HomeMy WebLinkAbout2010/11/15 - ADMIN - Minutes - City Council - Study Session I/I St. Louis Park OFFICIAL MINUTES
MINNESOTA CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL STUDY SESSION
ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
NOVEMBER 15, 2010
The meeting convened at 6:30 p.m.
Councilmembers present: Mayor Jeff Jacobs, Phil Finkelstein, Anne Mavity (arrived at 6.36
p.m.), Julia Ross, Susan Sanger, and Sue Santa.
Councilmembers absent: Paul Omodt.
Staff present: City Manager (Mr. Harmening), Deputy City Manager/Human Resources Director
(Ms. Gohman), Fire Chief(Mr. Stemmer), Communications Coordinator (Mr. Zwilhng), Senior
Planner (Mr. Walther), Director of Public Works (Mr. Rardin), Controller (Mr. Swanson),
Finance Supervisor (Mr. Heintz), Facilities Manager (Mr. Altepeter), and Recording Secretary
(Ms. Hughes).
Guests: Michael Clark(DLR Group KKE), Brian Hook and Pat Sims (Kraus-Anderson)
1. Fire Stations Project Update
Mr. Walther presented the staff report and introduced Michael Clark from DLR Group KKE,
Brian Hook and Pat Sims from Kraus-Anderson.
Mr. Clark provided an update on the design of the two fire station designs and advised that
changes to Fire Station No. 1 include reorganization of the parking area on the north end of the
site pursuant to Council suggestion in order to better utilize this area. He stated that the northerly
property line will be replatted to make better use of this area as well as vacating the excess nght-
of-way from Oxford Street. He explained that landscaping changes are planned to the south end
of the site following meetings with the neighborhood and include the addition of a berm that will
serve to block headlights from the aprons; other changes include some detailing of the south side
of the building wall to bring more character to this end of the building. He added that eight bays
are now shown on the drawings pursuant to Council direction, as well as the City records storage
space on the second floor above the small apparatus bay. He then presented the planned design
motifs planned for Fire Station No. 1.
Mr. Clark discussed the proposed changes to Fire Station No. 2 and explained that this station
will be a drive through facility, using only one entrance and one exit with fire trucks pulling out
onto Louisiana Avenue and proceeding in either direction. He added that the drawings for Fire
Station No. 2 now include four bays.
Councilmember Ross expressed concern about traffic backing up on Louisiana Avenue in the
vicinity of the fire station and requested that signage or a light be installed to prevent cars from
blocking the fire station.
Chief Stemmer stated that staff has been working with the traffic engineers from SRF Consulting
Group regarding this issue and noted that the fire station has been moved to the north to alleviate
some of the traffic concerns; discussion has also taken place regarding the possible installation of
a light in this area.
Mr. Clark discussed the southerly property line and advised that the City is currently negotiating
with the owner of the Walgreen's property about changing the property line in order to
Special Study Session Minutes -2- November 15, 2010
effectively use all of the property for everybody's best interests. He stated that all of this work is
being coordinated with the park project.
Mr. Clark then presented the analysis conducted on the use of a geothermal system for the two
fire stations. He stated that the mechanical engineer for the project, Bonestroo, performed an
energy modeling analysis using several scenarios, including a partial geothermal system for the
administration portions of the building and radiant heat for the apparatus bays, a high efficiency
traditional system, and a full geothermal system for the entire building. He advised that the
results of the modeling showed that a high efficiency traditional system is a more cost effective
solution for the project than using geothermal.
Councilmember Ross requested information regarding solar options as a form of energy for the
fire stations.
Councilmember Mavity asked if the costs for natural gas were projected into the future when the
analysis was prepared. She stated that both of these are limited natural resources whose costs
will only increase exponentially.
Mr. Clark replied that a discussion took place with CenterPoint Energy regarding how to factor
in increased natural gas costs versus electrical power and CenterPoint advised that the industry
standard is for electric and gas costs to typically follow each other.
Councilmember Sanger requested information on the payback if geothermal is used.
Mr. Clark stated that you still have to have a power source running the system, whether it is gas
or electric. He indicated when doing the energy analysis, a comparison needs to be done of the
amount of electricity used in a geothermal system versus the amount of natural gas used to create
heat in another system. He advised that there is no payback because upon closer review, a small
portion of the building is being heated and cooled, and a geothermal system works well only in a
cooling mode. He stated the apparatus bays will not be air conditioned and these bays account
for more than half of the buildings so there will not be any savings to offset costs. He added
there are also higher maintenance costs to a geothermal system compared to a traditional system.
Councilmember Mavity asked if there is any added value to the overall carbon footprint that a
geothermal system has versus a traditional system.
Mr. Clark replied that they have been working with Bonestroo on energy modeling of different
systems and to perform a simple cost payback analysis that looks at the financial costs and output
versus what you get back,but the analysis did not include a review of environmental costs.
Mr. Harmening stated that geothermal has been tested and proven to be a valid approach that has
payback benefits, but not with a building like this because a good portion of the building is not
being cooled.
Councilmember Santa stated that the City should remain cognizant of the soil issues which could
become more complicated and more costly if a geothermal system is utilized.
It was the consensus of the City Council to direct staff to proceed with a high efficiency boiler
system, instead of geothermal, at both fire stations.
