HomeMy WebLinkAboutPacket - 02/17/2014 - City CouncilCOMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE
MEETING
January 6, 2014
Mayor Low called the Committee of the Whole meeting of January 6, 2014 to order at 6:00 p.m.
In attendance were Mayor Low and the following Aldermen: Santi, Glab, Schaefer, Blake,
Wimmer, Peterson and Condon. Absent: None. Also in attendance: City Administrator
Morefield, Deputy City Administrator Martin, Deputy City Administrator Hobson, City Engineer
Pieper, Superintendent of Recreation Witt, Athletic Program Coordinator Lunkenheimer and City Clerk
Jones.
Alderman Condon arrived at 6:05 pm.
Alderman Santi arrived at 6:30 pm.
DISCUSSION REGARDING DIRECTION TO BE TAKEN REGARDING THE AQUATICS AND
RECREATION CENTER FEASIBILITY STUDY
City Administrator Morefield thanked those in attendance for braving the severe
weather conditions in order to attend the meeting . City Morefield introduced Mr. Daniel
Atilano, Dewberry Architects Project Manager. He stated that Mr. Atilano would be providing
Council with information regarding the Aquatics & Recreation Center Feasibility Study
performed by Dewberry Architects Inc. of Elgin, Illinois.
Alderman Condon arrived at 6:05 pm.
City Administrator Morefield advised Council that Staff is seeking direction from Council
regarding where the project should proceed. City Administrator Morefield introduced Deputy
City Administrator Hobson, requesting he briefly explain to Council the history of the proposed
aquatic/recreation center.
Deputy City Administrator Hobson informed Council that the discussion tonight
concerns the feasibility study completed by Dewberry Architects for the recreation center. Mr.
Hobson noted that the question of the recreation center in the City of McHenry has been long
debated beginning in 1980. Frequently, the topic of the recreation center com bined with
discussions regarding the feasibility of potentially building a combined recreation and aquatics
center.
At the time, the community pool option was the option chosen . The Knox Park Pool was
constructed and the swimming pool opened in 1981. In 1990, the City conducted a
comprehensive Attitude and Interest Survey of residents of the City of McHenry to identify
programs and utilities desired in the community. Based on the survey, the participants of the
survey identified a multi-purpose community recreation center as a need.
Committee of the Whole Meeting
Page 2
January 6, 2014
In 1995, a full audit of the community and a needs assessment was completed . The
audit and assessment again illustrated the community’s desire for an indoor recreation facility.
Planning began that year to investigate th e size, location and possible funding sources for the
facility. The preliminary designs at the time called for a 50,000 to 60,000 square foot building
that would accommodate a wide variety of City programs. The proposed facility was to be
located immediately west of the Municipal Center, south of Knox Park on land owned by the
City of McHenry.
In 1997, a measure went before the Council for a vote with an expansion of the
telecommunications tax, as a potential source of funding. The measure failed by a vot e of 3 to
4, yet the need remained and was recognized. Shortly thereafter, the City established a
mechanism diverting a portion of developer donations into a dedicated Recreation Center
Fund.
In 2001, the City placed a question on an Advisory Referendum Ballot regarding the
recreation center, asking residents if they would like a recreation center constructed in the City
of McHenry. The results of the referendum was 50% in favor and 49% opposed . At this point,
the City considered a partnership with the local YMCA on a shared facility. However, details
regarding the complex and divided revenue concerns between the agencies proved too
complicated.
As of 2006, the Recreation Center Fund has grown to $4 million. The funding mechanism
has expired and no funds have been added to the existing account. With no partners and an
estimated price point of over $10 million, the project was postponed. From time to time, the
topic of the recreation center has been raised at the committee level regarding how to use the
accumulated funds. Suggestions broached at various meetings have included building a
recreation center and the renovation of the now aging community swimming pool. Both
thorough discussions at the committee level and the continual rising costs of constructi on, has
led the City to again attempt to answer the recreation center question. The rising costs of
construction are essentially deteriorating the accrued money in the Recreation Fund simply due
to the fact that the inflation of costs exceeds any addition s to the currently frozen account. The
project will have to be addressed in a manner that will allow for phasing of both a Recreation
Center and an Aquatic Facility on the previously identified City owned property.
