00:00:10,530	And I would like to welcome both staff and commissioners and all attending in the meeting room this evening to this meeting of Bismarck planning and zoning commission and with that I’m going to call the uh call the meeting to order, sir, would you please call roll. Comm Bittner. Comm Field. He Comm Johnson. Yeah.

00:00:33,500	Larsson Here. Lukins Shell. Yep. Schmitz Sevare. Wangan chair Schwartz. Here. With that, we’ll move on to the first item on our agenda this evening, which is consideration of approval from the our meeting from the May 28th meeting, uh, Commissioners, what are your wishes? Move approve.

00:01:03,430	We have a motion to approve from Comm Wagen second from Comm Zen, any discussion? And I’m not seeing or hearing any, sir, would you please call roll? Mr. Wagan Yes, Comm Field, Comm Johnson, Comm Larson. Comm Schell. Comm Seva. Comm Zent Cha Schwartz. Yes, the motion is approved.

00:01:30,630	With that, we will move, move on to our consent agenda this evening, and we only have one item on our consent agenda. It’s Elk Ridge, 4th edition, and it’s a request for a preliminary plot and a zoning map amendment and staff’s recommendation is to call for a public hearing for both items, uh, Commissioners, what are your wishes as far as the consent agenda? I’ll move to approve the consent agenda

00:01:52,970	and call for a public hearing. Thank you, Comm Larson. We have a motion. I hear we have a second from Comm Johnson. Thank you. Any discussion? I’m not seeing or hearing any. Sarah, would you please call roll? Comm Sivak, Yes, Comm Field. Yes, Comm Johnson, Comm Wangan? Yes. Comm Larsson, Comm Schell Comm Zent? Yes, Schwartz.

00:02:22,430	Yes, the motion is approved. With that, we will move on to our regular agenda this evening. And the first item on our agenda, regular agenda is Northern sky, 2nd edition, 1st replat, Block 2 Lot 1, and it’s uh annexation request final consideration and Lauren’s going to provide us with staff briefing.

00:02:51,230	Uh, good evening, Chair Schwartz and Commissioners, uh, Wil Wilmontlo LLC is requesting approval of an annexation of the eastern portion of Lot one, block 2 Northern sky, 2nd edition First Replat.

00:03:17,000	The project area contains 46,101 square feet or less, and is located in Northwest Bismarck, in the northwest corner of North Washington Street and Ash Cooley, just on the north side of Wilkinson Place. It’s You may recall this agenda item was continued from the planning and zoning commission, uh, at the last meeting in May, um, which allowed for the adjustment of the annexation boundary.

00:03:38,970	That adjustment was accompanied by a lot modification to split the lot into two separate parcels, uh, you may also recall that the annexation request was also associated with two special use permits, um, to allow drive-throughs in conjunction with a restaurant and a coffee shop. In order to connect to municipal services for those proposed uses, the property would need to be annexed.

00:04:00,200	The eastern parcel created from the lot modification process and what is being considered for this annexation, uh, request tonight would contain the proposed restaurant and coffee shop. The western portion of this lot, as well as the other lots within the subdivision will be annexed when the development of the property occurs or by February 25, 2030 as per development agreement between the city and current property owner, whichever comes

00:04:20,570	first. The property has been identified as community mixed use in the future land use plan. Adjacent uses include offices and a convenience store to the north, undeveloped commercial property to the south across Wilkinson Place, undeveloped commercial property and, uh, middle school to the West and undeveloped commercial property offices and a variety of residential uses to the east

00:04:45,500	across Washington Street. Uh, annexations do not typically have a public hearing before the planning and zoning commission. Um, however, for postcards were mailed, um, in conjunction with that those two special use permits previously on May 17, 2025. Additionally, Hay Creek Township was notified of this request through that as well.

00:05:10,770	The public will be notified additionally of this request before it is heard by the City Commission, um, per, uh, various requirements uh within North Dakota. North Dakota Century Code. To my knowledge, stuff is not really, uh, received any formal comments regarding this request. Uh, the request was evaluated according to standards contained within the comprehensive plan, Bismarck Code of Ordinances and relevant state law.

00:05:34,100	The proposed annexation incorporates land that is within the urban service area boundary and has been designated as expansion priority 2. Um, and it’s clearly contiguous to the existing corporate boundaries, um, with 74% of the proposed annexations perimeter adjoining to that boundary.

00:05:59,170	I’ll also note that the creation of any new lots within the city of Bismarck is subject to development capital charges for municipal utilities. The modification associated with this lot will require that each of those two newly created parcels, uh, be vested for 2 inch meter capacity. Uh, capital utility charge of $24,732 will apply to both parcels.

00:06:30,700	The annexation request also triggers the health and abeyance costs for regional stormwater improvements and the construction of North Washington Street. Uh, capital utility charges and held in advance costs associated with the eastern portion of lot one will be due prior to, uh, recording of this annexation. The capital utility charge in the Held Bas costs associated with the Western portion, uh, will be due at the time that portion is annexed.

00:06:50,970	As a result of our findings contained in the staff reports, City of Bismarck staff find that the proposed annexation would not adversely impact the public health safety and general welfare and is consistent with the comprehensive plan, Bismarck Code of Ordinances and relevant to law.

00:07:12,930	Based on the findings, uh, within the staff Report staff recommends approval of the annexation of the eastern portion of Lot 1, block 2 Northern sky, 2nd edition, first replat. Do you have any questions, Commissioners? Questions for Lauren. Mr. Schell.

00:07:34,700	Not so much a question but just a, a clarification or a correction, uh, or just I just wanted to note that the utility capital charges would be due at the time prior to recoration, uh, but any of that held in abeyance costs are actually tacked onto that property after it’s recorded after the annexation is done and then a special assessment starts the year following, uh, the annexation completion, so that wouldn’t be due prior to the recording of the annexation. Just wanted to clarify that.

00:07:51,730	Thank you. Again, I’ll ask commissioners, any questions for Lauren? And I’m not hearing or seeing more and thank you. Uh, Commissioners, this is final consideration for this annexation request and staff recommends approval. What are your wishes? Gabe moved to approve. We have a motion to approve from Comm Schell.

00:08:20,630	Second We have a second from Comm Wain. And just additional discussion. And I’m not seeing or hearing any. Sarah, would you please call roll? Comm Field? Yes, Comm Johnson. Yes, Comm Larson. Yes, Comm Schell, Comm Sebach. Yes, Comm Wongan. Comm Zent Chair Schwartz. Yes, the motion is approved.

00:08:48,430	With that, we move on to item B and our regular agenda, which is FedEx subdivision and it is a major subdivision final platt. And Jenny is going to provide us with staff briefing this evening. Thank you, Chair Schwartz Commissioners. Robert Fettig is requesting a re-approval of a major subdivision final plot titled Fetig Subdivision.

00:09:12,000	This request is located east of Bismarck between 52nd Street, Southeast and 66th Street Southeast along the south side of East Main Avenue or County Highway 10, and consists of 4.8 acres with 3 lots and 1 block. The proposed plat, along with the zoning map amendment from the Agricultural and CG commercial zoning districts.

