Deputy City Clerk Goins, will you please call the roll? Chair Ball? Present. Chair Pro Tem Guerra? Present. Board Member Taylor? Not present. Board Member Faber? Present. Board Member Olsen? Just make sure she's not a participant alone. So because I'm a chair, it's a participant. And it's here to attendees. She's in that list. Oh, there's like all of you this time. No, that's me. Not present. That's all consultants. I was going to say that's all consultants. Board member Tito. That's me. Present. Right over here. Chair Powell, you have a quorum. Thank you very much. Next on the agenda is public comment. Public comment is designed for you to share your thoughts and concerns with the board. Do we have anyone signed up for public comment, Toby? Or Katie, sorry. Katie, there's no one in person. Is there anyone signed up in the chat? No. Perfect. Okay. Thank you. Sorry. So we're going to move on. Are there corrections to the meeting minutes of the March 20, 2025 Parks and Recreation Board Advisory? This is a new script for me. I haven't had this question before. No. Were there any changes to the meeting minutes? No? No, so you should move on to the hearing none, the minutes are approved as presented. Yeah, I just wanted, I've never read it that way before. Okay. So, okay. Sorry, we've never asked that question in these meetings before, so I'm just asking. Okay. Hearing none, the meeting minutes are approved as presented. So we don't vote on the meeting minutes being approved anymore. Okay. First up on general business is the Legay roundabout update, and we are joined by Dave from DTJ Design. Dave, before you jump in, chair and board. So tonight, you guys have recommended option one. If you remember, there were three options for the, and lady, this is, you'll have to just trust me on this. Three options for the monument option and surrounding landscape. Also, we took it to the city council. they had some discussion and ultimately the majority wanted option one, but there's a couple that wanted option two. So they had a follow-up question about costs, which David will chat with you about tonight. But ultimately what David's going to do is talk to you about the cost difference, but talk to you about a phasing plan. Perfect. And then what we're asking for and what I believe Katie had put in front of a couple of you was a motion to to support the, it says design, but it's really the phasing plan for this because, and not taking it all away for David, but we want to break it into two phases, the monument inside the roundabout, and then the landscaping really on the north, on the gay south, and on the west side, because the east side, we're going to be doing the Happy Canyon interchange, as you guys know, in 26, 27 and 28. And then there is some concern from a couple of council members and they'll make this decision ultimately. We just put in that colored stamp concrete in the medians in there. And so the idea that we just use public funds to build that. And there's some, they haven't really discussed that. I know some are okay ripping it out, but we're recommending, so we don't get in that. argument or perception with the public is that we leave it in and we do the final landscaping in 28 and we replace the colored camp stamp concrete with the interior landscaping in 28 as well. So that's kind of the punchline, but just wanted you to know what we did with council. And then from after tonight, we'll put it back on the council's agenda, following your recommendation or suggestions. Yeah, please do. Along those lines, I really can't see it yet, but on the side of the road, we want to have a sidewalk. And so we don't want to put the plants there, like take them out and then put the sidewalk in to make sure we're designing it. So let's put the plants on the other side of the sidewalk. Right now, it just makes sense. So that was something that we, like, we don't want to double work. Yeah. Yeah. That makes a lot of sense. And what council, the ultimate question for the council that's going to be coming and turning it off tonight. is, as Council Member Salazar alluded to, is we're building in the interchange, which has a bike pad in it. But then when it hits the roundabout, at this point, there's nowhere to go because, as you all know and drive it, that property hasn't been developed. And so the council is going to have to decide, do they want to front end the construction of the sidewalk? Because that would normally be the cost borne by the developer. But until they develop it, there's no requirement for it. So we're either going to have a sidewalk that stops or we're going to have to, you know, figure out where we think it's going to be safe to build that sidewalk and to go to the council at that time and say, do you want to go ahead and build the sidewalk or not? Which again, that'll probably happen ultimately in 28. So, all right, David. Can you hear us? I can hear you guys. Great. Can you hear me? Okay. Thanks for having me again. And I am going to show my screen and what we'll do is. I'm going to start with, let me know when you're starting to see this on the screen, the phasing map. Can everybody see that? Yes. Okay. So with the phasing map, as Michael mentioned, so we broke this down into three phases. The red phase, phase one, you're going to see a 1A and a 1B. What that means is... we did a cost for what just the hardscape elements are. So when we're talking hardscape elements, once again, this is concept one, so just the hard elements here, or concept two would be this element with the additional pilaster and long curving wall around that. So with that, that roundabout complete with landscape and hardscape is 1A, 1B. We broke out 2A, which is the sides, each sides of the approach from the east, and 2B with the center median. 3A would be similarly to 2, the two sides, and 3B is the center median here. And then really number four is kind of filling in these other edges in the orange areas. So where you see some of the pines all on, The adjacent sides connecting 2A and 3A, connecting from 2A to kind of the edge of the roundabout, and then this western side. In my opinion, that number four is the least important of all of this. Number one, A and B are the most important. Then your 2A, 2B, 3A, 3B sections are... I would say equally important. In fact, 2A, 2B might be more important, because you're going to have more people coming from off of I-25 than you are going to be potentially from coming from the south. Now, with that, just as a reminder. Can you real quickly, just on that last slide, just orient the board on what's coming? I mean, it's kind of ,, but just especially if people are watching it as well. So yeah, so I-25, this is the exit ramp right here for I-25. The new interchange would happen right here as you come off from I-25 and head north on Lagay towards basically the Castle Pines proper. And East Happy Canyon Road to the south, this is picking up everything for people coming from the south up into here. Concept one that most people picked, as i share this this this face is coming from the south right here this face is coming from i-25 concept 2 which we priced if you recall really only has a sign face facing from the i-25 interchange and from the south approach you basically pick up the taller pilaster with a chip logo and you won't see the name until you come around um on the costs They were pretty close, I'll admit. Let me start macro and we'll get into the details. So I want you to just focus right down in this lower corner right here. So concept one is 1.18 and I'll just share real quickly, concept two is 1.239. So there's not a huge difference in the cost, but really the difference comes into the hardscape elements that show up in the center of 1A, 1B. If I click between the two, you can see that concept two costs a little bit more. There are some nuances between two and three, but the landscape costs that change, they're not exactly proportional in a sense that in concept one, we have more plant material and we're cutting out more potential hardscape in those center medians, you'll notice that in phase four, it's pretty much a wash, the same thing. So if the recommendation is to go with concept one, it does prove out to be cheaper. It does prove out to be cheaper when you do a phased approach. Now, what Michael was mentioning, I'm going to go back to this real quick. So what Michael was mentioning here um let me click on something so i can draw on this so your first step really is doing this center median that's the most important thing knowing that there's going to be some trauma going on over on this side with the interchange and there was discussion about the sidewalk there i agree that there should be a sidewalk and what i think we're going to want to do so in the future this is going to have a a slip lane that that's probably not accurate a slip lane that is going more um off of i-25 and into a northbound directions and then there's going to be a roadway coming in through here so so feeding in a walkway through here is going to need to be a design effort as the slip lane part of the interchange happens in the future so as far as a phasing like we said do the center roundabout first it's really easy to do this southern phase 3a 3b because there aren't going to be any major construction constraints that should hold that up i would probably hold off on phase four until you do 2a and 2b the reason i say that is is sometimes money becomes a finite thing and i would rather you save the money from doing this and really make sure that we can