Deputy City Administrator Hobson stated that as part of the Fiscal Year 2013/2014
Capital Improvement Program (“CIP”) and the budget process, Staff discussed a number of
existing and future facility needs regarding:
the existing McHenry Municipal Center;
an aging, existing swimming pool; and
the development of space that could consolidate recreational programming and
provide an opportunity for expanded community fitness needs.
Committee of the Whole Meeting
Page 3
January 6, 2014
Municipal Center:
Now more than twenty years old, the Municipal Center was designed and built to meet
the needs of a growing McHenry community. However, evolving municipal functions combined
with changes in the use of technology, increased program needs in the area of recreation and
staff/departmental reorganization, a result of the recent economic downturn, have all had an
effect on the premises. A comprehensive facility analysis was included in the FY13/14 Budget in
an effort to identify the best uses of current space. The two most obvious needs concern the
Police Department and the consolidation/relocation of the Parks and Recreation Department,
both administratively and from a programming standpoint. Ideally, the space on the second
floor, directly above the Police Department and currently utilized by the Parks and Recreation
Department, would be made available to the Police Department. However, there is not
sufficient space within the Municipal Center to relocate the entire Parks and Recreation
Department to include the programming issues.
Recreation Center:
A public recreation facility has long been a goal of the community. A comprehensive
study was completed in 1995 for a facility of approximately 63,000 square feet. The desire was
so strong that the City established a Recreation Center Fund with developer contributions . The
Recreation Fund currently has a balance of approximately $4 million; however, the decline in
residential development over the past years has resulted in very limited additional
contributions to the Fund. As a result, the potential for developing the full scope of a
Recreation Center, envisioned in 1997, is not possible.
Aquatic Facility:
Knox Park Pool, built in 1981, now the Peter J. Merkel Aquatic Facility, was constructed
to serve a community of 10,737. While the facility served the community well, it is nearing the
end of its useful life in terms of maintenance. Additionally, the swimming pool is undersized for
a current community of nearly 28,000 residents.
Project Focus/Process
City Administration, with the gratis assistance of HR Green, has been able to develop
conceptualized site plans for the development of a combined recreation and aquatics facility on
the 10+ acre property site owned by the City of McHenry, just west of the existing Municipal
Center parking lot. The original thought behind a combined facility is that it would maximize
shared space (i.e., parking, restroom/changing facilities, public space) and develop a facility that
could:
1. provide a facility that could accommodate consolidated recreation programming (such
as dance classes, group fitness and multi-use rooms) and a fitness area (free weights,
weight machines, cardio fitness machines) resulting in recreation services being
relocated out of the Municipal Center;
Committee of the Whole Meeting
Page 4
January 6, 2014
2. provide a family-oriented aquatics facility to serve the residents of McHenry and also
attract customers from surrounding market areas; and
3. provide sufficient opportunities for future expansion of both recreation and aquatics,
including the eventual decommissioning of the current Peter J. Merkel facility.
At the May 13, 2013 Committee of the Whole meeting, Williams Architects presented
the conceptual design to Council. Following discussion, Council concurred that Staff should
work with HR Green to develop a formal Request for Qualifications (“RFQ”). An amendment to
the Recreation Center Fund, and a Professional Services Agreement with HR Green, was
approved by Council on June 3, 2013 and on August 19, 2013, approving retaining Dewberry
Architects, Inc., to conduct a feasibility analysis and provide architectural services related to the
design and construction of a recreation/aquatics facility.
Subsequent to the selection of Dewberry Architects, Inc., at the direction of Staff,
Dewberry set out to develop a plan for a combined recreation and aquatics facility based on a
total project budget of $8 million. A target amount of $8 million was used as the potential
number for utilizing the $4 million in the Recreation Center Fund and financing the remaining
$4 million through bonds financed with revenues generated by the facility. It is important to
note that a component of Dewberry’s scope of work w as also to conduct financial pro formas
analyzing various facility concepts with the goal of identifying a facility size appropriately to
meet the needs of the community but that could be funded without the need to utilize General
Fund money.
Mr. Hobson informed Council that during the week of December 16, 2013, Staff met
with Mr. Daniel Atilano and Ms. Barbara Heller to discuss the results of the feasibility analysis.
Mr. Hobson introduced Mr. Daniel Atilano, Dewberry Architects Project Manager. Mr. Atilano
addressed Council, explaining that Ms. Barbara Heller of Heller & Heller Consulting had planned
to attend the meeting tonight, however, due to the weather conditions found it necessary to
cancel.
