IV.3. Ordinance 2024-1214 - Cargill Outlot Rezoning
CITY OF HOPKINS
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE 2024-1214
AN ORDINANCE REZONING THE PROPERTY AT 100 JACKSON AVE N (WITH PID
19-117-21-31-0069) FROM IX-S, EMPLOYMENT MIX SUBURBAN CENTER WITH A
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT TO RX-TOD, RESIDENTIAL-OFFICE MIX TOD
CENTER WITH A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT
THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HOPKINS DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS
FOLLOWS:
1. That the following described premises is hereby rezoned from IX-S, Employment
Mix Suburban Center with a Planned Unit Development to RX-TOD, Residential-
Office Mix Transit Oriented Development Center with a Planned Unit Development.
2. The property to be rezoned is legally described in Exhibit A.
First Reading: September 3, 2024
Second Reading: September 10, 2024
Date of Publication: September 19, 2024
Date Ordinance Takes Effect: September 19, 2024
________________________
ATTEST: Patrick Hanlon, Mayor
__________________________
Amy Domeier, City Clerk
Exhibit A
Legal Description of Subject Parcel
That part of Lot 3, Block 1, Excelsior Crossings 2nd Addition, embraced within the
following described three parcels:
(1) Lot 3, Block 1, Excelsior Crossings
(2) Lots 1 and 10, Block 13, West Minneapolis Center, and the vacated North and
South alley in said Block 13; and Lots 14 and 15, except the East 16 feet of Lots 14 and
15, Block 4, West Minneapolis Center, and that part of vacated First Street North,
dedicated in West Minneapolis Center, lying between the Southerly extensions across it
of the West line of the East 16.00 feet of Lot 14 and the West line of Lot 14 in Block 4,
West Minneapolis Center and that part of the South Half of vacated First Street North,
dedicated in the plat of West Minneapolis Center, lying easterly of the southerly
extension of the west line of the East 16 feet of Lot 14, Block 4, said plat, and westerly
of a line drawn from the southeast corner of Lot 13, said block, to the most northerly
northwest corner of Parcel 34C, City of Hopkins Highway Right-of-Way Plat No. 1
(3) That part of vacated 1st Street North, dedicated in the plat of Excelsior
Crossings, described as beginning at the northwest corner of Lot 4, Block 1, said plat:
thence on an assumed bearing of South 87 degrees 31 minutes 58 seconds East, along
the north line of said Lot 4, a distance of 17.50 feet; thence North 43 degrees 53
minutes 44 seconds West a distance of 15.57 feet to the west line of said 1st Street
North: thence South 32 degrees 35 minutes 57 seconds West, along said west line of
1st Street North, a distance of 12.42 feet to the point of beginning.
CITY OF HOPKINS
City Council Report 2024-110
To: Honorable Mayor and Council Members
Mike Mornson, City Manager
From: PeggySue Imihy, AICP – Special Projects and Initiatives Manger
Date: September 10, 2024
Subject: Award Contract for Central Park Master Plan and Pavilion Feasibility
Study
_____________________________________________________________________
RECOMMENDED ACTION
MOTION TO AWARD CONTRACT WITH BOLTON AND MENK NOT TO EXCEED
$291,724 FOR A CENTRAL PARK MASTER PLAN AND PAVILION FEASIBILITY
STUDY.
OVERVIEW
Following the update made at the August 20, 2024, Council Meeting regarding the Park
System Master Plan and Central Park Project, Staff seeks the awarding of a contract to
Bolton and Menk and their subconsultants for the Central Park and Pavilion projects.
As discussed at the August 20th meeting, this project would provide design and
construction documents for the renovation of Central Park and a study to understand the
feasibility of a future expansion of the Hopkins Pavilion. This also includes a significant
evaluation of the soil conditions and potential contamination through the park from
previous illegal dumping activities. This project would be done in partnership with the Nine
Mile Creek Watershed District (NMCWD) who has offered to contribute both staff capacity
and funding to the project.
The total cost of the initial design and feasibility is $291,724 which will be paid with park
dedication fees and a $50,000 contribution from NMCWD. The City currently has
$526,100 in restricted park dedication funds which can be allocated to this project. Final
Design and Construction will come before the City Council following this phase, likely in
2026. For project construction staff will be seeking all available grant and partnership
opportunities through the County, State and other partners.
SUPPORTING INFORMATION
• Professional Services Agreement with Bolton and Menk
Administration
City of Hopkins Standard Agreement (Modified from 2004 Standard Form) VER. 12/05/2017
Page 1 of 9
AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
CENTRAL PARK IMPROVEMENTS & PAVILION EXPANSION FEASIBILITY
CITY OF HOPKINS, MINNESOTA
This Agreement, made this 10th day of September 2024, by and between CITY OF HOPKINS, 1010 1st
St S, Hopkins, MN 55343, hereinafter referred to as CLIENT, and BOLTON & MENK, INC., 12224
Nicollet Avenue, Burnsville, MN 55337, hereinafter referred to as CONSULTANT.
WITNESS, whereas the CLIENT requires professional services in conjunction with the CENTRAL
PARK IMPROVEMENTS & PAVILION EXPANSION FEASIBILITY and whereas the
CONSULTANT agrees to furnish the various professional services required by the CLIENT.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and promises between the parties hereto,
it is agreed:
SECTION I - CONSULTANT'S SERVICES
A. The CONSULTANT agrees to perform the various Basic Services in connection with the proposed
project as described in Exhibit I.
B. Upon mutual agreement of the parties hereto, Additional Services may be authorized as described
in Exhibit I or as described in Paragraph IV.B.
SECTION II - THE CLIENT'S RESPONSIBILITIES
A. The CLIENT shall promptly compensate the CONSULTANT in accordance with Section III of this
Agreement.
B. The CLIENT shall place any and all information related to the project in its custody at the disposal
of the CONSULTANT for its use. Such information shall include but shall not be limited boundary
surveys, topographic surveys, preliminary sketch plan layouts, building plans, soil surveys,
abstracts, deed descriptions, tile maps and layouts, aerial photos, utility agreements, environmental
reviews, and zoning limitations. The CONSULTANT may rely upon the accuracy and sufficiency
of all such information in performing services unless otherwise instructed, in writing, by CLIENT.
This obligation shall not include information that is classified as private or confidential under the
Minnesota Government Data Practices Act (MGDPA), unless access to such information is
essential to the CONSULTANT’s scope of services, in which case the CLIENT shall establish in
writing, and CONSULTANT shall comply with, any conditions governing access to and use of
such private or confidential information.
C. The CLIENT will guarantee access to and make all provisions for entry upon both public and
private portions of the project and pertinent adjoining properties.
D. The CLIENT will give prompt notice to the CONSULTANT whenever the CLIENT observes or
otherwise becomes aware of any defect in the proposed project.
City of Hopkins Standard Agreement (Modified from 2004 Standard Form) VER. 12/05/2017
Page 2 of 9
E. The CLIENT shall designate a liaison person to act as the CLIENT'S representative with respect to
services to be rendered under this Agreement. Said representative shall have the authority to
transmit instructions, receive instructions, receive information, interpret and define the CLIENT'S
policies with respect to the project and CONSULTANT'S services.
F. The CLIENT shall provide such legal, accounting, independent cost estimating and insurance
counseling services as may be required for completion of the consultant services described in this
agreement.
G. The CLIENT will obtain any and all regulatory permits required for the proper and legal execution
of the project.
H. The CLIENT will hire, when requested by the CONSULTANT, an independent test company to
perform laboratory and material testing services, and soil investigation that can be justified for the
proper design and construction of the project. The CONSULTANT shall assist the CLIENT in
selecting a testing company. Payment for testing services shall be made directly to the testing
company by the CLIENT and is not part of this Agreement.
City of Hopkins Standard Agreement (Modified from 2004 Standard Form) VER. 12/05/2017
Page 3 of 9
SECTION III - COMPENSATION FOR SERVICES
A. FEES.
1. The CLIENT will compensate the CONSULTANT in accordance with the following schedule
of fees for the time spent in performance of Agreement services.
Schedule of Fees
Classification Hourly Rates
Sr. Project Manager – Sr. Principal Engineer/Surveyor $155-280/Hour
Sr. Project Manager – Principal Engineer/Surveyor $150-225/Hour
Project Manager $135-195/Hour
Project/Design Engineer /Planner/Surveyor/Landscape Architect $120-190/Hour
Specialist (Nat. Resources; GIS; Traffic; Other) $90-150/Hour
Senior Technician (Inc. Survey1) $110-180/Hour
Technician (Inc. Survey1) $100-150/Hour
Administrative/Corporate Specialists $90-125/Hour
Structural/Electrical/Mechanical/Architect $120-$150/Hour
GPS/Robotic Survey Equipment No Charge
CAD/Computer Usage No Charge
Routine Photo Copying/Reproduction No Charge
Routine Office Supplies No Charge
Field Supplies/Survey Stakes & Equipment No Charge
Mileage No Charge
1No separate charges will be made for GPS or robotic total stations on Bolton & Menk, Inc. survey assignments; the
cost of this equipment is included in the rates for Survey Technicians.
2. Total cost for the services itemized under Exhibit I, Tasks 1-7 (Basic Services) is estimated to
be $269,031. Total cost for the services itemized under Exhibit I, Task 10 (Add Alternative
Services) is estimated to be $22,693. Itemization of this cost is as shown in the attached
DETAILED WORK PLAN and PROJECT FEES tables, attached hereto as Exhibit II.
3. In addition to the foregoing, CONSULTANT shall be reimbursed at cost plus an overhead fee
(not-to-exceed 10%) for the following Direct Expenses when incurred in the performance of the
work.
a. CLIENT approved outside (facilities not owned by CONSULTANT) computer services.
b. CLIENT approved outside professional and technical services.
c. Outside reproduction and reprographic charges.
d. Expendable field supplies and special field equipment rental.
e. Other costs for such additional items and services that the CLIENT may require the
CONSULTANT to provide to fulfill the terms of this Agreement.
4. Additional services as outlined in Section I.B will vary depending upon project conditions and
will be billed on an hourly basis at the rate described in Section III.A.1.
5. The payment to the CONSULTANT will be made by the CLIENT upon billing at intervals not
more often than monthly at the herein rates. Itemized invoices identifying all work completed
shall be submitted to the CLIENT by CONSULTANT and paid in the same manner as other
claims made to the CLIENT.
