Good evening. and welcome to the July 6th city council meeting. If you join me with a moment of silence and pledge of allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for it stands one nation indivisibley and justice for all. Okay, Mr. Olowski, roll call, please. >> Michelle Vulk >> here. >> Luke Kelly >> here. >> John Burmal >> here. >> Dian Walter >> here. >> Joshua Lee >> here. Okay, we'll move on to item number three, citizens comments. Opportunity for anybody to address the council for up to three minutes about an issue in the city or Yes. Come on up. How are you? >> Hi. Um, hello, Mayor Hillier and city council members. My name is Kieran Miller, and I'm speaking before you today as a concerned citizen uh to respectfully urge caution regarding the approval of any additional Islamic mosques or um centers in our city. So, I fully support the First Amendment right to peaceful worship. If it were if this were simply another faith community operating within constitutional bounds, I would have no objection or concern. However, Islam is a political, military, and legal system seeking total conquest that uses religion to advance their agenda, which is divi defined by a document entitled an explanatory memorandum of the Muslim Brotherhood in North America. This document, which was discovered in an FBI raid and entered into the congressional record in 20 uh 2004, makes clear the Muslim goal of implementing Islamic law in America. Just read their statement here. It states, and this is a direct quote, understanding the role of the Muslim Brother in North America, the process of settlement is a civilization jihadist process with all that the word means. The Iwan or the Muslim Brotherhood must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and sabotaging its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and God's religion meaning Islam is made victorious over all other religions. This is the goal of the Muslim Brotherhood in North America. As stated in their own words, they seek to quote sabotage, eliminate, and destroy Western civilization and establish Islam as supreme above all other religions. These are their words, not mine. The Muslim movement in North America is openly hostile to our country, to our constitution, and to our freedoms. Their goal is to establish a global Islamic caliphate in which everyone will either have to convert to Islam, be killed, or pay a jizzy tax. And it's critical to recognize that their central uh organizing unit is the local mosque. This explanatory memorandum also explains it's their goal to establish an Islamic center or mosque in every city which can become quote the axis of our movement, the base for our rise, a small Islamic society, including an office of domestic political resolution and battalions. So therefore, my request to you is that you put a moratorum on issuing any further approvals of new mosque locations and/or conditional use permits in order to take time to conduct further research. >> Thank you very much. Good evening, Mayor and Council. Um, I did not come with the intention of speaking tonight, but now feel like I must. Steven Buck, 16530 Judicial Road. Let people pray the way they want to pray. I might argue that some of the biggest evil done in this country is done by the Catholic religion. Anybody ever hear of a priest molesting a child? And we don't stop them from opening their churches. Let people pray the way they want to pray. There's evil and good in all religions. Depends on how far you want to take it. Let people pray the way they want to pray. Thank you. I just encourage any future comments to not disparage anybody's religion, whether your own or somebody else's, and try to keep it within the bounds of city business. If not, we're going to have to end public comment. >> I agree. Basically, >> your name and your address, please. Kevin McCarnney and I was a Lakeville resident and now I'm basically in Savage. You want the address? >> Yep. >> 5920 West 136th Street. Um I worked with Muslims at the bus company in Minneapolis. And um I took care of a woman's driveway who was next door who was who was a Somali Muslim. And I I don't agree. I don't agree with them because they're more of a political force than they are a religious force. And I remember what stuck in my bones was is when I saw a massive crowd in Dearbornne, Michigan, and the Muslims were >> I said I want let's stick to city business. What you're talking about has no part of our agenda tonight or anything. I'm opposed to it also as Thank you. Other comments? >> Good evening, mayor and city council members. My name is Surya Ganeshan and I'm a resident of Lakewell. I live at 7093 where I have resided for the past 5 years. For the past 3 years, my family together with the members of local Hindu community has hosted weekly prayer gatherings in the basement of my home. These gatherings take place every Thursday and provide an important space for Hindu worship, cultural community and community connections, especially for families, senior citizens and individuals with disabilities. Over time, attenance has steadily increased. As a result, traffic, parking, and accessibility concerns have also grown. It is no longer appropriate or safe to continue holding these gatherings in a residential home, particularly for elderly participants and those with mobility or accessibility needs. At present, many members of our community must travel approximately 40 minutes to Chesca to attend Hindu prayer services. This can be especially challenging for senior citizens and individuals with disabilities. Today there are 8 812 Hindu families representing approximately uh 2,326 residents in Lakewell. Our community is actively engaged in the life of this city. members uh regularly participate in community programs, recreational sports, cultural events and volunteer initiatives contributing positively to Lakewell social, cultural and civic life. To address the current limitations and provide a safe, accessible and appropriately located space, we have identified two potential location on Juniper Path and Seda Sedar Avenue, Cedar Avenue that are better suited for these gatherings. We respectfully request approval for conditional use permit to conduct community prayer activities at one of these locations. We are fully committed to complying with all city requirements, including traffic management, parking, occupancy limits, safety standards, and accessibility requirements. We will work closely with the city staff to ensure these gatherings remain compatible with the surrounding neighborhood. At the same time, we continue to explore a long-term solution for our growing community to coordination with the city staff. I have been working with the planning and commissioner to identify appropriate locations. Approval of this conditional use permit will provide an immediate, safe and accessible solution for our community while remaining full consistent with the city policies and process. Thank you for your time, your consideration and your service to our community. We respectfully ask for your support. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Any other comments this evening? >> Okay, seeing none, moving on to additional agenda information. Mr. Miller, >> nothing tonight, May. Okay, we'll move on to our first presentation which is a National Night Out proclamation. I didn't know if the chief if you wanted to talk about National Night Out at all. Otherwise, I'd have Council Member Lee. Sorry to put you on the spot. You don't have to even come up. If you just wanted to >> I'll share a couple things. >> Okay, great. >> Good evening, Mayor and Council. And uh prior to the proclamation being read, I'll just say that uh everybody's eyes and focus is on Panaprog right now. So is ours. But coming up quickly in a month is National Night Out, August 5th. We just encourage people to go uh onto our website. There's a tab on the left side. It says national night out. Click there. There's all kinds of information. You can register your party. You can make requests for police or fire visits. We'll accommodate as many of those as we can. So, just encourage people to sign up. It helps us plan. So, that's all I have. >> All right. Thanks, Chief. Council Lee, if you'd uh read the proclamation, please. >> Absolutely. Proclamation for National Night Out 2026. Whereas the National Association of Town Watch is sponsoring a unique nationwide crime, drug and violence prevention program on August 4th, 2026 called National Night Out. And whereas the 43rd annual National Night Out provides a unique opportunity for Lakeville to join forces with thousands of other communities across the country in promoting cooperative police community crimerevention efforts. And whereas the city council plays a vital role in assisting the Lakeville Police Department through joint crime, drug and violence prevention efforts in Lakeville and is supporting National Night Out 2026 locally. And whereas it is essential that all citizens of Lakeville be aware of the importance of crime prevention programs and the impact that their participation can have on reducing crime, drugs, and violence in Lakeville. And whereas police, community partnerships, neighborhood safety, awareness, and cooperation are important themes of the National Night Out Program. Now, therefore, we the city council do hereby call upon all citizens of Lakeville to join the Lakeville Police Department, Lakeville Fire Department, and the National Association of Town Watch in supporting the 43rd annual National Night Out on August 4th, 2026. Further, let it be resolved that we, the city council, do hereby proclaim Tuesday, August 4th, 2026, as National Night Out in Lakeville, dated the 6th day of July, signed by the mayor, Luke Helier. >> Very good. Just a reminder for folks to sign up to lakevillemn.gov to sign up your party to make sure that we have the appropriate people stop by. Thank you for reading it. We'll move on to item B and our liquor operations director, Miss Wool, will give us the midyear report on our liquor operation. Mayor and council members, thank you so much for having me. Um, I am presenting the Lakeville Liquors midyear report. So, I will start with sales metrics. So, our sales have increased 2.1% compared to 2025. Our sales totals are around $10.3 million thus far this year. Our customer count has remained flat and our sales per transaction have increased 3%. Our um gross profit has our gross profit dollars has improved 3.8%. So we have generated almost $110,000 extra profit this year compared to last year. And the biggest reason for that would be attributed to our increase in sales in our lowd dose hemp derived edibles and beverage category. The emporium room remains a popular rental space in the community. We've had over We've had 43 rentals thus far this year. We've collected over $30,000 in rental fees, bar service, and day of coordination services. We've also hosted 10 promotional events through the end of the month in June. Um that generated over $26,000 in ticket sales and increased revenue. Ecommerce and Door Dash. So our CityHive metrics are online platform. From year to date, our sales are around $23,000, and that is a 19% sales decrease from last year. Um, we had a large company