Mr. Hobson noted that from Staff’s perspective , it is not recommended that a combined
aquatic/recreation facility be developed at this time. Staff has determined that there is not a
combination of recreation center and aquatics programming that provide sufficient revenue
generation in order to cover the costs of construction and resulting debt service and
operations. Based on information provided, there would like ly need to be some alternative
financing source, other than the existing Recreation Fund and potential user/membership fees,
required to develop a combined aquatic/recreation facility.
Mr. Hobson stated that should Council decide to proceed with the project, i t is Staff’s
opinion that the development of a recreation facility would address more of the needs of the
residents of McHenry, consolidating recreational programming and providing opportunities for
expansion of programs and services. Additionally, the variety of year round opportunities
Committee of the Whole Meeting
Page 5
January 6, 2014
provided through the development of a recreational facility, as envisioned, offers revenue
generation and the ability of the facility to be self -sufficient. Lastly, moving the recreation
functions out of the Municipal Center would assist in addressing space need requirements of
the Police Department, as previously mentioned. Mr. Hobson turned the meeting over to Mr.
Atilano.
Alderman Santi arrived at 6:30 pm.
Mr. Atilano provided Council with a summary of the Aquatics and Recreation Center
Feasibility Study (the “Study”) explaining the Study performed by Dewberry Architect briefly by
breaking it down as follows:
Executive Summary
Integrates the planned improvements with Knox park and the Municipal Center;
Include a fitness center and multipurpose rooms in the recreation center;
Construct a separate and dedicated locker/shower facility for the aquatics park;
Long-term construction of a gym with an elevated walking/jogging track;
Consider renovation of the barn to become a banquet facility
Project Goals
Form – relates to the site, the physical environment and the quality of the space and
construction.
Function – implies “what is going to happen in the building.” Concerns activities,
relationship of spaces and people, their numbers and characteristics.
Economy – Concerns the initial budget and quality of construction, but also includes
consideration of operation and life cycle costs.
o Initial budget;
o Operating budget; and
o Life cycle costs.
Time – Past, present and future.
o Consideration of the historic barn and silo as an integral part of the design
solution;
o To open the facility by Memorial Day weekend 2015; and
o To develop a site master plan that anticipates future improvements.
Total Project Budget
Aquatic Park/Bath House/Concessions $3,500,000
Recreation Center $2,250,000
Site Improvements $750,000
Total Construction Costs $6,500,000
Soft Costs $1,500,000
Total Project Budget $8,000,000
Committee of the Whole Meeting
Page 6
January 6, 2014
Mr. Atilano provided Council with a cost definition breakdown and a project timeline.
He explained that Phase I of the Study involved the collection of facts. He stated that the soil
borings appear to be good, with the exception of a small pit. The IDNR i ndicated the Knox Park
Property Grant restrictions do not allow an indoor recreation facility to be built within the park
boundaries. However, an outdoor swimming pool does not have the same restriction. The barn
has the potential to become a future banque t facility and the revenue potential for that use is
high.
Mr. Atilano explained that Phase II was a needs analysis, which involved interviews, a
review of outdoor aquatic trends, recreation center trends, a review of aquatic facilities within
the market area, and demographic information. Phase III included site concepts (i.e., design
charrette, amenities, spaces and costs); five options were provided for the site concept. Phase
IV was the pro forma for the aquatics and recreation center, which included three options and
the related costs:
Option 1: 521 bather load + 10,640 square foot recreation center
Option 2: 1,001 bather load + 12,990 square foot recreation center
Option 3: 1,349 bather load + 12,890 square foot recreation center
Mr. Atilano stated Phase V concluded with findings and recommendations. It was
determined that a combined aquatic and recreation facility is not financially possible. Mr.
Atilano noted the most important aspect of the facility is financial. Even with the amount of
funds closest to the $8 million target, Option 1, there is still a gap of nearly $300,000. Revenue
opportunities must be taken into consideration. Mr. Atilano recommended phasing of the
improvements and either building an aquatic park or a recreation facility initially.
Mayor Low opened the floor for comments.
Deputy City Administrator Hobson stated that from a needs standpoint in the
community, a recreation facility fills a need. He noted that the Parks and Recreation programs
are a big component for the City of McHenry.
