2003-02-10
Official Minutes***
Approved by the Parks and Recreation Board 4/14/03
1 CITY OF SOUTHLAKE
2 PARKS AND RECREATION BOARD MEETING
3
4 February 10, 2003
5 MINUTES
6
7 Board Members Present: Bobby Rawls, Chairman; Frank Cornish, Vice-Chair; Mary
8 Georgia, Secretary; Liz Durham, Tim O'Connor, and Dorothy Wood
9
10 Board Members Absent: Eric Blomquist
11
12 Staff Members Present: Malcolm Jackson, Interim Director of Community
13 Services; Steve Polasek, Deputy Director of Community Services; Chris Carpenter,
14 Senior Park Planner; and Steve Moore, Recreation Supervisor
15
16 REGULAR SESSION
17
18 Agenda Item No. 1. Call to Order
19
20 Chairman Rawls called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
21
22 REPORTS
23
24 Agenda Item No. 2. Administrative Comments
25
26 A. Bob Jones Park Construction Update - Director Jackson delivered a
27 PowerPoint presentation on the highlights of the construction progress at
28 Bob Jones Park. Significant progress is being made. The front entry sign is
29 complete, the paving of the park roads and parking lots is underway, bar
30 ditches are being cut next to the loop road, the concession area that was
31 vandalized has been removed, the new slab poured, and CMU block walls
32 are being installed. Stone facing has been added to the pump house
33 building and a new roof installed. The dumpster screen is essentially
34 complete. Concrete aprons and walkways around the restroom/concession
35 building have been poured and final grading next to the trails is being
36 completed. Work has also started on the reconstruction of the playground
37 area. Mr. Jackson noted that the contractor, aware of drainage issues in the
38 playground area, at their own volition, and at no cost to the City, scraped
39 out the dirt, laid out some drain lines to get rid of the water and will re-
40 grade it back straight. Director Jackson commended the contractor for this
41 extra effort.
42
43 Mr. O'Connor's questioned staff about the size and depth of the pond
44 and whether the City would participate in the TPWD trout stocking
45 program for the spring and early winter? The City is looking into
46 participation next year.
February 10, 2003 Page I of 9
Official Minutes***
Approved by the Parks and Recreation Board 4/14/03
1
2 Ms. Wood asked if a protective railing would be installed on the big
3 pavilion? There is no railing planned for that facility; it is no different
4 than fishing from the shore as the water is relatively shallow.
5
6 Chairman Rawls commented that the Bob Jones Park "really looks nice
7 up there again" and thanked the staff, contractor, everyone involved in
8 the Bob Jones Park construction.
9
10 B. Community Services Employees Update - D irector Jackson commented,
11 "some of the faces and names may have changed, but our commitment to
12 quality and customer service continues." He presented a PowerPoint,
13 introducing members of the parks maintenance crew and the parks and
14 recreation staff. Director Jackson said any park maintenance type issues
15 could be directly reported to Park Maintenance Supervisor Mike
16 Reasoner. Director Jackson shared that two park maintenance workers
17 have been transferred to the Public Works department to work on a
18 mowing crew.
