Loading...
CC Minutes 04-13-2015Chanhassen City Council – April 13, 2015 Councilman McDonald: Can somebody put it up on the screen? Todd Gerhardt: The donation of $3,400 from the CAA. Mayor Laufenburger: Okay. Councilwoman Tjornhom: Take out 25? Mayor Laufenburger: Yeah, remove $25,500. Replace it with $3,400. Is that the right number Mr. Hoffman? Todd Hoffman: Correct. Mayor Laufenburger: Okay. Councilman McDonald: Well I’ll give it a shot. Mayor Laufenburger: Alright, Councilman McDonald. Councilman McDonald: The Chanhassen City Council accepts the donation of approximately $3,400 from the Chanhassen Athletic Association and Dugout Club for dugout concrete for Lake Ann Fields 1, 2 and 3 and labor to assist with infield improvements at the Chanhassen Recreation Center. Is that one still in? Okay. Bluff Creek Elementary School with the conditions noted. Mayor Laufenburger: That’s a valid motion. Do we have a second? Councilman Campion: Second. Mayor Laufenburger: Thank you Councilman Campion. Any further discussion on the motion? Resolution #2015-21: Councilman McDonald moved, Councilman Campion seconded that the Chanhassen City Council accepts the donation of approximately $3,400 from the Chanhassen Athletic Association and Dugout Club for dugout concrete for Lake Ann Park (Fields #1, #2 and #3), and labor to assist with infield improvements at the Chanhassen Recreation Center/Bluff Creek Elementary School with the conditions noted. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0. CONSENT AGENDA D(9). ADOPT RESOLUTION ORDERING THE UPDATE TO THE AUAR, 2005 MUSA AREA; AND APPROVE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENTS. Mayor Laufenburger: Do we have a staff report? th Kate Aanenson: Yes, thank you Mayor, members of the City Council. On your March 19 City Council meeting you directed to staff to prepare resolution for the update of the AUAR. That’s 20 Chanhassen City Council – April 13, 2015 what the motion before you would be to approve that resolution. As a part of that, included are the two contracts. One for Hoisington-Koegler Group at $39,000 and one for Kimley-Horn at $51,960. Both of these groups worked on the original AUAR. Be happy to go through any of the parts of it but I think the applicant is the one that has a few questions and I’d be happy to answer any questions that they may have regarding the process and the recommendations of the consultants. Mayor Laufenburger: Thank you Ms. Aanenson. Before I ask the applicant to speak is there any questions or comments from council? Alright, is the applicant of the concept PUD present? State your name and address please. Darren Lazan: We are sir. Good evening Mr. Mayor. My name is Darren Lazan with Landform Professional Services and I represent Level 7 Development. The developer for the Quadrant which is the development that has spurred the discussion on the AUAR. Mayor Laufenburger: Okay. Darren Lazan: Appreciate your time to be here tonight. Have no power point. Was told I kept you up too late last time so I will try to keep it a little cleaner this time. We’re excited to be here and excited to have this discussion. We continue to work on the plan and bringing this development forward. A lot of moving parts. A lot of exciting components coming together. We did request the AUAR be updated and we appreciate that consideration and I do want to acknowledge right up front that there’s a natural tension that occurs on all of these projects. When an applicant is paying the bill and someone else is scoping and carrying out the studies so we acknowledge that. I understand that that’s going to be the case going forward and I hope that’s respected both ways and most of my comments are going to be as respectful as possible challenging some of those scope items since my client’s the one paying the bill so we’re going to walk through a couple of those and I think by way of just a little background. I think it’s important to understand that while an AUAR is required along this road to approving this project, it’s by no means the means at which a project is approved or denied. It’s simply a means of updating a study that was done. It’s a means to assess the site’s ability to carry or to handle development at a given scale and the mitigation measures that may be necessary to handle that development so there’s nothing in the AUAR that says okay, we completed the study. X square feet can be built or Y. That’s all done down range at the PUD side. That’s where you get to have the input on the layout of the project. On the components of the project. We’ve had a lot of use discussion. That’s where that falls most likely in the PUD so I think we get balled up in this AUAR like it’s going to tell us what can be built here or what can be approved here. It’s simply a means to address those infrastructure components and say, this is what can be handled if these mitigation measures are enacted. Again by way, a little bit of background. The original AUAR was done in 2003. It’s our understanding that was for roughly $100,000 dollars and it took about 6 to 8 months to complete. There was one scenario studied and it was called in that background information, it was called the worst case scenario which I think is a poor choice of words but we’ll use their words for this study so. Mayor Laufenburger: Mr. Lazan, can I just interrupt you for a moment? 