Doug Branchhog to extend the abatement of the public nuisance at 2435 along Lake Road. Um, we heard from Doug at our last meeting and he asked for an extension. I don't recall what that extension was.
Mayor, I don't know if we ever really got to uh what the extension was going to be. Uh, the resolution that was passed uh at a previous council meeting is in your packet. So you can see that uh the current deadline is I thought it
was the 12th October 12th honor after October 13th. >> So Doug, what did what was your request? Could you come up to the mic? >> Well, I guess what I'm requesting is maybe to have it set in a couple stages
so I can get it all done. I move some stuff, but you know, it's only me, so it's hard to get stuff totally moved. Um, the backyard is nice and neat, and I showed uh Purcell that. The front yard is what I'm working on to get it. So,
that's nice and neat, so nobody has any objections to it. But it's taken me time. Plus, I have to work. And as as you know, I drive truck. So, I'm not home. I'm home two days, one day a weekend is when I'm home and I work as
hard as I can to try to keep everything up. Um, since the last meeting, I moved out four vehicles and other stuff, but I was going to ask for some time to clean up the front and then have Priscilla come out. And then I was wondering about
the back because, well, since the last meeting, I moved some stuff out on my lot and it was broke into again. So, I have to come up with about $1,500 to put cameras and everything out there so I can do something to catch them.
Otherwise, there's no point in moving it. Might as well just give it away if it's going to keep getting stolen from me. So, I mean, I can take it, put it in the trailers, but it don't do me any good if they come and steal it. I mean, I laugh about a little bit. It's not
funny, but I wish we could catch them. That would be nice. the officers stuck the camera up, but then after four days they took it down. So, I mean, it's like, what was the point? >> So, do you specifically have a a time that you want us to
>> I don't have a plan, but I was going to ask for at least 60 days to get the front all straightened out, and I know I can because, you know, working by myself, it's hard. Um, my sons aren't aren't there to realistically help. So,
um, but everything in the front will be fixed up nice and neat. It It is somewhat still right now. I mean, it's not like it's a a total disaster, but it depends on the eye of the beholder when they look at it.
>> Okay. Is there any comments from the council? >> Yeah, I'd like to make a comment. >> Go ahead. >> Okay. I hit my odometer from my house to his house and it's eight blocks away. I bought my house in 2008. Been there ever since. His house was there before my house. The guy got forced in the
annexation. Never want to be part of the city. I say we give the guy we do everything we can to work with him. He's on the on the road all the time with trucking. He's got two of his kids living with him. I've never had anybody complain to
me, my neighbors around me complain about his property. His property was there before ours. Yes, I know the city has ordinances that we got to go upon, but I say we work with them, give him some time. Um, I was even willing to give him a year because of the stuff he
has out there, but if he's willing to do 60 days on the front, >> let's work with him on the back. Um, that's all I got. >> Is that a motion? >> Well, >> you want to make a motion? >> I'll make a motion. Yeah. >> Okay. Is there a second to the motion? >> The motion would be to give them 60 days
from today to finish cleaning up. Second it. >> Second >> discussion. >> Well, I you know, we've been dealing with this for a long time and I know he's been out there for a long, long time, but we've been dealing with this for a long, long time, too. And I I I
would say that I'd like to see everything cleaned up by the end of the year, December 31st. And that'll give them time to get the front yard and time to get the back because we've been dealing with this too long. And think we're going to do this for another year. I I just I just don't think we can do
that. We've been pretty easy on him and I I think we should give him December 31st and he's going to have to get it all cleaned up and um and go from there because we just been keep putting this off and putting it off and it has to be cleaned up. >> A little bit a little bit more
background too. I was on the CDC in 22 when we annexed you and Doug and you came and and great presentation kind of said hey I'm going to need time and from 22 till now that's been a lot of time and granted you've done steps to get it looking a lot cleaner and I'll I'll give you that you've done a lot of work
already but I think after going on two three years 60 days and and that's kind of it is where I'm at. >> Is that on the front or the back? I think >> that's the property. I I think you there's no way he's gonna get I don't think he's going to get everything out of there in 60 days out of the back.
>> Like I said, >> I've I've never gotten one email from anybody in W three that complained about his house. >> Give the guy some time. >> There's there's been so much discussion on this and when we got into the city, we had people that lived out there said, "Thank goodness we're going to get this
thing finally cleaned up." Um >> I don't think he's going to be able to do it, Ron. >> Well, I think that we should give him till December 31st. If he doesn't have it done by then, the city will have to go in and then we'll have to bill you for doing it then. >> Well, we've got we've got a motion and a second on the table for 60 days, right,
Aaron? Was that your motion? >> But we haven't decided on the back. >> Oh, you were just on the front. Okay. >> I I would I would like to amend that motion uh that we go ahead and give them until December 31st for the entire project. And if it isn't done and then
the city would go in and clean it up and then it would be build against him or put on his tax roll. >> Okay. Is there a second to the amendment? >> Go ahead. I just had a comment or question. The Ron the only concern I have about extending to December 31st is
the weather's going to change and really are you going to get much done between the end of October till the end of December with the weather changing. So either it's October 31st or it's not going to happen until next year until the spring. >> So
I I I don't see why we couldn't because we've got all of September, we've got October, we've got November, and u December. Yeah, we're going to have weather, but a lot of people work around the weather. And I just uh you've got to make it a priority is what's got to happen. >> But Ron, the guy's an over over the road.
>> I know, but but then we're going to be back waiting another year, two years. Like Matt said, we've been dealing this since 2022. Here we're going to have 2026 before long. So we're going to wait another 3 four years and we we just can't keep waiting on it.
>> Well, it's going to come down to a vote here, guys. Do do we have a second to the amendment? >> Well, we have is it is it the front, the back, or both? And I'm concerned. Are you going to move stuff from the front to the back? If we give you >> everything in the front leaves
>> and then but not move to the back >> and I'm not moving it to the back and then I'm gonna go to the back. Everything in the back is in perfect order. It's just that I have to move it. But like you uh one of you were commenting 30 days
and we're going to probably we might have snow on the ground before 30 days and I'm going to be really fighting because I have to bring my low boy in there to try to get that so I can move stuff because it's not small stuff. It's my big stuff. And I was going to ask for
the second edition if you guys would let it go until June 1st for the back >> and everything will be gone. >> I just have one question and that question is to Alderman Bokei Ward 32. Have you had anybody in W three complain
about his property? >> Yes sir. >> You have? >> Yep. >> I have had none. Zero complaints. >> Mayor. >> Well, go ahead. I just >> Go ahead, Kelsey. >> Mayor, not to wait in this. Part of the
issue is that whatever timeline you put on, what you're going to be asking city staff to do is once that deadline, if it comes and goes and it's still in violation, we now have to find a vendor or contractor to go in there and clean it up afterwards. So my concern about
having a deadline December 31st is meaning that you're now putting city staff and in the vendor to have to go try to clean up this property in January. So if it's 2 feet of snow, you know, we're have to go in there and plow it out to get get the items out. So keep
that in mind. I think Alderman Drain is right and we talk about those weather conditions. It's not necessarily just for for Doug to be able to remove the material. It's what happens if he misses the deadline and now the city and the contractor has to go out there and remove it as well. So >> would that increase the cost? I would
imagine >> certainly absently. Absolutely. If we have to go basically follow road into the back of the property to access those cars. Um so >> but the bill is going to go on Doug's taxes, right? >> It would. >> Y
>> I did have one question. Um and I feel for you. I just can't imagine how difficult and stressful this is to try to manage all this being on the road and gone. I have a brother who's over the road truck driver. Hard to get stuff done around home. I I understand that. My question would be,
what is your plan that is different from the last two or three years that Priscilla's been working with you to achieve this? So, we didn't get to this point. What do you have a plan in place? Something different that you're going to be able to do? I guess um when we