19
20 Director Jackson also announced that Community Services Department
21 employees Missy Fisher and Linda Carpenter-Elgin were honored at the
22 2002 Employee Awards Banquet held February 1. Recreation Specialist
23 Missy Fisher received the Kristin Pitzinger Customer Service Excellence
24 Award and the Community Services Department Director's Award.
25 Linda Carpenter-Elgin was selected as the Community Service
26 Department Employee of the Year.
27
28 C. Clariden Ranch, Phase III Park Dedication Fees - Director Jackson
29 shared that as part of the new park dedication procedures approved by the
30 Board last year, the 59-lot residential development of Clariden Ranch,
31 Phase III was not required to dedicate 5 acres or more of park land and
32 thus chose to pay park fees, which is an administrative request now. This
33 development will contribute a rather substantial $88,500 to the
34 Park Dedication Fund after the Developer's Agreement is approved at the
35 February 18, 2003, City Council meeting.
36
37 CONSENT AGENDA
38
39 Agenda Item No. 3-A. Approval of the Southlake Parks and Recreation Board meeting
40 minutes of January 13, 2003s
41
42 A motion was made to approve the January 13, 2003 meeting minutes.
43
44 Motion: Georgia
45 Second: Cornish
February 10, 2003 Page 2 of 9
Official Minutes***
Approved by the Parks and Recreation Board 4/14/03
1 Ayes: Cornish, Durham, Georgia, O'Connor, Rawls, and Wood
2 Nays: None
3 Abstention: None
4 Vote: 6-0
5
6 Motion carried.
7
8 Ms. Georgia presented a motion to move agenda item number 5A, the fee request, at
9 the request of the applicant, to offset the required fee of $23,496 with construction of
10 a trail, which will connect the existing southern loop trail and meander down the
11 eastern park property line to the Vermillion property, as stated in the request on
12 Page 5A-2 of Item 5A [to Consent]; as well as move to Consent item 5C, as stated,
13 which is a recommendation to enter into an agreement Dunkin, Sims, Stoffels, Inc.
14 for the design and engineering of the Bob Jones Park Softball facility improvements.
15
16 Motion: Georgia
17 Second: Cornish
18 Ayes: Cornish, Durham, Georgia, O'Connor, Rawls, and Wood
19 Nays: None
20 Abstention: None
21 Vote: 6-0
22
23 Motion carried.
24
25 ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ON CONSENT ITEMS
26
27 Agenda Item No. 3-A. Approval of the January 13, 2003 meeting minutes. Minutes were
28 approved as presented in the Park Board packet.
29
30 Agenda Item No. 5-A, Recommendation of park dedication requirements for the
31 Vermillion addition, fourteen (14) proposed single-family lots and two (2) commercial
32 lots. The Vermillion Addition, at 14 lots and 3.12 gross non-residential acres, would be
33 required to dedicate a total of 0.41 acres. The equivalent in park dedication fees for this
34 addition is $23,496. The current request is to offset the required fee of $23,496 with the
35 construction of an 8-foot wide, 5" thick park trail. Staff estimates the length and
36 construction cost for the trail to be within, and very close to, the required park fee.
37 Additionally, the developer has committed to construction of a park entry sign on the
38 common property line in consultation with city staff. Therefore, to obtain pedestrian
39 access, provide trail construction shown on master plans, and to open up the southern end
40 of the park, staff recommends accepting the proposed trail and sign as fee credit. The
41 Park Board voted 6-0 to approve this item during Consent agenda.
42
43 Agenda Items No. 5-C, Recommendation to enter into an agreement with Dunkin, Sims
44 Stoffels, Inc., for the design and engineering of the Bob Jones Park Softball facility
45 improvements. Staff contacted five architectural/engineering firms and requested letters
46 of interest and background information from each in regards to the design of the Bob
February 10, 2003 Page 3 of 9
Official Minutes***
Approved by the Parks and Recreation Board 4/14/03
1 Jones Park Softball Facility Improvements. Four firms submitted information and staff
2 reviewed and scored their portfolios and letters of interest, evaluating them in ten
3 different categories with the top two firms (Dunkin, Sims, Stoffels and Carter and
4 Burgess) being invited for personal interviews. During the interviews, Dunkin, Sims,
5 Stoffels, Inc., demonstrated good presentation and communication skills, a strong desire
6 to work with the City, and an indication that they were capable of meeting the time
7 frames established for the project. Dunkin, Sims, Stoffels, Inc., is a well-known firm in
8 the Dallas/Fort Worth area and their work focuses primarily on the design of parks and
9 recreational facilities. The proposed contract is for $120,000, or 7.5% of the proposed
10 construction budget of $1,600,000, with up to, but not to exceed, an additional $22,000
11 for reimbursable expenses to include geotechnical studies, surveying, and printing costs.
12 Architectural/Engineering fees for a project of this size typically range between 8% and
13 10% of the construction budget. The proposed project is subject to the formal adoption by
14 City Council of the SPDC Capital Improvements Program anticipated to be considered in
15 February. The Park Board voted 6-0 to approve the agreement during Consent agenda.
16
17 REGULAR AGENDA
18
19 Agenda Item No. 4. Public Forum
20
21 Chairman Rawls opened the Public Forum by reading the provisions for a public forum.
22 No one was present to address the Board. Public Forum was closed.
23
24 Agenda Item No. 5-B. Recommendation for Park Dedication Funds expenditure in the
25 amount of $41,602 and Coke Fund allocation of $30,000 for the development of a Libert
y
26 Garden in Bicentennial Park.
27
28 Using a PowerPoint presentation, Director Jackson explained the request for the Liberty
29 Garden Park funding. Director Jackson pointed out that since the Park Board's original
30 approval of matching funds of $50,000 in October 2002, staff has re-evaluated the
31 original proposal by SPDC.
