HomeMy WebLinkAboutCS-37-87TOWN OF NEWCASTLE
REPORT File #
Res. #
By -Law #
(MIND: GENERAL PURPOSE & ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE
DATE: November 16, 1987
REPORT #: CS -37 -87 FILE #:
SUB,ECT :
NEW ARENA PROJECT
REPORT OF THE ARENA PROJECT TEAM
RECOMMENDATIONS:
It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose &
Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: -
1. That Report No. CS -37 -87 be received for information; and
2. That the recommendations contained in Attachment #1 and the
financing scenario identified in Schedule 'C' of Attachment #3
Report No. CS -37 -87 in the amount of $5,393,200. be approved;
and
3. That the Tender related to the construction of "new arena
facility" be awarded forthwith to Gerr Construction Limited,
Bowmanville, Ontario for an amount not to exceed $4,448,700.;
and
4. That the Regional Municipality of Durham be requested to
initiate the necessary work regarding the construction of
a water service in accordance with alternative 6 (excluding
booster pumping station) of the design brief prepared by
Totten Sims Hubicki Associates Limited on behalf of the Region
dated September 1987 at cost of $470,000; and
5. That the appropriate by -law be prepared for passage by Council
and execution by the Mayor and Clerk.
GENERAL PURPOSE & ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE
REPORT NO. CS- -37 -87 PAGE 2.
BACKGROUND & COMMENTS:
At the meeting of October 13, 1987 Council dealt with the new arena
project following a presentation by the Town's Consultant, Phillip
Barratt Kaiser. At that meeting Council approved an amount of
$5,073,500.00 for the facility based on a distribution of costs presented
by the Consultant.
As a result several outstanding matters were requested to be addressed by
Council which relate to the following:
(A) Subsequent report to Council following the Town's Consultant
issuing an addendum to the original Tender
(B) A report regarding alternatives to the expenditures of $130,000.00
for temporary pumping station
(C) A report dealing with the financial implications of the project on
the 1988 budget and the manner in which any shortfall in
proceeds such as fundraising will affect the budget in 1988.
Attachment #1 provides the information compiled by the Town's Consultant.
It includes the results of the issuance of an addendum to the original
Tender and the related analysis and recommendations. Attachment #2 provides
various comments from the Community Services Department pertaining to the
facility and the priority of various components related to the project.
Attachment #3 provides the Treasurer's report related to same.
Appendix 'A' provides the Consultant's report on the booster pumping station
as related to the project.
../3
GENERAL PURPOSE & ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE
REPORT NO. CS -37 -87 PAGE 3.
Appendix 'B' provides information from Regional Works Staff regarding cost
sharing as it applies to the water facility. It was indicated that the
Works Committee at the Region would be dealing with this matter at its
meeting of November 24, 1987.
In addition the Project Team has met on several occasions during the last
2 to 4 week period in an attempt to resolve the outstanding issue related
to the new arena project. The recommendations above provide the general
consensus of the Project Team. In part, this is based on a revised
commitment from the Fundraising Committee to raise a total of 1.1 million
for the new facility.
Respectfully submitted,
Marie Hubbard, Chairperson
Arena Project Team
MH:LK:sa
CONSULTANTS REPORT Attachment No. 1
Report No. CS -37 -87
A. RESULTS
The Post Tender Addendum No. 3 for the arena project closed on
October 29, 1987. Three firms were still involved in the bidding at the
outset, but Dineen Construction Ltd withdrew the bid deposit prior to
closing. Bids were received from:
Gerr Construction Ltd and
H.M. Brooks Construction Ltd
Addendum No. 3 was a series of deletions and changes required in
order to eliminate the overrun between the originally tendered prices and
the budget figure.
Also included in Addendum No. 3 was a request for prices to supply
and install a booster pumping station as per the attached report (see
Appendix B).
The following conclusions were drawn from analysis of the prices
submitted:
I. Gerr Construction Ltd is the low bidder
2. The "Prepackaged" fire booster pumping station is an
economical solution to the fire protection pressure
requirements
3. Further changes to the arena design will be required to cover
the remaining overrun of $91,000.00.
In discussion with Gerr Construction, the following further changes to
the arena project would result in additional capital reductions of $91,000:
1. Change tempered glass to plexiglass
2. Delete 40% of the asphalt paving (base course of gravel to
remain)
3. Downgrade sound system as required for Addendum No. 3
changes
4. Downgrade HVAC system as required for Addendum No. 3
changes
5. Change grade beams to masonry.
Please refer to the attached table for a comparative breakdown of
budget progression.
B ANALYSIS
The final building which will be constructed if the identified changes
are made to suit the budget would be an attractive and functional arena and
hall which will fulfill the original mandate. However, we ask you to
consider the following analysis with respect to long and short term benefits.
In general, the deletion prices were considered reasonable with the
following exceptions:
Item 3.1 Deletion of one bay of the multipurpose room
This was a major item of deletion for both the quality and versatility
of the facility. The credit allowed for this is approximately 50% of the
estimated cost to build it. Upon review of this item, it would be an
exceptionally poor value for deletion.
Item 4.1 Revision of high bay endwalls
This item consisted primarily of a deletion of a row of structural
steel columns, 3 rows of skylights, a six meter concrete block wall complete
with pilasters, an HSS truss, and deletion of raised seating in the concourse
area. Small changes to structural steel framework and cladding would
slightly offset these deletions.
The credit allowed for this item was about 35% of the estimated
cost, and is equivalent to the cost of deleting the skylights alone. The
contractor has been asked to revise this credit and advise.
Item 4.7 Deletion of cross over walkway
The cross over walkway was an item requested by the client and was
not part of the preliminary design or budget . It was included to facilitate
the following criteria:
a) In order to situate the Zamboni room in a central position for
single attendant supervision
b) In order to provide safe passage for Zamboni access route.