City of Hopkins Standard Agreement (Modified from 2004 Standard Form) VER. 12/05/2017
Page 4 of 9
SECTION IV - GENERAL
A. STANDARD OF CARE
Professional services provided under this Agreement will be conducted in a manner consistent with
that level of care and skill ordinarily exercised by members of the Consultant's profession currently
practicing under similar conditions. No warranty, express or implied, is made.
B. CHANGE IN PROJECT SCOPE
In the event the CLIENT changes or is required to change the scope of the project from that
described in Section I and/or the applicable addendum, and such changes require Additional
Services by the CONSULTANT, the CONSULTANT shall be entitled to additional compensation
at the applicable hourly rates. The CONSULTANT shall give notice to the CLIENT of any
Additional Services, prior to furnishing such additional services and the CLIENT must approve an
Additional Services in writing. The CLIENT may request an estimate of additional cost from the
CONSULTANT, and upon receipt of the request, the CONSULTANT shall furnish such, prior to
authorization of the changed scope of work.
C. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR
The CONSULTANT shall at times be deemed an independent contractor. The CONSULTANT is
not to be deemed an employee or agent of the CLIENT and has no authority to make any binding
commitments or obligations on behalf of the CLIENT except to the extent expressly provided
herein. All services provided by the CONSUTANT pursuant to this agreement shall be provide on
an independent contractor basis not as an employee of the CLIENT for any purpose including, but
not limited to, income tax withholding, workers’ compensation, unemployment compensation,
FICA taxes, liability for torts, and eligibility for employee benefits.
D. LIMITATION OF LIABILITY
CONSULTANT shall indemnify, defend, and hold harmless CLIENT and its officials, agents and
employees from any loss, claim, liability, and expense (including reasonable attorneys’ fees and
expenses of litigation) arising from, or based in the whole, or in any part, on any negligent act or
omission by CONSULTANT’S employees, agents, or subconsultants. In no event shall CLIENT
be liable to CONSULTANT for consequential, incidental, indirect, special, or punitive damages.
CLIENT shall indemnify, defend, and hold harmless CONSULTANT and its employees and
subconsultants from any loss, claim, liability, and expense (including reasonable attorneys’ fees and
expenses of litigation) arising from, or based in the whole, or in any part, on any negligent act or
omission by CLIENT’S employees, agents, or consultants. In no event shall CONSULTANT be
liable to CLIENT for consequential, incidental, indirect, special, or punitive damages.
Nothing contained in this Agreement shall be construed as a limitation on or waiver of any
immunities or limitations on liability otherwise available to the CLIENT. Nothing contained in this
Agreement shall create a contractual relationship with or a cause of action in favor of a third party
against either the CLIENT or the CONSULTANT. The CONSULTANT'S services under this
Agreement are being performed solely for the CLIENT'S benefit, and no other entity shall have any
claim against the CONSULTANT because of this Agreement or the performance or
nonperformance of services provided hereunder. The CLIENT agrees to include a provision in all
City of Hopkins Standard Agreement (Modified from 2004 Standard Form) VER. 12/05/2017
Page 5 of 9
contracts with contractors and other entities involved in this project to carry out the intent of the
paragraph.
E. INSURANCE
1. The CONSULTANT agrees to maintain, at CONSULTANT’S expense a commercial general
liability and excess umbrella general liability insurance policy or policies insuring CONSULTANT
against claims for bodily injury, death or property damage arising out of CONSULTANT’S general
business activities. The general liability coverage shall provide limits of not less than $2,000,000
per occurrence and not less than $2,000,000 general aggregate. Coverage shall include Premises
and Operations Bodily Injury and Property Damage; Personal and Advertising Injury; Blanket
Contractual Liability; Products and Completed Operations Liability.
2. The CONSULTANT also agrees to maintain, at CONSULTANT’S expense, a single limit or
combined limit automobile liability insurance and excess umbrella liability policy or policies
insuring owned, non-owned and hired vehicles used by CONSULTANT under this Agreement.
The automobile liability coverages shall provide limits of not less than $1,000,000 per accident for
property damage, $2,000,000 for bodily injuries, death and damages to any one person and
$2,000,000 for total bodily injury, death and damage claims arising from one accident.
3. CLIENT shall be named Additional Insured for the above liability policies.
4. The CONSULTANT agrees to maintain, at the CONSULTANT'S expense, statutory worker's
compensation coverage together with Coverage B, Employer’s Liability limits of not less than
$500,000 for Bodily Injury by Disease per employee, $500,000.00 for Bodily Injury by Disease
aggregate and $500,000 for Bodily Injury by Accident.
5. During the period of design and construction of the project, the CONSULTANT also agrees to
maintain, at CONSULTANT’S expense, Professional Liability Insurance coverage insuring
CONSULTANT against damages for legal liability arising from an error, omission or negligent act
in the performance of professional services required by this agreement. The professional liability
insurance coverage shall provide limits of not less than $2,000,000 per claim and an annual
aggregate of not less than $2,000,000 on a claims-made basis.
6. Prior to commencement of this Agreement, the CONSULTANT will provide the CLIENT with
certificates of insurance, showing evidence of required coverages. All policies of insurance shall
contain a provision or endorsement that the coverage afforded will not be canceled or reduced in
limits by endorsement for any reason except non-payment of premium, until at least 30 days’ prior
written notice has been given to the CLIENT, and at least 10 days’ prior written notice in the case
of non-payment of premium.
F. OPINIONS OR ESTIMATES OF CONSTRUCTION COST
Where provided by the CONSULTANT as part of Exhibit I or otherwise, opinions or estimates of
construction cost will generally be based upon public construction cost information. Since the
CONSULTANT has no control over the cost of labor, materials, competitive bidding process,
weather conditions and other factors affecting the cost of construction, all cost estimates are
opinions for general information of the CLIENT and the CONSULTANT does not warrant or
guarantee the accuracy of construction cost opinions or estimates. The CLIENT acknowledges that
City of Hopkins Standard Agreement (Modified from 2004 Standard Form) VER. 12/05/2017
Page 6 of 9
costs for project financing should be based upon contracted construction costs with appropriate
contingencies.
G. CONSTRUCTION SERVICES
It is agreed that the CONSULTANT and its representatives shall not be responsible for the means,
methods, techniques, schedules or procedures of construction selected by the contractor or the
safety precautions or programs incident to the work of the contractor.
H. USE OF ELECTRONIC/DIGITAL DATA
Because of the potential instability of electronic/digital data and susceptibility to unauthorized
changes, copies of documents that may be relied upon by CLIENT are limited to the printed copies
(also known as hard copies) that are signed or sealed by CONSULTANT. Except for
electronic/digital data which is specifically identified as a project deliverable by this
AGREEMENT or except as otherwise explicitly provided in this AGREEMENT, all
electronic/digital data developed by the CONSULTANT as part of the PROJECT is acknowledged
to be an internal working document for the CONSULTANT’S purposes solely and any such
information provided to the CLIENT shall be on an “AS IS” basis strictly for the convenience of
the CLIENT without any warranties of any kind. As such, the CLIENT is advised and
acknowledges that use of such information may require substantial modification and independent
verification by the CLIENT (or its designees). Provision of electronic/digital data, whether
required by this Agreement or provided as a convenience to the Client, does not include any license
of software or other systems necessary to read, use or reproduce the information. It is the
responsibility of the CLIENT to verify compatibility with its system and long-term stability of
media. CLIENT shall indemnify and hold harmless CONSULTANT and its Subconsultants from
all claims, damages, losses, and expenses, including attorneys' fees arising out of or resulting from
third party use or any adaptation or distribution of electronic/digital data provided under this
AGREEMENT, unless such third party use and adaptation or distribution is explicitly authorized by
this AGREEMENT.
I. DATA PRACTICES
All data collected, created, received, maintained, or disseminated, or used for any purposes in the
course of the CONSULTANT’S performance of the Agreement is governed by the Minnesota
Government Data Practices Act, Minnesota Statutes Section 13.01, et seq. or any other applicable
state statutes and state rules adopted to implement the Act, as well as state statutes and federal
regulations on data privacy. The Consultant agrees to abide by these statutes, rules and regulations
and as they may be amended. In the event the CONSULTANT receives a request to release data, it
shall notify CLIENT as soon as practical. The CLIENT will give instructions concerning release of
data to requesting party and CONSULTANT will be reimbursed as Additional Services by CLIENT
for its reasonable expenses in complying with the request.
City of Hopkins Standard Agreement (Modified from 2004 Standard Form) VER. 12/05/2017
Page 7 of 9
J. PERIOD OF AGREEMENT
This Agreement will remain in effect for the longer of a period of two years or such other explicitly
identified completion period, after which time the Agreement may be extended upon mutual
agreement of both parties.
K PAYMENTS
If CLIENT fails to make any payment due CONSULTANT for services and expenses within 60
days after date of the CONSULTANT'S itemized invoice, a service charge of one and one-half
percent (1.5%) per month or the maximum rate permitted by law, whichever is less, will be charged
on any unpaid balance. In addition after giving seven days' written notice to CLIENT,
CONSULTANT may, without waiving any claim or right against the CLIENT and without
incurring liability whatsoever to the CLIENT, suspend services and withhold project deliverables
due under this Agreement until CONSULTANT has been paid in full all amounts due for services,
expenses and charges.
L. TERMINATION
This Agreement may be terminated by the CLIENT for any reason or for convenience by the
CLIENT upon seven (7) days written notice. The CONSULTANT may only terminate for non-
payment by CLIENT upon CLIENT’s failure to cure upon 30 days written notice.
M. CONTINGENT FEE
The CONSULTANT warrants that it has not employed or retained any company or person, other
than a bona fide employee working solely for the CONSULTANT to solicit or secure this Contract,
and that it has not paid or agreed to pay any company or person, other than a bona fide employee,
any fee, commission, percentage, brokerage fee, gift or any other consideration, contingent upon or
resulting from award or making of this Agreement.
N. NON-DISCRIMINATION
The provisions of any applicable law or ordinance relating to civil rights and discrimination shall be
considered part of this Agreement as if fully set forth herein.
The CONSULTANT is an Equal Opportunity Employer and it is the policy of the
CONSULTANT that all employees, persons seeking employment, subcontractors, subconsultants
and vendors are treated without regard to their race, religion, sex, color, national origin, disability,
age, sexual orientation, marital status, public assistance status or any other characteristic protected
by federal, state or local law.
O. CONTROLLING LAW
This Agreement is to be governed by the law of the State of Minnesota.
City of Hopkins Standard Agreement (Modified from 2004 Standard Form) VER. 12/05/2017
Page 8 of 9
P. DISPUTE RESOLUTION
CLIENT and CONSULTANT agree to negotiate all disputes between them in good faith for a
period of 30 days from the date of notice of dispute prior to proceeding to formal dispute resolution
or exercising their rights under law.
