ready, Lindsay. Okay, let's sec [clears throat] it now three times. Okay, the time being 7:00, I call the city council meeting to order. Please stand for the pledge of allegiance. >> [clears throat] >> To the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> Oops. >> Welcome. and let the role reflect that we do have a quorum with the absence of council member Lefeld. Tonight, I would like to introduce our mayor for the day, Vivian Swanson. And Vivian wrote an essay that she will be reading along with 11 other essay applicants. And you'll hear why I chose her as the winning essay. Hi, my name is Vivian Swanson. I live in Hastings. I'm 10 years old and I go to McAuliff Elementary and I love to dance. If I were mayor for a day, I would make a Hastings kindness day. I would make sure that the police, hospital, and the fire department were all set and tell them to practice each and every week. I would also have a place open 24 hours for people to free dance. If I were mayor for a day, I would have Hastings kindness day on September 1st where I would encourage people to do something kind for someone. I would also have people put flowers by the bridge so that when people come, they feel welcome and the bridge would look super pretty. If I were mayor for a day, I would also see if the 911 crew is all set and ready, and I would tell them to practice each week since I like dance. Another thing I would do is have a dance place open 24 hours where everyone could pay $5 per person and they could go and free dance. It could be where people let out their wiggles and where they felt welcome. As as you can see, I would be very excited and busy to serve as a mayor for a day. I would do my best to help my community. >> Wonderful. [applause] >> [applause] >> Vivian has shadowed me for well half a day. We picked her up at school and we visited a couple of the departments and then came to saw um city hall. We had a workshop earlier on our parks and wreck department which she was very enthusiastic about and she loves the city. So she had numerous questions throughout the day and she was very um aggressively responsible for this beautiful essay and um her parents should be very proud. So thank you. If council we would step forward and we'll give Vivian a certification of recognition and we'll have her picture taken. Look at this. >> I love that me and Maya still live together though. >> Here we go. Three, two, one. Then when you're done, Kelly, if you could step aside, please That's always a fun day for us, right? And by the way, Vivian is fourth grade, 10 years old as she said, but amazing. So, comments from the audience. At this time, we will hear comments from the audience. Um, if you would list like to speak to the council, please step to the podium, state your name and your address. Oh, sorry. First, could we have approval of minutes? I'm sorry, council. Okay. first and second by Veritroof and House. All those in favor say I. >> I. >> I opposed to that or say no. And that prevails. >> Okay. Now, comments from the audience. >> All right. >> Thank you. >> Right here. >> No. Podium, please state your name and your address. >> Hi, my name is Aaron Dean. I'm a construction lawyer with Spencer Feain. Um, I live in Bloomington, Minnesota, but my address in downtown Minneapolis is 100 um 5th Street Suite 2500 Minneapolis, Minnesota. Um, I'm here to address um item 10C on the agenda. It relates to the property, the Hastings Crearyy. Yeah, that's the subject of a long-standing dispute of which I have not been involved at all. My involvement in this dispute has been for one week. I'm replacing my uh law firm partner because he broke his leg and needed someone to uh be here. I also represent Lloyd's Construction Services and M Miss Mayor and the city attorney and the community development director have all received a copy of the signed contract between the owner of the real property and Lloyd's construction for just under 411,000. M mayor, I sent it to you just shortly before the city council meeting began. There are some alternates that can increase the cost of that, but the bottom line is that Lloyd's Construction Services and the owner, Mr. Meru, are hopeful that work can begin on April 15th and end in 60 days and be completed by June 15th. Of course, we live in Minnesota and [clears throat] um the weather has to cooperate. We had great weather the last couple days, but coming up we're having another snowstorm and we need to have the temperature at an average um degree of 40° at night so we have constant water access in order to control any dust or debris during the demolition process. Lloyd's Construction Services is one of the one or two top haz hazardous materials and demolition contractors in the state of Minnesota and has done uh substantially larger projects than this one. I'm involved because I'm the one who referred Floyd's Construction Services to the project owner. I know that this has been a long time coming. I know that there was prior management problems with the city and prior management was removed. I know that the certificate of occupancy was revoked in August of 2023. I know there was a fire in September 2023. I know there's been all sorts of problems that have occurred over the last two and a half years. I had zero to do with all of those problems. I am the janitor helping to get this mess cleaned up. That is it. And um I know that the city council will be considering a resolution and an order to require that the property be cleaned up by June 15th. I want to tell you in advance that we are going to contest that just to preserve our rights. Not that the work does not have to be done. I don't know whether Lloyds can finish in 60 days. They are hopeful. I don't want that objection to be construed as being uncooperative. or to not agree that the work needs to be done. I want you to understand that on a construction project like this, it's going to be pretty nasty and there may be uncon unknown conditions below ground. There might be tanks. There might be uh much more hazardous materials than are anticipated. Only a braw report bun from 2024 was provided to the contractor. So the contractor has limited knowledge and information in order to proceed. The reason I say all of that is if this takes 90 days or 120 days to complete, it's not because the owner is being uncooperative or because the contractor is incompetent. It means it's a a very sophisticated project and requires a lot of caution. And the um when you're disposing of asbestous containing materials, you have limited landfills that they can go to and they're going to go to the Bolander um landfill. You have a lot slower work that's being performed and Lloyds is one of the most cautious and one of the most experienced demolition contractors in the state of Minnesota. So, the right contractor was found and please uh just be patient if it takes longer than 60 days. No one is interested in dragging their feet. Um, I'm as interested as everyone else for this long sorted, tormented ordeal be over, for the citizens, for the city council, for the mayor, for all of the city staff, um, and for that site to be cleaned up and everything on that site disposed of properly. So, I anticipate that the city council will unanimously approve the resolution and the order under chapter 463. Please understand that after today, the owner 3D LLC will object to that order without being objectionable and without um trying to um cause more delays. We just don't know it will take more than 60 days to complete the work. It's all weather dependent and all dependent on not having unknown conditions discovered. I'm happy to answer any questions if there are any questions. Um, but I hope this is the last time that you ever hear from me as a construction lawyer. And I hope that this project goes very well and that we're done in early June. If those things happen, we will all be happy. But if they don't happen, it does not mean that the contractor was incompetent or that the owner is uncooperative. >> Thank you. >> Thank you for your comments. >> Anyone else wish to speak to the council at this time? Okay. Council, any items to be considered. Okay. And consent agenda. At this time, council, I would accept a motion to approve the consent agenda. Council member Pemble. And second by council member Lawrence. Any discussion, councel? All those in favor of the motion state by saying I. >> I. Oppose that motion. State by saying nay. And that motion prevails. Tonight, under awarding of contracts, we have an approval for a new sidewalk cafe license for Hugafl on 214 2nd Street East. And for this item, we have a introduction by our community development director, John Hinsman. Well, I'm here in city council. I wasn't prepared to speak tonight, but I can introduce a little bit of the project here. It's a it's a sideway uh cafe project. I believe uh they are in the process of opening up downtown and we did have a review by city staff of the project itself and I don't think we received any comments back significantly from the staff were supportive of the issuance of it. And I guess I could stand for any questions. And John, we will also hold a public hearing as well. >> And we'll have a public hearing. Okay. >> Thank you, >> council. I will first have the public hearing and after that then we will have discussion. Anyone wish to or actually first I'll open the public hearing. Anyone wish to speak to the Sidewalk Cafe uh new license for downtown. Looks like no one no one on Zoom. I will close the public hearing now. [clears throat] Open discussion for council. Council member Verich. >> Thank you, your honor. Sorry to put you on the spot here, John, but I am just wondering if you have any sense of an opening date or if you've heard anything from the owners. We have lots of people that are excited downtown. >> Understood. And uh no, I I do not, council member, have an opening date for it. I know they've been working continuously for some time uh taking, you know, doing it on their own pace, but I'm unsure of what the opening date would be. Hopefully the sidewalk FA license is a good indicator. >> I would hope the same. Thank you, your honor. Thank you, John Mayer Veriche. Any other questions, council? Okay, with that, council, I would accept a motion to approve the sidewalk cafe license for Hugafo at 214 Street, 2nd Street, East Hastings. Council member House first second and a second by council member Pimbo. Any discussion, councel? All those in favor of the motion state by saying I. I. Opposed to that motion state by saying nay. And that motion prevails. Tonight we have a a motion to accept a quote and authorized signature of contract for corrective asphalt materials at for the 2026 pavement preservation project. And for this item we have with us our assistant city engineer John Caven. Welcome John. Thank you, mayor. Thank you, council. Pavement management. Um, the goal, as we know, is to to build a road and hopefully have it last as long as we possibly can. There's many tools in the toolbox to do so. The tool that we're talking about today is seal coat. Um, for decades, chip seals were the industry standard. Um, we've A chip seal is basically oil and rock that's applied to the road. um with the effort of hoping that that lasts a long time. Um few years back we put a pause on the program because we were starting to see stripping on the upper layer of the of the surface. So during that pause we um started talking with other cities to see what they're doing. Uh we're researching products and also um looking at de demos from from contractors. Um, after careful research, we'd