[0:00] [Music] [1:15] **Chair Curts:** Good evening everyone and welcome to the July 16th 2025 planning commission Apple Valley Planning Commission meeting to order. Uh first item out of business is the approval of the agenda. Any changes from staff? [1:53] **Tim Benetti:** Uh good evening madam chair, members of commission. We do not have any additions or changes for you at this time. [1:53] **Chair Curts:** Thank you. Any changes from the commissioners? No. Can I get an approval? [2:09] **Commissioner Scanland:** Madam Chair, I recommend approval of the agenda. [2:09] **Commissioner Mahwald:** Second. [2:18] **Chair Curts:** Approval are the motion was made by Commissioner Scanland, seconded by Commissioner Mahwald. Any comments? If not, all in favor say I. [2:18] **Commissioners:** I. I. [2:18] **Chair Curts:** Oppose. Nay. Motion carries. The next item of business is the approval of the consent agenda. The consent agenda items are considered routine and will be enacted with a single motion without a discussion unless a commissioner or a citizen request to have any items separately considered. It will then be moved to the regular agenda for consideration. Can I get a motion of approval? [2:44] **Commissioner Scanland:** So moved. [2:44] **Commissioner Mahwald:** Second. [2:44] **Chair Curts:** Made by Commissioner Scanland, seconded by Commissioner Mahwald. Any questions? If not, all in favor say I. [2:44] **Commissioners:** I. I. [2:44] **Chair Curts:** Oppose. Nay. Motion carries. [3:00] **Chair Curts:** This brings us to our number four, which is a public hearing tonight. Public hearing is on the Valley Station Apartments. I at this point will open up the public hearing. We will now open the public hearing for agenda item 4A. The affidavit of publication for the notice of public hearing is available for inspection in the planning department. Everyone wishing to speak at this public hearing should be sure to fill out the attendance roster. Please include your name and your address so that accurate records can be maintained. We will begin the procedure with a brief presentation by city staff followed by a presentation by the petitioner of the hearing. Upon the conclusion of the presentation, city staff will be asked to comment on the proposals conformance with pertinent regulations and policies. After that, comments will be taken from the general public. Terry Dill. [3:47] **Terry Dill:** Thank you, chair, members of the planning commission. Tonight's request is for Valley Station Apartments, and they are requesting um two land use applications approvals. One is amendments to the plan development district, um number 507, subzone 2, and then also for site plan and building permit authorization. The site is located at 7169 153rd Street. Um the site is surrounded by um Minnesota Valley Transit Station which is located directly to the north. Um there's a floor and decor store located to the west and Orchard Square Apartments is located directly to the south. And then there's also Chasewood family rental town homes are located directly uh to the east. The future land use um for the site is guided for suburban intensive high density and the current zoning of the property as I mentioned was PD507 sub zone 2. Uh the densities for this um property are um guided for 24 to 48 units per acre and the proposal that they are having before you tonight has a density of 47.7 units per acre which does align with the um 2040 comprehensive plan. As part of these requirements or the amendments, um they are asking for six different sections of the PD507 sub zone 2 to be amended. One is to reduce the setback that's required from the neighborhood street which is 155th which is located on the north side um from 40 ft to 25 ft setback. They are asking to increase the maximum units per acre from 16 to 48. They're asking to reduce the minimum square footage of land required per unit from 2760 square feet to 916 square ft. They're also asking the allowed coverage to increase from 20 to 35% of the lot um and increase the maximum stories from three to five stories and the maximum height from 45 to 60 ft. And then the last amendment that they're requesting is to eliminate the minimum one to three roof pitch that's required for all um multif family structures in that district. Um the site plan shown above um as I mentioned it's a five-story apartment building. The main entrance will be facing east with the parking lot out front. Uh the setbacks are 30 feet from the east property line, uh 15 feet from the south property line, and then 25 feet from the north property line, which is part of the amendments. Um amenities that they're proposing with this development include um a clubhouse or community room, outdoor patio, grill area, fitness center, bike storage, um electric car chargers, a dog run, um a tot lot. It's located in the front of the site. Um the site itself um will feature one to three-bedroom units with a mix of all three. Um the majority of them will be two-bedroom units. Um this is a workforce housing development proposition. Um with that they are required to have a 60% um area median income threshold for the residents. Um that is something that they are also applying for grants for this application and this will also receive funding from the CDA. Um the site itself has three underground garages that are provided on the site. The one access is will be located in the north kind of the front corner of the property. Um, there's another garage access from the access that will the driveway access off of Gas Light Drive and it'll enter into the garage on the south side. And then there's another third garage entrance, they'll be on the south side. Um, due to the grades, these three um, garages actually are not connected, so they're separate garage units. Um, the proposal also includes um, 240 total parking spaces will be provided um, which is 1.66 spaces per unit. Um that also includes both one garage stall for each tenant and then also 77 um surface parking spaces in the front parking lot area. Um staff does have um some concerns about the parking. We've asked them to do a parking analysis just looking at the demands based on the different units the one-bedroom, two-bedroom, three-bedroom just to determine if this will be sufficient parking for this um for this site. Um before you is a grading plan for the site. Um they will have an underground storm water retention system. They'll be located underneath the parking lot. Um the next plan sheet is a utility plan. Um part of this development they will be required to relocate the sanitary sewer. Um it also requires that existing drainage and utility easements be um vacated and rededicated um on this site. The sanitary sewer is extending from the east side, which is property that's owned by the CDA, and they have um said that they would participate in those easements. We'll also need to get an easement from them to relocate that sanitary sewer. Um the landscape plan that they provided has a nice healthy mix of different landscape trees. Um both coniferous, ornamental, and deciduous trees along with trees in the parking lot. They do have coniferous trees that are around the entrance into the garage on the south side for screening and for um headlights. And then they also have some additional coniferous trees along the south um property line. Um this is a rendering of the building looking from the northwest corner of the elevation, the building elevation. This is uh Gas Light Drive running north south here and then 155th Street running east west. The proposed building materials include um a stone veneer, cultured stone. Um they're also proposing to use James Hardy siding in two different colors. One's a lighter white and then a darker bronze gray color. And then at the base of all the structures, they will be using um decorative block. Um here's a rendering um just showing the different materials that they're proposing and the percentages on each elevation. Another rendering. Um here's a rendering as you're looking at the southeast elevation of the site. So this is Gaslight Drive. Um and this is from the west elevation. Again, Gaslight Drive located there. This is the entrance. Um, you will be driving under the building to access the parking lot and then the entrance into the one garage unit is in this location here. Um, this is a view from the east elevation with the outdoor patio area and the tot lot. And then, um, one of the last elevations. This is we asked them to provide a more of an overview of the site. um being that it's five stories and just the um how it's blending in with the other properties. This is the floor plan of the site showing the parking lot out front and again the garage entrances showing the separate garages. The third garage style is underneath the floor plan on the north side of the building. So, with that, um, I'm available for any questions you may have, and the applicant, um, and the representatives are also here if you have any questions for them. Okay. [12:30] **Chair Curts:** Thank you, Terry. Commissioner Puit. [12:40] **Commissioner Puit:** Mr. Chair, thank you very much. Uh Terry, if you could help me understand the request in the second amendment regarding the maximum units per acre from 16 to 48 when it appears that uh 48 is within the kind of 2040 comprehensive plan. Maybe I don't understand that correctly. [13:04] **Terry Dill:** Correct. Um so the comprehensive plan allows the the 24 to 48 unit. So it's guided for the correct designation but the zoning does not comply with the future guided land use. So the zoning only allows the lower