originally annexed me in, I asked for this 10 years if I'd have that long to get this cleaned up and in the sewer and whatever in there. >> And that's what I understood. So, I've been making accordingly to that to get
everything out and put in someplace where it's okay and it's secure. Then all of a sudden, while I'm gone on the road, you guys sent a certified letter to me. I wasn't there to get it. And when I finally did get back, there's a notice that you had a meeting on my door
saying everything just boom has to be done right now. And I went according to that. Um that's why all the back is all nice and clean. I did have cars back there before. I removed I removed all
the other stuff so it looks neat. It's not a junk. Um, what you want me like my boats, they have to go out of there. I mean, I use them, but accordingly what Priscilla says, I can't have them. Well,
I don't know. So, here I've lived there for 39 years. And I've kept everything accordingly. I mean, I've always any neighbor of mine has asked me for help, I've helped them. Um, I've never complained. I don't complain about anything out there. I
didn't I complained a little bit about being annexed in, but I agreed to it because I thought I had this time. In my mind, I had this time. Then all of a sudden, I don't have this time. So now I'm struggling. What you guys want to see is results. What I want to give you
is results. But I'm trying to give it you the results that you want by what I can do. Now the difference is my one son will help me so I can get it done. Um, I have to bring my trailer home from up in Fargo. It's in at the trailer place
because, well, I broke it over. It was overloaded and it wasn't designed. So, as soon as they get that done, which should be real quick, well, then I can put the stuff on the trailer and haul it out. Um, but at this point, everything
you know that I'm doing is trying to get it so everybody's happy. That's what I want. >> Okay. Mayor. Mayor, >> was there some movement or some record somewhere in that process in 2022
>> where you understood that you had 10 years >> 10 years to get it conformed to to the city and I didn't figure it would ever take me 10 years, but I didn't uh I didn't uh imagine that I would have got
co I didn't imagine that I would have lost one of my contracts because at the time I shouldn't have. There's been a lot of obstacles that I've overcome and I've overcome all of them except now this one. And then when I'm all done, I want to fix it up more
than what you want because I'm going to sell. I'm not going to stay because I can't have my stuff in one place and me living in another and and watching well these creeps come in and steal my stuff because it's the worst violation that you can feel in your life is to get when
stuff gets stolen from you. I mean, so bold they pull in and hook on to a 36 foot camper and drive out of there and nobody can find it. It don't make sense to me. And so bold they can come in and take 360 yards, 20 foot roll this big
around, pull it out of a back of a trailer and load it on something. Nobody finds it. Brand new carpet that was stored in there that I bought for the house. I mean, and then this last deal was the lumber. All the dynamic home lumber that
I bought, they come and got. And my other lumber that I had at the house, I pulled out of the house and put in the one trailer. And this is two years ago trail. >> Okay. >> Can't do nothing. But now I'm putting up
camera so I can find who it is. Plus, I'm moving it out there, taking the risk no matter what. and you guys tell me that I have to have this done, it will be done. >> Okay, mayor making the motion 60 days on the front and six month or uh September
of next year for the back. >> No, I would June 1st. >> We we we just keep going with this guy. >> Eron Aaron's made a motion. Is there a second to his motion? Second. >> How many motions do we have on the
table? I think too many. We're doing 60 in the front and September. >> There's two. There's two on the table. That's the motion that I want to make. Do I got to do I >> You're withdrawing your original mo motion. >> Withdrawing my original and going 60 in the front in September of 2026 for the
back. >> Is there a second? >> That's second. Yes, >> there was a second. >> Yes. >> Okay. >> Hopefully there's not further discussion. We got quite a bit to cover. >> Well, well, I do have further discussion. June 1st is plenty on this
deal. Whoever told you we were going to give you 10 years and let you know who that person was. We've been trying to get this cleaned up since 2022 and nothing's happened. We're just giving them way too much time on this. >> Okay. All in favor of the motion say I. >> I.
>> Opposed? >> No. >> The motion carries. >> So, do you understand the motion, Doug? You have >> I do. >> 60 days on the front. 60 days on the front. >> Can I have Priscilla come out and check it so you guys are aware of my progress?
>> Oh yeah, she will. >> Yeah, we'll do that. Thank you. >> Is it 60 days from today? >> September 1st at the end though. >> Well, we won't worry about that. It'll be out. >> Oh, yeah. We are worried about that. >> Is it 60 days from today, your honor?
>> Yes. Okay. Okay. >> I don't think there's anybody here for item two. So without objection, I'd like to jump down to item four, which is project updates on Westlake Drive Pavilion and City Park in Washington
Ballpark. Kelsey, do you want to introduce these items? >> Mayor, I'm going to probably defer to city engineer John Pratt for the Westlake Drive update. Okay, John, >> mayor and council, um we just thought
since we were all getting together, it was probably a good time to provide a bit of an update or at least an opportunity for council to ask some questions on where we're at maybe with uh the Westlake Drive project and the the beach project. Um since we had last had the full council together in a work
session, I think it was in in June. Um, so Brian's here from HKGI as well as uh Ben from my office both have uh had huge parts in this project. So in a nutshell again we broke the project into two two contracts that we intend to bid uh more
or less simultaneously. Uh the first of those is the the roadway or the core project which again is the the street and the trail and the sidewalks and kind of everything up top if you will. Um, and that'll be a cooperative project with with Becker County. That design's pretty well buttoned up. It's been
submitted to Mindot. It's on its way down to uh the Twin Cities to their central office for review. We got to get through that process and then we'll be ready to go with that. Truthfully, there have not been any significant changes as we've gone through things. You know, we
thought maybe there'd have to be a tweak here or there. that has pretty much stayed as presented since June. Um so not a lot to to say on that. The beach on the other hand um was lagging behind that uh that first project. And so we've
been working pretty diligently over the last few months to take that from you know planning and concept level into an actual design project that we can uh put plans and specs together and and get it out for bids. Um been a lot of
fine-tuning and adjusting um things that I'm not going to bore you with. I just trying to tweak uh sidewalk locations and alignments to make things uh ADA compliant so we don't have to have railings or minimize stairs and things like that and uh getting into the
details with fixtures and stuff like that. We're not done but we're very close. Um by and large um I can say that nothing significant has changed with that. nothing that I feel like I need to to bring to the council's attention. Um
I would say we perhaps one of the feedback some of the feedback that we got was to be careful we don't clutter the beach. And so I think there's been some uh steps along the way with different items where we've tried to thin that down a bit um just in keeping with with those comments that we were
getting from the public and from the council. So um nothing real significant there. I did want to mention that um late summer um Kevin Tingum with JNK reached out and he has some interest in
making some improvements to what I would call his little space of the beach down there which he's entitled to have by an easement. Um and really I would say in good faith and and good on Jane K. They don't want to be quote unquote the the wart on the beach after this is done. Um
those are his words, not mine. um and he's been interested in trying to make some improvements to his space um that are maybe in keeping with what we're planning to do down there. So, we worked with them to come up with some concepts um and he's looking at those. He's he's
reviewed those. Indications at this point is that uh he'd likely be interested in proceeding with those. Those would be privately paid for. we would potentially contract or build some of those under a project, but he would uh pay for those. So, you know, that's one piece of this that the council
probably hasn't seen uh that might come to fruition. So, um the other thing that I wanted to touch on tonight, and Kelsey, feel free to jump in on this one. Here we go. It >> because it's Kelsey's fault. No, you
know, Kelsey and I had some discussion recently. This is centered around the boat launch and there was quite a bit of discussion I would say around the boat launch in the early stages of this. Should we have it? Should we not have it? Will it work? All those sorts of things. Um, you know, I think we did
talk about removing it, but we probably really got hung up on, well, what's the best way to do a boat launch if you're going to have one? And maybe kind of got going down that rabbit hole. And in fairness, I think we came up with a plan that is probably the the best that we can do down there given the constraints.
