 year struggle and I would tell you not even just vocally, but I am just exhausted with attending these meetings, um, having been on the planning commission and Ben the loan vote to side with the people in the residential areas when they fight like the people did with the Body edition that you you heard

01:27:24,930	tonight. It, it feels like we’re knocking our heads against the wall. Um, we should have had an opportunity before they brought this plat in for the final decision to to have input on it, not at the end of the road when changes could still be made.

01:27:44,370	Here we come again and, and we feel like we’re the, the whiners or the complainers, but I’ll say we were there first. We were there when the land use across from us was still highest and best use of rural residential, which um one planner argued with me on, but I was on the commission when it was still the highest and best use for that area.

01:28:06,530	Then they cut the hill down 40 ft. So now we see everything into the city and the dilapidated fairgrounds what was the fairgrounds, um. And we have all of these industrial uses across the street when we assumed it would be residential, and we took smaller rural homes and we improved them and at

01:28:33,630	great expense, um, when we were told that it was going to be something similar across the road from us, no different than the other subdivision that was fighting. I, I almost wanted to cheer for them with the erm thing because that too we have fought. We’ve, we fought the tumbleweed.

01:28:53,830	We have photographs, we fought, you know, please, can we at least have down facing lights. Almost everybody did it until I most recent one, which we discussed last month. Um, it’s like we’re trying really hard just to accept what is and be good neighbors, but the promises aren’t being kept.

01:29:15,300	It seems like the city and the county just capitulate to the big businesses and that that somehow just doesn’t seem fair It, it seems like we ought to be able to all play in the same sandbox and I’ll play by the same rules, and it just, it doesn’t feel like that’s happening and I guess I feel like it’s a little bit futile

01:29:33,900	because you have this final plat in front of you now, and it’s just easy to say, yeah, go ahead, um, but you made promises before and I don’t see how this final plat, if the building orientation is as assumed.

01:29:59,500	Meets those criteria that you set out before, um, the, the previous owner of these lots had planned shop condos with the backs of the condos up against 52nd Street, and we’re like, OK, it’s industrial across the street, but if we’re only seeing the back of a building and a landscape buffer, it’s really something that we’ll just learn to live with, but if If the

01:30:20,370	goalpost keeps changing, uh, I think it’s It’s not only unfair, it, it puts a burden on us for things like resale value, um, the things that we’re we’re trying to do to improve our properties, um, I added another row of trees in the front of my yard trying to make up for the landscapeer across the street

01:30:43,830	that wasn’t being maintained. So the expense to the landowners on our side of the street has grown quite a bit as well, so. Like I said, we don’t want to come here and be the whiny bunch from the neighborhood.

01:31:03,030	We want to be the good neighbors and, and just accept what’s happening, but Please take into consideration the fact that though we were given notification of the plat we’ve never seen an orientation of the building and all of these things need to be taken into consideration when making good decisions on what’s going to take place.

01:31:22,470	And I didn’t really leave you any room for questions, but if you have any, I’ll be happy to. Answer them. Commissioner’s questions for Jan. I’m not seeing any chance. Thank you for your time. The podium is open for others that would care to address this agenda. I’m not seeing or hearing any.

01:31:50,630	Abe, would you mind stepping up again? And I don’t know if you can answer any of Jan’s questions as far as as building orientation and things like that.

01:32:04,000	Yeah, I do have a copy of the site plan and uh actually a copy of some renderings of the building and stuff like that that I can share with you if I can get the overhead projector to work. I’m not very computer savvy if it doesn’t turn on naturally. Come on, Ben, you can do it. Gets up and running. Oh Pick it up. Very good.

01:32:34,370	So what we have here is we have fifty-second on the, on the east side over out to the right. Um, Proposed building here. is orientated with the front facing south, the parking lot on the south along tandem Drive. Everything here would be concrete, uh, inside their yard, their fence line would actually be all the way around.

01:32:55,170	inside their yard Uh, concreted yard and a portion of it to be actual um. fresh concrete or crushed asphalt. guard, uh, we are required to have landscape along the front, uh, street trees, everything like that.

01:33:15,000	We will this buffer yard along Fifty-second, we are looking at doing that entire buffer yard, not just cutting it off where this plat meets, but we are looking at trying to update that entire buffer yard. Um, everything included in that for anything that’s dead or missing and, and try to spruce it up a little bit.