Alderman Peterson opined that fitness centers have become prevalent in the
community and are not the income producers they once were. He stated he would like to see
an aquatic center, but there is always something new, different, bigger and better that comes
along. Alderman Peterson stated his support for a recreation center.
Alderman Schaefer informed Council that he has spoken with a number of young people
who have expressed excitement about the prospect of an aquatics center. He opined that he is
a proponent of using the existing swimming pool at Knox Park and creating an entertaining
aquatic center. Alderman Schaefer stated he would like to see a facility done right the first
time.
Committee of the Whole Meeting
Page 7
January 6, 2014
Mayor Low stated that Dewberry has done an outstanding job with their plan for the
property. Mayor Low recognized Superintendent of Recreation Witt and Athletic Program
Coordinator Lunkenheimer sitting in the audience. She acknowledged that they do an amazing
job scheduling programs with no recreation center. Mayor Low opined that she likes the entire
concept and would prefer not to see any component of the facility discarded, but recognizes
the most urgent need, which is the recreation facility.
Alderman Glab stated that from the analysis it is apparent that an aquatic facility would
cost substantially more than originally thought. Responding to Alderman Glab’s inquiry about
impact fees, Deputy City Administrator Hobson stated that impact fees have not yet been
determined. Alderman Glab opined he would like to have a water park, but the City needs to
move forward and do something with the money on hand. He suggest s taking the money
currently available and using it to the City’s best advantage. Alderman Glab stated that he l ikes
the idea of converting the barn into a banquet facility to generate income for the City.
Alderman Condon concurred with Alderman Glab regarding the concept of converting
the barn and using it to generate income. Alderman Condon stated that she supp orts staying
within the City’s budget and opined that currently the need in the community is for a recreation
center with space for parks and recreation programs. Alderman Condon noted she likes the
concept that the plan can be built upon.
Responding to Alderman Schaefer’s inquiry about utilizing existing structures, since the
City appears to be moving away from an aquatics center, Deputy City Administrator Hobson
stated that the property comes off the tax rolls if the City takes it over. Staff has looked at a
number of properties; however, none has been acceptable.
Alderman Glab suggested community involvement might save some money on the
project.
Alderman Blake stated that to be in a position to build an aquatics center would be
ideal, but focusing on the recreation center now seems most practical. He opined that he likes
the idea of having a facility on this side of the City and believes the recreation center is a good
place to start.
Alderman Wimmer inquired whether a 10,000 square foot facility for a recreation
center is adequate. Deputy City Administrator Hobson stated that 12,500 square feet is a small
facility. He noted that the primary revenue generator for a recreation facility will the fitness
center and that the smaller that component becomes the less impact we will have from
membership revenue. Reducing the size to minimal amounts will also create cramped spaces
from day one for the brand new facility.
Committee of the Whole Meeting
Page 8
January 6, 2014
City Administrator Morefield inquired whether Council wants to utilize additional funds
other than what is in the Parks and Recreation Fund.
Alderman Glab opined that to commit General Fund money for a recreation center at
this time is unwise. He suggests staying within a budget and using the funds currently at the
City’s disposal. Deputy City Administrator Hobson stated that corporate sponsors are an option
to consider once some determinations are made regarding the project.
Alderman Condon stated she continues to have concerns about the CIP and Police
Pension Fund and is cautious about using money from the General Fund.
Alderman Santi stated he is in favor of moving forward with the recreation center and
using the money the City currently has available.
City Administrator Morefield, for clarification, requested if there is consensus among
Council regarding the following:
1. Research potential for the barn and silo on the property;
2. Focus on the recreation center component of the projects; and
3. Should not exceed the available funds and profit generated by the facility.
There was consensus among Council to the following:
1. Research potential for the barn and silo on the property;
2. Focus on the recreation center component of the projects; and
3. Should not exceed the available funds and profit generated by the facility.
Mayor Low thanked Mr. Atilano for his time, assistance and presentation.
ADJOURNMENT
Motion by Wimmer, seconded by Peterson, to adjourn the Committee of the Whole
meeting at 7:10 pm.
Voting Aye: Santi, Glab, Schaefer, Blake, Wimmer, Peterson, Condon.
Voting Nay: None.
Absent: None.
Motion carried.
The Committee of the Whole meeting adjourned at 7:10 pm.
_____________________________________ ____________________________________
Mayor City Clerk