e e I had I'll call order the Tuesday October 22nd regular Mee stand for the pledge I pledge aliance 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 right need a motion and second for the the agenda sorry I make the motion okay I'll second M discussion we had an item s yes sorry um mayor members of council we have item s that needs to be added I did send that out in the um in an email about hour or two ago is related to well number four rehab um approval of that weab work to be done and then can we move item F out of consent and just have a separate vote on it please okay item f is out um and I would like either for p to go in front of l or l to go after P leave that up to um I would recommend maybe L after P does that work works for me okay okay with those amendments any other changes all those in favor say I I all those opposed Say No Agenda pass 5 to zero and we have consent me a motion a second a motion a second discussion go ahead uh I have a couple Item B um payment for claims we have a $57,000 is Bill from CS mccrossen uh and I guess my question is not so much what is that about but is there any kind of timeline on when that project closes out I um C fashion I believe the last that's one of the last payments so it was related to some Landscaping work that we needed to have done and verified um um we had some troubles back and forth with them and arguments back and forth about completing that landscape work um and they finally did agree to do it without charging us extra dollars so um that was a win uh but that is basically the last bit of the work the rest of the dollars are left remaining on the project only retainage which is our $ 1% dollars that we hold back to make sure the project gets completed so um we would anticipate those to be early next year or early next spring at the latest okay this is like the last bits of projects that we had to make sure they got all complet which is like the landscaping and so on and so forth it is essentially mostly done yeah well it seems like it's been open a couple of years now yeah some point we ought to shut the door on it um we do hold dollars back for landscaping things only because we have a 2-year window on those and we want to make sure they stick um if something does go wrong or something goes bad then we have a new two-year window open so that's what leaves some dollars left over and we have to eventually just say when are we going to zoom liability for the rest of the items on that and when do we I I assume we've already done this but the Landscaping required versus what they did yep it's already been checked off through St Tech okay so one of their items that they do is they have a landscape architect or individual on their team and go through each one and make sure that every single circle on the thing is there which I do not want that job but thank you y uh I also had a question on item C that Rel to the Three Rivers land purchase and I'm wondering if we have any indication on how and when these properties will be used um so the there's two properties on approval tonight one of them is on the north side of um town and that will be used utilized for the West Mississippi Regional Trail from what I my understanding is um the other property on the south side of town which will be used for the Diamond Lake Trail um long term I don't know exactly when that process will begin I think think it takes um years to get enough Regional significance in order for them to put the project forward but um I believe the land will turn back to any of the other properties that we have in town that have been purchased by the rivers it'll go back to Natural um grasslands or n natural landscaping and tell that project comes of reasonal significance so I'm not sure when that timeline is I'd have to defer to three rsion under to answer that question okay um the reason I I'm asking it is that is that we are invested in these properties as well we are permanently giving up about $155,000 a year of tax revenue just on these two properties and this there's been a series of these and I I I'll just say I don't feel like we're um uh communicated with well on what the timeline and the plans are for these things and uh so we're not an uninterested party um and I just want us to well I don't know I guess that's my point is that we are investing this in in this in the way of lost revenue and uh hopefully you know it does ultimately benefit the community I have one other item H relates to um Zachary Villa's date and letter of credit release and it does take that letter of credit down to zero and but the narrative says that there there are still some final landscape item landscape items that need to be completed and I'm wondering what our Assurance is that or how we assure that those things get done when we're not holding anything yeah um I'm unfortunately Jason is not here to answer the question so I'm going to do my best here but I believe the landscape items that are left over are so minute in um magnitude that it doesn't make sense to hold on$ at this point we were holding on to dollars in the Lance and the L of credit for um a street light that hadn't been done and some fire hydr work I think that needed to be done I think or something like that but I'll refer to Mar there was two street lights that were outstanding that are in place now and there was some uh drainage swell work and some seeding of the pond the drainage swell work has been completed um the HOA had a hand in who was dealing with that and it was done to their satisfaction and the the uh storm water Pond has been seeded in the last few weeks so all the all the work on that project is actually complete okay good thank you that's all I have anybody else okay we have a motion at second all those in favor of consent say I I all those opposed say no consent carries 5 to zero open Forum do we have anybody mayor we have item F remove from all right item have I need a motion a second I'm a motion I'll second Travis any discussion thank you sir all in favor say I I I I'll oppos say no motion carries 5 to zero four did sorry all right four to zero um now we have open form is anybody here for come on forward NOP we on our way oh fine just that fast yeah than thank is anybody online uh so we do if you have anything for open Forum if you want to use the raise your hand function nobody all right staff consultant Council updates yeah good evening mayor members of ccil sorry I'm still um on unfortunately sometimes vacation mode here so trying to get caught back up and pull it up I have a couple updates for you tonight all right um a couple updates for you tonight uh one of them is an update for our Federal grant um we received a letter last week while I was out that shipo has agreed to allow some mitigation factors to fulfill their requirements for their portion of the environmental review this is good news for us um that's the best new we could have received so um they have agreed to that we signed paperwork yesterday to have a memorandum of agreement that said that we're on the same page we have one year to complete those items um so those will you will see those in subsequent months and or maybe next year um we have submitted the documentation to the federal historical preservation office also known as ACP and they have a 15-day window for final acceptance there's no reason they shouldn't accept it so we're hoping it happens before the 15-day window but um after that 15-day window is fulfilled we will then have a 30-day window for the eaw to be posted after that 30-day window has been posted we have have to accept the ew as the city and we can then present and begin work again on the project so um this is all good news however it is a few months delayed yeah unfortunately so um good news but um you know we still get the $4 million worth of funding so that is a huge win for us so when can we actually when do you predict we start back up work and what do you expect to be the approximate finish date on um so when we originally had planned for the delay we had anticipated it to be a May um end of May operational for the Wellhead treatment plant and that was as a September one start for the project um we are now going to be at a I'm going to say middle of December to be advantageous um for that start of that project which put us back about three and a half months so instead of the end of May we'd be pushing end of August y September um unfortunately it will not be when we wanted to which is before the summer season but um I think it's more important that we got the $4 million for the funding that it would be to use $4 million of Revenue but roughly I would say September of next year would be my rough guess Marty additional thoughts yeah I think that that's a fair guess but obviously it depends on when we can get them back on site and what their commitments are that they've taken on um in between the two projects um the good news is that the the pressure vessels are still in production so we haven't lost any time on that which would have been a big lead time for us to catch up on so that's the good news okay y thanks um second update I have uh an update on our housing first case I got an email last week with a letter from the US Supreme Court denying the um case to be appealed by the US Supreme Court that was previously denied by the Minnesota Supreme Court um that is again the best news we could have received based on the housing first case um so I know that there's some relief items that still need to be cleaned up by the district court um I did ask our attorneys should they provide an update I'm not real good with legal jargon and there was a lot of it in there um that's why I'm not an attorney but um I'm not sure if Amy can maybe touch base on it when she gets back to her item but did want to let that know to the council that we are again best news as possible and finally just a reminder to get those pump pumpkin pledges in for the um pumpkin Trail it is next Tuesday already so is coming quickly but we did receive a few of them I know and I don't know how the trailer's doing over there at public Orcs but hopefully it's get for but I don't know how many pledges that we've got but I don't think it's nearly enough at the moment more Publican pledges that's all I have thank you Amy um so we'll need to schedule a canvas meeting uh in our window that we're giving the 1112 um council meeting align are we all find doing the canvas during that meeting I am um and then just a reminder that we are here for extended hours for voting which is taking place all the way up until um the day before election day which is November 5th you would go to your polling locations um anytime before that for dating residents they would come here to City Hall um and right now it is where you can come in receive a ballot and stick it directly into the ballot counter machine um and we have quite a few people utilizing that so that's good to see we'll be here Saturday from 9:00 to 3: again on the 2nd from 900 to 3 and then Sunday the 3 from 900 to 3 and then additional hours on the 29th until 7 p.m. that's all I have okay uh mayor and Council I have a couple of items street sweeping is scheduled for the first week of November we've delayed it so we can get the maximum amount of leaves as we can um just a general note on the old public Workshop cleanup uh we have been working on the Boneyard behind the existing uh public the new public Workshop uh to create an extension to the existing Boneyard um that work will be completed in the next two weeks with with a comit um surface um we are working on getting the barrels and the fuel oils uh at the old shop um uh cleaned up um we've got one quote in we're working on a quote from a second vendor currently um uh they sent some information that needs to be reviewed so that's what we're at with that good evening mayor and members of council uh a little over a week ago uh the department um certified 13 firefighters in a fire apparatus operator class so um currently all um drivers within the fire department are certified to operate all our apparatus which is a huge success the only four that are not are just our new people so that's a huge success for us evening mayor members of the council um we have two officers going through Crisis Intervention training currently that leaves three officers left to be certified in it which will happen next year um we sent Sergeant grimby to ostage negotiator um class so we have four hostage negotiators within our department currently um we are also doing our annual coat drive and toys for Tat Drive um from November or starting now through December first we'll have um a Ben at the PD and a Ben at City Hall for any gently used or new coats and toys for Tops Amy good evening mayor m the council it's been a while since I've been here um I really don't have anything to report but if you do have questions Zach actually did a really good job explaining the housing first situation um so if you have questions about it I'm happy to try to answer them obviously it's not my case I haven't been representing the city on that but I can generally understand the the legal jargon so um but if you don't have any questions then I don't have anything to report I have a question okay um did the Supreme Court uh de deny their case or deny hearing their case oh it was simply a very short order where the the court said that they deny review which is denying the case they're not going to hear the case so that is just it's usually a very perfunctory process you know they submitted what's called a petition for curari and the the petition was denied so the court said nope not going to hear it thank you sure so other than that sends it back to the to this to the district state district court right um to resolve the last kind of lingering issue of of um there's they asked for injunctive relief but the things that they asked to have injunctive relief about has already have already been resolved and disposed of so there's really nothing there's no injunction to issue so um Monty Mills from Green espel has submitted a letter to the district court kind of pointing that out and saying we're happy to brief it if you want us to and they're just I think they're just waiting for a response to that to that letter from the court here in henen County okay Scott the only thing I really have is as we are all aware the uh striping job over there on the River Road in Pine View um I did send Kevin Anderson an email about it U it surprises me they did the painting the way they did and he has not responded back to me of course but I'm hoping we get some of some sort of resolution on how they did that you mean how are well to me they they cut off the right turn Lanes by that solid white line and there's enough room in my opinion to put that solid light white line right on the edge so that people you know instead of having it a solid white line they should have it right on the edge of the road the solid line and and to me there's still enough room for a a some sort of a right-handed turn Lan there on both on both uh directions resident called me and she said she had actually talked to somebody down there in public works and they surprisingly told her just use the shoulder as a turn light which I believe is illegal I wouldn't I wouldn't recommend that but the thing is is the way they did that is you we lost those turn lanes and I understand what they were looking to do but without those turn Lanes now you're blocking traffic if you're taking a right turn I mean you're not blocking along but you're slowing I don't know it just seemed kind of odd there was previous the previous line striping job had no dedicated left turn and so the county views a no dedicated left turn as more dangerous than having a bypass right lane so that's just based on their models that they use right and I can doesn't mean that it's right wrong or different but it just there models they would rather have a dedicated left turn than a bypass right turn yeah it's just that the the traffic I I know yeah and the fact that I think that intersection is maybe the only one that is of like major difference because of the sight lines related to that specific intersection yeah um and the ability to go over into traffic versus having to creep out and whatever else but I was surprised they didn't put up signage I know they took them while to paint it but to put up signage to show how the lanes were going to be used going forward like they could have done a better job of that up front to say well I'm taking two weeks to to pain that's my point and you left lanes there that almost set up ahead on well they did overnight cuz it got really confusing and that's when me and you were like H yeah that y me but what I get is I get why they did what they did because I've lived on that corner for years and everybody would always use that lane that turn lane as the bypass lane as somebody was blocking traffic to go left but to your point I think you're saying they see that as more of the safer row correct 100% I get the risk is still there whether it's a turn Lan or not people are still using it um I don't know what the ultimate fix would have been I think that comes in 2028 yeah so the ultimate fix we have talked with them at length as asking them to extend not making it a roundabout um because that would increase the dollars on that project significantly and then we would have to be involved in the project but um we would not be involved in the project if in 2028 they're able to extend those Lanes or the the drive Lanes slightly to be able to have a right a through and a left and it wouldn't take much yet so we have talked with the county with that and they have verbally agreed that that would be something they would be able to do but it won't be happening until 2028 you got it yeah that is correct okay yeah I think for me the part that's concerning is that they didn't communicate any of it um you know because I mean we put up a stop sign we have to put up signs that say change of you know intersection ahead or something and I don't know that that would have cost them anything to do but it might have cut down on some of the confusion or the feedback or that well hopefully I mean we're North Diamond heads the River Road that that I would think that would improve that that area that that's a nasty intersection so that will that will be improved in instead of A9 or whatever their date is 2028 I can't remember what year we'll go over tonight in the paper management plan there you go that's all I got I think did you want to talk about uh Saturday oh it's yeah we'll see what happens that's not a big deal I just got a little pumpkin thing going on Saturday at my office but we'll see what happens having a hard time getting the community engaged all right Travis um so the um New I don't know if you want to call it tar sealant that they're putting down on the on the loose rock is Raising some hackles um because what it's doing is it's sticking to things and it's tracking up into people's garage and blah blah blah um and here's the other thing I didn't even think of I mean I've seen this and I kind of like it except if you're a skateboarder or a skater that pretty much ruins the experience and that's one of the things that we wanted to try when we chose those roads because we didn't they were the main arteries and we didn't think that people would be really skateboarding on those particular streets so um we want to see how it would go in those areas first but the stickiness thing I've had several complaints about that um and I think that uh some of it was to do with we should have had street sweeping on that uh we paid for two I believe and I did get them out to do a third one to uh eliminate some of that um uh excess rock that was on the on the Sur well you have one scheduled for the leaves and whatnot right so you have one scheduled for another one right yeah that be that will be the fourth one around that project yeah okay yeah I don't know if you guys are keeping track of all the pluses and minuses but I mean it it well the real plus or minus won't come in for couple years up seven yeah six seven years I mean right now I mean it looks nice it does look good yeah um but people should don't need skateboarders on Zanzibar anyway really it's not on zanbar some of these Community devel we did choose two smaller developments to do it within those roads so that's my guess where you're yeah and the only reason is because those were smaller developments and not doing it on a large scale development which you not trying to pick on those smaller ones and there's sidewalks in those places too that's correct can't win for losing um that's all I Got U nothing from me Matt uh just a reminder it's two weeks to election day today I want to wish Dennis and the other city council candidates the best of luck we won't see anyone before then and then just to confirm we have a meeting next Tuesday at 7:00 a.m. yeah is correct y a special council meeting um yeah as a reminder of Mayor and Council that that special council meeting is just for the one item related to the um myth and jcf requests for dollars from Grants that have not do anything with the city we just have to administer them um for the um State's manufacturing moving into the cubes building for half of that building so that'll be next Tuesday at 7 a.m. I have to set an alarm yeah um okay uh that's it all right on to council business public hearing J good evening mayor members of council tonight we are looking for the um approval of unpaid utilities um to be assessed to properties in both henpen and re County um this is required to be a public hearing so I don't if you want to have the public hearing first or after does not matter but we do need an approval resolution Spiel and I can open the public meeting uh I don't have much of aiel besides we have utilities and we've only I think we've had five payments of utility bills since those delinquent letters went out that surprises me it it always does every this list looks a little bit longer than it has in the past or actually a lot longer is that the case or is that not the case um so historically we've always done this later on in the process um we typically did it a month from now which I we'll say that we may or may not have chose to do some timelines met some timelines that we shouldn't have but um that's why it's longer than what you're normally used to seeing is because typically people come in and pay at the last people still have until November come in and pay before no longer come off this list that is correct so there there will be people like come in and pay at the last minuty there was a charge in there for over $122,000 and I feel like we this last year there was a charge for a large amount was it the same the same address yeah and did they pay the last one or just get assessed against got assessed we did have contact with this individual okay um since this whole process has come about after multiple multiple times of letters and emails and phone calls and they finally were able we able to get a hold of them and um we were able to fix their problem um it was a water softener stuck open 247 it's got to be something because we've got to get these meters we have we reached out for over two years with and I we have all of the letters and emails and phone calls I emailed the guy a couple of times heck you know and he said he didn't even respond to the emails and I sent him a spreadsheet showing what he was using when he was using what hours it was going on and how much it was didn't hear anything and then I think one of my guys actually got access to the house and I figured out what was going on there Y correct the neighborhood knocked on the door or sorry David I didn't mean to no go ahead so did they reach out I believe they reached out finally and said can you have somebody come out and take a look at things and we went out and looked like we normally would do with any other resident that we calling we found almost immedately it's just without that measurement without that tool to give you real- time measurements you you can't I mean we looked at this with Mary's house and it's like yeah even when you're seeing those