densities. Um a lot of times when a comprehensive plans are updated the zoning should be rezoned to match those. Um in this site it it has not. So um we are asking for that amendment. [13:31] **Commissioner Puit:** Thank you. [13:36] **Chair Curts:** Anyone else? Commissioner Scanland. [13:39] **Commissioner Scanland:** Madam Chair, um you did a nice job with your presentation here and the the uh seems like there's nice mix of materials for the exterior and um um how the space is used in shifting up. Um I do have a couple questions and you said that there's a formal parking plan is going to be coming forward to be able to see. Um I I just have some um that's the the most glaring thing that comes out at me because over uh majority of the units are 111 plus of them are either two or three-bedroom and that the 1.6 I don't think is going to be adequate to do that. And then there's the concern with business parking across the street that's not going to be allowed. And then also with the transit station and there's minimal street parking with the change on um that's mentioned on 155th? Uh thank you. So um that's kind of a concern that I have here. Um has there been the fire department made any comment as far as egress with the parking lot the way it's set up and maneuverability? Are we getting ahead of myself when I ask that question? [14:39] **Terry Dill:** No, they were they did receive the plans, but we did not receive any comments. [14:39] **Commissioner Scanland:** Okay. It just seems awful tight around in some of that and that's brought about my question to you on that. [14:54] **Terry Dill:** Commissioner Scanland, one other thing that we um did ask for them to submit autoturn um movements. Um so those will be coming in. [14:54] **Commissioner Scanland:** Okay. And and one other thing I'd like to see also with this is a formal lighting plan to be able to show um light projections, especially on that um eastern side of the parking lot and how that may or may not affect the neighboring properties. That's a concern that I have, especially with going down to only 15 ft along there. Um that's something that's uh coming out. Unfortunately, we can't flip it around. Just the nature of the lot that it would be better if the lot parking was on the other side towards Cedar, but it's not going to work out that way. Um, and have you had any discussions with the concerning the additional two stories on it? additional two stories from maximum of three with the request of five. [15:47] **Terry Dill:** Yes. So this this was part of the original RFP um that was submitted to the city for um the city selling the property to the developer. Um and as part of that um the five stories and the density were allowed um in their proposal that was presented. One of the things that we did talk about was the design of the structure and the five stories. And they have used the lighter um colors in the design of it to kind of lessen the height of it so that it would fit in. Um they're using the darker colors on the bottom portion of the structure. Um just a it I mean it is five stories. uh transit station is located directly north. Um the apartments that are behind it are three stories. So it's just to kind of lessen the height impact. [16:39] **Commissioner Scanland:** Yeah, that's where I'm kind of getting concerned how it mixes with the existing neighborhood with that height and um dealing with that. So thank you for your explanation, Terry. [17:03] **Chair Curts:** That's my concern too is the five. So the Legends on 140th in Cedar. How is that—is that five? [17:03] **Terry Dill:** I believe that is a four story. [17:03] **Chair Curts:** That's four-story. So the five story just tends to be a little overbearing I think in that neighborhood. Um even four would be better than five, but I guess I'm a little concerned about the five stories myself. Um what else did I want to ask? Maybe I'll ask the applicant when they come up. How many garages were on the bottom or how many parking spaces were on the bottom? [17:22] **Terry Dill:** There are 162 garage spaces. [17:22] **Chair Curts:** 162 and 240 total parking? [17:39] **Terry Dill:** Total parking. Okay. [17:39] **Commissioner Mahwald:** Thank you, Chair. Um, kind of following up—like I think the original picture that you had that—or maybe it's the picture with the elevation looking back towards it. Um, yeah, the previous one—that's that's just huge. I mean, everything adjacent to it is, you know, it's dwarfed by that building. um that will forever change the character of that neighborhood. Um even the apartment buildings to the south which are at the upper right hand corner in this elevation when you look down on them—there is lawn, there are trees, there's landscaping. Um the town home development to the immediately to the east is is outstanding in terms of a multif family development with mature trees. Um parking areas are spread. So you'll have a cluster of six or eight or whatever parking spaces here down the road. It has a just a wonderful walkable neighborhood feel. and this will completely transform that neighborhood in my opinion. Um, so I'm concerned about, you know, it—the guide gives us—I guess we're we're we're looking at between this 24 to 48 units per acre. I would be curious to see what a how many units a three-story building could accommodate. Um, clearly there's been a decision by the city to to move forward with higher density for this area adjacent to the transit station, but it looks to me it's a 24 to 48 unit per acre range, but I don't understand also you had mentioned something with respect to the acquisition of the land if the number of units um the type of building was was considered for that—the height of the building—five stories. But it just—the way that that the housing was done to the south and to the east is is outstanding. Um and this is a drastic and dramatic change in my opinion. [20:16] **Terry Dill:** Yes. So, Commissioner Mahwald, this proposed building is what was submitted with their RFP to the council when they selected a developer for this site. Um the future guided land use of the intensive suburban high density is the most dense district and this was the location that they chose because it is close to the transit station and trying to locate um density next to that that use so that people can take advantage of it. [21:00] **Commissioner Sandal:** Madam Chair, Terry, I'm just not completely understanding. Um, are you—is this basically like we don't really have a say in allowing the five then? Is this one of those things that are kind of out of our control? [21:08] **Terry Dill:** Commissioner Sandal, this is an application site plan review. So, it's what you would review and you would provide your recommendation to the the city council. So, just as background, I was just providing information that this was a building that was included in the RFP that went to the city council, but um it it it's your review as a recommending body to the city council. [21:32] **Commissioner Sandal:** Okay. Thank you. [21:32] **Chair Curts:** The good thing is it'll be quiet. I mean, it'll break the noise from Cedar Avenue but—Commissioner Halas. [21:32] **Commissioner Halas:** Thank you, Chair. Terry, nice presentation. Uh you mentioned something about an application that was uh going to be put through or is put through. Can you tell us what at what step that is at and and what the progression is where it needs to go? [22:00] **Terry Dill:** Yes. So, commissioner, there is a transit orientated um district grant application that's available with the Met Council. Um that would be one grant that they would be applying for for this site. So that is, you know, support of affordable workforce type housing units that are within a half mile of a transit station. And the funding is for the development of the actual housing project. [22:00] **Commissioner Halas:** The funding would come from where? [22:45] **Terry Dill:** The Met Council. [22:45] **Commissioner Halas:** And at what step are we at right now? [22:45] **Terry Dill:** Oh, I'm sorry. Um the applications are due August 11th, but we have not made application yet. And as part of that grant submittal process, uh we will need to go to the city council to get a resolution of support before it can be submitted. [22:54] **Commissioner Halas:** Thank you. [22:54] **Chair Curts:** Any other questions for Terry? If not, would the applicant like to come up? [23:11] **Blaine Barker:** Good evening, chair and commissioners. Thank you for having us this evening and listening to the proposal. Um I'm Blaine Barker with Real Estate Equities. I also have with me representatives from the architect, Cost Architects, and LA Engineering who's the civil engineer and landscape architect. Um Real Estate Equities is a St. Paul based multif family developer, operator and owner. Um we own about manage 5,000 apartment units primarily here in the Twin Cities metro. Um we own everything we develop. We own them long-term, minimum of 15 years, often longer. Uh we manage all of our properties. Um what we're proposing this evening is very similar to other workforce developments that we've built throughout the metro, including here in Dakota County. Um we focus on the larger bedroom types, the two and three bedrooms. We see a lot of demand for families at these income levels and at these rent levels. So that's what we primarily focus on. Um we take great pride in what we build. Um they are, you know, workforce developments. They are income and rent restricted. Um, but we build them to a market rate standard. You should never know that it's