01:33:34,170	Um, so with, with this, as as far as I am with the site plan right now, this does, because I’m understanding meat. Um, meet the zoning ordinance for the For the current zoning ordinance that’s in effect for that. The building was shifted, so there is a maximum, so you have a 50 ft buffer yard and a 75 ft maximum setback off of 50 seconds.

01:33:54,470	So this building is actually set back within that. Within the approved set back of 75 ft. I think where the residents are, are looking as they were kind of wishing that this entire thing was a building all the way down that, and that’s just not feasible to build that big of a building for our site.

01:34:12,830	Um, I can show a couple. I can show a couple building slides here. It This work too Uh, let’s see, right side up. The South side entry. Uh, we’re, we do have like a, a light gray etus on the upper portion and then a dark, Uh, darker, I think it was a darker.

01:34:32,900	Dark black metal panels on the bottom to meet the ordinance. Um, from the south and the west. This will be the west side where the garage doors are. facing west, facing towards transport lane. The south here paces, faces, uh, Tandem Drive. I get those right? Yeah.

01:34:56,370	Um, from the east and the north, the east. The east side is actually the same thing the Eus on the, on the upper half. Uh, dark gray and then the dark metal panels on the, on the lower half along with windows along the front portion of this building to the front is pretty

01:35:11,030	much off. The back two are mainly for, not for, uh, It it shop space, but it’s more. As I understand it, it’s more for uh Sensitive materials for for the midcontinent, their routers, their there’s stuff for, for the cable supply.

01:35:46,030	So Um Yeah, if there’s any other questions or any The only other question I had was what kind of things can the neighbors expect in that. Concreted in lay down area. Uh, there’s, there’s rules and regulations set forth in the ordinance that the the stored materials can’t be too high. A lot of it’s going to be their work trucks. In their yard.

01:36:05,230	I’m sure they’re going to have some spools of cable wire and fiber optic, that sort of thing. Um, but there are rules to the height of that can be stored within that storage yard to try to be behind the fence. We are putting in a black.

01:36:21,400	Codd Or I’m sorry, a chain link fence with uh black slats all the way around that whole yard, um. To try to help buffer that yard and try to enclose that yard from from view. So thank you, that answers my question, Comm, any additional questions for Abe? Mr. Field. So how much more traffic is this gonna put on 502.

01:36:48,100	Honestly, uh, what they have is a uh they have the biggest shift at 40 workers. Uh They can enter from the north or from 52nd. I can’t tell you the traffic movements, movements completely. Um That, that’s all I really got for you is about 40, 40 maximum is what or 40. People on the largest shift.

01:37:12,000	Well, the only reason I was curious about that is across the street from this, I know the Guy that owns that construction company. And he had a lot of trouble when the new buildings and the UPS building come in. Because everybody said they’re gonna put trees, and they didn’t.

01:37:29,000	And he had his crews out there vacuuming sand to keep his lawn alive. Ooh. So, when you look at it, it’s great for people to come here, but there is nobody at the city of Bismarck. That drives out there. Because I know that owner complained many, many, many times. As it was overrunning his property from them doing dirt work.

01:37:49,230	And that’s just fine blow sand out there. Horrible, nasty blow sand. So, and he’s the only one that has living trees in that whole development as far as I know, unless somebody snuck out there and put a, a live one recently, but he’s got real nice ones in front of his building. OK.

01:38:08,030	So I can see where, you know, the neighbors get upset. So in 52nd used to be a nice street, and that’s getting all beat to hell because the traffic is overrun from too many, you know, you got the new development down there and that’s kind of a split half go to Apple Creek and half go up.

01:38:26,300	But that I don’t think that road was ever intended for all the heavy traffic it’s getting now. So that’s why I asked how much. It makes sense. And does that fall on the homeowners to pay specials if that road gets wrecked? Or whose fault is it because there’s a lot of heavy traffic moving in and out of

01:38:44,730	there now. Or is there somebody from the city that’s supposed to be looking out there. So I can, I can address that comment, Comm Field, uh, fellow Commissioners, that that.

