City of Piedmont
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
DATE: April 4, 2022
TO: Mayor and Council
FROM: Sara Lillevand, City Administrator
SUBJECT: Update on Community Pool Design Modifications and Direct Staff to: 1) Continue Review of Program and Cost Considerations Related to the 20 Versus 25 Yard Recreation Pool Lanes with Referral to the Community Pool Advisory Committee for a Review of the Recreation Pool Length, and 2) Direct Staff to Prepare a Donation Policy for the Acceptance of Donations for the Piedmont Community Pool Project
RECOMMENDATION:
Receive an update on Community Pool design modifications and, by motion, direct staff to:
1) Continue review of program and cost considerations related to the 20 versus 25-yard recreation pool lanes with referral to the Pool Advisory Committee for its review of recreation pool lane length; and
2) Prepare a donation policy for the acceptance of donations for Piedmont Community Pool Project.
BACKGROUND
On March 21, 2022, Council received an update on the Community Pool project Schematic Design cost estimates and proposed design modifications. Construction cost hyperinflation necessitated significant modifications to the previously approved Conceptual Design for the Piedmont Community Pool building. Given extreme inflationary pressures, staff along with project management and design team consultants advised the City Council review design modifications and facilitate an accelerated timeline for getting the Community Pool Project to bid in early August of this year. The developing plan presented on March 21st to address the significant funding shortfall prioritized the aquatics needs of the community and proposed design alterations focused on reducing the scope of the Community Pool Building. Council was in agreement with the guiding principle of prioritizing the pools as conceptualized and making substantial cost reductions in the building. Council directed staff and ELS to continue to proceed into the Design Development Phase with the significant modifications to the Community Pool building as presented in the March 21st meeting along with a request for further exploration of maintaining 25-yard lap lanes in the recreation pool as well as potential fundraising mechanisms.
COMMUNITY POOL PROJECT STATUS
As a reminder, the modifications presented to and affirmed by the Council on March 21st included minimal changes to the pools and major alterations to the building as outlined below.
Pool Modifications:
• No changes to the Competition Pool
• Modified length of the three Recreation Pool lap lanes from 25 yards to 20 yards, and • Reduced the size of the zero-depth entry area in the recreation pool Building Modifications:
• Elimination of the majority of the second story of the building. o The area paralleling the tennis court would be redesigned as a rooftop pavilion which could support outdoor programming as well as community gatherings. o The roof deck paralleling Bonita Avenue would support area for mechanical storage as well as PV (solar) panels.
o The “Pavilion” would be accessible from Bonita Avenue and would have no internal access to the lower level.
o The restrooms oriented to the tennis courts and small storage area would be retained on the second level with access off Bonita Avenue. • With the elimination of the second story, the planned elevator and stairway would also be eliminated, thus making the lobby of the Community Pool Building significantly smaller and shortening the leg of the building paralleling Bonita Ave. • The poolside room at deck level which could be used for classes, camps, birthday and school parties as well as regular lifeguard and staff training would be included in the bid package but would only be constructed if bids received fell within the project budget. • Elimination of one of the two planned “Family Restroom/Changing” areas.
Since March 21st, ELS has developed updated cost estimates based on the project modifications and has provided additional information and considerations based on questions received from Council, Pool Advisory Committee and community members.
Poolside Room: The estimated cost for the poolside room is $634,000. This will be added as a deductive alternate to the bidding package for the pools. This is an area where fundraising may be an alternative to cover this cost.
Gender-neutral changing spaces: The elimination of one of the family restrooms raised the question of possibilities for additional gender-neutral changing areas. ELS will explore adding a second changing room, without plumbing fixtures, while reducing the size of the remaining family changing/gender-neutral changing space that includes shower, lavatory and toilet fixtures.
ELS anticipates only a minor increase in construction cost for this change.
Additional building infrastructure required to accommodate future second story addition:
Modifying the design to accommodate a future structural steel framed second story has significant structural impact and is not advised. ELS has however developed a concept for preparing the current design to receive a future multipurpose room space within the pavilion which would not result in significant change in construction cost. ELS will present this concept to the City Council during tonight’s meeting.
Additional Storage space: ELS has identified opportunities to carve out additional storage space on the pavilion level as well as the pool deck and mechanical room area. Cost for these spaces is included in the revised budget estimate.
As illustrated below, the modified design brings the construction cost estimate to within $400,000 of the target without any potential site improvement cost savings associated with reduced height of retaining walls. This summary estimate does not include the poolside room ($643,000) or the full length 25-yard lanes in the recreation pool ($100,000).
Based upon the Council’s direction at the March 21st meeting, staff and ELS will continue to move forward through the Design Development Phase which is planned for completion by April 30, 2022.
