Loading...
Memo Shady Oak Beach Redevelopment e CITY OF HOPKINS MEMORANDUM DATE: April 14, 1995 TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Steven C. Mielke, City Manage~ SUBJECT: DISCUSSION--SHADY OAK BEACH REDEVELOPMENT ISSUES As a follow up to the meeting of the city councils of Hopkins and Minnetonka, Dave Johnson, Director of Recreation Services, has been working with Brauer and Associates, Ltd., consultants on the Shady Oak Beach Redevelopment Project, to answer questions which were raised during . the discussion. Attached is a memorandum from Mr. Johnson on these issues. Staff is now proposing a plan of action to continue moving fonvard on a redevelopment plan for Shady Oak Beach. The two city managers are suggesting each council appoint two members to a task force whose purpose would be to work with the consultant to finish the redevelopment project studies. Two Park Board members from each community would also be appointed. The members of this group would work with the consultant and staffs to complete discussions on a proposed improvement and provide input on the concepts. Dave Johnson will be at the April 18 Council meeting to discuss this memorandum with the City Council. At the conclusion of that discussion, the Staff is recommending that the Council consider the proposal of appointment of two members to a task force. Attachment: Memorandum on Shady Oak Beach Redevelopment Issues Dave Johnson, director of Recreation Services e gcn/s: 04J45A . DATE: March 24, 1995 TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council THROUGH: Steven C. Mielke, City Manager FROM: Dave lOMson, Director of Recreation Services SUBJECT: SHADY OAK BEACH REDEVELOPMENT ISSUES On November 22, 1994, members of the Hopkins and Minnetonka City Councils met infOlmally to discuss a number of issues related to the two Cities. The primary focus of this meeting was to discuss the preliminary plans for the redevelopment of Shady Oak Beach. The preliminary concept plans, prepared by Brauer and Associates, Ltd., were presented by Jeff Schoenbauer, Vice President of the firm. Brauer and Associates, Ltd. were selected in February of 1994 to conduct the beach study and prepare the redevelopment master plans. Throughout the presentation, Council Members addressed a number of issues regarding the concept plan. A summary of these issues were summarized in a memo, dated November 29, to both City Councils and the Joint Recreation Board. Subsequent to the November 22 concept review, Brauer and Associates, Ltd., and City staff from Hopkins and Minnetonka have prepared information to help address the issues raised at the Joint Council meeting. . The purpose of this memorandum is to outline the issues at hand and any program and/or cost implications which may result from any changes to the preliminary plan. YEAR ROUND USE OF THE SITE: Discussion took place regarding the possibility of seasonal use extending into the winter months. Suggested programs included skating, cross country skiing, and ice fishing. The possibility of using the site for winter programming was discussed by the Joint Recreation Board at length during Board meetings in July and September. Although the facilities could he designed to accommodate winter programs, the Joint Recreation Board along with staff feels that the needs of activities such as skiing and skating are currently heing met with existing facilities. SKATING The Cities of Minnetonka and Hopkins currently operate 30 skating rinks at 14 sites at an average cost of $6,800 per site. Given the open exposure of Shady Oak Lake, it is the opinion of staff that the site would provide less than ideal conditions for skating considering the limited wind protection. In . addition, there are maintenance concerns related to the operation of skating facilities at Shady . POSSIBILITIES FOR YEAR ROUND USE OF THE SITE: Discussion took place regarding the possibility of seasonal use extending into the winter months. Suggested programs included skating, cross country skiing, and ice fishing. The possibility of using the site for winter programming was discussed by the Joint Recreation Board at length during Board meetings in July and September. Although the facilities could be designed to accommodate winter programs, the Joint Recreation Board expressed concern regarding the cost implications associated with winter use of the site. SKATING Given the open exposure of Shady Oak Lake, the consultant, along with staff, are concerned with the amount of use the facility would receive. The possibility of providing a unique skating environment, including such amenities as trails or an oval, may increase the use the facility could receive. Maintenance of this type of facility may be difficult due to concerns for equipment early and late in the season. Many cities currently prohibit the operation of skating facilities on natural bodies of water. The Cities of Hopkins and Minnetonka currently operate 30 skating rinks at 14 sites. The average cost to maintain these facilities is $6,800. It should be noted that these facilities do not generate revenue of any kind. Operation of a skating facility at Shady Oak Beach would . increase the skating rink. operations budget approximately $7,500. CROSS COUNTRY SKIING Cross country ski trails are currently maintained at six locations throughout Hopkins and Minnetonka. Lake locations are generally considered non-desirable for cross country skiing due to the level topography, lack of wooded areas, and reduced wind protection. Staff anticipates that usage for cross country skiing would be minimal considering the availability of the current trails maintained at