It never ends It never ends It never ends It never ends It never ends It never ends You can never miss Well, the rain is dripping from the tree Just like the tears are falling from my cheeks And the lost trains are moving down the track Just like her, it ain't coming back She left me here without any warning On a cold, gray Kentucky morning I need a cup of coffee with a shot of cream Wake me from this awful dream ¶¶ I'm going to bring ourselves to order for our May 19th Environmental Equality and Public Works Committee meeting. We have a full and fruitful agenda. I want to first off under item one, approval of committee summary. I want to thank. Why is it not on? It's on. It's on. I want to thank council. They are ignoring me. That's correct. It's okay. Now I'm good. My voice didn't carry. All right. First, we're going to do our motions and summary from the April 21st meeting that was ably chaired by Councilmember Stennett. So I've looked over these minutes. I may have a couple of syntax things, but unless there's any specific additions or changes to the minutes from the April 21st meeting, I would ask for a motion to approve. I'll move. Second. All right. All those in favor? Aye. Opposed, like, signed. Thank you very much. There are a couple of resolutions in there that will be part of what our report out is during the council meeting later on today. And then we move directly. We start by having a drink. Okay. Distillery district update. Environmental Quality and Public Works Committee. No, this is just, I'm sorry. This is an issue placed by Council Member Kay. It's a really good update. Do you want to make some comments on the front end, sir? i'm happy to have the commissioner just proceed welcome commissioner welcome thank you sir i was asked to give an update on the distillery district and it came at a really good time can you hear me a little better yes sir we actually have been having quarterly coordination meetings with the distillery district the folks that are down in there in terms of developers property owners and others and when this request came we had literally just had the meeting I think three days before so all this information is very fresh and all this information we have also just provided I'll also give if you have questions about what our coordination meetings entail and who attends and all that I'm happy to give that information as well but we're going to focus on a few things here one an update of the town branch trail to an update of the hydrology study and then the other kind of major thing that's going on in the distillery district is the UK trunk line so in terms of town branch this is the the overall trail system. Start to finish in the red boxed area is the part that we have the funding for. This is the part that goes through the facility district, and it is phases four, five, and six, and so we're going to break that out a little bit and give a little bit more information about where this is. It starts at Bizzell Drive or Bizzle Drive and goes all the way to Oliver Lewis Way, and it's four, five, and six in terms of how that goes. Six is the longest. It is the most complicated, and this is the money, or these are the sections for which the governor gave us money. So we will go through the budgetary aspects of each one of these. For phase four, we have all the money. Design, right-of-way utility, and construction, it is about a million dollars. For phase five, and that's from Bizzell Drive to Townley Center. For section five, for phase five, it is from New Circle Road to McConnell Spring. Again, it's about five million of which we have money for design, right-of-way utility, and construction as well. And we are now given updates to where we are on those phases. All right. And then phase six, to which we only have design work or design funds at this point. It is from McConnell Spring Park to Oliver Lewis Way. This is obviously the most complicated aspect of it. It is the, when I say complicated, it's the most difficult, most challenging in terms of just the environmental aspects that are there. We've got a narrow road. We've got different property owners. We've got utilities in the way so this is just to get to the distillery district area is difficult in terms of this part so this is the one that's going to be the most difficult in terms of getting a good trail route the reason we have design at this point is without a without a route we cannot estimate right away utility relocation or construction at this point the others we already had a conceptual route for that section of the trail. So it was easier to estimate, and we, again, are in the design phase of that. So is the subject there telling us that you have spent $275,000 already? No, no, no. So here's where that's a – I think it's just sort of a transposed. I don't think it's supposed to say that. It was a mistake there. So where we are, and here's where we actually are. So last week – So what was the answer there? That was – we'll just say this. That's a fancy way to say we put the total there wrong. I don't know how – I think it's kind of a copy of that. Total is incorrect, I understand. Total is incorrect. Thank you very much. The money we have is $742,000 for the design work for Phase 6. Which we need, but we don't know what the route is yet. Correct, and that's what we're going to get through the design phase. So what the design phase will get us is a route from McConnell Springs to Oliver Lewis Way. Very good. And from that, we can estimate the right-of-way costs, the utility relocation, and then the construction costs. And while we have done, and again, we've discussed in here before some of the work that we have done in the distillery district proper in terms of giving an estimate or giving an idea of where the trail might go in just the distillery district, this phase six actually encompasses farther out. It goes from when it starts in McConnell Springs, just getting to the distillery district, to the pepper buildings and those other areas is a significant challenge. And so that's why this will cover that entire time. In the feasibility study that we have reported on in the past, there are some alternative routes through the distillery district that will be incorporated into this or used as part of the design phase. But we are in process, or as I'll show you, we just met last Monday to select a consultant. We selected a consultant for Sections 4, 5, and 6 and what we call the mid-block crossing, which is to McConnell Springs. So it gets us across Manchester right out there. And so this is where we've got that. We've selected them. I will not name them just because I don't believe the contracts are done. This is, again, this is literally a week ago. But we have picked it. At this point, we will be doing the designs for Sections 4, 5, and the mid-block crossing. We expect those to be finished this year just because, again, we already have a decent estimate or a decent idea of where those routes will go. And we hope to do construction starting in 2016 for Sections 4 and 5 and also the mid-block crossing. Section 6, as I've discussed, this design is just going to be more laborious. And obviously I think there's probably going to be a little bit more public input in this part as well, just because we will be going through the distillery district proper, and that's where they're going to have more stakeholder involvement in that part of the design. So we have selected them. They will be, once the contracts are signed and done, that design work will begin as quickly as possible. So the hydrology study, also related to a very strong interest, is the hydrology study. And again, we've discussed this previously in Environmental Quality and Public Works, exactly what this study entails. This is the overall area of the study. It encompasses a very large area in terms of a more specific towards the distillery district, the area of the floodplain delineation. That's a fancy way of saying redrawing the floodplain lines, which is one of the key parts to the hydrology study as it relates to the distillery district. We know where the existing floodplain is, and this has been the issue in the distillery district for years, is it's a floodplain delineation that was done in the 70s. We don't necessarily believe that it's accurate, and so in the process of this larger hydrology study, we are studying exactly where the floodplain is now, And that's the part that will be important. So here's where we are in terms of that. The data is being collected, and it needs to feed a computer model. This will give us the 100-year floodplain, and this is what drives pretty much everything. When we do our stormwater and other estimates, it's based on that 100-year flood elevation. This is where insurance and a lot of other parts take place. We have to calibrate it with historical data from past storm events as well. Vice Mayor Kay has a question. Yes. If you would not mind backing up, the hydrology study, first the big map, that's the entire area that was studied. Is that correct? This is the entire area that will be impacted by the hydrology study, yes. So what is, I'm sorry, I'm not clear. Does the study cover the whole area? Yes. When you say it's impacted by. Yes, it covers that entire area. And again, from a distillery district focus, the most important for this area is the floodplain delineation. That's why I'm giving the overall study. But when we discussed this hydrology study originally, it does encompass this entire area. And will that study include delineation of the other floodplain areas? Where necessary and where there are issues, yes. And if I can't follow up, where necessary, under what conditions would that happen? Where there are actual changes. So this is the issue with the hydrology study. It will discuss those areas in terms of where there are actual. Again, one of the things within here is, as Charlie Martin has mentioned, I'm not going to throw Charlie out here, but we have the town branch stays in its banks underneath Vine Street right now. So there's really not a floodplain issue as long as it's in a culvert. So it's not so much an issue there, but there are other places within here where there may actually be some floodplain issues that could be addressed. I guess where I'm going with my question is if, for instance, the Towne Branch Trail, if we wanted to further delineate that, do we have the information from this hydrology study, or does it require additional study to determine where the floodplain for any particular watershed stream? If you're talking about through the downtown where it's currently in the culvert? As an example. Well, they will not study where it's in a culvert because right now there is no floodplain because it's in a culvert. So it will not be part of the study per se. They can't study it because it's contained. So it's where it daylights out the back that the study starts to. So are there delineated floodplain areas that if someone wanted to do something in, then you'd have to do further study? Or does this hydrology study provide the information that they need? It should provide the information that's needed. It should provide the information needed. And again, I focused solely on this area for this presentation because that's the part that's most germane to the distillery district update. But the hydrology study does cover a larger area. Okay. And as I remember, the rationale for doing that larger area was that it was necessary to study a larger area to get to the point of being able to delineate that particular floodplain. Is that right? Correct. Great. Thank you. Thank you, Chair. And again, as we're getting to here, we are the— Just wait one second. Yes. You're good. Thank you, sir. Councilman Massadi. I think at this point my questions have been answered. I'm good. Very good. Thank you, ma'am. Proceed. And where we are in terms of the calibration is that data. So it's questionnaires to property owners is one of the things that we went over at our update meeting, our coordination meeting. There are questionnaires going out to property owners about, you know, their experiences. You know, have they seen where is the water, as well as looking at flow meters and field data as well. And we do have two storms to which we have data. It's not all flow meter, but it's also field data as well. and this is from the August 10th storm of 2014 and then the most recent storm on April 3rd. And this is just a little bit more in terms of the next steps, what happens next. So we complete the calibration of the model, and we get to the submission to FEMA. Yes, sir. You're doing such a great job. People want to jump right in. That's great. Council Member Mazzotti. I'm sorry. I should have thought this through a little bit more, but let me ask you one question. And when you're talking about the floodplain delineation here, you may compromise some businesses that want to go in there because they would have to now pay floodplain insurance, correct? Well, actually, that's what we're getting ready to talk about in terms of the next steps. Where we feel this will help is actually to reduce those issues. Because what we believe, and this is something that we're trying to get to the point of, this floodplain was created, I believe, back in around 1970. It was when it was delineated last. where we believe it is, we just don't know to what level, is how much is that a realistic, I think it's eight feet above. I think it's like an eight-foot floodplain right now, which means the first floor of many buildings in the Steele District is kind of off limits from a building perspective and from an insurance perspective. We do not believe it is that level, and so this study will help us determine where it really is. And it may mean that it's at one foot. It may mean it's at two