WEBVTT

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

NOTE
MEETING SECTIONS:

Part 1 (Video ID: fPfEZpmPCXM):
- 00:01:03: Park and Recreation Committee Meeting: Roll Call and Agenda
- 00:04:40: Reviewing Trail Gap Priority List and System Overview
- 00:13:39: Trail Gap #1: Bavaria Road East and Project Costs
- 00:14:31: Trail Gap #2: County Road 11 to Watermark Neighborhood
- 00:15:34: Trail Gap #3: County Road 11, Wetland Issues
- 00:16:57: Trail Gaps #4, #5 and #6: Bavaria Road and More
- 00:19:47: Trail Gaps #7, #8, and #9: Maline Creek, Rolling Acres
- 00:20:53: Trail Gap #10: State Highway 7 Access
- 00:24:46: Trail Gaps #11, #12 and #13: Auburn Drive, Woodstone
- 00:27:42: Completed Projects, Pedestrian Improvements and Highway 5
- 00:31:54: New Trail Gaps: Public Support, Timeline and Funding
- 00:40:33: Trail Prioritization: Correcting Ranking and Discussion
- 00:44:18: Overpass Connection to Stiger Lake: Potential New Trail Gap
- 00:58:10: Recommendations for Working with County and State Partners
- 01:06:11: Listing by Dependency and Taking Advantage of Opportunities
- 01:15:10: Community Member Feedback, Webpage Communication and Education
- 01:16:41: Motion to Adopt Trail System List; Motion Carried
- 01:18:24: Emerging Issues: Artwork, Sketch Plat, Park Updates


Part: 1

1
00:01:03.680 --> 00:01:18.320
like 10 seconds. >> Okay, we're we're uh good evening. It's time for our park and wreck committee meeting. It's May 18th. Um we'll start quickly with just a roll

2
00:01:18.320 --> 00:01:34.640
call. So anybody at home knows who's on the dis here. We'll start with >> my name's Owen Beckers, >> Lake Farber, >> Alex Han, >> Adam Der, Larry Schulz, >> Amanda Cahill, >> Mary Larson, >> and Alyssa Nelson, staff.

3
00:01:34.640 --> 00:01:52.000
>> Okay, thank you. Um, the first item on our agenda or announcements and open forum. Uh, does anyone in the audience want to address the committee? No. See no one here to do that. Uh,

4
00:01:52.000 --> 00:02:09.119
okay. We'll move on to item three. We want to adopt the final agenda. Um, anybody have anything they'd like to have different on the agenda add? If not, motions in order to accept the

5
00:02:09.119 --> 00:02:25.120
agenda. >> Motion to approve. >> Okay. Motion is made. Is there a second? >> Second. A motion made and seconded to adopt the final agenda. All in favor signify by saying I.

6
00:02:25.120 --> 00:02:42.000
>> Oppos say no. Motion carried. Thank you. On to the regular agenda. First item is approval of the committee meeting minutes from our last meeting which happened to be April 20th, 2026.

7
00:02:42.000 --> 00:02:57.440
Those minutes were sent to you. Uh, does anyone uh want to make a motion to accept those minutes or are there any corrections? >> I just have a question, Alyssa. Um,

8
00:02:57.440 --> 00:03:14.400
that meeting was like quite indepth and very lengthy with our discussion. And I know the meeting minutes aren't supposed to reflect everything that was discussed, but like is there a way to convey to the public

9
00:03:14.400 --> 00:03:31.280
or those reading the minutes like, you know, that these were our recommendations, but these are the city's next steps or like this is because there was a lot of discussion around timelines and um what the city,

10
00:03:31.280 --> 00:03:48.400
you know, was going to be doing um to get new, you know, quotes and and things like that. I just think someone reading it might not be as well informed about like the process next. >> For sure. We can absolutely if the

11
00:03:48.400 --> 00:04:04.319
committee so desires include a next steps on the meeting minutes. Let's see at least one head nod. >> Great. Do you in favor of that? >> Then um the motion would be approve committee meeting minutes for April

12
00:04:04.319 --> 00:04:25.199
20th, 2026 as um discussed. I approve to uh or I motion to approve the committee meeting minutes for April 20 26 with the addition as discussed. >> Is there a second to that motion? >> Second

13
00:04:25.199 --> 00:04:40.160
>> by Blake. Any further discussion? If not, all those in favor of the motion signify by saying I. >> I opposed say no. Motion carried.

14
00:04:40.160 --> 00:04:57.520
On to our main agenda item, which is review of the trail gap priority list. And uh with that, I'm going to turn it over to Alyssa. >> Wonderful. Thank you, chair and committee members. And before we start, just a quick housekeeping note. Um we do

15
00:04:57.520 --> 00:05:13.039
have the new AV system and new microphones, so they are movable. Um if you need to get them closer to you, please do so. We want to make sure everyone can hear you at home. Um, but let's kick it off to talk about trail gaps. Um, I know there's some new faces um to the committee, so we wanted to

16
00:05:13.039 --> 00:05:28.240
talk a little bit about what our trail gaps are. Um, and then we'll delve into uh Highway 5 and how Highway 5 has impacted our trail gaps um in a positive way and then we'll talk about what do our new priorities look like. Um, and

17
00:05:28.240 --> 00:05:43.840
specifically, are we missing any trail gaps as part of that too? Um, so but first, what are trail gaps? It's really an unconnected segment of our trail system currently. Um, so and you'll see on a map I'll have some uh images of what our trails currently look like. Um,

18
00:05:43.840 --> 00:05:58.800
really it's if we're trying to get from point A to point B, making sure people can do so. If there's a a missing piece in there, um, that's what we consider a trail gap. Um and really what they um occur to uh why they happen is mostly

19
00:05:58.800 --> 00:06:14.960
because of older developments um or sometimes we do a development here. This one doesn't come in for years later. Um and that connection wasn't really added as part of that first older development. Sometimes it's related to physical barriers such as wetlands. Um needing to

20
00:06:14.960 --> 00:06:31.199
add in specific roadway structures. Sometimes it's not having rightaway access or easement access. So there's a variety of different on why these trail gaps exist. Um and then what is the trail gap priority list? Well, the committee uh a number of years ago um I

21
00:06:31.199 --> 00:06:48.800
think 2020 2019 >> 19 I have document from >> um the committee did a deep dive into the city's trail system and brought forward these gaps that are well known and some that aren't necessarily well known within our trail system. Um and

22
00:06:48.800 --> 00:07:05.280
then as part of that there was a ranking discussion and the ranking was based on a variety of things. Some of that was engineering difficulty, some of it was cost. Um some of it was community impact. Um and then the trail gaps that were identified were then ranked in this

23
00:07:05.280 --> 00:07:21.520
priority system. Uh how does staff use that? Well, staff uses it to one um when we're having conversations with developers um we're bringing these trail gaps forward. So, if there's a development that happens to be adjacent or near trail gap, um we're bringing

24
00:07:21.520 --> 00:07:36.960
that forward as a recommendation to be included in a development even before it hits um the parks and recreation committee table because we've already identified it. Um we also bring that to our other government agency partners such as Carver County or the state of Minnesota when we're doing

25
00:07:36.960 --> 00:07:53.840
transportation projects of saying, "Hey, we know this gap is here. we're doing a roadway or you're doing a transportation or a roadway project alongside that trail gap. Let's group them together. Um so we use it in that way. Um and then in historic, we've also used them to help

26
00:07:53.840 --> 00:08:08.800
uh complete trail gaps too. Um and because there is a ranking list that helps us understand um funding priorities for that. And then I should note before I just jumped on to that um my last bullet point is we do review this periodically

27
00:08:08.800 --> 00:08:25.520
try to annually just to ensure that this priority list is accurate which we know it's already not. Um so we want to make sure that it's up to date and we also want to make sure that if there's any trail gaps that are missing from here that they are added which back um at the last conversation this committee had about the trail gaps, two additional

28
00:08:25.520 --> 00:08:43.039
gaps were added. So we know that there's some out there. We just want to make sure that they're highlighted because again, we might not be able to fund them all on their own, but when we're having these conversations with partners, we can get them added as part of larger projects. So, this is the ranking as it sits today

29
00:08:43.039 --> 00:08:59.360
with a big asterisk um that we do have to make some modifications to and I'm sure we'll talk about that um as part of the discussion. Um, but I'm just going to highlight the top three and we're going to go through each of these individually. Um, but the top three, at least to this list, are Bavaria Road

30
00:08:59.360 --> 00:09:15.279
East, um, which is Highway 5 to 82nd Street or County Road 18. Um, County Road 43, there's a section between the Watermark Development and the Stoplight at County Road 11. And then County Road 11, um, the Shioval neighborhood to Red Fox Drive. And I'm going to throw out

31
00:09:15.279 --> 00:09:30.720
another one because we know it's big on this list. It's eight here. We know it's higher. um is the Lake Mitanka Regional Trail westward connection to um the Lake Bridge development. Like I said, I'm going to go through each of these, but before I do, I'm you've seen this slide

32
00:09:30.720 --> 00:09:46.640
before. I've shown it multiple times, including the last com uh last meeting. Um but just a a quick highlight of our system overview. Where are we sitting today? When it comes to just our abundance of trails and sidewalks, City of Victoria has over 50 um miles of them

33
00:09:46.640 --> 00:10:02.959
um split almost even between the and sidewalk connections. Um this specific number was brought um together in 2023. So we know that we've increased this number since then. Then we look obviously as a community park system as we're looking at, you

34
00:10:02.959 --> 00:10:18.240
know, Carver Park Reserve or things like the arburetum. We have over 100 miles of trail and sidewalk available to our residents. And if you're interested in what that looks like, um these bold blue lines on the screen are

35
00:10:18.240 --> 00:10:34.640
exactly what our trail system is. Um we have a number of them obviously hitting Carver Park Reserve, but just even in our community alone, we have um a good chunk of uh trail and sidewalk. >> Yeah, I love this map. >> And I will have an illustration >> see the gaps.

