Gosh, who brought these? I forget what they call it. Pazels. They're so funny. >> They're my husband's favorite. So, they're always the first one I make every year. >> Does he know that you brought them? >> There is there is a there is a stack of them still at home. So, yeah. >> You think he will? >> Yes. >> We got two minutes. I thought they were very good. >> This is part of mine, too. Like them cheese. >> I'm good. Thank you. >> Oh, you're so strong. >> What are the flavors? Mint chocolate, orange, vanilla, and >> Which one did you get? >> That's what I >> Yeah. >> Annis is like licorice, right? >> Yeah. The licorice sounds so good. >> Yeah, that's >> okay. So this is the annis pile. That's the orange vanilla and that's the mint cream. >> I do those and rosettes. >> Does that t the season my mom started her rosettes today? >> I don't really guess that that's what everything is. >> Everything. >> She had to borrow my deep fat fryer cuz she doesn't have her own. She does it every Christmas and it's the only time we use it. If I don't leave it at her house, >> every first of the year, it comes back to my house to live until next Christmas. >> The crew cockro that's >> that's the display. >> You're going to need that, right? >> Request here. >> Oh, yeah. got to adapt to this chrome pocket is built into like >> Oh, is that was that cousin issues? >> I think that might be the issue. >> I can try my own. >> Let's do that. >> Okay. >> Otherwise, I can project again if you have me. >> I'll see if this one works. >> We're good. My computer says 529. Oh, okay. My computer says 529. Uh, >> all right. I will call this meeting to order on December 15th. Um, up first we have new employee. Welcome. Welcome you guys. >> Thank you. Um, so maybe I'll hand it off to you. >> Yeah. >> To do introductions. >> So, um, Luke Smith and Jenna >> Lotser. >> Lotser. I knew I was going to get that wrong. Um, they just started on the 1st of December. both of our uh brand new probationary firefighters. >> Awesome. Welcome. Well, I met Jenna at uh Carver Village Christmas. She started volunteering at events like 3 days after starting. >> Great. Right. Right. Um okay, this is the awkward part. We always tend to do truth, two truths and a lie with new employees. Um I truly chose it. It started during COVID when we were all virtual and it was just an easy way to get to know people. It's not intended to be awkward and sometimes it's just easier to have fun facts to share about yourself. So, do you want to go first, John? >> Can we have them? >> Can we do the introductions? >> Oh, yes. Well, you know what? I'm so excited. >> Mine's really not exciting. We'll go around the table and we'll do introductions. I'm Courtney Johnson. I'm the mayor of the city of Cr. >> I'm Christy Conrad. I Conrad City Council. >> Hi, I'm Erin Smith. I'm the community development director for the city. I'm Brenda Good, administrative services manager. >> Brent, we've met. >> Eric Bman, city council. >> Kayla Pasco, city council. Lori Ser, also a city council. >> And I'm Aaron Schmidt. I'm the city engineer >> who sometimes gets to sit at the stage. >> Okay. Um that Do you want me to start? Sure. Okay. Um, I have two kids. I drive a manual car and I work with medical devices. >> Okay. There's no one clear winner. >> I don't know. I >> YEAH, EVERYBODY'S WELCOME. You all can play too if you want. Um, okay. Which one's the lie? The second one. Oh. So disappointed. >> I thought you had three kids for some reason. >> No, I've only got two. I was good on three kids. >> No, I have two boys and I am a packaging engineer for medical device company. >> Very cool. >> Nice. >> Awesome. >> All right. >> All right. I'm Luke. Um, my two truths in a lie. I once won a less a baking competition. I believe that ketchup belongs on everything. And I live in the Honduras for 3 months. Oh, what was the second one? >> I believe ketchup belongs on everything. >> That's the truth. >> Oh, the truth. >> Not that one. >> Okay. It's between >> Oh, kind of one and three is the split for the most part. Which one's a lie? >> TWO. >> Ketchup is the one. >> Unless a baking contest. >> Yep. All right. You and Eric can team up. >> Yeah. >> Or compete. >> Our next meeting is the first Monday. >> Well, welcome you guys. Thank you so much for putting yourselves out there. Thank you for going through the volunteer process or for the through the interview process and becoming being well on your way to becoming firefighters. I know that the training especially these first couple years is robust. So, I appreciate your your time commitment and your willingness to be part of the team. >> Yeah. excited. Welcome. Thank you. >> This is the part where you guys are welcome to stay for the rest of the evening and come to every single one of our meetings after this point >> or you can take the opportunity to at this point. So, >> thank you so much. >> Follow our leader. >> Thank you guys. Thank you so much. >> Thank you. >> All right. Um, up next we've got the 2026 street project review. >> All right. Good evening, Mayor Council. >> Pull up a presentation here to go off of tonight. >> See if I can get this to work here. All right. Looks like we're ready to rock. So, um, wanted to take an opportunity to, uh, talk to the council tonight about the 2026 street project in a little bit more detail. Um, we had talked briefly about it a month or two ago now, but, um, have a few more details that we want to go through. Um, we've also had an open house since then, so we wanted to talk about that a little bit and just kind of talk about the next steps and and how the council would like to move forward. So, um, first of all, just recap with kind of just the project areas to remind you all where things are at. U, this project is broken into two chunks. The first being kind of the local street maintenance piece. Um, what council's been accustomed to the last few years. This would be down in the Carver Bluffs neighborhood again. And, um, combination of milling overlay and reclamation in the Carver Bluffs. And then also we have a small seal coat or a fox seal, excuse me, on the white pine way trail system which is a newer piece west of Jonathan Carver Parkway. So that that's the composition of the local street maintenance funds that um you'll be seeing the breakdown here in a bit. >> Aaron, this doesn't complete the work in the bluffs, does it? Is there some >> There's still um one more year left in the bluffs. >> Is that Ramsey? Is that when Ramsey Avenue >> Ramsey and then um Bluff Road, that loop road, >> we'll get we'll get that finished out next year. >> Um then we have the state aid portion. So this is all going to be used the with state aid funds to pay for. Uh this is a larger reclamation project of Mount Hope Road. So, one of our major collector systems through the city, uh, connecting County Road 61 down to Old Carver Road. So, that's a kind of a a primary collector as I mentioned. Um, it's on our state aid system and we talked about um the ter the northern termini is up at Spring Creek Drive, which is our city limit line. And then the proposed plan is actually to stop at fourth or fifth street which would be one block north of old Carver Road. So until we have definition to what that intersection improvement looks like at the intersection there at Old Carver Road, uh we feel it's best to hold that short just so we don't have any um pavement redo in the future. So that would be the proposed southern terminus of the project. Um, one item in particular that um, we wanted to note was we would intend to include two digital speed signs along the corridor um, as part of the project unless the council feels otherwise. So, just one piece there that we wanted to mention. >> Are they permanent ones there? They don't have to move like we don't move them around town. >> They would be permanently installed um, similar to what we would have on Sixth Street for example. >> One in each direction. >> Correct. >> Yep. Um, as I mentioned, we did have an open house on October 14th. Uh, we were planning to have those on site in a couple various locations, but we actually had some pretty poor weather that day. Um, so we decided to move it to city hall. We had that noted on the openhouse invitation that in the event of weather, we would be down here at city hall in in village hall room. So, we actually had uh nine residents that stopped by as part of the open house and wanted to share some of the feedback that we gathered as part of that. Uh number one, Mount Hope Road section. Um there was actually quite a bit of um talk around the cemetery area. There was a couple residents that that live nearby the cemetery and one of the suggestions was possibly adding a fence line to the southernly edge of our cemetery property and then also paving the cemetery loop roads in conjunction with this project. Um this is one that's currently planned for 2033 in the pavement