Lone Lake Park directly south of Shady Oak Beach. The 1995 City of Minnetonka Capital Improvement Program currently includes the addition of a Loop Trail System headquarters at Lone Lake Park. This facility would benefit cross country skiers during the winter season. ICE FISHING Use of Shady Oak Lake for ice fishing is minimal. This winter, the lake occupied one permanent ice house with 5-10 additional people fishing on comfortable weekends. Common spots to fish included the south portion of the lake near the peninsula, and the north east portion near Shady Oak Road and the Hennepin County trail connection. Both of these sites are a considerable distance from the beach site limiting the amount of use any rest room facilities would receive. - . DESIGN CONCERNS The preliminary plans, which were designed for summer use of the facility, present a number of restrictions which would need to be modified to allow for winter use of the site. The potentials for winter use need to be balanced against additional costs and potential compromises to summer use. Design concerns include: . The buildings, as currently designed, are not winterized. Brauer and Associates, Ltd. anticipate that the current cost estimates would increase 10-15 % if the facilities were modified for winter use. Current building cost estimates are $435,000. . The current layout of the individual buildings does not readily lend itself to accommodating a warming room for winter activities. Reconfiguration would be necessary to provide for this use. . The distance between the buildings and the edge of the lake is too far for easy skating access (15-20 feet is preferred). . The current building pad is 3-4 feet higher than the lake. A level grade is preferred for skating access. . Availability for winter use would require full time supervision of the facility during .J open hours of operation to protect from vandalism, freezing pipes, etc. DESIGNING OPTIONS Brauer and Associates, Ltd. have offered the following design options for consideration: 1. Redesign the building cluster (and related areas) to accommodate winterized facilities (a warming room and bathroom). 2. Provide another small winterized building situated near the lake (by the canoe rental dock) . It would be similar in style to other facilities and include a multi-use space (for winter warming and summer activities or storage) and a rest room (which could be used winter and summer). Potential cost: $100,000. CONSULTANTS COMMENT The design should stay as is. If winter use is desired, an additional facility could be . constructed closer to the lake as noted in the design options listed above. The use of a temporary portable facility could be used on an interim basis to determine if the demand for winter use warrants constructing a permanent building. . ADDITION OF A LOWER LEVEL TO THE MAIN FACILITY FOR WARM:ING HOUSE OR STORAGE USE. As stated previously, use of the current building for warming house use provides some logistical concerns. In addition, access to the upper level rest room from the lower level would be difficult. The use of a lower level for storage purposes would be a possibility and would be of benefit in the operation of the facility. CONSULTANTS COMMENT A lower level could be added to the structure for storage purposes. This would add an additional $25,000 to $35,000 to the building costs. It should be noted that under the current design, providing a walkout type basement would be difficult. STUDY ALL ALTERNATIVES FOR SANITARY SEWER SERVICE. In 1982, the City of Minnetonka contracted with Schoell & Madsen, Inc., to conduct a feasibility study for sewer and water service to Shady Oak Beach. The conclusion of that study indicated the best option for sewer service was a connection west to Dominick Drive. The 1982 estimated cost for this service was $51,413. . Council Members from both Hopkins and Minnetonka indicated concern regarding the revised cost estimate and recommended route for service. To respond to these concerns, staff consulted with the engineering firm of Short, Elliot, Hendrickson, Inc., (SEH) to update the study and provide current cost estimates and recommendations for service connections. Attached is the final report as submitted by SEH. The service route they are recommending remains the same (along the peninsula to Dominick Drive) as the 1982 report. In addition, they have prepared three options for differing types of service. Option 1, the service they are recommending, could be completed at an estimated cost of $47,500. This results in a $4,500 reduction in cost from the estimates included in the preliminary plan. A revised estimate for the 1982 plan, according to SEH, is $79,000. A copy of the SEH study, along with a map indicating the proposed route is attached for your review. The option recommended by SEH (Option 1) has been reviewed and approved by utility staff from both Hopkins and Minnetonka. It . 