32
33 Director Jackson reiterated the Mission Statement, "Partner with Keep America Beautiful
34 and cities across the nation in creating a place of beauty and peaceful reflection and
35 gathering - the Liberty Garden - in honor of the tragic events of September 11, 2001."
36 He said the enhancement of this endeavor is to create an additional park within an
37 existing one, and to improve Bicentennial Park's entrance. Director Jackson reviewed
38 each of the slides in the presentation. A copy of the presentation is attached to the
39 minutes.
40
41 SPDC recommended that the Liberty Garden Committee reevaluate the requested funds
42 by more closely defining the in-kind services and materials to be included and $7,000
43 from the coke Fund was approved by Council to seek professional services for design and
44 cost estimate clarification. Staff sought conceptual design review and refined cost
45 analyses from the consulting firm of Dunkin, Sims, Stoffels, Inc. The consultant's cost
February 10, 2003 Page 4 of 9
Official Minutes***
Approved by the Parks and Recreation Board 4/14/03
1 for the analysis will be approximately $1,50041,800. A copy of the consultant's
2 recommendation and comments will be provided to Park Board members.
3
4 The consultant's concluded that an accurate representative "retail value" of the project
5 was very similar to staff's projections, with some additional costs increases for inclusion
6 of ADA provisions at the site. The Liberty Garden Committee and staff have met and
7 refined their expected donations and contributions to offset some of the retail costs and to
8 explore cost-savings design measures. Retail costs have been reduced by $32,900 due to
9 donations and contributions delivered to date.
10
11 Director Jackson explained the cost breakdown and the funding requests being
12 considered, stating that the project cost is $171,602, down from the original cost
13 estimated at $201,936. $50,000 has already been approved in matching SPDC funds,
14 which will be matched with $50,000 in donation funds by the Liberty Garden Committee.
15 The Park Board is being asked to recommend expenditure of $41,602 from the Park
16 Dedication Funds and $30,000 from the Coke Fund. Director Jackson clarified that
17 Finance Director Sharen Elam has been on vacation, but has verified that her initial
18 evaluation of the Coke Fund validates that there is at least $25,000 unencumbered and
19 available. The other $5,000 will not be confirmed until all the invoices to date have been
20 reviewed by the Finance Department. Director Jackson clarified that staff is asking for
21 the amount up to what is available, not to exceed the $30,000, recognizing that that
22 amount could be less ($25,000). If there is need to make up a $5,000 shortfall, Director
23 Jackson, assured the Board it could be taken from either the General Revenue or the
24 Reforestation Fund.
25
26 Wendi Carlucci and Stefanie Talley, Southlake residents, and both members of the
27 Liberty Garden Committee answered questions from the Board and offered explanations
28 for specific items contained in the request. Park Board member Liz Durham also
29 represented the Committee.
30
31 Discussion:
32
33 Chairman Rawls mentioned the previous allocation of funds from the Coke Fund to
34 repair the Bicentennial Park entry road off of White Chapel and asked when the repairs
35 would be made. Director Jackson said repairs are expected to start in March or April if
36 several issues holding up the repairs can be resolved, namely the adoption of the CIP and
37 the weather does not interfere.
38
39 Regarding allocation of funds from the Coke Fund, if the Liberty Garden Committee
40 collects more than their promised $50,000 in matching funds, the funds allocated from
41 the Coke Fund will be reduced.
42
43 The Board had questions about the matching funds required from the Liberty Garden
44 Committee and how that figure relates to the final costs of the project. A lengthy
45 discussion ensued about how the $32,900 shown as donations and reduced costs already
February 10, 2003 Page 5 of 9
Official Minutes***
Approved by the Parks and Recreation Board 4/14/03
1 obtained by the Liberty Garden Committee should be listed in the Cost Estimates
2 documents provided in the packet. Conflicting views were shared.
3 Ms. Wood reasoned, based on the documents provided, that the $32,900 in donations
4 from the Liberty Garden Committee was in addition to the $50,000 shown as matching
5 funds from the Committee.