feet or three feet. And in terms of where we are, it's in gathering this data, and where we will get next is to submit this once the model has been calibrated using the field data and the flow data as well as the questionnaires. That model will be submitted to FEMA. Once it's been preliminarily approved, we can start issuing building permits based on what the model determines is what that floodplain actually is. In terms of the insurance going down, that will take final approval by FEMA, which may be a couple years out. And so I put two to three years because I don't want to be – You don't ever want to be optimistic about how long it will take for a floodplain to be approved by FEMA, but that's when the insurance levels will go down based on this new delineation of the floodplain. I just want to make sure it didn't compromise any existing businesses that were there now that maybe aren't paying insurance but now may have to as a result of the study. And we do not believe it will go – we don't believe it's going to go up. I mean, it's at – again, I believe it's at eight feet right now. We think anywhere it's going to go, it's going to go down. The question is how much it will go down, and that's what the model is being calibrated for. And that's where those storm events, again, you can say we're lucky that we had a big storm, two big storms. And that helps with gathering that field data. That helps with where we have some flow meters. And, again, it also helps even with the questionnaires to property owners. Where did they see it? And as I'll show you, we even have our own engineers were able to go down and take some pictures on the 3rd of April to even show. So the typical dry weather stream level is on the left or on my left. And then this was the storm event. So you see it's well below the road. That was on the 3rd of April, which is a pretty significant storm. So I think this will help in terms of gathering. This is the field data that we talk about. So this is some of the actual observations by the engineers and others where we can gather that data. It goes into the calibration of that model. We then submit it to FEMA. And once we have that, again, when we submit that model, it will tell us where we feel that floodplain actually is. From that, we can then go to building permits once it's got that preliminary approval. And then after final approval of FEMA, we can get to the insurance rates should go down. Again, depending on where that floodplain actually finally gets delineated as. All right. Thank you. Thank you, Chair. Well, first off, nice use of the packet to answer your question. Well done. And then Council Member Fred Brown has a question. Yes. Yes. Thank you, Chair. I guess I need a little history lesson here because a lot of this has been done and started before I came back on Council. So, and if you could indulge me on that, when did you start this process? The process of the hydrology study? No, the process of the whole trail. Of the trail? Yes. The whole project. The whole project. The whole, well, and again, we're discussing a couple different things here within the context of the distillery district. I would have to, if I go back to this large map. That one, yes. In terms of out here, I mean, this is typical of trail systems. They've been constructed over a period of time. I can get you, and I just don't have it. If I had Keith Lovin here right now, he could give you the full history of when this first phase of the trail went in. And, again, all I can give you at this point is it is built up to this point. Yes. And, again, allows access back into Madison Station Park. It goes back into the 90s. I'm just not sure how far into the 90s. But we can get you that information in terms of when all the things were constructed. That's okay. I just thought maybe you'd do it. It's been coming for a while. Okay. And what's the projection of completion time? And that's where, when we come back to this phase right here, 4, 5, and 6, again, we are built up to where that red line starts. That's where phases 4, 5, and 6 basically take over. Where we hope to be is beginning construction this time next year. And that's truly going to be determined, as construction often is, how well, how fast we can get through the design phases, and then how fast we can then put that out to bid and then weather. But we hope to be under construction this time next year and that we can get it done in that construction season. So we hope up to McConnell's Trace. It will take you from McConnell Spring, or not McConnell Spring, but from Masterson Station all the way to, if we can get it done, it will be up to, I'm trying to see where the mid-block crossing is. But there's a right here. So it will take us to the mid-block crossing. You keep referring to a trail. What's the dimension? What is the trail? It's, I believe, the standard 10-feet-wide trail. If you've not ever seen it, I actually have some great presentations on that. Okay, like any of the others. It is, yes. And that's going to be used by? It's quite heavily used currently by residents out in Madison Station. Pedestrians, bicycles? Absolutely, both, all. And where we really hope, where this has a chance to be really transformative is this will be one of the first ones, even when we get it connected up here. This is a significant, to me, this is a significant connection right here that gets us to Townley Center because this will be, in my estimation, one of the first trails where you can literally go from these subdivisions out here by Masterson Station, ride it all the way in off-road to a shopping destination. You can go get restaurants, ice cream, et cetera. And what's the total length of this trail when it's finished? Oh, I'd have to get to that as well. I'm not sure the exact length, and part of that is going to be determined by, in all reality by how we go this final route and where it finally ends up. So we've got one and two that's been completed and funded? And three as well. And how much general? Are we using any general fund money in that? In four, five, and six? Yeah. No. Four, five, and six is all completely donated by the governor. I see something local there. Four, phase four. Maybe I can't read it. No, this is the money. Phases four, five, and six was where the governor came and did the announcement last year at McConnell Springs about the funding for this. I noticed on your map, you know, the one where you showed the total distance, you got unfunded. Well, this is a— Five and six. So here's what I'll tell you. This is the only map we have that shows the entire length of the trail. So four, five, and six, and this is the slides right here, this funding was earmarked by the governor. Four phases, four, five, and six. Where we hope to get is if we can get, again, if we can get design for Phase 6 done as quickly as possible, being able to go back and try to get that, as we say. We don't have right-of-way utility relocation or construction money at that point. That's where we hope to be able to do is to go back and get that money for that. So does it look good that we're going to get the funding there? That's a great question. State's resources. Go vote. I think it depends on who the governor is and how quickly we can get through this. Okay. We can get it out there quickly. So it's a year-by-year type of deal then as far as getting to that. But right now we're not putting any general fund money in there. Correct. Phases four, five, and six are funding from the governor. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, sir. And now Council Member Richard Maloney. Thanks, Derek. My question is I'm glad we're doing the hydrology study. This should have been done first before we did those other phases because I think it would have helped out some of those developments that we had at the distilleries where they're never flooded before, but they're in like nine-foot flood leverage in some areas. So it sounds like to me you've already done all that study now. Now the next step is to try to get this stuff to FEMA and try to get them out of the flood place? We're currently at that calibration of the model. So that's where the next step is to, with the data that we're collecting, we're still in data collection mode, is to calibrate that model and then submit it to FEMA. and that's where when we calibrate that model, it will give us an indication of where that floodplain actually is. We submit it to FEMA, and at that stage, we can start doing the preliminary approval. Again, that's the building permit standpoint, for where there's not the issue for us as a local entity to issue those building permits in that floodplain. Because, again, under the new model, after preliminary approval, we hope it will be much lower than that eight feet. Well, it should be. It should be. We agree. At this point, though, the key is, although we may think it's lower, we don't have that number as to where it is. Is it at 3 feet? Is it at 4 feet? Is it lower? Is it eliminated? We don't know. And that's the purpose of this hydrology study is to really give us that delineation. We know it's, again, by all record, by everyone's discussion, it's not at 8 feet. But we've got to give that delineation as to where it is. And that's what this will get us. Okay. So when do you all hope to have those numbers? The preliminary monitoring? With that, I'm thinking we're hoping to be able to get it. Part of it is determined, and this is one of the key things. We've got our two rain events. Part of it's about, again, one of the things, questionnaires to property owners. The more information we get from property owners and the more rain events that we can use to calibrate that model accurately, the better. So some of it, again, we're happy we've had a wet spring. That's been good. If we can get a little more rain, it will help even more. If we hit a very dry spell, I'm not sure how that will impact it. But it could. But, I mean, can we use what has happened over the last 20 years? I mean, we've had three major floods and none of it. We do. That area never flooded. And that's the questionnaires. So this is where the questionnaires to property owners comes in. Because we can't go back and recalibrate based on information we don't have in terms of field data we didn't collect at that time. So this is where the questionnaires to the long-term property owners are so essential. What did you ever see? Did it ever come up to the back, you know, to six feet on your property? That's where those questionnaires are very helpful. and we're trying to get as good a compliance in terms of returning a response rate on those questionnaires as we can. Every bit helps. The last question I have, once we get these models and all that, and hopefully when do you hope to get to FEMA? I know we had this problem in the 11th District when I was a council member. We got houses out of the flood area that never flooded, but it took a while to get those letters from FEMA. I'm just wondering when you're all banking and hoping. I threw in there what I hope is a conservative estimate of two to three years from submission to where we can get to that insurance level to where things are where it's fully recognized. And this is the new floodplain. And that's where the insurance rates will be different based on that. And, again, this is where we're in many senses just guessing because we just don't know what their, you know, how many other loaners are they going to be reviewing at that time around the country. So a lot of it's determined on their workload and various other things. But we hope to be able to get it to them as soon as possible because there is going to be some relief for the building permits aspect where we're not dealing with those on a local level. While, again, it will not provide relief in terms of the insurance rates, it will in terms of being able to at least go through less hoops from a building permit standpoint. The group that you have now doing this, I was amazed at what their price came in to do all this. It was incredible because when we were doing four years ago, they wanted to look at $700,000 or more for another group. But these guys came in way less than it seemed like they're doing a heck of a good job. Right. One of the reasons that is because we're piggybacking on larger work that they're doing. So that kind of helps. In fact, it really helps a great deal. Thank you. Thank you, sir. Councilmember Akers, a guest for the day, has a question, too. Thank you, Chair. I agree with Council Member Maloney that we should have done this study in 2009 or 2010 when we first bonded $2 million to improve the district. But is there, I thought that the RFP included a completion date and deadline for submitting the LOMER letters and stuff to FEMA. Yeah, and again, what I'm just going to tell you is a lot of it is, as you really know, a lot of it is determined based on the ability to get the data to calibrate it. But what I'm going to tell you is we hope to submit it this summer, and I think we're still on that track, but I'm not going to throw – I don't want to be overly optimistic and then be back here in the fall and you say, why didn't we? And I just say it didn't rain enough or something like that. But that is our hope is to get it out there as soon as possible to be able to submit it to FEMA. Did the snow that we had this winter, was that helpful at all? That's a good question. I think generally when it comes to the floodplains and flood issues, it's that runoff. And I think, you know, there might have been, again, did we have people out there capturing field data? We did. Because there was, if you remember, I believe it was March, the very big snow event in March. It rained pretty soon right after and got warm, and there was a lot of snow melt. I don't think that's