do this properly so as far as a once again phased approach one two step three and coordinate step three with um the future condition here and then michael had mentioned if you were to say let me redefine this a little bit step one is the full median here or inside the roundabout step two is this outer edge and this outer edge step three could then be once the interchange design is figured out and although the slip lane through here is figured out and we have a sidewalk that we know works Then you could do this outer edge as a step and this outer edge as a step. And then the last step could be the center median here on the south and the center median here coming from the east. Now, depending on how detailed you want to go with those phases, the complications with phasing things like this is there is multiple mobilizations every time you do a phase. So the more we phase this, the more this will cost in the long run. The less we phase it, the less mobilizations and the cheaper it will be. I would suggest that in the phasing, we for sure make sure we're sleeving to each of these center medians however we need to for electrical and water in the future so that it is in and it's an easy thing to do in the center. Other than that, that's about all I have to present to you as far as, yes, the roundabout approach concept one is cheaper. then roundabout concept two the logistics of phasing this is pretty easy in my mind the most complicated thing is just figuring out what is going to happen on this side with a sidewalk and everything and as far as a master sidewalk thinking if you're coming across i-25 on a sidewalk and if the intention is to head north that is a lot easier than if you're trying to navigate through the roundabout and also have a direction going south. Roundabouts are typically not pedestrian friendly very well because they create points at which where you wanna cross is where somebody is tending to start to speed up. So these pinch points here tend to be the most likely points to cross sidewalks and have crossings. But then we're gonna start talking about You might want to start doing a paving pattern through each of the crossings right here and then doing a curb cut through the median. I don't know. I know I'm probably getting a little too far in the weeds, Michael, on that. But I'm hearing you guys loud and clear about a sidewalk would be a good thing. I do have a question on that sidewalk there. Is that OK if I ask that now? Yeah, no, no. So just like I actually live in this area and. I feel like people, there is a sidewalk currently on both sides of the road coming down the gate, not past the apartments right now. I honestly, I drive this 25 times a day. I don't see people walking on the east side of that road. And I just don't see people walking over from the Abbey Canyon neighborhood. I just want to throw that out there as someone that lives over there. And David, you're not going to be able to see what I'm going to show them. So I apologize, this is small and last minute because I wasn't thinking he was going here. So the yellow, so this is I-25 in the middle here. This is the roundabout right about here. And then this is the future road going over to the canyons on the east side and the Happy Canyon. So the sidewalk, the bike path comes over. So this lane right here coming off Coming down here is the slip lane that David was talking about. So that if you know you're going northbound on on Lagay, you don't go into the roundabout. You completely skip it and it merges into Lagay. So the sidewalk is already planned just north of that slip lane. And so you'll come up in here. And so that so there is going to be no opportunity ultimately to cross within the roundabout itself. And I don't see there's no sidewalk south. of there on Happy Canyon. So I think the only sidewalk or really, and there should be no pedestrian crossing within the roundabout at all. The question for that's gonna be ultimately before the council, and this is, again, I apologize a little bit in the weeds is, so bear with me, is the west side of Lagay is the, so Lagay is ultimately a four lane road when it's built. just like it is when you get to Chase, it turns into four lane as you go up. So the west side is the west edge of the roadway. We don't know exactly where the east side will be. So again, coming to the council later saying, do you want to go ahead and front end the sidewalk? It's a lot more risky to build it on the east side. Because we don't know exactly what the developer is going to do. We might be building it at a wrong location, et cetera, et cetera. So that would mean if you wanted to front end it, you'd build it on the west side, which means we're going to have to do a crossing at Lagay. But we would bring it far enough north out of the roundabout so that the cars are already moving forward. So we'd build some strip on the east, cross over. And I don't have the road, obviously, but crossing over. And I can pass this around so people can see it, but this really shows where that sidewalk is and should eliminate anything. And sorry, David, again, for any crossing within the roundabout. So what you're saying, Michael, is that there will be a place to cross further up. There is. Yeah. And so it's the strip. The issue for the council. is going to be from the, essentially from the roundabout, if you will, up to Chase Lane, where the sidewalk starts. And, you know, I mean, if the council was interested, and then the safest thing to do would be to keep people on the east side of LeGay all the way up to Chase. Yeah. A question for the future council, probably in 2028, which is when we would build this, because this won't be done until 2028. So, sorry. You mentioned it's a bike path. Will you just remind me, if you're on a bike, are you going to be with the flow of traffic in a bike lane, or are you going to be on the eventual sidewalk? So you're on a bike path. There are four... You don't mind us going into this, do you? No, I actually appreciate it. Okay. Stand by, Dave. You all good there? I'm good. Okay. So there's two controlled crossings and two uncontrolled crossings. So if I'm coming from somehow I got down Lagay, I'm coming in from the west, my first uncontrolled crossing is the slip ramp off I-25. So I get here with my bike or my kid or myself or whatever. I've got to look to the left and make sure that there's nobody doing 85 miles an hour off, which is unfortunate, but it is. So then I cross over there. And you can't see it. I apologize. Then there's a signal for the folks who are going. to the roundabout. So they'll be stopped, so you'll be able to push a button and have a safe crossing there. Then you come over, there's a, let me make sure, then there's a second safe crossing here, doing the sub-side down. I guess there's one, two, three, there's five crossings, actually. So you have two controlled crossings here, then you're running on a separate bike pad, separated, over, now you're on the west, now you're on the east side, sorry, so make sure you see it. then you've got one controlled crossing and then you hit another uncontrolled crossing. The second uncontrolled crossing will be people coming primarily from the canyons who are going northbound on I-25. So again, you'll have to look, in that case, you'll look to the right and just make sure that it's there. This is the standard pipe head that goes with the diverging diamond. I mean, there's really no alternatives. And because we've got the slip, we have an extra crossing. that you wouldn't necessarily have. But you can't stop them, one, because it's intended to be a slip and a pass-through. But when you start having too many stops, it backs up. And where CDOT really starts to get upset is if you start to back up onto, obviously, the interchange, and you've got people on there. Yeah, of course. Yeah, you bet. Thank you. I'll pass that around. What we're doing, and part of the reason or you haven't seen this, is we're up for trying to get the diverging diamond map overlaid with the bike pads so you can see them together. But I'll pass, let's see, make sure I put them. But I need to pass it around and you guys can see. Sorry, the diamond. Yeah, no, no. No, when Dave started talking about the slip lane, that's why I went over to. Always prepared with the paper. All right, Dave, back at you. OK, so anyway. I mean, just to clarify what Michael was saying, this is kind of a mystery zone right here till the final design actually happens. So the intention would be, whatever in the future happens, that area right there, I think the goal would be is to still have a similar banded landscape, however that configuration goes. Some of this landscape may move over because the walk's a little closer to the road, or maybe there's a landscape path with a walk going through like right in here and then splitting off. So, you know, obviously there's another future phase of design to happen to figure out that part. But that said, if I were to pick pink and say, you could probably pretty safely build all of this day one, And wait for a future after this gets more figured out where blue is you could then we incorporate this area right here and then you have 80% of what you really need yeah. Questions or thoughts on that. I just have a question on to I think it's to be that's right in the middle of the road, what is the. purpose of that? That's what that is? Yeah, it's the work way. Okay. Let me show you a couple comparisons. Here we go. This is, so if you look on this key map right here, this is concept one, this is