The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2008-01-16 PACKET 08.C.REQUEST OF CITY COUNCIL ACTION COUNCIL AGENDA MEETING ITEM # � DATE 01/16/O8 . PREPARED BY: Engineerinq Jennifer Levitt ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT STAFF AUTHOR ��.��.�.��.�� COUNCI� ACTION REQUEST: Authorize Preparation of Plans and Specifications for the Pine Tree Valley Park Activity Building. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Recommend the Council authorize Preparation of Plans and Specifications for the Pine Tree Valley Park Activity Building. ADVISORY COMMISSION ACTION: � P�ANNING ❑ PUB�IC SAFETY ❑ PUBLIC WORKS � PARKS AND RECREATION ❑ HUMAN SERVICES/RIGHTS ❑ ECONOMIC DEV. AUTHORITY ❑ DATE 01 /14/O8 01 /14/08 REVIEWED ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ APPROVED ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ DENIED ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ . '•�. ► �• ll _\ � MEMO/LETTER: Jennifer Levitt, January 11, 2008. ❑ RESO�UTION: ❑ ORDINANCE: ❑ ENGINEERING RECOMMENDATION: ❑ L.EGAL RECOMMENDATION: � OTHER: SEH building examples, concept 4. ADMINISTRATORS COMMENTS: �--° �C�- /� / °~/`f � '� City Administrator Date ��,��«.��«.��.�.��.��«��.�� , � ,r a' COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: ❑ APPROVED ❑ DENIED u OTHER �� ,� e7 CITY OF COTTAGE GROVE MINNESOTA To: r�i� Date: Honorable Mayor and City Council Ryan Schroeder, City Administrator John M. Burbank, AICP, Senior Planner Jennifer M. Levitt, P.E., City Engineer January 11, 2008 Re: Authorize Preparation of Plans & Specifications: Pine Tree Valley Park Activity Building „ „ Introduction The Pine Tree Valiey Park is within the 2008 Pavement Management Area and is programmed to have the existing park activity building replaced. Existing � ,ii m�� ...; .�;5=, _ ,: �--..�.._ 11 ��r. �� .; �, ,. � >'� The existing facility was a former sales office for ponnay Homes that was moved to the site in the mid seventies. It is the oldest City park activity building and has a variety of issues related to deterioration, accessibility, code compliance, and mold problems. Commission Review The Parks and Planning Commissions are reviewing the plans for the new activity building and site plan at a joint Planning and Parks Commission meeting on Monday, January 14, 2008. Minutes of the meeting will be distributed to Council on January 15, 2008. Pine Tree Vailey Park Activity Building January 11, 2008 Page 2 of 10 Option 4 Final Design �°-- __ � ` �� x. .� ,� . * ' „ r,. , �, I [-: �: ,�i . t ' • ,. � �� .�. �� . �� ;� � ��I `�� I�I I��. � ��'� � �"�iw��i�n �G�r� I � �� ; � �, �_ ��R.. The new park activity building was discussed at Council workshops in September and October when the scope of the pavement management project was being decided. At that time, three VIEW h'ROM SOUTIIEAST VIEW FROM NORT[-IEST ,� , �;� � Pine Tree Valley Park Activity Building January 11, 2008 Page 3 of 10 different levels of structures were discussed: simple picnic shelter, picnic shelter with rest- rooms, or an activitylwarming building with restrooms. Council provided direction that the latter should be constructed to serve the neighborhood and existing ice rink at the park. It should be noted that this park is the northern trailhead for the newly constructed Pine Tree Valley neighborhood trailway corridor and will receive an increased amount of use. The most recent City activity/warming building to be built was the one located in the Peter Thompson Family Park. Peter Thompson Family Park Activity Building �* ��•.�x� w - ;��4��:'�.��,� '_�� _ �� rtl _. , � � �. __ - , . .- ;;t= .�^. �', This public building was constructed by the developer at a cost of over $375,000, and was de- signed and constructed to meet recreation programming needs and the Iatest required arcni- tectural standards. The estimated cost of using this design at Pine Tree Valley Park led to a new more cost effective design that could be used in other parks. The architectural firm of SEH was contracted to work with the City on completing the new park activity building design. Design Options The proposed park building options were presented to the Parks Commission in October and discussions centered on a warming house and shelter. The idea the Commission desired to explore was to have a multi-seasonal use facility, one potentially with garage doors. The ga- rage doors would allow the enclosed space to be heated in the winter, and in the summer the doors couid be opened for an open pavilion. This concept was explored with the architect and is identified as Option 2. Option 2 v � - ,- _....