as big of an issue as a 7-inch rain in a 24-hour period. Sure. And so I think it's good that we have data at both, And that's one of the things that these consultants were doing, as well as our own engineers, is going out and checking on that field data. And I know you received video footage from one of the owners that's located right on the creek, and it didn't approach the bank. And I went down there as well just to look and see how close it was to the bank. It was rushing, and as they joked, we could have ridden a canoe to Frankfurt in probably five minutes that day. But needless to say, it was nowhere near the bank, so that was good. It is, and that's the great thing. And, again, it's one of those things that there's a silver lining out of a seven-inch rainstorm. And, again, there's a really good map, and I didn't bring it because it's not so pertinent here, but just to talk about that storm, there are parts of Fayette County that that was a thousand-year flood. Really? There are parts where we got a lot more than we had in the distillery district or a lot more than we had in my neighborhood. And I know we had a little bit of water in my basement, but in parts of Fayette County the rainfall was so extreme that it bordered on a thousand-year flood. Right. All right. That's all I have. Thank you, Chair. Thank you, ma'am. You had a couple more slides, sir. We do. One last section is the U.K. trunk line. And this is just a construction project. This is part of the remedial measures plan. And this information I got most recently updated by Vernon Acevedo, who is the project manager for all this. And this is, I put a box around it here to kind of show where it impacts Manchester. And this is, again, this runs, and this is important for you, Councilmember Farmer. This trunk line runs the entire length, basically, of Euclid. It starts down in the Stoey District and terminates at the corner of Euclid High and Tate's Creek. So on that way, and this is where we will eventually, I'm sure there will be more discussion as we go through. Oh, yeah. It will be coming down Euclid eventually. We're starting at the low point, which is down on Manchester. And this first section, trunk A, goes from Manchester to Derudy Street. We are in design phase right now with construction to be next year. And, again, these are estimates that I received from Vernon. One of the questions that we've had is how are they going to go, you know, how is this going to impact Manchester when they do this construction? And at this point, it's proposed to bore under Manchester. There will be some impact. There's no doubt that when you're putting in a new trunk line, there will be some impact on Manchester in terms of traffic flow. But boring under will probably be less, and I'll leave that to the experts on that. But at this point, the proposal is to bore under as opposed to just tear up the road completely, which should have at least some less negative impact on the traffic on Manchester Street. So will the biggest benefit be just a larger line or a new line that's larger? I believe it is a larger pipe. I probably have it. If you want, Charlie can probably come down and tell you the size of the pipe. It's pretty significant. Well, we've already been off topic. May as well enjoy ourselves. And then I have Council Member Maloney just in a moment, though. Yes, sir. I believe it's a 36-inch pipe, but it might be a 42. But it's fairly substantial. In order to be able to bore under Manchester, we'll have to dig basically a pit on each side, one that you insert the pipe under and the other one that you receive it in. So it'll be a fairly big operation on each side of the road, but be able to maintain traffic to and fro in the road. All right. Very good. Thank you. Council Member Maloney. Richard. Is your mic on? He's on. I'm sorry. How did this get into the distillery district update? Because where it starts, that's Manchester. And so it will have an impact on the traffic on Manchester. This is technically within the distillery district. Here's the rail line. So this is the east section of the distillery district. Farther down on the map is the west section where the Pepper Distillery and others are. So this is kind of the buster section up in here. So the reason I brought this up is because in terms of traffic coming down Manchester, going to places such as the Pepper Distillery and, again, where a lot of the new development is going on, this could have an impact on traffic. And so I felt it important to provide that information so that when there is construction in 2016, people are going to say, what is that? Well, this is what it is. And this is why we provide the same information in our coordination meetings with the distillery district folks so they know what to expect when it's coming. And, again, we're in design phase now. Construction will be in 2016. And when we build this, this is going to be Charlie's money, I assume, that's going to pay for this. This is part of the remedial measures plan. When they build this, is there going to be a lot more water going in there, and is this going to have an effect on a hydraulic survey? I mean, is that going to have an impact on it? Or is there going to be a lot more water going through there quicker, or is it going to be the same kind of amount of water going through? This is all sanitary sewer, so it's not related to the hydrology. So this is the sewer? This is the sanitary sewer, and it's the first leg of replacing the entire trunk sewer, basically from the plant all the way up to the upper reaches of Town Branch, particularly into, as he mentioned earlier, into the Euclid Avenue area. Okay. I thought this was a stormwater. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, sir. Council Members Tennant. Thank you, Chair. So, Charlie, you may not want to go too far. So how did the timing of this, how did this get included in the distillery discussion? Because for two years I chaired this committee, and we never once heard this mention in conjunction with the distillery project. So why the timing now? This wasn't on any of our other sewer lists either to do at this point. So did we speed up something? Did we put something on hold? How did we get to today being the first time we've seen this? It's always been in the red, white, and blue sheet. It has, but not in the distillery project. We don't look at things in terms of the distillery district. We look at it in terms of trying to abate recurring sanitaries who are overflows. But I think in Vernon's efforts to make sure that he's inclusive with all different sections of government about what we're doing, Commissioner Paulson recognized that there was an impact with what water quality is doing in relation to the distillery district project. And I'm not speaking for him, but I think what he said was he felt like it was important and he brought it to your attention. So this has always been part in the timing to be this year on this? Yes, sir. For some reason, I thought this was pushed further into the future on the sheets. And I can go back and pull those sheets and see what the dates were. But I saw 2017. Yeah, we're in the design phase right now, and we're beginning construction in 2016. I don't have it committed to memory either, and it may be one that we're finishing in 2017. It's a tough project, I mean, because it's really tight on each side of Manchester Street. When I mentioned the receiving pit and the boring pit, I was mentally thinking about how hard that would be because it's tight through there. And whatever existing utilities are in the way, it may not be an easy receiving thing. And also, this project is dependent on the sewer line that will be replaced as part of the Newtown Pike extension because that's getting done by the state. And we have to have this one done before that one's done because we're obviously starting at the bottom of the hill working our way up. So will this new trunk line allow additional connections in the area? Is that the purpose of doing it, to prevent overflows? Yeah, it would be for prevention of reoccurring overflows. In the further upstream areas, we have existing cross connections in the Park Avenue area in the neighborhoods off of Euclid Avenue to where it was built this way to where sewage overflows into the storm sewers on purpose during severe rains. So it'll alleviate the problem on that end, but it has nothing to do with the distillery district and alleviate issues. It doesn't, but I think that, like I said, is that the recognition that if, let's use it for a cap standpoint, you know, is that, you know, obviously that building a new sewer line that has larger capacity relieves any cap or capacity assurance program risks that may be involved, although the 20 million gallon tank we're building in Town Branch right now has a much larger impact than that pipeline does. So there is credit that will be given to the area because of this project? Correct. And do we have a list of people who are on a waiting list for credits, or do we already have credits in that bank? I'll be honest with you. I didn't come prepared for that right now. I don't think that we have anybody on the waiting list in that particular bank, but I'll verify that. Yeah, if you could, that'd be great. Thank you. Thank you, Chair. Thank you, sir. And then Council Member Mazzotti. Commissioner Paulson, one quick question. I know we're spending a lot of money here for the distillery district. Are we doing this concurrently with what the mayor has proposed in the budget? I think there's $10 million proposed for the downtown activity, for opening up the park and so forth. Are you specifically speaking about the Town Branch Trail? Yes. It is a component. I mean, I think we've been working on the Town Branch Trail, starting from the westernmost reaches in Masterson Station again, I think to Council Member Brown's question, it's been going on for quite a long time. This has been a long-time project. Will it connect? Yes. Was it designed? I mean, are the two related? Absolutely. And I think we are benefiting greatly from a lot of community effort, from a lot of people to push the Town Branch Trail again, starting from out in Masterson, coming down to connect at Oliver Lewis. It's been tremendous community outreach to get it moving. and the governor extending that money to make sections 4, 5, and 6 a reality has been a really big part of this. I'm not talking about community outreach specifically. I'm talking about consultants. We're talking about studies. We're talking about a lot of money. And I'm just wondering if all this is being done concurrently because you've got a $10 million proposal in the budget coming up for us. Will it have an impact? I mean, again, to my understanding, the downtown section will end at Oliver Lewis Way. Well, this one will begin. so they're not going beyond if i go back to this uh the map here where this section where the parts that we're talking about here are funded that end at the limits of the distillery district it is ending at oliver lewis way here is the the uk lot where the next section will be which is the downtown section so the the study and the design and everything in construction are all designed to end at oliver lewis way the part that we will hear more about this afternoon starts right there. So basically they're not concurrent. They're two separate projects. Well, they're two separate times, but they're really part of the same whole. And just as we've got multiple phases to this project, I think we view them as all as multiple phases as well. So we've got sections four, five, and six that we're talking about now. You could say the next phase, which is, again, the downtown section could be phase seven. But the way that we do them, the way that we have phased them in terms of design and construction and right-of-way utilities they are all part of the same again and the hope with this this this project that you'll see for downtown is to connect up on the other side to the legacy trail so so they're concurrent then correct okay thank you thank you ma'am i just had the last slide just says questions questions beautiful that's nice just had to get to it um council members tenet thank you chair just to kind of bring this to a point commissioner um council member brown's point this kind of started in 2009 and got on our front plate when the council made a decision to bond, what, $2.2 million to get some activity, some work done in the distillery district, streetscapes, et cetera, when we found out that the developer that we put faith behind didn't have a plan. After all, didn't do a feasibility study, didn't do a hydrology study, which should have been done. And now we're left with how much is left in that bond? We spent $413 on the feasibility, $109 on hydrology, and we have about $1.678 left. So you have money sitting there that we're paying debt service on that can't be utilized until all the work that the commissioner just went through needs to be done. So how far are we out from actually doing any real construction work and needing funding from this council? And that's a good question. I mean, in terms of the earliest we would be doing any construction in the part of the distillery district, I think the way that we would discuss, and I'll go back to the slide here, for this last section of the trail, this is all we have at this point is design. When you look at the length of this section, it is from here to here. It is the largest section in terms of length. We know there is a significant amount of right-of-way and utility relocation that will have to take place. And, again, we don't even have at this point an estimate of where the route will go. The things that we will have to do before we even get to construction are right-of-way acquisition and