My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Agenda - Public Works Committee - 01/17/2012
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Agendas
>
Public Works Committee
>
2010 - 2019
>
2012
>
Agenda - Public Works Committee - 01/17/2012
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/14/2025 10:19:30 AM
Creation date
1/13/2012 4:31:32 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Agenda
Meeting Type
Public Works Committee
Document Date
01/17/2012
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
57
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Public Works Committee <br />Meeting Date: 01/17/2012 <br />By: Brian Olson, Engineering/Public Works <br />Title: <br />Consider lighting retrofit for parking ramp project <br />5.2. <br />Background: <br />In 2005, Improvement Project 02-34 consisted of 590 stalls of structured parking within the COR. The decision was <br />made at the time to install 100 watt metal halide light fixtures. <br />In August of this year, a contract was awarded to Knutson Construction that would add an additional 200 stalls to <br />the existing parking ramp. Improvement Project 10-22 included a design that perpetuated the existing light fixtures <br />to give a consistent look throughout the entire parking structure. In light of the discussion last year about the <br />retrofitting of the Public Works facility, Staff requested a change order for the change -out of the existing fixtures <br />with LED and fluorescent lighting fixtures. As we saw in the Public Works retrofit case the cost to change to LED <br />light fixtures came in extremely high and are expected to near $220,000. <br />In conversations with Connexus Energy, LED street lights are becoming more and more popular because costs <br />continue to decline. This is typical in the lighting society. Costs decline in the street lighting fixtures and eventually <br />that cost competitiveness is then passed on to the parking ramp and transit uses. <br />Notification: <br />N/A <br />Observations: <br />It is evident from our discussions early on in this project that it would be very expensive to change the design of the <br />parking structure to include LED light fixtures (—$220,000) and therefore Staff focused on a fluorescent option. <br />Within a parking facility there are standards that need to be met to comply with building code. The Illuminating <br />Engineering Society IES has a standard that is very well. Attached to this case is a page from the IES manual that <br />identifies those standards. The original light fixture met that standard. Staff has had many conversations with the <br />architect, Connexus, Knutson and the subcontractor, Mayer Electric to these standards and have concurred that it is <br />critical to meet these standards as it is nationally accepted. Leo Offerman of Connexus Energy will be present at the <br />meeting if there are any questions regarding these standards. <br />Whereas there are many options regarding fluorescent fixtures, the one chosen has been proven in other outdoor <br />facilities (Maple Grove transit facility), performs well in cold weather environments and meets the IES standards. <br />Also attached to this case is an energy analysis that takes a look at the costs of operating the parking facility <br />and specifically identifies the portion of the cost that is attributable to lighting. About 45 percent of the energy used <br />is because of the lighting of the facility. The other 55% of the bill is attributable to the heating and cooling of the <br />stair elevator tower. <br />Since the purpose of this case is to consider each of three options that are available for lighting only, Staff has <br />normalized this discussion by providing a cost to operate the lighting system at $26,412 annually. The following <br />three options have been priced by Knutson Construction and are included for discussion. <br />1) Stay with the existing 100 w metal halide light fixture <br />Pros <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.