Press Alt + R to read the document text or Alt + P to download or print.
This document contains no pages.
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