09/11/2007 - City Council Special
SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING
TUESDAY
SEPTEMBER 11, 2007
5:30 P.M.
EAGAN ROOM-EAGAN MUNICIPAL CENTER
AGENDA
1. ROLL CALL AND ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA
II. STATEMENT OF DISCLOSURE / PROPOSED EAGAN CHARTER
III. PARKS AND RECREATION 5-YEAR CIP
19• IV. PROPOSED 2008 PUBLIC UTILITY ENTERPRISE BUDGETS:
(Water, Sanitary Sewer, Street Lighting, Storm Drainage, Water Quality)
V. PROPOSED 2008 CASCADE BAY BUDGET
VI. PROPOSED 2008 COMMUNITY CENTER BUDGET
b OC> VII. MODIFICATION OF DYNAMIC SIGN/BILLBOARD REGULATIONS
p, l` 4 VIII. COMMENTS RE: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR POTENTIAL
i i CONSOLIDATION OF USPS FACILITIES AT EAGAN BULK MAIL
CENTER SITE
P.1s6IX. COMPREHENSIVE GUIDE PLAN REVIEW (LAND USE CHAPTER)
VII. OTHER BUSINESS
VIII. VISITORS TO BE HEARD
VIII. ADJOURNMENT
Agenda Information Memo
September 11, 2007 Special City Council Meeting
II. STATEMENT OF DISCLOSURE / PROPOSED EAGAN CHARTER
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED:
To approve the following statement of disclosure pertaining to the proposed Eagan
Charter, per the recommendation of the City Attorney:
This document was not prepared by or on behalf of the Eagan City Council.
Questions concerning the wording or content should be directed to the members
of the Charter Commission and not to the Eagan City staff at city hall. The
Eagan City Council is not associated or affiliated in any manner with the Charter
Commission.
FACTS:
• Per the direction of the Council at the September 4, 2007 City Council meeting, the
City Attorney has revised the recommended disclosure pertaining to the proposed
Eagan Charter.
• It is proposed that this disclosure statement would accompany any copy of the
Charter provided by the City and would be posted on the City's Website, where the
proposed Charter is also available.
• The disclosure would also appear when the Charter is published for two consecutive
weeks in the legal newspaper.
• The City Administrator has requested that the City Attorney be present at the
September I 1 Council workshop in the event the Council would have any questions
pertaining to the proposed disclosure.
Agenda Memo
September 11, 2007 City Council Workshop
III. 2008-2012 PARKS AND RECREATION CIP
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED:
To provide feedback and direction to the APrC regarding the 2008-2012 capital improvement
projects outlined in this report.
FACTS:
• One of the primary responsibilities of the APrC is the annual preparation and updating of the
Departmental Capital Improvement Plan which serves as a blueprint and planning guide for
park projects. CIP projects must be either park development or improvement but cannot be
maintenance based.
• Funding for the CIP comes from the Park Site Fund (PSF), which is primarily money
collected from developments at the time of platting in lieu of land dedication.
• The CIP proposal presented by the APrC to the City Council encompasses 2008 through
2012. Historically after the review process the Council approves the first year (2008) as a
budget and the next years as a general plan subject to change as part of future reviews.
• The CIP has generally been driven by the projected ongoing balance of the Park Site Fund.
To provide a better view of the future, recent versions of the CIP have included all potential
projects though they may not be funded for years to come. There has also been considerable
discussion regarding the identification of alternative funding sources for the CIP.
• A number of projects in the proposed 2007 CIP represent the continuation of ongoing
programs and initiatives specific to replacement and upgrade. Examples include the
installation of playgrounds, skating rinks and tennis courts in parks with aged facilities. Other
improvement projects such as those at Patrick Eagan Park are tied to the implementation of
Master Plans.
• The CIP also includes two line item allocations that are renewed on an annual basis as
needed. These are the land acquisition "opportunity" fund which would be used to help
acquire priority open space should it become available and the "small projects" fund which is
used to complete smaller, unanticipated, capital projects or to help leverage additional
financial assistance from an associia~t~ion or alternative funding source.
• The projection included on page T is a conservative projection that does not include any
large land acquisitions.
a
• The projected revenue is based upon much smaller developments that split an existing lot
into 2-5 new lots rather than developments of entire new neighborhoods.
ATTACHMENTS:
• List of 2008 CIP projects, Page
• List of 2008-2012 projects, Page 1
• Recap of Park Site Fund, Page~b-.
2008 CIP project summary
• Patrick Eagan Park; Phase H of the implementation of the new Master Plan, primary
focus most likely to be trail improvement, seasonal structures, restoration and signage.
• Playground Replacements (3);Continuation of the ongoing rotational replacement
program. Candidate sites include Rahn, Ohmann and Carlson Lake Parks
• Central Park; Installation of a trail side exercise course and additional seating in the
patio area
• Carlson Lake;_Fishing platform removal and construction
• Dakota Hills Middle School; Field Improvements, pending shared funding
opportunity with ISD 196 and EAA (ISD 196 to provide project coordination when
initiated)
• Rink Upgrades; Continuation of the ongoing rotational replacement and upgrade of
rinks at skating sites. Candidate sites include Lexington, Pilot knob and Woodhaven
Parks
• Signage System Upgrade; Second phase of the installation of new entrance signage,
continuing primarily with neighborhood parks, some athletic site signage possible
• Small Projects; Funding for opportunities and need
• Acquisition; Funding for acquisition opportunities
O 0
C"
W W~ M
F
o
~aa 6
~ d a ~ 3
Wpgti A
C7 0A
~ -d
A W SON
Hw aW
C'n
U
az
aW
z > N A o O0 °o N ° 00 00 0° 0 0 0 0° 3
O r l w M 0 64 0 N~ 0 O O 0 0 O O
O 0~// O C59 O V1~~ - V) O O ~O
FiM M Q2i N
HaN d N ~@)
00
~ O W 0 ~
a O
~ N
o
A96o O O 0 O N
z o00
U `TeA N
0 69 y9 O °O
O0 O
O O ' C
N
O w 0 0~ O
p ' O ~ U
IV 0
N b fn p a1
Z ~bA LU U a
ca Q O O U O v
PL4
v~ay av~r~.wawcna°3 ° o cd o
y w O y O X a
U Cd . • • • . • • . °A U W
W b : o 'o a
a v~ w H a v~ d
a ~ A
a a > o o
o
0
cqs -9 'a
VQ Oa o
o • • • A a • • • c:b ~ F ~
U c ~
O NI a, o ° a~i c~ pA~ 'Q
p. a A U Z U ri
ao
N
I
0
c o .
A M U
M 0 Q
Ewy W M ~ O
wcati A
z
A
a
x
H
~ o
V
wo
a ~ F
a U
z
w~
Z A o 0 0 JR,' 0 0
i
C>
o 0 00 0o &S 0 0 0
60~ 601
0-4H
00
V N
A~
z °
V N
C)
°
N
_O 47 OUiO Rai
L7 ,s.^
7 n j 'a+ O ca _H y
a w
E"~ z oa04 *»~v O a.
C riaj y • • • • •o u a o
a.
a A a $
C/I
A
A, U o
a
"Cl
O w A v) o .b 0
d o o
Q" a~ GG U ~ U Q Z a ri ~
00
C'7 0
o
0
M U
00 Q
00 O ~y O
W W M 3
FUoo6
w~q.
a
Cie) dC7WH
H~~o
zA~ o
Z ~ oo
a
a W ~w
A W z~
O O N ~
a N W o
0 00 0
0
O d ri o °0 0 0 0
0 0
O p o ~ ,n
V o yq v~
~ w M
A ~ N
Z
V N
U 00
u p
N
U O 0
z
aF a° W 9b'
w W GO E~ a~ o
A > 0 A: o
a a
a ¢ Cd
A4 W v1
0
A.
b
O ~
Q ~ A
O a ~
w a ~ ~ w
pcz
a u Z
g
-o ~
~o
C'7 ~o
0
0
M U
M Q
O ~ O
3
W W M
U G 6
F
H ~
ti
a
z
o
H~ o o°
W a rA a~
~a a aw
w~ 'F
N
0 a N A
~ W o
~ F F o 0 0 0 0 o O
V N F~ U N bs o
r , yep bs ~ ~
h~wi/I W
q Q~ N
U N
ti
o
N
O
Z a
~ wx a
i...i FO ob O~ N ~
H U ~F ° `J °o > '`aao
a aka
a W O~ A A
a
Q p'' ~W > U U ° o
0
. p.
O g
F ,.k Q
~ ~ a a
cts
W a
(Z Cd
Na z z F z
177
b~
N
U Zo
0
M U
06
A o ~ ~
W W M 3
d~~ Q
r.
W ~ eoa
ti
a
zA~ o
w
~ a a
a
d Z ° ~a
w 0~
A~ z~
zoN
Sao
~ w o o~ o
O drj o °oo c °o
N U° N N
U IQ's 6q
~;~yyJ W M
A W N
z~
0
N
COD z o
G a~ ~ ~ o
aA A ~ a a
Cd
a a v~ ~
0
a
b
z
o ~
d Q
o
a ~
a
~ o o U
b~
~o
3
°o 00
~ o C> CD (Z
N M O O O M O O O M
O v ~ v1 0000 ~
r-4 eq
big 69 W W)
O
O
N 0 O O O O O O
00 N p p
0 W)
6~9 b9 69 69 6A 6~9
rW O
O O O O
V ~
N 00 O M O O
00 00
N
00
N
pM 'IT M oc m N r-1
M~ 6A 6) b9 6A 69 6) 6) 6A
F~1
A
O p
N N O
O O O O
m M
W o M O O O M M O O
i 00
O vi
N ~ ° 0 0 00
~ 64 ~ 69 69 - fn
6A) 6MS y~9
V1 ~
O
O
N
00
°op o 0
A N O O O O O O O
w oo O O O 00 O O ell
Okn O O N N
M v'1 d' 'T ~--i N
69 69 6i9 69 69 6S 69 U5 ~O
N
O
O
W O O O
0 O O 0 O p 0 M o
00 O O O M rf)
O O o0
h N O v~ p p
y~g a~
N I fs &q
i a
cd ° O b
w C O > b a °o
o o- a
m ae a x
° rn0 On as G?
~ ~ ~ d a W C v
0 0 ° b .a
G4 w iw H W H W (7
Agenda Information Memo
September 11, 2007, Eagan City Council
IV. 2008 PUBLIC UTILITY ENTERPRISE FUND BUDGETS
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED:
• To provide direction to staff regarding the proposed 2008 Public Utility Enterprise
Fund Budgets and to direct that it be placed on a future City Council Meeting
Consent Agenda for formal ratification.
Introduction
The 2008 Public Utility Enterprise Funds have been prepared in a manner consistent
with the revised format being implemented for all other budgets. The review process is
also similar to the General Fund with sensitivity shown to the financial goals of the City.
User rates will be reviewed in the usual process and incorporated into the City's annual
fee schedule for City Council consideration. Due to factors explained in detail later,
sanitary sewer rates are expected to increase to provide adequate cash flow for those
operations. No significant changes to rates are contemplated for any of the other utility
operations.
Enterprise Funds are established to account for the financing of self-supporting activities
of governmental units which render services to the general public on a user charge
basis. Records are maintained on the accrual basis of accounting.
The reports of the Enterprise Funds are similar to comparable private enterprise reports
and are self-contained. Creditors, legislators, or the general public can evaluate the
performance of the municipal enterprise on the same basis as they can the performance
of investor-owned enterprises.
Revenues
h5 Enclosed on page is a copy of the Detail of Revenues for all of the utility
enterprise funds.
Expenditures
Water 61
The City's water utility provides for the production and distribution of safe and clean
water through a series of 21 developed major wells, two treatment plants, and six
reservoirs and towers. The water utility also maintains the water distribution system
consisting of over 324 miles of mains and laterals. At year-end 2006, the City had
19,441 connections to the water system.
Excluding depreciation, debt service, and major planned maintenance ($1,435,200) from
the total for both years, the 2008 Water Utility Budget is proposed at $3,359,900, an
overall operational increase of $206,900, or 6.6% from the 2007 budget of $3,153,000.
Factors contributing to the increase are included in the department budget narrative to
follow. The bond payment including both principal and interest to retire the outstanding
1~
debt for the South Water Treatment Plant is $837,800 and is included in the budget.
Depreciation is budgeted at $1,822,800 for 2008.
An additional %i utilities technician worker is proposed to be added to the personnel
complement with the other Y2 accounted for in the Sanitary Sewer department. An
appropriation for this position is retained in the budget as a placeholder at this time.
pending additional review before the final budget is adopted. There is a reduction in
seasonal and intern allocation resulting from the proposed position from $48,100 to
$20,700.
Many of the expenditures proposed in the 2008 water utility budget are related to the
volume of water produced, treated and distributed (i.e., electricity, chemicals, break
repairs, etc.) which is often difficult to predict with any degree of accuracy. The sale of
water is proportionate to summer weather conditions, while break repairs often are the
result of winter weather conditions.
Capital outlay appropriations include an allocation of $130,700. The allocation includes
$5,700 for various computer replacements, $10,000 for chlorine leak detector for the
South Water Treatment Plant, $25,000 to replace two chlorine feed units at the South
Water Treatment Plant, $15,000 to replace the chlorine and fluoride analyzers at the
South Water Treatment Plant, $25,000 to replace two high zone and intermediate zone
meters, $34,000 to replace backwash media, and $16,000 as Y2 the cost (other Y2 in
Sanitary Sewer) to replace 4 hand held touch pad remote meter reader units.
Enclosed on pages RO through is a copy of the proposed line item 2008
budget for the Water division.
Sanitary Sewer (62)
The City's sanitary sewer utility provides for the transmission of sewage to the Seneca
Waste Water Treatment Plant. All sewage treatment for the City is provided at that plant
by the Metropolitan Council Environmental Services (MCES). The City's system
consists of 274 miles of mains and laterals and 12 sanitary lift stations. At year-end
2006, the City had 18,778 sanitary sewer connections to the system. Excluding the
depreciation costs, the City's budget provides for costs to maintain the collection system
(22.3%) and for the payments to MCES to provide for treatment (77.7%).
Again, excluding depreciation from the total for both years, the 2008 Sanitary Sewer
Budget is proposed at $5,151,200, an overall increase of $302,700, or 6.2% from the
2007 budget of $4,848,500. Factors contributing to the increase are included in the
department budget narrative to follow. The budgeted depreciation expense included in
the 2008 budget is $610,400.
In general, the primary cost for the sanitary sewer utility is the MCES disposal charge,
which is estimated for 2008 at $4,002,300.
An additional '/z utilities technician worker is proposed to be added to the personnel
complement with the other % accounted for in the Water department. An appropriation
for this position is retained in the budget as a placeholder at this time pending additional
review before the final budget is adopted. There is an allocation of $23,200 for seasonal
and intern assistance.
~a
Capital outlay appropriations include $14,000 for two Gas/02 monitors required by
OSHA, and $16,000 as %2 the cost (other Y2 in Water) to replace four hand held touch
pad remote meter reader units.
Enclosed on pages - through cNP is a copy of the proposed line item 2008
budget for the Sanitary Sewer division.
Street Lighting (63)
The City's street lighting utility provides for the operation of neighborhood street lighting,
major intersection lighting, and signals. User fees are used primarily on a pass through
basis to pay energy costs to provide the lighting; however, the fees include an increasing
component for the City's maintenance responsibilities related to the various types of
lights. At year-end 2006, 14,793 customers were being billed for 3,430 neighborhood
lights provided by that system. In addition, 18,881 customers were being billed for
community lights (major intersection lighting, and signals). The Street Lighting proposed
budget is increasing by $3,700 or.8% from $491,800 in 2007 to $495,500 in 2008,
excluding depreciation in both years. Factors contributing to the increase are included in
the department budget narrative to follow.
There are no personnel accounted for in this operating budget. However, there is a
depreciation expense of $12,800 included in this budget for 2008.
There is no proposed capital included in the 2008 Street Lighting budget.
Enclosed on pages - through is a copy of the proposed line item 2008
budget for the Street Lighting utility.
Storm Drainage (64)
The City's storm sewer system consisting of over 200 miles of pipe, 400+ inter-
connected ponds, and 20 lift stations is designed to collect and transmit run-off to the
Minnesota River. At year-end 2006, 18,896 customers were being billed for storm
drainage/water quality.
Excluding depreciation the 2008 proposed Storm Drainage budget is $223,500 reflecting
an increase of $33,200 or 17.5% over the 2007 budget of $190,300. Factors
contributing to the above average increase are included in the department budget
narrative to follow. Five (5) years ago, the storm drainage and water quality budgets
were separated for budget and accounting purposes. The storm drainage budget
reflects only those costs associated with the conveyance and maintenance of the storm
drainage system. The 2008 budgeted depreciation amount included is $967,100.
There are no changes proposed to the current complement of personnel in the Storm
Drainage utility. Capital outlay requests for consideration include $30,000 for pond
dredging and $40,000 to upgrade four major storm water lift stations.
Enclosed on pages- through is a copy of the proposed line item 2008
budget for the Strom Drainage division.
~3
Water Quality (65)
The mission the Water Quality Department is to protect and improve the natural,
esthetic, and recreational qualities of Eagan's lakes, ponds, and wetlands for the
enjoyment and use by present and future residents of the City and region.
Eagan has over 375 natural lakes, ponds, and wetlands larger than one acre, and over
80 percent of them are incorporated into the City's storm water system. The Water
Quality budget reflects only those costs necessary to improve and maintain the highest
level of water quality in various ponds and lakes.
The 2008 proposed Water Quality Budget excluding depreciation is $594,800 reflecting
an increase of $12,100 or 2.1% over the 2007 budget of $582,700. The 2008 budgeted
depreciation amount included is $34,300.
Capital outlay appropriations include $1,800 for a replacement canoe.
Enclosed on pages , through is a copy of the proposed line item 2007
budget for the Water Quality division.
2008 Utilities Fund revenue estimates 9/1/2007
Detail by Dept
2008 Budget
PUBLIC UTILITIES ENTERPRISE FUND
Detail of Revenues
Actual Actual Budget Estimated
Acct 2005 2006 2007 200
DEPARTMENTAL:
Water
4505 Water Service Fees $3,875,420 $4,465,054 $4,613,000 $4,837,000
4506 Water Service Penalties 12,020 15,398 12,000 15,000
4507 Water Connection Permits 8,311 7,556 9,000 7,000
4509 Sale of Meters 49,906 43,587 50,000 42,000
4511 Sale of Property 3,565 4,370 - -
4512 Water Turn Off/On Fee 7,700 11,407 7,000 8,000
4521 Constr Meter Permits 3,182 1,400 2,000 2,000
4522 Acct Deposit Not Refunded (22) (8) - -
3,960,082 4,548,764 4,693,000 4,911,000
Sanitary Sewer
4530 Sanitary Sewer Service Fees 4,405,837 4,506,968 5,064,000 5,408,000
4531 Sanitary Sewer Penalties 13,790 18,117 14,000 15,000
4532 San Sewer Connection Permits 7,250 6,450 8,000 5,000
4,426,877 4,531,535 5,086,000 51428,000
Street Liahts
4550 Neighborhood Light Svc Fees 279,741 303,520 259,000 285,000
4551 Neighbrhd/Comm Lt Penalties 1,586 2,050 1,500 2,000
4560 Community Light Service Fees 69,441 96,132 202,000 222,000
350,768 401,702 462,500 509,000
Storm Drainaae/Water Quality
4540 Storm Drainage Service Fees 1,007,172 1,047,207 1,068,500 1,133,600
4541 Storm Drainage Penalties 3,112 4,088 3,000 4,000
1,010,284 1,051,295 1,071,500 1,137,600
NON-DEPARTMENTAL:
4031 Assmt Penalties and Interest 2,947 3,279 3,000 3,000
4120 Permits 4,368 - - -
4160 State PERA Aid 4,442 4,442 4,400 4,400
4226 Developer Escrow Reimbursmt 39,273 39,565 35,000 35,000
4228 Eng / Financial Information 553 125 - -
4230 Printed Material / Other Fees 9 4 - -
4242 Maint Equipment and Personnel 9,491 2,507 8,000 5,000
4243 Manual Reading-Ded Bill Meters 1,956 2,140 2,000 2,000
4246 Admn Fee on SAC Coll 240 - - -
4376 Merchandise Sales 47 38 - -
4605 Amort on Bond Premium 3,078 36,937 - 37,000
4610 Interest on Investments 1,050,327 1,340,893 1,460,400 1,040,000
4612 Interest on Assessments 64,906 80,075 64,800 75,000
4614 Interest onMCES 2,649 1,800 900 -
4615 Change in Fair Value of Inv (375,814) 165,523 - -
4617 Antenna Lease Admn Fees 4,000 4,000 - 2,000
4618 Site Survey / Eng Applic Review 500 2,000 -
4619 Antenna Lease Landscape Escow 2,000 4,000 - -
4620 Antenna Site Rent (excludes ECC) 376,883 140,819 209,000 305,200
4657 Sale of City Property - -
4658 Vehicle Sales 45,105 3,280 -
4664 Cost Sharing Payment 600 - - -
4672 Water Quality Dedication Fees 35,464 38,510 35,000 35,000
4675 Wetlands Conserv Appl Fee 700 800 - -
4680 Connection Charge-Water 239,035 137,676 230,000 135,000
4685 Conn Chg--Water Treatmt Plant 242,964 219,860 230,000 200,000
4691 Other Revenue 676 985 - -
4822 Other Reimbursements 12,991 15,017 10,000 10,000
4980 Transfers In - -
1,769,390 2,244,275 2,292,500 1,888,600
GRAND TOTAL 111.517.401 $12.777.571 $13.605.500 $13.874.200
15"
D11 of Eapo 2008 Proposed Budget Operating Budget
Public Utilities - Water Department (61)
Responsible Manager: Wayne Schwanz, Superintendent of Utilities
PURPOSE & DESCRIPTION
The purpose of the Public Utilities - Water Department is to:
• Continue operation and preventative maintenance of the sewer collection,
water distribution, and storm conveyance systems.
• Provide safe and clean drinking water for the City of Eagan.
• Maintain the quality of the drinking water supply and test for compliance to
all State and Federal requirements. Ili
The Public Utilities - Water Department is responsible for the following functions:
• Inspect and maintain the water distribution system, including point-of-use metering.
• Inspect and maintain the storm water conveyance system and assist with water quality objectives.
• Supply and treat all potable water needed within the City including sampling, testing and chemical
treatment to assure water quality that meets or exceeds State and Federal health standards. Inspect and
maintain storage facilities, wells, and pressure control stations.
• Respond to customer complaints.
• Assist other departments when needed.
• Respond to emergency repairs.
PERFORMANCE INDICATORS
2005 2006 2007 2008
Description Actual Actual Estimate Target
Water main breaks 7 11 7 11
Gallons of safe drinking water produced
per day per capita 130 149 140 149
MN Dept. of Health samples collected 840 840 840 870
Backflow preventers tested 581 764 620 850
Meter service calls 1,608 1,613 1,608 1,613
Customer service calls 2,293 2,272 2,293 2,272
Hydrants flushed 3,800 3,874 3,850 3,874
Hydrants painted 592 680 600 680
Locates performed 8,700 8,801 9,000 8,800
lip
City of Eagan 2008 Proposed Budget Operating Budget
Public Utilities - Water Department (61)
Responsible Manager: Wayne Schwanz, Superintendent of Utilities
Capital HIGHLIGHTS & CHANGES
Expenditures by Category Outlay Overview: The Water budget is up $1,642,100, or
2.73% 52%, primarily due to $1,435,200 in planned
Merchandise maintenance to the Safari and Lexington
for Resale reservoirs. Apart from these reservoir maintenance
[Services & 1.72% costs, the budget is up $206,900, or 6.6%, because
other of increased costs for fuel, energy, a proposed full-
harges i'ersonal time position, and replacement of some
9.11% Services parts/equipment at the South Water Treatment
Parts & 22.55%
Supplies plant.
3.90%
Hiahliaht/Chanae 1: Rehabilitation of two
reservoirs-Lexington and Safari-as identified in a study by SEH that places them on a 15-year cycle for
painting and structural repairs. Delaying the repairs beyond 2008 would increase annual maintenance costs
significantly.
Financial Impact: Total cost for Lexington is $864,500; total cost for Safari is $570,700.
Service Level Impact: Scheduled maintenance allows the City to keep adequate amounts of water stored
safely. If the tanks are not rehabilitated at this time, they may not pass the 2008 State Health Department
inspections, requiring them to be placed out of service and removing 10 million gallons from storage.
Hiahliaht/Channe 2: Electricity and natural gas energy costs for the well and treatment plant pumps and heating
have increased both in unit prices as well as projected quantities. Unit prices and quantities of chemical used for
treatment are expected to increase as well.
Financial Impact: Electricity is up $121,500 and natural gas is up $22,800. A portion of these increases is
the community's
related to increased water sales and will be offset by revenues. No chane Service Level Impact: with service level. We ave been able to
rating availabhe from the MN Department of Health.
peak demand over years
Hiahliaht/Chanae 3: Add a full-time Utilities Technician (budgeted half in Water Division, half in Sewer Division)
responsible for research and documentation necessary to maintain standards for the AWWA, DNR, and
Minnesota Department of Health. These activities are being performed out of classification by full-time
maintenance employees or intern staff under GIS. Staff intends to eliminate intern positions within the GIS
Operation, and to eliminate one of the System Analyst positions.
Financial Impact: Total cost of the position is $66,100. Although the new position is an increase to personnel, it
is being offset by the elimination of the GIS interns and the vacancy of the System Analyst position ($80,200).
Service Level Impact: This position is necessary to continue technical and field-related activities performed by
the System Analyst who retired in 2007. By not creating and filling the new position, the number of intern staff will
have to be increased and more of the workload for outside agencies will be shifted to full-time maintenance
employees which would remove them from field operations that will result in an increase in sewer block-ups and
disruption to the water distribution system.
Hiahliaht/Chanae 4: Replace South Water Treatment plant parts necessary for maintenance due to wear and
tear and the effect of chlorine and fluoride on the equipment: chlorine leak detector feed units and fluoride
analyzers; high zone and intermediate zone effluent meters; add 34 totes of media (anthracite coal) to cells. The
South Water Treatment plant has been in service since 1991.
Financial Impact: Total cost is $109,000. The actual cost of the equipment has not risen that much in over the
15 years and the cost is comparable to the original equipment cost.
Service Level Impact: Replacement parts will allow safe and clean water to continue to be delivered to
residents. The media is necessary to bring the cells back to the original standards for treatment operations. By
not replacing the equipment on a scheduled operation and maintenance schedule, the equipment could fail and
cause a plant shutdown.
/G
17
City of Eapa 2008 Proposed Budget Operating Budget
Public Utilities - Water Department (61)
Responsible Manager: Wayne Schwanz, Superintendent of Utilities
EXPENDITURE SUMMARY
Actual Actual Budget Budget
Expenditure 2005 2006 2007 2008
Personal Services $ 702,624 $ 827,484 $1,096,000 $1,081,300
Parts and Supplies 267,199 302,374 225,300 186,900
Services and Other Charges 1,469,693 1,724,433 1,685,200 3,313,700
Capital Outlay 22,643 591 64,000 130,700
Construction Projects 112,198 (58,054) - -
Transfer Out 302,863 - - -
Merchandise for Resale - - 82,500 82,500
Total $ 2,877,220 $ 2,796,828 $ 3,153,000 $ 4,795,100
Bond Payment - Principal 645,000 675,000 715,000 725,000
Bond Payment - Interest 235,979 183,895 148,000 112,300
Paying Agent/Bond Destrctn. Fee - 403 500 500
Debt Service Payments 880,979 859,297 863,500 837,800
Depreciation Expense $ 1,824,624 $ 1,836,404 $ 1,804,200 $ 1,822,800
l
City of Eagan 2008 Proposed Budget Operating Budget
Public Utilities -Water Department (61)
Responsible Manager: Wayne Schwanz, Superintendent of Utilities
POSITION INVENTORY
Personnel 2005 2006 2007 2008 Hours
Superintendent 0 0 0.67 0.67 1,394
1 2,080
Water Production/Treatment Supervisor 1 1 1 686
Utility Field Operations Supervisor 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33
Administrative Assistant (System Analyst) 0.67 1.67 1.67 1.00 2,080
1 2,080
Senior GIS Technician 1 1
GIS Technician 1 1 1 1 2,080
Clerical V 1 0 0 0
0 0 0,5 1,040
Utilities Technician 0 1 1 1 2,080
Utilities Inspector 1
3 3 3 6,240
System Maintenance Workers 3 4 4
Water Treatment/Production Workers 3 3 8,320
Total 12 12 13.67 13.5 28,080
2008 WORK PLAN
Activit
Routine
1 Water Administration
2 Water Field Operation/Repair
3 Erosion control
4 GIS/GPS Administration
5 Treatment Plant/Production
6 Emergency call outs
City of Evan 2008 Proposed Budget Operating Budget
Public Utilities - Water Department (61)
Responsible Manager: Wayne Schwanz, Superintendent of Utilities
LINE ITEM DETAIL
Actual Actual Budget Budget
Acct PERSONAL SERVICES 2005 2006 2007 2008
6110 SALARIES AND WAGES-REGULAR $ 516,584 $ 602,116 $ 752,000 $ 767,400
6112 OVERTIME-REGULAR 13,487 11,884 30,400 31,000
6130 SALARIES AND WAGES-TEMPORARY 16,631 22,432 54,900 18,600
6131 OVERTIME - TEMPORARY - 282 - -
6142 PERA-COORDINATED 29,497 37,128 49,600 51,900
6144 FICA 39,843 45,993 64,100 62,500
6151 HEALTH INSURANCE 68,919 85,874 124,400 119,500
6152 LIFE 1,072 1,232 - -
6154 DISABILITY - LONG TERM 2,056 2,354 - -
6155 WORKERS COMPENSATION 14,535 18,189 20,600 30,400
TOTAL PERSONAL SERVICES 702,624 827,484 1,096,000 1,081,300
PARTS & SUPPLIES
6210 OFFICE SUPPLIES 1,332 3,064 2,400 3,000
6211 OFFICE PRINTED MATERIAUFORMS 120 204 200 200
6215 REFERENCE MATERIALS - 355 - -
6220 OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL 1,324 2,064 2,000 2,400
6222 MEDICAURESCUE/SAFETY SUPPLIES 390 1,815 1,000 1,500
6223 BUILDING/CLEANING SUPPLIES 1,908 3,212 2,000 3,200
6224 CLOTHING/PERSONAL EQUIPMENT 2,309 2,426 2,900 2,900
6230 REPAIR/MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES-GENERAL 142 1,262 - 1,200
6231 MOBILE EQUIP REPAIR PARTS 6,053 2,474 3,600 3,600
6232 SMALL EQUIPMENT REPAIR PARTS 36 - 300 300
6233 BUILDING REPAIR SUPPLIES 388 4,069 500 4,000
6235 FUEL, LUBRICANTS, ADDITIVES 15,984 21,779 22,900 19,300
6240 SMALL TOOLS 1,613 2,373 300 300
6244 CHEMICALS & CHEMICAL PRODUCTS 57,534 64,028 42,700 49,500
6250 LANDSCAPE MATERIAL & SUPPLIES 51 10,015 500 2,900
6255 STREET REPAIR SUPPLIES 1,973 24,681 2,000 2,000
6257 SIGNS & STRIPING MATERIAL 272 - 300 300
6260 UTILITY SYSTEM PARTS/SUPPLIES 131,959 104,842 80,500 82,500
6270 COMPUTER SOFTWARE 43,811 53,711 61,200 7,800
TOTAL PARTS & SUPPLIES 267,199 302,374 225,300 186,900
SERVICES & OTHER CHARGES
6310 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES-GENERAL 74,453 75,678 18,600 32,800
6314 AUDITING 2,700 3,800 3,900 3,900
6315 FINANCIAL NON-AUDIT 1,491 - - -
6323 TESTING SERVICES 5,986 9,101 5,700 8,200
6346 POSTAGE 14,225 13,240 15,600 16,400
6347 TELEPHONE SERVICE & LINE CHG 4,309 4,929 4,500 5,100
6351 PAGER SERVICE FEES 829 577 800 800
6352 TELEPHONE CIRCUITS 1,600 1,524 1,600 1,600
6353 PERSONAL AUTO/PARKING 170 222 - -
6354 CAR WASHES 45 38 - -
6355 CELLULAR TELEPHONE SERVICE 5,290 2,277 3,500 3,500
6356 ONE CALL SERVICE FEE - - 6,400 6,200
6370 GENERAL PRINTING AND BINDING $ 5,494 $ 6,281 $ 5,800 $ 11,800
ev"N
41~ City of Eapo 2008 Proposed Budget Operating Budget
Public Utilities - Water Department (61)
Responsible Manager: Wayne Schwanz, Superintendent of Utilities
LINE ITEM DETAIL(CONT'D)
Actual Actual Budget Budget
Acct PERSONAL SERVICES 2005 2006 2007 2008
6385 INSURANCE $ 62,300 $ 63,900 $ 67,100 $ 69,100
6409 ELECTRICITY-WELLS/BOOSTER STN 484,237 592,005 578,500 700,000
6410 NATURAL GAS SERVICE 96,660 123,582 109,400 132,200
6425 MOBILE EQUIPMENT REPAIR LABOR 512 60 500 500
6427 BLDG OPERATIONS/REPAIR-LABOR 3,243 5,240 800 5,000
6429 STREET REPAIR-LABOR 7,784 17,931 7,700 18,000
6432 UTILITY SYSTEM REPAIR-LABOR 7,752 61,949 110,100 1,502,000
6457 MACHINERY & EQUIPMENT-RENTAL - 991 - -
6475 MISCELLANEOUS 5,351 - - -
6476 CONFERENCES AND SCHOOLS 5,567 4,851 8,500 10,600
6477 LOCAL MEETING EXPENSE 56 95 100 -
6479 DUES AND SUBSCRIPTIONS 300 2,784 3,600 3,900
6480 LICENSES, PERMITS AND TAXES 38,587 59,648 38,000 51,200
6482 AWARDS, JUDGEMENTS, AND LOSSES - 88 - -
6487 VISA/MC BANK CHARGES 857 1,043 - -
6493 DAK CTY SA FEES 1,383 1,420 - -
6505 PUBLIC UTILITY ADMIN FEE 524,600 579,100 615,600 643,800
6506 TRANSFER FOR CENTRAL SVCS 106,900 84,006 56,900 57,600
6535 OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES - 1,336 5,300 6,700
6539 WASTE REMOVAUSANITATION SERV 197 344 - -
6569 MAINTENANCE CONTRACTS 6,815 6,393 5,800 11,900
6575 MCES DISPOSAL CHARGES - - 10,900 10,900
OTHER SERVICES AND CHARGES 1,469,693 1,724,433 1,685,200 3,313,700
CAPITAL OUTLAY
6640 MACHINERY/EQUIPMENT - 344 - -
6670 OTHER EQUIPMENT 22,643 - 7,000 130,700
6680 MOBILE EQUIPMENT - 247 57,000 -
CAPITAL OUTLAY 22,643 591 64,000 130,700
CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS
6700 CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS 112,198 (58,054) - -
CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS 112,198 (58,054) - -
TRANSFER OUT
6805 TRANSFER OUT 302,863 - -
TRANSFER OUT 302,863 - - -
MERCHANDISE FOR RESALE
6855 MERCHANDISE FOR RESALE - - 82,500 82,500
MERCHANDISE FOR RESALE - - 82,500 82,500
TOTAL WATER DEPARTMENT 12,877,220 $ 2,796,828 5 3,153,000 $ 4,795,100
52.08%
DEBT SERVICE
6490 BOND PAYMENT - PRINCIPAL 645,000 675,000 715,000 725,000
6491 BOND PAYMENT -INTEREST 235,979 183,895 148,000 112,300
6492 PAYING AGENT/BOND DESTRCTN FEE - 403 500 500
TOTAL DEBT SERVICE 880,979 859,297 863,500 837,800
6488 DEPRECIATION EXPENSE $ 1,824,624 $1,836,404 $ 1,804,200 $ 1,822,800
a~
City of Evan 2008 Proposed Budget Operating Budget
Public Utilities - Sewer Department (62)
Responsible Manager: Wayne Schwanz, Superintendent of Utilities
PURPOSE & DESCRIPTION
The purpose of the Public Utilities - Sewer Department is to:
Provide uninterrupted sanitary sewer collection to the City of Eagan.
Meet all Federal standards in waste water management.
The Public Utilities - Sewer Department is responsible for the following functions:
Maintain sanitary sewer collection system including pipes, manholes, and
lift stations.
Assist other departments as directed.
Report to all State and Federal agencies required by law.
Inspect and maintain the waste water collection system and ensure its sanitary conveyance to the
Metropolitan Treatment Facility at Seneca.
PERFORMANCE INDICATORS
2005 2006 2007 2008
Description Actual Actual Estimate Target
Televised sewer pipe, in feet 73,000 69,803 73,000 0
Sewer pipe jetted, in miles 99 93 99 0
Sewer pipe relined, in feet 5,000 5,000 5,000 0
New sewer service accounts 126 120 100 0
City of Eagan 2008 Proposed Budget Operating Budget
Public Utilities - Sewer Department (62)
Responsible Manager: Wayne Schwanz, Superintendent of Utilities
HIGHLIGHTS & CHANGES
Services & Expenditures by Category DACES Wastewater Overview: The Sewer division budget is up
$302,700, or 6.2%, primarily due to a $503,300
other Charges
Charges 9% increase (14.4%) in MCES wastewater treatment
75*-,
12.47°° charges offset by a $185,000 decrease in capital
Parts & expenditures.
Supplies
1.94% Hisahliaaht/Chansae 1: At the end of August, the
Personal City was notified by the Metropolitan Council
Capital Environmental Services (MCES) that charges for
Services outlay wastewater treatment for the City will be up 14.4%
9.17% 0.63% for 2008. MCES's total budget is up 5.4%, and
Eagan's flow increased by 2.9% at the same time total flow metro-wide decreased by 5.2%, thus Eagan's
proportion of the total charges is up sharply. Such a large rate increase was unexpected and Public Works staff
is investigating the numbers. MCES charges account for more than 75% of the total Sewer division expenditures.
Financial Impact: Assuming no change resulting from staffs investigation, the $503,300 increase will be
factored into 2008 sewer utility rate studies to be completed by staff later this year. In a very simplistic analysis,
the increase equates to $1.87 per resident per quarter. Of course, businesses will participate in the rate increase
as well.
Service Level Impact: Service level is not impacted by the increase in MCES charges.
Hichlitaht/Chanue 2: The Operations Analyst position (0.33 FTE) vacated by a retirement is not being replaced
in kind. However, a lower pay range Utility technician (0.5 FTE) is proposed as a new position.
Financial Impact: This keeps the Personal Services portion of the budget at a 0.4% increase in lieu of a
projected 3.5% increase with no changes.
Service Level Impact: It is anticipated that the proposed reassignment of administrative duties to the Systems
Analyst position and field/technical duties to the new Utilities Technician will be able to maintain the same level of
service delivery.
Hiahlisaht/Chansae 3: The 3-year charge from LOGIS for conversion of the Utility Billing system software and
implementation was completed in 2007 and no longer needs to be budgeted for.
Financial Impact: Both Water and Sewer division expenditures are down $41,200 in 2008.
Service Level Impact: It is anticipated that Utility billing service delivery will remain solid for many years with this
recent technology enhancement. In addition, the software has the capability to enable online viewing and
payment of bills, which LOGIS plans to incorporate into a secondary phase of implementation.
EXPENDITURE SUMMARY
Actual Actual Budget Budget
Expenditure 2005 2006 2007 2008
Personal Services $ 424,485 $ 374,437 $ 434,100 $ 436,000
Parts and Supplies 79,076 92,799 135,700 92,200
Services and Other Charges 515,208 605,735 564,700 590,700
MCES Disposal Charges 3,253,526 3,403,331 3,499,000 4,002,300
Capital Outlay 6,451 13,774 215,000 30,000
Transfer Out 6,410 79,037
Total $ 4,285,156 $ 4,569,113 $ 4,848,500 $ 5,151,200
Depreciation Expense $ 609,874 $ 614,589 $ 607,700 $ 610,400
0~3
My of EOPH 2008 Proposed Budget Operating Budget
Public Utilities - Sewer Department (62)
Responsible Manager: Wayne Schwanz, Superintendent of Utilities
POSITION INVENTORY
Personnel 2005 2006 2007 2008 Hours
Superintendent 0 0 0.33 0.33 693
Utilities Operations Supervisor 0.67 0.67 0.67 0.67 1,387
System Maintenance Workers 5 5 4 4 8,320
Utilities Technician 0 0 0 0.5 1,040
Administrative Assistant (System Analyst) 0.33 0.33 0.33 0 -
Total 6 6 5.33 5.50 11,440
2008 WORK PLAN
Activity
Routine
1 Sanitary sewer administration
2 Sanitary Field Operation/Repair
3 Storm sewer field maintenance
4 Emergency call outs
City of Eapn 2008 Proposed Budget Operating Budget
Public Utilities - Sewer Department (62)
Responsible Manager: Wayne Schwanz, Superintendent of Utilities
LINE ITEM DETAIL
Actual Actual Budget Budget
Acct PERSONAL SERVICES 2005 2006 2007 2008
6110 SALARIES AND WAGES-REGULAR $ 273,652 $ 265,895 $ 289,000 $ 303,100
6112 OVERTIME-REGULAR 15,704 5,092 13,400 13,700
6130 SALARIES AND WAGES-TEMPORARY 15,296 15,227 20,800 9,300
6131 OVERTIME-TEMPORARY 26 252 - -
6142 PERA-COORDINATED 16,057 16,061 18,900 20,600
6144 FICA 22,470 21,493 24,700 24,900
6151 HEALTH INSURANCE 36,467 36,925 48,500 43,100
6152 LIFE 558 499 - -
6154 DISABILITY - LONG TERM 1,055 949 - -
6155. WORKERS COMPENSATION 12,957 12,044 18,800 21,300
6157 RETIREE INSURANCE FUNDING 30,243 - - -
TOTAL PERSONAL SERVICES 424,485 374,437 434,100 436,000
PARTS & SUPPLIES
6210 OFFICE SUPPLIES 1,235 1,556 2,100 2,100
6211 OFFICE PRINTED MATERIAUFORMS 118 - - -
6220 OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL 841 911 1,000 1,000
6222 MEDICAURESCUE/SAFETY SUPPLIES 901 1,017 1,000 1,200
6223 BUILDING/CLEANING SUPPLIES 67 406 100 100
6224 CLOTHING/PERSONAL EQUIPMENT 2,048 2,137 1,400 1,400
6230 REPAIR/MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES- 59 - - -
6231 MOBILE EQUIP REPAIR PARTS 6,855 3,169 6,500 5,200
6235 FUEL, LUBRICANTS, ADDITIVES 13,194 16,772 17,500 16,300
6240 SMALL TOOLS 760 530 200 200
6241 SHOP MATERIALS 386 - - -
6255 STREET REPAIR SUPPLIES 874 407 1,000 1,000
6257 SIGNS & STRIPING MATERIAL - - 200 200
6260 UTILITY SYSTEM PARTS/SUPPLIES 7,190 17,947 63,500 63,500
6270 COMPUTER SOFTWARE 44,548 47,947 41,200 -
TOTAL PARTS & SUPPLIES 79,076 92,799 135,700 92,200
SERVICES & OTHER CHARGES
6310 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES-GENERAL 10,486 27,908 18,600 18,600
6312 ENGINEERING 14,197 -
6314 AUDITING 6,100 3,800 3,900 3,900
6315 FINANCIAL NON-AUDIT 1,491 - - -
6346 POSTAGE 12,524 13,194 15,600 16,400
6347 TELEPHONE SERVICE & LINE CHG 3,109 4,557 3,000 4,400
6351 PAGER SERVICE FEES 371 484 300 300
6352 TELEPHONE CIRCUITS 1,978 2,292 2,000 2,000
6353 PERSONAL AUTO/PARKING 89 199 - -
6355 CELLULAR TELEPHONE SERVICE 2,048 1,975 1,800 1,900
6356 ONE CALL SERVICE FEES 11,990 13,155 6,400 6,400
6370 GENERAL PRINTING AND BINDING 731
6385 INSURANCE 16,500 14,700 15,400 15,900
6405 ELECTRICITY $ 183 $ 220 $ - $ -
City of Bapfl 2008 Proposed Budget Operating Budget
Public Utilities - Sewer Department (62)
Responsible Manager: Wayne Schwanz, Superintendent of Utilities
LINE ITEM DETAIL(CONT'D)
Actual Actual Budget Budget
2005 2006 2007 2008
6408 ELECTRICITY-LIFT STATIONS $ 19,360 $ 19,111 $ 21,000 $ 21,000
6425 MOBILE EQUIPMENT REPAIR LABOR 1,064 129 - 1,000
6427 BUILDING OPERATIONS/REPAIR-LAB 2,620 5,240 - 1,000
6429 STREET REPAIR-LABOR 1,329 6,058 - 1,000
6430 COMMUNICATION SYSTEM RPR-LABOR - - 400 400
6432 UTILITY SYSTEM REPAIR-LABOR 112,818 147,290 143,000 148,000
6457 MACHINERY AND EQUIPMENT - 401 1,000 1,000
6476 CONFERENCES AND SCHOOLS 5,185 5,165 2,700 3,900
6477 LOCAL MEETING EXPENSES 49 57 - 300
6479 DUES AND SUBSCRIPTIONS 22 347 - -
6480 LICENSES, PERMITS AND TAXES 172 3,772 1,000 1,000
6487 VISA/MC BANK CHARGES 857 1,043 - -
6505 PUBLIC UTILITY ADMIN FEE 249,700 279,116 293,000 306,400
6506 TRANSFER FOR CENTRAL SVCS 53,400 38,684 28,500 28,800
6535 OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES - - 5,300 5,300
6539 WASTE REMOVAUSANITATION 156 344 - -
6569 MAINTENANCE CONTRACTS 1,607 1,566 1,800 1,800
6575 MCES DISPOSAL CHARGES 3,253,526 3,403,331 3,499,000 4,002,300
OTHER SERVICES AND CHARGES 3,768,734 4,009,066 4,063,700 4,593,000
CAPITAL OUTLAY
6640 MACHINERY/EQUIPMENT - 13,288 - -
6670 OTHER EQUIPMENT 6,407 - 14,000 30,000
6680 MOBILE EQUIPMENT - 486 201,000 -
6700 CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS 44 - - -
CAPITAL OUTLAY 6,451 13,774 215,000 30,000
TRANSFER OUT
6805 TRANSFER OUT 6,410 79,037 -
TRANSFER OUT 6,410 79,037 - -
TOTAL SEWER DEPARTMENT $ 4,285,156 $ 4,569,113 $ 4,848,500 $ 5,151,200
6.24%
6488 DEPRECIATION EXPENSE $ 609,874 $ 614,589 $ 607,700 $ 610,400
City of Eapn 2008 Proposed Budget Operating Budget
Public Utilities - Street Lighting (63)
Responsible Manager: Russ Matthys, City Engineer
PURPOSE & DESCRIPTION
The purpose of the Public Utilities - Street Lighting Department is to:
• Provide adequate lighting for public safety on city streets and at signalized intersections
within the City of Eagan.
