Look at that damn thing one times. >> Jan, I apologize. >> No, that's all right. I >> maybe >> you're not the only one that's ever done that, so whatever, right? >> Hopefully by the end of the year, I'll get it figured out.
some ways. >> Yeah, it was really slippery this morning about 12 12:00. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. Saturday. It was brutal. >> I mean, it was just the side streets were like you wouldn't do 20 miles an hour cuz you ain't stopping. >> All right. Go ahead. You're good.
>> Good. We had everybody said they were going to be yours. >> Kathy's out. >> Yeah. So is Jamie. Yeah. Not feeling well. >> Just us. >> He's got it going.
>> All right. It's our monthly economic development authority meeting. It's uh Tuesday, February 24th at 5:30. With that, we'll do a roll call. >> Mayor Ryland >> here. >> Councilman Spring
>> here. Kathy Gable is absent. >> Mr. Jan Bronson here, Carl Rogers >> here. And Jamie is absent as well. Mr. Jason Baker >> here,
and Kurt Meister. All right. Thank you, Kurt. Our >> agenda. I make a motion we approve the agenda. Move. comments. Favor signify by saying I. >> I
have a copy of our January 7th meeting minutes. And I attached the 2025 work plan as requested on there. That's why it's so long. Should be 2026 right there.
Well, yeah, but I this is 2025 plan to see what I make a motion we approve the meeting minutes from January 21st, 27th J. that some of the things we'll be talking
about tonight. >> Do you need to vote on the minutes? >> Sorry. >> Do you need to vote on the minutes? >> Yeah, I was going to say >> I was going I was just looking for discussion comments. >> Oh, I'm sorry. >> Yeah, sure. I I apologize for missing last time. Um just uh in brief looking
over the number letter F the grant application just curious Kurt uh anything more on that that looks like an interesting opportunity that was denied. >> No that was yeah unfortunately it's it's denied if it's kind of like u a beauty
pageant if the person who's elected can't fulfill then they'll look at other communities. Um, so if whoever won the grant can't fulfill the rights, they'll look at us. But that was brought to me by uh Jason um
yeah, looking for to conserve energy and had a a quote from Krauss Anderson, I believe for about $15,000 to do some work in the city or to get a to do the study, not to actually do the work that study. No, that was shot down
unfortunately. Any other comments? Seeing none. All those in favor? >> I saying I >> I have public hearings. Old business.
Well, this is going to not quite as exciting because they just so the final brand brand was taken to city council for February February 17th. It was not put on the agenda and they just approved it in a special meeting five minutes ago.
>> Work has been done since it's been approved. >> What's that? >> So, so the final brand as you can see for the city of Orno is in front of you. Uh they will t to tree will now start a color process and
uh a new tagline. >> Something we need because our old one was rooted in what was it? Growing towards rooted in community growing towards toward tomorrow. Honestly, I think if we just took rooted
in community out growing toward tomorrow, that would fit better. What about a bridge for tomorrow? Bridging tomorrow >> the steering committee for that that group >> we can give it as a flexibility bridging
forward >> or for the f tomorrow or for the future or whatever you got a bridge there so or just like he said uh the simple two word bridging tomorrow I don't know >> you need anything in between or not bridging tomorrow that's
>> that's you got to bridge so you Yeah, >> I like it tomorrow. >> So, we come back with some options for us to review then or is that >> Yeah. >> Yeah, because I just got I told her that they would be finalized today and then
we'll hit the next stage now. >> Okay. >> Did you mention anything about a timeline? You'd like to wrap this up or >> No, but I'm assuming it'll be pretty >> aggressive. >> Yeah. Fast now. I think the hard part's over. I'm assuming that I don't.