workforce housing when you're looking at it, whether it's from the exterior or interior. So, we have a lot of the same features you'd see in a typical market rate development. Um, granite countertops, stainless steel appliances, LVP flooring. Um, staff mentioned the amenities. We have a dog run, club room with outdoor patio, playground. Um, so we see tremendous demand throughout the metro, including in in Dakota County here. Um, we know it's the same case in Apple Valley and, um, excited for an opportunity to potentially become a part of your community. So, um, thanks again for having us this evening and I'm happy to answer any questions you may have. [25:14] **Chair Curts:** Thank you, Blaine. Anyone? So, um I guess I have a question, but it's more about the exterior of it. The recess, how you have that coming out. Is it possible to do the recess on the floor itself or the level, you know, you have five stories—each story, can you recess one of the stories? What I've heard is that the pedestrian kind of a—it's a better view for the pedestrians when they're walking on the sidewalk and stuff, do you follow what I'm saying? [25:14] **Blaine Barker:** I think so. Um, I'll actually invite Christian Borggan from Cost Architects to—he can better speak to that. Thank you. Don't go too far away though. [25:52] **Christian Borggan:** Chair, members of the commission, my name's Christian Borggan from Cost Architects. Just hoping you can clarify a bit. Are you talking—so, there's kind of the bumpouts in the building. Flattening them on the first floor to have the other ones kind of overhang? Correct. Yeah. Certainly possible and something we could explore. It means a little less square footage for those units on the first floor that are on the north end. I know there's just parking on the south end. So, that'd be a little more realistic, but on the first floor, we'd just have to explore that a little bit more, see how it impacts those units and the designs of those. But certainly something we could look at. [26:30] **Chair Curts:** Okay. Thank you. Before Christian sits down, does anybody have a question on the building itself? No. Okay. Thank you. [26:48] **Blaine Barker:** Thank you. [26:48] **Commissioner Scanland:** Um, my question, um, kind of hinges back to my questions with Terry is on parking. Um, with your experience and like you mentioned, the focus here too is on two and three-bedroom units and, um, the way it's currently set up, it's just over 1.66 spaces per unit. What you find with these type of units and the parking requirements? [27:21] **Blaine Barker:** Yep. Thank you, Commissioner Scanland. Um we've typically developed at a parking ratio of about 1.7 to 1.9 stalls per unit for comparable developments with comparable unit mixes throughout the suburbs of the Twin Cities. Um, one mitigating factor here because we are slightly below where we would typically want to be, um, which is at that, you know, about 1.8 is at all those other properties, we do charge for the covered parking, um, at a rate of $75 per month. Here to mitigate the slightly lower parking ratio that we have compared to the rest of our portfolio, we are not charging for that covered garage. every unit will get a free parking space because naturally what happens when we do charge for the parking at those other properties, there is some vacancy so not every parking space is being utilized. So actually at the 1.66 parking ratio with, you know, if you consider your parking vacancy zero because it's all free. We actually think we're going to have a higher ratio in terms of utilized stalls than our other properties where on the face the parking ratio is higher than what we're proposing, but we're charging for that parking which creates some of that natural vacancy. [28:38] **Commissioner Scanland:** Yeah, it's—and I—the concern then still comes back to is there's going to be minimal on street parking available and then you're talking just about resident parking without even consideration or discussion of visitor parking to be able to support that and that's again where I'm struggling with with my initial review. And this is going to come—of course we're going to do a parking study of it so that this gets flushed out—but just on the surface those are things as my initial review of this is—to me it kind of just really pops that there there's going to be a real concern with parking. um with the comments in terms of the number of stories of the building. Um especially with the going to the parking concern that we as a planning commission look at something less than the proposed five stories. Is that something still feasible for this project? [29:24] **Blaine Barker:** Yeah. Um commissioner, unfortunately not. We feel that our proposal as it currently sits is very consistent with what was presented to the EDA when we made an offer to purchase this land last summer as part of the request for proposals. [30:03] **Commissioner Halas:** Uh thanks for coming here tonight. Um, you said you have multiple properties in other places—metro area? [30:21] **Blaine Barker:** That's correct. That's correct. [30:21] **Commissioner Halas:** Is it—do you have something that's near a transit station that you've dealt with before in the Twin Cities area? Is this—that I think you referred to this as workforce apartments? Is this a newer concept for this type of thing being right next to the transit station or do you have something else in the Twin Cities you've done before? [30:47] **Blaine Barker:** Um, thank you Commissioner Halas. Um the this transit station will be the largest transit station we've developed near um which we do see as a as a benefit to our residents. Um when I was specifically speaking to we've done similar developments, I was more so referring to the building and unit mix itself of you know the workforce housing development targeting households at the 60% AMI and the predominantly two-bedroom and three-bedroom units. [31:24] **Commissioner Halas:** I'm just curious and for your support or something and what we were talking about with parking spaces, do you foresee that some of the people that are living there are going to be without a car using the transit as their main option? [31:40] **Blaine Barker:** We do. Um that data is tougher to quantify. Um staff has actually asked us for um some information and we've been kind of digging into our portfolio to see that. Um we don't have a property that's as directly close. So it's hard to find a great comp for that. Um but as part of our parking study that is being asked of us and required um it would be our intent to incorporate some of that data in that as well. Um we do believe that there will be residents without a car that use the transit station, but we'd like to better quantify it before I throw a number out there on how many I expect it to be. [32:27] **Commissioner Puit:** Yes, thank you, Chair Curts. Um, thank you for coming in, Mr. Barker. I really appreciate it. Um, I was wondering, you know, you made reference and there was discussion about the parking and the 1.7 maybe is what you see and this is a little bit slightly below that. Um, does your group also measure um, playground size? you make reference to a dog run. And I know that there's a request here to increase the allowable density coverage. Um just curious how you measure that. And part of the reason I asked is I saw the picture the elevation and I thought, "Oh, that's nice." And then I see how just massive this is and it doesn't seem very big in the scope of things um to allow for an area for the residents. Um, do you have a way that you measure um what size of a playground area or a dog run that you would put into a facility? [33:13] **Blaine Barker:** Yeah. Uh, thank you, Commissioner Puit. Um, I might actually invite Doug Loken up from LAS, our landscape architect. Sorry to put you on the spot here, Doug. [33:45] **Doug Loken:** Good evening. Uh, my name is Doug Loken. I'm a landscape architect with LAS out of Plymouth, Minnesota. Um I think we've done probably 10 projects with this developer and um we say playground—it's more like tot lot. So there's obviously various sizes of playgrounds. Um tot lots are more geared for like the two to six year olds and so the sizes are a little bit smaller. Um but based on the configuration of the site is how we select certain playground equipment. So we definitely size it prior to to make it work for each site. [34:58] **Commissioner Puit:** So, like I said, I think based on the number of units that this has, the 148 dwelling units, and there's a breakdown of you know, unit types, you know, one, two, and three bedrooms, it just looked like, you know, it was maybe checked a box to have a playground because it—I mean, a unit that size it just seemed pretty small. [34:58] **Doug Loken:** Sure. Sure. So, yeah, it's it's geared more for tot lot size. Um smaller children, younger children. [35:01] **Blaine Barker:** Thank you, Doug. I'll I'll just add to that briefly. Um for a apartment develop 150 units, we would typically have the one play structure. When we go north of 200–250, we'd add a second one and that's when we would actually have one that's the 2 to 6 tot lot and maybe a 5 to 12. Um but typically when we have a development of with this many units, we we have the one play structure. Um, I will say if there's a concern with the structure of the playground area, that's something we can look at. Um, I think candidly that'll be a more feasible change for us than reducing the height of the building. So, I I think that's something we can certainly entertain and take a look at. [36:12] **Commissioner