• Ensure the electrical provisions for the traffic control signals within the City of Eagan.
• Coordinate the maintenance of the street lighting system for optimal performance.
• Administer the maintenance of the traffic control signals' operation and infrastructure.
The Public Utilities - Street Lighting Department is responsible for the following functions:
• Coordinate the installation of street lights on all streets within City jurisdiction, both private
developments or public improvements.
• Address maintenance needs of the street lighting system & traffic control signals within the City, including
light replacement, pole repair/refurbishment.
• Provide field surveying, preparation of feasibility studies, reports and staff support at Council meetings for
public improvements for street lights.
• Manage the reimbursement of electrical services for street lighting and traffic signals.
• Update Capital Improvement Program for City's street light and traffic control signals.
• Coordinate/present Public Hearings/Final Assessment Hearings for City improvements for street lights.
PERFORMANCE INDICATORS
2005 2006 2007 2008
Description Actual Actual Estimate Target
Street lights maintained 3,443 3,489 3,532 3,566
New street lights installed 39 46 43 34
Upgrade existing street lights 7 8 4 8
Traffic signals 68 69 71 73
New traffic signals installed 1 1 2 2
o~~
City of Eagan 2008 Proposed Budget Operating Budget
Public Utilities - Street Lighting Department (63)
Responsible Manager: Russ Matthys, City Engineer
HIGHLIGHTS & CHANGES
Expenditures by Category Overview: The Street Lighting budget shows an
increase of 0.8% due mainly to an anticipated
increase in the cost of electricity with other budget
costs remaining equal or decreasing.
Services &
Other Hiahliaht/Channe 1: Electricity cost increase of
Charges 3.1 % anticipated.
1.v . 100°i° Financial Impact: Additional cost of $11,300 over
the 2007 budget of $370,000.
Service Level Impact: Anticipated increase in the
cost of electricity, greater cost responsibility for
some traffic control signals, and the installation of new street lights should be addressed by an increase in service
fee rates and additional customers in new developments.
Hiahliaht/Channe 2: A one-year decrease in the approved Street Lights CIP improvements will decrease
relevant costs by 28.1
Financial Impact: Reduced cost of $9,000 over the 2007 budget of $41,000.
Service Level Impact: Last year's $41,000 CIP expenditure was anticipated to be the highest in the five-year
period 2007-11. This year's proposed expense of $32,000 is getting closer to the expected annual average of
$22,400 over the five year period.
LINE ITEM DETAIL
Actual Actual Budget Budget
Acct SERVICES & OTHER CHARGES 2005 2006 2007 2008
6315 FINANCIAL - NON-AUDIT $ 1,102 $ - $ 2,800 $ 2,800
6406 ELECTRICITY-STREET LIGHTS 312,409 320,825 355,000 365,700
6407 ELECTRICITY-SIGNAL LIGHTS 18,105 15,669 15,000 15,600
6411 UTILITY SYSTEM STREETLIGHT 11,937 (5,655) 41,000 32,000
6432 UTILITY SYSTEM REPAIR-LABOR 50,996 35,571 41,200 41,200
6505 PUBLIC UTILITY ADMIN FEE 38,000 29,000 30,800 32,200
6535 OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 13,465 404 6,000 6,000
OTHER SERVICES AND CHARGES 446,014 395,815 491,800 495,500
TOTAL STREET LIGHTING DEPARTMENT $ 446,014 $ 395,815 $ 491,800 $ 495,500
0.75%
6488 DEPRECIATION EXPENSE $ 12,797 $ 12,797 $ 12,800 $ 12,800
City of Evan 2008 Proposed Budget Operating Budget
Public Utilities - Storm Drainage Department (64)
Responsible Manager: Wayne Schwanz, Superintendent of Utilities
PURPOSE & DESCRIPTION
The purpose of the Public Utilities - Storm Drainage Department is to:
• Maintain the City's collection and conveyance system for excess
surface water runoff.
The Public Utilities - Storm Drainage Department is responsible for the
i
following functions:
• Inspect and maintain drainage system consisting of pipes, ponds and pumping stations.
• Maintain the inlets and outlets for ponds including the removal of any erosion/siltation that restricts the
flow or limits ponding capacities.
• Respond to emergency pumping station alarms or resident calls during major peak events.
• Assist with Water Quality programs and objectives.
PERFORMANCE INDICATORS
2005 2006 2007 2008
Description Actual Actual Estimate Target
Televised storm pipes, in miles 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000
Drainage complaints received 22 15 18 18
Construction inspections performed 157 134 160 160
Ponds inspected 136 140 140 140
Control structures checked 96 142 100 100
C~
QI
City of Eap 2008 Proposed Budget Operating Budget
Public Utilities - Storm Drainage Department (64)
Responsible Manager: Wayne Schwanz, Superintendent of Utilities
HIGHLIGHTS & CHANGES
Capital Expenditures by Category
Outlay Personal Overview: The Storm Drainage budget is up
31.32% Services $33,200, or 17.5%, due to capital equipment and
16.24% storm pond dredging costs. All other operational
aspects of this budget reflect nominal inflationary
increases.
Services & Parts &
Other Supplies Hiahlisaht/Chanae 1: Acquisition and installation
Charges 5.19% of "System Control And Data Acquisition" (SCADA)
47.25% controls on 4 of our higher priority storm water
pumping stations (Hurley, Carlson, Country Hollow
and Schwanz Lake).
Financial Impact: 4 locations @ $10,000 for a total of $40,000.
Service Level Impact: This improvement provides a higher level of monitoring and remote control/response for
pump malfunctions and manual control overrides allowing more immediate and effective control of potential
flooding situations.
Hiahliaht/Chanue 2: Various lakes, ponds and detention basins scattered throughout the system are slowly
starting to fill up with sediment and debris, requiring major excavation and dredging improvement to restore the
pond basin to its original storage capabilities.
Financial Impact: Since this is anticipated to be an ongoing maintenance program, a $30,000 annual allocation
is proposed.
Service Level Impact: The various lakes, ponds and storm water detention basins need to be maintained to
insure that the original storage capacity is maintained and that the storm drainage capabilities of the ponds can
operate unimpeded, thereby preventing flooding of adjacent properties.
Hiehliaht/Chanue 3: The budget estimate for electricity for lift stations is weather dependent. A comparison was
made to the last 10-year average precipitation amount and to the last 4-year average of actual costs. The
resulting budget estimate is 24% less than the 2007 budget. Energy costs are difficult to accurately predict as
they are closely tied to weather.
Financial Impact: The 2008 budget is down $19,900 from 2007.
Service Level Impact: It is a necessity to run the storm water pumping stations as pond and lake levels dictate
based on rainfall amounts to prevent flooding of adjacent property.
EXPENDITURE SUMMARY
Actual Actual Budget Budget
Expenditure 2005 2006 2007 2008
Personal Services 144,736 $ 131,812 $ 34,500 $ 36,300
Parts and Supplies 12,088 24,027 11,600 11,600
Services and Other Charges 128,163 114,187 144,200 105,600
Capital Outlay 1,275 - - 70,000
Construction Projects 2,544 337 - -
Total $ 288,806 $ 270,363 $ 190,300 $ 223,500
Depreciation Expense $ 963,769 $ 968,877 $ 960,500 $ 967,100
3d
City OI Eapo 2008 Proposed Budget
Operating Budget
Public Utilities - Storm Drainage Department (64)
Responsible Manager: Wayne Schwanz, Superintendent of Utilities
POSITION INVENTORY
Personnel 2005 2006 2007 2008 Hours
System Maintenance Workers 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 1,040
Total 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 1,040
2008 WORK PLAN
Activity
Routine
1 Inspection/clean-up of structures
2 Lift station maintenance
3 Weed harvesting
4 Water quality support
5 Aeration
6 Storm response
31
My of Eagan 2008 Proposed Budget Operating Budget
Public Utilities - Storm Drainage Department (64)
Responsible Manager: Wayne Schwanz, Superintendent of Utilities
LINE ITEM DETAIL
Actual Actual Budget Budget
Acct PERSONAL SERVICES 2005 2006 2007 2008
6110 SALARIES AND WAGES-REGULAR $ 104,182 $ 95,120 $ 24,500 $ 25,406-
6112 OVERTIME-REGULAR 1,730 857 1,100 1,100
6130 SALARIES AND WAGES-TEMPORARY 6,523 6,036 - -
6142 PERA-COORDINATED 5,941 5,742 1,600 1,700
6144 FICA 8,082 7,190 2,000 2,000
6151 HEALTH INSURANCE 13,815 13,082 4,500 5,100
6152 LIFE 223 195 - -
6154 DISABILITY - LONG TERM 426 373 - -
6155 WORKERS COMPENSATION 3,814 3,217 800 1,000
TOTAL PERSONAL SERVICES 144,736 131,812 34,500 36,300
PARTS & SUPPLIES
6210 OFFICE SUPPLIES 47 245 100 100
6220 OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL 9 28 500 500
6222 MEDICAURESCUE/SAFETY SUPPLIES 6 - 200 200
6224 CLOTHING/PERSONAL EQUIPMENT 356 539 300 300
6232 SMALL EQUIPMENT REPAIR PARTS - - 100 100
6234 FIELD/OTHER EQUIPMENT REPAIR - - 100 100
6240 SMALL TOOLS - 5 300 300
6250 LANDSCAPE MATERIAL & SUPPLIES 28 552 - -
6255 STREET REPAIR SUPPLIES - 192 - -
6256 SNOW REMOVAUICE CONTROL SUPPLIES 40 - - -
6257 SIGNS & STRIPING MATERIAL 401 - - -
6260 UTILITY SYSTEM PARTS/SUPPLIES 10,911 17,549 10,000 10,000
6270 COMPUTER SOFTWARE 290 4,917 - -
TOTAL PARTS & SUPPLIES 12,088 24,027 11,600 11,600
SERVICES & OTHER CHARGES
6310 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES-GENERAL 16,734 22,658 - -
6353 PERSONAL AUTO/PARKING 113 6 - -
6370 GENERAL PRINTING AND BINDING - 731 - -
6385 INSURANCE 3,800 8,100 8,500 8,800
6408 ELECTRICITY-LIFT STATIONS 81,593 51,806 82,900 63,000
6427 BUILDING OPERATIONS/REPAIR-LAB 1,746 - - -
6432 UTILITY SYSTEM REPAIR - LABOR - 5,074 29,900 9,900
6457 MACHINERY AND EQUIPMENT 611 338 1,000 1,000
6476 CONFERENCES AND SCHOOLS 1,674 408 200 200
6480 LICENSES, PERMITS AND TAXES - 3,500 - -
6505 PUBLIC UTILITY ADMIN FEE 19,400 20,400 21,700 22,700
6535 OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 778 - - -
6539 WASTE REMOVAUSANITATION SERVICES 107 - -
6569 MAINTENANCE CONTRACTS 1,607 1,166 - -
OTHER SERVICES AND CHARGES 128,163 114,187 144,200 105,600
CAPITAL OUTLAY
6630 OTHER IMPROVEMENTS - - - 30,000
6640 MACHINERY/EQUIPMENT 185 - - -
6670 OTHER EQUIPMENT 1,090 - 40,000
6700 CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS 2,544 337 - -
CAPITAL OUTLAY 3,819 337 - 70,000
TOTAL STORM DRAINAGE DEPARTMENT $ 288,806 $ 270,363 $ 190,300 $ 223,500
17.45%
6488 DEPRECIATION EXPENSE $ 963,769 $ 968,877 $ 960,500 $ 967,100
City of Eapo 2008 Proposed Budget
Operating Budget
Public Utilities - Water Quality (65)
Responsible Manager: Eric Macbeth, Water Resource Coordinator
PURPOSE & DESCRIPTION
The purpose of the Public Utilities - Water Quality Department is to:
• Protect and improve natural, aesthetic, and recreational qualities of
Eagan Lakes, ponds, and wetlands for enjoyment and use by
present and future resident of the City and regional community.
The Public Utilities - Water Quality Department is responsible for the
following functions:
• Direct implementation of Eagan Water Quality Management Plan.
• Ensure City compliance with Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act ~ }
rules.
• Coordinate City compliance with Minnesota storm-water discharge permit and impaired water regulations.
• Monitor and manage water resources and other land use activities directly or indirectly affecting water
resources.
• Educate community about land and water issues relating to water quality, lakes, and wetlands.
• Coordinate among city, county, state, and federal entities to protect and improve water resources.
PERFORMANCE INDICATORS
2005 2006 2007 2008
Description Actual Actual Estimate Target
Lakes, ponds monitored in long-term program 18 19 18 19
Lakes, ponds aerated in winter for fisheries 8 5 6 6
Loads of aquatic plants removed from lakes 148 106 150 150
Lakes, ponds treated with alum 4 7 6 6
Impaired-Water/TDML studies 0 0 2 2
Climb Theatre performances in K-12 schools 5 6 6 6
33
City of Eapo 2008 Proposed Budget Operating Budget
Public Utilities - Water Quality Department (65)
Responsible Manager: Eric Macbeth, Water Resource Coordinator
HIGHLIGHTS & CHANGES
Expenditures by Category
Plarsonal Overview: The Water Quality budget shows an
Services Parts & overall increase of $12,500, or 2.1%. Modest
56.67% Supplies increases in personal services, operating supplies,
7.93% and mobile equipment repair parts are largely offset
' by reductions in general professional services and
1 planning services. This budget reflects a shift from
Capita Services & planning to implementation of the new 2007 Water
Outlay Other Quality and Wetland Management Plan. It also
0.30% Charges accounts for a 20% increase in the city's watershed
35.10% management assessment, according to the 2008
approved budget of the Gun Club Lake Watershed Management Organization.
Hiahliaht/Chanue 1: Additional personal services.
Financial Impact: Increase of $4,500.
Service Level Impact: Half-time summer intern to provide manual labor to field projects and to help complete
special program projects.
Hiahlicht/Change 2: Additional supplies, repairs, and maintenance.
Financial Impact: Increase of $2,700.
Service Level Impact: None. This is a minor adjustment primarily based on prior-year baseline costs.
Hiahlicht/Chanue 3: Reduction in general professional and planning services.
Financial Impact: Decrease of $25,000.
Service Level Impact: Despite this reduction, the City will likely receive significant state grants to conduct
required new studies and technical assessments for its compliance with stormwater discharge permit and
impaired water regulations.
Hiahliaht/Chanae 4: Additional engineering services.
Financial Impact: Increase of $2,000.
Service Level Impact: Expected increase to meet needs of required new studies and technical assessments.
Hiahliaht/Chanae 5: Additional general printing and binding.
Financial Impact: Increase of $1,500.
Service Level Impact: Reprinting of ever-popular Eagan Fishing Guide.
Hiahliaht/Chansie 6: Additional watershed management assessment.
Financial Impact: Increase of $6,000.
Service Level Impact: Support Gun Club Lake WMO in accordance with joint powers agreement and its
watershed management plan. Significant initiatives include: 1) fund resident water resources cost-share grant
program in collaboration with Dakota County Soil and Water Conservation District, 2) increased sponsorship of
workshops for homeowners, and 3) developing strategies to evaluate water quality assessments and to promote
wetland buffers in city parks.
City of Evan 2008 Proposed Budget
Operating Budget
Public Utilities - Water Quality Department (65)
Responsible Manager: Eric Macbeth, Water Resource Coordinator
EXPENDITURE SUMMARY
Actual Actual Budget Budget
Expenditure 2005 2006 2007 2008
Personal Services $ 205,759 $ 229,391 $ 317,000 $ 337,300
Parts and Supplies 25,351 28,469 44,500 47,200
Services and Other Charges 121,225 224,677 220,300 208,500
Capital Outlay 4,152 2,814 900 1,800
Total $ 356,487 $ 485,352 $ 582,700 $ 594,800
Depreciation Expense $ 85,303 $ 58,124 $ 61,700 $ 34,300
POSITION INVENTORY
Personnel 2005 2006 2007 2008 Hours
Water Resources Coordinator 1 1 1 1 2,080
Water Resources Specialist 1 1 1 1 2,080
Water Resources Assistant/Technician 1 1 1 1 2,080
System Maintenance Worker 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 1,040
Operations Support Specialist 0 0.5 0.5 0.5 1,040
Clerical Technician 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 1,040
Total 4 4.5 4.5 4.5 9,360
2008 WORK PLAN
Activity
Routine
1 Program administration/staff supervision/operations & clerical support
2 Monitor/manage water resources and relevant land use activities
3 Expanded monitoring/coordination for required Impaired Waters/TMDL studies & plans
4 Enhance recreational fishing; assess ecological conditions
5 Special projects/research
6 Public education/involvement
7 Public relations/customer service
8 Interagency coordination/partnerships
9 Professional development/training
10 Coordination for required Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan
City of Eagan 2008 Proposed Budget Operating Budget
Public Utilities - Water Quality Department (65)
Responsible Manager: Eric Macbeth, Water Resources Coordinator
LINE ITEM DETAIL
Actual Actual Budget Budget
Acct PERSONAL SERVICES 2005 2006 2007 2008
6110 SALARIES AND WAGES-REGULAR $ 155,208 $ 171,701 $ 243,900 $ 253,705-
6112 OVERTIME-REGULAR 104 30 - -
6130 SALARIES AND WAGES-TEMPORARY 12,010 12,152 - 4,500
6142 PERA-COORDINATED 8,971 10,160 15,200 16,500
6144 FICA 11,502 12,568 18,700 19,800
6151 HEALTH INSURANCE 14,535 19,082 34,300 37,200
6152 LIFE 333 372 - -
6154 DISABILITY - LONG TERM 646 713 - -
6155 WORKERS COMPENSATION 2,450 2,613 4,900 5,600
TOTAL PERSONAL SERVICES 205,759 229,391 317,000 337,300
PARTS & SUPPLIES
6210 OFFICE SUPPLIES - 105 100 100
6215 REFERENCE MATERIALS 145 - 200 200
6220 OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL 634 2,566 1,500 2,000
6222 MEDICAL/RESCUE/SAFETY SUPPLIES 19 29 100 100
6224 CLOTHING/PERSONAL EQUIPMENT 25 161 200 300
6231 MOBILE EQUIP REPAIR PARTS 7,353 10,753 8,200 10,700
6232 SMALL EQUIPMENT REPAIR PARTS - 53 200 200
6234 FIELD/OTHER EQUIPMENT REPAIR - 56 500 500
6235 FUEL, LUBRICANTS, ADDITIVES 7,479 7,082 11,300 10,300
6240 SMALL TOOLS 57 36 100 200
6244 CHEMICALS & CHEMICAL PRODUCTS 5,110 6,269 7,100 7,100
6250 LANDSCAPE MATERIAL & SUPPLIES 4,059 172 5,000 5,000
6257 SIGNS & STRIPING MATERIAL 181 1,187 500 1,000
6270 COMPUTER SOFTWARE 289 - 9,500 9,500
TOTAL PARTS & SUPPLIES 25,351 28,469 44,500 47,200
SERVICES & OTHER CHARGES
6310 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES-GENERAL 21,183 (20,408) 35,000 30,000
6312 ENGINEERING - 9,754 5,000 7,000
6313 PLANNING - 121,021 50,000 30,000
6323 TESTING SERVICES 20,419 20,565 25,000 25,000
6346 POSTAGE 21 71 100 100
6353 PERSONAL AUTO/PARKING 5 220 100 200
6355 CELLULAR TELEPHONE SERVICE 194 123 200 700
6359 LEGAL NOTICE PUBLICATION 166 - 200 200
6370 GENERAL PRINTING AND BINDING 2,747 4,502 500 2,000
6385 INSURANCE 2,200 4,000 4,200 4,300
6405 ELECTRICITY 1,414 776 1,600 1,600
6426 SMALL EQUIPMENT REPAIR-LABOR - 460 - -
6457 MACHINERY AND EQUIPMENT - - 100 200
6475 MISCELLANEOUS 232 7 300 300
6476 CONFERENCES AND SCHOOLS 1,392 2,641 2,400 2,900
6477 LOCAL MEETING EXPENSES 198 70 200 300
6479 DUES AND SUBSCRIPTIONS 418 897 400 400
6480 LICENSES, PERMITS AND TAXES 276 244 300 300
6495 WATERSHED MANAGEMENT ASSESSMNT 11,395 17,004 30,400 36,400
6505 PUBLIC UTILITY ADMIN FEE 47,600 50,000 53,200 55,900
6535 OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 5,205 4,650 2,600 2,600
6860 COST SHARING PAYMENTS 6,160 8,080 8,500 8,500
OTHER SERVICES AND CHARGES $ 121,225 $ 224,677 $ 220,300 $ 208,900
3~
City of Eapo 2008 Proposed Budget Operating Budget
Public Utilities - Water Quality Department (65)
Responsible Manager: Eric Macbeth, Water Resources Coordinator
LINE ITEM DETAIL (CONVD)
Actual Actual Budget Budget
Acct CAPITAL OUTLAY 2005 2006 2007 2008
6660 OFFICE FURNISHINGS & EQUIPMENT $ 4,152 $ - $ - $ -
6670 OTHER EQUIPMENT - 2,814 900 -
6680 MOBILE EQUIPMENT - - - 1,800
CAPITAL OUTLAY 4,152 2,814 900 1,800
TOTAL WATER QUALITY DEPARTMENT $ 356,487 $ 485,352 $ 582,700 $ 594,800
2.08%
6488 DEPRECIATION EXPENSE $ 85,303 $ 58,124 $ 61,700 $ 34,300
57
Agenda Information Memo
September 11, 2007
V. 2008 CASCADE BAY BUDGET
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED:
• To provide direction to staff on the 2008 Cascade Bay operating budget,
and to direct that the items be placed on a future City Council Meeting
Consent Agenda for formal ratification.
The Cascade Bay operating budget for 2008 is presented for consideration by
the City Council at the Special meeting. Campus Facilities Manager Vaughan,
Superintendent of Operations Mesko, City Administrator Hedges, Director of
Parks and Recreation Seydell Johnson, Director of Administrative Services
VanOverbeke, and Chief Financial Officer Pepper have met and reviewed the
proposed revenue estimates, and expenditure requests included in this budget.
The proposed 2008 budget is balanced at $1,188,500. This is a decrease of
approximately 1.9% or $23,000 from the 2007 budget of $1,211,500. More detail
is provided in the following sections of this memo. The budget does not propose
a rate change for the 2008 season. A complete rate history from the opening of
the facility broken down by the various categories is provided on page.
The balanced budget provides for the appropriate level of renewal and
replacement funds, includes an allocation for capital equipment, and annual debt
service.
Attendance
The proposed 2008 budget is based on an estimated attendance of 125,000.
The 2007 budget was based on an estimated attendance of 134,000. The actual
attendance for 2006 was 130,305. The following is a table displaying attendance
for eight years of operation and for two years of budget estimates for Cascade
Bay.
Cascade Bay Attendance Summa
1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
Attendance Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual Budget Budget
Season Pass
Admissions 77,852 64,384 66,229 55,39 48,83 28,403 38,33 38,223 41,000 38,000
Daily
Admissions 72,843 70,457 82,794 68,383 82,11 53,801 72,976 69,924 74,000 65,000
Group or
Birthday 10,129 16,36 19,086 17,814 17,57 18,28 17,381 22,15 19,000 22,000
Total
Attendance 160,824 151,201 168,109 141,592 148,52 100,492 128,696 130,30 134,000 125,000
Season Passes
Sold 9,100 7,800 7,000 6,175 5,27 4,120 3,940 3,60 4,100 3,800
Rounds of Golf n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 8,293 12,000 10,000
As a reminder, the facility was built based on estimated average attendance of
135,000. The average attendance over the eight year period (1999-2006)
calculates to 141,217. The highest attendance year was 2001 with 168,109
guests while the lowest year was 2004 with 100,492 reflecting the colder than
average summer.
Revenues
The following table illustrates actual revenues for the years 2001 through 2006,
the approved budget for 2007, and the proposed budget for 2008.
Cascade Bay Revenue Summa
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual Budget Budget
Admissions $ 742,888 $ 671,041 $ 756,162 $ 519,056 $ 598,185 $ 476,713 $ 601,500 $ 571,500
After 5 pm Adm 69,809 59,025 65,566 39,251 64,973 included In`admisalol 37
Season Passes included in admissions 156,202 174,000 173,000
Group Sales 125,865 145,902 127,463 131,013 127,063 137,759 136,800 121,500
Merch Sales 15,201 2,853 4,518 3,549 14,403 13,872 6,100 9,500
Concessions 239,299 206,647 232,790 168,957 222,328 246,795 211,000 230,000
Vending 4,083 2,089 1,332 909 3,172 2,092 1,400 2,000
Classes & Camps 3,062 10,661 16,335 22,245 19,841 21,320 22,000 23,000
Private Rental 4,473 7,345 14,351 5,000 10,000
Miniature Golf 24,315 33,700 28,000
Other 6,152 (1,091) (3,357) 1,113 9,973
Interest 36,626 39,603 25,417 15,751 13,887 24,985 20,000 20,000
Total $ 1,236,833 $ 1,143,973 $ 1,228,492 $ 901,847 $ 1,072,310 $ 1,128,377 $ 1,211,500 $ 1,188,500
Enclosed on page is a copy of actual revenues for the years 2005 and
2006, the budgeted revenues for 2007, and estimated revenues for 2008 with
more detail for that year.
3~
Staff continues to seek ways to generate more revenue. This effort results in
additional revenue from time periods where the facility would otherwise not be
open. Additional information is presented later in the memo outlining both
challenges and brainstorming ideas for 2008.
Personnel
The personnel section of the Cascade Bay budget is consistent with the
presentation for the 2007 budget and continues to reflect the implementation of
the recent organizational study. The 2006 reorganization and, the related
reallocation of support personnel between the Civic Arena and Cascade Bay are
reflected in the following table for Cascade Bay and in the presentation of the
Civic Arena budget. With the vacancies of two maintenance staff in 2007, those
positions were filled with a full-time Manager on Duty (MOD) and overnight
custodian position shared between Cascade Bay and the Civic Arenas. This
organizati mirrors the staffing at the Eagan Community Center. Enclosed on
page. q is a copy of the Cascade Bay personnel table. The personnel
table for the Civic Arena is the complement of the Cascade Bay personnel table
and per a previous City Council request is also presented on page.
Expenditures
Enclosed on pages DU through is a copy of the proposed line item
budget for 2008.
Consistent with previous years, this proposed budget provides for debt service
payments. The 2008 payments total $157,700 on the $1,200,000 borrowed from
the housing fund and the $800,000 loan from the Community Investment Fund.
The calculated renewal and replacement account is funded at $64,600 for 2008.
Enclosed on pages _a and C35 is a copy of the Cascade Bay
Renewal and Replacement Schedule.
Capital Outlay
Included in the preliminary 2008 Budget is an allocation of $2,000 for capital
outlay. Enclosed on page. r--:A- is a copy of the item proposed to be included
in the 2008 budget. This capital is proposed to be financed from current
operations as there are no items for which renewal and replacement dollars have
been set aside.
Included for consideration on page is a copy of the capital outlay request
form for replacement of the coping stones as noted in Highlight/Change 1. Since
this is not to be financed through the current year operations, the appropriation is
not included in the operating budget. Financing would be through retained
earnings and the renewal and replacement account.
Revenue/Ex enditure Summa
Enclosed on page iLP is a copy of a high level summary of revenues,
expenditures, and other disbursements from 1999 through the estimated results
of the 2008 budget. The net available component of retained earnings/cash at
12-31-06 is $372,626. Since the fund should have $508,870 set aside in the
renewal and replacement account, retained earnings is actually $136,244 behind
the desired cash position. This status results primarily from the significant
repairs made to the facility in 2005 and the construction of Captain's Course.
Observations:
While not specific to the proposed 2008 Cascade Bay budget, the following
information in bullet fashion helps provide perspective to past and future
operations of the facility.
2007 Season Recap
• Attendance did not meet projections for the 2nd year in a row. Attendance
was projected to be 134,000, which was slightly higher than the actual for
2006. The preliminary attendance totals appear to be closer to 120,000
for 2007.
• Season pass revenues hit the budget projection although it doesn't
represent much growth in this area.
• Golf projections are also less than projections at this point. With the water
park closed for the season we may see some expanded use particularly to
the groups that have been contacted for group parties and events.
• Attendance in 2007
o 1 day with 3-4,000
o 10 days with 2-3,000
o 51 days with 1-2,000
o 13 days with 500-1,000
o 13 days with <500
o 2 days were closed (Storm on August 11 and day with 60 degrees
for a high)
• Season was 90 days long.
• Preliminary reports indicate that concession sales will exceed the
projected budget but the numbers have not been finalized.
• Regular paid admissions were approximately 2,700 less than in 2006.
• After 5 pm paid admissions were approximately 1,700 less than in 2006.
• Morning activities (water walking, lap swimming, water aerobics) were
again popular and attendance was consistent with 2006.
Captain's Course Miniature Golf
The rounds of golf played have not met projections, however the numbers
are slightly skewed since several groups discovered that this was a great
add-on to their visit. Some of the number are still reflected in group
revenue and will need to be separated.
• While the comments are still positive about the course, more experienced
miniature golf players are interested in 18 holes rather than the 9 holes
that Captain's Course offers.
• This continues to be a great activity for adults with smaller children.
• The idea of marketing to golf only players has not been as successful as
anticipated. While there are some folks who come to Cascade Bay just for
golf, the market to capture is the folks already in the water park.
Challenges and brainstorming for 2008
• Clearly, the attendance numbers are declining with each year. There are
two distinct questions that need to be asked:
o What is the minimum base attendance needed to sustain Cascade
Bay annually and
o What are the primary elements that will need to be incorporated
into Cascade Bay in the future to ensure its viability?
• A marketing plan will need to be developed that would
o Define and market to surrounding communities.
o Define and market to new groups as well as recognize the loyalty of
existing groups.
o Promote private rentals.
o Offer incentives; i.e. for all birthday groups, give them a BOGO
coupon (buy one/get one free) to Captain's Course.
o Define cross marketing packages for Cascade Bay/Captain's
Course
• Have a site/amenity analysis completed to determine what space is
available for additional amenities or expansion that could be sustainable.
The analysis should also identify some of the new trends in water, parks
that could be incorporated into Cascade Bay.
• Capturing visitors when there are so many options for them to consider
will always be a challenge. We will need to define Cascade Bay's primary
focus for getting people here and capitalize on it. We hear that it is clean,
safe and a lot of fun. Our job will be to find the right "hook" to keep them
coming back.
• Big challenge will be if the proposed referendum in Apple Valley passes to
expand their water park to include a lazy river and other amenities this fall.
• In 2008, programming and added value or service will be the priority
focus.
Summary
There is a great deal of material presented with this budget proposal to assist the
City Council in its consideration of the 2008 budget. The 2008 budget as
presented is balanced, continues the implementation of the results of the
organizational study, provides for the appropriate level of renewal and
replacement funds, includes an allocation for some capital improvements, and
the annual installment for the scheduled debt service.
Staff continues to efficiently operate and to aggressively market the use of
the facility to increase revenues and is making every effort to operate a
successful business venture per City Council direction.
The cash position is an indicator of previous success as a business. However,
the competition for leisure time dollars and customer expectations demonstrate
the need to remain efficient and to remain a preferred vendor for the services
provided through the Cascade Bay activities. This proposed operating budget
and the proposed capital improvements assist in meeting that objective.
Cascade Bay Rate Comparison
1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
Daily Admission +.50* +.25 +.25 +1.00
> 42" 7.00 7.50 7.50 7.75 8.00 8.00 8.00 8.00 9.00 9.00
< 42" 4.50 5.00 5.00 5.75 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 7.00 7.00
> 62 years 4.50 5.00 5.00 5.75 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 7.00 7.00
< 18 months free free free Free Free Free Free Free Free Free
After 5 pm Admission
> 42" 5.00 5.50 5.50 5.75 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 7.00 7.00
< 42 " 3.50 4.00 4.00 4.25 4.50 4.50 4.50 4.50 5.00 5.00
> 62 years 3.50 4.00 4.00 4.25 4.50 4.50 4.50 4.50 5.00 5.00
< 18 months Free free free Free Free Free Free Free Free Free
Resident Season Passes +3.00 +2.00 +2.00
15` member 48.00 51.00 51.00 51.00 53.00 53.00 53.00 53.00 55.00 55.00
Add'1 member> 42" 38.00 41.00 41.00 41.00 43.00 43.00 43.00 43.00 45.00 45.00
Add'1 member <42" 25.00 27.00 27.00 27.00 29.00 29.00 29.00 29.00 31.00 31.00
Add'l member >62 yrs. 25.00 27.00 27.00 27.00 29.00 29.00 29.00 29.00 31.00 31.00
Add'1 member < 18 mos Free Free Free Free Free Free Free Free Free Free
Resident Passes-after 5 pm +3.00 +2.00 +5.00
1" member 40.00 43.00 43.00 43.00 45.00 45.00 45.00 45.00 50.00 50.00
Add'1 member > 42" 30.00 33.00 33.00 33.00 35.00 35.00 35.00 35.00 40.00 40.00
Add'I member <42" 20.00 22.00 22.00 22.00 24.00 24.00 24.00 24.00 30.00 30.00
Add'1 member >62 yrs. 20.00 22.00 22.00 22.00 24.00 24.00 24.00 24.00 30.00 30.00
Add'1 member < 18 mos Free Free Free Free Free Free Free Free Free Free
Non-Resident Season Pass
I" member n/a n/a 61.00 61.00 63.00 63.00 63.00 63.00 65.00 65.00
Add'1 member > 42" n/a n/a 51.00 51.00 53.00 53.00 53.00 53.00 55.00 55.00
Add'1 member <42" n/a n/a 37.00 37.00 39.00 39.00 39.00 39.00 41.00 41.00
Add'1 member >62 yrs. n/a n/a 37.00 37.00 39.00 39.00 39.00 39.00 41.00 41.00
Add'1 member < 18 mos n/a n/a Free Free Free Free Free Free Free Free
Non-Resident Pass-after 5 pm
I" member n/a n/a 53.00 53.00 55.00 55.00 55.00 55.00 60.00 60.00
Add'1 member > 42" n/a n/a 43.00 43.00 45.00 45.00 45.00 45.00 50.00 50.00
Add'1 member <42" n/a n/a 32.00 32.00 34.00 34.00 34.00 34.00 40.00 40.00
Add'1 member >62 yrs. n/a n/a 32.00 32.00 34.00 34.00 34.00 34.00 40.00 40.00
Add'1 member < 18 mos n/a n/a Free Free Free Free Free Free Free Free
*to reflect sales tax
$2.00 increase over 9 years = $.22 increase/yr or 3% annually
4ILf
City of Eapo 2008 Proposed Budget Operating Budget
Aquatic Facility - Cascade Bay
Responsible Manager: Cherryl Mesko, Superintendent of Operations
PURPOSE & DESCRIPTION
The purpose of the Aquatic Facility is to: -
• Provide a positive environment for residents and guests of all ages t~~._
to gather.
• Encourage and help build a sense of community through a wide
range of recreational and social opportunities. „•n~.,.•.b,a
• Provide a high level of service accessibility and professionalism to
expand revenue option to ensure the viability of this resource to the community.
The Aquatic Facility is responsible for the following functions:
• Provide a wide variety of water-related recreational opportunities for members and non-members.
• Capture a high level of revenue to offset operational costs, debt repayment and expand the retained
earnings capacity to accommodate future growth and expansion.
• Protect the City's community investment by maintaining the integrity and value of the building and its
amenities.
• Create a welcoming atmosphere and solicit input from users to best determine how to meet existing
needs and identify future growth opportunities.
• On-going analysis of existing operation and research to find ways to expand the recreational opportunities
beyond the three-month pool season in order to maximize the capital investment.
PERFORMANCE INDICATORS
2005 2006 2007 2008
Description Actual Actual Estimate Target
Season passes sold 3,940 3,609 4,100 3,800
Total attendance 128,696 130,305 134,000 125,000
Group admissions 17,381 22,158 19,000 22,000
88 + golf 88 + golf
Days facility is open 89 88 pre/post pre/post
season season
Rounds of golf N/A 8,293 12,000 10,000
Private rentals 4 8 8 9
W1 Of Eap 2008 Proposed Budget Operating Budget
Aquatic Facility - Cascade Bay
Responsible Manager: Cherryl Mesko, Superintendent of Operations
Personal Expenditures by Category
Services HIGHLIGHTS & CHANGES
49,71% Part
Ss & Overview: The 2008 budget reflects very little
upplies change in expenses or revenues from the 2007
Reserve for 6.61% budget. The 2008 budget reflects a decrease of
R & R $23,000 or 1.9% from 2007.
5.39% Services &
Other The only change of significance is purchases that
Debt Service Merchandise Charges should come from Renewal and Replacement.
13.15% for Resale Capital Outlay 16.91 %
° 0.23%
Hiohliaht/Chanue 1: Renewal and replacement
for 2008 will include some very high ticket items. The largest will be consideration for replacing the coping stones
surrounding the leisure pool. This was identified for future replacement during the re-construction of the leisure
pool and lazy river in 2005/2006.
Financial Impact: $90,000 to replace strategic areas ($250,000 to replace everything).
Service Level Impact: The replacement of these stones will help to protect the safety of guests in the pool,
particularly in areas where these stones cover a deeper trench for water overflow.
Hiahlicht/Change 2: The reorganization of Campus Facilities as approved by the City Council mirrors the
operation of ECC and is expected to provide a higher level of direct contact service to guests as well as to provide
a more efficient way to staff the facility and supervise seasonal staff.
Financial Impact: Slight increase in full-time staff.
Service Level Impact: Higher level of direct service contact.
Hiahliaht/Chanue 3: Seasonal salaries have increased compared to 2007 budget projections. This cost
projection was in conjunction with a new part-time pay schedule that unified all part-time wages throughout the
department. Seasonal hours were monitored very carefully in 2007 to meet budget projections and will be a
primary focus in 2008.
Financial Impact: The impact of the wage change had a bigger impact on the Cascade Bay budget because the
wages changed based on hours worked rather than a set rate for the season. It is expected that the 2008 budget
will accurately reflect actual costs.
Service Level Impact: None
Hiahlicht/Chanue 4: Account 6310-Professional services shows an increase of $15,800 from the 2007 budget.
The increase includes two items; $5,800 for a facility audit/assessment to define parameters for facility expansion
or improvements to help guide the long range improvement plan for Cascade Bay and $10,000 to re-surface the
floors in the concessions area.
Financial Impact: $15,800 increase from the 2007 budget.
Service Level Impact: To define options for expansion or improvements to Cascade Bay within the next five
years will better position us to maintain the financial viability of this community amenity. The concessions floor
surface has degraded over the last few years and to continue to meet health code requirements, it is time to have
it re-surfaced. This will also add a new clean look to the concessions space.
City of Evan 2008 Proposed Budget Operating Budget
EXPENDITURE SUMMARY
Actual Actual Budget Budget
Expenditure 2005 2006 2007 2008
Personal Services $ 518,684 $ 572,325 $ 563,900 $ 574,100
Parts and Supplies 67,903 66,438 89,400 79,300
Services and Other Charges 241,943 140,065 195,700 218,600
Capital Outlay 2,072 13,909 44,500 2,000
Merchandise for Resale 114,700 96,689 91,100 92,200
Debt Service 160,415 161,495 162,300 157,700
Reserve for Renewal & Replacement - 64,600 64,600 64,600
Total $1,105,717 $1,115,521 $1,211,500 $1,188,500
/4-7
City of Eagan 2008 Proposed Budget Operating Budget
Aquatic Facility - Cascade Bay
Responsible Manager: Cherryl Mesko, Superintendent of Operations
CASCADE BAY POSITION INVENTORY
Personnel 2005 2006 2007 2008 Hours
Aquatic Facilities Manager 1 0 0 0 -
Campus Facilities Manager 0 0.33 0.33 0.33 686
Maintenance Worker (2 @ .5 hrs.) 1 1 1 0 -
CF Maintenance Coord (5) 0 0 0 0.5 1,040
Custodian (5) 0 0 0 0.5 1,040
Maintenance Worker (1 @ .33 hrs.) 0 0.33 0.33 0 -
MOD 0 0 0 0.33 686
Clerical Technician 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 832
Administrative Coordinator 0 0.67 0.67 0 -
CF Operations Coord 0 0 0 0.67 1,394
TOTAL 2.4 2.73 2.73 2.73 5,678
2008 WORK PLAN
Activity
Routine
1 Respond to public comments or requests via phone or in person
2 Daily mainenance and cleaning of building and pool
3 Manage the building infrastructure to ensure efficient, safe and clean environment
4 Develop promotional materials for seasonal facility
5 Recruit, hire, train and supervise temporary and part time employees
6 Provide work direction to ensure high level of customer service is maintained
7 Develop long range plans and strategies for expanded service
8 Manage staff scheduling and training to meet the demands of the building
Cascade Bay and the Civic Arena share a number of staff. The Civic Arena staff complement is shown below:
CIVIC ARENA POSITION INVENTORY
Personnel 2005 2006 2007 2008 Hours
Civic Arena Manager 1 0 0 0 -
Campus Facilities Manager 0 0.67 0.67 0.67 1,394
Building Supervisor 1 0 0 0 -
Skating School Coordinator 1 1 1 1 2,080
Maintenance Worker (2 @ .5) 1 1 1 0 -
CF Maintenance Coordinator (5) 0 0 0 0.5 1,040
Custodian 65 ) 0 0 0 0.5 1,040
Operations/Maintenance Worker 0 1 0.67 0.00 -
MOD 0 0 0.00 0.67 1,394
Clerical Technician 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 416
Administrative Coordinator 0 0.33 0.33 0 -
CF Operations Coordinator 0 0 0 0.33 686
Total 4.2 3.87 3.87 3.87 8,050
T'
City of Eapo 2008 Proposed Budget Operating Budget
Aquatic Facility - Cascade Bay
Responsible Manager: Cherryl Mesko, Superintendent of Operations
REVENUE ESTIMATES
Actual Actual Budget Budget
Acct REVENUES 2005 2006 2007 2008
4310 PARK PROGRAM REVENUE $ 19,841 $ 21,320 $ 22,000 $ 23,000
4312 CONCESSION SALES 222,328 246,222 211,000 230,000
4314 MERCHANDISE SALES 6,154 9,644 5,600 7,500
4315 MERCHANDISE SALES NON-TAX 8,251 14,201 500 2,000
4316 GROUP SALES 125,862 136,702 102,800 121,500
4317 GROUP SALES NON-TAX 200 (579) 34,000 -
4318 DAILY ADMISSIONS 663,157 657,489 635,200 599,500
4321 MEMBERSHIPS - - 174,000 173,000
4322 VENDING 3,172 2,092 1,400 2,000
4326 FACILITY RENTAL 8,145 14,351 5,000 10,000
4327 FACILITY RENTAL NON-TAX 200 - - -
4610 INTEREST INCOME 13,887 25,579 20,000 20,000
4822 OTHER REVENUE 956 1,949 -
TOTAL AQUATIC FACILITY REVENUES $ 1,072,152 $1,128,970 $ 1,211,500 $ 1,188,500
-1.90%
City of Eapa 2008 Proposed Budget Operating Budget
Aquatic Facility - Cascade Bay
Responsible Manager: Cherryl Mesko, Superintendent of Operations
LINE ITEM DETAIL
Actual Actual Budget Budget
Acct PERSONAL SERVICES 2005 2006 2007 2008
6110 SALARIES AND WAGES-REGULAR $ 88,495 $ 113,743 $ 130,500 $ 133,500
6112 OVERTIME--REGULAR - - 1,000 -
6130 SALARIES AND WAGES-TEMPORARY 367,081 382,834 350,000 360,000
6131 OVERTIME--TEMPORARY 17
6142 PERA-COORDINATED 5,159 6,574 8,200 8,700
6144 FICA 33,673 37,058 36,800 37,800
6151 HEALTH INSURANCE 11,862 18,442 24,800 21,600
6152 LIFE INSURANCE 172 240 - -
6154 DISABILITY - LONG TERM 257 355 -
6155 WORKERS COMPENSATION 11,968 13,079 12,600 12,500
TOTAL PERSONAL SERVICES 518,684 572,325 563,900 574,100
PARTS & SUPPLIES
6210 OFFICE SUPPLIES 510 571 700 700
6211 OFFICE PRINTED MATERIAL/FORMS 462 182 2,000 1,000
6212 OFFICE SMALL EQUIPMENT - 64 100 100
6215 REFERENCE MATERIALS - - 300 300
6220 OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL 16,355 12,484 15,000 15,000
6222 MEDICAL/RESCUE/SAFETY SUPPLIES 3,069 2,544 3,500 2,500
6223 BUILDING/CLEANING SUPPLIES 5,082 5,806 5,000 5,500
6224 CLOTHING/PERSONAL EQUIPMENT 12,091 6,325 15,000 6,000
6230 REPAIR/MAINTENANCE SUPP-GENL 3,079 4,871 4,000 5,000
6231 MOBILE EQUIPMENT REPAIR PARTS 256 671 100 500
6232 SMALL EQUIPMENT REPAIR PARTS 2,262 878 2,000 1,500
6233 BUILDING REPAIR SUPPLIES 1,200 1,120 1,200 1,200
6236 POOL REPAIR SUPPLIES 3,218 747 5,000 5,000
6240 SMALL TOOLS - 224 500 500
6243 HEATING OIL, PROPANE AND OTHER FUELS - 691 1,000 1,000
6244 CHEMICALS & CHEMICAL PRODUCTS 18,194 26,119 30,000 30,000
6257 SIGNS & STRIPING MATERIALS 2,125 2,907 3,000 3,000
6270 COMPUTER SOFTWARE - 234 1,000 500
TOTAL PARTS & SUPPLIES 67,903 66,438 89,400 79,300
SERVICES & OTHER CHARGES
6310 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 48,406 17,282 7,500 23,300
6311 LEGAL 32,220 124 -
6312 ENGINEERING 959 -
6314 AUDITING 600 900 1,400 1,800
6319 MEDICAL SERVICES-OTHER - 477 100 500
6320 INSTRUCTORS - 40 1,000 1,000
6346 POSTAGE 2,204 3,378 2,500 3,000
6347 TELEPHONE SERVICE & LINE CHG 2,347 2,030 2,000 2,100
6348 MATRIX SERVICE AND REPAIR - 170 500 500
6353 PERSONAL AUTO/PARKING 43 61 200 200
6355 CELLULAR TELEPHONE SERVICE 27 229 300 300
6357 ADVERTISING/PUBLICITY/PROMOTION 2,098 8,430 8,000 9,000
6358 EMPLOYMENT ADVERTISING - - 500 200
6359 LEGAL NOTICE PUBLICATION 129 100
6370 GENERAL PRINTING AND BINDING 1,165 4,892 5,000 5,000
6385 INSURANCE 22,600 23,700 24,900 25,600
6405 ELECTRICITY $ 32,706 $ 35,527 $ 35,000 $ 38,000
5~
City of Eapn 2008 Proposed Budget Operating Budget
Aquatic Facility - Cascade Bay
Responsible Manager: Cherryl Mesko, Superintendent of Operations
LINE ITEM DETAIL (CONT'D)
Actual Actual Budget Budget
Acct 2005 2006 2007 2008
6410 NATURAL GAS SERVICE $ 58,188 $ 3,781 $ 55,000 $ 55,000
6424 POOL REPAIR/ LABOR 4,738 - 7,000 7,500
6426 SMALL EQUIPMENT REPAIR LABOR 1,561 1,019 1,500 1,500
6427 BUILDING OPERATIONS REPAIR LABOR 1,269 1,599 1,500 1,500
6428 FIELD/OTHER EQUIPMENT REPAIR 170 - 200 200
6475 MISCELLANEOUS 125 - 200 200
6476 CONFERENCES AND SCHOOLS 2,321 1,132 3,100 3,200
6477 LOCAL MEETING EXPENSES 70 17 200 200
6479 DUES AND SUBSCRIPTIONS 75 195 500 300
6480 LICENSES, PERMITS AND TAXES 575 725 1,500 1,500
6487 VISA/MC BANK CHARGES 9,718 10,739 10,000 11,000
6535 OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 6,631 6,011 10,000 10,000
6539 WASTE REMOVAUSANITATION SERV 2,150 2,053 3,000 4,000
6563 LANDSCAPING 2,985 9,392 6,000 5,000
6569 MAINTENANCE CONTRACTS 5,863 6,162 7,000 7,000
OTHER SERVICES AND CHARGES 241,943 140,065 195,700 218,600
CAPITAL OUTLAY
6630 OTHER IMPROVEMENTS 372 113 39,500 2,000
6640 OFFICE FURNISHINGS AND EQUIPMENT 1,700 127 - -
6650 FURNITURE & FIXTURES - 498 - -
6670 OTHER EQUIPMENT - 13,171 5,000 -
CAPITAL OUTLAY 2,072 13,909 44,500 2,000
MERCHANDISE FOR RESALE
6855 MERCHANDISE FOR RESALE 114,700 96,689 91,100 92,200
MERCHANDISE FOR RESALE 114,700 96,689 91,100 92,200
DEBT SERVICE
PRINCIPAL 80,000 85,000 90,000 90,000
INTEREST ON INTERFUND PAYABLE - 76,495 - -
INTEREST 80,415 - 72,300 67,700
TOTAL DEBT SERVICE 160,415 161,495 162,300 157,700
RESERVE FOR RENEWAL & REPLACEMENT - 64,600 64,600 64,600
TOTAL AQUATIC FACILITY $ 1,105,717 $ 1,115,521 $ 1,211,500 $ 1,188,500
-1.90%
6488 DEPRECIATION&AMORTIZATION $ 281,842 $ 299,951 $ - $ -
J `
G:\Capital Renewal & Replacement\Cascade Bay R&R schedule.xls 9/7/2007
Cascade Bay R&R schedule.xls
Cascade Bay
Renewal And Replacement Schedule
Item Year Purchased Life C cle Cost Annual Maturity Date
Ice Machine 1999 10 $ 3,239 $ 324 2009
Perfect F
#1 2004 5 4,150 830 2009
#2 2000 5 4,150 830 2005.