RECREATION POOL LANE LENGTH
On March 21st, Council directed staff to explore the feasibility of maintaining the 25-yard lap lane length in the recreation pool. The approximate cost differential for maintaining the 25-yard lane length versus the 20-yard length is $100,000. In addition to the upfront cost differential, there remain questions around whether the 20-yard configuration might actually provide a better variety of programming options and more optimal deck space for a wider variety of pool users than the 25-yard length. Delaying this decision by four weeks will not impede ELS’ Design Development progress and may be best addressed by the Pool Advisory Committee (PAC).
Staff recommends continued review of program and cost considerations related to 20-yard versus 25-yard recreation pool lanes with Pool Advisory Committee review. Thus, staff is seeking direction from the Council to continue staff’s review of program and cost considerations related Construction Cost
Estimate (Hard Costs) 03/21/2022 03/31/2022
Building $ 14,600,000 $ 9,100,000
Swimming Pools &
Decks $ 6,200,000 $ 6,100,000
Site Improvements $ 4,200,000 $ 4,200,000
Total $ 25,000,000 $ 19,400,000
Target Hard Cost
Construction Budget $ 19,000,000 $ 19,000,000
Gap $ 6,000,000 $ 400,000
to the 20 versus 25 yard recreation pool lanes and forward to the Pool Advisory Committee for their review of recreation pool lane lengths and provide their recommendation to the City Council at or before its meeting of May 2nd.
FUNDRAISING
Given recent history of successful public-private partnerships in support of recreational facility projects, Council directed staff to explore fundraising mechanisms to support the Community Pool project. In the past, these public-private partnerships have worked in a manner where the City has accepted donations from local non-profits that have collected money from the community and provided these funds to the City. These prior public-private partnerships have occurred for projects where there was lead time to engage the community. However, here, given the accelerated timeline to get to bid as well as significant alterations to the conceptual design, staff recommends a dual-track approach where the City would: (1) continue to accept funds from local non-profit partners, and (2) initiate fundraising efforts so that the City would accept funds directly from private donors. This dual-track approach would allow the quick activation of community members to make private contributions toward elements of the pool project which have been or may be cut from the design.
Because of the City’s customary practice to accept funds from community non-profits that have aggregated funds themselves, the City has not had a donation policy in place to date to accept significant amounts of community funds directly. Thus, staff recommends the Council direct staff to prepare a donation policy to ensure the City retains discretion in accepting contributions and how these funds are used. The policy would be presented to the Council at the May 2, 2022 meeting.
RECOMMENDED DIRECTION
1. Direct staff to continue the review of program and cost considerations related to 20-yard versus 25-yard recreation pool lanes and present the analysis to the Community Pool Advisory Committee for its review and recommendation to the City Council.
2. Direct staff to prepare a donation policy for the acceptance of donations from community donors.
Item #4 – Piedmont Community Pool Design Modifications
Correspondence Received Before 2:30 p.m. on Monday, April 4, 2022 Have we seriously considered saltwater for the larger competition pool? 29 hospitalized after London Olympic pool chlorine gas leak A swimming pool at the London sports complex that hosted the 2012 Summer Olympics has been evacuated after chlorine gas was released inside the facility By Associated Press
https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/london-olympic-pool-evacuated-after-gas-releaseincident/2022/03/23/ccc24d5a-aa9e-11ec-8a8e-9c6e9fc7a0de_story.html Hope Salzer
Dear Piedmont City Council,
I support design features that reduce costs and limit climate impact. Reducing the size of the recreation pool is a step in the right direction.
Respectfully,
Winifred Walters
Dear esteemed Council Members, Committee Members, Clarence, and Dennis:
Thank you very much for your service working on the Piedmont Community Pool Project! This continues to be a challenging project in many ways, but your hard work and dedication brings us closer every day to realizing our aspiration of a beautiful pool facility for Piedmont. Your efforts are much appreciated!
I am writing today to request that the City Council:
(1) require the development of an exterior lighting design for the competitive pool that complies with the national ANSI/IES standard for pool lighting, including alternative levels of illumination for consideration (including at least an alternative for 300 lux (30 footcandles) of illumination) and estimated pricing for each alternative; and (2) after review of the alternatives, adopt a compliant lighting design, to be funded by bond measure proceeds, by funding from the city above and beyond the bond measure proceeds, or, at a minimum, pursuant to the donation policy currently under consideration by the City Council.
By way of elaboration:
• To meet the very high demand for pool time and to make the most of the multi-million dollar asset we are developing, we need to plan for pool use before sunrise and after sunset and to install adequate illumination for water sports. For decades, the Piedmont Community Pool has been heavily used both in the early morning and evening hours, and consistent with this, the draft operational schedule shared during one of the community workshops reflected use from 6:00 a.m. until 10:00 p.m. That said, during October for example (in the heart of the water polo season), twilight does not begin until about 7:00 a.m. and ends around 6:45 p.m., leaving many hours of planned pool use reliant on artificial lighting.
