WEBVTT

METADATA
Video-Count: 1
Video-1: youtube.com/watch?v=rj_zNy94GqI

Part: 1

1
00:02:26.560 --> 00:02:42.959
Jack. >> Okay. Good evening everybody. I'd like to welcome you all to the public works committee meeting scheduled for today, Tuesday, July 28th. Uh we are going to start this meeting with approving the minutes from the April 14th

2
00:02:42.959 --> 00:02:58.959
uh meeting regarding the Lakers Lane concept. If I can get a motion. I'll second. >> We have a motion and a second. Uh, all those in favor signify by saying I. >> I. I. >> Opposed. Motion carries. >> Item number two is to approve the

3
00:02:58.959 --> 00:03:14.720
minutes from the May 11th special public works committee meeting. Look for a motion. >> I'll make the motion. >> Second. >> All right. We have a motion, a second. Are there is there any further discussion? Uh, all those in favor signify by saying

4
00:03:14.720 --> 00:03:30.319
I. >> I. I. >> Opposed? Motion carries. And one more uh regarding the minutes from the May 27th sidewalk summit to work session. Uh can I get a motion? >> So moved.

5
00:03:30.319 --> 00:03:46.560
>> Second. I have a motion and a second. Uh any further discussion? All those in favor signify by saying I. >> I. >> Opposed. >> Motion carries. Okay. Item number four. We're already halfway through the agenda. Look at that.

6
00:03:46.560 --> 00:04:02.640
Uh we need to reschedule the August public works meeting from the 27th or to the 27th or 19th of August. Uh looking for >> any suggestions. >> I have a conflict on the 26th. So whichever works better for the

7
00:04:02.640 --> 00:04:22.240
committee. >> I can make either one works. >> Any preference? >> Probably the 27th. I can do 27th. Okay. And our city engineer >> August 27th. >> Yes, sir.

8
00:04:22.240 --> 00:04:38.639
>> Yes, that works. >> I'm going to assume I am clear. I was going on a vacation with my wife, but we rescheduled. So, I'm here all August >> and will not be leaving. >> So, you're not missing that you're

9
00:04:38.639 --> 00:04:55.680
missing out on the vacation? >> Missing the vacation. Yeah. Okay. So, I think we have a unanimous consensus that August 27th for the public works meeting for the month of August works. Um, I'll take a motion for

10
00:04:55.680 --> 00:05:12.160
that item. >> So, moved. >> Second. >> Any further discussion? All those in All those in favor signify by saying I. >> I. Opposed. Motion carries. >> One more thing with that, Jesse. I'm going to try to send out um calendar

11
00:05:12.160 --> 00:05:28.800
invit invitations to the committee for that and then the rest of them for the year just so you can kind of plan ahead a little bit. >> That'd be great. >> Yes. >> It's a joke, but it's also serious if it's not on my calendar. It doesn't exist. >> Oh yeah. I I never where I'm supposed to

12
00:05:28.800 --> 00:05:43.039
be if it isn't on my account. >> Yeah, sadly. That's what uh that's where it's come to. Okay. Item number five, the Russk Road standard introduction. Um Tom, >> um before we get to that, um I think

13
00:05:43.039 --> 00:06:00.520
what I'd like to do is we have an up we uh Bill and Dave have an update on the road bonds I'd like to talk about. >> Um we're kind of stalling a little bit. Monica's going to be this year. Oh, sorry. I didn't see you behind the screens.

14
00:06:01.120 --> 00:06:15.360
>> Okay. Well, I still think we probably should just do a Well, I don't know. Want to just stay with the original order then? That's fine. >> And then we'll go to the update at the end. >> That's fine. Okay. >> All right. Let's do that. >> Monica, are you ready? >> So, the first one will be my

15
00:06:15.360 --> 00:06:31.919
introduction, I guess. So, I I um I provided everybody a draft of a memo that I'm preparing for the city council to work on um rustic road standards. Um so, what I'm looking for tonight is just a little discussion on this. I know you

16
00:06:31.919 --> 00:06:48.319
haven't had time to really review it. Um I think what I'll do is I'll read through it and then um if you have any comments or questions we can uh work on that. So um background on this um this why has

17
00:06:48.319 --> 00:07:05.840
several existing roads that it maintains that have a historical design uh that there is an overwhelming desire to preserve. Applying the regular road standard that we have to these roads is believed by many to be detrimental to maintaining the character they exhibit

18
00:07:05.840 --> 00:07:21.199
to preserve these roads is unique to Nisa. Um the rustic road standard should be a Niswah rustic road standard. Um the design the roads that I'm looking to have designated or would put up as

19
00:07:21.199 --> 00:07:36.720
candidates to be designated for rustic roads are Bass Lake Road, Camp Lincoln, Forest Avenue, East and West Lynon Boulevard, Mission Road, Ncomomas, Woodward

20
00:07:36.720 --> 00:07:52.639
Avenue, Poke Road, Old Government Trail, and Hole in the Day. Now, those last three we've already just paved. So, they're kind of locked in for a while now the way they are. Um cost. Um I don't have an exact cost

21
00:07:52.639 --> 00:08:07.680
on anything here, but um just I think we recognize that if we go to a lesser standard on our roads that we're inviting more maintenance. So, with this designation, there will likely be an increased frequency and cost of

22
00:08:07.680 --> 00:08:24.800
maintaining them. uh with the acceptance of the rustic road standard um we're accepting them as is and their maintenance will be funded by the levy as the other roads in the city system are. Given this increased cost, it would

23
00:08:24.800 --> 00:08:40.640
be my recommendation that the city not accept any new rustic roads. So if there's any private roads that come in and look to be brought into the city's maintenance that they would have still brought up to the road standard,

24
00:08:40.640 --> 00:08:59.600
the original road standard. Um, if somebody was doing development, they couldn't do that with a rustic road. They would have to do it with the traditional road standard. Um, yeah. So, that's kind of where I would leave that. Um the process um what I

25
00:08:59.600 --> 00:09:16.760
would expect is that uh once we have a more complete draft memo for the council, I would look for the council at a meeting to go through each road that I had designated and say whether or not they want that to be a rustic road.

26
00:09:17.360 --> 00:09:33.920
Um and then just a couple of other recommendations for it. Um, I would say that we should probably note the current condition of each road. Um, probably with a video or pictures

27
00:09:33.920 --> 00:09:48.320
um, just to kind of preserve whatever unique character. So like say if you had large trees, you're taking a picture of those large trees to try to maintain that going forward future generations as you all cycle in

28
00:09:48.320 --> 00:10:05.279
and out of our positions here. Um, please note that um by preserving the character of these roads, it doesn't mean that there can't or won't be changes both natural and man-made. U what I would propose is that any

29
00:10:05.279 --> 00:10:20.720
significant changes made by the city will be approved by the city council after a public information meeting and hearing. uh provided that the changes to the road aren't uh a maintenance reaction to say

30
00:10:20.720 --> 00:10:36.640
a large storm disaster like we had in 2015. >> That would be written into the into the ordinance, right? >> You know, sometimes you have to clear trees and hurry that happens. Um,

31
00:10:36.640 --> 00:10:53.920
and then brief discussions I've had with Dave and Witsth. Um, it I believe there would be some minimum engineering standards we'd have to apply even though it's a rustic road standard. And I would when I get done maybe Dave could add to what I'm

32
00:10:53.920 --> 00:11:10.079
about to say. Um, I think they should be a part of developing the new rustic road standard. Um, letting us know what what's the minimum that we have to employ as far as >> road loops going forward for like width and that

33
00:11:10.079 --> 00:11:28.959
kind of um yeah so that's that and then um the last thing I would say with this is if we uh develop our own rustic road standard um that we also design a sign some that

34
00:11:28.959 --> 00:11:45.120
tells everybody as you're coming onto that road that this and it's rustic road. >> Similar to like a scenic byway. >> Yeah. >> Indicator. >> Yeah. It's funny you It's funny you say that. It's It's an idea that I've thought of when we first talked about

35
00:11:45.120 --> 00:12:02.680
rustic roads a while back. >> If you go down Camp Lincoln Road today, you'll notice at the either end there's a small sign that says Scenic Drive or Scenic Drive or Scenic Byway. I think it says scenic drive.

