00:00:05,630	First item is called the roll. Board member Jansen. Yes, Board Member Seiffert. Yes, Board member Wohl here board member Wangler and Chair Clark, yes. Thank you. We are all present, so we’ve got a quorum.

00:00:29,230	Um, first item on the agenda after roll call is approval, approval of the meeting minutes from the August 7th, 2025 meeting. Has everybody had a chance to review those? I would entertain a motion I move to accept. We’ve got a motion. We have a second. No OK, uh, Comm Wengler, we’ll take your second. Is there any committee discussion on that? OK, let’s call the roll on that as well then. Comm Wohl. Yes Comm Seifert.

00:01:01,730	Yes, Comm Wangler, Comm Jansen, Chair Clark, yes. OK, so that, uh, motion carries. The next item on the agenda is public comments on items on the previous board of Adjustment meeting. We do not have anyone present, so we will pass to the next item on the agenda.

00:01:20,970	Uh, we’ve got a variance request by the University of Mary subdivision. If we could have staff present that, please? Thank you. Good evening, Chair Clark, board members. The University of Mary is requesting a variance from Section 1404017 of the city code of Ordinance from the rural residential height limits requirement to increase the building height for a proposed athletic dome from 50 ft to 80

00:01:52,100	ft. The property is located within the rural residential Soing District uses permitted within the Soding district include the education group and the University of Mary is considered part of that group. The city’s zoning ordinance does limit the height of non-residential principal structures within this zoning district to 50 ft.

00:02:09,230	The public has been notified of this request, 81 postcards were mailed to the owners of nearby properties on September 19th. To my knowledge, we have not received any inquiries regarding this request. Pursuant to Section 140602 of the city code of Ordinances.

00:02:27,870	This board may vary or adjust the strict application of any of the requirements of the zoning ordinance in case of an exceptionally irregular, narrow, shallow, or steep lot or other exceptional physical or topographical conditions by reason of which the strict application of the provisions of the zoning ordinance would result in an unnecessary hardship that would deprive the owner a reasonable use of land or building involved, but in no

00:02:47,800	other case. No adjustment in the strict application of any provisions of our zoning ordinance shall be granted by the board unless it finds the following that there are special circumstances or conditions that apply to the land or buildings that do not apply generally to land or buildings within the neighborhood and have not

00:03:05,270	resulted from any act of the applicant. that the strict application of the provisions of the zoning ordinance would deprive the applicant of reasonable use of said land or building, the granting of the variance is necessary for the reasonable use of land or said building, and that the variance as granted by the board is the

00:03:21,800	minimum variance that will accomplish the relief sought by the applicant. Finally, that the grant of the variances will be in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the zoning ordinance and will not be injurious to the neighborhood or otherwise detrimental to public welfare.

00:03:41,000	The applicant has submitted a submitted a written statement that identifies their anticipated hardship and explains why they believe the variant should be granted. This document was included within your packet. If you choose to approve the variance as proposed, staff asks that you identify a hardship and modify the review standards or findings outlined in your staff report to support your decision.

00:03:59,530	The applicant’s consultant is here they’re on Zoom, um, to answer any questions you have, but before they do, do you have any questions of me? I have one question. Um, this was zoned R. do you know when? I see the ETA was pre 1980, but Well, well, sure.

00:04:23,170	So it was zoned pre 1980. Um, and if I recall, probably 58 years ago, there was a request to rezone this property from rural residential to Public, I believe, um, that request was not, um, approved. There were some other considerations that were made and some of decent property owners had concerns with with some things as well.

00:04:41,470	So that was not approved at that time. Thank you. Any additional questions for staff? Thanks, Jenny. Thank you OK, and I understand we’ve got the applicant on Zoom. Will you state your name for the record, and we’d love to hear from you. Excellent.

00:05:08,500	Uh, my name is Jeremy Wheen, uh, an architect with ISG here on behalf of the University of Mary. Uh, so thank you for hearing this various request uh for this project. The university is undertaking. Um, the basis for the request is uh uh the accommodation of the needs within the space.

