Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutApril 19, 2005 Work SessionCITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS 590 40th Avenue N.E., Columbia Heights, MN 55421-3878 (763) 706-3600 TDD (763) 706-3692 Visit Our Website at: www. ci. columbia-heights, mn.us ADMINISTRATION Mayor Gal7 L. Peterson Councilraernbers Robert ,q. t/gilliams Bruce Nawrocki Tammera Ericson Diehm Bruce Kelzenberg City Manager I/galt Fehst NOTICE OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING to be held in the CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS as follou~s: Meeting of.' Date of Meeting: Time of Meeting: Location of Meeting: Purpose of Meeting: COLUMBIA HEIGHTS CITY COUNCIL TUESDAY, APRIL 19, 2005 7:00 P.M. CONFERENCE ROOM 1 WORK SESSION AGENDA 1. Public Purpose Expenditure Policy 2. Specifications and Professional services for water tower rehabilitation plans 3. Capital equipment replacement of Rodder 4. Discussion of Sullivan Lake Beach property The City of Columbia Heights does not discriminate on the basis of disatility in the admission or access to, or treatment or employment in, its services, programs, or activities. Upon request, accommodation will be provided to allow individuals with disabilities to participate in all City of Columbia Heights' services, proglams, and activities. Auxiliary aids for handicapped persons are available upon request when the request is made at least 96 hours in advance. Please call the City Council Secretary at 706-3611, to make arrangements. (TDD/706-3692 for deaf or hearing impaired only) THE CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS DOES NOT DISCRIMINATE ON THE BASIS OF DISABILITY IN EMPLOYMENT OR THE PROVISION OF SERVICES EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER CITY COUNCIL LETTER MEETING OF: APRIL 25, 2005 AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: CITY MANAGER NO: FINANCE APPROVAL ITEM: RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING A BY: LINDA MAGEE~4'/ff _k._ BY: PUBLIC PURPOSE EXPENDITURE POLICY WILLIAM ELRI~'E ~ NO: DATE: 04/14/2005 In July of 2002 the State Auditor's office issued an investigative report on the City of Brooklyn Park questioning various spending practices related to public purpose spending and the use of pubhc funds. As a follow-up to that, in August of 2002, the League of Minnesota Cities issued a nine-page memorandum offering suggestions of what cities should do to define public purpose spending. As part of the City's 2003 annual audit, our auditing firm, Tautges, Redpath, Ltd., recommended that the City consider creating a public purpose expenditure policy to determine allowable City expenditures. The bottom line of this is that city councils should adopt a public purpose expenditure policy clearly defining that employee benefits meet public purpose expenditure guidelines. The attached resolution establishes a public purpose expenditure policy for the City of Columbia Heights. It should be noted that the expenses covered by this resolution have been incurred on a regular basis by the City of Columbia Heights for many years. This resolution simply defines the expenses as having a public purpose. RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to waive the reading of Resolution 2005-21 there being ample copies available to the public. R_ECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to adopt Resolution 2005-21 being a resolution establishing a public purpose expenditure policy. WE:sms 0504142COUNCIL Attachments COUNCIL ACTION: RESOLUTION NO. 2005 - 21 BEING A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING A PUBLIC PURPOSE EXPENDITURE POLICY WHEREAS, the City of Columbia Heights recognizes that in the current work environment employee job satisfaction and productivity depends on more than just the salary an employee receives; and WHEREAS, all employee benefits are basically a form of employee compensation that like all other forms are designed to attract, retain and motivate employees; and WHEREAS, the City concludes that expenditures for employee events, including food at employee meetings, in reality, have as their primary purpose, the creation of a more productive work force that better serves the needs of the citizens of Columbia Heights; and WHEREAS, the City has determined that monies spent on such events are additional forms of compensation to all employees; and WHEREAS, employees have a reasonable understanding and expectation that if they are performing their job, they are earning the right to attend the employee events. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Columbia Heights has determined that expenditures for meals, beverages and employee events shall be considered a compensation benefit that meets public purpose expenditure guidelines. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that those expenditures for memberships and dues for professional and community organizations, when the purpose is to promote or improve the City's interests, are public purpose expenditures. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that employee and volunteer recognition program expenses that promote increased productivity, motivate employees, or acknowledge employees and volunteers for their service to the citizens of Columbia Heights are public purpose expenditures. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council believes it is important to provide recognition of traumatic or celebratory occasions that occur in the lives of employees, appointees, and elected officials, and as such, expenditures for these events meet public purpose expenditure guidelines. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council in the City of Columbia Heights, Minnesota authorizes the City Manager to expend budgeted funds for the above-referenced public purpose events. Passed this day of ., 2005 Offered by: Seconded by: Roll Call: Mayor Gary L. Peterson Patricia Muscovitz, Deputy City Clerk q Cities League of Minnesota Cities 145 University Avenue West, St Paul, MN 55103-2044 (651) 281-1200 · (800) 925-1122 Fax: (651) 281-1299 · TDD: (651) 281-1290 www. lmnc. org August 1, 2002 TO: City Managers, Administrators, and Clerks FROM: Tom Gmndhoefer, LMC General Counsel Issues arising out of July 17, 2002 State Auditor Investigative Report to the City of Brooklyn Park Introduction The Office of the State Auditor (OSA) recently issued a report "questioning" various spending practices of the City of Brooklyn Park. Since the report was issued, the League has had a number of calls from city officials asking our reaction to some of the issues discussed in the report. It is our sense that some of the practices addressed by the OSA may be cmmuon in other cities. Accordingly, we thought it might be helpful for the League to put in writing some of our thoughts regarding certain issued addressed by the OSA. At the outset, we want to make clear that this memo does not deal with all of the matters raised by the OSA, nor should it be taken as an encouragement or a recommendation by the League to disregard the observations made by the OSA. As always, decisions about city spending policies and practices are largely a matter of local concern and ought to be thoughtfully discussed and analyzed at the city council level. In addition, because many of the issues fall into what might be considered the "gray area," we encourage you to consult with your city attorney about this topic. Background As an initial matter, it 1Tlay be useful to make a colmuent on the legal effect of the auditor's opinion on Brooklyn Park and other cities. Under Minn. Stat. §§ 6.49 and 6.50, the OSA has the responsibility to supervise the financial accounts of Minnesota cities and to conduct an exmuination of city accounts and records as the "State Auditor may deem the public interest to demand." Pursuant to these powers, the OSA investigated complaints about Brooklyn Park's expenditure practices, and issued a report finding that a number of the city's expenditures were "questionable." As it stands, the report is an advisory opinion to the city. However, in the case of findings of suspected violations of law, the Auditor is required to send a copy of the report to the city attorney and/or county attorney for review for possible prosecution. A representative of the OSA has indicated that a copy of the Brooklyn Park report was forwarded to the city and county attorney, although he said that most of the issues addressed in the document did not rise AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY/AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER spending decisions. In fact, the Court has made clear that "this presumption necessarily makes the scope of review of such govermuental decision-malting extremely narrow and a reviewing court should overrule a legislative determination that a particular expenditure is made for a public purpose only if that detenuination is manifestly arbitrary and capricious." Accordingly, as discussed above, the question of what constitutes a public purpose is largely a matter of city council discretion. City authority With regard to the "authority test," a Minnesota municipal corporation has only such powers as are expressly conferred upon it by statute or its charter, or necessarily implied there from. In looking at the question of city authority, a distinction exists between charter cities and statutory cities. Many home role charter cities have an "all powers" provision, which reads something like "A city shall have all powers which may now or hereafter be possible for a municipal corporation in this state to exercise in harmony with the constitution of this state and of the United States." This broad grant of power under city charters has been interpreted as including "all those powers which are generally recognized as powers which may properly be given to and be exercised by, municipal corporations." State ex rel Zien v. City of Duluth, 134 Minn. 355, 159 N.W. 792 (1916). In construing municipal charter authority, the Minnesota Supreme Court in City of St. Paul v. Whidb¥, 295 Minn. 129, 136 203 N.W.2d 823, 827 (1972) (citing Park v. City of Duluth 134 Minn. 296, 298, 159 N.W. 627, 628 (1916)), enunciated the parameters of such authority: "Municipal corporations are created by state law.., their legislative authority is conferred upon them by the constitution and the laws of the state and, as to matters of mnnicipal concern, they have all the legislative power possessed by the Legislature of the state, save as such power is expressly or implicitly withheld..." Accordingly, for a charter city with an "all powers" clause, the scope of municipal authority is probably greater than that allowed for statutory cities. With regard to statutory cities, municipal authority has to be found in the statutes or be necessarily implied from that statutory authority. The question of what constitutes a valid implied power is the subject of some debate and creates much of the "gray m'ea" associated with the analysis of particular expenditure practices. The remainder of this memorandnm will not specifically differentiate between charter city authority and statutory city authority. However, individual cities should pay particular attention to the fact that on the authority question, charter cities may be able to argue a greater level of municipal discretion. Employee Recognition Events The League of Minnesota Cities has often been asked whether