5909 BAKER ROAD. SUITE 590, MINNETONKA MN55345 612931-9501 FAX612931,/188 ARCHITECTURE . ENGINEERING . ENVIRONMENTAL . TRANSPORT A nON February 14, 1995 RE: Minnetonka, Minnesota Shady Oak Beach Sanitary Sewer Study SEH No: MINNE9503.00 Mr. Dave Johnson Director of Recreational Services Ci ty of Minnetonka 14600 Minnetonka Blvd Minnetonka, Minnesota 55345-1597 Dear Dave: We are pleased to submit the results of our study on the alternative means to provide sanitary sewer service to the proposed Shady Oak Beach Redevelopment Project As background information, we were provided the following: ,. Section 3 - Master Plan Cost Analysis from the Shady Oak Beach Redevelopment Study by Brauer and Associates Ltd . ,. Feasibility Study for Sewer and Water Service to Shady Oak Beach by Schoell & Madson, Inc. dated May 11, 1982 ,. Contour maps ,. Sanitary sewer as-bui1ts The study was to address alternative methods of sewer service to the site, their associated costs, and environmental impacts. Of particular concern is the potential impact of routing a sanitary sewer near or under the water level of Shady Oak Lake and the cost associated with that construction. General Discussion There are two locations where sanitary sewer service is reasonably available. One location is in Dominick Drive near the intersection of Jorissen Drive. This would require a crossing of Shady Oak Lake in the old railroad grade. The other location is in Beachside Drive which serves the townhouse development east of Shady Oak Road and south of the Soo Line Railroad. The sewer in Beachside Drive is only about 1000 feet from the buildings clustered at Shady Oak Beach. However, gaining access to that sanitary sewer includes crossing several hills, railroad tracks, Shady Oak Road, and a parking area in the townhouse development before reaching the sanitary sewer in Beachside Drive. Crossing of the railroad tracks and Shady Oak Road would require additional permits, engineering costs, and construction costs. Crossing the parking lots of the townhouse development would require easements and driveway and sod restoration. Even though new trenchless construction methods are available for the crossing of the railroad tracks and Shady Oak Road, the extra expense, complexity of the design and construction, and lack of actual ownership of the sewer alignment are all detrimental to this connection location. It would be OUf recommendation that this connection . location be considered only if all other methods of crossing Shady Oak Lake in the old railroad grade are rejected. Although it is possible to connect to the trunk sewer in Dominick Drive with a gravity sewer extension to the Shady SHORT ELLiOTT HENDRICKSON lNe ST PAUL. MN ST Ci OUD. MN CHIPPEWA FALLS, Wi MADISON WI Mr. Dave Johnson . February 14, 1995 Page 2 Oak. Beach site, it is not a practical alternative. Excessive dewatering would be necessary along with tree removal along the old railroad grade. The initial cost would exceed the cost of a pumped alternative. Even considering long- term operation and maintenance costs of a pumping station, a pumped alternative is, in our opinion, the most cost- effective alternative. In addition to the cost factor, the gravity sewer alternative could be highly detrimental from an environmental standpoint. The Shady Oak. Beach Redevelopment Project is still in the conceptual stage. Accordingly, the amount of sewage to be generated at the site is still largely unknown. However, preliminary designs of pumping stations which could serve the site indicate that with a nominal I yzll forcemain, pumping rates of over 25 gallons per minute are easily achieved with some of the smallest pumps available. This should be adequate for any reasonable application at this site. The forcemain alignment for Options I through 3 which follow is shown on the attached drawing. The lift station would be located near the existing/proposed buildings. It would pump westerly down the old railroad grade across Shady Oak Lake to an existing manhole of the trunk sewer in Dominick Drive. For purposes of this study, it was assumed that the forcemain project would incur no restoration costs except the cost of crossing the existing parking lot and Dominick Drive. It is anticipated that a more fonnalized trail would be constructed along the forcemain alignment concurrent with or after the forcemain is constructed. Option 1 This option would consist of constructing a small "grinder pump" lift station on the Shady Oak Beach site. A . control panel with local alarm would be installed in one of the buildings occupied by staff. The lift station would pump westerly through a I W' forcemain to a discharge manhole constructed approximately at the east end of the parking lot at Dominick Drive. Sewage would then flow by gravity through a 6-inch sewer service to the trunk sewer in Dominick Drive. The forcemain would be constructed at approximately a four-foot depth by use of a ditching machine or a vibratory plow. Either alternative only leaves a scar at the surface with little disturbance of soil horizons. In fact, at a four-foot depth the forcemain would be at or above the normal lake levels of Shady Oak Lake except for the channel crossing. Vegetation loss would be minimal. At the channel crossing, the forcemain would be trenched or plowed below the channel bottom, but yet in the old railroad fill above the lake bottoIIL The natural lake bottom that existed prior to the railroad fill would not be pierced. No dewatering would be necessary. The equipment used for this kind of installation could easily travel through a couple feet of water at the channel location. Sediment control would need to be carefully designed for the channel crossing. The type of forcemain proposed comes in large rolls and would be field fused so as to be one continuous length of pipe, thereby making leakage from the forcemain almost impossible. However, due to its shallow depth, future construction in the area could damage the pipe. To minimize the possibility of damage by future construction activities, a trace wire would be installed in the trench with the forcemain to aid in locating the forcemain for any contractor working in the area. This system, being too shallow to provide frost protection, would not normally be useable in the winter. We understand that there are currently no plans for the beach area which would require sewage