00:00:12,200	Good evening everyone. Today is Wednesday, May 27th, 2026. I’d like to welcome everyone that is sitting in the Baker meeting room this evening, and those online to this meeting of the Bismarck Planning and Zoning Commission. And with that, I’ll call the meeting to order and ask Sarah to please call roll. Commissioner Bitner Johnson here. Schell here.

00:00:37,270	Schmitz here. Sivak. Swanson here. Taylor. Wangler here. Chair. Schwartz here. Thank you. With that, we’ll move on to the first item in our agenda this evening, which is approval of the minutes from the April 22nd meeting. Commissioners, what are your wishes? Move to approve the minutes. We have a motion to approve from Commissioner Swanson.

00:01:02,930	Second, we have a second from Commissioner Johnson. Any discussion? Commissioners. And I’m not seeing you’re hearing any with that. Sarah, would you please call the roll? Commissioner Johnson? Yes. Wangler. Yes. Schell. Yes. Schmitz. Yes. Swanson. Yes. Taylor. Yes. Schwartz. Yes. Motion is approved.

00:01:25,470	With that, we move on to public comment this evening. And this is limited to the items on this meeting’s consent agenda, which there are none and or the previous planning and zoning Commission agenda. With that, I’ll open the podium. Is there anyone here that would care to make public comment? And I’m not seeing anybody stepping up.

00:01:48,870	So with that, I’m going to close the public comment period. And we will move on to our consent agenda, which is a is quite short this evening. I think we still have to make a motion to approve it. Would that be correct? I don’t know if you do if there’s nothing on it. Okay. Nothing.

00:02:12,300	Nothing there to approve. So we can just. All right. We’ll we’ll pass on that. We’ll move on to our regular agenda this evening. The first item on our regular agenda is Silver Ranch fifth edition, block four, lot 45. And Isaac is going to give us some staff briefing.

00:02:34,200	Good evening, chair Schwartz and commissioners, for this first regular agenda item this evening. Uh, once we get the presentation up here shortly, uh, Investor Core is requesting approval of an annexation of lot 45, block four of Silver Ranch, fifth edition, and the adjoining, right of way of Davies Drive. The project is located northeast of Bismarck.

00:02:55,600	As you can see on the screens now, uh, and it’s north of 43rd Avenue along a future extension of Davies Drive. The project area, as you can see there, uh, is highlighted and it’s about 2.52 acres of land, more or less.

00:03:17,530	And the applicant wishes to annex this particular lot to provide a continuous length of Davies Drive within city limits for roadway construction. It’s perhaps a little hard to tell from this particular view. If we go to the next slide. Not exactly a better view, but there’s about a 5 or 6, uh, foot length along Davies Drive that is currently not annexed.

00:03:40,600	And by annexing this lot, there will be a fully continuous length on within city limits for the construction of Davies Drive going into the areas that the applicant wishes to ultimately develop. Um, there are a couple other areas, I guess the coloring on the screen there is not particularly good, but you can see the the boundary of city limits there.

00:03:58,600	So parts of Silver Ranch fifth edition are already annexed. But this particular part would be added into that. Uh, it’s part of the plat of Silver Ranch fifth, of course, which you recommended approval of in May of last year and the city commission approved in July.

00:04:16,470	And the area is still largely in the early stages of development and the surrounding area to the east and south is undeveloped land, so zoned a agricultural but then to the north is area within Silver Ranch Fifth that’s zoned PUD mostly will be single family homes with some other stormwater lots and a community center.

00:04:37,870	This lot in particular is also a stormwater lot, a stormwater and drainage easement covers the whole thing, so we’re not expecting any development on there, but just need that for the right of way. In this case, the annexation area is identified as parks and open space.

00:04:56,270	In the future land use plan, which are described as places to be largely kept in a natural state and providing many important functions for the community and the ecosystem. And the public was not notified of this because this is not a public hearing, the public will be notified of this request prior to the public hearing at the City Commission, in accordance with state law, as well as formal notifications to Burleigh County and Gibbs Township.

00:05:14,430	Should you recommend approval here today. And as a cumulative result of all the findings contained in the staff report, City of Bismarck staff find that the annexation would not adversely impact public health, safety and the general well-being of the public, and that it is generally consistent with the Comprehensive Plan Bismarck Code of Ordinances and relevant state law.

00:05:33,170	Therefore, staff recommends approval of the annexation of lot 45 block for Silver Ranch, fifth edition. Does the Commission have any questions for me? Commissioners? Questions for Isaac. I’m not seeing or hearing any. Thank you. Commissioners, with that, this is a final consideration. And, uh, staff’s recommendation is to approve. What are your wishes? Move to approve is presented.

00:06:05,630	We have a motion to approve from Commissioner Schmitz. Second second from Commissioner Wangler. Any additional discussion? Commissioners? I’m not seeing or hearing any with that. Sarah, would you please call. Roll Commissioner Johnson? Yes. Schmitz. Yes. Wangler. Yes. Swanson. Yes. Schell. Yes. Taylor. Yes. And Schwartz.

00:06:29,630	Yes. A motion is approved. With that, we will move on to item B and our regular agenda. Clear Sky, second edition. And Lauren is going to provide us with staff briefing this evening.