concept two. The purpose of that landscape to get that in there is When you look at this and you see the narrowness of the impact of the road, if you don't put the landscape in there, that's what this feels like. And it feels wider, it feels like people want to drive faster, and it potentially feel a little safer. As you get a little closer up to the monument, here's concept one, even having some of the landscape in the center median at the nose, and even right in here, it helps It just helps define the lanes as a little bit more narrower. But when you take all that away, it just makes the space look much larger. And this is what I, Dave, let me jump in. So this is because we just built this. This is what I was saying. There's a couple of council members that are just concerned from the public perception that we just spent a couple of funds. We just built this and to come in and rip it out. Excuse me. And at least waiting until 2028 gives us some level of return on that initial investment from last year. And Michael, I've been thinking of the optics on that. What you could say to residents is the reason we chose to fill this in is that this at the point that this was completed, instead of leaving it dirt, we created hard skid because at that point we didn't have water. Once we actually had water, that's when we decided to start cutting out some of this and finish its final condition. So it's a play on words, but in reality, we would never have left it dirt anyway, right? We had to hardscape it and finish it. And then four or five years later, that's when we finally got a water source and then the ultimate design is we planted it. Appreciate that. My little political statement of how you could help sell why you made certain decisions. Because we've actually run into that before. And here's the problem with that. Sometimes nothing's more permanent than a temporary solution. So having a temporary solution can be dangerous because it tends to be the easiest thing to ignore and not finish and go the full route and do what you really ultimately want to do. Any other questions. Are there any questions on any of the cost stuff or how that you can see how each phase. So if you were to do phase one at 624 and phase three at 211 that would ultimately be Your first phase on all this, if you will. So if you were to compartmentalize that and this right here that would coincide with what you would do first And then at a future date, once you started figuring out everything with the interchange, then you can implement this one. And when you look at it that way, and like I said, you know, phase four, to me, phase four is expendable. Just a quick question. If we compartmentalize and don't recommend area two now, is there any implication on the budget or, you know, could cost, this in cost could go up? Interpretably, yes. Just any drawbacks in that? I think, so we do have funds to do 1A, well, 1A, 1B, and 3A and 3B this year. I think, obviously, costs will go up because, excuse me, 2A, 2B, and 4, as I think both David and I have said, would probably happen in 28 right after it's done. And so the two issues, obviously, would cost more. Because prices will go up. And I think that the bigger concern in this board and the council could, it would be that discussion, but is what David said is nothing's potentially more temporary or permanent than temporary because we don't move forward with the change in the stamp concrete right now. The council in 28 or this parks board in 28 may say, why spend the money on it? It works just fine. We've got other priorities by then. But part of laying out the plan and identifying it within the phases and having a recommendation this evening of continuing both phases and that coming to the city council is at least we've set it in motion that that would be the plan, obviously, because the Tabor, the council can't account for those future funds. But, you know, the staff knows it. We would present it that way. So I don't think there is, aside from costs, I don't think there's really any other reason to do it that way. You know, there's no reason that, as David was alluding to, I mean, once we get into the construction of the interchange, once our project manager really starts to look at it, and I don't know what the phasing of it will be, but it might be that at some point he says, hey, if we want to put the rest of the landscaping and we're done with the big trucks over there, we could do it in... late 27 or something like that. So right now we're just throwing out 28 because that's when the completion is planned for the interchange itself. But it certainly could happen earlier. I love what Michael just said, and here's why. This number right here, general conditions and mobilization, that's to do the project, right? Well, if you only do a portion of this project and this project, and you start later with this project, you notice here there is no number right here. And so if you come back, you're going to have another added general conditions and mobilization. Now what Michael said is if they're working on the interchange and the equipment's already there and they're already mobilized and they have a construction trailer, you can probably really limit the general conditions and mobilization number and then just have them start constructing this so that's the only disadvantage to answer that question of waiting is sometimes you add in some of the general conditions costs and of course unit prices who knows we might have a really rainy couple years and tree growth is awesome and people have a surplus but Last I checked, water is getting more expensive, trees are becoming more scarce, and prices of everything just goes up every year. I will say the good news is you're not planning on building a pool. Because I will say this, the price of building pools in the past five years is an exponential cost curve rate compared to landscape and hardscape elements. So that's the good news. So yeah, that's all I pretty much had. Any other questions? So the group, I wrote your recommended motion clearly before I saw the, so I've changed it. And depending on what, if you want me to put 1A, 1B, 3A, 3B, the new recommended motion, depending on what you want, but you want a motion on the floor in a second, and then you guys should discuss it, whether or not you want to recommend a city council. Can we discuss it before we make a motion? You need a motion on the floor first. Okay. Okay. Why don't you put, for purposes of, why don't you do 1A, if you guys are comfortable with it, 1A, I guess it'd be 1A, 1B, 3A, 3B. Yeah. And can everybody see that? So you need to ask for a motion and someone needs to make the motion. Okay. Okay. The Parks and Recreation Advisory Board will make a motion to recommend the Liget Roundabout Design to City Council. I move to recommend. Do I start into that? If you want to make the motion, you can go ahead and make the motion. Or if you want to ask someone else to make the motion, they can motion. But you are absolutely allowed to make the motion. Okay. i move to recommend the city council the approval of concepts one phases one a one b three a and three b of the legay roundabout design as presented my second second day okay um now we can discuss correct okay so the one thing that does concern me about this motion is that Like, I don't love the idea of costs going up in the future with, like, 2A and 2B, and I feel like the whole reason why Council liked this plan is because of, like, the concept as it was presented to us in whole. I understand, though, the freeway issues. So, like, I also, like, I don't want to, like, discount that, but I think that it's, like, important to know, like, with Wayne, with, like, the interchange, like, that those are, like, I feel like the budget is kind of, like, well, we don't freaking know. So, like, I want to just, like, kind of throw that idea out there, but I do think that 1A, 1B, 3A, and 3B are super important to do, like, as soon as possible. Like, just for some of your background, if you guys don't know, like, I, we also work in landscape, and, like, prices are totally going up, and it is something where I think that, like, moving quickly on things like hardscape is really important, and I love the idea of getting things in as quickly as possible just so that we can, like, keep our numbers, like, as low as possible as well. Can we put the budget back up again on the screen? If we have to pay mobilization a second time and it's half the cost of what it could be for years. That's interesting. I just want a little more clarification on 2A and 2B. I'm sorry to ask that, but 2A and 2B, can we look at the picture again of where 2A and 2B were? Okay. So it's like the stuff coming off of the freeway. All right. So that actually makes the most sense. With the freeway interchange, you said it's going to be done in 2028? In total. Yeah. This section may be earlier. I just don't know. It's starting on the west. We're too early. With this being presented... is there a way to like create a plan with city council and say like, we recommend though, like going forward with the original concept as designed in 2028, once the freeway is done to like continue on and finish out 2A and 2B? Yeah, we could amend the motion. Yeah. Great. I think it's important because the whole reason we loved this concept, the whole reason we loved this concept when everybody talked was because people coming off the freeway are driving fast. and we want them to slow down coming into the city. And it was really important for us to have