Evening everyone. Clock just turned over to 6:30. So I will call um to order this July 20th meeting of the parks commission to order. Uh we'll start with the pledge of allegiance. Please. I 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. >> Okay. I'd like us to have a quick look at the agenda. Um and uh Adam Word, we're going to do some >> just during um public comment. We'll just have comment from the mayor. >> Okay, great. Um so with that slight adjustment, is there a motion to approve the agenda? moved to approve the agenda with the one change to moving up the public discussion comment. >> I second. >> Okay. All in favor? >> I >> I >> All right. Motion carried. Um public comment. Here we go. Mayor comment. Uh tonight we have in front of us the mayor um who's here to present some information that they had at their last workshop regards to the parks position that we've been talking about for the last um 16 18 months. Mayor, >> good evening chair commission. Uh just wanted to uh I know that you guys have done a lot of work and we've been doing a lot of changes to or improvements to the parks within the city of Lake Elmo and and one of the things in the uh parks plant master plan was to uh eventually get a position that somebody's dedicated to the parks. uh council discussed that uh two not this past workshop, the workshop prior in June. Um the discussion came around just being able to fund that position, how that position would would work within the city. The discussion revolved around what else can we do? There was a member from the um what is it this the summer uh or the school district's um >> draw blank sorry um community education. So, it really came down to right now that the council at this time doesn't feel like we have the the value to put into a position for the for the parks dedicated and to work with the community ed program more thoroughly to use our parks and locations for people not only in in Lake Elmo but also in the uh surrounding communities through community had um really trying to stay focused on the strategic initiatives that were set forth back in January, February when we had together. So, some of these items are going to take longer for us to get to both financially and maturity wise from a city. At least that's our our thinking on the council that what what kind of came through. So, I'm available for any questions if you have any regarding that. Great. Thanks for that update. Um, any questions from the commissioners? >> No, I think it's I appreciate your feedback because I I think it's important even though we don't necessarily do everything that's in the parks plan that we address those things and this is one the decision was made not to go ahead and that's I think that's a good way to go, good way to to do things. So, thank you again for your feedback. Any any timeline on revisiting it? >> Yeah, I guess that's just going to wait to be seen. We we need to make sure that the city's there financially. You know, obviously we're trying to reduce our debt long term. There are other things on the platter. We are spending quite a bit of dollars on redoing some of the uh playsets in the various I've seen some great comments on Facebook and other places where I think it was even somebody not in this community noted the public park playset somebody said well where is that what's the location so I think uh with the addition that just happened in um Lion's Park uh we're you know We're spending some good dollars on those. So, I think it's going to take uh we'll see how community ed progresses, see how that works with the city uh using the parks and then progress on, you know, it's almost like a um what's what what's the population that it takes to kind of determine that. We have some surrounding communities that do have have dedicated uh park recreation uh employees. We have some that are relatively to our size or a little bit larger that do not. And so it would be something that would progress along those points. >> Um one quick question. So, um, was the community ed representative able to speak at all about the, um, you know, the support that they might be able to provide in terms of bringing grants into the city because I know that was one component of that was in the master plan of a potential dedicated person was about Yep. about making the financial side work. It is community ed more on the programming side or more on the like bringing in investment side or do they kind of tow that line? I >> think it's more of a programming side and they work with individuals that want to do something inside the parks and >> make those opportunities available within the school district area really. So, you know, potentially people all the way from Marina and St. Troy down to Afton over to down into Woodbury and and over to Oakdale could participate in in the continuing or community education program and use our parks for those purposes. >> Okay. Thanks. just knew that this was something that was on your mind and wanted to make sure that we addressed it with you and didn't leave the hanging chat so to speak and have some communication so you were aware of what was going on in case you don't have an opportunity to watch the workshop videos. So >> yeah, thank you. Thank you. I appreciate it because I think this tonight's discussion on the sports complex and as you mentioned as kind of Lake Elmo evolves I think maybe as time goes on as Peter mentioned perhaps revisiting it when it's financially feasible to to do so and when there are enough things that become difficult to maintain. So I appreciate the the update. >> Thank you commissioner. >> Yeah likewise. >> All right. >> Okay. Thank you. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Okay. Next, let's look at the minutes and uh if there's any changes. Um and if not, if there's a motion to approve the minutes. I just appreciated that the staff present was captured in the last meeting. So that's great. I'll make a motion to approve the June 15, 2026 minutes. >> Thanks. Is there a second? >> I'll second that. >> All in favor? >> I motion carried. Thanks everyone. Moving on, we'll get an update um from Jason about the 76 acres. Thanks. >> Good evening. Um just wanted to give you an update on the 76 acre um park. As you know, we've been through a couple meetings. We had a joint workshop uh did an update in December with the parks commission and then uh released the RFP in early June. We're looking for four main tasks. The first one is really a financial analysis for the sports facilities, different scenarios. We talked about art artificial turf. Is it going to be a tournament type facility? Basically having someone look at that um looking at the needs, working with the sports associations. Task 1B, it was clear that there are other non-sports amenities to be placed in the park. So going through that process and determining what should go in the park that isn't a baseball field, softball or soccer. Um then obviously community engagement. Community engagement is a big part of this asking them to submit a plan. Test three is development recommendations, phasing and a site plan. This come up the cost. It's not sure what the cost is going to be. It's going to be based on what the community wants to see and what's approved ultimately by the commission and council. So we do see you know what what are their recommendations? How should this be phased? What does a site plan look like? What can we actually fit on the site? And then task four, this is really important for us that kind of ties into the financial analysis on the front end, just on the back end, preparation of a long-term management plan, um partnerships, that's with sports associations mostly, and staffing. So the questions that were just brought up, this is something that the consultant would look at going forward depending on what is built at the site. Um, so the RFP was released, it closed, we received nine proposals, all from qualified people. We have about three that were over budget. We released our budget with the council and that released at $60,000. three of them were substantially above and we've kind of had four or five that we're looking at um finalizing and and making a recommendation to the council. Um that's where we're at in the process. We have about um I think at the end of August is where plan to bring it to the council. We still have some questions for the people that submitted the RFP. So we're doing some follow-up there. And the question we have tonight planning the parks commission is uh what kind of involvement because after this group is selected we have to implement a community engagement plan. So what kind of involvement would the parks commission want to see in the process uh what are some of the priorities too? So, we requested a web page. We requested stakeholder meetings. We requested meetings with the sports associations. Also, following up with the parks commission, open houses, things like that. So, anything that you could um contribute tonight will help us move forward with that in terms of getting the right community engagement plan put in place as we move forward. >> Great. Thanks Jason. Um does anyone have any questions first and then we can transition into more of a discussion after if but if there's any questions about the content right now. >> So this is officially going to be a Lake Elmo park. >> Yes. Okay. >> As opposed to >> a a ball field. Whatever. Because what I'm going to say next is that if it is a park, then our interface should be basically as we do with other parks where we approve um the facilities. Uh we approve the layout, we have the usage guidelines that come out under the parks department. Um, so to me that answers or input for a lot of your stuff is uh and Adam knows the kind of stuff he brings to us. >> But every other park with that's the things that we do. Okay. So if you're going to put a pickle ball court, we would be involved with it. If you're putting a whatever and then we have the we set the rates for the um ball fields everywhere else. I assume we do the same thing with this. But that's my input >> to answer the question though in terms of the sports complex or a park. It's a park, right? But in terms of how much programming was the does the programming look like? Obviously that hasn't been determined yet. That's going through the process. >> And I realize there might be the point you made some major exception, but I think that's a the that method serves as a framework at least going forward. So your point is that there's a process that we already use for a lot of these things, >> right? Why would we invent something different unless there was some specific thing? >> Are there any other questions right now? >> Yeah, I guess I have a specific question about the the financial scenarios. Did you um give them criteria of what those I know you mentioned a couple as far as very briefly, but are there different scenarios that you provided of what those those potential financials would be? Meaning, I think I heard uh the last time you were here, I think when you were talking to other communities, it was somewhere in the 20 to 25 million for financials. Did you give any instruction to say, "Hey, here's option A for less. Here's here's the middle one. Here's the allout Cadillac version." Is that something the RFP had? >> Yeah. So, it gets into number of baseball, softball, and soccer fields. So, based on the work that I've done, those are the three associations. >> Okay. >> That were looking to move forward. There could be more, right? So looking just you know the user the users the types of sports then field surface artificial turf or grass with various artificial turf scenarios and an analysis of maintenance needs for associated cost and turf replacement. So turf replacement plan so all turf scenario turf at ball fields grass at soccer fields and then turf infields or you know certain fields or turf like you know whatever they can come up with. So, we're looking at um basically the price of the turf, right, which we know is going to be expensive. >> And then the replacement cost of turf, which we know is going to be expensive. >> Okay. >> And then we looked at also staffing and partnering with the sports association. So, is it going to be city staffed? Is it going to be leased to the sports association, which sports associations have small sections, right? So, looking at that and then scale, do people want to see a tournament level facility or is that not needed? So we want something that is consolidated baseball. You have maybe four or five fields, but it's not to that level of trying to draw tournaments. So looking at that and looking at the revenues that that could potentially bring and does that even make sense because it maybe it would be really nice to have, but we can't really count on the revenues to pay for the artificial turf long term. And then field lights. I think we probably want field lights, but I mean just looking at all those scenarios where you could cut cost if that's where the direction the commission and the council want to go. And then we're looking at locker room facilities, concession stands. We talked about, you know, instead of having concessions, maybe you have food trucks, right? So you have different ways to cut cut costs there, too. So that's part of it. >> Yeah. I guess so. The other component is uh the various list of amenities or and they're not even amenities, other facilities, pickle ball, pavilions, um hard surface courts, um amphitheaters I think is listed. Um I I've heard discussion in the the council about a central play facility, which um would be quite costly. So I guess my point is when we're talking about getting the different financials from in the RFP and somebody's that going to is going to do that work when they present it for for I just want to understand the process when they present it to community for review approval input are there going to be various structured layouts about costs so the community is able to make a decision or is this going to be communitydriven and and then we add up the cost afterwards. I just I want to kind of understand that. >> Yeah, I was just looking back at the RFP. The intent was to add that as a oneb as opposed to just like more community engagement and figuring out like what do you want because there could be features that are really expensive, right? Or the maintenance cost may be really high. So that also is part of that financial analysis. So like for example, I don't know, I'm just throw out there like clay court tennis, right? If someone went to clay court tennis, like what does that look like, right? um that could be really expensive to maintain, but other things maybe not as much. So, >> yeah. >> Well, that's I guess this isn't a question, just comment, but I'll say it anyway. That that's where I'm I'm I'm trying to parse down a lot of times when we're on the park commission and and park staff and the master plan kind of lays out needs already and we have a good grasp of needs. And I think some of these things we could probably um drive or make a decision on the front end about what we would actually be um spending