Since the retractable bleachers are being staged, it was felt that the
cross over could be constructed at this later time with minor design changes
to accomodate the safety aspect. However, in light of the minor amount of
credit allowed for this item, it is not a reasonable value to stage this
component.
Items 4.9 through 4.13
The total credits for these five, primarily maintenance related items,
was less than $6,000.
Item 4.14 Metal building insulation in lieu of insulation and liner
This change would provide a much less attractive, though equally
functional, building and although it could be upgraded by installation of a
liner panel at a later date, it is unlikely that funds would be allocated to do
SO.
This change would be incongruous with the intent of the rest of the
structure.
0
Item 4.15 Eliminate skaters flooring in change rooms
The evaluation of this deletion is similar to the above. The decision
was made to construct a good quality facility. Rubber mat flooring would
be a major downgrade but equally functional.
Industrial and commercial labour rates have increased approximately
4 - 6% since last April (a conservative figure since this was under Provincial
legislation). Material costs have increased approximately 12 %- masonry,
15% -steel (with a three month backlog), and 10 %- concrete. Generally, the
construction industry is extremely busy in the Toronto area. This accounts
for the initial overrun and the low credit allowances for the deletions. It is
primarily the sub trade mark ups that have accounted for this. In our
opinion, good value for changes and deletions were received on items where
entire features were deducted (i.e., operable walls) as opposed to those
where many sub trades were involved (i.e. items 3.1 and 4.1).
It is important to construct the long term components immediately
and cut back on the features (as opposed to vice versa) for the following
reasons:
1. Features are generally numerous low cost items which can be
added in smaller capital allocations over longer periods
2. Construction costs will increase. The more that can be
constructed at this time, the better the long range financial
benefit for the town.
3. It is very difficult to reach community consensus for large
capital outlays. Approval for the addition of desired features
at a moderate cost can be more easily obtained.
C RECOMMENDATIONS
Although the facility can be built for the budget figure, the best
value for _expenditure would require an additional extra capital budget of
$319,700 (see table on following page). This would include for the complete
y�
building envelope as per original bid and all features required to finish this
structure in a manner which would fulfill all the immediate needs and
expectations of the public. It would still include for a contingency of
$60,000 and design leeway for other changes in order to make this a
legitimate upset figure.
We therefore recommend that Gerr Construction Ltd be offerred a
contract to construct 'this facility for a contract not to exceed $4,388,700
plus an allowance of $60,000 for contingency.
BOWMANVIL.-LE ARENA
. areY+h air
1985 1987 1987 1-� CHED, 'A' I BUDGET ITENDER t II APTIDN I B�SD GCEON TI
LAND
225,000
225,000
225,000.::
225,000
225,000
RECOMMENDED EXPENDITURE
WATER
520,000
520,000
470,000 =
130,000 : =r
600,000
470,000
BASE BID 41850,000
HYDRO
7,000
71000
71000:
7,000
71000
DEDUCTIONS
DESIGN
202,000
220,000
220j000.:
220,000
220,000
CONTINGENCY 60,000
INSPECTION
-
-
-
15,000
24000
ITEM U 6,000
CONTINGENCY
-
-
60,000:
60,000
60,000
2 14,000
13 5zo
N G
ROAD WIDE '
o
0
0
`'0
0
5,0010
PERMITS
-
-
-
500
500
21 166,000
GAS
101000...
10,000
10,000, L
10,000
10,000
69,000
3,3 16,000
14 25,000
35 1,2M
BID P CK'G
4,4 1,000
45 11,500
TOTAL
(3993900)
(4,079,000)
(4,752,000)
(3,936,000)
4b x,700
SITE
818,900
440,000
520,000
450,000
43 000
ARENA
> X100,000
4672000
3,091,000:
x,855,500
EXTRAS
CGM CNTR
797,000
940,500
57LSCO
ITEM 42 0
OUTDR PAD
NOT INCLD'D
120,000
14 ,000 ;
NOT INCLD'D
43 29X
4,069,000
4,388,700
SEPTIC
75,000
50,000
59,000 =
59,000
ToTAL I 4,951,900 j 5,061,000 1 5,814,50011 5,013,500 1 5,013,500 X5,393,200
RECOMMENDED EXTRA CAPITAL $319,700 =6[
ATTACHMENT #2
REPORT NO. CS -37 -87
Report from Community Services Department
In light of the numerous meetings pertaining to the new arena and budget
deliberations as they relate to the overall project, I offer for your
information the following comments from the Community Services
Department's perspective.
As discussed with the Project Team, I would like to provide the following
comments as they it relate to the arena project. In discussion with the
Town's Consultant and various departmental staff, the Community Services
Department is of the opinion that in an attempt to meet the budget of
$5,073,500.00 (as approved on October 13, 1987), the integrity of the
basic structure would be jeopardied. More specifically, aspects of.the
building components and structure have been downgraded, altered or deleted
completely to a point where the Municipality would not receive true
value for its dollar. In effect, such an approach would reduce the life
expectancy of the building thereby increasing the operational costs of the
facility. In this regard, the general public would not have the facility
as they perceived.
With this in mind and understanding that the project team shares this view
with respect to true value for our dollar, I can wholeheartedly support
the Project Team's recommendation for an extended budget of
$5,393,200.00. If this approval is received we can be assured of the
best value for our dollar, and we will ultimately deliver a facility that
will operate in a cost efficient manner, will be a focal point for the
community, and finally will provide a facility that we can all be proud
of. Ultimately a determining factor in the decision making process is
that of affordability, which is being addressed by the Treasurer.
../2
ATTACHMENT #2 PAGE 2.