big bills you would have thought you questioned it a little you know well yeah it's like do you get your mail where where's that go yeah but part of it maybe too if it's a f for the out it's the first- time home buyer and they've always rented and their utilities were included they may not realize that water isn't supposed to be that expensive not sad to say but could be true I don't know but they're ignoring the bill yeah right and so my question is what is our do we have a shut off policy we do not okay I mean you know in this case if the if there was one even if it was 6 months of no payment or something like that you know it sort of forces the question I mean yeah so the reason before it gets turned reason why we don't have the shut off policy then we have to follow Minnesota guidelines for shut offs and unfortunately sometimes swatter is used for heat and then we end up with cold weather rules and so then we end up with not we can't do portions of people who don't have things and portions of the community that do so historically we've had a larger um fine for being assessed um for that reason is because there are just some homeowners that will do this year after year and just have it assess to their property um we did lower it um for the opposite reason for people to give them the benefit of the adts so not there's not a perfect system unfortunately I noticed that a few of these were rentals is that is it maybe a way to get it onto the I don't know I'm just wondering the the mentality here because a lot of these people know what they're doing and I don't understand why they would want to take that penalty I'm yeah I'm un sure we do send it out to both the the all the utility bills go both to the owner and to the renter every month so it's not like it's the owner doesn't know about it either so yeah okay Easy Come Easy Go and we'll open up the public hearing and is anybody online so if anyone would like to speak on this public hearing please use the raise your hand function not seen one right I will close the meeting I'll make a motion to approve it second okay any more discussion all those in favor say I I I all those opposed say no motion carries 5 Z and on to item K oh I didn't update the K you're good that's you I just didn't update the thing so that's from last week okay good evening mayor and Council um what I'm looking to discuss tonight is um uh the next uh phase of the LC Stevens uh Park um the revisiting the master plan Council uh spoke about this a little while ago um I think this is an opportunity for us to include uh whatever we think should be included and maybe take some of the items out I know there was some questioning about the uh the uh uh the building on this site I think that was one of the main driving en forces what that was going to be like costs and timelines on that kind of thing I think that what i' would like to do um is get you know something to put on in the RFP going out to uh I think we've identified three different uh companies that are interested in doing this and give them some guidelines so we don't just give them a blank canvas um so we can guide them a little bit as to what we would like to see in there um and what we definitely wouldn't like to see in there if that's at all possible um Park commission did look at this a couple of meetings ago and I included there um what their suggestions were um there were various things in there Lawn Bowling mini golf um bars restaurants all kinds of different things on there um that they were looking at um and they added a couple of extra items on there and I don't know if those are real realistic I don't I would like you guys to weigh in on some of that stuff um uh from the master plan we have done a few phases and I'll just go through the what we've done phase one is on the screen now which was basically putting in uh the street lights some Road access uh the band performance area the seating um the uh the what you call it SC what's that thing called uh it's not Pagoda oh perola that waste of money that's the other that's the other term for it um and and some Landscaping in there um which was basically um phase one of the master plan as we envisioned it um this is just a exploded view of phase one um we did um phase two which was uh nearly completed last year uh last year yeah um was a lot more trails a bit more additional parking down by the river um more landscaping and the bridges uh across uh the creek there um and then this is what's proposed for uh phase three which was uh is going to be completed next year uh so be complete that bridge over the Ravine um the irrigation um that we talked about um additional shelter over to Performance stage and um extend that performance stage a little bit uh the decorative gate at the uh uh uh the old entrance to the place um signage and then a picnic sh and some additional parking as an alternate for for this space so if we go to this is the original master plan and I have a list here yeah uh of things that have been completed so uh this is the same coding as on on the legend for the master plan uh the patio was done with phase one uh we haven't done anything with the Veterans Memorial space yet uh the outdoor performance area is completed the performance platform is completed um some parking has been uh uh completed down by the river uh overflow parking we haven't touched any of that um the picnic area with show is an alternate in phase three as I describe DED uh carrying boat access is going to be included with the 2025 water Trail buildout um there's uh a lot of the trail was completed with uh phase two the Regional Trail was completed with phase two the trail underpass is completed turn lanes were completed this year uh entry signage is going to be done with 2024 uh 25 next year and the existing St stairs are in clo C Park um so we've got quite a few things there completed um so we're looking at um the existing boat house um I you know I'm not sure what we're going to do with that I think the idea is that it would be removed I don't think it has any practical purpose there I think it's uh too far gone to be safe so uh we would probably remove that um the playground area is is in the plan um is we need to figure out what we want to do for that playground area it's a premium a premier park for day and so we should have a premier uh type of playground in there um um then the Horse bar uh which is the the one um I still think that there's a possibility there um to use that Horse bar for something um I would like to save it if we can get grant funding for it but um I'm not seeing too much of that at the moment but we'll see existing silos we need do you know that thing's open right now second again the the barn what about it it's open it's wide open it's wide open it's open yes sorry yeah okay yeah I know we've tried sealing it up number of times right but yeah we can seal it up again but it's um my only concern is is that the ladder get getting upstairs is is a ious thing and uh I'm wondering what kind of shape that second floor is in cuz you have kids up there okay well last time I was I know cuz my kid was up there the floor was pretty good apart from where where the hole in the roof was some of the boards in there we're going there but yeah we can certainly secure it again and until we figure out what we're going to do or at least beat that ladder down take the yeah whatever yeah but yeah um suggestion is don't put no more money into it but that doesn't turn into anything if we don't do that um right so there's the existing silos and there have been a number of ideas for those um from a viewing Tower to you know making a coffee shop or a seating area out of the other two rounded silos sorry said like a concession area of something something along those lines um and then there on the original plan there was an outdoor classroom which would probably be a nature-based thing um something that we could uh partner with the school and to see if there's some interest on what that could look like um whether we P plant a prairie or you know some some habits out there um to attract you pollinators that kind of thing um uh there's on the original plan was going to relocate the uh historic Old Town Hall building over to this site as well okay um which could um work for kayak or canoe rent a little space for that um so you could have uh staff in there if we were renting out stuff in bigger picture but uh there could be an opportunity for that um there's a restored prairie area located in there um what kind of budget are you talking about Marty because this is for phase three I mean this is with this list here you're talking a couple three four million bucks well that's kind of what where we're looking at and that's not with with the yearr round Event Center and these are the things that are already identified on the plan so so you trying to understand like where our interest and what the next phase pieces look like or well we want to go we got the three phases identified we want to figure out what the next phases are what the costs are for those phases what the cost is for the overall development of it and start budgeting for those things and the biggest thing is the year round Event Center what does that want to look like do we want to have something that way does it want to be a community center rather than an event center what are the differences I I need some guidance on that really because that's could be the big ticket item there yeah I think that's not we're not looking at that tonight R because that's huge that's a big deal but I mean something to look at and we talked about this at the Eda meeting last week uh John Hoffman was out um and he got Champlin a whole bunch of a boatload of money from Mississippi Crossing and he'd be willing to see what he can do for us on this deal too okay but we have to come up come up with some sort of a plan on what we want to build yeah uh I mean I I personally don't see the mini golf thing yet but the B Vil court is not that big a deal but I mean ideally my main things that I'd like to see done in the next six months ago eight8 10 months ago is some sort of a a shelter for the picnic area MH and some sort of a half decent performance area mhm Scott have you been to any of the Fisher Farm events no I haven't been there they have a really I think I don't go to a lot of events so your opinion is probably worth a lot whole more than mine is on this but they have a really good um covered stage covered stage there and I was talking to them about it cuz they got it engineered and built it themselves did the whole thing for $1 50,000 so who did it he goes we none of that shocks me well once you're bringing an engineer and whatever else well and I wearing a flood plane too so I asked him I said well could you guys do that for the city he said yeah we could do it for the city you just put a bidd in for it fr the company so I thought you might be interested in know and taking a look at it if you want to reach out to them but well I know you've been looking for something that was a little more cost effective than what we've been talking talking about that's when you got to get away from inside out and I mean so far we're still staying in that shell and we haven't moved ventured away from that yet yeah I know and I think that in phase three there was an extension of that that stage to enhance the performance area y y so I think behind with the whole park yeah and then there'll be the cover over of some description whether it's a a wood structure or a fabric structure they that still needs to be defined yet but that will be coming back um once Paul started you know did development on that so yeah so I think what we're looking for from Council tonight is we kind of have identified the phase three items that we're going to do in next year in 2025 which were delayed from from the 2024 project but what we need to do is to be able to go out we'd like to go out for RFP to be able to do the remainder of the items that are you want to do in the master plan for LC Stevens um I think we've heard from Council that there wasn't a lot of input or feedback in 2016 through 2018 with the project it felt like it was more staff L which is not the ideal situation for us it would we prefer it to come from Council so which is why we're looking to do an RFP for this process is to go out and get a different architect to be able to design it and then work with Council to figure out what do we want to do next and what are these items that are on the Parks Commission suggested list um or do we want to add any of these things to the park commission suggestions list do we not I think that's what we're looking Marty and I are looking for tonight is do you want to add any these things or do you want to just keep with what's on there currently in the plan and redesign it or what is your so I've got a couple thoughts on this which is the Event Center I don't think we need that in the foreseeable future if possibly ever as an event center is something else there maybe and I that up cuz we already have two event centers in the city and a third on the way four three events a fourth on the way and so we have a lot of event centers how it is but there might be some use that we could find otherwise that I'd be open to um and then you know we look at the Morris letherman um survey and Veteran spark was at the top of that so I think that's something I think as we look at the next phase I would like personally I'd like to see um prioritized and it clearly is also something that the community wants to see prioritize I think that's something that they the park commission suggested I think would uh help a lot I think a lot of these things could are fairly I'm going to call them small but could have an impact so like concrete cornhole or botch ball or Lomo and these are things that we could look at like an outdoor games area that would be fairly straightforward I don't think it's going to cost us $300,000 to do these are smaller things that we could use as interest points around the park so those are my my initial thoughts on when I through all this and what where I was at the concrete corn things are cheap they're not that much yeah with this it's where you put the things and stuff like that that's why I like to have a master plan so we're not putting stuff where we're going to be tearing it out you know two years later and I think that's what we did with the original master plan and that's what we've been following I just think that we need to enhance that master plan with all the future phases that need to be in there that we see at this time um and I to your point Matt I think I agree with you about the the building there B it's a central part of what we've designed so far so if it goes away um we would have to replace that area with something or do we want to put a separate type of building in there that has a totally different function I think it has an integral part of this plan um and if we're going to re revisit the um master plan I think that is something that definitely needs to be considered where it's going out or if it's staying in I mean I could see something like what they have at Andrews Park which is like a kitchen with a very nice covered area where you could have an event and I've gone to events there they're really nice and if you had a spot for food trucks whatever two that was more purposefully designed with the right power needs those kind of things I think you could make a really nice event area out there without having to be a quote unquote Event Center at least how I'm imagin Event Center but I'll shut up now cuz other people can tell yeah is when is the like just one is the playground equipment slated to go in cuz like I look at that area and I'm like people need something to do keep them there and kids entertainment is definitely one of the things that draws parents in they get the barn none of it SL going right now well that when I go to those events at LC Stevens I'm like as soon as like you see the first person leave it's like droves like okay you know there's nothing that really interests and keeps them there like moving in the park is a great element if you could do things beforehand because the kids want to release that energy and things of that nature I think that's like an element that needs to get Incorporated because we need we need people to have something to do while they're there other than than just that sole event yeah so I'm a firm believer in in incorporating elements that like that um but future State 15 20 years from now I just you know what do we want to identify that space as knowing that we got kayaks and all that other stuff so coming down the line with the park so yeah and I think that you know it will be you know we would look at the person who comes back with the RFP to design that playground and give us an idea of what would be good in there what would be different you know do we want it to be just like all our other playgrounds or do we want it to be something big and different as to go destination po yep all ages right all the way down toddlers all the way up to your your your twns or whatever you call those something I would Echo the concerns about the event center um part of it which I you mentioned is a big part of it so that's a that's a significant change you know I think a lot of these these other elements on what gets included you know I would like to see what we get from the RFP I mean get you know a designer on board and say Here's here are the things you know the 10 things we are interested in and have them show us what that could could look like or something this is not compatible with what you're trying to do over here yeah you know that's not the kind of stuff that I feel like I can make a good judgment on um as it relates to the barn I think we got to do something with it or we got to call it on on that it can't stay as it is it's a hazard and we're going to get burned on it are the silos and uh the brain bins they're not even stable either are they last time we had a structural engineer look at them he felt they were stable at that time but that's probably s eight years ago now that' be at least six years ago so we would have to get a structural engineer out to to revisit that and probably look at the Bond as well cuz that may have deteriorated at the same the uh yeah the cement silos I think are mhm they're going to be fine for a long time we still may not have a clue what to do with them but um but you're looking at you know us to whittle this list down right that's kind of what you're talking about we'd like to have some yeah if you're looking for things that you want to highlight that are on the plan or need to take Plan just so we have a better idea when we're going off RFP yeah of what we're giving some direction for David was saying is exactly what I'm looking for here is you know highlight some of the things we want that we can present them to the the the architect or designer for this and they would come back and say hey this would work or you know this would be a better selection or something like that but we need somewhere to start with um okay and then it's going to be a process of elimination once we select the the person that we're going to work with but right now I mean the just the uh the shelter and the uh M the and shell area mhm and the sign you're talking about out front you're probably talking 5 600 Grand right now correct and that's all phase three Stu we're talking phase four they want no I think he wants to know for f what we what out of this we want to add into three no no no three set set what we want what do you want four five six and how can we break those out so we are all on the same page with what's included in each phase as it goes along um right now it's always it's just been what works in the dollar amount and we just pick some things and call it a day and that doesn't work well for phasing because then we're picking parts and pieces and not and I think what I'd also like to get from this RFP is a good you know what is this going to cost and what each element costs then we can budget that way as well but is there another five or six available if all of a sudden you want to accelerate it because this thing just it's dragging on forever I mean we're going three step the only other way yeah the only other way to do funding is through lby okay so or say we could do a bond we just have to do a referendum with that Bond it seemed like there's a few things in here that are kind of no-brainers to I mean a driving range yeah that's crazy that's except too much space yeah um I I I think you know the a good solid restroom should have been in there from day one um yeah that's that keep people there right now I think that's the kind of the missing piece I see in the uh the picnic area in beld are we going to have plans so that next spring April May this can start they are going to be I haven't got the time did you are we talking next September October again no we're going to B that early I think I sent out the Gant chart to the council last week two weeks ago sorry yeah I I don't have the dates in but the idea is to get it all built out next year um so the design Development Paul's working on that now he worked on the irrigation stuff first and then the bridge and now he's working on the rest of the um Stevens he's got uh I think neighborhood 21 pretty much designed I own Gardens wasn't much to do on that so he's working on those um hopefully we're going to have be able to get those plans and specs in front of you in February or design development um in February um to get the final documents pulled together and then put it out to bed yeah so end of February would be authorized to bid March would be bidding time frame award bid would be in April we'd be starting construction in early May or end of April depending on what at that point would we be getting bids on DDS or CDs uh be it' be construction draw okay cuz you mentioned design development yeah that's yeah that's the stage before we get to the construction so I'm hoping that's not what we were going to be construction documents would be in May or April sorry sorry February into March that's what I meant to say you were thinking what's when you were thinking what's the rate on those CDs H yeah like where throw money at where now okay so what we're looking tonight is just an RF to go up for RFP to select a architect to be able to help us move forward with phases Beyond phase three and what we want to see in that Park as in re viwed or what do you renewed master plan for that project so what I do is take comments and stuff from tonight's meet and draw up an RFP and bring that back to council to make sure that we're on the same page before we uh put it out to you the Architects at work looking at what I think we just look to approve of the RFP tonight and then we could just stay I think unless cult has a problem with that I would rather do it sooner than later I think that makes sense to me and I would make that motion because I think some of the the things on this list I find uh desirable but I think they're incompatible with other things that are on the list and so we got to kind of pick a direction and I'd like some y guidance for that so I think that's all set so you're going to let a you're going to let an architect figure out what you want well I I'm just not sure you know we decide if we decide we want an ice rink or a path with refrigeration then that takes a bunch of these other things off the list right and while I would probably use it I don't know how you know that that's the highest and best use of that area help us Shuffle what tonight is for as an RFP to be able to select that architect to be able to help us doesn't mean we're approving anything of you know master plan Style Just and helping us means he's going to kind of iterate with parks and with us correct that's correct so RP is to be able to select an architect to be able to help us with the process select multiple AR Architects or one or where I'm going with this gu could we seem to there was a comment made a while back that we were going to kind of maybe go outside the box and and maybe look for some other designers