I now call to order the May 13th Chaska Planning Commission meeting. Um, Liz, could you get take roll call, please? Mr. Olson? Here. Paswa? Here. Campbell? Michaelis? Here. Rostad? Here. Crosson? Here. Sailor? Here. Urbanski? And vice chair Purdy? Here. That moves us on item number three, adopting the agenda. Has everyone had a chance to review the agenda? Uh, would anyone like to make a motion to uh approve and Second. Second. Approved by Commissioner Hassan. And seconded by Michaelis. Miss Michaelis. Was it or was it Rostad? Sorry. Uh, most motion all those in favor? Aye. Aye. Aye. Uh, motion carries. Moves us to item number four, visitor presentation. Is there anyone in the audience or online that would like to speak about something that is not already on the agenda? Nobody online, Liz? Nobody. Nobody. Oh, I'm sorry. >> [laughter] >> Um, now we'll move to item number five, approving the previous um planning commission minutes. Has everyone had a chance to review the the April 8th planning commission meeting meeting minutes? Uh, would anyone like to make a motion? Motion to approve. Second. Rostad first motion to approve and Um, Paswa second. Sailor. Oh, sorry, Sailor. Sorry, Scott. Yeah, still getting used to all the names. Um All those in favor? Aye. Opposed? Motion carries. Um, consent item number six, uh, recommended approval for the final plat for the Firefly Firefly Acres, the Jen and Scott Schlotteraf, uh, PC number 2026-10. Um, are you doing the presentation, Liz? Nope, no presentation for this. >> Oh, okay. >> Yep. Recommend approval. Yeah. Okay. I would like to No, move to approve. Okay. Second. That's not something I do. Hassan second. And, uh, Mr. Eiberg first. All those in favor? Aye. Aye. Opposed? Motion carries. Next item on the agenda, um, it is a public hearing to recommend approval, um, for public hearing recommend approval for zoning ordinance amendment ZOA to PMD 21 Amcon PC 2026-9. All right, I'm just bringing up my screen here. Can everyone see that in front of them? Great. All right, we have a zoning ordinance amendment request this evening for the Chaska Tech Center, which is in the zoning district PMD 21, uh, which stands for planned multi-use district number 21. Um, this is being proposed by Amcon Construction. Uh, so to give you an idea of where the site is located, um, and where the zoning district is located, it encompasses two separate lots, one that's owned by Formacote on Chaska Boulevard, um, and then second owned by uh, Chaska Tech Center just east of Farm to Coat. So if you know where Southern Social is, it's just west of that property off of Fire Lane. So to give you a background, back in 2018 is when Farm to Coat was approved for their building. During that time, the zoning district was adopted for plan multi-use district number 21. And then 4 years later in 2022, the Chaska Tech Center went through the approval process, and a zoning ordinance amendment was completed at that time to PMD 21. That basically encompassed the new building, the permitted uses for the Chaska Tech Center, as well as established sign criteria for the Chaska Tech Center. Within the zoning, the sign criteria basically states one wall sign is permitted for each tenant, not to exceed 12 square feet in area, and then designated in a location as shown on the elevation drawings. So the elevation drawing that was included as a part of that approval is shown on this screen here below. Basically where the doorways are for each tenant space, there was going to be or the approval for sign criteria included a 2 by 6 foot panel sign above those doorways. So a 12 square foot sign. Um >> [clears throat] >> Currently, the owners are working with a retail tenant that will occupy four of their tenant spaces on that will face the south side, so facing out towards Chaska Boulevard. The 12 square feet um um is not really conducive to a retail storefront uh by any means. So, really this is why this request is coming in front of us is uh looking for um additional criteria that can um be a little bit more uh appropriate for uh potential retail users and um for that facade that faces Chaska Boulevard. So, they get that visibility off the main roadway there. So, the current request um from the applicant is to amend the PMD 21 zoning ordinance relative to the sign criteria that's listed in there. Um all of the um changes that are proposed are shown on the right-hand side of this uh slide here in red. Um but to kind of lay it out generally um for you, it basically includes um allowance for them to do larger lit signs uh on the south elevation facing Chaska Boulevard. Um and reflect sign sizes and types that are more comparable to the city's commercial sign code. Um which really gets down to an allowance of 10% of a wall area for a tenant space you can have signage for. Um so, the changes for area on the south elevation would be more comparable to that