money on versus what we shouldn't. And so I I guess I'm echoing some some comment that's already been made as far as the being in the question of being involvement or how we're involved I think is is pretty important. um how how the commission is involved in how we help drive this and I'm again I'm just trying to understand ask questions understand how this process works because it is a fairly large process outside of what a normal normal park that we do but by and large it's >> probably the same process I mean it's it's what are the needs and what can we afford and so on and so forth. I just have a quick question about the proposals that came in. Did you find that the um proposals were those contractors did they have a range of experience with these various potential uses or was there a lot of specialization for like oh this this group builds youth sports facilities and how are you kind of um going to evaluate which one you're going to select? >> We're going through the scoring process right now. So we have make we have a matrix and we're going through looking at the points for community engagement making sure how robust their community engagement is. We ask for hours and rate so we understand how many hours they plan to spend. Um definitely some like you we have local people that are used to building in the area Iowa, Wisconsin, Minnesota. Um sports facilities and parks a lot of times it's we have a facility here and then you know just more I would say like open space type you see that we also have maybe one or two that also did really large projects. Um they would tend to be very expensive but real stadium type projects, right? Um, so we got a pretty good range. So I think some people read it sports complex and said, "Oh yeah, we build, you know, hundred million dollar facilities. We would want to, you know, try to get this RFP." But >> okay, >> you know, that's kind of what the range that we >> Okay. So like literally everything is what you kind of saw come in >> a little bit of what we would expect, right? I didn't expect to see a large facility. I think someone worked on a like a MLS soccer stadium, right? So, like I wasn't expecting that, but you know. >> Okay. Okay. Okay. That's helpful to know. >> Is there um either part of this or maybe it's already been done or it's done in other places. Is there going to be an environmental impact review? >> I don't think that's part of this scope. That's something we can consider in the future. >> Right. Everything from, you know, drainage to the environment around the area. >> Yeah, we'll look into it and see if it triggers a environmental assessment worksheet. >> Okay. >> But I mean at some point we will have to go and do all the engineering traffic study. I know that's been concerned especially if it's a sports complex and what that looks like. We just don't know yet. U one of the things that was discussed was using a um reuse pond for irrigation. It's required of new developments. So we would have a pond that we would use for irrigation, a reuse system. So that was discussed just because that's the city's policy for new developments. >> Okay. Any other questions before we transition into discussion about what type of involvement we want to see. >> I'll try and make it quick. Uh we've heard stadium style a couple times. Stadium. I think the input from that is probably coming from associations or maybe even as a minor minorly or or a >> down >> I don't know town ball or whatever it is. Um, do you anticipate how we would weight associations and and leagues or whatever it is that want to have the grandest thing versus what our community needs and how you how you plan on weighing that >> deciding that. >> So, that's something we talked about and it's kind of a wish list when we talk to them. So, it isn't like we don't want to be here if we don't get this facility, right? But just talking to high school example, one of the things they said is they would need something that, you know, softball and baseball, >> but they're not like they're not looking for a large scale stadium. I It's kind of hard. It's kind of like a stadium light if you could just better covers some sense. So, I mean, I think it's just going to come out with the commission. I mean, it's going to be a question when you go through this process. Is it something you're going to hear feedback from the sports associations, right? I think that's a decision that you're going to have to make with the council because it also comes back to the cost at the end of the day, what everyone wants to spend on this project. Yeah, I guess that is one of my and this is kind of moving over into comments now or discussion now, but um yeah, I mean that overarching question of what do people want to see in terms of soliciting community feedback, right? that of course there's going to be of course folks need to advocate for what they want to see and it's going to be it feels like it will strongly be influenced by that but I I think that if this is truly going to be a community park that's not a specific associations park you know that's not these different um interest groups those opinions I guess I I think and I guess that's kind of getting into the involvement that I want us to see is I feel like um the parks commission and city council too, like when we see uh proposals come before us for different, you know, programming of areas or uh amenity replacement, that type of thing. Um you know, I think that one of our jobs is to kind of filter that through, of course, and like I know it's your job as well. Um, but I think that that is kind of an important moderating factor. Um, so that things are so that input's weighted correctly and that it's not over so it's not out of balance, I guess. Um, not that anyone's going to be perfect at that, but I think that kind of the different levels of not approval of discussion that Hank mentioned that we see through other um, you know, steps of reviewing something is what I want to see. Um, yeah. Okay. So, now let's transition to discussion. >> I get I'll start. I I guess I look at this completely differently than a normal park we review. I mean, we could be spending six million, we could be spending 20 million. Um, I know the city's not a fan of task forces, but I thought what we did with the master plan worked fairly well. And I envision something like that for this where you could bring the association representation, community representation, park commission representation, high school council, what staff. I I I think this has a big effect on all of our other parks. >> Yeah. >> Yep. >> And I I guess that's part of our involvement as well as then reviewing it like we normally would. Yeah, I think a couple maybe a couple more touch points though with the entire commission than what we saw for the master plan because it is >> I I agree. Yes, I agree. But to me, this is more than a park. This could be a significant, you know, it might decide that we decide to, you know, not take away a pickleball court in a park because we've added pickle ball to this complex. But I think if you talk to your point that global perspective, I think that's the best way to do it because I don't want to be at this seat and hear, okay, this is what baseball said, this is what softball said, this is what the high school said. It would be good to get that everybody talking together about their needs and their what they want. Um, and that would include what this commission sees as well. So that that's that's just my take on this, but I could be the lone the lone wolf on that end of it. >> Oh, Tracy, I feel like one thing that I've seen worked well in other like standing commissions is if there can be just kind of a placeholder as soon as you know the contractor is selected. And I totally agree that some touch points with I think we can have up to two commissioners before we start to um you know have open meeting law uh considerations >> that or three commissioners um that's fine but if there can maybe be a standing agenda item where I don't know yourself Jason or um one of those task force members if that's what we want to call it whatever that ends up looking like. Um, depending on what the community and what the city process is, that could be a good way to make sure that everyone is informed and that there's that it's seen, you know, that we're prioritizing that touch point because I think that, you know, that's sometimes something that we struggle to do and it is really impactful for the sequencing and decisions that we make on other topics as well. I I agree. I think the question was asked by in your memo of what what participation we'd like to see. Uh you know our our task as a commission is to one of them is to participate in making recommendations on the development of parks. So that would be the short answer is I want active involvement in making decisions on developing this park whether it is uh touch points whether it you know as far as uh one of us meeting with staff whether it is one of us that we assign for example to tag along and help with the evaluation of RFPs. I think that's a entirely appropriate thing to do. it could be done by committee and um as uh Tracy suggests or or whether it does become that larger group like the park master plan and any of those uh may be acceptable but the short answer is what I would look for is active participation in making recommendations to the development of this park. I do not think that this commission has been involved. You can correct me. I I don't think we've made any decision. whatsoever or recommendation. We wouldn't make a decision, but we' make a recommendation regarding this park. So, I just I'd like to see that. >> Okay. So, right now I'm hearing kind of three asks, I guess. I we'll call it a task force with commission involvement. A standing agenda item during regular commission meetings until this has been completed. And as a commission, we want We want to be recommending to city council the staff's recommendations that are coming before us before going to council. >> As we would do with any other park. >> Yes. And I think with the the stakes are being are higher with this park and I think it justifies our involvement through the whole process and I think that's our responsibility as parks commission. >> Um Jason, can I ask you a question? Have you done or has the city done anything similar with other um commissions in terms of kind of intense involvement when a topic is so closely tied to like the charge of that commission? And are there ways like are there ways around um limiting the commission involvement um like uh you know workshops or something like that because I I understand that as city staff you can't be having open meetings all of the time to even talk about something. Right. So in the past with the fire station, we had a committee review it. So it was members from the planning commission, EDA, you know, groups. It was it was basically like you're explaining with the task force. >> Okay. >> I mean, I think if you want to set up a task force and make sure you aren't running a foul of any open meeting laws and just setting up who wants to be on that group, that's something we can um look into as we move forward. Um, obviously I think the sports associations it would be great to get, you know, get everyone in the same room too and you can hear from them. Exactly. Because it it wasn't like a, like I said, this is our list or we don't want to use it. I think there's a lot of flexibility there. >> So, um, I think that's something we can definitely set up. And then you mentioned the agenda item, but also just check-in meetings and maybe assigning one person that's on that um task force from the commission to be that lead to come back. >> Um I don't think I think that's it's definitely workable. Also on the 180 acres, we had the ULI come out and they had just, you know, one day basically two days. It was one day with with stakeholders just talking to stakeholders, conducting those meetings with them. So I think that was really effective just to get kind of understand where everybody how everyone really feels like there may be somebody that's like doesn't really want a high level sports complex, right? Or someone that really does want that. they they want to have that almost like a booster club that manages youth sports. Like you won't know that until you get everybody in a room. So, um I think that format works well. So, we've done it a little bit. >> Okay. I feel like we're entering into the second point of this discussion and and I guess maybe it's a point of clarification for you, Jason. Are you looking for us to also discuss and weigh in what are the priorities for like involvement in trying to determine what this looks like overall across the community? Um or were you more specific looking about what type of involvement you want this commission to have? >> What this commission um yeah what what the commission's involvement is going to be. But also there's certain things that we need to um address with the community engagement plan. We know we want a website or you know some of them are saying arc story map right but do you want an open house or two do how much involvement do you want with the sports associations in terms of making sure that they're having those meetings. You mentioned the task force maybe that just addresses it so that that happens. How many commission meetings do you want to have? Right. like it may just be one meeting and then there's the kind of almost like the final product after working through the task force. So it's kind of like >> what's most important in terms of community engagement because as you know there's a budget and everything you know it cost a certain thing. So we just have to like make sure we're not exceeding >> that right. So >> totally. Okay. So this is our time to discuss our wish list for community engagement then. Um, Tracy, I know you have a lot of experience here. Yeah. I mean, I think it it I think you can I don't think there's a one I mean, I'd like to see kind of a dovetail into multiple things. And again, I know I know there's a budget, but but I think, you know, it's a it's a combination to me of task force, maybe some public because that the public open houses, you might have just some people that are, like you had mentioned, more interested in just the park in general. Um, I don't know if that's a, you know, a one time, depending on timing, a one time or two time thing. Um certainly I think there's you could do input at some of our events that we have already in place and there's no cost to that you know so we can get input there and and then I think staff still needs to probably meet or probably still meet still needs to meet individually with the associations and the in the high school. I mean even if they're on the task force I think it's still important to have those one-on- ones >> um focusely stakeholders. >> Yeah. And maybe it's more. Maybe it's community ed. I mean, the mayor just talked about asking community ed to activate our parks. Well, now we've added, you know, that that ele maybe. We'll see what happens. But, um, I I think it's I'd like to see