01:39:04,630	particular property or that segment of 50 seconds, some of that is annexed into the city, some of it’s, um, of the, the area adjacent to the Barbie’s neighborhood is not annexed into the city, so we have, uh, agreements with the Burley County Highway Department on some of these fringe area roads of of who has the maintenance responsibility whether it’s a city segment or or county and we try to split up those responsibilities because there’s a fair number of these,

01:39:21,200	you know, half in, half out type of facilities, uh, so just try to share that responsibility. I can’t speak specifically on this one if it’s a city one or a county one, I, I do know that if it was a city maintenance activity because the, the county residents across the street are

01:39:33,470	not in the city. We would not be able to include them in a special assessment district if that was the funding mechanism utilized to maintain the roadway.

01:39:46,730	Um, however, if the county established a special assessment improvement district, they could cause all this property is in Burleigh County, um, so I guess I can’t speak to their processes, but typically they don’t create special assessment districts for maintenance projects like we do in the city. Thank you, Comm Schell. Any additional questions for Abe? Abe, thank you. You low rate ahead.

01:40:07,200	And it looks like Jan wants to come back up, I just wanna ask, I don’t know if Abe can answer it or if the commission, um, with the crushed concrete and stuff like that, that’s outdoors.

01:40:28,000	Is there some way that it is covered or maintained, I mean, we’ve been sandblasted for so many years that I’m concerned about outdoor landscaping stuff like that. I’m just curious how it’s stored. OK. Thank you. Uh, to, to answer the question about the crushed concrete or the crushed asphalt yard. It’s really just a temporary yard until we can place, place the concrete there. It’s just to save a little funds for right now.

01:40:46,130	It’s planned at 6 inch thick crushed concrete, uh, crushed as aggregate pretty much, uh, I’m, I mean, there are options and they want to keep it clean too, so they, they could be putting a solution down to try to bind that down a little better and everything like that, we can try to look at that, uh, if

01:41:01,670	there are any complaints or anything like that or The dust starts flying, that’s definitely an option, but the long term solution is to add it into their concrete yard. OK, thank you, Comm Johnson.

01:41:19,470	What height fence uh are you putting around the park, just planning on a 6 ft height fence for right now. Thank you. All right, thank you. Any additional questions for Abe? Abe, we’re good. Thank you. OK, thanks. Podium’s open for others that would care to address this agenda item. And I’m not seeing or hearing any, so with that, I’m going to close the public hearing on it.

01:41:37,870	This is a request for a minor subdivision final plat. And uh Staff’s recommendation is to approve Jenny, before we go further, Jenny, do you have any final comments? I do. Thank you. I normally don’t, but I like to address, um, Mr. Fowler’s, um, questions.

01:41:56,570	Daniel, would you mind putting on the screen the land use plan, please. Thank you. uh, Mr. Baller, you’ll see that purple area across the street, across a fifty-second Street is something called IF in our land use plan, that’s the industrial flex land use designation, the property that you live in in Barbie’s neighborhood is identified as transitional residential, that land use designation simply is

01:42:20,130	rural residential close to city limits. Um, so those two are land use designations. They are not zoning designations. The zoning for this property and your property are to remain the same. Thank you Thank you, Janie. With that commissioners? I am looking for a motion. Moved to approve.

01:42:45,100	We have a motion to approve from Comm Wangen. Second, we have a 2nd from Comm Sivak. Any additional discussion. And I’m not seeing or hearing any. Sarah, would you please call roll? Comm Field. Yes. Comm Johnson. Yes. Comm Larson.

01:43:18,900	Yes, Comm Schell, the motion is approved. With that, we move on to item F in our regular agenda, which is Shamrock Acres, 2nd subdivision, Block 5, lot 7, and Lauren is going to provide us with staff briefing this evening.

01:43:43,370	Uh, good evening, Chair Schwartz and Commissioners, uh, Brandon and Jessica Duff are requesting approval of a special use permit to increase the allowable area of accessory buildings to 3200 square feet and to allow an accessory dwelling unit on Lot 7, block 5, Shamrock Acres Second Subdivision. The project area is 2.

01:44:06,530	96 acres and is located north of Bismarck, east of 22nd, 26th Street Northeast, north of Eighty-Fourth Avenue, North Beach. East on the east side of Dublin Drive. Adjacent uses include a mix of rural residential and agricultural uses, um, the property has been identified as rural residential in the future land use plan.

