Loading...
5.1. SR 09-14-1998"ity of iver FROM: MEMORANDUM Item # 5.1. Mayor and City Council Pat Klaers, City Administrato"~r~ DATE: September 14, 1998 SUBJECT: Bond Referendum The City Council needs to approve the bond referendum question at its September 14, 1998, meeting. The city is required to get the City Council approved question to the County by September 18th in order to get this issue on the November 3, 1998, ballot. The question is being prepared by James O'Meara from Briggs & Morgan on behalf of the city and will be distributed at the September 14th meeting. The question will include an outdoor family aquatic center and park and recreation improvements in the amount of $3.95 million. In the fall of 1997, a $2 million recreation referendum was defeated. Following this off-year election defeat, the Park & Recreation Commission decided to pursue another referendum in November 1998 when a significant voter turn-out was certain. In February/March, the Commission discussed the need for more information from the citizens on the contents of a referendum question and specifically, if a pool needs to be added to the issue. A brief follow-up community survey was conducted by Decision Resources, Inc. in April 1998. Ever since the results of that survey became known in May, the city has decided to pursue a 1998 referendum that included an outdoor family aquatic center along with park and recreation improvements. The major concern for the city was the cost to the property owners for the proposal and the uncertainty of a successful referendum if the total cost got too high. In June, the Commission interviewed pool consultants and in July, the City Council hired Burbach Aquatics to complete a feasibility study for an outdoor family aquatic center. This report was presented on September 2, 1998. The only surprise in the report was the total cost of the facility. The city had been working on the assumption that a complete facility which matched the citizens' expectations could be accomplished for under $2 million. The facility in the proposal is estimated to cost $2,835,500, excluding some 13065 Orono Parkway · P.O. Box 490 · Elk River, MN 55330 · TDD & Phone: (612) 441-7420 · Fax: (612) 441-7425 Memo/Ballot Question September 14, 1998 Page 2 options that the city may find desirable. The pool facility may be slightly conservative in terms of size based on the city's growth, but the pool is the quality facility that everyone expects when you talk about an outdoor family aquatic center. Additionally, the cost estimates are believed to be accurate, but as we all know, actual bids could be higher or lower than the estimates, depending on any number of situations. There are numerous family aquatic centers throughout the Twin Cities and I believe that what is contained in the proposal is consistent with what citizens expect. This may be especially true when considering what is down the road in the city of Anoka. Everyone on September 2nd had "sticker shock" regarding the cost of the proposal. Discussion took place regarding constructing a smaller facility, constructing a facility of lower quality (less amenities), constructing the facility in phases and whether or not the city should pursue two separate questions or one question which combined the pool with outdoor recreation improvements. The conclusion of everyone in attendance seemed to be to pursue one large bond referendum question in the amount of $3.95 million. This included $2,835,500 for the family aquatic center, $1,064,500 for outdoor park and recreation improvements and $50,000 for bonding and issuance costs. The city definitely needs to present a complete and quality product to the public if an issue of this magnitude is going to be approved, however, depending on the bids, there may