1997-11-127
CITY OF SOUTHLAKE
JOINT UTILIZATION COMMITTEE
Wednesday, November 12, 1997
Members Present: Rick Wilhelm, Chair; Doug Strickland, Vice -Chair; Judy Gilmore,
Carol Lee Hamilton, Gary Fawks
Staff Present: Kim Lenoir, Parks and Recreation Director; Kevin Hugman,
Community Services Manager; Steve Johnson, CISD Assistant
Superintendent
Guests: Janet Murphy, Jill O'Neill, Cindy Huff, Susan Ansley
Agenda Item No. 1, Call to Order
Rick Wilhelm called the meeting to order at 7:10 p.m.
Agenda Item No. 2 Approval of Minutes of the October 15, 1997 Meeting
Rick Wilhelm requested the following changes be made to the minutes:
(a) Agenda Item Number 2; reference to sales tax for parks and recreation uses should be
" 1 /2 cent" instead of "2 cents."
(b) Agenda Item Number 3; include a sentence that makes it clear that JUC consensus
was that Rick Wilhelm should present the athletic facility as JUC's proposal at the
SPIN Summit.
Judy Gilmore made a motion to approve the minutes with the changes noted; Doug
Strickland seconded. Motion passed unanimously.
Agenda Item No. 3 Discussion of Future Joint Use Facilities, Projects and Goals
Rick Wilhelm welcomed those guests who had responded to the invitation to form a
focus group to discuss potential joint uses of an athletic facility and a natatorium.
Judy Gilmore and Doug Strickland discussed the progress made to date by the CISD
committee. Some of the issues that have been discussed were the location of the facility
and cost of a facility. Locations that have been discussed include the S. Kimball site and
a site in the Town Square.
Rick Wilhelm questioned ways to put the issues of a joint athletic facility in front of the
community. He asked what kind of strength could be engendered from the youth of the
community -- those who would be the primary users of the facility. Judy Gilmore also
\\SLKSV0004\KHugman$\WP-FILES\NC\MINUTES\97-11-12.DOC
noted that the natatorium could appeal to seniors and to parents of children involved in
aquatics outside of the school -sponsored programs.
The focus group participants and the NC members then discussed the potential uses of a
natatorium other than competitive uses such as the school -sponsored programs. The
participants noted that other uses could include:
• Swim lessons,
• Diving lessons,
• Water aerobics,
• Childrens' birthday parties,
• Private swim teams,
• Family open swim periods,
• Usage by day care centers,
• Water aerobic exercises/conditioning by participants in football, cross-
country, etc.,
• Rehabilitation for athletic related injuries,
• Leased time for private rehab providers such as Baylor.
The guest participants noted that the pool availability time at Grapevine is limited and
there are a number of Southlake residents who use that facility. They also noted that
there is a very limited number of pools that have indoor platform diving facilities. If that
were included in a natatorium, state and national level competitions could be held there.
Doug Strickland asked the group where they felt the best location for a natatorium would
be. The consensus of the participants was that it should be located on school property.
Rick Wilhelm asked the group what concerns or issues might be raised if a natatorium
were built next to residential property. The consensus of the focus group was that there
would be few issues or problems. They noted that noise levels would be minimal; traffic
would not be a significant problem since cars come and go, the participants do not all
arrive at one time and leave at one time. There was some discussion regarding the size of
the facility, specifically the height required for such a structure. The group said that
privacy for adjacent residents should not be an issue since the windows in a natatorium
are very few and those that are there, are very high. The participants were unsure of the
height of the facility but thought it would be similar to a 3-4 story building.
Discussion then focused on participation by the City and the CISD. A number of
possible options were presented, including: financial participation by the City, lease
arrangements, rental fees, and/or shared costs for employees of the facility. The use of
SPDC funds was noted as a possible source of funds for construction.
One guest noted that she understood the City had agreed to participate in the Durham
gymnasium, but still had not paid its share. Kevin Hugman said that the City had not
agreed to pay for the Durham gym, although there had been some discussion at the time
\\SLKS V0004\KHugman$\ WP-FILES\JUC\MINUTES\97-11-12.DOC 2
A
concerning this possibility. He noted that the City had paid $800,000 for the gym at
Carroll Middle School, and would be also paying an additional $70,000 for the parking
lot there. Although the City had essentially paid for one gym, the City's share of usage of
all joint use facilities was still less than the available hours had the City built its own
gym. The latest record had shown the City's cumulative usage of joint use facilities to be
approximately at 80%. This is calculated as:
total City recreation program hours at joint use facilities
total available hours of a City owned facility
Kevin Hugman explained that although the usage is less than 100%, the flexibility
allowed by multiple sites outweighs the strict cost -use perspective.
Rick Wilhelm noted that the discussion of Durham and other facilities as joint use had led
some to believe that a commitment had been made by the City to fund these facilities, but
that was not the case.
There was some discussion regarding the scheduling of joint use facilities and the costs
associated with operations.
Kevin Hugman noted that the Interlocal Agreement for Joint Use of Recreational
Facilities (the umbrella agreement) has not been reviewed by the JUC since it had been
adopted in 1995. He suggested that it might be appropriate to review it and modify it to
incorporate the lessons learned over the past two years, and address the issues that have
arisen. Rick Wilhelm agreed and asked staff to put the agreement on the next JUC
agenda for discussion.
There being no further discussion, the meeting was adjourned at 8:45 p.m.
_az:AA_�
Rick Wilhelm, Chairman
ATTEST:
Kevin Hugman, C unity Services Manager
\\SLKS V0004\KHugman$\WP-FILES\JUC\MINUTES\97-11-12.DOC 3