management plan um when we're doing the um Forner Lane Christy Drive area. So that's that's where that time's out right now. But if the council would want to move that up, we'd obviously have to uh move up the cash flow accordingly to make that work. Um there's also a a retaining wall kind of along the southerntherly edge of the cemetery as it um butts up to the trail system, which would be taken care of when we redo the trail as part of the project. So those are kind of the the key pieces that we heard up in that area. Um, one other uh question was or they wanted assurance that we'd have enough crown in the road after we repaved it. So, basically adequate cross slopes on the road paving, which I uh told them that we would make sure that we had in there uh to make sure that the drainage gets to the gutter lines. And then a couple just general questions about well, how does how does it work for access during construction? So, um, we communicated that your driveway, you'd still be able to access your driveway each evening. Um, in the event that there was a piece of severely damaged curb in front of your driveway, we would want to take care of that as part of the project. Um, but we'd make special um, communication with with each resident if that were the case. Um, that's kind of a one-off issue. It doesn't happen very often, but we would um communicate that in advance and try to coordinate that with the resident as needed. >> Um, one thing about the cemetery, so if we're going to look at paving those roads, excuse me. Right now, it's kind of easy because it's gravel to pull off. I mean, obviously when people come to a cemetery, they're visiting the cemetery. They're getting out of their vehicles. Um, we don't have any spot that's really designated for parking within the cemetery that I have recognized when I've been up there. So maybe that's something we want to put in our caps for later if we are going to think about paving >> those roads in there that there's little spots where people can pull off so that they're not blocking if more people are trying to drive in. I know it's not a super hight traffic area but >> then let's not encourage people to drive all over the grass either and park on the grass if we're going to pave. >> Okay, Erin, I have a question. Um >> did they have did they say why when you got feedback about asking to pave that sooner? Um, they didn't really mention why exactly. It doesn't sound like there's really like a nuisance like gravel tracking issue onto the road or anything like that. >> Seems like drainage is working okay. Um, it was more of just a suggestion I guess that we received. Is there any efficiency gained in doing it when we do this road or we >> um the only thing that you would benefit is just if you pave the roads now you could pull the paver out like on the Mount Oak Road. So you might save just a little like just like construction like tracking of along the paving like on the mat itself. So you might get some like scuff marks in the future if you did it in 2033 or or whatever. But um >> we also get some ruts back in there if we have heavy rains I believe. Don't we don't they have to go and create that road out. >> I'd have to >> check. We don't haven't done that to my knowledge recently. >> Yeah. I know when Paul and I had talked about the cemetery in the past, we we knew if we paved it, we would have to do some minor grading as well just to make sure that the drainage all worked. um you know we can't get that too high where it blocks the drainage. So that would be one thing we'd have to look at. >> Yeah, there was work done maybe six, seven years ago. >> I bet five, six years ago >> um or there was the roads were in pretty tough shape and so there was some grading some um dead tree removal etc. Um, but I think for the most part based on Aaron's comments right now, it' be an aesthetic. And I think we're probably talking in that 20 to $30,000 range. We don't have anywhere close to that. I mean, unless I mean, you create I mean, just like the trail conversation that's impending. Unless you create an opportunity by fill in the blank, there is an already made cash flow for that kind of addition. Unless bids come in really uh um well and then there's a kind of a conversation on priorities. Would you, you know, rather invest additional work in the cemetery versus another road that's maybe deteriorating? Might go from a mill overlayly to a reclamation. There's kind of a lot of different decision trees uh that could happen by making one of these decisions to move this up. Kayla, did you have some? >> Yes. Um, are we prepared to do any temporary parking permits for people who are in Carver Bluffs that are having if we're doing a reclamation or any major milan overlay that they would need to be if they choose not to park in their own driveways due to the construction? >> Uh, we've never done that before. I mean, it's they they always >> parking ordinance. So >> they couldn't keep their cars on the street with the construction going on. >> No, no. I'm saying like if they wanted to park >> like outside of the construction. So for example, my parents don't like if their when their road was under construction, they didn't like having to drive in and out because my dad had a new car and he's >> like >> like that. Um I'm not at the same um so he would be someone who would want to have an option to park on an adjacent street that is not under construction so that he would not have to drive in and out of a construction zone with a new vehicle. >> Yeah. I mean we I mean we have in the past pro provided in like public parking areas like temporary parking like u Lions Park we've allowed when we did like a mill overlay I think on Sky View um we did that um but have to give some thought to if you allowed like a temporary restriction on the ordinance it would only apply what do we put that at 42 or 70 48 or 72. >> Yeah, >> it would only if they left their car there for like 3 days, but >> um if that's something you want us to dig into, we certainly can. >> It's not necessary. I just I know we have a provision in the ordinance that you can issue temporary parking waiverss. So >> yeah, that's what we would in this instance if someone had an issue on in the bluffs, we you know, just from the top of my head was we would uh provide let them park in Bluff Park park parking lot overnight. >> Sounds good. As long as we have a plan. >> Mhm. Thank you. >> Yep. And just to reiterate, the goal is if if people want to drive in to their driveway each night, they can. But I I hear your point. If you don't want to drive on the on the gravel, >> I'm glad your dad's like my dad. >> I like your dad, TOO. >> OKAY. As long as we have a plan, Eric, I'm I'm okay. >> Um, so then just to round off the comments in the Carver Bluff neighborhood, there was more questions just about how does access work and such things. Um and then the one other comment we did receive was um working day restrictions for the the week of steamboat days. So traditionally what we have in our construction contracts are um Friday through Sunday of steamboat days. We prohibit work but we allow construction to occur you know through Thursday of that week. So there was a suggestion of limiting working days you know more more strictly. So I as the person who manages CBO days um I don't think it needs to be any more than it is. I mean I know we like garage sales but that's though for me we have the buses that come through to give rides to people from down or from up there to down here that starts Friday or no that's only Saturday even. So sorry. So to me um >> what we have our status quo through Thursday is just fine as long as it's quiet by Friday. We're good. Yep. Okay. Okay. So, you just want me to keep going, mayor, and then we'll take questions. >> Sure. >> Okay. >> Okay. So, one of the bigger topics we wanted to talk about tonight was the potential trail connection on Monopol Road. This is one that we kicked off last time, but we have some more details that we wanted to really dig into with the council and get some direction from you all on. So, um, this is a gap that's in our trail system today. It goes from Lions Park down to downtown here at Old Carver Road. So, currently any users of the trail to the north would have to go on the road for that last couple blocks um to get to downtown or vice versa. Um, there is some challenges. Obviously, we have a lot of topography issues in this area. Um, and depending on where you sit, um, there's a retaining wall on the west side of the road today, and then there's also several driveways on the east side, which made things very difficult. Um, the the biggest issue is where the road is situated in the in place right away today. Um the road is basically very tight to the easternly rideway line which would make putting a permanent trail on the east side not possible without in requiring additional permanent