utility relocation. And, again, with a significant amount of utilities in that area, it's probably going to push it back. And, again, to get on the utilities' time schedule is going to push it back even farther. I would say for within the actual distillery district, that last section, I can't imagine we'd be doing any construction before 2017, possibly 2018. Because, again, we are just, we don't even have the contract signed on the design phase for this at this point. Well, I mean, you know, so we're at least three years away from any real activity. And what that money was originally supposed to be used for was streetscape, but we can't do sidewalks. we can't do additional street lighting until we get the utilities moved, until those repairs are done, because otherwise we'd tear up the street and everything we work on. So, you know, I've said it before amongst this council, I've said it in our budget retreat, it's wrong to sit here on this money and pay debt service on a project that's not going to happen for three more years. So, Chair, I want to make a motion today that we move that money to the economic infrastructure fund that's proposed in the budget and not bond additional money to go into that fund because we have money sitting here that we can utilize for that fund, which was placed in the mayor's budget. So moved. Second. Okay. We've got a motion and a second on... In which I'll add the distillery district will be eligible for the funds. They can apply for it, like everyone else, and we'll hear, I'm sure, more about in the next couple weeks. But I would move that to that fund. All right. Do you just want to say it one more time, just a little bit slower? Sure. Move the remaining balance of the bond proceeds for the distillery district into the economic infrastructure fund, which is proposed in the mayor's budget, and not bond that money. Okay. Go into additional debt. Knock down the amount that we would bond in the proposed budget by using these dollars now. Yes. Okay. All right. Now, we're in discussion on the motion, but I'm going to stick with my list here. Council member, pardon me, Vice Mayor Kaye. Thank you, Chair. I may be able to support this motion, but first, I've been asking this question for quite a while, so I'm going to ask it again. Are there any improvements that could be done that would be consistent with whatever happens down in the distillery district? And the reason I ask the question is that there's been a fair amount of private investment. And while that private investment is going on, they suffer from a street that's not in good shape, from sidewalks that are not in good shape, from the failure of any additional amenities. So before I would be comfortable shifting that money, I want to know, is there anything that can be done to provide support for the people who have already invested in the distillery district and are having some success despite the fact that people drive in and say, you know, whoever would have thought this was going on, you drive down Manchester Street and, you know, it doesn't look like anything. So is there a way that some of those funds could be used now for infrastructure that will not be affected no matter what alternative plans are adopted? And I would say it's – I would not say that we could say, yes, we can just go ahead and do road or sidewalk at this point. Without a route through here, I would not say we could do that. And again, one of the reasons why, when we did the feasibility study and looked at possible routes through the distillery district, and again, if I had a slide, I would throw it up here at this time, but I'll try to just show you based on this map. This section here is the west section. This is the east section. On one of the proposed, and again, through the feasibility study, there were different alternative routes through the distillery district. This one obviously was the one we wanted to get closest to the town branch. on the east section, one of the proposed was to go at grade on the sidewalk. So it actually would be sidewalk improvements. Without a final route, without even a conceptual route beyond just that, I think it's too early to say, yes, we should go in there and redo the sidewalks anywhere in here when we may be coming back through and redoing them again. And again, when it comes to streetscape and sidewalk improvements, which are probably one of the main ones to do here, and again, one of the reasons I brought Charlie's project up is we're going to be right here. That's where all that construction Charlie's talking about in terms of the trunk line. So there is significant other things going on right now that may entail tearing up Manchester Street. And again, a road that's the state's road that is not currently in the five-year plan to even be improved, widened, straightened, or anything. And again, this is part of the work that we need to be discussing as we go forward with this design of the trail. How might those infrastructure needs be put in? And at this point, without a route, without even knowing where the trail is going to go, I think it would be a stretch to say we should put in sidewalks or fix the road at this point. And again, the road would have to be programmed in through the MPO and put into the road plan. So I think what I take away from that, that the answer is no. And that if anybody from the distillery district asks us why nothing is happening, the answer is we don't want to spend the money because we might have to redo some part of the project. And don't look for that in the next couple of years. I don't like to build a sidewalk and tear it up. That's one of the things I try to avoid. I understand. All I'm trying to do is be clear, because people who've been watching the development down there say, well, you know, all this part of investment and government is spending money in lots of different places. Why are they not supporting it where it's actually happening? If the answer is we don't want to do it because it will cost us money in the long run, we're doing studies, it'll take a couple of years, then money might be available. That's okay. Yeah, and I'll say this. I think we've got a couple examples where we're trying to get out in front of these sorts of projects, and we're timing them with things such as, again, UK trunk line. One of the things we're trying to do is we know Euclid's going to be torn up, trying to get out in front of that and study and say when that is done, how would we go through after it's done and do any improvements there? I think we're looking at the same kind of thing here. Without the trail, we don't know what the improvements are going to be. And again, from a streetscape standpoint, that can be part of the trail design. In fact, it usually is, are those sorts of packages that are the sidewall, you know, the kind of the finishing. But they are the finishing touches on a trail and on a streetscape. The last thing's done, not the first thing's done. Okay. So, again, just to put a fine point on it, the appropriate answer is we're not going to be investing in infrastructure for at least a year and a half to three years in the distillery district. Correct. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Chair. Thank you, Vice Mayor. Council Member Fred Brown, to the motion then? Yes. Thank you, Chair. First question. I want to go back. I asked you, I think, originally if there was any general fund money used for any of this project, and I think the answer was no. But then I'm finding out that we put $2.2 million in in 2009 out of general fund. My understanding, and if I answered that incorrectly, I thought you were talking about the Town Branch Trail. Well, it's just not all the time. And again, what's the $2 million two for? Let me go back real quick on my answer. All I could tell you about is Sections 4, 5, and 6, to which I do not know about the preceding aspects. There probably is a local match on Sections 1 through 3. I don't know what that is, but I can get you that information. But you're saying the $2.2 million was not town branched to your knowledge? $2.2 million, it was bonded to do a couple things. Design and construction of a trail, to which we have not done the design and construction of the trail. Okay. Again, the money for the design and construction of four, five, and six is coming from the governor, and then also streetscape improvements. That was the original bond back in 2009. Okay. And, again, what we've spent that on, we spent $413,000 on the feasibility study and then $109,000 on the hydrology study. Out of general fund? Out of bonded funds. Yes, general fund bonds. Well, the general fund's paying for it. We have another commissioner on deck. Bill O'Meara. Pardon? Do you have something to add to this, sir? Yes, I wanted him to answer. I want him to answer the next question. Generally, when we bond money, we're supposed to spend it within a certain period of time. What's the situation on this million-six we have left? Well, we bonded this in the 2010 issue, and there had been no activity. So when we did last year's bond, the 2014 issue, we flipped part of the money that was in the 2014 bond for the Senior Citizens Center So we spent down the 2010 proceeds so that we were within guidelines on spending that money and added this to the 2014. So we reset the clock on the time that council would need to make a decision on how to spend these dollars. So is the motion correct that we can take that $1.6 million and reallocate it to, what did you say, the economic infrastructure? Yes. There's no problem there from the bonding. I don't believe so. Okay, that's fine. Thank you. Thank you, sir. Council Member Akers. Thank you, Chair. I'm not really necessarily opposed to moving the funds. I do recall, though, that we talked about this in my budget link, about the million dollars for the economic investment. The economic infrastructure fund. Infrastructure fund. And that you weren't certain you could spend the million. You were hopeful that you would have enough projects to spend the full million. So my question would be, what is the likelihood you think you could spend 1.6 in the next fiscal year if given this money? First time we're doing it, and I'll give you the general overview of it, is it is a fund that will be available for publicly constructed, generally, or publicly dedicated infrastructure. Again, storms, sanitary, access roads related to economic development. So the component that will be the key is jobs, and this will flow along with the jobs fund board. And at this point, we don't know. I mean, it's what's out there in terms of economic development. I would hope we would spend it, but a lot of that's going to depend on the kinds of people that are coming and that we're attracting or trying to attract in terms of jobs here in Lexington. I think this one thing I will say is in our economic development work group that we're having in terms of the ED zone, Commerce Lexington has been a very strong supporter of this because they know that this is one of the things that they have not been able to use. I mean, it's one of those things that we – it's something that could be beneficial. And as an example, in terms of that million dollars, how far it will go or won't go, two most recent projects in which an access road was put in for economic development projects, Sumitomo was one and the other was Tempur-Pedic, was a total of, I believe, around $700,000. So there would still be enough room for doing more projects. And again, I think our idea is to spend this, and the idea as well is to have it roll over. So if we spend a million of the $1.6 million, we would then have in the next year to only allocate maybe $400,000 or so for the following year to keep that million-dollar fund available. But that's our thoughts at this point. And, again, I think that that's a great idea. But I also would, and I think I mentioned this in the budget link as well, that I would caution that we limit it to just projects that create jobs, that we promote and talk about constantly in fill and redevelopment. And so if someone wanted to propose an apartment building or an apartment complex or residential facility that wouldn't necessarily create jobs but would provide for infill and redevelopment, but they needed sewers or sewer capacity, that we would consider using these funds for that type of project as well. Yeah, and I understand that, but I think where our focus is, I think we really do have an issue in terms of attracting jobs. And the things that we're talking about in this work group is how do we, what are some things that we can get involved in this rather than just saying it's beautiful, We've got a great city. We've got high education. We've got a lot of great things. We need to have more skin in the game, and this is our way to do that. And the reason that we're tying it to jobs is because, I mean, that's how our general fund, that's the vast majority of what our general fund is made up of. And there's ability to recoup that investment through the payroll taxes through this. And I think it's a different, it allows us to have a way to weigh those a little easier. What you're looking at is when you've got various different applications, one apartment on one side of town versus an apartment on another side of town, and infill versus a – it becomes a very different dynamic, a very different argument. There's property taxes, too, though, if it's a blighted area that is not bringing in any money and then it's converted into something useful and tax revenue. Absolutely, and I think that's a valid point. But in terms of how we're trying to attract from a larger standpoint, from a larger public policy standpoint, those jobs are very important. And I think we need to work on some infrastructure, some infill incentives, But