Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Agenda and Packet
AGENDA CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL MONDAY, FEBRUARY 8, 2021 CHANHASSEN CITY HALL, 7700 MARKET BOULEVARD Electronic Meeting Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, for the next few weeks it is anticipated that some or all members of the City Council will participate in meetings by telephone and/or web conference pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 13D.021, rather than in person at the city council's regular meeting place at Chanhassen City Hall, 7700 Market Boulevard, Chanhassen, Minnesota. The Public Hearings portion of the City Council agenda allow for the public to provide comments on those agenda items. To help ensure an open public process, we have made accommodations for the public to continue to view and participate in public hearings by selecting one of three options: City Council Meetings • EMAIL your comments to the City Council at publiccomments@ci.chanhassen.mn.us All comments received by 6:30 p.m. on the day of the meeting will be included as a part of the city council meeting. This is the preferred method of public participation for City Council meetings. • WATCH the meeting live online at www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us/agendas or on Mediacom Cable Channel 107.2. The meeting begins at 7:00 pm. PHONE in your comments at 952-227-1630 when the Mayor opens the desired public hearing for comment. The Mayor will take each call in the order received. • ATTEND the meeting in person and present your comments when called upon. Social distancing practices will be observed during the meeting. Seating will be limited for this option. If you wish to make a public comment under the Visitor Presentations portion of the City Council agenda, please review the Guidelines for Visitor Presentations and complete and submit the online form. NOTE: For all options, you must provide your name and address for the record. A. 6:00 P.M. - WORK SESSION Note: Work sessions are open to the public. If the City Council does not complete the work session items in the time allotted, the remaining items will be considered after the regular agenda. 1. Discussion on City Manager Search B. 7:00 P.M. - CALL TO ORDER (Pledge of Allegiance) C. PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS 1. Maple Leaf Award - Bethany Tjornhom D. CONSENT AGENDA All items listed under the Consent Agenda are considered to be routine by the city council and will be considered as one motion. There will be no separate discussion of these items. If discussion is desired, that item will be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered separately. City council action is based on the staff recommendation for each item. Refer to the council packet for each staff report. 1. Approve City Council Minutes dated January 25 2021 2. Receive Planning Commission Minutes dated January 19, 2021 3. Receive Park & Recreation Commission Minutes dated October 27, 2020, November 24, 2020 and December 8, 2020 4. Resolution 2021-XX: Bid Authorization for 2021 Street Improvement Project (20-05) 5. Resolution 2021-XX: Accept a Donation from T-Mobile for 28th Annual FebryAju Festival 6. Approve The 2021/2022 Lake Ann Park Beach Lifeguard Contract 7. Resolution 2021-XX: Adopt Resolution Setting a Public Hearing for March 22, 2021 Establishing a TIF District E. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS Visitor Presentations requesting a response or action from the City Council must complete and submit the Citizen Action Request Form (see VISITOR GUIDELINES at the end of this agenda) F. OLD BUSINESS 1. Resolution 2021-XX: Adopt Arboretum Area Transportation Plan 2. Approve Legislative Agenda G. PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. Approve On -Sale 3.2 Percent Malt Liquor License for Golf Zone located at 825 Flying Cloud Drive H. NEW BUSINESS I. COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS J. ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS K. CORRESPONDENCE DISCUSSION 1. Review of Claims Paid 02-08-2021 L. ADJOURNMENT M. GUIDELINES GUIDELINES FOR VISITOR PRESENTATIONS Welcome to the Chanhassen City Council Meeting. In the interest of open communications, the Chanhassen City Council wishes to provide an opportunity for the public to address the City Council. That opportunity is provided at every regular City Council meeting during Visitor Presentations. • Anyone seeking a response or action from the City Council following their presentation is required to complete and submit a Citizen Action Request Form. An online form is available at https://www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us/action or paper forms are available in the city council chambers prior to the meeting. • Anyone indicating a desire to speak during Visitor Presentations will be acknowledged by the Mayor. When called upon to speak, state your name, address, and topic. All remarks shall be addressed to the City Council as a whole, not to any specific member(s) or to any person who is not a member of the City Council. • If there are a number of individuals present to speak on the same topic, please designate a spokesperson that can summarize the issue. • Limit your comments to five minutes. Additional time may be granted at the discretion of the Mayor. If you have written comments, provide a copy to the Council. • During Visitor Presentations, the Council and staff listen to comments and will not engage in discussion. Council members or the City Manager may ask questions of you in order to gain a thorough understanding of your concern, suggestion or request. • Please be aware that disrespectful comments or comments of a personal nature, directed at an individual either by name or inference, will not be allowed. Personnel concerns should be directed to the City Manager. CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Monday, February 8, 2021 Subject Discussion on City Manager Search Section 6:00 P.M. - WORK SESSION Item No: A.1. Prepared By Heather Johnston, Interim City Manager File No: BACKGROUND The City Council interviewed four candidates for the City Manager position on Wednesday, January 20. During follow up discussions at the Work Session on January 25, the Council agreed to release three candidates, make additional inquiries on the fourth candidate and potentially interview additional candidates from the original applicants. At the January 25 City Council meeting, the Council moved to lay the motion for City Manager contract negotiations on the table. DISCUSSION The Council will review results of additional due diligence efforts and discuss next steps in the City Manager search process. CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Monday, February 8, 2021 Subject Approve City Council Minutes dated January 25, 2021 Section CONSENT AGENDA Item No: D.1. Prepared By Kim Meuwissen, Office Manager File No: PROPOSED MOTION "The City Council approves the City Council Minutes dated January 25, 2021." Approval requires a Simple Majority Vote of members present. ATTACHMENTS: Work Session Summary Minutes Verbatim Minutes CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION JANUARY 25, 2021 Mayor Ryan called the work session to order at 5:OOp.m. COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Ryan, Councilman Campion, Councilman McDonald, Councilwoman Rehm and Councilwoman Schubert. COUNCIL MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Heather Johnston, Kate Aanenson, Bob Generous, Charlie Howley, George Bender, Don Johnson, Lance Pearce, Jake Foster, Rick Rice, Kelly Strey and City Attorney Andrea McDowell Poehler. PUBLIC PRESENT: Lynn Barboza, SGR. SOLID WASTE COLLECTION DISTRICTS Bob Generous presented background information on creating a waste hauler collection district in Chanhassen. This came about as a result of resident complaints concerning trucks being in their neighborhood almost every day of the week and trash containers being left out. Chanhassen currently has six residential solid waste haulers. These haulers were surveyed on their initial reaction to the idea of the City going to collection districting and although they weren't opposed to the idea, they prefer to stay the way they are because of the logistics involved in routing. Currently, Chanhassen allows any licensed hauler to service residential homes and they establish their own pickup dates. Staff is looking for direction from Council if they should pursue collection districts with the haulers, the number of districts, and the days of the week that would be most appropriate. Mayor Ryan stated that solid waste collection districts have been a topic of discussion that have come before the City Council for a number of years and that previous Councils have said that the City is not going to be in the business of managing garbage. Residents feel strongly about choosing their garbage hauler. Councilman Campion said the collection district idea was a good idea and that it would be a least -intrusive improvement. Councilman McDonald wasn't sure he wanted to see all of the garbage haulers out in one day. Councilwoman Rehm requested clarification on the difference between district collection and organized collection. Councilwoman Schubert asked if the haulers would coordinate with each other what time they would be servicing their district as it pertains to pedestrian safety. Mayor Ryan suggested that Bob talk to the haulers and see what they propose for collection days or number of days and that reducing the days from five to three would be an improvement. Councilwoman Rehm was open to ideas. Staff was directed to meet with the haulers to limit the number of pickup days to two or three as long as it doesn't limit the number of haulers that are available. City Council Work Session — January 25, 2021 2021 LEGISLATIVE AGENDA Interim City Manager Heather Johnston reviewed the proposed changes to the 2021 Legislative Priorities: 1. Support "Opt -Out" Suburban Transit Agencies. 2. Building Code Fees. 3. Unfunded Mandates. 4. Local Governance & Restriction on Local Government Budgets. 5. Environmental. 6. Transportation. 7. Water Resources Protection Funding. 8. Minnetonka Middle School West Intersection Improvements. 9. Fiscal Disparities. 10. Electronic Meetings (priority added to the list). ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION ON CITY MANAGER SEARCH Interim City Manager Heather Johnston provided an update on follow-up information requests regarding one of the candidates. Based on the feedback received, SGR Consultant Lynn Barboza asked the Council if they want to consider having some additional discussion today about the four finalists or just review the options search -wise, either to consider hiring one of the four candidates or talk about what options exist outside of making a selection of that group of four. Councilman McDonald ask to hear what the other options are outside of the four candidates. Consultant Barboza stated that a re -launch option is within the contract provisions so there would not be any additional professional fees assessed to launch the search; however, there would be hard costs associated with the steps in each of the phases. The approximate timeframe to re- launch would be three months; it could be less. The second option would be for the consultant to reach out to the remaining 7 of the 12 semi-finalists. Option three would be to choose one of the four finalists. Mayor Ryan recessed the work session at 6:50 p.m. Mayor Ryan reconvened the work session at 9:45 p.m. The City Council continued discussion on the City Manager search. They decided to have Lynn Barboza release the following three candidates: Darrow, Ziemer, and Wall, to contact the top candidate with the status of the selection process, provide links and written questionnaires of the next two candidates to the City Council and schedule interviews with those candidates. 2 City Council Work Session — January 25, 2021 Heather Johnston discussed continuing on as Interim City Manager during the remainder of the city manager search with the condition that she be able to work remotely for a couple of days a week. Ms. Johnston indicated she would be unable to stay beyond May 1. Council Member Campion asked if any other Council members had gotten any complaints regarding the condition of the city's ice rinks. Council Member Rehm indicated that people are really anxious to get on the rinks and that the rinks are pretty sloppy, although she didn't think it had anything to do with the city, but rather the weather. Dan Campion mentioned that the North Lotus Lake ice rinks were in poor condition and that backyard rinks were in better shape. Heather Johnston said that the crews have gone out and have been working hard to improve the rinks this week and she will check in with staff on their progress. The meeting adjourned at 10:25 p.m. Submitted by Heather Johnston Interim City Manager Prepared by Kim Meuwissen CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING JANUARY 25, 2021 Mayor Ryan called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. The meeting was opened with the Pledge to the Flag. COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Ryan, Councilman Campion, Councilman McDonald, Councilwoman Rehm and Councilwoman Schubert. COUNCIL MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Heather Johnston, Kate Aanenson, Charlie Howley, George Bender, Don Johnson, Lance Pearce, Matt Kerr, Kim Meuwissen, and City Attorney Andrea McDowell Poehler. PUBLIC PRESENT: Katie Schaumann Minnesota Valley Alliance (via Zoom) Chadd Larson Kimley Horn (via Zoom) Richard Hamblin 340 Sinnen Circle (via phone call) Nick Anhut Ehlers & Associates (via Zoom) Todd Simning 2166 Paisley Path (via Zoom) Brian & Keri Colvin 14870 Maple Trail SE, Prior Lake (via Zoom) Mayor Ryan: Good evening again, everybody. Thank you for joining us tonight. For the record, we have all of our council members present tonight. I do want to reiterate that we are still operating under emergency order which allows us to have members attend remotely and we will have one Council member joining us via Zoom tonight. Our first action is our agenda approval. Council members, are there any modifications to the agenda as printed? Please respond with a yay or nay. Councilman McDonald? McDonald: Nay. Mayor Ryan: Councilwoman Rehm? Rehm: Nay. Mayor Ryan: Councilwoman Schubert? Schubert: Do we need to move the Golf Zone out of the consent agenda and into new business? Mayor Ryan: It's already been moved. You may need to refresh. Chanhassen City Council — January 25, 2020 Schubert: Nay. Mayor Ryan: Councilman Campion? Campion: Nay. Mayor Ryan: And nay for me as well, so we will proceed with the published agenda. PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS: INVITATION TO FEBRUARY FESTIVAL Mayor Ryan: The City of Chanhassen is proud to announce the first community event of 2021, the 281h annual February Festival presented virtually and sponsored by T-Mobile. February Festival, I'm going to refer to it as Feb Fest because that's what we do around here, will be held from Monday, February 1 through Saturday, February 6 and I invite residents and their families and friends to join us by participating in the virtual ice fishing contest and in -person medallion hunt. Over $4,500 worth of prizes have been donated by local businesses and will be awarded as part of the fishing contest and submissions will occur via email. Participants are invited to fish any of the lakes in Carver County for Northern, Sunfish, Crappies, Walleye and Perch. The annual medallion hunt which is sponsored by Charter Bank in Chanhassen will also be held beginning February 1. Clues will be posted on the City's web page and on Charter Bank's front door at 9:00 am each day. For more information or to register for the fishing contest, please visit the City's website and I look forward to seeing everyone's virtual submission. This is another one of those events that has to be altered because of COVID. Obviously, one of the favorite events here in Chanhassen is Feb Fest when we can all gather on Lake Ann. Unfortunately; with COVID we can't do this this year so this is a great alternative. Thanks to the Parks crew and team for making an alternative option for everybody to participate. Go to our website for more information. PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS: PRESENTATION OF MAPLE LEAF AWARD TO BETHANY TJORNHOM Mayor Ryan: We were planning on awarding the Maple Leaf Award to former Council member Bethany Tjornhom but tonight did not work out for her so we are planning on having that little ceremony for her at our next Council meeting which is February 8. We look forward to celebrating her at that time. ORGANIZATIONAL ITEMS: APPOINTMENTS Mayor Ryan: This again is something that we do at the beginning of all of our meetings. These are appointments done by the Mayor and so we have a number of appointments that need to be made so I am going to go ahead and make the proposed motion for the following appointments: 2 Chanhassen City Council — January 25, 2020 Mayor Ryan moved, Councilman Campion seconded that the Chanhassen City Council make the following appointments: • Council member Jerry McDonald appointed as Acting Mayor; • Council member Haley Schubert and the Finance Director be appointed to the Fire Relief Association Board of trustees; • Council member Jerry McDonald to Seat A for a two-year term and Mayor Elise Ryan to Seat B for a three-year term on the Southwest Transit Commission; • Council member Jerry McDonald as liaison to the Planning Commission; • Council member Haley Schubert as liaison to the Park & Recreation Commission; • Mayor Elise Ryan as liaison to the Economic Development Commission; • Council member Lucy Rehm as the liaison to the Environmental Commission; and • Council member Lucy Rehm as the liaison to the Senior Commission. All voted in the favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5-0. Mayor Ryan: Thank you, everyone for picking up your extra duties as a Council member appreciate it. Thank you. CONSENT AGENDA Mayor Ryan: Next up we have Consent Agenda. Tonight we have Consent Agenda Items 1-5. All items listed on the Consent Agenda are considered to be routine by the City Council and will be recorded as a single motion based on staff recommendation. There will be no separate discussion of these items. Are there any items that the Council would like to consider separately, please let me know by saying yes or no. Councilman McDonald? McDonald: No. Mayor Ryan: Councilwoman Rehm? Rehm: No. Mayor Ryan: Councilwoman Schubert? Schubert: No. Mayor Ryan: Councilman Campion? Campion: No. Mayor Ryan: Nor do I so may I get a motion to approve Consent Agenda Items 1-5? Chanhassen City Council — January 25, 2020 McDonald: So moved. CONSENT AGENDA: Councilman McDonald moved and Councilman Campion seconded to approve the following consent agenda items pursuant to the City Manager's recommendations: Approve City Council Minutes dated January H, 2021 2. Approve City Council Special Meeting Minutes dated January 7, 2021 (City Council Interviews) 3. Receive Planning Commission Minutes dated January 5, 2021 4. Approve a Request for an Interim Use Permit for Excavation of Existing Wetland Along with Excavated Borrow Being Placed on a Location within the Parcel 5. Award Contract for Installation of Influent Flow Meter at East Water Treatment Plant (EWTP) All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0. Mayor Ryan: Thank you, everyone. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS: SOUTHERN VALLEY ALLIANCE Mayor Ryan: Visitor Presentations are included with each of our regularly scheduled Council meetings. Anyone wishing to address the Council on a matter that is not specifically on the agenda may step to the podium. Please provide your name and address for the record and then please address the Council. You will have five minutes to present your item. If your request includes an action item from staff or Council, please complete a Citizen Action Request Form so that we may appropriately follow up with your request. However, if you are simply making a comment with no required action, a form does not need to be completed. We have one scheduled tonight from Southern Valley Alliance. Are they joining us via Zoom? Katie Schaumann: Yes, I am here via Zoom. Can you hear me? Mayor Ryan: Yes, we can. Welcome! Schaumann: Thank you. I am just wondering do you want me to put my video on? Can you see me? I also have a presentation I could share my screen. Mayor Ryan: If you want to share your screen that would be great. We can't see you but we would love to see your presentation. We would love to see both, but... M Chanhassen City Council — January 25, 2020 Schaumann: All right. Are you able to see my screen? Mayor Ryan: Yes, we are. Schaumann: Okay, perfect. Thank you again for having me this evening. My name is Katie Schaumann. I am with Southern Valley Alliance. We are a non-profit organization that provides services and support for victims of domestic violence and we serve all of Scott and Carver Counties. I do want to give a quick warning as the topic I'm going to discuss may be triggering depending on your lived experienced so feel free to mute or step away for a moment while I discuss this. So Southern Valley Alliance is prevention and solution -focused organization and we partner with local law enforcement, county legal systems, social services, and healthcare providers to make the communities of Scott and Carver Counties a better, safer place to live. Our mission is to assist victim survivors and end domestic violence in our local community. I've been part of this wonderful organization for about six months, but Southern Valley Alliance has been serving your community for the past 39 years. Maxine Kruschke founded Southern Valley Alliance for Battered Women in 1982 after leaving a 32-year marriage where she herself was a survivor of domestic violence. Since then, we have been able to serve over 21,000 men, women, and children as they try to live a healthy, violence -free life. Last year we changed our name to Southern Valley Alliance to reflect a more -inclusive and progressive approach as domestic abuse can affect anyone, not just women. I am honored to meet with you tonight to share about the importance of recognizing and standing up for victim survivors within our community and share about the critical works Southern Valley Alliance is doing in the community. Did you know that one in three women and one in four men in the United States have experienced some form of domestic violence or abuse in their lifetime? In the State of Minnesota alone, more than 65,000 adults received domestic violence services from programs every year. We would like to think that it doesn't happen in our community, but the truth is domestic violence happens everywhere. Southern Valley Alliance is the sole provider of domestic violence services in Carver and Scott Counties and we assist over 1,500 victim survivors every year. In Carver County alone, we provided services for 255 individuals last year and in Chanhassen alone, since the organization began, we have assisted over 1,000 victim survivors. Our programs and services include a 24/7 confidential crisis line, crisis intervention and advocacy, safe housing partnerships. Unfortunately, there is no domestic violence shelter in Scott or Carver County, but we partner with Minnesota Day One to find emergency shelter services nearby, and can also provide emergency hotel stays provided by local hotels. We offer support groups currently being held online. We have a children's visitation center which provides supervised visits for children and their non -custodial parents, and we offer community engagement and education. Here's a quick snapshot of our 2020 fiscal report. We were able to serve over 1,500 victim survivors; over 500 in Scott County and over 200 in Carver County, with 913 Crisis Line calls answered, over 500 volunteer hours, and almost 200 children's visitation center visits. While Southern Valley Alliance assists all victims of domestic abuse, it's important to highlight the prevalence and impact of dating violence on teens, especially during the month of February. Nationally, February is acknowledged as teen dating violence awareness month to help shed light on the 5 Chanhassen City Council — January 25, 2020 issue of dating violence. Did you know one in ten high school students has experienced physical violence from a dating partner in the past year? Through increasing awareness, training, and building relationships, we can empower victims, educate our youth, inform our neighbors, and partner with agencies invested in the safety and wellbeing of our community. I want to thank you again so much for having me as a guest tonight and for partnering with us and ending the cycle of violence in Carver and Scott Counties. We can't do this without you. Thank you. Mayor Ryan: Wonderful. Thank you, Ms. Schumann. Can we see you now on the screen? Schaumann: Yes! Let's see here. Hello! Mayor Ryan: Hello, there. Thank you again for your presentation. Let me thank you and your organization for the amazing work that you're doing in this area. It's so important. The numbers are always so shocking to see I think for all of us. We get monthly reports from our Sheriff's office and that is a statistic that is always included but when you look at the County as a whole and what you've done and the number of people that you've served in Chanhassen, it's always a tough number to see. So thank you for the incredible work that you and your entire organization and all of your volunteers do for this community. It is greatly appreciated so thank you very much. Schaumann: You're welcome. Thank you. Mayor Ryan: Council, does anyone have any questions? Nope. Lucy, I can't see you so I can't see a head shake. Do you have any questions? You're on mute. Rehm: Thank you. I'm curious if there has been an uptick in domestic violence over the past year? I know with the pandemic and all I've heard that mental health crises have escalated. Just curious if there has been a noticeable increase? Schaumann: Yes, domestic violence and our services have been just an unpredictable as the virus itself. Towards the beginning of the virus last year it was seemingly not just in the state of Minnesota but across the country. Crisis line calls were down and we can only assume that's because victim survivors were trapped at home with their abuser and they didn't have that safe space of work or school to be able to reach out and seek the help that they were in need of. Throughout the year as things started opening up again and people were able to leave their homes, we did see nationally from the national domestic violence hotline. They saw a 10% increase in calls throughout the year and we have also seen that with our partnerships from our local police officers and sheriff's departments. It has been definitely an interesting year. I'm very glad that we can have these services that we can offer for the community so it's kind of a double- edged sword but we have this great resource but unfortunately we have to use it, too. Rehm: Thank you. Thank you for your work. I really appreciate it. 71 Chanhassen City Council — January 25, 2020 Mayor Ryan: Ms. Schaumann, I have one question for you. I know you mentioned that there is no facility in Scott or Carver County. Is that something that you're working towards? Schaumann: We are trying. We keep running into difficulties with both counties in getting permissions and funding and the ability to do that. So, hopefully sometime in the near future, but we keep running into some road blocks. Mayor Ryan: Okay. I'll follow up with you on that. I'm curious a little bit about those road blocks but thank you for sharing that. I don't think we have any other questions but again, I really appreciate and value the work that you are doing. Thank you for being a presenter tonight. I'm sure you go to schools as well to share this information in the school districts and high school, which obviously is extremely important. Thank you for your work. Thank you for being here tonight and what you provide our community is invaluable. So thank you very much. Schaumann: Yes, thank you all again so much for having me this evening. I really appreciate your support and partnership. Mayor Ryan: Thank you. Have a good night. Schaumann: Thanks. You, too. Mayor Ryan: I don't see any other visitors here tonight so we will move forward with our Fire Department and Law Enforcement Updates. FIRE DEPARTMENT UPDATE Johnson: Good evening, Mayor and welcome new council members. This is the Fire Department update for the end of the year as well as December. Staffing is strong at 42 paid on -call firefighters. We have the luxury and the honor to do a little ceremony for an icon in the Fire Department as well as probably the City of Chanhassen with Jack Atkins on January 10 working his last shift. He worked his last four -your shift on duty crew and they did some things around the City but then we did a little surprise at his home. We had most of our stuff lined up on West 78th and a sendoff on the radio. Hopefully I'll have some recordings to share with you later on. It was Jack's request that we hold off until later on in the year when COVID restrictions let up, where we can actually bring Jack in and honor him here with the Council so that will be our plan. We don't normally do that the day of anyway so... I'll bring Jack in to let the Council thank him for his 30 years of service. The Fire Department responded to 83 calls of service in December. Call breakdowns for our newer members. The 13 day -only and 41 duty crew only are scheduled shift calls which require only a small percentage of our population of our Fire Department to show up. Day only is covered by three of us that are full time during the day, as well as a handful of folks that, Jack being one of the main folks that were doing that during the day for us. Duty Crew is obviously for the calls that we handle just when duty crew is on... The nice thing about that is if you look at 29 general alarms with our Fire Department, that's 29 alarms that go out to 7 Chanhassen City Council — January 25, 2020 all of us. For instance, back in 2019 we ran 640 general alarms. In 2020 we ran 200... A huge retention in recruitment model for us. Just a tremendous work down with the firefighters. It certainly is nice when the... Out of those 83 calls, 44... Matt Kerr: Don? Don? Can you hear us, Don? Mayor Ryan: Chief, could you hold on one second? Kerr: Don, I think the mic, I think it got turned off there maybe? There's just a power button right up top there. Sorry, we are having a hard time catching you on Zoom. I know they can hear you but sorry to interrupt. Johnson: Here we go. Can you hear me now? That' the first time I ever really needed a microphone to carry. Firefighter responses which were two car fires, one deck fire which we were happy and lucky to be at Lake Susan Hills Apartments on a medical when the crews on scene noticed there was a deck fire on the exterior of the building, as well as two mutual aid responses to Carver and Excelsior. Just some quick numbers for 2020. We ran 917 total calls which represented about a 8.5% decrease in reduction from 2019, although our five-year average remains at 856. Five -hundred thirty-five (535) of those which represented 58% of the overall calls... responses. Those are actually down 6.2%... I am happy to report that working with Carver County Public Health over three different dates, 95% of the Fire Department was able to get their first dose of vaccine. In talking with some of my cohorts both regionally and here in Carver County, most Fire Departments are ranging about 50%. I'm not quite sure why. It is a personal decision and I am extremely proud between Carver County's offerings to get our crews in as well as several of them are ... working full time for other agencies ... to get their vaccines there. We are at about 95%... We start this week with the second dose so Thursday, Tuesday and the following Tuesday we finish off with most first responders... So, kudos to Public Heather for that. In summary, several of the department members assisted with painting the upper level of the fire station. As you know, we did a lot of renovations in the early part of 2020 in preparation for the duty crews ... leftover items and we still needed time and purchased with the Relief Funds. I did some training for Carver County and we've got several meetings that we attended virtually. We're working with ice rescue tonight. Kare 11 did a very quick spot on that, thanks to our social media blast. I did have a resident call me today wondering if tonight the residents were supposed to show up at Lake Ann for the training in ice rescue, so I did explain that it was for training for us and we were advising them that we were doing it. Social media is reaching the community. The only other thing I would say is if you would go to the graphs and charts that I provided, there's a graphic near the bottom that illustrates with red dots that has the calls for December, but more so we've included the calls for 2020. You can see that the Fire Department over 2020, those 917 calls, has reached most of Chanhassen. We're probably still in the 35-40 range for going out to mutual aid fires but we have served a lot of this community over the year. With that, I can stand for questions. Mayor Ryan: Wonderful. Thank you, Chief. Council, any questions? Lucy, any questions? 0 Chanhassen City Council — January 25, 2020 Rehm: No, I don't have any questions. Thank you. Johnson: Thank you. Mayor Ryan: Now we can really hear you. Lt. Pearce, welcome. LAW ENFORCEMENT UPDATE Lt. Lance Pearce: Good evening, Madam Mayor and Council. Can you hear me? Mayor Ryan: Yes, we can. Lt. Pearce: Well that's too bad. Okay. So I'm going to cover November and December for the Sheriff's Office. In November we had 849 calls for service. December we had 813, there was a typo in the graph that I gave you. I transposed the 31 to 13. Both months calls were dominated with suspicious activities and medicals which is what we want. People need some help or see something, they should call us. A couple of the metrics that I'm following for Council and have been this year. I appreciated it, the lady from domestic violence shelter because that does show in our statistics as well where the number of domestics and the number of domestic assault arrests have both increased by about 10% as we have seen throughout the year. In particular, we had a significant number of arrests in December for domestic assault. I think we had 8 total. The mental healths have been trending in a similar pattern as last year and then the notable crime for the year is, we are significantly increased in the frauds and thefts and that has to do with mostly thefts of packages and mail theft so I have been tracking that for Council as well for 2020. Highlights from the Sheriff's office for the last couple of months and leading over into January, we had no notable law enforcement issue for the entire County for the November 3 General Election and also for the January 20 inauguration. Calls for service for the entire year. In 2019 we had 10,569 calls for patrol. In 2020, 10,477 which is a decrease of less than 1 % in spite of COVID compared to last year for 2019. The only other notable one was, everybody can remember the December 23 blizzard, and we typically have within the City of Chanhassen have between 60-80 calls for a typical weekend. On December 23 we had 83 calls in one day so we were a little busy. With that, I stand for questions. Mayor Ryan: Great. Thank you. Any questions, Council? I have one question. I get, just reading on social media a lot of people are curious and I'm hoping you can reiterate the importance of if a package is stolen off their front porch or there is mail theft of potential fraud, that it is okay to call the Sheriff's Office or the... Lt. Pearce: Absolutely. There's a misconception that doesn't mean anything but your name is on the package, your name is on your mail and that could translate left of your identity which translates into a whole bunch of other potential problems. So absolutely, if you're missing something, please call us. 9 Chanhassen City Council — January 25, 2020 Mayor Ryan: Okay. And I appreciate you clarifying that because a lot of time people think they should only call if it's an emergency and go about trying to find other ways to deal with it, so thank you for making that clarification. Lt. Pearce: Yes, absolutely. If you think something is missing or you are expecting something we can help you try tracking that down. Mayor Ryan: Thank you. And thank you for following that important trend in terms of domestic violence and mental health and bring that information back to us. It's very important. PUBLIC HEARING: CITY PAVEMENT REHABILITATION PROJECT NO.20-05: ORDER IMPROVEMENTS AND AUTHORIZE PREPARATION OF PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS George Bender: Good evening, Madam Mayor and Council members. Mayor Ryan: Good evening. Bender: This evening I would like to discuss our 2021 City Pavement Rehabilitation Project and on Zoom is our consultant, Chad Larson, as well if he is needed for any questions or any support. This remains Project No. 20-05. These are our project areas in gold here. There's 6.2 miles proposed street rehabilitation which will include some spot curb and gutter being completed. In addition, we will be doing some rehabilitation of public utilities. For example, that would include some water main gate valve maintenance where we have some valves that were installed in the late 80s early 90s that have mild steel bolts holding the bonnet together and those need to be changed out with stainless steel bolts due to the corrosive soils in Chanhassen. In addition, we will be doing some inflow and infiltration improvements in the sanitary sewer system. Regarding the storm sewer system, we will be rehabbing some structures an adding sump manholes to the system to improve water quality and minimize some maintenance for future pond cleanouts. In addition, throughout the roadways where needed we will be adding and/or replacing drain tile with the project. There is one pond cleanout project in the Trappers Pass area that is proposed to be cleaned out with this project and then, there's not many but where necessary, we will be doing ADA pedestrian ramp improvements with the project. The need for this project is driven by the City's goal to maintain a condition index of 70 throughout the network. Currently, we are just below that in this project would raise it to 72.3. That's an estimate but it would raise it back over our goal and keep us in the range that we want to me. One thing I kind of wanted to go back over is that this project was originally proposed in 2020. It was the same six areas. These areas, the design was completed and it was bid out but ultimately it was not awarded to the contractor to be constructed due to funding challenges of 2020. When we looked at these areas, what we want to do in 2021, we are proposing is, you know we considered that this was already designed. The need has not changed in these areas and the budget is in place in 2021 so that's why the same six areas are being re -proposed. The scope of the project, essentially there wasn't a whole lot to 10 Chanhassen City Council — January 25, 2020 change. We did notice a few things like a couple of sump manholes that we wanted to add, a couple things that we changed because we are updating our Detail Plates and Specifications, but the most major thing with did was add a pond cleanout in the Trappers Pass area. The reason for that is, in coordination with our Public Works Department, was identified that that should be done. Our Street Utility Superintendent worked with the contractor to see whether they could handle it or whether, because we didn't feel that it could be self -performed and at that point we decided to add it to the project. The feasibility study for this was updated for the project and that was accepted at the last Council meeting on January 11. At this point, I want to go into a general street project summary here. Any costs related to utilities are covered separately by Utility Enterprise funds so they are not included in the street breakdown costs which I will be going into. The costs related to the street are covered by a revolving assessment fund and that revenue stream is basically from the franchise fee, a tax levy, and from the private special assessments that are part of the street project funding. Franchise fees are charged by the electric and gas utility companies which utilize the right-of-way in Chanhassen to provide their services. Going into the City's assessment practice, that defines that the City will cover 60% of the costs related to the street and then benefitting properties will cover 40%. Minnesota State Statute 429 regulates the practice of assessments. The franchise fee revenue is being used again to cover a portion of the 60% portion that the City is responsible for. One thing that we wanted to point out that we hear commonly questioned and we want to make sure that we clarify from some members of the community inaccurately feel that the franchise fee revenue is not intended to offset the private property assessments. That is not the case. It is there simply to help cover the City portion. As I mentioned, we had six areas in this project that were highlighted on the bigger map and this will break down. We named the six neighborhoods for simple communication means but this is our Trappers Pass area. This is our largest area that we will be doing. This is the Marsh Drive area south of Highway 5. There's two other smaller areas; one is the Lake Lucy Road area east of Powers and the Redwing Lane area south of Carver Beach Road. Then there's the Kurver's Point Road area and the Choctaw Circle area. The one thing you will notice here is I had some yellow areas and some blue areas. The yellow areas are representing areas that will be full -depth reclamation so essentially we will grind up the entire pavement surface and replace it. The blue areas are mill and overlay areas where we will grind off a portion of the bituminous surface and replace it with the exact amount that we grind off. I did want to review a little bit some of the public engagement that's already been done just to provide the understanding of how many times the City has reached out. There's certainly been more and more opportunities for people to call and talk about it and get their questions answered but just a few things that have been done in 2020. Two separate postcard invitations went out to each property and they were invitations to two separate open houses that were hosted. One of those open houses was at the library in the wintertime and one was at Lake Ann Park in the middle of the summer. At these open houses there was the opportunity for residents to provide comments to us, either directly or through comment cards. There were two separate public notification letters that went out indicating the two public hearings that would take place during the process of getting the project to being able to be bid. In addition, we created a project information web page on the city's website which includes a Notify Me sign-up option so that anybody could be notified every time there's an update posted to that. One thing I didn't list here but I did want to mention because the 11 Chanhassen City Council — January 25, 2020 project did not move forward. There was a project cancellation letter that went out along with a Q&A regarding why the road projects were cancelled in 2020. In 2021, for this public hearing, another public notification letter went out to each property. We will be hosting another open house before the assessment hearing and a postcard invitation will go out regarding that as well and then one more additional publication letter prior to that assessment hearing and we will continue to update the project web page. At this point I would like to move into the budget real quickly. This is a $5.2 million project so it is significant. The revolving assessment fund as I mentioned earlier covers the City portion which is 60% of the costs related to the street which is essentially the project costs that are not related to utilities. So that's a little over $2.2 million just for the City's portion and another $1.5 million for the cost from the private portion that goes to the benefitting properties. That's 40% of the cost for the street costs per the City's assessment practice. There's a little under $.5 million being applied to the storm system and surface water utilities, $360,000 to the sanitary sewer system and $610,000 for the water utilities. This kind of breaks down the cost if you re -add up the numbers a little bit differently but street improvements is just under $3.8 million and that's just kind of going towards that street portion. Then the little bit of difference in these numbers is kind of related to the indirect costs and how they are broken out. But again, that's $5.2 million. To break down how the assessments, what the cost will be, the feasibility study included preliminary assessment rolls. In the summary of that for the 40% portion that's assessed is the Trappers Pass area is a little over $3,000, Redwing Lane is $2,000 about. Choctaw is in the same neighborhood. Marsh Drive is $2,200. Lake Lucy Road area if $3,000, and the Kurvers Point Road area is almost $4,300. One thing that we did want to make sure is clear, the assessments amounts were calculated based on the project -specific areas, not on a project -wide basis so that the cost being charged were representative of the work being done in the neighborhood. Here's our estimated schedule to bring this project to fruition. Tonight we are here to host the public hearing and order the contract documents moving forward. In a couple of weeks we will be back to approve the plans and specifications which are basically the minor changes that we wanted to make, and authorize the project to go to bid. A little over a month later we would have our bid opening and then following that we would be doing a neighborhood meeting which we are projecting to have virtually. We will do what we can. After that, at the April 26 meeting we would be having another public hearing which will be specific to the assessments and possibly award the construction contract. After road restrictions go off we would be hopefully starting the project early in May with a completion in 2021 before it freezes up in November. With that, staff recommends proceeding with the project and ordering the plans and specifications and approving the preliminary assessment rolls. With that, that will be the motion that we will be looking for tonight after the public hearing and we would be at the portion where I could either take some questions or you can open up the hearing to the public. Mayor Ryan: Thank you, Mr. Bender. For Haley and Lucy this is your first public hearing so I wanted to share with you the process of kind of how we do this. So we get the staff report and then I'll ask if Council has any questions, just based on the report that you were given of staff. Then open the public hearing to give opportunity for the public to speak. Close the public hearing, and then there's more opportunity for further questions and discussion so if you don't have any questions at this time, there's still more opportunity for questions. I just wanted to 12 Chanhassen City Council — January 25, 2020 clarify that. Thank you for the presentation. Council, before I open the public hearing, do you have any questions of staff? Councilman McDonald? McDonald: Yes, Mayor, I do. Mr. Bender, you already held at least one public meeting I believe for this year's projects, is that correct? Bender: We hosted two in 2020 related to this project but we did not have an open house as of yet in 2021 and of course, this is the first public hearing. McDonald: At this point, notice has gone out that this project is going to be taking place? Bender: Yes. Every property has received a public notification letter about the project which includes notification of this evening's meeting. McDonald: Have you gotten any feedback from residents about the project, about either the cost or why us type questions? Bender: I have. I have a log in front of me that I intend to share this evening as kind of the public hearing portion of it. If you want me to go through that now, I can. But I've received a total of 10 emails and calls to date. McDonald: Okay. I can wait for you to share that as part of the public hearing. That would be fine. I just wanted to know if you have received any comments or feedback yet. Bender: Yep. McDonald: I have no further questions at this time, Madam Mayor. Mayor Ryan: Thank you. Councilwoman Rehm, any questions at this time? Rehm: I have no questions at this time. Thank you. Mayor Ryan: Councilwoman Schubert? Schubert: No. Mayor Ryan: Councilman Campion? Campion: No. Mayor Ryan: Okay. Just a couple of points of clarification. I know you are going to read the comments that you have received. Again, for historical perspective, there are two new council members, these projects were planned for last year and that was kind of at the peak of everything 13 Chanhassen City Council — January 25, 2020 with COVID and the concerns of people losing their jobs or potential and there was just a lot of, I guess, fear in the community and the country. So, as a Council we decided to postpone all road projects for last year. That's why they are coming back this year but it is the same ones that reviewed last year. I just wanted to give a little bit of background on that. A second piece is that's what you mean when you talk about funding challenges, right? Was from the perspective of residents, not funding challenges for the City? Bender: Yes. Mayor Ryan: Okay. I just wanted to clarify that. Then, the last piece from communication, and we can get into this later, I know there was some feedback last year that some of the postcards. I don't know if it was the graphics or the names of the streets, but there was feedback that some of the streets weren't on the postcard and so they didn't feel like they had been notified correctly. So I remember that it caused a little bit of confusion, specifically in the Trappers Pass area. I don't think all of the roads that were going to be touched were identified so they kind of came into it at the eleventh hour and didn't feel that they were part of the process in terms of neighborhood meetings. So when you look at your communications if you wouldn't mind just double checking that the streets are accurately identified as part of the communication. It would be appreciated. Bender: Yes, no problem. Mayor Ryan: Okay. Thank you. With that, I will go ahead and I hereby open the public hearing. Please step forward and state your name and address for the record. We also have our phone line open for anyone that wants to call in and the number is on the screen but 952-227-1630 and we will wait a couple of minutes to see if anyone calls in. If not, then Mr. Bender if you want to read the comments into the public hearing at that time because we have nobody here in the chambers. Charlie Howley: [answers phone] Good evening. You are live on the Chanhassen City Council meeting. Please state your name and address for the record and provide your comment. Richard Hamblin: This is Richard Hamblin, 340 Sinnen Circle here in Chanhassen. The proposal for the street rehabilitation is unnecessary I think. I think it's overkill. In fact, if you look at the Marsh Drive area, the streets in that area are no worse than Lake Drive, which is the main artery that feeds these areas, and that street is not part of the project. So, in my opinion, if that's not needed for repair, neither is the rest of the Marsh Drive project. Howley: Okay, Richard. That's your comment? We'll answer it after we get through all the comments, if that's okay? Hamblin: Okay, fine. 14 Chanhassen City Council — January 25, 2020 Howley: Okay. Stay watching the video so we can make sure we answer it. Are you still there? There's nobody else on there. Mayor Ryan: Is there another call? We'll leave the number open, or the line open and the number will remain on the screen. At this time we are going to move forward with the comments that were submitted via email to the Engineering Department and then if a call comes in while you are reading it, we will just take a pause in reading them, answer the phone call, and add it to the list. Bender: I received a call from a Pamela Murphy, 8021 Hidden Court in the Marsh Drive area. Essentially, she expressed that she would prefer to see the project put on hold for another year because the pandemic is not under control yet and people are still not working. The assessment would essentially be another hardship and the neighborhood streets are in good enough condition to wait. I received an email from Eric Anderson at 6580 Troendle Circle in the Lake Lucy Road area. Eric expressed support for the project and the proposed assessment. He indicated that neighborhood streets are in poor condition and need to be rehabilitated in order to support the value of the neighboring property. I received a call from Bob Ayotte at 6213 Cascade Pass. We discussed some funding questions but generally he is in support of the street rehabilitation project and feels it is needed. I received a call from Erica Arne at 40 Basswood Circle. She had a question related to drainage and storm pond near their property and I responded to their questions. It was more of a comment related to the improvements. She was not for or against the project or didn't indicate one way or the other. I received a call from Frank Zimmerman at 6291 Near Mountain Boulevard in the Trappers Pass area. He included an email and an attachment and he gave a multitude of reasons why he believes the special assessment should not be charged to fund the project. He agreed that doing nothing was probably not the best approach but he does not feel that the funding mechanism of utilizing special assessments is the way that the City should be charging for the work. There was follow up after I responded to him and Mr. Zimmerman wanted to hear this evening a rationalization for essentially spending more money than we have and the motivation behind it. I received an email from Diana Davis at 6387 Oxbow Bend in the Trappers Pass area. She supported the project, indicating that the poor conditions of the street devalue their property. She also indicated that she wishes the City paid a larger portion of the improvement because they pay a lot of taxes. In follow up, we talked about the assessment options for repayment and I explained to her that one option was to put it on property taxes and pay it off over a period of 8 years, which she thought was good and hopes that everybody know that before they make their decision. I received an email from Robert Langley at 8134 Dakota Lane in the Marsh Drive area. He does not support the project due to the assessment burden and the financial impacts of COVID-19 on their budget. I received a call from Christine Ostbye at 71 Twin Maple Lane in the Kurvers Point area. This was more of an improvement question related to requesting drain tile along Twin Maple Lane. There was no commentary regarding being for or against the improvements. I let her know that as part of the design there is drain tile planned along Twin Maple Lane to be added and she was happy to hear that. I received an email from Sandy Carlson at 7271 Kurvers Point Road. This was another improvement inquiry that was related to two ponds in the Kurvers Point Road area and requesting that they be cleaned out. I 15 Chanhassen City Council — January 25, 2020 received this this afternoon and I forwarded that concern on to our Water Resources to kind of research that and get back to the resident. There was one other call that I received. That was nine that I just had. This was one that did not want to be on the project record but they were supportive of the project. To kind of tally up a little bit, there was four for the project, three were against the project, and three commented or questioned improvements. Mayor Ryan: Great. Thank you, Mr. Bender. Bender: One other piece of information that I kind of wanted to add to that to compare this to 2020. At the same public hearing related to improvements we had 39 calls and emails. Mayor Ryan: Okay. Thank you for that statistic. That's important information so thank you. Howley: Madam Mayor, maybe an answer Mr. Hamblin, the guy who just called in? His question about Lake Drive East being just as bad as Marsh Drive. We would love to do that as well but that's a budget decision. We can't just go and do every road we want to. Lake Drive East is an MSA route so that would be funded by the MSA and that is scheduled for 2023. Mayor Ryan: Thank you, Mr. Howley, I was going to ask you to share that information that it is an MSA route so I appreciate that. No more phone calls? I want to make sure that we are good to go before I close the public hearing and bring it back. If there is, leave it open for. Thank you, with no more phone calls, thank you for reading the other comments into the record and nobody here in the chambers I hereby close the public hearing. I keep hearing beeps? Howley: No, that was. Sorry. [phone rings] Oh, we got someone. Shall we give it a go? Mayor Ryan: Yes, please. Howley: Good evening. You're live at the Chanhassen City Council meeting. This is the public hearing for the 2021 Street Improvement Project. Please state your name and address for the record and your comment. Hamblin: Yes, this is Richaard Hamblin, 340 Sinnen Circle. I heard the response in regard to Lake Drive. If we're going to prioritize cost, what I would say is do Lake Drive first. That by far carries the most traffic. The other residential areas don't have the traffic and so they are not wearing as fast. That's my comment. Mayor Ryan: Mr. Hamblin, if you wouldn't mind staying on the call right now. I'm going to have Mr. Howley just explain the difference between Lake Drive East and that road and the cost associated with where that funding comes from versus a residential street and road. So if you wouldn't mind just staying on the call in case you have a follow-up question you might as well just stay on the line. Mr. Howley, could you answer the question please? Chanhassen City Council — January 25, 2020 Howley: Yes, Madam Mayor and Councilmembers. We have a certain number of roads in the City that are collector -type roads, meaning they carry more traffic is the term he used, not the neighborhood roads, and when they are identified as collectors we can identify them as Municipal State Aid routes, MSA for short. By doing that, we are allowed to obtain funding every year from the state which comes from gas tax revenue and things like that and it's portioned out to all the cities who are over 5,000 people in population and it's used to maintain and repair and reconstruct those State Aid routes. [phone rings] Is that you, Mr. Hamblin? Hamblin: Yeah, I'm sorry. I dropped the call. Howley: Okay. We have a lot of needs in repairing roads and we want to leverage our MSA dollars to the best of our ability and so we wouldn't necessarily want to take our revolving assessment fund money to do an MSA road. We want to fund the MSA projects with the MSA funds and we want to fund our local roads with our revolving assessment funds. That's why even when we prioritize, we don't prioritize a collector street versus a local street. We want to keep the funding segregated and prioritized within those funds. That answers? Mayor Ryan: Yeah. Hamblin: I understand that portion; however, I do support the person who said the assessment ratio is probably a little skewed heavy toward the residential. I would recommend that that be looked at as well. Howley: What he is referring to there, Madam Mayor and Council, is the 60% city pay, 40% assessed to the benefitting properties. That' our policy and we uniformly use that policy on assessable projects until the policy changes. Mayor Ryan: Perfect. Hamblin: Who has the authority to change the policy? Mayor Ryan: The City Council does. Hamblin: Okay, so that was the assumption that residents would have to bring before the Council, I assume? Mayor Ryan: Correct. Yes. Hamblin: Okay. All right. I got it. Mayor Ryan: Great. Thank you very much for calling. I appreciate it. Howley: Nothing's ringing. 17 Chanhassen City Council — January 25, 2020 Mayor Ryan: Well, it's closed but I'm glad he called back because I thought he might have a follow-up question so I appreciate him calling back. I know you've been around for a while, Mr. Bender. How far back does the policy go for the 60/40 percent. Any ideas? Bender: I couldn't tell you how far exactly it goes back. I can tell you the last time it was updated was 2014 and I would have to look back at exactly what those updates were. I don't believe it changed the split between 60 and 40. I think it was more changing language and improving the frequently asked questions but I know it's been around a long time. I'm trying to remember off the top of my head whether it says it on it, when it came about. Kate, do you happen to remember that at all? Aanenson: No, I don't. Mayor Ryan: Okay. It was just, I mean I didn't know if you knew off the top of your head how long that policy has been in place. Obviously, it was I think 2018, Councilman McDonald? Councilman Campion? 2018 that we approved the franchise fee, right to pay for, to increase the amount we could spend for the 60% to get up to the $3.6 million. Howley: Madam Mayor and Council, I think you considered it in 2018 and finally adopted it in 2019 because we didn't get the funding until 2020, which was partially your funding. We will certainly find out when the City established the 60/40 split policy and send that out to you just so you are aware. We'll look that up for you. Mayor Ryan: Okay. I appreciate it. McDonald: If I could, Madam Mayor, I've been on Council 2007 and it was 60/40 then and it was 60/40 before I came in so it's been in place for a number of years. Mayor Ryan: Okay. Perfect. Thank you for that clarification. If you get dates it would just be interesting for us to know that policy. You got it, Mr. Bender? Quick. Bender: It is in the frequently asked questions so if anybody's really curious about the assessment practice you can go to the City's website and in the search box in the upper right- hand corner type assessment practice and that will get you to not only the practice itself but also this frequently asked questions document that's currently on the screen which indicates on the third question that 1993 is the answer. Mayor Ryan: Perfect. Wonderful. Well, thank you. The FAQ, that sheet was developed as part of the franchise fee process that we went through, right? Does it include the discussion on franchise fee? Is it that document? Chanhassen City Council — January 25, 2020 Bender: I believe that is incorrect. This was in place when I started and the franchise fee discussion kind of came to the forefront after I started. This document has been in place longer than that. Mayor Ryan: Just for public knowledge I think it's important. I know we did, this is an important document on assessments but there still seems to be some questions about franchise fees, how those are used, how we arrived at that decision and I believe that document is still out on our website. I would encourage folks to take a look at that as well. Thank you, residents for calling in. Go ahead, Mr. Campion. Do you have a question? Campion: Madam Mayor, I just wanted to make a comment along those lines. When we were contemplating the franchise fee back in 2018, we did talk about changing the assessment practice and potentially assessing less to residents or potentially covering the entire street improvement through a franchise fee. Either of those options got pretty heavy objections from the public because the people's road who had been repaired in the last few years, or no matter how many years you go back to 1993 and then come forward and say, well I was assessed more. Now you need to compensate me when you're going to charge these other residents less. Just for the record I thought I would bring that up. Mayor Ryan: Thank you, Councilman Campion. I think that's an important thing to bring up. We did have a lot of discussion around that, if we should change the policy, and we got a lot of pushback in terms of the assessment and making any changes to the assessment. But if residents want to bring something forward we always encourage you to do so. Feel free to do that but thank you for that clarification. Mr. Bender, I have one other question you had brought up in your presentation when you talked about project need, and maybe this is something we can identify specific to Marsh Drive because I think those were the ones that were in opposition. You made note that our goal is 70 or72 and I'm guessing just the average is 69, but do we know what the OCI rating in Marsh Drive is because I think it's important for all of us, especially for new Council members, that we don't typically do road projects when roads are at 69. They are usually considerably lower so I just want to make sure that we clarify that point, that the roads were not 69. Maybe that's an average but where is Marsh Drive? Howley: Madam Mayor and Council, you're right. That 69 is city-wide average, not 2020 project. George has on his PowerPoint the exact OCIs of the Marsh Drive area and all six areas if we wanted to look at them. If they want to put the PowerPoint back up. There we go. Basically, it ranges from 27 on the low end to 39 on the high end. So these need repair. Mayor Ryan: Right. And I think that's important for us when we are making this assessment to understand what those numbers are because we don't, unless there's the need when we go through this process of evaluating roads, we really look at those numbers so for clarification, it's kind of hard to read on the screen but you said the low end was 27 so that, the goal as a city, which again we recently in the last couple of years evaluated is 70 is still the target number of the OCI rating we want to hold as a City standard as kind of our policy and we agreed that 70 19 Chanhassen City Council — January 25, 2020 was an appropriate number meaning 100 is. I want to make your that you and Ms. Rehm are on the understanding that 100 is a perfect newly -constructed perfect road and so 70 is where we have determined as Council as the road kind of our average road. So these roads sit well below 70. I just wanted to make that point of clarification. With that, let me see if there are any other questions. Councilman McDonald, any other questions for staff at this time? McDonald: I guess one of the things that Mr. Bender brought up that I would like to put on record a little bit. You talked about being able to finance this and I think you said the period was 8 years. Would you explain, what are we looking at? What would be the interest rate that the City charges? Typically on a project like this if you add it to your property taxes, do you know what that amount would be on a yearly basis. Bender: In this case I haven't calculated that specific to this project. Just bringing up quickly what the current prime rate is. The Wall Street Journal has it at 3.25% so the assessment practice states that 2% would be added to that so the interest rate offered to the residents would be 5.25% if this going today. The street costs as they breakdown go to that assessment number that I explained previously and showed. Then that would be broken out at over an 8-year period on their property taxes if they choose not to pay it off up front. The one thing that we work with the Finance Department on to help explain the 5.25% may be a little bit high but it's calculated at a simple interest, not a compound interest. Usually to get that number, if I get that from a resident, I put then in contact with the Finance Department and they get that question answered correctly for them. They're the experts at that part. McDonald: Okay. Thank you. At least you've given enough detail that kind of lays out what the process is and how we arrive at the numbers that we are going to arrive at. As you say it's simple interest so it does make it a fairly easy calculation. Thank you. Mayor Ryan: And as follow up on that. So if the project goes this year and they decide to put it on your property taxes then they wouldn't be paying in until 2022. Howley: I believe that is true. Bender: I believe they have to pay it off by a certain date in 2021. I think they have to pay it off the year that they are doing it, honestly. I think that's in the assessment practice, too. If they are financing it, correct, then the first payment would go in 2022. Mayor Ryan: I'm sorry. If they put it on their property taxes and they are financing it, they it would come on, I remember talking about this last year when you were talking about delaying it that they wouldn't have to pay until 2021 so I just want to clarify that if they decide to go that way it would be 2022. Okay, Bender: I misunderstood. Sorry. 20 Chanhassen City Council — January 25, 2020 Mayor Ryan: No worries. Councilman McDonald, did you have any further questions? McDonald: No further questions at this time, Mayor. Mayor Ryan: Councilwoman Rehm, any questions? Rehm: No. I just wanted to point out that it was a very helpful PowerPoint to see it all laid out like that. That was very helpful. No comments or questions at this time. Mayor Ryan: Thank you. Councilwoman Schubert. Any questions or comments? Schubert: No other questions. Mayor Ryan: Great. Thank you. Councilman Campion? Campion: No further questions. Thank you. Mayor Ryan: All right. I don't have any further questions either. Thank you for the presentation and answering the questions and reading the comments that you received into the record. I appreciate that. With that, is there? If you won't mind putting the motion back up on the screen? Thank you. I would entertain a motion, please. McDonald: Mayor Ryan, I'm trying to remember what we did last year on this. I'm not sure if I can vote on this because I live within the area so I believe that I need to recuse myself from a vote. Ryan: You can vote for the plans and specs but I think you can't vote on the final... Howley: Mayor Ryan, if I remember correctly, that was the guidance that you've got to recuse from the assessment hearing, adoption of those. But to move forward with the plans and specs. Resolution 2021-02: Councilwoman Schubert moved and Councilwoman Rehm seconded that the City Council orders improvements and preparation of plans and specifications for the 2021 City Pavement Rehabilitation Project No. 20-05. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5-0. Mayor Ryan: Again, that's just to move forward with the plans and specs and it will again come back to the Council for final approval and there will be another public hearing and opportunity for residents to provide feedback. If you do have questions either about the project specifically, please call our Engineering Department. If you have questions specific to the financing, please contact our Finance Department. Thank you for that. 21 Chanhassen City Council — January 25, 2020 NEW BUSINESS: CITY MANAGER CONTRACT Mayor Ryan: Next up, we have the City Manager contract. As many of you know, we have former City Manager Todd Gerhardt last summer and we have had an interim city manager for the past many months. During that time we began a process to hire a full-time city manager. We hired a recruiting firm, staffing firm, to walk us through the process, identify candidates to bring back to the Council to review. We've been going through this process for the past many months. Just this past week we interviewed for our final four candidates so that is where we are at right now. We had a discussion earlier in the evening at our work session to continue the conversation about the candidates that were recently interviewed. I will wait for a Council member to potentially make a motion here but what was discussed in the work session is that we still needed more time to discuss as a Council. We have four great candidates but there was just some more conversation that needed to be had following our work session. So our intent, unless there was a change which is obviously possible, but the intent was to continue that conversation after our Council meeting back in the work session for further conversation. With that, if there is a Council member that would like to make a motion at this time I would entertain that? McDonald moved and Campion seconded to table the City Manager Contract until after Council has had the opportunity to deliberate further on our selection and our choices. All voted in favor and the motioned carried unanimously 5-0. NEW BUSINESS: OVERVIEW OF USE OF TAX INCREMENT FINANCING Aanenson: The next three items are related, all relating around a project we have been talking about TIF on. To give you a background on the TIF we actually have our financial consultant, Nick with Ehlers is on the line and he is going to screen share and go through a presentation. With that, we will also talk about if we were to proceed with the TIF District, the next steps that we have to do so you can be thinking about that as we go through the project itself and then the final part of that is actually a grant request. With that, if we could put Nick on? There he is. Nick Anhut: Thank you, Mayor and Council. My name is Nick Anhut with Ehlers & Associates and I am going to share my screen with a brief presentation to give you some background on the use of tax increment financing in general. I plan to go over why provide public assistance in the first place. Why cities would choose to implement tools such as tax increment. Talk about how the City of Chanhassen protects it's local financial resources, and then break out into an overview of what this tool actually is. Some of the nuts and bolts components of tax increment financing. How it can be used and what it's derived from and then we will wrap up with the public process component. There are statutorial steps that need to be met in order to implement this tool. So fundamentally, a city is going to use it's financial resources to provide assistance to projects that have financial barriers. Something where the private marketplace is not able to overcome on it's own. Obviously, it would also be something that is in line with a city's vision for a piece of property or an area within the city. An example of why this might be the case is fundamentally that a project, when it's built, it's rents or it's projected rents that it can charge to 22 Chanhassen City Council — January 25, 2020 either it's tenants or other users of the facility. Those rents are too low to support the debt and investment that's necessary up front to pay for the cost of the project. Now this can be for a number of reasons. It could be for contamination on the site, an inordinate amount of costs that you wouldn't see on other pieces of property or other areas or other communities. It could be due to high development fees, infrastructure that's necessary to build the site on a certain location and provide access to those potential consumers. Or it could be inclusion of affordability parameters, meaning that we are trying to target an audience of tenants and limit the rent or the price that they pay to live in a certain area. That in and of itself could create a gap, if you will, where the income created from the project does not overcome the overall cost. Communities are going to do this in order to meet various public policy objectives, creating employment and attraction of higher paying consumers, tax base growth, perhaps redeveloping blighted sites or underutilized sites throughout the city that have been ignored for a long period of time. Another key factor for this discussion is to improve housing availability and provide choice and options to the residents of Chanhassen, a place to live that is affordable. In addition, cities utilize these types of tools in order to just improve community quality of life in general and to finance infrastructure needs associated with some of these developments. Any time we are considering the use of public financing we want to protect the resources of the community and with the use of tax increment there is actually a statutory guideline and test associated with the use of this tool. So within the statute there's what's called a but for test, or but for the use of tax increment there would not be a reasonable expectation that this development would happen in the private marketplace. So this but for test, it's first component is a finding by the City Council. It's a city approval process. The City Council will find that a proposed development would not reasonable be expected to occur solely through private investment without the assistance. A second part of the test for certain types of projects is that the increased market value expected from that new development, net of any public assistance that's provided, is still going to be higher than a reasonable alternative use of the site. So essentially that is you have a project that's going to come about but it has a high price tag in terms of local subsidy to make it happen, if the city has a reasonable alternative that provides a greater benefit than it's not meeting the but for test to provide assistance to the first request. Now this test is actually not applicable to incidents where there is affordable housing and as you can imagine, by keeping rents affordable we are actually lowering the potential value of the project. If it was all market rate pricing we would expect because there is higher income generated from those rents, that the value of that property is going to be higher. So the policymakers at the State, when they wrote the statute, decided not to apply this test in the case of affordable housing. For past projects in Chanhassen, we've also not just relied on those findings but we actually performed a gap analysis to substantiate meeting the first component of that but for test. The expectation that the private market would be unable to accommodate this development on it's own. For that, we require a review of the developer's tax increment application and financial information in the form of their pro forma for the project. This is a detailed analysis of all the project costs that are anticipated, the expected rents and their comparisons to market rate rents, as well as all the sources of financing. That analysis helps determine A) is there a gap in the private financing, and then B) also ensure that private parties are actually maximizing those private resources we would expect them to generate in terms of a mortgage on the property as well as the type of cash or other investment we would expect up 23 Chanhassen City Council — January 25, 2020 front anticipating the future returns from the income stream generated from the project. This process helps right -size the amount of public assistance needed to make that project feasible and defend that but for test. So to get to the point of what we are discussing, what is tax increment financing? Ultimately, TIF, as it is known, is the ability to capture and utilize most, not all, but most of the increased property tax revenue derived from a new development and it is defined to a specific geography defined by parcels. We will draw a map when we create a new TIF district and include a specific amount of parcels and that district is limited to those locations. Now when I said most of the increased property tax revenue, there are some exclusions. For commercial property, both the state property tax as well as fiscal disparities contributions are excluded. In addition, the school has an operating referendum that is also not captured as tax increment, so that funding stream for the school will be increased when a TIF project comes about because it will increase the amount of taxes available for that stream regardless of the capture of the rest of the tax increment revenue. This creating of a revenue stream allows the city to assist in financing a project, or providing the up -front funding necessary to pay for that gap in costs that was mentioned earlier. This is all authorized within the TIF Act, as it's known, Chapter 469, Sections 174-1794. As a brief overview of the preceding slide, just to give some feel for these taxes and how they are generated, I do have a chart on the screen that show the before, during and after, if you will, for a piece of property that is included within a TIF district. The blue area at the bottom represents the base taxes or those taxes that are being paid the property today before a TIF district is implemented. Those taxes, that value continues to be on the city, the county, and the school districts general tax base, so any time that the city, the county, and the school district are adopting their levies every year and spreading that over their tax base, they will continue to be able to utilize that. It will not be captured within the tax increment financing district. Those revenues will continue to flow to fund operations of all of the local jurisdictions using the property tax. But when the project is constructed and built and that value of the property increases related to that construction, all that value is captured within the TIF district and it is segregated as a separate revenue stream that flows to the city. The property still pays it taxes just like it would for any other like development within the community. Those taxes are set based on the local tax rates in effect for every year so it will continue to change as tax rates increase or decrease over the life of the district. But that revenue derived from that is segregated and it is separately disbursed by the county after they collect it, directly to the city so that the city can utilize it to help in the financing that it was obligated at the onset. Over the life of the district, those taxes will be segregated and collected. They can be collected based on policy and the need for the project for as much as 26 years in the case of an affordable housing TIF district. Other TIF districts have shorter timeframes but the maximum statutory term is 26 years in the case of housing. At the end of the life of the TIF district, either when it meets that statutory maximum or if it is able to be decertified earlier because it's provided enough revenue to meet the financing obligation, all of that value then reverts to the general tax base for each of the city, county, and school district and it gets included in those calculations for those levies. So during this period, what I would describe it for everyone is you're not actually pulling revenues away from the city, the county, or the school district and providing them to pay for the development, you are actually deferring the benefit. When the TIF district decertifies, all of a sudden you will have a larger tax base than you started with, and everyone who is paying property taxes will have a lower tax right 24 Chanhassen City Council — January 25, 2020 because there is now a new project, a new development that is in the fold once that TIF district decertifies. It will not impact your ability to levy the taxes that you need to maintain your operations from here going forward. To further provide some numbers to color these slides, again the property pays it's taxes just like any other type of like development within the community at the same rate based on it's value. It's just those taxes get distributed differently than a property on the general tax rolls. Just by way of an example for a rental housing development within the city, we expect that this development will generate about $215,927 in annual property taxes. Of that amount, as you see the line that says base value taxes, about just under $9,000 of that amount is what the property is paying today essentially and what will continue to flow to help pay for operations as a vacant site with no buildings on it. But, $31,000 of that total amount will not be captured and held within the TIF district. It will actually provide funding to the school's operating referendum because that specific revenue stream is protected or excluded from tax increment. The rest of the taxes will be distributed back to the city and help in financing the project. So there are different types of TIF districts and each one has their own qualifying activities, limits, and statutory exemptions involved. They fall into these general categories. One is to essentially re -do substandard or obsolete buildings. A redevelopment or a renewal and renovation TIF district can help in providing financing for those types of project. A housing TIF district can provide financing for affordable housing projects as I will get into in a future slide. There's also another form of TIF district called an economic development TIF district that can provide certain types of jobs and tax base creation within the community, primarily for manufacturing, industrial, warehousing, and distribution type jobs. That is a tool that the city could utilize to help incentivize the businesses and create some new jobs within the community. Specifically, to a housing tax increment financing district, the maximum term, as I mentioned, is up to 26 years. Again, up to. That is to be decided based on the financial obligation that's necessary to build a project and it's exclusively designed to assist affordable housing that can be either rental housing in the form of apartments, townhomes, or it could be owner - occupied housing. It could actually be utilized for single-family homes. In the case of rental projects, the building itself has to meet either of two affordability tests. Either 40% of the units need to be set aside for occupancy to individuals or families that are at or below 60% of the area median income. The second test is a lower percentage, 20% of the units need to be set aside but they need to be limited at 50% of the area median income. As long as the project meets those minimums, it can qualify to be included within an affordable housing TIF district. Now these tests are annual tests that are ongoing for the life of the TIF district and in order to continue to use the property taxes generated from the development, the city will need to prove compliance and it's typically passed through to the developer to do so on an annual basis. A 100% of the increment that's created needs to be used for affordable housing needs or it's administration but the project itself doesn't have to be exclusively an affordable housing development. There can, there is an allowance so that up to 20% of the assisted development's value can include commercial or some other mixed use on the property. Lastly, one item that I will mention that is exclusive to a housing TIF district is it has no pooling restrictions. What I mean by pooling is that any uncommitted TIF, so TIF that was not deemed necessary to finance this particular project within the TIF district, can still be collected and utilized to assist other off -site affordable housing needs throughout the community. So there are a potential to use a tool derived from one 25 Chanhassen City Council — January 25, 2020 project to assist another. That is exclusive to a housing TIF district. Now, we've created a revenue stream by creating the TIF district. How can that revenue actually be utilized to assist in building a project? There's really two different buckets to think about in terms of that and it relies on who's providing the up -front funding. The city has utilized a pay-as-you-go TIF note in the past and this is essentially a tool where the developer will provide 100% of the funding up front. All of the costs to build the project will be paid but a portion of those will be reimbursed from the city's tax increment that is collected over time. It's called a pay-as-you-go note and a no -risk note in the sense that there is really no risk to the city in that instance as long as the developer builds the project and creates and pays the taxes necessary, the city will then remit the funds to reimburse the developer's investment. It does not have any obligation to kick in any additional funding from a separate source, and it has no obligation to provide any time that is not actually created if the development were not to get off the ground or if the taxes came in lower than anticipated. All of that risk falls on the developer. A different way of providing the funding is if the city were to incur some of the risk to provide maybe some more economic feasibility or more streamlined approach to provide funding for infrastructure, the city can take some risk and incur some of those costs and repay itself from the future tax increments. You can do so either through and interfund loan where you've got funds on hand, maybe in a reserve, that you can utilize to pay for an infrastructure and then repay yourself over time from the increment that's created, or the city could actually issue debt in the form of general obligation or revenue bonds and pay those bonds off with the future tax increment collections. The last bit that I will get to and then you can be rid of me is just a recap of the public process involved with creating a TIF district. As I mentioned, it is up to the city council. It's a city process to do that but there are some unique components to it. Ultimately, a public hearing is going to be held at the council level for any TIF district or any modification to a TIF district in the future, and it requires their approval. It requires them to adopt what's called a tax increment financing plan. The plan is essentially a document internal to the city that establishes the purpose of the TIF district, the public policy objectives, the geography or the boundaries, those parcels that are going to be included within it, and it also establishes a budget for the anticipated tax increment revenues and how they are going to be utilized to pay for the project or projects, if you will. That TIF plan is created and needs to be submitted to the county and the school district, their governing bodies, 30 days prior to the public hearing that's being held. Both of those entities do not have any say or formal approval of the TIF district itself, but they can provide comments to the city to inform it's decisions. In addition, the Planning Commission is also tasked to review the tax increment financing plan and confirm whether or not the proposed project within that plan complies with the city's general plans for development within the community, whether it has obtained the approvals necessary to move forward and doesn't conflict with any land use regulations for the site. In addition, in the City of Chanhassen the EDA plays a role as well as the administering arm of the tax increment financing. So the EDA does itself actually review and provide a recommendation to the Council in that public hearing whether or not to adopt and move forward with creating the TIF district. That concludes all of my comments. We have also included a proposed schedule of events within the Council's packet and I am happy to go over any of this or answer any of your questions at this time or after the project discussion. Thank you. all Chanhassen City Council — January 25, 2020 Mayor Ryan: Thank you, Nick. I appreciate that presentation. Go ahead, Ms. Aanenson. Aanenson: I think if Nick can stay on the line we will go through the project and then kind of explain what we previously talked about in some work sessions regarding TIF and the maybe Nick can then go through the formal timeline if that's your goal to move forward. Mayor Ryan: Perfect. Before we get to the project specific, I know some of us have gone through TIF before but I just wanted to make sure to see if there is any questions from either Councilwoman Rehm of Councilwoman Schubert for Nick at this time. Campion: Madam Mayor, I actually do have one question. I thought it was a great presentation, Nick and though I seen, been educated on TIF before there was some stuff from that presentation that jumped out at me. So for the TIF classifications, there was housing, the economic development and the redevelopment, right? Those were the three? Do you have similar thresholds as you lay down for the housing on the, is the maximum payback term from an economic development district, is that also 26 years. Anhut: Each one actually has its own limits. Economic development is only, it's limited to 9 years as a maximum. Redevelopment TIF district, if it meets the qualification of having substandard buildings, can go as long as 26 years, just like a housing TIF district. There is also another, it's a renewal and renovation sort of a redevelopment like, TIF district and that one can go as long as 16 years. Campion: One follow-up question. So on the economic development district, is there a threshold you know like the 20/60, 40/60, 20/50? Is there something like that for the economic development that has to create a number of jobs of something like that to qualify? Anhut: For economic development, it does have to comply with the city's business subsidy policy so if you do have a local policy that guides how many jobs need to be created based on the amount of assistance that's given to a project, it does have to comply with that; however, there are no statutory minimums so it is a local policy driven focus. However, it is limited in the types of development that you can assist so as I mentioned there are specific manufacturing, distribution, industrial jobs that are limited to your typical retail developments will not qualify for that economic development TIF... Aanenson: If I may, Mayor and Council members. For the new people for your edification we have done three different districts here in the last few years so maybe I could summarize kind of what Nick was saying. So if you look at the Emerson project that we did with DEED, they had to provide wages that would meet the qualifications so they were doing some expansions over at Emerson so we participated with the State of Minnesota on that one. Then a blight or redevelopment one would... on part of the Dinner Theatre, so that was a different type. And then so this is the third type that we're looking a housing which I don't think we've done a housing one for quite a while. Those are three different examples. 