that was doing events and and using our platform for large purchases last year and their events have shrunk. So, our sales on online have shrunk as well. But thankfully, we have Door Dash to make up the difference. this year. To date, they've had almost $128,000 worth in sales and there's been almost 4,500 um orders. So, as I mentioned, our gross profit is up mostly due to our lowd dose hemp derived beverage edibles and sales. Um, we started selling these project products in June of 2023 when it became legal in Minnesota to do so. Our estimated sales this year is going to be over $1.5 million. Um, these products make up 6% of our total sales. Uh, compared to last year at 3.7, this is our fastest growing category in our stores. Without federal legislative intervention, we will lose this revenue stream and the ability to sell these items in our store on November 12th. So, this would be detrimental to our um bottom line, our revenue, and our budget. We're hoping something positive happens. Community engagement. During the month of March, we collected almost $30,000 to benefit our local area food shelves, including the Open Door Pantry and 360 Communities. Achievements. For the fifth year in a row, we are named a top 100 retailer by Beverage Dynamics Magazine. This year, the uh awards dinner and banquet was held in Minneapolis. So, we had the unique opportunity to bring our team down and actually accept it in person. So, that was fun. Staffing developments. Um, at the end of March, we hired Samantha Conn as our Kia Cook assistant manager. She came from Longville Municipal Liquors. She was a 12-year assistant manager there. So, we're lucky to have her. We're planning to hire one more full-time assistant manager at the Kia Cook location. We're crossing our fingers for August or September hire date. Two of our full-time leads earn their WCT level one certification in wine and one of our full-time assistant managers earned their double their level one and two certifications in wine. Upcoming events, we have the Taste of Lakeville quickly approaching. We're very excited to be part of this fun community event again this year that will be happening in August. Um, we're partnering with our environmental resources department um to help with their endeavors with raising funds for the Ritter Farm Park. So, we're going to help them and host a puzzles, pizza, and beer event. Um, and that will be in October. And then in November, we'll be once again doing our annual yellow ribbon program that provides support to veterans and their families. That is all I have tonight. I now stand for questions. Council questions, comments. Great job as always. Yeah, my only request is just keep us in the loop on the federal stuff. >> Try to pay attention, but maybe you guys get some more from the >> from Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Okay, moving on to uh item six, our consent agenda. Any items you wanted to highlight, Mr. Miller? >> Thank you, Mayor. A few tonight. Item 6G and 6K are both donations that we are asking to accept from the Lakeville Public Safety Foundation. One of them is for uh AEDs uh for our fire department. That's in the amount of $6,700. And then another is custom cabinets uh for $8,300 to the fire or to the police department for a pantry that they have for for people who come in and we're appreciative of those donations. Items 6H and 6L are both uh I would say environment related. 6H is in a annual agreement with the Metropolitan Council for some lake monitoring programs. And then item 6L is a joint powers agreement with the Vermillion Wershed District for some fish management. We're always appreciative of those efforts as well. And then item 6 O is a joint powers agreement between Dakota County and the city for engineering and construction for the North Creek Greenway. And that's in the least east lake community park area and we're very excited about getting that project moving forward as well. >> Fantastic. Council, any other items? Really? If not, I'll take a motion to approve it. >> I move approval of the consent agenda. >> Is there a second? >> Second. >> Okay. I will just say quickly uh we had a constituent email about item U today and I think that the answer we got from the city engineer um answered all the questions they had. So, I'm comfortable moving forward. So, with that, all those in favor say I. >> I post. >> No. Okay. Sent agenda passes. We'll now move on to items seven and eight. Uh action items, unfinished business. There are none. With that, I will call for about a fivem minute recess before we move into our new business slash uh work session, which will start with uh Dakota County. stepping. Stupid. N hey. Hey It's almost This is All right, we will now get started with the next hour. So, we'll tee this up with an update on safety and operations about County Road 5060 or more commonly known as 50 and 185th Street. And we've got our friends from Dakota County here to give us the background on our project. Sorry for the formality. We we since you last were with us, we've kind of shifted how we do our meetings. So, thanks for your willingness to stand up. >> Welcome to take a seat eventually, too. >> Thank you. >> Good evening, mayor and members of the council. I'm Aaron Lee, the transportation director for Dakota County, here with um county uh traffic engineer Tyler Craig to discuss information on the Conro 50 and 60 intersections. I'll turn it over to him. >> All right. I'm gonna see if I can get this thing working here, too. Oh, nice. I have my mouse. All right, we've got a lot of information. We've got about 300 pages worth of report that we're going to try to squeeze into 20 minutes here and then we'll get everybody home and watch some World Cup. Um, so really the the the point of this discussion is it stems from the safety of the 50 and 60 185th and Kenwood roundabout. Um, this has consistently been the highest location where we have crashes throughout the whole county since this roundabout was built. Um, >> is it the only double round roundabout? >> It is the only double roundabout in the county, one of three in the state. >> Okay, thank you. >> Yep. Um, and with that, you know, we get a lot of obviously we have data that shows that there's a lot of crashes here, but we also get a lot of resident requests about what are we doing about this? You know, we get a lot of complaints from um, people walking and biking and and existing on this corridor. There's a crash here almost every other day, right? So, a big part of this discussion is what are we doing on the county's end to make sure we're we're doing this is we're we're making as safe as mitigations as we can to this. Um, we're going to nerd out for a second and talk a little bit about the data though. Um, that crash rate index is kind of that that big big metric that we're thinking about. Um, and that's essentially it's a ratio showing um the amount amount of of crashes, the volume, and then kind of comparing it to other locations across the state. um and it returns a value. If that number is above a 1.0, uh that suggests there's a crash issue that might need to get mitigated. Well, as you can see, this is a 5.96 is much higher than one. Um you know, when we look at this throughout the whole county, we do this every year as part of our our system check. We do a ranking of all the the safe intersections. Uh this is again consistently number one since 2021. It's been the worst one that we've had. Now, I'll just say anecdotally on this list >> on a 10 to1 ratio do I get calls about >> nine and 190th >> over this. >> So, even though they're both in in here, that's the one that I'm I get contact most. >> Right. That's an interesting point. You know, we we've kind of seen that too of like even these we're making mitigations to all of those locations. Even at lower numbers, we're still making those mitigations, right? So, there's a little bit of, you know, is it so bad that people just are used to it being bad? you know, it's there's a little bit of that at play, too. So, I get that. Um, how do we get here? Let's go back in time. 20 pre205. Um, this was a traffic signal. It was noted. It was before I was around here. Some of you may remember this um when you were around if if you were around, but >> stop sign when I was in high school. So, yes, I remember. >> Well, well, this was a traffic signal at this point. >> Yeah. Well, it got uh widened, so I need the traffic signal. >> Exactly. And and that's a great point is that, you know, when before it was kind of a single through lane situation. Um it was kind of standalone free operation is what we call it where it's kind of assigning time based on who's there first, right? Um so at the time that was single lane. With the roundabout work that happened in 2015, um it gained more through lanes. So, it's, you know, two by it's two lanes entering and and so that has better capacity than it did at the the prior spot. Um, additionally, this area has changed a lot. Um, there's new improvements that we can do with our traffic signals that weren't necessarily a part of that before. Um, >> yeah, go for it. >> So, there's more traffic crashes with the roundabout, but I was looking for an indication on injuries. >> Is that just all crashes? And can you comment on the severity of the difference in the severity of the crashes and injuries and fatalities with the uh signalized intersection versus the roundabout? >> I feel like you're a a you should buy a lottery ticket because I think you know exactly what's coming up. Oh, >> we did that. >> Um >> that's what this is for. >> Right. Yep. So, this is kind of that idea, right? When when you build a roundabout, um you expect there's going to be some level of an increase in crashes, right? Um but it's at the at the uh expense of less severe crashes, right? So we kind of accept a few more crashes that are lower injury um knowing that we're going to have lower severity crashes. Um so when we built this this roundabout immediately we saw a massive increase in crashes in all crashes. Um far more than we would have expected, right? Usually it's a 20 to 30% increase or something. this was 10 to six a year and then that first year we had about 120 115 or so. Um and as you can see over time the crashes have been increasing but also the severity um has been increasing as well. If you look at the bottom you can see those bars have uh roughly how much severity is in there. Those greens are your possible injuries. Uh yellow is your minor injuries. And then if you look at the 2022 you can see there's a a little bit of line underneath. That's some of the a uh serious injury crashes that we've had. Um so we're seeing as volumes increase out here that we're seeing an increase of crashes, but also of some of these severity crashes happening. Um and this is, you know, kind of a a harder graph to read. We've got crashes on the on the left axis and uh traffic volume. That's AAD, average annual daily traffic on the left axis. Um kind of showing that historically we've seen growth here, right? That's what we would expect from a growing area. Uh around 2.7 is where we're sitting right now. And that kind of correlates a little bit. >> I I'm just You know what? I am blown away when I see this. And