21 Chanhassen City Council – April 13, 2015 Darren Lazan: Sure. Mayor Laufenburger: Mr. Lazan, my assumption is that you have a few points that you want to raise, is that correct? Darren Lazan: Yes sir. Mayor Laufenburger: Would you prefer that council or staff response to, respectfully respond to each point as you make it? Would that be easiest for you? Darren Lazan: No, I think at the end our request is that we move forward with the AUAR but we work together so unless the council cares to get into that, into the weeds that far we would be more than happy to do so but I think we can… Mayor Laufenburger: But my assumption is that your recommendation at the end will be based on all of these points, this is your recommendation. Is that correct? Darren Lazan: This is our request, but yes sir. Mayor Laufenburger: Okay. Darren Lazan: And I think it would be easier if we went through. Mayor Laufenburger: Okay, alright. Darren Lazan: If council maybe weighed in on what they want more detail on we can do that. Mayor Laufenburger: Okay, proceed. Darren Lazan: And as I mentioned this is an update to the original AUAR so we have an AUAR that’s been completed. It’s fairly extensive and this is an update. Extensive amount of development has occurred. Roughly two-thirds of the study area has been developed so that removes quite a bit of variables from the study and there has been extensive work done on part of the City. Not only our site but all the surrounding areas so we have a pretty decent body of work that’s been done, not only when the study was originally done but subsequent to that with major traffic improvements on Lyman and Powers and 212 and so forth so there’s a pretty significant body of work associated with that. And I think most of the concern that we have today that want to express is on the scope of the proposed AUAR that’s outlined in the packet and that applies to both fee and structure obviously and without digging into all the details really there’s three components that are of greatest concern. One is the number of scenarios proposed. As best I can tell from the information I have five scenarios are proposed. An existing. A no build scenario. Those could be combined. They may have intended to be combined but it didn’t read like that. A, the Level 7 development proposal would be a scenario. The more intense development scenario is a proposed scenario and then a scenario developed from your visioning exercise you discussed earlier today so that’s five scenarios compared to the original one scenario that was part of the original study. Four or five. To be fair that existing and no build should and could be 22 Chanhassen City Council – April 13, 2015 the same scenario. There’s approximately 13 workshops, meetings, chamber luncheons and so forth. This is roughly 3 times what was done with the entire original study so I think we’d like your input and we’d like some more consideration on the scope of the meeting involvement. The workshops. Can these be combined? Can this be streamlined? Again it’s roughly 3 times the original scope of services in there. And the other major component is the traffic comprising roughly $21,000 of the study portion. It analyzes 7 intersections. That’s 4 more than the original study analyzed. It didn’t make mention of the work that’s done. I think it’s fair to assume that if you’re reconstructing Lyman and Powers was completely redeveloped, the intersection was done with 212 that there should be an extensive body of work associated with that. It’s currently under construction so we had hoped we could maximize those studies and move that forward. And again that reflects then obviously in the schedule. We kind of walked through that originally when we requested the AUAR. We’re very anxious to get it started. It really is driving our process. The 6 month schedule that’s out there is about twice what we originally contemplated when we met with staff in November. The fee as well is roughly twice but the scope and the schedule right now is very concerning that we, it appears we don’t really start the AUAR components related to the development until June and that maybe speaks a little bit to the discussion earlier tonight