Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPickart Park Master PlanPickart Park Master Plan March 2025 Project No. 23.049Oshkosh, Wisconsin Prepared for: City of Oshkosh Parks Department 805 Witzel Avenue Oshkosh, WI 54902 Prepared by: Rettler Corporation 3317 Business Park Drive Stevens Point, WI 54482 March 2025 TABLE OF CONTENTS Master Plan 1.0 Acknowledgements ............................................................................ 1 2.0 Introduction ......................................................................................... 2 3.0 Site Analysis ....................................................................................... 3 4.0 Needs Assessment ............................................................................. 5 5.0 Master Plan Development .................................................................. 6 6.0 Cost Overview .................................................................................. 10 7.0 Conclusion ........................................................................................ 11 8.0 References ....................................................................................... 12 Appendix A. Detailed Cost Estimate B. Meeting Notes City of Oshkosh Pickart Park Master Plan P a g e | 1 1.0 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The following persons provided critical input, support, and critique in the development of this document. The City of Oshkosh and Rettler Corporation wish to thank the following people for their time and assistance in developing this plan. City of Oshkosh City Council: Matt Mugerauer, Mayor Karl Buelow, Deputy Mayor Paul Esslinger, Council Member Jacob Floam, Council Member Kris Larson, Council Member DJ Nichols, Council Member Joseph Stephenson, Council Member City of Oshkosh Advisory Park Board: Tim Franz, Seat 1 Becky Metz, Seat 2 Lester Millette, Seat 3 Amy Davis, Seat 4 Jacob Floam, Council Rep. Devon Hudak, Alternate 1 Steven Herman, Alternate 2 City of Oshkosh Staff: Ray Maurer, Parks Director Chad Dallman, Assistant Parks Director Travis Derks, Landscape Operations Manager/City Forester Jenny McCollian, Revenue Facilities Manager Erica Maertz, Administrative Assistant Rettler Corporation: John Kneer, ASLA, PLA, President Rebecca Ramirez, PLA City of Oshkosh Pickart Park Master Plan P a g e | 2 2.0 INTRODUCTION In 1912, John and Mary Pickart purchased an eighty-acre dairy farm west of Oshkosh. In 2018 their descendants, Paul Pickart and his siblings, began the process of creating the Pickart Estates subdivision on the property. In keeping with the City of Oshkosh municipal code regarding subdivisions, the family dedicated 1.51 acres to the City for a neighborhood park. In 2022 a request was made from the Pickart family and approved by City of Oshkosh to name the parcel of land, Pickart Park. In 2024 the City partnered with Rettler Corporation, a Stevens Point based landscape architecture, engineering, and design firm to create the following Pickart Park Master Plan. City of Oshkosh Pickart Park Master Plan P a g e | 3 3.0 SITE ANALYSIS Pickart Park is situated in the Pickart Estates subdivision, on the far west side of Oshkosh, south of the Fox River and just north of W 9th Ave. Parcel #: 90665020104 Size: 1.51 acres Address: Mary’s Dr, Oshkosh WI The site is mowed and generally level, with only a two-foot difference in elevation across the property. The lowest point is in the top center, where an inlet has already been placed and connected to storm sewer pipe. The highest points are at the west end and the south end. Slopes are gentle, in the 1%-2% range. Access can be either by car, with parking along the street, or by foot utilizing the subdivision sidewalks and road crossings. While the site does not yet (as of the time of survey) have sidewalks along its street-facing perimeters, it did have curb and newly planted trees. The developer plans to install sidewalks in the near future. Other utilities include water, sanitary, and storm connections at the northern side of the western end. Electric, gas, fiber, and water come in at the far east side of the site. Two solar powered light poles have been placed along the northern boundary. While two of the parcel edges border the street, the other two sides are adjacent to current