01:44:28,730	The applicants, uh, intend to place the accessory dwelling unit within a 2400 square foot accessory structure, building inspection staff have noted that a building permit will be needed for the construction of the accessory dwelling unit within that accessory structure. The applicants had originally planned to place the new accessory structure in the southeasterly corner of the lot.

01:44:49,470	Um, this is indicated on the screen before you or within your packet, uh, as that red square with an X marked out through it, um, county engineering staff did note that this area has had stormwater issues in the past and recommended that the placement of the proposed accessory structure be placed at a an elevation of at least uh 1880 ft to.

01:45:12,000	Negate potential impacts to the adjacent properties, the applicant was made aware of this recommendation and decided to relocate the proposed accessory structure to align with that recommendation, um, the new proposed placement of that accessory structure is identified as the red rectangle with uh without the X through it, so it’s more centered within the lot there.

01:45:34,670	Uh, based on this new location applicant does intend to demolish the current accessory structure that is right next to that uh red square. The public has been notified uh notified of this request uh notice was published in the Bismarck Tribune on April 11th and 18th and 61 postcards were mailed to the owners of nearby properties on April 11th, um, additionally, the project is located within

01:45:54,230	Bert Creek Township, uh, which is not organized and, uh, therefore no communications with the township have occurred. To my knowledge, staff have not received any formal comments regarding this request, um, however, staff has received. Two inquiries, uh, via phone, uh, requesting additional information about the request.

01:46:19,770	However, uh, through those conversations, uh, those inquiries did not indicate if they were for or against the proposed uh request. This request was evaluated according to the standards contained within the comprehensive plan, uh, code of ordinances and relevant state law.

01:46:41,630	The law does conform to the minimum lot size requirements of the underlying zoning district and the proposed request, uh, the lot size is greater than 65,000 square feet and may increase the total allowable accessory structure size to a maximum of 3200 square feet with approval of a special use permit by the Planning and Zoning Commission.

01:46:58,300	Only one accessory dwelling unit would be constructed on this parcel and would be occupied by no more than one family. The accessory dwelling unit, uh, will not be larger than 800 square feet and will be completely contained within the accessory structure, uh, that would need to meet all requirements of this code. The location of the accessory structure is, uh, that it will be located within meets all setback requirements for the zoning district as well.

01:47:21,130	Um, based on the site transmitted an additional off-street parking space for the accessory dwelling unit would be provided, uh, and, and only one bedroom would be included within the accessory dwelling unit.

01:47:40,870	Um, additionally, the applicant has noted that they will have an additional drain field for that accessory structure, uh, to comply with the requirements for the accessory dwelling unit. Uh, adherence to building and fire codes would be uh verified prior to issuance of the building permit for the accessory dwelling unit, uh, including adequate, uh, inadequate drive for the, uh. Uh, back from the street back to the proposed accessory structure.

01:48:02,630	As a result of all findings contained within the staff reports, City of Bismarck staff find that the proposed specially use permit would not adversely impact the public health, safety, and general welfare and is generally consistent with the comprehensive plan, code of ordinances, and relevant state law.

01:48:23,100	Therefore, staff recommends approval of a special use permit to increase the allowable area of accessory buildings to 3200 square feet, as well as, uh, to allow an accessory dwelling unit on lot 7, block 5, Shamrock Acres, 2nd subdivision. Do you have any questions for me? Comm, questions for Lauren. I’m not seeing or hearing Lauren. Thank you. Thank you.

01:48:45,000	With that, I’ll open up the public hearing for this agenda item is either the requester or a representative here to speak to it. And I’m not seeing anybody, so, um, Anybody else that is welcome. Good justice address this agenda item if they would like. And again, I’m not seeing or hearing anybody, so with that, I’m gonna close the public hearing on this agenda item.

01:49:10,200	Commissioners, uh, learned any additional comments? Uh, no, not this time. Thank you, Chair. All right, thank you. With that, Comm, this is a request for a special use permit and uh staff recommendation is to approve. What are your wishes? Move touf. We have a motion from Comm Wangen to approve. Second, we have a 2nd from Comm Sivak.