that foliage on both the north and south side of the street. So that would be the only thing that I would say. It's just like we liked that because we wanted people slowing down coming off that freeway coming into town. If you'll allow me. I am not the awesome motioner out there, but what if we said... what if the motion was i moved to recommend to the city council the approval of concept one phases 1a 1b 3a 3b immediate of the legate roundabout design immediately and phases 2a 2b and 4 as soon as feasible or as soon as reasonably yeah possible or something totally and and just like In some way, making sure council knows. The reason why we're recommending that is because we want people to slow down. We want people to really think consciously. Then when the future parks board hasn't had this conversation and didn't have the conversation on council, they'll know why we're pushing that. I love that. Okay, cool. Thank you for helping us amend that. So Toby will walk you through the process. Technically, you did not amend it yet. So you need to make a motion to insert the word immediately after design and as soon as feasible after presented. You've got to put in phases. Phase 2A, 2B. Nope, down below. Oh, yeah. And phases 2A, 2B, and 4. Sorry to be pushing you. No, I agree. Just make it your motion. That's absolutely it. I'm new to this, generally, but I agree. I think the design invites, like, respect for our city, so I think it, like, tells people, hey, let's, like, slow down and, you know, welcome to the city. Yeah, enjoy the old crossing right here. Yeah. So a question, 2A, 2B, and 4? 4, yeah. On 2A and 2B, And I apologize, we live on the canyon side, so I don't go down the gate that often. But did I understand that it's there already, that little... No. If we go back to the diagram... The roundabout, but the... But the medians are there. Yeah, that's true. So the median is there. So... Are the costs that are in question is really planting the foliage, the landscape? Well, it's stamped concrete in there right now. That's there. So we'd have to rip out the concrete to put the planters in. And so it's the perception that we just put in colored stamped concrete, and now we're ripping it out and opening plants. What about the water, though? Is the water? There is no water right now. So you have to, where is that going to be? When is that going to be done? That's a very good question. In the short run, we would probably have the water tanks. You've seen them before, that the tanks are up on the stands, and then it would constantly water. You would absolutely have to do it. Well, in Colorado, you totally have to do it. You'd have to have water. Mike talked about, at one point, building water over that area. Yeah, water will eventually come down once the developer develops it, or we put in a water line down. But there is no water at this point into there. So in the short term, as I said, we'd have a water truck that was watering. So we don't have a... concept or do we, what the costs would be to get it? For 2A and 2B or no? For your addition. Just make it all. Yeah, we do. The whole thing is 1.1, what does that say? 1.188. But what we're saying is if we wait on 2A, 2B, and 4, those costs will go up. But we also don't want to put in stuff that they're going to rip out over the next three years. Or not reach forward with. Yeah. So is that why we're doing three before two? Yes. And Michael, can I bring up an issue? We focus so much up here in not doing the center median and ripping out the hardscape here. But if you go to implement 3A, 3B, you are immediately tearing out a hardscape in this southern island. Is there an island there? So right now, that island has hardscape all in it. And if your motion to go with 1A, 1B, 3A, 3B, 3B is this center island right here with landscape in it. So you would be implementing tearing out some hardscape. Now, that said, I would use the narrative that... The reason we're tearing out hardscape is we didn't have water for it in a final plan, and we didn't want to leave it as just dirt. Now that we have our final plan, we are going to remove that and replace it with plant material, just so they feel like they're not just completely wasting money because they put hardscape in there. Is that a problem? I wonder. The hardscape was like a placeholder until. Yeah, tell me about what we actually decided. So they don't enjoy. And for full disclosure, I've only heard from two council members that this is a concern. I mean, and, you know, you guys are an independent body, so you should make your own decision about what's a higher priority, getting the landscape in there and making it the ultimate vision that you all have. Well, does it have potential for us to, like, meet with council at some point and, like, talk about it? Only if it becomes a real issue. But, I mean... As we've had you before, I think, when these things come before council, it's always helpful to at least have the chair, if not other board members, there to support it. I mean, obviously, we've got Councilman Broussard, but you are the ones who are making that. So, again, I wouldn't – and ultimately, the majority of council may say we don't care. So, again, don't get hung up on that. I probably shouldn't have brought it up. No, but it's helpful for us to know. And I think it's helpful for us to be able to say, like – This is kind of what we discussed in our meeting. Like, this is why we came to that conclusion. You guys feel free to come to your own conclusion. And before we get in front of council, I'm sure one of the questions that I'll be asked in council, we could get it to you beforehand, is what is that differential in there? How much did we pay for that colored stamp concrete? I mean, if it's $50,000, maybe council will use it and you view it as one way. If it's $200,000, you might think of it a little differently. So, you know, we don't have any numbers to provide you right now. It's just the, I think it's that gut reaction of, you know, we built something and the Metro District comes and rips it up and it just, you know, it's where governments can get a bad rap for. Because it's difficult to irrigate the center irrigation. Sorry, Toby, you're going to kill me. Could we, like, recommend that we, like, don't tear out the South Median until we, like, put in? 2A and 2B? Are you going to tell me? Well, no. I think you go back to the breakout. We'll tell you what. I'll go there. Just let me remind everybody. Here's 2A. Yeah. Or sorry, 3A, 3B. This is what it looks like with plant material. That is what it looks like without. Yeah. And that's the design we all hated. Yeah. And what I would recommend for you to do I know this because I deal with my board of directors. If you want to make a motion to approve doing this because you believe the vision is solid and holds water, I would make that motion and push for it because then your argument with city council is we had a governing body that voted for a certain vision for Castle Pines and we'd like to see that ultimate vision. As soon as you start putting clarifications on it and delayed timing, It leaves room to say, we don't believe in truly the vision. Now, Michael, you had said something about costs. So let me just do this. So on this diagram, area 3b, this pink right here, and on the cost estimate, 3b, the total landscape Awesome. You guys talk them on yourselves. I'm going to tell you how much hardscape the value is that you're going to rip out. I'm going to give you a rough idea. Is that valid? Yeah, I think he partially answered it. I think we need to be careful because we're saying rip out the hardscape, but it looks like most of it will stay intact. It's just taking out the middle bit, right? Yeah, it's a good point. You'll have to just rip some hardscape out and get that middle strip. Yeah. I guess. Yeah. Okay. So that's a good. Yeah. unfortunately. It's not a full, some of it will remain, right? It's not a total replacement. It's hard to move around cement. I mean, Dave, you tell me what you guys would do, but you guys aren't going to leave any of that stamped concrete in there. You'd take it all out, wouldn't you? No, we're going to still leave a splash block fully around. There's going to be a good two or four feet of hardscape around that. So if, for example... if you look at this edge right here there you're still going to have a full four foot of splash block of that hardscape plus a good chunk of it as it narrows down through here and then we're only going to cut out a little triangle in the median so i'm going to guess you're going to save the total amount that is in there you're going to save about 30 of the hardscape 40 of the hardscape that's already there so now what are you doing is I'm looking at our detailed cost estimate here. Irrigation, 9,000 square feet. So bear with me here. 96, 98. That's just in the center median times. And typically, that type of hardscape costs around, with the decorative finish, the colored concrete plus the stamp, we're going to say it's $22 or maybe 14 a foot 698 times 14. so we're talking you know that could be 135 000 of hardscape that would be hold it out oh wait hold on a second i'm sorry that's up to one area three a my bad i gotta go to three b So while he's calculating that, I want to say a couple things. One, I feel like I led you guys down a path that was not a direction, because you've heard me for however many years you've been on the board. Your job, in my view, is really to create the vision, the ultimate. And I think that's part of where your conversation