commercial sign code standard or within that. Um also included in the amendment is to have language for tenants that occupy more than one tenant space since the current zoning is pretty silent on that. Um this allows um that flexibility if tenants do occupy one more than one space. There's some criteria there that needs to be met um on the building. Um and that's for all tenants within the building, not just the south-facing um facade. Um, the 2x6 panel uh sign design would still be applicable on the other facades, so on the east and west sides that sign criteria would still remain in effect. So, really the changes are kind of focused on that southern elevation to allow for those larger signs um and allow for lighting as well. Um but all in all the sign designs would be consistent or similar in type um all throughout the building. Um just to give you a visual on um what's proposed in terms of size um and the emphasis on the south elevation here, so we have a floor plan snippet of uh the south-facing tenants um as well as that southern elevation showing the proposed um sign areas with this amendment. Um basically the corner tenants which have more wall area facing the south elevation will have a little bit bigger signs at 48 square feet in size. And they're showing how that um 4x12 panel can fit uh within the elevation there for the corner tenants. And then the non-corner tenants which were which are kind of sandwiched between both of the corner tenants and shown in blue here uh would be allowed 32 square foot um wall sign areas above the doorways. And those are also shown how they can fit um within the elevation and the windows and doors of the building there. Um so, those are the sign areas proposed with the changes uh specific to the south elevation um that's included with this amendment. >> [clears throat] >> So, in conclusion, uh, we are asking, um, or requesting a recommendation of approval uh, of the zoning ordinance amendment to, uh, PMD-21 based on the draft ordinance. Um, if this moves forward, uh, this evening, um, it will be seen and reviewed at the May 18th City Council meeting, which is next Monday. Happy to answer any questions. Um, this does include a public hearing. Uh, we also have representatives, uh, from the applicant's side as well, if you have any questions for them. Thank you, Liz. We're going to bring it back to the commission. As Liz mentioned, this is a public hearing, but before that, are there any questions from the commission to the applicant or the city? Uh, yeah. I have uh, so, it's like why there is a difference between the corner, um, units versus the middle units? Like, I mean, if some suppose right now we are, um, amending the ordinance like, for 32 ft. Suppose what what happens the next tenant, like the next door tenant comes in and says, "I want 48 ft because 48 sq ft because the corner one is having 48 ft." So, are we going to go with another amendment? And how exactly we define that size is it there might be four units. Two units are having 32. Other having 42. And the side units only again 2 by 6, 12. How exactly we come up with that one? Yeah, it's it's based on that sign drawing that was put together by the applicant. They basically had to show how they can fit a sign panel in the area of those tenant spaces. So, the the metric of 32 and 48 is really coming out of that exercise that the applicant did. So, if those interior tenants really wanted to do a bigger sign, I mean, it's there's not a lot of options for them um just based on where the doorways and the windows are set out there. Um so, that's why 32 square feet is kind of the max they can get there between or above the doorway. So, based on the elevation drawings and all this, they come up with that particular number. >> Yep. So, I mean, what about the side ones? I mean, is Is there any reason we are not providing benefit for the side units, not giving that 32 feet? I mean, a 32 square foot. On the east and west? Well, that would be a question for the applicant. Um They chose to move forward with just the south elevation um because that had more of the visibility um and they can probably speak to kind of how they see the other east and west tenant spaces functioning with the the panel designs, which is the current um sign allowance that's out there today. Okay. Yeah, the only reason I'm asking is like if suppose side tenants also wanted to come back and again, we have to come back for another amendment, right? And what is the point? I mean, if the elevation is allowing it, I mean, can't we do it like a common thing for that entire text center? That is the only point I wanted to Yep. Do you want to Sure. Should I open the public hearing now? Sure. So, it's fine. >> We're We'll open the public hearing at 7:14 p.m., please. Um I'm Ed Flaherty. I'm the uh owner of Lariat Companies, which owns the center. Um If we just briefly, if we go back