6
7 Ms. Durham, Park Board member and Liberty Garden Committee representative, talked
8 about the in-kind donations and commitments already received by the Liberty Garden
9 Committee. She said contractors have not been selected yet; blueprints must be prepared
10 first.
11
12 Senior Park Planner Chris Carpenter said it was his understanding that the $32,900 was
13 taken off of the retail cost of the project, making the cost $171,602. The $50,000
14 matching funds from the Liberty Garden Committee would still be needed.
15
16 Ms. Georgia said that as she viewed the balance sheets found in their packets, it appeared
17 that the $32,900 had been dedicated either by services or shrubbery/statute/or other
18 amenities. It did not appear to include any cash donation. Ms. Durham explained that
19 some of the cash had already been applied to purchases, with some cash left over, which
20 was applied toward purchases of amenities. Thus, those purchases are applied against the
21 $50,000 matching funds and the required matching funds are reduced.
22
23 Mr. O'Connor asked how much actual cash has been received of the $50,000 matching
24 funds from the Liberty Garden Committee? Liberty Garden Committee has received
25 $2,300.
26
27 Park Board members talked about what constitutes "matching funds." Cash, donated
28 services, in-kind contributions can meet the criteria for matching funds; matching funds
29 do not necessarily mean matching "dollar-for-dollar."
30
31 Ms. Georgia said it was important to define clearly what was "donated" and what was
32 "reduced" in the documents.
33
34 Ms. Wood pointed out that according to information presented to the Board, it appeared
35 there was a $32,900 shortfall. She recommended the gross cost of the total project be
36 shown as $201,936, the original proposed amount of the project.
37
38 Ms. Durham explained that the funds are set up to be used on a "per invoice basis" and
39 City staff will manage that process.
40
41 Chairman Rawls asked if funding of the $40,000 pavilion was being solicited from
42 businesses or private donations. The Committee will seek sponsorships for that and other
43 costs once promotional materials are available.
44
February 10, 2003 Page 6 of 9
Official Minutes***
Approved by the Parks and Recreation Board 4/14/03
1 Mr. O'Connor suggested "phasing" the project, which would show progress. He
2 questioned whether the Liberty Garden Committee was willing to reconsider their earlier
3 position that the project must be presented as one "whole."
4
5 Ms. Durham responded to Mr. O'Connor's question saying that the Committee has
6 looked at phasing the construction - the subtotal other than the amenities will be phased;
7 and the pavilion will also phased. She emphasized that the pavilion will be one of the key
8 elements of the project. The waterscape, the planting and the pavilion are the three main
9 elements. The pavilion will be the last thing to be constructed.
10
11 Chairman Rawls suggested that the pavilion, at an approximate cost of $55,000, be
12 separated from the current request. Perhaps corporate contributions could be sought for
13 that part of the project. Chairman Rawls felt that approach might be more agreeable to
14 the SPDC and City Council.
15
16 Ms. Durham and Ms. Talley explained how the Committee was planning to have
17 someone underwrite the cost of the pavilion and that the intent was to promote the whole
18 project, with the pavilion part of the approved concept plan. The pavilion will be the
19 selling point to get sponsors.
20
21 Director Jackson said it was his understanding that the Park Board's direction was that
22 "the request be presented as an entire project, with a total cumulative cost of $204,000,
23 but of that $204,000 we are engaging it in two separate phases - the first phase being the
24 garden, which is $X, and here's the money that have already been raised for that and the
25 funds that are asked to come from the Park Dedication and Coke - and then phase two,
26 which will be additional funds that are derived from donated sources to the Liberty
27 Garden Committee."
28
29 The two main points of concern for the Park Board involved the pavilion and the
30 amenities list and the need to present a "phased" approach for the entire project.
31
32 Ms. Georgia said she felt it was important that the Committee get the matching funds for
33 the first portion because that was the basis that the Board had granted the first $50,000
34 matching funds on.
35
36 Ms. Durham said the funds were put in reserve, anticipating that they would perhaps not
37 be used at all, however, have them there so that the Committee could move forward and
38 be able to solicit funding and get the project moving.
39
40 Director Jackson asked that the minutes show that staff modified the chart that was
41 presented to the Board in their packets to reflect the project costs were revised back to the
42 original $204,502; the chart will show SPDC matching funds of $50,000; it will show a
43 Liberty Garden Matching Funds of $50,000 $32,900 of which has been received to date
44 - and that the additional $32,900 has been added into the original request of Park
45 Dedication Fund. So the Park Dedication Funds will now show $74,502, with a Coke
February 10, 2003 Page 7 of 9
Official Minutes***
Approved by the Parks and Recreation Board 4/14/03
1 allocation fund being matched on the $30,000, bringing the total budget costs to
2 $204,502.