has been, is what is the ultimate vision? The cost? This is the first time we've ever drilled into this level of numbers. And at the end of the day, this is a council decision, not a board. And I mean, even if you're making a recommendation, I think some of what you have been talking about is what is the statement that you want to make in the totality of this project? Yeah. And that's ultimately and what we. The original thought when Dave and I talked was this was about construction limitations of the interchange, not should you ultimately do all what you guys wanted unanimously, which was concept one. Right. And concept one did remove. some of the media, but that was acknowledged at that time when that conversation was here. And so, again, I feel a little bad that I might have led you down that path, thinking about what a couple of council members wanted. I would, I mean, Dave's going down this road if you want to hear what those numbers are, but ultimately I would come back to what is your vision? And given the fact of the earlier part of the conversation that we don't know how the construction of the interchange is going to go. This is a reasonable breakout of how you would do, build your ultimate vision of concept one, which is 1A and 3A, 3B, because we know you can do that without impacting, without the interchange impacting it, right? And then that's why I said when feasible, 2A, 2B, and 4, because, I mean, heck, again, in early 27, our project manager may come in and say, hey, you're free to go. And then we can go to council, come to you, and then go to council and say, let's go ahead and do it. And we're there. So maybe if that helps, just kind of bring it back in the big visionary picture. That makes me feel wonderful about what's happening. Yeah, it is the vision. That, right there. No, no, I mean, is there, what's taking place? We all voted in February for concept one, and then we brought it to council for them to look at concept one, two, and three initially. And We talked, city council also liked concept one. We can show you like the full extent of the plan if you haven't seen it. I guess what I was really asking, what I'm hearing a lot is a lot of this for Big Pizza was to help with safety. Some of it, yeah. Some of it. As well as it looking well, right? Yeah. I guess that's been more of a vision. So the ultimate vision that the council approved in 2019, I think, was a gateway and wayfinding plan. And every entrance to town, according to that adopted plan, is to have a monument and entrance. So there's one at Monarch. There's the one on southbound I-25 right now. There's the one that's being built right now. If you drive on Castle Fines Parkway, where Hess turns into Castle Fines Parkway, it's coming out of the ground. And so every entrance to town is going to ultimately have this over... however long it takes us to do it. So this is this entrance into town's vision. And the vision has already been adopted by the council in their plan. So each location has its unique characteristics. And so that's what this conversation is, is what exactly do we want this one to look like? If that helps. Can I just add on to that, Terry, too? It also is with our comprehensive plan, like the sense of place. This helps us give that sense of place. This is our community. we want it to be welcoming, not just safe, but like pretty. Yeah, absolutely. And ultimately the interchange, when we build the interchange, one of the things we're working on is incorporating the gateway features onto the actual bridge itself. And then the northbound off-ramp at Happy Canyon will have some kind of, you know, again, pending council's approval, will have a similar monument to the southbound Gasplines Park would want And then there'll be one on the east side, most likely entering into the east side of town. And then when Crowfoot's connected, there'll be one there. So every entrance. And it tells everybody both sides of the highway are one community that continues that whole thing. And as the Councilwoman said, maintains that sense of community. So if I may make a recommendation. If you all are on the same page of how you want to go forward with this, I'm not sure that we have heard from everyone about if they want to go forward with the motion or amend a motion. Once we find that out, then you will either yes or no amend the motion. But if you want to just take a poll of everyone, all the voting members, to see where you stand before the amendment, and then we can move forward with this. Okay. Does anybody have any concerns with the amended motion as we've moved it? And it has not been moved yet. You have not amended it. What I mean is the way that Toby rewrote it, does anybody have a problem with the way that she rewrote it, I guess? Is that a better way to ask? So is everyone okay moving forward with the amendment, or are you guys wanting to scrap the whole thing? Like, do you want to make sure that we add in phases 2A, 2B, 4 when feasible, and the other immediately? Is that the direction everyone wants to go? I'm personally not comfortable not doing that. You're not comfortable not doing that? I'm not comfortable with us not recommending to do phases 2A, 2B, and 4. Okay, so everyone's on board with that. What I'm going to recommend is, Chair Ball, for you to... state the following. If there are no objections, I will withdraw my motion, and then we'll just start with the new motion. Perfect. Okay. If there are no objections, I withdraw my original motion. Hearing none, the motions withdraw. Hearing none, the motions withdraw. Thanks. Robert's rules training. Robert's rules training. or somebody else wants to make a decision. You read it, Emily. I'm stressed out now. You never get the level of video. Okay. I move to recommend to City Council the approval of Concept 1, Phases 1A, 1B, 3A, 3B, 3B of the LeGay Roundabout design immediately. as presented, and then phases 2A, 2B, and 4 when feasible. Perfect. So you have a motion and a second on the floor. Yeah. Deputy city clerk, go until you please call the vote. Perfect. I love that. Chair Ball? I approve. Chair Pro Tempura? I approve. Board member Faber? I approve. Board member Olsen. I approve. The motion passes. Thank you. Sorry that this is your first meeting. This is so different than usual. Dave, before you go, just a reminder, next Monday, I was going to do this on my update, but since Dave's still here, next Monday, starting between 12 Is Laney a voting member on the board? No. OK. No, not voting. We don't need your opinions. Yeah, voice your opinion all day long. It's because there's five, and if you had six, you end up with no time. Oh, cool. Got it. So just a reminder on Dave on the call here, starting at noon, and some of you, I know we can't get there until later, but somewhere between 12 and 4, we're going to be next door. And we've got a large three-by-three printouts of the maps. And Dave's going to facilitate the trail naming. Perfect. And we'll have lunches and everything. So thanks very much, Dave. Appreciate it. Yeah, thank you. Thanks for letting me explain everything and present to you. And congratulations on a unanimous decision. We'll see you on Monday. All right, yeah, we'll see you guys on Monday. Thanks again. Perfect. Okay, sorry, I had to write that down in motion. Okay, the next general business item is the Coyote Ridge Park additional enhancements discussion, and we are joined by Robin and Mia from HCM. Let's complete the Coyote Ridge Park enhancements discussion before we move on to the seminar. Hey, guys. Hi. How are you doing? Good. Good to see you. Nice to see you as well. It looks like you're going to bring it up. Yeah, so I'm here today just kind of pretty quickly going to go over where we are on Coyote Ridge Park and also do a recap on the... Oh, you want me to share? What we talked about last time. She's asking a question. So we'll start with the Coyote Ridge Park. We broke your slideshow into two things because they're going to need to do a recommendation in the middle. So we put up questions at the end of the first one. Okay. Can everybody see my screen? The Coyote Ridge Park phase one? No? Yes. Okay. We can see it. Yes. Okay. Yes. Okay. Do you want me to go ahead? Yeah. Yes. Okay. All right. So just to recap on the additional scope we talked about last time, I believe it was in March, where we talked through some different options of doing some additional design work to determine if you want to add some additional scope to the current project phase one. So this is just a recap of where we landed. As you can see on this drawing in the area red, that's what we currently have in the project phase one in the base scope. And what we talked about doing was proceeding with doing schematic design for the following options. Option one was looking at adding a flush restroom where there's an existing vault restroom down by the playground and the parking lot. And that would include looking at it from a year-round perspective and then all the utility work that would need to be done and connect across the park. So we're going to study that a little bit more, which will help us understand what the cost of that would be once we're done with schematic design and dial that in. And then option two was looking, option two and three kind of go together, was looking at how do we expand that existing ball field to get it to a true 300-foot foul location line field and expand it into the excel property so and then improvements of dugouts fully enclose it with outfield fence shade structures bleachers