• There is a national standard for illumination of outdoor swimming and water sports facilities promulgated by the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) and the Illumination Engineering Society (IES) – the ANSI/IES RP-6-20 Recommended Practice:
Lighting Sports and Recreational Areas, An American National Standard with which Piedmont should comply. With respect to outdoor water sports facilities (i.e., pools intended for swimming or water polo training or competition), the standard for illuminances on Class II pools is 500 lux (50 footcandles), for Class III pools is 300 lux (30 footcandles), and for Class IV pools is 200 lux (20 footcandles). High school sports, amateur leagues, and training facilities fall within this range (Class II – IV) depending on spectator capacity, level of play, etc. For context, the lowest class (Class IV) covers pools where there is limited or no provision for spectators, and is the class for elementary schools, recreational events, and social events. As noted, the ANSI/IES standard calls for a minimum of 200 lux (20 footcandles) for Class IV – there is no lower level of illumination that complies with the national standard for pools for water sports, i.e., modern facilities for swimming or water polo that will operate after dark. (Admittedly, there is a lower minimum level of underwater and deck illumination required to comply with California law relating to lifeguards being able to observe without interference of the underwater area and pool surface, but this does not address how much light is necessary to play a water sport successfully or safely beyond the risk of drowning.) By way of background, for higher levels of play, additional illumination is recommended or required (e.g., the NCAA water polo standard (without broadcast) is 50 footcandles; the FINA standard for international competition is 600 lux (60 footcandles).) Television broadcast requires even higher illumination levels (e.g., the NCAA recommends 125 footcandles for televised swimming, water polo, and diving). • Lighting levels are a performance and safety concern. In water polo, the ball is a fastmoving multi-directional target. The average male high school senior is shooting and fast passing the ball at over 35 miles per hour. Clearly seeing the ball coming, whether as a goalie or a teammate, is extremely important to playing the game and to protecting oneself. In competitive swimming, a swimmer needs to time their approach to the wall carefully to execute a flip turn correctly at speed. Shadows interfere with a swimmer’s perception of where the wall is. Sufficient and consistent illumination is needed for a “fast” and safe pool.
• Since last fall, Piedmont’s water polo and swimming communities, including Piedmont boys water polo coaches John Savage and Rik Krumins, have been concerned about this issue of adequate lighting. Both Coach Savage and I raised this issue for group discussion during Workshop #3 in November and I made the specific proposal for 30 footcandles of illumination at that workshop. I further elaborated on our comments in a letter to the Pool Advisory Committee in mid-January and the topic has been pursued during at least two Pool Advisory Committee meetings. At the request of the Pool Advisory Committee, ELS presented during the March 22 meeting a set of slides showing preliminary lighting design alternatives from 15 to 30 footcandles. At that time, Clarence stated that no pricing for these alternatives was yet available, but would be available by the April 4 City Council meeting. Unfortunately, I reviewed the informational materials for today’s City Council meeting and did not see any information relating to the lighting design.
• The level of lighting that is installed will have important impacts on the program offerings and density of use Piedmont will be able to pursue for the pool, especially in the Fall and Winter months. Given recent hyper-inflation, Piedmont will not be able to include in the project everything that community members would have liked, but exterior lighting should remain on the list of essential features that will be fully developed, even if they ultimately may need to be separately funded. It is unreasonable, for example, to elevate the “birthday party” room as a feature that is included in the project for bidding and earmarking that feature for funding by donations when estimated pricing for exterior lighting has not been developed or shared. Community members and donors, given a choice, may well prefer to contribute towards exterior lighting rather than the “birthday party” room, but we need designs and pricing.
• In closing, let me also add a word on the environmental impact of this project. Building a local facility that complies with the requirements, including lighting requirements, of a competitive and recreational sports facility will save energy in ways that many commenters are not recognizing. The loss of the Piedmont Community Pool has not lessened demand for pool time. Our community is now logging many miles in private cars to pursue swimming and water polo at pools throughout the East Bay and Contra Costa County. I recently spoke with a manager for the Soda Aquatic Center in Moraga and he told me he understands Piedmont’s aquatic needs because he has so many of Piedmont’s swimmers at his facility now. The Piedmont High School water polo teams conducted their practices last year at pools in Berkeley, Oakland, and San Leandro. I understand that the Piedmont Swim Team also is swimming in several pools, including in Emeryville and Montclair. I am driving myself and family members for swimming and water polo opportunities to Berkeley, Alameda, Moraga, and Lafayette. Building a pool that meets the local community’s needs is like building housing close to mass transit – it reduces the huge environmental impact of myriad trips by masses of people in private cars.
Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions or would like to discuss this further.
Thanks again for all your hard work on the project!
Best regards,
Paul Jahn