Um, but maybe didn't look back a little bit of well, do we want to do the boat launch or not? And I think some of what drove this question from Kelsey's standpoint and and mine is, you know, at one point we were talking, you know, about a pretty significant investment
into a bolt launch that we were a little bit, you know, depending on who you talk to, a little 50/50 on. and we were looking at a cost of somewhere maybe around $300,000 being invested into that boat launch. And that's a pretty sizable investment. Is it still worth it? Um how
much is it going to get used was the other question with the new boat launch on Northshore Drive? U you know, is that is the use going to drop off and now all of a sudden that investment is really not worth it. So, what I would tell you is in response to a couple of those
things is we have fine-tuned the costs um with the boat launch and they've gone down pretty considerably. Part of that is uh the DNR is agreeing to provide us some of the concrete planking which is actually quite expensive. Um all in by
the time we've we've finalized all this stuff we're spending just a little over $100,000. So, I mean that helps. It's still a large sum of money, but far less than $300,000. The other piece is we got some information from Becker County uh
through their uh AIS coordinator and they keep counts of course whenever the coordinators down there of of how often this gets used. And maybe a little bit surprising to me, uh the counts from this summer were actually up from past years. So again, do what you want with
that information, but to me that's indicating that even with the new launch on Northshore Drive, we're still seeing significant use of that launch. So that's the way I would lay it out. Um, it's not too late to reverse course,
meaning the other option really at this point is to not do a boat launch. And if you don't do a boat launch, what do you do through there? Well, you just simply try to carry the green space through. Um, do a little bit of landscaping and things like that, some stuff up by the
nodes. By the time you do some of that stuff, you're probably not spending $100,000, but you're still probably spending 50 60 $75,000. So, if if you're looking at this as an opportunity to save a ton of money, that's not there. It's just whether or not we feel the
launch is is needed. Um, so that's the meat and potatoes of the discussion that we want to have. uh keep in mind one of the big driving forces for keeping that launch was winter access. If we don't have the launch, you know, what do we do
for winter access? And we've started to um mess around with some ideas of what that could look like and I can show you those if there's interest, but otherwise we would probably have to look for alternate winter access down there. So, Kelsey, you want to add anything to this? Yeah, I mean it is kind of my
fault to start secondguessing this, but I think it it stemmed from our conversation with the DNR. The good news is that they're willing to provide the planks for the boat access, which is a big cost savings. But, you know, when we had that discussion, ask them if they would cost participate in putting a a
public boat access on little Detroit is um how you say Larry wasn't no, it was kind of hell no kind of thing. I mean, they're like we've we've done a lot in Detroit Lakes already. I mean, they've they've, you know, bought the property, put in that uh the north access, and
they're like, "Hey, the deal was we did this, and you guys were going to close those accesses on on Little Detroit because the way they phrased it is uh the city was concerned about AIS and you want to limit the number of accesses and you had
all these um safety concerns and hey, DNR's like, hey, we did our part and now you're coming back and asking us and saying, Oh, you want to now keep this this access open. So, it kind of got me thinking, well, yeah. I mean, are are we making the right choice? I mean, as the
DNR put it, um, hey, nice job with your design. It's better, but it's far from perfect, right? And why are you sticking money into an imperfect boat access? Again, you start thinking about, you
know, you kind of only get one shot at this. I mean, what we do here is probably going to be here for the next 50 years. So, I just want to make sure that we're comfortable with moving ahead with the plan that we have. And and John's right, you know, we didn't really spend a lot of time saying, "Well, what's the other opportunity? If you
don't put the boat access in, what could it look like there?" Again, maybe you just roll the, you know, the turf through there and you just you extend the beach. Maybe that's the answer. Um, we talked about winter access. There's still a way we could have winter access at Rossman and not a boat access. You
know, you could still have a way to hard escape it down to the lake, but it's not a boat access. Uh again, we could look at that option. Again, right now that plan is, you know, the boardwalk, the the city, the beachwalk gets looped back
up to the bike trail to avoid this whole area, right? And you just you lose a part of that valuable real estate. So that's just reasons why I thought it's worth another look of what that option could be. But there's a lot
of reasons as John explained why we should just keep the boat access and keep the plan as it is. But um thoughts? We wanted to bounce this off you. You know, one of my concerns with the new boat access was
the amount of green space that we were losing by looping it in and around. It definitely makes putting a boat in much easier than it is right now. But obviously they're they're figuring out
could we ever just leave it the way it is now. If they're using it more than they have in the past, even with Northshore, it's working. I I took a pontoon out yesterday and you
know, I tried to back the trailer and you almost have to pull in the street to get it. It it it isn't it isn't perfect by any means, but I'm wondering even with the loop, we'd almost have to still pull up that far. The loop definitely gives more of a staging area, but it
takes so much green space. By keeping it the way it is now, we won't have to move the the uh the bike or the walking path up towards the, you know, we could leave that down lower where it is now, >> I think.
>> And the you probably still reroute because you don't want people backing onto the the sidewalk. That was the concern. I see. Okay. >> That's why that was brought up. Okay. >> So, >> yeah, >> you might still want to do that,
>> Ron. But, you know, one one thing um I've been thinking about why the new north side one isn't being used because I've driven by there many times and it's like people don't really know that it's there yet. I think that's why we're still having people using it like they
have been this last summer, but you drive by the new access and that lots hardly ever full. You see a few cars there, but I when DNR is questioning this why we're not moving that one out of there, it tells me that they went
ahead and built it because they thought everything's going to be moved to the north side. And I think once if we ever did take this one out down on the beach now, that one on the north side would be used. But one thing that I I like about if we did move it, we're we're spending
a lot of money redoing that whole beach. The first big change of that beach since 1965. It would give us more green space. It would give us more access and it would be a lot safer than with right now we got all these people coming with their boats and pontoons and everything
else backing in and pulling out. You got a lot of people, kids moving. It is kind of an accident waiting to happen. And then when they get done, they go ahead and they take their trailers and they park them up on the streets and so forth. So I I I would almost um I I I would prefer because we're doing the
beach now, first time since 1965, a complete new beach, that we would go ahead and take the current access on the beach side, get rid of it, and um make that all public beach and green space. I think it in the long run I think we'd be
come out much better with it and have people move all that to the new north side that that that's just been put in for us. >> Any further comments from the council regarding that access? >> Just Oh, sorry, Jackie. >> Go ahead.
>> My my only comment was going to be if it's to Kelsey's question about the winter access. I think before deciding to take that out, you really need to know what we're going to do for winter access. What's the plan? >> And by all means, we're not making a decision tonight. Yeah. Just
>> want to get some feedback. >> I think the concern I have is removing the access is a detriment to the Legion Campground. And I personally think the Legion Campground is an asset for the city. And with the ordinance saying that
the city code saying that those people cannot leave their boats on the beach overnight, then they're trailing in and out, in and out every single night. they're here and I think that's a detriment to them. So, I would be in favor of continuing the access.
>> Any further comments? I'll I'll say that I'm also in favor of continuing the access on Little Detroit. And as a person two doors down from the new one, I think it is used nicely and maybe it isn't used. It isn't full every day, but there are days where there are a lot of boats and trailers in there. So, and it
but I think it's a great neighbor to have. So, two doors down. I did you and Alderman Derany too and my concern is in the winter time you get all these people with ice castles >> and I'll tell you what that brings a lot of money in this town >> and you take that access away >> that's not good.
>> Yeah I sorry I was say I I agree as well and and I think to your point Craig uh I I would be concerned about the safety and pulling out. So anything we can do to keep people off of the road during that and keep them from backing over the sidewalk. I think those two things would be my primary concern around it.
>> I would vote to keep it in, but I would also be interested in seeing what the plans look like to get on access in the winter. >> Okay. So, anything else, John? >> Nope. I think that's that's enough feedback unless the council had any other questions related to the Westlake
Drive and Beach project. >> Okay. So, we'll move on and talk a little bit about the pavilion in the city park. Brian, are you going to take that one or? >> Yeah, mayor. Thanks. Uh, we just conducted our third steering committee
for both of those projects, the combination of the pavilion site design and the reconstruct of that facility and the city park master plan. Um, some good feedback from the group on that today on some preliminary concepts. We're going to revise and edit those accordingly and
get them prepared for a community open house on October 7th which we'll host down at the pavilion. uh following that there'll be a subsequent opportunity uh at an event I think following that weekend on the 11th uh for additional input and combining that with some
online engagement over that week long week and a halfl long period from there uh will g give us quite a bit to go on to kind of refine towards preferred concepts for uh both the broader city park master plan uh the site design around the pavilion and some guidance
towards the uh the pavilion um architecture program for that facility as well. So, um all of that will lead then towards a a submitt uh at a schematic design phase to to uh the state historic preservation office uh
for their review and then subsequently to the construction manager for review and pricing at that stage. So, um, as we conclude the community engagement component, we'll be back in touch with the steering committee to gain some more of their insights on that preferred direction all leading up to those
subsequent submittals uh, going forward. So, I think a lot will happen over the next month and a half in both of those projects and uh, we'll be able to update you accordingly as we hear uh, on the community engagement side. So, uh, any questions from council on that?
