041100 PK AgP16,
- CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD
PARK COMMISSION MEETING COUNCIL CHAMBERS
TUESDAY, APRIL 11, 2000 7:30 P.M.
AGENDA
1. CONVENE PARK COMMISSION MEETING
A. Roll Call
Berndt
Puzak
Arnst
Lynch Bix
Themig
Young_
Dallman
B. Review Agenda
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A. Park Commission Meeting Minutes of March 28, 2000 (Att.- #2ADraft
Summary)
3. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR
4. REPORTS
A. Report on City Council Meeting of April 10, 2000
5. DISCUSSION OF PLANNING COMMISSION'S PUBLIC HEARING FOR SKATE
PARK (MAY 2, 2000)
• Determine Who Should Attend
• Determine if Any Special Park Commission Preparation is Necessary
• Any Questions to be Answered by Brad Nielsen
6. CONSENSUS FOR DATES AND FORMATS OF PARK TOURS
• Proposed Dates: May 9, May 23
• Format:
1. May 9 at 6:00; Freeman, Cathcart, Crescent Beach
2. May 23 at 6:00; Manor, Silverwood, Badger
3. Rain Date for Either Night; June 13
7. APPROVE LOCATION OF ARBOR DAY TREE TO BE PLANTED ON APRIL 29,
2000 AND DETERMINE TIME
• Recommended Site:. City Hall Grounds
I
PARK
COMMISSION AGENDA
TUESDAY, APRIL 11, 20011
PAGE
2 OF 2
8.
DISCUSSION IN REGARDS TO THE TRAIL CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT
PROGRAM (CIP) (Att. -#8)
9.
FINALIZE FORMAT FOR OPEN HOUSE FOR SMITHTOWN ROAD WEST
NEIGHBORS REGARDING TRAIL/SIDEWALK SCHEDULED FOR APRIL 29,
9:OOA.M. -10:30 A.M. AT CITY HALL
• Agree on Format, Handouts and Staff Availability
10.
DISCUSS SPORTS ORGANIZATION POLICIES RELATIVE TO USER FEES (Att.
#10)
• Confirm Date and Format for Follow -Up Meetings
• Review Draft Letter to Organizations Concerning Follow -Up Meetings and
Finalize (to be mailed under separate cover)
• ` Discuss Policy That Changes Fee From Voluntary to Required
11.
REVIEW 1999 "TO DO LIST GOALS" (Att. -#11)
• Make Additions for 2000
12.
NEW BUSINESS
13.
ADJOURNMENT Council Liaison:
April. Dallman
May: Berndt
j , ,
CITY OF SHOREWOOD
PARK COMMISSION
TUESDAY, MARCH 28, 2000
MINUTES
1. CONVENE PARK COMMISSION MEETING
Co -chair Arnst called the meeting to order at 7:50 p.m.
A. .Roll Call
D A F T
Present: Chair Artist, Co- Chair Themig; Commissioners Puzak, Dallman, Bix and Young;
Acting Administrator Brad Nielsen; Mayor Woody Love
Also Present: Don Sterna of WSB & Associates; Ellen Luken, Architect
Absent: Commissioner Berndt
Later Arrivals: Councilmember Chris Liz6e
B. Review Agenda
Themig moved, Puzak seconded to approve the Agenda. Motion passed 6/0.
•
2. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES
A. Joint Meeting With Sports Organization of January 31, 2000
Puzak moved and Dallman seconded to approve the Minutes as presented. Motion passed
5/0 ( Themig abstained).
B. Park Commission Meeting Minutes of March 14, 2000
Commissioner Bix asked for the following changes to comments she made at the March 14
meeting to more reflect the intent of her statements:
• Page 2, Item 4B, Paragraph 6: Change first sentence to: "Commissioner Kate Lynch Bix
asked what the minimum state aid requirements are for a sidewalk and for a trail ".
• Page 7, Paragraph 3: Change last sentence to: "The building is more than what we budgeted
for, so either we can't build it —or- if we really want it, we need to find the funds."
Bix moved and Young seconded to approve the Minutes as amended. Motion passed 510
( Themig abstained).
3. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR
There were none.
5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
7:30 P.M.
=I
PARK COMMISSION
MARCH 28, 2000 - PAGE 2
4. REPORTS
A. Report on City Council Meetings of March 13 and March 27 0
There was no report on the Council meeting of March 13. Commissioner Themig attended the
March 27 meeting, updating the Council on the progress of various park projects. He reported
that the Council stressed that they want the Park Commission to continue to move forward with
plans. The Council also wants the Commission to come to a consensus on the issue of fees for
sports associations and the overall funding for the building.
B. Report on Parks Foundation Joint Meeting March 16, 2000
Commissioner Daliman reported that the Foundation reviewed the plans and cost estimates for
the proposed Freeman Park structure. Their consensus was to get an alternate bid on the picnic
pavilion, but to preserve other features of the building as originally designed. The Parks
Foundation has committed to raise $10,000 per year to donate toward capital improvements and
park maintenance.
5. REVIEW CIP FINANCING OPTIONS AND PLANS FOR BUII.DING
A. Questions for Architect / WSB Engineer
Chair Arnst explained that a memo has been provided with cost projections for four different
scenarios of payment terms and design options for the building. The consulting engineer and
architect were present to answer further questions. Arnst said her hope is to come to a consensus
and prepare a recommendation to Council at this meeting.
Themig asked the engineer and architect for their impressions of the plans and cost estimates.