it is valid to spend municipal funds on employee recognition events. The League has historically taken the position that cities can sponsor and pay for employee recognition programs if they are structured so that they retain and motivate employees. In the past, employee benefits meant group health, life and disability insurance. In recent years, most private and public sector organizations have expanded their compensation and benefit programs to include things such as: service and achievement awards; "camaraderie-type" events like annual banquets, employee picnics and holiday parties; on-site daycare or daycare referral services; flex-time and work/life policies; payroll-deducted car and homeowner's insurance; medical and daycare expense accounts; and assistance with carpooling, transportation or parking. One reason for this expansion of benefit programs is that today's workforce is diverse and offering a wide range of benefits allows employees to choose the ones that are most important for them. For example, employees in families where both parents work sometimes prefer time off above other benefits. A single parent, however, may require family health insurance. Younger employees may value events where they can socialize with other employees. Another reason for expansion of employee benefits is the fact that studies continue to show that nearly all employees rank "recognition" as a key factor in a good work enviromuent. Since "recognition" means different things for different people, employers who want to meet diverse needs offer a variety of formal and informal recognition programs. Researchers in intergenerational issues advise employers that each generation of employees value different types of recognition programs and no single effort will be valued by all of the generations present in the workforce. Finally, in addition to the important goals of employee satisfaction and retention, many employers recognize the value of benefits that promote positive social interaction among employees. Employees who interact together develop a "synergy" which often allows for better ideas, better cooperation, and higher productivity. On the opposite end of the continumn, a dysfunctional workforce with high interpersonal conflict may experience .lower productivity, higher absenteeism and probably higher insurance claims. All of these factors can negatively affect an employer's product and services. We think a city council, as an employer, could logically conclude that expenditures for employee events, including food at employee meetings, really have as their primary purpose, the creation ora more productive work force that better serves the interests of the citizens of the community. Another way to look at these types of expenditures is to view them as a fonn of expected employee compensation similar to the analysis used in evaluating employee recognition events. To avoid the argnment that expenditures on employee events is an unlawful gift, there should be an understanding~ in advance, that these events are an expected form of compensation. If a city wants to implement such a progrmn, it would probably be helpful to have the city council review this issue as part of its annual budget discussion. Councils may even want to go as far as passing a motion specifying and providing that amounts spent on such events are additional forms of compensation to all employees. The key again, is that the employees have a reasonable prior understanding and expectation that if they are performing their job, they are earning the right to attend the employee event. Accordingly, as with many of the other issues addressed by the OSA, the question of the validity of business luncheon expenses incurred by city officials is one for the city council to evaluate, looking at whether the expense furthers a public purpose and whether it can logically be seen as a natural incident of a mtmicipal function. In this regard, we would urge cities to set policies and establish guidelines describing under what circumstance the city will reimburse for employee lunches. Chamber of Commerce Dues Relying on a 1997 Attorney General letter Opinion to the City of Staples, the OSA questioned the legality of paying dues to the local Chamber of Cmrnuerce. The Attorney General's Opinion, upon which the OSA relies, offers a very narrow interpretation of three statutes that arguably support authority to pay chamber dnes. In particular, Minn. Stat. § 469.187 - § 469.189 gives various categories of cities, the authority to expend city funds to advertise the "resources and advantages" of the connnunity. While there is no explicit statutory authority to pay dues to a Chamber of Commerce, it can be argued that the purpose ora Chamber of Commerce is to promote the city's resources and advantages. In effect, the lnembership in the Chamber of Connnerce could be viewed as a contract between the city and the chmnber to promote the city. To buttress this argument, at the time of approving chmuber membership, the city council may want to make explicit findings about what it intends to receive from its chamber membership and why participation in the chamber promotes an important city purpose. Another statute that relates to this question, is Minn. Stat. § 469.191, which specifically "pennits a home rule or statutory city to appropriate not more than $50,000 annually out of the general revenue fund to any incorporated development society or organization of the state for promoting, advertising, improving, or developing the economic and agricultural resources of the city." Again, while not an explicit grant of authority to join the local chmuber, a reasonable argmuent can be made that dues to the chmnber of commerce could logically