Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Agenda Packets - 2012/01/23
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA MOUNDS VIEW CITY HALL Monday, January 23, 2012 7:00 p.m. 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 3. ROLL CALL: Flaherty, Stigney, Hull, Mueller, Gunn 4. APPROVAL OF AGENDA 5. PUBLIC INPUT: Citizens may speak to issues not on tonight’s agenda. Before speaking, please give your full name and address for the minutes. Also, please limit your comments to three minutes. 6. SPECIAL ORDER OF BUSINESS 7. COUNCIL BUSINESS A. Resolution 7886, Approving the 2012 Public Works and Parks Seasonal Positions B. Introduction and First Reading of Ordinance 867, to Allow Outdoor Vending Kiosks (ex. Redbox) at Retail and Restaurant Businesses C. Resolution 7888, Accepting Miscellaneous Cash Donations for 2011 D. Resolution 7889, Approving Bidding Documents and Authoring Advertisement for Bids for 2012 Reroofing of Community Center and Water Treatment Plant No. 1 Project E. Resolution 7890, Approving Bidding Documents and Authorizing Advertisement for Bids for 2012 W ater Tower Reconditioning Project F. Resolution 7891, Approving Maintenance Method for Traffic Sign Retroreflectivity Standards G. Resolution 7892, Authorizing LHB, Inc. to Perform a Retrocommissioning Study for the Community Center 8. CONSENT AGENDA A. Resolution 7887, a Resolution Appointing Representatives to the Anoka County Blaine Airport Advisory Commission 9. JUST AND CORRECT CLAIMS 10. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - None City Council Agenda Monday, January 23, 2012 Page 2 11. REPORTS A. Reports of Mayor and Council (1) Announce Executive Session following conclusion of regular meeting for purposes of Labor Negotiations. The Council will adjourn meeting from within the Closed Session. B. Reports of Staff C. Reports of City Attorney 12. Next Council Work Session: February 6, 2012 at 7:00 pm Next Council Meeting: February 13, 2012 at 7:00 pm 13. RECESS INTO CLOSED SESSION Item No: 7A Meeting Date: January 23, 2012 Type of Business: CB Administrator Review: ____ City of Mounds View Staff Report To: Honorable Mayor and City Council From: Desaree Crane, Assistant City Administrator Nick DeBar, Public Works Director Item Title/Subject: Resolution 7886, Approving the 2012 Public Works and Parks Seasonal Positions Introduction: On March 26, 2001, the City Council adopted Resolution 5546, which describes the procedure for hiring Seasonal Employees. This resolution requires that the City Council approve all seasonal positions. Discussion: Annually the City Council has approved the hiring of seasonal Public Works positions. Resolution 5546 requires that approval take place six weeks prior to actual hire of seasonal employees; therefore, this is typically done early in the calendar year. Seasonal Employees benefit the City by providing labor services during periods of higher labor demand at much lower pay rates keeping overall labor costs down. In return, seasonal employees benefit from the skills and work ethics they learn on the job. As a result, the employees, the City, citizens, and taxpayers all benefit from this program. Historically, there have been three time periods throughout the year when the City has employed seasonal workers. These periods have been: Summer (10 positions), Fall (2 positions), and Winter (1 position). In 2009, it was the consensus of the City Council and Staff to decrease the Summer seasonal positions from 10 to 8 positions, due to the budgetary cuts in state aid. This number was further reduced in 2010 when the Winter seasonal position was eliminated and the part-time water division position was reclassified as a public works seasonal position. In 2011, the City Council approved 8 seasonal positions. Staff is recommending 8 seasonal positions for 2012. Three of the seasonal positions are paid from the Enterprise Funds (water, sewer, storm). Summer Seasonal Employees – Duties include general Public Works and parks maintenance duties. The employees generally are employed for about three months in the summer – mid-to late-May to mid-to late-August. Typically one Parks Division seasonal employee and one Utility Division seasonal employee begin employment in April. Fall Seasonal Employee – There are two (2) seasonal positions, one (1) in Public Works Utilities Division and one (1) in the Parks Division. Historically, summer positions are extended to cover Item 07A Monday, January 23, 2012 Approving the 2012 PW Seasonal Positions Page 2 duties performed in the fall. Duties performed by the Public Works Utilities Division seasonal employee includes assisting with the utility locates, hydrant and valve maintenance, sanitary sewer and manhole cleaning, stormwater system maintenance, and other utility-related duties. The duties of the fall seasonal employee in the Parks Division include fall activities such as mowing, leaf clean up, mower maintenance, assisting with brush removal and tree trimming, and providing assistance in year-end maintenance activities. Depending on start dates, the Fall seasonal positions are typically utilized up to a December termination. Wage Proposal for 2012 Seasonals: Staff recommends no wage increases for 2012 Public Works Seasonals. In 2011, new hire seasonal positions were filled at $11.00/hour, and returning seasonal workers were compensated at $11.75/hour. Each summer seasonal employee will work up to 40 hours per week. The fall seasonal employees and ice rink employee may also work 40 hours per week: however, hours may be fewer since these positions are often filled with current college students that are available part-time only. All seasonal positions will remain on staff for a period no longer than six months. Recommendation: Staff recommends approving the Seasonal Public Works Positions for 2012. Respectfully submitted, Respectfully submitted, ________________________ ______________________ Desaree Crane Nick DeBar RESOLUTION 7886 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA APPROVING THE 2012 PUBLIC WORKS AND PARKS SEASONAL POSITIONS WHEREAS, Resolution 5546 requires that seasonal positions must be approved by the Mounds View City Council; and WHEREAS, Seasonal Employees benefit the City by providing labor services that are relatively less expensive and are available during periods of greater labor; and WHEREAS, the City of Mounds View Public Works Department does have a need to hire seasonal employees; and WHEREAS, the Public Works Department is recommending that seasonal positions be approved for two periods throughout 2012; and WHEREAS, said periods are Summer and Fall; and WHEREAS, for 2012, Staff is recommending that new hires start at the hourly rate of $11.00/hr and returning seasonal workers would be compensated at $11.75/hr. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Mounds View, Ramsey County, Minnesota as follows: 1. The 2012 Summer Seasonal Public Works Positions are approved – a total of eight (8) positions. These positions would start in approximately mid-to late-May 2012 and terminate in mid-to late-August 2012. However, one Utilities Division and one Parks Division seasonal employee typically begins employment in April. 2. The 2012 Fall Seasonal Public Works Positions are approved - a total of two (2) positions. One position in the Public Works Utilities Division and the other in the Parks Division of Public Works. These positions would start approximately in mid- to late-August 2012 and be terminated by the end of the year, weather permitting. 3. All Public Works seasonal positions will be filled; with new hires starting at an hourly rate of $11.00/hr. Returning seasonal workers will be compensated at an hourly wage of $11.75/hr. 4. Each seasonal position may work up to forty (40) hours per week. 5. The duration of the Public Works seasonal positions shall not exceed six months. Resolution 7886 Page 2 Adopted this 23rd day of January, 2012. ____________________________________ Joe Flaherty, Mayor ATTEST: ____________________________________ James Ericson, City Administrator (SEAL) Item No: 7B Meeting Date: January 23, 2012 Type of Business: Council Business Administrator Review: ________ City of Mounds View Staff Report To: Honorable Mayor and City Council From: Heidi Heller, Planning Associate Item Title/Subject: Introduction and First Reading of Ordinance 867, Amending Chapter 1112.04 to Allow Outdoor Vending Kiosks at Retail and Restaurant Businesses as a Conditional Use Introduction: Video rental stores are almost no longer in existence due to technology and the internet. But another trend for renting movies and video games has appeared in the last few years – the “Redbox”. These are fully automated vending “kiosks” that are about the size of a food vending machine and dispense dvd movies and video games to rent. These “Redboxes” are located inside or outside, and so far are only located at specific businesses in the Twin Cities metro area – McDonalds, Walgreens, Cub Foods, Rainbow Foods, Festival Foods, Byerly’s and Holiday gas stations. Discussion: Over the last few years, McDonald’s and Walgreens have asked if they could place a Redbox outside their business in Mounds View. The City Code does not address this type of outdoor use, which means that it is not allowed. City staff has told both McDonald’s and Walgreens that they could not have one outside, but they would be allowed inside the business. McDonalds does have a Redbox inside the restaurant. Recently the Holiday gas station in Mounds View installed a Redbox outside of their store (they did not ask the City if it was allowed), and Walgreens has asked what they could do to be allowed an outdoor Redbox at their store. By doing a 55112 zip code search online for a Redbox location, it shows there are several in every city surrounding Mounds View. The current Mounds View Zoning Code does not address vending kiosks, or anything similar. Other cities deal with these kiosks differently. Some simply allow them with no permits and others require special use permits. Staff feels that these kiosks would likely not cause issues if they were allowed (there have been no problems with the Redbox at Holiday). The machines use 12 square feet of ground space, are placed on the sidewalk next to the building so they are not removing parking spaces, and customers are only parking for a few minutes. At the November 2, 2011 Planning Commission meeting, Staff asked the Commission to discuss how outdoor vending kiosks should be addressed. The Commission decided that the zoning code should be amended to allow these kiosks as a conditional use in commercial districts, including commercial Planned Unit Developments, but only at retail stores, gas stations and restaurants. Ord 867 Intro & First Reading Report January 23, 2012 Page 2 Staff feels that a conditional use permit and planning review process might not be necessary for this particular use. The Council could also consider adding outdoor rental vending kiosks simply as an accessory use with the same requirements. Because the Zoning Code is written in such a way that the uses build on each zoning district (the uses allowed in B-1 are allowed in the B-2, B-3 and B-4 districts), Staff is proposing to add the following language to the B-1 district chapter, which would then carry over to the other zoning districts. A definition of “Vending Kiosk, Rental” is also being added into Zoning Code Chapter 1102.02. Definition: Rental Vending Kiosk: fully automated self-service machines that dispense and accept products in a rent and return process. The proposed language to be added to Chapter 1112 of the Zoning Code reads as follows: Chapter 1112, B-1 Neighborhood Business District Subdivision 1112.04: Conditional Uses: Subd. 7. Outdoor Vending Kiosks; provided that: a. The kiosks shall accept only electronic forms of payment. b. The kiosks shall rent only movies and video games. c. The kiosks may be placed only at retail stores, motor fuel stations and restaurants. d. Only one business on each property may install outdoor vending kiosks. e. The kiosk shall be placed immediately adjacent to the host business’ building. f. No loss of parking or interference with the flow of traffic shall occur due to the placement of a vending kiosk. g. The kiosks may be allowed in PUD districts. Ord 867 Intro & First Reading Report January 23, 2012 Page 3 Recommendation: The City Council should review Ordinance 867 with the proposed Zoning Code amendment and take testimony from staff. Sincerely, Heidi Heller Planning Associate Attachments 1. Redbox information 2. Ordinance 867 Photo of an outdoor Redbox For more information, visit the Redbox website at www.redbox.com ORDINANCE 867 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 1100, CHAPTERS 1102 AND 1112 OF THE MOUNDS VIEW ZONING CODE ADDING RENTAL VENDING KIOSKS The City of Mounds View ordains: SECTION 1. The City Council of the City of Mounds View hereby amends Chapter 1102, Section 1102.02 of the Mounds View Zoning Code pertaining to “Definitions” by deleting the stricken language and adding the underlined text as follows: 1102.02: DEFINITIONS: Subd. 105. Rental Vending Kiosk: fully automated self-service machines that dispense and accept products in a rent and return process. SECTION 2. The City Council of the City of Mounds View hereby amends Chapter 1112, Section 1112.04 of the Mounds View Zoning Code pertaining to “B-1, Neighborhood Business District, Conditional Uses” by deleting the stricken language and adding the underlined text as follows: 1112.04: CONDITIONAL USES: Subd. 7. Outdoor Vending Kiosks; provided that: a. The kiosks