Ms. Luken explained some background on the design process and some of the differences in the
initial estimate and changes from that design. Much of the cost estimate increase is in materials
designed for vandalism protection and security. (Security fixtures are worth about $1,800 extra
per fixture.) She stated that the current estimate is somewhat conservative and hopes the price
will be better than the estimate. A breakdown of costs was provided as follows:
Picnic Pavilion $52,900
Concession Multipurpose Room $77,600
Toilet Rooms $240,822
Ms. Luken said she thinks we have the best solution for the application. She described some of
the various materials, which were selected for their durability and explained why she
recommends them. Even though the cost is greater initially, the long -term maintenance issue is
important.
Themig asked about the cost differences in wood exterior over cinder block vs. burnished or
rock -face block only. Ms. Luken said the block would be more expensive or equal. She
proposes changing the bathroom to regular block and use an epoxy -type of painted coating. She
offered some possibilities for cutting costs in floor surface, countertops, window design,
plumbing, method of heating, etc.
PARK COMMISSION
MARCH 28, 2000 - PAGE 3
When asked about the value of reducing the size of the building as a way to reduce costs, Ms.
I s Luken said the savings are minimal. Also, the size of the concession area is already smaller than
what she thinks it should be for the number of people it may need to hold.
Themig asked if there would be any problem with adding the picnic pavilion at a later time. Ms.
Luken said it is a possibility, with some foundation work being extended from the main building
as part of the initial package. The later cost to add the pavilion would end up being higher than
the $52,900 that would be saved initially.
Chair Arnst said she agrees that this design would be a quality, no- frills building. There was
discussion about alternate plans for the sink in the concession area. Ms. Luken recommended
getting a bid alternate for items they may want to drop from the project. She also suggested that
someone check with Minnegasco on the cost alternate to run gas to the structure as lower cost
heat source. There was some discussion about timing with the sewer /water project.
Themig asked if accommodations were made to include a telephone. Mr. Sterna said there is a
stub for a phone line and it is being looked into.
Mr. Sterna reported that he spoke with the park director for the City of Prior Lake to compare
costs with a recently constructed park building. Although some of the amenities are different, it
did verify that this type of structure is very expensive. The higher initial cost for industrial grade
materials is necessary considering long -term maintenance issues. It's a case of pay now or pay
. later. Ms. Luken stated that her estimator said that his estimates on similar structures for other
cities are consistent with this one. The durability and quality of this type of building is going to
cost more than a garage structure.
Acting Administrator Nielsen reported that the City Council has looked at the 4 scenarios for
financing and constructing this building. All 4 depend upon inter -fund borrowing. He also
commented that the funding source estimate of $15,000 per year from park dedication fees is
probably double the amount it actually will generate. There may also be variables in some of the
other revenue sources. Nielsen also pointed out that the General Fund Contribution of $10,000
per year may be affected by the City's budget constraints.
Themig asked what, philosophically, the City should provide in services and amenities. Mayor
Love said that the Council has discussed this. He commented about levy limits and legislation
that factor into this type of expenditure. The Council, while aware of future budget concerns, is
encouraging this project as long as it can show some solvency.
Themig said his dilemma is in supporting something that will put a burden on future Park
Commissions. Mayor Love agreed with the statement, however this kind of project can stimulate
the community to work toward projects like this in the future. He cited the example of creative
fundraising done by the City of Excelsior.
• Arnst asked for discussion on the 4 funding scenarios. Themig pointed out that the 10 -year
financing plan, including the canopy still shows a fund balance of some amount as early as 2001
PARK COMMISSION
MARCH 28, 2000 - PAGE 4
according to these projections. He added that this is the building the Park Commission has said
they want and we should go for that and commit.
i
Arnst said her feeling from the joint meeting with the Council and Parks Foundation was to do
the entire building, rather than doing it in phases. Themig asked if they discussed the fact that
there is already a picnic shelter at Freeman. Dallman said they consider it to be separated from
the people who. use the soccer /softball end of the park.
Puzak said he supports the building, the toilets, and the concession stand, which will partially
fund the building and will bring the support of the sports organizations. He feels the pavilion is
optional. He suggested building an overhang 8 feet out and then add 16 more feet if the funding
is available in the future. He cannot support $13,000 for a stainless steel sink because its worth
is the equivalent of a half of a skate park.
Puzak also asked why add heat capability for a warming house if funds will not be available for a
skating rink in the future. He cautioned against putting all the eggs in this basket. With a zero
balance remaining, there may not even be money to support a flooded free skate area.
Arnst asked if the idea of an 8 -foot canopy would work. Ms. Luken said at that point that they
would just as well go out the full 24 feet. The building can be designed to support a future
canopy with an extension of the foundation. She explained how a bid alternate works.
There was consensus to replace the $13,000 stainless sink with a simple wall -hung stainless sink
in the plan. It was also suggested to eliminate the granite countertops in the bathrooms and use
wall -hung sinks there as well. 0
Commissioner Young asked about the intentions for a skate park. Chair Arrest provided
background as to how the idea came about and Shorewood's role in the Youth Coalition. She
said there is very strong interest. Puzak added that there is a legitimate need, as demonstrated by
petitions and other past events.
Arrest said she was initially in favor of leaving the canopy off of the building, but after discussion
with others and the points made at this meeting, she is now more committed to the full structure.
She asked the Mayor if the Council is looking for a vote on one of the 4 scenarios. Mayor Love
said the Council is also seeking input on where some of the funds will come from.