__. . ._. �.. __� y �s._ . , . _... , µ� . _..^. i,:�' - _ � p4wi . - ma�w . _ � RRSE v�,�' , . � � i �m.- �� - r� ...... 4.. �� - . After discussing the design, a number of negative factors surtaced, such as how to prevent vandalism from occurring to the garage doors and extremely poor heating efficiency in the Pine Tree Valley Park Activity Building January 11, 2008 Page 4 of 10 winter. Staff did not feel the garage door concept worked well from a programming standpoint and there was potentiai for high maintenance costs associated witn the doors. Also, the key aspect of the building is to serve as a warming house, and if the building could not be cost effectively heated in the winte�, #he�� the rriain purpose was comprom�sed. Option 1 Option 1 had restrooms that were accessible from the outside, a large activity/warming area with many windows, exterior cold storage for recreational programming, and a covered shelter. c�i=i;cr� s vrew froln pfeyground � � � Gvest elevacicr� � —� .�n_� ea�r efrvatran _ y€ { + view frtun twCkey rMk north etevaCior7 ��_,...,. - � *OUf�I C}YWd(t�tl .. -�. . The design of Option 1 was determined not to meet the City's original design parameters for the project and was too costly. These factors were cause to focus on the critical elements that the activity building must have. The critical elements included: 1. Reduced square footage. 2. E�rterior access to restrooms. 3. Exterior restroom doors must be visible and easily monitored to ensure that doors are not propped open. 4. Orientation of covered area and restroom doors to be highly visible from the road. 5. Exterior restroom doors to be covered to prevent snow from collecting at threshold. 6. Provide for a shelter for one or two picnic tabies. Pine Tree Valiey Park Activity Building January 11, 2008 Page 5 of 10 Provide for a warming area to serve 40 individuals (25'x 25'). Provide only one stall for each bathroom. Provide windows for ventilation. 10. Provide steep roof pitch to reduce vandalism. 11. Site building near the existing location to reduce vandalism and the cost of utility extensions. 12. No windows in direct line of fire from hockey pucks. 13. Building materials must meet city code requirements. Option 3 With a more specific design program, the architect took those ideas and produced Option 3. Option 3 has a simple floor plan that meets the objectives above and has a steep roof pitch to allow the mechanical systems to be placed in the attic space to reduce the square footage of the building. The larger attic space would also allow for storage of recreational programming items and other miscellaneous items related to the park. Option 3 Option 3 was analyzed and additional modifications completed to have the exterior design in- tegrate better with the surrounding neighborhood, and the original design parameters. Option 4 The final option (Option 4) has a 6:12 roof pitch, which matches more closely with the neighborhood houses. `�;'�`-1 .r . � � - � -� - Option 4 Finai Design Pine Tree Valley Park Activity Building January 11, 2008 Page 6 of 10 VIF.W FROM SOUTIIEAST The reduced roof pitch does not aliow the additional storage desired, but sti�l allows for the mechanical unit to be installed in the attic space, which keeps the footprint of the building smaller. The covered shelter area wili allow for iwo picnic tables to be placed underneath, and in a rental situation more tables can be provided for the interior. The janitor area provides for a mop sink and storage of restroom materials. The floors will be concrete with no finishes. The buiiding materials in Option 4 are compliant with current code requirements. Modifications from Option 3 to Option 4 include: plumbing chase door moved to under the shelter of