36
00:12:06.959 --> 00:12:23.040
Correct. Yeah. Just in theory the same concept >> marking that road as such. Well, I think the model I was thinking of is if you've seen the signs that the state issues for um

37
00:12:23.040 --> 00:12:37.920
projects that are fund by funded by the legacy grant, there's usually a sign about maybe yay tall and yay wide and it has a picture of the Clean Water Legacy Act and it's just something that draws it out to people's attention as they're

38
00:12:37.920 --> 00:12:56.800
coming and going. Um, so with that, my, you know, I'm I'm seeing that we would have a staff recommendation to develop and adopt a new rustic road standard and that we would ask the council to establish that as outlined above. So with that, I would

39
00:12:56.800 --> 00:13:13.680
look for any feedback, questions, additions, thoughts. I guess of all the information, Tom, that that I've looked at that's been provided, the only question I would have would would be that the traffic counts and all these all these roads have been done and and

40
00:13:13.680 --> 00:13:31.040
they meet the standard. >> I'm sorry, what did you say, Tom? >> The traffic counts. >> Oh, okay. So, we haven't done traffic counts on any of these recently that I'm aware of. >> Okay. Is that is that one of the requirements that that the state >> The state has that requirement. So, if

41
00:13:31.040 --> 00:13:48.480
we have a city You can you can make your own. >> We could either make our own or we don't have >> that wasn't clear to me. So, >> um yeah, I apologize for that. >> Okay. >> So, there's two issues. So, Monica's here to ask for a state designation for Camp Lincoln Road and that's what the

42
00:13:48.480 --> 00:14:05.279
packet that she provided talks about. >> Yeah. Um, so a little bit more background to where this uh rustic road discussion started. As we were starting to look into the 26 and 27 road bonds, uh, part of that 27 original 27 road

43
00:14:05.279 --> 00:14:21.120
bond were the three roads in um, Grand View. And if any any of you are familiar with the East and West Lynon and Ncomomas, they're definitely probably rustic roads if we have any in this. And so we were starting to talk about well

44
00:14:21.120 --> 00:14:37.920
where do we deviate from our original road standard for some of the require some of the um characteristics that they wanted to preserve. Well, when we started talking about that, I started talking about, well, the other roads such as Camp Lank.

45
00:14:37.920 --> 00:14:53.440
Um, I think Monica heard about that and then the work she's done is she went and actually looked into um a rustic road designation by the state. >> So, I'm going to let her talk about that when she gets up.

46
00:14:53.440 --> 00:15:12.360
>> And they're kind of two separate issues. >> Okay. >> So, uh kind of coming back to the standard Um so road uh traffic counts is one suggestion. Um anything else?

47
00:15:13.600 --> 00:15:30.639
>> So So the Camp Lincoln Road would be a state designated rustic road and the other ones you're you're talking about here would be a Niswah rustic road designation >> and they could be both. >> Okay. All right. Got it. Thank you,

48
00:15:30.639 --> 00:15:46.079
>> Dave. any comment on any of this? >> Well, just the the premise behind standards itself, you know, there's the state standards, then often county has county standards, cities have city

49
00:15:46.079 --> 00:16:00.880
standards. They kind of uh go to the different functional classification of roadways and what their purposes are. Um when you get down to city and township

50
00:16:00.880 --> 00:16:19.279
um level roads uh level of service um they can get uh down to very narrow very uh narrow clear zones, recovery zones, and that type of thing. I've seen

51
00:16:19.279 --> 00:16:37.920
them go down to as narrow as like 14 feet of road surface, six feet of clearing on each side. And u those are in those types of cases there's a lot of

52
00:16:37.920 --> 00:16:54.560
consideration that goes into it. You know, length of road, is it a through road? um all these types of things that need to be considered when you establish what what the function of the road is and what you're trying to preserve.

53
00:16:54.560 --> 00:17:11.679
And bottom line for the city is uh public safety and uh maintenance, long-term maintenance of it. And is it going to be

54
00:17:11.679 --> 00:17:29.760
designed to serve the functional classification for it? Is it going to carry the traffic volume? You know, what are what's the speed that it's going to be designed at? You

55
00:17:29.760 --> 00:17:46.880
know, that relates to the recovery area off the edge of the roadway. So, um standards are set up uh for for those reasons and then for

56
00:17:46.880 --> 00:18:01.120
um developers that are coming into the city that are looking to subdivide develop public infrastructure. what's the baseline standards that are going to be applied, you know, to

57
00:18:01.120 --> 00:18:15.760
everybody when they decide to develop some land and build a public road. So, um there's a lot to think about when you go into that.

58
00:18:15.760 --> 00:18:32.720
State park standards uh are used in funding mechanisms. You have to meet those standards. in order to get funding to improve the roadway. We've done that a number of

59
00:18:32.720 --> 00:18:49.679
times. State Park Road account is one uh that goes to boat landings. State parks, things like that. Um, national parks have national park road standards that are somewhat less

60
00:18:49.679 --> 00:19:04.880
um, uh, black and white or urban design style. Uh, they're meant to be lower speed through a park setting so they can

61
00:19:04.880 --> 00:19:21.280
reduce some of those impact areas off the edge of the road. So those are the things that that come into play and if the city is considering adopting a lesser standard for a particular area, it should fit the

62
00:19:21.280 --> 00:19:37.360
criteria for that. That's all I'm saying. Some points that come to my mind, Tom, is if we have private roads throughout the city of Niss right now that have

63
00:19:37.360 --> 00:19:53.760
city sewer underneath them, such as Tall Timbers, for example. >> Mhm. >> And they don't have, which is private road, not city-owned. Is there any reason to not consider roads like that

64
00:19:53.760 --> 00:20:11.200
to be considered under a rustic road designation? Because I do agree with your basis that we're going to grandfather these roads in and not retroactively go back. But with an asset like that, such as the city sewer system underneath a road like Tall Timbers um

65
00:20:11.200 --> 00:20:27.520
and any other ones throughout the city, would that be worth something to consider? And I'm not expecting an answer, but just something to chew. Yeah, I kind of thought of that question too. And so I think ultimately when we get to the city council and they're making a decision on this, um I think

66
00:20:27.520 --> 00:20:43.520
they have to one decide if they're going to allow existing private roads to enter into the road system or set up a set up a process for how that can happen because right now uh we really don't have a good process for that. Uh we look

67
00:20:43.520 --> 00:20:59.919
for um usually a uh a petition, but it usually just starts with one or two people that are frustrated with some something that's how the roads maintained and then they come to us looking to be added into the

68
00:20:59.919 --> 00:21:15.520
city's maintenance. Um and where councils have struggled with this in the past is they're already getting all the tax dollars that they can get. So any roads that