be seen as payment to a development corporation for purposes of "promoting, advertising, improving, or developing the economic and agricultural resources of the city. To help safeguard a city's decision, the'city council may want to explicitly make findings noting that it used the chamber dues as a pa3nnent consistent with the statute. It is worth noting that a 1997 Attorney General Opinion concluded that this statute would actually authorize a contribution to the chmuaber, but could not be taken as authority to become a member. A fmal statute bearing on this question is Minn. Stat. § 471.96, which allows a city to appropriate necessary funds to belong to a "county, regional, state or national associations of a civic, educational or govermnental nature, which have as their purpose, the betterment and improvement of municipal govermuent operations." The Attorney General concluded that it "does not appear that Chmubers of Commerce can be characterized as associations of a civic, educational, or govermnental nature, which have as their purpose, the bettenuent and improvement of mtmicipal govermuent operations, even thongh their interests may include such Audit Management Letter Intemal Control Matters INTERNAL CONTROL MATI'ERS During our audit for the year ended December 31, 2003, we noted the following internal control matters: Special Assessments In 2003, the amount of special assessments certified to the county differed from the amount approved by the City council by approximately $900. When presenting the special assessments to the council, the City does not specify the individual amount due by pin number. We recommend the City lists the special assessments presented before the council by amount per pin number in order to prevent a variance between amount authorized by council and amount certified to the county. Public Purpose Expenditures In 2003, the City paid for catering and door prizes for an employee holiday party. It is the Minnesota attorney general's opinion that the city should "refrain from paying for holiday parties or other employee social events." We recommend the City consider creating a public purpose expenditure policy to determine allowable City expenditures. Rental Revenue In 2002, the City received overpayments for a tower rental revenue lease from Sprint PCS. As of December 31, 2003, the City has not credited the overpayments to be recognized as rental revenue to City. We recommend the City recognize the revenue accordingly. CITY COUNCIL LETTER Meeting of: 4/19/2005 AGENDA SECTION: WORK SESSION ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT: CITY MANAGER ITEM: AUTHORIZATION TO SEEK PROPOSALS FOR BY: K. Hansen~-~, BY: PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FOR MISCELLANEOUS DATE: 4/14/20~ DATE: j/~/~?/~ REPAIRS TO T~ WATER TOUR~/~. In 2003, City staff had an interior/exterior inspection conducted on the City's Water Tower. This is a recommended practice to be conducted approximately every 5 years to analyze and ensure the integrity of the structural condition and coatings of the steel tank. A copy of that report is attached for reference. The City's only Water Tower is a 250,000-gallon single pedestal, welded steel design located at 4700 Stinson Boulevard. The last major renovation was in 1996 when the interior and exterior were repaired and recoated with a lead free epoxy. Based upon the inspection report, major renovation is not required at this time, but spot or miscellaneous repairs to the coatings and structural should be made to continue the life of the interior/exterior coatings for another 12-15 years. An update of the estimate of cost for the recommended repairs is in the $45,000 to $50,000 range. Staff is not anticipating any work to be conducted in 2005, but only requesting preparation of plans and specifications at this time. The industry currently has a 12-15 month lead-time from bidding to work initiation. The plans and specifications require a certified coating engineer (NACE) and registered structural engineer, in addition to field inspections. City staff budgeted this item in the 2005 Public Works Water Construction budget. Due to the lead-time from bidding to getting a contractor to perform the work, staff is recommending to re-budget this item again in the 2006 Water Construction budget for construction with engineering services for design funded in the 2005 budget. Recommended Motion: Authorize staff to seek proposals for design and inspection services for Miscellaneous Repairs to the City's Water Tower. Council Action iNSPECTION REPORT 2~0,000 GALLON SINGLE PEDESTAL SPHEROID STINSON BLVD. TOWER CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS KCI PROJECT NO. 03MN022 By KoL LIVl ER CONSULTANTS, INC. 7494 253rd Avenue NE Stacy, MN 55079 (651) 462-7266 ~ (651) 462-3249 [fax] Report prepared by: Robert E. Kollmer Certified NACE International Coatings Inspector No. 1291 I hereby certify that this inspection 'report was prepared by me or under my. direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota. RegistrationNo. 18551 City of Columbia Heights 250 MG Single Pedestal Spheroid KCI Project No. 03MN022 Page ii TABLE OF CONTENTS Title Page .................................................................................................................................... i Table of Contents ....................................................................................................................... ii 1.0 1 2.0 2 3.0 4.0 Tank Data ....................................................................................................................... Summary ......................................................................................................................... 