HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Report - April 3, 2002 I-03CITY OF LODI COUNCIL COMMUNICATION
AGENDA TITLE: Indoor Sports and Activity Complex 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 Indoor Sports and
Activity Complex 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 $681,135 for the design of an Indoor
Sports and Activity Complex. As a reminder to Council, a project
estimate of $7,500,000 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 services/work 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
• Design Development 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.
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 Lodi Sports Foundation, representatives of the Boosters of Boys and
Girls Sports - BOBS, and a representative from the Parks and Recreation Commission. Field trips have
been taken and items of consideration have included site location and a wide range of program issues
and design ideas. On March 7, 2002, a public workshop was held at the Carnegie Forum 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. Gymnasium spaces have been a priority focus along with the need for cost
recovery ability. The preferred site plan selected will have an impact upon initial costs to construct and
cost recovery potential annually.
Our process has seen strong support among the advocates for gymnasium space and multi use rooms
for programs and rentals to be included in the design. With these factors in mind our process has
focused upon two plans which both occupy just over 30,000 square feet. i have attached information
which ELS has prepared which provides some of the estimated costs for two plans. I 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 regarding which concept it prefers, it will allow schematic
work to move forward with one preferred site plan rather than two.
FUNDING: None
Roger Baltz
Parks and Recreation Director
RB:tI
cc: City Attorney
APPROVED:
H. Dixon Flynn -- City Manager
03/26/02
City of Lodi
Indoor Sports Complex
March 21, 2002
Program and Budget Analysis
Budget- $5,250,000
.Bull Ing
101-1
:tnnancea;rrogram
l3Onland
SportsGoniplex
2k.
Indoor Sports Building
7'S to 105
Old Firehouse
15
1. Support Spaces
5,250
5,250
5,250
5
Additional Support
1,500
1,500
1
2. Gyms
1
On -Street
20 to 30
Large Gym: 2 x 50'x 84'
130400
13,400
13,400
47
Small Gym 1 x 50'x 84'
6,7001
6,700
6,700
3. Small Activity Rooms
13
13
Lakeview: new
Meeting Room for 30
1,000
1,000
1,000
10 to 13
Fitness Room
2,000
2,000
9 to 14
Aerobics Studio
2,000
2,000
9 to 14
Bab sit Room
1,000
1,000
1
Meerting Room for 60
2,000
2,000
20 to 27
4. Food
0
Catering Kitchen
800
- 8.00:
800
Vending Area
200
Cafd
800
800
Total Net Area
27 .350.
35,650
Gross Area x 1.15) 31,453 - 40;998
Cost $/sq.ft.
$175; -:$190 .:.
$:1.7$ $190
Total Cost $1,000's
$5;504 $5;976
$7,1:7.5 $7,790
Site
Civil ($1,000's)**
$500 $500
$500 $500
Landscape $1,000's) $8.57 $3.57 $357 $357
Contin enc 15% $1.;025 $ 1205 $1,297
Total Cost Range 7 3 6 :' 17.858 ::$9,236 '$91944
Budget- $5,250,000
.Bull Ing
esasic:rrogram
Demand .:
:tnnancea;rrogram
l3Onland
SportsGoniplex
35 to 48
7'S to 105
Old Firehouse
15
15
Total50
to 63,90..to`.:120
Lots
spaces:
On -Street
32
16'
Main Street Closure
47
47
47
Temporay Lot.
20
20
Lakeview. exist.
13
13
Lakeview: new
32
32
Total'
1;4467
10$
** Electrical undergrounding and water tower revisions not included
r, v
M
4J rA
MM "wo
la:m
ul
0
0
O
N
W
N
0
9 r
4J
.,l
€4
0
�(dd
04
64 M 4)
0 .N r --I
11 MV,
INDOOR SPORTS COMPLEX PUBLIC MEETING
MARCH 7, 2002
lullalklllx.�
• 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.
• David Petta stated ELS has been directed by the City of Lodi to have design for
Indoor Sports Center completed by 10/31/02.