when we went through this process, there was a lot of questions about who are the tenants going to be. We own a number of these buildings, and it's kind of a flip of the coin. You just These are spec buildings, and you don't know who your tenants are going to be till the building is ready and and uh and so just a couple of brief um I think updates for all of you. Um all of our tenants are Chaska residents except two. And one of them is in Carver and one of them is in Chanhassen. One of the objectives um in these early discussions were we like this project because we can keep the local businesses in this community when there wasn't space like this for you know, the availability of of smaller smaller users. Um presently the building is about two and a half years complete. It's about 80% occupied. Um and when we first talked about this, I alluded to what I called pseudo retail users. I didn't realize that we'd have the type of potential users that were as retail as these are. But what's happened in the marketplace is there's a demand for retail in your core central business district and there's no retail. There's just no space. And so I have a half a dozen tenants that are prospects that want these spaces and we haven't gone further with those people subject to getting um you know, the sign ordinance straightened out. Um so um that's kind of the history here. The side tenants, none of those tenants have businesses that they need identification, but they don't have daily traffic from their tenants. A lot of them have their inventory and their services and tools there and a lot of them don't spend time in their facility during the day. It's very unusual. Um a couple a couple of users do have customers that come to them, but they're you know, the nature of their work is two or three customers a day. So, once once people know how to get to them, that's all that's important. And so, I that's why we didn't try to change the side uses. And if I look at all of our other buildings, um, the bulk of those buildings don't have retail. It's really office warehouse. Smaller office warehouse use. So, does that answer your question, Commissioner? Is there any other questions I can answer? You You mentioned the signs have to be uniform in lettering. Does that allow for a distinct logo branding? I mean Well, we're going to have to have the ability to to have the tenants use, you know, their logos. I mean, that's standard. Uh We have a lot of other buildings I've worked with cities to establish sign ordinances. And typically, um, you always have to let the tenant have, you know, the use of their logo. So, um, but yeah. So, let's have one quick question. When we were approving the tech center, right? We considered like most of the applicant mentioned, most of the occupants are like maybe using like they are not like day-to-day traffic comes into that tech center. Based on that, I think we did have the parking requirement. So, if if potential retail like which will have more traffic comes into that building, I mean, do we need to reconsider the parking requirements for that those units or is like sufficient enough to have that? Uh, short answer is no, uh, because the zoning that's in place out there does allow for retail. And we looked at that as a part of when we put the zoning in place to understand if the parking out there can support retail and kind of that lighter industrial use. So, the permitted uses out there are very specific to be conducive to how the parking is allocated out there. So, retail is an allowed use. So, we don't have to you know, go through and review their parking needs and stuff like that um when a retail user comes in. It's their uh they're permitted outright in terms of the zoning. Yeah. Another answer to that question is in the master plan, there's still land available to add additional parking if we would need it. Okay. So, and maybe the last comment I'd make is if you look [clears throat] up and down um Jessica Boulevard primarily um to the east all of those tenants have massive signs. And um we we couldn't fit them in. We tried to be practical and the same time um the design was pertinent to the building itself. Um and so, we're not asking for pylon signs. We're not asking for signs that fill up half the building or anything, but our tenants do need to have signs big enough so that when people drive by, they know what's there. They see it, they know how to find it, how to get to it. Um this will be a destination um I think uh facility at some point. The neighbor next to Spice Rack is um a company called um Heaven Bakery. They are a wholesale gluten-free baker. Um Polina and Vlad Lahoda are Ukrainian immigrants. Um they do not do retail, but I think at some point in the future, I would see them going to have a takeout operation there. But, um at this point in time, they're selling direct to consumer, and then they're selling