easements for the trail. So that's that's uh kind of the biggest driver and why we we think the east side isn't really a valid option. There's a lot of complexities with with five driveways on that side plus the permanent rightway acquisition process would make things extremely challenging. So, um right now we're going to focus on the west side of the road and talk about some of the complexities with that as we're seeing it. Um and just to remind the council, we're we're estimating this at about a half a million dollars. So, this is not a a cheap endeavor by any means. So, um, just keep that at the forefront of our minds as we talk about this tonight as well. Um, so what the proposed plan would be to make this happen is the in place retaining wall is situated about 3 to four feet behind the curb today. And what that would have to do is that that whole retaining wall would have to ship to the west where we'd want that to be situated as 10 feet behind the curb. So that would allow for a two two foot clear zone plus an 8ft trail. So 10 ft in total, which is essentially what we did on Sixth Street for that state aid route. Um 8ft standard trail with that twoft um clear zone. So you're not basically right up against the retaining wall when you're driving a bicycle up and down that corridor. Erin, for emphasis, I know we talked about at a previous council meeting, but there are different requirements because we're using state aid funds. Can you >> um bring that up again and talk about that? >> So, for it to meet a trail standard, it has to be 8t wide and you also have to maintain that clear zone distance. Um >> that is absolutely required. >> Yep. Otherwise, you have to go down to a sidewalk section. So, and the rest rest >> sidewalk section you with can do that. >> You could go down to like a six foot sidewalk behind the curb, but that would not meet what the rest of the the section is going to the north. So, that's a trail. So, you would you would be essentially >> going from a trail like route in your city down to a sidewalk. >> Okay. So, sounds fine. Um my question though is does that still meet the requirements then if we are on our state aid road if we were to just put in a sidewalk at the 8 ft or whatever it is or six with the six >> you'd still have to remove the retaining wall regardless. So it's you're not really getting out of any of the issues that we're talking about. >> How much how many feet are from the retaining wall to the curb on >> it's 3 to four feet. So it doesn't meet even a sidewalk section. >> So the difference between a trail and a sidewalk is 2 feet. >> Is that >> Yes. >> Okay. >> That and um it's a nuance, but uh the city doesn't plow sidewalks. So the adjacent property owner is responsible for maintaining that sidewalk, i.e. shoveling it. >> Good point. But the cost would be basically the same because regardless we have to move the retaining wall >> and on a trail we'll get more more likely to get the funding. >> You you'd still get funding for the sidewalk behind the curb but it just again it's not I guess the question is do you want to have this as part of your trail network? >> I have a few more questions logistically here. So if we've got what do you say three feet maybe? >> Okay. So I mean the sidewalks in the downtown area here between three and four feet in the historic district. We do have them in town but if we have three to four feet and let's say we have to get to sixish to maybe eight whatever it is we have right away on the other side of the road without removing that retaining wall. Can we shift at all? like use the space, use the 3 ft of of trail that we have there, add on the additional feet and then push the road, >> push the whole road east, you're saying? >> Yeah. In that section, >> that would be pretty tight with because we have hydrants on the east side of the road. We also have signage. Um, we would need we needed right away for the 8ft trail the if we were going to do it on the east side. So, I don't I don't think we'd get it if we shifted the road. >> And then we're pouring new curb and gutter and moving fire hydrants. >> So, you'd basically have two You'd have 1,400 ft of curb that you'd have to replace. >> Yeah. I think we want to check too the difference because I'm assuming black or concrete's going to be more expensive than black top. >> Yes, it's about twice as much. And right across the street, just measuring quick on GIS, the right of way on the east side of the road is about a foot. So gaining one foot if you shifted it plus three gets you to four only. >> Okay. >> Yeah, it's it's really tight. >> So if we did this as a trail and we made it four, six feet just on its own like just six, let's say five feet, whatever. So we get a weird number here. So five feet. So, what would that impact then for is that all out of pocket then? I mean, can is it we just say as a city, okay, we're going to do the road your way, state aid road, but we're going to put in a 5-ft trail because it fits here and we're coming into old sections of town and we can't we can't make everything to brand new standards all the time when we're in old sections of of Carver. >> We could maintain it. Number one, >> based based on past projects, they wouldn't approve our plans. Okay. >> It's kind of uh you have to meet all their standards. We kind of went through that on the bicycle path for Sixth Street that >> uh it's kind of all or nothing. >> Okay. >> So, >> okay. And you can try to run it, but I think what Erin is saying is correct in that um even moving in that retaining wall, but you're still moving the entire retaining wall. So um I'm not sure if that's your question, but the on the state aid part, it's it's been an all or nothing, at least in the projects that we've submitted to them. >> Can the road be So what I'm trying to get at is like how do we not have to obliterate that retaining wall and put up all that money towards that retaining wall? And so how wide is that road? Can the road narrow? >> It's already pro we already prohibited parking on one side um due to the width. So I wouldn't suggest going any narrower that road. >> We but this is considered a collector. Correct. >> Yeah. >> Well, a lot of our collectors don't have parking on them. >> Yeah. I mean you could I mean it's just >> this is a hard spot. I want to look at all the >> No, it's good. I mean just from the experiences that all of us have is that road feels really tight. So the idea of narrowing it seems uh anxietyridden but we could still test it out. We have plenty of time. You could look at lane widths. I mean the lane I'm not >> I think it's 26. >> Yeah. So we're if we if we went down to 24 we'd have the private parking on both sides. 26 is uh meets fire code for parking on one side. >> Well, actually, we'd only have to do it in this section from the park down. The rest of the road can stay the way it's at because that trail is already in place. So, it would just be from Lions Park down to fifth. Is that fifth right there? Yeah. To to fifth really old cover road eventually, but yeah, >> I don't hate that idea. It's a hill anyways, so we probably want folks parking on it. >> Do you gain it? >> And it would really just be that section who's given. >> But that doesn't give us enough. >> That gives us up to three feet if we add the ement from the other side. >> So we're at six feet total >> from the other side is pouring all new. >> That's true. So we're at two feet. So we're at five feet and we need six feet. >> So I think what I'm >> six feet for a sidewalk, eight feet per trail. I'm what I'm hearing is the council's interested in looking at uh narrowing the road in a section so that the retaining wall doesn't have to be touched and could come back to you with what that might look like. >> I think what I'm hearing is the council is interested in us getting creative and making a trail happen is what I feel. >> I not and I'm saying a trail and I mean a trail or a sidewalk or some safe route for pedestrians to get up that hill. Yeah, when we look at snow removal, I mean, down here at Gazebo Park, they use the brush on all the sidewalks and everything to clear out Gazebo Park, if we had to have an exception area in town where it's this they brushed that road as a sidewalk rather than a trail. I mean, I think the council can make talk about that and make that decision if >> my biggest concern >> because you couldn't less wipe on it. So, I'm just >> My priority would be not moving the retaining wall because as soon as we touch that retaining wall, we're in hundreds of thousands of dollars. And I personally can't justify that for three blocks, four blocks of road. But if we can find a creative solution that gets us the width we need >> without moving the retaining wall and staying within our easements. And the reason I struggle too is because we this is a very logical way to come down. We do have the trail that goes up the