the patio, adding windows in the restroom to allow for naturai ventilation in the sum- mer, upgrading the materials on the building to meet code requirements, removing the com- merciai grade windows and utilizing residential style double hung to provide easy opening mechanism and retaining the vauited ceiling in the warming area to reduce damage to the ceiling from sticks and to help keep the small space feeling larger. ViLW FI20M NORTEIEST SECTION OF WARMING SPACE Pine Tree Valiey Park Activity Building January 11, 2008 Page 7 of 10 The existing Pine Tree Valley Park building has 1,296 square feet. The proposed building with the restrooms and warming area has 782 square feet and the sheiter is 272 square feet. The square footage of the proposed building in reference to other City Park buildings is detailed in the chart belaw: Park Building Square Footage Comparison Park Building Size (s� Shelter Size (sf) Total (sf) Woodridge 1444 676 2120 Hearthside 952 336 1288 Highlands 952 336 1288 Kingston 705 1410 2115 Lamar 616 264 880 Community Hall 930 NA 930 Oakwood NA 756 756 Hamlet 1200 600 1800 P.T.F 1824 720 2544 New PTV B/dg 782 272 1054 Cos4 Estimate Option 4 The current engineers estimate breaks down for option 4 is as foilows: Engineers Estimate: PTV Building (BricklBlocklHardy Plank) Structure General Conditions � l.S A- Substructure Structural Slab on Grade 800 SF A- Substructure Foundation Wail and Footings 140 SF B10 - Superstructure Single-Story Superstructure 800 SF 62010 - Exterior Walls Siding 400 SP 62010 - Exterior Walls Brick Veneer Walls 1100 SF 62020 - Exterior Windows Steel Windows 155 SF 62030 - Exterior poors Door Assembly 1 LS 630 - Roofing Shingled Roof 1800 SF C1010 - Partitions CMU Block Walis 200 SF C1030 - Fittings Restroom Accessories t SF C3010 - Wall Finishes Epoxy Finish - Maximum 450 SF C3020 - Floor Finishes Sealed Concrete 800 SF C3030 - Ceiling Finishes Painted Ceiling 760 SF C3030 - Ceiling Finishes Pamted Gyp 200 SF D2010 - Plumbing 1 lS D3040 - HVAC 1 LS D40 - Fire Protection 1 LS D5010 - Electrical 1 �S Contractor Overhead/Profit Existing Park Building Demo DesignfConstruction Services LegallFiscai Fees Communications (phone,security) Advertising/Printing Contingency Total $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ S � $ $ $ $ $ � $ S 5 19,674.40 7.64 16 38 8 89 7 90 36.15 56.07 9,844.64 11.00 13.17 3,304.80 5.49 4.11 2.53 8.62 23,282.17 29,576.00 24.00 8,592.00 19,674.40 6,112 00 2,293.20 7,112.00 3,160.00 39,765.00 8,690.85 9,844.64 19,800.00 2,634.00 3,304 SO 2,470 50 3,288.00 1,922.80 1,724.00 23.282.17 29,576.00 24.00 8,592.00 9,837.20 3,500.00 32,100 00 4,500.00 500.00 1,000.00 11,500.00 $ 256,207.56 Site Plan The site plan for the project has changed from the original concept for three reasons: cost savings for utility e�ensions, improved visibility for security, and preventing stray pucks from nitting the building. The site plan utilizes some of the same design elements as the new parking lot off 80th Street in the northern part of Pine Tree Valley Park, such as the circular Pine Tree Valley Park Activity Building January 11, 2008 Page 8 of 10 concrete patio area. The new site plan allows for a trail connection from the new parking off Indian Boulevard to the building and then beyond to the piay area. This will make access to the play area ADA accessible, which it currently is not. Additional parking stalls have also been added to the existing parkirrg lat to heip reduce the amount of orr-street parking. The existing trees that serve as a buffer and are proposed to remain and additional trees to be added to provide additional shade to the trail, building and seating area at the play area. Lighting is pro- posed to be via wall pack units on the building, existing street lights, and existing hockey rink lights. No additional lights are proposed. �, ..rv_ '�, -. , ., � Ex'<.C^.g 7rii1 S _ E�ci6EreY�9'� `,� . 