HomeMy WebLinkAbout5.C.1. Park CIP Update
5. C. \. .
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
MEMORANDUM
To: Mayor and City Council
Mark McNeill, City Administrator
From: Mark Themig, Facilities and Recreation Director
Meeting Date: City Council Workshop, August 28,2003
Subject: Revised Parks and Recreation 2004-2009 CIP
INTRODUCTION
The following are proposed changes to the 2004-2009 Capital Improvement Program
based on Council comments from the June 30 workshop, and additional follow-up
research by staff.
DISCUSSION
Possible Bonding for Park Projects
At the workshop, there was a discussion regarding the feasibility of bonding for some
park projects. After further research, it appears that is it possible to attach park projects
to other public improvement projects, so long as the assessment is at least 25% of the
overall project cost. Two 2004 improvement projects that would meet this criteria are
Valley View Road and 1 th Avenue.
Staff discussed which park projects could be added to other improvement projects. In
general, there was consensus that the park projects should be redevelopment projects
instead of new parks. Assuming this reasoning is acceptable to Council, Tahpah Park
Parking Lot/Playground Reconstruction and Huber Park Development are both projects
that could be considered redevelopment projects.
Huber Park Development (2004-2005)
Comments:
. Reconsider staging projects and coordination with sewer work. (Council)
. Review scope of riverbank stabilization. (Council)
. Proceed with scope of project to create a focal park for the community. (Council)
. Investigate alternative funding sources. (Council)
Follow-up and Proposed Changes: As you know, the fill process that is underway is
based on a concept plan, not actual construction plans. In order to ensure fill
accuracy, coordinate staging of the development, analyze options to stabilize the
riverbank, and clarify the extent of the proposed development, staff is proposing to
modify the CIP to proceed with detailed design and construction plans for the park
this fall ($40,000). The feasibility of staging construction beyond two years isn't fully
known until more complete detailed design is available.
This will provide an opportunity for Council to make decisions related to the extent of
riverbank stabilization and scope of the development, such as what type of
performance area is desired. The detailed design and construction plans are also
needed as the fill process nears completion to ensure correct elevations, and to
address concerns from neighbors related to the parking lot detail and extent of the
overall development. Given the unique characteristics of the park and the proposed
amenities, I would recommend that we outsource the detailed design and
construction plans.
Retaining the DNR trail along the river may qualify for funds to assist with riverbank
stabilization. Staff will continue discussion with the DNR and other agencies for
potential funding.
Tahpah Park Parking Lot Reconstruction and Play Equipment Replacement (2004)
Comments:
. Original proposal to fund from the General Fund is not feasible. (Staff)
Follow-up and Proposed Changes: Funding doesn't appear feasible in 2004 from the
General Fund as originally identified. Staff is recommending that funding for this
project be added to a proposed 2004 improvement project, such as Valley View
Road or 17h A venue. By doing so, the project costs can be bonded and levied, so
long as 25% of the total project costs are assessed.
Greenfield Neighborhood Park West Development (2004)
Comments:
. Project timing and staging. (Staff)
Follow-up and Proposed Changes: Project consolidated to one year (2004) instead
of spread over two years to minimize impact to park area and neighborhood, and to
maximize cost efficiency of work.
Community Center Carpet Replacement (2004)
Comments:
. Original proposal to fund from General Fund not feasible. (Staff)
Follow-up and Proposed Changes: Finance Director Voxland indicated that this
project is not included in the CIP or operating budget. Council could consider funding
this work from reserves.
Prairie Village Park Land Acquisition and Development (2005-2006)
Comments:
. Project timing, staging, and funding. (Council/Staff)
Follow-up and Proposed Changes: Land acquisition moved to 2005. Park
development moved to 2006 and amount increased to reflect recent costs
($200,000).
ProvidencelWestchester Park Development (2006)
Comments:
. Project timing, staging, and funding. (Staff)
Follow-up and Proposed Changes: Project construction consolidated to one year
(2006) instead of spread over two years to minimize impact to park area and
neighborhood, and to maximize cost efficiency of work. Estimated project costs
increased to reflect recent costs of similar park developments in neighboring
communities ($600,000).
Southbridge Area Park Development (2005-2009+)
Comments:
. Funding identified for potential purchase of MNDOT 75 parcel in 2008. (Council)
Follow-up and Proposed Changes: Funding eliminated.
Greenfield East Neighborhood Park Development (2007)
Comments:
. Project timing, staging, and funding. (Staff)
Follow-up and Proposed Changes: Project construction consolidated to one year
(2007) instead of spread over two years to minimize impact to park area and
neighborhood, and to maximize cost efficiency of work. Estimated project costs
increased to reflect recent costs of similar park developments in neighboring
communities ($650,000).
O'Dowd Park (2005)
Comments:
. Reconsider development timeline. (Parks and Recreation Advisory Board/Council)
Follow-up and Proposed Changes: Temporary improvements are being planned for
2003 to address abuse of park (more information will be presented to Council in the
near future). Proposed change in C/P provides for design in 2004, and improvements
in 2005.
Other
. Review and update park dedication fee formula to better reflect costs. (Parks and
Recreation Advisory Board/Council)
Follow-up and Proposed Changes: Changes will be considered by the Parks and
Recreation Advisory Board at their September meeting.
. Make sure we budget for upkeep and maintenance. (Council)
Follow-up and Proposed Changes: Funding increases limited for 2004. Staff has
discussed more detailed analysis of proposed cost of developments and providing
this information for Council consideration as part of the development review process
as well as budget process.