through um retail distribution, also. Um so um Thank you. Liz, do we have anybody online for this No. action item? No. Okay, we will close the public hearing at 7:21. Any further questions? Well, I'd like to make a motion to approve. Second. First motion by Commissioner Purdy, second by uh Mr. Rydberg. All those in favor? Aye. Opposed? Motion carries. Next item, 7B, also a public hearing item, recommend approval of zoning ordinance amendment to PCD-18, City of Chaska, PC number 2026-11. We're just filled with amendments today for signs. >> [laughter] >> Um we have another zoning ordinance amendment proposed this evening for the curling event center in the planned commercial district number 18. Uh this is being proposed by the City of Chaska, as we own this building. Um to give you an idea of where it's located, we're in downtown here on um the northwest corner of where Highway 41 and Chaska Boulevard intersect. Um so, this is the curling and event center. You've got Fireman's Park as well as um the restaurant space that's attached to that as well. Um also in proximity are other retail businesses and one other area that um I'll reference this evening is the strip center across the street from high uh across the street of Highway 41 where AT&T, Edible India um Dunkin' Donuts um exist there. Oops. Um so, for background, uh 2014 was when we approved uh the curling and event center and adopted the ordinance for planned commercial district number 18. Um Crooked Pint was the original restaurant user in that building when it first opened. Um however, it it is being taken over by a new restaurant um that is called Copper Field. Um so, since they're taking over uh we have to modify our monument signs as a part of that. Um and kind of through that review process um they were met with challenges in terms of the visibility and the size of the signs um that exist out there today. Um there's also sign criteria that is wrapped into that PCD 18 zoning district um and when it was put in place, and again, this was before Nate and I's time here, um it definitely had very restrictive language in there in terms of the uh allowances for both the ground signs and the wall signs on the building. Um and we understand the intention to be more to focus the attention on the quality of the building and um um uh be sensitive to the park adjacent as well. So, um that was the intent of why there were restrictive um uh provisions put in place. Um but they are definitely more restrictive than kind of our standard sign code uh would permit both in the historic downtown core area and what we allow for commercial signs both for wall and ground signs. Um In addition, the wall sign edge for the restaurant space, so the restaurant kind of takes up that gray um uh gabled end of the building that's on the northeast side of the building. Um and there are limitations just due to the location and some of the architectural features of that space. Um And um with the intent of the zoning district and sign criteria that was put in place, really didn't want any signage facing out towards the park. So, kind of keep that park feel out there was kind of the intent. Um so, due to those limitations, there's really not a lot of options to put um wall signs on the restaurant side of things. Um and the visibility again um is important for a retail user. Um the uh existing ground signs are both at the Chaska Boulevard entrance and then there's also one right outside of uh that restaurant space along Highway 41. Uh those are currently 32 square feet and uh about 5 and 1/2 to 6 ft tall in height. Um So, the proposed amend amendments um tonight uh and what's being requested it better align with kind of the standard sign codes uh that we have for both the historic downtown core area, as well as the commercial allowances. Um, and also still maintaining that quality image, um, for the park and the building itself, too. So, that was really the intent, with the request this evening. So, the current request, all of the changes are shown in red on the right-hand side here, but to put it generally, the changes to the sign criteria criteria for PCD 18 would include allowing the wall signage allowance to be consistent with the historic downtown core area regulations, um, which all of the other properties south of, Chaska Boulevard, have to meet that. Um, and we feel with the wall signage, it's only fair to do that as well. So, the changes would include, um, reference to that part of the code for wall signs. Um, and then for ground-mounted sign allowances, that would align more with the commercial regulations, um, and really our reference point is the monument sign that's across the street at the strip center with AT&T, Fitness First, Edible India, Dunkin Donuts. Um, that sign, um, is roughly 60 square feet in sign area, 10 feet in height. If you kind of include those brick pillars, it's 100 square feet kind