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 Structural Evaluation ............................................................................................. 2 Coating Evaluation ............................................................................................... 2 Repair and Reconditioning Cost Estimate ........................................................... 3 Remaining Tank Life ............................................................................................ 3 Recommendations .......................................................................................................... 4 3.1 Interior Structural ................. : ............................................................................... 4 3.2 Interior Wet Coating ............................................................................................ 4 3.3 Cathodic Protection System ................................................................................. 4 3.4 Interior Dry Coating ............................................................ : ................................ 4 3.5 Exterior Structural ................................................................................................ 5 3.6 .Exterior Coating ................................................................................................... 6 Inspection and Evaluation Methods .................................................................................. 7 4.1 Scope .................................................................................................................. 7 4.2 Evaluation Techniques ........................................................................................ 7 Appendix A: Appendix B: Appendix C: Photographs Drawings Surface Preparation Requirements City of Columbia Heights 250 MG Single Pedestal Spheroid KCl Project No. 03MN022 r'-~y~ I 1.0 TANK DATA KCI Project No.: 03MN022 KCI Proposal No 03-035 Customer: City of Columbia Heiqhts Phone: 763-706-3700 Street/City/State/Zip: 637 38th Avenue NE, Columbia Heiqhts, MN. 55421 Customer Contact: Sean Johnson Tank Owner: City of Columbia Heiqhts Phone: 763-706-3706 Tank Owner Contact: Kevin Hansen P.E. Director of Public Works / City Engineer Owner's Tank Designation: Stinson Blvd. Sinqle Pedestal Tank Description: Sinqle Pedestal 250,000 Gallon Tank Location (Street/City/State/Zip): 4700Stinson Blvd., Columbia Heiqhts, MN. 55421 Purpose of Inspection: Tank structural examination and interior & exterior coatinq evaluation. Date of Inspection: May 7, 2003 Inspected By: Robert J. Kollmer NACE #5191, & Brian McCarthy Type of Inspection'. KCI Standard Existinq Steel Water Storaqe Tank Inspection Manufacturer: CBI Construction Date: 1975 Serial No.: 5-4000 Capacity: 250,000 Gallon Type of Construction: Number and Size of Pilasters/Support Columns: Tank Diameter: Height: Height to: Type of Access to Tank Interior: Roof Manway Tank Construction Drawings: Yes Previous InSpection Records: Yes/AEC Design Code: AWWA D-100 Welded Yes One Riveted Overall Shell/Balcony N/A HWL 106.75 LWL 76.75 Date Last Coated Coating Contractor Surface Preparation Paint System Paint Manufacturer Lab Lead Test Paint Chips Interior Dry EXISTING COATING INFORMATION INTERIOR 1996 TMI Coatinqs SSPC-SP 10 Epoxy Tnemec No No EXTERIOR 1996 TMI Coatings SSPC-SP 6 Epoxy Tnemec No City of Columbia Heights 250 MG Single Pedestal Spheroid KCl Project No. 03MN022 Page 2 2.0 SUMMARY 2.1 Structural Evaluation Based on the inspection data, it appears that some miscellaneous structural modifications and repairs are required. 2.2 Coating Evaluation 2.2.1 Lead Content Analysis The total lead content of the interior and exterior coatings was not analyzed. At the time this tower was reconditioned in 1996, the coating manufacturer submitted a letter stating that their coatings were certified as lead free. Therefore, neither the interior wet, nor exterior coatings are classified as lead-based paint. Removal of non-lead based paint must be performed in accordance with applicable local, State and Federal regulations. Repair specifications must include provisions for full containment and/or the implementation of vacuum recovery must be employed during exterior spot repairing. 2.2.2 Interior Coatinq Based on our evaluation, overall the interior coating is in good condition with only two (2) to four (4) percent coating failures below the high water level (HWL) and one (1) to (2) percent coating failures above the HWL. The coating is repa!rable and.should be repaired within two (2) years. If the tank coating is properly repaired, it should provide an additional twelve (12) to fifteen (15) years of additional'service. See photos in Appendix A. 2.2.3 Exterior Coatinq The tank was last coated in 1996. The coating is in good condition and requires only minor repairs. If coating repairs are completed within two (2) years, the coating should provide an additional eight (8) to ten (10) additional years of service. NOTE: It is more cost effective to do the interior/exterior structural repairs, and coating repairs at the same time. City of Columbia Heights 250 MG Single Pedestal Spheroid KCI Project No. 03MN022 Page 3 2.3 2.4 Repair and Reconditioning Cost Estimate The cost of structural repairs and of simultaneously repairing the interior and exterior coatings are estimated at $33,900. This estimate is based on current pricing. In order to obtain competitive bids the project should be bid nine (9) to twelve (12) months prior to the scheduled start date. An experienced coating contractor with the proper crew and equipment should be able to complete the project in three (3) weeks. Remaining Tank Life Based on the inspection data, it