about some of the visioning exercise that’s bleeding into the AUAR. And I think probably fundamentally the heartache that we have with it as a development team is that we are bracketing the study of the infrastructure’s ability to handle development with a no build, which would be exactly what you see today or existing and the most intense development. So we’re unsure as to what the, until a concern is discovered along that way where we find limitations with the most intense development, we don’t believe we will. There really is no point other than to expand the scope in doing the 3 steps in the middle. If the most intense development uncovers issues related to any one of the AUAR components, maybe then we adjust the scope. Back off and say well, the most intense development trips significant traffic concerns. Let’s back up and analyze one other scenario that is likely to help bracket that but we believe based on what we’ve been told, what’s been done on the roadways specifically in the past. What you contemplated in your Comprehensive Plan that that most intense scenario will in fact prove that the site can handle that component and normal mitigation efforts will be effective so with that we certainly can stand for any questions but I think our request respectfully is that we break that connection with the visioning exercise we talked about earlier tonight. That we allow the AUAR to go forward while that parallels because we think that will be very useful input to the next stage which is the PUD of development. That we order the AUAR tonight. Move it forward but we work with staff to help narrow that scope. That we focus on possibly the existing plus one or existing plus two scenarios instead of four. That we work to combine or streamline the workshops and luncheons and other meetings that are there to be more reflective of the original effort. And that we allow that to move forward as quickly as possible so that we can take that feedback and help craft the PUD application that you’ll entertain at the next step. So with that I’ll stand for any questions and certainly can dive into more detail if you folks want to get that far into the weeds but I think we basically covered our concerns and we look forward to your comments. Mayor Laufenburger: Okay, thank you Mr. Lazan. Any questions or comments for the applicant from council? Councilman McDonald: Mr. Mayor. 23 Chanhassen City Council – April 13, 2015 Mayor Laufenburger: Councilman McDonald, yes. Councilman McDonald: It’s not so much I have a question for the applicant yet but what I would like to do is get a little bit of input from Ms. Aanenson to comment on those three issues that he brought up. The number of scenarios. Number of meetings and workshops and traffic studies in general. Can you help me understand a little bit about the importance of these? Where the applicant fits into all this. I mean once we order this my understanding is, is that at that point the contractor will talk to everybody and bring everybody together at the table. Is that a correct assumption? Kate Aanenson: Yes ultimately. I mean once you go out for review on this you have so many days to enact it so we want to make sure that you’re comfortable with what you put out there and receiving comments on that. So one of the things that we did commit to, Kimley-Horn has some meetings as does Hoisington-Koegler. Working with the applicant. As soon as this gets ordered that we’d sit down and try to set those meetings in place to make them seem less. Shorten up that schedule so we’ve already talked to them about that. Trying to get those on the books so we’re not duplicating meetings. Kimley-Horn and Hoisington-Koegler and Level 7 development, we can all be at the same meeting at the same time, that would be very helpful and help shorten up the process and we certainly are willing to do that. Councilman McDonald: Okay. And then a question for the applicant. After hearing that, the fact that you know we are evidently willing to work with you and to try to get this thing done because there is a time limit evidently and as you heard tonight we will separate it from the whole thing about the visioning of what would be best for that area. Can you accept that and at that point are we good to go as far as ordering this study? Darren Lazan: Mr. Mayor, Member McDonald. Councilman McDonald. Certainly it’s refreshing and encouraging to hear that we will work together to limit the number of meetings and I think that can be done and I’m comfortable that we can move forward with that component and work with staff to fine tune that. I think it’s important, and I don’t know that we’re going to quantify tonight the traffic other than a good faith effort to make best use of the traffic and to relook at the number of