COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT: Lloyd Lawrence, Neil Evers, John Bergman, Mark Nelson, Gary Shade, Mary Hamann-Roland, Dave McKeag, Ruth Grendahl, Denise Louis, Arthur Zimmerman, Peg Smith, , Nathan Koering, Jeff Loch, Mark Heieren

COMMITTEE MEMBERS ABSENT: Richard Berg

OTHERS PRESENT: Integrated Process Management Facilitator, Marlene Libby, Dakota County Commissioner Willis Branning, Dakota County Physical Development Director Susan Hoyt, SEH Traffic Engineering Consultant Glen Van Wormer, City Administrator Tom Lawell, Community Development Director Rick Kelley, Acting Public Works Director Neal Heuer, Police Department Captain Merle Lohse, Administrative Assistant to the City Administrator Andy Pederson, Ron Olsen, Diann Albers, Steve Johnson, Sara Pool, Randy Peterson

Meeting Facilitator Libby called the meeting to order at 7:10 p.m.

Ms. Libby distributed information to the Committee including: (a) a letter dated August 21, 2000, from Committee Member Berg (Attachment 1); (b) map depicting traffic volumes at various locations prepared by Mr. Van Wormer (Attachment 2); and (c) various articles of literature distributed by Committee Member Louis (Attachment 3-6).

Andy Pederson stated the requested changes to the July 31, 2000, Meeting minutes that were received via e-mail have been made, and they include:

• Revise the statement on page three to state: "Committee Member Lawrence stated that the Committee should consider the phased implementation of potential solutions. Committee Member Lawrence discussed the potential of narrowing Garden View Drive, and the ability to slow and block traffic along the street, and if the City would change the affected street from a neighborhood collector to a neighborhood street. Committee Member Nelson discussed the potential to choke the intersection of Garden View Drive and Whitney Drive. The Committee had a general discussion on geometric changes."
• Add on page four an * to the statement: *Channelizing right turn lane (pork chop).
• Revise the statement on page four to state: "The Committee discussed the analysis completed by MnDOT regarding the speed limits on Garden View Drive. MnDOT stated that they could decrease speed 5 mph from 45 mph to 40 mph north of 144^th Street; however, they would require a 10 mph increase from 30 mph to 40 mph south of 144^th Street to Walnut Lane which is across from Westview Elementary School crossing area. The Committee recommended that, when presented with two options, the speed limits remain the same as they are now. The option the Committee rejected was a proposal by MnDOT to decrease and increase speed limits in different areas along Garden View Drive. The Committee felt the MnDOT proposal endangered the many children walking to Westview Elementary School."
• Add "Noise ordinance enforcement for County Road 46" on page five, number four to state: No jake braking" signs (noise), Noise ordinance enforcement for County Road 46.
• Add "Add more lanes/possible removal/reduction of lights to make Cedar Avenue more convenient than Garden View Drive" on page six, number to eight to state: Improve signal timing on Cedar Avenue, Add more lanes/possible removal/reduction of lights to make Cedar Avenue more convenient than Garden View Drive

Mr. Pederson stated that the requested changes would be reflected in the official Meeting minutes. Mr. Pederson also indicated that the Meeting minutes would be posted to the City of Apple Valley's web site once the requested revisions have been made.

MOTION: of the Committee to approve the July 31, 2000 Meeting minutes. Motion passed unanimously.

Ms. Libby introduced Steve Johnson, 960 Oriole Drive, and 17-year resident of Apple Valley. Mr. Johnson stated that he works at Valley Oldsmobile and on Friday, August 18, 2000, one of his employees witnessed the accident which occurred on 140^th Street. Mr. Johnson stated that he has three children, and he emphasized to the Committee its responsibility to ensure the safety of the children. Mr. Johnson stated that he does not want to see any other children be placed in jeopardy. Committee Member Shade stated that safety is one of the Committee's primary concerns, that current levels of traffic are unacceptable, that the Committee is concerned about the alignment with Highview Avenue, and volume are safety are the top concerns of the Garden View Drive Committee.

Glen Van Wormer discussed the details of potential concept solutions for the entire Garden View Drive corridor as well as various potentially impacted side streets.