Commissioner Bix pointed out that park dedication fees are not reliable, plus the Commission
would be relying on the Parks Foundation. On the other hand, the user fees and concessions are
viable things, but Bix said, she wants to feel better about them. She asked about the user fee and
its value over time, adding that without more information, it's hard to plan.
Themig said even if we come to consensus to build the full building with either the 7 or 10 year
payment plan, it's not a done deal because it has to go out for bid. It would be important right
now to at least move the concept of the building forward and continue on in discussion of how to
pay for it.
PARK COMMISSION
MARCH 28, 2000 - PAGE 5
Bix stated she agrees that the structure would be a nice addition to Freeman Park, but the
question of how to pay for it is still a concern.
•
Mayor Love said currently the project has the Council's support. The need to know what the
Y � Y P 1 PP Y
Commission thinks the building needs to include. Secondly, they will not vote for it unless they
know how it's going to be paid for. The Council is looking for reliable streams of revenue. The
concession stand needs to be an income source and not just an amenity that loses money.
The Council will depend upon the Park Commission to monitor revenues, such as the $10,000
that was committed by the Parks Foundation. He encouraged the Commission to first decide
what they want to build and then go to the Council who will support it if they can see how the
building will be paid for. Ultimately the Council will have to decide if it is a sound financial
project.
Themig pointed out that the building has been on a master plan for a long time. In looking at the
big concept, he believes they should move forward and then figure out funding details. There
was further discussion about how to proceed through a recommendation and funding decisions.
B. Recommendation to City Council
Puzak stated that there have been various suggestions for reducing costs and he is trusting that
staff and consultants will work out the "wants" and the "needs" in the building proposal. Given
that,
Puzak moved, Themig seconded that the Park Commission recommend that the full
building be constructed with financing over 10 years. Themig asked to add a friendly
amendment that when it comes to soliciting bids that they take the canopy as a separate
bid.
Puzak said he is leaving it to staff and the experts to take out as much as they can (such as the
$13,000 stainless steel kitchen sink / counter), while staying within health and building code
requirements. Ms. Luken said she could modify the language accordingly. Puzak asked that the
architect make changes as needed and as discussed.
The friendly amendment was accepted and the motion passed unanimously.
Engineer Don Sterna asked about the Vine Hill trail meeting with the neighbors. Puzak said the
plan is acceptable to everyone and thanked him for his work to incorporate specific requests and
preferences. There was some discussion about placement of a crosswalk on the north end of the
trail. Sterna will discuss details with City Engineer Brown.
There was a short break.
rl
PARK COMMISSION
MARCH 28, 2000 - PAGE 6
6. SPORTS ORGANIZATION FEES
A. Review Our Goals for the Fees
Chair Arnst reviewed the background and purpose of the Park Use Policy. A meeting with the
sports organizations on January 31, 2000 took place to let them know about funding issues with
parks. Arnst explained that costs and needs vary from one sport use to another. Themig
explained the Options for Recovering Costs for Providing Above Base Maintenance. Another
option is a "per- participant" fee structure.
Commissioner Bix asked how user fees have been collected in the past. It was explained that the
system was voluntary. She also asked about the percentage of participants who use the park
facilities that are not Shorewood residents. Given that 61% of users are from outside of the
Shorewood tax base, Bix stated that she thinks it is fair to have that group help contribute toward
the use of the facilities.
Commissioner Young asked how neighboring communities fund their park facilities. Puzak
stated that we are not funding parks, but the wear, tear and maintenance plus operating expenses.
Some other Cities' methods of collecting user fees were described. Themig stated he wants to
make sure that non - Shorewood residents are not singled out. Bix said she was suggesting that
the sports organizations perhaps should pay a fee that is not voluntary, but depending upon the
cost of use.
B. Develop a Formula for Cost Recovery
Amst said the sports organizations have indicated willingness to contribute to the cost of wear
and tear for their use. The two issues are; (1) come up with a formula that is fair, and (2) create a
policy if it's not paid. Puzak summarized the process that was used to calculate fees for base
maintenance and for providing extra maintenance for the various sports. He proposed that
everyone who registers for an organized sport be charged a $4 user fee (the cost of a pair of
socks) to join a league that plays in Shorewood parks. He estimated that the revenue stream from
that would be similar to the maintenance costs (at approximately 3,250 athletes).
Puzak moved that the Park Commission have a user fee assessed at $4 per athlete assessed
to the sports organizations per season. Dallman seconded.
Discussion: Puzak pointed out that the advantage is equality for everybody. The disadvantage is
that it may not be exactly true to the cost for each sport. Themig suggested considering a
different scale for resident vs. non - resident. He also thinks adults should be charged more than a
child should. Puzak said he is not comfortable with distinguishing one city from another.
Shorewood is part of a larger community. Themig agreed.
•
•
There was discussion about the cost of $4 relative to the total registration fees the associations
charge their players. Arnst supports the idea of one fee across the board for its simplicity. Bix
said she liked the $4 "socks fee" and Young agreed, but preferred a $5 socks fee. Themig
encouraged a higher fee for adult socks.
PARK COMMISSION
MARCH 28, 2000 - PAGE 7
There was discussion about how such revenue would be applied to park maintenance costs and
46 how it relates to the overall park budget. Mayor Love encouraged using a $5 figure, reminding
the Commission of the delay in implementation. Puzak agreed that, because assessing the fee
would occur at the time of registration, such revenue is a year away from being a reality. He is
not opposed to a $5 fee.
Puzak withdrew the motion (with Dallman's approval). Puzak moved that the Park
Commission recommend to Council that the City of Shorewood assess a $5 per athlete user
fee against the organizations enrolling athletes to play in the City of Shorewood parks.