3
4 After a lengthy discussion, the consensus of the Board was that a phasing approach
5 would be a more palatable approach. Various scenarios were discussed.
6
7 Ms. Georgia recapped the phased project as: Phase I would be minus the pavilion and the
8 foundation for the pavilion - Phase I would be a total cost of $172,878 - $55,000. Phase
9 II would be all of the amenities, which are calculated at $31,624 + the pavilion.
10
11 A motion was made for the Park Board to support the implementation of Liberty
12 Garden in a phased approach. Phase I consisting of all items listed on Page 511-4,
13 minus the pavilion and all the installation costs associated with the pavilion as well
14 as Page 513-5 (that would be the total of Phase I); Phase II would be the pavilion and
15 all installation costs for the pavilion as well as the items listed on Page 513-6, with
16 one exception - the benches, Item 16, and statutes (Item 22) would be included in
17 Phase I, since they have already had matching funds. As a part of this motion, I'm
18 making the motion that out of Park Dedication Funds, we take approximately
19 $40,000 and recommend that be dedicated to the Liberty Garden project, Phase I.
20 Phase II will need to be funded on further consideration, etc.
21
22 Motion: Georgia
23 Second: Wood
24 Ayes: Cornish, Georgia, O'Connor, Rawls, and Wood
25 Nays: None
26 Abstention: Durham
27 Vote: 5-0-1
28
29 Motion carried.
30
31 Director Jackson clarified that the Liberty Garden issue will be brought back to the Park
32 Board for recommendation of Phase Il, prior to presentation to City Council, should
33 additional funding be requested.
34
35 Agenda Item No. 7. Liaison Reports
36
37 Board members reviewed the following:
38
39 (a) Recreation/Special Events - No report this meeting.
40
41 (b) Youth Sports Associations - Soccer, baseball, youth softball, and inline
42 hockey signups begun last week and will continue through this weekend.
43
44 (c) Community Groups - No report this meeting.
45
February 10, 2003 Page 8 of 9
Official Minutes***
Approved by the Parks and Recreation Board 4/14/03
1 (d) SPIN - SPIN hosted a citywide forum providing information on
2 proposed zoning/concept plans for Harris Southlake at Central Drive and
3 FM 1709, and proposed single-story office space at 817 W. Southlake
4 Blvd. on January 27, 2003.
5
6 (e) SPDC - SPDC w ill hold its next meeting February 18.
7
8 (f) JUC - The next meeting will be held Thursday, February 13 at 6:00
9 p.m., Town Hall.
10
I1 (g) City Council Monthly Report - Chairman Rawls will deliver the Park
12 Board Report at the February 4"' City Council meeting. Subsequent
13 assignments are: March 4 - Tim O'Connor, April 1 - Liz Durham.
14
15 A enda Ite . 8. Ad' ournment
16
17 he ark Board oted nanimously to adjourn the meeting.