and we haven't done that we're still we're still glued to one that's what this is looking outside the box good this is a I can't wait outside the bo so is that a second I second it second to a third third all right so I got a motion at a second any more discussion is this something that we would look at more like qu like quality over like quantity at that point like the quality of the design I guess as asking the group so I know that we always go for lowest bid on things but is this something where we maybe we have an alter like an alternative thought we're like hey they met more of the design requirements that we were looking at as we look at these bids coming up I guess not trying to convince a console I'm just saying like is that's something that we might do different here because we're looking at theity helpful to see plans have done in the past and then photos of what it looked like in reality when they were done so we could have a better understanding of Cu when you work as designer designers have their own style and so understanding their Style and what that looks like what it actually developed to but can we select the not cheapest one if we're looking at design items yeah for some reason I think you can use Best Value method yeah I think that's what it is I think that's what we did with the sorry I think that's what we did with The Branding exercise we didn't go with the cheapest option um we went with the best value yeah was the best option yeah so depends you want here try two me members of the council I could just chime in and say it depends on how you issue it you need to kind of set out from the beginning which method you're going to use correct Y and I think that this moment that question that c h is asking is do we want to use the Best Value method versus the lowest bid method which is best value is what do you feel is the best value might not be the cheapest one but it might be something that you get for the design or something that follows like our design you got it like requ quality of items versus yeah but it would have to be done in the RFP process so that would maybe be a good thing to clarify what the counil would like just my thoughts anybody I I agree I think we would be best served by looking at what do they what do they bring to the table in that I don't know you know how you would word that in the proposal but we want to see what they you know what they've done what their design philosophy is but previous projects I think would be a big part of that and I think that's generally the way it goes will present yeah when we did the brand in they presented a a a portfolio of their previous projects um and then we selected to down from there um so I've got three that we've reached out to are interested we could probably U do we feel like we want to go out to more people than that don't we post it publicly for anyone no private conversations that I've had oh we are now required depending on the dollar amount how does that work could you like like if a city had a park that we were like hey that looks really good as you built out like who was your architect could you do something like that as long as it yeah so that we'd have to get more than one C exactly but like you know hey they built a really cool Park I I don't know which one's around us I just I don't know how that's how that works it's just can you that it was get off a dollar amount yep that's it would be Best Value method that's all you that's all but it just has to go on the RFP when it's written that says the value is not based on the lowest bid it's based on the best value so that means that typically what happens is contractors will then give you a higher price because they know that you want the best value may not be the cheapest option then so the price typically goes up with that because they want if they want the business they're going to give you the best product possible which might cost more money um so again if you're looking for cheap it's not the best bit option because I think there's some language in the brand in U RFP that we sent out as well that covers that you know the best value option y okay me three is better than one for sure but I think five would if we get to five I think that for me at least think that helps CU if we get to three and two of them are really bad or one's really bad it just really makes it hard then CU you only have three to choose from so I kind of assume you go for five and two are going to fall off once we see them right away and then we're going to have three to choose for them but maybe we get five awesome choices I don't know yeah I can certainly expand you know who we're going to to sorry didn't mean I just think that if we're looking for Best Value which I think includes some fresh thinking here our chances are better if we cast The Net a little wider yeah I agree okay all right any more discussion all those in favor say I I yes all those opposed say no motion carries 5 to zero okay on to item l M skip L I'm gonna go to m good evening mayor members of council I'm stepping in for Jason quizur tonight um who is out sick so hope it feels better quickly um this is for the approval of plans and specs authorizing plans and specs for stantic to move forward with the sou di the grow Improvement projects um just some project information so that is refreshed this identifies sou um the paper management plan that was um accepted by the council earlier this year identify South Diamond Lake Road as an overlay treatment in 24 and 25 some segments identified in 24 we delayed and combined it with 25 for efficiency um we may need to Mill at some of the length of the project so um that will be need to identifi during the design process in roughly 5 miles of roadway preliminary cost of estimates from the um Engineers are 1.3 to 1.5 million um we are going to um work with the city of Rogers to be responsible for costs that would be a segment in Rogers to be able to get to Brockton Lane they have agreed to do those Pro Pro cost with us Champlain has declined improvements for that segment in Champlain so we will end the project short of Dayton River Road even though it's only I don't even know 50t block and a it's not that long but the city of Champlain has declined moving forward those improvements unsure why I thought they had just done it a couple years ago say that again that little section I thought they had just done that a couple years ago that maybe why they don't want to do it but it doesn't matter Rogers has agreed to do it so they are going to acceptable with the project cost related to that process the proposed project again all it goes from our Dayton border on the east side all the way into Rogers so we will do some work again into Rogers to get to Brockton Lane the that project will actually look out really well and actually um turn out to would be a better product if we do a continuous project all the way down there our recommendation is to approve the engineering proposal um authorizing plans and specs and that'll be 22,500 that is all you're approving tonight I will stand for questions and I'm not an engineer my two questions were uh Jason T question question so I guess I can email them or something I was just curious as to I got to believe some of those soils are nasty and I'm just wondering if the mill and over that we did before would have kind of told us what areas we may have to beef up at some point um so I believe we would use the same we would start with that process that we did in was it 201 2012 I think it was 14 2013 yeah it was that we did a Mill and overlay project on so I think we'd utilize that is the beginning process and see where we want to add more that might be a spot where we would say maybe we would inste have an overlay of you know a millon overlay or something of an inch or inch and a half we'd do two inches or two and a half inches there um just because we know it's poor soils but um that'll be all plashed out I'm assuming during the plans and specs was any of that detailed out in the pavement management study it was not it was just identified for a full 2in overlay on the entire project because there is no sewer and water Ur or not sewer and water there's no storm water along Road it's just um what do you want to call it drainage SS or whatever there's no yeah there's no curbing gutter so that was identified for overlay and then we would just tie in all the the um driveways into that overlay if we were to raise it two inches we' just tie in all the driveways to that so um but we can do a mill in spots just to make it a little more level or whatever that's why it was done just a strict overlay and not a mill overly will this be done during the summer so it w affect School the school and school be the identified process yeah so the identified process would be to um probably go out I think from what I remember Jason said that he wanted to go for bids in April or even end of March and then be able to award the bid sometime in May so that they could start construction right after school starts or scars school and then do we have any other um overlay or Mill and overlay projects on the 25 plan for the road or not that I remember um the only other one could would have been an assessment project that we're looking at and I think that's for ter torial Road um between Brockton Lane and Dayton Parkway and that is a larger project it relates to sewer and water and roadways but it's an assessment project and not a levy project this would be a levy project and how much do we have budgeted for this um 1 point I believe in the longterm plan it's 1.4 something million it's in the long-term plan that we will talk about after item P it's in within the engineer estimate since you just gave perfect almost move ahead with the test okay any more discussion all those in favor say I I all right all those opposed say no carries 5 to zero on to item n um mayor members of council we do have John on Zoom are you able to can you speak John I can speak if you can hear me oh boy there we go yep hello floor is your John I'll turn the TV down hold on hold on hold on one second little all right now try again John okay am I echoing there you go no you're good I'm also feeling under weather so I I'm uh so this is uh for gon Creek addition there's three um applications number one is for comprehensive plan amendment to amend the comp plan staging area from 2020 to current uh the second is the zoning map amendment that change it from A1 agricultural to gm5 General mix use and the third application is for pre preim plight and just to uh uh State what where this is exactly it's along Brockton and and Dayton Parkway so there's the project that is falls on the north side of Dayton Parkway and the south side of Dayton Parkway uh specific to the preim plant uh the project includes RightWay as well as 11 Outlaws so the developers intent is to Market these Outlaws for development by others um those future developers would then have to replat each Outlaw into a specific view so at that time you'd have a new development and a new uh site plan review um with the GMU 5 District it's the intent that 60% of the area is residential and 40% is commercial uh the residential portion is intended to be to have a density of 12 to 20 units per acre so another words these are Apartments um this uh concept plan for this was reviewed back in 2022 um when this went to or when this went to plan commission review this pass mon uh plan commission did recommend approval for it uh the developer is requesting a reduction in RightWay withd on was South uh culdesac um from 80 ft to 60 ft uh plane commission was okay with that although staff is still recommending 0 um with that I can stay answer any questions go ahead so I I have one that's a little more brought but we're um we're entertaining uh moving these two uh Parcels from from the 2020 staging plan into current and I guess my question is why aren't we moving that whole triangle into current um I know there's other development interest in this in this vicinity and it just seems like redundant work to do this again um when it appears that this area is is ready to be developed we can do that we just can't do that tonight because oh because to the posting correct because the posting that's correct okay your question is not a bad one it's just we can't do it tonight because of the post that was done we can put all our posting out to have a moving everything to 20 20 to current which is fine um it just has to be done with another public hearing process so and would we be able to combine that request then into one for the Met Council yes y because that that seems to be I mean where we would gain some efficiency here it sounds like we can't avoid talking about it twice not on this parcel no but on a future partial yes I'd be okay with that I think that makes sense makes sense to me yeah y okay my only thought on this I see it's bright yellow on the map but it's kind of almost hidden in the the packet is the property to the north of this that little triangle that will'll never get access directly on 94 we'll never get access um to the West so I just want to make sure that that property isn't landlocked and we'll get access and we'll have the ability to do that when that time comes that property developed So currently with the preliminary plat and correct me if I'm wrong John I'm just answering because I'm here quicker than you are um is that is not being extended for right away to the north property line so it's staff's recommendation would be to extend that right away to not landlock that individual property although the developer would argue differently knowing that he's standing there he would agree with me um and that's why he's not proposing that in his um what do you want to say in his project currently um I believe his then he can come up and discuss if he'd like to either but I think his idea would be that once that property were to sell on the North side is yellow chunk there I think um that they would then dedicate that right of way and not the the developer it I I'm I it doesn't matter to me when that land gets dedicated if it's now or futri CU unless you tell me there's a good reason it should happen now and we shouldn't wait till the future but my concern more or less is we have a landlock piece of property then that either's going to have farming Forever on it which depending on what goes there may or may not even work for that area but it also isn't good for the city I think long term to to do that and so my concern is that we it is known that there needs to be a way to connect those properties together whenever the best time to do it is i' look for staff to direct so yeah so to answer your question customer TR is that um if you do not dedicate r away with this current project the individual to the north the triangle to the north would have to work with the property owner to the south in order to get access so if that I'm going to use your screen because you have the little orange thing up right now if that orange parcel does not develop that Northern triangle can never get access to the road so if the say the northern triangle says they want to sell today and I'll sell for a dollar to any developer there's no way they can still get access to that besides a farm which is your comment or question um with without that RightWay if they were to if you were to dedicate RightWay with this with this project and preliminary plat then they would be able to get access whenever CU they'd be able to pull the road through um without having to get so approval um from the land I thought I had seen it somewhere that the north property will be allowed full access to the roundabout they will not they have been denied that so where did I read that go ahead John sorry one addition so we you have some community ation with henan County that um there it's all the wording they their preference is that there be no access to that to that roundabout um they haven't said definitely no they're not going to allow it I I thought they did I thought go ahead let me your name and roundabout is functioning and it's functioning better than they thought it would so they term is that they would prefer that there not be access to that roundabout but they not denied it I thought I had read that actually said it would likely be approved but okay go ahead I was going to say a few things about that number one we've been talking about that for many oh can you put the microphone in front of you can thank you your name and address oh ken streer 6900 WIA Circle Brooklyn Park Minnesota 55428 thank you sorry about that and I represent the Shany group we've been talking about this for a number of years and actually this body at one point agreed with me and subsequently there's been a lot of information misinformation provided to you so in talking to the land owners and then I I believe the city in this report that you received tonight said that they contacted the uh County and I think Zach said it properly they would prefer not but they aren't saying they're not going to do it so they are not landlocked they're not landlocked today they're not landlocked tomorrow and frankly um no the reason I have been so adamant about not wanting to do it is number one the property may be developed together yeah okay that's number that's possibility and not not a bad possibility not an unlikely possibility second of all we have a letter sent from remember us laughing about this I you didn't have to trust me I had the attorney drafted for you that said we won't develop that lot until we have a resolution of that problem but we continue to come to these meetings and we continue to argue about something that's been a falsehood for the last three years and I'm not trying to argue about anything I just want to make sure that we're looking at the big picture and not just the one picture so I'm not trying to and I looked at it too but we keep covering the same ground and this is yeah you to give us a bit of a a leeway though because we haven't talked in how long right so a year so I appreciate it I I appreciate you reminding us but it doesn't go fast enough for me but I hear what you're saying so who is who is who is uh Chad elos he's the H up a County transportation so I I found this this this thing in here it's on page 110 of the agenda it says that the county may allow the north adjacent adjacent parcel to access and they got a footnote of five and it says per an email from this person um I thought the the one of the primary reasons not to do the RightWay is cuz you don't know where it's going to be you have no clue or where any either of us might want it exactly and then if it were to develop all in uh in apartments for example or any kind of housing for that matter that road isn't going to go straight up and down it's going to wiggle like a snake in a frying pan so uh well you had a an I wasn't going to go there but no saying nobody knows where it's going to go and it it it would behoove everybody to when when that develops it but that's why we came forward with the letter all kidding aside and I wanted it to come from the client's attorney not just me sitting here in front of you to say we aren't going to do anything until we all figure that out so we didn't want that problem now I'm happy to talk about it again tonight real quick I'm Vicky vend with WB and I'll just give some quick background on that too um um oh god with WSB I'm sorry um so as far as that uh North South Road goes um again same thing Ken was saying where we don't know what's going to happen with the development if it's both um of them or if it's just this piece but we cannot develop out Lot B until we come back in front of you guys so at that time we understand that we will be working with you if they are indeed landlocked that we will be working and I can't I can't uh sell that land or get somebody to a point where they would come before you without them being able to walk on it and from our property you can't get to that property and we've worked for a year or longer than a year uh with the Army Corps to get permission to cross that water and work out all the details on that that's why there just the cul yeah but those approvals are all complete all the Wetland approvals done so we're very happy about that and ready to move on to construction so just to reiterate your previous commitment and letter is still valid and would be a part of any approval here yeah can I don't remember the letter of everything that was in there I don't remember that yeah I remember the letter it distinctively said that they would figure it out yep it was basically like almost like a promissary note it was the I get it and and I understand the problem and I'm fine with it and and the the council's been fine with it in the past and the Planning Commission was fine with it yeah I got a couple other items though mostly to to clarify uh in number three of the staff uh comments on page one of your documents that I think you got oh can you move the mic in front of you sorry we've I get so relaxed with you guys I I'm serious like sit in my living room well there's nobody telling me what to do well maybe yes all right so here it is uh we we have talked to you we've talked to the Planning Commission the code requires 50 ft we're going to give 60 fet but they threw a little hook in here that didn't come up at either the council meeting when we met with you about the 60 ft or the Planning Commission meeting when we went with them 60 ft the RightWay could be required at the time the Outlaws are replatted you don't need it and the there's a little feeble argument way back in the uh uh stantex report that says that uh they need it for utilities don't forget when we plat these Lots we have to give a 10t drainage utility easement so there is going to be plenty of room for that so I'm asking you to just clarify the fact that that we're going to do 60 ft because we're going to be in there we're going to build it we're going to do 60 ft then the second any comments or questions I that then the second one I have is that um this gets a little deep so bear with me a minute uh there's there's number 10 in the stantech report do you all have that stantech report yes y okay so go to number 10 if you would please and here we talk about the fact that uh we've asked that the uh to to get through the Army Corp we could not take our road to our property lot so we're going to curve it in the interrup okay but when the uh fellow to our East or whomever comes along to develop to the east uh they're going to ask us to redo that to back to what would be i' call the original layout of that role so we're curving it instead of going this way we're curving it I have a couple comments on that number one we're all we're all good with that I want to point out that they've asked us uh to the developer to provide an escrow for the completion of this work what we're going to complete is the realignment part of it not complete the extension of it down to the down to the edge of the property we don't need it we shouldn't pay for it we're doing the same thing with the city and with with uh helping that developer out on the U west side where they've asked us to put a fire lanane in for everybody we're okay with that but but and and we're okay with correcting our change now I also want to point out should that fellow go first there'd be no correction right because we just build it you know but but we're happy to make not happy but we will we will pay for the correction if you will but I wanted to be be sure that tonight we're we're understanding I will pay for the correction the re the the realignment if that's the fair word but not the extension of that road to the edge of our property line and I think that's fair we've given an easement for it so that's not going to be a problem you got the land somebody wants the road let them build yeah is that a rideway or an easement I can't remember based on the docum I thought we gave it as an easen at this time because I don't you tell me Vicky that's sorry Vicky Vandal um so the South Road has to pull on right away uh the curve has EAS got and then the RightWay is being plotted in its final condition so that's it