REPORT NO. CS -37 -87
If it is determined that the budget cannot be extended, the possibility of
"phasing" the project does exist, until such time that the additional
funding required is in place. However, this scenario is not deficient of
drawbacks as they relate to timing and overall cost. It is conceivable
that if "phasing" the project proves to be the most acceptable solution,
we will ultimately run the risk of paying an extremely inflated price to
complete the project. However, we will be satisfying the immediate
priority of replacing the Bowmanville Memorial Arena, as it is becoming
increasingly difficult to assure public safety and mechanical competence,
unless major expenditures are realized.
Respectfully submitted,
seph P. Caruana, Acting Director
Department of Community Services
JC:sa
Recommended for presentation
to the Committee
Lawrence Kotseff
Chief Aftinistrative Officer
UJS
'
Attachment #3
Report No.CS -37 -87
REPORT FROM THE TREASURER
In order to address the financial matters related to the new arena facility in
accordance with Resolution #C- 815 -87, a comprehensive analysis was undertaken
for the period of 1987 to 1991 based on the best available information at this
time.
This analysis required the detailed consideration of the following aspects:
1. Population and household projections,
2. Projected tax assessments,
3. Projected increases in revenues, and
4. Expenditure increases related to both operating and capital
requirements.
The result of the above analysis is provided in Schedule "A ". The population
and household information suggests continuous growth in the Town, especially
as indicated to 1991 (refer to lines 8 and 9). Those projections have been
incorporated notwithstanding more recent information which would suggest that
such projections are on the conservative side.
With respect to projected tax assessment, staff has extrapolated information
from the period 1984 to 1986 which indicates total assessment growth of
approximately 3.0% per annum. This general rate of increase has been used to
derive the projected assessment base as provided in Schedule "A" (refer to line
15) .
As Members of Committee are aware, development within the Town during the period
of 1984 to 1986 was relatively limited and therefore the 3.0% factor applied in
Schedule "A" beginning in 1987 is considered to be conservative.
In order to arrive at projected revenues, an analysis of the various revenue
accounts was undertaken. The results of this analysis indicate a general
increase in revenue of approximately 130 over the period (refer to line 30 for
total revenues).
Page - 2 -
Attachment #3���
Report No.CS -37 -87
Expenditure increases with respect to current operations have been projected
at an annual rate of 60 over the 1987 base year as indicated in line 32 and
further detailed in lines 35 to 43. In particular, line 35 is drawn to the
attention of Members of Committee. This indicates general government expenses
for the Town and in particular, the unclassified administration section wherein
funds have been provided to be transferred to the debenture retirement reserve
fund commencing in 1988 as reflected on Schedule "B ". In so doing, this will
provide funds to liquidate debenture payments for the new arena project and
administrative facility which would commence in 1989. The scenario presented
in Schedule "A" incorporates a debenture of $2,500,000 for each of the two
projects for illustration purposes only. It should be emphasized that if funds
are not allocated to retire the debenture as described above then the operating
expenses would be reduced thus reducing the tax levy. Alternatively, the funds
could remain and be used for other needs. In addition, $125,000 per annum
has been included in the calculations to offset possible staffing requirements
over the period.
Expenditures regarding capital requirements have been extracted from the 1987
Capital Budget and have been updated with revised values as they apply to the
Community Services and Fire Departments. These latter updates have been provided
following considerable discussions with the respective Department Head. The
Capital Budget as presented has not been approved by Council but is subject to
change during 1988 budget deliberations. It should be emphasized that
expenditures related to the implementation of the 911 System in the Fire
Department have not been addressed in Schedule "A ". In addition, the Capital
requirements from the Library and Museum Boards are not included in the
analysis.
In short, the essence of Schedule "A" would indicate a nominal increase and
in some years a decrease in the mill rate. An exception to this occurs in 1988
due to certain capital requirements as indicated in line 97.
Page - 3 -
Attachment #3
Report No.CS -37 -87
Schedule "C" provides the proposed financing as it relates to the new arena
project. Committee Members will note that the debenture impact pertaining to
this facility is proposed to be $2,352,651.
Should there be a shortfall related to the fund raising activities in the
Community, there would a number of options available to the Town, such as;
a) Temporarily borrowing from existing reserve funds,
b) Short term borrowing from approved financial institutions,
c) Increasing the debenture requirements in accordance with O.M.B. approval.
This situation will be monitored and commented on further as the fund raising
campaign unfolds.
In conclusion, staff_ is of the opinion that this facility can be financed as
outlined in this report, however, this is based on the premise of continuing
to budget funds to retire the debentures as indicated on Schedule "B ". Based on
the funding commitments identified in Schedule "A" indicating the new arena
project and administrative facility, staff is of the opinion that further
significant projects of a similar nature should not be entertained until after
1991.
The financing proposed to retire the debenture is based on the interest rate
factor of 11% and will fluctuate depending on the prevailing market conditions
at the time of the debenture issue.
Respectfully submitted,
.R. Blanchard,
Treasurer.
JRB /hjm
Recommended for presentation
to the Committee,
wrence Rotsetf,
ief A i�,istrative Officer.
SCHEDULE A
REVENUE.WK1
CORPORATION OF THE TOWN OF NEWCASTLE
REVISED #7
REVENUE/EXPENSE
&
CAPITAL PROJECTIONS 1987-1991
E
F
G
H
l
6
1987
1980
1989
1990
1991
7
1.Populaticm Projection
8
38,04
40,314
41`J19
42,219
42,984
2.Number of Households
9
12'938
13`438
13,773
0,073
14,328
3.Pru ected Tam.Asspssm.
10
Residential & Farm
U
$37`616`796
$38,944,669
$40,319/416
$41`742'691
$43`216`208
` Commercial & Indust.
12
6,085,576
6,143,389
6,201,751
6,260,668
6,320,144
Business
13
2,329,815
2,329,815
2,351,715
2,373,821
2,396,133
2,41659
14
Total
15
46,032,187
47,439,773
48,894,988
50,399,492
51,955,011
16
4.Revenue-Gen.Serv.