like to try a new product um by uh called Reclamate. It's by um Corrective Asphalt Materials. As you can see in the photo here, um it's it's basically an oil that gets applied. Uh in about 10 or 15 minutes, the product cures and then sand is put on top. The purpose of the sand is unlike seal coat where this the sand um just basically laps up any remaining oil that's sitting on top and then the next day it's swept off. Um so unlike a chip seal the where um the chip seal serves as a sacrificial layer that's applied over the top surface of the of the roadway um which ultimately then trapped the water underneath. This product penetrates the surface of the roadway which slows down the degragation process. It slows down the oxidation and drying out process of the surface. So a resident can expect who's on the project can expect a letter in the mail just requesting no parking 7 to 7. Um the the process itself takes about 30 minutes to do with the oil and then letting it cure and then applying the sand. Um and then uh once the sand is down then and vehicles are ready to to drive on it. It'll be swept off on the very next day. So we received a quote for 30,000. Uh the price is competitive with what surrounding cities are seeing. And um so the goal that we've um are recommending is to apply this in fairly newly uh paved uh locations in development. we can use the development escrow, the the pavement preservation escrow to to pay for it. Um and uh it would be these locations, the Heritage Ridge development, the Villas at Pleasant, um the Cobblestone Court, and South Oaks 4th. So with that, I can stand for any questions. >> Thank you, John. Any questions, council? Council member House. Thank you. Thank you so much for the presentation, John. I have quite a few questions. Um, with a new product, can you speak to the environmentally friendliness of this product? >> Yes. Um, it's not any worse than the the the the chip seal product itself. Uh, they do have um, uh, extensive literature on the product and everybody out there's going to claim it's environmentally friendly. It's oil. Oil's oil. Um, so from that perspective, the the goal would be to keep it confined, not going down the storm sewer, letting it run. So it needs to stay on the road surface. And from the demonstration that I saw, I wasn't concerned. It's nearly not going to run off the street. >> They do a good job with it. >> Okay. Is there any concern of any um pets being around that product then? >> Actually, um I was very impressed with the the type of oil this is. the chip seal oil was very sticky. If you think paving, you're on the right track with what that is. >> This product, it really didn't have that tackiness to it. >> Okay. >> So, in a way, it's almost better than what we've been doing in the past. >> Um, and then a few other questions I have is what streets are you guys wanting to continue this on after uh these main streets? Are there specific areas that you guys are wanting to target more? So, >> yeah, that's a great question. I would say if this year goes really well, we could see ourselves doing future reconstructs. So the year after a road is reconstructed, we try to >> protect that surface and we could roll it into a continual program. >> Perfect. And last question I have is uh do you know of any other towns that currently use this product? >> Yes. Um like the closest one to us is Woodbury. >> There is a list of about 10 or 15 and it's starting to grow. So we're not early and we're not late. We're right in the middle of what the metro area cities um are experiencing. So, everybody's kind of in that searching process. So, I'd say we're right right in the middle. >> Perfect. Thank you. >> Yeah. Thank you. >> Thank you, Council Member House. Council member Pemble. >> John, refresh refresh me. What did you say the dollar value would cost for this for this chunk of >> it? It'd be approximately 30,000. And when you say that the next day or 24 hours after it's swept, it's drivable. Is that what you said? >> It's actually drivable as soon as the sand is down. So it would be within 20 minutes, 30 minutes. >> Okay. That was that was my biggest question. I thought you said something about 24 hours before. And so we want to be able to have our residents be able to get back in and out of their properties. And that to me was as long as you know we we advance and try and find a better product than what we've been using for decades, I'm I'm in. I think this is a good idea. >> Thank you, Council Member Pebble. Any other discussion, Council? If not, I would accept a motion to for the quote and authorization for signature of contract from correction asphalt materials for the 2026 pavement preservation project. Council member Verichoff with a first mo and council member Pimell with a second. New discussion. All those in favor of the motion state by saying I. I. >> I. Opposed to that motion state by saying nay. >> And that motion prevails. Thank you, John. Thank you. >> Tonight under public works, we have an adopt the to adopt the county state aid highway 42 corridor improvements. And for this item, we have a presentation by Dakota County Project Manager Joe Moro and C or Commissioner Slavic. Welcome. [clears throat] Well, good um evening, mayor, council members. Uh Mike Slavic, Dakota County District 1 Commissioner. Uh before I introduce uh our project manager for this project, uh Joe Morno, um I want to just go and give a little bit of a background on a couple things related to u the history of this project as it actually started um we we started talking about doing some revamps to this project back in 2016. Uh those who've lived on on the street for many years know that this project was uh reconstructed in 1997. And typically we don't do another rec reconstruct or really um enhancements on a road for about 50 plus years. So the fact that uh we're kind of coming at a at a point now uh is a little bit unique in the kind of the county process. But in uh 2016, uh then uh council member Belonic had been receiving a number of comments related to speed and pedestrian safety, particularly between um uh River Riverdale and uh Pleasant Drive and just what's as the popularity of the Mississippi River Greenway. Um we were seeing more and more bikes and uh pedestrians trying to cross uh County Road 42 Ninja Road as well as uh we've just continue to see uh speeds be very uh high and fast as you're coming from a 55mile rural county road into the city limits here. And uh though the flashing speed signs have helped some, they there was concerns that we needed to find ways to find uh measures to calm the traffic as we went through this. So in 2016, May 7th of 2016, we met at the library in the morning, uh about just under 50 residents, uh as well as the director of transportation and myself met to kind of talk about what could be done, if anything. At that point, the it wasn't time for a mill and overlay the project. Uh the it wasn't anywhere near a 50-year reconstruct, but we uh did know that this was becoming a growing concern. At that point, the um County Road 42, the rural section was just in the design phase. So, if you may recall, that had no shoulders, steep ditches, and uh uh it was to the point actually where at that time, Sheriff uh Leslie was not willing to go in and um do patrol and speed patrol on that road because it was so unsafe. Every time they were pulling over somebody for speeding, um they actually ran into a number of squad cars that got um run into over the years. So they said this road needs to be a priority for safety that has safe shoulders so that we can do a little bit more of enforcement on the rural portion in Niner Township. So at that point the road was under construction and uh that was kind of just to see what that did. Uh and we continued in 2018 2019 um to just go and figure out what would be ways to to address traffic calming measures to slow down traffic as well as the pedestrian safety. So what happened in that part in there under uh council member Fox we had um the group kind of reconvened kind of in the postcoid world time to kind of figure out what could be done. Some of you were involved and on the council at that point there where we ended up doing a feasibility study uh to go and determine what are some ideas that could actually go and and be proposed. A 2024 corridor study was done that went and determined a couple different things. One of the big ones in there was that to cross um you we had to determine where a trail would make sense, but to cross from um one side of 42 to the other, there really needs to be a um kind of a midc crossing as opposed to Pleasant Drive for to be able to get to the greenway where the greenway entrance to go to the switch back down to Lock & Dam Road uh would really be a safer way to do that to address some other cal uh traffic calming measures throughout the whole corridor as well as some safety on the roads uh uh issues Just to give note that this road um would not be up to county standards. If we would be building this road today, this is not how we would be building County Road 42/ Ninja Road Second Street. Um so on that part in there, we were able to do that evaluation and then as we did that, we started with public engagement. We met with the the public to kind of in the very beginning of the stage in January 2024, uh we presented some early findings in design in in April, the spring of 2024. And then most recently in uh December of this past year was kind of the design process at that part there. Um I should note that the city council and the county board did authorize to kind of move forward in in some of these steps. So we've gotten to a point of a 90 plus percent design of a potential uh road improvements for safety safety and pedestrian safety and and c traffic calming. So that has been about that's kind of been the process of where we have been going through thus far to get to this point in here. The proposal is about a $3 million project and as you're well aware um most of what we have is either 100% paid for by the county or a 15% cost share with our local partners uh in this part in here. So looking I think as we have seen in the past a potential project is roughly $300,000 to the city as well as 2.7 million to the county. Couple things that I want to make note separate from just the historical background and that is just uh the uniqueness of Hastings when it comes to county roads. There is about 420 plus miles of county road um throughout all of Dakota County. All the major cities have um often times four to uh eight times as many miles of county road than Hastings has. Hastings being an older community has state roads that still go through this. But however, there's only about six miles of county road in uh the city of Hastings compared to my largest city in District 1 of Farmington is almost 30 miles of county road. And with that, you see uh pedestrian uh large 8-ft trails on both sides. you see no bypass lanes in a metro area or in an urban area, you see only turn lanes that go with that. Uh the reality is that county roads move a lot of traffic there. Though they're in residential areas and that is is part of it, you see a lot of traffic that is moved on a county road compared to a local city road. And I and I think that that's just kind of one of those those unique parts of this in that uh the reason why we put a trail as opposed to a sidewalk on our uh county roads is because oftentimes uh dictated by the state and speed limits, they're 45 miles an hour or above even in city limits. Think of if you go to Egan, which has many miles of county