okay and I I only got one more all right uh any questions on that though then the other thing I want to talk about is a little B go in front of the mic again um and that's number uh in your can you move the mic back please no worries um the last one I want to talk about is number 73 and number 90 uh I can explain what they're talking about so I don't understand how this happened but when when you built the access point to our north side and to our Southside it was built wrong you can't handle trucks the Turning Rus is wrong it's not wide enough so on our plans we're showing it correctly like it needs to be to work okay but now they got to comment here that that that's our cost to pay for and I don't see that I see whoever designed that for you whoever built it for you whoever did this or that they're the ones that should be paying for that correction we can do the work we're talking about the dollars and cents here then the other thing that that kind of you know really kind of scares me is they bring up the fact that we've got to move street lights and we've got to move utility lines and this and that that's something better done by the city than by by Me by me or anybody working on my behalf and I think that needs to be addressed it's buried in the report I don't expect that any of you paid attention to it I had a read it a few times myself to be sure I knew what I was talking about and the only reason I know what I was talking about is Vicki explained it to me hey Jason me uh that's a great Jason I don't have I don't have the answer for you okay so do you can I just say one other go ahead and if I were you uh uh you know when they do all that they can they kind of do it when they're doing the stoplight I just don't think my client should be paying for it really because we didn't do it wrong nobody called me and said how white should that be Ken so now that they figured out they did it wrong to begin with that should be somebody else's nickel having said that you know it we can do the work we're just talking about dollars and cents that can be dealt with in our developers agreement you know so I'm bringing it up because it's a big issue for my client rightfully so so let me just throw this out there um and I do read all of these things but I don't have Vicki next to me to explain I know how you feel so I I always I mean I don't always understand what the ramifications of some of this uh but so my my thought on it is because earlier here in number 72 we talk about participation in the ultimately in the stoplight yeah um piece couldn't this be just folded into that that this work needs to happen ultimately youve done at the same time but I'm asking you in a sense of fairness here the stoplight is going to be spread out between a number of people yeah not sure this correction should I mean I don't know who did what I don't know if mindat mindat did that for you obviously you weren't up there with a shovel uh so who did it and who did it wrong but you you're referring to the work not the cost or are you referring to the cost also the cost I guess that's that's where I was going is that you know if it gets folded into sort of that General expectation that you or your client is going to purchase participate in the cost of improving that intersection that this wouldn't couldn't that be folded into this scopa work as well that those things also need to happen and you'll participate on I think this is going to cost a few bucks if in that report they say you know you have to have traffic control you have to do this and that I don't know what it takes to get uh somebody out there to move those power lines or whatever utilities are buried in there uh if are we in the way of any I I doubt but you know sewer should be underground but you know what are we doing and this is not something really you know that's trunk stuff so it's something the city should want to do in my opinion you know what I mean see your opinion is that we probably spec it correctly and it was built incorrectly or you don't know it was designed incorrectly in my opinion because there's no reason for somebody to build it wrong it just wasn't wide enough based on your own engineering or the Consulting Engineers report is saying saying that that it needs to be widened for trucks to make a turn now going back all those years CU I I came here I was a young man if you recall uh if you go back to all those years we had it guided for the peace south east of us I call it uh uh they were going to be light industrial or office warehouse at that time so somebody had to know trucks were coming but even if they didn't think about that you got to have trucks to build anything so so they just designed find it wrong and that should not the the financial burden of that should not be ours I'm not sure it should be yours that's what I was getting at if we knew that it was built wrong we could I think that's something staff can work through I mean yeah it is seems reasonable you got to get a number a number out of it correct and then negotiate it out figure it out figure where it goes now the only reason I'm bringing it up if if you're nice enough to approve this uh for us tonight uh that's a condition and I want I would ask you respectfully to deal with these matters I brought up in what you do so it doesn't get approved as a condition but it gets approved the way you want it to get done you follow what I'm saying in other words we can't we can't say we'll deal with it in because you're approving my project subject to those conditions those conditions say my client have to pay for it part of the whole thing here is you can't have what you don't ask for and that's probably what why it's asked for so I would I would guess yeah that engineering memo comes from engineering not from why would you not say Hey you can do anything you want but you're going to pay for it well so to me just figure out the numbers and talk about it your your ask is to pull this out as as a condition and we will work on it at another time when we figure out what the numbers are where the responsibility should be yeah I had no idea anything about that so I'm not trying to trap anybody is that kind of what you're thinking what's that is that kind of what you're thinking yeah I'm thinking that you know we still have to do a developers agreement we got time but I I don't want to I don't want to commit on behalf of my client tonight that we're going to pay for that work I get it I think that can be included in the da absolutely can whatever have no problem with it and the clarification on the construction of the road as opposed to the realignment and uh the 60 ft yeah I think we just add we just add a c caveat at the end of that what item 90 or whatever item is that would just say you worked on through staff or whatever is it 73 or 72 and 90 I'm 73 73 and 90 yeah we just add a cave on both end of the items with those conditions it says that staff will work through with the developer so a couple of questions you know you originally were looking at a 50 foot um instead of 60 and you were talking about at that point you you know you allocate 10 ft for utilities is is is what does that how does that is there a benefit to the project if you go with 50 instead of 60 and is there your code requires 50 y we were in front of you and we said we would do 60 we sent the plans in because the the uh our engineering firm found out the COD only required 50 when I was in front of the Planning Commission I said I I told the council I do 60 I open my big mouth you want 60 I'll do 60 so let's do 60 now is there an advantage to the client yes as we all know I got water everywhere yeah you so the more land I can keep for development I I mean I'm really fighting for inches here so but I said 60 to you I said 60 to them I can't get out of 60 and trust me I'm way out of 60 now well I I I guess my concern is is that I I would like to see this project succeed as you would um if this 50 helps you and it doesn't run a risk for the city it's a no-brainer but I don't know Jason's not talking over here Jason's not talking yeah that's correct cuz I'm not Jason um I would say that we would we would suggest to have 60 ft and I've talked with Jason at length about this and the reason for is because we don't know what's going to be there so if we knew there was going to be XYZ item then 50 might be fine but if we don't know we have to plan for the worst case scenario which would mean but I didn't need the 80 ft I don't need the 80 ft I don't yeah he's fine with 60 so just go with it it says neighborhood collector is 60 80 ft if this was a longer stretch of road I think we'd proposed to have 80 ft if there was turn lanes and whatever else I think another criteria is it has to connect to something we don't connect to anything corre we're going to have a little fire lane over there now okay but we're not going to have a connection which is kind of a shame for all of us you know at least a right end there to take the traffic off of that corner but that's yesterday's news yeah May so 60t right away allows for 12 ft uh beyond the bir so 12 ft for utilities or any sidewalk that might fit in there yep if it's 50 it gets really tight well then why is our requirement 50 that's cuz that code probably hasn't been updated in um te years like a lot of our codes okay we we'll address that later the 60 I I would just get it okay I'm good and thank you so I I appreciate the time I do um so I'm okay with the rest of the Planning Commission recommendation I think uh I mean we can we can make adjustments to 73 and 90 is that is that what it was 73 yeah we we had a caveat there that says you know we'll work on it with staff we'll work on that later I want to leave the cabinets in there because I don't know what engineering and the reason for that but I would say that we'll just work through to staff Mr re a question on um the SS of approval item three refers to the assurity for the realignment of the curve um that is specific to the curve not the extension to the adjacent property can I don't know if that answers your question or it if that's your interpretation and that's where the council feels we are I think we're comfortable with that I'm not sure when I read it and when I had others read it the way it's phrased and it said the developers should be responsible the the uh it kind of grabbed everything above that and above that it talks about the extension so if you're clarifying for the record that we're only talking about uh uh the rehabilitation and not the extension I'm good that that's correct I would agree and I want everybody to be clear on it you know what I mean I want everybody to know what we're doing and what you're doing I would yeah I would agree with John all right I'm good I will need a motion I'll make a motion to go approve with those changes yeah with yeah yeah and clarification um I'll second it then any more discussion all those in favor say I I I all those opposed say no motion carries 5 to zero thank you very much and John I hope you feel know better item o thank you Mr Mayor um just to to summarize this real quick the Met Council has uh what's called the livable communities act which is several grants that are available to communities that participate in the program in order to be a participant uh the cities are required to adopt uh portable housing and life cycle housing goals um so specific to Dayton this includes a goal and I want to be clear that this is a goal not a requirement a goal to uh to provide or to create the the the ability of having 183 to 333 affordable housing units within the current decade and the life cycle housing goal of 1140 units within this decade life cycle housing is defined as density that's at least eight units per acre um so an example would be um probably uh tighter town homes or apartments um the reason why I have an interest in this program and I'm using the example of Blaine is that Blaine was able to receive uh $56,000 that were used uh to provide an assessment to mobile home park for either rehabilitating homes or moving replacing mobile homes um this is an option that I could see that we could go after uh that would assist a bacon Park in some of their homes that are uh in at the best condition so um I understand that there's probably some um I don't know I'm I'll just say disagreement with the Met Council but these are public funds that we've already paid for and so it's an advantage uh would say it be good for us to take advantage of this program that I can try to answer any questions before I L my well thanks for the well I help on the life cycle housing um definition I'm I still don't not sure quite how that describes what this is talking about but I do have a concern around the the goal of 1140 um you know we've developed at 200 houses a year the last two years or that's about where we're going to finish this year um you know we'd like to stay there but we don't have full control over that I think but that's it's 2025 basically and this thing goes to 2030 so that would be basically all of the housing if we stayed at that 200 per year rate need to meet that definition to meet this goal and that that seems like a big commitment to me John what does obligated not to prohibit affordable housing from occurring mean uh um so affordable housing realistically mean is only going to occur if it's Apartments if we resembl the whole city for single family there's no chance of getting affordable housing so that that would be an example of prohibiting affordable housing for say that again what would be that example if we Zone the whole city for single family okay but does that not include um let's say somebody comes forward with the project and they need say a a a cup iup or a Zone request um how does this not factor in when it says we can't prohibit um you know so if someone applied for you know a c for an apartment building or something you you're allowing you're allowing the opportunity for affordable housing to you know then it's up to the developer whether or not they want to build it so okay but it does say we're obligated not to prohibit that's that's what I'm getting hung up on I mean the whole thing kind of I think process the answer to your question mayor is that if there were to be a project for affordable hous we could not deny it based on the fact that we don't want affordable housing well we would never do that but we would we can't prohibit it essentially so we can't force it to not happen because we don't want it to happen there or um CU they might not so how does that play out you know we had a request um in the area that we were just talking about or near there um that required a a large almost permanent Tiff commitment to support it would we be somehow prohibited from saying no to that no no you could still say no I think if there was other yeah because that had other situations related to Tiff so say that that same project came in it was not Tiff requested but they used other funding sources from the federal government or the state um to get affordable housing in there you couldn't you know say no because it's affordable housing we'd have to have you know essentially we'd be able to say we'd have to help that through so I guess what I'm getting at is we would never say no to affordable housing what we would say no is to other other subsidies other things that come with it so when they say you're obligated not to prohibit I mean that seems like they get to kind of decide what that means they get to decide that hey you're going to build this zero confidence in the Met Council so I I'm not here I'm not going to argue I don't know differently so I'm going to say sure because I don't know any differently we talked about this at Eda last week and none of us had any interest in this at all was was there was it the same concerns or what what just being dictated on what you have to have and H not have to build I mean I don't want to be all of a sudden have met Council say Hey you signed up for this program now I want you to build 500 cheap homes I just in my opinion if you can't afford to build it you can't afford to buy it so that's just the way it is would it be beneficial if somebody like a rep from met Council came and explained it a little bit better cuz there was an option on the website I went and explored a little bit that you could call or have a representative call you and discuss what this like meant and things of that nature I I just feel like there opportunities in Dayton where I feel like this could apply and could apply very well I just you know are we are we locked you know by Dennis's comment you know are we locked in at that point on something or is that is there a broader term definition to it I I just feel like I don't have enough education that that could be a good option you know and you know no money's ever free is probably the term that you get to is that you know there's always caveats to everything that you get free money but then you know I can live in your house whenever I want to kind of deal but you know there always those kind of deals that I'm referring to that don't things that free well I I think that's a good idea um to really talk about what do they mean by you can't say no um in particular but it looks like we have a November 15th deadline to do something on this which is leaves us one one meeting 30 yeah um so I don't know how practical that that that is but it it's worrisome to me because it just the um the owner housing piece of it talks about the 60% Ami and an affordable home price of $217,000 what can even be built for that you can't build anything for that condos so I mean some of this seems unachievable to me so I share the same concerns that have already been voiced so I'm not going to revoice them all what I will say the one I will revoice is that you know we've worked with the Met Council before and I think um we have good reason not to trust everything that's just placed in front of us from them because it hasn't worked out in our what we would all I maybe not speak for what I would not considered to be in this City's best favor as with many of our our residents and so I'm I'm hesitant to move forward with this I have the same general feelings that kind of came out of the Eda around that um but I'm happy to hear more and get questions answer I don't think I don't think getting more information is a bad thing I just don't know if we're going to get it in time and who's to say that that person doesn't misspeak and then we sign up for something without realizing it so again I I don't i' rather come from I don't feel it's unfounded I've got trust issues with the me Council as many of us do and so nobody works with the me Council yeah yeah so so that's that's my bigger concern I if this was coming from henen County I'd be slightly more interested doesn't mean I'd say yes but I'd be slightly more interested just because who it's coming from is is worrisome to me no I get it so if we want to have someone I'm happy to hear them out with an open mind and and listen that's that's I'm okay with that too if that's what we said about yeah it sounds like from the council's pr we could also look at this for the next decade as well we don't have to do it now this is likely going to be a program that's going to continue into the 2031 through 240 decade as well so Mr Mayor this is an annual program and so the only deadine we have is November 15th every year so we can discuss the same next year sure I think I think that' be okay more advantageous for so no interest in no all right that's item one thank you John now we are up to item P more Letterman survey yep feing marriage of council um I was obious not here in the last week so I appreciate the responses back again I'm um staff is here to answer your question um talk about items that were discussed um there was two items that were sent to staff um for discussion one of them was the um residential speed limits and one of them was Fire Station 3 um and they are on this slide as you see here um not sure what the questions or comments we want to talk about this is just general discussion for the council for future meetings that we can take direction from and anything else that you may want to discuss from the survey that was the only question that I we had received was these two items so take it away um so the city street speed limits you know we have talked about this a number of times in the past um but we finally have at least a number um so so the whole point of this thing was we weren't going to go out for referendums we felt that this would be a better route um and so we have the answers now and looks like 71% wanted those speed limit city streets reduced so I guess what I'm thinking on this one is uh that we move forward and determine what it will take to implement I think Chief you had talked to us in the past about what we needed to do here it seems like we can we can take a look at what that really means what it really costs um we might want to wait for a meeting that quisberg is here I know that he had mentioned we spoke about it and there is a significant cost there's significant cost there is significant cost into changing the speed limit so it's not saying that it can't be done but it does come with a cost but that would be the information we would need that Discovery would I think yeah I think staff would need direction from Council from majority Council that would say we want to move forward with investigating this process I think just a some rudimentary information yep um to what that would take you know you can argue whether or not the the efficacy is there I the problem is I mean I shouldn't say it's the problem that 71% of people say they want it reduced so we should at least take a look at that we've been hearing this for a while I heard one month into be in that Council so I'm in the same boat I'm not I think we need to do more research on it and figure out what the cost is going to be and whatever it looks like and if Jason and the chief want to weigh in as well I think that'd be helpful at that point but I think putting together a I know we got some information in the packet but a more scope yeah I think I know cost part of is the signs I know signs Believe It or Not aren AR aren't cheap um so but I think it'd be good to understand like what that cost actually means and what we're looking at and getting more information be helpful yeah I think there's a there's yeah I'll continue and then I'll okay I'm sorry I'm moving my mouth and not saying anything um yeah I I'm certainly in favor of moving forward not necessarily proving this tonight because I would like to understand what the what costs or studies or you know what what we have to do to make that change I didn't think I don't think it should be that hard but I also you know had some concerns in our in the narrative it it talks about the mindat report stating an average of 1 to 2 mph reduction in speed um when lowered and you you know which doesn't sound like a lot you know um right but it's I looked at the report a bit closer and that that conclu well it's not a conclusion but that average is uh kind of misstates what we're talking about here in in that um I looked at their the streets that were studied right 21% of them had no change in speed limit I don't know why they're included in the study but 21 and lo and behold there was very little change in speed on those roads well okay that took rocket science um but of the the two roads sorry three roads that that actually were a 30 to 25 mph change range from 5 1 12 to 7 m an hour reduction in in speed know and that's that's real to me and um you know maybe I'm not studying the you know I'm not a civil engineer I've said it a bunch of times that was my dad and that's why I know nothing about it because I had to listen to him my own life um sorry Dad but um you know looks to me like that number is a lot bigger than what's what's stated here um and and so I I wouldn't want that to dissuade us from from moving ahead because I think it understates the actual impact in their report they just didn't frame it that way I think there's something that's not in this report too that I did some research on which is stopping