Q. SURVIVAL
All obligations, representations and provisions made in or given in Section IV of this Agreement
will survive the completion of all services of the CONSULTANT under this Agreement or the
termination of this Agreement for any reason.
R. SEVERABILITY
Any provision or part of the Agreement held to be void or unenforceable under any law or
regulation shall be deemed stricken, and all remaining provisions shall continue to be valid and
binding upon CLIENT and CONSULTANT, who agree that the Agreement shall be reformed to
replace such stricken provision or part thereof with a valid and enforceable provision that comes as
close as possible to expressing the intention of the stricken provision.
S. AUDIT DISCLOSURE
The CONSULTANT must allow the CLIENT, or its duly authorized agents, and the state auditor or
legislative auditor reasonable access to the CONSULTANT’s books, records, documents, and
accounting procedures and practices that are pertinent to all services provided under this Agreement
for a minimum of six years from the termination of this Agreement.
[remainder of the page intentionally blank]
City of Hopkins Standard Agreement (Modified from 2004 Standard Form) VER. 12/05/2017
Page 9 of 9
SECTION V - SIGNATURES
THIS INSTRUMENT embodies the whole agreement of the parties, there being no promises, terms,
conditions or obligation referring to the subject matter other than contained herein. This Agreement may
only be amended, supplemented, modified or canceled by a duly executed written instrument signed by
both parties.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed in their behalf.
CLIENT: City of Hopkins, Minnesota CONSULTANT: Bolton & Menk, Inc.
Mike Waltman, P.E., Burnsville Work Group
Leader
9/10/2024
Date
Date
CENTRAL PARK MASTER PLAN & PAVILION
EXPANSION FEASIBILITY STUDY
SCOPE OF SERVICES
TASK 1: PROJECT INITIATION
Task 1 includes time and effort to align the project team around important
project management objectives, such as communication protocols, critical
milestones and delivery dates, and the final engagement plan, including
preliminary identification of key stakeholders, community organizations, and
partner agencies.
1.1 SCHEDULE OF WORK TASKS
To communicate and track the schedule and task completion, the detailed
project schedule will be reviewed with city staff to confirm all desired
milestones, building off this proposed work plan. Within our scope of work,
our Bolton & Menk project manager will actively maintain the schedule
with updates shared routinely with the city’s project management team at
recurring check-in meetings. The schedule will continue to be focused on
project milestones and deliverable dates, and will identify the responsible
party for each deliverable and required review/response periods. This
schedule will be refined through discussion with staff based on the input
from various agencies and stakeholder needs, public engagement, and the
data collection required for project delivery.
1.2 CITY STAFF COORDINATION MEETING #1
This initial meeting will bring city staff and key project team members
together to ensure everyone understands the project scope, schedule and
deliverables. Discussion and review will include overall project goals, critical
success factors, project schedule, engagement and work plan, data needs
and availability, and communication protocols. The Bolton & Menk team will
provide meeting agendas and summaries for all staff coordination meetings.
Task 1 Meetings
• City staff coordination meeting #1
Task 1 Deliverables
• Updated engagement plan and schedule of work tasks
TASK 2: DATA COLLECTION
2.1 TOPOGRAPHIC & BOUNDARY SURVEY
Bolton & Menk will complete a topographic and boundary survey, on the
city’s standard datum, for the project site, as defined on the enclosed project
location and issues map. The survey will establish property boundary limits
and topographic conditions needed for final design and plan documentation
that meets city standards.
2.2 GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION AND PHASE 1 ESA
Braun Intertec will apply their existing knowledge of the site to inform
the feasibility of an expansion to the Hopkins Pavilion and site renovation
of Central Park. It is understood that the proposed pavilion expansion
is assumed to be a slab-on-grade facility with one story above (using
conventional foundations and steel framing), along with site improvements
for Central Park to potentially include a new soccer field, new volleyball
courts, additional pickleball courts, and new proposed shade structures.
In response to the RFP scope of work, we have reviewed the statutory
requirements for requiring an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW)
and do not see a mandatory EAW being required for this project. While
it is possible the city could require an EAW of itself, we do not anticipate
the need for further evaluation of an EAW. Recognizing the underlying
soil conditions that our team has familiarity with; however, we would
recommend a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) be completed for
the site coupled with necessary geotechnical field investigation.
Braun Intertec’s exploration work on-site dates back to at least 1968. A 1968
report by Braun indicates environmental impacts from the landfill including
‘dump debris’, wood, glass, rubber, paper, tin, etc. In 2015 Braun’s most
recent on-site environmental work took place in the northwest parking lot,
SCOPE OF SERVICES
CENTRAL PARK MASTER PLAN & PAVILION EXPANSION
FEASIBILITY STUDY | CITY OF HOPKINS 01
Exhibit I
adjacent to the pickleball courts. During oversight of the excavations, Braun
and Bolton & Menk staff observed debris such as concrete, asphalt, glass
bottles, wood, rebar, coal, and miscellaneous garbage. Petroleum odors were
also documented. Our team understands that in the mid-1960s, this landfill
activity moved further south in Hopkins and ultimately a much larger landfill
by surface area was created, though Central Park soils may be comprised of
similar material.
To identify and comprehensively document the history of the site, Braun
Intertec will conduct a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) of the
site in accordance with ASTM International (ASTM) Practice E1527-21 and 40
Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 312. The purpose of the Phase I ESA
will be to identify recognized environmental conditions (RECs) in connection
with the property. The Phase I ESA will include a government and historical
records review, site reconnaissance, interviews, and data evaluation.
The results of the Phase I ESA will be summarized in a written report,
provided electronically, documenting information sources used, findings
and conclusions, and the professional opinion of Braun Intertec regarding
the impact of any potential environmental concerns in connection with
the site. Appendices to the report will include copies of available historical
information (e.g., fire insurance maps, aerial photographs, etc.). In addition
the scope of the Phase I ESA, Braun Intertec will collect on-site soil boring
information to bolster the understanding of the site.
Three soil borings will be taken for the preliminary expansion considerations
at the Pavilion. The purpose of this initial geotechnical evaluation will be to
characterize subsurface geologic conditions at selected exploration locations,
evaluate their impact, and provide geotechnical recommendations for the
preliminary design information for the Pavilion Expansion.
Braun Intertec will also perform these six borings in Central Park (for a total
of nine locations) to nominal depths of 15 to 25 feet below existing grade for
the project. Braun will perform standard penetration tests at 2.5-foot vertical
intervals to a depth of about 15 feet, and at 5-foot intervals at greater
depths. An additional six locations will be used to assist in identifying the
horizontal and vertical limits of the landfill.
2.3 REVIEW OF PREVIOUS PLANNING EFFORTS
We will review information from previous planning efforts that inform the
current and future use of Central Park and the Pavilion, and provide a brief
summary of how the following plans impact the plan for Central Park and the
Pavilion:
• City of Hopkins Park System Plan 2023
• Cultivate Hopkins 2040 Comprehensive Plan (as prepared by Bolton &
Menk)
• City of Hopkins Pedestrian and Bicycle Plan
• Nine Mile Creek Watershed District Concept Plan (as prepared by Barr
Engineering)
• Nine Mile Creek Watershed District Flood Study (as prepared by Barr
Engineering)
• ParkServe - Trust for Public Land
2.4 ONLINE PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT
Early engagement of the public should include opportunities for input on
proposed amenities, facilities, program, and priorities. An online survey
allows people to engage and provide input at their convenience. We will
work with staff to develop a survey tailored for Central Park and the Pavilion.
It is anticipated that this online engagement will include a questionnaire and
an INPUTiDTM map to allow respondents to provide place-based comments
on a map of the park.
CENTRAL PARK MASTER PLAN & PAVILION EXPANSION
FEASIBILITY STUDY | CITY OF HOPKINS 02SCOPE OF SERVICES
Exhibit I
2.5 CITY STAFF COORDINATION MEETING #2
In addition to project updates and outlining of next steps, city staff coordination
meeting #2 will include a review and discussion of the previous planning
efforts summary to ensure the project team is aligned with city staff on key
components of Central Park’s position within the larger system of parks,
recreation, and community developments. This meeting will also be used to
review findings from the site survey and geotechnical evaluation.
2.6 UPDATE MEMO #1
We will provide a project update memo to share project status and key findings
from Task 2 Data Collection
Task 2 Meetings
• City staff coordination meeting #2
Task 2 Deliverables:
• Topographic and boundary survey
• Baseline geotechnical report
• Summary of previous planning efforts
• Online public engagement: questionnaire and INPUTiDTM map
• Update Memo #1
TASK 3: CENTRAL PARK NEEDS ASSESSMENT AND
ANALYSIS
3.1 SITE TOUR
To begin the assessment of the quality and condition of existing assets, the
project team will visit the park and pavilion with key staff to deepen our
knowledge and understanding of the site. Inventory and analysis will include
assessment of the parks:
• Baseball fields (2)
• Tennis courts (4) on ISD 270 property
• Picnic facilities (grills, tables)
• Outdoor hockey rink/wiffleball enclosure
• Open skating rink
• Parking
• Pickleball courts (5)
• Shelters (2)
• Playground
• Restrooms/warming house
• Soccer/football field
• Softball field
• Site connectivity and circulations (all modes)
• Existing vegetation
• Experiential and visual quality
• Lighting
• Habitat/ecological conditions
• Current park maintenance practices
3.2 PRELIMINARY ISSUES AND OPPORTUNITIES DIAGRAM
To summarize and begin synthesizing our findings from the site visit, we will
develop a Preliminary Issues and Opportunities Diagram for Central Park.
This deliverable will summarize/synthesize findings from all previous tasks to
supplement the site tour information, including contextual information from
previous planning efforts. This diagram will continue to be developed and
evolve, layering findings from engagement and data collection tasks.
3.3 POP-UP EVENTS AND YOUTH- FOCUSED ENGAGEMENT
SUPPORT
We anticipate supporting pop-up and youth listening sessions conducted by city
staff to get input from community members in the project area to understand
how they use and would like to use Central Park. The Bolton & Menk Team will
provide one set of engagement materials for use by the city for pop-up events
and one set of materials for youth listening sessions to be conducted by the
city.