69
00:21:15.520 --> 00:21:29.679
they add like that the tax base isn't growing but now you're increasing the budget for maintenance. So that's something that they have to understand that >> uh when they do that >> that you know they'll have to adjust the budget accordingly

70
00:21:29.679 --> 00:21:47.919
>> which was kind of that the basis of with the city sewer being underneath any given private road. Would that be worthwhile considering? >> Um, we already have an easement if the sewer is there. >> So, we can do what we need to do to

71
00:21:47.919 --> 00:22:04.640
repair the sewer. >> Um, what we end up doing is say we have to tear up the pavement. We have to put it back in at least as good a condition as what we've taken away. U most of these private roads like tall

72
00:22:04.640 --> 00:22:21.440
timbers don't make any you know they don't hit any of the criteria for our standard with drainage. >> No. So >> okay >> in that case we'd be putting them back as is. So as far as maintaining the sewer it's probably cheaper for the city to leave

73
00:22:21.440 --> 00:22:40.480
them as they are. Um, but in fairness, if a group of people that live on the road, say, I know several people from Centennial have been >> asking the city council to uh be maintained by the city. And um

74
00:22:40.480 --> 00:22:55.520
I think if you have a strong majority of folks that are asking for that, you have to consider it. Still a council decision and every council has different priorities. Um I think should have a mechanism for how that happens to kind of relieve the

75
00:22:55.520 --> 00:23:12.400
council from uh looking at each thing uniquely for the first time. If there's a process, then there's a fairness to that. So, if you set up a process without applying to any particular road and then folks can

76
00:23:12.400 --> 00:23:27.600
come and ask, that would probably be better. And I think that's kind of what I was hoping to do with this uh rustic road standard, too. Um, right now we're not currently working on any road projects on a rustic road. So, if we set

77
00:23:27.600 --> 00:23:44.240
up the standard, if you will, or the it will seem a little more fair. We're not bending to one side or the other making that call. Another point I had too was uh conversation, you know, I had I think up

78
00:23:44.240 --> 00:24:00.080
here maybe about a year ago or more regarding I think East West London and there was a large outcry from the residents in that vicinity where they were they wanted just a a repaving,

79
00:24:00.080 --> 00:24:17.440
right? And these same points came up then as you have them on paper now where we then also discussed well if there's going to be more frequent and routine maintenance that's going to have to occur. It's not something that we're going to be releving for on a more

80
00:24:17.440 --> 00:24:34.960
frequent basis compared to what we have scheduled with the curb and gutter standard that WSN has worked out for us. We talked about assessment uh assessments at that point for those specific roads. If those residents would prefer to have this designation for

81
00:24:34.960 --> 00:24:51.360
their road, would that be something that the city could then entertain removing that dollar cost from the future uh road bond? uh they're strictly just they're strict that group say east

82
00:24:51.360 --> 00:25:07.919
west London is responsible for the divided cost amongst the property owners for for what that is and I know it wasn't a popular concept but if there's something that's going to be done more frequently and like Monica there's obviously a lot of support for

83
00:25:07.919 --> 00:25:23.279
having a rustic road piece uh on camp Lincoln Road is it fair to the taxpayers across the entire base of Niswah to have to continually fork more money over on a routine basis because of a a group and rightfully so petitioning to have their

84
00:25:23.279 --> 00:25:39.440
their home street be classified and maintained as such. I think it would be a great conversation for the council to have in consideration of this, but would help make the point of what's like a what's a maintenance schedule going to potentially be, which would then be the

85
00:25:39.440 --> 00:25:54.799
traffic count conversation that Tom was alluding to. >> I can give you a little bit of insight into that. So, for instance, the roads in Grand View. Um, it's nobody's fault, but you know, the pavement thicknesses aren't there. Um, the drainage hasn't

86
00:25:54.799 --> 00:26:10.320
been there. And whether we've paid for it, if they've paid for it, about every 10 to 15 years, those roads have been repaved since I've been here. Um, and that's largely drainage is poor. the

87
00:26:10.320 --> 00:26:26.720
road thickness isn't built to handle the traffic volume and tonnage that they have. So, I I think there's something to that. I think the council should have that that conversation like you're saying. Do you have some sort of an assessment

88
00:26:26.720 --> 00:26:41.520
policy for that? Or if you have none, just understand that you're having an you will have an inflated levy to maintain that. >> Correct. Right. And I think Camp Lincoln for example. I mean there is a Grand

89
00:26:41.520 --> 00:26:56.799
View property there. I don't know what truck traffic that property requires to be able to maintain, but I would imagine there's some sort of tandem axle vehicles two-tonon plus three ton that are driving down that road that

90
00:26:56.799 --> 00:27:12.720
naturally will cause more wear and tear on it on a >> more accelerated basis than roads that don't. >> Yeah. >> Like Mission, right? Please, Monica, can you come up to the mic, though? I know it's comfortable sitting down, but

91
00:27:12.720 --> 00:27:28.720
>> I love this. Um, what's really interesting uh about Camp Lincoln is it ch it's changed a lot even since 19 oh I don't know when. 1909, sure. But, uh, it's changed really since the pandemic and there's been so much going on. We've

92
00:27:28.720 --> 00:27:44.640
got huge food trucks that go down that road, but they've been going down that road forever and it's really seasonal. And then there's a a a there's something that happens in May which there's a lift that comes off and then everybody can have a bigger road like there's a May first or something that

93
00:27:44.640 --> 00:28:02.799
>> roads. Yes. And I've been monitoring is it getting worse or better? And it just depends. Like when they did tore up um and did all the development on Nashway, well, everybody took those shortcuts. So there are a lot of, you know, 30 mph rigs driving down with Bobcats

94
00:28:02.799 --> 00:28:17.440
and stuff, but it changes all the time and it's very very seasonal. And even right now, this has probably been the quietest year on the road um in terms of large vehicles, fast vehicles, and lots of camp vehicles. So, it's it's really

95
00:28:17.440 --> 00:28:34.159
so so different. But I will say that um this discussion we're having I I know it's not my turn yet, but I have some really good news is that it's not going to cost anything for what I'm proposing for Camp Lincoln. So, I can't wait to talk. I'm sitting there ready. But I I

96
00:28:34.159 --> 00:28:49.279
wanted to add this part about the discussion because and those those trucks, Jesse, go down the entire road. They don't just kind of come off 13 and go to the camp. They they come and go. I've seen the huge food trucks going all the way from Nashway. So, it's the whole

97
00:28:49.279 --> 00:29:06.799
road gets it. >> Okay. Well, she's up at the stand now. Is there anything else you'd like to go over? >> Well, >> or excuse me, Kaylin, >> I guess. And I might be putting the cart ahead of the horse, but um

98
00:29:06.799 --> 00:29:22.799
is there a particular reason that we're only going after this state side for Camp Lincoln Road and not the other rustic roads that you have mentioned? >> They asked the Monica asked or Monica is asked, >> right?