distance at 25 M hour versus stopping distance at 30 mph when you're talking to residential neighborhood and a kid k diring out I think I think the numbers are find is like 25 30 ft and that can be a significant difference in in stopping when you're you're talking about you know residential air so I'd like to see information more substantial studies on that as you guys do the investigation is kind of what that looks like yeah um what I was going to mention is I and so I appreciate the council having majority it's with something we can move forward with um there's going to be a byproduct I'm thinking of this that you're going to have to that we're going to have to figure out as a city is how do we enforce that um we can't be on every residential street it's possible um if we are we're going to need a lot bigger police force um but what that's going likely going to do is it's going the byproduct is going to be we're going to get a lot more complaints about people speeding in residential neighborhoods and how are we going to deal with that as a council and as a staff as the question um because if you implement a $25 mil speed limit people are expecting you to enforce that speed limit and now if you don't now you're going to have more people saying why aren't you enforcing that speed limit that you should be enforcing not a bad thing that we shouldn't be enforcing it but we just have increased calls and increased volume and then increased Staffing which is great that costs more money and more Ley dollar and that's probably going to be more expensive in the long term than the speed limit signs and uh whatever else is needed from a civil engineer as aspect and again I'm only speaking from a perspective of staff not as a perspective of I know anything other than that I I think you know with what I'm hearing from people is they expect those to be enforced today where we're at yep and I won't I mean to me it it takes a lot of work to get up to 30 on some of these some of these development roads I think that's why they're designed that way yeah well that's part of it but um I don't know that the enforcement I I guess I I don't know that that's going to cost more um maybe it will but I mean we enforce those roads as we can enforce them whether it's 30 or 25 or or the 45 and 50 roads um so I'm I'm I'm that could be S some of the discovery that we do um is to look at that we yeah I think from sou perspective as well we just would hate to enforce this whole thing go through the whole process and a year later we say it's you know too much yeah same issues same problems it's not working whatever abandon that it could be the same ISS and again I don't mean to that a deterrent just as but if it brings down the mean by five or whatever yeah then you know maybe it was worth it I don't know yeah we'll do some research on investigation and stuff and and then get back to you yeah and I wanted to say too just just because I mean there are a few things in that Morris Le Letterman survey that came out as pretty clear I'm taking them as mandates and this is one of them and so I think you know we need to talk about what the implications are and what the costs are but I think that we need to pursue this in a real way okay yeah that's kind of what I was looking at is is there's a few items in here that you know some of them were the the garbage thing it was total tossup right now it wouldn't surprise me if we had better numbers that that wouldn't be such a tossup but we didn't and it's a tossup so it there's no mandate there um the garbage thing was was talking to a gentleman this past week and he's like yeah but the city locks Us in they just jack up their rates afterwards it's like well we they lock it out a rate just like you're recycling it so it wouldn't change like oh then I'd be okay with it so it's interesting how even like like if there was I think I'm not saying we should I'm not saying we should act on that I agree with you but I think on some of those words it's a bit of a tossup if education was put in place then survey but those questions were asked again in two or three years after so maybe edification happened around the piece or there was some information put before the question I'd be interested to see I don't want to speculate which way I think they go but I'd be interested to see if that would change anybody's opinion on the matter yeah and that specific question there was no information yep exactly y it's just a a lot of this is just there's a lot of information here and I think no one here is going to ignore what residents are saying in the survey but I also think a lot of this is It's it'd be even better if we had directional data we have one data point so a lot of this like like 25 M speed limit I think is very actional we had 70 plus per of people say it it makes sense right but we don't have there's somewhere if it was if if for the garbage for example if we had done this 3 years ago and it was 20% and now it's 50% well now there's a big swing right you've got that kind of directional change to look at too so we're looking at one data point so it's sometimes it's hard when it's that close to assume Direction in my opinion okay well then we'll see some of this if if I mean if we take his threeyear you know span on this yeah depending on depending on growth I would think two to three years means the right number me the right amount of time to do it only because we need to have more data points to begin with than we do later on once we're fully growing it starts somewhere and then I think that's kind of refines the where we go to the garbage truck thing like I think context drives the behavior there there's a few of those that you I think we want to be careful on which questions we change because then we've now changed yeah you know are they anymore but this was one of them where I think that people were it was inconclusive for me and that maybe we need to work on how we ask that question the next time to try to get uh you know clear Direction I'm going to keep on task Fire Station 3 was the other question that was asked all right so this one there's there's three questions that are relevant um question 12 was satisfaction with current level and it was 97% um question 27 um 52% had had no concern about response times 37 had a minor concern so that that's that's 89% that did not have a major concern that at least a minor did not have at least a minor concern minor or no concern minor or no yep yep um and you know this is a primary reason for for station three question 29 uh the mean here and uh Mr lman said the same thing the mean is six a month that doesn't get you much at all no not no and that's so that's nowhere near what we' be need what we would what we would need and and he had mentioned and and this is what I'm seeing is that the the the fire station where we have it scheduled is premature um what I'm reading from this data is residents are not wanting this wanting it and and at at the time we have it we we we need a couple years to schedule this thing and right now they're saying no that's what I'm seeing from this um I I personally think those bins were wrong I know he he disagree with that but I'm not sure how you can look at this distribution and not come to that conclusion um it was basically a binomial distribution and that doesn't usually give you good information you know that the number is somewhere between those two but um and if you put the numbers in it's six a month so so I'm and this will get back to the long-term plan but I am going to propose that we push that out and I think we should push it out at least until the next survey can can maybe pull that back in or or leave it as it is but I'm going to I'm going to suggest we move that out to 2031 oh three years so I guess from my perspective I think the the data you're saying is clearly there I would say 52% had no concern which isn't honestly over surprising to me when you think about the the geography you have about half people live in the North half of the city half people live in the south half of the city people live in the half north half of the city literally live right between two fire stations doesn't surprise me that 50% of them have no concern over the the um the question so that that's not overly surprising to me I think as we look at I think the timing of it needs to be honed in I don't disagree with that one bit and I'm not saying 28's right not saying a different dates right because I don't I'm not going to say I know what the right date is um but what I will say is is that my understanding from most people up here I I don't want to speak on everyone's behalf is as we look at you know where growth is going to happen most of our growth is going to continue to happen more from the south than happens in the north so as we continuously add population the South then you're going to have more and more people down there which are the furthest people away from a a firehouse yep um and so we have a as we think about growth what that looks like we need to also make a decision if we want to be reactive or proactive and then based upon that we need to decide when is the best timing based on us growing two to 250 homes a year and what that looks like and when the timing is so I I am not going to propose a specific date I think is the right date for it um I don't think just shoving it all the way out's the right answer I don't know if 28's the right answer my guess is the real answer is somewhere in the middle is it I'll say well yeah and and to your to your point the more growth we have if there's a want down there that number will will skew with the next survey we'll see that I'll I don't know if we always need three firehouses I think we need two firehouses we need two firehouses properly placed in the city in the long run so I think I think that's the key here and um I think depending on what happens in not SEO we may have a um a different issue on our hands that also may drive change around this item with their fire department getting up and we've got firefighters right now on our fire force that literally I was told can throw a stone from their driveway and hit the new Firehouse so I hope they stay with us and but I have a feeling we're going to lose some to oo and when only three firefighters currently live in Dayton that service that firehouse and the village I don't know if we're going to get enough people down there to help keep that Fire H open anyways so I think that's something we also need to weigh in on is do we just need to shift it if that ends up being the case because if we can't have people run the firehouse we can't keep it open then it's not doing any good where it is either right and so I think I I think that the survey gives us some direction which is helpful some of the results aren't overly surprising to me but I do think that there's more than just there's more to consider than this than just the one or two three survey well as far as do we need the the thing two two questions there's other mitigating factors throughout the city and cities around us I think we need to be considering as we think about timing but again I'm not I don't know what the right timing is my guess is the right timing somewhere between 28 and 32 but I don't know what the right timing is yeah the only reason I picked 2031 is because that gives us three years to do another survey um and you know again we if if the trend there is is you know going to strongly pull it in then we pull it in um but that gives us that threeyear threeyear um time between surveys I also like what people say about the school district where they they didn't preemptively build the schools and know that now they probably need and now people are really frustrated and so I don't want to get to the point where people are frustrated that we don't have what's needed down there knowing that we plan on y positioning a larger percentage of our growth in the South half of the city than the North half and I'd rather be proactive and maybe slightly ahead than reactive to it afterwards I think okay it's a big piece I'm just saying that if we weren't going to react to this information we shouldn't have asked I'm not saying we shouldn't react to the information okay I think I just backed up that we should look at what the right time is between 28 and 32 are the years I put out I'm just not saying I know what the right dat is and you know it's a side issue but the the school thing I think that boggles everybody's mind I don't disagree but I don't want to be like the school district is my point like I I don't want to be reactive to everything happening I'd rather be some proactive or at least process put into it that helps us say this is this is the well right and that's why I think it's a hard question to to just use the survey results from I would say we to my read of this thing there was no man mandate from our residents that we need to do something and we need to do it sooner than later right it's a it gets harder for me in a way because you don't use the fire department every day or often or hopefully ever right and so how you know for the average person you know how are they how are they making that that judgment if they've never had an event in their neighborhood or at their at their place where they needed an emergency response to judge how are we doing on that so people are not concerned in general about where we are today I think that's that's fair I think that it's it really falls back then to us to anticipate when when this is is going to be because we don't want to be behind the eightball on this thing my whole concern around a lot of what we're is being proposed around the fire stuff is is the timing it's not the answer it's it's the timing of it and you know it was in our packet so I reread the our latest fire report that I know nobody loves but it's the one we have and even there they're talking about a phase approach to the third fire station putting up something temporary build building leadership it they suest in that report Tak four or years to to bring somebody to a point where they should be a leader in a new situation like a new fire station and I feel like we're we're moving too fast on all of this and reinforced for me by the fact that our residents don't don't see it as an imminent need um so I think we got to we we really do need to um give this thing a little bit of a slide and and do some do some better planning I've mentioned it before I we've been we've discussed it a number of different ways that we need a strategic plan for our fire department and you know it's not there I think a lot of the pieces are there but it's not it's not compiled into into a plan uh if it is I've not seen it but it's it's not it's not there and I think we need to have that because we're making some important decisions I think we're making some expensive decisions and and the timing of it isn't I mean we're not doing ourselves any favor by rushing this and doing it poorly and so that's that's been my concern from from the beginning of our budget discussions this year is that it's too much too soon for me okay Zach do we know without SEO Building A Fire Station how much they're paying not for the equipment in like just for the building for your engineer estimate is just short of 20 million for the building itself for the building itself and all said and done engineering all the stuff everything said done with the building itself just the building is 21 okay five million or something like that that's our engineer's estimate that um is also a I think it's four or five bay um overnight quarters it's a fairly expansive station not saying that we don't need that or that's what we're looking at here I'm just saying that just in general relative aspects that's not something that we have like next door here so and they're starting that next when are they start so they put out for bid in September I think they needed beds back in any minute now I think and I think they're looking to approve in the early November I believe and then it'll be construction yeah either late this year Orly now for 27 so yeah that is correct yeah so they're building it now I think they're expecting a year and a half to 2year construction period roughly yeah yeah I was just going over Albert Bill's uh contract for fire service through them and they have Hardo dates at 2027 an anticipation that they have their Department up and running cor so I think I said I think it's end of this year beginning of next year which is 25 if their anticipated thing is construction through 25 and probably through most of 26 and then 27 they would start their own yeah fulltime SL prle water model yeah I guess I just want to give my optic on you know that studying versus you know the fire you know the expectation I just want to make it through the lens of like um What the residents are seeing is that the fire department's not going to out of the park that we're meeting the expectations that they that they want um that's the front side of the curtain and the thing that I've always advocated for is like who was doing the work on the back side and that doesn't require Fire Station 3 but to your point David like it's a model change um the way that the department wants it to like the way that the resident firefighter residents whatever you want to consider them at this point um how they feel it's conducive to their lifestyle um so like I see on that report like yeah 90% like that's cool like what I see is when people see the firet truck going down the road going to Mrs Smith's house like yeah they made it cool but what we're not I guess as far as like this body goes is like what does success look like to keep those numbers that high because right now if we get to the point where're like oh we just need to kick that down the road like there's stress from those doing the work that are like hey a model change needs to happen because I need some more predictability in my life um and I don't know where that falls in like your strategic plan but I can tell you like those things should happen sooner so that we can start to build out those strategic plans then at that point because if you don't if you run the people that are there now ragged what you're doing is you're saying like hey I'm trying to predict what you or trying to dictate what you do in your free time in a sense because I don't have any more to give they don't have any more to give I reassured myself on training last Thursday I said is the pressure that um some of us are putting on is it the right one they're like yes this is what we want to make it work CU this is how we keep Dayton fire going I just wanted to put that out there like I agree that you know maybe the timing of Fire Station 3 could be flexible but I think the model at which we operate um to maintain a successful organization should be honed in and those asks right now as far as like how we staff how we fund how we do those longer term things we could build ourselves as this body some more time in that um planning phase so that makes any sense yeah well I I get where you're coming from I and you know it's the it it is the the firefighters that you know our top of Mind here is as far as that the the core function is the is the service you know if we're if we're beating up all our employees while we're doing it that's a that's a that's an important question but it's not the primary mission right the primary mission is to respond to the call right and how are we doing that and what infrastructure do we need to do that and a staffing model that's that's livable for people and I think we've heard loud and clear that nobody likes what we have it's you know it's continuous recruiting which I think volunteer paid on call systems are I hear that everywhere I look into this issue that everybody's got that problem and it's not a sustainable model because people don't volunteer the way they used to in the past so I I get that I get that we need to be moving in in that direction we need to provide relief to these folks that donate so much of their time to us I just am not sure that we're I don't like that we're doing it without a clear plan and that's that's been my objection since May or whenever we started talking about this hear that and and I think we need to I think we needed to take a step back put uh put the the energy into developing that plan because there's so many pieces of this I can't even articulate them all when we're talking about changing the Staffing model and then and then buying uh a lot of new equipment and then adding the fire station and Staffing that up and doing doing all this by 2028 does not seem realistic to me and maybe it would if there was a plan that showed me we're doing this now we're doing this in 6 months we're doing this in a year that would certainly help me even if I disagreed with it I would at least understand what we're talking about 100% and today it just feels like things are are flying in a bit randomly I also think that uh I'll never understand the the call system okay I'm just I'm just going to that again why we do an all call versus like and even in the report that nobody loves they talk about looking at that very issue that calling out by by unit or by station demographic crew or you know call type um that and I I don't think we'd be inventing those things I think there's models that we could look at because to me having been on call a good portion of my working life you know it didn't go that way and I I know what it feels like to to get those calls in the middle of the night and my calls weren't to go save lives specifically right but it was an expected response if you're on site in 30 minutes or less um for you know for what I did for Corporation okay and what I what I don't get about our current model is that we have you know fiveish people that are responding to the to the average call and we've got 204 people that have to make a a mental and moral decision about whether they should respond or not right and that I don't know how that doesn't cause a whole bunch of stress for people to say you you know do I drop what I'm doing and go on this one or enough guys going to come am I leaving you know I mean I think I think it's gymnas a model that's designed to cause stress for people and and we talk about work life balance I think that's a horrible one to have to make that that moral decision every time you your pager goes off for a call when you know you don't need 29 guys right so why are we paging 29 guys well you need to get a response get you need to fill the truck you need to whatever it takes to go to that event but I just you know I think there's steps short of one or the other that that we're not looking at at at this time I think that I know I'm skipping ahead here but you know when it gets to the duty crew model sounds like the right way to go to me yep yeah I want to keep us on task a little bit here sorry we went up from fire station through now we're talking about the fire department which is good related but not Tas I think the general I I agree with you I'm going I'm going a ways off here I think it all plays together I don't don't disagree I don't yeah I don't disagree with the I I agree it all plays together I just want to make sure we're staying to ask with the question um and not because I want to deter the comment and discussion to happen about yeah what are your thoughts on Firehouse 3 oh I didn't know you guys wanted an opinion um to me someday we're going to need one yes I don't disagree and someday it should be in the south end of town I I don't disagree with that either the major eyehole here is uh $6 a month doesn't buy you anything I mean you're talking $70 or $80 a month to build what it's going to take to build I don't even know if that covers it um and we know they're not going there I mean nobody wanted to I mean John's got in his report that they're willing to spend 10 to 30 and I didn't see that in the report to me it was under 10 that they would throw in there um so and I've for 2 three years I've been 20 30 or after I've been there all along to me it takes more people to defray the cost and six seven8 years from now we'll get more people I mean that's going to happen and a