or future residential properties. According to the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources Surface Water Data Viewer, there are no wetlands on the site, however some areas are designated with wetland indicator hatches. A wetland delineation may be required before construction. According to the United States Department of Agriculture Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey, the site is composed of Kewaunee silt loam, 2-6 percent slopes, eroded. City of Oshkosh Pickart Park Master Plan P a g e | 5 4.0 NEEDS ASSESSMENT Two community input meetings were held with the neighborhood residents to listen to thoughts, concerns, and desires for the space. The first was held on April 30, 2024. A sign in sheet indicates that roughly twenty people attended. After a brief PowerPoint presentation, a question- and-answer and brainstorming session was held, fielded by the consultant, the Oshkosh Parks Director, and the Assistant Parks Director. At the end, the group was in agreement that a playground, paths, some sort of shelter, seating, green space, trees, bag toss or some type of game for adults, and park lighting were the main priorities. Multiuse courts should also be planned for. After the first meeting, two concept plans containing the items listed above in different orientations were developed by the consultant. Rough cost estimates were also developed. These options were presented at a second input meeting on September 25, 2024. At this meeting, the group was unanimous in their decision that Concept 2, with some modifications, should become the base for the Master Plan. The Oshkosh Parks Department staff suggested some revisions as well. City of Oshkosh Pickart Park Master Plan P a g e | 6 5.0 MASTER PLAN DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT 1 In this concept, a tennis/pickleball multiuse court dominates the high ground at western end of the park. Not far away, a rubberized surfaced playground with plaza and cantilever shade structure over some seats shares the same asphalt entry path. A drinking fountain is located nearby at the intersection of the north entry and the future sidewalks. The center of the park is mostly green space, perfect for impromptu games and running off energy. The main entrance is located at the northeast corner, along with bike racks, a landscaped park sign, and concrete bag toss equipment. Both activity areas are lit with internal park lighting and connected by an eight-foot-wide accessible asphalt path. Landscape buffers have been placed along all sides of the park that border residential properties. CONCEPT 2 In this concept, there is no main entry. Instead, there are three entries connected by concrete sidewalk loops. And once again, all residential facing sides have been provided with a landscape buffer to assist with mitigating activity and noise. A basketball court has been placed on the west end, with a large central green space adjoining for spontaneous play and running around. The rubberized surface playground has been located in the center of the park along a wide entry sidewalk. Across the walk from the playground is an open shelter with picnic tables from which parents can watch activities taking place on either side. A drinking fountain has been placed at the corner of this entry. A third entry is sited on the eastern side of the park next to bike racks and concrete bag toss equipment. Also in the works is a discussion on rentable game equipment and lockers. MASTER PLAN Based on Concept 2, the Master Plan contains a multiuse tennis/pickleball court and a half basketball court on either side of the westernmost entry. An open shelter with seating and a drinking fountain are located on the west side of the central entry, and a poured-in-place rubberized surface playground to the east. The easternmost entrance leads to bike racks, seating, and concrete bag toss. A park sign is located on the northeastern corner. Smaller open green space areas are situated between each of the entries. Construction will likely be phased, as funds allow, with the playground and eastern loop taking priority. City of Oshkosh Pickart Park Master Plan P a g e | 10 6.0 COST OVERVIEW The following site development cost ranges have been derived from 2024 actual project construction costs. Redevelopment may be