road, many of those roads there are not 30 miles an hour as county road and and that is just kind of part of of the requirements with a county state aid road, which this also is. Uh so that makes it a little bit more challenging in how how things are done in here and why it was a larger priority to go in and make some investments. Um even though the road is not seeing a full reconstruction with that. I think I'll also note just a couple things. Um you know the the challenge is you would not see bypass lanes within an urban section anymore in in a county state aid road. And that has been we heard initially why you heard so many the conversation that happened about a month ago related to boulevard trees and um I'm it's my understanding that the trees that would be at the cemetery would be honestly have about another 30 plus years of life left from they're about roughly 70 years old. However, to be able to make pedestrian safety uh excuse me uh traffic safety with turn lanes and that uh as you'll hear from Joe that is kind of some of those steps in there. I will make note that uh one of the things that the council and mayor you asked for was to go and get confirmation and work with the cemetery board to get them on record for their position related to the trees. And um not to give a spoiler of Joel, but uh they the cemetery board has come back and actually support of uh removing those trees on the condition that new trees are are put into place there. Joe will talk a little bit more of the type of tree that uh they're talking with that part there. And that's outside from a number of issues that though they are may have 30 plus years of life, you never know what a windstorm might do and and that puts a lot of liability onto the cemetery as well as uh that is an aging old wall and the root system on there can actually have some impact there. So uh at the end of the day the cemetery board did come and uh give their position that the the trees do make some sense in there. So, you had a couple other things that you asked as a council to go and have county staff give some better explanation on. And I know we have some neighbors that will probably have some comments as well with this um on here, but I want to just go and introduce once again Joe Morno is the uh project manager for this project. And he's going to do much more of the emphasis on the the reasons and decision-m on why a couple things. Why the location of the trail was put at a certain spot. Uh why the need for threelane sections. uh further comment on the boulevard trees and then um also talk about just the the project from river all the way down to downtown and what uh what that may have an impact. Uh, as you recall, the operations committee at um, initially had had a conversation related to restricting parking and I think that, you know, Joel will add some further comments on that, but um, outside of that design, I think that can still be a conversation related to the parking because it is a mill and overlay from river all the way to downtown, which means the asphalt and the curb, everything stays the same and that's a matter of of painting and markings and that that's not where we are at today. Today, it's really more to moving forward for that ultimate final design and the joint powers agreement to get uh the parts that will be new and added safety uh and also added traffic calming measures. So, with that, madame uh mayor and council members, I'm going to let Joe have the show and go from there. So, thank you much. >> Thank you, Mike. >> Thank you, Commissioner Slavic. Thank you, Mayor Fazper and Council members for having been back here. Um, as Commissioner Slavic noted, one of the things we want to talk about here is the um the the consideration of parking restrictions on Second Street near near downtown. And what I'll do just in the interest of everyone in the audience here is go to the uh end here just where I had a had a slide and I can I can cover that first and um leave it um leave it up to the council as far as if we need any discussion on this topic. So, um, so, so again, River Street down to downtown, this is just going to be a mill and overlay. And, you know, we'll be looking at restriping to help restrict some of the speeds and given that um, we don't have any any trail and not really a a good prospect for one in the now or in the future. We're looking at allowing, you know, bicycle use of those shoulders. So, coming coming down the hill, you know, we're going to stripe that fog line closer in. So we have about 4 and 1/2 ft of uh usable shoulders for bicycles [snorts] bicyclists if they um for those that that want to um go down go down second street here. So that's that's typically and that would be in each direction. So that's typically a you know sufficient width. Um what we wanted to consider when we when we were taking this approach was any possibility of restricting parking on these three blocks. So this is from um Forest to Eddie Streets. Um and that would provide a little bit of a safer um safer facility. And we did come to the uh or rather uh John Caven had brought up the topic at the September um operations committee meeting just for discussion and I my my what was relayed to me was that there was some interest as far as um looking at that as a possibility. Uh, one thing I just want to bring up as far as the county's practice and parking restrictions on our county system is that um, we typ we don't enact any any any changes to parking rules and regulations without city uh, consent on any on any change. So, um, our our position I think where we stand today is that we would um, you know, look for that direction from the the operations committee and the council on on that action. um if it's whatever direction it is, we'll we we can we can adapt as far as the the project um and see what uh see what other alternatives there are. Um so I can um if everyone's if everyone's good, I can I can return to the first part of the or the rest of the um presentation here. One moment. So again, um just revisiting some of the uh key issues is what I want to uh go over tonight. And again, that's the decision-making process on the trail going back to the corridor study um and through the design process. And then again, a review of the threelane section um from First Street to the hospital entrance as well um being being where we had the most the most questions here. Um and then just to reiterate um as well, vehicle speeds is uh you know a priority here. Um and then ensuring safe uh safe bicycle facilities as Commissioner Slavic noted. Um you know, County Road 42 is not really up to not really up to county standards in that respect. And then again, pavement maintenance where we're right at that time will be pursuing an overlay. Uh so with the trail location um during the 2024 corridor study, we had kind of taken a square one approach as far as how we wanted to build um you know trail here and our county county approach is to have trail facilities on both sides of the roadway. One is that it's easier to access. It limits crossings. Um that's just a safer safer approach. Um and um you know we we also of course recognize that you know there's a more of a recreational purpose here on on on 42 of the greenway than you typically see elsewhere within the county highway system. Um taking that square one approach we did have um you know we looked at the north side and un you know understood just from our evaluation but also with public involvement that there's significant concern as far as um residential impacts. There's the 14 houses there on the on the western end of town here. Um where you know trail would cross over the driveways. Um and that would restrict you know their the use of their yard even that you know that that that part of the yard that's in the right of way but also restrict use of their driveways as well because we coming further back. Our our facility would look at you know have you know five foot boulevard 10ft trail and then a twoft clear zone. So, we're coming, you know, 17 ft off the back of the curb. Um, and, you know, restricting, um, you know, that would restrict, you know, where where, uh, residents would be able to, you know, park and use their, uh, driveway to a pretty significant degree in this in this areas. Um, another consideration with the cemetery, um, even with the corridor study, we had reviewed, um, the potential of a left turn lane at at least First Street at that point in time. and um you know understood you know one that there would be you know tree impacts but also um between a left turn lane and a trail facility and kind of the hard the hard limits of of the cemetery um that you know both would not be feasible. So taking understanding that we we we landed at um again arriving at at a decision to just pursue trail on the south side here. Um again there's fewer impacts here. We're largely within the right of way. Um our our expectation is that as far as easements and temporary easements for construction, they'll be pretty pretty light. Um there's so in and there you know we have some trail there today and we in a lot of areas we'll be just be reconstructing over either trail or or sidewalk. Um again uh given given that it's on the on the south side there's better access given you know that's what the majority of residents are. Um and then with access to the m Mississippi River greenway um we're able to kind control the points of crossing a little more easily there to the to to to protected crossings with curb extensions, striping and lighting. Um so that's another another benefit, you know, whereas if you had had another trail on the north side, people may be more inclined just to cross whenever they come up to come up to Ninja Road here. You know, the drawback of course is that there wouldn't um you know, for those houses on the north side, there would be no easy direct access to a trail, but they were there would be um coming, you know, coming up on um near Riverdale with the Mississippi River Green River would be the closest point of access. Um, one other thing just to touch on as well, just, you know, from the county perspective is that, you know, we there there again we recognize there's a significant recreational use um in this area with the greenway um and with with city facilities, but we do take into consideration more um just a kind of a you know, a matter of access with residents as well and understanding that there's still, you know, transportation purpose to fulfill here as well as far as people, you know, walking to school, you walking to work. I know, you know, there's the hospital here. Um, so making sure that, you know, it's a kind of a more full picture of kind of the of the uh of of the objectives going on to meet here. Um, but still from a recreational standpoint, there is the um there is the the designated 10 mile and three mile trail here for the city. Um we do you know see this project as you know helping to complete that three-mile trail um with trail on the south side with g with protected crossings as well and then also giving access to the to the uh the 10mi trail and even um providing another alternative. I don't know if that's a eight mile trail that you or eight mile loop you can make on the south of this trail but that gives um you know residents another option there for from a recreational standpoint. Um so from here I just want to talk a little bit more about the three lane section and um kind of what the the reasoning was from the corridor study um through the design process here as far as um as far as adding in these turn lanes. So during the corridor