backside. So technically you're accessible to get to Lines Park, but >> it's not, you know, it's not lit. You're It's steep. I mean, it's a long steep. Yeah. Steep also, but it's But um >> it's crazy steep. >> Yeah. So can you go back a slide, too? I just I think that this is such an important connection for maybe back one more. the Mount Hope section I think because like sorry one more one more so this one because like if you take a look at all those residents that are up there there is Sky View there's all the folks in Christy's Bluff we're going to be getting potentially new Chaza residents we're interested in Triangle between 212 and Chaza Boulevard is Chaza I think I just feel really import that We need to figure out a way to make a trail >> or sidewalk accessible. >> I'm saying trail, I mean whatever pedestrian can use to get down connection because there's >> beyond Lions Park. There are parks downtown. We all know that there's a grocery or a uh >> ice cream store that's real popular. Casees is popular with the kids. I just it's the children that are coming down the hill that I want to make sure have a safe spot to get downtown. >> Tony, again, what jeopardizes any funding for this? >> Not meeting state aid standards for any number of um I would say minimum road specifications that they have for funding. If it if this was um Spring Creek Drive, you could put like a two- foot sidewalk there if you wanted to. It's just we're using I mean all this project is 100% funded at this point from state aid. >> Um so whether you do it with their project or you do it later, you're kind of subject to their rules. And you know, we spent several meetings going over different ways to get a pedestrian way. The one thing that we did talk about is changing the geometry of the road so we can go back. And >> so we didn't explore that. >> We only explored kind of off street like uh we looked could we you know down you know and have a railing and kind of that kind of thing and kind of use the grade as kind of a natural area. They're just Uh if you go back to the you go to back to the picture of the the home Aaron there's just that you know the rightway is actually probably at the front end of that sedan like land a trail without really disrupting that property owner. So that's why we um talked about pushing that retaining wall back and even with that there is some unintended consequences. Um, >> how many driveways do we impact with that? >> One. >> Just Okay. So I think what we can do is look at um that they playing like I'm an engineer here but I do I would want to like talk about the the kind of the safety you know like your traffic folks of pushing out a section of road in a kind of an arbitrary spot and how that's signed and Um, not that we have people like bouncing into curbs and uh that kind of thing. Um, but let's go back and like let's look at that and review. Um, and you know, I don't often see cars parked on that section. But if you're eliminating parking, then I think we owe it to the neighborhood to go back and say, "This is what we're thinking." um and plan maybe another open house over the winter and say this is what we're thinking. It involves no parking on either side of the street >> in that section. >> Yeah, let's be very clear about >> not all about hope just that >> right um get some feedback from our snowplow team etc. Um and then bring that back to you as a package and then let you give us some additional direction. >> Is there a a life expectancy for a retained law there is can a well engineered retained wall like that >> stay in place in perpuity. >> It can stay in place 50 plus years. I mean that the systems that we're installing are very long-term solutions. >> So, >> but at some point that will need to be replaced. >> Th this one I should clarify this is a modular block wall. This is a dry cast system. So, they don't last as long as the >> the new blocks we're using are wet cast concrete blocks and they don't >> they don't they don't have issues with the salt and the freezing and the and the thaw like these do. So, >> so I guess what my question is is this one due to be replaced in the next 10 years? >> Yeah, that's a good question. We should probably look at that a little closer too. >> Um, >> and is that a city-owned? I assume >> it's in the rightway. Okay. So, that's a city-owned retaining wall that we take care of. >> Okay. >> Um, >> it's a good point. >> And then, you know, you talked about you putting on your engineering hat. We talk a lot about traffic calming measures. And tell me if I'm using the wrong engineer terms, but that would be a traffic calming >> measure to slow folks down as they're coming into town. >> I have one last question. So, when looking at this picture, you can see behind the retaining wall, you've kind of got that big open grass area. I'm not sure who you folks are if that's your house right there. Yeah. >> Um, so when we talk about right away, how far does the rightway go into that? You said almost to the front of that car. >> Okay. So, >> when I'm thinking about right away, and you're not going to want to, but we're looking at everything. So when you're talking about right of way and putting things in, I mean, if this was other right of way, would we be inclined to use it for a trail? I mean, in the Carver Bluffs or something like that. So, I'm I am not for or against it, but I you said that you had looked into that a little bit. We know that it affects, you know, one homeowner on the street. Um, but >> is there we could make it work. Oh, it almost >> we couldn't make it work because of the the grade change. You can see there's like a >> like a 4 foot elevation drop from the top of the retaining wall to the driveway. >> So like you like >> we couldn't land the >> we couldn't land the trail without like >> we'd have to go way back into their property and buy temporary easements and >> Okay. Well, I mean, if you came down and you graded it out to hit where the driveway hits, I mean, what kind of grade would that be? I mean, that's a pretty >> That steps, maybe. >> That's a pretty big one for state aid is >> when you're when you have a road slope like this, you know, the profile grade of this road is really steep. >> So, they'll they'll allow you to match the road grade, but once you increase it and make it steeper yet, then that doesn't meet their rules anymore. So we can't like climb faster the state. >> Okay. >> So that that is a that's a big issue. >> Okay. >> Um for the Mindot ADA office. >> I Kayla, you don't want to see the the retaining wall be rebuilt. I That's not a barrier for me. Um, especially if it's getting on in years and it's something that we would have to do in the next handful. I mean, if we have to do it period and could do an upgrade into something that would be something with more longevity. >> My problem is not with having a retaining wall rebuilt. My problem is the cost associated with it. >> But if it's an investment we're going to have to make at some point. >> Yeah. and and regardless if we can figure out what the lifespan is left on there, that would be something I'd want to see in the master plan. >> We can do that. >> Any other thoughts on this section? >> I don't want to belabor it, but I'm not sure how narrowing the road gave us enough, how the math gave us enough. >> I don't think it did yet. I think we're looking for some creative engineering to come up with a few more feet. Well, I mean, what I'm hearing is we're going to see if we could extend we we rip out that curve on the west side and then narrow the the street by 3 ft. >> Mhm. >> Then you could get a sidewalk. >> Then you can get a sidewalk. Yeah. >> Well, and it's need to be net measured on site. Like we're looking at GIS stuff, which is great, but all we've ever talked about is that it's close, right? But we don't know if it's exact when we're on the GIS. So, I think knowing for sure like can we get in one way or another or if just that's that's not going to work that way. >> We'll get a figure drawing based on actual survey. >> Yeah, we have the survey now. So, >> and we'll show you what a sidewalk looks like in the drive lane widths and you'll be able to see all that. We'll >> and we'll, you know, work on a, you know, make sure there's a safe transition from going from like the wide section to the narrow section. And I know you'll bring us some funding estimates, right? What it looks like. >> We already kind of Well, >> with the new core stuff, >> um there could be a possibility we could maybe make that a entrance to Lions Park a little bit more pronounced, you know, where it's like almost like a stop there rather than a you know, what it is today. And maybe that's a safer pedestrian. You could do a bump out there and then you lose that with around the boat. So, >> it might be a pretty seamless transition. >> Yeah, >> that would be great to slow people there before they really get going