>> That's what she told me is this is the part that go quicker. >> So the color office will come back to the steering committee as a whole. Did they input back or is that or does it just come back to the EDA to make that decision? I'm guessing the steering committee will
help Congress finalize what >> but the EDA would make the final decision of what steering >> just yeah >> let's make sure that's >> yeah see what she >> noted in the minutes and >> what she's doing for the next
you know the next stage of All right to her ongoing update then yeah next item is development. Yeah, we're heading towards so EDA can be a major player within the city of Oronogo if they decide to be a part of
um seeing who can take over such an example as residential lots and we use this >> um the one I used was it River Park drainage >> drain field. We talked drain field and we talked about the last meeting and so I kind of went through that development list that I had earlier and I took out
such things as like the tiff and tax abatement that was on there which is not a problem at all because that stuff is pretty intense. >> Uh so what I set my statement down here I said the city has a unique situation of growth and development. Um, you know why? Because it's close to Rochester and
a population in 2010 has recorded 1,300 residents and increases a total of 1,800 residents in 2020. And that's from census.gov. Homemstead County is projected the city to increase its population to 2575 residents in 2045.
So, it's about a 78% growth rate, which is by far the highest in Homestead County. You can find that on the Homestead County website. um BDA, you know, we could be a part of determining how this growth happens. Um
and one of the good ways to start honestly is with this lot, with this parcel of land. Um I've attached a map to your um packet. You can see the actual parcel and then this was the parcel that was divided up amongst I
think it was Majestic Homes how they kind of divided up and they to show how that they would develop that lot as a possibility with a retention pond on it and so on. Um, so we we could be a part of taking this information, kind of okaying it and
then sending it on to the city council and it would I don't know give the city council an additional okay and this is the way it should go. You know, this is what we should do or not. What the EDA has to determine and I I contacted a a colleague of mine who
does this in Canon Falls. Canon Falls has bought land. The city purchased land and developed the land into residential lots. The EDA owns every one of those lots and sells every one of those lots themselves. So, if you're interested in
buying a lot, you come to the EDA. They make the decision and that point on. If that's something you're interested in as an EDA, that's one way you could do it. Now, the way we could do it is EDA could sell this chunk of land and then whoever
buys the land divides it up, subdivides it, whatever, into individual lots, we'd want them to follow kind of the same similarity, you know, in the neighborhoods. um if the lots are on the or the parcels of land are on the outer edges of the city, that's going to be a little
different because um it's not interior in the city like the other lots that are here. So what we're kind of looking at with growth is if you know we as an EDA want to be a player in that would be fantastic and help with the growth and
the same can be done with u extension of industry that comes in you know if it's going in industrial area we can be a player with that as well. So, I kind of re I took out, like I said, some of my bullet points. And what this
affidavit or this document shows is just kind of how we would deal with those lots. So, I guess what I'm looking at, would you EDA be interested in literally looking at each individual lot? I mean, like, would we have that platted
and then we would sell each lot or would we just sell the whole thing? or help the excuse me, help the city sell the whole thing. >> Um, I would prefer to um do it individually. >> Okay.
>> I I see the benefit in selling it as one big lump and just being done with it, but I I don't think that we will get the return um that we should get by selling it that
way. Um so >> okay. >> Yep. >> I would say we have few few opportunities like this and to maximize the return on on this property I think is important in the city.