00:09:29,530	to the CG commercial zoning district was approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission on May 22, 2024 and the City commission on June 25th, 2024, with the understanding that assigned annexation petition is submitted prior to the recording of the plot the required petition has been submitted in the zoning map amendment will be completed when the plot is recorded. Prior to recording the plot, a site plan was submitted for staff review.

00:09:47,900	During review, it was noted that an additional stormwater and drainage easement would be required as a result of the proposed development. The was added onto to block one of the proposed plot as this plat had not been recorded with the Burley County Recorder, it is appropriate to hold a public hearing on the plot to receive planning and

00:10:04,770	zoning commission, as well as City Commission approval for the proposed changes. The public has been notified of this request. A notice was published in the Tribune on June 13th and June 20th and 16 letters were mailed to postcards, excuse me, were mailed to the owners of nearby properties on June 13th.

00:10:23,430	To my knowledge, we have not received any comments regarding the. request. The request was evaluated according to the standards contained within the comprehensive plan, Bismarck Qu of Ordinances and state law, and as a result of all the findings contained in the staff report, staff find the proposed major subdivision final plot would not adversely impact public health, safety, and general welfare and is

00:10:41,570	consistent with our comprehensive plan, Code of ordinances, and state law. Therefore, staff recommends the reapproval of the major subdivision final platform for FedEx subdivision. Do you have questions, Commissioners, questions for Jenny. I’m not seeing or hearing any Jenny. Thank you.

00:11:03,500	With that, I’ll open up the public hearing for this agenda item and is there is the requester or representative here to speak to it. Thank you, Chair Schwartzlander Namler Schwarzenegen Engineering, uh, representing Robert Fetting on this. Yeah, as Jenny mentioned, this is really just a reapproval of a plat.

00:11:19,030	uh, we had a situation where the southern line is draining through the northern lot, even though the property is owned by the same person, uh, draining across his own property, but at some point if that land were to be sold, there are easements in place now so to, to protect that drainage area. But I can answer any questions if you have them. Commissioner’s questions for Landon. I’m not seeing or hearing. Thank you.

00:11:37,300	With that, the podium is open for others that would care to address this agenda item. And I’m not seeing anybody stepping up. So with that, I’m going to close the public hearing. Jenny, any additional comments? No thank you, Mr. Chair. All right. Thank you. With that commissioners, this is a request for a major subdivision final latte and staff recommends approval.

00:11:58,570	What are your wishes? Move to approve. We have a motion from Comm Logan to to approve. Second. A second from Comm Zent. Any discussion. Comm Schell. Maybe this is a question for staff is the required annexation petition is that condition? Is that still a condition or has that been already satisfied, so therefore this reapproval does

00:12:21,030	not need to have any conditions tied to it. Comm Schell Commissioners, um, the annexation petition has been submitted, so there are no additional. Conditions. Thank you. Thank you, Comm Schell. Additional, uh, discussion. And I’m not seeing or hearing any, so with that, Sarah, would you please call roll? Comm Wongan. Yes.

00:12:49,700	Comm Field, Comm Johnson Comm Larson. Comm Schell, Comm Seva Comm Zent Chair Schwartz. Yes, the motion is approved. With that, we move on to item C in our regular agenda, which is the vos subdivision. This is a request for a major subdivision final latte. And I believe Jenny is once again going to provide us with staff briefing.

00:13:13,700	Thank you. And Chair Schwartz, Comm Mark and Shirley Vos are requesting approval of a major subdivision final plot titled Vass Subdivision. This request is located south of Bismarck, south of Forty-eighth Avenue along the west side of South 12th Street, Southeast and consists of 5 acres with 1 lot in one block.

00:13:32,000	You tentatively approve the proposed plot at your meeting on May 28th. The property is currently zoned rural residential and the applicant intends to construct one single family dwelling and accessory buildings. on the property. The applicant has also indicated that the smaller accessory buildings on site will be removed.

00:13:52,830	Adjacent uses include rural residential to the north, west and south, and agricultural to the east across 12th Street Southeast. The public has been notified of this request. A notice was published in the Tribune on June 13th and 20th, and 38 postcards were mailed to the property owners of, um, owners of nearby properties on June 13th. We did receive one inquiry, neither for or against, just really looking for more information.

00:14:11,500	This request was evaluated according to the standards contained within the comprehensive plan, Bismarck Court of Ordinances and state law as a result of all the findings contained in the staff reports, staff find that the proposed major subdivision, Platt would not adversely impact public health, safety and general welfare and is consistent with the comprehensive plan, code of ordinances, and state law.

00:14:29,600	Therefore, staff recommends approval of the major subdivision final platform FOs subdivision. Do you have questions? Question for Jenny. I’m not seeing or hearing any. Thank you. This is a public hearing. With that, I’m going to open the public hearing is either the Request or or representative. Thanks Jerry Schwartz, uh, Lan Na Swinson Hagen.

00:14:55,770	Representing the vasses on this one. this is one of those situations where we have sort of these remnant parcels that are kind of scattered throughout the EDA and even the city where it’s just a piece that has never been platted. The zoning is already in place.

00:15:08,800	It is zoned rural residential, uh, so today we’re just, we’re just plotting it together to allow the construction of that single family home and a possible accessory building, but I can answer any questions if you have them, Comm, questions for Landon. I’m not seeing anyone. Thank you. With that, the podium was open for others that would care to address this agenda item.

00:15:31,670	And I’m not seeing anybody coming up to the podium. So with that, I’m gonna close the public hearing and ask, uh, Jenny, any additional comments? No, thank you. All right, thank you. With that, Commissioners, this is a request for a major subdivision final Platte staff’s recommendation is to approve. What are your wishes? Motion to approve.

00:15:53,370	We have a motion to approve from Comm Johnson. A second from Comm Sivak. Is there any additional discussion? I’m not seeing or hearing any, so with that, Sarah, would you please call roll? Comm Seva, Comm. feel, OK, Comm Johnson, Comm Wagen? Yes. Comm Schell? Yes. Comm Larsson, Comm Zet? Sher Schwartz. Yes, the motion is approved.

00:16:25,530	With that, we move on to item D. In our regular agenda, which is the municipal 4th edition, 1st replant block 1, lots 2 and 3, and once again Jennie is going to provide us with staff briefing.

00:16:46,770	Thank you, Chair Schwartz, Commissioners, CD Holdings LLC is requesting approval of a PUD amendment for lots 2 and 3 Block 1 municipal Fourth edition first reply. The request is located in West Central Bismarck between Shaffer Street and Canary Avenue along the south side of Edwards Avenue and consists of 13.63 acres with two lots in one block. You considered this request and called for a public hearing at your meeting on May 28th.

00:17:04,370	The proposed PUD amendment would allow for a 102 ft tall hotel with multi-family units on the upper floors, event convention space, commercial and office space, and associated parking on lot 2.

00:17:26,900	Us for lot 3 are proposed to be defined at a later date under a specific development proposal and submitted as a subsequent PUD amendment in the inter term lot 3 is supposed to remain undisturbed and in its natural state. The existing PUD amendment was adopted in October of 2022 upon sale of land by the city of Bismarck to a private party to allow a climbing gym as a primary use in additional uses to support the climbing gyms such as office space, storage and

00:17:44,530	maintenance facilities. The climbing gym never materialized. The existing PUD as well as the proposed amendment include provisions related to high quality designs, slow preservation, landscaping and other development and aesthetic standards. This amendment includes provisions.