18
19
20 Bobby R~ vIs
21 Parks & Recreation Board Chair
22
23
24 May Georgia
25 Parks & Recreation Board Secretary
26
27
28 Attachments: Item 513, Expenditure of funds for Liberty Garden - PowerPoint presentation and cover memo
29 w/attachments
February 10, 2003 Page 9 of 9
. Qn
t
L '
~ a
m L
VI '
J
O e
N m
00
U4 C
y,.- .RM py1
4
1t
~Y4MR) s C
~f O
co
? ~ i~,; {;gi •L
r:
;moo 0
r
V! CL -r- _ a) C1) -0 C:
U) 0
E
N a U~ O N C
C: 4-j
C. CL
~C6•C_-0 NC_4-- ~~~>fn M
O C C m - •O 4 C:HE V i
C 4- ca I cn O L o
if ~ ~~~NN ~m E Cu ~C _
U
co ~CCOC70 > ~U0.a)Co
ImQ)-Q m E~- CC ~E i= 0-
C6~4- C(n•V~ 0-Z C6 0c:
C O C m
O 0.U~O~O =M0~~ iU C a)
C-L =3
04 M HE aC): t/1 LU a) O r-
ow
~Q ca a") =4-j WCn ca a)DO U U
O
N
44,
N
' r L.L
Q
4~ • oo
.Ly
ca ca
z 06
c EL
O O
o ~ 4-j
~i Q O U U U r-
~ ~ O r- C O-
Q O CO W U ~ m N ~ oz$ CL
06 06
V1 N 0= 'L _0 U L N O O
-P O O ~ E
C: m
Dz(Dm>0-CL <-2:
i
1
rl
" l ! Q
m
•T~~ Y
QC>
r1
A
a~ cn
CU=-
_0 U f6
O) a) cn cli
1 E cn c:
U L C Co
a) o' O 0
ca N CU C;) "0 c 0 cn
E-cCU -L -0 N C: UCU~ ~ ~ C:
NO
E O CUL Y c cno 0
>om N -0 0~C:
0 C= U5 C: 0
O a) +a) c: E -0 0 -cn
0 0 C) -0 CU =3 70
E40 CU --4-
-p E CU C/) cu C:
O)c 0- C: 0 0
LO d- p - 0~ 70 Co U U
5-- Cli
p 6F} ~ E C.0
O N E a) N ,cu u) c: u) C cn O cA
0E4 ~Ch cn Ccn~- 000p 0-a
m
(np 0>~UCuULOU) jC6CCD Ca~(a
ma)=U ON~^~ I I 0(~~ 0M0
L~0 U64 U) 2 U~ P 0) Of 6g-0
,r •k
iff g€g x ~ Cb fi Cti f> ~
td
1 Pi
I r r P -
Bi ~ t (
e
-~--~~c, A
Cwd f
j Y r
, ~`~F fi`~~ mgr L=a_ I~,~.~--_ t -,E>~•G-- ~Sa a ~3'
x'1
14
S, t3 7:.
u r>
lie
~Aie
( y A
a
r All 3K to to n
f7 I
! Y'~~P ~ k Ij f6 ~ f
q a S
C)
CO
Cr
0) O O N O N
0 C) O O COO O
O O V-~ C r-
LO LO ff} Hg bItF} 6CY)
0- r
L
lot U)
_0 _0 c
3
• ~ LL U co
J U c
C ~ co O co O
N co Q
0 ~ U CO
co co
N O
U
~
V E 0 Cfl cn
'0 E L ~ -se Fu
U
C/) 0-
City of Southlake, Texas
MEMORANDUM
January 27, 2003
TO: Parks and Recreation Board
FROM: Malcolm Jackson, Interim Director of Community Services
SUBJECT: Recommendation for Park Dedication Funds expenditure in the amount of
$41,602 and Coke Fund allocation of $30,000 for the development of a Liberty
Garden in Bicentennial Park
Action Requested: Park Board recommendation for Park Dedication Funds expenditure in the
amount of $41,602 and Coke Fund allocation of $30,000 for the development
of a Liberty Garden in Bicentennial Park
Background
Information: During the past year, staff has been working with the Southlake Liberty
Garden Committee on the conceptual design and cost estimate for a proposed
Liberty Garden. The Liberty Garden Committee consists of Keep Southlake
Beautiful, the Southlake Garden Club, Master Gardeners, the American
Airlines Flight Attendants, and city staff.
Park Board approved matching funds of $50,000 at their October 14, 2002,
meeting. The cost estimate for the project in its entirety was originally
$201,936. It includes walkways, arbors, garden statues, landscape beds
featuring native and adaptable plant material, irrigation, signage, trash
receptacles, benches, picnic tables, decorative lighting, and a pavilion.
However, since Park Board's original approval, SPDC has recommended that
the Liberty Garden Committee reevaluate the requested funds by more
closely defining the in-kind services and materials to be included and $7,000
from the Coke Fund was approved by Council to seek professional services
for design and cost estimate clarification.
Staff has reviewed the original proposal and sought conceptual design critique
and refined cost analyses from the consulting firm of Dunkin, Sims, Stoffels,
Inc. The consultants concluded that an accurate representative "retail value"
of the project to be very similar to staff's projections, with some additional
quantity adjustments and provisions for ADA access. Staff also met with the
Liberty Garden Committee to refine expected donations and contributions to
offset some of the retail costs and to explore cost-saving design measures.