Special Study Session Minutes -3- November 15, 2010
Mr. Clark reported that the Fire Stations Working Group has also focused its efforts on obtaining
Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design Green Building Rating System (LEED)
certification for the fire stations in order to meet the City's goals and sustainability initiatives.
He presented a LEED project checklist and advised that based on current assumptions, the
project would qualify for 56 total points, resulting in Silver LEED certification. He stated that
LEED certification would provide the City with a third party verification of the City's
achievement of a certain level of sustainability. He added that the cost estimate for pursuing
LEED certification is approximately$69,000 for both stations.
Mr. Harmening pointed out that regardless of whether LEED certification is obtained, the City is
building two environmentally-sound buildings.
Councilmember Finkelstein stated that while he appreciated the idea of obtaining LEED
certification, the cost to obtain certification is significant. He stated the City and the Council are
expected to be good fiscal stewards of taxpayer money and felt it was more important to build
environmentally-sound buildings but to forego LEED certification in light of the cost.
Councilmember Sanger agreed and added that staff could simply write a story about the fire
stations project and that addresses the City's green building policy.
It was the consensus of the City Council to not pursue LEED certification for Fire Station No. 1
or Fire Station No. 2.
Mr. Clark presented the second construction cost estimate prepared by Faithful & Gould and
stated that the results confirm that the fire station designs are on budget at approximately $15.5
million.
Mr. Hook added that the cost estimate will be reduced by approximately $150,000 due to the use
of a traditional boiler system.
Mr. Walther discussed the ongoing work with the neighborhoods and stated that staff is currently
working with one neighbor regarding the north exit drive at Fire Station No. 2. He indicated that
refinements continue to be made to the building's landscaping and lighting on the south side. He
stated if Council is comfortable with the proposed designs, staff will commence with the
construction drawing phase and formal application phase for the zoning approval. He indicated
that the issue of two-way traffic on Oxford Street will be addressed later, but the overall plans
are not impacted either way as it relates to Oxford Street. He advised that it is anticipated that
construction will commence on May 1St at one or both sites and Kraus-Anderson estimates it will
take approximately twelve months to complete both stations. He added that along with the
economies of scale in bidding the two projects together, it also reduces the operational disruption
for the fire stations.
It was the consensus of the City Council to direct staff to proceed into the Construction
Documents phase of the fire stations project.
The City Council Special Study Session recessed at 7:25 p.m.
The City Council Special Study Session reconvened at 8:59 p.m.
\ Special Study Session Minutes -4- November 15, 2010
2. Utility Rates—2011
Ms. Gohman presented the staff report and the City's water utility rate history. She advised that
based on Council's previous discussion, staff focused on a phased-in option that adjusts water
rates over a ten year period and that provides for bonding. This approach also recommends that
during year five the City review the phase-in plan and make any adjustments to the phase-in plan
based on business needs. She indicated that under this scenario, usage fees will increase
approximately 3.3% annually. A typical quarterly billing was presented showing a comparison
of existing and proposed rates and showing the proposed increase.
Mr. Harmening pointed out that the new rate approach does not create more revenue than what is
needed over ten years or what has been projected as being needed in the past; the new rate
approach creates the required revenue in a different way by shifting to a fixed charge approach.
He added that the phased-in approach does contribute to a need for more bonding.
Council discussed top users of water in the City and how the move to a fixed charge will provide
a more stable water fund.
Ms. Gohman indicated that the costs included in the estimates represent capital items such as
meter replacement and reconstruction,but do not include service line ownership by the City.
It was the consensus of the City Council to have a further study session with Public Works
regarding the policy of ownership of water service lines.
Councilmember Sanger stated that she felt a phased-in approach over ten years was too long and
preferred using a shorter penod of time. She asked that the Council consider increasing the fixed
rate portion of the rates to help address some of the City's capital costs that impact everybody
regardless of the amount of water they use. She stated that fixed rates only cover administrative
costs and she preferred to increase the fixed rate a little more so that the City can borrow less.
She noted that the City did not raise rates for quite a long time.
Councilmember Mavity expressed concern about raising rates too dramatically and too quickly
in the early years. She stated the City has some very cost effective financing tools available
because of the current economy. She added she, has concerns about putting too much on
residents at this particular time.
Mr. Harmening stated that the Council will have an opportunity to discuss rates again each year
and adjustments can be made at that time.
It was the consensus of the City Council to direct staff to proceed with the recommended phased-
in option for water rates.
Ms. Gohman reviewed the current and proposed sewer, storm drainage, and solid waste rates.
She stated that the information contained in the report is based on the study conducted by Ehlers
last year. She presented an estimated quarterly utility bill for water, sewer, storm drainage, and
solid waste, noting that the phased-in option projects with approximately 8.04%overall increase.
It was the consensus of the City Council to approve the recommended sewer, storm water, and
garbage and recycling rates for 2011.
Special Study Session Minutes -5- November 15, 2010
Council discussed the cost of the ongoing testing related to the Reilly Tar site.
Mr. Anderson stated that staff has been working with the EPA to reduce some of the tests being
done by the City and to find ways to conduct more efficient sampling. He indicated that the goal
is to reduce these costs by as much as $150,000 over time.
Councilmember Sanger asked if there is any way of having these costs shared with some other
entities.
Mr. Rardin replied that the consent decree has been reviewed to see if there are any requirements
that the City could eliminate.
The meeting adjourned at 9:31 p.m.
Nancy Stroth,City Clerk Jeff cobs, Ma or