• The budget for the Aquatics Complex is $2.77 million.
• Mr. Petta explained that the project should bid by the end of 2002 with the start of
construction by the end of 2003.
• Mr. Petta stated that ELS plans to take the final site plan to the Parks and
Recreation Commission on June 1, 2002.
• Ken Sasaki asked if all designs are going on the pretence that all properties have
been acquired.
• Mr. Petta stated it does but it's further down the road — next phase
• Mr. Mamuyac started the presentation by going over the components of the project
which include:
Balancing design, function and economics -
• Context
• Place making
• Building transparency
• Night and day
• Details and durability (materials)
• Sustainable building design — energy savings programs
• Mr. Mamuyac discussed some of the facilities that ELS has designed or are in the
process of design. They are:
• Irvington Community Center — Fremont
• Cragmont School — Berkeley Unified School District
• Stanford University Recreation and Athletics
• UC Berkeley Recreation Sports Facility
• Cal Poly San Luis Obispo Recreation and Events Center
• St. Mary's Recreation Center
INDOOR SPORTS CENTER PUBLIC WORKSHOP
MARCH 7, 2002
MINUTES
Page 2
• Mr. Mamuyac reviewed the proposed downtown site and its components. He
stated that the Elm Street revitalization is very important to the site.
The site challenges are:
• Water tower
• Fire station — ELS has been asked to study the feasibility of reusing the fire
station.
• Main Street and Elm Street have potential for renovation.
• ELS along with City staff and Steering Committee members conducted a field trip
to Breakaway Sports. While there they discussed how donated pieces will be
utilized in the new design.
• ELS along with City staff and Steering Committee members also went to the
Roseville Community Center. This facility is considered an upscale facility.
• Mr. Mamuyac reviewed the three design scheme's submitted by ELS:
• Scheme A: Transform Main Street into parking: 3 main components;
combined gym space, support space, and community functions. Recreation
staff moved to firehouse. Alley landscaped promenade with access to Hale
Park.
Scheme B: Parking — come in, turn around, and
Combined double gym and a single gym. Separate
the gyms through the main area. Two indoor socc
structure. Move recreation offices to firehouse and
office into community center.
exit on Locust Street.
entrances and enter to
:r fields with pole barn
turn existing recreation
• Scheme C: Main Street becomes a parking area. Split gyms. Indoor soccer.
Move recreation offices to firehouse. Alley landscaped promenade with
access to Hale Park.
INDOOR SPORTS CENTER PUBLIC WORKSHOP
MARCH 7, 2002
MINUTES
Page 3
Question and Answer -
Ron Williamson questioned community space (i.e. climbing wall, etc. that would
generate revenue).
Mr. Petta stated that many items were listed (i.e. fitness rooms, climbing wall, etc.).
If these items are included, they will not fit into the 30,000 square foot. Climbing
wall could be included in a court yard and not necessarily be included in the
building space.
Ron Williamson questioned whether cost recovery directions have been given? How
big is the picture and does the Armory and other facilities tit into the picture?
Mr. Petta stated that it's hard to do cost recovery until you have it programmed
together. In the next few weeks they will be putting together the information. ELS
hasn't done the numbers yet but thinks the rate of return for this building will
probably be a lot lower than the pools because the maintenance is less than the
cost of the pools. 9000 sq. ft. needed for the basics (i.e. lockers, administrative
space) with 1000 sq. ft. left over.
John Johnson questioned whether the $5.25 million figure came from.
Mr. Baltz stated $5.25m is an estimate based on $175/sq ft. x 30,000 square feet.
John Johnson doesn't understand why the facility is limited to $5.25 million.
Mr. Petta — Property is really 45,000 sq. ft. and it would leave room for future
expansion.
John Johnson doesn't understand why the space isn't being filled up now.
Mr. Mamuyac stated that they were given the figure of 30,000 sq. ft. to work with.
Statement only - Ron Williamson stated that in the last 10 years it's obvious that youth
basketball, court space, is needed. Gym space is needed. We in the community need
to recognize that revenue generators also need to be included.