Scanland:** Madam Chair, uh, follow-up question. With this being 148 units, how many residents would you with your experience expect be an expectation for a unit of complex of this size? Number of people living there? [36:12] **Blaine Barker:** Yep. Thank you, Commissioner. Um, based on our observations, we typically see about 1.22 to 1.3 residents per bedroom in a development like this. [36:31] **Commissioner Scanland:** Okay. That helps out to give a little better perspective on that. Um and this the whole idea of the workforce department building and the complex here in relation to the transit station is you know the importance of that and having that living arrangement within Apple Valley to give residents opportunities for jobs outside of Apple Valley using transit and so forth. Um, I'm still struggling with the density of this and um, as Commissioner Mahwald had pointed out and the the effect that it's going to have on the existing surrounding neighborhood as far as changing the character of that—and um, so if that's something you can maybe keep in mind coming back to the next meeting to um, you know, how that can be mitigated. Um, I'm again—just the five stories is I'm having difficulty with that. [37:42] **Commissioner Mahwald:** I think this—thank you, Madam Chair. Um more of a comment than a question, I guess, but it's related to the discussion that we're having here. you know, the size of the the playground and other amenities, the amount of green space that is allowed with the size of the building itself, and the number of parking spaces that are required. I'm I guess I'm just kind of curious as to like how this the density of this proposed development compares to again the the development to the east as well as the development to the south. Um, again, I'm just the density, units per acre, population per acre, relative to the amount of green space that's available. uh the playground um I'm assuming that the playground um I'm curious to see how the playground in the development to the east compares to the proposed tot lot in this but those are just observations in terms of overall feel. Will will this development be in any way connected to um either the development to the south or the development to the east? Will there be sidewalks um or other connections to those adjacent streets? [39:38] **Doug Loken:** Uh currently we're we are connecting to the street to the north and to gas light on the west and there's connections to the neighborhood that way. Um we can't physically make the grades work to step up um to the town homes to the east and to the south. There's—it's where our garage driveway entrance is. So there's no good pedestrian route that direction. [40:07] **Commissioner Mahwald:** So the west and the north. Okay. [40:41] **Commissioner Sandal:** Madam Chair, um thank you also for coming in. Um there's a lot about this project that I really like. I like the architecture of it. I think it looks really nice. Um I lived in an apartment that looks a little similar to this when I first had kids and the tot lot would have been amazing. So I love that you have that there and um some of those extra amenities. So um I think my concern just continues to be the five stories and changing the dynamic of um that whole area. Um I I think I have a question for Terry actually. Um on the from Evan Acosta, the engineer. On the second page under grading and drainage plan, it says a number 28. It says there's concern about shared grading between the proposed Seven Brew and McDonald's lot. That's not this area. Is that correct? Or is am I—is there a Seven Brew and McDonald's coming in? [41:30] **Terry Dill:** Commissioner Sandal, are you referring to the engineering review? Yeah. If it's referencing Seven Brew, I did not see that in there. That is an error. [41:47] **Evan Acosta:** Madam Chair, commissioners. Yeah, that's that's just a lone error from from the memo. [42:02] **Commissioner Sandal:** Perfect. Thank you. Good catch. I just was like—another McDonald's is coming up. That was all. Thank you. [42:02] **Chair Curts:** Terry, what about the school? Have we checked in? You know, like with the elementary, I know there's a school right there and stuff. If that many more people come on board and everything, the school district will be able to handle this and the school. [42:21] **Terry Dill:** Chair Curts, we have not contacted the school district. [42:21] **Commissioner Puit:** Yes, thanks, Chair Curts. Um, Terry, I guess back to my a little bit to my original question and the 2040 comprehensive plan—and I fully understand and thank you for, you know, making sure that it's understood that the ordinance hadn't been updated, though the comprehensive plan had uh with that plan um allowing for up to or anticipating 48 uh units per acre. trying to figure out the math on that. I I anticipate it would have to be a five-story building. I'm not sure how you would accomplish that. And was that even a consideration and maybe that predates, you know, your efforts here with the city, but I'm just wondering how you can accomplish a 48 um units per acre if you don't have the height. And so, it's a little bit more about the 2040 comprehensive plan and the thoughts and the desire of where we were headed as a city with that plan. um you know to go from a density of 24 to 48 is you know how do you accomplish that if it's not heightened. [43:19] **Terry Dill:** Thank you commissioner um yes being newer to the city I was not here when the 2040 comp plan was um went through the review process but that area with that many units—it would be allowed that that you would anticipate that there would be a five-story building on that site you know three to five stories depending but to maximize the full density of that site which the city tries to accomplish in certain areas, this being one of them. Um since it is near the transit station, um it would be anticipated that it would be a five-story building. Um, one other thing I just want to mention also is as part of the 2040 comprehensive plan review and the densities. Um, with that review process, the school district is involved with that and they are given all of the anticipated um, densities and future growth numbers so that they can factor that into their planning for schools. [44:19] **Commissioner Scanland:** Madam Chair, um to the question as far as the maximum number of units per acre—it's we're not just talking about 48. I mean, it's 16 to 48. So, there's a range here for us to be working in that we're not necessarily having. And I understand that the applicant is looking on the high or exceeding the maximum proposed here, but the way it reads is 16 to 48. So there is opportunity within the way this is zoned to have something less than that. [45:05] **Terry Dill:** Commissioner Scanland. So the the comprehensive plan actually guides it for 24 to 48. The current zoning is 16. So a development that would be proposed on the site would have to have at least 24 units per acre. [45:05] **Commissioner Scanland:** Okay. I mean regardless it's there's still a variable there. Yes. Okay. Thank you. [45:48] **John Jensen:** Good evening, Madam Chair and commissioners. Thank you. My name is John Jensen. Um, here with my wife. We both live uh 140th in Galaxy and we own rental property behind the building just up 153rd. My concern with you is again the height. It it is a beautiful building, but you don't want to turn into a cookie cutter building. They're all over the town. You can find them everywhere you go. So, I know when I come down Cedar Lakeville, I can see the one on 140th from the top of the hill. You know, it's—we're we're on flat land here. I'm concerned with the population density increasing. Um, our roads are already horrible. We're and not getting any better. And now we're going to add 240 cars to a street that doesn't have a stoplight, that has buses constantly going in and out. I'm worried about the safety, the buses, um the rents for the rest of the people that live behind there. They're, you know, trying to, you know, have single family homes for people. And I don't know if we've looked at that. We're probably going to need a stoplight there. Um, but yeah, that that building's everywhere. And I don't I think that when that was originally zoned, it was probably for light commercial or some retail property. And when this new 2040 came out or whatever the heck that is, they opened it up to residential, but they didn't really because they didn't fully make everything transparent. So maybe there was a mistake made at that point. I don't want to compound it with another one, but I do think it's too tall and I think it's too many people. [47:30] **Lynette Olsen:** Hi there. Good evening. Um, my name is Lynette Olsen. I live in the Cedar Point Town Homes, which is directly behind it on Garrett Drive, which is the cul-de-sac. That's a circle. Um, I've lived in Apple Valley since 2003 when the old transit center was there. And when it was operational, I know um a lot of the parking because we had parking problems at that time would park in the circle. So as a homeowner in the townhouse, um if I had company coming over, there was no parking because cars would park in that cul-de-sac because there was no parking in the original transit center. Um, so when the new transit center was created, it was wonderful because now people could park and could visit me and we wouldn't have to worry about parking. So when I was listening to the presentation and having the the limited parking, I got concerned again because now my fear is the the cul-de-sac is right behind this