00:05:31,430	So the university is trying to develop a premier athletic complex on campus, and the dome structure is identified to host a number of different events including soccer, basketball, football, several of which require some height variances in order to accommodate practice, uh, gameplay, those types of things.

00:05:56,500	Uh, and the fifty-foot variance just does not accommodate uh the safe ty or the clearances needed for those athletic events, which is why we’re requesting the 80-foot, uh, variant. And I’d be happy to answer any other questions that your team might have. Thank you Any questions You have a couple Go ahead.

00:06:21,730	Jeremy, uh, Curttier, um a couple items, I did a lot of research on the domes and and one of the things that they keep on me back to is the height of the dome is based basically 30% of what the width of the building is. So this building’s 275 ft at 30%, that’s 82.5 ft basically is a recommended height of the dome. I’m assuming that’s for design purposes, for snow loading and things like that too.

00:06:41,800	Is that correct? Correct. OK, no loading and also to make sure we can get the correct um height angles right around the perimeter of the building, so we don’t have compromised wall heights at the perimeter. Um, is this, is this facility going to be air conditioned? I haven’t seen any air conditioning in any domes.

00:07:01,630	because of the structure. I see the lights, but Yeah, so currently it is not anticipated to be air conditioned. Uh, and this is designed to be a seasonal dome, so there is the opportunity should the owner wish to remove it during the offseason.

00:07:22,970	which would be the summer months Uh just for point of reference for the, the Tennis Center over Mandan, that’s 55 ft. but it’s strictly tennis and pickleball, so it makes a difference.

00:07:42,870	Uh, looking at the requirements, uh, for baseball and stuff, they recommended a minimum of 60 ft which I thought was a little low, but they give a range from 60 to 75 or something like that. Softball is obviously a little less. but in any case what you pointed out, the highest clearance is on the side. in order to play the different sports and so forth was the big deal, so correct.

00:07:59,370	And even with some of those lower ends of the height clearances, there’s still lights, uh, and things like that that would hang from the structure. So I want to make sure that we have the necessary clearance not only for at least those minimums recommended for gameplay, but also for the infrastructure necessary just to um make the, the, the structure usable. OK.

00:08:17,530	Thank you Thank you. Any additional quest additional questions. Thank you, Jeremy Thank you OK, we would normally have, uh, commons members of the public right now. We’d open the floor for that. We don’t have anyone here right now. So let’s move on to, uh, the board’s consideration of this variance request.

00:08:48,370	Um, before we have committee discussion, we need to have a motion on the floor, so I look. I look to you to move us forward. If we do have a motion to approve the variance request. I would ask that motion include the necessary findings of fact. Is that the universal sign if you’ve got a motion? No.

00:10:40,100	Yeah I’ll make a motion to approve the variants. the hardship being uh, we have a very unique situation in the RR zoning arena that no one ever anticipated we’d have. on a dome being built and how would they expect to know that, you know, back in pre-1980. They didn’t even exist at the time.

00:11:15,730	So, uh, the ordinance actually is the hardship based off not being current with what has transpired in the last 45 years Uh, it would be, uh, if we this would deprive the applicant of the use of the property. uh, this minimum variance would grant the necessary uh things they need to use their land reasonably.

00:11:40,730	Uh, it’s a minimum variance It is in harmony with the general purposes of the institution and the property. and it is not injurious to any of the neighbors. Thank you. And we have a second on that.

00:12:07,000	Is there any discussion? No discussion on the motion Well, I think it’s just important that everyone, they, they spelled it all really well. Uh, the only time you’re gonna see the full 80 ft is on the south side. but everyone that drives along the east side of the campus, it is set down in because they’ve lowered that property down a lot.

00:12:20,370	I see it every day and I think it’d fit in very well there. and what a nice thing to be able to use to accommodate things, the needs that they have. I mean, that didn’t exist 45 years ago, and now it’s something they can use and and, uh, take advantage of, so OK. Thank you.

00:12:43,730	The only thing I, I struggle with on this whole, whole thing is I don’t, I don’t feel like this is a special circumstance or condition. of the the property or the building, um. the building is a proposed building that doesn’t even exist um.