shall accept only electronic forms of payment. b. The kiosks shall rent only movies and video games. c. The kiosks may be placed only at retail stores, motor fuel stations and restaurants. d. Only one business on each property may install outdoor vending kiosks. e. The kiosk shall be placed immediately adjacent to the host business’ building. f. No loss of parking or interference with the flow of traffic shall occur due to the placement of a vending kiosk. g. The kiosks may be allowed in PUD districts. Ordinance 867 Page 2 SECTION 3. In accordance with Section 3.07 of the City Charter, City staff shall have the following summary printed in the official City newspaper in lieu of the complete ordinance: On February 27, 2012, the City Council adopted Ordinance 867 that amends Chapter 1112 of the Mounds View Municipal Zoning Code about the B-1, Neighborhood Business District, Conditional Uses. Outdoor vending kiosks are added as a conditional use to the B-1 Zoning Code. They can be allowed at retail stores, motor fuel stations and restaurants with a conditional use permit. A printed copy of the ordinance is available for inspection during regular business hours at Mounds View City Hall and is available on line at the City’s web site located at www.ci.mounds-view.mn.us. SECTION 3. This ordinance takes effect 30 days after its publication in the official City newspaper. PUBLIC HEARING, INTRODUCTION AND FIRST READING by the Mounds View City Council this 23rd day of January, 2012. SECOND READING AND ADOPTION by the Mounds View City Council this 27th day of February, 2012. PUBLICATION DATE: March 8, 2012 _____________________________________ Joe Flaherty, Mayor ATTEST: _____________________________________ James Ericson, City Administrator (seal) Item No: 7D Meeting Date: January 23, 2012 Type of Business: Council Business Administrator Review: ____ City of Mounds View Staff Report To: Honorable Mayor and City Council From: Nick DeBar, Public Works Director Item Title/Subject: Resolution 7889, Approving Bidding Documents and Authoring Advertisement for Bids for 2012 Reroofing of Community Center and Water Treatment Plant No. 1 Project Background: In response to aging and leaky roof issues the past few years, a comprehensive roof management program (Program) was prepared in 2010 for all sixteen City-owned buildings. The Program included detailed inspection, evaluation, costs, and schedules for repairs and replacement for each individual roof section. The Program recommended that full reroofing for the Community Center and Water Treatment Plant No. 1 occur in 2012. A section of the Public Works Maintenance Facility (over the original building) is also recommended to be replaced in 2012, but City staff recommends a “repair as needed” approach since the Capital Improvement Program includes demolition and reconstruction of this building in 2016. City staff received a professional services proposal from INSPEC for reroofing of the Community Center and WTP No. 1. The proposal phases and fees were broken down as follows: Design ($11,500), preparing plans/specifications ($13,700), bidding ($900), and construction observation/testing ($12,000-$14,000) for a total estimated project fee of $38,100 to $40,100. The Council authorized INSPEC to perform design services and prepare plans and specifications for the project on October 10, 2011 (Res. 7837). Discussion: INSPEC has completed the design for the project and incorporated these details into plans and specification for a public bid. A ballasted EPDM-membrane roof system is proposed for the Community Center and a built-up roof (similar to recent City Hall work) is proposed for WTP No. 1. INSPEC estimates reroofing construction costs of $370,000 for the Community Center and $45,000 for WTP No. 1. The proposed 2012 Budget includes $250,000 under Special Projects (280-4180-7050) for Community Center reroofing and $50,000 under the Water Enterprise Fund (700-4823-7050) for WTP No. 1 reroofing. The shortfall for the Community Center budget stems from a calculation error where City staff thought the original budget amount of $546,396 in the Program was off by a factor of 2. Actual construction costs will not be known until bids are solicited, after which the Council will need to consider a budget modification if the actual costs exceed the engineer’s estimate. A copy of INSPEC’s construction document report is attached. The proposed project schedule is as follows: Jan. 23, 2012 Council approves bid docs/authorizes advertisement Feb. 2, 2012 Publish ad for bid in Sun-Focus Feb. 15, 2012 Pre-bid meeting with potential bidders Feb. 23, 2012 Bid opening Mar. 12, 2012 Council awards construction contract to successful bidder Early April, 2012 Begin construction Late June, 2012 Complete construction Res. Approving Bidding Documents & Authorizing Ad for Bid for 2012 Reroofing January 23, 2012 Page 2 Recommendation: City staff recommends that the City Council adopt the attached resolution that approves the plans and specifications authorizes advertisement for public bid solicitation for reroofing the Community Center and Water Treatment Plant No. 1. The resolution will also authorize INSPEC to perform professional consulting services associated with the bid phase for $900 The Council will still need to approve awarding a construction contract to the successful bidder before any construction can occur, and at which time the actual construction costs will be known. Respectfully submitted, Nick DeBar - Public Works Director Attachments: Resolution 7889 INSPEC Construction Document Report RESOLUTION 7889 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA APPROVING BIDDING DOCUMENTS AND AUTHORING ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS FOR 2012 REROOFING OF COMMUNITY CENTER AND WATER TREATMENT PLANT NO. 1 PROJECT WHEREAS, the City owns sixteen separate facilities totaling over 127,000 square feet of roofing areas, many of which need repair or replacement now or in the near future; and WHEREAS, on October 25, 2010, the City Council authorized INSPEC, Inc. of Minneapolis, Minnesota to inspect and evaluate roof conditions; quantify deficiencies, roof service life, and associated costs; analyze information gathered; and prepare a written report summarizing findings into a Roof Management Program; and WHEREAS, the Roof Management Program recommends full reroofing for the Community Center and Water Treatment Plant No. 1 during 2012; and WHEREAS, the City Council authorized INSPEC to perform design services and prepare plans and specifications for the reroofing of the Community Center and Water Treatment Plant No. 1 on October 10, 2011 (Res. 7837); and WHEREAS, INSPEC has finished design services for the project and incorporated design details into plans and specifications to solicit public bids. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Mounds View, Ramsey County, Minnesota as follows: 1. The bidding documents prepared by INSPEC for 2012 Reroofing of Community Center and Water Treatment Plant No. 1 (City Project No. 2011-008) are hereby approved. 2. Staff is hereby directed to cause to be published in the Sun-Focus newspaper and in a regional trade publication, at least three weeks before the last day to submit bids, a notice to bidders for the implementation of said project as required by law. 3. The time and date for receipt of bids for said project is hereby established as 1:00 p.m. on February 23, 2012 at which time submitted bid proposals will be publicly read aloud at the prescribed place. 4. INSPEC is authorized to perform professional services associated with the bid phase of the said project for $900. Adopted this 23rd day of January, 2012. ____________________________________ Joe Flaherty, Mayor ATTEST: ____________________________________ James Ericson, City Administrator (SEAL) Item No: 7E Meeting Date: January 23, 2012 Type of Business: Council Business Administrator Review: ____ City of Mounds View Staff Report To: Honorable Mayor and City Council From: Nick DeBar, Public Works Director Item Title/Subject: Resolution 7890, Approving Bidding Documents and Authorizing Advertisement for Bids for 2012 Water Tower Reconditioning Project Background: The City’s 500,000-gallon elevated, fluted-column water tower was constructed in 1992. At that time, Mounds View had two water towers and dismantled both after constructing the current one. The water tower paint coating was inspected and had spot repairs done in 2003. Properly installed paint coatings should provide 15 to 20 years of service life. The tower is now 20 years old and in need of a refurbishing. In 2009, the City hired KLM Engineering, Inc. of Lake Elmo, Minnesota, to inspect the entire water tower and prepare an inspection report. The interior and exterior of the tank was examined and evaluated by KLM, including a “float-down” inspection performed inside the tank, on August 18, 2009. In addition to determining the interior and exterior coating replacement, the report identified some miscellaneous structural modifications and repairs required to bring the tower into compliance with OSHA regulations, AWWA standards, and better/safer access in and on the tank. Based on the inspection data, the structural repairs and coating replacement was recommended to be completed within one to three years (2010-2012). The estimated project cost was $523,500 at that time. Additional costs may be incurred with antenna work. In February 2011, the City hired KLM to prepare technical specifications and drawings for bidding and construction documents for a 2011 construction schedule. The scope of work involved partnering with the City’s engineering staff to prepare the plans and specifications jointly. Based upon this arrangement, KLM has provided the City with a fixed fee estimate of $2,800 for design/bid phases and $45,255 for construction management/inspection (total $48,055). Additional costs may be incurred associated with the antenna leases. A neighboring city spent over $100,000 in consulting fees a few years ago for the traditional consulting engineer-coatings engineer when they reconditioned their water tower. Due to unfavorable weather and an unusually large amount of other municipal water tower reconditioning projects last summer, coupled with conflicts with Festival in the Park, the project was postponed and rescheduled for a 2012 construction schedule. Discussion: Bidding documents have been prepared jointly by KLM and City staff and are being readied for solicitation of construction bids. The project will include full repainting of the tower’s exterior, the interior tank, and a partial repainting of the interior of the column. There is also many exterior and interior structural repairs that need to occur before painting that are also included in the construction documents. A public bid is required since the construction costs will exceed $100,000. Res. 7890, Approving Bid Docs and Auth. Ad for Bids for 2012 Water Tower Reconditioning January 23, 2012 Page 2 KLM estimates a 9-week construction schedule. In addition, existing telecommunication companies with leases on the tower will need to remove and reinstall their equipment before and after the City’s contractor’s work. The proposed project schedule is as follows: Jan. 23, 2012 Council approves bid docs/authorizes advertisement Feb. 2, 2012 Publish ad for bid in Sun-Focus & regional trade publications Feb. 15, 2012 Pre-bid meeting with potential bidders (tentative) Feb. 23, 2012 Bid opening Mar. 12, 2012 Council awards construction contract to successful bidder April-May, 2012 Begin construction July 30, 2012* Complete construction *A bid alternate will be included in the bid form to solicit prices for a delayed schedule with a completion date of October 15, 2012 will be used for comparison purposes to the earlier completion deadline. The adopted 2012 Budget includes $700,000 under the Water Enterprise Fund (700-4823- 7050) for water tower reconditioning – down from the $800,000 budgeted in 2011. Recommendation: Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the attached resolution approving the plans and specifications and authorizing solicitation of public bids for the reconditioning of the elevated water tower. Respectfully submitted, Nick DeBar - Public Works Director Attachment: Resolution 7890 RESOLUTION 7890 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA APPROVING BIDDING DOCUMENTS AND AUTHORIZING ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS FOR 2012 WATER TOWER RECONDITIONING PROJECT WHEREAS, the 500,000 gallon elevated water tower is twenty years old and in need of interior/exterior coating replacement and structural modifications and repairs to comply with current OSHA requirements; and WHEREAS, KLM Engineering, Inc. of Lake Elmo, Minnesota inspected the water tower in August 2009 and prepared an inspection report that recommends coating replacement and structural modifications and repairs to be performed in one to three years (2010-2012); and WHEREAS, the City Council authorized KLM Engineering to perform design services and prepare plans and specifications jointly with City staff for the reconditioning of the elevated water tower on February 14, 2011 (Res. 7742); and WHEREAS, plans and specifications have been prepared and City staff recommends advertising the project to solicit public bids. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Mounds View, Ramsey County, Minnesota as follows: 1. The bidding documents prepared by KLM and City staff for 2012 Water Tower Reconditioning Project (City Project No. 2009-002) are hereby approved. 