of total there, or up to 100 square feet. So, we wanted to mimic kind of the scale of that across the street, just due to the again the limitations of the architecture on the restaurant side. Um it's not conducive for a wall sign there unfortunately, so we felt uh that the um kind of reasonable uh change to the ground side in front of the building there would be uh more appropriate to have um something consistent with the sign that's across the street. So, the changes um in terms of sign area and height would basically mimic um or be very close to the sign that's across the street there on the other side or here on the curling event center side. So, the really the the tangible um uh change that's proposed out here is for the ground signs both on the Chaska Boulevard and the Highway 41 side. Um so, we do have some design concept for that um just to show you what that would look like uh and that's on this slide here. So, this would be a 64 square foot um sign, 10 ft in height. Um so, again um pretty much the same size and scale of the one across the street. Um so, in conclusion, we are recommending um or asking you to recommend approval of the zoning ordinance amendment to PCD 18 based on the draft ordinance and kind of the the pieces that I laid out uh previously. Um this also includes a public hearing. Um and if it gets uh recommended for approval tonight, it'll go to council on Monday, May 18th. Happy to answer any questions. Thank you, Liz. We'll bring it back to the commission. Any questions from any of the commissioners? I I one. Did the Cricket Pint just not renew their 10-year lease? I can speak to that. Um yes, so Crooked Pint, when they originally entered into the lease for the curling event center, it's a 10-year lease with two 5-year options to extend. Um they're at the end of the 10-year lease now, and so we entered into some conversations about, you know, what should the future hold? Um Crooked Pint is under the same uh umbrella as Copperfield, uh the Green Mill Corporation. Um And so, as the conversations uh evolved, there was an idea to bring in Crooked Pint as a new opportunity to kind of refresh the space, um create a new menu opportunity. Some of the things that Copperfield does that Crooked Pint does not, um would be a breakfast offering, um including kind of a sort of bakery uh taking, you know, grab-and-go type of a of an offering. Um so, we don't really have a lot of breakfast opportunities in Chaska right now. There's maybe a couple, but um this this we viewed as an opportunity to bring something new. Um it's an opportunity they're currently remodeling the space, so we can do that and give it a refresh kind of at that 10-year anniversary of the facility. Um and it's given some opportunity. It'll be exciting when it reopens. Um there's some new thought put into how does the restaurant relate to the curling facility and creating spaces um that, you know, based on what we've learned over the next 10 or over the last 10 years, hopefully sets it up to um work better together. Um and so, there's there's some of those benefits that come out of that that partnership. But, it ends up being under the same kind of uh umbrella company, um we're rebranding more than anything. So, they move forward um and I'm not greatly involved in the in the lease side of it, but I believe they're moving forward um kind of under the terms of that original lease, just, you know, tweaking it a little bit. So. Yeah. I have one question on the on the signage. Um and again, we'll start there. My my only Question from a brand strategy standpoint, and this doesn't impede whether or not to improve approve that zoning ordinance change, cuz I think that makes sense. Um but the ratio of space allocation to the curling and event center versus the restaurant. I'm curious how that was decided, cuz normally that would be flipped, right? Your anchor would get the bigger space allocation, and then the secondary would get the smaller space allocation. Yeah. Um I think well, you're asking a question that I'm not fully Fair enough. able to answer, cuz it it has to do with the negotiations that have, you know, gone up you know, between the city and uh Copperfield. Um I think there's part of that. I also think there's some recognition that um at this point, I think a lot of folks are pretty familiar with Firemen's Park, the curling and event center, at least the folks who live in Chaska. Um and maybe, you know, the thing that people would be looking for um would be the Copperfield um if you're coming from out of town, sort of this I don't know, it's a judgment call, right? Um and I think there's some thought that you you know, someone's coming from outside of Chaska looking for the facility, um the reason for that is maybe more likely to be the restaurant um than the other two. Now, there's going to be exceptions to that, but that's the best I can answer. Yeah. Fair