it laid out in terms of the timing and just, you know, it's if it's RFP, you know, you get the RFP back and you pick whomever and then that's when it starts and then identify if you want to go the the task force route. Um, I just think that's the simplest way to kind of get that initial global engagement. and then some open houses I think staff still and then regular I mean I think we'll have to decide depending on how quickly the process goes what meetings we would have with then with the council or just discussion with the commission again there's no cost to obviously us getting updates as a commission and certainly meeting with the council in a workshop perhaps one or two times I guess it just depends on how this proceeds because it it could be it could take a while. >> So right now the timeline is about four to five months. One thing I want to add too is we um are using a platform called PCO. It's part of the national community survey. So we started we've used it before on the 180. Um so one of the reasons this is taking longer than I wanted it to is we were trying to align it with the NCS. So this group would be able to formulate questions that would be part of the larger NCS, not just for the park, but specific park questions, too. So we would have a a survey >> with that. >> I'd also love to see some kind of informal and opportunistic engagement. And if we could figure out how to do that in a really like a way that gets high quality data, I think that that would be really useful. like at National Night Out, right? That's right around the corner. Um there's huge attendance last year, right? Um I feel like we're kind of that four to five month or four to six months window means that I don't know maybe some of the winter type community events would not make the cut off here. Um but yeah, I I I don't know. So, I guess I would love to see questions and opinions and um that type of stuff come out of these pre-existing events where there's an opportunity to connect with a high volume of people. >> We've had bad experiences with surveys and that's part of the reason that they're suggesting these alternative means. seems like you have to get people involved and really engaged before they'll give you a lot of opinions, but just during a survey hasn't seemed to work in this community. Yeah, I I guess with that I I mean I think that the 180 acres um that was, you know, just seeing kind of the different phases of community feedback that happened with the um you know, really targeted one to two days questioning and then it just went out to a survey and some open houses. Um, you know, I I think that giving people something to react to is often really helpful in terms of getting feedback, targeted feedback, but then I think that there's also the risk there of having something too far along that it's constrained what that feedback looks like. So I think somehow like towing that line would be really helpful in terms of when you're looking for that global engagement, can it happen twice, right? Can it kind of set some intentions? And maybe that's something more informal. And then can it, you know, can you push that forward or if you need to kind of readjust a little bit? I like the idea of having I'm just thinking from past experience not communitywise but in the business world doing surveys and doing qualitative um getting the qualitative feedback early and then the quantitative feedback is at a different phase to your point like because you can use some of the qualitative or the informal sessions to get the opinions and sort of then kind of narrow it down some versus having which is is really positioning that engagement given that framework. I guess >> I think some of these things are going to be determined by the person the not the person but the entity that's hired through this RFP process. Correct. I mean, how how we engage with community is going to be driven by that. So I I guess I would be in favor of just if tonight coming up with some something concrete and I don't I guess I'd look for your input about whether you we would want to whether we make a recommendation to city council or however this happens but for one of us to be involved in the RFP evaluation process whether that's something you're all interested in because that seems to me concrete. It seems like some of us have some experience with this and could certainly lend a perspective that is within our purview. Uh and again just something concrete that we can decide on bots. >> No thoughts? >> No, I agree. I think anywhere along the line where we can um have input or listen and report back is really helpful. >> Y >> I think we as to take on about the input from the community. We've got the night out. There's the September um citywide activity. There's going to be things going on with the new school opening. I wonder if we could if the school district would allow us to have something there because they'll have lots of things going on. there's lots of opportunity to get input and I I think we should try to do that wherever we can along the way you know at the front end and then once we have some things more firmed up possibly get further input to narrow things down >> from your perspective as staff is that a possibility >> to have be involved in the RFP I think if you want to assign one person that we can work with so that way you're informed it's fine I mean would like to know tonight because we're on a >> you know timeline. So if there is one person that wants to do that then >> just let me know. Yeah, I was going to ask Jason, what is your timeline for that? And um I mean again, some of these things would be determined based on your contractor, but is you know, do you and your staff have a standing weekly, couple times a week meeting for this that we can kind of use to figure out, okay, what what do our availabilities actually look like? because it's not helpful to be involved if you know >> we talking about the task force or >> um I I guess both >> right so so right now we're going through the RFP process y and we have scored the RFPs we have followup where we are going to have questions for basically the top four or five >> so we're in that process right now so if someone wants to be involved we would need to know basically tonight just so we can share that information if one person on the commission just >> well I can ask it a different way did did you intend to have this go before the parks commission as a part of the the RFP approval >> to to go in front of the parks commission >> it was not set up for the approval it was set to go to the council >> uh is that something we would like to see in lie of having somebody >> I think in lie of that would be appropriate >> so what we can do is we can um probably have the finalists how we typically submit it to council the finalists and then you would get to see the packets and the pricing. So, the pricing is confidential until it's selected, but we could send that and put that on the schedule. >> That would work. So I want to say with this process too once we get through the selection with the community engagement we can also come back and bring that update prior to the contract or after the contract we get the community engagement set up you understand like the timeline everything moving forward then the process happens right based on this RFP the way it's written there should be three scenarios with cost so at that point it's the plan is created with these scenarios however that looks in terms I'm talking really the sports facilities because you know the cost you know talking about the cost and then that is a document that is then the next step is which one do we it's going to be a longer process right so like the six months is going to have this document of options and then it's also like which one do we really want to move forward with >> yeah okay Jason is this too much to ask for and fellow commissioners let me know if I didn't get this quite right but um if we selected someone from the commission tonight to be involved with the RFP in selecting the final contractor here. Um, if we did that and then if we tabled kind of this discussion on task force, how to involve the commission with that committee, whatever it ends up being until you have selected the contractor and kind of know what they're proposing for interfacing with city staff as well and what that kind of meeting schedule might look like. Would it be do you anticipate that that would be okay for us to start to have that information? so that we can, you know, prioritize and figure out our own availability um at the August meeting moving forward >> to determine the three people that will be on the task force >> or is that I mean >> I'm just I think with timing I mean it's >> what I think we would do based on the conversation is >> figure out the task force we would tell the consultant that this is the like these are the things we definitely want to see >> and then they come and put plan together with timing and at that point move forward and then we can send that out and then if some people can't make it you some people thought they could then at that point that can be determined. >> That's why the theory is nice. Well, and if you do a task, if you do a task force, something will have to be sent out to the community like the master plan. >> Yeah. Was, you know, asking for people and then asking, you know, selecting representation from associations hopefully are asking that they submit somebody to represent >> on the task force. I mean, we don't have to do we don't have to we could just say that's our approach. We don't have to figure that all out, I think, right now, but we could certainly add to the approval of the contractor that they that's that would be our that would be our approach if we decided >> approach. Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Is with a committee. >> Okay. So, I think if the commission agrees, we need to kind of select someone that we'll recommend um Jason will reach out to and think about being involved for the RFP. The remaining components here selecting that contractor with that information. Are there any nominees? I guess self-nominees or other nominees Peter you've expressed a lot of interest >> no I guess you know as we discussed this I mean part of the pro this process is to get the information as I discussed this I think if I would be satisfied if we were involved in making the recommendation to the that it come to us as a group the RFP the selections um before it gets re and we make a recommend as well as staff obviously makes a recommendation >> to council. I think that to me is an acceptable way to go rather than have somebody. >> It sounds like at this point jumping in the middle of it. It sounds like you're well on the >> and we have scorecards too. So like we're going through the process. We're giving scores for certain we're giving scores for cost, right? So like >> when we bring it, it's going to have the scorecards in the background of what we're recommending and why. We'll probably call out certain things. That's something we've already discussed. Um, and then we present it just the same way that we would to the city council. So, you would see that and then you would see the pricing and you have the hour breakdown and kind of the financials and >> Well, that sounds great. And I think if you need to move faster, it might be okay to consider, you know, like a workshop, calling a workshop in advance of our next monthly meeting. Does that seem to resonate? Because >> Sure. >> I don't I like I don't I guess I'm concerned about us holding up a process by an extra two or three weeks that you know you've already expressed a little bit of concern with, right? So I feel like >> if we don't appoint anybody, my suggestion is that we do kind of appoint the chair and vice chair as people points of contact if nothing else. So if something happens >> uh tomorrow morning and you need some input from this group, then there's a person or two persons you can get a hold of. That's my suggestion. >> Yeah. Um, and then I think we should also select an alternate to Tracy and I so that we have three in terms of thinking about detailed involvement if that is >> except with open meeting laws. >> Right. I I guess Jason, does that if we would wait until for you to bring that back to our August meeting, is that too late or do we need to >> have a or do we need to have like you said have a separate meeting to look at the proposals >> so you can get it to council? >> Yeah. Ashley, do you know when the we plan to bring it to council? >> We plan to bring it to council on 8:18. Um so this would push it back regardless. >> Got to do it tonight, guys. So, we can just push it back. Um, >> 91 I think would be the next date, right? >> You could also do a special meeting. I think I was going to say that. >> I think we should do a special meeting so that you can keep that >> 818 schedule and that you know >> this can just be a a more transparent process, I guess. And Ellen, I'll just follow up with you in the next couple days and we'll figure this out. And then I think I heard task force three people >> that can get decided. Whoever wants to do that, we have more information. We're going to bring this back to the commission in terms of the finalist. You'll see the background and then >> you can go from there. >> That sounds great. And that's really helpful to know that that 8:18 is what's on the calendar, too. >> Okay, that was a lot. Thanks, Jason. Um, is there anything that anyone feels like we've left out as kind of a summary point here? >> It's a lot, but it's what is expected, I believe. Yeah, >> I I'm pausing because I I I do want to I I'm inclined to back up a bit about a specific item on here about how how this property was chosen and when I and how that process rolled out and in the context of again hearing sports stadium amplified potential ampl ampl amplitheater whatever that word is um lights. Do you know has anybody um done any po any any sort of evaluation of how this would impact potentially Lake Elmo Park Reserve, Sunfish Lake Park, which it's housed right between is has anybody through the purchase process or any other process that you're aware of talked about that >> in terms of affected how >> again uh sound amplification light, traffic, noise. I actually my my main concern when I first saw that property, we weren't involved at all in that property. When I saw that that was the decision was made, I thought, okay, that's I mean, that is what it is. And I was picturing a kind of a pinwheel sports complex. >> As this has been rolled out, I'm getting a different picture. I understand we don't know exactly what that's going to look like, but it looks to me that has very good potential to be a lot bigger than just a pin wheelel ballpark >> and a less stadium. And at that point I start to think about mainly no amplified noise and the amount of uh traffic and activity that happens really at a sports complex. I spend some time down in Woodbury because of my nieces this time of year constantly. I mean it isn't if we're talking a sports complex you're not it's not a Tuesday evening thing. this