2. Staff is hereby directed to cause to be published in the Sun-Focus newspaper and in a regional trade publication, at least three weeks before the last day to submit bids, a notice to bidders for the implementation of said project as required by law. 3. The time and date for receipt of bids for said project is hereby established as 11:00 a.m. on February 23, 2012 at which time submitted bid proposals will be publicly read aloud at the prescribed place. Adopted this 23rd day of January, 2012. ____________________________________ Joe Flaherty, Mayor ATTEST: ____________________________________ James Ericson, City Administrator (SEAL) Item No: 7F Meeting Date: January 23, 2012 Type of Business: Council Business Administrator Review: ____ City of Mounds View Staff Report To: Honorable Mayor and City Council From: Nick DeBar, Public Works Director Item Title/Subject: Resolution 7891, Approving Maintenance Method for Traffic Sign Retroreflectivity Standards Background: The Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) is the national standard for traffic signs and pavement marking on any street, highway, or bicycle trail open to the public (23 CFR Part 655.603). Minnesota has a state-wide version of the MUTCD that is required to be used on all public and private roadways in Minnesota. MS 169.06 empowers local road authorities to place and maintain traffic control devices on roadways under their jurisdiction. The MUTCD was recently updated in 2009 and mandates (requires) that agencies maintain traffic signs to meet retroreflectivity standards. All regulatory and warning traffic signs have a compliance date of January 2015, and all guide signs and street name signs need compliance by January 2018. To facilitate compliance, agencies need to have a maintenance method chosen from standardized assessment and management methods by January 2012. A description of these methods is attached for reference. Discussion: City staff is recommending a combination of methods to comply with the retroreflectivity standards. The two methods recommended are expected sign life and blanket replacement. The blanket replacement method is being performed with the Street and Utility Improvement Program with all traffic signs being replaced in each project area. Traffic signs on streets not included in the Program will be maintained by the expected sign life method, which compare the age of individual signs to the expected sign life. A map of these areas is attached for reference. To complicate matters with the traffic sign retroreflectivity mandate, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) is considering proposed changes related to the mandate. The changes include eliminating, extending, and revising most of the compliance dates. A 60-day public comment period ended October 31, 2011 and a final ruling has not taken place. Upon a final ruling, engineering staff will progress with a more detailed traffic sign management plan and policy. Adopting the maintenance method will meet the January 2012 compliance requirement. Recommendation: City staff recommends that the City Council adopt the attached resolution approving the maintenance method for complying with new traffic sign retroreflectivity standards. A more developed traffic sign management plan and policy will be considered by the Council in the future upon a final ruling by the FHWA on proposed changes to the retroreflectivity compliance dates. Respectfully submitted, Nick DeBar - Public Works Director Attachments: • Resolution 7891 • Maintenance Methods for Traffic Sign Retroreflectivity Standards • Traffic Sign Maintenance Program Map RESOLUTION 7891 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA APPROVING MAINTENANCE METHOD FOR TRAFFIC SIGN RETROREFLECTIVITY STANDARDS WHEREAS, the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) is the national standard for traffic signs and pavement marking on any street, highway, or bicycle trail open to the public (23 CFR Part 655.603); and WHEREAS, the MUTCD was recently updated in 2009 and mandates that agencies maintain traffic signs to meet new retroreflectivity standards by January 2015 for regulatory and warning signs and January 2018 for guide and street name signs; and WHEREAS, to facilitate compliance with the retroreflectivity mandates, agencies need to have a maintenance method chosen from standardized assessment and management methods by January 2012; and WHEREAS, City staff is recommending a combination of the Expected Sign Life and Blanket Replacement methods be employed to comply with the retroreflectivity standards. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Mounds View, Ramsey County, Minnesota as follows: 1. The Expected Sign Life and Blanket Replacement methods are hereby approved as the maintenance methods to be used by the City of Mounds View in complying with the traffic sign retroreflectivity standards of the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD). Adopted this 23rd day of January, 2012. ____________________________________ Joe Flaherty, Mayor ATTEST: ____________________________________ James Ericson, City Administrator (SEAL) 2&72%(50,11(627$·6%(6735$&7,&(6)2575$)),&6,*10$,17(1$1&(0$1$*(0(17+$1'%22. Maintenance Methods :KDW$UH7KH&KRLFHV" ²$VVHVVPHQW0HWKRGV 9LVXDO1LJKWWLPH$VVHVVPHQW ²&DOLEUDWLRQ6LJQV3URFHGXUH ²&RPSDULVRQ3DQHOV3URFHGXUH ²&RQVLVWHQW3DUDPHWHUV3URFHGXUH 0HDVXUHG6LJQ5HWURUHIOHFWLYLW\ ²0DQDJHPHQW0HWKRGV ([SHFWHG6LJQ/LIH %ODQNHW5HSODFHPHQW &RQWURO6LJQV ²&RPELQDWLRQRU2WKHU0HWKRGV %ODQNHW5HSODFHPHQW ([SHFWHG6LJQ/LIH 9LVXDO1LJKWWLPH,QVSHFWLRQ &RQWURO6LJQV 2WKHU0HWKRGVGRFXPHQWHGLQDQ (QJLQHHULQJ6WXG\ Management ²([SHFWHG6LJQ/LIH ²%ODQNHW5HSODFHPHQW ²&RQWURO6LJQV M Assessm e n t ²9LVXDO1LJKWWL P H $ V V H V V P H QW ²0HDVXUHG6L J Q 5 HW U RIO H FWL YLW \W\ 9 Co m b i n a t i o n o r Oth e r M e t h o d s 6RPH H [ D P S O H V L Q F O X G H ²%ODQNHW 5 H S O D F H P H Q W ([SHFW H G 6 L J Q / L I H ²9LVXDO 1 L J K W W L P H , Q V S H F W L R Q &RQWURO 6 L J Q V ²2WKHU 0 H W K R G V G R F X P H Q W H G LQDQ( Q J L Q H H U L Q J 6 W X G \ How Do I Decide? % %2&72%(50,11(627$·6%(6735$&7,&(6)2575$)),&6,*10$,17(1$1&(0$1$*(0(17+$1'%22. Assessment Methods (1/2) 1. Visual Nighttime Assessment 7KLVLVDQRQWKHIO\DVVHVVPHQWRIUHWURUHIOHFWLYLW\PDGH E\WUDLQHGLQVSHFWRUVGXULQJQLJKWWLPHFRQGLWLRQV7KH LQVSHFWLRQVKRXOGEHFRQGXFWHGDWQRUPDOVSHHGIURP WKHWUDYHOODQHXVLQJWKHORZEHDPKHDGOLJKWVDQGDW W\SLFDOYLHZLQJGLVWDQFHV IHHWIRUVWUHHWQDPHEODGHV IHHWIRUVWRSVLJQVDQGXSWRIHHWIRUV\PERO W\SHZDUQLQJVLJQVEDVHGRQDIHHWSHULQFKOHJLELOLW\ GLVWDQFH 2QHRUPRUHRIWKHIROORZLQJSURFHGXUHVVKRXOG EHXVHGWRVXSSRUWWKHYLVXDOQLJKWWLPHLQVSHFWLRQV Calibration Signs Procedure $QLQVSHFWRUYLHZVDFDOLEUDWLRQVLJQHDFKWLPHSULRU WRFRQGXFWLQJDQLJKWWLPHILHOGUHYLHZ7KHFDOLEUDWLRQ VLJQVKDYHNQRZQUHWURUHIOHFWLYLW\OHYHOVDWRUDERYHWKH VSHFLILHGPLQLPXPV7KHFDOLEUDWLRQVLJQVDUHVHWXSLQ DPDLQWHQDQFH\DUGZKHUHWKHLQVSHFWRUFDQYLHZWKH VLJQVLQDPDQQHUVLPLODUWRQLJKWWLPHILHOGLQVSHFWLRQV 7KHLQVSHFWRUXVHVWKHYLVXDODSSHDUDQFHRIWKH FDOLEUDWLRQVLJQWRHVWDEOLVKWKHHYDOXDWLRQWKUHVKROGIRU WKDWQLJKW·VLQVSHFWLRQDFWLYLWLHV ,QVSHFWRUVPXVWEHWUDLQHG7UDLQLQJFRXUVHVDUHDYDLODEOHWKURXJKPDQ\/RFDO7HFKQLFDO$VVLVWDQFH3URJUDPV /7$3 FKHFNKWWS ZZZOWSRUJ Comparison Panels Procedure 7KLVSURFHGXUHLQYROYHVDVVHPEOLQJDVHWRI FRPSDULVRQSDQHOVWKDWUHSUHVHQWUHWURUHIOHFWLYLW\ OHYHOVDERYHWKHVSHFLILHGPLQLPXPV,QVSHFWRUVWKHQ FRQGXFWDQLJKWWLPHILHOGUHYLHZDQGZKHQDPDUJLQDO VLJQLVIRXQGDFRPSDULVRQSDQHOLVDWWDFKHGDQGWKH VLJQSDQHOFRPELQDWLRQLVYLHZHG7KHVLJQVIRXQGWR EHOHVVEULJKWWKDQWKHSDQHOZRXOGWKHQEHVFKHGXOHG IRUUHSODFHPHQW Consistent Parameters Procedure 7KHQLJKWWLPHLQVSHFWLRQVZRXOGEHFRQGXFWHG XQGHUVLPLODUIDFWRUVWKDWZHUHXVHGLQWKHUHVHDUFK WRGHYHORSWKHPLQLPXPUHWURUHIOHFWLYLW\OHYHOV7KHVH IDFWRUVLQFOXGH ²8VLQJDVSRUWXWLOLW\YHKLFOHRUSLFNXSWUXFNWRFRQGXFW WKHLQVSHFWLRQ ²8VLQJDPRGHO\HDURUQHZHUYHKLFOHIRUWKHLQVSHFWLRQ ²8VLQJDQLQVSHFWRUZKRLVDWOHDVW\HDUVROGZLWK YLVLRQ FRUUHFWHG %2&72%(50,11(627$·6%(6735$&7,&(6)2575$)),&6,*10$,17(1$1&(0$1$*(0(17+$1'%22. Assessment Methods (2/2) 2. Measured Sign Retroreflectivity 7KHUHWURUHIOHFWLYLW\RIHYHU\VLJQLQ\RXUV\VWHPLVPHDVXUHG ZLWKDUHWURUHIOHFWRPHWHU DSSUR[LPDWHSXUFKDVHSULFHRI DQGWKHUHVXOWVDUHFRPSDUHGWRWKHWKUHVKROGOHYHOV GRFXPHQWHGLQ7DEOH$RIWKH01087&'6LJQVZLWKDFWXDO UHWURUHIOHFWLYLW\OHYHOVEHORZWKHVSHFLILHGPLQLPXPVZRXOGEH VFKHGXOHGIRUUHSODFHPHQW 6RXUFH )+:$6LJQ5HWURUHIOHFWLYLW\*XLGHERRN6HSWHPEHU %2&72%(50,11(627$·6%(6735$&7,&(6)2575$)),&6,*10$,17(1$1&(0$1$*(0(17+$1'%22. Management Methods 1. Expected Sign Life :KHQVLJQVDUHLQVWDOOHGWKHLQVWDOODWLRQGDWHZRXOGEHUHFRUGHGVRWKDWWKHDJHRIWKHVLJQLVNQRZQ7KHDJH RIWKHVLJQLVFRPSDUHGWRWKHH[SHFWHGVLJQOLIH²EDVHGRQWKHGRFXPHQWHGUHWURUHIOHFWLYLW\GHJUDGDWLRQIRUD VSHFLILFJHRJUDSKLFDUHDFRPSDUHGWRWKHPLQLPXPOHYHOV6LJQVROGHUWKDQWKHH[SHFWHGVLJQOLIHZRXOGEH VFKHGXOHGIRUUHSODFHPHQW 2. Blanket Replacement $OOVLJQVLQDQDUHDFRUULGRUZRXOGEHUHSODFHGDWVSHFLILHGLQWHUYDOV7KH UHSODFHPHQWLQWHUYDOZRXOGEHEDVHGRQWKHH[SHFWHGVLJQOLIHRUZDUUDQW\ SHULRG7KLVPHWKRGHOLPLQDWHVWKHQHHGWRDVVHVVUHWURUHIOHFWLYLW\RUWUDFN WKHOLIHRILQGLYLGXDOVLJQV,IWKHZDUUDQW\SHULRGLV\HDUVUHSODFLQJ RIWKHVLJQVHDFK\HDUZRXOGGHPRQVWUDWHFRPSOLDQFHZLWKWKHVSHFLILHG PLQLPXPUHWURUHIOHFWLYLW\OHYHOV 3. Control Signs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·6%(6735$&7,&(6)2575$)),&6,*10$,17(1$1&(0$1$*(0(17+$1'%22. What Method is Best for Your Agency? (1/2) Assessment Methods 9LVXDO$VVHVVPHQW0HDVXUHG6LJQ5HWURUHIOHFWLYLW\ 5HTXLUHVWUDLQLQJDQGORWVRIVWDIIKRXUVRQWKHURDG<RXULQVSHFWRUVZLOO KDYHWRYLHZHYHU\RQHRI\RXUVLJQVLQWKHILHOG DWVLJQVKRXU VLJQV>W\SLFDOFRXQW\@§KRXUVSHU\HDU 0D\UHTXLUHWKHSXUFKDVHRIWHFKQRORJ\³D5HWURIOHFWRPHWHURUUHIOHFWLYH VKHHWLQJVDPSOHV³DQGDQLQYHVWPHQWRIWUDLQLQJ\RXUVWDII 7KHSULPDU\DGYDQWDJHRIXVLQJRQHRIWKH$VVHVVPHQW0HWKRGVLVWKDW \RXUDJHQF\ZLOOJHWWKHPRVW\HDUVRIVHUYLFHIURPHDFKVLJQLQ\RXU LQYHQWRU\DVLVSUDFWLFDOO\SRVVLEOH Management Methods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·6%(6735$&7,&(6)2575$)),&6,*10$,17(1$1&(0$1$*(0(17+$1'%22. So which Method is Best? 1RRQHFDQWHOO\RXZKLFKPHWKRGLVEHVW)+:$·V6LJQ5HWURUHIOHFWLYLW\*XLGHERRNFDQSURYLGHVRPHDVVLVWDQFHEXW\RX NQRZWKHFKDUDFWHULVWLFVRI\RXUV\VWHPDQG\RXURUJDQL]DWLRQEHWWHUWKDQDQ\RQHHOVH7KLQNDERXWWKUHHSULPDU\IDFWRUV ²,QYHQWRU\ ,IWKHQXPEHURIVLJQVRQ\RXUV\VWHPLVVPDOO FRQGXFWLQJDQDQQXDOLQVSHFWLRQZRXOGEHUHODWLYHO\HDV\ ,IWKHQXPEHURIVLJQVRQ\RXUV\VWHPLVODUJH ! FRQGXFWLQJDQDQQXDOLQVSHFWLRQFRXOGUHTXLUHRUPRUHVWDIIKRXUVSHU\HDU VR\RXVKRXOGFRQVLGHURQHRIWKHPDQDJHPHQWPHWKRGV ²6WDII ,I\RXUSURIHVVLRQDOVWDIILVWUDLQHGDQGKDVH[SHULHQFH FRQGXFWLQJQLJKWWLPHLQVSHFWLRQVLWZRXOGEHHDV\ WRFRQWLQXH ,I\RXGRQ·WKDYHWUDLQHGVWDIIWKHFKRLFHVZRXOGLQFOXGH DGGLQJVWDIIDQGWUDLQLQJWKHPRUXVLQJRQHRIWKH PDQDJHPHQWPHWKRGV ²7HFKQRORJ\ ,I\RXDOUHDG\RZQRUDUHZLOOLQJWRSXUFKDVHD UHWURUHIOHFWRPHWHU RUDNLWZLWKVDPSOHVRI VKHHWLQJPDWHULDODWWKHWKUHVKROGV WKHNLWLVFXUUHQWO\XQGHU GHYHORSPHQWFKHFN0Q'276WDWH$LGZHEVLWHIRUIXUWKHU LQIRUPDWLRQ WKHPHDVXUHPHQWPHWKRGPD\EHEHVW ,I\RXDUHQRWZLOOLQJWRPDNHWKHVHLQYHVWPHQWVWKHYLVXDO DVVHVVPHQWRURQHRIWKHPDQDJHPHQWPHWKRGVZRXOGEHD EHWWHUFKRLFH What Method is Best for Your Agency? (2/2) KWWS VDIHW\IKZDGRWJRYURDGZD\BGHSWQLJKWBYLVLEUHWURWRRONLW Make a decision, move forward, evaluate, and make changes if you have to. Item No: 7G Meeting Date: January 23, 2012 Type of Business: Council Business Administrator Review: ____ City of Mounds View Staff Report To: Honorable Mayor and City Council From: Nick DeBar, Public Works Director Item Title/Subject: Resolution 7892, Authorizing LHB, Inc. to Perform a Retrocommissioning Study for the Community Center Background: The Community Center was constructed in three phases between 1997 and 1998. Construction of the facility utilized portions of the existing Bel-Rae Ballroom building that occupied the site prior to construction. Unfortunately, there were a number of construction and design issues that occurred during and after construction of the facility for these and other reasons. Since completion, there have been many issues related to the HVAC system at the Community Center that have required many hours and expenses to diagnose and repair, with some that seem to reoccur for unknown reasons. In addition to spent time and costs to address, there is an “inconvenience” cost with those that work, visit, or rent the facility spaces. Discussion: City staff has met with a number of qualified mechanical contractors to determine what improvements or adjustments are needed to avoid the on-going problems with the HVAC systems. There have been a number of recommendations by contractors to provide a long-term fix to the issues. Some of these recommendations are similar, while others vary significantly. Furthermore, there is no guarantee that these improvements would provide long-term benefits that City staff are seeking. City staff consulted with an engineering consulting firm specializing in buildings and related equipment. The firm, LHB, notified City staff that Xcel Energy has a retrocommissioning program geared toward finding comprehensive solutions to existing issues with energy-consuming building components. Xcel’s program provides rebates for upfront costs to partially cover study costs, as well as implementing energy-efficiency recommendations of the study. A handout is attached describing Xcel’s program. LHB provided a proposal to provide retrocommissioning and HVAC diagnostic services for the energy consuming equipment at the Community Center, including water heating and lighting, with special emphasis on the high humidity and poor environmental control of the interior. City staff applied for Xcel’s recommissioning program and was pre-approved by Xcel for a partial reimbursement for $1,625 of LHB’s study fee of $15,000. LHB has personnel that have obtained certification through Xcel Energy – a requirement for reimbursement