36
00:10:34.640 --> 00:10:52.000
>> Yeah, you can. And I will have an illustration later um at my end of the slide where I will have this map a little bit bigger. Um, and then I will overlay it with the gaps. Um, so you can see the connections as they relate to this larger trail system. Maybe I brought it forward. I didn't

37
00:10:52.000 --> 00:11:10.880
remember that. Yes. So the gaps are the ones the the dotted red lines. Um, the other piece I noted um, one of the topics that has been brought up to by this committee but also the senior advisory committee that we have is we we

38
00:11:10.880 --> 00:11:26.480
have gaps. However, um what's really important is the communication that we are working on these gaps or the communication between the challenges of why these gaps exist and we'll go through that. Um but then also leveraging the trails that we have. We have over 53 miles of trail and sidewalk

39
00:11:26.480 --> 00:11:43.519
just maintained and owned or within the city of Victoria over a 100 miles between Carver Park, the city of Victoria and the Arboritum. Um and just a small section of the arboritum for that matter. Um so making sure that people are aware that these exist. So between the two committees they created

40
00:11:43.519 --> 00:12:00.240
what's called walking routes um really creating these um age friendly routes around the city of Victoria um to really highlight and emphasize and give people the ability if they're looking to explore their neighborhood um explore just the other parts of the city connect

41
00:12:00.240 --> 00:12:16.000
to different parks um and different areas that they can just hop on a bike or walk there or take a car because all these are parkable as well. um and take a a walk from one to I think the highest is about five miles um in length. So, it's just an option for people to to

42
00:12:16.000 --> 00:12:33.600
leverage our trail system as it currently sits today, recognizing that we do have trail gaps, but they're also very challenging trail gaps at this point. Let's get past this one. And then a quick national comparison to where we sit today. Um we don't have market

43
00:12:33.600 --> 00:12:49.040
cities. That's not necessarily the easiest information to find, but something that is on our list that would be great to have. Um, and market cities would be comparable cities to us within Carver County or the metro area that are similar size, scope, growing at the same

44
00:12:49.040 --> 00:13:06.399
rate capacity. Um, however, we do have national averages from the National Recreation and Parks Association. Um, on a national average, each city has about 19 miles of trail that they maintain. Um, cities less than 20,000, which is where we sit, has four miles of trail.

45
00:13:06.399 --> 00:13:24.639
If you bump that up um to sorry not 10 but 20,000 to close to 50,000 um it's 10 miles of trails and we're sitting right about 25 plus. So we're doing well on a national comparison. Let's go through the gaps. But before I

46
00:13:24.639 --> 00:13:40.000
do that, I just want to stop here and see if there's any preliminary questions. >> All right. >> Oh, are you going to talk more about the funding? We can touch on the funding. Yes. Okay. Y >> So, let's talk about the gaps first. Um,

47
00:13:40.000 --> 00:13:56.880
so gap number one is Bavaria Road East. It's about 1.2 miles and it's our first priority um out of the 13 that we've identified. Um, you can see it on the screen. Um, and I do want to note, and we'll talk more about this piece specifically, but this is one of them

48
00:13:56.880 --> 00:14:12.800
that will be completed as part of the Highway 5 project. Um, in comparison for cost scope, we do because this is something that's recent. Um, this trail gap of one uh roughly a mile costs um just shy of a million dollars to

49
00:14:12.800 --> 00:14:31.360
complete. When we're talking about budget and costs, um these aren't necessarily the simplest things. They are expensive. Trail number two is that county road 11 to watermark neighborhood. Um and I do want to And I have this later too, but

50
00:14:31.360 --> 00:14:47.279
there's a small piece that was already completed um just right over here to the Green Crest neighborhood. That's right here. Um so that part was already established. So now we're just trying to work on the remaining piece. You can see there's a trail connection up here already. Um so that's about a half a

51
00:14:47.279 --> 00:15:03.680
mile. Um and really the challenging piece to this is we do not have rightaway access. This is along a county road. um which happens to be one of our challenging issues for a lot of these part or a lot of these trails um since we don't have easement right away. we

52
00:15:03.680 --> 00:15:18.160
don't really necessarily have the authority to make trail decisions um at this point. And it has been council's priority and policy then when it comes to ones that are allowing county roads, state roads, roads that are not within the city's jurisdiction um to wait for

53
00:15:18.160 --> 00:15:34.000
there's till there's transportation projects going on. Um similar to what we're seeing with Highway 5. County Road 43 is on the county's list for realignment. They don't have a deadline for that yet. Um, but we do know that's going to come eventually and when they

54
00:15:34.000 --> 00:15:52.320
do, this is one of those that we will be bringing forward as a priority for the city. Number three is along County Road 11. Um, so we're just south of the stop lightss here um connecting the Chavevel neighborhood um to part of the southern

55
00:15:52.320 --> 00:16:08.320
end of Deer Run um over by Red Fox Drive. There's a little bit of a trail connection here. Um there's a few of managing through this, whether it's through crosswalk, um trail on either the west or the east side. Um no matter

56
00:16:08.320 --> 00:16:23.360
how you split it, it is expensive. There's significant wetlands and elevation changes in this space, which makes this road uh and this trail development a very expensive one. Um and there has been conversations um of just this neighborhood asking for a crosswalk

57
00:16:23.360 --> 00:16:40.320
just to even get across County Road 11. Um again, this a county road. We don't have any jurisdiction on crosswalks and the county's policy for any crosswalks is there has to be um roadway improvements done first. Um so again, county road 11 is one of those that

58
00:16:40.320 --> 00:16:57.800
needs to be um improved upon. Um so county's policy is to wait for those improvements to happen before you add crosswalks. Um it is just shy of.3 miles um in size.

59
00:16:58.959 --> 00:17:15.600
Trail number four is Bavaria Road West. So we talked about Bavaria Road East. This is on the other side of the road. Um this part is completed. So there would just be this small section to 80th Street um down to uh 78 or up to 78th

60
00:17:15.600 --> 00:17:33.360
Street. Uh it's just shy of a mile in itself. Um and due to the arburetum area transportation plan and Bavaria road east being completed um the county did uh decide to focus on east and not put any allocation towards the west project.

61
00:17:33.360 --> 00:17:53.679
We wanted to focus on one number five uh is the paving of the Lake Mitanka regional trail. This is also going to be completed as the high as part of the highway 5 project with Carver County. Um just as a tidbit. Um so the trail that's behind us, the Lake

62
00:17:53.679 --> 00:18:09.520
Minnetonka Regional Trail, was previously owned by Three Rivers in the City of Victoria. Um within the last year, that ownership was transferred to Carver County. Um so now they're the ones that own and manage the trail all the way up until um the county's

63
00:18:09.520 --> 00:18:26.000
boundary um when it hits the Henipin County boundary once it goes north. and then it goes back to Three Rivers. Um so again, Carver County is leading this project, but it will be done. It's about a little over a mile. Um there's this section here and then there's a smaller section out to the north. The entirety

64
00:18:26.000 --> 00:18:42.640
of it will be paved as part of the Highway 5 piece. >> Is that one this summer or a different time >> frame? I don't have that information off the top of my head. Um of exactly when that is done. >> Oh, wait. I see it. when it might be on

65
00:18:42.640 --> 00:19:00.080
there midsummer. Okay, this midsummer to winter 2026. >> I believe they're going to try and do it alongside the rest of the trail projects and we'll get into that in a second. Trail number six um is along County Road

66
00:19:00.080 --> 00:19:16.720
43, Church Lake Boulevard. Uh we saw a part of this up above. Now we're just going farther south over to Watserman Lake Preserve and Marsh Lake Road um and tellers. So, this is a longer stretch um in between these two areas and then also the connection to Wasserman Lake

67
00:19:16.720 --> 00:19:33.280
Preserve. We hear about this one um quite frequently because the Waserman Lake Preserve is a well-used park and people do access it especially for the fishing element um and folks that are from the northern areas like Ambergate or Rap City Watermark um try to walk to

68
00:19:33.280 --> 00:19:47.840
Westerman Lake are not able to do so without entering or walking alongside the county road. Um the challenge again with this one is um the rightway access um and the multiple crossings that are needed for this um for this trail