27 Chanhassen City Council — January 25, 2020 Campion: That's helpful. Thanks. Aanenson: Yes. It seems like a long time ago that we did the Emerson one. To Nick's point, you have to audit those all the time and the state does too to make sure what they presented or represented is true. So, with that, I'll proceed with the... Mayor Ryan: Councilwoman Rehm, did you have any questions? Rehm: No. No, I don't have any questions at this time. Thank you. NEW BUSINESS: APPROVE A REOUEST FOR A SITE PLAN REVIEW AND VARIANCE FOR A 110-UNIT APARTMENT BUILDING FOR SENIOR LIVING LOCATED AT 1361 LAKE DRIVE WEST (POWERS RIDGE APARTMENTS) Aanenson: I'll circle back with Nick as we get to, I've got a placeholder for a TIF slide here. This is Lake Place, Powers Ridge. As you recall, we talked about this early this summer as this project was to go forward. A public hearing was held at the Planning Commission on January 5 and it is before you now. There are actually three requests with this project. One is for site plan approval. The other is for a variance for the building height and then for the TIF request itself. So the location on Lake Drive West, this is part of, there is existing buildings here. This is the last one of the buildings. The first two were built. This one was the most recent one and this is the infill piece and this is just over three acres in size. So, this was the project, Lake Susan Hills, the entire project was approved in 1987 and had quite a few units in it. Over 400 single family. This is the part that was guided high density. As I mentioned, these three buildings were constructed, then the senior building, and this one was entitled for 88 units. Again, the high density one came back through in the year 2000 so all the buildings were given site plan approval, but the reason that this is before you now, this building did not come back because they met all the original site plan approvals so those stayed in perpetuity. Because this one is changing up they are staying within that footprint but they want the additional density that's coming back for your review in an amendment to the PUD. The site plan itself as I mentioned is staying within that same footprint. Again, they are asking for the additional units to do that. In looking at that, we went back and looked at what the original approval was and it did allow for more overall units. So looking at that the density allocation under the comprehensive plan says you can do that but then there's the requirement that you provide affordable housing, which is what we discussed earlier this summer and into the fall, talking about that. So staff, based on additional units and what we were looking at for the expectation for assistance would be to get to the area median income, so it would be 50 units. I know there was some question about the number of units so there will be a total of 110 and 50 of those would have to meet the area median income and we will go into the details of that in a minute. But the building again stays within the same footprint I think which was a little bit of a challenge and that forced the height requirement. I'll let the developer talk a little bit more about that. A little bit taller ceilings and a little bit more architectural detail than the first two buildings. So again, there was some combined parking with some of the other, all Chanhassen City Council — January 25, 2020 the associations would be combined so there is crossover parking with this one. Because it is now senior apartments the parking ratio is slightly less so they can meet all the parking. Actually they do exceed the parking standards. Again, the building material consists of masonry either Black Hills Velour brick. They still are working on those types. The material samples are on the microphone table? I was going to say dais, but that's up here. He can put the overhead camera on too. There you go. So, I think while it is slightly different, it meets today's kind of look and so it does have the street presence. Again, highly articulated, and the Planning Commission did recommend approval of those changes. Again, the building elevations and the signage. It does have that presence. That collector street. So the garage floor plans, I'm not sure if you're looking at all the floor plans but I'll go to the exterior, some of the issues there. One of the challenges on these pre-existing sites is when those were originally put in place even back into the early 1970s and then early 2000s, the storm water has changed dramatically. Some of the challenge here was the storm water. I know when the Planning Commission was concerned about the separation and the units but we do have minimal separation and it exceeds that so that shouldn't be the problem. They're putting the additional storm water here and best practices for the controlling cleaning of the water. In a future item we will be talking about those costs and the grant application for that through the Carver County CDA. So they both drain to public systems downstream and the capacity, they will have to provide that information to Engineering and that's a condition of approval, that they would have to meet those standards and provide that documentation to the Engineering Department before any permit would be issued. Again, the arrows show the direction that the storm water is moving. Utilities, there's adequate public utilities that were built out during Phase I and II to service this site. The applicant is proposing to provide new sewer and water laterals and then there's a monument sign that's proposed over an existing main so that has to be relocated. I don't see any problems with that. Access, this came up at the Planning Commission public hearing. There were two calls in. I know you received another letter tonight and I will just go through it briefly and then I will rely on the City Engineer to give a much more detailed nuanced response. Those access points, access to the site is actually via two access points. One servicing this building that is the senior building, and then the drive in three and four are, access three is proposed for underground parking and egress and then points two and four are proposed for the above -ground circulation. One of the concerns that was raised is whether there would be enough visibility coming out of the site and some of the sight lines. I'll let Mr. Howley answer those, or respond to those comments. Howley, Thank you, Kate. Mayor and Council, so the issue that we've heard about is with acess number three which is the access to the underground garage and if you're coming out of that garage if you can imagine driving easterly and you want to take a left, the inbound traffic you would have to cross but you would have to look kind of behind you at an angle, not at 90 degrees. In the staff report, the Engineering Department recommended that their engineer and architect and planners kind of review site circulation because we feel there might be a better way to do it. Utilize existing point one and three, which is what the original site plan contemplated. Potentially we didn't like the turning movements all that much at access point number two because those entrances are offset and there is a lot of pavement there. There potentially could be a better way to lay out the access to the underground garage and the parking lot. However, there 29 Chanhassen City Council — January 25, 2020 are approved site plans in place that show kind of what they are doing so we didn't take it to the level of a condition that thou shalt change it because we don't like it. It didn't rise to that level. With private streets, the risk is with the owner and they have an engineer who is signing these plans who takes responsibility for things like that. So we left it as a recommendation to look at it and review it but we didn't put it as a condition that they need to change it. Mayor Ryan: In the comments that are coming in that we received is that from the president of the homeowners association I think it was? And then a couple of comments that came through the Planning Commission, is they would prefer it to have dual access, so on the east and west? Or are they asking just to have it on the west end or is it to line up with the driveway on the other side, or all of them? Aanenson: I think they wanted two access points. Howley: Yeah. I think they wanted, my impression was, they were a little late to the game. They didn't quite know it was coming. This is the email that I'm talking about from the association president. They literally just want to talk about it and understand it and maybe strategize a little bit what would work better. I didn't get the impression that they had, these are what we want, make sure you do that. More discussion I think is what they want. Aanenson: So I think when the developer talks, they wanted some other outside amenities there too like community gardens and pickleball and some of those sort of things. I think that was some of the rationale but obviously safety plays into all that too. I'll let maybe the applicant address that in a little more detail but as Mr. Howley stated, one access point was there already and they felt like the sight lines were adequate. Landscaping, it does not meet the minimum requirements for landscaping. We put those in the conditions of approval, some additional landscaping that needs to be put into place but I am confident that that can be accommodated. Again, that's covered by that. Again, the variances for the 42-foot height and that's measured at the midpoint of the roofline, that was some discussion with the Planning Commission. Again, that's in order to accommodate the additional, they are staying within that footprint because they half to. It's a tight site. But also that provides for a little bit larger spaces in the floor and also the pitched roof element. The Planning Commission did support that one too. We put the variance findings in there. I'm going to go through all those unless there's a question on those. Again, the Planning Commission, we had one no vote which we will talk about in a minute. But I do want to spend a little bit of time on, Nick went through the tax increment, what we had talked about with the City Council, kind of the recommendation. So there was a couple, to Dan's point, Nick had put together a couple of different runs, that the different percentages of 75%, 85% available tax increment up to 95%. What the Council's recommendation was at that time was to go with a 90% so what we had recommended was, as Nick said at least 40% would have to be put aside, but we had recommended that so it was between 45 and 55 when we recommended based on the density that density bonus that would be 50 units at 60% of AMI and that would also be then for 16 years. That would be a shorter term with their payback. That was a recommendation that came out from you and that's kind of what we were going forward with then and that's what we 30 Chanhassen City Council — January 25, 2020 presented at the Planning Commission. Again, the Planning Commission doesn't vote. That's a City Council decision. There's a separate process that will be involved in the TIF itself but the recommendation for that. We want them just to be aware of it because they will have to approve the consistency with the comprehensive plan as part of the TIF agreement. Mayor Ryan: And the TIF comes back us at the EDA, right? Aanenson: Correct. We will go through that schedule that I wanted Nick to kind of go through too so you are aware of that. It would go back to Planning Commission just to say it's consistent with the comprehensive plan, not the exact numbers. But the Planning Commission did recommend approval. They liked the design. The negative vote again I think was maybe not so supportive of the TIF itself. It had some concerns about the overall design based on that. Otherwise, they did recommend approval. So with that, we are recommending approval of the site plan for the 110 units, the three-story apartment building with the variance for the height of 42 feet, subject to the conditions of approval. Again, increase the landscaping and the findings of fact, but all this is kind of predicated on the TIF approval going forward and that's a whole separate process. That's our recommendation. I would be happy to answer any questions you have. Mayor Ryan: Thanks. Do you want, before we bring in the developer, answer questions first? Is that what you prefer? Aanenson: Sure. Yeah. Mayor Ryan: Council, any questions for Ms. Aanenson? Councilman McDonald? McDonald: Not at this time. Thank you. Mayor Ryan: Councilwoman Rehm? Rehm: No questions at this time, thank you. Mayor Ryan: Councilwoman Schubert? Schubert: Not at this time. Mayor Ryan: Councilman Campion? Campion: None at this time. Mayor Ryan: I don't either so if Mr. Simning is on the line and he has anything to add or share? 31 Chanhassen City Council — January 25, 2020 Todd Simning: Good evening, Mayor Ryan and City Council members. Thank you Kate for the good introduction and Nick, for your explanation of TIF. I think the first thing that I want to point out is I think this project, what our building is amenity wise, is going to be a really, I'll say a fantastic addition to Chanhassen. When I look at the projects around the southwest region, Chanhassen, Shakopee, even some of the inner rings. I don't really think that they have the amenity package that we have. I'm looking at pickleball. We have garden areas. We've really taken into account a dog run, bike facilities for both the racking system as well as even a maintenance program for bikes. Having a really nice main floor library, lounge area. Having an area towards the back with a large patio with a kitchen area, walking down to a patio. We have a fire pit. We have a sky lounge. Those are things that you don't talk about in Chanhassen. It's things that you talk about maybe in the inner city when you get closer, but what we are trying to do as a development group and as myself being one of the owners, being a resident of Chanhassen, and my other four partners, we are really trying to bring something different to the suburban area that seniors would really want to be a part of. We are looking forward to working with Chanhassen to be able to utilize this, I will say kind of package in a way, to bring it to another community to say we are really trying to bring some affordable housing to a area that typically doesn't get a lot of development reaction. What we are looking for is a little bit of a participation with the City to help us be able to bring a really high level of amenity and living standard to people that really want both affordable and market rate. So it's really been a fun process for me as a developer. I've been doing this for 34 years. To be able to give something back to my community and I think that's probably the biggest thing that I want to emphasize to the City and make certain that you guys understand that this is a deep commitment from somebody that's live here in the area for quite some but, want to use this as kind of a springboard to bring it to other communities. We don't know whether that's going to work or not. The City of Chanhassen, so far, City staff has been very proactive to help us be able to develop this so I'm really excited about that. We talk about the height variance. One of the reasons why we need a height variance is because on the main floor when you walk into most apartment buildings, you have and eight of nine -foot ceiling height. In this case, we actually have a 10-foot ceiling height on the main floor because we really want to create and ambience that people want to live in. That's one of the reasons why our height of the building got a little bit higher. The entrance that people are talking about from the east side to the west side, you know it's fundamental to us because on the west side again talking about amenities, what we are trying to do is create a garden area and a dog area on the west side of the property. That really is conducive to sunlight and whatnot and actually having gardens flourish. It's a really great area for people to walk out and take their dogs out. You get on the east side, kind of the north side, its, you're not able to create that same ambience. When you're driving out the east side and again when this original plat was approved, they say a entrance, number 3, from the east side and obviously they thought it was okay. Otherwise, the City staff, City Council, everybody wouldn't have approved it. When you are out there, it's interesting because you are actually sitting at a high point. I've been out there, I took pictures. I encouraged the City Planning Commission to go out there. I encourage you guys to look at it also, is that you actually have a really good visibility. There is a lot of traffic that comes up there obviously that goes into the other building, but you really have good visibility out of there. Our building is going to be 55+. There are some that are 62+ that have 32 Chanhassen City Council — January 25, 2020 maybe some older population but when you drive through this area and, particularly between the new building that was built and the second building that was built, there is not that great of visibility coming out of those two garages. That one garage coming out of the second building and we are going to be actually in a really, really good position to have good visibility and when you get up there it isn't like you have to turn your head completely one way or another. You're sitting at the top of the building. So I really want to preserve the east side exit. I don't want to denigrate the west side strictly because on our project and what we are trying to accomplish, we really want to bring more of a benefit to the garden area and dog run and people, I'll say people of my age, younger, older, we like our pets and we are really trying to create something that is very, very usable to the residents that might live there. So, I really want the east side exit and truly feel as though that would work out well and if you guys went out there and saw that you are at the high point I don't think that would be an issue. One of the fundamental parts of Chanhassen and for us asking and working with the City staff, City Planners, City Council for TIF, is that Chanhassen consider themselves to be a community for life. What we're trying to bring to Chanhassen is allowing people that have lived here their entire life to stay here. That's one of the reasons why Nick actually has been very, very helpful, is that he has helped both Planning Commission and staff and hopefully you guys understand that truly by helping us create a TIF district, it actually helps us be able to keep residents that wouldn't be able to afford to live in Chanhassen, to stay in Chanhassen. We're going to, our plan is to own this long term. I'm really excited. This is one of the first times that as a developer, most of the time, I'm developing and selling and you don't have any ownership into it because people just buy from you and in this case, we're actually going to have a vested interest in making certain that number one, the building is a really, really fantastic building. We want to be able to bring this example of what we did in Chanhassen to other communities and we have a vested interest in making certain that it is successful. With that, I am open to questions from Staff, City Council, and just understanding where you guys are and just helping to make Chanhassen a better place. Mayor Ryan: Great. Thank you, Mr. Simning. Council, any questions for Mr. Simning? Councilman McDonald? McDonald: I have no questions but I do appreciate you trying to bring a product such as this to Chanhassen. You're right. We do try to be a community for life and I think something like this could prove to be a benefit, especially for age group that you are looking to target this at. I don't have any questions going forward. I understand where you are at and I guess where I am at is that so far that it looks okay to me. So thank you. Mayor Ryan: Thank you, Councilman McDonald. Councilwoman Rehm? Rehm: I would like to echo Councilman McDonald's comment about how we are a community for life and I live the idea of more people being able to stay here in Chanhassen, as they get older. I think a building like this would be a good solution for that. I do have a question about like the amenities. I think the community garden sounds great. I'm curious about connections to 33 Chanhassen City Council — January 25, 2020 trails and walking and also about the pickleball? I know that's super popular right now. Is that something that 20 years from now can they use that space for other activities as well? Mayor Ryan: Ms. Aanenson? Aanenson: Sure. I admitted that the trail connection, that is a condition of approval. If you could put that PowerPoint on really quick? So there is a trail connection going across right here that is a condition of approval. That would take you over to the park so that would be a condition of approval. Then some internal connections, too. Sidewalks internally to connect it to the other ones so they are all part of the association. I would leave it up to the developer but as we know, a lot of these projects, their amenities change over time depending on what's popular. We know that outdoor fire pits are popular right now and picnic areas. Mayor Ryan: Anything further, Councilwoman Rehm? Any follow-up questions or comments? Rehm: No, that's it for now, thank you. That was a good presentation. Mayor Ryan: Thank you. Councilwoman Schubert? Schubert: Yeah. I will also echo, I know when I was campaigning, probably the most asked question was, had to do with senior housing and affordable housing and this kind of marks both of those so I'm excited to see that. I was a little concerned because I kept reading comments and whatnot on just the east side entrance and I have the map up, Google Maps right now, and it looks like building two and building three probably use that, because the curve was one concern but the other concern was just volume of traffic. But it looks to me like buildings two and three would use the west entrance more just based on where the garages comes out. Is that correct or have you guys ever done kind of a, what's the work I am looking for, looked at the volume of traffic based on both entrances you have to the three buildings currently? Simning: Is that a question for the developer. Schubert: Yes. Simning: I wasn't sure but no, we haven't done a traffic study itself but the entrances for those other two buildings are further to the west and you do see a fair amount of traffic that actually moves that way. I think when people come from Chanhassen from the east, they do primarily come up the main road and kind of come through, but when they're leaving, it seems as though they are leaving towards the west because it's a shorter route out. But we have not done a traffic study itself. Schubert: Okay. That's all. Mayor Ryan: Perfect. Thank you. Councilman Campion? 34 Chanhassen City Council — January 25, 2020 Campion: I don't have any more questions at this time and it does look like a very high -quality product that they're designing here and I'm excited to see it go forward. Mayor Ryan: Okay. Thank you. I have one, well I have a couple comments. First, Mr. Simning, I appreciate this and while its not, and I agree I don't think it needs to be condition necessarily, you know whenever you want to have a good healthy working relationship with the association that you are going to be a part or the neighboring buildings and so while maybe there are not major changes to the exit/entrance, maybe there's some tweaking with alignment coming from building one and I just would encourage, Council did receive an email from the President of that association, and just being a good neighbor. I would just encourage you to connect with them and then work obviously with City staff to see if there are any solutions that don't change the total complexity of the project but if there is some tweaking or articulating that can be done I would, I think Council would really appreciate it and show your good -neighbor spirit. I just wanted to make that comment and appreciation. I also just, you know from a personal standpoint, I'm extremely excited about this project for a couple of reasons. First, just kind of the formulation. This is really has been a grass -roots effort. It came about two years ago to me from a meeting that I had with some seniors at the Senior Center, that they love Chanhassen, they love being here, but they are near the end of living in their homes and they don't know where to go. While we have a lot of great senior housing in Chanhassen the affordable component was something that was missing. So it was brought forward and something that I talked to the former City Manager, Mr. Gerhardt, about, with Ms. Aanenson about, this was something obviously in our comprehensive plan and just a real missing link in Chanhassen was senior affordable. About that same time two years ago Mr. Simning reached out to me and we went to coffee and he talked about wanting to do something in Chanhassen that would kind of leave his legacy as a long-time resident, a developer, he wanted to know what he could do as a legacy type project in Chanhassen and talked to him about the importance if senior affordable, and I just want to say, you know, thank you to Mr. Simning to kind of pushing this through and working with Ms. Aanenson and staff to find a way to get this done. I know there were some challenges early on finding the right way to make this happen and go about it and introducing it to Council. But I just think it's really neat when you have a Chanhassen resident, senior residents, and everybody can come together to present a project which I know will be really high quality based on the work that Mr. Simning does. I'm just really excited to have this in Chanhassen and its not only a great project, but an affordable component for our seniors. I just want to more say thank you if this moves forward with Council support, I just want to extend my appreciation for everybody that was involved to continue this project and moving it through, so I just wanted to share that, share my thoughts on that. Next, I think we just need to have a better understanding of timeline? Aanenson: Yeah. So my preference would be is you make a motion on this and there is two other action items that I will just kind of briefly go throught. Mayor Ryan: So start with a motion on this and then we move to the other items? Okay. Council, is there any one that would like to make a motion please? 35 Chanhassen City Council — January 25, 2020 Councilman Campion moved, Councilman McDonald seconded that the Chanhassen City Council approves the site plan for a 110-unit three-story apartment building with a variance for the building height to allow 42 feet to the midpoint of the roof, subject to the conditions of approval and adoption of the findings of fact. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5-0. Aanenson: If Nick's still on the line I would just like to take a minute and kind of go through the next steps because while it seems like we're going to be moving along, because now things start picking up steam. We have been talking about this as you mentioned Mayor for a few months and so now we are on a timeline for the developer as there is incurring costs. The first thing I would like to go through is there is a schedule that Nick has put together regarding what needs to happen to put a tax increment district together. So he's put together a calendar which was included in your packet. That was part of his presentation. Nick, did you want to just take a minute or two and maybe hit some of the high points of this? Anhut: Sure. So we envision that at the next Council meeting agenda on February there will be a formal resolution provided to set a public hearing for the TIF district in March. That public hearing we envision to be March 22. This will give us the time necessary to prepare the documentation and to also disclose those documents to the county and the school district. We plan on distributing that draft of the TIF plan document on February 19 to the county and the school district, consistent with the 30-day requirement. This item will also go before the Planning Commission, again the TIF plan itself, just to confirm that the proposed project that's to be within the TIF district is in conformance with the actions that you have taken this evening to approve the land use. That will come before them on March 2. We will have potential for a workshop discussion with the EDA on the 81h to review that TIF plan document and to talk about the agreement with the developer. Then a notice of a public hearing will be published March 11 and the public hearing held at the Council on March 22 to go over the tax increment plan and then once the public hearing is closed, there will be a resolution for consideration by the City Council to approve the TIF plan document and establish the new TIF district. That is the gist of the schedule going forward. Aanenson: That's the schedule we will be following. Thank you for that, Nick. I think that's all we need him for at this point. I'll relieve him. Mayor Ryan: Thank you, Nick. Thanks for the great presentation. That was fantastic. Anhut: Thank you all. Have a good evening. Mayor Ryan: You too, thank you. NEW BUSINESS: CARVER COUNTY CDA — COMMUNITY GROWTH PARTNERSHIP GRANT 36 Chanhassen City Council — January 25, 2020 Aanenson: The final action that relates to this development is actually an opportunity to apply for a grant. With the Carver County CDA, they do two annual grant cycles so we always look to see what's in process. This is the one project that we have that meets the criteria so we obviously are going to try to, especially since it's for affordable housing, we are going to try to see if we can secure a grant. In your packet we put together a resolution for the City Council to say that they support the project. There has to be a lot of information so this is again where the developer has already got a lot effort put towards the project, so they put together their documentation, their pro forma of how they're going to manage the project timeline, all of their overall costs or expenses and the like. But we are requesting funding for is for the storm water management. As we mentioned, that's a complex part. We talked about that in the work session, too. Those are always some high expenses so we are putting in to help with the affordability to reduce some of their costs of $400,000 towards storm water. We are the ombudsman. The money comes to the city and then we pass it through to the developer so the project would have to go forward. There's also a timing issue, too. The fact that these projects lined up, that if you would pass the support resolution and the project has been approved by you, that's going to score more points as we compare with other cities because it is a competitive process for other cities in the county. Again, there's different criteria so some of those also as Nick mentioned some of those are not only for affordable housing but also for economic development, salary, wages and the like which we have applied for and some of those we have been successful at getting. So this project will be going to the CDA in the first part of February. This would be your last meeting before that so the timing worked out well. What I'm looking for from the City Council is supporting the resolution that's in your packet because the project does meet the growth initiative for the county and the city has the capacity to ensure the project will be administered through that and that it's supporting affordable housing, that you would support the grant and we're just asking for your support on that so we can include it with their completed application. Mayor Ryan: Great. Thanks, Ms. Aanenson. Council, any questions about the grant? Councilman McDonald? McDonald: No questions. Mayor Ryan: Great. Councilwoman Rehm? Rehm: No questions. Mayor Ryan: Councilwoman Schubert? Schubert: No questions. Mayor Ryan: Councilman Campion: Campion: No questions. 37 Chanhassen City Council — January 25, 2020 Mayor Ryan: I don't either. With no questions, I would entertain a motion? Resolution 2021-03: Councilman McDonald moved and Councilman Campion seconded that the City Council adopts a resolution approving a grant application for funding from the Carver County Community Development Agency for Lake Place, Powers Ridge Apartments Building C. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5-0. Mayor Ryan: Thank you for taking care of that, Kate. I appreciate it. That was 2, 3 and 4 NEW BUSINESS: APPROVE A REOUEST FOR AN INTERIM USE PERMIT TO OPERATE A GOLF DRIVING RANGE ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT 825 FLYING CLOUD DRIVE (GOLF ZONE) Aanenson: This application also went to the Planning Commission on January 5. It did get unanimous support and the applicant, after reviewing the conditions of the approval, wanted some relief from one of those conditions. Otherwise, typically we would put these on Consent. The applicants are Brian and Keri Colvin with a request for an interim use for the golfing driving range on property zone A-2. This used to be the RSS [Rain, Snow & Shine]. I worked on this project a long time ago. It has been inoperable for a few years. It was approved inl998. Since that time, the update of 61, there's a signal there. As you may or may not know, we looked at a different land use in the future. It may be a number of years before we get sewer and water down there so this provides reasonable use of the property and a great entertainment place for our community. Again, the history of 1998. Site plan was approved in 1999. They allowed a second story for the driving range and then they also allowed them to have 3.2 malt liquor. In 2006 they amended the site plan and granted variances to allow square foot addition so they could have some interior entertainment. In 2018, the driving range was closed and after six months the IUP (Interim Use Permit). Again, the interim use permit has a specific time to it and I'll go through that in a minute because we do anticipate that when sewer and water becomes available that a higher and better use would go there. In short, they are planning to use the driving range how it was used. Use the existing facilities. They are not planning on grading or expanding or doing any other alterations. It does need the inspections from the Fire and Building Code so that will be accomplished, and planning on running on the business. Again, some context. Most of the property is in the 100-year flood plain. You can see the area. This is an old farmstead that the driving range is in the upland. Compliance with the code to make sure it is not detrimental to surrounding uses and, this is part of the interim use, that it meets the zoning requirements. It does. The goal is to create the performance standards for golf and driving ranges without negatively impacting the surrounding area. It will terminate 12 months after municipal services become available. That's when sewer and water is in close proximity and that would be a discussion that would come back before the City Council. You have the ability review that. As I stated, they have to pass the fire inspection and septic compliance. It does have a septic system down there. And then no alterations beyond what was previously allowed, restore some of the Chanhassen City Council — January 25, 2020 rain gardens, and the landscaping plans, and then the driving range which we talked about and I'll go through that in a little more detail. Then, pesticides and storage, the chemicals that are out there and any future operations do require a permit. The condition that the nets go up is the reason this is before you tonight. The applicant's have stated that they cannot do the nets before spring so we agreed to a compromise. We are going to allow them to put them up by June 14 and then they will put an escrow in place. It is quite a ways out there and people think they don't, but there's a lot of people that like to see how far they can hit it out there. So you're into the wetlands which is a discussion when this originally went up, we wanted to make sure the nets weren't too low allowing for wildlife to travel back and forth. It is in a fly away plus the navigation for animals. I think we're meeting both parties figuring out a way to make this work so we are excited that they are restoring it. We are very happy to have them here. I think they are on the line if they waited up this late, but we are recommending approval with those modifications. There they are! Mayor Ryan: Oh, there they are. You made it! You survived! Aanenson: So we are recommending approval with those changes. Mayor Ryan: So, just for clarification, when it came to the Planning Commission it got approved with the old requirements, and then since the Planning Commission you have worked with them and agreed that you will give them until June 14 to put up the nets and that's what they were asking is they couldn't do it with the snow and the conditions, correct? Aanenson: Correct. Mayor Ryan: Mr. and Mrs. Colvin, did you want to add anything? Brian Colvin: No, I just wanted to thank everybody. Thank you, Mayor, Council, Kate. I just wanted to start by saying, you know my wife and I, we had a pretty good idea that the surrounding community would be excited for the Golf Zone to reopen but the overwhelming response that we have had in the last couple of weeks, it's really showed us how much the community has missed this place and right now we are on track with all of our inspections. We've been working diligently the last couple of months to really clean the inside up. Clean the outside up. The next step is just getting the doors open and getting established while we have a few peak revenue months. We just wanted to thank the City for working with us here on the nets and we are always willing to work with them, too. That being said, I'll leave it to you. Mayor Ryan: Great. Thank you for those comments. With everybody working from home they can sneak out and hit a few balls. Colvin: That's right! 39 Chanhassen City Council — January 25, 2020 Mayor Ryan: I get the interest so that's fantastic. Thank you for that and thank you for working with the applicant on meeting in the middle. I appreciate that. Colvin: Yep. We do, too. Mayor Ryan: Thank you for saying that. Council, any questions or a motion? The motion is on the screen. Councilman McDonald moved, Councilwoman Schubert seconded that the Chanhassen City Council approves an interim use permit for a golf driving range subject to the conditions of approval, adopts the attached findings of fact and recommendation, and amends Condition 9 to read "Driving range nets comply with previous recommendations from the DNR shall be installed by June 14, 2021. A $2,500 escrow shall be provided to ensure that the nets are installed and that all stray golf balls are collected from the flood plain." All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5-0. Mayor Ryan: Congratulations! Thank you. And again staff thank you for making that work. I appreciate it. Good luck! Colvin: Thank you. Thank you so much. COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS — None ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS — None CORRESPONDENCE DISCUSSION — None Mayor Ryan: With that, we will meet back in the Fountain Conference Room to continue our conversation about the city manager. With that, I would entertain a motion to adjourn. Councilman Campion moved, Councilwoman Schubert seconded to adjourn the meeting at 9:34 pm. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5-0. Submitted by Heather Johnston Interim City Manager Prepared by Kim Meuwissen .ff CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Monday, February 8, 2021 Subject Receive Planning Commission Minutes dated January 19, 2021 Section CONSENT AGENDA Item No: D.2. Prepared By Jean Steckling, Sr. Admin. Support Specialist File No: PROPOSED MOTION "The City Council receives the Planning Commission Minutes dated January 19, 2021." Approval requires a Simple Majority Vote of members present. ATTACHMENTS: Verbatim Minutes CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING JANUARY 19, 2021 Chairman Weick called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Steven Weick, Mark Randall, Laura Skistad, Eric Noyes, Mark von Oven, Michael McGonagill, Doug Reeder MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Kate Aanenson, Community Development Director; MacKenzie Young - Walters, Associate Planner; Matt Kerr, IT Support Specialist; Alison Vance, Admin. Support Specialist PUBLIC PRESENT: Michael & (Maria) Juliana Sylvia 9607 Sky Lane, Eden Prairie, MN 55347 Brian, Elise, Seagland (sp???) Bruner 6609 Horseshoe Curve, Chanhassen, MN 55317 Weick: Good evening, everybody, calling to order this evening's Planning Commission meeting. Tonight is Tuesday, January 19, 2021 and we have two items on tonight's agenda. I'll begin the meeting with a quick roll call to make sure we have a quorum. Commissioner von Oven? von Oven: Here. Weick: Gotcha. Commissioner Noyes? Noyes: Here. Weick: Commissioner Skistad? Skistad: Here. Weick: Commissioner McGonagill? McGonagill: Here. Weick: Great. Commissioner Reeder? Reeder: Here. Weick: Good evening. Commissioner Randall? Chanhassen Planning Commission — January 19, 2021 Randall: [No answer] . Weick: Not sure we have Mark tonight. OK. And I am here so we have six and that is a quorum. Weick: Quickly review the guidelines for the meeting this evening. It is a Zoom meeting as it has been for several months so please be patient with us as we work through our process. I also ask that Commission members not hold chats or side discussions or text messages that are not public. All of our discussions this evening need to be in the public record. As I mentioned, tonight we have two public hearings on the agenda. First, staff will present the item. When staff is finished, we have a time for open questions from the Planning Commission for staff. When that's complete, the applicant can make a presentation or answer any questions that have come up during the staff report and also be open for questions from Planning Commission members. At the conclusion of the applicant's address, we will have a public hearing in which we will summarize any emails we've received for the record, we will open up the telephone line for telephone calls as appropriate and anyone present can come forward and offer a comment on any of the item. We'll then close the public hearing once we've have a change to hear from everybody in every format. Commission member can then discuss the item amongst themselves, consider a motion, and as appropriate, have a vote. So with that, I will introduce the first item on tonight's agenda. PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDER A REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF AN ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT WITHIN A PROPOSED SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE LOCATED AT 10029 TRAILS END ROAD Young -Walters: Thank you. This is Planning Case 2021-06. Just a reminder, if this is not approved or denied by a 3/4 vote, it will automatically go to the City Council on February 8, 2021. In addition, any citizen or resident aggrieved of this decision can appeal it. There are four business days to do that and if appealed it will also go to the City Council. That being said, this is a variance to use a single-family dwelling as a two-family dwelling. The location is 10029 Trails End Road. This lot is zone Residential Single Family. This zoning district has a minimum 15,000 square foot lot area, requires 30-foot front and rear setbacks, 10-foot side yard setbacks. This district is limited to a maximum of 30% total lot cover of which at most, 25% can be impervious. Buildings are limited to 35 feet in height. It is a single-family district so under the Code, it is only allowed single-family residences. Duplexes would not normally be permitted. There is a large drainage and utility easement running across the rear of the property. The applicant is proposing to construct a new home of this site. The proposal would leave them with 23'/4 percent lot cover but the home's footprint that has been proposed meets all aspects of City Code. So they are not requesting any variance from any setbacks or lot cover ordinance. I put up the elevations here just so you can see. So what the applicant is proposing is they are proposing adding an apartment above the three -car garage. It will be attached to the home. The apartment will have a kitchen, bedroom, laundry area and bathroom. This would constitute separate dwelling unit because it is separated from the rest of the upper level by walls here so there is no free flow between. They have stated that they need this apartment to facilitate the in -home care of aging 2 Chanhassen Planning Commission — January 19, 2021 parents. The father has a Parkinson's diagnoses which necessitates this arrangement. They have stated that the house will have the external appearance of a single-family home and that they are not proposing separate utility service. So, we did get some calls from the neighbors. We had one phone call just asking what was going on with the lot. Once we clarified that the proposed accessory dwelling unit would be an attached unit and not a separate building, they indicated they had no concerns with it. We did also get one email in support of the proposal which was forwarded to the Planning Commission. This is a bit of a unique variance. Typically the City Code does not allow for variances for uses. So, for instance, we couldn't give a variance for allow and industrial use to go in a residential neighborhood. There is one exemption in the Code which is allowing a single-family house to be used for a two-family dwelling if four conditions are met. They has to be a demonstrated need based on disability, age or financial hardship; the dwelling has to maintain the exterior appearance of a single-family dwelling; it cannot have separate utility services; and the variance cannot be deemed to negatively impact the surrounding properties or neighborhood. In looking over the applicant's proposal, staff believes this meets all four of these criteria. The city has issued three similar variances in the last 20 years. We have yet to receive any complaints engendered by having this type of above -garage arrangement for caring for elderly parents. So for that reason, staff believes that this....is recommending approval on this variance. Staff is recommending conditions to prevent it from being rented out in the future and those will be recorded against the property. With that, if there are any questions, I'd be happy to answer them. Weick: Thank you, MacKenzie. I will open it up for any Commissioner questions. Hearing... von Oven: You said there's only been three or four of these in the last 20 years, but did you mean specific to this type of variance? Are there other variances where folks have built a separate dwelling on the same property and been issued a variance? Young -Walters: Nope. We have issued since 2020, the city has received variance requests to use a lot zoned for single-family as a two-family dwelling and in all three cases, it's been an apartment above the garage. Pretty much with some size differences, identical to this. von Oven: Got it. And then in the "may not be rented" clause, what would actually stop a family from down the road doing an Airbnb. Young -Walters: Ya, so it would be one of those where were staff to receive a complaint, we would then have leverage because the document recorded. But as you indicated, it's not like we would be able to do a regular inspection or monitor the site to guarantee to it was never listed. There is something of an honor system. von Oven: Got it. OK, thank you. Weick: Thanks, Mark. Chanhassen Planning Commission — January 19, 2021 Noyes: Chairman, it's Commissioner Noyes. I have a question about the future. If this property is sold, I know staff has mentioned that there are ways to tie this variance into the property going forward. Can you explain that a little bit to, in case there are new owners in the future how they would be held to the same standards as the current owners? Young -Walters: Yep, so the main things is variances are recorded with the county against a property so when you do a title search, that variance and what's recorded again it is going to pop up. It would also need to be done as part of a seller's disclosure so anyone buying this would know that that restriction is in place. There would also be copies of the variance in the property file for public inspection and then, again, it would just, again, being kind of on that expecting people to follow the rules but then the city would have a clear enforcement mechanism were it violated because we could very easily go to a judge and say, this is explicitly recorded against a property and is not being followed. Noyes: Thank you. Reeder: Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Reeder. When I look at this for a Parkinson's, a person who has that disease, is there any way that they're anticipating being able to augment the stairway for some person that has a physical problem? Young -Walters: I would defer that question to the applicant. Weick: And we'll hold that for the applicant's presentation. Did you have any other questions, Commissioner Reeder? Reeder: No, that's fine. Just seems like there should be some provision there. Weick: OK. Other comments or questions of MacKenzie? Cool. Hearing none, I will invite the applicant to join us and either answer the specific question about the stairwell and please talk to use about this project. Michael Sylvia: Hi, hopefully everybody can hear me OK. My name is Mike Sylvia. This is my wife Juliana Sylvia. Juliana Sylvia: My first name is Maria as you probably saw on the documents but I go by my middle name, Juliana. Michael Sylvia: And these are my parents. This is my dad and this my mom on the left. I'll at least, I'll answer the questions specifically, initially, and then we can discuss other stuff. The staircase that goes to the apartment above the garage is wide enough to accommodate a chair lift, the once you see on TV. That was something that was planned. We also, the bathroom that they have there, the shower is handicap accessible and it's curb less, kind of forward planning for that purpose. But as far as the, our builder is on, Steve, but our plan is if the rendering of the home, with or without the in-law is the same so it's not going to, it wouldn't change, it's going to look 2 Chanhassen Planning Commission — January 19, 2021 the same as a single-family, it's just that additional space would be ... My parents currently live in ... we're currently renting a home and they live in the basement and they've been living there for the last 16 months and my father's condition is deteriorating and it's just not ... we had never envisioned him living in the basement of the rest of his life so this is something that would be an opportunity for him to live in the same home with us. They have three grandchildren and they are ours and their lives revolve around them. So that's kind of the, it was always kind of their dream and our to kind of have something where we had separate spaces, not living in a basement, something with light, their own bathroom, their own kitchen. So, this was an opportunity... we love the street, we love the neighborhood, we were hoping to hopefully be there for the 20 years. Weick: Great. Thank you very much. I appreciate the perspective and the information about your project. Commissioner Reeder, I would open it back up to you if it answers your question or you had any follow up question. Reeder: Mr. Chairman, that answers my question. I assume they anticipated that, I just wanted to make sure we're all aware of how they're going to handle that. Weick: OK, great. Any other questions for the applicant from Commission members, at this time? OK. Not hearing any, thank you very much for making yourselves available this evening and sharing with us about your project. I appreciate that. Michael Sylvia: Thank you, you guys. Weick: Ya, you bet. Absolutely. Thank you. At this time, we'll open up the public hearing portion of this item. As MacKenzie mentioned, we did receive... Young -Walters: Yep, we did receive one phone call where they'd asked what was being proposed and then once they were informed that it was an attached accessory dwelling, they expressed they were comfortable with it. And then we received an email that they very much liked the appearance of the house, that they wanted to welcome the new family to the neighborhood and they thought it was wonderful they were looking to take care of their aging relatives. Weick: Great. Thank you. And we have opened the phone line. It is 952-227-1630. I will pause awkwardly while we wait for anyone to call in at this time. There is no one in Chambers for in - person comment at that time. Seeing no calls come in, I will close the public hearing portion of this item and open for Planning Commission comments, motions and vote and I would just open up by saying that looking at the plans for the project, it's a beautiful and I think the intent also beautiful and you know, I think it's a wonderful addition to that neighborhood in my opinion. Certainly open it up for other Planning Commission comments or motions. McGonagill: Mr. Chairman, this is Commissioner McGonagill. I just wanted to compliment the applicant for following the process of the city and doing, you know, they went through and did everything they could to meet the Code and variance request. I agree with everything you said, 5 Chanhassen Planning Commission — January 19, 2021 Mr. Chairman, and .... You know, they could have made it... Well you know, we've seen some of these where they've made it difficult and the applicant's make it difficult but clearly the Sylvia's have not. I appreciate them working with staff on this for us. That's all I have to say. Weick: Thank you. von Oven: I also want to commend Mr. & Mrs. Sylvia. We should all be as fortunate and good to take care of our parents the way that you all are proposing to. It's also odd for me, I guess, I'm somewhat of a, I guess I'm not new anymore. As these things come to the Planning Commission, I actually do question, there's probably a day coming where this isn't necessarily a variance. I think more and more people are going to need to be doing this and we should be doing this. It'll be interesting to see how that works. I'm very surprised that there've only been three or four in the last 20 years. So I'm not nervous about setting a precedence, I'm more nervous about that more and more of us are going to need to do exactly what you are doing and the less loophole, or hoops that people have to jump through to do it I think will be good. So, I commend what you're doing. I'm fully in support. Weick: Thank you, Commissioner von Oven. Randall: I have a few comments on it. Weick: Shoot. Randall: A couple things. One, just full disclosure. My house is somewhat set up like this. I enjoy having my parents stay with me. A couple of caveats that were in that presentation that I thought are interesting to note. It's to have a separate entrance. Typically, I would assume if you had a rental unit you'd want to have a separate entrance where they wouldn't have to walk through the house and that type of thing. I thought was important. It's a good, I'm glad that they, I'll echo that they went through the city to do that. I think it's going to be very commonplace coming into the future. Weick: Thanks. Good perspective. Randall: With that, I can make a motion if you'd like. Weick: Sure thing. Young -Walters: Alison, can we get the motion up, please? Randall: The Chanhassen Board of Appeal and Adjustments approves the variance request for the use of a single-family swelling as a two-family dwelling, subject to the conditions of approval and adopts the attached Findings of Facts and Discussion. Weick: We have a valid motion from Commissioner Randall. Do we have second? 71 Chanhassen Planning Commission — January 19, 2021 von Oven: Second. Weick: Second from Commissioner von Oven. von Oven: Correct. Weick: Any final comment before we vote. I think we've all expressed our favorable opinions of this project. With that I will commence a roll call vote. Commissioner Skistad? Skistad: Aye. Weick: In favor. Commissioner Noyes? Noyes: Aye. Weick: In favor. Commissioner von Oven? von Oven: Aye. Weick: Thank you, in favor. Commissioner McGonagill? McGonagill: Aye. Weick: In favor. Commissioner Reeder? Reeder: Aye. Weick: Commissioner Randall? Randall: Aye. Weick: In favor and I also vote in favor. The item passes 7 in favor, 0 against which meets the 1/4 approval requirement as well. Thank you again, MacKenzie, for your report as well as the applicant for being available this evening and we wish you luck with your project. Thank you very much. Sylvia's: Thank you. Thank you very much. Randall moved, von Oven seconded that the Chanhassen Board of Appeals and Adjustments approves a Variance to allow construction of an accessory dwelling unit within a proposed single-family residence located at 10029 Trails End Road and adopts the Findings of Fact and Decision. The motion passes unanimously with a vote of 7-0. 7 Chanhassen Planning Commission — January 19, 2021 PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDER A REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE TO REPLACE/REBUILD RETAINING WALLS, ADD WALKOUT TERRACE, ADD STAIRWAY TO LAKE, AND RECONFIGURE LAKESIDE DECK/PATIO LOCATED AT 6609 HORSESHOE CURVE Young -Walters: This is Planning.... von Oven: Actually Commissioner Weick, sorry before you jump in there, I just need to let everyone know that I need to recuse myself from this one. It's just a few houses away from me and I know these fine, upstanding citizen. Weick: Fair enough. Thank you for letting us know. So for the record, we have six Commissioners which is still a quorum. Young -Walters: So this is Planning Case 2021-07. The applicant is ... Again, I'll just reiterate that if passed by a 3/4 majority vote of denied by a 3/4 majority vote, the decision is final. If not, it will advance to the City Council on February 8. In addition, any resident aggrieved of the decision has four business days to appeal the decision of the Planning Commission at which point it would go to the Council as well. That being said, this is a variance request to place an at - grade deck and retaining walls within the bluff setback and bluff impact zone. So the location of the property is 6609 Horseshow Curve. This property is zoned Residential Single -Family. It is a riparian lot and there is a bluff present. This zoning district requires a minimum 20,000 square foot lot area. Has 30-foot front and rear setbacks, 10-foot side yard setbacks, a 30-foot bluff setback, a 20-foot bluff impact zone setback, a 75-foot shoreland setback, and a 25 percent lot cover limit. The property is also allowed one water -oriented accessory structure (WOAS) within 10 feet, I'm sorry, that 75-foot shoreland setback although it needs to be 10 feet from the Ordinary High Water (OHW) level and is limited to 250 square feet in size. So this house has quite a few existing nonconformities. The lot is 27,878 square feet with around 23 percent lot cover. The house has a nonconforming 5-foot bluff setback. The porch actually encroaches over into the bluff. The southern retaining wall has a nonconforming encroachment into the bluff as well. This red line here is the top of the bluff and the west retaining wall is a 0-foot bluff setback, essentially running right along the top of the bluff. The WOAS has a nonconforming 3-foot bluff setback, 5-foot side yard setback, 7-foot shoreland setback, and a nonconforming 304-square foot size and it also located over a city sanitary sewer easement. One thing I will mention, is this property is a little unique as nonconformings go. In that, when the house was built in 1999, there was not a bluff present on the property. The construction of this retaining wall here, flattened out the grade and pushed the grade change down enough that it actually flipped the property over the edge of the bluff ordinance and created the bluff that then created all of the nonconformities that are the result of the, that are not resulting in a variance being needed. So, while we did consult with the city attorney and a bluff is a bluff whether it was preexisting or created, it is something that staff kept in mind as we evaluated this variance request. So, the applicant is proposing to install an at -grade deck and drainage system within the bluff impact zone so that's the first 20 feet from the bluff. They are proposing to place he south retaining wall with a living wall system located within the bluff, and the west retaining wall with a concrete wall within the bluff impact Chanhassen Planning Commission — January 19, 2021 zone. They are proposing to reconfigure the existing nonconforming WOAS. Because they are reconfiguring it in a way that reduces its size and the existing of the nonconforming setbacks, it does not actually require a variance but we are including it in request just to formalize the nonconforming dimensions. And then they are also proposing to install stairs down to the lake. This is permitted by Code and does not need a variance. It's just mentioned here for the sake of completeness. So the justification is, in 2018, they conducted an extensive remodel on the property and they actually removed several pretty significant encroachments from the bluff. An impervious patio, an 8-foot bump out, and an above -grade deck that was located across the top of the bluff. The result of removing those elements has left the area behind the house as weed and dirt and the feel a wood deck is a reasonable amenity to having to give some cleaner access to that area. The retaining walls are failing. They noted that during a rain event last year, property damage occurred as boulders came loose and rolled down the property as well as some erosion associated with that failure. They believe that the living walls is an environmentally sensitive way to stabilize the slope. As a note, they could replace the existing retaining walls in their existing configuration placement without a variance and what they're proposing appears to be less environmentally impactful than what they could do without a variance. Again, the WOAS is being redesigned to work with the stairway and is resulting in a smaller structure and removal of impervious surface near the lake. And again, this could have been replaced with the existing size and composition without a variance. As staff looked this over, one thing we wanted to mention is just, this applicant worked extensively with staff. They've met with us about a half dozen times over the last half year and have been very receptive to our feedback and concerns so I do just want to mention that. They are utilizing a pretty robust drainage system, living wall technology, pervious decking and fescues to try to manage stormwater and minimize any impacts to the bluff and the lake. I did mention the unique situation in how this bluff came to be. With that, staff does recommend approval. Looking at the balance of the project, it leave the property in a better situation than what they could do if they just replaced stuff without requesting a variance. I'd be happy to take any questions at this time. Weick: Thanks, MacKenzie. I will open up with a couple questions to get things started as I find my notes. Does the, does the, does the new deck add anything to the hardcover? Young -Walters: Nope. So because decks are not considered to be lot cover and they're doing a wood deck with gaps and then if you look at their plans, they're actually running I believe aggregate and draintile base to manage the stormwater as well which is, to be honest, more engineering than they would need to do to meet the pervious definition for decking. So they went above and beyond in that respect. Weick: Cool. Thanks for the clarification. And then, looking at the shape of the deck that they're adding, I'm assuming that the city didn't have any, you know, the corners right up to the edge of the bluff line. I'm assuming you didn't have any issues with that. Young -Walters: Ya, you know, what we looked at a lot was the depth of the deck. It's a 12-foot deep deck. The placement and configuration make design sense in terms of providing access from the patio door to the connected step system. Especially when we look at the fact that it's not I Chanhassen Planning Commission — January 19, 2021 lot cover that they're replacing that failing retaining wall, that they have the drainage system, that they pulled out 350 square feet of impervious surface. Again, on the balance, we didn't feel this was a threat to the bluff. Weick: OK. I appreciate that. Those were my two questions for MacKenzie. Any other, any questions from Commission members? And by the way, I can see you all now, this time. Just for the, I see you Commissioner von Oven. Well hearing and seeing no imminent questions here, I will go ahead and invite the applicant to make a presentation or respond to any of the questions they've heard already this evening. Welcome. Elise Bruner: Thank you. Hi, this is Elise Bruner. I'm here with my husband, Brian, our daughter, Seagland (sp???), and thank you for taking the time to review our variance request. We've been working with Travis Van Liere and his landscape architects to try to present an environmentally -friendly as well as aesthetically pleasing design for our property to provide more access for our family and to try to just utilize the full enjoyment of the property that, that we live on. I think that MacKenzie's done a great job in terms of summarizing the main points of concern, and this has been kind of an on -going dialogue and we appreciate all the excess and.... activity that we've received from the Planning division in terms of making this property as livable and enjoyable as possible. It is a unique property in that it's located on a slope and so there are two basic areas where we can convene and be outside, either down by the lake or right outside the front of our house off of the slider downstairs. And so, we're just trying to make sure that we have the opportunity to create those spaces for our family. I'm willing to answer any other questions. Just by way of background, I grew up at 6611 Horseshoe Curve and then my parents built the original house in 1999 and the in 2016, my husband and I purchased the property from them and remodeled it. So I actually grew up in this neighborhood so it's pretty exciting to be able to see this through to its completion. So we thank you for your consideration. Weick: Thanks, that's fantastic to hear about the history behind that, and also a pretty cool project and thank you for including all of the pictures. It's really helpful especially, this time of year, even if we were able to get out and look at property, which this would be a difficult one to look at. Um, Elise Bruner: Well, you'd have to, you'd have to bring your sled. Weick: That's right. It'd be difficult to get around. So, thank you for the thoroughness of the report, that was really, it was helpful. It was nice to see how this will all fit together and it looks like a good project for you. Any questions for our applicant from Commission members? McGonagill: Mr. Chairman, this is Mr. McGonagill. Weick: Yes. 10 Chanhassen Planning Commission — January 19, 2021 McGonagill: Could you? I'm fascinated with the living wall, I think that's pretty cool. I've done a lot of geotechnical work in a previous life and so I'm curious how you came with this and how this will work on the slope and, you know, I'm just, more curiosity than.... just interested in it. Elise Bruner: Thank you. You know, I don't like to consider myself an expert in anything but when I started looking at options and I consulted with Travis and Danielle, our landscape architects, about this option of kind of getting rid of the tradition boulder, and my husband wanted concrete and that wasn't going to happen and so I was like looking for something that had a low impact but that kind of, just kind of blended into the environment and didn't, I don't know, stick out as much and reviewed some of the really unique engineering where by, you basically put in kind of a webbing that goes into the property and then you kind of, you do the plantings and basically it all kind of gels together with the fescue and so we're hoping that that kind of just creates a more natural looking environment and, I guess Travis and Danielle could speak to that engineering component if, I think they're on the phone as well. McGonagill: I'm just curious about ... on the slope, the degree of slope that this things going on. I'm trying to imaging the slope it's on. Maybe MacKenzie can answer it but where it's supposed to go, what kind of slope is on that. Weick: If the applicant's architect is on, I would defer to them for a design discussion on it. Travis Van Liere: Ya, I'm on. Travis Van Liere. Can you guys here me OK? Others: Yes. Travis Van Liere: So to answer your question, it's a product that we've used previously and it comes from kind of a company that we work with that's out of Colorado. They use if for kind of mountain homes or hillside homes. The product that we are referencing, it's called Slopeteam (sp??), actually, and it's a geosynthetic that kind of gets laid over the surface and so it allows you to do engineered slopes up to, almost up to a 60% slope. We're going to do that here but you can do a 1:1 slope pretty easily which is a 45 degree angle and that's kind of what we're proposing to do here in lieu of the retaining wall system, which was already kind of, it was battered but the wall was installed 20 plus years ago when the original house was built and some of the boulders that were installed weren't properly sized accordingly so as you know construction happened over the remodel process and everything else and just time, they've just slowly degraded and kind of washed out and fallen down the hillside. So this is a product that we've used steep slopes. We've used it on various, different conditions, but ya, it's a nice product. It's fairly new and not too many people use it for retainage per se, but for managing kind of steep slopes and this is kind of the perfect application with what we're using it for. Our main purpose we to, as Elise said, minimize the impact from the lake so that you didn't see this large retaining wall system kind of up again the house and make it a more natural aesthetic. McGonagill: Are you going to have to do much regrading, a grade plan, in order to install this? 11 Chanhassen Planning Commission — January 19, 2021 Travis Van Liere: Yep, so there was a grading plan was included in our packet and you'll notice there's kind of a hatched area that indicates the extents and it kind of looks like a trapezoid. So, where the old retaining was, you'll see kind of a 1:1 slope and it goes around primarily around the corner where the old retaining wall would be on the southeast corner of that new deck that we're proposing. McGonagill: So, ya, you will have some re... but that's part of the application that you're working with staff on. Travis Van Liere: Yep, yep. McGonagill: OK, well thank you very much. It's helpful. I've used this stuff in applications in mountains so I'm familiar with something similar and it, once it, I've never done it in cold climates like this but once it gets in, it will hold. So, Travis Van Liere: Yep, yep it's really nice. McGonagill: That's all I have Mr. Chairman. Weick: Great. Thank you. Any other questions? Well I thank the applicant and architect for sharing information about your project. It's very helpful for us to get your perspective and answers as well. With that, I will open the public hearing portion of this item. I believe we received an email. Young -Walters: We did not an email on this one. Weick: We did not. Young -Walters: I had one call from a neighbor just kind of wanted to know what was going. Didn't express any concern with the project. Weick: OK. I was mistaken, I apologize. The number is on the screen, 952-227-1630. There is no one in Chamber for in -person public comment and give it a moment if anyone is dialing. Nothing coming in? I'm going to go ahead and close the public hearing portion of this item and open for Planning Commission member comments and/or a motion. I think when I first read this one, I thought, oh my goodness, there's so much, there's so much going on here, but when you really peel back the onion a little bit, everything makes sense, to me anyway, on the property and certain doesn't seem to, it's used to help the property across the board as opposed to anything that would limit, or be an imposition on the property. Noyes: Chairman, it's Commission Noyes. I would propose a motion. Weick: Wonderful. 