study we did do a uh we did we we did evaluate um or or take accounts for uh traffic volumes uh throughout the full corridor generally doing those at the at the intersection. Um and this would be you know taken over the course of 24 hours but then have that broken into 15minute increments which gives us a very good view of basically how you know how how second street and ninja road function throughout the day. Um what we saw uh you know in this area was that there's significant um significant activity both for you know through traffic as well as left turns you know in particularly in the morning um at first street. So we you know able to tell that you know for you know you know 30 minute period throughout the day the or 30 minute period in the morning that left turns outn number you know through traffic. So there's a kind of a a real mix between where people are going and being able to pull that you know those movements apart with a turn lane um is is a safer practice here given given those high volumes um going into the hospital at First Street. at the hospital. Um you see a similar pattern, not quite the same number, not the quite the same volume of of vehicles, but you see, you know, in the morning, um, you know, a rush going to that main main entrance as well. Um, but even throughout the day, we still sign see a significant share of of the traffic going through this area, making left turns, and again, um, putting putting those onto in a turn lane is is easier for managing traffic, but also for for safety. Um, in an earlier discussion as well with the hospital, they they were interested in seeing a a dedicated left turn um or or having movements basically disagregated, which they are now with the B bypass lane. If we bring a left turn lane and have that through lane that um provides effectively the same thing, but um a little bit more safely. Um so last time I was here I provided a few kind of basic crosssections and um what we had done is made a little bit more of a uh presentable a little more um understandable um graphic here of what the roadway would look like with um you know post construction. So what I have here is kind of the current plan design. This is within the 30 mph zone and we have um we have three [clears throat] lanes at 10 1/2 ft um 5 1/2 ft shoulder um and we're what that leaves and that would require you know reconstruction of that north edge moving that curb out and um and performing a full recon you know full construction on on that north end. Where that puts us in relation to the trees is about 4 and 1/2 ft away from uh the center of those trees. So, it would get pretty close. Um, given the construction needs here with a a full construction, we're going down, you know, 3 and 1/2 ft. We would, you know, certainly be be running into to roots there and and causing, you know, significant disruption to the trees likely likely killing them um in most in most cases. Um and then showing the an alternative kind of that was discussed um at a at a staff level to see if you know if there's a option here for um looking at preserving the trees. Um this shows basically the same 30 mph area without a shoulder on that north side. So we have a a 12ft lane that [snorts] includes a gutter. There's no there's no 5ft shoulder there. this um you know we still need to reconstruct that curb and put it out but this um gives us a little bit more space about four more feet from from the trees and it's still I'd say at that point with it being a full construction it's still an open question as to whether we strike um any roots here cause any damage to to these trees um going out to the 45 mph zone this is the transition is right about at the the senior home um the the difference here is that we need to have at 45 miles an hour 12 foot lanes instead of 10 and a half foot. Um, keeping the keeping all the other, you know, dimensions of the roadway the same. This puts us even closer to the to the trees out there. Um, and again would would likely mean, you know, removing if um, you know, killing it the trees or uh if we choose not to remove. And then looking at um an option with no shoulder. If we have no shoulder on just one side, that doesn't do too too much here. So, this graphic shows what happens if we remove shoulder on both sides. And in this in this scenario, we would have a little over 11 ft from from the trees that um that provides more space. Uh, one thing I want to stress as far as um just from a design standpoint for the roadway and um and the shoulders um for for roadway operations, it does serve quite a few purposes. You know, as I noted before, we're going to have the shoulders um you know, have the shoulders wide enough to allow for bicycle use. you know, understanding the, you know, the recreational uses out here and bicyclists and that, you know, some some are going to continue to use the the shoulder if they're able and comfortable to. Um, and that's still generally safe. So, we without the shoulders, we lose that ability. Um, shoulders also provide some snow storage if you get a particularly heavier um, winter and uh, you know, and and snow piles up and you run out of space and this provides a little bit of a margin of error from that perspective. And then also with um emergency vehicles, having a little bit of extra width as far as um you know pulling off the rotor for other other other needs like if law enforcement needs to pull over a vehicle that provides a safer situation as well. Um again with the alternative um you know we don't we don't have that um you know it's a little little margin of error for um you know for snow snowfall operations and it's a more dangerous situation if people still decide to use the bice you know b you know bicycle on the roadway and not not the trail. And um what we believe is that in most cases here, we would still need to remove a majority of trees. Um so with that, um I know um we covered the the parking restrictions. We could take questions on those here in a in a moment. But, um, just looking kind of out for the rest of this year, um, one thing for our project schedule that's going to be needed in the not too distant future is, um, is is a joint powers agreement to proceed with, um, our project. The key thing here is rightway acquisition. So, our process for a wave of acquisition, we assume about a 12-month process that assumes kind of worst case scenarios again a condemnation, but it's what we build our and not not that we're, you know, we know that we're headed for that, but it's just something we build into our schedule to make sure that we're um prepared to to bid when we want to bid um construction. So, uh the design process itself is is fairly far along. Um we're at what we call 60% design and um we expect to complete that probably by the end of this summer and then um finish that acquisition of easements end of 26 start of 2027 and that would put us into uh position to bid construction and then complete the project in 2027. So um so again on these topics or others I'm happy to stand for any any questions or clarifications. >> Thank you Joel. Council, Council Member Pemble. >> Joe, can we let's I've got a couple three questions, but one of them is let's go back and talk about the speed. I know there was a speed study and I know the city's been out there checking speeds, too. So, can you just review that for the folks here? >> Yes. Um, Council Member Pebble, the uh the last speed study, formal speed study that was completed out here was in 1999 on the west end of the corridor in the east end closer downtown. It was done in 1973. So, it's been um quite a while. what a speed study, you know, is something that's done in conjunction with Mandot and that's basically an evaluation of of the uh the speed limit and um they'll evaluate and they'll recommend and set a speed limit based on what they see for volumes for design of the uh of of the facility. Um what we're um typically if if we were going to do a speed study and get Mandot involved, what we would do is at do it do it after a project um so that we can evaluate post construction conditions and and understand at that point what um what might be the correct speed limit here. Um I I I I'll note as far as with the corridor study in 2024, we had along with those traffic counts I noted, we had also reviewed um and and taken some readings of of speed coming into town um also closer into town as well. Uh the in broad terms um what we found was you know the what we see as kind of the top end I mean the top 15% of um travel speeds it's a little bit more than you want to see and that what that we have you know designed for um if you compare it to the you know the entirety of our system and other uh other other places and other cities it doesn't show up too much worse than um what uh than what we see elsewhere. Um understand, you know, especially maybe at the edge of town as you come around past Riverdale, that's that's that's probably, you know, 10 miles an hour more. I'd say that's the that's the biggest area of concern. >> Okay. Secondly, on that, can you be more clear about bypass lanes versus three lanes, >> uh please? I think there's a lot of question there by some of folks here. Um, and I might John had the foresight to bring up a map here. I'll see if I can zoom in on one of the um bypass lanes. So out there today, um, this one here is at Madison and um, Nininger. So throughout much of the quarter, of course, it's two lanes. Um there's several places here that um we have a bypass when we come to an intersection presuming allowing people to go past is if if a vehicle is left you know turning left that's generally um not an accepted design. This was put to put in in 1997. So what um the alternative well on the west and what we're proposing to do again is eliminate the the bypass at Madison and Monroe. What we're again going to be doing between First Street and the the main hospital entrance is basically, you know, push out the curb and on the outside that's going to be a continuous through lane. On the outside, the median is going to be the median is going to be, you know, a painted median, not a raised, and that's going to have the left turn lane. So that's um from a visibility standpoint for you know the intersections and and vehicles on the on intersecting streets that's going to be a safer condition and um and then also lowers you know rear end chances as well. So that's the that's the difference here is it's going to be yeah just a continuous outside lane um through you know about uh you know right about here where where you do see a bypass lane again that will that'll be incorporated into kind of that new design where it's just the through lane on the outside. But the point I wanted to get across is that instead of the lane of traffic switching around by bypass, you're going to have that center section for left turns or right turn lanes to make that work. >> Correct. >> U the next thing is the uh well the tree replacement. I think now that the cemetery is bought for that, they're just wanting to deal with you directly about what type of replacement tree those 36 replacement trees are going to be. They're very particular about that. They'll be getting a hold of you. The um chunk uh of the the trail piece once that's put in, that's not the homeowner's responsibility to take care of anymore. that's going to be rolled over to the parks department from what I had heard at our last meeting. Is that still correct? Um so for our trail facilities um the county practice it's a little diff different here because we have you know one stretch on on um on the south side here