I think it's got to be, in terms of how we weigh that out, weighing the different applicants. And again, what we have here from an infrastructure standpoint with jobs is we know the proposed number of jobs and the salaries they're going to bring in and what type of investment we'll get. If someone comes in and they're going to bring in 10 jobs at $1,750 an hour versus they want a $200,000 infrastructure, that we can look at and say, does that make financial sense for us to invest $200,000 in infrastructure for jobs that may not pay that well over 10 years? Okay, I just have a minute left, so I have a few more questions here. Recently, or over the past several years, we have talked about in the distillery district the need for curbs and the lack of curbs, the lack of gutters and storm drains in the district. Recently, last week, the street was paved by the state, and so that has caused additional problems with flooding in some of the buildings that are located there that don't have curbs and storm drains and sewers along the street. So could any of this money be used to build that kind of infrastructure? and before you answer that one. Also, sewers. We talked about with Charlie a couple years ago, there was no sewers in the district, and that was a big problem for developing the Pepper Campus. Those folks down there built their own pump station because the city didn't have the infrastructure for toilets. So now we're going to take the money and give it to some other business somewhere else in the city so they can build infrastructure. So my question is, why can't we either reimburse those guys for the pump station they built or add on to the current infrastructure of sewers in that area and or curbs and gutters and storm infrastructure? Two different questions. One is a road question in terms of curbs and gutters and all that. That is a full road project. We don't just go in and put in curbs and gutters. It's similar to questions that we've talked about in terms of sidewalks. In some parts of town, sidewalks are not just sidewalks. They're part of a full road project. This would be a full road project put in curbs, gutters, and storm gutters in particular on that road. we would have to get that program through the MPO and get that in the road plan. That is currently not in the road plan. It should probably be, but that's something we have to move forward. And, again, that is a state road, so us just going in there. And I'll also say this. To do that will take a significant amount of time. We would then have to find the money. We'd have to go through, do the design, bid it out, and then, again, the construction of it will cost, I will just say this, a lot more than the $1.6 million that we would have. In terms of sewers, and I'll let Charlie correct me on this, we don't build sewers. When it's a greenfield development, any developer that's built out, Ball, Anderson, others, they put in that and they dedicate it to the city. That's part of a development cost. And I think that's something we have not discussed before in terms of us going in and building infrastructure that's usually dedicated to us. But every greenfield development that's gone on in the last I don't know how many years, they build it and dedicate it to us. That's the point about building it with that infrastructure fund, is that this is something that would be publicly dedicated to us anyway. Very good. Thank you. Council Member Evans, again on the motion, supposedly. Yes. Thank you. Yeah. I do have a question about the motion. Is this, is it a recommendation to be presented to the full council? Okay. Okay. Okay. And then on that, I guess I'm not comfortable. I think I might be along with Council Member Akers, but I'm not quite comfortable with automatically delegating it to a certain area when we haven't had that full discussion. So I'm presuming that would be the next discussion if it does come out of committee to where it could go or how it could be spent, because I'm not comfortable voting on it being spent right now or going directly someplace else. We were kind of talking about options right now, but personally, just as a new council member, I think I would need to digest this a little bit more. So is that the expectation that we would have that discussion later on? Well, sure, I'll take this. I mean, I think the idea would be that if we sanction this today, because this is a motion that has, in my opinion, direct implication on the budget. So we'd have to read it out in some capacity before we would take action on the budget because the decision on this would affect what our bonding is in the budget. So today's conversation is about whether this group wants to forward it to the council, which then I think you would have a fuller discussion because you're going to have everybody who's not here now and have a different frame for the discussion, if you will. Because now you're reporting something out from committee, having vetted it a little bit, and it is a motion that's come up in an organic fashion. We need to look at some of the other potential outcomes, but I think that that would take place at this special report out before the budget is done. Is that kind of along the realm? I think that answers my question. Very good. Thank you. Council Member Stunders, then. Thank you, Chair. I just want to add some clarity to a couple things. One, when this money was originally bonded, it was for streetscapes. It was for design for trails, none of which have happened. The governor gave us money for the trail piece, but I share some of the frustration that Councilmember Akers alluded to. We should have done this project years ago. We should have been all over this in a much different capacity. Unfortunately, we're not, but we're at a point where we can't do any more work. They just repaved Manchester Street, the state did, and asked, why did you all go in there and repave that? We're going to come in there and tear that up. They said, you're not going to be down there for at least three to five years. So they made a conscious decision knowing we're not going to be down there doing any kind of legitimate streetscape planning work, streetlights, curbs, gutters, for at least three years. They put brand new asphalt down. So this is an opportunity, and I fully support the distilleries. I want to see something happen. We need a developer down there who wants to see something happen, can help us do the work. We have a lot of great businesses down there that I support, but we need to do something, but we need a plan. And right now we don't have that final plan and the final cost. When that happens and they come to council and say, we need $10 million, that's when we can have those discussions. But right now, we can't spend this money, and I think there's projects out there. And my motion was specific, Council Member Evans, to put it in the economic infrastructure fund. It wasn't floating ideas out there or seeing what else we can use on it. It's specifically for that fund so that anyone in the distillery district can apply to utilize that money in their business. And I agree with Council Member Akers. I know you and I may disagree on this as well, but I think it should be used for any infrastructure that promotes, either takes an abandoned property and puts it back to good use, and jobs. Of course, jobs is 84% of our funding. I agree with that. I get that. But I think there could be some opportunities where we could use infrastructure money, even for reimbursement, if someone has went out on a limb and done it on their own, maybe to help them stimulate other parts of their business. I'm open to all ideas as we as a council discuss this fund. I think there's a lot of things we need to vet through the fund. but I think getting the money in place and then vetting what we can do with that fund is another discussion. This is simply using money that we can use today and put it to use for our economic development efforts. Thank you, Chair. Thank you, sir. And Council Member Maloney. Commissioner, do the money that we're going to take out, are you going to still have enough money to finish up the feasibility, I mean the studies, the FEMA and all that? Do you have enough money for this? Yes. Okay. And go back to what I thought about this. When we were going to do this study, Brad, and do all what we're doing, it was really going to put that back in compliance so they can get grants. So we're going to take that $2.5 million and divest it into a $30 million grant because they would have been eligible if you get them out of the flood area, which we're working on right now. They'd be able to, for new market tax credit for businesses and housing, It's hard to put housing down there because nobody insured them or nothing like that. So this was supposed to help all that. And it was really more. We invested $2 million to hopefully get back $30 million, which I think can happen. It's just, like I said, we went backwards. And now doing the hydraulic now, it's going to get back on track. And Council Member Akers, I support this. And I think the next two years or whatever, we may have to come back and do a bond. But I see the potential of being a $30 million investment in that area down there. Because it is a blighted area. It is coming back slowly but surely. But I think it can be a lot better. Thank you, sir. Anyone else on the motion? So this is a motion to substitute the bond proceeds into the current budget proposal for the Economic Development Fund. If there are no other additions or comments, we'll move to a vote, please. All right, that one passes unanimously, almost-ish. Okay, well done. Thank you very much. All right, anything else, Commissioner? No, sir. Thank you very much. Next is our snow plan review, an item of great interest to a lot of folks who suffered through this past winter. And this review answers a lot of questions, gives a lot of really good facts. Commissioner, director, welcome. We appreciate both of your time and the work you've already done, but please tell us more. So, Mr. Chairman, you asked us to bring forward to you all the snow plan review. And as a part of the events that occurred in February and March of this year, the significant snowfalls that we had, in conjunction also with your all's motion to bring this into the committee, the CAO directed that the deputy CAO and myself convene all of the divisions of government that had any part to play in the snow removal and have sort of an after-action discussion about what happened, what we did differently, what we could improve on as we're going forward. Yearly, we look at the snow plan, but because of the significant events of February and March, we recognized we needed to look at it a little bit differently this time. So what I'd like to do is go over a little bit about what we proposed to talk about today, And that's basically an overview of the current snow removal plan. Talk about some background statistics in snow that occurs in Fayette County yearly, historically. Talk about what occurred in February and March of this year. And then talk about from our discussions internally and externally, areas of opportunities and perhaps some next steps that we're considering. And then basically trying to solicit from you all in your thought process input from you as to what changes you'd like to see us do. And then with the committee's approval, what we would do is take this information and come back to you in our typical time frame, which is about October is when we would have a discussion about the snow plan, and present to you what changes we recommend with y'all's input going into that and sort of taking it from there. Have you met with most council members on this individually? I'm sorry. Have you met with most council members individually? I have not specifically talked about the Stowe review. I had lots of email and phone conversations and face-to-face discussions during February and March. But I think we need to, we're hoping this will stimulate your all's thought process a little bit and give you some of the overview, give you some ideas on, tell you a little bit about what we're thinking about, but we need your input on this to go forward. Thank you. So this is a map of the current snow plan where we have it ranked from one to four. Had previously talked about that as being priority routes. The feedback we got from 911 and 311 was that our constituents did not like the terminology of priority because when they heard that they were priority four and we were plowing priority ones, that did not sit well with them. So we're proposing we change the wording on that from priorities to rank. Rank. Yeah. So, you know, semantics are important, as I understand. But nevertheless, so we also found out in looking at this that the map that we had been working on, and this is our GIS map, was last populated in 2008. So this version that you have here, and your aides can get access to it through GIS, is 214-215 map. As many of you all in either the Hamburg area or the Masterson Station area will denote, there's been significant growth in those areas, which did not appear necessarily in our snow removal plan previously because of growth in some of the different subdivisions. And so this is a positive step in trying to address some of your all's concern by bringing our map up to date. But GIS has been working very hard in creating layers to this that you all will be able to look at individually. So you would be able to look at the 214 map. You also would then be able to layer on that however the rankings occurred that you wanted to. We also are working on the LexTran route. We're looking on some school routes. routes. We're trying to get some layers that would talk about where population changes have occurred in Fayette County, where areas of economic