The Board of County Commissioners and the Drainage Board met on July 28, 2026, at 9:38 A.M. The combined meeting addressed infrastructure contracts, design exceptions, a sidewalk waiver, funding commitments for bridge replacement, sheriff’s office agreements, a settlement agreement, rezonings, and several drainage board approvals. All votes were unanimous unless noted.
Yes. Ryan will open those up and we'll come back at a later time at the meeting to read those into the record. Number two, change order number one, VC 25, hyphen zero eight, hyphen zero one concrete street repairs. This is a change order for a net increase of 48,5875 cents for the final material quantities need to complete the project. When the project was originally bid out, additional deterioration occurred within that year. So this accounts for the additional patching repairs that were not included in the original cost estimate. Anything else here, John? Nope, that summarizes it. Okay. Okay. Motion to approve. Commissioner Gable. Yes. Commissioner Canterbury. Yes. President Elpers. Yes. Number three, pipe fee acceptance for McCutch and Trace Section 3. This is for a pipe acceptance fee of $3,292. This is a subdivision off side road that was approved under the old Plan B drainage ordinance procedures. You want to explain anything else here, John? That uh old ordinance just said that any pipes outside the right-of-way could be covered through the developer paying the two dollar a foot fee. So this fee will cover any future structural failures of those pipes outside the right-of-way in section three of McCutching Trace. Okay. I'll make the motion to approve. Second. Commissioner Gable. Yes. Commissioner Canterbury, yes. President Elpers. Yes. Number four, usable shoulder width and shy line offset design exceptions for Darmstadt Road Bridge number 400 over CSX Railroad. Because this is a federal aid project, the county must meet NDOT design standards. However, this is a request to waive standards related to the shoulder width and shy line for this project. John, anything else here? The Shy Line is in DOT's way of saying that an object beyond a certain distance wouldn't be perceived as a hazard by a driver. So in this case, uh for this bridge, that distance is five feet. The shoulder is three feet eleven inches. So we can't meet that without widening widening the bridge. There's no signs of the existing bridge rail having been hit or anything. So there's nothing that indicates that there is an existing problem. So on that basis, that's why I would recommend that that design exception be approved. And the other one in DOTS design standards call for the shoulder width to be eight feet. And again, we can't provide that without substantial widening of that bridge. The scope of work for that bridge was just a rehab. So if we tried to widen the existing 3 foot eleven shoulders to make those eight feet, we'd have massive cost increases. And again, there's no sign that there's a hazard that we need to be concerned about. So recommend approval of that design exception as well. So we're fitting the bridge with the existing road width, essentially. Right?