Transcript of SANDY RIVER PARK Master Plan
S a n d y R i v e r P a r k M a s t e r P l a n 1
‘ G AT E WAY T O M T. H O O D ’
S A N D Y R I V E R P A R K M a s t e r P l a n
C i t y o f S a n d y , O r e g o n
J u l y 2 0 1 1
2 S a n d y R i v e r P a r k M a s t e r P l a n
1515 SE Water Avenue, Suite 100
Portland, Oregon 97214
GM Project Number: 2090278.00
‘ G AT E WAY T O M T. H O O D ’
39250 Pioneer Boulevard
Sandy, OR 97055
www.cityofsandy.com
S a n d y R i v e r P a r k M a s t e r P l a n 3
A C K N O W L E D G E M E N T S
C O N S U L T A N T T E A M
GROUP MACKENZIE
Tommy King, ASLA
JIM SLAGLE RECREATIONAL TRAILS
Jim Slagle, Trail Planner
C I T Y O F S A N D Y
Nancy Ream Enabnit, Community Services Director
Seth Atkinson, Finance Director
Tracy Brown, Planning Director
Liz French-Storn, Engineering Technician
Steve Gillis, Parks Maintenance
Joe Knapp, Network Administrator
Scott Lazenby, City Administrator
Mike Walker, Public Works Director
T E C H N I C A L A D V I S O R Y C O M M I T T E E
Melanie Atkinson, Bornstedt Village Resident
Byron Ball, Sandy High School Environmental Sciences
Chris Cohen, Sandy High School Student
Jason Dumont, The Nature Conservancy
Kate Holleran, Metro
Russ Plaeger, Sandy River Basin Watershed Council
Kathleen Walker, US Forest Service
4 S a n d y R i v e r P a r k M a s t e r P l a n
This page intentionally left blank.
S a n d y R i v e r P a r k M a s t e r P l a n 5
T A B L E O F C O N T E N T S
1 . 0 I N T R O D U C T I O N . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
7
2 . 0 S I T E B A C K G R O U N D + I N V E N T O R Y . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
3 . 0 P L A N N I N G + D E S I G N P R O C E S S . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 3 3 . 1 T e c h n i c a
l A d v i s o r y C o m m i t t e e + T A C M e e t i n g # 1
3 . 2 P u b l i c W o r k s h o p # 1
3 . 3 T e c h n i c a l A d v i s o r y C o m m i t t e e M e e t i
n g # 2
3 . 4 P u b l i c W o r k s h o p # 2
3 . 5 T e c h n i c a l A d v i s o r y C o m m i t t e e M e e t i
n g # 3
3 . 6 F i n a l M a s t e r P l a n
4 . 0 C O S T O P I N I O N . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 7
A P P E N D I X A : P u b l i c W o r k s h o p S u m m a r i e s .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 0
A P P E N D I X B : N a t u r a l R e s o u r c e R e p o r t b y P
H S . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2
A P P E N D I X C : 2 0 0 4 R e p o r t o f G e o t e c h n i c a l
S e r v i c e s f o r
S a n d y R i v e r P a r k E n t r y b y G e o D e s i g n . . . .
. . . . . . 3 4
A P P E N D I X D : A n i m a l S p e c i e s I n v e n t o r y . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 0 b y C h r i s C o h
e n , S a n d y R i v e r H i g h S c h o o l
View of Sandy River Park (right of the river) from Jonsrud
Viewpoint
6 S a n d y R i v e r P a r k M a s t e r P l a n
This page intentionally left blank.
S a n d y R i v e r P a r k M a s t e r P l a n 7
The Sandy River Park is perhaps the best kept secret in the City’s
park inventory. This 124-acre wooded parcel extends from the top of
the hillside (level with Bluff Road) on the west, the city limits
on the south and down to the Sandy River in the valley. An old
logging road descends through the park, providing river access.
Except for this feature, the park is formally undeveloped.
Trailhead parking is limited to streetside parking along Marcy
Street (a short, dead-end residential street east of Bluff Road).
The site is located outside the City limits and urban growth
boundary (UGB).
For those in the know, this “under-discovered” park provides an
easily accessible wilderness experience. Thus, the City Council and
Park Board would like to preserve the area as a natural,
passive-use park, but would like to begin to develop amenities
appropriate for the site with this master plan to help guide
efforts and provide a tool for seeking grant funding.
The size, complex history and rich natural resources that make
Sandy River Park such a special place, also necessitated a detailed
approach to gaining an understanding of the background, current
conditions and potential of the site and progressed into a
thorough, iterative design process. Regular meetings with the
Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) and two major public outreach
workshops were key to the success of this project.
City staff, Council and Parks Board members, as well as Sandy
citizens all played a significant role in the evolution of the
resulting Sandy River Park Master Plan. This document supports the
original goals of increasing residents’ awareness of the park and
providing amenities that promote appropriate utilization of the
park — improved trails, signage, trailhead parking, scenic
viewpoints, seating and picnic facilities, improved shoreline
conditions with potential for a pullout for kayakers/canoers using
the future Sandy River Water Trail and many others detailed in the
following sections of this summary.
This report provides an overview of the planning process that
resulted in the final, preferred Sandy River Park Master Plan. A
summary of the inventory and site analysis is followed by a
chronological look at the planning and design process, including
the TAC and public workshops. A thorough description of the master
plan and its components is included, with the cost opinion, public
meeting summaries and other important supporting documents provided
as appendices.
1 . 0 I N T R O D U C T I O N
Vicinity Map and Site Aerial Photo courtesy of Google Maps
8 S a n d y R i v e r P a r k M a s t e r P l a n
This page intentionally left blank.