00:06:55,330	Uh, good evening, chairman Schwartz and commissioners, uh, for investments LLP and 94 investments LLP are requesting approval of a zoning map amendment from the R5 residential and the agricultural zoning districts to the R5 residential zoning district, as well as a major subdivision final plat titled clear Sky second edition. The project area contains 19.18 acres and is located east of Bismarck, east of 52nd Street, southeast and north of Apple Creek Road.

00:07:19,330	Um the Bismarck City Commission, at their meeting last night, approved the Land Development Code and as well as the associated official zoning map. As such, the zoning ordinance for the proposed zoning map will reflect the new zoning district, the equivalent of the city’s residential suburban code on the codes effective date of October 1st.

00:07:42,870	The request would create seven lots in four blocks in order to facilitate the acquisition of this property for future development. The applicant is working with an adjacent property owner to subdivide this area and developed additional neighborhood amenities and infrastructure.

00:08:05,270	The applicant has noted that this area will be developed later on, after the rest of clear Sky edition is further developed. Um. This will include the subdivision of the larger lots for residential urban development. The proposed zoning district would generally conform to the character of that district. When that future residential development occurs. The property has been identified as urban neighborhood. In the Future Land Use Plan, which are identified as places for quiet enjoyment of home life.

00:08:30,330	The adjacent area is developing single family residential to the north, undeveloped residential to the west, and agricultural land to the south and east. The Planning and Zoning Commission considered this request on April 22nd, and called for a public hearing.

00:08:49,800	The public was notified of this request via publications in the Bismarck Tribune on May 15th and 22nd. 32 postcards were also mailed to adjacent property owners on May 15th. A physical sign was placed in a publicly accessible spot as well at the project location. On May 11th. Staff did receive one phone call regarding this request. Just looking for additional information. Um.

00:09:13,130	No formal comments were submitted for this request. The request was evaluated according to standards contained within the Comprehensive Plan Code of Ordinances and State Law. Um staff have noted that additional Off-Site Stormwater and drainage easements for the adjacent property, as noted within the conditional approval for the post construction, Stormwater Management Permit, must be received prior to

00:09:36,930	recreation of the plat. Additionally, the applicant has submitted a waiver for the minimum lot with for lot three, block four. These are provided as conditions of approval for this request.

00:09:55,930	As a result of findings contained in the staff report, City Bismarck staff find that the proposed request would not adversely impact the public health, safety and general welfare and is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan Code of Ordinances and State Law.

00:10:19,130	Therefore, staff recommends approval of the proposed Zoning Map amendment from the R-5 residential and agricultural zoning districts to the R-5 residential zoning district, as well as the major subdivision final plat for Clear Skies, second edition, with the condition that the additional Off-Site Stormwater and Drainage easements, as noted in the conditional approval of that post construction Stormwater Management Permit, are received prior to recreation of the plat, and a waiver for the minimum lot with for lot three. Block four is approved with this request. Do you have any questions.

00:10:40,570	Commissioners questions for Lord. I’m not seeing any Lauren. Thank you. Thank you. With that, I will open the public hearing on this agenda item is either the applicant or representative here to speak to the agenda item. Good evening. I’m Matt Geiger, I’m the developer here.

00:11:11,000	And I guess I just agree with the staff and concur with Lauren’s statements and just hear if you have any questions. Commissioners questions for Matt. It’s a great group tonight, Matt. Thank you. Thanks. With that, the podium is open for others that would care to address this agenda item. And I’m not seeing or hearing any.

00:11:37,730	So with that I will close the public hearing on this agenda item. Lauren, any additional comments? None at this time. Chair. Thank you. All right. Thank you. Commissioners. With that, um, this is a request for a zoning map amendment and a major subdivision final plat. Staff recommends approval of both with conditions indicated. What are your wishes? Move to approval with the conditions.

00:12:03,300	We have a motion to approve from Commissioner Swanson. Second, a second from Commissioner Johnson. Any additional discussion? Commissioners, I’m not seeing you hearing any with that, sir, would you please call roll? Commissioner Johnson? Yes. Swanson. Yes. Wangler. Yes. Schell. Yes. Schmitz. Yes. Taylor. Yes. Schwartz. Yes. The motion is approved.

00:12:31,630	With that, we will move on to Boulder Ridge, eighth edition. And Jenny is going to provide us with staff briefing this evening. Chairman Schwartz commissioners, five Guys Investments LLP requests approval of a zoning map amendment and major subdivision final plat titled Boulder Ridge, eighth edition.

00:12:56,500	This request is located in North Bismarck, east of North Washington Street, between 43rd Avenue Northeast and East LaSalle drive. It consists of 13.6 acres with 19 lots and four blocks. As Lauren mentioned earlier, the City Commission at their meeting last night approved the Land Development Code and associated official zoning map, which will take effect on October 1st.

00:13:17,000	As such, the zoning ordinance for the proposed zoning map amendment will reflect the new zoning district equivalents outlined in the LDC and the existing district, so the zoning map amendment would be from the agricultural Zoning district to the OS open Space, also known right now as P public and the SES residential suburban, also known right now

00:13:36,200	is the AR ten residential lot one, block two of the proposed subdivision will include a park for the proposed, or will include a proposed park for the Boulder Ridge neighborhood and lot ten. Block four will function as a stormwater area and is encumbered by a stormwater and drainage easement.