>> Okay. Thank you, Brian. >> Thank you. >> And we're going to talk a little bit about the pavilion as well. It's Sean, right? >> Yes, Mayor. >> Yep. >> Good evening, council. Sean Senkll with JLG Architects. Uh JLG is hired to be the architecture architect of record on
the pavilion project. Um I don't have too much more to offer than what what Brian had just did, but I wanted to give kind of an update on what our next steps are with the pavilion project. Um to give you kind of a look ahead for the next couple months. We've just began what we call schematic design phase,
which is kind of the first formal design phase of the project. Really, the goals of schematic design are trying to establish a site plan and a floor plan that meet the goals of the project in the community. Uh we're starting to identify what the exterior looks like,
materials, um building systems, structural systems, all of those things. So, as Brian mentioned, we'll be working with the steering committee to keep progressing that effort moving forward. Um, I was going to touch on Shipo, but Brian already did that. I think just to give you kind of a sense of some of the
work that has been done already. Uh, we've begun efforts to get a site survey for the project. Uh, we've also got a geotechnical report done. Those two things really set us up for success to kind of hit the ground running to continue our design. Um, as anyone would
have probably imagined, the geotechnical report, which studies the soils in the site, um, no surprise to anybody, uh, the soils aren't great on the pavilion project site, but we've, uh, already started to discuss with our structural engineer, um, options, cost-effective
options for how we're going to manage that. So, just a quick high level update. Happy to take any questions, but just wanted to give a sense of where we're at. >> Any questions for Sean? All right. Thank you guys. Um,
Washington Ballpark. Kelsey, you want to take that one? >> Yeah, mayor. I decided to run through a few photos. Um, we had some new 3D renderings kind of done based upon our current plans. Um, I guess the the bad news is we're not out to bid yet. Um, we're still working through a few
hiccups. Um, but every hurdle we get over, we're one step closer to getting the thing out. So, um, I'll just kind of zip through these. Again, this is kind of the exterior view. Um, don't pay too much attention to that sailboat in in
kind of the the plaza there. We're still working on what that concept's going to be. Um, but generally, you can get some feel for what that color and look is going to be on the exterior. Uh going back to the green dual doors, extension
of the fence up to the corners of uh the grandstand helps provide some access control for different events. Uh this is kind of on the Washington Avenue side. This is the new ADA ramp that will be installed along with kind
of a viewing plaza. Um that is again kind of on the south side of the of the grandstand. the new um dugout that be the guest dugout is right next uh kind of sandwiched just to the east of the
ADA ramp. Uh this whole area would basically be concreted. Uh again, kind of a a plaza area as you walk over to the concession stand. Skipping over to the uh the Langford side, this is the view of kind of the
home dugout and kind of the east view of the grandstand. You'll just have stairs basically on this side. No ramp. Uh this is the view from the field of of the grandstand. You'll notice on both sides there's a carveout for basically
uh some ADA access for uh seating area. The backs on the um the seats have been taken out every other one. Right now it's pretty tight in there if you try to walk through and sit because there's there's those high backs on every one. Um this view is basically every other
one of those uh uh back stops are removed. Uh again, this is kind of the Langford view. Uh kind of clean up where that batting cage and stuff is. Now, uh we have a storage area that's added on as a part of the uh the home dugout. There's
also kind of a coach's room also in that dugout. Again, this is the Langford view. So that batting cage and the bullpen gets moved down uh kind of the third base foul line.
I think this actually just jumps. We just jumped over to Washington Avenue. This is uh you'll see it again. Let me skip that. Um this is >> high-rise buildings in there. >> Yeah, right. That's uh I think that's the white condos technically. Oh, it used to be white condos. I got I got to
stop calling them the white condos. Um this is the new concession stand and kind of the plaza on the first baseline. Um you'll see that uh Alderman Cfield was talking about follow balls earlier and you know one of the main goals of
doing the project is new netting and that was one of our first hurdles um that we had to get over but you'll see much higher netting. In this case the netting's all the way down to that concession stand uh on the first baseline. So again this is kind of a viewing plaza. This is on the back side
of the new concession stand along with the new flag pole area and flagpole plaza. Uh this is the view from inside of the grandstand. And there's probably better views, but I want to point out um this
is new. You see this area here? So this is the traditional walkway that you see in the grandstand. Um this is the elevated area that you walk around. Again, we have new railings here. Uh, one of the problems we had is to get these poles in, these structural poles
to do the netting. So, right now the netting is just hung off of the roof. Uh, to get these structural in and the footings in, we had to move away from the existing grandstand. So instead of having just a twoft gap here, which would be convenient for collecting
garbage, we moved this out about five feet and basically put um you know basically a false wall that's closer to the home plate. So that moves this whole back stop, which is pretty large now. It moves it all about 5t closer and it provides the secondary access for
basically players and coaches to get from one side to the next. >> It's it's different. Um, as Terry pointed out, he wants this to be different. He doesn't want just a cookie cutter ballpark. And I think this is one of the elements that makes uh kind of our stadium and ball field a little bit
different. That was one of again many challenges we've been dealing with. Uh, again, you can see the poles are extended um be quite a bit higher uh than the current rough line of the grandstand. Again, try
to provide some protection on those foul balls. Again, this is just the home dugout. Again, now there's there's no protection in those dugouts today. Um, this will all incorporate some netting uh and some
protection for all the for both sides, both dugouts. Again, this is the plaza over on the first baseline and the new concession stand is here. another viewpoint of that concession
stand plaza. Um, for sure the bullpin uh visitors bullpen will be moved down to that first base foul line. This extra batting cage is kind of an option right now. Um, we don't need to have two batting cages,
but we'll see where the funding comes in whether that batting cage will get added or not. getting kind of a elevated view of the first base follow line. There's third base and inside the dugout or inside the
stadium again. Uh this is inside um this is basically the ticket booth here. Uh that would be facing the outside. These are the windows. These are the existing cross braces. And again the restrooms would be on the inside
underneath. the grand stand. I think either I'm repeating pictures or I'm about done. 110. I think I got a couple more.
That's uh this is where the right now the garbage cans are um just sitting out here in the back side. Uh this will be a new enclosed uh garbage area. >> Uh this is inside the press box. I think
that's the last picture. Uh the press box will remain um but actually that top row will actually be a kind of an observation or viewing area. Think that's it. >> Kelsey, do you have any update on the fundraising? >> Um, not any exact numbers. Uh, we
continue to get a good response. Um, this community is amazing. People just kind of come out of the woodwork and say, "Hey, we're interested." Uh, we just sent out a mailer to about 600 addresses. Um, so those hit the mail
last week and we've gotten one already back. I know of uh pledge sheets. So, we'll see how that turns out, too. >> Okay. Is there any questions from the council? >> Kelsey, is this bid going to include a a turf field right now or or what are we
going to >> Yeah, great question. So, there's there's two bid packages. The first bid package is going to be the building uh components. So, it's basically going to be the the grand stand, the dugouts, and the concession stand. The second phase is basically kind of a civil project,
and that's going to be the field improvements and the turf. Um that is kind of in a parallel tract. Um but that'll probably be bid slightly later than the building bid. >> Further questions. Okay. Thank you.