6c'stirq 8aI19eid ' f .. t ' �_n ExsC�g P4xy 0.'ea Council Concept Review On January 2, the Council held a workshop on the proposed Concept 4 park building and had several questions. The following addresses these questions: Why can't the architectural drawings from the Highlands Park and Hearthside Park be used? • These buildings were constructed in 1985, and no records of the plans can be lo- cated in City storage or with the architect (Bonestroo). • The existing buildings wouid not meet current City architectural requirements, build- ing code requirements, fire code requirements, and ADA requirements. N�� t � �� _...�'� _-- Pine Tree Valley Park Activity Building January 11, 2008 Page 9 of 10 Why are architecturai services required? • Required plan engineering details are provided. • Detaiied specifications are created for uniform bidding results. • The plans can be utilized for future park buildings. Why are the construcfion costs so high ($243/square foot)? • The public bidding process creates some additional paper work and "hoops" for bidding contractors. • Commercial windows cost more. • Commercial doors and hardware cost more. • Commerciai construction finishing methods differ from traditional wood frame con- struction and increase costs in materials and labor. • The use of more masonry and heavy duty materials. • The construction costs of the Highland Park and Hearthside Park Activity buildings were projected into 2008 dollars using a 5 percent construction increase index. This analysis projects the adjusted cost to be $270,000. • Comparisons of other similar activity building construction costs are attached, for a true comparison to the Pine Tree Valley Park Building only the hard construction number should be used which is $214/sf. What are the advantages and disadvantages between an asphalt and metal roof? Asphalt Roofs The life expectancy of asphalt roofs is fess than metal and requires replacement. Asphalt roofs need to be replaced in 15 to 20 years at approximately $5,500. Asphait roofs are wind and hail damage susceptible. Metal Roofina . The City has been implementing the use of inetal roofs on new shelters. • Metal roofs are durable and have a life expectancy of 40 to 50 years. • Metal roofing increases the cost by $20,000. • Metal roofing is hail damage susceptible • Snow avalanching is more prevalent on metal roofs leading to damage or injury. What are the advantages and disadvantages of bathrooms in the facility. Advantaaes Portable Toilets • Portable toilets provide 24 hour use. • Portable toilets are cleaned and maintained by the contractor. • The costs of vandalism to portable toilets are born by the contractor. Disadvantaqes Portable Toilets • Portable toilets would cost $4,500 per season at the park. . Portable toilets are less desirabie due to odors, perceived lack of cleanliness issues and other stigmas. • Portable toilets require additional cost for an ADA accessible concrete pad. • Portable toilets require additional cost for any desired screening. Pine Tree Valley Park Activity Building January 11, 2008 Page 10 of 10 Advantaaes Permanent Bathrooms . Not having to rent portable toilets for 30 years saves the City approximately $100,000 at the current rate of $4,500 per season at the park. • Ciean and more desirabie faciiities. Disadvantaqes Permanent Bathrooms . The construction costs attributed to permanent bathrooms are approximately $30,000. • Hours of use are restricted. • Permanent bathrooms need to be opened and closed daiiy. . Permanent bathrooms need to be cleaned and maintained by City employees. . The costs of vandalism to permanent bathrooms are born by the City. What are other Communities do+ng with permanent restroom facilities? • Woodbury's report on opening park restrooms is that: o Park maintenance crews open the buildings in the morning and Police CSO's close the bathrooms at dusk. It has been a very positive experience with minimal vandalism. Most vandal- ism is simply markings on wails and clogging of toilets. They do minimize portable restroom use in these areas so there definitely was some cost savings. Having the CSO visit the parks at dusk increases overall security. Proposed Schedule January 2, 2008 Council considers concept and provide comment on the plan. January 14, 2008 Neighborhood Meeting at 6:00 p.m. January 14, 2008 Joint Planning CommissionlParks Commission Meeting at 7:00 p.m. January 16, 2008 Council considers SEH architectural