enough. Yeah. It's a good question. Okay, I'll open the public hearing at 7:33. There's [clears throat] nobody in the audience. Is there anybody online? There's nobody online. Okay, we'll close the public hearing at 7:34. Um I'd like to make a motion to approve. >> Oh, I had a start. Not related to this sign though. Like I think we had some conversations about like having a digital sign or something which will maybe display more about like some cities are having it and we had some conversations right? Like now Taste of Chaska is going to be next week something like that. We wanted we were talking about having some kind of digital signages around the downtown area especially that signal so that like it can have more reach. Talking to like city commission meeting planning commission meeting like the next event something like that right? So why don't you take this opportunity because if city wants that and just add extra digital sign on top of whatever you have it so that way you can have those events and the city related events can be displayed over there and it can have more reach. I mean just we had some conversations before probably you can consider and talk about that. Just a suggestion. Yeah, I think it's it's a good comment and I think it's something we're always thinking about is how do we best communicate with with the community make sure people are aware of what's going on and Yeah, especially that that that sign is board is like a redesigning. So probably it's the same place you can have somewhere on the top or like close to that. Maybe yeah. Yeah. Any other questions? Thank you. I'd like to make a recommendation of approval for zoning ordinance amendment PCD-18 City of Chaska PC number 2026-11. Could I get a second please? Second. Seconded by Raster. All those in favor? Aye. Opposed? Motion carries. Final item, other business. I I have one if I could offer it up. Absolutely. >> All right. Um >> Is this pertaining to your email? It does. So, I'm trying to just share on the screen here. Am I doing it? All right. All right. So, yeah, I want to make the Planning Commission aware it was I think uh well, whenever the last City Council meeting was last Monday. Uh Council made took action to uh direct staff to move forward uh with a scope of work um to update the Downtown Master Plan. So, the Downtown Master Plan was adopted by the City Council in 2012. Um so, as we continue to speak about things that happened between before Liz and I were here, um this is another one, but uh but it's it's been a great plan. It's laid that plan that was put place in 2012 identified a lot of things that have now been implemented. Um so, if you look around and you see all the streets in downtown have been rebuilt at this point. 41 got completely redone um and rethought. Um the uh Paseo network on the east side and through the alleyways on 41, the underpass that brings the trail underneath there. Um this the wayfinding signage that's been implemented. Fireman's Park is something that was identified. Uh the need for a new library and we're working on that. We're going to start a process for that um in short order as well. The Landing Apartments that are at the um uh kind of the and the gateway point to the city as you're crossing 41. It's on the on the east side um off of the bridge. So, that was a site that was identified for redevelopment in that plan. Um and there's more. There's more stuff in addition to the things I just listed off, but suffice to say, you know, the plan being almost 15 years old, with as much as been has been completed and achieved at this point, it feels ripe and it feels like it's the right time to think about what should that next you know, version of it be. I think previous discussions with council, you know, there is the feeling that the overall broader vision that was set in that plan is probably still relevant, but it's rethinking about how do we apply that for the next 10-15 year time horizon and what are those next priorities going to be. So, that'll be the idea and that'll be what we move forward with. Part of it will be to have a task force that provides direction to staff and to our consultant. The consultant will be HKGI. And specifically leading that Jeff Miller is his name. He's worked with us on the zoning project that we're continuing to to work on. He's also been involved last I think two comprehensive plan updates. And he was involved with the downtown master plan. Also had involvement in the city square west redevelopment plan that we are continuing to try and figure out how to implement that one. So, he's got what he has told me is a PhD in Chaska. So, I don't know from what university exactly, but he's got that. And so, he's excited to you know, continue with that and bring that depth of knowledge that he has based on that long-term relationship. Jeff actually worked for the city earlier in his career for