development have occurred, and calling attention to perhaps where some transportation travel has changed that we need to reflect in our snow removal thing. We also need to address and need your assistance in doing that. The other streets that aren't in ranks one through four and how we set about prioritizing them within a rank. We're looking at that, and the map will help us dramatically because, frankly, we think there are some areas that we have overlooked in the past or not provided in the ranking that needed to be provided. And also thinking about some of the new transportation areas that will occur. So as an example, when Citation Boulevard comes online, that will create some new connectivity within that area of town for which we're going to need to look at our snow plan in conjunction with Citation Boulevard. So that's just some of the things that we've been doing in terms of getting ready for this discussion. So you're saying that's the newest map, and you're asking us individually to give you input on our area or the whole map? All right. Proceed. We solicit that from you. Very good. And we will, in turn, solicit our constituents. But I want it to be out there as part of the public discussion. Go on. We've heard from a lot of them. I'm taking those into consideration. But we know you hear from many more than we do. And you pass on the ones that are important. Well, we were extremely responsive during the events, I think, or tried to be. I mean, and you're not through this deck yet, but temperature played a real role in the first event and made it very hard on us. In the second event, it was warmer, but we had so much more snow. So I think you're on the right track. Let's keep going. I'm sorry to sidetrack you. So you all need to know, and I know that you do from these events, but I'm helping to recall this, that currently we have 46 trucks in Fayette County that we have with plows that we can use for snow removal. You need to know that the newest piece of large rolling stock, and I mean by that large trucks that we would have plows on, is eight years old. So we have an old fleet that we are currently using. it is important to note that none of the 46 trucks that we use for snow removal are trucks that just sit there and are only used three months out of the year. They're in use all the time. We do not have a single vehicle that we set aside and says this is just for snow removal. They're used 12 months out of the year. This is a very efficient method of doing snow removal in terms of it. But, again, it makes it so that the rolling stock is older kind. You may remember during the event we had a couple of them that went down because of the usage of them in terms of it. When we mobilize for a snow event, we are not just using people from streets and roads. Again, we're being efficient across the government. Thirty-four of our drivers come from water quality. Three of them come from parks and recreation, and 63 of them come from streets and roads. And these individuals are all people who drive snow removal equipment during that period of time. So we are mobilizing approximately 100 workers. As you may recall, we break them into two different crews. They work 12-hour shifts during a snow emergency event, And that's so that all 46 trucks are being in use 24-7 with the two different shifts that we have. A little bit of background on right now in our snow plan, we are responsible for 111 lane miles of snow removal. That's approximately the distance to Washington, D.C., and back in that. We have about 4,200 and some odd streets. The State Highway Department is responsible for 500 of the lane miles, and that's on top of the city. So 1,600 is approximately the lane miles that we have within the city. 500 of those are handled by the state. The 11 balance are handled by the state. Just some background statistics on what our average snowfall is. Between 2008 and 2014, our average snowfall was 19 inches in Fayette County. Over the last 20 years, if you expanded that, it was 13 inches. So we're getting more snow, it looks like, in our time frame that we're in right now. On the average, there are three to five significant snow events per year. And when significant snow event, what I'm talking about is an event for which we're actually plowing snow. If you don't get an inch of snow, you don't really need to use a snow plow. You would use salt and chemicals on that to try to deal with the snow. But the three to five is when we're talking about we have enough measurable snow that we would actually be plowing those. we mobilize many more times than necessarily we're out plowing so some of the mobilization we do is to salt and sometimes it's pre-treatment that we do as you're aware if it hasn't been raining and we know it's going to snow we'll get out and pre-treat the roads prior to the snowfall helps it melt and be dealt with a little bit easier In 2014, we mobilized 32 times. This last winter, we only mobilized eight times. On the average, we have about 22 events for which we mobilize. Commissioner? Yes, sorry. That's no problem. We have a question from Council Member Fred Brown. Yes, sir. When you finish? Okay. You're being spared. Go ahead. You're on. Gotcha. I want to talk a little bit about what the chairman mentioned about the two snow events that we had. The February one started on the 15th and 16th. We had 10 inches of snow, followed by two days later, five inches of snow, followed by three days later, three inches of snow. The event was very significant for us, not because just the amount of snow we occurred, but for the extraordinarily cold temperatures we had. Those are the temperatures that were reported by the National Weather Bureau at Bluegrass Airport, and these temperatures go from February 15th through the 22nd, which was about the period of time we mobilized and did snow removal during that period of time. The high was plus 8 for that whole period of time. The low was minus 18, very cold for this climate. The March event, it started snowing on the 4th. We got 17 inches of snow on that event. The temperatures during, so we mobilized from the 4th to, I think, the 8th. I think the Sunday we demobilized at that time. During that period of time, the temperatures rained from a minus 2 to a plus 51. So the event for us was from the 4th to the 8th, four days. because the temperatures cooperated with us and made our job easier to do. On the February event, approximately the same amount of snow, it went from the 15th to the 22nd, if my memory is correct. The cold temperatures created quite a problem for us to deal with. This is a graph that just shows the temperatures during those two events. The significance of the temperatures is this. Depending on the temperature, we have different treatment options that we can do on your roads beyond just plowing. And salt is effective in the light blue. We add some chemical additives to it that make it more efficient. but as you get colder, the salt doesn't become as effective, and you have to use other kinds of chemicals. And then there are chemicals for which, if it gets cold enough, the minus 18, they don't work at all. When we got to the super cold minus weather, we ordered aggregate, which is ground up gravel. Is that what it is? Pretty much ground up gravel. we had about 460-some tons of that, which we would sprinkle out in the areas that were very icy, trying to allow for traction and also stopping and things of that kind of nature. These are just some pictures to remind you of that event, which I'm sure still is in your mind. So we did some things differently in 2015 because of the amount of snow we got and because of the cold temperatures. And going back to the February event, when it got to Wednesday and we got five more inches of snow and we were still in a cold temperature route, we said we need more help. The 100 people that we had out working 24, the two shifts of 24-7 were not making progress in what we wanted to do. We sought permission and got private contractors to be hired to come in and augment our force. They brought in some equipment that we do not have. You would have seen road graders in some of your neighborhoods doing some work that when you get packed, icy snow, snow plows just bounce off it. The road graders could remove it. and that made a big difference to us going in and being able to do what needed to be done during that period of time. That's the amount that we paid to the private contractors to the two events that we had. When we brought the private contractors in, we recognized that we needed to assign city people to the private contractors to go into the different neighborhoods with them because they weren't like our streets and roads and water quality people, Fayette County familiar. They were people from all over the region who came in to assist the private contractors in driving, and we wanted to make sure that they were on the streets they were supposed to be on, driving the way they were supposed to be driving, and recognizing some of the problems that we have in various neighborhoods with parking on both sides of the street and narrow roads and things of that kind of nature. So we were very cautious about doing that. You also will recall that we got to the point in the February event, and also a part of it in the March event, where we were unable to pick up garbage during that period of time because of the cold weather and the depth of the snow. We went, I guess, the longest period of time we went was, I think, a week of no garbage pickup. If you were from a Monday to a Monday kind of time period, that was the longest period of time we went to. We said we've got to get out and get the garbage picked up. Albert and his crew got with waste management, mapped out where the next pickup was going to be on that Monday, the Monday routes. They then went on Sunday and plowed the streets that hadn't been plowed that would go into the garbage areas, and we were able, therefore, to start getting garbage picked up again. And Albert also, on the days of the pickup, pre-station plows in the areas in which the garbage pickup was going to occur in, to be able to assist the garbage pickups in those areas, either to plow in some of the areas additionally, or actually to go physically help the waste management people who were doing pickups. So that, in fact, we were, on the days we said we were going to restart garbage pickup, we did have pickup in all those areas. and it went smoothly and nicely. To make that happen, we created an ad hoc communication network between streets and roads and waste management. They talked on cell phones. They talked on some radios that we had. That helped us dramatically to get the vehicles to the right places to be able to assist the waste management pickup. We also created snow farms. This is a new item that we have. One of the snow farms is the picture on the left. for you all too. That was in Shiltoe. Part of the plowing that we did on some of our major intersections ended up closing some of the side streets, as you know. And in the process, the only way you can address that is, in essence, really to go pick up the snow and haul it out of the area. So we were doing that in major intersections, and we were also doing it in the downtown area because we had so much snow in there. So we created a snow farm out at Chilloteau in the park area there. I think that's near the swimming pool, if my memory is correct. And we also created it on the landfill pad at Old Frankfort Pike. And so there was a location where we could take the snow and dump it to do that. That was very helpful to us. we also recognized that in recreating the green space work that we have done with reorganizing parks and environmental services to do the green spaces we had sort of dropped the ball on sidewalks in certain areas of the city that were city owned property The viaducts were one of the things that we got calls on and quickly recognized needed to be done. We got environmental services to get contractors to go out and plow the sidewalks. So that's going to be one of the focus areas that we're going to look on going forward. So some of the areas of opportunity that we recognize that we need to focus on during the summer leading forward to our meeting in October is going to be what streets have experienced and neighborhoods have experienced growth areas and need to be added to our plowing routes, what areas of population growth have occurred that create traffic connectivity issues that we need to be thinking about. And I mentioned Citation Boulevard to you in terms of that. What are some of the new areas of economic development that have occurred in our city? And I use as an example Coldstream. I also use Beaumont Center as an area that we need to look at carefully because of the growth of the economic opportunities there, and that needs to be incorporated in any snow removal plan that we have. So some of the areas that we currently recognize is underserviced. sidewalks. We're going to meet with parks, environmental services, and facilities management and come up with a sidewalk routing system that are city-owned sidewalks that are our obligation to plow and come up with that and present that to you as an idea on what to do. Had some complaints from people who were on man of war and the sidewalks weren't plowed there, and there's some areas of large populations there now. People were walking out in the street because the sidewalks were so deep, because when you plow, you plow what was on the street off onto the sidewalk, and we need to have a mechanism to address that. We need to focus on Lex Tran bus stops. We've had meetings with Lex Tran talking about it. We need to make sure that the school bus routes are taken care of. During both of these events, the school board, as you know, canceled