00:13:52,630	It’s our understanding that a development agreement outlining improvements of this lot and eventual transfer of ownership to the city of Bismarck has been drafted and would be recorded with the final plat. The property has been identified as urban neighborhood in our future land use plan. These areas are places for quiet enjoyment of home life.

00:14:09,400	The proposed zoning districts would conform to the character of this district. Adjacent uses include developing single family residential to the north, south and west, and a remnant agriculture zone parcel to the east.

00:14:28,730	The Planning and Zoning Commission considered the preliminary Plat and Zoning Map amendment at your meeting on January 28th, 2026, and called for a public hearing. A notice was published in the Tribune on May 15th and 22nd and 123 postcards were mailed to the owners of nearby properties on May 15th.

00:14:45,270	A physical sign providing the information on tonight’s public hearing was placed in a publicly accessible spot at the project location on May 11th, and one written comment was received. An email to you this morning. The proposed zoning map amendment and major subdivision final plat were evaluating were evaluated according to standards contained within our Comprehensive Plan Code of Ordinances and State Law.

00:15:03,800	As a result of all findings contained in the staff report, staff find that the proposed major subdivision, plat and zoning map amendment would not adversely impact the public health, safety in general welfare and is consistent with our Comprehensive Plan Code of Ordinances and State Law.

00:15:20,400	Therefore, staff recommends approval of the proposed Zoning Map amendment from the Agricultural Zoning District to the ten residential, which will be ours residential, suburban and public zoning districts, which will be our office, open space district and major subdivision. Final plat for Boulder Ridge, eighth edition. Do you have questions? Commissioners? Questions for Jenny. I’m not seeing any Jenny. Thank you.

00:15:43,870	With that, I will open the public hearing for this agenda item and believe that the applicant or a representative, and I see Landon is stepping up. So thank you. Chair Schwartz. Land and I will Swenson Hagan Engineering representing five guys on this project. Uh, nothing to add with Jenny. Didn’t already cover but here to answer any questions if you have them.

00:16:00,370	Commissioners questions for Landon. Landon I’m not seeing or hearing any. Thank you with that. Thank you. With that, the podium is open for others that would care to address this agenda item. Thank you. Sir. Would you add your name to the log up there please and introduce yourself.

00:16:22,230	Okay I’m Jerry for I’ll have, uh, one of the homes that are to the back of that park area. Just curious as to what’s going to be used to separate the park from the home. Lots. then. And then they’re going to take care of all the noxious weeds back there.

00:16:52,700	Jenny, can you address that question? Thank you. Um, board members, sir, I, I’m assuming they will take care of the noxious weeds. I haven’t talked to them about the noxious weeds. I’m just looking through our land development code right now. Um, for any kind of buffering requirements, I suspect we have them, but I’m going to need a second to find them.

00:17:11,900	Yeah, I just worried, you know, park and running right into our backyard without any kind of barrier fence or whatever. And I don’t know if trees will grow there either because of the alkali soil. So just curious how it’s going to separate out. We can certainly, um, work with parks as well. Okay. Thank you. Thank you Jared.

00:17:30,600	With that, the podium is open for others that would care to address this agenda item. Good evening commissioners. My name is Roger Harris. I’m the president of the Boulder Ridge HOA. Um, I just had a question on regarding the, um, on the park.

00:17:53,270	Do you know what the the the specials. Is that going to go to the members, or is that going to be split through the city? Um, or how does that work exactly? You know, I can’t answer your question on that. Commissioner Shell. Sure. I can take a stab at that one.

00:18:10,670	Um, so the the park development agreement or the park open space policy that the city and parks have and a joint powers agreement, uh, uses the special assessment process that the city has to make a portion of the park improvement, whether that’s the purchase of the land or the purchase of the equipment or the general

00:18:28,270	improvements of that land. Um, all is then special assessed to the benefiting properties. And for, for the purpose of this project, that area, I guess I’m not exactly sure what that boundary is definitively, but I think in the park development agreement between the developer and the park district that was

00:18:44,030	part of this plat, uh, had a boundary that was many of the properties within Boulder Ridge proper. So even up to 57th and down to 43rd Avenue, I believe, is the boundary. Um, that would be part of that neighborhood park as this the entire Boulder Ridge area really hasn’t had a park developed.

00:19:01,870	Um, through all eight editions so far. That is a process that would have the right for the public, would be benefited from that improvement to protest out the improvement. If they’re not interested in that.

00:19:22,200	So in the coming weeks, the Park district will be more than likely requesting the city create a district and create a resolution of necessity, and then send letters out to all the affected landowners, letting them know what those expected. Special assessments would be. And kind of the term of what, how long they would take to pay off and where the park would be at, and have a little more information about what the actual park improvement.

00:19:34,900	Okay. And so is this also including the completion of Normandy as well for this eighth edition? Okay, I just was looking for clarification on that because I know some members were requesting about that. So thank you. Thank you Roger. With that, the podium is open for others. Land on your back.

00:19:58,800	Yeah. Thanks again. I just wanted to clarify. And with Commissioner Shell’s comments there, the assessment district for the Park District is the entirety of the Boulder Ridge Subdivision, less some of the commercial units are out there.