12 Chanhassen Planning Commission — January 19, 2021 Noyes: The Chanhassen Board of Appeals and Adjustments approves a 19-foot bluff impact zone and 29-foot bluff setback variance for the construction of a deck, a bluff impact zone and bluff setback variance for the construction of retaining walls within the bluff, and a 25-foot bluff, 5-foot side yard, and 3-foot shoreland setback variance for a water -oriented accessory structure (WOAS), subject to the Conditions of Approval, and adopts the attached Findings of Facts and Decision. Weick: Thank you. We have a valid motion from Commissioner Noyes. Do we have a second? McGonagill: I'll second it. Commissioner McGonagill. Weick: A second from Commissioner McGonagill. Before we vote, any final comments on the project? Hearing none, we will commence with a roll call vote. Commissioner Randall? Randall: Aye. Weick: In favor. Commissioner Reeder? Reeder: Aye. Weick: Thank you. Commissioner McGonagill? McGonagill: Aye. Weick: Thank you. Commissioner Skistad? Skistad: Aye. Weick: Thank you. In favor. Commissioner Noyes? Noyes: Aye. Weick: In favor, and I also vote in favor. The item passes 6 in favor, 0 against which is also over the 3/4 requirement so the item passes unanimously. Thank you to MacKenzie. Wonderful report. Thank you, I'm sure, for the very long hours from the applicant trying to put this together. It's much appreciated and it looks like a beautiful project and certainly good luck in implementing it and, enjoy, when the summer comes around, for sure. Elise Bruner: Thank you, guys, all very much. Other: Thank you. Noyes moved, McGonagill seconded that the Chanhassen Board of Appeals and Adjustment approves a Variance to replace/rebuild retaining walls, add walkout terrace, 13 Chanhassen Planning Commission — January 19, 2021 add stairway to lake, and reconfigure lakeside deck/patio located at 6609 Horseshoe Curve. The motion passes unanimously with a vote of 6-0 with Commissioner von Oven recusing himself. Weick: With that, that is the final item on tonight's agenda. Would someone please note our minutes from our last meeting which was dated January 5, 2021. Skistad: So noted. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Skistad so noted the Verbatim Minutes of the Planning Commission meeting dated January 5, 2021. Weick: Oh, thank you, Commissioner Skistad. ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS. Weick: With that, I will turn it over to Kate a City Council update. Aanenson: So on January 11, 2021, McGonagill: Can't hear, Kate. Can't hear, Kate. Aanenson: Yep, I just realized that. On the January l ld' City Council meeting, they reviewed the Deer Haven subdivision which you saw. That one had some variances for the private street and also the variance for the width of the public portion of that street. So there was good discussion of that at the City Council and that was approved. That was the only action we had. At the next Council meeting, next Monday night, we do, we'll be following up on the apartment project, the wetland, and then we have the Golf Zone on Consent. The other two were variances that there was no appeal on. Young -Walters: I believe Golf Zone got pulled off Consent, right? Aanenson: Ya but it's on the agenda. Young -Walters: Oh, ya, sorry. Aanenson: So that's it. You do have meeting in two weeks. We have a variance and MacKenzie's got that one and then, we're anticipating having our annual report done. So as of right now, we do not have applications that came for the second meeting in February so right now, pencil that as a potential free night. I'll keep you informed on that and it something comes up but right now we don't anticipate anything on for that meeting. That's all I had, Chair. Weick: All right. I'll certainly miss everybody the Yd Tuesday in February. Wonderful. Any questions for Kate? 14 Chanhassen Planning Commission — January 19, 2021 Aanenson: We'll see everybody in two weeks. von Oven: Just one quick one. I know that we had a, as a Planning Commission, had approved the, I forget exactly the name of it, but had to do with boat parking in the driveway, and then City Council tabled that. Is there a schedule for that to come back to City Council? Aanenson: Correct. No there's not. I think, because we've got new Council people on board, I think there's some time that they want to kind of, some other pressing items. MacKenzie gave you an update, but for every positive "let's do a boat storage" there's a negative "let's not do boat storage". So I think there's just some heavy lifting here right now. We're looking for appointing a new City Manager, looking for a new Finance Director, and we have two new City Council members so I think everybody's just trying to get their feet underneath them and then they'll probably reconsider putting that back on the agenda but we'll keep you posted on that. von Oven: Great, thank you. Weick: Any other questions for Kate? Weick: All right. I would entertain a motion to adjourn then. From anybody. von Oven: So moved. Weick: All those in favor please signify with Aye? All: Aye. Weick: All right. We are adjourned. Thank you. Von Oven: Good night. Skistad: Thanks, Steve. Von Oven moved to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 7 to 0. The Planning Commission meeting was adjourned at 7:50 p.m. Submitted by Kate Aanenson Community Development Director Prepared by Jean Steckling 15 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Monday, February 8, 2021 Subject Receive Park & Recreation Commission Minutes dated October 27, 2020, November 24, 2020 and December 8, 2020 Section CONSENT AGENDA Item No: D.3. Prepared By Kim Meuwissen, Office Manager File No: PROPOSED MOTION "The City Council receives the Park & Recreation Minutes dated October 27, 2020, November 24, 2020 and December 8, 2020." Approval requires a Simple Majority Vote of members present. ATTACHMENTS: ❑ Park and Recreation Commission Meeting Minutes dated October 27, 2020 ❑ Park and Recreation Meeting Minutes dated November 24, 2020 ❑ Park and Recreation Meeting Minutes dated December 8, 2020 CHANHASSEN PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING OCTOBER 27, 2020 Chairman Boettcher called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Jim Boettcher, Karl Tsuchiya, Matt Kutz, Haley Schubert, Sandy Sweetser, Jim Peck and Youth Commissioner Zoe Erpelding MEMBERS ABSENT: Joe Scanlon STAFF PRESENT: Jerry Ruegemer, Park and Rec Director; Priya Tandon, Recreation Supervisor; and Jodi Sarles, Rec Center Manager APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Jerry Ruegemer added item number 3 under reports regarding Lake Ann playground presentation. Tsuchiya moved, Kutz seconded to approve the agenda as amended. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 7 to 0. PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS: Boettcher: Do we have anything Jerry? Ruegemer: Not tonight. Boettcher: No Halloween Party? Ruegemer: That was last week. Priya certainly can share. Tandon: Sure we can do a brief overview of the Halloween Party. Given I guess the extreme cold it went very well. We got a lot of positive feedback from families and kids so that was awesome. Jodi and Mary were there and Jerry was there helping out and Commissioners Sweetser and Shubert and Erpelding also helped out. Ruegemer: Matt was there with family. Tandon: Yep, so helping out the day of the event. Overall went very smoothly. A lot of positive feedback. We had 22 businesses and organizations either donate or partner at the event helping out as well and then the Chaska High School Key Club, Chanhassen High School Key Club, and Students Today Leaders Forever service organization from Chanhassen school also Park and Recreation Commission — October 27, 2020 helped out. So overall a lot of help with the event. It was a group effort. Very cold but it went pretty well. Boettcher: Did you get a rough count did you say on people? Tandon: Yeah we did. So we had about 200, 150 to 200 at a time and then we did four waves of that. Boettcher: So still had at least some type of a party then. Tandon: Yes, yes. Boettcher: Alright thank you Priya. Anything else? VISITOR PRESENTATIONS: Boettcher: Next item we have visitor presentations. I believe we'll wait with that until we get to the new business under youth associations. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Boettcher: Any additions, changes, corrections need to be made? Hearing none motion to approve. Tsuchiya moved, Kutz seconded to approve the verbatim and summary minutes of the Park and Recreation Commission meeting dated September 22, 2020 as presented. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 7 to 0. YOUTH ASSOCIATION PRESENTATIONS. Boettcher: And we'll go right into the new business. Jerry you want to introduce the topic? Ruegemer: I sure can. So just as kind of our brainstorming that we had in August and September, we had kind of talked about wanting to become really kind of familiar and have our youth associations come in. Give some presentations and talk about their associations and what sports they offer. What population they serve. Just a history of Chanhassen and the area community so we're really lucky to have CAA here tonight, the Chanhassen Athletic Association and CC United Soccer so we're excited. They both have really long lasting history in our communities and serving our residents in Chan and around the area as well so their groups really go back to the 70's and 80's when their associations and soccer clubs got started so they do have a long rich history serving our community so, so really I think it will be informative tonight for the council, or council. For the commission to hear. I was at the council meeting last night. Just 2 Park and Recreation Commission — October 27, 2020 to hear kind of first hand really what great service they have so we'll kind of start with CAA and then we'll move over to CC United Soccer so Terry and Lenny the floor is yours. Boettcher: And if of you would for record state your name and address. Terry Kemble: Terry Kemble, 3160 West 82 a Street. I'm the administrator for the Chanhassen Athletic Association. Lenny Checheris: And my name is Lenny Checheris. If you can spell I'lI give you a cookie. C- h-e-c-h-e-r-i-s. Boettcher: Did you tell him about me and cookies? Seriously. Lenny Checheris: 2411 Hunter Drive. Boettcher: Alright thank you. Lenny Checheris: So I thank you for inviting CAA here. Terry asked me to speak because for some reason she says she doesn't like public speaking, I'll BS on that. She's never had short of words but she asked me to just kind of go over some of the history of CAA. You know I'll introduce myself. I'm Lenny Checheris. I'm the Baseball President... League Director. I've been with CAA since 2001. I'm sorry, 2011. 2011 so I have two boys that have been involved with CAA since they were youngsters and now one is in high school. I have a 13 year old who continues to play baseball and will continue to do so for the next couple of years, but a little history. I'm just taking some of the notes. The history of CAA. Terry and I were talking earlier tonight and we were trying to figure out how long CAA's been around. She said she was in middle school so that would make me in diapers so it's somewhere around 1970. About 1970 and it's been a robust program for many years. I know baseball really took off because I witnessed my next door neighbor with baseball. It seemed like it just took off from there. This was probably 2006 or `07 and we've been able to form several teams throughout, you know we've had issues as it relates to numbers. We've got competing factors. We've got kids have to make a decision to play soccer or baseball because they align if I remember correctly. Ruegemer: All the ages groups. Lenny Checheris: And the older age groups and some kids decided to play soccer. Some decided to play lacrosse, baseball and they, our program numbers throughout the last 8 years have seen some fluctuation. Terry printed everything up for you so you guys can take a look at it but through CAA we offer baseball, softball which is under the Diamond Sports umbrella. We offer basketball. We offer soccer. Volleyball is no longer part of our umbrella under CAA. Club has taken most of the kids. Terry Kemble: Yes. The high school coaches recommend. Park and Recreation Commission — October 27, 2020 Lenny Checheris: Yeah so you know and that's what CAA is really competing with is our club teams now. We've lost several teams, members to even at the younger ages now. They're marketing to 10 and 11 year old kids to play club for the better experience and more competitive experience and most people are finding that it's really not. The fun is really at CAA. But you know all in all we have a dedicated group of volunteers at CAA that really are passionate about the sport. You know this year was an anomaly as COVID took hold of nearly everything in our lives but we, when it started out in March. I think it was March 13th when they closed the schools or something happened on that day. I can't remember. You know we were meeting, certainly weekly because we had already formed teams. We didn't know what we were going to do. Once pardon my French all hell broke loose in May we started meeting several times a week and by the end of, Governor Walz was supposed to give us some information on May 1. It was postponed to May 14th. Once again postponed and we had to make a decision so parents and families could go on with their lives. We couldn't hold them on and tell whether we were playing baseball or not playing baseball. We don't know. It wasn't fair to them so we decided to end the league this year. Or end the season I should say on May 261h and June 1st we opened it back up but we were only, we were the sanctioning body for teams that were independent of CAA so they needed our insurance. We left them play. We formed most of the teams formed again because we cancelled the season. It was a huge mess but it was really neat to see that out of all the teams that we postponed or cancelled the season two kids didn't show back up and in fact we had 3 other kids that joined which was really neat because people were scared. I mean everybody was scared at that time about COVID and we put in safety measures. We did a really good job, we had wonderful persons that tackled, we did a tremendous job providing sanitization at all the fields. She just did a great job so you know we had a great season. All the kids had fun. You know it was an abbreviated season but it was still a lot of fun. But you know getting back to the other sports. I know Bill on the basketball side is, he's just going through it. He doesn't know if we're one COVID case away from cancelling the season and fingers are crossed that it doesn't happen that way. I know all of the basketball programs throughout the city have safety protocols in and are very sensitive to making sure that no one gets sick with COVID and if they do they just, what is the process? I was talking to Bill about it. If a kid gets, they isolate him. Terry Kemble: They have to stay home for 2 weeks. Lenny Checheris: But at these tournaments they're not going to be as robust as they once were. Two people per kid are allowed in the gymnasium which you know baseball usually you're outside right. You can socially distance really well. Soccer took a hiatus this year because obviously it was unprecedented times. We use that word ad nauseam but they decided not to play because they're younger. I'm sorry, CAA soccer decided to take a hiatus this year. Younger children. Parents were a little bit more concerned. There was more concern from the parents so they decided not to play this year but as you can see the numbers are still robust within our community and our sports. We have kids that not only encompassing Chanhassen but also Victoria, Carver and some from Minnetonka there that are involved in our program because 2 Park and Recreation Commission — October 27, 2020 it's a lot better, quote unquote better program that what Minnetonka can provide because they don't offer the competitive tournament teams that everybody clamors for... So we use all of the fields within Chanhassen. We use Lake Ann which is by far my favorite field to watch baseball at. I mean there's a buzz when kids are there and we're able to have our baseball games there and this year and instead of traveling so much a lot of baseball was played at Lake Ann. We have Lake Susan which is shared with the high school and Minnetonka. Bandimere. All those parks. What was that Sunset Ridge there's one and there's just quite a few parks. You guys are great. You maintain them for us. They look great and I think you fold into the mix the Dugout Club and boy they've really, they were instrumental at putting lights up at Lake Susan. The City Council really helped us out. Gave us a solid and helped us fund it and we raised money for it and obviously the plans for other things like restrooms at Lake Ann instead of Porta Potties. Those are kind of long term ideas. I'm off the board by then but you know but I think that's really kind of the direction certainly Diamond Sports is going. You know the facilities as it relates to basketball that use all of the schools around here and so forth. There's a couple of notes. One thing about certainly for baseball because I'm at the mercy of baseball, I mean it's a feeder sport to town or high school but also the Red Birds. How many kids from Chanhassen are on the Red Birds? Terry Kemble: We've looked at 5 or 6 now. Lenny Checheris: Yeah there's just, you know and it's just these kids really just want to play ball and it wouldn't be possible if we didn't have such beautiful fields here in Chanhassen and you go from the small fields to the little bit bigger fields to the full sized fields and we can service them all. There was one other thing I was going to bring up. You know we have some head winds coming up I think I mentioned earlier as it relates to club baseball. If you're familiar with club soccer. People believe it's a better experience. You know it's more competitive and candidly it's not. These kids really get a great coaching from volunteer parents that coach baseball and it's something that we're going to have to really look at. Back up about 10 years ago softball, once you hit 12 years old you're off to club and it used to be housed in here didn't it up until they were like 14. Until high school. Now they're going younger and younger and pulling these really high level softball players and recruiting them so the growth projections as it relates to baseball we don't know. It's been flat for the last couple of years which is better than the decline that we've had in the last several and that's, we're just grateful that the kids keep coming out and they're having fun playing ball and the price is reasonable. CAA offers scholarships for those in need so if you don't have the money to play there's scholarships available and so it's very inclusive as it relates to play and you know if the coaches candidly make calls if the kids don't come back. They find out why aren't you playing? If they say hey I don't want to play baseball anymore. I sucked at it or it's too slow for me, I'm playing lacrosse. God bless you. Go do something else but if it's because of money we make sure that they're playing baseball or softball. So it's really a brief synopsis of our program. Is there anything about soccer because it's been kind of soft. You're going to talk about real soccer. 5 Park and Recreation Commission — October 27, 2020 Terry Kemble: So the youth soccer program we compete with Jonathan and then the City also has a soccer program too so when I first started in CAA there was probably 700-800 kids in the program in the fall and now it's gone down to say 200 because there's just so many different options to play in the fall and a lot of kids decide to play traveling soccer now because Jonathan has a really great program. My daughter played it 3 years. Kutz: Do you advertise for your programs like I've heard of you but I'm trying to think like where we could have signed up to play? How would we have gotten an email saying hey. Lenny Checheris: Honestly you wouldn't have because that has been our dilemma. It's been word of mouth. We have now hired a marketing director for our baseball program. Diamond Sports Program and that's really something that because Google provides you, if you're A 5 0 1 C league, Diamonds Sports is. CAA baseball/softball, they will provide you X amount of dollars to market and that's been a rub that we've had for quite a while so we've had people that would actually say hey I'll champion this and nothing got done and we are of course a volunteer organization and we spend quite a bit of time trying to generate more numbers for kids or more for the program because it exposes kids to baseball. Candidly this year I think we've got the right person to really deal with it. Terry Kemble: We also use that Peach Jar... Kutz: Yes, that's where I've heard. That's where I found, you jogged my memory now. Terry Kemble: We used to supply flyers and send them home with every child in their packets but they don't do the packets for that Peach Jar has actually saved us a lot of time and money. Kutz: So like the City they do the 3 and 4 year olds and the 5 and 6 year olds but that's kind of where you guys stop right? Sarles: Right. Kutz: In comes you guys, you know that might be an opportunity to work... saying hey here we go. Lenny Checheris: Where are you from I'm sorry? Sarles: I run the Rec Center. Lenny Checheris: The Rec Center, okay. Terry Kemble: Jodi and I worked together a lot when I ran the softball program. 0 Park and Recreation Commission — October 27, 2020 Sarles: And we do, I mean we basically tell people when they ask where do we go from here, you know because the kids have aged out and needs more competition. We send them all to CAA or over here to the CC United. Lenny Checheris: Yes sir. Peck: I've got several questions. I'm Jim Peck and ... but I'm a baseball freak. Lenny Checheris: Well good. We're in good company. Peck: I've been doing baseball for 58 years. One of my questions is the northern third of Chanhassen is not in the East Carver County or East Carver School District. Do you get any kids out of that or do they all end up in the Minnetonka system because that's where they go to school? Lenny Checheris: Jim you know we have quite a few kids that we've been able to pull from that corridor but eventually, and the reason being is because they tell us, they're qualified to play anybody within 112. St. Hubert. All of the parochial schools within our association boundaries are eligible to play. That area, and I think you're talking like just north of. Peck: Well it's not very far. It's about 6 blocks north. Lenny Checheris: Right. A lot of kids playing from, who go to school in Minnetonka play for Chanhassen. Peck: But as they get old they stay at Minnetonka because they don't have much option from what I can tell. Lenny Checheris: Correct. We've had one kid who's in my older boy, my 16 year old boy's class that is a Minnetonka kid that's choosing to go to Chan. Peck: My second question is you don't, you don't do anything with the Legion programs? That's a separate entity? Lenny Checheris: It is a separate entity but we are certainly a feeder program for them. Peck: My next question is your numbers from the last 6 years to not last year which you went up some, are about half. Do you think that's partially due to travel baseball? Lenny Checheris: I do not. What I do think it is, is the competing sports like lacrosse is really looking at 2013-2014, that was I'm trying to do the math. Peck: Yeah lacrosse is not on here so I can't relate to the numbers. 7 Park and Recreation Commission — October 27, 2020 Terry Kemble: We don't have lacrosse. Lenny Checheris: No we don't have lacrosse under our umbrella. Peck: But you have lacrosse in Chanhassen. Lenny Checheris: Oh yes we do. Peck: So it's competition. Lenny Checheris: Yep. Ruegemer: City Lacrosse, Minnetonka Lacrosse... Peck: Because I deal a lot with travel ball and that's fine. It's here to stay. I've got a couple theories you pay me I'll tell you how good your kid is. Your kid can't play very well because I want your money. That's going on a lot. Lenny Checheris: That's it, you know and to your point that's really what's happening at club areas right now that we're struggling with. We had one kid who was rostered on a club team at the Millers and played in the summer and in the fall but then for the following 2020-'21 summer he was cut because guess what they got a better kid in his position. Tsuchiya: Or he got too old. Lenny Checheris: No, no, this kids is an 11 year old kid. Peck: This kid might not have. Lenny Checheris: Yeah so he joined our program. Peck: And a child that comes from a family that doesn't have very much wherewithal monetarily, we're not interested in his unless he's really, really good and then we'll scholarship him on the other kid's dime. That's exactly what's going on. So I commend you that you've got it going and you've got a lot of kids playing and it's fun for them. They've got to enjoy it. If they don't enjoy it and not having fun they shouldn't be doing it. They should do something else whatever that may be. Lenny Checheris: Correct. Peck: Thank you. N. Park and Recreation Commission — October 27, 2020 Lenny Checheris: You're welcome. Any other questions? Kutz: Just briefly we talked about baseball and softball. Where are you guys play the basketball at? Lenny Checheris: Throughout, we're sprinkled through all of the schools around here. Rec Center. Terry Kemble: Mostly the high school. Lenny Checheris: Pioneer Ridge. Chaska Middle School East and West. Terry Kemble: Victoria. But the school district charges a lot of money for us to play in their facilities. We're very fortunate that the City of Chan doesn't charge us for field usage. Lenny Checheris: Yeah and kudos to whoever it is... The field when it's ready to play ball they're landscaped properly. They're, we've got enough infield dirt. You know it takes once it's there we still have to maintain it of course as an association but the initial start up man if you could take a picture of that it looks beautiful so commend the park board for taking care of the fields so well. Boettcher: The one thing you touched on was about baseball and the number is going down for different reasons but you hear it all the time about, especially high school sports. Parents are getting their kids out of football because it's too dangerous so they want to get them over to baseball and you mentioned it briefly and the kids say it's too boring. Like I try to watch the games like the World Series again tonight I'll be watching it but you know when somebody's standing up there and he has to undo his strap, like please when I played Babe Ruth and Junior League I mean I wasn't very good by any means but I was there. I mean we loved it. Now apparently kids look as it's too time consuming. You say some are going over to lacrosse so when you lose someone do you do like an exit review, you know what did you like? What did you like type of thing. Lenny Checheris: Yeah I think I touched on that a little bit. We do. For baseball in particular. I don't know about basketball or soccer but you know we reach out to the families and figure out what's up. What's wrong? Was it the coaching? Oh no not the coaching. Was it anything else? I just didn't want to play ball anymore. I wanted to play lacrosse and it's like as long as he's doing something and not playing video games I'm alright with it right, but if it's, you know we had a couple of people certainly throughout COVID that struggle financially and we supported them regardless what we had in our coffers. We have to take care of the kids and make sure they keep coming back. Peck: Sometimes when a player's 10 years old he's really playing because his dad's forcing him to play and he really doesn't want to. There's a little more of that than you really get to know. 9 Park and Recreation Commission — October 27, 2020 Lenny Checheris: There is some of that. Peck: Not a lot but there's some. Lenny Checheris: Yeah you know and to your point I think you've got some really engaged dads who lived vicariously through their kids and wish their kids were something that they weren't you know and you can tell. You can tell the kid's heart's not in it. You've been what did you say, coaching 58 years. You've seen it all then so. Peck: I don't think it's as bad now as it might have been 10 years ago. I think that's backed off a little bit with a lot of education. Lenny Checheris: I think it has but the truth of the matter is baseball, you have to have passion for that sport. Diamond Sport. Any diamond sport. Softball can get boring too but you just have to have passion about whatever you're doing. I have a son that plays baseball and downhill skis. Well he has a passion for both and you know hockey could be someone's passion or soccer could be someone's passion or baseball but eventually what I'm noticing now especially with my older boy, he was the first year he's not playing basketball since he was 5. He's in high school now. He's focused on football and baseball so you know kids gravitate to what they feel they're best at. Peck: In bigger schools they get so much pressure to play whatever 14 months a year that they can key on football or whatever if they don't play year round... Lenny Checheris: And that's the thing with my older boy. He's really training. He's a pitcher and he's training his pitching and hitting and winter long which is kind of breaks my heart because he's played basketball since he was a kid. You know he had, gymnasiums get a little stuffy and stinky and hot but it was still fun. The passion was there. You know everybody gets excited. A lot of noise and I miss it so. Ruegemer: Any other questions from the commission? Boettcher: I have one more but it's in regards to the basketball. I've been on the commission now this is my 9th year. We've heard a lot of presentations, is it Todd? Ruegemer: Neils? Boettcher: Neils came in and we talked about we did the lights at Susan. The dugouts. The scoreboards and stuff. The basketball I can't remember anyone coming in for CAA talking about basketball so I was kind of surprised when I looked at this and I see the numbers for participation actually more than baseball but it's something that's like a well kept secret. 10 Park and Recreation Commission — October 27, 2020 Lenny Checheris: You know it's a well oiled machine. Terry Kemble: My husband runs it. Boettcher: There's no problems with it? Lenny Checheris: Well and to be fair I mean he really has, a really stuffed program where kids, there were very few cuts this year right if any? Terry Kemble: I don't know. Lenny Checheris: Alright but that's just a rumor mill that not very many kids get cut but they're trying to be a lot more inclusive and he really does a great job. That's a lot of work. Terry Kemble: It's probably never been brought up because we don't use the city facilities for that but we use the school district's so that's probably why it's never been presented. Boettcher: Any other questions for anyone? Lenny Checheris: Thanks for having us. Terry Kemble: ...and what we should have talked about is, in normal years we host large tournaments for baseball and baseball and it brings a large number of people to the community and they go out to the restaurants. They stay in the hotels. You know they go to the grocery stores and I don't know if the City, maybe Jerry probably does because we do a lot with him but I don't know if the City people realize how much CAA brings to the community. Lenny Checheris: Yeah it's true. You know we had a baseball tournament which generates a great deal of money for the program but it also generates a lot for the restaurants and the hotels. Terry Kemble: The basketball tournament is the largest in the state. I said it's the largest one in the state and Sandy used to help us with that. Schubert: Oh basketball? Terry Kemble: Yes. Ruegemer: So just so the commission knows too and in probably February of this year I started working with Jackson... older kids with baseball. We kind of starting developing kind of an economic model to kind of gauge and track per team how much money is, what are we talking about here so we were kind of putting together some information to kind of try to measure that and have kind of a benchmark for year to year to kind of try to chart that so I was kind of working on that. I still have it and it's going to be a goal for 2021 to kind of hoping we'll be 11 Park and Recreation Commission — October 27, 2020 back to 80 percent normal, who knows but that is something that certainly I have interest in to present. I think it would it be helpful for our commission also for City Council as talking points I guess for economic so that could really tie into a lot of things. With future funding and field improvements for lighting or soccer improvements, that type of thing so based on ... we certainly want to support our business community. Council's very in tune with that so that's kind of one of the reasons why we started to talk about that ... but we'll dust that off and we'll get it kind of moving again so. Thank you both. Appreciate you coming in. Jonathan with CC United. Jonathan Tudor: Good evening. My name's Jonathan Tudor, T-u-d-o-r for those of you have not seen my last name around for a while. I'm the Director of Coaching at CC United Soccer. I'm figuring out more and more, and I apologize for a lack of preparation tonight. I changed by email address about a month ago and we've been trying to figure out people that don't have my new email so I got a call yesterday that says hey, there's a meeting and it was pretty vague but I put some things together on the club and if you've got any questions afterwards I'll be only too happy to chit chat some more about it. CC United is like the community based program. I've been privileged to be a part of community sub programs for the last, close to 30 years. Both myself, I worked for my dad at Tonka United and we were there for, my dad was there for probably 20 years and then he came over to us and I was his assistant at Tonka United and then CC United which was Chan Chaska Soccer Club back then which was some 16 years ago asked me to come over and help their program and I've been very, very fortunate to have a lot of good experiences over the year. Currently our club we have about 650 competitive players. We have about 1,100 in the rec. We are 40 percent gen in our total programs. We are a District 112 club so we cover the cities of Chaska, Chan and Carver and Victoria. The field usage that we get from the City of Chan, we're fortunate to get Bandimere and they're definitely overused in the fall program City Center. We absolutely and I apologize batter it up a little bit. We were there every day, every moment this year with our COVID requirements we struggled. Our season kind of came to a close in March and we were told basically, like everybody else it's been a very unsure time and obviously the safety of every family that's part of the program has been our highest priority. But we came back slowly and they had a guideline where we could only have 9 kids at practice but I'd have to mark out grids for them and that was very entertaining and they had to sit 5 yards apart and coaches with masks and spray bottles and we did that for a couple of months and it was very, very creative and I think the positive thing about COVID that I hope has happened is it's kind of, it's brought about something that's missing. You know we get lost in what we want from youth sports I feel currently and I think COVID kind of brought it back on track. We just want to see our kids play. We want our kids to be outside and want them to be away from the screen. We want them to be active. We want them to be engaged and missing that more than anything I think was absolutely huge for whatever sport they play. Whatever activity they do just having the ability to go and interact. I've got two kids. My oldest played through the CC United program and is currently in college. I never really understood kind of the value of youth sports until I became a parent coach and I think that, who's been a parent coach? Alright. I think the beauty of becoming a parent coach and being there with your kids and seeing them at some part in the journey or Sandy helping out with her kids ... just being a part of it I think is such a fantastic thing. You know you're privileged to see, to be on this journey with 12 Park and Recreation Commission — October 27, 2020 them that they seem to have, one of our coaches pointed out at what point do the smiles stop on the team pictures and it's usually about 13 when competition gets a little bit too serious and we focus on something else but like I said I think the COVID situation brought into what we actually want from this sport. As a community organization, like I said we're fortunate to get the facilities. We're in the July the 4t' parade. We're fortunate there. Last year's, was it last year's July the 4t' parade the club actually lost money by going in the parade because all the kids turned up with their soccer balls and put them on the back of the float and I thought they were to be given away so I was kicking these balls into the crowd and by the time we finished our loop there were like 12 crying children so it ... the club very well with everybody getting these new soccer balls. We had a picture of all these kids being pulled around on the back of these cars you know. Who knew soccer would make your kid miserable. You know we focus, CC United is a community based club. We focus on the attachment phase and we're very committed to community development. How we batten that up is that, we don't recruit. We don't, we have no flyers absolutely anywhere. We solely care about the kids that come out from District 112 from the start to the finish. You know there's no phone call. There's no advertisements in any magazines. There's no Facebook page that says come here. We have a very respectful approach to other people's community because I believe that if we take one player from another program like say Eden Prairie it creates a negative effect in that Eden Prairie program that affects somebody else's soccer experience so just having an open conversation with them and finding out why you here? You know what do you want out of this? What are you hoping to get that you're not getting and it's, if it's not happy where they're at and they're making sure that the kids are responsible and the parents are responsible and they reach out and do the right thing. But like I say we are very committed to the development of the kids in this. The attachment thing I think is the most important phase in anything that the children do. It's that part that they get to like and I think to be a part of the attachment thing it has to be local. It has to be cost effective and they have to be doing it with their friends. At the club we're very, very conscious on putting people with friends in our rec program. It's all friend based. When they get up to 11 years old then we take into account friendships and drives and things like that just so that we keep them connected. Our goal, and baseball's probably the same, it's not what happens now. It's by the time they hit 18 that they still want to come and swing a bat and hit a ball and if you've got kids that come back and they're playing and you've given them that I think that is more priceless than any state tournament that you could ever, ever win. In our program we have a large amount of parent coaches. The last successful year we had which was previous as far as the full season, we had 429 coaches and 380 were parents. And the reason why we strive to get parents coaches is it keeps the cost low. We don't have to pay for parent coaches. Without the increased fees to get them to come in but we make sure that the pressures are that they're well trained and these people would be absolutely lost without, because basically when you become a parent coach you have to do your background check and your safe ... and concussion training. It's a long requirement of safety precautions that we ask our parents to do and they're on top of that. We ask them to come in 3 times a month to come and do coach training and then they've got their own training and they're assessed on the field ongoing so we do hold them accountable but we want them to be a part of the program and they too see the joy in being a parent coach. On a personal note I think that youth sports lost it's purpose a little bit. I think we're losing the 13 Park and Recreation Commission — October 27, 2020 purpose of the name and the game and I've had a little bit chance to work with the cities to get the kids back in the game. You know it shouldn't be about playing for an elite team or a showcase team. It should be about playing for a team and it should be about the sport and the sport's name should surpass anything else. Some of the greatest soccer clubs in the world are just called their name. There's no academy or league or showcase that goes with it because we want them to play for the name not the game. We've proven in the club that even when we keep our kids together they can achieve. Last year we had a group of 18 year old girls that stayed together and play right through the program and out of a 16 player squad, 14 are playing college. 6 of them are playing Division 1 college. Two of them are playing at the U so that from a community club that doesn't search players is phenomenal achievement. It is an absolute phenomenal achievement and I think in my position I'm just privileged to have lots of memories of chasing Karl's dad. You know trying to keep up with him for many years. He's probably still playing age who knows what now. Tsuchiya: 66. Jonathan Tudor: Oh my goodness. He's defied age. You know and being a part of Sandy's kids and everywhere I go I see these memories of kids and it's not about the state tournament. It's about the years of practice and being around the group and keeping connected with the group and where they go and grow up and when they come back into the community with their own kids and make me feel twice as old so. The future of our club. We're trying to provide every single site. We're trying to provide an attachment for the kids in the community but we also recognize it's about development. It's about development of an ability to play a sport. We've added Annie Kutz who is the former Assistant Director of Coaching for Minnesota Youth Soccer to our staff. We've got Cole O'Connor as our goal keeper coach who was the Minnesota United Soccer Coach and we've recently just added a position for Katie Clark who was the Chanhassen Girls High School coach. She's going to be Director of Women's Sporting Attachment Phase so Katie's going to be in charge of any female experience within the club. If you've noticed despite the girls hauling the slide up the side on sports participation it's a male dominated coaching world and we want to get those moms involved. We want to get that balance because I think playing, I think having a girl playing for a female coach I think is priceless and can provide a lot more moving forward for them in their longevity. That's a lot of information there. Like I say we are struggling right now with our neighbors. Our neighbors in Minnetonka, we recognize that the borders cross and Chanhassen runs into Minnetonka just as Minnetonka runs into Chanhassen but they're crossing a few boundaries and we're having a few difficulties with them. They are a recruiting club and there are different beliefs and directions to us but it is making it a challenge with their current stance and mail out's and things like that so we're trying to work together. We welcome any help to be able to work together to provide an opportunity for all kids to play in any community. So we are looking at that. The thing I think we need from the City of Chan is the fields are fantastic and we're sad that they weren't used as much as they were the previous year. They were always well kept and they're as accessible as ever and I understand the importance of pulling the trigger when the rain comes. We could use some working together maybe to get some goals out there on Bandimere because are still, they're the oldest things that 14 Park and Recreation Commission — October 27, 2020 we have. I'd invite Cole's probably got 3 or 4 goals on him that tells you how old they actually are so any questions? That's about everything that our club is, you know we are year round program now. Now developing the District 112 dome. We utilize that. We utilize space in Eden Prairie. We're trying not to push our kids into you must play soccer year round. It is the belief of myself and the club's direction that kids should multi sport. They should play hockey, basketball, football, baseball, whatever that they want. They shouldn't be pressured into one sport and what we have at the club is called an open door policy where our kids can just email a coach and go practice with that team. So if they've got baseball on Mondays and that's when their team is practicing, if there's a team practicing on Tuesday they can go play with them and just say to that coach and say hey I trained with that team just to keep my team in so we're not trying to force our kids to play soccer. What we're trying to do is to get them to understand what their goals are. What do you want to do with your soccer? How good do you want to be? If you just want to play with your friends that's fine. If you want to push then you need to be accountable to those goals and that's the big thing we focus on in the club and this year I'm very excited to have the staff to it. We have an office just down by Paisley Park and I'm very excited to see what the next few years hold for the club so. Ruegemer: Does the commission have any questions for Jonathan? Sweetser: Jonathan are we still one of the larger clubs with kind of...? Jonathan Tudor: We used to be but the change in the soccer dynamic and I don't know what it's like in other sports but other community clubs emerging to survive so for example there's just been Woodbury and Dakota Red merged to form a club called Salvo which loses their community name which I don't know how they do it and still get community fields but now they're trying to get Lakeville in there too. Burnsville has merged with Apple Valley. Minnetonka merged with Hopkins and Plymouth so they've got their programs so it's survival all over the place. Tsuchiya: Wayzata? Peck: Plymouth's Wayzata. Jonathan Tudor: Yes Wayzata Soccer Club merged with Plymouth to form PSA and then Tonka merged with PSA to form the fusion. Soon we'll all be just one big club. You know that's the kind of thing that we're fighting against because we are an attachment based club. We want the kids to have the experience but like saying, the challenge just lately is, I think some clubs have lost focus on their grass roots which is the kids ... and you've got to prioritize them in every way. They're the ways that are going to keep your club going and growing so. Ruegemer: Thank you Jonathan. Anything else? We appreciate your guys coming in tonight and sharing your stories and we applaud your passion for the community and really provide the opportunities for the kids so thank you for that. 15 Park and Recreation Commission — October 27, 2020 Jonathan Tudor: Thank you. Ruegemer: You're welcome to stay if you'd like to but you're certainly welcome to go eat tonight. Take care. REPORTS: 2020 PICNIC SEASON EVALUATION. Boettcher: I don't see anything listed here under old business. You didn't have anything additional Jerry? Ruegemer: No. Boettcher: We go onto item I, Reports. First one is 2020 Picnic Season Evaluation. Priya this looks like it's your's. Tandon: Yep, thank you Chair Boettcher and thank you commissioners. So this year's 2020 picnic reservation season was significantly shorter than previous seasons, as you can imagine due to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic and restrictions on gathering size so this year paid picnic reservations totaled 32. We normally have around 120 so obviously very down just due to the cancellations and restrictions on gathering size. So the paid picnic reservations ran from July 21 st through October 3rd compared to May 1st to October 1st or so which it normally is. And these 32 reservations generated about $3,000 in revenue compared to the $15,000 that we normally bring in. And many other picnics and small gatherings take place weekly at all the locations but reservations aren't made so that's an option for people as well. So just going over some background like I said, the typical picnic reservation season was May 1st through October 15t but this year the first portion of that picnic season fell under the Stay at Home Minnesota order in phases I and 2 of the State's Safe Reopening plan and so the Stay at Home or Stay Safe they really encouraged no social gatherings and that increased to 10 so it didn't make sense to have a lot of those picnics because a lot are larger company picnics or family reunions that by nature have more than 10 people and cost of those groups cancelled their events on their own so we just kind of didn't open the picnic season. And then the other point there is yeah typically most picnic shelter reservations throughout the years are for groups over 25 people so that's kind of why we kind of waited til the guideline of 25 people in a social setting to reopen those picnic reservations. So for 2020 like I said 32 paid picnic reservations brought in a total of $3,000 revenue. To remain compliant with the CDC and State Safety Guidelines the capacity for all picnic shelter reservations was limited to 25 people and that was based off of the social setting classification as part of the State's Safe Reopening Plan. Not the outdoor entertainment classification which is that 250 number so that's why we went with the 25 people. The revenue typically is around $15,000 compared to the $3,000 this year just again with COVID. If you see there are a few attachments that detail the number of reservations. The number of people. Kind of a total throughout those reservations and then the revenue as well. Unfortunately 2020 isn't really comparable to any of the previous years because of by nature it's 2020 as you can kind of Park and Recreation Commission — October 27, 2020 see by the graphs there. Everything down but consistent with other seasons. Most popular site was the Klingelhutz Pavilion at Lake Ann which was then followed by the Lakeside Pavilion at Lake Ann which was then followed by Lake Susan. And there is a breakdown that kind of details that each pavilion, how many residents made reservations. Was it school district? Non- residents and those were pretty consistent with previous years but just very, very scaled down in number. And we did have over 700 picnickers that were parts of picnics that were under reservation so that was cool to see. At the end of the picnic season an evaluation was sent out to those who made picnic shelter reservations and the information collected was largely positive. The big comments and suggestions included fees, especially for the lower capacity of people and hope for some sort of online reservation system or request form so we'll review that for next year. And yeah overall I guess we're pleased that we had the picnic facilities to offer to people especially as they look for ways to maybe social distance for a gathering with family. You know especially the Klingelhutz is pretty big and wide open and so people could come with their groups of family and spread out so it was a nice thing that we were able to offer, and that's about it. Anyone have any questions? Boettcher: Anyone have any questions for Priya? We've still got something with a shorten year and a weird year and hopefully the last year like that. Tandon: There were a lot more weddings and celebrations of life this year than I think maybe previous years just because we were one of the spaces that were open and outdoors for people to use so that was kind of nice to see. Tsuchiya: Priya I was wondering with the 25 person limitation, did you guys do any kind of enforcement on that? Tandon: We did not. So every reservation we made we really asked people to follow the spirit of the Executive Order and make sure they are limiting capacity and kind of did our best to make sure that they were at the 25 person limit prior to making the reservations so there were no surprises at then end, like oh. My group has 100 people, you know. We tried to make it very clear from the beginning and I think people understood. Tsuchiya: Okay so more of an honor system. Tandon: Yeah. Ruegemer: Just so the commission knows, I mean the phone rang all summer long and had we had higher capacity of our 25 people we could have made our $15,000 and probably more because Priya was constantly taking phone calls and Jodi same thing with, you know if we had increased capacity at the Rec Center as well we could have been booking rooms all day long but obviously we're following the CDC guidelines and the Department of Health guidelines so we know our parks were being extremely used this summer as it was kind of a place where you could go together as Priya said so I think our community feels extremely lucky and fortunate that 17 Park and Recreation Commission — October 27, 2020 our facilities were open. Our playgrounds were open. Skate park was open. Our beaches were open. Our picnic facilities were open so we at least have some positivity in the cruddy year that 2020 has been with that so I think people were extremely appreciative of that and as Priya touched on it we had just cancellations upon cancellations from you know birthday parties to graduation parties and family reunions so you can see in the numbers we were down on our revenue projections but I think that's across the board for everybody right so we're hoping for a strong rebound in 2021 and hopefully once we get the vaccine and things start getting hopefully back to normal we're hoping for 70, 80 percent or 90 percent next year so fingers crossed but you know Priya and Jodi and Mary they all did a great job of informing people of what they can and can't do and providing safe protocol in place to get people involved and make sure that we're going in the right direction for our facilities so thank you. Boettcher: Alright thank you. CHANHASSEN PARK AND RECREATION SCHOLARSHIP PROGRAM REVIEW. Boettcher: This looks like Jodi. Sarles: Thank you Chair Boettcher and commissioners. I'm not sure if you've uncovered it or not but we have had a scholarship program here, a formalized one in the City of Chanhassen since 2009. It's on our website. We offer it to anybody here. Under our current program applicants can receive up to $100 per person per year with a family maximum of $350. We have a few minimum co -payments so it's 20 percent for that program so if they were to come and go to one of the playground programs they would have to pay that first 20 percent and then the park and rec covers the 80 percent there. So we have some exclusions currently. So a lot of Mary's trips, overnight trips. We've got punch cards were one. Day camp. Sports unlimited and Sky Hawks camps, shelter and facility, personal training and then the competitions and that. Each recipient may use that for a total of up to 4 programs annually and then only 3 of those can be summer programs. So since 2009 we've granted $4,000 in scholarship funds so it's not, for that time period that's a fairly low number. But as we're looking at it and we kind of decided to do an investigation and see how other areas are doing. What we're doing differently. What can we do to include more activities so we decided to kind of shift how we offer our programs. Change that percentage so folks will pay for 50 percent instead of 20 percent but then with that switch we include things like punch cards. Make a purchase of punch cards. Now punch cards are like cash and they would have to stay here in house but they could use it for their family and that would offer a lot more options for people to use that money. Also we would include those Sky Hawks and Sports Unlimited camps who did remove kind of the $10 programs and less. Just that is a lot of the administrative fees and everything to get people, it makes sense with those and they can use that for more programs annually with a limit of 3. We allow that for all ages. Some area programs were just for ages 18 and under but we felt it was important to continue to offer it for everyone. You know for all people's health so if you kind of look around a couple of the attachments are what we will put out for 2021. Got to remember those dates in my head here so it's just basically, it is for just residents of the City of Chanhassen. Can't have any outstanding Park and Recreation Commission — October 27, 2020 balances of course and then the kind of program scholarships will be awarded as resources allow. So if all of a sudden got inundated and everybody was taking a gymnastic class and we kind of ran through the entire season for our year with that, that gives us the flexibility to pull back some of that. The dollars that we would be covering. A lot of area programs either have a scholarship fund so they're doing different programs and things to try to generate funds with that. Some of them are like memorial funds. That's what Chaska has is a memorial fund. And so this one we're basically kind of covering that cost for the folks so we are going to still not include things like day camps and field trips. Adult sports, personal training, birthday party facility rentals, those sort of programs but we did include those other programs such as the Rec Center punch cards and also the attachment is the upgraded scholarship application form so if you do have neighbors, friends, people you know that are looking to participate and don't think they can we should sure love to have them here. We don't want to exclude anybody for any of our programs so. Do you have any comments on the scholarship program or things you'd like to see added or changed? Kutz: So are you ... dollar amount fee or is it just whatever it ends up being? Sarles: We've set a maximum for $1,000 I think it was per quarter and that was set in 2009 so we've used $4,000 so we're doing okay with that one for now. Sweetser: And that's just based on the number of applicants. Sarles: Correct. And kind of looking at this we were also anticipating that we may be seeing additional applications for folks right now with this COVID phase so wanted to make sure we can take care of people and provide them those activities that they can do in the city here. Boettcher: So when you go through the vetting process I mean do you ask the tough question, I mean if somebody asks for assistance do you say can we see your mom and dad, two kids, do you get to that degree or how is it, I mean that's always the tough question. Sarles: Right. Boettcher: You don't always ask that but. Sarles: So kind of on our program we really don't want to keep people's personal information here. That was one of the things so we do ask if you're receiving a form of public assistance and these are how many people are in your household and also if there's any hardships that we should know about and then your annual income estimate so that's kind of the questions we ask. We do not make them provide us with any statements from the State or anything that they're receiving you know free and reduced lunches with the school district. Ruegemer: And that's basically kind of based on their answers with that. We're kind of taking people at their word on that so obviously they do have an annual income. We can see what 19 Park and Recreation Commission — October 27, 2020 people are making and how many kids and people they're supporting within their family so you can kind of see the number of years that we've been doing, we don't get a lot of people generally asking for assistance so I don't view this as a wide spread problem and I guess we have, like the associations tonight have really kind of looked at this as it's really our goal to include our public in our recreation programs. We don't financial barrier to be a problem so we've always absorbed annual costs and it hasn't been a large sum of money through the years. You know we have a lot of in kind things that we can just provide for our staffing and we don't have a lot of money going out that we can't cover or absorb within the revenue phase of these programs so. Obviously Jodi and Priya talk about this. We have to anticipate part of this too. The associations kind of touched on it tonight but people lose their jobs or furloughed and we do have a lot of needs out there potentially so if people have enough courage I guess to ask, we want to make, we really want to navigate them through that easy process for them and I don't think we've ever turned anybody down at all so it's going to be easy for people to get their kids involved. I guess in my mind and I think in staff s mind it really is a confidence booster. It's something positive for people whether it be their kids or a parent, they can provide for their family and that's a positive light within a tough situation so we're all on board with this and hope the commission is as well. Tsuchiya: Does any of this proposal need a motion? Ruegemer: We should have a motion on that yeah. Sarles: It's not written but it would be to accept the recommendations for a 2021 scholarship program. Boettcher: Would someone like to make a motion? Tsuchiya: I'll make a motion. I would move that the recommendation that staff has outlined in item number I-2 be adopted. Is that sufficient Jerry? Ruegemer: Yep. Boettcher: Alright we have a motion. Is there a second? Sweetser: Second. Boettcher: Motion and a second. Any other discussion? Tsuchiya moved, Sweetser seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission adopt the recommendation outlined in Item number I-2 regarding the 2021 Park and Recreation Scholarship Program. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of7to0. 20 Park and Recreation Commission — October 27, 2020 LAKE ANN PARK PLAYGROUND EQUIPMENT UPDATE. Boettcher: Thank you Jodi. Very good. Jerry you've got I-3. Ruegemer: I do. Boettcher: With a presentation. Ruegemer: So obviously we did not have an opportunity to get out to Lake Ann Park to visit the new playground equipment this year with darkness and cold and snow but I just wanted to put together just a brief, it's nothing over the top. I just wanted to kind of show the commission tonight kind of a start to finish in pictures the progress and finished product at Lake Ann so. Just want to kind of go through that here real quick with the commission so we know that the Lake Ann Beach, we took that playground equipment down right after Labor Day. Right after the beach season closed. We knew that the beach was extremely busy this year with COVID, so we wanted, we didn't want to interrupt the kind of flow of that so we waited until school kind of started after the Labor Day weekend until we took that down so. So we took down the old equipment and kind of got the process started so the commission will probably remember the playground cost was around $50,000 for that replacement of the concrete border. There was kind of a combo bid between Power Hill Park and Lake Ann Park so that was $40,000 in total so we kind of split that out so we figured about $18,000 for the border. We'll see some pictures of that here coming up as well with that and the interior wood fiber. We kind of got rid of the pea gravel. You know a lot of times we'll do the poured in place for the community park structures. That's kind of the surface for that so that was basically $1,800 for a total of $69,800 for that so this playground replaced the original, well not the original but a playground from 1992 so 28 years old. That playground was so it was time. It was getting tired with that. The border was getting tired so we'll just kind of go through that itself. So you can kind of see on the left hand side, that was the original structure since 1992 with that and we'll kind of go through and the crew was starting to assemble the project. You can see the leaves so that was probably in late September for that. For kind of the starting of that project so take a picture of that and we'll kind of work through the process here. So this is kind of the beginning of the project. Everything was fenced for safety and there was throughout the course of the day the crew would get done working and they would button up everything for the night so people wouldn't get in there. So kind of the removal process here. So we took out the wood border for that and then one of our skids here, Bobcats then pulled out the old piping and concrete footings out with that and basically kind of started with a clean slate. This is the concrete company, Tietz Construction was down there so the container was expanded to make it a little bit more room down there as well so you kind of see how they form the concrete. The concrete border for that. Has some different angles of that so obviously concrete was poured all the way around the structure itself so you kind of see it from different angles what it looked like so that's kind of the start of that. I think this was done 1 or 2 days before they poured. So that's when the concrete was pouring. You can kind of see the concrete... so our crew comes in and starts to kind of lay out the decking and the support posts for the playground equipment itself so if you can kind of see the orange dots kind 21 Park and Recreation Commission — October 27, 2020 of painted in the dirt, you kind of see that? That is where it's, the posts were basically laid out so the insulation could happen so the rental machine is called a Dingo so we used to do a lot of the digging with a Bobcat attachment and then 2 foot auger. We'd work with it down and ripe out the dirt. This has got a lot smaller footprint. Little bit easier to navigate through that container with that. You'll see some additional pictures so everything gets done. I see one, that's JJ holding that but holding up laser level so we can get exact depth on that so, with that so we can kind of go from side to side so. Our crew you see them holding the level with that and you can kind of see that auger bit that goes down to a certain depth and then pulls out the dirt and then that's kind of an exact depth based on height of the pole and a number of different factors of kind of how that has to be constructed. So again old and new, same angle. This is a complete product. This is done probably about the first week or two in October out at Lake Ann so you can see the wood fiber, kind of the base material that's in there so Adam and crew usually leave about 3 inches over the winter time. We're letting it kind of compact with moisture, rain, play, everything kind of settles down and then they'll come back at a later time and then kind of top dress it again to make sure they've got their safety depth and stuff for that around all areas of the playground itself so old versus the new for that. You can kind of see the different angles of the new playground equipment itself. I think the last shovel of wood fiber and there were already kids playing on it so we know that this will be a very welcomed site come next spring and summer. Early summer with the beach reopens back up again but park maintenance staff did a great job of getting it completed and kind of buttoned up here prior to the winter season so it's ready to go. If those commissioners who have kids or grandkids that want to go down and play, have at it. It's really a nice addition to Lake Ann so questions? Tsuchiya: I'm just curious Jerry, what happens to the old equipment? Is it recycled or donated? Ruegemer: Usually by the time, usually it is kind of outlived it's usefulness so a lot of times you know when I first started working here a lot of times we would put it on public auction but now just kind of through liabilities of old equipment and that sort of thing it's basically just recycled and destroyed. Boettcher: You said it was 28 years old. Ruegemer: 28 years old, yep. Installed in 1992. Boettcher: Because what is it, normally isn't it 25? Ruegemer: 20-25, yeah. This is really kind of a first generation epoxy poles and kind of a lot of the stuff was old redwood and wood type of structures that kind of were that first generation. And then we kind of evolved through the course of time so now you don't see wood borders anymore. It's all kind of poured in place concrete now so we're really kind of looking at really a longevity thing so they do last the number of years. Obviously we have a significant investment in these playground pieces so we just want everything to last so I will not be around when this one is replaced again. Hopefully. 22 Park and Recreation Commission — October 27, 2020 COMMISSION MEMBER COMMITTEE REPORTS. None. COMMISSION MEMBER REPORTS. None. Boettcher: I did notice one thing today. I drove by Lotus Lake boat landing and it looked like one of the residents that lives right by the landing had cleared some timber or someone came in and did a landscape service. There was a bunch of firewood stacked on the sidewalk. Is that to be given away or do you know anything about it? Ruegemer: I don't know anything about that. Boettcher: It was all I could do to not stop and load it back in my Jeep. As soon I would if someone would come out, but it's right where the restroom usually is. It's right out here on the sidewalk and they even have it stacked by size. The bigger diameter here to the smaller. Ruegemer: Easy for pickens huh? Boettcher: That's what I thought. I mean like I said it was really tough. Sarles: We don't know how you get home tonight but if it goes away. Ruegemer: In the dead of the night go load up. Boettcher: I mean you wouldn't have to worry about Emerald Ash Borer. It's close for transporting it. Alright seeing no other business anyone want to make a motion to adjourn? Tsuchiya moved, Sweetser seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 7 to 0. The Park and Recreation Commission meeting was adjourned at 8:21 p.m. Submitted by Jerry Ruegemer Park and Rec Director Prepared by Nann Opheim 23 CHANHASSEN PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING NOVEMBER 24, 2020 Chairman Boettcher called the meeting to order at 7:03 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Jim Boettcher, Karl Tsuchiya, Matt Kutz, Haley Schubert, Sandy Sweetser, Jim Peck, Joe Scanlon, and Youth Commissioner Zoe Erpelding MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Jerry Ruegemer, Park and Rec Director; Priya Tandon, Recreation Supervisor; and Jodi Sarles, Rec Center Manager APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Jerry Ruegemer added an item under Public Announcements regarding providing an update on Phase II operations within the City. Tsuchiya moved, Kutz seconded to approve the agenda as amended. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 8 to 0. PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS: Boettcher: Anything else, Jerry? You've got one item? Ruegemer: I just want to give the Commission an update as to where we are right now. As of yesterday morning, Monday morning, the City of Chanhassen went from Phase I to Phase II operations. Just with the rise in COVID cases, we decided as an organization to shut down all of our public building to try to get a handle on exposure to our employees as well as our public coming in contact with our public buildings. City Hall is closed. Public Works, the Chanhassen Senior Center and the Chan Rec Center. They are all closed to the public. What that means is no in -person programming at this point anymore so we are really trying to modify a lot of our operations as to kind of what we're doing. Priya, Jodi, and Mary have all gotten together the last couple of weeks in anticipation of this coming down the line and really trying to beef up our virtual recreation program in offerings that we are going to be having going forward through the four weeks that the mandate from Governor Walz is in place and beyond. We're kind of looking that it's probably going to go until after the first of the year into January. Programming staff is doing a great job on looking ahead for that. Mary is looking already at modifying her holiday party that's coming up here. That was going to be in early December. Taking it out of the Rec Center and have a drive -by food pickup and that's... Staff is in the modifying, making it work mode again here for everything. Public Works, we're certainly taking precautions. Everybody is masking up. We're not riding together in the same vehicle. We're staying apart six feet at least. Everybody's trying to take precautions in washing hands and if there are symptoms that are Park and Recreation Commission — November 24, 2020 present within our organization, we certainly are asking people to take a mandatory two -week quarantine period at home whether that is exposure of yourself or a family member or spouse. whatever. People have been very diligent about recognizing that and staying away. Knock on wood, our employee base has been pretty good across the board, whether that's at City Hall of Public Works. Certainly we've had some cases with that but our percentage certainly do not rival that of Carver County's high percentages. We are in that 13-15% rate right now. We are doing everything we can to lessen our operation exposure like I said again to our employees and also the public. That's kind of where we are at right now. We were operating Phase I and that was kind of the mass and offices and really trying to distance as much as we can. That was really the reasoning for going virtual. In Phase II all of the public meetings now are all virtual. That's the Environmental Commission, Park & Recreation Commission, Planning Commission, City Council, all those types of things. That's kind of where we're going to be at for a awhile so anticipate our December meeting also being virtual with that as well. We'll send out another link for the Zoom meeting information so I just wanted to give the Commission an update as to kind of where we are at right now going forward for a while. Boettcher: Jerry, is the anticipation is that you will follow the timeline of the Governor's restaurant and gym shutdown or are we just looking at on your own from internal City of Chanhassen and make a decision that way? Ruegemer: No, Chair Boettcher, we are following the Governor's lead on that. Certainly with the MDH and health guidelines with that as well but we are following the Governor's lead on that. Boettcher: Okay. Thank you. Ruegemer: You're welcome. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS: Boettcher: Any other questions for Jerry? Hearing none, we will move on. Visitor Presentations? ...on the public there? Karl's got a grin on his face. He may have somebody in the room with him. Tsuchiya: No. I don't see anybody Zoom -bombing us. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Boettcher: Approval of the Minutes I think is kind of a done deal since they weren't included so we can move on from that. Ruegemer: Apologies again to the Commission on that. We are going to be working through some details on our end on that, so apologies again to the Commission. 2 Park and Recreation Commission — November 24, 2020 Boettcher: It shows where we rank in the importance of the City. Ruegemer: Hopefully you don't feel that way but I'm not sure what's going on with that. We will get that cleared up on our end. NEW BUSINESS: PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION INTERVIEW PROCESS Boettcher: No problem. Thank you. All right, moving on to New Business. Jerry, this looks like it's yours. Ruegemer: Yes. Thanks Chair Boettcher. I think we had talked a little bit about this. Sorry I need to put my glasses on. The writing I think is getting smaller on these reports. Kind of what we are doing as a city is taking a look at the whole interview process across the board in all commissions. On a staff level we certainly are discussing kind of looking at the process. In the past, all of you have gone through that process of applying, coming in and talking to the Park & Rec Commission, going through that process, then recommendations have been made for the Park & Rec Commission on to City Council. You come again for a second interview with that process. What we are trying to do across the board in all commission is trying to streamline that process. We're kind of looking to eliminate the commission interview and go right to the Council level with that. What we are looking to do is 1) brainstorm between the Commission here and look at what are the 5, 6, 7 top characteristics that you guys are looking at in potential candidates. We are looking for that so we can brainstorm on that and then 2) we are also looking for a person that will represent the Park & Rec Commission and have a seat at that table, and then a backup. Typically, the person that represents the Commission is the chair and the second person that could fill in potentially could be the vice chair as well. That's the way it's breaking down so really what we are looking to do is come up with those key characteristics tonight and then nominate two people, one person as kind of the lead person to go in on those interviews and the second person to be in that spot. The background is the information that is listed in your report. That's the information attached to all the Boards and Commissions as far as attendance and powers and duties and that sort of thing. Just for your information that you guys can draw upon. Obviously, we are going to be, with Commissioner Schubert successfully gaining a spot on the City Council. Congratulations to Haley on that. We are going to be looking for a replacement for her spot. That will be an application process again to fill her spot and that will start by this new process. After the first of the year, after Commissioner Schubert is sworn in to City Council, we will be paralleling that process and getting some candidates available to interview. I will entertain characteristics that the Commission would like me to write down and I can forward those on Interim City Manager Johnston. Boettcher: How soon would you want? A couple of week's timeframe that we get our suggestions to you? Ruegemer: I would love to do that tonight, Chair Boettcher. 3 Park and Recreation Commission — November 24, 2020 Boettcher: Would you? Okay. I don't know if anyone had anything prepared so everybody can think on their feet or their seat since we have to do this early because short -timer Schubert wants to leave us. Ruegemer: She's not laughing, Jim. Boettcher: She's not! Tsuchiya: Don't call down the wrath, Jim. Come on! Boettcher: We will miss her, definitely. Tsuchiya: Nice recovery. Boettcher: Any ideas? Matt, you're usually pretty vocal and do you have some ideas you would like to lead us off? Kutz: I don't know. It would be nice to have somebody that is familiar with the city process and how to navigate it, if possible. But, then again, somebody else that's a little bit newer so that they have fresh ideas. That's always nice in my opinion. If they have any experience with park and rec stuff I think that's always a plus and how they moved previous park and rec stuff forward like if they were part of a park and rec in a neighboring city. If they have had a hand in a project before. Ruegemer: Thank you, Matt. Boettcher: Sounds good. Anyone else have any suggestions? Tsuchiya: I don't know how we can measure this but I would say someone who is active. Someone who will use the park and other recreational facilities. Some firsthand knowledge to demonstrate that either they have or they will use the parks. Has gone to Lake Ann. Have been to Bandimere. Has some first-hand knowledge. I think that would be helpful. Boettcher: Jerry, is the anticipation the candidates, a successful candidate, would that be a one- year term same as Chair and Co -Chair. What were the thoughts on that? Ruegemer: No, that position would assume Commissioner Schubert's remaining time on that. Boettcher: No. I mean the person that was going to be assigned to the selection committee. Ruegemer: Yes, that would coincide with that. Yes. Boettcher: So both of them would be a one-year commitment? 2 Park and Recreation Commission — November 24, 2020 Ruegemer: Yes, or less potentially depending when your term is up. Boettcher: Okay. Anyone else have any thoughts? Commissioner Schubert, since you are leaving us you can give one last blast here. Schubert: I figure I'm going to be on the committee helping pick the next person out so I'm listening to you guys. Question, though. Any thoughts on people with experience with youth sports associations in town versus not? Plus, minus, kind of net neutral? I don't know. Boettcher: So you are saying like a CAA member or a soccer group... Schubert: Yeah. Or like Commissioner Sweetser having had children... I think everyone here mostly except for me has had children go through youth sports within the town and how important is that on to this because youth sports in town do use our facilities for the most part. The City facilities. Is that something people feel strongly one way or another on? Boettcher: Sandy, what do you think? Sweetser: I think that's definitely part of kind of what Karl was saying just with knowing the community and having been involved with it in different capacities, using different programs and facilities, but also I was thinking... way to pinpoint it but somebody with some fundraising knowledge or some just capabilities of thinking outside of that box. Not that we've had an opportunity to do a lot of that recently but just how can we come up with new and different ideas and revenue -producing opportunities. I don't know. I wouldn't put that as the number one, but just somebody that maybe has some of that capability of thinking in those directions. Ruegemer: Good thoughts, Sandy. I appreciate that. Tsuchiya: I'm wondering also can we add something in there that talks about looking at the current composition of the commission and if you are consideration a candidate, looking for some other points of view, whether that be age, gender, race, capabilities. Looking at park and recreation from a handicapable point of view for example. We haven't really entertained anything like that. Can we get somebody else that might be able to bring that perspective that we have been overlooking, as an example. Boettcher: That is a great point, Karl. There is actually someone going on right now in the Watershed District. It's called DEI and it's looking to get in more minorities and such. Getting a more diverse group together on different commissions like the Watershed District. A couple of DNR committees that I'm on they're doing the same thing so it's pretty much what's going on across the board that I see right now. Ruegemer: Great. Joe or Zoe, do you guys have any thoughts? 