down the road. >> Look at us. >> Look at us all engineering. >> So, >> and it'll, you know, we're still, we're not at 500,000, but we're probably a couple hundred, you know, so yeah, >> because we're going to be with the amount of sidewalk and curb. The retaining wall is a is a big number. It'll be less, but I don't want to give the council the impression that it's going to be 50,000 when we come back. >> Yeah. >> Um and then if you want to move to that next slide, it'll be these scenarios and I kind of help build these with the team. So, um the nice part about this there's still so let's just uh for scenario sake say the trail goes down to 150 instead of 500. So you could you can get 50% from the trail connection program. There are some criteria for that. So we'd have to make sure that we can meet that with grade of the trail primarily or sidewalk. Um and then just kind of use this as a guide um for what you'd be seeing. So if the numbers go down, some of these uh numbers will uh go down kind of on a prrated basis. So the trail ended up being half the amount from 500 to 250. You know, debt service would be probably 35,000 instead of 70 and on from there. But we'll clean this up once we get that new estimate from uh Aeron's office. what >> is just want to kind of emphasize this. So I'm not hearing at least at this point any the council saying we don't want to pursue this or we want to pursue something else. It's just figure out how to get something that's better than what we have today and bring that back to us. >> That's where I'm at. Is anybody else? >> That's where I'm at. Yeah, we're we're I think the tradeoff with the parking in that in that area is worth the exploration of this. >> Okay, that's good. Thank you. Okay, >> we'll keep moving then. So, this is the north end. This is at Spring Creek Drive. Um this is one we've been looking at for a handful of years now. And really what we have up there is a sighteline issue. Um the property owner there in the corner has a large number of coniferous trees that are basically planted right on the right ofway line. So that's it's kind of a messy situation. It's like, okay, are these his trees or they our trees? And it's going to go down that path potentially if we start talking about taking trees out. So, um, we looked at this last fall and we feel that if we can move the stop bar up closer to the road and just do a modification in that corner to the to the curb line and the pedestrian ramp with this project, we can get that stop sign moved up, which will increase the sight line to the south. Um so you can see here this picture those are the large trees and you're looking south towards um Christy or Forner Lane and you see now where you stop today those trees are in the way. But if you can move that stop bar further towards the intersection another five or 10 feet then you'll be able to see the south a lot better. So that um would be our goal to to try to clean that up without um going and taking out you know 10 50 year old trees. So just wanted to get any thoughts on that. But that would be how we want to pursue that one. >> Yeah, I think I think that's great. Does that include some curb work there then to make it >> that corner the pedestrian ramp would have to get cleaned up and modified. Um the stop sign placement is going to be one that we need to review. >> Okay. >> Um but we've looked at this from a MUTCD perspective and we feel like we have some options here to still meet the state and federal requirements for stop signs and improve that situation. >> Okay. >> Yeah, that's a tricky intersection. >> Thank you. Thank you guys. >> Thank you. >> With the electric poles and the wipes all stay the same above ground. Um, that's actually one Brent brought up in the past. I haven't looked at that one too closely yet with the electric company, but there's a lot of stuff going on there. So, that might be a tough um relocation effort, but we can definitely look into it. There's there's lines that are going in multiple directions there. Our goal is to have it moved because it's another impediment to that site line. So, even if it's not buried, that it's maybe pushed. So, we did uh based on some feedback from the neighborhood, we did install some pedestrian crossing signs up there. And there's going to be some additional traffic and work done in conjunction with uh the Chesa residential project. I'm forgetting the name of it right now, but um so there's going to be some work. So, this will be good timing there. And there'll be some more or higher traffic volumes than there are today. Okay. And then just to to finish it up tonight, um talking about the funding summary, this is all in line with the pavement management plan estimates that we put together. So we have three buckets of money that are going to fund these improvements. Obviously the street maintenance fund. Um local street maintenance fund piece for the Carver Bluffs. State aid street funds for Mount Hope Road. And then combination of the various utility enterprise funds for doing the minor utility um maintenance items associated with these project areas. So um some minor gatefeld work, you know, maybe replace a hydrant. Um the public services team is taking a close look at kind of all those things this winter and we'll decide what items have to be addressed with the maintenance of the street. But this is a that 115 is a combination of sewer, water and storm sewer based on the on the CIP 2026. So that is the funding summary for the for the work. >> That 1.6 million does not include any of the trail work we just discussed. >> It does not. Okay. Um, so I guess we we'll talk uh with Brent and we're going to work on these revised concepts for the area and then we'll decide when we're ready to come back to council to to circle back and talk about that at which time you'd be able to authorize the preparation of the plans and specs. And then um we'd be doing that this winter going out for bids and such. And this would be a 2026 summer construction project. >> Erin, could could you have something for the second work session in January for the council to on the trail sidewalk? >> Oh, easily. Yeah, for sure. Yep. >> Okay. Let's plan for that. >> Okay. >> And then we'd authorize the first meeting in February based on whatever feedback they have, right? >> Okay. >> Thanks for taking another look at that and your willingness to get creative because I think we're going to have to do something that's rather non-traditional. >> Yeah. >> Thanks for the ideas. >> If you need any engineering help the office, just let us know. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Okay. Thanks, Aaron. Um, okay. Up next, we've got the Great River Energy. Just have to struggle when I'm saying it. Um, public utilities commission application. Is the best aid to brainstorming? Why don't we pass these? Did >> you just take the cookies away from me? >> Cookie. Cookie. >> Okay. I think that was the hint to pass these. That's usually how that goes. >> Thank you for taking a minute to uh >> Yeah. to uh >> Who made all these? >> Uh Kathy made the caramels and pretzel things. I'm not sure who made the other. >> Maybe Julie. How many of these should I eat, do you think? >> Nope. You lost your center. You just got the pretzel. Yeah, you did. >> Okay. And then we'll just try this one, too. Anybody? Anybody? >> Wow. >> Farthest away from your body. >> What happens when we have meetings at dinner time? Like, >> now we'll be all hooked up on shredder every single >> Okay. All right. I think you all are pretty familiar with Great River Energy, the Lake Town 115 kilowatt project uh proposed through our growth area. So, um this has been a pretty impactful project for us for a couple reasons. Number one, obviously that it runs through our growth area. Number two, some challenges we've had with notification from the project. We were uh filled in pretty late in the process by a township resident that kind of randomly stopped into city hall as opposed to being part of the decision-m process which other communities had the opportunity to do with Great River Energy. So, um some facts about their proposed project and then we'll get into some updates that have happened. So, it's a proposed length of 3 to five miles that essentially extends through um the uh preferred route goes through our northern growth area that we have in our orderly annexation area and guided in our comprehensive plan. And that project includes poles that are 75 to 100 ft tall. So, it's large infrastructure through the growth area with the right of way under the poles being 100 ft which drastically limits the type of development that can happen under those poles. So if it's similar to some easements, some power easements we have in town, we likely wouldn't be able to do much of anything in that area. So obviously the property under the poles would be largely unbuildable, which is deeply impactful