>> So would be okay with having the city pay to have the you know have it drawn out have it platted for and then individual lots. >> Yeah. So we would have to look at the extent like the cost to have the all that done. I mean, that's something that's been kind of vague that we've
gotten a little information that there would be a cost, but we don't know how exactly how much that would be. And um you know, there's there's a handful of uh unique things with this particular
lot um that could add to the cost, I think. So the question I guess as you see to lay it out you have more control of what how you want it developed by EDA doing and doing it out. It appears to me
that each one if I look at the sewer hookup each one of those houses would be pretty much up to the street. If I look at the way it played out the driveways come off the roadways. So, as far as
sewer and water, pretty much each of those lot, whoever buys the lot would kind of takes the the cost of running the sewer and the water out to the the street. The city would have a little bit going from maybe this the street
>> back of the property line, but the owner wherever they put position their house, >> Yeah. >> would take a lot of the cost of util of the util, let's put this by utilities, >> whack and sack fees. uh the utilities to do that. And so it's a thing if you're gonna to me again as I said last time
mediator to do something. If you took this piece of property and tried to divide it up and do that and sell it, it shows that we're kind of a viable committee to do something willing to move something forward. It kind of protects the other people in the
neighborhood, whatever that is individual houses. So they're they kind of rest assured that it's going to kind of go that way and what's going to go on. takes a lot of the hype out versus a developer company. So, I'm going to buy the whole thing and now I'm going to do what I want with. And this way you
can you've got eight lots. You've got eight lots there. You've got eight more people hooking up and you got eight more people coming in to pay taxes and I think you get more taxes on eight versus if you just sold the lot, one person builds in the middle of it says
this is what it is. So, I think it behooves the city to >> Yeah. to to recoup it and get as much out of it as they can. That's my thought. And I would be okay with a scenario where a builder or developer wants to come in and partner with the
city as well and say, "We're going to buy this whole um this whole section." Um, we're going to be doing the developing and then we're going to take that cost
for and that would be to have the ability to be the sole builder for those eight lots as well. So they're so we would still kind of maintain control over the lots as far as
receiving the money, but they would then get uh rights to build those or if they had better ideas on how to de to develop it, I think that that would be reasonable to have them come with a plan as well. So,
I'm not opposed to a partnership either if that's if somebody is willing to come in and say, "Well, I can put up eight houses in one summer. All my equipment's on site. We're going to tear things up one time. We've got to, you know,
remediate the drain field one time. And I can get all my subcontractors in a row to knock this out. Somebody could make, you know, eight houses in in a summer. That's
>> just get it done with >> and that could be a hybrid approach of of doing that. I like the idea of the of a developer coming in for all the
eight lots just from the standpoint of consistency as opposed to eight different contractors >> coming in and buying a lot from the city. I think that was would be a lot of trouble. >> And this is just this is just an example. It's not Yeah. So everybody
knows it's not official. I was so we could do a couple if you decide to do a an RF Q if you will to purchase this. Uh the city could put in there the specifications for the depth and the
width of the lots so it fits the neighborhood. This one's drawn in 150 by 240 I guess. So those are pretty good size lots. That's fine. I don't have a problem with that. Um it does match across the street and everything but I think that would be
Yeah, you see to me it looked like the this is like a a Riverbend development where here's a development. U in that case it was Paul Meer that came in and built eight different kinds of homes, but he it was his it was his development.
>> Yeah, >> it's just that he's buying the land now. I agree that. But at the same time, we're going to each of these homes, the Wacken Sack fees, by the time this is built could be close to right now, it's about $17,000 to hook
up. That's not counting the cost. That's just the wacken sack piece without the cost to this going into the street and connecting to sewer and water. So, this river park road is going to be pretty well cut up, too, >> by the time it's all done with. So
that's where I think the benefit of having it done once, having somebody come in and do it once. I mean, if we were to take these lots and sell these lots individually, would you be expecting that developers would come in and be like, I would like to buy lot one or lot eight. Or would you think
that individuals individuals are coming here or retail um real estate agents representing individuals coming here and saying, "We want to buy a lot for, but we want a builder out of Mano to come do this." Or
a private guy in island to do. >> I think it depends on who it is, >> but like it wouldn't be specifically if we were to buy this and develop this, plat this, we could sell it to developers or individuals. Correct.