school, So that made our job a little bit better, but that's not always going to be the case. And we need to make sure that we're doing the job for the Fayette County schools as we should. We've had meetings with them. We need to address the non-priority streets in our system so that our citizens have some knowledge of when we're going to get to them. Because that was one of the big themes. You're all nodding your heads in the phone calls we all got. When are we going to get to my street? We also need to figure out if there is a way we can address courts and cul-de-sacs. Cul-de-sacs are very difficult in snow removal to address. Albert will tell you that some of them are almost impossible to address because there's no place to get rid of the snow in the cul-de-sac. Do you push it up into somebody's yard? Most of the time in the cul-de-sacs, people have parked around in the cul-de-sac. The snowplow can't get in to address that at all. It takes a long time to address it because of the geometry of the cul-de-sac and how the truck actually operates. Albert says in some cul-de-sacs that are really narrow, it could take as long as 45 minutes to carefully plow that area, even when you have all of the cars out of the cul-de-sac. to help us get a little handle on that GIS is doing for the first time we believe GIS mapping of all the cul-de-sacs in the city Fayette County, never been done before apparently and we need to have a better handle on that to figure out whether we can even address that in our snow plan but we're looking at that we also are going to be installing here in the fall route wear into our snow plant, our vehicles that we use for snow removal. This will allow ultimately us to create an interactive map that you all will be able to look at and the citizens will be able to look at and figure out where we are at a given time. We're hoping that we will have that available. If not, we will at least create a map that's similar to the leaf collection map, and we will be saying for this 12-hour period, we will be plowing these streets. For the next 12 hours, we'll be plowing these, and setters, sort of like what we did in the leaf collection phases. We also are excited about the opportunity that the route wear will allow us to do because when we have built the salt barn, which we hope you will approve in the budget, the alternate one out at Blue Sky, we will then be able to come back in with the routeware and reprioritize all of our snow plan routes so that we are more efficient in the way that we address that. The administration is currently working on implementation of an internal citywide network to allow better coordination for our snow removal teams. we are and have, as I've indicated to you, received information from Planning and Preservation and Development, and they've helped us with GIS to create the new 214-215 map, which is available for you all. We are going to work up a plan, a development plan, for what event triggers automatically us bringing in private contractors. Is it a three-inch snowfall? Is it a six-inch snowfall? Is it a three-inch snowfall with sub-zero temperatures? We need to come up with a plan to do that. We've had some preliminary discussions about that. We want to study it a little bit more and maybe get some ideas from some other communities what they've done on that. But we recognize that this is an area that we can improve on and ought to improve on. and we also sort of need to talk with some of the other departments to get a better understanding of how we would have that contract set up so that it would be seamlessly applied. When that happens, the contractors would already be available. We had to make a lot of phone calls and beg requests for people to come in and help us in the February snowfall with the cold temperatures and the snow. It took a couple days for the contractors to mobilize because they couldn't get their drivers from the surrounding counties who live there into Fayette County to even be able to drive. That won't always be the case, but nevertheless, we need to figure out how to do this better. As I indicated to you, we're going to work up a plan on how to clear the city-owned sidewalks and who's responsible for what and kind of a ranking in terms of that. and we genuinely solicit your input and suggestions to us. So, whoa, I jumped over the question. There we go. We were on questions. So I am on questions. So that we can come back to you all in October and present to you the changes that you're requesting and have we look at also. Thanks for the presentation. You have engendered some follow-ups. First off, Council Member Fred Brown. Thank you, Chair. Very good presentation. A little lengthy there. I remember the snow too well now. But I again want to commend Albert Miller and all the streets and roads and other departments that really got out there and went beyond and above what needed to be done, I think, to clear the streets. So I was impressed with the, you know, of them staying with the project. Even after we got done with the priorities, we knew we had to go into other streets, and I think the opportunity was there. This ranking that you're doing now is, I think, you gave each district a listing of streets when this was occurring. Is this new ranking going to be the same streets, or are you going to be dealing with different streets? We clearly need to examine all of the rankings that you have there and shown on the map are the ones that we previously had in place. That was the current rankings and coloration and whatever on the map there. We clearly need to see whether there are changes within the ranks that occurred and what areas of new growth, new development that have occurred that need to get changed and put into a different. Well, the reason I ask that is that if that's I've already got those listings. So as a district person, I can look at my district and know the roads and make suggestions. And I think that's what you want input. That's exactly the kind of input. And if you get that, you want that before October so you can put it in the new plan. Well, and have discussions with you, too, because we need to have a better understanding. Some of you all during the snow events would email us and say, can you get this hill in my district because we're having ice problems on it? We would then send a truck out and salt that area. But we don't know all of those areas, and you do from your constituent services better than we do. Also, in this new plan, the additional salt barn that we've already got in place or budgeted, I think. The money in the mayor's budget is to do the design work on it. We can't do the construction until 2017 because of water quality finishing up the blue sky work that needs to be done on closing out that plant. Does it take that long to get another place, another site? So it's not in the 216 budget? The construction plans for it are. It won't help us the next snowfall. And then build it in 217. Okay. The next two winters, that's not going to help us in figuring out how to manage your trucks back and forth. Okay. Do we not have a fleet plan for streets and roads? We've got a fleet plan for fire. We've got a fleet plan for police. We're trying to buy so many vehicles to keep the fleet at least manageable and in good repair. So we do. But the issue for you all to consider is do we end up adding more capacity in the snow removal? We're stuck with the 46. Well, what they will do is replace vehicles. Yeah, but those 46 trucks are used for other services all during the year. So they are in the fleet plan? Yes. So you're getting some new trucks somewhere, aren't you, as you? Last one we got for the large rolling stock, meaning the ones that would do the major streams. Nothing in the budget for that for this next year? No request? Can tell us. Welcome, sir. I'm not sure if there is or not. I haven't really heard. I do know some other things that are in it. And I think we have two right now that are down at Fleet that are being fed up. But we have our snow plows and everything is starting to age, and it really takes, especially with that much snow, it really takes its toll. I'm just saying in your plan, maybe when you come in with this plan in October, where you might need to make some suggestions there as far as at least the next fiscal year budget on addressing this fleet plan. And we're expected to have a manual of some kind that we can actually look at as a council member and be able to look in our district, our streets, and be able to answer questions as far as the ranking, not the priority. Yes, sir. Okay. Thank you. Council member, thank you. Now, Council Member Susan Lamb. Thank you for recognizing me today, Chair. Yes, ma'am. Thank you. And I want to echo the outstanding work from the Division of Streets and Roads and many other areas of government for the snow removal this year, because it was one of those that we just, you know, it just doesn't happen very often. I have several comments and questions. You said talking about the snow farms that you created this year. Is that the first time that we've actually done that? Yes. Okay. We have hauled it before to another place, but this is actually the first time that we've had that site, the training pad on Old Frankfurt, to dump it at. Okay. I think that, and I know that over on your other page you said that you needed to, let me get to it here, you need to know what level of snow and temp trigger the hiring, but I also think you need to also include that in the type of snowfall as far as the snow farms. I think that is an outstanding idea, and I think that it really did help a lot. The other thing, you talk about the GPS tracking units in the vehicles. Is there any additional cost to this, or is it included in the mayor's proposed budget? Some of the money is $215 money. Some of it will be $216 money in the mayor's budget. Maybe in our links committee, actually. I think that was a topic of conversation we had in length. Some was in $215, but then we needed some additional money in $216. You had it split. Yes, sir. I think that's correct. The purchase of the equipment is in 2015. Okay. And what the 2016 would be would actually be the subscription price. Oh, okay. Okay. That's good. And it's a yearly type. For maintenance and everything, maintenance of the software. Right. Exactly. Okay. All right. Now, my other questions have to do with suggestions. I think we all know that our ordinance on the sidewalk snow removal is pretty unenforceable. and one of the ideas that I have is we have the parking authority that is available for ticketing cars that are parked incorrectly. Well, if we have a massive amount of snow, clearly they're not going to be ticketing cars that are parked downtown because nobody can park there. so what i wanted to suggest is that we look at maybe have an mou with the parking authority and use those citation officers to actually put in place to go around and cite businesses that aren't keeping their sidewalks clear um that's one idea and it would just be a matter of changing they're already citation sworn in as citation officers so it would just be a matter of adding their enforcement authority in Section 1410 in the Code of Ordinances. Just food for thought. And a good point. Yeah. The other thing is that you have private contractors, and I know that Craig Benz did some research, and we have private contractors for plowing of the streets. What about if we considered having private contractors for snow laborers to help clear sidewalks? I mean, clearly, when you have the magnitude of snow we had this year, we don't have the personnel to take care of the city sidewalks, much less anything else. So that's another idea there. The other thing is, is I think we need to change our ordinance on the books about sidewalks, snow removal, and make sure that we include the ramps. because right now for accessibility, I just don't know. I think it needs to be more clear, and right now I think it probably allows a violation of the ADA laws. And also I think we need to identify sidewalks like Manowar, the sidewalks on Manowar. Whose responsibility is that? That's ours. It's the city. It is? Okay. Well, again, those are some other reasons that maybe we could have some snow laborers. And then Fayette County Schools, I mean, you know, they didn't play very well this year and keep their sidewalks plowed either. So I think that we need to find some way of coordinating that with them a little bit better, too, because they have a lot of sidewalk coverage. And last but not least is how can we address the plowing of the snow where it doesn't go back into the shoveled and plowed driveways? I know that was a huge ordeal, and I don't know if we have to reinvent the wheel or if maybe other cities have solutions that we could learn from. so other cities plow the same way that we plow right when you have an articulated snow plow like that it pushes it to the side and it's always going to do that the road graders because you could move the blade can do some more sophisticated things and so when the private contractors came in they were able to do some of that but albert will tell you that when you plow the streets with the snow plows that we have you have to push it and you're pushing it to the side otherwise you'd push it to the middle of the street and then nobody would get anywhere so it's not an easy thing to do and and yes after you've plowed your driveway you get mad when they come by and re-plow it but right and i realize that it that is one of those situations where you don't have solutions i mean there's just not a better way to do it but um and i think that's everything on my... You raised some good points, and I think it's going to be important for us to... We need to do our own first as a city to then be in a position