Thank you, Mayor Recording. I'd like to call this meeting of the Downs Creek City Council of Order, this March 4th, 2024 at 501 PM. For the work session. Thank you. Would you leave the pledge? Be happy, too. to apply the United States of America. And to the role model, we're just saying one nation under God in the physical of liberty and justice for all. Next slide. Mayor Schermarks. None. That's the same. Thank you. The first item under strategic priorities is capital improvement plan. We have Mr. Bennett for presentation. is capital improvement plan. We have Mr. Bennett for presentation. Mayor and council members, I am excited to come back and bring to you the recommended capital projects for FY25 and the CIP for the four years following that. You may recall that back in November I previewed with you the policy that staff intended to follow in order to produce a five-year plan along with, I'm sure of who that is. It's me. Soft to an end's just start. But nothing can dampen my enthusiasm for the CIP. After we talked about the process in November, we decided even though we were kind of on an abbreviated schedule, we would go ahead and see if we could follow that during this year and get to you in March, a playing along with that FY25 list of projects. Just to kind of refresh your memory on what we said we would do and tell you what we did is once I preview the policy with you in November, I task the department heads to produce capital improvement requests and they submitted those and you see my book here, sort of my working book where we consolidated and took those requests in. We then sat down with a peer review committee which was comprised of all the people that made capital improvement requests for FY25. And from that it was a fantastic meeting where we sort of iron sharpened iron each other to kind of see how our proposals could be improved and how the requests could be better. And we ended up getting a couple of revised requests that came out of that peer review committee. The last step for the capital improvement request for FY 25 was a scoring and review by the capital improvement committee, CIP committee, consisted of the two of us in the City Manager's Office, HR and finance, and we used a scoring system with some set criteria to evaluate those submittals. We also took into account your input from the retreat back in January, as well as consider the strategic priorities that you set forth in that retreat. The result is a list of 15 projects for FY 2025 that the committee would recommend as being your FY 2025 capital improvement projects. And you can see them there on page two. So I know this is an overwhelming document that was attached to this. So I wanted to kind of put in the memo the FY25 projects to use that as an anchoring point for the discussion. It is a recommendation, it's not said in stone. I might suggest that the way you kind of approach this is to look at this FY25 list. Kind of think about what I keep these on here, what I take something off, what I add something to it, what I rearrange the order. And as you focus on FY25, that'll impact maybe what you do to the larger document. Something falls off FY25, maybe you slide it to FY26. But hopefully this chart will be helpful in orienting you to the projects that the CIP committee is recommending for inclusion in the first year of the CIP. Ronnie Campbell is here, a finance director. I owe him a debt of gratitude for his hard work in putting together the five year plan that you see. He worked tirelessly to create that document working with our department heads that submitted plans that you all have approved, like the stormwater plan or the T-splosh programming list or parks and recreation. Ronnie, did yo-mins work pulling it together? So I appreciate that Ronnie. And you all should be thankful to you. Did a great job getting the document together. So he is here with me tonight to help answer any questions that you may have. And with that Mr. Mayor, I'll turn it over to you to proceed. As you see, Fit. Thank you. And I hate to say it. Ronnie, as much as I appreciate all the work that you did and appreciate you being here, I'm hoping that we don't get quite so technical that we have to call on you. But my big thing is I think that it's, despite being a lot of information and potentially a complex document. The issues in front of us tonight are relatively straightforward. And so for me, the critical thing is what's in front of us for fiscal year 25. And so at the top of this list, we've got the new fire station. I think at least in the past we've had maybe unanimous consensus that that would be what we want to move forward with in fiscal year 25. And so then you've heard me talk about the conveyor belt. So in my mind, that falls off and this that puts into play the five year bigger CIP. For me, I'm a little less concerned about that longer term, CIP because we're gonna have so many opportunities for check-in and adjustment and to change. And so just like, you know, we had, we just had our retreat, we'll have a retreat next year, then we'll have a similar meeting like this this time next year. Staff will then work on the budget. I'll get a chance with it, then it goes to the council. And it's only after it goes to the budget vote before we're actually casting something somewhat in stone. Yes, that is correct. casting something somewhat in stone. I look at this as a lot of a road map and illuminating what we're thinking about doing in the future, but we're not actually making a decision tonight. We're simply, it's a check-in in my mind. Right. And so for that, you know, I'm definitely involved with the plan for fiscal year 25 and for the more global five year plan in general. But with that, I'll hand it over to you, Stacey. Thank you, Director Campbell and Assistant City Manager Bennett, very much for all your work on this. I, for 25, definitely for the police substation is my first. And how I prioritize was needs, then improvements and maintenance of our existing assets, and then wants. So with that, after the police station or fire station is the police vehicles. And after that, I would move the New Town Park as recommended in the Parks Update Plan and fund that in 25, which is 750,000. And similarly, Altremele Animal Habitat, since those are existing assets we own. And then the Collie Creek Courts Parking would be my last project on 25. And then I would, I don't know if you want us to get this detailed, but I would take out the John's Creek High School Bio Retention altogether. And same with the number 15 John's Creek Abbott's stream restoration since that is private property. And then I would move linear park and the performing arts hall to fiscal year 2026. And that's just. What was that got? Can you run down your top four again, please? Yes, sir. Or five, I was trying to track with you and I lost. No, no, that's okay. I'm pleased. And we got fire station 63 number one. Yes. And then police vehicles number two. And Newtown Park number three. And what about Newtown Park? Was that one of the later year projects? Well, in the yes, you headed on 26. But it was resurfacing the courts and the lighting to the tennis courts. So you're bringing that into the books? Yes, and that was recommended in the parts of the plan to be done in 25. And then the Autry Mill animal habitat was number four, but that was also recommended to be done in 25. Thank you for clarifying for me. No, No problem. And the number five is just the Collie Creek Courts Parking. I'm sorry, what was the fourth thing? The Autry Mill Animal Habits Head. Anything else? No. There. All right. Thank you. Assistant City Manager Bennett and Director Campbell. Also for your time on this one. I know we talked on the phone a little last week trying to understand this. And I wanted to make sure I understand once this happens, oh, sorry, once we get a consensus on this, is this coming back in any kind of form of resolution or anything? Yes, once we work session this and we have a consensus of what you wanna see in F5 25 and the rest of the plan That it would come back at a future council meeting for an adoption of the plan. Okay Because I am in agreement Councilmember Skinner and with the mayor that we are the fire station 63 is the number one priority for fiscal year 25 and Would be happily surprised if there is funding for anything else, but I find it unlikely. So I didn't prioritize other things for fiscal year 25, although Collie Creek Courts Parking is probably the one with the most current need in my opinion. I wanted to talk more, I know you asked again that we're not talking about funding yet, but it brings to mind the question of how like we can put all of these things, for instance, as council member Skinner did, she like prioritized them, but we're not able to afford all of those things every year. So talking about how we're going to fund the conveyor belt, I guess, is something I would like to have another discussion about it sometime. And maybe that's part of budget season. That's all I have, thanks. Thank you, Ron. Thank you, Ron, for putting it together. So it definitely helps us make the discussion easy for the surplus and even for the budget time. So thank you for the time and effort. So for the immediate project like fire station, that is a priority. So which would pretty much take up the surplus and 2025 capital, most of it. The question is the remaining, there is a list here, but it doesn't mean that we're going to follow the list, right? It's up to the council to come back and discuss at that point to see which one we're going to fund it. In case if we have more funds than what we are using it for the fire station. So at that point we can have another conversation of like which project is going to move to the second. Right, correct. At this point all you're doing is as of today what project would you do and how would you rank them and prioritize them? The projects don't get off the ground until money is appropriated at a later date. And if at a later date you decided I won't read an Albi number two or four and Albi number three, you can certainly do that with your appropriation decision. If that matter, if someone wanted, they could ask that we bring the CIP back, for a minute, if they really felt that strongly about it. Sure. If we wanted to have that discussion. Unlikely, but that would be an option. Well, that was my question about the resolution. We're going to pass a resolution that has like numbers one through eight, prioritized. Yeah. Again, like number one, I would give it fire station. Number two, I don't know if you can have enough, but I would say, colleague Rick Courts parking, because that is a. So the remaining I'll take it by, like when we get the funding and we will decide when it's right time. So one suggestion run on the performing arts hall. Instead of performing arts hall can we just say arts hall or in the like halls. You could. You could. If century like might. Facility to something else or facility. Yeah, arts facility. I like that. Drone. If that's the law of counts, I'm happy to make that change. That's our facility. It is. Thank you, roll. All right, anything else? I just have, generally, some questions on the process. So, with the new policy on the update for the CIP, so it has the, what was it, the name of the committee, the P?, so it has the, what was it, the name of the committee? The peer review committee? Yes, so that would meet in the fall to tackle these, to get it ready for spring time. Will that be just adjusted? Like, will you all visit all five years of projects every single year annually? Or will you like, will we move on to 2030 next year to put the, does that make sense? So what we look at is we look at the upcoming fiscal year. So this year we looked at FY25 to really score and get those projects together for this recommendation. And then we stack all the other things from the plans in the future years. So next year, using the mayor's example of the conveyor belt, whatever falls off the conveyor belt that we get done in the next fiscal years off. And now we look again fresh at FY26 next year and then years up through FY30. So they keep rolling down year after year and my intent is to have everyone ask fresh each year so that we have a good look with, you know, as things may change. What project people are requesting and will evaluate them each year on their own merits and some may roll down some may stay out in the future. But yes, every year focusing on the very next year one. Gotcha. All right, and so are we going to approve this on March 25th? Or will approve the policy, but are we voting on the actual plan on the 25th? So I will tell you, I have not put that on the council meeting on our agenda tracker. We have contemplated that you may, since this is new, want one more chance to look at it at a work session or after this discussion have questions for me or Ron or other people that you want to talk to as you prioritize these. This is our practice year. So even though we say we want to have an adopted plan by March 31st, I think it would be perfectly fine if you wanted to have another work session. Talk a little more about it. Ask questions in between and then you