HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Report - April 3, 2002 I-02COUNCILCITY OF LODI IL 4J
/ 1
AGENDA TITLE: Aquatics Facility project review and request for direction
MEETING DATE: April 3, 2002
PREPARED BY: Parks and Recreation Director
RECOMMENDED ACTION: That the City Council review progress to date on the project and provide
direction regarding specific design element components.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION: On February 6, 2002, the City Council approved a professional
consulting services contract with ELS Architecture and Urban
Design (ELS) and allocated $269,075 for the design of an Aquatics
Facility project. As a reminder to Council, a project estimate of
$3,500,000 was discussed at shirtsleeve sessions last year during consideration of COP financing.
Actual costs of the project will depend upon its actual design. Also, staff has attempted to estimate
annual operations and maintenance costs but this will also vary depending upon actual design. ELS
can conduct a detailed economic analysis upon request and for an additional fee. For our project to
date, ELS has provided rough estimates of annual operating subsidies based upon their experiences
with other similar facilities.
The basic services included in the contract include a scope of servicestwork plan to be performed in
phases. The City must approve proceeding with each phase and may elect to terminate services at the
end of each phase. The phases are as follows:
• Planning Phase
• Schematic Design Phase
• Construction Documents Phase
• Bid and Permit Phase
• Construction Phase
• Post Construction Phase
The City established an ambitious timeline for the construction documents phase and has established a
goal for construction documents to be at 90% completion by November 1, 2002.
The consulting firm (ELS) has been working for several weeks now and clear direction regarding the
elements for the project are needed. Specifically, the schematic design phase will require detailed
components identified and clear direction for a preferred site plan.
APPROVED: <--;
H. Dixon Flynn -- City Manager
03!26102
444
To date a variety of actions have occurred with regards to the project. Per the contract, ELS has been
working with a steering committee on the project. This group has included representatives of several
City departments (Parks & Recreation; Public Works; Community Development; the City Manager's
Office), representatives of the Aquatics Task Force, representatives of the Lodi City Swim Club, and a
representative from the Parks and Recreation Commission. Field trips have been taken and items
considered have included site location and a wide range of program issues and design ideas. ELS has
also met with the Aquatics Task Force and the Board of the Lodi City Swim Club. On March 6, 2002, a
public workshop was held at the Lodi City Library to encourage input and ideas for the project.
One of the primary issues of discussion has been the question of what the purpose of the facility should
be for the community. Recreational needs, instructional needs, and competitive needs have all been a
focus. The initial construction cost and the ongoing annual operations and maintenance (O&M) costs
have also been reviewed for differing designs.
Our process has seen strong support among the advocates of competitive swimming for a 50 meter
pool component to be included in the design. Our consultants have indicated that it is recreational and
instructional water use which has the greatest cost recovery potential for a facility. With these factors in
mind our process has focused upon two plans. One which includes a 25 meter pool and roughly the
same amount of recreational/instructional water, and one which includes a 50 meter pool and a strong
recreational/instructional pool component. There is a very substantial cost difference both in initial
construction costs and then in annual operating costs for the two differing plans. I have attached
information which ELS has prepared which provides some of the estimated costs for these two plans.
would like to remind all that these are only estimates and will change depending upon the various
design decisions which are made.
We intend to have ELS in attendance at both the April 2, 2002, Parks and Recreation Commission
meeting and the April 3, 2002, City Council meeting to present the project status and answer questions.
If the Council is able to provide clear direction on the pool sizes, it will allow schematic work to move
forward with one preferred site plan rather than two.
FUNDING: None
2
Roger Baltz �
Parks and Recreation Director
RB:tI
cc: City Attorney
APPROVED:
H. Dixon Flynn -- City Manager
0=6/02
L01
Conmunity
Aquatics
Facility
25yd x 25m pool
ti
IA
Vine Street
Conmunity
Aquatics
Facility
25yd x 25m pool
A
I
, j
ISI $.Axis at&228
;9
P"" *tall* on Ata"L
Vine Street
Community
Aquatics
a-
4J
41
CO
Facility 50m. pool
City of Lodi
Aquatics Facility Planning
March 28, 2002
Program and Budget Analysis
Fro M 4f L�
.3 -070a-6)
Recovery Rate 1 55% to 65% 1 70°x6 to 80%
Annual Subsidy $175k to $225 $100k to $150k
Offsite Improvements Direct frontage only)
Surface Improvements
t.a
7
Pools and Equipment
Sanitary
Water
$152,960
$35,020
Demand
25 meter x 25 yard (sf)
Total Off Site
6,150
50 meter x 25 yard (sf)
Rec pool: instruction, slide, wet play (sf)
Total Pool Area (so
_ _
12,300
7,300
19,600
7,300
13,450
2,000
2,000
175 to 233
100 to 133
--
Cost $/sf
$110
$110
$110
Subtotal -�
$2,156,000
$1,479,500
$220,000
Waterslide
$150,000
$150,000
_-
Wet play structures - --
$100,000
$100,000
Pools Total ---�
$2,406,000
$1,729,500
$220,000
Support Buildings
1. Administrative (sf)
1,000
1,000
40
2. Changincl Rooms (sf)
1 3. Concessions (sf)
4. Classroom / Party Room (sf) -
2.800
1 4001
1,300
1.600
4001
0
(400)1
1
5. Pool Equipment (sf)
1,600
1,200
_
6. Indoor Storage (sf)
_
500
0
7. Covered Bleachers & Breezeway (x 50%)
3,200
1,200
(700)
Net Bldg Area (nsf) _
10,800
5,400
$1,100
Gross Bldg Area (nsf x 1.1 for mech. strut)
11,880
5,940
($1,210
Cost $/sf
$200
$200
$200
Buildinfas Total
$2,376,000
$1,188,000 242 000
Sitework"
(Design)
Hardscape
$624,200
$411,500
Softscape ---
$299,100
$200,600
Paving
$233,340
$194,880
$40,000
1.82_
Underground (incl. dry utilities)
$84,340
$82,340
General Conditions (incl. erosion control)
$36,500
$36,500
Site Total
$1,277,480
$925,820
$40,000
Contingency 16%
$908,922
$676,498
($75,30
Total
$6,968,402
$4 419,818
$577 300
Total IncludingFurther Deducts
Bud et:
3 842 518
$2,775,000
Recovery Rate 1 55% to 65% 1 70°x6 to 80%
Annual Subsidy $175k to $225 $100k to $150k
Offsite Improvements Direct frontage only)
Surface Improvements
$232,810
Storm Drain
$185,640
Sanitary
Water
$152,960
$35,020
General Conditions (Off site)