69
00:19:47.840 --> 00:20:07.840
project. Number seven is the safe cross at Maline Creek Park. Um currently we do have a section of trail that just ends um alongside County Road 5 with the tree clearing and the brush clearing along Highway 5. this trail um is a lot more

70
00:20:07.840 --> 00:20:23.840
visible than it used to be. Um so you can very clearly see it if you go east um from city hall um along Highway 5. Um and then this project was specifically to do a safe crossing underneath to connect to the south end of Victoria or

71
00:20:23.840 --> 00:20:44.320
the southern part of Highway 5 in Victoria. Um connecting into Matteline Creek Park. This will be completed as part of the Highway 5 project. Number eight um is the Lake Bridge neighborhood connection as part of the Lake Mitanka Regional Trail. Um so Lake

72
00:20:44.320 --> 00:21:00.880
Minnetonka Regional Trail is headwatered at Kirk Lock and Park. This would extend the trail um all the way to our current trail section which connects Lake Bridge to the Watermark neighborhood. So continue along that regional trail. This

73
00:21:00.880 --> 00:21:16.320
would be a partnership with Carver County. um as Carver County is the owner of the regional trail, so we'd have to work with them on that. But really the challenging piece that comes into this and you can't quite see it on the screen, but there's multiple property owners that are alongside this. Um we

74
00:21:16.320 --> 00:21:31.840
haven't necessarily had the policy conversation recently, but previously council had did not uh want to do any sort of eminent domain um over uh property owners uh related to trails. Um, so really this one is dependent on

75
00:21:31.840 --> 00:21:46.799
some sort of development happening for either of those neighbors. Um, there's also a large parcel um, right in this area which will be brought to you at a later date. Um, if you've been here a couple of years, you might have remembered the Amira project that has been brought to our table. That project

76
00:21:46.799 --> 00:22:02.080
is um, no longer, but there's somebody else at the table now um, that is interested in this site. And so we'll be bringing that back to you um as part of a sketch plat again um and talking through that um and then of course we'll talk specifically about this trail

77
00:22:02.080 --> 00:22:20.960
because the more and more we can get that develop um the better it will be for us. So the closer we'll be number nine also will be completed as part of the highway five project um is along rolling acres road um really from

78
00:22:20.960 --> 00:22:36.720
this trail that is just north of Freeborg all the way up into where the trail connects again just south of the highway 7 and Rolling Acres intersection. Um, this is a fun trail because as soon as you just continue walking, there's just a sign that says dead end. Um, but it's at the end of the

79
00:22:36.720 --> 00:22:52.600
trail, so you've already made the distance. Um, so we're really excited to remove the sign and actually complete this trail. Um, it's just shy of five acres. Um, and it's been a great partnership with Fer County to get this one done.

80
00:22:53.840 --> 00:23:10.720
Trail gap number 10. Um, we've been focusing really on the southern end of Victoria, but now we're kind of moving to the north end. This is along Highway 7, um, which connects the neighbors that live along Smithtown or Virginia Shores Circle, um, in that area to the Lake

81
00:23:10.720 --> 00:23:27.919
Minnetonka regional trail, which really then brings them to the rest of the Victoria community. Um, so this has been one of those priorities um, that has been highlighted year after year. It's a very small connection. Um we just connect from this culdevac here all the way down um to the lake or to the Lake

82
00:23:27.919 --> 00:23:43.200
Minnetonka regional trail. Um however um what you can't see as part of this image or what you may kind of see as part of this image um is that requires a bridge alongside the ravine um which happens to add additional cost. The other piece to

83
00:23:43.200 --> 00:23:59.520
this is that um it's alongside a Mindot right away. This being a state highway. Um the positive news is is that the um the city of Shorewood is partnering with a lot of cities in this area, including the city of Victoria about doing um

84
00:23:59.520 --> 00:24:15.120
improvements to State Highway 7. Um so as we're continuing to have those conversations and as MDOT's continuing to lead that area or that that project of improving Highway 7, um we will be bringing our trail projects forward along with other safe crossings that

85
00:24:15.120 --> 00:24:30.720
might be found in this stretch um of Highway 7. Hey, Alyssa. >> Yeah. >> Um because I love your new um map and safety improvement information. The um

86
00:24:30.720 --> 00:24:46.080
the rolling acres one that you just spoke to um isn't isn't highlighted on here. The trail. >> Yeah, let's get that. >> Um I think just people would probably ask about that or love to see that.

87
00:24:46.080 --> 00:25:08.960
>> Yeah, good call. There we are. Uh number 11. Uh this was added in 2022 when uh a resident and the neighborhood um reached out to the city about making an additional connection um along Highway 5. This is west of

88
00:25:08.960 --> 00:25:25.679
downtown. Um this is the Auburn Drive neighborhood right across the street from the Lake Bridge connect uh neighborhood, but making a connection. Um, so these residents have access to uh the the regional trail as well as downtown and the rest of our trail system. Um, so this one was added um

89
00:25:25.679 --> 00:25:44.720
that year. It's about uh 0.5 miles in length, so not extremely large. However, um we did do some preliminary cost analysis of that at that time and in 2022 this stretch was about $2.5 million. So this is not a a significant

90
00:25:44.720 --> 00:26:02.000
uh s well it is a significant cost for such a short trail. Um but it is a good indicator of just again how expensive these trail projects can be. Um one we're again on state um rightway um but it would also include some sort of bridge. There is a protected stream um

91
00:26:02.000 --> 00:26:18.400
that is along here. Um you can slightly see it there as well as needing a boardwalk through about thousand ft of wetlands. So um that increases the instrumentally >> and the current construction that's going on for the roundabout there doesn't change what's on what's pictured here.

92
00:26:18.400 --> 00:26:38.080
>> It would not. No. >> Number 12. Uh this was added just recently to the committee's list. Um and this is the connection between Waterford Lane and the Waterford development. Again, we're on the north side um by Highway 7 connecting them to the Rolling

93
00:26:38.080 --> 00:26:55.679
Acres uh development. Again, we're in county road or uh highway uh state highway access here in their rightway. Um and it's another one of those because there's already talk about highway 7. Um these are one of the areas that we will be um highlighting to that group about

94
00:26:55.679 --> 00:27:12.000
and creating um that trail connection through that project. And then the last is a safe crossing um at Woodstone Drive. So, County Road 43 is right here. Um, if you can remember, we just had, I think it was number two

95
00:27:12.000 --> 00:27:27.919
or number three, this green line here that would connect um, County Road 11 all the way to this trail here. So, this is just another crossing from the Deer Run neighbors um, to access that trail system. Um, this again is county road

96
00:27:27.919 --> 00:27:42.559
jurisdiction um, and would also need to stripe a pedestrian crossing which we we briefly touched on is um, left within the county's hands. Um, is one of those that as county road 43 gets developed um we will include this as part of our

97
00:27:42.559 --> 00:28:04.000
priorities um with the county. I did want to highlight um that we have had some completed projects as part of this um task and this priority list. Um so the first one is there was an addition uh to our county road 18 trail

98
00:28:04.000 --> 00:28:22.120
alongside uh Lions Park. So, this is one um that has been added as part of that park or as part of this trail gap priority listing um which has been helpful and that was also done in conjunction with Carver County and reconstructing or doing some improvements to County Road 18.

99
00:28:22.320 --> 00:28:36.960
Uh Coochia Lane when the Brookmore development came through um we worked with the developer to make sure that there was a trail connection from the north end of Coochia Lane to the south end of Coochia Lane. having that trail connection being crossed off the list

100
00:28:36.960 --> 00:28:55.200
and then that small section um of County Road 43 which I mentioned earlier which connected the Green Crest residence um to County Road 11. And then the other one which is part of the Bavaria Trail project, but we did do

101
00:28:55.200 --> 00:29:12.240
a small piece of the Bavaria Trail from Hill Point all the way to County Road 18. again that it's going to be extended as part of the Highway 5 project all the way to Highway 5. And I also want to touch on some of the safety pedestrian improvements that are

102
00:29:12.240 --> 00:29:28.240
also occurring as part of Highway 5 that aren't included on the priority list. Specifically wanting to call out um that there will be a trail underpass, the Lake Minnetonka uh regional trail and underpass installed at um Rolling Acres Road. So, that is something that was not

103
00:29:28.240 --> 00:29:44.799
on the list, but is also a really huge win for our community. Um, another one is a trail overpass um at 78 Street entering into our downtown. Currently, we don't have um any sort of crosswalk or uh crossing space um for that area.