to folks that own that property, folks that are thinking about developing their property, who have held it in their family for a while, thinking that might be how they retire, pass well, etc. So through a timeline in the project, you can see that Great River Energy has been working on this project for two plus years. I won't go through all of these, but they started some open houses in January of 2024. So coming up on January 2026, obviously we're coming up on year two. Um, we became aware of the project in October, so about 9 months after that process, after their open houses had uh been completed. So they were working on it previously and then we were made aware in October. Uh through the time between October and now the city council has been fantastic about engaging with Great River Energy, sharing testimony, sharing implications that their project will have directly to our growth area and on our community. And I think that's been deeply impactful to the public utilities commission. We've gotten a lot of feedback from them requesting additional information or following up with us. So, I'd say the information that we've provided has been deeply impactful and just the story that we've shared of we weren't given the same benefit that other communities were. We'd like to slow this process down a little bit. So, through some testimony, some letters that we all have been writing together, um the PUC, the public utilities commission, requested that additional study was done on route B. So the great river great river energy has their proposed route or their preferred route and then route B is a route that um some other people have been advocating for the city being one. So the PUC then requested that Great River Energy go back and do additional study for what is what we're calling route B. A comment period is open right now. It closes tomorrow. So there's a letter in the packet that we're looking for some feedback on that would we would be looking to submit tomorrow to be included in the comment period that's live right now. So the study that was completed was done by power engineers. It's included in the packet. Um and it's studied again route B which has historically been the city's preference. Staff review of the uh power engineer study. If you took some time to read it, I hope that you came to some of the same conclusions. But the proposed route that Great River Energy is looking to explore primarily increases load between Waconia and Victoria north of Airport Road, which I think is one of the more challenging portions of this project is that it's deeply impactful to our growth area. Folks that will be in the city of Carver and we don't get a net positive increase from it. Um the benefit is outside of our growth area, outside of our community, but we are the ones taking that impact. The proposed route by Great River Energy is likely more reliable than route B. So just through like length, distance between poles, etc. Their proposed route is more reliable. So in their head, that route makes a lot of sense. It's more reliable. It's cheaper. So moving forward with that probably makes a lot of sense for them. And one piece that's important to think about with the power engineer study is that route B would require a breaker station. That's estimated at about $9.5 million. Is that the change in reliability? Is that record station? Is that >> is that the primary reason that they wouldn't want to do that? >> No. From my understanding, the reliability doesn't change much. >> It's just the way that the uh project is routed that were to require that station. >> So, has our city attorney had comments on because the point they're saying we're taking the brunt of this, right? We don't get any net benefit from you running the line between Wakonia or from for Wakonia and Victoria. Does that I mean what does Dave had to say about >> Yeah. >> that >> I think Council Member Fersman asked him that at a previous meeting and his feedback was that just because we're a miss doesn't mean that it was wrong in some way. Like it was unfortunate. Uh it was obviously challenging for us to understand, but they likely didn't miss a city or a state requirement that would shut the project down entirely. So it's an unfortunate situation. Um if there was some case that could be made that they had to start the process over, I think we would explore that option. But from Dave's feedback, that isn't a route that we can explore right now. So, what we're looking for tonight is some feedback on the letter, obviously, to get it into the public utilities commission by end of day tomorrow. So, to be included uh in their information as the PUC begins to review the power engineer study looking at the preferred route as well as route B. >> Thank you for going through that tooth comb. Um, I didn't read all the information before you shared the letter with me, so I was shocked and disheartened to see that our community is not going to benefit from this. >> Um, I'm fine with the letter. Um, Erin and I kind of went back and forth with some on it. You know, for me, I think it sounds crass and heartless perhaps, but like for the extra costs that they're going to have to go through for route B, I'm okay with. I think I want this in the communities that it serves. And I think that route B I I continue to prefer route B with this. So, no change in my position either. I I was uh proponent about vi uh last time we talked about this. Uh I think it's the appropriate language in the letter. I'd like to think that the uh PUC is going to be able to weigh on uh Great River Energy's decision. It doesn't. I mean, it sounds like they could still say Great River Energy can choose to um follow that directive or not. Correct. >> Correct. The PC is responsible for issuing them a permit. >> Yeah. >> Or they can continue to submit their proposed route. >> Yeah. So, no change in our position. Uh I also feel strongly that uh without any benefit to our community I don't I can't I can't in good conscience uh well not that I have the power but allow for uh for route A to to to just uh go true without I mean it seems like a a convenient omission for the city of Carver to not have been included uh in any of the public hearings and uh knowledge prior to a resident telling us about this it uh financially convenient for Green River as well. So nothing more to say. I'm just I'm just as upset about this as I think every other council member and the mayor and city staff. So, thank you for drafting the letter and I would support that. >> I'm sorry. I'm looking at this because we just kind of spoke strongly about having that we, you know, we don't have any benefit from this line, the benefits of the communities. Do you have that spelled out somewhere? >> Where do we have >> the >> I'm just laughing at the draft. Right. Is it not is it strong enough though does not align with your so I'm just wondering if there it deserves another sentence of >> hit it back punchier. >> Yeah. >> So it's a peak behind the curtain. I drafted an original letter and I was having a tough day apparently. It was two pages of this deeply emotional stuff and then I sent it to Brent and he was like here's some edits girl one page. So >> no, I agree with Christie. I think, you know, it would I don't think it hurts to be uh articulate and aggressive in our response. >> What if we and I had it in a draft when I was editing the letter um and then I took it out, but what if we just bolded that part? >> I think it was a whole another sentence of something a little punchier. Yeah, >> I have two pages. We can find a sentence. >> Okay, >> stick right back in. >> Um, can you clarify to me? I did read the whole document, but um I I am unclear about whether they're talking about the breaker for route B. >> Mhm. And but the document says they're not putting in a they wouldn't be putting in a breaker. So this 9 whatever million they're they say it's required but they wouldn't be putting it in. Is that correct? Or is this are those two am I thinking about two different parts of the project? >> Yeah. So their proposed line doesn't require that breaker. Route B would >> Okay. Okay. So route but in here so in route B when when they talk about all of this >> they talk about how in order to get the proper what uh kilowatt miles megawatt miles whatever I think it's megawatt miles in order to get the proper load of megawatt miles they would require this breaker but the project would not include the breaker as required in order to get the right megawatt miles. Are there am I thinking about two different things? One that they would include and one that they would not. >> I didn't really get rid of it that way. I thought that >> so had to have it. >> I'm I'm just going to I'm going to look at where it was. >> Have something similar to um and was it was early on like around page 12 is that made it sound like they might need it and it would be 10 to 15 