adopt a policy in April. I think that would be fine. The goal is we wanted to have an adopted plan in place before we get deep into the budget process, because this plan will impact and inform what the budget would look like. So you do not have to do it the next meeting if you wanted to get into April before you vote on it. That's perfectly all right. But so we would pass the policy but the plan itself is non-bind like to your very bold italicized comment approval that's. It's like when we pass when, when we accept a strategic policy. Yeah. So I like Aaron's phrasing of a resolution how to express your intent. So this document expresses your intent of what projects you want to see done and in what order and with what funding. So or she might consider using it. We are going to pass. That was my question, Chris. So we've already adopted the policy and we're going to, we're going to pass, that was my question, Chris. So we've already adopted the policy, and we're going to pass a resolution with the prioritization and plan for the next five years. So that's what we have to figure out what that prioritization is. I didn't come prepared for this meeting. Because I still have a lot of questions about some of these smaller projects. We want to go ahead and speed them up and knock them out. Or do we want to, you know yeah pass snowball effect that that's like on the stormwater it's like we could clear some of these from the play that's not multi-million dollar yeah but then that puts to backseat you know an arts facility to use that new new nomenclature and or do we really want I mean that one is we have a written is six million dollars every year which isn't maybe feasible so we need to be having that any. It's just a much more complicated discussion. And you just started introducing the different funding sources theoretically, start getting involved with multiple conveyor belts potentially as well. Yeah, I know that's more complicated. Your goal was to not get it. I really want to keep it not as complicated tonight. But to curse this point, or to Chris' question, we have to prioritize this one through ten or more. Again, same I didn't get prepared, but the thing is, some of those things like the strong water thing, like if you look at the funding sources, they are from the strong water utility and some other sources. So it's like, right now I'm only looking at the list of the projects and not really looking at like prioritizing it like for the 25, I don't think we're going to have more than the fire station. So, right now, you can just focus on that one. When you isolate it to the general fund, it becomes a much simpler and more finite question. Exactly. Exactly. But at least in the next year and the next two years, so in this process, did you all do the maintenance and operations estimates for the criteria? So that was one of the factors that was included in the request. So yes, we would see what, like for example, police vehicles come with a personnel cost. So that was accounted for and evaluate in these when we scored them. And then, is there any way you could send us the MNO estimates of this list? Absolutely. I just be curious about that. And then I love the multi criteria rank order. Yes. But my question is, okay, so where was it? State the grant funds that are available for this project. Say, hypothetically, you get something on your fiscal year 28 list, but it's a bit idealistic, quizzotic. You think this would be good, and it makes the CIP plan, but then you get grant funds, or your major hurdle is into resources to execute on the Kappa project, but it's the funding, right? That's, I'd say 90% of this will boil down to funding. What happens then, if like there's a change in the middle of a year, would that just be targeted during the budget season or just one off? Like if you got a $3 million for a Makerspace grant, Makerspace USA, there's a grant. The only thing you could spend that money on is make your space, because it's coming from make your space, USA. Then you just appropriate that money and do it. I think I would treat it as kind of that one off ad hoc. Like you want most of your decisions to no longer be ad hoc, but to be a planned out project base decision process where you go and you look for the funding that you need to do that. So if you find the funding and it bumps something up the list, the criteria has changed, right? Because now that big weighty criteria, there's already some money available to do it. That's not general fund. Then it makes logical sense to me that in that one-off situation, you would go ahead and move that project up because you had the money available. But I can, same goes with the strong water too, Chris, like 319, like if he spent like 600, we can get another 400. So it's like there are other ways to get the funding. I mean, it's not meant to be a straight jacket when the council is meant to be a guidepost for us, for you, the staff, for the public. It's simply a planning document. This is what I would like to do. This is the order that I would like to do it in. These are the years I would like to work on it and complete it in this future year. These are the sources of funds that I would like to look to to see if I have them to pay for it. And then if grant funds come along or some other injection of cash cash like ARPA If you have a year ago, you know then it just moves projects up and you do them quicker Step shot from the retreats we have for last three years When Kimberly was there was telling us strategic priorities for 2221. How's it in a different? How is the CIP difference? Yes. Because what I'm saying is, whatever was there on 2021 strategic priorities, we did it. Or we rolled it forward to 2022, if it was what the... Yes, so I certainly see it as a similarity. I think back in those days, you were probably looking at that one year horizon. So one way this one is different is that you now have a five year horizon that you're looking at as you are planning. So that's one difference that I see. But certainly similar, I just see this as kind of standing on the shoulders of that effort to try to give you a little more detail, a longer range planning. One of the things I know, this is the source of funding to a motorless kind of spelled out here in this document. So part of the policy, sorry, part of the policy, ask that staff include in the recommendation, not necessarily the amount of funding you would take out of a particular category, but what categories would be available to fund those particular projects? And I'd argue that general funds on there quite a bit, so these will be competing with each other. So if it went through that robust ranked order criteria and these are the prioritization from the peer review committee. I'm not going to put my thumbprint on it, though I would be curious it if it's gone through that? Through the department heads and pose necessarily to like for example the fire station at the top No, if that's what went through the peer to committee through those nine criteria then I'd say I mean, I'm good with the policy in the process and the tabular results that have been populated in the memo. Yes. Okay. You can take the data scientists out of there, but you can't. Am I accepting of every single project not yet, but that's not what this process until? I think we're all just dating with this at this point. So, all right. I thank you very much for the time and effort. You've created this document from our wishes for a CIP type process going forward. Both of you guys have done a great, great job. Thank you, Ronnie. Thank you, Ron. I love this. It adds a little bit of formality into and visibility into what we're looking at for 25 and beyond. So I like it. I've got a whole bunch of questions on each one of these, but your your time and effort offline was great, helped out a lot. Just my simple priorities are here and funding is usually, it will always be the challenge because the fire station will take most of the funds and that is my number one priority. My number two is police cars, police vehicles if you will. And I looked at this and said, okay, what touches the citizens, the most and the quickest, and how can we move this and give back to the citizens as much as possible. So number one, police substation, police fire halls, excuse me. And police vehicles, number three would be Colleague Creek Park Parking. It's needed. Colleague Creek is a huge success and I think we need that parking. Four is Medlock Bridge Trails, East and West, four and five. And number six is Autry Mill, the Nature Preserve. I think if money's, again, money's challenge, I don't think we'll be able to fund all these, but that is the priority I have today. I am loving the performance art hall or however we want to describe that. The arts facility. The arts facility. I just think there's so many more questions that we have and we have to answer before we can dedicate funds to that today. That's around. Larry, could I get a little bit of clarity around the Archimel Nature Reserve? Is that the animal habitat that you were referring to Readability or some other? It's the 26, what's in 26? I think it was 1.65 million. Okay. The preserve inherited center. Yep. Got it. Just pulling that forward if there's some numbers because again that's a growing, an otter mill. It touches so many people, children as well as so many different areas. I think it's a great way to build that area. Quite recently I was flying over the Atlantic and I looked out of the window, there was R and R on the engines. I realized that Rolls Royce engine was the only thing which kept me from that cold Atlantic below. And I think R and R here is Ron and Ronnie. Hopefully you were keeping you from plunging into the ocean of... Hopefully, it happened the capital improvement planning run fully don't plan to sit into now you're the guys are keeping it away from it thank you wonderful document actually for last two three years I've been looking for such a document one of the things which bothered me a lot is somebody said oh one point five million we can find it somewhere. And the number of questions I get when people make that statement is as if I'm the only one who's stopping it from getting it to that project, their pet projects. So now when things are laid out like that, there's a roadmap in front of us. It makes it a lot more predictable. It makes the city look a lot more efficient that we are thinking so much ahead. As far as coming down to the nuts and bolts, no surprise. Fire station takes the... And I also believe that we will not have any money left for any of the projects. If there is any money left, I would like to use it for the next, when I have this offline discussion with Ronnie, I would like to get some kind of idea of what are the grant, Elmick grants which are likely to show up so that those projects can be addressed and without much of general fund being injected there. And I think stormwater projects need definite priority because we've seen a lot of citizens in John's Creek very adversely affected. Thank you again, both of you. All right. So everybody was in agreement about our top of the list, the IP item, the fire station, police substation. I think you guys do a better job of keeping notes on some of the details, maybe, than I do. But where do you want, what do you need from us moving forward from here? So as I look at my notes, I do not have enough consistency from two and beyond. That may be the result of you needing some more time to sort of live with this and ask some questions. I don't want to presuppose and belabor this discussion, but I know this is a lot of information and it's our first time through. So I can't help but think that maybe we need another work session for you all to kind of mull over what it is you talked about tonight. Ask any questions that you may want to ask and then try to get to through whatever finalized at the next work session before it hits a council meeting in April. Certainly you're prerogative to do however you want to do, but... No, definitely not. Oh, that idea. At least like two to five, we can... I didn't really get prepared on like looking at like what's going to be the next one. Sure. Right now I just was thinking like what can go on that list of projects. So if you have to prioritize for the top five, I just need one more. I'm happy to accommodate and in between the meetings, I know I've had some meetings and phone calls with many of you. Happy to talk more to answer any questions to help with that process. So. What do you think I find it difficult? Your numbers there, I may have to wrestle with them a little more because what I am thinking this seems to have come under budget. I don't want surprises at a later date or rather we should be making a city a little more less prone to shocks of future development of future requirements. So I would definitely have these conversations with folks there and make sure that these requirements which are putting out their reflect our priorities or reflect our thinking for the city. Do we? Oh, go ahead. Can I ask a question? Sure. Chris asked if we, you know, we had a later date from my understanding, once we approved the 25 list, that will be