Mr. Van Wormer stated that he first examined intersections on Garden View Drive at County Road 46, Whitney Drive, County Road 42, and 140^th Street.

Mr. Van Wormer presented potential concept solutions along the northern portion of Garden View Drive. Mr. Van Wormer stated the neighborhood concept could be introduced through the narrowing and channelization of the street near County Road 38. Mr. Van Wormer stated that a potential solution would be to raise the median where paint currently exists on Garden View Drive at County Road 38. Mr. Van Wormer stated that the introduction of the neighborhood to drivers as well as narrowing the street would provide traffic calming. Mr. Van Wormer continued his discussion and the use of a mixture of channelizing islands and narrowing to produce traffic calming through the area on Garden View Drive south of 143^rd Street. Mr. Van Wormer stated that he was continuing to refine a plan that would slow down traffic before the hill and curve on Garden View Drive.

Mr. Van Wormer presented potential concept solutions in the County Road 42 and Garden View Drive intersection area. Mr. Van Wormer stated that this intersection could be "cleaned up" in several ways. First, Mr. Van Wormer stated that the potential exists to prohibit right turns on a red light onto County Road 42 from Garden View Drive, as well as stop traffic at the traffic signals before the frontage roads on the north and south side of County Road 42. Mr. Van Wormer stated that the potential exists to implement left-turn signals at the intersection of County Road 42 and Garden View Drive. Mr. Van Wormer stated that one of the primary objectives is to reduce pedestrian conflicts at this intersection and promote pedestrian travel in a north-south fashion along Garden View Drive. Mr. Van Wormer also discussed that to achieve such ends, the potential to reconstruct the driveway entrances to the commercial entities at the intersection as well as the possibility for raised channelization islands on both sides of County Road 42 could be examined.

The Committee discussed the importance of educating the public as a larger component of this process.

Neal Heuer stated that the school zone speed limit signs have been ordered and would be installed on Garden View Drive on Wednesday.

Mr. Van Wormer presented a potential concept solution south of the County Road 42 intersection which included a channelizing island as well as providing a striped crosswalk.

Mr. Van Wormer presented a potential concept solution for the corner of Garden View Drive and Whitney Drive which included the narrowing the approach of each street to one lane of traffic in each direction. The narrowing of the streets from the existing width to one lane would minimize traffic impacts from turning movements and heighten safety at the intersection. Mr. Van Wormer also presented a potential concept solutions that narrows Garden View Drive in 157^th Street area.

Mr. Van Wormer presented a potential concept solutions for the southern most portion of Garden View Drive including the Garden View Drive and County Road 46 intersection. Mr. Van Wormer presented a channelizing island, as deemed acceptable by Dakota County, as a potential concept solution for the County Road 46 and Garden View Drive intersection. In addition, Mr. Van Wormer presented a channelizing island at the intersection of Garden View Drive and Hyland Pointe Court to eliminate northbound traffic onto Garden View Drive from the Hyland Pointe area. Mr. Van Wormer also presented a potential concept solution that included a raised median extending from the channelized island at the intersection of County Road 46 and Garden View Drive to the beginning curve on Garden View Drive. Mr. Van Wormer stated that options in the area around the curve on the southern portion of Garden View Drive are limited due to the nature of the curve in the street. Mr. Van Wormer stated that the 20-mph advisory speed limit cannot be extended around the entire curve because of the fact that it is not true, and as a result, drivers will not obey the 20-mph speed limit on the curve.

The Committee discussed potential traffic calming measures on Whitney Drive at both Cooper Lane and Pennock Avenue. Mr. Van Wormer stated that he has highlighted specific areas potentially affected by restrictions on Garden View Drive and will discuss these traffic calming measures once the solutions on Garden View Drive are more apparent and the affects are more predictable.

The Committee discussed the potential impacts of speed bumps and humps. Mr. Van Wormer stated that speed bumps and humps should not be placed on hills or curves due to safety considerations. Mr. Van Wormer also stated that the placement of speed bumps and humps on streets with volumes in excess of 2,000 vehicles per day is not a good idea.

