HomeMy WebLinkAboutCRPS-05-112 - Accelerated Implementation Schedule - Twin Pad Arena
~
Report To:
Date of Meeting:
Submitted By:
Prepared By:
Ward(s) Involved:
Date of Report:
Report No.:
Subject:
Mayor C. Zehr and Members of Council
June 20, 2005
G. Sosnoski, General Manager of Corporate Services & City
Clerk
G. Sosnoski (on behalf of the Twin Pad Steering Committee)
June 16, 2005
CRPS-05-112
ACCELERATED IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE - TWIN
PAD ARENA
RECOMMENDATION:
None at this time - information requested by Council.
BACKGROUND:
At the Finance and Corporate Services Committee meeting of June 13, 2005, a
recommendation was adopted directing staff to investigate the feasibility of accelerating
construction of a Twin Pad Arena to coincide with the start of the 2007 / 2008 hockey season. A
preliminary estimate of time and impact is being presented to Council at this time as several
decisions would have to be made in the very near future were we to accelerate this process.
REPORT:
Attached are two schedules relating to the process for design and construction of a new Twin
Pad Arena. Schedule 'A' is the normal schedule which would be followed in preparing a
business case, selecting a site, developing a budget, consulting with stakeholders and
completing the design and construction process. This is the course of action recommended by
staff as being the most realistic and comprehensive approach. Schedule '8' is a compressed
schedule which could see occupancy in the early Fall of 2007. This course is not recommended
by staff as the schedule is very tight with little margin for error or delay and would require the
curtailing or elimination of steps which we feel are important. It should be stressed that these
schedules are at a very preliminary stage.
If Council wishes to proceed with the compressed schedule, the decision-making process must
be dramatically accelerated. Staff would need clear direction to proceed with the accelerated
schedule on June 20 or June 27 at latest. Approval to advance funds (approximately 20% of
the project budget) to begin the process of retaining a consultant would be required by the end
of June. Approval of the full project budget would be needed by the end of August in order to
proceed with an Expression of Interest for consultant services by September 1.
The following are the expected process / project impacts arising from a compressed timeline as
outlined in Schedule 'B':
· Business Case process. There would be no business case document before Council in
advance of a decision to fund the project. Staff would be principally focused on selecting
the site, developing a project budget and retaining a consultant.
· The Capital Budget for the Twin Pad would have to be dealt with exclusive of the
remainder of the Capital Forecast. This is necessary as the budget is required to select
the consultant in September, 2005.
· Investigation of bundling options would be limited and would result in the elimination of
any complex bundling options.
· The sites reviewed would be limited to those currently owned by the City.
· There would be no investigation of possible partnership options.
· There would be little or no public consultation on the selection of the preferred site.
· There would be a greater margin for error in estimating project costs and an increased
likelihood of cost overruns.
· The Development Charge By-law (DC) is still under appeal with the indoor recreational
facilities being an issue. We will not know by mid-August what proportion of DC funding
will be available. This could also be a risk in regard to Schedule 'A'.
· There could potentially be a gap in service provision if any facilities (eg. lit ball
diamonds) on the preferred site cannot be relocated prior to the start of construction.
There are also several broad assumptions built into the accelerated timeline; namely: that every
aspect of the implementation process would have to strictly adhere to deadlines as there is little
or no option for delay; that there would be no delays in the construction phase due to material
shortage, strikes, etc.; the existing amenities on the construction site would be relocated prior to
construction beginning.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
At present, the Steering Committee only has a very preliminary budget estimate (plus or minus
30%) in part due to not having identified a site and an incomplete understanding of project
scope. A commitment to fund the entire project would be required well in advance of the
scheduled 2006 budget process and immediately following selection of the site and refinement
of the project budget in July / August of this year.
The funding for the project would have to be advance from 2008 / 2009 / 2010 which may
require deferral of another capital project.
CONCLUSION:
As indicated above staff cannot recommend the compressed timeline outlined in Schedule 'B'
but will do our very best if directed by Council to implement. This project is relatively complex,
not because of the nature of the building as much as the related issues of public consultation for
the new arena and for the decommissioned site, relocation, decommissioning of an existing
facility and site selection, all of which will have a significant impact on neighbouring residents
and user groups.
G. Sosnoski
General Manager of Corporate Services
& City Clerk