99
00:29:22.799 --> 00:29:38.320
>> Otherwise, uh >> is there a particular reason why we don't include all of those in one one package? I guess from from my point of view, if I can avoid involving the state in anything we do, >> unless they're providing funding or some

100
00:29:38.320 --> 00:29:57.520
other benefit to the city, I I don't like uh pursuing anything with the state because they always come with strains. >> Yeah. >> I think it's better if we keep it local. That that's my opinion of um so that's

101
00:29:57.520 --> 00:30:13.600
why I haven't asked that designation for these roads and I'm looking for more of a miswah a unique miswah standard. >> I guess where I'm coming at is I was just looking at her uh her presentation. I'm not sure she's going to go through it, but for the legal strength where

102
00:30:13.600 --> 00:30:31.039
it's weaker if it's a city-only preservation versus um under the Minnesota statute in in my opinion, if we're going to do this now, we're going to go through the time energy to get this through the city council that it doesn't just stop with

103
00:30:31.039 --> 00:30:46.480
this city council that it can't just be overturned next year. And so I guess if it was me, I would like to see the same strength put into whatever if if we pass this. We put in similar language that would be at a

104
00:30:46.480 --> 00:31:01.679
state level to the local level so that it can't change it in another two three years. >> I want to come back to what what you're talking about. Um Gayen, I think I would like to let Monica go through her presentation >> before we talk about that more.

105
00:31:01.679 --> 00:31:16.960
>> Sure. Yeah. Thanks. and Galen. Um, I'm going to address that in my presentation, too. I I feel like I want to join your committee because I've it's been a pet project of mine for a couple years. >> Well, Monica, if you haven't noticed, we do have a couple seats open. >> I know. I know. But anyway, first of

106
00:31:16.960 --> 00:31:32.559
all, um, if I'm up, I want to thank everybody for this time tonight and those in the audience. And really, I'm here representing um hundreds of community members, residents, and as you saw in the packet, uh people are still contacting me saying, "Am I too late?"

107
00:31:32.559 --> 00:31:47.679
So, I don't think we're here to discuss whether or not we value uh Camp Lincoln Road. Um and I do want to also um respectfully say that I am requesting that uh chair on that we we look at this from the standpoint of pursuing at the

108
00:31:47.679 --> 00:32:04.720
council level um the rustic road designation through the state ordinance 160 um83 and I really look forward to talking about it as a discussion uh because I don't think I know everything but um I do think that there's a lot of misconceptions about what that really

109
00:32:04.720 --> 00:32:18.960
means and I hope I can answer your questions tonight. So, um, you all received that packet, the I'm not going to go through the hundred, I don't know, 75 pages of it, but, um, I do want to kind of highlight a couple of things.

110
00:32:18.960 --> 00:32:34.640
Um, so this is about continuity. So, I know there's going to be a lot of changes in our city and there are happening changes every year. What we're trying to do is just focus specifically on Camp Lincoln Road and what that is as

111
00:32:34.640 --> 00:32:51.840
a value to the city and to the residents and to um the city has that park on it as you know it's about 20% of the land um the coat camp um tradition and they've been the stewards of that road. they're about 30% of that land uh touching all sides and then the

112
00:32:51.840 --> 00:33:08.080
residents are about 50% of that land and I don't know what the zoning of it is but the but everybody's there people that I talked to they're biking they're walking um the campers are on it um and then in the winter it's four of us coming to Schaers for milk but it's been

113
00:33:08.080 --> 00:33:24.240
a a road that has a very fluctuating average daily traffic and that's the key is average daily traffic so um one of the things that I want to get into when we look at the statute is I've talked to Mindot and I think Mindot said, "Oh,

114
00:33:24.240 --> 00:33:39.440
that's a statute we haven't dealt with for a while." And I talked to um Peekquat because they have several rustic roads. And the good news is this is all in the council's jurisdiction. In other words, I thought it was something we had to apply to the state and get

115
00:33:39.440 --> 00:33:56.640
into the bureaucracy and then get into a situation where if we ever wanted to do something different, we had to deal with the state. Nope. It's all in your hands. So, in other words, we could come up with um basically resolutions. You'd be

116
00:33:56.640 --> 00:34:13.359
the authority, this this body, this council, and it it shows up as a resolution. So, it's not binding anybody, but it is definitely does not have to go through approval. No fees, no filings, no verification of traffic. It's at the discretion of the council.

117
00:34:13.359 --> 00:34:28.960
No traffic studies, no extra lawyers. You know, it's something that chat GBT could draft as a resolution and it could be finessed based on the ordinance. And I'm oversimplifying it, but that was exciting, right? Don't need to apply, don't need to get in, but it's called a

118
00:34:28.960 --> 00:34:45.839
statute. So, why do they have it? they have it to give you all direction. And so what they're saying also is guess what? You don't have to maintain it to the same standard, but it's up to you to decide what that standard is. So I would love to find out, do we have a standard for Camp Lincoln Road? Like what is the

119
00:34:45.839 --> 00:35:01.760
protocol for how to handle it? And I also want to say I love the plowing. The road is maintained. I'm not here to complain. You guys do an excellent job maintaining the road. There's potholes that are filled. The trees are taken care of. And your people are very responsive. But is there Tom a current

120
00:35:01.760 --> 00:35:16.960
standard for that road? >> Not there is only one city road standard. >> Okay. >> And so we deviate from that currently for for roads such as Camp Lincoln recognizing that they're unique. Um,

121
00:35:16.960 --> 00:35:33.040
however, that that's that was probably some of my discussion here trying if there's a desire for that with the city council to have two standards to establish it. Well, I respectfully consider um or

122
00:35:33.040 --> 00:35:48.640
invite you to consider that Camp Lincoln standard might be different from some of these other standards and that you don't pursue a project with engineers and everyone that goes through a rustic road standard because that is not a requirement of this proposal tonight.

123
00:35:48.640 --> 00:36:04.560
Well, where I would >> does that does that >> from what you're thinking is no matter what road you have, no matter what standard we apply to it, >> there's a liability to it because it's owned by the city. >> Okay. >> And so if we don't apply some minimum standard, that's why you kept hearing me

124
00:36:04.560 --> 00:36:20.160
talk about a minimum engineering standard. >> Yeah. >> Is um we have to have even if whatever we come up with, we have to be consistent and stay with that. >> Gotcha. So while say Camp Lincoln Road

125
00:36:20.160 --> 00:36:36.320
may be maintained in a different way than say East or West Lynon, they would each meet the minimum. >> Gotcha. So would you uh envision something like um you're you're talking about if we're going to have these rustic roads and designate them as such,

126
00:36:36.320 --> 00:36:52.800
that's different than the standard. So the standard is kind of a separate project to decide how are we going to maintain them for the safety and liability issues. And would you envision that there'd be one standard or would you want to look at all the different roads? And clearly I don't want to get in a rabbit hole. I do want to focus on Camp Lincoln, but I was just curious

127
00:36:52.800 --> 00:37:09.200
about your thoughts on that, Tom. >> I think what I would be looking for is that the standard would have language in it that defines what the minimums are >> and then it would give us some options for for being a rustic road. So we could

128
00:37:09.200 --> 00:37:24.800
apply those options to the different road. So say the widths are a little different or something with the drainage is a little different, >> right? >> As long as it meets that minimum standard and it can still be designated a rustic road, but it might be a little different.

129
00:37:24.800 --> 00:37:41.119
>> Sure, that makes sense. >> I if I if I nail it down too much, then it becomes hard and fast. It's hard to be flexible when things >> Yep. >> aren't aren't quite the same.

