The URL can be used to link to this page

2001-04-23City of Southlake, Texas MEMORANDUM April 20, 2001 TO: SPDC Board of Directors FROM: Kevin Hugman, Director of Community Services SUBJECT: Board Meeting — Monday, April 23, 2001 1. Agenda Item No. 2. Executive Session. We will have two potential land acquisition opportunities to discuss with you at this meeting. 2. Agenda Item No. 4. PUBLIC FORUM: This is the public's opportunity to address the Board about non -agenda items. During this proceeding it is important that the Board not deliberate (discuss among yourselves) or take action on any item brought up at this time. The Boards' options during this topic are 1) to listen, 2) ask questions and respond to the presenter only, 3) request staff to look into the issue and report back to the Board or 4) request that the Chair put the item on a future agenda for the Board to discuss or consider. 3. Agenda Item No. 5A. Approval of the regular SPDC meeting minutes of March 26, 2001. If you have corrections to the meeting minutes, please let Secretary to the City Manager Kim Bush know in advance or make it part of the motion for consideration. Kim can be reached via e-mail at kbush2ci. southlake. tx. us or by calling her at 481-1420. 4. Agenda Item No. 6A.Award of bid to Sun Ports International for shade structures for baseball fields in Bicentennial Park, and approval of Change Order # 1. You will recall that SPDC approved matching grant funding in the amount of $65,000 (total funding of $130,000) to the Southlake Baseball Association (SBA) for construction of shade structures on the baseball fields in Bicentennial Park. One bid was received, from Sun Ports International in the amount of $133,735. Staff met with the contractor and developed a reduction in the size of shade structure for Ballfields #8 and #9, resulting in a $12,000 savings, and bringing the project within budget. SBA concurs with the proposed change order. Staff recommends the award of bid ($133,735) and approval of Change Order #1 (cost reduction of $12,000), and a project construction contingency (additional $8,000), for a total project cost not to exceed $129,735. 5. Aaenda Item No. 6B. Approval of Joint Utilization Agreement between Carroll Independent School District and City of Southlake for natatorium. As you know, this agreement has been approved by the City Council and CISD Board of Trustees. All of you were at the meeting and know of the discussions regarding the agreement and the reimbursement of funding to SPDC. We have placed this item on your agenda so that SPDC can formally approve the allocation of funding towards the natatorium. SPDC Board of Directors Board Meeting — Monday, April 23, 2001 Page 2 6. Agenda Item No. 6C. Contract for professional services with Brinkley Sargent Architects for Recreation Center. As you know, we have obtained City Council approval for use of the Timarron/Richards site for the proposed recreation center. The next step is to contract with an architect to design the facility. We would like to get this underway very soon in order to apply for a Texas Parks and Wildlife Indoor Recreation grant. Our application, to include a conceptual floor plan and facility components, will be due by July 31, 2001. As noted in the packet item cover memo, staff is very comfortable with the qualifications and experience of Brinkley Sargent Architects. They have designed several city and YMCA recreation centers, including the City of Coppell facility. You will note that included in the scope of services contract, is the development of an enterprise plan by the architect. This will include a detailed analysis of expected operating expenses, staffing needs and anticipated revenues, based on the projected facilities and programming in the facility. We will have a copy of the enterprise plan developed for Coppell by Brinkley Sargent at your meeting so that you can see what the product would look like. Mr. Dwayne Brinkley of Brinkley Sargent Architects will be at your meeting to answer any questions you may have. 7. Agenda Item No. 6D. Allocation of additional funding for softball complex at Bicentennial Park. As you may know, at their March and April meetings, the Parks Board considered a request from the Southlake Girls' Softball Association (SGSA) to move the planned softball complex from Bicentennial Park to Bob Jones Park. This request was based on a desire by SGSA to take advantage of ballfield development at Bob Jones Park in the current project, and add the allocated $1.1 million for the complex at Bicentennial to alleviate a funding shortfall. Rough preliminary cost estimates were obtained from Shrickel, Rollins and Associates when developing the revised Bicentennial Park master design plan. It was determined that a full complex and ancillary needs would be well in excess of the approved funding. The Parks Board considered the request from SGSA, taking into consideration their needs, the change to an approved master plan at Bob Jones Park, the loss of planned practice facilities at this time, and other factors. At their April meeting, the Board tabled the item, directing staff to plan a city-wide SPIN meeting to discuss the issues involved. We have tentatively set the date for this meeting on May 2 or May 3. In the interim, it was discussed that perhaps additional funding could be allocated to the Bicentennial Park plan from other sources within the SPDC budget. The item on your agenda is to consider this possibility. This would require re -allocation of approved funding within the budget. Staff has identified some approaches as to how to address the issue of costs, especially considering that the only cost estimates we have at this time are very preliminary. We feel that a detailed concept plan with better cost estimates for SPDC Board of Directors Board Meeting — Monday, April 23, 2001 Page 3 Bicentennial Park will provide a more accurate cost basis, while not delaying the project nor incurring substantial design costs. (This would be similar to what we did on the recreation center siting at Bicentennial Park "hill"). Any additional funding allocation to this project if desired, can also be determined at this meeting. 8. Agenda Item No. 7A. Sales tax report. The monthly sales tax report is included in your packet. 9. Agenda Item No. 7B. Project Status Report. The monthly status report is included in your packet. OTHER ITEMS 1. May SPDC meeting. The May meeting would normally fall on Monday, May 28, which is Memorial Day. It is our recommendation that instead of planning an alternate date, if a meeting becomes necessary, we will request to hold one prior to a scheduled City Council meeting. Please let us know your thoughts. 2. Also included in your packet: • Park Board unapproved minutes from April 9, 2001 meeting. We appreciate your commitment and service to the City. If you have any questions regarding the agenda or materials, please feel free to contact me at 481-1527. KH STAFF CONTACT INFORMATION: Sharen Elam, Director of Finance, 481-1713 Kevin Hugman, Director of Community Services, 481-1527 Steve Polasek, Deputy Director of Community Services, 481-1543 Ben Henry, Park Planning and Construction Superintendent, 481-1584 Chris Carpenter, Senior Parks Planner, 481-1585 L City of Southlake, Texas r MEMORANDUM April 19, 2001 TO: Kevin Hugman, Director of Community Services FROM: Ben Henry, Park Planning and Construction Superintendent SUBJECT: Award of bid for construction of shade structures for baseball fields in Bicentennial Park and approval of change order No. 1 Action Requested: SPDC approval for award of bid for construction of shade structures for baseball fields in Bicentennial Park and approval of change order No. 1 Background Information: As previously approved by SPDC through a matching funds request from the Southlake Baseball Association, this project involves the design, purchase, and installation of bleacher shade structures on Bicentennial Park baseball fields #4, #5, #6, #7, #8, #9, and #10. The shade structures would consist of a powder coated pole support structure covered with a UV shade fabric. The fabric will be similar to that used on the existing shade structures at the Bob Jones Park soccer fields and the Southlake Tennis Center. The recommended fabric colors of burgundy and forest green will match the existing dugout shade covers. The proposed shade structures were estimated to cost $130,000 and would provide much needed relief from the summer sun for numerous spectators, players, coaches, and officials. The construction timeline, should the project be approved, would provide for an estimated completion date of July 2001. The City received and opened one bid on April 17, 2001 in accordance with State bidding procedures. The bid on the project was submitted by Sun Ports International in the amount of $133,735, slightly over the approved budget of $130,000. Staff met with Sun Ports International and have developed a reduced scope of work that would bring the project within budget while maintaining the integrity of the project. Essentially, with the implementation of change order No. 1 the shade structures for fields #8 and #9 would be reduced in size. The shade structures would still cover all of the seating area but would be reduced in size over the pedestrian plaza by approximately 1,178 square feet. Staff has reviewed these changes with the Southlake Baseball Association and they concur with the proposed change order. Sun Ports International is a well known shade structure installation firm with a reputation for providing professional, quality workmanship. They have completed work for such entities as the City of Southlake, City of Hurst, City of Highland Village, the City of Houston, and the City of Fort Worth. Kevin Hugman, Director of Community Services April 19, 2001 Page 2 Financial Considerations: Matching funds in the amount of $65,000 (total project budget $130,000) have been approved as part of the FY2000/01 SPDC Matching Funds Program. Change Order No. 1 would reduce the scope of the contract by $12,000 from $133,735 to $121,735. In addition, project construction contingency in the amount of $8,000 (6.5 % of the project) is requested to cover unforeseen costs arising from the project, as well as the purchase and installation of SPDC recognition plaques. Citizen Input/ Board Review: Staff met on December 15, 2000 with members of the Southlake Baseball Association to review the proposed shade structure project. The Parks and Recreation Board recommended approval of this request at their January 8, 2001 meeting (5-0). SPDC approved the matching funds request at their January 22, 2001 meeting (6-0). The Parks and Recreation Board approved the design of the shade structures at their March 19, 2001 meeting (6-0). City staff reviewed the proposed change order No. 1 with Bill Stroope, President of the Southlake Baseball Association, on April 19, 2001. Mr. Stroope was in agreement with the proposed changes. Legal Review: Not Applicable. Alternatives: SPDC discussion and consideration. Supporting Documents: Supporting documents include the following items: ■ Change Order No. 1 ■ Diagram of shade structures Staff Recommendation: Place as an item on the April 23, 2001 SPDC agenda for approval award of ll,bid for construction of shade structures for baseball fields in Bicentennial Park to Sun Ports International for $133,735, approval of Change Order No. 1 for a reduction in cost