is constant. Um, so it's just hit me and I realize this is kind of late in the process here, but that question does come to mind and I think it's maybe a worthwhile question for us to ask before we go any further whether it merits evaluation on sound noise, the the noise, the light. >> I think the nature center does stargazing events. Um, does that get effectively cancelled because of um because of lighting? I don't I don't know. It seems to me that potentially I want to discuss this with with you um to say do we want to discuss do we want to discuss that as a as something as a consideration? Is this a consideration? I would like to piggyback about the effect on the wildlife with the traffic, the lights, the noise. Um, you know, Susie Dennis talked about, I don't know if if it was a covenant or what, the agreement that there would be open space between the park reserve and sunfish for the deer and other wildlife to go. >> I don't know if that's >> and I mean, I there's probably no legality there, but there was good intention. And I think putting something like that between the two parks is something we really have to think about. >> Yeah. I don't know. I guess I'd like to hear from fellow commissioners whether you think it would be worthwhile for us to make a recommendation to to council to evaluate potential impacts to those parks which are nature preserves. I mean there's Sunfish has got a little bit more going on now but by and large they're I mean Lake Elmo does as well but but they are natural environments that could be potentially impacted. I wanted to get your thoughts on that. >> Um I guess I do have thoughts from a you know like endangered and threatened species perspective. I think that there's um pretty poor habitat connectivity when we think about our really rare species between the park reserve and sunfish anyways with that major thoroughfare and no like underpass or wildlife bridge or anything like that which I feel like is totally reasonable um that that it doesn't exist. So, I guess I don't have any like legal concerns um in terms of uh you know like heavy environmental impact language. Um but I I do think that overall like it's a common concern that we hear is how to mitigate adverse effects on the community. And I think in this case the community is a involves two parks right that are these open space areas. And so if there are things that you know the folks that are more heavily involved with the programming the kind of future plans right like of the um transportation corridors and uh you know build out of the park reserve if things are going to change there. I mean, obviously, I think it would be prudent to know that so that you can kind of mitigate any adverse impacts before those negative consequences are realized or it's too late in the game to do anything about it. >> Yeah. in terms of noise, in terms of light, in terms of um increased traffic. >> One of the difficulties is, as you said, is because of the wide range of scope that they're talking about here, they almost need to kind of get to the point of get a little bit of an idea because if you don't like if you put a pickle ball court and you come out and you say that, you're going to get noise. people who are going to come out and say plus or minus or whatever. Okay. Um so a little this will come out in this process as you're figuring out how big of a box or how big of a facility you've got. Oh, we're going to have parking for 3,000 cars. Well, that's different than another configuration. So, some of that has to go progress. But the warning to you is that we hear this all the time in parks. Okay? So that's why we're a little sensitive to it. And um sometimes we've gone down that road too far. So um it it definitely has to be part of whatever this process is is to figure out I how many ball fields will determine how many lights and how many lights will determine how much off you know overflow lighting there'll be. Um, so there's there's a lot of different aspects that are determined on that size and exactly what are the things that are going in there. Chair, so we can potentially move this along. Would you would you take a motion so we can? >> Um, I I would take a motion. >> Jason, are you looking for something that formal >> to complete this? >> Yeah. I >> no I mean >> no I'm I'm saying regarding regarding what we're discussing right now like I think we could talk >> I think we can always propose a motion. >> Yeah. I just want to kind of move it along. I I think we uh I I don't want to get bogged down into discussion if we don't have a motion is what I'm trying to say. What would you >> I would make a motion to recommend to city council an evaluation of how the sports complex may impact Lake Elmo Park Reserve and Sunfish Lake Park to determine whether it's an appropriate location for such a facility. >> Second. Um discussion. >> It's a recommendation. >> Yeah, that would be I mean a recommendation to city council. That's what that's what we do. >> Yeah. I think it's better to do this now than to wait down the road and find out, boy, this is a really bad mistake or it's affecting people and animals in such an adverse way on a much larger scale than the um issue with the pickle ball noise, putting in new new courts and then finding out later. you know, there were other considerations that we weren't aware of or didn't consider at the time. Um, Peter, are you thinking some that you would like to see the contractor do something like this or uh I guess like are you are you just looking for some rationale um for confirming or altering? Uh I I guess I don't know to what extent things would potent would need to be altered because I I I'll answer it differently. Uh to your your initial question um whatever whatever evaluation is the what professionals would do is what I'm recommending. That's not within something that I really have knowledge about. I I guess >> just to clarify this is part of the process. Just make sure this is part of the process moving forward. >> We're amplifying that this should be part of the process. >> Because of our vast experience in these types of matter. >> Yeah, I agree. I think it should be part of the process. I don't I guess I disagree that it needs to be the like called out in a special motion per se or a special recommendation, but that's fine for that to be my opinion. Um, but yeah, I I mean I think that having a defensible and clear and transparent rationale for every part of this moving forward is going to be really important, especially if this needs to go to a, you know, if this is something that our community members are going to be voting on to fund. um you know, just kind of having all of those ducks in a row in a really thoughtful way, I think will probably help support those positive outcomes. So, I I think it's valid. Any other discussion? All right. All right. So, we have a motion on the table right now to recommend to city council to evaluate how this sports complex might impact other parks um sorry uh Lake Elmo Park Reserve and Sunfish Parks um to determine whether it's an appropriate location for such a facility. All in favor? >> I I Any opposed? >> Okay, motion carried. Thanks. Okay, with that, thank you, Jason. This was this was a lot a lot. >> We look forward to talking to you again. >> Yeah. Uh, this is all really exciting stuff. >> Okay, Adam. Um, next, the Sunfish grant contribution >> or uh archery Is that correct? Is it bank contribution next time? >> Um, >> DNR grant. >> It is the DNR grant. >> DNR grant. >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> And Tony will bring you up for public comment after Adam's presentation. Is that all right? >> Okay. Perfect. Thanks. >> Uh, thank you, chair. Um, tonight with us we have Lissa with Stantech as well as Varity. She is a a community coordinator with um um the Salman Air Center. They'll be presenting us tonight with some information in regards to uh the continued grant efforts that we've had for removing buckthornne at Sunfish Lake. Um just keep in mind as we do go through this um there are they will be requesting or asking of the of the parks commission some additional funding potentially. Um so take that in consider consideration as we look for toward that 2027 budget. So, with that, I'll pass this over on to Varity and um Lissa with their presentation down this button down there. All right. Hi, I'm Varity. For those of you that don't know me, I am the programs manager, environmental educator, and project manager for this restoration project. So, I wear a lot of hats. Um, and I apologize. Um, I was I've been at the nature center since 7 this morning with K9 Critter Camp, 14 kiddos. >> Wow. >> So, we are actually, just a side note, we're selling out on some of our camps this year. So, we're really really excited about that. Tonight I'm here to talk to you guys about the restoration project. Um I don't know if many of you have been able to get out there and see that process and progress on your own. Um I think you will be very uh if you haven't, you should come on out. We would love to take you on a little tour. Uh if you remember back, this is um historically what it looked like. So going into the park, it was pretty thick, right? It was uh very dense. There were a lot of down a lot of down materials and um it became such a problem that our a local resident George Johnson, I don't know if many of you know him, he came into the park and just really was getting bothered by how much Buckthornne had taken over. And um he organized along with Tony uh a first phase of just volunteers who went out and cleared five acres by hand. Um this led into hey can we do even more? So they had cleared over by the parking lot there area and it eventually evolved into three different phases that have run from 2022 to to this month of 2026. And the initial process was to just purpose was just to get that invasive buckthornne um out of there. As they started to get into getting rid of the buckthornne they started to find pockets of other invasives. So it in the additional phases that came about included uh vegetate getting rid of more vegetation such as garlic mustard. Um we invite you all to come out and pull garlic mustard with us. Uh bo and then the oriental bittersweet was really I think I'll go into that a little bit more too. There were pockets there too that as you kept uncovering more you found more. Right. So initially um and I was not I've only been managing this project for the last year and a half um prior to that was George um with his volunteer hours which was amazing. So the first phase um is the red area um there. Hold on one second here. This is not as clear. So the lu red area was the first initial phase. It was 40 acres. Um it was $157,000 um in and that was including uh uh from the DNR grant and uh money from you folks and then 800 hours that we put in. And then uh the second phase being the purple area. So phase two was took on a lot larger um acreage 142 acres we then looked at and worked on. uh that was over just almost over over half a million. And then the last phase that we just finished up too was another 19 acres and that came back into the original phase one area. That's the line the yellow uh stripe area and that was where we were concentrating on trying to get that phase one area to a much better uh reasonable place in which it can hold its own now with having had a burn in it. All right. uh and being with our project uh partners as you can see the the land and legacy amendment with the the CPL uh DNR grant huge um Stantech has been another amazing contractor for us and partner in this whole thing and of course you guys in the city of Lake Elmo as you can see there phase one um the city of Lake Elmo was able to contribute $10,000 to that original phase the second phase n only $1,000 had been used in that. So the 9,000 got rolled over and then you also approved another 15,000 for that and then phase three was another five. During this time we did not do this by ourselves. Um we used several different groups. I ran monthly uh events, buckthornne removal events the second Saturday of every month uh except for during the summer as it's too hot. And we would have the sentence to serve Washington County sentence to serve group. Uh master gardeners came out, local residents came out. And every month I would have probably at least 10 to 12 15 uh volunteers to come out and cut. And when people are determined to clear out a place, they can clear out a place. We also had 4 groups come out. I've had scout troops come out. Um we've done large buckthornne removal events. Um we've had our buckthorn days in October. We also the staff and volunteers that that work with Sally um nature center have been really critical to what we got done here. This is just a little bit more about our volunteer contributions. Phase one there was 400 hours pledged and we completed over 800 hours. And phase two we pledged 800 hours and we did over 1300. Um so it was very exciting to be able to have that much community. So, it's really just become a thing that we do there now. You know, again, other groups are looking at us like, "What can we do? How can we come and help? Where do you need us?" And we're like, "Cut buckthorn." Um, some of the fun groups too, we had uh I worked with a lot of homeschoolers and so they also brought in their 4 groups. So to see the kids out there doing it and just their excitement and seeing an area be cleared from all that brush, they would just get so excited and they were excited to come year after year. I'm going to let Lissa take over a little bit on the project achievements so she can kind of get into more about what they were able to do with Stantex assistance. >> Yeah. So number one on the list is involving people in the process and uh keeping them engaged in stewardship and understanding what a healthy woodland looks like and how they can and help achieve that. So all the hands-on work that was done was really that was really a huge part of this and the 800 and 1300 over 2,000 hours of volunteers involved. Um what we see is other achievements through the last six years. Better wildlife viewing, being able to see the wildlife in the park. Um more wildflower blooms. We're seeing species that we haven't seen in areas starting to show up. Um starflower, a spring ephemeral has shown up in our in the phase three area. Have never seen that before. So things are starting to to return and um continue to to kind of weave back that native ground layer, the landscape and water views. You can see the wetlands and the ponds throughout the park. Now um of course the the the major impact was 180 acres of invasive brush removal. Um that was quite an effort and achievement of it in and of itself. uh improved wildlife habitat, especially for songirds, pollinators, more blooms out there, um insects, frogs, toads, turtles, you name it. Lots of um benefits for wildlife, increases in the diversity of the native plant communities out there, both through natural recovery of the native ground layer and then also the additional native seeding that was done. Uh reduced wildfire risk. We took care of a lot of down