$61,000
Total Off Site
5667.430
** Earthwork quantities are an allowance only, until property and topographic information is available.
Lodi Aquatic Facility
PROJECT SCHEDULE
Wed 3/27/02
EXHIBIT A
ID
Task Name
Duration
2002
12003
Jan Feb MarlAprkugSep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr may
Jun Jul AugSep Oct Nov Dec
1
City Council Authorization
Aquatics Facility Planning
Investigation & Site Plan Alternatives
Preferred Site Plan
Finalize Plan and Report
DPR / SteerCom Meetings
SteerCom I Task Force Meeting
DPR / SteerCom Meetings
DPR / SteerCom Meetings
Public Meeting
P&R Commission Presentation
Council Presentation
SCHEMATIC DESIGN PHASE
Schematic Design
Milestone Meetings with DPR
Steering Committee Meetings
SPARC Presentation
P&R Commission Presentation
Council Presentation
CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS
DPR Review
Funding Target Date
PERMIT
BIDDING
CONSTRUCTION
Start Warranty Period
Milestone Meetings with DPR
0 days
60 days
18 days
17 days
14 days
0 days
0 days
0 days
0 days
0 days
0 days
0 days
76 days
76 days
0 days
0 days
0 days
0 days
0 days
132 days
7 daysR
0 days
30 days
60 days
335 days
0 days
0 days
In
, DP
. Ste
.
♦
stigation & Site Plan Alternatives
Preferred Site Plan
Finalize Plan and Report
3114
fCom 1 Task Force 2119
PR I SteerCom 315
DPR / SteerCom 3128
irblic Workshop
412 P&R Commission Presentation
413 Council Presentation
Schematic Design
D IR Meetings
. ♦ 3 aercom Meetings
t3 SPARC Presentation
+ /4 P&R Commission Presentation
15 Council Presentation
Construction Documents
Review
` 10131 Funding Target Date
Permit
Bidding
Construction
♦ ♦ DPR Meetings
Start Warranty Period •
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
is
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
Pagel
AQUATIC
DESIGN
GROUP
MEMORANDUM
DATE: 27 March 2002
TO: David Petta
ELS Architects
FROM. Randy Mendioroz
RE: Lodi Aquatics Complex Cost Recovery
Pursuant to your request, we have reviewed the preliminary drawings issued by your office
and offer the following opinion of probable cost recovery (percentage of gross revenue compared
with operating costs):
Base Scheme (25 Yard x 25 Meter Pool with 7,300 SF Recreation Pool): We generally
recommend at least a 50/50 split between competition and recreation programming to
ensure high cost recovery. Since this scheme is actually 46% competition / 54%
recreation we believe that 70-80% cost recovery is achievable, for a total annual subsidy
of approximately $100,000 to $150,000.
2. Enhanced Scheme (25 Yard x 50 Meter Pool with 7,300 SF Recreation Pool): Since
this scheme is weighted 63% competition / 37% recreation, we would expect 55-65%
cost recovery, for a total annual subsidy of approximately $175,000 to $225,000.
Please note that these preliminary estimates of cost recovery are based upon our experience
with similar facilities statewide and can be extremely subjective. Factors such as local competition,
number of operating days, rising energy costs, and methods of operation can produce significant
variations in cost recovery ratios. Should the City of Lodi require additional due diligence on this
issue, we would recommend that an economist be retained to provide a more detailed analysis of
demographics, local competition, projected revenues, projected operating expenses, and ultimately,
projected cost recovery.
1950 KELLOGG AVENUE, CARLSBAD, CA 92008 TEL 760.438.8400 FAX 760.438.5251
Memorandum- 26 March 2002
David Petta, ELS Architects
RE: Lodi Aquatics Complex Cost Recovery
Page 2 of 2
I hope this information is helpful. If you have further questions, please contact me at the
earliest convenience.
CC: Project File
AQUATIC
DESIGN
GROUP
MEMORANDUM
DATE: 26 March 2002
TO: David Petta
ELS Architects
FROM. Randy Mendioroz
RE: Lodi Aquatics Complex Pool Construction Costs
Pursuant to your request, we have reviewed the preliminary drawings issued by your office
and offer the following opinion of probable construction cost:
Base Scheme (25 Yard x 25 Meter Pool with 7,300 SF Recreation Pool): We would
estimate costs for the 25 yard x 25 meter pool at $676,500 (6,150 SF @ $110/SF); the
Recreation Pool at $803,000 (7,300 SF @ $110/SF); and an allowance for waterslide
and wet play structure of $250,000 ($150,000 for the waterslide and $100,000 for the
wet play structure). This provides for an aggregate total of $1,729,500 for the Base
Scheme Pools.
2. Enhanced Scheme (25 Yard x 50 Meter Pool with 7,300 SF Recreation Pool): We
would estimate costs for the 25 yard x 50 meter pool at $1,353,000 (12,300 SF @
$110/SF); the Recreation Pool at $803,000 (7,300 SF @ $110/SF); and an allowance for
waterslide and wet play structure of $250,000 ($150,000 for the waterslide and
$100,000 for the wet play structure). This provides for an aggregate total of $2,406,000
for the Enhanced Scheme Pools.
Please note that these preliminary budgets are inclusive of the following: engineered layout;
pool and surge tank excavation; pool rough mechanical; pool rough electrical (including rough -in
for timing systems); pool and surge tank reinforcing steel; pool and surge tank structures;
foundations for waterslide, tower and wet play structure; pool and surge tank finishes (tile and
1950 KELLOGG AVENUE, CARLSBAD, CA 92008 TEL 760.438.8400 FAX 760.438.5251
Memorandum- 26 March 2002
David Petta, ELS Architects
RE: Lodi Aquatics Complex Pool Construction Costs
Page 2 of 2
plaster for pool, cementitious waterproofing for surge tank); competitive and deck equipment;
waterslide structural supports, waterslide tower and wet play structures; pool finish mechanical;
pool finish electrical; and clean-up / start-up.