17
( -Tax Levy
18
3,750,747
3,979 577
4,488,220
4,619,889
4`738,101
-Supplementary
19
120,000
157,000
161`340
165,803
1704391
-Other Tax-Debt
20
15,108
15,302
14`904
14,735
13,763
-Telephone Revenue
21
118`902
133/170
149,150
167`048
187,095
22
Total Gen. Serv,
23
4,004,757
4`285`049
4,813,614
4,967`475
5,109,350
'
24
Pay.io Lieu of Taxes
25
658,107
710,755
767,616
E29,025
895,347
Ontario Grants
26
21,05`247
2,379,557
2,470,639
2,650,IB5
2,828,892
Fees & Service Chgs.
27
1`949`601
2/137,08
2`309/412
2,498,495
2,707 186
Other
28
1`528,967
471`072
386,796
405,238
424,708
29
Total
30
10,166,679
9`984,259
80748 07
11,350,418
11`965,483
31
5.[xpenditurp-Ge 'l Sery
32
10`166,679
9`984,259
10/748`077
11,350`418
11/965,483
EXPENDITURE ANALYSIS.-(5%)
34
General Government
35
2'742,833
2,132/469
2,489`292
2/662`477
2,879,1113
Fire Dept.
36
798'154
842/595
878,613
876/840
929/451
Transportation
37
3`417,698
3`622,760
3`840,125
4`070`533
4,314`765
Environmental
38
83`441
84`835
85,709
86/888
87'346
Health
39
116/117
123,084
130`469
138,297
146,595
Community Services
40
2`295,785
2,423`255
2`525`143
2,668 734
2,710`565
Planning Dept.
41
712,651
755`261
798,726
846/649
897`448
Total
43
10,166/679
9.984`259
10`748`077
11,7350 ,418
11,965,483
44
DEBT RETIREMENT:
45
Courtice Fire Hall
46
39,200
39`468
39,405
Darlington Arena
47
18'166
18,166
18,166
18`166
18,166
-- --
Sewer-Jackman Rd.
48
D`892
8`457
8`743
8`966
9,127
8,506 8,605
Sewer-Coleman
49
4,417
4`815
4/553
4/291
4,636
4`322 4/615
High School Aud.
50
10,73B
11`115
10`403
10`691
10,890
- --
Darlington Arena
51
89,609
89`367
89`490
89/868
-
- -
P.U.C.-Buwmanville
52
1,501
1`739
1v608
1,478
--
-- --
Police & Fire Building
53
42/967
43,100
Bow. PUC-Town Portion
54
298
291
Industrial Land
55
1`788
1,746
-
-
--
_ --
Add: New Arena-2,5m
56
347,663
347,663
347`663
347,663 347,663
AdminCentre-2.5m
DEBENTURES OUTSTANDING
Funding
Local Imp. Charges
Reserve Fund-Ind.
Reserve Fund
Tax Levy
Total Funding
Mates of Taxation-General
Residential & Farm
Commercial & Indust.
Percentage Increase
57
1147,663
347,663
347,663
347,663
347,663
59
217`576
218,264
867`694
828`786
738`145
708`154
708,546
61
62
15,80
15.302
14,904
14`735
13`763
V
V
63
1,780
1`746
V
V
V
V
0
64
0
0
695/326
695,326
695,326
6-15,326
695`326
65
200,680
201,216
157,464
118`725
29`056
12`828
13`220
67
217,576
218,264
867`694
828,786
738,145
708,154
708'546
68
69
70
71
79.355
81.317
89.07
88.968
88.567
72
93.359
95.667
104.749
104.668
104.196
73
74
2.47%
9.49%
+0.08%
-0.45%
7.CAPlTAL FINANCING
76
Source of Funds(proj'd)
Funds
0
/o 5,380,150 1'
382,550
764`700 1,004,500
831,400
Reserve
79
117,000
432,5VV
658 0VV
,
469 VOV
,
484 �VV
`
Reserves
Cont'ib^fromOthers
OO
8�
469`000
�' 500
V
722` 500
O
755`500
V
705,000
V
660`500
Ontario Grants
V
V
V
Other
TAX LEVY
82
83
V
1,134,700
v
i 604,4VV
`
957,0VV
974`500
833,000
Debentures
84 5,365,700
0
V
V
V
-----------_
86 $13
_ --
424 O5V $4,\41`95V $3,155`2VV
$3,153`00V
$2,809`00V
Total
, ,
87 ========
8.CAPlTAL E%P.(PROJ)
88
uv $13
424 V5V $4
, ,
$2,609,000
�41 950 $J`�55,2OV $3`�53/0OO $2,�,0VO
90===========
=/=='================================
�
CAPITAL EXP.ANALySlG:
91
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~=~~~~~~
92
8EN.GOV'T-Admio.Centre
93
5`024,100
350,V0V___________________________
94 ____---_____---_
PROTECTION-PERSONS & PROPERTY
95
V
20,000
V
15,000
-Animal Control
96
97
0
152,000
532`5VV_____`________`________`___
155'0OV
328 0VO
170,000
-Fire Dept.