So that concludes our project updates. Correct. >> Correct. >> We'll move uh we'll move back to item three. Then we'll get into the capital improvement plan. We need to do >> to do two or no
>> I'll leave that to the last. I don't think there's anybody here for that. Jackie, >> so the capital improvement plan. John, are you going to lead lead off or >> without objection from the administrator? Yes. Okay. >> So, uh, mayor and council, I'll give you
a little where we're at with some, uh, capital improvement planning and there's a number of new council people that, uh, have not probably been through this process. So, just a little background and then we'll kind of dive into the the the projects themselves so that the council can provide some input and
comment. But, um, we update this generally speaking every couple of years, um, at least formally in terms of going through, restructuring it, uh, bringing it back to the council, uh, having hearing and things like that. Um it all essentially starts with a number
of meetings um with city staff and department heads and trying to kind of pull and collaborate ideas, needs and things like that that we um all have related to street and infrastructure projects and that is this plan focuses
on those street and infrastructure improvements. Um, so we work through that. Uh, we get it to a point, which is where we are tonight, where we wanted to bring it to council, get some, uh, feedback from, um, the elected body. Generally, or at least the last couple times, we have
followed this up with a a public hearing where we'll kind of have a same presentation to the public where we advertise it and if folks want to come in and hear about the plan, uh, they can. And then ultimately we adopt the plan. Um, you know, why do we do this?
It's quite simply just a roadmap um for our infrastructure improvements. We call it a five-year plan. It's got some projects that stretch out past that, but just sort of generally speaking, we're trying to look out over the horizon for the next five years. Um it is to some
degree the first level of of public uh communication related to projects that we are planning on doing. Uh we get it on the website and things like that. That gives people a bit of a heads up that hey um your street might be on the radar for improvement.
Um it helps us prioritize the needs that we have. We have plenty of needs. Um but probably moreover it it helps with financial planning. Um you know every year's looking at this when she's starting to look at budgets um that that
you all work through. Um, Vernell is using this information to help establish uh water and sewer and utility rates. Um, it helps us when we want to pursue different funding applications or outside funding sources. So, that's sort
of the why we do it. Um, the thing to note is this is far from any sort of a commitment. Uh, we're we will add, we will delete, we will reorganize. Um, I will say that as a city I think we've done really well of utilizing the plan, meaning it doesn't just go to waste. It
is our our guiding principle, if you will, and we get a lot done off of it, but it will change. It's not by any stretch of commitment. Um, the project costs are credibly preliminary. They're there to help gauge the scope and size of the project, but, you know, we
haven't dug into these things to any great detail. So, that's sort of my my intro to this thing. Um, couple of other comments on the front end stuff. We keep kind of a running tally. This has probably got oh, seven
or eight years worth of of past or completed street utility improvement projects in there. I show that just as I guess from a posterity standpoint to show that what we've accomplished over, you know, since about 2018, it's over $70 million worth of improvements, which
is that's a lot. Um the number to maybe keep in mind is if you want to compare kind of apples to apples a little bit. You know the last five years of this is right around 50 million. You know if you're sort of keeping score with what the next five years has to come. You got
to keep in mind inflation and things like that. But um lot of projects on that list. Uh I'm not going to walk through all these. We have a similar project outlining parking lot multi-use trail improvements. Again, we separate these a little bit as this is a fairly
good accounting of what we've used some of our food and beverage tax funding uh on over the last number of years. So, I'm going to flip through the the the worksheets real quick, but it is going
to be fairly quick. Um this is a summary table of all the street utility improvement projects. We've got about 60 million uh laid in there. Um, again, kind of a partnering table looking at parking lots, multi-use trails, and
we've got sort of this third table. Um, really are projects that, uh, the development authority is looking at with industrial parks and things like that. So, those are just good summaries. We've got a couple of of maps. Um, it's good to look at these, I think, from the
standpoint of are we spreading our dollars around the community, making improvements, and not focusing on too much of of one area. Um, but it's just a good reference. Uh, other mapping here of the uh the city's
bike route, multi-use trail mapping. Um, again, just a good reference. So, hopping into it starting in 2025. Some of these you're you guys are well uh versed in. Um Lyn View Estates, we talk about it every month. That project's out
for bid right now, so I'm not going to spend any time talking about it. 270th Avenue, I think the council's fairly familiar at this point that that's on the docket. We've done a per and we're probably targeting a project for next next summer on that.
Uh, also in 26, of course, just got done talking about the the beach in Westlake Drive. So, that's in here. 26, probably the first time you've seen or heard this Resort at Abbey. Um, that
is just the tenative name given to what would be a plat on uh what we call the Wendell property. So, this is south on 270th Avenue on the northwest corner of Abbey Lake, south of Lake Forest. Um,
the map you see there is really, really preliminary. I don't even know that they've submitted this in a preliminary platform format, so I'd call it concept level. We don't know if it'd be this. They haven't made any formal request yet, but there's been discussion. So really the way you need to look at this
is just it's a placeholder project for something that we know is brewing down there and that we ought to financially plan for. It'll be driven completely by what the developer wants to do and when they want to do it, but we're trying to just program some dollars in for
something we think might happen. >> So John, can I ask a we able to ask questions? Okay. Um, so the accessible amount on that is a million44,000. And you're estimating for it 11 acre or 11 plus or minus 11 lots. I mean that's I mean is that just because it's a little
further east from Highway 270? >> Yeah. And I I think the the important thing to take away from this one would be that we're trying to program a million three for >> you know some lots in here. >> Okay. >> We've not studied that to any great level. Okay.
>> But so we're really just swinging blind. >> Okay. Thanks. >> Again, I think that's just a theme like all these new subdivisions. >> No, >> we don't know when they're going to come in. I mean, our crystal ball just isn't that clear. So, we just throw, you know,
pepper these into the the plan just so we have, you know, some financial modeling based upon when they could feasibly happen. But, you know, Marty Solomon might show up next year and say, "I want to do Antler Ridge next year or next week." We go, "Oh, okay. Well,
So yeah, that's exactly it. Um, >> can I ask you a quick procedural question? >> Um, so for instance, resorted abby. So >> we know that this project, we've gone through all of the planning commission
and uh well, we haven't approved a plas. >> So how do we know this is on the radar? Sorry. >> Yeah, we've had from a staff standpoint, we've met with uh Mr. Wendell a couple of times along with some of his representatives. I would say a couple times they've had some discussions with
Larry. A lot of it's been centered around annexation and things like that, but that process has now been completed. And so >> so no formal steps have been taken in terms of this being on a this is just conversations and we're have a pretty good idea that this is going to happen
at some point. >> That's that that's that's yeah, that's our best guess. >> Okay, that's >> is it possible nothing happens? Yeah, there's an avenue for that. >> Resort at Abby before, so I was >> Yeah, you haven't. >> Okay, >> John, I've got a question. Uh,
how many miles of roadway do we have in the city of Detroit Lakes now? And and then we're looking at these future projects. How many more miles are we going to be adding? Do we know those numbers? >> I don't know those numbers off the top of my head, Ron. Um, I mean, roads of existing roadways were 200 I'm not gonna
get that right. >> 289. Yeah, Sean and I argue about this, but somewhere 189 200 miles is what we have now. What we're going to add >> right now 200 plus what we're going to add then. Okay. All right. Thank you. >> Um, moving on to the next project. And
again, feel free to stop me. I'm just going to kind of skim here is we have a number of projects. You'll see a theme here coming up on what we're calling the north side neighborhood. And so we're really we are making a concerted effort I would say to make some street utility
improvements in the area south of Highway 34, north of BNSF tracks, uh west of Roosevelt, east of Washington. If you can kind of envision that. Um I've been fortunately working
with the city for nearly 20 years and I can count on just a couple fingers how many projects we've done in that area. My point being, we have a lot of very old infrastructure up in that area that is going to need some attention and we better start taking some bites at that
um before it catches up with us. So, we've done a fair amount of recon and and trying to prioritize some of these. I fully expect I've got all these individually laid out. We could end up mashing all these together. We might split them into three projects, could be
two. We'll have to see. There's a number of things how that'll play out. So, don't get too hung up on that. They probably won't be single projects, but these are all neighborhood streets that we plan to do street and utility reconstruction projects on. So, you've got Central
Street from Washington to Roosevelt, um, right now laid in in 27, you know, a little over $2.2 million. You got Davis Street also in 27 looking at just about 1.8 million.