00:20:11,400	So it’s quite a quite a number of lots that would be part of that group. So the Parkers are just approved their agreement just the other night. So there will be, as commissioner mentioned, they’ll be sending out their letters pretty soon. Here. Pretty good. Thank you for the clarification. Again, I’ll ask.

00:20:28,570	The podium is open for others that would care to address this agenda item. And I am not seeing or hearing any. So with that, I’m going to close the public hearing. Um, Jenny, any additional comments? I do, thank you. Um, my computer is being very slow and I can’t get to the page, but Lauren has it up here for me.

00:20:47,600	Um, with the new land development code and with some of our existing requirements, both the open space district and the residential suburban district are both lower intensity districts, and we do not require a buffer between the two. Thank you for that clarification.

00:21:10,130	With that, commissioners, this is a request for a zoning map amendment and a major subdivision final plat staff recommendation is to approve both. What are your wishes? Move to approve. We have a motion to approve from Commissioner Johnson. Second. We have a second from Commissioner Swanson. With that, Commissioner has any additional discussion? I’m not seeing or hearing any with that. Sarah, would you please call roll.

00:21:44,170	Commissioner Schell? Yes. Schmitz. Yes. Johnson. Yes. Swanson. Yes. Wangler. Yes. Taylor. Yes. Chair. Schwartz. Yes. A motion is approved. With that, we’ll move on to item D and our regular agenda. The gram edition. And once again, Jenny will provide us staff briefing on this. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

00:22:12,030	Um, commissioners Dakota upright D partnership is requesting approval of a minor subdivision plat titled Graham Addition. It’s a lot of auditor’s lots. 1202 and 1212 and parts of block 17 and 18. In Suttles edition.

00:22:30,730	This request is located in southeast Bismarck, south of East Bismarck Expressway, and east of South 12th Street in the southwest quadrant of the intersection of Lee Avenue and Airport Road. It consists of 1.76 acres with two lots in one block. The minor plot would create two lots. In one block. There are two existing buildings located on the property, and each building would be located on a separate lot.

00:22:47,730	Their minor plot also identifies existing utility easements and access points. No new access points are proposed. Adjacent land uses include industrial uses to the north across Lee Avenue, east across Airport Road South, and a vacant industrial zoned parcel to the west. A notice was published in the Tribune on May 15th and 27.

00:23:06,400	22nd and 17 postcards were mailed to the owners of nearby properties on May 15th, May 15th. A sign providing information on tonight’s hearing was placed in a publicly accessible spot at the project location. On May 11th, staff did receive one phone call inquiring about redevelopment of the site and outlining some traffic concerns on Airport Road.

00:23:26,130	This request was evaluated according to standards contained within the 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 plat would not adversely impact the public health safety in general welfare and is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan Bismarck

00:23:43,500	Code of Ordinances and State Law. Therefore, staff recommends approval of the minor subdivision final plat titled Graham Edition. Do you have questions, commissioners? Questions for Jenny. I’m not seeing or hearing any Jenny. Thank you.

00:24:05,270	This is a public hearing, so I will open the public hearing is either the applicant or a representative here to speak to this agenda item. Good evening, chair Schwartz and Commission members Nicholas Cullen with Houston Engineering. I’m here representing Dakota Upright. Any questions you may have, be happy to answer them. Commissioners questions for Nick. Nick, I’m not seeing anything. Thank you. Thank you.

00:24:29,370	With that, the podium is open for others that would care to address this agenda item. And I’m not seeing anybody else stepping up to the podium. So with that, I’m going to close the public hearing. Jenny, do you have any additional comments? No, thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you. Jenny, with that, commissioners, this is a request for a minor subdivision final plat staff’s recommendation is to approve.

00:24:51,130	What are your wishes? Move to approve as presented. We have a motion from Commissioner Schmitz. Second, a second from Commissioner Johnson. Any discussion? Commissioners. And I’m not seeing or hearing any. So, Sarah, would you please call a roll? Commissioner Swanson? Yes. Johnson. Yes. Schmitz. Yes. Wangler. Yes. Schell. Yes. Taylor. Yes. Schwartz. Yes. So motion is approved.

00:25:20,930	With that, we’ll move on to item E in our regular agenda. Metal Valley sixth edition. And Isaac is going to provide us with staff briefing this evening. Good evening again, chair Schwartz and commissioners for this next regular agenda item, BDC Expressway LLC are requesting approval of a minor subdivision final plat titled

00:25:43,930	Meadow Valley sixth Edition. As you can see on the screens before you and in your packets. It’s located in sort of west central Bismarck, little south to, uh, along the south side of East Bismarck Expressway in between South third Street and seventh Street, and also adjacent to Bozeman Drive. There. The project area consists of approximately 1.

00:26:08,500	83 acres, and it is a replant of lots 41 through 44 block two Meadow Valley Addition replant of lot one, block two, and lot two, and the west one foot of lot three, block two. Meadow Valley Edition. Or in other words, it’s about five lots in two blocks of two separate subdivisions.

00:26:27,670	And that’s why the final two attachments on this staff report shows which of the two subdivisions it is being replanting. Um, the area is, as of right now, currently one parcel, and the applicant intends to use the minor plat process to create two lot in one block subdivision.