eligibility. Recommendation: City staff recommends that the City Council adopt the attached resolution authorizing LHB to perform recommissioning services for the Community Center. The completed study will provide professional recommendations for any long-term fixes to the many problems encountered at the Community Center, as well as recommendations for energy efficiencies, and rebates for both. Monies have been budgeted in 2012 for this study under Special Projects (480-4180-7050) for $65,000. Respectfully submitted, Nick DeBar - Public Works Director Attachments: 1) Resolution 7892 & 2) Xcel Energy Recommissioning Info Sheet RESOLUTION 7892 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA AUTHORIZING LHB, INC. TO PERFORM A RETROCOMMISSIONING STUDY FOR THE COMMUNITY CENTER WHEREAS, the Community Center was constructed in three phases during 1997 and 1998, incorporating various building components of the Bel-Rae Ballroom facility that occupied the site prior to construction; and WHEREAS, there has been a history of problems with HVAC equipment creating poor environmental conditions and requiring many staff hours and expenses to address; and WHEREAS, Xcel Energy offers a Retrocommissioning Program that provides rebates toward study and implementation of improvements to energy-consuming components of buildings; and WHEREAS, a proposal to perform a retrocommissioning study of the Community Center by LHB for $15,000 was pre-approved for inclusion in Xcel’s retrocommissioning program for $1,625. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Mounds View, Ramsey County, Minnesota as follows: 1. LHB, Inc. is authorized to perform a retrocommissioning study for the Community Center. Compensation will be for a stipulated sum of $15,000. 2. Upon satisfactory review by the City Attorney, the Mayor and City Administrator are hereby authorized and directed, for and on behalf of the City, to enter into agreement with LHB for said services at said compensation. 3. A 5% contingency of $750 is approved for additional diagnostic, testing, or other services that may be required, for a budget amount not to exceed $15,750 for said services. Use of contingency will be pre-approved by the Public Works Director. 4. Payment for the above said work shall be paid for from Account 480-4180-7050. Adopted this 23rd day of January, 2012. ____________________________________ Joe Flaherty, Mayor ATTEST: ____________________________________ James Ericson, City Administrator (SEAL) information SHEEt Colorado | minnESota recommissioning Save on energy CoStS and InCreaSe Comfort wIth reCommISSIonIng from XCel energy XCEL ENERGY REBATES HELP OFFSET RECOMMISSIONING COSTS Study Rebates: Xcel Energy helps pay for upfront recommissioning study costs – up to 75 percent of the study cost (not to exceed $25,000). Implementation Rebates: Xcel Energy provides rebates up to 60 percent of the measure cost for implementing the energy-efficiency recommendations in your study. Every building has the potential to oper- ate more efficiently. In fact, conducting a building tune-up – “recommissioning” or “retrocommissioning” – can help save as much as 20 percent on energy bills. Re- commissioning your facility is an economi- cal way to identify electric and natural-gas energy-efficiency improvements. In addi- tion to energy savings, recommissioning offers a number of additional benefits: • Earn valuable credits for environmental programs such as Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design for Exist- ing Buildings (LEED EB) and it could increase your ENERGY STAR® score • Achieve comfortable and convenient energy efficiency for both your organiza- tion and building tenants • Increase equipment life • Provides independent and objective direction for energy saving options Our traditional recommissioning program involves two steps: 1) diagnosis; and 2) implementation. Xcel Energy offers rebates to offset out-of-pocket costs for both steps. And we’ll work with you every step of the way until your project is complete. Step One – Conducting a Recommissioning Study Over time, a building can fall out of optimization, or building and staff changes can alter the way your building runs. A recommissioning service provider of your choice will analyze your building and diagnose where you could make improvements to your building’s existing systems, assess your potential energy savings and prepare a study report. Most improvements found in a recommissioning study can be made with little or no cost to you. The report will help you: • Develop an objective business case for efficiency project approval • Detail how best to run your building’s current mechanical systems at peak efficiency • Identify energy savings, costs estimates and corresponding rebate amounts for individual energy conservation opportu- nities available Step Two – Implement Recommendations Once improvement measures are identified, the next step is to implement some or all of the recommendations, whichever makes sense for your company. Most recommissioning measures are low or no cost to you – and focus on equipment tune-ups rather than upgrades. Studies show typical energy savings up to 20 percent, with a simple payback of less than one year. Recommissioning information SHEEt business solutions centeR 1-800-481-4700 Colorado | minnESota 1-800-481-4700 | xcelenergy.com © 20XX Xcel Energy Inc. | Xcel Energy is a registered trademark of Xcel Energy Inc. | Northern States Power Company – Minnesota, Public Service Company of Colorado, Xcel Energy Companies | 10-01-541 | 01/2010 | CRS 1703 Typical recommissioning improvements include: • Optimizing your HVAC equipment • Updating lighting controls • Identifying, updating or optimizing system controls • Adjusting equipment to reduce long- term wear and tear • Restoring economizer operation Preapproval is required before you begin your study or implementation. Xcel Energy Delivers a Variety of Rebate Options If you are looking to optimize the performance of your existing building systems, we offer a variety of Recommissioning programs designed to meet your energy conservation goals. 1) Recommissioning/ Retrocommissioning Study and Implementation. Energy experts will conduct a comprehensive review of your building’s energy consumption – even if your building was previously commissioned. Recommissioning studies will identify opportunities to effectively reduce your energy use up to 20 percent. You can earn study and implementation rebates with this option. 2) Fast Track Studies. This option is for customers who have completed a recommissioning study on their own, without receiving study funding from us. You can earn implementation rebates* with this option. 