Adhoc Committee for Rec Facility Minutes 2012 02-13-12APPROVED 5/7/12
UNITED CITY OF YORKVILLE
Ad Hoc Committee for Recreation Facility Alternatives
Committee Meeting
City Hall Conference Room
Monday, February 13, 2012
7:00 p.m.
Call to Order: Chairman Chris Funkhouser called the meeting to order at 7:02 p.m.
Establish a Quorum:
Present:
Chris Funkhouser, Chairman, Alderman Ward 3
Jackie Milschewski, Alderman Ward 2
Ken Koch, Park Board
Debbie Horaz, Park Board
Quorum established
City Officials Present:
Bart Olson, City Administrator
Tim Evans, Superintendent of Recreation
Other Guests:
Lynn Dubajic, YEDC Executive Director (arr 7:06pm)
Tony Scott, Record Newspaper
Citizen Comments:
None.
Previous Minutes Correction:
No corrections.
New Business:
No new business.
Old Business:
Recreation Facility Alternatives: Chairman Funkhouser said that Ms. Schraw has
provided the committee with a memo and some additional information about other
facilities within the scope of city- or municipal-run Rec Center facilities. She also
provided spatial requirements; what the minimums were to accommodate the needs we
currently offer. The third piece is existing locations around the city for rent or lease.
Chairman Funkhouser stated he would like to focus in on the options and narrow down
the choices to bring to the City Council for discussion.
City Administrator Olson commented he found it interesting that Woodstock is in direct
competition with privately run facilities. The city actually advertises in the newspaper,
and everyone is O.K. with it because they were there first. The advertisement actually
illustrated in a matrix what each facility had in comparison – privately and publically.
(05:06)
Ms. Dubajic said regarding free-standing buildings, two that were brought up at the last
meeting (in the Fox Industrial Park) have either been sold or under contract. There is a
5000 square foot building on Deer Street that used to be a bus barn, but that’s not big
enough for the needs of a Rec center. Another building that is available is the X-pac
building on Route 47, but that was an industrial building that is 120,000 square feet. She
did not think using retail space was a good alternative since that space should be
generating sales tax; plus you would be leasing it. Rental for new commercial space in
the city averages around $13.00 a square foot per year, plus between $1.50 and $2.00 a
square foot for common area maintenance; and approximately $5.00 a square foot for
taxes. Ms. Dubajic then had to leave the meeting. (approximately 7:30 p.m.)
Chairman Funkhouser then went to the spatial information and figured the basic number
they would use is about 15,000 square feet – not including the pool – which would
translate to a pretty good chunk of change to rent In addition, there would be start-up
costs including moving/getting/fitting equipment and setting up rooms for the pre-school.
Also to keep in mind is the timing of everything – lease expiration; lease start-up; double
rent payments. He suggested presenting the following options: REC Center Purchase;
Lease New space; Build a New Facility; or Partner with the Schools. (A spreadsheet
illustrating the pros and cons for each is attached.)
The Committee is ready to forward the minutes of this meeting - along with the Pro/Con
spreadsheet – to the City Council for their consideration.
Adjournment:
Chairman Funkhouser is not scheduling another Ad Hoc Committee for Recreation
Facility Alternatives and asked if anyone had any additional business. Since there
wasn’t, he adjourned the meeting at 7:57 p.m., Mr. Koch made a motion and Ms. Horaz
seconded.
Minutes respectfully submitted by:
Bonnie Olsem
A B C D
REC Center Purchase Lease New $12 - $20 S.F.Build New $5M - $10M School Partnership
PRO PRO PRO PRO
Membership base Custom space (blank canvas)Have available City land Best use of tax dollars
Almost budget neutral Flexibility - one or two yr lease Ultimate blank canvas Community partnership
No initial outlay Timing Limited maintenance (new) budget More facility for less City $
Rental properties attached Excitement Increase the customer base
Location Ownership Limited maintenance budget
Room for expansion Excitement and community trust
Taxes lost
Own asset
CON CON CON CON
Location Limited uses Expensive (land, building, equipment)Timing (operations, City funding)
Age Loss of services New customer base Lack of concrete details
Maintenance Customer base Timeframe Involving another entity
Deal to be negotiated Parking Paying for two spaces for awhile (scheduling, intergovernmental)
Taxes lost Equipment outlay Bonding Unknown operational budget
Locked in No ownership Referendum Referendum
Size of available space Unknown operational budget Competing w/Club 47
Lack of local options Competing w/Club 47
Expensive
Neighbors
Unknown budget
Competing w/Club 47