00:26:46,430	The property is entirely located within a CG commercial zoning district as of right now, which is not being requested to change. As you’ve been hearing, the new Land Development Code has been approved. So by the time October comes around, this will go to what we are referring to as the commercial mixed zoning district.

00:27:03,630	But that is not being requested to change more immediately than that. So still CG not being requested to change. Adjacent uses include some retail and services to the east, single family residential to the south, multifamily residential to the west, and Kirkwood Mall to the north, and the plat area is identified as destination mixed use.

00:27:24,200	In the Future Land Use Plan, which are described as major commercial and employment centers that serve the entire regional trade area of Bismarck, as well as visitors.

00:27:40,400	There is one other thing that planning staff would like to bring to your attention regarding this item, and it was noted in the staff report as well. But if we can go to the plat document on the screen there. Thank you. Uh, there is one easement shown on the plat as a 50 foot wide MDU easement, and it’s noted as being unrecorded.

00:27:59,530	Uh, the applicant has stated that they are working with MDU to make sure that that specific easement is squared away, both in terms of the exact dimensions, and make sure that it is recorded or in some way appropriately documented, but that has not that is not ready as of right now with this hearing, and it may not be ready until sometime in June. According to the last communication I had with them.

00:28:14,630	So, uh, in the staff report, though, staff are comfortable still advancing this application with the condition that that one specific easement is properly documented prior to the final approval by the city Commission.

00:28:37,730	So the public was notified of this request via publications in the Bismarck Tribune on May 15th and 22nd and 44 postcards were mailed to owners of nearby properties. On May 15th of this year. Additionally, a physical sign providing information on the public hearing was placed in a publicly accessible spot at the project location. On May 12th, 2026. Staff have received a couple of inquiries about this project. People asking for more information, asking what’s going on.

00:28:59,270	But to my knowledge, staff have not received any written comments prior to this hearing. Therefore, as a cumulative result of all the findings contained in the staff report, City of Bismarck staff find that the proposed minor subdivision final plat would not adversely impact public health, safety or the general well-being of the public, and that it is generally consistent

00:29:18,000	with the Comprehensive Plan Bismarck Code of Ordinances and relevant state law. Therefore, staff recommends approval of the minor subdivision final plat titled Meadow Valley sixth edition, with the one condition that the easement shown on the plat as an unrecorded 50 foot MDU easement is appropriately documented prior to final approval by the City

00:29:38,270	Commission. Does the Commissioner have any questions for me at this time? Commissioners questions for for Isaac. I’m not seeing any Isaac. Thank you. This is a public hearing.

00:30:01,330	So with that, I will open the public hearing is either the applicant or representative here to speak to this agenda item? And I’m not seeing anybody stepping up. So with that the podium is open for others that would care to address this agenda item. And once again, I’m not seeing anybody come to the podium. So with that, I’m going to close the public hearing on this, uh, agenda item. Isaac, any additional comments? None at this time. Chair.

00:30:20,530	Thank you. All right. Thank you. With that, commissioners, this is a request for a minor subdivision final plat staff recommendation is to approve with conditions. What are your wishes? Move to approve. As presented. We have a motion to approve from Commissioner Johnson. Second. Second from Commissioner Schmitz.

00:30:48,130	Any additional discussion? Commissioner shell? Maybe it’s a question for staff. Isaac. Did the applicant and MD. You seem positive that the easement situation will be resolved in a timely manner, with this being condition that it can’t move to city commission until that’s resolved? It could be stuck in limbo if it never gets resolved.

00:31:09,000	So maybe just asking for the confidence factor on that particular issue. Commissioner Schell Chair and Commissioners. The last I heard was that yes, perhaps sometime in June this could be resolved, but an exact timeline is beyond my knowledge, I suppose. And maybe as a follow up. And the applicant was okay with it in that limbo state, I guess I should say, until it gets resolved.

00:31:30,300	I am not aware of anything to the contrary. Commissioner shell. Works for me. Thank you. Thank you, Commissioner Shell. Additional discussion. Commissioners. I’m not seeing or hearing any. With that, we have a motion on the table. Sarah, would you please call roll. Commissioner Johnson? Yes. Swanson. Yes. Wangler. Yes. Schell. Yes. Schmitz. Yes. Taylor. Yes. Schwartz.

00:31:58,100	Yes. Motion is approved. With that, we move on to item F in our regular agenda, which is replant of block one of Interstate Commercial Park, first edition, block one, lots one through two. And Lauren is going to provide us staff with staff briefing. Good evening again chairman Schwartz and commissioners.

00:32:15,730	Rivera Bank is requesting approval of a drive through for Teller Lanes in conjunction with the financial institution on lots one through two, block one plot of block one of Interstate Commercial Park first edition.

00:32:36,530	The project area is located in central Bismarck, north of Interstate 94, in the southwest quadrant of State Street and East Interstate Avenue. Um, please note that an associated lot modification request for lots one and two has occurred, which has combined them into one parcel. Um, this is noted within the table on that front page of the staff report. Um, the property has been identified as destination mixed use in the future land use plan.

00:32:56,470	The project location is surrounded by a mix of commercial uses, including retail stores, restaurants, offices, as well as a couple hotels. A notice was published in the Bismarck Tribune on May 15th and 22nd, and 12 postcards were mailed to owners of nearby properties on May 15th.