intersections we study and so forth but again if it’s a good faith effort to make the best use of those studies, we’re fine. I think if we could get direction or confirmation tonight that we could arrive at what scenarios will be analyzed I think we will have the highest level of comfort that we can move forward and get this done. Councilman McDonald: Well I guess with that, isn’t that part of your discussion with Kimberly- Horn? I mean from what you’re bringing out here I would think that they would even agree with you that yeah we go no build to maximize it and then at that point if that’s what creates a problem they’re going to back off. You know I can’t speak for them or anything such as that but as I understand the process you know you would have input into all of that with them and I would think that in order to again cut the time down yeah, you reduce the scenarios to try to get at a good answer. 24 Chanhassen City Council – April 13, 2015 Darren Lazan: I think that’s an excellent point and we would be very excited to work in that manner. I think again if we could have just a little bit of summary clarification that we’ll work together to address those three I’m more than happy to take that under direction and move forward. Councilman McDonald: Well I guess I would turn back to staff Mr. Mayor and just kind of ask that you know in outlining that, isn’t that the way it works? Is that once we give this over to Kimberly-Horn that they will in good faith you know again try to work through this the most efficient manner possible? Kate Aanenson: Correct. I mean we’re helping them. We’re the governmental unit supervising this project so we’ve already talked to both parties on that. Trying to streamline those meetings and the like so yes, in good faith but I think just to reiterate. One of the issues that came up during the concept PUD was some of the traffic concerns in the neighborhoods so I’ll let Paul Oehme, the City Engineer talk about that but we want to make sure that we are looking at some of those, the SRF looked at all the external traffic. Didn’t look at the internal traffic and that’s one of the things we want to make sure that our residents that raise that as concerns that we are addressing that so… Mayor Laufenburger: Mr. Oehme before you talk about traffic, let me just clarify here. Mr. Lazan brought up three primary issues. The number of scenarios. The number of workshops. I take that to mean the number of meetings. And number three is the traffic and it sounds to me like you agree that cooperation regarding the number of meetings and workshops is something that can be addressed. Darren Lazan: Yes sir. Mayor Laufenburger: Would you agree on that? Okay. So let’s, before we go to traffic let me just clarify. The number of scenarios. Mr. Lazan, you’re suggesting a no build scenario and a max build scenario, is that correct? Darren Lazan: Mr. Mayor I think we could start with a no build and a max build and very quickly in the effort identify whether any intermediate, and I would suggest our proposal would be a great intermediate. It’d be somewhere right in the middle of the no build and the max but we start with those two and then meet again if we have an issue and expand the scope if that’s necessary. Mayor Laufenburger: Just to clarify for the council. As I read the packet and the Hoisington- Koegler Group proposal it specifically, very clearly identifies three scenarios and from those three you identified five so I’m, you don’t have to explain. Darren Lazan: It’s very simple. The two are existing and no build which have been added to the traffic and send to the engineering component so that’s the three development scenarios and as I said sir it lays out like it’s two more scenarios but really existing and no build should be the same. 25 Chanhassen City Council – April 13, 2015 Councilman Campion: And Mr. Mayor I was confused as well. Mayor Laufenburger: Mr. Campion. Councilman Campion: And I was just thumbing through it. In Exhibit A I see what I think he’s talking about. Mayor Laufenburger: Okay. Councilman Campion: It does read like five. Mayor Laufenburger: I stand corrected Mr. Lazan. So now let’s talk about traffic. Mr. Oehme you want to, do you have some comments that you want to share with us regarding traffic studies? Paul Oehme: Sure Mayor Laufenburger, City Council members. So as Ms. Aanenson had indicated when we were going through the public process identifying, or through the project here we did hear from concerned residents in this area about traffic and the need to look at the traffic for this particular development in greater detail. The intersections that we identified are mainly internal intersections that we want to look at and specifically for pedestrian movements, crossings and such by city