complex. Visitors are going to start parking in that cul-de-sac. Um, we have a young—the town houses or the the buildings that are directly behind it that are not in the cul-de-sac. There's a lot of children that play in that cul-de-sac. So, now I'm concerned that if people are going to start parking there, again, the children that are playing in that area—there's a basketball hoop that's behind there. There there could be issues with the children that are playing in the neighborhood. Um, I'm not sure if the sidewalk that's directly behind it, um, is going to still continue to be there. A lot of the people that, you know, walk or that live, you know, further in Apple Valley, that sidewalk gets used constantly. That's on the back side of the the old transit center that they use to get to the Cub to get to Target. Um, looking at the map, it looks like there's little limited use between the, you know, limited area between the parking lot for the parking for the complex because it looks like there's just a little area between the parking lot and that townhouse. [49:42] **Chair Curts:** Are you talking south of the building? [49:42] **Lynette Olsen:** Yes, south of the building. Um, so I'm not sure if that sidewalk is still going to be there that's maintained behind. [49:58] **Christian Borggan:** So, the three buildings that are—yes, that—so, there's a sidewalk that's right there. Is that sidewalk still going to stay there? Yes. [50:26] **Lynette Olsen:** Okay. But it looks like there's just a little greenery. Is there going to be enough of a buffer between the parking lot there and the sidewalk that that you'll have enough of a buffer? [50:26] **Christian Borggan:** That's roughly about 10 ft and there'll be um there'll be a 6ft screen fence there as well. [51:20] **Lynette Olsen:** Okay. And is that going to be maintained? Because right now—that's my big beef with the city—is that it's not being maintained because nobody's maintaining the um old transit center. So the bushes that were there, the trees that are there, nobody's maintaining it. So it it's horrendous. So is—and that will be maintained by who'sever doing the complex or would it be the city that's maintaining that buffer between the fence? [51:20] **Christian Borggan:** So we'll maintain um inside our fence and trim on the outside of the fence but anything off our property you know. [52:02] **Lynette Olsen:** Okay. But but there shouldn't be Okay. Thank you Christian. But but there would be a—Okay. So that was my other concern is that we we want to have a buffer because that sidewalk is constantly being being used today. But the concern is the parking—if there's limited space—where you know like you said to the visitors—where are they going to the park? The there's a little parkway that's between Orchard Apartments um and the transit center right now that has like benches and they have like waste paper baskets. Is that still going to be there? [53:05] **Chair Curts:** So explain to me that the sidewalks will remain there so they're not going to touch that. [53:40] **Lynette Olsen:** Okay. So that was that—and then the other thing is the five stories. I know with a parking lot there you're not going to have trees. My concern is since my complex is where that cul-de-sac is, are they going to be able to see into—even the town houses that are up above, are they going to be able to see into us? Because they're going to be up five stories. So, if they're looking down, you know, now I have to be concerned. Are people going to be able to see into our area where we're living? Because they're up five stories and they can see down into where we're living. Right now, we don't have anybody there. So we don't have to worry about people looking into our business and then the lights—on—I'm I think was it Commissioner Scanland that talked about the lights beaming into the properties for the parking lot because we want them to be safe but at night time I don't want lights beaming into my my neighborhood. So thank you for listening. It's going to be a big change because it's been many many many years since there's been anything there. [54:36] **Commissioner Scanland:** Madam Chair Terry, this kind of maybe a question for Evan that the question about traffic came up and along with the traffic that's going to be concentrated with this and the existing with the transit center, what that means going forward as far as intersection control and so forth. If we could talk about that at the next meeting, that'd be helpful. [55:06] **Evan Acosta:** Madam Chair, Commissioner, yes, we'll we'll be prepared um with the response. [55:06] **Chair Curts:** All right. Thank you. Any other residents or anybody else would like to speak? [55:06] **Beth Jensen:** Good evening. My name is Beth Jensen. I um live at 14120 Forest Lane up by Galaxy and 140th. However, I do own a town home in the Cedar Point town home community there. So, just to the east of this proposed building and I am I am very un—very unhappy. I don't think it belongs there. Five stories is too high. Um it's it just—as as you said, Commissioner Mahwald? It's—it doesn't fit in at all. And we don't need to have all that additional apartment complex in that part of Apple Valley. I think it's best to keep on with town homes. If you want to put anything in there, put more town homes in there. Keep that community the way it is. It's a nice quiet community that doesn't have crime. I'm I'm honestly—I'm afraid with low rent housing. Um the type of personnel that would be living there, it will make it an unsafe community. So, that's all. Thank you. [56:45] **Mary Jean Charl Boy:** Good evening, Commissioner. I'm Mary Jean Charl Boy and I live at Cedar Point. So, I am right next to um I think it's called Charleswood and then this apartment complex would be next to that. So, my first concern is the height and um how it's going to really block a lot of views for so many people that live in the residential homes within that neighborhood. And to me, the reason I moved in the area was, and this was 30 years ago, to Cedar Point, was because it was residential. There were so many homes and it was family and it wasn't so condensed. So, um that's number one concern. And then number two is the parking issue because even the way it is now, there's parking problems where I live at Cedar Point. You know, some families have four cars, some have three cars. They're using the guest parking spaces. They're using this this cul-de-sac that was referred to. So, and I do know there are times where people park in the um transit parking lot because there's not enough parking where we live. So, I can't imagine having this larger building with more people and not enough parking that they're not going to also slip in to park there and then there's not enough space when it's really busy. So, those are my main concerns. And then the traffic cuz it's, you know, it's right off of Cedar. There's safety concerns with these the families that are right next to us at Chasewood. Their kids are all over on the cul-de-sac street. And I'm just so concerned about the safety. And I do have people that drive into Apple Valley. And this is unfortunate, but with all the new high-rise buildings that are over by the post office, I've—the comments have been, "Boy, it has gotten so congested in Apple Valley. There are just new buildings all over. It's just not—it's really not—I don't know. They don't feel that it's laid out that well." But—so I guess I would like to not have as many levels. Okay. Thanks. [59:34] **Kurt Peters Schmidt:** Hello, Commissioner. Thank you. Uh, I'm Kurt Peters Schmidt. I live also at that Cedar Point town home, so in Garnet Way. Um, everyone actually has made some pretty good points about traffic and density and that kind of thing, but I just—something I hadn't heard yet tonight—about what—what impact or what plans are there for—I—you're plopping down a lot of a lot of people in in a small area. What's the impact on going to be on utilities? So, it's going to affect power, water, um, you know, sewage. I mean, that seems to be a lot of a lot of people in one place that's going to put a a drain, no pun intended, on on some of our utilities there. So, um, has there been any— [1:00:20] **Chair Curts:** The city engineer will come up with—show that next time? I'm guessing yes. All right. Thank you. You're very welcome. Thank you. Anyone else? No one. If there are no further comments, I will close this public hearing. It is the policy of the planning commission not to act on an item on the same night of its public hearing. The planning commission will weigh all comments and information received tonight in its deliberations at future meetings. This item will continue to appear on future planning commission agendas until a recommendation on the petition can be forwarded to city council. Thank you. [1:01:19] **Chair Curts:** That brings us to—we have no land use action items tonight. It brings us to other business. And I have a bicycle and pedestrian plan update from Evan Acosta. [1:01:37] **Evan Acosta:** Good evening, Madam Chair, members of the planning commission. I'm excited to bring forward the update or an update, draft update for the city's bike and pedestrian plan uh update. Um, and so with me tonight, Gabrielle Grindy with HKGI, the consultant that the city used for uh drafting and creating—assisting with the technical side of the uh the plan update. So, Gabrielle will give the the presentation here tonight, but both be available for questions. And then special thank you to Commissioner Scanland and Chair Curts for their assistance in the task