5 Park and Recreation Commission — November 24, 2020 Scanlon: Yeah. I really like what Karl said about adding a voice that we don't necessarily have right now. I think that's something that's always good to add to the fold if possible. Obviously, that kind of depends on who applies and stuff. If you can get that and then somebody who's passionate about the parks or the recreation facilities and someone who either wants to be involved or is involved I think that's always a plus, too. Boettcher: Zoe, any thoughts from you? Erpelding: Those all sounded good to me. I liked the point about with the fundraising. How that would be a new, kind of different thing and to have perspective to have new ideas. Boettcher: Okay. Are you jotting all these down, Jerry? Ruegemer: Yes, I am. Boettcher: You're the faithful jotter this evening? Ruegemer: I got my notepad right here. Tsuchiya: Are you writing really big, too? Ruegemer: Absolutely. I'll show you right here. Boettcher: No stick figures though, huh? Ruegemer: Not yet. That's great. Those are great ideas. Great thoughts. That's a great starting point so if there is anything else that the Commission would like to think about tonight you certainly can email me the next couple of days if you would like to and get some more thoughts before it goes on to the Interim City Manager Johnston on that. All the commissions are kind of going through this exercise as well. We're trying to look for new ways to do things. Like you guys said, kind of thinking outside the box. Not do it the same way we have done for the last thirty years and try new things. We appreciate that and your thoughts. The next thing would be to identify a couple of people going forward that will be part of that committee and interview process. Tsuchiya: Jerry, is that something that has to be advertised or do you look at past applicants and reach out to them? What happens? For Haley's position? Ruegemer: We would advertise that. It would go on our city web pages and social media posts and that would kind of start that process all over again. We don't necessarily go back to the people with past applications. We just advertise again to get new candidates. Certainly, people can reapply if they would like. 71 Park and Recreation Commission — November 24, 2020 Tsuchiya: Okay. Ruegemer: So what we are looking for is the first person and second person that would be involved in that process here that we can identify to be on that interview committee with the Council. Boettcher: I guess nominations would be open? Anyone has any choice? Tsuchiya: Chair Boettcher. Boettcher: Why did I know you were going to say that? Tsuchiya: Because you can see my face. Boettcher: That's it. That's why mine is hidden so you can't see what I'm looking at you with. Tsuchiya: I'm sure that's it. I think you're out on the lake somewhere. Boettcher: And I guess we'll need a second? Sweetser: Second. Boettcher: All rights. And for the alternate commissioner? If I could I would choose Matt Kutz. Sweetser: I'll nominate Karl. Kutz: I'll nominate Karl, too. Boettcher: I just wanted Matt to sit up in his chair. That's why I called his name. Do we have a second for Karl? I think there is two of them. Kutz: Yeah, there's two. Boettcher: With those two choices I'll entertain a motion to approve. Kutz: Motion. Boettcher: Second? Sweetser: Second. Boettcher: A motion and a second and those in favor signify by saying aye. 7 Park and Recreation Commission — November 24, 2020 Ruegemer: Chair Boettcher? Can we repeat who made the motion please? Boettcher: We did the selections. We didn't do the proposed motion as of yet, I don't think. I think this was just the commissioner and the alternate commissioner that we just voted on. Ruegemer: And who made that motion? Boettcher: Karl picked me. Ruegemer: Okay. I thought you just voted on something here so I wanted to know who made the motion. Kutz: I think Commissioner Sweetser picked Karl and I kind of seconded it. Sweetser: Yes. Boettcher: But to Jerry's point, there is a request here on the agenda for a motion to develop a list of key characteristics. So if someone would want to make a motion and a second on the listed motion? Tuschiya: I would move to propose the key characteristics that Jerry so eloquently wrote down on his notepad for our interview process. Boettcher: All right. And a second? Sweetser: Second. Boettcher: We have a motion and a second. All those in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed, no. Commissioner Tuschiya moved and Commissioner Sweetser seconded to propose the key characteristics as noted by Jerry Ruegemer for the interview process. All voted in favor and the motion carried 8-0. NEW BUSINESS: YOUTH ASSOCIATION PRESENTATIONS Boettcher: Jerry, it looks like this is also yours. Ruegemer: Yep. Chair Boettcher, last month we had CAA and CC United come and give presentations as to what they have done, their history in our community. We were all set to have Tonka United in tonight but there was a COVID situation that this person is in quarantine right now so we are not going to be doing that tonight. We are going to postpone their presentation to N. Park and Recreation Commission — November 24, 2020 a future date. I just heard that this afternoon. That is where we are going to go tonight so we are just going to reschedule that for a future meeting. Boettcher: Great. That works. NEW BUSINESS: ESTABLISH 2O21 PICNIC RESERVATION FEES Boettcher: Jerry, this is still yours. Ruegemer: Thank you, Chair Boettcher. What we are looking to do is the Parks & Rec Commission takes a look at our annual picnic fees every year. Obviously, our picnic reservations as you have kind of seen here from past reports, we did not have a stellar year in 2020. There certainly was a lot of interest out there for people using our park system and our park shelters. We were really limited for the number of group members I guess that we could have and the total people in these groups. Our revenues were not great this year so looking ahead it didn't really feel the right time to raise fees since we did raise fees for the 2020 picnic season. Staff is recommending that we stay the same as our 2020 rates for the 2021 season. We did raise those I think $25 per group last year for resident and non-resident. We are still going to have our large group fees for groups of 100 or more. We're hoping that we can get people back in our park system having group picnics again and hopefully to raise those revenues again for 2021. Boettcher: In regards to everything going on this year Jerry with COVID and all even though these were outside, what were the precautions? Was city staff there to do cleaning like at the Klingelhutz Pavilion cleaning tables and seats and such? What additional safeguards were taken. Ruegemer: You know it's, we certainly were there picking up garbage and those type of things. We did have signs up saying that we did not clean every table in there, much like our playgrounds and that sort of thing. They were available for people but wanted to make sure that people kind of knew that we didn't have the capacity to wash down every picnic table every half a day or every day, that type of thing. People were there and welcome to use those for that but what we tried to do certainly was limit the number of people so they could spread out so Priya was very busy this summer, spring and summer, fall, taking many phone calls on that so we really limited it to 25 people so they could really spread out. That is part of the things that we were certainly taking precautions on for the summer. Just really trying to limit the group numbers. Boettcher: Thank you. Is there any, I don't know how far ahead you go, are you already getting any reservations for the 2021 calendar year? Ruegemer: Typically, Chair Boettcher, the new reservations for the calendar year start after the first business day after the first of the year. What we try to do is keep all those reservations within the same calendar year so its then easier for accounting revenue to keep track on our end for that. What we try to do then is work with our youth associations to get the tournaments on the 9 Park and Recreation Commission — November 24, 2020 books so we can book a lot of that information out prior to that picnic season starting. The masses for the grad parties, family picnics, reunions, and that sort of thing will start after the first of the year. Boettcher: Thank you. If there isn't any more discussion we will look for, three is a proposed motion on the agenda if someone would like to make it? Tsuchiya: I'll do that. Commissioner Tsuchiya moved, Commissioner Sweetser seconded to recommend that the City Council approve the 2021 Picnic Reservation Fees. All voted in favor and the motion carried 8-0. OLD BUSINESS: 2020-2021 RINK SEASON UPDATE. Boettcher: Priya's been sitting there so patiently for 32 minutes waiting so here's your chance. Priya? Tandon: Thank you, Chair Boettcher and thank you, Commissioners. So there is an update to an update. Speaking to Jerry's point, when we moved into Phase II and all city facilities were closed to the public that will include the warming houses as well. Again, due to the uptick in cases in Carver County, those warming houses are such a confined space that we wouldn't be able to open them at least at this moment safely. Those are on hold until I guess further notice. But if and when those do reopen there is an update to hours. Just due to some budgetary restrictions kind of resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic, the warming house staff hours will be reduced. All warming house locations and days open will be unchanged. We kind of just shaved a little bit off of each end of the various days. So changes on weekdays at the four locations that have warming houses: City Center, Rec Center, North Lotus and Bandimere, will change from 4pm- 9pm hours to 4pm-8pm hours. Those rinks will also change on Saturdays from 10am-9pm hours to 12pm-9pm hours, and then on Sundays instead of being from 1pm-7pm they will go to 1pm- 6pm. Also on school release and holidays rather than being open from 10am-9pm, the warming houses will be open from 12pm-9pm. We tried to look at, we keep track at each rink of how many patrons are at the rink at each hour of the day. The rink attendants go out hour by hour and track so we can look at that data and close during those hours that the rinks are used the least to accommodate as many people as possible. By reducing these hours the reductions will save the city approximately $3,000 in the 1600 Recreations Budget which will overall help with the process this year of cutting back due to COVID and the decrease in revenue that we've seen. If you look at the attachments you can see the graph of where the hours will be cut and where participation and use of the warming houses and rinks are at those time. Boettcher: I like the reports that you have here going back to 2015-16 and in five years you see the difference. 10 Park and Recreation Commission — November 24, 2020 Tandon: Unfortunately, our 2020 edition to that document, the same with the picnics, won't be the same or as ideal but hopefully we will be able to get the warming houses open if the situation allows: Ruegemer: Priya, would you give the Commission and update as to if the warming houses aren't open, we'll have additional seating and benches and that sort of thing outside for people? Tandon: Yes, absolutely. Thank you, Jerry for the reminder. Because of the warming house closures and even with the warming houses being open to encourage to maybe sit outside and put on their skates. We will have picnic tables at all rink locations: City Center, Rec Center, North Lotus, Roundhouse and Pioneer Pass as well. They will all have picnic tables for people to sit, put on their skates, put their bags at to hopefully still provide some space for people to use. The rinks will still be flooded, of course weather dependent as per usual, but that will give people an option to still use the rinks and have some where to put their things while they are enjoying those facilities because we will likely see an increase in people out there because so many things are closed and kids aren't in school as much in person. We are going to try to have some resources out there for people to use. Tsuchiya: Priya, what is the situation with the warming houses? You said they are on hold, are they not going to be delivered until you give the call or what was that about? Tandon: We work with Mobile Mini and they've been very great about this whole situation. They are not going to be delivered here until we give them a call and we wouldn't start any sort of payment to them until they are physically delivered here as well. They are available for us if and when we need them but they're just kind of waiting on our call. Tsuchiya: Thank you. Kutz: Just a couple of comments. I think I would like to have the City maybe reconsider their closing time. If they want to open up an hour later I think that would be fine because most people are probably still working, but 8pm is in my opinion too early to close. I'd rather try something like if okay if there is nobody there, close at 8pm, but we're going to stay open until 9pm or 8:30pm at least and cut back that way. I agree there's going to be a lot more use with not a lot of other things to do potentially. When do we normally flood the rinks? Mid -December maybe? So we're probably looking at hopefully two weeks of a shutdown by then left? Maybe three? I think I would like to see the City reconsider the closing times of the warming houses because to be honest with you without the warming houses there you're really going to have a decrease in usage and I would be hard pressed to not voice my opinion here and say I think it's the wrong move to close earlier. If you want to open later, I think that's fine. But closing sooner I just disagree and I ask you guys to reconsider it, at least, like I said if nobody's there then by all means shut down by 8pm, but if there's people there, especially at the Rec Center, that one I can see people staying at for sure until 9pm. Just my thoughts. 11 Park and Recreation Commission — November 24, 2020 Tandon: Sure, absolutely we can take a look at that. Another thing that we may try to take a look at is the lights to see if there is some way to keep them on longer to accommodate for those people but again that just depends on I guess the facilities that are out there so we will definitely take a look at that for sure. That's a good point. Tsuchiya: Clarification. What does it mean if it turns out that on weekdays at 8pm it gets closed? What does it mean that its closed? What happens? Does the attendant leave or do the lights get turned off? Tandon: Yeah, the lights would get turned off and the rink attendant would leave. Tsuchiya: Okay. I feel like Matt has a point here if we can find a way to have public access to the lights with a timer or something like that but the rink attendant's not there and people still want to use it. I think that's a great idea. Ruegemer: I can speak to that point, Commissioner. Tandon: Absolutely. Ruegemer: It's kind of an either or situation. We have a summer and a winter mode for those lights. If we are in the winter mode than the attendant kind of controls, is kind of the master controller of that. If we put it in summer mode then it's like a push-button system like at the skate park and tennis courts, pickleball, that sort of thing where you have to go and reactivate that about every 45 minutes for it to continue to be on. For us to ask a rink attendant to switch that from, we really don't want rink attendants kind of master high voltage electrical boxes to make that point. It's kind of a, we're taking your certainly your comments to heart here and what we are certainly trying to do is kind of look at traditionally when, Priya did a great job of kind of looking at kind of past attendance numbers as to where we were. We do have attendants between 8-9pm a lot of times but a lot of times the attendant is sitting by themselves for that extra hour. We really kind of try to gauge that and really what we need to do is stay consistent with those hours. We can't just, you know, Tuesday night we close at 8:15pm, then we're going to close at 8:30pm, then we're going to be at 8:O1pm. It doesn't give our residents a sense of when things are going to be open so it kind of has to be, it's 8pm versus 9pm isn't that different I guess in our mind for that. There will be some circumstances and we can certainly take a look at adjusting those hours but it really was kind of part of that budgetary process for us to look at reductions in those areas and that's really what we had come up with to make the budget balance. Boettcher: Very good points. Thank you. Anyone else have any questions? So looking at this point, Jerry, the hours will stay as listed that Priya's report showed? Ruegemer: At this point that is likely where they are going to stay and obviously to some of the Commissioner's points here even if the Governor's mandate is going to go beyond the four weeks, we really have to stay consistent with those hours across our skating season. We certainly 12 Park and Recreation Commission — November 24, 2020 can take a look at how we did for those reduction of hours and the timing of the hours type of think in the evaluation. If we swung and missed on this horribly then we can look to adjust hours next year. Boettcher: Okay. Thank you, Jerry. Any other questions? If not, Priya, thank you very much. We'll move onto the next item. REPORTS: DISCUSSION OF MIXED USE IN CHANHASSEN PARKS AND FACILITIES Boettcher: Jodi, this is yours. Sarles: Great. Thank you, Chair Boettcher. Happy Thanksgiving to the whole commission here early. I hope you guys have a safe and healthy and Happy Thanksgiving. With that, I just, we've been kind of talking about this for a while through the summer and into the fall and just trying to deal with how folks are using the parks right now. With the pandemic of course we've seen numbers and numbers of people coming out and using the parks and it is such an important part of their mental and physical health. Anything from people gathering to have meetings in a picnic shelter just so they can see their parents or grandparents. We've got a number of health and fitness folks using our parks for different classes. The beach was busy. The pickleball courts are nuts. They still are busy. They had to put the nets back out there for them. So we just kind of wanted to start a little bit of discussion with you with all of this increased usage just kind of a discussion and how our resources are provided to the community. We want to make sure, first and foremost, our residents are able to access to the parks and use all of the amenities that we have. So we just wanted a little bit of discussion. Appropriate guidelines, possibly, that we should be putting out there with the understanding that we do have limited resources. Other cities are using different attendants to kind of enforce these rules or regulations. That is something we do not have at this time. So we just wanted to start a discussion on the activities that we've witnessed in the facilities this summer, and then as things moved indoors, Mary and I have had some conversations of different groups kind of utilizing our spaces for their own personal, we'll say personal gain. Examples that we have here are paid, private tennis programs that have been operating on our city tennis courts whether that be Meadow Green or out at the Rec Center. We've seen them there. We get the outdoor group fitness classes, private lessons on our pickleball courts. The Senior Center we've got a number of groups wanting to run their own private activity clubs or groups in the Senior Center and what we think of those things. Then of course at the Rec Center there are always folks wanting to do private lessons in our gym using the open gym time. I guess we just wanted to open a discussion, get some opinions before we create a little more formalized plan here for what we want to put out there. I would appreciate all of your opinions and I'm going to start taking notes here. Kutz: Just to start off for me. If the people are local, if it's not being abused I feel it's great that they're using it. I personally don't feel that they should be charged fees. That's part of what they're paying for when they live here to have some opportunities to do things. I don't want to 13 Park and Recreation Commission — November 24, 2020 charge people for every single little thing that they have to do in the city and I feel this is one area where we don't have to do that yet. Hopefully, we can continue to provide that without having to charge fees, especially if they are already paying for a pass at the Rec Center. We are already getting fees that way for them just to be in the building. I don't really want to see us charging and have to do more recordkeeping and tracking then what we are already doing. Just my opinion. I'd rather keep it nice and clean unless you feel it's getting abused then maybe it's time to make some changes, but as long as it is not getting abused, I don't feel there's a need to charge. Just my thoughts. Boettcher: Thanks. Sweetser: I have a little bit of a different take on that. Just from the standpoint of and I agree with everything that it's not being abused if it's residents, but I kind of know people Jodi that use some of those facilities and they are making quite a bit of money off of it. Not that we have to get a take of that but I also wonder, and maybe Karl can chime in a little bit more here, but using our facilities for business purposes, what about the legalities of the insurance? If they just come in and they're using the facility, training basketball players and somebody gets hurts. I don't know if that's even an issue or if by paying the Rec Center fee when they come in, are they covered. I would throw out the financial part of it in that direction a little bit from the insurance coverage. I do agree I don't want to gouge anybody but it does take space away from when X- trainer comes in with basketball girls into the Rec Center does take away those nets from kids coming in to play and I've seen that personally happen. Just from that standpoint, what liabilities do we have if there is an organized activity going on but necessarily under our oversight? And that I don't know because I'm no attorney. Tsuchiya: I can't give a legal opinion. I would say that Jerry would probably say you could ask the City Attorney about that but it's almost ... legal side because I don't want to say anything that would bind me. I agree with Sandy and Matt on this on different points. I would be curious, what does everybody understand by the term "abuse?" This is the attorney in me talking. Abuse in this case is very subjective so what does that mean? What do we all think? To me it's if someone is going into the Rec Center and they're using the basketball courts, is that actually turning away other residents that want to use the basketball courts because it is all being taken by someone that is making money on running a clinic or something like that? Just using that as an example of that point. That to me seems like it's kind of stepping over some line but how do you police that? As Jodi said we don't really want to ask attendants to go out there and police this. We don't want have city staff do that. What's the easy way of addressing this with written policies? What I understand Jodi's getting at with the minimalist amount of enforcement that we have to use in trying to make as bright line of rule as possible in this situation. Coming from an attorney who has to draft stuff, what is abuse? It seems I know it when I see it but I can't really vocalize what it is. I don't know. Sarles: I can throw in another example. Over the summer there has been the two tennis courts at the Rec Center, and we had been shut down for most of the time but they were in use for private 14 Park and Recreation Commission — November 24, 2020 clinics all summer long many days so it was taking away from some other folks that would come up, see them booked full, and then they would drive off somewhere else to go play. So we had certain things like that. The other concern that I guess Jerry and I had talked about too was just making sure that are these folks, do they have their background checks done? Are they insured? Are they a safe, if it's perceived that it's possible that it's a Park & Rec activity, we wouldn't want to be involved with something that wasn't up front on all of those items. Tsuchiya: Would it be possible, Jodi, maybe to use your Rec Center, your staff there. If this is what you guys observed and you see it multiple weeks in a row, at some point someone goes over there and talks to them. If we observe that it seems like you're more of a business venture, you're not just using it as a recreational facility, you're using the facilities to coach or train, whatever it may be. Do we make an exception or do we carve that out in the City in a policy to say look, you can do this; however, you're going to have to get on a schedule? Think of it as maybe like the different sports athletics facilities or teams that use the baseball fields and the soccer fields. I think I remember talking to Jerry about this. Tonka United and CC United really want our soccer field time and that requires scheduling. I'm not saying that city staff needs to do that for down to the basketball court and pickleball court, but do we have to entertain the possibility like look, if you're going to come out here and you're going to use our facilities with somewhat regularity and you're going to make money by using our facilities, do we need to have you schedule time so that we know when you are coming or we limit the amount of space that you can use? Say look, we understand that you come out here, you can use a tennis court every Saturday from 3-5pm, but only one, because we want to make sure one is open for residents. I'm just thinking out loud here. I invite everybody else to talk about it but I'm just trying to find some sort middle ground on where is that line of abuse and how do we address it if we observe it? Kutz: One other thing, maybe we to just have an online scheduling thing for all park facilities. There's got to be a way to have a calendar out there saying hey, tennis courts are reserved from 1-2, 2-3, 3-4 throughout the day for each facility if that's what it has to come down to. I'm sure that software's out there somewhere and some other community is using it somehow. Tsuchiya: Yeah, but that involves more costs. Kutz: Well if we're going to get revenue, you're going to have costs. Tsuchiya: Well sure. It's a balance then between scheduling online and they first come first served. Kutz: I agree but you can't have it every which way. There's got to be either rules or there's got to be first come first served. One of the two. Tsuchiya: Well then it's going to be, especially if it's non Rec Center, who is going to enforce that? If you show up and I have the place reserved and you show up and you want to use it, 15 Park and Recreation Commission — November 24, 2020 obviously we don't want this to turn into, this all depends on the people that are involved and we can't control that but what happens if there is an altercation? Does City staff respond? Does the Carver County Sheriff have to respond? I hope it never escalates to that. My mind always goes to these places with my profession. Ruegemer: That certainly isn't what we wanted and really to kind of staff's point is really what we're trying to do and this really has kind of come to the forefront during this past spring, summer, fall, winter. So obviously with that, Cross -fit classes down on Park Road. Everybody's looking for an outdoor space to hold their private event. We're trying to schedule mowing grass, irrigation, maintenance work on tennis courts, any type of thing that we're trying to do and people are always there. I guess to Jodi's point what we are trying to do is really just kind of get a handle on that whether there is a revenue piece to that or not or a scheduling process for that. What we're really trying to do is just be aware of who's in our park system. It's really no different than we've had baseball camps out at Lake Ann Park for 25-30 years, right? So they go through the process, schedule through me. There is a fee assessed for that because we know they're charging $300-$400 a kid for that and I guess that's maybe my philosophy is if they are using public facilities for private gain, I guess I look at that maybe we should get a little piece of the pie and that's kind of the way that I look at things because these public facilities are public for our residents to use to what Jodi had kind of said. If these courts are completely filled to capacity all the time and then one of our residents wants to come out and play, throw the ball with their kids or play tennis or pickleball, there's private kind of situations going on right now that they're not available for residents anyway. I'm not saying that we have to, that this is completely revenue based because it really isn't. It's just really about kind of getting a handle on and kind of what's going on in our park system is really kind of the main focus of this. Boettcher: This is all a bunch of good points. Everyone, to Karl's point, what I see, I guess a personal sticking point for me, is when you go somewhere and you want to use a facility and it's completely filled up and there is someone professionally training or whatever. In the case of a tennis court, if there are two courts, don't book both of them for someone to do training. Leave one of them available for the public. For me, it's a little bit different situation but if I go to a boat ramp at 5:30 in the morning and there's normally no one there, there's 47 boat trailers sitting there and I can't even get to the water, you don't want to hear what comes out of my mouth at 5:30 that morning, but if someone wants to do this, the problem with a trainer you also have to make sure they are listed as an independent contractor and that they are licensed and bonded. That doesn't take all of the liability away from the city that I've seen. Again, I can't speak to legalities either but the biggest thing is to maintain and opening for the residents along with when Jodi, when you made that comment I was watching everyone's faces when you said something about pickleball is still going right now everybody had big grins on their face. You're imagining people out then in mittens and gloves and galoshes chasing each other off the court because they want their time to play pickleball in November and December. That shows right now with the whole pandemic thing. I heard and interview with a gym owner, he owns four or five gyms in the state of Minnesota. His concern with the lockdown was that right not people need to be exercising. They need to be out there. That is part of not only your personal health but 16 Park and Recreation Commission — November 24, 2020 your mental and your physical health to get outside and do something and anything that we can do to keep encouraging that. I'm open to the point that is someone is going to be out there using the fields for professional and financial gain, don't take everything up. Don't use all the space. As to Matt's point earlier, you live in Chanhassen. That's a part of your deal as a resident here. You're paying taxes. That's part of your deal as a member of the Chanhassen community to be to have access to this. All really good points. Anything else Commissioner Peck or Schubert, Scanlon? Tsuchiya: Jim, your point there is that if you are a resident of Chanhassen you get to use it but with the caveat in my mind is for personal use. Boettcher: Right. Tsuchiya: That's how I would see it and I would just want a clarification. I don't know. If that's something that maybe we can, if everybody is on that same consensus. There's nothing wrong with personal use but where is that threshold where you're using it for personal gain, right? Boettcher: That's a fine line. If there's availability at the Park & Rec Center, don't tie up an entire court. Don't tie up all the meeting rooms or whatever. Leave some options there. People are going to come in off the street. They are not going to see all the notifications you can put on Facebook, Snapchat, Twitter, McWe, Parlor, whatever you want so Jerry can walk around Chanhassen with a stapler and flyers and stick them on every light pole. Somebody is not going to see it and they are going to be offended. You can't please everyone 100% but personally again it's just a sword I've fallen on too many times to get to a place with anticipation and say, oh wow, 17 tennis courts are all full. It leaves a bitter taste in your mouth. Just my two cents. Schubert: Has the City Attorney been contacted on what the liability issues are at that point. I think that is a valid concern and question and get and answer, Can someone sue the City if they are getting a private lesson because it was on City property, even though the City had no clue that it was happening. It's a weird, in my mind I feel like that's a good question that should probably be answered. Ruegemer: Certainly we had conversations with the City Attorney on past practices with general ballfield use, swimming at the beach, skate park, those types of things. To kind of take it to this level as far as kind of private we would need to explore that further to that point. Tsuchiya: The doctrine of sovereign immunity us probably going to apply in this situation but when you get down to the local government level again I would defer to the City Attorney but my guess is going to be there will be some protections for the City. It's going to come down to a matter of the threshold of negligence in this situation. Was the City negligent? I don't know exactly where that threshold is in those kind of situations if someone were to hurt while they were practicing pickleball with a paid professional or paid coach, I'm sure the City would get named on any kind of suit because you would throw the net as wide as possible but unless the 17 Park and Recreation Commission — November 24, 2020 city was actually negligent, if we demonstrated negligence, then the City might be on the hook. But, that threshold because it's a City is usually fairly high. You have to prove a pretty high standard of negligence against a sovereign entity like a city or a government. But you didn't hear that from me. Boettcher: It was somebody that looked like Karl. Very good discussion. Anyone else have anything to add? Jodi, are you looking for a consensus or just suggestions or what all would you be looking for yet? Sarles: I think we were just looking for some guidance here. If it's something that we just need to update some rules and regulations. We weren't necessarily to try to go charge everybody because that's not what we do but just kind of a little more guidance, maybe a little more signage but we kind of know how that works, too. You can have a sign on every post like Jerry said and no one reads it. Just some ideas from you guys just to help us navigate as these activities are growing and we don't want to create a new problem. You hear some nightmare stories out in Washington and Oregon where they've had a lot of trouble with Cross Fit classes and people bringing out those giant tires and tearing up turf and all sorts of fun stuff you end up having to repair on the back end because it wasn't on the front. That's kind of what we are hoping to chat about a little bit. Make sure... Tsuchiya: Should Adam be here then? Sarles: I didn't tell Adam that yet. He would have his own opinion there I think. Boettcher: So Karl, take the US Land Rover tires off the SUV and go and do damage on the baseball fields. Tsuchiya: I get mine off of big dump trucks, Jim. Boettcher: Oh, do you? Okay. Any other discussion? Does that give you enough ideas then, Jodi? Sarles: Yeah, I think that's great. We'll start working on this and just try to find a way make sure we are open and happy to all. Boettcher: All right. Thank you, Jodi. REPORTS: 2020 HALLOWEEN PARTY EVALUATION Boettcher: Priya, this looks like it's yours. Tandon: Yes, thank you, Chair Boettcher and thank you Commissioners. We talked a lot about this particular even before so I will try to keep it short. Due to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, obviously the traditional Halloween Party was modified into the three different pieces: Trick or Park and Recreation Commission — November 24, 2020 Trail, Boo Your Neighbor and the Halloween Costume Contest. Again, we talked about the Trick or Trail a lot but overall the theme is made successful by a ton of different people. All the businesses. We had 21 businesses and service organizations participate which was fantastic. Three different volunteer organizations came to help out set up and take down. Park Maintenance was great. So helpful. Mary, Jodi, Jerry they were all there making sure the even ran well so it all came together from a variety of different people putting in their efforts and I got a lot of positive feedback so thank you to everyone who was there and participated. Boo Your Neighbor also went very well. We sold 62 Boos. The child Boos we sold 37, the family we sold 6, and the adult we sold 19. Again, a lot of positive feedback on that program as well as the Halloween Costume Contest. We had 11 entries. Three in the individual category and eight in the group. One fun thing is we had an entry from California. A family looking to do activities all across the country virtually and they requested a postcard from the City of Chanhassen just as kind of a souvenir from that so that was a really fun thing that happened. Overall, there was a lot of positive feedback that we were able to modify the event into something even though it was not the original plan. That's pretty much all I have on Halloween. Boettcher: I like those Trick or Trail. That's a good play on the words there. And it looks like even after everything with the conditions, still made $1,600, so that's good. Tandon: Yeah. Overall it turned out great. We had a very generous donation from T-Mobile of $1,500 to cover all the costs of the Boos so that was key in making all of these programs possible so we were very happy about that. Boettcher: All Right. Good. Any other questions for Priya? Tsuchiya: I got a Boo. Thank you, Priya. Those were great. The families loved them Tandon: Good. I'm glad to hear that. REPORTS: 2020 TREE LIGHTING CEREMONY PREVIEW Boettcher: Priya, this is still yours. Tandon: Yep. Thank you, Chair Boettcher. So the City of Chanhassen's annual tree lighting ceremony is held each year at City Center Park. The typical event draws between 100-400 community members so with the current regulations on social gatherings that typical event is not possible this year. Just the background. So we were in Phase III of Minnesota's Stay Safe plan when we made that decision which limited the number of individuals in an outdoor entertainment gathering to 250. In our discussions, it wasn't very feasible way to make that possible at City Center Park while social distancing and still having our event components like Santa we normally have. We can't have kids sit on Santa's lap this year. Petting of the Reindeer. Just a lot of contact in those activities so we are modifying this year's tree lighting ceremony into a new COVID-friendly program. We named it the Chanhassen Tour of Lights and that will be kicked 19 Park and Recreation Commission — November 24, 2020 off by a virtual tree lighting by Mayor Elise Ryan on Facebook Live and on the City's web page. The concept of the Chanhassen Tour of Lights is a citywide driving or walking tour of residential holiday light displays. Any home in Chanhassen can register their light display to be a part of the tour and then we'll take their address and put a pin drop on Google Maps and then come December 5, which would have been the day of the original tree lighting ceremony, we will publish a map of all of those households. We are not doing exact addresses or any sort of names associated with the houses just out of an abundance of caution and respect for people's privacy, but we will publish a map with all the various locations around Chanhassen and then maybe some suggested paths that people can drive through or walk through and enjoy the lights completely social distanced, completely with their own household to not have any more spread of the Coronovirus through that activity. Again, that will be kicked off on Saturday, December 5 at 5pm with a virtual lighting of the tree in City Center Park. Mayor Elise Ryan will flip the switch on Facebook Live and we will kind of pan across and show the lights and people are encouraged to tune in on both Facebook Live and the website, same as we kind of did for the 41n of July Fireworks Display. If they would like at home we are encouraging people to flip on their own holiday display lights at 5pm just as kind of a fun unity community sort of deal and they can start their own personal Chanhassen Tour of Lights that will run through December 31. We are taking measures as well just to encourage people or let them know that this is a strictly virtual event, both events for the tree lighting and the tour of lights. We're on social media, the web site. We're kind of putting that out there that this is strictly virtual, there no event at the park, and the day of the event too we will have signs and some cones out to indicate to people watch on Facebook Live, watch on the web site. There's no in -person component of the event this year just with the current regulations that are in place. That's about all I have. Kutz: Is there anything on the virtual trail, did you say virtual trail or just trail of lights? Tandon: Yeah. Trail of Lights. Kutz: Is there like a contest we could make out of that with first, second, and third place or does it just get too troublesome to tally that up? Make it work? Maybe reward them with some Chanhassen Bucks or something like that? I don't know. It's always more fun when there is money involved. Tandon: The only thing with that is we went with the option of not disclosing exact addresses so it would be difficult at this point to have people vote but we are offering for all houses that enter they will go into a drawing for a holiday prize pack so that will include gift cards from our sponsors from various locations around Chanhassen to kind of spice it up to like what you are speaking to. Kutz: Yup. Perfect. Boettcher: Any other questions for Priya? If not, thank you very much, Priya. We appreciate it. 20 Park and Recreation Commission — November 24, 2020 Tandon: Thank you. COMMISSION MEMBER COMMITTEE REPORTS. None. COMMISSION MEMBER REPORTS. None. Boettcher: Jerry, I wanted to ask about December. Is our meeting is going to be on the 15th, is that correct, or the 81h? Ruegemer: Let me look real quick on that. I believe it is the 8th versus the 15th. Give me a quick sec. Boettcher: Because we usually went with the second Tuesday. Ruegemer: Yup. That will be December 8 and we'll get an exact time of that. Typically, we've met earlier because we've gone on kind of a holiday social afterwards but that will not happen this year unfortunately so this year we will likely start at 7pm that night. Boettcher: So if any of us want to order anything from Door Dash or Grub Hub we can send the bill to the City and you'll take care of it? Ruegemer: Put it on your tab. Boettcher: Anyone else have anything to add? If not, I'm going to throw in a final note about everything going on right now. I sent an email to Jerry and Priya this morning so I appreciate you changing to a Zoom meeting. Some of you know that my wife is a nursing manager at Methodist Hospital in St. Louis Park. She manages four units and just over 200 nurses so this whole thing that's been going on for eight months I have to give her kudos. Hopefully she can't hear me. I have to give her kudos. I mean, she's gone to work every day. She's never complained, much. What she goes through with scheduling, if she has a nurse that's in contact with a patient that has COVID, there's a whole protocol, two weeks off and everything. Finally, last week she came home one night and she told me it's getting bad. Stay home. For her to say that after eight months told me that something was changing. She just came home this evening just as an example walked in the door, she's on her phone, making three/four phone calls. They had a patient that had two negative results of a COVID test. The third results after four days in the hospital, the third result came up positive. In that four days she had 17 nurses and 13 support staff that were exposed which means that out of 200 people she could have 30 people off work for two week. Trying to keep four units running you normally need 200 nurses. Now you have to take it down to 170. I don't even ask what she goes through. I just phew, wow. But with that in mind, everybody really be careful out there. I mean it's, like I say my wife is not the type of person. She's not an alarmist by any means. When she says its bad, for lack of better terms it's hitting the fan. Everyone be careful. Have a great Thanksgiving and I look forward to seeing everyone. Haley, hopefully you get over what you've got going. Let's us know your conditions. 21 Park and Recreation Commission — November 24, 2020 Schubert. Yup. We're going to get tested tomorrow so we'll find out then. Eric's two weeks off of Methodist right now, too. He just got told to stay home for at least two weeks. Boettcher: What unit does he work in? Schubert: He's in the OR right now but transferring to be an ICU nurse in the next couple of weeks. Boettcher: That's not one of my wife's units. Sweetser: I have a positive story, though, from Methodist. My husband and I both had COVID earlier in the fall, late summer. My husband ended up in the hospital for six days at Methodist and the care was amazing and my heart goes out to everybody who works there, Jim. Please tell your wife thank you because they really ... My husband wasn't in the ICU but he certainly was really sick and they were great so thanks. Boettcher: In fact, a nurse that works for my wife on the last Friday, she has COVID and she posted a video to all of her fellow nurses at the hospital and to listen to this girl. I shouldn't say girl. Thirty-eight years old in very good health and she was gasping for every word. I just watched and I went holy crap! And here's someone who is in really good shape, athletic type of person and it's taken her down to that and she says I'll be back in two weeks and I'm like wow. So Haley, don't make the big eyes. I hope you don't get to that level. Schubert: Yeah. Me too. Boettcher: We definitely will be thinking of you. Anyone else have anything? If not, I'll entertain a motion to adjourn. Schubert moved, Kutz seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 8 to 0. The Park and Recreation Commission meeting was adjourned at 8:19 p.m. Submitted by Jerry Ruegemer Park and Rec Director Prepared by Kim Meuwissen 22 CHANHASSEN PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING DECEMBER 8, 2020 Chairman Boettcher called the meeting to order at 7:02 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Jim Boettcher, Jim Peck, Haley Schubert, Youth Commissioner Zoe Erpelding, Karl Tsuchiya, Matt Kutz, Sandy Sweetser and Joe Scanlon MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Jerry Ruegemer, Park and Rec Director; Priya Tandon, Recreation Supervisor; and Jodi Sarles, Rec Center Manager; Adam Beers, Park Superintendent; Mary Blazanin, Senior Center Coordinator APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Peck: I would like to discuss an item from last meeting when I couldn't get on the thing to speak. I have some grave concerns about the use of our facilities like....of people in different genres that don't pay any fees to use it and beyond that I have concerns about background checks and sexual abuse. Boettcher: Do you want to add that under New Business, Jim? Peck: Either New Business or Old. Wherever you wish to put it. Boettcher: Let's put it under New Business. What do you want to title it? Just Facility Use? Peck: Facility Use by Private Entities Boettcher: OK. We'll add that in. Item 2 under G. New Business when we get to that if that'll work for you. So looking at the agenda then, any other items, if looking for a motion to approve. Tsuchiya moved, Peck seconded to approve the agenda as amended. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 8 to 0. PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS: Boettcher: Jerry? Priya? Anyone have anything? Ruegemer: Just real quick and Priya can jump in on this as well. Wanted to make everybody aware, I don't know if anybody watched the tree lighting virtually on Saturday night but Park and Recreation Commission — December 8, 2020 everything went off without a hitch. So thanks to Mary, Jodi, Priya, Adam's crew, Jason... was there from our Park Maintenance Division. Keith, one of our Rec Center facility supervisors was out there and Heather and her mom and Mayor Ryan and her family were there to flip the ceremonial switch. It was really kind of a, too back we couldn't do it in person, but in the year of modification, we really had a good time of it. Just thanks again to staff for really going above and beyond and figuring it out again how we could do a Facebook Live and go to Granicus and watch on our Facebook page and our Facebook Live page and so staff did a bang up job on that. Adam's crew did a wonderful job. I just drove through again tonight with all the lights on. It looks spectacular. Over 1,400 views so far from the video from Saturday night. Many positive comments on our city Facebook page. People seem to be extremely pleased that we still held the event, although virtual. I think people were very appreciative of the city's efforts to really kind of carry on the tradition and just make something beautiful out of cruddy year. Anyways, I just wanted to make the Commission aware if and please feel free to stop by the City Center Park anytime. We were talking about the mailbox; Adam's crew built a really cool mailbox. Priya, Mary and Jodi had kind of come up with that idea and brainstormed the Letters to Santa. Jodi, Priya or Mary, you want to talk about the letters that were going into the mailbox and what happens at that point? Sarles: Sure. What we decided once the mailbox went out that Macy's and Make a Wish, for every letter that goes through Macy's, they donate a $1 to Make a Wish so all the Santa letters, and it goes up to a $1,000,000 so each week I'll be dropping off those letters over at Macy's just to make sure those get in the count. All the kids can make their letters. I don't know that Santa's going to respond to all of them at least somebody will get something good out of it. Ruegemer: Just another way that staff is being super creative and making some positivity of our holiday season. So a hats off for our great team for making all that happen. Just really trying to look for some relief in this last month of the year here and I think everybody's looking 2021. Just wanted to fill in the Commission a little bit on that item. Boettcher: Thank you, Jerry. I couldn't watch it Saturday evening but I think several years ago when it started and Santa was in the little house and the little kids found out about it and the next two years they were trying to rip the door off so I'm sure all the kids miss that. That was always a good time. Ruegemer: Well we're smarter, Jim, now. Adam's crew screws the door shut. Sweetser: I'm sure that was when my kids were little. They were probably the ones doing it. Boettcher: The first year I think it went over fine. Everybody was surprised when we came out and there were six little boys lined up going "he's in there, get him". Great. Alright. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS: None 2 Park and Recreation Commission — December 8, 2020 Boettcher: Next item we have visitor presentations. Not seeing any visitors present, let's move on to Minutes. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Boettcher: Were approving the October minutes. Have you had a chance to look at it? Any changes, deletions? If not, I'll look for a motion to approve October minutes. Tsuchiya moved, Peck seconded to approve the verbatim and summary minutes of the Park and Recreation Commission meeting dated October 27, 2020 as presented. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 8 to 0. NEW BUSINESS: Boettcher: 2020 Year -End Review. Priya this looks like it's yours. Tandon: Yes, thank you, Chair Boettcher, and thank you Commissioners. We have our annual year-end review PowerPoint presentation. We're going to try something new this year since it's over Zoom. We're going to try a screen share and then I'll play the presentation from my screen so I have not tested given that this is our first meeting so apologies if it's a little touchy but we're going to try this. Can you all see my screen? Voices: Yes. Tandon: Great. We'll go ahead and try to present. [Priya plays PowerPoint.] Alright, and that is all I have. Boettcher: I want to know why Commissioner Shubert had a cake. I didn't get a cake. I thought that was a perk of being the Chair. Tsuchiya: You don't want a cake, Jim. We know that. Boettcher: I know, I'd rather it be cookies. So it looked like some things still went on this year with everything else going bad in the world. Still some things did happen. Ruegemer: It made me smile looking through. It was fantastic. We had a lot going on. Boettcher: Oh ya. Voice: Great job. Ruegemer: Ya, thank you so much, Priya. Great job on that. Park and Recreation Commission — December 8, 2020 Tandon: Yep, absolutely. Ruegemer: And thanks to staff for getting photos together and getting it all ready to go. Good job. Boettcher: Good. Well hopefully 2021 will have even more going on. We can only hope it'll be a better year. Thank you, Priya. Appreciate it. Item 2, Commissioner Peck, you want to get into your Facility Use. Some of the issues you wanted to raise. Peck: I had some concerns about the facility use by private entities, whatever they may or may not be. If I'm business, no matter what it is, I either have to own or lease some space. It seems like we have people in private entities at the taxpayers' expense on our property that don't pay a fee and I don't know if that's right or wrong. I personally don't think it's right but that doesn't make me right. My second part of that is these people, whoever they are, do they have to pass some sort of background check or do they just show up and use our facilities? A long time ago, I was involved in a sexual abuse thing from a baseball training, it didn't happen to me personally, but somebody I know, the person got charged and spent some time in jail over this and after he got out, he moved away and my understanding is....it happened again and if something like that were to happen on our property on our watch, we'd probably get thrown into that deep debt. Carl probably know more about that then I might but I have concerns about that. Boettcher: So, Commissioner Peck, is this in regards to like a follow up to last month when you couldn't join the meeting? Peck: Yes it is, sir. Boettcher: It is, OK, because I was going to say it sounds very familiar. We had some of this discussion but again we couldn't get your input last month because of technical issue but some of the questions I think that came up last month or last meeting that was something about, like you say, the outside entities. They need to be licenses, they need to bonded and what is the city's liability. I think Jerry you gave us a pretty good rundown of everything as far as scenarios. Is there something you want to go over again for Commissioner Peck and the rest of us? Ruegemer: We certainly can. Jodi feel free to jump in here as well. Jodi was kind spearheading that conversation last month and obviously we have a lot groups, particular with 2020 kind what's been going on with private groups, yogo studios, CrossFit. A lot of those groups had maybe limitations of being inside and holding classes so they kind of took a pilgrimage I guess outside and were using a lot of our park system, soccer fields, picnic facilities, private pickle ball lessons, tennis lessons, those types of things on our public courts so those are the types of things that I think Commissioner Peck is kind of getting at right now that we had kind of discussed last week or last month I should say for a November meeting. Those are the types of things that we were kind of interested in kind of hearing the Commissions discussion points on that or are creating something that really isn't a problem or are we trying to, I guess staff is kind of looking Park and Recreation Commission — December 8, 2020 at this and Jodi can jump in, kind of getting some type of handle on this so we kind of know who's there. We've done baseball camps out at Lake Ann Park or other parks, Lake Susan Park or Bandimere for years that people kind go through that process and rent or go through a facility permit so we kind of know who's there. They have general liability type of insurance. I kind of think lately it's been onesie, twosie companies that are certainly charging for their services that are going on in public facilities for that. I think that really the point of this wasn't necessary a big revenue stream for us it's just more a lesson is kind of having an idea of who is on our courts, for Adam's crew, if we have scheduled maintenance on a tennis court or pickle ball courts or mowing certain grassed areas that can of manage and work around this type of thing. It's always kind of nice to know who's using your facilities. So those are really the discussion points that we had kind of talked about last week or last month. Jodi, pop in. Sarles: Ya, right. Jerry's right on that and we've seen it all over the place. It's not just here. We don't have the staff to be out in the parks and patrolling that all the time of course but we're just trying to look a little bit of direction whether or not we post some signage which we know we've got hundreds of signs out in our parks so really didn't want to go that route but have some sort of backing of what we want when folks call and say "you know, there a gentleman running tennis every day on the Rec Center courts for three hours" or whether it's pickle ball or people just even using the shelters. It's just everything kind of under the sun has come up and making sure that we're aware and things are going on in the parks that are safe and our community is being taken care of too. So it was just a general discussion as to ... I certainly don't want to add more work to ourselves to add permitting for every single for every single activity either so this wan an open conversation to get some input to see what direction you would like us to take on that a little bit or get some input so that we can formulate a plan because as this has been going on, I think, you've got the CrossFit out there that can cause some turf damage, we get people taking over courts, that's also another issue for other people and we're just trying to alleviate any tension in the city too. That's kind of where we were at with that. Boettcher: Any of that that you want to address, Commissioner Peck? Does that answer any of your concerns? Peck: A little bit but I still don't see where we've got people using our facilities and have no background check, in today's world and that really bothers me because if something happens we're going to be in that net whether we're guilty or not. It's immaterial, we let them use our property either knowingly or unknowingly. I can't do anything now in my baseball if I'm not cleared, no one can participate with us if they aren't background cleared and we've had to drum a couple people because they didn't clear. Ruegemer: Yep and the city certainly has gone through that exercise before with a tennis instructor who's done private lessons on our courts. It's a process. It takes probably three weeks or a month to go through from start to finish but those are the people that come to us and call us so those are the people that we know about. There's a ton of people that we don't and we certainly put an educated type of a feeler out there to see who's out there that may be doing this. 5 Park and Recreation Commission — December 8, 2020 I think Jodi has a decent handle on who is doing pickle ball lessons and tennis lessons at the Rec Center but I think the biggest unknown is these little pop up yoga studios and CrossFit and some of those types of things and Matt had made a point last month that they are public facilities and should be open to the general public. So we're just kind of try to get a handle on what's going out there, if there are ways that we can limit our liabilities in certain ways and protect ourselves I think was our motivation behind this. Peck: I don't want us to take away from our city residents that they want to use the space but they can't because we've got a non -revenue paying pickle ball instructor running the camp or whatever. Boettcher: Commissioner Peck, that was one of my issues last month too. As a resident, say of Chanhassen, I don't want to go to a pickle ball or tennis court or whatever and find out that's it's blocked up because someone is doing that, someone is making revenue or whatever. I guess my thing I'd like to see, I'm sure it probably isn't done, if someone is doing it for that purpose, could they post it, could they bring a sign with them just to put at the entrance to the court or hang it from the net or whatever, from these hours, we're doing this. As a residential and you pull and the thing is blocked, you tend to get this feeling of apprehension and you know, "why can't I use it". If there's something that at least explains it without even a confrontation, is that something that's ever been done? Do you think something that would, would it make you feel better if you drove and it said "Such and such tennis pro is here teaching from 4:00-5:30 p.m. this evening. Sorry for the inconvenience." I don't know. Would that be something to alleviate it because like I say, I wouldn't want to pull up and see that the entire facility is used and I don't know why. Then I find out that someone is actually making money, giving lessons. I would feel as a resident of the city kind of slighted. Ruegemer: Mr. Boettcher, we certainly have done some of that in the past with some of our recreation programs at the Rec Center. We've it certainly for the Skate Park. We did skate camps, that sort of thing up town at the skate park so it's just kind of an education piece that certainly staff could do if we know about rentals that are going on or usage but we're just kind of looking to the Commission for some guidance on that and you are wanting staff to pursue more of a formalized process for that but certainly we'll take direction from the Commission on that. Sarles: I don't know that whenever we offer programs out there at the courts, we do make sure we have notice up there two weeks ahead of time so that when people and going and using them, they have that knowledge that "oh the city's going to do a pickle ball tournament these three days, from this time to this time" they have that information up front so we also have that to fall back on when folks are getting upset. Boettcher: I like that. I'd like to see that for any other individual too. If the city does it, we don't have to do it but it we are then I'd like to see the same request, requirement, whatever for someone coming in from the outside as Commissioner Peck said. 2 Park and Recreation Commission — December 8, 2020 Kutz: Jodi, this is Matt. I was wondering as long as you've been working here, how many complaints or questions have you gotten regarding not being able to use the courts at all of any field for the matter? Have we received a handful, are we talking 100? Sarles: No, we probably receive maybe a handful. When pickle ball started, that became kind of the hot button sport and took everything by storm out at the Rec Center. So that did inflame some folks about "who are these people coming in and using our courts" and all of that. I wouldn't say it hundreds, it's probably tens. Kutz: A year? Sarles: Ya, tens a year. Of course, it's always the ones, the squeaky wheels too. Kutz: Right. I'm just trying to get a handle of, if this really is an issue or if it just one of two people that are having a bad day and they need to vent a little at us for some reason or another. I'm just trying to get an understanding on how big of problem this is. That's all. Peck: Matt, I'm of the opinion most people if whatever facility is full, they don't question why. They just go away. They won't complain, they won't ask, they don't even know it was a private entity. Kutz: Well, Commissioner Peck, Jim, the only, I drive around the city and to be perfectly honest, the only facilities that I see full are the pickle ball court are the Lake Ann baseball parks, consistently. I don't really see a problem with tennis courts. I don't really see a problem with ice skating rinks, per se. I'm just trying to figure out where the exact issue is here so we can narrow it down. Peck: And there may be no issue, it might just be me, as I've said twice already, I have a great issue with potential sex abuse. Kutz: As we all would of course, for sure. If people are coming to us and they're asking to use our facility, I'm really glad that the staff is doing those checks as they come in. It's the ones that don't do anything that, how hard are we going to try to patrol that. Peck: Well, we don't have enough staff and you don't always know if it's what you just said a legitimate entity that we've already approved or said they could use it. Kutz: Ya. Schubert: I have two kind of comments/questions. First one, last meeting I thought we had talked about kind of talking to the city attorney and seeing if they had any viewpoints on what the city level of responsibility would be in times of those situations. I don't know if that question has been asked or has been answered yet but I think that might be worth getting a little more 7 Park and Recreation Commission — December 8, 2020 clarification to Commissioner Peck's concerns. If the city attorney said, get their viewpoint on it too because I think would help quell a lot of the questions that are being thrown out. And then the second thing which is a complete kind of a 180, is I think outside of people making money on using public property, the other big concern was maintenance staff not being able to perform the maintenance when they showed up somewhere because a group was using a field or something. Am I correct in that? Is there a way, I don't know, Adam, probably you can answer this. Is there a way to say this field be, maintenance will be performed on this field every Wednesday from 7 a.m. to 8 a.m. Is there a way to try and get the maintenance process, I know weather plays a fun little factor in everything in the summer, especially in spring. But is there a way to maybe try and have a process in terms of what fields get maintained when, and mowed so that then that can be posted and then people go "oh I should probably stay away because city maintenance is going to be here during this time". Beers: So historically we've never had, and run into these issues from time to time, periodically. It's never been a major point of concern, for example, if there's a baseball camp, Jerry's staff and Priya and Jodi always do a really, really good job communicating with us. We kind of alter any of schedules and if that is the case, it's just as simple as us moving on and going to the next location. It's never really been in my time in seven years has it been a point of contention. Any time there's a tournament or tennis or pickle ball, we just make sure we get in there ahead of time and people .......... that we're going do .......... or whatever it might be. I think from a maintenance perspective, there's not really a major issue. As far as the fields go, we work with Jerry every year and we kind of close off one of the soccer fields or baseball fields. We actually take it out of commission for a few month while we do aeration and our top dress or over seeding. I guess from my perspective, it's not really a, I think that we would unnecessarily creating another layer where we may not have to. I hasn't been an issue. Schubert: OK, thank you. Boettcher: No I think, Haley, you were right, I do remember that conversation about getting the city attorney involved in this and some of the issues that were raised at last month's meeting. I think that'd be a great idea. I think that's more of an indicator where are decision would come from based on what our liability is. Sarles: Alright, I will get on that right away. Tsuchiya: I also want to comment that even if there is a concern after the city attorney comes back wouldn't implementation of any kind of rules or required registration, wouldn't that have to go through City Council but also, I don't know what the current ordinances are in Chanhassen about that. Is this going to be ordinance based or is this just strictly department rule based? Ruegemer: A lot of that, Karl, is probably no different than John Q. Public with the family going and playing baseball. There's probably some immunity with that as well, whether it's a playground, skate park, that type of thing. Obviously, we're not having people sign waivers at Park and Recreation Commission — December 8, 2020 the skate park, that type of thing. They're not going through background checks type of thing with the kids but anything that's we've done as far as a program type of has been contracted and gone through us so they kind of go through and make sure they have the liability type of insurance. For the little onesie, twosies to everybody's points, it really kind of hard for us to kind of shake down or chase down everybody with that so I guess we'll have to find out what our representation says but a lot of that stuff may be covered under general liability kind of stuff if something would happen. You know, playing baseball games and sliding into second base and break an ankle type of thing, if they want to go through that process, they certainly can. Probably within the last month, we've had somebody on their bicycle out by Century Boulevard and hit a crack or bump on a trail and go over the handlebars and lose some teeth, but it kind of sounded like he was on his phone while he was doing this so that went through the insurance claim and denied so the city didn't have any, we weren't negligent at that point even though the section of trail had little bit of a bump on it but that was just kind of I guess normalcy for trails and people have to kind of be aware so those types of things, like I said, we kind of do have some immunity with that. We have to be kind of gross negligent for us to be on the hook for those types of things but to Commissioner Peck's point as far as any kind of sexual abuse, certainly we can't control the world of who uses public facilities but those were the type of things that we were kind of discussing about, is here a way for us to have some measures or controls in place that we can kind of govern I guess a little bit. I like I said, we're not looking to create more work for staff and we're just trying to get kind of a handle on our world a little bit and people using these public facilities. Sweetser: Maybe it's just as simple as, on the website with whatever the kind of policy or procedure has become, just having it on the website, basically stating, "if you are going to be conducting a `formal' program of some sort, you need to contact us in advance. And then you're still going to have somebody that doesn't and if then, to Matt's point, if it then becomes a problem, you're going to hear about it, Jodi. So then it can be addressed with that individual who's giving the private lessons or whatever. I think just having that information, the website probably going to be the place someone goes first if they're legitimately trying to get a facility to do whatever their business is or they're going to go there to look to see, how does the Chanhassen Rec Center rent out their fields or whatever. Even if they're not going to do it, they're going to go look and just see what the process is. It might just be that simple. Boettcher: Anyone else have any other input, suggestions? If not, Commissioner Peck, does that address our next steps? Peck: Yes, if we're going to go to our city attorney to get a little more guidance that should be fine. Boettcher: Ok, thank you. This one we won't let drop. We'll see if we can find someone on the Council that maybe is favorable to Park & Rec Commission, maybe used to be a member of such. Maybe when the vote comes could swing it in, what's this head shaking, you're going the 0 Park and Recreation Commission — December 8, 2020 wrong way. We would not ask you for a favor afterward. Alright, next item, H. Old Business. We don't have anything listed. Is there anything, Jerry or anyone else, that comes to mind? Ruegemer: Not at this time. OLD BUSINESS: None Boettcher: Alright, then we'll move on to Reports. First item under Section I, No. 1. Looks like Adam, Quarterly Update. REPORTS: PARK MAINTENANCE QUARTERLY UPDATE. Beers: Thank you Chair Boettcher and commissioners. Just have kind of a quick snapshot of what the Park Maintenance staff has been working on the last month or two. Facility shut downs are all but complete. Rental facilities obviously are closed. We've done some maintenance in the Lake Ann concession building, ....replacing lights, doing some kind of deep cleaning. All the drinking fountains are closed and have been removed. Fountains are now shut down ..... winterized. Ruegemer: Adam, can you talk closer to your microphone? You're breaking up a little. Beers: Ya! Is that better? Ruegemer: Yes, sir. Beers: I was going to say the only facility we have now open is the pickle ball courts and with this wonderful, long fall we've been having, we've just left it out there at the Rec Center so I think, Jodi, you can probably attest to this....happy pickle ball customers. Other than that, we've been pulling in the docks and the fishing piers which is out annual maintenance program. Worked with the DNR this year and we were able to secure a replacement fishing pier at Lake Ann. I believe the last one was put in in the early 90's, I think that's probably correct, somewhere around so it's pretty old. So staff has been working at our Lake Ann shop right now through the winter ... a lot of major project to get that rebuilt and ready for the next season. As far as skating rinks go, we are patiently waiting to get out and start flooding. Unfortunately, the weather has not cooperated at all with the flooding conditions so staff is ready to go as soon as we get some cooler weather. Due to the Covid 19 pandemic, we are unfortunately kind of pumping the breaks on putting the warming houses out so staff is out to put some ancillary picnic tables and benches around so people can use them to get ready to go out and skate. That's kind of our plan right now. Other than that, we've been really trying to peck away at just some tree trimming projects. Been working with the forestry department and Jill Sinclair on getting some buck thorn removed and we have some high school students doing some fall clean up at City Hall and the library. So it's been a pretty busy fall. We've been very fortunate with some good 10 Park and Recreation Commission — December 8, 2020 weather but other than that, I'd just like to say Happy Holiday from Park Maintenance and hopefully we can actually get back into the Council Chambers and see you guys soon. Boettcher: Alright, thank you, Adam. Quick question. What is the staff number through the winter, your maintenance staff? Beers: There are eight total. There's seven and myself. Ruegemer: Commissioner Boettcher, Adam can certainly touch on this but we have a brand new Parks operator starting next Monday, the 141h of December. He'll be replacing JJ Wahl who was with our department. He took a job with another city, the City of Mound. So Adam, Gary, Jake Foster and myself went through the interviewing process. I think we had 25-30 apps. Narrowed it down and then we hired Nick Jacobson. Nick has extensive golf course experience. Most recently he's been work down at Target Field, so with the Twins. So he was on the maintenance crew, field crew. We're excited that is Nick is going to be starting with us. He's pretty excited to be starting with us and Adam will have full plate on his hands. He's getting another employee, kind of trained and ready to and we'll get him in a plow truck and a flooding truck before he knows it so we're excited for that so just a little update on Adam's division. Boettcher: Looks like he's got a pretty good resume with maintenance at Twins stadium. I mean, does he live close to here, was that the reason for a job change or did he indicate that? Beers: Ya, so he has been, his wife is an attorney and had been kind of traveling around the country, so he'd been kind of moving around and they, I think within the last two years decided to make south.... of the metro kind of home. I think they're plan is to stay and raise their family here so he was pretty excited for the opportunity to .......... Boettcher: Sounds like a good addition. Thank you, Adam, I appreciate it. Next item, Senior Center Quarterly Report. Looks like Mary's been keeping people busy. REPORTS: SENIOR CENTER QUARTERLY UPDATE. Blazanin: Ya, thank you, Chair Boettcher and Commissioners. Hello. I won't go whole in the interest of time, you have it, you can see that we've had a lot going on in spite of that fact that we have to keep the numbers really low. I'll just point out three things about what's been happening this quarter. Interestingly enough, once we reopened, we had a lot of, what I call, younger seniors, so really younger, active, older adults. People age probably 55-70. They're in the younger set at the senior center. But they started contacting me to bring their small groups in knit or crochet or book clubs. We had a Scrabble group come in who had been playing together but needed a place be. Some Mahjong. I hired a Mahjong teacher who was able to teach a group of ladies how to play and they continued to come along with another group and all those things could be done fairly socially distanced and those are the types of games you can clean easily, so that worked out well. Our card groups couldn't come back yet. We're still just waiting on that 11 Park and Recreation Commission — December 8, 2020 but that was really exciting that a lot a younger folks were working their way in. A lot of people who are must more tech savvy so posting things on our website and on our Facebook pages, really brought in a lot of folks who didn't necessary use the senior center in the past or know that we existed for their benefit. So that's really been a plus with this that we've been able to sort of tie into those folks who are more computer savvy and watching what the city is doing on its website and Facebook page. So that's a good deal. The second thing I wanted to mention is that we have our holiday party coming up. We decided not to cancel it completely. We're going to do a drive up event and it's all just kind of coming together but I've got about 55-60 folks who are going to drive up a week from Thursday to pick up a meal. The Chan O'Laires were thrilled because I asked them if they would be willing to stand outside and sing some carols and so there is a small group of Chan O'Laires coming to sing carols as people drive up. Jerry, you don't put the Santa suit on. I know you're disappointed but I found a Santa who is also going to be in the parking lot greeting people. We we're super excited about that. We have some businesses who have put together some really nice gifts for our folks so we'll be able to hand those out as people come up to pick up their meal and it's just be nice to see people. And again, I have probably 30% of people that signed for this are people that I don't know who just happened to see it on our webpage or Facebook page and keyed into and signed up so that's really nice. The 3rd thing I wanted to mention is that I have started a cell phone recycling program. The National Council on Aging offers senior centers in the United States the ability to turn in old cell phones and get paid for them. So I started that recycling program. People have been dropping cell phones off, a lot of them at City Hall and I've turned them in and have already earned over $100 which is, you know, better than nothing. I will keep doing it and I'm hoping people give a lot of cell phones Christmas presents this year and need a place to recycle their cell phones, they can bring them to the Senior Center and we'll turn around and put that into programming to keep our costs down for our folks. I thought there was one thing but I think that's where I'm going to leave it. Do you have any questions for me? Boettcher: Mary, I have an old bag phone from about 1993 when I was working with Ford in Detroit. It that thing worth ... can you get a nickel for it? Blazanin: Yes! Probably. I have had several phones where I really only get about a dime but, no, bring it in. The nice thing about this program is what they can't repurpose or reuse again, they will give some phones to let's say like shelters or to folks that can't afford to buy phones. They'll repurpose them and get them ready for that. If they do that, they take them apart and recycle the parts. So, it's all a good thing. Boettcher: Good. Schubert: I was going to say, I know for a while there was an ask for phones for the Meals on Wheels program. Is that still, are you kind of going between the two of them for this or are they one in the same? 12 Park and Recreation Commission — December 8, 2020 Blazanin: Ya, no, we started with that idea but we're not going to use it towards that. I think instead we'll use it towards things like the holiday party where we ask people to pay for a meal but those folks that might be, that I know of who might struggle with even coming up with $10 or $8, I'll just sign them up and use that money to help pay their cost. Schubert: OK. I did find a phone over the weekend while I was cleaning so I'll drop it off sometime soon. Boettcher: Thank you, Mary. Any other questions for Mary. If not, thank you for a great job as always. We appreciate it. Blazanin: You're welcome. REPORTS: CHANHASSEN RECREATON CENTER QUARTERLY UPDATE. Boettcher: Item 3. I don't see a report for it so I'm thinking Jodi is going to tell us about the Rec Center from just off the top of her head. Sarles: No report? Boettcher: No, the link was dead. Sarles: OK, I'll have to check what happened there. Boettcher: You can wing it. We'll believe you. Sarles: I will wing it. I've got some paper here in front of me. I have one but sorry about that. I'll email it over tomorrow to you all. So basically, it's been an interesting time here with, we shut down at the end of our day on November 20th. The good news is the staff have been given the opportunity to continue working. Albeit, not as facility supervisors, but things have been custodial tasks. I have one assigned to City Hall that is doing scanning for city documents into Laserfiche files so it's kind of tough time out at the Rec Center right now so if you want to work out or do anything, that's just not happening but for me the walls are getting painted, the trip around all the doors that hasn't been touched since 1995, other than to be scratched by everybody, that's getting worked on so we're getting a bit of a makeover right now. It's not the job that I would like to have right now that's for sure. Right now one of the things that happened through that Covid 19 Cares funding, any of the lobby furniture that was more than 2, so a loveseat, we had I think six of those out in the front lobby and if anybody had been in the Rec Center for a while, you know that those couches are well, they have seen a lot of love and so well worn and so the good news is we were able to replace all of our lobby furniture, anything that was a two -seats or loveseat we were able to use the Covid or Cares funding and then they city bumped up our Capital funding that we had coming next year to this year so that we could replace everything. So we have a very fancy, antimicrobial, vinyl fabric. I did some fine 13 Park and Recreation Commission — December 8, 2020 shopping so they are very heavy duty. I think they have 400 lb., so my little toddlers when they jump and down on it may be they'll withstand some of the abuse that happens out front but it looks the total amount that we spent was about $12,000 or $11,873. About $3,460 was from that Covid Cares funding so that's been very nice right now. If you look behind my vending machines, you'll see the pieces we can't have out in the lobby just yet because of spacing needs so we have a max of 12 out there and I think I've got another eight back in the or seven, by the vending machines. As I'm looking here, the things I was writing about, we had to update, being a drop -in facility with the Covid 19, we've had to make a lot of adjustments to try to meet those capacities so basically our fitness center is now, or has now and probably will be when we reopening under a 5-person limit in the fitness center so we created a reservation system for people to register up to an hour and a half, so 30-minute blocks, they could pick three a day so that they would be guaranteed a space. We were having some trouble with people being turned away and having to wait in the lobby and that just wasn't feasible for any longer that way so we've had this adjustment but I think people are finally, well had, finally been kind of use to that and they were signing up for all their workouts from now until December at that time, so that was a good one. So then when that happened, indoor pickle ball, once we came inside, when it snowed, we went to a maximum of 20 people and they had to sign up. We did get some push back with some of the pickle ball players a little concerned with the sharing of courts and spaces and rotations and so we added another opportunity where people could sign up for just their four people or a group of four to six. They wouldn't intermix with any of the other courts so we called it pickle ball pod play and that seemed to, they have that choice now. They did not get the most popular time that we offer pickle ball but they have that choice and people had been using that before everything kind of shut down on us. Thanks to Adam, he really, really... those guys are so excited to have courts outside. I was getting calls even this week for people wanting to borrow the indoor net to set them up anywhere they could go because of the weather here this week so they were very appreciative of the work that crew did to get those nets out. Programs of course have been changed and pretty limited in numbers. We've offered babysitting, dance, that's, we almost made it through our whole fall session of dance with the exception of the last Saturday, they transitioned to Zoom on that day. Now we're into the winter session and for the most part, fortunately, we've been able to keep most of our dancers into the winter even being taught through the Zoom application. Rec Center sports. We did pretty well with our soccer because we were outside and then soccer came inside and then we kind of lost a little bit of participation with some folks, got a little concerned about sitting in the gym. We had all of our bleachers are marked out, we've got a limit of one parents per child that can come in during that time just so that we could offer enough safe space for folks to wait at that point. We're hoping we can come back in possibly January, February, but right now, it's up in the air. And then as far as some virtual ideas we've had going on, Mary, Priya and I have been meeting quite a bit to throw a few ideas together. A couple of them just making sure we're out there all the time, all weeks. So if you're checking on our Facebook page, our training at the Rec Center, Julie, she's offering a Monday Motivations, so she'll do different fitness activities, whether it's cardio or strength, things you can do, I think her first one was, things you can do while you're waiting for your coffee to brew in the morning. She's got one, things you can do during commercials during your football games, so it they're kind of fun little, quick topics about two minutes or so that she just 14 Park and Recreation Commission — December 8, 2020 gives some ideas and shows how to do proper positioning for your exercises. And then, if you're willing to attend and do this one, we'll have the Chanhassen Trivia Challenge so that's going to be next week on December 17 so we're putting it together as a Zoom trivia. We'll have groups up to I think we've got the limit right now at about 25. So it's you and your immediate family or people, just no more than 2 adults per team and then kids and we'll different ideas, or different topic throughout the night. I think it's going to be about 45 minutes and the winners will receive some prizes from some of our local businesses. So we're trying to encourage folks to get out and spend some money, get some take-out maybe, stop by at the hardware store to pick up you need to fix the cupboard door. Hoping to drive some business to our local group. And then we're, last thing here is that our punch card sales, sadly, has been postponed. Typically, every December we have a pretty big punch card sale for the month. With being shut down, we're going to move that to whenever we open and then probably have it as a six -week period. Keep your eyes peeled for that one. Anyway, with that, I hope you guys all have a wonderful holiday, great December and hope to you see you soon in person. Boettcher: Alright, thank you, Jodi. Great. So there is still something going on there ....after Covid. Sarles: Oh ya! Boettcher: What is the official, is the 18th the end of the state shutdown? Is that correct? Sarles: Ya. Boettcher: So by the 21st, that week, Christmas week, restaurants and businesses are supposed to be open again? I can't keep up anymore. I mean ... Every state has their own rules now. Sweetser: I don't that that's, I think that that's the end of, you remember how in the spring it kind of kept extending a little bit. I don't think the Governor's committed that it's completely reopening on the 19th but, let's hope. Boettcher: Especially for the restaurants in the area. Ruegemer: I think that's the approach I think the city it taking. Kind of a wait and see attitude and approach to that. So, like I said, Jodi, Mary and Priya have been doing a really great job on meeting frequently and kind of going through program, virtual programming ideas and coming up with fun things for our community to do to try to keep people engaged. People are growing weary and growing tired of the just the whole situation everybody is in. Just really just to do a great job. They're really kind of banding together and I think our department is much stronger now than we were in March, certainly. I think we're much better prepared through the phasing processes and procedures that we've been going through and Mary and Jodi and Adam's groups, certainly with the outdoor maintenance. Everybody's done a really great job of coming up with safety protocols and really dumping everybody's division out on the floor and kind of figuring it 15 Park and Recreation Commission — December 8, 2020 out. So, you know, it's been a lot of thought processes and to try to do things differently and with virtual this and virtual that and putting X's on the bleachers and spacing 4, 5 and 6 year olds for soccer and t-ball and those types of things. I just really complement our staff for really working hard and really putting in the time. Just a case in point, I mean, Mary and Jodi have certainly been working together on making sure that our facilities supervisors and our Park Maintenance staff have, Adam has enough to do all the time, but incorporating Park Maintenance into some projects at City Hall. Adam's crew are putting in a chair rail for Mary down in the Senior Center and fixing some trim. Jodi's crew have been coming over and helping with scanning in the Building Department. I think there's enough scanning for at least another 10 to 15 years of plans and I mean, Rick Rice over the moon with getting some of that kind of stuff done. There's just a lot of people rolling up their sleeves and maybe going outside their lanes and really just doing what's best for the city employee base as well as our residents and just really, everybody's been working extremely hard through 2020. It's been extremely challenging for staff to really go outside the norm of what we're kind of used to. We certainly long for those days of what we're kind of used to. We certainly long for those days of having a normal Feb Fest and Tree Lighting Ceremony and fireworks and all those types of things. We'll get there at some point in time but everybody's doing just a great job just really giving it their effort and not putting their heads in the sand and going into the corner in the fetal position. I mean seriously, everybody's just been really working hard and just trying to make it a better situation for our residents and guests of our city. So just tip of the cap. Boettcher: So for Feb Fest for the ice fishing contest are you just going to have people go to the Google play store and download one of the ice fishing games and then we'll do a virtual top 50? Would that work? Ruegemer: Priya, you certainly can talk about that. We've had lots of discussions about Feb Fest. Tandon: Ya, for sure. Jerry and I have met a few times over the past couple weeks to try to figure out what's going to happen with Feb Fest. We've also had some communication with other tournaments across the state and it seems like a lot of groups have tried to do an in -person tournament. Not many are going virtual. One of the fishing, I think it is the biggest fishing tournament in the state, the Brainerd Jaycee Fishing Tournament. They are doing a virtual contest. So we hope to do a virtual contest. Our concern is just maintaining the integrity of Feb Fest. We do have some higher value prizes and we want to avoid any sort of cheating or dishonesty and just keep the integrity. So it seems like as of now, we do plan on doing a virtual Feb Fest where participants fish on their own and they either submit via email or through an app. There's an app called Fish Donkey I learned about that you can submit your fish through that and then go into some sort of drawing for prizes but we're working out the specific logistics of that to find out what can be best for participation and keeping the brand of the event, but Feb Fest will happen it just won't be, you know, as we all know the way it has been before. Ruegemer: So unlikely we'll, we will not be having the dogsled rides, or the tent out on the ice, the bonfires, s'more kits, hayrides, that sort of thing, will not be happening this year just because 16 Park and Recreation Commission — December 8, 2020 of the guidelines put into place by the CDC and health organization and that sort thing. But we're trying to hold onto the tradition of the ice fishing contest and we're going to kind of spread it out over the course of that week and have people fish, we'll certainly talk about Lake Ann and also Carver County as well. Having it open up potentially to lakes in Carver County during that timeframe and limit to the species that inside Lake Ann so we're not having 30 lb. walleyes that are coming out of Lake Waconia type of thing. I know Priya's been working extremely hard on getting background and information from other cities and contests and kind of what they're doing so we're formulating that and I think we're very close to kind of finalizing a format and getting information put together and Priya's been talking to the DNR about getting the permit processed certainly for that so. You know, a lot of it kind of up in the air as well with the December 18 deadline by Governor Walz. There isn't a lot of movement right now with the DNR... certainly anything more than 250 people. Priya's on top of that and she'll keep moving and advancing that forward and we'll have an update for the Commission very shortly. Boettcher: I just read about the one in Brainerd that Priya was talking about, the big fishing contest and said it was going virtual. I didn't read all the detail on it but with that one, I mean, that always had a first prize of $10,000 so there's going to have to be some serious, someone's going to have to monitor that, not that fisherman ever lie or cheat but I mean, I don't know, I don't know how it's, how it would take place. Yes, Commissioner Shubert doing the.... Ruegemer: I think what Priya has mentioned, I think that is a state-wide, any lake in the state of Minnesota is eligible to fish in the Brainerd contest so I think that's what Priya had mentioned and she certainly can explain is that Fish Donkey will be available from, what, noon to 3:00 on that contest day and you can fish anywhere in the state and then register a fish during that time and range for that and that's how they're going to do it. Boettcher: So if there's still open water, can I take my boat out and go fishing? Ruegemer: I guess so. Tandon: I think they're still working out some logistics. I do think our virtual Feb Fest, assuming that we'll be virtual, will be structured a bit differently than they are structuring there's just because, ya, keeping the integrity of the contest but, ya, they're from noon to 3:00 on that specific day and you have to take your photo of your fish through an app but they have big prizes but it will be interesting to see what happens. Boettcher: Definitely. Anyone else have anything to add? Kutz: I was just going to ask, has anyone checked the local lakes? Do we have a'/z inch of ice on the lake right now or anything? Boettcher: I don't that it would be that much to tell you the truth. 