service in the winter. However, should the need arise, such as for a trailhead or skating facility, there is a way to make this alternative useable in the winter. This would be accomplished by using a larger than normal wet well at the pumping station. With the very limited flows likely in the winter, the wet well could function as a holding tank:. Sewage would need to be hauled periodically during the winter, perhaps as seldom as once a season at very nominal cost. e Mr. Dave Johnson It February 14, 1995 Page 3 The operation and maintenance impacts of this option are also minimal. Each fall, it would be appropriate to pressure test the forcemain to verify its continued leak-proof status, flush the main, and blow all liquids out of it so the main does not freeze and break. The large wet well should be pumped dry in the fall to remove any sand and other sediment which may have been deposited in it from the swimmers using the showers and restroom facilities. Option 2 This option is very similar to Option 1 except that the channel crossing would be accomplished by suspending the 1!t2'" forcemain from the bottom of a bridge. We understand that a bridge is being contemplated for the channel crossing to complete the Loop Trail system. Suspending the 1!t2" forcemain from the bottom of the bridge avoids the need for an under water channel crossing and its associated sediment control. However, an air relief valve will be necessary at this location potentially resulting in odors discernable by trail users. The system becomes more complex with additional fittings, valving, and the need to protect the exposed pipe. This option, of course, requires that the bridge be built concurrently with the forcemain. Option 3 Similar to Option 1, a grinder pump lift station would be constructed with a 11ft forcemain discharging to the sewer at Dominick Drive. To provide frost protection and potential year-round use, the forcemain would be installed at a seven-foot depth. The wet well for the lift station could be of normal size since it would not need to function as a holding tank: in the winter. The trace wire would not be necessary. Even at a seven-foot depth, the forcemain would not be below the lake bottom, again avoiding the potential of piercing the bonom of Shady Oak Lake. . Option 4 This option would consist of constructing the conventional lift station contemplated in the May 17, 1982, Feasibility Study for Sewer and Water Service to Shady Oak Beach by Schoell & Madson, Inc. This type of lift station included larger duplex pumps with a remote alarm system and all other amenities similar to the City's other lift stations serving multiple properties. We have not reexamined this option, other than to update its cost based on the Engineering News Record Construction Cost Index. Based on this index for May of 1982 and the current index, the cost estimate should be increased by approximately 54%, which would result in an estimated total project cost of about $79,000. No other review of this option was made. Option Comparison The table attached to this report provides a quick comparison between the various options described. It can be seen that the costs of Options 1,2, and 3 are all very similar. Accordingly, the option best serving the needs of the City should be chosen. If none of these options are deemed appropriate, then a connection to Beachside Drive should be further studied. Recommendation We would recommend that the City consider Option 1 for the following reasons: 1. Its cost is similar to the other two least expensive options. 2. Environmental damage during construction will be minimal or nonexistent with the proper sediment control system. 3. There is little risk of leakage from the type of forcemain proposed, particularly if occasionally pressure tested to verify integrity. It 4. This option does provide a means of serving the site in the winter should winter uses of the facility become attractive. Mr. Dave Johnson . February 14, 1995 Page 4 Detailed cost estimates are provided at the end of this report for your reference. We would be happy to review the contents of this report with the City Council and others as appropriate should you require further assistance. ymb Attachments c: Mr. Steve Mielke, City Manager, City of Hopkins . e Q) 0.. - ._ 0) " 0 0- c .E ("') 0 (/J c: ro ~ 0 (/) ro_ E c _ (]) .!: C ,,, ~ 0 m ~ (0) 0 _ ~ ~ c -E ~ .... ro Y7 '0 0-- 0 o ~ - ~"O - ~ "" cO) - ~ ~ Q) .c ._ m {/J _ ::= C __ m 0> O "OC 00.. (/J~ - ._ co>o .- m o>ro "O~::l""'= .t:! E US 0 0-0 ::J $ ~m o}... w~~~.c g ==e Ero ::=._C mU ';jo -_ ::::=0 ~ro 0 ~_ ~ro ~;:o ~Q) Z (1) ~ 0- - ro ._ (1) Q) ~_ 0 0- C E 3: Q)ro 0 m c ro c "0 E ..q- (/J cd - E C- ._ C .... p Q) .!: C E C") <<1.- 0 l'--::=' (,) Q) (l) 0.. E........r o::l C 0> OJ C Y7"5 '0 .5 (; C- Q) ~ o u~~ - OJ~ -(1)3- ._ .....0> .' cO) _.....- a ocg m.c _00 momi _ 5,- C:-o.. ~ m oS E ~E It: ..u __ 0 \I~ '- o ~.cro cO> 0- m~ro- _ __ "O.....::l .....--"0 ~om$ _ 00-- ::lro-m .....:;.. (/) "L ,,, 0 Cfl - ::J o.mo.~ 0.- w~~ Cfl.cO~ Q) m"OE- Em -_C o>u.!:== C C mc~m __ p~o _~~m 0 o 0 ~ 0.;:: <( ~ ::;;::" 0.. m ;:: ;:: z en .- - ~ ::l0- m oE- ~ ~ coic 0 ~ m .om . _ ._ 0)"- 0 ~ ::i 3: ~c m "0 cOo c- ro .- E E'co ~ Q5{/J 'D~cD-g0>-3 o ('II 0).0:;::; t;;: "O~ -ocoe'mCj) Ec () C OEm .a c- c-cdO"O 0- ........ '<u::l ::::: .c - 0.'- o oo(/)_ ~ rouExD ~"O ,.. ._ -..... 0.- Q) - ... Q) _ ...." _ m 0. m (/J '" 0 Q).... m ctJ o 0. ol'!"O E ~ .- - .0 m~"" m "'~ ._ O"::J ~ c- 0 - - 0 "0 ro ..... ~ Q) 0. _ "0 E Q) ,S - ,,, C :> :!::: '" :>"0 0> ....roc......... ~- _ :>c....3 Q) ~ ::lEQ).c- 0>0; O omQ) (/)Q) m EU~ (/J:> -:: 0. -0 Q) 0 0) 0) r.n CD -- ~ c -:> '" (/) C O'l 0- "0 - 0> U '0 - "- ::J - .c::J.c.... x~::::: ..........Q)Q)~ roO) (f) tJ) OJ $ u.l .o:.:J o....g tJ) ;:"0.. ::c 3: - _ _::lo. 0) m oE- 0).... .E l;; ;:: g il ~ ;:: ~ * e>~ m "0 Q) LC"l ro - gO-cd .