00:18:08,430	Not a geotechnical exploration for slope stability must be performed by a geotech technical engineer and in the state of North Dakota and all recommendations provided in this report shall be followed. Staff would require that this be completed on and all recommendations followed prior to approval of a site plan for the proposed development. Adjacent uses include Bismarck State College Community Bowl to the north, the water storage facility to the east and undeveloped land riverfront to the south and west.

00:18:27,900	The public has been notified of this request to notice. was published in the Tribune on June 13th and 20th and six postcards were mailed to the owners of nearby properties on June 13th. To my knowledge, we have not received any inquiries regarding this request.

00:18:45,370	The request was evaluated according to Stans contained within the comprehensive plan, Bismarck Code of ordinances and state law, and as a result of all the findings contained in the staff report, staff find that the proposed PUD amendment would not adversely impact public health, safety and general welfare and is consistent with our comprehensive plan, code of ordinances and state law.

00:19:02,830	Therefore, staff recommend approval of the PUD amendment for Lots 2 and 3, block 1, Municipal Fourth edition first reply. Do you have questions, Commissioners? Questions for Jenny. I’m not seeing or hearing any, Jenny. Oh, Comm Johnson. Could, could you elaborate on The flexibility you might have in the future to adapt to a plan that might change slightly versus uh.

00:19:25,930	It is it, is it restrictive enough to make sure that it’s not gonna be a. Three story value level hotel by itself, and it’s going to be a significant project still is it? Or the, the graphics and the diagrams. Tied to the approval enough to, to restrict it from that.

00:19:51,470	Comm Johnson, um, right, the, the, the graphics are included in the PUD um there likely could be some changes with some design, um, I don’t believe it is the intent or was our intent to allow for anything other than what is being proposed. Could it be, let’s say a hotel without an event center.

00:20:12,830	Is that allowed or is it uh? The way that the POD is written, it says hotel comma with Event Center. So yes, the event center would be included. Thank you. Thank you, Comm Johnson. Comm, additional questions for Jenny. I’m not seeing or hearing any Chinese. Thank you.

00:20:36,330	With that, this is a public hearing, so I will open the public hearing and ask either the request or a representative here. To, uh Come to the podium. Commissioners. Cameron Fleck with CD Holdings Cameron, would you put your name on the log up there? Is there one up there? Sure thing. Thank you.

00:21:04,030	Um Can I mess with, can I bring up the slideshow or not? Would I be able to do that? No, I can, uh, this I can say the thing that you’re. Yeah, go ahead and run that one. That’s fine. I’ll just work out my notes. They work great. In Again, my name is Cameron Fleck, uh representing CD Holdings.

00:21:24,400	Appreciate you guys taking, uh, the time, um, been working and taking lead on this project. I’m just gonna take a couple of minutes to explain the project, um, just, uh, was there a slide show that we had. Uh, slide one should see lot two, Lit up so you guys can actually see that lot to um.

00:21:44,200	Lot 2 is the only lot that we’re looking to make this zoning amendment to at this time, and it’s in a shaded area within the plan, so as you can see here, uh, in this diagram, you have a lot 12, and 3.

00:22:00,170	It’s just the one in the red block diagram there, lot 2 that we are that we’re looking to make this amendment to so lot 3 will still stay the same. Um Is that the right one? If not, I could send it over, yeah, yeah, if, because it does, it looks a little bit different.

00:22:17,770	I’ve only got a couple slides here, so I won’t take too much of your guys’ time, but I just want to give you guys a little more context of the project and where it’s at. No problem, it will, yeah. Here you can see Here you can see the lot to, uh, a little bit clearer of what we’re looking to put on the site. Uh, this image shows the hotel potential, um, destination center on lot 2.

00:23:06,370	He here’s where you can see the hotel tower, um, the hotel entrance, uh, a parking lot out front. There’s going to be 3 levels of parking ramp in the back, which we’ll get into here in a minute and then you can see the hotel event center, uh, in the back that um is capable of supporting up to 900 people.

00:23:24,600	This image shows the surface parking lot. As well as the main floor level of the building. Um, so you see here you have the main floor as you walk in of the drop off area.

00:23:43,700	Um, you’ve got the hotel lobby, you’ll have 5 meeting rooms, uh, breakout meeting rooms, a junior ballroom, a large ballroom, a restaurant and kitchen, uh, with a patio overlooking, taking in the views of the Missouri River, um, and then also, uh, outdoor terrace, um. As well for people to congregate outside. In this slide, you’ll see the, this is one level of the three levels of parking structure.

00:24:03,500	I think this is an important one to point out, as we have 900 occupants in the public assembly. We have 150 in the hotel and we have a uh kind of broke out here for the required space needed is 484 parking spots.

00:24:22,230	A key point to this project is we built it with the 3 levels to to be um in this congested area 498 parking spots, so an ample amount of parking, uh, up in this project area. So we’ve exceeded the code minimum. for parking. Here’s a bird’s eye view of uh of it from Edwards Avenue. Um, this would be an image taken from the Bismarck owl side looking towards the Missouri River, taking in the Missouri River views and also looking back towards Bismarck.

00:24:44,570	Another visual of the building of the hotel tower oriented to take, take the advantage, you know, towards the river and back towards the city again. I think this hotel will be an asset for the community bowl and regional events that occur here like state track meets, um, views from the rooms overlooking the bowl would be a great addition.

00:25:05,470	The parking, places to stay, venue, places to eat and hang out would be a great addition. You know, I just want to point out that this development will not impact the natural beauty of the trails that exist on that lot too.

00:25:27,330	We want to keep that, uh, in its natural beauty with the Missouri River, uh, with the terrace and the restaurant views can kind of see a little bit more on the next slide here. This is just an image of the drop off, uh, at the front entrance of the building, how people enter and exit and then just some of the floor layouts with the hotel concept with the suites at each

00:25:47,170	end, um the room occupancies, uh, And some more of the layouts of the rooms. You know, overall we’re asking to amend the PUD amendment, um, so we can It’s an important step for our project partners, you know, to fully make the project shovel ready.

00:26:11,100	Um, this design process really helped us understand what we can fit on the site related to parking and hotel rooms, and so we’ve gotten that far, but today we’re hoping we can tackle the zoning change so we can move forward to spending money on feasibility studies and and other things within this project. Thank you for your time. Comm, questions for Cullen before he steps away from the podium. Mr.

00:26:33,570	Johnson, what, what are your thoughts on the destination center? What, what is that aspect of it. The destination center is, is meant, uh, right now to be a type of library or some sort of of destination center for tourists to come and travel through. Thank you, Comm Johnson. Comm additional questions for Cullen. I’m not seeing any Cullen.

00:26:58,800	Thank you. Thank you for the clarifications. Tried the webinar there. Access to this. OK. With that, the podium is open for others that would care to address this agenda item. And I’m not seeing or hearing anybody stepping up.