17 Park and Recreation Commission — December 8, 2020 Kutz: I've noticed some ponds are froze over but I haven't seen, I haven't went by any of the bigger lakes. Just curious if anybody knew. Ruegemer: We have not as a city gone out and tested any depths on those ices. I'm sure there's open water still on some of the areas so we are not advising any ice travel at this point. Kutz: Ya. Boettcher: Everybody always tries to push the seasons. Alright, well with that, I'd like to say to, I've got an echo here. Somebody got a mic on yet? Commissioner Shubert, he just had to leave us. Don't forget the little people as you climb the ladder. You know, there's someone on the Council that's going to state senate so in two years that may be your next, oh, no, you're not going pole vault to there? OK. But remember where we are, Tuesdays, fourth Tuesdays, 7:00. You can come and sign in and site and hassle us if you want. We won't be offended. Schubert: [Laughing]. No. Thank you, Chair Boettcher and Commissioners. It's been a phenomenal, phenomenal two years with you guys and I am definitely going to miss you guys but am very excited for the future. COMMISSION MEMBER COMMITTEE REPORTS. None. COMMISSION MEMBER REPORTS. None. Boettcher: Good. We look for good things from you too. I think the Council just got a big boost with you joining them. Does anyone else have anything else to add? If not, I would like to say to everyone, be safe, Merry Christmas, Happy New Year. Commissioner Schubert, since this is your last meeting, kind of not written in stone, but would you like to do the motion to adjourn? Schubert: So moved. Boettcher: And the second? Sweetser: Second. Boettcher: With a motion on the second, I will have a Merry Christmas, Happy New Year. We will see you in a better 2021. Meeting adjourned. Thank you. Schubert moved, Sweetser seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 8 to 0. The Park and Recreation Commission meeting was adjourned at 8:39 p.m. Kutz: Thank you. Park and Recreation Commission — December 8, 2020 Others: Merry Christmas, Happy New Year. Happy holiday. Ruegemer: Happy holidays, everybody. Take care. Peck: It was a great day. The first Covid vaccine was given today. First injection. Boettcher: Good. Ruegemer: Alrigbt, have a great night, everybody. Others: You too. Night. Bye. Submitted by Jerry Ruegemer Park and Rec Director Prepared by Jean Steckling 19 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Monday, February 8, 2021 Subject Resolution 2021-XX: Bid Authorization for 2021 Street Improvement Project (20-05) Section CONSENT AGENDA Item No: DA. Prepared By George Bender, Assistant City Engineer File No: ENG 20-05 PROPOSED MOTION "The City Council adopts a resolution accepting the plans and specifications and authorizing publication of an advertisement for bids for the 2021 City Pavement Rehabilitation Project 20-05." Approval requires a Simple Majority Vote of members present. BACKGROUND On November 27, 2019, the Engineering Department prepared and released a request for proposals (RFP) for consultant services for the project. On December 20, 2019, the Engineering Department received two proposals from consultants for consultant services. On January 13, 2020, the City Council approved a contract with Kimley Horn & Associates and authorized preparation of a feasibility study. On February 11, 2020, the Engineering Department hosted an open house to introduce and discuss the project with the public. Notifications were sent to residents in the nearby areas who will be affected by the project. On April 13, 2020, the City Council accepted the feasibility report for the project and called for a public hearing to be held on April 27, 2020. On April 27, 2020, the City Council held a Public Hearing, ordered the improvements, and authorized preparation of plans and specifications. On May 26, 2020, the City Council accepted the plans and specifications and authorized publication of an advertisement to bid the project. On June 19, 2020, the City opened sealed bids for the project. On June 22, 2020, the City Council called a Public Hearing to be held on July 13, 2020. On July 13, 2020, the City Council held a Public Hearing and tabled adoption of the assessment roll and awarding a construction contract to July 27, 2020. On July 27, 2020, the City Council decided to not move forward with the project in 2020. On November 10, 2020, the City Council approved a contract amendment with Kimley Horn & Associates to facilitate minor updates to the 20-05 feasibility study and contract documents in addition to re -bidding the project as the 2021 City Street Rehabilitation project. On January 11, 2021, the City Council accepted the feasibility report and called a Public Hearing to be held on January 25, 2021. On January 25, 2021, the City Council held a Public Hearing, ordered the improvements, and authorized preparation of plans and specifications. The 2020 City Pavement Rehabilitation project has been renamed the 2021 City Pavement Rehabilitation project. The project number (20-05) remains the same as do the six neighborhood areas identified for rehabilitation in the project. Staff utilized the City's Pavement Management Program and site investigations to determine the project limits as shown in Figures 1-7 (attached). None of these areas have had major rehabilitation performed after the original urbanized street construction (only maintenance activities such as pothole patching, crack -sealing, and seal coats). The six neighborhood areas follow: • The Lake Lucy Road area which lies east of Powers Blvd with approximately 0.7 mi les of streets built -out between 1988 and 1992. • The Redwing Lane area which also lies east of Powers Blvd with approximately 0.5 miles of streets built -out in 1980. • The Trappers Pass area which lies north of Pleasant View Road and west of TH 101 with approximately three miles of streets built -out between 1985 and 1994. • The Choctaw Circle area which lies west of TH 101 with approximately 0.4 miles of roads built -out in 1978. • The Kurvers Point Road area which also lies west of TH 101 with approximately 0.6 miles of streets built -out between 1991 and 1992. • The Marsh Drive area which lies north of Rice Marsh Lake and south of TH 5 with approximately 1 mile of streets built -out in 1986. All of the streets identified have deteriorated over the years and are in need of roadway pavement rehabilitation. The project was designed in 2020 but the City decided to not move forward with the project due to several factors. The City's revised Capital Improvement Plan for 2021-25 plans for the rehabilitation of the same project area and streets in 2021. Schedule The projected schedule for project is as follows: Tas W Date Approve Plans & Specifications; Autbarize Advertisement for Bids February 8, 2021 Bid Opening March 12, 2021 Neighborhood Meeting {Virtual) April 2021 Public Hearing for Assessments & Award Construction Contract April 26, 2021 Start Construction May 2021 Substantial Construction Complete November 2021 Budget for the proposed work has been included in the 2021 CIP for the project to be constructed in 2021. Funding for the project is proposed to come from the pavement management fund and special assessments to benefiting properties for the street improvement costs. The special assessments will be managed per the City's Assessment Practice. City utility enterprise funding will be utilized to cover the rehabilitation needs specific to each utility. The preliminary special assessment amounts for the six neighborhood areas identified to be completed are as follows: • Lake Lucy Lane area: $3,004 • Redwing Lane area: $1,996 • Choctaw Circle area: $2,040 • Kurvers Point Road area: $4,282 • Marsh Drive area: $2,221 • Trappers Pass area: $3,005 The Redwing Lane and Choctaw Circle areas will be rehabilitated by a standard mill and overlay technique. The Trappers Pass, Marsh Drive, Lake Lucy Lane, and Kurvers Point Road areas will be rehabilitated by a full depth reclamation. The main difference in the assessment cost is related to this primary difference. These preliminary assessment amounts compare favorably to the final assessment amounts proposed in 2020. A summary of the project costs per area and funding sources is as follows: C.P. 20-05 Total Area Improvements Amount Lake Lucy Road Area $534,230.50 10% Redwing Lane Area $370,097.50 7% Choctaw Circle Area $304,439.00 6% Kurvers Point Road Area $545,536.50 10% Marsh Drive Area $847,537.50 16% Trappers Pass Area $2,443,384.00 47% Indirect Costs $200,000.00 4% Total $5,245,225.00 100% 2020 Financing Source Amount Revolving Assessment Fund (City portion) $2,271,433 Surface Water Utility Fund $485,000 Sewer Utility Fund $360,000 Water Utility Fund $610,000 Special Assessments to Property Owners $1,518,792 Total $5,245,225 RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the City Council accept the plans and specifications and authorize the publication of the advertisement for bids. ATTACHMENTS: Resolution Figures 1-7 2021 CIP Sheets CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA DATE: February 8, 2021 RESOLUTION NO: 2021-XX MOTION BY: SECONDED BY: A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND AUTHORIZING PUBLICATION OF THE ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS FOR THE 2021 CITY PAVEMENT REHABILITATION PROJECT NO.20-05 WHEREAS, on January 25, 2021, the City Council held a Public Hearing for the 2021 City Pavement Rehabilitation Project No. 20-05; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the Resolution passed by the City Council on January 25, 2021; Kimley-Horn and Associates in conjunction with the City Engineer have prepared plans and specifications for the 2021 City Pavement Rehabilitation Project and has presented such plans and specifications to the City Council for approval. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Chanhassen City Council: 1. Such plans and specifications, a copy of which can be reviewed at the office of the City Engineer, are hereby approved. 2. The City Clerk shall prepare and cause to be inserted in the official city newspaper and on QuestCDN.com, an advertisement for bids upon the making of such improvement under such approved plans and specifications. The ad shall be published at least three times, shall specify the work to be done, shall state that bids will be opened on March 12, 2021, and the responsibility of the bidders will be considered by the Council at 7:00 PM on Monday, April 26, 2021, for the 2021 City Pavement Rehabilitation Project No. 20-05, in the Council Chambers at the City Hall. Any bidder whose responsibility is questioned during consideration of the bid will be given an opportunity to address the Council on the issue of responsibility. No bids will be considered unless sealed and filed with the City Clerk and accompanied by a bid security payable to the clerk for 5% of the amount of such bid. Passed and adopted by the Chanhassen City Council this 8t' day of February, 2021. ATTEST: Heather Johnston, Interim City Manager Elise Ryan, Mayor YES NO ABSENT 2020 City Pavement Rehabilitation Maps (Figures 1-7) As -Built: 69-27 ` Installed: 1991 Estimated OCI: 13.65 As -Built: 89-27 As-Built:91.3 Installed:1991 r Installed: 1992 Estimated OCI: 17.12 Estimated OCI: 36.45 a l As -Built: 84 Installed: 1988 Estimated OCI: _ As -Built: 69-27 \ Installed:1991 \ �1 Estimated OCI: 15.59 rc ,4 Luke L u[y Rd ,� Lake Lucy Road Parcel Boundaries Figure 1: Lake Lucy Road Area Map '`r Choctaw Circle Parcel Boundaries As -Built: 78-6 Installed: 1978 Estimated OCI: 44.2 As -Built: 78-6 Installed: 1978 Estimated OCI: 43.44 7771 Ln�cea , n. As -Built: 78-6 Installed: 1978 Estimated OCI: 24.81 _ Figure 2: Choctaw Circle Area Map As-Built:87-20 >. Installed: 1991 �o ed V,++Qyv;ew T .? Estimated OCI: 23.06 / AS -Built., As -Built: 87-20 Installed: 1991 4_ Estimated OCI: 13.42 Installed: 1991 /F� Estimated OCI: 30.44 r ..\ As -Built: 87-20 Installed: 1991 Estimated OCI: 29.26 As -Built: 87.20 Installed: 1991 Homesm ad cir ' Estimated OCI: 24.78 a ~ As -Built: 91-11 Installed:1992 Estimated OCI: 1298 F+n saner 0-%-r Kurvers Point Road Parcel Boundaries As -Built: 91-i i Installed: 1992 Estimated OCI: 34.29 Figure 3: Kurvers Point Road Area Map I ~ R © As -Built: 85-12 a goreniin Installed: 1986 m Estimated OCI: 38.59 As -Built: 85-12 Installed: 1986 4ew °1 Estimated OCI: 28.47 n Utz Pontl�Prom enaCe ���Kidd_ III - AI: 2 In.,.Il.d:1986 Estimated OCI: 39.43 g As -Built: 85-12 Installed: 1986 Estimated OCI: 34.98 Marsh Drive Parcel Boundaries Installed: 1986 Estimated OCI: 39.67 1_ a z as -Built: 85.12 Installed: 1966 Estimated OCI: 36.49 Doko[a Ln / 1 j b As-BuIIt:85-12 S Installed: 1986 Estimated OCI: 27.64 A Figure 4: Marsh Drive Area Map C'arvnr t:.;,rn Rd As -Built: 78-57 Installed: 1980 �- As -Built: 78.57 Estimated OCI: 67.71 n Installed: 1980 Estimated OCI: 41.69 11(�,j V,rr i As-Built:78-57 s° Installed:1980 Estimated OCI: 51.06 l acorn sr_!i Ln -- i(erher (3Nr1 1'1� Redwing Lane Parcel Boundaries Installed: 1980 Estimated OCI: 38.08 As -Built: 7$-57 Installed: 1980 Estimated OCI: 60.33 s \/ Figure 5: Redwing Lane Area Map 41 Carver 8nar.li hrf cr. e or Ponderosa nr I Lone Ea,, o, WoodRrG ar As-Built:85-14 As-Built:-11 Installed:1987 'Installed:748fi Estimated OCI: 20.50 Estimated OCI: 27.70 72,.," VJ ' a 6.9 �aP , r As -Built. 90 fi i Installed: 1991 Estimated OCI: 17.73 Se See Trappers / ; 1 Pass {EAST} 3�r As-Built:85.11 ar Installed:1986 o Estimated OCI: 20.98 As -Built 92-4 As-Built:924 Installed:1991 `\ Y Installed: 1994 Estimated OCI: 17.39 \ As -Built: 89-13 ¢� Estimated OCI: 48.54 {{{ Installed: 1987 1 As-Built:90-6 Estimated OCI: 1790 1 Installed: 1991 Estimated OCL 20.42 a j 0-*,o Project Are i a Parcel Boundaries Figure 6: Trappers Pass (West) Area Map As-Builts: 83-6 As-Builts: $3 fi Installed: 1985 Installed: 1985 Esimated OCI: 27.78 Esimated OCI: 45.01 As-Builts: 85-3 \ Installed: 1986 Esimated OCI: 25.38 c Y _ I l• _ T",.; �� •�; ��� Ps-Builts:83-83- 6 n Installed: 1985 As-Builts: 85-11 As-Builts: 85-3 A a Esimated OCI: 37.87 Installed:1986 Installed:1986 f7-, Esimated OCL 27.70 Esimated OCI: 25.38 �r! ' Piedmont Gl Sr'asta Git As-Builts: 83 fiB As-Builts: rr,pvn'sPas , Installed: 1986\ Installed: 1985 Esimated OCL 24.08 \ Esimated OCI: 30.84 j� - •- � Iqm is Ci As-Builts:83-6 q As-Builts:85-3 Installed: 1985 %\ Installed:1986 Esimated OCI: 34.42 o m Esimated OCI: 25.38 Y As-Bui lts: 85- E 4 Jf s Installed:1987 ` Esimated OCI: 20.22 `.`�i nL in WnY tie Rq /%/ a• n � q �(/jam\\ l\ As-Builts: $$_6B As-Builts: 8345 Installed: 1986 �- --- ---------- - --- - --. Installed: 1985 Esimated OCL 24.1$ . Proleet Ale. Esimated OCI: Parcel Boundarieti K' F on o zoo Figure 7: Trappers Pass (East) Area Map Capital Improvement Program 2021 thru 2025 City of Chanhassen, MN 'roject # ST-012 'rojcct Name Annual Street Improvement Program Department Street Improvements Contact Charlie Howley Type Improvement Useful Life Unassigned Category Streets/Highways Account#1 601-6xxx-4xxx Account#3 Priority n/a Account #2 Account #4 Description Total Project Cost: $59,152,000 knnual project to rehabilitate and/or reconstruct streets in the City. The 5 year Capital Pavement Management Plan identifies the planned streets for the next five years. The Plan gets updated every fall to review priorities and needs. Justification I the City uses a Pavement Management System to monitor the condition of the City streets. While proper preventative maintenance extends the ife of the street and is cost effective, a street will eventually deteriorate to a point that major maintenance is required. Rehabilitation projects intend the life of the street. In cases when utilities or poor sub grade needs to be replaced or where streets have deteriorated to a point where •ehabilitation will no longer be practical, reconstruction of the street is necessary. A feasibility study is written to consider the merits of the )roject, scope of work and assessments. Prior Expenditures 32,257,000 Construction Total Prior Funding Sources 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Total 6,795,000 4,875,000 4,975,000 5,075,000 5,175,000 26,895,000 Total 6,795,000 4,875,000 4,975,000 5,075,000 5,175,000 26,895,000 32,257,000 Assessment/Revolving Assess Fund Total MSA Sewer Utility Fund Surface Water Utility Fund Water Utility Fund 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Total 3,600,000 3,700,000 3,800,000 3,900,000 4,000,000 19,000,000 975,000 975,000 420,000 225,000 225,000 225,000 225,000 1,320,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 2,500,000 1,300,000 450,000 450,000 450,000 450,000 3,100,000 Total 6,795,000 4,875,000 4,975,000 5,075,000 5,175,000 26,895,000 Budget Impact/Other the construction allotment revenue the City receives from MSA has been cut by 15% for 2021. No advancements are being approved by MSA zntil further notice. City has an Assessment Policy, last updated in 2014, that identifies what and how much of the project is assessed to benefiting properties. Capital Improvement Program 2021 thru 2025 City of Chanhassen, MN Project # SWMP-032 Project Name Stormwater Pond Improvements Account#1 720-7025-4xxx Account#2 Account #3 Account #4 Department Surface Water Management Contact Charlie Howley Type Improvement Useful Life Category SW -MP Priority n/a Description Total Project Cost: $4,070,000 this program will provide inspection and cleaning of City stormwater ponds. This work may include sediment removal, placement of blanket, •ip-rap or other erosion control BMP's, vegetation management and assessment, repair and replacement of inlet and outlet structures. Justification there are approximately 300 stormwater ponds in the City of Chanhassen, all requiring regular maintenance to assure they function to National Jrban Runoff Program recommendations. This measure has also been identified in Chanhassen's National Pollution Discharge Elimination Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) permit. The project will also minimize flooding potential. Prior Expenditures 820,000 Maintenance Total 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Total 650,000 650,000 650,000 650,000 650,000 3,250,000 Total 650,000 650,000 650,000 650,000 650,000 3,250,000 Prior Funding Sources 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Total 820,000 Surface Water Utility Fund 650,000 650,000 650,000 650,000 650,000 3,250,000 Total Total 650,000 650,000 650,000 650,000 650,000 3,250,000 Budget Impact/Other ?ublic works streets staff often do minor stormwater pond maintenance. CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Monday, February 8, 2021 Subject Resolution 2021-XX: Accept a Donation from T-Mobile for 28th Annual February Festival Section CONSENT AGENDA Item No: D.5. Prepared By Priya Tandon, Recreation Supervisor File No: PROPOSED MOTION "The Chanhassen City Council accepts a donation of $3,000 from T-Mobile to cover the costs of the 28th annual February Festival and directs staff to prepare a letter of thanks to T-Mobile's Regional Marketing Manager, Tony Wirz." Approval requires a Simple Majority Vote of members present. BACKGROUND The Chanhassen Parks & Recreation Department presented the modified, COVID-friendly February Festival event this February 1-6, consisting of an on -your -own fishing contest and medallion hunt. T-Mobile generously agreed to donate and cover the costs of this event, which included fishing contest prizes and promotional materials. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council approve the attached resolution accepting the $3,000 donation from T-Mobile for the 28th annual February Festival event. Additionally, staff will prepare a letter of thanks to T-Mobile for their involvement and generous donation. ATTACHMENTS: ❑ Resolution CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA DATE: February 8, 2021 RESOLUTION NO: MOTION BY: SECONDED BY: 2021-XX A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING A DONATION FROM T-MOBILE BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE CHAN14ASSEN CITY COUNCIL hereby accepts the $3,000 donation from T-Mobile for the 28 h Annual February Festival held February 1-6, 2021. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that staff is directed to prepare correspondence thanking T-Mobile for their generous contribution. Passed and adopted by the Chanhassen City Council this 8 h day of February, 2021. ATTEST: Heather Johnston, Interim City Manager Elise Ryan, Mayor YES NO ABSENT CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Monday, February 8, 2021 Subject Approve The 2021/2022 Lake Ann Park Beach Lifeguard Contract Section CONSENT AGENDA Item No: D.6. Prepared By Jerry Ruegemer, Park and Recreation, Park and Recreation Director File No: PROPOSED MOTION "The City Council approves a two-year contract (2021/2022) with Minnetonka Public School District 276 for Lake Ann Park Beach Lifeguard Services in the amount of $34,680 per year." Approval requires a Simple Majority Vote of members present. SUMMARY The Park and Recreation Commission reviewed and discussed the two-year (2021/2022) Lake Ann Park Beach Lifeguard Contract at their January 26, 2021 meeting. A motion was made by Commissioner Tsuchiya and seconded by Commissioner Peck recommending the City Council approve the 2021/2022 two-year contract (Option A) with Minnetonka Public School District 276 for Lake Ann Park Beach Lifeguard Services in the amount of $34,680 per year. This amount is included in the 2021 Lake Ann Park Operations Budget (1540) and will be submitted as part of the 2022 Lake Ann Park Operations Budget. ATTACHMENTS: ❑ Park and Recreation Commission Staff Report dated January 26, 2021 PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Tuesday, January 26, 2021 Subject Consider Recommendation To City Council; 2021/2022 Lake Ann Park Beach Lifeguard Contract Section NEW BUSINESS Item No: G.1. Prepared By Jerry Ruegemer, Park and Recreation File No: Director PROPOSED MOTION The Park and Recreation Commission recommends the City Council approve a two-year contract, (2021/2022) with Minnetonka Public Schools ISD 276 for Lake Ann Park Beach Lifeguard Services in the amount of $34,680 per year. Approval requires a simple majority vote of members present BACKGROUND The City of Chanhassen contracts with Minnetonka Public Schools ISD 276 for the provision of lifeguard services at Lake Ann Park. The city and ISD 276 have worked together and developed a two-year contract format that has been used since 2007. The city council has endorsed the concept of a multi -year contract. The 2020 contract was: 24 hours/day x 72 days = 1,728 hours per season Hours: 11 am — 6 pm daily Dates: June 6 through August 16 $33,670 The 2021 Proposed Contract: (Option A) 24 hours/day x 72 days = 1,728 hours per season Hours: 11 am — 6 pm daily Dates: June 5 through August 15 $34,680 The 2022 Proposed Contract: (Option A) 24 hours/day x 72 days = 1,728 hours per season Hours: 11 am — 6 pm daily Dates: June 4 through August 14 $34,680 Attachment 2 shows a list of options developed by Minnetonka Public Schools ISD 276 for the two-year 2021/2022 contract. Staff reviewed the various options and is recommending approval of Option A. This option has 24 hours daily, while the number of days the beach is open remains at 72. The proposed new two-year contract amount is $34,680 per year, a 3% increase over the 2019/2020 contract. The 3% increase is due to rising staff wages for the upcoming proposed two-year contract. This amount is included in the 2021 Lake Ann Operations Budget (1540) and will be submitted as part of the 2021 Lake Ann Park Operations Budget. A representative from Minnetonka Aquatics will be available through Zoom for the January 26 meeting to review the options and answer the commission's questions. RECOMMENDATION The Park and Recreation Commission recommends the City Council approve a two-year contract (Option A) for (2021/2022) with Minnetonka Public Schools ISD 276 for Lake Ann Park Beach Lifeguard Services in the amount of $34,680 per year. ATTACIFEVIENTS: ❑ Lifeguard Service Proposal Options 2021/2022 ❑ Lake Ann Lifeguard Contract 2021/2022 ❑ Lifeguard Coverage Lake Ann Beach City of Chanhassen Beach Options 2021-22 Two Year Contract Option A: same service as 2019-20 24 hr/day x 72 days = 1728 hours Total hours: 1728 x $20.07 = $34,680.00 each year Option B: same service as 2019-20 24 hrs/day x 72 days = 1728 hours Total hours: 1728 x $20.07 = $34,680.00 each year 2021 invoice = $33,680.00 2022 invoice = $35,680.00 *could choose other similar price structure to lesson increase for 2021* Option C: 60 minutes less in coverage each day i.e. 10:30 AM-4:30 PM or 11:00 AM-5:00 PM 20.0 hr/day x 72 days = 1440 hours Total hours: 1440 x $20.07 = $28,900.00 each year Option D: reduce from 72 to 60 days of service for 2021 and 2022 24 hr/day x 60 days = 1440 hours Total hours: 1440 x $20.07 = $28,900.00 each year *could increase number of days by $482 each day* Option E: 90 minutes less in coverage each day i.e. 10:30 PM-4:00 PM 18.0 hr/day x 72 days = 1296 hours Total hours: 1296 x $20.07 = $26,010.00 each year *2019-20 agreement was for $33,670.00 each year* TWO (2) YEAR AGREEMENT FOR SUMMER SERVICES AT LAKE ANN BEACH - SUMMER 2021 & 2022 AGREEMENT made this 8th day of February, 2021 between the CITY OF CHANHASSEN, a Minnesota municipal corporation ("City") and the MINNETONKA PUBLIC SCHOOLS (the "Contractor"). WHEREAS, the City of Chanhassen has requested that Contractor provide a Lifeguard Service Program during the 2021 and 2022 Swimming Seasons for Lake Ann Beach. WHEREAS, the Contractor agrees to provide Lifeguard Services for Lake Ann Beach. NOW THEREFORE, the parties agree as follows: 1. CONTRACTOR'S SERVICES. A. Lifeguard Service. The Contractor agrees to provide the City with qualified and Red Cross certified personnel to lifeguard above stated beach from June 5 through August 15, 2021 and June 4 through August 14, 2022 from 11:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. daily (weather permitting). B. Contractor agrees to provide: 1) an appropriate number of lifeguards on duty at all times, according to any applicable industry standards or regulations; 2) lifeguard staff with ongoing in-service training during the summer season; 3) supervision of lifeguard personnel; 4) all necessary safety equipment for the Lifeguard Services including: rescue tubes, first aid kits, reaching pole, rescue board 2. CITY OBLIGATIONS. A. Beach. The City agrees to provide a clean and well -maintained beach and beach area as stated in this agreement. This includes defined swimming boundaries; clean restrooms and lifeguard station. The City agrees to provide a working telephone, lifeguard chairs, umbrella, and megaphone. B. 2021 Payment. The City agrees to pay Contractor a total of $34,680 divided into two equal payments of $17,340 on July 10 and August 10, 2021 in return for lifeguard services. C. 2022 Payment. The City agrees to pay Contractor a total of $34,680 divided into two equal payments of $17,340 on July 10 and August 10, 2022 in return for lifeguard services. 83758 Pagel of 4 3. INDEMNIFICATION. Contractor agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the City, its employees and officers subject to limitations of Chapter 466 of Minnesota Statutes from any and all liability, loss, costs, damages and expenses including but not limited to property damage and personal injury, including death, which arise in connection with any acts or omissions of Contractor's employees. The City agrees to indemnify and hold harmless Contractor and its employees, officers and agents from any and all liability, loss, costs, damages and expenses including but not limited to property damage and personal injury, including death, which arise in connection with the City's performance of this Contract or in connection with any acts or omissions of City employees subject to limitations and immunities subject to Chapter 466. 4. REPORTS. Contractor will provide the City with all necessary information relating to the Lifeguard Services provided in order for the City to properly maintain the beach. On an as need basis the Aquatics Manager or Aquatics Supervisor will report to the City representative in regards to incidents and/or accidents. At the end of the season (October 2021 & October 2022) the Contractor will provide the City will a full report of beach activity during the season. 5. LIABILITY. Employees of the Contractor and all other persons engaged by the Contractor in the performance of any work or services required, volunteered, or provided for herein to be performed by Contractor shall not be considered employees of the City and any and all claims that may or might arise under the Worker's Compensation Act of the State of Minnesota on behalf of said employees while so engaged in any of the work or services provided to be rendered herein, shall in no way be the obligation or responsibility of the City and all other persons engaged by the City in the performance of any work or services required or provided for herein to be performed by the City shall not be considered employees of the Contractor, and any and all claims that may or might arise under the Worker's Compensation Act of the State of Minnesota on behalf of said employees while so engaged and any and all claims by any third parties as a consequence of any act or omission on the part of said employees so engaged in any of the work or services provided to be rendered herein shall in no way be the obligation or responsibility of the Contractor to the full extent permitted by law, actions by the parties pursuant to this Agreement are intended to be and shall be construed as a "cooperative activity" and it is the intent of the parties that they shall be deemed a "single governmental unit" for the purposes of liability, all as set forth in Minnesota Statutes, Section 471.59, Subd. 1; provided further that for purposes of that statute, each party to this Agreement expressly declines responsibility for the acts or omissions of the other party. 6. INSURANCE. The City is responsible for obtaining property and liability coverage for the cities' beaches. Contractor will maintain professional liability and comprehensive general liability coverage for all employees in an amount consistent with Chapter 466 of the Minnesota Statutes. 7. TERM OF AGREEMENT. Notwithstanding the date of the signature of the parties to this Agreement, upon acceptance by all parties, this Agreement shall be deemed to be effective upon signature by all parties and shall remain in effect until October 1, 2021 and October 1, 2022 unless earlier terminated by either party, with or without cause, upon 45 days written notice or as otherwise provided in this Agreement. 83758 Page 2 of 4 8. DEFAULT. If Contractor or City fails to perform any of the provisions of this Agreement or so fails to administer the work as to endanger the performance of this Agreement, this shall constitute a default. Unless the party in default is excused by the other party in default, the non -defaulting party may upon written notice immediately cancel this Agreement in its entirety. 9. SUBCONTRACTORS. Contractor shall not enter into any subcontract for performance of any services contemplated under this Agreement nor assign any interest in this Agreement without the prior written approval of the City and subject to such conditions and provisions as the City may deem necessary. Contractor shall be responsible for the performance of all Subcontractors. 10. AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVES. The parties to this Agreement shall appoint an authorized representative for the purpose of administration of this Agreement. The authorized representative of the City is: Heather Johnston Interim City Manager City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Blvd., P.O Box 147 Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317 Phone: (952) 227-1100 The authorized representative of the Contractor is as follows: Dr. Dennis Peterson, Superintendent Minnetonka Public Schools 5621 County Road 101 Minnetonka, Minnesota 55345 Phone: (952) 401-5000 11. AMENDMENTS. Any amendments to this Agreement will be in writing and will be executed by the same parties who executed the original Agreement, or their successors in office. 12. ENTIRE AGREEMENT. It is understood and agreed that the entire Agreement of the parties is contained herein and that this Agreement supersedes all oral Agreements and negotiations between the parties relating to the subject matter hereof as well as any previous Agreements presently in effect between the parties relating to the subject matter hereof. 83758 Page 3 of 4 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Agreement to be duly executed intending to be bound thereby. (SEAL) CITY OF CHANHASSEN :' Elise Ryan, Mayor AND Heather Johnston, Interim City Manager DATE: MINNETONKA PUBLIC SCHOOLS mm DATE: Dr. Dennis Peterson, Superintendent 83758 Page 4 of 4 2021/2022 Lake Ann Beach Lifeguard Coverage 11:00 AM-12:00 PM: 2 guards 12:00 PM-5:00 PM: 3 guards 5:00 PM-6:00 PM: 2 guards 0 6 hours 6 hours 6 hours 6 hours 11:00 X X 11:30 X X 12:00 X X X X 12:30 X X X X 1:00 X X X X 1:30 X X X X 2:00 X X X X 2:301 X X X X 3:00 X X X X 3:30 X X X X 4:00 X X X X 4:30 X X X X 5:00 X X 5:30 X X 6:00 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Monday, February 8, 2021 Subject Resolution 2021-XX: Adopt Resolution Setting a Public Hearing for March 22, 2021 Establishing a TIF District Section CONSENT AGENDA Item No: D.7. Prepared By Kate Aanenson, AICP, Community File No: Development Director PROPOSED MOTION "The Chanhassen City Council adopts a resolution calling for a public hearing to establish Tax Increment Financing District No. 12." Approval requires a Simple Majority Vote of members present. SUMMARY With the recent approval of the Lake Place Apartments the next action item for the City Council is to establish the Tax Increment Financing. By approving the TIF Resolution the City Council is calling for a Public Hearing on March 22, 2021. BACKGROUND Attached is the Schedule of Events. The City's EDA will be reviewing the TIF Plan documents and consider a resolution to adopt them on March 8, 2021 and the City Council will hold a Public Hearing on March 22, 2021 and consider approving the TIF District. RECOMMENDATION Adopt the attached Resolution. ATTACHMENTS: ❑ Resolution ❑ TIF Schedule of Events CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA DATE: February 8, 2021 RESOLUTION NO: MOTION BY: SECONDED BY: 2021-XX RESOLUTION CALLING FOR A PUBLIC HEARING TO ESTABLISH TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NO. 12. WHEREAS, the City of Chanhassen, Minnesota (the "City") has heretofore established its Downtown Chanhassen Redevelopment Project Area (the "Project Area") and adopted the Redevelopment Plan therefore; and WHEREAS, the City Council (the "Council") of the City intends to consider establishing Tax Increment Financing District No. 12 (the "TIF District") as a housing district within the Project Area and adoption of a Tax Increment Financing Plan (the "TIF Plan") for the purposed of financing certain improvements within the Project Area; NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City as follows: Section 1. Public Hearing. This Council shall meet on March 22, 2021, at approximately 7:00 P.M., to hold a public hearing on the proposed adoption of a Modification to the Redevelopment Plan (the "Redevelopment Plan Modification") for the Project Area, establishment of the TIF District therein and adoption of the TIF Plan therefor (the Redevelopment Plan Modification and TIF Plan are referred to collectively herein as the "Plans"), all pursuant to and in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.090 to 469.1082, and Sections 469.174 to 469.1794, inclusive, as amended, in an effort to encourage the development and redevelopment of certain designated areas within the City; and Section 2. Notice of Public Hearing Filing of Plans. City staff is authorized and directed to work with the Chanhassen Economic Development Authority (the "EDA") and Ehlers & Associates, Inc., to prepare the Plans and to forward documents to the appropriate taxing jurisdictions including Carver County and Independent School District No. 112. The Interim City Manager is authorized and directed to cause notice of the hearing, together with an appropriate map as required by law, to be published at least once in the official newspaper of the City not later than 10, nor more than 30, days prior to March 22, 2021, and to place a copy of the Plans on file in the EDA Executive Director's office at City Hall and to make such copy available for inspection by the public. ATTEST: Heather Johnston, Interim City Manager Elise Ryan, Mayor YES NO ABSENT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT & REDEVELOPMENT Schedule of Events City of Chanhassen Carver County, Minnesota Proposed Modification to the Development Program for Downtown Chanhassen Redevelopment Project Area to Establish Tax Increment Financing District No. 12 (a housing district) Draft as of January 6, 2021 January 25, 2021 City Council considers site approvals February 8, 2021 City Council considers resolution to set a public hearing March 22 to establish the TIF District [Ehlers provides form of resolution for Council approval] February 9, 2021 Ehlers distributes letter to County Commissioner giving notice of potential housing TIF district (deadline: 30 days prior to publishing hearing notice) February 9, 2021 Project information, TIF District PIDs, potential fiscal impacts and draft TIF District maps submitted to Ehlers for drafting TIF Plan documents Ehlers confirms whether building permits have been issued on the property to be included in the TIF District February 16, 2021 Ehlers completes internal review of draft TIF Plan documents. February 19, 2021 Ehlers distributes draft TIF Plan with fiscal/economic implications to School Board Clerk and County Auditor (deadline: 30 days prior to public hearing) County receives information for review of county road impacts, if any* *The County Board, by law, has 45 days to review the TIF Plan to determine if tax increment should be used for any unplanned county road improvements necessitated by the development. Because City staff believes that the proposed TIF district will not require unplanned county road improvements, the TIF Plan will not need to be forwarded to the County Board 45 days prior to the public hearing. March 2, 2021 Planning Commission meets at 7:00 PM to review TIF Plan documents and consider a resolution affirming the development proposed within the TIF Plan conforms to the general plans for development and redevelopment of the City as a whole. [TIF Attorney provides form of resolution by February 23, 2021] March 8, 2021 EDA reviews the TIF Plan documents and considers resolution to adopt them (TIF Attorney provides form of resolution by March 1, 20211 March 11, 2021 Publication of hearing notice and map in the Chanhassen Villager (at least 10 days, but not more than 30 days, prior to hearing) (Ehlers will submit notice, map and instructions. Publication deadline: March 4, 20211 E H L E RS BUILDING COMMUNITIES. IT'S WHAT WE DO. nfo@ehlers-inc.com 1 (800) 552-1171 ® www.ehlers-inc.com ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT & REDEVELOPMENT - IS March 22, 2021 City Council holds public hearing at 7:00 PM on the Modification to the Development Program for the Downtown Chanhassen Redevelopment Project Area and Establishment of Tax Increment Financing District No. 12 City Council considers a resolution approving the TIF Plan documents and establishing the TIF District [Ehlers and attorney provide packet information March 15, 2021] March 23, 2021 City may issue building permits for property in the TIF District without interfering with the captured tax capacity By June 30, 2021 Deadline for annual certification requests. Ehlers requests certification of the TIF District with Carver County, and files TIF Plan documents with the MN Department of Revenue and Office of the State Auditor Under M.S. 469.1771, an action contesting the validity of a determination by the EDA and City to establish the TIF District under section 469.175, subdivision 3, must be commenced within the later of: (1) 180 days after the municipality's approval under section 469.175, subdivision 3; or 2 90 days after the request for certification of the district is filed with the county auditor under section 469.177, subdivision 1 Ilk FREERS BUILDING COMMUNITIES. IT'S WHAT WE DO. ® info@ehlers-inc.com 1 (800) 552-1171 ® www.ehlers-inc.com PUBLIC FINANCE ADVISORS CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Monday, February 8, 2021 Subject Resolution 2021-XX: Adopt Arboretum Area Transportation Plan Section OLD BUSINESS Item No: F.1. Prepared By George Bender, Assistant City Engineer File No: ENG PW067135 PROPOSED MOTION "The City Council approves a Resolution to support the Arboretum Area Transportation Plan dated February, 2021." Approval requires a Simple Majority Vote of members present. SUMMARY Carver County is requesting the City of Chanhassen provide their support for the Arboretum Area Transportation Plan. The key takeaway is that the partners will continue to work together to secure funding and move individual projects into preliminary and final design phases to prepare for construction. The Arboretum Area Transportation Plan (AATP) is a high level planning exercise to study major transportation corridors for future build -out to serve the TH 5 area west TH41 through downtown Victoria. It is essentially a vision for the TH 5 corridor and major roadway network surrounding the Arboretum through the year 2040. Additional routes and corridors that impact the expansion of TH 5 within the boundaries of the study were also considered. These include TH 41, Crimson Bay Rd, Minnewashta Parkway, West 82nd Street, and Rolling Acres Rd. The project is being led by Carver County and partners involved are MnDOT, the cities of Chanhassen, Chaska, and Victoria, and the University of Minnesota's Landscape Arboretum. The County's Consultant, Bolton & Menk, will present a summary of the AATP along with specific steps performed since the last Council briefing. This study has been worked on for a period of about two years. The AATP includes a breakdown of the goals, public engagement effort, options considered, the recommendations, prioritization, and implementation plan which includes future financial budgeting for the various agencies. The County has a dedicated web page for the AATP, found at this link which has an abundance of information: https://www.co.carver.mn.us/departments/public-works/projects-studies/arboretum-area-transportation-plan The final report is presented in a GIS Story Map format, found at the following link: https://arcg.is/14PO5H. Attached to this staff report is the Executive Summary and a few other summary documents not found in the Story Map. One of the attachments shows the overall roadway network in the City of Chanhassen including last measured traffic volumes. This map is being included as an information item in response to the comments received from some of the residents along Minnewashta Parkway. The team is very happy to report a recent success for the overall plan. The Regional Solicitation grant application that the City Council supported on June 8, 2020 was successful. This resulted in a $10 million dollar federal grant being awarded to reconstruct a portion of the the TH 5 corridor from just west of the new bridge location over the south end of Lake Minnewashta to west of Rolling Acres Rd in Victoria. It should be noted this study has always been intended to be a high level transportation corridor planning study. The level of detail contained in the AATP is necessary to solicit funding applications and provide a framework for more detailed preliminary design in the future. It is essentially a vision for the expansion of the transportation network within the project boundaries. It is not a preliminary nor a final design for any of the identified projects. There will be many more opportunities for interested parties and residents to participate in public engagement as the projects develop into the preliminary design phase. Beyond supporting the vision of the plan, the key focus for the city is the future financial expectations associated with the various projects. These expectations are shown in the implementation section of the plan. NOTE: The attached emails were received from our public comments email account on Wednesday, February 3. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends supporting the approval of the Arboretum Area Transportation Plan as presented. ATTACHMENTS: ❑ Executive Summary representing the final report for the study ❑ Summary from meeting with Minnewashta Parkway neighborhood - January 21, 2021 ❑ Summary from the meeting with Crimson Bay Rd neighborhood - January 21, 2021 ❑ Feedback Summary from the final Open House ❑ Resolution ❑ Roadway Classification Map ❑ Emails from Kevin Zahler and Debbie Bequette ❑ Email from Kevin Hoffman ❑ Email from Dorothy Downing ❑ Email from Adam Dirlam ❑ Citizen Action Request from Richard Berland ❑ Email from Gerry Reason ❑ Email from Craig Anderson ❑ Email from Kristen Modlin ❑ Emails from Kevin Zahler ❑ Email from Scott Lacek ❑ Email from Jennifer Frankman ❑ Email from Chris Evers & Rona Caldwell ❑ Email from Jean -Paul Botha & Monika Milstver ❑ Email from Peter Moe to Kevin Zahler ❑ Email from Kevin Zahler to Peter Moe ❑ Email from Debbie Bequette ❑ Email from JL Rudaz ❑ Email from Chad Gauger A0eao retu m A& —r, Transportation Plan fjjq�' CARVER DE PA10 NT OF �COUNrY TRANSPORTATION wl•^••^u �..e.•.y. ARBORETUM The Arboretum Area Transportation Plan was developed from March 2019 through 2020 through study of the current and future transportation needs of major corridors near the Minnesota Landscape Arboretum. These corridors included Highway 5, West 82nd Street, Rolling Acres Road, Bavaria Road, and Highway 41. Project partners included Carver County, MnDOT, the Minnesota Landscape Arboretum, and the cities of Victoria, Chanhassen, and Chaska. Why is the Plan Needed? The Plan was developed to address these needs: • Considerable delays due to vehicle congestion during peak traffic times • Above average crash rates at intersections and on roadways • Significant growth in population and traffic projected over the next 20 years • Gaps and safety concerns related to existing bicycle and pedestrian network Plan Objectives Three objectives guided development of the Plan.The first was to engage local communities in creation of the corridor visions.This was done through online surveys, advisory committee meetings, neighborhood meetings, open houses, and small group discussions. Another objective was to develop improvements that addressed study goals. To achieve this objective, the project team evaluated draft concepts and scored them on how well they WE ARE met study goals. The scores were HERE presented for public feedback. A The third objective was to identify corridor improvement projects Study and how they can be phased in over time. Projects were created by grouping concepts together. Then, based on a number of factors, the projects were categorized into short, mid, and long-term improvement projects. (Jo CITY OF *aIdiB Jrroe �BSen Chaska fK!!B MINN ESOTA Development of the Arboretum Area Transportation Plan was guided by these goals, which are consistent with broader goals adopted by the project partners: Vehicle Mobility a Respect the Environment Provide efficient and Provide infrastructure reliable vehicle mobility. improvements that respect the environment. OUser Safety a Financial Responsibility Safely accommodate all Develop a financially system users. responsible implementation plan. ® Support Multimodal Network Provide a comprehensive network for pedestrians and bicyclists. Looking Ahead PreliminaryFinal Design Construction g Design & Right of Way LDefineTHEVISION ■Define WHAT TO BUILD& Define HOW TO BUILD The study resulted in a plan for the overall vision. A,A*boretu m IWea Transportation Plan In the Arboretum Area Transportation Plan, projects are defined at the concept level. Once funded, a project will be further developed with public input during the design phases. Build the project Recommended Corridor Visions The general vision for each corridor is described below. For details, please visit www.co.carver.mn.us/ArboretumAreaTransportationPlan. HIGHWAY 5 The overall vision for Highway 5 is to expand the roadway to four lanes, improve several intersections, and allow flexibility for future development areas. Improvements include new signals at Minnewastha Parkway and Park Drive/Kochia Lane and a roundabout at County Road 11 on the west side of Victoria. ROLLING ACRES ROAD The vision for Rolling Acres Road includes reconstruction of the road with improved intersections, continuous pedestrian/bicycle facilities, and an improved crossing for the Lake Minnetonka LRT Regional Trail. The vision includes a two-lane divided road south of Interlaken and flexibilityfor either a two-lane divided or three -lane facility north of Interlaken. Implementation Approach The implementation approach of the Arboretum Area Transportation Plan offers a logical and sequential path to implement improvements over time. This will allow Carver County, MnDOT, the Minnesota Landscape Arboretum, and the cities of Victoria, Chaska, and Chanhassen to plan and work together towards realizing the corridor visions. The plan is a guide and will remain flexible as funding is secured for future improvements. The Arboretum Area Transportation Plan identifies 20 improvement projects in total amongst the corridors. The implementation approach for the Plan prioritizes these projects based on multiple factors including recognition of already planned/ programmed projects, financial constraints, funding opportunities, contribution toward improving the transportation network, public support, and council priorities. The project priority/timing figure on the right represents the level of consideration that went into project sequencing. Trail on east side of Bavaria Road ,a Public Support/ Council Priority Planned/ Programmed Projects BAVARIA ROAD TRAIL The recommended vision for Bavaria Road is to build a trail on the east side of the road. The City of Victoria is already moving forward with this project as part of a separate effort. Local funding and grant money will pay for construction of the project in 2022. WEST 82ND STREET The vision for West 82nd Street is a two-lane undivided roadway with trail along the north side. Other improvements include a roundabout at Bavaria Road, a side street stop with potential for a roundabout in the future at McKnight Road, and flexibility for the ravine crossing connection to Lyman Boulevard. Technical Project Prioritization/Data Driven Logical, Systematic Transportation Network Project contact: Angie Stenson, AICP, Carver County Senior Transportation Planner, (612) 360-7422, astensonPco.carver.mn.us Ahboretu m I'e a Transportation Plan Project Implementation Project Ti meframe Short-term (2021-2026) 'Mid-term (2027-2031) r Long-term (2032-2040) Opportunity/ development driven U�fN, lil/=r Roundabout (H5W-3) Roundabout -� (RAR-2) Reconstruction two-lane divided and Interlachen roundabot (RAR-1) Install signal and four -lane expansic (H5W-5) Pedestrian overpass (H5W-6); Signal improvement ®' (H5W-4) Four -lane expansion (H5W-2) Four -lane expansion (H5W-1) II Pedestrian " r underpass (RAR-5) The Plan is a guide to support The Plan is not a 13 Reconstruction coordinated transportation commitment to invest in two-lane divided planning among Carver a specific improvement at -- (RAR-4) County, MnDOT, and the a specific time. D cities of Victoria Chaska and Chanhassen. Trail underpass (RAR-3) _ Atgraceimprovements area short term priority either priori ocwith- roadway project " , ST ...,,, Crimson Bay - - - Road extension ---- ---� --- -------------------------i---------- --- - ----- Construct east side trail - (BAV-1) Project Sequencing Categories Roundabout (W82-3) IB Regional solicitation for four -lane expansion 1 - (H5E-1) Four -lane expansion (H5E-2) Partial displaced left turn (H5E-3) - Roadway paving and reconstruction ! Pavement - (UV82_7) rehabilitation& signal replacement Roundabout (W82-2). - (W 82-4) 13 ii 01. .. The goal of the plan is to implement improvements while maximizing outside funding and minimizing cost burdens on each agency. Cost estimates for projects were based on conceptual drawings and included multiple assumptions about grants and cost shares. Timing for projects was divided into the four categories shown below. Short-term projects (2021-2026) Projects designated as short-term include projects that are part of already planned/programmed improvements (for example: a project that is already incorporated into a city's capital improvements plan), large projects that have a good chance of winning federal funds in the near future, and smaller projects that provide a lot of benefit for relatively little cost. Short-term projects are expected to be implemented in the next five years. Long-term projects (2032-2040) As with mid-term projects, the timing of long-term projects will depend on funding and priorities. Mid-term projects (2027-2031) The timing of projects designated as mid-term is less known and projects may move between here and the long-term project category. Timing of these projects will depend on agency funding and local priorities as well as outside funding such as aid programs, grants and loans. Opportunity/development driven projects A project identified as opportunity -driven may depend on future development in an area. For example, if a large land development project occurs, funds may become available for nearby road improvements. Ahboretu m /yea Transportation Plan F u Reconstruction --- - two-lane divided and Interlachen roundabout (RAR-1) Install signal and four -lane expansion (H5W-5) ens Roundabout ; (H5W-3) Signal Construct east improvement side trail (H 5 W-4) (BAV-1) '-�• 0 lE Short-term Timeline MM 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 RAR Construct trail reconstruction east side of two-lane Bavaria Rd divided & (BAV-1) Interlachen Hwy 41 pavement roundabout rehabilitation (RAR-1) & signal replacement 9 (waz-z) Crimson Bay Hwy 5 four - Road extension lane expansion (H5E-4) (H5E-1) r) Install signal Hwy 5/CR 11 N Park/Kochia interim & Hwy 5 roundabout four -lane (H5W-3) expansion (H5W-5) Hwy 5/CR 11 S interim signal improvement (H5W-4) ( ----- Regional solicitation for four -lane expansion (H5E-1) Crimson Bay Road extension (H5E-4) Pavement rehabilitation & signal replacement (W82-2) -. ------------ Total Cost $41 million Amount shown in build -year costs. Cost Participation (2022-2026) Source Share Grants* $12.7M MnDOT (STIP/CHIP) $2.7M Trunk Highway/Local Option Sales Tax $10.6M Carver County/Local Option Sales Tax $5.5M Carver County $4.7M City of Chaska** $92k City of Chanhassen** $302k City of Victoria** $3.6M University of Minnesota** $100k * $10M grant has been secured for Project H5E-1.The remaining amount is an estimate of other potential awards. Without grants, each agency's cost share will be higher. Projects could also be delayed until a grant is secured. ** Cost share and estimates do not include municipal utilities unless otherwise noted in the implementation plan. Estimates are not to be considered final construction dollars and are based on conceptual drawings and numerous assumptions. AOoretum /yea Transportation Plan Roundabout -- -- (RAR 2} n Mid-term Projects Reconstruction two-lane divided (RAR-4) Roundabout - - (W82-31- IB I1 13 Mid-term Timeline 2027..............................2031 Hwy W 82nd St four -lane roadway paving expansion & reconstruction (H5E-2) (W82-1) Roundabout (W82-3) RAR/Hwy 7 Roundabout (RAR-2) Y .J Four -lane expansion (H5E-2) Roadway paving and reconstruction (W 82-1) Total Cost $88 million Amount shown in build -year costs. Cost Participation (2027-2031) Source Share Grants* $33.5M MnDOT (STIP/CHIP) $1.2M Trunk Highway/Local Option Sales Tax $29.2M Carver County/Local Option Sales Tax $173M Carver County $2.9M City of Chaska** $0 City of Chanhassen** $0 City of Victoria** $3.1 M University of Minnesota** $0 * Grant amounts are an estimate of future potential awards. Without RAR reconstruction grants each agency's cost share will be higher. Projects could also two-lane divided be delayed until a grant is secured. (RAR-4) ** Cost share and estimates do not include municipal utilities unless otherwise noted in the implementation plan. Estimates are not to be considered final construction dollars and are based on conceptual drawings and numerous assumptions. AOoretum /yea Transportation Plan Long-term Projects Trail underpass (RAR-3) At -grade improvements are a short term priority -- --- — either prior to orwith a roadway project. Four -lane expansion -A-- - --- -- (H5W-2) Four -lane expansion (H5W-1) ii Long-term Timeline 2032 .............................. 2040 Four -lane expansion (H5W-1) Four -lane expansion (H5W-2) Partial displaced left turn (H5E-3) Trail underpass (RAR-3) Partial displaced left turn (H5E-3) Total Cost $77 million Amount shown in build -year costs. Cost Participation (2032-2040) Source Share Grants* $31.7M MnDOT (STIP/CHIP) $1.1 M Trunk Highway/Local Option Sales Tax $34.9M Carver County/Local Option Sales Tax $2.8M Carver County $1.4M City of Chaska** $0 City of Chanhassen** $800k City of Victoria** $4.01M University of Minnesota** $0 * Grant amounts are an estimate of future potential awards. Without grants each agency's cost share will be higher. Projects could also be delayed until a grant is secured. * Cost share and estimates do not include municipal utilities unless otherwise noted in the implementation plan. Estimates are not to be considered final construction dollars and are based on conceptual drawings and numerous assumptions. AhboretumImplementation• • • • /� Transportation Plan or- 911111111 Corridor projects are sequenced over time to maximize outside funding and to minimize cost burdens to local agencies. Short-term projects include already planned/programmed improvements, large projects likely to win competitive funds in near future, and small projects that have high benefit at a relatively low cost. Project Timeframe 'Short-term (2021-2026) Mid-term (2027-2031) I Long-term (2032-2040) Opportunity/ development driven DescriptionProject Project Hwy 5 Expansion (Regional Solicitation Application -West of RAR to East H5E-1 of Minnewashta Pkwy) H5E-2 Hwy 5 Expansion (Minnewashta Pkwy to Hwy 41- Excluding Hwy 5/41 Intersection) H5E-3 Hwy 5/41 Intersection (Assumed Partial Displaced Left Turn) H5E-4 Crimson Bay Road Extension Q H5W-1 Hwy 5 Expansion (Regional Trail bridge to West of Park) Hwy 5 Expansion (West of CSAH 11 to Regional Trail bridge - Includes = H5W 2 bridge work) H5W-3 Hwy 5/CSAH 11 N Intersection (Interim roundabout with 2-lane Hwy 5) H5W-4 Hwy 5/CSAH 11 S Intersection (Interim Signal Improvements) H5W-5 Park/Kochia (Traffic signal and Hwy 5 expansion through Park) H5W-6 Hwy 5/78th St Pedestrian Crossing RAR Reconstruction - From Hwy 5 to Interlaken (not including Hwy 5 c Q RAR-1 intersection, assumed 2-lane divided and roundabout at Interlaken) 0 NRAR-2 RAR/Hwy 7 Intersection Reconstruction (Roundabout no shift assumed) W Q RAR-3 Lake Minnetonka Regional Trail RAR Crossing (overpass assumed) z RAR Reconstruction - From Interlaken to Hwy 7 (not including Hwy 7 J RAR-4 intersection; assumed 2-lane divided) 0 RAR-5 Hwy 7/RAR Pedestrian Crossing cc BAV-1 Bavaria Road - East Side Trail (82nd Street to Hwy 5) I.— W82-1 82nd Roadway (Two-lane undivided from Bavaria to Hwy 41, ravine W bridge, end intersections excluded) `^ W82-2 Hwy 41 Pavement Rehabilitation and Signal Replacement 0 z 0000 W82-3 82nd Street/Bavaria Road Intersection (Roundabout) LU W 3: 1 W82-4 82nd Street/McKnight Road (Roundabout) Costs shown are inflated to build -year costs. H5W-3 H5W-5 H5W-6 H5W-4 _ H5W-2 H5W-1 RAR-2 RAR-4 RAR-1 13 ' 13. W82-1 Ahboretu m /�Transportation Plan What"s Next We're Just Getting Started! The shared corridor visions outlined in the Arboretum Area Transportation Plan will assist each partner agency as they consider future capital improvements and develop budgets. The Arboretum Area Transportation Plan is the result of the first phase of a process. Before construction, each project identified in the Plan will need to go through a preliminary design phase that includes refinement of the vision with input from the public as well as efforts to secure funding. The final design phase will collect additional public input and resolve outstanding design details such as right of way and construction staging, resulting in a final project layout to be used during construction. The Process WE ARE , HERE , Study _AA,jiboretum Ie, Transportation Plan i CARVER M iOF 'B COUNTY DEPARTMENT TRANSPORTATION ARBORETUM The partners will continue to COUNTY together to secure funding and move individual projects into preliminary and final design phases to ready for construction. TO/ ChCITY aphaSS� Chaska 3Or k 6�. Funding will be key to moving projects forward. I I ,� � I� I I I I Preliminary Final Design Design & Right of Way DefineTHEVISION I Define WHAT TO BUILD I Define HOWTO BUILD Public input WA Public inr)ut WA Public i • Study justification • Vision refinement • Draft design • Concepts • Funding • Right of way • Evaluation Result: • Construction staging • Result: The Vision Preliminary Design • Result: Final Design Learn more Construction Build the project www.co.carver.mn.us/ArboretumAreaTransportationPlan A retum no,/'eaoTransportation Plan Minnewashta Parkway Neighborhood Virtual Meeting Notes Thursday, January 21, 2021 Scheduled 6:30 — 7:30 p.m. / Actual 6:30 — 9:00 p.m. Number registered: 96 (10 project team members) Number participating: 68 devices (9 project team members) Estimated public attendees: 90+ (estimate 1.5 per device) Overall Study team shared ^30 minute presentation which summarized study findings. Remainder of the meeting was spent taking questions and listening to concerns and ideas from everyone on the call who wanted to share. Concerns • Concern that relocation of the main Arboretum entrance would increase traffic on Minnewashta Parkway. • Concern that traffic analysis is flawed/underrepresenting how many trips will reroute and that additional Arboretum visitors would use Minnewashta Parkway to access the Arboretum (particularly on busy days) • Concern that Google Maps or other mobile map app will route people through the neighborhood and wondering if there is any way to influence those recommendations. • Highway noise levels, with respect specifically to the highway connection and bridge over the lake. • Difficult for pedestrians with strollers and wagons to cross Minnewashta Parkway near Kings Road to access lake. • Speeds and speed limit on Minnewashta Parkway are too high. • Property values would be affected by increased traffic. • Previous survey efforts as part of engagement on the study may not have been representative of the overall position of the neighborhood. Ideas • Have signal at Hwy 5/Minnewashta Parkway but limit access specifically to and from the southern leg into and out of the Arboretum. • Reduce speed limit on Minnewashta. • Add speed bumps to discourage speeding. • Improve pedestrian crossings at popular lake access points. • Install an all way stop at Minnewashta Parkway/Kings Road intersection. • Keep main Arboretum entrance at current or other location than Minnewashta Parkway (perhaps off 82"d Street). • Make intersection less appealing to people who use Minnewashta Parkway from Hwy 5/Hwy 7. • Prevent certain movements at traffic signal on busy Arboretum days to limit visitors using Minnewashta Parkway. BOLTON & MENK A retum no,/'eaoTransportation Plan Crimson Bay Road Neighborhood Virtual Meeting Summary Thursday, January 21, 2021 Scheduled 5:30 — 6:15 p.m. / Actual 5:30 — 6:30 p.m. Number registered: 51 (9 project team members) Number participating: 40 devices (9 project team members) Estimated public attendees: 45+ (estimate 1.5 per device) Overall Study team shared —30 minute presentation which summarized study findings. Remainder of the meeting was spent taking questions and listening to concerns and ideas. Concerns • Increased Traffic Ideas o The proposed connection of Crimson Bay Road to 78th Street would increase traffic in the neighborhood. o People would cut through neighborhood during highway peak traffic times, during Westwood Church events, and after regular church service. o Concern that people already attempt to cut through. They turn around in cul-de-sac at Dogwood Rd/78th St or continue through narrow Dogwood Rd. Compromised Safety o The area roadways are too narrow to accommodate anything other than the neighborhood traffic. o The proposed connection will make the roadway less safe. High number of children in neighborhood, on and crossing the roadway, and gaps in pedestrian facilities. o On street parking already causes issues on streets with cars meeting on roadway. Felt it would be far worse with connection completed. Change of Setting / Lower Property Values o Concern that connection would change quiet neighborhood and decrease property values. The group desired a modified solution that includes a cul-de-sac at southern end of Crimson Bay Road with no connection to Highway 5 (many participants like this idea; no one dissented). This concept was felt to resolve all concerns noted above. See concept on next page. City staff noted this option is not consistent with City code and would need to be looked at with emergency services. Have right -in only at Highway 5 and retain connection to 781h. See concept on next page. Install signage related to "no outlet" to deter people from driving down a roadway with no connection (could be installed now due to issues with people turning into the new cul-de-sac thinking it is a connection). BOLTON & MENK Cul-De-Sac DBOLTON & MENK DBOLTON & MENK _4)A oretum �a r� Transportation Plan 4A'',,// l'Yr�,"n" 61 respondents Relationship to the study areas Quantity Percent Resident 51 84% Property owner 24 39% Business owner 1 2% Work in the area 10 16% Commutes through the area 12 20% Visits area often 6 10% Other 3 5% * Some respondents selected more than one category. Neighborhood Quantity Percent Rolling Acres Road 17 28% Minnewastha Parkway 13 21 % Baycliffe 7 11 % Park Drive/Kochia Lane 7 11 % Downtown/west Victoria 5 8% Allegheny Grove 2 3% Bavaria Road 2 3% Outside study area 2 3% Smithtown Road 2 3% W 82nd Street 2 3% Highway 5 1 2% Katy Hills 1 2% TOTAL 61 100% k1141 �S�? Respondents were asked about LPG• support for each vision & timing. Do you support for the vision? Yes, I support the vision. No, I do not support the vision. I have partial support I'm neutral for the vision. about the vision. What is your level of support for implementation (timing/sequencing) of the vision? No Low Neutral Strong Very strong support support support support Highway 5 - West ............................................................................................. All respondents Vision Implementation 50 respondents 47 respondents Partially suppo 9 08%) (44) Low support 6 (13%) Strong support Neutral A(47 26%) 17 (36%) -� Comments forHwy 5 - West Concerns: • Reduced access to Hwy 5 from Stieger Lake Ln/78th St • Traffic increase on Minnewashta Pkwy • Expansion of Hwy 5 to four -lane in Downtown Victoria may impact small town feel • Private property impacts • Addition of signals may cause delay Ideas: • Signal at Hwy 5/80th St intersection • Noise barrier Hwy 5 - West Hwy 5 - East 9 = 9 drip � c Cca. f, � � 3 6 � survey respondents Highway 5 - East ..................................................................I.............................. All respondents Vision Implementation 49 respondents 47 respondents Low support `5 (11%) Neutral 10 (21 %) .......................................................................................................... Minnewashta Parkway Neighboorhood Residents Vision Implementation 13 respondents 13 respondents Do not support 3 (23%) 4 Partially support 5 (38%) Neutral 0 (0%) cti:)ro/ 1 (8%) ........................................................................................................... Comments for Hwy 5 - East Concerns: Ideas: • Impacts of relocation of Arboretum entrance to Minnewashta Pkwy Traffic calming measures onn Minnewashta • Addition of signals and increase in delay Pkwy s Confusion about Hwy 5/41 intersection concept s d Expansion of Tristan Dr to Arbortum property L j �dn a Speed on Minnewashta Pkwy W 82nd St Phased four -lane expansion of Hwy 5 creating bottlenecks • Stop control at Minnewashta Pkwy and Kings Road intersection for park and lake access Rolling Acres Road (RAR) W 82nd Street Vision 57 respondents Do not supp 11 (19%) Neutral 8 (14%) Partially support 13 (23%) All respondents Combined 38 (67%) Implementation 48 respondents upport (8%) Low support i� 4 (8%) ong support Neutral 18 (38%) 15 (31 %) Combined 25 (53%) RAR Neighborhood Respondents Vision 17 respondents Do not Implementation 15 respondents Combined 9 (60%) Strong support 5 (33%) No support 0 (0%) Low support 3 (20%) Neutral 3 (20%) Comments for RAR Concerns: • Two-lane divided roadway limiting some access to private properties • Vehicles using U-turns in two-lane divided concept increasing noise/light impacts to nearby properties • Private property impacts including tree removals and acquisitions • Roundabout at Hwy 7 not creating traffic gaps like a signal (Baycliffe neighborhood) • Safety concerns for bicycles/pedestrians at roundabouts • Increased traffic in Swiss Mountain neighborhood • Traffic from RAR re-routing to Minnewashta Pkwy during project construction • Costs and property impacts of having paths on both sides of RAR • Trail re -alignment impact to Rolling Acres Lane • Implementation of projects too spread out Ideas: • Connect west side properties on nothern end of RAR to Waterford Lane • Wider shoulders for bicyclists • Add noise buffers • Keep three -lane option on south end of RAR • Grade -separated pedestrian crossing on Hwy 7 near RAR All respondents Vision 45 respondents Comments for W. 82nd St Concerns: • Improvements may not be needed if Hwy 5 is improved Combined 17 (46%) Implementation 37 respondents Low support 0 (0%) Strong Neutral support 17 (46%) 10 (27% Ideas: • Place path on south side of road to provide easier access for residents and lessen impacts to Arboretum property CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA DATE: February 8, 2021 RESOLUTION NO: 2021-XX MOTION BY: SECONDED BY: A RESOLUTION TO SUPPORT THE ARBORETUM AREA TRANSPORTATION PLAN DATED FEBRUARY, 2021 CITY PROJECT NO. PW067B5 WHEREAS, the City of Chanhassen, Carver County, and MnDOT are responsible for the planning and development of a safe and functional multimodal transportation system within their jurisdictional boundaries; and WHEREAS, the City of Chanhassen partnered with Carver County, MnDOT, the University of Minnesota Landscape Arboretum, and the cities of Chaska and Victoria to identify transportation system improvements in the Arboretum Area on Highway 5, Highway 41, Rolling Acres Road, Bavaria Road, and 82nd Street West; and WHEREAS, the Arboretum Area Transportation Plan considers transportation improvements at the intersections of Crimson Bay Rd, Minnewashta Parkway, and the Arboretum's main entrance along TH 5. The City of Chanhassen acknowledges the need for continued partnership with Carver County, MnDOT, the University of Minnesota Landscape Arboretum, and the City of Victoria to plan safe and reliable intersection solutions at these locations; and WHEREAS, the Arboretum Area Transportation Plan recommends roadway corridor visions including: roadway typical sections and corridor footprints, pedestrian and bicycle facilities, and access type and intersection control to serve short, mid, and long-term development and transportation infrastructure needs; and WHEREAS, the City of Chanhassen recognizes that the study recommendations establish a future planning -level corridor vision for agencies to jointly work towards, noting additional design and environmental review will be required for individual projects; and WHEREAS, the Arboretum Area Transportation Plan includes an implementation framework with estimated improvement costs, project sequencing, and timeframes to guide capital improvement planning for the City of Chanhassen, Carver County, and their partners for improvements along Highway 5, Rolling Acres Road, Bavaria Road, 82nd Street West, and Highway 41; and WHEREAS, the City of Chanhassen acknowledges that the implementation framework is subject to funding availability and all Arboretum Area Transportation Plan partners will continue to coordinate to advance the goals and objectives of the plan, seek and maximize outside funding sources, and will request City Council approval for each specific project and City of Chanhassen contribution as individual projects move forward; NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Chanhassen City Council: That the City Council of Chanhassen does hereby support the findings, recommended corridor visions, and the proposed implementation framework of the Arboretum Area Transportation Plan to guide future transportation investments in the study area. Passed and adopted by the Chanhassen City Council this 8t' day of February, 2021. ATTEST: Heather Johnston, Interim City Manager Elise Ryan, Mayor YES NO ABSENT From: dbeg uette(cicomcast.net To: Bender, George; Public Comments; Ryan, Elise; McDonald, Jerry; Campion, Dan; Schubert, Haley; Rehm. Lucy Cc: Amy Rosenberg; brvonbeguette(cbamail.com; Tallenburg(&msn.com Subject: FW: Minnewashta Parkway and Arboretum entrance, February 8, 2021 City Council Meeting Date: Wednesday, February 3, 2021 4:23:29 PM Hi team, I wanted to support the note below. In a worse case scenario, bullet #6 needs to be addressed. There simply needs to be more cooperation to take into consideration ALL sides to this. We need to see solutions that speak to the Minnewashta Parkway neighborhood concerns. In the spirit of good faith, not sure why this is even a battle to do so. Thank you for your continued consideration and review. Debbie Bequette 952-237-7280 From: Kevin Zahler Sent: Wednesday, February 3, 2021 4:03 PM To: publiccomments(@ci.chanhassen.mn.us; eryan(@ci.chanhassen.mn.us; JMcDonald(@ci.chanhassen.mn.us; dcampion(@ci.chanhassen.mn.us; hschubert(@ci.chanhassen.mn.us; Irehm(@ci.chanhassen.mn.us Cc: Bender, George <GBender(@ci.chanhassen.mn.us> Subject: Minnewashta Parkway and Arboretum entrance, February 8, 2021 City Council Meeting Dear Chanhassen Mayor and Council Members, I am writing in regard to the Arboretum Area Transportation Planning. I understand that the Chanhassen City Council will discuss this plan on February 8, 2021 and we need the city help with this situation. 