130
00:37:41.119 --> 00:37:58.240
Um, if it was just me looking at it or the existing people that are talking about it, that would be one thing. But what'll happen is this will live on long after we were done talking about it and new folks will come along and they'll take that try to interpret that. So, you want to be firm where you need to be and

131
00:37:58.240 --> 00:38:15.359
try to leave it open where you can. >> Exactly. So, it's not too rigid. There may be different parts of the road that need some different um standards, per se. >> So, that was also why Can I ask a question? >> M Mr. Chair, >> so Tom, would would you be talking about

132
00:38:15.359 --> 00:38:31.280
uh amending the current street standard ordinance in order to fit rustic road >> standards and or or these would be all covered by a new a new uh ordinance? >> Yes, there'll be two road standards when we're done.

133
00:38:31.280 --> 00:38:48.640
>> There'll be the regular road standard that we have today where it's a 66 foot ride of way and certain amount of d and clearing. >> Okay. >> Okay. So, this rustic road standard is separate from actually a designation of

134
00:38:48.640 --> 00:39:03.599
a of a road. >> So, one of the things I was obsessed with is do we have to have a special sign? Does it have to have the stamp? Does it have to have the ordinance? The answer is no. I got two people at MIDOT to say put up whatever you want. And as far as I'm concerned, Kemp Lincoln Road

135
00:39:03.599 --> 00:39:18.640
kind of is already a, you know, it's got the scenic road and and the invitation to be be nice to the bikes and the walkers and everybody. So, I don't think that um having the designation impacts any of the ideas on what are we going to

136
00:39:18.640 --> 00:39:35.680
do with the signs to brand it for Nisa, how are we going to um adhere to standards? Like right now, sure roads have their problems, but there is some maintenance protocol for Niswah's Camp Lincoln Road. And so I'm not asking for anything special for that. And what's

137
00:39:35.680 --> 00:39:52.640
nice about the state um statute is it basically says that, you know, the road has to be maintained, but you have that flexibility to do what you want with it based on your recommendations in the engineering. So it doesn't interfere with a specific standard from the state

138
00:39:52.640 --> 00:40:08.160
standpoint. It's you're the authorized authority is what I learned. >> So let me ask you a question. It it it's not binding. Um it doesn't provide us with funding. What what's the benefit in your eyes to having the state

139
00:40:08.160 --> 00:40:25.520
designation versus just a city designation? >> That's the that's the million-dollar question. So what it is is it's a couple of things here. It's about the continuity of continuing as a city, as a city council to say this is a valuable piece of road that we want to maintain

140
00:40:25.520 --> 00:40:40.640
its historic character. It's a flyway system for the birds and the bees and everything else. And um it's actually a designated flyway. So there's ecological, there's um city, there's beauty, there's usage. It's it's in line

141
00:40:40.640 --> 00:40:57.119
with the park plan. What it does say is it it says that if you're going to change it um or talk about changing it or have a discussion about doing something different with it, you have to have transparency with the community. And I'm not sure it I don't know what it

142
00:40:57.119 --> 00:41:13.200
says, but the obviously the full council has to vote on it. So, it's a way to first of all just document that we care about it. It is an asset and something we love in our city and we want to maintain it as much as we can for as long as we can. And we understand that if there is a day where something has to

143
00:41:13.200 --> 00:41:29.520
change, there's public notice about it. It's it's more of a um it's a little bit more official than just a city doing it on their own. A city could do it on their own, >> but a city could write it the way they want to write it. And it doesn't even have guidelines for how to write it, but

144
00:41:29.520 --> 00:41:46.240
it gives you guidelines for how to change it. >> I think to Mr. Blommer's point it was the question surrounding why the state versus ourselves right >> for transparency and requirements for um public notification of any changes to

145
00:41:46.240 --> 00:42:00.560
it. >> But those could all be put into an ordinance that we pass at the city level anyhow. >> Correct. >> So I mean we could take the guidelines from the state. We could pass those at a city level and it wouldn't even need to it wouldn't need to go to the state level at all. it could be uniform across

146
00:42:00.560 --> 00:42:16.319
the board for all the all those the roads that we're looking at for the rustic road designations. >> Yeah. You know, I think you you Tom, you could clarify that. Um because that was kind of a point. Everyone was saying to me, "Oh, you're over complicating this.

147
00:42:16.319 --> 00:42:31.599
You're trying to" Because I kept saying, "Well, how do they write the resolution? You know, what what do they have to do? Do they send it somewhere?" They say, "No, they they write the resolution, but they reference it." So, it's kind of like it's giving you the criteria for declaring it a rustic road. Now, could

148
00:42:31.599 --> 00:42:48.160
you declare it a rustic road if it didn't meet the state criteria? That's a question maybe to find out because I'm wondering from just technically using the word rustic road, is it automatically assumed that it's a state statute rustic road? But I think the state's done a nice job of helping to

149
00:42:48.160 --> 00:43:05.200
define the criteria for what it is, right? 30 45 mph check. you know, the the traffic we're going to assume on an average daily basis is in line. Check. Um what was the other thing? The scenic nature and the beauty and the historical value. Check. So, they've just defined

150
00:43:05.200 --> 00:43:20.240
it. So, to help cities do what we're trying to do here, which is decide, do we want to declare these roads rustic and in particular Campoint, if that makes sense? >> Kind of. Um, one of the things I would point out, uh, the roads in Grand View

151
00:43:20.240 --> 00:43:36.560
would never meet the traffic counts that the state is calling out. >> What what roads at Grand View? >> So, for instance, Ncomomas and Forest and Woodward. Uh, I'm sure they well exceed 150 cars per day, but I would still like to declare them as rustic. >> Really?

152
00:43:36.560 --> 00:43:51.760
>> So, >> and I don't know, maybe you'll have to find that out from the state because maybe they say, "Oh, no, that's not a rustic road unless it meets the traffic count." I don't know. >> Yeah. I mean, I I I read through what you had and I also went to the state's website. >> The the limited benefit I could find

153
00:43:51.760 --> 00:44:07.760
with the state designation versus just a strong city ordinance was um it gives us um some limited liability um protection >> for this for the state ordinance.

154
00:44:07.760 --> 00:44:25.119
>> Yes. it. So, for instance, uh kind of coming to what Dave was talking about recovery zones and that kind of thing, if we had a state designated rustic road, it gives us some liability protection if there were an accident or

155
00:44:25.119 --> 00:44:39.440
some because it's a lesser standard that we're applying to that to a rustic road. >> It would give us some protection from that liability, but it doesn't detail it. doesn't tell me >> uh you're completely immune. It doesn't

156
00:44:39.440 --> 00:44:57.359
say um if you adopt this these standards for roads such as a speed limit or whatever that will the state will indemnify the >> the city. >> Well, you know what's interesting? This is a nice discussion because what I was thinking of is why wouldn't you want to

157
00:44:57.359 --> 00:45:13.920
do it in in areas that you could given what you said? like what's the problem with referencing in the um resolution or the resolution to have the ordinance that this was kind of based off the guidelines from this resolution. Why wouldn't you want to reference it where

158
00:45:13.920 --> 00:45:30.960
it's applicable? Um and then on the roads that it's not applicable on, you know, call them out in an appendix. But I think that if you have that whatever it is, why wouldn't you want to use it? It doesn't seem it's just a just referencing it. It's not doing much. You're just looking for a reference. I

159
00:45:30.960 --> 00:45:46.000
You're not looking for us to fill out an application. >> No, no, no. That's what I said earlier. I said, "This is It got too easy." And I called the guy at at Peekquat and I said, "How did you do this?" And he said, "No, no, you're in charge over there. Nysa does what they want to do. They, you know, they they reference it

160
00:45:46.000 --> 00:46:01.839
and it's there." So, I think that you are nothing changes. There's no extra work. There's no state people we have to deal with. So, that was I thought the the aha moment in this whole process. So, why wouldn't you want to reference it? I guess is my question. >> Oh, well, I certainly think we would.