of $12,000, and $8,000 in project contingency for a total project amount not to exceed $129,735. E CHANGE ORDER No. 1 Dated: May 2, 2001 Project Bicentennial Park Ballfield Shade Canopy OWNER City of Southlake Contract For Shade Canopy Contract Date May 2, 2001 To: SunPorts International, Inc. Contractor You are directed to make the changes noted below in the subject Contract: City of Southlake Owner :1 Dated , 2001 Nature of Changes: • Square foot reduction to the shade canopies for ballfields #8 and #9. Remove Following Items From Contract: Quantit Unit Price Total 1) Reduction to canopy square foot 1,178 sf. n.a. $12,000 Total Deleted = $12, 000 Additional Work to be Constructed: 1) n/a uantit Unit Price Total Total Added = $ 0.00 Subtotal = ($ 12,000.00) Total Amount Change Order = ($ 12,000.00) Page 1 of 2 E E t E E L E E E Q These Changes result in the following adjustment of Contract Price and Contract Time: Contract Price Prior to This Change Order $ 133,735.00 Net Resulting from This Change Order $ (12,000.00) Current Contract Price Including This Change Order NSPE-ASCE 1910-8-B (1978 Edition) Contract Time Prior to This Change Net Resulting from This Change Order $ 121,735.00 60 calendar z Current Contract Time Including This Change Order 60 calendar days The Above Changes Are Approved: The Above Changes Are Accepted: Shana K Yelverton Assistant City Manager Date SunPorts International, Inc. Contractor MOS Date Page 2 of 2 G k _ A 2001 2001 FIELDS 4 AND 5 REMARKS: 1. FRONT SECTION CANTILEVER SBAWA mtEM MSn 20' 2. SINGLE FABRIC TOP 3. SQUARE STEEL TUBING 10, 4. CONCRETE CORE DRILLING 5.12 FT ENTRY HEIGHT 6. POLE IN THE HOLE FOOTING SYSTEM TOTAL AREA COVERED - 1941.42 SO.FT 40' 40' 38'-3' 10, 40' 40' Sun Ports International, Inc. (,on - 5 F1 20' N low FIELD 10 REMARKS: 1. FRONT SECTION CANTILEVER 3LE FABRIC TOP ARE STEEL TUBING JCRETE CORE DRILLING T ENTRY HEIGHT E IN THE HOLE FOOTING SYSTEM Sun Ports International, Inc. I _ A r 1 1.42 SO.FT FIELDS 6 AND 7 18, --i- -- 20' --IF- 20' 18, 18' REMARKS: 1. EXTENDED HIP UNITS 2. SINGLE FABRIC TOP 3. SOUARE STEEL TUBING 4. CONCRETE CORE DRILLING S. 12 FT ENTRY HEIGHT 6. POLE IN THE HOLE FOOTING SYSTEM TOTAL AREA COVERED - 1764 SOFT Sun Ports International, Inc. 49' 63' 30' FIELDS 8 AND 9 33' 63' 33' 30' / REMARKS: 49' 1. SUPERSPAN STRUCTURE 2. SINGLE FABRIC TOP 3. SQUARE STEEL TUBING 4. CONCRETE CORE DRILLING S. 13 - 10 FT ENTRY HEIGHT 6. BASE PLATES BELOW SURFACE TOTAL AREA COVERED - 4958 SOFT a�n/ per' Sun Ports Intern itional, Inc. _% 11 [::;;;; Q;D US z ll City of Southlake, Texas r MEMORANDUM April 19, 2001 TO: Billy Campbell, City Manager FROM: Kevin Hugman, Director of Community Services (xt. 1543) SUBJECT: SPDC approval of Interlocal Agreement for Joint Use of the Carroll Independent School District Natatorium. Action Requested: SPDC approval of Interlocal Agreement for Joint Use of the Carroll Independent School District Natatorium. Background Information: The Carroll Independent School District is currently under construction on the new natatorium. The natatorium will be used by the District to provide both educational and athletic programs. It will also afford an opportunity for the City and District to offer community based programming such as open swim, learn -to -swim, and water aerobics, to name a few. City and District staff met on several occasions throughout the last year to develop and review a proposed interlocal agreement for the CISD Natatorium. The agreement was developed by CISD and City staff approximately one year ago and has been reviewed and discussed at the Joint Utilization Committee (JUC) meetings on numerous occasions during that time. A proposed draft interlocal agreement, was approved by JUC at their March 8, 2001 meeting (5-2). Following JUC approval, the proposed Interlocal Agreement was reviewed and discussed by the Southlake Parks Development Corporation at their March 26, 2001 meeting. Following a comprehensive discussion of the Agreement, the SPDC voted to table the Agreement and forward their comments on to the City Council for consideration during the planned joint meeting with the CISD School Board. Following the SPDC meeting, Council Member Rex Potter met with School Board Member Jerry Lawrence, and City and CISD staff to review proposed changes to the Agreement in an effort to provide a document that incorporates the comments of the SPDC and that both governmental entities might support. Changes proposed to the draft agreement included: ■ Striking the City reimbursement of fifty percent (50%) of the first $1.2 million received in sponsorships, donations, and grant money. ■ Incorporating wording which includes City participation in the effort to receive funding through sponsorships, donations, and grants. 6 Q-\ Billy Campbell, City Manager April 19, 2001 Page 2 ■ Allocating all funding received through sponsorships, donations and grants to the natatorium for maintenance, operations, or future improvements, unless otherwise mutually agreed. ■ Charging the Aquatics Commission with the development of the natatorium usage schedule, allowing each member one (1) vote, allowing for the designation of alternates for each representative, and _requiring all seven members or designated alternates (four from CISD, three from City) be present in order for a vote to occur. ■ Strikes "full or partial" use of the facility from the Agreement, instead allowing for a minimum usage of the natatorium facility of fifty percent (50%) of the annual operating hours (scheduling to be determined by the Aquatics Commission). ■ The addition of a dispute resolution process. Allows for disputes to be resolved by the Aquatics Commission, and if unable to do so the dispute would be forwarded to the City Manager and the CISD Superintendent, followed by the Mayor and CISD Board President if need be, and non- binding arbitration as a last attempt to avoid legal action. Neither party would forfeit their right to file a lawsuit should the dispute not be ,,,, resolved to both parties' mutual satisfaction. Financial Considerations: The City has currently obligated $1.25 million in SPDC funding towards the construction of the natatorium ($500,000 in FY-2000/01, $500,000 in FY- 2001/02, and $250,000 in FY-2002/03). The proposed Agreement would allocate all funding received through sponsorships, donations and grants to the natatorium for maintenance, operations, or future improvements, unless otherwise mutually agreed. It would also provide that all revenue generated through the use of the natatorium would belong to the CISD and used to offset maintenance and operational costs of the facility. Citizen Input/ Board Review: This item was approved by the Joint Utilization Committee by a vote of 5-2 (Carlucci and Harold against) at their March 8, 2001 meeting. The proposed Interlocal Agreement was reviewed and discussed by the Southlake Parks Development Corporation at their March 26, 2001 meeting and tabled. SPDC comments from their meeting were provided to the City Council for consideration. The City Council, at a joint meeting with the CISD School Board on April 11, 2001, approved with minor changes the Interlocal Agreement for Joint Use of Carroll Independent School District Natatorium (6-0). (b'r2 Billy Campbell, City Manager April 19, 2001 Page 3 Legal Review: The document follows the same general format as the existing interlocal agreement for joint use. The City Attorney has reviewed the latest Agreement and their comments have been incorporated. Alternatives: Discussion and comments on the Agreement. Supporting Documents: Supporting documents include the following: ■ Interlocal Agreement for Joint Use of Carroll Independent School District Natatorium incorporating subsequent changes as approved by City Council and CISD Board of Trustees. ■ Minutes from joint City Council and CISD Board of Trustees meeting. Staff Recommendation: Place as an item on the April 23, 2001 SPDC agenda to approve the Interlocal Agreement for the Joint Use of Carroll Independent School District Natatorium. M - § �3- s 4�x�". �'�flF€ a -k..* Wl lolls is ve - i,t?t° All ter * . ,mi.4..,;�.'s'`' z 'tS` ; ki «. € 4 r..�a'�INS_, sc r� A lot now 0m. S � _ �ktg� on N .rt f ems' axa errs # { QW i' .,gu,�j*' •s'R,te .fir h k . i•< '` .i �'`�i,%,:`b f'i �• �$'pi Y i. iy .: "£ 3albt.a+ae"6rp.R<": f qElan- fi a et a ! �S r+v= •v R *a%"`-�'a'*^'*"3,b's'h`� WA #, ^' Mtn SUMP 3 <t' u AS vb�WWA g On, Fill UAW," R s T � � � � �• "'k�''S�`'� jR.�,�i °�'.,iR. ^� ;c; � ?w �(' ¢ '��r'tf ';,. cif; z, �,2, +.;. . A _ a s i4f t �� j 4 � tr� z; ° '" R ttd §rv* � {Y"y Q'.+ Zt4 s s . g know ins. I— : x t €' 3 +r�r-: ,r'" f•'rt� -x Sto �',..�A+E»y {� in t g;��'- � lf EV xr t ; 7 EJ��ig' y A Ia k v. xf " N*c. - `' ✓ _, r�'� . .$ '� � i iI Yam' _ � � } _ S tl ' sj k� r�4,i«' xr. S.;r`a r,�"Y'��' x ys '< - s .,;�* a S 9. X kiONslV321 1 IN Al AIN �f. ram' aa�r` ��. rws,c r r- n,� t � tx ate'! �. S d �',� �r� ,�' >• r � °:,"x , +� � 3 � gS ' k ' e W av :' ' a aa.. ` r.'"M . , arrNW QUIP zx�, -t'` �` ".,�„ ` h • - AWN A, to t� Al Too ^. S np fl'� f .<' .t M,t } `'•6�* Fa �i ,, gr ,. r,t _ �4 # y$ '� env W WKS . . al 5 s. `'t r•.� �r � s r s '� .� ''{. r�eS^war�"•-.."fix fs £"`_ t M. rk �.:. Y'3:`g' ; 1. i yam'L 5h 3 x Su fi m."e ¢ � �4 < t�e',�''sa. r .� �.� r'u" ""�, 4 ��`4 t' � f., �tra ��ti� s:�'� ��^'t &�'b•, ,`�,�t �.`�"�� l;vi"'xze�:v-�+',F, Yr WIN �� % 3 i y4sri a .�� 5';'s�i °�'�*. � ��'3 * Pot sn ,t `*' ' -€ } `; '✓ a '�,.�5",�+3,'� �' 2�WkTi i�a,� r q, .r '" � a" „v„ 1 .. � •'i*.* A�, 4 . "' �r '9 •s Tf . _^. 5 `r~; `.�'-aL. RUSS SO A `. W��`'�r"��r'��`�a`�,�.��-a�u�y� <Y'' o- -'t 3''s S•r *,`i a r i t�'STM-r'r°`,. ,, a 5'�<gc`�k' OF Mammal a# ac2�'.°" " s , .. f � 1 ix' `. .r$k.. iT'Y. }. Y:- 6� : � �.�..._ : ,.'