1. In the interest of public safety we need a traffic signal at Minnewashta Parkway and highway 5. MDOT has said that a 3 leg intersection does not qualify but they have not stated why. Presumably due to volume but they have not clarified this point. a. Surely regulations can be modified in the interest of public safety and considering the already very high volume of traffic. 1. At the 1/21/21 neighborhood meeting the county team has identified a whopping 2500 vehicles per day going north to highway 7 and 2150 vehicles per day going south to highway 5. a. 37% of these vehicles are not from the Minnewashta Parkway neighborhood! This is a point I have brought to your attention at the April, 2020 council meeting. i. The traffic volume on Minnewashta Parkway is already high, with high rates of speed and many using it as a bypass between highways 5 and 7. b. Now, a conscious step to increase the traffic even more, the Planning Team has stated 40 additional on weekdays and 60 on weekends. I say conscious step because it is clearly planned to invite more traffic on Minnewashta Parkway. i. It is also disappointing that the traffic increase on Minnewashta Parkway was not even considered until after we asked questions following the November 19, 2020 open house. It feels like the concerns of the residents in and around Minnewashta Parkway are not being considered. ii. I also feel that the date from the Planning Team is not accurate. The Planning Team informed us on 1/21/21 that on arboretum event day the traffic can back up for 1 mile from the east on highway 5 to the arboretum entrance. Two significant points; 1. Is it even possible that by adding a traffic light at Minnewashta Parkway will alleviate that? 2. With that kind of backup I feel quite confident that drivers will look for alternatives and their GPS technology will easily show the path of least resistance. 1. Plus, we are experiencing declining property values and being assessed for Minnewashta Parkway resurfacing for the benefit of a large population that does not live here. 2. At the 1/21/21 neighborhood meeting the neighborhood was nearly unanimous on being against an arboretum entrance at Minnewashta Parkway. 3. The arboretum is a jewel and so is our neighborhood. Lake Minnewashta is the main view from the arboretum. The parkway is already the walk/runner/bike trail to the arboretum, and city beach and park. Why would the arboretum choose to deteriorate our neighborhood to the benefit an arboretum natural area? I think we can work together to make this a benefit for both. We should be celebrating an environmentally friendly parkway entrance to the arboretum!! 4. The arboretum already has an established entrance that is off the main road, surrounded by property owned by the arboretum with access from highway 41 that already has a s stop light. This must be a lower cost to the University of Minnesota than creating a whole new entrance. a. I have asked the University of Minnesota for more transparency on their selection of Minnewashta Parkway and they have not responded, perhaps Chanhassen can be more effective in obtaining financial clarity on this point. 5. 1 hesitate to bring this up but if the only recourse is for the 4 leg entrance to the arboretum what can be done to mitigate the deterioration of our neighborhood environment, i.e., very high volume of traffic and very high rates of speed? We need your help to modify this plan to a more reasonable and fair approach that does not penalize our neighborhood. Best regards, Kevin Zahler Pathfinder GS Corporation 6651 Minnewashta Parkway Excelsior, MN 55331 USA kazahler(@hotmail.com Alternate email: kjzahlerl(@gmail.com Office & Mobile phone +1-612-618-9817 WhatsApp, WeChat, Viber Skype: kevinzahler Make a difference! From: Hoffman, Kevin To: Public Comments Subject: Minnewashta Parkway and Arboretum entrance, February 8, 2021 City Council Meeting Date: Wednesday, February 3, 2021 6:16:37 PM Dear Chanhassen Mayor and Council Members, This is in regard to highway 5 and minnewashta parkway. I understand that the Chanhassen City Council will discuss this plan on February 8, 2021 and we need the city help with this situation. 1) 1 have been informed from the 1/21/21 neighborhood meeting the county team has identified a whopping 2500? vehicles per day going north to highway 7 and 2150? vehicles per day going south to highway 5 a. 37% of these vehicles are not from the Minnewashta Parkway neighborhood! This is a point I have brought to your attention at the April, 2020 council meeting. i. The traffic volume on Minnewashta Parkway is already high, with high rates of speed and many using it as a bypass between highways 5 and 7. b. Now, a step to increase the traffic even more, the Planning Team has stated 40 additional on weekdays and 60 on weekends. I say conscious step because it is clearly planned to invite more traffic on Minnewashta Parkway. i. It is disappointing that the traffic increase on Minnewashta Parkway was not even considered until after we asked questions following the November 19, 2020 open house. It feels like the concerns of the residents in and around Minnewashta Parkway are not being considered. ii. The Planning Team informed us on 1/21/21 that on arboretum event day the traffic can back up for 1 mile from the east on highway 5 to the arboretum entrance. Two significant points; 1. Is it even possible that by adding a traffic light at Minnewashta Parkway will alleviate that? 2. With that kind of backup I feel quite confident that drivers will look for alternatives and their GPS technology will easily show the path of least resistance. 2) Plus, we are being assessed for Minnewashta Parkway resurfacing for the benefit of a large population that does not live here. 3) At the 1/21/21 neighborhood meeting the neighborhood was nearly unanimous on being against an arboretum entrance at Minnewashta Parkway. 4) The arboretum is a jewel and so is our neighborhood. Lake Minnewashta is the main view from the arboretum. The parkway is already the walk/runner/bike trail to the arboretum, and city beach and park. Why would the arboretum choose to deteriorate our neighborhood to the benefit an arboretum natural area? I think we can work together to make this a benefit for both. We should be celebrating an environmentally friendly parkway entrance to the arboretum!! 5) The arboretum already has an established entrance that is off the main road, surrounded by property owned by the arboretum with access from highway 41 that already has a s stop light. This must be a lower cost to the University of Minnesota than creating a whole new entrance. a. I have asked the University of Minnesota for more transparency on their selection of Minnewashta Parkway and they have not responded, perhaps Chanhassen can be more effective in obtaining financial clarity on this point. 6) 1 hesitate to bring this up but if the only recourse is for the 4 leg entrance to the arboretum what can be done to mitigate the deterioration of our neighborhood environment, i.e., very high volume of traffic and very high rates of speed? Please help to modify this plan to a more reasonable and fair approach for our neighborhood. Kevin Hoffman 6631 Minnewashta Parkway Chanhassen MN For the best experience, open this PDF portfolio in Acrobat X or Adobe Reader X, or later. Get Adobe Reader Now! From: Adam D To: Public Comments; Ryan, Elise; McDonald. ]errv; Campion. Dan; Schubert, Halev; Rehm, Lucv Subject: Minnewashta Parkway & Proposed Arboretum Entrance Date: Friday, February 5, 2021 10:13:34 AM Attachments: imaae.ono Dear Chanhassen Mayor, Council Members and Carver County Board I am writing in order to provide my concern as it pertains to both the proposed Arboretum entrance at the intersection of Minnewastha and Highway 5 as well as additional safety measures our city should be taking as it pertains to vehicle traffic on Minnewashta Parkway and surrounding neighborhoods. Kevin Zahler has kept the residents of the Minnewashta neighborhoods apprised as to his communications regarding these issues and in that regard I would wholeheartedly agree with his concerns, sentiments and proposed solutions. Rather than reiterating the same thing in different words, I include the correspondences that he has had to incorporate by reference and provide my support. Furthermore, we need the city's help in addressing the safety issues that are present and prevalent on Minnewashta Parkway among other roadways. Moving the Arboretum entrance to the intersection of Hwy 5 and Minnewashta Parkway would only exacerbate these safety issues. Prior to the proposal of moving the Arboretum entrance there was concern brought to the city council about these safety issues and the proposal to reduce the speed limit and the enforcement of such on Minnewashta Parkway. It is my understanding that the city council was directed to address the concerns of the speeding and unsafe conditions where Minnewashta Parkway is being used by non-residents as a pass through between Highway 5 and Highway 7. 1 include pictures as an example of the semi trucks and other vehicles using the parkway as a shortcut on a daily basis and driving entirely too fast. Many cars and trucks are consistently driving on the Parkway at 40+ MPH. My wife, myself, and multiple family members have almost been rear -ended multiple times trying to leave our residence given our need to back out on to Minnewashta Parkway, and we've had our mailbox taken out by a vehicle driving entirely too fast. To that end, like other cities and suburbs including Minneapolis, Saint Paul, Edina and Saint Louis Park, we need to create additional safety measures for the neighbors that are biking, crossing the road, or simply pulling out trying to leave their homes. This would and should include a reduction in speed limits to 25 mph, stop signs and most importantly an active enforcement of the posted speed limits. Thank you for your consideration in figuring out both a more logical and efficient entrance to the Arboretum and keeping our neighborhood roads safe for all. Adam Dirlam Resident Kevin Zohler's comments incorporated by reference Dear Chanhassen Mayor, Council Members and Carver County Board, I am writing in follow up to my email of January 25, see below including the Arboretum Area Transportation Planning team response. I understand that Chanhassen will discuss this plan on February 8 and we need the city help and the county help with this situation. 1) In the interest of public safety we need a traffic signal at Minnewashta Parkway and highway 5. MDOT has said that a 3 leg intersection does not qualify but they have not stated why. Presumably due to volume but they have not clarified this point. a. Surely regulations can be modified in the interest of public safety and considering the already very high volume of traffic. 1) At the 1/21/21 neighborhood meeting the county team has identified a whopping 2500 vehicles per day going north to highway 7 and 2150 vehicles per day going south to highway 5. a. 37% of these vehicles are not from the Minnewashta Parkway neighborhood! This is a point I have brought to your attention at the April, 2020 council meeting. i. The traffic volume on Minnewashta Parkway is already high, with high rates of speed and many using it as a bypass between highways 5 and 7. b. Now, a conscious step to increase the traffic even more, and, I feel, the team's increase estimation is way off base. c. Plus, we are experiencing declining property values and being assessed for Minnewashta Parkway resurfacing for the benefit of a large population that does not live here. 2) At the 1/21/21 neighborhood meeting the neighborhood was nearly unanimous on being against an arboretum entrance at Minnewashta Parkway. 3) The arboretum is a jewel and so is our neighborhood. Lake Minnewashta is the main view from the arboretum. The parkway is already the walk/runner/bike trail to the arboretum, and city beach and park. Why would the arboretum choose to deteriorate our neighborhood to the benefit an arboretum natural area? I think we can work together to make this a benefit for both. 4) The arboretum already has an established entrance that is off the main road, surrounded by property owned by the arboretum with access from highway 41 that already has a s stop light. This must be a lower cost to the University of Minnesota than creating a whole new entrance. 5) 1 hesitate to bring this up but if the only recourse is for the 4 leg entrance to the arboretum what can be done to mitigate the deterioration of our neighborhood environment, i.e., very high volume of traffic and very high rates of speed? We need your help to modify this plan to a more reasonable and fair approach that does not penalize our neighborhood. Best regards, Kevin Zahler +1-612-618-9817 kjzahler(cDhotmail.com Dear President Gabel, Regents and Arboretum Management Staff, I am writing to you to plead for help to bring a sense of reasonableness to this situation. The residents in and around Minnewashta Parkway have been informed that the University of Minnesota has decided to move the arboretum entrance to Minnewashta Parkway. Speaking for myself, I feel that the arboretum is a true jewel that we can all be proud of and we annually support the arboretum. So, given this proud heritage it seems a disconnect to be declining the Minnewashta Parkway environment for the benefit to the arboretum. This is especially concerning when there exists a perfectly acceptable entrance on a very low traffic street where the arboretum owns most of the surrounding property. An existing entrance surely is less costly than a new entrance, plus, the existing entrance already has traffic light control from highway 41. The neighborhood residents in and around Minnewashta Parkway are arboretum neighbors and it seems very hard to believe the University of Minnesota would deteriorate a neighborhood for the benefit of a naturalist environment. If you have time the trailing emails provide more information. In spite of the counter points from Carver County the residents were nearly unanimous in opposition to an arboretum entrance at Minnewashta Parkway, however, we do need help with traffic control. Hope you can add some guidance to this to help your neighbors! Thank you. Best regards, Kevin Zahler +1-612-618-9817 kjzahler(cDhotmail.com Print Citizen Action Request Form - Submission #4493 Date Submitted: 2/5/2021 City Council - Citizen Action Request Form Complete this form and submit it prior to the City Council meeting date you wish to present your request. Select the date of the City Council meeting you plan to attend to make your visitor presentation.* 2/5/2021 NOTE: The City Council meets on the second and fourth Mondays of each month with the following exceptions in 2021: o December 20 - Meeting CANCELLED Printable 2021 City Meeting Calendar 2021 City Meeting Calendar View and/or print this calendar to assist with determining when city council meetings are held in order to make your date selection above. Resident Information First Name* Last Name* Richard Berland Address 1 * 6900 Minnewashta Parkway Address2 City* State* Zip* Excelsior MN 55331-9662 Phone Number* Email* 612-240-3016 rberland@me.com If no email address, enter "none." Council Action Requested* Please vote against the Arb Transportation Plan Provide a brief description of the action you are requesting from the City Council. Summary of Information* Minnewashta Parkway and ajoining streets are a prime residential neighborhood The parkway is already very busy and it will be unsafe and unpleasant to add the Arb traffic We believe the projected increase in traffic is dramatically understated. The Arb is a great facility to have in Chanhassen. However it should not solve its' entrance needs by despoiling our neighborhood A Parkway is just that, not an entrance ramp.Please separate the Arb entrance from the Parkway improvements and do not place the additional traffic on the Parkway.. Thank you. Provide a narrative of the request including need, costs, timetable, background, etc. What Happens Next? Immediately upon submission of this form, staff will be notified by email and will provide copies to the City Council prior to the selected meeting date. Questions? Contact Deputy City Clerk Kim Meuwissen at 952-227-1107 or by email. City Council Work Session Discussion Date mm/dd/yyyy Action City Council Meeting Date mm/dd/yyyy Action MINNEWASHTA PARKWAY CONCERNS Having lived in the Red Cedar Point / Minnewashta Parkway neighborhood a number of years, I have safety, noise, and the potential of a reduction in property value concerns in our neighborhood. If you agree, please give your active and vocal support to help mitigate these issues that are being pushed on to the Parkway neighborhoods. ARBORETUM ENTRANCE CHANGE AND AREA GROWTH TO ADD SIGNIFICANT MORE PARKWAY TRAFFIC Are you aware that the University of Minnesota Landscape Arboretum is planning to change their main entrance to the Highway 5 and Minnewashta Parkway intersection? We are a family that loves the Arboretum and have been long time Arboretum members. So I understand the valid regional reasons why this change is being considered by all parties as part of the Arboretum Area Transportation Plan. However, the focus of the plan presented up to the January 21, 2021 neighborhood virtual open house, has primarily been on the plan benefits of Highway 5 and Arboretum traffic flow, as well as Highway 5 and Minnewashta Parkway intersection safety. The local traffic volume changes to Minnewashta Parkway seems to have had a very low priority as part of development of the "area" plan. It is apparent that the consultant planners think of the Parkway as a "collector" road, where I also think of it as a neighborhood street serving lots of pedestrians. From a Minnewashta Parkway neighborhood perspective, I am afraid the Parkway, unknown to many, is quietly being transformed from a beautiful neighborhood asset, to an unsafe higher volume cut across "collector" roadway. In the November 19, 2020 virtual open house of the Arboretum Area Transportation Plan, it was mentioned that the additional traffic as a result of the Arboretum entrance change would be minimal on Minnewashta Parkway. It was casually mentioned that Google Maps would still route people on to 41 or Rolling Acres from the north, other than just north of 7 near Minnewashta Parkway. However, with the entrance moving further west, homework shows that Google Maps routings change significantly. Currently, Google Maps routes travelers that are just north of the intersection of Minnewashta Parkway and highway 7, on to the Parkway to get to the Arboretum. With the entrance move further west, travelers that travel from the north that use highway 19 north of Excelsior will be routed on to the Parkway to the new entrance. The statement made in that November 19t" virtual open house meeting was minimally correct, but significantly understated. Arboretum traffic from Minnetrista, Tonka Bay, Navarre, Minnetonka Beach, Orono, Long Lake, etc. will route to travel the Parkway to and from the Arboretum unless some mitigation strategies are put in place that effect Google maps mapping algorithms (i.e. stop signs, speed limits, or other barriers). At the January 215t virtual open house meeting, the last meeting before the Chanhassen city council presentation on February 8th, a study was presented estimating a projected increase of Parkway traffic to be 40 to 60 vehicles per day in peak season. Those numbers are significant. Unfortunately, in my opinion, that study estimate may be low. First, what will the Parkway traffic volume be for large volume special events at the Arboretum? Second, I do not believe the study accounted for increased geographic traffic as described in my previous paragraph. Third, it was stated that 80% of current Arboretum traffic comes from the east. I believe the continued assumption is that with the entrance move further west, the flow percentage arriving on highway 5 from the east would remain the same 80%. That logic may be flawed. People from the near northeast (Excelsior, Minnetonka, Hopkins, St. Louis Park, etc.) that know the area may choose to use the Parkway even though it may not be as quick. Why not, it is a scenic less hectic drive and ends up right at the Arboretum entrance. On top of the Arboretum entrance change and the local neighborhood continuing to be built up, presentations show that Carver county has significant growth in population projections. With that general population increase, the volume of traffic will continue to grow not only on Highway 5, but also on the Parkway as a north south shortcut cut across highway for cars and trucks. Did you know that 37% of the Parkway traffic is not from the neighborhood? One also needs to think ahead about what will happen to Google Maps mapping when Highway 5 4 lane construction and the Highway 5 bridge construction by the old Arboretum entrance create congestion for a number of years into the future. Alternative routing on to the Parkway during those many construction years could be brutal. Page 1 SAFETY ISSUES FOR SCHOOL BUS KIDS AND PEDESTRIANS CROSSING THE STREET TO USE THE LAKES More often than not, vehicles are going much faster than the posted 30mph speed limit on the Parkway. The curved and hilly nature of the Parkway does not allow a driver to see far ahead, making traffic speed a safety issue. On the north end, different association pedestrians cross the Parkway with strollers, kids, and dogs in tow to get to and from Lake Minnewashta. By the Lake St. Joe public access, snowmobilers, ice fisherman, and skaters cross the road. All along the Parkway, kids get on and off of school buses. However, I believe the biggest issue is in the middle of the Parkway at Kings Road. INTERSECTION SAFETY ISSUES AT KINGS ROAD AND MINNEWASHTA PARKWAY Many pedestrians and bikers cross the road at the intersection of Kings Road and Minnewashta Parkway all year long. Joggers, bikers, and dog walkers on the Minnewashta Parkway path are on the east side of the Parkway south of the Kings Road intersection. All of that foot traffic is forced to cross the Parkway at Kings Road in order to get to the path that is continues on the west side of the Parkway north of the Kings Road intersection. This intersection is especially unsafe in the summer months. Kids are going to and from Round House Park. Kids are going to and from fishing on the public fishing dock. Kids are going to and from the public beach. There are many 30mph signs on the Parkway and now an electronic digital speed sign, all much appreciated. But over time, these tools tend to blend into the background and become ignored. I have observed vehicles traveling way too fast for safety approaching this intersection. I also have observed during Parkway construction that the temporary stop signs at this intersection helped. I was disappointed to see them removed this winter as Parkway summer construction wound down. RECOMMENDATIONS I ask for your vocal support in pursuit of the following to make the Parkway safer, and also to change mapping algorithms for reducing traffic volume: • Put in permanent 3 way stop signs at Kings Road and Minnewashta Parkway along with stop ahead warning signs o There are stop signs on Galpin and Brinker Street near Sugarbush Park. I suspect they were put in as a safety measure for park goers that cross Galpin. The same implementation logic should be at this Kings Road intersection. • Reduce the speed limit on the Parkway to 25mph • Limit trucks of a certain weight from being able to use Minnewashta Parkway unless servicing the local Minnewashta Parkway community • Investigate additional traffic barrier or event manual routing ideas to prevent traffic to and from the Arboretum, going straight to and from the Parkway Even though there have been open houses and virtual meetings, I do not believe most Minnewashta Parkway neighbors are clearly aware of what the long-term traffic ramifications to them are as part of the big picture Highway 5 plans. Hard copy communication of the Arboretum entrance changes and associated anticipated traffic volume increases should be distributed to the Minnewashta Parkway neighborhood homes. This communication should have been done a long time ago, not after funding requests have already been made and the month of city council presentations. CONTACTS TO COMMUNICATE CONCERNS OR IDEAS • Angie Stenson, Carver County Senior Transportation Planner 612-360-7422 astenson@co.carver.mn.us • George Bender, Chanhassen Assistant City Engineer 952-227-1164 GBender@ci.chanhassen.mn.us • Chanhassen City Council and Mayor Thank you! Gerry Reason 612-719-4051 GerryReason@hotmail.com Page 2 From: Craig Anderson To: Public Comments Subject: Minnewashta Parkway Arboretum entrance Date: Friday, February 5, 2021 1:56:31 PM Dear Council Members, I am writing to express my opposition and concerns regarding the proposed move of the Arboretum entrance to Minnewashta Parkway. Moving the entrance to this location will definitely be a detriment to the Chanhassen / Victoria community and especially to those homeowners and residents located in the Minnewashta neighborhoods. At the neighborhood zoom meeting held 1/21/21, the neighborhood homeowners were clearly unanimous in being against the moving of the entrance to Minnewashta Parkway. From the neighborhood Nextdoor Postings, there is also opposition and a groundswell to form a united front against this proposition. The arboretum has several alternative entrance possibilities, including moving it to an access off of Hwy 41. There is already a stoplight there to accommodate their requests. There could also be a light at the current entrance that could be used intermittently as traffic demands require. Minnewashta Parkway is already seeing an abundance of non -neighborhood traffic using this road as a connection between Hwy 5 & 7. The speeds are way above the posted 30 MPH because of these commutes. Adding a light and Arboretum entrance will only make the level of traffic much higher and at times crowded. We also already have Arboretum visitors parking in our neighborhoods to take advantage of walking in to the Arboretum for free. The voices of Chanhassen residents will best be heard when you seek to modify this plan to not move the Arboretum entrance to Hwy 5 & Minnewashta Parkway. I highly encourage you to vote against approval or at least table it until the neighborhood Chanhassen residents get a fair say in this matter. Sincerely, Craig Anderson 7507 W. 77th Street From: kmodIin(cbmedia corn bb.net To: Public Comments; Ryan, Elise; McDonald, Jerry; Campion, Dan; Schubert, Halev; Rehm, Lucv Subject: Vote NO - Arboretum Area Transportation Plan, Move of Arb entrance to Hwy5/Mwshta Pkwy Date: Saturday, February 6, 2021 2:58:56 PM Attachments: Meeting Summary - Minnewashta (2021-01-21).pdf Hello: As a home owner along Minnewashta Parkway, PLEASE look closely and BE ADVISED of the last meeting involving the Minnewashta Parkway residence and the majority response from the 90 + participants whom CLEARLY OPOSE the move of the main Arboretum entrance to Hwy5 and Minnewashta parkway. I agree with all the concerns noted on the attached. I feel it is my obligation to communicate and callout the following critical concerns: • Minnewashta Parkway is a collector road; designated to distributor low -to -moderate -capacity traffic. Moving additional traffic due to this proposed change is not sustainable. Please keep the original proposed Arboretum Main entrance on 82nd street with which, is a much better solution to accommodate future Arboretum traffic. • BE CREATIVE, there are always ways to produce exceptions forgetting a stoplight on Hwy5 and Minnewashta Parkway. We DO NOT want increased traffic down Hwy5, impacting Minnewashta Parkway negatively and other collector roads. • Inconclusive Survey efforts — while, we appreciate the effort, the appropriate data was missing or not adequate (none reported; noise, pollution, and water impacts/metrics) and details (study was too high level) to substantiate a move of the Arboretum entrance and, were NOT made available to the public. • What was not noted by Bolton & Menk (in the attached) which, I mentioned in the meeting - was how difficult it has been to get consolidated information, an integrated program/project plan. The information on the various websites are disjointed and not kept up to date. How can we possibly comment or be involved if we don't know what decisions are being made and, at what juncture in the process. • i.e. the current plan that I see on the website shows that the Arboretum main entrance is going to be on 82nd street. However, we are now having conversations to vote on moving the main entrance to Hwy5/Minnewashta Parkway? I think this might be a bit confusing for residence that are going to be negatively impacted and not understand why they need to be involved NOW. • i.e. Plus, that you are going into design? You DO NOT have our neighborhood's consensus yet. The only folks involved as part of the Stakeholder Advisory Committee were people that lived closest to Hwy5 and perhaps not considering those on the other end of the neighborhood living closest to Hwy7. I already experience TOO MUCH TRAFFIC from Hwy5 and, now you want to add traffic onto the Parkway. Not feasible. That's all for now. I appreciate your review of my comments and concerns. Thank you, Kirsten Modlin Note: all caps = word emphasis. I'm not yelling at you. A retum no,/'eaoTransportation Plan Minnewashta Parkway Neighborhood Virtual Meeting Notes Thursday, January 21, 2021 Scheduled 6:30 — 7:30 p.m. / Actual 6:30 — 9:00 p.m. Number registered: 96 (10 project team members) Number participating: 68 devices (9 project team members) Estimated public attendees: 90+ (estimate 1.5 per device) Overall Study team shared ^30 minute presentation which summarized study findings. Remainder of the meeting was spent taking questions and listening to concerns and ideas from everyone on the call who wanted to share. Concerns • Concern that relocation of the main Arboretum entrance would increase traffic on Minnewashta Parkway. • Concern that traffic analysis is flawed/underrepresenting how many trips will reroute and that additional Arboretum visitors would use Minnewashta Parkway to access the Arboretum (particularly on busy days) • Concern that Google Maps or other mobile map app will route people through the neighborhood and wondering if there is any way to influence those recommendations. • Highway noise levels, with respect specifically to the highway connection and bridge over the lake. • Difficult for pedestrians with strollers and wagons to cross Minnewashta Parkway near Kings Road to access lake. • Speeds and speed limit on Minnewashta Parkway are too high. • Property values would be affected by increased traffic. • Previous survey efforts as part of engagement on the study may not have been representative of the overall position of the neighborhood. Ideas • Have signal at Hwy 5/Minnewashta Parkway but limit access specifically to and from the southern leg into and out of the Arboretum. • Reduce speed limit on Minnewashta. • Add speed bumps to discourage speeding. • Improve pedestrian crossings at popular lake access points. • Install an all way stop at Minnewashta Parkway/Kings Road intersection. • Keep main Arboretum entrance at current or other location than Minnewashta Parkway (perhaps off 82"d Street). • Make intersection less appealing to people who use Minnewashta Parkway from Hwy 5/Hwy 7. • Prevent certain movements at traffic signal on busy Arboretum days to limit visitors using Minnewashta Parkway. BOLTON & MENK From: Kevin Zahler To: Public Comments; Ryan, Elise; McDonald. ]errv; Campion, Dan; Schubert, Halev; Rehm, Lucy Cc: Bender, George Subject: RE: Minnewashta Parkway and Arboretum entrance, February 8, 2021 City Council Meeting Date: Saturday, February 6, 2021 4:11:42 PM Dear Chanhassen Mayor and Council Members, In follow on to my email below dated February 3, 2021, below, I would like to add this added information to the agenda for the February 8, 2021 city council meeting. One of the statements made by MDOT is that the intersection of Minnewashta Parkway and highway 5 does not qualify for a traffic light as a three way intersection, point 1 in my email below. MDOT has never explained why this is the case? In addition, I think they should provide the history on this type of intersection. Please see three examples of this exact situation, all with traffic lights. Perhaps the most telling example is at E Bush Lake Rd and Highwood Dr. A residential neighborhood intersecting with a much busier road. Please help and ensure that the interests of the Minnewashta Parkway neighborhood are properly addressed. Thank you `�00, .a terrace oo, —N"bq �a co m QJ d Aml?rican Btvdw Arnerican Blvd W rp N •O rn 0� Q7 Q' C N S r ------------ M CL Best regards, Kevin Zahler +1-612-618-9817 kizahler(@hotmail.com From: Kevin Zahler r Sent: Wednesday, February 3, 2021 4:03 PM To: publiccomments@ci.chanhassen.mn.us; eryan@ci.chanhassen.mn.us; JMcDonald @ci.chanhassen.mn.us; dcampion@ci.chanhassen.mn.us; hschubert@ci.chanhassen.mn.us; Irehm@ci.chanhassen.mn.us Cc: Bender, George <GBender@ci.chanhassen.mn.us> Subject: Minnewashta Parkway and Arboretum entrance, February 8, 2021 City Council Meeting Dear Chanhassen Mayor and Council Members, I am writing in regard to the Arboretum Area Transportation Planning. I understand that the Chanhassen City Council will discuss this plan on February 8, 2021 and we need the city help with this situation. 1. In the interest of public safety we need a traffic signal at Minnewashta Parkway and highway 5. MDOT has said that a 3 leg intersection does not qualify but they have not stated why. Presumably due to volume but they have not clarified this point. a. Surely regulations can be modified in the interest of public safety and considering the already very high volume of traffic. 2. At the 1/21/21 neighborhood meeting the county team has identified a whopping 2500 vehicles per day going north to highway 7 and 2150 vehicles per day going south to highway 5. a. 37% of these vehicles are not from the Minnewashta Parkway neighborhood! This is a point I have brought to your attention at the April, 2020 council meeting. i. The traffic volume on Minnewashta Parkway is already high, with high rates of speed and many using it as a bypass between highways 5 and 7. b. Now, a conscious step to increase the traffic even more, the Planning Team has stated 40 additional on weekdays and 60 on weekends. I say conscious step because it is clearly planned to invite more traffic on Minnewashta Parkway. i. It is also disappointing that the traffic increase on Minnewashta Parkway was not even considered until after we asked questions following the November 19, 2020 open house. It feels like the concerns of the residents in and around Minnewashta Parkway are not being considered. I also feel that the date from the Planning Team is not accurate. The Planning Team informed us on 1/21/21 that on arboretum event day the traffic can back up for 1 mile from the east on highway 5 to the arboretum entrance. Two significant points; 1. Is it even possible that by adding a traffic light at Minnewashta Parkway will alleviate that? 2. With that kind of backup I feel quite confident that drivers will look for alternatives and their GPS technology will easily show the path of least resistance. 2. Plus, we are experiencing declining property values and being assessed for Minnewashta Parkway resurfacing for the benefit of a large population that does not live here. 3. At the 1/21/21 neighborhood meeting the neighborhood was nearly unanimous on being against an arboretum entrance at Minnewashta Parkway. 4. The arboretum is a jewel and so is our neighborhood. Lake Minnewashta is the main view from the arboretum. The parkway is already the walk/runner/bike trail to the arboretum, and city beach and park. Why would the arboretum choose to deteriorate our neighborhood to the benefit an arboretum natural area? I think we can work together to make this a benefit for both. We should be celebrating an environmentally friendly parkway entrance to the arboretum!! 5. The arboretum already has an established entrance that is off the main road, surrounded by property owned by the arboretum with access from highway 41 that already has a s stop light. This must be a lower cost to the University of Minnesota than creating a whole new entrance. a. I have asked the University of Minnesota for more transparency on their selection of Minnewashta Parkway and they have not responded, perhaps Chanhassen can be more effective in obtaining financial clarity on this point. 6. 1 hesitate to bring this up but if the only recourse is for the 4 leg entrance to the arboretum what can be done to mitigate the deterioration of our neighborhood environment, i.e., very high volume of traffic and very high rates of speed? We need your help to modify this plan to a more reasonable and fair approach that does not penalize our neighborhood. Best regards, Kevin Zahler Pathfinder GS Corporation 6651 Minnewashta Parkway Excelsior, MN 55331 USA kjzahler(@hotmail.com Alternate email: kjzahlerl(@gmail.com Office & Mobile phone +1-612-618-9817 WhatsApp, WeChat, Viber Skype: kevinzahler Make a difference! From: Scot Lacek To: Public Comments Subject: Highway 5/Arboretum Project Citizen Comments Date: Saturday, February 6, 2021 6:28:36 PM Dear City Council: I appreciate your consideration of some comments I would like to make about the Highway 5/Amboretum Entrance Project. 1. There have been substandard reasons given of why the 82nd avenue entrance can't be used as the new entrance to the Arboretum. It seems to be a good option to move traffic off of highway five and use the existing traffic lights on highway 5 and route 41. We have been told only three reasons why the 82nd avenue entrance can't be the new entrance: a. It was always the long-term vision of the Arboretum to make the entrance coexist with Minnewashta Parkway ('Parkway') b. The 82nd entrance is not paved. Also, three-mile drive may not be used. c. The only way to get a traffic light on Highway 5 and the Parkway is to have a four-way intersection. The project team should better explain why the 82nd avenue entrance can't be used as the new entrance, or further investigate it. Given that the Parkway option is the ONLY feasible option, here are the two main issues, and solutions, that can be employed to make it work: 1.) the safety for citizens due to increased traffic on the Parkway needs to be addressed, particularly around the public beach area. A stop sign or reduced speed can resolve this matter. 2.) The additional traffic that will be diverted to the Parkway needs to be limited by prohibiting direct entry to the Arboretum from the North and exiting the Arboretum from the South on high traffic days (special events, weekends). Travelers to the Arboretum will be diverted by their traffic mobile applications (e.g., Google Maps) to the Parkway, substantially increasing the traffic. By prohibiting North/South traffic during peak hours, the apps won't divert traffic to the Parkway. This will also help hold housing values on the Parkway and also be fair to the residents who will be paying an assessment to resurface this road in 2020 and 2021. If no efforts are made to eliminate the additional traffic on the Parkway, the Parkway residents should have an adjustment to their assessment due to the accelerated deterioration to the Parkway. Sincerely, Scot Lacek Neighborhood Resident and LMPA Board Member From: Jennifer Frankman To: Public Comments; Rehm, Lucv; Ryan, Elise; McDonald, Jerrv; Campion, Dan; Schubert, Halev; Bender, George Subject: Minnewashta Parkway and Arboretum entrance, February 8, 2021 City Council Meeting Date: Saturday, February 6, 2021 7:00:26 PM Dear Chanhassen Mayor and Council Members, I am writing in regard to the Arboretum Area Transportation Planning. I understand that the Chanhassen City Council will discuss this plan on February 8. 2021 and we need the city to help with this situation. It's been recently brought to my attention that it has been determined that the only way a traffic signal can be placed at the Hwy 5 and Minnewastha Parkway is by moving the Arboretum entrance to this intersection. As a concerned citizen living in one of the Parkway neighborhoods I am very concerned about this requirement for a light. The increase of traffic on Hwy 5 due to new housing developments west of the Parkway on Hwy 5 and in Victoria have made it very difficult for residents to safely exit the Parkway onto the Hwy. We need a permanent light at this intersection for public safety. Moving the Arboretum entrance to this intersection would not only increase traffic on Hwy 5 but also on the Parkway which is even more concerning to me. Drivers on the Parkway drive WAY to fast as it is and often don't stop at the stop signs exiting their neighborhoods. Pedestrians struggle to cross the Parkway to access the sidewalks between cars that come roaring by. I'm concerned that adding more traffic to the Parkway by moving the Arboretum entrance will make it even more dangerous for families living off the Parkway. If the only way to add a stoplight at this intersection is by moving the entrance to the arboretum, what can be done to mitigate the deterioration of our neighborhood environment (very high volume of traffic, very high rates of speed, etc)? We need your help to ensure this plan is more reasonable and a more fair approach that does not penalize our neighborhood. Thank you for your consideration. Jennifer Frankman From: Chris Evers To: Public Comments; McDonald, Jerrv; Ryan, Elise; Campion, Dan; Rehm, Lucv; Schubert, Halev; Bender, George Subject: Minnewashta Parkway and Arboretum entrance, February 8, 2021 City Council Meeting Date: Monday, February 8, 2021 10:06:45 AM Dear Chanhassen Mayor and Council Members, Please forgive the copy and paste of Kevin's email below but both Rona Caldwell and 1 (6630 M Minnewashta Parkway owners) agree with the points below and urge you to re -read these prior to your meeting tonight and strongly consider our input. I am writing in regard to the Arboretum Area Transportation Planning. I understand that the Chanhassen City Council will discuss this plan on February 8, 2021 and we need the city help with this situation. 1. In the interest of public safety we need a traffic signal at Minnewashta Parkway and highway 5. MDOT has said that a 3 leg intersection does not qualify but they have not stated why. Presumably due to volume but they have not clarified this point. a. Surely regulations can be modified in the interest of public safety and considering the already very high volume of traffic. 2. At the 1/21/21 neighborhood meeting the county team has identified a whopping 2500 vehicles per day going north to highway 7 and 2150 vehicles per day going south to highway 5. a. 37% of these vehicles are not from the Minnewashta Parkway neighborhood! This is a point I have brought to your attention at the April, 2020 council meeting. i. The traffic volume on Minnewashta Parkway is already high, with high rates of speed and many using it as a bypass between highways 5 and 7. b. Now, a conscious step to increase the traffic even more, the Planning Team has stated 40 additional on weekdays and 60 on weekends. I say conscious step because it is clearly planned to invite more traffic on Minnewashta Parkway. i. It is also disappointing that the traffic increase on Minnewashta Parkway was not even considered until after we asked questions following the November 19, 2020 open house. It feels like the concerns of the residents in and around Minnewashta Parkway are not being considered. I also feel that the date from the Planning Team is not accurate. The Planning Team informed us on 1/21/21 that on arboretum event day the traffic can back up for 1 mile from the east on highway 5 to the arboretum entrance. Two significant points; 1. Is it even possible that by adding a traffic light at Minnewashta Parkway will alleviate that? 2. With that kind of backup I feel quite confident that drivers will look for alternatives and their GPS technology will easily show the path of least resistance. 2. Plus, we are experiencing declining property values and being assessed for Minnewashta Parkway resurfacing for the benefit of a large population that does not live here. 3. At the 1/21/21 neighborhood meeting the neighborhood was nearly unanimous on being against an arboretum entrance at Minnewashta Parkway. 2. The arboretum is a jewel and so is our neighborhood. Lake Minnewashta is the main view from the arboretum. The parkway is already the walk/runner/bike trail to the arboretum, and city beach and park. Why would the arboretum choose to deteriorate our neighborhood to the benefit an arboretum natural area? I think we can work together to make this a benefit for both. We should be celebrating an environmentally friendly parkway entrance to the arboretum!! 3. The arboretum already has an established entrance that is off the main road, surrounded by property owned by the arboretum with access from highway 41 that already has a s stop light. This must be a lower cost to the University of Minnesota than creating a whole new entrance. a. I have asked the University of Minnesota for more transparency on their selection of Minnewashta Parkway and they have not responded, perhaps Chanhassen can be more effective in obtaining financial clarity on this point. 4. 1 hesitate to bring this up but if the only recourse is for the 4 leg entrance to the arboretum what can be done to mitigate the deterioration of our neighborhood environment, i.e., very high volume of traffic and very high rates of speed? We need your help to modify this plan to a more reasonable and fair approach that does not penalize our neighborhood. We appreciate the opportunity to work with you. Chris Evers & Rona Caldwell 6630 Minnewashta Parkway From: Jean -Paul Botha To: Public Comments; Rehm, Lucv; Ryan, Elise; McDonald, Jerry; Campion, Dan; Schubert, Halev; Bender, George Cc: Monika Milistver Subject: Minnewashta Parkway and Arboretum entrance, February 8, 2021 City Council Meeting Date: Monday, February 8, 2021 12:30:22 PM Dear Chanhassen Mayor and Council Members, With Reference and support of Mr Kevin Zahler's emails to the Chanhassen Mayor and Council Members dated February 3, 2021 and February 6, 2021: As relatively new residents to Lakeride Rd (Oct 2020) the number 1 priority for the safety of our family is that we need a traffic signal at Minnewashta Parkway and Highway 5. It is a cause of great anxiety and stress for both me and my wife as we do our daily daycare drop off and pick-up every day. With a 8mo and 3yo in the car I consider myself to be a cautious, responsible and experienced driver that finds both; 1) turning left onto highway 5 (by having to time an extremely dangerous merge into fast moving oncoming traffic) and; 2) turning right onto Minnewashta Parkway (reducing speed and turning safely with impatient highway 5 drivers behind you) - extremely dangerous even under normal driving conditions (not to mention icy conditions). As a new resident (catching up on the broader corridor initiative) I am surprised that this is not already a top priority of the Mayors office and Council considering the dangers involved. Lastly, today (for us at least) the logic of making the traffic signal contingent on the entrance of the Arboretum being moved is unclear to us — considering the lack of visibility and community input on the decision to move the entrance (and the potential impact on Minnewastha Parkway traffic levels - for which speeding is already an issue) - I would greatly appreciate if this could be addressed in tonight comments. Kind regards, Jean -Paul Botha & Monika Milstver UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA Minnesota Landscape Arboretum 3675 Arboretum Drive Chaska, MN 55318-9613 Office 612-301-7587 Fax 612-301-1274 www.arboretum.umn.edu February 4, 2021 Mr. Kevin Zahler +1-612-618-9817 kizahler@hotmail.com Re: University of Minnesota and Landscape Arboretum Response to 01/29/2021 Message • The Minnesota Landscape Arboretum is an international research and cultural center and a major regional destination. Visitor counts of 5,000 on peak event days, and 460,000 annually require safe, clear, and convenient access from a major arterial highway. Primary function of the new Arboretum entrance is to increase safety on Trunk Highway 5 (TH 5) by minimizing vehicles queuing on TH 5 as they wait to enter the Arboretum. Based on a review of two years of data (2017-2019), more than 80% of the Arboretum's visitors are coming from the east, using TH 5 as the primary approach to the site. In December 2020, Carver County completed a localized traffic study of the street network north of TH 5, west of TH 41, and east of Rolling Acres Road using data from 2017-2019. The data shows about 2,200 to 2,500 vehicles moving north -south daily on Lake Minnewashta Parkway between TH 5 on the south and TH 7 on the north. The new intersection on TH 5 is forecast to bring an estimated additional 40-60 vehicle trips on Lake Minnewashta Parkway north of TH 5, with low counts happening on peak season weekdays and higher counts on peak season weekends. This represents an increase of about 2% over current traffic using the parkway. • Due to MnDOT's design requirements relative to road alignment and traffic volume, MnDOT will only install a signal at Lake Minnewashta Parkway if the Arboretum's primary entrance is relocated directly across the parkway. Overall community reaction is that the traffic signal is an essential safety improvement. Recognizing most visitors are headed east, Arboretum Operations will direct visitors to leave from Arboretum Drive (east), not the west exit (aligned with Lake Minnewashta Parkway). Redirecting the Arboretum's major entrance to West 820 Street does not work for Arboretum visitors or operations. Most of the Arboretum destinations are located near the TH5 corridor. Indirect routing for the bulk of Arboretum traffic will significantly alter travel flow, diminish the Arboretum's gardenesque character, and create unnecessary delays for the Arboretum's maintenance and operations vehicles. Increased internal traffic would incur additional investment in infrastructure, roads, and maintenance, as well as operational changes. • Counties invest in their major transportation corridors every 20-30 years. City, county and federal funding has been secured for this project. Given the growth of the surrounding communities in the last 15 years, conditions on the ground meet required design standards for traffic volumes and intersection alignment. Based on these factors, the recommended intersection is the best possible option. Driven to Discover UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA Minnesota Landscape Arboretum 3675 Arboretum Drive Chaska, MN 55318-9613 Office 612-301-7587 Fax 612-301-1274 www.arboretum.umn.edu Sincerely, Po6erf ff 4--,- Peter C. Moe, Arboretum Director W, " bAa"- Michael Berthelsen, Vice President, University Services Brian Buhr, Dean, College of Food, Agricultural and Natural Resource Sciences Driven to Discover From: Kevin Zahler To: "Peter Moe"; Public Comments Cc: "uores Joan T. A. Gabel - Office of the President"; "Monigue MacKenzie"; "Alan Branhaaen"; koowell(a)umn.edu; sviogum(&umn.edu; tia(&umn.edu; rbeeson(aumn.edu; "Mary Davenport"; kliher(aumn.edu; hsu(a)umn.edu; kenvanva(aumn.edu; mayeron(&umn.edu; dmcmillan(Ebumn.edu; "Damn Rosha"; rrs(a)umn.edu; Bender. George; "Langenbach. Diane (DOT)"; "Eric Johnson"; Howley. Charles; "Darin Mielke"; "Angie Stenson"; "Brian Buhr"; "Brian Steeves"; "provost Rachel Croson - Executive Vice President & Provost"; "Vera Westrum-Ostrom": "Michael Berthelsen"; "Lyndon Robjent"; "Ross Tillman"; Ryan, Elise; Johnston. Heather; Workman. Tom; dhemze(alco.carver.mn.us; McDonald. Jerry; Campion, Dan; Schubert, Haley; Rehm, Lucy Subject: RE: Arboretum entrance at Minnewashta Parkway https://www.co.carver.mn.us/departments/public-works/projects-studies/arboretum-area-transportation-plan Date: Monday, February 8, 2021 3:10:44 PM Hello Peter, Thank you for your email, I appreciate receiving your thoughts. As you have requested, I have copied the Minnewashta Parkway neighbors and also public comments for tonight's meeting. However, I feel that your response is simply echoing what the planning team has already stated and referenced in my email to the University of Minnesota. I feel there is more to be gained by working together to find real solutions with all stake holders. Minnewashta Parkway neighbors have largely been left out of the planning process. I have added comments to each of the points in your letter today, please see below. There is more to be gained by partnering with your closest neighbor and maintain that arboretum feel with your closest neighbor! 1. The Minnesota Landscape Arboretum is an international research and cultural center and a major regional destination. Visitor counts of 5,000 on peak event days, and 460,000 annually require safe, clear, and convenient access from a major arterial highway. (]kjz]] I absolutely agree and have stated numerous times that we are fortunate to have such a jewel for a neighbor! However, your numbers speak for themselves, huge numbers that will contribute to the deterioration of our neighborhood. We prefer to work as partners in preservation of a natural habitat including our neighborhood. 2. Primary function of the new Arboretum entrance is to increase safety on Trunk Highway 5 (TH 5) by minimizing vehicles queuing on TH 5 as they wait to enter the Arboretum. Based on a review of two years of data (2017-2019), more than 80% of the Arboretum's visitors are coming from the east, using TH 5 as the primary approach to the site. [(kjz]] Your research was 100% transparent to your neighbors in the Minnewashta Parkway neighborhood. It isn't too late, let's work together to create an environment that works for everybody. 3. In December 2020, Carver County completed a localized traffic study of the street network north of TH 5, west of TH 41, and east of Rolling Acres Road using data from 2017-2019. The data shows about 2,200 to 2,500 vehicles moving north -south daily on Lake Minnewashta Parkway between TH 5 on the south and TH 7 on the north. The new intersection on TH 5 is forecast to bring an estimated additional 40-60 vehicle trips on Lake Minnewashta Parkway north of TH 5, with low counts happening on peak season weekdays and higher counts on peak season weekends. This represents an increase of about 2% over current traffic using the parkway. (]kjz]] As you know, the study completed in December, 2020 did not consider a traffic study of Minnewashta Parkway. That study only occurred after the November open house when we asked about the impact to our neighborhood and that information was not released until January 21, 2021 neighborhood meeting. It was loud and clear at that 1121121 meeting that not one resident believed or accepted the study results. It is not difficult to understand that when you have a 1 mile long backup now to enter the arboretum that this problem will not be resolved by adding a traffic light. With this significant of a backup we believe that drivers will look for alternative routes, obviously, that will be Minnewashta Parkway. We are very concerned with risking our future on a study that nobody believes. 1 feel the increase of 2% is way off the mark, and, in any case, we are already faced with 37% of the traffic volume from nonresidents. This is a point we have brought to the attention of Chanhassen in the past. Although the 2% is doubtful, even a 2% increase is more than we should be exposed to. 4. Due to MnDOT's design requirements relative to road alignment and traffic volume, MnDOT will only install a signal at Lake Minnewashta Parkway if the Arboretum's primary entrance is relocated directly across the parkway. [(kjz]] We have discussed this point numerous times and MDOT has not provided any rationale on why a 3 way intersection cannot have a traffic light. We only need to look down the road to see examples of what is not allowed?? Hwy 7 & Oak street, Hwy 7 & Old Market rd.,Hwy 7 & highway 44 Overall community reaction is that the traffic signal is an essential safety improvement. Recognizing most visitors are headed east, Arboretum Operations will direct visitors to leave from Arboretum Drive (east), not the west exit (aligned with Lake Minnewashta Parkway). 5. Redirecting the Arboretum's major entrance to West 82nd Street does not work for Arboretum visitors or operations. Most of the Arboretum destinations are located near the TH5 corridor. Indirect routing for the bulk of Arboretum traffic will significantly alter travel flow, diminish the Arboretum's gardenesque character, and create unnecessary delays for the Arboretum's maintenance and operations vehicles. Increased internal traffic would incur additional investment in infrastructure, roads, and maintenance, as well as operational changes. (]kjz]] And yet it is OK to impose increase traffic on Minnewashta Parkway? We need to work together with a more acceptable plan for all. 6. Counties invest in their major transportation corridors every 20-30 years. City, county and federal funding has been secured for this project. Given the growth of the surrounding communities in the last 15 years, conditions on the ground meet required design standards for traffic volumes and intersection alignment. Based on these factors, the recommended intersection is the best possible option. [[kjz]] At the expense of our neighborhood. Planning should include all stake holders, it is 100% unclear to me why we have not been involved in a more transparent process? Best regards, Kevin Zahler +1-612-618-9817 kizahler(@hotmail.com From: Peter Moe <moexx004@umn.edu> Sent: Monday, February 8, 2021 10:31 AM To: Kevin Zahler <kjzahler@hotmail.com> Cc: upres Joan T. A. Gabel - Office of the President <upres@umn.edu>; Monique MacKenzie <moniquem@umn.edu>; Alan Branhagen <abranhag@umn.edu>; kpowell@umn.edu; sviggum@umn.edu; tja@umn.edu; rbeeson@umn.edu; Mary Davenport <mdavenpo@umn.edu>; kliher@umn.edu; hsu@umn.edu; kenyanya@umn.edu; mayeron@umn.edu; dmcmillan@umn.edu; Darrin Rosha <drosha@umn.edu>; rrs@umn.edu; Bender, George <GBender@ci.chanhassen.mn.us>; Langenbach, Diane (DOT) <diane.langenbach@state.mn.us>; Eric Johnson <Eric.Johnson@bolton-menk.com>; Howley, Charles <CHowley@ci.chanhassen.mn.us>; Darin Mielke <dmielke@co.carver.mn.us>; Angie Stenson <astenson@co.carver.mn.us>; Brian Buhr <bbuhr@umn.edu>; Brian Steeves <stee0168@umn.edu>; provost Rachel Croson - Executive Vice President & Provost <provost@umn.edu>; Vera Westrum-Ostrom <verawo@umn.edu>; Michael Berthelsen <berth004@umn.edu>; Lyndon Robjent <Irobjent@co.carver.mn.us>; Ross Tillman <Ross.Tillman@bolton-menk.com>; Ryan, Elise <ERyan@ci.chanhassen.mn.us>; Johnston, Heather <hjohnston@ci.chanhassen.mn.us>; tworkman@co.carver.mn.us; dhemze@co.carver.mn.us; JMcDonald@ci.chanhassen.mn.us; dcampion @ci.chanhassen.mn.us; hschubert@ci.chanhassen.mn.us; Irehm@ci.chanhassen.mn.us Subject: Re: Arboretum entrance at Minnewashta Parkway https://www.co.carver.mn.us/departments/public-works/projects-studies/arboretum- a rea-transportation-plan Mr. Zahler, The University of Minnesota and Landscape Arboretum response to your 01/29/2021 message is attached. Please forward this response to your neighborhood group. The U of M and Arboretum will start design work on the new Arboretum entrance in coming months. A public information meeting will be scheduled and all Arboretum neighbors will be invited. Sincerely, Peter Peter C. Moe Director University of Minnesota Landscape Arboretum 3675 Arboretum Drive Chaska, MN 55318 USA moexx004(@umn.edu Office Phone and Fax (612) 301-1246 Cell - 952 220-4923 Home Phone (952) 474-2236 On Fri, Jan 29, 2021 at 4:44 PM Kevin Zahler <kizahler(aphotmail.com> wrote Dear President Gabel, Regents and Arboretum Management Staff, I am writing to you to plead for help to bring a sense of reasonableness to this situation. The residents in and around Minnewashta Parkway have been informed that the University of Minnesota has decided to move the arboretum entrance to Minnewashta Parkway. Speaking for myself, I feel that the arboretum is a true jewel that we can all be proud of and we annually support the arboretum. So, given this proud heritage it seems a disconnect to be declining the Minnewashta Parkway environment for the benefit to the arboretum. This is especially concerning when there exists a perfectly acceptable entrance on a very low traffic street where the arboretum owns most of the surrounding property. An existing entrance surely is less costly than a new entrance, plus, the existing entrance already has traffic light control from highway 41. The neighborhood residents in and around Minnewashta Parkway are arboretum neighbors and it seems very hard to believe the University of Minnesota would deteriorate a neighborhood for the benefit of a naturalist environment. If you have time the trailing emails provide more information. In spite of the counter points from Carver County the residents were nearly unanimous in opposition to an arboretum entrance at Minnewashta Parkway, however, we do need help with traffic control. Hope you can add some guidance to this to help your neighbors! Thank you. Best regards, Kevin Zahler +1-612-618-9817 kizahlerna hotmail.com From: Angie Stenson <astenson@co.carver.mn.us> Sent: Thursday, January 28, 2021 2:24 PM To: 'Kevin Zahler' <kizahler(ahotmail.com> Cc: Bender, George <GBender(aci.chanhassen.mn.us>; Langenbach, Diane (DOT)<diane.langenbach(@state.mn.us>; Eric Johnson <Eric.Johnson(@bolton-menk.com>; Howley, Charles <CHowley(@ci.chanhassen.mn.us>; Peter Moe <moexx004Pumn.edu>; Darin Mielke <dmielke(aco.carver.mn.us> Subject: RE: Minnewashta Parkway https://www.co.carver.mn.us/departments/public-works/projects-studies/arboretum-area-transportation- pim Hi Kevin, Thank you for your ongoing interest in the Arboretum Area Transportation Plan and for participating in the neighborhood meeting last week. The information from the meeting including a link to the presentation video and slides are available on the project website. I appreciate the feedback and have responded with additional information from the project team related to each takeaway below. A"iz SfPv,So-wAICP I Sr. Transportation Planner Carver County Public Works Mobile 612.360.7422 1 Email astenson(aco.carver.mn.us From: Kevin Zahler <k zahler(@hotmail.com> Sent: Monday, January 25, 2021 9:39 AM To: ervan(cDci.chanhassen.mn.us; JMcDonald(@ci.chanhassen.mn.us; dcampion(@ci.chanhassen.mn.us; hschubert @ci.chanhassen.mn.us; IrehmRaci.chanhassen.mn.us; Gayle Degler <gdeeleraco.carver.mn.us>; Tim Lynch <tlynch(aco.carver.mn.us>; John Fahey <ifahey(@co.carver.mn.us>; Tom Workman <tworkman(aco.carver.mn.us>; Angie Stenson <astenson(aco.carver.mn.us>; Langenbach, Diane (DOT)<diane.langenbach(@state.mn.us>; 'Bender, George' <GBender(ilci.chanhassen.mn.us>; moexx004na umn.edu; Eric Johnson <Eric.Johnson(a bolton-menk.com>; 'Alan Branhagen' <abranhagaumn.edu> Cc: 'Howley, Charles' <CHowley(aci.chanhassen.mn.us> Subject: RE: Minnewashta Parkway https://www.co.carver.mn.us/departments/public-works/proiects-studies/arboretum-area-transportation- plan This email was received from outside of Carver County Dear Arboretum Area Transportation Planning, Minnesota Landscape Arboretum, Chanhassen Mayor, Council Members and Carver County Board, Thank you for the presentation on January 21, 2020 concerning the Arboretum Area Transportation Plan. I appreciate your openness to discuss the details and the long hours you all have put into this planning so far. This virtual meeting along with the recent past calls I attended have helped a lot to bring more clarity to this plan and impact on Minnewashta Parkway. Our past exchange of emails and past discussions are further below for reference. I am addressing this to all of you; County, City and Arboretum as I believe it is not too late to meet the needs of all involved. Following are my "take aways" from the Thursday evening meeting. 1. We heard during this meeting that 97% of the past respondents favored a traffic light at the intersection of highway 5 and Minnewashta Parkway. I think most people attending the meeting agreed that a traffic light is needed in the interest of public safety. However, I did not hear a single supporter out of the +/- 60 attendees on Thursday that agreed to this also becoming the entrance to the Arboretum. In fact, I heard nearly unanimous concern with this proceeding. a. 92/123 (75%) participants at the December 2019 open house preferred a signal over a roundabout. 27/30 residents from the Minnewashta Parkway neighborhood preferred a signal. b. 41/49 (83%) respondents Supported or Partially Supported the vision for improvements on this segment of Highway 5 at the December 2020 open house. Only 5 participants did not support the plan with 3 from the Minnewashta Parkway neighborhood. c. Overall feedback from residents has indicated that a majority want a permanent traffic signal. MnDOT will not allow a permanent signal at the 3-legged Highway 5/Minnewashta Parkway intersection with the current or projected traffic. Partnering with the Arboretum entrance relocation as the southern leg of the intersection makes the permanent traffic signal possible, as it would then meet the MnDOT requirements. d. As you noted, we heard at the neighborhood meeting, that many Minnewashta Parkway residents are concerned about traffic rerouting to Minnewashta Parkway to access the Arboretum via relocated entrance. This is why we conducted additional traffic analysis of this possibility, which estimates less than a 2% increase in traffic to Minnewashta Parkway from Arboretum visitors. 2. We also heard that with this new entry to the Arboretum that traffic will increase on average by 40 to 60 trips per day. Of course, that is averaged and we can assume that on event days that will be significantly greater. It would help to have a better estimate on event days. a. This traffic analysis was completed for May and October — the busiest times for the Arboretum. The estimated increase is less than 2% and includes 40 additional trips per day on weekdays and 60 additional trips on weekends. b. We have completed traffic analysis for Arboretum event traffic to make sure the signal would still operate effectively. Local traffic concerns can be mitigated through specific traffic management planning, which the Arboretum has indicated would be their typical practice. 3. We also heard that on event days traffic can back up from the Arboretum entrance to the east to Century Boulevard, almost 1 mile. a. This is correct and one of the conditions that would be mitigated through the proposed improvements to Highway 5 with 4 lanes instead of 2. As per previous item, we conducted peak event traffic analysis to show this would not occur with the proposed improvements. The Arboretum is also restructuring their ticketing process, so that on busy days payment would be taken at exit. 4. Points 2 and 3 suggest that perhaps more research should go into the Minnewashta Parkway traffic survey. We heard several comments from the residents that they believe (and some tested this while on the call) that GPS routings will take more people down Minnewashta Parkway, especially considering the backups. a. As part of our recent additional analysis for Minnewashta Parkway and investigation of potential routing to the Arboretum, we also conducted Google Maps verification and found it to be 1 minute faster for traffic routing from Highway 7 westbound to stay on Highway 41 to Highway 5 versus Highway 7 to Minnewashta Parkway. b. At the meeting, several residents brought up the concern over Google Maps routing Arboretum visitors via Minnewashta Parkway; however, we cannot control how Google Maps routes traffic. 5. We also heard from MDOT that the cost of a traffic light at this intersection is a relatively very low cost at $250,000 to $300,000. We were also told that MDOT policy would not allow a traffic light without a 4 way intersection. However, this is a matter of neighborhood public safety. The residents of the Minnewashta Parkway neighborhoods are entitled to both, our neighborhood and public safety. I think both can coexist and we need help with flexibility. With todays technology traffic signals can easily be designed to not interrupt the normal traffic flow unless there is a need for entrance. MDOT has also told us that this has been a long watched intersection because of the risk of Minnewashta Parkway drivers turning east on to highway 5. a. MnDOT will not allow a permanent signal at Highway 5/Minnewashta Parkway without the traffic generated by the 4th leg of the Arboretum entrance. The existing and projected traffic without the 4th leg do not meet the established MnDOT requirements (warrants) for a signal. 6. This plan is also costing all residents financially and in turn a direct impact of tax revenues to the city and county. Property values will decline, we have already heard from realtors that the traffic along Minnewashta Parkway is a strong detraction to real-estate values. Plus, residents are being assessed for the repair of Minnewashta Parkway with the benefit to those that choose to use the parkway as a bypass between highways 5 and 7 (instead of using highway 41) and in the future to benefit the arboretum. a. The purpose of the study is to identify regional transportation improvements. Analysis from the study estimates less than a 2% increase in traffic to Minnewashta Parkway during busy Arboretum visitor months of May and October. The addition of a permanent traffic signal at Highway 5/Minnewashta Pkwy would improve access to Highway 5 and safety at the intersection for residents. b. I defer to City staff to provide information on assessments. 7. We also heard Chanhassen report that the city has been studying speed limits and perhaps considering a more city wide change. I had also discussed this with the city at a council meeting in April, 2020 due to the high amount of bypass traffic between highways 5 and 7. 1 understand that the city would like to implement an equitable plan if there is any change at all. However, Minnewashta Parkway is being adversely impacted by the bypass and also the potential for an arboretum entrance. I think the time has come to follow the lead of other cities, parkland areas and reduce speeds now. a. City staff can provide more information on this. The ability to change the speed limit may be limited by MnDOT standards required for Municipal State -Aid System funding because the roadway is designated as such. As the regulation on speed limits for City -owned roads recently changed, guidance for roads with this designation is still being determined. 8. There were comments about adding stop signs along the Minnewashta Parkway route, specifically, Kings Road was mentioned. This and other locations could also make our neighborhood more resident friendly. a. City staff can provide more information on this. Often a related concern that comes up with addition of stop signs is the noise related to accelerating vehicles. 9. In my view the 82nd street entrance is the better option for the arboretum; a. Entrance already exists. b. Lower cost to University of Minnesota. c. Safer for all. d. Moves congestion off of main roads. i. The Arboretum established in their Master Plan to relocate their main entrance to Highway 5/Minnewashta Parkway. Safety and access is their top major concern and priority. There is a recommendation for a secondary access from 82nd St, but the main entrance needs to be from Highway 5 to access the main buildings. Their 3-mile drive is not built to standards to carry all entering and exiting traffic and expanding it would require major impacts to natural conservation and wetland areas, making it infeasible. Additional questions on this can be directed to Arboretum or University of MN staff: Alan Branhagen (abranhag0umn.edu), Director of Operations; Peter Moe (moexx0040umn.edu), Executive Director; Monique MacKenzie (moniquemna urn edu), Director of Planning in the Planning, Space, and Real Estate department. We need your help to protect the Minnewashta Parkway neighborhood for the safety and well being of the residents. Plus, in the best interest of the arboretum and the city it is important to maintain Minnewashta Parkway as the walking/running/biking gateway to the arboretum, city beach and city park! I look forward to receiving your support!! Best regards, Kevin Zahler +1-612-618-9817 kizahlerna hotmail.com From: Kevin Zahler <k1zahler(cDhotmail.com> Sent: Saturday, January 16, 2021 3:16 PM To:'eryan(@ci.chanhassen.mn.us' <eryan(@ci.chanhassen.mn.us>;'JMcDonald (@ci.chanhassen.mn.us'<JMcDonald(@ci.chanhassen.mn.us>; 'dcampiont7a ci.chanhassen.mn.us' <dcampion(@ci.chanhassen.mn.us>;'hschubert(@ci.chanhassen.mn.us' <hschubertt7a ci.chanhassen.mn.us>; 'IrehmPci.chanhassen.mn.us' <Irehm(@ci.chanhassen.mn.us>; 'Gayle Degler' <gdeeler(@co.carver.mn.us>; 'Tim Lynch' <tllynch(aco.carver.mn.us>;'John Fahey' <jfahey(@co.carver.mn.us>;'tworkman(oco.carver.mn.us' <tworkman(0)CO.caryer.mn.us> Cc: 'Bender, George'<GBender(@ci.chanhassen.mn.us>;'Howley, Charles' <CHowley(@ci.chanhassen.mn.us> Subject: FW: Minnewashta Parkwayhttps://www.co.carver.mn.us/departments/public-works/projects-studies/arboretum-area-transportation- plan Dear Chanhassen Mayor, Council Members and Carver County Board, Hope all are well and settling into your new legislative year, thanks very much for your dedication to our city, I am sure it is challenging and time consuming for all of you. This is a follow on email, I last wrote to all of you on December 19, 2020 concerning the plight of Minnewashta Parkway, a lot has transpired since then. I have now included the Carver County Board as they also have a vested interest in this. The following chain of emails are exchanges between me and the Arboretum Transportation Team. They have been very helpful in communicating with us and have been very good about answering questions. I have included the entire chain of emails as it provides a lot of history, however, time consuming to go through. So, I have also summarized the key points as follows; 1. In the recent weeks we; myself and one other neighborhood resident, Scot Lacek, have had two conference calls with the highway team. This has brought more clarity to what is occurring but has left us with several open questions. 2. As you know, there will be a "final proposed improvement" meeting on 1/21/21 and hope all of you will attend. a. We understand that there will be time for follow up to this "final meeting" since some of the needed information will only be presented at that meeting. 3. A key question for our neighborhood is a traffic survey for Minnewashta Parkway with and without the arboretum entrance. We are told that this survey is now complete and will be presented on 1/21/21. a. It seems a bit late to only now consider the traffic impact on Minnewashta Parkway. In our recent conversations we discussed what a worst case scenario could be, a long line of cars on Minnewashta Parkway on event days at the arboretum. Without a doubt we all know if this plan proceeds we will definitely have a significant increase in traffic on Minnewashta Parkway. 4. It is also clear that the absence of a traffic light at the Minnewashta Parkway highway 5 intersection is a significant hazard. This week the MDOT representative informed us that this intersection was one of the more watched intersections because of the hazard. MDOT also informed us that the intersection does not qualify for a traffic light unless it is a 4 leg intersection and I think with other volume criteria. a. However, MDOT has also informed us that the cost of light at that intersection would only be $250,000 to $300,000. 1 feel quite sure with today's technology that an on -demand signal could be installed so as to not have nuisance stops for the highway 5 flow of traffic. b. I also have the hope that the interest of public safety and maintenance of our neighborhood will prevail. Adding more traffic to an already overused residential road is not in the best interest of the neighborhood or community. Policies can be changed, we just need the help of our elected representatives to accomplish this. Minnewashta Parkway is a residential and parkland area with a wonderful walk/run/bike trail that also already serves as a gateway to the arboretum. It is also the gate way to the city beach, fishing pier and park. There are many, many families with children at risk if we allow this increased traffic to occur. 5. As a Minnewashta Parkway resident I am also being assessed for the rebuild of Minnewashta Parkway. I am happy to pay this assessment for the good of our entire neighborhood. However, it seems quite unfair to assess residents of Minnewashta Parkway and then encourage even more traffic with the entrance to the arboretum and by pass between highways 5 and 7 (that is the purpose of highway 41). 6. Plus, the arboretum also has a perfectly functional alternative entrance at 82ad Street. I suspect utilization of this entrance would be at a significant savings to the arboretum. I believe that these plans will be submitted to both City of Chanhassen and to Carver County for approval. We need your help to return our neighborhood. Thanks very much for your help. Best regards, Kevin Zahler +1-612-618-9817 kizahler(o)hotmail.com From: Kevin Zahler <kizahler(cDhotmail.com> Sent: Thursday, January 14, 20213:31 PM To: 'Angie Stenson' <astenson(@co.carver.mn.us> Cc: 'Bender, George' <GBender(@ci.chanhassen.mn.us>;'Ross Tillman'<Ross.Tillman(c bolton-menk.com>;'ScotLacek' <scotlacek(a) hotmai I.com> Subject: RE: Minnewashta Parkway httos://www.co.carver.mn.us/departments/public-works/proiects-studies/arboretum-area-transportation- 2LM Thanks Angie, Please see my added questions in your email below. Plus, am I correct that the Carver County Board and Chanhassen City Council needs to approve these plans before they can proceed? Will either or both have options to request modifications? FYI, at least one of the new Carver County Board members was under the impression that highway 5 and Minnewashta Parkway was going to be a roundabout. Thanks again for all of your help and cooperation, much appreciated. Best regards, Kevin Zahler +1-612-618-9817 kizahlerPhotmail.com From: Angie Stenson <astenson(aDco.carver.mn.us> Sent: Thursday, January 14, 2021 3:14 PM To: 'Kevin Zahler' <kizahler(cDhotmail.com> Cc: 'Bender, George'<G BenderPci.cha nhassen. mn.us>; 'Ross Tillman'<Ross.Tillman(@bolton-menk.com>;'Scot Lacek' <scotlacek(ahotmail.com> Subject: RE: Minnewashta Parkway https://www.co.carver.mn.us/departments/public-works/projects-studies/arboretum-area-transportation- Good afternoon, Thank you for the clarifications. We can further discuss and clarify these items at our meeting tomorrow morning. We will present the new traffic analysis regarding Minnewashta Parkway and Highway 5 existing and projected travel patterns at the January 21st virtual public meeting. The presentation slides will be made available following this meeting. [(kjz]] The meeting announcement is labeled as a final meeting, will we have an opportunity after the 1121 meeting to comment? The January 21st meeting will also include information from Arboretum staff about their plan to move the main entrance opposite Minnewashta Parkway. Their 2018 Master Plan identifies this as the preferred long-term entrance and primary access location. [fkjz]] Who can 1 contact to obtain this information? This study, although named Arboretum Area Transportation Plan, includes the roadways and infrastructure around the Arboretum and did not study the Arboretum's access planning or cost estimates related to their long-term plan, as those are decisions made by the University of Minnesota. We do have costs for highway improvements to Highway 5 and 82nd St., which I can provide if of interest. [fkjz]] yes, please provide. Can it be segmented as to incremental cost for each entrance? What 1 mean is, what is the cost if the arboretum entrance is or is not at that location? Am 1 correct in my understanding, the highway 5 improvements and 82nd street improvements will proceed no matter where the entrance to the arboretum is? A" & S%EwsowAICP I Sr. Transportation Planner Carver County Public Works Mobile 612.360.7422 1 Email astensonaco.carver.mn.us From: Kevin Zahler <kizahler(@hotmail.com> Sent: Friday, January 08, 2021 4:12 PM To: Angie Stenson <astenson(@co.carver.mn.us> Cc: 'Bender, George' <GBender(@ci.chanhassen.mn.us>; 'Ross Tillman' <Ross.Tlllman(albolton-menk.com>; 'Scot Lacek' <scotlacek(@hotmail.com> Subject: RE: Minnewashta Parkway https://www.co.carver.mn.us/departments/public-works/projects-studies/arboretum-area-transportation- !plan This email was received from outside of Carver County Thanks Angie, Please see my clarifications below Best regards, Kevin Zahler +1-612-618-9817 From: Angie Stenson <astenson(@co.carver.mn.us> Sent: Friday, January 8, 2021 3:08 PM To: 'Kevin Zahler' <kizahler(@hotmail.com> Cc: Bender, George <GBenderna ci.chanhassen.mn.us>; Ross Tillman <Ross.Tillmanna bolton-menk.com>; Scot Lacek <scotlacekr7a hotmail.com> Subject: RE: Minnewashta Parkway plan IN A postcard went out today to all residents in the Minnewashta Pkwy. neighborhood. We will send out an e-bulletin next week to those signed up for the project email list and also add an announcement to Facebook. I received your feedback in the 12/31 email. The project team was already copied on this email, so they are informed of the comments. Regarding the two questions: 3. Can we obtain the results of the Minnewashta Parkway survey in advance of the January 21 neighborhood meeting? [(kjz]] Hope we are not miscommunicating? Over our past several email exchanges and our recent telecon 1 understood that a specific Minnewashta Parkway traffic study was being performed to analyze the impact of the arboretum entrance, i.e., a traffic study with data reviewing Minnewashta Parkway traffic with and without the arboretum entrance. In our telecon 1 thought it was stated that this information would be presented on 1121121. 