01:49:35,100	Any additional discussion? And I’m not seeing or hearing any. Sarah, would you please call Roll? Mr. Wangen? Yes, Comm Field. Yes, Comm Johnson, Comm Larson. Yes. Comm Sivak, Comm Schell. Comm Zent Chair Schwartz. Yes, motion is approved.

01:49:59,670	Moving on to item G in our regular agenda is harvest Grove 3rd subdivision, Block 3 lot 1, and once again Lauren is going to provide us with staff briefing on this. Uh, good evening again, Chair Schwartz and Commissioners, Matthew Stern is requesting approval at a special use permit to increase the allowable area of accessory structures to 3200 square feet on that one block 3 Harvest Grove 3rd subdivision.

01:50:19,930	The project area is 1.65 acres and is located north of Bismarck, west of Highway 83 northeast, north of Eighty-Fourth Avenue northeast on the east side of Carraway Drive. The property has been identified as rural residential in the future land use plan.

01:50:41,830	Adjacent uses include undeveloped land to the east, rural residential single family to the north and west and agricultural land to the south. The parcel is within the rural residential zoning district and is large enough to have an allowable maximum size extra accessory structures of 2400 square feet without the special use permit.

01:51:07,100	There is an existing 364 square foot accessory structure, and the applicant would like to build an additional 2160 ft accessory structure. A second driveway for a new accessory structure is shown on the submitted site exhibit that’s uh on the screen as well as. With your packet. Uh, the applicant has received a 2nd road approach permit from Burley County, um, for that second driveway.

01:51:25,670	The public has been duly notified of this request. Notice was published in the Bismarck Tribune on April 11th and 18th and 45 postcards were mailed to the owners of nearby properties on April 11th. This project is located within Burnt Creek Township, which is not organized. Therefore, no communications with the township have occurred.

01:51:44,900	To my knowledge, staff has not received any comments regarding this request from the public. This request was evaluated according to the standards contained within the comprehensive plan code of ordinances and relevant state law. The lock conforms to the minimum lot size requirements of the underlying zoning district and the proposed request.

01:52:02,470	The lot size is greater than 65,000 square feet and may increase the total allowable accessory structure size to a maximum of 3200 square feet with approval of the special use permit by the Planning and Zoning Commission as a result of all findings contained within the staff report, City Bismarck staff find that the proposed special use permit would not adversely

01:52:21,100	impact the public health safety in general welfare, and is consistent with the comprehensive. plan, Bismarck Coat of Ordinances and relevant state law. Therefore, staff recommends approval of a special use permit to increase the allowable area of accessory structures to 3200 square feet on lot one, block 3, Harvest Grove, 3rd subdivision.

01:52:40,470	Do you have any questions? Questions for Lauren. I’m not seeing or hearing Lauren. Thank you. Thank you. With that, I’ll open the public hearing for this agenda item is either the Requester or a representative here.

01:53:03,300	Schwartz, yeah Landon Naim Schmitt Engineering representing Matt Stern in this, um, yeah, I know you guys have seen quite a few of these lately, just another typical. As here to, to up the size of that accessory building. I can certainly answer any questions if you have them. Commissioners, questions for Landon. I’m not seeing or hearing any, sir. Thank you. Thank you.

01:53:22,370	Without the podiums open for others that would care to address this agenda item. And I’m not seeing or hearing anybody, so with that, I’m gonna close the public hearing and uh. Learn any final comments? No, not this time, sir. Thank you. All right. Thank you. With that, Commissioners, this is a request for a zoning map amendment and uh staff recommendation is to approve.

01:53:45,000	What are your wishes? Motion to approve. We have a motion from Comm Zent. Second, we have a 2nd from Comm Sivak. Any additional discussion? And I’m not hearing or seeing any. Sarah, please call Roll. Comm Sivak. Comm Field? Yes. Comm Johnson. Yes. Comm Wangen? Comm Larson. Yes Comm Schell? Yes. Comm Zent. Yes. Schwartz.

01:54:15,000	Yes, motion is approved. With that, we’ll move on to item 8 H in our regular agenda, which is Sykes 2nd edition and uh Jenny is gonna provide us with staff briefing on this. Thank you, Chair Schwartz. Comm, Ridgeline Contracting is requesting approval of a minor subdivision final plot titled Psych’s 2nd edition.