#3 2001 5 5,000 1,000 2006
Turnstiles
#1 1999 20 11,500 575 2019
#2 1999 20 - 2019
#3 2002 20 2,222 111 2022
HVAC s stem admin 1999 20 14,000 700 2019
Sand Play Area
Mermaid Fountain 1999 6 3,600 600 2005
Waterfall Waterpla 1999 6 4,700 783 2005
Kom an Sand Table 1999 6 700 117 2005
Guard Chairs
#1 1999 10 900 90 2009
#2 1999 10 900 90 2009
#3 2001 10 1,360 136 2011
#4 2001 10 1,360 136 2011
Air Conditioning conc. 2000 20 20,000 1,000 2020
Roofing 3 buildings) 1999 20 6,000 300 2019
Shed 2002 20 2,500 125 2022
Funbrellas 0
#1 1999 10 2,257 226 2009
#2 1999 10 2,257 226 2009
#3 1999 10 2,257 226 2009
#4 1999 10 2,257 226 2009
#5 1999 10 2,257 226 2009
#6 1999 10 2,257 226 2009
#7 1999 10 2,257 226 2009
#8 1999 10 2,257 226 2009
#9 1999 10 2,257 226 2009
#10 1999 10 2,257 226 2009
#11 1999 10 2,257 226 2009
#12 (Birthday Part Area 2001 10 2,304 230 2011
Sun Port 2002 10 4,275 428 2012
Walk in Refrigerator 1999 20 6,993 350 2019
Walk in Freezer 1999 20 4,017 201 2019
2 door freezer 1999 12 2,604 217 2011
2 door refrigerator 1999 12 2,029 169 2011
Refrigerator Display 1999 12 3,809 317 2011
Sandwich/nacho dis la 1999 7 1,021 146 2006
Mobile Heated Cabinet 1999 10 3,307 331 2009
Undercounter heated cabinet 1999 10 2,498 250 2009
Cash Registers 5
#1 1999 5 - 2004
#2 1999 5 - 2004
#3 1999 5 - 2004
#4 1999 5 - 2004
D namtion Monitor air tester 1999 10 1,760 176 2009
HVAC Equipment 1999 20 4,000 200 2019
Gas Hot Water Heater 1999 20 4,000 200 2019
Video Security System 2002 10 9,625 963 2012
Suitmates (2 1999 5 2,500 500 2004
PAS stem 1999 10 5,000 500 2009
Water Flume/Wood $ Steel 1999 10 73,848 7,385 2009
G:\Capital Renewal & Replacement\Cascade Bay R&R schedule.xls 9/7/2007
Cascade Bay R&R schedule.xls
Cascade Bay
Renewal And Replacement Schedule
Item Year Purchased Life Cycle Cost Annual Maturity Date
Water Flume/Fiber lass 1999 20 145,000 7,250 2019
Water Flume/Install 1999 20 80,000 4,000 2019
Ship Slide 1999 15 20,800 1,387 2014
Starburst 1999 15 20,500 1,367 2014
Tumblebuckets 1999 15 8,000 533 2014
Deck Chairs
Econo 50) $66.0 1999 10 3,300 330 2009
Lounge 200) $156.7 1999 10 31,350 3,135 2009
Econo 40) $66.00 2001 10 2,640 264 2011
Lounge (10 $156.7 2001 10 1,568 157 2011
Econo (50) $66.0 2002 10 3,300 330 2012
Lounge 40) $160.00 2004 10 6,400 640 2014
Concession Patio Furniture
Ladderback Chair 150) $99.2 1999 15 14,885 992 2014
31" Caf6 Table 28) $153.0 1999 15 4,286 286 2014
31 "Bar height table (12)$163.7 1999 15 1,966 131 2014
46"x85' oval dining table (2)$553.0 1999 15 1,106 74 2014
Turbines
#1 1999 20 13,333 667 2019
#2 1999 20 13,333 667 2019
#3 1999 20 13,333 667 2019
#4 1999 20 13,333 667 2019
#5 1999 20 13,333 667 2019
#6 1999 20 13,333 667 2019
Boilers
#1 1999 20 17,500 875 2019
#2 1999 20 17,500 875 2019
#3 1999 20 17,500 875 2019
#4 1999 20 17,500 875 2019
Pumps
#1 1999 20 3,950 198 2019
#2 1999 20 3,950 198 2019
#3 1999 20 3,950 198 2019
#4 1999 20 3,950 198 2019
Filters
#1 1999 20 25,000 1,250 2019
#2 1999 20 25,000 1,250 2019
Pulsar Chemical Equi men 2002 7 8,000 1,168 2009
Room Heaters 1999 20 3,800 190 2019
Stranco Controllers
#1 1999 15 3,000 200 2014
#2 1999 15 3,000 200 2014
Irrigation Control System 1999 15 20,000 1,333 2014
LMI Pum s
#1 1999 5 1,200 240 2004
#2 1999 5 1,200 240 2004
#3 1999 5 1,200 240 2004
#4 1999 5 1,200 240 2004
#5 1999 5 1,200 240 2004
#6 1999 5 1,200 240 2004
Flooring 2002 20 20,000 1,000 2022
Phone System 2001 7 21,000 3,000 2008
Walkie Talkies 2004 5 6,000 1,200 2009
Walk Behind Lawn Mower 2004 8 3,000 375 2012
Total $ 900,597 $ 64,563
s3
CITY OF EAGAN
JUSTIFICATION OF CAPITAL OUTLAYS REQUESTS
1. Department Dept. No. Account No.
Cascade Bay 9222 6630
F. 2. Give Description and Quantity of Item Requested. Indicate Date Desired.
One automatic restroom cleaner to provide regular in-depth cleaning of locker rooms and rest rooms.
January, 2007
3. Describe the necessity for and/or benefits or savings expected from this item
This would replace the current Kaivac machine that is shared between the Civic Arena and Cascade Bay. This equipment provides a
higher level of cleaning, particularly for heavily used locker rooms and rest rooms.
4. If the item requires an increase in personal services for the activity, state the new job title(s) contingent upon the item.
5. Indicate any expenses necessary to place this item in operation and whether these expenses are included in your budget request.
6. List any item which will be replaced by this purchase. State recommendations for disposition of this item.. For example, trade-in,
salvage, discard, etc.
The existing Kaivac machine will be kept to supplement the new equipment until it is no longer usable.
ESTIMATED COSTS
Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost Trade-In Net Total Cost
1 $4,000 $4,000 $ $2,000/Civic Arena
$2,000/Cascade Bay
CITY OF EAGAN
JUSTIFICATION OF CAPITAL OUTLAYS REQUESTS
1. Department Dept. No. Account No.
Cascade Bay 9222 6670
2. Give Description and Quantity of Item Requested. Indicate Date Desired.
Coping stones required to cover water overflow trench surrounding leisure pool.
Order January 2008 for installation in May 2008
3. Describe the necessity for and/or benefits or savings expected from this item
During the re-construction of the leisure pool and lazy river in 2005 it was noted that the coping stone installed at Cascade Bay had
experienced some manufacturing defects at other facilities. While we have been fortunate with the majority of the stones, we have only
had to replace a minimal amount to date. The inspection of these stones in 2006 revealed some hairline cracks and the consultant
inspecting the pool suggested that they all be replaced. At this time we do not see the necessity to replace all of them but would focus on
areas where the risk of breakage is the greatest.
4. If the item requires an increase in personal services for the activity, state the new job title(s) contingent upon the item
5. Indicate any expenses necessary to place this item in operation and whether these expenses are included in your budget request.
The estimated cost includes the cost for installing the stones.
6. List any item which will be replaced by this purchase. State recommendations for disposition of this item. For example, trade-in,
salvage, discard, etc.
ESTIMATED COSTS
Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost Trade-In Net Total Cost
1 $90,000 $90,000 $ $90,000
55-
O O N V
O O 0 0 0 0 00
O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 O O
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O M N 0 O N (D O O N (D e q Cl
NOOOL OOO(!7 O (n 00 '~~'p
00 (D
00
r OM0 o NO ro ONioN~ ~O U) W f~7 rOM
Q OO d r--M N N W O N M (nom
G C ~ r N _
d
N m
r
V9. 60 yg tq Vi 69 69 69 69 to
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 O O
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 N
0 x000-O?r(n O N O)?~h(n (Q (o SI! ~ d
IAO~N(ON~MO 0 M01 ov V vm N L U
a) rM N N wcom O) V 0 w O O N d
V- r N N O > (7
U
x co
m' E 1 cc
Er z
a
Q..6
69. b9 tH e9 61, fil~ ti a
in 00 0) (n 0) co O (o in
(n 0) N r O Cr) a) 00 o o )n r
(n 0) N O N N N_ O m~ N N CO 00 W O N O N a) b O 0
M R 07 C 0) V w 0
N M (N
O r W Cl 00 M O N M V N N two l0 0I O M TO V :M C(C C O) n
r p
N ~
w (p M M 7 N N 0) O N M 00 O .O 00 0I M
O N
C
N Q
bq 64 tH 69 64 N9 64 69
V1 r Or C3 W 00~nM
` r00 O O O
00 M W M N N O Wn(o O (o O to /i7 ~n O O I-- M
`(o N 00 V O C R CO M (o ),O (n O N M :D O o)OO N
0M~M M y (p ~O N
7 Mr NO)'TrM ~ -co N 000IT v co IV 0 0 W Sit 0) o co
mM v IT C O N a )n M N N l'7 v N N
-t t
O N 0_ r
N Q
ty 64 W 69 61V 69 69 69
r co N M M O M O O O 04
M N ~{f) (h o O O r
0 M In V~ r O (n (n (n 'R 0
N O01 C It 70) V c'r 00 1n cc O N r (o M O (OLC Q)N CY) M` -7 OmcoN C Q7 co
~ j M (Or N N
-7 -4
w t.- 00 N N` CO N M co C) V N co N co co cr)
0
.i
Z Q 6-1 ty W 619 W 64 to 69 69
W
..to :ity o O O N O
W O M 000 o O r N ~CD 000 N O 00 N 5:7 M 0001 (n
M p v ?0000 Ov M 00M(O
RNVr°)cNVV Mv
0 N NN N Q)R00N O r (n O W l~oN~ O (ro loo (NO M o 0I r (n o C4 OrM
v N O ff'. 00 00
7 m N a r N N _ IT N
LL 0 69 69 69 b4 69 69
y W
d S 00 M N M co N w N 00 O co V' d) R N '0 co 00 00 o W
MCMmN r O `r NM(or D) 0~ N000.~ (n : N 0 0 0)
V
O r O)rN W R N (CL 1 (3 (OO(7r r O C O MM
C A V NR CO O) wM M 0) 0 r Or fNr7N
W G G N70 0 N N 0 M O NN000 0 Ow r o 0
>,Z N a r~ N~ CL a
•V O E9 619 64 6-9 to 6-9 'fA V9
IL 0)
U Z 0 0) O t o : I) ti r O O O M
W (00 NNO r r0 0 C-4 CI) C4 r- rr v 'a0 co OOr00 G) 0) i0 0_ W W N Co (O ~ N Q) N O N n M 7 S~'?1 (h CL ct
C.
to C) 0 (CL t W O) I A N O O N M (n ) n r N N N W co 0) O (n O N
P p 7 ?O(h~ N 0 c c)) Co 0000 NN 0 P?i In to
M(D 64
a N O V 00 N r! _N Y) N Q _
UJI
69 64 64 u9
Z
co O N O M N N M N O (D 0 0) M 0 0 M to
0 co M N rrrlo w o
W
V O r M r co r V N r (n N o O O o 0 CJZ 0 O M 00 O v
iQ r0)r-0 LO 0O O 0U)
G r (n co
7 R O (0 l0
M
O l0 0) N N oD 00 W N 1n co 0) O
N Q
b9 tH 64 64 60 64
O1 0) W O co M 00 M N (n :SD l0 O o 0) o
NODO O) r M 0 N-V IT O a co r OONM
N M O r N O N(n O) OCL 000 V 0000(`7
W O r
M r
In M 7 N UI 000 N c0 O m 0 00 N 0 LD CD 0)
Q1 al N
Q
y9 vs w 64 b9 Vi c tH
_ E E
d C
ep C ~ d
0) C ❑ N d
y a C N E
. O) d c a) A U y d 2 N Z A
E > y E y w y
d
7 lC S X 7 07 C ;E C C O_
O
~o d 3 d
d °c_ ~ > Q V) U x 3 c H E O LLO. ~ aci i m h
d
N .d 0!' ~ O _ U N N L O N O a O c T d ` J
o a m w c Z 2 n t o G c d Z °-cam aai d
v~ y y E d ° g o. c eC d CL ~ O 9 00 d R d
e0 K a❑ E
d c m N c U' y v) d d d O Z n >
.C U U
•E R U 'v d l0 d d d O. d R v :3 ) y 0 d d w d x CD U d .6 o
N W W
vy co dU ~p Q n °?O c 0 o X00 ZU 4 y o
0 7 U ` cc W f9 = d C (0 r y Z - l0 y (7 c a r .L) f0 (C 0 (6 917
C lE > U C O t rd, 2C o x d (0 O d W O d o O d 0 '0 '0 7 d
d m _ d CL o o
W DO0O0m'r0 zoS►- F W O 0 U(nUF ~r ZHO❑ F F 4'I- aacn
~Ce
Agenda Information Memo
September 11, 2007, Eagan City Council
VI. 2008 EAGAN COMMUNITY CENTER BUDGET
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED:
• To provide direction to staff on the 2007 Community Center operating
budget, and to direct that it be placed on a future City Council Meeting
Consent Agenda for formal ratification.
• To take official action (approve as presented or as modified) on the
proposed 2008 membership rates.
• To provide direction to staff regarding the preparation of a policy for
membership fees and scheduled increases.
• To provide direction to staff regarding further investigation of a lease
option versus a purchase option for replacement fitness equipment.
Background
The preparation of the 2008 Eagan Community Center Budget continues to
reflect the general parameters agreed upon prior to opening the facility in 2003
while taking advantage of the additional information and experience gathered
over the ensuing years. The 2008 budget has been prepared in a manner
consistent with the revised format being implemented for all other budgets.
Superintendent of Operations Mesko, City Administrator Hedges, Director of
Parks and Recreation Seydell Johnson, Director of Administrative Services
VanOverbeke, and Chief Financial Officer Pepper have met and reviewed the
proposed revenue estimates, and expenditure requests included in this budget.
Revenues
As noted in the "Action to be Considered," the budget incorporates a slight
increase to the membership rates per the following.
Fee History
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
Actual Actual Actual Actual Proposed
Resident 1st member $30 $32 $32 $32 $35
Resident each
additional 25 27 27 27 30
Non-Resident 1 st
member $35 $37 $37 $37 $40
Non-Resident each
additional 35 37 37 37 40
Membership includes:
• Use of the fitness center, free weights and track.
• Member's choice of 28 free classes offered each week.
• Member's rate for personal training or identified fee based fitness
programs.
• Monthly fitness updates as part of the member retention program.
• Two free daily guest admissions.
• Member appreciation events.
Free participation in open basketball or open volleyball.
Usage by Members:
Since the ECC fitness center opened, staff has tracked the membership and
usage in several different ways. While we can see that the building is busier,
especially during the peak winter months, it is helpful to quantify the level of
activity. The chart below indicates the monthly use pattern for the fitness center
beginning with the first full year the fitness component was open. It should be
noted that while this does not indicate how many members are identified each
month it does indicate that the use by members has increased steadily and
significantly. The statistics through August 2007 show that we are already 27%
over where we were a year earlier.
2004 2005 2006 2007
January 4,515 7,324 10,496 14,103
February 4,411 7,027 9,798 12,096
March 4,882 7,912 10,529 12,862
April 3,807 6,583 8,766 11,270
May 3,766 6,389 8,429 10,613
June 4,670 6,246 8,020 10,410
July 4,593 6,234 8,103 10,594
August 4,592 6,623 7,346 8,536 as of 8/31/07
September 4,268 5,759 7,398
October 4,616 6,299 8,822
November 5,327 6,841 9,858
December 5,409 6,828 9,590
Totals 54,856 80,065 107,155 90,484
46% 34% 27% as of 8/31/07
ECC fee schedule - General
Although not a direct consideration for the 2008 Budget, staff is proposing that
the City Council consider a policy to update fees bi-annually; thereby increasing
predictability and overall stability in revenue forecasting. Fee adjustments will be
proposed each even year so that the odd years can provide appropriate
budgetary dollars necessary for the marketing and informational pieces that will
5~
take more planning. By moving to a regular bi-annual fee review or change,
users will become accustomed to the fee cycle. Given the nature of the market
and potential changes in certain areas, staff suggests maintaining flexibility
within the proposed policy to consider fees within the annual budgeting process
resulting from extraordinary circumstances.
The antenna lease revenue transfer used to balance the operating budget is
reduced from $225,800 in 2007 to $199,800 in the proposed 2008 budget.
Enclosed on page is a copy of the detailed revenue estimates for 2008 as
compared to the budget for 2007 and actuals for 2005 and 2006.
The revenue estimates, in general, are fairly aggressive, are based on more
operational experience than in previous years, and rely on continued extensive
and successful marketing of the facility in combination with high customer
acceptance and satisfaction.
Expenditures
Excluding depreciation and debt service from the total for both years, the 2008
Eagan Community Center budget is proposed at $1,633,000, an overall increase
of $45,300, or 2.9% from the 2007 budget of $1,587,000. Factors contributing to
the increase are included in the department budget narrative to follow. Since
debt service is paid through a tax levy resulting from the successful referendum,
it is not included in this operating budget. The bond payment including both
principal and interest to retire the outstanding debt for the building is $1,129,800
for 2008 compared to $1,133,200 for 2007. Depreciation is also not included in
the operating budget as the renewal & replacement account is used in lieu of
depreciation and is fully funded at $124,500 in the 2008 operating budget.
The 2007 budget included an appropriation to include the operation for a coffee
bar. The following is an update on that activity:
Coffee Bar Operation
The experiment of offering a high quality coffee at the ECC has not blossomed
as it was originally hoped. E-Tab has been anxious to roll out their marketing in
conjunction with the ECC's marketing plans. While we've offered several "soft
openings" and introductions to the service, a few additional items will help move
this operation forward.
The first thing will be to identify a name to brand the operation. There are
several names the Council may wish to consider so that we can look at a "grand
opening" opportunity in November. Hopefully, the opening can tie into a
community event being considered for November 7 at which time the name could
be unveiled and the E-Tab teens could be instrumental in bringing this to the
community.
The second enhancement to growing this business will be the introduction of
wireless service in this building. IT has been working to find the best way for this
to work and staff is hopeful that the ECC will soon become a spot for guests to
have a great cup of coffee and get a little work done at the same time. At some
point, it is hoped that the atrium and patio will provide the opportunity to create
some meeting "pods" for guests to use.
Personnel
The total change to this line item is 2.1 % over 2007. The reorganization has
been completed and the addition of two full time MODs has added a higher level
of direct customer service and provided for the successful inclusion of passports
at the ECC.
Enclosed on page W is a copy of the position inventory for the ECC.
Enclosed on pages 7D through is a copy of the proposed line item
2008 budget.
Capital Outlay
The following capital outlay items are included in the proposed 2008 ECC budget
to be financed from 2008 operations:
$29,000 gym dividers--The gyms are currently divided into 3 separate
gyms. If the gyms could be divided again into 6 separate/smaller spaces
it would allow for even more flexibility for this highly coveted spaced
during peak use. Dividing one of the gyms for example could ensure
members gym space while still accommodating a half gym private rental
or practice space at a reduced rate. This would also address space
needs for some fitness classes that might not be able to be
accommodated in other areas of the building.
$7,300-kitchen upgrades--This would provide stainless steel
tables/shelves or storage to replace the plate warmers that are no longer
used by caterers. The extra prep space has been requested for the last
few years by the caterers using the kitchen and will also provide much
needed storage for our food and beverage service.
$15,000-front counter upgrade--This will provide for more efficient
service delivery by enhancing the existing space and is also providing for
an egress door/gate from the gym side of the counter.
$10,000 - white resin outdoor chairs--This will allow us to capture
revenue that is currently outsourced for outdoor weddings/events. These
can also be used in the gyms or for other large seating events in areas
outside the banquet rooms.
$4,000 - 2 LCD projectors--This will allow the rental of equipment in all 3
Oaks rooms simultaneously. Currently there is one in the building so
others are brought in by outside vendors.
$800 - 2 AV carts--This would allow 2 additional mobile audiovisual carts
to be equipped for use anywhere in the building.
• $700 - 3 whiteboards/easels--This will replace 3 boards that are nearing
the end of their usefulness.
$10,000-security cameras/monitoring station--This will allow visibility of
the Blast and gyms by the front counter staff. This would allow the option
of cutting part-time staff and retain the ability to monitor activities within
the building that are generally hard to see.
$3,000-new play element in Blast--In order to keep this play element
fresh some new equipment or program is proposed that would provide a
new play feature.
$2,500- Detex alarms on gym/track doors--These would be installed to
prohibit entrance to the building through the emergency exit doors that
can be opened by a guest to allow someone into the building. The alarm
would be an audible siren.
The following four items are proposed to be paid through Renewal and
Replacement funds:
• Banquet tables $3,000
• Chair replacement pads $16,000
• Automatic restroom cleaner 44,000
• Fitness equipment $79,400
Fitness Equipment Considerations
The fitness equipment, which includes 10 pieces of new equipment for a
purchase price of approximately $80,000, creates a new discussion.
According to the renewal and replacement schedule, all the fitness equipment
was scheduled to be replaced in 2008/2009. Staff instead prefers to only
replace those pieces that should no longer be used or are no long a benefit to
the center at this time. The 10 new pieces are more state of the art and are
expected to be heavily used by members. There may also be some value in
looking at a lease vs. purchases option wherein some equipment is replaced
each year and placed on a 3-5 year lease cycle. This option may better
position the City of Eagan to offer current equipment that is maintained and
replaced based on use or term of lease. The new pieces of equipment have
been placed in the budget as a purchase however, if the Council so directs,
staff can further investigate a leasing option to present at a later date. The
installation of new equipment also coincides with the implementation of a
membership fee increase.
Enclosed on pages'/ cA, through are copies of the individual Capital
Outlay Request Forms further explaining each proposed item of capital.
I is a copy of the Capital Renewal and Replacement
Enclosed on page &*8
schedule for the Community Center.
Marketing
The following is a summary of how various areas of the Community Center are
being marketed in 2007.
Fitness Memberships and Classes
• Letter sent to all members to thank them for their membership. Daily
guest passes reserved for them to pick up at their convenience.
• January promotion "Gear Up for 2007" promoted duffel bag and water
bottle for first 250 new members.
• Promoted Fitness on the Road - very successful promotion that led to
teaching classes at BCBS twice a week and interest by several other
corporations.
• Introduced walking track passes to be used during non-prime time.
• National Senior Heal & Fitness day participation.
• Worked through U-Care to provide Enhance Fitness, program designed
and paid for by U-Care for a 62+-age population. Program is during non-
prime time and full with wait list.
• Promoted and expanded personal training through members and
surrounding businesses
Blast Indoor Playground
• Created new group field trip package to include the Blast and second
activity for older kids. This was typically accommodated in the gym.
• Ads placed in MN Parent, Mpls/St.Paul, Eagan magazine
• Coupon on back of Cub receipts for Inver Grove Heights to promote
summer admissions.
• Included coupon for each birthday party participant for Y2 off next visit.
• Created a package of information to be handed out at each session of
preschool classes.
• Cross-market with Cascade Bay to offer the Blast as alternate site in the
event of rain.
Banquet Room and Meeting Rooms
• Ads placed in the Wedding Directory and Wedding Guide. Listed as both
reception and ceremony site.
• Ad in Minnesota Meeting & Events Resource Guide
• Ad in Eagan telephone directory
• Staff visits to local businesses and meetings
• Participated as a host in a golf tournament for MN Government Event
Planners.
• Staff attendance at meeting planner forums at the U of M.
• Staff visits with local hotels to hand out ECC and City information on
events and recreational opportunities.
• Coordinate with ECVB on events that will put ECC renters into hotels in
Eagan. They conversely work to drive events to the ECC.
• Develop wedding planning classes marketed to ECC brides
• Over 500 brochures and informational packets mailed out.
CP5_~
Regular On-Going Marketin :
• Press releases done on a regular basis for all specialty programs
• Link on the Explore Minnesota web site as "attraction"
• Articles written for Experience Eagan
• Promotion in Discover Brochure and City web page.
• Promotions on BECT
• Updates and revisions to the virtual tour
• New electronic reader board used to promote programs/events
Conclusion
The Community Center clearly accomplished a successful beginning and has
established a niche in the Community. While many challenges have been
addressed, many remain and will be aggressively met into the future. This
proposed budget incorporates previous City Council direction and is overall a
"stay the course" budget with minor modifications and enhancements related
primarily to keeping the facility fresh for the visitors and improving operating
efficiencies. It also allows for continued flexibility as the City goes forward.
b3
City of Eapo 2008 Proposed Budget Operating Budget
Community Center
Responsible Manager: Cherryl Mesko, Superintendent of Operations
PURPOSE & DESCRIPTION
The purpose of the Community Center is to:
• Provide a positive environment for residents and guests of
all ages to gather.
• Encourage and help build a sense of community through a
wide range of recreational and social opportunities.
• Promote health and wellness in the community.
• Maintain a high level of service, accessibility and
professionalism to expand revenue options to ensure the
viability of this resource to the community.
The Community Center is responsible for the following functions:
• Facilitate a wide variety of programs and classes for members and non-members.
• Market and operate a wide range of meeting spaces and rental opportunities for the community.
• Capture a high level of revenues to best offset the operational costs of the building.
• Protect the City's community investment by maintaining the integrity and value of the building and its
amenities.
• Operate and maintain a quality fitness center and wellness programs.
• Provide space, programming and opportunities for all ages.
• Create a welcoming atmosphere and solicit input from users to best determine how to meet existing
needs and identify future growth opportunities.
PERFORMANCE INDICATORS
2005 2006 2007 2008
Description Actual Actual Estimate Target
Groups in the Blast 83 61 90 70
Birthday parties 473 432 500 475
Meetings 660 750 750 775
Open gym program participants 4,914 5,635 5,100 5,700
Group fitness attendance (included in membership) 11,866 15,167 12,300 14,000
Memberships - year round 1,455 1,800 1,750 1,850
Personal Training 884 968 1,000 1,050
Weddings 71 71 85 80
Average attendance in building per day N/A 1,000 1,100 1,150
D11 of Eapo 2008 Proposed Budget Operating Budget
Community Center
Responsible Manager: Cherryl Mesko,
Personal Expenditures by Category Parts & Superintendent of Operations
Services Supplies
59.52% 4.28% HIGHLIGHTS & CHANGES
Overview: The proposed Eagan Community
Reserve for Services & Center budget is up $45,300, or 2.9%, from 2007.
R& R Other The Community Center continues to expand the
62% Charges number of users that find their way to this
Merchandise Capital 21310% o wonderful amenity. The budget for 2008 is
for Resale Outlay
5.5 6 designed to find more efficient ways to staff the
~.ssio building to provide the level of service that the
public has demanded. It also reflects a clearer
understanding of what the public is looking for and how they want to use this building. The focus for 2008 will be
to maintain a high level of direct service contact to meet a growing demand for service and space from the public.
Analysis of use patterns and service expectations will drive staff re-structuring options.
The increase to the personnel portion of the budget is 2.1%. The addition of full-time Managers-on-Duty in 2007
has been a very positive addition and has helped to provide more direct service and oversight to the day-to-day
operation. The operating expenses are increased by 2.8% over 2007. Many of the capital expenditures are offset
by revenue projections or are covered under renewal and replacement as 2008 begins the cycle for larger capital
replacement items identified in the renewal and replacement schedule.
Passport sales, fitness membership fee increase and room rental rate increases are the primary factors in the
overall revenue projections, however the declining attendance in the Blast by individuals and groups offsets some
of that revenue. The longer the facility operates the closer the projections for revenue and expenses become. It is
expected that the majority of revenue and expense corrections will be completed in 2008. This should provide a
solid base to continue into 2009 and beyond for future projections.
Hichliaht/Chanue 1: Postage shows a substantial increase over 2007. This is due completely to the postage
costs associated with passport execution. Express mail costs are borne completely by the applicant so all of these
costs are recovered. The daily postage costs are also covered by revenue generated from each passport.
Financial Impact: The increased costs will always be covered by a revenue stream. If no passports are
processed, no additional postage costs will be incurred.
Service Level Impact: This makes obtaining a passport a very easy process.
Hiahliaht/Chanae 2: The budget increase in electrical is projected to be 8%. While we have some historical
perspective on costs, an ever changing energy market can change these numbers significantly.
Financial Impact: $10,000 increase for the 2008 budget year. The increasing energy costs will continue to
provide a challenge in estimating costs.
Service Level Impact: As the activity grows in this building the expectation for a comfortable and efficient
building continues to expand.
Hiahliaht/Channe 3: Several capital items are being requested to enhance service or to expand revenue
opportunities.
Financial Impact: Capital requests total $91,100 for the 2008 budget. Many of these capital items have a
revenue stream attached to them but most are operational costs based on the expanded use of the building.
Service Level Impact: We will be better positioned to capture revenue that is currently outsourced and provide
more inclusive service based on recent experience.
/ s
City of Bapo 2008 Proposed Budget Operating Budget
Community Center
Responsible Manager: Cherryl Mesko, Superintendent of Operations
Hichlicht/Channe 4: Renewal and Replacement projects are reviewed each year to make sure they are
accurate and appropriately scheduled. There were several items that were scheduled for 2008 that have been
pushed to later years because they do not need to be replaced at this time. The remaining items include the
replacement of the banquet chairs, tables, restroom cleaner and fitness equipment. These items are not shown as
part of the capital outlay but are identified on the detail sheets.
Rather than replacing the entire banquet chair, this request is to replace only the back and seat pads since the
basic frame is still in very good condition. Because we can no longer obtain the existing pattern, a whole new
pattern/color will be selected.
Banquet tables were scheduled to be replaced; however, we will only be replacing tables that are no longer
usable. The majority of tables are still in good working condition.
Restroom cleaner is scheduled to be replaced in 2008.
A large percentage of fitness equipment is scheduled to be replaced in 2008. Because most of it is still in very
good condition, a replacement cycle is being proposed that would bring in pieces of new equipment every year
over the next 5 years and then begin a cycling process to upgrade some pieces of equipment each year
thereafter. This request replaces some of the treadmills, bikes and cross-training equipment with new
computerized systems that incorporate new technology commonplace in other fitness centers. Because
replacement costs of equipment are escalating to incorporate the new technology, we will also present a leasing
option that will provide a 4-5 year life cycle and then be replaced.
Financial Impact: 400 replacement chair pads = $16,000 (whole chair would be $36,000)
12 replacement banquet tables (long) = $3,000
Restroom cleaner = $4,000
Replacement fitness equipment: treadmills, bikes, cross training equipment = $80,000 (purchase)
Service Level Impact: These improvements will maintain the visual and functional operation of the building.
Hiahliaht/Chanue 5: Professional Services shows a significant increase from 2007 primarily due to two items.
The wallpaper in the Oaks is beginning to look worn in several areas and cannot be repaired. The cost to remove
and replace wallpaper in this space is very expensive ($20,000) so this proposal is to remove the wallpaper and
paint the walls the same dark green that appears throughout the building and also complements the existing
space. This will also allow overnight staff to paint whenever there is some wear showing so the space always
looks fresh and new. The second item is expanding the electrical capability in the pre-function space.
Financial Impact: $5,100 over 2007 budget; $4,200 for Oaks painting and $1200 for electrical in pre-function
space.
Service Level Impact: Being able to freshen up the walls in the Oaks as needed will present a much more
professional look in the space and preserve its visual integrity. The addition of electrical in the pre-function area
will accommodate the expanded use of this area and eliminate the need to run cords everywhere to meet the
electrical needs of this space.
City of Bapo 2008 Proposed Budget Operating Budget
Community Center
Responsible Manager: Cherryl Mesko, Superintendent of Operations
EXPENDITURE SUMMARY
Actual Actual Budget Budget
Expenditure 2005 2006 2007 2008
Personal Services $ 813,998 $ 821,970 $ 952,200 $ 971,900
Parts and Supplies 56,983 75,155 75,900 69,900
Services and Other Charges 281,943 319,096 324,100 348,000
Capital Outlay 8,717 22,192 80,200 91,100
Construction Projects 3,178 - - -
Merchandise for Resale 30,651 31,089 30,800 27,600
Resem. for Renewal & Replacement 120,800 121,600 124,500 124,500
Total $1,316,270 $1,391,102 $1,587,700 $1,633,000
(407
City of Ealaa 2008 Proposed Budget Operating Budget
Community Center
Responsible Manager: Cherryl Mesko, Superintendent of Operations
POSITION INVENTORY
Personnel 2005 2006 2007 2008 Hours
Community Center Manager 1 1 0 0 -
Maintenance Engineer 1 1 1 1 2,080
Fitness Coordinator 1 1 1 1 2,080
Rental Coordinator 1 1 1 1 2,080
Facility Operations Coordinator 1 1 1 1 2,080
Lead Custodian/Maintenance 1 1 1 1 2,080
Custodial 3 3 3 3 6,240
MOD 0 0 2 2 4,160
Total 9 9 10 10 20,800
2008 WORK PLAN
Activity
Routine
1 Respond to public comments or requests via phone or in person
2 Provide support to the day-to-day fitness center
3 Daily maintenance and cleaning of building
4 Provide support to the day-to-day concessions operation
5 Register participants in recreation programs, memberships or daily admissions
6 Set up and change room configurations to accommodate multiple events
7 Develop promotional materials for specialized uses: Blast/Rentals/Fitness
8 Manage staff scheduling and training to meet the demands of the building
9 Recruit, hire, train and supervise temporary and part-time employees
10 Provide work direction to ensure high level of customer service is maintained
11 Manage the building infrastructure to ensure efficient, safe and clean environment
12 Establish and manage fitness programs, classes and memberships
13 Coordinate the rentals of all available spaces within the building
14 Provide input and directions pertaining to policies, budget and general operation of ECC
15 Develop and manage capital improvements and long-range planning
16 Develop and manage policies & procedures that best meet the needs of the community
17 Coordinate outdoor events with indoor activities
~O
City of Bajaa 2008 Proposed Budget Operating Budget
Community Center
Responsible Manager: Cherryl Mesko, Superintendent of Operations
REVENUE SUMMARY
Actual Actual Budget Budget
Acct REVENUES 2005 2006 2007 2008
4304 PERSONAL TRAINERS $ 30,257 $ 51,641 $ 47,400 $ 53,300
4305 EQUIPMENT RENTAL 7,080 5,434 15,000 15,000
4310 PARK PROGRAM REVENUE 22,217 11,143 15,500 10,000
4312 CONCESSION SALES 38,994 44,420 73,000 55,200
4314 MERCHANDISE SALES 2,502 2,258 4,000 2,300
4316 GROUP SALES 63,202 62,003 78,600 76,800
4318 DAILY ADMISSIONS 70,064 67,231 73,000 71,200
4321 MEMBERSHIPS 501,259 647,307 688,500 710,000
4323 VENDING (VENDORS) 5,675 7,998 7,500 7,400
4324 ROOM RENTALS 188,473 201,826 260,000 281,300
4326 FACILITY RENTAL 1,221 510 4,500 3,000
4328 CONTRACT REVENUE 44,112 77,153 85,000 85,300
4329 PASSPORT PROCESSING - - - 47,000
4621 ECVB RENT (3,621) 10,100 10,300 10,400
4822 OTHER REFUNDS AND REIMBURSEMENTS 1,615 1,662 - -
4840 INTERNAL REVENUE - 35,698 - 5,000
SUBTOTAL 973,051 1,226,385 1,362,300 1,433,200
OTHER FUNDING SOURCES
TRANSFER IN-ANTENNA LEASE REVENUE 343,219 164,717 225,400 199,800
SUBTOTAL 343,219 164,717 225,400 199,800
TOTAL COMMUNITY CENTER REVENUES $ 1,316,270 $ 1,391,102 $ 1,587,700 $ 1,633,000
2.85%
***ADJUST 2007 ANTENNA BY $39,147***
~I
City of Baran 2008 Proposed Budget Operating Budget
Community Center
Responsible Manager: Cherryl Mesko, Superintendent of Operations
LINE ITEM DETAIL
Actual Actual Budget Budget
Acct PERSONAL SERVICES 2005 2006 2007 2008
6110 SALARIES AND WAGES-REGULAR $ 400,940 $ 373,211 $ 445,900 $ 460,300
6112 OVERTIME-REGULAR - - - -
6130 SALARIES AND WAGES-TEMPORARY 259,674 285,502 319,000 328,000
6131 OVERTIME-TEMPORARY - - - -
6142 PERA-COORDINATED 32,740 35,719 27,900 29,900
6144 FICA 47,858 48,823 58,500 60,300
6151 HEALTH INSURANCE 60,103 65,420 89,000 82,900
6152 LIFE INSURANCE 818 830 - -
6154 DISABILITY - LONG TERM 1,558 1,575 - -
6155 WORKERS COMPENSATION 10,307 10,890 11,900 10,500
TOTAL PERSONAL SERVICES 813,998 821,970 952,200 971,900
PARTS & SUPPLIES
6210 OFFICE SUPPLIES 2,279 3,600 3,000 3,000
6211 OFFICE PRINTED MATERIAUFORMS 647 1,841 2,000 2,500
6212 OFFICE SMALL EQUIPMENT 1,004 4,260 2,200 2,000
6220 OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL 16,199 21,927 14,500 11,900
6222 MEDICAURESCUE/SAFETY SUPPLIES 53 232 200 200
6223 BUILDING/CLEANING SUPPLIES 17,755 17,835 14,300 16,900
6224 CLOTHING/PERSONAL EQUIPMENT 3,210 2,223 3,000 3,000
6227 RECREATION EQUIPMENT SUPPLIES 4,381 3,017 8,000 8,100
6230 REPAIR/MAINTENANCE SUPP-GENL 1,899 2,688 2,500 2,500
6232 SMALL EQUIPMENT REPAIR PARTS 1,495 9,396 7,000 5,000
6233 BUILDING REPAIR SUPPLIES 5,968 5,311 7,000 6,500
6240 SMALL TOOLS 1,258 820 800 600
6241 SHOP MATERIALS 587 667 600 700
6244 CHEMICALS & CHEMICAL PRODUCTS 248 488 2,300 2,300
6257 SIGNS & STRIPING MATERIAL - 372 1,400 300
6270 COMPUTER SOFTWARE - 478 7,100 4,400
TOTAL PARTS & SUPPLIES 56,983 75,155 75,900 69,900
SERVICES & OTHER CHARGES
6310 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 1,243 238 1,500 7,000
6314 AUDITING 500 1,600 2,100 2,000
6315 FINANCIAL- NON-AUDIT 550 - 600 700
6320 INSTRUCTORS 135 - - -
6346 POSTAGE 1,681 2,130 2,500 5,400
6347 TELEPHONE SERVICE & LINE CHG 3,609 3,318 4,400 4,100
6348 MATRIX SERVICE & REPAIR - 54 500 500
6353 PERSONAL AUTO/PARKING 1,526 1,274 1,800 1,500
6355 CELLULAR TELEPHONE SERVICE 263 201 500 300
6357 GENERAL ADVERTISING 4,994 12,360 13,000 12,000
6370 GENERAL PRINTING AND BINDING 5,985 8,626 10,000 10,400
6385 INSURANCE 18,100 19,000 20,000 21,000
6405 ELECTRICITY 112,928 128,226 115,000 125,000
6410 NATURAL GAS SERVICE $ 80,647 $ 64,292 $ 90,000 $ 90,000
70
City of Evan 2008 Proposed Budget Operating Budget
Community Center
Responsible Manager: Cherryl Mesko, Superintendent of Operations creation
LINE ITEM DETAIL
Actual Actual Budget Budget
SERVICES & OTHER CHARGES (CONT-D) 2005 2006 2007 2008
6426 SMALL EQUIPMENT REPAIR-LABOR $ 115 $ 250 $ - $ 500
6475 MISCELLANEOUS 6,405 14,401 3,000 3,000
6476 CONFERENCES AND SCHOOLS 5,106 3,908 5,100 5,000
6477 LOCAL MEETING EXPENSES 155 293 500 500
6479 DUES AND SUBSCRIPTIONS 485 563 1,000 1,200
6480 LICENSES, PERMITS AND TAXES 485 40 700 1,500
6487 VISA BANK CHARGES 7,882 9,993 9,000 10,000
6535 OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 18,683 32,065 23,500 26,100
6539 WASTE REMOVAL/SANITATION SERV 2,306 3,211 3,700 4,700
6569 MAINTENANCE CONTRACTS 8,160 13,053 15,700 15,600
OTHER SERVICES AND CHARGES 281,943 319,096 324,100 348,000
CAPITAL OUTLAY
6640 MACHINERY/EQUIPMENT - 20,757 4,400 4,000
6650 FURNITURE & FIXTURES 3,724 - 27,000 51,300
6660 OFFICE FURNISHINGS & EQUIPMENT 4,993 1,435 4,800 4,800
6670 OTHER EQUIPMENT - - 44,000 31,000
6700 CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS 3,178 - -
CAPITAL OUTLAY 11,895 22,192 80,200 91,100
MERCHANDISE FOR RESALE
6855 MERCHANDISE FOR RESALE 30,651 31,089 30,800 27,600
MERCHANDISE FOR RESALE 30,651 31,089 30,800 27,600
RESERVE FOR RENEWAL & REPLACEMENT 120,800 121,600 124,500 124,500
TOTAL COMMUNITY CENTER $ 1,316,270 $ 1,391,102 $ 1,587,700 $ 1,633,000
2.85%
DEBT SERVICE
PRINCIPAL 550,000 565,000 585,000 605,000
6491 INTEREST 584,283 571,150 548,200 524,400
6492 PAYING AGENT/BOND DESTRUCTION 403 431 400 400
TOTAL DEBT SERVICE 1,134,686 1,136,581 1,133,600 1,129,800
6488 DEPRECIATION&AMORTIZATION $ 561,693 $ 563,202 $ - $ -
1
CITY OF EAGAN
JUSTIFICATION OF CAPITAL OUTLAYS REQUESTS
1. Department Dept. No. Account No.
ECC 9223 6650
2. Give Description and Quantity of Item Requested. Indicate Date Desired.
3 gym divider curtains to split the 3 gyms into 6 separate rentable spaces.