dead wood through winter burn piles and so we've uh greatly reduced the amount of um fuel that is remaining for drought years and um incidental fires. So better understory conditions for oak regeneration. So the mature oaks out there have opportunity for those seedlings and saplings to grow without the shade of the buckthornne. Soil stabilization on some of the steep slopes out there. There's better trailside vegetation, so the green along the trails will continue to spread out into the areas that have been opened up and or buckthornne has been removed. Water quality protection, you know, by restoring the the ground layer vegetation. You're holding more water and filtering more water and retaining that water from runoff um to the ponds and wetlands and Sunfish Lake. um the wind. If you walk the trails now, you can feel the breeze and that's um beneficial for u eliminating some of those um biting insects. And then also the the process achieved better conditions for control burns which we were able to I guess I close out the calendars. >> Yeah. Okay. Okay. All right. So, picture is worth a thousand words. So, we wanted to showcase a few photos from before and after. And so, this first one is a photo point from the phase one area, the yellow hashed area of view south. And so this was a picture that Varity had up earlier before November of 2020 before any work began. And this is what I'm sorry that what that same area looked like this May. So greatly improved open understory and a lot of wild geranium and native sedges and grasses coming in from in the understory. In that same spot, just another view in a different direction. Okay. And there it is this spring and then another photo point along the west side of that area. So this is an idea of like for the whole like what the rest of the park is looking like. >> Yep. Kind of representative spots. So this is >> Wow. >> Wow. Norway. >> Yeah. Sorry about that. Maybe if I can use this. I will keep it going better. >> Okay. >> All right. Um Yeah. So after phase one, after the initial buckthornne removal and then this is during the process of the selective tree removal and buckthorn during phase three and then last fall during a burn this spring and this is what it looked like this spring after it started greening up and our fire crew during our one of our controlled burns this spring. Um so in that phase one area where we went back and did about 19 acres more of work um we were able to burn about an acre of that area in 2023 but we were able to burn about 14 acres um this spring. So here's the area that we burned in 2023 and here's just an example of the ground layer and the wild flowers in that burn unit. And then this year ago in the spring, we as part of our phase two project burned a um an area um just north of the nature center and how that area looked post burn and then the greenup and the wild geranium blooms in the spring went through there. um this past spring. More photos showing kind of post burn one of our burn units in April and then how that same area looked in June of this year. So, and this is just a map showing in one of our uh burn units where we have burned areas and unburned areas. So, we've left some refugeia for those critters that are less mobile. So there's more work to be done and that's part of why um in in addition to um covering what what has been done in the past but also propose additional work um in a phase four scope and some of the activities that we're recommending include some of the same things that have been done through the first few phases but there's followup work there's additional buckthorn respouts and seedlings and and saplings to work on. So another phase of work may include invasive brush treatments. So again the same species buckthornne round leaf bittersweet honeysuckle barberry um white popppler and amir maple would be some of the targets for additional brush treatments. um winter fuelwood reduction, continuing to work on some forestry mowing and um consuming some of that down dead wood in a pile burn situation during the winter time when you have snow cover, safer ground conditions for burning. Um reintroducing more prescribed fire to more of the park. um herbaceous weed control, continue to work on bock and garlic mustard and Canada thistle throughout the upland acres in the park, do more native seeding, and there's potential also to incorporate production of biochar from some of the dead standing buckthornne out there from the first couple phases of work. So some of that standing biomass could be uh burned during the the winter and returned as biochar back into the woodland. So those are some proposals for phase two activities. And these are some of the locations where that work could occur kind of in a general sense. >> I think in this phase 4 too we're talking about also addressing like the driveway. So, there's quite a bit of invasives that have come in that are sitting along that driveway now and if we don't take care of those, it's that entry to the park and we would like to really get that cleaned up. Um, and just some other pockets that we weren't able to address also because part of the time that we were doing this, the weather needed to cooperate in the winter time. We can't bring out heavy equipment unless we have a really deep frost. And for the last couple years, we've had like one. So, we got one good winter time, right? about one um where we were able to bring in heavy equipment that able to clear out large swaths because even though our volunteers have been amazing and we've put in a lot of time, we still couldn't have done that much without getting in some of that heavy equipment. I mean, our volunteers have been great. They they're like goats on the hillsides, right? Like they're climbing up in the winter time and sliding down and they're trying to cut and and and um dab those spots. So part of this next phase of what we would like to talk about is being able to address some of these other pockets that we just weren't able to including the drive-in. >> Yep. So and also as a part of a a next phase of work um we'd recommend developing a forest stewardship plan. believe there was one that was developed in 2015 and I know when we came before you in 2023 to talk about the project again you brought up that need for a you know a plan to take you forward after all of this this work is completed. So that would be something that would be a logical um task to include in the scope of work so that you have that maintenance plan set with a budget and maintenance activities and ways that volunteers can continue to be involved in the stewardship going forward. So establishing what your new baseline conditions are in the park, setting forth what the maintenance activities are going to be and then that will help you budget going forward. So, and then in addition to that, >> so we're coming into >> um just in what we're looking to ask and for you guys to consider is you know over the last six to nine years we've tackled 180 acres of that 284 acre park. Um we again just to reiterate are trying to push another um phase through there. So, just to explain sort of your chart there, the the CPLDNR grant funding program all lots up to $1 million to be spent on one site. This would be the last amount that we can ask for, right, before we've hit that million dollar mark. So, as you can see, restoration is very expensive, right? And that's where we're saying talking about a stewardship plan is going to be really important because you've gotten the money spent on that property already. We would like you guys to be able to keep that going forward so that you don't slip back. It doesn't slip backwards and you have to spend more money later on down the line, right? If we can keep maintaining this park. Um, and and we it shouldn't be as as deep, right? Because we've cleared out so much of it and we have a better understanding of how to get on top of this, too. Um, so with these are all um estimated numbers. So, until I can get in front of the DNR and the CPL to talk to them about what our final numbers are, this is my best estimate. So, take it with a grain of salt. Um, $290,000 is roughly what we have left to be able to reach that million-doll mark. Um, we need to then as per every other phase, we have to contribute 10% um as a community to show a great faith effort in this work. Um, and it can come in cash and in in kind um, donations, meaning our volunteer hours. So, historically, as I showed you guys, we've had um, wonderful support and donations from the city. We would be looking for another 15,000. Um, and then we would dedicate 600 hours, and I'll tell you, it'll be double, maybe triple that by the time we're done, but ours would estimate about to be 20,000. So, we're coming up to 325,000 to finish out this project. So, um, thank you. And if you guys have any questions, please go ahead. >> Okay, great. Thanks, Verity. Thanks, Lissa. Um, let's invite Tony up for some public comment and then we can um bring you back up for questions. >> Thank you very much. This is a an opportunity to bring up the fact that 11 years ago this evening, we brought a brought this proposal to the parks commission to uh uh negotiate with the city to build build a nature center and it passed that evening. So, uh, if you think back 11 years, Mike Pearson was the mayor, Mike Boothlet was the, uh, uh, Lake Elmo public works, uh, department chair, and, uh, Alyssa Mloud was the city planner at that point. And it was the first night that Julie Johnson was on the job. So, if you think back, there's a a lot has happened. And one thing that's happened is that we've put a lot of effort and a little bit of the city money into clearing this park of of of Buckthornne and Varity and and Lissa have done a really nice job of showing you how well it's been done. But we don't want to have it slide back into Buckthornne. And so we came this evening to ask for your support to continue this this project. We hope to get another three-year program out of the DNR for the as you already mentioned $290,000 which would put us on a maintenance basis. We're almost to the point where it's clear now we have to maintain and it's like your lawn. If you don't do something about your lawn the dandelions are going to come back and or your prairie if you don't burn a prairie it's going to be forest again. So you just have to remember that we've put a lot of effort into this. We've had a lot of help from public works. We've got uh uh roughly 30,000 from the city and a lot of volunteer time into it. We don't want to lose that. So, please consider that when you're thinking about it that we really need the support to keep it going. Thank you. >> Thanks, Tony. >> All right. Are there questions from commissioners for varity or comments? I've been using the park for 50 years and it's amazing how it's changed and how nice it is to be so open and to see the terrain and just it's >> and the washouts on many of the ste well I used to ski there >> on those steep hills which I haven't done for a couple decades. That's incredibly impressive in that park to do downhill ski or to do cross country skiing. It really is. >> And there were so many wash outs in the spring and with rains and it it's just it's amazing the work it that's been done and how much it's improved the park and I really think it's a lake emmo gem. >> It is. >> It's amazing. So, thank you to all of you who have worked so hard to make it that for us. >> I will tell you too, like I've had kids come in and they're like, I saw deer, Varity. I saw deer out there. three deer like and before you would not have been able to see. You would have heard things but you would never have been able to see them. So that's what gets me excited about this too is just to see how much like the native uh flora is coming back especially in areas where we didn't even seed anything. It's just the sunlight is finally hitting that soil and that seed that native seed that's always been there is just being activated now and it's just beautiful. It's absolutely gorgeous. the wild geraniums in the spring. It's just like a carpet, a purple carpet out there. Um it's it's um again there's still work to do, but I think the um improvements have been significant. Uh it's also I think we've also increased our diversity of birds. So we have like a haiku box and we've noticed that there's different birds. Um a black build cuckoo I heard the other day. I've never ever heard one of those before. So three of us heard it in the trees. So, the fact that it's opened up more, I think too, allows for more um birds to come in and do insect hunting. Um it's more open for them. It it allows more viewpoints for all the critters. So, it's been pretty impressive. And now we can see actually how what's going on up there. >> Yeah, I'll just second that it is really amazing to go out there and to see everything. And um yeah, you know, I think that there's also really good emerging evidence that when you do get light down there at the forest floor and can kind of undo decades of um not necessarily neglect, but deferred maintenance, you know, um you do start to see these ecosystems kind of sustain themselves in this um improved >> higher quality habitat state. And so um yeah, I I don't know. I guess I just really support staying on top of this, finishing it right with the re and being able to leverage um external resources to do that in a really impressive way. Um >> I am also trying really happy to see this. >> Yeah, I'm also trying to look at other grants for after this that we might be able to utilize for you guys too that would be able to help with some of those costs for maintenance too because we know that sometimes difficult to do. So, you're our parks director or whatever that whatever that was. That's not the right name. But, >> uh, to that end, as far as maintenance, do you has any assessment been done at all as what would be estimated for annual maintenance of invasive species? >> We have not at this point. That is something that was going to be in that future like get some get some of this fun funding in this last bit to use for that too, right? So, we have some staff time compensated for that >> and we're working with Stantech has been amazing and they've been a great partner. So, if we we'll bid this one out again and if they end up taking that again, it would be an easy partnership to work with them for what kind of a plan we could come up with to be able to propose to you guys. Um, I'll also just add, you know, I think that getting the heavy equipment in there when you have when it's the right alignment of the opportunity, >> weather and the funds, um, you know, that's that's not something that volunteer hours can do for you and it makes a huge impact in a really positive direction. Mhm. >> Um and so setting yourself up to take advantage of that, right? If everything aligns, I think is um I I just support that for sure. >> Great. Wonderful. >> All good. >> Are there other questions here? Um would someone like to make a motion? >> I'll make a motion. I move to recommend to city council the commitment of up to $20,000 for the DNR legacy grant for