by phased development; therefore, the total cost should be evaluated by both individual elements and their phasing potential. Earthwork and Demolition $183,870 Utilities $141,800 Walks (concrete) $62,800 Playground $274,070 Bag Toss $16,650 Multiuse Court $88,550 Basketball (half court) $39,320 Buildings and Miscellaneous Amenities $247,900 Construction Items Total $1,054,960 Contingency (at 10%) $105,500 Construction Estimate Subtotal $1,160,460 Geotechnical Borings $5,000 Project Soft Costs $98,640 Summary- Project Total $1,264,100 (See Appendix A for detailed cost estimate line items) City of Oshkosh Pickart Park Master Plan P a g e | 11 7.0 CONCLUSION Pickart Park is an important resource to the surrounding neighborhood and community, as well as an enduring memorial to the Pickart Family legacy. An early stage in construction- the park site being essentially a blank slate- and enthusiastic local interest combine to make this a unique opportunity to construct something tailor-made to the community. We believe that implementing the ideas outlined in this document will assist in ensuring and maintaining Pickart Park’s importance in this neighborhood and the City of Oshkosh. City of Oshkosh Pickart Park Master Plan P a g e | 12 8.0 REFERENCES ▪ City of Oshkosh. Information about parks, boards and committees, and GIS information. Retrieved from URL: o https://www.oshkoshwi.gov/ https://www.ci.oshkosh.wi.us/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=1081941&dbid=0&repo =Laserfiche ▪ Oshkosh Parks Department. Ray Maurer, Parks Director, and other department staff and members, provided important information regarding the current needs and recommendations for the City of Oshkosh. ▪ USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey. o https://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/App/WebSoilSurvey.aspx ▪ Winnebago County Wisconsin. Mapping and GIS information. Retrieved from URL: o https://www.co.winnebago.wi.us/planning-and-zoning/gis o https://www.co.winnebago.wi.us/planning-and-zoning/gis/data-download ▪ Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources. Surface Water Data Viewer. Retrieved from URL: o https://dnr.wisconsin.gov/topic/SurfaceWater/swdv City of Oshkosh Pickart Park Master Plan APPENDIX City of Oshkosh Pickart Park Master Plan Appendix A Detailed Cost Estimate PRELIMINARY COST ESTIMATE Pickart Park Master Plan - Preferred Concept Oshkosh, Wisconsin Park Facility Development - Master Plan Rettler Project No.: 23.049 Item Estimated Category No.Item Description Units Quantity Unit Price Extension Sub Total $183,870.00 1.Mobilization L.S.1 $82,000.00 $82,000.00 2.Common Excavation, 12-inch depth C.Y.2,445 $10.00 $24,450.00 3.Strip Topsoil, 6-inch depth S.Y.7,340 $2.50 $18,350.00 4.Place Screened Topsoil, 6-inch depth S.Y.4,892 $3.00 $14,680.00 5.Excavation below Subgrade Allowance C.Y.690 $23.00 $15,870.00 6.Seed/Fertilize/Mulch Common Green Space S.F.44,030 $0.50 $22,020.00 7.Erosion Control L.S.1 $5,000.00 $5,000.00 8.Tracking Pad EACH 1 $1,500.00 $1,500.00 $141,800.00 9.Stormwater Management Allowance L.S.1 $25,000.00 $25,000.00 10.Storm Sewer L.F.500 $55.00 $27,500.00 11.Storm Basin EACH 4 $3,000.00 $12,000.00 12.Site Electrical & Service Allowance L.S.1 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 13.Sanitary Utility Allowance L.F.210 $65.00 $13,650.00 14.Water Utility Allowance L.F.210 $65.00 $13,650.00 WALKS (CONCRETE)$62,800.00 15.Concrete, 5-inch depth (inc. viewing area)S.F.7,993 $7.00 $55,960.00 16.Dense Graded Base, 6-inch depth S.Y.977 $7.00 $6,840.00 PLAYGROUND $274,070.00 17.Play Equipment Allowance L.S.1 $175,000.00 $175,000.00 18.PIP Surface S.F.3,115 $22.00 $68,530.00 19.4" Underdrain L.F.200 $20.00 $4,000.00 20.Concrete Thickened Edge Walk, 5-inch depth S.F.693 $12.00 $8,320.00 21.Dense Graded Base, 6-inch depth (walk)S.Y.85 $7.00 $600.00 22.Concrete, 5-inch depth (playground plaza)S.F.1,370 $12.00 $16,440.00 23.Dense Graded Base Course, 6-inch depth (playground plaza)S.Y.167 $7.00 $1,180.00 BAG TOSS $16,650.00 24.Precast Concrete Bag Toss Boards SET 2 $2,500.00 $5,000.00 25.Concrete, 5-inch depth (inc. viewing area)S.F.463 $7.00 $3,250.00 26.Dense Graded Base, 6-inch depth S.Y.57 $7.00 $400.00 27.Rental Kiosk/Sports Equipment Smart Locker L.S.1 $8,000.00 $8,000.00 MULTIUSE COURT $88,550.00 28.Hot Mixed Asphalt, 3.5-inch depth S.Y.847 $25.00 $21,180.00 November 7, 2024 EARTHWORK / DEMOLITION UTILITIES 29.Dense Graded Base, 12-inch depth S.Y.932 $12.00 $11,190.00 30.Acrylic Surfacing and Striping S.Y.847 $20.00 $16,940.00 31.Sawcut Joints L.S.1 $1,000.00 $1,000.00 32.Tennis Court Netting (Posts, Net, Center Anchor Strap)SET 1 $3,500.00 $3,500.00 33.10' Vinyl Coated Chain Link Fencing L.F.210 $75.00 $15,750.00 34.3.5' Vinyl Coated Chain Link Fencing L.F.140 $30.00 $4,200.00 35.10'H x 12'W Vinyl Coated Gate EACH 1 $3,000.00 $3,000.00 36.4" Underdrain L.F.372 $20.00 $7,440.00 37.6"HDPE Storm Sewer Pipe and Endwall L.F.145 $30.00 $4,350.00 BASKETBALL (HALF COURT) $39,320.00 38.Hot Mixed Asphalt, 3.5-inch depth S.Y.233 $25.00 $5,825.00 39.Dense Graded Base, 12-inch depth S.Y.256 $12.00 $3,075.60 40.Acrylic Surfacing and Striping S.Y.233 $20.00 $4,660.00 41.Sawcut Joints L.S.1 $500.00 $500.00 42.Post Mounted Basketball Hoop EACH 2 $9,000.00 $18,000.00 43.10' High Black Vinyl Chain Link Fencing L.F.50 $75.00 $3,750.00 44.4" Underdrain L.F.100 $20.00 $2,000.00 45.6"HDPE Storm Sewer Pipe L.F.50 $30.00 $1,500.00 BUILDINGS AND MISCELLANEOUS AMENITIES $247,900.00 46.Benches EACH 2 $800.00 $1,600.00 47.Stone Seat Wall F.F.48 $100.00 $4,800.00 48.Open Shelter (20x34')S.F.680 $250.00 $170,000.00 49.Site Furniture Allowance L.S.1 $8,000.00 $8,000.00 50.Drinking Fountain EACH 1 $10,000.00 $10,000.00 51.Bicycle Racks EACH 1 $10,000.00 $10,000.00 52.Park Lighting EACH 3 $5,500.00 $16,500.00 53.Park Sign L.S.1 $15,000.00 $15,000.00 54.Landscaping Allowance L.S.1 $12,000.00 $12,000.00 SUMMARY CONSTRUCTION ITEMS TOTAL:$1,054,960.00 CONTINGENCY at 10%:$105,500.00 CONSTRUCTION ESTIMATE SUBTOTAL:$1,160,460.00 GEOTECHNICAL BORINGS $5,000.00 PROJECT SOFT COSTS $98,640.00 SUMMARY - PROJECT TOTAL $1,264,100.00 Notes: Geotechnical study not completed at time of study. Soil conditions may impact cost estimate. City of Oshkosh Pickart Park Master Plan Appendix B Meeting Notes Listening Session Meeting Minutes Client: City of Oshkosh Name of Project: CORP update RHR Project No.: 23.049 Date: Tuesday, April 30, 2024 Time: 4:30pm Location: Parks Dept Bldg No. Name Company Email/Phone 1. Ray Maurer Parks Director RMaurer@oshkoshwi.gov 2. John Kneer (consultant) Rettler Corporation jkneer@rettler.com 3. Rebecca Ramirez (consultant) Rettler Corporation rramirez@rettler.com 4. Chad Dallman Assistant Parks Director CDallman@oshkoshwi.gov 5. Twenty-one community members I. Introductions ▪ The Parks Director introduced the master planning process using Rusch Park as an example. ▪ John Kneer then introduced Rettler Corporation and went through the PowerPoint presentation. He further went into more detail on the Master Planning process. He then opened the floor to comments. II. Public Input and Discussions ▪ Input: Can you give a size example of the sort of playground that cost on the presentation would install? Answer: The Parks Director listed 44th Parallel Park (going in now), Roe Park (constructed last year), and Westhaven Park as similar examples. The cost includes metal equipment and accessible poured-in-place surfacing. PIP surfacing also saves a lot of maintenance. ▪ Input: Will there be sidewalks in Pickart Park? Answer: unsure at this time. The consultant stated that designers use paths to promote movement through the park. The Assistant Parks Director did note that the trees planted were located with a possible exterior sidewalk in mind. ▪ The Parks Director outlined the playground purchase process. The city sends an RFP out 6-8 playground vendors, asking each to submit up to three proposals. Park staff reviews these, and then the neighborhood picks their favorites. ▪ Input: Are tennis courts so expensive because concrete and asphalt are expensive? Answer: Yes, material costs are high. Kneer said park development can be phased. ▪ Input: Does the tennis court on the side include lights? Answer: No. ▪ Input: Question about trash cans in parks. The Parks Director stated that since 1999, the city has gone to a “take out what you bring in,” like the state parks. The city generally does not provide trash cans. Trash cans are a nice convenience, but people abuse it. People even drop off boats in the parks. ▪ Input: Does the city pick up pet waste or provide pet waste stations? Or