to think that you talked the city I wasn't here on the council, but the county, not you, because you already just claimed that you weren't that here. Talked into talk the city into a double roundabout with these kinds of numbers. And we'll get into that a little bit, but that's a great point that >> and we've just lived with it year after year. >> Yeah, there's >> great point. There's a little bit of a um you know, when we built this, there's a discussion of will it how does it handle the oncoming traffic, right? Um there's a lot that we now know about that um which we can cover when we get into that too. We've got that discussed as well. >> Why why is 24 such an outlier? >> 24 is an outlier. been angry in an election year or was >> I just >> a lot more snow >> that's a good question. I mean you can see there's a few different correlations and and drops and things like that. 2018 we believe that's from a um a high enforcement year there may have been some construction that occurred that year. Obviously 2020 is COVID and postcoid and kind of ramping up. 2025 was low because the east approach was getting worked on on 185th. So, there's going to be less volume entering that 2024. >> That's a great question. Um, >> you know, >> even with less volume, it's it's a high number. >> Right. Right. And and that's that, you know, when you measure that with that, uh, when you account for that volume, we still see 5.9 6.0, you know, these are five to six times what we would expect something to be like this. Um, so obviously this the first day this happens, the first year we have an issue here and we've been aware of those and we've been trying to fix those throughout and working very closely with the city on a lot of uh both soft and more hard mitigations for that. Some of those included campaigns for education um enforcement campaigns like we had uh just mentioned um signing and striping trying to clarify what drivers need to do. Um there's some research projects that happened. Um but notably, I want to uh point out those bottom three. Um those are some of the more recent deep dives that we've worked really closely with uh Lakeville on with figuring out exactly what what's going wrong here. You know, so in 2024, we did a in-depth crash review where we looked at every single crash that had occurred. We figured out where it was happening, where they were coming from, where they were going, any trends, the age, the you know contributing factors. Was it looking at the sun in a certain way? What is happening? Right? What's going on with that? Um then after that we did a uh design peer review where we sent our intersection to uh some roundabout experts who you know they're the roundabout scene is kind of a uh they kind of do their own thing, but they're a lot of it's a lot of research and it's a lot of it's a tight-knit community. So, we kind of sent that to some of them to review these and see if there's there's anything that we missed in that 10 years since since this was in place. And then, uh, most recently the traffic control analysis where we really dived into, uh, what different variations can we do with this intersection and how does it impact safety, how does it impact delay, how does it impact cost, things like that. Um so from that we've got some different options that we're looking to um propose here I guess and we'll discuss those three options. Um option one is the enhanced roundabout improvement. This is essentially taking the the roundabout as it is today. Um providing improved pedestrian beacons, some better zcrossings, what what they're called for uh safer pedestrian movements. Um permanently buffered lanes with mumble strips in those buffers. We'll talk about that in a second. um as well as some maybe leveling around the central mound. This is more of a spot improvement, right? Um what can we do quick to make this thing safer is is this approach. Um option two is looking at those same improvements but installing um southbound right and eastbound right bypass lanes. Um again same options as option or same improvements as option one but just with those bypasses. And then the controversial one, um, should this go back to a signal? Right? Knowing now that we have additional capacity on the through lanes, knowing now that we have the ability for additional left turn capacity, we have uh improvements in our signal timing technology, we have the ability to time signals to the west and to the north to kind of create progression. Um, what do we what how does that measure up from a from a safety standpoint? And that really is how we want to look at all these, right? You know, there's a lot of different ways to to compare all these options, but primarily we're concerned about the safety, right? What is the safety going to how's that going to improve and how do we bring that 423 number down to as low as we can to zero, right? Um so really looking at all these with a safety lens. So getting into the first two options, right, those are the buffered lane kind of the they involve that buffered lane um improvement. We put in some temporary buffered lanes. I'm sure maybe you have you all have seen that. Um, we put those in last October and more temporary, right? It's just more paint on the road. Um, pretty minimal to negligible difference. I don't know if if you all have drive driven out there since those have been up. If you've noticed them, >> good for you. Um, >> it's pretty. >> Anecdotally, it seems like a lot of people don't notice them when I go out there to watch it, but that's okay. um you know when we looked at prior years and again this was in October so we don't have a full year's worth of data but we tried to keep that sample size similar throughout the past right so that 77 number that's kind of thrown out because 185th construction was going on um but prior to that you know 95 78 in those pockets those are the amount of crashes in that six months um is it an improvement right is is that thing helping the the the improvement of the safety. It seems negligible, but you know, I think the argument or the discussion here is when you do it permanently instead of just striping on the road, does that improve it? Right. When you put those mumble strips in the buffer lane, how likely are people to drive over? Does when we say mumble strips, does that does the board know what >> on 35 the >> Yep. where we kind of they're they're less on the highway where you can you drive off and it rattles your whole car. We've made them now that you can put them in the street and you feel it only in the vehicle, not outside. So, you know, we've done some testing. It's pretty cool that you don't know where they're driving over when when they're driving over it. So, it's it's uh pretty neat technology that they can do and effective for not telling people that they're coming off to the road. But the point is when you do those with permanently ground in striping, does that have a better improvement than just a temporary striping? So, So that's for the by the excuse me the buffer lanes. Now we're going to look at the bypass options. This is option number two. The idea behind the bypass options are well largely it's kind of an operational improvement, right? There's an improvement to safety, but as you'll see, it's kind of minimal. Um, the idea here is that you're removing some of that volume from the internal part of that roundabout and pulling them out to the side so that they're not necessarily contributing to the uh crashes within that intersection. Right. So, >> but but are you saying that it's only nine? You would spend all that money for nine. >> And that's the point. That's the that that's kind of one of the trade-offs, right? is that, you know, is is this an improvement that's actually an improvement or is it something that we're improving something that isn't necessarily there? And this is just from one year. But, um, >> just to be clear though, when you say bypass, like if you're coming from the north and making the the westbound, if can you still if you're in that right lane, can you still go through the roundabout or is it forcing you to make that right turn? >> I can show exactly the idea. That is Could you say that again? I want to make sure I understand. >> So if you're coming from the north south >> Okay, >> there you go. >> Yep. >> And you want to go through the if you're in that far right lane >> in this lane here in the bypass even further up there. Do you have And you're in that do you have to go right or can you still go through the um roundabout? >> You I want to make sure I'm getting this right, too. If >> you go straight if you're in the right lane, >> if you're in the right lane that isn't the bypass, you can go straight. Yep. If you're in the right, if you're taking a right, you should be taking the bypass is is maybe what it >> So essentially adds a right turn lane, not a bypass lane, >> right? So I guess what I'm saying is is that while there were only I forget the number certain number of crashes in that movement, >> it would also reduce the number of cars going through the >> right >> roundabout in general, which theoretically would reduce the number of potential crashes. >> Correct. And that is a very valid point that by removing that volume from the internal part of the intersection that may have an improvement to circulating. I feel like they're they're they're mind reading here. This is great. U the counter to that is that unfortunately the way that this and there's obviously this is going to if this option is pursued there's final design and things like that that have to occur. While removing that volume out may have an improvement to the internal circulating roundabout traffic, it may introduce a another potential conflict. Right? And I think that's kind of the the idea here is that you're looking over if you're taking this right, you're looking over your shoulder, you find a gap, do you have enough time to notice that there's a pedestrian crossing there? I think your point about the volume with less volume entering in the intersection is valid. um it just it may introduce another type of crash. So, it's kind of one of those where we don't have a great, you know, modification factor for that, but that's definitely something that was uh that we looked at when we were looking at this. >> I'll also note on that chart with the crashes with the signal and the roundabout, we plotted the traffic growth rate. So the first year it opened, the traffic was around 30,000, maybe less than that. And today we're at over 45,000. So even even then when we had 15,000 less vehicles entering that a day, we still had, you know, around 115 crashes during that time period. So, um, we we're not confident that reducing pulling traffic out of that roundabout is necessarily going to have a significant increase, uh, decrease in the crashes that we're seeing. >> But some of those numbers are large to to city administrator's point that they are some they're not the most of the volume, but it's it's a decent percentage of that volume making those, right? So, the idea here is that yes, you may be removing some volume from that. It just isn't a noticeable difference. >> So these are your ideas, Dakota County's ideas. >> Uh in conjunction, >> have you looked