00:27:36,370	So with that, I’m gonna close the public hearing on this agenda item, uh, Commissioners, this is a request for a PUD amendment. And staff recommends approval. What are your wishes? Motion to approve. Motion to approve from Comm Johnson. 22 from Comm Zen. Any additional discussion? If I, if I may, I’d elaborate on a comment that, uh, or question from Comm Johnson earlier proceed.

00:28:02,700	So the, the ordinance does allow modifications to a plan unit developments, if they’re minor to be made by the Director of Community Development, if they’re major, they would come back, uh, to this body. Obviously there’s a lot of details in the material that were given to us. I, I’m, I’m assuming that’s kind of behind Comm Johnson’s question.

00:28:19,100	If any of these details were to change, which they likely will in any kind of development process. Uh, the small changes, um, for example, we have allowed adjustments in the height of buildings in the past, um, the way the Or is written changes to the location, setting or character of buildings and structures if they’re minor may

00:28:38,470	be authorized by by the director of Community Development. So, so, uh, but if there were a change of use, so for example, the Event Center not being included as part of that, that would be a major change, but, um, dimensional changes may, may occur.

00:28:56,500	And just for clarification, Daniel, what is the difference between minor and major? How do you draw that line? So the ordinance doesn’t specify, uh, so we go off of precedent typically, uh, and we look at the changes that have been authorized in the past.

00:29:14,300	Uh, we can accept guidance from you today, if you wish, um, on what you would consider to be minor or major, uh, but that’s how we make those decisions and then ultimately it’s um Ben’s decision as a director of community development and that thank you.

00:29:33,070	With that, again, I’ll ask the question, any additional discussion? Comm John, you know, last time we saw this, there was, we, we denied a previous amendment to this, and this is. You know, this is what should be on this site. This is a premier site and this is a, a premier development that’ll be a destination in itself and Really take advantage of that, that location in our city, so I’m, I’m hopeful that they can.

00:29:50,100	Pull this off and we, we can have an asset like this in our city. Thank you, Comm Johnson. Additional comments. Chair and fellow commissioners to, to that point, this site has been in front of This commission a couple times now with different proposals, I guess.

00:30:12,370	My concern is, I know there’s been previous applicants that um had a lot of expectations put on them related to. Architectural. Um Architectural look of the building, uh, I don’t think that there’s necessarily something wrong with this, but I would also say it’s not necessarily architecturally compelling. Um, so I guess that is a note that I would have on this, and especially, I mean, when we’re talking about the slope.

00:30:33,770	This is a bird’s eye view that we’re seeing in the rendering, but it’s not uncommon to think that there is going to be bird’s eye view onto this site and so that can end up looking like a lot of rooftop as well, so I guess those are two major concerns I have when I think of the site overall I think amazing youths,

00:30:53,470	great for the community that that’s a need that we have, um, but two concerns I have on that, especially when we’re making adjustments to height, and so there’s a really great view that potentially part of that’s blocked by this, and then we’re also talking about adding more space for.

00:31:12,170	parking that is very much needed in this area, but that also means more hard space. So without those architectural elements, um, we’re losing some of the natural beauty of that area in that way. Thank you, Comm Larson. Commissioners, additional comments. Discussion I’m not seeing or hearing any with that, Sarah, would you please call Roll? Comm Johnson. Yes. Comm Larson.

00:31:42,700	Yes Comm Field? Yes. Comm Schell? Yes. Comm Sebak? Yes. Comm Morgan? Yes. Comm Zent? Yes, Chair Schwartz. Yes, the motion is approved. With that, we move on to item E in our agenda. And I’m not sure I’m going to say this correctly, Isaac, is it? Shoute Schultz, uh, Schultz edition, and it’s a request for a minor subdivision final plot.

00:32:13,030	And Isaac will provide us with staff briefing. Thank you, Chair Schwartz and Commissioners. Now you have me second guessing if I’ve been saying it correctly this time, but uh I believe uh Schultz’s strategies with the consent of capital Entertainment Corporation is requesting approval of a minor subdivision final plat that until I am told

00:32:31,300	otherwise, I will continue to say Schultz’s edition, um, and I’ll, I’ll clarify one thing there. So Capital Entertainment Corporation is the current owner of the land you see before you, but then a short strategies is the technical. for the minor subdivision final plat specifically.

00:32:48,930	So as you can see on the screen here, there we go, uh, this project is located in central Bismarck, uh, in the northwest quadrant of the intersection of South 3rd Street and East Front Avenue there. The project consists of approximately 3.

00:33:12,300	6 acres of land, with this being the replat of the one existing parcel that is currently legally defined astract 118 of Part of Blocks 5 and 7 original platt, and it would split the one existing parcel. uh into two lots in one block as part of the subdivision. The product is in the DC uh. Downtown Core zoning district, and that is not being requested to change at this time.

00:33:37,030	The project is in the southwest edge of Downtown Bismarck and is, uh, generally uh surrounded by other downtown properties with some, this is the future land use plan here, but in the zoning itself, uh, there are some other properties that are zoned CG around it, but generally speaking, it is in a mixed-use part of town, so there’s a variety of commercial office and residential.

00:33:55,500	uses in the area. The plant is defined in the future land use plan as being in the downtown as well or continue to be part of the downtown, which is of course just described as the heart of the community in the historic center of Bismarck.

00:34:15,470	The public was notified of this request via publications in the Bismarck Tribune on June 13th and 20th and 35 postcards were mailed to nearby property owners on June 13, 2025 as well. Uh, the area of the Replat as part of the original plant can be seen on the screen there.

00:34:36,800	And so staff did receive one inquiry for further information on this request from the State Historical Society, and we sent them some more information, but they did not provide any opposition. or anything like that as part of this process and staff did not receive any other written comments prior to this hearing to the best of my knowledge.

00:34:54,700	Um, as a cumulative result of all the findings contained in the staff reports before you, the City of Bismarck staff find that the proposed minor subdivision final plant would not adversely impact public health, safety, and general welfare, and that it is generally consistent with the comprehensive plan, Bismarck Code of Ordinances and relevant state law. Therefore, staff recommends a approval of the minor subdivision final plat of Schultz edition.

00:35:17,230	Does the Commission have any questions for me at this time, Comm, questions for Isaac. Comm Schell. Um Isaac, the the vacated 2nd Street right of way that would have bisected these two lots.

00:35:37,830	Do you know if there’s any facilities in that right of way and all the city doesn’t have any from my understanding, but were there any private utilities or anything along those lines that would need to be accommodated, um. Because it might have been vacated with a reservation of a utility easement for a MDU a Capital Electric, or whoever it might be, uh, you, can you speak to that if that’s something they’re we’re aware of.

00:35:53,230	Sure, so Comm Schell, Chair Schwartz and Commissioners, there are, um, easements for utilities and access on the plat itself, but I would defer to the applicant or the representative to touch a little more on that. Thank you, Comm Schell. Commissioners, additional questions for Isaac. I’m not seeing or hearing any Isaac. Thank you.

00:36:14,970	This is a request for a public hearing with that I’ll open the public hearing and would either the requester or representative, and once again Landon is stepping up. Thank you, Chair Schwartz.