buckthornne removal at Sunfish Lake Park in 2027 to 2028. >> Is there a second? >> Second. >> Any discussion? Additional discussion. >> Do we have the money? >> Yeah. I just want to make sure uh I know some of the the the language in the reports a little different than what she presented as far as I indicated like 363,000. Um she did update some of those numbers since sending her presentation this weekend. So um >> 15,000 would be we're asking not 20 although we would take 20. >> Maybe uh we could change the motion to not exceed uh in case something would um change with that grant opportunity. Thanks, Adam, for looking at all those details. Um, >> would you like to amend your motion? >> Okay. So, I I'm Could you be clear? I'm not clear on what you said to amend it to up to >> not to exceed like 20,000. >> Not to exceed. Okay. >> All right. I would like to amend my motion. So it would read as motion to recommend to city council the commitment of up to and not to exceed $20,000 for the DNR legacy grant for Buckthornne removal at Sunfish Lake Park in 2027 2028. >> Uh do we have a second for that for the amended language? >> Second. Okay. Any discussion? Again, we would love if you guys came out individually and just would like a tour of the park or whatever. We'd be happy to walk around with you. >> I I saw one of those parts. I pulled one of those in the picture. I pulled one of those. >> Thank you. >> That's great. I knew it was somebody. >> Thank you. >> All right. Um, all in favor? >> Any oppose? All right. Motion carried. Um, thank you everyone. Okay, next we have um our agenda item about the archery hunt >> to kill the deers that the little kids see. >> Yeah, that they love. >> I'm just pay facing this all together. >> Yes. >> Thanks for sticking around everyone. >> Thank you, chair and commission. Tonight I have with me uh Dan Mcwain. He is a natural resource coordinator with uh Washington County. Uh he also works under the Washington County public works department, but uh working with him over the last couple months in regards to some um some um deer survey issues that had happened over the last year. So I'll turn it over to Dan to present a little bit more about that and the potential of a deer hunt to include both parks in the city. >> Awesome. Thank you, Adam. Yeah. Again, my name is Stan Mcuwayne. I'm a natural resource coordinator with Washington County. Uh, as Adam mentioned, I am housed within public works, but I actually come to Lake Elmo Park Reserve every day where I office. So, I'm on the north end of the park there. Um, the just a little background, some of the face you some of the faces look familiar from last time when I was at the commission. So, I'm hoping to cover that, but also cover uh for those not familiar with archery deer harvest. Uh and at the end of this presentation, I will have a request for a motion uh if you were in support of the recommendation. So, here's uh what I'd like to cover in the presentation. Talk about deer management goals, surveys, the history of uh harvest uh between Lake Elmo Park Reserve and Sunfish Lake. Talk about how the 2021 deer harvest went uh and then a little bit of background with MBRB for those who are not familiar with MBRB. that's metro bow hunters resources base and then go into the recommendation uh followed by questions. So to start off with um you know as as people know like deer are it's enjoyable to see deer as we just talked about in the previous presentation. Uh but with deer deer also can bring nuisance issues when they're at high populations. So, uh, the Minnesota DNR, um, recommends a range of between 10 to 20 deer per square mile for our metro region. Um, and when you start to get above that, that's when you start to see impacts to deer that they do to species. So, that's impacts on how they browse, uh, species diversity influencing. There's a lot of different things. Um, so that is a goal with implementing deer harvest, uh, herd health. So there's like uh deer diseases that can increase when you have higher populations. Actually deer sizes can be reduced with higher populations too. Um so that's a factor. And then the other thing especially in this case the factor of uh vehicle deer collisions would be county road 14 between Sunfish Lake and Lake Elmo Park Reserve. So, what I typically notice is as we get further and further away from when we last had a hunt, those hits tend to increase uh quite a bit. Um, yeah. So, those are the the reasons why we do it as far as like how we go about determining uh whether a harvest is needed for the community. Um what I showed here in the graph is uh an illustration of surveys with deer harvest going back to 1993. So everything up until this past year, all the data was helicopter data. Helicopters are typically um you're in that like 60% 70% success range as far as the number of deer you're counting. And that can vary based on your where you're flying. like if you have a lot of coniferous trees, uh what the snow cover is, there's like a lot of variables that go into that variability. But, uh this past year, because we had another low snow year, uh we were able to use a drone and so you can kind of see what it looks like from those images that I provided. Um but they're able to pick out every deer and it's extremely accurate. So, um so I I'm pointing that out because you'll probably look at it and you might be alarmed. You might be like, "Oh, that's like kind of matching 1993." Don't be alarmed. I would say um that's actually pretty consistent with a lot of those years probably at that 120ish mark. So, it's it's that time. Um it's comparable to previous years. As far as uh what's happened with the history, so 1993 to 2015, there was eight shotgun deer harvests. And then in 2021 uh we came to the commission and asked uh for approvals to switch to an archery deer harvest. So that's what we did the last goound. And in that harvest um we had we worked with MBRB. Uh we had two three-day hunt periods. 44 deer were harvested by 39 hunters with 64% of being antlerless. Um, and part of the reason for coming to you tonight too is that the harvest would include like a closure of some fish lake park. So that impacts the city park. And then for this uh for that last hunt, we actually had portions most of the trails were open um within Lake Elmo Park Reserve and then we just had no hunt buffers on the trails and that went well. I think our our challenge and why I'd like to change that this year is just off leash dogs. So, um, yeah, other than that, it went really well. Uh, exceeded expectations overall. U, why MBRB? So, you might like be asking, why not, uh, host a public hunt? The reason we do it is they're experienced. They provide hunt coordinator logistics. Um, they have strict policies. It requires much less staff time to actually imple implement the hunt because they're all volunteers. And then um they don't charge us and then they also cover um the county and the city with insurance. Um what I so just to talk about their strict policies so public safety they have a weather policy. So if they have rain or snow they actually cancel because that impacts tracking um standards. Uh they have uh just to speak on the hunter education part of it. They require a hunter orientation. So, everyone has to come to the hunt. We'll be hosting a orientation at the Nordic Center, go over all logistics. So, it's very wellrun. As far as the recommendation ahead of you, I just put this into the slide and then I also kind of gave a little bit more details for those who may wonder like is this any different from the last time. So the the big differences on what the proposal would be um would be uh we're reducing from 39 hunters to 25 hunters which is really 29. So 10 less and that's just with some of the um habitat restoration work that's happened. It just stand locations it it's a lot easier with less hunters. Um but we still feel confident that we're able to get to our goal of 40. Um with this again, Sunfish Lake Park would be closed and then uh we'd be closing more trails on the west side of Lake Elmo Park Reserve as well as the Nordic Center trails. So, the only part of the park that would remain open is kind of like the new playground in the pave loop kind of right in there where there's not much for uh archery opportunities. And with that, pause for any questions. Thanks, Dan. There questions from the commission. Last time we had lots of questions about safety of neighbors and had a buffer zone around the park >> that and people wouldn't be basically be shooting towards the houses. I assume they'd be doing the same thing, right? >> Yeah, Madam Chair, commission member. Yes, that we will have a similar approach. Um I believe we used over 300 feet on that border last time. Um and yeah, so we had 300 feet and typically they don't like to be set up near that either. Uh the other thing that's really nice with them is they have a very strict uh yardage policy. So I don't know if you happen to see one of the materials in the packet, but they have a 20 yard strict. and you violate that, they'll know because that's one more yard is like where were you shooting? Where like there's a lot of and the a lot of protocols with that. The other thing is that it's uh it's an bow and arrow. So, it is going down at 20 yards. So, it's a down to the ground trajectory versus a on the ground trajectory going out. Do you know are they allowing the use of uh crossbows for this? >> Um they are not allowing use of crossbows for this. >> Uh and I I would keep it that way um because of concerns with trajectory. >> Yeah. >> Just out of curiosity, do you do you know or maybe Adam can speak to do you know if we had any complaints from neighbors? Not specific complaints, but just generally about safety concerns or anything that we >> Yeah, I can. Actually, Adam, would you like to talk first? Oh, go >> ahead. >> So, I guess that's part of the thing, too, and why maybe went first like I try to reduce the workload on like Adam will send me the the information, the calls, um or Marty did in the past, I guess. And so, I I talked to everyone. So, in the it was a great reduction in concern from neighbors. Um because if you're living next to the park with the shotgun deer hunt like that was like I get a lot of neighbors who were like hey you got to meet with me I want to see that no hunt boundary talk about the process and after I met with people they were less concerned each time but in this last go around I didn't have any uh safety concerns per se uh the only and this goes for St. C bluffs as well. The only interactions that I've had lately is with people who hunt and there's been more concern on that front typically because there's a deer involved. Um so that is the only people I I heard from that had concerns is just fellow hunters, >> which was very weird um for me to experience that. um because in the past there was a lot more like concerns about it from the larger community too. So that was kind of an interesting thing last time. Um but we worked through it and um yeah I think through the end of that I mean they understand that it's wildlife it's public property. >> Yeah I I had heard um comments about the closure of the park. Why is the park closed? That's what I heard last time. Okay. >> The other thing is this group gives the meat to food shelves, don't they? >> They can. Um, they do have relationships with different entities that know people in need. Um, I'm not an expert in how they handle that, but yes, they do have those connections with uh people who need it as well. Uh, the other thing that they helped us with in the last hunt, um, there was two things. They actually helped us learn more about PAS and they also did CWD testing. So with the PASS we were able to share information with the DNR and that um helped with understanding human consumption of the meat because that that was a concern at the time and that's no longer a concern for this area. >> This may be more of a question for Adam. Do we I mean I know you mentioned insurance, but do we do any type of agreement or contract? I'm just thinking in terms of just like anou or anything like that that kind of outlines the proc a process like what like what occurs like what I'm just curious beyond just here's our insurance do we does the city ask for anything else? >> Yeah. No, that's a good question. So, I wasn't here in 2021 when they did that, but under it's my understanding that they really do turn this back over to um Dan and his staff to really monitor and manage that. So, with that approval from council, they would really turn this whole pro uh program right over to them >> over to the county to the So, then do you have a do you have an agreement? >> Yeah, madam madam chair, commission member, great question. And I think so we do not have a specificou in relation to this. Um I think the reason in the past based on like the conversations I've had and learn learning looking into it they view the county has viewed that in order to host this hunt somefish lake is critical because if there's a harvest in one part but not the other the deer are influenced and moved between. So I don't I don't necessarily I think there's there's mutual benefit there that's been just understood but yet not in a formal agreement per se >> and and part of that is uh just to add one more thing and I know Adam put it in the agenda packet he mentioned that within your city ordinance um if there's a harvest that occurs in a city park or that has to go to council for approval. I think that's maybe part of the process and even me being here today to seek your approval. >> I just had a question on the um proposed hunt details with the two or the two time chunks of a couple multiple days. Um and the goal harvest amount. I guess I'm just curious, is that a floor? Is it a ceiling? um if conditions are really good and folks are really successful um you know do you alter those times is there a potential third window if you're not meeting that 40 threshold um I I guess how do those factors come in just to kind of anticipate what impact might be there >> yeah madam chair just to talk about that more I think that was someone uh someone a commission member had that question last time I think that goal of 40 deer harvested is that that is a good goal. I didn't put that there. I thought about that before putting that number. If we hit that number, I'd be ecstatic. If we hit 25, I'd also be ecstatic. It like for these harvests, it really depends on the weather. >> So, like any reduction is really what you're looking for. >> Any reduction. Yes. Okay. Um, I'll just say in 2021, like I had people who were saying you're oh well shotgun deer harvest you're going to have to do more hunts because they're just not as effective because that's what I've, you know, seen in the literature and just hearing from others. Like archery can't be as effective, but we proved we could be just as effective with a high deer population. Now, if we had a lower deer population, maybe that would have changed. Um but yeah, weather is a key variable there because again if they have like snow or rain coming in in the morning, they