3.4 PARTNER AGENCIES, COMMUNITY ORGANIZATIONS, AND
KEY STAKEHOLDER MEETINGS
We will work with the city to host coordinated meetings with stakeholder
groups and key partner agencies and organizations to gather information and
give project updates. This is key to developing a plan that is informed and
CENTRAL PARK MASTER PLAN & PAVILION EXPANSION
FEASIBILITY STUDY | CITY OF HOPKINS 03SCOPE OF SERVICES
Exhibit I
supported by the community partners. We envision a revolving door style set
of in-person meetings where feasible and schedules allow. Virtual meetings
can also be facilitated should they be preferred by any group or individual.
3.5 CITY STAFF COORDINATION MEETING #3
City staff coordination meeting #3 will be used to review findings from the
pop-up engagement meetings, youth engagement, and stakeholder meetings
from Subtask 3.4. We will also use this time to discuss objectives for and
status of the ongoing ecological and natural resources investigations being
conducted by the project team.
3.6 IDENTIFY OPPORTUNITIES TO IMPROVE ECOLOGY AND
WILDLIFE HABITAT
Our team will identify preliminary opportunities to reduce maintenance
requirements, improve ecology, and create wildlife habitat. We will look
for opportunities to reduce impervious surfaces, minimize turf, improve
ecological habitat, and protect existing trees. Opportunities identified during
this task will then be detailed during concept and design development.
3.7 DETERMINE BMPS TO MEET NMCWD REQUIREMENTS
Nine Mile Creek Watershed District rules require stormwater management
be included as part of site redesign to minimize or reduce the impacts of
redevelopment on downstream waterbodies. The amount of stormwater
management required will be based on the proposed work at the park
(site disturbance and impervious surfaces). Our team will consider those
permit triggers to estimate pollutant reduction and stormwater rate control
requirements for the site based on the conceptual plan for Central Park and
the Pavilion. Actual best management practice (BMP) design and sizing will
be closely integrated with concept development and will likely be impacted
by the underlying condition of the site.
3.8 DETERMINE WATER QUALITY BMPS THAT ARE "ABOVE
AND BEYOND" OPPORTUNITIES
Alongside determination of the stormwater management requirements,
we will help identify stormwater practices considered "above and beyond"
the requirements that could be eligible for funding from project partners or
other granting organizations. For this task, we will help quantify thresholds
for BMPs that would exceed NMCWD requirements that may be eligible
for funding. Based on discussions with NMCWD staff, those BMPs of most
interest and alignment with organizational goals will be considered as
preliminary designs are developed in Task 4.
3.9 DETERMINE FEASIBILITY AND BENEFITS OF FLOODWATER
STORAGE IN CENTRAL PARK
The Barr/BMI design team will develop creative flood management concepts
that align our unique understanding of the hydrology of the site with critical
recreational components. Prior to concept development, we will work with
the City of Hopkins to develop design criteria, such as acceptable frequency
and duration of floodwater impacts, to ensure the design concepts are
aligned with intended park usage.
The feasibility analysis will include modeling of two flood management
concepts ranging in size to help determine the magnitude of flood
management necessary to improve adjacent and downstream flood issues.
Management of flood water in Central Park may have a significant impact on
the character of the park due to infrastructure elevations and topography.
As such, it will be necessary to discuss results and gauge cost implications
with partner organizations, including consideration of potential grant funding
sources. This subtask includes:
• Refinements to existing conditions XP-SWMM model based on up-to-date
data from Hopkins
• Develop and model flood storage concepts with project team
• Prepare cost estimate for preferred flood storage concept
• Prepare summary of results, including feasibility considerations, benefits,
and costs
3.10 DETERMINE FEASIBILITY OF INTEGRATING NINE MILE
CREEK HEADWATERS
The location of Central Park is unique in its proximity to Nine Mile Creek
at its source, or headwaters. This fact is unknown to many, making this
a remarkable opportunity to showcase the water resource itself and to
create a distinctive placemaking feature that speaks to visitors about their
relationship to water quality and habitat in their urban watershed.
CENTRAL PARK MASTER PLAN & PAVILION EXPANSION
FEASIBILITY STUDY | CITY OF HOPKINS 04SCOPE OF SERVICES
Exhibit I
During the park concept development phase, our team will consider
opportunities to manage the water in a way that:
• Makes the resource visible and accessible
• Provides educational or engagement opportunities
• Creates a unique user experience not seen within the Hopkins park
system
The feasibility analysis will include preparing sketches of potential
headwaters concepts and identifying preferred options for water source (e.g.,
surface drainage or re-routing of storm pipes from upstream neighborhoods).
The magnitude of this feature is likely to be impacted by the underlying
condition of the site, and so may change in scale within the two proposed
concept plans as described in Task 4.
3.11 NEEDS ASSESSMENT AND ANALYSIS SUMMARY
The Bolton & Menk team will prepare a needs assessment and analysis
summary detailing the work done to date, including a summary of key
findings from engagement activities, feasibility studies, and the identification
of issues and opportunities. This report will include any recommended
program, amenity, and facility updates to the existing Central Park Concept
Plans from the 2023 Hopkins Park System Plan and the NMCWD.
3.12 CITY STAFF COORDINATION MEETING #4
City staff coordination meeting #4 will focus on the review of the Needs
Assessment and Analysis Report, findings from the Community Co-Design
Meeting #2 and next steps of concept development.
3.13 UPDATE MEMO #2
We will provide a project update memo to share project status and key
findings from the needs assessment and analysis tasks
Task 3 Meetings
• Site tour
• Partner agency, community organization, and key stakeholder meetings (up to 10)
• Staff coordination meetings (2)
Task 3 Deliverables
• Preliminary issues and opportunities diagram
• Engagement materials for city use for pop-up events and youth engagement
• Needs assessment and analysis summary
• Update Memo #2
TASK 4: PRELIMINARY CONCEPT DESIGN
With a full understanding and confirmation of desired amenities, facilities,
programs, site conditions, constraints, opportunities, and feasibility of
stormwater and ecological improvements our team will be ready to move
into preliminary concept design.
4.1 PRELIMINARY DRAFT CONCEPTS
We will produce two alternative concepts that respond to two likely
scenarios for Central Park that emerge from our feasibility findings in Task 3.
We will also develop planning-level cost estimates for each concept. Graphics
will include plan drawings, sections, and output from 3D study models, as
needed to illustrate the design intent at the conceptual level.
4.2 CITY STAFF COORDINATION MEETING #5
City staff coordination meeting #5 will focus on getting feedback on the draft
concept alternatives to make refinements for a joint Park Board / City Council
workshop, in addition to general project updates and actions for next steps.
4.3 PARK BOARD MEETING #1
The Bolton & Menk team will provide the Park Board with an overall project
update including schedule, process, and findings from previous tasks,
including public engagement, needs assessment and analysis, and feasibility
studies. Preliminary draft concepts will also be presented for comment and
input from Park Board members ahead of a joint workshop with City Council.
4.4 PARK BOARD / CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP
The Bolton & Menk Team will develop presentation materials for a joint
workshop with City Council and the Park Board to get feedback from both
groups on the preliminary draft concepts before they are distributed for
public comment.
CENTRAL PARK MASTER PLAN & PAVILION EXPANSION
FEASIBILITY STUDY | CITY OF HOPKINS 05SCOPE OF SERVICES
Exhibit I
4.5 ONLINE ENGAGEMENT
Preliminary draft concepts will be shared on the INPUTiDTM online
engagement tool to get public feedback on the two concepts. Respondents
will be able to provide targeted feedback on specific elements of each design
to help inform the preferred concept.
4.6 REFINE PRELIMINARY DRAFT CONCEPTS
Based on comments from city staff and partner organizations and the Park
Board we will make final revisions to the two concepts plans and update
the preliminary cost estimates. These two final conceptual plans and
cost estimates will be included in the final park plan report to document
the process and findings that will inform the development of a preferred
preliminary concept and cost estimate.
4.7 CITY STAFF COORDINATION MEETING #6
City staff coordination meeting #6 will be used to review the final preliminary
concepts and gather feedback on a single preferred concept. This meeting
will also be used to provide project updates and prepare for next steps.
4.8 DEVELOP PREFERRED PRELIMINARY CONCEPT AND COST
ESTIMATE
Upon careful consideration of the input received on the two conceptual
alternatives, our team will work with city staff to determine a preferred
concept. This direction will be the basis of design for moving into final
design. At the completion of this step, the city will have enough information
to determine how far the budget will go and what can be included in final
design.
The deliverables for this step will consist of a preliminary engineering report
and 30% cost estimate.
4.9 UPDATE MEMO #3
We will provide a third update memo to share project status and key findings
from the preliminary concept design phase.
Task 4 Meetings
• Staff coordination meetings (2)
• Park Board Meeting
• Pop-up meetings (2)
Task 4 Deliverables
• Preliminary draft concepts and cost estimates (2)
• Online engagement
• Refined preliminary draft concepts
• Preferred preliminary concept and cost estimate
• Update Memo #3
TASK 5: CENTRAL PARK PLAN FINAL REPORT
A final park plan report will be developed to document the planning effort
for Central Park. This document will include a summary of input collected
throughout the process, the two conceptual design alternatives, the refined,
preferred alternative concept with cost estimate, and a memorandum
summarizing public input not incorporated into the final conceptual design
and justification for its exclusion.
5.1 DRAFT CENTRAL PARK PLAN REPORT
A draft report will be prepared and distributed for city staff review.
5.2 CITY STAFF COORDINATION MEETING #7
City staff coordination meeting #7 will focus on any revisions to the draft
plan required by staff in preparation for distribution of the draft plan to the
Community Co-Designers.
5.3 FINAL CENTRAL PARK PLAN REPORT
Working with city staff to incorporate feedback from the community co-
designers on the draft report, we will finalize the Central Park Plan for Park
Board approval.
5.4 PARK BOARD MEETING #2
Bolton & Menk will present the final Central Park Plan to the Hopkins Park
CENTRAL PARK MASTER PLAN & PAVILION EXPANSION
FEASIBILITY STUDY | CITY OF HOPKINS 06SCOPE OF SERVICES
Exhibit I
Board. As the Hopkins Park Board is not an approving body, the goal for this
meeting would be for the Park Board to recommend the plan for approval by
City Council.
5.5 CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL
Following the Park Board meeting, Bolton & Menk will present the Central
Park Plan to the Hopkins City Council for approval. This milestone will mark
the end of Phase I; Planning and Preliminary Design for the project, ushering
in final design.
Task 5 Meetings
• Staff coordination meeting
• Park Board meeting
• City Council meeting
Task 5 Deliverables
• Draft Central Park Plan Report
• Final Central Park Plan Report
TASK 6: PAVILION FEASIBILITY STUDY
6.1 PROJECT KICKOFF
Our team will meet with staff and project representatives to outline project
goals and objectives and define the expectations for the project. We will
review in detail the overall proposed project workplan with your team and
revise as necessary. Our team will collect and review any existing or new
data that is pertinent to the project understanding, as well as tour existing
facilities with city staff to better understand current community resources
for the Pavilion. Lastly, we will discuss communication expectations that will
be necessary day-to-day, as well as touchpoints with appropriate community
leadership.
6.2 EXISTING CONDITIONS/SITE ANALYSIS
The JLG team will assess the existing conditions of both the Pavilion and
site. Our team consists of Erik Olson and Tom Betti who designed the last
major addition and renovation to the Pavilion, giving us the experience and
expertise to deliver a report that not only looks at the condition of the facility
but also at the opportunities that exist for the future vision of the Pavilion
6.3 MARKET ANALYSIS
We will utilize the skills and tools of Ballard*King to lead the market analysis
portion of the data collection task of the work. The first step in the market
analysis process will be working with your team to identify appropriate
primary and secondary service areas. From these definitions, Ballard*King
will be able to complete a full demographics analysis and alternative market
analysis, exploring data associated with current market trends related to
community access to indoor recreation opportunities.
6.4 SYNTHESIS AND SOLUTIONS DESIGN CONCEPTS
Conceptual facility and site planning, based upon information gathered
from the engagement process and market analysis, is an important step
in developing community support and exploring potential facility options.
Conceptual planning will illustrate potential approaches — creating options
for recreation and art facilities, existing and potential future programs,
accessible parking, etc., an provide additional information for development
of facility operations and cost estimates. We will begin by holding a two-
or three-day design charrette, and efficient and intensive workshop with
project stakeholders and the community. Held online or on-site in Hopkins,
the charrette will allow us to distill ideas within a relatively brief time. The
following outlines the charrette process which would be refined with your
input. Stakeholders and/or the public may be integrated into the charrette at
your discretion. Should a virtual charrette be preferred, we suggest extending
the timeline to three days.
Day 1: Our team hosts a morning workshop session with project
representatives and invited participants to discuss project goals and input
received from community engagement activities. This is an opportunity to
talk about the big picture — the vision of what community facilities could
be and how they could impact the community. We then develop preliminary
CENTRAL PARK MASTER PLAN & PAVILION EXPANSION
FEASIBILITY STUDY | CITY OF HOPKINS 07SCOPE OF SERVICES
Exhibit I
facility and site options for review and discussion with key staff and
stakeholders later that afternoon.
Day 2: Based on feedback from the previous day, our team will revise the
preliminary concept options and hold another workshop discussion to
discuss revised options and gather more feedback.
Day 3: Our team will again revise the concept options and hold a final
workshop discussion. A public openhouse may be held, if desired, to present
the result of the charrette to the community.
After the charrette, the concept options developed during the charrette
workshop will be further refined by the design team. Rough budget estimates
for each will be prepared to assist the city and team in evaluating the options
and selecting a preferred approach.
6.5 ZONING/REGULATORY REVIEW
As design concepts are developed, the JLG team will vet the various options
against the zoning and regulatory codes that are in place. The goal of this
review process is to ensure that any concepts developed can meet the
zoning regulations that are in effect and identify any variances that may be
required. If so assess the chance of approval. We will engage the local zoning
authorities in this process.
6.6 COST ESTIMATION/FUNDING ANALYSIS
The design team will lean heavily on the construction manager to explore
and vet the proposed conceptual solutions for the project and develop
comprehensive project estimates for the proposed solution(s). Considering
all things from construction, site work, furniture costs, design and legal fees,
the comprehensive project estimates will serve as the targets for the city to
budget and plan for a project in the long-term. During this phase, the entire
team will work closely with the city and their financial team to brainstorm
and discuss potential project funding mechanisms as the city looks to make a
project a reality.
6.7 FINANCIAL/OPERATIONS ANALYSIS
Utilizing the outcomes of the design concept exercise, Ballard*King will
support the city in development of a proposed operational plan for the
project. The plan will incorporate all items pertaining to a new facility
including, operational hours, staffing, and service offerings. The plan will
consider all necessary standards associated with the proposed facility. A
final Pro Forma will be produced, highlighting operational expenditures and
revenue and exploring potential pricing strategies. The JLG team will also
support the city in identifying potential project partnerships and analyze
opportunity/risk with various options, target desired program amenities and
offerings, as well as pricing and operational strategies for a new facility.
6.8 REPORT AND PRESENTATIONS
Our team will assemble all data, analysis, and recommendations in a
comprehensive, user-friendly report. The report will document the study
process — including a summary of the process and strategies for public
involvement — as well as address market, operational costs, and potential
project costs. The report can be used as a decision-making tool in moving
the project forward. Prior to issuing the draft report, our team will prepare
a preliminary copy for review and discussion with City staff and project
representatives. This review allows for critical feedback and makes certain
that the draft report responds to the study objectives as outlined at the
project kick-off.
After incorporating revisions extending from the draft report presentations,
our team will submit and present the final study report to the City of Hopkins
leadership.
TASK 7: COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT & MEETINGS
7.1 PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT SURVEYS AND ENGAGEMENT
SUMMARIES
Online surveys will be distributed to gather specific input at strategic points
in the project development process.
CENTRAL PARK MASTER PLAN & PAVILION EXPANSION
FEASIBILITY STUDY | CITY OF HOPKINS 08SCOPE OF SERVICES
Exhibit I
Following each phase of engagement, an infographic-style report will be
created summarizing that phase’s purpose, promotional tactics employed,
feedback opportunities provided, number of comments received, key themes
heard and how it will inform the next steps of the project process. This can
be shared with the public at the end of each phase to close the feedback
loop, providing transparency and building community trust throughout the
process.
7.2 COMMUNITY POP-UP ENGAGEMENT MATERIALS
To assist the city in outreach we will provide one round of materials for pop
up engagement events featuring fun, attractive, and engaging activities.
7.3 PARTNER AGENCIES, COMMUNITY ORGANIZATIONS, AND
KEY STAKEHOLDER MEETINGS
We will coordinate and schedule meetings and offer presentations when
necessary to the following groups: City of Minnetonka, Three Rivers Park
District, Hopkins School District 270, Nine Mile Creek Watershed District,
local sports associations, and interest groups such as Access Hopkins, Active
Kids Association of Sport, Hopkins High School Hockey and Soccer teams,
Hopkins Youth Hockey Association, Hopkins Youth Lacrosse Association,
Hopkins Rugby, Turf Tots, Tonka United Soccer Association, and other core
groups as identified through the engagement process.
While the community wide engagement plan unfolds, other unorganized key
interest groups such as students or bicyclists may also be identified where a
focus group could be organized.
Bolton & Menk, and/or Barr Engineering, will plan to facilitate and attend
two meetings with the Nine Mile Creek Watershed District (NMCWD) for
purposes of confirming anticipated approvals of regulatory requirements
and gauging potential for cost-participation on certain elements of the
project. Should a Nine Mile Creek Headwaters or flood mitigation solution
be realized, these meetings will be crucial to garnering NMCWD support for
direct funding and/or support for other funding programs.
We anticipate up to 10 agency, community, and other stakeholder
engagement meetings.
7.4 YOUTH-FOCUSED ENGAGEMENT
We will work with city staff to provide materials for youth-focused
engagement to be conducted by the city, such as a “Design Your Own
Playground” challenge where students have an opportunity to share what
their dream park vision is.
7.5 CITY OFFICIALS MEETINGS + UPDATE MEMOS
The Bolton & Menk team will prepare presentation materials for two Park
Board meetings, one City Council meeting, and one joint Park Board/City
Council workshop. We will also provide 3 update memos throughout the
process to help keep council and park board members informed on project
progress.
TASK 10: ADD ALTERNATIVES
The scope included as our team’s baseline services generally represents
our proposed scope of work intended to meet the requirements of the RFP,
including innovative community engagement measures to achieve the high-
quality performance desired by the city. The following add alternatives are
recommended additions to the recommended additions to the scope that
we have separated out in the event it eases ‘apples to apples’ comparison of
our baseline scope/fee to that of competing proposals. Each of the following
add alternatives are proposed ala carte for city determination regarding their
inclusion.
10.1 GEOTECHNICAL SOIL INVESTIGATION - ENVIRONMENTAL
TESTING AND OVERSIGHT
As part of our team’s baseline services, Braun Intertec will collect soil borings
at the Pavilion site and Central Park. The baseline data collected will help
guide foundation considerations in terms of soil strength properties and
highlight limits of what may generally be classified as ‘garbage’ or regulated
fill. However, the baseline scope does not go so far as to quantify and
qualify the specific regulated chemical constituents of the soil that will be
needed if historic landfill soils are to be remediated to some degree. This
add alternative task seeks to identify more specifically the soil constituents
the city will be faced with, which can help quantify the costs associated with
encountering or disposing of such material, and in turn better inform project
scoping decisions and strategies to avoid, minimize, or mitigate the site soils.
CENTRAL PARK MASTER PLAN & PAVILION EXPANSION
FEASIBILITY STUDY | CITY OF HOPKINS 09SCOPE OF SERVICES
Exhibit 1
Soil Screening
Soil samples from the soil borings will be visually and manually classified
in the field by an environmental technician using ASTM D2488 “Standard
Practice for Description and Identification of Soils (Visual- Manual
Procedures).” Field personnel will examine soil samples for unusual
staining, odors, and other apparent signs of contamination. In addition,
the soil samples will be screened for the presence of organic vapors
using a photoionization detector (PID). The PID will be equipped with a
10.6-electron-volt lamp and calibrated to an isobutylene standard. The
PID will be used to perform a headspace method of field analysis as
recommended by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) and in
accordance with Braun Intertec Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs).
Soil Sampling, Analytical Testing, & Reporting
Soil samples will be collected from the soil borings for laboratory analysis
in accordance with Braun Intertec SOPs. Soil samples will be collected from
depth intervals in the unsaturated zone where indications of contamination
are observed in the field. If no indications of contamination are observed, the
soil samples will be collected from depths most likely to be impacted based
on the potential contaminant source. The budget for this task assumes that
up to 12 soil samples will be submitted to Pace Analytical Servies (Pace) of
Minneapolis and analyzed for a combination of the following parameters:
• Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) using United States Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) Method 8260
• Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) using EPA Method 8270
• Diesel range organics (DRO) using the Wisconsin Department of Natural
Resources (WDNR) Method
• Eight Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) metals using EPA
Methods 6010 and 7471
Braun will also conduct six vapor probes with VOC and Methane analysis on
the site soils, recognizing historic landfill uses.
Upon completion of the on-site work and receipt of laboratory analytical
results, a report will be prepared detailing the methods, results, and
conclusions/recommendations.
SCOPE OF WORK NOT INCLUDED IN THE PROPOSAL,
BUT AVAILABLE UPON REQUEST AS PART OF FUTURE
PROPOSAL
GEOTECHNICAL ANALYSIS: RESPONSE ACTION PLAN AND
ESTABLISH DETAILED LIMITS OF REGULATED SOILS
A response action plan (RAP) or other soil remediation steps following receipt
of analytical soil testing results are not included in our proposed scope of
services at this time, but can be developed and submitted for consideration
by the city once the site layout and soil specifics are better delineated.
GRANT APPLICATIONS & ADMINISTRATION
This project can be scoped through the park planning phase to include
improvements attractive for partnerships with and grants from other
agencies.
Example funding sources include:
• Potential funding from project partners; The Nine Mile Creek Watershed
District has authorized up to $50,000 for feasibility analysis of stormwater
and flood management improvements as part of the Hopkins Central
Park Plan development; depending on the partnership agreement,
we anticipate this funding could cover the bulk of our teammate Barr
Engineering’s efforts during our Phase I preliminary design; depending
on outcomes of preliminary design, additional funding may be available
through project partnerships for final design and construction
• We recommend the city pursue funding from Hennepin County through
the MN Brownfields Gap Financing Program for the environmental
analysis of the borings; the program may fund up to $15,000 toward
efforts identified in this proposal
• MnDNR Flood Hazard Mitigation Grant Program; this program funds
publicly-owned capital improvements, including the engineering and
construction of flood storage structures and other related activities
• MPCA Climate Resiliency grants; the 2023 legislature invested $100
million to fund climate change adaptation and resiliency, including funding
CENTRAL PARK MASTER PLAN & PAVILION EXPANSION
FEASIBILITY STUDY | CITY OF HOPKINS 10SCOPE OF SERVICES
Exhibit I
to implement climate resilient projects such as flood storage in Central
Park
• Hennepin County also has a variety of funding sources related to
community parks, community development, and site cleanup that may be
appropriate resources following our preliminary design efforts
• MN Legislative Funding (Bonding Bill); we understand the city does not
intend to pursue these funds at this time, but it may be beneficial to
revisit this idea should the project scope expand to large scale regulated
remediation of historic regional landfill remnants
• MnDNR Outdoor Recreation Grant Program; this funding at a 1:1 match
can be used to fund a variety of park improvements for cities; with limited
strings tied to the funding and recognizing the goals of this project, we
anticipate Hopkins’ Central Park will be a good candidate to apply for this
money; the Bolton & Menk team has been successful in securing and
implementing projects with this funding routinely
• Depending on the investigations completed and results of analytical soil
testing, the site may be eligible for funding sources related to landfill and/
or petroleum cleanup; the Bolton & Menk team, with partners in Braun
Intertec and Barr Engineering, are best positioned to identify and navigate
these opportunities in response to a wide variety of possible outcomes
CENTRAL PARK MASTER PLAN & PAVILION EXPANSION
FEASIBILITY STUDY | CITY OF HOPKINS 11SCOPE OF SERVICES
Exhibit I
TASK
Phase I Planning + Preliminary Design
S O N D J F M A M J J A S
Task One: Project Initiation
1.1 Schedule of Work Tasks
1.2 City Staff Coordination Meeting #1 (Engagement 7.1)
Task Two: Data Collection
2.1 Topographic + Boundary Survey
2.2 Geotechnical Evaluation
2.3 Review of Previous Planning Efforts
2.4 Online Public Engagement (Engagement 7.1)
2.5 City Staff Coordination Meeting #2
2.6 Update Memo #1 (Engagement 7.5)
Task Three: Central Park Needs Assessment + Analysis
3.1 Site Tour
3.2 Preliminary Issues + Opportunities Diagram
3.3 Pop-Ups + Youth Engagement Support (Engagement 7.2 + 7.4)
3.4 Partner Agencies, Community Organizations + Key Stakeholder
Meetings (Engagement 7.3)
3.5 City Staff Coordination Meeting #3
3.6 Identify Opportunities To Improve Ecology + Wildlife Habitat
3.7 Determine BMPs to Meet NMCWD Requirements
3.8 Determine BMP Opportunities That Are "Above And Beyond"
3.9 Determine Feasibility + Benefits Of Floodwater Storage In
Central Park
3.10 Determine Feasibility Of Integrating NMC Headwaters
3.11 Needs Assessement + Analysis Summary
3.12 City Staff Coordination Meeting #4
3.13 Update Memo #2 (Engagement 7.5)
SEE NEXT PAGE
TASK 1
TASK 2
TASK 3
TASK 4
City Staff Coordination Meeting
Public Engagement Meeting
Update Memo
Key Project Deliverable
PROJECT TIMELINE CENTRAL PARK MASTER PLAN & PAVILION EXPANSION
FEASIBILITY STUDY | CITY OF HOPKINS 12PROjECt tImElInE
Exhibit 1
TASK
S O N D J F M A
Task Four: Preliminary Concept Design
4.1 Preliminary Draft Concepts
4.2 City Staff Coordinaton Meeting #5
4.3 Park Board Meeting #1 (Engagement 7.5)
4.4 Park Board / City Council Workshop (Engagement 7.5)
4.5 Online Engagement (Engagement 7.2)
4.6 Refine Preliminary Draft Concept
4.7 City Staff Coordinaton Meeting #6 (Engagement 7.8)
4.8 Develop Preferred Preliminary Concept + Cost Estimate
4.9 Update Memo #3
Task Five: Central Park Plan Final Report
5.1 Draft Central Park Plan Report
5.2 City Staff Coordination Meeting #7
5.3 Final Central Park Plan Report
5.4 Park Board Meeting #2 (Engagement 7.8)
5.5 City Council Meeting (Engagement 7.8)
Task Six: Pavilion Expansion Feasibility Study
6.1 Project Kick Off
6.2 Existing Conditions / Site Analysis
6.3 Market Analysis
6.4 Community Engagement
6.5 Design Concepts
6.6 Zoning / Regulatory Review
6.7 Cost Estimate / Funding Analysis
6.8 Financial / Operations Analysis
6.9 Draft Report
6.10 Final Report + Presentations
Phase I Planning + Preliminary Design
TASK 4
TASK 6
TASK 6
TASK 5
City Staff Coordination Meeting
Public Engagement Meeting
Update Memo
Key Project Deliverable
CENTRAL PARK MASTER PLAN & PAVILION EXPANSION
FEASIBILITY STUDY | CITY OF HOPKINSPROjECt tImElInE 13
Exhibit I
The Bolton & Menk team will provide the Phase 1 scope of services as described for an hourly based, not-to-exceed fee of
$269,031.
Add-alternative tasks are estimated to be $22,693, which relates to analytical soil testing. Please find our detailed cost
proposal, containing hours and rates for key staff, below.
We will bill work following our standard hourly billing rates and will not exceed our estimate without prior authorization
from the city. The estimated fee includes labor, general business, and other normal and customary expenses associated
with operating a professional business. Unless otherwise noted, the fees include vehicle and personal expenses, mileage,
telephone, survey stakes, and routine expendable supplies; no separate charges will be made for these activities and
materials. Expenses beyond the agreed scope of services and nonroutine expenses, such as large quantities of prints, extra
report copies, outsourced graphics and photographic reproductions, document recording fees, outside professional and
technical assistance, and other items of this general nature will be invoiced separately.
Client: City of Hopkins
Braun
Intertec
JLG
Architects
Ballard*Kin
g
Project: Central Park Improvements & Pavilion Expansion Feasibility
Task No.Work Task Description
Principal‐in‐ChargeProject ManagerSenior Landscape ArchitectLandscape DesignerPrincipal Landscape ArchitectSite Civil EngineerLandscape DesignerSenior Urban Planner & Engagement AdvisorCommunity LiaisonProject Communication SpecialistSurvey ManagerSurvey TechnicianSurvey Crew ChiefClericalSenior Landscape Architect/Barr Project ManagerSenior Landscape Architect/DesignerPrincipal EngineerSenior Engineer (Civil, Water Resources, Environmental)Water Resources EngineerTotal
Hours
(BMI &
Barr Key
Staff)Braun IntertecJLG ArchitectsBallard*KingTotal
Cost
1.0 Project Initiation 2 5 3 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 4 0 0 22 ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ $3,878
2.0 Data Collection 2 6 4 0 0 4 3 0 0 0 12 24 88 0 2 1 1 0 0 147 20,330$ ‐$ ‐$ $46,487
3.0 Central Park Needs Assessment & Analysis 4 27 10 23 1 24 29 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 25 14 39 110 112 418 ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ $65,415
4.0 Preliminary Concept Design 13 24 34 32 0 20 20 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 34 56 10 50 0 293 ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ $45,879
5.0 Central Park Plan Final Report 5 11 6 16 2 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 2 1 4 0 58 ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ $8,915
6.0 Pavilion Expansion Feasibility 7 8 2 1 0 000000000 6 3 2 1 232 ‐$ 39,400$ 21,500$ $66,392
7.0 Community Engagement & Meetings 16 37 8 6 0 0 21 14 32 70 0 0 0 0 6 3 2 0 0 215 ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ $32,065
$269,031
Total Hours 71 164 235 308 49 222 79 15 33 70 12 24 88 38 164 227 73 343 138 2353 20,330$ 39,400$ 21,500$
Average Hourly Rate $211 $162 $161 $122 $220 $159 $125 $176 $128 $138 $201 $141 $189 $106 $160 $150 $210 $165 $140
Subtotal $14,981 $26,568 $37,835 $37,576 $10,780 $35,298 $9,875 $2,640 $4,224 $9,660 $2,412 $3,384 $16,632 $4,028 $26,240 $34,050 $15,330 $56,595 $19,320 20,330$ 39,400$ 21,500$
10.0 Optional, Add Alternatives 4 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 21,525$ ‐$ ‐$ $22,693
$291,724
Detailed Cost Estimate
Total, Hourly Not‐to‐Exceed Fee (Phase 1 + Add Alternative)
Subtotal: Phase 1 (Planning + Preliminary Design)
Bolton & Menk, Inc.Barr
Project Name
City of XXX, Minnesota Section X ‐ Page X
FEES 14
Exhibit II
AA/EOE
Braun Intertec Corporation
11001 Hampshire Avenue S
Minneapolis, MN 55438
Phone: 952.995.2000
Fax: 952.995.2020
Web: braunintertec.com
August 1, 2024 Revised Proposal QTB200689
Mike Waltman, PE
Bolton & Menk, Inc.
12224 Nicollet Avenue
Burnsville, MN 55337
Re: Revised Proposal for a Geotechnical Evaluation and Phase I ESA
Hopkins Central Park and Pavilion Expansion
11000 Excelsior Boulevard
Hopkins, Minnesota
Dear Mr. Waltman:
Braun Intertec Corporation appreciates the opportunity to submit this revised proposal to complete a
geotechnical evaluation and Phase I Environmental Site Assessment for the Hopkins Central Park and
Pavilion Expansion project in Hopkins, Minnesota.
Project Information
We understand the City of Hopkins is looking at the feasibility of an expansion to the Hopkins Pavilion
and site renovation of Central Park. The proposed Pavilion Expansion is assumed to be a slab-on-grade
facility with one story above (using conventional foundations and steel framing) along with site
improvements for Central Park to include a new soccer field, new volleyball courts, additional pickleball
courts, and new proposed shade structures.
Previous Experience, Geotechnical and Environmental Information
We have completed previous projects in the area with Bolton & Menk, Inc. (BMI), in collaboration with
City of Hopkins dating back to 1968. Recently, we completed a pavement evaluation in 2014 for BMI as
well and an environmental screening report in 2015 for the Central Park parking lot on the northwest
corner of the park for BMI.
Our work with City of Hopkins and BMI has helped us understand the current site conditions and
construction challenges associated with the proposed work. We understand Central Park was built on an
old landfill between 1962 and 1964. Our exploration work from 1968 indicated environmental impacts
from the landfill including ‘dump debris’, wood, glass, rubber, paper, tin, etc.
Our 2015 environmental work took place in the Central Park parking lot in the northwest corner of the
site, where we performed screening and sampling to typify soil removed for the project for offsite
disposal. During our oversight of the excavations, we observed excavated debris that we identified as
concrete, asphalt, glass bottles, wood, rebar, coal and miscellaneous garbage. Petroleum odors were also
noted.
Bolton & Menk, Inc.
Revised Proposal QTB200689
August 1, 2024
Page 2
Base RFP Scope – Geotechnical & Environmental Scope
Our base scope will utilize previous pavement borings for the new proposed pavement work and will also
incorporate 9 new soil borings for the preliminary Pavilion Expansion and Central Park site
improvements.
Geotechnical Scope of Services
We propose the following tasks to help achieve the stated purpose. If we encounter unfavorable or
unforeseen conditions during the completion of our tasks that lead us to recommend an expanded scope
of services, we will contact you to discuss the conditions before resuming our services.
Purpose
The purpose of our geotechnical evaluation will be to characterize subsurface geologic conditions at
selected exploration locations, evaluate their impact on the project, and provide geotechnical
recommendations for the design and construction of pavements, central park site improvements and
preliminary design information for the Pavilion Expansion.
Site Access
Based on aerial photographs, it appears that the site will require an all-terrain vehicle (ATV) drill rig
equipped with hollow stem auger. We assume there will be no cause for delays in accessing the exploration
locations. We are not including tree clearing, debris or obstruction removal, grading of navigable paths, or
snow plowing.
Depending on access requirements, ground conditions or potential utility conflicts, our field crew may
alter the exploration locations from those proposed to facilitate accessibility.
Our drilling activities may also impact the vegetation and may rut the surface to access boring locations.
Restoration of vegetation and turf is not part of our scope of services.
Staking
We will stake prospective subsurface exploration locations and obtain surface elevations at those
locations using GPS (Global Positioning System) technology. For purposes of linking the GPS data to an
appropriate reference, we request that you provide CAD files indicating location/elevation references
appropriate for this project, or give us contact information for the consultant that might have such
information.
Utility Clearance
Prior to drilling or excavating, we will contact Gopher State One Call and arrange for notification of the
appropriate utility vendors to mark and clear the exploration locations of public underground utilities.
You, or your authorized representative, are responsible to notify us before we begin our work of the
presence and location of any underground objects or private utilities that are not the responsibility of
public agencies.
Bolton & Menk, Inc.
Revised Proposal QTB200689
August 1, 2024
Page 3
In addition, our fees include a budget to retain a private locate company to mark private utilities that are
not the responsibility of public agencies. Upon our request, the property owner must also be available to
assist the private locate company in determining the presence of any underground objects or the
location of utilities. We will not be liable for any damages resulting from unidentified or misidentified
underground objects or utilities. Further, we reserve the right to stop work if underground objects or
utilities are suspected or known to exist, but locations cannot be accurately determined.
Soil Borings
We propose to drill nine (9) standard penetration test (SPT) borings to nominal depths of 15 to 25 feet
below existing grade for the project. We will perform standard penetration tests at 2 1/2-foot vertical
intervals to a depth of about 15 feet, and at 5-foot intervals at greater depths.
For areas of pavement construction, we intend to utilize previous boring information collected in 2014.
Figure 1 depicts our proposed boring locations for the Pavilion Expansion and Central Park site
improvements.
Figure 1. Proposed Boring Locations
Figure collected through City of Hopkins ‘Parks Concept Boards’ dated May 15, 2023.
Proposed Boring Locations
Bolton & Menk, Inc.
Revised Proposal QTB200689
August 1, 2024
Page 4
If the intended boring depths do not extend through unsuitable material, we will extend the borings at
least 5 feet into suitable material at greater depths. The additional information will help evaluate such
issues as excavation depth, consolidation settlement, and foundation alternatives, among others. If we
identify a need for deeper (or additional) borings, we will contact you prior to increasing our total
estimated drilled footage and submit a Change Order summarizing the anticipated additional effort and
the associated cost, for your review and authorization.
Groundwater Measurements
If the borings encounter groundwater during or immediately after drilling of each boring, we will record
the observed depth on the boring logs.
MDH Sealing Record
We are planning the deepest borings to be at least 15 feet and less than 25 feet. Therefore, the Minnesota
Statutes require us to complete a Sealing Record after our completion of the borings. Our proposal includes
the fees for the Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) Sealing Record.
In the event we extend our borings to a depth of 25 feet or greater, the MDH requires us to complete and
submit a Sealing Notification Form for the project. The submission of the Sealing Notification Form will
require a signature from the property owner (or agent). If we extend our borings to a depth of 25 feet or
greater, we will forward on to you a copy of the form for signature and increase our total fees by $100.
Borehole Abandonment
We will backfill our exploration locations immediately after completing the drilling at each location.
Minnesota Statutes require sealing temporary borings that are 15 feet deep or deeper. Based on our
proposed subsurface characterization depths, we will seal 75 linear feet of borehole with grout. Our
lump sum fee includes those fees associated with the sealing.
Sealing boreholes with grout will prevent us from disposing of auger boring cuttings in the completed
boreholes. Unless you direct us otherwise, we intend to thin-spread the cuttings around the boreholes.
Over time, subsidence of borehole backfill may occur, requiring releveling of surface grades or replacing
bituminous or concrete patches. We are not assuming responsibility for re-leveling or re-patching after
we complete our fieldwork.
Sample Review and Laboratory Testing
We will return recovered samples to our laboratory, where a geotechnical engineer will visually classify
and log them. To help classify the materials encountered and estimate the engineering properties
necessary to our analyses, we have budgeted to perform the following laboratory tests.
Bolton & Menk, Inc.
Revised Proposal QTB200689
August 1, 2024
Page 5
Table 1. Laboratory Tests
Test Name
ASTM
Test
Method Purpose
Moisture content D2216 Soil classification, moisture condition, and engineering properties
Percent passing #200 sieve D1140 Soil classification, and evaluate frost susceptibility
Organic content D2974 Evaluate suitability of soils for reuse
We will determine the actual laboratory testing for the project depending on the encountered
subsurface conditions. If we identify a laboratory testing program that exceeds the budget included in
this proposal but provides additional value to the project, we will request authorization for the additional
fees through a Change Order.
Engineering Analyses
We will use data obtained from the subsurface exploration and laboratory tests to evaluate the
subsurface profile and groundwater conditions, and to perform engineering analyses related to structure
and pavement design and performance.
Report
We will prepare a report including:
A sketch showing the exploration locations.
Logs of the borings describing the materials encountered and presenting the results of our
groundwater measurements and laboratory tests.
A summary of the subsurface profile and groundwater conditions.
Discussion identifying the subsurface conditions that will impact design and construction.
Discussion regarding the reuse of on-site materials during construction.
Recommendations for preparing structure and pavement subgrades, and the selection,
placement and compaction of fill.
Preliminary recommendations for design and construction of the proposed pavilion addition.
We will only submit an electronic copy of our report to you unless you request otherwise. At your
request, we can also send the report to additional project team members.
Bolton & Menk, Inc.
Revised Proposal QTB200689
August 1, 2024
Page 6
Schedule
We anticipate performing our work according to the following schedule.
Drill Rig Mobilization – Scheduled for September 16th and 17th, provided we receive written
authorization by no later than August 26th, 2024.
Field Exploration – 2 days on site to complete the soil borings.
Classification and Laboratory Testing – Within 1 week after completion of field exploration.
Preliminary Results – Within 1 week after completion of field exploration.
Draft Report Submittal – Within about 3 weeks after completion of field exploration.
Final Report Submittal – Within 5 days of receiving comments on the draft report and
depending on the complexity of the comments.
If we cannot complete our proposed scope of services according to this schedule due to circumstances
beyond our control, we may need to revise this proposal prior to completing the remaining tasks.
Environmental Scope of Services
Environmental Task 1 – Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA)
Braun Intertec will conduct a Phase I ESA of the Site in accordance with ASTM International (ASTM)
Practice E1527-21 and 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 312, which is the recognized industry
standard defining good commercial and customary practice for conducting all appropriate inquiry (AAI)
into the previous ownership and uses of the Site consistent with the Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA). The intent of this practice is intended to permit a
user to satisfy one of the requirements to qualify for the innocent landowner, contiguous property
owner, or bona fide prospective purchaser limitations on CERCLA liability. The purpose of the Phase I ESA
will be to identify recognized environmental conditions in connection with the subject property.
The Phase I ESA will include a government and historical records review, site reconnaissance, interviews,
and data evaluation. The results of the Phase I ESA will be summarized in a written report. So that they
may be identified within the report, the user must supply the names of all parties intending to rely on the
executed service and subsequent report. Additional reliance may be obtained at the discretion of Braun
Intertec.