S a n d y R i v e r P a r k M a s t e r P l a n 9
2 . 0 S I T E B A C K G R O U N D + I N V E N T O R Y
Group Mackenzie thoroughly examined the results of previous
planning work related to Sandy River Park, the current conditions
of the site, and the City of Sandy’s current partnerships or close
working relationships with stakeholder groups or individuals
contributing to the enhancement and greater good of this special
place. Such partners include:
The Nature Conservancy•
Mt. Hood Community College•
2 . 1 B a c k g r o u n d D a t a
& P a s t P l a n n i n g E f f o r t s
The City of Sandy provided a great deal of information to assist
with a thorough understanding of both City-wide background and
details specific to Sandy River Park. These items included:
Parks Master Plan (May 15, 1997)1.
Aerial Photography2.
g. Streams and wetlands
Urbanization Report (January 2009)4.
Urban Renewal Plan (December 1998)5.
Comprehensive Land Use Plan and Map 6. (October 20, 1997, last
updated December 2008)
Locally significant wetlands map (June 21, 2006)7.
Transportation System Plan (December 1995)8.
Sandy River Open Space Field Survey (not dated)9.
Report of Geotechnical Services for Sandy River 10. Park Entrance
(March 26, 2004)
1997 Parks Master Plan, existing and proposed facilities mapping
indicates recommendation for trails at the Sandy River Park
site
The Nature Conservancy restoration mapping at Sandy River Park and
surrounding sites
City Comprehensive Plan indicates recommendation for a regional
park at the Sandy River Park site
1 0 S a n d y R i v e r P a r k M a s t e r P l a n
2 . 0 S I T E B A C K G R O U N D + I N V E N T O R Y ( c o n t .
)
2 . 2 E x i s t i n g C o n d i t i o n s
The Sandy River Park is a 124-acre wooded parcel located outside
the City limits and urban growth boundary (UGB). The property
extends from the top of the hillside level with Bluff Road on the
west, the city limits on the south and down to the Sandy River in
the valley on the north. The site is a virtual ravine with water
entering the site from all sides, providing year-round streams and
wetlands, as well as challenging trail alignment decisions.
An old logging road descends through the park, providing river
access. Except for this feature, the park is formally undeveloped.
Many visitors access the park from the Sandy Fish Hatchery to the
east, which requires crossing Cedar Creek to reach the park.
Parking is limited to streetside parking along Marcy Street (a
short, dead-end residential street east of Bluff Road) and
available spaces at the hatchery.
Due to the relatively limited means of access to the site, Sandy
River Park remains “under-discovered” and what should be an easily
accessible wilderness experience is under-utilized. This condition
also lends itself to undesired uses and visitors, which leads to
safety concerns as expressed during the master planning
process.
The Nature Conservancy is currently partnering with the City on a
massive natural vegetative species restoration project. The parcel
was previously commercially logged and the park is currently
undergoing a first stage restoration project with full efforts due
for completion in 2011. The Nature Conservancy is leading efforts
to clear out invasive species (largely blackberries and alders) and
replant the site with conifers and other natives. The City
anticipates maintenance following the restoration will be provided
in partnership with community organizations, rather than by City
staff. Initial clearing of additional user trails are a side
benefit to the project.
Additionally, the City previously commissioned a preliminary
geotechnical analysis for the top of the slope to explore trailhead
parking options accompanied by preliminary parking studies.
2 . 3 S i t e I n v e n t o r y
Group Mackenzie completed several site visits to Sandy River Park
over the course of the project. These visits and research into
site-specific conditions influenced the direction of planning
efforts. The site inventory map and photographs are included on the
next page to assist in communicating our findings and observations,
which were the focus of the first Technical Advisory Committee
meeting and Public Workshop.
To gain the most insight possible during site visits, Group
Mackenzie was joined by City staff and other experts to support key
observations and reveal hidden opportunities. The priorities
expressed during the inventory process include:
More inviting entry (signage, trash, utilities masked, • viewpoint,
gate) Parking and viewpoint locations • Washout locations and bank
erosion• Trail access points• School district not currently
interested in • participating Work collaboratively with the work
done on site • by The Nature Conservancy to improve quality of
vegetation (thin out alder, remove invasives, introduce evergreen
natives) Access trails created can serve park visitors• Lots of
water throughout site (creek(s), springs, • seeps) Viewpoint at
waterfall • Trail is washed out in areas in north portion of the
site• Access to river needs close evaluation for best route•
Explore connections to downtown — destination for • water trail
users Connections to hatchery and other adjacent • amenities Bank
stabilization at river• Work with fishing enthusiasts and other
conservation • groups Salmon run — interpretive value• Viewpoint
coordination•
S a n d y R i v e r P a r k M a s t e r P l a n 1 1
2 . 0 S I T E B A C K G R O U N D + I N V E N T O R Y ( c o n t .
)
Panorama from West to East
Site Inventory + Context
Sandy River Shoreline
Inventory + Connections
1 2 S a n d y R i v e r P a r k M a s t e r P l a n
This page intentionally left blank.
S a n d y R i v e r P a r k M a s t e r P l a n 1 3
3 . 0 P L A N N I N G + D E S I G N P R O C E S S
The planning and design process took place over the course of six
months and included a series of three Technical Advisory Committee
(TAC) meetings, two public workshops and progress meetings between
the City and Group Mackenzie. Refer to Appendix A for summaries of
Public Workshop #1 and #2.
The following is a chronological account of these milestones and
the feedback that helped shape the process and resulting Sandy
River Park Master Plan.
3 . 1 Te c h n i c a l A d v i s o r y C o m m i t t e e
& TAC M e e t i n g # 1
Participants in the TAC were invited to be part of this group based
on their relevant expertise, involvement with related work and
anticipation that they would actively contribute to the
committee.
Using the past planning efforts as a starting point, TAC Meeting #1
presented attendees with the Site Analysis, possible objectives of
the project, and amenities to prioritize to assist Group Mackenzie
with developing a draft trail alignment as our next step.
