Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01/21/1992URBAN AFFAIRS ADVISORY COMMITTEE MINUTES CITY OF APPLE VALLEY January 21, 1992 1. CALL TO ORDER The January 21, 1992 meeting of the Apple Valley Urban Affairs Advisory Committee was called to order at 7:05 p.m. by Chairman John McKay. Members Present: Chairman John McKay, Members Shirley Doering, Sharon Schwartz, Van Holston, and Councilman Robert Erickson. Members Absent: Pam Sohlberg, JoAnne Ellison, and Robin Curran. Staff Present: Mary Mueller, Terry Cook, and Scott Hickok. Others Present: Cindy Webster, Peggy Tittle-Swaim, Sue Nathan, and Debbie Wold. 2. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA 3. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF JANUARY 21, 1992. 4. DISCUSSION ITEMS A. Energy Grant Program -Scott Hickok- Scott Hickok introduced the topic of the Apple Valley Energy Grant Program In the introduction, Hickok asked each of the individuals in attendance to introduce themselves and state if they were a Committee Member, Self Reliance Center (SRC) representative, Minnegasco representative, staff,. etc. Hickok continued by reviewing a brief history of the Energy Conservation Program in Apple Valley. Peggy Tittle-Swaim, Self Reliance Center (SRC) representative explained the energy use evaluation aspects of the program. Swaim continued by stating that in many cases, the information that is provided through this program will result in a 25°/a reduction in energy consumption in a residence. Swaim also explained that for each energy audit SRC performs, $80.00 is provided by Minnegasco. The State Grant Apple Valley received also helps to pay for the cost of each inspection. Councilman Bob Erickson stated that he had a negative experience with an energy audit where he was told that he needed to spend $5,000.00 on new windows. Erickson asked about what type of recommendations are given and whether or not "Bag Ticket" items like new windows are typically recommended. Swaim responded by saying that the technicians that perform the evaluations are not in any way affiliated with sales of products. Urban Affairs Advisory Committee Minutes January 21, 1992 Page 2 Sue Nathan, Minnegasco representative, added information regarding knowledge of certain "Energy Audit" programs that were focused on sales not energy conservation. Because of those programs, both Minnegasco and Self Reliance Center are extremely careful to train their auditors, and to oversee that the recommendations are conservation-focused, not sales-focused. Nathan added that many of the recommendations involve low or no cost improvements which can be made. Nathan concluded by stating that in some cases they were getting requests to evaluate homes of individuals who are Dakota Electric customers. Those individuals have been redirected to Dakota Electric. The Dakota Electric audits are performed by contract auditors whom Dakota Electric has hired. Shirley Doering commented on chimney caps and attic fans as energy conservation devices. Swaim discussed elements of the New Hope Program which has been designed to include all residents whether they are gas, electric, oil, etc. Hickok added that Dakota Electric has been invited to participate in our program, but as of yet, their program is independent. Nathan explained pre/post 1980 requirements and what those requirements have meant to Minnegasco's energy conservation effort. Nathan also gave examples of simple things that can be done by homeowners to conserve energy. Shirley Doering asked about low-income individuals, who do not have a means of correcting the problem(s). Sue Nathan explained that the low-income individuals will get up to 16 hours of service, including an air infiltration test. A 2596 improvement in infiltration rates will translate into a 796 direct energy savings. John McKay asked about the number of low-income individuals we have in Apple Valley. Swaim explained the program numbers which were recorded during the first year of the energy program Swaim explained that of 230 households requesting landscape audits, 108 planted trees. She also explained the. promotional efforts and areas she felt we could concentrate on in year two of the program. Sue Nathan explained issues which she observed that she thought we could improve on during the second year. The improvement centered around simplification of the process for those who want a $10.00 audit. Nathan also stated that emphasis on completion of request cards is important -cards lacking vital information pose difficulties for those who are responding to that request. Nathan also explained how those with new homes may have specific concerns which can be addressed by an auditor, but generally the new homes were built to standards which incorporated energy efficient requirements. Van Holston stated that he had the landscape energy audit and that it was very informative. Peggy stated that 130. people have had home energy checkups. Bob Erickson asked about the 1978-79 energy credit programs. Sue Nathan responded. Shirley Doering asked about the fuel assist applicants. Sue Nathan explained that both Self Reliance Center and Minnegasco work with and refer qualified clients to fuel assistance programs. Urban Affairs Advisory Committee Minutes January 21, 1992 Page 3 Councilman Erickson stated he would put this on a Council agenda to reemphasize the fact that this program is not designed to sell products. B. Housing Preservation Program -Scott Hickok- Scott Hickok explained briefly the history of the housing preservation efforts in Apple Valley and what ordinances may be appropriate for future adoption. Hickok discussed articles which had been clipped from recent newspapers to emphasize the importance of early implementation of preservation awareness programs and standards. Bob Erickson explained this is not a new concept, not only can a program such as this educate, but it can set standards to utilize if paint, shutters, etc. are falling. off homes. Shirley Doering asked about the inspection process. Hickok explained that it depends on the policies which we set for implementing this program. John McKay cautioned against mass discipline and also asked what specifically we would look for. Examples of working plumbing, insufficient electrical service were given. A general housing preservation discussion ensued. 5. OTHER STUDY OR CODE ISSUES A general discussion on attendance occurred following the housing preservation issue. 6. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at g:55 p.m. kg