3) Fast Track Proposal. This option is designed specifically for customers who may not be ready to undertake a comprehensive recommissioning study, yet have identified one or two specific recommissioning energy-saving measures. You can earn implementation rebates* with this option, as well. 4) Refrigeration Recommissioning Studies. Supermarkets are the most electricity-intensive type of commercial building – and refrigeration accounts for half of an average store’s electricity use. Refrigeration recommissioning studies identify opportunities to tune up existing refrigeration systems rather than replace them, ensuring more reliable operation, which helps to avoid costly repairs and reduce downtime. You can earn study and implementation rebates with this option. * In order to qualify for Fast Track rebates, your analysis should include energy saving estimates and demonstrate a thorough understanding of the affected equipment’s energy and demand consumption. Find Out if Recommissioning Is Right for You Contact your Xcel Energy account representative, or contact our Business Solutions Center at 1-800-481-4700. You also may visit www.xcelenergy.com/ recomm for a full overview of product offerings, case studies and applications to get started today. WHAT IS COMMISSIONING? Commissioning is systematic and documented process of ensuring that specific building systems perform interactively according to the design intent and the owner’s operational needs. With today’s buildings and systems becoming more complex, the need for commissioning contin- ues to grow. Unfortunately, com- missioning remains an uncommon practice. Recommissioning takes another look at a building that was previ- ously commissioned to ensure it is once again running at optimal performance. Retrocommissioning involves tun- ing up an existing building that was never formally commissioned. Unless you requested commissioning, it’s likely your building’s systems never were properly calibrated for ongoing efficiency. Xcel Energy’s Recommissioning program covers both recommission- ing and retrocommissioning. Item No: 8A Meeting Date: January 23, 2012 Type of Business: Consent City of Mounds View Staff Report To: Honorable Mayor and City Council From: James Ericson, City Administrator Item Title/Subject: Resolution 7887, a Resolution Appointing Representatives to the Anoka County / Blaine Airport Advisory Commission Introduction: The Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC) established an airport advisory commission to provide a mechanism for communities and their residents to interact with MAC and to act as a liaison between the Anoka County / Blaine airport and the surrounding municipalities. Discussion: On September 14, 2009, the City Council approved Resolution 7499 which appointed City Administrator Ericson and resident Barbara Haake as City representatives to the Anoka County / Blaine Airport Advisory Commission. Those terms expired at the end of 2011, as evidenced by correspondence from the Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC) dated January 11, 2012. Pursuant to the MAC correspondence, the City needs to appoint (or reappoint) two members to the Commission. I have spoken with resident Barbara Haake who has agreed to continue serving on the commission if it is the will of the City Council. I would be happy to continue to serve as the second representative unless a Council member has a strong inclination in that regard. Recommendation: Approve Resolution 7887 which reappoints resident Barbara Haake and City Administrator Jim Ericson to serve two-year term on the Anoka County / Blaine Airport Advisory Commission, in representation of the City of Mounds View. Respectfully submitted, ________________________ James Ericson City Administrator RESOLUTION 7887 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION APPOINTING REPRESENTATIVES TO THE ANOKA COUNTY / BLAINE AIRPORT ADVISORY COMMISSION WHEREAS, on September 14, 2009, the Mounds View City Council appointed City Administrator Jim Ericson and resident Barbara Haake to represent the City on the Anoka County / Blaine Airport Advisory Commission; and, WHEREAS, Barbara Haake’s and Jim Ericson’s terms on the Airport Advisory Commission have expired as of December 31, 2011; and, WHEREAS, according to correspondence from the Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC) dated January 11, 2012, the City needs to appoint (or RE-appoint) city representatives to the Commission for two-year terms beginning January 1, 2012; and, WHEREAS, the City Council desires that both City Administrator Ericson and resident representative Haake be reappointed for two-year terms beginning January 1, 2012. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council approves the reappointment of City Administrator Jim Ericson and resident Barbara Haake to the Anoka County / Blaine Airports Commission for two-year terms commencing January 1, 2012. Adopted this 23rd day of January, 2012 _____________________________________ Joe Flaherty, Mayor ATTEST: ____________________________________ James Ericson, City Administrator (seal) 396760v1 SJR MU125-11 Kennedy 470 U.S. Bank Plaza 200 South Sixth Street Minneapolis MN 55402-1458 (612) 337-9300 telephone (612) 337-9310 fax http://www.kennedy-graven.com Affirmative Action, Equal Opportunity Employer Graven C H A R T E R E D SCOTT J. RIGGS Attorney at Law Direct Dial (612) 337-9260 Email: sriggs@kennedy-graven.com MEMORANDUM Date: January 19, 2012 To: Jim Ericson, City Administrator From: Scott J. Riggs, City Attorney Re: Mounds View Project Status Report MU125-11: Administration. General discussions with staff regarding various City matters. Matter is presently pending. MU125-65: Licensing Matters. Research regarding massage licensing. Consult with City staff regarding same. Matter is presently pending. MU210-162: Robert’s Bar. Follow-up with City staff regarding CUP provisions, liquor liability insurance coverage, etc. Matter is presently pending. MU210-166: Billboard Matters. Review question regarding dynamic billboards and proposed revisions to City Code. Draft and revise proposed third amended lease, etc. Consult with City staff regarding same. Forward third amended lease to the City and others. Work on document execution issues, etc. Matter is presently pending. MU210-189: Coventry Senior Living Project. Review final plat and other documentation. Consult with City staff regarding same. Matter is presently pending. MU210-192: Senior Housing Revenue Bonds, Series 2010 (Select Senior Living). The temporary bonds that were issued and expected to be refunded with permanent bonds in 2011 have been defeased. Matter is presently pending. MU210-196: Minor subdivision: 7337 Spring Lake Road. Review preliminary documentation. Draft subdivision opinion. Draft easements and letter of instruction and forward to City and closer. Consult with City staff regarding project. Matter is presently pending. SJR:jms &