00:33:18,300	A physical sign providing information on the public hearing was placed in a publicly accessible location. On May 11th. To my knowledge, staff has not received any public comments regarding this request. The request was evaluated according to standards contained in the Comprehensive Plan Code of Ordinances and State Law, and as a result of those findings, City of Bismarck staff find that the proposed Special use permit would not adversely

00:33:38,530	impact the public health, safety, and general welfare and is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan Code of Ordinances and State Law. Therefore, staff staff recommends approval of a drive thru for teller lanes in conjunction with the financial institution on lots one through two. Block one plot of block one of Interstate Commercial Park first Edition.

00:33:58,630	Do you have any questions? Commissioners questions for Lord. I’m not seeing or hearing any. Lauren. Thank you, thank you. This is a public hearing. And with that, I will open the public hearing is either the applicant or a representative here to speak to this agenda item. Good evening. Chair.

00:34:24,930	Commissioners Abe Ulmer with independent land surveying and engineering, the civil engineer for the design of this project, uh, Rivera Bank, is looking at actually demoing the existing bank that’s on that property on the west half of that property right now, and building a new, uh, roughly three story building on the east side of that property.

00:34:43,700	Um, it’s just one of those hoops we have to jump through for the special use for the for the drive through area, for the teller. Um, we have originally we had a little skinnier lanes, but, uh, working with the structural and the architect, we did get those to actually meet your guys’s code, which is good.

00:35:02,000	Uh, so we didn’t have to go for a special variance to the special use permit, so. But if you have any questions, I’m. I’m available. Commissioners. Questions for you. Okay. Thank you. Abe, I’ve got a question for you. Sure. And this.

00:35:22,730	is this will date me and goes back a long ways, but I know a portion of that lot had a had a gas station on it one time. Correct. And there were concerns about, uh, were being able to build on it. There are as far as I know, there were monitoring wells put in place and stuff like that.

00:35:40,270	There there are certain things that we have to look out for during construction. Uh, so there are some regulations that we have to follow environmentally as we go through that, in case we do, uh, find some spoiled soils, I guess, for lack of a better term.

00:35:58,070	Um, so there are certain things from that original gas station that we are jumping through the hoops to try to make sure that we can build there, too. So. Okay. Thank you. Okay. Again, commissioners, any questions for. Hey. Thank you. Thanks. With that the podium is open for others that would care to address this agenda item. And I’m not seeing or hearing any.

00:36:16,530	So with that I’m going to close the public hearing. Lauren, any additional comments? No additional comments. Thank you. All right. Thank you Lauren. With that, commissioners, this is a special use permit request. Staff’s recommendation is to approve. What are your wishes? Move to approve is presented. We have a motion to approve from Commissioner Schmitz.

00:36:42,200	Second, we have a second from Commissioner Swanson. Any additional discussion? I’m not seeing or hearing any without. Sarah, would you please call roll? Commissioner Johnson? Yes. Swanson. Yes. Wangler. Yes. Taylor. Yes. Schell. Yes. Schmitz. Yes. And chair Schwartz. Yes. A motion is approved.

00:37:08,470	With that, we’re on to item G in our regular agenda. And it’s a planning and zoning commission. Bylaws. Uh, Daniel. Good evening. Chair Schwartz. Uh, Planning commissioners. So these are bylaws that would, uh, basically organize the conduct of you as a board. Uh, these, to our knowledge, are the first draft bylaws that the Planning and Zoning Commission has had.

00:37:29,700	Um, our other boards typically do have these, uh, they dictate basically how, uh, like I mentioned, the board meetings are conducted, how certain conflict of interests are handled, how open meeting requirements are handled.

00:37:48,170	Uh, when the meetings are held, how their noticed quorum selection, all of the things that you do in a day to day, week, week, basis, month, month, basis, uh, these are your own laws. So you can choose to, uh, adopt them as is or change them as you wish. They do not go to the city commission. They just affect your own operations.

00:38:05,800	Uh, this is something that chair Schwartz have been working with. My predecessor, Ben Marathon. We kind of put it on the back burner for a while while we were working on the land development code, but now that that’s finished, we’re bringing them back to you. Uh, during the training session in April, we did share a draft with you. At that time.

00:38:18,430	They haven’t changed at all since that draft. So if you read it, then it’s exactly the same thing that’s in your packet this month. Uh, so we don’t necessarily have a recommendation for you. You can choose to adopt them as is.

00:38:31,530	Or if you’d like some discussion if you’d like to make any changes, we can come back to you later. There’s no rush. You’ve gone 100 years without these, so you can go another month without them as well. If you if you’d like. Um, so that’s that’s what we have. Okay. Thank you.

00:38:45,000	I think these have been in the works for probably two years. And like Daniel indicated, they kind of got moved to the back burner as other things came up. So, uh, and I think having read through them a number of times, um, I like them, I think they’re, they’re very pertinent to our group. And, uh, so with that, I would open thank you, Daniel.

00:39:05,300	I would open the floor to discussion. If there are any questions or comments regarding the bylaws. We do we do have a number of, uh, of new members that are sitting on our commission right now. And I hopefully this will be will be helpful for, for indicating how we operate.