Dallman seconded. Motion passed unanimously.
C. Next Steps for Implementation, i.e., meeting with organizations individually
A letter will be sent, as a follow up to the meeting of January 31, 2000, to each of the sports
organizations that the funding formula will stay as is for this year (as a voluntary donation), but
change to a mandatory fee for the next year. A meeting will take place with each individual
sports organization to discuss the policy in detail. Meetings will be set up in 30- minute
increments during an evening in May and will be in work session format. Arnst and Puzak will
compose a letter to the sports organizations. The Commission will discuss "enforcement" issues
at their April meeting.
Arnst brought up other funding ideas which had come up in discussion with sports organizations.
She would like to research concession options as a revenue generator and asked for help to
investigate. Staff will be asked to do some checking. Themig will also offer some information.
7. DISCUSSION OF PARK COMMISSION GOALS FOR 2000
Table until April.
8. REVIEW TO DO LIST
Table until April.
9. NEW BUSINESS
There was no new business.
10. ADJOURNMENT
Themig moved, Puzak seconded to adjourn. Motion passed unanimously.
The meeting adjourned at 10: 30 P.M.
Respectfully Submitted,
0
Connie Bastyr, Recording Secretary
r I
•
CITY OF
SHOREWOOD
5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD - SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331 -8927 - (952) 474 -32-36
FAX (952) 474 -0128 - www.ci.shorewood.mmus - cityha11@ci.shorewood.mn.us
•
TO: Mayor and City Council
Brad Nielsen, Acting City Administrator
FROM: Larry Brown, Director of Public Works
DATE: April 4, 2000
RE: A Motion to Adopt a Resolution Approving the Plans Specifications and Estimate
and Authorizing Advertisement of Bids for the Covington Road and Vine Hill Road
Trail Project.
On March 28 the Park Commission conducted a Public Information Meeting for trail segments
along Covington Road and Vine Hill Road. The meeting was well attended with positive feedback
received for the project.
Included in the City Council packet are copies of the plans for the trail project. In brief, the trail
section along Covington Road is 8.0 feet in width and will be a bituminous trail. This trail extends
from the existing walk west of Silverwood Park to Vine Hill Road. In general, there is a separation
of 4 to 5 feet between the edge of the road and the edge of the trail. The exception to this is in the
area immediately west of the Covington Road — Vine Hill Road intersection where the trail is up
against the edge of pavement. This is necessary due to topographical and right of way constraints.
Similarly, the trail along Vine Hill Road is to be constructed on the west side of Vine Hill and is 6.0
feet in width. The proposed trail extends from the existing trail, north of Near Mountain Boulevard
to approximately 230 feet north of the Vine Hill Road - Kingswood Terrace intersection. In
accordance with the neighborhood feedback received, a portion of the trail will be constructed as a
6.0 foot concrete section, versus bituminous.
Attached is the engineer's estimate of construction. Costs shown in the attachment are construction
costs only. The following is a summary of the project costs with the contingency and soft costs.
an
40 PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
• Mayor and City Council
Approval PS &E
Authorize Ad for Bid
April 6, 2000
Page 2 of 4
Trail Segment
Construction
Costs
Design, Administration, and
Inspection Costs
Total
Covington Road
$ 44,841.00
$ 13,452.30
$ 58,293.30
Vine Hill Road
$ 86,455.50
$ 25,936.65
$ 112,392.15
Total
$ 170,685.45
It would be unfair to talk about the costs of the project without looking at the Trial Funding Source.
Staff has revisited the Capital Improvement Program with the revised cost estimates to insure that
adequate funding is available. Attachments 1 and 2 are the Trail Project Schedule and the Trail
Funding Source Summary in draft form.
The Funding Source Summary indicates that the balance of the trail fund will be decreased to
approximately $18,388 at the end of the year 2000. While a revised CIP has not been reviewed by
the Park Commission, there has been considerable discussion regarding the expenditures for this
project. A revised CIP will be brought before the Park Commission for their review and comment
April 11, 2000.
Staff is recommending approval of the attached resolution which approves the plans, specifications
and estimate and authorizes advertisement of bids. If approved, bids will be opened on May 17,
2000 at 10:00 am.
•
Opinion of Probable Cost
WSB Project: Bituminous Trail Improvements For Vine Hill Road and Covington Road Design By: Avo
Project Location: City of Shorewood Checked By
WSB Project No: 1190.00 Date: April 05,2000
Schedule 1 - Vine Hill Road
40
•
Line
No.
Item
Number
Descti lion
Unit
Unit
Price
Project Total
Estimated
Q-tity
Estimated
Cost
2021.501
MOBILIZATION
LUMP SUM
3000.00
1
3000.
2101.502
CLEARING
TREE
250.00
6
1500.
2101.507
GRUBBING
TREE
250.00
6
1500.00
2104.501
REMOVE CURB AND GUTTER
LIN FT
4.50
78
351.
2104.501
REMOVE BITUMINOUS CURB
LIN FT
2.00
50
100.
2104.503
REMOVE BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT
SQ YD
3.00
126
378.
2104.513
SAW CUT PAVEMENT
LIN FT
2.50
300
750.
2104.523
SALVAGE SIGN
EACH
35.00
11
385.00
2105.501
COMMON EXCAVATION (P)
CU YD
7.00
545
3815.00
2105.521
GRANULAR BORROW (LV)
CU YD
10.00
120
1200.00
2211.503
AGGREGATE BASE CLASS 5 - 100% CRUSHED
TON
14.00
575
8050.00
2301.502
BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT
SQ YD
9.00
1510 -
13590.