00:13:09,970	like, like Kurt said, the, the hardship is the is the ordinance itself and I, I guess my opinion is this probably if we’re gonna grant an exception without, without having the, the special circumstances and that’s, um, that’s a matter of opinion, I guess, but I think it’s uh decision to be appealed to. a proper reward rather than us.

00:13:36,100	I don’t think we have the authority for this, but I’m probably going to be a no on it Well, I, I think to your point, uh there’s nothing, this is an institution out there which is a little different being in a role. residential area Uh, it’s not as if we’re gonna have 20 of them coming in because there’s nothing else out there at this point.

00:13:57,970	Uh, I don’t see it in our lifetime, but I think it’s a good way for them to be able to accommodate the need and the growth that they have and in my opinion, this is one of the things that is available to them that wasn’t before.

00:14:17,800	and it makes a lot of sense and besides, they can’t take it down if they want to. you know, in the summer and not have it up.

00:14:32,230	so forth, so it’s it’s really flexible for them, and I think it’s important to you know, try to keep it so we can adapt to the the needs of the community and in this case, the school, I think that’s things that are coming and so forth and I, I think we probably need to look at that or a little bit and probably tweak it a little bit to be a little more current with

00:14:47,330	what’s available to you that wasn’t available. a long time ago I mean, I never thought of them back in 1980, so. No, and, and I’m not, I’m not against this. I, I think it’d be a great addition to the, to the university and, and uh we would like to see it, see it done. um.

00:15:07,500	my, my concern is just with just, is just the appropriate for him to be making this decision and order As a matter of protocol is it fair to say that this attention has now been this issue has now been brought to the attention of staff as far as reevaluating the ordinance Sure, um

00:15:41,000	Chair Clark board members, as you are aware and we’ve talked about it, um, at the table here for a number of months. We are currently reviewing and going through a new zoning code or a land development code. Um, this will be addressed. I don’t know.

00:15:59,800	quote fixed or not, we’re still in those early stages of, of understanding what some different zoning districts that, um, we could create would have different limitations, but certainly this is an issue that has been brought to our attention. Thank you so much Any additional discussion by the board? Um all right, let’s take roll on that motion then. Lord Seifert. Yes.

00:16:41,370	For Wah? No Bo Wengler? Yes Or Jansen Yes and Chair Clark, uh, yes, OK, so that motion passes the variance will be granted, and does that mean construction needs to take start taking place within the next year. Thanks, and great question again. Thevariance needs to be used within 24 months.

00:17:07,000	Um, the project is going through our site plan review processes right now and I’m assuming that they’ll submit if they haven’t already a building permit shortly, so I think they’ll be able to accomplish that. OK, thank you, Jenny. Um moving on to item 3B on our agenda. We have, uh, variance requests by auditors lot S3 in the east half of Section 25 Hay Creek Township. Thank you, Chair Clark, board members.

00:17:32,700	Lonnie Barth is requesting a variance from section 1404 1711 of the city code of Ordinances, our agriculture accessory building height section to increase the side wall height from 16.5 ft to 18 ft and a building height of 25 ft to 27 ft for a proposed accessory building.

00:17:55,100	This request is located west of Bismarck between I-94 and Wilderness Cove Road. Along the west side of River Road, the property is zoned to agriculture and consists of 71. 2 acres. The accessory building is proposed to be, um, just shy of 11,000 square feet, 10,943 square feet.

00:18:13,270	The planning and zoning Commission is scheduled to hold a public hearing on a special use permit for the building as it’s over 8000 square feet. This meeting is scheduled for October 22, 2025. Today we’re just discussing the building height variants as well as the sidewall height variants.

00:18:30,900	The public has been notified of this request in 16 postcards were mailed to the owners of nearby properties on September 19 th To my knowledge, we have not received any inquiries regarding this request. Pursuant to Section 140602 of the city code of Ordinances.

00:18:50,000	This board may adjust or vary The strict application of any of the requirements in the zoning ordinance in case of an exceptionally irregular, narrow, shallow, or steep lot or other exception exceptional physical or topographical conditions by reason of which the strict application of the provisions of the zoning ordinance would result in an unnecessary hardship that would deprive the owner of a reasonable use of land or building involved, but no other case.