appears that, if the recommended structural repairs and coating repairs are completed .within the next 1 to 2 years, and inspected regularly, the tank is satisfactory for continued service. The repairs on the interior and exterior, if applied and maintained properly, should last an additional twelve (12) to fifteen (15) years. City of Columbia Heights 250 MG Single Pedestal Spheroid KCI Project No. 03MN022 Page 4 3.0 RECOMMENDATIONS The photographs referred to in this section are in Appendix A. All drawings are found in Appendix B. The surface preparation requirements for all repairs as well as the requirements for welding are described in Appendix C. Based on the evaluation of the inspection data, the following are our recommendations: 3,1 Interior Structural 3.1.1 3.1.2 The gap between the dry well tube and the dry well tube collar need to be completely sealed by installing foam backing and epoxy caulk in the opening. This will prevent any further severe corrosion in between the plates which are not accessible with a paint brush. See photo # 2. Replace the 12 x 18 inch oval gasket on the manway in the drywall tube and the 24 inch diameter manway in the bowl plates. See photo # 3. 3.1.3 Replace the insulation on the inlet/out pipe and install an aluminum covering over the insulation. See photo # 4. 3.2 Interior Wet Coating 3.2.1 Overall, the interior coating is in good condition with only 2 to 4 percent coating failures below the High Water Line (HWL) and 1 to 2 percent coating failure above the HWL. The coating is repairable and should be repaired within two (2) years. See photos 5 through 13. 3.2.2 After structural modifications are completed, spot repair all areas of damaged coating' and existing coating failures with a light-colored polyamide epoxy system. 3.3 Cathodic Protection System 3.3.1 The reservoir does not have a Cathodic Protection system. Although this is considered an inexpensive form of interior coating protection, it may not be required if the coating is repaired and applied properly. The cost of a Cathodic Protection System is not included in the Engineer's Cost Estimate. 3.4 Interior Dry Coating 3.4.1 Remove the insulation from the inlet/outlet pipe. Inspect the pipe for corrosion and coating failures. Complete any repairs as needed, then install new foam insulation With an aluminum jacket from the'valve pit to the tank bowl. See photo #-4. City of Columbia Heights 250 MG Single Pedestal Spheroid KCI Project No. 03MN022 Page 5 3.5 3.4,2 Exterior 3.5.1 3.5.2 3.5.3 3.5.4 3.5.5 3.5.6 3.5.7 3.5.8 3.5.9 The interior dry coating is in good to fair condition. There are random locations of coating failures and pinhole rusting that should be repaired. If coating is repaired within the next two (2) years, it should provide an additional ten.(10) to fifteen (15) years. See photos 14 and 15. Structural Install one (1), 24-inch diameter round, hinged roof manway, outside the handrail, approximately 180 degrees from the existing roof manway. See photo #16 for a typical AWWA style hinged roof manway. This will provide additional ventilation during the interior surface preparation and coating, and should bring the tank into compliance with OSHA Confined Space Entry Requirements. To prevent trespassing, install a padlock on the roof access manway. The cost of a new lock is not included in the Engineering Cost Estimate. Reattach the existing vent screen with a corrosion-resistant, heavy-duty metal banding. The existing vent screen has plastic zip ties holding the screen in place on the exterior of the vent. See photo #17. The antenna coax penetrations in the roof of the tank have foam insulation sealing the gaps around them. Birds have removed a large portion of this insulation. See photo #18. Fill in the existing gaps with a better performing sealer. Edge weld the 6" x 6" antenna bracket base plates that were stud welded to the tank roof. See photos 19 and 20. Stud welding has been known to have a high failure rate when not welded by qualified welders. The existing obstruction light globes are not secured to the light fixtures. They could possibly be blown off under the right windy conditions. Install missing fasteners onto aviation obstruction light globes to insure they are secured. Install an OSHA-approved ladder safety climb device on the interior dry ladder. See photo # 21. Install a rubberized cover over, the existing unused coax penetration in the bottom bell portion of the tank. See photo #22. Remove loose, cracked and spalled grout and concrete under the base plates of the support columns. Repair using non-shrink 3000 PSI grout. See photo #23. City of Columbia Heights 250 MG Single Pedestal Spheroid KCl Project No. 03MN022 Page 6 3.6 Exterior Coating 3.6.1 3.6.2 It appears that the tank was last coated in 1996. The exterior coating is in good condition and requires only minor repairs at random locations on the roof, shell, and the dry riser column. The spot repair areas shall be given one good coat of epoxy primer and one coat of epoxy urethane finish. To be effective, the exterior coating repairs should be done within the next one to two (2) years. See photos 24 through 28. After structural repairs are completed, the spot repair surfaces should be abrasive blasted and the coating replaced with a light-colored polyamide epoxy primer and match the existing epoxy urethane finish coating system. City of Columbia Heights 250 MG Single Pedestal Spheroid KCI Project No. 03MN022 Page 7 4.0 INSPECTION AND EVALUATION METHODS 4.1 Scope 4.1.1 4.1.2 4.1.3 4.1.4 The tank was evaluated on the interior and exterior in conformance with the following: a. KCI Proposal No. 03-035. 