real huge issue is in four or five years actually Four we're going to have a Buu load of industrial money coming in here I mean not not a Buu load but substantially a lot more money coming in from the industrial buildings on the Tiff that expires in 2030 I think it is although I think 29 or 30 a lot of that's already spent too so well I'm trying not to pre-end money that we don't have yet what on the 2028 schedule is it the 2028 schedule I mean this whole fire station in 20 there's $30 million in that 2028 thing that needs to be worked on it that's going to cost these people huge money I think it's like I think it's 35 it was 35 until I seen somewhere that we were talking about oh in here 10 million for a city hall instead of five yep yeah well there's your 40 correct yeah so I think it was 20 million for the fire station it's 10 million for City Hall that's $30 million and then there and then there's a$2 and half million expansion to public and then there's five for the river yeah well The Event Center we kind of already discussed tonight that sounds like that's a no go which is again that's but I mean the River Road we know that's 5 million and that's about that time frame so yeah and that's and that was coupled in the fact that we do one large what do you want to call it it never ends Bond but that would be it would only reason to do that would be to get over there's certain benchmarks that you hit for different tiers and you get a discounted rate for interest I mean I I understand that's why it was coupled there but other the whole reason to put that in 2028 is because that's when the ladder comes do and if you're going to bond three or four million for the ladder why not B there was the other I think we can pay for the ladder without having to I think between now and then we could probably save enough money to pay for the ladder it shocked the heck out me but we'll see well and saving money for for and it wasn't just the ladder it was the tender with it right so that was almost three and a half million yeah uh tenders paid for as long as we continue on the long-term plan that we're planning on yeah okay so I I personally don't have any objection to pushing it out the other thing we heard at the open house and what what's a little bit puzzling and and here it is again is we heard that this fire station might happen in 2026 that's incorrect I will say on the record that come from I don't know how know where it came even if we even if we want there's no way that we could even do it in 26 so oh the earliest it would be and again the earliest is we need to plan we need to have all this stuff done the earliest it could be even physically is 28 and again the year should we try to keep it out I think what the idea always keep it out 5 years just to keep it on the horizon but not set it in stone and we just used 28 but it was pushed out I think it was put in there in 21 or 2020 in 28 and then just kept in 28 cuz it wasn't near enough to talk about until this year and so now we're talking about it a lot which I think is a good thing to talk about the other interesting fact was uh at that open house also is now that all of a sudden the uh the word is out that there's a fire station on 117th nobody wants it there well I talked to a couple people there and their concern was more the noise and once there's not that much once we explained to those people that were there with the concerns how we handle this firehouse and how we don't just turn the sirens on as they're in the in the you know firehouse on the way out like they're not just waking every up middle of the night T unless they absolutely have to they seemed a lot more um okay with it at that point in time I think that's go ahead Paul Mr Mayor members of the council just to let you know state law requires if you have your lights on you have to have your siren on yep by St instant you come out of that door so if you're telling residents that you can't it is a state statute that's what I was told we're doing currently is that we're is that we don't just turn the lights on the sirens on when we're pulling out of the driveway it's best practice is what it is it's you know like I'm not going to say we are we aren't severity of the call dictates on you know those kind of things but whoever is in that driver's seat may live in that neighborhood they know somebody and they say nope not until I get out to a major roadway um it's there's without without a policy without any of that stuff like I just we're we're human we're neighbors too if there's a state law yeah there's and to me if you don't follow that state law you might be liable or something sure but at the end of the day we're not we're not putting in an airport here no you know at our 600 calls a year rate which we know will grow but that's 1.6 calls a day yeah out of somewhat divided between ultimately three stations so this is not I mean this is that's not the make that's also common for them to be in residential neighborhoods like when I lived in K Rapids almost every single one was in a residential neighborhood it's very common for them to be there so this isn't something that other cities haven't found a way to work through as well no if if we want to in you know reduce response times and you know have a functioning organization that's successful like peculiar uh placement of this of this stuff is definitely closer to the residents closer to the responses closer well it does behoove us though if if if an opportunity shows up in the industrial area let's say ddl says hey I got this do something with it yeah it seems like we should we should take advantage of that but we should always you're going to wave pros and com sorry I'm not to try to Z wants to stay on just TR stay that's it stay on task all right that's it so okay so I guess like I said my deal would be to push that out to 2031 so do we want to move beyond the questions is there a specific ask you have on this before we get to the next item which is the longterm plan I'm also trying to figure out is is I know I know that they're connected and understand that but my questions are moving be moving on to the next item then yep we can do that we okay so we're done with this it I think so you a question for the survey again we can always come up with if you guys have things that you want to talk about with the survey later on please talk about it we bring them up and we can it gives us direction from for staff level and we can that survey had things about the Parks when we go out for the RFP RFP might be good information to put in that as well we do that okay good uh on to item L just a back a few here all right I'm going to start long-term plan so this is going to be focused heavily on utility funds first and then I want to get back to payer management because that one had a ton of changes and that's all based on the effect of the paper management plan and the intersection study which affect a lot of things that means a lot of dollars are going out of this place we got to figure out a pay for them again not trying to solve the entire world's problems for the next 10 years but need to mostly talk about them so I'm going to discuss the last one first which is the sewer fund because it's also the easiest um we did get increased um we went through and had engineering go through all of the cost Rel did all the projects and then if there was any portions of the projects that were related to a street that would also be a sewer or a water or a storm water project let's get all those updated as well so you'll see a lot of red numbers in this one it's the last page that you have second to last page um and those all red numbers again are in um anything that's in red has been updated from last year so it's a different number um the only two changes we have for ads are um related to Marty's requests of having an enclosed trailer with an emergency tools and supplies ready to go for when the guys were on call they can come in hook a trailer up and go Rel to Emer emergency tools and supplies we do not have one of those currently and so it would be nice for the guys to have from what Marty has mentioned to me what's an example of that yeah so what's an example of emergency tool so um what uh would be would be um just a regular uh enclosed trailer um but we would have all the supplies and tools in that uh trailer to to go and it would be for um fire hydrant repairs um sewer water like a a maintenance trailer or something so yeah you just have like a maintenance trailer where you have all your equipment yeah so it's just just ready to go when we need it and you already have all the tools correct uh we have some of tools we would have to get some additional tools to just stock that up because those tools that we have are General use tools we would want the all the tools to be set up in this uh trailer ready to go with it it's a trailer not like a box truck I know Mana used to use like a m like well they had a trailer hooked up to it so the tools were in the truck and then they had like the the uh that they would use when they go into the pit and stuff like that the whole thing would run out and they just had a back hole that they would use and talking a 16 20 foot enclosed T of Axel trailer yeah yeah something along those lines 6 7,000 bucks that's about all they are well we but your 20 will include some tools too yeah it's going to include a lot of tools they going to be specialist parts for hydrants and all that good stuff in there as general use that's my well it says yeah with tools and supplies so with tools that's okay the other one that is new this year on the sewer is the sewer Main bulkheading and I'm not going to try to explain it cuz I tried to listen to Jason and I couldn't understand it something in River Hills there's a main that goes to one spot needs to go to another spot so when original uh the original part River Hills was uh done uh there was a portion that had to be forc uh fed the sewer out of the lift station to get to the gravity part of this the the net uh the network when uh ion Gardens came in uh the line was extended so we don't need to force it that way anymore it can gravity down straight into the extension so we need to go in and bulkhead that um that Force man off basically cap it yeah just cap it and take it out of service there you go that's lame in terms what I got um and then the other ones again are um Territorial Road which is a portion that we're talking about next year and I mentioned that as part of the projects um for next year is an assessment project and then um the 113th Avenue was pushed out to 2027 just based on responses from Council um this past year when we talked about doing those projects so that's it in SE when you've got the just a question and this applies not just this line on but all of them when you look at like the territorial water improvements yep you've got 50% developer and 50% assessment yep um so none of that's charged the city then that's correct so why don't we just put zero in the like where are you accounting for this because I this always like my problem is residents will sometimes look at this and I'll get an email why are we paying for this it's why is it's like well they are you have to look over here so it can be confusing so can you just help anyone looking at this understand why there's a number there when it costs the zero to the city and that's the paid paid that the paid buy is supposed to help you do that but I think the problem is you guys like to see money coming in going out and not just poof it never it bypasses right that's I know I know where it is on the next page I get it get the same question I get I get this question often so it's an opportunity as we go through all of this just now to talk about why we do it that way so the reason why I do it that way is for cash flow purposes is so we're able to cash FL the projects if needed okay so if I have it here as a project and I don't have a cost for it I'm not allocating those cash flows in the future to say that project is going to come in I'm going to need to make sure I have X number of dollars available in Investments at that time so that we can pay for that project um if I have a zero number here it say oh it's going to be paid for by somebody else I don't have to worry about it and then we have to pay it's bigger than 380 it' be a million dollars or $2 million and I don't have an investment ready to go for that because I'm investing our dollars in the future to try to get our best interest possible um if those projects move or the dollars aren't there that I have to then grab an investment early which means now we're taking a loss on that investment because I'm not holding it to maturity so that's why it's there um I don't care if we want to put it as a zero like make the right hand side the cost of the that's fine it doesn't matter to me I just wanted to make sure that if people were listening and trying to follow along at home they understood why the reason why it's only for Castle purposes related to when we're projecting out costs of a project thank you and making sure the dollars are there I would venture to say scen on not too many people want to carve pumpkins not many people I surpris get a lot of questions from on this I hope people are paying attention but again there are people the paid by column is what we have there but again if we want to create as long as the cost is there that's all I'm looking at so if we want to have the right-and colums from 2024 to 2034 be just the cost to the city that's fine by me for C you know but it's just the cost that has to be in there for the full for on the project but we can talk about adjustments we've done them in the past and I'm happy to do them I just to make sure all the council's on board before I make a change and you're like what the heck is that I'm okay with it just as long as we have the paid by it's just then you have to explain to the resident yes it it does make more work for me on the cash flow side of things on the second page to show you how the cash flows work with the project so then I have to move things back and forth and left and right and I've had it happen in the past where I didn't pull thing forward or 50% an opportunity for it's it's fine I'm asking for a change it was just more Y no I think the information there yep yes you already it's just how how quickly and I get tripped up on it on it too you know we're not on that page but I saw 665,000 for Diamond Lake draw down and I'm like what yeah and then another 400 I have no I have no information on this where' that million then well then I read closer and it's like okay that's the Watershed do you have any question on the sewer portion of things I do I'm going to move to I'm going to move to storm water so that's a few pages ahead of it and the reason why I'm doing these is because there's different magnitude of the projects so I want to do storm sewer next or storm water next this is your cost related to the draw down um I believe it's the would be the two four six page back from the back I don't know what page number it is but P 27 27 there you go page 27 there you go um so a lot of these change and these are based on what we're hearing from The Watershed um for request it's like the French Lake draw down the Diamond Lake draw down to tell you the truth I don't know what any of those mean or what the project is I have no idea and that's a great question for Jason who's not here Jason hey Jason um so we can talk about those later on again it would be a split cost $25.75 and we could also have our 25% um covered by a grant so that's what we'd like to do that's good would be to have our portion done as a grant and we are meeting with the grant person for Stant Tech talk about all these projects we we have on Thursday this week so so can I waste two minutes of time here away Marty are you aware of the straw down I mean does it are they doing what I think it means they're going to drain the lake um I don't I haven't had any information about the you know them draining the lake okay so I'm not aware of that part of it it just seems like that much money they're doing something significant and the Elum I think that that's just a a treatment but that is a treatment for but the draw down coil the draw down sounds like they're going to drain the lake yeah I'm assuming Google says it's it's it's a draining of a lake yeah that's what it is and for AI you know six I I don't know what the purpose of that is for like said these are coming these are coming directly from our engineering team from they're communicating with the Watershed I don't know what the purpose of those those weren't on the projects before to kill bullheads sure and carp so okay oh sure sure make it deeper at that same time that would be cool it would be nice to they do is happening next year um I would agree so I asked the same question you guys did and I believe they're working trying to get the explanations for me have a representative on the Watershed District yes we do yep you will see him at the next council meeting oh good deal notes so like I said these are all updated projects these projects are not set in stone they're just the planned projects again trying to figure out if we can projects here or there and we will always use grants if we can so and your confidence is pretty good would get grants for these um I will say that if we don't get grants um the chances of us doing the project are probably small okay okay or smaller smaller and if we get grants okay yeah if we can utilize Grant dollars because there is a lot of Grant programs that I don't even think people apply for yeah that we can probably get and it's fairly easy to do it it's just get in the process any questions on the storm water fund there is again partions of the um storm water fund that are related to certain Street projects and the reason for that is to allocate different costs out to different projects okay storm water overall looks fairly healthy to into the future for now um could be something we need to look into in the future as storm water requirements continue to change for us as the city um we may have to look into different ways of funding it as long as if we have development we have to worry about it but if we don't have development for a while we may need to look at other ways to fund storm water projects because they come up more than what we'd want to believe um for example if we are to reconstruct a road as in take all the pavement off take all the dirt off if you do more than x percentage of inches or percentage of the thing you know then have to add storm water ponding that you may not have had before I don't know just for updating the road just for updating the road um which isn't a problem for us now as a young and fruitful City but when we become older and have to redo those roads that's going to become an issue is it just because they're adding curb and gutter now to it or no they've already curb and gutter before new rules related to percentages and overflows and percentage of 100e rain events and that would have came in on the south end of Zanzibar had we waited we waited and at all for that one we got in just before the Nick time and they considered gravel still as a nervious right or no considered gravel a impervious surface now they're consider gravel possibly a perious surface when you're redoing a roadway oh so that's interesting perious as in requires drainage correct impervious as imp imp okay we'll move to the water fund which should be the fourth page back or two back from where you were just at9 29 there you go and the reason why I'm looking at Water fund next is because this one is again the most prevalent related to Dollars wise is because as our continued growth happens we need to continue to fund new items related to the water department and they are expensive um the other half of the enclosed trailer with um tools and supplies is in here as well so this is also water and Sewer so is this going to be another trailer nope same trailer oh okay um there just half the dollars would come from the sewer fund half the dollars would come from the water fund to be able to get all the tools I don't know if it'll be exactly 20 grand my guess is it'll that's just a guess number you for for why are you're after 40 yeah yes that's what oh we didn't say it that way just 10 minutes well it's just we got the numbers from oo what they paid for their trailer out there teeth okay so that's what we going off I mean don't go there by the time we get by the time we get to get an actual cost it might come down um that's what our aim would be but we put up 40 in based on what we were told by iGo to to budget for it okay and 20 would come from the water department and 20 would come from the sewer department okay one comment I have and this is not a change on here but do we have 25 million for a Sal Dayton Water Treatment Plant I wanted to get to that yes and it's not I mean I know we kicked it out to 32 I don't know that we should even have it on here cuz we're not it shouldn't so we the water tower I understand that Maple Grove might require us to do that well and pressure may require us to do it yes but that's a different capacity so the reason we from St but from we don't have any current plans to move forward with uh south I mean separating from the Maple Grove Water System and that contract goes through 2035 so I I just don't see where we need this on there it's not a I think it's creates confusion instead of uh being a Tickler for planning correct sure so from our perspective as staff if that agreement only goes through 2035 we need to hge our bats as a city to make sure that we are funded and able to continue to Water Resources if that agreement is not extended so that is why it is on here it's cuz if as long as Maple Grove is not have an extended agreement with us which we have asked to redo and I think they've not said well it's out 2035 don't worry about it um we'd prefer to have it extended that's our goal as a city um staff but without that agreement being extended we have to plan to provide the same water service or at least something comparable for that area and the reason why it's in 2032 is cu it takes roughly 3 years to construct a water treatment plan we will not get it comparable at that price I hope we don't and I hope we don't ever need it but that is why it is on here from staff's perspective it's not because we're pushing for that or want to so it as this big ominous thing that we have to pay for it's the plan to be able to suffice if we don't get an agreement for that says they want to extend it can we add that to the item name something about per contract agreements if contract Maple Grove not renewed or something like that else fails yeah but I because I was going to say just add a column that's unassigned but that doesn't fit this need either I think if we edit the item I think it's helpful for people presume that Maple girl won't extend it and I have nothing that says that they won't they would be silly not to I I would hate I would rather be conservative and say here's the number it is going to be to suffice for that area for water than to say oh we're fine Maple Grove loves us we don't want to do anything and then in 2 years nle Grove says nope we're not doing that and we have nothing on this plan for how we're paying for that stuff yeah and I haven't looked at this recently but I did read their comp plan at some point in the past when we were more I think when we were doing the test well or something that um they don't they don't make any mention of separating from these agreements with us and tan the only mention of anything related to Dayton was the potential for us to me to add a water tower um that is correct yep so we have a meeting with people Grove in a month 3 weeks um with them so we did meet with them couple months ago 3 months ago related to staying on their water system and they needed to do some analysis based on how much our Dres how much they're anticipated us for having four draw on their system um what they needed to do cuz they're planning on looking at softened water through their water treatment plants they to plan that um so they were