be some very modest phasing of the pool improvements required. The community survey said the citizens wanted an outdoor family aquatic center. Accordingly, if the people want the facility and if they approve it at the polls then the city will construct and manage the project. There is a concern about the chances of success at the polls, as not suprisingly, the survey indicated that most people desired a $3 million facility but only wanted to pay as if the facility costs $1 million. The challenge for the referendum committee will be to get public information out regarding the proposal so that everyone is aware of the issue before the November 3rd election. In retrospect, the city maybe should have started immediately after the defeat last fall, but we still have a solid 6 weeks to conduct a full public information campaign regarding the proposal. The campaign is still in its early stages but will include copies of a three- dimensional rendering of the proposal which should be available in early October. The rendering will identify the general location of the facility in Orono Park and all the components within the project, but its orientation may shift slightly in one direction or another. The campaign will also include a video, informational flyers, newspaper articles and advertisements, along with public informational presentations with consultant Dave Burbach in s:\council\refques.doc Memo/Ballot Question September 14, 1998 Page 3 attendance. These presentations are tentatively scheduled for Tuesday, October 6th, at 7:00 p.m. at City Hall, and Monday, October 26th, at 7:00 p.m. at City Hall. s:\council\refques.doc FEASIBILITY STUDY/ MARKETING STUDY FOR THE CITY OF ELK RIVER, MINNESOTA MUNICIPAL POOL ALTERNATIVES SEPTEMBER 2, 1998 I I I I I I © BURBACH MUNICIPAL & CIVIL ENGINEERS, 1998 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED, PRINTED IN THE U.S.A. I d II d d d II d i II il il CHAPTER 5: DATA AND PROBABLE CONSTRUCTION COSTS (09/01/98) 5a. Data For Medium Outdoor Recreation Pool TOTAL WATER SURFACE AREA = 10,000 square feet TOTAL POOL PATRON CAPACITY = 666, FACILIT~ PATRON C,~,PACITY = 1,300 1. Pool surface area: 10,000 square feet 2. New pool water volume: 225,000 gallons 3. New pool patron capacity: 666, Facility Capacity approximately 1,300 4. New pool recirculation rate: 1,050 g.p.m. 5. Number of required sanitary facilities: Fixture Female Male Water Closets 9 5 Urinals 0 5 Lavatories 5 5 Showers 12 12 6. Required lifeguard chairs: 5 7. Anticipated operating staff: 8. 10 (with waterslide and concessions) Surge tank capacity: 25,000 gallons 65 11 II ! ! ! il I1 !1 il ii il ill ii il 5b. Opinion Of Probable Construction Cost. (09/02/98) CATEGORY AMOUNT 1. Main Pool Tank 2. Surge Tank 3. Main Pool Piping 4. Pool Filtration and Backwash System 5. Main Recirculation Pumps 6. Main Pool Chemical Addition 7.-11. No Wading Pool for this Facility (zero depth main vessel fulfills this activity) 12. Deck Equipment 13. Deck Drain System 14. Electrical Service 15. Water Service 16. HVAC 17. Vacuum System 18. Mechanical Building 19. Decking 20. Bathhouse Structure · 21. Bathhouse Roof 22. Bathhouse Doors & Windows 23. Sanitary Facilities 24. Bathhouse Water Heater 25. Pool Enclosure (fence) 26. Pool Painting Demolition, Site Fill, Grading & Underdrains $500,000 50,060 104,000 74,000 22,500 24,000 32,000 25,000 52,000 28,500 8,500 9,000 63,000 45,000 440,000 75,000 26,000 130,000 9,000 24,000 18,000 52,000 ii 66 ii 128 Stall Parking Lot I il ! ]11 ill IN IN IN tN 27. Safety Equipment 29. Chemical Controllers 32. Main Pool Heater 33. Site Amenities a. Sun arbors/shelters b. Sand Play Area and Appar~.m~ c. Veranda d. Sand Volleyball Area e. Large Grass Areas f. Sunning Areas and Furniture g. Landscaping h. Concession Building i. Bicycle