incorporated in the budget. Yes, that will be the list of capital projects for the FY25 budget. Yes, I just, I wasn't sure of Chris. Well, no, no, but that's still up to the mayor's budget in terms of what is funded in the budget. Not based on the policy. Oh, so no matter what. The charter would override that. Yes. So this is what informs what goes in the motion. And I'm going to be informed by what our council is deliberating as part of this. No, that makes, it's kind of like how pass budgets, but we're just getting a, or further preview of the capital projects, what a three or four months in advance, I guess maybe even years in advance now at this point. And so they're not guaranteed to be funded because there's other variables during the budget process. So I think there'll be the back end of what the CIP's proved, but what goes in what's funded in the mayor's final budget won't be determined until that's presented. Correct, because per the charter the budgets that the City Mangers Office prepares goes to the mayor for review and It has to be approved by both the City Mangers Office and the mayor so unless he says it goes through it does not go through. Okay, so let me ask a question. It's not good. Okay. So let me ask you a question. So between now and are you looking at potentially pushing off one work session or two work sessions? That's a question for us, I guess, council. But also in that interim period, do you think we'll have additional projections as far as revenues that we can look at and get a better idea of what potentially we can fund beyond the fire station. So I don't know if we're far enough along to make those sort of projections number one. I'm sure Ron would be happy to come up with whatever kind of, if he's able to, any kind of projections you would like. If I could just encourage you that this process is meant more to select the projects based on importance in the criteria than it is to try to fund them at this stage of the game, but I'm happy to provide any information that we can put together as far as funding projections. If that's something you would like to have. But my encouragement would be line up the projects first and then think about the funding when we hit budget cycle. Did you get all your questions? I think so. Okay. Well, because I had a question. So something that would be helpful to me is for like two and three, the Medlock Trail has L-Mig funding,ispost as possibilities and that's part of the reason as I'm trying to like grapple with how you do prioritization You know, it's like do you pay off the death as a high centers first or do you pay off the death as the smallest? You know like you're trying to think through how to improve a snowball Yeah, just trying to like think through that so you know I would hate to do two and three first and then we get the Elmick grants or funding that would have paid for those and yet we paid for them out of general fund and then now we're trying to, we don't have enough to get the parking, right? So I guess something that would be helpful is to know how much potential anticipated funding would be available through Elmick, through T-splots and through the stormwater utility to say, well, yes, you put $100,000 funding request here, but we really think $50,000 from general fund and $50,000 from stormwater utility or something. Because then I'm like, oh, that $50,000 number could be higher up the list. Understood. Spoiler alert, there's some more Elmig money coming. A second chance that we are going to be able to get our hands on and the answer to Aaron's question could be that we could use the Elmig money and knock out two and three and not test general fund. And that's why parking was number two for me. And then after that, it starts to get murkiers. We're not sure what our abilities are going to be. Thank you. But again, same goes to the ground to strong water. Ground. Correct. So we're going to come back at a future work session. Lash guys want to hammer it out right now. It sounds like, I think we're prepared to do that. Sure, wrong. Absolutely, but absolutely so I'll bring it back. I kind of capture what everyone said here into the memo as the update and you all can pick it up from here. Happy to answer any questions. I got an estimate. I think we should do at least two seven. not the next work session, but the work after that. So, at least we have some idea what revenues have come in. We'll be little better off, because at this point it looks just like a wish list. I think we're trying to stay away from that aspect of it though. I understand, but the point is you can't still make out prioritized, I'd like to do this, like just now as she was telling, we will not know how much Elmig is coming through. We will not know what is the general fund position, things like that. So if you are just prioritizing based on what could be, I think it may be, we may be off the mark when you are doing that. If it just, are we looking at six weeks or a special call, work session at four weeks. Something else. I'm looking at a special meeting unless four or no one are dying to have a special call meeting. But can we suffice it to say that you're going to be getting back to us about scheduling this topic again at a future work session? My intent is to be back on the 25th, unless y'all tell me otherwise, for a continued discussion based on kind of a little bit of feedback. That's what we're going to keep going. Yep, happy to do that. All right, thank you, Ron. Sure. All right. Next item. Thank you. The next item is a mission statement. Continued discussion. You have interim sending manager Grier for presentation. So I'm going to change direction. I am going to say one thing on this topic. I think that no matter where we are in 30 minutes, we drop the topic. Because otherwise we could be here for the next until 7 o'clock or 7 o'clock or 7 o'clock or 7 o'clock or 7 o'clock or 7 o'clock or 7 o'clock or 7 o'clock or 7 o'clock or 7 o'clock or 7 o'clock or seven, 15 or 730, just talking about this. Now, maybe we'll get lucky and we'll kind of consent this earlier, but if we don't, I think we ought to make it a hard stop in 30 minutes. All right, go ahead. Great, okay, so I want to pick up a conversation that we started at the retreat. It was the first opportunity for this sitting council to take a look at our mission statement, which right now is to be an exceptional city. And as a group, you guys did a lot of great work thinking about why we exist as a city and thinking about what it is that's so special and important about John's Creek. We talked about how you shape a good mission statement and how it really needs to convey the factors of what makes us a special city and what we do and what we focus on. Coming out of the retreat, our working draft, where we left it, was to ensure the highest quality of life, John's Creek exists to serve residents and businesses. And at the retreat, it was important that we kind of get enough into it to be able to help shape where we're headed with our priorities and remember that they need to all come back to something big and impactful. And from that conversation, it was really a combination of protecting, preserving, and promoting that high quality of life, and then focusing on the service we provide to our residents and businesses. But rather than continue to workshop it at the retreat, we said, let's put a pin in this and come back to a future work session. So that's where we are today in the agenda packet. I gave you some examples of mission statements in other cities. I reminded you of that conversation. But as the mayor said, I want to use the next 29 minutes to talk through just a we could land right here with to ensure the highest quality of life. John's Creek exists to serve our residents and businesses or you could add to this or refine it one way to do that would be oh I really want to add the how so another phrase at the end of this of how am I serving those residents and businesses? I'll give you again some examples from other cities, and then I can put back on the screen. Our vision, which gives us the more aspirational, we strive to do this by ease of movement throughout and a live town center and a vibrant business community. So these two pieces can fit together in order to inform, but it's really counsel that needs to drive this conversation. So I thought by having it up on the screen, I could literally type as you go and we could kind of workshop through it. I will try to be mindful of the time and make sure I give you at least a five minute warning or maybe a halfway through that conversation. But Mr. Mayor, I don't know if you want to start with more thoughts or. Yeah, just I do think that there's value in it being short enough and simple enough that it's repeatable and memorable to be shared. Whether it's the people that come to work here every day or it's all of us or our residents, that they'd be able to really consume it. So that's not only big piece. And I agree that which is why I'm wondering if we can have a tagline or something short in addition to this. Because all the ones I looked at and I only put a few minutes into this they were kind of lengthy So I came up with something that was kind of lengthy Not perfect, but just something to work with if you want me to read it We're in half a type of ways you can All right, so don't laugh. John's Creek exists to protect serve Oh, no, I'm sorry to protect secure and enhance an exceptionally high quality of life for our residents and businesses. Through responsible stewardship, community engagement, and transparent policies and practices, we are assuring John's Creek will remain the best city in which to live, work and fly. remain the best city in which to live, work and fly. I mean, you can laugh, that was a joke like good good. Good good. Long and ready. All right, I missed the part in the middle. The responsible stewardship. Yeah, responsible. We'll still work. Yeah. So I really like where you were saying how like you want to say protect and serve and I really like that but I know how much it sounds like the police mission but I like protect serve and improve our community. But. But, uh, I mean, this one is rare. I'm not perfect. Just, well, I'm not. It's something, I just need them to be distinguishable. It's something like Jones Creeky. Jones Creek exists. I was trying to think going back to like why we incorporated from Fulton County in part of it was because... I wanted to protect our quality life. Trying to get it to fit on its green. Okay, that's most of it. John's Creek exists to protect secure and enhance an exceptionally high quality life. Okay, that kind of is mirrored to the part we had above. For residents and businesses, again, through responsible stewardship, community engagement. I guess fans community engagement? After community engagement, it was transparent policies and practices, which doesn't have to be both words. Okay. Does that get it all? I think you got it all. Thank you. Okay, so now we've got two options. And there were two, it was two different sentences though, like. Okay, so now we've got two options. And there were two, it was two different sentences though, like, quality of life for our residents and businesses period and then how we do it. We're here. Yes. We got it. Aaron? I did not come with my creative hat on, but I'm not going to be a part of it. Aaron? I did not come with my creative hat on, but I'm happy to give some credit. Not criticism, but like, no, I didn't mean like that, but like, I'm happy to weigh in on everyone else's creative thoughts are. One thing I liked the done, what do you want, I thought it was a little too long, but I liked the way they said the quality of life for those who live, work and visit here. I liked that better than we keep using residents and businesses. And you know, as a resident and a business owner, obviously I care that we do a good job for everyone like that. But I liked the way it centered the people by saying that those who live, work and visit here. And then it so that includes not that we have a lot of tourism, but we like more people to come visit John's Creek. Man. I know. Yeah. We would like to have things that draw people to enjoy spending time in John's Creek. So more than the visiting is the way it's entered the humans, the live work and visit here. That's all. Great. Yeah, it does. Seeing him hit it, it comes through. There we go. There we go. Oh, he gave me two options. I just emailed you 12. Is that complete or you can't? Nope, I'm topping in and then. And just... Well, please. He's doing that from what you want to read, what you got? Hey, go ahead. Yep. Okay. Improving community excellence. Come to the vibrant community and reach by exceptional services to all residents and businesses. Post-Rinprote and Unity. And the second one. The only one. Okay. Yeah. That's right. We'll read it. Read it, because I... You need to be an exceptional city. Yeah, I like that. And then you add this as a miss. Just a second from the top. Read it. Okay, the second one. Yeah. Possibility in the vibrant features. Comm committed to a community built on exceptional services, innovation and inclusivity, ensuring a prosperous city