force meetings we've had to date. Been very helpful with your input and looking to get input from the rest of the planning commission tonight. Um, and then we also want to want to thank the Dakota County uh statewide health improvement partnership who funded this plan update. So, without further ado, I'll give you to Gabrielle. [1:02:37] **Gabrielle Grindy:** Thank you. Good evening. Uh, I will—I'll be giving a presentation on a quick overview of the process for this plan. uh go into some detail in the plan content and then talk a little bit about project priorities and have a discussion if you have interest in providing feedback. So please feel free to interrupt me if I go through something too quickly. Our process started back in December. We had a kickoff with staff. We had a tour of some of the areas of the city that we wanted to look at focus and on detail for bike and ped planning. Uh we had engagement beginning in January and we went through the end of April with online survey and we had a couple pop-up meetings at city events and then we had the task force which has met three times so far and there is potential to have one more task force meeting coming up. So right now we're at the draft plan. Hopefully you've seen the draft plan document and I will be presenting a high-level summary of that. So this is the summary of all the meetings that we've had so far. We're at the July 16th planning commission. So there are four more potential meetings occurring in this process. The plan content is organized into five sections. There's the about the plan, summary of community engagement, a summary of the plan in context which has a lot of maps and information uh evaluating the existing system and then where the gaps are in the system. Then there's guiding principles which includes some information on best practices and recommendations and then the implementation section at the end. So that section is not complete. We're waiting for input on priorities and then we'll finalize that section and finalize the plan. The about the plan section has some information about the timeline. So the planning process as it took place, the phases of the plan, and then the purpose of the plan. So that's somewhat based on the SHIP grant that Evan mentioned. uh how that was written and what the goals according to SHIP are which include addressing the citywide network making sure that the network is complete making sure that we're engaging with the community so getting input from residents as much as possible identifying best practices and then guiding future program and policy directives. The benefits of a connected system in any community include safety, health, which includes physical health and mental health, and then social health. So seeing your neighbors face to face when you're biking or walking, uh brings, you know, the community together rather than when you're in a vehicle and you're not seeing people. Uh air quality, sustainable and efficient transportation networks. So if you have more people choosing to bike or walk rather than using their vehicles, it creates more efficient networks. uh livability and mobility which goes along with um the two lower ones household and community prosperity and regional economic competitiveness. So biking and walking in a community and having a connected network just makes the community more valuable, more marketable to people to visit and to live in that community. And then recreation. So that's something that was really important in Apple Valley because a lot of the people that we heard from use the system for recreation. So even though the SHIP goals really want to focus on that commuter uh network, really a lot of the people in the community use it for recreation. So when we're looking at who we're planning for, you know, we are really planning—we're trying to plan for the people that are not able to use a vehicle. So people that are not able to drive yet, people under 16, older people that can't drive, people that can't afford to drive, people that use public transportation either because they choose to or it's more efficient. and then also those recreational users. And then this diagram at the bottom of the page shows uh biking comfort levels. So this is a graphic that has been used nationally for many bike and ped plans. And when we asked people in the community to respond to an online survey and at the pop-up meetings about what type of bicyclist they are, uh we got most responses in that 50% interested but concerned category. So that's really who we want to plan for. Those are people who would like to bike but are concerned about the safety. So they really want to be on those off-road facilities and they want to have safe crossings. So in Apple Valley where there are a lot of major roadways with high speed and several lanes of traffic to cross that's important being able to cross those roadway safely. The next section is community engagement. So, in this section, we highlight uh some of the uh responses we got from the community. We did complete a couple pop-up meetings where we talked to a lot of people at the Midwinter Fest and the home and garden show. And a lot of people that we talked to again talked about the recreational value. So, they like all the off-road trails. They like being able to go throughout the county. So the greenways when those are complete will be really important to that circulation network and allowing people to safely travel by bicycle and by foot throughout the county and the community—being off-road. So we have some infographics in this chapter that show some of the answers again that we got from people in the survey. We asked about what people want to see most in terms of improvements to the system. We did hear a lot about the safety. So the crossing—safe crossings was really important. Then we also have several maps that talk about some of the needs in terms of demographics and some of the Met Council needs. Community area of needs look at where are there areas of higher poverty and then the environmental justice areas—that's an MPCA term. So that looks at diversity and also economic disparity and where are those higher needs. So you can see up along Cedar on the east side of Cedar and then in the south central area of the Cedar those are more areas that are focused on providing systems that provide bike and walk facilities. Uh then in the planning context we have several summaries of all of the plans have been done that impact this plan. So, the city's comprehensive plan, some safe routes to schools plans, some of the county's plans, uh, also a summary of some bike and ped related resources. So, the state has a lot of resources that can be referred to for how to safely plan biking and walking facilities. Uh, then we have a map of the existing system. So, the system, the city is pretty well covered. Sidewalks are in most of the neighborhoods and then off-road trails are on a lot of the major roadways and the county greenways are identified on McAndrews and then the North Creek Greenway moving north south through the city. Uh then we have other maps identifying where some of the destinations are in the city. The regional bicycle transportation network—again a Met Council designation. Uh we have some information on the ring route talking about some of the needs for safe crossings and identifying that it is really pedestrian facilities right now but there is that desire to have safe biking facilities whether that's on road or providing within the the sidewalk and the boulevard a space for bicyclists so that they can feel safe without getting in the way of pedestrians in that area. Uh then we have more maps identifying where some of the gaps are—some of the transit facilities that affect people who need to bike or walk to get to transit. Uh identifying also major road barriers. So those roads that are higher volume and then also higher speed identifying the the Cedar 42 intersection which is the highest volume intersection in the county and how there's the need to either get around that for bicycle and pedestrian movement or either providing safe ways for people to move through that. Then the next section is guiding principles. So that—we have reorganized the guiding principles from the 2010 bikew-walk plan. We've condensed them into four overall guiding principles with some sub-principles. So the they are reducing barriers to biking, walking—that's the main guiding principle. So how can we do that? Encouraging alternative modes of transportation. So encouraging people to choose other modes than their vehicle. Enhancing the trails and sidewalks in the community with elements that aid navigation. So that would be wayfinding and then also other supportive facilities. So those could be benches, landscaping, trees that provide shade, pl—you know items that provide a sense of place and make people want to experience the the trails. And then maintaining a safe and functional network. Uh so this is a list of the six Es which are part of the SHIP requirements. Uh we've added a couple. So, education, engineering, equity, enforcement, encouragement, and evaluation are part of the Es that should be values used as you're looking at recommending improvements to your bike-walk network. And then we've added experience and ethics. That's been in some publications recently saying as you're thinking about the network, experience is really important to get people to want to use it. And then ethics, just thinking about all the people that need to use it and how important it is when you're making decisions. Uh we have some best practices which include some