cancel. >> Okay. >> Just from a tracking. So yeah, >> we've had really good years like even at the bluffs here the last time, >> but I can't be too optimistic. So >> Okay. Okay, that's helpful to know. >> And m just related to that too. So that does run the risk then just with that is like if we don't have hit our numbers like you could probably see us back sooner to try to to do a harvest too. >> Sure. Perfect. >> Are there other questions? >> Is would someone like to propose a motion? I make a motion to recommend to the city council to approve the city of Lake Elmo and Washington County in coordination with the Metro Bow Hunters Resource Base, MBRB, to implement a 2026 archery deer harvest at Lake Helmo Park Reserve and Sunfish Lake Park. >> There a second. >> I second. >> Any discussion? One thing you didn't present this year that uh you presented in the past was picture after picture of the damage done by the deer in the various parks. And so I think that that's one of the the good reasons to do this. >> Great. Thanks. Um all right, I'll call the question. All in favor of the motion on the table to approve this 2026 archery deer harvest say I. >> I. >> I. >> Any oppose? All right, motion carried. Thanks, Dan. >> Thank you. >> All right, moving right along. Adam Ridge Park playground replacements. Yes. Thank you, chair and commissioners. Again, I just want to come back and review our um Ridge Park playground and um kind of the efforts that we put in here in the last uh several months ago in regards to moving forward with that. So, our Ridge Park playground was originally stalled in 20 2003. Um, and based off our current standards has exceeded its lifespan and it's due for replacement. Um, in the spring of 2026 here, we did close this park uh because it did have enttrapment issues. Uh, these entrapment issues are actually identified by a consultant that we use to come out and uh help us do some of our uh playground inspections. So, um, this actually came up and, um, we had blocked off the, uh, playground, uh, earlier this season knowing that it was already being shifted by the frost from the spring, um, and understanding that we probably the only way to fix it is to actually remove it and probably reinstall it. So, um, so comes at a good timing that we're reviewing this park, uh, but also looking at options and how we went forward to, uh, looking at our our classifications of whether or not to replace this park. So, again, back in March, uh, we reviewed this, we looked through those criterias of proximity, our redundancy, our classification, um, our community input. If you don't remember, we did do a survey of that area just to kind of get some some concept plans, but also some feedback from the community in that area, too. So, with that said, we did uh reach out to a couple of our vendors again uh and came back with uh four different options. Our first one is from um kind of numbered them wrong in our in your packet. I I start with number one, then go back to number one. But I'll start with the the barn concept. This comes from uh Sincy Wreck. uh this barn concept does have a play structure for uh 2 to 12 years old. So I think that was one thing that was addressed in our in our group too their discussion is to kind of bring in that smaller um um child uh play areas for for use. And that's why you'll see that secondary uh playground option in this one does come with that four set swing set as well as additional uh options for students to use or kids and students use those uh two different slides on this one. Kind of a different photo of this one. Um just kind of give the concept. This is not the one. Keep looking at that one. I do not have that photo on here, but uh just brings a barn barn theme to um barn theme too. We can change the colors and things like that. I think in the packet it does have just a brown and green um picture of that, but uh many different color options with that. Again, we would stick with our standard uh concrete border with uh mulch playground chips inside there. So, one of the things as we go through these options is you'll see that the prices are a little bit higher um than what we initially recommended at 125,000. I did uh talk to those consultants and ask them that, you know, if something does come right on that verge or could be higher that we as staff could continue to install that or use utilize volunteers in the community to install that. um which I did find in our last uh in our last go around I did come back and ask those questions to city council about an increase in that because that wasn't included um or to take out because we had um missed an opportunity for a grant opportunity or a lower cost of that playground is that staff was able to do that. We took advantage of that. It worked out really well. Um so you we will notice in some of those prices that those prices for that mulch are probably a little over double what you know what staff can do that for. So, it's a good opportunity, not not something that we have equipment for. We have members of staff to do it or community members um to help us out with those situations. So, um that first option does come back at about $150,000. Uh talking with that consultant and that um um about just some shade structure with that and benches. Um I did talk with the homeowners association too a little bit. uh on the side there are some opportunities there for they'd like to potentially donate the benches uh so they could put their own plaque and things on there to kind of make it more community uh centered again. So I thought that was a great opportunity to maybe take those out of of actually our designer putting those in uh but also putting um allowing them the opportunity to put the shade structure there yet. So if that was just a canal lever type straight structure over our bench or the donated bench like we might have at Deontraville, right? So um so some some communication in the background that might not be incorporated into the photos or into the design work itself. So uh something that I will work directly with them about still keeping in mind that that price that our item that we have to keep those those numbers too. Uh moving on to the first option with our flagship. Um in your packet you do have an option uh it's a yeah the blue yellow one does come with the canopy. You'll see in my description that does add a lot of cost to it. So, um the initial design of that does not include the canopy. Um so, one of the questions is is well, can we always put that in later? Um it's one of the things uh on a system like that is that that's typically the first thing that's put in. Um because it is below grade um it is like the mounting the base of that. So, if it is something that we're adamant that we do want that shade structure in, um, that we we'd want to just go with it right out of the gate versus trying to put it in later. Um, again, that does add an additional cost to that. As we see, um, nearly $40,000 to put that extra shade structure over the top of that play set in this one. Again, you'll find in this one um in option one here uh from Flagship is that uh no benches are included in this uh mainly because we looked at possibly uh a donation coming from that. This does offer a multiple uh slide sets uh with additional um multiple u swing slides plus the swing which is a group swing but also the four section um swing on the side. more photos of that one. Again, work with a representative from the parks commission if wanted uh about changing colors or any color options. Uh a lot of opportunities available for color options and sequences as in any of these. As always, we did discuss about placement of this um of this play set. Um, this designer actually makes a shows a good example where this where this could be placed uh within the park. We are looking to move this to the front entrance of that uh of Ridge Park just to eliminate um that access all the way back over the top of the hill it being in a low spot where water does sit. So, looking to get this out in front uh a little bit more for accessibility and access. In the end, this one does come back a little bit higher there again. And I think this one's at 130 35,000 for that. Again, those would have come in there. I think a little below $10,000. Um that could be a reduction in that by over half by reducing that. Option two is also uh designed by Flagship. Uh this offers a simple uh a single climbing structure with a double and triple slide feature, multiple climbers and a balance beam, a sixperson swing to include a toddler swing and a double swing. Uh again our size options with our with these are about the all typically about the same size about that 50 60 feet by about 70 80 feet. Um again all the interior be uh wood fibers for our playground surface. This option here brings in uh approximately the same price at about $135,000. >> Does that include the sha the shade structure on this one? >> It does. >> Yep. Sorry. What's the cost on this one? >> About 135,000. >> Third option from uh Flagship. Um again offers a multiple climbing uh playground set that leads users to three different slide options. a fourperson swing which includes a toddler swing and three additional spinners for future uh for play features. Again, um the size of this one's about 58 by 79. Uh again, the increase on this one is about 160,000 price on this one. Does include a lot more features on this one. Um you know, include um just the playet from, you know, going from slide to slide, but also the additional features in this one. You'll see a lot of the same features that um that are incorporated at our first one in Pebble Park uh with our climbers and our um accessibility from one to the next. You'll see a lot of the same features on this one. Um similar to our Pebble Park, >> but you wouldn't have the bench. You >> correct? >> Right. Okay. >> Yep. >> Yeah. might just with small little talk with uh community members over there potentially up to up to two benches what we'd be looking at for playgrounds up there. So, >> did you ask them if they were interested in paying for any of the playground? That >> that conversation did come up. >> Okay. Great. Thanks, Adam. Do you have any more on the presentation? >> Uh, no. Nothing further on that. Just just a reminder, yes, this is a CIP item that we have in there. We did have a lot at 125,000. I know some of my um my options do present more than that. uh if we need to stick to that 25,000 if we just if we do have a one of the items that we like and we want to move forward with um I can work with the consultant on u adapting that to make some changes so that we're closer to those numbers. Um if we do not want to move forward with any of those um I'll go back to the drawing board. >> Okay, great. Um I do have a quick question for you. So, city council has not seen a recommendation from us on Ridge Park at this point. Is that correct? >> Correct. >> Okay. So they don't I guess I the reason I'm asking is because I feel like it would be um maybe prudent um and I guess it could be formal or informal to just communicate with them about how and why we saw the need for this structure against our criteria here. um so that they're informed that we're not making, you know, unreasonable requests here. >> No, I think that's important to note that one of the things that why we brought this is bringing this one forward is because we did create those criteria. >> When I do present this to them, I can identify those criteria again and relay uh what our message was at that time, why we selected this park and why we why we selected those criteria. I mean that was a meeting in itself just selecting those criteria right >> yeah perfect thanks >> other questions for Adam >> are they all are all the options the same age range 2 to 12 >> yeah so the first one I showed you had the option range of 2 to 12 the next group of those next three from flagship are all that five to 12 range okay >> y >> do they have items that would constitute that 2 to 12. Yes. But um there's not like the designated area that's for that smaller youth group, right? >> Okay. Have we gotten I know we don't typically do this and this is I guess something that I'm I struggle with just on these playgrounds in general is have we gotten any input from the neighborhood kids on these specific options >> in this certain park. We did not do a community survey on the four or five the options that we got. Um in the past we have um for instance Lions Park for instance we did. >> Right. I'm just I'm just wondering if we should stay with that >> for all of our selections. I mean, I I'll be honest as a commission member and I I do this I've done this for a living. I've picked out playgrounds and I'm not comfortable as a commission picking out a playground for a park. I just don't I I think we need some input. And if that's one or two people, great. But I I I just I don't think this body should be selecting playgrounds without any other additional input from the community and where it's going. That that's just my feedback. But if the commission wants to decide, that's fine. But I just I I'd like us to get in a better practice of trying. And I know it's hard because we haven't necessarily gotten the best response. But >> yeah, that might be the only setback I would think is like as commissioners might say um from past surveys and we are limited to those days like our bigger events that we can present that at. But um it's an option. Yeah, I um couple things there is we've done pretty good when I don't remember any any equipment specific feedback from the community. Okay, you know, okay, yeah, have a playground set there. We're fine. Um, I think we've had more creativity ourselves on making sure we cover an an age range and a um configuration that different, you know, putting in different ones slightly different. So, I think we've been doing a pretty good job on that. Um, and I don't know really how much uh equipment specific input you're going to get from this committee because when we first surveyed this committee, I mean the community, um, we didn't get a lot of feedback other than when they came in here and they provide comments, they said they wanted a playground set. So, What do you remember? >> I I remember the most of the comment being around just keeping it quiet. But I we don't but I I guess I would say that my comment is yes, I hear you. I exactly where you're coming from. I think part of the I mean part my our all of our position here is to represent to to a certain degree the public but we also want the public to give us input at the same time. Obviously that's part of the opportunity here whether we get out the message to make sure people are coming. I I I guess to Hank to your point, I think uh the last time we met that when we said this is what we're going forward with, the community members said, "Okay, you're you're just doing a playground, right? That's all it is." And that was their main concern. And we have, you know, that we don't >> the parking lot too. >> Well, the Yes. >> the size of the parking lot. I so I I think and this is in the context of the cost and and to your point the point