._ � r , L_ .S`. �"• E .ryi��. FKA1005% SPECIAL JOINT CITY COUNCIL / CISD BOARD OF TRUSTEE MEETING APRIL 11, 2001 ' MINUTES City Councilmembers Present: Mayor Rick Stacy; Members: Patsy DuPre, Gary Fawks, Ronnie Kendall, Rex Potter, Keith Shankland (10:00 p.m.), and Greg ' Standerfer. CISD Board of Trustees Present: President Robert Glover; Trustees: Bill Eden, Steve ' Harold, Jerry Lawrence, Rebecca Miltenberger, J. Carol Parsons, and Doug Strickland. ' City Staff Present: City Manager Billy Campbell, Director of Community Services Kevin Hugman, Finance Director Sharen Elam, Public Works Director Pedram ' Farahnak, and Executive Secretary Kim Bush. CISD Staff Present: Superintendent of Schools Ted Gillum, Business Manager Jim ' Schiele, Assistant Superintendent of Business and Finance John Craft, Assistant Superintendent of Administrative Services Steve Johnson, Public Information Officer Julie Thannum, and Secretary Donna Hosea. Regular Session: tAgenda Item No. 1, Call to order. CISD President Robert Glover called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. President ' Glover announced that agenda item #3 and #4, Discussion regarding TIF and Chapter 41, respectively, would be discussed prior to consideration of the Joint Use agreement ' for the Natatorium. Agenda Item No. 3 and No. 4, Discussion regarding TIF and Chapter 41. ' President Glover presented to the Board and City Council information regarding Tax Increment Financing (TIF) as it relates to CISD including growth management, funding sources, and financial constraints. Mr. Glover commented that the Board wanted City Council to be aware of the issues facing CISD beginning with the next school year. ' CISD Business Manger Jim Schiele explained the projection of recapture payments and TIF contributions. He stated that the projection was based on wealth level per Weighted Average Daily Attendance (WADA) of $295,000 Tax Assess Value (TAV) per student. He also commented that CISD receives an estimated cash benefit of $112,742, which is 70% of the net benefit as a result of CISD's involvement in the TIF (see handout included with the minutes). UNOFFICIAL MINUTES OF JOINT CISD AND CITY OF SOUTHLAKE MEETING, APRIL 11, 2001, PAGE 1 OF 4 Mr. Schiele estimates that, if current legislation does not change, the district will be paying to the State 8.54% of every dollar collected for fiscal year 2001-2002, and estimates that by the year 2005-2006 that percentage will increase to 29.07 % . ' Mr. Glover explained that CISD will have additional recapture options items on the May ballot that will help to reduce the impact of Chapter 41. They include: (1) Contract with a neighboring school district to educate students who reside outside t district's boundaries, which means sending money directly to local school districts rather than to the state; (2) Issue $3 million new debt previously planned for Certificate of Obligation Bond Issues; and (3) Reclassify $7.1 million Certificate of Obligation Bonds to Debt Service. CISD and City Council discussed adding students outside the district to help reduce the ' effects of Chapter 41, but Superintendent Ted Gillum commented that the cost to educate each additional student (approximately $6,300) would out weigh the cost due ' the State for that student. Mr. Schiele added that if you bring a student in from another district, they get the WADA credit, you do the education. ' Councilmember Kendall commented that it would have been a good idea for the City to have had available the cost associated with doing infrastructure improvements. President Glover commented that it would be helpful to have a financial summary. He suggested that this might be a good topic for discussion the next time there is a joint meeting. ' Agenda Item No. 2, Joint Use Agreement for the Natatorium. Director of Community Services Kevin Hugman gave a brief history of what has ' transpired up to this point with regard to discussions by SPDC and JUC concerning funding and use of the natatorium. ' For this meeting, everyone agreed to reference the joint use agreement as approved by JUC on March 8, 2001, which also incorporates the city attorney's comments, and a ' separate document that includes changes recommended by Councilmember Rex Potter and Board Trustee Jerry Lawrence. An informal poll was taken of all SPDC members present including Sherry Berman, Tad Stephens, and Cara White. All agreed that they were not interested in getting repayment for the $1.25 million allocated to the construction of the natatorium as long as sufficient use of the facility was provided for use by the community. Motion was made to approve the interlocal agreement for joint use of CISD natatorium as set forth in the agreement approved by the Joint Use Committee on March 8, 2001 and incorporating the city attorney's comments (see attached to the minutes), together with all of the changes as recommended by Councilmember Rex Potter and Board ' UNOFFICIAL MINUTES OF JOINT CISD AND CITY OF SOUTHLAKE MEETING, APRIL 11, 2001, PAGE 2 OF 4 �t (b- %p Trustee Jerry Lawrence (see attached to the minutes) with the following changes: (1) adding the words and CISD after the word Southlake under Witnesseth, first paragraph; (2) deleting the word and City after the words "The CISD" under Article II, second ' paragraph, first sentence; (3) adding the word marketing to the natatorium director's duties under Article III, first paragraph; (4) adding the words subject to the provisions of Article X to Article V, paragraph one after the words "in order to establish"; (5) ' deleting the words "all the Commission representatives" and inserting the words at least two City representatives and three CISD representatives under Article V, ' paragraph 2; and, (6) insert the words to both parties' mutual satisfaction after the words "unable to resolve the Dispute" under Article X, second and third paragraph. Motion: Councilmember Standerfer Second: Councilmember Fawks Ayes: Councilmembers DuPre, Fawks, Kendall, Potter, Standerfer, and Mayor Stacy Nays: none Approved: 6-0 (Councilmember Shankland was not present during the vote) ' Councilmember DuPre commented that she voted in favor of the agreement only after considering the informal polling of all the SPDC members whereby they stated that they are not concerned with receiving any reimbursement on the ' $1.25 million contributed by SPDC. Motion was made to approve the Joint Use Agreement as motioned by Councilmember Greg Standerfer. Motion: Trustee Lawrence ' Second: Trustee Harold Ayes: Trustees Eden, Harold, Lawrence, Miltenberger, Parsons, Strickland, and President Glover ' Nays: none Approved: 7-0 CISD Board asked whether or not the District's attorney had reviewed the agreement. Superintendent Ted Gillum commented that the attorney did have a few comments, but nothing that would change the intent of the agreement. He t commented that if there were questions, either the CISD or City staffs could work through those with the attorneys. Trustee Harold commented that he is happy with the agreement but with the understanding that it might need to be renegotiated at some future point ' depending on the effects of Chapter 41 on the District. If things get tough, the School Board may have to decide to close the natatorium and turn operations over to the City. Councilmember Standerfer commented that the agreement could be negotiated by both parties at that time, but he wanted everyone to understand that CISD and the City have committed to operating for the term of the agreement - the days and times as set forth in the agreement. Mr. Harold ' UNOFFICIAL MINUTES OF JOINT CISD AND CITY OF SOUTHLAKE MEETING, APRIL 11, 2001, PAGE 3 OF 4 \(b-vt wanted it also noted that it is not the intent of the agreement to give the entire facility to the City 50% of the time - it's for the City to be able to use at least part of the the facility 50 % of the time. Agenda Item No. 5, Discussion on Joint Use Projects. (Councilmember Shankland arrived for the meeting at this time.) Mayor Stacy updated the Board about the Stars Center and commented that the 3-acre tract (owned by CISD at the new stadium site and designated as a future parking lot) might be a good site for the Center. President Glover commented that once the City worked through some of the issues, CISD could look into how they might get involved. He suggested that this would be a good topic to consider as they get ready for the next bond election later this year. Discussions were also held concerning the use of CISD tennis courts during the day, needs of the Lacrosse Association, repair of lighting at the school site at North Carroll Avenue and Dove Road, and sponsoring an adult Special Olympics at the new stadium. All agreed that these would be good topics to include on the Joint Use Committee's agenda. Agenda Item No. 6, Adjournment. It was agreed that more joint meetings needed to be held - possibly on a regular basis at least twice a year. There being no further business to discuss, the meeting was adjourned at 10:40 p.m. Mayor Rick Stacy ATTEST: Acting City Secretary Kim Bush UNOFFICIAL MINUTES OF JOINT CISD AND CITY OF SOUTHLAKE MEETING, APRIL 11, 2001, PAGE 4 OF 4 City of Southlake, Texas r MEMORANDUM April 20, 2001 TO: Kevin Hugman, Director of Community Services FROM: Steve Polasek, Deputy Director of Community Services SUBJECT: Contract for professional services with Brinkley Sargent Architects for the Recreation Center Action Requested: SPDC approval to enter into a contract for professional services with Brinkley Sargent Architects for the Recreation Center. Background Information: The Teen Center Coordination Committee was established in 1998 in an effort to gather information and collect input relating to the development of a Southlake Teen Center. During that time the Committee was actively involved in defining the scope of the teen center project and working with the young adults in our community on the facility concept. In May of 1999, a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) was sent out to eight local architectural firms with experience in the design and construction of park and recreational facilities, specifically recreation centers. Five firms responded and their qualifications were reviewed by staff and interested members of the Teen Center Design Committee. The firms were considered based on the following: • Overall experience and ability to perform the services requested within the time frame given. • Experience of the firm in regards to the design and operation of recreation centers, activity centers, and/or related facilities. Ability to display creative proficiency within the concept design while still addressing basic operating concerns and budget constraints. Experience working with public groups, city officials, and city staff. Brinkley Sargent Architects of Dallas was determined to be the organization best suited for the Teen Center project based on their experience in recreation center design, as well as their experience in developing "Enterprise Plans" for proposed recreation centers to include needs analysis, facility program, conceptual development, and cost analysis. They are a twenty-five year old firm specializing in recreational, sports, and public architecture. Brinkley Sargent has completed design work on over fifteen recreation centers in the '.� " Kevin Hugman, Director of Community Services April 20, 2001 Page 2 past five years including the Plano Aquatic and Recreation Center, Coppel Aquatic and Recreation Center, and the Lee Park Recreation Center in Irving. Staff contacted six local municipalities and all indicated that they were very satisfied with the work provided by Brinkley Sargent and would use them again on future projects. Although it was later determined that a recreation center would better suit the overall needs of the community as compared to a teen center, it should be noted that the architectural qualification review process was based on recreation center design experience. As a result, Brinkley Sargent Architects remains the recommended choice to design the new facility. Financial Considerations: Funding in the amount of $550,000 for the Recreation Center design is identified in FY2000/01 of the SPDC Capital Improvements Plan (CIP). Construction funding of $5,700,000 is identified in the SPDC Capital Improvements Program and also anticipates a $750,000 Texas Parks and Wildlife grant. Therefore, assuming an award of grant the proposed agreement is based on a construction budget of $6,125,000, plus $281,500 construction contingency, for a total project construction budget of $6,406,500. Total fees associated with professional services for the Recreation Center enterprise plan, site conceptual plan, architectural design, and construction administration are not anticipated to exceed $593,500 (contract summary below) or 9.7 % of the construction budget. The additional $43,500 for professional services is available in FY 2001/02 for construction ($700,000), and would result in a slight reduction in the proposed project construction contingency as designated above. Enterprise Plan $25,000 Basic Architectural