4.2 General guide lines of AWWA Standard D101, "Inspecting and Repairing Steel Water Tanks, Standpipes, Reservoirs, and Elevated Tanks for Water Storage." KCI "Procedures for Inspection of Existing Steel Water Storage Tanks". The inspection of the base metal and of the coating on all interior and exterior surfaces was limited to areas accessible without scaffolding or special rigging. In addition, where possible, the base metal and the coating on the interior wet surfaces were examined from a rubber raft while the tank was being drained. No structural analysis was done to determine if the tank design complies with the AWWA D100-96 Standard for "Welded Steel Tanks for Water Storage." However, any observed non-conformance to the AWWA D100-96 standard is noted in this report. Although compliance with OSHA regulations was not a part of this inspection, any unsafe conditions or violations of current OSHA regulations which were observed are noted in this report. Evaluation Techniques 4.2.1 Site 4.2.2 The tank site was visually examined for proper drainage away from the tank and for conditions affecting access and exterior repairs. In addition, the following tank site information was obtained, as applicable. Site dimensions: distance to fences, power lines, owner buildings, public property, private property/buildings, school/playgrounds, public parks and other property. Foundations The tank concrete foundation was visually examined for cracks, spalling, condition of grout, indications of distress/settlement, and elevation above, grade. City of Columbia Heights 250 MG Single Pedestal Spheroid KCl Project No. 03MN022 Page 8 4.2.3 4.2.4 4.2.5 4.2.6 Coatinq Thickness Interior and exterior coatings, where accessible were tested in accordance with Steel Structures Painting Council SSPC-PA2-82 "Measurement of Dry Film Thickness with Magnetic Gages," using PosiTector-2000/Quantix 2200 Type 2, fixed probe, magnet flux gages. Coating Adhesion Adhesion testing of the coating to the steel was performed by ASTM D3359: Shear Adhesion Test, Measuring Adhesion by Tape Test. In addition, a subjective coating adhesion evaluation was performed using a pen knife. Coatinq Cure The cure of the interior wet coating was cure evaluated by the manufacturer's recommended field method. Coating Serviceability The estimated remaining coating life or serviceability evaluation was performed using a wide variety of inspection instruments such as dry film thickness gauge, pen knife, Tooke gauge, adhesion tester(s), and 30x microscope. The instrument inspection was combin, ed with a thorough, total, close visual inspection of all accessible areas of the interior coating for holidays (misses), skips, runs, sags, surface contaminants, overspray, dry spray, poor coating cohesion, inter-coat delamination, loss of adhesion to the substrate, condition of the steel underneath the coating, and any other objectionable defects for the service required. City of Columbia Heights Public Works Department Work Session Discussion Item Work Session Date:April 19, 2005 e, ~.t ~''~~ Prepared by: Kevin Hansen, Public Works Director/City Engine ' Lauren McClanahan, Public Works Superintendent~ ITEM: Authorization to seek bids for the Capital Equipment Replacement of Unit # 190A: 1987 Sereco Truck Mounted Sewer Rodding Machine. Background: Unit #190A was purchased new in 1987, for $12,953 with a projected life expectancy of 20 years. Unit # 190A sewer rodding machine, replaced an older sewer rodding machine and was mounted on the same truck., a 1964, Ford ~ ton 4x4. In 1996, a new Ford F350, 2x4, one ton chassis was purchased to carry Unit #190A, for $15,914 with a projected life expectancy of 15 years. Unit # 190A has been used as the primary piece of equipment to root saw sanitary sewer lines and clear blockages that may occur. Unit # 190A is 18 years old and maintenance and repair records indicate that $13,765 has been spent on Unit # 190A since 2000. In 2004, the first full year of increased sanitary sewer maintenance approximately $12,000 was spent for replacing sewer rod and cleaning tools. The Shop Supervisor has rated the condition Unit # 190A as poor. Unit # 190A has been reconditioned 3 times and would need to be reconditioned again in the near future. Parts delivery has taken as long as 2 to 3 weeks. The 2005 Sanitary Sewer Capital Equipment Replacement budget has allocated $130,000 for the replacement of Unit # 190A Analysis/Conclusions: Following the significant backups in 2003, and at the recommendation of the League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust (LMCIT), staff developed a model Sanitary Sewer Maintenance Policy that requires Public Works to clean all of the sanitary sewer lines that have a history of back up (trouble lines) on an annual basis and the remainder of the city on a three-year repeating cycle. This represented a significant increase in annual sanitary sewer maintenance. To meet the demands of the City's current sewer maintenance efforts and minimize the number of backups, it is necessary to update equipment and operational procedures to meet the increased demands on city crews. Work Session Discussion Item Authorization to seek bids for the Capital Equipment Replacement of Unit # 190A. The use of Unit # 190A requires employees to repeatedly lift the stainless steel heavy rod and guide hose to position the cleaning tool in the sanitary sewer line. None of this lifting can be done using proper lifting technique and therefore exposes employees to possible serious back and shoulder injury. Unit gl 90A has a great deal of down time due to sewer rod failure. The sewer rods become brittle with use and repeatedly break. Broken or bent rod replacement exposes employees to possible serious injury when repairs are made. Additionally, our NPDES Phase II permit now requires many of the same maintenance activities we perform in our sanitary sewer operation, i.e., cleaning of our storm lines! After carefully reviewing current and future sanitary and storm sewer maintenance requirements, manpower, operator safety and sewer cleaning equipment that is available for purchase in 2005, Public Works staff has the following recommendations: 1. Replace Unit # 190A with (1) one High Pressure Water Jetter Truck Mounted. This unit is capable of root sawing, removing grit, clearing blockages, thawing frozen lines, and washing down manholest It also provides the operator with the highest level of safety and ergonomic design available at this time. 2. Dispose of Unit # 190A by means of auction or junk as vendors have indicated they would not take a trade-in because the unit is obsolete and has little or no value. 