The result provides what the Committee and staff feels to be the most
accurate representation of "actual costs" for the project, and, therefore, the
most accurate assessment of what the Matching Funds, Park Dedication, and
Coke funds will be applied toward. The cost breakdown by "retail costs,"
5B- i
Parks and Recreation Board
January 27, 2003
Page 2
"donations and contributions," and "actual costs" are provided in Table 1
(attached).
Financial
Considerations:
• Commitment of $41,602 from the Park Dedication Fund account. The
current balance is $256,000.
• Commitment of $30,000 from the unallocated remainder of the Coke
budget. The unencumbered balance is currently $53,032.
• Keep Southlake Beautiful will serve as the project treasurer for the
Committee.
Financial Impact: As part of the Liberty Garden development process, the Committee pledged
to work with volunteer groups such as the Southlake Garden Club and Master
Gardeners to provide general maintenance of the plant material and beds to
include weeding of beds, pruning, occasional plant replacement, and
mulching (estimated at 32 man hours @ five times per year or 160 hours per
year). The City would be responsible for daily trash removal, irrigation
maintenance, and general site repairs as needed (estimated at 1.5 man hours
per week or 78 hours per year). Total man hours per year for complete
Liberty Garden maintenance is estimated at 238 hours. Utilities costs for
electrical are estimated at approximately $50.00 per month. There would be
no water costs as the city utilizes a well for irrigation.
Citizen Input/
Board Review: The Liberty Garden Committee made a report to the Parks Board and
reviewed the general concept plan at their April 8, 2002 meeting.
The Parks and Recreation Board approved a $50,000 Matching Funds request
at their October 14, 2002, meeting.
SPDC tabled the Matching Funds request and recommended approving funds
for design and cost refinement at their October 22, 2002, meeting
Council approved $7,000 from the Coke Fund budget for these services at
their November 5, 2002, meeting.
Legal Review: Not Applicable.
Alternatives: Park Board discussion and consideration may result in various project
alternatives.
5B-2
Parks and Recreation Board
January 27, 2003
Page 3
Supporting
Documents: Supporting documents include the following items:
■ Table 1 - Liberty Garden Cost Estimate
■ Southlake Liberty Garden Concept Plan
Staff
Recommendation: Park Board recommendation for Park Dedication Funds expenditure in the
amount of $41,602 and Coke Fund allocation of $30,000 for the development
of a Liberty Garden in Bicentennial Park.
It is also important to note that the Liberty Garden Committee is in an on-
going cycle of soliciting additional funds and donations. Therefore, staff would
also recommend that the Park Board stipulate that donations received in excess
of the match requirement be used to offset any funds allocated, but not
expended, from the three city funds. Staff also recommends that the priority for
expending funds for construction come first from the Matching Funds and Park
Dedication Funds budgets, then from the Coke Fund, as the Coke Fund is a
smaller, more specialized fund with a funding reserve commitment.
5B-3
a~ O p
00
F" MO O 00 M
V 69 509 roq b4 64 b9 69
O 6R O 69 b°4 Goa b°4
W O
~z
0
A
o kn ~ ~ o0
H~~ ~ O ~ M O DO M V'~
H U E09, coq 6'9 yq 69 69
EOS
0-4 ° n N
a FTC 69 yg rs _ N kn N 69
E~ bA
M
Sz~
N
W Z N U s; U N N cn N O
w cis
in,
dW ap ~ ~ or o ~-rs
Cfl
U) CL
0
co W
cts H U w° o o 'Q
A U , ~ Ts b 'C b b b U
6n ct3
r-L r.