1 was simply asking if we could receive this information in advance of our call on 1/15/21? 4. Can we obtain the cost comparison between the new Minnewashta Parkway entrance to the arboretum and the 82nd Street entrance? [(kjz]] We also discussed this during our earlier telecon and 1 think you said that the arboretum has this information. This request is to ask what is the cost to create the arboretum entrance at Minnewashta Parkway. 1 also asked what is the cost for the 82nd Street entrance. This cost must be zero since it already exists. However, what is the cost to make it the main entrance? I am simply looking for a cost comparison as 1 believe the 82nd Street entrance is a huge savings of public money. 1 realize that there are other costs associated to adjacent roads but I also understand those steps will occur in any case. So, very simply, which is the lower cost entrance for the arboretum only? For question 3, are you looking for survey results from the open houses? For question 4, the purpose of this study was to evaluate and recommend transportation improvements to Highway 5 and 82nd St. (and other study corridors). We have cost estimates for these improvements. Is this what you are looking for? The Arboretum's long-term entrance/exit location planning analysis and recommendation was completed as part of their 2018 Master Plan. Avcg & $%wiowAICP I Sr. Transportation Planner Carver County Public Works Mobile 612.360.7422 1 Email astensonaco.carver.mn.us From: Kevin Zahler <kizahler(a hotmail.com> Sent: Thursday, January 07, 2021 5:44 PM To: Angie Stenson <astensonnia co.carver.mn.us> Cc: Bender, George<GBender(cDci.chanhassen.mn.us>; Ross Tillman<Ross.Tillman(@bolton-menk.com>; Scot Lacek <scotlacekPhotmail.com> Subject: RE: Minnewashta Parkway https://www.co.carver.mn.us/departments/public-works/projects-studies/arboretum-area-transportation- plan This email was received from outside of Carver County Thanks Angie, Look forward to your further response. Did you receive my 12/31/20 email, attached? How will the neighborhood be notified on the 1/21/21 meeting? Best regards, Kevin Zahler +1-612-618-9817 kizahler(o)hotmail.com From: Angie Stenson <astenson(caco.carver.mn.us> Sent: Thursday, January 7, 20214:47 PM To: 'Kevin Zahler' <kizahler(@hotmail.com> Cc: Bender, George <GBender(@ci.chanhassen.mn.us>; Ross Tillman <Ross.Tillman(cDbolton-menk.com> Subject: RE: Minnewashta Parkway https://www.co.carver.mn.us/departments/public-works/projects-_ plan Hi Kevin, I want to update you that to date I've been unable to confirm a time with MnDOT staff for a virtual meeting. I am continuing to work on this to try and get a time confirmed for next week. Aug & $%wiowAICP I Sr. Transportation Planner Carver County Public Works Mobile 612.360.7422 1 Email astensonoco.carver.mn.us From: Angie Stenson Sent: Wednesday, December 30, 2020 3:49 PM To: 'Kevin Zahler' <kizahler(@hotmail.com> Cc: 'Bender, George' <GBender( ci.chanhassen. m n.us>; 'Alan Branhagen' <abranhag(@umn.edu>; Langenbach, Diane (DOT) <diane.langenbach(@state.mn.us>; moexx004(@umn.edu; Darin Mielke <dmielke(@co.carver.mn.us>; 'Cara Geheren' <Cara.Geheren(@focusengineeringinc.com>; 'Eric Johnson' <Eric.JOhnson(@bolton-menk.com>; 'Angie Bersaw' <Angie.Bersaw(@ bolton- menk.com> Subject: RE: Minnewashta Parkway httos://www.co.carver.mn.us/departments/public-works/projects-studies/arboretum-area-transportation- Dim Hi Kevin, Thank you for joining our discussion meeting yesterday to discuss the traffic memo for the Arboretum event traffic analysis that was completed. I'm working with the project team to find available times when we could discuss additional topics including: 1. The traffic signal warrants analysis for the Highway S/Minnewashta Parkway intersection and specifically the conclusion that no signal option is allowable with a 3-leg intersection. 2. Feasibility options and analysis of other potential locations for the Arboretum's main entrance. I'd like to combine these topics into one discussion meeting. It will be next week before I have availability responses from project partners, and I'll contact you and Mr. Lacek regarding potential times. AKgi & S AICP I Sr. Transportation Planner Carver County Public Works Mobile 612.360.7422 1 Email astensonoco.carver.mn.us From: Kevin Zahler 4 zahler(@hotmail.com> Sent: Monday, December 28, 2020 4:58 PM To: Angie Stenson <astenson(Z co.carver.mn.us> Cc: 'Bender, George' <GBender(@ci.chanhassen.mn.us>; 'Alan Branhagen' <abranhag(@umn.edu>; Langenbach, Diane (DOT) <diane.langenbachPstate.mn.us>; moexx004(@umn.edu; Darin Mielke <dmielkek@co.carver.mn.us>; 'Cara Geheren' <Cara.GeherenPfocusengineeringinc.com>; 'Eric Johnson' <Eric.Johnson(a bolton-menk.com>;'Angie Bersaw' <Angie.Bersawt7a bolton- menk.com> Subject: RE: Minnewashta Parkway httos://www.co.carver.mn.us/departments/public-works/projects-studies/arboretum-area-transportation- I iJiat1 This email was received from outside of Carver County Hello Angie, I haven't received the available times email from you but I am available most of the time. However, have the surveys been completed for Minnewashta Parkway/Highway 5 with and without an arboretum entrance? I am happy to discuss but is it the best use of your teams time if that information isn't available yet? Please let me know how you would like to proceed. I feel like the residents perhaps did not have a clear picture when they were surveyed. As your data indicates many residents were in favor of a traffic light at that intersection. However, how clear was it to those surveyed that they could only have a traffic light if the arboretum entrance was included? Plus, how many of the east west highway 5 corridor drivers agree to a traffic light with an arboretum entrance. I feel quite confident that these drivers would rather have the light service the Minnewashta Parkway traffic only. Surely you have found in your research with the huge increase in east west highway 5 traffic that Minnewashta Parkway will be even further compromised. I am also concerned with the statement "no allowable option that includes a traffic signal at Highway 5/Minnewashta Parkway without the 4th/southern leg of the intersection with access to the Arboretum"! This seems quite short sighted considering the depth of study placed on this, coupled with your data that reveals there was a fatal accident at that intersection. Of course, I do not know the details of that accident but the intersection as it is now is an accident waiting to happen. However, we do not need to encourage even more high speed traffic on Minnewashta Parkway. As an aside, I also wonder if other surveys should be performed on Minnewashta Parkway? • Number of vehicles using it simply as a bypass between 5 and 7. • Speeds Minnewashta Parkway is a residential road, I know, the county, city and state call it a feeder road. That does not take away the fact that it is residential, a walking/running/biking gateway to the arboretum and we are taxed the same as all other residential neighborhoods that do not need to endure the large volume of high speed traffic. I think that in cooperation with the city and state that other solutions can be found I appreciate your continuing cooperation. Best regards, Kevin Zahler +1-612-618-9817 kizahlerna hotmail.com From: Angie Stenson <astenson(Z co.carver.mn.us> Sent: Tuesday, December 22, 2020 3:01 PM To: 'Kevin Zahler' <kizahler(@hotmail.com> Cc: 'Bender, George' <GBenderna ci.chanhassen.mn.us>;'Alan Branhagen' <abranhag(@umn.edu>; Langenbach, Diane (DOT) <diane.langenbach(@state.mn.us>; moexx004(@umn.edu; Darin Mielke <dmielkePco.carver.mn.us>; 'Cara Geheren' <Cara.Geheren(@focusengineeringinc.com>;'Eric Johnson'<Eric.Johnson(@bolton-menk.com>;'Angie Bersaw'<Aneie.Bersaw( bolton- menk.com> Subject: RE: Minnewashta Parkway https://www.co.carver.mn.us/departments/public-works/projects-studies/arboretum-area-transoortation- aLa.n Hi Mr. Zahler, Thank you for taking the time to review the materials for the Arboretum Area Transportation Plan related to the Highway 5/Minnewashta Parkway intersection. I'm available to set up a call for next week where we can discuss the project in more detail. I will send a follow up email with some specific times. In response to the concerns you and a few others have brought forward and feedback from the Council at the November work session, the project team conducted additional traffic pattern analysis for the Highway 5/Minnewashta Parkway intersection. This information is planned to be presented via a virtual neighborhood meeting on the evening of Thursday, January 21st. We hope this information will be helpful in better understanding how a future traffic signal at this location would operate. Analysis for the study included evaluation of the eligibility of the Highway 5/Minnewashta Parkway intersection for a traffic signal. The amount of traffic from Minnewashta Parkway alone at the Highway 5 intersection does not warrant a controlled intersection, meaning a permanent traffic signal would not be allowed by MnDOT. In response to public feedback regarding the need for a controlled intersection at this location, we looked at if coordinating with a future planned Arboretum entrance as a fourth leg to the intersection would meet MnDOT warrants and requirements for a controlled intersection, and it does. There is no allowable option that includes a traffic signal at Highway 5/Minnewashta Parkway without the 4th/southern leg of the intersection with access to the Arboretum. Thank you for adding your feedback to this dialogue as we try and understand the overall feedback from the community in weighing the positive and potential negative aspects of a permanent traffic signal at this location. We will be notifying the Minnewashta Parkway neighborhood after the holidays of the opportunity to learn more at the virtual meeting on January 21st A"g & Sf2v-y0vvAICP I Sr. Transportation Planner Carver County Public Works Mobile 612.360.7422 1 Email astenson0co.carver.mn.us From: Kevin Zahler<k1zahler(@hotmail.com> Sent: Saturday, December 19, 2020 2:04 PM To: Angie Stenson <astenson(@co.carver.mn.us> Cc: 'Bender, George' <GBender(@ci.chanhassen.mn.us>; 'Alan Branhagen' <abranhag(aumn.edu>; Langenbach, Diane (DOT) <diane.langenbachna state.mn.us>; moexx004(@umn.edu; Darin Mielke <dmielke(@co.carver.mn.us>; 'Cara Geheren' <Cara.Geheren(@focusengineeringinc.com>; 'Eric Johnson' <Eric.Johnson(@bolton-menk.com>; 'Angie Bersaw' <Angie.Bersaw(@ bolton- menk.com> Subject: RE: Minnewashta Parkway https://www.co.carver.mn.us/departments/public-works/projects-studies/arboretum-area-transportation- plan This email was received from outside of Carver County Hello Angie, Thanks for your response below, that is a lot of information to absorb! However, I did go through all of it including the numerous URL's and related downloads. The attachment is a bit hard to follow since I do not understand the numerous acronyms. I think I will want to discuss this further as you suggested but best to wait until you complete the traffic study for Minnewashta Parkway, when will that report be ready? To be clear, I think it is very important to perform this study with and without the entrance to the arboretum, please confirm that this will be performed? My take away from the huge amount of data is that perhaps that the Minnewashta Parkway neighborhoods were not provided an accurate view/question. I can see that certain neighborhood surveys selected a traffic light at the highway 5 intersection. However, they were not given the choice of a traffic light without the arboretum entrance. The neighborhoods, especially at the south end of Minnewashta Parkway need this light as it is a significant safety issue. By including an arboretum entrance into this intersection only serves to compound the problem. This is a significant disservice to the Minnewashta Parkway residence as well as the highway 5 east/west traffic! This is especially true when there is a very viable alternative at a much lower cost with the 82"d Street entrance. That entrance already exists and makes it unnecessary to construct a new entrance. The traffic along highway 5 is increasing significantly, I suspect the attachment you sent to me explains that (like I said, I don't know what all the acronyms mean) and will increase even further in the coming years. Carver County has allowed this to occur by allowing the huge residential expansion in western Carver County. I am not suggesting that this expansion shouldn't have been allowed but the county must also take responsibility for allowing this growth. Impeding the traffic along highway 5 is not in the best interest of those residents. I saw that you commented that peak weekday traffic would not occur when there is an arboretum event. However, have you performed a weekend traffic study? The weekend traffic is very high and continuous through the day, not just morning and evening. The highway 5 corridor will not like being interrupted for the frequent arboretum entrances compared to the much more sporadic entrances from Minnewashta Parkway. We need the county, state and city help to correct the direction with these plans. Minnewashta Parkway is a residential neighborhood and we do not want that atmosphere destroyed. We enjoy being a walkway entrance to the arboretum and that is what a parkway should be. The residence on and around Minnewashta Parkway deserve the right to preserve their neighborhood. We need your help with a light at Minnewashta Parkway and not an arboretum entrance. As I mentioned previously, this surely represents a huge savings of arboretum funds, a win for all involved. Thank you for a continuation of this dialog and hope we can begin to right this ship!! Best regards, Kevin Zahler +1-612-618-9817 kizahlerna hotmail.com From: Angie Stenson <astenson(@co.carver.mn.us> Sent: Monday, December 7, 2020 5:02 PM To: 'Kevin Zahler' <kizahler(@hotmail.com> Cc: 'Bender, George' <GBender(@ci.chanhassen.mn.us>; 'Alan Branhagen' <abranhag(@umn.edu>; Langenbach, Diane (DOT) <diane.langenbach(@state.mn.us>; moexx004Pumn.edu; Darin Mielke <dmielke(@co.carver.mn.us>; 'Cara Geheren' <Cara.Geheren(@focusen ineeringinc.com>; Eric Johnson <Eric.Johnson(@bolton-menk.com Angie Bersaw <Angie.Bersaw(@bolton- menk.com> Subject: RE: Minnewashta Parkway https-//www.co.carver.mn.us/departments/public-works/proiects-studies/arboretum-area-transportation plan Hi Mr. Zahler, Thank you for the questions regarding project. All of the traffic study information will be packaged and made available on the website at the end of the study. Per your request, I'm attaching the preliminary traffic analysis information for the Highway S/Minnewashta Pkwy. intersection from the study: 1. Draft memo dated 3/9/20 Re: Minnesota Landscape Arboretum - Event Traffic Sensitivity Analysis a. This is the traffic analysis that was completed regarding Arboretum events and looks at how the intersection would function with peak event traffic. b. I'm available to set up a meeting with staff to discuss the technical aspects of this document. For example, the analysis includes an application of the peak event traffic to weekday mornings, but we know that there are few if any major Arboretum events held on weekday mornings. Based on the feedback we've received as part of this fourth phase of public engagement, we are working on additional traffic analysis and will make that available to the public when it is ready. Additional traffic study work will likely be recommended as a next step for the City and/or MnDOT to pursue if needed as the project moves forward. Minnewashta Parkway residents were included in the public engagement plan in following ways: 1. 2 representatives on the 16 member Stakeholder Advisory Committee that met 4 times throughout the study process. 2. 28 residents/properties closest to the intersection were invited to participate in the subarea/neighborhood meetings throughout the study process. These meetings were intended to be smaller groups to reach out more directly to property owners closest to Highway S. 3. All Minnewashta Parkway residents between Highway 5 and Highway 7 were included in the direct mailing for each of the 4 open houses - 550+ residents/properties. a. Here is the link to the Open House summary from the 7/16/2019 meeting: httpso//www.co.carver.mn.us/home/showpublisheddocument?id=18467 i. We received comments from residents on the existing issues at the Hwy 5/Minnewashta Pkwy intersection. b. The Highway 5 information from the 12/17/19 Open House and other meetings is available under the Additional Information page: i. Link to the open house boards (page 7): https://www.co.carver.mn.uslhome/showpublisheddocument?id=19195 ii. Link to the Highway 5 layout from meeting: https://www.co.carver.mn.us/home/showpublisheddocument?id=19211 c. Here is the link to the Open House summary from the 12/17/19 meeting: hhttps: //www.co.carver.mn.us/home/showpublisheddocument?id=20897. i. We received a total of 123 responses regarding the Highway 5/Minnewashta Pkwy. intersection, with 92 in favor of the signalized full access option. ii. These responses were processed with paper forms because it was an in -person meeting, but I can dig in to see how many specific residents from the Minnewashta Pkwy neighborhood participated. A" & Sftv,1 wAICP I Sr. Transportation Planner Carver County Public Works Mobile 612.360.7422 1 Emaff astenson0co.carver.mn.us From: Kevin Zahler <k zahler(a)hotmail.com> Sent: Friday, December 04, 2020 12:29 PM To: Angie Stenson <astensonnia co.carver.mn.us> Cc: 'Bender, George' <GBenderPci.chanhassen.mn.us>; 'Alan Branhagen' <abranhagPumn.edu>; Langenbach, Diane (DOT) <diane.langenbach(@state.mn.us>; moexx004(@umn.edu Subject: RE: Minnewashta Parkway httos://www.co.carver.mn.us/departments/public-works/proiects-studies/arboretum-area-transportation- plan This email was received from outside of Carver County Thanks Angie, Can you tell me where I can access the traffic studies for the related highways involved? In addition where can I find the traffic study for Minnewashta Parkway? Surely there was one performed? If not, how can that be implemented? Plus, what kind of survey was performed for Minnewashta Parkway neighborhoods, where can I see these results? Best regards, Kevin Zahler +1-612-618-9817 kizahler(@hotmail.com From: Angie Stenson <astensonna co.carver.mn.us> Sent: Tuesday, December 1, 2020 12:44 PM To: 'Kevin Zahler' <kizahler(@hotmail.com> Cc: 'Bender, George'<GBender@ci.chanhassen.mn.us>;'Alan Branhagen' <abranhag@umn.edu>; Langenbach, Diane (DOT) <diane.langenbachPstate.mn.us>; moexx004Pumn.edu Subject: RE: Minnewashta Parkway https //www.co.carver.mn.us/departments/public-works/projects-studies/arboretum-area-transportation plan Hi Kevin, Thank you for your feedback. I'll pass your comments on to the rest of the project team and make sure they are included in the feedback from this round of public engagement. Avg & 5f6010*vAICP I Sr. Transportation Planner Carver County Public Works Mobile 612.360.7422 1 Email astensonaco.carver.mn.us From: Kevin Zahler <kIzahlerna hotmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, December 01, 2020 9:36 AM To: Angie Stenson <astensonl@co.carver.mn.us> Cc: 'Bender, George' <GBender(@ci.chanhassen.mn.us>; 'Alan Branhagen' <abranhagl@umn.edu>; Langenbach, Diane (DOT) <diane.lan2enbacht7a state.mn.us>; moexx004Pumn.edu Subject: RE: Minnewashta Parkwayhttps7//www.co.carver.mn.us/departments/public-works/projects-studies/arboretum-area-transportation- plan This email was received from outside of Carver County Hello Angie, Thank you for your previous response and the recent open house. It was well organized and presented. However, I am disappointed that Minnewashta Parkway was not included as one of the neighborhoods. I do see a lot of recent comments on Nextdoor Minnewashta concerning both the entrance to the Arboretum and the speed limits on the parkway. I think 95% have significant concerns with the plans you are presenting. This plan is a huge mistake and not only a disservice to the residence in and around Minnewashta Parkway but also to the folks that use highway 5 east and west. I get that there should be a traffic light at highway 5 and Minnewashta Parkway for the safety and convenience of the parkway residents. However, we really do not need to encourage even more traffic at that intersection. I understand improvements need to be made to 82nd street to make it viable, however, there is an even greater expense to make Minnewashta Parkway the main entrance into the Arboretum. Why would this plan choose to inconvenience the parkway residents as well as the huge traffic flow on highway 5? It simply doesn't make sense. The traffic on Minnewashta Parkway is already a high flow and at a very high speed. On and event day people along Minnewashta Parkway will not be able to get out of their driveways and neighborhoods. I went to the city council last year and asked that they help with; reduce the speed limit and enforce limits. I have not seen any action in that regard. Now that the parkway is open again after the summer construction the speeding cars have returned, actually even during construction it was still a race track. We know they city can reduce the speed limit, should follow the lead on Minneapolis and St. Paul, but so far no action. Please discuss with your partners the possibility of changing the direction of this plan. If it continues it will absolutely deteriorate the quality of life for the residence in and around Minnewashta Parkway! This is an irresponsible act and we need help. I also filled in the survey questions at the website, below are some of my comments made there. 1. 1 understand the reason for a planned stop light at Highway 5 and Minnewashta Parkway. However, I am very strongly against the entrance to the Arboretum at Minnewashta Parkway. Minnewashta Parkway has already become a race track for many drivers, bypassing between highway 7 and highway 5. It is extremely unfair to the residents in and around Minnewashta Parkway to subject us to even more traffic. You have very acceptable alternatives at 82nd street and this would also greatly benefit those needing to use highway 5. 2. It seems that the residents on Minnewashta Parkway area have not been considered. Why would you implement a plan that severely impacts the parkway neighborhood? To intentionally route heavy traffic through the Minnewashta Parkway neighborhood is extremely unreasonable and shows no concern for the residents. There are clear alternatives that work for Minnewashta Parkway. Plus, even better for the highway 5 corridor users. Please reconsider 82nd Street! Best regards, Kevin Zahler +1-612-618-9817 kizahlerPhotmail.com From: Angie Stenson <astenson(cDco.carver.mn.us> Sent: Wednesday, September 9, 2020 3:48 PM To: 'Kevin Zahler' <kizahler(@hotmail.com> Cc: 'Bender, George' <GBender(@ci.chanhassen.mn.us>; Alan Branhagen<abranhag(@umn.edu>;'Langenbach, Diane (DOT)' <diane.langenbach( state.mn.us> Subject: RE: Minnewashta Parkway https://www.co.carver.mn.us/departments/public-works/projects-studies/arboretum-a plan Hi Kevin, The 82nd St. entrance option is being studied as a secondary, additional access to the Arboretum; the primary main entrance would still come from Highway S. The primary entrance to the Arboretum is not planned or intended to be relocated from Highway 5. I touched base with Arboretum staff and have additional information to share regarding the 82nd St. accesses. The new access I circled in red is likely quite a few years out (requires new County Road) and would be to serve the future fully developed Chinese Garden and other areas on the south side of the Arboretum. The entrance to Farm at the Arb and Bee Center, also off of 82nd St./Highway 41, is planned to be improved sooner but would be primarily for events and classes at those buildings, or as a member -only entrance on busy days in the spring, summer, or fall. None of the 82nd St. entrances are planned to be open in the winter to serve the main buildings due to the narrow and icy road conditions on 3 Mile Drive. The site is also not set up to route all Arboretum visitors onto 3 Mile drive without causing major traffic problems. From a study perspective, one of our goals is to improve access and safety for the neighborhood at the Highway 5/Minnewashta Pkwy. intersection, as we heard many concerns from residents. MnDOT is a partner on the study and has indicated the existing traffic at the intersection would not warrant a signal. It would be unlikely for a signal to be installed at Highway 5 and Minnewashta Pkwy without the addition of the fourth leg of the Arboretum entrance to the intersection of Minnewashta Pkwy. Thank you for your comments and participation in the study to this point. The study will include one more round of public engagement, likely in late Fall, where the proposed concepts will be provided for review. You can sign up for project updates at this link to receive emails regarding upcoming meetings or newly available information. Upon completion of the study, the City Council and County Board will be requested to adopt the study with the proposed improvement concepts. Agencies would then pursue funding opportunities for the projects identified in the study. Please contact me or the other staff copied on this email (George Bender - City of Chanhassen; Alan Branhagen - MN Landscape Arboretum Director of Operations; Diane Langenbach - MnDOT South Area Engineer) with questions about the study. A"Le, Sf AICP I Sr. Transportation Planner Carver County Public Works Mobile 612.360.7422 1 Email astensonaco.carver.mn.us From: Kevin Zahler <k1zahlerC@hotmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, September 08, 2020 1:40 PM To: Angie Stenson <astenson(@co.carver.mn.us>; 'Howley, Charles' <CHowley(cDci.chanhassen.mn.us>; moexx004mDumn.edu; 'Bender, George' <GBender(@ci.chanhassen.mn.us> Cc: pazahler(aDgmail.com; PublicWorksContact<CarverCountyPW(@co.carver.mn.us>; 'Alan Branhagen' <abranhag(a)umn.edu>;'Ryan, Elise' <ERvan(d)ci.chanhassen.mn.us> Subject: RE: Minnewashta Parkway httos://www.co.carver.mn.us/departments/public-works/projects-studies/arboretum-area-transportation- i>J.d11 This email was received from outside of Carver County Thanks Angie, Great to hear that Minnewashta Parkway is not a done deal. What is the next decision point and how can residents participate? I like the 82nd street option for numerous reasons as previously mentioned. Curious why the bee entrance is not one of the options since it already exists and has been used in the past. In any case, there must be good reasons and a clear path to not further congest Highway 5 and Minnewashta Parkway. Best regards, Kevin Zahler +1-612-618-9817 kozahlerlahotmail.com From: Angie Stenson <astenson(@co.carver.mn.us> Sent: Tuesday, September 8, 2020 1:05 PM To: 'Kevin Zahler' <kizahlerna hotmail.com>;'Howley, Charles'<CHowley(a)ci.chanhassen.mn.us>; moexx004(c)umn.edu;'Bender, George' <GBender(a)ci.chanhassen.mn.us> Cc: pazahler(@gmail.com; PublicWorksContact <CarverCountyPW(@co.carver.mn.us>; 'Alan Branhagen' <abranhag(@umn.edu>; Ryan, Elise <ERvan(a)ci.chanhassen.mn.us> Subject: RE: Minnewashta Parkway https://www.co.carver.mn.us/departments/public-works/projects-studies/arboretum-area-transportation- plan Hi Kevin, Thank you for the additional observations and questions and for taking time to review the information. One item to note is an additional, secondary entrance to the Arboretum is being studied and considered from 82nd St. The improvements to 82nd St., converting it to a paved County Road, would need to occur for a public entrance to be serviced from 82nd St. The 82nd St. concepts can be viewed at this link: https: // /cisbolton- menk.com/inputlD/assets/pdfs/82ndLayouts 11x17.pdf. The future entrance would be located at the existing maintenance entrance. I see this is not clearly labeled on these maps; I will work to get these labeled better. Below is a screenshot to better indicate this future access location - circled in red. ARBORETUM ENTRANCE CONCEPT 2�11 , - � •ram CITY STREET CONNECTION CONCEPT r �J �r I Minnesota Landscape' Arboretum' hom -Z •ems_ Lriy. I appreciate your feedback and will make sure to share your questions and concerns with the full study team. A" & Ste*uso-PLAICP I Sr. Transportation Planner Carver County Public Works Mobile 612-360.7422 1 Email astensonla7co.carver.mn.us From: Kevin Zahler <kzahler a@hotmail.com> Sent: Monday, September 07, 2020 4:40 PM To: Angie Stenson <astenson(@co.carver.mn.us>; 'Howley, Charles' <CHowley CcDci.chanhassen.mn.us>; moexx004(@umn.edu; 'Bender, George' <GBender(@ci.chanhassen.mn.us> Cc: pazahler(@gmail.com; PublicWorksContact<CarverCountyPW(a)co.carver.mn.us>;'Alan Branhagen' <abranhag(@umn.edu>; Ryan, Elise <ERyan�ci.chanhassen.mn.us> Subject: RE: Minnewashta Parkway ALM This email was received from outside of Carver County Hi Angie, Thank very much for your detailed response, this helps provide some clarity. However, I remain deeply concerned and join many of my Minnewashta neighbors with concern for this potential plan. I have studied the information you have sent, my additional observations and questions; 1. It appears that the 82"d street option was not considered, I did not see that in the information you referred to. It seems the best option with access from highway 41 and Bavaria road and very little impact to any residents. It seems like the most unobtrusive, most user friendly, most traffic friendly option. Gets the traffic off of the main busy road and provides a very relaxed entrance to the Arboretum. 2. The Arboretum is a large naturalist area, Minnewashta Parkway is a Parkway, with residents along its length, a beach, a park, a walking/biking path and an entrance to the Arboretum. I feel it should remain part of the naturalist area. 3. By making Minnewashta Parkway the main entrance to the Arboretum you are inviting even more traffic on the parkway. We already suffer from high traffic volumes, industrial trucks, high speeds and unsafe conditions. This new entrance will compound those problems and make a residential neighborhood even more dangerous. 4. Why make the traffic on highway 5 even more difficult. My guess is the folks living west of Minnewashta Parkway along 5 don't want to see this additional road block. It just seems very wrong to further penalize the residents along Minnewashta Parkway, we are already enduring a lack of consideration for our residential neighborhood. Plus, realtors have told me that our property is devaluing due to the "highway" in front of my home. This is not fair to the residence and I hope other considerations can be made, especially when there is an excellent alternative. Best regards, Kevin Zahler +1-612-618-9817 kzahler(c�hotmail.com From: Angie Stenson <astenson(@co.carver.mn.us> Sent: Thursday, September 3, 2020 5:07 PM To: 'Kevin Zahler' <kizahlert7a hotmail.com>;'Howley, Charles' <CHowley(c)ci.chanhassen.mn.us>;'moexx004(@umn.edu' <moexx004(@umn.edu>; 'Bender, George' <GBender(@ci.chanhassen.mn.us> Cc: 'pazahler(d)gmail.com'<pazahler(@gmail.com>; PublicWorksContact <CarverCountyPW(cDco.carver.mn.us>; 'Alan Branhagen' <abranhagna umn.edu> Subject: RE: Minnewashta Parkway https://www.co.carver.mn.us/departments/public-works/projects-studies/arboretum-area-transportation- plan Hi Mr. Zahler, The FAQ document for Minnewashta Pkwy is now available on the website (and attached): httDs://www.co.carver.mn.us/home/showdocument?id=20579. We hope this is helpful information. I'm available to discuss questions you may have about the study and the proposed concept A" & Sfewso-$�AICP I Sr. Transportation Planner Carver County Public Works Mobile 612.360.7422 1 Email astensonaco.carver.mn. uS From: Angie Stenson Sent: Wednesday, September 02, 2020 1:52 PM To: 'Kevin Zahler' <kizahler(@hotmail.com>; Howley, Charles<CHowley(a)ci.chanhassen.mn.us>; moexx004(@umn.edu; Bender, George <GBenderna d.chanhassen.mn.us> Cc: pazahlerPgmail.com; PublicWorksContact<CarverCountyPW(@co.carver.mn.us>; Alan Branhagen <abranhag(@umn.edu> Subject: RE: Minnewashta Parkway https://www.co.carver.mn.us/departments/public-works/projects-studies/arboretum-area-transportation- plan Good afternoon Mr. Zahler, Thank you for taking time to reach out to us about regarding the Arboretum Area Transportation Plan and specifically the Highway 5/Minnewashta Parkway intersection concept. You are correct that as part of the study and consistent with the Arboretum Master Planwe have developed a concept that shows the future relocation of the Arboretum entrance to the southern leg of the Minnewashta Pkwy./Highway 5 intersection. The study concept can be viewed at this link: https: //www.co.carver.mn.us/home/showdocument?id=20439 The best documents from the study to review in relationship to the concept would be the boards from the December 2019 open house at this link: https: //www.co.carver.mn.us/home/showdocument?id=19195. In addition to the main study website, many of the documents from earlier in the study have been moved to the Additional Information tab at this link: https:/4www.co.carver.mn.us/departments4Public-works rojects-studies/arboretum-area-transportation-plan/arboretum- area-transportatio n-plan-additional-information I've provided some additional background information below related to the proposed concept. In addition, we are working on a Frequently Asked Questions document for the Highway 5/Minnewashta Pkwy intersection that I will send your way when available, which will make the information and links more accessible in one place. • Feedback from residents so far in the study process indicated a high desire for an intersection control of some type at the Minnewashta Pkwy./Highway 5 intersection. Many residents stated the inability for safe access onto and off of Highway 5 with the current design. Safety issues are also well documented at this intersection. o The study considered a traffic signal and roundabout option at this intersection location. The signal operates best for Highway 5 traffic. The amount of current and projected traffic on Minnewashta Pkwy; however, does not warrant a traffic signal at this location, which is a requirement for signals on State highways. The addition of the Arboretum entrance as the 4th leg of the intersection makes a traffic signal possible by meeting the traffic warrants for a signal on a State highway. • The concept for the Minnewashta Pkwy/Highway 5 intersection is proposed in order to improve operations for Minnewashta Pkwy. residents and the Arboretum. o The backups from Arboretum event traffic experienced today would be mitigated with changes to the main entrance and on site ticketing changes. Event traffic was studied (October 2019) and the new intersection with expanded capacity on Highway 5 and turn lanes to Minnewashta Pkwy. and a new Arboretum entrance would be able to handle peak event traffic without creating the long backups experienced today on Hwy S. For example, a second westbound lane on Highway 5 with a right turn lane onto Minnewashta Pkwy would be a significant improvement for residents that currently wait in westbound traffic west of Highway 41. We welcome comments on this information, as we are still in a concept and study phase to determine the proposed improvements. Based on your feedback and other similar comments, we are working with study partners to take a closer look at this intersection concept. Angi & Sfe&So-wAICP I Sr. Transportation Planner Carver County Public Works Mobile 612.360.7422 1 Email astensonoco.carver.mn.us From: Kevin Zahler <k zahler()a hotmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, September 01, 2020 1:43 PM To: Angie Stenson <astenson(u)co.carver.mn.us>; PublicWorksContact<CarverCountyPW(a)co.carver.mn.us>; Howley, Charles <CHowley(a)ci.chanhassen.mn.us>; moexx004(ilumn.edu; Bender, George <GBender(@ci.chanhassen.mn.us> Cc: pazahler(@gmail.com Subject: Minnewashta Parkway https://www.co.carver.mn.us/departments/public-works/projects-studies/arboretum-area-transportation-plan This email was received from outside of Carver County Hello All, I have reviewed the site listed above and cannot find information on a revised entrance to the Arboretum. However, I have heard that a plan might be in place to make the entrance to the Arboretum an intersection with Minnewashta Parkway. Is this correct, where can I find more information? Minnewashta Parkway has already absorbed more hardship than it should as a residential street and we need to take steps to not make this situation even more intolerable. Chanhassen has promised more speed surveillance and a possibility of lower speed limits, neither one has materialized even during this construction phase. Even without the highway 5 to 7 bypass during construction it has become a bit of a race track! I am vehemently against using Minnewashta Parkway for the entrance to the Arboretum. I am strong supporter of the Arboretum but they do have very reasonable alternatives for an entrance. I think West 82"d street by the red barn would be a much better alternative Thank you for considering this request and appreciate receiving aby information for clarity on this situation. Best regards, Kevin Zahler Pathfinder GS Corporation 6651 Minnewashta Parkway Excelsior. MN 55331 USA kizahler(@hotmail.com Alternate email: k zahlerl(a)gmail.com Office & Mobile phone +1-612-618-9817 WhatsApp, WeChat, Viber Skype: kevinzahler Make a difference! From: dbeouette(u)comcast.net To: "Kevin Zahler"; "Peter Moe"; Public Comments Cc: "uores Joan T. A. Gabel - Office of the President"; "Monigue MacKenzie"; "Alan Branhagen"; koowell(a)umn.edu; sviogum(&umn.edu; tia(&umn.edu; rbeeson(aumn.edu; "Mary Davenport"; kliher(aumn.edu; hsu(a)umn.edu; kenvanya(aumn.edu; mayeron(&umn.edu; dmcmillan(Ebumn.edu; "Damn Rosha"; rrs(a)umn.edu; Bender. George; "Langenbach. Diane (DOT)"; "Eric Johnson"; Howley. Charles; "Darin Mielke"; "Angie Stenson"; "Brian Buhr"; "Brian Steeves"; "provost Rachel Croson - Executive Vice President & Provost"; "Vera Westrum-Ostrom": "Michael Berthelsen"; "Lyndon Robjent"; "Ross Tillman"; Ryan, Elise; Johnston. Heather; Workman. Tom; dhemze(alco.carver.mn.us; McDonald. Jerry; Campion, Dan; Schubert, Haley; Rehm, Lucy Subject: RE: Arboretum entrance at Minnewashta Parkway https://www.co.carver.mn.us/departments/public-works/projects-studies/arboretum-area-transportation-plan Date: Monday, February 8, 2021 4:23:29 PM Thank you, Kevin. To those on this note apart of the planning team, I am in support of Kevin's continued representation of us as neighbors. In addition, as we have been seeing and hearing, there hasn't been anything offered to the Minnewashta Parkway concerns. Why is that? No solutions or plans will be perfect, but I would hope that at some point there is consideration for ALL that are affected by the plans. Thank you for the continued dialogue and considerations of what can be done to help mitigate the concerns from our side of this project. Thanks, Debbie Debbie Bequette 952-237-7280 From: Kevin Zahler <kjzahler@hotmail.com> Sent: Monday, February 08, 2021 3:10 PM To: 'Peter Moe' <moexx004@umn.edu>; publiccomments@ci.chanhassen.mn.us Cc:'upres Joan T. A. Gabel - Office of the President' <upres@umn.edu>; 'Monique MacKenzie' <moniquem@umn.edu>; 'Alan Branhagen' <abranhag@umn.edu>; kpowell@umn.edu; sviggum@umn.edu; tja@umn.edu; rbeeson@umn.edu; 'Mary Davenport' <mdavenpo@umn.edu>; kliher@umn.edu; hsu@umn.edu; kenyanya@umn.edu; mayeron@umn.edu; dmcmillan@umn.edu;'Darrin Rosha' <drosha@umn.edu>; rrs@umn.edu;'Bender, George'<GBender@ci.chanhassen.mn.us>;'Langenbach, Diane (DOT)'<diane.langenbach@state.mn.us>;'Eric Johnson' <Eric.Johnson@bolton-menk.com>;'Howley, Charles' <CHowley@ci.chanhassen.mn.us>;'Darin Mielke' <dmielke@co.carver.mn.us>;'Angie Stenson'<astenson@co.carver.mn.us>;'Brian Buhr' <bbuhr@umn.edu>;'Brian Steeves' <stee0168@umn.edu>;'provost Rachel Croson - Executive Vice President & Provost' <Provost@ u m n.edu>; 'Vera Westrum-Ostrom' <verawo@umn.edu>;'Michael Berthelsen' <berth004@umn.edu>;'Lyndon Robjent' <Irobjent@co.carver.mn.us>;'RossTillman' <Ross.Tillman@bolton-menk.com>;'Ryan, Elise' <ERyan @ci.chanhassen.mn.us>; 'Johnston, Heather' <hjohnston@ci.chanhassen.mn.us>; tworkman@co.carver.mn.us; dhemze@co.carver.mn.us; JMcDonald@ci.chanhassen.mn.us; dcampion @ci.chanhassen.mn.us; hschubert@ci.chanhassen.mn.us; Irehm@ci.chanhassen.mn.us Subject: RE: Arboretum entrance at Minnewashta Parkway https://www.co.carver.mn.us/departments/public-works/projects-studies/arboretum- area-transportation-plan Hello Peter, Thank you for your email, I appreciate receiving your thoughts. As you have requested, I have copied the Minnewashta Parkway neighbors and also public comments for tonight's meeting. However, I feel that your response is simply echoing what the planning team has already stated and referenced in my email to the University of Minnesota. I feel there is more to be gained by working together to find real solutions with all stake holders. Minnewashta Parkway neighbors have largely been left out of the planning process. I have added comments to each of the points in your letter today, please see below. There is more to be gained by partnering with your closest neighbor and maintain that arboretum feel with your closest neighbor! 1. The Minnesota Landscape Arboretum is an international research and cultural center and a major regional destination. Visitor counts of 5,000 on peak event days, and 460,000 annually require safe, clear, and convenient access from a major arterial highway. [[kjz]] I absolutely agree and have stated numerous times that we are fortunate to have such a jewel for a neighbor! However, your numbers speak for themselves, huge numbers that will contribute to the deterioration of our neighborhood. We prefer to work as partners in preservation of a natural habitat including our neighborhood. 2. Primary function of the new Arboretum entrance is to increase safety on Trunk Highway 5 (TH 5) by minimizing vehicles queuing on TH 5 as they wait to enter the Arboretum. Based on a review of two years of data (2017-2019), more than 80% of the Arboretum's visitors are coming from the east, using TH 5 as the primary approach to the site. ((kjz]] your research was 100% transparent to your neighbors in the Minnewashta Parkway neighborhood. It isn't too late, let's work together to create an environment that works for everybody. 3. In December 2020, Carver County completed a localized traffic study of the street network north of TH 5, west of TH 41, and east of Rolling Acres Road using data from 2017-2019. The data shows about 2,200 to 2,500 vehicles moving north -south daily on Lake Minnewashta Parkway between TH 5 on the south and TH 7 on the north. The new intersection on TH 5 is forecast to bring an estimated additional 40-60 vehicle trips on Lake Minnewashta Parkway north of TH 5, with low counts happening on peak season weekdays and higher counts on peak season weekends. This represents an increase of about 2% over current traffic using the parkway. [(kjz]] As you know, the study completed in December, 2020 did not consider a traffic study of Minnewashta Parkway. That study only occurred after the November open house when we asked about the impact to our neighborhood and that information was not released until January 21, 2021 neighborhood meeting. It was loud and clear at that 1121121 meeting that not one resident believed or accepted the study results. It is not difficult to understand that when you have a 1 mile long backup now to enter the arboretum that this problem will not be resolved by adding a traffic light. With this significant of a backup we believe that drivers will look for alternative routes, obviously, that will be Minnewashta Parkway. We are very concerned with risking our future on a study that nobody believes. I feel the increase of 2% is way off the mark, and, in any case, we are already faced with 37% of the traffic volume from nonresidents. This is a point we have brought to the attention of Chanhassen in the past. Although the 2% is doubtful, even a 2% increase is more than we should be exposed to. 4. Due to MnDOT's design requirements relative to road alignment and traffic volume, MnDOT will only install a signal at Lake Minnewashta Parkway if the Arboretum's primary entrance is relocated directly across the parkway. [(kjz]] We have discussed this point numerous times and MDOT has not provided any rationale on why a 3 way intersection cannot have a traffic light. We only need to look down the road to see examples of what is not allowed?? Hwy 7 & Oak street, Hwy 7 & Old Market rd.,Hwy 7 & highway 44 Overall community reaction is that the traffic signal is an essential safety improvement. Recognizing most visitors are headed east, Arboretum Operations will direct visitors to leave from Arboretum Drive (east), not the west exit (aligned with Lake Minnewashta Parkway). 5. Redirecting the Arboretum's major entrance to West 82nd Street does not work for Arboretum visitors or operations. Most of the Arboretum destinations are located near the TH5 corridor. Indirect routing for the bulk of Arboretum traffic will significantly alter travel flow, diminish the Arboretum's gardenesque character, and create unnecessary delays for the Arboretum's maintenance and operations vehicles. Increased internal traffic would incur additional investment in infrastructure, roads, and maintenance, as well as operational changes. (]kjz]] And yet it is OK to impose increase traffic on Minnewashta Parkway? We need to work together with a more acceptable plan for all. 6. Counties invest in their major transportation corridors every 20-30 years. City, county and federal funding has been secured for this project. Given the growth of the surrounding communities in the last 15 years, conditions on the ground meet required design standards for traffic volumes and intersection alignment. Based on these factors, the recommended intersection is the best possible option. [(kjz]] At the expense of our neighborhood. Planning should include all stake holders, it is 100% unclear to me why we have not been involved in a more transparent process? Best regards, Kevin Zahler +1-612-618-9817 kizahler(@hotmail.com From: Peter Moe <moexx004(@umn.edu> Sent: Monday, February 8, 2021 10:31 AM To: Kevin Zahler <kizahler(@hotmail.com> Cc: upres Joan T. A. Gabel - Office of the President <unres/7a umn.edu>; Monique MacKenzie <moniauem(a)umn.edu>; Alan Branhagen <abranhaR(cDumn.edu>; kr)owell(@umn.edu; svipgum(@umn.edu; tia(@umn.edu; rbeeson(@umn.edu; Mary Davenport <mdavenpo(@umn.edu>; kliherl7a umn.edu; hsu(@umn.edu; kenyanya(@umn.edu; mayeron(@umn.edu; dmcmillam@umn.edu; Darrin Rosha <drosha(@umn.edu>; rrs(@umn.edu; Bender, George <GBender(@ci.chanhassen.mn.us>; Langenbach, Diane (DOT)<diane.laInge nbach(@state.mn.us>; Eric Johnson <Eric.Johnson(@bolton-menk.com>; Howley, Charles <CHowley(@ci.chanhassen.mn.us>; Darin Mielke <dmielke(@co.carver.mn.us>; Angie Stenson <astenson(@co.carver.mn.us>; Brian Buhr <bbuhr(@umn.edu>; Brian Steeves <stee0168(@umn.edu>; provost Rachel Croson - Executive Vice President & Provost <provost(@umn.edu>; Vera Westrum-Ostrom <verawo(@umn.edu>; Michael Berthelsen <berth004(@umn.edu>; Lyndon Robjent <Irobjent(@co.carver.mn.us>; Ross Tillman <Ross.Tillman(c bolton-menk.com>; Ryan, Elise <ERvan(@ci.chanhassen.mn.us>; Johnston, Heather<hiohnston(@ci.chanhassen.mn.us>; tworkman(@co.carver.mn.us; dhemze(@co.carver.mn.us; JMcDonald(@ci.chanhassen.mn.us; dcamoion(aci.chanhassen.mn.us; hschubert(@ci.chanhassen.mn.us; Irehm(@ci.chanhassen.mn.us Subject: Re: Arboretum entrance at Minnewashta Parkway area -transportation -plan Mr. Zahler, The University of Minnesota and Landscape Arboretum response to your 01/29/2021 message is attached. Please forward this response to your neighborhood group. The U of M and Arboretum will start design work on the new Arboretum entrance in coming months. A public information meeting will be scheduled and all Arboretum neighbors will be invited. Sincerely, Peter Peter C. Moe Director University of Minnesota Landscape Arboretum 3675 Arboretum Drive Chaska, MN 55318 USA moexx004Pumn.edu Office Phone and Fax (612) 301-1246 Cell - 952 220-4923 Home Phone (952) 474-2236 On Fri, Jan 29, 2021 at 4:44 PM Kevin Zahler <kizahler(@hotmail.com> wrote Dear President Gabel, Regents and Arboretum Management Staff, I am writing to you to plead for help to bring a sense of reasonableness to this situation. The residents in and around Minnewashta Parkway have been informed that the University of Minnesota has decided to move the arboretum entrance to Minnewashta Parkway. Speaking for myself, I feel that the arboretum is a true jewel that we can all be proud of and we annually support the arboretum. So, given this proud heritage it seems a disconnect to be declining the Minnewashta Parkway environment for the benefit to the arboretum. This is especially concerning when there exists a perfectly acceptable entrance on a very low traffic street where the arboretum owns most of the surrounding property. An existing entrance surely is less costly than a new entrance, plus, the existing entrance already has traffic light control from highway 41. The neighborhood residents in and around Minnewashta Parkway are arboretum neighbors and it seems very hard to believe the University of Minnesota would deteriorate a neighborhood for the benefit of a naturalist environment. If you have time the trailing emails provide more information. In spite of the counter points from Carver County the residents were nearly unanimous in opposition to an arboretum entrance at Minnewashta Parkway, however, we do need help with traffic control. Hope you can add some guidance to this to help your neighbors! Thank you. Best regards, Kevin Zahler +1-612-618-9817 kizahler(a�hotmail.com From: Angie Stenson <astenson(@co.carver.mn.us> Sent: Thursday, January 28, 2021 2:24 PM To: 'Kevin Zahler' <kizahlerfa@hotmail.Com> Cc: Bender, George <GBender(@ci.chanhassen.mn.us>; Langenbach, Diane (DOT)<diane.langenbach(@state.mn.us>; Eric Johnson <Eric.Johnsont7a bolton-menk.com>; Howley, Charles <CHowley(@ci.chanhassen.mn.us>; Peter Moe <moexx004(@umn.edu>; Darin Mielke <dmielke(@co.carver.mn.us> Subject: RE: Minnewashta Parkway httos://www.co.carver.mn.us/departments/public-works/projects-studies/arboretum-area-transoortation- plan Hi Kevin, Thank you for your ongoing interest in the Arboretum Area Transportation Plan and for participating in the neighborhood meeting last week. The information from the meeting including a link to the presentation video and slides are available on the project website. I appreciate the feedback and have responded with additional information from the project team related to each takeaway below. A". & Sie*60-*vAICP I Sr. Transportation Planner Carver County Public Works Mobile 612.360.7422 1 Email astensonoco.carver.mn.us From: Kevin Zahler <kzahlert7a hotmail.com> Sent: Monday, January 25, 2021 9:39 AM To: grvan(@ci.chanhassen.mn.us; JMCDonald(@ci.chanhassen.mn.us; dcampion(@ci.chanhassen.mn.us; hschubert(@ci.chanhassen.mn.us; Irehm(a)ci.chanhassen.mn.us; Gayle Degler <gdeeler(ci)co.carver.mn.us>; Tim Lynch <tivnch(c)co.carver.mn.us>; John Fahey <ifahey(apco.carver.mn.us>; Tom Workman <tworkman(@co.carver.mn.us>; Angie Stenson <astenson(@co.carver.mn.us>; Langenbach, Diane (DOT)<diane.langenbach(@state.mn.us>; 'Bender, George'<GBender(a)ci.chanhassen.mn.us>; moexx004(@umn.edu; Eric Johnson <Eric.Johnson(a bolton-menk.com>;'Alan Branhagen' <abranhag(@umn.edu> Cc: 'Howley, Charles' <CHowley(@ci.chanhassen.mn.us> Subject: RE: Minnewashta Parkway https://www.co.car .12im This email was received from outside of Carver County Dear Arboretum Area Transportation Planning, Minnesota Landscape Arboretum, Chanhassen Mayor, Council Members and Carver County Board, Thank you for the presentation on January 21, 2020 concerning the Arboretum Area Transportation Plan. I appreciate your openness to discuss the details and the long hours you all have put into this planning so far. This virtual meeting along with the recent past calls I attended have helped a lot to bring more clarity to this plan and impact on Minnewashta Parkway. Our past exchange of emails and past discussions are further below for reference. I am addressing this to all of you; County, City and Arboretum as I believe it is not too late to meet the needs of all involved. Following are my "take aways" from the Thursday evening meeting. 1. We heard during this meeting that 97% of the past respondents favored a traffic light at the intersection of highway 5 and Minnewashta Parkway. I think most people attending the meeting agreed that a traffic light is needed in the interest of public safety. However, I did not hear a single supporter out of the +/- 60 attendees on Thursday that agreed to this also becoming the entrance to the Arboretum. In fact, I heard nearly unanimous concern with this proceeding. a. 92/123 (75%) participants at the December 2019 open house preferred a signal over a roundabout. 27/30 residents from the Minnewashta Parkway neighborhood preferred a signal. b. 41/49 (83%) respondents Supported or Partially Supported the vision for improvements on this segment of Highway 5 at the December 2020 open house. Only 5 participants did not support the plan with 3 from the Minnewashta Parkway neighborhood. c. Overall feedback from residents has indicated that a majority want a permanent traffic signal. MnDOT will n allow a permanent signal at the 3-legged Highway 5/Minnewashta Parkway intersection with the current or projected traffic. Partnering with the Arboretum entrance relocation as the southern leg of the intersection makes the permanent traffic signal possible, as it would then meet the MnDOT requirements. d. As you noted, we heard at the neighborhood meeting, that many Minnewashta Parkway residents are concerned about traffic rerouting to Minnewashta Parkway to access the Arboretum via relocated entrance. This is why we conducted additional traffic analysis of this possibility, which estimates less than a 2% increase in traffic to Minnewashta Parkway from Arboretum visitors. 2. We also heard that with this new entry to the Arboretum that traffic will increase on average by 40 to 60 trips per day. Of course, that is averaged and we can assume that on event days that will be significantly greater. It would help to have a better estimate on event days. a. This traffic analysis was completed for May and October — the busiest times for the Arboretum. The estimated increase is less than 2% and includes 40 additional trips per day on weekdays and 60 additional trips on weekends. b. We have completed traffic analysis for Arboretum event traffic to make sure the signal would still operate effectively. Local traffic concerns can be mitigated through specific traffic management planning, which the Arboretum has indicated would be their typical practice. 3. We also heard that on event days traffic can back up from the Arboretum entrance to the east to Century Boulevard, almost 1 mile. a. This is correct and one of the conditions that would be mitigated through the proposed improvements to Highway 5 with 4 lanes instead of 2. As per previous item, we conducted peak event traffic analysis to show this would not occur with the proposed improvements. The Arboretum is also restructuring their ticketing process, so that on busy days payment would be taken at exit. 4. Points 2 and 3 suggest that perhaps more research should go into the Minnewashta Parkway traffic survey. We heard several comments from the residents that they believe (and some tested this while on the call) that GPS routings will take more people down Minnewashta Parkway, especially considering the backups. a. As part of our recent additional analysis for Minnewashta Parkway and investigation of potential routing to the Arboretum, we also conducted Google Maps verification and found it to be 1 minute faster for traffic routing from Highway 7 westbound to stay on Highway 41 to Highway 5 versus Highway 7 to Minnewashta Parkway. b. At the meeting, several residents brought up the concern over Google Maps routing Arboretum visitors via Minnewashta Parkway; however, we cannot control how Google Maps routes traffic. 5. We also heard from MDOT that the cost of a traffic light at this intersection is a relatively very low cost at $250,000 to $300,000. We were also told that MDOT policy would not allow a traffic light without a 4 way intersection. However, this is a matter of neighborhood public safety. The residents of the Minnewashta Parkway neighborhoods are entitled to both, our neighborhood and public safety. I think both can coexist and we need help with flexibility. With todays technology traffic signals can easily be designed to not interrupt the normal traffic flow unless there is a need for entrance. MDOT has also told us that this has been a long watched intersection because of the risk of Minnewashta Parkway drivers turning east on to highway 5. a. MnDOT will not allow a permanent signal at Highway 5/Minnewashta Parkway without the traffic generated by the 4th leg of the Arboretum entrance. The existing and projected traffic without the 4th leg do not meet the established MnDOT requirements (warrants) for a signal. 6. This plan is also costing all residents financially and in turn a direct impact of tax revenues to the city and county. Property values will decline, we have already heard from realtors that the traffic along Minnewashta Parkway is a strong detraction to real-estate values. Plus, residents are being assessed for the repair of Minnewashta Parkway with the benefit to those that choose to use the parkway as a bypass between highways 5 and 7 (instead of using highway 41) and in the future to benefit the arboretum. a. The purpose of the study is to identify regional transportation improvements. Analysis from the study estimates less than a 2% increase in traffic to Minnewashta Parkway during busy Arboretum visitor months of May and October. The addition of a permanent traffic signal at Highway 5/Minnewashta Pkwy would improve access to Highway 5 and safety at the intersection for residents. b. I defer to City staff to provide information on assessments. 7. We also heard Chanhassen report that the city has been studying speed limits and perhaps considering a more city wide change. I had also discussed this with the city at a council meeting in April, 2020 due to the high amount of bypass traffic between highways 5 and 7. 1 understand that the city would like to implement an equitable plan if there is any change at all. However, Minnewashta Parkway is being adversely impacted by the bypass and also the potential for an arboretum entrance. I think the time has come to follow the lead of other cities, parkland areas and reduce speeds now. a. City staff can provide more information on this. The ability to change the speed limit may be limited by MnDOT standards required for Municipal State -Aid System funding because the roadway is designated as such. As the regulation on speed limits for City -owned roads recently changed, guidance for roads with this designation is still being determined. 8. There were comments about adding stop signs along the Minnewashta Parkway route, specifically, Kings Road was mentioned. This and other locations could also make our neighborhood more resident friendly. a. City staff can provide more information on this. Often a related concern that comes up with addition of stop signs is the noise related to accelerating vehicles. 9. In my view the 82"d street entrance is the better option for the arboretum; a. Entrance already exists. b. Lower cost to University of Minnesota. c. Safer for all. d. Moves congestion off of main roads. i. The Arboretum established in their Master Plan to relocate their main entrance to Highway 5/Minnewashta Parkway. Safety and access is their top major concern and priority. There is a recommendation for a secondary access from 82nd St, but the main entrance needs to be from Highway 5 to access the main buildings. Their 3-mile drive is not built to standards to carry all entering and exiting traffic and expanding it would require major impacts to natural conservation and wetland areas, making it infeasible. Additional questions on this can be directed to Arboretum or University of MN staff: Alan Branhagen (abranhagOumn.edu), Director of Operations; Peter Moe (moexx0040umn.edu), Executive Director; Monique MacKenzie (moniquemPurn edu), Director of Planning in the Planning, Space, and Real Estate department. We need your help to protect the Minnewashta Parkway neighborhood for the safety and well being of the residents. Plus, in the best interest of the arboretum and the city it is important to maintain Minnewashta Parkway as the walking/running/biking gateway to the arboretum, city beach and city park! I look forward to receiving your support!! Best regards, Kevin Zahler +1-612-618-9817 k!zahler(@hotmail.com From: Kevin Zahler <kjzahlerna hotmail.com> Sent: Saturday, January 16, 2021 3:16 PM To:'ervan(a)ci.chanhassen.mn.us'<eryan(@ci.chanhassen.mn.us>;'JMcDonald (@ci.chanhassen.mn.us'<JMcDonald(@ci.chanhassen.mn.us>; 'dcampion(ilci.chanhassen.mn.us' <dcampionna ci.chanhassen.mn.us>;'hschubert(@ci.chanhassen.mn.us' <hschubert(ilci.chanhassen.mn.us>; 'Irehm(@ci.chanhassen.mn.us' <Irehmaci.chanhassen.mn.us>; 'Gayle Degler' <gdegler(cDco.carver.mn.us>; 'Tim Lynch' <tlynch(@co.carver.mn.us>;'John Fahey' <jfahey(@co.carver.mn.us>;'tworkman(a)co.carver.mn.us' <tworkman(,Dco.carver.mn.us> Cc: 'Bender, George'<GBender(ilci.chanhassen.mn.us>;'Howley, Charles' <CHowleV(@ci.chanhassen.mn.us> Subject: FW: Minnewashta Parkway https://www.co.carver.mn.us/departments/public-works/projects-studies/arboretum-area-transportation- plan Dear Chanhassen Mayor, Council Members and Carver County Board, Hope all are well and settling into your new legislative year, thanks very much for your dedication to our city, I am sure it is challenging and time consuming for all of you. This is a follow on email, I last wrote to all of you on December 19, 2020 concerning the plight of Minnewashta Parkway, a lot has transpired since then. I have now included the Carver County Board as they also have a vested interest in this. The following chain of emails are exchanges between me and the Arboretum Transportation Team. They have been very helpful in communicating with us and have been very good about answering questions. I have included the entire chain of emails as it provides a lot of history, however, time consuming to go through. So, I have also summarized the key points as follows; 1. In the recent weeks we; myself and one other neighborhood resident, Scot Lacek, have had two conference calls with the highway team. This has brought more clarity to what is occurring but has left us with several open questions. 2. As you know, there will be a "final proposed improvement" meeting on 1/21/21 and hope all of you will attend. a. We understand that there will be time for follow up to this "final meeting" since some of the needed information will only be presented at that meeting. 3. A key question for our neighborhood is a traffic survey for Minnewashta Parkway with and without the arboretum entrance. We are told that this survey is now complete and will be presented on 1/21/21. a. It seems a bit late to only now consider the traffic impact on Minnewashta Parkway. In our recent conversations we discussed what a worst case scenario could be, a long line of cars on Minnewashta Parkway on event days at the arboretum. Without a doubt we all know if this plan proceeds we will definitely have a significant increase in traffic on Minnewashta Parkway. 4. It is also clear that the absence of a traffic light at the Minnewashta Parkway highway 5 intersection is a significant hazard. This week the MDOT representative informed us that this intersection was one of the more watched intersections because of the hazard. MDOT also informed us that the intersection does not qualify for a traffic light unless it is a 4 leg intersection and I think with other volume criteria. a. However, MDOT has also informed us that the cost of light at that intersection would only be $250,000 to $300,000. 1 feel quite sure with today's technology that an on -demand signal could be installed so as to not have nuisance stops for the highway 5 flow of traffic. b. I also have the hope that the interest of public safety and maintenance of our neighborhood will prevail. Adding more traffic to an already overused residential road is not in the best interest of the neighborhood or community. Policies can be changed, we just need the help of our elected representatives to accomplish this. Minnewashta Parkway is a residential and parkland area with a wonderful walk/run/bike trail that also already serves as a gateway to the arboretum. It is also the gate way to the city beach, fishing pier and park. There are many, many families with children at risk if we allow this increased traffic to occur. 5. As a Minnewashta Parkway resident I am also being assessed for the rebuild of Minnewashta Parkway. I am happy to pay this assessment for the good of our entire neighborhood. However, it seems quite unfair to assess residents of Minnewashta Parkway and then encourage even more traffic with the entrance to the arboretum and by pass between highways 5 and 7 (that is the purpose of highway 41). 6. Plus, the arboretum also has a perfectly functional alternative entrance at 82ad Street. I suspect utilization of this entrance would be at a significant savings to the arboretum. I believe that these plans will be submitted to both City of Chanhassen and to Carver County for approval. We need your help to return our neighborhood. Thanks very much for your help. Best regards, Kevin Zahler +1-612-618-9817 kizahlerPhotmail.com From: Kevin Zahler <k zahler(@hotmail.com> Sent: Thursday, January 14, 2021 3:31 PM To: 'Angie Stenson' <astensonPco.carver.mn.us> Cc: 'Bender, George'<GBenderl@ci.chanhassen.mn.us>;'Ross Tillman' <Ross.Tillman (a)bolton-menk.com>;'Scot Lacek' <scotlacek(a) hotmai I.com> Subject: RE: Minnewashta Parkway https-//www.co.carver.mn.us/departments/public-works/proiects-studies/arboretum-area-transportation plan Thanks Angie, Please see my added questions in your email below. Plus, am I correct that the Carver County Board and Chanhassen City Council needs to approve these plans before they can proceed? Will either or both have options to request modifications? FYI, at least one of the new Carver County Board members was under the impression that highway 5 and Minnewashta Parkway was going to be a roundabout. Thanks again for all of your help and cooperation, much appreciated. Best regards, Kevin Zahler +1-612-618-9817 kizahlerlaDhotmail.com From: Angie Stenson <astensonna co.carver.mn.us> Sent: Thursday, January 14, 2021 3:14 PM To: 'Kevin Zahler' <kizahler(@hotmail.com> Cc: 'Bender, George' <G Bender(@ci.chanhassen.mn.us>;'Ross Tillman' <Ross.Tillman(a)bolton-menk.com>;'Scot Lacek' <scotlacek(cDhotmail.com> Subject: RE: Minnewashta Parkway httns://www.co.carver.mn.us/departments/public-works/projects-studies/arboretum-area-transportation 42im Good afternoon, Thank you for the clarifications. We can further discuss and clarify these items at our meeting tomorrow morning. We will present the new traffic analysis regarding Minnewashta Parkway and Highway 5 existing and projected travel patterns at the January 21st virtual public meeting. The presentation slides will be made available following this meeting. f(kjz]] The meeting announcement is labeled as a final meeting, will we have an opportunity after the 1121 meeting to comment? The January 21st meeting will also include information from Arboretum staff about their plan to move the main entrance opposite Minnewashta Parkway. Their 2018 Master Plan identifies this as the preferred long-term entrance and primary access location. [[kjz]] Who can I contact to obtain this information? This study, although named Arboretum Area Transportation Plan, includes the roadways and infrastructure around the Arboretum and did not study the Arboretum's access planning or cost estimates related to their long-term plan, as those are decisions made by the University of Minnesota. We do have costs for highway improvements to Highway 5 and 82nd St., which I can provide if of interest. [fkjz]] yes, please provide. Can it be segmented as to incremental cost for each entrance? What I mean is, what is the cost if the arboretum entrance is or is not at that location? Am I correct in my understanding, the highway 5 improvements and 82nd street improvements will proceed no matter where the entrance to the arboretum is? A"g & Sfty sO- AICP I Sr. Transportation Planner Carver County Public Works Mobile 612.360.7422 1 Email astensonaco.carver.mn.us From: Kevin Zahler<kkizahler(@hotmail.com> Sent: Friday, January 08, 20214:12 PM To: Angie Stenson <astenson(@co.carver.mn.us> Cc: 'Bender, George' <GBender(@ci.chanhassen.mn.us>; 'Ross Tillman' <Ross.Tillman(o)bolton-menk.com>; 'Scot Lacek' <scotlacek(a) hotmai I.com> Subject: RE: Minnewashta Parkway https://www.co.carver.mn.us/departments/public-works/projects-studies/arboretum-area-transportation- plan This email was received from outside of Carver County Thanks Angie, Please see my clarifications below. Best regards, Kevin Zahler +1-612-618-9817 kizahler(@hotmail.com From: Angie Stenson <astenson(aDco.carver.mn.us> Sent: Friday, January 8, 2021 3:08 PM To: 'Kevin Zahler' <kizahler(@hotmail.com> Cc: Bender, George <GBender(@ci.chanhassen.mn.us>; Ross Tillman <Ross.Tillman(@bolton-menk.com>; Scot Lacek <scotlacek(cphotmail.com> Subject: RE: Minnewashta Parkway httos://www.co.carver.mn.us/departments/public-works/projects-studies/arboretum-area-transportation plan 0, A postcard went out today to all residents in the Minnewashta Pkwy. neighborhood. We will send out an e-bulletin next week to those signed up for the project email list and also add an announcement to Facebook. I received your feedback in the 12/31 email. The project team was already copied on this email, so they are informed of the comments. Regarding the two questions: 3. Can we obtain the results of the Minnewashta Parkway survey in advance of the January 21 neighborhood meeting? [fkjz]] Hope we are not miscommunicating? Over our past several email exchanges and our recent telecon 1 understood that a specific Minnewashta Parkway traffic study was being performed to analyze the impact of the arboretum entrance, i.e., a traffic study with data reviewing Minnewashta Parkway traffic with and without the arboretum entrance. In our telecon 1 thought it was stated that this information would be presented on 1121121. 1 was simply asking if we could receive this information in advance of our call on 1/15/21? 4. Can we obtain the cost comparison between the new Minnewashta Parkway entrance to the arboretum and the 82nd Street entrance? [(kjz]] We also discussed this during our earlier telecon and 1 think you said that the arboretum has this information. This request is to ask what is the cost to create the arboretum entrance at Minnewashta Parkway. 1 also asked what is the cost for the 82nd Street entrance. This cost must be zero since it already exists. However, what is the cost to make it the main entrance? 1 am simply looking for a cost comparison as 1 believe the 82nd Street entrance is a huge savings of public money. 1 realize that there are other costs associated to adjacent roads but 1 also understand those steps will occur in any case. So, very simply, which is the lower cost entrance for the arboretum only? For question 3, are you looking for survey results from the open houses? For question 4, the purpose of this study was to evaluate and recommend transportation improvements to Highway 5 and 82nd St. (and other study corridors). We have cost estimates for these improvements. Is this what you are looking for? The Arboretum's long-term entrance/exit location planning analysis and recommendation was completed as part of their 2018 Master Plan. A". & Si2wy0-wAICP I Sr. Transportation Planner Carver County Public Works Mobile 612.360.7422 1 Email astensonoco.carver.mn.us From: Kevin Zahler <k zahler(@hotmail.com> Sent: Thursday, January 07, 2021 5:44 PM To: Angie Stenson <astenson(@co.carver.mn.us> Cc: Bender, George <GBender(@ci.chanhassen.mn.us>; Ross Tillman <Ross.Tillman(cilbolton-menk.com>; Scot Lacek <scotlacek(@hotmail.com> Subject: RE: Minnewashta Parkway https://www.co.carver.mn.us/departments/public-works/projects-studies/arboretum-area-transportation plan This email was received from outside of Carver County Thanks Angie, Look forward to your further response. Did you receive my 12/31/20 email, attached? How will the neighborhood be notified on the 1/21/21 meeting? Best regards, Kevin Zahler +1-612-618-9817 kizahler(ahotmail.com From: Angie Stenson <astenson(@co.carver.mn.us> Sent: Thursday, January 7, 2021 4:47 PM To: 'Kevin Zahler' <kizahleri7a hotmail.com> Cc: Bender, George<GBender(cDci.chanhassen.mn.us>; Ross Tillman <Ross.TillmanC@bolton-menk.com> Subject: RE: Minnewashta Parkway https://www.co.carver.mn.us/departments/public-works/projects-studies/arboretum-area-transportation- PLM Hi Kevin, I want to update you that to date I've been unable to confirm a time with MnDOT staff for a virtual meeting. I am continuing to work on this to try and get a time confirmed for next week. Ar,.gi , SfP AICP I Sr. Transportation Planner Carver County Public Works Mobile 612.360.7422 1 Email astenson(aco.carver.mn.us From: Angie Stenson Sent: Wednesday, December 30, 2020 3:49 PM To: 'Kevin Zahler' <kizahler(@hotmail.com> Cc: 'Bender, George' <GBender(@ci.chanhassen.mn.us>; 'Alan Branhagen' <abranhag(aumn.edu>; Langenbach, Diane (DOT) <diane.langenbach(@state.mn.us>; moexx004(@umn.edu; Darin Mielke <dmielke(@co.carver.mn.us>; 'Cara Geheren' <Cara.Geheren(afocusen ineeringinc.com>;'EricJohnson'<Eric.Johnson(@bolton-menk.com>;'AngieBersaw'<Angie.Bersaw(@bolton- menk.com> Subject: RE: Minnewashta Parkway https://www.co.carver.mn.us/departments/public-works/projects-studies/arboretum-area-transportation plan Hi Kevin, Thank you for joining our discussion meeting yesterday to discuss the traffic memo for the Arboretum event traffic analysis that was completed. I'm working with the project team to find available times when we could discuss additional topics including: 1. The traffic signal warrants analysis for the Highway S/Minnewashta Parkway intersection and specifically the conclusion that no signal option is allowable with a 3-leg intersection. 2. Feasibility options and analysis of other potential locations for the Arboretum's main entrance. I'd like to combine these topics into one discussion meeting. It will be next week before I have availability responses from project partners, and I'll contact you and Mr. Lacek regarding potential times. Avg & Sf2o- ov AICP I Sr. Transportation Planner Carver County Public Works Mobile 612.360.7422 1 Email astensonCaco.carver.mn.us From: Kevin Zahler 4 zahler(@hotmail.com> Sent: Monday, December 28, 2020 4:58 PM To: Angie Stenson <astenson(aco.carver.mn.us> Cc: 'Bender, George'<GBender(@ci.chanhassen.mn.us>;'Alan Branhagen' <abran hag(aumn.edu>; Langenbach, Diane (DOT) <diane.langenbach(astate.mn.us>; moexx004(@umn.edu; Darin Mielke <dmielke(@co.carver.mn.us>; 'Cara Geheren' <Cara.Geheren(@focusengineeringinc.com>;'Eric Johnson' <Eric.Johnsonna bolton-menk.com>;'Angie Bersaw' <Aneie.Bersaw(@bolton- menk.com> Subject: RE: Minnewashta Parkway https://www.co.carver.mn.us/departments/public-works/projects-studies/arboretum-area-transportation- 17FUI This email was received from outside of Carver County Hello Angie, I haven't received the available times email from you but I am available most of the time. However, have the surveys been completed for Minnewashta Parkway/Highway 5 with and without an arboretum entrance? I am happy to discuss but is it the best use of your teams time if that information isn't available yet? Please let me know how you would like to proceed. I feel like the residents perhaps did not have a clear picture when they were surveyed. As your data indicates many residents were in favor of a traffic light at that intersection. However, how clear was it to those surveyed that they could only have a traffic light if the arboretum entrance was included? Plus, how many of the east west highway 5 corridor drivers agree to a traffic light with an arboretum entrance. I feel quite confident that these drivers would rather have the light service the Minnewashta Parkway traffic only. Surely you have found in your research with the huge increase in east west highway 5 traffic that Minnewashta Parkway will be even further compromised. I am also concerned with the statement "no allowable option that includes a traffic signal at Highway 5/Minnewashta Parkway without the 4th/southern leg of the intersection with access to the Arboretum"! This seems quite short sighted considering the depth of study placed on this, coupled with your data that reveals there was a fatal accident at that intersection. Of course, I do not know the details of that accident but the intersection as it is now is an accident waiting to happen. However, we do not need to encourage even more high speed traffic on Minnewashta Parkway. As an aside, I also wonder if other surveys should be performed on Minnewashta Parkway? • Number of vehicles using it simply as a bypass between 5 and 7. • Speeds Minnewashta Parkway is a residential road, I know, the county, city and state call it a feeder road. That does not take away the fact that it is residential, a walking/running/biking gateway to the arboretum and we are taxed the same as all other residential neighborhoods that do not need to endure the large volume of high speed traffic. I think that in cooperation with the city and state that other solutions can be found. I appreciate your continuing cooperation. Best regards, Kevin Zahler +1-612-618-9817 kizahler(@hotmail.com From: Angie Stenson <astensonna co.carver.mn.us> Sent: Tuesday, December 22, 2020 3:01 PM To: 'Kevin Zahler' <kizahler(cahotmail.com> Cc: 'Bender, George' <GBender(Dci.chanhassen.mn.us>; 'Alan Branhagen' <abranhag(c)umn.edu>; Langenbach, Diane (DOT) <diane.langenbach(astate.mn.us>; moexx004(@umn.edu; Darin Mielke <dmielke(@co.carver.mn.us>; 'Cara Geheren' <Cara.Geheren(cDfocusengineeringinc.com>;'Eric Johnson' <Eric.Johnson(@bolton-menk.com>;'Angie Bersaw' <Aneie.Bersaw(@bolton- menk.com> Subject: RE: Minnewashta Parkway httos://www.co.carver.mn.us/departments/public-works/projects-studies/arboretum-area-transportation aLan Hi Mr. Zahler, Thank you for taking the time to review the materials for the Arboretum Area Transportation Plan related to the Highway 5/Minnewashta Parkway intersection. I'm available to set up a call for next week where we can discuss the project in more detail. I will send a follow up email with some specific times. In response to the concerns you and a few others have brought forward and feedback from the Council at the November work session, the project team conducted additional traffic pattern analysis for the Highway 5/Minnewashta Parkway intersection. This information is planned to be presented via a virtual neighborhood meeting on the evening of Thursday, January 21st. We hope this information will be helpful in better understanding how a future traffic signal at this location would operate. Analysis for the study included evaluation of the eligibility of the Highway 5/Minnewashta Parkway intersection for a traffic signal. The amount of traffic from Minnewashta Parkway alone at the Highway 5 intersection does not warrant a controlled intersection, meaning a permanent traffic signal would not be allowed by MnDOT. In response to public feedback regarding the need for a controlled intersection at this location, we looked at if coordinating with a future planned Arboretum entrance as a fourth leg to the intersection would meet MnDOT warrants and requirements for a controlled intersection, and it does. There is no allowable option that includes a traffic signal at Highway 5/Minnewashta Parkway without the 4th/southern leg of the intersection with access to the Arboretum. Thank you for adding your feedback to this dialogue as we try and understand the overall feedback from the community in weighing the positive and potential negative aspects of a permanent traffic signal at this location. We will be notifying the Minnewashta Parkway neighborhood after the holidays of the opportunity to learn more at the virtual meeting on January 21st A"i,2 S1AICP I Sr. Transportation Planner Carver County Public Works Mobile 612.360.7422 1 Email astensonna co.carver.mn.us From: Kevin Zahler <kizahler(@hotmail.com> Sent: Saturday, December 19, 2020 2:04 PM To: Angie Stenson <astenson(@co.carver.mn.us> Cc:'Bender, George'<GBender(a)ci.chanhassen.mn.us>;'Alan Branhagen' <abranhag(a)umn.edu>; Langenbach, Diane (DOT) <diane.langenbach(@state.mn.us>; moexx004(@umn.edu; Darin Mielke <dmielkePco.carver.mn.us>; 'Cara Geheren' <Cara.Geheren(@focusen ineeringinc.com>;'EricJohnson'<Eric.Johnson(@bolton-menk.com>;'AngieBersaw'<Angie.Bersaw(@bolton- menk.com> Subject: RE: Minnewashta Parkway https://www.co.carver.mn.us/departments/public-works/projects-studies/arboretum-area-transportation- plal n This email was received from outside of Carver County Hello Angie, Thanks for your response below, that is a lot of information to absorb! However, I did go through all of it including the numerous URL's and related downloads. The attachment is a bit hard to follow since I do not understand the numerous acronyms. I think I will want to discuss this further as you suggested but best to wait until you complete the traffic study for Minnewashta Parkway, when will that report be ready? To be clear, I think it is very important to perform this study with and without the entrance to the arboretum, please confirm that this will be performed? My take away from the huge amount of data is that perhaps that the Minnewashta Parkway neighborhoods were not provided an accurate view/question. I can see that certain neighborhood surveys selected a traffic light at the highway 5 intersection. However, they were not given the choice of a traffic light without the arboretum entrance. The neighborhoods, especially at the south end of Minnewashta Parkway need this light as it is a significant safety issue. By including an arboretum entrance into this intersection only serves to compound the problem. This is a significant disservice to the Minnewashta Parkway residence as well as the highway 5 east/west traffic! This is especially true when there is a very viable alternative at a much lower cost with the 82"d Street entrance. That entrance already exists and makes it unnecessary to construct a new entrance. The traffic along highway 5 is increasing significantly, I suspect the attachment you sent to me explains that (like I said, I don't know what all the acronyms mean) and will increase even further in the coming years. Carver County has allowed this to occur by allowing the huge residential expansion in western Carver County. I am not suggesting that this expansion shouldn't have been allowed but the county must also take responsibility for allowing this growth. Impeding the traffic along highway 5 is not in the best interest of those residents. I saw that you commented that peak weekday traffic would not occur when there is an arboretum event. However, have you performed a weekend traffic study? The weekend traffic is very high and continuous through the day, not just morning and evening. The highway 5 corridor will not like being interrupted for the frequent arboretum entrances compared to the much more sporadic entrances from Minnewashta Parkway. We need the county, state and city help to correct the direction with these plans. Minnewashta Parkway is a residential neighborhood and we do not want that atmosphere destroyed. We enjoy being a walkway entrance to the arboretum and that is what a parkway should be. The residence on and around Minnewashta Parkway deserve the right to preserve their neighborhood. We need your help with a light at Minnewashta Parkway and not an arboretum entrance. As I mentioned previously, this surely represents a huge savings of arboretum funds, a win for all involved. Thank you for a continuation of this dialog and hope we can begin to right this ship!! Best regards, Kevin Zahler +1-612-618-9817 kizahler(@hotmail.com From: Angie Stenson <astensonna co.carver.mn.us> Sent: Monday, December 7, 2020 5:02 PM To: 'Kevin Zahler' <kizahler(@hotmail.com> Cc: 'Bender, George' <GBender(@ci.chanhassen.mn.us>; 'Alan Branhagen' <abranhagCa)umn.edu>; Langenbach, Diane (DOT) <diane.langenbach(o)state.mn.us>; moexx004(@umn.edu; Darin Mielke<dmielke(@co.carver.mn.us>;'Cara Geheren' <Cara.GeherenPfocusengineeringinc.com>; Eric Johnson <Eric.Johnsonna bolton-menk.com>; Angie Bersaw <Aneie.Bersaw(@bolton- menk.com> Subject: RE: Minnewashta Parkway https://www.co.carver.mn.us/departments/public-works/projects-studies/arboretum-area-transportation- aLm Hi Mr. Zahler, Thank you for the questions regarding project. All of the traffic study information will be packaged and made available on the website at the end of the study. Per your request, I'm attaching the preliminary traffic analysis information for the Highway 5/Minnewashta Pkwy. intersection from the study: 1. Draft memo dated 3/9/20 Re: Minnesota Landscape Arboretum - Event Traffic Sensitivity Analysis a. This is the traffic analysis that was completed regarding Arboretum events and looks at how the intersection would function with peak event traffic. b. I'm available to set up a meeting with staff to discuss the technical aspects of this document. For example, the analysis includes an application of the peak event traffic to weekday mornings, but we know that there are few if any major Arboretum events held on weekday mornings. Based on the feedback we've received as part of this fourth phase of public engagement, we are working on additional traffic analysis and will make that available to the public when it is ready. Additional traffic study work will likely be recommended as a next step for the City and/or MnDOT to pursue if needed as the project moves forward. Minnewashta Parkway residents were included in the public engagement plan in following ways: 1. 