across the nation at these double roundabouts and has anybody been successful? >> Have I got some treats for you at the end of this presentation? Mayor, >> um, sorry, >> before we get to the the third option, >> in doing some of my own research, there are other roundabout options that weren't presented like turbo roundabouts, metered, fully signaled. Why are those not a part of the option list? >> Sure. Here. >> And good, good point. So, we did look at as part of this deep analysis that we did here, um, this traffic control analysis, we really ran the gamut on what we could do. you know, uh, we looked at some 2x1 options where, you know, maybe we find one movement that what's the lowest movement we could use to, you know, maybe just have operations be a little bit more um, detrimental during the peak times if it's going to give that safety benefit. What does that look like? Um, so we modeled an option like that. It had pretty catastrophic modeling results. Um, we looked at turbo roundabouts there. Turbo roundabouts aren't necessarily a thing that we do in Minnesota. I know Chaska had tried a spiral type roundabout, but that requires a pretty massive roundabout footprint. Um, we looked at doing some signalization. We looked at some really really funky signal stuff of metering certain parts. Um, and I think there's this may be in the end of this, but we've got kind of a a matrix of all the options that we looked at of of, you know, 2x two, two by, you know, different scenarios that we wanted to make sure we were modeling. Um but yes, the these uh these were largely taken from um there was a a roundabout e design expert that helped designate some of these items and and when we get deeper into the 2 by two discussion, we'll see kind of why we did those buffered lane uh discussion points is that >> it just it seems like with the this 2 by two being such a rare thing in Minnesota and really kind of rare nationwide, some of your examples are, you know, on the south and west coast. uh in terms of other examples, it it seems like the options need to be creative as well since there's not a lot of the I don't know how the modeling is done to to really understand is that a realistic uh scenario for this um situation because I mean some of the modeling was talking about the failure happens after I believe 40,000 >> 50,000 you know so we're obviously above that so it it requires either a very sophisticated ated roundabout situation, which I guess these options don't seem as uh sophisticated of a roundabout or going backwards in terms of a a signalized. And so that's where I'm trying to figure out the >> the options are is this truly the full set of options we have for this intersection. >> We did look at the signaliz option signalizing a roundabout. The problem is that it creates significant delay because unlike a signal where you you can allow through two and left turns that happen at the same time and right turns. When you have a roundabout, you can't do that because you have conflicting movements. People can go any direction in that roundabout. Rather than a signal, we control every single movement with a green light. >> So, it creates more delay because we have we have more options people can do. So, we can't let all the traffic go at once like in the signal where you can control it. >> Oh. Oh, sorry. Keep going. But we did do some we we looked out, you know, in in Brooklyn and some of these other locations. I'm sure you've seen some of these in in your homework that you've done, too. I love hearing this. So, let's hear all the questions. This is let's nerd out over it. Um, some of those intersections are so big that you can signalize them better. And as we'll get further into this, you'll see that other locations have done that signalization. this footprint doesn't really exist for that where we would have to do essentially all of westbound goes and then all of northbound goes and then all of east and that as Erin as Erin was saying it really is a massive detriment from to a to a delay standpoint and we'll get into that too but also a safety standpoint >> you're actually getting into a question I had um one and maybe I missed it but one piece of data that I didn't see is the difference in traffic flow with the intersection that we have now in the volume of traffic. Um my personal experience is is that it flows relatively smoothly versus a signalized intersection where you can go to any number of those around here and you see that the traffic flows incredibly frustrating. >> Sure. >> You don't even get your green light if you're at the tail end of a of a line of cars and you have to wait for two cycles of lights. So, um, that's another thing that I I'm mentally balancing in there with the traffic volume and the lights and the traffic flow. >> And, uh, I I think there are it's like, uh, council member Lee, I think there are some solutions here for this that could uh, try to help mitigate, but I'm I'm concerned about, you know, if you do go signalized, what that's going to do to traffic flow. >> Yeah. >> In the area. Well, we do mention that and I will note that the good thing about a traffic signal is that we are able to modify traffic signal timing accordingly, right? And the I think a little bit of the way that this signal used to be from what I had seen in the records, we would not operate it in that same way. There's better ways that we can operate it. Um, but I understand where you're coming from of signals are different. You know, >> there's other signals in the county that you guys are operating that are incredibly frustrating >> and we're looking at making those as good as we can. I agree. >> Yeah. County Road, if if you could County Road with a four in front of it, I think you pretty much got it like >> heard. Um I'm going to get back into the Oh, yeah. Okay. So, we'll This is again another great segue here. Um thank you, Council Member Burmeell. the coming from this from a safety discussion. Um we wanted to look at what safety differences exist, right? Um in the industry it's pretty understood that roundabouts are going to have less severe crashes than a traffic signal. That is a given. That is what you would expect. That's why you build them. Um you may have more general crashes, but you're not going to have as many severe crashes. Um obviously we're seeing a lot of them, but we wanted to look at other locations across the county, right? We looked at some of our highest traffic signals. Uh and again that AADT, that's average um annual daily traffic. Um we really looked at five or six of those, but those are just the highest ones that we wanted to point out. Um we're seeing that even though those are higher traffic locations, not only are we seeing less total crashes, but we're seeing less severe crashes there. Um, and I I hear myself saying that and I want to make it clear that our stance here is not that signals are more safe than a roundabout, right? We're saying that for some reason the context of this roundabout when compared to other locations, there's less severity at those other locations than we're seeing here. And it it keeps coming back to that point of, you know, if the point of this intersection is to make this as safe as possible, and if the point of a 2 by two roundabout is to make this so that we're having as se low as, excuse me, as many low severe crashes as we can, reduction in our severity crashes. That's what I was trying to say. Um, if we're not doing that, what's the point of this roundabout, right? Is this doing what we should be really needing it to do? Um, and if not, how do we get it there? Right? What are the steps we need to do? it's been in operation for 10 years and we haven't been able to really bring that down as much. So, what's wrong? And that's kind of that that trilogy of those three studies that we referenced earlier of what is really happening here. How do we truly fix the issue? Um, >> did your studies show what percentage of the population just avoids going through a double roundabout if they possibly can? They will take other routes versus going through that double roundabout. We did see uh so we collected 2026 data here um just recently this few months ago or whatever um we did see a significant drop in northbound right traffic. So does that tell us that they found it during construction they found a different route? Did they find a different way to go? And that's also a little bit concerning too of if they're if that's a high commuter traffic route, they're finding a different route that isn't on the county stretch, where are they going? Are they going to Lakefield neighborhood streets? Are they going to locations where there's kids biking or playing soccer in the in the street or something? Right? Where is where else is that traffic going? The worse it gets, the more likely that will happen. Right. But I and I think if so if I'm looking at you know 42 in Cedar and then 42 in Pilot Knob those both of those have other roads nearby that can serve a lot of traffic you know whether it's giant cake or whatever and so forth. It's really is the only other option that people are going to take when coming through this area. >> So I I do understand that being the case. I don't I can't can't account for why there's still more trips through Cedar and 42, but there's there's fewer crashes, >> right? And it's it's a major commuter throughway. You know, I I I get that. Um yes, there's other things around it, but it's still kind of the main two of the major spines at the county. Um and 31 and 42 31, you know, Pilot Knob is really your main your second main north south route. Um it was just really we were really interested to see that number though because I think ultimately it comes back to the point that these numbers are are numbers that people feel right when you go and when even if it's a a a PD property damage crash that's still a crash that people have to pay for right taxpayers have to bear that burden right whether it's through repairs or medical bills or you know missed work or things like that especially nowadays these are the things we want to minimize as much as we can um and it was just surprising to that some of our heaviest, biggest signals of, you know, double left turn lanes and and massive throughput still had a um lower severity. Now, that's not to say that the likelihood doesn't exist that they could happen, right? Um but it's just something to note that these intersection types seem to be doing differently than we would have expected comparatively to this location. I'll just note I looked up tonight our second our intersection with the second highest just total number of crashes not looking at traffic volumes crash rate index severity but it is uh 42 in Cedar. So that has our number two most crashes in the county. So you can see that 50 and 60 is almost four times higher than our number two intersection in the county as far as crashes go and almost has double double the amount of traffic. We're going to show some de got two things I want to preface here. We have two different delay models we want to talk about. We have done two different growth rates and we'll show both of those for you here. Um, but we mentioned how we're focusing as safety, right? How do we make this thing