Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - 01/06/2014 - Committee of the WholeCOMMITTEE 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 combined 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 the 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 vote 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 construction, 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 additions 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. ProiectFocus/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 was 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 likely 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, it 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 Proiect Goals L • 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 r • 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 indicated 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 banquet 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 cos_ t 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 suggests taking the money currently available and using it to the City's best advantage. Alderman Glab stated that he likes 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 supports 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. v 4� Mayor C_L) , c� City Clerk