does this fall under the same policy as above? Yes, it does. Bring your bags and carry out your dog’s waste. ▪ Input: We live across from the park and my kids make us go to Jones Park because of zip lines. Jones Park has a zip line, small playground, and natural environment. ▪ The Parks Director stated that if the neighborhood wants to see some specific amenity (such as a zip line), to please let the parks department know so they can include it in the proposal. ▪ Input: What about horseshoes? They aren’t very expensive. ▪ John Kneer stated that bag toss and table tennis are also getting popular. The Parks Director stated that Oshkosh does have a few of those items, however they do not seem to be highly used. ▪ A discussion followed on bag toss rental with equipment that can be unlocked via phone. Boards are concrete so that they cannot be taken. ▪ Input: Can you add basketball hoops to a pickleball court so that you can get half-court basketball as well? The consultant then talked about multiuse courts and their usage in Appleton. He stated they are becoming more common. ▪ Input: A question was raised about how many items and of what size can actually fit in this park space. Kneer roughed in a tennis site based on the scale shown on the survey currently up on the slide. A multiuse court would take up quite a lot of the park. ▪ Input: What about boundary fencing to protect neighbors immediately next to the park? A discussion of fencing started (i.e. wooden, etc.) ▪ Input: One person stated that they are looking for an exterior perimeter walking path for strollers and ADA access. ▪ Kneer stated that the meeting is narrowing in on a main entrance at the northeast corner. ▪ Input: Question on whether street parking would be required. Answer: Given the neighborhood character of the park, and the size and cost of a parking lot, probably not. It will leave more money to spend on amenities. ▪ Everyone agreed that a playground was a priority. ▪ Input: Green space is also a priority. ▪ Input: Suggested a basketball court. ▪ Input: Want to see an inclusive playground with something for different age groups that “grows with the kids.” Would also like to see a basketball court for older kids. ▪ Input: Attendee states they never play in their back yard with their kids because of the pond. The open field at Pickart Park is the safest space in the neighborhood to safely play with young children. ▪ Input: Question about playground siting- would you have it near the entrance? Answer: No. It would not be immediately near the entrance, but at one of the site high points away from traffic and in a wider area. ▪ Input: Would like to see pickleball or something that adults can do. Want something “adultish” in the park. ▪ Input: It’s great that this is in a recognized neighborhood association to help with funding. Additional funding is available. ▪ Input: Would like a shade structure as well as trees and landscape. ▪ The Parks Director inquired if there was interest in a basic open-air shelter. The answer was yes. Would like that along with landscaping. ▪ Input: Want a drinking fountain. ▪ The Parks Director stated he would check if sidewalks were going to be constructed around Pickart as part of the subdivision or not. ▪ Input: Can we have internal paths that connect to sidewalks. It doesn’t have to be concrete. Answer: Yes. ▪ Input: I am hearing that the neighborhood park should also be a gathering space. ▪ John Kneer asked what the residents would like. Answer: Shelter (about three quarters raised their hands), playground (roughly half raised their hands), paths, and multiuse courts later. ▪ The Parks Director said he would like to start the park this year and finish up by next summer. There would be time to review options. He further warned that if pickleball is constructed, it would attract noise and visitors from outside the neighborhood. ▪ The Parks Director asked about lighting. A positive response was received. The consultant noted that bollard lighting can be laid out along the trail. ▪ Input: A question was raised about how to be respectful to those neighboring the park. The consultant spoke of defining lot lines and buffers. The Parks Director said he would mark the corners prominently to make sure the lot lines are clear. ▪ Input: Would like seating along the