>> Yeah. Well, Ryland, you were talking about, you know, the road wall tore up. Is it a possibility on those six lots that go across the front there that they could tear the whole road up and then if the lots are there? What my point is you put the sewer in at one time and the
water lines in one time and it comes to their lot. So if they dig something up to hook up, you're not tearing the road up again. In other words, when you come in there, you go down that whole road and you bring your pipe into the into the property line a little past the
property line. You put it in the road tore up one time and that's done. And so that being tore up and dug back down is going to be on the property not bothering the street and you might be able to get a little bit more if the utilities were into that
point. Just my thought. I mean, otherwise, like you said, one guy digs it up and the next guy comes back. >> So, >> so I guess on that particular road, I'm pretty sure that the the manholes are right down the middle of the
>> Right. They're all in the middle. >> Right down the middle. But I don't know why I don't know why because we like loops and redundancy. I don't know why we wouldn't hook up necessarily between lot and two and run an easement down through
seven in the grass and not touch the road and you only are tearing up. >> Yeah. >> What's the other side? Is it down the same? Is the other side where the houses are? Is there >> lots two through six would h they would have their hookup going through their
backyard. >> Okay. So, you're going back. So the the oh run between live one and two and three four. Okay. >> Yeah. >> And like I said that's all stuff that we information that we as a EDA can
>> aid the city with. >> But yeah there might not be because it's gravity fed and that's the way it's going to naturally drain anyway. So going to the road might actually be harder than coming and getting a
drainage easement and the utility easement down the back line and have it running through the back and then you're not tearing up any road. You're just >> But if you do that then when you sell that lot the easement that ement is always going to be 30 feet or whatever
it is wide. So the people that buy the property are giving up can't ever do anything with that property because you have that easement that comes down then someone says who's going to mow that who's going to take care of that easement? >> Well, according to the city it's the property owner.
>> Well, I understand I'm well aware. >> I I'm I have easements on four sides of my house that that I take care of. um it's not a big deal but yeah it would add an easement.
>> You know the one thing about these size these lots you know what's being proposed here they run 26 they're 40 almost 41,000 square feet versus
150 lots on 36,000 square feet. So they're >> they're one acre. They're oneacre lots. >> They're one acre lots. >> 43,000 is one acre. So some less than one. >> And for this for this parcel of land that would fit because the houses around
it. I mean, if you wanted to make them small, a little smaller lots, get more houses in there, >> it's a possibility as well. I I think sitting at the one acre lot, if we're getting eight houses at 1 acre
and nine houses at 3/4 of an acre, I don't know how much >> what are the what are the dimensions, Ryland? 150 by how deep are they? Two, >> three, four, and five. >> 2950 by 240.
>> 240 give or take. and two and six are 170 by 240. That's what the drawing is. Now that's >> so 36,000. So 43,000 is an acre. So just that's a big lot. Like those are So where where
are we at with respect to gathering the information past this this being potentially just a rough sketch as of now? Is that kind of where >> I just got this from Majestic Homes looked at this and they drew this out. It's just a example. >> No, it was great. So, I'm I'm just
curious um because I remember my first meeting and Adam was still a part of the uh EDA as well, Adam Beadling. And >> did Majestic come to the EDA through Adam or was Majestic? I'm just curious. >> I don't know how Majestic
>> We had a separate meeting. >> Were you there, Jason? >> Yeah. >> Yeah. Todd Todd. >> Okay. >> Yep. That's who it was. He lives up uac right >> the city engineer was there too just
>> yeah answering questions >> cool uh I think there's a big range of options you know and it'd be great to look at um the the costs involved from just turning it over to Majestic and having them develop and put them up for
sale to um controlling it ourselves and to see 17,000 per lot to hook up is the estimate potentially. >> Exact. >> Yeah. >> Now, by the time they get built, there's a 3% 5% increase since 2022. So, could
be between 17 and 20,000 depending when it's going to be built. But, >> so a ballpark 130 to 150,000 just for Wackac for the whole eight of them. Um, >> we have eight. Now, if we have 10, >> yeah, >> the city brings in more. That's why, you know,
I'm not against big laws. I'm just saying, hey, Riverbin has half of their lots or a third of their lots are only 100 foot width and 120 foot deep usable space because they drop off on the slope. And they're all six $700,000
homes, but you know, we could we could put in two or three more lots. I'm not saying that number is, but there's we could do more than eight lots, too, if we want to kind of help with our density and pick up more um more funds, you know, with the exchanges, but yet be nice lots to complement across the
street. >> And I think we just need to look at what is across the street. I think we need to measure measure those lot frontages and make sure that we're if those are 150, then I think we stay with 150. If those
are 120 and we can squeeze an extra lot in there, then maybe we'd talk about that. Um >> I think to go ahead. >> I was say I don't think to we get a little close to that point too. Bring in because they're on the HOA over there, right? >> No.