years. >> That's that's what I'm thinking about too. And I'm wondering if that's the breaker or if that's an additional thing in like in addition to the >> Does that change our preference for route? >> No, it's still just for for the most clarity on the letter to make sure that we're being accurate in what we're saying. >> Um Gosh, this is a really long annotate. >> Um you also don't have to find it in this moment. >> Yeah. So um so here time frame uh so this is page 12 you're right page 12 if route alternative B is selected they'll evaluate whether a breaker station would be added but they won't necessarily include it and it's not included in the current plan. >> Correct. Okay. So that 9.5 million that they're saying is going to cost extra is not going to cost extra because they're not going to include yet. Correct. >> Okay. And >> Mhm. Yeah. >> Yeah. So, let's So, >> can we put that in Can we highlight that in the letter that they're calling this an increased cost, but they don't know if they're even going to do the increased cost? >> Increase, but potentially. >> And if they do, it could be 5 to 10 years. >> Yeah, it could be >> or sorry, 10 to 15 >> 10 to 15 years down the road. >> Thank you for the page number, Lori. I appreciate that. Well, >> that's good because they're touting it as like, oh, we go this route, it's going to have to be this amount. And that's a little bit of BS in there. >> Yeah. Maybe not those words. >> Official and diplomatic, but >> just don't write it by breath next time. >> It was It was two pages of darkness. It was >> Now I kind of want to see it share that with us. We just need to see. >> You'll cry yourself to sleep after reading it. >> And your children are ugly, too. >> Okay. Do you have bars? I love you. Thank you. >> Okay. >> Um, let's move on to the storm water pond maintenance communication plan. >> What can I say? >> Care deeply about 115 megawatt lines. >> All right. Thanks for your patience. Um, at a work session in November, there was some discussion about storm water pond maintenance and council requested that staff follow up with a formal plan as far as communications related to that. Uh, so I met with um Andrew and Jordan and Paul from public services and kind of gathered some facts and we came up with a a plan um that we wanted to share with you tonight. So, the city currently manages around 40 ponds and then additional ponds are added as new development occurs and staff is developing a formal plan to establish a rotational maintenance schedule for those 40 ponds. And through the process, um, Andrew really dug into what other cities were doing, um, and sharing for information, um, and just compared it to what we had and what opportunities were out there. He found that the city of Prior Lake had a fact sheet that mirrors our process. And with their permission, we developed a version to reflect Carver's specific practices and relevant details. So, this is um, this was included in your packet. um but it's a a mowing program fact sheet that um was tailored to represent city of Carver practices and contact information on there. So this is the draft of that which was included. Um the top part outlines um what our maintenance crew will um perform on a regular basis and what mowing includes and the timing of it with some contact information. And then down at the bottom there's a sample picture of what it looks like the day of mowing and then what it would look like one year later. And then we also included a QR code that would take the user back to our website. And for the communication side of it, um that fact sheet um will be included on our website. Um but what we'll do is we'll mail it to the affected property owners and if there's a homeowners association related to that pond, we will notify them as well. The QR code directs the users to our website. Uh the city's homepage will have a news flash and then we can share via social media being Facebook and Instagram right now. We'll include it in newsletter articles and uh when we proceed with the city's mobile app, we can do that as well. So if you have any questions on communications, I'd be happy to answer that. If it's storm water pond maintenance related, I'll give it a whirl without Andrew here. But any questions, comments? Go ahead. Is there any way we can include um suggestions for residents that are concerned about asset protection? Like I said, my neighborhood, we had a lot of fences >> and a lot of fences that were um harmed in the process of mowing one of our storm water ponds. We had about I had about three of my neighbors that had dad fence repairs. And then we also had one neighbor that got a sign that was sucked into a mower and shot through her house. So, um, if there's any way we could include some kind of permissible, not necessarily like recommended or anything, but just like permissible activities if you're concerned about mowing near your property. Um >> when you say permissible activities >> state when when one of my neighbors after the fence debacle um reached out to the city someone had mentioned that in the future when it's coming up that they may consider um mowing or weed whacking within a certain distance doing that on their own within a certain distance so that the city >> um that the city equipment wouldn't go all the way up to their fence line and risk >> damaging the fence. >> Yep. Does that >> I think Yep. I think we could house this if we just from our side just left a one foot >> buffer between so we're not we don't we're not mowing right up to the property line. >> Yeah. And hopefully that um creates less of a conflict point. And then if they do, we could maybe add a sentence about if there's um to the where the contact information is for Andrew that, you know, kind of list off if there's, you know, any issues with the service or we figure out how to word smith that they can contact Andrew. Is that >> that's that's fine. Yeah. >> I just we had a lot of problem. It was the first time that our storm water pond had been mowed and we had a lot of issues with it and I don't know if it was user error or resident error but just managing that going that interaction going forward is important. >> Understood. >> Yeah. And I mean you said what one or two feet whatever it takes to just have a nice little clear zone there where we're not >> fences and sides and then because good deep punish folks who >> but there's this >> of course they will >> but then when then their fence will get hidden fences >> they can't go right up to the property line can they right on okay >> since we're addressing the storm water ponds I know this is the mowing program do we put any language in there to remind fols So we don't treat the water. We don't because and we get that question too. How come it looks like algae and why why doesn't the city clean the water? Do we do we since we're communicating this do we put any note in there about serving its function? >> That's kind of along the lines of what I was thinking of these aren't ponds. You don't have a lakefront property. This is a storm water. >> It's kind of a thing. It's not a, you know, Yeah. >> Like I don't know if there's a little bit or even if it's something that you kind of click through that's on the website where the QR code takes you, but I think there's a opportunity to educate a little bit more there. >> You can do that. But it's not a water feature. >> Yeah, >> we have other water features. >> It's called the Minnesota River. So, >> okay. >> Any other thoughts? All right. Thank you. On to um commission review for the strategic plan. M. >> Uh thank you, mayor and council. So, this was an item uh that was discussed during the city's last strategic plan update. Uh kind of two buckets here. One, the park advisory group, and I had some help from Aaron and then kind of giving the history of that. So, kind of a cliffnotes version. uh had a long-standing parks commission. Um and the city council decided to kind of disband the parks commission in favor of a parks advisory group. Kind of a a more kind of a fun less uh sitting behind the deas acting on formal items when there weren't a a lot of formal items to act on. Um it got off to kind of really good start. A lot of like uh pieces uh to share park funding 101, learn to play pickle ball, etc. Uh but the well has kind of run dry a little bit on uh ideas for that. And so one of the things that that we talked about and um so one you could kind of keep it going but the uh the pace of those uh hasn't kept up. So uh we could take another run at it but in our analysis we are offering as an option to transform that or transition that into a resident advisory group. Um so we have some more diversification of topics. So uh when we were sitting around brainstorming thinking about uh the budget and the upcoming public services project um even just a maybe an idea that the council wants to kind of sample by kind of a distinct