a couple of years. He worked for the city of Chaska as well. Um So, working with HKGI, looking for that task force and working towards establishing that. We're looking for folks who would be up to the task of meeting approximately four times between end of June, early July when we'll have the first meeting hopefully and then targeting March timeline for council to adopt. Uh, you know, hopefully a recommended plan at that point. Um, so meeting four times over the course of about, you know, a year, maybe a little less. Uh, in the evening most likely on a weekday. Um, and I'm hopeful that the meetings would be no more than two hours. I don't feel a whole lot of good happens after a two-hour meeting uh, timeline happens. So, that I think that's a fair goal. And so, we're looking for a good mix. We have a couple from the city council um, who will be on it. We're asking for the park board to have a a person, uh, planning commission, the historic preservation commission, um, someone from the history center, the downtown business alliance will have a couple folks on it. We're also currently advertising um, to hopefully get um, some applicants that could serve two spots for downtown residents and then another two spots for residents at large. Um, and I think there's a the county, there's a few others that we've got um, trying to plug into the the task force and cast hopefully a a wide net um, to the extent that we can. There will also be throughout the process opportunities for public input. We'll be at uh, you know, we're looking to be at River City Days, we're looking at the Latin Festival. There's also a downtown Halloween trick-or-treat that happens um, that hopefully we can set up a presence at. Um, and then the state of the city um, event that we tried our our first uh, edition of that earlier this year. Um, and so, we're hoping that that'll be an annual thing. And that should be a good opportunity to plug into that one as well towards as we get towards the hopefully the end of the process. Um, so, that's the idea. That's the commitment and I guess what I'm hoping for is maybe the planning commission would want to talk about, you know, who might be interested in serving on that this evening. Um, my thought is hopefully we can get to a decision through a consensus is That's why I didn't put it as an action item tonight, but if we're feeling like we want to revisit in June, there's still time. We could put it on the agenda for the June meeting and, you know, come to a conclusion then if we're not able to this evening. So, I can say Commissioner Urbanski expressed interest, although he's not here this evening. So, he asked me to to provide that, but at the same time, he recognizes chair, you know, he's happy to um you know, create that or you know, bow to you know, whoever else might have an interest in that as well. So, that is what I have to say. If anyone has any questions, I'm happy to to take those and help in this >> So, do you have any I mean, dates for the meetings are not yet decided? We don't have dates for the meetings quite yet. The first meeting I can say we're aiming for end of June, early July. Oh, early time frame. >> Okay. So, that'd be the first one. After that, just based on this timeline that we've put together, it's the green dots. So, you know, August, September, and then December. Although having been part of projects, you know, many times, as you the further you get from the start date, the more likely there is for shifts to happen, but we do want to try and stick to the schedule as the best that we can. Yeah. Yeah, only reason I I'll be out from end of July to end of August. So, that is just reason why I just wanted to check with you >> Yeah. the day and And there are four meetings and if I wanted to be there, I wanted to be on all four meetings rather than that like one or two meetings. Doesn't make any sense, right? That is the only reason I'm just asking. >> Yeah. Anyone else have any interest? I do. Anybody else? I There are some I don't know how much time I have or how many meetings Yeah. Yep. Yeah, so for for this group, we're looking [clears throat] for one, which is consistent with how we've formatted task force in the past. This we tend to have one from each commission. The risk that we run into if we go bigger than that, and part of the reason why we typically don't is because you can end up with a city heavy, you know, presence in these things. So, we try to have, you know, balance of city presence and there's different perspectives bringing the commissions in to be, you know, kind of part of the conversation with council members as well. But, then also making sure that the space for, you know, non-commissioned city representative type folks is, you know, is in balance. So, that's kind of the rationale there. >> [snorts] >> One thing that I've council did all the groups I've talked to have have done as