00:36:32,070	Um, yeah, so, so a few questions, uh, came up during the plotting of this, amongst them, uh, a situation where we have a couple of blocks and a and a vacated right away, so it’s created this sort of oddball track, uh, so we’re trying to split that in half basically and because of sort of its existing sort of odd description of minor plot is, is recommended at this point to, to put the.

00:36:45,830	lotta accordingly, the east side of the parcel has an existing structure on it. It’s the old borrowed bucks Roadhouse on it. Um, we’ve supplied and access and utilities to get through that lot to to supply the West lot.

00:37:02,400	Uh, at this, at this point, no plans that we’re aware of for construction on on either lot, but that’s certainly potential going down, um, we, when we did survey the property, we did, we did ask for locates from the utility companies. No utilities were shown in the in the vacated right of way, but we have supplied a utilities on the south side of this. There’s some light poles that are there right now.

00:37:14,100	some utilities on the street and that just gives the city a little bit more room, uh, to work with as well. Um, additionally, city engineer, uh, Comm Schell had asked about the the right of way on Front Avenue. There’s been some surveys in the past that were showing that right away at only 70 ft.

00:37:28,100	Uh, that was an error, we can correct it now with the spot showing it as the full 80 ft of length. I can answer any questions if you have them. Commissioner’s questions for Landon. I’m not seeing anyone. Thank you. With that, the podium is open for others who would care to address this agenda item. And I’m not seeing or hearing anybody stepping up.

00:37:51,000	So with that, I’m gonna close the public hearing. Isaac, any additional comments? None of this time. Thank you, thank you. With that commissioners, this is a request for a minor subdivision final plat staff’s recommendation is to approve what are your wishes. Motion to approve. We have a motion to approve from Comm Wogan.. 2nd. 2nd from Comm Zen.

00:38:13,900	Any additional discussion? Not seeing or hearing any. Sarah, would you please call Roll? Mr Commission Wagan? Yes. Comm Johnson. Yes. Comm Field? Yes. Comm Larsson, Comm Seva. Comm Shall? Yes. Comm Char Schwartz Comm Char Schwartz. Yes, the motion is approved.

00:38:42,300	With that, we’ll move on to item F in our regular agenda, a village cooperative edition and it’s a request for a minor subdivision final latt and Lauren will provide us with staff briefing on this. Uh, good evening, Chair Schwartz and Commissioners, uh, reholdings, Bismarck LLC with consent from the current owners, uh, Ronald Knuson at Aburece uh are requesting approval of a minor subdivision final plot titled Village Cooperative Edition.

00:39:10,070	The project area is comprised of 6.59 acres and is located in North Bismarck, north of Ashley Drive in the southwest corner of the inner section of North Washington Street, Amador. Avenue. The proposed plot is a replat of lot 1, block 2, Good Shepherd North edition. The proposed flat would create two lots in one block.

00:39:32,970	The property is included in the RT residential zoning district has been an identified as Nehood mixed use in the future land use plan. Adjacent uses include single family residential to the east across North Washington Street and the West as well. Uh, Missouri slope to the north across Medora Avenue and Legacy United Methodist Church to the south.

00:39:56,500	The public was notified of this request, a notice was published in the Bismarck Tribune on June 13th and 20th in 27 postcards were mailed to the owners of nearby properties on June 13th. To my knowledge, staff has not received any formal comments regarding this request.

00:40:17,900	The request was evaluated according to standards contained within the comprehensive plan code of Ordinances and relevant state law. Uh Uh, as a result of all findings contained within the staff Report city of Bismarck staff find that the proposed minor subdivision final plot would not adversely impact the public health safety and general welfare and is consistent with the comprehensive plan code of ordinances and state law.

00:40:39,100	Their forest staff recommends approval of the minor subdivision final plaque titled Village Cooperative Edition. Do you have any questions? Comm questions for Lauren. I’m not seeing you here. Thank you. This will be, this is a public hearing, and with that I will open the public hearing is either the requester or a representative here to speak to this agenda item.

00:41:03,730	And I’m not seeing any, so with that, I opened the podium to others that would care to address this agenda item. Chair, there may be somebody online that wishes to to comment and Andrew Schaffer, I believe. OK. Well, let’s proceed. Yes, uh, thank you, Commission.

00:41:28,770	Um, my name is Andrew Schaffer and I represent real estate Equities Holdings LLC, um, we’re a developer based out of the Twin Cities area and we will, um, Our purpose for replatting this lot is to develop a village cooperative senior housing project on the eastern lot and um Some future development on the Western lot. Uh, we’re excited to have this in front of the commission tonight.

00:41:50,830	We’re excited to be moving forward on our proposed project. Uh, without a welcome any questions you may have. Commissioner’s questions for Andrew. Andrew, I think you’re getting off easy this evening. I don’t see anybody putting their hand up. Thank you. Thank you.

00:42:18,370	Without the podium is once again 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, uh, close a public hearing. Lauren, any additional comments? No additional comments. Thank you. All right. Thank you. With that Commissioners, this is a request for a minor subdivision final plat staff’s recommendation is to approve what are your wishes.

00:42:41,400	I’ll move to approve. We have a motion from Comm Larson to approve. Second, we have a 2nd from Comm Wain. Any additional discussion. And I’m not seeing or hearing any, but that’s Sarah, would you please call Roll? Comm Sebak? Yes. Comm Field? Yes, Comm Johnson, Comm Wagan. Mr. Larson, yes. Comm Schell, yes. Comm Zen Cha Schwartz.

00:43:10,330	Yes, the motion is approved. With that, we move on to item G in our regular agenda, which is Silver Ranch, 3rd edition, 2nd Replatt, and it is a request for a minor subdivision final latt and I believe Isaac is going to provide us with staff briefing on this. Yes, thank you, Chair Schwartz and Commissioners.

00:43:27,830	Our next regular agenda item comes to us from Investcore, uh, Inc. who is requesting approval of the minor uh subdivision final Platt titled Silver ranch 3rd. edition 2 Replat, as you can see on the screens before you, this project is located in Northeast Bismarck, north of Welder Avenue and east of Silver Boulevard along a future

00:43:47,630	extensions of Halvorson Avenue and Silberneger Silbert Nagle drive, uh, the product consists of approximately 6.1 acres and is a replat of lots 9 through 19 block 8 and lots 1 through 5, block 14, Silver Ranch 3rd edition. the adjacent rights of way of Halverson Avenue and Silver Nale Drive, uh, as well.

00:44:17,430	The project consists of just rearranging some lot lines and and creating some additional lots, it would go from the existing 16 lots in 2 blocks to 22 lots in two blocks to facilitate some twin home style development, uh, the project, uh, and here you can see, uh, the area of the replant as per the original plated portion.

00:44:35,670	The project is zoned our 10 residential, and that is not being requested to change. The property is within the broader Silver ranch series of developments and would be surrounded by a variety of single and two-family residential properties to the West and south, especially with the north and east being developed in generally a residential pattern as well,

00:44:57,000	but of course this is still in the process of developing, so, uh, exact details to be determined in to a degree. The plant is identified as urban neighborhood.