for all. Yes, we exist. Again, exceptional. We still there with the statement. Sorry. Sorry. No. Okay. We got a bunch of them. Yeah, a lot to work with. Press. All right. So I had some assistance on this air and you'll love it. Yeah. It wasn't chat GPT. I'm in a relationship with the call now. What's wrong with that? All right. What the scary will we want the lives in the walls? This is good. So this is our mission is to make John's Creek a city of choice by delivering outstanding municipal services, maintaining fiscal responsibility, investing in infrastructure, supporting local businesses, and cultivating a safe, inclusive, and thriving environment for all who live, work, and visit our community. That's how darn I like that one. All right. Thank you, Claude. Can we back up to outside? I'll email it to you real quick. Okay, that'd be great too. I like it. The word thriving is always really good. I like to have inclusion, I believe, and I believe I also have that inclusivity, which is a good one, and there's another word that used. Vibrance, a good one. I'm not ever going to live that down. I'm just joking, I wrote that. No choice. That was a city of choice, because we talked a lot about that at the retreat. We want to be the city that people choose. When people have, they look at Georgia and are they going to move to, they choose John's Creek because we are the place people want to be. I've put your statement into chat, GPT, to generate criticism of your statement. I'm going to read that. I've got one. To empower a thriving community through innovation, dedication, and meaningful connections for all. I'm going to be a little bit more patient. Like at those minutes, just look in the way. She'll be 20 minutes. Hi, Hannah. Can you email or say it one more time? I got to empower a thriving community through. A creative side. Boy, who would have thought that seven politicians could just spin up a bunch of words? I'd like them more simple. I like it when it's like- Councilman DiBiassi. Like it weren't for reading, protecting the service. I would say protection. It's a two in power. Two in power, a thriving community through innovation, dedication, and a meaningful connection for all. A meaningful connection. Great, got it. I'm going to go to the next one. This dramatic pregnant pause is fantastic. Is waiting for the finish for the bar. Okay. Yeah. See when I was in the idea they had a tagline think. I love it. Let's go with that. It doesn't matter. Pass. I love it. Let's do it that. That's what I mean. Doesn't matter. Pass. But there is something where you can see like be the exceptional city. You can interpret it in any different way. That is the driving goal and each individual department can have different mission statements. Similarly, if like just the other few minutes ago she, city of choice, that's another fantastic tagline. Our pride is another tagline, and I'm borrowing from what Stacey said. I don't like long machine statements. Best place to live, work, visit, and play. Oh, number three. The mission statement typically, I mean, the why we exist is usually more than a tagline, right? Because the be the, I think we're used to be the exception, which was not really a mission statement, right? No, but that tagline is not mission statement. Well, if you think. It's the oral war arching umbrella which changes everything. Why we exist. So, if you are proud of that city that means you are a business there is a reason for you to be proud. If you are a citizen there is a reason for you to be proud. If you are a lover of something you have a pride in that city, whatever be the reason. So, that. For those to be an exceptional city and it was built off of the existing tagline of being the exception. So it was like the other way around. We had to be the exception and then we turned it into to be an exceptional city. So do you help us get to somewhere? anywhere, perhaps. One way of us bifurcating or narrowing, do you like something that's more simple and a little bit broader and what it encompasses or do you like something that's longer in more detail? One sentence. One sentence, not a long sentence, but all right, so you would be relatively short. Yeah, short, I'm a short. But even though we have like health wellness and innovation or is our motto. Also improving our community, all that kind of, I mean, a lot of these things roll up underneath. We're not gonna, I don't think we should try to cover every little nukin' cranny girl. It's then you've... Yeah, I don't know. Just kidding me. I understand what you're saying about. You would like it to be sort of like a thing that you could almost repeat as a mantra or something. But then it's just very vague to be an exceptional city is very vague or like Roswell, sorry, to call them up, to provide our citizens with an exceptional quality of life. It's just very vague. It doesn't say the how or why or what are the values that make it exceptional, whereas some of these that you all have provided have really good values. Innovation, vibrant, inclusivity, like to your point, that these were all the, these were the values that formed the city. And so I think an expression of those values in the mission statement is worthwhile. Even though it makes it longer, but I don't want it to be like two, some of these are two and three sentences long. I think it should be one. But so that you would be a kind of a longer sentence. A longer sentence, one sentence. But isn't this what we, as a body, are going to deliver to the community? Yeah, we're going to do this. Not. Yeah. This is where we are. We haven't arrived. Why we do this. Right. We haven't arrived yet. We're getting this mission and therefore it's our duty responsibility to fulfill that mission. Exactly. All right, Bill. But we're not talking with the tagline, right? We're just talking the mission statements. So that statement itself should pretty much say what we will deliver and what we have in the plan, like how? So you're for a little bit more long? At least a sentence, like it's not like a too long but sentence, like if you have to put something under the logo, that's a tagline. It could be, that's a different discussion again. Maybe they can come back, make a tagline out of the statement. Where do you plan to use this machine state? And on the website, like it's a future, or? I'm going to get it in a tattoo form, probably. Hey, what is your thing, Chris? What is your suggestion or do you want to long something or short? I mean, different with this process, so whatever you all think is best. So what I heard, the city manager is one sentence. Yeah. And can we agree one sentence without multiple sentences? I'm going to go with it. Okay. How are you going to go with it? I'll go with it. So if we just get to an agreement for one sentence. Can we agree like what are like the three values? We want the sentence to have and so we've got some really good ones We've got transparency inclusivity dedication innovation. I'm trying to like find what are some of the three lines? Thriving was a good one. Yep, like multiple people to innovation multiple people to the word community Innovation or dare say that one? What makes us special too is like I think we have more community engagement than a lot of the other cities. So that's what sets us apart in my opinion. Make a man-gary. I can change. These keywords? Well, so what the web says about us responsible governance, innovative solutions and strategic partnerships through the Toronto one. I diverse the shop sense community and it's the same growth as the number one. The other one I gave you guys. Thank you Mr. President. Well being a bitch resident, Foster is a strong economy and promotes healthy active lifestyle through the provision of excellent services, they are and these intramedictive improvements. Right. So that's what we put out there. Is this something that we're going to be more successful with our time? If we've all kind of put something up on the wall and then you would provide us back with what you put in this document. And you kind of would Smith it from there. And especially now like we're saying, okay, it's going to be within one sentence. Aaron saying three values perhaps. Okay. Just trying to narrow us. So my thought is I've captured what you've shared. And for today, the goal is just to continue the conversation. So I will share back with the group a like, hey, here's a version you can continue to work on. We'll aim for one sentence and kind of go from there as we get feedback in. We'll schedule another work session. It's a driving. Yeah. Everyone wants to drive. Yeah, I'm sorry. Driving. Absolutely. But no, driving is a key right? Yeah. Five irons would be. Thriving or bad? I would. Yeah, they're both similar. I was thinking I could go back through your thoughts from above and kind of capture the ones that we didn't. Yes, I will send you back something out for you to continue to work on. I think this was a great advancing. It forged a little bit further. All right. Thank you. All right, thank you. Thank you very much. All right, next. Madam Court. Thank you. The next item is a construction contract award and contract with G.Dot for Abbott's Bridge from Parsons to Medlec. I'm not exactly sure. I know they were watching in the back. They probably just have on that quick wrap up. I think she's coming in as we speak. Miss Sanders. Is here for presentation. Okay. Okay. Vokodymy, Mayor and Council, I'm very pleased to be here tonight to introduce the construction contract for this segment of the Appets Bridge Road corridor. This has been an effort by City staff, council members and other dedicated stakeholders working with our partners at Atlanta Regional Commission and Georgia Department of Transportation to get to this important milestone. This T-Splot 2 congestion relief project will improve safety and traffic flow along Abbots Bridge, between Parsons Road and Midlock Bridge Road. The project footprint will be a continuation of what has already been constructed between State Bridge Road and Parsons Road. Adding minions, turn lanes, sidewalks, and bike lanes. In addition to these general improvements, it will also correct the sharp curve at Reynolds Farm and replace the existing box culvert over John's Creek with a bridge. And following a review of the construction bids, we recommend that this project be awarded to Vertical Earth. In addition to this main construction contract, we also recommend a construction engineering and inspection, contract to Atkins, and budgeting an additional 5% contingency. The grant total for construction, including a portion of the utility pull relocation costs, is roughly $38.4 million. Approval of the attached construction agreement with G.Dot and the IGA with Fulton County, offset these costs by over $23 million. And the sleeves of funding gap of $11.3 million, but above what has already been budgeted for this project. And therefore, we also recommend budget amendments to transfer available tease plus two, inflation, interest, and unallocated revenues towards this congestion relief fund. And while this is a larger gap than expected, we feel that as a shovel ready project, and one that we have followed all the requirements for federal funds. We feel that we'll have a strong opportunity to receive additional grant funding. So following council authorization, we'll finalize the contracting process, work with finance on a budget amendment and prepare for construction. And to kick off this phase, we are planning a groundbreaking for tentatively scheduled for April 18th, at noon, across from Reynolds Farm. And lastly, weather permitting, constructing it, expecting to take three years. So with that, I am here for any questions you may have. Well, thank you, Miss Anders. And this is a project that in general has broad support and I appreciate it and I'm very appreciative that we've had support from our partner government organizations like G. So, anyway, I'm supportive and thank you. I have no questions. Thank you for spending so much time on this. I know this is a project that has been long awaited. Thank you for spending so much time on this. I know this is a project that has been long awaited. Thank you. Thank you, Mrs. Proyeck that we are looking forward to. Just three years is going to be a long time, but it's a good project too. The money on. I have no question. Well, I take that back. I'm curious to do the different neighborhoods. Are they aware that this is going online since it has been a gap since the right away acquisition, like we've had half a decade. We are starting up planning for communicating an outreach into all this. Cool. I'm really excited to be additional opportunities for grant funding as well. And with that, I'll support it. This has been long in the works. So thank you. Thanks. All right. Very good project. I live right around the corner from this project, so I know this road well, and it has been a long time coming. I've got two questions. The John's Creek that we're put into culverts, I guess they're box culverts that we're taking that creek. Is there any plans for sediment mitigation since we're digging that area up and having to drop these culverts there. Yes, all