Mr. Mamuyac stated that revenues typically recover operational costs not capital costs.
Mr. Petta stated that after the Steering Committee meeting yesterday, it was determined
that the court space is what is truly needed.
Mr. Mamuyac asked those present what the consensus was, any preconceptions, or
any ideas about the site.
INDOOR SPORTS CENTER PUBLIC WORKSHOP
MARCH 7, 2002
MINUTES
Page 4
Mike Reese stated that Rad Bartlam wanted to see the building brought down to Elm
Street. Both Mr. Petta and Mr. Mamuyac really liked that idea.
John Johnson had concerns about indoor soccer. He was concerned that the City was
spending a lot of time to make a beautiful new building and there would be a pole shed
to cover the indoor soccer.
Mr. Mamuyac asked if the indoor soccer space is appropriate for this area.
John Johnson stated he is not against the indoor soccer space and if we are going
to build a nice building, why build a pole barn for indoor soccer.
Ron Williamson asked if there is an attractive way to decorate a pole barn?
Both Mr. Pelta and Mr. Mamuyac both agreed there is. Mr. Mamuyac feels it is
going to only be a canvas cover as opposed to a steel barn structure.
Ron Williamson asked if the facility should be consolidated to control staffing issues.
Ron Williamson asked if the design is to be tied into the parking structure design?
Mr. Mamuyac stated, "No".
Tom Alexander asked if the property on Lockeford Street belongs to the City and could
the indoor soccer be moved there?
Mr. Baltz stated, "Yes".
John Johnson feels the indoor soccer field could be used as a multi-purpose field.
Mr. Mamuyac would lobby to keep the dasher boards more temporary.
Mr. Baltz stated that the project as its being laid out is a phase project with the property
to the west as phase 1 and the other projects as phase 2.
Mr. Baltz stated the budget was tied to the facilities on the west side not to the other
building.
John Johnson asked if it would be appropriate for ELS to design items to set on the
whole 40,000 sq. ft.?
Mr. Baltz stated, "No", due to Council asking for best estimate of footage at a prior
Council meeting and the scope of service ELS was given was for 30000 sq. ft.
INDOOR SPORTS CENTER PUBLIC WORKSHOP
MARCH 7, 2002
MINUTES
Page 5
John Johnson asked if there is a limitation to having a second floor?
Mr. Mamuyac stated it would have to be over space that's not gym space.
Ron Williamson asked if ELS will deal with the flow issue.
Mr. Mamuyac stated, "Yes".
Tom Alexander stated the master plan is an advantage because phase 1 addresses the
gym space and phase 2 should address the revenue issue.
John Johnson asked if there could be a two-story section in between the gyms with
cycles and bikes overlooking the gyms. This creates a grand entry.
Mr. Johnson then went up to the magnetic design board and laid out his idea for
the two-story section.
John Johnson feels that all space should be multi-purpose space.
Mr. Mamuyac stated that costs for a two-story facility would automatically go up $100K
due to needed elevator and two sets of stairs.
Bob Johnson doesn't see where the money and the vision is with the incorporation of
the donated items by Dave V. Primary focus is an indoor sports center and would hate
to get distracted by where to put the donated items. Whatever pencils out according to
the budget and the space available is what is in focus.
Summary:
Start with a core facility with ideas of how it can grow.
• Ron Williamson liked Scheme B building layout and parking from Scheme A.
• Mr. Petta polled those present to see if they felt there was a need for breakout
space for meeting rooms. Two answered yes.
Mr. Petta asked Mike Reese and Steve Dutra what kind of smaller space would
work for a community room.
• They stated that something with wood floors, no carpet, no soft stuff.
• Mr. Baltz likes the idea of the kitchen facility and multi-purpose rooms but the more
we can do with the property the best.
INDOOR SPORTS CENTER PUBLIC WORKSHOP
MARCH 7, 2002
MINUTES
Page 6
Mr. Petta stated that ELS will come back with a design incorporating a kitchen and
a little breakout room with hardwood floors.
• Jim Jones expressed his concerns regarding parking.
• Mr. Petta explained that currently all staff and user parking is being counted
on site. ELS will make sure that parking is adequate for all the buildings
needs. The intent is to have all the daily use parking on the site.
• Steve Dutra is stressing the need for storage.
• Mr. Petta stated that if you have a double gym you need 450 square feet of
storage; a single gym you need 250 square feet of storage; general building
storage is 200 square feet. Each meeting room carries its own storage.
• Steve Dutra would like to see more emphasis on the building instead of in the
landscape.
ELS will bring back a refined picture to the 3/21 Steering Committee meeting. At
that point the design should be 90% final. ELS is hoping to get the design
approval shortly after that.
$5.25 million budget = 30,000 sq. ft. gross building area
Meeting adjourned at 8:40 p.m.
Lodi Indoor Sports and Activity Complex
'Lodi Parks and Recreation Department
T 1 • . ..l •
Budget, Schedule and Process '�
• Budget: $5,250,000
• Schedule:
Complete Working Drawings 10/31/02
Complete Schematic Design 6/1/02
U
• Public Process
0
0
0
Ea
0
PIS
Al
'i
N
N
CO
0
U
N
.13TUOD z�4!AIJOV puU spodS ioopul ipo-I
im
4Z
coQ
v
0
U
co
31uaa /41nTIOV put sliodS zoopul iporl
N
cn
0
(o
C
O
CL
Cn
>+
(6
ID
m
a .
I;DIUa:) XTIAIJOV puP sjjodS joopul ipo7
M
IOIuaj XJIAIJOV puU sjjodS ioopui ipol
Cd
w
XDJU3D XI!AIIOV puP sjjodS ioopul Tpol
w
Multi
se Schem
4
v IA��(
a�
City of Lodi
Indoor Sports Complex
April 2, 2002
7
s
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
Program and Budget Analysis
� t. '�T, :i r.t !k C�j.l.
sem•
yuK {�.
Indoor Sports Building
5,250
13,400
___6,700
1,000_
5_,250
1, 500
13,400
2,800
2,000_
300
- 750
600
-250
5
t.b.d.
14 to 20
6 to 10
t.b.d.
A. Support Spaces
Additional Support
B. Gyms
Large Gym: 2 x 50'x 84'
Small Gym 1 x 50'x 84'
C. Activity Rooms
Small Multi Use for 30
10 to 13
28 to 37
-- - -- 9 to 14
3
---------- ---------..... _ 1
Divisible Multi Use for 80
Cardio 1 Aerobics Studio
Climbing Wall
-- - -- ---
Bab sit Room
---- _ __ - - - -----
— - -- -
D. Food
- --
0
Catering Kitchen
800
47
Vending Area
200
Cafe
- -- ----_ _
Total Net Area
27,350
26,600
30,5909,200_
$175. $190
-
$5,353 $5,812
$500 $500
$3 $357
$932 $1,000
8,000
_
-$_17_5 $190
- - - -
$1,6101 $1,748
-
-57
$242 1 $262
j $2,010
Gross Area (x 1.15)
—
31,453
Cost$/sq.ft.
--$175i
Total Cost$1,000's
( )
_$190
$5,504; $5,976
83
Site_
Civil ($1,000's `*
$500 $500
Landscape ($1,000's)
Contin enc 15%
$357 i $357
$954 $1,025
Total Cost Range $1,000's
$7,315 r $7,858
1 $7,142 $7,669t_$1,862
Budget: $5,250,000
Parking Analysis
Building
3 Court Parking
Demand
Multi Use
Demand
rts Complex
35 to 48
60 to 80
Old Firehouse
15
15
Total
50 to 63
75 to 85
Available Lots
Spaces
On -Street
32
16
16
Main Street Closure
47
47
47
Temporary Lot
20
20
Lakewood "As Is"
13
Lakewood as parking
32
Total
144 1
63
83
Electrical undergrounding and wafer tower revisions not included