Got Andrews Avenue in here on 27 at just about 2.5 million. So that's kind of the first batch of them. Also in 27 we've got what is a very very generic placeholder project for street
rehab. And we just got done with doing some of this. We've generally done one of these I would say every 3 to four years. And these are focused primarily on pavement restoration. So we're doing mill and overlay and full depth reclamation, trying to go after the
worst of the worst in terms of uh street conditions where we have good utilities underneath. Um but we can just focus on street pavement improvements. Um generally pretty pro popular projects from the standpoint that you know we're able to spread that work around and uh
we get some pretty positive feedback. We had two and a half million. I do not can't tell you where that will be applied other than the list is longer than what we have for funding. I mean, so it ends up being an exercise between Sean, myself, Kelsey of going where do
we need to do what's the worst and so we'll that's a place over for 27. >> Mr. Brad, if I may, looking at the Andrews Avenue, and this may be just a general procedural question, but looking at the accessible value compared to the general funds, general funds is much
higher on that project. Is that due to the the ordinance, the way the way the project split up, or is that due to city having a lot of property along that road? >> I'm going to guess, and Ben can correct me if I'm wrong here, but I think it's because we have a lot of sidelot footage.
>> Gotcha. >> And so we're eating a lot of footage. >> Okay. Thank you. Yeah, >> this is just an editorial comment. I mean, um, you know, we're tackling a lot of roads on reconstructs on this north side,
but they're 300 foot blocks, right? You know, it's just not the most efficient network of of for costwise, right? I mean, you have all these side lots that we only assess for half the footage, and it's just a lot of cost that comes back
to the city. And even then, with our current assessment policy where, you know, city taxpayers and city rateayers are eating more of the project cost, those assessments are still in that 25,000
range. And you know, it's going to be hard in that area as you as you look at the the property values in that area to get swallow a $25,000 assessment. So again, that's why we do these things. That's why we do these CIPs so we can start submitting to the
state, start submitting our facility plans, try to chase some grant dollars or at least some low interest loan dollars. We talked about even like a small cities app. Um, and that's why this is two years out so we can start planning and trying to tackle uh some of
those other grant applications. But it's just really challenging when you look at that whole area that needs to be reconstructed how as a city we're going to fight that off. >> Yeah, 100% agree. And you you may see to
Kelsey's point, you may see a request sometime in the next couple months for us to start some preliminary work on that to Kelsey's point because we need to get moving on the design so we can get through various certifications and potentially start chasing some of that money even though the the construction's
not right now 27 and it could be 28, but we got to get ahead of that. So, >> uh I' I've got I've got a question on um you know, we've got quite a few parking lots. I'm looking here at Washington Square Mall for almost 2 and a.5
million. Will all that come out of the food and beverage tax or will we create an assessment district for the downtown business area because those are we're getting some pretty big, you know, finance areas for these parking lots now and whether or not are
we going to have enough money to fund all these things through that food and beverage. >> So, to answer your question, I just got to find the sheet. Ron, bear with me here. Page eight. >> Page eight. >> Item 20. >> Oh, you're looking at the table. Wow. All right. I was looking for the
worksheet. Any >> John John, can we can we just put a pin on the parking lot discussion? Let's >> Sure. Can you hold that? >> Can we get back to that one? I'll get to it. Okay. Because I think it's worthwhile to look at that to talk about it that page eight that whole sheet and then understand maybe what some of the thoughts are on that.
>> Yeah. >> Hang on and I I will get to that. Those are good questions, Ron. >> Anyway, moving into to 28. again another slew of >> excuse me oh I'm sorry Wendy >> I just really have a quick question because I you know that's a lot of dollars running through this report
obviously and you had commented about grants and you had talked about chasing grants and >> absent those grants what is the impact to our bottom line because a couple months ago probably right before budget and you know earlier in the summer I had
asked Heidi um what kind of money do we get from the state and um I came up with $ 38.549 million in the last 5 years in grants for various projects in the city and
34.5 million in low interest loans 19.5 of which were for street projects. So my question is if we didn't have those does how does that impact this five-year plan?
>> Um seems like a lot of I mean that's half of >> 70 million of the last eight year you know what I mean I'm just >> sure and I mean there were number of questions in there so I'm trying to parse them out but I mean the bottom line is that I mean I think
>> to the point that is why we have to do these capital plans and and what does it look like well Heidi's pulling that into some of the financial modeling that you all get presented when we get into budget cycle and things that don't fit
get pushed. I mean, um, without the outside, whether they're grants or lowinterest loans or some form of funding assistance, uh, without any of that, I think it's safe to say that, yeah, we would have to trim this back.
It's either trim that back or watch the tax levy go quite a bit higher. I mean, that's the short answer. And so, we have to react to that. We're not guaranteed any of it or very little of it. I mean, we get uh a certain amount of of stability in our
our municipal state aid dollars that we get every year and we use those dollars and and things like that, but we're also going after low interest loans and at different times we've been eligible for grant dollars um one year and then the next year we're no longer considered eligible and you you can't predict a lot
of that stuff. Um, so I know that's not a real good answer to your question, Wendy, but it would have a significant impact. And you know, the only thing I would add is I think we're we're always looking between myself, Larry, Kelsey,
constantly kind of on the hunt for how can we leverage outside dollars in different ways. I mean, we have our own things like food and beverage tax. the watershed uh has indicated that they may have some mechanisms for say Washington Square Mall. Um
there's a slew of things. There's a lot of one-time grants that the state legislature puts out there and it's a oneand done and then they're gone. >> That might push a project. >> I mean, I could talk about funding programs quite frankly for probably the better part of an hour and put you all
to sleep. So, uh but we're looking and we're always on the hunt and we have to have them or we have to trim I don't want to steal Heidi's thunder, but that's that's the next step, too, is is plugging all these in. And that's what Heidi's working on. And if you remember the all the spreadsheets in the
bar graphs we've looked at before, and you know, we try to project what debt do we have coming off, what can our levy support with new debt for debt levy, and that's the next step. Now that we have this document, start plugging those in.
And that's that's really where you get make hard decisions of what has to get pushed back or other your levy's going to go up or something has to give. So >> uh was there any more mayor or moving on? >> Moving on.
>> Okay. Um again a number of projects on the north side. Main Street from Washington to Roosevelt. uh Union Street, Washington to Roosevelt, Bowling from North Street to Front
Street. So, that's another slug of them. Uh we plugged in another subdivision project, Ridge View subdivision, phase two. Uh last time I looked, I think there was a handful of houses constructed in phase one. Will this be
ready for a phase two by 2028? Maybe, maybe not. but just another placeholder for the next phase of that subdivision. Um, we've done a fair amount of analysis on the water distribution system as part of
larger study um that that led to that the need for another tank on the south side of town. Um, and so right now we're looking at 2028 putting up a smaller water tower somewhere along the south
side of the lake. Uh, a lot of that's to meet fireflow needs and things like that. >> How many gallons are you thinking a small one would be? >> 300,000 is what we're planning right now. >> Yep. >> Um, in 2029, we've got some work
programmed on 290th Avenue. This is a project, frankly, that's been on in the CIP for quite a while. We've kind of kicked it down the road for a bit. Um, we picked 29 because this aligns with when Mandot right now is planning to make improvements at that Highway 10,
Eastshore, 290th, McHugh uh set of intersections out there. And so there'd be some impact to 290th. And so we've got uh some pavement improvements scheduled for that area. Uh I'd point out there that a large portion of the adjacent footage on that project belongs
to the city between uh Sucker Creek and upper Sucker Creek. We own about 3/4 of the adjacent footage. So another placeholder for Antler Ridge subdivision 2029
um West Willow. We're planning to finish what is kind of the last chunk of Willow Street uh from Cheryl out to the excuse me the 59 roundabout. Um that one's always notoriously been in tough shape.