well is they will, you know, have one person kind of be the primary and then have a secondary, recognizing that, you know, something could come up and it's nice to have, you know, that second person. >> So, we have the option to do that. We could do that. That's a good idea. We got two people, so Yeah. Yeah. So, if you want to arm wrestle on who that primary is, it'd be just be helpful for me to know for expectations. Um you know, that that could be helpful or if you guys want to talk about it and come back in June, I'm open, you know, that can work, too. That works with the timeline. Right. I think that's a brilliant solution. Would we also be able to make space to provide input behind the scenes to kind of have our spokespeople bring [clears throat] forward if we have any questions >> Yeah, that's a great question and I think a really good suggestion. That's in line and consistent with how we've done things before. I know Commissioner Urbanski served on the There was a task force for the community center that happened and that process was a couple years ago, I think, now. And he did a really nice job of providing updates at planning commission meetings and, you know, kind of seeking other people's perspectives and wanting to, you know, carry that forward. I think that's a great suggestion that you know, it's a great way for the role to be approached. Super. Yeah. So, who wants to be primary and who wants to be secondary? Or do you guys want to talk about it separately? We could connect after. Cool. Cool. Might depend on the dates that you end up picking this to like What are we lining up with and how many lacrosse games do I have to be at? Fair enough. And that's why it's great to have a buddy system on it, too. So, yeah. Yeah. Sounds good. Thank you. You're welcome. Any other questions for staff? I think that's great. This is looks like a great process. Thank you. Yeah, it's proven I think very valuable to the downtown with the plan that we've had. Um And you know, one of the if you if you go back pre-2012 um at least based on the the stories I've been told um one of the one of the motivating factors was that people were feeling like you know, they wanted to invest in downtown and attempts were being made and things were happening. Um but there wasn't a you know, strategy behind it necessarily, right? Or not not a formal expressed strategy. Um and so, you know, kind of begged the question well, what what's the most bang for our buck? Where should we be spending our effort and our and our money and our time and all that kind of stuff. Um and so, that's what this plan has done um and I think it's laid good groundwork to continue the momentum. Yeah. Awesome. All right. Do you have another question since on your list there says Southwest Transit? Yeah. Do you know what the status is of the bill that would combine Southwest Transit and the other metro transits into Metro Transit? I don't. Yeah, I know that's that's been a debate this session. It's been that's always been sort of something lurking in the shadows. Um this idea that the suburban opt-outs, um you know, what should their status be relative to Metro Transit and you know, at some point do they come together or how does that how should that be? Um and that I think had some momentum early in the session this year. I haven't heard anything recently. Um and it it might be because nothing is moving forward or it might be because I'm just out of the loop, so I'm not I'm not too sure. Um the sort of reading the uh the tea leaves, so to speak, on the legislature is a risky thing to do. Um but uh feedback that I've received from our lobbyists, they're not expecting that there's going to be anything, you know, super earth-shattering at this point. Um I think, you know, so we'll see what comes out and we're getting towards the end of session. It's a Sunday Um and often there's things that kind of come together at the last, you know, final final hours of session. Um so we'll need we'll know soon enough. Um but yeah, that's the best I can answer right now. I think from the city's perspective, um you know, Southwest Transit has been a really good partner and really good asset for the community. Um and I think, you know, a lot of I don't want to speak too much on behalf of council on a legislative issue, but um I I feel pretty confident that they would love to see Southwest Transit remain that uh well into the future. Like you said, they've really been good for our community. A lot of people don't realize that. >> Right. Yeah. I'd hate to see it go away. Me, too. It'd be [snorts] a challenge, for sure. Any other questions? Well, would someone like to make a motion to adjourn? Motion to adjourn. Second. Seconded by um Sailor. Sailor, and Commissioner Rostad. First by Commissioner Rostad, second by Sailor. All those in favor? Aye. Meeting is adjourned. All right. There you go. Good stuff, guys.