The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About#32 - Inwood Development Park Plan1 STAFF REPORT DATE: December 17, 2019 IT EM #: TO: City Council FROM: Ben Prchal, City Planner AGENDA ITEM: Development of Inwood Park REVIEWED BY: Ken Roberts, Planning Director Parks Commission BACKGROUND: The City has decided that it would be appropriate to develop the available park Land in the Inwood Development. During the October 21st Parks Commission meeting, Staff asked the Parks Commission as well as an active Inwood Community group to provide details on the types of amenities they want to see in the park space. At the October 21st meeting suggested amenities were provided to Staff which was then brought back for a second review at the November 18th Parks Commission Meeting. ISSUE BEFORE CITY COUNCIL: Would the City Council Like to Approve the Parks Commission Recommendation for Developing the land in Inwood? ANALYSIS/FISCAL IMPACT: The entire park is 12.11 acres in size, which includes the north/south trail connection. However, Staff is expecting about 1.8 acres of the park will be useable for “active use amenities.” In the past there have been many ideas of the types of uses that this park should satisfy. At one point exercise equipment was discussed, picnic tables and a pavilion, and a pickle ball court(s) have all been on the table when it comes to this park space. Some things Staff would like the Council to keep in mind is that the neighboring park to the East known as Stonegate which has a baseball field, playground, and parking. Staff would not recommend duplicating amenities due to the close proximity. Furthermore, keep in mind the surrounding demographic of potential users. Suggested Amenities for the Park in Inwood: Bike Rack Pavilion (with electric) Pickleball Water fountain Trash cans/seating Exercise equipment Walking Trail Connection(s) Frisbee golf Bocce ball 2 FISCAL IMPACT: At this time, $150,000 is reserved to develop the park. The funds are not sufficient enough to cover all of the desired items. Due to the cost of the amenities Staff would like to recommend follow through on one of two options and add the other items in an additional phase(s). (Please refer to the breakout table explaining the costs.) Plan 1 – Pavilion, Pickleball, Benches/Picnic tables, and trash cans. Cost $122,045 Remaining Funds for grading or unforeseen costs $27,955 Plan 2 – Pickleball, Benches/Picnic tables, Trash can, Walking Trail, and Trees. Cost $111,080 Remaining funds for grading or unforeseen costs $38,920 Staff Comments Staff recommended the Plan 2 improvements because it appeared to be more in line with the objectives of the Parks Commission and the City Council. Staff is recommending that the development of the park be broken up into two phases so that the City does not accidentally overextend on the allowed budget. With that said Plan 2 is being recommend with amendments and broken up into more than one phase. (See Park Commission Comments Below) Plan 2 – Staff views this as the preferred option because it provides and active use (pickleball), benches under trees (alternative to the pavilion), and a walking trail connection to the Stonegate park (Removed by Park Commission). Instead of creating a paved trail at this time into Stonegate Public Works will be able to remove trees and create a gravel stub into Stonegate and create the connection. After discussing the plans with Public Works it seems prudent to plant prairie grass east and north of the courts. There are grant opportunities to purchase seed and Washington County allows Cities to rent a no-till seeder. Staff is recommending that the Commission allow Public works to utilize the savings to purchase see (if the grant is not successful) and rent the planter from Washington County. PARK COMMISSION AND STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Park Commission: The Parks Commission would not like to pave the trail connection into Stonegate as it would only be a stub into the park and remain unfinished until other funds were allocated to extending it up to Stonegate Park parking lot. Instead Public Works would cut and create a gravel path into the park which would serve as a temporary access until the mentioned funds were reserved for the trail. Staff Recommendation: City Staff agrees with the direction of the Parks Commission and agrees that a phased plan for the park would be appropriate. Doing it this way would allow Public Works to be involved and help prep for future improvements. Staff is recommending Plan 2 as it appears to be more in line with the objectives of the Park Commission while also providing shading for the picnic tables. Amenity Price Unit Cost Bike Rack - 5 Bikes $284.00 1 $284.00 Pavilion $40,000.00 1 $40,000.00 Pickleball $40,000.00 2 $80,000.00 Bocce Ball or Horeshoes 2 $0.00 Water Line $47.00 73 $3,431.00 Water Fountain $3,050.00 1 $3,050.00 Trashcans $475.00 1 $475.00 Benches/Picnic Table (under pavilion) $785.00 4 $3,140 Exercise Equipment $2,000.00 4 $8,000.00 Walking Trail $74.00 365 $27,010.00 Frisbee golf $350.00 3 $1,050.00 Tree Planting $250.00 10 $2,500.00 Total Cost $168,940.00 3 Inwood Park Plan Phase 1 - Two pickleball courts arranged in a way that would allow additional courts (if desired). - Install a trail connection from Ivywood Cir. to the existing Inwood trail. - Tree Plantings (ten were budgeted) - Install 1 Trash can and 4 picnic benches. Staff estimates the costs of this phase to be $98,325 which leaves $51,675 for future phases. Phase 2 - Installation of a pavilion. - Install a paved trail connection into Stonegate