104
00:29:44.799 --> 00:30:03.200
So, we're really connecting um this whole edge of town to our downtown area through this ad. Um, so a couple different ones that we thought uh to highlight and we thought were important as part of this. Now I kind of highlighted the trail gaps

105
00:30:03.200 --> 00:30:20.159
that will be completed as part of the highway 5 project. I am showing the graph again and the check boxes that are above are the ones that will be completed. So again that's Bavaria Road East. We're checking that one off the list. um the the paving of the Lake Matanka Regional Trail, um the safe

106
00:30:20.159 --> 00:30:35.120
cross at Meline, and then the rolling acres road um piece as well. Would you would you say like we should just remove the other Bavaria trail because

107
00:30:35.120 --> 00:30:50.240
they've decided on the one side of the street? You know, that is a great question for the committee. Um and there's a few different ways to think about it. One, you can say, "Yep, we've already done one side of the the trail. Um, and we're going to leave it off the

108
00:30:50.240 --> 00:31:05.520
list." Um, however, again, like this is more of a guiding document to staff and council when we have conversations with our partners and developers. So, once it gets taken off the list, um, 10 years down the road when it's a new person sitting in my seat or new people sitting

109
00:31:05.520 --> 00:31:21.919
in your seats, they might not recognize that need and it might not be brought to the table. Um, so just something to think about. Yes, it can absolutely be removed. It could also be shuffled down on the priority list too. Um recognizing that we did complete the other part or

110
00:31:21.919 --> 00:31:38.080
you guys could say we like it where it is and it's still a larger priority for our community too. There's no wrong answer. >> Probably depends a bit on a bit upon if they're putting crosswalks on, right? People can cross the street then you definitely you know I feel like the need for a west side would go down

111
00:31:38.080 --> 00:31:54.799
drastically if there's crosswalks. If there's not, maybe it stays on the list but moves down >> and there's not a crosswalk at the end of the trail >> on the south side. Right. Makes sense. >> So this is the priority ranking if we were to remove those. Um so we still

112
00:31:54.799 --> 00:32:10.480
have a number of left to complete. Um, and I should have noted previously, um, these two, when the committee first completed this in 2019, um, they reviewed them and did, uh, extensive conversations about ranking them between

113
00:32:10.480 --> 00:32:27.279
environmental sustainability and sensitivity, engineering difficulties, and ranked them and gave them each a score. um for these last two because they were added um kind of late. We didn't go through that extensive conversation and we didn't provide that that level of detail for it. So I did

114
00:32:27.279 --> 00:32:42.320
just put them as I think I just gave them each the same percentages. So that's why they're looking short and they're the each of the bar areas um are exactly the same. Um so just as an FYI to that they the difference between you

115
00:32:42.320 --> 00:32:58.240
know this color and the color below there's no significant difference to them. It was just me throwing it out there so they show it on the graph. >> Can you talk a little bit about how something new would get added to this list and maybe when the like did all of these get added at the same time or have

116
00:32:58.240 --> 00:33:13.600
they sort of come peacemeal in over time? >> Great question, committee member. Um it was a mix of both. Um a lot of these and I'm looking to my senior committee members. A lot of these were added in 2019 as part of that initial process. However, um these specifically last

117
00:33:13.600 --> 00:33:30.480
three, um the highway five of Auburn Drive, the Waterford Lane, and the safe crossing at Woodstone were added later. Um the Auburn Drive happening in 2022. Um the Waterford and safe cing safe crossing happening last year. Um so they have happened through staggering time

118
00:33:30.480 --> 00:33:46.159
frames. Um what comes out of that then is that these ones have follow this graph table of public support environmental sustainability engineering difficulty local connection impact um where more of the newer ones don't follow that protocol because we didn't

119
00:33:46.159 --> 00:34:00.799
do that exercise when these ones were added. Yeah, I I think the the first ones um that were done in 2019, uh we just collected all the information that we already had and we ranked those

120
00:34:00.799 --> 00:34:16.159
and as we heard from other people in the community or there were new developments, uh then we added some and we will want to continue to add them if there are some. Uh as of this time, we

121
00:34:16.159 --> 00:34:31.599
aren't aware of any. Doesn't that there aren't some out there. Uh the other thing to keep in mind too is um all the time we're not looking for the, you know, route A to route B a straight line.

122
00:34:31.599 --> 00:34:50.000
>> Uh so while some some may want to do that if you have to go a quarter mile out of your way to get from A to B and still be on a trail, it probably doesn't make a lot of sense to have trails on every street. >> Um uh sidewalks, yes, but you know, the

123
00:34:50.000 --> 00:35:07.119
trail system. So, we kind of look at those things as well. So, if uh any of our new members are um aware of, you know, areas where there might be, please bring them up. Yeah, because Waterford Lane was

124
00:35:07.119 --> 00:35:24.079
specifically um a guest that came to our meeting and pointed that out. Uh a a resident um that you know knew that we were talking about trail gaps that evening and came and and you know to show that we are

125
00:35:24.079 --> 00:35:39.520
listening. We of course added that to this list. And then actually I believe it was Jacob who pointed out um our committee member Jacob who pointed out how people are trying to

126
00:35:39.520 --> 00:35:56.320
use the trails with the safe crossing at Woodstone. Like okay, this neighborhood recognizes they don't have trail on their side of the road, you know, so they're crossing here to get to the next trail type thing.

127
00:35:56.320 --> 00:36:12.720
And the last thing I do want to mention uh to committee member Cahill's point um there has been a lot of conversation about funding um related to this. We do have a CIP capital improvements plan that is dedicated towards um trails um

128
00:36:12.720 --> 00:36:29.359
trail reconstruction uh trail construction um the mix of the two um that is still currently existing. However, the funding of that isn't necessarily based on this trail gap piece. Uh council's policy has really been because of all these are so

129
00:36:29.359 --> 00:36:45.359
intertwined with other projects, specifically transportation projects, that that is the time when we fund and construct these trail gaps or I should say development projects because we do have the Lake Minnotonka Regional Trail Extension. I I know in

130
00:36:45.359 --> 00:37:02.560
the past, Alyssa, and committee members that uh we've looked at granting opportunities as well. In fact, uh one year we did get $150,000 grant, which would have helped towards the project. Unfortunately, uh we weren't able to get right away from uh a

131
00:37:02.560 --> 00:37:18.560
land owner, and so we had to send the money back. Um, but I noticed in the Star Tribune this morning there was an article on the legislative session that ended yesterday and they passed a bonding bill and I clicked on the link

132
00:37:18.560 --> 00:37:35.040
and I saw in the link that under the metropolitan council there was uh $10 million believe it was 10 million at least 10 million allocated for uh regional parks and trails. Uh so there might be an

133
00:37:35.040 --> 00:37:51.839
opportunity there for a grant or at least to look into to see if there's a possibility of that uh should we choose to uh or the council would choose to pursue one of these. >> Absolutely. I think that's a great thing to note uh chair and to note when these

134
00:37:51.839 --> 00:38:08.640
projects do come through as part of construction or development um the city still does have a cost share. Um it's not like that we're just putting the ownership on other partners. Um for example the area east project that we're currently working on with Carver County. Um the city does have a cost share to

135
00:38:08.640 --> 00:38:23.200
that and we also received a state grant to help offset that cost about $250,000 because it is a almost a million dollar project. So um that is something that we're currently and always actively looking at is how do we reduce the cost

136
00:38:23.200 --> 00:38:41.200
of these trails um when they do come through. So, I guess maybe that does answer that answers a question that I had and and so it still is valuable to rank these trail gaps, especially if they're um connected to a transportation

137
00:38:41.200 --> 00:38:57.920
project. Say for instance, anything that needs to uh be dealt with the county for like county road portions, like it's still reasonable to rank that in a higher part of our priority list even though we can't do anything until there's like a countywide >> Okay. because we still pay a little bit.

138
00:38:57.920 --> 00:39:13.520
So, it still needs to be prioritized. >> As staff, we do find the priority list valuable. And I will say, um, we just met the city engineer and myself with Carver County. They're going through a trail, um, master planning process. It's actually a parks and trail master planning process. Um, but they're

139
00:39:13.520 --> 00:39:28.640
reaching out to all the cities to talk about what are their goals, what are their, you know, what would they like to see when it comes to regional trail connections or what are their plans for trail connections? and um they were pleasantly surprised to see this list existing. They've talked to other cities

140
00:39:28.640 --> 00:39:44.480
and this doesn't exist anywhere else in the county. Um so we were able to have that very detailed conversation with them and the transportation engineer about what um are our priorities and how does that intertwine with the county system as well. So I don't know the the

141
00:39:44.480 --> 00:40:01.280
results of that. I don't think they're ready to push out their master plan, but I do expect that to be coming out shortly and then that will be shared with you all too. And then I just wanted to highlight the trail system again um and then overlaying that with the trail gaps um

142
00:40:01.280 --> 00:40:17.680
just to help with some conversation. Um but at this point I'm going to turn it back to the chair, help answer any questions and then really look to the committee to see um and I can bring this back up to and just kind of pivot wherever the committee would like to have their slides in front of them. um

143
00:40:17.680 --> 00:40:33.359
this ranking list now that the highway five project pieces are being completed um do we want to rearrange this priority list and how do we want to do so >> okay thanks Alyssa um open it up for

144
00:40:33.359 --> 00:40:50.400
conversation comments questions >> I think we need to make a correction for the one that was an error from what we did last year first so for um the Park to Lake Bridge development was currently listed at number eight and I think last

145
00:40:50.400 --> 00:41:07.280
year we had it at like two or three. Yes. Um from my notes on our November 18th, 2024 meeting um there is a bit of movement

146
00:41:07.280 --> 00:41:26.800
in the top areas. So we had Bavaria road east as 1 A and then we had Bavaria Road West as 1B. Then we had the Kirk Laken Park to Lake

147
00:41:26.800 --> 00:41:44.000
Bridge neighborhood as 2A and then County Road 43. Um, County Road 11 to Watermark neighborhood as 2B and then

148
00:41:44.000 --> 00:42:08.400
County Road 11, Chevel number three. Yeah, I I recall that it was different in this list too. So we can incorporate that into this and also change this as we we'd like. Um

149
00:42:08.400 --> 00:42:23.040
>> okay >> going forward. But you're you're correct. I noted that too and I think Mary saw that as well. >> And then I have a little star on here too that it is in different color pens. So, I don't know when I wrote this, but

150
00:42:23.040 --> 00:42:43.200
um like Steager Lake Lane from Highway 5 to the Victoria the new Victoria Vet is a potential other missing trail connection. >> I think that one was from the one that's going to be fixed with the uh Highway 5

151
00:42:43.200 --> 00:42:58.400
project. I think that's from uh the Steer Lake access road to uh the rolling acres underpass.