doing some analysis I think it was three or four months ago now um and wanted to get backed with us so they're meeting with I think it's like middle of November that we're meeting with Marty n and hopefully that will then spur up SP something conversation let's extend this agreement so we know we're both on the same path and we're going to be together which then eliminates all of those items should look for an evergreen agreement we don't have to worry about an ending I don't know if they would do that but we could ask yeah it's hard to say I would think they would but I don't know um so this water tower yes is at I mean given the the numbers on that that looks like it was actually calculated fairly yep accurately that's correct what about TimeWise because that puts it right after that 2028 Behemoth so and now we got another 6 million so that would be paid for out of a totally different fund and we would not need yep but yeah we we'd still have to make sure that we had plenty of water or water um whatever money water um in there yep in 2029 is really a good date it's a good date cuz that seems Kinder early it's based on usages that we're seeing currently in Trends um we could probably utilize a water tower today if it was you know a developer wanted to pay for one cuz they needed one related to a development that they needed we could probably utilize one today but um there isn't no there's no downside for us to have a water tower well I thought it was just really there for fire it's there for fire suppress it's also there for draws like if they have lots of user users on the yeah sprink systems right now like the's building for example if you drive by that building there's a giant water tank sitting on and the reason for that is there's not enough pressure on the maple gr system to fulfill that sprinkler system need to meet fire so they have to have a separate system if we had a water tower that would supply enough pressure they wouldn't need that they call it a sister or something it's a well I just the only reason I mentioned is cuz it is in 2029 and that's another big hitter that is correct that uh that tank you're talking about the cubes so cubes paid for it yeah they did oh yeah yeah it wasn't who cares if the correct but if we had a water tower they would have not had to do that for that product I don't care if they have to do it maybe what he's saying is if if we had a big business come in and say hey we have to do this it's going to cost us a million and a half dollars to build this water tank do you just want to partner now we'll give you the million and a half to build the water tower you pulling the water on territorial yeah I get it the question I have and maybe I missed it cuz maybe I missed it is there anything on here for a water tower for the Village yep it's the Northwest water tower there it is yep that's what I was and that is planned for a grant yeah so we had it funded for almost but fell for came came down the way well it's been we had two at some point it 2.14 something million in the last bonding bill and I missed it by 30 seconds at some point that was factored into the water rates and that was about want to say about 10 10 years ago yeah when into the Wellhead treatment plant that went way over budget that we thought so it wasn't lost dollars it just was um reallocated reallocated yeah so anything else on water again there's a lot of updated numbers here anything that's in red was actually updated and actual cost was given to us by engineering um anything in Black which is the again the ones that are close and the ones that are really far out those just Ball Park numbers we didn't do a actual does the wellhe head treatment for that well does that include already having the to Tower or is that without the tower no that's with the tower thought it was way cheaper if we had the tower significant I'm hoping it's not that much actually cuz that was with all the pressure tanks you had to put in I thought was the $7 million it was over 8 million but again they're using inflationary cost to in for 26 it did bring it down but it didn't bring it down the same rate that the cost we thought it okay yeah but it did bring the maintenance down I will tell you right now cuz the number of pumps that were in that thing right the maintenance on those things is going to be if we had to do that process okay anything else on water again healthy fund which is good that's a good thing to have and that means that we're able to do projects later on last one is payer management and this is probably going to take us a long time so I don't know how long you want to hit on it and such um and but we all night if you want to talk about it a lot of increased numbers a lot of new numbers in red it's probably the middle of your packet cuz I give you the entire long-term plan there you go page 25 um so Marty myself and Jason and Nick who you guys I don't know if you've met Nick or not Nick is our kind of second um Lauren was our previous person that we had um she was replaced by Nick Nick went through all of these costs and all these projects gave us updated numbers how much would it cost in here and there um based on the payment management plan that we used to get the um when we did the paper management plan we didn't pick a certain amount every year we picked we wanted to get to 75% or yeah PMI or whatever it was of 70% or whatever so they went through all the projects we grouped them together based on as close as we could to when the P management plan um had identified but we also tried to get them closer together so for example 2026 if you went back on the payment management plan it might not have had all of the products that were staying there but those were within a year or two um but we tried to group them by location so we could try to get get them closer from mobilization costs and because those mobilization costs end up being so much money for those projects that that's what ends up eating into a lot of the dollars so um 2025 salt Diamond Lake Road we already identified that again 1.4 million is in the budget um a chip and fog seal would cover the difference of the costs and again 550 is a general number doesn't mean we spend 550 it would be try to get as many many roads as we can done with chip in fog seal in 2025 if it's not 550 it's not 550 but um and 2026 the main ones are going to be Holly Lane which is from the Parkway south or towards King Solutions and then 125th Avenue and East French Lake Road which if you've driven that road at all you tell you there's a patches on patches on um East French Lake Road although that you could discuss whether that's going to be there long term or not it is a very very Patch Road and it's actually pretty well traveled um specifically now that the parkway is open and now you go down to the Parkway and you get a 17 17th Avenue you take a left on East French Leg Road to hit Zar north um it is pretty well traveled so we had move did I think that one was planned out a little further out and we said we should probably move that one closer just based on traffic um but again also trying to get them condensed in a certain area and then chip and fog seal of 250 and that's just to get us to close I think it's right around $2 million for that year that they were identified in um and so we'd be at U East French Lake Road deal yes that has to be a complete restruct reconstruct for that kind of for that number has to be 1 million bucks uh oh that's Dayton Parkway extension oh that is the port that's only developer cost and that's just the portion where it is guessing we have no clue totally what it would cost to be between the Parkway and 17 where it sits today extend it North to East French Lake Road 1.1 1.81 I think is Mill and overlay that has because it's Holly l and 125th and East French Lake Road which is quite a quite a Jun if you go all the way from um Fernbrook all the way across over to Dean pumpkins and all the way down to territorial is that whole stretch we're talking about redoing it's going be the equivalent what we're doing on South CL yep and then Holly Lane from the parkway towards would be quick trip at the time it's got to be over five miles then it's probably close yep well South D's 5 miles and that's 1.3 1.4 my guess is yeah 125th Avenue from Fernbrook underneath Zanzibar to Dean pumpkins and then straight down oh it's from Fernbrook all the all the way over down the territory and why I wonder why that road isn't such cuz that I think that was new in 200 which road just for clarity Mr east east FR Road East French Lake 125th all the way down to be done in 2008 is it 8 that late I thought it was earlier but it doesn't matter it's probably in that 08 area somewhere 10 I thought was 08 or 09 so why is it already uh yeah okay um combines and tractors Leo Leo I'm just gonna say com you want you want to assess that I'll hear from that Tom around uhhuh okay let's move on so that's in 2026 um 88 compliance you're seeing coming into play in 2026 as well and I'm going to pass one off to Marty um I think that's just a request from srf yeah so some time ago we uh were required to do a study um to bring all of our um handicapped accessible U sidewalks and uh stuff up to code srf did a study and they um came up with a number for us and we split it out over a number of years um to get the work done so that's where that those numbers come from I think the total project cost was somewhere in the $2.5 million for all of the upgrades that we need to do to Pavement and install um you know the domes and stuff like that for safe crosses for ADA compliance you will see those for a number of years yeah I see they go all the way up to 2032 so in terms of clarity for reading where a project like this continues on through multiple years why can't that all be on the same line oh yeah um which one's you talking about just use the Ada thing it's there and then you know five lines down it's there again in the next year I can do that if you'd like it just would instead of being a right now it's just automatically formula entered in so whatever is in that column that's underneath cost automatically just goes to whatever year is assign assigned in the replacement year it's just an automatic formula thing I can I see you're saying yeah yeah I think that' be that would actually be good cuz you'd still have it and every year just going across and you could just see it the question is is right now it's kind of stepped yeah you're scaled by year if you did that as one line when would you like to add that at the top do you want at the bottom cuz it wouldn't be stepped anymore it would just be all the way across which is fine it doesn't matter that matters they wouldn't step anymore cuz I just to call them anyways no it just it would be easier for me to read when I see it sure and then I see it again and well didn't we just do that yeah so it you know really the cost of the project is all of those numbers it is yeah together and it would be easier to understand that if they were all in the same okay I will make that adjustment I will probably move that to the top line item just because it makes the most sensitive on the top that way it's on you can see it all the way across but reduce the number of lines to it won't make it as it will not make it as long there's a bunch of those in there that is correct good suggestion um the next one that I want to just make sure you touch base on is an intersection improvements that we want to talk about that's rust Creek Parkway in Fernbrook that's the first intersection that was identified as the know projects and the Scopes can I ask a question on that that is a pretty heavy project yes sir that project wasn't list in the top three worst intersections in the city correct was not um no but the other ones that were were going to be taken care of with County projects in taking care of is a loose term right so what is funded by corrected and funded by the county in future years so there's no point us redoing them sooner even though they're number one two and three but my thought was if they're going to come back and redo those roads between now and 29 I think was the year whatever they had on their their slide wouldn't it make sense for us at that time to try to get them to do one of those three intersections since they're the three worst and we would do that that's correct so like I think the number one is North Diamond Lake Road and Dayton r Road and that's going to be redone in 2029 okay so it's I'm just further okay thank so yeah 2029 that's when North Diamond Lake Road and dayon Road intersection gets redone we suggested roundabout there that's what we oh they decided they have not decided what else would they do a stop light oh County yep yeah so no one it's significantly cheaper for stop light than it is for roundabout so um but we have enough I think um land around there we've also worked with through Park District and they are amendable to give us some land on the northwest corner there to be able or not us give the county and we'll have to sell them three or four more properties is it yeah um so that's why they may have taken care of in a future project by the county which is why they didn't get addressed by us soon sooner okay thank you what was the estimate here based on was this also RAB lights roundabout round okay didn't they didn't the developer try to get a round about there to begin with and we couldn't get it done yes he did oh The Rush Creek Parkway in yeah so so what I'm just curious and I I'm I think roundabout there makes sense it would have made sense before what has changed all of a sudden that makes us think that the parties that said nope you can't do that before all of a sudden going to say yes now like have we been having conversations with them and they're like yep no we're way more open to it now than we were 5 years ago and if we said great now you cover the developers cost cuz you should have let them do it when they wanted to do which is why we have a 50/50 cost in and and I think they're getting hammered by calls cuz Rush Creek in the morning is backed up the stack up and the vision on the intersection is not great um that is why we're putting a 50/50 cost split in there but we think it I just want to make sure if it's on here and someone sees it that we have some thought that the county is going to say yes to this and they're not going well hopefully More Than Hope like an email conversation that says yes we'd be open to this idea we should talk about more even that is enough I think to get it on here what I don't want to have us say is we love to come into this it's on here and we get to it everyone's expecting it and all of a sudden it never happens because we didn't do any to we won't guarantee the year but we have had continued conversations and that one is our of the intersections that we studied yep that was our most important that isn't going to already be taken care of on a different project that is identified by the thank you so that's why it's at 27 is because that's what we feel like is the soon as we could probably push the county to get it done with assistance um after they when do we think the roundabout will assuming that everything moves forward assuming everything moves forward DCM Farms what year do we think the round water will go at 113th 2026 or 2012 okay4 mat there's $32 million with the that's incl good luck what there's 32 total million roughly for the county to take care next DEC yeah good luck yeah it's not lost to me so we do have yeah so the Dayton of Road section I'm going to call that section three of our projects when they went came and talked to us about it which is uh the 2029 project the first one that's 100% covered by the county and three R Park District of that 7.9 million um and then you have 2029 as well dayon of Road that's south of north di Lake Road that is a what do I want to call it a rehab project that's a port that includes Pine View that we I mentioned earlier in the meeting that we'd have them discover see if they can make some more turn lanes and make three lanes there or whatever some wi widening will not be a roundabout there um but that portion and our portion would be covered by thers Park District as well because they would like to have a trail all the way along that road so um the county asked if we wanted a trail there we asked Park District they want a trail they said yes they'll pay for the whole thing so there's no cost um that is all the way from would be our border Dan D Galloway Park y okay all the way to essentially would be clo Overlook Park would be down in 2029 and again the 20 I use 2029 for the section I'm going to call segment two of their project which is our border or South Diamond Lake Road which is Tech technically in Champlain to North Diamond Lake Road of Dayton Road is going to be redone they don't know if it's going to be 28 or 29 I'm utilizing 29 because it's not a full Rec construct project it's only a rehab project do they have enough R away for a trail yes oh they do okay so they've asked if we want a trail along there C bck said yes so there will be a road whether it's 28 or 29 there'll be the road will be rehabed and also a trail at it all right a mini bike to Dave's house then huh yeah said I can ride my mini bike to Dave's house then uh not quite you'd have to stop at LC Stevens Park but yeah you eike ebike yeah um so those projects again those will be Pine View and Dayton of Road would be taken care of or at least adjusted as best we can without our physical dollars if we decide that we want to put any more money to that we can but it's going to be at our expense for the city for Dayton Dayton River Road and Pine View and then um North di Lake Road and dayon Road will be taken care of in 2029 so those were the I think those one and three is that trail going to be on the North side the whole way I think so okay it originally talked about a Crossing so that's what I thought but it to me makes more sense if they're buying out land the north side to have it be on the North side well if they already have the RightWay they must know I think it's on the north side of the road okay okay I say they're buying all that property there yeah and then shortly following that road is segment four of their project which is everything north of Vicksburg which would be um to Brock or anything North to Vicksburg all the way to to the historic village and that's where there's going to be a contribution from the city involved um and that is because of the intersection at Brockton Lane and River Road that needs to be reconstructed there is thers going to put a path on that one too um we'd love them to cover our 20% we have not talked about about they have not identified a year yet we are guessing 2030 based on what they that was the TBD yeah TBD section but no it's still kind of a roundabout right they're not it'll be a roundabout at Brockton and oh they are they confirm to be roundabout confirmed again we are suggesting that they do that and well I think that was their thought too a couple years ago when they looked it makes that all three of them that one makes the most basically of the of our top three those are our top three yep um and those are all be taken care of within the time frame of this project so what is the driver for the I'm looking at 29 again y the laale intersection realignment realignment yep so that was based on a on the intersection inventory study there was a suggestion to be able to fix that would be to move the road to the right um further away from where currently lines up because of the sight line that you see um to the right uh towards Gooden Park um would be to realign that road for laale so the realignment a curve yes towards the curve so you actually come into a straight T versus a kind of what do you want to call it a sideways that's another one where you got to kind of you got to kind of look over and you look right through your ey beam of your vehicle basically it's right down the line um that 1.5 million would be redoing laale all the way from South Diamond Lake Ro or North Diamond Lake Road to Dayton Riv Road and then also realign it it's not just the realignment it's not just the realignment that's one of them things that'll get pushed out until 2035 the one thing I do like about this is that we have I think better numbers than before because we had all these studies done so this is kind of the culmination of the work we've been doing over the last couple years to get our payment management better under control from a plan perspective so you got it this is the best pay management plan we've had fund we've had since I've been here easily and it's only CU it's complete with all of the information and accurate numbers or at least best numbers we can do today and inflation any other phones you want to talk about I know you we talked about um the fire station one I don't know if we want to do that tonight I'd prefer to do it at a different meeting if we can um we can push it out to wherever we want to again it doesn't nothing in this plan is set in stone so we can always move it out pull it back in leave it out pull it back in whatever we want to do but otherwise those are the items I wanted to touch on for sure I think I'm not sure what you just asked I mean it any other funds you want to talk about in the long-term plan that we discussed that I did not have on the slides well should be 401 through 410 which is Capital Equipment through Capital facilities which we've discussed at a previous council meeting before um I thought I seen something there too that me and I believe the only one that's really updated in quotes is we removed the locker remodel in 410 and updated the cost for City Hall yeah what what happened there um the reason for that is because of the police station that's being added to it as well to make a canus so when you did all this right is Zach since you're the person that did this right yep are you envisioning then like Firehouse with the police station and City Hall All in One location or are you envisioning we need a different location for help me better understand what that looks like that what you've put in here you have to have something in mind when you put it in here so whether I agree with it or not I'd like to at least understand what your vision is so the idea would be to best utilize our dollars by utilizing one facility similar to what Maple Grove Fridley Elk River all have it seems to be that that has been the growing trend is to put all of the services together in one location the only one that we would not put together would be Public Works and we would leave that there only because their facility is brand new no reason to move it um we do need to expand that facility because they are running out of Rome would it's amazing that they can fit as much crap as they can in there with people moving around and two Crews doing this and three crews doing that um but the idea from staff's perspective um would be to have a combined campus Civic campus similar to other communities around us and that also gives us the best bank for dollars too we don't have to buy additional land we're not spending dollars on same things that could be covered in different areas so you know we don't have to have you know 15 bathrooms in one location we could have you know 15 in one location versus five here 10 there three here and then more overall that is where the costs are coming into play well so this this 10 million I I guess I I'd still like to explore why it is that we have to have a new fac facility which fund do you live at just we all have at the same uh 41 the capital capital fac the 10 million for City Hall and I know I've heard you say that you think it's too expensive to expand this thing I just I I I have a hard time swallowing that it's going to sure yeah we can we can look into getting an architect to design the only way to expand this building is going to go up yeah um there's just no way to go I mean we can go out and take the parking lot out but then we're taking out more of the field too which then means but mean fine too you're comparing it to $10 million I think we can do lot Milli and I um when I put it together the first time