Services $429,000 - Schematic Design - Design Development - Construction Documents - Bidding and Negotiating Construction Administration $107,000 Sub -Total $561,000 Reimbursables not to exceed $32,500 - Geotechnical Investigation - Printing and Delivery Costs - State Licensing and Review Fees EW TOTAL $593,500 Kevin Hugman, Director of Community Services April 20, 2001 Page 3 Citizen Input/ i1 Board Review: The Parks and Recreation Board recommended the selection of Brinkley Sargent Architects at their April 9, 2001 meeting. Legal Review: The City Attorney has reviewed the proposed agreement and their comments have been incorporated. Alternatives: Alternatives include the following: Rejection of Brinkley Sargent Architects and request staff start the review and selection process over. Supporting Documents: Supporting documents include the following: ,, • Draft agreement with Brinkley Sargent Architects. • Architectural qualifications of Brinkley Sargent Architects. Staff Recommendation: SPDC approval to enter into an agreement with Brinkley Sargent Architects ,,,, for professional services for the Recreation Center enterprise plan, site conceptual plan, architectural design, and construction administration for an amount not to exceed $593,500. mp 10 ;-tg�, 4 g KAM ® R, 9N N, Mu Olt�s - 'S V It -I P, WE Z, WAI r; i gar W, -M, v, , 406 4 Want WJ Not j A goat WK ...... .... P, �M iv 'k, , ti� wool A U5, "MM04, ANA Q�ii "n the xv, Ou Aw Altos, 11j, 1 pq RE W wbi, 4 1,00 XMIX, AST, tog 24 iow my ism a e v his }, � ry` 1 v a +a� Yj w Iij yy F S� c� �mgmo � L •� �� :F as �: � e ems. ,� z �F . � rtw i m� x� Y „�`:� � �� tg� s �"� � ��. �. s «' �`� - v s;{ t xkr''-rvsk�'� *"�:°ap�w s >, s " r 4�5, Vf a 4 ks '+- 6 - `.:: 'z 3 2 r fc xr'r 3•r k ` "°., -,�,� F J j' Y i'a."*�'' , '#?" 1 7 a. aya.,R Y 'Ala gn �' —yr r*f. Iry �;0.5 aME Ty0-11 * )v a "Aa` g - 3 5 a, pW,p r gg __ P '°" 7zt % '5, 0 ok - 3 dw #3,,., zA i' e IV, T� . s�.�#�`a �. k �" '.@ � ,��T'A�K , .� wf � G yC .$• +*q' .y�yi W�'� arc ,..i` s.`'iP�4�� s`ke 5tr, ,g '' #a`a',F a 9°5" �,p#",z'a' a3L3 t-: 1 ?`l� } 1q gi" '✓".� 'p2-i4 +3 A f +% vt sr r xrX�*tYe� �s 4i �..��si i° :�.>•x: rx s a x a, ��'` �� q � Sky on s ;. t a s An ORIN, r IS lot 4 � i �, r � . i a ��, .;� y. K '`� -. � '� •� r q -:y ,. 7c'.r`ckfi s."' �' 4 � � t1 s - ✓ r Y a. , � § a � �� $� � s �"'C � ° �»#-� : � 3J� � ��€ }'�s"s' wfs 0. �$ t wx�i i r # ,�,� # :� * , 11VVo MY ar c, ze*f' SMt. Known s .�"r. •.s� $"'., ', 'F'+A.c�»s�` o?`r .. 4+`�l'xa '•}°` AS I �, --g r s" POP ` Vrl f Ma x Lp G` q ? .a s# .a t mi x y ; r�' 1172 ja pp, �""ki - ',.y .r z �"Y +lh. l ; J. �- Zx $v,• #. �'�„�?�iE' '#i � 1 � �.t �, 8 A .� %'d.'- 'r. 4a � r Q5 1K1171JAY IM jItil qp- t } 3 3 H �Y.x-rr S ! ai �,"y� .�`x; �� _ .. _ . 7",'t�':, . _ ,. r�o> �.. _ _ �., .... � _ _.,� Ya .+,... nt �.ar s.�., xa.•v 5 . ,a2% �r ' � ,.a�.a..'�vu.1P'�� . t q�, f toy ty Who:r Q2 PO T VMS dry,. m£ a tea° n WAI ,,;`" Y t 4 k UalE.�� S c a +t Lfi y ri«5 AMIN '�n*�''4 �d",� ," £ -� _ " ,o -.. x t fi !a 3 w EMU - pp.,Q'�.�,a.-. nor�i �` s x., b x c�^` �-`� ��=7 r.3� > s . � a `�,� . � � "`` Pr •r � `L � �i xxa ,i ma's='�',�m8 5: 3 r �i3 tl ,s; s W10 INE xD 4 -17 4 a M r 1, xW te .ntd.*° t, �{,a Sw ,..,t� " 4 $`S ,x. •' a' c �rz�a § s e x 7.r.'sx WOM .MZIN 3x - - s xa `?`' 3 >* x ,,, ,2 y �;r-3v�' a'i53:', r� .r y A'T v `-✓z," szY' s4 Ar log; wo i x cfl „ t, - �, .. :.•ai. �' , �t'w� g=�' �., � �F�' r ��,� e , t�.� .��+�e'. �a tip" "kt �� tc ffive'�' �,.;, �-�. ��.#�' a ' " t 114W a WT IVAna R 1 15M U"A I -, NO -4j.4 04 A V� two YJ, IVA_ NEW Is III out VP 0 Pg- MO ................. K �Aiw "IP �DV 4153 b �; WNW_ MUM ga, VMS A saz2'3 LOO, "Ov 4 "Ke W St& � 41 , Wpg, Iz 'f w 1p rg %ky04 oar", It pizz,nk 14 n A j No-, . . I � �., , ---. - _,k_ - -, n,� � MA Pot OWN ;", 15 �vz_S�M !Awvt�: M BMW 0, ........ --- yq=v WWI 74 NOW 51 `Tv 7 IM! I— i M-Y.i�.,move", r. .', a,�'at 3 � s < M0,1 � ��UP �� &fi VTONNIM! s '. 3 s' 1 Y-, ;' t.; ds '# z � �.'''�x `�.h�n-� ka.. c, -;�. .9".-, "� '✓r�r4v 6" i# `f " s =d �. xk air?Nv w w Y %t"' � "E � �% ,�'�.,�,�,� ,� ;x,rF,` ,e�.. t.��'dR i" ��,�.�: '� a.t„ �:•1 'aft r`still, z. _ 'gym.& �� x � m�'i. �' { h.:a s•-max!'.. ey z4 �?". FAp �s TAT X hr -i s^�� g• ^" iXs gj rpm 9 r 4 a .v^ � SI ,g�'�4t�� 11.1 w O i ' t 4 * a > 3' ``� { '3 'A oo �# �'IS tt� moo a. i f� .Ctikypr„FCEk� ITT-" y<� 3� $ e IN Ail 41 s �5� a � _ g«'Xc�'�'§��k '� x*v..: ' *i a Onc, COIN i `r",: • : G�,,. x �y v} ice' ¢ �a,�� 3t `.' i 9 t - f'�y' SIR, . #� t zoom" Wq r Ab, n;rg a 'S' y x # 2, is P eF - n e}xc �" s , a 9 'R1 af;k � ��y"�t � � *' was Wrap c n A i i�t � �d qW -no Njpk c � _P1 Mono,pv fix a a ..'iwW:Ea-.�'a LEI"�. , fe 3 W17 1 V1 T Awl"_ 5 j, .am je rw' Q1.7s NzQaM"">_— 71K% X�vyev sell l_Q tit q 14 �64 a, WE Nx 74 qq%-;W --did d "g, t 3!mp� URN' AS a � *eR Awl 1, 4bi PI Of. moo my 1, nowww? put PEE Vxk 4W Amr MANY` 0_ _ , U :_ " � , � ,�7 4 •own -OF �5-7 "Wxx 'A pA;rr m I " Ism" 41" aa R.Im T-T N, A A, ----- Vow ��R R Zg; sea ty zlte gwr W Rio 6113 vl;t MIN SIX 15-f 41 Mtag 1 WL710 7 T*!I, Alf, I NN A Wt, i`�w,R N, W m 2- - S 2 sac qqp qWv jt� I r7 W, u'rAnn 579 Ion - - - - - - - - - - Kk Mani"' Lsks t- L April 6, 2001 Steve Polasek City of Southlake 400 N. White Chapel Southlake, TX 76902 RE: Development of a Community Recreation Center Dear Mr. Polasek: BRINKLEY SARGENT ARCHITECTS We are pleased to share with the City of Southlake the qualifications of Brinkley Sargent Architects. It appears that our firm is uniquely positioned to help the City of Southlake identify the needs and demands of a community recreation center and design a facility that incorporates all the elements required to make it a successful project. Brinkley Sargent Architects is a twenty-five year old Dallas based firm that has developed recreational projects for many cities in the Southwest. Some of the strengths of this team include: ➢ Experience with municipalities — Brinkley Sargent Architects has completed over ninety successful public projects. ➢ Experience with Operational and Performance of Facilities — We have completed numerous studies that predict expenses and revenues for facilities including NRH2O Waterpark, City of Plano Recreation and Aquatic Center, Coppell Recreation and Aquatic Center, Rowlett Aquatic Park, and Allen Natatorium. We know how to develop a business plan for your specific project that will arm you with accurate information to make informed decisions. ➢ Experience with Recreation Projects — Brinkley Sargent Architects has completed over 15 recreational projects of various types. We understand the programming and design requirements for recreational facilities. ➢ Familiarity with this Region — We understand the demands of this region and how cities have responded to the same issues you are facing. We also understand the construction cost in this region with having four current projects in different phases in the Dallas / Ft. Worth Area. 5000 QUORUM ➢ Experience with Citizen Input — We are currently conducting the same survey process required with your project. The goal is to get accurate dependable SUITE L 2 3 information and allow the citizens to be a part of the process. DALLAS.T XAS 7524C TEL 972 - 96; - a9-0 FAX 972 - 9�'= - 9'31 6 C — ^ � A T, zas Cor po r Our team is qualified to provide all services required by this project. Feasibility Study Community Input Meetings Business plan for development including staffing description Design and Construction of Community Recreation facilities Our team possesses all the experience to lead you through the evaluation and implementation of a facility that responds to the city's needs. We are enthusiastic over the possibilities of assisting City of Southlake with the planning and design process. We hope our response accurately reflects our interest with this exciting project. Sincerely, Dwayne Brinkley, AIA DMB/kg s i± FIRM PROFILE Brinkley Sargent Architects is a25 year-oldDallas based firm specializingin the development Brinkley Sargent Architects of public facilities. This specialization has included both recreational/ sports and public 5000 Quorum Drive, Suite 123 safety project ranging up to $15 million in size. Principals in Brinkley Sargent have directed Dallas, Texas 75240 projects up to $50 million in project size. 972.960.9970972.960.9751 Fax One factor that sets Brinkley Sargent apart from other firms is its ability to understand the needs of the client and bring together the correct team to address those unique concerns. An outgrowth of that ability to think 'but -of -the -box" is the development of the expertise in Aquatic Business Plan developments. There was a need, and we sought to fill that need with a team of experts. We have now established ourselves as a leader in this unique area of aquatic planning. Successful projects using this business tool include North Richland Hills NRH2O Waterpark, Oak Point Recreation and Aquatic Center, Allen Natatorium, and Coppell Recreation and Aquatic Center. Having a large partofour work in the public sector, our interaction generally involves groups such as advisory boards, special interest groups, neighborhood associations, instructors, public corporation (4B) boards, councils, school boards, park boards and other citizens. Our approach to working with these groups encourages participation and interaction in a focused manner. Each meeting has a purpose and everyone is encouraged to expand their horizon and help conceive of new and innovative design possibilities. To help focus and guide this process, BSA is committed to providing a principal to lead the team. To this end, a "project delivery" process has been developed to ensure quality control from start to finish. This process works through a framework of controls at each phase of the project as well as phase by phase review by the client. The concept behind these technical controls is to allow maximum freedom of design on each project. Because of this ability, Brinkley Sargent Architects has been able to establish a proven track record with both governmental and private clients for creative designs that are within budget and on time. Brinkley Sargent Architects is fully computerized, uti I izing the latest in software and hardware technology. We utilize design software that allows 3-D imaging for desi-n and AutoCAD Release 14 for document production. Two in-house Hewlett Packard plotters, one with color capabilities, expedite our quality control process. This commitment to technology has provided our clients with a flexible building, managementtool that has many applications. The firm has been fortunate to be honored for design excellence not only by its peers but also by user groups such as Athletic Business and Texas Parks and Recreation Department. I (, C_ - 1-b Email 4info@brinkleysargent.com www.brinkleysargent.com Date oflncorporation: 1979 A Texas Corporation C i t M Mr. Brinkley serves as Project Management Principal for Brinkley Sargent Architects. In addition to his over 25 years of extensive design experience, Mr. Brinkley also possesses over 11 years of experience in a project management and t construction management role. This depth of experience has provided him a unique perspective into the components of a successful project. His experience ranges from design of recreational facilities to master planning of all city departments. He understands the architect's role in monitoring construction budgets and is sensitive; to issues that may arise