January 2008
3. Describe the necessity for and/or benefits or savings expected from this item
The 3 gyms are currently separated by curtains to allow the rental of the separate spaces. Dividing the spaces again will allow for
expanded rentable space and/or use for classes or programs that do not need an entire gym. The benefit would be expanded
flexibility during peak attendance, will provide additional rental revenue along with an affordable option for "in-fill" rentals.
4. If the item requires an increase in personal services for the activity, state the new job title(s) contingent upon the item
5. Indicate any expenses necessary to place this item in operation and whether these expenses are included in your budget request.
The electrical requirements for installation are included in the identified cost.
List any item which will be replaced by this purchase. State recommendations for disposition of this item For example, trade-in,
salvage, discard, etc.
L___~ - - A
ESTIMATED COSTS
Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost Trade-In Net Total Cost
3 $11,000 $29,000 $ $29,000
If purchased/installed
together
CITY OF EAGAN
JUSTIFICATION OF CAPITAL OUTLAYS REQUESTS
1. Department Dept. No. Account No.
ECC 9223 6650
2. Give Description and Quantity of Item Requested. Indicate Date Desired.
Kitchen Upgrades - stainless steel tables/shelves/storage
February 2008
3. Describe the necessity for and/or benefits or savings expected from this item
Underused plate warmers were removed from the kitchen in 2007 to make room for more prep space in anticipation of this budget
request. The tables will add the additional work surface required by the caterers and the shelves and storage will be used by ECC for
the growing food and beverage operation.
4. If the item requires an increase in personal services for the activity, state the new job title(s) contingent upon the item.
5. Indicate any expenses necessary to place this item in operation and whether these expenses are included in your budget request.
V6. List any item which will be replaced by this purchase. State recommendations for disposition of this item. For example, trade-in,
,alvage, discard, etc.
ESTIMATED COSTS
Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost Trade-In Net Total Cost
1 $7,300 $7,300 $ $7,300
-73
CITY OF EAGAN
JUSTIFICATION OF CAPITAL OUTLAYS REQUESTS
1. Department Dept. No. Account No.
ECC 9223 6650
2. Give Description and Quantity of Item Requested. Indicate Date Desired.
Front Counter Upgrades
August 2008
3. Describe the necessity for and/or benefits or savings expected from this item
The front counter has a unique architectural design but after 5 years of operation does not provide the level of efficiency needed
particularly during high demand building use. Primary attention would be paid to reconfiguring the working counter on the inside of
the work area to better separate fitness member check-in and memberships, passport use and general program/activity use. Of key
importance will be the addition of an egress location from the front counter space near the elevator for access to the
gym/concessions area. This change will provide more efficient service delivery to the public.
4. If the item requires an increase in personal services for the activity, state the new job title(s) contingent upon the item.
5. Indicate any expenses necessary to place this item in operation and whether these expenses are included in your budget request.
List any item which will be replaced by this purchase. State recommendations for disposition of this item. For example, trade-in,
salvage, discard, etc.
ESTIMATED COSTS
FQuantfity Unit Cost Total Cost Trade-In Net Total Cost
$15,000 $15,000 $ $15,000
CITY OF EAGAN
JUSTIFICATION OF CAPITAL OUTLAYS REQUESTS
1. Department Dept. No. Account No.
ECC 9223 6670
2. Give Description and Quantity of Item Requested. Indicate Date Desired.
250 white resin outdoor chairs
February 2008
3. Describe the necessity for and/or benefits or savings expected from this item
The growth of outdoor weddings/events requires that renters find a vendor to rent and set up chairs for their event. Because of the
volume of events it would be a greater service and offer a new revenue stream to the ECC if we had chairs to rent. Currently renters
are spending $2-5 per chair for their event. White resin chairs would provide the professional look renters are seeking for outdoor
events in the summer but the chairs could then be used in the gym or for other events in the building as needed during the balance of
the year. This would also provide another piece as we move more into wedding packages for a set fee.
4. If the item requires an increase in personal services for the activity, state the new job title(s) contingent upon the item.
5. Indicate any expenses necessary to place this item in operation and whether these expenses are included in your budget request.
List any item which will be replaced by this purchase. State recommendations for disposition of this item. For example, trade-in,
salvage, discard, etc.
Stacking metal chairs currently used in the gym would be moved to other facilities within the city.
ESTIMATED COSTS
Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost Trade-In Net Total Cost
250 $40 $10,000 $ $10,000
CITY OF EAGAN
JUSTIFICATION OF CAPITAL OUTLAYS REQUESTS
1. Department Dept. No. Account No.
ECC 9223 6670
2. Give Description and Quantity of Item Requested. Indicate Date Desired.
2 LCD projectors
February 2008
3. Describe the necessity for and/or benefits or savings expected from this item
The growth of meetings has resulted in increased requests for presentation equipment. When simultaneous meetings are occurring
there are not enough LCD projectors to rent. This will add to the inventory of rentable AV equipment to supplement and upgrade
the current inventory.
4. If the item requires an increase in personal services for the activity, state the new job title(s) contingent upon the item.
5. Indicate any expenses necessary to place this item in operation and whether these expenses are included in your budget request.
6. List any item which will be replaced by this purchase. State recommendations for disposition of this item. For example, trade-in,
salvage, discard, etc.
Existing equipment will be kept until it is no longer usable.
ESTIMATED COSTS
Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost Trade-In Net Total Cost
22 $2,000 $4,000 $ $4,000
CITY OF EAGAN
JUSTIFICATION OF CAPITAL OUTLAYS REQUESTS
Dept. No. Account No.
1. Department 6670
ECC 9223
12. Give Description and Quantity of Item Requested. Indicate Date Desired.
2 AV carts
February 2008
3. Describe the necessity for and/or benefits or savings expected from this item
The growth of meetings has resulted in increased requests for presentation equipment. This will allow staff to prepare a cart
containing frequently requested AV equipment that will be fully stocked and portable and can be brought to any meeting space in
the building.
4. If the it=anincrease ersonal serv ices for the activity, state the new job title(s) contingent upon the item.
5. Indicate any expenses necessary to place this item in operation and whether these expenses are included in your budget request.
6. List any item which will be replaced by this purchase. State recommendations for disposition of this item. For example, trade-in,
-alvage, discard, etc.
ESTIMATED COSTS
Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost Trade-In Net Total Cost
F2 $400 $800 $ $800
-77
CITY OF EAGAN
JUSTIFICATION OF CAPITAL OUTLAYS REQUESTS
1. Department Dept. No. Account No.
ECC 9223 6670
2. Give Description and Quantity of Item Requested. Indicate Date Desired.
3 Whiteboards/Easels
January 2008
3. Describe the necessity for and/or benefits or savings expected from this item
The growth of meetings has resulted in increased requests for presentation equipment. This will add to the existing inventory until it
is not longer usable.
4. If the item requires an increase in personal services for the activity, state the new job title(s) contingent upon the item.
5 Indicate any expenses necessary to place this item in operation and whether these expenses are included in your budget request.
6. List any item which will be replaced by this purchase. State recommendations for disposition of this item. For example, trade-in,
salvage, discard, etc.
ESTIMATED COSTS
Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost Trade-In Net Total Cost
3 $220 $700 $ $700
-7e
CITY OF EAGAN
JUSTIFICATION OF CAPITAL OUTLAYS REQUESTS
Department Dept. No. Account No.
ECC 9223 6670
2. Give Description and Quantity of Item Requested. Indicate Date Desired.
34 Security cameras in the Blast
1 monitor at front desk to monitor security cameras in Blast and gym
January 2008
3. Describe the necessity for and/or benefits or savings expected from this item
There has been a growing concern for people entering the Blast without paying or when they're not age appropriate during peak
attendance in the building. We have also seen more vandalism, generally minor, but the layout of the space makes it difficult to see
where people are within the play structure. The strategically placed cameras will be connected to a monitor at the front desk so that
staff can periodically monitor the use and/or abuse. In addition, the existing security camera in the gyms will be connected to the
monitor so that staff can more efficiently view areas that are not as visible from their work station. The monitor at the front desk
will be able to more effectively alert staff to an issue when they cannot leave their work station.
4. If the item requires an increase in personal services for the activity, state the new job title(s) contingent upon the item.
5. Indicate any expenses necessary to place this item in operation and whether these expenses are included in your budget request.
X11 costs associated with this installation are included in the bid.
6. List any item which will be replaced by this purchase. State recommendations for disposition of this item. For example, trade-in,
salvage, discard, etc.
ESTIMATED COSTS
Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost Trade-In Net Total Cost
F344 security cameras $10,000 $10,000 $ $10,000
1 monitorin station
-7q
CITY OF EAGAN
JUSTIFICATION OF CAPITAL OUTLAYS REQUESTS
1. Department Dept. No. Account No.
ECC 9223 6670
2. Give Description and Quantity of Item Requested. Indicate Date Desired.
New play element for the Blast
August 2008
3. Describe the necessity for and/or benefits or savings expected from this item
Daily use of the Blast has been declining so consideration is being given to adding a new play element. There are several that are
being considered that would provide a new kind of interaction. A ceiling mounted projection onto the floor that would invite active
physical participation by all ages is a preference, however there are other play features that could also be considered.
4. If the item requires an increase in personal services for the activity, state the new job title(s) contingent upon the item.
5. Indicate any expenses necessary to place this item in operation and whether these expenses are included in your budget request.
All costs associated with this installation are included in the bid.
6. List any item which will be replaced by this purchase. State recommendations for disposition of this item. For example, trade-in,
~alvage, discard, etc.
ESTIMATED COSTS
Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost Trade-In Net Total Cost
t $3,000 $3,000 $ $3,000
OO
CITY OF EAGAN
JUSTIFICATION OF CAPITAL OUTLAYS REQUESTS
1. Department Dept. No. Account No.
ECC 9223 6670
2. Give Description and Quantity of Item Requested. Indicate Date Desired.
Detex alarms on gym/track doors
August 2008
3. Describe the necessity for and/or benefits or savings expected from this item
As the building gets busier there are more incidents of users opening the gym or track doors to let people in from the outside.
Several of the doors, particularly in the south gym are not easily visible, which makes it easy for someone to open the door to let
someone in. While this may not completely eliminate the problem because the doors need to be able to be used for emergency
egress, the sound of the alarm should be a deterent.
4. If the item requires an increase in personal services for the activity, state the new job title(s) contingent upon the item.
5. Indicate any expenses necessary to place this item in operation and whether these expenses are included in your budget request.
All costs associated with this installation are included in the bid.
6. List any item which will be replaced by this purchase. State recommendations for disposition of this item. For example, trade-in,
alvage, discard, etc.
ESTIMATED COSTS
Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost Trade-In Net Total Cost
6 $cornbined cost $2,500 $ $2,500
CITY OF EAGAN
JUSTIFICATION OF CAPITAL OUTLAYS REQUESTS
1. Department Dept. No. Account No.
ECC 9223 RenewaMeplacement
2. Give Description and Quantity of Item Requested. Indicate Date Desired.
12 8-foot banquet tables
January 2008
3. Describe the necessity for and/or benefits or savings expected from this item
Banquet tables are scheduled for replacement in 2009, however they will not all be replaced. Currently there are several tables that
are damaged and not usable which leaves the inventory short for big events. Replacing some of the tables each year over the next
several years will limit the cost implications and extend the life of those currently in circulation.
4. If the item requires an increase in personal services for the activity, state the new job title(s) contingent upon the item.
5. Indicate any expenses necessary to place this item in operation and whether these expenses are included in your budget request.
6. List any item which will be replaced by this purchase. State recommendations for disposition of this item. For example, trade-in,
salvage, discard, etc.
i ables no longer usable will be discarded. Tables will remain in inventory until they are no longer usable.
ESTIMATED COSTS
Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost Trade-In Net Total Cost
12 $250 $3000 $ $3,000
04:0)
CITY OF EAGAN
JUSTIFICATION OF CAPITAL OUTLAYS REQUESTS
1. Department Dept. No. Account No.
ECC 9223 Renewal/Replacement
2. Give Description and Quantity of Item Requested. Indicate Date Desired.
400 chair replacement pads
January 2008
3. Describe the necessity for and/or benefits or savings expected from this item
All banquet chairs were scheduled for replacement in 2008. Because of the cost associated with replacing the whole chair ($90/ea)
we are requesting to replace only the back and seat pads ($40/set). The first choice would be to replace the pads with the existing
pattern and style so they would not all have to be replaced, however that style/pattern is no longer made so a new pattern/color will.
need to be selected. By not replacing the whole chair there is a savings of $20,000.
4. If the item requires an increase in personal services for the activity, state the new job title(s) contingent upon the item.
5. Indicate any expenses necessary to place this item in operation and whether these expenses are included in your budget request.
Staff time to replace the ads - should not impact the budget as an additional expense.
6. List any item which will be replaced by this purchase. State recommendations for disposition of this item. For example, trade-in,
alvage, discard, etc.
Chair pads no longer usable will be disposed of.
ESTIMATED COSTS
Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost Trade-In Net Total Cost
400 $40 $16,000 $ $16,000
g3
CITY OF EAGAN
JUSTIFICATION OF CAPITAL OUTLAYS REQUESTS
i. Department Dept. No. Account No.
ECC 9223 RenewaUReplacement
2. Give Description and Quantity of Item Requested. Indicate Date Desired.
One automatic restroom cleaner to provide regular in-depth cleaning of locker rooms and rest rooms.
January 2008
3. Describe the necessity for and/or benefits or savings expected from this item
This would replace the current Kaizan machine that provides a higher level of cleaning, particularly for heavily used locker rooms
and rest rooms.
4. If the item requires an increase in personal services for the activity, state the new job title(s) contingent upon the item.
5. Indicate any expenses necessary to place this item in operation and whether these expenses are included in your budget request.
6. List any item which will be replaced by this purchase. State recommendations for disposition of this item. For example, trade-in,
salvage, discard, etc.
The existing Kaizan machine wiI I be kept to supplement the new equipment until it is no longer usable.
ESTIMATED COSTS
Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost Trade-In Net Total Cost
1 $4,000 $4,000 $ $4,000
CITY OF EAGAN
JUSTIFICATION OF CAPITAL OUTLAYS REQUESTS
t. Department Dept. No. Account No.
ECC 9223 RenewaMeplacement
2. Give Description and Quantity of Item Requested. Indicate Date Desired.
5 Treadmills
2 cross trainers
3 bikes
January 2008
3. Describe the necessity for and/or benefits or savings expected from this item
Much of the fitness equipment is scheduled to be replaced in 2009. Phasing replacement over the next 34 years may be a more
practical way to spread the costs as well as provide something "new" on a regular basis. The costs for equipment have increased
substantially since the initial purchase in 2003 so more thought needs to go into how to best replace this capital investment. The
new pieces of equipment will have a 3-5 year warranty so the costs for maintaining equipment internally will drop with these piecesl
4. If the item requires an increase in personal services for the activity, state the new job title(s) contingent upon the item.
5. Indicate any expenses necessary to place this item in operation and whether these expenses are included in your budget request.
List any item which will be replaced by this purchase. State recommendations for disposition of this item. For example, trade-in,
salvage, discard, etc.
5 treadmills would need to be sold (trade-in value = vendor doesn't take trade-in)
3 upright bikes would need to be sold (trade-in value = $1200)
2 commercial climbers would need to be sold (trade-in value = $600)
ESTIMATED COSTS
Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost Trade-In Net Total Cost
5 treadmills $10,100 $50,500 $ -0- $50,500
3 interactive bikes $4,700 $14,100 $1,200 $12,900
2 adaptive motion $8,300 $16,600 $600 $16,000
Note: Will look at options and implication to budget to lease rather than purchase. Disposal of existing
equipment will be a challenge imless we can find a smaller community/fitness facility that wants to purchase
used equipment.
Comm Ctr R&R schedule.xls 9/4/2007
Eagan Community Center
Capital Renewal/Replacement Funds
Estimated
Useful Replacement Year Annual Year to
Item Description Life Cost Replaced Amortization Replace
BOILERS (3) 35 $ 75,000 NEW 03 $ 2,143 2037
WATER HEATERS (4) 12 16,000 NEW 03 1,333 2014
PLAYSPACE 8 150,000 NEW 03 18,750 2010
CHILLER 20 135,000 NEW 03 6,750 2022
ROOF 20 250,000 NEW 03 12,500 2022
RIDER FLOOR SCRUBBER 6 8,800 NEW 03 1,467 2008
KAIZEN RESTROOM CLEANER 6 2,800 NEW 03 467 2008
HUMIDIFIERS (4) 10 48,000 NEW 03 4,800 2012
CIRC MOTORS (4) 8 4,800 NEW 03 600 2010
AHU SUPPLY/RETURN MOTORS (4) 35 120,000 NEW 03 3,429 2037
BUFFER 7 1,500 NEW 03 214 2009
SWEEPER 7 3,300 NEW 03 471 2009
CARPET EXTRACTOR 7 5,500 NEW 03 786 2009
PULL EXTRACTOR 5 2,400 NEW 03 480 2009
WATER SOFTENER (2) 20 9,000 NEW 03 450 2022
CARPET SPOTTER 7 600 NEW 03 86 2009
BURNISHER 7 1,500 NEW 03 214 2009
WALK IN COOLER 8 8,000 NEW 03 1,000 2010
REACH IN REFER/FREEZER 7 4,850 NEW 03 693 2009
REACH IN REFRIDGERATOR 7 4,050 NEW 03 579 2009
REACH IN FREEZER 7 4,050 NEW 03 579 2009
DISPLAY COOLER 7 1,000 NEW 03 143 2009
WARMING OVENS (4) 7 11,000 NEW 03 1,571 2009
DISHWASHER 10 8,400 NEW 03 840 2012
BOOSTER HEATER 7 1,020 NEW 03 146 2009
PLATE WARMERS / HOLDERS (7) 7 11,320 NEW 03 1,617 2009
ICE MAKER 7 2,600 NEW 03 371 2009
REFRIDGERATOR (2) 12 800 NEW 03 67 2014
OVAL TABLES (45) 15 15,750 NEW 03 1,050 2017
RECTANGULAR TABLES (90) 15 22,500 NEW 03 1,500 2017
BISTRO TABLES (12) 15 3,600 NEW 03 240 2017
BANQUET CHAIRS (450) 5 37,050 NEW 03 7,410 2007
PLASTIC CHAIRS (175) 5 3,850 NEW 03 770 2007
PODIUMS (3) 12 2,000 NEW 03 167 2014
TENSABARRIERS (16) 12 2,300 NEW 03 192 2014
ATRIUM/LONE OAK FURNITURE 7 8,600 NEW 03 1,229 2009
POND FOUNTAIN 6 7,000 NEW 03 1,167 2008
BANQUET ROOM AUDIO SYSTEM 8 21,550 NEW 03 2,694 2010
AEROBIC STUDIO AUDIO SYSTEM 8 10,580 NEW 03 1,323 2010
EXERCISE ROOM AUDIO SYSTEM 7 2,700 NEW 03 386 2009
CARDIO FITNESS EQUIPMENT (30) 7 116,040 NEW 03 16,577 2009
FREE/SELECTORIZED FIT. EQUIP.(14) 7 7,500 NEW 03 1,071 2009
INDOOR CYCLE BIKES (15) 6 8,625 NEW 03 1,438 2008/09
TEEN CENTER FURNITURE 7 15,000 NEW 03 2,143 2009
PREFUNCTION / OAKS CARPET 5 40,000 NEW 03 8,000 2007
REMAINING BUILDING CARPET 7 46,000 NEW 03 6,571 2009
BUILDING VCT /VINYL FLOORING 5 19,500 NEW 03 3,900 2007
ATRIUM 5 3,000 NEW 03 600 2007
MEETING ROOM / TEEN
CENTER / LONE OAK 6 16,500 NEW 03 2,750 2008
AED 10 2,000 NEW 04 200 2013
MENU BOARD 15 2,000 NEW 04 133 2018
BURNISHER - 2nd 3 1,500 USED 04 500 2006
Total 124,554
O Y
COMMUNITY CENTER - Capital Replacement
2005 Setup RE for Capital Replacement 315,724.00
2005 2005 Contribution from RE 120,800.00 127,154.89 9223.3560
2005 Interest 6,354.89 9223.3570
442,878.89
2006 2006 Contribution from RE 121,600.00 139,472.54 9223.3560
2006 Interest 17,872.54 9223.3570
582,351.43
97
Agenda Information Memo
Eagan City Council Workshop Meeting
September 11, 2007
VII. MODIFICATION OF DYNAMIC SIGN/BILLBOARD REGULATIONS
DIRECTION TO BE CONSIDERED:
To provide direction to staff regarding the preparation of a City Code amendment for the regulation of
dynamic signs.
FACTS:
➢ In response to the initial installation of electronic digital billboard signs in late 2006, a number of
cities in the region, including Eagan, enacted moratoriums on the placement of additional signs
of that type, to permit them to study and consider additional regulations in their regard. The city
of Eagan enacted its moratorium in January, 2007, and it is set to expire on October 31, 2007.
➢ In an effort to control costs and not duplicate work already being done by other cities, the City of
Eagan joined with the League of Minnesota Cities, which was coordinating a joint study on
behalf of its member cities.
➢ At that time, the City of Minnetonka had commissioned a study by SRF both to provide the basis
for its own consideration of additional regulations and to better define the issues associated with
such signs as part of its defense in a lawsuit brought by Clear Channel Communications to permit
the installation and operation of such signs in that City. Minnetonka agreed to permit LMC to use
and distribute the SRF study for use by its members, once Minnetonka had implemented its own
ordinance update, which occurred in June, 2007.
➢ While the Minnetonka ordinance is not defined as a model ordinance, it has incorporated the
findings of the SRF study, input from affected sign companies and input from the attorneys
involved in the lawsuit to permit the City to effectively regulate dynamic signs and permit off-site
and on-site sign owners to communicate a variety of messages effectively.
➢ The City of Minnetonka Study Session staff memo logically and concisely lays out the
background and policy issues that are most germane to this matter, staff proposes that the first
two attachments below, the Eagan staff memo and the Minnetonka Study Session staff memo, be
used in tandem to organize the Council's discussion of this matter and its direction to staff.
Following the staff presentation and initial Council questions, staff would propose to have the
Council review and discuss the six bulleted questions at the end of the Eagan staff memo and
spaced through the body of the Minnetonka staff memo.
ATTACHMENTS:
➢ Eagan staff memo on pages through
➢ City of Minnetonka Study Session staff memo on pages % through
➢ SRF memo regarding application of Dynamic Signage Study Report on page
Dynamic Signage Study Report by SRF enclosed without page number.
➢ City of Minnetonka Dynamic Sign Ordinance on pages 1Q through
A LMC magazine article on digital billboards on page
➢ Eagan City Code section on Off-Premise (Billboard) on pages through
➢ Eagan off-premise sign locations on page 12
n /-70
City of Eapn MeiDo
TO: TOM HEDGES, CITY ADMINISTRATOR
FROM: JON HOHENSTEIN, DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DATE: SEPTEMBER 6, 2007
SUBJECT: DYNAMIC SIGN REGULATION
Background
In the past, the City of Eagan has regulated lighted and changing message signs
to maintain consistency among signs throughout the community and to minimize
driver distraction and traffic safety. The City has done this using two methods
common in municipal zoning codes. The City Code prohibits signs images that
flash, scroll or blink and the Code regulates changing image signs by
establishing a maximum frequency of image change.
Changes in Sign Technology
The issue of changing image signs has evolved over time. When the primary
means of changing sign messages was by the hand replacement of lettering on
reader board signs or the manual replacement of entire sign faces, image
change was infrequent because of the manual labor involved in the process. The
other historic method of message or image change was scrolling lighted
message boards, which the City Code prohibits by definition.
Recently, LED and other lighting technologies have enhanced the ability of users
to change images more frequently and remotely. As this has occurred, the City
has regulated such signs most often through conditional use permits for pylon or
monument signs, in the conditions for which, the City Council has typically
established fairly conservative frequency rates of two to four image changes per
day. The conditions of approval have varied, however, from as little as two times
per day to one planned development that permits changes of six times per hour.
In setting these standards, the City recognized that frequent changes in sign
images and messages would create distractions for drivers needing to pay
attention to traffic signals, road signs and other traffic.
1
Dynamic Signs
Even with the advances, though, most sign technologies still were limited to
changing text or rudimentary animation, so the limitations on blinking, scrolling,
etc. continued to limit most image changes to static text.
The City addressed the issue of changes in entire images in 2000, when DeLite
applied to install a billboard at 1-35 and 1-494 that used rotating triangular
structures to display three different messages over a period of time. At that time,
the City Council determined that the display of different messages in this format
could be permitted provided the entire image changed, so that the effect was not
one of animation, but rather a different means of changing an otherwise static
image.
The rotating panel technology was a precursor to a more recent development in
the sign industry. In recent years, display panel technology has improved and
prices had come down to the point that it had become cost effective for the
billboard industry to begin to install LED signs that could function like video
monitors, such that they could permit the change of entire images
instantaneously. The technology permits multiple signs to be controlled
remotely, using computer software that manages the images and their brightness
from a central location.
While the technology has the capacity to do full animation, similar to display
screens in sports stadiums, the industry recognized that federal, state and local
regulations in many urban areas prohibit flashing, scrolling, blinking and other
types of animation. For that reason, the industry has attempted to define a
minimum duration for each image to appear before a change would occur, in an
attempt to conform to such standards. In the Twin Cities, the first company to
use such signs, Clear Channel, has identified a duration of 8 seconds per
message.
Introduction of LED Signs in Twin Cities and City Regulation
In the Twin Cities, Clear Channel was the first billboard company to introduce full
panel LED dynamic signs in late 2006. They were installed on existing sign
structures in a number of cities in the region, including one on 1-494 in Eagan.
Following their installation, a number of cities recognized that their sign codes
had not been written with such technologies in mind and several of them, like
Eagan, enacted moratoriums to permit them to study whether additional
regulations would be necessary.
The most widely publicized moratorium occurred in the City of Minnetonka,
where the City not only enacted a moratorium, but ordered that two signs that
had been erected in the City be shut off, because they alleged that the full extent
of the company's intended work on the signs had not been included in their
2
electrical permit application. (Note: Minnetonka handles electrical inspections
internally, where Eagan relies on state electrical inspectors. The replacement of
a sign face in Eagan does not require a building permit.) Clear Channel sued the
City of Minnetonka to permit the signs. Through initial rulings, Minnetonka
prevailed in having the court find that the City had the authority to regulate such
signs in the public interest, but also permitted the company to turn on its signs,
provided it abided by the duration included in Minnetonka's moratorium of no
more than one image change per hour. The City commissioned a study by SRF
to be used as the basis for establishing its regulations. Through the lawsuit, the
related sign study and the subsequent settlement of the lawsuit, the two parties
resolved the issues of how the City of Minnetonka would continue to regulate
signs given the changes in technology, within parameters acceptable to the
billboard industry.
While it is unfortunate when public policy issues are resolved through lawsuit, in
this case, by virtue of the situation, the City of Minnetonka has provided a base
for other cities, while also receiving at least preliminary court rulings on the key
issues of the application of local regulation to a changing sign technology.
In addition, as staff has prepared the background for this discussion, it has
confirmed with Clear Channel that it would be open to other cities using a format
and conclusions similar to that adopted by the City of Minnetonka. Therefore,
unless there are substantial reasons to approach Eagan's regulations or policy
decisions differently, it appears that there would be few, if any, challenges to
following a similar path.
League of Minnesota Cities Role
In order to provide guidance to their member cities and to permit cities to avoid
having to reinvent the wheel, the League of Minnesota Cities worked together
with the City of Minnetonka and SRF to develop the background for the study
and to make it available to other cities. In enacting Eagan's moratorium, the City
Council authorized staff to work with LMC both to control costs and to be able to
base Eagan's potential ordinance amendments on data consistent with that used
by other communities.
Following the completion of the study in early June and Minnetonka's adoption of
its ordinance in late June, the City of Eagan received the information necessary
to begin the Council review of the data. Since a workshop meeting was not
scheduled in July and the August workshop was focused on the 2008 City
Budget, the information is coming forward at this time.
3
Q
a'
Format for Council Review
The City Council originally established its moratorium through July 31, 2007. In
consideration of the timing of the completion of the LMC-Minnetonka study, the
moratorium was extended through October 31, 2007. Several updates on the
matter have been provided to the City Council in its informative memos, but this
review represents the first opportunity for the Council to discuss the merits of
modifying sign regulations in this area.
In order to complete City's review of this issue by that time, the matter is being
presented to the Council in at a workshop meeting on September 11. Based on
the Council's direction, a City Code Amendment will receive a public hearing
before the Advisory Planning Commission on September 25 and the item will be
back before the City Council on October 2 or October 16, to permit publication
before the end of October.
Discussion Context
The discussion of changing images or messages on signs involves a number of
local policy issues to be addressed below and in the attachments. Several
overarching issues and definitions provide the context for the discussion.
The first is that regulations must be content neutral. That is, to say, that the
City's regulations are not permitted to differentiate between signs based on the
message being displayed. The only qualifications to that limitation are that cities
may differentiate between commercial and non-commercial signs (i.e. sales
promotion v. "support our troops" signs) and they may differentiate between on-
site and off-site signs (i.e. name or logo of business on the same property v.
billboards for businesses or products not on the same property).
While these differentiations, can be made, one outcome of the study and
discussion through the LMC is that we refer primarily to changes in "image"
rather than changes in "message" when describing the signs and performance
standards.
The second is that LED technology is only the most recent approach to changing
sign images. While the discussion at the outset revolved around LEDs, it
became apparent that the real regulatory issue relates to image change and not
the means by which it is accomplished. As a consequence, the joint study and
the Minnetonka ordinance use the term "dynamic" signs to describe those on
which an image changes, regardless of technology.
4
Eagan Policy Issues
As noted above, the value of the LMC coordination and the City of Minnetonka
analysis and ordinance preparation is that it permits the City of Eagan to
approach the same issues in a more succinct manner. For that reason, rather
than reproduce all of the same information, the Council is invited to review and
respond to the issues outlined in the background memo for the City of
Minnetonka Study Session on May 14, 2007. Only the questions noted at the
end of each section of that memo are repeated here, with the addition of several
additional questions or clarifications, speck to the Eagan's situation or
ordinance.
• Should dynamic sign regulation be consistent with the current sign
ordinance, and apply equally to all forms of freestanding "dynamic"
messages, types of signs and zoning districts?
o Eagan staff would concur with the conclusions in the Minnetonka
memo regarding the need for additional standards relating to the
location, size and manner of display.
• Should a general brightness standard be adopted, with an administrative
appeal process?
o Minnetonka staff and representatives of Clear Channel agree that
the appeal process is unlikely to be used, but it in place reinforces
both parties' incentives to work together to achieve appropriate
brightness levels in consideration of ambient light conditions.
• Should the ordinance require instantaneous replacement of static,
unrelated messages?
o The study's conclusion reinforces the City's previous limitations on
animation.
o A related question is whether the City should identify a sign size
under which the City would permit animation or more frequent
image change, since displays of some size would be too small to
be seen by the traveling public? One example is the trend toward
video displays on gas pumps, which allow a number of images to
be displayed at the point of sale, at a scale that can only be seen
within close proximity to the display. Such an exception may
address concerns like those raised by businesses during the City's
review of window signs.
• Should the minimum display time be set at 20 minutes?
o The 20 minute duration has now been adopted by the Cities of
Minnetonka and Bloomington and, as such, would permit the City of
Eagan to have consistency with other cities that have addressed
this issue to date.
o It would also permit the City to shift from the current range of
different durations required under its conditional use permits to one
standard that would be easier for sign owners to adhere to and
easier for the City to enforce. Current and future owners of such
5
93
signs would also benefit by the duration being shorter than the
current CUP standards.
• Should the maximum portion of the sign message area be limited to 35%?
o The City of Eagan currently limits the dynamic portion of a sign to
be subordinate to the business name on the sign area. For the
reasons outlined in the Minnetonka ordinance, this reinforces the
primary purpose of many signs that are used for "way-finding" to
have a constant image and for the dynamic portions of the signs to
be secondary and smaller than the constant portion.
• Should incentives be provided for the removal of off-premise signs?
o The City of Eagan has a fraction of the number of off-premise signs
(billboards) that the City of Minnetonka has, due to the timeframe
within which the City developed, the zoning code in place when
development occurred and the implementation of ordinance
provisions that capped the number of off-premise signs and their
area, such that the number and area can never increase. Even so,
the City of Eagan's stated intent has been to cap and, if possible,
reduce the number of off-premise signs in the community. In that
way, its interests are similar to those stated in the Minnetonka staff
report.
o The incentive approach implemented in the Minnetonka ordinance
is one that permits an off-site sign to have a greater proportion of its
surface have a dynamic image that changes more frequently than
the City's general standard, in exchange for which the number of
off-site signs is reduced. Given the large number of off-site signs in
Minnetonka, the incentive ratio established permitted the
installation of one dynamic face in exchange for the removal of two
other sign faces. Minnetonka concluded that the removal of signs
was a substantial public interest that could be served by this
mechanism.
o With a smaller number of signs and sign faces in Eagan to begin
with, a different ratio or a different approach to the incentives may
be appropriate. One alternative that the City found to serve a
substantial public purpose in the case of the approval of the
DeLite/CBS tri-panel billboard was to have the off-sign's owner
commit to provide the City with a certain level of public service
communication.
o Either of these mechanism could function within the context of the
City's current regulations regarding the reduction and replacement
of off-site signs.
Summary
The City of Eagan implemented a moratorium on dynamic signs in order to study
whether the City should adopt additional regulations in their regard. The City of
Minnetonka and the League of Minnesota Cities have prepared a study and have
G 6
l~
provided background that provides information to consider such changes. While
LMC has not defined the Minnetonka ordinance as a model ordinance, the fact
that its regulations are based on the findings of the study, that they were
developed in the context of a lawsuit and its settlement and that it serves public
interests similar to those stated by the City of Eagan, it can serve as a
reasonable basis for the City's discussion of the policy issues above.
7
~S
City Council Study Session Item # 1
Meeting of May 14, 2007
Brief Description: Regulation of dynamic signs
Requested Action: Review recommendations and provide direction
Background
The city of Minnetonka enacted a moratorium on all electronic signs on December 18,
2006, and directed staff to undertake a study to determine if there is a need for
amendments to the city's sign ordinance. This action was taken in response to the
erection of two digital billboards on 1-394 and 1-494.
Staff contracted with SRF Consulting to conduct a review of existing studies and other
cities' ordinances. Staff also retained the services of Gerald Wachtel, a recognized
expert in the study of dynamic signs and advisor to the city of Seattle, Washington at
the time that city's dynamic sign ordinance was adopted.
Although the study is not yet finalized, the major conclusions and recommendations of
both consultants are incorporated into these staff recommendations. The detailed report
will be provided at the time the proposed ordinance is introduced.
General Framework
The easiest approach to dynamic signs, from both a legal and enforcement standpoint,
is to either prohibit all of them or allow them with no restrictions. Instead, staff
recommends consideration of a balanced approach to dynamic sign regulation that
protects community interests, while recognizing the need to reasonably accommodate
evolving sign technologies.
The term "dynamic" sign is used to identify all signs that have changing messages,
regardless of the means. By avoiding descriptions that identify the type of change, such
as "electronic," the ordinance can better deal with future technologies that have not yet
been developed. This approach also recognizes that changing messages by any means
can be distracting to the driving public.
Signs are a form of "speech" protected by federal and state constitutions. As a result,
cities must be very careful that sign regulations generally do not discriminate on the
basis of message content. It can be a challenge to defend an ordinance that draws fine
distinctions when allowing certain kinds of signs to be dynamic while prohibiting others.
Accordingly, staff proposes that dynamic sign provisions "overlay" the city's existing sign
regulations. There would be no change to the existing standards regarding such things
City Council Study Session of May 14, 2007 Page 2
Dynamic Sign Regulations
as zoning, number, size and location. As a general matter, the dynamic regulations
would apply equally to all signs, with few if any distinctions between zoning districts or
between on- and off-premise signs.
Although residential districts are deserving of more protection than other zoning
districts, that is taken into account in the underlying regulations. Additionally, there are
uses in residential districts that could benefit from having changing messages, such as
churches, schools and government offices. The recommended approach is to allow
dynamic signs in all districts for all uses but to control the potential impacts through
appropriate restrictions.
The recommended approach does not include any spacing requirements. Staff believes
that spacing restrictions could result in unequal treatment of property owners, since the
first property owner to install a dynamic sign could prevent the neighboring property
owner from also having a dynamic sign. This would be unfair, and could actually
increase the frequency of such uses by creating an incentive for nearby property
owners to race each other to convert their signs.
The only locational requirement recommended by staff is to limit dynamic messages to
freestanding signs only. Dynamic messages would not be permitted on building signs.
Discussion question: Should dynamic sign regulation be consistent with
the current sign ordinance, and apply equally to all forms of freestanding
"dynamic" messages, types of signs and zoning districts?
Staff recommendations are provided for brightness levels, operational mode, minimum
display time and size of the dynamic portion.
Brightness Levels
The consultants determined that the brightness of signs can be distracting, and if very
bright, can actually result in a "blinding" effect, particularly at night. Pure white light
appears the most bright, and has the most blinding capability.
Unfortunately, there is currently no good way to measure the brightness of signs in the
field. Sign manufacturers can measure the light emitted by LED signs in a controlled
factory setting by measuring the "nit" level, but those conditions cannot be re-created in
actual field conditions. Additionally, the instruments used to measure brightness are
currently very expensive.
With no good way of measuring brightness, staff recommends that the city use the
general standard adopted by the Wisconsin Department of Transportation: "No [sign]
may be illuminated to a degree of brightness that is greater than necessary for
q7
City Council Study Session of May 14, 2007 Page 3
Dynamic Sign Regulations
adequate visibility." The general philosophy is that dynamic signs should have the same
appearance has regular signs both during the day and at night.
The recommended ordinance would incorporate a process that allows city staff to make
the initial determination, but allows a sign owner to appeal this determination to an
independent panel. The appeal panel would consist of one person selected by the city,
one person selected by the sign owner, and one person selected by the first two people.
This approach was discussed at a meeting with sign industry representatives and
appears to be generally acceptable.
In addition, the ordinance would prohibit the use of pure white light, because of its
blinding potential. Industry representatives have agreed to help staff define that term.
Discussion question: Should a general brightness standard be adopted,
with an administrative appeal process?
Operational Mode
Dynamic signs have the capability of operating in many different modes, ranging from
static messages to scrolling text to full motion video. These operational modes have
obvious implications for the distracting nature of dynamic signs.
The city's consultants concluded that there can never be definitive proof of a causal
connection between dynamic signs and highway accidents. This is because state-of-
the-art driving simulators cannot truly simulate real-life conditions. Further, controlled
roadway studies cannot be performed, because controlled roadways can not be filled
with hundreds or thousands of cars operating under normal conditions. Finally, eye
movement studies use a very limited pool of test subjects who are operating under
circumstances that are designed to avoid accidents.
Nevertheless, the studies performed to date provide important insight. For example,
some studies indicate how drivers tend to react to signs in different settings, while other
studies inform how different degrees and types of distraction are associated with
accidents. By considering those individual pieces together, the city can thoughtfully
evaluate the risks posed by dynamic signage.
Studies do show that there is a correlation between moving signs and the distraction of
highway drivers. An eye movement study showed that changing signs may distract
drivers by as much as two seconds. The Federal Highway Administration has
determined that being distracted for two seconds or more can result in traffic accidents.
Drivers can be distracted not only by a changing message, but also by knowing that the
sign has a changing message. Drivers may watch a sign waiting for the next change to
occur. Drivers are also distracted by messages that do not tell the full story in one look.
City Council Study Session of May 14, 2007 Page 4
Dynamic Sign Regulations
An example is a scrolling sign - people have a natural desire to see the end of the story,
and will continue to look at the sign in order to wait for the end.
The consultants also concluded that drivers are more distracted by special effects used
to change the message, such as fade-ins and fade-outs. Finally, drivers are generally
more distracted by messages that are too small to be clearly seen or that contain more
than a simple message.
In response to these conclusions, staff proposes that the ordinance allow only static
displays. No animation, motion or video would be permitted. Additionally, the message
change would have to be instantaneous, without any distracting effects, such as
dissolving, spinning or fading. Sequential messages, such as a two-stage message for
a single product, service or business, would also be prohibited. Staff is also considering
the possibility of requiring a minimum font size to avoid messages that are too small to
easily read or that contain too much information.
Discussion question: Should the ordinance require instantaneous
replacement of static, unrelated images?
Minimum Display Time
Because staff is recommending against an absolute ban on dynamic signs with static
displays, and also that there be no spacing requirements, the minimum display time
becomes critical. If the display time is too short, a driver could be subjected to a view
that appears to have constant movement. This impact would obviously be compounded
in a corridor with multiple signs.
If dynamic signs become pervasive and there are no meaningful limitations on each
sign's ability to change frequently, drivers may be subjected to an unsafe degree of
distraction and sensory overload. Accordingly, a longer display time is appropriate.
Staff recommends that the minimum display time be set at 20 minutes, which is the
standard adopted by the city of Bloomington following its own thorough study. This is
less than the one-hour display time that is currently in effect through the district court's
temporary injunction, and thus provides greater flexibility to sign owners. There would
be an exception for time and temperature signs, which the federal court has recognized
as a legitimate exception to limitations on variable message signs.
Discussion question: Should the minimum display time be set at 20
minutes?
R~
City Council Study Session of May 14, 2007 Page 5
Dynamic Sign Regulations
Size of Dynamic Portion
One objective of dynamic sign regulation is the prevention of driver distraction. Public
safety is also protected by ensuring that people can find their way to where they want to
go. If "way-finding" is compromised, driving conduct can be adversely affected by last-
second lane changes or turns, which could result in traffic accidents.
Staff believes that a significant portion of permitted signs
should remain constant, so that identity and location can be
more readily determined. Staff also believes that this way-
finding purpose should be given significantly more weight 80 sgft Pylon Sign
than any advertising purpose of a dynamic message.
Limiting the amount of sign face that can be dynamic also 35% Dynamic
serves aesthetic and public safety purposes by discouraging
the proliferation of multiple changing signs and reducing
exposure to the public.
Dynamic portion
Accordingly, staff recommends that no more than 35 percent 3.5'x ff
of the message area of a permitted sign could contain a
dynamic message. This favors way-finding over advertising
by a 2:1 factor. Further, structural limits to dynamic
capabilities should be enacted to enable enforcement.
Discussion question: Should the maximum
portion of the sign message area be limited to
35 percent?
Incentives
Staff also recommends that incentives be provided for the removal of non-conforming
signs, specifically billboards. The advent of this technology creates an important
community planning opportunity. A single dynamic sign can serve the function otherwise
performed by multiple traditional billboards. Thus, outdoor advertising companies ought
to be encouraged to use dynamic sign displays to consolidate such activities in
appropriate locations while removing traditional billboards from areas where large signs
are not appropriate.
The city of Minnetonka previously made a determination that off-premise signs are no
longer allowed in the city because they are inherently distracting, and do not serve the
need of property owners to identify themselves and their businesses. Those signs
remain now as non-conforming uses.
Staff recommends that an off-premises sign be allowed to use a greater portion of the
message area for dynamic messages if the owner removes one other off-premise sign,
Sao
City Council Study Session of May 14, 2007 Page 6
Dynamic Sign Regulations
subject to certain minimum size and other conditions. This one-for-one trade would
offset the distraction of a larger message area by removing the inherent distraction from
another sign, and would reduce the number of non-conforming signs in the city.
Discussion question: Should incentives be provided for the removal of
non-conforming off-premise signs?
Next Steps
After staff has received council and planning commission direction on these issues, a
draft ordinance will be prepared. The plan is to introduce the ordinance at the June 4th
council meeting, conduct the public hearing at the June 14th planning commission
hearing, and adopt the ordinance at the June 25th city council meeting. This will meet
the deadline of the current moratorium ordinance.
Submitted through:
John Gunyou, City Manager
Originated by:
Desyl Peterson, City Attorney
Ron Rankin, Community Development Director
Julie Wischnack, City Planner
1d~
MICONSULTING G Roue, INC.