Exclusions to these preliminary budgets include: site work and site utilities; building and
shade structures; utilities to a P.O.C. within mechanical equipment room; pool decks and deck
drainage; landscape and irrigation; site, security and sports lighting; perimeter fencing; site
furnishings and spectator seating; and timing system / scoreboard(s).
I hope this information is helpful. If you have further questions, please contact me at the
earliest convenience.
CC: Project File
LODI A Q U ATIC S C OMP LEX
Parking Standards
Parking standards have not been established for this facility type. A generally accepted standard for
optimal parking is a ratio of 3 persons per vehicle. With space constraints, some communities have
targeted 4:1 with provisions for overflow parking during larger events. Parking demand can also be
managed administratively through the scheduling of the facility.
The following table provides parking demand based on a conservative 3:1 ratio and the more
commonly used 4:1 ratio. Consideration must be given for the change -over when one group of
Total Users/Cars
1,140
407
315
Users Per Hour
Conservative Estimate
Average Estimate
Ratio User Number of
Ratio User
Number of
Space Component
Peak Time
Car
Cars
Car
Cars
Competitive Pool
700
3:1
233
4:1
175
Recreation Pool
400
3:1
133
4:1
100
Staff/Service
30
1:1
30
1:1
30
Short Term
10
1 1:1
10
1 1:1
10
Total Users/Cars
1,140
407
315
03/27/2002 16:56 4158366771 SWA:SF
March 26, 2002
ELS
2040 Addison Street
Berkeley, CA 94704
Attn.: Mr. David Petta
Ref.: Lodi Aquatic Landscape, Preliminary Cost Estimate, SWA Job No. ELSN103A
David:
Attached please find the preliminary cost estimate for the two (2) schemes.
Aquatic design is providing the pools, and structural costs for waterslide and footing and all the
mech./elec. associated.
The comparison In overall sqft. landscape costs are as follows:
1. Basic scheme is :t7.47,/sqft overall, enhanced scheme is roughly VI -V sqft overall. Both
without contingency added.
2. Enhanced scheme is:
a. both pool areas are depressed requiring more retaining walls at perimeter.
b. concrete paving is upscale with color.
c. overall, larger tree box sizes are recommended.
d. additional site lights are required.
e. additional site furniture are required.
f. additional railing is required due to added ramps and walls.
Please note the items listed under exclusions and we did not provide contingency as requested.
Best regards,
SWA Grou
Roy Imamur , Principal
PAGE 02
San Francesco
Sausalito
Laguna Beach
Houston
Dallas
630 Mission Street
Third Floor
San Francisco
CA 94103.4015
TO 415.836.8770
Fax 415.836.8771
03/27/2002 16:56 4158368771 SWA:SF PAGE 03
SWA Group — ELSN1O3A
Lodi Aquatics Center — Base Scheme
Preliminary landscape costs per plan - Developed for 3/28/2002
1. Buildings/Service/Seating
1 8,500 sqft
2. Pools
t 13,780 sqft
3. Parking Area
t 53,900 sqft
4. Hardscape Area
t 36,800 sqft
5. Softscaue Area
t 50,000 soft
TOTAL Site Area
# 162,700 sqft (t 3.7ac)
SWA Group —ELSN103A
Preliminary landscape cost
Base Scheme
1
03/27/2002 16:56 4158368771 SWA:SF
Hardscane
Concrete paving ( Broom F.)
3,700 0 @ 4.50
- 16,700
Concrete paving @ Veh. (6")
1,650 0 @ 5.00
- 8,300
Concrete paving @ Pool, Main Area
25,650 0 @ 5.50
-141,000
(Sandblast Fin., with glare reducing agent)
Concrete seatwall (2' wide)
440LF @ 80.00
- 35,200
Concrete steps
80 0 @ 75.00
- 6,000
Concrete wall (89 (18"high)
15OLF @ 75.00
- 11,300
Precast Concrete bollards
9 each @ 800
- 7,200
Street Lights (30') Standard
5 @ 3,200
- 16,000
Pool Area Pole Lights (301
10 @ 3,500
- 35,000
Parking Area Pole Lights (14')
1502,400
- 36,000
Metal Rail/ Handrail
11OLF @ 50.00
- 5,500
Pool Deck Drains
50 each @ 500.00
- 25,000
Perimeter Metal Fence/ Gates
850LF @ 45.00
- 38,300
Kiosk
1 each @ 10,000
- 10,000
Street Furniture (Allowance)
LS
- 20,000
Sub, TOTAL
411,500
PAGE 04
5 WA Group — ELS N103A
P re llm Inary landscape cost
Base Scheme
2
03/27/2002 16:56 4158368771 SWA:SF PAGE 05
Softscaae
Trees (36"box) 110600.00
Trees (24"box) 67 @ 275.00
Trees (15 gal.) 56 @ 95.00
- 6,600
- 18,500
- 5,400
Shrub/G.0 Area 14,000 sgft ® 5.00 - 70,000
Lawn (SOD) 22,800 sgftC .70 - 16,000
Lawn (SEED) 13,200 sgftQ .35 - 4,600
Irrigation (AUTO) 50,000 sgft @ 1.50 - 75,000
90 day Maintenance 50.000 soft @ .04 4.500
Sub. TOTAL 200,600
Summary
Hardscape 411,500
S oftscage 200,600
Total 612,100 (7A7/sgft)
Exclusions:
Main drainage structures & lines, parking area paving, curbs/ gutters, public sidewalk, elec.
circuitry of site lights, signage / graphics, sculptures / special garden structures, fountains,
grading cut/fill, building service area/encl., viewing stands.
SWA Group— ELSN103A
Preliminary landscape cost
Base Scheme
3
03/27/2002 16:56 4158368771 SWA:SF PAGE 07
SWA Group — ELSN103A
Lodi Aquatics Center — Enhanced Scheme
Preliminary landscape cost estimates per plan - Developed for 3/28/2002
1. Buildings/Service/Seating t 14,000 sqft
2. Pools t 19,780 sqft
3. Parking Area t 54,800 sqft
4. Hardscape Area t 46,700 sqft
5. Softscane Area t 58.500 soft
TOTAL Site Area 1193,700 sqft (t 4Aac)
SWA Group— ELSN103A
Preliminary landscape cost
Enhanced Scheme
1
03/27/2002 16:56 4158368771 SWA:SF
Hardscane
Concrete paving (Broom F.)