as safe as we possibly can? Who cares about delay? Well, the reason delay matters here, especially at at a roundabout, is because the longer you wait at a roundabout, the more likely you're going to be making a uh unsafe maneuver, right? A roundabout, you have to find a gap in traffic to go, right? So, if you've been waiting for two minutes and someone's honking at you and you've had a long day and you're getting panicked and you you just want to get through that, the longer that number wait happens, the more likely an unsafe gap might be taken. Um, now this this number here, as we mentioned, we've got two of these tables. We'll show the next one in a second, but um these numbers are coming from the county travel demand model. This is looking at um essentially what predicted growth is comp plan. Um, this got updated in 2022 to reflect the most recent data that we have. Um, and it shows growth on I want to say uh 2.5 on 60 and 1.5 growth rates on 50. Um, so when you carry that through, we did kind of a sensitivity check of how long can each of these operations last. Um, we see that the roundabout does pretty poorly over time and it gets worse and worse. Now, to your point, um, Council Member Vulk, the how much will people actually deal with that is the big question before they find a different route that isn't on the county system. Um, that's a big thing we're nervous about. Um, so that's something to be mindful of with this. And this is using a um should preface this is using a VSIM model where they kind of it's called micro simulation where they assume each car operates like a vehicle would um and then it is able to gather the amount of delays that each vehicle feels. So, um, that option one, that roundabout, the orange option, um, at the worst case in 2044, that's a 5m minute wait on average per vehicle. Um, so we were talking earlier of, you know, what we think our anticipated weight would be before we found a different route. And I don't think it'd be five minutes. I think it it'd be less than three minutes for me personally, but, you know, different drivers have different expectations on that. Um if we look at bypass the option two with the bypass the purple option um we get a little bit more mileage out of that right and there's understandably so right we kind of did a capacity improvement so therefore the capacity is a little bit improved from that um and then come 2032 2035 we start to see some failure with that um and then it kind of fails exponentially with that and then option three the traffic signal um that's a little bit different from the roundabouts because it's not as dependent on delay as you were meioning that you know people wait longer to signal and we can the good thing is we can make traffic signal timing better depending on the different level of traffic that's there right we can make the longer splits when they need it and we can make shorter splits when there's not traffic there um additionally you don't necessarily have the situation where people need to risk it to make a gap right this green thing is going to tell them that that they can go now um but as a result it is kind of uh you're able to tweak it and make it last longer. It's just do we have the staff and able ability to do it? And we've we've got some we we hired some new people. So I think we're in a pretty good spot with some signal timing stuff. So if you've got issues, please let me know and we can maybe tweak your timings. >> Tyler, could you clarify one question for me? So if I'm reading this right, the yellow or the orange dash line is the what's designated as the level of service F. So the worst for a roundabout, >> right? >> And the blue is for a signal. Why isn't that the same? >> And that >> it should be it's an intersection. It should be measured at how quick you have to get through there because >> I mean I I go through there at the peak time almost every day. And according to this, it's F now. And I don't think that's the case, >> right? And I do want to clarify that's using some of the 24 data. When we get into the the 26, we'll see some some differences with that. But um the reason for the difference in the failure threshold is a lot of well it comes from the the highway capacity manual um essentially the expectation is that drivers will wait longer to signal because they know they're going to be getting their time in a bit. Right? So psychologically there's been studies that that that's kind of just the measure that they use. Um, you can Google this that you probably already Googled this honestly, but uh um but >> well, you know, it's eventually gonna turn green for you, >> right? So that the acceptable level is longer. I think for a roundabout or an unsalized intersection, it's 55 seconds of wait is failure. And this is for average overall, right? That's not necessarily looking at the worst case. Um whereas a signal I think is I want to say 80 seconds for failure. So it's it's a good 30 second to 25 second difference of what is considered failure. >> I think the challenge is when we do 35 and 50 and how much more traffic in in my mind like how how this will back up because 10 years ago when we had signals and I get how it was changed. You could sit there for two three more cycles and you could be back at culvers. >> Sure. during high traffic times. We have not seen that in my my driving with the roundabout. To me, it's like obviously the crashes are important. I don't want to discount that, but clearly we're moving traffic through much quicker. On the next slide, when you say travel demand model on the lower end, >> Yep. Is that that is that population growth or traffic growth? And how can you just tell me how because we've grown a ton. >> I do think between 26 and 36 it is going to slow down for a whole bunch of reasons and I think we'll come more in line with the Met Council's kind of projections of being capped out at maybe 90. So I think this this makes a lot more sense to me as I'm thinking about our city growth than the previous slide. So I I'm just as a timing scenario that's my >> great point and that was one of the reason one of the things that uh Lakeville brought up to that you know do we truly anticipate that this growth is going to occur right um a lot of that was from the 2040 plan where they were saying in this year of 2040 we can expect this much traffic on the road and then kind of you kind of have to do some backward math but you literally try to get to that point right it might not be linear in real life but >> I just I think that The part is that we've sped up in my mind to the 2030 already because we had 10,000 people move from 2000 to 2026. >> Sure. >> That so I think we are going to see a leveling out versus what we kind of planned for 10 years ago versus what was reality on growth. Right. >> Sorry, I've got a mosquito bit of my leg on the chin. >> Well, I will note that the the travel demand model numbers that was oops that was just updated in 2022. Um, obviously things have changed. I get that. Um, and that was a large impetus for looking at a lower growth rate, right? What does that look like? That's kind of what this is. Um, looking at a fi a 0.5 versus 1.0 growth rate um is pretty minimal, but it's it's that could be a thing that happens. We wanted to check it for sensitivity. Um, and we're here to present that. Um, obviously it's lower volume, so you can expect that those lower delays are a resultant of that. Um, the roundabout, we still see a potential failure come 2035. Um the option two, the bypass option um does pretty well, right? That the capacity improvement has a pretty good good benefit for the um what we'd expect there. The traffic signal um consistently no matter the volume. These are low enough that um it's pretty negligible from a signal timing standpoint, but we're easily able to make that signal timing adjusted um for that. And this is looking at looking at um obviously just PM peak. We've tweaked the timings as we would um every four or five years we look at it or when we get resident concerns. We we try to keep a good eye on these. Um sometimes we don't always hit them though. Um it just kind of shows that that signal is a little more sustainable given lower volumes. Uh the bypass option also is not failing. So um >> yeah. >> Yeah. Sorry. C um it seems like we're trying to correct speed and distraction mostly. um because the the driving habits aren't improving either um from folks. So, what about other factors like decreasing the speed limits in at least approaching the intersection and that impact on people's ability to be more aware and not fly through the roundabouts? >> Sure. Sure. And that has that's been brought up by um a few residents as well. And I think a lot of that thought is if you design this roundabout, well, the 20 mph speed limit is kind of the advisory speed limit. That's what people will feel safe driving, right? The outside doesn't necessarily have as much of a a realm. Now, we can argue that whether or not, right? I I've got my own thoughts on that. Um I mean, the yellow signs look like a suggestion, I think, to many. Um and they just continue with the speed of the the cross streets, you know, 55. We did not get speed data within the um within the intersection. We got some drone footage that was pretty neat. Um wildly we saw some a crash happen the day we collected drone footage which like you never have happen but um we did not get speed data on that. We did show that there was a lot of people are once they're coming to the intersection they do stop to slow right they're yielding >> um speed within the intersection that may be a part of it but um I don't have data on how much that outside speed limit impacts the speed inside the roundabout. >> Sure. >> Um it's something to consider. I would say knowing how Mindot does a lot of their speed limit stuff, it might not necessarily give the result that we would hope it would give. Um but I I understand your your point on that. Yep. >> Um yeah, in looking kind of on the same lines looking at uh option one >> where you know we have the the uh painted medians which have helped people at least conceptually go okay I should be over here. Um you're talking about the rumble sticks. uh I rumble street. >> I would go one step further because physical barrier calms traffic and if you took those and raised those and made that what's white and ch and hashed there a small median it will slow people down and it will force them to think about where I'm going and what I'm doing. >> Right. >> Yeah. I just get worried about snow removal >> and that's our issue as well. Right. And that's kind of what um council member Lee was getting at. That's kind of the isn't quite the turbo, but that's kind of what they are, right? Like, how do you channelize that movement, >> right? Because that's really the reason the 2 by twos have the issue, right? You have an issue with people not going over the spot where they need to go or it's not clear enough or there's other issues with sight things and there's a few different factors that come into play with that. Um, but we did not pursue that because of snow and climate and things like that. Yeah, because I as I looked at the intersection, I'm thinking, okay, if we're willing to just etch a sketch