- Ec:~ ~ ~ .cc .o~CD -3 or- Q)._.... I'"- Q) U Q) -::::< 0) E .... ro v 0. _ E "0 ,'" ..... C ... U Ol- u:>..'- 0 C - cd 0 .- .... .... _ C ..., 0. .- ro .c - .... "0 .2 .E $ ,_ m 0. OJ ~ - u E - (l) .... " C C Cfl (l) .S (/) Cfl cd 0 CD Cfl 0. -!'I coO) '" Cfl Q) 0> Q) ..... 0) ::l O _",.- '::>..... Cfl - - cc _ro~ c"O o~ Q)E- ;::!::: 313 "in '0 ~ "'0 ';j ..... cd CO) (l) == ._ cr-::J E Cfl (l) 0.....0. ..m ..mo (/l E :> ==O)E m> Q)....~ r.nQ)- -:> <<1"0 = ~_ ~_c (1)0"0= 3- .c~""0> -0 -=0 ........O)ID w(l) (J) ..... -' :;.. .- .- :;.. ... 0:> -r- ::- ::JO-:> .JC ...J>O ..._1.1>> ........:> "0 ~ C CQ) ~ Ol " ._.e .0 " ::> ~ . =s .2 a:""" C c - 0 w ~ Q) gQ.l o~ ~~ w ._ en'" C'l ',p <0 I/) c: 0 _... 0 m ~m m......- o~ _ ~ VIE ...c~ ~- ~ ~ ~ c ~-~ m~ Q) 0 Q) o~ ~~I/) ~~ c u ~ UO o~$ m~ Detailed Cost Estimates . Option 1 Mobilization $1,800 Duplex grinder pump lift station. lump sum 12,000 1!h polyethylene pipe forcemain w/trace wire - 4' deep, 1800 LF @ $7/LF 12,600 6" pve service, 200 LF @ $121LF 2,400 Inside drop connection to existing manhole 500 Manholes with valving, 3 each @ $900 each 2,700 Pavement restoration, 2200 SF @ $2/SF 4,400 Sediment control 1. 600 Subtotal $38,000 +25% legal, engineering, contingencies 9,500 Total Estimated Project Cost $47,500 Option 2 Mobilization $1,800 Duplex grinder pump lift station, lump sum 12,000 1 ~ polyethylene pipe forcemain w/trace wire - 4' deep, 1600 LF @ $71LF 11,200 . 1~" polyethylene pipe forcemain suspended, 200 LF @ $101LF 2,000 6" pve service, 200 LF @ $12/LF 2,400 Inside drop connection to existing manhole 500 Manholes with valving, 3 each @ $1100 each 3,300 Pavement restoration, 2200 SF @ $2/SF 4.400 Subtotal $37,600 +25% legal, engineering, contingencies 9,400 Total Estimated Project Cost $47,000 Option 3 Mobilization $1,820 Duplex grinder pump lift station, lump sum 11,000 1 Y2 polyethylene pipe forcemain - 7' deep, 1800 LF @ $7/LF 12,600 611 pve service, 200 LF @ $12/LF 2,400 Inside drop connection to existing manhole 500 Manholes with valving, 3 each @ $1200 each 3,600 Pavement restoration, 2200 SF @ $2/SF 4,400 Sediment control 1. 600 Subtotal $37,920 . +25% legal, engineering, contingencies 9,480 Total Estimated Project Cost $47,400 !r '"l J ~ " ~ ~ a \'3i u " ! -< ~I 0 (/) 0 ~ , ~ + ~ ~~\ 0 i 1) . .. ,. + ~ + ~ i ~ ~ ~ .. ! ~ " <> ! .... '" i · ~ -t . ADDITION OF FAMILY CHANGING ROOMS Current trends in building designs, particularly recreation facilities, include the provision of family changing areas/restrooms. Outdoor facilities, because they only operate during the summer months, do not require this option on as frequent of basis. The majority of swimmers at Shady Oak Beach are to the facility prepared to swim. This practice could change if such facilities were available for the families with younger swimmers. The potential costs for the addition of family changing rooms needs to be balanced against the amount of use they would eventually receive. CONSULTANTS COMMENT This alternative can continue to be considered as part of the building schematic design phase. Concern is that additional building square footage (and costs) would be required to accommodate. Potential cost increase- $20,000-$30,000. FEASffiILITY OF SHADY OAK ROAD IMPROVEMENTS INCLUDING A DROP- OFF AREA, TRAFFIC LIGHT, AND LEFT TURN LANE. These items will continue to be explored as Hennepin County prepares plans for the upgrading of Shady Oak Road. This project is currently budgeted for 1998 in the Cities elP, although county programming is uncertain at this time. . CONSULTANTS COMMENT Staff and consultant continuing to review these issues. Initial reactions include: 0 Left turn lane is a good idea and will be forwarded to Hennepin County for consideration. Right-of-way space may be a constraint. 0 Drop off area not recommended because of conflicts with turn lanes and site access. Preference is to encourage the use of designated drop off areas adjacent to the entrance court. 0 Department of Transportation (D.O.T.) Volume/use criteria for a traffic light at the intersection will probably not be met. The estimated cost for the addition of a traffic light is $75,000-$100,000 which may be another factor for consideration by the D.O. T. CONCESSION STAND UPGRADE Revenues generated at the Shady Oak Beach concession stand are heavily dependent upon the weather conditions for any given season. With consistently cool and/or damp weather, . crowds are reduced to a minimum. In addition, summer staff employed at the beach work for the Recreation Department under the assumption that their scheduled hours will be consistent throughout the year. Most employees are working to help support their college . expenses. This makes it difficult to adjust hours according to weather conditions and still employ qualified personnel. Redevelopment plans for the coneession area do include an increase in square footage over the current facility. In addition, the design layout would allow for the concession area to be better customer service oriented. It should be noted however that increases in revenues, even with these changes, will still be dependent upon weather conditions. CONSULTANTS COMMENT Staff and consultant are continuing to review. It should be noted that construction costs will increase if the concession area is upgraded from simply offering prepackaged type products to more of a full service concession area. It may, however, be cost effective in the long run. CONSTRUCTION COSTS FOR