3,000 0 @ 4.50
- 13,500
Concrete paving @ Veh. (611)
2,050 0 @ 5.00
- 10,300
Concrete paving @ Pool, Main Area
36,600 0 @ 7.00
-256,200
(Sandblast Fin., with color, saw cutJTS)
Concrete seatwall (2' wide)
435LF @ 80.00
- 34,800
Concrete steps
19000 75.00
- 14,300
Concrete wall (89 (18"high)
60OLF @ 75.00
- 45,000
Concrete wall (89 (3'high)
80LF @150.00
- 12,000
Precast Concrete bollards
6 each @ 800
- 4,800
Pedestrian Pole Light (109
202,200
- 4,400
Street Lights (301) Standard
7 @ 3,200
- 22,400
Pool Area Pole Lights (30')
11 @ 3,500
- 38,500
Parking Area Pole Lights (14'
18 @ 2,400
- 43,200
Metal Rail/ Handrail
290LF @ 50.00
- 14,500
Pool Deck Drains
60 each @ 500.00
- 30,000
Perimeter Metal Fence/ Gates
895LF @ 45.00
- 40,300
Kiosk
1 each @ 10,000
- 10,000
Street Furniture (Allowance)
LS
- 30,000
Sub. TOTAL
624,200
PAGE 08
SWA Group— ELSN103A
Prel ImInary landscape cost
Enhanced Scheme
2
03/27/2002 16:56 4158366771 SWA:SE PAGE 09
Softscaoe
Trees (60"box)
1 @ 3,500
- 3,500
Trees (36"box)
50 @ 600.00
- 30,000
Trees (24"box)
1080275.00
- 29,700
Trees (15 gal.)
17 @ 95.00
- 1,600
Shrub/G.0 Area
23,800 sqft @ 5.00
-119,000
Lawn (SOD)
28,900 sqft @ .70
- 20,200
Lawn (SEED)
5,800 sqft @ .35
- 2,000
Irrigation (AUTO)
58,500 sqft @ 1.50
- 87,800
90 day Maintenance
55,500 sqft @ .09
- 5,300
Sub. TOTAL
299,100
Summary
Hardscape 624,200
Softscave 299,100
Total 923,300 (9.21/sqft)
Exclusions:
Main drainage structures & lines, parking area paving, curbs/ gutters, public sidewalk, elec.
circuitry of site lights, signage /graphics, sculptures /special garden structures, fountains,
grading cut / fill, building service area / encl., viewing stands.
SWAG roup — E LSN103A
Preliminary landscape cast
Enhanced Scheme
3
03/26/2002 09:01 2093686610 BALHBACH & PIAZZA PAGE 02
QD0W a
323 West Elm
U Lodi, California 95240-t
u � cg) � U - � 2b03
Phone (209) 560-6618
SAUM 13ACH 8� PIAZZA, ilNe. pax (meg) she-sslo
JOB NO. 0208
March 27, 2002
CITY OF LODI PROPOSED AQUATICS CENTER.
PRELIMINARY COST ESTIMATE - CIVIL WORK
Note: This estimate is based on preliminary Site plan supplied by ELS on March 25, 2002
A_ BASE SCHEME ON-SITE
Surface Work
1 Each
$3,000.00
$3,000.00
ITEM
QUANTITY
UNIT
TOTAL
1. Parking Asphalt Concrete
180 L.F.
$20.00
$3,800.00
Section
53,900 S.F.
$2.00
$107,800.00
2. Concrete Curbs
1,715 L.F.
$14.00
$24,010.00
3. Earthwork & Mobilization
Lump Sum
$34,000.00
$34,000.00
4. Site Grading & Compaction
330 L.F.
$28.00
$9,240.00
(other than parking area)
58,800 S.F.
$0.40
$23,520.00
5. Clearing & Grubbing
3.7 Acres
$1,500.00
$5,550.00
Subtotal
Lump Sum
$8,400.00
$194,880.00
underground
6. 4" Water Service
1 Each
$3,000.00
$3,000.00
7. 6" Sanitary Sewer
380 L.F.
$17.50
$6,650,00
8. 8" Sanitary Sewer
180 L.F.
$20.00
$3,800.00
9. Sewer Manhole
3 Each
$1,600.00
$4,800.00
10. 24" Storm Drain Line
75 L.F.
$50.00
$3,750.00
11. 15" Storm Drain Line
240 L_F_
$35.00
$8,400.00
12.12" Storm Drain
330 L.F.
$28.00
$9,240.00
13, Misc. 10" Area Drain Lines
250 L.F.
$20.00
$5,000.00
14_ Drop Inlet Catch Basins
4 Each
$750.00
$3,000.00
15. Sand/ail Separator
Lump Sum
$8,400.00
$8,400.00
Subtotal
$55,840.00
TOTAL BASE SCHEME, ON-SITE WORK
$250,720.00
B. ENHANCED SCHEME: ON-SITE
Surface Imomyernents
ITEM
QUANTITY
UNIT
TOTAL
1. Parking Area Pavement
Section
54,800 S.F.
$2.00
$109,600.00
2. Concrete Curbs
2,070 L.F.
$14.00
$28,980.00
3. Earthwork & Mobilization
Lump Sum
$56,000.00
$56,000.00
4: Site Grading & Compaction
80,400 S.F.
$58,000.00
$32,160,00
5. Clearing & Grubbing
4.4 Ac
$1,500.00
$6,600.00
Subtotal
$233,340.00
03/26/2002 09:01 2093686610 BALiMBACH & PIAZZA PAGE 03
Underground Improvements
6. Base Scheme Underground Lump Sum
7. Additional 10" Area Drain Line 100 L.F.
Subtotal
TOTAL - ENHANCED SCHEME, ON-SITE WORK
C. GENERAL EXPENSE
(Design, Staking, Supervision, etc_ for On-site Portion)
$55,840.00 $55,840.00
$20.00 $2,000.00
$57,840.00
$291,180.00
$28,000.00
D. OFF-SITE IMPROVEMENTS
(Along site frontage based on enhanced scheme only; includes sewer & storm drain
pump station)
Note: Street work includes full street width to opposite side curb and gutter.