>> No, they're not. No. So they don't have that. Never mind. say, but still maybe bring in some of the neighborhood folks, the people that are right across the way and talk with them and have them come sit in on kind of a a meeting to get their opinion and their ideas, thoughts. And >> yeah,
>> I'm sure they'll they'll have them. >> Yeah, there there are strong opinions both ways of developing this and not developing it. So, um there will be opinions. um development is going to be key and
it's going to be beneficial for the city already did with Cedar Woods. >> Yeah, >> he invited him. He shared what he wanted to do to complement the streets, the houses across the street. So, >> I don't think anybody, you know, we don't want to
>> put 10,000 square foot lots across the houses. >> No, no, no. I think to be as conforming to the neighborhood as possible would be um ideal. And for a little bit of context, yeah, I Majestic Homes are fantastic. I actually just before this
meeting came from open an open house for Majestic Homes and they have seven lots left over in their development um on the south side of 65th Street and
they're going for 120,000 a lot at point like just under 2 an acre. >> Yeah. >> Like it's crazy. right >> what they're going for now. >> So then to look at that from again the lens of do we want to do this ourselves
or do they handle the whole thing and what's the value of that chunk of land to sell off to >> Majestic or whomever to then be >> likely the ex exclusive builder for the mall as opposed to having it open and
then having it up in the air for each one. Although within guidelines for sure, >> I have a plan that was that I used when we found our home or
bought our lot, but it shows all the different widths and the paper all around the streets here. So, we could >> send that to you share it to >> Has it gotten to the point of knowing whether or not any of these would be walkout lots? That makes a pretty big
impact on I don't I don't know. Yeah. I doubt I was just curious. I don't know if anybody would be walking field, you know. >> Yeah. Right. >> So there's I don't think it slopes properly to make that
>> to do that. I mean, they would have to be pulling dirt out of the backyard quite a bit. >> We have to call it the drain field. The name we could use. That's creeping me out. I mean, another
option would be to go the other way. I doubt it would go over very well with the neighborhood, but to turn them into uh they call them detached villas, you know, that sit on like point >> slabs. >> Yeah. Slabs and less than a quarter acre lots. You can
fit 20 or 30 of them in there, but I I doubt that would go very well. I'm not sure that every house in the area, there's a lot of walkouts in the area, but there's a handful of them that I'm looking at that I think are
um are just basements. They don't have the walk out. So, I guess from a from a starting point, it's either we could do two things. We could either consensus to um between the two points.
One point is that we have community involvement the public information meeting of what we're looking at. I don't think I think a consensus is we're going to develop it. I don't think there's any plan to put a dog park ballpark diamond park or anything like that.
>> I think there's strong feelings both ways for that as well. Even if we were to go down that discussion, I think there's strong feelings each way. >> Yeah. >> So, just looking at the Homestead GIS
maps that the lots immediately across are just under one acre. I'm trying to find their uh frontage, but >> what's on seven? What's that on lot
seven or lot seven? What is that? >> That's where the tanks were added to the building. >> Oh, the tank the buildings were on that side. >> Yeah, that was like the equipment shed and the tank shed. Yeah. Now, the other thing we should maybe
consider talking and maybe that was discussed before Majesty come in is to uh have our city engineer look at our drain field and maybe they've been involved with this plot. >> Well, he was >> he was involved with this meeting. >> Okay. So he's he's aware of what we're
doing here. >> What's that? >> The last email that I got from him stated that he wasn't sure that we could do anything with that being that is designated green space in the development from the old from the
river park development. It is designated as green space. So >> he owns it now that he owns it. So I don't know I don't know how much that changes it. So he kind of sent me he sent me an email after some of these discussions
saying he's not sure. >> Well, there I I don't think there's a question that it is developable. >> Well, that because it was designated green space, I don't know that we
can profit from it. So that's the sticky part. So we'll have to get some clarification from him. >> Why I why don't you let me contact I can contact him next week and ask about that. Right.