Transportation • Civil • Structural • Environmental • Planning • Traffic • Landscape Architecture • Parking • Right of Way
MEMORANDUM
TO: Tom Grundhoefer
League of Minnesota Cities
FROM: Karen Sprattler, Senior Associat
SRF Consulting Group, Inc.
DATE: June 21,2007
SUBJECT: DYNAmic" SIGNAGE: RESEARCH RELATED TO DRIVER DISTRACTION AND
ORDINANCE RECOMMENDATIONSREPORT
This study was originally commissioned in response to litigation brought by Clear
Channel Communications, Inc. in response to actions taken by the City of Minnetonka,
Minnesota in regard to the installation of two LED ("light emitting diode") billboards
along Interstate 394 and Interstate 494. This study was undertaken to examine issues
surrounding the Minnetonka billboards. While the concerns were precipitated by LED
billboards in particular, this report examines more broadly "dynamic" display signage.
However, this report is not the intended to be a comprehensive study of all issues raised
by dynamic signage or other types of billboards,
As the study progressed, additional communities and the League of Minnesota Cities
expressed interest in these issues. While it is true that the study was prepared for the
City of Minnetonka, it is acknowledged that the many of the findings and conclusions,
and the broader discussion of many of the issues of concern may be useful to other
communities involved in similar situations.
R IPr%cts159951FInal ReportlStudy disclaimer062007 KS.doc
One Carlson Parkway North, Suite 150 Case Plaza, One North Second Street
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55447-4443 S r f c o n s u l t i n g -Gam Fargo, North Dakota 58102-4807
Tel: 763-475-0010 • Fax: 763-475-2429 Tel: 701-237-0010 9 Fax 701-237-0017
,tin curia! Upportority CnlpfovWr
L O~
ORDINANCE NO. 2007-
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CITY CODE SECTION 300.30
REGARDING DYNAMIC SIGNS
The City of Minnetonka Ordains:
Section 1. City code §300.30, subd. 1 is amended as follows:
1. Purpose and Findings.
The purpose and findings of the sign ordinance are as follows:
a) Purpose: the sign ordinance is intended to establish a comprehensive and
balanced system of sign control that accommodates the need for a well-maintained,
safe, and attractive community, and the need for effective communications including
business identification. It is the intent of this section, to promote the health, safety,
general welfare, aesthetics, and image of the community by regulating signs that are
intended to communicate to the public, and to use signs which meet the city's goals by
authorizing:
1) permanent signs which establish a high standard of aesthetics;
2) signs which are compatible with their surroundings;
3) signs which are designed, constructed, installed and maintained in a
manner that does not adversely impact public safety or unduly distract motorists;
4) signs which are large enough to convey the intended message and to help
citizens find their way to intended destinations;
5) signs that are proportioned to the scale of, and are architecturally
compatible with, principal structures;
6) permanent signs which give preference to the on-premise owner or
occupant; and
7) temporary commercial signs and advertising displays which provide an
opportunity for grand openings and occasional sales events while restricting signs which
create continuous visual clutter and hazards at public right-of-way intersections.
b) Findings: the city of Minnetonka finds it is necessary for the promotion and
preservation of the public health, safety, welfare and aesthetics of the community that
the construction, location, size and maintenance of signs be controlled. Further, the city
The 6tFF6k8R language is deleted; the underlined language is inserted.
ld3
Ordinance No. 2007- Page 2
finds:
1) permanent and temporary signs have a direct impact on and relationship
to the image of the community;
2) the manner of installation, location and maintenance of signs affects the
public health, safety, welfare and aesthetics of the community;
3) an opportunity for viable identification of community businesses and
institutions must be established;
4) the safety of motorists, cyclists, pedestrians and other users of public
streets and property is affected by the number, size, location and appearance of signs
that unduly divert the attention of drivers;
5) installation of signs suspended from, projecting over, or placed on the tops
of buildings, walks or other structures may constitute a hazard during periods of high
winds and an obstacle to effective fire-fighting and other emergency service;
6) uncontrolled and unlimited signs adversely impact the image and aesthetic
attractiveness of the community and thereby undermine economic value and growth;
7) uncontrolled and unlimited signs, particularly temporary signs which are
commonly located within or adjacent to public right-of-way or are located at
driveway/street intersections, result in roadside clutter and obstruction of views of
oncoming traffic. This creates a hazard to drivers and pedestrians and also adversely
impacts a logical flow of information;
8) commercial signs are generally incompatible with residential uses and
should be strictly limited in residential zoning districts; and
9) the right to express noncommercial opinions in any zoning district must be
protected, subject to reasonable restrictions on size, height, location and number.
Section 2. City code §300.02, subd. 2, is amended by the deletion of the following
definitions and the re-numbering of the remaining clauses consecutively.
The r,,tF'GkeR language is deleted; the underlined language is inserted.
Ordinance No. 2007- Page 3
date,
IGGated at the di6play site,
Section 3. City code §300.30, subd. 2, is amended by the addition of the following
definition which is to be inserted alphabetically and the following clauses renumbered
consecutively:
"Dynamic display" -any characteristics of a sign that appear to have movement
or that appear to change caused by any method other than physically removing
and replacing the sign or its components whether the apparent movement or
change is in the display, the sign structure itself, or any other component of the
sign This includes a display that incorporates a technology or method allowing
the sign face to change the image without having to physically or mechanically
replace the sign face or its components. This also includes any rotating,
revolving moving flashing blinking or animated display and any display that
incorporates rotating panels LED lights manipulated through digital input, "digital
ink" or any other method or technology that allows the siqn face to present a
series of images or displays.
Section 4. City code §300.30, subd 4(a) is amended as follows:
a) Monument identification signs:
1) one sign per development;
2) maximum copy and graphic area as follows:
width of adjacent copy and graphic
right-of-way area
less than 100 feet 36 square feet
100 feet or greater 50 square feet
3) maximum monument area is two times the potential copy and graphic
area;
The &tFiGken language is deleted; the underlined language is inserted.
~W
Ordinance No 2007- Page 4
4) copy and graphic display limited to three items of information; (Figure 30-
16)
Figure 30-16
5) 15 foot maximum height; and
6) signs which are not internally illuminated shall have light fixtures and
sources screened from viewed
Section 5. City Code §300.30, subd. 10 is amended as follows:
10. Prohibited Signs.
The following types of signs are expressly prohibited in all districts:
a) roof signs including signs mounted on a roof surface or projecting above the roof
line of a structure if either attached to the structure or cantilevered over the structure;
sFee-8;
eb) flashiRg,
signs with dynamic displays except search lights under
subdivision 8 and those allowed under subdivision 14;
dc) portable signs, except temporary signs that are specifically permitted in section
300.30;
ed) projecting signs. Wall signs shall be mounted parallel to the building and shall
not project more than 18 inches from the face of the building;
#e) painted wall signs including signs painted on the face of a structure. Works of art
The 6tFi6keR language is deleted; the underlined language is inserted.
l
Ordinance No. 2007- Page 5
which are not commercial messages are exempt;
gf) signs attached to trees and utility poles;
#g) signs within public right-of-way except for official traffic signs and those specified
in subparagraph 9(k) and (1);
+h) signs which are designed to resemble official traffic signs except signs which are
used to control traffic on private property;
fi) abandoned signs or signs other than outdoor advertising structures that advertise
an activity, business, product or service no longer available on the premises on which
the sign is located;
ki) signs attached to fences except athletic field fence panels according to
subdivision 1;
Ik) illuminated signs which exhibit any of the following:
1) external illumination that is determined to interfere with safe traffic
operations;
2) the sign is directly oriented to any residential district; or
3) the level of illumination exceed standards specified in section 300.28,
subd. 2.
ail) signs that obstruct the vision of pedestrians, cyclists, or motorists traveling on or
entering public streets;
nm) exterior signs that obstruct any window, door, fire escape, stairway or opening
intended to provide light, air, ingress or egress for any structure;
en) signs that are in violation of the building code or the electrical code adopted by
the city;
po) blank signs;
qp) merchandise boxes or signs not affixed to a principal structure excluding signs
permitted in subdivision 8(d);
fg) outdoor advertising signs are not permitted in any zoning district,.except that the
The StFiGkeR language is deleted; the underlined language is inserted.
6-7
Ordinance No. 2007- Page 6
provisions of this paragraph do not apply to temporary outdoor advertising signs
permitted under Subd. 9 (k) above. Outdoor advertising signs which exist on the
effective date of this section shall be considered as nonconforming signs and are
subject to standards contained in section 300.29. An outdoor advertising sign is a
principal use of property. No permitted or conditionally permitted use or any part of such
use may be located on the same parcel of property as such a sign. The parcel on which
such a sign is located may not be subdivided to segregate the sign from the remaining
property. For the purposes of this paragraph, "parcel of property" means any property
for which one property identification number has been issued by the county, or all
contiguous property in common ownership as of October 15, 1997, whichever is
greater; and
sr) any sign not expressly permitted by the provisions in section 300.30.
Section 6. City code §300.30 is amended by the addition of a new subdivision 14 to
read as follows:
14. Dynamic Displays.
a) Findings. Studies show that there is a correlation between dynamic displays on
signs and the distraction of highway drivers. Distraction can lead to traffic accidents.
Drivers can be distracted not only by a changing message, but also by knowinq that the
sign has a changinq message. Drivers may watch a sign waiting for the next change to
occur. Drivers are also distracted by messages that do not tell the full story in one look.
People have a natural desire to see the end of the story and will continue to look at the
sign in order to wait for the end. Additionally, drivers are more distracted by special
effects used to change the message, such as fade-ins and fade-outs. Finally, drivers
are generally more distracted by messages that are too small to be clearly seen or that
contain more than a simple message. Time and temperature signs appear to be an
exception to these concerns because the messages are short, easily absorbed, and
become inaccurate without frequent changes.
Despite these public safety concerns, there is merit to allowing new technologies
to easily update messages. Except as prohibited by state or federal law, sign owners
should have the opportunity to use these technologies with certain restrictions. The
restrictions are intended to minimize potential driver distraction and to minimize
proliferation in residential districts where signs can adversely impact residential
character.
Local spacing requirements could interfere with the equal opportunity to use such
technologies and are not included. Without those requirements, however, there is the
The stFiskeR language is deleted; the underlined language is inserted.
Iv`
Ordinance No. 2007- Page 7
potential for numerous dynamic displays to exist along any roadway. if more than one
dynamic display can be seen from a -given location on a road, the minimum display time
becomes critical. If the display time is too short, a driver could be subiected to a view
that appears to have constant movement. This impact would obviously be compounded
in a corridor with multiple signs. If dynamic displays become pervasive and there are no
meaningful limitations on each sign's ability to change frequently, drivers may be
subjected to an unsafe degree of distraction and sensory overload. Therefore, a longer
display time is appropriate.
A constant message is typically needed on a sign so that the public can use it to
identify and find an intended destination. Changing messages detract from this way-
finding purpose and could adversely affect driving conduct through last-second lane
changes, stops, or turns, which could result in traffic accidents. Accordingly, dynamic
displays generally should not be allowed to occupy the entire copy and graphic area of
a sign.
In conclusion, the city finds that dynamic displavs should be allowed on signs but
with significant controls to minimize their proliferation and their potential threats to public
safety.
b) Regulations. Dynamic displays on signs are allowed subject to the following
conditions:
1) Dynamic displays are allowed only on monument and pylon signs for
conditionally permitted uses in residential districts and for all uses in other districts.
Dynamic displays may occupy no more than 35 percent of the actual copy and graphic
area. The remainder of the sign must not have the capability to have dynamic displays
even if not used. Only one, contiguous dynamic display area is allowed on a sign face:
2) A dynamic display may not change or move more often than once every
20 minutes, except one for which changes are necessary to correct hour-and-minute,
date, or temperature information. Time, date, or temperature information is considered
one dynamic display and may not be included as a component of any other dynamic
display. A display of time, date, or temperature must remain for at least 20 minutes
before changing to a different display, but the time, date, or temperature information
itself may change no more often than once every three seconds;
3) The images and messages displayed must be static, and the transition
from one static display to another must be instantaneous without any special effects;
4) The images and messages displayed must be complete in themselves,
The StF'GkeR language is deleted; the underlined language is inserted.
Ordinance No. 2007- Page 8
without continuation in content to the next image or message or to any other sign:
5) Every line of copy and graphics in a dynamic displav must be at least
seven inches in height on a road with a speed limit of 25 to 34 miles per hour, nine
inches on a road with a speed limit of 35 to 44 miles per hour, 12 inches on a road with
a speed limit of 45 to 54 miles per hour, and 15 inches on a road with a speed limit of 55
miles per hour or more. If there is insufficient room for copy and graphics of this size in
the area allowed under clause 1 above then no dynamic display is allowed:
6) Dynamic displays must be designed and equipped to freeze the device in
one position if a malfunction occurs The displays must also be equipped with a means
to immediately discontinue the display if it malfunctions and the sign owner must
immediately stop the dynamic display when notified by the city that it is not complying
with the standards of this ordinance:
7) Dynamic displavs must comply with the brightness standards contained in
subdivision 15:
8) Dynamic displays existing on (insert the effective date of this ordinance)
must comply with the operational standards listed above An existing dynamic display
that does not meet the structural requirements in clause 1 may continue as a non-
conforming development subject to section 300.29 An existing dynamic displav that
cannot meet the minimum size requirement in clause 5 must use the largest size
possible for one line of copy to fit in the available space
C) Incentives. Outdoor advertising signs do not need to serve the same way-
finding function as do on-premises signs. Further, outdoor advertising signs are no
longer allowed in the city, and there is no potential that they will proliferate Finally
outdoor advertising signs are in themselves distracting and their removal serves public
safety. The city is extremely limited in its ability to cause the removal of those signs
This clause is intended to provide incentives for the voluntary and uncompensated
removal of outdoor advertising signs in certain settings This removal results in an
overall advancement of one or more of the goals set forth in this section that should
more than offset any additional burden caused by the incentives These provisions are
also based on the recognition that the incentives create an opportunity to consolidate
outdoor advertising services that would otherwise remain distributed throughout the
community.
1) A person may obtain a permit for an enhanced dynamic display on one
face of an outdoor advertising sign if the following requirements are met:
The StFiGkGR language is deleted; the underlined language is inserted.
I~~
Ordinance No. 2007- Page 9
(a) The applicant agrees in writing to permanently remove within 15
days after issuance of the permit at least two other faces of an outdoor advertising sign
in the city that are owned or leased by the applicant each of which must satisfy the
criteria of parts (b) through (d) of this subsection This removal must include the
complete removal of the structure and foundation supporting each sign face The
applicant must agree that the city may remove the sign if the applicant does not timely
do so, and the application must be accompanied by a cash deposit or letter of credit
acceptable to the city attorney sufficient to pay the city's costs for that removal The
applicant must also agree that it is removing the sign voluntarily and that it has no right
to compensation for the removed sign under any law.
(b) The city has not previously issued an enhanced dynamic display
permit based on the removal of the particular faces relied upon in this permit
application.
(c) Each removed sign has a copy and graphic area of at least 288
square feet and satisfies two or more of the following additional criteria:
(1) The removed sign is located adjacent to a highway with
more than two regular lanes and with a general speed limit of 45 miles per hour or
greater, but that does not have restrictions on access equivalent to those of an
interstate highway;
(2) All or a substantial portion of the structure for the removed
sign was constructed before 1975 and has not been substantially improved;
(3) The removed sign is located in a noncommercial zoning district:
(4) The removed sign is located in a special planning area
designated in the 1999 comprehensive plan; or
(5) The removed copy and graphic area is equal to or or -greater
than the area of the copy and graphic area for which the enhanced dynamic display
permit is sought.
(d) If the removed sign face is one for which a state permit is required
by state law, the applicant must surrendered its permit to the state upon removal of the
sign. The sign that is the subject of the enhanced dynamic display permit cannot begin
tooperate until roof is provided to the city that the state permit has been surrendered.
The StfiGk8R language is deleted; the underlined language is inserted.
!ll
Ordinance No. 2007- Page 10
(e) The applicant must agree in writing that no dynamic displays will
ever be used on one additional outdoor advertising siqn that has a copy and graphic
area of at least 288 square feet in size. This agreement will be bindinq on the applicant
and all future owners of the sign. If the sign is subsequently removed or destroyed and
not replaced, the holder of the enhanced dynamic display permit is not required to
substitute a different sign for the one that no longer exists.
2) If the applicant complies with the permit requirements noted above the
city will issue an enhanced dynamic display permit for the designated outdoor
advertising sign. This permit will allow a dynamic display to occupv 100 percent of the
potential copy and graphic area and to change no more frequently than once every
eight seconds. The designated sign must meet all other requirements of this ordinance
Section 7. City code §300.30 is amended by the addition of a new subdivision 15 to
read as follows:
15. Brightness Standards.
a) All signs must meet the following brightness standards in addition to those in
subdivision 10:
1) No sign may be brighter than is necessary for clear and adequate visibility.
2) No sign may be of such intensity or brilliance as to impair the vision of a
motor vehicle driver with average eyesight or to otherwise interfere with the driver's
operation of a motor vehicle.
3) No sign may be of such intensity or brilliance that it interferes with the
effectiveness of an official traffic sign, device or signal.
b) The person owning or controlling the sign must adjust the sign to meet the
brightness standards in accordance with the city's instructions. The adjustment must be
made immediately upon notice of non-compliance from the city. The person owning or
controlling the sign may appeal the city's determination through the following appeal
procedure:
1) After making the adjustment required by the city, the person owning or
controlling the sign may appeal the city's determination by delivering a written appeal to
the city clerk within 10 days after the city's non-compliance notice. The written appeal
must include the name of a person unrelated to the person and business making the
appeal, who will serve on the appeal panel.
The fitFi6keR language is deleted; the underlined language is inserted.
Ordinance No. 2007- Page 11
2) Within five business days after receiving the appeal the city must name a
person who is not an official or employee of the city to serve on the appeal panel Within
five business days after the city names its representative the city's representative must
contact the sign owner's representative, and the two of them must appoint a third
member to the panel, who has no relationship to either party.
3) The appeal panel may develop its own rules of procedure but it must hold
a hearing within five business days after the third member is appointed The city and the
sign owner must be given the opportunitV to present testimony, and the panel may hold
the hearing, or a portion of it, at the sign location. The panel must issue its decision on
what level of brightness is needed to meet the brightness standards within five business
days after the hearing commences. The decision will be binding on both parties
C) All signs installed after (insert the effective date of this ordinance) that will have
illumination by a means other than natural light must be equipped with a mechanism
that automatically adiusts the brightness in response to ambient conditions. These siqns
must also be equipped with a means to immediately turn off the display or lighting if it
malfunctions, and the sign owner or operator must immediately turn off the sign or
lighting when notified by the city that it is not complying with the standards in this
section.
Section 8. A violation of this ordinance is subject to the penalties and provisions of
Chapter XI II of the city code.
Section 9. This ordinance is effective upon adoption.
Adopted by the city council of the City of Minnetonka, Minnesota, on June 25, 2007.
Janis A. Callison, Mayor
ATTEST:
The 6tFiGk8R language is deleted; the underlined language is inserted.
l l3
Ordinance No. 2007- Page 12
David E. Maeda, City Clerk
ACTION ON THIS ORDINANCE:
Date of introduction:
Date of adoption:
Motion for adoption:
Seconded by:
Voted in favor of:
Voted against:
Abstained:
Absent:
Ordinance adopted.
Date of publication:
CERTIFIED COPY:
I certify that the foregoing is a correct copy of an ordinance adopted by the city council
of the City of Minnetonka, Minnesota, at a meeting held on June 25, 2007.
David E. Maeda, City Clerk
The R language is deleted; the underlined language is inserted.
GOVERN ING YOUR CITY
Amending Digital Billboard Regulations
By Larry Foxman
here are about 450,000 road- billboards, most officials elect to amend Distance from road/distance between
side billboards in the United current legislation to incorporate the billboards. Billboard size defines both
States advertising everything newer technology. For example: the distance from the road and the dis-
from highway amenities to tour- ■ The city of Columbia, S.C., voted to tance between billboards.
ist attractions. Currently, 400 of alter a city ordinance to allow digital Brightness. Bright digital billboards
them are digital billboards, and billboards that would change images not only provide additional distraction
their numbers are estimated to every six to eight seconds, opening to drivers at night, but also provide dis-
grow tenfold within the next the door for a large private company tracting glare through reflecting sun-
decade, according to the Outdoor to upgrade 100 to 120 traditional bill- light during the day.
Advertising Association of America. boards within city limits. Length of time image displayed.
Bill Christensen, of Technovelgy.com, ■ Reading, Pa., allows digital bill- Image display times shorter than the
predicts even faster growth of digital boards and treats them the same way industry standard of 8-10 seconds
billboards, citing a $2 billion market by as tri-vision boards.The billboards results in greater distraction for drivers
as early as 2010. are allowed in highway-commercial and may be seen as animation, which is
Made up of thousands of light emit- zones, must be at least 100 feet from prohibited for roadside billboards.
ting diodes (LEDs), digital billboards the roadway, and cannot be brighter Transition between images. Image
appear much like the Jumbotron screens than traffic lights. transition should be quick. Any transi-
at most major league stadiums.The bill- ■ Minnesota cities Eagan and St. Paul tion time longer than a second or two
board industry claims the billboards are have banned any new signs until they may create an additional distraction for
not dangerous to drivers, stating that study the impact of the new technol- drivers. I
although digital billboards look like TV ogies and determine whether official
images, the images are static, and don't rule changes are needed to govern Larry Foxman is coordinator, City Program
move. But driving safety researchers, the advertisements. Minnetonka cut Resources, Research and Municipal Programs
including the Traffic Injury Research power to two digital freeway signs, with the National League of Cities. Phone:
Foundation, believe digital billboards saying they pose a dangerous distrac- (202) 626-3137. E-mail: foxman@nlc.org.
not only keep drivers' attention focused tion for drivers and citing a violation
longer, but are also more "cognitively of the city's flashing-sign prohibition.
demanding."The Federal Highway ■ Zoning changes in Lincoln, Neb., I.MC Board authorizes electronic
Commission has yet to weigh in on the allow digital billboards that meet state
pros and cons of roadside digital bill- law requiring billboards to maintain billboard study
boards and has allotted $150,000 to their images for a minimum of 10
study the new technology. seconds and be placed at least 5,000 At its February meeting, the LMC Board
In most situations, digital billboards feet apart. The billboards also have to of Directors authorized a study of the
will simply take the place of an already meet a brightness standard and are traffic-safety issues related to electronic
existing print billboard. In many cases, shut off between midnight and 5 a.m. billboards to help cities make a decision
advertising companies need to obtain Municipalities considering amending on regulating this new form of advertis-
permits from local governments to current statutes and ordinances to deal
convert traditional billboards to digital with the reality of the new technology ing.The League is hoping a coordinated
ones, and this means that nearly every- of digital billboards should consider the study will alleviate the need for cities
thing is negotiable from numbers and following criteria. to do their own research.We anticipate
placement, to brightness and image dis- Federal and state laws. The 1965 completing the study by late spring.
play time. City officials can negotiate Highway Beautification Act and cor- For more information contact Tom
time and space for advertising govern- responding state laws are in place to Grundhoefer, LMC, at (651) 281-1266
ment programs and activities, or require provide for effective control of out-
the digital billboards be used for emer- door advertising. Roadside billboards LMorC, tgru at (651) at (651) m 281nc.o or Paul @ ,
gency or disaster announcements. fall under this category. Local laws and -1227 78 or pwerwin@
Since most municipalities already ordinances must adhere to these over- lmnc.org.
have ordinances dealing with roadside riding federal and state statutes.
MARCH 2007 M I N N E S O T A C I TIES 1 3
§ 11.70 EAGAN CODE
D. Off-premises signs.
1. No off-premises sign shall be permitted in any zone within the city except as
permitted under this sub-paragraph.
2. The owner of an existing off-premises sign may construct a new off premises sign
pursuant to a conditional use permit issued in accordance with the provisions of
chapter 11 of the City Code, and under the following criteria:
(a) No sign will be permitted which increases the number of signs beyond the
number of signs depicted in table A (which follows this section), as amended
from time to time.
(b) No sign shall be permitted which increases the total square footage of all
signs beyond the number of total square feet depicted in table A (which
follows this section), as amended from time to time.
(c) No sign shall be permitted which increases the total number of sign surfaces
beyond the total number of sign surfaces depicted in table A (which follows
this section), as amended from time to time.
(d) The maximum square footage of a sign shall be 250 square feet; however, the
city may allow a sign in excess of 250 square feet upon (i) the reduction of
the total number of signs, square footage or surface areas depicted in table
A (which follows this section), as amended from time to time, and (ii)
amendment to said table A to reflect such reduction, and (iii) further, so long -
as the total square footage of all signs is not increased beyond the total of
sign square footage depicted in said table A, at the time of application for a
new sign.
(e) No sign shall be located nearer to any other off premises sign than 1,500
lineal feet on the same side of the street or 300 lineal feet on the opposite
side of the street.
(f) No sign shall be located on a platted lot which contains a business sign.
(g) No sign shall be located within 300 feet of any freestanding ground sign or
pylon sign.
(h) No sign shall be located within 200 feet of any residentially zoned district.
(i) No sign or any part thereof shall exceed 40 feet in height as measured from
the land adjacent to the base of the sign.
3. Any new off-premise sign permitted under this paragraph, shall not be placed
• upon -any property upon which a building or structure already exists.
4. Any new off-premise sign permitted under this paragraph, above, shall be located
only on property zoned for business or industrial use.
5. Any off-premise sign now existing or permitted to be constructed shall be
removed prior to the city approving the platting of the property upon which the
Supp. No. 10 CD11:154
LAND USE REGULATIONS (ZONING) § 11.70
sign is located or prior to the city issuing a building permit for the construction
of a structure upon the property upon which the sign is located, whichever occurs
earlier.
6. Any new off-premise sign pursuant to a conditional use permit issued hereunder
shall be subject to the provisions governing conditional use permits as set forth
elsewhere in this chapter.
E. Building-mounted, window/door and temporary business signs, standards.
1. Building signs on single-tenant buildings and end units in multi-tenant build-
ings. On single-tenant buildings, no more than three total signs, distributed on
up to two elevations, are allowed in the following combinations, not to exceed the
allowed sign area based on zoning:
(a) One elevation displaying a business name sign, and one elevation displaying
a business name and a product name sign for a total of three signs; or
(b) One elevation displaying a business name sign, and one elevation displaying
either a business name or a product name sign for a total of two signs; or
(c) One elevation displaying a business name sign or a product name sign for a
total of one sign; or
(d) Two signs, each displaying a separate business name if two tenants are
occupying one unit space for a total of two signs on one elevation.
2. Building signs on interior units of multi-tenant buildings. On multi-tenant
buildings, no more than two signs per tenant on one elevation are allowed in the
following combinations, not to exceed the allowed sign area based on zoning:
(a) One sign displaying a business name, and one sign displaying a product
name for a total of two signs on one elevation; or
(b) Two signs, each displaying a separate business name if two tenants are
occupying one unit space for a total of two signs on one elevation; or
(c) One sign displaying a business name for a total of one sign on one elevation;
or
(d) One sign displaying a product name for a total of one sign on one elevation.
3. Design similarity. All business signs mounted on a building shall be similar in
design.
4. Multi-tenant building signage. Building facade signage on multi-tenant buildings
shall be evenly distributed between all tenants.
5. Product name signs. Product name signs shall be subordinate to business name
signs.
6. Roof signs. No sign mounted upon a building is allowed to project above the
highest outside wall or parapet wall.
7. Roof signs in BP and RD districts. In BP and RD districts, no roof signs shall be
allowed.
8upp. Na 13 CD11:155
Lone Oak Rd
Yankee Doodle Rd
4
1 l ,
1 F
r , -
"r
Diffley Rd ,cgyr = Diffley Rd
Cliff Rif " -
a
a ti
I
M Of EaDan Feet
° 0 1,500 3,000 6,000
Off-Premise Signs/Outdoor Advertising Location T
Legend
• Off-Premise Sign
0 300' Radius
1 1500' Radius
Agenda Information Memo
Eagan City Council Workshop Meeting
September 11, 2007
VIII. COMMENTS RE: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR POTENTIAL
CONSOLIDATION OF LISPS FACILITIES AT EAGAN BULK MAIL
CENTER SITE
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED:
To authorize the submission of comments regarding the Environmental Assessment for the USPS Twin
Cities Consolidation Project.
FACTS:
➢ For a number of years, the City of St.Paul and Ramsey County have pursued the relocation of the
downtown St. Paul postal sorting facility in order to permit the redevelopment of the Union Depot
as a mulit-modal transportation hub and additional private investment in the city's riverfront
redevelopment area.
➢ In 2002, the United States Postal Service pursued the relocation and consolidating a number of
facilities located around the Twin Cities to the Twin Cities Army Ammunition Plant property in
Arden Hills. The City of Arden Hills and its citizens vigorously opposed the USPS development
on that property and the Postal Service was forced to discontinue its efforts to locate the facilities
there.
➢ The City of Eagan was informed in 2005 that the United States Postal Service was considering
relocating the facilities instead at the current site of the USPS Bulk Mail Center at 3165
Lexington Avenue.
➢ Recognizing that the development would be tax exempt, but that it was being proposed for
property already owned by the Postal Service, the City responded to the announcement by
indicating that it would only be willing to host the facility if the project addressed local needs,
such as the installation of the segment of Denmark Avenue that crosses the property and
mitigated any traffic impacts or other impacts the project would place on the City. Since the
facility would not support the City's infrastructure or service needs through property taxes, it
would be expected, at a minimum to meet those requirements.
➢ In an effort to work cooperatively with the City of St. Paul and Ramsey County, which have an
interest in the facility's relocation, Dakota County, whose county road system would receive a
substantial amount of the facility's traffic and the USPS itself, the City of Eagan has participated
in the Post Office Partnership, a partnership which meets regularly to discuss their respective
needs and the relationship of the USPS decision process to those needs.
➢ The process has been slow and laborious, often fiustrated by ongoing changes in USPS
representation and consultants who would come into the situation without background regarding
the history of the discussions or the cooperative focus of the Partnership. Within the past five
months, the pace has accelerated as the USPS is now focused on completing a series of steps in
order for the USPS Board of Governors to be able to make a decision on whether to proceed with
the project by the end of 2007.
➢ In April of 2007, USPS announced that it had retained its third different traffic engineer to
complete the Level III Traffic Impact Study, which they indicated was the only remaining
document necessary for the release of the Environmental Assessment required under NEPA for
the review of Postal Service projects. Despite promises by USPS to cooperate with the City of
Eagan and Dakota County to scope and conduct the study in a manner in which the City and
ilk
County could be assured that their interests and concerns on the part of the traveling public would
be addressed, the study results have been incomplete and the City and County have been provided
with inadequate time for review.
➢ Most recently, the USPS issued the EA for the project, despite the fact that:
o the Level III Traffic Study has not been finalized (required for the Transportation Section
review),
o significant issues raised by the City and County about the draft study to date remain
unaddressed, and
o the results that have been shared do not support the conclusions and/or assumptions the
USPS has said are necessary for the operation of the site.
Also, the premature issuance of the EA is contrary to previous written assurances by the USPS
that the EA would not be issued until after completion of the final traffic analysis.
➢ An update on this situation was provided to the City Council at its meeting on August 21, 2007,
at which time the Council directed staff to formally request that the EA be withdrawn until the
traffic study was complete to the satisfaction of the City and County, at which time it would be
reissued. The USPS has denied the City's request and indicates that comments on the EA are due
by September 14.
➢ Ordinarily, the City Council does not take formal action on business items at workshops unless
there is a specific time constraint that prevents the item from appearing on a regular agenda
Since the comment period ends prior to the next regular Council meeting, staff requests
consideration of authorization to submit comments at this time.
➢ Because of the incomplete nature of the EA's Transportation Section and the importance the City
has placed on this aspect of the project's review from the outset, if the comments on the
Transportation Section are not ready for distribution on Friday, they will be distributed to the
Council on Monday.
ATTAU04ENTS:
➢ Introduction and Overview of EA on pag s through
➢ Draft comments on pages L;M through
➢ City Administrator letter to USPS regarding denial of City request to extend EA comment period
on pagesl-'-il through I4~2 POJ'L Cvr'~espc~c~,deXtic e.. I"--
➢ Copy of EA available on CD by request.
~aD
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
TWIN CITIES
CONSOLIDATION PROJECT
EAGAN, ST. PAUL, AND
MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA
UNITED STATES
POSTAL SERVICEri
Prepared by:
U.S. Postal Service
Headquarters-Major Facilities Office
4301 Wilson Boulevard, Suite 300
Arlington, Virginia 22203-1861
USPS Project Q82823
f
August 2007
►a~
USPS Twin Cities Consolidation Project
Environmental Assessment
Table of Contents
Paee Number
Table of Contents i
11
Table of Contents (continued)
Introduction l
Purpose and Need for Action l
Background 1
Alternatives 6
Proposed Action 6
No Action Alternative 11
Alternatives Considered But Eliminated 11
Environmental Consequences and Mitigation .........................................................................13
Topography, Geology, and Soils 13
Hydrology and Water Quality 115
8
Floodplains
Wetlands 18
Prime Farmland 21
Vegetation 21
Fish and Wildlife 23
Air Quality 24
Historical and Archaeological Resources 26
Local Employment and Economics/Relocation 30
Environmental Justice 32
Land Use and Zoning 32
Visual Resources/Aesthetics 38
Noise 39
Hazardous Materials and Waste 40
Transportation 44
Parks and Recreation 51
Community Services 51
Utilities and Infrastructure 53
Energy Requirements and Conservation 54
Cumulative Impacts 55
No Action Alternative Impacts 56
Summary and Conclusions 57
United States Postal Service Page i August 2007
Major Facilities Office, Arlington, YA
~ a,a
Table of Contents (continued)
Page Number
List of Figures
Figure 1. Project Location Map 2
Figure 2. Site Locations 3
Figure 3. Site Aerial Photographs 4
Figure 4. Proposed BMC Expansion Site Plan 8
Figure 5. St. Paul P&DC Property 9
Figure 6. Land Use Designations in the Vicinity of the Eagan BMC 34
Figure 7. Zoning Designations in the Vicinity of the Eagan BMC 36
List of Tables
Table 1. Delineated Wetlands in the Near Vicinity of the Eagan BMC 20
Table 2. Population and Employment Demographics for St. Paul, Minneapolis, and Eagan 30
Table 3. Approximate Number of Employees at USPS Facilities 31
Table 4. Underground and Aboveground Storage Tanks Removed From the Eagan BMC......... 42
Table 5. Study Intersections 46
Table 6. AM Peak Hour Capacity 47
Table 7. PM Peak Hour Capacity 48
Table 8. Mid-Day Peak Hour Capacity 49
Table 9. Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures 59
Appendices
Appendix A References
Appendix B Photographs
Appendix C Consultation
Appendix D Distribution List
Appendix E National Register Evaluation of the St. Paul Post Office and Customs House
Appendix F Phase I Archaeological Assessment
United States Postal Service Page ii August 2007
Major Facilities Ofce, Arlington, VA
Ia3
Introduction
The United States Postal Service (LISPS) has prepared this Environmental Assessment pursuant
to the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969, its implementing
procedures at 39 CFR 775 and the President's Council on Environmental Quality Regulations (40
CFR parts 1500-1508), for the possible consolidation of current postal operations within the
Twin Cities, Minnesota area to the existing Minneapolis-St. Paul (Eagan) Bulk Mail Center
(BMC) facility, located at 3165 Lexington Avenue South in Eagan, Dakota County, Minnesota.
In addition to expanding the existing Eagan BMC, the project includes the potential relocation of
postal functions and/or disposition of assets of the USPS' St. Paul Processing & Distribution
Center (P&DC), Minneapolis P&DC, and Twin Cities Metro Hub operations facility in north
Minneapolis. Project maps showing the locations of the facilities involved in the project are
presented in Figures 1 and 2. Aerial photographs showing the project facilities are presented in
Figure 3.
The Proposed Action would have a significant beneficial impact on USPS operations and
productivity and would allow for the potential revitalization of downtown St. Paul in the form of
a transportation terminal, commercial center, and other development in keeping with City of St.
Paul and Ramsey County Regional Railroad Authority plans in for the area.
This Environmental Assessment examines and evaluates the physical and cultural environmental
impacts of the Proposed Action. This document also evaluates the impacts of a "no action
alternative," which would involve continuing current operations at the Eagan BMC, the St. Paul
P&DC, the Minneapolis P&DC, and the Twin Cities Metro Hub, with no expansion of the
existing Eagan BMC facility.
Purpose and Need for Action
Background
Over the last several years, representatives of the City of St. Paul have inquired about the
prospect of the USPS relocating the St. Paul P&DC (consisting of the former Union Depot
railroad concourse (Concourse) and walkway, St. Paul Post Office/Customs House with the 1961
Addition, the 1978 Kellogg Dock Addition and parking areas) located within the 13.5-acre
riverfront property along Kellogg Boulevard in downtown St. Paul. The City's motivation has
been driven by two factors: the strategic location of the Kellogg Boulevard property adjacent to
the former Union Depot structure (Headhouse) that was once the most important rail terminus in
the city; and the redevelopment potential of the site for a variety of residential and commercial
uses. The City of St. Paul and Ramsey County have desired the site for decades for the
prospective redevelopment of the Union Depot Headhouse, the USPS-owned Concourse and
walkway structure, the 1978 Kellogg Dock Addition and parking areas into an intermodal
transportation center within the larger context of an economically vital riverfront development.
The City/County will not acquire the St. Paul Post Office/Customs House with the 1961
Addition, which will be sold separately.
United States Postal Service Page 1 August 2007
Major Facilities Office, Arlington, VA
~ a~
03 10 37 23 17 ( 21 Hugo
Lino Lakes
30 610 1 32 1
Br oklyn e l }
-109-14 61 Ito
8 0 3 5 r
er Turge so ach
a ee P 252 35 45 Law 1
l t l 49 5s
North Oaks
130 i ills 96 Whhe
47 77 54 Vad Is ~r
Crystal 12 He) tE
e \ #A' Twin Cities Metro Hub 73 76 97 29 N It
10 rn ~aM
44 46 120
elw o Minneapolis P&DC C Springs
St I 52 36
1561 \ 165 7 23 Vill@ 21 ittl@ 19 23 - 68 tlth
V 1
102 57 153 36 58 65 UI
70 e 58 - ae 25 ` St. Paul P&DC Hillside
81 66 ' u fdal 2 Pa - 5
GOl S3 ( 30
5 2 ony ! Fa1C n 64 6
2so . Heig is 6 /
` 100 - 40 49 pal
I _ dale
122 32
v o M
55
5
~ ~ 33
V age Pa- 48 t r 10 35
3 20 22 f{` 37 39 -120 W HINGT
! eado rok Park 46 38 1 13
n haha %j 68 1
> 3 p /
2 1 a -156 ~ Laks
Edi m a
158 - M NE O A 35 62 s , Eagan BMC 6 43 13A
62 17 32 sg @ld He Paul 114 L $ 18
• 110
100 52 20
in
st P In ~ S h ke° 1 ~
rt
63 ewpo
s2 77 13 Pa StI V St. Paul
149
26 22
31 Y 39, Cotta
28 55 28 Grov
28
1 ver ro
,
mingtan H is i 56 I~
g~
43 73
30
0.. -
1 31" 32
71
i13 . \
Vag@ - F' 34 ~Un18 l 38 j
16 31 5 52
SCO 38 23
az - „ pple I y
33 UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE
i
D A T~
42 US Postal Service
27 Bu Hill° Twin Cities Consolidation Project
31 Environmental Assessment
! 1 46 Lake 'Ile 9 PROJECT LOCATION MAP
SOURCE: Microsoft Corp. 2005 SCALE: DATE: PROJECT: FIGURE:
1'=2 Miles October 2006 JG 3,502 1
~a~
island Boorn Park
.apt.
NC, 52
73
_ C
Minneapolis P&DC Twin Cities Metro Hub
-
c
ounty Roc
~Q 4fdp S S Gerttdtbq
y,~P s '0Ff R aY PW
St. ArMony
~
Fallaw
22
152 ~ 2ijQ, _ 1 t
Sf 280. Ryan St
m %1b i Rim. A
awb
a adw►ajr St „ a Ave
bLa~deo ale
nrlpapolis
I
a , 65
N m
"SIL
55 S fh $t 122 i 127 b
S
A
V
V ~ Ave 52 Ave
1ZE1110t Park rk
55 goys 5i
G
a2A
3
12 B
10
oto (2- 6 " eo
Eagan BMC 10 St. Paul P&DC s S
Apollo Rd 1~r 1~S` 55 kowertown
98
04
Ir x\
-
Rd
Eagan ° 5t. P81l1
z
•r 3 gwd- E
43 UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE
' Y8nkeg---a0Qdk- Rd Ya_nke US Postal Service
Twin Cities Consolidation Project
Environmental Assessment
T Grvr SITE LOCATIONS
SOURCE: Microsoft Corp. 2005 SCALE: DATE: PROJECT: FIGURE:
1 °=0.3 Mile October 2006 JG 3502 2
gas
Twin Cities Metro Hub
Minneapolis P&DC
r
St. Paul P&DC
N
Eagan BMC
r.
UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE
US Postal Service
Twin Cities Consolidation Project
Environmental Assessment
SITE AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS
SOURCE: Google Earth 2006 SCALE: DATE: PROJECT: FIGURE:
Not To Scat October 2006 JG 3502 3
" a~
la-7
Constructed in 1936, the St. Paul Post Office/Customs House is a USPS-owned, multi-story
building located in downtown St. Paul. The existing Post Office/Customs House and 1961
Addition and the 1978 Kellogg Dock Addition have sufficient space for administrative offices,
processing operations, maintenance functions, employee facilities, and support areas. The only
portion of the site that is deficient for current operations is the platform on the 1978 Kellogg
Dock Addition.
The 21,000-square-foot truck dock facility with 23 50-foot dock spaces (referred to as the K-
Dock or Kellogg Dock Addition) was constructed in 1978 on property across the street from the
main facility to handle the increased volume of tractor-trailer trips for the St. Paul P&DC to
sustain operations. This dock facility is connected to the main facility (Post Office/Customs
House and 1961 Addition) by two skyway bridges over Sibley Street. With the continued
increase in the amount of tractor-trailer utilization since 1978, the K-Dock is inadequate to
support efficient operations due to the lack of both platform area and dock doors.
In the absence of an independent plan by the USPS to relocate mail processing operations, the
USPS investigated expansion of the docks. Since the USPS owns the land around the K-Dock,
the area could provide expansion space. However, the former Union Depot Concourse and
walkway are located on the most desirable area for any planned expansion. This structure is
listed on the National Register of Historic places, which has several implications that would
constrain expansion options on the site. Also, a moderate to high potential exists for the
presence of both pre-contact and historic archaeological deposits on the site between Sibley and
Broadway streets and south of Second Street East as well as below the City-owned parking area
south of Second Street between Jackson and Sibley streets. Therefore, expansion on-site was
abandoned as an alternative.
After a thorough investigation of available, suitable sites or buildings adequate for relocation of
the St. Paul P&DC and development of a feasible operations plan for the Minneapolis/St. Paul
area, the USPS advised congressional leaders on June 6, 2005 that relocating the St. Paul mail
processing operations approximately 10 miles south to an expanded facility on the existing
Minneapolis-St. Paul Bulk Mail Center site in Eagan, Minnesota would be a prudent course of
action and in the best interest of both the USPS and the Minneapolis-St. Paul community. The
USPS is continuing to negotiate with the City of St. Paul, Ramsey County Regional Railroad
Authority, and their designated representatives for the sale of a portion of the property that
includes the former Union Depot railroad concourse (Concourse) and walkway, the 1978
Kellogg Dock Addition and parking areas. Sale of the St. Paul Post Office/Customs House with
the 1961 Addition will be completed as a separate transaction.
United States Postal Service Page 5 August 2007
Major Facilities Office, Arlington, VA
~ a~
Alternatives
Proposed Action
Based on the project purpose and needs described above, the Proposed Action involves
relocating many of the functions and operations from USPS facilities in the Twin Cities area to a
single site co-located with the existing Bulk Mail Center in Eagan, Minnesota. The following
four facilities are involved in the proposed project:
Minneapolis-St. Paul (Eagan) Bulk Mail Center
The Minneapolis-St. Paul (Eagan) Bulk Mail Center (BMC) is located at 3165 Lexington
Avenue South, Eagan, Minnesota 55121-2288, which is east of U.S. Interstate 35E (I-35E),
and about %2 mile south of Lone Oak Road in Dakota County. The facility serves as a Bulk
Mail Center servicing Zip Code areas 498-499, 540-551, 553-554, 556-567, and 580-588,
and is one of 21 USPS Bulk Mail Centers nationally. The facility building is a 430,556 -
square-foot, primarily one story, part three-story, pre-cast concrete and steel building. The
BMC consists of an administrative area with administrative and support functions on three
stories in a section of the building. A high bay area contains a dock-height main floor with
equipment mezzanines for conveyor and sorting equipment. The administrative section of
the building contains employee locker and lunch rooms, office space, and operations support
areas in three levels. Also occupying the site is a 9,870 square foot Equipment Vehicle
Storage (EVS) building and a 2,376-square-foot building formerly used as a Vehicle
Maintenance Facility (VMF). The BMC was constructed in the early 1970s and the USPS
occupied the facility in 1975. The building was expanded in 1999. The site totals
approximately 92 acres. The USPS owns both the site and the buildings. Land use in the
surrounding area is primarily commercial and light industrial. The BMC has a normal
complement of approximately 543 employees (including approximately 364 Craft
employees), and currently operates seven days per week, generally in two tours (shifts), from
6:30 a.m. to 3:00 p.m., and from 7:00 p.m. to 3:30 a.m. Maintenance activities and other
operations occur on a 24-hour basis.