98 ---------------
99
152`000
532`500
175`000
328`000
05,000
_
100 ----------------
PUBLIC WORKS
'
-Roa Constr »
\O\
102
2,576,000
2,J25`�0
l`9V6,NN
2`155,000
2,056,000
0
-Bridge �idge & Culvert Cunst,
103
55`000
V
V
V
V
O
-
-Sidewalks
�O4
105
�7O`000
3,000
«
6 500
`
6 5VV
,
6 5V0
`
17,500
- '
St Lighting
1�
0
�0/0�
�v�
�/�
J/4�
-Equipment
0
V
V
V
V
-Miscellaneous
107
108
109
2,804,000
2,601`500
2,418,500
2'468`500
2,2,444,500 A0
Total
110
COMMUNITY SERVICES
1\1
112
�6 8V0
�7`25V
�� �0
`
204 50V
`
31 4V0
`
��
-Facilities
1\3
5�/��
` `
304,700
1�,�
00
�,�
52` 000
�`�N
)
48,100
-Equipment
114
60,550
�` NN
77`
V
V
-Cemeteries
115
� ` 3VV
V
V
Total
1\6
TOTAL CAPITAL EXPENSES
iD
118
5/443,950
657/950
561`700
356'500
179`500
1\9
120
13,424/050
4/141,950
-
3`155,200
3,153,000
2`809`000
121
122
RATES OF TAXATION-CAPITAL
123
124
23.459
32.784
Ulq86
�8.766
15^571
Residential & Farm
���iai&l��.
1�
�.5�
38.5�
�.3�
�.K0
�8 31q
~
\26
127
39.75%
-42.09%
-1.15%
-17.03%
Percentage Increase
128
TOTAL RATES OF TAXATION
Residential &F�
129
�
N2 814
114 00
1N�022
107.735
104'138
1�^5�
Commercial & Indust.
131
��'��
.
1�'��
.
��N�
.
1�.7�
1,2 ---------------------------------------------------------
133 10.9BX - 5.33' %. - 0.27% -3.34%
134 -------------------------------------- ---- ------- --------- - - -- - --
Schedule 'B'
Estimated Cash Flow -Based on Continued Budgeting of Debentures Retired & Other 5oures of Funds:
BY -LAW EXPLANATION YR.DEBENTURE 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993
RETIRED
75-74
Newc.Fire Hall 1986
21,775
21,775
21,775
21,775
21,775
21,775
21,775
1987
Baseline Bridge 1986
9,137
9,137
9,137
9,137
9,137
9,137
9,137
1989
Works Garage 1966
4,781
4,781
4,781
4,781
4,781
4,781
4,781
1990
B.PUC -Town Port. 1986
1,689
1,689
1,689
1,689
1,689
1,689
1,689
1991
B.PUC -Town Port. 1986
645
645
645
645
645
645
645
68 -18
Police & Fire Bld.1988
168,256
43,100
43,100
43,100
43,100
43,100
68 -20
B.PUC -Town Port. 1988
290
290
290
290
290
68 -20
industrial Debent.1988
1,746
1,746
1,746
1,746
1,746
u1 -78
Courtice Fire Hall1989
39,405
39,405
39,405
39,405
74 -45
Darlington Arena 1990
69,867
89,867
89,867
70-26
PUC- Bowmanville 1990
1,478
1,478
1,478
74 -68
Darlington Arena 1991
18,167
18,167
71 -26
High School Aud. 1991
10,890
10,890
-
Administrative Imp
20,000
200,000
20,00
200,0
200,000
-
Hospital Donation
-
83,00
83,00
83,00
83,00
83,00
83,00
-
US Exch -Fire Hall
15,393
15,393
15,393
15,393
-
- D'Igtn Arena
26, 838
26,838
-
Density Grant
150,00
150,000
150,00
150,00
.150,000
150,000
150,000
TOTAL AVAILABLE CASH
188,027 271,027 516,163
570,961
662,306
718,201
718,201
Excss Carried over
188,027
From previous yr
271,027
279,891
155,526
122,506
145,381
* *TOTAL CASH
975,217
850,852
817,832
840,707
863,582
***DEBENTURE PAY'T REV D
-Arena @ 2.5 million
347,663
347,663
347,663
347,663
347,663
- Admin. @ 2. 5 million
347,663
347,663
347,663
347,663
347,663
Excess Cash
279,891
155,526
122,506
145,381
168,256
(file - MARIE)
4
fir'
SCHEDULE (C)
ARENA FINANCING
Sale of Old Arena
Ontario Hydro
Lot Levy Community Services
Fund Raising
Arena Reserve
Engineering and Inspection Fees
Debenture
Balance of Wintario Grant
175,000
180,000
434,300
1,100,000
338,749
500,000
2,352,651
312,500
5,393,200
APPENDIX 'A'
REPORT NO. CS -37 -87
November 4, 1987
REPORT ON BOOSTER PUMPING STATION
PHILLIPS BARRATT KAISER was requested to investigate alternate
solutions to the problem of supplying adequate water pressure for fire
protection to the site of the new sports complex at the corner of Regional
Road 57 and Highway 2. A conventional booster system had been
conceptually designed by Durham Region and the ensuing capital cost
estimate was $130,000.
It is our understanding that a permanent boosting station is imminent
to service this area, and a collective agreement has been reached by local
developers to this purpose. The estimated schedule for this was two to
three years.
Based on information from the report titled "Water Supply For The
Bowmanville Arena" by Totten Sims Hubicki Associates and PBK mechanical
design data, an alternative "prepackaged" booster pumping system was
selected from qualified suppliers in order to supply the required pressure for
the fire protection system only. This equipment complies with the following
governing Specifications and Guides:
Ontario Building Code
National Fire Prevention Association NFPA 13 and 20
Insurers Advisory Organization, IAO Intepretive Guide
Underwriters Laboratory.
The installation of the above system can be accommodated within the
existing design with some minor revisions due to reduced domestic
pressures.
This system was preliminarily designed, specified and included in Post
Tender Addendum No. 3. The total extra cost to include the fire booster
pumping system in the contract package would be $30,000.