the thing and make it a uh a four-way stoplighted intersection, what could we do less to maybe expand the lanes, get some of those medians in there and make it so you can remove the snow and get a plow through there and uh and do that? But, um I that's one of the first things that popped into my mind when I looked. Ballards were a discussion we had of like uh you know they don't they're assuming that we're okay you know getting them knocked down every every winter right do we put ballards up there to keep that thought that they can only go in that lane right um I know Minneapolis does a lot of their um they call quick builds where they put in improvements or whatever and they just anticipate that they have to put them out every year you know that's an option as well you know it's just how much does that lead into other we want to avoid all the unintended consequences that we can. >> No, I get that. >> Yeah. >> So, can we can we jump to what we call it slide 296, but that's the costs and >> Oh, sure. >> Yep. There you go. So, I'm going to throw a wrench in this whole conversation for you because we've had the our city engineer and I have and the city ministry and I had had a conversation about this a little bit thinking more broadly because we've been kind of just playing koi to not push through Kendrick which is a connection on 185th over to 50 and our thought is if we push that through we develop that road because you're going to have a more seamless route on 175th once the new 50 is finished, right? You're going to be able to travel through very easily around called the bag of Ace Hardware and then over past Target and then on you could then head south or or west I guess very easily and I think that helps divert traffic. You know, what are your thoughts on that? because to me I think that there's some improvements that we can work on potentially you guys thinking about option one us thinking about how to make Kendrick work and re-evaluating because my thought is I don't feel comfortable saying okay post 3550 we're really going to know what the traffic through here is going to look like and I wouldn't want to go down a path where we're picking a more permanent solution of all of a sudden our assumptions are completely different based on what happens with that intersection. Sure. >> So I can offer one point in that bar chart again that I referenced earlier on the crashes. So even if we saw flat growth on 56, no additional traffic, we're at 47,000 today. And if we remove conceivably um down to 2016 levels, which is um around 34,000. So we're removing 13,000 vehicles a day. We're still seeing over 100 crashes in that time period. So that's why we're not confident that removing traffic, even a fairly large amount of traffic is going to result in a significant crash reduction. And even that's assuming we don't have any growth any growth on 50 or 60. Well, and that's why I say mixing it with one of the >> I just I option one to me seems like a very low it's a lower cost and it's something to try before investing heavily in a completely different direction of a signalized or some of the option two of the roundabout. >> Yeah, >> to me I I feel like if if you couple the reduction in pressure and make some safety changes because I will say the the thing anecdotally people say to me is I can't see over the mound and the fact that you're talking about leveling that I think makes a big improvement. one for pedestrians but two for people thinking about what movement they can make through if they can actually see over it. >> So we we will explore the easy option. I mean regardless of the outcome of the discussion on bypass signal >> that's something we want to pursue pursue in the near term future because it is low cost and mumbles cost nothing it brings us. So that that's something we're going to be exploring with the county board as well here soon >> regardless of option. Yep. Yep. that we can still put in mumble strips at a minimum and see if that has an improvement with the striping that we have in place. >> I'm just >> you guys are great partners. There have been some road changes that have occurred that have just not gone the way we wanted to go and you want it to go. And so I'm just trying to say how can we work together come up with some immediate stuff and because to me 3550 is such a huge change. I don't think a model and this is not my world. I don't know anything about what you're talking about. You're a great expert. I'm very confident of that. I just know from traveling through this area, I think it's going to be substantially different. People are going to make different choices that we can't look for. And so I don't want to make a choice now than post 29. People's how they're traveling here is very different. >> So maybe we can kind of jump to the very last slide. Yeah. >> And why we're here tonight and what we're looking for. So, we're essentially looking for feedback, which you've given us a lot of feedback on all of these various options. Um, one, you know, our main goal of this whole entire analysis has been crash reduction. Delay is a kind of a secondary issue, but it's really how can we get those crashes reduced? And so, next week, we'll be going back to the county board and report to them the feedback that we have heard tonight. and um we're looking for direction to possibly proceed with an engineering consultant CR contract to do further analysis and engineering design. To this day, we've done not real engineering design. The graphics you saw out there are very conceptual. They're 2D quick layouts. We don't know what the impacts are of those. And so that that's going to be the ask um to just enter a consultant contract so we can do more analysis and design. So that's That's where we're at right now. And as part of that, we would do a lot of public engagement as well. >> When you say design, do you mean what option? >> Well, I guess that's that's what we're going to find out. Um, with the feedback and we present to the county board, we want to pursue one of these options. Do we want to look at them more in all of them in more depth? Um, that's that's the question that we'll be asking. And so, preliminary engineering you know we usually that's a 30% layout so that's a layout that we can understand where our right way impacts are where construction impacts are right now we don't understand that with I mean we haven't done any engineering work on these options at all >> high level yep >> um and obviously this is more analysis right um so yeah yep and the prelim does sorry >> I I don't like option three >> I can maybe be convinced on the road I think option two potentially depending on what else happens with 35 and 50. Um, so I guess I wouldn't my feedback to the board with two commissioners here would be is I'm not comfortable on any type of solution without seeing real life changes on potentially if we go down the road on Kendrick connection and potentially what happens with 50. So that's my feedback. I'm one of the five of us here. >> Uh I I will add it. You had a prior question too that I wanted to really uh address too with what that Kendrick connection looks like. Um as part of the 2011 study that kind of got us to this spot. Um they had an analyzed that and kind of undergone what they anticipate that traffic would pull from this intersection. Um and it wasn't as much as you would think. I was surprised at how low it was. it was um I think from the north leg it was taking 2500 a day and from the west leg it was taking 2500 a day. So essentially you know that's traffic that may be using that. Um but that's still at max 5,000 out of 47,000. Um, >> you said that was 2011. >> 2011, but they had grown it to, um, I think they did 20 35, 2040. Don't quote me on that. Um, but they had done that same thought of, you know, assuming Kendrick happens and then different levels of growth as well. Um, I was just surprised that it was kind of a lower number than I would have anticipated. And on some levels, I get that, right? It's if people are going to be using the county system. See if I can find a good graphic of this. That's all right. I don't have a really great one. Um, but really you've got folks that are these folks may not be making that movement anymore, right? Some of those may be using Kendrick. Uh, and then the only other movement that really gets inhibited is this movement. Maybe some of those are using Kendrick, but if you look at what Kendrick is, you know, how many folks use I guess it it could happen, right? The projections we saw were pretty low. Um, and to Erin's point too, even when we had a lower volume, we still saw a crash issue, you know. So, I we get nervous about these these big improvements for something that's not going to give a substantial benefit, right? We want to make sure we're spending money wisely. Want to make sure we're doing the right thing and improving safety as much as we can. Um, so I guess maybe that's kind of a >> Did you do you break it down in your report where those let's say it was 400 crashes for the year, which way they were traveling and what the numbers were? >> So maybe there's only two sides to this. It needs to be corrected. the issues are, you know what, and I can we can kind of go back into the a little bit of like the discussion of what the industry has behind that, but the issues are largely at each of those corners, right? Um >> for the most part, there's some >> that's why I'm asking you is if you if the crash So you're saying the crashes are 100 this corner 100. It's split evening. It doesn't matter which direction they're coming from, there's a crash. Or is there certain ways that they're traveling that are causing the crashes that they're coming from 35W and as they want to go straight across, you know, they're most of the crashes are occurring in one sector versus the other three. There's not necessarily as we broke it down that deep, but it's not as cut and dry as that. I think the bigger the bigger point is ask >> we did we kind of broke it up into I don't want to say quadrants, but I'll say like oct o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o octaggents or something, right? But um you know on the entering, on the exiting, on where they cross, you know, things like that. And then from each of those, we dug in to figure out which lane were they in, what how did they interact with the other lane. Um it's more of that front. Um we can infer that they were coming from this spot. Um but that that's a great point that it wasn't necessarily one side was showing it. It was each of these corners were showing the issue that we see at these other industry spots. And that's kind of what we had found when we put this out to folks across the US. Right? Um first off um a lot of the experts that we showed this to were very surprised that this had such a high entering volume. Right? We talk about 47 as what we're sitting at, 48 47. Um 50 to 55 is where you start to see the system breakdown from a safety and from an operational standpoint. Um you know, we ran this in front of some some research folks and some real uh I know them so I can say this, but real roundabout dweebs on on what we want to do here. Um and they kept coming back to that point of surprisingly how