Surface improvements
ITEMUCS
ANTI
UNIT
TOTAL
1. Curb, Gutter & 5' Sidewalk
810 L.F.
$34.00
$27,540.00
2. Curb & Gutter Only
1,005 L.F.
$15.00
$16,080.00
3. Special Commercial Driveway
2 Each
$3,500.00
$7,000.00
4. Street Pavement Section
44,220 S.F.
$2.80
$123,816.00
5. Earthwork
Lump Sum
$17,000.00
$17,000.00
G. Final Grading & Compaction
52,810 S,F.
$0.40
$21,124.00
7. Street Signs
Lump Sum
$400.00
$400.00
6. Remove Exist_ Barricade
1 Each
$500.00
$500.00
Q. Install Dead End Barricade
2 Each
$900.00
$1,800.00
10. Street Lights
7 Each
$2,250.00
$15,750.00
11. Striping
Lump Sum
$1,800.00
$1,800.00
Subtotal
$232,810.00
Storm Drain Svstem
12. 30 inch Storm Drain
500 L.F.
$55.00
$27,500.00
13. 12 inch Storm Drain
180 L.F.
$28.00
$5,040.00
14. Storm Drain Manhole
3 Each
$1,700.00
$5,100.00
15, Side (nisi Catch Basin
5 Each
$900.00
$4,500'.00
16. Storm Drain Pump Station
Lump Sum
$85,000.00
$85,000.00
17.12" Farce Main
1,000 L.F.
$26.00
$26,000.00
18. Bored 12" Force Main
130 L.F.
$250.00
$32,500.00
Subtotal
$185,640.00
Sanitary Sewer stem
13. Sewer Pump Station Lump Sum $95,000.00 $95,000.00
26. 10" Force Main 1,380 L.F. $22.00 $30,380.00
21. Bored 10" Force Main 120 L.F. $230.00 $27,800.00
Subtotal $152,960.00
03/28/2002 09:01 2093686610 BAUMBACH $ PIAZZA PAGE 04
Water Svstem
22. Remove Existing Blow -off
2 Each
$550.00
$1,100.00
.23. 8" Water Main
1,020 L.F.
$21.00
$21,420.00
24. Fire Hydrant Assembly
3 Each
$2,600.00
$7,800.00
25. 8" Valves
4 Each
$850,00
$3,400.00
26. Install Blow -off
2 Each
$650.00
$1.300.00
Subtotal
$35,020.00
TOTAL - OFF-SITE IMPROVEMENTS ADJACENT TO SITE FRONTAGE
PLUS SEWER AND STORM DRAIN PUMP STATIONS
$606,430.00
Note: Cost of 30" Storm Drain ($27,500) should be reimbursed as credit toward the master
storm drainage development impact fee.
E. GENERAL EXPENSE (Design, Staking, Supervision, etc.) for Off-site
Portion $61,000.00
ADDITIONAL ITEMS WHICH APPLY TO OVERALL_ PROJECT:
F. DRY UTILITIES (Gas, Telephone, CATV, Electrical) $26,500.00
G. EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL $8,500.00
-�L
AQUATICS COMPLEX PUBLIC WORKSHOP
MARCH 6, 2002
MINUTES
Meeting was called to order at 7:02 p.m. by Roger Baltz.
• Mr. Baltz opened the meeting with an introduction of the topic and the objectives of
the meeting.
• Mr. Baltz introduced David Petta and Clarence Mamuyac from ELS; and Randy
Mendioroz from Aquatic Design Group.
• David Petta stated ELS has been directed by the City of Lodi to have design for
Aquatics Complex completed by 10131102.
• The budget for the Aquatics Complex is $2.77 million.
• Mr. Petta stated that the Aquatics Complex should be something that is enjoyed by
the whole community.
• Randy Mendioroz introduced himself and stated that Aquatics Design Group has
completed between 100 & 150 projects including:
• Roseville
• Folsom
• Pannell
• UC Davis
• UC Berkeley
• Pools for the 2004 Olympic Trials
• Mr. Mendioroz explained that the role of Aquatics Design Group was to assist City
staff and the community to build the project.
• Clarence Mamuyac polled the audience as to how many there were interested in a
competitive pool and how many were interested in a recreational pool. Out of 45
attendees (excluding staff) all were interested in the competitive pool with one
interested in the recreational pool.
• Clarence Mamuyac explained that ELS has been in business for 30 years in
Berkeley; David Petta has been with the firm 20 years and Mr. Mamuyac has been
with the firm 15 years.
• Mr. Mamuyac started the presentation by going over the components of the project
which include:
AQUATICS COMPLEX PUBLIC WORKSHOP
MARCH 6, 2002
MINUTES
Page 2
• Balance Design, Function & Economic —
• Context
• Project Image & Perception
• Place Making
• Durability & Ease of Maintenance
• Pool Flexibility & Operations
• Heat, Wind, Sun & Shade
• Sustainable & Energy Efficient Design
Aquatics Experience -
• Positive experience for all involved
• Lodi Aquatics Project —
• Current Lodi Aquatics Facilities are Enze/Field Pools
• Site —
• End of Vine Street
• Neighbor & Partnership Opportunities —
• Shared parking with the adjacent church
• Site Factors -
• 3 acre site
• Water feature
• Planned residential
• Church
• School
• Budget Scheme includes -
• 150 parking spaces
• Staff parking
• Recreational pool — slide/lap lanes/water feature
• 25m x 25 yard competitive pool
• Berm
• No concessions
AQUATICS COMPLEX PUBLIC WORKSHOP
MARCH 6, 2002
MINUTES
Page 3
Budget Plus (50m pool) includes -
• 150 parking spaces
• Buildings with class room/party room
• 50m pool
Recreational pool
• Berm
• Concessions
Mr. Petta explained design boards and costs associated with each pool.
ELS and Aquatics Design were done with their presentation and asked for
questions.
QUESTION AND ANSWER -
Is the cost of an odd shaped pool more than a flat pool?
Mr. Mendioroz stated, "No"
What are the pool depths in the Budget scheme and the Budget Plus scheme?
Mr. Mendioroz replied the Budget scheme depth is 6'4" and the Budget Plus depth
is 13 ft.