152
00:42:58.400 --> 00:43:13.200
That was the pave part that was added. It was on there, but I think we highlighted it. So, that one's going to be covered anyway, I believe. >> So, I see like Sear Lake laying right

153
00:43:13.200 --> 00:43:30.480
in, right out. So Alyssa, is that going to then have a trail along it? >> No, it's the existing trail that isn't paved. There's a Is this the one that goes past here? It's Lake Manka Trail. >> Regional Trail.

154
00:43:30.480 --> 00:43:45.119
>> Yeah, it's where that road that you turn into to go down to the lake access. >> Uh there it's that road right there. The trail is paved from downtown to right there. And then it's

155
00:43:45.119 --> 00:44:01.680
>> But if but if you go like at this uh 78th Street Trail overpass right now and if that just goes right over >> Okay. >> Do you can you picture it? And then it's

156
00:44:01.680 --> 00:44:18.400
by like that auto shop. There's like no >> Okay. So what you're >> what you're saying is what's going to happen after the overpass? Is there going to be a new gap? >> Correct. Yes. Okay. I don't know that we discussed that at the time because we didn't know there was going to be an

157
00:44:18.400 --> 00:44:34.800
overpass there. >> Yes. Correct. >> So, so that that may be there's a potential of that being a a new trail gap. I don't do Do you know, Alyssa, where that uh overpass is going to come out at?

158
00:44:34.800 --> 00:44:50.319
>> Chair, committee members, I think that's a really good question and I can talk to our city engineer about where this will land. Um, if it does not land in a natural space that has a pedestrian connection, do we want to add this to

159
00:44:50.319 --> 00:45:05.200
the list? >> Yes. >> Sounds good. And then if it doesn't if it does make a natural connection, we'll leave it off. Correct. >> Yes. >> Okay, perfect. We can do that. >> I guess I was under the assumption it had a natural connection. Otherwise, what?

160
00:45:05.200 --> 00:45:20.640
>> Yeah. I mean, because this 78th Street, you know, um, that's on the screen right now is a nice is, you know, like a well utilized trail. And I only know this from like running across Highway 5 here.

161
00:45:20.640 --> 00:45:37.839
Um, uh, to get to Stager, you know, to connect to downtown, there there isn't currently any sidewalk or trail right along the road, right? Like I I don't understand the the

162
00:45:37.839 --> 00:45:53.760
LRT is >> well probably probably you don't need one >> there but >> you probably don't need one along Stiger Lake Lane but you have to get from the overpass 78th overpass to the Lake Minnetonka Trail and then you're right

163
00:45:53.760 --> 00:46:10.640
downtown. >> Yeah. If it connects to the trail right Minnitanka trail. >> Yeah. If it doesn't if if it connects to the road then there's not a walking path in in the grass. >> Okay, good point.

164
00:46:10.640 --> 00:46:30.560
All right. So, what would the committee first of all any other questions before we attempt to >> is it so on on this graph which ones are are dependent on not just the city of Victoria but whether it's Carver County

165
00:46:30.560 --> 00:46:48.000
or Shore View and stuff for Highway 7 because if there are a few that are entirely within our control could slightly shift priority. But if that's a crazy view, then we can just move on. >> Uh committee member, that is not a crazy

166
00:46:48.000 --> 00:47:05.359
view. Um what is the crazy piece is that every single one of these has a direct connection to external partners. >> Okay. Well, then that makes it >> my question was somewhat related, but I guess an add-on to that is do we have any line of like so Bavaria Road West is

167
00:47:05.359 --> 00:47:20.160
a good example with the construction being done to complete east. Do we have line of sight into any timing of upcoming county road projects or at least general forecasting where we could provide

168
00:47:20.160 --> 00:47:36.079
footnotes or asterisks to some of these items um to clarify, right? because it's like we could keep Bavaria Road West right where it's at and it's it might be three in the list, but it's kind of just going to get passed over because presumably they're not going to do

169
00:47:36.079 --> 00:47:50.000
another project for quite some time on that road. So, seems most logical to move it back, but it would be nice to note for future committee members or someone picking this up um to note why

170
00:47:50.000 --> 00:48:06.160
that gap would be moved further back. um provide that clarification I think would be would be helpful context as we look at this year-over-year or someone picks it up fresh as a member of the public. >> Good point. I think for U

171
00:48:06.160 --> 00:48:24.319
Bavaria Road West, uh I would leave it on the list, but I'd push it uh back towards the lower end because the likelihood of anything happening there is pretty slim considering a lot of dollars are going in there now. And there is trail now on the one side of

172
00:48:24.319 --> 00:48:38.640
the road. >> So, there's probably other trails that if there was a choice between that and something else, you probably want to do one where there are no trails at all first. Um, but to Alyssa's point

173
00:48:38.640 --> 00:48:58.160
earlier, uh, it's probably good to leave it on the list in case uh, you know, the opportunity would present itself sometime in the future. >> Other thoughts, comments? >> Yeah, I think I think in some of our meetings we've had that same request is

174
00:48:58.160 --> 00:49:16.240
like to put dates on these because if you guys really want to dig like super deep into this you can look up the arborum area um transportation plan and they have like a lot of this stuff

175
00:49:16.240 --> 00:49:32.800
in there and then they will tell you like right now it's a 203 33 construction, right? So if if that's the case, then I think it would be nice to have like

176
00:49:32.800 --> 00:49:49.599
this this trail is connected to Arborum area transportation plan. Construction date right now is 2035 or whatever it might be because it is surprising sometimes to find these dates that far

177
00:49:49.599 --> 00:50:08.240
out. So that Alyssa, >> can I make a a comment, committee members? Um, on what we typically do when it comes to these projects, especially since they're not city projects, is we're very hesitant to put dates on items. One, um, because if they

178
00:50:08.240 --> 00:50:25.119
change, we're not necessarily the owners of that, so we're not always in the loop. Um, so now we're putting inaccurate information on our site. Um, two, those dates are all subject to change. Even that map that I provided, um, it says in asterisks on the bottom, these dates are subject to change

179
00:50:25.119 --> 00:50:41.200
because things come into play such as funding, um, and other challenges that come into any sort of project. Um, specifically transportation projects that once you put formal dates out there, um, people have it in their mind that it's going to complete 2030. All of

180
00:50:41.200 --> 00:50:57.440
a sudden, now it's 30, 2032, 2033. Um, and those are challenging to make sure that we're updating all of the pages. What we do do on that um that uh that page that we sent out as part of the agenda packet that lists all the

181
00:50:57.440 --> 00:51:12.480
walking routes is we link back to the arburitum area transportation page site. So then if people are looking for those project pages um and those specific dates that go along with that, they can find that through the Carver County web page. It's I imagine it's probably tough to

182
00:51:12.480 --> 00:51:29.040
continually confirm that what we've got laid out as a trail gap is necessarily in scope for whatever project whether it's the arboritum or road construction like it might not necessarily be confirmed that it's in scope all the time I would assume. Is that a fair assumption or do they usually communicate that pretty well?

183
00:51:29.040 --> 00:51:45.680
>> We're pretty in tandem with our county partners specifically ones that are in the city of Victoria. Yeah, >> since since I've been on this is my ninth year on the committee and I believe every time uh that we had something on this list that there was a

184
00:51:45.680 --> 00:52:01.040
project uh it had included. >> Okay, that's good. >> So, and I I think that the staff does a good job of bringing it up >> and uh and the city council addresses it and uh and we've been able to get it.

185
00:52:01.040 --> 00:52:21.359
So, The other thing I I think too is it used to be I real important to list these in order because I think there was a thought at one time that okay we'll try to tackle these one at a time but when we got a cost estimate and we're talking

186
00:52:21.359 --> 00:52:38.559
million plus and millions for all of them excuse me it uh appeared that wasn't really practical. So, uh, the city council, I think, came up with a really good plan

187
00:52:38.559 --> 00:52:59.839
of let's try to work these into existing or projects as they come up. Not only will be cheaper, uh, but it'll just be one big project at a time. So, as we were talking, I just found the

188
00:52:59.839 --> 00:53:17.680
safe crossing at 78th Street. It is in the Arboritum area transportation plan. Uh, and this is from my print out in 2021, but um it's projected to connect to the LRT.