of the community when we say the community around this park is really only 40 residents or 40 households. It's only 40 houses. And that to me, especially when we're seating the 125, has kind of getting a little bit problematic for me because I'm like, I don't know that we need to be spending more money than we've allotted when we haven't heard. Maybe we heard a little bit of feedback. Yeah, let's do a playground. But we don't have people saying, "Yes, we're really excited about this playground. Here's what we'd like to see." Uh, I'm I'm having a little pause at this point. I did vote to say, "Yeah, let's continue with this." But I I think I guess my overall message is uh I would like to hear options that are are below our our um our threshold, our budget. >> I think that I think the city council would too. Um, Peter, I think that you're kind of hitting on something which is maybe a question for you, Adam, but kind of where I was getting at in terms of thinking about how this is justified and some rationale behind that. Um, so when I looked at it, so within walking distance to the park, I counted 61 homes there. >> Okay. >> Um, you know, basically the same, right? Pretty small number. Um, but Adam, in some discussions that we've had, I I guess I was just hoping you could maybe speak to the the agricultural field just to the south there, which is I mean immediately adjacent to Ridge Park. And um you when I look at the comprehensive plan, I see it's planned for 2040 for rural area development. So, if this is installed um in 2027, you know, we're thinking about that 30 year or 25 year lifespan, like how that kind of compares for the parking or for the playground set and what you might be anticipating as a city in terms of development happening. Um, and I guess so I do see like I I don't know if the timing makes sense because you've got that information and I don't, but you know it would be this big hole between like Tablin and Stonegate playgrounds if if this playground was removed. um that would have an immediate impact on what I 40 to 60 homes whether or not they're you know every person that lives in that home is actively using this playground or looking to use one. Um but so my question to you Adam is can you speak can you share a little bit of information if you have any about um that open lot south of Bridge Park? Yeah, I might actually refer to our planner a little bit if she knows any information on but um so yeah, the city is working uh as you know um uh we did drill a well there this spring um so we are doing some testing there right now as far as for a teacher uh plant there. Um nothing's been done besides just the original drilling and um testing of that. The future development of that site is under conversation whether that property will be developed. I think there's a little bit of commercial residential um you know just because of its uh proximity with you know two major throwaways right there right so uh I think definitely uh the owner is looking at uh possibility how does it how what are my options of getting it into the Musa you know because right now it's outside of that so that's conversation being had too so with that being if that ever does get to that point of being put in there um there's potential growth there on both on both sides the the business or industrial side of that as well as the residential site. So, yes, you'll see that number go up and that trail connectivity from like you indicated um Stonegate through the Boulder Ponds area, right? Um or Inwood uh town home area back up through that and potentially down to Ridge Park. >> Adam, what about the west side, the old Everhard Farm and south of there? Didn't we see something about that? >> Yes. >> Potential development. >> Um not High Point. What is the other name of this one? Um >> done by Tory Pines. So that that develop Tory Pines and the one above it. Uh >> I believe you >> Lake Elmo Heights. >> No C. >> Looking at the map right there. >> Tory Pines. Then there's a section 40 acres in there and there's the Heights, right? Is that the property you're referring to? >> Well, there's the old Everard farm. I don't know what it is. >> I'm looking at the map right here. It's It's called >> It's Lake Elmo Heights where the Heights Park is. >> Yeah. >> And then there's a there's a gap and then it was Tory Pines and there was a proposal to put a another subdivision in there. >> We looked at it. >> But I've asked about those in relationship to this park and everybody goes, "Well, the street's too busy. Nobody will ever cross that street." >> Yeah, it is problematic. It's very problematic. And I've gone around Peter like you on this on this one because um again I started asking about to the north, you know, uh the parks there and and they said there's no way to get across there and um there's the potential to the south. One of the things is this is a big piece of land that we're not utilizing otherwise. Okay. So that was kind of tipping me towards putting in the playground equipment, but I I do consider it a bit problematic. And there's really nothing else down as was said by the chair to get to Stonegate. And there's nothing in the Heights, right, Park? >> It's empty, right? >> It's empty, right? >> Yeah. >> You got to go. You got to go up to tablet. So, it's a pretty big stretch there. A mile, mile and a half to table. Um, chair, I hear your concern mainly is the regards to the price of what I proposed. you have any suggestions or would you that I could go back to if you have a one of these that you like that we you would reconvene on or different option. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. Well, let's transition into talking about the different options here that are before us and if something in if a version of something in here is suitable or if we want to kind of go back. I guess what I see when I look at these option one that St. Corey recreation barn theme they've got the 360 slide. Um it's like a slide into a climber which is pretty unique. I've only encountered it at one other park um that I've personally been to and it was a huge hit. Um so that's one thing that kind of seems a little distinctive to me in that one. I feel like the flagship option one, I don't know. I guess that feels pretty expensive to me. Um, and I don't know, maybe that option two from Flagship is kind of hitting that sweet spot for me, but it doesn't have this detailed pricing breakdown, which I don't know. I think is kind of unfortunate. Um, but we I'm sure we could piece it together. >> The cheap one then is option. The cheapest one is option two. >> Yeah, >> especially if you remove the 10,000 >> or the chips. >> That seems to be the one that might hit this. >> Yeah, I guess you could remove the double person or remove. This also has the biggest swing component. >> So, that could be the answer is we just gave them the bear a workable, but we didn't go extravagant. And perhaps other features could be added at another point. You know, we talked about >> we've talked about all kinds of stuff. >> Have something for higher ed group or >> um does RID I mean I was there this spring and I just don't remember. >> Are there swing sets at Ridge or were they before things were decommissioned? >> I think there's maybe a small one. >> Yeah, there are. Okay. In this case too to reduce if you were to move on with option two, one of the things you could do is reduce the size of the swing too. This is a very large swing set to include the double swing plus additional five other seats. Um you could minimize this down to even a um you know this section in the double seat or maybe just maybe just the four. Um that's a huge cost savings as well. >> Is it really huge to eliminate? Yeah, you um yeah, you eliminate I I wouldn't say you're going to knock up >> $25,000, but um you know, yeah, it adds up >> because the structure on this last one does need to hold all all three of these. So, it does add up. >> Gota sounds like Sounds like we're in discussion. So, I'll just I I'm I'm I'm still I guess I'll just reiterate I'm in favor of finding something smaller. I would like us to find something with a smaller smaller cost with the idea that I still believe this is a pretty decent park for disc golf. I would prefer to put money towards that. Uh knowing that city council know we're going to use these criteria and we can explain it to them knowing that they would they have said let's come up with um alternatives. I would that's that's my perspective on it. >> Good point. So, Peter, I'm hearing that. Um I mean, what did you think about the St. Croy wreck option? Um that one seems a little bit more parcelized, I guess, with the barn thing and then, you know, it's the only one that has that smaller two to five section. You know, I don't know if removing that would get you closer to the kind of >> benchmark price we had estimated. >> I don't I mean, my personal take in this maybe is back to kind of your point as far as picking picking playgrounds. Like I you know, my perspective on uh what things look I'm not a huge fan of the barn. Maybe the kids would love it. I don't know. It it doesn't seem like it fits with the neighborhood actually. >> We're at some place where >> don't they have a barn in that neighborhood? >> No, it's the other one. >> No, this is maybe it was in Clyice Park. There's a barn around the corner that I'm aware of. >> No, it's Homestead Homestead. >> It's certainly unique. Yeah, >> but I don't I mean I think that that neighborhood in particular is is not it's not there isn't the agriculture. There's some pretty >> pretty um >> it's Homestead that has the barn in the neighborhood >> and and Fields of St. Croy too, I think. >> Could you go back to both of those options? So, option two and the St. Croy one and ask what they would be able to do for 125 or to meet our budget and just see what comes back. >> I mean, Yes, I feel like if I mean I'm totally in favor of if it wouldn't be too hard to go back. Um, you know, it's unfortunate that this playground, the existing one is totally decommissioned. So, whatever. But um I guess I would be if we're going back and thinking about price, I would be interested in maybe even being closer to that $100,000 marks that we have $25,000 to invest in maybe something like disc golf goals >> or there's just a little bit more wiggle room there to to make a proposal to city council that's totally aligned with our objectives. I guess, >> Adam, as far as the time frame, would this be installed if we decided tonight? Would it be installed this year still? >> Yeah, both contractors currently right now have openings in August, September for this to be this year. If we go back um we might be pushing pushing it, but >> you probably still hit the spring >> by spring of 27. Yeah, you get it back on the list and then Do you need a motion if we send it back to staff or do you just need to be told? >> Just need to be told. >> Well, table is >> I mean I >> direction. >> I I guess I'll make a motion. I move to recommend tableabling this motion or this agenda item and um requesting that city staff go back to the contractors and look for a lower cost option. >> I'll second that >> discussion. I think that's fiscally responsible >> or not. It's fun. And >> you have a contact person at the group, right? >> At the >> the neighborhood group. >> Oh, yeah. Yeah. >> Maybe you talk to them. >> I really appreciate though that you have already taken that initiative to talk about the benches with that homeowners association. That's >> that's awesome. That's really great to see. >> Swings. Um, other discussion on the motion on the table. Okay, I'll call a vote then um to table this and to request that staff go back for a lower cost option. All in favor? >> I >> I Any opposed? Okay. None. Thank you. Um, now we have communications and updates. >> Ashley, anything? No updates for me. >> I don't have anything further unless you have questions. >> I normally have >> um my only question is are we planning anything? We um are you city staff planning anything for National Light Out where you would request um commissioner involvement at this point? >> No. Volunteers are always welcome to help out. Um we will typically as public works we always have equipment down there. um for display for the kids, things like that. But um nothing beyond really beyond that at this point. >> Okay. So the update is reach out to Adam in the next couple of days if you want to volunteer. >> Okay. Commissioners have any updates? >> I have a couple comments. Um having spent part of the weekend at a ball tournament at Lions Park, I heard very many positive remarks about the Lions Park playground. My eight-year-old grandson today said it was the best. >> The best. >> Well, it's so much better than what it was. >> Yeah. >> And then we also stopped at the Willowbrook um playground in Oakdale about maybe half a mile from east of or west of Pebble Park today. >> And they have a really nice playground. I wonder what that cost. But the the part that I really liked, maybe you want to stop by sometime because we're always looking for something for older age range. It says for 13 years and up and it is an obstacle course and it has I believe there's six features at least um different things that I have not seen before in a park. Really neat. Um then they also had if you've been down to the science museum where you race kids run against different animals or you know athletes or whatever. So, they have something that it's actually longer than that and it'll time how long it takes you to get from one end to the other. Really neat feature. And another beautiful thing they had because they had water there, they have a mister, just a little mister. You know, it's not a splash pad or anything like that. But it was a really neat park and it would be neat to have something like that in Lake Emma someday. I'm sure cost a lot more than the$125,000 we're talking about. >> Yeah. when they approved it, I recall it was close to a million dollars for that. They invested in the park, not just the playgrounds, but >> the park they've got other features, too. But but anyways, >> I'm always out on on the lookout for need parks and that was a really neat park. >> So, >> yeah. Yeah. For I think Peter's correct. It was closer over 850,000. It's closer to a million dollars, but does have port in place, playground, um mats and things like that. So, a lot of activities. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. And it's got I think it's it's got a a shelter with a I don't >> for the new city center park. The big park. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. There you go. Anyways. >> Okay. Other updates? >> Uh I will just make a quick comment to to all of us that um I appreciate the the mayor coming in. If you haven't watched that uh the workshop that he was discussing, it's worthwhile watching to hear the direct comments and discussion. Um I think it's worthwhile. >> Great. Thanks, Peter. >> All right, with that, can we take a motion to adjourn this meeting? >> I move to adjourn. >> Second. >> All in favor? >> I I >> All right. With that, this July 20th marathon