parks and at specific intersections as well too so that, we felt is a high priority for the City to look at in this study is the traffic and make sure that we’re doing our due diligence and trying to cut down as much as we can on cut through traffic so. Mayor Laufenburger: Kate you want to add anything to that? Kate Aanenson: No but I mean certainly it doesn’t mean we won’t sit down with Kimley-Horn and take a look at that and see if there’s ways that, if there’s other information out there we’ll always, you know we’re willing to look at that and but we just want to put that out there that we picked those intersections because of the input we received but certainly willing to work on that. Paul Oehme: And Mayor if I can too. I mean the contract specifically for the traffic with Kimley-Horn it is a time and materials not to exceed amount so you know they’re only going to bill us for what they have incurred in their costs so obviously we’re not going to be passing any more than what Kimley-Horn is going to be billing us to the developer so I just want to make sure everybody’s aware of that. Mayor Laufenburger: Alright. Let me move to other council members if I can. Any other questions or comments for the applicant or staff? Councilwoman Ryan: Mr. Mayor. Mayor Laufenburger: Councilwoman Ryan. 26 Chanhassen City Council – April 13, 2015 Councilwoman Ryan: Ms. Aanenson, when Mr. Lazan refers to, a couple times original effort and initial conversations, what is he referring to when he talks about time frames with 6 months versus 3 months and initial agreements of numbers of scenarios? What is that? Kate Aanenson: I think we had some initial conversations about what could potentially be a time frame and a dollar amount. Councilwoman Ryan: And so if for the, the proposed motion, I know we’ve verbally commented on making some of these changes but the motion says approving the professional services agreements which Mr. Mayor was referring to at the three scenarios. The time line and schedule and you know the meetings and workshops. I guess I’m not comfortable without a change to a services agreement that has been discussed with, I mean do we typically change service agreements before we vote on them? I mean this is an agreement that would be signed at the end of the night and from just the brief conversation that we’ve had there’s been a lot of changes already so how does that typically? Mayor Laufenburger: Mr. Gerhardt. Todd Gerhardt: Mayor, City Council members. The agreement in front of you is a maximum contract. It’s an hourly rate with a not to exceed dollar amount. So typically when we get into professional service contracts, not just with private developers but with well contractors. Water treatment plant studies. It’s usually a not to exceed amount because there’s so many unknowns. They may come back and say you know we’d like to look at a traffic studies if we go this way. What this agreement does is gives us the most flexibility. We’re going to work with the developer. We’re not going to require everything that’s in the agreement. I think everybody has kind of said that tonight and I’ve got to believe Landform has entered into these with other communities. It gives staff and the developer the most flexibility so we don’t have to keep coming back to council saying can we do one more study in this area. It’s not to exceed $90,900 and you know its amazing how two engineering firms kind of get together and they kind of agree on what’s the best method to study something. I’ve seen this multiple times over the last 5 years and it is kind of a trust thing but if you would like to eliminate things in the contract we can always bring something back to you so it’s not to an exceed amount and I think there’s been clear direct tonight that you know some of the meetings won’t be needed. Councilwoman Ryan: And just to follow up on that because I, unless I didn’t hear it I haven’t heard an issue with the dollar amount. It’s the time line that’s I believe of issue and the fact that the AUAR update schedules in this document, that we would be voting on is again concerning because this is laid out and I want to make sure that everybody’s in agreement with the timeline. Todd Gerhardt: Yeah. And what the timeline, you know the consulting engineers get together and talk about it. And the planners. Don’t want to forget the planners. But when there’s certain meetings that won’t be needed that will reduce that timeline and if there’s other things that we can study upfront, like the concerns regarding Pioneer Pass Park. Maybe we can hold off on that and concentrate on the Quadrant information first and bring that as kind of Phase I of the AUAR. So concentrate on the stuff that Scott and their group needs to move ahead and feel comfortable with