The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2003 04 28 Regular E Additional Park Screening at Moss Park COMMISSION AGENDA ITEM E CONSENT INFORMATIONAL PUBLIC HEARING REGULAR X 04/28/03 Meeting MGR. ~~PT C!',\? Authorization REQUEST: The Parks and Recreation Department is requesting the City Commission to consider again options for additional park screening at Moss Park that are not budgeted and would require new appropriation. PURPOSE: The purpose of this item is to review options for additional park screening at Moss Park, and receive direction from the City Commission. CONSIDERATIONS: . The City Commission discussed additional park screening at the June 11,2001, City Commission Meeting. The motion was to consider it at budget time. This was done and funds were not provided. . The City Commission discussed Park Screening at the January 27,2003 meeting and directed staff to come back with the status of irrigation at the park. . At the City Commission meeting on February 10, 2003, staff informed the Commission that irrigation is present and the cost for hedge material would be $ 12.00 per lineal ft. No action was taken. . The City of Winter Springs has expended for Moss Park from the Park Improvement Program, $ 409,441.00. . A 3-gallon size Viburnum Hedge 400 ft. long was planted. However, due to the plants size and close proximity to the playground & basketball court it did not survive. . Moss Park is used extensively by the public and is very attractive. . The neighbors screening on their property is of various types and styles that boarder the park and distract from its appearance. . SRI has completed a screening study of the park with several options with estimated costs. The cost of a 6ft. high vinyl or PVC shadow box fence would be $ 27.00 per ft. or $ 10,800 per wall "A" or $ 16,740 for wall "B". 1 FUNDING: Additional screening is not budgeted and would require from $ 4,800 to 55,800 depending on the option selected, from the Land Acquisition & Park Improvements Funds. RECOMMENDATION: The Parks and Recreation Department recommends that if the City Commission desires to improve screening with a consistent appearance to better provide a site and sound buffer that would hold up under park usage, the best selection is a 6 feet high structural brick wall option "A" at a cost of $ 36,000 from the Land Acquisition and Park Improvement Fund. IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE: May, 2003 June, 2003 Aug., 2003 Sept., 2003 Begin preparing take off for screening. Begin preparing bid documents or obtain price quotes. Award contract. Estimated Completion. ATTACHMENTS: Attachment # 1 SRI Moss Park Neighboring Property Screening Study. COMMISSION ACTION: 2 . ATTACHMENT #1 Planning and Architecture Inc . -.15= . . . ~ Ranaldi 17 Jan 03 Chuck Pula, Director Park and Recreation Department City of Winter Springs ] 000 East SR 434 Winter Springs, F]orida 32708 Re: Moss Park Neighboring Property Screening Study Chuck Pursuant to your recent request to review the costs of fencing for the above referenced project please accept this letter as an update to our letter to you dated 30 Apri] 0] . The prices in the table of our 30 April 0 I letter, are reasonable and do not need to be adjusted to meet c.urrent prices. If any thing they are conservative and like]y 5 to 10 % high. The only clarification we would like to add is that the wood stockade fence (item 3 in the table) is high at $]5 per foot, and can be reduced to $10 per foot, and the shadow box fence (item 4 in the table) is high at $ 25 per foot and should be reduced to $ 15 per foot. Also we included a vinyl or PVC shadow box fence in our pictures but did not provide a price, and for your information this type fencing can be installed for approximately $ 27 per foot. We trust this brief analysis is of value to you in making an informed decision and would be happy to provide any addition information or assistance you may need. 890 Northern Way Suite E I ph 407 977 1080 fx 407977 1019 Winter Springs, Florida 32708 email info@sriarch.com AA-002984 30 Apr 01 Chuck Pula, Director Park and Recreation Department City of Winter Springs 1000 East SR 434 Winter Springs, Florida 32708 Re: Moss Park Neighboring Property Screening Study Chuck Pursuant to our recent conversations and a request from the City Commission to look at the options to enhance the appearance of the above referenced project, please accept this brief analysis for your consideration. Objective: Provide some form of screening between the park and the adjoining neighborhood to the north and west. This screening will serve to visually dress up the park by replacing a variety of existing fencing with a consistent appearance as well as provide those neighbors a site and sound buffer from the park activities. Options: There are several alternatives to accomplish this goal and the following chart shows their representative cost per lineal foot. The wall "A" and wall "B" column shows what the total cost would be for 400 feet and 620 feet respectively for the wall as shown on the attached sit(~ plan sketch. option description cost Ilf wall "A" wall"B" 1 4' to 5' wax myrtle hedge $ 12.00 $ 4,800.00 $ 7,440.00 2 6' hioh chain link fence with planted vines $ 13.00 $ 5,200.00 $ 8,060.00 3 6' high wood stockade fence $ 15.00 $ 6,000.00 $ 9,300.00 4 6' hiQh wood shadow box fence $ 25.00 $ 10,000.00 $15,500.00 5 6' high concrete block and stucco wall $ 65.00 $ 26,000.00 $40,300.00 6 6' high split face decorative concrete block wall $ 75.00 $ 30,000.00 $46,500.00 7 6' high structural brick wall $ 90.00 $ 36,000.00 $55,800.00 Conclusion: As you can see the cost for screening runs from a low of $ 12 to a high of $ 90 per lineal foot and each alternative has it's pros and cons. In analyzing which is the most appropriate alternative consideration must be given to initial cost, maintenance costs, and whether the objective is primarily aesthetic improvement or sight and sound inlprovement. The solution providing the best maintenance cost, best aesthetic improvement, and excl:llent sight and sound improvement is (no.7) the brick wall, however it is the most expensive and may be cost prohibitive. The least expensive solution (no. 1 ) the wax myrtle hedge will provide excellent aesthetic improvement, good sight and sound improvement, reasonable maintenance costs, but will take a minimum of two years to establish sufficient growth to adequately provide the screening desired. In closing there are a couple oflogistica1 issues that would need to be resolved prior to making the screening improvement, namely who will have maintenance responsibility, and will the screen be installed on City property or private property. If installed on private property there may be additional costs involved such as demolition and removal of existing fencing, as well as preparation of some form of agreement or easements to construct the new screening. We trust this brief analysis is of value to you in making an informed decision and we would be happy to provide any addition information or assistance you may need. Regards Wm E. Starmer NCARB President "--." 1 4 year old 5' high wax myrtle hedge (trimmed) 2 4 year old 5' high wax myrtle hedge (untrimmed) , ..',.'';;: :.~ 3 4 year old 5' high wax myrtle hedge (trimmed) 4 4 year old 5' high wax myrtle hedge (untrimmed) 5 6' high wood shadow box fence painted 6 6' high vinyl shadow box fence 7 6' high concrete block and stucco wall ..""""""'..;.... . -.' .~.:..-.;.:..~ 8 5' high split face decorative concrete block wall ~~ ~ 9 6' high brick waIl r '---k- - ,.: '-~-- ---., \ 220' ;, ~ J \,.......___ .___....,..//...r .....~.t J ,,/ NORT~ ~ MOSS PARK SITE PLAN WALL OPTION 'A' INCLUDES Ti-lE 125' AND 21S.' LEG FOR APPROXIMATEL'r 41Zl1Zl LF WALL OPTION 'e' INCLUDES ALL Tf4REE LEGS, FOR APPROXIMATEL'r e,21Zl LF . _.__.0' I- ./ / /p' .",........ =- _,r - ...... ... / /' /