3 . 2 P u b l i c W o r k s h o p # 1
At Public Workshop #1, a more thorough site analysis was reviewed,
goals specific to the park were discussed, preliminary trail
alignment recommendations were presented and trailhead / parking
concept plans were reviewed. The goals and program elements
discussed included:
1) Entry a. Improve Appearance & Function b. Apply New Signage
Design Standards c. Connect to Downtown Sandy and High School d.
Include On-Site Parking 2) Vegetation a. Coordinate with The Nature
Conservancy’s Work b. Improve River and Creek Bank Conditions c.
Address Erosion and Wash-out Areas 3) Trails a. Connect to Off-Site
Opportunities b. Recommend Locations, Amount and Hierarchy c.
Address Impact of Water d. Take Advantage of Views and Unique
Features e. Support and Promote River Trail 4) Amenities a. Picnic
Facilities b. Seating c. Viewpoints d. Access to Fishing e.
Preserve / Restore Habitat 5) Interpretive Opportunities a. Natural
Resources b. Geologic Features c. Cultural Influences
1 4 S a n d y R i v e r P a r k M a s t e r P l a n
3 . 0 P L A N N I N G + D E S I G N P R O C E S S ( c o n t .
)
Entry
Upland Zone
Wetland Zone
River Zone
S a n d y R i v e r P a r k M a s t e r P l a n 1 5
3 . 0 P L A N N I N G + D E S I G N P R O C E S S ( c o n t .
)
Resource Zones
1 6 S a n d y R i v e r P a r k M a s t e r P l a n
3 . 0 P L A N N I N G + D E S I G N P R O C E S S ( c o n t .
)
* Developed for a previous entry study effort
S a n d y R i v e r P a r k M a s t e r P l a n 1 7
3 . 3 Te c h n i c a l A d v i s o r y C o m m i t t e e
M e e t i n g # 2
Based on the input received at Public Workshop #1, Group Mackenzie
helped to facilitate a discussion during TAC #2 focused on how to
achieve balance within Sandy River Park, so that natural resources
and appropriate recreation activity can co-exist within the
boundaries of the park. Conclusions included:
Trail alignments shall be a minimum of 100-feet from the • edge of
any sensitive area wherever possible; Trails will not create a
complete ring around resources so • that the open areas will help
to maintain habitat value;
Trail locations will not always bring visitors direct contact •
with resources recognizing that views into certain habitats are
sufficient; Dogs must be leashed at all times; and• No motorized
vehicles will be permitted with the exception • of safety and
scheduled park maintenance.
Additionally, regional trail expert Jim Slagle, was added to the
consultant team to assist with trail alignment, type, materials and
environmental considerations. These decisions and conclusions are
reflected in the materials that were then created for Public
Workshop #2. The email messages included on this page provide
further insight into the TAC meeting conversation:
3 . 0 P L A N N I N G + D E S I G N P R O C E S S ( c o n t .
)
From: Kate Holleran [mailto:k8holleran@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday,
January 26, 2010 8:59 PM To: Jenny Richmond; Scott Lazenby; Linda
Malone; Kathleen and Mike; kwalker@fs.fed.us; Nancy Enabnit;
BallB1@ortrail.k12.or.us; lmalone@ci.sandy.or.us Subject: Re: Sandy
- Public Meeting #1
At the first technical advisory meeting that I attended and then
again at the first community meeting, I advocated for considering
the impacts of development activities on wildlife and water
quality, especially in the Sandy River natural area. This email is
to provide some science behind my input.
How can we make this wonderful public resource available to our
community while protecting as many of its natural values as
possible? Wise planning of use, conservation and protection of the
resources, and education are key. I am so glad that Sandy purchased
this property, that the current initial restora- tion work is
occurring and that Sandy is being proactive and thoughtful in its
development. It may seem like just a chunk of land to some people,
but it is a part of the larger Sandy River Watershed and
inextricable connected to the river that flows along its northern
edge.
Additional trails in the area, with the associated disturbance of
wildlife caused by hikers, bikers and in particular dogs will
result in reduced wildlife habitat value and water quality if not
carefully planned. Although there will be an inevitable reduction
in these functions in any development, it is fairly easy to reduce
the negative impacts of trails and associated development on water
quality and wildlife. Here are some of my recommendations based
both on a review of the literature and applied management
experience on many natural areas similar to the Sandy River natural
area. I tried to provide some op- tions from most protective to
less protective development.
1. Provide as wide a buffer to water systems as possible. 200 feet
is well supported in the scientific literature, but I know that
people want to be closer to water-myself included. Wider is better.
Perhaps a wide buffer with small spurs into the wetland system
would work.
2. If you must put a trail near water, do not encircle the water
source. A loop trail leaves no refuge for wildlife using the water
and will eventually result in the reduction of the riparian area
around the water source due to human disturbance (think about the
current condition of the natural area along the river, think of
Trillium Lake, Mirror Lake, the stream in Meinig Park, etc). Every
person and every other ani- mal loves water, so this is no
surprise. Once you lose the riparian veg, it is very difficult to
restore it in accessible areas-increasing the erosion and
degradation of habitat and water quality. I suggest using a spur
trail into just one of the wetland areas-out and back but no loop-
to provide access to the water and wildlife viewing (perhaps we
could include a viewing blind designed into the trail plan). This
would still leave a loop trail above and below the wetland areas
for hikers/bikers. A compromise would be to sacrifice the smaller
wetland area with a loop trail but leave the other wetland
undisturbed.
The current trail design impacts both wetland systems and
completely surrounds them with a trail. I suggest that neither
trail be selected until a natural resource survey and assessment is
completed that quantifies the water and wildlife values of the
wetlands. I understand that you have a natural resources consultant
on contract. I think that person might be able to either complete
or recommend another bi- ologist to complete such a survey. Your
decision to impact these areas should be made with as much
information as possible so you are aware of what you are
losing/gaining in any given alternative.