coming into town to the Mississippi River Greenway and that's designated as part of the Mississippi River Greenway and the county would uh today >> pro you know performs you know snow clearing on there and would continue in the future as well. um from this from the the greenway south to uh to River Street and I believe this is about a 43 or 400 foot stretch. Um that would be you know with our policies it would be the uh the cities that perform perform the snow clearing there. >> Right. And the last item I want to discuss is uh when John came to us and on your behalf at the operations committee meeting, it was like, okay, your predecessor did not indicate any parking restrictions at all downtown. And when we had our operations committee meeting and John says, "Well, they're looking to do both sides for this three blocks." And I'm going, "We can't do that." I I really personally, you know, yes, after thinking about some safety aspects, I know that probably the smarter thing is to do some, but I just want it be pointed out to folks that originally that was not part of the plan and that it was added in. Council member, that is Pamela, that is correct. Um it was something that once we kind of figured out an approach here for the the section from river down to downtown um and we knew we were going to have you know keep you know restripe to make those shoulders more bikable. Um that was a consideration that was brought up there. So you're you are correct um that was you know first brought up I would say August of last year um as a potential change here. >> Thank you. >> Thank you council member Pemble. Council member House. >> Thank you, Honor. Hi, John. Thank you so much for presenting again. I appreciate you. Pardon me. I appreciate for taking your time uh to come speak with us. And a few questions I have uh very similar to Council Member Crumble is with the parking restrictions on uh the downtown area on Second Street. Um with that being said, does the county when they make changes to these plans contact at home businesses um in regards to their concerns? because there are a few at home businesses uh that utilize that parking space ample in front of uh Second Street in Abiding Streets that would be taken away. Um it looks like from Forest Street downwards uh down towards um uh the main heart of downtown. And so I was wondering how that works um first. >> Okay. Um so with so for this specific issue we um we did not uh contact so um any local business I know that it was a concern and you know there was a general concern raised I think at that initial operations committee meeting um that's something that you know as far as [snorts] as far as our process we can we can consider again um you know my expectation with this process is that we'll you know, we're going to understand all the impacts here. Um, we need to maybe understand too as well the benefits of uh, you know, you know, the benefits for for bicycles and see if there's still the possibility for I think coexistence and still, you know, expecting a reasonably safe bicycle facility as well. So, there's maybe a closer look we can do there. Um, but as far as as far as, you know, coming to a coming to consensus here, you know, why you think we'd work with, you know, first with John, but also with the operations committee as far as hearing those concerns, but certainly we can discuss that with the business owners as well. Um, as far as specific ones, I I'll know we weren't aware of any. >> Perfect. Thank you. No, I appreciate that. Um, is there any way that the process and plan can move forward without um removing any parking uh spaces from Second Street uh from Forest Street onward down? >> Um >> um with the original proposed plan that was without restricting that. >> Yeah, I I um I think it's it's it's possible we need to have a a closer look. Again, there's um I wouldn't say there is a hard and fast rule as far as you know what works here, what doesn't. Um we could as far as you know understanding the the spacing and you know again we're moving in that moving in the tightening up the traveling to allow this we may find that there's enough you know enough space there. Um I know just from my own experience you know you know you know looking at very various points of the day it's not and there's use but not heavy use. So that might make it a little bit easier for bicyclists as well. So that um again um you know we you know we'll we'll do a little bit more work to come to a recommendation but again the county is not going to um you know unilarly act on this. It's not our not our practice. >> Perfect. Thank you. And then I just wanted to confirm um with the tree removal, how many trees will be removed? And then um if the county has a specific um would it be placed along that boulevard area back behind the fencing or would it be more towards the cemeter inside of the cemetery for them? >> So council member house the uh the number of trees is 23. Um there are the all the the all the hackberry trees um along that line. Um so those you know we would you know if if we remove them we would look at replanting within the boulevard. Um you know there's a few um get back to the presentation here in those graphics but you'll see that um and this is this is kind of you know the further east on the in in that section you know we still have the 4 and 1/2 ft here or 4.7 you know that's to the diameter of the trees. there's about another five or so feet back to the fence. Um, we would look to plant you, you know, plant trees in there. Um, as far as that process and selecting a tree, um, you know, we would I'd cooperate with, you know, John and staff and get get input on kind of a, you know, you know, desired species and we'll, um, um, you know, have have, you know, have the cemetery way in here. the from the county perspective, the the need here given that it's fairly close to the the roadway is um restricting the you know the species is with respect to diameter. So typically what we um >> would want in a situation like this is not much more than 5 in and again that's that that's just mainly for you know you know a hazard for roadway traffic as far as a strike. you know, 18 inches is, you know, I didn't didn't mention it earlier, but earlier, but of course, that's a that's a pretty serious thing to strike at even 30 miles an hour. So, we'll want something that um even though there's no record of crashes out here with the trees, um something that we want to um address now and make sure it's a safe design. >> Perfect. Thank you. I appreciate your time. Um and I appreciate your commitment to this project because I know it's been a lot to go through. So, I really do. Um but yeah, I would app uh um move forward with the project if there is parking still allowable on that second street. I know that's been a big thing for a lot of our residents. Thank you. >> Thank you, Council Member House. Council member Beck. >> Hi, Joe. Um was the first time this was brought to like a public open house for opinion in December or was there a previous open house before that? Um member back the there there were two um open houses in the um with the corridor study January and April of 2024. Um you know I understand what went on there that that was done under the previous uh Bryce the previous project manager. Um so at that point in time we had some fairly concrete ideas of what we wanted to do. the design process hasn't hadn't begun. But as far as, you know, pedestrian needs, you know, opportunities for, you know, helping to reduce speeds, um, those those things were addressed. We didn't roll out a, you know, a, you know, half halfway completed design like we did back in December, though. >> Okay. And then on the tree topic, I understand the safety concerns of removing 23 trees. I'm not going to argue that point. Um I'm still concerned on why the city is going to be paying 15% to remove the trees on your road project. >> Um correct. So the the um the basis for that cost share in this in this situation it's it's part of um falls under the category basically modernization. So the the removal of trees is made necessary by you know implementing the [clears throat] implementing the left turn lanes constructing those while um keeping the keeping the other uh dimensions of the roadway the same. Um so anything related to that work is 15%. That's that's a necessity um to to make that happen. Um what I'll what I can say as far as tree removals um you know what I've seen on current and recent projects for for tree removal cost is about $300 to $350 per tree. Um and that's you know it's for a mature tree. So if um uh you know for for 23 trees we're looking at the neighborhood of $8,000 total for just tree removal. 15% of that I think is something like $1,200. So as far as you know getting it down isolating just the the tree removal cost it's not not huge. Um the uh replanting it falls under kind falls under an aesthetic uh our aesthetics policy which is is 50/50 and um you know tree plantings you know these days go for 7 to 800 depending on on the size and species. >> Okay. Because I know Dan mentioned that last time you gave the presentation on the 50/50 as well. So that was my next question and that's the still the explanation is it's aesthetics. >> Correct. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Thank you council member Vic. Council member Vera. >> Thank you your honor. Thank you for being here again tonight. Thank you for answering questions. Thank you Commissioner Slav. Um there's been a lot of back and forth on this. There's been a lot of concerned neighbors and which I think wasn't so sure point that if there's any that otherwise um from other pedestrian all work on board the next steps afterwards. for addressing what we would do in this case. See, you know, how you know how the right turn there that something that that process kind of make their own conclusion. Sometimes it's you conceivably have so approach um for sort of fire and law enforcement. um you know some development just outside of town in in township where um there may be some changes to the to the intersection out there at Lock Boulevard and there might be some opportunities to um you know to to to enact some more speed control design you know design elements out there. So, I would I would um I would say we'd want to kind of exhaust those possibilities first um and then look at a look at a speed study probably near the end of our process. >> Thank you, Council Member Vir, Council Member Lawrence. >> Thank you, your honor. Uh Joe and uh Commissioner, thank you for what you guys do for our um trail system and everything. Again, my concerns I brought it up last time. Again, my concern is from first into downtown. I just can't fathom we spend millions of dollars to get people on the Mississippi Greenway. Why are we trying to push people onto Second Street? Um I've lived here 40 plus years my entire life. And I've probably never seen zero people parked on Second Street from Forest into downtown. And I think it just it's going to be a huge hardship to people to say, "Hey, you can no longer park here." especially the people on the north side of Second Street because there is no parking for them on their on their properties, you know, it just it's a it's a cliff. It goes down into Lake Rebecca. So, um I just I I don't understand why they're trying to push like yes, I get it all the way to first. Everything you're doing to first, 100% on board. From first into downtown, it just doesn't make any sense. like you could have first kind of start your to get people onto the greenway to go, you know, west in, you