01:54:40,030	The request is located in southeast Bismarck, south of Airway Avenue and east of University Drive in the Northwest quadrant of the intersection of Burlington Drive and Wanchana Way and consists of 6.06 acres with 8 lots in one block. This is a proposed replat of lot 2A and 2B block 1 Sikes edition. Portions of the proposed plant are currently being developed and 2.

01:54:59,800	plans for storage units and warehouses have already been approved. The proposed plan would create an individual lots for existing and future buildings. This plot was a previously approved by you back in January and the city commission in February. However, the applicant has requested changes be made to the plot prior to recordation.

01:55:19,500	Changes include removal of some internal access easements and water and sewer easements as

01:55:25,370	recorder, it is appropriate to hold another public hearing on the plant and received plan. And zoning commission as well as city commission approval of the proposed changes. The public was notified of this request.

01:55:40,130	A notice was published in the Tribune on April 11th and 18th and six postcards were mailed to the owners of nearby properties on the 11th. To my knowledge, we have not received any comments regarding this minor plot. The request was evaluated according to standards contained in the comprehensive plan Bismarck Code of Ordinances and state law.

01:55:57,400	And as a result of all the findings contained in your staff report, staff find that the proposed minor subdivision final plot would not adversely impact public health, safety and general welfare and is consistent with our comprehensive plan, code of ordinances, and state law. Therefore, staff recommend approval of the minor subdivision final platform for Sykes 2nd edition. Do you have questions? Questions for Jenny.

01:56:17,730	I’m not seeing you here Jenny. Thank you. With that, I’ll open the public hearing for this agenda item is either the requester. A representative Landon will once again be stepping in. Thank you, Chair Schwartz. You add on a little bit to what Jenny had said. This was approved previously.

01:56:33,830	Uh, we hadn’t filed the plot yet and in that time, uh, some, some events occurred, possible purchases have come up, uh, so sort of a change to how they wanted lots to be combined and reconfigured, uh, so rather than filing the plot and then coming back before the commission and saying, hey, we

01:56:49,170	need to vacate a bunch of easements that are in place. We just bring it back in front of you again so you can take another look at it. Like answer any questions if you have them. Perfect. Questions for Landon. I’m not seeing anyone and thank you.

01:57:05,170	With that the podium is open for others that would care to address this agenda item. And I’m not seeing or hearing anyone, so with that I’m going to close the public hearing. Um, Jenny, any additional comments? No, thank you. Thank you. With that commissioners, this is a request for a minor plat staff’s recommendation is to approve.

01:57:24,370	What are your wishes? Motion to approve. We have a motion to approve from Comm Wangen. Second, we have a second from Comm Zent. Any additional discussion? And I’m not hearing or seeing any. Sarah, please call roll. Comm Field. Yes. Comm Johnson. Yes. Comm Larson.

01:57:48,930	yes, Schwartz, yes, the motion is approved. With that, we will move on to our other business this evening, and I believe Daniel is gonna to brief us on some items. OK, uh, Josh Schwartz, planning Commissioners, we have one other item for you this evening. So we would like to bring forward two potential zoning ordinance text amendments.

01:58:07,530	Uh, we’re not looking for any action tonight from you, just, uh, feedback, of course, if these were to continue. You would be considering and, and holding a public hearing on these anyway.

01:58:21,000	Uh, in recent years, we like to get your, uh, feedback upfront before we sync staff time and, and, and go down a rabbit trail on any of these, we want to know that you at least are aware and, and, and conceding to that. So the first is a inordinance on short term rentals. Now this is the we’re referring to Airbnbs, VRBOs, uses of residential property, uh, for, for rental periods of 30 days or less.

01:58:41,370	The, uh, this has come up during our land development code process. It’s been raised by, by members of our steering committee. Uh, we’ve also heard some interest in the community, uh, of for this and other communities in North Dakota are looking into regulating short term rentals, uh, our recommendation of staff

01:58:57,570	would. be to do this as a separate zoning ordinance tax Amendment rather than bundle into our, our land development code. We feel like it, it is a self-contained topic. It probably deserves its own, uh, stage, so to speak, on the, on the topic.