00:45:15,730	in future land use plan which are described as places for the quiet enjoyment of home life, and the public was notified of this request via some publications in the Bismarck Tribune on June 13th and 20th and 13 postcards were mailed to nearby uh owners of property on June 13, 2025 as well. To the best of my knowledge, staff has not received any inquiries or written comments prior to this hearing and as a cumulative result of all the findings contained in the staff reports.

00:45:36,730	for you, City of Bismarck staff find that the proposed minor subdivision final latt, uh, would not adversely impact public health, safety, and general welfare, and that it is generally consistent with the comprehensive plan, Bismarck Code of Ordinances and relevant state law.

00:45:58,900	Therefore, staff recommends approval of the minor subdivision final plats titled Silver Ranch 3rd edition, 2nd Replat. However, before I ask if you have questions, I will make one more note that uh as you maybe saw in some of the maps, part of the This area is not annexed. Part of it is, part of it is not.

00:46:14,530	Uh, there is no associated annexation request with this specifically because that was included with the uh last month’s request for Silver Ranch, 5th edition, uh, so that was included there. Staff is working with the applicants to make sure that the legal descriptions of that annexation request are accurately described in case, you know, depending on the timing, it might need to be adjusted to this new legal descriptions, but we are

00:46:36,300	working to make sure that that is all sorted out. So that’s not something you have to worry about at this, uh, meeting here, but I just thought I’d bring that up in case anyone had questions on that. So, now, does the Commission have any questions for me? Comm, questions for Isaac. I’m not seeing or hearing. Thank you.

00:46:55,500	This is a public hearing and with that, I’ll open the public hearing. is either the request or a representative here to speak to this agenda item. Thank you again, Chair Schwartz.

00:47:14,330	Exactly as, uh, Isaac had described it there, we have a group of single family lots effectively, but the zoning is set up for either single family or twins, so we’re coming in, relating to, to make them officially twin homes that can actually be on their own lots rather than in combined lots and things like that.

00:47:30,130	Also, as you mentioned, the annexation request is already in process with Silver Ranch 5th, property a little further to the north and the east, so hopefully at some point here these can tie together and they can all be filed around the same time so that the, the annexation request. The plots are all working together, but I can certainly answer any questions if you have them, Commissioners. Questions for land. I’m not seeing anyone and thank you.

00:47:47,230	With that, the podium is open for others that would care to address this agenda item. And I’m not seeing anybody stepping up. So with that, I’m going to close the public hearing. Isaac, additional comments, no additional comments. Thank you. All right, thank you. With that, Commissioners, this is a request for a minor subdivision final plot.

00:48:09,230	Staff recommendation is to approve what are your wishes. Motion to approve. We have a motion to approve from Comm Wagen. Second 2nd from Comm Zen. Any additional discussion? And I’m not seeing or hearing any. With that era, please call roll. Comm Larsson. Yes, Comm Field. Comm Johnson. Yes. Comm Schell? Yes. Comm Sebach Comm Wongan? Yes. Comm Zent? Sher Schwartz.

00:48:39,230	Yes, the motion is approved. With that, we move on to item H in our regular agenda based on Electric 4th edition, Block 1 lot one, and it’s a request for a special use permit and Isaac will once again provide us with the staff briefing. Thank you again, Chair Schwartz and Commissioners. This next.

00:48:57,700	regular agenda item comes to us from Colombo LLC who has requested approval of a special use permit for a drive-through in conjunction with a coffee shop on Lot 1, block 1, Basin Electric 4th edition as seen on the screens before you.

00:49:17,670	Uh, this is located in sort of north central Bismarck in the southwest quadrant of the intersection of East Century Avenue and North 19th Street. Uh, the property is zoned conditional CG commercial we drive-throughs are permitted with a special use permit. And a majority of the land around it is zoned similarly. It contains a mixture of uses ranging from parking and offices to a golf course across North 19th Street to the east.

00:49:37,800	Access, uh, to this property would be via the lot to the south, according to the attached site exhibit and not directly onto North 19th Street itself and the area is identified as community mixed use in the future land use plan, which is described as places of commerce, employment, and residence for. the Bismart community.

00:50:01,770	The public was duly notified of this request via publications in the Bismarck Tribune on June 13th and 20th and 10 postcards were mailed to nearby properties on June 13, 2025 as well, and to my knowledge, uh, staff have not received any public comments or inquiries regarding this request.

00:50:23,170	So therefore, as a cumulative result of all findings contained in your staff reports, City of Bismarck staff find that the proposed special use permit would not. Adversely impact public health, safety, and general welfare, and that it is generally consistent with the comprehensive plan, Bismarck Code of ordinances and relevant state law.

00:50:42,900	Therefore, staff recommends approval of the special use permit for a drive-through in conjunction with a coffee shop on Lot 1, block 1, based on Electric 4th edition. Does the commission have any questions for me at this time? Comm questions for Isaac. Comm Zen. Isaac is.

00:51:00,570	I can’t really see too well it’s on there is, is there something in that lot now or is it vacant? It, I believe it is vacant at the moment, Comm Zen, yes, as of right now it is vacant. I thought maybe there was a parking lot there or something. It’s not. Thank you, Comm Zent Commissioners, Comm Johnson. You know if we have other instances of The stacking required stacking being split between multiple windows.

00:51:25,130	Uh, Comm Johnson and Commissioners, I could not find one in my review, um, but it is possible there’s one out there that I did not find, but staff had no concerns in our initial reviews with this particular orientation. Thank you, Comm Johnson. Comm, Comm Schell.

00:51:44,530	I think maybe it’s a question for you, maybe it’s a question for the applicant, but it shows access onto the, the property to the south. Do have we confirmed that they have the right to access the property through, through the South.

00:52:04,630	Commissionerchell and Schwartz and Commissioners, if my memory serves, and perhaps it is, is mistaken, there is an access easement there, but if that is not correct, I would invite the applicant or the representative to correct me. Thank you, Comm Schell. Commissioner’s additional questions for Isaac. I’m not seeing any, Isaac, thank you. Thank you. Is this a public hearing, and with that I’ll open the public hearing is either the requester or a representative here to speak to this agenda item.

00:52:25,970	Thank you again, Jerry Schwartz. Uh, yeah, I can, I can try and answer a few of those questions for you. Um, right now the lot is empty with the exception of there’s a large billboard sign there on the property so that you can see that on the on the site a little bit in that northwest corner.

00:52:37,800	That’s what that structure is. There’s an existing site right there. Um, there is an access easement onto the property right now, um, that would allow this access point we’re in discussions with, with the adjoining property owners. They’re amenable to even additional easements if necessary to, to gain access to this.

00:52:54,800	We can provide the existing access easement to staff if they would like to to. going forward, for sure. The, the two access points or the two windows is unusual in this area, a little, I don’t believe there are any in Bismarck. There is one in Mandan that we’ve seen.

00:53:09,330	Um, I, I believe it is the same ownership group, uh, different zoning or they’re obviously different styles of it, but they have the similar building. In fact, I believe it’s the exact same building. But uh I can try to answer any other questions if you have them. Commissioner’s questions for Landon.