>> So there I think there is some some confusion on on that as well. Um I know some of the property owners right there were told that that land could never be developed. Um
well again if they were told that because you had the because you didn't have city sewer and water >> that's a true statement because you need the you need the fill but once things move on nothing's forever. >> I think that a lot of people in that neighborhood were told a lot of things
that weren't true as well. So >> you know as a realtor you say well it won't be developed because it's a drain field. When someone said what's that over there? Well, that's drain field never developed. Oh, okay. Gotcha. >> As far as drain fields being developed,
Paul Meyer is developing those two lots on his drain field. >> Yeah, it's absolutely physically developable. I don't know if what um >> because when it was the development was created, it was used as a green space.
if that rule >> if or still applies now that it's no longer >> owned for that or used for that purpose if it's still going to be considered you know allowable build it or does it still do they still have to have a green space in that community?
>> Correct. >> Yeah. So if it's part of the river park, if the acreage of river park and that is what was donated to the city as green space as to
fulfill their to fulfill their um obligation for the development. That's kind of where that that is where the sticking point is. developer calls them outlots. Outlaw A and B or whatever
>> is what is currently on our GIS. >> And I think that when Joe was looking at it, he was looking at the old contract with the developer and it was called Greenspace. >> So, we'll have to get clarification.
>> I got drawings, too. I'll show you what I got. >> That's fine. I'm just telling you what the email that I got from him. Let me >> It's a question for sure. >> Let me ask >> that's a pretty key question. Yeah. >> Yes. Yeah. >> The big question is can it be developed to start with?
>> I mean I remember hearing somewhere that whether it's green space or not the city has the availability to find equivalent acreage within the city that it could be considered green space and and flip-flop
the designation and then it would be open. I don't think there's a way that like keep it from happening. It just make make it more complicated. >> Wouldn't the city be because you looked at new development where you know the city required x amount of
development offset that say oh we're not x amount of dollars >> I would assume the city could say we're not going to use it as a development and not need the green space anymore. But
how new is that in lie of space? We'll take cash because I I think that's fairly new. >> That's why that's why Kane is busy on a lawn mower. >> I think it's just >> he's willing a lot of green space
>> to move on. I guess just to come back and see before we talk anymore about it just what is what is and then >> yeah, that has to be the first answer, right? just to for sure know if we can move forward with it. >> Yes. >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> In the meantime,
should we gather some more information from Majestic and or any other potential builders or developers or is that just one question then we'll just look at that next meeting? >> I think it's fair to the taxpayers that we should try and look at more than just
one. >> Yes. >> Majestic is a good one. here. Majestic's wonderful. Um, they have great houses. There's a couple Majestic houses in the neighborhood. Um, >> yeah, Carl, if you know someone and you're obviously you're in the line of business.
>> Yeah. Well, then Paul as well. >> Paul Meyer. >> Yeah. >> You know, Big tends to be on smaller homes, but Paul Meyer, there's there's >> Don Hurley with Castlewood is another good one. Um, but just like anything else, never hurts to get a couple opinions.
>> Yeah, for sure. Yeah, it would be great. >> Well, that's I'll share with you what I have. If there's other stuff you want to look for yourself, I think it would be better just to get some direction so we can uh discuss this a little bit more earnest. And
>> yeah, and then and then we then decide when um when to bring in the surrounding residents. For sure. >> Yeah. Well, if the land is sold, there would have to be a public hearing because it's
public land city owns selling it. But I don't know if we need a public hearing just to get their opinion on it. >> I think that I don't think we need a public hearing. I think that it would be reasonable to send out invitations to an EDA that we're going to talk about it though. >> Okay.
>> Yeah, we'll figure out the green space. Carl, if you don't mind just kind of floating the idea to different Okay. you know, see what they would say about it. That'd be great. Bring that to the next meeting. Hopefully, we can build on it.
I have collected different comments, ideas, people have sent me, kids have sent me dog park, open space, whatever. Share that with people.