Committee Member Louis presented to the Committee a survey which she conducted on Harwell Avenue on August 21, 2000, regarding the higher volume of traffic on their street (Attachment 7). Ms. Libby asked Committee Member Louis what was the knowledge base of those who were surveyed, and asked whether the residents who were surveyed were presented with the various alternatives that the Committee has been studying. Committee Member Louis indicated the residents who were surveyed were not educated nor aware of the various alternatives that the Committee has been studying throughout its process, and that each of the residents surveyed had differing levels of knowledge regarding the options for the potential solutions to their concerns. The Committee discussed the fact that one of their responsibilities and objectives is to examine any potentially affected streets, such as Harwell Avenue, Harmony Way, or Hyland Avenue, and incorporate their findings on these streets into their final solution. The Committee also discussed the fact that such solutions will be incorporated into their final plan and be presented to the public at its open house.

Committee Member Hamann-Roland stated that she spoke with Jim Cavanaugh who indicated that in addition to speed humps, narrowing the streets and education would also be viable alternatives.

The Committee discussed the importance and need of educating the public with regard to traffic safety.

The Committee asked Mr. Van Wormer whether he has considered stop signs at any point in his concept solutions plan. Mr. Van Wormer stated in order for a stop sign and its compliance rates to be successful, it is necessary to have heavy volumes on the cross street so the motorist is aware of why they should stop. Mr. Van Wormer stated that his intention in this plan was to reduce speeds through the various other alternatives presented earlier in his presentation.

Meeting break at 8:22 p.m. Meeting reconvened at 8:35 p.m.

Ms. Libby distributed two articles from the Fall 2000, City of Apple Valley Newsletter regarding pedestrian and school safety as well as an article entitled "Concerns over speeding vehicles in residential areas." (Attachment 8).

Mr. Van Wormer discussed the map depicting traffic volumes at various locations as prepared by Mr. Van Wormer and requested by Committee Member Lawrence (Attachment 2).

Mr. Van Wormer presented information previously presented on the traffic generation from each of the areas surrounding Garden View Drive (Attachment 10).

Mr. Van Wormer presented information discussing balanced a north-south direction of travel on Garden View Drive, showing a "reverse flow" movement..

Mr. Van Wormer presented a map on the various routes vehicles may travel to access the commercial area in Apple Valley (Attachment 11).

Mr. Van Wormer presented information on traffic volumes in the City of Lakeville from the 1998 City of Lakeville Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Van Wormer discussed the potential for cut-through traffic with the alignment of Highview Avenue and Garden View Drive and the subsequent concerns that arise (Attachment 12).

Mr. Van Wormer presented information on areas of Lakeville which have yet to be developed and their potential impacts on Apple Valley. Mr. Van Wormer stated that as areas in southern Lakeville develop, they will more likely use major routes such as Cedar Avenue, Interstate 35, and major County roads for their travel, and that vehicles will be less likely to use local streets in Apple Valley. Mr. Van Wormer also discussed the fact as commercial development in Lakeville increase with their expected growth, the commercial traffic from Lakeville to Apple Valley will reduce, or at least will not increase.

The Committee discussed the traffic generated from each of the four quadrants surrounding Garden View Drive in Apple Valley and asked whether similar comparisons could be drawn as development occurs in Lakeville with Highview Avenue. Mr. Van Wormer stated that this conclusion could not be reasonably be implied because the destination, street options, and various other factors are different than the Garden View Drive quadrants.

Mr. Van Wormer presented information on the traffic impacts on Garden View Drive when the alignment occurs without any measures being implemented (Attachment 9).

The Committee discussed the traffic forecasts as presented by Mr. Van Wormer and the Committee deemed these forecasts as acceptable.

Mr. Van Wormer presented information on what alternate routes vehicles may use as potential implications to solutions on Garden View Drive (Attachment 13-16).

Mr. Van Wormer presented information on the "reverse flow" of traffic south on Garden View Drive and its alternate route.

Mr. Van Wormer presented information on the traffic impacts on Garden View Drive when the alignment occurs without any measures being implemented as well as future projections based on the Committee proposal (Attachment 9).