00:53:24,830	Mr Schell Landed, uh, I just offered that we probably don’t need to see the, the access agreement now, but just note that if you don’t get that access easement or or or granted at the time of site plan approval, um, the configuration that you have shown would likely not work, and we’d probably have to come back to this board for a a different special use permit layout, certainly understood. Thank you, Comm Schell.

00:53:40,830	Comm, additional questions for Landon. I’m not seeing or hearing any London. Thank you. With that, the podium is open for others that would care to address this agenda item. And I’m not seeing anybody step up, so with that, I’m going to close a public hearing. Isaac, and any additional comments? Not at this time, Chair. Thank you.

00:54:01,070	All right, thank you. Uh, with that, Comm, this is a request for a special use permit. Staff recommendation is to approve. What are your wishes. Motion to approve. Motion to approve from Comm Za. 2nd from Comm Seva. Any additional discussion? I’m not seeing any, so with that, Sarah, would you please call roll? Mr. Wangan? Yes.

00:54:31,430	Comm Field? Yes. Comm Johnson, yes, Comm Larson, yes. Comm Schell? Yes. Comm Seva Commissionerent Chair Schwartz. Yes, the motion is approved. With that, we move on to item I in our regular agenda, which is Co West 5th. Mm 5 2nd replat block one lot one.

00:55:00,770	And it’s a request for a special use permit, and Lauren London is going to provide us with staff briefing. Is that a 5? Uh, that’s correct. OK. Uh, good evening again, Chair Schwartz and Commissioners, Capital Credit Union is requesting approval of a specially used permit for a drive-through in conjunction with the coffee shop on lot one, block one, Country West 5th, 2nd Replat.

00:55:22,870	The property is owned CG commercial, a drive-through, uh, is permitted as a special use in the CG commercial zoning district with approval by the Planning and Zoning Commission. The project area includes 77,000, 66 square feet and is located in West Central Bismarck, north of Interstate 94, south of West Century Avenue in the northeast portion of the intersection of

00:55:45,670	Burt boats Drive in Tyler Parkway. The the property has been identified as destination mixed use in the future land use plan adjacent uses include restaurants and offices, uh, shopping center, as well as a convenience store, um, within the general vicinity of the area. The public was notified of this request.

00:56:09,770	A notice was published in the Bismarck Tribune on June 13th and 20th and 14 postcards were mailed to the owners of nearby properties on June 13th. To my knowledge, staff is not. d any public, public comments regarding this request.

00:56:31,530	The request was evaluated according to standards contained within the comprehensive plan, Bismarck Code of Ordinances and relevant state law based on the site exhibits submitted and uh located in your packet. The requirements for a drive-through in conjunction with a coffee shop would be met.

00:56:51,870	The drive-through requires 10 stacking spaces which are provided on the north side of the site, um, with the 10 stacking spaces, uh, behind the menu, uh, and ordering board, an additional 3 stacking spaces are available. behind the coffee shop, uh, pickup window access for the site is provided via an access easement on the east side of the site as well.

00:57:10,530	As a result of all findings contained in the staff Report, City of Bismarck staff find that the proposed specially use permit would not adversely impact the public health, safety in general welfare, and and is consistent with the comprehensive plan code of ordinances and relevant state law. Therefore, staff recommends approval of a special use permit for the drive-through, uh, for a drive-through in conjunction with a coffee shop on that one, black one country West visit. 5th, 2 replat.

00:57:31,300	Do you have any questions for me? Commissioner’s questions forlorn. Comm Lawrence, so this will be within the existing building. They’re not gonna be adding on, correct? the site exhibit that they’ve provided, that that would be correct. Comm and. They do have some empty space in there. I could see something like that going in there, yes.

00:57:54,970	Thank you, Comm, Comm, additional questions, Mister Schell. Lauren does the proposed coffee drive through lane take away any of the required. Drive through space for the bank functions that are currently on the site.

00:58:21,600	Uh, through discussions, Comm Schell Commissioners, uh, through discussions with the applicant, it was discussed that there would be some utilization by both the coffee driver as well as the bank drive-through uses within that, uh, drive-through lane, uh, on the west portion of that side, and is that Getting to your question, Comm Schell. I guess I, I was just wondering if they’re taking.

00:58:41,770	One of the drivers that is currently used for the bank that was required and and turning that into a, a drive-through for the coffee shop, and, but I don’t know if that’s the case, but maybe that would just be a clarification by the applicant. Thank you, Comm Schell. Commissioner’s additional questions forlorn. I’m not seeing or hearing Lauren, thank you. Thank you. Is this a public hearing and with that, I’ll open the public hearing is either the applicant.

00:59:06,230	Our representative here to speak to it. Good evening, Chair Schwartz Commissioners Jason Patrician, Swenson Hagen representing the ownership group, um, just to answer a couple of the inquiries, um, not all of the driver, uh, lanes on the north side of the bank are being used currently.

00:59:34,730	And so that North end is and was a free, um, lane area and so that would be the stacking portion that would be used to utilize for the menu board and then of course the stacking for the coffee portion, um, second, uh currently there would be no addition to the building, so it’s uh re-adaptation use within the building itself.

00:59:58,630	And Just a point to note, we did go through a parking analysis and so when the bank was actually constructed. Um, back under a previous zoning ordinance for parking, and of course with the newer parking ordinance, uh, we’ve generally seen kind of a reduction in, in the different applications of parking and so if we go and look at the bank portion for their parking needs

01:00:24,300	based on use and then the coffee use we do and are able to park, uh, the building with the two different uses with the parking that’s currently there.

01:00:45,630	Um, the layout that we do have currently, we would be losing only one parking space right now to the existing parking lot, um, we’re currently working on trying to get out. Uh, a schematic so that we can get some pricing put together for two different options, um, right now there’s currently the one lane on the west side of the building, and we are going to be looking at what that would look like if we accommodated two lanes through there, um, but ownership group

01:01:07,030	does know about the potential stacking of that mixed bank. Teller use and of course the coffee use, um, if we do go with a two-lane option, we can accommodate that through signage, striping, um, just a lot of those visual features to, to get those. People through that space, um.

01:01:31,570	But I would ask if you guys have any questions. Comm questions for Jason. I’m not hearing or seeing any, Jason. All right. Thank you. Thank you. With the podium is open for others that would care to address his agenda item. And I’m not seeing. Anyone else stepping up, so with that, I’m gonna close the public hearing.

01:01:55,570	Laen any additional comments? No additional comments. Thank you. All right. Thank you. With that, this is a request for a special use permit and staff recommends approval. What are your wishes? Motion to approve. Motion to approve from Comm Wygan. Second. It was second from Comm Seva. Any additional discussion? And I’m not seeing or hearing any with that.

01:02:21,400	Sarah, would you please call roll? Mr Larson, yes, Comm Schell, yes. Comm Wangan? Yes. Comm Johnson? Comm Field. Comm Sebak Comm Zent Chair Schwartz. Yes, the motion is approved.