What is the rate of return?
Mr. Mendioroz stated that no economic feasibility study has been done and he is
not aware of one being done
Will the costs for materials be taken into consideration and will the most cost effective
materials be used? Can the berm be terraced to save costs?
Mr. Petta explained that material costs will be taken into consider. He also
explained why there is a need for some higher quality materials in the construction.
What is the deck size between the deck and the berm in the Budget Pius design?
Mr. Mendioroz stated that typically it is between 20 — 25 feet.
Will the 50m pool be available to the public as well as the Lodi Swim Club?
Mr. Mendioroz stated that in his experience there is very little use of the
competitive pool by the public due to the depth of the water.
Statement only — City needs to have a competitive pool.
AQUATICS COMPLEX PUBLIC WORKSHOP
MARCH 6, 2002
MINUTES
Page 4
Statement only — There are not enough swim facilities in Lodi to share.
How many of the other facilities that Aquatics Design have developed have the same
demographics as Lodi?
Mr. Mendioroz stated that the facilities were across the board as far as size.
Could the monies allocated for this project be explained?
Roger Baltz explained how the figures were arrived at for the three projects and
how much was allocated for design.
Statement only — the needs of the Community need to be met by this project.
Statement only — The need for berms on the church side of the property might be
looked at because of noise.
ELS will look at this issue.
Statement only — The competitive pool will be a stimulus for the community because of
monies generated due to competitive meets and the amount of people brought in by
these meets.
Statement only — 50m pool could be used for multiple uses i.e. water polo, swim
lessons, scuba diving
Mr. Petta stated that construction could start the beginning of 2003. It takes
approximately 8 — 12 months to build a pool.
What does $2.77 million represent?
Mr. Petta stated the cost of construction.
What is the average cost to building a 50m pool?
Mr. Mendioroz stated it is between $100 and $110/sq. foot which equals
$1,353,000,
What about handicapped accessibility?
Mr. Mendioroz stated that a lift is what is required by State codes. A ramp is
viewed as violating the spirit of A.D.A. as a handicapped person cannot access the
water on his own.
AQUATICS COMPLEX PUBLIC WORKSHOP
MARCH 6, 2002
MINUTES
Page 5
Will there be only one water slide?
Mr. Petta stated that is up for discussion.
What type of lighting will there be?
Mr. Mendioroz stated there would be 10 foot standards for a recreational pool and
100 foot for competitive.
Will there be a scoreboard?
Mr. Mendioroz stated that electrical will be roughed in for a scoreboard. The cost
for a scoreboard is approximately $35,000 - $50,000.
Has a secondary site been identified?
Mr. Baltz stated this is the only site being considered.
Mr. Baltz explained that a preferred design needs to be selected and then taken to
Council. He further explained that he welcomed all input. Mr. Baltz felt that the
preferred design should go to the Parks and Recreation Commission for their
recommendation to the City Council. Bob Johnson concurred with Mr. Baltz as to what
the procedure should be.
How does a final design get selected?
Mr. Baltz stated that the Steering Committee would make the final design decision.
He further stated that the Steering Committee was made up of representatives
from the community including the Lodi City Swim Club and the Swimming Pool
Task Force.
Statement only — the biggest component that is missing is that you will get fitness
swimmers to utilize the pool as well. Currently fitness swimmers drive to facilities such
as UOP to swim.
Who found sponsors for Folsom slide?
Mr. Mendioroz stated that City staff did.
Meeting adjourned at 9:10 p.m.
Lodi Aquatic Center
Some people live to swim,
others swim to live.
Summer Swim League Growth
In 2001 a total of 776
swimmers
■ Six Teams
■ Turned away aprox,
50 participants
r ■ 31 participants on
the waiting list
Swim Lessons
■ Mommy and Me
■ Youth
■ Adult
Current Parks and Recreation
Programs
■ Summer Swim
■ Water polo
League
■ Lifeguard Training
■ Swim Lessons
■ It. Lifeguard
■ Wading Tales
■ Water Aerobics
■ Tot Water Play
■ Community Water
Safety
Summer Swim League
Wading Tales
■ Story time at Lodi Lake
■ Arts and Craft
■ Water Play
1
Tot Water Play
■ 2-5 Years of age
■ Water games
include;
■ Water Tag
■ Hide and Seek
■ Slide through the
hula hoop
■ Find the missing
object
American Red Cross
■ Lifeguard Training 36 hours
■ Jr. Lifeguard Training
■ Community Water Safety
Additional Programs would
include:
■ Diving
■ Scuba
■ Snorkeling
■ Kayak
■ Canoe
■ Synchronized Swimming
• Water polo (competitive
& recreational)
■ Summer Swim
League
■ City Swim Club
■ Long Course Meets
■ Swim meets
■ Physical Therapy
s Water Aerobia
New Programs
■ Water polo
■ Waterfit
■ SSL
■ Water Aerobia
■ Teams in the City
. Tae Bo
. MddxwN
. Stretching
Why more water?