3. Retain Unit #190:1996 Ford F350 2x4 one ton chassis and convert it into one, or both of the following vehicles: 3a. Flat bed truck equipped with a lift gate for use in repairing storm sewer catch basins. 3b. Wood chip truck, used to tow the wood chipper during tree trimming operations. Requested Action: Authorize staff to seek bids for (1) one new High Pressure Water Jetter Truck Mounted, to replace Unit # 190A: 1987 Sereco Truck Mounted Sewer Rodding Machine. The Vactor Ramjet is the perfect machine for faster, safer response to blockages, as well as regular preventive line maintenance. A single operator can operate the Ramjet and get the job done quicldy and effectively. With your choice of hose reel locations, unique productivity-enhancing options and a variety of accessories, the Ramjet can be configured to exacdy match your needs. Available Vactor Jet Rodder Pomp Choose the exdusive Vactor Jet Rodder pump with jack-hammer acdon that scours pipes dean. Muldple pump flow available. Triplex pump also available. Choice of Front or Traditional Rear Hose Reel Choose the hose reel location that matches your applicafions. Front mount provides a safe "between the headlights" workstation. Telescoping, Rotating Hose Reel (front mount only/optional) Telescopes and rotates for easy operator setup in a multitude of applications. Allows cleaning of muldple inlets and reduces hose damage due to misaligument. Auto-wind }lose Guide (optional) Allows hands-free operation from the control panel, preventing hose from tan- gling as it is rewound. Standard on the rear mount, optional on the front mount. Stainless Steel Water Tank More durable than tanks made of steel or plastic material. Provides years of rust-free service; prevents cracking in cold weather. Available in three capacities. Drive Options Drive options indude hydrostatic, direct drive PT® or auxiliary diesel engine. Genuine Vactor Quality & Service Designed, built and backed by the world's #1 sewer cleaner manufacturer. Includes technical support via toll-free 24-hour hodine. Configurations Model/Drive System Pum_p Hose _Reel Location S_h_roud GPM _Available F (hydraulic PTO) Vactor Front (standard) Not available 60/80/100 V (hydraulic ?TO) Vactor Rear Standard 60/80/100 D (diesel) Triplex Rear Standard 65/80 P (direct drive PTO) Triplex Rear Standard 65/80 Example: A model V8020 has a Vactor pump, rear mounted reel, pump rated at 80 gallons per minute and a 2000 Note: 2000+ gallon water systems require a tandem axle chassis. Water Tank Size 1500/2000/2500 gal 1500/2000 gal 1500/2000 gal 1500/2000 gal gallon water tank. General Specifications Water pump · 3 in. Y-strainer (Vactor pump only) -o Water relief valve · Engage/disengage at operator station Water tank · #304 stainless steel, 10 gauge with 3/16 in. end plates · High strength elliptical design · Stainless steel baffles · 24 in. dia. inspection port · 4 in. air gap with anti-splash valve · 25 ft. x 2-1/2 in. water £~ hose with couplers · 2 in. drain valve at rear of unit · Water level sight gauge · Ladder on tank (curbside) Storage · %ol tray, curbside and streetside ' , Security door with canopy at rear (shrouded units only) · Weatherproof toolbox (36in. x 18 in. x 18 in.) Wash down equipment · Handgun with 35 ft. x 1/2 in. hose and coupler · Rear handgun connection · Midshift connection with front reel Standard accessories · 30° sanitary nozzle · 15° sand nozzle · Flexible hose guide · Nozzle pipe assembly · Jetter Operations, Parts Manual · Hydrant wrench Lighting and paint · D.O.T. lighting system · White enamel Options · Dual fill system · W'mter package (air purge, recircula- tion system) Front Mounted Hose Reel · Telescoping, rotating design (optional): telescopes 15 in. (381 mm), rotates 270° · 600 ft. (183 m) hose capacity · Engage/disengage at operator station · Aura-wind guide (optional) Rear Mounted Hose Reel · 800 ft. (244 m) hose. capacity · Engage/disengage at operator station . Anto-wind guide (standard) · Rotating reel in lieu of fixed red with shroud Warranty The Vactor Ramjet is warranted against defects in material or workmanship for a period of 12 months from the date of delivery tq the original purchaser; with a 10 year warranty on the water tank. Optional extended warranty paclmges are available. Consult your Vactor dealer for complete warranty information. Your Vactor Dealer is: Mac Queen Equipment, Inc. 595 Aldine Street St. Paul, Minnesota 551 04 (651) 645-5726 1-800 ~832-641 7 www. macqueeneq.com Specifications subject to change without notice. Vector%nd Jet Rodde~ are registered trademarks of Vector Manufacturing. Effective 8/g9 PIN 000551] Printed in U.S.A. ©1999 Vactor Manufacturing, Inc. VACTOR'-" Vector Manufacturing, inc. Subsidiep/of Federal Signal Corporation 1621 South Illinois Street Streator, Illinois, U.S.A. 61364 (815) 672-3171 Phone (615) 6724779 Fax www.vactor, com