walkways. Benches of some sort. ▪ Input: Want open space, buffers, and to plant trees early to give them time to grow. And also to leave some spots open. ▪ Input: Question about whether pickleball needs tall fencing. Answer: No. Only competition courts. Some recreational courts only have backstops. The Parks Director mentioned Stevens Park as an example. III. Conclusions ▪ John Kneer with Rettler reviewed the next steps of master planning, collection of community input, and stated it would be a few weeks before coming back to review. ▪ The Assistant Parks Director stated the department would try to get unique play items or themes. ▪ Input: It was noted that the email address on the comment sheets differed from that in the presentation. The consultant zoomed in on the presentation so people could write down the new address. The Parks Director stated that both would work for the duration of the input date. Pickart Park Neighborhood Input Meeting Minutes Client: City of Oshkosh Name of Project: CORP update RHR Project No.: 23.049 Date: Wednesday, Sept 25, 2024 Time: 6:00-7:00pm Location: Oshkosh Parks Department No. Name Company Email/Phone 1. Chad Dallman Assistant Parks Director 2. John Kneer Rettler Corporation jkneer@rettler.com 3. Rebecca Ramirez Rettler Corporation rramirez@rettler.com Four community members I. Introductions ▪ John Kneer, with Rettler Corporation, introduced the company and then the recent CORP approval and its connection to the Pickart Park Master Planning process. ▪ John Kneer presented Pickart Park Concept 1 and 2, then displayed both on the screen side-by-side and invited questions and comments. II. Questions and Discussions ▪ Input: Concept 1 does not show picnic tables? Answer: correct. ▪ Attendees expressed a preference for the larger shelter with tables in Concept 2. ▪ Attendees expressed a preference for the walking paths in Concept 2. They liked the idea of loops. ▪ Attendees expressed a preference for the entrance location in Concept 2. They preferred a non-corner entry. ▪ Attendees liked the greater green space in Concept 2. ▪ Attendees all agreed that they generally prefer Concept 2. Some mentioned liking its simplicity. ▪ Input: A question about the amount of buffer space/room between the bean bags area and the residence to the south was raised. Answer: about 30 feet. It was also noted by another participant that Concept 2 had more room in that area too. ▪ Attendees were interested in a multiuse court with tennis, pickleball, and basketball on the same court. Something larger than is currently shown in Concept 2. ▪ Discussion on water fountain location. It was agreed that the location near the playground was good from both a utility and use perspective. ▪ Attendees like the shelter with tables being near- but not a part of the playground- as shown on Concept 1 vs Concept 2. Then the shelter can be used for various purposes. ▪ Lighting questions were raised. Attendees want park lighting moved closer to events. Athletic lighting for the multiuse courts (i.e. single pole Musco sports light) would be nice. Especially something that can be programmed. ▪ The Assistant Parks Director asked about restrooms. Neighbors considered, but ultimately decided they would like to keep much of the park usage local. ▪ The Assistant Parks Director asked about landscaping. The neighbors wished to get the landscaping in soon so that it has time to grow. Attendees added it to priorities. ▪ Priorities are: i. Playground ii. Trails iii. Landscaping iv. Adult games v. Pavilion vi. Attendees agreed that they want the middle and east section of the Concept 2 concept done first. The multiuse courts and associated path/loop can be completed later. III. Next Steps ▪ John asked about further input and went into a brief description of the next steps. i. Advisory Park Board will evaluate funding and cost estimates from Rettler Corporation. ii. After Park Board is satisfied, they will then adopt the plan. ▪ Attendees asked about start date, timing, and process. ▪ Question about whether the concept or master plan will be posted online after adoption. ▪ John Kneer also mentioned that the concepts and Advisory Park Board meeting packets are available online. ▪ Question about showing up to meeting. The Assistant Parks Director said that would be fine and show support.