St. Paul Processing & Distribution Center
The St. Paul Processing and Distribution Center (P&DC) consisting of the former Union
Depot railroad concourse (Concourse) and walkway, St. Paul Post Office/Customs House
with the 1961 Addition, the 1978 Kellogg Dock Addition and parking areas is located at 180
Kellogg Boulevard East in downtown St. Paul, Ramsey County, Minnesota. Originally
constructed in 1934, the St. Paul Post Office/Customs House is a USPS-owned facility
serving as the originating facility (the original recipients of mail collection) for Zip Code
areas 540, 550-551, and the destinating Area Distribution Center (ADC) (the final recipient
of mail collection prior to delivery) for Zip Code areas 540, 546-548, 550-551, and 556-559.
The St. Paul Post Office/Customs House is a 1,166,458-square-foot facility consisting of
several floors of mail processing operations and an office tower of 17 floors. Floors 13
through 17 were added in 1939, a south addition was added in 1961, and the K-Dock (see
discussion in Purpose and Need section) was added in 1978. The remainder of the P&DC
includes the Concourse and walkway and parking areas. In addition to processing
operations, the facility also houses Post Office operations, including retail, box section,
delivery, mail acceptance operations, computer-forwarding system (CFS), the St. Paul
United States Postal Service Page 6 August 2007
Major Facilities O.,lce, Arlington, VA
~~9
Postmaster, domiciled USPS Northland District administrative employees, Midwest Division
of the U.S. Postal Inspection Service, and several small U.S. General Services
Administration (GSA) tenants. The facility currently employs approximately 1,245
employees (including approximately 923 Craft employees) in three tours. The facility is
adequate for current operations, except for platform areas. The St. Paul Post Office/Customs
House with the 1961 Addition is eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic
Places. The former Union Depot railroad concourse, currently owned by the USPS as part of
the St. Paul P&DC, is listed on the National Register.
Minneapolis Twin Cities Metro Hub
The Twin Cities Metro Hub (TCMH) is located at 1301 Industrial Boulevard in Minneapolis,
Hennepin County. The TCMH includes 350,359 square feet of space in a multi-tenant leased
facility. The lease agreement expires December 31, 2007 and has two five-year renewal
options remaining. Occupied in 1988, the TCMH houses originating processing of non-
surface transportation Priority Mail, destinating Standard A/Periodical bundles distribution
for Zip Code areas 540 and 550-555, and accepts Standard A/Periodical drop shipments for
the Minneapolis and St. Paul ADC 540, 546-548, 550-564, and 566 Zip Code areas. The
TCMH also houses the Minneapolis Business Mail Entry Unit (BMEU), metro Mail
Transport Equipment (MTE) distribution, Northland District Stamp Distribution Office
(SDO) including stamp destruction responsibilities, District Warehouse, and delivery
activities for Zip Codes 55404 and 55454. The facility currently employs approximately 149
employees (including 106 Craft employees) in three tours, and is considered adequate for
current operations.
Minneapolis Processing & Distribution Center
The Minneapolis P&DC is located at 100 South 1St Street in downtown Minneapolis,
Hennepin County, along the south bank of the Mississippi River, just north of the main
downtown commercial district. The Minneapolis P&DC is a USPS-owned facility serving
the originating 553-555 Zip Code area mail, and is the destinating Area Distribution Center
(ADC) for Zip Code areas 553-555, 560-564, and 566. The Minneapolis P&DC is a
1,159,000-square-foot, four-story building constructed and occupied in 1935. In addition to
processing operations, the facility also houses retail, box section, delivery, Computerized
Forwarding System (CFS), the Minneapolis Postmaster, Northland District administrative
employees, Employee Assistance Program (EAP) activities, and the Inspection Service. The
facility currently employs approximately 1,229 in three tours.
Specifically, the Proposed Action includes the following primary components:
1. Increase the processing capacity on the existing Eagan BMC site to serve ZIP Code areas
540, 546-548, 550-551, 553-560, 562-564, and 566; and originating and destinating mail
for St. Paul ZIP Code areas 540 and 550-551. This expansion will involve creating a
single "co-located" facility on the site that incorporates postal operations from the St.
Paul P&DC and the TCMH. The facility expansion would occur entirely on existing
USPS-owned property in the city of Eagan and would include new workrooms, support
areas, additional platforms/loading docks, a storage building, parking areas, access
drives, and other features. The proposed Eagan BMC site plan expansion is shown in
Figure 4 and includes the following:
United States Postal Service Page 7 August 2007
Major Facilities Office, Arlington, VA
13~
® Z
m_ W a
U W
W ~ ~ N
v a O
Suew W R
P ►~I~l - -
mmmm
S3LW
-nIH wciias 5i N+wrtiv~ rry y g Z g
y 6 m
C cc w O
j O
a
O
7-- .
•
j.; r,
i
31
Figure 5. St Paul P&DC Property
1
United States Postal Service Page 9 August 2007
Major Facilities Office, Arlington, VA
13~
■ A single, expanded postal mail processing facility which includes new
construction of approximately 600,000 square feet of additional space and a new
24,000-square-foot storage building.
• A 24,600-square-foot storage building, located to the west of the main building
expansion near the western portion of the USPS property.
• 130 loading docks
■ Outdoor parking spaces for 937 LISPS employees, officials, and visitors; 12
employee motorcycles/bicycles; 29 tractors; 252 trailers; 1 5/7/9-ton vehicle; 10
Business Mail Entry Unit (BMEU) customers; and 2 Postal Inspection Service
staff.
■ A new stormwater detention basin in the southwest corner of the site to provide
additional capacity and water quality control for the expanded site.
In connection with the expansion project, the City of Eagan wants the USPS to grant or
convey a right of way along the undeveloped westernmost part of the USPS property and
to construct a public street to join the northern and southern segments of Denmark
Avenue. Discussions between the USPS and the City of Eagan regarding the extension
are on-going. This EA, however, takes into account the potential impacts associated with
the development of the Denmark Avenue extension as part of the Proposed Action.
Should Denmark Avenue not be constructed the USPS would continue to use existing
entry/exit points along Lexington Avenue, or a combination of modified entry/exit points
along Lexington Avenue and a new driveway in the southwest corner of the USPS site
connecting to the southern terminus of Denmark Avenue. The findings and conclusions
of this EA would still be valid.
2. Relocate mail processing operations from the existing St. Paul Processing & Distribution
Center (P&DC), located at 180 Kellogg Boulevard East in St. Paul, to the expanded
Eagan BMC.
3. Vacate and relinquish the St. Paul P&DC and its various buildings to USPS Asset
Management for possible disposition. The St. Paul P&DC property is expected to be
divided into two parts for disposal (See Figure 5):
• Portion I - Union Depot railroad concourse (Concourse) and walkway, the 1978
Kellogg Dock Addition and parking areas which is currently under negotiation for
sale to the Ramsey County Regional Railroad Authority; and,.
• Portion 2 - St. Paul Post Office/Customs House with the 1961 Addition which is will
disposed of separately to as a yet undetermined Buyer.
4. Relocate operations at the Twin Cities Metro Hub (TCMH) in Minneapolis to the Eagan
BMC and other Twin City area facilities. Relocate ZIP Code 55404 and 55454 mail
carriers in the TCMH to other Twin City facilities. The LISPS' lease on the TCMH
would not be extended.
5. Retain or find alternate space for retail, delivery, Stamp Distribution Office (SDO),
BMEU, and postmaster administrative space in downtown St. Paul for ZIP codes 55101
United States Postal Service Page 10 August 2007
Major Facilities Office, Arlington, VA
133
and 55102. Retain or find alternate space in the metro area for Postal Employee
Development Center (PEDC) and for Headquarters Sales, Inspection Service, and Office
of Inspector General (OIG) personnel.
6. Relocate Northland District administration functions to the Minneapolis P&DC. The
Minneapolis P&DC would be retained for ZIP code areas 553-555. Consolidate the
Minneapolis and St. Paul Computerized Forwarding System (CFS) into the Minneapolis
P&DC.
Retain Minneapolis and St. Paul Vehicle Maintenance Facilities (VMFs).
The new Eagan facility would allow for the deployment of state-of-the-art mail processing
technology that would result in improved mail services to postal customers in the Twin Cities,
Minnesota area and the region.
No Action Alternative
In this Environmental Assessment, the no action alternative includes generally continuing current
operations at the Eagan BMC, the St. Paul P&DC, the Minneapolis P&DC, and the Twin Cities
Metro Hub, with no expansion of the existing Eagan BMC facility. Under the no action
alternative, operations and mail processing at the Twin Cities area facilities would not be
consolidated and would continue to be inefficient and costly. It does not, however, preclude the
USPS from evaluating the need for future expansion or operational changes at these or other
facilities.
Alternatives Considered But Eliminated
Several other operational alternatives were also considered for consolidation of the USPS
facilities in the Twin Cities area. These include the following:
■ Larger Operational and Development Alternatives on the Eagan BMC Site. At least
two additional configurations of the Twin Cities consolidation concept were considered.
In addition to the activities identified in the Proposed Action, one alternative involved the
relocation of all current mail processing and distribution operations at the Minneapolis
P&DC to the Eagan site. A second alternative involved the Proposed Action activities
and the relocation of the Minneapolis P&DC originating mail processing and distribution
operations only to the Eagan site. In both cases, the proposed facility expansion at the
Eagan BMC would be considerably larger, requiring more land development, a higher
volume of USPS vehicle traffic (trucks and employee vehicles), relocation of more
employees to the Eagan site, and a higher potential for impact on the natural and cultural
environment. Based on these considerations, and the higher costs for a more intense
development at the Eagan site, the USPS opted not to pursue the Minneapolis P&DC
relocation options further.
■ Expansion of the St. Paul P&DC. As discussed previously, the USPS evaluated the
expansion of the St. Paul P&DC. The demolition of the former Union Depot Concourse
and walkway would have presented a potential opportunity for expansion of the P&DC
United States Postal Service Page 11 August 2007
Major Facilities Office, Arlington, VA
13~-
Draft Comments on USPS EA - September 10, 2007
The City of Eagan is in receipt of the Environmental Assessment for the Twin Cities
Consolidation Project (EA) issued by the United States Postal Service and dated August,
2007. The document was issued on August 15, 2007 at which time the City was advised
of a 30-day comment period through September 14, 2007. The following represent the
City's comments on the EA as presented, with the qualification that no comments can be
prepared for the Transportation section of the document, because it relies on a Level III
Traffic Study that has yet to be completed.
The EA was distributed at this time despite a representation by the USPS that it would
not issue the EA until the Level III Study had been completed (Steve Roth letter dated
October 16, 2006). In consideration of the fact that the Level III Study has not been
completed, the City of Eagan views the EA as incomplete and requested that it be
withdrawn until the Level III Study was satisfactorily completed and that it be reissued at
that time with a new 30 day comment period (Tom Hedges letter dated August 28, 2007).
The USPS denied the City's request and restated the September 14 deadline for the
submission of comments, with the qualification that if the final traffic study resulted in a
revision of the Transportation Section of the EA, USPS would give the City and Dakota
County 14 days from the circulation of the revised section to submit comments on that
document (Larry Duss letter dated September 4, 2007). The reason for issuing the EA at
this time is to meet a timeline self imposed by the USPS to finalize the EA and issue a
Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) (Larry Duss email dated August 23, 2007),
which suggests that the EA is being viewed by the USPS as a matter of form and not an
investigation of potential impacts of the project. Or in other words, the execution of the
accused will occur immediately upon the completion of the fair trial.
Further, Mr. Duss has indicated that the finalization of the Level III traffic study "should
not alter the traffic study findings that are already in the Environmental Assessment"
(Larry Duss email dated September 6, 2007). Therefore, USPS has effectively indicated
that it does not intend to accept or address the comments from the City or any other party
with respect to a completed traffic study.
In the two and one-half years since the USPS preliminarily identified the site at 3165
Lexington Avenue in Eagan, the Cities of Eagan and St. Paul together with Ramsey and
Dakota Counties and representatives of their Congressional delegation have met regularly
with representatives of the USPS in a forum named the Post Office Partnership (POP).
The stated purpose of the POP has been to work cooperatively to insure that the interests
of St. Paul and Ramsey County in acquiring the downtown Postal Service property for
river front redevelopment and a transit hub were balanced with the needs and interests of
the City of Eagan and Dakota County.
The group communicated to the USPS that it would need to address all of the needs of
the parties in order for the project to be successful. Further, the City of Eagan has
communicated that it would only be willing to serve as a host to the expanded facility if
~ 3S
the issues that the City has identified as essential for the development of the property
(such as the installation of the Denmark Road connection) are included in the project and
that the costs of mitigating impacts the parties identified would need to be paid for by the
project. The City's stated intention was to work with the other parties through the POP,
so that upon issuance of the EA, it would be able to determine that all of its issues and
needs had been addressed.
Over the life of the POP, the participation of the USPS in the POP meetings has been
characterized by inconsistent communications, frequently changing expectations and
representations, missed timelines and a succession of new and different representatives,
each of whom needed to be educated about the history of the process and the purpose of
the POP. In the last six months, the USPS participation has shifted focus to executing the
proposed project irrespective of the process and discussions to date, refusing to meet the
needs of the City of Eagan and Dakota County relative to the installation of required
transportation improvements and pressing forward with the project review schedule
despite the fact that the Level III Traffic Study is incomplete and the fact that the USPS
has changed the assumptions of the scale, site plan layouts and direction of traffic related
to the project as recently as August 21, 2007.
The proposed expansion of the USPS facility at 3165 Lexington Avenue presents the
classic challenge faced by communities that are host to the facilities of other units of
government. Typically, such facilities are at least tax-exempt, so that they automatically
create demands for services and infrastructure without contributing to the tax base and
tax revenue. In some cases, such as those involving federal and quasi-federal facilities
such as the USPS, the agency is able to invoke immunity from local zoning and land use
requirements (EA p. 37), thereby preventing local units of government from requiring
that impacts on local systems and services be mitigated.
Since the typical development approval process and related requirements that are
intended to meet community needs and mitigate project impacts can be ignored by the
agency, the communities that are identified to host such facilities have three choices - to
require the businesses and residents of the community to absorb the impacts of the
facility and the costs of mitigating its impacts, attempt to work with the agency to achieve
voluntary compliance with the typical requirements of a development or to oppose the
development politically and publicly. The City of Eagan and Dakota County are not
prepared to do the first, they have made every effort to do the second and the
consequence of the most recent aggressive and uncooperative actions by the USPS will
be the third.
Within that context, the City of Eagan's comments are as follows:
Introduction (page 1) - "The Proposed Action would have a significant beneficial
impact on USPS operations and productivity
USPS representatives have stated that they view themselves as a displaced business that
should not be required to meet the requirements of the City and County at their proposed
new location. In justifying this position for not funding transportation improvements in
the City of Eagan that are prerequisites to the City's support of the project, they have
indicated that they do not wish to move from the St. Paul site, because it is among the
most efficient and productive in the USPS system (LISPS and Wenck meetings with City
and County representatives on August 17 and August 21, 2007).
Alternatives-Proposed Action (page 7) -
"Specifically, the Proposed Action includes the following primary components:
1. Increase the processing capacity on the existing Eagan BMC site to serve ZIP
Code areas 540, 546-548, 550-551, 553-560, 562-564, and 566; and originating
and destinating mail for St. Paul ZIP Code areas 540 and 550-551."
As stated earlier in the same section of the EA, service for Zip Code areas 553-555, 562-
564, and 566 is currently provided by the Minneapolis P&DC. Therefore, providing
service to these Zip Code areas at the Eagan BMC would require relocation/consolidation
of certain services from Minneapolis P&DC. While the EA suggests that consolidation
of this service to the Eagan BMC site results in a "minor staff adjustment at the
Minneapolis P&DC", there is no discussion on the volume of truck traffic that will be
displaced to the Eagan BMC site. Furthermore, the draft Level III Traffic Impact Study
does not include any discussion, or provision for, employee trips or truck trips associated
with this aspect of the consolidation. The exclusion of this aspect of the consolidation
from the draft Level III Traffic Impact Study further supports the City's' conclusion that
it is incomplete.
Alternatives-Proposed Action #1 (page 10) - "This EA, however, takes into account the
potential impacts associated with the development of the Denmark Avenue extension as
part of the Proposed Action. Should Denmark Avenue not be constructed, USPS would
continue to use the existing entry/exit points along Lexington Avenue, or a combination
of a modified entry/exit points along Lexington Avenue and a new driveway in the
southwest corner of the USPS site connecting with the terminus of Denmark Avenue.
The findings and conclusions of the EA would still be valid."
Denmark Avenue does not have a terminus. The City's Comprehensive Guide Plan
designates Denmark Avenue as a through street, the existing segments of which are
completed north and south of the USPS property. The assertion by the EA that a public
street that is to serve a variety of purposes for the development site and other users should
be used by the USPS as a private driveway, without regard to the development's
responsibilities to its completion, is invalid on its face.
Further, Figure 4 represents the extension of Denmark Avenue as a through street, which
concurs with the City and County's expectations of the project and the stated assumptions
of the agency for the Level III study until August 21. Until the USPS representatives
recently redirected the agency's traffic engineer to modify the assumptions for the Level
III Traffic Study to shift all traffic from the site to Lexington Avenue, the consultant had
not presented any data to suggest that this alternative had been studied. Not only is the
alternative to not install Denmark Avenue contrary to the City of Eagan's stated
t37
minimum consideration for support of the project, the conclusion that so substantial a
change would not invalidate substantial portions of the analysis to date is unfounded,
undocumented, arbitrary and capricious.
USPS staff have disclosed to the City of Eagan and Dakota County that funding
designated to meet the City's requirement for the installation of Denmark Avenue is
included in the contingency line item of the draft budget for the project (Telecon with
Larry Duss and other USPS representatives, Tom Hedges, Tom Colbert, Jon Hohenstein
and Brian Sorenson on June 8, 2007.)
Alternatives-Proposed Action Last Paragraph (page 11) - "The new Eagan facility
would allow for the deployment of state-of-the-art mail processing technology that would
result in improved mail services to postal customers in the Twin Cities, Minnesota area
and the region"- See comments on Introduction, page 1, above.
No Action Alternative (page 11) - "Under the no action alternative, operations and mail
processing at the Twin Cities area facilities would not be consolidated and would
continue to be inefficient and costly." - See comments on Introduction, page 1, above.
While the complete opposite of the recent representations by USPS representatives that
they are not able to afford to address the local needs and expectations of the prospective
host community and that they are constrained by unsubstantiated financial limitations,
USPS representatives have indicated in past POP meetings that the consolidation of
facilities is a nationwide initiative to take advantage of new technologies to enhance
overall system effectiveness and efficiency.
Since none of the public agencies affected by this decision have been permitted to review
the project budget or sources and uses of funds, it is impossible to verify whether the
combination of revenues from the sale of the St. Paul facility, other agency revenues,
revenue enhancements from increased facility operating efficiencies and other factors are
adequately addressed in the project assumptions, other than the disclosure by USPS
representatives that funding for the Denmark installation has been budgeted as noted in
the comments above.
Alternatives Considered But Eliminated Acquisition of Other New Sites and
Buildings (page 12) - "The USPS evaluated potential new sites for consolidation of the
area USPS facilities for the past several years confirmed that the expansion of the
existing USPS-owned facility and property at 3165 Lexington Avenue South in Eagan is
the most efficient and cost-effective alternative available to the USPS
Given the current representations by USPS representatives that the consolidation of
facilities at the Eagan site is only feasible if the USPS invokes its immunity from local
controls and requirements and refuses to assume responsibility for development
obligations, the original analysis was at least incorrect or this conclusion is invalid.
!3~
Environmental Consequences and Mitigation - Topography, Geology and Soils
Impacts Eagan (pages 14-15) - The EA should incorporate the following
GOAL 3: PROTECT SURFACE WATER RESOURCES FROM IMPACTS OF LAND
DEVELOPMENT AND RE-DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES.
POLICY 3.1
Require new development activity creating more than %z acre of new impervious surface
to achieve no-net increase of Total Phosphorus (TP) and Total Suspended Solids (TSS)
loading or to meet removal performance criteria of 50 percent TP and 80 percent TSS,
whichever is more restrictive. This policy protects the quality of downstream resources
and complies with nondegradation requirements of the NPDES MS4 permit.
POLICY 3.2
Require redevelopment activities to achieve no-net-increase of TP and TSS loading.
This policy protects the quality of downstream resources and complies with
nondegradation requirements of the NPDES MS4 permit.
POLICY 3.3
Require infiltration of the first one-half inch of stormwater runoff from any rainfall event
from: 1) new impervious areas of redevelopment activities and 2) the entire site of new
development activities. At its discretion, the City may modify or waive this requirement,
based on consideration of any of the following:
1. soil borings indicate unsuitability for infiltration (e.g., hydrologic soil types C or D);
2. infiltration of the equivalent runoff volume is accomplished elsewhere within the same
City subdrainage district;
3. the potential of groundwater contamination exists due to such variables as, but not
limited to, the following:
a. geology that exposes aquifer vulnerability (e.g., karst, shallow bedrock, etc.); or
b. land use that causes high pollutant and sediment levels in stormwater (e.g., industrial
areas, high vehicular traffic rights-of-way, etc.); or
4. other circumstances that may affect feasible and prudent implementation of this policy.
This policy protects the quality of downstream resources by eliminating up to 75 percent
of annual runoff, as well as reducing TP and TSS.
POLICY 3.4
Collect cash dedications in lieu of on-site treatment for water quality/wetland protection
capital improvements, at the City's discretion. This policy recognizes that it will not
always be desirable and/or feasible for development/redevelopment activity to comply
with on-site mitigation requirements as outlined in Policies 3.1 and 3.2. This provision
provides another alternative to achieve compliance with those policies by financing off-
site improvements. The methodology for applying and calculating the cash dedication is
in Chapter 9.
137
Hydrology & Water Quality Affected Environment (page 15) - LeMay Lake is 500' to
1000' west of the site, not 0.5 mile, and within the Shoreland District Boundary.
Hydrology & Water Quality Impacts Eagan BMC (page 16) - In the first paragraph it
is Denmark Avenue, not Hampton Drive.
Hydrology & Water Quality Impacts Eagan BMC (page 17) - In the last paragraph,
Construction activity within water, when permitted, will require floating silt fence in
accordance with Eagan standard detail plate.
Hydrology & Water Quality Mitigation Measures (page 17) - See above from Eagan
Water Quality & Wetland Management Plan Requirements
Wetlands Affected Environment Wetland Regulations and Jurisdiction (page 19) -
In the third paragraph, Insert reference to City Ordinance Section 11.67, Wetlands
Protection and Management Regulations, with regards to LGU wetland requirements.
Local Employment and Economic/Relocation Impacts (page 31) - "The addition of
these new employees at the BMC site would bring new jobs to the City of Eagan and
provide increased patronage to Eagan area businesses."
The analysis of economic impact is superficial and misleading. While the City does not
discount the potential for 1,000 additional employees to shop at local businesses and, as
existing USPS employees may choose to relocate and attrition leads to more USPS
employees living in the area, the benefits to the larger community are derivative and
diluted. The retail area in which the EA suggests the greatest revenue gain may occur is
precisely the area in which the City has the greatest concerns that increasingly
unacceptable levels of congestion will occur if the USPS persists in poorly conceived
traffic planning and its effort to disregard its responsibilities to provide for required
transportation improvements.
While it would require a level of analysis that the EA doesn't pretend to attempt, it is
likely that unless the added traffic and congestion from the new operation is not mitigated
and addressed in the way in which the City and County suggest it should be, any benefit
to area retailers could be offset by other shoppers choosing to avoid the area due to USPS
traffic.
Further, the EA makes no effort to quantify the impact of a tax exempt development on
the remainder of the property owners in the City. Since cities and counties in Minnesota
do not have access to local income taxes and can only implement local sales taxes
through special legislation, the primary source of local tax revenue is the property tax.
Therefore all demands for local infrastructure capacity and services that the USPS facility
creates are subsidized by all other taxpayers in the City and County. The EA does not
analyze the opportunity cost to the City and County from the lost property tax revenue
that would accrue from a private sector development of the property. In short, the USPS
/I
should actually make every effort it can to meet local needs and interests at the outset of a
project like this, in recognition of the ongoing impact it will have on the community's
resources and service delivery in the future. This point will be noted in the comments on
impacts on local services below.
Local Employment and Economic/Relocation Impacts (page 31) - "The loss of
employment in downtown St. Paul and, to a lesser degree, north Minneapolis would have
a slight negative impact on the local businesses and restaurants"
It is not logical to suggest that the addition of a certain number of jobs in one community
would have a substantial positive impact, while the loss of the same number of jobs in
another community would have a slight negative impact.
The excluded analysis above also omits any reference to the substantial economic benefit
the City of St. Paul and Ramsey County would experience by the introduction of a
substantial private redevelopment of the riverfront on what is currently tax exempt
Property.
Land Use and Zoning (page 35 and 36) - "The performance standards for this district
(BP zoning district) are intended to establish and maintain high quality site planning,
architecture, signage, and landscape design to create an attractive and unified
development character." and "The proposed expansion would be compatible and
consistent with the existing land use on the site and in the general vicinity of the
project." and "However, the proposed expansion into the BP zoning district on the
western portion of the USPS site does not strictly comply with the zoning requirements
for this district because the regulations do not specifically allow `outdoor storage and
high truck traffic' in the BP District. Despite the conflict with the strict interpretation of
the BP zoning district, the proposed expansion of the Eagan BMC would be consistent
with the goals and policies outlined in the Eagan comprehensive plan and with other
development plans and goals."
The introduction of an I-1 use in the BP zoning district is NOT consistent with the goals
and policies of the City's comprehensive plan and other development plans and goals.
Specifically, the district goes further than not allowing outdoor storage, the district
specifically prohibits outdoor storage. Further, the agency has invoked its immunity from
local regulations to indicate that it does not intend to comply with the City's materials
finish standards for the BP zoning district or even the more permissive standards of the I-
1 zoning district.
By expanding the industrial uses to the west, the proposed action would introduce a
largely unscreened view of a large industrial development, constructed of base finish
materials, surrounded by truck docks and trailer storage located between retail and
hospitality developments characterized by brick finishes and architectural upgrades along
one of the City's most highly traveled viewsheds - 135E. If the project were to assume
responsibility for its development responsibilities and required improvements to
eliminate its adverse impacts on other residents, businesses and taxpayers, the
inconsistency might be offset, but absent that, the proposed facilities and uses create an
undue and significant impact on the community and are contrary to the City's plans and
goals.
Land Use and Zoning Mitigation Measures (page 36) - "No mitigation measures
would be necessary for any of the USPS sites associated with the Proposed Action. As
an independent establishment of the executive branch of the government of the United
States, the Postal Service is immune from local zoning and land use requirements (39
U.S.C. 201); however, the USPS would consider recommendations from state or local
officials or local requirements during the consultation process (39 U.S.C. 409(f)(4))"
Despite earlier representations by the USPS planning consultant that the agency would
meet the City's requirements to apply to plat and rezone the development property, the
USPS has now invoked its immunity from local requirements. Apart from offering to
review the site and building plans with City and County staff as a courtesy, there is no
evidence that the USPS will genuinely consider or incorporate any local
recommendations or requirements into the development if the project were to proceed.
Visual Resources/Aesthetics Affected Environment and Impacts (page 38) - "Views
from the east (sic) from along .I-35E and areas west of I-35E are primarily of the
undeveloped BMC property, with some glimpses of the BMC building and the
surrounding commercial development including the Home Depot and Sam's Club
facilities." and "The Proposed Action would not result in significant impacts on visual
resources or aesthetics in the project area. Although there are no significant viewsheds in
the vicinity of the BMC, construction of the expanded BMC facility would affect the
appearance of the BMC site landscape and alter views from certain vantage points in the
area passing vehicles on I-35E would experience the most noticeable view changes."
The I-35E corridor in the area between Lone Oak Road and Pilot Knob Road is among
the most highly traveled and highly visible viewsheds in the community. By expanding
the facility as proposed, the facility would have a significant detrimental affect on the
aesthetics of the high quality commercial and industrial appearances that characterize this
viewshed. As noted above the facility as proposed will be a largely unscreened, high
profile, large mass building constructed of base materials with little if any attention to
architectural detail.
As noted under the land use and zoning comments above, if the project were to assume
responsibility for its development responsibilities and required improvements to
eliminate its adverse impacts on other residents, businesses and taxpayers, the
inconsistency might be offset, but absent that, the proposed facility and its finishes create
an undue and significant impact on the visual environment of the community, diminish
the City's identity as a quality business environment and are contrary to the City's plans
and goals.
Transportation (page 44 and following) - The Transportation Section of the EA makes
reference to a Level III Traffic Impact Study. The Level III Study has not been
lqc~
completed to date. The preliminary draft of the study that was shared with the City of
Eagan and Dakota County was included significant deficiencies and unresolved issues.
The City and County have submitted extensive comments to the USPS consultant to
assist them in preparing a complete study, but that document has not been submitted to
the agencies to date. As a consequence, the City or County can only comment on the
assertions made in the EA and on the incomplete traffic information provided to date.
The City has communicated to the USPS in the letter from Tom Hedges referenced above
that the absence of a completed Level III Study renders the EA incomplete and that it is
not reasonable to require affected agencies to comment on a document that has not been
provided to them. It is the responsibility of the USPS to provide the communities with a
reasonable opportunity for review of the completed document.
Despite this, the USPS representatives have indicated that the EA presupposes the
outcome and validity of the Level III study and have denied the City's request to
withdraw the EA and reissue it after the study is completed with a new 30 day comment
period. Due to the failure of the USPS to produce the final study and its decision to
require comments in its absence, the City's comments are based on the information
available to date and the City must conclude that all information that remains undisclosed
and without analysis relates to significant impacts that the Proposed Action will not
mitigate.
As such, Proposed Action will adversely impact the City of Eagan and, absent evidence
that the impacts have been accurately identified, analyzed and mitigated, the project
should not proceed.
Specific comments on the partial information available are as follows:
Transportation- Affected Environment (page 45)-
"The proposed USPS expansion provides an opportunity for a City coordinated extension
of Denmark Avenue to provide a continuous roadway segment from Lone Oak Road to
Yankee Doodle Road. While the current proposed expansion plan accommodates this
extension, USPS and the City have yet to finalize an agreement concerning the details for
the proposed road segment."
The EA and Level III Traffic Impact Study include statements which indicate the
connection of Denmark Avenue may not be constructed as part of the proposed action.
However, the 2010-build and 2020-build scenarios modeled as part of the draft Level III
Traffic Impact Study make use (albeit artificially limited) of the Denmark Avenue
connection. If the connection of Denmark Avenue is not constructed, several
assumptions made in the Level III Traffic Impact Analysis are no longer valid and result
in a study that does not represent the anticipated traffic patterns generated by the
proposed action.
In addition, the draft Level III Traffic Impact Study indicates artificially limited use of
Denmark Avenue by USPS employees and/or Business Mail Entry Units (BMEU). The
forecast trips selectively assigned to Denmark Avenue in the Level III TIS are not
consistent with anticipated motorist behavior. Specifically, the City anticipates that a
large number of BMEU and employee trips will use Denmark Avenue to access 1-35E via
the ramps at Yankee Doodle Road. The proposed site plan, as indicated in Figure 4 of
the EA, does not include any physical barriers which limit the number of trips accessing
Denmark Avenue to the small volume identified in the draft Level III Traffic Impact
Study. The inadequate modeling of the anticipated traffic patterns created by the
proposed action supports the City's conclusion that the draft Level III Traffic Impact
Study is incomplete.
USPS representatives have stated their confidence in the accuracy and completeness of
the draft Level III Traffic Impact Study on numerous occasions. While several
conflicting verbal explanations of the traffic patterns generated by the proposed action
have been provided, USPS representatives indicated on August 21, 2007 that the traffic
patterns presented in the draft Level III Traffic Impact Study accurately portray the site
operations anticipated with the proposed action. However, the site plan indicated in
Figure 4 does not provide any physical barriers which guarantee these traffic patterns.
Given the City's doubts with the accuracy of the traffic patterns presented in the Level III
Traffic Impact Study, the USPS should execute a Travel Demand Management (TDM)
agreement with the City of Eagan and Dakota County which formalizes USPS' previous
commitment to maintaining the analyzed traffic patterns, unequivocal criteria for
determining when USPS is in default of those patterns and explicit mitigation measures
which would be performed by USPS for differing traffic patterns.
Local Employment and Economics/Relocation- Impacts (page 31)-
"Consolidation of area functions at the Eagan facility would result in the relocation of
approximately 1,000 craft and management jobs, primarily from the downtown St. Paul
area, to the City of Eagan."
Reference in the EA is made to the relocation of approximately 1,000 craft and
management jobs. This number cannot be verified via the draft Level III Traffic Impact
Study.
Transportation- Impacts (page 50)-
"Based on the analysis in this report, the proposed USPS expansion is expected to result
in a relatively low number of additional trips to the roadway network during the AM and
PM peak hours."
Parks and Recreation (page 51) - "The Proposed Action would have no adverse
impacts on any of the Eagan area parks or other recreational facilities or opportunities
As noted in the economic impact and community services comments, while the direct
impacts of the facility may be relatively small, by invoking its immunity to local controls
and obligations, the development will not support either the improvement of additional
facilities through parks and trails dedications and by virtue of the fact that it is tax
exempt, it will not support the ongoing maintenance and operation of park facilities
through property taxes.
Community Services (page 52) - "No significant impacts on local fire and police
services would be expected."
As noted in the economic impact and parks and recreation comments, the facility will
require the same public safety response and protection services as would any industrial
development of a comparable scale and, by virtue of its tax exempt status, all services
that it does require will be subsidized by the remainder of Eagan's taxpayers.
Summary and Conclusions (pages 57) - "The traffic impact analysis conducted for this
project indicates that project-related truck and employee vehicle traffic associated with
the Proposed Action would not adversely affect the level of service for area roadways or
create undue safety hazards"
In the absence of a complete and valid Level III Traffic Impact Analysis and sufficient
time for agencies to review it, there is no plausible basis for this conclusion.
Summary and Conclusions (pages 58) - "Careful facility design and layout, avoidance
or minimization of impacts through best management practices, and voluntary
compliance with applicable local design and construction codes to the maximum extent
practicable would minimize or prevent impacts that would otherwise occur. For example,
as shown in Figure 4 of this document, the facility was designed specifically to avoid the
wetlands that are located on or adjacent to the site ...to control runoff would minimize
impacts to soils, water quality and wetlands."
The USPS has invoked its immunity from local zoning regulations and has expressed its
intent to not comply voluntarily with applicable local design and construction codes.
Most regulations pertaining to wetlands and surface water protection are mandated by
and follow models defined by federal regulations. Since the agency presumably is not
immune from meeting federal environmental requirements, the fact that those mirror
local ones does not equate to voluntary compliance with local standards or
implementation of locally defined best practices. In addition, while the concept of
federal preemption is clearly stated, the notion that any mail and package sorting and
distribution center needs to be immune from local controls in order to be financially
viable ignores the fact that UPS, FedEx and a variety of the USPS's direct competitors
meet local requirements every day when they develop their facilities around the United
States.
There is no evidence in this case that any effort is being made to design or develop the
proposed facility carefully or in a manner intended to avoid or minimize impacts.
Summary and Conclusions (pages 58) - "Therefore, constructing and operating the
expanded mail processing facility on the USPS Bulk Mail Center Site at 3165 Lexington
Avenue in Eagan would result in increased operational efficiencies and a beneficial
impact on USPS operations, productivity, and costs, without causing significant adverse
impacts on the environment."
The comments made by USPS representatives in meetings held throughout the POP
meeting process, and more specifically in meetings held between USPS representatives
and City and County staff on August 17, 20 and 21, made clear that the only factors
bearing on the decision making process in this case was the opportunity to increase
operational efficiencies for the benefit of the Postal Service in the context of the proceeds
from a pending purchase agreement with the Ramsey Regional Rail Authority and other
unspecified revenue sources. As noted above, the analysis minimizes the significance of
the impacts on the host community, claims immunity from local requirements and is
dismissive of the obligations of the development to meet the needs and expectations of
the host community.
Appendix C Consultation Affidavit of Publication of Notice - The USPS published its
intent to prepare an EA in the Star Tribune on July 17, 2006 and in the Pioneer Press on
July 19, 2006. In both cases the notice indicated that the EA was expected to completed
in October, 2006. The EA was ultimately distributed in August, 2007. While NEPA
does not require an EA to be distributed within a timeframe proximate to the notice, the
release of the document has occurred so far removed from the notice and the original
representations made in the notice as to make it ineffective in engaging public comment.
Appendix C Consultation Louis Berger Memo presenting Minutes of December 4,
2006 Meeting - While the inconsistency between the minutes and the discussion at the
meeting should have been noted and corrected earlier, the review of the EA presents the
opportunity to correct and clarify the following bullet #4 on page 2.
• In response to a question if the USPS will be treated as a private developer
developing the site in Eagan, the City and County responded that they would like
the studies performed as if it is a private development, however, contributions
towards construction of mitigations will not be treated as such.
In the course of the conversation regarding the City and County's expectations of the
project, USPS posed the question of whether more was being expected of the project
because it was the post office than would be expected of a private developer. The City
and County responded that, to the contrary, they expected the project to be responsible
for the same obligations as a private developer and that the studies should be performed
on that basis (including the extension of Denmark Avenue as noted in bullet #1 on page
3), but that the City recognized that USPS may not be obligated to pay for certain
obligations of private developments, such as building permit fees.
Given that the City's explicit position has been that the USPS project had to be
responsible for the installation of Denmark Avenue, just as a private developer would be
obligated to do, attributing a statement to the City that the development would not be
responsible to contribute to the construction of mitigation measures is not correct.
111~p
4 10 City of Ea~an
September 6, 2007
Mike Maguire
MAYOR
Lawrence P. Duss,.P.E.
Paul Bakken Project Manager
Peggy Carlson Headquarters Facilities
4301 Wilson Blvd, Suite 300
Cyndee Fields Arlington, VA 22203
Meg Tilley
COUNCIL MEMBERS Re: USPS Response to Request for Withdrawal of Environmental Assessment for
Potential Consolidation of USPS Facilities
Thomas Hedges
CITY ADMINISTRATOR Dear Mr. Duss:
We received your letter of September 4, 2007 denying the City's request to withdraw the
EA for the USPS Twin Cities Consolidation Project (A copy of which is attached). In it
you make a number of assertions as the basis for your decision that need to be noted.
MUNICIPAL CENTER As with EAW's under Minnesota law, we understand that the EA is the vehicle by which
it is determined whether a higher level of analysis, typically an EIS, is necessary. While
3830 Pilot Knob Road an EAW or EA is a brief analysis to support that determination, it needs to provide all of
Eagan, MN 55122-1810 the information necessary for third parties to make informed comments regarding the
651.675.5000 phone sufficiency of the analysis and its conclusions of impact.
651.675.5012 fax
651.454.8535 TDD your letter goes on to state that the EA was circulated to various parties on August 14,
2007, "with an attached draft Phase (sic) III traffic report for the Eagan expansion". In
the attached correspondence to Kathy Fischer of the Ramsey Regional Rail Authority,
MAINTENANCE FACILITY you also asserted "that the EA does, in fact, include a Phase (sic) III traffic report". That
3501 Coachman Point is, in fact, false. Neither the hard copy of the EA nor the CD version that was delivered to
Eagan, MN 55122 the City include any version of the Level III traffic study.
651.675.5300 phone
651.65300 p0 fax The only draft of the Level III study that the City has received was a CD copy of the
initial discussion draft of the report on August 7, 2007, followed by hard copies of the
651.454.8535 TDD report the following week. As a consequence, City and County staff had fewer than eight
work days to review a highly detailed document prior to the meetings you reference as
having occurred on August 17, 20 and 21.
www.cityofeagan.com
At that time, the traffic engineers present, including the USPS consultant, acknowledged
that substantial issues remain to be addressed, USPS introduced new information
regarding the extent of BMEU traffic expected planned for the site and USPS staff in
Arlington redirected the study assumptions to focus all traffic on Lexington Avenue. All
THE LONE OAK TREE of this together means that this fundamental part of the EA is not complete by any
The symbol of definition and, by extension, it is not possible for the City, County or any other interested
strength and growth party to comment on it in any meaningful way.
in our community.
You indicated in your letter and email of August 23, 2007, copies of which are attached,
that Wenck had been directed to complete the traffic study within two weeks. The City
and County have yet to receive the completed traffic study.
Yet the conclusion of your letter of September 4 states that USPS will only extend the
comment period for the City and County "should any revisions be made to the
Transportation Section of the EA". Since you have already indicated in your email to
Kathy Fischer that "Wenck's responses (to the City and County comments) should not
alter the traffic study findings that are already in the Environmental Assessment", USPS
has already determined that the outcome of the traffic study is predetermined, the
comments of the City and County are irrelevant and that the controlling factor is not the
accurate and responsive review of local concerns, but the need to meet a schedule to
make a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) on the EA on September 20, 2007.
Structuring study and comment processes in a way that is clearly intended to marginalize
and dismiss local concerns underscores the unwillingness of the USPS to partner or
cooperate in this process. This approach effectively disregards the concerns of the City
and County.
Given the history of the review process outlined above, the City respectfully requests that
USPS reconsider the opportunity it has to extend the EA Comment period or to commit
in writing to the extension of the comment period for the Transportation Section of the
EA at your earliest opportunity. Otherwise, the City's conclusions must be that there are
significant impacts that have not been disclosed and analyzed, meaning that the USPS
could not issue a FONSI.
ncer ly
Tom Hedges
City Administrator
Cc: Senator Norm Coleman Senator Amy Klobuchar
Congressman John Kine Congresswoman Betty McCullom
Governor Tim Pawlenty Carol Molnau, Commissioner MnDOT
Senator Jim Carlson Representative Lynn Wardlow
Representative Sandy Masin Tom Egan, Dakota County Commissioner
Rafael Ortega, Ramsey County Board
Members of the Post Office Partnership
~~0
AUUNIFEDST4TES
laOSf/~LSEI~V~CE
August 23, 2007
Mr. Jon Hohenstein
Community Development Director
City of Eagan
3830 Pilot Knob Road
Eagan, MN 55122
RE: United States Postal Service
Proposed Mail Processing Facility
At Existing Eagan Plant
Mr. Hohenstein:
Pursuant to the Traffic Study Meeting held in your offices on August 21, 2007, this
communication serves to summarize the discussion points and clarify the direction that our
traffic consultant, Wenck Associates, will take to complete the draft report. The noted items
are as follow:
• Wenck Associates will finalize the draft Traffic Report as originally identified
• Wenck Associates will respond to outstanding traffic issues from the City of Eagan
and Dakota County staffs that are pertinent to the draft Traffic Report as distributed
• It is understood that City of Eagan and Dakota County will not support a planned
expansion by USPS at the Eagan property without the Denmark Avenue Extension
being part of the expansion project
• USPS insists that Dakota County allow for the installation of a signal control at the
existing truck entrance into the Eagan facility from Lexington Avenue
The USPS will expect a confirming response from you within seven (7) calendar days after
receipt.of this letter. If the aforementioned items are not correct or require further clarification,
please indicate in your response.
Sincerely,
Lawrence P. Duss, P.E.
Project Manager
Headquarters Facilities
4301 Wilson Blvd, Suite 300
Arlington, VA 22203
cc: Tom Colbert, City of Eagan
Brian Sorenson, Dakota County
Ed Terhaar, Wenck Associates
file
jhohenstein@cityofeagan.com
Telephone: 651-675-5653
Fax: 651-675-5694
From: Duss, Lawrence P - Arlington, VA [mailto:Lawrence.P.Duss@usps.gov]
Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2007 2:47 PM
To: Jon Hohenstein
Cc: Tom Colbert; Sorenson, Brian; Edward Terhaar; Matuzek, Michael T - Denver, CO -
Contractor; Roth, Stephen C - Arlington, VA; Tamaskar, Ujwala - Arlington, VA; Ruffing, James M
- Arlington, VA - Contractor; mike.marinovich@cbre.com
Subject: Phase III Traffic Study
Jon,
This email is in response to your email to me dated yesterday. Wenck Associates has been
instructed to finalize the traffic report based on the original assumptions and that all other traffic
patterns are to be ignored.
Referencing the current targeted milestone dates, we have allowed for five days to "finalize" the
EA after we receive comments from the City of Eagan, Dakota County and others so that we can
issue the FONSI (Finding of No Significant Impacts) on or about September 20, 2007. As such,
we established September 14 as the date to vt comments back and with a thirty day review
period, we issued the "draft EA" on August 15 .
To maintain schedule, we decided to issue the draft Traffic Report along with the draft EA. It is
anticipated that the Traffic Report will be finalized along with the EA. As of yesterday, Wenck
Associates has been provided direction to complete the Traffic Report as originally outlined and
to respond to any outstanding issues from the City of Eagan and Dakota County pertinent to that
study hopefully within the next two weeks. The direction given to Wenck Associates was
subsequent to our meeting at your offices. If more review time beyond the 10 of September is
required by the City of Eagan and/or Dakota County for respective reviews, USPS will certainly
consider an appropriate time extension.
Attached to this email is. a letter directed to your attention that confirms what we believe are the
key issues relative to the project and the traffic study. It is presumed that this email along with the
letter will be favorably received by you, your staff at the City of Eagan and the Dakota County
staff so that the Phase III Traffic Study and encompassing Environment Assessment can be
finalized as quickly as possible.
Lawrence P. Duss, P.E.
Project Manager, Design & Construction
Headquarters Facilities
United States Postal Service
4301 Wilson Blvd, Suite 300
Arlington, VA 22203-1861
703-526-2827
Lawrence.P.Duss(@usps.gov
t50
POP Agenda and Minutes Page 1 of 2
Jon Hohenstein
From: Duss, Lawrence P - Arlington, VA [Lawrence. P.Duss@usps.gov]
Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2007 7:20 AM
To: Fischer, Kathryn
Cc: Jon Hohenstein; mike.marinovich@cbre.com; Branson, Carrie M - St. Louis, MO; Matuzek, Michael
T - Denver,. CO - Contractor
Subject: FW: POP Agenda and Minutes
Hello Kathryn,
Having just received the meeting minutes from the POP Meeting on August 20th, I would like to confirm what
Carrie Branson eluded to in her email regarding the EA and the Phase III Traffic Report. As you know, I arrived at
the end of the meeting due to travel complications so I was not present for the main discussion.