EXCERPT FROM
ADDENDUM NO. THREE
I
BOWMANVILLE ARENA
SPECIFICATION AD3 -M1
VERTICAL IN -LINE FIRE PUMP
(Drawing No. A -1368)
October 21, 1987
PBK Job No. 87006.02
Page 1 of 4
Supply and install as indicated on plans one (1) Darling Ultra
Firepak Series 1135 complete package fire pumping system or
approved equal listed and labelled by the Underwriters Laboratories
of Canada consisting of:
1. Pump
One Darling model 6 in. by 4 in. LA -F vertical inline
centrifugal fire pump listed by the Underwriters Laboratories
of Canada having a capacity of 500 USGPM for a pressure boost
of 86 PSIG. Suction pressure 27 PSIG, discharge pressure 113
PSIG).
The pump shall have bronze impeller with smooth water passages,
stainles steel shaft sleeve, mechanical shaft seal with
stainless steel metal parts, ni- resist seat, carbon washer and
Viton bellow suitable for 125 PSIG suction pressure and nickel
cast iron casing.
The pump shall furnish not less than 150 percent of rated
capacity at a pressure not less than 65 percent of rated head.
The shutoff total head of the pump should not exceed 140
perent of total rated-head.
Pump to be hydrostaticaly tested to twice the maximum pressure
developed at shut -off but not less than 400 PSIG.
SO)
SPECIFICATION AD3 -M1
2. Electric Motor
October 21, 1987
PBK Job No. 87006.02
Page 2 of 4
The fire pump shall be driven by 40 hp, 3500 rpm, 575 volt, 3
phase, 60 cycle standard vertical close coupled open damp -proof
motor with 1.15 service factor.
3. Fire Pump Controller
The Fire Pump Controller shall be specifically labelled for
fire pump service by Underwriters Laboratories of Canada,
(Commander Model D- 10630 -D3B -165). The control equipment shall
be completely assembled, wired and tested at the factory.
All equipment shall be enclosed in CEMA 1 enclosure with drip
cover.
The controller shall be of the full service full voltage
across - the -line type and incorporating the following:
a) Circuit breaker complying with requirements of NFPA 20.
Capacity of the circuit breaker shall be 22,000 amperes
interrupting capacity.
b) Emergency start mechanism.
c) Motor starter capable of being energized automatically
through the pressure switch, or manually with selector
switch on "Manual" position.
SPECIFICATION AD3 -M1
October 219 1987
PBK Job No. 87006.02
Page 3 of 4
d) The pressure switch set to cut in at PSIG and out at
PSIG.
e) Manual stop.
f) Pilot lamps to indicate circuit breaker closed and power
available.
g) Alarm relay to energize a remote audible or visible alarm
through an independent source of power to indicate circuit
breaker open or power failure.
h) Manual selector station - A two position switch shall be
provided on the enclosure marked "Automatic" and "Manual ".
4. Mounting
The fire pump shall be complete with suction and discharge
O.S. & Y gate valves, silent check valve, 3 -1/2 in. dial
suction and discharge gauges, casing relief valve and with
suction and discharge flanges, all mounted and wired, along
with control panel on the common base to produce a self
contained packaged fire protection system complete with 9B -7 -95
Jockey pump and contain D- 106610561 -A01B1 panel mounted, piped
and wired.
SPECIFICATION AD3 -M1
October 21, 1987
PBK Job No. 87006.02
Page 4 of 4
5. Functions
Jockey pump shall start automatically on a pressure drop in the
system and stop automatically once the pressure has reached the
cut -out point.
Should p ressure continue
e to drop below start point of Jockey
pump the fire pump shall start automatically and build pressure
int. The Jockey pump shall stop automaticaly
back to cut -out po
anually shut -off. Both
but the fire pump will run until m
control panels will contain contacts for remo e sealnshalllbe
of loss of power and pump running. The fire pump
protected during periods of no flow by
setting the casing
relief valve to open 10 PSI above the start point.
6. Installation
rovided to absorb any
A substantial foundation shall be p late.
vibration_ and to form a solid support to the unit base p
suitable foundation bolts shall be embedded in concrete with
pipe sleeves to permit adjustment of bolts after concrete
poured. The pumping unit shall be placed on its foundation,
carefully
levelled and the foundation bolts tightened. The
base plate shall be carefully grouted with concrete and
foundation bolts tightened again after concrete is dry.
7. Testin
The fire pump unit shall be thoroughly shop tested in
manufacturing plant and ULC labelled prior to shipment,
separate labels for pump and controller.
416 292 3493 ; 4163351911 :
295 10- 16 -87; 10:56 AM; ^4q` FRGE . 03 ^�_re
XEROX.TELECOPIER S
OCT 15 , �;7 12: 05 rya r�uRo `�� tic8t in -line find PUC 1,
harts
` ! r
Ver setectlan c
F CLASS r bteaux de s6lection des PomPe
C1.A5$E Ta inCendle V6rticaie$ on Irgne
6 F'UMp DIVtSICiN POMPES
(1891 /min) 2"
X 1.1/2„ LA -F
50
USGPM
USGPM
15 USGPM
TOTAL
WT-
TOTAL
WT-
Psi
PRODUCT # BHP MAR
PRODUCT #
M0,101,
HEAD
15.0
MAX- NP
egg.
Kp
PSI
FT.
kPa
Ul- ULC
6.5 7.1/2
319
145
40
92
276
$4320 64220
8.6
54320 54220
8.6
53
122
365
54221
11.5 10
374
170
68
157
469
54321
54222
17.2 15
400
181
91
210
627
54322
54223
23.0 20
505
229
125
289
862
54323
54224
28.7 25
605
274
138
319
952
54324
452
84324
54304 5..
54205
z50 USGPM (9465 I1min) 4" 3-r•• LA•F
----- �"`I.- 1 TOTAL WT
{x1341 /min? 2'
X 1. 1/2
rr LA -F
USGPM
15 USGPM
TOTAL
TOTAL
WT-
Psi
F f •
PRODUCT #
M0,101,
ULC
15.0
HEAL
592 26
MAX.
P
Lqs,
K9
PSI FT.