00:39:35,730	There’s there’s a number of us that have been here for a while, and, uh, it is it helps to put everything in, in, in writing. There, there are a, um, one of the things that I wanted to visit about, just briefly, is that in, in, uh, with the training that took place earlier back about a month ago, um, one of

00:39:59,670	the things we didn’t talk about was really meeting process. And, uh, again, for the, for the newer members of the commission, I think that’s kind of an interesting thing. And you’ve probably caught on to it already.

00:40:20,600	But, uh, realizing that, uh, the public comment period is a great time for us to, to collect information from the public that has thoughts on, uh, topics that are going on that we’re dealing with. And then again, the public hearings are another way, and it’s a great time for commissioners to listen to public comment, get information. It’s a good time to ask questions.

00:40:50,430	And, uh, um, gather information. But leaving the discussion for what happens after the public hearing is closed. And once the public hearing is closed, then of course, we talk about motions and uh, uh, discuss amongst ourselves, sharing our thoughts, uh, based on the information that we have received. And I think it’s it’s a good process.

00:41:15,670	It’s worked well over the years. And, uh, once we get into, you know, the as new commissioners, once you get comfortable with that, I’m sure you’ll, uh, jump right in on things. So. So with that, I would ask the question, should we adopt these as they are? Do you need additional time to look at them? Um, Mr..

00:41:42,700	Chairman? Yes, Commissioner. Swanson. Yeah. So I have a. Looking at these. I have a question just about some probably like maybe enforcement of some of these. Like, I see the conflict of interest piece. Maybe I’m getting away to in the weeds of this.

00:42:01,530	Like, I guess I don’t know what our current like, what conflict of interest laws or rules currently. Um, govern this board, but I’m just wondering, like, this doesn’t say anything about, like, what if you fail to disclose a conflict of interest? So I’m just curious if we know if there’s any process along that way and if we’re adding this in here, are

00:42:19,670	we setting ourselves up for something in the future? So I don’t know the answer to that, but. That’s a good question. And, you know, we’ve had conflict of issue brought before us when there have been items being discussed.

00:42:38,230	Daniel, can you speak to that at all? Has there ever been something where it’s been discovered after the fact? Sure. Um, that’s a good question. The so I guess the more direct answer enforce one of the bylaws really does not extend beyond removal of from the board. I mean, that would that would really be the only enforcement mechanism of the bylaws in particular, since they’re just your own rules.

00:42:54,270	Um, however, there are conflict of interest rules at the state level as well. And some of the language that we’ve used in here is just borrowed directly from, from that. So it’s really there just as more of a reminder than a new, a new requirement. Okay.

00:43:11,870	Um, so as far as that, I, you know, I don’t be I’d be waiting outside of my, my wheelhouse to tell you what the enforcement mechanism of state law would be, but we can get an answer for you. Okay. That would be that would be interesting.

00:43:29,630	I think especially because realizing that we’re an advisory board and we make recommendations to the city commission, would that in fact invalidate a recommendation that we made if it was found that there was a conflict of interest that was not reported. It would probably depend on how the vote was, if it was close or not. Because if you have a conflict that’s not noted, it’s one member that member’s vote probably is thrown out.

00:43:50,330	Then you still have a do you still have a quorum first and then second? Do you have enough majority vote to sustain the the vote? Unless, you know, I suppose if there is something through that conflict of interest that was through the discussion process that convinced others to vote a certain way, then I don’t know.

00:44:11,670	I mean, that’s a legal question. Um, I guess for other boards and I, I believe we do for this. I mean, I take it for the being the mayor. So there’s an oath of office in the oath of office. You’re obligating yourself to disclose when you have a conflict of interest.

00:44:30,900	And I mean, I’ve done it. I don’t know, maybe a dozen times in the three plus almost four years that I have served as mayor, in one meeting or another, as a professional, it’s my obligation, regardless of what I’m doing here at the table. So I would just hope that we are respectful of that.

00:44:51,770	Um, and the board, the commission could choose to devote that that conflict is not bearing. So we have an example of that at city commission, not this week, but two weeks ago, where we had a topic at the table and a commissioner disclosed that because he’s not going to be a

00:45:11,670	commissioner any longer, that he might well be bidding on a job that the city is going to be. And we chose that. That wasn’t going to have a it had no conflict because we were just a preliminary budget to the job. So the commission chose that. That was not a conflict.

00:45:29,230	So I think it’s, you know, these are the bylaws. I think the one thing is, if we find out there’s a continuum of somebody not disclosing that we would want to remove, maybe even once, depending on the violation. Um, but I think it’s a legal question we can ask. I don’t know that, you know, we could adopt the bylaws.

00:45:48,470	And if we find that there’s something we need to add, we can amend them or we’ve gone, as you said, 100 years, probably close. Um, we just wait and get that answer, which would probably be my recommendation. Okay. Thank you. Please. You all have an architects.

00:46:08,330	You all have your own set of code of conduct as well that we have to live by that aren’t much different. Okay. Thank you, Commissioner Swanson.

00:46:30,100	My recommendation would be that if there is any doubt in your mind that there could be a conflict, it’s best to put it on the table and let the commission decide whether or not there’s something there that, uh, would, uh, ask you to move away from the table for the vote or not. So rather than waiting until after the after the vote takes place. Fair enough. Yeah. And we can. And we can have Daniel look into it further.