01:59:15,470	So if, if you wish, uh, we can move forward with drafting that and perhaps the summer or sometime holding a public hearing, we would, of course, need to gather input and, and look at and do some research on it before, uh, having, we haven’t done any of that yet before having anything to show to you, uh, we wanted to bring that one to your

01:59:27,470	attention. Uh, the second one, is more technical, uh, and it’s a zone would be a zoning earnest text Amendment, uh, adjusting the setbacks of our P public zoning district, uh, and this is really stemming from some discussions we’ve had with Bismarck State College and potential projects they’re looking at.

01:59:47,630	Uh, and the way that our height limits interact with our setbacks, not to get into all the details, but it really would render the site they were looking at entirely unbuildable, uh, because of very extreme, uh, setbacks that would be applied.

02:00:05,370	Now, in many of the other zoning districts, we’ve actually amended out of, out these complex, uh, there’s a complex language and we’ve just replaced it with more simple setbacks. Uh, we just didn’t do that for the Public district for whatever reason, we just see less development of uh in the these areas. And so, uh, we would recommend doing some changes just to the public district.

02:00:21,630	Now we, we could and will likely address this in the land development code as well. However, uh, the applicant would like to move forward more quickly than that or at least have some assurance that they could design and not, uh, sink too much time into their designs and, um, without the assurance of the zoning,

02:00:39,170	meaning zoning. So they, they’ve requested that we do this before, uh, the land development code. So those are two. things we would propose to work on and come back to you with and we can take any comments you have. Commissioners’ comments, um.

02:00:54,530	Support or not, what would you like? What would you like to have staff do? Comm Zan, I’d like to see him proceed with both of them, I mean. R A and B or AMBs are becoming more popular and that’s a good plan, and, uh, the setbacks we’ll take a look at them. Thank you, Comm Sivak. But Agree, disagree.

02:01:22,730	You’re good for that, Comm Johnson Good. Comm Schell. I think the concept definitely on the, the, the Pub. fully support that one. Maybe I’d question the, the short term rental justunderstanding how many complaints we have and what the complaints are and if we already have regulations that cover that maybe is my question if it’s noise or if it’s nuisance or what what’s

02:01:40,470	the What are we responding to by the ordinance that would, that would govern a short-term rental, maybe is my question. Sure, yeah, and I, I can speak to that.

02:01:55,030	And, and honestly, our, our position has been for many years the staff is let’s just wait on this and see, you know, see if there is a response from the public. Obviously there are Airbnbs and VRBOs out there and they almost always operate without incident, however, uh, we have received complaint recently, uh, that, uh, from one member of the public on on an Airbnb that maybe had some

02:02:15,370	received a couple of complaints sporadically and none that maybe rose to the level of, of something systematic, but, uh, so that on top of our, our steering committee wishing us to be a part of the land development code, um, kind of spurred this. Thank you. Thank you, Comm Field.

02:02:32,100	So what, what period of time are you thinking a short term rental is. Cause there’s a lot of people that that snowbird here. And they’ll rent their house to somebody for 6 months and go to Arizona. And then they come back. So I mean that’s. How they can afford to do it.

02:02:54,930	So I mean, and, and everybody here knows that I’m an advocate for leaving people alone. I don’t like seeing people poked. And I think we should stay out of people’s business unless they’re breaking the law. So to create a law so that they’re breaking one. Only tyrants do those things.

02:03:16,730	Sure, I can maybe if if you me I can address that that first question, and that’ll certainly have to be spelled out clearly in the ordinance site. Typically these, when we’re talking about short-term rentals, we’re talking about 30 days or less.

02:03:31,870	So the 6 months would not, that would be any other rental would not apply to this, uh, it would be the ones that are rented by the week weekend or the week essentially. Thank you, Comm Wangen, your thoughts? I support um taking a look at both of those, especially the, the setbacks on the.

02:03:55,800	That, that hasn’t been touched in a long time and it’s causing some, Challenges now maybe it’s Thank you. Thank you. And last but by no means least, Comm Larson. Thank you. Yes, I agree. All right, thank you. And I also agree, I think they should both be looked at. So, uh, with that in mind, Daniel, please, uh, have staff move forward. Thank you. OK, we’ll be back. All right.

02:04:22,400	With that, um, our next meeting. Of the commission is scheduled for May 28th. And I want to thank you all for your time this evening, and with