of our projects we designed for a Rojan sediment control for all stages of construction. So it's already part of the equipment that they're going to put into the construction. Yes, that's correct. Gotcha. And just from a standpoint of traffic. So, and I know this came up once before and Director Haggard had talked about it from a standpoint of, we're not shutting this road down. I think we're going to be just taking off one lane at a time and traffic will still keep flowing. Is that correct? Correct, we will not be rerouting any traffic for this project. The bridge is probably the most critical point where we will be offsetting that bridge when we construct it. So allowing traffic to flow. So there's really no additional impact on Parsons Road. People aren't going to be diverting themselves. They might choose to, but they won't be directed or detoured from this project. Got you. Thank you. I 100% support. Thank you. I love the fact that you're including bike lanes there. All through. I don't recall, is it going to be a four lane road? Or is it just going to be a center turn lane? So-lane road or is it just going to be a center-turned-lane? So similar to the projects that have been constructed to the west, so that's from State Bridge. Near the OC Road? Near the OC Library? Yes. I'm not sure. Yes, right there by the Burger King, Library, Jones Bridge and... So because it starts off OC Library there, there are two lanes and then it converges to one. Yes, so it will be constructed with that same footprint and my understanding that the strategy is to design that for a future conversion from two lanes to four lanes by just changing the striping. Okay. So that would not happen until the segment from roughly to the east of the section from Medlock Bridge to P.I.B. is constructed. So, but now I wouldn't, let me ask you this, Ms. Anderson, my understanding is that it would not necessarily trip towards going to for lane until there was a certain metric that had been reached. I didn't think that it was necessarily just because it got all the way to the east. That's correct, but that is one sec. That is at least the first stage it would have to have. The pavement is wide enough at future day to restripe and have furlains. Right, and they put in bike lanes. But are we going to, once we do go to four lanes, do we lose the bike lane? The sidewalks have been developed that are wide enough to handle bike traffic as well. And then I think this follows the current bike policy where it will be essentially two lanes in each direction. So the bike lane is no longer critical for bike traffic. Is no longer a critical for bike traffic. That does lose into bike lane fall in place with our bike policy that we have worth. It's- Doug, I've eaten food and didn't food. Yeah, I mean, I'm just wondering because this was planned prior to the bike policy was adopted. So I'm wondering if this is going to be retrofitted with bike lanes going forward. So, yeah, the bike lanes will, if it ever gets to four lanes, if the traffic volume hits the mark, yes, the bike lanes will go away on the asphalt. We're building 10 foot trails on the side to accommodate that, or they could stay in the lane because now two through lanes on each side. The bicycle policy that we adopted was to make sure there was at least a lane for a car to go around a bike safely. And this is on that corridor and then when you have two lanes in the same direction, they could get in the second lane, go around the bike safely. So it does meet that part of the policy. If that answers the question. Okay, gotcha. that part of the policy. If that answers the question. Gotcha. Don't 100% love it. But I mean, we have bike lanes now and people run it all the time. I just wish it would stay there even when it goes to four lanes, but I understand. So. I just want to add to the, to reiterate the emphasis that changing it, like we're going to construct it as one traveling in the direction in a bike lane, changing it would be a future council decision after traffic counts, traffic patterns make it appropriate to even bring that back to you to consider. So it may stay as one traveling in the direction in those bike lanes for the foreseeable future. Because we have found that the section that has been completed, doing the Abyss Bridge and Parsons, is functioning just fine at peak AM and PM. And that may be the case for 10, 20 years. But the beauty of the design is that the curbs are set so that if 25 years from now we find that we do want to vehicular travel lanes, you could do that. Or you may find that no having the bike lanes and the wide trails is functioning perfect. So it's more flexible, but don't worry. Like we are going to construct it as one travel any instruction in bike lanes on both sides. But if there was restriping at some point in the future, that would come back to Council. Yes. Absolutely. It would come back to you. I just wanted to add that stress. That would be a future Council decision. Right. As well as the Georgia DOT. Yes. The Ohio Road. So they have control. Yes, we would come before we would do anything, obviously, come to Council. Can I ask if you're getting back to my questions. Do I understand that this turn lane is not running the entire length? Though there's not a continuous turn lane, it's just turn lanes as needed for left turn lanes into neighborhoods and also right turn lanes as needed. So what you say on the change bridge where it's a how is it really mitigating traffic then? If you're just having the same two lanes, which is them, I can understand that you're going to make a liner sight a little better because the sharp turn, but how is it mitigating the through flow? Well, with the addition of turn lanes, it doesn't allow opportunities for cars to get out of the way, so it's not slowing down, it's not the stop and go. They can ease into that turn lane and slow down. It is not materially going to increase. What I'm looking at is if there's a dedicated turn line that's meant for overtaking or things like that, what turn left into neighborhoods? No, we're not adding a continuous turn lane if that. Okay. But there are strategically placed and designed. So the reason why I'm thinking that the central lane is also can be used by emergency vehicles without any issue of forcing other vehicles off the road. Correct, but there's now a very wide bike lane that they'll be able to, a car will be able to pull over too. So it does improve this enhanced safety in that regard. You also mentioned their neighborhoods will be, are you going to provide this deceleration and acceleration zones, or is it part of the right-of-way acquisition? Are you going to do it or are you expecting the neighborhoods to do that? Oh no, it's all part of this project and where needed right away was acquired for those lanes. Is this for that acceleration and deceleration? Lanes? I'd have to look at it case by case, naming it. Meaning what I meant is there's a subdivision there. Right. That guy is turning right. He can't just merge into the traffic. He needs some space to accelerate. I believe in, I think we'd have to look at each neighborhood, but for the most part, they'll still have to merge into traffic just from a stopped condition. From a safety perspective, acceleration lanes are no longer built. Period. No longer built? You do not build acceleration lanes unless they're on a High-speed interstate kind of entrance sort of situation when you're coming in off a side road onto a road You are we don't want cars starting to accelerate and then trying to look over their shoulder to merge We want to make a decision that there's a gap and then turn right so it's a safety reason that acceleration lanes are no longer the standard Surprise because we get a lot of complaints from black stone So it's a safety reason that acceleration lanes are no longer the standard. Surprise. Because we get a lot of complaints from Blackstone subdivision. Those, whenever, whenever he and me campaigned there, they were all wanting a light there because they wanted to stop the traffic there. But then when I came and talked to you, you talked about the accidents and all that. Right. But I'm surprised that the turn is the acceleration decilations and some of the acceleration we do all the time. Acceleration is a different story. It's about it's about the angle of the driver entering the road. If they're looking back over their shoulder, we find that causes a lot of accidents. Just side swipes and that's why that's become something that the industry, the state, the federal standards are not to build that same sort of. What about the decision zones? The lanes? These are recent, we do everywhere we can, it's within the footprint of the project. Can I do a little bit for a second? Just real quick. So as this project integrates into the intersection of Medlock and Abbots, you know, we have an intersection improvement plan already. Is the footprint going wider at that point or does that intersection with of it will stay consistent with this project or is it going to get even wider? With this project, it's a little bit misspoke to say it ends at Medlock Bridge. It actually ends just before the intersection. I think it's Primrose Parkway. Primrose Parkway, it's just easier to say, for me to say a Medlock Bridge Road. The next project with GDOT will start it at where mean, sorry, go through Medlock Bridge Road to a pastry industrial parkway. And that one, I'd have to look at exactly what they have, but I believe it's two through lanes in each direction, plus turn lanes additions or enhancements as needed. The intersection is fairly fat already. Right. So you're just tying in to it. Yes, we'll be tying in just west of that intersection for this project. Gotcha, gotcha. there's tie tie into it. Yes, we'll be tying in just west of that intersects for this project. Gotcha. Gotcha. Just for the look what I use at P.I.B. to Bell Group. It's very bad traffic. I don't know how it is from Medlock which going towards you. See like green. It's much better. It's much better. Yeah. Medlock is a big change over embalming of cars from the east side of Medlock and the west side of Medlock. It's just why the four lanes on this project are not as necessary today. So it sounds like that we had vast consensus. Is this something that we want to put on consent? Just one other question before we go there. I'm going to go for consent too. So because this is so close to the town center and the tunnel that we're building just a little further north, is the sidewalks the pathways? Are they on both sides as you approach the intersection or just one side? And which side is that? Because people have to cross over this big intersection, it becomes almost like a state bridge at that point. For this project, there will be pedestrian sidewalks on each side. I believe it's, I think it's on the south side that has the, both sides have the, both sides have an enhanced side. Was it safe to say that this should look and going to enhance that. I'm not going to enhance that. I'm not going to enhance that. I'm not going to enhance that. I'm not going to enhance that. I'm not going to enhance that. I'm not going to enhance that. I'm not going to enhance that. I'm not going to enhance that. I'm not going to enhance that. I'm not going to enhance that. I'm not the road engineer, but for what or reason that area does seem to flow much, much better. I heard what you were saying about the single layman for what a reason they've made some strategic cutouts that seem to help flow quite a bit. So, everyone's good for- No, no, no, no. Thank you, Mindy. Three years, is that how long it'll take, I think, in the contract it said? Yes, that's what we're estimating. Okay. How long it will take, I think, in the contract it said? Yes, that's what we're estimating. Okay. Can they do any work at night? Or will they be? And because wouldn't that impact all those homeowners? So this timeline is without any night traffic just to give the relief to the homeowners. I guess reduce any kind of inconvenience. And they won't shut it down at any time. You don't anticipate that. I heard the bridge I was having flashbacks. Because of how wide we're doing the road, we'll be able to build half the bridge and move the traffic over and then build the other half. So it's not closing to build this bridge. And to your point, I do think it's important that it should be part of our process and who is selected. It sounds like we've already selected the vendor. But obviously we have a tale of two different projects happening in Johns Creek, where one is a very aggressive vendor that is really pushing forward very quickly and we've had another one where not so much that case. So please keep us with those good aggressive conscientious vendors. Anyway. All right. Thank you. All right. Next slide. Thank you. The next item is slide. Thank you. Thank you. The next item is Fire Station 63. Police South Substation Project Update. We have Director Madsen for presentation this evening. We continue to move full steam ahead on this project. And because of the importance and significance of it of this particular project I'm here to give you a progress update on