161
00:46:01.839 --> 00:46:20.640
>> Yeah. >> Yeah, >> we we could write it on there tonight. >> I I >> just make sure we're covered. >> That would be called vandalism. >> Okay. Um >> any just maybe something to add to this. So,

162
00:46:20.640 --> 00:46:35.839
you know, the state has probably the lowest level of liability protection is minimum maintenance roads, but they have to be signed as a minimum maintenance road. The city still has to keep the the

163
00:46:35.839 --> 00:46:54.240
way clear, you know, if they may not have to snowplow it in the wintertime. Um, that's probably the the lowest standard that that the state has actually put in into statute

164
00:46:54.240 --> 00:47:12.160
>> has specific criteria to it. This one um I anticipate everybody would like to see the snow plow throughout the winter to be able to use the road in its entirety. Um, it's kind of the next step level up

165
00:47:12.160 --> 00:47:29.839
from minimum maintenance, but it's sounding more like the the ultimate desire here is by the residents is to make it more of a preservation route to preserve the roadway

166
00:47:29.839 --> 00:47:46.000
in its current state for as long as possible. Is that or am I missing the your point? Well, I thank you for that. I think that what we're really saying is that it's kind of been the way it's evolved with the the town over the decades, right? Um, but we want to

167
00:47:46.000 --> 00:48:00.720
maintain the character. There's there's very uh few places like that that are this long that um involve this many residents, community visitors, everybody, and it's associated with the park. We just want to um continue the acknowledgement of the council. One of

168
00:48:00.720 --> 00:48:17.280
the things that I did some research is and Tom and I were chatting that, you know, we don't even know when that sign went up, the scenic route, but you all fixed it one year because it was kind of falling apart. And um I personally was before um a past council because I came

169
00:48:17.280 --> 00:48:34.640
to my cabin and I said, "What the heck? My uh my map doesn't match with where the road is and why is my electrical box halfway through my yard." So I mean that road has done some changes throughout the years but pretty much it's been the same and I think people want it to stay

170
00:48:34.640 --> 00:48:51.119
uh useful want it to support the level of walking and activity and biking and there yes there are trucks going through there but um it's really seasonal and I think we just want to make sure that it's continuously documented because when you look back the years it was

171
00:48:51.119 --> 00:49:08.160
talked about in several councils one of them were one council was even concerned about um the logging going on and how that impacts you know that area and someone was talking about will the canopies over the road actually protect it. I mean, there's been discussions in

172
00:49:08.160 --> 00:49:23.920
this council for decades and all the different councils have said, "Yeah, this is a great road. Let's keep it going and it's worth preserving and we just want to make sure that that continues as much as we can." And when I found this resolution or not resolution, but um

173
00:49:23.920 --> 00:49:40.960
this statute uh I thought, "Wow, this is perfect because we really fit into it nicely." And if that road was 45 miles an hour, that wouldn't be a good road. You know, it already is a 30 mph. it meets all of the criteria and why not reference it and get the extra liability

174
00:49:40.960 --> 00:49:57.680
and then document it throughout the council process that we still maintain interest in preserving that. And also it helps when future people come in and think about doing things that's already in the council. It's already it's already a documented um road. That makes

175
00:49:57.680 --> 00:50:13.359
sense. >> That helps. Yeah, >> that was a long answer, but I'm very passionate about it. >> Oh, I can tell. So that's that's great. >> But it's not just me. I I want you to make clear. I mean, my house butts right on it. But it really is amazing this past couple months how many people I've

176
00:50:13.359 --> 00:50:29.200
talked to that have been asking me when is that meeting? And I said, you you don't need to come. The council likes the road. Council maintains the road. Your taxes aren't going up. As far as I can tell, this is a a tax neutral thing. It's just a designation. That's all we're asking for is a designation that

177
00:50:29.200 --> 00:50:45.920
looks like it's coming with some benefits. So in the sense of preserving what you have out there um you know from from my perspective that means it's got a it's

178
00:50:45.920 --> 00:51:03.119
got this bandwidth of of standard applied to it. There's a minimum part to the standard and then there's also a cap or a maximum level to that. So you don't want it to

179
00:51:03.119 --> 00:51:19.200
you know, expand in the future to something that might be more of a urban style roadway. You're putting limits on it to keep it rustic. You're putting a cap on potentially the width

180
00:51:19.200 --> 00:51:37.200
of the road, the geometry of the road to keep the speeds down to something around 30 miles per hour. you know, the clear zone or sight distance is not going to be like a 45 mile per hour road.

181
00:51:37.200 --> 00:51:52.240
>> Yeah. I think the key is to stay in the framework. In other words, don't go like right here. It says um you've got to maintain the road and this is a discretionary um decision at the anticipated traffic volumes. You've got to maintain the road based on it meeting

182
00:51:52.240 --> 00:52:08.079
the criteria of 30 miles an hour. this average daily traffic number of 150 um and what you're trying to do preserving the trees and everything like that. So you designed the standard based around this road meeting the criteria like what

183
00:52:08.079 --> 00:52:23.280
do you need to support a road like that. So you would have to maintain it and it probably would make the you pave it right at the whenever the next paving comes up >> right. Yeah. So currently the way we decide what roads need to be repaved is

184
00:52:23.280 --> 00:52:41.119
based on their condition and age. So um the next opportunity for say Camp Lincoln to be paved would be the earliest is 2032. That's our next road bond cycle. Um that doesn't mean that it'll be in 2032. Um but that's our

185
00:52:41.119 --> 00:52:57.520
next opportunity. So we do a new road bond or we start planning for a new road bond every seven years. So, and Camp Lincoln would be one of the ones that hasn't been touched uh in my tenure. So, it's a candidate. So, we look at things

186
00:52:57.520 --> 00:53:13.520
like alligator cracking and the amount of potholes and things like that for when it needs to be repaved. >> Yeah, it's interesting. They they um they they define the rustic road is a road that is not on the state aid system

187
00:53:13.520 --> 00:53:30.960
that has the following characteristics and then it it lists them. So I don't know if they own that name rustic road or if the city can take liberties and decide that you guys want to do this rustic road concept and and create the standard. And I did not ask the Peekquat

188
00:53:30.960 --> 00:53:47.680
folks if they just when their map shows all the the rustic roads. They all look kind of the same. I drove some of them, but I didn't ask them, you know, did do you have a standard and it's at all are you sealing the name or did you apply

189
00:53:47.680 --> 00:54:03.839
the rustic road designation and all of that? >> I I I from my understanding of the or uh the uh statute, we we designed the the standard. >> So I

190
00:54:03.839 --> 00:54:19.520
>> Yep. I don't think that. And why would Peekquats all look roughly the same? Well, we all call Anderson Brothers when we want paving done, right? So, I mean, they have certain equipment. It does certain things. And that's why most of the roads look similar. They have

191
00:54:19.520 --> 00:54:35.839
similar trees. We all our maintenance crews have similar vehicles. >> Well, I just want to unless there's further discussion or questions, um this is really um a great opportunity to talk about this, right? We haven't really done this and we've been thinking about

192
00:54:35.839 --> 00:54:52.400
it for a while and I thank everybody for your time and does anyone have any questions for me or >> No, >> I think one thing that would be beneficial is if we u if we could ask Pquat for their language in their

193
00:54:52.400 --> 00:55:09.040
charter on how they did their definition and it doesn't mean that we need to copy it, but um just to see another example of what another city around us has pretty much the same topography as we do. Kind of where they've landed on things, we can

194
00:55:09.040 --> 00:55:25.200
>> adopt it or change it as we as we need to. But in my opinion, whatever we do for Camp Lincoln, I think should be pretty much standard through all this all the rustic roads we're looking at. I don't see any reason why we would have then three different standards.

