Loading...
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