the police and fire substation at Brumbleau. We're now six months into design and from September to December 2003 the design team met with the police department, the fire department as well as public works and the IT department to really go through all the needs and wants of this particular building. We did include public works and IT as well so that we could really get a handle on the infrastructure needed to make this project a success. The first milestone submittal was sent to us near the end of the year, the end of December 2023. At that time, near the end of the year, the end of December 2023. At that time, we got our first glimpse into what this thing could cost. At that time, it seemed prudent to reevaluate sort of the needs and wants against the initial ask in the RFP. So we went back to the designer. We said you've given us all we wanted and needed, but we really need the needs here. So they went back not to the drawing, where they really just trimmed the edges down on the building to a smaller footprint that achieved everything that was in the initial RFP. They put dollars to that particular footprint, which is what is included in your agenda. Going over some of these particular line items, just to mention the construction costs, the top line there, that does include a 8% design contingency. So we're at the conceptual design stage here. So there is a certain amount of contingency included therein, just for the unknowns that will become more clear as the project progresses. So that top line includes an 8% contingency therein. There's also the more traditional construction contingency that we also include there. The intention of that particular part of the budget is to just provide some breathing room in the budget in case things like unsuitable soils are rock or hit during construction, things that you just can't anticipate. So that's what that's for. I've also included in the memo the current available budget items that are funding this project. I know you all are talking a great deal about how to fund this particular project. At this point, we're still moving forward with design. We anticipate this project will be ready to let for construction bids towards the end of the summer, which would line it up for a work session, potentially a work session, very early in the fiscal year 25. So, you know, coming to you around October, I would say. So that's where we're going right now. I'm happy to dive into further detail on anything. You'd like to ask me about. Erica, so, all right, so this is a 30% document check-in, which is fairly unusual, I think. I'll remember us normally doing 30%. So the next milestone, I believe a 60%. Yes, we call that design development, yes. And so at the 60% mark, will the amount of contingency this built in should that come down? Yes, so you may even see that same line items stay fixed, but they might say, oh yeah, we know things a little more. So instead of the internal to that number, the design contingency might go down to 5% of the next the middle, but you build the total might remain the same. That's what you would expect. And so right now we've got two different pieces of contingency. Right. Am I correct? 18% total? 10% and 8%? Yes. And so then that will eventually go down to where? So the process. Right, so the design, I mean there's always going to be a little bit of design contingency built in because we can't anticipate with, no, no, that's the eight, right? This is where this is the design. Oh, weak heart. Don't tell me 18% contingency. No, no, no, no, of course not. No, um, the design contingency, that's because we are doing our best guess on what people are going to bid on this thing, right? So, yes, so that might go down to 2%, 5%, you know, towards the 90% construction document phase. We would ask for the 10% contingency as when we bring our construction bids to you. Now, you all may choose not to fund a whole 10%. For example, Collie Creek, I think we've got maybe 8% of memory serves. It was less than that. However, that's generally what we ask for. It's a very standard construction contingency. Again, those are for the elements like hitting rock, unsuitable soils, things that just arise during construction that we can't anticipate. And so right now, where we've got a number of friends, it's 10 points, something I don't remember the decimal. Yeah, 10 points. Forish. So as the contingency comes down to what would be typical, what's the delta? We would anticipate being at ten point four. That's what the contingency is for is to make sure we fit the whole project in that budget. Okay, so that's with the final contingency. Correct, that would be all in what I hope to deliver that project to the city within that budget. All right, thank you. Any questions? I do. Thank you, Erica, very much. And the first question is I can't understand the first bid came in at 9.9. And then you add in the other communications, utilities, materials, everything, and I can get to 10.4. But the first estimate included the three bays. Yes. And the second estimate did not, and it was at 8.8. So how did you get to 10.4 without the third bay and with the reduced square footage? That's a good question. And I think I have, I believe, what you were looking at. We could compare notes on which particular cost assessment was. This was a three-day, I believe I provided around mid-February per request. So the 9.9 was the design, that top line only, and then you added things down from there. So again, if you had 9.9 for the design, the hard bid construction cost, you add a 10% on top of that for construction contingency. That would bring it up to 11. So I'm sorry, it's been going back to your question on how we got to what you see in here. The, I can go back in great detail, but the architect gave us a cost of 7.9 million, added an 8% contingency. And based on some discussions, there was a storage building that we had initially said was going to be an ad alternate. We actually included that in the base bid, so that added 300,000 on top of that. So that's, I think, where we maybe were missing the- No, I don't think so. That was added in the first bid as well. Okay, so basically, we're back at 10, even the- But minus the third bay. Yeah, I believe that- Third Bay. Yeah, believe that. So I take it it would have been 11.9 million that estimated total project cost because that it was at 9.9 and today 8.5 you have to add another 150 K for construction contingency. So you're looking at another 1.6 million. So if you would have had a 3-bay, it would have been 11.9. Is that correct? Actually, that's very close to what I have. 11.6 is what I have. Okay, so this just doesn't match the first bid, but I understand you had in the extra. Is there something that the staff is asking of the council? There are no decision points at tonight's meeting. This is an update. There's just a check. Yes, we have questions regarding the budget. How much we want to allocate to this? Because the original scope included the three bays. Because one of the things I think we learned the lesson of, and with this building was a reverse value engineering. We are now in the process to do that. So we're paying more now for this building than if we had done it right in the first place. So that's what we didn't want to happen with the fire station. So the original ask was for the three bays so that we could and I've got all these reasons why. But one of them and it's in that capital request that I sent you Chris. But one of the reasons it's necessary is in case we have to bring our AMR services in house, they would have to store that vehicle as well if in the event we ever need a ladder truck. That would need to be stored there because we only have one ladder truck in the city. And then the other reason was the police vehicles need house somewhere. So the compromise when I met with Kimberly and Erica was that out storage building, they could house the police vehicles in. But if we're trying to make sure we're setting us up for success and not having to go back and reverse value engineer, it would be prudent to add it now instead of later. And so if you do that, the third base, you know, 1.2 million, but you could forego that outbuilding, which is 330,000. So you're basically looking at spending $935,000. When you say the original scope? Yes, the RFP. Okay. Including it's in all those documents on one of the capital projects. I could be mistaken, but I believe the RFP listed it to pay. Well, the request was for three. It's in here. I can point out if you'd like to. I was okay. And the request for pay. From the chief to Ed was asking for three bays and the reason why? There are two RFPs. One that was internally generated. And then there was another RFP that was actually submitted. And there was a three-base originally was what was the ask and the need and justification, but somehow an RFP with two bays went out. And that's what crossed the three. And so they crossed the K-backed. So right now at Newtown, we have two bays, correct? Correct. Correct. Current one, yes. Correct. But we have two apparatus there. Okay. And so the two bays for the new station would be double death bays. Double death bays. Double death bays. Bowing four pieces of apparatus. So four pieces of apparatus. So that would give us double the capacity we have now. Yes, sir. And that was based on feedback from the fire chief. With some of the reasons that Councilman Skinner just mentioned, of at some point, you may be useful to be able to station and ambulance there. Not useful, but it would be a must at that point. Well, he also, sorry, our fire chief, and I have talked about it may make more sense to station that at 64. There are typically 10 ambulances that serve the North Folden area, so it would be highly unlikely. We'd have two in Johns Creek at any point given our call volumes, but having two double depth bays would allow us to have the possibility of if it proved useful to have an additional additional, additional apparatus station at that fire station. Some of that, you're right, you can double the capacity, but some of that was a concern over safety as far as taking a fire trucks and backing them up because of the footprint that we're having to deal with. The turnarounds, we may be able to, instead of backing a fire truck into those bays, they wanted to pull through. Which is either or two, and we had two apparatus to be able to pull out and the ambulance can easily back out of a bay if necessary. What ambulance is, I mean, I don't know, what, are they typically housed? Right now they are not. It was just part of the ongoing conversation for our emergency medical response and our partnership with AMR. We had actually thought it probably more likely that that would be at 64 since it is three double depth phase. That was part of the planning for that station. Well, even if we needed a ladder truck though, like we don't know, that's part of why it's true, but pairing from the future. The city's comprehensive planning and its growth models for the new town area of the city don't really anticipate significant changes in population or land use. So the need for having three major apparatus in that area are not presently demanded and that's something that I know. I can be used in storage. In the right now, we have only one ladder truck. But one ladder truck and one, the other one is used as a comfort also. Two. Two. Oh, thank you. Thank you. If it arrives at the scene early, it used as the ladder truck. If it comes in a... So the other one, if it goes in the very first, if it rolls to the scene of fire, it's the pump. If it comes in the number three, then it is used as the ladder truck. But even as the ladder truck, apparently they can't reach beyond seventh floor. Anybody? Given the fact that we're having medley coming up, we're having Boston scientific, we are also looking at more economic development. We are picked up. At this point, I would like to add to her saying that none of the counties, none of the cities around us do not have three bays. Alfredo has three bays, recently the built one. Ross will recently build a three-bay one. Forsyth County, all of theirs are three-bay. Gwyneth County, all of them are three-bay. So the point is, if we are seeing, we are the exceptional, we are the exceptional to the safety of our citizens too. Why should we compromise on that? In a way that's a false choice to say that three bays necessarily equal to certain safety outcomes. Yes, yes, definitely. Because right now we have a station that is two bays and they can put two apparatus and there has been, believe me, I want to know if there is any compromise and our ability to make a safety response, an emergency response because of the current fire station, that's news to me and I need to know right now. But I think what does- I'd like to hear the answer. There is not. Councilman Skinner and Councilmember D. Biasi met with the police, the fire chief, Eric and I, and asked the fire chief if there was any compromise or problem with having two double depth space. I guess a big deal. Not currently, is what he said. The more did he say in small? My point here is we are debating $870,000 between a two and a three bay. If you remove