what’s occurring in and around the area. 27 Chanhassen City Council – April 13, 2015 Councilwoman Ryan: And how does that relate to then what we would be voting on tonight? Todd Gerhardt: I think this agreement gives both of us the flexibility to flex the schedule. It’s kind of open ended but I think we’re trying to give them the assurances that we’ll concentrate on their portion of it and that will be discussed at the first meeting with the consulting engineers. Kate Aanenson: Can I just add too? I think the other thing that, this is verbatim Minutes. We’re on the record stating what our intentions are and in good faith it’s on there so it’s both our goals to keep this moving forward in a timely manner and we want to work together on that so. Mayor Laufenburger: I would also add, let me also add too that we’re, both organizations have people who are very experienced in this sort of thing so when we say that we’re going to approve this, essentially what we’re doing is we’re, we as a council are giving our permission to move forward with this process in an efficient and an effective way recognizing that this is most expensive, longest term scenario. Notice I didn’t use that 5 letter word Mr. Lazan. So with the intent on both parties, given guidance by the council to speed things up and do it for less money. Councilwoman Ryan: And so would it make sense then to vote on moving forward with the AUAR and voting on that and then asking for the services agreements to come back after they’ve been revised? Mayor Laufenburger: Mr. Gerhardt. Todd Gerhardt: Mayor, City Council, I think that would delay it 2 weeks. You know you do have on the first page of the professional service contract scope of services. City retains HKgi to provide professional services described in the contract. HKgi must complete the services specified in the contract document before November 1 and then we also have, which one is it again Roger? Mayor Laufenburger: 3 is not to exceed. Todd Gerhardt: Not to exceed. Roger Knutson: Paragraph 2 is scope of services. Todd Gerhardt: Yeah the scope of services. So we can reduce the scope of services at any time so. Roger Knutson: Maybe I could suggestion. Mayor Laufenburger: Mr. Knutson. Roger Knutson: If we could amend paragraph 2 to make you more comfortable. It specifically says, right now it says the City retains HKgi to provide the professional services described in the 28 Chanhassen City Council – April 13, 2015 Contract Documents. The next sentence would read, the City retains the right to reduce the scope of professional services. Mayor Laufenburger: Is that an implied? Roger Knutson: I just think putting it in there would be a good idea, that’s fine. Mayor Laufenburger: Okay. Councilman Campion: Now what? Mayor Laufenburger: Just a second. Councilwoman Ryan and the entire council, we meet second Monday and the fourth Monday of every month and I think that if we put too many restrictions on the City staff and the developer to come to us for check points that will naturally put a length of time on it. My experience for the last 4 years and Councilwoman Tjornhom and Councilman McDonald for much longer than that, we have seen that the professional staff that we have in place, with the experience that they have in place. The number of years and the projects that they’ve been involved with they will always, they will always do their best to insure that they’re spending the City taxpayer’s money wisely and efficiently so I, my view is that I would be in favor of giving them the approval to manage the program the way they have shown us to manage programs in the past. That would be my perspective. Any other council members for comments? Mr. Lazan, did you want to have a closing comment of some sort? Darren Lazan: I would, thank you. You know we certainly appreciate the effort to nail down the scope. Everybody wants to be clear upfront and had we had the time I would love to have a lot more discussion and go back and revise those but I think you know in the interest of moving it forward and making the best use of your time so we’re not back here again if we, I think given the content of the discussion today if we could approve the contracts as amended by the City Attorney or as proposed by the City Attorney with the understanding that we’re going to have an initial charge meeting or initial scope meeting and if for some reason at that point we’re not able to come to an agreement on the reduction to the scenarios, the workshops and the traffic, maybe then we’ll come back and bother you but we would like to move it along and I think I’m hearing tonight that there’s an interest in doing so and I think that’s probably the best and most expeditious route. Mayor Laufenburger: Okay, thank you Mr. Lazan. Todd Gerhardt: Mayor. Mayor Laufenburger: Mr. Gerhardt. Todd Gerhardt: One other item that wasn’t included in the staff report is that after the initial scope meeting with the consulting professionals and Level 7 that $90,900 check be escrowed was not included in the motion. Mayor Laufenburger: So you want to make sure that that’s included in the motion? 