Additional Programs
Aquatic Programs
IJ
Aquatic Programs
MAYOR'S TASK FORCE
UNANIMOUSLY
RECOMMENDS LARGER
POOL FACILITY
TASK FORCE
RECOMMENDATION
■ Only the larger pool capacity allows
Flexible/multiple use programs and
meets future needs
■ Comparable facilities are being
successfully operated (Folsom,
Roseville)
TASK FORCE
RECOMMENDATION
■ Lodi has very limited public pool
availability
■ Demand exists now for more pool water
and the demand will continue to
increase
LODI RECREATION/FAMILY SUMMER
SWIM
FACILITIES (MAY - SEPTEMBER)
■ 1979 - Lodi Population 32,932
■ Lodi Lake - Open For Family Summer
Swim/With Diving
■ Blakely/Enze - Open For Family Summer
Swim
■ Lodi High - Open for Family Summer
Swim/With Diving
■ Tokay High - Open for Family Summer
Swim/With Diving
3
LODI RECREATION/FAMILY SUMMER
SWIM
FACILITIES (MAY - SEPTEMBER)
is 2002 - Lodi Population (2001) 58,600
m Lodi Lake - Improved Facility --No
Additional Capacity/No
Diving
is Blakely/Enze - Improved Facility --With
Additional Capacity/No
Diving
■ Lodi High - No Family Swim Or Diving
■ Tokay High - No Family Swim Or Diving
(In Addition WSD's Primary Use Is Curriculum & Special Ed
Programs)
2002 - Two Pods, Lodi &Tokay
■ Lodi -
Mens & Womens - Swimming
(Frosh/Soph & Varsity) -4
Teams
Mens - Water Polo (FroWSoph
& Varsity) - 2 Teams
Mens & Womens - Diving
(Frush/Soph & Varsity) - 4
Teams
Womens Water Polo
(Frosh/Soph & Varsity) -2
Teams
Tokay -
Mens & Womens - Swimming
(Frosh/Soph & Varsity) - 4
Teams
Mens- Water Polo (Frosh/Soph
& Varsity) - 2 Teams
Mens& Womens- Diving
(rmsh/Soph & Varsity) - 4
Teams
Womens Water Polo
(Frosh/Soph & Varsity) - 2
Teams
NEW/EXPANDED PROGRAMS FOR SOM POOL
(In Addition to Parks And Rec. Programs)
(1) Family Recreational Swimming
(2) Open Lap/ Fitness Swimming
(3) Synchronized Swimming Clubs
(4) Diving Clubs 1m+3m
(5) Masters Swim
(6) Masters Water Polo
(7) Club Swim Teams (U.S. Swimming)
(8) U.S. Water Polo (USWP) Mens & Womens
18u, 16u, 12u
(In Addition WSD'sPrimary Use Is Curriculum & Special Ed
Programs)
1978 - Two Pools, Lodi & Tokay
at Lodi - Mens &
Women - Swimming
(Frosh/Soph & Varsity)
- 4 Teams
Mens - Water Polo
(Frosh/Soph & Varsity)
- 2 Teams
Mens & Womens -
Diving (Frosh/Soph &
Varsity) - 4 Teams
■ Tokay - Mens &
Women - Swimming
(Frosh/Soph & Varsity)
- 4 Teams
Mens - Water Polo
(Frush/Soph & Varsity) -
2 Teams
Mens & Womens -
Diving (Frosh/Soph &
Varsity) - 4 Teams
SCHOOL DEMAND ON FACILITIES
HIGH SCHOOL SPORTS ONLY
(In Addition LUSD's Primary Use
Is Curriculum & Special Ed Programs)
Bear Creek - Mens & Womens - Swimming (Fresh/Soph 0,
VarAW) — 4 Trams
Mens - Water Polo (Frosh/Soph & Varsity) —
2 Teams
Mens & Womens - Diving (Frosh/Soph & Varsity) -
4 Teams
Womens Water Polo (Frosh/Soph It Varsity) -
2 Teams
2006 - (Estimated) Add New High School, Add 12 Teams, Add
one new 25 x 25 pool (subject to Joint Use Agreement
with City or Stockton)
TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATION
What we can't do with 25 x 25 pool
an Cannot maintain diving area during water
polo and swim practice
at Cannot run two & three water polo courses
for practice at the same time
as Cannot run more than one summer swim
league team or club practice at same time
4
TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATION
What we can't do with 25 x 25 pool
■ Cannot maintain lanes for fitness or
recreation swimming while water polo &
swim teams practice
■ Cannot run any combination of three
activities
Budget, Schedule and Process 19
• Budget: $2,775,000
• Schedule, for funding:
Complete Working Drawings 10/31/02
Complete Schematic Design 6/1/02
• Public Process y
U
cC
W
m
U
7
C
Ea
0
a
Public Process
•Steering Committee 211402
• Task Force 2/1902
•Swim Club Board 2/2802
*Steering Committee 3002
*Public Workshop 3602
•Steering Committee 32802
L S]
rR
Xiiiiou,3 soilvnb-Vipo7
Pool Combination Options
L.mug,.,.
Siie
am
Gott
- See
Cosi.-
Rewya
;: s
1 50m x 25 yd (12.000 sq
Ion, worse swim
$1.35m
2,000 sf
wet playground
$0.35m
$1.7m
50% -BD%
$250-$350
,M l*w end 4'$
201anes x 25 yd
nap depth "try
entry
w 0. floating goals
�mUltt-U50'
warm up laps
2 35m x 25 yd(8.4005f)
141amux 25 yd
$Q.Om
2,000 sf
wet playground
$0.5111
$1.4m
60%-70%
$125-$175
.hallow end 3'.6'
class area for 62
zero depth -"
= mul"se-
warm up laps
water slide
I
w p. bstMg goals
3 Som x 25 yd (.200 sq
121.— x 25 yd
$0.8m
3,000 sf
w.t Wyqwml
$0.6m
$1.4m
60%-70%
E 125-$175
-strellav end 3'-6'
class area for 31
zero depth entry
mulva
w.p. wan capes
w.ter slide
425. x 25 yd (6,000 a t)
10 tars x 25 yd
$0.7m
3.D005f
wetplaygrow,d
50.7m
$1.4m
70%-80%
E1W-$150
-shallow ord 3'-6'
w.p, wall capes
zero depth -by
2 water s6tlee
.$ CompIRecC..binwlP.0
10 lanesx25yd
Ind
incl.
wet playground
ins.
$1.3m
70%-80%
$100.$150
(10,000 sf'PanneB'rnode0
w. p. wall cages
zero depth miry
WAM19sde
5, CWVRaC Cmft.-.d Pod
rR
Xill!ouj soijunbV 1po-I
O
tn
Xilljo-e j sotjrnbV ipo-I
:i.LS
R
NifE14am0
HMMMRM
mi4IIEaAw
OM2`?MMpq
To S q Q
L FI MIEl Flo AR
a[MO ME10
LV
Ca
_To a wF
0I0I0
LUQ
Cin
City of Lodi
Aquatics Facility Planning
April 2, 2002
Program and Budget Analysis
program Area
`m.Scheme
, .. ZSy x ?5m
Scheme
Parlung-,
Pools and Equipment
$152,960
Water
(Demand)
25 meter x 25 yard (sf)_
12,300
-
7;300
19,600
$110
$2,156,000
6,150
_ -- --
7,300
13,450
$110
$1,479,500
175 to 233
--------
100 to 133
50 meter x 25 yard (sf)
Rec pool: instruction, slide, wet play (sf)
Total Pool Area (sf)
Cost $Jsf
Subtotal
Waterslide
$150,000
$100,000
$2,406,000
$150,000
$100,000
$1,729,500
Wet Play Structures
Pools Total
Support Buildings
1. Administrative (sf)
1,000
- 2,8_002,000
400
1,000
1,600
400
800
8,000
8,800
$200
1,000
_ 40-
2. Changing Rooms (sf)
3. Concessions (sf)
_ 400
_
4. Classroom / Party Room (sf)
1000
5. Pool Equipment (sf)
- -
1,200
_ _ 400
800
6,800
_ 7,480
6. Indoor Storage (sf)
_
7. Covered Breezeway (x 50%)
Net Bldg Area (nsf)
Gross Bldg Area (nsf x 1.1 for mech, struct)
Cost $/sf
$200
Buildings Total
$11760,000
$1,496,000
Sitework**
Desi n
Landscaping (Planting & Flatwork)
$68_4,0_00
$233,340
_ $84,340
$36,500
$1,038,180
$563,000
Paving
$194,880
182
Underground (incl. dry utilities)
$82,340
General Conditions (incl. erosion control)
$36,500
Site Total
$876,720
Contingency 15%
$780,6271
$615,3331
Total
1 $6,984,8071
$4,717,553
Budget: $2,775,000
Operating Costs Recovery Rate 1 55% to 65% 1 70% to 80%
Annual Subsidy I $175k to $225 $100k to $150k
Off-site Improvements (Direct frontage only
Surface Improvements
Storm Drain
$232,810
$185,640
Sanitary
$152,960
Water
$35,020
General Conditions Off site)
$61,000
Total Off-site
$667,430
** Earthwork quantities are an allowance only, until property and topographic information is available.
11iC I L 1 I `i' F'LkNH 11,16 y 2093:3600? N0. 619
1 11
tom:;
ttllicd qI.l�t��if ll�etlirf
Eacility Planning Department
faao-V-4� 4-
MA��
EMORANDUM
TO: Superintendent Huyett
FROM: Mamie Starr, Assistant Superintendent Facilities and Planning
DATE: Marcia 29, 2002
RF: City of Lodi Aquatics Center
On March 28, 2002, I attended the meeting of the City of Lodi Aquatics Task Force, of which I ann a
community member (not specifically representing the District). The Task Force was asked to make a
recommendation to the Parks and Recreation Commission and the City Council regarding the size of the
main pool to be included in the project. The question was a 25 teeter pool or. a 50 meter pool? The
critical issues were an additional $2,000,000 construction cost and the incrementally higher operational
cost.
I was asked about the Joint Use Agreement, future school facilities (especially switnrnittg pools), and the
probability of there being more time available for City use of the 50 )teeter pool at Tokay High School.
I responded as follows, per our discussion prior to the meeting:
• We anticipate building a pool at the fourth high school (as part of the total project) out of
Measure K; however, it is a "lower priority" expenditure.
• A pool for .Dear Creek is desired, but Measure K will be used for a theater and other program
spaces. There are presently no funds assigned to a pool at that site and it is not specifically
included in the 10 year Facilities Master Plan. .
• Bear Creek is currently using THS, as well as Blakely on occasion.
• Even with the Fourth High School, we will still have 4 high schools sharing 3 pools for an
indefinite period of time,
• The District will make the THS pool available per the provisions of the use agreement;
however, we will commit to improving the scheduling so that it might accommodate more
City hours.
• We acknowledge that the current bulkhead is a barrier to maximizing flexible use of the
TNS Pool, but we have not been able to commit funds for its replacement.
• The primary purpose of our pools is the educational program, specifically PE swimming for
both regular education and special education students. The second purpose is the
competitive athletic program. For these purposes, we do not need a 50 meter pool.
• i acknowledged that we have concerns about diving and the depths of the pools (which is
why we no longer have 3 rneter boards) and we are aware of the Ls.4ucs relative to the depths
of the pools for water polo.
+ Regardless of the size of the City pool, we will continue to have our pools available under
the provisions of the Agreement (I did twt discuss the priority that the City of Stockton will
have for the Fourth High School Pool under the provisions of our joint development
agreement with them).
1306 last Vine Street - Lodi CA 95240 - 209.331.7219 (Lodi) - 209-063.8218 (Stoekton) - 209.331.7229 (FAX)
1i-:;. 11! 1k, I,I:I ►t'_iLi I I'Ud11It1J1_, -0 L'IYJ ;i- ,`-Ye
IJI I, (Ali 1J413
a Our school teams (especially water polo) would probably be interested in using the City
pool; however, there are issues related to having a USA -approved facility.
We concluded that the District's use of the school pools, even with the addition of a third pool, leaves
relatively little time for City use, particularly for long -course swinuning.
The members of the Task Force present voted unanimously to recommend a 50 meter pool, with the
following rationale:
✓ The Tokay High pool can not come close to mating the existing, latent, and future demand for
pool space (especially for long -course) in the City of Lodi, even with maximizing scheduling.
✓ This is a community with a strong swinuniug interest - having a second 50 meter pool in the City
will allow that interest to grow and provide opportunities for more youth and adults to participate
in swim activities.
✓ The initial cost may seem substantial; however, amortized over time, it becomes inconsequential.
✓ This is a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to provide a facility that will meet community needs.
✓ District pools will continue to be available, broadening the opportunities for programs as well as
major aquatic functions which bring dollars into the commercial sector of the City.
✓ A significant portion of the operational cost of the center (with the larger ) pool can be recouped
through fees.
✓ The larger pool, particularly with a functional bulkhead, provides more water area, which results
in more program accommodation.
✓ The larger pool ovnied by the City will allow long -course progranLi to grow which have been
stymied because the Tokay Pool is so heavily used for school programs.
✓ There is a documented demand for more pool area.
The members of the Task Force, and Parks and Recreation Director Baltz, asked if the District could
have representation at the Commission meeting on Tuesday evening, April 2"d and at the Council
meeting on Wednesday evening, April 3" for the purpose of responding to questions related to the
District's position.
cc: Members of the Board of Education
Dixon Flynn
Janet Kceter
Roger lIaltz
Jennifer Pinnell
Randy Studer (Task Force Chair)
Max Steinheimer (Task Force Representative)