The first sentence of the second paragraph under "Status of Post Office to Eagan" of the meeting minutes is
incorrect. The sentence reads "The Environmental Assessment was distributed last week without the Phase III
details". The EA does, in fact, include the Phase III Traffic Report. Our traffic consultant, Wenck Associates, is
currently finalizing their response to questions/clarifications raised by the City of Eagan and Dakota County
transportation engineers from their review of an advance copy of the traffic study. Wenck's responses should not
alter the traffic study findings that are already in the Environmental Assessment.
It is requested that the above clarification be added as an agenda item for the next POP Meeting.
Lawrence P. Duss, P.E.
Project Manager, Design & Construction
Headquarters Facilities
United States Postal Service
4301 Wilson Blvd, Suite 300
Arlington, VA 22203-1861
703-526-2827
Lawrence.P.Duss c@r usps.gov
----=Original Message-----
From: Branson, Carrie M - St. Louis, MO
Sent: Wednesday, September 05, 2007 4:43 PM
To: 'Fischer, Kathryn'
Cc: Duss, Lawrence P - Arlington, VA; Matuzek, Michael T - Denver, CO - Contractor; 'scox@fwhlaw.com';
'Mike.Marinovich@cbre.com'
Subject: RE: POP Agenda and Minutes
Hi Kathryn,
I wanted to clarify the statement attributed to me in the meeting minutes. Although the issue of the EA definitely
came up, I don't believe I said the timeline could be extended if any omissions were found. I recall the EA was
discussed in general terms and I may have indicated that an extension could be requested. Perhaps it is a matter
of semantics but I want to make sure the minutes are accurate. The Postal Service did not make any promises,
express or implied, to extend the comment period.
Also, the EA did include information from the Phase III Traffic Study.
Thanks very much,
Carrie M. Branson
Attorney
Ph: 314-872-5178
151
POP Agenda and Minutes Page 2 of 2
Fax: 202-4064535
-----Original Message-----
From: Trost, Bekky [mailto:Bekky.Trost@CO.RAMSEY.MN.US] On Behalf Of Fischer, Kathryn
Sent: Wednesday, September 05, 2007 10:21 AM
To: undisclosed-recipients
Subject: POP Agenda and Minutes
Good morning, everyone: ,
Please find the agenda and minutes for the next POP meeting scheduled for Monday, September 10,
2007. The meeting will take place at the Dakota County Northern Service Center, One Mendota Road,
West St. Paul, room 110C. The meeting will start at 1:30 PM.
if you have any questions, please contact Kathy Fischer at (651) 266-2762.
Thank you.
«09-10-07. doc>>
«08-20-07.doc>>
Bekky Trost
6560 RCGC-West
50 West Kellogg Blvd.
St. Paul, MN 55102
Bekky. trost@co. ramsey. mn. us
Ph: 651-266-2790
ISM
9/6/2007
` UWTED S <ATES
A AdST&sE(ZVK'E
September 4. 2007
Fom Iled ues
City :'Administrator
City of Ii.aoan
3830 Pilot Knob Road
Fa«an. SIN 5122
Thomas Colbert. P.E.
Director of Public Works
City of Eagan
3830 Pilot Knob Road
Eagan, NI N 5 i 122
Brian K. Sorenson, P.l;.
Program Engineer
Dakota Count-,-
149 5 Galaxic Avenue. 3"r Floor
:Apple Valley. MN _55124
Re: USPS 'T'win Cities Consolidation Project
F nvironmental Assessment
Dcar Mr. [ledges. Mr. Colbert, and Mr. Sorenson.
I am its receipt of the letter dated August 28, 2007 from Mr. I ledges as well as the letter
dated ALJOust 31, 2007 from Mr. Colbert and Mr. Sorenson. In both letters, it is requested
that the above-referenced Environmental Assessment ("EA-) be withdrawn by the Postal
Service and reissued at a later date. Before addressing this request. I would like to clarifv
the nature and purpose of the EA.
An I:A is a concise public document with three functions: I ) It brIetly provides sufficient
evidence and analysis for determining whether to prepare an Environmental Impact
Statement 2) it aids an agency's compliance with the National Environmental
Policy Act (-NEPA") when no EIS is necessary; and 3) it facilitates preparation of an HIS
when one is necessary. t Due to the more limited nature of Dui EA, as compared to an EIS,
agencies are generally not mandated to provide a comment period. As the Council on
Environmental Quality .("CEQ") has observed, "the EA process provides fan agency]
flexibility in how [to] involve interested parties in the most efficient and effective manner
to obtain input on the EA.
'40 C.F.R. 1508.9(x)
' Connaughton, James L.. "Guidance for Environmental Assessments of forest Health Projects" (Dec. 9,
2002), at=ai/able at ttttp::i~vww.fs.fed.us'proiects/hfi/2002/dechuidance-for-environnreiital-
assessments.pdf.
The Postal Service circulated a draft version of the FA on August ICI. 2007 to the City of
Fa~tan. the City of'St. Paul. Ramsey County, and Dakota County with an attached draft
Phase III traffic report for the i agan expansion. The Postal Service determined that this
was the most efficient and effective method to solicit input from interested parties.
FOllow-ing issuance of' the draft F'A and draft Phase III traffic report. Postal Service
representatives islet with transportation engineers and other representatives front I;aoan
and Dakota County on August 17August 20'x', and August 21". Traffic was a primary
topic of conversation at each of these meetings.
in response to some of the questions raised by Fagan and Dakota County. the Postal
Service directed its traffic consultant to further refine the traffic report. 'The edits to the
traffic report can best be described as clarifications rather than changes in the basic
assumptions Underlying the traflic study. The Postal Service will provide the interested
parties with the final Phase HI traffic report when it becomes available. Iloxcver. it is
not anticipated that the clarifications will alter the analysis contained in the I:A. 'I-hat is
to say. the finding that *-the Proposed Action would not result in any, significant impacts
to the roadway network at or in the near vicinity of- the Fagan site" is not expected to
change.
The Postal Service requests that comments to the i'A be provided by September 14. 2007.
Should any revisions be pride to the Transportation section of the FA. the Postal Service
will circulate. the revised "Transportation section and allow the parties toul-tecn ( 14)
calendar days to provide comments thereto. 'This approach is intended to allow the City
of Fagan and Dakota County Slltficlent time to provide input Oil the Transportation
section, as requested. while also allowing the Postal Service to review comments tit the
overall FA as expeditiously as possible.
Thank you for your continued cooperation in this platter.
Sincerely.
Lawrence Duns. P.L.
Proiect Nila.nager. Design Construction
I-leadquarters Facilities
United States Postal Service
=1301 Wilson Blvd. Suite 300
Arlington. VA 27203-1861
703-526-2827
15`~
Agenda Memo
September 11, 2007 Special City Council Meeting
IX. DRAFT LAND USE SECTION - COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
DIRECTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To receive a presentation relative to key components
of the 2008 Comprehensive Plan Update Land Use Section and to provide City staff direction for
additional/different information to finalize the draft of this section.
FACTS:
➢ The City is required to update its Comprehensive Plan every ten years. Work in this
regard has been on-going since last year and the City Council has seen draft sections
related to Parks & Recreation, Transportation and Utilities at previous work sessions.
➢ The Advisory Planning Commission (APC) and City staff has spent a number of
Workshop meetings working on updating the Land Use Section. In addition to updating
facts and figures, the commission has worked on visioning land uses for the next 10-20
years.
➢ One of the more visible proposed changes involves Special Areas. Special Areas were
created with the last update in an effort to acknowledge certain areas of the City that, due
to unique characteristics, required more in-depth review to define existing and ultimate
land uses via a more individualized small area plan. Attached is a map/list of the seven
Special Areas created with the 2000 Update and the map/list of the nine proposed Special
Areas for the 2008 Update.
➢ Another proposed change is the addition of a new Land Use Category that has tentatively
been labeled Major Office. The idea for this new category has arisen recently and has yet
to be fleshed out with the APC. The purpose of this category would be to allow the City
to proactively define areas where development expectations incorporate major office
(including campus type development) and high tech research/engineering uses with little,
if any, emphasis on warehousing and distribution. Staff believes there is rational for this
new category generally and that it will also provide a logical transition for certain areas
where the current Special Area designation is suggested to be removed.
➢ The Major Office category will be more specifically office related when compared
against the two categories (BP-Business Park and OS-Office Service) currently affording
office use as an option.
➢ Lastly, some Councilmembers have periodically stated that the LD - Low Density
Residential (0-4 units/acre) designation, created with the 2000 Update, was inappropriate;
however, the City Council has not provided specific direction regarding this concern. To
avoid a consistency issue and non-conforming status of many existing parcels, the 0-4
density range was necessary. In addition to the 0-3 unit/acre issue, there was also
concern relative to the D-II designation. The stated issues were addressed at the time of
the 2000 Update:
♦ The density of smaller single family lots, in areas like Cedar Grove and McKee
Addition, exceed the previous D-I Single Family, 0-3 unit/acre range.
♦ Acknowledging that when the zoning requirement of the standard 12,000 SF
minimum lot size is divided into an acre of land (43,560 SF), the result is 3.63
units/acre.
♦ Concern existed that the D-II Mixed Residential, (0-6 unit/acre density) was too
liberal in density and use because it accommodated R-1, R-2 and R-3 zoning.
There was a significant amount of property designated D-II.
➢ Planning staff will be present to briefly walk through the items listed above and be
available for questions.
ATTACHMENTS: (4)
Existing Special Area Map/List on page 15
Proposed Special Area Map/List on page I 9W
Draft Major Office language & map and current lP and O/S language on pages_ and /
Existing LD Low Density language on page
frOENIDUCA HE \~;H~,S
S
,
OdkLRd _
• _ ,~..._-gym; '~"y., I tl 1 ,.L~ _ [ t
I
1
YankeeI Doodle Rd
'IT
1
f
J
+V4r
O
/ 7 f It A2 R ~1 ~kp J L--~--~ I11._ I 'f W -
y~i I~
C -
rid_ _
ISt , LLli~l~~ 19 - I.. F
o-
J r: i-
I / NCI 1 -F
7 -
g.j
- -I
CLff Rd `I II
LL
4 f.. t Me E t i r r75 1 e ~Y ' -1 a .t~ _I
Y r l 7
A
APPLE VALLEY POSEN OUN T
~04ofEaIn Special Areas (Current)
SA # Name Legend
2008 Comprehensive Plan Update 1 The Waters
Current Special Areas 2 Hwy 55 Triangle Area O Current Special Areas
3 Rural Residential
4 Central Area Parcel Line
5 Cedar Grove Q Municipal Boundary
6 Lebanon Hills Residential 2
7 Blue Cross Blue Shield Campus 0 Section N
0 0.5 1 2
Miles
/s-
l ,
- l I it -
aoncw~. - N I
55-
ZIP
I Lone Oak Rd _
i _
I`.{ I I Yenkee Doodle Rd
IT Hill*
l i - PropHly I 1 r
i m,- - y
-wescod Rd
i - L.'
S
IZ6
i
i'
hl°`er 'i I - _ ~J -_Dtfiey Rd.._
i
+JL
,7111 4
'1. i'. 00 Rd
- -I J
13
1 c r
I I ~ I
AFP I ( ,'ALI- EY RC, SEMOUi='T
~Otyof Rajan Special Areas (Proposed)
SA # Name Legend
2008 Comprehensive Plan Update 1 The Waters
Proposed Special Areas
3 Rural Residential
Proposed Special Areas 5 Cedar Grove parcel Line
6 Lebanon Hills Residential
8 Hwy 55 Q Municipal Boundary
9 Radio Towers/Drivers Training Site Q Section
10 Lost Spur
11 Carriage Hills
12 Parkview 0 0.5 1 2
Miles
[The proposed Major Office land use category was created to define areas that are more
appropriate for major office campus and high tech research and engineering uses with
less emphasis on warehouse and distribution uses. The intent is to provide a refinement
of the Business Park designation that limits warehouse and storage to be clearly
accessory to office related uses. Major Office will both recognize the existing specialized
corporate campus developments in the City of Eagan and help further refine the desired
land use expected in the northeast portions of Eagan and Central area, especially assisting
removal of Special Area plans as build out and approved development plans are in place.]
• Major Office
Uses: This land use category provides areas to accommodate' a' mix of professional
offices, research and development facilities, and limited high-tech.,,
manufacturing/processing services typically located within large corporate campus areas
or along more highly visible interstates or major arterial roads. Corporate office
buildings, research and development facilities, educational/vocational institutions, hotels,
and public open space/trails designed to accommodate daytime employment populations
are examples of uses allowed in this category. Warehouse/storage uses should be clearly
accessory to an allowed primary use.
Compatibility Considerations: Major office development is usually done in a
coordinated manner with unified design treatments, that provide a high level of exterior
material quality. These uses are generally, compatible with light industrial, commercial,
service and multi-family uses. Compatibility with lower density residential uses depends
largely on the scale and amount of traffic generated to and`from a particular area.
Access Needs: Major Office uses 'generate a substantial amount of employee traffic.
They should be located along arterial and collector roads. However, individual property
access may be''provided from local streets-within an overall office park development.
Physical` Suitability: Many major office uses exist in large buildings which are most
suitable; to sites with few development constraints (e.g. steep slopes, wetlands,
woodlands). , However, specialty office and service buildings (e.g. corporate
headquarters), may be encouraged to utilize unique site specific designs to both integrate
and protect significant natural features.
Associated Zoning: `Zoning categories considered consistent with this land use category
include: Agricultural (A), Research and Development (RD). Business Park (BP) zoning
is compatible with office/high-tech uses only. A majority of areas guided for Major
Office are associated with Planned Developments that are compatible with major office
uses.
i`E!,d LD0 A H E I GH i S
e.. Ge~c,~ ~ . r
comor«e
cen« ~,~r
Otfcc Park E a nG ~ . w
ake,q. , y~ Gra rk 1 ~1 ,tom i
Lone Oak Rd
J 1
S~
~ wrwce
ly Mvnn A
Yankee Doodle Rd
r_
.mw. _
9r ~ 5r '3r '°J
Fever Grove
meop carrer~ Wescott Rd -r:
J_
Pe ~1
~a >
'9 =9 y 3
f"
ii
U.
C - DAR Rd
Z
3.9 zJ xy
CkR Rd
y l 39
APPLE ` AILLEY ROSEMOUNT
Legend
Cif of Earn
2008 Comprehensive Plan Update -Major Office-Proposed
Proposed Major Office Land Use Category Parcel Line
Q Municipal Boundary
0 Section I~
0 0.5 1 2 T
Miles
IUD
• Business Park
Uses: This land use category provides areas to accommodate a mix of professional
offices, research and development facilities, and light industrial uses as well as some
support services. Corporate office buildings, office-warehouse, office-showroom,
research and development facilities, restaurants and hotels are examples of uses allowed
in this category.
Compatibility Considerations: Business Park development is usually done in a
coordinated manner with unified design treatments. These uses are generally compatible
with light industrial, commercial, service and multi-family uses. Given the relatively high
design finish, these uses can also be compatible with lower intensity residential uses (e.g.
single family, two-family). However, their compatibility with residential uses depends
largely on the amount of traffic generate, particularly truck traffic.
Access Needs: Business Park uses generate a substantial amount of employee traffic as
well as moderate truck traffic. They should be located along arterial and collector roads.
However, individual property access may be provided from local streets within an overall
business/office park development.
Physical Suitability: Many office/business park uses exist in large buildings which are
most suitable to sites with few development constraints (e.g. steep slopes, wetlands,
woodlands). However, specialty office and service buildings (e.g. corporate
headquarters) may utilize unique site specific designs that can be well integrated into the
sites with more rugged terrain or significant natural features.
Associated Zoning: Zoning categories considered consistent with this land use category
include: Agricultural (A), Research and Development (RD), Business Park (BP), and
potentially Limited Business (LB).
• Office/Service
Uses: This land use category provides areas for offices and lower intensity service and
retail businesses. Professional offices, medical clinics, day care centers, dry cleaners and
banks are examples of uses allowed in this category.
Compatibility Considerations: These uses are fairly low intensity and can be
compatible in close proximity to residential uses, given appropriate design and buffering.
They are generally compatible with other commercial, retail, and light industrial uses and
can serve as a buffer between more intense commercial or industrial uses and lower
intensity residential uses.
Access Needs: Office and service access needs vary with the size and type of the
establishment. In general, these uses benefit from direct access to busy arterial and
collector roadways. However, smaller offices and limited service establishments can also
thrive on smaller roadways.
Physical suitability: Varies with scale of development. In general, large footprint or
multi-tenant buildings are suited to flat, open sites. However, specialty office and service
buildings (e.g. corporate headquarters, hotels) may utilize unique site specific designs
that can be well integrated into sites with more rugged terrain or significant natural
features.
Associated Zoning: Zoning categories considered consistent with this land use category
include: Agricultural (A), Limited Business (LB), Neighborhood Business (NB), and
potentially Research and Development (RD).
l
• Low Density Residential (0-4 units per acre)
Uses: This land use category provides areas primarily for single family detached housing
units. However, some attached housing (two-family units, townhomes) may be
appropriate provided they comply with the density restrictions and other applicable
zoning regulations.
Density: The maximum gross density allowed within this land use category is 4 units per
acre. Densities within this land use category are generally low, ranging from old
farmsteads and large lot estates to smaller lot subdivisions often associated with older
single family subdivisions. Lot sizes are generally consistent with R-1 zoning standards,
however, smaller lot sizes exist in older single family neighborhoods and in some
planned developments. The creation of new small lot subdivisions may also be
appropriate in situations where: a) a maintenance organization or exterior maintenance
provisions strategies are in place, b) the site contains unique physical characteristics that
can be preserved through use of smaller lots and/or cluster design, and c) the
development design is consistent with the surrounding neighborhood.
Compatibility Considerations: Due to the low intensity of single family uses, buffering
is usually required where it abuts other more intense uses, particularly industrial or
commercial uses or busy roadways. However, this does not mean that strict physical
separation of uses must always be maintained. Through attention to appropriate scale,
aesthetic treatment, and mitigation of potential external nuisances such as noise and light,
single family uses may be compatible within close proximity to more intense uses. In
addition, there are portions of Eagan that are subject to levels of airport noise that make
single family uses undesirable. In these areas new single family development should be
discouraged (see Airport section - tab 5).
Access Needs: Individual access to all lots is required in single family and duplex
development. Due to the low intensity of these uses, access is generally most appropriate
from local and neighborhood collector roads. Direct driveway access off arterial
roadways is discouraged.
Physical Suitability: Single family development has few limitations beyond those
imposed by the City's existing regulations regarding wetland, shoreland impacts, tree
preservation, and water quality. In areas of steep slopes or other significant natural
features worthy of protection, it may be appropriate to utilize cluster design techniques to
minimize disturbance of the natural site features. Cluster design would allow smaller lots
in exchange for substantial preservation of the significant natural features within a
subdivision.
Associated Zoning: Zoning categories considered consistent with this land use category
include: Agricultural (A), Estate (E), Single Family (R-1), and Small Lot Single Family
(R-IS) (proposed new district). Duplex (R-2) and townhome (R-3) zoning may also be
consistent provided they comply with the density restrictions.
MO
"DYNAMIC" SIGNAGE:
RESEARCH RELATED TO DRIVER DISTRACTION
AND
ORDINANCE RECOMMENDATIONS
Submitted by
SRF Consulting Group, Inc.
Prepared for
City of Minnetonka
June 7, 2007
Al
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Pale No.
1.0 INTRODUCTION 1
2.0 PURPOSE OF STUDY AND METHODOLOGY 1
3.0 SELECTED RESEARCH FINDINGS 2
3.1 Expert Opinions 3
3.2 Billboards: a Source of Driver Distraction? 4
3.3 "Dynamic" Billboards: an Additional Source of 6
Driver Distraction?
3.3.1 Other Information 9
3.4 How Much Distraction Is a Problem? 10
3.5 How Does "Brightness" Affect Driver Distraction? 15
3.6 Billboard and Other Signage Regulation: a 16
Minnesota Perspective
3.7 Billboard and Other Signage Regulation: Other 16
Perspectives
4.0 SUGGESTED REGULATORY APPROACH 19
4.1 Definitions 19
4.2 Types of Regulatory Measures 19
4.2.1 Complete or Partial Prohibition of Electronic Signs 19
4.2.2 Size Limitations on Electronic Signs 20
4.2.3 Rate-of-Change Limitations on Electronic Signs 20
4.2.4 Motion, Animation, or Video Limitations on Electronic Signs......... 21
4.2.5 Sign Placement and Spacing 22
4.2.6 Text Size 22
4.2.7 Brightness Limitations on Electronic Signs 23
4.3 Public Review 24
5.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 25
Appendix A - Current Sign Technologies
Appendix B - Outdoor Advertising Sign Brightness Definitions
Appendix C - Electronic Outdoor Advertising Device Visual Performance Definitions
A[2
LIST OF TABLES
Page No.
Table 1: FHWA Reanalysis of Faustman's Findings 5
Table 2: Crash Causation Summary 11
Table 3: Percentage of CDS Crashes Involving Inattention- 12
Distraction Related Crash Causes
Table 4: Specific Sources of Distraction Among Distracted Drivers: 12
Table 5: Telespot Sign Crash Rates - Expressway Southbound 13
Table 6: Telespot Sign Crash Rates-Expressway Northbound 14
Table 7: Number of New Messages Displayed at Various Driver Speeds and 21
Time Intervals Between Messages
LIST OF FIGURES
Page No.
Figure l: VicRoads' Ten Point Road Safety Checklist 18
;Q3
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This study was precipitated by concerns raised by the City of Minnetonka, Minnesota in regard
to the installation of two LED ("light emitting diode") billboards along Interstate 394 and
Interstate 494. The LED function was applied to two existing "static" image billboards located
adjacent to the interstate. Following installation of the LED function, the City turned off the
power to the signs though a stop work order based on current city ordinance prohibiting flashing
signs, which is broadly defined, as well as permitting requirements for the retrofitting of the
signs to the upgraded technology. The billboard owner sued the City, and the court response to
this legal action as of the writing of this study has been to allow limited use of the LED
billboards. A moratorium on further signage of this type was established by the City to facilitate
the study of issues related to driver distraction and safety and appropriate regulatory measures
for LED and other types of changeable signage.
This study was undertaken on behalf of the City of Minnetonka to examine these issues. While
the concerns were precipitated by LED billboards in particular, this report examines more
broadly "dynamic" display signage which is defined as any characteristics of a sign that appear
to have movement or that appear to change, caused by any method other than physically
removing and replacing the sign or its components, whether the apparent movement or change is
in the display, the sign structure itself, or any other component of the sign. This includes a
display that incorporates a technology or method allowing the sign face to change the image
without having to physically or mechanically replace the sign face or its components. This also
includes any rotating, revolving, moving, flashing, blinking, or animated display and any display
that incorporates rotating panels, LED lights manipulated through digital input, "digital ink" or
any other method or technology that allows the sign face to present a series of images or
displays. These capabilities may be provided by a variety of technologies which are discussed
later in this report.
As the study progressed, additional communities within the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area, as
well as the League of Minnesota Cities, expressed interest in these issues. However, it is not the
intention of this report to provide a comprehensive study of all issues raised by dynamic signage,
or other types of billboards, but rather to focus narrowly on the issues of concern to the City of
Minnetonka.
2.0 PURPOSE OF STUDY AND METHODOLOGY
Driving a motor vehicle is a complex task that requires the ability to divide one's attention.
Simultaneously maintaining a steady and legal speed, changing lanes, navigating traffic and
intersections, reading and interpreting street signs, drivers are often challenged by conditions that
can change in the blink of an eye. Internal and external physical conditions can affect how safely
the driving task is accomplished. Drug or alcohol intoxication, fatigue and/or distractions in the
driving environment all can play a role in motor vehicle crashes. However, these conditions are
rarely the sole reason for a crash. Rather, these conditions serve to exacerbate an already-
complex driving environment and subsequent mistakes in judgment can lead to crashes.
,A4
Increasingly complex traffic and roadway environments require greater attention to and focus on
the driving task.
The purpose of this study is to understand what existing transportation research tells us about the
effects of dynamic signs on motorists. This study also explores regulatory measures enacted in
other jurisdictions to address concerns related to driver distraction. Due to time and scope
constraints, this report is not comprehensive, but rather addresses the most frequently cited and
easily accessible information available. The report concludes with a discussion of regulatory
options for the City of Minnetonka to consider in their formulation of policies to address
dynamic signage.
Information collected for this report draws from a variety of sources including interviews with
subject matter experts, government and academic research, and policies developed to regulate
various types of signage.
Several city and county sign ordinances were used as references for policy and regulatory
research. In some cases, ordinances were brought to our attention by planners and others
following the sign ordinance issue. In others, Internet searches were conducted using words and
references that apply specifically to dynamic signs.
Several sign manufacturers and sign companies provided an industry perspective through a
workshop with the SRF Consulting Group and the City of Minnetonka staff on February 27,
2007. This meeting yielded information about sign characteristics that can be addressed through
policy and regulatory measures. Daktronics, a company that manufactures and markets LED
signs, was also helpful in this regard, providing informational materials about characteristics of
signs that can be regulated and examples of city sign ordinances with which they are familiar.
3.0 SELECTED RESEARCH FINDINGS
This following section presents a summary of expert opinions and selected driver distraction
research conducted by government and academic researchers examining roadside signage and its
effects on the driving task. Studies are organized around critical questions with serious research
ramifications.
• Is there reason to believe that billboards are a source of distraction?
• Is there reason to believe that "dynamic" billboards are an additional source of
distraction?
• How much distraction is a problem?
• How does "brightness " affect driver safety concerns?
• How should billboards and other signage be regulated from a driver safety perspective?
2A5
3.1 Expert Opinions
A combination of researchers and public policy experts were interviewed for this study.
Individuals were identified while conducting background research into driver distraction and
were interviewed because of their credibility in the field.
Kathleen Harder, a researcher at the University of Minnesota, has conducted driver
distraction research for a variety of applications, including research for Mn/DOT. She is
an expert in the field of human 'factors and psychology. She indicated that electronic
billboards pose a driver distraction threat because of their ability to display high
resolution color images, their ability to change images, and their placement in
relationship to the roadway, particularly in areas where the road curves, exits and
entrances are present, merges, lane drops, weaving areas, key locations of official signs,
and/or areas where roadways divide.
Greg Davis, a researcher with the FHWA Office of Safety Research and Development,
in Washington, DC was involved in the 2001 FHWA study on electronic billboards. He
was interviewed to gain a deeper understanding of this critical study and to learn of
recent research in this area. Davis stated that while no research has established a direct
cause and effect relationship between electronic outdoor advertising signs and crash rates,
the lack of such a research finding does not preclude a causal relationship between
electronic billboards and crashes. He advocated for a new study that can control all
variables and determine if a cause and effect relationship exists.
Scott Robinson, an outdoor advertising regulator for Mn/DOT, wrote the 2003 technical
memorandum that addresses allowable changes for outdoor advertising devices. Mr.
Robinson indicated that the memo was originally written in 1998 to establish a permitted
rate of change for tri-vision signs and that the application to electronic billboards was not
considered. The minimum change rate of 4.9 seconds for 70 mph roadways and 6.2
seconds for 55 mph roadways was based on the travel time between static signs spaced at
the minimum allowed distance apart. Mr. Robinson also indicated that the memo is not a
Mn/DOT policy, statute or rule, but rather it was written to provide internal guidance.
Jerry Wachtel, an Engineering Psychologist and highway safety expert in private
practice, was the lead author for the FHWA's original (1980) study on electronic
billboards. He has continued his active involvement in this field, and advises Government
agencies as well as the outdoor advertising industry on sign ordinances, sign operations,
and the implications of the latest research on road safety. Mr. Wachtel believes that it is
neither feasible from the perspective of research design and methodology, nor necessary
from a regulatory perspective, to demonstrate a causal relationship between digital
billboards and road safety. Rather, he believes that we have a strong understanding, based
on many years of research, of driver information processing capabilities and limitations,
and of the contributions to, and consequences of, driver distraction, on crash risk; and
that this understanding is sufficient to support development of guidelines and ordinances
for the design, placement, and operation of digital billboards so as to lessen their
potentially adverse impact on road safety and traffic operations.
3A6
Wachtel also offered comments on drafts of this report. In later conversations related to
his review, Wachtel stated his belief that even though visual fixations on roadway signs
decrease as route familiarity increases, a strength of the new digital billboards is that they
can present messages that are always new. Thus, the conclusion from the 1980 FHWA
study is another argument against these billboards; namely, drivers spend more time
looking at the unfamiliar signs than at familiar ones, suggesting digital billboards are
more dangerous than traditional fixed billboards. Wachtel also suggested his preference
for a goal to have any given driver experience only one, or a maximum of two, messages
from an individual roadside sign.
3.2 Billboards: a Source of Driver Distraction?'
The purpose of a sign is to attract the attention of passersby so that a message is conveyed. To
the degree signs attract the attention of vehicle drivers, they may distract them from the activity
of driving. While this report primarily examines the impact of dynamic roadside advertising, the
role traditional static advertising plays in driver distraction is discussed below.
The relationship between roadside advertising and crash rates has been the subject of several
studies. The majority of this research was conducted in the 1950s, 60s and 70s. While some of
the earliest studies have been subsequently criticized for flawed methodologies and improper
statistical techniques, some findings emerge when the totality of the studies are examined. One
of these findings is that the correlation between crash rates and roadside advertising is strongest
in complex driving environments. For example, higher crash rates were found at intersections
(generally considered a complex environment) that have advertising than those intersections that
do not have advertising. A few of the studies that are important in this field are summarized
below.
Minnesota Department of Transportation Field Study (1951) and
Michigan State Highway Department Field Study (1952) 2
These two studies from the early 1950s used similar methods but came to significantly
different conclusions. Recognized as the more scientifically rigorous study, the
Minnesota study found that increases in the number of advertising signs per mile are
correlated with increases in motor vehicle crash rates. It also found that intersections
with at least four advertising signs experienced three times more crashes than
intersections with no advertising signs. Conversely, the less rigorous Michigan study
found the presence of advertising signs had no effect on the number of crashes.
Iowa State College, Do Road Signs Affect Accidents? (Lauer & McMonagle, 1955)3
A laboratory test was created to determine the effect of advertising signs on driver
behavior. The results of this study found removing all advertising signs from the driver's
field of vision did not improve driver performance. When signs were included, driver
performance was slightly better. Note that laboratory methods used in this study are
considered to be dated by today's standards.
4A7
Faustman (California Route 40) Field Study (1961)° and Federal Highway
Administration, Reanalysis of Faustman Field Study (1973)5
Two studies that appear to have stood the test of time are Faustman,s original analysis of
California Route 40 and its re-examination by FHWA more than a decade later. The
original analysis tried to improve upon previous research by limiting variables, such as
roadway geometric design and roadway access controls. The FHWA reanalysis focused
on disaggregating the data and converting actual crashes to expected crash rates on
specific roadway sections. Each of the sections was given a value based on the number
of billboards on the section. A linear regression was performed to determine the
expected crash rates. An analysis of variance of the regression coefficients found that the
number of billboards on a section was statistically significant. The reanalysis found a
strong correlation between the number of billboards and crash rates as shown in Table 1.
Table 1. FHWA Reanalysis ofFaustman's Findings.
Expected No. of Cumulative Increase
No. of Billboards Accidents in a in Accident Rate
5-year Period
0 5.92
1 6.65 12.3
2 7.38 24.2
3 8.11 37.0
4 8.84 49.3
5 9.57 61.7
Federal Highway Administration
Safety and Environmental Design Considerations in the Use of Commercial
Electronic Variable-Message Signage (Wachtel & Netherton, 1980) s
This extensive review provides a comprehensive discussion of roadside advertising
research as of 1980. The study authors noted "attempts to quantify the impact of roadside
advertising on traffic safety have not yielded conclusive results." The authors found that
courts typically rule on the side of disallowing billboards because of the "readily
understood logic that a driver cannot be expected to give full attention to his driving tasks
when he is reading a billboard." Because the distraction evidence is not conclusive, these
decisions were generally not based on empirical evidence.
The research review noted that accident reports often cite "driver distraction" as a default
category used by uncertain law enforcement officers who must identify the cause of a
crash. As a result, the authors believe crashes due to driver distraction are not always
properly identified. In addition, law enforcement officers often fail to indicate the precise
crash locations on crash reports, making it difficult to establish relationships between
crashes and roadside features.
~8
Accident Research Unit, School of Psychology, University of Nottingham
Attraction and distraction of attention with roadside advertisements (Crundall et
al., 2005) 7
This research used eye movement tracking to measure the difference between street-level
advertisements and raised advertisements in terms of how they held drivers' attention at
times when attention should have been devoted to driving tasks. The study found that
street-level advertising signs are more distracting than raised signs.
3.3 "Dynamic" Billboards: an Additional Source of Distraction?
Signage owners or leasers want to incorporate dynamic features into their signage for a number
of reasons: to enhance the sign's ability to attract attention, to facilitate display of larger amounts
of information within the same sign area, to conveniently change message content, and to
enhance profitability. As mentioned earlier, this report uses the term "dynamic" signs to refer to
non-static signs capable of displaying multiple messages. Several studies documented the ability
of a sign to accomplish the first of these goals.
University of Toronto
Observed Driver Glance Behavior at Roadside Advertising Signs (Beijer & Smiley,
2004) 8
Research done at the University of Toronto compared driver behavior subject to passive
(static) and active (dynamic) signs. The study found that about twice as many glances
were made toward the active signs than passive signs. A disproportionately larger
number of long glances (greater than 0.75 seconds) taken were toward the active signs.
The duration of 0.75 seconds is important because it is close to the minimum perception-
reaction time required for a driver to react to a slowing vehicle. For vehicles with close
following distances, or under unusually complex driving conditions, a perception delay of
this length could increase the chance of a crash. The following findings were reported in
this study:
• 88% of the subjects made long glances (greater than 0.75 seconds).
22% of all glances made at all signs were long glances (greater than 0.75 seconds).
• 20% of all the subjects made long glances of over two seconds.
As compared to static and scrolling text signs, video and tri-vision signs attracted
more long glances.
• Video and scrolling text signs received the longest average maximum glance
duration.
• All three of the moving sign types (video, scrolling text and tri-vision) attracted more
than twice as many glances as static signs.
649
University of Toronto
Impact of Video Advertising on Driver Fixation Patterns (Smiley et al., 2001) 9
Another study completed at the University of Toronto used similar eye fixation
information in urban locations to show that drivers made roughly the same number of
glances at traffic signals and street signs with and without full-motion video billboards
present. This may be interpreted to mean that while electronic billboards may be
distracting, they do not appear to distract drivers from noticing traffic signs. This study
also found that video signs entering the driver's line of sight directly in front of the
vehicle (e.g., when the sign is situated at a curve) are very distracting.
City of Seattle Report (Wachtel, 2001)10
The City of Seattle commissioned a report in 2001 to examine the relationship between
electronic signs with moving/flashing images and driver distraction. The report found
that electronic signs with moving images contribute to driver distraction for longer
intervals than electronic signs with no movement. Following are major points made in
the report:
• New video display technologies produce images of higher quality than previously
available technologies. These signs have improved color, image quality and
brightness.
• New video display technologies use LEDs with higher viewing angles. Drivers can
read the sign from very close distances when they are at a large angle from the face of
the sign.
• Signs with a visual story or message that carries for two or more frames are
particularly distracting because drivers tend to focus on the message until it is
completed rather than the driving task at hand.
• Research has shown that drivers expend about 80 percent of their attention on driving
related tasks, leaving 20% of their attention for non-essential tasks.
• The Seattle consultant suggests a "10 second rule" as the maximum display time for a
video message.
The expanded content of a dynamic sign also contributes to extended distraction from the
driving task. The Seattle Report examined how this may be due in part to the Zeigarnik
effect which describes the psychological need to follow a task to its conclusion. People's
attention is limited by the ability to only focus on a small number of tasks at a time, and
by the tendency to choose to complete one task before beginning another. In a driving
environment, drivers' attention might be drawn to the sign rather than the task of driving
because they are waiting to see a change in the message. This loss of attention could lead
to unsafe driving behaviors, such as prolonged glances away from the roadway, slowing,
or even lane departure.
►l 0
While the Zeigarnik effect may be present in a wide variety of driving situations, possible
scenarios that could affect drivers include:
• A scrolling message requires the viewer to concentrate as the message is revealed.
Based on the size and resolution of the sign, and the length of the message, this could
range from less than one second to many seconds.
• A sequence of images or messages that tell a story, during which the driver's
attention may be captured for the entire duration that the sign is visible. Instead of
merely glancing at the sign and then returning concentration to the driving task, more
attention may be given to the message.
• Anticipation of a new image appearing, even if the expected new image is not related
to the first image. In this case, the driver may be distracted while waiting for the
change.
Federal Highway Administration
Safety and Environmental Design Considerations in the Use of Commercial
Electronic Variable-Message Signage (Wachtel & Netherton, 1980) "
This research provides information on the use of on-premise Commercial Electronic
Variable-Message Signs (CEVMS) that display public service information (i.e,. time and
temperature) and advertising messages along the Interstate highway system. The
research found the following major considerations:
• Highway Safety Considerations
The link between changing messages that attract drivers' attention and crashes has
been an issue of concern since the earliest forms of electronic signage became
available. This study thoroughly reviewed the literature seeking information
regarding a potential link between CEVMS and crashes:
"Although a trend in recent findings has begun to point to
a demonstrable relationship between CEVMS and
accidents, the available evidence remains statistically
insufficient to scientifically support this relationship. "
The study also noted that studies have not documented information about "such
occurrences as `near misses' or traffic impedances that are widely recognized as
relevant to safety, and which may or may not be attributable to the presence of
roadside advertising."
• Human Factors Considerations
Human factors relate to all the elements that explain driver behavior, such as eye
glances and driver responses to a variety of driving-related stimuli. The study makes
the point that simple driving-related tasks consume relatively little information
processing capacity. However, when other conditions, such as congestion,
complicated roadway geometries, or weather are also considered, the marginal extra
,Q►11
amount of attention required to read roadside advertisements could lead to driving
errors that could cause crashes.
"The enormous flexibility of display possessed by CEVMS
makes it possible to use them in ways that can attract
drivers' attention at greater distances, hold their attention
longer, and deliver a wider variety of information and
image stimuli than is possible by the use of conventional
advertising signs. "
Texas Transportation Institute for FHWA, Impacts of Using Dynamic Features to
Display Messages on Changeable Message Signs (Dudek et al., 2005) 12
This study examined the comprehension times for three different scenarios for
DOT-operated changeable message signs. The scenarios evaluated were:
• Flashing an entire one-phase message
• Flashing one line of a one-phase message while two other lines of the message remain
constant
• Alternating text on one line of a three-line CMS while keeping the other two lines of
text constant on the second phase of the message
The findings of this study were:
• Flashing messages did not produce faster reading times.
• Flashing messages may have an adverse effect on message comprehension for
unfamiliar drivers.
• Average reading times for flashing line messages and two-phase messages were
significantly longer than for alternating messages.
• Message comprehension was negatively affected by flashing line messages.
While this research did not evaluate advertising-related signs, it does demonstrate that
flashing signs require more of the driver's time and attention to comprehend the message.
In the case of electronic billboards, this suggests that billboards that flash may require
more time and attention to read than static ones.
3.3.1 OTHER INFORMATION
NHTSA Driver Distraction Internet Forum (2000) 13
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration held an internet forum to gather
research and public comment related to driver distraction with an emphasis on the use of
cell phones, navigation systems, wireless Internet and other in-vehicle devices. During
this forum, participants were invited to take a poll to determine the most prominent driver
, ►l2
distraction issues. Electronic billboards were identified as one of six noted sources of
distraction.
Parliament of Victoria, Australia, Report of the Road Safety Committee on the
Inquiry into Driver Distraction (2006) 14
This report identified road signs and advertising as one of the largest sources of driver
distraction. At least three billboards near Melbourne, Australia display moving images.
"The Committee considers these screens to be at the high
end of potential visual distraction and accordingly, present
a risk to drivers. "
The study also included a quote from the Manager of the Road User Behaviour group at
VicRoads (the State's road and traffic authority) from a December 2005 hearing:
What we do know is when there is movement involved, such
as flicker or movement in the visual periphery, that this is
more likely to capture a driver's attention. We actually are
hard-wired as human beings to movement, so particularly
moving screens and information that scrolls at
intersections and in highly complex driving situations -
these are risky, and in particular researchers have been
most concerned about those sort of advertising materials.
This opinion would suggest that electronic signs can present a distraction to drivers.
3.4 How Much Distraction Is a Problem?
A number of studies were identified that discussed concerns with driver distraction generally. It
should be noted that some of the studies cited use specific crash data that is ten or more years
old. Direct comparison of distraction sources to influences of today may not be completely valid
due to increased technological sophistication of distracting influences. These could include in-
vehicle technology (e.g., navigation systems, MP3 players, DVD players, CD players, computer
systems, etc.) as well as other potentially distracting influences (e.g., cell phones, text messaging,
dynamic signage, other roadway elements, etc.) that were not commonplace when the data for
these studies was collected:
Australian Road Research Board
Investigations of Distraction by Irrelevant Information (Johnston & Cole, 1976) 15
This research used five experiments to test whether drivers could maintain efficient
performance in their driving tasks while being subjected to content that was information
rich, but irrelevant to driving. The findings were that a small, but statistically significant
amount of performance degradation was observed when the participant was under a
critical load of stimuli.
#13
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration/ Virginia Tech Transportation
Institute
Impact of Driver Inattention on Near-Crash/Crash Risk: An Analysis Using the
100-Car Naturalistic Driving Study Data (Klauer et al., 2006) 16
This study analyzed the data from a driving database developed by the National Highway
Traffic Safety Administration. This database contained exhaustive data recorded by
instrumented vehicles that measured glance position, impairment, drowsiness, risk taking
and many other parameters potentially involved in crash causation. Vehicles were
instrumented so that an observer did not need to be in the vehicle to collect data.
Automated data collection reduced the problem of an observer influencing driver
behavior. The study found that glances of two seconds or greater doubled the risk of
crashes or near-crashes. The study also found that 22 percent of crashes are accompanied
by "secondary-task" distraction whether inside or outside the vehicle.
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration/ Virginia Tech Transportation
Institute
Driver Inattention is a Major Factor in Serious Traffic Crashes (2001) 17
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration commissioned a study to examine
the causes of crashes. The study gathered information from four areas throughout the
country and used data from the National Automotive Sampling System (NASS) from
April 1996-April 1997 for analysis. The geographic areas were selected because they had
good crash investigation practices and high interview completion rates. The results of
this study are summarized in Table 2.
Table 2. Crash Causation Summary
Causal Category Percentage of Drivers
Contributing to Causation
Driver Inattention 22.7
Vehicle Speed 18.7
Alcohol Impairment 18.2
Perceptual Errors 15.1
Decision Errors 10.1
Incapacitation 6.4
Other 8.8
Association for the Advancement of Automotive Medicine
The Role of Driver Inattention in Crashes; New Statistics from the
1995 Crashworthiness Data System (Wang, 1996)18
This report analyzed the NHTSA 1995 Crash Worthiness Data System (CDS). It found
that the greatest source of driver distraction (3.2 percent) was due to a specified person,
object or event outside the vehicle. The full results of the study are presented in Table 3.
414
Table 3. Percentage of CDS Crashes Involving Inattention-Distraction
Related Crash Causes
% of % of
Data Element Drivers Crashes
Attentive or not distracted 46.6% 29.4%
Looked but did not see 5,6% 9.7%
Distracted b other occupant (specified] 0.9% 1.6%
Distracted b movie object in vehicle [ edl 0.3% 0.5%
Distracted while dialing, talking, or listening to cellular 0.1%0 0,1%0
one (location and type of hone specified)
Distracted while adjusting climate controls 0.2%0 0.3%0
Distracted while adjusting radio, cassette, CD (specified] 1.2% 2.1%
Distracted while using other devicelobject in vehicle 0.1% 0.256
(specified]
S1 y or fell asleep 1.5%1 2.6%
Distracted b outside person, object, or event (specified) 2.0% 3.2%
Eating or drinkin 0.1% 0.2%
Smoking-related 0.1% 0.2%_
Distracted/inattentive, details unknown 1.5% 2.6%
1Other distraction (specified] 1.3% 2.2%
Unknown/No Driver 35,5% 46.0%
Weighted driver N - 4,627,000 (7.943, unweighted). weighted crash N - 2,619,000 (4,536).
m order for a crash to classified 'attentive," all involved drivers had to be classified 'atsentive."
® - estimate based on 5-9 cases.
University of North Carolina Highway Safety Research Center
The Role of Driver Distraction in Traffic Crashes (Stutts et al., 2001) 19
A study prepared by the University of North Carolina Highway Safety Research Center
for the AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety examined the sources of driver distraction in
traffic crashes. The data came from the CDS from 1995-1999. Of the thirteen specific
sources of distraction tracked by the study, the greatest source of distraction was an
outside person, object or event. While the study does not break down the sources of
outside distraction, it does show that distractions outside the vehicle are the largest factor
in distraction-related crashes. The results of this study are presented in Table 4.