during the various stages of the project. Mr. Brinkley has experience on a broad range of building types ranging from a world class Coppel Recreation Center velodrome (bicycle racing track), Hospital Addition and Master Plan, Recreation Facilities, 153-acre Mixed Use Land Development, and Corporate Headquarters. He lead the design effort in the development of one of the largest municipally operated waterparks in the United States at North Richland Hills. He has taken a leadership role in combining leisure and competitive aquatic elements for cutting edge facilities in the southwest. Oak Point Center He has also completed enterprise plans (feasibility studies) for several recreation facilities. These business plans estimate the costs of running a facility as well as estimated incomes depending on the elements planned for the facility. Because he is also a designer of these facilities accurate project development costs can be forecasted for the entire project. Certification by National Council of Architectural Registration Board (NCARB) means Mr. Brinkley can be a Registered Architect in all 50 states along with his Texas Registration. Professional associations include the American Institute of Architects and the Health and Management Subcommittee for AIA. He graduated from Oklahoma State University with Honors with a Bachelor of Architecture Degree. He has also presented planning seminars at the Texas Municipal League Convention. He is an active participant of the executive YMCA Board in Plano. L:o C- - r2A RESUME Dwayne M. Brinkley, AIA Principal Brinkley Sargent Architects Years with Firm: 25 TBAE #: 5518 A selection of recreational facilities are: Garland Senior Center Garland, Texas Mustang Recreation and Aquatic Center Mustang, Oklahoma Oak Point Center Plano, Texas Coppell Aquatic & Recreation Center Coppell, Texas Lee Park Recreation Center Irving, Texas Keller Natatorium Keller. Texas Allen Natatorium Allen, Texas Rowlett Aquatic Park Rowlett, Texas McKinney Aquatic Masterplan McKinney, Texas Lakeway Pool Study Lakeway, Texas McKinney Aquatic Study McKinney, Texas Allen Aquatic Study Allen, Texas Superdrome in Frisco in cooperation with Collin County Community College Frisco, Texas Frito-LayiPepsi Youth Ballpark Plano, Texas Russell Creek YMCA & Pool Plano, Texas Legacy YMCA & Pool Plano, Texas Moseley Pool & Park DeSoto, Texas North Richland Hills Aquatic Park (NRH20) North Richland Hills, Texas LJ EXPERIENCE AND REFERENCES BRINKLEY SARGENT ARCHITECT Please see Project profiles for complete description and images of these projects NRHZO Family Waterpark A 23 acre outdoor family waterpark with new elements added yearly since Team Members with BSA: opening. Services provided included: Business Plan (which included feasibility, CounsilmanlHunsaker programming, staffing analysis and profit and loss), Design and Construction Administration. Mr. Bill Thornton Superintendent of Parks City of North Richland Hills 6720 NE Loop 820 North Richland Hills, Texas 76180 817-581-5 735 Piano Aquatic and Recreation Center (Oakpoint) A 87,000 SF recreation and aquatic center with gymnasium, gymnastics center, classrooms, Indoor 50 meter competition pool, indoor leisure water and outdoor leisure water. Services provided included: Business Plan (which included feasibility, programming, staffing analysis and profit and loss), Design and Construction Administration. Mr. Robin Reeves City of Plano Parks & Recreation Department P.O. Box 860358 Plano, Texas 75086-0358 972-461-7250 Team Members with BSA: Counsilman/Hunsaker Coppell Recreation and Aquatic Center Team :i,lembers with BSA: A 38,000 SF recreation and aquatic center with gymnasium, classrooms, indoor Counsilman/Hunsaker leisure/lap water and outdoor leisure/lap water. Services provided included: Business Plan (which included feasibility, programming, staffing analysis and profit and loss), Design and Construction Administration. Mr. Gary Sims Department of Leisure Services City of Coppell P.O. Box 478 Coppell, Texas 75019 972-462-0022 L t- Rowlett Family Waterpark This outdoor family waterpark was designed to complement an existing community center. Services provided included: Business Plan (which included feasibility, programming, staffing analysis and profit and loss), Design and Construction Administration. Mr Jim Bowlin Director of Parks and Recreation City of Rowlett P.O. Box 99 Rowlett, Texas 75030 972-412-6146 EXPERIENCE AND REFERENCES BRINKLEY SARGENT ARCHITECT Team Members with BSA: Counsilman/Hunsaker Allen Natatorium This 48,000 SF facility, will have indoor competition and leisure water for use by Team Alembers with BS.4 the city and the school district. Services provided included: Business Plan Counsilman/Hunsaker (which included feasibility, programming, staffing analysis and profit and loss), Design and Construction Administration. Mr. Don Horton Director of Parks and Recreation City of Allen One Butler Circle Allen, Texas 75013 972-727-0100 McKinney Aquatic Park Master Plan Team Alembers with BS.4 This 20 acre plus development is part of 100 acre city park. Elements of master CounsilmanlHunsaker plan included 50,000 SF recreation center, and $10412,000,000 multi -phased water park. The development of Phase I is planned for 2002 opening. A business park plan will be developed within the next year. Iv1r. Larry Offerdahl Director of Parks and Recreation City of McKinney 130 South Chestnut Street McKinney, Texas 75069 972-562-6080 (� G- 2.. io Arlington Public SafetyBuilding NationalAIA Committee on Architecture for Justice, 1992 Bluitt-Flowers Health Center Dallas AIA Committee on Health, 1992 Women 's Breast and Diagnostic Center Presbyterian Hospital of Dallas Texas Society ofArchitects- Architecture for Health Committee, 1992 South East Dallas Police Station Arational.414 Committee on Architecture forJustice, 1993 c- d IA Paris Regional Cancer Center North Texas Chapter of the Associated Builders and Contractors.,1993 West Texas Cancer Center Texas Downtown Association, 1994 Plano Justice Center Yaliona1,41,4 Committee on Architecture forJustice, 1994 Longview Cancer Center Longview News -Journal Readers Choice Awards, 1994 McCuistion Women 's Pavilion, Paris, Texas Association of General Contractors - Dallas, 1995 McCuistion Women 's Pavilion - Paris, Texas Association of Builders and Contractors - Dallas, 1995 Longview Cancer Center - Longview, Texas Modern Healthcare Magazine and National AIA Committee on Architecture for Health, 1995 South Texas Cancer Center - Brownsville, Texas Association of General Contractors - Austin, 1995 Longview Cancer Center - Longview, Texas Texas Architecture for Health Design Awards GoldAward, 1996 Medical City of Dallas, T.O.P.A. Oncology Center -Dallas, Texas Texas Architecture for Health Design Awards Bronze Award, 1996 NRH20 Water Park - North Richland Hills, Texas TerasRecreation and Park Society, Inc. Park Design Excellence Award, 1996 NRH20 Water Park - North Richland Hills, Texas Athletic Business National Award of Merit, 1996 �� (_- 'Iti AWARDS C PUBLICATIONS Arlington Public SafetyBuilding North RichlandHillsAquaticCenter NationalAIA Water Parks Committee on Architecture for Justice Athletic Business News Justice Facilities Review 1992-93 9-I995, 6-I996 South East Dallas Police Station Longview Cancer Center NationalAIA Award Winning Projects Committee on Architecture for Justice Modern Healthcare Justice Facilities Review 11-1995 1993-94 South East Dallas Police Station Longview Cancer Center PublicBuildings Project Survey TexasArchilect Texas Architect 3, 4-1993 112-1996 Bluitt-Flowers Health Center Longview Cancer Center Healthcare Design Award Winning Projects Texas Architect Texas Architect 5,'6-1993 516-1996 L Aw Plano Justice Center Medical City of Dallas, Oncology Center NationalAIA Award Winning Projects Committee on Architecture for Justice TexasArehitect Justice Facilities Review 516-1996 1994-95 t L+ BRINKLEY SARGENT ARCHITECTS This exciting project is being developed _ for the City of Plano's growing need I. for Aquatic Programs. We developed an enterprise plan which estimated construction cost as well as operational -- - - Fi costs and expected revenues. We 4 conducted numerous public meetings a, to gather input on user groups of the facility before we established a program of spaces. Based upon the programmed spaces we developed a proposed design and cost estimate for that design. We further developed projected revenues of the facility as well as operational costs including staffing. This enabled the City to determine how they could best operate the facility at a minimal cost. The Facility will contain both Aquatic and Recreational components. The Aquatic side includes an indoor 50 meter pool as well as a 2000 SF recreational pool. Outside we are developing a 6000 SF leisure pool with access between the indoor and outdoor areas. The Recreational side will include a double gym, gymnastics room, weight room, racquetball courts, children's activity room and classrooms, and meeting rooms. CAMA V✓ `R PROJECT PROFILE Plano Aquatic and Recreation Center Plano, Texas Role: Architecture Site Masterplan Planning Programming Financial Feasibility Furniture, Furnishings and Loose Equipment Specifications Construction Administration Project Data: Indoor 50 Meter Pool and Recreation Pool Outdoor Leisure Pool Recreation Center with Gymnasium. Track, Racquetball, Gymnastics, Weight and Classroom Activity Areas Date Completed: April. 2000 Estimated Dollar Value at Completion: $12.7 million Owner: City of Plano P.O. Box 860358 Plano, Texas 75086-0358 Contact: Mr. Robin Reeves Head of Park Planning Parks and Recreation 1409 Avenue K Plano, Texas 75086 972.578.7250 5000 QCOk C%i S L`!TE i DAL L A S TEXAS ."_-. 9 '12 y60 9970 FAX 9' ` - 960 - 475 E Si A ; L imfo@hrinklevsargen(.,IIM "� � � }� ,t t BRINKLEY SARGENT ARCHITECTS ADDITIONAL IMAGES Plano Aquatic and Recreation Center Plano, Texas 5000 QUORUM SUITE 'i 21 DALLAS. TEXAS '5240 9?2-960 9970 FAX 9',=-960 975: 4in Eo@ bri nk ley sareent..om BRINKLEY SARGENT ARCHITECTS L-411110e r This project was developed for the growing City of Coppell to meet the citizen interest for more recreation facilities within their city. Services included developing estimated cost versus revenue projections as well as the traditional architectural role of design. The facility contains both family aquatic and traditional recreation center components in one facility. It was sited adjacent to a 100 acre park near Town Center. H PROJECT PROFILE Coppell Aquatic and Recreation Center Coppell, Texas Role: Enterprise Plan Architecture Site Masterplan Planning Programming Financial Feasibility Furniture, Furnishings and Loose Equipment Specifications Construction Administration Project Data: Indoor Leisure/Lap Pool and Outdoor Leisure Pool Recreation Center with Gymnasium. Track, Cardiovascular Area and Classroom Activity Areas Date Completed: May, 2000 Cost: $7.5 mil Owner: City of Coppell 255 Parkway Blvd. Coppell, Texas 75019 Contact(s): Mr. Gary Sims Director of Leisure Services 255 Parkway Blvd. Coppell, Texas 75019 972.304.3565 'Ooo QL ORi;SI SL!r. ;z' UALL �S r E X A S -_ 972-4b0-99'6 FAX 9"? - 95r. u75: E M A I L amfor brinhie7sarg:nt..ona is BRINKLEY SARGENT ARCHITECTS ADDITIONAL IMAGES Coppell Aquatic and Recreation Center Coppell, Texas 2Ooo QUORUM SLITS t_+ DALLAS.TEXAS 752.4L 9 ' 2 - 960 9970 FAX 972 - 960 975: dinfO@brinkleysargent.c-om BRINKLEY SARGENT ARCHITECTS .".