cohort of residents um and doing that twice a year and doing a little bit of educational doing a little bit of informative. Um again that was um a suggestion. So you could keep the parks advisory group in place, you could transition to the resident advisory group or you could do something uh altogether different. And then the second bucket was the alternate commissioner designation. Uh this predates my time with the city. Uh but it's genesis has to do with uh making sure there was enough uh folks for a quorum. Uh, and that was quite an issue some some years back uh, especially for the planning commission where they didn't have enough folks to process uh, planning commission items. Eric, you or Council Member Pchman might have been on some of those groups where we had folks not showing up and we had public hearings that had to be delayed. Uh, Natalie Meyer did some research for us on that. Uh, you can see that hasn't been an issue for some time. >> Sorry. And um one of the things that at least anecdotally that I have noticed and experienced, it seems to be kind of a a kind of a clumsy process when it uh involves folks that want to be an alternate and move to the full member and what that all means. And then even at the meetings, you know, uh particip those members and participating in that discussion and then not having the opportunity to vote. So again, same kind of uh piece there. You're welcome to kind of keep it as is for whatever reasons or you can remove that alternate designation which would just bump up uh the quorum piece from three members to four members. Uh we didn't list it, but you could certainly draw that back and have five members for uh HPC and planning commission or do frankly anything in between. So uh Erin and I can answer any questions. There's no right or wrong way to do this but uh we did uh instigate this conversation or initiate this conversation strategic planning session and so wanted to help with the discussion. >> Sure. Um let's take this in two chunks and talk about the parks advisory group advisory group. Um I was the leazison of the parks advisory group and we have not met since June of 2024. Some of that is like dead and gone, unfortunately. I like the idea of turning it into a resident advisory group. I think we could do some fun stuff with tabletop exercises of like this is the budget. How are we going to divvy it up? What do you think? You know, like is it worth it putting a trail on here, you know, and just kind of doing feedback? Especially as we're going into the comprehensive plan, a public services building potentially and a lot of stuff where we want to use folks to help us spread these messages. >> Um, so when the parks advisory group, were they involved with the landing revamp when we kind of went back as a drawing board with that? >> Well, we haven't done that work yet. That's this summer. >> Okay. And then how about for the park down here for Creekide? Were they were they meeting about design for that? >> That was the probably the last thing that the parks commission did. It did. Okay. Um, the only reason I'm asking is because I know a lot of this has kind of been kicked to the planning commission. At least it that gives me that appearance. I'm not saying it all has been, but where you know back in the day the parks commission had a lot to do here in town. There was a lot of things. Now things change and evolve and are different from the way they were back then. But my initial when I look at this, especially we're going into comp plan and parks master plan, is that I I don't know that the parks advisory group or commissioner, whatever you want to call it, maybe is done yet. I think that there's things that are coming up that might be important for a group like that to look at. And I think that a lot of things used to be talked about with the parks commission. I'll just I keep saying commission, but that was kind of before what I'm used to. So, um you know, talking about how things were designed and, you know, getting a pulse from them on what the community was feeling and looking for and um trends, things that they were doing and then having some, you know, input on what certain areas look like and maybe, you know, just use the landing as an example. Maybe some people said we we found out we all really want a bright yellow kids playground down here or maybe we really don't. So while I don't well I don't think the whatever the resident advisory group is a terrible idea when I just think of it this way of like these kind of random topics. I mean, I think we have put focus groups together before, like we've done for county road 11 with the landscaping and that kind of things. And maybe some of these things that are mentioned are will be covered well by focus group rather than having just or you could call it a resident advisory group, you know, that works too. Um, but I almost feel that one's going to be a little pie in the sky and not quite focused enough because it could be this topic and this topic. Well, I might care about that topic, but maybe I don't care about that topic as much or I'm not knowledgeable. So, but if I'm on the advisory group as a appointee, then maybe that's not my my passion either, right? So, maybe I really feel strongly about the parks, but I don't feel as strongly about the public services facilities. So, I don't know. For me, I I'm I would rather see the resident advisory groups come in as specific focus groups for these specific areas and then continue on with the parks advisory for now, which in two years could change again. >> Maybe just one note of clarification and probably a question for staff. The parks advisory group were not appointed folks. It was just a group of like you want to come and it was very casual of like are you interested in pickle ball? No, you don't have to go. Cool. you know, like, and I think I see the the resident advisory group being the same way. Do you care about the comprehensive plan? Does that sound nerdy and fun to you or does that sound nerdy and not how you want to spend your time? Cool. They'll come, you know? So, well, with all this new things that are coming, all these new developments, maybe maybe we got rid of the parks commission when right now it's something that we should actually be thinking about having or something that maybe is a little more structured as a park advisory group. Um, I just think we have I mean we're growing immensely and I do maybe we gave up on >> what seemed right at the time but maybe it's too maybe it's something that actually is needed. >> I would say it's not so much that we and Aaron we're real me in if I'm wrong. I don't think we gave up on it. There just wasn't enough to do for either one the parks commission and the parks advisory group like we >> Yeah. And that was the hard part for me is like it was an active group of great people and we didn't want to bring them together just to like say that we did >> to say we met and it was great. >> So if we want to keep that as a group kind of as a reserve I think we could tap into it. >> But it's just tricky if they don't hear from us for 18 months and then we say like hey we have a cool park. Come on in and hear about it. And some of those people absolutely will. I just I don't want them I want to meet their expectation that they're providing value. >> Y I agree. >> Do you think there's enough deliberation in the next year to warrant a structured advisory board? >> I think that deliberation like on the landing and the parks master plan needs to be communitywide. Like I wouldn't I would want to do broader open houses and like the comp plan I would like to get feedback from everyone in the community not just to funnel it to I want to get feedback from people who are excited about parks but also hate our parks and like that's not the group of 20 people that said I want to volunteer my time to learn more. >> So I would say feedback needs to be broader than just that group. And do you think they we think the resident >> panel is likely to bring a larger audience to do that? >> I don't in my head they wouldn't make decisions. They would give us some feedback. So it could be like a small cohort that gets together to talk about it. But there would be several other >> So who's making the So where the parks commission needs to have input about the parks that are going in whether it's the landing or new who's doing that now? Is it the planning commission or is it staff? of any tuition. >> Okay. >> Should we postpone? Just hold on to this for the meeting. Oh, yeah. I know. We're getting >> No, no, no. I just I I don't want to shoehorn this into the next few minutes. A little bit more conversation. >> Great. Undertain to >> I'll make a motion to adjurnn. >> I'll second by. All those in favor say I. >> I. Same side. Motion passes. All right. Sorry for the abrupt >> ending, but I think we need more time. I know. I have to stop with the cookie.