00:46:53,430	Yeah, that works for me too. I just I think, like we said, since we haven’t had these for 100 years, I just don’t I just want to make sure we’re checking all the legal processes that we’re not setting ourselves up. Um, to in a type of trap so that I’m good. This conversation is good, so.

00:47:12,100	Fair enough. Thank you. Commissioners. Additional discussion. Are you comfortable with what’s there? Do we need to look at it harder? Mr. shell. I might suggest that if if this does pass and we adopt these the removal of members section in particular that we look at that just being, um, prospectively and not

00:47:39,130	retroactively, um, there’s some language in there is talking about three consecutive meetings or seven of the last, I guess, seven regular meetings within a calendar year.

00:47:52,570	I don’t know if we’ve really had that expectation noted of what the mandatory attendance would be, and I’d want to give every member here on the board the opportunity to to get in line with what those bylaws would say and not kick someone out, because that’s actually occurred. Maybe now with some of the members that aren’t in the meeting today.

00:48:05,000	So I just want to be respectful of those that are here and and those that aren’t here to make sure we give everyone the opportunity to to kind of abide by the bylaws. If that’s the case. We won’t make them retro. That’d be that’d be my preference. Commissioners. Additional thoughts? Comments? Okay. With that? Uh, Mr..

00:48:35,400	Schmitz, that’s the only question to address Connor’s question. I do think it would be wise before we adopt them and then have to amend them within two months or less to at least investigate what what penalties, I guess, or would be or what concerns there might be if we have a fail to disclose conflict of interest situation and if they need to be, if it

00:48:57,800	needs to be addressed in the bylaws, it may not need to be addressed in the bylaws. It may be a procedural thing. But I think before we adopt them, we should have that answer rather than coming back in two months and amending them to fix something.

00:49:15,870	So I would ask that Daniel at least have conversation with Attorney Meis. Um, she’ll be able to get to the bottom of that. Mayor Schmitz is there anything? Because I’m assuming there is bylaws for the city commission. There are. Well, there’s you have an oath. There’s a code of conduct.

00:49:37,270	Um, we have our ordinances are basically our bylaws, and we have to operate by there’s a there’s an ordinance around the city administration, and then we have a separate code of conduct as well. Okay. And and the oath of office. Is, is, is the, um, is it more detailed? I guess is what I’m asking. I don’t believe it is. Okay. I mean, their elected positions.

00:50:00,830	Yes. And so like that’s a whole different game. You don’t you can’t dismiss a elected officer unless they’re found guilty of some fraud, fraudulent action. And then it probably is a court action.

00:50:21,100	I don’t I would hate to even opine on that because I don’t know, I would be wrong, but but you know, the volunteer board, I think it’s a little different. And so I don’t think it’s going to be an issue, but I would just kind of brought up the question. It’s a legitimate question. Let’s address it before we adopt. Fair enough. Thank you. With that, I guess I would entertain a motion. Uh, Commissioner Wangler.

00:50:43,030	I just I. Didn’t read. Close enough. Um, Commissioner Shell said that, you know, our our meeting, it says, uh, if you fail to attend seven regular meetings in one calendar year. So that means you could miss October, November, December this year. January, February, March next year.

00:51:10,200	And you still got four more, even though you’ve missed six in a row. Did we want to make that in a 12 month period? Which means that if they miss those six, they’ve got one more until October. Yet just something else to think about.

00:51:39,700	If if, you know, rather than the calendar year in 12 and a 12 month period could probably be that that word. So. Commissioners. Additional thoughts. Commissioner Schultz. I would agree with that.

00:52:02,000	If it was a rolling 12 month period or something like that, for for that determination, I’d I will say to if we are talking through the removal process or whatever the the recourse is for a member of the board failing to abide by these bylaws, maybe that removal of members, Section Daniel is expanded or or looked into to what happens if someone isn’t following the general conduct or the some of the other statements in here, not just the attendance of being here.

00:52:20,670	There might be some other pieces that can be brought into the removal, if that in fact is the the primary recourse of of not abiding by the bylaws, by a member. Thank you.

00:52:38,470	Yeah, I, I understand that also I’ll just add one thing to is a removal is a still at the discretion of that commission. So it’s not saying that you automatically are removed if you missed that number. So. Thank you. Commissioner Shaw. Commissioners. Additional discussion. I think let’s get those answers. I think it’s a good thing to establish bylaws or some rules around the board at the, um, members of the board or commission.

00:53:07,630	Daniel, are you good with continuing. this particular item to our next meeting? Yes. And I will have a conversation with attorney Meas I already have an email ready to send out to her, and we’ll we’ll get some answers for you next month. Okay. Thank you. So with that, I’d entertain a motion to continue. Also move.

00:53:25,230	We have a motion from Commissioner Schmitz. Second second from Commissioner Swanson. Any additional discussion? If not Sarah, please call.. Roll. Commissioner Johnson. Yes. Swanson. Yes. Wangler. Yes. Schell. Yes. Schmitz. Yes. Taylor. Yes. Schwartz. Yes. The motion is approved. Our next meeting is scheduled for June 24th, 2020 sixth.

00:53:52,700	I’d like to thank you for your for being here and participating this this evening. And I wish you a good evening. And I