>> Yeah. And I think anything that's going to cost the city additional money to maintain that area is going to be a hard hard thing to sell. >> Yeah. >> And if it does become a city park, then
we got to think about parking, added cars, driving in the neighborhood. >> Yep. >> Whole host of kind of parks. We have River Park, too. So >> like we have plenty of kind of parks for right now. So
other thoughts. >> Okay. >> All right. We'll move on. >> There's your database. >> Uh yeah, this is information for the EDA. I started working with Mel. We're going to put together a a business database on the city website. So when you come to the website, you'll see a
visitors icon and you can see the variety of businesses that are within uh the city. It'll basically be the title, uh, phone number, address, maybe a picture. We'll see if how that goes. U, it'll kind of spice up the website a
little bit. Kind of give or no, more of an independent feeling with all the businesses that were in. There's quite a few when you start looking at them within the community. So, that's just information to you guys. >> How's your business going? >> What's that?
>> How's your business going? Yeah, they're going pretty well. I went to Thompson Garage and Yeah. Yeah, they're going very well. >> Anything? >> Nay. Nay. I don't think this >> No, nothing. Nothing negative.
>> Nothing. >> You know, it's just been kind of high and things are going well. >> Yeah. >> When the two do well, three in fire safety, but the two >> Yeah. >> are up and running. I see they're
working now at the flooring. There's some people working over there now. >> Yeah, I'll get in there probably this summer. >> Okay. May meeting date. >> Yeah, I will not be able to be at the Tuesday 26th date. I'll be absent that
week. Um, so there are a couple possibilities. I could have a sub, you know, I could have a seen a colleague come in. Uh, because I I won't be there the whole week. So, it's not like I move it to Monday. Um, and I don't know if you want to move it a week ahead, anything like that, but
32. So, I am just a heads up. I will be gone. A lot of people have brothers and sister-in-laws that live in Spain. I know. So, you all know that. So, that's why I'll be gone. That's sarcasm. Please read it. So, I'll be on the 20th, which
is Wednesday of the previous week. Um so yeah >> through the 29th 30th >> through the 31st. Yeah after that >> Sunday. So possibilities
>> 18th. No that's >> I could have the meeting ready to go. Like I said, I could have everything ready, have a meeting without me. Just a heads up for said month of
May. >> We need you here, Kurt. >> We should change the date to make it fit for whatever works for you. >> Maybe zoom in from Spain. What would it be? Oh, yeah.
and your uh extend my Spanish is a Monday. >> 18th is a Monday, I believe. >> I believe I'd be able to make the 18th. >> So, you're leaving on the 20th? >> Last Monday. >> I am.
>> What month are we looking at? >> May. >> May. My daughter graduates from KU on the 16th. >> I could make How about this? Let's put May 18th. Is that okay for now?
>> I'll make an option. We could I just move it to May 18th. And >> are we the township planning zoning has a meeting here at 6:00 on May 18th? >> Um the prior week at all. Yeah. How about I don't give us anything
that we need to get to council >> has a meeting here >> maybe moves to the >> seventh will be on the 7th that >> so maybe May 14th 14th
>> tentative 14th >> if we do the 14 if we do the 14th then we just had a meeting in in April the last week of April and you're you're meeting two weeks >> okay well I just I was saying then you're just meeting two weeks right after that. So we can move it back too.
I mean >> tenative from May the >> 14th >> it's almost Thursday. >> You make good point. It's two weeks but >> 5:30 >> just about three weeks. >> We're still holding meeting. So I guess I didn't make any to me. I just wanted to make that >> 14th tentative tentatively the 14th.