189
00:53:17.680 --> 00:53:36.240
Um, however, it the date on here was 2045. So that's why I say like these dates I again like I understand your concern too. But like if you're not deep diving into this and people say

190
00:53:36.240 --> 00:53:53.119
like oh like even me like oh that's great that that we're going to get that safe crossing connect to the trail. But then right here I see it's 2045 and projected 2045 dollars are6 million

191
00:53:53.119 --> 00:54:09.119
for that. So >> Alyssa. >> Yeah. And if I can note on that one as you were saying that I haven't I was looking for the the specific uh images of that trail connect connection. Um but I do believe it loops and connects to the Lake Mitonka Regional Trail. I will

192
00:54:09.119 --> 00:54:24.800
find that information and share that with the committee to confirm that. Um but I do want to timelines do change. This will be included as part of the larger highway 5 projects. So, um in the next couple of years, not 204. So, it's another one of those things do really

193
00:54:24.800 --> 00:54:40.000
change at at a rapid pace um when it comes to these large infrastructure projects. >> I I think the other thing as we look at these I think the one thing that I know I've learned over the period of time I've been on this is it's important to

194
00:54:40.000 --> 00:54:56.880
set out expectations because if we you know, if we when we first came up with this, I think the expectation of the committee members is, well, each year hopefully we'll be able to knock out one of these and then we got the engineering study and found out how much it cost and how many dollars

195
00:54:56.880 --> 00:55:12.720
there were. It just wasn't practical. So, um I think it's important to say why we have the gaps. Um how we're going about them, which I I think the council has now outlined. We're trying to do these with other

196
00:55:12.720 --> 00:55:30.240
projects, make that clear. Um, we continually look for grant dollars. We do that, but I don't think we can promise that, uh, you know, any of these are going to get done at a specific time. Uh but I think we can probably assure the public that if a project

197
00:55:30.240 --> 00:55:47.040
comes up with the county on a road or the state on highway 7 or highway five uh beyond uh what it is now that uh that discussion will take place at that time and if it's on the list it makes it easier for the city to discuss that with

198
00:55:47.040 --> 00:56:01.920
our other partners. I think you made a good point about do we even bother ranking if it's all based on projects happening with a county or state partner. The only one

199
00:56:01.920 --> 00:56:18.559
that really isn't I mean the um the Kirk Locken one is a little bit different because it's not really based on a highway going through highway improvement. It's more debased based on the development.

200
00:56:18.559 --> 00:56:35.520
Yeah, that one is probably the only one. It's not based on highway construction. >> I I I think I think that that makes you make a good point there. And I think that differentiates that one from the others. That's dependent on a couple other things. That's the you know the

201
00:56:35.520 --> 00:56:51.040
other property. >> But I think from a city standpoint um you know maybe that one we add that up higher in the I think we keep it up higher in the list whether it's one, two, whatever. And then maybe we lump the others by

202
00:56:51.040 --> 00:57:06.240
um I I think we just have the list, but we could put them lump them together. Several leaves are based on highway 7. So if the highway 7 project they're talking about that in the next few years at least there's a study going

203
00:57:06.240 --> 00:57:22.319
on. Suppose it all depends on funding. We could lump the highway se two highway seven ones together. We can lump the two county 43s together. >> Um the what? There's one county road 11

204
00:57:22.319 --> 00:57:38.160
>> I think. And I think I think that one county road 11 chavevel to red fox we had ranked number three. I think the discussion around that one had revolved around that that's the missing

205
00:57:38.160 --> 00:57:53.760
connection to the growth areas in Victoria in the new parks and also the elementary school. So like I think that was a really strong committee discussion around

206
00:57:53.760 --> 00:58:10.400
like reasonings for wanting to keep that kind of towards the top is like that we we saw all the south of that trail getting developed towards Victoria downtown. Yeah. >> Yeah. Again, it's a county road though,

207
00:58:10.400 --> 00:58:29.119
so if we don't have access, >> so you know, the the one argument is just here's our list. You know, we'd like all these done. Uh, you know, let's take advantage of opportunities when they come up with our partners. Be one

208
00:58:29.119 --> 00:58:46.160
way to look at it. The other way is to make a list, put numbers on it, and that say they're all important, but these if dollars became available somehow outside of those projects, this is what we would think would be in the best interest. So,

209
00:58:46.160 --> 00:59:03.040
sometime the council said, "Wow, somebody left some money to the city for trail improvements. Uh, where would you like to put them?" They could look at the list and say, "Well, here's the priorities." And I think you could do that based like still grouping them and then ranking them within the groupings themselves. So

210
00:59:03.040 --> 00:59:19.119
the ones that aren't reliant, the ones that are reliant on County Road 43, the ones that are reliant on Can Road uh 11, Highway 7, and then we can rank within those ones whether it stays the way that it is here today. But if it's relying on the project itself, we can't really say

211
00:59:19.119 --> 00:59:34.640
when or if it's going to be done regardless. And so, but then if we get down to, okay, Highway 7 project is happening, where do we want to put our money within the Highway 7 project to apply because we can't do all of the the the trail gaps, for instance, then at least they have something to go off of

212
00:59:34.640 --> 00:59:49.280
there. >> But comparing them to each other doesn't necessarily make sense because we have no say over it. >> Right. Right. I don't think we should belabor the ranking, but if there's something as big as the highway 5 project and we can knock four of them off the list and it might move Bavaria

213
00:59:49.280 --> 01:00:05.520
Bavaria West down the list a little bit, that's probably the extent of the discussion we would need to have. I think doesn't make sense to just re-evaluate every year for the sake of it to move three to four and six to seven or whatever, right? Yeah, >> you just have to write have the right group.

214
01:00:05.520 --> 01:00:20.480
>> Yeah. >> On the, you know, make sure the list is as complete as possible. >> The most important thing is we have them on the list. >> And the second most important thing is when the project comes up is that we we work very closely to try to get all

215
01:00:20.480 --> 01:00:37.119
those on that that list done in that area because it probably it's going to be more difficult to have it happen later. Alyssa, how does that conversation go with new projects as far as understanding when the

216
01:00:37.119 --> 01:00:53.920
in, you know, in kind of the instances we have of next big projects, so the county road or highway projects and and how they come in and then how the discussion goes with respect to adding in these trails and and would we, you know, using 43 as an example of two

217
01:00:53.920 --> 01:01:09.760
projects, like would we have time to engage in that discuss hierarchy of what we put forward as part of that or >> not typically. Um does the parks and recreation committee be engaged in infrastructure or transportation projects? That's really what the list is

218
01:01:09.760 --> 01:01:26.799
there for is to you know have all these to the table and then we can talk about them to our partners. Um, I do want to look at creating kind of that hierarchy right at the beginning to help with those conversations, too. Um,

219
01:01:26.799 --> 01:01:43.359
I'm just kind of typing up what I'm hearing, what I was thinking, and I don't have it up on the screen because I'm actively working on the the slide deck so you can see it in front of you. Um, but to take, like you said, create those groupings. So, you have the Lake Mitanka region trail, that's a standalone. Then you have something like Highway 7. Um, we already have that

220
01:01:43.359 --> 01:01:59.599
ranking available. So I would just take the ranking that's already created as part of that and then put those two together. Um same with the county road 43 project is we have three of them and then I would take that ranking based on the list the priority list that we

221
01:01:59.599 --> 01:02:14.400
currently already have and then do that for the rest of them if that makes sense to the committee. I think that's the right way to look at it. And then I think we should cross check it with the notes that you have, Amanda, and see if those rankings still line up and then

222
01:02:14.400 --> 01:02:31.680
>> within their subgroups and then we can figure out how that all shakes out. Okay, why don't we start why don't we go on your list and just that you had of what we talked about our

223
01:02:31.680 --> 01:02:48.480
meeting last year the year before last year I think >> well are you working on trying to show us something first >> yeah I was thinking if I can list these out then Amanda we can cross check what you have >> if that works for the committee >> and apologies these are just my really

224
01:02:48.480 --> 01:03:23.039
quick writing these down. Notes I believe in 2019, one of the big rationale of County Road 43 was completing that trail because that's connection to Lions Park where a lot of kids, you know, could ride their bikes

225
01:03:23.039 --> 01:03:39.720
or whatever, but that road's terrible for walking. I wouldn't want my kid walking on that road. But then we found out it's an engineering nightmare because it's and it's also county road. So,

226
01:03:41.280 --> 01:03:58.000
>> Oh, sorry friends. Okay. Again, very high level notes, not taken um any sort of spelling or grammar accuracy, just my trying to jot things down to at least make it clear. And I will also note I did not place the

227
01:03:58.000 --> 01:04:15.039
highway connection in any order. So, we can make that change, too. Um if we feel like we need to. So, I put highway 5 because it was the first thing I grabbed. County Road 43, second, County Road 11. So, those can be switched or the committee can say we don't want to