know, onto the greenway, whatever, get into downtown. Um I, you know, and obviously I'm picking out of thin air, but I don't know if I've ever seen a bicyclist on Second Street because it is already so narrow to begin with. You know, the sidewalks there, but again, bicyclists don't like to ride ride on sidewalks because bicyclists belong on streets. Um, but again, I just I don't understand. So, I just again wanted to put it out there just so everybody heard. Thank you. >> Thank you, Council Member Lawrence. >> Have a reply to or No. >> Oh, sorry. Um yeah, council member uh Lawrence as far as you know the the approach here even um you know even if we were to construct trail you know right up you know our sidewalk or trail right up against the curb on the on the on the south side there. Um what that what that requires is basically you know regrading you know yards um you know on the hillside pretty far back and you know from um you know from from that trail. So we're the impact if we went down that path for designing would be you know complete regrades of you know some people's yards. Um the alternative is retaining walls which um that's a cost that you know escal typically tends to escalate really quickly if um we put in a few hundred feet of of retaining wall. Um and then on top of that there's driveways just having a look through there. There's um you know a few driveways that you know would have to get regraded to where they wouldn't you know quite possibly wouldn't be usable. Um there's another one in, you know, a little bit closer into downtown where it's a short driveway that might not be be usable as far as space to park. So, um you know, from an engineering standpoint, um you know, you're out of good options and then the bad options are really expensive or, you know, in this case, probably too impactful to to um you know, to pursue to pursue a trail on that south side. Um so that that that um that's kind of where we're left with with this. And again um you know given that it's not a a a broader construction um at uh at that area. The you know the approach is you know to to to um you know have that as that as a you know shoulder facility. So um it's I think it's just a it doesn't fit with the scale of the project. It's um just too impactful. And I think as far as properties, property owners, it would be too much to to bear in that instance. >> Yeah. And I'm not saying to put a trail there. It's not wide enough. Again, it would impact way too many people. I'm just saying they're wasting money, resources, whatever, for the county, for the city, whoever it is to even do anything on that road from first to downtown because then you're hardship for no parking on that road. the hardship of, you know, and if first there first you can get in get into the neighborhoods over there um to get yourself into downtown or like I said, you have a beautiful greenway. Me and my family use it all the time. People should use the greenway to get into downtown, get out of downtown, whatever. That that that's my point. I'm not saying put in a That would be ridiculous in my in my opinion, but that's what I'm trying to get at. Thank you. >> Thank you, Council Member Lawrence. Well, Joe, Commissioner, thank you again for being, you know, here two times presenting, being mindful and making the minimal changes that you have. I think you've listened to what our concerns were. But I do want to give there are people here in the audience that I told them that after your update, after our discussion, if they have any additional questions, I'd like for them to be able to speak at this time. >> Okay. Please step to the podium and state your name and your address. Thank you. >> She's got >> Can I just make a quick comment, Mayor? Yes. Thank you for that. That's kind of what the three of us were thinking, too. So, yeah. >> My name is uh John Phelps. I I live at 301 uh 2nd Street uh West. It's uh right in the three areas where they were talking about taking out the parking and uh I know the parking is real important to the people down at the you know downtown the business and whatnot. A lot of uh cars are down there. the car shows. We sit on the deck and we'll watch uh cars come in and uh when they go to leave car show, we'll say, "What do you think it's going to be? 20 20 seconds, a minute?" Usually, we we bet on it. There's seldom two minutes go by before it's filled up. It's real common to have the whole street filled up. A lot of people that that park their cars there regularly that don't have driveways actually pull their cars around and in back and let other people park during those times when when that's uh you know it's with safety there there's a lot of stuff there but when people are parking I don't see the the problems of the the traffic. People don't go by there fast. We don't have a lot of accidents. Parking is premium and it's it's really needed and is important when it comes to safety in the area. When there's nobody parked on that side of the street and it's it's done, people do drive a little bit fast and we see a lot of accidents. My granddaughter when she comes over says, "We're not having spaghetti again, are we?" Because it's a known thing that when we have spaghetti, there's a bang. We go out, we look at the thing, we look at the cameras, see all the the cars smashed up. Airbags have saved lives there. We have seen some terrible accidents at that intersection because people are driving fast and the airbags save lives. If if you put a bike trail there and there's a lot of bikes down there, the bikes don't have airbags. I don't want to see that happen. So, I'd like to see the parking stay. It's needed a lot. And uh more bikes there. I have them go down by the river some other way, but uh that could could be potentially bad from the accidents I've seen. So, otherwise, I don't have anything more for that. >> Thank you for your comments. Hi, my name is John Machesca. I live at 401 Second Street West Hastings. Um, fifth generation in the city. Um, my concern is here today is a lot of this was not told a couple months ago when we went uh to the YMCA and had this discussion and I asked uh a lot of people there. I said this whole thing safety and I said how many accidents have happened? How many people have been hurt? and they could not provide the data. I live on Second Street. I love the historic part of it. Go around. You know, why are we taking the old historic and putting a bike path down a huge steep hill? You know, it's I I just want to plead my case to you guys that it's just it's I think it's dangerous. And you guys have this beautiful path that goes down by the dam that attracts everyone. And uh you know I don't want to say it's going to make our neighborhood ugly by any means, but um you know I just I just feel like it's not going to stop there. It's going to keep going and then they're going to take my boulevard and you know at where do you draw the line? You know so um I'd like to pass my house on to my kid one day and keep it the way it's been since 1855. So, you know, I appreciate you guys, councilmen, council women, mayor, you know, if you guys could respect the people that live right there. And um, you know, we need the parking. I have a small lot. It's one of the oldest houses in Hastings, but I need that parking for when family comes and they come to Hastings and like, "Wow, I love this neighborhood. I love the downtown." Like, oh yeah, you got to park 10 blocks away, you know? So, um, just for everyone that respects that, I thank you guys for thinking of us and, uh, that's all I just wanted to say. So, thank you, mayor. Thank you, council men and women. So, >> thank you for your comments, John. >> Yes, >> Mayor Fpender, council members. Um, just just one thing I want to clarify with respect to the design. And I think um there is and maybe again go back to the the Google Google Maps here as our proposed design and our um and what we're planning for for trail um from the edge of town or actually back up to Lock Boulevard. Um and it's going to be continuous trail down to River Street. Um what we're proposing to do once we're at River Street since there's not not adequate space for for for constructing a trail is we're going to have we're going to restripe with our Milanova. What that's going to do is have allow for you know use of bicycles on that shoulder for use of bicycles. So what won't be happening here is any change for for trail behind the curb but it's just going to be a shoulder uh at at the curb. The curbs themselves from River Street down to 60 won't won't be changing. So, as far as uh you know, property impacts, you're not going to you're not going to see that with this project. Um there are a couple of changes um with with the uh the pedestrian crossings at at Ashland Eddie and Spring here um where we're going to be bringing out the curb to provide a shorter pedestrian crossing, but that won't come back in into yards. So, that's that's what we're looking at here. Um again the um kind of one of one of the things again that that was issue was just the potential of um of restricting parking in this stretch from forest to the east to to make that a little bit safer for those bicyclists in the shoulders. But again that's still an open question to to to be resolved here with the city and county. [clears throat] >> My name is Fred Wland. I live at the Pringle House, 413 Second Street West. And uh I've got multiple issues that I've found with this. And I I uh number one is the parking because the downtown business historical area really needs to be combined and and joined with the residential on Second Street. So you have more of a comprehensive area that shows the history of Hastings, not just the businesses, but the residences as well. And for that, we need to have parking. There's a walking tour that's been in existence for the last what 50 years. And so where do people park when they go on the walking tour? You're going to want to park by the houses or downtown. or maybe you're going to, you know, make a loop and have lunch and come back through. Um, I have a business out of my home which has been registered with the city since probably 2013 14 and so people park on Second Street, bring their clock into my house. I do the repair work and when they come to pick up, they have to load up. It's a It's the safest way to come and enter my business is is is off of Second Street. Um most of my customers are elderly, so they're 50 years old up to 90 near Dust. Um, it's it's going to be far safer them safer for them to park on the south side of Second than to have to try to cross Second Street because it does get pretty busy with traffic. And with traffic, let's talk about the fire department. That's a frequent flyer route for them guys to run up to the hospital and and for um transports from the hospital to other areas. um [cough and clears throat] bike path. I think you know it it would become a duplication of what we already have down by the river corridor and you know in in in economic times as we have where you know we need to be concerned about money I I think we need to look at what we're spending. Um, the way this was presented to me, my understanding from that December meeting at the YMCA is that in my area this was just going to be mill and overlay. There was going to be no change in parking. no bike path was discussed and then this suddenly comes up now which you know I I I I I think either there's a communication problem or there's a hidden agenda going on. So with that I would say I wouldn't support this the way it is. If you wanted to break it into segments and