Single Blog

I think it is important to highlight to you that according to the Implementation Principles, the design phase is required to consider options to many specifically named elements.  Although it seems as though this Phase 1 deals with issues that were less sensitive to the community, this Phase will address a few elements mentioned in the Implementation Principles as needing consideration of options including the curved pier (should not be too far into Bay) and associated parking.

I expect that the team chosen will in fact need to look at options as that is a typical part of any project design, and the RFP specifically states that there will be consideration of design strategies and, as Robin’s email notes, that there will also be meetings with neighborhood groups. 

However, I did see one item in the Question and Answer attachment that was possibly a bit off track in that regard as follows: 

Q2. Significant public involvement was part of the master plan process. What is the City’s expectation for public involvement during the design and construction phase? What City Public Involvement resources will be available to the consultant, if any?

A2. Public involvement is an element in the project, but it differs in intent from the master planning process. Having an adopted master plan, our responsibility is to keep the neighborhood and the public at large informed of the project plans and progress. There will also be required public meetings as part of at least one permit process. City staff and facilities will be available. The consultant will be asked to prepare graphics for presentation and attend those meetings.

The Implementation Principles, No. 6, addresses the need to “re-engage with the neighborhood and greater community.”  The clear intention of the Implementation Principles was to “re-engage” the community to discuss the options and other issues needing further consideration as expressed in the other Implementation Principles and otherwise.  Answer 2 could be misunderstood to say something different in describing the scope of work as limited to keeping the public “informed of the project plans and progress.”  The answer to the Question: “What is the City’s expectation for public involvement during the design and construction phase?” might have been better stated as: “With respect to the design phase, the City’s expectation is to ‘re-engage with the neighborhood and greater community’ (see Master Plan Chapter 9, Implementation Principle No. 6) in order to get public input on the various design options, especially as to matters spelled out in the Master Plan Implementation Principles No. 1-5.”  Also, Answer 2 in making reference to permit process public meetings could also be read as a bit different than the meetings with neighborhood groups referenced in the brief scope of services.   

So, once the process gets started, one focus will need to be to involve the community in looking at options at a point in time when input can be meaningful.  Another consideration that MBNA will be very interested in is the process for deciding on the final design.  While there is a Master Plan, there will be decisions made on many issues that require further consideration including input from the public.  MBNA will be very interested to learn how that process will work—how do those decisions get formally made i.e. directly by the City Council, with or without input from the Park Board, or in some other fashion.

We hope and expect that the City will make it clear to the short-listed firms and successful firm that while there is a Master Plan, the design approach is not finalized for all elements, and that it will be important to involve the community in the process of considering options for those unfinished elements.  This process may very well be the standard approach the City uses in all park design projects.  However, the MBNA has not been involved in other park development projects, so it has no experience in that regard and can only make known its concerns.