0 MN
in,
W h
~ H~ ~ a w w
~ ~A ~ ~ ~ a O °wa a
E-+ p. a _ j a M N o a o o a
~ ~ w N v] ~n
O
z
w
H
0
o ~
"o 3
W a N ri fs, ~r vi 00
jam'
FT 00 0° o 0010000
O O o o o~ o~
O N O D1
669 oo b9 69 m 69 69
69 tfr
v~ O
C) C) ri 69 ° 69 o cl~
CAF r . 0 kr M
~z bo'Nj b9 6N9
O
A
d F o° o° o0 0° o oo 00
~ O O 00
QF"O 06 r4
69 b9
►a c 00 O O
~Ud' d" O O O O
z F O
IQ's
0
Q)
m 03 d O
O C/] cd
N O
F g a cd 'd ~ •ZJ E ~1 fl
96 cz O I ,O N cd 'L bCIS
A N
~ct N V (-WCOPO
COO
N cd
A b
bA N cd cC N cd O bA 3
S"r w~ N CJ O It
bA • cd .^S U d •rr . l 4y
3
F
121
H z ~ N
"L3 .O
a N w a a s ~ l
o
I F
H ~ ~ o
~ C pQ o cad O
E r`~ 00 ;
N V)
U
cl
-0 CU A.-O u On
:.I 0_ •N C~ ..r • U
cri tr 0 O ~E
a O a rq
a O 00 O 00 O O~ O N C O
Q F N O Cl\ tr)
ll~
M N l~ N 00
V 69 69 69 6N9 69 69 ff? NEf~ 't
Q V 69 69
V1 O O O O O O O O O O O
69 O 69 69 69 69 69 o O O~w O
O O O O V^
a Q 69 06 6C~9 ~ 6M9
..z
0
A
O 00 O \O O O O O d o0 N
a s O O W) O N O
~O N C) C~ N N kn o 00 tn
Q * cn 614 _
O W O It 69 6Fi ~ 69 rs ~ M o
~ ~4 V 69 69 N
69 69
m C)
0
F. W ~ O O ° o 0 0
z H 69 69 N t I
~a 69 oq
N N ^ cd N
V1 O o aA o
00 tz!
y o cd cd 9 0, o c~3 U U
w o b o on
cd cd cd N c~ - U
b 'a 'd U +O 'd +ct Cd
0 L)
w a a u a rS U N r-~ U 03 a
00
03 cj CIS Cd
(1) OJ
- C N M a 00 - (V
V
c W5
O H
~ NO
o
w a
H
If M h y ~i
O u
06
~ a ON N C/1 N ~ C H
N N
O O
H4 b9
O O N O O
0000 ~O
69 b4 b4 69 b9
U
M
~ O
U
ct O
6N~4
n/ ~'Uw v
v ~ p +v-' ~ v b
T ~
~ rn ~ O Q ~ O O
a~
y y
G~ C~ C~ C~ RS LC CC C~ C~ C~ GC LSS RC IAA dA CA C~. C~ Ct~ GC GC C~ C~ V
.Nr GA GA GA bA bA bA bD bA bA bU bA bA O O O bA ~ bA bA GA CA ~
C~
CJ
.C
A ~
O v
O I O O O O In 1n ~o O m O M N N
Mo,Nel NOO~4~~-- mM~~~~N~~NM•--
yC
y
w
O
C.
O
i
v
O
a
a
c ~ A •a
CD 00 Im, Co 0
(U 4-4
(3, 40
'D 0 cu
Cl eat 4) Cl C o
i~dG=,A~~E~WU3L~fs,U~-1~-1~aAfxpq~
`E ~
c5 r4 NM4tri ~6 r-: o6 a,6 eq* ~
to ~-4 N M 4 N ~ t-: d0
N
O
U
c
rn
70-
MT
rn
c m y `
Uv c
w
Rx Nab
=0; C
U W O- 8. P.- E
oCo E _l C~ O N
U U N E• N b
III
In CD 075
C A 8.5i
Cf) L
~j ZO C U O~NMIt Lo Co M
O =
a CL
M C N I III Sir :E 2 Z5 C
a O. 11 I
O N i
Lo
m 1% _
V d \
T
a
S\b
O E L~ II1
o ~ y cD
all
p • ' ii ' ` Mm
III tsi_N '
>
xg
J
N
' d 0 = d o
_ = }R U- v ~
Q m CL
m 0 ® o d, w
M UU
O 00,
* ®
® p
111, 0
o 06
-00
040
U O
oio
y O
\ II \\\I I
1
m
0 T
y~ rn L c \
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ W ~ ~ III AA
I E
3 ~ °.2
~
4)0cmEo E
DE cm
>vY>a~N~ EM d)
$~o ~iroQ 0 e
C 'O O c N (A C 3 C N C $ 7 J s r I I 11 `
`v moo 2 a~~} \
rn L
WE 13
L C` N l0- O m 4? y 7 -_Np O N I
N W CJJ O -O
z `w a, Sm w a c c
M
e) M
- M C0 3 l0 / pll
yy r 'O C 'C N ry M N C
C 9 '
L (D ,p $
CIL r t _
0 CID
x 8 7 in C fC0 a \
ztoio m nl\
m
c
nl -
1