and a scoreboard so looking at that and we're going to study that in a few different ways in order to see what we can do And bring that back to you. So all of this would be taken through schematic design level. So not full construction documents, but enough design due diligence, you know, talking to Excel Energy, talking to the utility company as far as the sanitary line and water connection for the plumbed restroom. and really helping us identify what the true cost would be in order to make these improvements. And so we would come back to you after we've done that and present that to you. We're waiting for, we still don't have a survey for the project, even the base scope. We're hoping to get that. first of next week. So what we'd like to do is, and so it's kind of slowed us down on the base scope a little bit, but I think that's okay because the reality is we want to come back to you with schematic design for both the base scope and these additional... options, option one, two, and three, so that you have all the information of, you know, what are we getting in the base scope? How is that looking? And where is that budget line? And then what are our options if we do choose to want to move forward with any of the, what we found in the schematic design for the optional scope? So we are... Design fee for the additional work includes civil engineering, architecture, who's going to cover mechanical, electrical, plumbing, and some level of structural. And then we also have some irrigation design in there to understand that since we'd be doing modifications. And then, of course, landscape architecture. So we have quite a few consultants in the additional scope as well. So design fee for that is $52,860 to take that through schematic design. And so I wanted to probably stop there and make sure that's what everybody was expecting as far as the scope we talked about exploring in that schematic design additional options. Can I ask a couple of weird questions? Is that okay? I know this is selling, but when we're, I know we talked about like putting in the flush restroom. Do we have any idea like how many bathrooms we're going to have up there? When like, like the like toilets, I know that sounds really dumb, but right now there's the two. And I'm just curious, like what the plan might be to like, what are you going to get quoted? Are you going to get eight? Are you going to have two? Like what? Like I just. Yeah, that's, that's a great question. So that's part of what we're going to do is. Is study, you know, we want to meet with city staff and, you know, understand programming, understand how this is used. You know, outdoor restrooms aren't as clean, you know, clear as far as code requirements for is how many toilets are required. But we do have some parameters that we go off of based on, you know, field usage and kind of just parking spaces and, you know, size of playground and. those kind of things that help us identify what we think would be appropriate facilities. Obviously demand, you know, we do, this will have to be a Forest Main sanitary. So demand on the sanitary system sometimes will play into that as well, how many toilets we can have in order to not, make it even more costly if we have to, you know, since we likely have to have a lift station in order to get the sanitary out. So those that's part of this design is just, you know, understanding the needs. Is there any specific storage to that wants to be in here outside of obviously chase and access to the toilet facilities? We usually are looking at to, you know, a family. We typically try to add a family restroom in these facilities. buildings as well which is especially really nice next to you know playground and stuff like that so um that'll be that'll be part of this design process is kind of working through that to determine how to right size the the facility thanks for answering such a like random specific question thank you oh yeah no that's a great question yeah i think we went through this for like a year but i was like that's probably a question we never like I'm going to get in trouble with toilets again. No, it's still important. It is important. I have one too. I just can't remember what happened to the additional vault toilets. I know that was on the list of options. Did that, I just can't remember if it fell out or if it's moving forward. The ones that were done by the baseball field? Yeah. I think that was something that we had. Didn't we? The baseball field? I looked at Robin. There was one that was closer to the pickleball courts, or it was closer to the baseball diamond. I don't remember. Toilets being like the Cadillac version, but then there were the step-down versions of just doing all toilets in different locations. Yeah, per the master plan, there's one recommended up by the pickleball courts, and then one replacing the Santa La enclosure over by the baseball. We don't have that in this additional scope, but if it's something that you want to look at, we, we can certainly do that. I think our understanding of the direction was more to focus on that year round one flush restroom, see how that, if that's a real cost that, you know, ultimately could be supported and then see where we land with that and then determine vault restrooms a little further down the road. But again, certainly can look at that as well. Yeah, well, I guess because the water seemed like a stretch. Everyone was freaking out about water. I thought we landed on, let's try to expand vault toilets. Maybe that was the easy, like the more feasible option. I don't know why, but in my head, I thought this wasn't a possibility at this part. No, we definitely, we walked away from the last meeting or whenever it was with... with flushable toilets. I think that's great if it's like something we can do. Because that was the estimate between, and that was the conversation, Emily, between you and Richard on the trade-off in there. I think, Robin, my question back to you, I think, for further clarification is, what you're saying is put in, install one flushable toilet location, and then potentially, and so where would that go relative to the two vault toilets in the master plan? So right here where we say option one is where the flush restroom would be, and then the vault, there would be a new vault restroom up by the pickleball courts, and then a new one at the ball field, kind of adjacent to that parking lot. Basically, we're thinking pretty close to where that Santa La enclosure is right now um which would give you you know restroom much better restroom facilities than you have now you know given the distance you have to travel from pickleball down to this one and then this is just a sandalette okay those wouldn't be included in the purple looming board for this year, this fiscal year? Correct. Okay. I don't remember landing in that style. Because the bathrooms I thought were way over the budget we had before. Yeah, it was. And the total addition in my head, and Robin may remember, was about another three and a half to four million. That's what I thought. But there's three and a half in the fund balance. And so part of once we get through this process is once you guys ultimately decide on that would be to have a recommendation to council to take the additional funds out of the fund balance to complete it. It's going to be a 25, 26 project anyway, so it would carry it over. I thought I mentioned that. I feel like that's not something I would want to do, because I feel like the Coyote Ridge in total was like $17 million. Yeah. I would much rather put it towards all the other stuff that we, I don't know. That's like, I didn't realize that was like part of it. Now's the time to change it. I mean, I guess my question is, Well, and I like the first idea, but my most important thing is to have the year one plan move forward with one upgraded toilet somewhere, one of them from the master plan, because that was only like, it was less than $100,000. It was like a small piece of the $3 million. They didn't go about it. They just had a discussion last time. Yeah, that's what this is coming. Yeah. Is this going to be in March? Yeah. Is that when you guys talked? Okay. It's okay. Okay, so we didn't. Okay, thanks, Toby. That was helpful clarification. Okay. Yeah. That's why this is all coming back. So, and why she's saying, if you want, and that's why we have the motion is to increase the design fees to accomplish what we thought we walked away from the ball field and a flushable toilet. But if you want, if you want an evaluation of upgrading one of the two vaults and, and I don't know, Robin, if you know what the, just off the top, what the, to build a new vault toilet, for example, at the particular ball courts would be. I should know this. I know we did some. Yeah, it was on the quote that we landed on in January. Yeah, I just don't. I don't remember what it is. I didn't look at it. As long as that discussion isn't closed, we can take up those. Part of what we're asking for tonight, though, is we've got a proposal for additional design fees. And so that obviously is going to change if it's a flushable toilet versus moving forward with a vault. I mean, obviously it'll be less, but I guess it'd be good for you guys to have a conversation about what is it you really want to see in that phase one. Did you have three vaults instead of one flush? I don't know. Yeah, I think, yeah, Richard was... It was returned pro. The expanded ball field. It was kind of framed as ball fields versus toilets. I thought we landed in a place where