WS
U L U l-C
6.5
7.112
319
145
4.0 92
Z76
54320 54220
8.6
92
276
54300 54200
51 118
352
5 4221
11.5
10
374
170
67 158
462
54321
54222
17. 2
15
404
1$1
91 210
627
84322
54223
23.0
20
505
229
125 289
862
54 323
54224
28.7
25
605
274
139 319
452
84324
54304 5..
54205
33.0
30
680
z50 USGPM (9465 I1min) 4" 3-r•• LA•F
----- �"`I.- 1 TOTAL WT
(56811min) 3" X 2,r LA•F
150
USGPM
HEAD
TOTAL
WT•
L.BS. K9
Psi
F f •
PRODUCT #
M
ULC
15.0
HEAL
592 26
40
92
MAX-
HTOR
LBS•
K9
Psl
F T
kPa
UL ULC
$•6
7.112
347
156
40
92
276
54300 54200
11.5
10
Q02
183
51
11$
352
54301 54201
11 2
15
428
194
71
164
490
54302 54202
23.0
20
533
242
92
213
635
5 4303 54203
28 7
11
25
633
287
112
259
773
54304 5..
54205
33.0
30
680
309
125
289
802
54305
z50 USGPM (9465 I1min) 4" 3-r•• LA•F
----- �"`I.- 1 TOTAL WT
' 6,r X 4•r LA -'F '
*500 U ,GPM (1133 %m in1 ToTAi
HEAD PRODUCT # MAX. M roR
LOS.
UL
ULC
37 I�ntin) Z" X 1.1/2�r LA Psi FT. kPa 21.5 20 760
10f1 USGPM ( P MOTOR TOTAL wT. 40 9.2 310 54313 54213 23.0
PRODUCT # 45 104 28,7 25
�- - 86
HEAD MAX• HP Lss• Kg 379 54314 54214 90;
ULC 55 127 34.5 30
k" UL 4a9 54315 5421' 93
PSI FT 6.5 19 145 65 150 46 p 40
7.1/2 3 54216 113
40 92 276 54320 54220 8.6 86 199 693 5431$ 57.5 .50
c50 116 345 10 314 170 107 247 738 54317 54217 - 60 11S
455 54321 54221 11.5 4b0 181 69.4
66 152 17.2 15 125 289 862 54318 54218 76 12
54322 54222 20 605 229 896 54319 54219 76.0
91 210 927 23.0 130 300
125 289 862 54323 54223 266 605 274
138 319 052 54324
•54224 2$ -7 *499 USGPM for Ul - label
sent bas�e5 sur les Prassions
NOTES= uiasances de m
1, Toutes ies solo dent eux diverses P
mum corresp de 1.15
NOTES: aximum Pressures with tear d'un facteur de 5
sad on m avec w� facteur de service vente-
tors, with 1.15 service factor' 2, pour des s+lectiom avec mo
1 • All selections are based consult our sales
f different size motor rte 1.0, consulter notre s disport ble.
service factor motor selection,
n est pas d p 1`385
3• t_'�tiquatLe FM r
2. For 1.4 S $uQ @r.edeslRPmPt
office• nneea n CA 1:aGU:: s,ns prude S
3. FM label not avaiiable c1 to cbanpe wdho °t
Dale subSe
$� M
HEAD
MAX-
AX.
M
T
L.BS. K9
Psi
F f •
kPa
UL
ULC
15.0
i5
592 26
40
92
276
64307
54207
t7.2
47
109
324
54248
23.0
20
697 3'
gg
1r0
440
543 8
54249
28-7
25
7g7 31
7 6
176
525
54349
54210
3 • 5
30
644 3
90
208
622
54310
54211
45 0
40
872 2
110
254
760
54311
.--
54212
50.4
50
942 '
120
277
829
54312
' 6,r X 4•r LA -'F '
*500 U ,GPM (1133 %m in1 ToTAi
HEAD PRODUCT # MAX. M roR
LOS.
UL
ULC
37 I�ntin) Z" X 1.1/2�r LA Psi FT. kPa 21.5 20 760
10f1 USGPM ( P MOTOR TOTAL wT. 40 9.2 310 54313 54213 23.0
PRODUCT # 45 104 28,7 25
�- - 86
HEAD MAX• HP Lss• Kg 379 54314 54214 90;
ULC 55 127 34.5 30
k" UL 4a9 54315 5421' 93
PSI FT 6.5 19 145 65 150 46 p 40
7.1/2 3 54216 113
40 92 276 54320 54220 8.6 86 199 693 5431$ 57.5 .50
c50 116 345 10 314 170 107 247 738 54317 54217 - 60 11S
455 54321 54221 11.5 4b0 181 69.4
66 152 17.2 15 125 289 862 54318 54218 76 12
54322 54222 20 605 229 896 54319 54219 76.0
91 210 927 23.0 130 300
125 289 862 54323 54223 266 605 274
138 319 052 54324
•54224 2$ -7 *499 USGPM for Ul - label
sent bas�e5 sur les Prassions
NOTES= uiasances de m
1, Toutes ies solo dent eux diverses P
mum corresp de 1.15
NOTES: aximum Pressures with tear d'un facteur de 5
sad on m avec w� facteur de service vente-
tors, with 1.15 service factor' 2, pour des s+lectiom avec mo
1 • All selections are based consult our sales
f different size motor rte 1.0, consulter notre s disport ble.
service factor motor selection,
n est pas d p 1`385
3• t_'�tiquatLe FM r
2. For 1.4 S $uQ @r.edeslRPmPt
office• nneea n CA 1:aGU:: s,ns prude S
3. FM label not avaiiable c1 to cbanpe wdho °t
Dale subSe
416 292 3493 3 4163351911 ; #
XEROX TELECOPIER 295 10- 16- 87;10:56 AM; PAGE. 04
OCT 16 127 12:06 DAP. DUPO 292 3493
PAGE: 4,241
Darling Jockey P'urr>tps
pompcs d'appo.int Darling
r..� r, ,,nAnCC
PUMP Ulvlwuly
3-500 RPM
mi
be controlled without running period timer. / Ces pompes doivent We control6es sans L•f nuterie
NOTE: Theso pumps are to
*THREE PHASE
SINGLE PHASE
*TRIPHASt
WT
CAPACITY BOOST
typNOPHAS�
_
pRODUCT
PRODUCT
MODEL NO.