much entering volume is coming in here. Um and with that 2 by 2, the other thing we found from the industry is from the 10 years that we've done this um that we've had this here, but also since that time that the industry has built more and more of these 2 by twos, we've found that there's a 2 by 2 issue that's present at almost all of them that gets farther exacerbated, right? And that's kind of what I wanted to get into a little bit here of, you know, MDOT will not build these anymore, right? Because the 2 by 2 issue is it's such a stronger issue that unless you do some type of turbo or some type of situation that you're you're um making different tweaks to it, they try not to build them if they can because you know, and we kind of echo that of like we want to make this thing work. We don't want to build something we don't think is going to work. If we need to build a 2x1, let's build that and then secure the ride ofway to build it when we need it if we don't have a better alternative, right? Um you know when we look at the um the 2 by two portion of I mentioned earlier that we had only three locations in the state. This one was in Mano that's 29 entering. We're at 49 entering. These are just they would much rather do other situations than build a 2x two. Right? You know looking at high view and 179th that's an intersection that's a 2x1. We don't necessarily see those crash issues. Yes, there's lower volume, but we also don't see that 2 by two crash issue because of kind of that inherent design that we've understood from the industry. Um, and some of the people that have built these and started that in Europe, in UK, um, we kind of adopted that model when we we took that idea. Um, we're seeing that they're starting to remove some of them, right? They're starting to signalize some of their big intersections because they're running into similar issues that we saw here. Um, we s found in Arizona there was a uh 2 by two roundabout interchange that they converted to a signalized diverging diamond interchange because there were so many crashes that they had. Um, and that's essentially what what's going to get built at 50 and 35, right? Um, they they figured that those roundabout the amount of 2x two crashes that were occurring there and that's only looking at that's even less because you have it's a ramp, right? You don't have a four-legged approach. you really have a three-legged approach with an exiting lane. Um, they had gone through and and totally converted that. Uh, and then I think maybe the not the most fun but the most interesting point of of all this is we really did some deep dive on some of this data. Um, there's a signal data or a roundabout database out there that has 5,000 4,000 roundabouts and you can filter all these things and look at different configurations and things like that. Um, from that record, there's 450 2x two roundabouts in the US, not considering 2x1 or hybrids or whatever. Um, from all of those, we only saw four other locations that had the volume similar to what we have here. And almost all of them, all of them see the issues that we have, right? The one that was just built in Fischers, Indiana, um, that was built in 24. They had six crashes a year at a signal. They built this roundabout and it was 165 the first year to the >> Fisers is the number one safest city in America according to the new thing. So, >> or is it Carmel or is it Fischers? >> It was one and four. Okay. >> Just another point as we kind of wrap this up. >> Yeah. Sorry, we're going along here. We talked about trying to get you guys back home that's included in your model, but we are also adding a stoplight at Orchard Trail on 185th, too. And so, that will provide some some relief for traffic moving from the freeway that way. So, I think it just goes to your point, mayor, that there's still a lot of unknowns here. >> And if I could summarize, I think what you're hearing is that there's some interest from us to still try to improve some some safety and traffic concerns here with maybe some of the lowhanging fruit before going full-fledged into a really expensive project. >> Which to that point, just a question, how does the funding break down city to county work for a project like this? >> So, First, I'll say we're not proposing a construction project right now. We're just proposing staff will be proposing to the county board to move forward with preliminary engineering to look at deeper dive into these. Um, if this were to move to a construction project, because this was recently reconstructed and the city paid their share of that, we would be proposing to the board that there's zero city share. I I would assume if you didn't, I would be saying that you should because you talked us into one thing and now you've decided that it doesn't work and I don't want to pay for it. >> Y understood. Thank you. >> Yep. I think that's valid. Obviously, the point is that we're trying to make this as safe as we can. Yep. >> Okay. Other comments? As I said, you're going to recommend what you recommend, but we'll have to continue to have conversations because I'm not sold on anything. So, appreciate you coming. >> Thanks for having us. >> Thank you. >> Sorry it went so long. >> No, it's all right. >> I'm going to get my phone going and see how the game's going here. >> It was needed. >> Well, I won't see the game, I guess. >> No. Well, that was an important conversation. So, >> okay. Um, we'll turn it over now to our parks director, Mr. Macy Archin >> and give >> who will give us our facility update. >> Uh good evening, mayor and uh council. Um so we're back again to do another update on our park system master plan. Uh this has been underway now for uh almost a year actually at this point. Uh, and last I was here, we talked about a status update on what we had heard back from community feedback as far as um through our stakeholder meetings and several of the surveys that we had done, open houses and other um other ways of gathering data. And at that meeting, we had talked a little bit about one of the priorities that we've heard quite a bit about, which was the desire for year-round recreational opportunities, uh, i.e. community center but also looking at how we manage our existing recreational facilities. So since that meeting we have added to our contract with HKGI and um we are going to be presenting uh some of the findings from uh the meetings and stakeholder meetings that we've held since. So with that I'm going to introduce uh Brian Harris with HKGI. >> Welcome. >> Hey welcome mayor members of the council. Thanks for having me here tonight. uh brief presentation for you uh here to kind of go through uh where we're at today in in both of these processes. Uh give a little bit of an update on timeline, some of the key takeaways that Joe had talked about here as well and where we intend to go. Wh that went end home. Got it. Uh project purpose. Uh as Joe alluded to, we started with the parks and trails master plan. that is a guide for uh 10-year direction for development investment or reinvestment in parks and the trail system. Um helping to fulfill the comprehensive plan chapter for parks and open space uh as part of that process. As he mentioned coming out of the early uh surveys of that work, a lot of discussion around the community uh center topic came up. Um we work through a scope uh we have htm architects on board to help us with some of the uh planning for uh this portion of the feasibility study and that community facility study would help us again understand any potential reinvestment in those existing facilities uh arts campus uh heritage center etc along with providing some direction for a potential new uh community center as well. Um just so you could see sort of timeline for these two tracks. Generally, we're here um early part of summer working through some of the strategic vision and recommendations of the overall parks and trails uh planning process. Uh working through some of the needs assessment and programming for the community facility study. We'll begin after this uh phase to help develop some site plan options for that. Um both implementation strategies will come forward towards the fall and conclude here uh with two reports and recommendations um in the end of this year. Um over the last um month, month and a halfish, we've been working with uh the project management team to help kind of guide and strategize around uh interviews with key stakeholder groups and get the information from uh the project management team, a combination of staff and other uh liaison. As we go forward, we've held uh specific stakeholder focus group sessions with the groups that you see up above there, more or less outside of what has already taken place as a part of the park and rec system plan. Uh we conducted an open house although lightly attended paired with an online survey that we had quite a few uh respondents for as well and that continues to grow. We intend to keep that open through kind of the Panaprog window if you will. We're going to be attending um a a popup event on uh the 8th out at uh Caspersonson Park live on the lake session kind of paired with a comprehensive plan to gain a little bit more uh insight from those as well. Um generally this uh was kind of distributed through connected people with the parks and recreation department. So you can see that some of these results may be more weighted towards that. But I also talk about an um a statistically valid survey that we will be conducting in August as well where we'll be able to get at more of the broader populace of the of the community. Couple of key takeaway slides. A lot of this information was provided in the packets but I didn't want to go through all of that. Some of the key pieces here are out of that question about the community center. Generally, threearters are in the camp that they agree or strongly agree that this is a a facility the city of Lakeville should have um and that they would regularly attend or use a facility like this as well. Um we asked some drill down questions beyond that then about some of the components that could be a part of this overall facility. These are sort of ranked in their order of sort of very important to somewhat important as we go across the board. Uh walking track uh typically paired with indoor gym space is is highly valued. Individual fitness is another key component that people have been looking for combined kind of with the group fitness. You see sort of the gamut of other potential uh features that could be a part of this overall facility. I'd say these all ranked in the the more strong uh category, if you will. Others that we had also included through here. Um I think the lower ranking ones would be things like an esport esports or an e-gaming area, a kind of a workspace or a computer tech area. Some of these other ones are sort of midlevel uh between all of these. Uh we also allowed for a write in uh components with this common response themes of those that were not uh associated with direct connect. So the other category if you will community pool indoor aquatic center more of an affordable facility uh indoor rack family recreation those kinds of things were also talked about as well. >> A question for Ivon. When you do this