information from those resources I mentioned earlier—the state bicycle facility manual—which talk about roadway treatments and crossing treatments some of the different physical implementation ways that you can do that and then also planning for everyone. So if you build a system that works for someone who's eight-year-old and someone who's 80 years old then it should work for everyone. So that's just a a general value in terms of bike and walk planning and placemaking. And then trail design and maintenance is another um operational best practice to keep in mind when you're planning these facilities. They will need to be maintained. So making sure you're thinking about that. Uh then we have several high-level recommendations which include providing policies. So, we did not write a complete streets policy, but recommendation carried over from the 2010 plan is that the city develop a complete streets policy. Several communities in the metro area do have those that can be referred to. Also, developing an e-bike policy and the red page here includes some information about e-bike policies that we've cited from other cities and also some information from the state DOT. So, this can be used as a resource if the city wants to develop an e-bike policy. uh we also have some recommendations just on general—on how to implement those guiding principles. So building the facilities that help to provide that connected network and then also the promotion. So providing either events—we had some people that asked about—um there used to be a bike with the mayor, bike with the—something like that, some program that used to occur—and somebody one of the residents we talked to said could something like that happen again to bring more people out, you know, having those kind of encouragement and promotional programs that will encourage people to use the system. Then we identify largely throughout the city a vision of a connected network. So looking at the the map in the upper left corner, those thicker lines show the county greenways. So those could be the spines of the system. The other solid lines could be other off-road bike routes. And then the dash line in the southern part of the city could be potential on-road facility. And then the red highlights the ring route which is primarily pedestrian route. So having a connected system allows people to get onto one of those spines which allows them to get onto another spine and this creates connection to the rest of the county and other communities as well. Then we also have some images, precedent images and recommendations related to wayfinding in the community—to operations and maintenance and then also some more programming ideas and educational ideas for promoting biking and walking. Then we get to the final chapter which is implementation. So we have two maps. One of the maps highlights where the trail gaps are and we've identified from the 2010 plan what those projects are that would complete the trail gaps that have not been completed yet. And then working with city staff, we've identified a preliminary prioritization. And then the second map and table shows the intersections that we're recommending for improvements in terms of safe crossings and those have not been prioritized yet. So those are identified on the bottom map and table and then the top one is the trail gaps map and table. Then we also include some options and resources for funding. So as the city looks to implement these facilities, they can work with the county to implement some of these that are on county roads and facilities and then also look at other funding sources to get these implemented. Finally uh I've identified the top five priority projects and they're all in the northern part of the city and the numbers listed on the map identify where they are in terms of order. So one on 140th would be the the top priority project. Uh we also had a resident email city staff asking for this along with some other gaps to be completed there because of the schools and other community facilities in that area. And then two on McAndrews. So that would need county coordination. Three and four are in that area of higher need according to the the MPCA and Met Council statistics. And then five again on McAndrews that would be county coordination as well. So looking to get feedback from you on these top five priority projects or if you think any others should rise to the top. Thank you. [1:16:51] **Commissioner Halas:** Thanks for your presentation. Uh, yes. I'm I'm living on the north side of the Apple Valley area and I'm I'm looking at your number one priority. Is that because of the construction of the town homes that are over in that area off 140th? Is that what that's the break in that is what you're looking at for priority? [1:17:16] **Evan Acosta:** Madam Chair, Commissioner. Uh so largely the prioritization is a remnant from the 2010 plan. So these were ranked on a large series of criteria in 2010 that included they had a cost factor. They had the—Gabrielle kind of identified a preliminary you know arterial component of it or network component of it. So most of the gaps identified in 2010 or a significant amount have been closed. So what—I guess you know looking at gap number one—which um we're happy to report is in the capital improvement plan and budget for next year. So will be closed in 2026. Um, so I guess to your question, we we could provide a little bit more detail on those criteria that were used in 2010, but there was a there was a long list of factors that went into each significant segment. [1:18:22] **Commissioner Halas:** Okay. I was just using that for an example as I walk in that area all the time and it—I think there's a walking path or a paved path on the north side of 140 that goes down quite a ways but there is the old par 3 construction area that is going up right now and I was kind of wondering if that's kind of the case what you're looking to continue that through. [1:18:46] **Evan Acosta:** Correct. Yeah, this is just west of that new Eagle Point town home development. Um, so this is the last—that would be the last segment west of that that needs to be closed. And then you can kind of see not quite as highlighted, but—actually steal the mouse from you. You know, there's in the underlying here we have another gap on 140th. And most of you are probably familiar with the the curve here from 140th between Garden View and Hayes. [1:19:28] **Commissioner Halas:** Yes, it does. Thank you. And I'm glad you're you referenced the e-bikes and that kind of thing because our neighborhood's full of kids riding scooters and e-bikes and nobody pedals anymore. They move pretty quick. [1:19:28] **Commissioner Scanland:** Madam Chair, I'd just like to thank both of you for your leadership on this that it it's been enjoyable working on it with you and very educational. Um, any really fits into what the city is doing, what the park system is—updating the parks—what the county has done with the trail system and how now we're—the city—is taking in, like you said, we're starting to fill these gaps, identifying where new gaps are to be able to move forward with this and the, you know, the whole popularity of it with bikes. And it was interesting to learn too with um seniors or older generation how they're embracing e-bikes and the fact that it's it's allowing them to—something that they in the past wouldn't be able to maybe undertake. Now they have the flexibility of taking on these trail system that we have and it really is opening up to them. So um that's appreciated with the network. Um, I noticed this week on Cedar Avenue with crossing—are you—we're putting in mid—or the county—is putting in mid-island lights for crossing to assist with if you get stuck on the island that you have some reference point? [1:20:52] **Evan Acosta:** Yeah, Commissioner Scanland. Yeah, that's a that's a dual-purpose function that those flash buttons have. So, for anyone not aware, if you haven't been on the section of Cedar that was just paved, Milan overlaid—that'd be from County Road 42 north to—I believe it goes up to where it turns into 77. So, you'll see at the intersections now in the median, they've added the pedestrian push button signals. Um, and those provide an—I believe they provide an audible component for those that are hearing impaired. So, it kind of gives them that ADA component as well as provides the refuge in the middle for folks to continue their journey across. And then lastly, it does as you've probably seen if you've seen it in your vehicle, it draws your attention as a driver now. You've seen that—oh, there's something in the middle now. So, those are multi-function and and they're a welcome addition. [1:21:48] **Commissioner Scanland:** Yeah, it is because it's the difficulty in trying to cross Cedar Avenue that um it helps if you end up getting stuck. Um you can't walk fast enough and have you have some possibly control over it. Um, I was going to make one comment and this is something Evan and I have talked about back and forth—that I have a passion for—is to look at in the future, but it's you can mention as far as—there's a whole—this would fall into another project—but is speed limits and speed limits within certain park areas of areas that the city now has the flexibility of controlling speed limits in as far as parkway speeds of 20-25 miles an hour, which we didn't previously have the ability to do. That was all state controlled. So, um, you said that there was a project in the future here that there are grant monies to be able to that that would fit into. [1:22:32] **Evan Acosta:** Yes. So, the city