2340.521
BITUMINOUS DRIVEWAY PAVEMENT
SQ YD
10.00
55
550.
2411.603
BOULDER RETAINING WALL
SQ FT
23.00
270
6210.00
2501.515
12" RC PIPE APRON
EACH
250.00
1
250.
2501.515
15" RC PIPE APRON
EACH
350.00
1
350.
2501.515
24" RC PIPE APRON W/ TRASH GUARD
EACH
650.00
1
650.
2501.515
30" RC PIPE APRON W/ TRASH GUARD
EACH
700.00
1
700.
2503.541
12" RC PIPE SEWER DESIGN 3006 CL V
LIN FT
20.00
24
480.
2503.541
15" RC PIPE SEWER DESIGN 3006 CL V
LIN FT
28.00
32
896.
2503:541
24" RC PIPE SEWER DESIGN 3006 CL V
LIN FT
32.00
12
384.
15" HDPE PIPE SEWER
LIN FT
20.00
180
3600.
15" HOPE APRON
EACH
150.00
1
150.
2506.501
CONST DRAINAGE STRUCTURE DESIGN G
EACH
350.00
1
350.
2506.501
CONST DRAINAGE STRUCTURE DESIGN SPEC 1
EACH
450.00
2
900.
2506.502
CONST DRAINAGE STRUCTURE DES 4020 -48
EACH
800.00
1
800.
2506.516
CASTING ASSEMBLY
EACH
375.00
4
1500.00
2521.501
4" CONCRETE WALK
SQ YD
25.00
340
8500.00
2521.501
6" CONCRETE WALK
SQ YD
28.00
90
2520.00
2531.501
CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER DESIGN B619
LIN FT
16.00
20
320.
2535.501
BITUMINOUS CURB
LIN FT
5.00
50
250.
2564.531
F &I SIGN PANELS TYPE C
SQ FT
35.00
40.5
1417.5
2564.604
ZEBRA CROSSWALK WHITE -EPDXY
SQ FT
7.00
342
2394.
2571.541
TRANSPLANT TREE
TREE
350.00
3
1050.
2571.544
TRANSPLANT SHRUB
SHRUB
25.00
4
100.00
2571.607
TREE PROTECTION FENCE
LIN FT
3.50
650
2275.
2571.607
TREE PRUNING
HOUR
75.00
3
275.
2575.501
SEEDING
ACRE
0.15
2000
300.00
2573.502
SILT FENCE
LIN FT
4.00
360
1440.
2575.505
SODDING TYPE LAWN
SQ YD 1
3.00
3900
11400.
2575.523
WOOD FIBER BLANKET TYPE REGULAR
SQ YD
2.50
750
1875.
Subtotal Schedule 1
S86,455.5
1190.00 Engineers Estimate.xis
I 1II
�J
Line
No.
Item
Number
2021.501
2101.501
Description
MOBILIZATION
CLEARING
Unit
LUMP SUM
ACRE
Unit
Price
3000.00
950.00
Project Total,
Estimated
Quantity
1
1
Estimated
Cost
3000.
950.
2101.506
GRUBBING
ACRE
950.00
1
950.00
2104.501
REMOVE CURB AND GUTTER
LIN FT
4.50
52
234.00
2104.513
SAW CUT PAVEMENT
LIN FT
2.50
40
100.
2104.523
SALVAGE SIGN
EACH
35.00
6
210.00
2105.501
COMMON EXCAVATION (P)
CU YD
7.00
580
4060.00
2105.521
GRANULAR BORROW (LV)
CU YD
10.00
300
3000.00
2211.503
AGGREGATE BASE CLASS 5 - 100% CRUSHED
TON
14.00
435
6090.
2301.502
BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT
SQ YD
9.00
1390
12510.00
2501.515
18" RC PIPE APRON W/ TRASH GUARD
EACH
500.00
1
500.00
2503.541
18" RC PIPE SEWER DESIGN 3006 CL V
LIN FT
30.00
8
240.00
2504.602
ADJUST VALVE BOX
EACH
200.00
1
200.00
2506.502
CONST DRAINAGE STRUCTURE DES 4020
EACH
500.00
1
5O0,00
2506.516
CASTING ASSEMBLY
EACH
400.00
1
400.00
2531.501
CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER DESIGN B619
LIN FT
16.00
52
932.
2535.501
BITUMINOUS CURB
LIN FT
5.00
660
3300.00
2571.607
TREE PROTECTION FENCE j
LIN FT
3.50
390
1365.00
2571.607
TREE PRUNING
HOUR
75.00
6
450.00
2575.501
SEEDING
ACRE
0.10
2000
200.00
2575.505
SODDING TYPE LAWN
SQ YD
3.00
1500
4500.00
2575.523
WOOD FIBER BLANKET TYPE REGULAR
SQ YD
2.50
500
1250.00
Subtotal Schedule 2
f
saasal.o
Total Schedule 1 & 2 11 1 a131,296.5
U
1190.00 Engineers Estimate.xls
Mayor and City Council
Approve PS &E
Authorize Ad for Bids
April 6, 2000
Page 3 of 4
.,•. �::::., :•.,•:.,,;x,::•.,•.,.:•.:......
. +r +.
r..,., .....x,,,.,,.., ..,, :;.+•,+: r: + +:.:........• :•..:••- :: -•:::: •:•: -;. :. :..,;..: :.. :... .: ..: :. ..