POIbS
LBS
DEBIT SUR PRC- -SSION
USGPM
NP
MODEL
MODtLE
VOLT
NO.
PRODUCT
MODELE P_ ODUIT
__.__. -
100
1/2
5A05 -100
115
115
7000
7001
5805.100
5807.130 '
50
55
130
3/4
5A07 -130
7002.
5610 190
60
5 190
1
5010 -190
230.
230
7003
5B15.260
70
_
260
.1 -1/2
51315.260
5 0
$0
1/2
9A05•$Q
116
7004
9605 -$Q
91307 -95
55
95
3/4
9A07 -95
115
7005
7006
9810 -140
60
9 140
1
9D70.14Q
230,-
230
7407
9815.200
70
200
1-1/2
90 16.200
9020 -240
230
7008
91320 -240
80
240
2
1/2
12A05-45
115
7009
12805 45
50
55
45
85
3/4
12A07 -85
115
7010
12807 -85
12810 125
60
12 125
1
12010 -125
230
7011
7012
121315 -170
70
•
17 0
0
1 -1/2
12015.170
230
7013
12B20 -195
80
195
2
12020 .195
230
50
25
1/2
18A05 -25
115
7015
18805.25
18807 -40
55
qp �
314
18A07 -40
115
7016
7017
18810-6
60
-1
78 65 '
1
18D1065
18015 US
230
2"m
70M
90
05
1.1/2
2
18['�2Ci -1 015.
23Q
70110
� 1fig2d f15
lO5
25D 10.60
230
7021
25810•GO
GQ
70
60 �
70
1
1 -1/2.
25DIS -70
230
7oz2
25615.70
25g2Q 85
80
25
85
2
25020.85
230
7023
TURN
PAGE FOR CURVES
CUURBE5 AU VI:RSU
VQIR
"Any Standard. Voltage
`Tout voltage standard
-^
- N
0
rr
itSV�M
GIA'IEIJ S�auS
molESf pe,%Jr
µlLLllf thlLj
FIRE PUMP 30Krs l a�Ut~nP uiL+�►� . a'
3.�
�.
z3_ sa" JO-3 8
j
21,
Gc�IJ1Ro�► E+� Lot�TRal.LEK
lo2
�b
l5Z4
584 14 2 ~
y,b
a..
41'
bb"
24' 289 ' 6z ,
:.SILENT -Cl
VA1 -VE-
CHECK va
GALL VA
v I sca
R
z
c
x
n
r
n
c
c
z
4 IT
z
-I
r N
1-0
U,
c
I
• rk� v.
J
U
T�
N.i
�l
ro
A
[D N
W cD
N
W
.P
tD
W
y
• f- ��'. 0)
E 3 J
m W
. Ut
4 S I S S sc�Lc! �J T 5 D A.RLIN GT DuRO
SERIES � 125 � 1135' � ECHELtE: LTIE�t' LTD � N
'� _ULTRA P L U S ORN. *T GC G°i I ha MONTREAL — CANARA
Ot55. PAR R� '
No
CKa. SY
■
w -
R
z
c
x
n
r
n
c
c
z
4 IT
z
-I
r N
1-0
U,
c
I
• rk� v.
J
U
T�
N.i
�l
ro
A
[D N
W cD
N
W
.P
tD
W
y
• f- ��'. 0)
E 3 J
m W
. Ut
4 S I S S sc�Lc! �J T 5 D A.RLIN GT DuRO
SERIES � 125 � 1135' � ECHELtE: LTIE�t' LTD � N
'� _ULTRA P L U S ORN. *T GC G°i I ha MONTREAL — CANARA
Ot55. PAR R� '
No
CKa. SY
APPENDIX 'D'
REPORT NO. CS -37 -87
Report from Regional Works Department Staff
The Region's existing policy
is basically that the cost of extensions of
watermains and sanitary
sewers for industrial, commercial or institutional
is aid entirely by the applicant. The reason for this is based on
uses p for these uses-
with fact that the Region does not charge a lot levy
Policy, when a watermain or a sanitary sewer is
in accordance with this p y� the Region will pay for oversizing
constructed for any of the above uses,
provided that the development concerned is:
1) Inside the Urban Service Area, and purposes.
2) Inside the area designated for Lot Levy p ur p
r watermain required to service the new arena facility
The 16 inch diamete rovide adequate
is sized to provide capacity for the flow required to p
fire protection for this facility in addition,
the arena is located
'de the urban service area and outside the area designated basis within
o
outside there as n
levy calculation purposes. For these reasons,
existing p
olicies, for the Region to share in the cost of the construction
of the watermain.
the Region would be prepared to enter into an agreement with the
However, from any property owner
Town to "endeavour to collect" frontage charges to the Town.
whose property abuts the watermain and reimburse �� money connects to
This would, of course, occur at the time the prop
the watermain.
Furthermore, the Region of Durham police building,
located immediately
north of the site for the new arena is now serviced with water a well.
It may prove fruitful to enter into negotiations ewi watermain. l such that
Department for a contribution for taee of the watermain extension, staff
the police facility can take advantage o erty va
will be following up this matter and will contact i nr rin order
owners whose property would abut the watermain extens
determine if they have a need to connect to the watermain.
This latter point would also be related to future development
possibilities that would abut the watermain extension in the vicinity of
the new arena facility at some point in time in the future.