with City Hall I was using a $5 million number and that was based on some other cost that I'd heard from fridley's facility was 4.6 million or something like that and that has everything in it so I was like oh that's seems compfortable but that was also pre-co so fry paid pre-co 5 million for the all three pieces of that sure yeah okay and fredley is a population of what a lot well it's the population but it's also I mean they got Business Clubs 44 runs through I mean yeah they they've got transan activity all day all night yeah yeah they also paid pretty pretty dollar for their do for their land too they took Ice Arena and they that old ice arena that was there and they made that an entire campus and made it a park and similar to what we'd like to do here in Dayton is to make it a facility that people can utilize 24/7 um and try to get a park and everything else and I I think that's the idea was to when we looked at Atlanta 117th it would be to be able to do more than just a fire station there um would be to be able to get a park out of the back side of the you know area and utilize the entire property for all of Dayton not just you know have a nice for one use yeah yeah for one use or just staff yeah yeah okay well like I said I I I'd like to see why it's going to be 10 million and why it needs to be a new facility that's all um and we are in agreement that Fire Station 3 is moving out to 2031 yeah I don't yeah it's up to council it's not death's perspective I certainly don't disagree I don't think it I agree I me phrases properly I think it should move out I don't know if 31 is the right number I don't if 30 is the right number I don't 32 is the right number I don't know what the right number we picked a number 28 so I'd be fine picking a number 2031 and like I said well it's going to also have to line up with City Hall and the rest if for if we decide we want to do all one spot then it's all going to line up on the same year right it's not going to matter whether it's 31 or 30 or 32 because there's three or four different councils between now and then and I don't I don't disagree with that my point is whatever we move that to we got to line everything up if we agree the goal is of everything in one building then we got to move everything to the same yeah time slot is what I'm getting at more than making it more strategic yeah I i' also yeah need convincing that that made sense too but it might yeah CU it's just like continuity of services if you know if I need to meet with the fire chief now I have to drive all the way down to the south end of town to meet with him to then drive back here oh I get that I get that I'm I'm I'm just saying minutes I'm just saying one facility sure I mean if you got a building here and a building here and a building here that's they could still be done you mean like Champlain setup you have individual individual building campus and I don't think way is different than for City so I don't think the one's tied to the other at least not at this point I'm okay with 31 and in the context of the discussion we're just having I we look at this every year so if we find that you know the need is driving it sooner talk about a year and maybe we'll know more okay okay I will move all of those items um the one that I'm not sure on is public works we'll have to try to figure that one out and we'll talk about that one later yeah we we the only reason I say that is just because of the growing staff and the amount of things that they have there um we can fix that yeah we can sure quck spending I I thought so so you had brought this up before was this just uh a a huge overhead uh roof and then some other uh extensions on the Public Works building or what was this to an a half million um I thought I thought you had given us a plan a while ago we that lean to cover yeah we were talking about having some outdoor storage um at one time um just to take care you know to to protect our equipment it's stored outside all the time it was thing no okay I thought this was part of it it's not no no no okay that was a separate thing and uh it was on the original plan and then it got kicked off of the original plan um got kicked off yeah it you just for cost effectiveness of the building okay so so it's just for outdoor storage of stuff to keep it out of the weather like U you know stuff that we put out there attachments and stuff outdoor storage equipment it's in there it's $100,000 that's a lean to Y and that again the $25 million would be to expand what's there currently and then add I think it's tip up panels and rough and whatever else but we'd have the what the two includes is not just the building portion it's also extending back the um ice or the what do you got the salt salt storage pushing everything back cuz then you got to add a driveway in the back further on you got to add a road further back so only doesn't just The Bu going east you're going east right yeah that's the only way you can go basically you ready to sell say how do the neighbors feel about yeah how do the neighbors feel about that I'll be dead before it happens yeah that's fine you missed that you're planning on that ear four years huh took 40 years to get a new one now you want another one in uh 10 10 12 yeah I mean like I said I did work in public works and it's like it's it's tight in that parking lot when you have all the trailers and the people moving back and forth and you got different Crews doing different things and it is tight in there and it was it was interesting so I can vouch for it to handle it yep again fine moving everything up to 31 that's fine that one is separate we'll keep that one if we can in 28 just for planning purposes but we could also talk about that and discuss that further at length um so I think that's I think that's a more how are you though I mean one of the drivers for the city hall was had a room here staff yep um I mean other than shipping Amy out in the back corner there you do you have a plan for my own area now we have two open cubicles currently that we revamped from two larger cubicles we remade them two smaller cubicles we can look at doing more remote work um and we can put you in a different office and get four desks back in that office easily I know got two cubicles that's two years wants to be back in Z office because there is no windows everybody is miserable when we have to visit him I know but I wish I ever got to pick my desk in the office when I worked in the office never once got to pick my desk that that I guess what I'm getting at is maybe there's an interm solution to where you know we don't need government buildings always seem to be these bulletproof I don't mean that probably pous words um block I mean they just seem to be expensive building can we do something at an extension that anybody else would do a commercial facility would do and it's po I'll out my I will say that typically um the reason why government buildings are built that way and why they're designed that way is cuz um Public public money pays for it no not public money pays for it's people can get frustrated with the city and that's when things happen no different than I'll use the New Hope shooting for an that's why they happen you don't get frustrated at a business and walk into business and shoot the business up well they could you can not always you not saying you can't but they typically happens more often at government buildings than it does anywhere else that's why they're built that way I think even you and I've talked about this even with the space you have I think that there are different options that other corporations have implored for example I work at General Mills they had fuse stations and they were able to get two almost two desks into a space they had one because they got rid of cubicles and had unassigned seats and it was just desk space You Walked In You plugged your stuff in and everything worked and it they were converting almost everything over to that right so so almost every space works that way and they find efficiencies in them too those people are miserable I I I I I I worked in those spaces and I had no problem with were a paper list that would be more realistic but we are not right I'm just saying that it if we can find a we are doing we talking about a short-term solution so we are doing all I will tell you right now that we have about a 100 people coming in a day for direct balloting um and it's I'm not meeting my legal requirements for space yeah okay um so we're not not facilitating what we're supposed to be doing legally yeah I I don't know like I said I think we are working and have worked on all the interrupt Solutions we possibly can the idea is to treat public dollars as if they are our own so we are doing whatever we can so and we did get numbers on revamping even to like turn the garage into remember using three years ago or so million it was a ridiculous amount of money that we didn't feel I guess what has always blown my mind is is if you have a commercial entity do something like this it's nowhere near the dollars yeah they also don't the public bid it either so they can have their friend do the project for half price I think also like why does a speed limit sign cost so much right it's because it says it's for the government they're going to charge it three times as much yeah I I don't disagree if I think we can find a worthwhile solution it's definitely worth looking at I also look at I just think you're going to run on a room here yeah sooner than 2031 yeah so that's why I was going to say I look at the long long term like if this is not where we plan on having City Hall this partial of land being the long term do you put the money in I think about then is it worth putting the money in to buy putting a couple million dollars in to buy us a couple years and to move everything or does it make more sense just to say you know what let's just get to where we need to get to and do it right and then and I think the upgrades here had a significant cost is because a lot of we don't have a lot of the ADA compliance that we would have to meet today if we were doing construction sure in this building in this space yeah okay that's another reason to exp what's Happ if you revamp it if you open it up if we expand it it's going to everything has to be if you don't touch anything no no no I'm saying not there's a certain percentage of remodeling that triggers Ada requ you got exactly about adding a second floor public hit that I guess so then you got to get an elevator we do have an elevator chter ready say this was set up there was one set up it's never been used in 20 in this building yeah it was there was supposed to be one in the other building too but somehow it got lost go check for check for for a fork you have what you need yep yep perfect thank you thanks item two looks like I'm closing this thing out tonight no quite oh yeah you are yeah Al we have another item we have too um so um looking to get approval to award the contract for the irrigation install that was approved to go out to bid in September um we've got the bids back um the bids came in under the engineers estimate um by $42,000 um the cheapest bid was for Peterson companies um I'm looking for approval to to award the contract to approve okay second is that just item Q item Q just okay okay I got a motion second any discussion on Q all those in favor say I I I I all those opposed say no car 5 to zero it just it disappoints me that this is one of the clearer things that we want to go after and we still got a a part that's useless in my opinion so anyway I guess you got just got to get we're getting there Scott it's getting there slower than we be dead before it's finished he's been saying that a lot I know you want to bet a dollar you seen your doctor is there some news you want to us item R um again uh this is part of the same project um this is for the power and well installation um the bids came in under again under estimate with Rena being the low bid at 177,00 is about $9,000 under bid so I'm looking for approval I have just one question here just one uh what's that nothing didn't say anything go ahead uh you and I talked there was supposed to be a gentleman that was going to call you I found out today that he didn't call you y so he's basically out of the picture and the only reason I wanted him to call you is I have an issue with this renter outfit and we don't have the option to wait another week or anything do we well there according to the bidding documents no the award is today can't we deny this bid and just go out to rebid we can do that but I don't know how long that holds him up I mean I don't is this something you're doing yet this fall yeah I'm trying to get this in this fall that's why I want to get it done if we can get the well drilled in the winter that's a good no I was told this morning that he was going to call you today but apparently didn't no I haven't heard anything for yeah so to me I don't care if we go ahead and go with it I'm disappointed in how this came in also because of previous experience with rener and the other bidder I'd say based on their numbers wasn't particularly interested in the work no yeah um at least that you know if you look at their bid there's a lot of just round numbers that you know so obviously I mean I think that the you know the bid the low bid is within in the range of the architect's estimat so you know I don't think that's unfair I just feel like we better put $50 or $100,000 into contingency because we're working with these guys again who have told us very clearly they're responsible for nothing should we put it in the contract that they're responsible for X Y and Z to help cover us on that that this is a bid there AR there aren't no change orders either you do it for this number you don't do it change it's always difficult with well drill as stuff because everything is underground is unknown so I don't know how we can it's the same old argument to me you're paying for their expertise yeah and where was it um yeah so yeah I I think we're going to stuck but do we have the option to wait two more weeks or not we would have to Reid so yeah we would have to Reit the thing all right is there a time length we have to leave the new bids open for I think I think well do know I think it was 30 days I don't no I don't think it's I think it's two weeks it could be that's what I wasn't show I think it's 14 days is how long the bit has to go out for ship for 10 days prior we vot for going out for B the possible downside Runner could come back and still be the lowest bid and be at $249 999 and then we're stuck taking that so it's it's a bit of that you seen this one yeah yeah I mean that's what I would do if I was them yeah I I you know and I think we I think it's unfortunate that this is how it came out because this is a company that we've not had good experience with maybe we'll get lucky and they'll change our experience mind well that's what it's going to be as lucky chose my words carefully yeah do good we agree we're giving a second chance give another chance to and there is no agreement that you can have this is your number right we can write them the contract I I would I would add that that ver verbiage to it but then they're going to ensure WR that's going to be well then then you then you have the option to to talk about it again yeah so if they don't sign the contract then we have to go out for a rebid and we we we've gone through this stuff the these guys they're going to build Insurance in if we require them to hit their number and that may be a good thing a bad thing I don't know but you know there if we had that I I personally would feel more more comfortable just taking the 186 although I guess we don't know with that they're going to Jer it around that's not an actual bid that's that's the architect so it's 177 or 250 I wasn't I just wasn't paying attention wor I put that in there to show you where the PS are at AR yeah all right whatever whatever you guys do you know if you guys think we should I'll follow suit but I wasn't here when that happened so I I looked to y'all for the guidance on this I don't know that we've got a good option here I'm okay with it only because I think we're kind of up against the wall so and you know if he's going to screw one up probably be better if he screws this one up $5 million yes I don't know and you know what I mean maybe you know we're picking out an instance that's an unfair example it just seemed like the attitude was lacking too so but yeah oh all right I'll get it over make a motion to approve okay need a second I'll second it any more discussion all those in favor say I I the PO say no no oh oh God Dave why didn't you I you could have told me it's symbolic okay four to one on to item s oh good night off to item have a good night okay estimate um mayor members of council item s was added tonight to the while rehab approval um I believe Marty was able to get two quotes M um de those two quotes for us I don't remember the dollar month two quotes uh I've got the spreadsheet here uh the two quotes were Rena were 125,00 and trout were 96,3 so we are requesting approval of rehab of the well number four which could be done in November which is why it's added tonight otherwise we couldn't get on their schedule um for the 96,000 that was that's with trout trout trout trout trout head low trout head the low bit did the original well yeah yeah I remember I think I remember them being Y and they have got uh availability in November uh to do the job it's a two Monon job we want to try and get it done um before the the worst of the weather hits in the winter um it's if it gets to 10 10 degre then it makes it really difficult for them to do the work it's a two-month job yeah and when are we supposed to have the pump back the pump is going to be ready in a couple of weeks here so are we going to wait to put the pump in y that's the idea because now I just want to make sure we're on the same page and Miss that's all so we're currently pumping around 500,000 Gall a day um which is well within the capacity of well 2 um if I don't think that that's going to be an issue um so we should be able to maintain all that for the next couple of months and then um install the pump and get that all set up at the same time as after clearing the wild so I didn't want to really put the pump back in and risk damaging it and then taking it out again and having those you additional cost of taking it out again and put it back in so this was to expand the expand the area or to pull the sand what's happened there's 100 ft of material that's dropped in the bottom of the well which is probably slued off from the top when we put it in production um and it's looks like it's sand so we're going to just um what they do is they pressurize the well to look for any more fishes and cracks and then once that's done they will suck it out they'll put a basically a big vacuum down the bottom of the hole pull all the sand out separate that out and then we'll do some more water samplings and then we will test the well for the water quality so they will run it up to 1,500 gallons a minute um and the water would have to be clear they put it in a glass J and they see how much sand is in there at that time and you guys do you guys do a uh have a way to measure that sand flow I mean that that um to know how much sand is in there uh they've estimated there's 150 yards of material at the bottom of the W what I mean is is you could at some point the sand started coming up right so that ate up the pump do we have any mechanism at all that checks the the clarity of the water that checks for sand or that yeah is there a sand filter or there's a sand separator in the warehouse itself and so once a week we will empty the sand separate and Visually see how much sand there is coming up did you guys see a spike in that or say again did you see a spike in that before the we saw a spike at the start and then we ramped down the the startup on on the pump which then alleviated that problem Oh but then you know recently we uh emptied the sand separator there was a small amount of sand in there but we saw all this metal material coming out of there and so we figured out that there's something going on down there and we caught it earlier than we did on the previous uh version these are these are DC pumps they're they're scrolling type but they're not pumps that are either on or off right that you can adjust the speed uh you can adjust the speed through the uh BFD and is there um a recommendation that it in my understanding is we used to just p on and full off and that Duty sake would cause privations to the water is that so we set a ramp up for for it um so it can you can go over 9 minutes as a ramp up on it is that is it is it pretty likely to be a fix for this or at least a I think that the uh pulling the sand out the bottom and pressurizing the well again is going to make it more stable I think that we will look at elevating the um ramp up time as well as a secondary precaution on this does the vfd chase chase the demand at all is it more step than that we don't run off pressure we run off of height in in the water tower um because if you generally um you would only run off pressure if you were taking a water tower out out of the scenario because then your water is sitting in the water tower all year and not getting circulated um so we run off of pressure off a elevation so it will get to 35 ft and it will call for the well and the well will switch on we'll fill it to 39 ft and then it will switch off it will ramp down it won't be just a hard shut off so the vfd steps in there if we were to take the water tower off of offline then we could run it um as a uh on the but it's not the preferred way of doing it um there's a lot of um issues with running it that way um you can have some back flow if you have a a big pressure drop can back flow the material down into into the well which you don't want to do um they're very and the Chlor and chemical feed is based on of the the speed of the motor so if that fluctuates you don't get that consistency with what you're feeding as chemical as well chist can I ask maybe a stupid question which is the sand trap when you say you're visually looking at is it like oh today there's this much and tomorrow there's that much or like is like how much of a so my question is is do we need to buy a $15 scale in every week just have you guys log here's the weight of the sand that was in there so that way you can say oh my goodness it visually we might not have seen it but we're like twice or a week ago it might be time to look at this and see if something's going on versus waiting till maybe it's not that simple this is why I said this could be a St a stupid question I don't know the answer I don't think it's a stupid question I think I could give you a stupid answer what we're we're currently doing is we're just piling the stuff up and and looking at it visually and taking an eyeball off it and saying okay yeah that's a big pile this week it wasn't that big last week it's not it's not an exact science but maybe the the scale would be a way going forward with that or at least some level in that just have a even a yeah a cheat sheet there that's Monday is blah blah blah blah we could do and you know what I don't know if but it seems like uh you know this sand really didn't do us any good no wanted to make sure that you are aware that so this is to try to our best fix for this well y if this is going to continue to be a problem we may going to buy other have we may have a bigger problem on our hands with what we're doing in the future so I don't want to say that this is the Cure All fix let's hope it is and not going woodn't saying that we it is but feel free to have the city council help you design the fix I will I'll make sure that happens David I would assume you want to make this uh motion though I'll make the motion sure I'll say for trout right yeah yeah I'll say okay any more discussion all those fav say hi all those opposed say no at carries 5 to zero and thank you there are no objections we'll be adjourned let go home for dinner I wish it look like that yeah it does e e e