Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout9E Park Master Plan Report Phone 952.447.9800 / Fax 952.447.4245 / www.cityofpriorlake.com 4646 Dakota Street SE Prior Lake, MN 55372 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT MEETING DATE: MAY 21, 2018 AGENDA #: 9E PREPARED BY: FRANK BOYLES, CITY MANAGER PRESENTED BY: FRANK BOYLES, CITY MANAGER AGENDA ITEM: CONSIDER APPROVAL OF A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING WSB TO PROVIDE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES TO COMPLETE THE PARK SYSTEM MASTER PLAN AND DIRECTING THE CITY STAFF TO RETURN TO THE CITY COUNCIL WITH A FINALIZED PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTRACT THEREFORE DISCUSSION: Introduction The purpose of this agenda item is to request that the city council approve a resolution authorizing WSB to complete a park master plan document as provided in their May 4, 2018 proposal, allocate park dedication funding for the work and direct the staff to finalize a standard professional services agreement therefore. History For decades the City of Prior Lake has placed a high priority developing parks, trails and sidewalks for the enjoyment of citizens and residents. As a result, 50 neighborhood parks, five community parks and in excess of 100 miles of trails and sidewalks have been developed. Prior Lake is generally recognized to have one of the best park systems in the Twin City area. Anyone who has attended a baseball, softball, soccer, football, or rugby tournament hosted in our community will attest to that. Our present park, trail and sidewalk system was developed in accordance with a park master plan completed over a decade ago as a requirement of the City’s 2030 Comprehensive Plan which mandated by Minnesota Statute. We are once again approaching a deadline for completion of a comprehensive plan. This plan will be the 2040 Comprehensive Plan. The city council has already reviewed some of draft “Chapters” of the 2040 Comprehensive Plan including: Land Use, Water, Sewer and Storm Water. Transportation is in the process of completion. The chapter of the comprehensive plan which has not been started is the Parks and Trails. A Park and Trail Master Plan is therefore required. Current Circumstances Just as with each of the other Comprehensive Plan Chapters the city staff is unable to complete the prerequisite work. Like most cities the staff does not have the time required to complete the study (1000+/- hours). Nor do we possess the various types of expertise required to accomplish the work as we do not have architects, ecologists and other specialists required to accomplish the work necessary to complete such a project. Every bit as important, this city staff has never prepared a parks master plan. In addition to affecting the quality of the deliverables, the timeline for a staff-initiated project would prevent the collection of user input during the summer peak period. After studying RFP’s completed by other cities and factoring council input from work sessions on the topic, Assistant City Manager, Lori Olson prepared a draft RFP which was reviewed by the staff and city attorney. Once the RFP was finalized, it was sent to four consultant planning firms. Two firms, SRF and WSB submitted proposals. Copies of the RFP Document and proposals submitted are available for city council review in my office. SRF PROPOSAL The SRF Proposal provides for 535 hours of consultant time for completion of the project over the period April 2018 to January 2019. The employees they propose for the project have experience in parks master planning. Three SRF employees would be primarily responsible for the work including a firm principal, specialist in park master planning and a trail planner. The SRF Study is contemplated to be divided into three sections including: affirm the issues (solicit stakeholder input); create the vision (synthesize stakeholder comments and feedback) and approve the plan (including draft and final document). Ten tasks are identified within these sections including: Reviewing the documents, evaluating community demographic trends, updating park inventory, level of service evaluation, park and recreation goals and strategies, identification of facility improvements, identification of trail gaps, implementation, final document and stakeholder engagement. As measured by the number of work hours devoted, the SRF Proposal places greatest emphasis as follows: 102 hours to park and recreation facility improvement initiatives, 95 hours toward preparation of the final document and 93 hours toward stakeholder engagement. The principal and senior associate will devote a total of 166 hours to this project, leaving 369 hours for the other professionals. Deliverables include: attending kickoff meeting, existing conditions text narrative, on-line site tour of facilities relevant to plan, demographic chart, tables and maps of current and forecasted demographic conditions and potential implications, updated matrix identifying existing amenities and facilities, existing condition air photography of individual park properties, goals and strategies guiding development of master plan recommendations, text narrative map depicting existing and proposed trail plan, Narrative text tables that summarize time frames, costs and revenue sources, 20 year capital improvement plan, one color printed and bound copy of draft and final master plan documents. The total proposed cost of this proposal is $55,960. WSB PROPOSAL The WSB Proposal provides for 1145 hours of consultant time for completion of the project from June 2018 to April 2019. This is a collaborative effort between WSB and Hagen Christiansen and McILwain Associates. The management team includes five persons including a senior associate, landscape architect, a long tenured park and recreation director, a capital improvement plan expert, and a building architect. The project plan includes three task areas including planning, community engagement and master plan preparation. More specifically the detailed project steps are: start up, data collection, community engagement and planning assessments, draft plan and final plan. As measured by the number of hours devoted to tasks the top three priorities are 150 hours to draft plan document, 122 hours for planning analysis and assessment and 83 hours for implementation strategies and recommendations. The two principals devoted to this project are anticipated to spend 745 hours collectively on this project with the remaining 400 hours provided by specialists in various areas. Deliverables include: project schedule, community engagement plan, notes/minutes of all meetings, monthly progress reports, draft findings of data collection and park and trail evaluations, findings from engagement, presentations, draft plans and graphics, draft system plan, final system plan including recommendations for prioritizing new parks, trails open space and recreation facilities, recommended action steps prioritizing park and trail infrastructure repair and replacement schedule considering potential changes in existing infrastructure (phasing plan), 20 year capital investment plan for park and trail improvements identifying potential grant and funding opportunities, identification of priority projects for the upcoming budget, The total proposed cost is $129,000. ISSUES: An RFP review team was established to review and rate the proposals. The team included the City Manager, Assistant City Manager, Public Works Director/City Engineer, Parks Foreman, Recreation Manager and a member of the Citizen Engagement Committee (CEC). From previous city council discussion, the RFP review team was aware that the city council values two aspects of this proposed work most highly: 1. Citizen Engagement- The council wants to assure that as many stakeholders as possible will be reached by the consultant, so we can understand present and future usage of the park system. Not surprisingly this task is very time consumptive if one is to do justice to the objective. 