analysis, do you look at other communities on what they pay to participate? You know, if you're live in Egan, what does it cost a family to be a member of their community center, for instance? And >> yeah, >> because I I I do think in general people are like, "Yeah, community center is a great idea." And then you ask them to follow up how you want to pay for it. I think that's a great point and something that we would like to target as part of that statistically valid survey piece that we would add into it. >> Good comment. Um, so just quickly some of the key takeaways on the existing facilities generally through that entire discussion through stakeholder groups and along with the PMT group that arts campus should stay in downtown really focused as an anchor for for the community, downtown activities, larger festivals, etc. Some things could be done to enhance that campus. Maybe connect the two buildings between uh the performing arts and the fine arts campus. Maybe some upgrades to that site to provide some more flexibility for different events other than just the larger ones that could happen there as well. Um the active adults uh are definitely bursting at the seams in the renovated kind of retrofitted heritage center. That may be something that we look at as a key feature as part of the community center. That demand is continuing to rise. Um, while programming is is working at these facilities, there's more that could be done. I think more offerings could happen. Uh, classrooms could be larger. They could do more. Staff could do more with some of those current facilities. A little limited in what they have in terms of size and space. Um, and just a reoccurring theme for additional space kind of throughout all aspects of the key features. Um, looking at the new facility, the bigger theme here is really plan for how this community looks at 90,000 at a buildout of that that size and scale. How could we rightsize a a potential build for a facility and think about expansion as need warranted throughout provide flexibility for some of the room sizes and spaces so that we can overlap some of that program. Um the gymnasium spaces really had a huge demand. Everything from uh staff recreation having a location where they can that they can house a a hundred kids or a larger group for day camps, things like that. Be able to bring kids in from outside into a rain uh a rainfree area. Um and then even for the associations we met with basketball, volleyball, things like that. Having uh the additional gym space uh in the community would definitely be served well. Sorry to keep jumping in. Yeah, I would say >> in general it seems like the school district is not going to be adding square footage of gymnasium space >> in the very near future. I know they're adding on to some of the middle schools, >> right? >> But when they go through conversations, they're not talking about building new buildings. And so I think to your point to think about is >> we're kind of locked in our square footage today unless we >> I think that's a fair point. And I think the school district has demands that are outside of the recreation side too that put some pressure on those gymnasium spaces at the same time. So, um, again, fitness and walking track were huge desired amenities, kind of ranked one and two in the books, if you will. And then pay attention to the outdoor spaces and the opportunities that those present for other either community events. Uh, could be things like weddings or other um, uh, revenue generating venue type of spaces. uh that could be included within that. So, it's not although Joe alluded to it, you know, really a demand for indoor recreation, it doesn't just have to be that. And how is that uh connected to potentially other facilities? Uh on the park side, just some of the quick takeaways we're seeing on this. Um really the big idea here uh are these the bullets listed. Planning for replacements, taking care of the great park assets that we have today. Uh enhancing those facilities. There's a really strong game plan through park staff already and increasing some of the variety either in the play equipment or the park components within that. So there's a broader mix across the overall community. Continuing to improve uh connectivities with trails, even uh intersection crossings, things like that that create a better connectivity for people to get across some of these busier roads in the communities to to park amenities. uh expanded water access and experiences, being able to touch the water, launch a canoe, kayak, those kinds of things, either on Marian or orchard or other locations where we could find places where we can be able to touch the water and gain access and connection to the water has been a huge component of what we're hearing out of the parks plan. Continue to take care as of as much as possible those those naturalized areas, having uh a lot of character in the landscape with those. and then uh ensure that through the growth of the community, we're looking primarily towards that Cedar Avenue corridor, you know, where we have additional available land, that parks are right size for development. Uh we're not over or under those and the locations of those are adequate to provide the service need for the growing uh residents in that area. So from this point forward, our next steps will be to conduct probably through the month of August, a little bit beyond that statistically valid survey. We're working with staff and the PMT group on that right now uh with our subconsultant to help formalize those questions for it going forward. Um we will begin to finalize the approach or approaches for the community uh facilities study. That also will entail what do we do at the arts campus? What do we look at for Heritage Center? What would a new facility include and look like? And how could that space planning kind of shape out? That will help inform size and scale of parcel need or acreage for a facility like this. Maybe some idea about what the initial build would be and how that could incrementally grow over time to meet the needs of the community. And then additionally working through the implementation section of the the parks system plan. So we'll bring be bringing all of those forward over the next few months. So with that, I'll or Joe will entertain any questions you guys have of the process we've been undertaking. >> My my just one last recommendation. Uh when you're having the conversations and we're talking about indoor space, we got to look at land. There's not a ton of places. I mean, there's the what is in here. I don't know if we've got a parcel that can meet that that is also kind of central to the city if that makes sense. >> Yeah, >> we've got plenty of land on the, you know, east and south side, but it's like, you know, >> and I I will add, uh, the conversation about land land acquisition and and that longer term planning component has been a key, uh, feature of the park system master plan. Um, and with that, as Brian had mentioned, uh, through the PMT, uh, the group that we put together that, you know, we have representatives from the chamber and the convention and visitors bureau. So looking at those longer term plans if something like a community center were to happen, making a decision sooner rather than later about land acquisition seems important. So I think everybody um kind of echoes that sentiment. >> Any other questions? >> I just have one question. So for the heritage center, does it have to be one building or could it be two? >> Uh valid point or a valid question. So we met uh with the active adults uh representatives with active adults and we also met with heritage center I'm sorry historical society and yellow ribbon to talk more about their needs uh for space and I will say through a lot of those stakeholder meetings we uh found some of the responses surprising. Um for example historical society if um if given the opportunity a traditional museum like they have is not what they would want long term. They would like a different setup. they like the idea of a community center where maybe it's uh display cases or those types of things because they don't have staff >> to um to maintain regular hours. So, which is was a surprise to us. >> Um storage space, you know, space where they can work on curation, that's important. Um office space, yellow ribbon was similar in that respect. For them, um the big component is their connection to the active adults. That's very important for them. Um but designated meeting space not important. Um and the space that they have now isn't right sized for what they need. They've got one group that meets once a week that needs a much larger space than what they can house and one group that's massively smaller that could go in a smaller conference room for example. So through those meetings the conversation was yes if a community center were to move forward if something like that were to happen. I think there's very different ways where we could work with those groups in order to uh to free up space to free up space and and that's a little bit about what Brian was talking about about these flex spaces where I think we can do a better job of being more efficient in how we use our spaces, how we staff offices um given that opportunity. So, >> well, I just the other thing was I wasn't sure if I realized that the heritage the Heritage Center is a nice location. Um, and it was one that was available. Um, but I didn't know if it worked for all the seniors. Lakeville is such a big community and so I just didn't know if having a satellite somewhere else would prompt the numbers to go up with more people getting involved. but yet provide that area um some some services. >> Yeah. And I would say one of the key components that we have heard and we've done uh I mean over the last year based on our strategic plan, we've visited a variety of um senior facilities. Uh so we've been gaining input from a lot of those facilities. But one of the things I would say that we've heard pretty pretty clearly from the senior population that we have met with is designated space for them even if there are shared rooms that were to be used is still important. The feeling of home, the feeling of a designated entrance is very important. Um because they in a shared facility don't necessarily want to be tripping over families with, you know, young kids. they'd still like that designated entrance, but that doesn't mean that they aren't willing to share spaces for classes and those types of things. So, >> other comments? Should I had you guys go first? Sorry about that. >> Thank you uh very much. I appreciate look forward to more updates. >> Thank you all. >> Um with that, any council committee updates? Okay, seeing none, we've got a full week of Panrog. Tomorrow is family fun night. Wednesday is live at the lake. Thursday beer brought some bingo. Friday cruise night. Saturday grand parade, fireworks Sunday night, plus dozens of events in between all that. So hopefully see everybody out at Panda Prague. And with that, I'll take Oh, our next council meeting July 20th here in city hall. And with that, I'll take a motion to adjourn. >> Move. Is there a second? >> Second. >> All those in favor say I. >> I. Opposed. We're journ.