say support the western segment and maybe revisit something on the eastern side and get these details worked out, that might be a more viable suggestion, I think, at this time because I think everybody does have concerns related to the width of the street and the parking. Thank you. >> Thank you, Fred. Hi everybody. My name is Jenny Gustoson and I live at 1328 Lincoln Lane. Um, I feel I have a lot of very similar viewpoints to um, what was already brought up, but I just want to reiterate a few other things. Um, number one is we're going past the hospital. So, we've got two entrances to Alina Health and then another entrance that will go to the clinic. So, those are going to be areas where you've got people coming and going. And I just have the concern about safety for our pedestrians, bikers, people that will be going in and out of those um areas. Are they going to respect the trail that would be very very busy going past a line of health? Um also be aware we have ambulances that will be going up and down Niner. So, with increased pedestrians, um, I just want to make sure safety is a key factor for us in planning for this. Um, also, it just kind of seems weird when Lisa Lifeeld was asking questions the first time you were here, she phrased it really, really appropriately. she said. So, we're going past the hospital and we've got this 10-ft wide bike path and then we get to um River Street does it and then we cross over at that site and then we get to the other side of street and it's going to be a sidewalk. Is that still what it's going to be? A sidewalk going from that location to downtown. >> So, we're not going to widen it. It's going to be a the width of a sidewalk still. >> Correct. The sidewalk on the north side will still be there. There's, you know, part of the design right now is adding a protected crossing just a little to the west of Grove Street. >> Okay. So, we're not widening the sidewalk. It's just going to be a sidewalk still. >> Okay. So that just it seems kind of weird. But also the location of where we're going to have people cross Ninger. It's just a little alarming because you're going to be coming up and over a hill and there's going to be the the cross over Ninger. But if you come from the other direction, there's going to be that tight curve. Once again, I'm just concerned about safety. Like we don't want anybody to get injured or hurt or run over. Um, but it's just kind of alarming that you've got those two um, changes to the road there that I think we definitely need to consider for safety. Last but not least, um, I would just like to ask what are we doing about safety at the intersection of would that be Spring Street, Lock & Dam Road, and Nininger. So that's the road that would take you down to Lock and Dam. Um, that's a very busy intersection already. Um, I think many of us can attest to how dangerous it already is, especially at popular events such as Rivertown Days or other times when we have a lot of traffic and people downtown. Um, we have tourists that come to town, they want to check out the lock and dam. We have trucks pulling boats that want to be able to access the boat ramp. What are we going to do to make sure that um potentially increased pedestrians, bikers are going to be safe in that area in addition to the bikers that are already on that bike path by the confluence um in combination with the road traffic, um big rigs, i.e. the Boers that are wanting to launch at the boat launch. I had heard once upon a time that there was the potential of the curb being kicked out, but are people still going to be able to turn into the lock and dam road? If I can answer that, um we with with this project, she's correct. We're going to look at a a curve extension there at um at Spring Street. Um just again, this the purpose is to shorten that crossing distance as you're crossing. Second Street. Um something we can evaluate is, you know, to to your point is um is making sure that that that design is still um you know, still um able to accommodate turning movements, you know, for specific vehicles and assuming trailers as well. So that's that's something we're able to uh to evaluate in our design. If um believe it should still be adequate. If we find a you know find a a concern there though, we can um refine our design as far as um being able to turn movements and making sure there's enough room there. So that's something we can take into consideration. >> Okay. Um and then another question. Uh there's the area at Madison where eastbound traffic on Nininger currently has the capability to take a right-hand turn into Madison because there's a turn lane. Will that turn lane stay or is that one going to be removed? >> So the current design um does have that that one being removed at Madison. Um part of the part of that um approach is again to to narrow the roadway and you know to to help control speeds for design perspective. What we looked at um when we took traffic counts was that um throughout the day as far as the you know the volume of traffic and the volume of turns there it was it was small. It was um you know it's you know you know a couple an hour or thereabouts. So that's typically not um not enough to warrant a a right turn lane. I mean, our decision is that the, you know, from a safety perspective is that it's there's likely more benefit there to to look at a slower design than provide a than providing that right turn lane where which um general risk and there hasn't been a real record of crashes there as well, just from our early analysis of crashes. So the concern for myself and my neighbors in that area is if traffic traffic is going to be going at 45 miles an hour on that road, it's kind of nice for us to be able to utilize that turn lane that currently is there. So I guess our ask would be if the speed is not going to be reduced from a safety perspective, we would definitely like to have that turn lane still there. Um, and I guess what is your magic number when you say low volume of turns like if if we're focused on development and whatnot like what at what point would you say we can keep it in the plan? Um given and I apologize I don't have the specific number to that you know to that intersection on on me but um what I would expect given that you know you have have that neighborhood um well established is that we wouldn't see um any there's not a prospect of an expansion is that we wouldn't see higher volumes in the future. That's some, you know, something I can take another look at, but from our our first look at things we don't think that's going to likely change in the future. >> And I guess I would just like to reiterate what Tim Lawrence had said. We've invested a lot of money into the Greenway Trail. I think we should continue to and maybe it would be wiser for us to utilize the Greenway Trail versus this change that we're we've been presented with. Thank you. >> Thank you, Jenny. >> Anyone else wish to speak to the council? Okay, council. Any other discuss? >> Can I wrap up? >> Commissioner. Yes. >> Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair. Uh uh Madame Mayor, I guess. Um, so I just a couple things just to wrap up with that. I said I I would agree with many of the conversations that have been been said throughout all of this part in here. Um, in that, you know, just one to continue with the clarification that river to downtown doesn't change the road. The it it changes as proposed the parking, but the road does not, you know, it it's a matter of striping and and that is at the discretion of the city, the city council. you have that discretion. Many of these things here, it is a county road and ultimately uh if you choose to partner on this on here, it's building a road up to county standards. That being said, the parking is one of those things that has a local control for discretion on that part in there. So, if some of your conversation that you choose to enter into a joint powers agreement and move this this project forward, um that is at your at your discretion. If you say that you could we could frankly you could go and and stripe the road exactly how it is with the current lanes as they are have parking on all sides and do everything up to that point as it is. And I think that the reason why there is a uh 8ft pave trail from uh frankly river to the west is partially because that's where your speeds are higher than 30 m an hour. When you are under 30, you think of a residential street. That's when you can have your 5-ft sidewalk. But uh because you can go on the shoulder, you can go down the road. You can also go and and walk and have to step off the boulevard. But when you get into higher speeds, which county roads are higher speeds, you need to be able to be able to push that uh baby in a stroller or walk that dog and also have somebody go the other direction. And you can't do that on a sidewalk. And that is if you look at where the speeds are 45 versus where they become 30, that is kind of that that is the reason why you see a trail in that part there. And I fully agree with council member Lawrence. I think I said this when the discussion was happening in the first place that uh uh we have an amazing 10mi loop, eight miles of it are county greenway. Uh the county has put the investment into uh eight of that 10 miles in that part in there. The county maintains both the Vermillion River Greenway and the Mississippi River Greenway. And it's about using as many people to go and do that part in there. And that's the reason why the uh um bumpouts are kind of in the middle of uh Ninja Road uh to [clears throat] be able to connect the trail on the south side to the river greenway. And I think that continuing to drive that is really where the focus should be on that part in there. Frankly, if I as a biker, as somebody who grew up only a couple blocks away from uh uh Second Street, I can tell you that um if I was going to go down if I was going to go downtown and I I'm not going to go down busy Second Street, I'm going to go down Third Street if I want to where there's not as much traffic. And I think that that's where those who who know and want to get to downtown from the top of the hill, they're going to use one of the alternative uh roads in there that has less traffic, they're not going to So, so those who are in that part in there, I really believe continuing to drive to the uh Mississippi River Greenway is the right approach in there. And we need to make sure that people are crossing that road as safe as possible. So I guess my point on this is just uh to reiterate to the public that river to the east doesn't actually change but for markings if that is the wishes of the uh council and I think parts of that can continue to go on there but uh you do have your discretion as your joint powers agreement to go and say operations was only three of the seven of you and as the seven of you you collectively would like to to go and maintain parking for whatever reasons you do have that right. So, uh, it's certainly in your hands, but I wanted to at least do some clarification and pass it back to you. >> Thank you, Commissioner. Thank you, Commissioner. >> Commissioner House or Commissioner House, >> Council Member House. >> Thank you. Thank you so much for clarifying that. I really appreciate your time with um that just because I think that clears up a lot for us here as well. So, thank you. >> Any other discussion? Council, >> council member Verich. Nothing. I'm going out on a limb here. Mayor, what if I made a motion to go ahead and adopt the corridor improvements, but take out the parking restriction conversation