195
00:55:25.200 --> 00:55:41.200
>> No, I don't think we would either. We'd have one. Like I explained a little earlier, we'd have some hard and fast rules that they each have to have and then there would be some guidelines >> to allow for a little variability between them because they are different to if you go down they each have a

196
00:55:41.200 --> 00:55:57.520
little different width or different training. >> I mean we could put something in our code that would say we're designating this as a rustic road and whatever that means according to our language and then it stays that way for 100 years. The other thing I was hoping to do as part

197
00:55:57.520 --> 00:56:13.920
of this is once the council designates what roads they want to be a rustic road that we actually catalog them. We >> we videotape them. We take pictures. Whatever we got to do drawings, descriptions of what they are. >> Yeah. >> And then that's preserved.

198
00:56:13.920 --> 00:56:31.040
>> Yep. >> Monica, I thank you for coming in and I look forward to seeing this conversation continue up to the council. >> Okay. Great. >> Is there Is there any necess necessity for a motion for a recommendation or is this a conversation that this committee

199
00:56:31.040 --> 00:56:48.720
would like to see be continued and brought to the council? >> I think what I would look for from my end is um we'll just reference the statute that that Monica has brought to us in our ordinance and um we'll we'll

200
00:56:48.720 --> 00:57:05.839
look at um some other examples such as PQS to see if there's it's already done that we can reference and then we'll work with to come up with something for a draft that's unique. We'll probably bring that draft back to this committee

201
00:57:05.839 --> 00:57:21.359
so that everybody here can see it again. >> Y >> and then you'll either recommend that that go to the city council for approval or not or maybe some changes or additions and the council then will take it from there. >> Great.

202
00:57:21.359 --> 00:57:38.160
>> Great. Ju just to be clear, Tom, on the the Peekquat Lakes example that we're using, are those all designated under the state statute? >> I'm not city adopted their own.

203
00:57:38.160 --> 00:57:57.599
>> I'm what I'm saying is um we need to find that out. >> Won't take long. I can >> It won't. >> Thank you very much. >> Thank you. appreciate it. >> I will probably bring this back. It'll it'll be a few months. Um we're just

204
00:57:57.599 --> 00:58:13.440
coming into some pretty busy stuff with with the road bonds, the work that's going on with that. So, I'll working on it, but it probably won't come back to this committee for a few months. >> Okay. What What kind of motion do you want? >> I don't think we need a motion.

205
00:58:13.440 --> 00:58:32.720
>> I think we're okay with that. >> Unless you just want to direct me to do what I just said. Second. >> Okay. >> Any further discussion? All those in favor signify by saying I. I. >> I. >> Opposed. Motion carries.

206
00:58:32.720 --> 00:58:48.799
Uh, with that, that' be the last topic that we would like to go over is the some updates for the 2026 >> and 2027 road bonds. >> Okay. I'll turn it over to >> I'll let Dave jump in. Um, but I just

207
00:58:48.799 --> 00:59:06.799
want to make one quick announcement based on an email I got from Mike Deie. Maybe Dave was probably stealing some of his thunder here with the Anderson Brothers. Uh, they're going to begin work on a few more of our 2026 roads on August 3rd. So if you live

208
00:59:06.799 --> 00:59:24.559
on Edna Lake Road, Edna Lane, uh Parkway Drive, and Wooddale, those are the next roads that are going to be re resurfaced or be worked on. So >> great. >> Yeah, thanks for stealing my thought.

209
00:59:24.559 --> 00:59:40.000
No, that was 2026 street improvements. So, uh yeah, so they're coming along. Um just a few easements yet to get done the remaining roads, but um little by little

210
00:59:40.000 --> 00:59:58.000
we're getting through the list and uh be good to get those paved and and grass growing on those here in the fall so we can get those wrapped up. Anything to add to that, Bill, that you would

211
00:59:58.000 --> 01:00:30.960
add? Okay. >> Yeah, we're working on for 2027 >> 2026. So that's the the next thing we just wanted to give you an update on is

212
01:00:30.960 --> 01:00:46.000
current progress status on 2027. And uh as Bill just mentioned, we we've got drawings that uh I don't know if Maggie, you can maybe flip one up there.

213
01:00:46.000 --> 01:01:06.000
How about City Hall Street? So, uh as that comes in, um you can see our line work on there for the design. Uh our goal is to be right around 60% complete with design at

214
01:01:06.000 --> 01:01:22.880
this stage so that we can uh begin to really define what kind of space uh is needed to accomplish these improvements. Um what you see in orange is

215
01:01:22.880 --> 01:01:39.359
uh what we feel would be the easement space that we'd need to be able to construct the sidewalks and drainage along the edges of the road. Uh there is established right of way. The city owns a large chunk of the land on the north

216
01:01:39.359 --> 01:01:56.160
side of city hall street. So, uh, we've got that and then there's the, uh, permissions from the DNR along the trail, uh, for some of the improvements and changes that we've made along there. But, um, some of this may look familiar

217
01:01:56.160 --> 01:02:12.960
to you uh, from initial conceptual design uh, that we laid out. It's a conventional intersection with some channeling and some raised islands um uh with some lowered pedestrian pathways

218
01:02:12.960 --> 01:02:30.400
especially where the Paulian Trail crosses there um just east of Main Street lower Colen Road. But, uh, these pedestrian refuge islands will help give, uh, folks that are walking,

219
01:02:30.400 --> 01:02:46.079
pushing a stroll or so forth a chance to get across these streets rather than try to dodge traffic across 60 to 80 feet of pavement. So, um,

220
01:02:46.079 --> 01:03:02.720
it also adds quite a bit of sidewalk. um both directly behind the curb and separated from the curb. Uh so that gives a couple of different design

221
01:03:02.720 --> 01:03:19.680
templates to work from so we can be a little bit flexible. Um it also gives a easement space that's permanent behind the sidewalks so that with streetscaping that would be the next thing coming to the city council. We'd be looking at

222
01:03:19.680 --> 01:03:37.440
having the flexibility of having um benches, uh lighting, planters, things like that to um enhance these street corridors. So, that's part of the program, too. I think we're well along

223
01:03:37.440 --> 01:03:57.680
with that. And maybe you could put up um Lakers Lane Church This is one that we've talked about quite extensively um especially with stakeholders there

224
01:03:57.680 --> 01:04:12.400
immediately abudding that intersection. Uh that gives um the extent of the project. Um just west of the intersection on Lakers

225
01:04:12.400 --> 01:04:28.480
and then down to um Woodward Drive on the east end and then uh right in front of the school replacing the sidewalks and dealing with some drainage issues

226
01:04:28.480 --> 01:04:44.480
there. And then the roundabout at the intersection. So, um it's been great having the stakeholder input there. Um having the past meetings with them, they've really provided good input

227
01:04:44.480 --> 01:05:01.440
especially to what happens with the traffic there during pickup drop off at the school. U traffic stacking and queuing needs and things like that. And so, you know, just looking at the traffic for that area, this seems to be