3. No dogs. As far as wildlife and water quality, dogs are not
good. Sorry dog lovers. There is substantial research that shows
that dogs on leash or off leash reduce the occurrence of wildlife
near trails: birds, deer, etc. That could be good info for using in
an interpretive sign explaining why dogs are not permitted. In
addition, a recent study indicated that animal feces may be a
significant non-point pollution sources in watersheds. The Sandy
River is an incredibly valuable and stunningly beautiful river and
habitat to rare and endangered salmonids. We are its advocates and
it needs as much protection as we can provide. Wildlife: dogs are
natural predators and with the possible exception of Paris Hilton’s
goofy purse dogs (are those really dogs?), wildlife recognize and
respond negatively to dogs. I know of course that this is a tough
position to take and if protection of water quality and wildlife
habitat are not objectives in the park development it is an even
harder sell. But, education can go a long way.
4. Alternately: dogs on leash only, enforced. Provide doggie bags
at the entrance to the natural area for picking up dog s-t. Even
people who don’t know or care about water quality and wildlife, do
not want to walk in dog poo or be harassed by someones’ pit
bull.
5. Follow TNC’s restoration work with maintenance weed control and
erosion control. I haven’t read the TNC grant that is being
implemented in the natural area right now, but I suspect it doesn’t
have money for 5-years of maintenance on the replanting that they
are doing. In order to not lose those plantings to weed re-growth,
the City must budget a relatively small amount for weed control. I
can help you estimate the cost of this treatment. (Can someone send
me the grant project plan or the link if it is electronic? I ‘d
like to see what the planting plan is and what the plan is for weed
control.)
For the real science geeks in the group, below are some references
for the science regarding dogs, trails and wildlife. I can provide
more if you are interested.
Please feel free to share this email (I didn’t have a list of who
was at the technical adv. meeting i attended) and I welcome your
comments.
Kate
On Thu, Feb 4, 2010 at 12:21 PM, Jason Dumont
<jdumont@tnc.org> wrote:
Nancy,
I think Kate brings some really good points to light in her
suggestions. In particular, her concerns about impacting the
wetlands should be given some thought. I agree that restricting
user access to the wetlands and ensuring that people stay a good
distance back from the riparian boundary of the wetland is a good
rule of thumb. However, finding good access to the site (other than
via the road), is very difficult. Even the road has to cross
through or directly adjacent to the wetlands because the wetlands
essentially span the site from west to east. In reality, any trail
system will need to pass close to the wetlands. This will be a
balancing act but I don’t think developing a trail network on the
site needs to cause great damage to the wetlands. It just needs to
be done well and managed carefully. I think you’re doing the right
thing by having Group Mackenzie get experts together to finalize a
design taking into account many perspectives.
Regarding dogs…I agree that the best option is keeping dogs out of
the park. However, realisti- cally speaking, a policy insisting
that dogs be kept on leash is more workable. The more that’s
enforced, the better chance the park has of maintaining its natural
and wild character. The more dogs are running around, the less
chance there is that the bears, elk, and other wildlife that
currently inhabit the place will be able to remain. Preserving the
wild character of the park, in my opinion, is critical.
I want to reiterate my perspective of the park: The city has taken
a really wonderful step by investing in this park. However, the
city’s property is only a small fraction of the natural space. In
time, I would like to see the adjacent natural areas brought into
public ownership or into conservation ownership in order to ensure
that the entire 500+ acres of forested natural area that buffer
both sides of the river are preserved forever. The more the local
community sees the park as a resource and takes pride in having
that resource, the more likely it will be that there will be
support for conserving and managing the park and the surrounding
natural areas. Developing and encouraging responsible public use is
essential to getting local buy-in. I’m really glad that the city is
working through a planning process for the park, and look forward
to helping the city make the most of that resource.
Jason Dumont Portland Area Preserves Manager The Nature Conservancy
of Oregon (503) 802-8151
From: Kate Holleran [mailto:k8holleran@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday,
February 04, 2010 5:38 PM To: Jason Dumont Cc: Nancy Enabnit;
rplaeger@yahoo.com; Corey Gargano; Jenny Richmond Subject: Re:
Sandy - Public Meeting #1
I am in full agreement with Jason’s comments about connecting the
community to the park and its natural features that we want to
conserve, if possible, with adjacent lands (just a dream right
now!) I am so thankful for Sandy’s thoughtful approach to the
development and Mackenzie’s open process for input. Thanks for
including me in the process. Kate
1 8 S a n d y R i v e r P a r k M a s t e r P l a n
3 . 0 P L A N N I N G + D E S I G N P R O C E S S ( c o n t .
)
3 . 4 P u b l i c W o r k s h o p # 2
Much of the input received at the second public workshop focused on
the location, functionality and style of the restroom and trail
types, especially materials.
Three potential restroom locations were presented — at the Marcy
Street trailhead, in the center of the park and as close to the
Sandy River as possible. The center of the park was not favored.
Preference for the other two locations was roughly equal. The
trailhead provides easy access to utilities and inclusion at the
main park entry. However, the reality of those fishing using this
location are slim and reducing the impact of these park visitors is
a priority. Environmental and functional restrictions limit the
feasibility of a restroom sited close to the river. Access for
maintenance is limited to a motorized wheelbarrow or utility
vehicle. The environmental benefit is great enough that a solution
is a priority.
Input received regarding trail type reinforced the preference for
natural surfacing, with limited use of paving, steps, wood and
other hard-surface or heavy- handed options. Those offering input
were very clear that they want to feel they are in a natural
resource focused park. Some even prefer removing the term “park”
from the name of the site. Comments confirmed that
the alignments shown are favored, with an additional connection
shown to the hatchery crossing Cedar Creek.
Additional input included a request for more substantial picnic
tables and strong preference to include interpretive/educational
signage as soon as possible.