the storage shed, in other words, a two bay fire station will have to have a storage shed to house motorcycles and different police and different items. If we take that cost at $331,000 and subtract it from the cost of 1.2 million for a three bay, the delta difference is only $870,000. So while- Sure, hold on, let me- So where I'm going with this is- Where I'm going with this was that there is, while today a two-bay maybe needed. But in the future, how do we future protect ourselves and $870,000 is a good way to have the asset there to put different, another truck if we needed to. We don't have to turn around. There's so many benefits for $870,000 to go ahead and build that fire station that can protect us for the next five years, that if we do have some kind of growth, if every, it's no secret, AMR is challenged right now, it's no growth, it's no secret that at some point in time, who knows what's gonna happen with that, with that the ambulance service, and if we ever have to do something aggressive in that, in a North Fulton side of things, maybe we should plan for things like this. So my understanding is the outside storage building is for the motor cycles? Yes, it would be for the police equipment. They have to be kind of in a separate area or could they be in the three bay? They can be in the three bay. I know there's an issue of like they can't be messed with, they can't get knocked over all this kind of stuff. They can't share the, they can share, they have to be careful how they share a space because the fire department knew so the space they need. So we've accommodated some space on the site so that that concern is met in outbuilding. So, T-Anth, does that sufficiently answer your question? I wanted to go back to Council Member Diviastin's point. You raised a couple of the importance of future planning. Absolutely, that's why these are two double depth bays instead of two single bays. So we are doubling the capacity for apparatus that could use that space. If, when we explored the want of, what if we had three double depth base the anticipated use of that was to house Police motorcycles and the reserve boat which can both be safely stored in an outbuilding, both for the motorcycles and the reserve boat, which is not presently housed indoors. So we are improving the level of service and doubling the capacity for apparatus in the two double depth phase. So we are planning for the future while at the same time acknowledging that the growth in that area, both in residential population and service is not anticipated to radically change. Well, you remind me so, Chris, I'm thinking about back when we talked about the fourth fire station, and there was some debate at that time about that we were storing some apparatus, maybe in Dawsonville or something. And so one of the things that the fourth fire station was going to do is it was going to bring that, and it would have it housed in the fourth fire station. But I can't remember the exact makeup in terms of how many bays and how many apparatus and what extra capacity there is there. Yes, that is why Station 64 was designed with the three bays so that the reserve engine could come back to John's Creek and be available when the primary needs to be in service for like an oil change or some kind of damage. Gotcha. Yes, but. Gotcha. I think I'm just jumping ahead. Please go ahead. Go. I don't feel that I'm adequately briefed to make a decision about three-base versus two as that information was in in the memo. And so I just want to make sure I understand the math though. I think it was Larry said something like $870,000 Delta, but then the difference was 1.6 million, or did you mention earlier? So what's that difference? Because that's more than just the 300,000. Is it the design contingency, plastic construction contingency adding up? We were just as of the building. We were just as of the building as well as to take the pay off. So there's some there too as well. So if we were to add back in a bay, is it really an $870,000 delta or is it really 1.6 million? I would anticipate adding 1.2 on top of this, that number, the 10.4. Okay. Thank you, that's all I have. How are you getting to 1.2? So there's the delta you talked about between the big project with everything and then the smaller thing with two bays and a reduced building size. So 1.2 being the additional bay, the remainder being the scaling back of the building in terms of the bunks and the offices and things like that. And then you subtract the 330-1,000 because you're not building it out. You could subtract that if you desired, yes. So that would be back in the third. Sorry, okay. Is this going to make sure I understand that? It's where we put the outbuilding. So do we keep that in base bid? Do we take it out? So if we're taking it out, then you would. You're subtract. Going back, sorry. But if you want to use that third bay not for motorcycles and a reserve boat, then you've defeated your argument that we need that for an ambulance. That's what I don't. I understand that for the future. But if council wants to do it, by all means. It seems like we're either going to fail in the future or we're building a storage unit in the future. What are the other? If in the eventuality that we need more capacity. Which is why a storage building was included in the base bench as a that would provide us a different space we could store our motorcycles and it would allow us to store the reserve boat under cover. But that's all it will ever be. It's a storage unit. By taking the monies and putting it into the third bay. Now it's a storage unit today, but we future-proof ourselves that if we do have to add another engine, another truck, an ambulance because of something with AMR, we have that capacity already built in no additional cost. So we're shooting- Well, except for the additional cost of building a storage facility, which are- They're two different costs, the storage facility- The storage facility will go away if you build a third bay. It'll just go away. And that's why you subtract it for an adult. No, it's them. Then we realize, oh no, we need to have the third bay for AMR or another ladder track or another track or whatever. Then no longer serves as a storage facility at which point we will need to build a storage facility for the items that were stored there in the third bay. So I'm saying either way, if we end up growing out of the situation, we will have to build something else. It's just a question of what are we building in the future and how much does that cost? What's cheaper to build today than go back and build a bay on that? No, I would agree that it's cheaper to build all at one time. I just, you know, I think partly because of my experience studying the stats for the fourth fire station. Because I mean, I wasn't opposed to the fourth fire station. I just didn't want to spend the money on it unless it was absolutely needed. And ultimately it wound up that it was needed because there were areas of John's Creek. They were relatively small, but they were still not getting the level of service that the rest of John's Creek was from the existing three. But so we added the fourth fire station. But during that process, you know, the stats say that over 98% of our responses are non-fire related, right? They're more medical related, yeah, EMT response. And so I just don't know that these things that you're trying to future-proof about really hold the water because the amulets is we don't owe them a garage. But if we brought it in house, which I think you brought up at the retreat, if we were to do that, you have to have them in a garage. I'm sure when you bought this building, you didn't think we'd require all those extra spaces. But we did go ahead and build them subsequently. At this point, there's a law which says if you have space, it will be utilized. And we have called a fair amount of land there. If you don't optimize it, at this point, for one of 900,000, the delta, I think that really sounds slightly short-sighted to me. But I really need to understand it's one point here. But timeout, this is not the purpose of us building this new. This was not to make certain claims of enhancements to safety. Y'all, this was a condition of the state of disrepair, the current fire station is. So as a safe working conditions, we were supposed to move locations and create something that knew to serve the firefighters better. And I think if we're starting to add bays, all this stuff, we're scoping beyond the original intent. There was no data showing that there was a safety concern that nothing we will do will enhance the safety. So that was a bit frustrating. So I'm really getting frustrated that we're continuing to add wants on these when this was supposed to be a need that I wasn't 100% committed on the first place, but I compromise. So I am not going above another bay. I think the double sided gives an extra want. We are not impacting safety. So I think we say, good job, Erica, wave for the 30% update and let's move ahead. Rather put in a finger and a pot that has no rational explanation of why we would do this at this point, y'all. The subject matter expert is the one that asked for it, though. So I really respect the fact we're trying to do it visibly responsible, but what's going to happen when we need it when AMR comes in house? I don't know, let's say next year or in two years. Then that request should have been made with data presented, why it's a safety defect, but that's not how it's been presented. And that's not how I bought into this project at all, but I don't think it's there, so I think we need to move up forward. There's nothing we move on right now. This is a check-in, but we just, you know, a check-in basically is because potential data has changed or new data has come to light. And if that's the case about something, though, you talked about that there were two RFPs. No, only one RFP, but the request from the chief to go in the RFP included three bays. All right, but to me, the RFP that goes out is the RFPs that work through the process that ultimately has approved and works to change. I don't know. But that's their call. That's when we come in and see what that call correct right so that's what we're doing here I'm not trying to second-guess them or something but my point what I'm trying to say is all it and I've seen historically here that we're building places we're building we're adding new things why did we think about it before and this is a deliberative body. I understand Pris and this point, this need is sufficient. It is one-on-one replacement, should be fine. But we are not looking at just this when we talk to the chief, he's saying this will not be sufficient in future. And he's categorically saying that and when he's asked for that RFP earlier, he actually asked for three bays. I need to clarify. Well, I gotta say I don't like the tone of this conversation because we are about to be pitting members of staff in this conversation. It is not a healthy dynamic that this is happening. At this point, we have to rely as she said, he's a subject matter expert. He's not is a subject matter expert. He is not just a subject matter expert. He is the guy who probably will lead his department, given the resources. You and us have provided him with a lot of resources. There is police of fire. I don't understand why we, for want of this kind of money and the grand scheme of things. So you're just stopping this. But when it comes to how to put out a fire, I would agree that Chris Coons is a subject matter expert. However, we are also tasked with construction and management and budgets and resources. It is not unusual for there to be many, many, many requests made from department heads that go up the chain and they do not all get accepted. And some of those have been from the last two budgets that I personally have been able to see where, I think thankfully we've had, in Ed Densmore, we had a city manager that said, I appreciate that that was something that they wanted, but it was his recommendation to me that it was not necessary. And so ultimately, being physically restrained, I have to take that with a lot of weight. I don't agree, but I've also seen the male which he has talked about the three-bearing. When Chief Coons has sent the request to Eddancemore, he was happy about it. Subsequently, he may have come back to you and said, I don't know, but what are the paper trail choices? They were both in unanimity that they wanted three days. Somewhere down the line, this got changed. I'm saying no. If it's, if two days want to meet a requirement for next 20 years, I think Dynand it's 1000 out of mine saving. Unless you're going to build some big apartment towers on the town. I don't know what we would need a form. No, we don't. What about Medley? These are all new coming up. 900 apartments are coming. Newtown is not going to affect Madeline. No, but at least the resource will be shared, right? As much as we share, what about if Roswell tries to build something on that end? We still will support them. So my point is this is a critical, I am passionate about this, my house got fired, guys came after 22 minutes, my entire first vlog got