228
01:05:01.440 --> 01:05:18.720
the preferred alternative um both from the engineering standpoint. I think city staff and also the people that have their businesses there in the school. So, uh I think it's it's headed

229
01:05:18.720 --> 01:05:34.559
in the right direction. You can see it's pretty far along, at least 60% there. And we've identified the easement areas there. We need to work out some of the maintenance questions that still remain, especially with the school. You can see

230
01:05:34.559 --> 01:05:50.160
it goes quite a ways into the parking lot there. And so, you know, where's the dividing line for maintenance on some of that curb and gutter and walkway and that sort of thing? What what is the schools? What's the cities? Those are

231
01:05:50.160 --> 01:06:05.280
the things that we still need to talk about with them. So, Are those raised islands then? >> Yes. >> Okay. >> Um, it's not going to be obviously the type of roundabout center island that you you

232
01:06:05.280 --> 01:06:21.039
see elsewhere around the city in NESA, but you know, you'll be able to drive right over these if you have to vehicles. >> Yeah. >> It's only about 3 in high. >> But is that going to cause any issues

233
01:06:21.039 --> 01:06:38.319
with your snow plows? No. >> Yeah. But it'll it'll give designated pathways for pedestrian students to be able to get to the school safely across that uh cross path on the east side of

234
01:06:38.319 --> 01:06:54.720
the roundabout where it'll be an enhanced crosswalk with uh the uh rectangular rapid flashing beacon signs that they can actuate when they cross. So it'll slow traffic down. It'll do its

235
01:06:54.720 --> 01:07:11.760
job that way. So and the buses will be able to navigate that just fine. We ran our turn templates through this design. They can get their buses through there. So >> one thing that's kind of cool that if

236
01:07:11.760 --> 01:07:27.440
you notice the buses are actually pulled now off the main line and they're protected a little bit by that concrete pump. like when are we anticipating this could start? >> Well, it's slated as a 2027 project. So

237
01:07:27.440 --> 01:07:42.480
the project timeline is to work through a design, get it uh through approvals uh the stakeholder input final on that with the school and then um

238
01:07:42.480 --> 01:08:00.880
the goal would be to try to bid this competitively January time frame, you know, so we get good bids and going northward. Maggie, if you can find church going northward.

239
01:08:00.880 --> 01:08:33.759
I know I'm kind of tripping through these pretty fast, but you know, >> or both. Are both of those projects anticipated to start next year? >> Yes. >> They would all be one contract.

240
01:08:33.759 --> 01:08:48.719
>> So, streetscaping included? >> I'm sorry. >> Streets the streetscaping included as well. >> Yep. >> And would that be a separate contract or would that be something you try to loop in? >> We could bid it all as part part of one contract.

241
01:08:48.719 --> 01:09:09.199
>> Good. Okay. Some of the contract items that we gathered from some of the stakeholder meetings would be to uh stage the intersection disruptions and put milestones into the construction so that they're not having both Main

242
01:09:09.199 --> 01:09:25.799
Street and City Hall Street tore up and Lakers a you know Lane and Church Street at the same time being tore up. So got to somehow get people back and forth from their houses back in their soul.

243
01:09:26.799 --> 01:09:42.799
So this is kind of a eagle point of view over the church looking to the west. Um north side of the roundabout

244
01:09:42.799 --> 01:09:59.679
and we've got on street parking there. Two different styles of it actually three. 90 degree at the existing parking but by the business there just north of city hall street parallel parking by the

245
01:09:59.679 --> 01:10:14.320
church >> diagonal parking near the businesses just south of that so on city hall street we have diagonal parking as well laid out but one of the things that

246
01:10:14.320 --> 01:10:32.719
we're still looking at that you know I whether it's pie in the sky or not is the future possibility of if you could imagine City Hall Street ex extending through the church property

247
01:10:32.719 --> 01:10:49.280
>> and at some point over to um >> Wooddale >> Wooddale and so you know how would that look if you want we've kind of squared up city all street with this design so you're at a 90 degree when you're at the

248
01:10:49.280 --> 01:11:04.960
intersection not a skew, but a skew would almost fit better over there. If you think about a future street extension, um if you go straight across with this one, you've got a existing building

249
01:11:04.960 --> 01:11:27.560
there. But, you know, those are some of the things we're looking at. >> Yes. So, we're going to be talking about this at the August council meeting, the streetscaping portion of this, right? >> Yep.

250
01:11:27.600 --> 01:11:46.320
>> Well, I have a proposal on the agenda for city council consideration >> for August. >> For August. >> Will this committee see it beforehand? >> Uh, we could get it around to everybody for sure. >> Yeah. If not, let's at least email it to

251
01:11:46.320 --> 01:12:03.440
them, I think, is fair. >> Anything that comes up like that. >> Okay. >> Anything else? >> Really? Oh, yeah. >> This is well done, Dave. Thank you. Okay, good. And Bill. >> Yes. Thank you both.

252
01:12:03.440 --> 01:12:19.440
>> Yeah, it's pretty exciting. We've had a lot of feedback um from all the area businesses and stuff and everybody's really excited about what we've shown. So, >> well, it's like the it's like a it's like the goodie bag at a 12-year-old birthday party. Um,

253
01:12:19.440 --> 01:12:35.360
I too have heard from various business owners downtown and then residents and also folks that are not from the area that travel through here, why don't you have more city lights? Why aren't there more flags, banners, city items around

254
01:12:35.360 --> 01:12:51.199
town to that extent, which obviously they're used to from the Twin Cities. Um, but I think those details, if the price is right and we can keep it true to Niswah, I think would be a fantastic piece for this town, especially, and

255
01:12:51.199 --> 01:13:05.920
it's going to be important, too, of of how it's presented because I think the first pass on the downtown Niswah, um, what was that called again? >> We can't reference that in this committee.

256
01:13:05.920 --> 01:13:23.120
>> Oh, you know what I mean. um it it was it just I don't think it stuck on the first toss and we wanted to stick on the first toss here. So, um, from the from the concepts that you showed at the last public works meeting or maybe that was

257
01:13:23.120 --> 01:13:39.840
two months ago now, trying to dial that in as much as possible within reason for these budgets is going to be going to be important. But I think we'll make this downtown corridor pop. And I mean pop espe especially on a safety aspect when

258
01:13:39.840 --> 01:13:56.880
you have I'm assuming it was roughly 15 to 20,000 people for the parade again on Fourth of July and the other events too. So yeah, great work. >> Any other questions from the committee? No.

259
01:13:56.880 --> 01:14:12.640
I I I just really want to acknowledge what you guys have done because I know this has been a long process and there were a lot of people that gave their input and a lot of really impassionate people and I think this satisfies the whole bit. I think it's really well done.

260
01:14:12.640 --> 01:14:29.040
I didn't think you were going to be able to do it. >> So, Bill did it. Well done, guys. >> Okay. Well, with that, I will take a motion to adjurnn unless there's any other items you'd like to discuss. I think we've got it all. >> Nice.

261
01:14:29.040 --> 01:14:47.520
Make that motion. >> No. Okay, we have a motion. Do we have a second? >> Second. >> All right. All those in favor signify by saying I. >> I. >> Opposed. Meeting's closed. >> That's what

262
01:14:47.520 --> 01:14:58.480
had a meeting like that. >> What? Five years. >> It missed it. Well, maybe