+: :•yn...:y >tkkYYiY, , kY•.y:`kt:, +`.kkk +Lk`v d
.. .. >:. .,: -. .. .. -y
:k }.tYv,.,
?kkwkkk
.. ; + +ky »„
"Y'Y<2�,,,
': j
:Yx. Y•3YxY t.yv
YY .`Y;��2,aYY,;,
,`.
.+„w:,i?.4vn.,4?•.u.:
Y ' + :tY•:r.,:,,.,.,:
. w3,.•' R> a:,...
u,22:.Y,,.,.,.x,:..,.,,xSJ„xx, ..,.,.�k.w.Y., t,: ..,,
:::..:.,r
•:::
+'• kk: kY:: kYt: Y:•.,,.,
.,.,,..,:k,..........YkY,.,.,, 2Y,.,..,., .,
Proj.
Description 2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
a
Covington Road Trail
$ 58,293
b
Vine Hill Road Trail
$ 112,392
c
Smithtown Road (W. of LRT Trail)
Total Expenditures
$ 170,685
$ -
•
•
Mayor and City Council
Approve PS &E
Authorize Ad for Bids
April 6, 2000
Page 4 of 4
• .,k`u`v`kvkki u , , k �.4' v '" :vkQa.
waw�•niA :
"``.ii `~
, :�;� "` : k}`. 2: }•: } }kk:x` } %:kikv'•:S
.''
>.`: ^;<'\ . : _
:ti. {:kkki•.
•. i`.k�ca}:a.:,v.,,y
':kk "• :•`. {ykw
2
w ,r }xya•.;,,aa„ \ „a:,,yw
w{1•:k::'{ # >...3: {:.'}.k}{, CY.}.ky`:
w,•:.:i W '{`,.hnRitii:w:•
• \w w "•'4rk. , >k 4: :h.. , .
'},: :Y� ? } }..t`kk::.7. >� ' �:, k.?. kk:. �:'{ w •`.::.. fik?.\ ::. N` k.: �U.} kY»}
, .k :
�} kk?..+ . :k¢:h; ?y ? }:o>?yy:�`•Y.xak•�23k
4 .M1 +t. ?^ }h ?'• }} }:: hY•}: `::}:• } } } } }xy;.yi}C::xnxy:3:
yv:' �?.} 2: ::::.,.. }Mr: { }} }.,........k.:.:
..R {.::..: }}} i}$:•:•?•^}:{.;; Y:: ii?' r,` ti? i{>
ii'}; ri? 52iww;`x,i } >k; >.::}:.
2000
2001 2002
2003
2004
Beginning Cash Balance
$ 159,975
$ 18,388
$ 49,239
$ 81,886
$ 116,375
Transfer Public Facilities
$ 15,000
$ 15,000
$ 15,000
$ 15,000
$ 15,000
Transfer Local Roads
$ 13,650
$ 14,650
$ 15,650
$ 16,650
$ 17,650
Capital Outlay Projects
$ (170,685)
$ -
$ -
$ -
$ -
Interest Income @ 5.0%
448.49
1,200.95
1,997.22
2,838.41
3,725.62
Ending Cash Balance
$ 18,388
$ 49,239
$ 81,886
$ 116,375
$ 152,750
F - I
L-1
•
CITY OF SHOREWOOD
RESOLUTION NO. 00-
A RESOLUTION APPROVING PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS AND
EST MATES AND AUTHORIZING ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS FOR THE
COVINGTON ROAD AND VINE HILL ROAD TRAIL PROJECT
CITY PROJECT 9904
WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution 99 -055 adopted by the City Council on
July 20 1999, Plans, Specifications and Estimates for the design phase of City Project
9904 were prepared.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Shorewood, Minnesota:
1. Plans, Specifications and Estimates were prepared by WSB & Associates,
Inc. for such improvement pursuant to Council Resolution 99 -05. Said plans,
specifications and estimates are hereby approved and shall be filed with the City
Clerk.
i 2. The City Clerk shall prepare and cause to be inserted in the official paper
and in Construction Bulletin an advertisement for bids, attached hereto as Exhibit
A, upon the making of such improvement under such approved plans and
specifications. The advertisement shall be published for 2 weeks, shall specify the
work to be done, shall state that bids will be opened and considered by the Council
at 10:00 a.m. on May 17, 2000 in the City Hall Council Chambers, and that no bids
will be considered unless sealed and filed with the Clerk and accompanied by a
cash deposit, cashier's check, bid bond, or certified check payable to the Clerk for
5 percent of the amount of each bid.
ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD
this 10th day of April, 2000.
WOODY LOVE, MAYOR
n
U
ATTEST
BRADLEY J NIELSEN, ACTING CITY ADMINISTRATOR
ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS
1 BITUMINOUS TRAIL IMPROVEMENTS
AND APPURTENANT WORK
FOR THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that sealed bids will be received by the City of Shorewood at the office of
the City Clerk until 10:00 a.m., May 17, 2000, at the City Offices located at 5755 Country Club Road,
Shorewood, Minnesota, 55331 -0927, and will be publicly opened and read at said time and place by
representatives of the City of Shorewood. Said proposals for the furnishing of all labor and materials
for the construction, complete in- place, Of the following approximate quantities:
2,900
SY
Bituminous Pavement
1,010
TN
Aggregate Base Class 5
76
FT
RC Pipe Sewer
180
FT
15" HDPE Pipe Sewer
5
EA
Drainage Structures
270
SF
Boulder Retaining Wall
340
SY
4" Concrete Walk
90
SY
6" Concrete Walk
5,300
SY
Sodding Type Lawn
The bids must be submitted on the Proposal Forms provided in accordance with the Contract
Documents, Plans, and Project Manual as prepared by WSB & Associates, Inc., 350 Westwood Lake
Office, 8441 Wayzata Boulevard, Minneapolis, MN 55426, which are on file with the City Clerk of
Shorewood and may be seen at the office of the Consulting Engineers or at the office of the City Clerk.