Obviously we've got some really really bad soils under there. Uh we have some federal uh federal state aid funds that come to us in 2029. So we're planning to utilize those funds for that portion of Willow. big reason is we again we have
nobody to special assess on that one. So that's really going to be borne 100% by the city. Uh so that was some of the strategy on that. Um Willow Street storm water basin improvements. Um I don't know how much the council's heard about this but we've
been in a about a year-long cooperative study with uh the watershed district um looking at an existing storm water treatment basin that's over there. And the reason we're looking at this one is we get a lot of storm water from the
core portion of our community that eventually makes it to this basin. Uh anything that heads down towards the lake, goes along the beach, goes to the fairgrounds, goes to a lift station, eventually goes through here. And the important part is this basin
discharges to a ditch that goes to Slair Lake. and Lake Sinclair has a uh TMDL on it for phosphorus. So, we have to start making progress towards what's called our load allocation for um for
phosphorus related to the TMDL. So, we're looking at ways to enhance that base and that are actually going to move the needle on what our goal is is for that. That's um that's regulated by the state and we have to show progress on that. So, we've got some different
ideas. Um, we're kind of waiting to let some other information come to light here before we make a decision on on what we want to do there. But 2030, another street rehab project. Um, you know, I'd start to point out that we've still got 2 and a.5 million on that. You know, it's five years from
now. Um, 2 and a half million won't get us a real long ways on on street pavement stuff. Um, so keep that in mind, but it's a placeholder for right now. When you say, >> John, when you say we still have
2,2,500, >> what do you mean by that? >> I mean, we've got 2 and a half million programmed. >> Um, I I can >> into our financial >> I can about >> it's the same amount we used. >> Yes. Again, meaning I used two and a
half million in was it 2027 >> and again in 2030. So >> five years from now, two and a half million is going to buy you less than >> it's not going to get us very far. >> I apologize. Sorry. >> Would would we be better served? You talk about 5% inflation. Should these be bumped up every, you know, going out
three years, should you have a quarter of a million more because it's going to be that much more? I mean, that you should look forward to. >> You know, there's probably the need. I I know from Kelsey and and Heidi's standpoint, these projects really spike.
>> Yeah. >> The the levy, correct? I mean, >> they're a little tough to to take, but going up. >> Oh yeah. I right Ben had made a good point. We we do all these projects are
forecasted in today's dollars and depending on which year we land them in. They get an inflationary factor put to them if you will. So I'm estimating you know for example
the Willow Street punt. We have some current dollars for that, but knowing that's not going to be till 29, we we bumped that. Comparatively, I don't have anything to estimate on the 23 street rehab because I don't have a project. So, it's just literally a >> I know, but we're a growing community
and you know, I mean, we have more streets to take care of and everything and plus inflation is there. >> Yeah. I just think that it might be instead of it being a static number every three years out even I think it just >> kind of splitting hairs but
>> no that's that's a fair point >> John with the uh we're not getting the funding like we used to pelican river water shed with their funding is that gonna are we going to have quite an increase from money that they we used to get some help from them we're not
getting that anymore like MS4s and all this with that >> they have some they have access my understanding they have some uh access to some grant dollars as a watershed district that we would not have access to as a municipality. So I mean that's
what we're hoping to access is have them >> will we still get some of that from them since they're we're not really getting the help like we used to. >> Yeah. I mean we're hoping to that's the discussion. Uh do I have any guarantee that they're going to come to the table with dollars? No. But that's been the
discussion is that they think they can get some grant dollars to help go towards that project. >> But when we were dropped off of that, what's going to happen in the future down the road for other projects that you say help with them that do we have to make where we're going to make up
that money that we used to get from them for future years? >> I'm not aware of any funding that we get from the watershed district unless I'm missing something. Kelsey, Heidi, I don't I don't think we get any funding from the water. >> I thought we had some from MS4 and all
and some of that stuff, but we >> No, we've gotten some oneoff grants for different things, but through the water. >> Okay. You know, >> they did help. You're right. They >> the library, but it's it's project specific. And then
>> not the wershed district that's getting the money and giving it to us. They're getting it from somewhere else like Bowser or somewhere another state agency and they're they're passing it through to >> but they're an they're an eligible applicant right >> where we are not. >> Correct. >> So would that's what I'm saying. Well
will we be an eligible applicant then but since they're not getting it for us will we'll be able to do it on our own then? >> No we're looking at them to get the funds for us. Okay. Just like >> Yep. They're they're a cooperative project with the water. >> Okay. Yeah. They're still doing Yeah.
Uh I'm just about there I think here. Um again third 2030 just a placeholder for a next phase of the Southwood Shores Estates project that's under construction right now. Totally dependent on how that unfolds.
Um, we've got a couple of the next projects are have been on the plan for quite a while that deal with the installation of sewer and water infrastructure and street improvements on the west side of Long Lake and it's
basically broke into two uh different projects. Uh, we pursued this a little bit at one point in time. It's been a number of years now. Um really the response that we got from from those folks on the west side of Long Lake was they weren't interested. Um it would
come at a very very large expense to the city and so if there's no interest in the cost we kind of just keep plugging these out there until such time that that's going to make some sense. I don't Kelsey if you had anything to add to that. Yeah, the only thing I'd add is um
Mayor Brink and Sean and I met with Detroit Township last week. Um you know, West Long Lake Road is in is in poor condition and it's getting worse. And then the uh the two
streets at the end of West Long Lake Road, which I'm not going to remember what those are, Sean. Do you remember what's the north and south one? >> They have different names, too. on >> is one long view.
>> Could be. >> Yeah, I I don't recall either. >> Those are in really bad shape. Um and then not to mention Cherry Hill Road. Um especially that east end, that culde-sac um is in really rough shape. Again, there's only a few houses at the end of
that. And you know the city limit line through there is is kind of a jigsaw of you know parts of West Long Lake Road we we have 50% responsibility we share with the township. Other areas it's all
township and then you get closer to Long Lake and it's all in city limits. Um, and our conversation with with Detroit Township was how are we going to split that cost and to redo that road? Um, you
know, we've been holding off because if you were going to blow it all up and do utilities someday, you wait till that time, right? And then you redo the road. But at some point, we're have to decide, you know, if we're not going to do the utilities, the road's going to have to be addressed.
and it's probably like a full depth reclamation. Um, that's probably, you know, I think the township would like to do that in a couple years from now. Um, however, they've already made the case of maybe the city should pay more than
their share. Um, they think it's unfair that we have kind of the the property value down on the lake. Um but the township has um a greater percentage of the abuing property cuz as statute says
we would just take the cost of that road and split it based upon whatever our prorated percentage is of what is budding the city right that's what statute says and they're making the case that that's really not fair because um
you I think they feel like maybe it was we cherrypicked and annexed all the the high property value that's on the lake, but all the road miles is still in the township. So, that's going to be a discussion that, you know, the council is going to have to have later as we look at what that project looks like.
But, um, the road's not getting any better and, um, at some point we have to decide if we're not going to do the utilities, we're probably going to have to address the road. So this would be kind of like what's your development Alderman Carlson?
>> Well Springs >> kind of do the same thing like we did with his development where we put in but we don't put the sewer in potentially. >> Okay response to that. >> Um when we did that at Willow it seems like I I feel like my vote hung on the
fact that it was not a throughway. It was like you just we can't go through that property to get to the other side for further development and that was kind of what made it different from other projects.
