HomeMy WebLinkAboutCS-13-91 s"
I
-""-" •w.,k,,. TOWN OF NEWCASTLE
l;7`'' - REPORT File #
rq
S " C Res. #' ;'
`'+i :,C4 4. By-Law #
MEETING: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION
DATE. APRIL 8, 1991
CS-13-91
REPORT #: FILE #:
SUBJECT: PROPOSED COURTICE COMMUNITY FACILITY
FEASIBILITY STUDY FINAL REPORT
RECOMMENDATIONS:
It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose & Administration
Committee recommend to Council the following:-
1. That Report No. CS-07-91 be received;
2. That Council authorize staff to investigate the possibilities of a
public/private partnership proposal for a Community Facility within the
Courtice Urban Area; and
3. That staff be authorized to erect a sign on the site of the proposed
facility (Courtice Road and Highway #2) announcing the project.
1.0 FEASIBILITY STUDY:
1.1 As members of Council are aware, the firm of Marshall Macklin Monaghan
Limited was retained to conduct and prepare a Feasibility Study for a
Community Facility within the Courtice Urban Area.
1.2 The final report as submitted by our consultant has been provided to
Members of Council, under separate cover.
1.3 Part I of the study is as an information base, outlining the results of
the various surveys and public participation process conducted specifically
for this study. Part II is provided as a detailed analysis of the Market
Assessment and evaluation of the facility components. Information related
to the public/private development concept is also provided in Part II of
the study.
../2
2
REPORT NO. CS-13-91 - 2 - APRIL 8, 1991
2.0 FACILITY THEME:
2.1 Through the Study Process, it was determined that a facility for the
Courtice Urban Area should be comprised of three (3) distinct features or
themes. These are described as "Core Facilities", "Sport Theme" and
"Childrens' Theme".
2.2 Such a facility would service a broad spectrum of needs for the residents,
accordingly, a cross section of the "Sport Theme" and "Childrens' Theme"
in concert with the "Core Facilities" has been determined by the consultant
as being most appropriate for the Town.
2.3 Examples of specific components and size requirements of the facility are
provided in the text of the study (Part II, Section 5.2 Page 5 - 15) . It
should be noted that these components are detailed for the information of
Council and further, are provided as a result of the consultant's review.
The suggestions indicate that the needs of the Community will be addressed
and that an appropriate market exists in the immediate area (and to a
certain extent beyond) to make them viable.
3.0 IMPLEMENTATION:
3.1. Traditionally, the provision of recreational facilities was the sole
responsibility of the municipality for which the facility is being
provided. In recent years however, an innovative approach to providing
facilities has been implemented in other municipalities where a partnership
scenario, between the private sector and government has been formed. A
good example of this is the "Sky Dome" in Toronto and the "Mississauga
Sports Complex" which incorporates a four pad arena and ten floodlit
baseball diamonds at an estimated cost of approximately 25 million dollars.
3.2 Preliminary estimates regarding the Courtice Community Facility indicate
a financial requirement in the order of approximately twelve to fifteen
million dollars. It is suggested that due to the magnitude of this project
that a public/private partnership approach merits examination. A major
advantage of such an approach would be that the facility could be provided
within a shorter time frame, while the cost to the taxpayer is maintained
at a reasonable level.
3.3 For this reason, it is recommended that staff be authorized to investigate
the possibilities of a public/private partnership scenario for this
project.
3.4 Should Council wish to proceed within a more traditional method, by bearing
the total capital costs for this facility, these costs could be prohibitive
resulting in a phasing of the complex components over several years.
. ./3
90
REPORT NO. CS-13-91 - 3 - APRIL 8, 1991
4.0 CONCLUSION:
4.1 The proposed facility, would certainly meet the future requirements of the
Town and the Courtice Urban Area and certain needs beyond this point. It
should be noted however that the terms of reference provided to the
consultant indicated that the Town of Newcastle is interested in an
innovative facility and approach, which would attract private enterprise,
while at the same time responding to the community recreation and leisure
needs of our citizens.
4.2 The blend of components and the aspect of a public/private partnership is
offered with the intent of reducing ongoing operational expenses of
traditionally tax funded facilities with revenue generating amenities.
This, however, must be examined in more detail.
4.3 With the approval of the recommendations contained in Report CS-13-91 it
is the intention to proceed expeditiously with the anticipation of a
further report to Council in the Fall of 1991.
Respectfully submitted, Recommended for presentation
to the Committee
7 1 A
df Josepi P. Caruana, Director Lawrence . Kotseff
Department of Community Services Chief Ad in strative Officer
JPC:sda
r
11
- 2 -
COURTICE COMMUNITY RECREATION COMPLEX SCHEDULE III
FIRMS CONSIDERED FOR CONCEPTUAL DESIGN
5) Moffat Kinoshita Assoc. Inc. (Architects)
124 Merton Street
Toronto, Ontario
M4S 2Z2
Telephone - 488-5811
Contact: Henry Wong
6) Shore, Tilbe, Henschel, Irwin, Peters (Architects)
4 New Street
Toronto, Ontario
M5R 1P6
Telephone - 922-7711
Contact: Steve Irwin
7) I B I GROUP
Suite 500
240 Richmond Street W.
Toronto, Ontario
M5V 1W1
Telephone - 596-1930
Contact: Randy Grimes
936
SCHEDULE IV
Corporation of the Town of Newcastle
COURTICE COMMUNITY COMPLEX
Feasibility Study Proposals
1. Hough Stansbury & Woodland Limited $41,000
2 . Shore, Tilbe, Henschel, Irwin, Peters $43,029
3. Marshall Macklin and Monaghan Limited
Moffat Kinoshita Associates Incorporated $47,000
937