we could do ball field improvements and a ball toilet. And what I walked away with was bathrooms and a flushable toilet. Because that still fit within those additional dollars. Because regardless, we're going to have to go to council and ask for... additional funds beyond the $4 million, whatever the numbers are. I watched this meeting like two months ago, but I wasn't here, and I'm like, what? Sorry. Robin, just for clarification, so all of the stuff we talked about in the last meeting, some of that doesn't need additional design fee, right? None of the base scope, yeah. But the vault funds were not base scope. Correct. replacing the restroom was not part of the original project. Yeah. And, and what I recall about the, the previous conversation is there was a conversation about vault versus flush. And, you know, we talked about the community really wanting a flush restroom in this park and it came up a lot in the master plan process. So the thought was if we proceed with at least investigating, that seemed like the right spot to do it. If you were going to replace it, put a flush restroom in the park by the playground on that side of the park seemed to be the appropriate place to do that. If you went and you spent the money on a vault, just replacing it with another vault restroom, obviously you don't want to put a flush restroom there in the future. It's kind of either or. So that was part of that conversation too. They have a flush, but it puts us a year behind in being able to get where we want to park. Yeah, and so the ball field and the pickleball vaults though, those were also not based scope? No. They were on the quote. Last meeting you guys were able to add... different things because of the amount of money we had. And so that was the discussion. You guys never came to a general consensus. It was just what was talked about. So, yeah, I think you guys need to have a general consensus. And I just want to make sure everybody knows that currently the Allbridge Park restrooms are closed in the winter. They're winterized. So it's not a – flush toilets doesn't mean it will definitely be open all year long. Yeah, I guess that was my – just for the committee, I just wanted improved bathroom options. It was not. Yeah. Like right now you have 20 people standing at the bathroom. I don't, to me, it doesn't matter. That'll be yours out. Cause it's so far above and beyond. So we pulled it. Oh, sorry. Go ahead. Oh, I just didn't want, I hadn't wanted them to go by the right side because of all the ball field improvements. So to the degree that we can kind of do a ball band scenario, that would be ideal. So should we, What do you guys feel about the design team based on my thoughts on March? Were you here at March's meeting? Yeah. Yeah. What are your thoughts about, like, what the discussion was that was had? My question is, what happens if, you know, we can't work with Excel to expand in Walkfield? They'll say yes. But, I mean, do we have any, like... movement on that at all? Because I know we've been asking about it for like two years. Yeah, they're not going to, as I've said, for two years, they're not going to say yes until we have an application. Okay. And some until we get the engineering. But they've said, they've said unofficially, wink, wink, you know, we don't see any issue, but they won't do anything until they have an application. But, so I don't, I don't foresee any... any concern with that, so. They've been great to work with on everything else we're working on, so. Cool. Yeah. So I think if I could frame it, and this might be a question to Robin, and Robin, I know you were going to, but to throw out, if we, if more toilets is what we're looking for, then what if we improved the existing vault toilet? And knowing that, it sounds like it's a kind of one and done for now, for the foreseeable future. adding the two vault toilets in the areas that she described. And what's that cost relative to one flushable toilet? Does that make sense, Robin? Yeah, we can look at that. And I think ultimately it will depend on how many stalls we have, obviously, for the vault. as far as what the costs would be. And it needs to be right size based on the space and the constraints of the site as well, of course. So. Meaning doesn't, that's not, because we didn't look at a poll last meeting for the mold toilets. You didn't. Okay. All right. Thanks. All right. My mind is, was totally around flushable toilets. I can't, I have no recollection of anything but flushable, but. I think I was annoyed last meeting. I'm like, why isn't this base scope? I feel like this was base scope all along, but I just want to make sure we're not paying for a second role when we had one of them at the last meeting. They did have general costs of what it costs to add this piece and that piece and that piece. I do recall that. Yeah, we had multiple different options. I think we had like seven options and we understood this was the direction we were going, but And maybe just to recap on what the base scope is, the base scope is improving the playground, adding accessible paths to the shade structures, replacing picnic tables so there are accessible tables, adding bike racks, improving the paths from either side of the drainage to be ADA accessible as well. And then enhancing this area on the south side of the bridge to be kind of a community gathering space or a little node, if you will, in the trail system with some plantings around it. So a lot of accessibility improvements. And then the playground was expanding that, making that inclusive and improving the... equipment that's there replacing some of it and then adding new and surfacing that's fully accessible as well. Okay and I think that like makes a lot of sense like I'm like so about the engineering design fees we definitely want to know like the base scope of baseball fields restroom options I think that that yeah thank you for like marking that that like makes sense to me okay. Does anybody have any other discussion they want to have on the, like, toilet situation or baseball field situation or anything? Any questions? I do. Yeah. Sorry. Michael would like a flush toilet. I do like flush toilets. I just want to be clear. So we know you want bulk toast, but do you want her to look at the costing of improving the existing and adding the two? Is that... from my guest that hasn't already been looked at from the past course we looked at. I'm not married to the idea of a flush toilet. I mean, I can compromise and I think we can upgrade from porta potties to wall. That works well. But like you, I'm concerned about how much it's going to cost to run a water line and all that. Is it really worth it versus... maybe expanding more toilets. Yeah, a better phase of toilets, let's just say. So Robin, does that help clarify for you? So just to bring up one thing is you can't expand a vault restroom. So you have to replace the entire, if you want more toilets, you have to replace the whole thing. These are prefab building. So they're not really able to be expanded on. So I just want to make sure that everybody understands that. And then, and then it sounds like the preferences don't explore. We're taking the flush restroom out of exploring at all at a schematic design level. And we're looking at what is the cost to add it or increase the size of the vault restroom by the playground and add a vault restroom. by the baseball field and the pickleball courts. Is that? Yeah. I'm wondering Robin for, because I recall you saying the issue about not being able to expand it because they're free, free fab. And I wonder if just from a terminology standpoint, it's, it's replacing the, it's a replacement at the playground and adding two new ball toilets at the, at the parking lot and at the pickleball. Yeah, that makes sense. Like just replacing. Yeah. So we probably need to come back to the board with what after Robin looks at what the original scope was included because part of these design fees is going into final engineering so we can go to construction, right? So there still is going to be an increased cost, but we'd look at the three ball toilets and the ball field. Is that? Well, right now we're, our design fee is to take it through schematic design to better understand what the, you know, what the design is, what the construction costs would be. I, you know, my gut feels that we're not going to be, more than this fee based on this conversation. A lot of it was in architecture, kind of MAP design and utilities for the flush restroom. So if that, again, don't hold me to that, but my assumption is that's kind of where we are. So maybe to avoid having this come back just so we don't lose another month, The recommendation is, we'll modify that, but ball fields and vault toilets, period, and then leave the dollar amount out. So we're just saying that what this board is recommending to the council is the approval of the engineering fees. She'll fine tune those. And then when we put the memo together for the council, we'll just plug in what those engineering fees are. So if you guys are comfortable with that. Toby's got your motion right there. Make a motion and a second, and then you can vote on it. Want to make a motion? I move to recommend to City Council the approval of engineering design fees for the Coyote Ridge Park, Base Scope, Baseball Field, and Vault Toilets. One second. I second. Yeah, absolutely. Sorry. Deputy City Clerk Katie, would you like to call the vote? Board Member Olsen? Approved. Board Member Faber? Approved. Chair Gall? Approved. Chair