Park. Staff would recommend taking the savings from Phase 1 and applying it to Phase 2. The Parks Commission would have liked to have seen a pavilion but Staff is skeptical that the budget would be able to accommodate a pavilion in Phase 1 because of potential inflation. “Motion to approve the Inwood Park Improvement Plan, consisting of two Picklball Courts, A Paved Trail Connection from Ivywood Cir. to the Inwood trail, Tree Plantings, trash can, and 4 picnic benches.” ATTACHMENTS: • Proposals o Cost Break Out  Pictures of items o Tentative Layout of Park o Bids from other Communities for Pickleball Existing Trails Proposed Inwood Trail Connection Amenity Price Unit Cost Bike Rack - 5 Bikes $284.00 1 $284.00 Capable of accommodating 5 bikes. Pavilion $40,000.00 1 $40,000.00 It is expected to cost $20,000 for the pavilion and then another $15-20K for shipping, install, etc. Pickleball $40,000.00 2 $80,000.00 Quotes from Stillwater have been provided, their situation is different from Lake Elmo's as they had a base to work off of and their space is consisting of 3 courts where Inwood would be 2 courts. Also, some information for St. Louis Park is useful as well. They propose to install 5 courts, Staff divided the total cost by 5 to get an estimate per court ($40k) Bocce Ball or Horseshoes 2 $0.00 Staff would recommend waiting to see if there would be any interest for volunteers to build the courts or perhaps an eagle scout would be interested building them. Water Line $47.00 73 $3,431.00 I was given an estimation of $36 to $58 per ft., with an average coming to $47 per lineal ft. Water Fountain $3,050.00 1 $3,050.00 One fountain that is handicap accessible Trashcans $475.00 1 $475.00 Benches (under pavilion)$785.00 4 $3,140.00 Benches under the pavilion or trees Exercise Equipment $2,000.00 4 $8,000.00 Estimated Cost - Not including Install Walking Trail $74.00 365 $27,010.00 The walking trail pricing is based off of a 8' trail with 6" of gravel base. The Lineal feet provided is an estimation of what will be needed. Frisbee golf $350.00 3 $1,050.00 Tree Planting $250.00 10 $2,500.00 Prices will vary per tree type Total Cost $168,940.00 Pictures of items listed out in the financial breakout. TEMP. SED. BASIN DRAINAGE AREA = 7.6 AC MIN. CONSTRUCTION VOL = 17788 CF 4GRADING, DEVELOPMENT & EROSION CONTROL PLAN M/I HOMES 941 NE Hillwind Rd., Suite 300 Fridley, MN 55432 of 248 Apollo Drive, Suite 100 Lino Lakes, MN 55014 Phone: (763) 489-7900 Fax: (763) 489-7959 www.carlsonmccain.com InWood Lake Elmo, Minnesota \\northstar.local\linolakes\public\jobs\5161 - 5180\5172 - lake elmo property\cad\engineer\final grading\5172_gr.dwgSave Date:05/03/17 environmental engineering surveying · · · Print Name: Signature: Date:License #: Drawn: Designed: Date: I hereby certify that this plan, specification or 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 02/13/15 LC 02/13/15 Brian J. Krystofiak, P.E. 25063 BJK 13 Revisions: 1. 02/23/15 Update Bid Set Per City Comments 2. 03/23/15 Per Watershed Comments 3. 03/27/15 Per City Comments 4. 04/06/15 Per MPCA Comments 5. 04/10/15 Per City Comments 6. 04/16/15 Per City Comments 7. 05/13/15 Per City Comments 8. 2/26/16 Per City Comments Meeting: City council Meeting date: April 15, 2019 Consent agenda item: 4b Executive summary Title: Bid tabulation: award bid for addition of pickleball courts in Wolfe Park Recommended action: Motion to designate K.A. Witt Construction Inc. as the lowest responsible bidder and authorize execution of a contract in the amount of $209,906 for the pickleball courts in Wolfe Park. Policy consideration: Does the city council wish to proceed with this projects by authorizing staff to enter into a contract with K.A. Witt Construction Inc.? Summary: A total of seven bids were received for the Wolfe Park pickleball court project; summary is as follows: Contractor Bid amount K.A. Witt Construction Inc. $209,906.00 GL Contracting, Inc. $231,337.55 Peterson Companies $237,217.28 G Urban Companies $244,582.00 ODESA II $255,740.50 Meyer Contracting, Inc. $297,503.46 Barber Construction, Inc. $313,777.80 A review of the bids indicates K.A. Witt Construction Inc. submitted the lowest responsible bid for the addition of pickleball courts in Wolfe Park. References have been checked and K.A. Witt Construction Inc. has completed this type of project successfully in other cities. Financial or budget considerations: This project is included in the city’s Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) for 2019 for $175,000. The low bid was $209,906. Additional expenses for consultants and soil disposal put the project costs at $238,406. The increase in bids is due to two main factors: asphalt and steel costs. Similar to what the city has experienced with higher bids on street projects, the price of asphalt has risen dramatically due to all the construction projects in the area. Steel is needed for the fencing around the courts. Steel costs are also coming in higher for other cities. Staff recommends proceeding with this very project. We do not think rebidding this would result in lower prices. We have rearranged some CIP projects and have saved money on other projects so that we have money to cover the increased cost for this project in the Park Improvement Fund. Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to creating opportunities to build social capital through community engagement. Supporting documents: None Prepared by: Rick Beane, Parks Superintendent Reviewed by: Cynthia S. Walsh, Director of Operations and Recreation Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager