Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAGENDA REPORT 1987 0325 CC ADJ ITEM 11D ITEM 1.1L1� MOORPARK 7-10MAS C. FERGUSON STEVEN KUENY Mayor City Manager CLINT HARPER,Ph.D. �'� C4 J. KANE Mayor Pro Tern °q1 City Attorney ELOISE BROWN f PATRICK RICHARDS,A.I.C.P. Councilmember Director of JOHN GALLOWAY "s O Community Development Councilmember oo R. DENNIS DELZEIT BERNARDO PEREZ °b City Engineer Councilmember +�'•° �y . JOHN V.GILLESPIE MAUREEN W.WALL Chief of Police City Clerk THOMAS P.GENOVESE City Treasurer M E M O R A N D U M TO: The Honorable Mayor and City Council FROM: Community Services Department ' ;` DATE: March 11 , 1987 SUBJECT: 69 ACRE COMMUNITY PARK SITE - DEVELOPMENT OF CONCEPTUALS AND REQUEST OF APPROPRIATION OF ADDITIONAL FUNDS FOR DESIGN PHASE ITEM: As City Council may be aware,there is $10 , 000 for Professional Services in the Fiscal Year 86/87 budget appropriated for the design phase of the proposed 69 acre Community Park site. At their May 21 , 1986 meeting, the Commissioners accepted the kequest for Proposal, added their suggestions and authorized staff to proceed in obtaining proposals from various consultants . Attached for City Council review is the approved RFP as it was distributed. Please note that the proposal for the conceptual design provides for three meetings with the Parks & Recreation Commission and one with City Council, assuring community participation in the conceptual design process . Based upon staff distribution of nine RFP' s, we received five proposals . All proposals covered the identified Scope of Work, therefore, staff has ranked them on the basis of their proposed cost . 1 . Presburger and Associates $35 , 000 2 . BSI 36 , 000 3 . Heimberger/Hirsch 69 , 000 4 . Anthony and Langford 95 , 000 5 . Land Images 193 , 000 Staff has confirmed with Presburger & Associates , the low bidder on March 10 , 1987 , and their price is still $35 , 000 . 799 Moorpark Avenue Moorpark, California 93021 (805) 529-6864 • r City Council 69 Acre Park March 11 , 1987 After considerable public input in favor of the development of the 69 acre site and several hours of review and discussion by the Parks & Recreation Commission, the following action was recommended: On March 2 , 1987 , the Commission 's action was to accept the staff recommendation that the 69 acre site in PC-3 remain designated as a Community Park and the Commission requested that City Council appropriate an additional $25 , 000 from the Park Improvement Fund in order to proceed with the preparation of conceptual plans for the park' s ultimate development which was to be done in phases and that the phasing and the facilities and amenities be brought back to the Commission prior to consideration of the proposals for design. Council should be aware that the Commissioner' s , at their March 9 , 1987 meeting reviewed the attached Request for Proposal. After considerable discussion they took the following actions : 1 . The park is to include 4 baseball fields , 6 soccer fields , 4 multi-purpose fields to accommodate football and field hockey. Commission vote was 4-1 . 2 . That Phase I to include, but not limited to, all proposed field usage. Commission vote was 3-2 . 3 . The sports fields should run from the west to the east along the northern edge of the park, with clustering as needed; also, if needed we could possibly use a portion of the Edison Right of Way for those fields . Commission vote was 3-2 . A concern discussed by the Commissioners was that the Community Park; 1) provide maximum athletic field facilities and; 2) that it provide amenities/or activities for the entire community and not just specific interest groups . Staff will, upon City Council approval of the additional funds , interview Pressburger & Associates and return to the Parks & Recreation Commission in April requesting the award of contract . The proposal/contract will reflect all of the Parks & Recreation Commissions concerns relative to phasing and modification of amenities along with any other concerns . City Council 69 Acre Park March 11 , 1987 RECOMMENDED ACTION: Based upon the above information staff would request that: City Council accept the recommendation that the 69 acre site in PC-3 remain designated as a Community Park and approve the request for an additional $25 , 000 from the Park Improvement Fund in order to proceed with the preparation of a conceptual plan for the ultimate development of the park, which is to be done in phases and that the phasing, facilities and amenities be reviewed by the Parks & Recreation Commission prior to consideration of the proposals for design of any improvements . MOORPARK, CALIFORNIA ,City Council Meeting of - 1987 JWF:r j h ACTION: Attachment )0q'4- ,ca i -i«1!Q_c_ 1 By `` REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL Community park 1. Introduction The Community Park is located in central south portion of Moorpark. The 69 acre park site is amist a newly developed residential area bound by the Arroyo Simi and So. Calif. Edison power line row to the north, a future high school site to the west and residential development to the east and south. The City proposes the said park site as the future site to accommodate the community's youth sports organizations as well as theCity's recreation program activities. Development of the Community Park will provide for much needed facilities in a City that is currently experiencing growth in it's population. This park will offer the residents of Moorpark greater recre- ational opportunities for active or passive participation. The Community Park is to be developed as the City's major community park. The development of the said park will be extensive and therefore will not be fully developed in a single phase. The project is to result in alternatives and recommendations for (1) phasing of amenities and improvements (2) design themes and standards and (3) implementation procedures including possible financing mechanisms. �r II. Scope of Work The project is to be divided into two parts: Part A - selecting desired improvements 6 preliminary study, Part B - design and phasing alternatives. A. Preliminary Stud 1. Perform field investigations as required to recommend proposed methods of conducting work. 2. Conduct two public meetings to receive public input on the proposed design. Public meetings will be done at the Parks and Recreation Commission meetings. Conduct two City review meetings; one to be completed with the Parks and Recreation Commission and the second to be completed with the City Council. 3. Provide preliminary development cost estimates, narrative and a schematic design proposal as needed during development of conceptual plan. 4. Conduct preliminary lighting and noise impact analysis for siting of such facilities. 5. Analysis of parking needs including possible locations and location of access road/s to the said park. 6. Conduct an aerial mapping and any necessary field Survey to locate and depict the extent of Southern California Edison, R-O-W Flood Control property, and any other rights of way (easements) contained within the parkland area. Mapping and survey are to additionally identify the location of utility poles, trees, wells, roads, slopes in excess of 52 and that portion of the park within the 100 year flood plain. B. Phasing & Financing Alternatives 1. Discussion of development phasing alternatives, and the financing alternatives associated with each phasing alternative. 2. Discussion of the costs for each phasing alternative. 3. Manpower analysis on the operational and maintenance costs. 4. Utility and water analysis for operation and maintenance of the park site. 5. Assist in the completion of appropriate enviornmental documents for the adoption of the ^onceptual plan (prepared by City staff) . Probable Facilities to be included in the conceptual design are: 1. Four (4) baseball fields a) all fields to include lighting, dugouts and bleachers. b) two (2) snack bar/restroom/utility storage facilities, to be located adjacent to baseball areas. 2. Three (3) multipurpose playfields (for soccer or football play) a) two (2) fields should include lighting b) one of the two lighted fields should include bleachers. 3. Various picnic facilities to include shelters, tables and barbeques. 4. One major tot lot with equipment and benches., and two smaller fenced tot lot areas. 5. Security lighting and drinking fountains. 6. Jogging/running trail. 7. Multipurpose building to include offices, restrooms, utility storage, and multipurpose room. 8. Gymnasium. 9. Olympic-size pool. 10. Six (6) tennis courts. III. Proposal Format Your proposal shall include the following: 1. The firm's approach to the design of this facility with special attention to creativity, low maintenance, sensitivity to the historic and natural beauty aspects of the park, saftey, assthetics and adequate public participation in the design process. 2. The scope of work with estimated time schedule by work element. 3. Resume's of the project manager and all other individuals to be involved in the project and a bar chart indicating the degree to which each will be directly involved in any or all aspects of the project. 4. Professional fees and services rendered designated not to exceed on lump sum A and not to exceed on lump sum B. Fees are to include the four (4) meetings as described and include the costs for any additional meetings. 5. A reference section which describes the consultant's resources to perform the work, including, but not limited to: Consultant's prior experience on similar projects, experience with the public participation as part of the design process, ability to produce projects within budget and five references. 6. List of facilities designed during last five (5) years. i 7. List firm(s) to perform lighting and noise analysis. 8. Affirmative action plan assurances of compliance with State and Federal equal employment opportunity requirements. 9. A time line for completion of each part of the project as designated. IV. Selection Criteria The following criteria, in addition to cost estimate consideration shall be used in determining the firm that will prepare the preliminary studies and final working drawing for this project. A. Ability of the consultants to perform the specific tasks outlined in the RFP. B. Qualifications of the specific individuals who will work on the project. C. Amount and quality of the time key personnel will be involved in their respective portions of the project. D. Reasonableness of the fee requested to do the work. E. Demonstrated record of success by the consultant on similar work. V. Contract Conditions The selected consultant will enter into a contract with the City of Moorpark which shall include the following condition: The firm selected for the project will be required to sign the appropriate City contract outlining and detailing the project services and requirements. VI. Submittal of Proposal Ten (10) copies of the Proposal shall be accepted by the City Manager, City of Moorpark, 799 Moorpark Avenue, Moorpark, California, 93021, by S p.m. on Friday September 19, 1986 . Parks & Recreation Commission Minutes May 21, 1986 page 2 Commission Zemont Recommended to the Planning Commission and the City Council to encourage a Hillside Conservation, Preservation and Management Program that functions to discourage ridgeline development and/or alterations. Also for the ordinance to be developed at the earliest possible date. The motion was seconded by Chairman Rasey which passed with a 4-0 vote, with Commissioner Wilson being absent. RECESS Chairman Rasey call for a recess the time being 8 p.m. The Commission reconvened at 8: 10 with all Commissioners present, with Commissioner Wilson being absent. RECESS B. Budget After discussion between staff and the Commission,the consensus of the Commission was to have the Budget Committee go over the figures and make a recommendation to the Commission for further consideration. C. Community Park Request for Proposal The Administrative Assistant gave an introduction to this item and after discussion Commissioner Zemont moved, seconded by Commissioner Roe to accept the request for proposal which should include the following: 1. multi-use basketball/volleyball court 2. explanation of Edison area 3. jogging trail to accomodate a 5K run 4. coordinate High School facilities 5. consider use of water, possible lake 6. possible artificial turf area, requested by National Field Hockey Assoc. 7. paved surface for walk way at edge of hillside The motion passed with a 4-0 vote with Commissioner Wilson being absent. D. Community Center Rules & Regulations The Administrative Assistant introduced this item and after discussion Commissioner Sabine moved, seconded by Commission Zemont to accept the Community Center Rules & Regulations as corrected. With staff to check the room capacity for room A. The motion passed with a 4-0 vote with Commission Wilson being absent.