01:02:51,670	With that, we move on to item J in our regular agenda, which is, uh, dimensional standards and Public zoning districts and Isaac is going to provide us with the Staff briefing on this agenda item. Yes, thank you, Chair Schwartz and Comm. So our final regular agenda item for this evening is a zoning ordinance text amendment coming to you from the community development department who is requesting approval of an ordinance revision to the building setback and height regulations for structures in

01:03:15,800	the Public zoning district or specifically Section 140416 of the Bismarck Code of Ordinances, uh, staff have had some conversations with Bismarck State College and their consultants about some proposed projects that they are interested in doing on, on their properties, and they noted that the section of that ordinance had some, some complexities, uh, in connection

01:03:40,300	with building height and building setbacks that could be confusing or even render certain projects infeasible, but we’ll get to that in a moment. Um, if we could have the Uh, slides shown on the screen here, but as, as we get there, so staff requested direction from the Planning and zoning Commission about this

01:03:59,970	topic on April 23, 2025, and the Commission directed staff to move forward to address some of these issues, um, as you can see here, we’re just looking to simplify some of the building setback regulations in connection to building heights, as well as simplifying some building side yard, uh, setback regulations, so Uh, the, the commission considered this uh

01:04:25,100	request on May 28th, 2025 and called for a public hearing. Here you can see the uh summary of changes. Hopefully you can read that OK, otherwise, I, of course, will say it here as well.

01:04:44,270	So the existing regulation for building height in P public is 75 ft maximum, uh, unless it is within 300 ft of any residential zoned district, then it is a height limit of 50 ft. Staff are not proposing any change to this.

01:05:04,100	this particular area, uh, the main part that came up in our conversations with um the, the BSC’s consultants was the fact that for the front yard, rear yard, and the side yard for every foot or fraction thereof over 35 ft in height, there would be an additional setback, uh, distance added for the front yard and rear yard, that would be an additional 2 ft for every foot or fraction thereof over 35 ft and for the side yard, it is an additional 4.

01:05:23,830	feet for every foot or fraction thereof over 35 ft. The existing regulation is starting at 25 ft for front yard, 20 ft for rear yard, and then my personal favorite, uh, the side yard here, uh, the existing side yard setback regulations.

01:05:42,500	There has to be two side yards, of course, and the sum of these two side yards shall not be less than 20% of the average lot width, and if the lot width is less than or equal to 60 ft. Each side yard. Shall not be less than 10% of the width, but never less than 5 ft.

01:05:59,200	Or if the average lot width is greater than 60 ft, each side yard shall be at least 6 ft, but at least 15 ft if the height is at least 35 ft, but then also if it’s over 35 ft, you have to add an extra 4 ft for every foot or fraction thereof, over 35 ft. So I hope you are taking notes.

01:06:13,600	We are going to now move on to some math problems to make sure we’re all understanding this, and I have some extra scratch paper and pens if you need them, you cannot. share, uh, with your partners though is individual work.

01:06:30,030	This is, of course, all a joke, I, I say right there, but this would mean that if someone wanted to go up to 75 ft as of right now, um, depending on the width of the lot, the front yard, rear yard, and side yard would need setbacks of 105 ft 100 ft, and between 165 and 175 ft for each side yard, you know, respectively here.

01:06:50,300	Um, so this is what we’re looking at addressing. a little bit. The proposed regulations would simplify things. We would essentially keep the uh absolute minimum allowed right now and if we can go to the next slide, we’ll sort of highlight this a little more.

01:07:07,930	So we’ll keep the 25 and the 20 ft and that 5 ft for the side yard, that is the absolute minimum, uh, the ordinance allows right now, uh, staff chose to go in this direction to not only simplify things but also minimize the possibility of creating potential non-conformities moving forward.

01:07:28,900	I will note one other thing, uh, that the Applicants, uh, well, not we are the applicants, the BSE’s consultants is what I was trying to say. Uh, did, uh, inquire about reducing the front yard, uh, minimum to 15 ft and in the uh. process of doing the uh zoning code rewrite the land development code.

01:07:51,730	The proposed front yard minimum setback there is 15 ft, but staff so far did not reduce the 25 to 15, uh, staff are open to that, but we decided to leave it as this, at least as of right now, if the Commission has other thoughts, we are happy to hear them.

01:08:07,630	But as of right now, the proposed change, no change to the height limits, and then front yard simplify it down to 25 ft, rear yard 20 ft, side yard. 5 ft So The public was notified of this request on June 13th and June 20th and to the best of my knowledge, staff has not received, uh, they were notified via publications of the Bismarck Tribune, and to the best of my knowledge, staff has not received any comments or inquiries regarding this

01:08:30,630	request from the public. So as a cumulative result of all the findings contained in this staff report, City of Bismarck staff find that the proposed zoning ordinance tax amendment would not adversely impact public health safety. and general well-being and that it is generally consistent with the comprehensive plan.

01:08:47,700	Bismarck Code of ordinances and relevant state law, and I promise we’re not just saying that because we wrote this and are requesting this. Uh, so therefore staff recommends approval of the zoning ordinance text amendments to revise the building height and setback regulations for structures in the Public zoning district, specifically Section 140416.

01:09:09,300	And does the commission have any questions for me at this time, Comm, questions for Isaac. Commissioner’s Zan. So Isaac, 5 ft would be the minimum on the side. Yes. But it would be encouraged to go wider than that. So, as always, uh, Comm Zent and Commissioners, the minimum setback would be just a minimum an applicant or someone wanting to build something could of course go above that.

01:09:30,430	They would not be required to go down to the minimum. It would just offer them a little more flexibility in case if they wanted to go down to that, they could. I just think that would be tough if you had an air conditioning unit on the side of the house or something else, it would be difficult to get something.

01:09:45,400	Past that to go from the front yard to the backyard. I think we should encourage beyond. More than 5 ft so that. You can even get a lawn mower through there or or something to go from front yard to backyard. That, that seems kind of tight to me. Thank you, Comm and.

01:10:05,800	Commissioner’s additional questions for Isaac. I’m not seeing or hearing any Isaac. Thank you. Thank you. This is a public hearing, and with that I will open the public hearing. Is there any one in attendance that would like to address this particular agenda item.

01:10:29,200	And I’m not seeing or hearing anybody stepping up, so with that, I’m gonna close the public hearing. Isaac, any additional comments. Not at this time, Chair. Thank you, thank you. With that commissioners, is this a request for a zoning ordinance text amendment and the staff’s recommendation is to approve what are your wishes. Motion to approve as proposed. We have a motion to approve from Comm Waggan. Second.

01:10:56,600	A second from Comm Seva. Any additional discussion? I’m not seeing any, so with that, Sarah, would you please call Roll? Comm Field Comm Johnson. Yes. Mr. Larsson, yes. Comm Schell? Yes. Comm Sebach, Comm W Wagan? Yes. Comm. Yes. And er Schwartz. Yes, the motion is approved. With that, we are down to other business. On our uh regular agenda.

01:11:29,630	Is there anything out there that, uh, needs to be brought up for the good of the commission. And I don’t see anybody jumping up. So with that, our next meeting. Of the commission is scheduled for July 23rd.

01:11:53,600	I would like to thank everybody for their attention and attendance this evening, Commissioners and staff, and I think we’re all ready to get out and enjoy a nice evening. So, Have a good