BRIDGE AND TRAIL IMPROVEMENTS It was noted at the joint City Council meeting that the redevelopment proposal did not include funding for the proposed bridge linking the peninsula. The City of Minnetonka 1994 Capital Improvement Program included $130,000 for bridge and trail improvements at Shady Oak Beach. This item was not forwarded to the 1995 CIP due to the anticipation of the projects completion in the fall of 1994. The City's Finance . Director has indicated that the appropriated funds are still available for completion of the project. On November 17, 1994, Bob Hill, Minnetonka Trail Coordinator, met with D NR Trail Grant Supervisor Dan Collins regarding ongoing trail projects within the City. Mr. Collins indicated that "turnback" funds were available and inquired about any possible projects within the City. After discussion, it was determined that the bridge crossing the peninsula was a potential project. The application process was completed on February 6 and submitted to the DNR to review. Estimated costs related to the bridge, including construction and placement, are approximately $77,000. Grants are available for up to 50% of the project cost. Correspondence items regarding the Shady Oak Beach trail segments, along with related CIP information, are incbded for your review. - .~ JV-~~.:'995~OO=19iXI MI~C&M .... ~~_~,. 612~ .RP.02~ ~\.~\ ID I /~ ~ ~Y-... .' : ~\\\~~ . ~ I ~ :;.. '"'" ~..'.~t~; .\\, ..~ \: ~.--. .......... U . l\ !Ill ~............y ~, ~~~ -..;: ....;: I)' .:~ . . . ,,~..... ~ ~""""--t' ~ --..; ~j' ~ ~ '~ .. . ---- -~// "",==- ~ .' ~ ~ .~ .....~ ;,. ~ -.. f' ., ~ .-. \.... . ~~ ,"'i~ ~ ,\ ~~~'f/l)' '" :'-. 'I . {.': - i ~ ~ ~ A~~\\' ~-1 if:7'$ r -J Go \ 1i'l\ ~. · \ ,,.. .J. ~ . ~. , ,... .. ~ ~\ d I ~ %f~~~ .. i ~ ~ If ~ L' \ \~~ .. oJ.. ,. X~') ~ ~ ~ \ \ Q ~--- ~ ,;; ~ \ ... \ . 'l~).( ~~~~~". 0> ,__ ~ J ~ -e:,~r~~;j(~ . ;r. '-l ~ "T -n~'u :/~...../~~ 1 ~lJr -:o~~ )...' ~ '. ":~<i r:F :>,;: \. ---- lJ II ::It:::::::\. ~ ~~. ( A'::o.L . ,,~ ." ~~~ ~\\~ --:i ~ ~ ~J rJ;j ~~j~v'Y' ~ ~ :y Cii \ nJ..2-.:r\ lL -~ N ~ ~ ,.~: ] 0 . \ ~.... ~ill I __ p f::t.: __ ......~I/ ~ ~\. ~ :~ , _ \ '\\ .' J'l J:.# ~!::iI ~~ - "' - _~ ~ . z J\.. ;;\\ ~ 7 ~ X ~ ~ {F> ~J ___ f . Ji ~'i-~ ~,i I'..X 'k ~ +. l r 7-0. I ." ..< -....;: ~ . . :: ~~..~ ~ ~ ~'J~~~-1!J:.":I '\1 ~ '\ 5i ..; ~ \'" (;'" / 'il~ 7'T ...L T~ < ~t~ t 0 ~ \~~ ~ '. ~ ~I .1J1:1lfF~'f/7J,~J I.. ii.:~. , .il ~~~~ \\ :: 'J' ~ ~H/;I 1l"f;,1l - I ;~. . 1 __ >;zj ~. \\i;;x "'2'J....7"t ~~ ~~IIl,~ ,11. . ../i ...... m-:-...' ~ t\ >>\(01, ~ ~ \ : ..: ., V~'" ~ ~ t,/ -2; ~ . '/-I ~'rnL~ i:: -. i . .:~ -' ~~ I ~~~ ~g ~ V~ ~ ~ I I ~I"~~ F' . ~ . ~~t-~(~ J/s [. ~~ U/ ~""" I ,..' I') 1 tfB:) ~ ""v ""' .0 ~ , >-,:; I~:E 0 ;' .. :-\ ~ \ ~.~ ~ ... ~ \ Q . '" III u:i ~ 1&1 : .' \\ \J. ~ ~~~ ..;;~ -~ .r-iJ It.... . i ~ rll/ ~ ~ "'-'- ~ TI 0 . ~ \I l,.j J \l. "'4, ~. ~-h:. 1"1 II) ! .". ~ ~ -V I '\.1 .\ ,t , - _ I 0 >- :. 0 ~, . ~~,. 0> 0 I O~\ _ ,~\l\ .~ ~~(j c::: 'il en !. ..:; ~ . i 1\,'. I' 0 .. \' ~ . ,. :::--.~ ~~~.J : '.; \ \ ,,~~ I 0 . 0 '\ ~0: I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ :; .' ~",: . .~~ I \ \, ~ I ----.., 1\ ~ a: . 1 'J,. i"fj rr ...,. _ ~ . " ~... ., ... , \' IX J' . ,0 t...... . · .\ \ 3~ 0 X ~ -U ~ ;.-;- ~\ ... . ); i \ ~~ .01 if\.;r- 0; ~~;.J.. 1'1 ~~c. 1- .~;. \ ,,~~OI\)( ~~m ~...~ J ~.I ';;., >- ~ ~ ..." y ~ t-= z ! . ';"~ .. \- m- \\ ~ -=-----== t' \~ J '::::7 e 0 l': ~.: lLG I' :or:; '\ ~~ J I. .'-. L.. .! " ..;;:: . -- "'J.j ~ . .... ' : : ./"':: ~L__ ...... ~ ~ a-\ . ....--::: w. 1.. ,~; J J~- ~ ~tJ-'-- Z I. T: ". ~ :;..- -:; ~ '~,\ ~ . i lif . r: V'z;:;t" I 0 ~ . '..' 1 I ~ j ~ . ': s . \ I . .;~. ~ / ~ ' ~ ~ . I . '.~' .,. ,,1 . lD ~ '~I,' ". .. j, ," .~ , .. .. ." .... . . ....."" '"". - -- .... JfV+-2'i'-1995 13~44 MI~A 08J1 612 9B3 8405 P.01/01 e., TO: Dave ChUds. City Manager THRU: Brian Wagstrom, Director of Operations & Maintenance FADM: Bob Hili, Trail Coordinator - DATE: November .23, 1994 RE: GRANT APPLICATION FOR SHADY OAK LAKE LOOP TRAIL BRIDGE, SEGMENT E-3 On November 17, 1994, staff met with Dan Collins, DNR Supervisor TraIl Recreation Services and Administrator for the Minnesota Cooperative Grants Program to review the status of our $50,000 grant to construct Segments G-3 (and E-4). This segment Is the link between the Loop TraU System, the SW LRT Corridor Trail and Bryant Lake Regional Park. Upon completion of that disoussion Mr. Collins inquired as to whether or not the City would be Interested in requesting some '"tumback- funds available at this time. Staff suggested tha Shady Oak Lake Bridge on Outlot B connecting to the SW LRT Corridor Trail at Dominick Drive was a possible projel::t Mr. Collins indicated that the bridge and trail would appear to be an acceptable application of the funds and suggested we apply as soon as possible. The turnback . funds are available .on a first come first serve ba9is~ rather than through a oompetltive distribution as before. . . . .. . -- .... .. - . .....h .....+ Maximum funding in the program is for 50 peroent up to $50,000. Approximately $38,000 is available with additional tumback monies anticipated. Like the Initial solicitation, the contract must be let by June 30. 1995, with construction completed by August 30, 1995. Segment E-3 (inc1uding the bridge) is listed in year 1994 of the current 1994-1998 elP. This segment was not moved forward in the proposed 1995-1999 CIP, Construction of this segment has been tied to the pending CP Rail easement and Shady Oak Beach redevelopment project The total estimated cost of Segment E-3 is $130,000. The previously Qstimated costs directly associated with the bridge a.nd immediate trail connections ara calculated to be approximately $77,000. The bridge structure alone costs $33,000. Therefore it would be staffs expectation that we could receive the entire $38,000 currently available if chosen. Pnsr-It.. brand fax transmittal memo 767'1 ) F_. I co. .) t)epI, Pht;W'le' fa!( , , , ~. . . . .. ... . ".c rOTA:... P.01 n__ - - ~--- .... .. n..... :II .... .. .... ~ ... ... n....... 0 1. .. ~ "',,- , = .0'. ' . ., . < . -.... .", .0'.::.'" 0 .oC............ . < . .... ... .... _ .. . _ ..li.... . :~;'. - 1::n.:'~'s.'.' . ~ 0'" ~ .. 3 i a 11 . If 11 : .......::ci\.+ L -!t)m~..... . _ .. _.. r III g. III _ _ r ~ _ "Q" '.' ," ...'!'l..... i 0 ..!. U "Q ~ :s... n 0 III 0"0'" .#j..: ..Xi."' ,.~f)(.:.'. _ 0 ~. ~ ...." · - o ..~ ~:. :2. 5' .. ~ .., ~. ,. · {,. ,. a · < l i";: -C/l "1:l:~i ll~4(( .. ~ ~ ... .. _ _ ! _ . ' . ... _ _ .~'^ -" i ."*''''.. o CIIl ... .. ::=; - 0 _ 0 - - 0 .. '1'::':: ~.. .._,,,. . ."""'~"" _" _ ' ..v. .~. < " i . ~ _. .."'_ .. 0 ,... If .' 0" ..;>- -.. . ",.,,, .1 ...'So.o '" ..g 0 l' <" :>-0 "''ii~ ..: ~. <.. ... ~. _'_ 0 0 . .... III .... ::~,', g.' .<..,::;.-.:,,';: . . - . - ' " . ...... ) :s _ ... =:... Q ~ ~ t= ~o ~ ~ ....... r- Ul ~ .,. C/l" .... ~I :O!>...i'i\: e. I~:. ~ 3..~. WItH} - ,,- . -' ". ~ - ..- ........ .--..' . ~ 0.. . 0 ~ . s. '" { i ::T Cl 0 5':""~{; '" 'I''''~:' .1' .:'?fftt,. ~"I ~;:='-. 01 I (1111l~'" 0< eo. - ~ -'; ~ '.- __. . _ If c... .."". ~ . . < .. i. 0 _ _ o. i!. i!. ....~ ..... :<; i *"', 0 .'~ .J'.' ~ 1:" i ~ !l 0 0 - ",-.. 0 eft .o,t.... Ill' n ;. ,Yo.,..... .. ~ 4It "1].' ,"'~ _... _ _ _ _~. ~ _ _ '~_.' -n .' - '.' ". .".... -.... - - .. . .--_. . - .~ .' ~ If . i ~ _ _ .. t. t.. n { 0 i :II o. ,'~ C 1'.- '" .... .:~'#.!.): - ;~ ..g ~ ~. iC --9...."!;...... ,,%(If i!. ~.- ~ t~ t.ih .I..l H<i~~...::r i - ~% ilif\ ia a::'s6. ~.. g:. U~...;;; ~i;; g II =' It~1t] _ .. 3 ~ . g, !> g ..:11 g I\- 0 ~ · i ~ 0 .~,".^" ""',.- ~ Bsi! ~ .g~ 6'blZ- ~\?! ~, ;. ..Ii . _ _. -g... t,>....3 .. n · '"," .~.,,' -" .. . _ . :< 0 '$' _ . _ &ffi. -~' ",,'it o g il ~ _. " 0 _ - ,..0 .. 0 0 .n'''~' .......... .,..:X... N' e _ ... < 0 _ '" 0 ."!!. _. -';::;;;' 1!iffi' ,~tlfJli! . . ...1" ' " .. .... .. " - .. If ..~,.....-~" ~ . .:>- :>- :>- .. '""' n n ",. ,.." ,.w., .........: l \\ \ ~~. p~ t m l~ , ~~ II .~. con . ~ " ~ " "" ~ ~ ",to .Mt:: ..., ".. 'J .. · ..' ..' .~. ,,,,"" .. " to · - · '" .. .. ... '" .. ~:>- .. '!> "'" " '" .. n ~ i I 'i~ _0 ~ ......' ~~s.~ \ n~ Ui n i \ I .. -a- .. :< n--" ~ o:g ~ !~ :~:"<::~:~::::;: ._.._ I ~ .,,>eO,....., .. ...N.... !l: w;tn \ I ~~~ii . ADDITION OF A SLIDE ON DEEP WATER PLATFORMS The addition of a large "water slide" was discussed at a May 25, 1994 meeting with the Shady Oak Beach area residents. Residents attending the meeting generally opposed this idea as a means to increase attendance at the facility. The addition of smaller "recreational" slides to the diving areas were discussed by Council Members at the joint meeting. This option appears to include less restrictions as far as health and liability concerns, although these issues would still need to be addressed. The addition of a smaller slide could be accommodated with the redevelopment of the beach or added at a later time. Adaptability to changing water depths would be an important issue to address if the addition of a slide was considered. CONSULTANTS COMMENT Addition of a slide could be accommodated assuming liability and health department concerns can be addressed. PROVISION OF ADEQUATE SHADE AREAS CONSULT ANTS COMMENT Shady areas will be extensive, including: . 0 Pergolas around upper plaza- basically a roof structure that will provide extensive areas of shade. 0 Tree plantings - additional overstory trees can be added to provide additional shade. 0 Building roof overhangs will provide shade when people are standing or waiting in line. ADDITIONAL PARKING ON EAST SIDE OF SHADY OAK ROAD The property located to the east of Shady Oak Road is privately owned. Negotiations for the purchase of the land would be required with any purchase involving a considerable expense. If the City Councils wish to pursue this possibility, it would provide valuable parking for the facility and eliminate current parking restrictions. CONSULTANTS COMMENT Initial concerns include the cost and impact on the land. Tree removal and grading would be extensive. It would also eliminate a natural buffer between adjacent residential properties and Shady Oak Road which may be contentious. . . POTENTIAL FOR PROJECT PHASING CONSULTANTS COMMENT Given the nature of the project, the potential to phase construction would be limited. Simply stated, the function of the beach depends on most of the elements shown on the plan. There is some opportunity to phase peripheral components such as play areas, decks, and peninsula and outlot B improvements. The total potential costs associated with these items is approximately $200,000. REDEVELOPMENT POSSIDILITIES BASED ON THE AL TERNA TIVE OF A $1,000,000 BUDGET CONSULTANTS COMMENT Overview This memo addresses the impact that limiting the development budget to $1,000,000 (as apposed to the $1,659,484 as defined in the master plan cost analysis - September, 1994) would have on the design of Shady Oak Beach. . Perspective The current design for the beach area was an outgrowth of the specific program objectives defined during the planning and design process. The costs associated with that design are estimated to be $1,659,484. To limit potential costs to $1,000,000, significant programmatic and design changes will be necessary. The following defines possible ways to reduce the overall development cost estimate and the potential impact