29 Chanhassen City Council – April 13, 2015 Todd Gerhardt: But only until after that scoping meeting is completed and they feel comfortable with the scope. And same thing with the contract should be signed after that scoping study meeting with the consulting professionals and Level 7. Mayor Laufenburger: Okay. Comment or motion from council member. Councilwoman Ryan: Mayor may I have, make a clarification then to what Mr. Gerhardt just said? So for the proposed motion based on what Mr. Knutson had suggested that adding to the motion about that $90,000 held in escrow as well the contract won’t be signed until after the initial charge meeting. Todd Gerhardt: Yep, the scoping study. Councilwoman Ryan: Scoping study, okay. Todd Gerhardt: Yes. So then everybody would leave that meeting feeling comfortable on the vision going and still giving each party the flexibility to add or subtract to the contract. Councilwoman Ryan: Okay, thank you. Mayor Laufenburger: Anybody else comment or motion? Councilman McDonald: I’ll do a motion. Mayor Laufenburger: Councilman McDonald. Councilman McDonald: Okay I would propose that the Chanhassen City Council adopts a resolution ordering the update to the Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR) for the 2005 MUSA area and approves Professional Services Agreement with Hoisington. Mayor Laufenburger: Hoisington. Councilman McDonald: Hoisington-Koegler Group Incorporated and Kimley-Horn and Associates Incorporated. And that we also add to this motion that there would be a $90,000 escrow amount after the scoping meeting and also that the contract would be signed after the scoping meeting and all parties are in agreement with scope. Mayor Laufenburger: And related to Mr. Knutson’s comment about paragraph 2 of the Professional Services Agreement. Councilman McDonald: Also add Mr. Knutson’s suggested improvement to number 2. Mayor Laufenburger: We have a motion. Is there a second? Councilwoman Ryan: Second. 30 Chanhassen City Council – April 13, 2015 Councilman Campion: Second. Mayor Laufenburger: Councilwoman Tjornhom, I’ll give that to you. Councilwoman Tjornhom: I didn’t even say anything. Mayor Laufenburger: Excuse me. Todd Gerhardt: You’re the Mayor. You can do that. Mayor Laufenburger: I’ve got a bad ear over here. I think I guess it was Councilwoman Ryan who said second. Thank you very much. So we’re, the motion is the language as it shows on, in our packet with the addition of the payment and contracts to be, escrow payment and contract to be signed after the initial scoping study and the language that the City can reduce the scope of the contract at any time. Todd Gerhardt: Correct. Mayor Laufenburger: Any comments? Or discussion. Resolution #2015-22: Councilman McDonald moved, Councilwoman Ryan seconded that the Chanhassen City Council adopts a Resolution ordering the Update to the Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR) for the 2005 MUSA Area; and approves professional services agreements with Hoisington-Koegler Group Inc. and Kimley-Horn and Associates Inc. with the addition that the contract be signed and $90,960 escrowed after the scope of services meeting is held, and with the addition to number 2 of the Professional Services Agreement to add the sentence, “The City retains the right to reduce the Scope of Services.” All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0. Mayor Laufenburger: That motion carries 5-0. Thank you very much staff and thank you very much Mr. Lazan and team. APPOINTMENTS TO THE PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION. Mayor Laufenburger: This is the appointments to the Park and Recreation Commission. Over the last several weeks we, the City Council and the Park and Recreation Commission has conducted interviews for the open slots on the Park and Recreation Commission and first of all I want to say thanks to all of the citizens that made application. We at the council are always pleased to see people willing to invest their time and their energy in improving the City of Chanhassen regardless of what commission it is and I’m pleased to make this in the form of a motion. That we appoint Jim Boettcher and Julie Hougham to each, appointing each of them to a 3 year term on the Park and Recreation Commission. And also appointing youth representative Lauren Dale as the youth representative for a one year term on the Park and Recreation Commission. And that is a motion. Is there a second? 31