to place pressure or to give counsel to the Fayette County Public Schools to do a better job and or turn to deputizing more folks to give tickets to individuals or homeowners. We have to do ours first in order to set an example so that others can follow it. But excellent beginning there. I agree. We do need to set the pace and be the leaders, and thank you for allowing me to contribute. Yes, ma'am. Council Member Evans. Thank you, Chair. First of all, again, thank you for all of your all's hard work. I know I was one of those calling. Quite honestly, I was a little disappointed that the slide 12, I think, were all of the questions and issues that we had, I was hoping that there might be more answers to those issues in this presentation. But that being said, I guess if we're supposed to give our input from our district to you, is October going to be enough time to have something set? We don't know what our winters are like anymore. and my concern would be that if we're not going to have another a full review or I guess what might be the hopeful plan presented until October that we might still have some changes or there might still be some concerns and might not be in effect when we do. If we did get some random snow in the fall that we usually don't get. So I guess that's my concern is just the timing of it and how soon can we get more of those real answers or real plans set. Because, I mean, that was the crux of all of my calls, and that's kind of what our constituents are expecting to hear. What are the answers and where am I going to fall in this ranking or is it going to be called a ranking? All of those things. And, I mean, we've got some of those answers already. We emailed you all, rightfully so, asked for our input early on after it was all said and done. So I'm just kind of concerned or wondering what has preliminarily been put together, because I know you all have some of those answers. So in looking at that, that's where when we found out that we needed to update the map, and it took GIS a little bit of time to update it for us and then do the layering that we've done on it. You have that now available for you to look at so that you have the latest city map with all of the streets that have been dedicated to the city on it. And that hopefully will help us all in looking at areas that we either have missed or that need to be changed in terms of their ranking or have new development areas in it that we need to take into consideration of it. I'm hopeful that we can get your input and work on it over the summer into the fall. Typically, we do come to you in about October. It gives us a month or so to get your input and then make changes and come back to you. I don't know timing-wise that we could do differently because when we get to December, we can have snowfalls. As you know, so that's up to the committee. We're going to talk about it right now. Something else there, or are you good? I think she raises a very good point, because really what we're asking you to come back with is a plan that's more dynamic than anything we've had before. So in the spirit of being dynamic about it, why don't you do it for September as opposed to October? We're at your disposal for doing that. Well, I mean, we can do August if you want to. Let's let them run with it a little bit. I think October is too late, at least September, and if we can roll it for August, we can. But I don't want to place that extra added on them today. Let's see where they get to. The sooner the better. How about that? Is that good now? Now, Council Member Mazzotti. Thank you, Chair, and thank you, David and Albert, for the hard work you did this winter. A couple of quick questions on your private haulers or private contractors. they're going to have the GPS equipment available to them because here you spent $334,000 with them, which I don't know how much that equates to how many. So how can we rectify that situation? So actually with the private contractors where we had a city worker mentoring them going into the neighborhood, that would be the connectivity that we would have. They were assigned particular areas and particular streets. Albert can talk more about the specificity of that, but I don't think we'd be in a position. So if they've got this guy mentoring them, they're telling the mentoring how to plow a street, or they're saying, we've already been here before? That person would be following them around. It was one of our inspectors from our different departments that followed contractors into the different areas that they were assigned to. Following them to make sure they're doing the job correctly, following to make sure they're on the right location? Yes, ma'am. Both. So without this GPS tracking device for them, we've got to put a city worker on following them to make sure they're doing the job right, and that doesn't seem real efficient. So maybe that's something, you know, down the road we can look at, or maybe a mobile device that they could also pick up and say, okay, this is where you should be, this is what you should be doing. The other thing that will occur as we bring the private contractors on year after year is they will become more familiar with the areas of the city in which they would be assigned to. Our current workers are familiar because they run the routes all the time year after year, and actually they plan to do that ahead of time. I would think there's got to be some kind of a mobile device that can just be handed off to, you know, you come up here, you do this for us, here's the device, this is where you go, this is the location. That's pretty simple, I would think. And I guess the second thing is, and I wanted to make, I'm sure most council members are aware of this, and maybe some aren't, that we have a lot of private streets in our residential neighborhoods. And I can't tell you the number of calls I received from people who said, guess what, my street didn't get plowed. And I'd look up on the map and I said, you know, you live on a private street. They had no idea. I've been a proponent of this ever since I've been on this council, is to get rid of private streets and residential subdivisions. I see no purpose of them. I can understand in commercial areas, I can understand in apartment complexes, but for a private street in a residential area that doesn't receive city services, i.e. snow removal, it is a nightmare for them and for us. So I would move to make a motion that we look at having no more private streets in residential subdivisions. Do I have a second? It's a concern. I mean, and maybe if you all didn't get those kind of complaints, but... You might want to send that to another committee. I mean, that might be a planning thing. I can put that in planning committee then. I moved to put that in the planning committee that... Maybe you should do that in a work session. I can't do that because I'm a chair, so I probably should wait. This is not the forum to make a referral to that committee. The work session is the forum to do that. Anyways, that's a concern of mine. Thank you. Very good. Thank you, Council Member. Now, we're narrowing in on our time frame here, so I don't want to leave anybody out. Be brief as you can, but move forward. Council Member Gibbs. Thank you, Chair. Commissioner, I think you guys do a fantastic job on the roads, but I just want to reiterate some of the stuff that Susan said. This was a pedestrian disaster, and I know that's not your responsibility, but I want to make sure that's considered in it. I'm glad you put the public property in. I like Susan's idea of having Lex Park. I think that should be explored because they did, in fact, cancel any citations on the meters for quite an extended period of time. And the areas that really need to be done are the commercial corridors. Residential is important as well, but as I was walking out of Belcourt to get down here, I didn't mind walking down the middle of the street and Forest Avenue. When I got to Main Street, I had to walk out on the street on Main Street, including along Triangle Park, which belonged to us. And so we really have to get after the businesses. That's the primary thing, and I think Lex Park can do it, at least in the city core. But thank you. Thank you, sir. Council Member Stenet. Thank you, Chair. I'm trying to be brief. David, what are we going to do? I think the biggest issue I had during this last two snowstorms is communication. I think a lot of my colleagues and citizens, who are we going to have? Do you have a plan on who we're going to call when there is a problem? Who do you pick up the phone, email, text? What do we need to do? Have you developed that chain of command yet? Because we're all over the map this last time, and we've got to fix that, because it's not fair to Albert and other people out there who are actually doing the work. We'll bring a proposal for you when we come back to you in September on that. Very good. Thank you. You good? Thank you, sir. Council Member Maloney. Mine's real quick. Can you do me a favor? When you come back, can you give us where we are on the salt barn? because I want to make sure you and Charlie are communicating because I know Charlie's doing a lot of work there. From what I understand, you're all going to cover a pond and put it over a pond. I just want to be sure we don't do anything double the cost or anything like that. Just make sure. Thank you. Thank you, sir. Council Member Akers. Thank you, Chair. I agree with Council Member Evans that I expected or thought we would see more changes to the snow plan based on opportunities or neighborhoods that you know of that have been developed, major streets in those neighborhoods, and even the Lex Tran and school bus routes, if we could maybe in August see a map that has some of those streets that you know of in Masterson or that are on the Lex Tran route and school bus routes, and maybe it's different if school's in versus school not being in. I don't know. But, I mean, I think that you all can do some of that work in advance of what we do, and then we can say, oh, you missed this one, you missed that one, versus us giving you probably a lot of streets that you all already know and your staff and your drivers are well aware of. So that's my only recommendation. And, again, also to speed it up because we are not always the quickest to get things moving and completed, so I would like to see it done before winter. We just got the LexTran bus routes. They don't have it electronically. We had to populate it, and our GIS people made it up themselves. so some of this stuff just just happens so but they'll be here that's a very they're gonna be here let me just say August yes sir all right councilmember Lane thank you chair I'd like to say Commissioner there were a couple of problem areas in my district and you guys responded very promptly and it helped out quite a bit some neighbors were trapped in their neighborhood because of an incline, and you all get that fixed. One suggestion that I have is that maybe you could work up a plan where you could sign up the presidents of neighborhood associations or their designated party to be communications into you during a snowstorm. And, of course, in order for them to qualify, they'd have to maybe have a two- or three-hour meeting where they would explain what our snow policies are and what is a priority, what isn't a priority. But then you would have a network of neighborhood presidents that could call in and advise you if they're having a problem in one of their neighborhoods. And that would be good to have somebody on the ground that could respond to you. And then with regard to downtown, I would just remind council that I did not support this, but you all did pass a tax for the downtown management district, and they're supposed to shovel that snow now as part of their deal, so I'm going to hold them up to it. Thank you. You also hear a call for partnering in several of these comments, and I think that we need to take the lead, and we'll look forward to your follow-up in August, as it were. Anyone else? All right. We will not be able to take up the rest of our agenda, but I wanted to ask you all to give consent potentially to moving down to number five, the reduction of speed limit on Jewett Creek Drive, which is Council Member Scutchfield, who is not here today. This is pages 94, 95, and 96 of our packet. You can tell if you look at it briefly that traffic has already signed off on changing part of Jewett Creek from 35 to 30 miles per hour. There's a map, a nice map on page 95, and then a potential resolution on page 96. A motion and a second to pass that item. And all those in favor? Aye. Opposed like sign? I hope we didn't pass up any good conversation there. All right. Are there any other motions to come before us at this time? We have a couple of minutes, and he did make a motion to adjourn, but if you're going to say something, you need to hit your microphone button, man. Okay, go ahead, Richard. Please, please. Hit your microphone button. I want to commend Al and him for doing it next month, But this is what we're here for these kind of streets. We just came through. We put a policy together. So I think it's going to be a lot cleaner to what we've been doing. So hopefully you all read this. It's going to take care of what we came on here in January. I'm sorry. Everybody was all. But I want to commend Dow and her staff and Glenn Brown and David Holmes and I. We met for about two months and got this straightened out. You're right. And that's a good part of the agenda we just didn't get to today because we ran out of time. I appreciate your saying something. And we'll look forward to hearing about that. in August? No, just kidding. All right, now your motion. All those in favor? Opposed, like signed, we are adjourned.