has received, and is in the process of finalizing a grant agreement for the safe streets and roads for all federal grant. So, we will be completing a comprehensive safety action plan, which is a more of a vehicle level study. Um, and the speed limits—this is a perfect component of that study. Um whereas the bike and ped plan obviously focuses a little bit more on the pedestrian and bicycle aspect. Uh so you know if they—if we weren't right behind this plan with that safe streets and roads for all grant—we might try and incorporate that into this somehow. But given that we have been selected for funding and are finalizing a grant agreement for that separately. That would be a great opportunity to just pick that up pretty much right after—it makes perfect sense for that to fit into that. [1:23:17] **Commissioner Scanland:** Absolutely. um um discussion. So again, thank you both of you. [1:23:17] **Commissioner Puit:** Yeah, thanks Chair Curts. Um great job Evan and Gabrielle. I really appreciate you taking the time to share the presentation. Um regarding safe crossing—and I I feel two ways about it when I'm driving and—I grew up in Bloomington, Indiana and I go back there and they really promote biking, right? They want to change the downtown into a a very bikable community. Um, and I'm not sure that there's an opportunity—who owns the and controls the roadways—but when I'm driving, I'm very frustrated when I come to a stoplight and can't turn right on red. However, when I'm biking or walking, I'm like—I feel safer and I know that that's why they do it. So, is there any consideration of that or just general—and again, it may be controlled by the state or the DOT. I'm not sure. Um, but I'm just curious on um when we think about, you know, safe crossings um and encouraging the community to bike um the no turn on red thought—and you may not have the ability to—I get it. It's about the bike trails, but I'm just curious. [1:24:01] **Evan Acosta:** Yeah, that's a—that's a great question, Commissioner. Um that's something that—I'll give an answer and then Gabrielle will probably with more wisdom than me jump right in and correct me. But um we would incorporate something to the effect of the city should consider evaluating criteria such as that in that recommendations chapter. Um it's a great point. It's one that I haven't considered. Maybe Gabrielle has run across it before, but we'd certainly be happy to take a closer look at that before we finalize the plan and see if there's a way that we can incorporate a sort of a flag or a hand raise that says, "Hey, when you're thinking about on street bike facilities, how does that work when it comes to signalized intersections?" And Gabrielle, if you have anything to add. [1:25:05] **Gabrielle Grindy:** Well, I just know that around schools, that's definitely considered. There are lots of intersections around schools that have that no turn on red for that reason. Exactly. But I don't know what control the city has—if you can do that on county intersections or state intersections. But yeah, I think that's a good question. [1:25:23] **Commissioner Sandal:** Madam Chair, Evan, Gabrielle, thank you um for all of your work on this. Um, going off of the safe crossings thing, um, is, uh, 42 and Garden View one of those that are that's being looked at? [1:25:44] **Evan Acosta:** Um, yes, Commissioner. Uh, so 42, County Road 42 and Garden View Drive is scheduled for complete reconstruction by Dakota County in 2027 and 2028. Um so the stretch of County Road 42 from the Burnsville border all the way to 147th—sort of where it curves and you go up by um like Walmart—um that that all is scheduled for reconstruction over those two years. the specific intersection of Garden View and 42 has been a topic of extensive discussions to to specifically to outline how do we get pedestrians across all four directions there and then factoring in obviously we have frontage roads there that make it that much farther to get kind of where you're going. Um so that is that is in the county CIP and with the way that that would work it's also in our CIP as a kind of partner with them in that. Great. [1:25:44] **Commissioner Sandal:** It'll be too late for me, but I don't let my son go that way right now because he—we were in the car and saw somebody run a red light and he was like, "Oh, that's why you don't let me scoot across this." I said, "Yeah, yes." Okay. Um and then my other question is on the priorities three and four up on Palamino. I literally was just walking there today. Um is that the north side doesn't have—? [1:25:44] **Evan Acosta:** That's—That's correct. So um the crossing there um is over trunk highway 77. So that that that bridge there is owned by MnDOT. Um and that bridge is a little too narrow to facilitate—well frankly it's too narrow for a ped crossing as it is now. If you've ever had to walk or bike across it the sidewalk there is roughly what—three feet wide. Um, so one of the things we've been working with on MnDOT is they have scheduled improvements along their trunk highway 77 corridor and we'd like to ask them to look at making improvements to that bridge deck to facilitate cross pedestrian crossings of the bridge on both the north and south side and then the city would happily jump in and close gaps three and four to make that um you know a loop at that point. [1:25:44] **Commissioner Sandal:** Perfect. Okay. And then my final question um is the MCA Andrews gap um between—shoot—between Garden View and Pennock. Um there's the trail on the north side and not on the south side. And I know that the county has been kind of talking about things with that and I've lost sight of where that's at. Is that potentially in the works? [1:28:14] **Evan Acosta:** That's—Yes, Commissioner. That's in the works. I don't I don't believe there—there was at one point a a CIP date for that project that was since um delayed due to kind of scope creep from um the related work and I don't know if that pertain to roadway improvements that would have to be made at the same time um but I don't currently have a date that they intend to close that at this time. [1:28:39] **Chair Curts:** In my beautiful world that I live in, I was thinking, wouldn't that be wonderful if we could become, you know, like how they have at schools where they have the garden, you know, to flag and stop traffic to walk across the street or something. Maybe down the road they'll have robots and the robot can walk the people across. The other thing was—is I went to Italy last fall and everywhere they have these fresh fountains where you can fill your water bottles and stuff like that. I know we have probably some water fountains here and there, but wouldn't it be wonderful to have on the trails—have like a filtered water fountain where you can fill up your water. Like I said, I live in a beautiful world. [1:28:39] **Evan Acosta:** That would be—that would be an incredible amenity to offer um for our trails. Um, I don't I don't know for sure if that's something that's on any of the county greenways or not yet, but we certainly could look into that component and maybe report back with some positive news on that. [1:29:48] **Chair Curts:** Okay. Let me know when those robots are existing. Anybody else? We could volunteer. Like I said, we could all just say this is my weekend to work. I'll go volunteer up there. Okay. Good job. Thank you very much. [1:30:04] **Gabrielle Grindy:** Thank you. Thanks, Gabriel. Uh—there was just one more slide saying the next step. So, we will be going to Parks and Rec and City Council in the next month. [1:30:04] **Tim Benetti:** Thank you, Madam Chair, members of commission. Uh just a quick reminder, your next meeting of Wednesday, August 6th, also followed by the August 20th meeting date. Um I also want to jump ahead a bit here, but uh uh I was informed this week that uh this room is going to go for some uh upgraded uh improvements on the uh sound system and the uh media system. So either September 17th meeting or October 15th, we're going to have you in the Regency Room for uh one of those meetings, but uh we'll let you know well in advance of that meeting. So uh we'll we'll give you a fair fair heads up and just reminder that uh this will probably be under construction here, but uh I think we can all fit in the Regency Room and we we can successfully handle our meetings in there. Finally, just want to thank Commissioner Becky Sandal for giving a great presentation today at our Rotary Club meeting. She talked about the empowerment of the women and the girls of our world and how important it is for athletics and uh just team spirit, team building, and uh she did a great job, phenomenal job. And uh her husband Ben, just outgoing president, also did a great job. and they're two fantastic people. So, if you would like to come to our one of our Rotary Club meetings and make a presentation on anything that you are are passionate about, we'd love to have you. Or if you'd like to join Rotary, I'd be happy to talk to you about that, too. [1:32:08] **Commissioner Mahwald:** Still looking for my talent. [1:32:08] **Tim Benetti:** Uh—and that's it. So, hope you have a good night and a great weekend. [1:32:08] **Chair Curts:** Thank you, Tim. Congratulations, Becky. Do I have a motion? [1:32:08] **Commissioner Scanland:** So moved. [1:32:08] **Commissioner Halas:** Second. [1:32:24] **Chair Curts:** Motion to adjourn by Commissioner Scanland, seconded by Commissioner Halas. All in favor say I. [1:32:24] **Commissioners:** I. I. [1:32:24] **Chair Curts:** This meeting has adjourned. [Music] [1:32:36] [Music]