Potemwa? Approved. The motion passes. Thank you. Can Laney jump in with any comments or questions? Yes. You're desperate for a certain kind of toilet. She's gonna come up and be like, oh my gosh, we can't do this. Okay. Perfect. Okay. Are there any clarifying questions that anybody has? Right? Is that what I need to do? So you're good. You can move on to the next item. Okay. Yes. You can move on to the next item with Soaring Hodge. You haven't done this many motions in a long time. I haven't done this many motions since like 2023. It's been a minute. All right, give me one second. Let me get to the... It was like my first meeting. There was one where I ran like the first meeting as chair, and I was like, how many motions are we going to do here? But I haven't done that in a long time. Okay, so moving on to Soaring Hawk Park. Am I okay to proceed, actually? Yes. Okay. So one of the questions that came up at one of the previous meetings, or at least in discussions with Michael, is what can we do, you know, with Soaring Hawk to determine how we can move forward on that project as you have funding available? And so the recommendation that we're bringing to you today is to, right now you have a master plan and, you know, We have, you know, some additional soil and stuff that's been moved on site. And so what our recommendation is to get a survey, a site survey for how everything exists on site, get all the easements that we know are on the site and documented, and then take this approximately 25 acres between Canyon Top Trail and Cross Canyon Trail through schematic design. And that would also include, I'm going to go to the next page, also include a phasing strategy. So we can work with you and the city to plan for, you know, what are realistic chunks of money that you might have that would help with, you know, implementing this park in phases. And so we would take it through schematic design, which would further the design. Again, we'd take it through more of an engineering level. We'd be able to understand the costs of this 25 acres and then break it down into different phases so that then you can kind of use that as a guide of how you start to implement different pieces of the park. We'd work with you on what, Are priorities, you know, do you want to, you know, is the ball field slash multipurpose area a priority? Are pickleball and tennis courts as a playground over here or a bike, little bike pump track? What are the kind of priorities? So really weaving together, pushing the design forward to the next step, coming up with a phasing strategy. And a plan and a cost estimate that breaks out that each one of those phases with each, you know, part, whether it's, you know, $750,000 or $500,000 or whatever. two million dollars or whatever it is what can you buy and what makes sense for implementation you know and some sometimes it's you know that first part is doing some overlock grading and utility work which is not as gratifying because it doesn't you don't you don't end up with something but those are things that we can help with as we do the schematic design level for that and this These couple images on this slide, this is very common, right? You just don't have $15, $20 million that it becomes available all at once. So phasing the parks is very common. So this is an example of one of a phasing plan that will go along with more detailed drawings than the master plan. And then... a cost assessment is tied to that. So each one of them, it'll be an overall for that park, 25 acres. And then we'll also break it up into, you know, the pink area, the blue area and the green area and what it costs to implement that. Because as kind of the conversation with DTJ was earlier about the roundabout, obviously, ultimately it costs more. to do things in phases because your contractors remobilizing, you know, costs change over time. And so you'll have an overall cost estimate. If you were able to build it all at once, that 25 acres, and then we'll break it out and share and we'll, we'll do, we can also add some level of escalation onto these costs estimates say, Hey, we're gonna, you know, this is a five to 10 year strategy plan and we'll have, you know, the first, The first phase will be in two years and we'll add, you know, kind of the average escalation that we've seen onto those estimates so that, you know, if you're budgeting for something in 2029, you know, we're trying to give you the best cost that we can on all the things that we know at the time and include that escalation on that so you can properly budget for it in the future. So this would include, you know, a full... design team there are two buildings on this master plan that were intended to be flush restrooms and also have some site maintenance storage and some athletics recreation storage in them so it does include design for that and then civil engineering electrical and lighting design and irrigation design as well. So that's, oh, sorry, go ahead. No, I've said perfect. Okay, so yeah, so that was what we were recommending as a way to give you the next level of a tool that you'd be able to work from for implementation moving forward. And I would just add before you begin discussion that Hunter didn't, $50,000 in is already in the appropriated budget. So you've got the funds to do this if you want to move forward. Yeah. And that does include, like I said, a site survey. I can't remember what, but that's always a decent chunk just to get all that site survey, which is really important because it's kind of the key to making sure that we're moving forward with design and the best of our expertise. Does anyone have any clarifying questions for Robin that we need on this part? Does anyone have any discussion that they'd like to have about this part before we make a motion? I move to recommend to City Council the approval of the cost of a site survey, schematic design and phasing strategy for Soaring Hawk Park in the amount of $149,625. I second. Deputy City Clerk Weins, will you please call the vote? Chair Pro Temuera? I approve. Board Member Olsen? I approve. Chair Gall? Approved. Board Member Faber? I approve. The motion passes. Thank you. I approve too. I love it. Okay. Thank you so much, Robin, for being patient with us, too, through our toilet discussions. No problem. Toilets are always a hot topic. Toilets and shade. I love it. I love it. Okay. So next on the agenda is staff updates. Mr. Penny, do you have anything you'd like to report today? I do have something. So do you want to introduce first? I just wanted to introduce Katie Owens, our new deputy city clerk. She's been with us for a few weeks. She came from California. She's a great addition to the team. She doesn't have a lot of city clerk experience, which no one did when they came into this job, myself included. But she is web smart, and she's learned stuff really fast. She's going to be a great addition to your team. Thank you. Welcome. Thank you. And although I love you guys dearly, we did hire a Parks and Rec director. We did. Yes, we did. So Chair Ball had joined us on at least one other interview, maybe two. I can't remember anymore. And then he was number seven as well. His name is Marcus Graves, and he'll be joining us. Don't take it personal. He'll be joining us on June 9th. So he'll officially see you at the June meeting. And I'll stay with you for a couple months, similar to the transition here, and especially as we get him up to speed. He comes to us from West Woodman Hills, thank you, which is in Payton, lives in Monument. I was like, is that in the same? Yeah, yeah, sure. We have a lot of small towns, right? And before that, he worked at UCCS in the Springs in there. Parks Operations, and before that, I believe 12 years, give or take, in South Suburban. So he has lots of experience, both in capital projects, programming, I think the whole aspect. And I think you guys will really like him. It seems to be somebody who's willing to get out with the contractors and consultants and staff and get out in the field. as well as be able to do big picture visionary work with you around this table here. So I'm excited for that. And I will continue to stay on as through that transition until you guys are able to kick me out the door. Yeah, make your own . And that is all I have. Thanks. Thank you. Okay, our final agenda item tonight is the board member updates. Do any board members have any updates for our group? No. Okay, I'm really happy that you're here. We tried to get a student for many years. This is really exciting for us to be able to have the buy-in from people that aren't in their 40s. Do you want to give an intro? The meeting has started, too. I mean, my name's Lainey. Oh, this cool thing. There you go. Oh, I have to turn this on. That was that, too. We're all oiled machines. My name's Lainey Tedra. I go to Lutheran High School over in Berkert. I live in Forest Park. Actually, right down there. I'm 18. I'm going to Grand Canyon University in a few short months. Congratulations. Thanks. To be a trauma surgeon. So I'll study pre-medicine and then go off to med school. But I still hope to, you know, attend online and then when I come back. So, yeah, I'm excited. That's awesome. Thank you. Thank you so much for being here. We're about to impact your road commute from Forest Park. That would be Michael's fault, not mine. Okay, perfect. Well, perfect. Does anybody else have anything that they'd like to bring up before the meeting's over? Okay, then I will adjourn the meeting at 6.06 p.m. Thank you all very much. Later, friends.