3 . 5 Te c h n i c a l A d v i s o r y C o m m i t t e e
M e e t i n g # 3
The discussion regarding Sandy River Park at TAC #3 led to
resolution of all outstanding topics. The primary restroom will be
built at the trailhead, with temporary facilities at the hatchery
during peak fishing seasons until a second restroom can be added at
the river. The park property across the river will be addressed in
a future master plan update. The trail alignment is logical and
addresses the balance needed between recreation and natural
resource protection.
3 . 6 F i n a l M a s t e r P l a n
Because of the limited changes to the graphics produced for Public
Workshop #2 and the final plans, this summary provides the refined
and finalized maps and support graphics beginning on page 19 of
this booklet.
Above: Public Workshop #2 Sandy River Park Project Station
Right: Site Section and Enlargements of Key Park Amenities
(produced for final master plan documents)
S a n d y R i v e r P a r k M a s t e r P l a n 1 9
3 . 0 P L A N N I N G + D E S I G N P R O C E S S ( c o n t .
)
Proposed Trail Alignment
2 0 S a n d y R i v e r P a r k M a s t e r P l a n
3 . 0 P L A N N I N G + D E S I G N P R O C E S S ( c o n t .
)
Trail Type 1 (Upland Zone)
The alignment in this section of trail remains relatively unchanged
from the existing former logging road location and new access trail
built by The Nature Conservancy. We recommend meandering the
straight logging road section as shown in Alternate 1. • Width: 10
feet at emergency/maintenance route, 5 feet all other sections •
Surfacing: 1/4” minus compacted gravel (this can achieve
accessibility standards, yet will give the feeling of a “nature
trail”) • Slope: <8.33% wherever possible, rest stations per
accessible trail guidelines can be included in areas that exceed
optimal slope
Trail Type 3 (River Zone (except Loop 1) and most future
connections)
Once a hiker reaches the Trail Type 3 sections, they are deep into
the park and ready for a more challenging adventure. This portion
of the trail system traverses the steepest slopes and takes a
visitor to some of the most unique areas of the site. All Trail
Type 3 alignments are new sections not yet established so no
alternates are proposed. • Width: 2.5 to 3 feet • Surfacing:
compacted earthen surface • Slope: no limit, but attempt to not
exceed 20%
Trail Type 2 (Wetland Zone and River Zone Loop 1)
The new / revised sections of Trail Type 2 will provide a lower
maintenance location (positive slope/drainage) and less impact on
wetland resources. As is, Alternate 2 sets up a memorable and
unexpected viewpoint, but is located in a wet area that will be
difficult to maintain over the long term. The recommended route
will be easier to maintain and presents the same view as a surprise
when hiking north. The existing Alternate 3 alignment traverses a
very wet area; the recommended route is a more sustainable location
a proper distance from the wetlands. Alternate 4 currently is a
tricky slope to navigate and contributes to erosion adjacent to
Cedar Creek. The proposed route eliminates this issue and provides
a view of a second water fall. • Width: 3.5 to 4 feet • Surfacing:
compacted earth • Slope: <12.5% wherever possible, rest stations
per accessible trail guidelines can be included in areas that
exceed optimal slope
S a n d y R i v e r P a r k M a s t e r P l a n 2 1
3 . 0 P L A N N I N G + D E S I G N P R O C E S S ( c o n t .
)
100-foot Buffer
2 2 S a n d y R i v e r P a r k M a s t e r P l a n
3 . 0 P L A N N I N G + D E S I G N P R O C E S S ( c o n t .
)
SANDY RIVER PARK June 3, 2010 Proposed Trail Alignment
Entry Monument
Entry Monument
Entry Monument
Site Furnishings
S a n d y R i v e r P a r k M a s t e r P l a n 2 3
3 . 0 P L A N N I N G + D E S I G N P R O C E S S ( c o n t .
)
Signage + Furnishings
2 4 S a n d y R i v e r P a r k M a s t e r P l a n
3 . 0 P L A N N I N G + D E S I G N P R O C E S S ( c o n t .
)
Entry, Parking and Overlook
Until the opportunities for additional connections are available,
Marcy Street will be the primary access to Sandy River Park.
Limited space is available for parking, with 11 stalls shown. If
the restroom shifts to another location, one to two more spaces
could be added. The overlook provides views of the park, a clear
meeting place, and a spot to rest before or after a long hike.
Signage will offer a memorable entry and interpretive
Restroom A number of restroom building options were considered. CXT
Concrete Buildings is the recommended manufacturer based on
durability, maintenance requirements, Cascadian design availability
and their headquarters location in the Pacific Northwest. • What is
the optimal restroom location? (1) Entry at Marcy Street (2) Sandy
River (3) Mid-point
Riverbank Restoration Sandy River Park is an important fishing site
enjoyed by many people throughout the seasons. Pressure by both
people and natural systems is resulting in an eroded bank that will
continue to worsen without intervention. Bioengineering techniques
can stabilize the damaged area, however education via signage and
volunteers to encourage positive use of the riverbank is equally
important. National Marine Fisheries Services and Department of
State Lands will require permit to ensure the work complies with
the Endangered Species Act and the needs of this valuable salmonid
habitat.
S a n d y R i v e r P a r k M a s t e r P l a n 2 5
3 . 0 P L A N N I N G + D E S I G N P R O C E S S ( c o n t .
)
Installation Phases
2 6 S a n d y R i v e r P a r k M a s t e r P l a n
This page intentionally left blank.
S a n d y R i v e r P a r k M a s t e r P l a n 2 7
4 . 0 C O S T O P I N I O N
Accuracy
The level of detail and accuracy of pricing in this estimate are
consistent with the degree of completeness of the documents used
for estimating purposes. The document used to prepare this estimate
includes the preferred Master Plan with site base data from GIS and
aerial photography provided by the City of Sandy. Additional
information was obtained through discussion with the client and
industry contacts.