contract and considers authorizing plans and specifications. February 20, 2008 Council considers plans and specifications and sets bid date. March 20, 2008 Bid project. Aprii 2, 2008 Council considers project award. April 21, 2008 Notice to proceed. August 1, 2008 Substantial completion. Budget Review The City Council established a Park Shelter & Playground Equipment Replacement Fund in 2003 to provide for updating of these types of facilities. The annual budget appropriation has been $100,000 since 2003. The current fund balance is approximately $429,000, including the 2008 levy amount. The proposed Pine Tree Valiey Park Building engineers estimate is $256,208. The Park Shelter & Playground Equipment Replacernent Fund would be utilized for the building replacement as outlined in the 2008 Pavement Management Feasibility Report. Recommendation It is recommended the Council authorize the preparation of plans and specifications for the Pine Tree Valley Park building for concept Option #4. OP7ION 4 WEST ELEVAI'lON �: ° . � WARMING SPACE I � L �. � "—" � MEN � " �I,� PATIO i � � �� 9 5 0 I�J r`o � . LEVF.LI �_ -� f ,_ ..a�- _.. � � " —_ ` (' WAflMING SPACE L 'f I �� _— " 1 L a MECH �- 9'-d ' 6'-0' - f--r 1 LEVELZ 'a � S � 5 � 3 SOU7H ELEVATfON VORTH ELEVAI'ION F.AST ELEVALION VIEW FROM SOL`THF,AST SECTION OF WARMING SPACE Vlf W kROM NORTFIFSI' ��w ��<R`�°��£��`� ��,�a� �� d ��i"'��'�� { �,� `�. . _ -�` �`.`;`"�: -, , ° � � � � Location � $t.Anthony, Minnesoea Features • Pavilion is the focal point providing for multiple park ac[ivities • Warming house wich fireplace can be divided into cwo separate spaces • Outdoor picnic shelter provides built-in barbecue gril) and serving counter • Restroom access from inside and outside for after-hours use • Pavilion contains pool equipment for outdoor water feature ° Contractincluded three park structures 5EH Services • Design • Construction administratio❑ Estimated Cost � $750,000 �ompieted � 2003 Estimated Size • Silver Point Park 1,690 sq. fr. �242.72 $F 611 200$ • ce�crai Park i,zoo 5q. rc. $299.75 SF Current price with • Waeer Tower Park 200 sq. ft. IIlf�8t1011 multidisciplined. si�gle source. � wwwsehinocom ' �� -� j; . � ,. . .�r.�e '".:^.�.> . _ �E�� s c ��15 %ea. � � �,�.��a�a�° Lacation � Foley, Minnesota Features � Warming house and picnic sheRer for ihe Park • Structure incfudes kitchenette for group rental Overhead garage doors allow for open area environment Two restrooms accessible from the exterior Exterior electrical system allows for additional hook-up SECd Services Estimat�d Cast �$199,200 • Design • Conscruction administration �°mple�ed � 2067 Estirciated 5ize � 1,344 SF $148.21 5F in 2006 $162.14 Sf Current price wiYh inflation mulndisUpiined. singic source. ( wwwsehinc.com � _� . �� '�"��6�� 3��=,� ��n�� . ,, .;:,e;� Location/bwner ( Long Lake, Minnesota The reconstruction of Highway forced che City of Long Lake to rebuild ics existing City park. SEH worked with the City and Mn/DOT officials to negotiate tbe replacemen[ cost of the newly improved park. Features • 1,250 sq. fc. park structure cootaioiog warmi�g house, concessio� building and park storage • Buildi�g designed with alternate excerior fi�ishes to provide bidding flexibility to meet limited budget SEH Services • Site planni�g • Architecture • Civil, structural and electrical engineering • Survey • Construction observation CompBeted � Spring 2004 Cost � $238,000 $190.40 SF in 2004 $226.20 SF Current price with inflation multidis<iplined. single source. � wwwsehinc.<om - ^'h I ,:'+i ��r ��"�a�� K;,� ��c� ��,��e,� v�� S R ��i�� ... �/ ' _ '� Location/Owner � Lake Superior -Ashland,Wisconsin Features - � Restrooms and changing rooms for swimmers � � Craksman-style design to complement designs prevalent Y � in northern Wisconsin —�� "�"' � Durabie cost-effective constr�cxion materials � .. m... '- � � Incorporates natural light through the use of obscure glass � Forcemain connected to City sanitary sewer SEH Services � Architectural design � Floodplain study and investigatio� Cost � $72,000 $110.80 SF in 1996 $173.29 SF Current price with inflation multidisciplined. single source. � wwwsehinc.com ^� �+' �;-' ',