«..•` Y�es� Binding [Ir:atmn Hd-A i. C?,C:'Y TOW", CE'4TER -- I Buxlo, 5,r4;-nt AR(:,I.iCf This YMCA facility is being placed in a corporate environment and is more suited to adult activities. Areas provided include pool, gymnasium, cardiovascular area, climbing wall, racquetball courts, aerobics room and juice bar. This facility will be part of a planned urban community and will have shared use with a nearby hotel. PR O J E C T P R O F I LE Legacy Park YMCA Plano, Texas Role: Architecture Design Construction Site Masterplan Planning Programming Financial Feasibility Furniture, Furnishings and Loose Equipment Specifications Construction Administration Project Data: Project Size: Est. Date Comple Cost: Owner: Plano YMCA 2601 Glencliff Plano, Texas 75075 Contact(s). Mr. Tony Shuman Executive Director Plano YMCA 2601 Glencliff Plano, Texas 75075 972-721-2501 25,000 S.F. 2000 $4,500,000 5000 QuoRCN SL iTE 1 _ DALLAS. IX AS 97_ - 960 - 9970 FAX 972 , 960 -v71 E St A 1 ?intoCSrakl.�sargen;.,,,., [a BRINKLEY SARGENT ARCHITECTS PROJECT PROF 1 LE Kk'S-EL '.R:lK PAKK Russell Creek YMCA Plano, Texas fi _ i rWtfMON. We developed a plan for a new YMCA to be located in the fast growing section of North Central Plano. This YMCA has indoor and outdoor pools, double gym, cardiovascular," weight room, racquetball courts, aerobics room, day care programming spaces and office areas. The plan was developed to provide for future growth of the Center in a planned manner. Role: Architecture Design Construction Site Masterplan Planning Programming Financial Feasibility Furniture, Furnishings and Loose Equipment Specifications Construction Administration Project Data: Project Size: 40,000 S.F. Est. Date Complete: 2002 Cost: $5,800,000 Owner: Plano YMCA 2601 Glencliff Plano, Texas 75075 Contact(s): Mr. Tony Shuman Executive Director Plano YMCA 2601 Glencliff Plano, Texas 75075 972-721-2501 5000 QUORL M SUITE i2? DALLAS. TEXAS 5210 972 - 960 - 9970 FAX 972 960 - 975 E M .A I L dinf'o@bnnkleysargenl.com L� t- BRINKLEY SARGENT ARCHITECTS The concept was to develop an open town square with a mix of public and commercial development around it. Nearby are areas for multi -family housing in a more urban design with parking lots hidden behind the units. The centerpiece of this development would be the Community Center, which will include a recreation center, library, senior center and meeting/reception space. Exterior recreation areas for family aquatics and a four-plex tournament level softball complex. t(Sc- - ��15 PROJECT PROF 1 LE Mustang Community Center Mustang, Oklahoma Role: Needs Assessment Site Masterplan Furniture, Furnishings and Loose Equipment Specifications Construction Administration Project Data: Project Size: Date Completed: Construction Cost: Components: 57,000 SF 2001 $7,500,000 Community Center, Recreation, Senior Center Library, Meeting Rooms, Aquatics, Ball Fields Owner: City of Mustang 135 N. Mustang Road Mustang, Oklahoma 73064 Contact(s): Huey P. Long City Manager City of Mustang 135 N. Mustang Road Mustang, Oklahoma 73064 405-376-4521 5000 QUORUM SUITE 123 DALL.AS. TEXAS 75240 972 960-9970 FAX 9 7 - 9 b 0 975 i t- BRINKLEY SARGENT ARCHITECTS 1 —03-" �wi:qupose Room • • • _ ,/ Sw. f Oti. Oii �uxJn .� i._IY1 «r•n+. tK+M f I! i�'� onw� or ar. win - _ cart. This expansion to a "starter unit" in the fast growing section of McKinney will provide indoor aquatics, gymnasium, cardiovascular/weight room, and ex- panded babysitting. The site is elevated with ex- panded views to the west overlooking the Stonebridge Tennis and Beach Club. L(- - --%, �. PROJECT PROFILE McKinney YMCA McKinney, Texas Role: Architecture Design Construction Site Masterplan Planning Programming Financial Feasibility Furniture, Furnishings and Loose Equipment Specifications Construction Administration Project Data: Project Size: 25,000 S.F. Est. Date Complete: 2002 Cost: $3,500,000 Owner: Plano YMCA 2601 Glencliff Plano, Texas 75075 Contact(s): Mr. Tony Shuman Executive Director Plano YMCA 2601 Glencliff Plano, Texas 75075 972-721-2501 soon QUORL.1I SUITE 123 DALLAS. TEXAS '5240 9 12 - 960 - 9970 FAX 9-2 460-975 E M A I L linio@hrinkleysargent.rom City of Southlake, Texas MEMORANDUM April 18, 2001 TO: Kevin Hugman, Director of Community Services FROM: Steve Polasek, Deputy Director of Community Services SUBJECT: Allocation of additional funding for Softball Complex at Bicentennial Park Action Requested: SPDC consideration of allocating additional funds for softball complex at Bicentennial Park. Background Information: Funding in the amount of $1.1 million dollars was appropriated in the FY 2000/01 SPDC budget for the design and construction of a four field complex for the Southlake Girls Softball Association. As part of the Bicentennial Park master planning process, the fields are planned for the southwest corner of the park on a portion of the thirteen (13) acre tract abutting Shady Oaks. Subsequent to staff s estimates for the CIP budget process, the planning and engineering firm of Schrickel, Rollins and Associates performed a preliminary review of the site. This resulted in an estimate of well over $2 million for the full development of the project, which would include engineering, field development (earthwork, fencing, irrigation, lighting, hydromulch), restroom/concession building, a parking lot off of Shady Oaks, utilities, spectator area flatwork, and a pedestrian bridge across the existing drainage channel. Additional funding for exterior landscape development and site amenities (shade structures, decorative planters, mow strips under fence lines, bench seating walls, etc.) would further add to the cost of the project if pursued. Listed below is an estimated breakdown for these items: (Costs are estimates only and would require additional planning and engineering) ➢ Four girls softball fields with 200 foot foul lines ($1,100,000) Earthwork, fencing, backstops, skinned infield surface, fine graded top soil, irrigation system, turfgrass from seed, sharp cut-off sports lighting with 50 foot candle infield levels, utility company primary service transformers. ➢ Spectator Area ($300,000) Complete bleacher pad paving, entrance walks, plaza around restroom/concession building, small planter seat walls. ➢ Restroom/Concession/Storage Building ($300,000) Kevin Hugman, Director of Community Services April 18, 2001 Page 2 2,000 sf. enclosed space, architecturally compatible with surrounding neighborhood. No A/C or fire sprinklers. ➢ Parking Lot with entry from Shady Oaks ($350,000) Concrete parking lot with handicapped access, lighting, and islands/landscaping to meet City ordinances. 40 spaces per field x 4 fields = 160 spaces minimum. No storm sewer, grass or concrete lined swale to convey runoff to drainage. ➢ Utilities ($50,000) Sanitary sewer line, cleanouts and manhole connection to main line in drainage way. Tap and tie for domestic water for building and drinking fountain. Irrigation line connection to existing irrigation main. ➢ Pedestrian bridge across drainage way ($100,000) ➢ Landscape development ($100,000) Landscape ordinance requirements, turfgrass and irrigation for peripheral areas, and minimal signage. 11 ➢ Alternate for amenity items ($250,000) «r Overhead shade shelters for bleacher areas, concrete mow strips, kiosk, benches/seating areas, planters, entrance development. ➢ Construction Contingency (10 % of final budget) ➢ Professional Services (15% of final budget) Geotechnical investigation, professional design services, CA/CO, and contingency services. The overall cost based on the estimate from Schrickel, Rollins would be approximately $2.5 million. Several options are available in order to reduce the initial cost of the project and still provide for the current needs of the Southlake Girls Softball Association. (1) One option would be to contract with Schrickel, Rollins and Associates to provide a detailed conceptual design with cost estimates. This would allow for the project components to be reviewed in greater detail, scaled back where appropriate, and/or phased in over time. An appropriate construction budget can then be established based on an agreed upon scope of work. This option would cost approximately $7,500, would take approximately sixty (60) days to complete, and would allow for design development and construction drawings to proceed immediately following. (2) Another option, similar to that mentioned above, would be to conceptually design the facility as whole but only produce schematic and construction Kevin Hugman, Director of Community Services April 18, 2001 Page 3 drawings for those items that can be constructed within the existing budget. Essentially, build now what the budget will allow for and phase in the remaining project components over time. (3) Also for consideration would be delaying the project until such time as the project budget can be increased within the SPDC CIP to a suitable level. Presently, the SGSA has use of three fields at Bicentennial Park, as well as a restroom/concession facility, all of which are in relatively good condition. While this may not prove to be a popular option, the existing facilities could suffice based on the current participation levels. It should be noted, the existing facilities are not conducive for holding tournaments, do not promote growth within the organization, and allow for limited use by the older participants. (4) A final option would be to utilize the initial estimates provided by Schrickel, Rollins and Associates (included within this memo) to determine what components of the project should be pursued within the existing budget or whether to increase the budget based on an agreed upon scope of work. Essentially, this means establishing the budget and scope of the project based on the information available, bypassing a more detailed planning and cost estimate process. There is a risk involved in this option in that the estimates L40, are preliminary in nature and not based upon a more detailed conceptual plan. Financial Considerations: Funding in the amount of $1.1 million is available in the fiscal year 2000/01 SPDC budget for a softball complex at Bicentennial Park. Additional funding, to be determined, might be reallocated from within the CIP budget (Land Acquisition $750,000 and Bob Jones future improvements $550,000). Citizen Input/ Board Review: SPDC, Parks and Recreation Board, and citizen review of Bicentennial Park Master Plan (various meeting times and dates). Legal Review: Not Applicable. Alternatives: SPDC consideration of various options as presented and discussed. Supporting Documents: Supporting documents include the following items: ■ Bicentennial Park Master Plan ■ Approved SPDC Capital Improvements Plan E r rl� Kevin Hugman, Director of Community Services April 18, 2001 Page 4 Staff Recommendation: SPDC consideration of allocating additional funds for softball complex at Bicentennial Park. �'- t� -L\- 'P^181adn�l� a�l'�1 J � _y m II! �a = l �I 3 = 4 ©' SPDC Capital Improvements Plan (CIP) 2001-2003 Budgeted/lciuF1 t � FY 1999100 a FY 2000/01 FY 2001/02 FY 2002103 Carry Forward Balanced wr $2,385,750 $1,789,990 $350,790 Interest earnings $125,000 $175,000 $125,000 $175,000 Oper Fund Transfer $500,000 om - $241,000 $100,000 $100,000 Grant Proceeds $250,000 $500,000 $0 $0 Senior Lien Debt 5`b5 $4,400,000 LO $5,500,000 Total Proceeds $5,316,000 $225,000 $5,775,000 i � r Total Available Funds $3,842,000 $7,701,750 $2,014,990 $6,125,790 