Table 4. Specific Sources of Distraction Among Drivers in Distraction-Related Crashes
Specific Distraction Percentage of
Drivers
Outside person, object or event 29.4
Adjusting radio, cassette, CD 11.4
Other occupant in vehicle 10.9
Moving object in vehicle 4.3
Other device/object brought into vehicle 2.9
Adjusting vehicle/climate controls 2.8
Eating or drinking 1.7
Using/dialing cell phone 1.5
Smoking related 0.9
Other distraction 25.6
Unknown distraction 8.6
Total 100.0
,~►15
Three studies were found which attempted to measure driver behavior specifically in response to
dynamic signage. Two of these studies demonstrated a potential relationship between dynamic
signage and crash rates:
Minnesota Department of Transportation, The Effectiveness and Safety of Traffic
and Non-Traffic Related Messages Presented on Changeable Message Signs
(CMS) (Harder, 2004) 20
This study used a driving simulator to measure the effect of Department of
Transportation changeable message signs on traffic flow. The two messages evaluated
were a "crash ahead" warning and an AMBER Alert (child abduction information). The
research found that just over half of the participants used the "crash ahead" message and
60 percent could recall the AMBER Alert with scores of Good or Better. Over one fifth
of the participants slowed down by at least 2 mph upon seeing the AMBER Alert,
demonstrating that messages relevant to drivers are associated with changes in at least
some drivers' travel speed .
Decision of the Outdoor Advertising Board in the Matter of John Donnelly & Sons,
Permitee, Telespot of New England, Inc., Intervenor, and Department of Public
Works, Intervenor, with Respect to Permit Numbered 19260 as Amended (1976) 21
This proceeding documents the Commonwealth of Massachusetts Outdoor Advertising
Board's ruling regarding one of the first changeable signs. This sign was located near an
arterial road in Boston and-used magnetic discs to portray a message that changed every
30 seconds. The original sign permit was rejected based on four criteria, one of which
was safety. Upon appeal, the Massachusetts Department of Public Works allowed the
permit based on the fact that the sign would give the public a benefit. However, they
ultimately determined that the sign was a safety hazard based on crash rates before and
after the sign was installed. Tables 5 and 6 show the change in crash rates.
Table 5. Telespot Sign Crash Rates - Expressway Southbound
Average Average Average
per year per year Percent
(1/1/1970- (1/1/1973- Change
12/31/1972 3/31/1975
Crashes where
the sign was viewable 29.0 20.0 -31.0
north of sign
Crashes where
the sign was not viewable 39.0 15.6 -60.0
south of sign)
416
Table 6. Telespot Sign Crash Rates - Expressway Northbound
Average per year Average per year Average
(1/1/1970- (1/1/1973- Percent
12/31/1972 3/31/1975 Change
Crashes where
the sign was viewable 46.3 42.7 -7.8
south of sign)
Crashes where
the sign was not viewable 8.0 1.8 -77.5
north of sign)
This analysis shows that while crash rates decreased on comparable sections in the years
after the sign was installed, the sections where the sign was visible experienced smaller
crash rate decreases. Due to these arguments, the Board ruled that the operation of the
sign must be terminated.
Wisconsin Department of Transportation
Milwaukee County Stadium Variable Message Sign Study - Impacts of an
Advertising Variable Message Sign on Freeway Traffic (1994) 22
A study prepared by the Wisconsin Department of Transportation (WisDOT) examined
crash rates before and after an advertising variable message sign was installed in 1984 on
the Milwaukee County Stadium, home of the Milwaukee Brewers professional baseball
team. Crash statistics were analyzed for the three years before and the one and three
years after the sign was installed. As they are often associated with driver distraction,
side-swipe and rear-end crashes, as well as total crashes, were examined for both the
eastbound and westbound directions. The sign was much more visible to eastbound
traffic due to the stadium's proximity to the roadway and the amount of visual
obstructions for westbound traffic.
The analysis found an increase in crash rates for all crash types in the eastbound direction
after the sign was installed. Most pronounced was an 80 percent increase in side-swipe
crashes after the first year of installation. Results in the westbound direction were mixed,
with a 29 percent decrease in crashes the first year the sign was in place and a 35 percent
increase in the three years the sign was in place. Although no control roadway sections
were studied, an interview with the study author revealed that the introduction of a sign
on a high volume curving roadway may have introduced enough distraction to an already
demanding driving environment to explain the higher crash rate in the eastbound
direction. The study author also stated that the study was not able to establish a causal
relationship between the sign and the crash rates.23
Federal Highway Administration
Research Review of Potential Safety Effects of Electronic Billboards on Driver
Attention and Distraction (2001) 24
The Federal Highway Administration published a comprehensive report in 2001 that
consisted of a literature search, literature review and a description of research needs for
417
the topic of electronic billboards (EBBs). While the study did not conduct any new
research, it does provide an excellent summary of the role electronic billboards play in
traffic safety and includes good descriptions of the terminology related to electronic
billboards. Selected findings from that synthesis are provided below:
"In most instances, researchers were not able to verify that an
EBB was a major factor in causing a crash. Only one study
since the 1980 review and one lawsuit were identified. "
"Studies were identified that verified that: an increase in
distraction, a decrease in conspicuity, or a decrease in
legibility may cause an increase in the crash rate. "
"Commercial EBBS are designed to `catch the eye' of drivers.
Their presence may distract drivers from concentrating on the
driving task and visual surrounds. "
"There is indication that individual differences in age and
driving experience may be important considerations in driver
distraction, and are relevant to understanding driver responses
to the external environment. Furthermore, research regarding
driver familiarity of their route demonstrated that visual
fixations on roadway signs decreases as route familiarity
increases. This research may show that there is a difference
between commuter and visiting drivers. "
Based on these findings, the FHWA recommended additional research to further
demonstrate how roadway characteristics, sign characteristics and legibility, driver
characteristics and other potential driver distractions affect traffic safety. FHWA was
contacted to see if any new information was available. Greg Davis, a Research
Psychologist with the FHWA Office of Safety R&D, indicated that the FHWA has not
performed additional studies on the topic since the report was published. He stated that
there is "no direct correlation between electronic outdoor advertising signs and crash
rates". He referred to a before/after study of electronic signs installed along a freeway in
Las Vegas that found no change in crash rates. He went on to say that the lack of a
research finding that links signs with crash rates does not mean that a causal relationship
does not exist. He indicated that he has been contacted by several law enforcement
agencies regarding the link between driver distraction and dynamic message
signs/electronic billboards. He indicated that this is a timely and pertinent topic for many
states due to the increasing popularity and capabilities of electronic outdoor advertising
devices, and he expects further research to be forthcoming. He advocates for a new study
that can control for all variables and determine if a cause and effect relationship exists. 25
3.5 How Does "Brightness" Affect Driver Safety Concerns?
The brightness of any sign, static or dynamic, raises concerns with discomfort or disability glare
to the driver that may arise when viewing any lighted object. Disability Glare occurs when a
418
driver is exposed to a light source so bright that it temporarily blinds the driver, impairing their
ability to perform driving tasks. This temporary blindness is brief, but can be dangerous.
Discomfort Glare occurs when a light source is bright enough to distract or encourage the driver
to look away from the light, but is not blinding. Discomfort glare is of particular concern in
cases where a bright sign is located in the same line of sight as a traffic sign, signal or another
vehicle.
While concerns about glare are not unique to dynamic signs, newer sign technologies, which
often include dynamic components, have the technical capability to emit more light and/or
respond to ambient light conditions, raising additional concerns about sign brightness in areas
where signs compete with regulatory traffic signs or signals.
3.6 Billboards and Other Signage Regulation: a Minnesota Perspective
Roadside signage is governed by policies and laws at the federal, state and local levels.
Minnesota Statute, Chapter 173 seeks to "reasonably and effectively regulate and control the
erection or maintenance of advertising devices on land adjacent to such highways." The statute
requires adherence to federal statutes with respect to interstate and primary systems of highways.
Minnesota Statute Ch. 173.16 Subd. 3. regulates lighting of signs. Signs which are "illuminated
by any flashing light or lights, except those giving public service information" (time, date,
temperature, weather or news) are prohibited. This section also states:
(b) Advertising devices shall not be erected or maintained which are not effectively
shielded so as to prevent beams or rays of light from being directed at any portion of the
traveled way of an interstate or primary highway, of such intensity or brilliance as to
cause glare or impair the vision of the operator of any motor vehicle; or which otherwise
interfere with any driver's operation of a motor vehicle are prohibited.
and
(c) Outdoor advertising devices shall not be erected or maintained which shall be so
illuminated that they interfere with the effectiveness of or obscure any official traffic
sign, device or signal.
3.7 Billboard and Other Signage Regulation: Other Perspectives
During the course of this study, several articles were found which summarize regulation of •
dynamic signage in other states:
Wisconsin Department of Transportation
Electronic Billboards and Highway Safety (2003) zs
The Wisconsin Department of Transportation also published a literature review report to
further explain the current state of EBB research. Although much of the information is
~►19
mentioned in other sections of this report, the Wisconsin review did summarize
Wisconsin's regulations for electronic billboards.
• No message may be displayed for less than one-half second;
• No message may be repeated at intervals of less than two seconds;
• No segmented message may last longer than 10 seconds;
• No traveling message may travel at a rate slower than 16 light columns per second or
faster than 32 columns per second (light column defined as pixel column);
• No variable message sign lamp may be illuminated to a degree of brightness that is
greater than necessary for adequate visibility.
National Alliance of Highway Beautification Agencies (1999) 27
Although this survey is eight years old, it generated the following information related to
electronic billboards:
• Nine states had specific regulations governing signs,
• Nine states had regulations on tri-vision signs that were either being drafted or in
pending legislation,
• Fifteen states had regulations regarding moving parts and/or lights,
• Nine state had no regulations on tri-vision signs, and
• Six states and Washington, DC, prohibited tri-vision signs.
An investigation into state outdoor advertising regulations was also conducted.
• Thirty-six states had prohibitions on signs with red, flashing, intermittent, or moving
lights,
• Twenty-nine states prohibited signs that were so illuminated as to obscure or interfere
with traffic control devices, and
• Twenty-nine states prohibited signs located on interstate or primary highway outside
of the zoning authority of incorporated cities within 500 ft of an interchange or
intersection at grade or safety roadside area.
Parliament of Victoria, Australia, Report of the Road Safety Committee on the
Inquiry into Driver Distraction (2006) "
This report, cited earlier for its driver distraction opinions, identifies road signs and
advertising as one of the largest sources of driver distraction. VicRoads, the state's road
and traffic authority, has implemented the following regulations.
420
Figure 1. VicRoads' Ten Point Road Safety Checklist
An advertisement, or any structure, device or hoarding for the exhibition of
an advertisement, is considered to be a road safety hazard if it:
1. obstructs a driver's line of sight at an intersection, curve or
point of egress from an adjacent property; or
2. obstructs a driver's view of a traffic control device, or is
likely to create a confusing or dominating background which
might reduce the clarity or effectiveness of a traffic control
device; or
3. could dazzle or distract drivers due to its size, design or
colouring, or it being illuminated, reflective, animated or
flashing; or
4. is at a location where particular concentration is required
(eg. high pedestrian volume intersection); or
5. is likely to be mistaken for a traffic control device, for
example, because it contains red, green or yellow lighting, or
has red circles, octagons, crosses or triangles, or arrows; or
6. requires close study from a moving or stationary vehicle in a
location where the vehicle would be unprotected from
passing traffic; or
7. invites drivers to turn where there is fast moving traffic or
the sign is so close to the turning point that there is no time
to signal and turn safely; or
8. is within 100 metres of a rural railway crossing; or
9. has insufficient clearance from vehicles on the carriageway;
or
10. could mislead drivers or be mistaken as an instruction to
drivers.
#21
VicRoads also gives operational requirements for electronic advertising message signs.
Signage must:
• not display animated or moving images, or flashing or intermittent lights;
• remain unchanged for a minimum of 30 seconds;
• not be visible from a freeway; and
• satisfy the ten-point checklist.
4.0 SUGGESTED REGULATORY APPROACH
Local governments regulate electronic outdoor advertising devices in widely varying degrees.
Some cities completely prohibit the use of all electronic signs (sometimes specifying LED signs),
while others have no regulations specific to electronic signs. Between those two extremes, there
are many levels and types of control that can be applied.
The primary concerns to keep in mind when considering sign regulations are 1) First
Amendment rights, which can be affected by regulations that affect the content of a sign's
message, and therefore should be avoided, and 2) changing technology, which can quickly make
a sign ordinance no longer applicable if the ordinance has been specifically written to address a
certain type of sign technology. Performance based measures may therefore be preferable as they
remain viable even as sign technology advances.
4.1 Definitions
Signage discussions often include a number of different words or phrases used to describe the
technical characteristics of signage devices or their components (such as LEDs). For the purpose
of zoning, some additional terms are also used to describe sign characteristics. Any regulatory
efforts should take care to precisely define terminology. One possible resource in this effort is
"Street Graphics and the Law," published by the American Planning Association (APA)
Planning Advisory Service29.
4.2 Types of Regulatory Measures
4.2.1 Complete or Partial Prohibition of Electronic Signs
Some cities have completely prohibited the use of electronic outdoor advertising devices. For
example, the City of Maple Valley, WA prohibits all types of electronic outdoor advertising
devices including animated signs, electronic changeable message signs, flashing signs or
displays, moving signs, scrolling displays, and traveling displays. This applies to both on-
premise and off-premise signs.
Other cities are very selective about where electronic signs are allowed, allowing them only in
certain zoning districts. There are very few "standard" approaches. For the most part, each local
#22
government tailors their regulations to their own situation. One approach adopted by cities is to
prohibit electronic outdoor advertising devices in residential zoning districts, and for a certain
distance away from residential zoning districts, similar to the zoning limitations placed on
illuminated signs. Some ordinances require that electronic signs be situated such that the sign
face is not visible from nearby residences.
4.2.2 Size Limitations on Electronic Signs
Another way of regulating electronic signs is to limit their size. Again, there is no set standard
for this. One ordinance reviewed for the purpose of this study limits the electronic portion of a
sign to no more than 50 percent of the sign face with the overall size determined by whatever the
sign ordinance allows for a particular zoning district. Other examples of electronic sign size
limitations include five square feet, 1,000 square inches, 20 square feet, and so forth. In other
ordinances, there is no differentiation made between the size of electronic signs and other signs.
According to input from representatives of the sign industry, the smaller the size of the electronic
sign, the more desirable it is for businesses to use frequent message changes, or sequenced
messages, where more than one screen of text is used to convey an entire message.
4.2.3 Rate-of-Change Limitations on Electronic Signs
Many communities that allow electronic signs also regulate the rate at which the messages on the
signs can be changed. Research on sign codes has shown this to range from as little as four
seconds to as long as 24 hours.
The Interstate 394 sign between Ridgedale Drive and Plymouth Road is visible for
approximately 45 seconds at free flow traffic speeds. Depending on text size, the message may
not be readable by drivers during this entire duration, but the message changes can attract
attention from long distances. Depending on how often the message changes occur and the
speed of traffic, drivers on this segment could see a varying number of discrete messages. Table
7 provides the number of message changes a driver would see at different change durations and
traffic speeds.
423
Table 7. Number of New Messages Seen at Various Driver Speeds and
Time Intervals Between Messages
Number of Messages Seen
Speed Time sign is Message Display Time (seconds)
(mph) clearly visible* 6 g 10 60 1800 3600
(seconds) (30 minutes) (1 hour)
30 1 60 11 9 7 2 1 1
45 40 8 6 5 2 1 1
55 33 7 5 4 2 1 1
*Assuming the sign is clearly visible from one-half mile away.
Prohibiting displays from changing quickly can minimize potential driver distraction, but it
would significantly limit the message owner's ability to convey information that does not fit on
one screen of the sign. Using two or more successive screens to convey a message is referred to
as sequencing. Based on the studies summarized in part 3 of this Report, including the glance
duration studies performed by Klaur for the FHWA in 2006 and by Beijer & Smiley in 2004, and
Wachtel's analysis for Seattle of the Zeigarnik effect, a message delivery system such as
sequencing that requires or induces a driver to watch the sign for several seconds increases the
likelihood of driver distraction. Based on information from the sign industry, for sequencing to
be effective in a marketing sense, a brief rate-of-change (1-2 seconds) is generally used before
transitioning into the next screen.
Some codes specify how an image changes, while other codes prohibit the use of transitions.
The change from one image to another can be accomplished by various techniques: no transition
- simply a change from one screen to another, or fading or dissolving one image into the next.
Flashing, spinning, revolving, or other more distracting transition methods can be prohibited,
allowing businesses to use sequencing in an effective manner without making the signs overly
distracting. Another way of regulating distracting transitions is to require a very short time of a
dark or empty screen between images.
4.2.4 Motion Animation or Video Limitations on Electronic Signs
Motion on a sign can consist of everything from special text effects (spinning, revolving,
shaking, flashing, etc.) to simple graphics, such as balloons or bubbles rising across the screen, to
more realistic moving images that have the appearance of a television screen. According to sign
industry representatives, video imagery on a sign is referred to as "animation" if the sign is
limited to the capability of 10 frames per second. Fewer frames per second make the moving
image look more like animation. Imagery produced by signs that have the capability of
processing up to 30 frames per second is accurately referred to as "video" imaging.
Many communities that allow dynamic signs do not allow the application of any type of motion,
animation, or video on the signs. However, Seattle was obliged to allow video imagery on their
signs after earlier signage code regulating certain types of signs was not strictly enforced. In
addition to requiring a dark period between successive messages to overcome the Zeigarnik
effect, Seattle also limits the duration of the video message to a minimum of two seconds and a
424
maximum of 10 seconds. This time frame was established based upon careful calculations of the
streets from which these signs could be seen, speed limits and traffic volumes in addition to the
community's concern over the extent to which moving images could distract drivers. However,
Seattle also limits the size of their electronic signs to a maximum of 1,000 square inches, with no
single dimension greater than three feet, thus minimizing the effect of video images.
4.2.5 Sign Placement and Spacing
Regulating the number of dynamic sign potentially visible to a driver at any one time as well as
the position of the sign in relationship to the roadway may reduce distraction to drivers. Spacing
requirements should consider the speed, width and horizontal and vertical alignment of the
roadway.
Some communities have established minimum distances between electronic signs. Establishing
an adequate distance between these types of devices seems particularly important if a fairly fast
rate of change is allowed for the purpose of facilitating sequenced messages or if animation and
video imaging is allowed. Closely spaced signs attempting to convey sequenced messages may
simply create visual overload and an over-stimulated driving environment. Research conducted
to date has not yielded information about optimal electronic sign spacing. Seattle adopted a 35-
foot spacing requirement for their electronic signs based upon multiple levels of analysis of the
downtown city environment in which these signs are present.
Due to the varying characteristics of individual roadways in this regard, overlay districts
allowing dynamic signage with conditions specific to that area could be considered. Overlay
districts could also take into account other locational factors such as offset from the roadway and
conspicuity. Determining appropriate offsets from the roadway must consider roadway clear
zone requirements as well as spacing of frontage roads and access points, while also considering
the signage too far outside the driver's line of sight may be a further distraction. Conspicuity, a
sign's ability to stand out from its surroundings, should also be considered.
4.2.6 Text Size
Legibility is another important property of signage. The preferred approach used within highway
signing is that drivers can read text that is' 1 inch high from 30 feet away. Larger text is needed
for signs to be legible at greater distances. Large, legible text allows the driver to read the
billboard from varying distances and focus on the driving task. Conversely, with small text, the
driver is more likely to focus on the sign for a longer period of time and possibly be more
adversely distracted. However, the size or type of text or the amount of text due is rarely
regulated.
425
4.2.7 Brightness Limitations on Electronic Signs
One of the main concerns about the use of electronic signs, regardless of whether they consist of
changeable text, animation, or video, is the brightness of the image. The brightness of an object
can be characterized in two ways. (luminance is the total brightness of all the light at a point of
measurement. Illuminance often describes ambient light and can be measured with a standard
light meter such as is used in photography. Luminance is the measure of the light emanating
from an object with respect to its size and is the term is used to quantify electronic sign
brightness. The unit of measurement for luminance is nits, which is the total amount of light
emitted from a sign divided by the surface area of the sign (candelas per square meter).
Many, but not all, LED-type signage can be time-programmed to respond to day and nighttime
light levels. Higher-end signage types are equipped with photo cells to respond to ambient light
conditions. Despite these controls, LED signs have been observed that are considered to be
excessively bright. Sign industry representatives indicate that excessive brightness can be the
result of 1) sign malfunction or improper wiring, 2) lack of photo cell and/or dimming
mechanism, or 3) operator error or lack of understanding that brightness is not necessarily an
advantage, especially if it makes a sign unreadable or unpleasant to look at. They also maintain
that the intent of the electronic sign industry is to establish a brightness level that is similar to a
traditional internally or externally lit sign. Recent observations of sign technicians calibrating
the Interstate 394 LED billboard noted that the brightness controls are not calibrated to specific
nit levels, but rather vary in proportion to a set maximum level, like a volume control dial on a
typical car radio.
To control the extent to which electronic signs are a distraction or the extent to which they are
readable, many local governments have adopted regulations that limit nit levels. At this time,
ordinances that use nit level limitations typically differentiate between day time and night time
nit levels. A common daytime nit limitation ranges from 5,000 to 7,000 nits. A common
nighttime limitation is 500 nits, although in areas that are extremely dark at night, with very little
in the way of ambient light levels, less than 500 nits may be appropriate. Other communities
have taken this farther, such as Lincoln, Nebraska, whose sign code incorporates a graph of
varying ambient light levels ranging from night time to a bright sunny day and all conditions
between those two extremes, and has correlating nit limitations for the various ambient light
levels.
Enforcement of these types of regulations is challenging as luminance of electronic signs is very
difficult to measure in the field. Typically, sign luminance is measured and calibrated in a
controlled factory setting using a spectral photometer to measure the light output. This
calibration setting is then used in conjunction with a photo cell to control the brightness of the
sign. The higher the ambient light levels, the brighter the sign. There are different nit thresholds
for various colors. White is most often used to set dimming levels because at a constant nit level,
white has the most intensity as perceived by the human eye.
Lincoln uses a light meter to conduct testing on electronic signs and found a wide range of
luminance levels. One small electronic sign had luminance levels of 13,000 nits. The process
that Lincoln uses to check luminance levels is to hold a luminance meter close to the face of the
sign so that it captures only the light emitted from the sign. They have not had any requests to
426
measure the brightness of LED billboards, so the viability of using this approach on billboards
has not been explored.
In Seattle, sign luminance was found too difficult to measure, so signs are visually inspected
when complaints from the public are received. Sign owners are then contacted and asked to
adjust sign luminance accordingly.
Both Mesa, Arizona and Lincoln, Nebraska have included a requirement for written certification
from the sign manufacturer that the light intensity has been preset not to exceed the illumination
levels established by their code, and the preset intensity level is protected from end user
manipulation by password protected software or other method approved by the appropriate city
official. This language appears to offer the advantage of ensuring that electronic signs, at a
minimum, cannot exceed a certain established level of brightness.
At a minimum, it is important for communities to require all electronic signs to be equipped with
a dimmer control. A requirement for both a dimmer control and a photo cell, which constantly
keeps track of ambient light conditions and adjusts sign brightness accordingly, is optimal.
Over time, the LEDs used in electronic signs have a tendency to lose some of their intensity, and
an owner may choose to have the sign adjusted and calibrated, which involves adjusting the level
of electrical current in a manner that affects the brightness of the sign. This occurs over the
course of two or three years. Having maximum nit levels established would ensure that the sign
company has upper limits to work with as far as adjusting the sign is concerned.
4.3 Public Review
Most communities establish rules within their sign code and do not create opportunities for
electronic signs to be approved through conditional use permits or special use permits. Some
communities with special overlay districts, or areas that are oriented toward entertainment and
night life, have established a review process for electronic signs, or for various functions of
electronic signs such as animation and video.
Other communities take the opposite approach, where they allow electronic signs with no
controls whatsoever, except in certain special areas, such as a historic overlay district, or a
historic downtown district, where the signs are prohibited. Each community needs to tailor their
application of electronic signs to meet their needs.
As of the writing of this report, no ordinances have been discovered that have a special review
committee just for the purpose of electronic signs. Typically, sign regulations established in the
zoning ordinance would be reviewed in accordance with existing review and approval processes.
As with other development features, dynamic signage should be either prohibited, permitted, or
conditional depending upon the zoning district and/or the specific features of the sign as
established within the city's regulations (i.e. size, specific location with respect to the adjacent
roadway, zoning district, proximity of sensitive uses). The recommended review process for
permitted dynamic signs should be the same as procedures already in place for administrative
427
review. For dynamic signs requiring a Conditional Use Permit (CUP), the standard process for
public notification and a public hearing before the planning commission should apply.
5.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Driver distraction plays a significant role in traffic safety. Driver distraction is a factor in one in
four crashes, and of those crashes involving driver distraction, one in four involves distractions
outside the vehicle. The extent to which dynamic signage contributes to traffic safety has been
examined in this study. Following are some of the major findings from a review of available
research.
• Drivers that are subjected to information-rich content that is irrelevant to the driving task
(such as digital advertising) may be temporarily distracted enough to cause a degradation in
their driving performance. This degradation could lead to a crash.
• The unlimited variety of changing content allows dynamic signage to attract drivers'
attention at greater distances and hold their attention longer than traditional static billboards.
• Several studies have found a correlation between crashes and the complexity of the driving
environment. For example, crash rates are higher at intersections because the difficulty of
the driving task is increased by the roadway's complexity. Complex driving environments
place a high demand on drivers' attention. Introducing a source of distraction in an already
demanding driving environment is more likely to result in crashes. This is illustrated by the
1994 Wisconsin DOT study that examined crash rates before and after installation of an
electronic sign on a high-volume curving roadway. Introduction of this sign was identified
as a likely factor of the 80 percent increase in side-swipe crashes that was experienced.
• Many studies have noted a correlation between outdoor advertising signs and crash rates, but
have not established a causal relationship between the signs and crash rates. Driving is a
complex task influenced by multiple factors. It is not necessary to establish a direct causal
relationship between outdoor advertising signs and crash rates to show that they can make the
driving task less safe. While the research shows that driver distraction is a key factor in
many motor vehicle crashes, this often includes many interacting factors that distract drivers.
The specific driver distraction danger that advertising signs contribute is difficult to quantify.
A study that could control for multiple variables (human factors, vehicle, enforcement and
the roadway environment) would be needed to provide a definitive statement on the level of
driver distraction that signs produce. Such a study would likely find that not all advertising
signs cause distraction that would lead to crashes, but some signs in some situations are more
likely to contribute to crashes than others.
Overall, the literature review conducted for the purpose of this study identifies a relationship
between driver distraction and electronic outdoor advertising devices. As indicated, driver
distraction is a significant factor in crashes. The purpose of dynamic signage is to attract the
attention of people in vehicles, so a natural conclusion from that knowledge is that drivers may
be distracted by them. Professional traffic engineering judgment concludes that driver
distraction generally contributes to a reduction in safe driving characteristics.
428
For this reason, state departments of transportation have carefully studied the design and location
of dynamic signs within the highway right-of-way. Their goal is to convey a message to the
traveling public in a manner that is as straight-forward and readable as possible without being a
visual "attraction". The goal of the outdoor advertising sign is to be a visual attraction outside
the right-of-way, possibly making it a source of driver distraction. Nevertheless, the actual
change in crash rates influenced by the presence of any specific device has not been quantified in
a manner that fully isolates the impacts of an electronic sign. Recent studies conducted by
FHWA and others have cited the need for further research.
In the interest of promoting public safety, this report recommends that electronic signs be viewed
as a form of driver distraction and a public safety issue. Therefore, the ordinance
recommendations identified here should be considered. These recommendations should be
reviewed in the future as additional research becomes available.
With respect to regulatory measures for electronic outdoor advertising signs, it is important that
local governments take a thorough approach to updating their ordinances to address this issue.
For example, an ordinance that addresses sign motion, but does not address brightness and
intensity levels may leave the door open for further controversy. This report seeks to identify all
of the aspects of electronic outdoor advertising devices that are subject to regulation. It does not
specifically state what those regulations should be (e.g. the size of electronic signs), since these
are all things that policy makers and staff must take into careful consideration. Further, as driver
distraction and resulting influences on safety do not, in a practical sense, distinguish between on-
premise and off-premise signage, this distinction is not highlighted in the recommendations
below.
Regulatory Measures recommended for consideration
To properly address the issue of dynamic signage, it is recommended that the sign code address
the following:
1. Identify specific areas where dynamic signs are prohibited. This would typically be done
by specifying certain zoning districts where they are not allowed under any
circumstances. If dynamic signs are to be allowed in specific areas, this could be done by
zoning district (only higher level commercial districts are recommended for
consideration) or by zoning overlay related to specific purposes (e.g. entertainment or
sports facility district) or to specific roadway types.
2. Determine the acceptable level of operational modes in conjunction with such zoning
districts or overlays. The various levels include:
a. Static display only, with no transitions between messages,
b. Static display with fade or dissolve transitions, or transitions that do not have the
effect of moving text or images,
c. Static display with scrolling, traveling, spinning, zooming in, or similar special
effects that have the appearance of movement, animation, or changing in size, or get
revealed sequentially rather than all at once (e.g. letters dropping into place, etc.), and
#29
d. Full animation and video.
3. If one of the forms of static display is identified as the preferred operational mode, a
minimum display time should be established. This display time should correspond to the
operation roadway speed (rather than posted speed limit), allowing at most one image
transition during the time that the sign if visible to a driver traveling at the operational
speed.
If a shorter minimum display time is considered, the effects of message sequencing
should be considered. Wait intervals of more than 1-2 seconds between sequenced
messages have the potential to become more of a distraction as viewers wait impatiently
for the next screen, in an effort to view the complete message.
4. If the community wishes to accommodate animation or video in some or all locations
where dynamic are permitted, a minimum and maximum duration of a video image
should be established. The purpose for establishing a time limit is to ensure that the
message is conveyed in a short, concise time frame that does not cause slowing of traffic
to allow drivers to see the entire message. Given the creativity of advertising, these video
images may be seen as a form of entertainment, and people typically like to see an
entertaining message through to the end.
Differentiate between zoning districts where dynamic signs are permitted by right, and
zoning districts, overlay districts, or special districts where they should only be allowed
through the approval of a Conditional Use Permit. A CUP would involve public
notification and review and approval by the Planning Commission. Other options would
include a design review board or other dispute resolution process.
5. Consider the establishment of minimum distance requirements between electronic
outdoor advertising devices in relation to the zoning district or roadway context in which
the signs are allowed.
6. Consider size limitations on dynamic signs for zoning districts where they are allowed.
This may vary from one district to another.
7. Consider if dynamic signs are allowed independently, or if they must be incorporated into
the body of another sign, and therefore become a limited percentage of the overall sign
face.
8. Establish a requirement for that all dynamic signs that emit light be equipped with
mechanisms that allow brightness to be set at specific nit levels and respond accurately to
changing light conditions. The City must establish the authority to disable or turn the
device off if it malfunctions in a manner that creates excessive glare or intensity that
causes visual interference or blind spots, and require that the device remain inoperable
until such time that the owner demonstrates to the appropriate city official that the device
is in satisfactory working condition. If such technology is not available, consideration
should be give to banning dynamic signs that emit light until such time as the technology
allows brightness levels to be precisely controlled.
430
9. Consider maximum brightness levels that correlate to ambient (day or night condition,
lighting of surrounding context) light levels. A maximum daytime and separate
nighttime nit/footcandle level should be established. Consider wording that requires the
sign to automatically adjust its nit level based on ambient light conditions.
10. Consider a requirement for a written certification from the sign manufacturer that the
individual sign's maximum light intensity has been preset not to exceed the maximum
daytime illumination levels established by the code, and that the maximum intensity level
is protected from end user manipulation by password protected software or other method
approved by the appropriate city official.
11. Require sign owners to provide an accurate field method of ensuring that maximum light
levels are not exceeded. If such a method cannot technically be provided, consider
banning dynamic signs that emit light until such time as the technology is available.
t►31
PRELIMINARY DRAFT FOR REVIEW BY CITY OF MINNETONKA
Further changes are anticipated following Signage Workshop
"Preliminary Report is specific to City of Minnetonka issues and may not be sufficient to
address concerns in other communities"
APPENDICES
A32
PRELIMINARY DRAFT FOR REVIEW BY CITY OF MINNETONKA
Further changes are anticipated following Signage Workshop
"Preliminary Report is specific to City of Minnetonka issues and may not be sufficient to
address concerns in other communities"
Appendix A
Current Sign Technologies
A33
PRELIMINARY DRAFT FOR REVIEW BY CITY OF MINNETONKA
Further changes are anticipated following Signage Workshop
"Preliminary Report is specific to City of Minnetonka issues and may not be sufficient to
address concerns in other communities"
Appendix A - Current Sign Technologies
Roadside signage has long been used to alert and direct travelers to retail businesses, lodging,
attractions and other destinations. Until the 201h century much of this image was "static" in
nature, presenting a single image that could only be altered by repainting or otherwise removing.
an image and replacing it with another. With the advent of motorized travel, signage became
more "dynamic" or active in its efforts to attract the traveler's attention as they moved at ever
increasing speeds. Initially, motion was created by flashing bulbs or alternating sets of neon
tubes.
Today's technologies allow for an increasingly sophisticated display of images that can be
manipulated by a few strokes of a keyboard. Simpler forms of signs capable of displaying
multiple images include "tri-vision" signs which present a series of images through mechanical
rotation of multi-sided vertical strips. The rotation occurs at regular intervals presenting a series
of static images. Other forms are electronically produced, allowing for a wide range of colors,
messages and images depending on the level of technology, and typically produced by light
emitted by the sign face. Basic levels of technology present letters or numbers in a single color
of light, such as "time and temperature" signs or gas pricing signs. Many of these signs can
present longer images in a scrolling fashion, or can provide simple animations.
Recent advances have introduced a variety of technologies to the outdoor advertising arena. The
largest impact has been made with LED signs which offer an inexpensive yet powerful approach
that combines full motion, brilliant colors and a readable display. Other technologies are in
development, including "digital ink" signs that offer a changeable medium on a surface that
looks like a normal vinyl billboard. These signs manipulate ink on the surface, allowing for a
dynamic presentation of images without being internally illuminated.
The various sign technologies are referenced by a wide array of terms: "changeable message
signs," "electronic billboards," "animated signs." In general, this report focuses on the broad
range of signage types which are capable of displaying multiple images through electronic
manipulation, which we will refer to as "dynamic" signing. Reference to specific signage types
is made when necessary to discussion of specific issues (e.g. the brightness of LED signage).
A14
PRELIMINARY DRAFT FOR REVIEW BY CITY OF MINNETONKA
Further changes are anticipated following Signage Workshop
"Preliminary Report is specific to City of Minnetonka issues and may not be sufficient to
address concerns in other communities"
Appendix B
Outdoor Advertising Sign Brightness Definitions
A35
PRELIMINARY DRAFT FOR REVIEW BY CITY OF MINNETONKA
Further changes are anticipated following Signage Workshop
"Preliminary Report is specific to City of Minnetonka issues and may not be sufficient to
address concerns in other communities"
Appendix B - Outdoor Advertising Sign Brightness Definitions
This appendix defines various technical terms that are used to describe the operational
aspects of electronic billboards.
Billboard Illuminance
Billboard illumination is typically discussed using two terms: illuminance and luminance.
Because this section includes some technical jargon, a glossary that further defines terms
used in outdoor advertising is provided in Appendix C.
Illuminance: The amount of light that is incident to the surface of an object. This is the
method for describing ambient light levels or the amount of light that is projected onto a
front-lit sign. This parameter is typically measured in lux (footcandles x meters). For the
purposes of dimming, illuminance is discussed to describe the ambient light that hits the
photocell.
Luminance: The amount of light that emanates from an internally illuminated sign. This
parameter is measured in nits. The nit levels necessary for the sign to be legible vary with
the ambient light conditions. On a sunny day, the nit levels must be very high, while at night,
the levels must be very low to prevent the image from distorting and to prevent glare.
Billboard Luminance (Bri hg tness)
Luminance is measured in nits (candelas/square meter) and describes how bright the image
is. In essence, it is the amount of light that is radiated from the sign divided by the amount of
surface area of the sign. No matter how big the sign is, the luminance of the sign is
consistent. For example, the brightness of computer monitors is also measured in nits.
The European standard "EN 12966" specifies that at certain ambient light levels, the sign
should output a given number of nits. There are different tables for each color due to the
properties of how the human eye interprets each color. The color that is most often used to
set dimming levels is white.
The FHWA has developed recommended practices for dynamic message signs installed
within the roadway right-of-way. The standard is NEMA's TS-4 "Hardware Standards for
Dynamic Message Signs (DMS) With NTCIP Requirements." Note that these standards
were prepared for message signs deployed within the roadway right-of-way and should not
be taken as recommended luminance levels for advertising signs. Table A-1 provides a
simplified version of the NEMA TS-4 standard for the color white.
~6
PRELIMINARY DRAFT FOR REVIEW BY CITY OF MINNETONKA
Further changes are anticipated following Signage Workshop
"Preliminary Report is specific to City of Minnetonka issues and may not be sufficient to
address concerns in other communities"
Table A-1 - Luminance Standards
Ambient Approximate Minimum Maximum
Light Light Luminance Luminance
(lux) (nits) (nits)
40,000 Sunlight 12,400 62,000
10,000 Cloudy 12,400 -
4,000 Overcast 2,200 11,000
400 Sunrise/Sunset 600 3,000
40 Candlelight 250 1,250
less than 4 Moonlight 75 375
Source: NEMA TS-4 (2005)
Billboard Resolution
Billboards require far less resolution than print advertisements. For example, Clear
Channel's LED "Digital Outdoor Network" LED bulletin-size (14' x 48') billboards require
dimensions of only 208 pixels high by 720 pixels wide. If this image were to be printed at
300 dots per inch (dpi), a typical print resolution, the entire image would be less than
1.7 square inches. Therefore, it is ideal to keep the message on these signs simple and clear
because they do not currently allow resolutions similar to printed images.
Dimminiz
To maintain readability, the brightness of a sign must be adjusted to match ambient light
conditions. If this is not done, the image will appear too bright and can even degrade the
image quality through a phenomenon called "blooming." If the image blooms, the brightest
areas of the image bleed over into darker parts and the image clarity is degraded.
Dimming is typically controlled by a photocell, which measures the ambient light conditions
and varies the light output of the sign based on preconfigured settings. As ambient light
conditions darken, the photocell senses the decrease and lowers the light output of the sign.
Some sign manufacturers do not incorporate photocells in their electronic signs.
Electronic billboard dimming can also be controlled by scheduled dimming according to time
of day or manual dimming. On-premise signs may use any of these methods, but most, if not
all, off-premise standard size electronic billboards are auto dimmed by photocell. Some
signs include user-defined dimming curve capability allowing total control over sign
brightness and adjustability to accommodate local brightness ordinances.
AA7
PRELIMINARY DRAFT FOR REVIEW BY CITY OF MINNETONKA
Further changes are anticipated following Signage Workshop
"Preliminary Report is specific to City of Minnetonka issues and may not be sufficient to
address concerns in other communities"
Appendix C
Electronic Outdoor Advertising Device
Visual Performance Definitions
A38
PRELIMINARY DRAFT FOR REVIEW BY CITY OF MINNETONKA
Further changes are anticipated following Signage Workshop
"Preliminary Report is specific to City of Minnetonka issues and may not be sufficient to
address concerns in other communities"
Appendix C - Electronic Outdoor Advertising Device Visual Performance Definitions
Conspicuity
Conspicuity is the property that related to the contrast between a sign and its background and
its ability to stand out from its surroundings. This is a subjective property that depends on
many factors of both the environment and the viewer.
Contrast
Contrast is the property that defines the relationship between the brightness of the brightest
color possible to the darkest color possible on a sign. In times when ambient conditions are
very bright, such as a sunny day, the darkest color may still be very bright due to the sun's
reflection off the sign. In these cases, the lighter colored areas of the billboard's image must
be much brighter than the contrasting dark areas.
Le ibili
The ability of the driver to read a sign is related to its legibility. Large, legible text allows
the driver to read the billboard from varying distances and focus on the driving task.
Conversely, with small text the driver is more likely to focus on the sign for a longer period
of time and possibly wait until the sign is very close.
State departments of transportation use NEMA's TS-4 document for this criterion. This
document specifies many characteristics related to legibility including character height,
resolution and color.
Glare
Disability Glare
The first form of glare is disability glare. This occurs when a driver is exposed to a light
source so bright that it temporarily blinds the driver, impairing their ability to perform
driving tasks. This temporary blindness is brief, but can be dangerous.
Discomfort Glare
Discomfort glare is when a light source is bright enough to distract or encourage the driver to
look away from the light, but is not blinding. Discomfort glare is of particular concern in
cases where a bright sign is located in the same line of sight as a traffic sign, signal or
another vehicle.
AA 9
PRELIMINARY DRAFT FOR REVIEW BY CITY OF MINNETONKA
Further changes are anticipated following Signage Workshop
"Preliminary Report is specific to City of Minnetonka issues and may not be sufficient to
address concerns in other communities"
Frequency of Change
The frequency of change is determined by the interval of time between sign image changes.
The rate of change can usually be adjusted by the owner and operator of the sign. Frequency
of change is highly variable, with some on-premise signs changing faster than once per
second. While no standard is generally accepted, local government agencies have used
ordinances to limit the frequency to anywhere from 5 seconds to 24 hours.
Interactive signs
Interactive signs change their message based on the person viewing it. For example, the
carmaker MINI has installed variable message signs that display a customized message to car
owners who have special key dongles containing a radio frequency identification (RFID)
chips when the dongle is in close proximity to the sign.
Another example is a microphone system that identifies the radio stations passing drivers are
listening to and displays a specific message for that station.
'no
i
' B. Wallace, "Driver Distraction by advertising: genuine risk or urban myth?" Proceedings of the Institution of Civil
Engineers, Municipal Engineer 156, 2003.
2 J. Wachtel, and R. Netherton. "Safety and Environmental Design Considerations in the Use of Commercial Electronic
Variable-Message Signage. Report No. FHWA-RD-80-051," Washington, D.C., 1980.
3 A.R. Lauer and J.C. Mcmonagle, "Do Road Signs Affect Accidents?" Eno Transportation Foundation, 1955.
4 D. Faustman, "A study of the relationship between advertising signs and traffic accidents on U.S. 40 between Vallejo and
Davis." San Francisco: California Roadside Council, Report CRC No. 165, 1961.
5 S. Weiner. "Review of report." Washington, D.C.: Federal Highway Administration, Environmental Design and Control
Division, August 1973.
6 J. Wachtel, and R. Netherton. "Safety and Environmental Design Considerations in the Use of Commercial Electronic
Variable-Message Signage. Report No. FHWA-RD-80-051," Washington, D.C., 1980.
7 D. Crundall et al., "Attraction and Distraction of Attention with Roadside Advertisements," Elsevier, 2006.
8 D. Beijer and A. Smiley, "Observed Driver Glance Behavior at Roadside Advertising Signs," Transportation Research
Record, 2005.
9 A. Smiley et al., "Impact of Video Advertising on Driver Fixation Patterns. Transportation Research Record, 2004.
10 G. Wachtel, The Veridian Group, "Video Signs in Seattle - Final Report." 2001.
" J. Wachtel, and R. Netherton. "Safety and Environmental Design Considerations in the Use of Commercial Electronic
Variable-Message Signage. Report No. FHWA-RD-80-051," Washington, D.C., 1980.
12 C. L. Dudek et al., "Impacts of Using Dynamic Features to Display Messages on Changeable Message Signs,"
Operations Office of Travel Management: Federal Highway Administration, Washington, D.C., 2005.
13 "NHTSA Driver Distraction Forum: Summary and Proceedings," <http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/pdf/
nrd-13/FinalIntemetForumReport.pdf>, accessed on February 14, 2007.
14"Report of the Road Safety Committee on the Inquiry into Driver Distraction," Parliament of Victoria, Australia, Victoria,
Australia, 2006, p. 110.
15 A.W. Johnston and B.L. Cole, "Investigations of Distraction By Irrelevant Information," Australian Road Research
Board, 1976.
16 S.G. Klauer et al., "Impact of Driver Inattention on Near-Crash/Crash Risk: An Analysis Using the 100-Car Naturalistic
Driving Study Data," National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 2006.
17 Driver Inattention Is A Major Factor In Serious Traffic Crashes," <http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/people/
outreach/traftech/TT243.htm>, accessed on February 14, 2007.
J. Wang, "Role of Driver Inattention in Crashes; New Statistics from the 1995 Crashworthiness Data System, 40th
Annual Proceedings, Association for the Advancement of Automotive Medicine, Vancouver, British Columbia, 1996.
19 University of North Carolina Highway Safety Research Center, "The Role of Driver Distraction in Traffic
Crashes,"2001.
20 K. Harder, "The Effectiveness and Safety of Traffic and Non-Traffic Related Messages Presented on Changeable
Message Signs (CMS)", Minnesota Department of Transportation, St. Paul, Minnesota, 2003.
21 "Decision of the Outdoor Advertising Board in the Matter of John Donnelly & Sons, Permitee, Telespot of New England,
Inc., Intervenor, and Department of Public Works, Intervenor, with Respect to Permit Numbered 19260 as Amended," The
Commonwealth of Massachusetts Outdoor Advertising Division, 1976.
22 Wisconsin Department of Transportation (1994). Milwaukee County Stadium Variable Message Sign Study. Wisconsin,
USA: Internal Report, Wisconsin Department of Transportation.
23 T. Szymkowski, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Interviewed on February 20, 2007.
24 Federal Highway Administration, "Research Review of Potential Safety Effects of Electronic Billboards on Driver
Attention and Distraction," 2001.
25 G. Davis, FHWA Office of Safety Research and Development, Interviewed on February 23, 2007.
26 CTC & Associates LLC, "Electronic Billboards and Highway Safety, <"http://www.dot.wisconsin.gov/library/
research/docs/tsrs/tsrelectronicbillboards.pdf>, accessed on February 14, 2007.
A41
27 Federal Highway Administration, "Research Review of Potential Safety Effects of Electronic Billboards on Driver
Attention and Distraction," 2001.
" "Report of the Road Safety Committee on the Inquiry into Driver Distraction," Parliament of Victoria, Australia,
Victoria, Australia, 2006.
29 D. Mandelker, A. Bertucci and W. Ewald. "Street Graphics and the Law," APA Planning Advisory Service, 2004, pp. 51-
55.
A42