2 representatives on the 16 member Stakeholder Advisory Committee that met 4 times throughout the study process. 2. 28 residents/properties closest to the intersection were invited to participate in the subarea/neighborhood meetings throughout the study process. These meetings were intended to be smaller groups to reach out more directly to property owners closest to Highway S. 3. All Minnewashta Parkway residents between Highway 5 and Highway 7 were included in the direct mailing for each of the 4 open houses - 550+ residents/properties. a. Here is the link to the Open House summary from the 7/16/2019 meeting: https: //www.co.carver.mn.us/home/showpublisheddocument?id=18467 i. We received comments from residents on the existing issues at the Hwy 5/Minnewashta Pkwy intersection. b. The Highway 5 information from the 12/17/19 Open House and other meetings is available under the Additional Information page: i. Link to the open house boards (page 7): https: //www.co.car-ver.mn.us/home/showpublisheddocument?id=19195 ii. Link to the Highway 5 layout from meeting: htLps://www.co.carver.mn.us/home/showpublisheddocument?id=19211 c. Here is the link to the Open House summary from the 12/17/19 meeting: htt17s: //www.co.carver.mn.us/home/showpublisheddocument?id=20897. i. We received a total of 123 responses regarding the Highway 5/Minnewashta Pkwy. intersection, with 92 in favor of the signalized full access option. ii. These responses were processed with paper forms because it was an in -person meeting, but 1 can dig in to see how many specific residents from the Minnewashta Pkwy neighborhood participated. A" & S>e*L-�wAICP I Sr. Transportation Planner Carver County Public Works Mobile 612.360.7422 1 Email astensonCa co.carver.mn.us From: Kevin Zahler <k zahler(a hotmail.com> Sent: Friday, December 04, 2020 12:29 PM To: Angie Stenson <astensonna co.carver.mn.us> Cc: 'Bender, George' <GBenderaci.chanhassen.mn.us>;'Alan Branhagen' <abranhag(apumn.edu>; Langenbach, Diane (DOT) <diane.langenbach(@state.mn.us>; moexx004(@umn.edu Subject: RE: Minnewashta Parkway https://www.co.carver.mn.us/departments/public-works/proiects-studies/arboretum-area-transportation- plan This email was received from outside of Carver County Thanks Angie, Can you tell me where I can access the traffic studies for the related highways involved? In addition where can I find the traffic study for Minnewashta Parkway? Surely there was one performed? If not, how can that be implemented? Plus, what kind of survey was performed for Minnewashta Parkway neighborhoods, where can I see these results? Best regards, Kevin Zahler +1-612-618-9817 kizahler(@hotmail.com From: Angie Stenson <astensonna co.carver.mn.us> Sent: Tuesday, December 1, 2020 12:44 PM To: 'Kevin Zahler' <k1zahleriahotmall.com> Cc: 'Bender, George' <GBender(@ci.chanhassen.mn.us>;'Alan Branhagen' <abranhag(@umn.edu>; Langenbach, Diane (DOT) <diane.langenbach(@state.mn.us>; moexx004Pumn.edu Subject: RE: Minnewashta Parkway https://www.co.carver.mn.us/departments/public-works/proiects-studies/arboretum-area-transportation- 12LM Hi Kevin, Thank you for your feedback. I'll pass your comments on to the rest of the project team and make sure they are included in the feedback from this round of public engagement. Ate. & Sfe*vovwAICP I Sr. Transportation Planner Carver County Public Works Mobile 612.360.7422 1 Email astensonoco.carver.mn.us From: Kevin Zahler <k zahler(@hotmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, December 01, 2020 9:36 AM To: Angie Stenson <astenson(@co.carver.mn.us> Cc: 'Bender, George' <GBender(@ci.chanhassen.mn.us>; 'Alan Branhagen' <abranhagCa)umn.edu>; Langenbach, Diane (DOT) <diane.langenbach(@state.mn.us>; moexx004Pumn.edu Subject: RE: Minnewashta Parkway httos://www.co.carver.mn.us/departments/public-works/proiects-studies/arboretum-area-transportation- i>im This email was received from outside of Carver County Hello Angie, Thank you for your previous response and the recent open house. It was well organized and presented. However, I am disappointed that Minnewashta Parkway was not included as one of the neighborhoods. I do see a lot of recent comments on Nextdoor Minnewashta concerning both the entrance to the Arboretum and the speed limits on the parkway. I think 95% have significant concerns with the plans you are presenting. This plan is a huge mistake and not only a disservice to the residence in and around Minnewashta Parkway but also to the folks that use highway 5 east and west. I get that there should be a traffic light at highway 5 and Minnewashta Parkway for the safety and convenience of the parkway residents. However, we really do not need to encourage even more traffic at that intersection. I understand improvements need to be made to 82"d street to make it viable, however, there is an even greater expense to make Minnewashta Parkway the main entrance into the Arboretum. Why would this plan choose to inconvenience the parkway residents as well as the huge traffic flow on highway 5? It simply doesn't make sense. The traffic on Minnewashta Parkway is already a high flow and at a very high speed. On and event day people along Minnewashta Parkway will not be able to get out of their driveways and neighborhoods. I went to the city council last year and asked that they help with; reduce the speed limit and enforce limits. I have not seen any action in that regard. Now that the parkway is open again after the summer construction the speeding cars have returned, actually even during construction it was still a race track. We know they city can reduce the speed limit, should follow the lead on Minneapolis and St. Paul, but so far no action. Please discuss with your partners the possibility of changing the direction of this plan. If it continues it will absolutely deteriorate the quality of life for the residence in and around Minnewashta Parkway! This is an irresponsible act and we need help. I also filled in the survey questions at the website, below are some of my comments made there. 1. 1 understand the reason for a planned stop light at Highway 5 and Minnewashta Parkway. However, I am very strongly against the entrance to the Arboretum at Minnewashta Parkway. Minnewashta Parkway has already become a race track for many drivers, bypassing between highway 7 and highway 5. It is extremely unfair to the residents in and around Minnewashta Parkway to subject us to even more traffic. You have very acceptable alternatives at 82nd street and this would also greatly benefit those needing to use highway 5. It seems that the residents on Minnewashta Parkway area have not been considered. Why would you implement a plan that severely impacts the parkway neighborhood? To intentionally route heavy traffic through the Minnewashta Parkway neighborhood is extremely unreasonable and shows no concern for the residents. There are clear alternatives that work for Minnewashta Parkway. Plus, even better for the highway 5 corridor users. Please reconsider 82nd Street! Best regards, Kevin Zahler +1-612-618-9817 kizahler(@hotmail.com From: Angie Stenson <astenson(@co.carver.mn.us> Sent: Wednesday, September 9, 2020 3:48 PM To: 'Kevin Zahler' <kizahlerfa@hotmail.cQm> Cc: 'Bender, George' <GBenderk@ci.chanhassen.mn.us>; Alan Branhagen <abranhag(@umn.edu>; 'Langenbach, Diane (DOT)' <diane.langenbachPstate.mn.us> Subject: RE: Minnewashta Parkway https://www.co.carver.mn.us/departments/public-works/projects-studies/arboretum-area-transportation plan Hi Kevin, The 82nd St. entrance option is being studied as a secondary, additional access to the Arboretum; the primary main entrance would still come from Highway S. The primary entrance to the Arboretum is not planned or intended to be relocated from Highway S. I touched base with Arboretum staff and have additional information to share regarding the 82nd St. accesses. The new access I circled in red is likely quite a few years out (requires new County Road) and would be to serve the future fully developed Chinese Garden and other areas on the south side of the Arboretum. The entrance to Farm at the Arb and Bee Center, also off of 82nd St./Highway 41, is planned to be improved sooner but would be primarily for events and classes at those buildings, or as a member -only entrance on busy days in the spring, summer, or fall. None of the 82nd St. entrances are planned to be open in the winter to serve the main buildings due to the narrow and icy road conditions on 3 Mile Drive. The site is also not set up to route all Arboretum visitors onto 3 Mile drive without causing major traffic problems. From a study perspective, one of our goals is to improve access and safety for the neighborhood at the Highway 5/Minnewashta Pkwy. intersection, as we heard many concerns from residents. MnDOT is a partner on the study and has indicated the existing traffic at the intersection would not warrant a signal. It would be unlikely for a signal to be installed at Highway 5 and Minnewashta Pkwy without the addition of the fourth leg of the Arboretum entrance to the intersection of Minnewashta Pkwy. Thank you for your comments and participation in the study to this point. The study will include one more round of public engagement, likely in late Fall, where the proposed concepts will be provided for review. You can sign up for project updates at this link to receive emails regarding upcoming meetings or newly available information. Upon completion of the study, the City Council and County Board will be requested to adopt the study with the proposed improvement concepts. Agencies would then pursue funding opportunities for the projects identified in the study. Please contact me or the other staff copied on this email (George Bender - City of Chanhassen; Alan Branhagen - MN Landscape Arboretum Director of Operations; Diane Langenbach - MnDOT South Area Engineer) with questions about the study. A"i,& Sfe*L v, vAICP I Sr. Transportation Planner Carver County Public Works Mobile 612.360.7422 1 Email astenson(alco.carver.mn.us From: Kevin Zahler<kkizahler(@hotmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, September 08, 2020 1:40 PM To: Angie Stenson <astenson(@co.carver.mn.us>; 'Howley, Charles'<CHowley(a)ci.chanhassen.mn.us>; moexx004(@umn.edu; 'Bender, George' <GBenderC@ci.chanhassen.mn.us> Cc: pazahler(c)gmail.com; PublicWorksContact <CarverCountyPWna co.carver.mn.us>; 'Alan Branhagen' <abranhagna umn.edu>; 'Ryan, Elise' <ERvanPci.chanhassen.mn.us> Subject: RE: Minnewashta Parkway https://www.co.carver.mn.us/departments/public-works/projects-studies/arboretum-area-transportation- Dim This email was received from outside of Carver County Thanks Angie, Great to hear that Minnewashta Parkway is not a done deal. What is the next decision point and how can residents participate? I like the 82nd street option for numerous reasons as previously mentioned. Curious why the bee entrance is not one of the options since it already exists and has been used in the past. In any case, there must be good reasons and a clear path to not further congest Highway 5 and Minnewashta Parkway. Best regards, Kevin Zahler +1-612-618-9817 kqzahler(ahotmail.com From: Angie Stenson <astenson(@co.carver.mn.us> Sent: Tuesday, September 8, 2020 1:05 PM To: 'Kevin Zahler' <kizahlerna hotmail.com>;'Howley, Charles'<CHowley(a)ci.chanhassen.mn.us>; moexx004na umn.edu;'Bender, George' <GBender(aDci.chanhassen.mn.us> Cc: pazahler(a)gmail.com; PublicWorksContact<CarverCountyPW(@co.carver.mn.us>; 'Alan Branhagen' <abranhag(@umn.edu>; Ryan, Elise <ERvan(a)ci.chanhassen.mn.us> Subject: RE: Minnewashta Parkway https://www.co.carver.mn.us/departments/public-works/projects-studies/arboretum-area-transportation- plan Hi Kevin, Thank you for the additional observations and questions and for taking time to review the information. One item to note is an additional, secondary entrance to the Arboretum is being studied and considered from 82nd St. The improvements to 82nd St., converting it to a paved County Road, would need to occur for a public entrance to be serviced from 82nd St. The 82nd St. concepts can be viewed at this link: https: // /cisbolton- menk.com/inputlD/assets [pdfs/82ndLayouts 11x17.12df. The future entrance would be located at the existing maintenance entrance. I see this is not clearly labeled on these maps; 1 will work to get these labeled better. Below is a screenshot to better indicate this future access location - circled in red. I appreciate your feedback and will make sure to share your questions and concerns with the full study team. A"iz SAICP I Sr. Transportation Planner Carver County Public Works Mobile 612.360.7422 1 Email astensonaco.carver.mn.us From: Kevin Zahler <kizahler(@hotmail.com> Sent: Monday, September 07, 2020 4:40 PM To: Angie Stenson <astenson(@co.carver.mn.us>; 'Howley, Charles' <CHowley(@ci.chanhassen.mn.us>; moexx004(@umn.edu; 'Bender, George' <GBenderna ci.chanhassen.mn.us> Cc: pazahler(cagmail.com; PublicWorksContact<CarverCountyPW(@co.carver.mn.us>; 'Alan Branhagen' <abranhag(@umn.edu>; Ryan, Elise <ERvan(dci.chanhassen.mn.us> Subject: RE: Minnewashta Parkway https://www.co.carver.mn.us/departments/public-works/proiects-studies/arboretum-area-transportation- ALM This email was received from outside of Carver County Hi Angie, Thank very much for your detailed response, this helps provide some clarity. However, I remain deeply concerned and join many of my Minnewashta neighbors with concern for this potential plan. I have studied the information you have sent, my additional observations and questions; 1. It appears that the 82"d street option was not considered, I did not see that in the information you referred to. It seems the best option with access from highway 41 and Bavaria road and very little impact to any residents. It seems like the most unobtrusive, most user friendly, most traffic friendly option. Gets the traffic off of the main busy road and provides a very relaxed entrance to the Arboretum. 2. The Arboretum is a large naturalist area, Minnewashta Parkway is a Parkway, with residents along its length, a beach, a park, a walking/biking path and an entrance to the Arboretum. I feel it should remain part of the naturalist area. 3. By making Minnewashta Parkway the main entrance to the Arboretum you are inviting even more traffic on the parkway. We already suffer from high traffic volumes, industrial trucks, high speeds and unsafe conditions. This new entrance will compound those problems and make a residential neighborhood even more dangerous. 4. Why make the traffic on highway 5 even more difficult. My guess is the folks living west of Minnewashta Parkway along 5 don't want to see this additional road block. It just seems very wrong to further penalize the residents along Minnewashta Parkway, we are already enduring a lack of consideration for our residential neighborhood. Plus, realtors have told me that our property is devaluing due to the "highway" in front of my home. This is not fair to the residence and I hope other considerations can be made, especially when there is an excellent alternative. Best regards, Kevin Zahler +1-612-618-9817 kizahler(@hotmail.com From: Angie Stenson <astenson(@co.carver.mn.us> Sent: Thursday, September 3, 2020 5:07 PM To: 'Kevin Zahler' <kizahler(@hotmail.com>;'Howley, Charles'<CHowley(a)ci.chanhassen.mn.us>;'moexx004(CDumn.ec1u' <moexx004(@umn.edu>; 'Bender, George' <GBender(@ci.chanhassen.mn.us> Cc:'oazahler(@Email.com' <pazahlerna gmail.com>; PublicWorksContact<CarverCountyPW(@co.carver.mn.us>;'Alan Branhagen' <abranhag(@umn.edu> Subject: RE: Minnewashta Parkway httos://www.co.carver.mn.us/departments/public-works/projects-studies/arboretum-area-transportation- aLan Hi Mr. Zahler, The FAQ document for Minnewashta Pkwy is now available on the website (and attached): https://www.co.carver.mn.us./home/showdocument?id=20579. We hope this is helpful information. I'm available to discuss questions you may have about the study and the proposed concept. A"g & Sf2K3,0-wAICP I Sr. Transportation Planner Carver County Public Works Mobile 612.360.7422 1 Email astensonoco.carver.mn.us From: Angie Stenson Sent: Wednesday, September 02, 2020 1:52 PM To: 'Kevin Zahler' <kizahler(@hotmail.Com>; Howley, Charles<CHowley(a)ci.chanhassen.mn.us>; moexx004(a)umn.edu; Bender, George <GBender(@cLchanhassen.mn.us> Cc: pazahler(@gmail.com; PublicWorksContact <CarverCountyPWna co.carver.mn.us>; Alan Branhagen <abranhag(@umn.edu> Subject: RE: Minnewashta Parkway https://www.co.carver.mn.us/departments/public-works/proiects-studies/arboretum-area-transportation plan Good afternoon Mr. Zahler, Thank you for taking time to reach out to us about regarding the Arboretum Area Transportation Plan and specifically the Highway 5/Minnewashta Parkway intersection concept. You are correct that as part of the study and consistent with the Arboretum Master Plan we have developed a concept that shows the future relocation of the Arboretum entrance to the southern leg of the Minnewashta Pkwy./Highway 5 intersection. The study concept can be viewed at this link: https://www.co.carver.mn.us/home/showdocument?id=20439 The best documents from the study to review in relationship to the concept would be the boards from the December 2019 open house at this link: https: //www.co.carver.mn.us/home/showdocument?id=19195. In addition to the main study website, many of the documents from earlier in the study have been moved to the Additional Information tab at this link: https://www.co.carver.mn.us/departments/public-works rojects-studies/arboretum-area-transportation-planiarboretum- area-transportatio n-plan-additional-information I've provided some additional background information below related to the proposed concept. In addition, we are working on a Frequently Asked Questions document for the Highway 5/Minnewashta Pkwy intersection that I will send your way when available, which will make the information and links more accessible in one place. • Feedback from residents so far in the study process indicated a high desire for an intersection control of some type at the Minnewashta Pkwy./Highway 5 intersection. Many residents stated the inability for safe access onto and off of Highway 5 with the current design. Safety issues are also well documented at this intersection. o The study considered a traffic signal and roundabout option at this intersection location. The signal operates best for Highway 5 traffic. The amount of current and projected traffic on Minnewashta Pkwy; however, does not warrant a traffic signal at this location, which is a requirement for signals on State highways. The addition of the Arboretum entrance as the 4th leg of the intersection makes a traffic signal possible by meeting the traffic warrants for a signal on a State highway. • The concept for the Minnewashta Pkwy/Highway 5 intersection is proposed in order to improve operations for Minnewashta Pkwy. residents and the Arboretum. o The backups from Arboretum event traffic experienced today would be mitigated with changes to the main entrance and on site ticketing changes. Event traffic was studied (October 2019) and the new intersection with expanded capacity on Highway 5 and turn lanes to Minnewashta Pkwy. and a new Arboretum entrance would be able to handle peak event traffic without creating the long backups experienced today on Hwy S. For example, a second westbound lane on Highway 5 with a right turn lane onto Minnewashta Pkwy would be a significant improvement for residents that currently wait in westbound traffic west of Highway 41. We welcome comments on this information, as we are still in a concept and study phase to determine the proposed improvements. Based on your feedback and other similar comments, we are working with study partners to take a closer look at this intersection concept. A"g & S AICP I Sr. Transportation Planner Carver County Public Works Mobile 612.360.7422 1 Email astensonoco.carver.mn.us From: Kevin Zahler <k1zahler(cahotmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, September 01, 2020 1:43 PM To: Angie Stenson <astenson(@co.carver.mn.us>; PublicWorksContact<CarverCountyPWPco.carver.mn.us>; Howley, Charles <CHowley(@ci.chanhassen.mn.us>; moexx004 cDumn.edu; Bender, George <GBender(@ci.chanhassen.mn.us> Cc: pazahler(a gmail.com Subject: Minnewashta Parkway httos://www.co.carver.mn.us/departments/public-works/projects-studies/arboretum-area-transportation- Ilan This email was received from outside of Carver County Hello All, I have reviewed the site listed above and cannot find information on a revised entrance to the Arboretum. However, I have heard that a plan might be in place to make the entrance to the Arboretum an intersection with Minnewashta Parkway. Is this correct, where can I find more information? Minnewashta Parkway has already absorbed more hardship than it should as a residential street and we need to take steps to not make this situation even more intolerable. Chanhassen has promised more speed surveillance and a possibility of lower speed limits, neither one has materialized even during this construction phase. Even without the highway 5 to 7 bypass during construction it has become a bit of a race track! I am vehemently against using Minnewashta Parkway for the entrance to the Arboretum. I am strong supporter of the Arboretum but they do have very reasonable alternatives for an entrance. I think West 82"d street by the red barn would be a much better alternative. Thank you for considering this request and appreciate receiving aby information for clarity on this situation. Best regards, Kevin Zahler Pathfinder GS Corporation 6651 Minnewashta Parkway Excelsior, MN 55331 USA Alternate email: kizahlerl(cDgmail.com Office & Mobile phone +1-612-618-9817 WhatsApp, WeChat, Viber Skype: kevinzahler Make a difference! From: Jean -Lucien Rudaz To: Public Comments Subject: Minnewashta parkway Date: Monday, February 8, 2021 5:35:17 PM To whom it may concern, I am new resident to Chanhassen, having moved over the summer to a property on lakeridge road. I understand that there are plans to add a traffic light and relocate the arboretum entrance to intersection of highway 5 and minnewashta parkway. While I am fully supportive of this, I am concerned aboutentrance. eased traffic flow on minnewashta parkway and highway 7 due to change in location of the arboretum entrance.I have young children and we enjoy walking to the park across from the beach and crossing the parkway has always made me nervous. Now with this possible increased traffic, I am now especially fearful for their safety when crossing in the future. I know also that there are older children and teens who bike and cross often and they would be at increased risk as well. Given that, are there any solutions that the council is looking at to alleviate this issue? Can we put in speed bumps and or dedicated pedestrian crosswalks? Is this even something that is being discussed Thank you for your time and consideration. Regards JL Rudaz 4110 Lakeridge Rd, Excelsior, MN 55331 From: Chad G To: Public Comments Subject: Arboretum Transportation Plan Date: Monday, February 8, 2021 5:51:55 PM Dear Chanhassen City Council members - I would like to comment publicly toward asking for your support to NOT approve the Arboretum Transportation Plan as currently proposed on the Feb 8, 2021 agenda. Other commentators have identified the significant issues the proposed plan creates for the Minnewashta Parkway area neighborhoods. I would like to add one additional concern to the list for your consideration as our public officials. Please vote 'nay' based on the increase traffic flow on Hwy 5 into residential areas; -The Arboretum documents presented identified 500,000 visitors/year to the Arb, with 80% of those traveling into the Arb from the east. For those 400,000 visitors, and for assumption purposes, let's assume 3 visitors/vehicles. This equates to 133,333 vehicles per year entering the Arb from the east on Hwy 5 or 365 vehicles/day for 365 days per year. These vehicles today travel west on Hwy 5 from Hwy 41 to the Arb entrance with the land on both sides of Hwy 5 unoccupied and owned by the Arb. -If the Arb entrance is moved further west to be opposite Minnewashta Parkway, these 365 vehicles/day (plus vehicles for deliveries, employees, volunteers and contractors) will now travel along Hwy 5 along the south end of Lake Minnewashta and past the southern neighborhoods of off of 77th Street and Tristan Heights. -As a City Council- I call upon you to represent us as city residents to oppose the current Arboretum Transportation Plan on the grounds that the noise impact of this additional traffic will significantly harm the livability of any home that sits on the southern bay of Lake Minnewashta (noise, sight) as well as significantly higher traffic noise for residential neighbors that live off of 77th Street and Tristan Drive. Thank you for your willingness to represent us as Chanhassen residents on this matter.... The Arboretum is an important part of our community, but the current Arboretum Transportation Plan is not well designed to positively impact the long term future of the Arboretum (capacity issues) while balancing this with the need to not spoil a public waterway with significantly higher traffic noise and sights as well as residents along the Hwy 5 corridor from the current Arb entrance to the proposed Arb entrance opposite Minnewashta Parkway. Chad Gauger CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Monday, February 8, 2021 Subject Approve Legislative Agenda Section OLD BUSINESS Item No: F.2. Prepared By Heather Johnston, Interim City Manager File No: PROPOSED MOTION "The City Council approves the 2021 Legislative Priorities." Approval requires a Majority Vote of the entire council. SUMMARY The Council reviewed the draft Legislative Priorities at its January 25 Work Session. Staff was given direction to make some modifications to the language and prepare the revised Legislative Priorities for action by the Council. DISCUSSION At the January 25 Work Session, the Council requested clarification language on several of the priority statements. Staff was also requested to draft additional language relating to continuing the practice of allowing for electronic participation in City Council meetings outside of an emergency order. Subsequent to the meeting, additional materials for the Arboretum Area Transportation Plan were circulated to support a request to the Legislature for $10 million in State bonding funds to help offset the cost of the project to the local partners. Staff added additional language to the Legislative Priorities to support this request. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the City Council approve the attached Legislative Priorities. ATTACHMENTS: ❑ 2021 Legislative Priorities ❑ AATP Legislative Request City of Chanhassen 2021 Legislative Priorities 1. Support "Opt -Out" Suburban Transit Agencies: Chanhassen supports opt -out cities and suburban transit agencies, in concurrence with the findings of the Office of the Legislative Auditors January 2011 Governance of Transit Report. Creation of these agencies provided residents and businesses with a desired service that met their needs while maintaining financial and management controls. The State should refrain from infringing on the ability of local agencies to provide and control bus services for the benefit of area businesses and residents. Suburban riders are an integral part of the suburban transit system. 2. Building Code Fees: The City believes strongly that development should pay for development and costs for those services should not be passed on to existing residents through increased property taxes. Local governments must ensure new developments meet established standards for the safety of future residents, and building permits play an important role in advancing these oversight responsibilities. Cities are in the best position to set these fees at the local level. 3. Unfunded Mandates: Chanhassen opposes both current and future statutory changes that create mandated tasks that require new or added local costs without a corresponding funding mechanism. Without a funding source, Chanhassen is potentially in the position of having to increase property taxes and/or fees. These unfunded mandates add to the responsibilities for cities and the ability to fund traditional service needs. 4. Local Governance & Restriction on Local Government Budgets: The eCity strongly supports participation in cooperative arrangements, but strongly opposes any effort to weaken the ability of local governments to provide the best services and benefits for their communities (levy limits, unfunded mandates, cooperative purchasing, and ability to grant variances). Local budgets are subject to intense public scrutiny. Inflation alone forces cities to spend more money to maintain current service levels. The people who know what is best for this city are the people who live and work here. 5. Environmental: Chanhassen supports protection of our environmental resources. However, compliance with regulations is often confusing and complicated. Wetland permitting processes are too time-consuming and can slow down development processes. Research should be conducted by the State on streamlining one or more of the following processes: Wetland Conservation Act, Clean Water Act requirements, EPA Standards and Regulatory Rules, etc., especially when it comes to Army Corp of Engineers (ACOE) jurisdictional impacts. 6. Transportation: a. Stable fEunding for the Me+~e~t' +�~Municipal State Aid (MSA) program which sLipports local roadway improvements should be maintained to ensure local communities are able to address issues on these Sig volumeke transportation network roads. ab.Regional projects should have regional funding sources. Funding should be focused on reducing or eliminating local city contributions. • TH 5 Project Improvements (West of TH 41 to Norwood Young America): This is a joint project with MnDOT, Carver County, and the Cities of Victoria, Waconia, Norwood/Young America, and Chanhassen to expand corridor four lanes. U.S. Highway 212: Continue development of Highway 212 from County Road 147 on the Chaska/Carver border to the City of Cologne. • Highway 18: Complete the two-mile gap in the County Highway 18 transportation corridor as a part of the Arboretum Area Transportation Plan. 1}c. 7. Water Resources Protection Funding: The City is supportive of a program that would provide a stable funding source for water resource protection improvements. The program could be formula based, similar to the Municipal State Aid program for roadway improvements. 8. Minnetonka Middle School West Intersection Improvements: Work with Minnetonka School District to submit a bonding request to improve the intersection at TH 41 and the Minnetonka Middle School West entrance to address traffic and safety issues. 9. Fiscal Disparities: Explore modifications to the fiscal disparities program in order to reduce the imbalances inherent in the current formula. The fiscal disparities program was created in 1971, and although the population of the metro area has grown by over 1.5M people since that time, the formula for fiscal disparities has remained the same. As the population grows, the need for retail services to support residents grows with it. Individual cities and their property taxpayers take the lead in developing regional, retail, and service assets that support residents and visitors to the area. In addition to the cost of planning and developing these assets, retail and service industries consume significant city services, particularly in the area of public safety, as well as impose significant burdens on local roads, bridges, and other transportation infrastructure. A 2012 report commissioned by the Minnesota Legislature demonstrates that the property taxes generated by these retail services do not pay for the additional services they require, an imbalance that is increased by the fiscal disparities program. Local taxpayers in communities that host regional retail assets are forced to subsidize the costs of city and county services while taxpayers in communities that use, but do not develop, these assets have their tax rates lowered. -9-.10. Remote Meetings: Chanhassen would support changes to state statute that would allow for Council Members to participate in meetings remotely outside of an emergency order. Limitations may include number of meetings annually or under limited circumstances, such as work -related travel. LEGISLATIVE PRIORITIES FOR OTHER AGENCIES: Metro Cities 2021 Legislative Policies League of Minnesota Cities Legislative Policies Municipal Legislative Commission Legislative Policies g:\admin\legislative priorities\202 1 \2021 legislative priorities.doex ) N A*'D'.boretum Transportation Plan www.co.carver.mn.us/ArboretumAreaTransportationPlan What are the Problems Today? • Limited east -west road capacity chokes Lack of transportation movement of people and goods. infrastructure to support • Limited community connections force significant population and 5,000 vehicles per day to Highway 5 employment growth. and other regional highways. Limited ingress/egress to • Existing gravel roadway cannot Minnesota Landscape Arboretum support the traffic demand. inhibits future development. All visitors must use Highway 5. • Lack of east -west trail connections. • Congestion caused by lack of connectivity has resulted in severe injury and fatal crashes. Total Investment $24M (2025 build year cost) 13 , M 40 n CITY 01 �,CirruSQ CCARVER DEPARTMENT OF IN 0", Chaska COUNTY TRANSPORTATION ARBORETUM With Investment, What are the Realized Benefits? • On day of opening, the safety and mobility of regional travelers will dramatically increase. — Crash rates would drop on area roadways. — Local traffic would travel on local routes. — Capacity of area roadways greatly improves. • Freight will have reliable connections to the highway system. • Roadway infrastructure will not inhibit growth. • Pedestrian and bicyclists will have another key link in the system connecting communities. • Increased traffic flow will improve air quality. • Enhanced stormwater treatment will improve water quality. Project partners have committed $14M Project partners include Carver County, MnDOT, University of Minnesota Landscape Arboretum, and the cities of Victoria, Chanhassen, and Chaska. 18 INFRASTRUCTURE FEATURES • Two-lane undivided roadway • Trail on the north side linking other community trails • Lower speed roadway designed to fit the rolling terrain • Stormwater treatment • Major city utility extensions will share this corridor • Designed to be sensitive to the natural and built environment Community benefits: — Increased traffic flow will improve air quality. — Enhanced stormwater treatment will improve water quality. — Local connection to job centers, industrial areas, schools, and other community destinations. — High school drivers have a safe, direct, local road connection. — Allows the Arboretum to realize their Master Plan to expand resources and add a secondary access point off this new roadway. — Allows development of over 700 acres in Chaska. This project will be partially funded with Carver County's Local Option Sales Tax, however undingthe cities of Chaska, Chanhassen and Victoria have no ability to fund their share of the Gap1 OM project without land development. Development opportunities are very limited with the Arboretum to the north and no development plans to the south until after 2040. Future Plans for the University of Minnesota Landscape Arboretum The Landscape Arboretum desires to expand the Chinese Garden located -� along Three -Mile Drive and make it a feature attraction. However, the �- expansion will not happen without this project to handle the additional l� ,a 150,000 visitors entering at this new access point. U public point toboretum Vision for Future Development of Chinese Garden, Minnesota Landscape Arboretum Minnesota Landscape Arboretum 11 ❑C CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Monday, February 8, 2021 Subject Approve On -Sale 3.2 Percent Malt Liquor License for Golf Zone located at 825 Flying Cloud Drive Section PUBLIC HEARINGS Item No: G.1. Prepared By Kim Meuwissen, Office Manager File No: LIQ Golf Zone PROPOSED MOTION "The City Council approves the request for an on -sale 3.2 percent malt liquor license from Colvin Golf LLC DBA Golf Zone located at 825 Flying Cloud Drive." Approval requires a Simple Majority Vote of members present. BACKGROUND This office has received a request for an on -sale 3.2 percent malt liquor license from Colvin Golf LLC dba Golf Zone. The applicant is reopening an existing 11,100 square -foot facility located at 825 Flying Cloud Drive. Golf Zone is described as a driving range and putt -putt golf course. Colvin Golf LLC has applied for a food license permit in order to serve Heggies Pizza, thus meeting the requirement to prepare and serve food on site. Seating is provided for 28 guests. The licensed premises will be limited to the 11,100 square -foot indoor facility only and not outside of the facility or in the parking lot. Colvin Golf LLC is a Limited Liability Company consisting of the following two partners: • Brian Colvin - 50% Interest • Keri Colvin - 50% Interest The Carver County Sheriff's Office has completed a background investigation on both partners, including criminal history checks, driving records, and outstanding warrants. Lt. Lance Pearce reviewed the results of the background investigation and determined that the liquor license could be issued. A public hearing notice was sent to all property owners within 500 feet of the proposed site. As of the date of this staff report, staff has not received any comments or concerns. A review of Carver County tax records show that all tax payments on the property are paid to date. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council approve the request for an on -sale 3.2 percent malt liquor license from Colvin Golf LLC DBA Golf Zone located at 825 Flying Cloud Drive. Approval of the license would be contingent upon certificate of liquor liability insurance and receipt of the license fee of $410. ATTACHMENTS: ❑ Property Report Card ❑ Site Plan ❑ Floor Plan ❑ Affidavit of Mailing of Public Hearing Notice Property Card Parcel ID Number Taxpayer Information Property Address Parcel Information Building Information Miscellaneous Information Assessor Information ALT. —EXISTING f * ` rpuND 4" a ` ` -f SWALE �� Ed Tr J+/.; :l`1' P�TGWINCT J��B '� 'f�• FRACTICE r AREA i t4F w �SIL ROCK r A E FEN tv 9x, h 1 A tr y, li 5 I �� i1i�}LJ N •'4 ,. ,, gyp, X. Rlv , It�I n', F� G 5TfJ.E T I t A-4 e4' ITJ t n,I NEW BLDG. ElOOF 9 n� 11,100 SF BAR IFFE fy 725.24 72 g � t -�NTR.1N C � - ----- - 5p {3 HC/AVA PARKI I 1h/ SIGNS TEMP. ROCK r' wPtiZ1L`5` +-..P 710 % CONSi, ENTF t 39,160 SF ' A '` FINAL LQCAT TO 6E ❑FTCF 1' N �� VL PRIOR TO CF I T1 l 00 SF f TREf= 17 ES OR CONST, f 3.3' CLUIEH USE E = 739.24 r: � AMERICA e�Tr J SF} 0 ICE 1ST Z7TFTiNG M I aul d- F1 11 PARKINGG SAGE Ex. 9LDG TO TREE % - i BE REMOVED . (3U12t- SF-INE' 4 S` ALLHALT .o= A} i i 4 O % ' ; NEIU DUGOUTS FIFE - 725.24 , I aM1 L11JJ-1-LL1- i 724 I 8 CL-III RIPRAP I 0 2) CITY OF CHANHASSEN AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING NOTICE STATE OF MINNESOTA) ) ss. COUNTY OF CARVER ) I, Kim T. Meuwissen, being first duly sworn, on oath deposes that she is and was on January 28, 2021, the duly qualified and acting Deputy Clerk of the City of Chanhassen, Minnesota; that on said date she caused to be mailed a copy of the attached notice of Public Hearing Request for an On -Sale 3.2% Malt Liquor License for Colvin Golf LLC, doing business as Golf Zone, located at 825 Flying Cloud Drive, to the persons named on attached Exhibit "A", by enclosing a copy of said notice on a postcard addressed to such owner, and depositing the postcards addressed to all such owners in the United States mail with postage fully prepaid thereon; that the names and addresses of such owners were those appearing as such by the records of the County Treasurer, Carver County, Minnesota, and by other appropriate records. Subscribed and sworn to before me this 28'' day of January, 2021. Notary Public 111'_j Kim T. Meuwissen, Deputy 10JEAN M STECKUNG ►' buy Publio-Mkx, mm W � im at. aw CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING REQUEST FOR AN ON -SALE 3.2% MALT LIQUOR LICENSE FOR GOLF ZONE, 825 FLYING CLOUD DRIVE NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Chanhassen City Council will hold a public hearing on Monday, February 8, 2021 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers at 7700 Market Boulevard, to consider a request from Colvin Golf LLC for an on -sale 3.2% malt liquor license at Golf Zone located at 825 Flying Cloud Drive. All interested persons may appear and express their opinions regarding this application at said time and place. Chanhassen City Code requires that all property owners within 500 feet of the site be notified in writing. If you have any questions, contact Kim Meuwissen at 952-227-1107. Heather Johnston Interim City Manager (Published in the Chanhassen Villager on January 28, 2021) RAIN SNOW OR SHINE GOLF LLC 791 CHERRYWOOD LN WACONIA, MN 55387- STATE OF MINNESOTA - DNR 500 LAFAYETTE RD ST PAUL, MN 55155-4030 SKIP S COOK 15506 VILLAGE WOODS DR EDEN PRAIRIE, MN 55347-1439 HAGEN LAWN & LANDSCAPE LLC 850 FLYING CLOUD DR CHASKA, MN 55318-9503 CHANHASSEN CITY PO BOX 147 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-0147 CARVER COUNTY 602 4TH ST E CHASKA, MN 55318-2102 GORAN PUJIC 1161 BLUFF CREEK DR CHASKA, MN 55318- JANE P LENT 1190 BLUFF CREEK DR CHASKA, MN 55318- HEIDI R MOE 1425 BLUFF CREEK DR CHASKA, MN 55318-9515 PETERSON FARM HOLDING NO 3 LP 15900 FLYING CLOUD DR EDEN PRAIRIE, MN 55347-4047 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Monday, February 8, 2021 Subject Review of Claims Paid 02-08-2021 Section CORRESPONDENCE DISCUSSION Item No: K.1. Prepared By Kelly Strey, Interim Finance Director File No: SUMMARY The following claims are submitted for review on February 8, 2021: Check Numbers 174880 — 174933 ACH Payments Total All Claims ATTACHMENTS: ❑ Check Summary ❑ Check Summary ACH ❑ Check Detail ❑ Check Detail ACH Amounts $198,000.40 $ 199,456.47 $397,456.87 Accounts Payable Checks by Date - Summary by Check Number User: dwashburn Printed: 1/29/2021 9:06 AM Check No Vendor No Vendor Name Check Date 174880 ALAINC Aladtec, Inc 01/21/2021 174881 BCATRA BCA O1/21/2021 174882 BORSTA BORDER STATES ELECTRIC SUPPLY O1/21/2021 174883 CABFEV CABIN FEVER SPORTING GOODS O1/21/2021 174884 ceam City Engineers Association of Minnesota 01/21/2021 174885 CITEDE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE O1/21/2021 174886 DigImp Digital Impact Solutions, LLC O1/21/2021 174887 EHLERS EHLERS & ASSOCIATES INC O1/21/2021 174888 EMPGRO EMPLOYEE GROUP FUND O1/21/2021 174889 FACMOT FACTORY MOTOR PARTS COMPANY O1/21/2021 174890 HeaPar HealthPartners, Inc. 01/21/2021 174891 INFSEN InfoSense Inc 01/21/2021 174892 KENGRA KENNEDY & GRAVEN, CHARTERED O1/21/2021 174893 PipSer Pipe Services Corporation 01/21/2021 174894 REARES REACH FOR RESOURCES O1/21/2021 174895 TWIHAR TWIN CITY HARDWARE O1/21/2021 174896 AE2SCON Advanced Elements Operational Technolog 01/28/2021 174897 AirHeat Airics Heating & Air Conditioning 01/28/2021 174898 asapun ASAP Underground LLC O1/28/2021 174899 ASPEQU Aspen Equipment 01/28/2021 174900 B1ueWat Blue Water Plumbing Inc 01/28/2021 174901 UB*02145 BLUFF CREEK DENTAL, PLLC O1/28/2021 174902 CENENE CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGAS0 01/28/2021 174903 CenLin CenturyLink 01/28/2021 174904 CHRINC CHRISTIANS INC O1/28/2021 174905 ComMin Compass Minerals America, Inc 01/28/2021 174906 CorInv Cornerstone Investors 01/28/2021 174907 CUTABO CUT ABOVE INC O1/28/2021 174908 DPBPro DPB Properties LLC O1/28/2021 174909 dsmexc DSM Excavating 01/28/2021 174910 EriHei Heidi Erickson 01/28/2021 174911 ferwat Ferguson Waterworks #2518 01/28/2021 174912 GRABAR GRAY -BAR O1/28/2021 174913 IndSig Indigo Signs 01/28/2021 174914 JOHNJERR JERRY JOHNSON O1/28/2021 174915 LacSal Lacount Sales, LLC O1/28/2021 174916 LANEQI Lano Equipment 01/28/2021 174917 LawPro Lawson Products, Inc. 01/28/2021 174918 LEAINS LEAGUE OF MN CITIES INS TRUST O1/28/2021 174919 MBEInc MBE Inc 01/28/2021 174920 MinuPre Minuteman Press 01/28/2021 174921 MNHEAL MN DEPT OF HEALTH O1/28/2021 174922 NexExt Nexgen Exteriors Corporated 01/28/2021 174923 POST POSTMASTER O1/28/2021 174924 QUAFIR Quality First Janitorial & Maintenance Inc 01/28/2021 174925 SawDes Sawhorse Designers & Builders 01/28/2021 174926 SHEWIL SHERWIN WILLIAMS O1/28/2021 4 MOF 0 MMS5 Void Checks Check Amount 0.00 3,600.00 0.00 15.00 0.00 74.34 0.00 1,770.80 0.00 120.00 0.00 2,000.00 0.00 144.00 0.00 2,765.00 0.00 113.50 0.00 59.34 0.00 67,405.26 0.00 26,080.00 0.00 792.00 0.00 48,030.16 0.00 9,439.55 0.00 532.43 0.00 500.00 0.00 3.46 0.00 4.90 0.00 264.50 0.00 1.40 0.00 751.70 0.00 1,210.90 0.00 60.71 0.00 78.60 0.00 9,530.58 0.00 7.14 0.00 900.00 0.00 325.00 0.00 2.94 0.00 2.97 0.00 231.66 0.00 557.79 0.00 166.50 VOID 100.00 0.00 0.00 158.98 0.00 7,869.22 0.00 13.98 0.00 6,728.62 0.00 1,488.00 0.00 16.00 0.00 32.00 0.00 9.18 0.00 1,180.36 0.00 625.00 0.00 8.33 0.00 386.70 AP Checks by Date - Summary by Check Number (1/29/2021 9:06 AM) Page 1 Check No Vendor No Vendor Name Check Date Void Checks Check Amount 174927 SimTod Todd Simning 01/28/2021 0.00 850.00 174928 StaWat Standard Water Control 01/28/2021 0.00 5.49 174929 STRUCONT STRUCTION CONTRACTING LLC O1/28/2021 0.00 10.88 174930 TigPlu Tiger Plumbing, Heating & Air 01/28/2021 0.00 3.60 174931 TotaCom Total Comfort A/C & Heating 01/28/2021 0.00 9.28 174932 WacCom Waconia Comfort 01/28/2021 0.00 6.65 174933 WEAWAT WEATHER WATCH INC O1/28/2021 0.00 1,056.00 Report Total (54 checks): 100.00 198,000.40 AP Checks by Date - Summary by Check Number (1/29/2021 9:06 AM) Page 2 Accounts Payable Checks by Date - Summary by Check User: dwashburn Printed: 1/29/2021 9:07 AM Cfff OF CA�SS�f Check No Vendor No Vendor Name Check Date Void Checks Check Amount ACH z-aircom Air Compressors Plus 12/16/2020 0.00 15.75 ACH z-amazon Amazon 12/16/2020 0.00 6,269.93 ACH Z-amepla American Planning Association 12/16/2020 0.00 476.00 ACH Z-APPLE Apple.com 12/16/2020 0.00 1.98 ACH Z-BATPLU Batteries Plus 12/16/2020 0.00 95.67 ACH Z-CABFEV Cabin Fever Sporting Goods 12/16/2020 0.00 155.68 ACH z-cdwg CDW Government 12/16/2020 0.00 127.92 ACH Z-chifil Chick-Fil-A 12/16/2020 0.00 91.81 ACH z-Co1Sou Columbia Southern University 12/16/2020 0.00 360.00 ACH Z-corfee Corporate Card Annual Fee 12/16/2020 0.00 24.00 ACH Z-CubFoo Cub Foods 12/16/2020 0.00 72.51 ACH z-DQ Dairy Queen 12/16/2020 0.00 12.96 ACH Z-Davann Davanni's 12/16/2020 0.00 1,069.70 ACH Z-DAYINN Days Inn 12/16/2020 0.00 353.22 ACH Z-doltre Dollar Tree Stores Inc 12/16/2020 0.00 33.33 ACH Z-DUNGAR Dungarees 12/16/2020 0.00 84.95 ACH Z-ebay Ebay 12/16/2020 0.00 32.19 ACH z-engall Engineering Alliance MN 12/16/2020 0.00 60.00 ACH z-flefar Fleet Farm 12/16/2020 0.00 331.04 ACH Z-GALLS Galls LLC 12/16/2020 0.00 182.95 ACH Z-GEMPLE Gempler's 12/16/2020 0.00 87.66 ACH z-grain Grainger 12/16/2020 0.00 54.03 ACH Z-HOMDEP Home Depot 12/16/2020 0.00 687.67 ACH Z-Hyvee Hy-Vee 12/16/2020 0.00 19.78 ACH z-IndPla Indelco Plastics Corporation 12/16/2020 0.00 23.31 ACH Z-IRInd Ingersoll-Rand 12/16/2020 0.00 1,307.48 ACH Z-Jimjoh Jimmy Johns 12/16/2020 0.00 1,134.85 ACH z-kidwam KiddyWampus.com 12/16/2020 0.00 16.91 ACH Z-KWITRI Kwik Trip 12/16/2020 0.00 4.43 ACH Z-logme LogMeIn Inc 12/16/2020 0.00 375.80 ACH Z-lunbye Lunds & Byerly's 12/16/2020 0.00 162.23 ACH Z-MCMCAR McMaster -Carr 12/16/2020 0.00 365.66 ACH Z-MENARD Menards 12/16/2020 0.00 457.32 ACH Z-Merlin Merlins Ace Hardware 12/16/2020 0.00 53.52 ACH Z-MNPOLL MN Pollution Control Agency 12/16/2020 0.00 390.00 ACH z-natreg National Registry Of EMT 12/16/2020 0.00 20.00 ACH Z-newhor New Horizons Minnesota 12/16/2020 0.00 790.00 ACH Z-NOVLIG NoveltyLights.com 12/16/2020 0.00 1,931.76 ACH Z-OFFMAX Office Max/Office Depot 12/16/2020 0.00 72.19 ACH z-OnUpSi Once Upon a Sign & Printing 12/16/2020 0.00 107.53 ACH Z-panbre Panera Bread 12/16/2020 0.00 176.51 ACH Z-parcit Party City 12/16/2020 0.00 64.26 ACH Z-PAYPAL PayPal 12/16/2020 0.00 50.00 ACH Z-pcwor PC World Magazine 12/16/2020 0.00 19.97 ACH Z-pubsur Public Surplus 12/16/2020 0.00 93.40 ACH z-quill Quill Corporation 12/16/2020 0.00 25.98 ACH Z-SamClu Sam's Club 12/16/2020 0.00 84.11 Page 1 of 2 Check No Vendor No Vendor Name Check Date Void Checks Check Amount ACH Z-Sche Scheels 12/16/2020 0.00 79.98 ACH z-sounew Southwest Newspapers 12/16/2020 0.00 48.00 ACH Z-SOUREN Southwest Rental and Sales 12/16/2020 0.00 51.18 ACH z-steric Stericycle Inc 12/16/2020 0.00 544.74 ACH Z-SUBWAY SUBWAY 12/16/2020 0.00 12.42 ACH Z-TACGEA Tactical Gear.com 12/16/2020 0.00 268.94 ACH z-target Target 12/16/2020 0.00 375.04 ACH Z-thefir THE FIRE STORE.COM 12/16/2020 0.00 1,530.86 ACH Z-TPToo TP Tools & Equipment 12/16/2020 0.00 114.46 ACH z-vitoxi Vital Oxide Solutions 12/16/2020 0.00 303.60 ACH Z-walmar Wal-Mart 12/16/2020 0.00 20.86 ACH Z-zoom Zoom 12/16/2020 0.00 85.90 ACH AMESOL AMERICAN SOLUTIONS O1/21/2021 0.00 192.54 ACH BATPLU BATTERIES PLUS O1/21/2021 0.00 207.20 ACH carcou Carver County 01/21/2021 0.00 31,438.46 ACH COMINT COMPUTER INTEGRATION TECHN. 01/21/2021 0.00 10,595.00 ACH De1Den Delta Dental 01/21/2021 0.00 2,907.55 ACH InnOff Innovative Office Solutions LLC O1/21/2021 0.00 56.12 ACH LifSup Life Support Innovations LLC O1/21/2021 0.00 522.10 ACH METCO Metropolitan Council, Env Svcs 01/21/2021 0.00 14,760.90 ACH MRPA MN RECREATION & PARK ASSOC. 01/21/2021 0.00 1,299.00 ACH MOSBAR MOSS & BARNETT O1/21/2021 0.00 4,672.00 ACH NusEqu Nuss Truck & Equipment 01/21/2021 0.00 132.86 ACH OREAUT O'Reilly Automotive Inc 01/21/2021 0.00 289.24 ACH POMTIR POMP'S TIRE SERVICE INC O1/21/2021 0.00 1,420.00 ACH RoaMac Road Machinery & Supplies 01/21/2021 0.00 570.05 ACH MNLABO MN DEPT OF LABOR AND INDUSTRY O1/26/2021 0.00 3,432.85 ACH ABMEQU ABM Equipment & Supply, LLC O1/28/2021 0.00 15,135.00 ACH AdvEng Advanced Engineering & Environmental Services, LLC O1/28/2021 0.00 3,712.92 ACH AMESOL AMERICAN SOLUTIONS O1/28/2021 0.00 786.39 ACH Co1Lif Colonial Life & Accident Insurance Co 01/28/2021 0.00 99.16 ACH CORMEC CORPORATE MECHANICAL O1/28/2021 0.00 1.82 ACH CRYINF Crystal Infosystems LLC O1/28/2021 0.00 1,379.56 ACH DiaSno Diamond Snow & Ice Control 01/28/2021 0.00 1,400.00 ACH DOLLIF DOLLIFF INC. INSURANCE O1/28/2021 0.00 23,239.00 ACH FASCOM FASTENAL COMPANY O1/28/2021 0.00 50.41 ACH Avesis Fidelity Security Life 01/28/2021 0.00 252.40 ACH InnOff Innovative Office Solutions LLC O1/28/2021 0.00 1,304.69 ACH KIMHOR KIMLEY HORN AND ASSOCIATES INC O1/28/2021 0.00 21,413.99 ACH MVEC MN VALLEY ELECTRIC COOP O1/28/2021 0.00 138.41 ACH MUNLEG MUNICIPAL LEGISLATIVE COMMISSION O1/28/2021 0.00 6,569.50 ACH NAPA NAPA AUTO & TRUCK PARTS O1/28/2021 0.00 442.38 ACH NusEqu Nuss Truck & Equipment 01/28/2021 0.00 336.18 ACH PioEng Pioneer Engineering, P.A. 01/28/2021 0.00 1,000.00 ACH PreWat Premium Waters, Inc 01/28/2021 0.00 3.00 ACH ProTec Pro-Tec Design, Inc. 01/28/2021 0.00 153.00 ACH STRGUA STRATOGUARD LLC O1/28/2021 0.00 1,699.35 ACH WSB WSB & ASSOCIATES INC O1/28/2021 0.00 2,699.50 ACH WWGRA WW GRAINGER INC O1/28/2021 0.00 358.44 ACH XCEL XCEL ENERGY INC O1/28/2021 0.00 21,686.49 ACH ZIEGLE ZIEGLER INC O1/28/2021 0.00 1,235.08 Report Total: 0.00 199,456.47 Page 2 of 2 Accounts Payable Check Detail -Checks User: dwashburn Printed: 01/29/2021 - 9:15 AM tofCITYOF CHM3ER Name Check Da Account Description Amount Advanced Elements Operational Technology, LLC O1/28/2021 700-0000-430( Software and Hosting/Maintenance 500.00 Advanced Elements Operational Technology, LLC 500.00 Airics Heating & Air Conditioning 01/28/2021 400-0000-3613 Technology Fee - 6680 Deerwood Drive 3.46 Airics Heating & Air Conditioning 3.46 Aladtec, Inc 01/21/2021 101-1220-430( software 3,600.00 Aladtec, Inc 3,600.00 ASAP Underground LLC O1/28/2021 400-0000-3613 Technology Fee - 951 Penamint Court 4.90 ASAP Underground LLC 4.90 Aspen Equipment 01/28/2021 101-1550-412( Supplies 264.50 Aspen Equipment 264.50 BCA O1/21/2021 101-1120-430C Background Investigation 15.00 BCA 15.00 Blue Water Plumbing Inc 01/28/2021 400-0000-3613 Technology Fee - 6330 Teton Ln 1.40 Blue Water Plumbing Inc 1.40 BLUFF CREEK DENTAL, PLLC O1/28/2021 700-0000-202( Refund Check 201.60 BLUFF CREEK DENTAL, PLLC O1/28/2021 701-0000-202( Refund Check 485.45 BLUFF CREEK DENTAL, PLLC O1/28/2021 700-0000-202( Refund Check 37.05 BLUFF CREEK DENTAL, PLLC O1/28/2021 700-0000-202( Refund Check 14.67 BLUFF CREEK DENTAL, PLLC O1/28/2021 700-0000-202( Refund Check 4.24 BLUFF CREEK DENTAL, PLLC O1/28/2021 701-0000-202( Refund Check 8.69 BLUFF CREEK DENTAL, PLLC 751.70 BORDER STATES ELECTRIC SUPPLY O1/21/2021 101-1220-451( Supplies 74.34 BORDER STATES ELECTRIC SUPPLY 74.34 CABIN FEVER SPORTING GOODS O1/21/2021 101-1611-413C Feb Fest Fishing Prizes 1,770.80 CABIN FEVER SPORTING GOODS 1,770.80 CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO O1/28/2021 101-1220-432( Monthly Service 796.81 CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO O1/28/2021 101-1530-432( Monthly Service 288.67 Accounts Payable - Check Detail -Checks (O1/29/2021 - 9:15 AM) Pagel of 5 Name Check Da Account Description Amount CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO O1/28/2021 101-1171-432C Monthly Service 93.42 CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO O1/28/2021 601-0000-308( Monthly Service 32.00 CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 1,210.90 CenturyLink 01/28/2021 700-7043-431( Monthly Service 60.71 CenturyLink 60.71 CHRISTIANS INC O1/28/2021 101-1250-3302 Plan Review Refund - P2021-00140 - 9675 Independence Dr 78.60 CHRISTIANS INC 78.60 City Engineers Association of Minnesota 01/21/2021 101-1310-436( Membership -Bender 60.00 City Engineers Association of Minnesota 01/21/2021 101-1310-436( Membership -Henricksen 60.00 City Engineers Association of Minnesota 120.00 CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE O1/21/2021 101-1120-436C WAFTA Dues 2,000.00 CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE 2,000.00 Compass Minerals America, Inc 01/28/2021 101-1320-415( Materials 3,251.33 Compass Minerals America, Inc 01/28/2021 101-1320-415( Materials 2,084.98 Compass Minerals America, Inc 01/28/2021 101-1320-415( Materials 4,194.27 Compass Minerals America, Inc 9,530.58 Cornerstone Investors 01/28/2021 400-0000-3613 Technology Fee - Stoughton Ave 7.14 Cornerstone Investors 7.14 CUT ABOVE INC O1/28/2021 720-7202-430( Tree Removal 900.00 CUT ABOVE INC 900.00 Digital Impact Solutions, LLC O1/21/2021 101-1611-434C Re -Print of FebFest Tickets 144.00 Digital Impact Solutions, LLC 144.00 DPB Properties LLC O1/28/2021 720-0000-3325 Wetland Permit Refund 275.00 DPB Properties LLC O1/28/2021 101-1420-360' Wetland Permit Refund 50.00 DPB Properties LLC 325.00 DSM Excavating 01/28/2021 400-0000-3613 Technology Fee - 7238 Alphabet Street 1.47 DSM Excavating 01/28/2021 400-0000-3613 Technology Fee - 7197 Pearl Drive 1.47 DSM Excavating 2.94 EHLERS & ASSOCIATES INC O1/21/2021 700-0000-430( 2020 Utility Rate Study 921.66 EHLERS & ASSOCIATES INC O1/21/2021 701-0000-430( 2020 Utility Rate Study 921.67 EHLERS & ASSOCIATES INC O1/21/2021 720-0000-430( 2020 Utility Rate Study 921.67 EHLERS & ASSOCIATES INC 2,765.00 EMPLOYEE GROUP FUND O1/21/2021 101-1110-4370 2020 Soda Machine 113.50 Accounts Payable - Check Detail -Checks (O1/29/2021 - 9:15 AM) Page 2 of 5 Name Check Da Account Description Amount EMPLOYEE GROUP FUND 113.50 Erickson Heidi 01/28/2021 400-0000-3613 Technology Fee - 4169 Red Oak Lane 2.97 Erickson Heidi 2.97 FACTORY MOTOR PARTS COMPANY O1/21/2021 101-1170-414C Supplies 27.84 FACTORY MOTOR PARTS COMPANY O1/21/2021 101-1170-414C Supplies 31.50 FACTORY MOTOR PARTS COMPANY 59.34 Ferguson Waterworks #2518 01/28/2021 700-0000-415( Materials 77.22 Ferguson Waterworks #2518 01/28/2021 700-0000-415( Materials 154.44 Ferguson Waterworks #2518 231.66 GRAYBAR O1/28/2021 101-1350-412( Supplies 557.79 GRAYBAR 557.79 HealthPartners,Inc. 01/21/2021 101-0000-2012 February Insurance 29,094.75 HealthPartners,Inc. 01/21/2021 101-0000-2012 February Insurance 1,582.10 HealthPartners,Inc. 01/21/2021 210-0000-2012 February Insurance 395.53 HealthPartners,Inc. 01/21/2021 700-0000-2012 February Insurance 4,746.33 HealthPartners,Inc. 01/21/2021 701-0000-2012 February Insurance 4,746.33 HealthPartners,Inc. 01/21/2021 720-0000-2012 February Insurance 2,151.66 HealthPartners,Inc. 01/21/2021 101-0000-2012 February Insurance 17,851.74 HealthPartners,Inc. 01/21/2021 101-0000-2012 February Insurance 633.04 HealthPartners,Inc. 01/21/2021 210-0000-2012 February Insurance 633.04 HealthPartners,Inc. 01/21/2021 700-0000-2012 February Insurance 2,706.24 HealthPartners,Inc. 01/21/2021 701-0000-2012 February Insurance 1,440.16 HealthPartners,Inc. 01/21/2021 720-0000-2012 February Insurance 1,424.34 HealthPartners, Inc. 67,405.26 Indigo Signs 01/28/2021 101-1170-4110 Signs 166.50 Indigo Signs 166.50 InfoSense Inc 01/21/2021 701-7025-470' Supplies 26,080.00 InfoSense Inc 26,080.00 KENNEDY & GRAVEN, CHARTERED O1/21/2021 605-6502-430( Professional Services 792.00 KENNEDY & GRAVEN, CHARTERED 792.00 Lacount Sales, LLC O1/28/2021 101-1320-412( Batteries 158.98 Lacount Sales, LLC 158.98 Lano Equipment 01/28/2021 400-0000-470' Equipment 7,869.22 Lano Equipment 7,869.22 Lawson Products, Inc. 01/28/2021 101-1320-412( Supplies 13.98 Accounts Payable - Check Detail -Checks (O1/29/2021 - 9:15 AM) Page 3 of 5 Name Check Da Account Description Amount Lawson Products, Inc. 13.98 LEAGUE OF MN CITIES INS TRUST O1/28/2021 101-1170-4483 Insurance 5,000.00 LEAGUE OF MN CITIES INS TRUST O1/28/2021 101-1170-4483 Insurance 1,728.62 LEAGUE OF MN CITIES INS TRUST 6,728.62 MBE Inc 01/28/2021 720-7025-429( dump fee 424.00 MBE Inc 01/28/2021 720-7025-429( Disposal 1,064.00 MBE Inc 1,488.00 Minuteman Press 01/28/2021 101-1170-4110 Business Cards 16.00 Minuteman Press 16.00 MN DEPT OF HEALTH O1/28/2021 700-0000-437( Water Supply System Operator Class D - Chad Syverson 32.00 MN DEPT OF HEALTH 32.00 Nexgen Exteriors Corporated 01/28/2021 400-0000-3613 Technology Fee - Permit 2021-00012 - 6310 Steller Circle 9.18 Nexgen Exteriors Corporated 9.18 Pipe Services Corporation 01/21/2021 701-7056-4751 2021 1&1 Project Sanitary Sewer Project 48,030.16 Pipe Services Corporation 48,030.16 POSTMASTER O1/28/2021 701-0000-433( Utility Statements- Permit 914 590.18 POSTMASTER O1/28/2021 700-0000-433( Utility Statements- Permit 914 590.18 POSTMASTER 1,180.36 Quality First Janitorial & Maintenance Inc 01/28/2021 101-1370-435( December cleaning 500.00 Quality First Janitorial & Maintenance Inc 01/28/2021 700-0000-435( December cleaning 62.50 Quality First Janitorial & Maintenance Inc 01/28/2021 701-0000-435( December cleaning 62.50 Quality First Janitorial & Maintenance Inc 625.00 REACH FOR RESOURCES O1/21/2021 101-1600-430( Adaptive Recreation & Inclusion Services 9,439.55 REACH FOR RESOURCES 9,439.55 Sawhorse Designers & Builders 01/28/2021 400-0000-3613 Technology Fee - 7343 Frontier Trail 8.33 Sawhorse Designers & Builders 8.33 SHERWIN WILLIAMS O1/28/2021 701-0000-415( Paint 386.70 SHERWIN WILLIAMS 386.70 Simning Todd 01/28/2021 101-1420-3602 refund rezoning and PUD 850.00 Simning Todd 850.00 Standard Water Control 01/28/2021 400-0000-3613 Technology Fee - 1101 Lake Lucy Road 5.49 Accounts Payable - Check Detail -Checks (O1/29/2021 - 9:15 AM) Page 4 of 5 Name Check Da Account Description Amount Standard Water Control 5.49 STRUCTION CONTRACTING LLC O1/28/2021 400-0000-3613 Technology Fee - 960 Lake Susan Hills Dr 10.88 STRUCTION CONTRACTING LLC 10.88 Tiger Plumbing, Heating & Air 01/28/2021 400-0000-3613 Technology Fee - 417 Rice Court 3.60 Tiger Plumbing, Heating & Air 3.60 Total Comfort A/C & Heating 01/28/2021 400-0000-3613 Technology Fee - 7018 Cheyenne Trail 9.28 Total Comfort A/C & Heating 9.28 TWIN CITY HARDWARE O1/21/2021 101-1190-451C Return -86.62 TWIN CITY HARDWARE O1/21/2021 101-1170-451C Supplies 579.04 TWIN CITY HARDWARE O1/21/2021 101-1170-451C Supplies 40.01 TWIN CITY HARDWARE 532.43 Waconia Comfort 01/28/2021 400-0000-3613 Technology Fee - 6800 Utica Circle 6.65 Waconia Comfort 6.65 WEATHER WATCH INC O1/28/2021 101-1320-431( Weather Service 528.00 WEATHER WATCH INC O1/28/2021 101-1550-431( Weather Service 528.00 WEATHER WATCH INC 1,056.00 198,000.40 Accounts Payable - Check Detail -Checks (O1/29/2021 - 9:15 AM) Page 5 of 5 Accounts Payable Check Detail-ACH User: dwashburn Printed: 01/29/2021 - 9:15 AM tofCITYOF CHM3ER Name Check D Account Description Amount ABM Equipment & Supply, LLC O1/28/2021 400-4120-470 Utility Box 15,135.00 ABM Equipment & Supply, LLC 15,135.00 Advanced Engineering & Environmental Services, LI O1/28/2021 700-0000-430 AWIA Compliance 2,560.00 Advanced Engineering & Environmental Services, LI O1/28/2021 700-0000-430 2020 SCADA Services 203.92 Advanced Engineering & Environmental Services, LI O1/28/2021 700-0000-430 2020 SCADA Services 949.00 Advanced Engineering & Environmental Services, LI 3,712.92 Air Compressors Plus 12/16/202( 101-1220-412 Supplies 15.75 Air Compressors Plus 15.75 Amazon 12/16/202( 700-7043-431 Reclosable Zip Plastic Poly Bags 19.75 Amazon 12/16/202( 700-7043-431 Laptop Bag 30.99 Amazon 12/16/202( 700-7043-415 Materials 48.36 Amazon 12/16/202( 700-7043-415 Materials 12.00 Amazon 12/16/202( 700-0000-424 Clothing - Mike Wegner 44.99 Amazon 12/16/202( 701-0000-431 Laptop Bag 24.99 Amazon 12/16/202( 701-0000-431 Laptop Bag 24.99 Amazon 12/16/202( 700-0000-426 equipment 53.19 Amazon 12/16/202( 700-7043-431 Laptop bag return -30.99 Amazon 12/16/202( 700-0000-431 Laptop Shoulder Bag 23.74 Amazon 12/16/202( 700-0000-424 Clothing Allowance - Kevin C 51.29 Amazon 12/16/202( 701-0000-424 Clothing Allowance- Kevin C 51.29 Amazon 12/16/202( 700-0000-431 Surface Pen 64.99 Amazon 12/16/202( 212-0000-429 Masks - disposable 391.51 Amazon 12/16/202( 101-1560-430 syrup - Annual Pancake Bfkst 40.98 Amazon 12/16/202( 101-1530-413 Microphone for podium 13.98 Amazon 12/16/202( 101-1530-413 Microphone for podium 19.99 Amazon 12/16/202( 101-1530-413 Microphone for podium return -13.98 Amazon 12/16/202( 212-0000-415 Disinfectant and disposable rags 740.73 Amazon 12/16/202( 212-0000-413 Face masks 13.50 Amazon 12/16/202( 101-1160-430 Amazon Sewer Video Access Fee October 1.23 Amazon 12/16/202( 212-0000-470 Dell docking stations COVID 629.94 Amazon 12/16/202( 212-0000-470 Wireless mice for laptops COVID 138.36 Amazon 12/16/202( 101-1160-453 Lost Surface Pen Building Dept Jeff K 64.99 Amazon 12/16/202( 212-0000-470 Surface LTE Gary Berg COVID 1,316.67 Amazon 12/16/202( 212-0000-470 Surface Case COVID 51.87 Amazon 12/16/202( 212-0000-470 Monitors for Council Chamber remodel COVID 521.85 Amazon 12/16/202( 101-1160-453 Apple to HDMI adapters Don J/ 1 spare 31.98 Amazon 12/16/202( 212-0000-470 USB Extension cable for microphone Courtyard Conf Rm COVII 23.99 Amazon 12/16/202( 212-0000-470 Monitors for laptop docking stations COVID 679.56 Amazon 12/16/202( 212-0000-470 Surface Pens COVID 129.98 Amazon 12/16/202( 400-4126-470 Battery banks for ipad/wifi pucks 59.98 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-ACH (O1/29/2021 - 9:15 AM) Page 1 of 10 Name Check D Account Description Amount Amazon 12/16/202( 400-4126-470 Laptop bags 299.70 Amazon 12/16/202( 101-1160-453 Replacement ipad case Fire Department 34.99 Amazon 12/16/202( 400-4126-470 Monitor Ashley Finance 169.85 Amazon 12/16/202( 101-1110-437 office supplies 34.41 Amazon 12/16/202( 101-1170-411 Office supplies 11.97 Amazon 12/16/202( 101-1260-412 Tool for CSO's 49.99 Amazon 12/16/202( 212-0000-411 Exam Gloves 56.90 Amazon 12/16/202( 212-0000-411 office supplies 35.88 Amazon 12/16/202( 101-1170-411 office supplies -22.49 Amazon 12/16/202( 101-1170-411 office supplies 51.23 Amazon 12/16/202( 101-1170-411 office supplies 161.01 Amazon 12/16/202( 101-1170-411 office supplies 17.69 Amazon 12/16/202( 101-1170-411 Office supplies 46.47 Amazon 12/16/202( 101-1170-411 Office supplies 45.64 Amazon 6,269.93 American Planning Association 12/16/202( 101-1420-437 APA Membership 476.00 American Planning Association 476.00 AMERICAN SOLUTIONS O1/21/2021 101-1250-413 Envelopes 192.54 AMERICAN SOLUTIONS O1/28/2021 700-0000-434 Envelopes 393.20 AMERICAN SOLUTIONS O1/28/2021 701-0000-434 Envelopes 393.19 AMERICAN SOLUTIONS 978.93 Apple.com 12/16/202( 700-0000-431 Storage 0.99 Apple.com 12/16/202( 101-1220-431 iCloud Storage 0.99 Apple.com 1.98 BATTERIES PLUS O1/21/2021 101-1170-451 Battery 116.55 BATTERIES PLUS O1/21/2021 101-1170-451 Battery 90.65 Batteries Plus 12/16/202( 700-7019-415 Materials 95.67 Batteries Plus 302.87 Cabin Fever Sporting Goods 12/16/202( 101-1550-412 Waders 155.68 Cabin Fever Sporting Goods 155.68 Carver County 01/21/2021 700-7043-432 Utility Fiber 435.00 Carver County 01/21/2021 700-7043-432 Carver Fiber 500.00 Carver County 01/21/2021 720-7205-430 AIS Watercraft Inspection 29,963.46 Carver County 01/21/2021 101-1160-432 Carver Link Internet 540.00 Carver County 31,438.46 CDW Government 12/16/202( 400-4126-470 Power Bank Dell Latitude 9510 127.92 CDW Government 127.92 Chick-Fil-A 12/16/202( 101-1110-437 CC Dinner 91.81 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-ACH (O1/29/2021 - 9:15 AM) Page 2 of 10 Name Check D Account Description Amount Chick-Fil-A 91.81 Colonial Life & Accident Insurance Co 01/28/2021 101-0000-200 January2021 60.72 Colonial Life & Accident Insurance Co 01/28/2021 700-0000-200 January 2021 19.22 Colonial Life & Accident Insurance Co 01/28/2021 701-0000-200 January 2021 19.22 Colonial Life & Accident Insurance Co 99.16 Columbia Southern University 12/16/202( 101-1220-437 Officer Development K Geske R Weidman 360.00 Columbia Southern University 360.00 COMPUTER INTEGRATION TECHN. 01/21/2021 400-4126-470 Replacement Backup Server Dell 10,595.00 COMPUTER INTEGRATION TECHN. 10,595.00 Corporate Card Annual Fee 12/16/202( 101-1130-430 Annual Fee - Bill K 12.00 Corporate Card Annual Fee 12/16/202( 101-1130-430 Annual Fee - Don N 12.00 Corporate Card Annual Fee 24.00 CORPORATE MECHANICAL O1/28/2021 400-0000-361 Technology Fee - 2900 Corporate Place 1.82 CORPORATE MECHANICAL 1.82 Crystal Infosystems LLC O1/28/2021 101-1170-411 Toner 936.87 Crystal Infosystems LLC O1/28/2021 101-1170-411 Toner 442.69 Crystal Infosystems LLC 1,379.56 Cub Foods 12/16/202( 101-1560-430 Octoberfest beverages and mustard pkgs 22.71 Cub Foods 12/16/202( 101-1614-413 Boo Your Neighbor program supplies 39.08 Cub Foods 12/16/202( 101-1614-413 Boo Your Neighbor program supplies 10.72 Cub Foods 72.51 Dairy Queen 12/16/202( 700-0000-437 Dinner for training 12.96 Dairy Queen 12.96 Davanni's 12/16/202( 101-1180-437 Election food 136.27 Davanni's 12/16/202( 101-1180-437 Election food 134.41 Davanni's 12/16/202( 101-1180-437 election food 265.32 Davanni's 12/16/202( 101-1180-437 Election food 174.64 Davanni's 12/16/202( 101-1180-437 Election food 136.27 Davanni's 12/16/202( 101-1180-437 Election food 174.64 Davanni's 12/16/202( 101-1110-437 CC Dinner 48.15 Davanni's 1,069.70 Days Inn 12/16/202( 700-0000-437 Hotel for training 353.22 Days Inn 353.22 Delta Dental 01/21/2021 101-0000-201 February 2021 Insurance 1,941.41 Delta Dental 01/21/2021 101-0000-201 February 2021 Insurance 30.20 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-ACH (O1/29/2021 - 9:15 AM) Page 3 of 10 Name Check D Account Description Amount Delta Dental 01/21/2021 700-0000-201 February 2021 Insurance 379.86 Delta Dental 01/21/2021 701-0000-201 February 2021 Insurance 319.46 Delta Dental 01/21/2021 720-0000-201 February 2021 Insurance 236.62 Delta Dental 2,907.55 Diamond Snow & Ice Control 01/28/2021 101-1320-415 Materials 1,400.00 Diamond Snow & Ice Control 1,400.00 Dollar Tree Stores Inc 12/16/202( 101-1560-413 Octoberfest decorations and supplies 33.33 Dollar Tree Stores Inc 33.33 DOLLIFF INC. INSURANCE O1/28/2021 101-1170-448 Travelers Insurance 23,000.00 DOLLIFF INC. INSURANCE O1/28/2021 101-1170-448 Travelers Insurance 239.00 DOLLIFF INC. INSURANCE 23,239.00 Dungarees 12/16/202( 701-0000-424 Clothing Allowance - Jerry Johnson 42.48 Dungarees 12/16/202( 700-0000-424 Clothing Allowance - Jerry Johnson 42.47 Dungarees 84.95 Ebay 12/16/202( 701-0000-451 Camera mount bracket LS-24 32.19 Ebay 32.19 Engineering Alliance MN 12/16/202( 101-1310-437 Webinar 60.00 Engineering Alliance MN 60.00 FASTENAL COMPANY O1/28/2021 700-0000-455 Materials 10.66 FASTENAL COMPANY O1/28/2021 101-1320-412 Materials 39.75 FASTENAL COMPANY 50.41 Fidelity Security Life 01/28/2021 101-0000-200 February 2021 Vision Insurance 206.08 Fidelity Security Life 01/28/2021 700-0000-200 February 2021 Vision Insurance 21.73 Fidelity Security Life 01/28/2021 701-0000-200 February 2021 Vision Insurance 15.46 Fidelity Security Life 01/28/2021 720-0000-200 February 2021 Vision Insurance 9.13 Fidelity Security Life 252.40 Fleet Farm 12/16/202( 701-0000-424 Clothing Allowance - Charlie Chihos 53.03 Fleet Farm 12/16/202( 700-0000-424 Clothing Allowance - Kevin C 112.50 Fleet Farm 12/16/202( 701-0000-424 Clothing Allowance - Kevin C 112.49 Fleet Farm 12/16/202( 700-0000-424 Clothing Allowance - Charlie Chihos 53.02 Fleet Farm 331.04 Galls LLC 12/16/202( 701-0000-424 Clothing Allowance - Jerry Johnson 91.48 Galls LLC 12/16/202( 700-0000-424 Clothing Allowance - Jerry Johnson 91.47 Galls LLC 182.95 Gempler's 12/16/202( 700-0000-424 Clothing Allowance - Joseph Gillen 43.83 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-ACH (O1/29/2021 - 9:15 AM) Page 4 of 10 Name Check D Account Description Amount Gempler's 12/16/202( 701-0000-424 Clothing Allowance - Joseph Gillen 43.83 Gempler's 87.66 Grainger 12/16/202( 101-1550-415 Materials 29.91 Grainger 12/16/202( 701-0000-453 Materials 24.12 Grainger 54.03 Home Depot 12/16/202( 101-1550-412 Holiday Lights 192.85 Home Depot 12/16/202( 700-0000-455 Parts 5.35 Home Depot 12/16/202( 700-7019-453 Equipment 19.32 Home Depot 12/16/202( 701-0000-455 Supplies 38.26 Home Depot 12/16/202( 701-0000-455 Supplies 67.02 Home Depot 12/16/202( 700-0000-426 Small Tools 222.36 Home Depot 12/16/202( 101-1220-437 OSB boards for live fire training 142.51 Home Depot 687.67 Hy-Vee 12/16/202( 101-1600-413 Personal expense used city credit card I will pay for charge 19.78 Hy-Vee 19.78 Indelco Plastics Corporation 12/16/202( 700-7019-415 Materials 23.31 Indelco Plastics Corporation 23.31 Ingersoll-Rand 12/16/202( 700-7043-415 Materials 1,307.48 Ingersoll-Rand 1,307.48 Innovative Office Solutions LLC O1/21/2021 101-1170-411 Office Supplies 56.12 Innovative Office Solutions LLC O1/28/2021 101-1600-413 Supplies 1,036.14 Innovative Office Solutions LLC O1/28/2021 101-1170-411 Office Supplies 187.73 Innovative Office Solutions LLC O1/28/2021 101-1170-411 Office Supplies 43.94 Innovative Office Solutions LLC O1/28/2021 101-1170-411 Office Supplies 36.88 Innovative Office Solutions LLC 1,360.81 Jimmy Johns 12/16/202( 101-1180-437 Election food 130.59 Jimmy Johns 12/16/202( 101-1180-437 Election food 138.30 Jimmy Johns 12/16/202( 101-1180-437 Election food 150.33 Jimmy Johns 12/16/202( 101-1180-437 Election food 138.30 Jimmy Johns 12/16/202( 101-1180-437 election food 138.30 Jimmy Johns 12/16/202( 101-1180-437 Election food 162.43 Jimmy Johns 12/16/202( 101-1180-437 Election food 138.30 Jimmy Johns 12/16/202( 101-1180-437 Election food 138.30 Jimmy Johns 1,134.85 KiddyWampus.com 12/16/202( 101-1614-413 Trick or Trail program supplies 16.91 KiddyWampus.com 16.91 KIMLEY HORN AND ASSOCIATES INC O1/28/2021 605-6502-430 TH 101 Reconstruction 14,248.44 KIMLEY HORN AND ASSOCIATES INC O1/28/2021 605-6503-430 TH 101 Reconstruction 1,604.30 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-ACH (O1/29/2021 - 9:15 AM) Page 5 of 10 Name Check D Account Description Amount KIMLEY HORN AND ASSOCIATES INC O1/28/2021 601-6046-430 2020 Pavement Rehab - 20-05 5,561.25 KIMLEY HORN AND ASSOCIATES INC 21,413.99 Kwik Trip 12/16/202( 700-0000-437 Lunch at Training 4.43 Kwik Trip 4.43 Life Support Innovations LLC O1/21/2021 101-1220-413 Supplies 522.10 Life Support Innovations LLC 522.10 LogMeIn Inc 12/16/202( 101-1160-430 LogMeInPro Annual Service Renewal 375.80 LogMeIn Inc 375.80 Lunds & Byerly's 12/16/202( 101-1110-437 CC dinner 162.23 Lunds & Byerly's 162.23 McMaster -Carr 12/16/202( 700-7019-415 Supplies 24.26 McMaster -Carr 12/16/202( 700-7019-453 Supplies 210.41 McMaster -Carr 12/16/202( 700-7019-453 Parts 130.99 McMaster -Can 365.66 Menards 12/16/202( 101-1550-415 Materials 55.88 Menards 12/16/202( 700-7043-415 Materials 34.88 Menards 12/16/202( 700-0000-455 Materials 72.83 Menards 12/16/202( 700-7019-415 Materials 293.73 Menards 457.32 Merlins Ace Hardware 12/16/202( 101-1614-413 Trick or Trail program supplies 36.34 Merlins Ace Hardware 12/16/202( 720-7202-432 comet garden maintenance 17.18 Merlins Ace Hardware 53.52 Metropolitan Council, Env Svcs 01/21/2021 101-1250-381 December SAC -149.10 Metropolitan Council, Env Svcs 01/21/2021 701-0000-202 December SAC 14,910.00 Metropolitan Council, Env Svcs 14,760.90 MN DEPT OF LABOR AND INDUSTRY O1/26/2021 101-1250-381 December surcharge -70.06 MN DEPT OF LABOR AND INDUSTRY O1/26/2021 101-0000-202 December surcharge 3,502.91 MN DEPT OF LABOR AND INDUSTRY 3,432.85 MN Pollution Control Agency 12/16/202( 701-0000-437 Training - Mike Wegner 390.00 MN Pollution Control Agency 390.00 MN RECREATION & PARK ASSOC. 01/21/2021 101-1520-436 Membership 1,299.00 MN RECREATION & PARK ASSOC. 1,299.00 MN VALLEY ELECTRIC COOP O1/28/2021 101-1350-432 Monthly Service 138.41 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-ACH (O1/29/2021 - 9:15 AM) Page 6 of 10 Name Check D Account Description Amount MN VALLEY ELECTRIC COOP 138.41 MOSS & BARNETT O1/21/2021 210-0000-430 Professional Services 4,672.00 MOSS & BARNETT 4,672.00 MUNICIPAL LEGISLATIVE COMMISSION O1/28/2021 101-1110-436 2021 MLC Member Dues 6,569.50 MUNICIPAL LEGISLATIVE COMMISSION 6,569.50 NAPA AUTO & TRUCK PARTS O1/28/2021 101-1250-414 Supplies 268.01 NAPA AUTO & TRUCK PARTS O1/28/2021 101-1250-414 Supplies 9.05 NAPA AUTO & TRUCK PARTS O1/28/2021 101-1320-414 Supplies 165.32 NAPA AUTO & TRUCK PARTS 442.38 National Registry Of EMT 12/16/202( 101-1220-430 EMT Re Cert 20.00 National Registry Of EMT 20.00 New Horizons Minnesota 12/16/202( 101-1120-437 Training 790.00 New Horizons Minnesota 790.00 NoveltyLights.com 12/16/202( 101-1550-415 Lights 699.46 NoveltyLights.com 12/16/202( 700-0000-415 Lights 1,232.30 NoveltyLights.com 1,931.76 Nuss Truck & Equipment 01/21/2021 101-1320-414 Supplies 132.86 Nuss Truck & Equipment 01/28/2021 101-1370-412 Supplies 225.00 Nuss Truck & Equipment 01/28/2021 101-1320-414 Supplies 111.18 Nuss Truck & Equipment 469.04 Office Max/Office Depot 12/16/202( 700-7043-412 Supplies 15.34 Office Max/Office Depot 12/16/202( 700-7019-415 Materials 19.28 Office Max/Office Depot 12/16/202( 700-0000-431 Laptop Bag 37.57 Office Max/Office Depot 72.19 Once Upon a Sign & Printing 12/16/202( 700-7043-415 Storage Magnets 107.53 Once Upon a Sign & Printing 107.53 O'Reilly Automotive Inc 01/21/2021 700-0000-452 Supplies 15.65 O'Reilly Automotive Inc 01/21/2021 101-1550-412 Supplies 46.92 O'Reilly Automotive Inc 01/21/2021 101-1370-426 Equipment 6.36 O'Reilly Automotive Inc 01/21/2021 700-0000-414 Equipment 45.85 O'Reilly Automotive Inc 01/21/2021 700-0000-414 Supplies 29.86 O'Reilly Automotive Inc 01/21/2021 101-1320-412 Supplies 94.67 O'Reilly Automotive Inc 01/21/2021 701-0000-452 Materials 33.29 O'Reilly Automotive Inc 01/21/2021 701-0000-452 Materials 16.64 O'Reilly Automotive Inc 289.24 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-ACH (O1/29/2021 - 9:15 AM) Page 7 of 10 Name Check D Account Description Amount Panera Bread 12/16/202( 101-1180-437 Election food 176.51 Panera Bread 176.51 Parry City 12/16/202( 101-1614-413 Boo and Trick or Trail program supplies 32.14 Parry City 12/16/202( 101-1614-413 Boo Your Neighbor program supplies 32.12 Parry City 64.26 PayPal 12/16/202( 700-0000-437 Webinar 50.00 PayPal 50.00 PC World Magazine 12/16/202( 101-1160-421 PC World Annual Subscription 19.97 PC World Magazine 19.97 Pioneer Engineering, P.A. 01/28/2021 720-0000-430 120192 Royal Oaks Estate 1,000.00 Pioneer Engineering, P.A. 1,000.00 POMP'S TIRE SERVICE INC O1/21/2021 101-1320-414 Supplies 1,420.00 POMP'S TIRE SERVICE INC 1,420.00 Premium Waters, Inc 01/28/2021 101-1550-412 January Service 3.00 Premium Waters, Inc 3.00 Pro-Tec Design, Inc. 01/28/2021 101-1160-430 PW Card Reader Repair 153.00 Pro-Tec Design, Inc. 153.00 Public Surplus 12/16/202( 101-0000-203 Auction fees public surplus 93.40 Public Surplus 93.40 Quill Corporation 12/16/202( 101-1170-411 office supplies 25.98 Quill Corporation 25.98 Road Machinery & Supplies 01/21/2021 101-1320-412 Supplies 570.05 Road Machinery & Supplies 570.05 Sam's Club 12/16/202( 101-1560-430 Food for Octoberfest party 40.26 Sam's Club 12/16/202( 101-1560-430 Pancake Bfkst food 43.85 Sam's Club 84.11 Scheels 12/16/202( 701-0000-424 Clothing allowance - Bill Kistner 39.99 Scheels 12/16/202( 700-0000-424 Clothing allowance - Bill Kistner 39.99 Scheels 79.98 Southwest Newspapers 12/16/202( 101-1120-436 Chan Villager digital subscription 48.00 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-ACH (O1/29/2021 - 9:15 AM) Page 8 of 10 Name Check D Account Description Amount Southwest Newspapers 48.00 Southwest Rental and Sales 12/16/202( 700-7043-415 Equipment Rental 51.18 Southwest Rental and Sales 51.18 Stericycle Inc 12/16/202( 101-1160-430 Shredding Service Finance Documents 544.74 Stericycle Inc 544.74 STRATOGUARD LLC O1/28/2021 101-1160-430 Proofpoint Email 176.00 STRATOGUARD LLC O1/28/2021 101-1160-422 Ivanti Patch Mgmt Renewal 1,523.35 STRATOGUARD LLC 1,699.35 SUBWAY 12/16/202( 700-0000-437 Training Dinner 12.42 SUBWAY 12.42 Tactical Gear.com 12/16/202( 701-0000-424 Clothing Allowance - Bill K 134.47 Tactical Gear.com 12/16/202( 700-0000-424 Clothing Allowance - Bill K 134.47 Tactical Gear.com 268.94 Target 12/16/202( 701-0000-424 Clothing Allowance - Jerry Johnson 44.98 Target 12/16/202( 101-1614-413 Boo and Trick or Trail program supplies 11.81 Target 12/16/202( 101-1614-413 Boo and Trick or Trail program supplies 171.18 Target 12/16/202( 101-1614-413 Trick or Trail program supplies 48.23 Target 12/16/202( 101-1614-413 Boo Your Neighbor program supplies 53.87 Target 12/16/202( 700-0000-424 Clothing Allowance - Jerry Johnson 44.97 Target 375.04 THE FIRE STORE.COM 12/16/202( 101-1220-426 Rope & Webbing 1,239.48 THE FIRE STORE.COM 12/16/202( 101-1220-426 Rope Throw Bags 291.38 THE FIRE STORE.COM 1,530.86 TP Tools & Equipment 12/16/202( 700-0000-417 Motor Fuels 114.46 TP Tools & Equipment 114.46 Vital Oxide Solutions 12/16/202( 212-0000-415 Disinfectant for Rec Center 303.60 Vital Oxide Solutions 303.60 Wal-Mart 12/16/202( 101-1560-430 Pancake Bfkst food 20.86 Wal-Mart 20.86 WSB & ASSOCIATES INC O1/28/2021 720-0000-430 2020 Water Resource Support Services 1,370.50 WSB & ASSOCIATES INC O1/28/2021 601-6038-430 2018 Street Improvment Project - 18-01 375.00 WSB & ASSOCIATES INC O1/28/2021 601-6039-430 Lake Drive East Street Improvement Project 18-02 480.00 WSB & ASSOCIATES INC O1/28/2021 420-0000-430 2020 Chanhassen Pavement Management - Streets 474.00 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-ACH (O1/29/2021 - 9:15 AM) Page 9 of 10 Name Check D Account Description Amount WSB & ASSOCIATES INC 2,699.50 WW GRAINGER INC O1/28/2021 101-1550-415 Materials 182.39 WW GRAINGER INC O1/28/2021 101-1550-415 Materials 36.40 WW GRAINGER INC O1/28/2021 101-1550-415 Materials 139.65 WW GRAINGER INC 358.44 XCELENERGYINC O1/28/2021 601-0000-308 Monthly Service 580.00 XCEL ENERGY INC O1/28/2021 700-0000-432 Monthly Service 1,721.21 XCELENERGYINC O1/28/2021 101-1350-432 Monthly Service 75.01 XCELENERGYINC O1/28/2021 601-0000-308 Monthly Service 28.00 XCEL ENERGY INC O1/28/2021 700-0000-432 Monthly Service 2,279.26 XCELENERGYINC O1/28/2021 601-0000-308 Monthly Service 40.00 XCELENERGYINC O1/28/2021 101-1350-432 Monthly Service 18.74 XCELENERGYINC O1/28/2021 601-0000-308 Monthly Service 14.00 XCELENERGYINC O1/28/2021 101-1350-432 Monthly Service 31.91 XCELENERGYINC O1/28/2021 601-0000-308 Monthly Service 14.00 XCELENERGYINC O1/28/2021 700-7043-432 Monthly Service 5,173.66 XCELENERGYINC O1/28/2021 601-0000-308 Monthly Service 290.00 XCEL ENERGY INC O1/28/2021 700-0000-432 Monthly Service 1,915.46 XCELENERGYINC O1/28/2021 101-1540-432 Monthly Service 417.11 XCELENERGYINC O1/28/2021 101-1600-432 Monthly Service 51.36 XCELENERGYINC O1/28/2021 101-1550-432 Monthly Service 236.42 XCELENERGYINC O1/28/2021 601-0000-308 Monthly Service 388.00 XCEL ENERGY INC O1/28/2021 700-7019-432 Monthly Service 3,444.43 XCELENERGYINC O1/28/2021 101-1170-432 Monthly Service 693.26 XCELENERGYINC O1/28/2021 101-1190-432 Monthly Service 545.95 XCELENERGYINC O1/28/2021 101-1220-432 Monthly Service 1,077.22 XCELENERGYINC O1/28/2021 101-1370-432 Monthly Service 1,550.66 XCELENERGYINC O1/28/2021 101-1171-432 Monthly Service 25.17 XCEL ENERGY INC O1/28/2021 700-0000-432 Monthly Service 193.83 XCELENERGYINC O1/28/2021 701-0000-432 Monthly Service 193.83 XCELENERGYINC O1/28/2021 601-0000-308 Monthly Service 688.00 XCEL ENERGY INC 21,686.49 ZIEGLER INC O1/28/2021 101-1320-414 Supplies 709.22 ZIEGLER INC O1/28/2021 101-1320-414 Parts return -24.36 ZIEGLER INC O1/28/2021 101-1320-414 Supplies 525.86 ZIEGLER INC O1/28/2021 101-1320-414 Supplies 24.36 ZIEGLER INC 1,235.08 Zoom 12/16/202( 212-0000-430 Zoom monthly webinar charge/ council/ Rec Center 85.90 Zoom 85.90 199,456.47 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-ACH (O1/29/2021 - 9:15 AM) Page 10 of 10