• Copies of Proposal Forms and the Plans and Project Manual for use by contractors submitting a bid may
be obtained from the Consulting Engineers, WSB & Associates, Inc., 350 Westwood Lake Office, 8441
Wayzata Boulevard, Minneapolis, MN 55426, upon deposit of Twenty -Five Dollars ($25.00) (non -
refundable) per set.
No bids will be considered unless sealed and filed with the City Clerk of Shorewood and accompanied
by a cash deposit, cashier's check, or certified check, or bid bond made payable to the City of
Shorewood for five percent (5 %) of the amount bid, to be forfeited as liquidated damages in the event
that the bid be accepted and the bidder fail to enter promptly into a written contract and furnish the
required bond.
No bids may be withdrawn for a period of sixty (60) days from the date of opening of bids. The City of
Shorewood reserves the right to reject any or all bids.
DATED: April 10, 2000 BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL
s/s
City Clerk
Shorewood, MN
PUBLISHED IN THE: Sun Sailor. April 19, 2000
Construction Bulletin: April 14, 21, 2000
•
BITUMINOUS TRAIL IMPROVEMENTS
CITY OF SHOREWOOD, MN
WSB PROJECT NO. 1190.00
Exhibit A
City of Shorewood
Athletic Association Park Use Policy (1/2S/99 Draft)
Background Shorewood City park land has been acquired and park facilities
and improvements have been provided over the years by various
sources. The City itself, Athletic Associations to varying degrees,
civic organizations and many volunteers have helped make our
parks what they are today. Once installed, the facilities and
improvements become part of the park and assets of the City.
The athletic associations have provided quality organized sports
activities for the youth and adults of our community.
Purpose Recognizing the increased need for quality athletic facilities, the
Shorewood Park Commission has developed a policy to work more
effectively with athletic associations.
The purpose of this policy is to:
• Establish a basic park facility level.
• Discuss facility improvement funding options.
• Establish a process for requesting facility improvements.
• Establish ongoing funding sources to maintain parks and
• facility improvements.
Basic Park Through general funds, the City will provide the following basic
Facilities park facilities in all parks:
*Park Property
•Feld /Play Space
•Play Equipment
•Rest Room Facilities (including portable units)
•Parking
•Trash Receptacles and Removal
The specialized athletic associations are responsible for
preparation of the fields (i.e. striping, placing and removing nets).
Facility Athletic facilities or special use facilities are considered above and
Improvements beyond basic park facilities. As the need for quality athletic facilities
is increasing, funding for facility improvements is decreasing in
Shorewood. Therefore, it is in the best interests of both the athletic
associations and the City to work cooperatively in addressing
facility improvements.
When an association determines a need for a facility
improvement, the association must present the request to the City
#io
for consideration. Approval and implementation of the request is
greatly enhanced as the proportion of funding provided by non -
City sources increases. A meritorious proposal with full outside
funding is likely to be implemented quickly, while the same
project requesting full or partial City funding must be considered
as part of the City's five -year Capital Improvement Program (CIP).
This consideration will involve evaluation of need verses other
projects waiting funding. If the improvement promotes safety,
the City may actively pursue the improvement.
In order to effectively evaluate projects requesting City funding,
the proposal should be submitted to the Park Commission during
the summer for consideration in the budgeting process.
All proposals* should include the following:
• A thorough description of the improvement.
• Maps or drawings.
• The demonstrated need.
• Estimated Costs.
• Possible'funding.
• How the improvement will be completed (volunteers,
contracted work, etc.)
*City staff can assist in providing information (such as maps,
drawings, etc.) for the proposal
If an improvement is approved and completed, the improvement
becomes the property of the City of Shorewood. If major repair
or replacement is needed, the association may provide funding or
work with the City in identifying the need and scheduling in the
five -year CIP.
cxc,usrlve use or Kecognizing the community benefits of park land, Shorewood Parks
Improved are available on a "First Come, First Served" basis to the
Park Facilities community. However, athletic associations my request exclusive
use of improved park facilities. Requests for use are to be
submitted in January for consideration by the Park Commission.
Requests for use should include:
• Organization
• Requested facilities
• General days and times the facility(s) will be used
•
data/parks /Athletic Assoc. Policies
Reservation In exchange for exclusive use, athletic associations will contribute
Fee funding to operate these facilities by paying a reservation fee.
. This fee will be dedicated to the park operation fund.
The fee is determined by:
•
•
data/parks /Affiletie Assoc. Policies
Cost for Providin
Above Base Maintenance
Activi
Football
Facilities Used
Hockey
Bad er
Cost
Badger 9
--.$1
Cathcart
Represents 1/2 of 21% of total costs for providing ice at
Badger and Cathcart.
21% is determined from 11
hours /week of reserved ice time
from total available of
51.5 hours /week warming house
services. Furthermore,
dividing this figure represents 1/2 costs directed toward
Tonka United Soccer
the recreational skating area and 1/2 costs toward hockey
area.