228
01:04:15.039 --> 01:04:31.920
any sort of priority rankings outside of the individual groupings um and we can make those notes as well. Um so in this Lake Minnitonka regional trail that connection to Lake Bridge um as a standalone um so it obviously has no priority within that section. Um for

229
01:04:31.920 --> 01:04:48.400
highway 7 we have that Virginia Shores Circle um connection to the Lake Mitonka Regional Trail as that priority one within that grouping. Priority two would be the Waterford connection to Rolling Acres Road. County Road 43, we have three of them. So that first one is that

230
01:04:48.400 --> 01:05:04.720
connection um for that end of the trail down to County Road 11. The second is that Teller's Road to Marsh Lake Road. So connecting Rap City um and the Ambergate neighborhood to Waserman Lake Preserve down to Marsh Lake Road. Um and

231
01:05:04.720 --> 01:05:20.480
then the last one is that safe crossing um intersection from Deer Run to the Water U Mark neighborhood. Standalone again is County Road 11, that Chabal neighborhood safe crossing connection or that trail alongside. Um and then State

232
01:05:20.480 --> 01:05:35.839
Highway 5 again standalone. That's the Auburn neighborhood connection. Um and then the last um but not least is Bavaria Road West. another standalone. >> I think the best place to start is is it

233
01:05:35.839 --> 01:05:53.359
a good idea to rank these groups against other groups. In my opinion, I don't think it's worthwhile because it there's it's not really our priority of when a county road project, transportation project goes. So, if everybody's in favor of that, then maybe we can just go and switch over to looking at the sub or

234
01:05:53.359 --> 01:06:11.760
the the groupings within each uh county road or highway. I I would I would agree with that. >> I think the the key thing that's on the list is the most important thing where I mean >> Oh, right. the fact that it exists.

235
01:06:11.760 --> 01:06:26.400
>> It exists. >> Yeah. Agreed. >> Because I think then the city staff >> and council can when the state comes and says gets the communities together around Highway 7, we have you got something to bring to them.

236
01:06:26.400 --> 01:06:41.760
um or County Road 43 or 11. And you're right, we don't if we rank these um against each other and we come up, we're setting an expectation that county, let's say we put County Road 43

237
01:06:41.760 --> 01:07:01.599
second on the list and then well that project isn't coming up for 15 years going to have people with expectations something was going to happen and it isn't. We'd be better off to say here's our list. uh when those roads are um

238
01:07:01.599 --> 01:07:19.839
under construction or a new project comes up, uh these are the gaps that we're going to be discussing and hopefully be able to complete at that time. >> Completely agreed. >> Other thoughts. Are there any other ones that people

239
01:07:19.839 --> 01:07:36.079
aren't aware or that aren't on this list that people are aware of? I think that's probably good. Going back to >> the only one was the one that Amanda brought up earlier that Alyssa thinks that looks like it connects, but so we'll put a footnote at asteris at the

240
01:07:36.079 --> 01:07:52.559
bottom and take it off the list if it's solved and if not we'll leave it on there. >> That's the overpass at 78th that we're talking about. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> And if it connects to Stiger Lane, >> I'm guessing. >> Yeah. Or if they're working on Steer >> or the trail. Yeah.

241
01:07:52.559 --> 01:08:09.039
I don't think >> wherever the overpass is connecting to a trail that >> hopefully it doesn't just go down to grass basically. >> I doubt it does. >> And it sounds like it doesn't based off of what you're saying, Alyssa. >> I'll confirm that. I'm fairly positive it does, but again, if it doesn't, um,

242
01:08:09.039 --> 01:08:29.279
we'll make sure it's added. It would be silly for us to do that large overpass without some sort of connection. >> Yeah, we don't want to create a new trail gap. Okay. It seems like there's a consensus around um you know not ranking these uh

243
01:08:29.279 --> 01:08:46.640
against each other but ranking within uh or at least listing within in case that kind of gives some feedback if um there was only one of these going to be done with a project uh that which one we prefer.

244
01:08:46.640 --> 01:09:03.120
>> Yeah. call it listing by dependency. >> Yeah. Or otherwise >> with a you know the the danger in doing that you start doing that and you could end up getting some cut out of a project too by saying oh that's a lower they really didn't have it's a high priority

245
01:09:03.120 --> 01:09:20.319
we'll just kind of skip over that that's not happened before. >> Yeah. I I was just gonna ask um how did the little connection from um Victoria Drive to the Crest

246
01:09:20.319 --> 01:09:35.440
>> Green Crest like how did that connection get made? Like if we if if we really don't need to rank at all like because there are sometimes that the city sees an opportunity and is

247
01:09:35.440 --> 01:09:51.520
like we're just going to get this piece done. I because if you could share how that happened. >> Yeah, absolutely. Committee members and I I will preface this by saying I wasn't in the parks and recreation department

248
01:09:51.520 --> 01:10:07.360
at that time. Um, what I do know is because that connection was on the trail gap priority list, it was already something that was heightened in council's awareness, um, we did have residents in that area did reach out to the county and reach out to the city

249
01:10:07.360 --> 01:10:21.840
that lived in the Green Crest neighborhood and said, "Hey, this is a priority trail gap. Can we look at what the costs were?" And the costs were fairly low when it comes to trail gap connection cost. Um, so that was something that the county and city was

250
01:10:21.840 --> 01:10:37.520
able to do um in a relatively short time frame. Um, so it really was just kind of a this is something already on the list. We can make it happen. Let's do it. >> One of the least challenging ones of all the others that were on the list. and

251
01:10:37.520 --> 01:10:53.760
and I I look at the lists that we have here and I look at the number of ones we've done over the last few years because of projects or are in the works because of the highway five project. Um you know they

252
01:10:53.760 --> 01:11:11.600
are getting done. It's u so we know that highway 7 is under consideration for a project in the not too distant future. So that happens. Hopefully these couple can be included in that. And then down the road some of

253
01:11:11.600 --> 01:11:28.080
these others, they're going to happen at some point in time. Um may not be on our time, but certainly not my time. Uh but uh they'll eventually get done if they're on the list and the projects

254
01:11:28.080 --> 01:11:44.640
take place. The other thing I think uh is very important uh to keep in mind and uh we have input into this because the new developments come to us for comments. um is that we always look at the trail

255
01:11:44.640 --> 01:12:01.760
uh connections within those new developments so we don't create new problems for down the road because we all know from the experience we've had here is that once there's a gap and there's no pro road project it's not likely it's going to get done very soon.

256
01:12:01.760 --> 01:12:17.920
But if it's a development coming in new, we can get it done right away and it's uh um not a problem later. I do like the I do like the thought of not ranking them against themselves, but at the same time, if we simply group

257
01:12:17.920 --> 01:12:34.400
them by road construction projects or otherwise, does it kind and this is a genuine question, does it kind of give the impression we just kind of throw our hands up until >> road construction happens? I I I don't I don't know. I just wanted I just wanted to propose that to the group.

258
01:12:34.400 --> 01:12:49.679
>> I was going to just ask a similar question, but not exactly the same. is that if residents would be disappointed if if they are following along and and have seen these rankings in the past and

259
01:12:49.679 --> 01:13:06.320
then all of a sudden the ranking or priority list is gone, are they going to be is there going to be some disappointment there? >> I I think that the way to do that it's on the communication. I think what we're

260
01:13:06.320 --> 01:13:22.560
saying is all of these are important What we're saying is when they're done is dependent on >> but they have true dependencies. Yeah. >> So we're not saying we shouldn't do any of these and we're not saying one's more important necessarily than the other.

261
01:13:22.560 --> 01:13:36.640
We're just saying we want to take advantage of opportunities as they present themselves. >> And even in the past we weren't necessarily saying one's more important than the other. Even if it might look that way with a a stacked bar chart on the left that's higher than the ones on the Yeah, I understand what you're

262
01:13:36.640 --> 01:13:52.800
saying. agree if want to add anything >> chair that was exactly what I was going to note is that we can include that communication we do have the web page available so we can note that there um that the shift has changed and that we're not necessarily ranking these on

263
01:13:52.800 --> 01:14:09.199
priority but just showcasing what gaps that we have in our community and then uh illustrate the the direction that council has set when it comes to lumping these into other projects due to a variety of different reasons. And I was thinking as as that was mentioned as we

264
01:14:09.199 --> 01:14:24.400
were talking about expectation setting um that we want to make sure that the expectation is also there that we're not prioritizing these by construction they're prioritized by something different um so I think there's some communication that we can do on the front end that will help with that

265
01:14:24.400 --> 01:14:39.679
>> and like you said earlier like the true value is the fact that the list exists and you're chatting with county or state you know MIDOT engineers right and we've got we actually have a list of trail gaps that need to be addressed. And so if yeah, you're building this by the way

266
01:14:39.679 --> 01:14:54.719
here. These are the ones that we've been ident that have been identified for a while. I think the that's the real value of of the list. Not necessarily, well, this one's ranked two of nine and this one's ranked eight of nine. How do you feel about doing both? And I think it's as a comm community member, it may be

267
01:14:54.719 --> 01:15:10.159
equally as disappointing if you were to see maybe the lack of a priority listing, but also if you're looking at the priority listing and the number one priority hasn't been fixed for x amount of years and and number two and number four and number six are crossed off. It's like, well, I thought that was the

268
01:15:10.159 --> 01:15:26.400
number one priority >> and the one that you live next to is eight and has been eight for a while, >> right? >> Yeah. It's more education about how how these all come about and how they're funded because it's It's complicated. >> Yeah. Exactly. And I think that the grouping of these actually provides more

269
01:15:26.400 --> 01:15:43.600
clarity in the sense that it's not just this is number one and this is the one we're going to do next. Because if number one's counter road 43 and number two is counter road 11, those two aren't going to happen in linear order. It's going to be whenever the the road project occurs. So this tells you here's

270
01:15:43.600 --> 01:16:06.159
what we're looking at whenever these things happen. And I think that that actually provides way more clarity to people in the community. Okay. Any other thoughts, comments? Um, I think the key thing is going to be communication. I think in the

271
01:16:06.159 --> 01:16:21.520
communication too, not only what we just talked about, but I think um to give some people an idea of what a trail cost because I think there's some people say, well, you know, you know, come up with

272
01:16:21.520 --> 01:16:41.920
50,000 and we can finish this mile and a half and the 50,000 won't even get half the cost of the engineering study to look at it. So, um I think anything like that would be helpful. So, do we want to have a motion to adopt

273
01:16:41.920 --> 01:16:59.040
this list? Um and uh maybe put in that we feel they're all important and um we should take advantage of opportunities as they present themselves.

274
01:16:59.040 --> 01:17:14.560
uh with road projects, etc. I think the council's priority adopted that, but it doesn't hurt for us to reinforce that. >> If so, does someone like to make a motion? >> Alex, I feel like it's yours. >> Um,

275
01:17:14.560 --> 01:17:31.320
>> no pressure. I guess motion to provide the trail system list to council, noting that all of these trails are equally important, but to be uh

276
01:17:32.800 --> 01:17:48.080
utilized when the opportunity presents itself. >> Does someone want to second that? >> I second that motion. >> Okay. Motion. Did I hear a second? >> A second. >> Okay. All right. Uh, any further

277
01:17:48.080 --> 01:18:06.480
discussion? If not, all in favor of the motion signify by saying I. >> I. >> Oppos say no. Motion carried. I guess if the council wants us to

278
01:18:06.480 --> 01:18:24.159
uh do something different as far as uh prioritization or whatever, they will ask us uh to take a look at something if they have a would like us to do that. But all right, next on the agenda is

279
01:18:24.159 --> 01:18:41.280
emerging issues. You have any emerging issues? It looks like you do. >> I do. Chair, just a few things. Um, one that's not on this list, but it's at the top of mine, so I don't want to forget it is we do have new artwork behind you in council chambers for those that do

280
01:18:41.280 --> 01:18:58.880
not know. Um, we partner with Deb Zeller of Zeer Studios. She's a Victoria resident, has her studio in, uh, Hopkins um, just in Main Street if you're ever interested in taking a field trip. Um, but she works with the city to provide on a a bimonthly basis, so every other

281
01:18:58.880 --> 01:19:14.400
month um, new artwork in council chambers. whatever is at her art studio and when that's done they'll bring portions of it here and then she continuously works with local artists to get it updated. So we do have a partnership is what we call the program

282
01:19:14.400 --> 01:19:29.920
um voting sheet in front of you. Make sure before you leave if you want to vote please do so. It's kind of like the the winning um picture we do every single um new artwork um grouping that we have in. So take time to do that at the end um after the meeting is

283
01:19:29.920 --> 01:19:45.199
adjourned. Um, but a couple other things to highlight for you. I'm going to go backwards just because I'll go from the quickest to longest. Um, that we do, um, we previously communicated that we're hoping to cancel the June 15th committee meeting. Um, however, we do have a new

284
01:19:45.199 --> 01:20:01.600
development that it's at Sketch Plat phase. It's actually that one um that's right along the Lake Bridge neighborhood um that old mirror project. Um, we would like to bring that to the committee and we'd like to include it on June 15th. However, was previously talked about at

285
01:20:01.600 --> 01:20:18.480
this committee is being cancelled. I did want to check in with all of you to see if one you'd be open to keeping that many committee meeting on the calendar and even if you have booked over things. I want to make sure we have a quorum for that as well. So, I just want to pause here to see if there's any um thoughts

286
01:20:18.480 --> 01:20:36.480
on bringing that back onto the calendar. >> Looks like it's looks like we'll have enough. >> I still have it on my calendar. >> I saw enough thumbs up. So, we're we're good. >> So, yeah, it's cool. >> Well, then we will be joined um by our city planner Brian McCann on that one.

287
01:20:36.480 --> 01:20:52.159
He'll showcase the development and talk about um some of the park and trail impacts to that. And then the last one, I wanted to update you on Hunters Brook and Marsh Hollow Park. Um as you remember at the end of the very long discussion in April, um the next step

288
01:20:52.159 --> 01:21:08.320
was to bring it to city council at their following meeting on the 27th of April um to talk about um they approve the committee's recommendation and then the steps to move forward. I will say um that we are moving forward with the park projects um a little different than the

289
01:21:08.320 --> 01:21:24.239
committee's recommendation. Uh council decided to allocate additional funding to both of those parks um utilizing the park dedication fees. So they're trying to include um additional amenities at both the spaces. They did provide some minor feedback to the original layouts

290
01:21:24.239 --> 01:21:40.400
that we saw. um they still kept the two priority the priority concept that the committee recommended. So priority for Hunterbrook uh was number one. Marsh Hollow was that number two design. Um but trying to keep all the elements within those um so not necessarily

291
01:21:40.400 --> 01:21:57.679
limiting uh the elements that we work so hard to eliminate because of budget on that. Um so we are working now with the design firm RSG for the bidding package and moving forward with um getting that kind of finalized construction and design layout um completed. So more news

292
01:21:57.679 --> 01:22:14.880
on that, but I did want to provide that update for you. >> Is that a common or rare occurrence that um council decides to tap into the parks funding to get the whole package or whatever the case may be. um committee

293
01:22:14.880 --> 01:22:30.960
members and the rest of the committee, I I wouldn't necessarily say it's rare or common. Um we're kind of in a a different situation um where we have a little bit more funding um in that park fund than um typical or maybe not even typical, but we don't necessarily have a

294
01:22:30.960 --> 01:22:47.360
lot of park projects on the radar. I mean, we have two really big park projects that are in this new area of town that have zero park elements around it. And I think they they captured that of this is the South Growth area. These are going to be the regional parks for this area. So, we want to make sure that

295
01:22:47.360 --> 01:23:03.280
they fit the need of that community. Um, and they really wanted to make sure that they were something cool and special for that neighborhood. >> Awesome. Do you know if it changes construction timeline or start date at all? >> Not for either of those two parks. >> I was uh I watched that meeting. I was

296
01:23:03.280 --> 01:23:17.760
really glad to see that they were utilizing those funds. I think that was a very wise move. Uh the funds aren't doing any good sitting in an account when they're set aside. So, it was nice to utilize those for for the people out

297
01:23:17.760 --> 01:23:34.400
in that area and for the regional park. >> Could I ask another question, Alyssa, because it's not reflected in the minutes? Did they add things then that we kind of discussed uh maybe those neighborhoods not wanting

298
01:23:34.400 --> 01:23:50.719
at the parks? >> Great question, committee members and the rest of the committee. Um they did add back all the amenities at Marsh Hollow. Um so I know there was conversation about removing um like the community garden spaces

299
01:23:50.719 --> 01:24:10.560
um or that natural trail piece or the hammock grove. Um they opted to add those in um to see what that would look like for a cost. In the discussion on the community park piece, uh staff did point out that the

300
01:24:10.560 --> 01:24:25.840
committee had indicated a concern about, you know, the appearance and all that that we had brought up and uh they discussed it and um they also said that people in that area really don't have

301
01:24:25.840 --> 01:24:42.639
access to a garden space like the rest of the community because they're farther out. And so that's why they added that back in. So, it made sense to me how the discussion took place and it was uh to me I was glad to see they're adding

302
01:24:42.639 --> 01:25:01.320
things back in instead of taking things out that we thought were important. So, >> great point, chair. Thank you for noting that. >> That is all I have. >> Okay. Any committee members have any other emerging issues they'd like to bring up?

303
01:25:02.400 --> 01:25:18.000
So, Are you graduating this year? >> I am not. No, I'm a junior. So, >> okay. All right. I was going to say, well, we'd have to congratulate, but we'll have to wait a year to do that. Okay. Anybody else? If not, thanks for

304
01:25:18.000 --> 01:25:35.120
your attendance and everybody have a great Memorial Day weekend. Is there a motion to adjurnn? >> A motion to >> second. >> Second. >> Okay. All in favor signify by saying I. I

305
01:25:35.120 --> 01:25:39.239
>> meeting adjourned. Thanks again.