Bid Conditions
This project has been estimated as a complete project with separate
subtotals for individual portions of work for informational
purposes only. If the project is bid in phases, the total estimated
cost of the overall project will be higher.
Items Affecting the Cost Opinion
Items which may change the probable construction costs include, but
are not limited to:
Modifications to the scope of work included in this •
estimate.
Restrictive technical specification or excessive • contract
conditions.
Any specified item of equipment, material, or product • that cannot
be obtained from at least three different sources.
Escalation
Unit costs included herein are reflective of current costs with no
escalation included. A labor and material escalation factor will
need to be added once a construction period has been
determined.
Exclusions
Items excluded from this estimate include any additional soft
costs, permitting fees, testing and inspections.
Cost Opinion Objective
This cost opinion is intended to be used as a tool for decision
making and managing construction costs during the next phases of
the project. It is prepared using industry contacts, experience,
and the best judgement of the professional consultants. This
estimate is intended to reflect an amount close to what would be
the low bid of the project with respect to the present level of
design and documentation with consideration given to the current
market conditions. The consultant has no control over market
conditions, wage rates, or any contractor’s method of determining
prices or quantities. Therefore, the consultant is relatively
certain that there will be deviations between this estimate and the
actual cost of construction.
2 8 S a n d y R i v e r P a r k M a s t e r P l a n
4 . 0 C O S T O P I N I O N ( c o n t . )
ITEM DESCRIPTION UNIT QUANTITY UNIT PRICE AMOUNT NOTES
GENERAL 1 Mobilization, Bond, Insurance LS 1 PD -$ roughly 5% of
construction
2 Site Prep / Trail Clearing SF PD 0.50$ -$ strip, clear, prune
(not incl. plant salvage)
3 Tree Protection Fencing LF PD 3.00$ -$ 4 Erosion & Sediment
Control Measures LS 1 PD -$
Sub-Total -$
TRAILS & ASSOCIATED ITEMS
5 Trail Type 1 - refine existing, 10' wide LF 1655 15.00$ 24,825$
gravel surface meeting ADA standards
6 Trail Type 1 - refine existing, 5' wide LF 2365 10.00$ 23,650$
gravel surface meeting ADA standards
7 Trail Type 1 - new, 10' wide LF 910 25.00$ 22,750$ gravel surface
meeting ADA standards
8 Trail Type 2 LF 3370 12.00$ 40,440$ earth surface, 4 ft.
wide
9 Trail Obliteration LF 1340 4.00$ 5,360$ 10 Bridge EA 2 10,000.00$
20,000$ 11 Slope Restoration EA 1 4,500.00$ 4,500$ 12 Viewpoint
Station AL 3 5,500.00$ 16,500$ interpretive sign, bench
13 Bench EA 5 800.00$ 4,000$ 14 Picnic Table EA 3 750.00$ 2,250$ by
Keystone Building, (541) 633-0041
15 Directional Sign EA 4 400.00$ 1,600$ 16 Mileage Marker EA 5
300.00$ 1,500$ 17 Interpretive Sign EA 1 4,000.00$ 4,000$ not at a
viewpoint
18 Trail Type 2 LF 3120 12.00$ 37,440$ earth surface, 4 ft.
wide
19 Trail Obliteration LF 1330 4.00$ 5,320$ 20 Bridge EA 1
10,000.00$ 10,000$ 21 Viewpoint Station AL 1 5,500.00$ 5,500$
interpretive sign, bench
22 Bench EA 3 800.00$ 2,400$ 23 Directional Sign EA 1 400.00$ 400$
24 Mileage Marker EA 3 300.00$ 900$
22 Trail Type 3 LF 2710 12.00$ 32,520$ earth surface, 2.5 - 3 ft
wide, challenging
23 Viewpoint Station AL 1 5,500.00$ 5,500$ interpretive sign,
bench
24 Bench EA 2 800.00$ 1,600$ 25 Directional Sign EA 1 400.00$ 400$
interpretive sign, bench
26 Mileage Marker EA 2 300.00$ 600$
27 Trail Type 1 LF 0 25.00$ -$ gravel surface meeting ADA
standards
28 Trail Type 2 LF PD 12.00$ -$ earth surface, 4 ft. wide - to
hatchery, school district
29 Trail Type 3 LF 3585 12.00$ 43,020$ earth surface, 2.5-3 ft
wide, challenging - to Jonsrud
30 Bridge EA 1 10,000.00$ 10,000$ 31 Viewpoint Station AL 1
5,500.00$ 5,500$ interpretive sign (Pannier frame), bench
32 Signage and Furnishings EA PD PD -$ Sub-Total 332,475$
Cost Opinion (Master Plan)
Sandy River Park Master Plan
Project Description: Furnish all equipment, materials, and labor
necessary to complete the construction of approximately ____ linear
feet of trail and associated improvements.