Little League
Freeman Soccer Fields
Freeman Fields 1 -3
4 775
Manor Field
$8,223
Minnetonka Adult Softball
F e Fields 4 -6
12 648
Options for Recovering Costs for Provi,
Option 1
Above ove Base Maintenance
Even Fee
Option 2 Full Fee Option 3
Football
Percentage of Cost
Hocke
3 500
1 555 (50070)
Tonk United Soccer
3 500
1 835 775.50
Litt__le Lea
$3,50
4 775 917.50
Minnetonka Adult Softball
3 5006'
8 223 $2,387.50
$8
Total
_$3
648 $ 4 , 115.5o
17 500
29 036 6 324.00
14,520.00
Items to consider:
• Billing should occur at time facility is reserved.
• In the event winter conditions do not permit full use of reserved ice, hockey would uld be refunded for amount not used.
a ) �
1999 "TO DO" LIST (GOALS)
0
• Multi - purpose building construction
Explore partnership with Senior Center /youth for operating concession stands
=> Consider nighttime lighting policy*
=> Consider liquor policies*
• First successful trail segment completed
• Approve and implement sports organizations policies
=� Create a written legal document that transfers ownership of improvements to the City
• *s1 1€::: "E:'A is ::` -::* iE!t1 tii:E if: >:3YE g:: ::: i'ltf AU
• goo "
': vi: i::•i� v: ii:v': •: i:•� iii•
• Explore Trail Collaboration with Greenwood and Excelsior
• *These issues, among others yet to be identified, need to be considered as a pro- active
measure. They may arise as a result of the completion of a multi - purpose, multi - season
facility that will invite more diverse use than the picnic shelter alone.
4/9/99
data/parks /Commission/Parks To Do 99
•
III
0 9 0
Park Commission Meeting Follow -up
Checklist
Park Commission Meeting of OV14 6
1999 "To Do"
List
Action taken
Dyne
Issues
Date
Park booklet - Mark Themig volunteered to work on this.
First draft will be prepared by 10 -1 -99
6/22/99
Consider a sign at Manor Park stating that this is where the first City Hall
Pat Artist will check with Mary Bensman
6/22/99
was located.
on her interest in following up on project.
Sept. mtg.
Pat talked with Mary & she is
interested in working on project (10-
12 -99)
First successful trail segment completed
1999 To Do List
Multi - purpose building construction
LB will work on different plans and bring
1999 To Do List
• Explore partnership with Senior Center /youth for operating
back to Park Commission (5- 25 -99). LB
concession stands
will sch. on planning comm. mtg. for a
conditional use permit and public hearing
• Consider night time lighting policy*
(6 -22 -99 mtg). City Council mtg.
• Consider liquor policies*
8/23/99. Council passed proposal for
professional services from WSB (10-12-
*These issues, among others yet to be identified, need to be considered as
99). Jim Hurm & Mark Themig working
a pro - active measure. They may arise as a result of the completion of a
on a grant. 3.28.00 mtg. review CIP
multi - purpose, multi-season facility that will invite more diverse use than
the picnic shelter alone.
Cathcart Park — Sign saying "No Parking on Grass"
LB will look into
Galpin Lake Rd Trail
Staff will check on issues: county /street
Sept/Oct
road; Chanhassen -loop from Murray to
Bracketts; Excelsior grant application not
successful - LB check into, heard
Excelsior may be doing something on
south side of 7 (10- 12 -99).
Freeman Park — Map for trail
5 -25 -99 Park Tour - Winter Project (10-
12 -99)
Page 2
Park Commission Meeting of 11/49/99
199 "Ta Do"
List
Action taken
MIg.
Done
Issues
Date
Wayside Rest Area — Check on the walkway /trail from stop light to across
6 -8 -99 Park Tour — LB will look into the
the ditch
possibility
Silverwood Park — Fill in the holes around the blocks by the swing set area
6 -8 -99 Park Tour
Prepare project schedule and look at Smithtown segment and
LB will prepare a project schedule. LB is
CovingtonNine Hill trails (6 -8 -99 meeting)
ordering feasibility studies and ask to
authorize a survey at the July 26 City
Council meeting. Neighborhood mgt.
3/28/00 to review maps and answer
questions (3/14/00)
Smithtown West LRT — Look at keeping the trail on the south side of
LB will take another look at keeping trail
Smithtown west of the school and have a crossing at the school. Also, look
on south side. He will also look into
into extending the trail to the LRT for cost and obstacles, etc. (6 -8 -99 mtg)
extending the trail. Working on right of
way issues. Set date to meet with
residents regarding right -of -way
issues.(3 /14/00)
Yellowstone
Pending
2000
Manor Park and Badger Park — Aerator for pond. 6 -22 -99 mtg. Pat Arnst
6 -8 -99 Park Tour - Mark gave LB info
will do further research regarding clean up of ponds.
regarding aerators. This is a winter
project (10- 12 -99).
Wayside Rest Area — Seal the well
6 -8 -99 Park Tour - LB check into putting
well back into operation (10- 12 -99).
Mill St.
Check on issues - County Rd, connection
Sept/Oct
with LRT- LB checking with County,
heard they may be upgrading Mill St.
(10- 12 -99).
Wayside Rest Area — Look at property as a possible skate park
6 -8 -99 Park Tour Working on grant and
fundraising options. DanP. Brad, Scott
Z. mtg. W/Mayor (3/13/00)
Wayside Rest Area - Improve the barrier along Highway 7 /parking area
6 -8 -99 Park Tour - Referred to LB
Smithtown /E of LRT
Not this year (1999)