2. Review of existing Parks to recommend future use- The city council has previously discussed the fact that our neighborhood parks are “cookie cutter”. As one of the more important deliverables of this study, recommendations will be made about the future of each park and whether any sort of repurpose or modifications are in order to best serve the community in the future. At the May CEC meeting, the entire committee reviewed the WSB proposal and provided feedback. The CEC discussed the ways that stakeholders will be reached and suggested that open houses are not well attended and should not be relied upon. They concurred with the use of pop up meetings (going to where people rather than the opposite). They also thought that Ladies Night Out and Park Parties would be good additional venues to reach stakeholders. The WSB proposal suggested that a Steering Committee be included. The CEC concurred. They do suggest that a CEC member be a liaison and that the steering committee be formulated by an application and interview process. The CEC felt strongly that Steering Committee members must be broad thinkers rather than individuals who may tend to focus on details. After considering all factors, the RFP Review Team recommends the WSB proposal for the following reasons: 1. With respect to the two council priorities identified above (citizen engagement and review existing parks to recommend future use) the proposal of WSB is considerably more aggressive than the SRF proposal. 2. WSB is devoting a significantly greater number of hours and a larger array of talent for the completion of this project. The staff believes that the WSB estimates are more realistic for the work to be done given the status of our current master plan. 3. For WSB, the two key consultants leading the project represent 65% of the total study hours whereas the two SFR study leaders represent only 31% of the proposed study hours. Our preference is to have the most talented and experienced personnel most involved in the effort. 4. The WSB community engagement process is the most robust and seeks to include the input of as many Prior Lake Stakeholders as possible by using a wide variety of traditional and non-traditional approaches. 5. While both consultants propose to use online polling, the WSB engagement project explicitly seeks to reach those groups that are historically not heard from on this subject. 6. The community engagement process is earlier in the WSB study process than in the SRF study underscoring its use to help direct the findings rather than endorse the findings. 7. Prior Lake has not had a park master plan for a decade the previous plan did not discuss critical park issues which now must be addressed to provide for a complete plan. With the more robust plan documents, our expectation is the plan will be more long lived so that in ten years (with the 2050 Comprehensive Plan) we will be fine tuning this plan rather than a complete re-write as we are now. In essence, we are starting all over instead of refining what we already have. The staff does concur with the CEC that refinements can be made to the proposed study process and timeline. Working with a CEC liaison, the staff proposes to work with WSB to make modifications to the proposal. For example, $5,500 is devoted to city meetings but not to the steering committee. We would recommend that the two be consolidated. The staff believes it would be useful to review all proposed study hours to see if the number of hours and therefore the cost can be reduced without sacrificing any quality aspect of the master plan. FINANCIAL IMPACT: This is a cost not to exceed proposal. Therefore, if there are overestimates of time the funds will not be spent. The staff will be monitoring the progress of this study for this and other management reasons. The cost of the Master Plan Study is proposed to be paid from the Park Dedication Account. These are funds collected from commercial and residential developers to provide land and capital for city parks. The master plan is the primary tool to direct these funds for park related capital improvements. The park dedication fund balance is $1.507 million as of 3/31/2018. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Motion and second to adopt a resolution designating WSB as the consulting engineer to complete the city’s park master plan and directing that the city staff meet with the consultant to refine the process and cost and return to the city council for final contract approval. 2. Take no action and direct the staff to prepare additional information as may be desired. RECOMMENDED MOTION: Alternative #1 4646 Dakota Street SE Prior Lake, MN 55372 RESOLUTION 18-___ A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING WSB AND ASSOCIATES TO PREPARE A PARKS MASTER PLAN IN ACCORDANCE WITH THEIR MAY 4, 2018 PROPOSAL AND DIRECTING STAFF TO WORK TO REFINE THE PROJECT COSTS AND TO RETURN TO THE CITY COUNCIL WITH A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT FOR FINAL APPROVAL Motion By: Second By: WHEREAS, By Minnesota Statute the City of Prior Lake must periodically submit a comprehensive plan to the Metropolitan Council for approval, and; WHEREAS, One element of the comprehensive plan is the master park plan, and; WHEREAS, The city staff has neither the knowledge nor the time to complete such a plan, and; WHEREAS, An RFP was prepared and distributed to four consulting engineers for this work, and; WHEREAS, WSB and SRF submitted a proposal and the staff recommends WSB as set forth in the staff report dated May 21, 2018. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF PRIOR LAKE, MINNESOTA as follows: 1. The recitals set forth above are incorporated herein. 2. WSB is designated to complete the park master planning work. 3. The staff is directed to meet with WSB to refine the process and cost and to return with a professional services contract for final city council approval. Passed and adopted by the Prior Lake City Council this 21st day of May 2018. VOTE Briggs McGuire Thompson Braid Burkart Aye ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ Nay ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ Abstain ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ Absent ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ______________________________ Frank Boyles, City Manager