S Capital Expenditures_. Matching Funds $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 Joint Use $20,000 $20,000 $20,000 $20,000 Special Projects $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 Smith Park $50,000 $50,000 Continental Trails * $320,000 $32t)OaO ` Trailhead Improvements * $16,000 Capping Wells $20,000 $20,000 Bleachers * $11,000 1 t00U" Game Field Lighting * $200,000 tj, 05666' ure Center Imprvments asifil Signage ,, .: ' M $100,000 $10,000 Girls Softball Complex $1,100,000 Bob Jones Development $2,250,000 $200,000 $350,000 RR Building ($300,000)AN Well & Aeration ($150,000) Natatorium $500,000 $500,000 $250,000 Teen Center Survey * $10,000 Teen Center Construction $300,000 Land Acquisition $1,800,000 $775,000 Rec Center Planning $550,000 Rec Center Construction $700,000 $5,000,000 NEW ITEMS Bob Jones BleachersF -' $35,000 Bic. Park Volleyball Improv. $30,000 Baseball Warm-up Area $13,000 Concession Stand A/C units $18,000 Project Expenditures $2,897,000 11600,000( $5,621,000 $1,570,000 $5,770,000 Reserve (6%) F $290,760 $94,200 $346,200 '-tal Proceeds Less $945,000 $1,789,990 $350,790 $9,590 Commitments -Bold/italic -- projects underway SPDC-CIP 2001-03-appvd.xls Approved by City Council October 17, 2000 C SOUTHLAKE PARKS DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION '' 1/2% SALES TAX REPORT Actual Budget Actual Estimated (budget-est.) % 1999-00 2000-01 2000-01 2000-01 Difference Change October $155,259 $168,404 $196,516 $196,516 $28,112 16.69% November 150,165 162,810 161,845 161,845 (965) -0.69% December 125,632 136,241 162,616 162,616 26,375 17.10% January 176,808 191,776 259,882 259,882 68,106 53.55% February 135,803 147,228 151,056 151,056 3,828 3.29% March 120,289 130,448 144,692 144,692 14,244 13.02% April 182,799 198,169 198,169 - 0.00% May 148,210 160,812 160,812 - 0.00% June 150,396 163,210 163,210 - 0.00% July 190,883 206,959 206,959 - 0.00% August 153,898 167,005 167,005 - 0.00% September 151,760 164,608 164,608 - 0.00% $ 1,841,902 $ 1,997,670 $ 1,076,607 $ 2,137,370 $ 139,700 6.99% Estimated sales tax collections as a % compared to FY 1999-2000 16.04% I �A t 1 1 1 1 free 1 SOUTHLAKE PARK DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION Capital Projects Status Report April 18, 2001 Entrance Road Repair - F.Y.1998-99 Status: Numerous contractors have declined to submit a quote to repair the entrance road. Road repairs will be considered with the next phase of improvements to Bicentennial Park, pending completion of the revised Bicentennial Park Master Development Plan. Park Trail - FY.1998-99 Status: Remaining trails will be reviewed and addressed following the completion of the Bicentennial Park Master Development Plan. Phase I1 with TPWD Grant - Design - Phase II Contract Began: January 3, 2000 Consultant: Cheatham Associates Design Contract: $178,752.00 Status: The site plan was presented and reviewed by SPIN #1, the Parks and Recreation Board, and SPDC and City Council. The Texas Parks and Wildlife Department and the U.S. Army Corp of Engineers have approved completed plans. Construction has progressed very well despite above average precipitation. The pond is essentially complete. Construction is continuing on the amphitheater, balffields, playground, soccer restroom, and pavilion foundation. The vehicular areas, day camp facilities, and trails are scheduled to begin within the month. Nature Center Planning - Status: Recommended improvements developed by the architectural design firm of ' Schutts Magee Associates, Inc. will be presented to Park Board for approval in May. Primary utilities will be installed as part of Bob Jones construction. i Page 1 1 Noble Oaks Park - F.Y. 20004 Status: The perimeter 8-foot pathway is included in the construction plans for the widening of South Carroll Ave. A basic concept plan for the park is included in the approved Park, Recreation and Open Space Master Plan. No funding exists for improvements at this time. Koalaty Park - F.Y. 2000-01 Status: All requested improvements planned previously are complete. Royal and Annie Smith Park - F.Y.1999-00 ' Status: SPDC approved $50, 000 for planning and construction of initial park improvements in FY 1999-2000. The conceptual park plan will be addressed within the Parks, Recreation, and Open Space Master Plan update. 11 Lonesome Dove Park - F.Y. 1998-99 Status: All requirements of the developer's agreement are addressed. Pavilion lighting, irrigation and playground improvements are complete. SPIN and the Park and Recreation Board have accepted the loop walk improvements. Construction has begun with approximately a third of the sidewalk complete. "Chesapeake" Park -F.Y. 1999-2000 Consultant: Carter Burgess Inc. Matching Funds Approved: $35,794 Approved by Parks Board: February 14, 2000 Approved by SPDC: February 28, 2000 Status: Minor earthwork remains. Trail implementation began in early July with irrigation improvements to follow. Upon completion of the park, the developer will submit invoices for the approved items for reimbursement. Staff will coordinate the procurement and planting of the shade and ornamental trees in the park. "Sheltonwood" Park - F.Y. Status: A basic concept plan for the park is included in the approved Parr Recreation and Open Space Master Plan. No funding exists for improvements at this time. Page 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 Continental Boulevard Trail (White Chapel to Davis)-- F.Y.1998-99 Design - Phase II Contract Completed: Consultant: Dunaway Associates, Inc. Status: The designed 6-foot pathway is scheduled to begin within available areas not affected by road improvements. RecreationCenter - ' Status: City Council has approved the Timarron/Richards location for the Recreation Center. City staff will seek an architectural proposal from Brinkley Sargent Architects. N Southlake Baseball Association Approved by SPDC: Status: Bids have been received for proposed shade structures around the baseball backstops of fields #4, #S, #6, #7, #8, 99, and 410. Approval will be requested from SPDC and City Council this month. Installation could be expected within the month of June, 2001. Southlake Girls Softball Association Southlake Equestrian Association — ' Approved by SPDC: September 27,1999 / Approved by Park Board: September 13,1999 / March 19, 2001 Status: SPDC approved $10, 000 at the September 1999 meeting to install various ' items requested by the Southlake Equestrian Association. Completion of the northern parking lot is pending dry conditions. Page 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Northeast Tarrant Tennis — Approved by SPDC: September 27, 1999 Approved by Park Board: August 9, 1999 Status: NETT has issued a check to the City in the amount of $2, 500 towards their matching requirement. Funds have been used to purchase various components including trash receptacles, tables, chairs, watercooler stands, etc. Senior Tree Farm #1 - Approved by SPDC: January 16,1998 Approved by Park Board: December 8,1997 Status: Many of the trees will be planted in Chesapeake Park when ready. Senior Tree Farm #2 Approved by SPDC: Approved by Park Board: Status: All project requirements are completed. The Texas Forest Service grant money assisted in the planting offrve hundred and twenty-eight (528) trees at Senior Tree Farms #1 and #2, utilizing five hundred and eighty-three (583) volunteer hours. Senior Tree Farm #3 Approved by City Council: June 15,1999 Approved by Park Board: June 7,1999 Status: The Texas Forest Service Grant of $8, 600 ($4, 300 Grant Award with a $4,300 Required Match or in -kind services) began on October 1, 1999. The third phase has been established as an extension to Tree Farm #2 located at 275 Shady Oaks. Four hundred (400) saplings (Lacebark Elm, Cedar Elm, Shumard Oak) were planted on February 12, 2000. Joint -Use Equipment - Status: Available as needed. Signage for all Parks - Status: Available as needed. Page 4 Complete $ 2,817.85 Bicentennial Park Erosion Control. Complete $ 3,000.00 Tree Transplanting at Bob Jones Park. t Complete $14,604.00 Bicentennial Park Phase II Wrought Iron Fencing. Complete $ 499.00 Tennis Center Pro -Shop Window Tinting. Complete $ 459.00 Tennis Center Signage. ' Complete $ 1,300.00 Bob Jones Park Water Well Discharge Piping. Complete $ 1,657.50 Bicentennial Park Pond Aeration Electric ' Complete Complete $ 3,619.70 $ 1,000.00 Bicentennial Park Ballfield Concrete Improvements Senior Tree Farm Capital Items. Complete $ 6,000.00 Bicentennial Park Bermuda Hydro -mulch. Complete $3,356.83 Bicentennial Park Baseball Security Lighting ' Total $37,228.87 ' F.Y. 2001- In Progress $ 1,500.00 Bicentennial Park Trinity Well Repairs In Progress $ 7,200.00 Tree Transplanting Complete $ 3,486.00 Bicentennial Park Ballfield Irrigation #4, #5, and #10 Complete $ 1,500.00 Lonesome Dove Park Grubbing and Clearing ' In Progress $ 5,000.00 Bob Jones Roll -off Dumpsters Complete $ 1,600.00 Lonesome Dove Park Furniture Complete $ 5,000.00 Chesapeake Water Well Upgrade ' Total $25,286.00 1 Page 5 Bicentennial Park: ➢ Four girls softball fields with 200 foot foul lines $1,100,000 ➢ Spectator Area $300,000 ➢ Restroom/Concession/Storage Building $300,000 ➢ Parking Lot with entry from Shady Oaks $350,000 ➢ Utilities $50,000 ➢ Pedestrian bridge across drainage way $100,000 ➢ Landscape development $100,000 ➢ Professional Services (15% of final budget) $345,500 TOTAL: $296459500 Bob Jones Upgrade + (4) Practice ballfields Bob Jones Park Upgrade Requirements: ➢ Fencing $75,000 ➢ Irrigation $75,000 ➢ Concrete work $75,000 ➢ Bleachers $20,000 AW ➢ Scoreboards $30,000 ➢ Shade Structures $80,000 ➢ One -hundred fifty additional parking spaces $350,000 ➢ Expansion of restroom to include concessions $300,000 ➢ Lighting $200,000 ➢ ➢ Engineering Contingency $130,000 $75,000 Sub -Total $194109000 (4) Practice ballfields ➢ Grading/Earthwork $300,000 ➢ Backstops and minimal fencing $30,000 ➢ Restroom building with utilities $250,000 ➢ Hydromulch $60,000 ➢ Pedestrian Bridge $100,000 ➢ Concrete work $10,000 ➢ Professional Services (15% of final budget) $112,500 Sub -Total $8629500 TOTAL: $292729500 NAParks & Recreation\BOARDS\PKBOARD\MEMOS\01 memos\4-01\softball fields cost.doc r, 1! Project'-- Softball Fields Bicentennial Bob Jones Park Practice Fields Grant$'s Earthwork (C-27 Bid Info) 400,000 155,000 (400,000) 400,000 630,397 Skinned Infield Surface ballfield clay surface — outfield etc. Unknown Unknown (not incl) Unknown Fine Graded Top Soil (1) (1) (1) (incl)* Hydromulch 60,000 (1) 60,000 (1) 60,000 (1) (incl)* Backstops 100,000(2) 100,000(2) 100,000(2) Outfield Fencing (2) (2) (2) Players Benches Dugouts (incl)* Irrigation System 130,000 130,000 Sports Lighting 200,000 200,000 Transformer (TU Electric) Spectator Area 300,000 300,000 30,000 (incl)* Bleacher Pad Paving Concrete - part Entrance Walks Plaza and RR/Concess Bldg Small Planter Seat Walls Bleachers & Scoreboards $20/000/$30,000 $20,000/$30,000 Foul Poles $10,000 10,000 Restroom/Concess/Storage Bldg 300,000 200,000 300,000 2,000 sf encl space (to match N. BJP) (RR Only) + $220,000 (budg) Parking Lot w/ Entry 350,000 350,000 350,000 60,000 (incl)* Concrete Pkg. Lot 160 spaces 150 spaces 160 spaces Lighting Landscaping D I Project Bicentennial Bob Jones Park Practice Fields Grant $'s Utilities 50,000 50,000 50,000 Sanitary Sewer line & manhole Irrigation Line Connections Tap & Tie for Drinking Fountain TOTALS 19950,000 19600,000 1,2609000 Pedestrian Bridge 100,000 100,000 Landscape Development ? 