In order to satisfy the requirements of AAI, the user bears specific responsibilities for satisfying certain
components of the environmental inquiry. The E1527-21 Practice provides a User Questionnaire which
outlines the information that the user must provide (if available) to the Environmental Professional. The
User Questionnaire, attached to this proposal, should be completed and returned to Braun Intertec so
that the information can be included in the report.
Bolton & Menk, Inc.
Revised Proposal QTB200689
August 1, 2024
Page 7
The results of the Phase I ESA will be summarized in a written report documenting information sources
used, findings and conclusions, and the professional opinion of Braun Intertec regarding the impact of
any potential environmental concerns in connection with the Site. Appendices to the report will include
copies of available historical information (e.g., fire insurance maps, aerial photographs, etc.). A draft copy
of the Phase I ESA will be issued electronically for review and comment. Upon receipt of comments,
Braun Intertec will issue the final Phase I ESA report.
Only an electronic copy of the Phase I ESA report will be submitted to you unless you request otherwise.
Optional Alternative Scope – Environmental Services
As noted in our base scope section, we understand that Central Park was previously a landfill site. Given
the site history, we have provided an optional services to perform environmental work to identify
specific environmental concerns regarding the existing in-place material.
Environmental Task 2 – Environmental Oversight of Geotechnical Soil Borings
Soil Screening
Soil samples from the soil borings will be visually and manually classified in the field by an environmental
technician using ASTM D2488 “Standard Practice for Description and Identification of Soils (Visual-
Manual Procedures).” Field personnel will examine soil samples for unusual staining, odors, and other
apparent signs of contamination. In addition, the soil samples will be screened for the presence of
organic vapors using a photoionization detector (PID). The PID will be equipped with a 10.6-electron-volt
lamp and calibrated to an isobutylene standard. The PID will be used to perform a headspace method of
field analysis as recommended by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) and in accordance
with Braun Intertec Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs).
Soil Sampling and Analytical Testing
Soil samples will be collected from the soil borings for laboratory analysis in accordance with Braun
Intertec SOPs. Soil samples will be collected from depth intervals in the unsaturated zone where
indications of contamination are observed in the field. If no indications of contamination are observed,
the soil samples will be collected from depths most likely to be impacted based on the potential
contaminant source. The budget for this task assumes that up to 12 soil samples will be submitted to
Pace Analytical Servies (Pace) of Minneapolis, Minnesota and analyzed for a combination of the following
parameters:
Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) using United States Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) Method 8260.
Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) using EPA Method 8270.
Diesel range organics (DRO) using the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (WDNR)
Method.
Eight Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) metals using EPA Methods 6010 and
7471.
Bolton & Menk, Inc.
Revised Proposal QTB200689
August 1, 2024
Page 8
Reporting
Verbal results of the environmental monitoring will be provided to you as they become available. Upon
completion of the on-Site work and receipt of laboratory analytical results, a report will be prepared
detailing the methods, results, and conclusions/recommendations. A draft copy of the report will be
forwarded to you prior to report finalization. Only an electronic copy of the Braun Intertec environmental
monitoring report will be submitted to you unless you request otherwise.
Environmental Task 3 – Environmental Cleanup Grant Application Assistance
Braun Intertec will assist Bolton & Menk, Inc. in determining which environmental cleanup grants may be
available for this project. The grant sources that will be explored will include DEED, Met Council, and
Hennepin County.
Environmental Task 4 – Soil Vapor Assessment
Objective of Soil Vapor Assessment
The objective of the soil vapor assessment is to evaluate the Site for potential soil vapor intrusion risks to
the existing and proposed structures at the Site. The proposed soil vapor assessment includes six soil
vapor samples to be collected from the vicinity of those existing and proposed structures.
Soil Vapor Sampling and Analytical Testing
Six soil vapor probes will be advanced on the Site using a hydraulically-driven push-probe rig to a depth
of 5 feet bgs and then retracted to a depth of 3 feet bgs. New, inert tubing will be attached to the top of
the downhole sampler and the sampling point and tubing will be purged with a hand pump to remove
two volumes of air prior to sample collection. Following purging, organic vapor concentrations will be
screened with a PID and the value recorded. The soil vapor samples will then be collected using
laboratory-supplied negative pressure air-sample collection canisters (6-liter or 1-liter canisters)
equipped with 200 milliliter per minute (mL/min) flow restrictors in accordance with the MPCA
guidelines and in accordance will Braun Intertec SOPs. Following sample collection, the temporary
sampling point will be removed from the borehole and the borehole will be sealed in accordance with
MDH guidelines.
The soil vapor samples will be submitted to Pace National of Mount Juliet, Tennessee and analyzed for
VOCs using EPA Method TO 15.
Reporting
Verbal results of the soil vapor sampling will be provided to you as they become available. Upon
completion of the on-Site work and receipt of laboratory analytical results, the methods, results, and
conclusions/recommendations will be included in the report also documenting the environmental
oversight of the geotechnical soil borings detailed above.
Bolton & Menk, Inc.
Revised Proposal QTB200689
August 1, 2024
Page 9
Fees
We will furnish the services described in this proposal for a lump sum fee of $20,330. Table 2 provides a
breakdown of the proposed fees for the base RFP scope.
If the optional scope is selected, we will furnish the services described in this proposal for a lump sum fee
of $21,525. Table 3 provides costs for the optional scope.
Table 2. Proposed Fee Breakdown
Service Fee
Geotechnical Scope
Staking and Utility Coordination $1,570
Subcontracted – Private Utility Locator 300
Drilling 8,865
Laboratory Testing 1,750
Engineering & Reporting $4,860
Geotechnical Subtotal $17,345
Environmental Scope
Task 1 – Phase I Environmental Site Assessment $2,985
Environmental Subtotal $2,985
Project Total $20,330
Table 3. Proposed Fee Breakdown for Optional Scope Add
Service Fee
Environmental Scope
Task 2 – Environmental Oversight of Geotechnical Soil Borings $12,995
Task 3 – Environmental Cleanup Grant Application Assistance 1,080
Task 4 – Soil Vapor Assessment 7,450
Optional Environmental Scope Total $21,525
Our work may extend over several invoicing periods. As such, we will submit partial progress invoices for
work we perform during each invoicing period.
Bolton & Menk, Inc.
Revised Proposal QTB200689
August 1, 2024
Page 10
General Remarks
We will be happy to meet with you to discuss our proposed scope of services further and clarify the
various scope components.
We appreciate the opportunity to present this proposal to you. Please sign and return a copy to us in its
entirety.
We based the proposed fee on the scope of services described and the assumptions that you will
authorize our services within 30 days and that others will not delay us beyond our proposed schedule.
Bolton & Menk, Inc.
Revised Proposal QTB200689
August 1, 2024
Page 11
Our services will be provided under the terms of the Subconsultant Master Agreement for Professional
Services dated January 1, 2021.
To have questions answered or schedule a time to meet and discuss our approach to this project further,
please Zach Semlak at 651.788.5071 (zsemlak@braunintertec.com) for geotechnical related questions or
Jeff Arndt at 952.995.2433 (jarndt@braunintertec.com), for environmental related questions.
Sincerely,
BRAUN INTERTEC CORPORATION
Zachary T. Semlak
Staff Engineer
Jeffrey A. Arndt, PG
Project Scientist
Imants Pone
Manager, Senior Scientist
Joshua L. Kirk, PE
Director, Senior Engineer
Attachment:
ASTM Practice E1527-21 User Questionnaire
The revised proposal is accepted, and you are authorized to proceed.
Authorizer’s Firm
Authorizer’s Signature
Authorizer’s Name (please print or type)
Authorizer’s Title
Date
AA/EOE
Braun Intertec Corporation
11001 Hampshire Avenue S
Minneapolis, MN 55438
Phone: 952.995.2000
Fax: 952.995.2020
Web: braunintertec.com
ASTM Practice E1527-21 User Questionnaire
Site: Hopkins Central Park and Pavilion Expansion 11000 Excelsior Boulevard Hopkins, Minnesota
Name: Date:
Company:
In order to qualify for one of the Landowner Liability Protections (LLPs) offered by the Small Business
Liability Relief and Brownfields Revitalization Act of 2002 (the “Brownfields Amendment”), the User must
conduct the following inquiries. The User should provide the following information to the environmental
professional. Failure to conduct these inquiries could result in a determination that “all appropriate
inquiries” is not complete.
(1)Environmental cleanup liens that are filed or recorded against the property.
The types of title reports that may disclose environmental liens include Preliminary Title Reports,
Title Commitments, Condition of Title, and Title Abstracts. Chain-of-title reports will not normally
disclose environmental liens. Did a search of recorded land title records (or judicial records where
appropriate) identify any environmental cleanup liens filed or recorded against the property
under federal, tribal, state or local law?
(2)Activity and use limitations (AULs) that are in place on the property or that have been filed or
recorded against the property.
The types of title reports that may disclose AULs include Preliminary Title Reports, Title
Commitments, Condition of Title, and Title Abstracts. Chain-of-title reports will not normally
disclose AULs. Did a search of recorded land title records (or judicial records where appropriate)
identify any AULs, such as engineering controls, land use restrictions, or institutional controls that
are in place at the property and/or have been filed or recorded against the property under
federal, tribal, state or local law?
(3)Specialized knowledge or experience of the person seeking to qualify for the LLP.
Do you have any specialized knowledge or experience related to the property or nearby
properties? For example, are you involved in the same line of business as the current or former
occupants of the property or an adjoining property so that you would have specialized knowledge
of the chemicals and processes used by this type of business?
Bolton & Menk, Inc.
Proposal QTB200689
July 31, 2024
Page 2
(4)Relationship of the purchase price to the fair market value of the property if it were not
contaminated.
Does the purchase price being paid for this property reasonably reflect the fair market value of
the property? If you conclude that there is a difference, have you considered whether the lower
purchase price is because contamination is known or believed to be present at the property?
(5)Commonly known or reasonably ascertainable information about the property.
Are you aware of commonly known or reasonably ascertainable information about the property
that would help the environmental professional to identify conditions indicative of releases or
threatened releases? For example,
(a)Do you know the past uses of the property? If so, please explain.
(b)Do you know of specific chemicals that are present or once were present at the property?
If so, please explain.
(c)Do you know of spills or other chemical releases that have taken place at the property?
If so, please explain.
(d)Do you know of any environmental cleanups that have taken place at the property?
If so, please explain.
(6)The degree of obviousness of the presence or likely presence of contamination at the property,
and the ability to detect the contamination by appropriate investigation.
Based on your knowledge and experience related to the property, are there any obvious
indicators that point to the presence or likely presence of contamination at the property? If so,
please explain.