Was that >> Yeah, I I think that's fair. Um you also had some big lots and the cost feasibility wasn't great. kind of the same issue in this area. And I'll let John jump in here if I get this wrong, but um if you look at the map, um the
reason why we've never done the project is unless something happens out there, the cost feasibility of getting utilities all the way to kind of the southwest side of Long Lake is it's not good for the city and it's not good for the property owners. I mean, I mean, what that cost would be is is pretty
astronomical. Um you have the Concordia uh property that is can't be developed. It's tax exempt. Uh kind of on the west side of Long Lake, east side of um West Long Lake Road where the bend
is. South of that is um property where they were going to extend the gravel pit. Um, now if if this is a big if, Wendy, you know, if something would change with that property owner, um, where the
gravel pit was going to be extended to and they say, "Hey, now we're going to do a housing subdivision." Well, that helps, right? You now start your numbers and your feasibility of getting utilities down there are better. If the campground decides, hey, we're going to sell out and we're going to subdivide,
your numbers might look better. >> But unless those things happen, again, the feasibility and cost for both the property owners in the city getting utilities all the way to that southwest side, it's just not pretty. It's just ugly. Um,
>> so much so that one point we actually looked at going underneath the lake, as silly as that sounds. But that's just not where we're at. >> Wow. >> Well, well, that that was the that was the plan. >> Well, and that's the big reason why that
west side along Lake hasn't been done is because there were so few property owners that every time that subject came up, well, a handful of us can't pay these millions of dollars. it's we don't have enough residents. So, so then they come back and say, well, then the city of wants and they should do it. We just
we don't have the money either. It's a tough deal. >> I don't know when if I answered your question. On the west side, you got the railroad spur there and um there's not a whole lot >> to go that way probably. Um so there's a there's a few opportunities out there,
but it's kind of limited. >> So basically what I'm hear is unless there would be some situational changes surrounding that area. Annexation probably isn't considered nor is >> the area is annexed already.
>> The area is annexed. The water and sewer. >> Okay. All right. I think >> Yeah, the areas in pink are already annexed in. So then there's there's a chunk in the middle where Cherry Hill Road is on the north and then that area south that's all subdivided and >> big lots, mostly built out but huge
lots, right? So again, the feasibility of that is not >> it's not good. >> Not great. >> Thank you. >> So anyway, I I think the takeaway is make sure you keep in mind when we have projects like this in here. There's a reason we have them in there, but you know, there's some big dollars tied to
these and there's hu even larger question marks. So just be aware of that. Um I'll I'll try to finish up here. Um Rosman Avenue. Um, this is a new one we added. Uh, this is in
response to basically some real good concerns related to the water mane. We've we've had some repairs there. We're finding out that the it's old cast iron and the bolts that are holding the water man together are essentially disappearing. Um, so and with the new
tower going online, um, that's got us a little bit concerned. We've got it as a TBD. If I had to guess, we're going to have to move that up in the plan at some point here. Um, but that one sort of just hit the list here uh this go around. >> Legion Road's another one that's getting
tough. Um, we didn't have a good spot for it yet, so it's it's on the radar as a TBD. Um, but we are going to have to look at making some improvements uh to Legion Road, both from a street and utility standpoint. Then there's uh some multi-use trails. I
mean, this is the Westlake Drive one. Um, you guys are well aware of that. the arena parking lot that has been discussed on and off. Um but at some point we're going to need to do something in the way of parking there. Um improve that area. Um we've got it
pushed out right now to 2029. Um that's primarily just driven at what the projections are for the food and beverage tax um fund and when when we can fund that project. um a project that we just started some
discussion on with Becker County. Uh they've got plans to do a full depth of reclamation on Westlake Drive, basically from Pelican River to Longbridge Road. Um it was a good opportunity if we wanted
to continue that trail that we've got constructed on Westlake Drive and get that to Longbridge Road, it was a good chance to do that. Um, we're looking at putting a grant application in for that, but that would be a cooperative project with Becker County
Washington Square Mall Ron. You mentioned that this has been on the plan for a number of years. Sean actually just did some pretty good heavy maintenance, I'd call it, on that lot this year to buy us uh some additional time. Um but that project um we've had some discussions
with the watershed district on and them trying to access some outside grant dollars for that. Um we'd obviously probably still have to use some food and beverage tax for it. As far as uh downtown parking district assessment, um I I feel like that would be in play. Um,
that's generally what we've done in the downtown parking lots is had the uh the parking district pay for a portion of that, which means all businesses downtown that don't have uh parking that meets ordinance would chip in uh on a pr-rated basis.
>> But, you know, I guess my question is is that, you know, we've got all these parking lots now and um most most of them are tied uh um to DLCC. We got the the arena parking lot. We got the downtown.
We're out there at the the mountain stuff. I'm just saying is that is our dollars coming food and beverage. Is that going to keep up? Because as we keep adding things on, are we are we going to be able to to have enough money to keep up with all these projects we
have, especially when they start have to need repairs? And that's my concern is that we've got so many of these projects now. I don't know if we're going to have enough food and beverage tax. What are we going to use for resources and to uh fund these uh as we go down the road
here because we're, you know, we've just got more and more of these parking lots to put on with these things. And >> yeah, I mean the answer is it's it's an annual battle. I mean, it's it's an ongoing neverending
struggle whether it's these or other things within the city. And you know, you're not committing to do this right now, but you know, when the time comes, we have to look at, is there money in the food and beverage tax to pay it? How much grant dollars can we get? How much do we feel like we can put on the
parking district and and make that palatable for the businesses? And you got to look at all those factors. And if the answer is no, >> then the parking lot has to stay like it is. Um that's sort of >> well because because right now I what for the year Heidi what are we like up
two or 3% in the food and beverage or >> I mean it's you put me on the spot. um food and beverage for the year. We're up about 1%ish, but um yeah,
so we're not up a ton, but I mean it is collecting at a fairly decent rate. Um but like you said, you know, there's only so much to go around. So that's exactly why we're doing this, right? So we can have these numbers. we know what
these numbers are and then I can plug them into the spreadsheet that you all see then when we do the budget discussions and plug them into each year that we're thinking that we might want to do these projects and then see if the money is there, right? And so that's sort of the exercise that I'm doing now
that we have the CIP draft is plug them all in and make sure that the funds are there to accomplish all these things. >> Come in. Okay. I was just u I I guess I I'm just looking at all the street projects, but when you start adding in with the parking lots and trails, that
all comes off the food and beverage and I'm just concerned about dollars where it's coming from. >> So, I think Ron, one thing I'd add to your point is, so you mentioned on page eight is is the table of our parking lot multi multi-use trails. You can see there's a gap between 26 and 29 where
we're not doing anything. That's because of the beach project. >> Yeah. >> You know, that's You know, we have some funds available in that food and beverage tax, but um by the time we do the beach project, we're going to fund all that with food and beverage tax. We're going have to repay
ourselves couple of years to get out of the red and into the black. So, we don't we don't have another parking lot project till 29, >> right? >> Same could be true. I mean, this multi-use trail on Long Lake Park, we
designed it when we did the north side of Long Lake, deferred it, just didn't do it at the time, and so we've left it in here, and we kind of just keep scooching it out. Um, if and when we do that, we'll see. Again, the rest of these I'm I'm not going to spend a bunch
of time on here. They they're just various trails that we've looked at. Ones from 59 over to Richwood Road. Um, we've looked at trying to finish off the the trail through town. Um, basically we've got it along Frezy Street now and
need to get it over towards West Avenue. Um, done some studies on getting a trail from the H Heartland State Trail up to DMR. Um, there's a little bit of activity on that, but we've got that on our radar.
Um, you know, to your point, Ron, I mean, a lot of these the this trail in particular, we'd probably have to seek outside dollars or it's not going to happen. So, uh, last couple here, Tower Road Industrial Park, um, this is a
development authority project. Uh, Larry's actually working on submitting, uh, some funding applications to EDA and to, uh, the state for that project, you know. So, we've got this updated into 2027 right now.
We'll see. It'll depend on the success of those applications, I would say. Um, North Industrial Part Phase 3, we've put that back to a TBD because we just signed a lease to mine that for the next 10 years. So, we're not going to be doing anything anytime soon. So,
that's it. >> Any questions for John? >> And we don't have any action tonight on this, Kelsey. Is that correct? the earliest it would be a hearing in November, okay, on it. But like I mentioned, we, you know, staff, we still need to digest this. Heidi needs to plug
this in. You know, we'll probably um >> we'll see. We'll have to look at uh some of the graphs and maybe we we do that in our work session or something. We'll see. >> Okay. The last item is item number two. Would
somebody like to make a motion to approve that temporary license for the VFW? So moved. Second. >> Motion's been made and seconded to approve the issuance of a temporary intoxicating liquor license the BFW for October 11th at the pavilion.
Discussion. All in favor of the motion say I. >> I. >> Opposed. Motion carries and the business of this council has come to a conclusion. The meeting's adjourned. I told my wife [Laughter]
>> I knew what the answer that question was.