012009 PK MIN SP
CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5735 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD
PARK COMMISSION SPECIAL SESSION SOUTHSHORE CENTER
TUESDAY, JANUARY 20, 2009 7:00 P.M.
MINUTES
1.CONVENE PARK COMMISSION SPECIAL SESSION MEETING
Chair Norman convened the Special Session at 7:00 p.m.
A.Roll Call
Present: Chair Norman; Commissioners Davis, Young, Hensley, Trent, Quinlan,
DeMers; Park Coordinator Anderson; and late arrival City Council liaison
Woodruff
B.Review Agenda
Davis moved, Quinlan seconded, approving the Agenda as submitted. Motion
passed 6/0.
2.REVIEW REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS FOR PARK CONSULTANT
SERVICES
A. Identify Projects for Consultant Services
Chair Norman polled the Commission and determined that, based on the majority, the top
three Consultant firms were found to be Damon Farber, SRF, and TKDA.
Acknowledging that some of the work contained within the scope of services could now
be handled by the staff park person, Norman suggested they begin to give thought to
revising the package of deliverables for the firms.
Davis stated that she found it surprising, and a bit offensive, that several of the firms
charged a fee for the reproduction and printing costs for the project. She suggested that,
whomever they choose, they back this charge out.
DeMers stated that he based his preference for Damon Farber on the overlap of park
experience between parks and open spaces, as well as, price.
7:25 p.m. Council member Woodruff arrived.
Hensley and Quinlan agreed that each of the top three provided a pretty specific list of
tasks and some deliverables, though they would want to define those even further.
Trent felt some missed the mark entirely, though he would have liked more specific
deliverables from Damon Farber.
Woodruff reminded the Commission to consider what tangible results they will get out of
this process, noting that if the Commission felt they didn’t get exactly what they were
PARK COMMISSION AGENDA
TUESDAY, JANUARY 20, 2009
PAGE 2 OF 4
looking for from this broad paint brush approach they could redirect and ask for more
specifics.
Hensley stated that the proposals each were good and now it was the job of the
Commission to determine what product/options they wished to focus in on and for what
cost.
Chair Norman stated that while he liked the experience, methodology, and step by step
processes each proposed, he would need more specific deliverables from them. He
believed the Commission could lay out some pointed projects to provide them with in
order to get deliverable specifics in return.
Woodruff interjected that if the Commission felt a new list of requirements or deliverables
was needed, perhaps, a new RFP might be triggered. He believed it better to ask for a new
refined RFP than to take one that is a bit fuzzy.
Trent stated that, he believed, TKDA articulated their deliverables better than the others at
each phase of the process. It was apparent they had taken the time to visit the parks, meet
with staff to determine some of the issues and challenges facing parks, and take pictures.
Quinlan asked whether the Commission felt that justified the additional $10,000.
Trent stated that he did not take into account the fee page as he evaluated the proposals;
rather he picked the one he felt best addressed the Commission’s concerns and then
opened the fee page.
Anderson pointed out that if the Commission chose to narrow the field it would be within
their authority to tell the consultants that the scope of services has changed somewhat
since the original RFP conception, as they have brought on an internal staff person for
parks who can address some of the items contained within the RFP.
Davis asked what pieces staff could cover.
Anderson stated that staff could inventory the parks (evaluating age/condition of
amenities), do demographic research, survey stakeholders, hold open houses or focus
groups, and work thru a review or, at minimum, update the Master Plan with the
Commission to prioritize the parks that need work.
Davis didn’t believe a whole reworking of the Master Plan was in order.
Woodruff commented that the Commission could ask the consultants to rebid on a refined
scope of services, since they would be too high now, given some items could be handled in
house, and ask them to stay under a certain dollar amount. Woodruff encouraged the
Commission to ask the consultants questions before deciding which way to go.
For the price difference, DeMers was more comfortable with the proposal from Damon
Farber than paying $10,000 more for the one by TKDA.
PARK COMMISSION AGENDA
TUESDAY, JANUARY 20, 2009
PAGE 3 OF 4
Woodruff suggested the Commission create a short list of favorites and invite them in for
interviews.
Davis stated that, knowing the Commission will update the Master Plan on its own, the
Commission could revise the scope of services during the interview process.
Hensley moved, Quinlan seconded, to invite representatives of TKDA, SRF, and
Damon Farber to join the Park Commission for brief 30 minute question and
th
answer interviews to be held on Wednesday, February 4, starting at 3:00 p.m. in
the Senior Center. Motion passed 6/0.
Trent volunteered to create a scorecard grid in which to evaluate the consultants.
Chair Norman volunteered to assemble a list of questions to be given to the consultants
ahead of time in order to give them time to prepare. He encouraged Commissioners to
send him their question ideas as soon as possible, by the end of next week.
Woodruff suggested they pose questions such as: What will specifically be delivered?
Drawings/plans/style book or visual catalog. What are the things you are going to give us
upon which we can take action immediately? At minimum, he suggested the consultants
bring the project manager to the interview but he discouraged the Commission from
getting into any price discussions.
Anderson summarized the Commissions intent to invite each consultant back for a 30
minute question and answer session advising them that, based on the fact that a few things
have changed since the RFP process was begun and that the City has added staff for some
of the work, the Commission may wish to revise the scope of services somewhat. In
addition, the Commission wishes to learn a few more specific things with regard to
deliverables and will provide each firm with a list of questions prior to the interview, as
well as, some concrete items the Commission itself wants to see.
Some of the concrete things the Commission identified they were looking for included:
-Playground equipment recommendations/trends
-Senior or adult equipment amenities to promote healthy lifestyles
-Discuss recreation features – water feature
-Covered Shelters & Warming House ideas
-20 year plan to connect parks
-Cathcart – complete facelift – parking, shelter, hockey, tennis court,
playground equipment, and other amenities
-Freeman – any new additions – open space or free skate area
-Badger – new warming house
-Manor – new warming house, rink, lights
-Skatepark – covered picnic shelter area
-Silverwood – shelter
-Wetland area at Freeman – long term plan for rehab
-Additional new amenities – platform tennis/youth ultimate etc.
PARK COMMISSION AGENDA
TUESDAY, JANUARY 20, 2009
PAGE 4 OF 4
3.ADJOURN
Davis moved, Hensley seconded, adjourning the Park Commission Special Session at
8:30 p.m. Motion passed 6/0.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,
Kristi B. Anderson
Recorder