Racks and area j. Water Feature #1 and Pump System i' Water Feature #2 j. Water Feature #3 k. Single Flume Waterslide o. Public Address System Probable Facility Construction Cost Professional Fees Contingency fund Total Probable Facility Construction Cost OPTIONS 28. Pool Area Lighting System 30. Pool Cover 31. Solar Blanket · 33. Site Amenities k. Double Flume Waterslide 1. Pool Security System m. Irrigation System p. Competition Swimming Equipment 128,000 4,000 25,000 20,090 16,000 30,000 15,000 25,000 10,000 50,000 15,000 80,000 8,000 24,000 10,000 55,000 125,000 8,000 $2,459,500 326,000 50,000 $2,835,500 92,000 13,500 12,000 175,000 25,000 17,000 18,000 67 M~..CHANIC~L BUILDING ID / //: CONCESSION ~ ~"'-' '" ',o~~ ~, :-'"~ ' ' ' ....... ,: ........................... ~:: ....... / /// ............. :5_--_-..5;::55 ............. EATER / , / ...... ............ ...... / / / ' ' '"',"", ,--"' ~ ~ ORONO ROAD BASiCBALL ir{ELD ,' ',. '- l: '"',. EXIST{NG FMRCROUND PARKING AREA l; 1' 0 100 200 300 PROPOSED SITE PLAN ELK RIVER. MN. VERSION !{ S2 BURBACH k[UNICIPAL & CIVIL ENGINEERS 60?4 Nt~b~jr I0 Be~a4Ji. P,O, It~ ?lll-I~tl~lll4. ~1. 6~18-(G) ~4~-~-I~x (SOS) Woodlands Trails Park Orono Park Country Crossing 3~ Mississippi Oaks Lafaye~eWoods Ridgewood East Deerfield IV I-rfllsid e 5~ Meadowvale Heights East of 169 Park Wanhin~ House ' ' ' 2 - Open Shelters 1 - Rest l~.ooms 1 - Rest Room Add Playground Equipment Pl_ayground Equipment ,~(~ourt Basketball - ~u ti. Playground Equipment ½ Court Playground Equipment 2 ½ Courts Add Playground Equipment Lights . . Add Playground Equipment Playground Equipment /,~.Court - ~'u/. ~- Playground Equipment ½ Court Playground Equipment ~"Court -- F~ Open Shelter Total This Section Orono Softball Complex I Rest Room Oak Knoll Cass Fields Combination Shelter/ Concessions/Res~~er 4 - Lighted Fields 1 - Combination Shelter/' Concessions/~m 1 - Open Shelter Funds to Purchase Park Land Trail Babcock Park to Downtown Riverwalk Phase 1I for Cass Fields Lion's Teen Center TotaI ThisSection Trails Total This Section Rail Road Trail 4.5 miles 169 to Proctor Link 1.0 mile Country Crossing I 'A mile Oak Knoll ½ mile Woodland Trails 2.0 miles Highway 10 1.5 miles Total TMs Section Engineer & Design GRAND TOTAL Iqq ' 50,000 lOO,OOO ~ 550°0 180,000 .---- 125,000 l D~ ooo $480,000 100,000 ~ I0 Off O0 50,000 100,000 100~ ,o,ooo $400,000 $200,000 ?0,ooo 7 6 15,000 15, 25,000 125,000 ] ~,, ooo 75.000 v~ $ s~o,ooo 73,000 ~oj o~ $100,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 30,000 ~%ooo 5,000 ~ O~ ooo 30,000 5,000 -- 35,000 10,000 -- 20,000 Ro~o.'o"o 2,000 20,000 30,000 5,000 Io~ ooo 30,000 ~o~ ooo 5,000 -- 30,000 5,000 / o~ 25,000 09/10/98 16:12 FAX 6122233002 SPRINGSTED INC. ~003/003 City of Elk River, Minnesota $3,950,000 General Obligation Park Bonds, Series 1999 20 Year Schedule Calculation of Net Proceeds for Project Costs Total Bond Issue (a) Less: Costs of Issuance Less: Allowance for Discount Bidding Net Proceeds for Project Costs $4,015,000 (30,505) (65.000) $3,919,495 Estimated Market Value $50,000 75,000 110,000 125,000 150,000 175,000 200,000 400,000' 600,000 800,000 1,000,000 Tax Rate Dollars Applied (b) of Tax 0.047% Increase 0.047% $24 0.047% 36 0.047% 52 0.047% 59 0.047% 71 0.047% 83 0.047% 95 0.047% 190 0.047% 285 0.047% 380 0.047% 475 (a) Principal amount of the bonds is the referendum ballot question of $3,950,000 plus the allowance for discount bidding of $65,000. (b) Tax rate equal to the estimated average levy of $336,090 (including the 5% overlevy) divided by the City's 1998/99 referendum market value of $708,013,324. · Changes in interest cafes, ~iming or size of the bond issue may cause significant alterations of this information. Prepared by: Springsted Incorporated (9/10/98) Elkpark.xls