Mr. Van Wormer stated that 95 percent of the through traffic would be eliminated under the proposal before the Committee. Mr. Van Wormer also stated that 50 percent of the local traffic would use alternative routes such as Harmony Way and Harwell Avenue. Mr. Van Wormer stated that 50 percent of the Apple valley commuter traffic would also have find an alternative way back.

Randy Peterson, resident of Harwell Avenue, stated that no more traffic can be put onto Harwell Avenue.

The Committee asked Committee Member McKeag about the revised traffic patterns at Valley Middle School. Committee Member McKeag stated that buses would enter and exit from near Baldwin Drive. Committee Member McKeag stated that the primary goal of the redistribution of traffic at Valley Middle School is to minimize traffic conflicts in the parking lots along Garden View Drive.

The Committee discussed parking on Garden View Drive in front of both Valley Middle School and Southview Elementary School. The Committee requested that Committee Member Nelson discuss the various parking options with his neighbors to obtain input on the most desirable option for parking along Garden View Drive. The Committee discussed the possible parking options along Garden View Drive in front of the schools and they include:

• Permitting parking on the west side of Garden View Drive nearest the schools;
• Prohibiting parking on the east side of Garden View Drive in the school area;
• Prohibiting parking on the east side of Garden View Drive in the school area during established time periods (i.e. 7 a.m.- 4 p.m.);
• Permitting parking for certain periods of time (i.e. 15-minute parking restrictions);
• Prohibiting parking at certain times (i.e. 2:30 p.m. - 3:30 p.m.); and
• Establish resident only parking.

The Committee discussed these options and the potential implications of such options. Committee Member Nelson stated that he would discuss this issue with his neighbors and present them with the options.

Committee Member Loch requested that Mr. Van Wormer examine speeds and possible solutions for Whitney Drive. Mr. Van Wormer stated that once the solutions for Garden View Drive are more clearly defined, solutions will be developed for potentially affected streets such Whitney Drive.

Committee Member Smith requested the name of someone from MnDOT who could provide clarification on the determination of speed limits on Garden View Drive. Mr. Heuer provided Committee Member Smith with a brochure from MnDOT with potential contact information.

Committee Member Lawrence requested Mr. Van Wormer examine the viability of speed humps on Whitney Drive near Cooper Lane.

The Committee discussed potential calming activities on Harwell Avenue.

Mr. Heuer stated that the school zone speed limit report for Whitney Drive south of Southview Elementary School had been completed and if the Committee so desired, it could be placed on the City Council agenda for Thursday, August 24, 2000. The Committee so moved this notion.

The Committee discussed the need for additional communication with the public regarding the Committee's activities as well as the need for additional education on pedestrian traffic safety. The Committee discussed the need to educate people on the determination of speed limits. The Committee determined that Committee Member McKeag should draft a press release and forward it via the Committee e-mail list-serve for their review. The Committee also determined that a continued education program should be undertaken to and educate and promote safety.

Committee Member Grendahl stated that in response to the accident which occurred on 140^th Street, she was asked as an elected official what the City Council could do about speed limits within the City. Committee Member Grendahl asked the Committee whether they would support an effort to return control over speed limits to the locally elected officials or at minimum develop an appeals board which reviews determinations made on speed limits by MnDOT. The Committee unanimously endorsed Committee Member Grendahl's request for support of local control for speed limits. Committee Member Hamann-Roland stated that she would advocate for such a position at the Association of Metropolitan Municipalities (AMM) meeting on Wednesday.

Ms. Libby introduced Sara Pool, staff writer, of This Week Newspapers. Ms. Libby stated to Ms. Pool that this Committee is currently considering potential solutions to the Garden View Drive traffic and are concepts at the current time, and solutions would be presented to the public at a future open house. Ms. Pool indicated that she was currently working on an article regarding speed limits and it would soon be published.

The Committee determined its next meeting to be August 28, 2000, at 7 p.m., and tentatively scheduled an open house for September 18 from 5 p.m. -8 p.m. at Valley Middle School.

Mr. Van Wormer stated that he would work to develop preliminary cost estimates and further illustrative concept plans and present to the Committee at its next meeting.

Meeting adjourned at 10:05 p.m.