Page 1
S a n d y R i v e r P a r k M a s t e r P l a n 2 9
4 . 0 C O S T O P I N I O N ( c o n t . )
TRAILHEAD IMPROVEMENTS 33 Demo & Clearing AL 1 5,500.00$ 5,500$
remove +/- 21 trees, existing improvements
34 Erosion Control AL 1 2,500.00$ 2,500$ 35 Tree Protection LF 325
3.00$ 975$ 36 Earthwork AL 1 10,000.00$ 10,000$ excavation,
embankment
37 Concrete Paving - 4" thick, pedestrian SF 2150 5.75$ 12,363$
pervious paving and subbase
38 Asphalt Paving - vehicular SF 6400 5.00$ 32,000$ pervious paving
and subbase
39 Gravel Paving - vehicular SF 0 4.00$ -$ slopes likely too
steep
40 Gravel Paving - pedestrian SF 710 3.25$ 2,308$ wearing course
and subbase
41 Concrete Curb LF 260 12.00$ 3,120$ extruded
42 Metal Edge LF 310 8.00$ 2,480$ 43 Retaining Wall - high LF 110
125.00$ 13,750$ 44 Retaining Wall - low LF 45 75.00$ 3,375$ 45
Sanitary Line LF 140 60.00$ 8,400$ 4 - 6" line, connections,
trenching
46 Water Meter with Backflow EA 1 2,400.00$ 2,400$ 47 Water Line LF
105 22.00$ 2,310$ 2" line, connections, trenching
48 Electric Improvements AL 1 5,000.00$ 5,000$ service, 2 safety
lights
49 Storm Facilities SF 1000 4.00$ 4,000$ soils, plants,
overflow
50 Restroom Building - facility, installation AL 1 65,000.00$
65,000$ by CXT
51 Bench EA 4 800.00$ 3,200$ 52 Bike Rack EA 3 300.00$ 900$ 53
Bollard EA 8 600.00$ 4,800$ 54 Curb Stop EA 8 125.00$ 1,000$ 55
Entry Sign EA 1 5,000.00$ 5,000$ 56 Interpretive Sign AL 1
5,000.00$ 5,000$ Pannier frame
57 Plantings AL 1 4,500.00$ 4,500$ approx. 1500 sf
Sub-Total 199,880$
RIVER BANK RESTORATION 58 Shoreline Improvements - intensive LF 235
150.00$ 35,250$ 59 Shoreline Improvements - moderate LF 420 75.00$
31,500$ 60 Restoration Away from Shoreline SF 43560 0.50$ 21,780$
approximate area
61 Restroom Building - facility, installation AL 1 36,000.00$
36,000$ vault, accessible by utility vehicle to be determined
62 Educational Signage AL 1 10,000.00$ 10,000$ Sub-Total
134,530$
Project Cost 666,885$ not including project-dependent items
Contingency (15%) 100,033$ master plan, capture project- dependent
items
Overhead & Profit (6%) 46,015$ contractor
Total 812,933$
includes canoe/kayak pullout as a stop for the Sandy River Water
Trail
Page 2
ITEM DESCRIPTION UNIT QUANTITY UNIT PRICE AMOUNT NOTES
GENERAL 1 Mobilization, Bond, Insurance LS 1 PD -$ roughly 5% of
construction
2 Site Prep / Trail Clearing SF PD 0.50$ -$ strip, clear, prune
(not incl. plant salvage)
3 Tree Protection Fencing LF PD 3.00$ -$ 4 Erosion & Sediment
Control Measures LS 1 PD -$
Sub-Total -$
TRAILS & ASSOCIATED ITEMS
5 Trail Type 1 - refine existing, 10' wide LF 1655 15.00$ 24,825$
gravel surface meeting ADA standards
6 Trail Type 1 - refine existing, 5' wide LF 2365 10.00$ 23,650$
gravel surface meeting ADA standards
7 Trail Type 1 - new, 10' wide LF 910 25.00$ 22,750$ gravel surface
meeting ADA standards
8 Trail Type 2 LF 3370 12.00$ 40,440$ earth surface, 4 ft.
wide
9 Trail Obliteration LF 1340 4.00$ 5,360$ 10 Bridge EA 2 10,000.00$
20,000$ 11 Slope Restoration EA 1 4,500.00$ 4,500$ 12 Viewpoint
Station AL 3 5,500.00$ 16,500$ interpretive sign, bench
13 Bench EA 5 800.00$ 4,000$ 14 Picnic Table EA 3 750.00$ 2,250$ by
Keystone Building, (541) 633-0041
15 Directional Sign EA 4 400.00$ 1,600$ 16 Mileage Marker EA 5
300.00$ 1,500$ 17 Interpretive Sign EA 1 4,000.00$ 4,000$ not at a
viewpoint
18 Trail Type 2 LF 3120 12.00$ 37,440$ earth surface, 4 ft.
wide
19 Trail Obliteration LF 1330 4.00$ 5,320$ 20 Bridge EA 1
10,000.00$ 10,000$ 21 Viewpoint Station AL 1 5,500.00$ 5,500$
interpretive sign, bench
22 Bench EA 3 800.00$ 2,400$ 23 Directional Sign EA 1 400.00$ 400$
24 Mileage Marker EA 3 300.00$ 900$
22 Trail Type 3 LF 2710 12.00$ 32,520$ earth surface, 2.5 - 3 ft
wide, challenging
23 Viewpoint Station AL 1 5,500.00$ 5,500$ interpretive sign,
bench
24 Bench EA 2 800.00$ 1,600$ 25 Directional Sign EA 1 400.00$ 400$
interpretive sign, bench
26 Mileage Marker EA 2 300.00$ 600$
27 Trail Type 1 LF 0 25.00$ -$ gravel surface meeting ADA
standards
28 Trail Type 2 LF PD 12.00$ -$ earth surface, 4 ft. wide - to
hatchery, school district
29 Trail Type 3 LF 3585 12.00$ 43,020$ earth surface, 2.5-3 ft
wide, challenging - to Jonsrud
30 Bridge EA 1 10,000.00$ 10,000$ 31 Viewpoint Station AL 1
5,500.00$ 5,500$ interpretive sign (Pannier frame), bench
32 Signage and Furnishings EA PD PD -$ Sub-Total 332,475$
Cost Opinion (Master Plan)
Sandy River Park Master Plan
Project Description: Furnish all equipment, materials, and labor
necessary to complete the construction of approximately ____ linear
feet of trail and associated improvements.
Page 1
Notes:
“PD” indicates a project-dependent item requiring the next level of
design development to estimate accurately.1.
Refer to page 20 for additional detail regarding Trail Type 1, 2
and 3.2.
Plant / habitat restoration work to be completed by The Nature
Conservancy is not included in this opinion.3.
Soft costs (permitting, consultant, etc.) are not included in this
opinion. 4.