so that that can be taken up by operations committee and full council, a bigger discussion going forward. And I'm really thankful to the neighbors and the homeowners that were here tonight. And frankly, I'd want to hear more from them, too. Is it possible that we could move forward? Would that be a a good compromise for homeowners, for the council, and for the county as well? >> Well, we can follow your motion if someone >> Let's have a vote. >> Okay. >> I just want to clarify that would remove no parking um throughout Second Street. Correct. On uh from Forest Down. Thank you. >> Okay. >> That would be my There is a motion on the table. Council member Beck seconds that motion. No discussion. Council, council member Lawrence. So >> just to clarify, no restrictions on Second Street for parking is what we're saying. >> We can make those decisions. >> Yeah, that's what But that's what you're trying to say. >> TBD. >> When you say no, no, it just gets >> Sorry, I didn't mean to do a a double negative there. What I'm saying is that I want that to be a conversation that the council has and frankly I really want to hear from council member Lyfeld. She was >> felt really really strongly about this and I'd really like her opinion as well. That would give us a chance to talk to some more homeowners, make sure that we are honoring their wishes in the best way that we can, but also I think striking a good compromise, thanking the county for everything that they've put into this years of work, millions of dollars, and continuing the parts of the project that I think everybody up here is incredibly supportive of. Thank you, Council Member Veroff. There is a first and second. All those in favor of that motion state by saying I. >> I. Opposed to that motion, state by saying nay. And that motion prevails. Thank you, Commissioner. And thank you, Joe, again. All right. Under community development, we have a resolution order to demolition and remove hazardous building the Hastings Crearyy site at 1701 Vermillion Street. And for this item, we will have a presentation by our city attorney, Cynthia Cynthia Kirchoff. Welcome, Cynthia. Thank you, Mayor Councel. So, this this matter is relating to the the crearyy site. Um, the the request here is for the council to take action on declaring it or determining that's a hazardous building. And the reason I'm here is because there's legal requirements for doing that. Otherwise, John would do the presentation. [laughter] >> I am. >> I don't think so. So, this property is located at 1701 Vermillion Street. Before I get into the facts of the case, I just want to give you a very brief overview of um the legal requirements for declaring a hazardous building. The city council has the authority to declare a building a hazardous building, and you're given that authority under um chapter 463 of state Minnesota statutes. There's a process that the city council has to follow in order to declare a building hazardous. One of the first things that we have to do, and that's in your packet, is a memo from the building official saying the building has problems. So, it's it's um hazardous. it's um a public safety issue and they want the council to take action on um having either the property owner fix it or demolish it. The next step is for the council to adopt the order. That's required by state law and there there's a draft order in your packet. Once the order has been approved by the council, it's served on the property owner. That's required by state law. they have 20 days to respond to that. They can um and I'll get into this a little bit later, but if they don't respond, and some property owners don't respond, then there's a uh a faster track for um asking a judge to allow the city to demolish the building or fix it and then assess the costs of that work against the property. So, the city would get paid back that way. Just a few facts on this property. It's a um you you know more than way more than I do on this. I I just uh became introduced to this a couple weeks ago. Uh it's owned by um 3D LLC. It's a vacant commercial building. Um the the CO was revoked on the property in uh 2023 and following that a fire took place on the property. And I do have some fabulous pictures in my presentation. I didn't take them, but it just showing the the tremendous fire that that um happened on the property. The city and the property owner and the property owner's attorney have communicated um about the cleanup on this property for probably a couple of years um since the fire happened. Um asking going back and forth trying to determine how the property was going to be cleaned up and the timing for that. Um the staff inspected the interior of the property in uh November of last year and I have some pictures showing what the interior looks like. Here's a couple of um screenshots of a video from YouTube from [clears throat] excuse me channel 4 of the fire. You can see the the fire trucks putting out the fire on the top picture and the the bottom picture is a a shot of the top or the roof of the building that's no longer there. I found some fascinating pictures on Dakota County GIS. This is an aerial picture from 2023 and you can see there's a roof on the building. Uh and then in 2025 you can see there's damage from the fire. I just thought that was a really great great picture and to show you what the difference is because obviously we can't get a picture of the roof of the building. So, uh, in that during that November 5th inspection, the staff took pictures of the interior and as you can see, the the roof of the building is collapsing and there's equipment um and debris inside the building. Here's another picture of uh the roof collapsing. Just thought those were really good pictures to show show the council and the public as to what the building looks like. So the resolution and order that's in your packet, the p purpose of that is to lay out findings that the council is making findings that the pro the building is hazardous that the property owner has not made no efforts to clean it up. Um the property the building on the property is not secured and therefore [snorts] the building is is hazardous mostly because of the fire. So, in that order, there is a a [clears throat] deadline that the property owner has to clean up the property. That means they demolish the building and remove the building that's been demolished. And the deadline that's proposed in that order is a June 15th of uh 2026. As I mentioned earlier in my presentation, the order after it's if it's approved by the council tonight, it has to be served on the property owner. they under state law have the ability to answer that um that order. If they don't answer within 20 days, then um what happens is um the city can ask a judge um to declare them in default and then ask the judge to allow the city to remove the building and then assess the costs. But that that can't be done till the end of the period that they have to clean up the property. If the property owner does answer the u the order files an answer within 20 days and it's a contested case, it's like a civil lawsuit. So the requested action tonight is a motion to approve the resolution and order that's in the packet authorizing or ordering the property to demolish and remove the hazardous building from the property. And I'm happy to answer any questions. >> Thank you, counselor. Any questions? Council. Yes. No. Okay. Okay. Council member Pemble. >> Thank you, Madame Mayor. I'd like to move that resolation resolution move forward in this instance having so many folks since the fire come and complain that why isn't something being done. It's like the property owners ignored and did not follow through with the concerns that needed to be evaluated. I know that there's issues about insurance and all those other things and who did what and whatever, but to not get any real step moving forward to see a resolution to getting this taken care of before we get to this point. We have to move ahead with this. And I fully understand what sir you said at the beginning of the meeting about contesting the order, but I think we as a city and elected members to the council here shall and must move ahead with this resolution. Thank you. >> Thank you for the motion. Council member Pemble and Council Member House. >> Thank you. I'd like to second that. And I'd also like to ask a quick question to um our attorney uh as well. So, can you go into a little bit of depth on how often we have reached out about this property to have um uh cleanup completed and demolition completed? Can you go on a little bit of depth with that, please? >> Mayor, um would I be able to defer that question to staff? You may. Council member House, uh, over the two and a half years since the fire has occurred, I have been at least in monthly contact with the owner's attorney, uh, Mr. Ludigin, on this one. Uh, he's been good to work with. However, the insurance company has made a delay in things and we are all seeking this to be cleaned up. So, we have had numerous conversations with the applicants or with the owner's attorney on this one. Thank you so much and I'm sorry to put you on the spot there. Thank you. >> Thank you, John. Thank you, Council Member House. Council member Verv, >> a comment, your honor. Is that okay? >> You may. >> Thank you. Thank you, Council Member P. Thank you, Council Member House. I completely agree. I appreciate you coming here tonight, sir. I appreciate the position that you're put in by being hired as legal counsel for this, but this has been years of the community being um frankly at risk from the environmental potential hazards of this, the the eyesore, the the the homeowners that live around there. Just there's so many so many issues to this. I just this has to get done sooner than later. And while I want to play nice in the sandbox, um, we've got to move forward on this. This has to be cleaned up and it was due yesterday. Thank you, Council Member Verich. >> With that, there is a motion and a second. No other discussion. All those in favor of the motion, state by saying I. >> I. Opposed to that motion, state by saying nay. And that motion prevails. Thank you, counselor. Council, any announcements? Okay, I do have a few. This weekend was school resource officer appreciation day. Thank you to our officers Freeman and Domer. We greatly appreciate their care, [clears throat] guidance, and service for our students. The Hastings Downtown Business Association is hosting its annual Frozen Mulligan where you can play a ninehole mini golf course in downtown businesses this Saturday, February 21st. Dakota County Historical Society and Building Remembrance for Reconciliation will host an update and a Q&A on a Hastings Black Heritage Trail at 5:30 p.m. Tuesday, February 24th at the Tilden Community Center. 2026 Community Investment Fund applications are now being accepted. First deadline is March 2nd. Happy birthday in Costa Rica to council member Lifel tomorrow. Um public safety advisory commission meeting Thursday, February 19th, 6:30 p.m. Monday, February 23rd, 700 p.m. administrative committee and 700 p.m. Planning Commission meeting. Tuesday, February 24th, 5:30 public safety committee meeting. Wednesday, February 25th, 7 PM, Parks and Recreation Commission. Monday, March 2nd, 5:30 p.m. Council, we do have a workshop with a 700 pm regular city council meeting. With that, I would ask for an adjournment. Council member Premble and Council Member Lawrence. No discussion. All those in favor of the motion state by saying I. I. Opposed to that motion state by saying nay. We are a journey.