00:19:07,170	No adjustment in the strict application of the provisions of the ordinance shall be granted by the board unless it finds the following that there are special circums t ance s or conditions that apply to the land or buildings that do not generally apply to land or buildings within the neighborhood and have not resulted from any act of the applicant that the strict

00:19:22,100	application of the provisions of the zoning ordinance would deprive the applicant of reasonable use of said land or building, the granting of the variants is necessary for reasonable use of land or building and that the variances as granted by the board is the minimum variance that will accomplish the relief sought by the applicant, and finally that

00:19:39,170	the grant of the variants will, will be in harmony with the general purposes The general purpose and intent of the zoning ordinance and will not be injurious to the neighborhood or otherwise detrimental to public welfare.

00:19:55,730	The applicant has submitted a statement that identifies their anticipated hardship and explains why the variant should be granted. This document was included in your packet. If you choose to, um, approve the variance as proposed. Ste asked that you identify a hardship and modify the review standards or findings outlined in the staff report to support your decision. Do you have any questions I have one question.

00:20:16,600	As I look at the written statement of hardship, the variance’s request, the type of variance requested is wall height of 18 ft. This is really two elements though, right? Thank you very much, Comm, our board member Clark, um upon review of the submitted variants request, our building team, they’re fantastic and very diligent, realized that the building height would also

00:20:34,700	be over the allotment, the building height, um, max for the zoning district is 25 ft. So in doing so, you’ll see on the screen here as well as in your packet, when they did the elevation, um, the median elevation was 26 26 ft 3 inches, and we thought just to bump it

00:20:50,170	up to 27 just in case something’s changed out in the field. We didn’t want them to have to come back to the board if you did choose to approve the variant. OK, thanks for clarifying. Any other questions for staff In the applicant here. Do we have, uh, we will find out. I would have a question OK. OK.

00:21:18,970	Thank you. OK, thanks, Jenny. Do we have any representatives from the applicant here? No OK. Do we have any members of the public that would like to comment on this, uh, variance request. That’s your ride OK She can comment if she wants.

00:21:46,800	OK Um, so no, we do not have any, uh, representatives from the variants from the applicant, and we do not have any members of the public testifying in this. So let’s close the public hearing on this variance request. It is now in the hands of the board.

00:22:03,800	to do as it sees fit, and again, we can have some discussion once we have a motion on the table. I’ll make a motion to deny the variance. We have a motion. Do we have a second? I’ll, I’ll second that. OK, we have a motion in a second. We’ve got an opportunity for discussion.

00:22:46,500	Is there any board discussion on this? I have, uh, a few, I wish the applicants had been here. I have a few questions that I think are pertinent to this when they listed the reason uh that they needed it Uh, they did build up the property to get above the floodplain.

00:23:04,730	but he says the driveway will be considerably steeper, causing the possibility of hitting the top of the door when entering with the RV Well, you can feel on the outside there so you get a level platform to back in straight and not have an issue.

00:23:19,170	You don’t need an 18 ft sidewall, you only need a 16 ft side wall. The other issue with the over the, the height of the building itself, Maxin on a 25. they can easily change the slope of the roof, which I’m sure has metal on it. You can go down to a 112 instead of a 412 and drop that down considerably.

00:23:34,230	Still use the, the, they are using the scissor truss and that to his other point about having 8-foot ceilings, highist on both 1st and 2nd floor and it’s 2-story down the inside there. you would have about 7.5 on the outside and it would go up from there.

00:23:54,800	You’d have a vaulted ceiling, uh there’s really from my standpoint, there’s no reason. that he can’t build this and comply with what’s in the ordinance right now. Thank you. Any more board discussion? Nope. OK. Let’s take roll Hor Seifert Yes. Board member Jansen, yes. Board member Wengler. Board member Woolf. Chair clerk, yes OK, the motion carries and the variance request has been denied.

00:24:41,370	That is appealable And the next item on our agenda is other business. Do we have other business we need to address? In board my number there are no additional business for the sport tonight. OK. That’s a wrap then. Um, let’s, let’s Adjourn.