Look everybody's look at their schedules when we come back in my god is March. we come back at the end of March. You have anything that I'll put it back on the agenda again if anything pops up
changing it. I appreciate >> meeting April 28th inpe would have gone on the June council stuff, right? Yes. >> Well, let's I don't >> we'll see how the April meeting goes or
the March meeting in April. >> Okay. >> So, agenda item for April to solidify May. >> Yes. >> It might be so far be nothing there to
>> so we can certify. Yeah. Certify that. But as of now, we'll put the 14th. And if something changes, like I said, I'll put on the agenda, let you know. >> Okay. >> All right. Go back. >> Yeah. One of the work plan goals we had
for 2025 was to connect basically city Warrenoko with um the Douglas Trail. And those of you familiar with this, the map I put here, the is it what was road? Is that how you pronounce? >> Mhm. Also, Lake Shady. That
uh red line there goes up to that roundabout. And once you get to the roundabout up there, it is a paved walking path from that point all the way to Douglas Trail. So for the city, what would be fantastic is if we had a biking trail starting at
the overpass down here at the bottom of the map because that pretty much connects both sides of the city and it is paved right now. I was in contact with DNR. It took a long time for them to get back to me and I called
several times and uh was her name? Luis Thompson informed me the DNR does not have the authority to participate as the authorizations outlined by legislation identified in the master plan and she sent me a copy of the master plan was 1980 and does not include or nogo. So
what we're looking at is the city itself kind of making doing this ourselves. What I mean by that is I'm not saying go out and repave a new sidewalk or anything, but I think starting with some small signs would be just beneficial.
>> You know, I'm going to talk to pain. >> There's a six foot right away on either both sides of that. >> Okay. >> It's not >> if we had a just a a small sign like if you go to the the park system, the trails throughout Rochester, they'll
have signs. will say Foster Aaron 0.5 miles and has just an arrow. Something as simple as that would be way to get us on track for this for the future. >> The city limits stops.
You see the Wisita road. >> Yeah. >> About where the T and A in that word, that's where the city limits stop. >> That's by 120th. That's just right there. >> Yeah, >> that was either road. >> Okay, so 128th >> even we had a sign,
>> you know. I don't I don't see cuz it's already paid. The road's already paid. >> If you look across the road, you see where it says Fifth Street Northwest. >> Yeah, >> there's a line a property line. >> Oh, okay. >> That's the city limits. >> Okay. >> So, if we just bring that across,
that gets you pretty close to where the city limits on the corner. I don't think makes any difference in our decision- making, but that's that's where the city limits goes into the township. >> The Pine Island Township. >> Yes.
>> Okay. >> Um, but I want to talk to Payne next week just to see his view of it at all. Do you think we could do any striping or arrows, you know, like the parallel
signs you see painted for? >> Yeah, that'd be something I could definitely ask. >> Not saying in this in the right way, but on the shoulder. >> Yeah, that's just a thought. And it could be on either side, too. The six foot is on either side, I believe.
>> Okay. Realistically, I don't know that any kid is riding going to be riding that to the elementary school from fifth grade and under. >> I'm not sure kids, but I do know parents
go up to Douglas Trail that way. >> Yeah. But I mean, I think we were designating as a safe routes to school, right? >> Yeah. So >> even getting to the high school from that >> that's a that's a hike.
>> I don't I don't even know what the mileage on get over there. Yeah, I I agree with that. I was like but I figured because when you go up to that road, they've already got it, you know, a p separate
path there and there's access to it >> at the roundabout. >> At the roundabout, it's just be just this little I say little, but I'm not putting the asphalt down by any means. >> Be great to connect and that be a
connection to the trail for sure for recreation. >> Yeah. Yeah. This wouldn't be safe to school. >> Yeah, that would be something. >> But like I said, I'll be talking to T about it to see what we can do to if there's a possibility out there from the
city's point of view. uh because obviously the DNR has nothing to do with this and that was part of our work plan for 2025. >> Okay. And if there signs see what Kane says
and we can always touch base with the township about extending the signs if they'd be willing to do that up to the roundabout or whatever. Yes. Okay. And that's all I got. Next meeting is March 24th,
5:30. Goes well. I be at that meeting for sure. >> 5:30 has worked out. Okay with everybody so far. Okay, it's good. Make a motion to adjurnn. Second
favor say I. >> I 62. >> All right. Thank you everybody.