3 0 S a n d y R i v e r P a r k M a s t e r P l a n
A P P E N D I X A
Workshop #1 Summary:
Exhibits: goals, location map and existing conditions site photos,
preliminary trail alignment recommendations, trailhead
concepts
Level of Improvements
Balancing impacts to the site with preservation (and • enhancement)
of natural resources ranked high for most attendees.
The 3-zone concept with a hierarchy of loop trails was • well
liked.
Install the trails to minimize impact include • spurs, not loops,
in the wetland zone.
Take advantage of views and exposure to • unique features = big
benefit of the site.
Future connections were very important to some, • and not a concern
to others.
Hatchery and Dodge Park were highest • priority.
Not many knew about the opportunity to • link into the BLM water
trail.
Many neighbors are concerned about lights and • noise.
Signage (entry and interpretive) and benches ranked • high on the
priority list with picnicking facilities (tables, shelters) as a
second priority (concern that if these come too soon, before use
increases, that transient users may not use appropriately).
User Groups
Some attendees were interested in mountain bike • trail(s).
Accommodating fishing is a high priority.•
Dogs were a hot topic — highly recommended to • enforce on-leash
only.
Equestrians may / will use the site regardless of what • is
formally allowed — plan for this.
Parking / Vehicles•
If on-site parking goes in, the majority of • attendees wanted it
to include the maximum number of spaces possible.
Except for emergency and maintenance • vehicles, the parking right
at the entry was the extent of tolerable vehicle traffic
on-site.
Almost 100% consensus for no motorized vehicles on-• site (except
for emergencies and maintenance) — no BMX, 3-wheel, 4-wheel
recreation.
Other
The name of the park was a hot topic with the • suggestion that the
work “park” be dropped from its title to communicate the assumed
more nature-based approach.
Most attendees were interested in trail width, • surfacing, etc.
This will be addressed in the next step of planning.
S a n d y R i v e r P a r k M a s t e r P l a n 3 1
A P P E N D I X A ( c o n t . )
Workshop #2 Summary:
Exhibits: proposed trail alignment, 100-foot buffer map, signage
and furnishings map and examples, main entry / trailhead concept
plan, restroom recommendation, riverbank restoration options, trail
type summaries
Large Group Presentation:
Many pros and cons to each restroom location option • and type
(vault, locker, composting, standard).
Is the park limited to one restroom? •
The trailhead is considered the primary meeting • place, entry
location and takes advantage of the viewpoint.
Construction and long-term maintenance becomes • more difficult the
farther from the entry / closer to the river.
Why aren’t improvements to the island and farthest • north portion
of the site shown?
The 3-loop approach to the trail design has stood up • to
re-design. Specific alignments changed and four alternatives are
shown for your consideration.
Small Group Comments:
Overall Site Plan•
Show a connection to the hatchery with a • bridge over Cedar
Creek.
Positive general feedback.•
Alternate Routes 1 – 4•
No opposition to installing the alternate • routes. Everyone seemed
to be in favor of routes that provide a more sustainable / lower
maintenance location (out of wet areas, on slopes, fewer bridges
required).
Trail Types•
Keep Trail Type 2 and 3 as “natural” looking • as possible — no
steps. Safety is important. Don’t use wood that will have contact
with the ground.
Installation Phases•
General agreement with Phases 1, 2 and 3.•
When would connection to northern most • areas (island, etc.)
happen? Phase 4+?
Signage and Site Furnishings•
Benches and tables should be as beefy as • possible.
Don’t install until enough eyes on the park to • deter
vandalism.
Interpretive signage is a priority.•
Marcy Street Entry•
Will the cars impact the neighbors? There • could/will be more cars
on Marcy Street, but people currently park on the street to use the
site. The drop in the grade from the entry point to where the cars
are located will buffer some of the view of the cars.
Bollards and entry signs acting as a gate • were seen as positive
features.
Benches at the overlook were well liked.•
Restroom•
Preference for a single stall, small building.•
One vote for each location (Marcy Street • Entry or Sandy River or
Mid-Point).
Isn’t there a lower tech, simple option that is • cost effective
enough that a restroom can be installed at multiple locations? Why
not an old-fashioned outhouse?
Work with the hatchery — collaborate on • temporary facilities
during fishing season.
Removable vault facility above the floodplain • serviced by a
motorized wheelbarrow and access through the hatchery was
recommended.
Riverbank Restoration•
Complete this work as soon as possible. •
3 2 S a n d y R i v e r P a r k M a s t e r P l a n
A P P E N D I X B
S a n d y R i v e r P a r k M a s t e r P l a n 3 3
A P P E N D I X B ( c o n t . )
3 4 S a n d y R i v e r P a r k M a s t e r P l a n
A P P E N D I X C
S a n d y R i v e r P a r k M a s t e r P l a n 3 5
A P P E N D I X C ( c o n t . )
3 6 S a n d y R i v e r P a r k M a s t e r P l a n
A P P E N D I X C ( c o n t . )
S a n d y R i v e r P a r k M a s t e r P l a n 3 7
A P P E N D I X C ( c o n t . )
3 8 S a n d y R i v e r P a r k M a s t e r P l a n
A P P E N D I X C ( c o n t . )
S a n d y R i v e r P a r k M a s t e r P l a n 3 9
A P P E N D I X C ( c o n t . )
4 0 S a n d y R i v e r P a r k M a s t e r P l a n
A P P E N D I X D
S a n d y R i v e r P a r k M a s t e r P l a n 4 1
This page intentionally left blank.
4 2 S a n d y R i v e r P a r k M a s t e r P l a n
‘ G AT E WAY T O M T. H O O D ’
39250 Pioneer Boulevard
Sandy, OR 97055
www.cityofsandy.com
Please return to the City of Sandy or Group Mackenzie for
re-use.
1515 SE Water Avenue, Suite 100
Portland, Oregon 97214