100,000 100,000 100,000 Alternates 140,000 140,000 Overhead Shade — Bleachers 110,000 110,000 Concrete Mow Strips 33,600(BJP bid) 33,600 (bid 6 fields) 33,600 Kiosk Benches/Seating Areas Planters Entrance Development Batting Cages (2 desired) 20,000 each 20,000 each EL L- City Of Coppell Enterprise Plan For A Family Aquatic And Recreation Center By Brinkley Sargent Architects In Association With Counsilman / Hunsaker Associates June 1997 July 30, 1997 Page 1 Coppell Aquatic Center Minkley Sargent Architects & Counsilman/Hunsaker & Associates, 1997 ALL RIGHTS TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION 1: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 5 Option 1 5 Option 2 5 Option 3 5 Option 4 5 SECTION 2: INTRODUCTION 5 Background 5 Study Objectives 5 Mission Statement 5 SECTION 3: CONCEPTUAL FACILITY DESIGN 5 Site Selection 5 General Description 5 A General Overview of Options in Contemporary Aquatics 5 Option 1 5 Option 2 5 Option 3: 5 Option 4: 5 Issues Regarding Multiple Locations 5 SECTION 4: AREA AQUATIC, RECREATION, MEETING SPACE AND MULTI- PURPOSE PROVIDERS 5 Brickhouse Gym 5 Carrollton Rosemeade Aquatics and Recreation Center 5 Grapevine/Colleyville School District 5 4W City of Lewisville 5 Lewisville Natatorium 5 Lewisville YMCA 5 Northlake College 5 North Texas Gymnastics/Ballet 5 NRH2 0 5 City of Plano 5 Coppell Family YMCA 5 SECTION 5: EVALUATION OF POTENTIAL USER GROUPS 5 Analysis Of Target Market Area 5 Population By Distance 5 Incomes 5 Age Distribution 5 Local Demographic Analysis 5 WEATHER 5 ANALYSIS OF SPECIFIC USER GROUPS 5 SPECIFIC POTENTIAL USER GROUP PROFILES —AQUATICS 5 The City of Coppell Parks Department 5 Competitive Aquatics User Groups 5 USS Club Structure 5 Educational System Users 5 Lesson, Fitness and Recreational Users 5 Lesson Users 5 Fitness Users 5 Recreational Users 5 Aquatic Therapy Users 5 SPECIFIC POTENTIAL USER GROUP PROFILES —RECREATION CENTER 5 July 31, 1997 Page 2 Coppell Aquatic Center ©Brinkley Sargent Architects & Counsilman/Hunsaker & Associates, 1997 ALL RIGHTS , J, Aerobics / Fitness Users Basketball / Volleyball Users Dance / Gymnastics Users Education System Users Senior Citizens Industry Users SECTION 6: FACILITY MANAGEMENT Activity Programming Facility Programming Marketing Strategy Personnel Requirements SECTION 7: FINANCING OPTIONS SECTION 8: OPINION OF PROBABLE REVENUE Opinion of Attendance Levels Facility Capacity Market Penetration Special User Group Admission Swim Team Swim Lessons Aquanastics Therapy Sample Fee Structure Opinion of Revenue SECTION 9: OPINION OF PROBABLE EXPENSES Facility Staff Operations & Maintenance Insurance Repairs and Maintenance Commodities Utilities Sinking Fund SECTION 10: OPINION OF FACILITY OPERATIONS Cashflow Analysis APPENDIX A: GENERAL LIMITING CONDITIONS APPENDIX B: AQUATIC/RECREATION CENTER SITE EVALUATION SUMMARIES APPENDIX C: AQUATIC THERAPY PROGRAMMING ANALYSIS SECTION 1: INTRODUCTION SECTION 2: PERSPECTIVES ON WARM WATER AQUATIC PROGRAMS History of Warm Water Aquatic Programs Current Use of Aquatic Physical Therapy and Wellness Programs Future Trends in Aquatics and Wellness Special Considerations When Becoming a Physical Therapy Provider SECTION 3: AQUATIC PHYSICAL THERAPY PROGRAMS General Definitions Populations Served by Aquatic Physical Therapy Types of Evaluation and Treatment Programs Tests Procedures Modalities Billing Procedures Using Diagnosis and Treatment Codes Diagnosis Codes 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 July 31, 1997 Page 3 Coppell Aquatic Center ©Brinkley Sargent Architects 6 Counsilman/Hunsaker & Associates, 1997 ALL RIGHTS 11 Treatment Codes 5 SECTION 4: AQUATIC PHYSICAL THERAPY STAFFING AND SCHEDULING5 Staffing for Program Support 5 SECTION 5: ALTERNATIVES FOR AQUATIC PHYSICAL THERAPY MANAGEMENT 5 Self -Operate 5 Lease Arrangements 5 SECTION 6: AQUATIC WELLNESS PROGRAMS 5 General Definitions Populations Served 5 5 Program Descriptions 5 Sources for Participants 5 SECTION 7: AQUATIC WELLNESS PROGRAM SCHEDULING AND STAFFING 5 Program Scheduling 5 Program Staffing 5 Law 1, #*SW July u y 31 1997 Page 4 Coppell Aquatic Center Wfinkley Sargent Architects & Counsilman/Hunsaker & Associates, 1997 ALL RIGHTS H L 4W I L I SECTION 1: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Brinkley Sargent Architects in association with Counsilman/Hunsaker & Associates was retained by the Coppell Recreation Development Corporation (CRDC) to study the feasibility of developing a new community aquatic and recreational facility. Four concepts were developed, each examining to varying degrees possible components of these facilities, including indoor and outdoor aquatics, gymnasium and multi -use spaces, meeting, classroom and administrative spaces. Each option was analyzed and estimates were made for Project Costs, Attendance (recreation general admission and organized user groups), Operating Revenue, and Operating Expense. Below is a summary of the findings for each scheme. Option 1 Total Building Square Footage: 51,694 sq. ft. SPACES Regulation Gym 2 Practice Gyms Aerobics / Dance Room Fitness Room Classrooms Lounge Indoor Leisure Pool Indoor Fitness Pool "L mri W q `�JI■■ftI S N PON �" ImErFAM"111MMIlH IrIN11■■I HIM �-E Project Cost: $7,999,361 Elevated Running Track Multi -Purpose Room Offices Child Care Option 1 provides for development of a new community recreation and indoor aquatics center. The dry -side recreation facility provides for multi -purpose programming in a variety of spaces, including a 9,000 sq.-ft. gymnasium with elevated track, multi -purpose spaces of various sizes, fitness and dance/aerobics rooms, meeting and classrooms, child care space, and accommodations for staff, maintenance, storage, etc. The aquatics features July 30, 1997 Page 5 Coppell Aquatic Center ©Brinkley Sargent Architects & Counsilman/Hunsaker & Associates, 1997 ALL RIGHTS H include two separate year-round bodies of water: a 6-lane 25-yard fitness pool, and a �W 3,650-sq.-ft. leisure pool with zero beach entry and a variety of waterplay elements and features. Locker rooms are shared by both aquatics and dry -side patrons. Financial Performance Executive Summary L 4W r The above approach will provide the City of Coppell with a full -service year-round aquatic/recreation facility that will meet many of social, recreational and educational needs that have been expressed through surveys, public hearings and meetings. The below analysis allocates total revenues and expenses of the facility operation. Table 1 Option 1 Financial Operating Impact 1998 1999 2000 2001 Revenue $ 675,237 $ 736,290 $ 784,718 $ 801,860 Expense 758,235 777,191 796,620 816,536 Operating Cashflow (82,998) (40,900) (11,902) (14,675) Recapture Rate 89.05% 94.74% 98.51% 98.20% July 30, 1997 Page 6 Coppell Aquatic Center ©Brinkley Sargent Architects & Counsilman/Hunsaker & Associates, 1997 ALL RIGHTS ii L- Option 2 Total Building Square Footage: 44,431 sq. ft. & 17,447 sq. ft. outdoor aquatics Project Cost: $7,820,110 Regulation/dbl. Practice Gym Fitness Room Multi -Purpose Room Aerobics / Dance Room Lounge Offices Classrooms Outdoor Leisure Pool Child Care Indoor Leisure Pool Elevated Running Track lr----- 001 lri`Ir, Option 2 provides the same dry -side recreational multi -purpose facility as that featured in Option 1. The aquatics element has been modified, however, scaling down the indoor facility, which features a multi -purpose leisure pool for fitness, wellness, lesson and recreation programming, and an outdoor seasonal family leisure pool featuring a water slide, lily pad walks, and other participatory play features. July 30, 1997 Page 7 Coppell Aquatic Center Wfinkley Sargent Architects & Counsilman/Hunsaker & Associates, 1997 ALL RIGHTS Financial Performance Executive Summary Increased aquatic leisure programming for the summer months will result in increased revenue for the year, while expenses will experience a slight reduction largely due to decreased air handling requirements of the smaller indoor aquatics space. The below analysis allocates total revenues and expenses of the facility operation. Table 2 Option 2 Financial Operating Impact 1998 1999 2000 2001 Revenue $ 743,819 $ 807,537 $ 854,337 $ 873,989 Expense 735,614 754,005 772,855 792,176 Operating Cashflow 8,205 53,533 81,482 81,813 Recapture Rate 101.1% 107.1% 110.5% 110.3% July 30, 1997 Page 8 Coppell Aquatic Center Minkley Sargent Architects & CounsilmanMunsaker & Associates, 1997 ALL RIGHTS r Option 3 Total Building Square Footage: 50,794 sq. ft. Regulation Gym 2 Practice Gyms Aerobics / Dance Room Fitness Room Classrooms Lounge Indoor Fitness/Leisure Pool Elevated Running Track I Project Cost: $7,913,711 Multi -Purpose Room Offices Child Care ------------------------------------------- As in Option 2, the recreation center has not changed in Option 3. The aquatics component has once again been incorporated entirely indoors for year-round programming. In Option 3, fitness and leisure elements have been combined in a single body of water featuring a 4-lane 25-yard lap swimming area connected to the family leisure pool. Features of the leisure component include a water slide, current channel, zero beach entry and other popular elements. Financial Performance Executive Summary The revenue generated from Option 3 is less than Option 2 primarily because of the elimination of the outdoor aquatic component. The following analysis allocates total revenues and expenses of the facility operation. July 30, 1997 Page 9 Coppell Aquatic Center W inkley Sargent Architects & CounsilmanMunsaker & Associates, 1997 ALL RIGHTS Table 3 Option 3 Financial Operating Impact 1998 1999 2000 2001 Revenue $ 651,247 $ 712,300 $ 760,728 $ 777,870 Expense 763,193 782,273 801,830 821,875 Operating Cashflow (111,946) (69,972) (41,101) (44,005) Recapture Rate 85.3% 91.1% 94.9% 94.6% July 30, 1997 Page 10 Coppell Aquatic Center ©Brinkley Sargent Architects & CounsilmanlHunsaker& Associates, 1997 ALL RIGHTS N �1_ Option 4 Total Building Square Footage: 47,225 sq. ft. Project Cost: $7,000,000 Regulation/Dbl. Practice Gym Fitness Room Offices Aerobics / Dance Room Lounge Child Care Classrooms Elevated Running Track Multi -Purpose Room Indoor Competitive Pool Option 4 features a 25-meter by 25-yard competitive aquatic feature that will be able to accommodate age group swim team training, masters training, and with the addition of spectator seating be able to host regional aquatic events. There are no leisure specific design features included in this space. Financial Performance Executive Summary The revenue and expense projections are significantly different from previous options. This is a result of the different utility requirements and labor requirements to operate this space. Revenues are also impacted by the increase capacity for competitive programming and a decrease in usage by recreational swimmers. July 30, 1997 Page 11 Coppell Aquatic Center ©Brinkley Sargent Architects & Counsilman/Hunsaker & Associates, 1997 ALL RIGHTS C%, Table 4 Option 4 Financial Operating Impact 1998 1999 2000 2001 Revenue $ 575,819 $ 624,662 $ 663,404 $ 677,118 Expense 684,491 701,604 719,144 737,122 Operating Cashflow (108,672) (76,942) (55,740) (60,005) Recapture Rate 84.1% 89.0% 92.2% 91.9% July 30, 1997 Page 12 Coppell Aquatic Center ©Brinkley Sargent Architects & CounsilmanMunsaker & Associates, 1997 ALL RIGHTS