gutted. I wish and they were half mile from my house, my wife had to go and call those guys. I don't want that to happen even by a remotest chance. So for me, I can't expect this kind of thing to be replicated again. But my point is, for want of certain things, we as a body can think. When we bought this building for $30 million, we could have easily put all those cubicles or added spaces. When we came to this thing, we had moved so many people from one room to other. Things like that could be anticipated. If they had enough place, look, the HR Department of Newly built, the whole part there was newly built. Now going to Chania's, that wing is again rebuilt up again. All these things, possibly we can think of. If you just say, hey, at this point, you'll meet my need sure enough. Of now, I'm concerned about something else. So 22 minutes, was that your house here in John's Creek? No. That was somewhere else. But my point, what I'm trying to say is, how important it is, how important it is, for whatever be the reason nothing should fall through the cracks. And they're in there and lies exactly where you and I agree because I closely monitor our response times and I'm seeing that our response times are good, our solid and meeting our objectives and I'm not sure how moving from a to single bay to double bay across the street is one to do anything other than maintain or improve the response time. You know what EMR has got to pull out of Forsyth County because they were not agreeing to the terms that you said. Now they're South Fulton. Sorry. South Fulton. Sorry. South, no, no. Forsyth County also, the mood out of South, Forsyth County. South Fulton, yeah. Because they didn't agree. And now they've got some greedy ambulance service, which they're not clearly not happy. It, why do we have to make compromises like that? No, I have no idea what you're talking about. What I'm trying to say is we are going to bring in quality ambulance service like EMR. EMR. If those guys want about two ambulances there, let them be there. I think that one of the problems with this conversation is, you all obviously have some information about ambulance provision that some of us are not as familiar with and it's kind of the assumption under which you're relying on to justify the rationale for the third bay, which if you're correct, I mean you're correct, right? I'm not arguing with you. I just am saying that we, I think need to get on the same page because it sounds like the justification for the third bay is not about fire safety and fire provision. It's about AMR and ambulance response. Just a little bit. That's a very good question. It's not actually, it's a public knowledge. We possibly can go ahead and- No, I mean, we, I mean, like everyone can follow the news and we all know that there's all this lobbying, but the jump from AMR to now City of Johns Creek is going to provide its own ambulance service in-house is like a different- Bartow Count days that providing? I understand, but like I've been on this body for four years. Have you ever heard that we're going to start providing a bill on service? No, not in the city, but it's not worth a $1.2 million speculation in my opinion. I mean, the question does there being asked for Oswald? I mean, I'm not saying you guys are wrong whole conversation is about? It's a check-in. And we do have potentially other data, other information. So I think this conversation accomplished exactly what it was for. Because you're not asked us to do something today, but we're talking through items and things and potentially more things that we need to talk about. Maybe we should just have a bring it back in work session another time. I don't know because if we're going to change something or if we adjusted the specifications, it should have been done not on a check-in. It should have been done from the outset if there was additional evidence or data that we needed something. That should have been a risk. Is this comfortable to us? Just comes to light. It's what? It's just starting to come to light some things. So that's why I think we've brought a tear in talking about as soon as possible, honestly. But I mean, you're talking about it like it's something, like a mystery, and I feel like I've gotten a clue, as I'm trying to understand what it is that you're talking about it, like it's something, like a mystery, and I feel like I've gotten a clue, I'm trying to understand what it is. It's a mystery in the sense. If we are trying to share with rest of our colleagues, what is the future going to be like? What are the future likely variables into the future? That's exactly what we're doing here. If for some reason we see things, writings on the wall, they are not very, very clear. They are seeing our neighbourhood cities building things differently. At some point we have to learn from them, imitate them, or rather research why they did what they did. Well, I have to say say I was having a conversation with Assistant City manager Bennett about the capital improvement plan and we were talking about Ross of city of apparatus policies Their annual budget is $99 million operating budget and then a hundred fifty four total budget including capital projects Our ours is half that and our populations double theirs So it's like if they're building three bay three double bay fire stations They probably generally have a much bigger budget and they also have a military of over 5.8% or something like that. So we're talking about a very different frisco approach. It's not that just that look at the entire unit count even is building they're all building three days. No again, there is a need justification this. The point what I'm saying is three base means three guys can get out first. If you stack one behind the other, it becomes difficult. That's what these folks are telling us to park things behind each other. It is difficult. I am going to have a conversation with our fire chief tomorrow. No, I think this is a good idea. But my point is our idea is to bring things to light so that all of us make this informed decision. I know, but I, we are just trying to be full surprise or a hat. What is open source knowledge? To save us money in the future. No, again, I thought we are making a decision like this is just a chicken giving us an update and just looking at it. But if you have the new information, I'm not. Yeah, and is there a certain information? Why not share it? Yes, like, I don't, that I know all we have. I showed you the original request that came back from CROT and then it was modified because I guess staff thought it caused too much. Does that send out to email? No, I had to open records requested to get it. So like the first one was for the 9.9. So wait a second, so you didn't open requests for... Yeah, the prompt, the emails, to be able to get the cost estimate because I kept hearing that there was no cost estimate. No, again, okay. Going back to what may has been before, there are ones and needs. To your point, even in the corporate world, they'll come back and say, okay, best to have all those things. They'll ask everything else. Everything they want has. It was a Greek side park here, a requirement or a want, and the water and need. Again. We didn't discuss as much. Look, this is definitely something which will impact it. I'm not trying to be smarter on you or something, but I'm just saying we thought nothing about allotting millions of dollars for this park next door. Here we're talking about 900,000 and we're talking about scope creep. Again, safety is concerned. If the debt, but if the chief is gonna come back and say here is the debt, I'll ask it. That's what is gonna happen and we need it definitely but okay Kimberly I'm gonna come back to you. Try the chief like again does he justify like third day like what is the reasoning and like initially yes like they can ask for everything in the world but we got to look at the budget and see okay what is it like what is the growth in that area and does it gonna have an impact right now the only reason we are moving from one fire station to another one is for the better facility growth in the area that has to do with what we really do in the future. We actually try to make it better. Yeah, of course. We just don't we don't invest so much money to just have another one of the same kind. No, no, we're making it a better and double doubling the capacity, right? Yeah, so it's like, does the data justify it to our data? I think, but I mean, if we were to follow the data, the data would say based on historical trends, I mean, you can read articles at Nazim about how the modern moniker of fire station is, like we were saying earlier, the vast majority of what they do is EMT. And so for EMT, you're talking about smaller vehicles, you're not necessarily looking at the same need for a big of a physical footprint for a building. I mean, if anything, we should be looking at maybe putting two different places for two smaller apparatuses to be dispersed geographically. It just doesn't make sense to have one bigger one, but I'm interested. Will you email the information that you're talking about so we can all be? I don't know. I'm the ambulance, so are we suspecting any two? No board of check-in. For ambulance services, that's a large topic. Would it be beneficial to bring that back to the next more session of kind of where we are? There's a lot of state law requirements related to the medical transport and the permissions needed. And there be a number of legislative changes for Johns Creek to get into that business. So I want to make sure you guys have equal information on that. But is it fair to say, because I mean, I want to just double check my own information. Obviously there are negotiations happening for a future contract for service. I don't think that's correct. There has not been as part of that anything about that we are going to be abandoned and asked to provide this ourselves. No, there is. Mr. Mayor, I just, soon, what are you going to talk to Chief Coons? Talk to him. All the five things that talk to him about this, he are some kind of ambulance services, where sub-CDs are involved because they are pulling out of markets. Talk to him tomorrow. Hello. Because the idea is so that we don't get the sticker shops at a living room. No, that I agree. Like if we have to build it, building today is a better option. But do we really need to build because of that? I think it's a good idea. I just go check out yourselves, what the previous correspondence was. When we do the budget, we read the backnotes, right? No more. What are the wants they want? What are they, how do they justify it? And at some point, I've lost budget. I went around the notes and said, why I'm not including this? Because if somebody, for whatever reason, if whether it was head or anybody else who nixed a project, which we think is by a priority, it's for us to come back and say, no, we do need that. So I would strongly suggest, do you want to research? No, definitely. Again, it's, if there was a data suggesting that there's the need for the third way, and if it's not included then we should not. We should not be published. But based on this rationale, we should have said no, we need to make Abbott's bridge four lanes in this project because that actually has growth trends associated with it. If we were going to future, so I see and I acknowledge the perspective that we should look to accommodate future populations. However, I would no merit that we require this. In fact, like I said, you all are making me even reconsider the element of repair in the first place, because I think goal posts have shifted. I mean, I don't think it's appropriate. So just to talk more consistency, every time when I'm talking about old Alabama or anything, I always insist on a turn lane. I always, even in the retreat this time, I say we should make it a point to have a turn lane. In every road, we construct it. But that was just my desire and I'm being consistent with that since day 1. It doesn't sound like there's really anything that we're being asked to do or decide. And so I think we've definitely given this a thorough hearing. I didn't hear. Point would be if Council is willing to allocate the money for the third bay, because it's not included on the current trajectory where we're headed. So. I guess Eric, is it between now and next time we discuss this? Is it possible to get the price, everything being equal but a third bay, have that number side by side with a double bay. And then also what it would cost, I know it's going to be more, but what it would cost if we did have to add a third bay in a retrofit maybe four or five years. I know it's possible to do it here today, but- It's a false choice. It's a false choice. Yeah. I mean, either we need the third bear we don't. I know. I don't think that just to just we all know it's going to be a lot more expensive data. It is, it is, but what's the level of expense? Is it a couple million? Is it three, four million to add a third bear a couple years ago? I mean, I need to know the reasoning to add more to. Of course. I think there's some education as to happen. All right. Five minutes, Councilor Chambers. Sorry meeting.