that those reductions will have on the design. Cost Analysis Section Potential Change Impact to Design Potential Savings (from $1,659,484) Section 1 - Removals Retain existing buildings Must commit to (19,000) renovation of existing structures. Section 2 . Earthwork Adjust grades only to By reusing existing (l0,000) and General Utilities accommodate ADA structures, adjusting the accessibility . grades in the beach area to meet ADA requirements and provide more "usable space" becomes more . difficult to achieve. - - e Cost Analysis Section Potential Change Impact to Design Potential Savings (from $1,659,484) Section 3 - Buildings and Renovate existing Eliminates major (290,000) Architecture buildings to meet program objective of minimal requirements as improving function of Note: This limits work apposed to constructing buildings. Would on existing buildings to new buildings. Includes require complete the minimum required minimal space expansion redesign of the master for ADA compliance. It to meet pressing needs. plan for the beach area. only provides minimal Also greatly impacts additional square footage Note: November 20, aesthetic appeal and for identified program 1994 letter addressed atmosphere of the beach needs. this issue, as well. area. Section 4 - Pavements Reduce extent of Reduces the amount of (100,000) and Retaining Walls retaining walls and new usable space due to walk areas to minimum elimination of most required for basic access retaining walls. and egress. Reduces extent of walkways that improve site accessibility. Reduces extent of courtyard paving and accessible gathering . areas. Section 5 - Decks, Eliminate all decks. Reduces diversity of site (60,000) Docks, Platforms, Piers Leave in renovation of amenities available. existing diving platform and fishing pier. Section 6 - Play Areas Eliminate waterworks Reduces diversity of (40,000) play area. amenities for young children. Section 7 - Misc. Site Reduce quality of Significantly takes away (30,000) Improvements fencing and reduce from visual appeal of extent of site amenities park site. Section 8 - Reduce extent of Takes away from visual (10,000) Landscaping/Seed and landscaping. appeal of park site. Sod Section 9 - Site Lighting No change Already considered (0) recommended. minimal necessary for site safety. Totals Potential Savings (559,000) . . Summary Statement of Potential Savings Original Construction Subtotal 1,371,475 Total Potential Savings as listed above (559,000) Revised Construction Subtotal 812,475 Construction Contingency (10 %) 81,247 Revised Construction and Contingency 893,722 Design and Engineering Fees (10%) 89,372 Revised Grand Total 1,064,342 Comment Please consider the above table of potential cost savings as a preliminary assessment of how costs could be reduced. Further study is recommended if a more thorough investigation of potential savings is desired. Although preliminary, the above table does illustrate that limiting development costs to $1,000,000 will significant impact the design of the beach area's redevelopment. Simply stated; the design as currently presented could not be . developed for $1,000,000. BEACH RELATED FEES AND SCHOLARSHIP AVAILABILITY FOR LOW INCOME RESIDENTS The Joint Recreation Board reviewed staff recommendations for 1995 Shady Oak Beach fee adjustments at their February 8, 1995 meeting. These recommendations were approved by the Joint Recreation Board and will be forwarded to the Minnetonka City Council for coru;ideration on March 27. Recommended changes include an increase in non-resident season pass rates from $25 to $27. The resident rate would remain at $18. In addition, daily parking fees are recommended to be increased $0.25 to $2.50 and daily admission rates increased $0.25 to $1.50. Scholarships, which provide opportunities for low income residents of Hopkins and Minnetonka to participate in programs sponsored by Recreation Services, are also available to users of the beach. In 1994, scholarships were processed for 22 residents applying for $394 in scholarships. Information regarding the scholarship program is included in each of the departments program brochures which are mailed three times annually to all residents of Hopkiru; and Minnetonka. A listing of scholarships issued by the City is attached for your reVIew. . 1994 SCHOLARSHIPS (SHADY OAK BEACH) 17-Feb-95 . SCHOLARSHI P SCHOLARSHIP AMT RECEIVED AMT RECEIVED DATE CODE/PROGRAM MINNETONKA HOPKINS 12-Jul-94 3863 Beach Permit 18.00 02-May-94 3863 Beach Permit 16.00 31-May-94 3863 Beach Permit 18.00 06-Jun-94 3863 Beach Permit 18.00 03-May-94 3863 Beach Permit 18.00 16-Jun-94 3863 Beach Permit 18.00 16-Jun-94 3863 Beach Permit 18.00 03-Jun-94 3863 Beach Permit 18.00 06-Jun-94 3863 Beach Permit 18.00 21-Jun-94 3863 Beach Permit 18.00 21-Jun-94 3863 Beach Permit 18.00 19-Jul-94 3863 Beach Permit 18.00 09-May-94 3863 Beach Permit 18.00 25-Apr-94 3863 Beach Permit 18.00 31-May-94 3863 Beach Permit 18.00 15-Jun-94 3863 Beach Permit 18.00 07-Jun-94 3863 Beach Permit 18.00 .02-May-94 3863 Beach Permit 18.00 11-May-94 3863 Beach Permit 18.00 20-Jun-94 3863 Beach Permit 18.00 04-Jul-94 3863 Beach Permit 18.00 07-Jul-94 3863 Beach Permit 18.00 YEAR TO DATE TOTAL: 108.00 286,00 . . SUMMARY Brauer and Associates, Ltd., along with City staff from Hopkins and Minnetonka have reviewed the before mentioned issues as summarized from the joint meeting of the Hopkins and Minnetonka City Councils. The Joint Recreation Board also reviewed each item at their December 13, 1995 meeting. Please advise if additional information is requested on these items, or any other issues which were not included in this memorandum. . .