COUNCIL MEETING January 31, 2019 AGENDA TEAM INTRODUCTION 5m - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

S. G. Nesbitt Memorial Arena & Community Centre COUNCIL MEETING January 31, 2019

AGENDA TEAM INTRODUCTION 5m BACKGROUND 15m ASSESSMENT 10m PROPOSED SOLUTION 10m

TEAM INTRODUCTION

WELCOME Team Introduction

BACKGROUND Delivery Model OWNER OWNER OWNER GENERAL ARCHITECT GENERAL CONTRACTOR CONTRACTOR SUB - ARCHITECT ARCHITECT CONTRACTOR CONTRACTOR SUB - ENGINEERS & ENGINEERS & CONSULTANTS CONTRACTOR CONSULTANTS Design Bid Build Design Build IPD

BACKGROUND

BACKGROUND History of Community Centre 1972 Construction start of arena 1972 Wood structure revised to steel alternative 1989 McEwen Report  Chloride salts found in original mortar  Brine leaks under rink slab 1992 Expansion of Community Hall, Repairs to Arena 2010 AECOM structural report  Block wall deterioration 2014  Greer Galloway structural report  Block wall deterioration  Brine Leak 2018 McIntosh Perry structural report  Assessment for re-use of existing structure

APPROACH Re-Using Existing 2014 Greer Galloway Report provided a cost estimate of $2.4M to retrofit the existing arena The analysis did not include areas that were inaccessible (including foundations) The IPD team had Mcintosh Perry review the existing conditions to assess the scope of work for structure re-use / expansion

Evaluation Re-Using Existing  Can the foundations support the additional roof load (code, new insulation)?  Can the structure support the additional loads of the roof and walls (insulated)?

Evaluation Foundation

Evaluation Foundation

Evaluation Foundation The IPD exposed the foundation to the footing and found:  The original foundation is the chloride contaminated block and is deteriorated (not salvageable)  The piers at columns are not salvageable (constructed primarily to limit frost damage)  The existing footings were smaller than the 1972 design requirements. (Underpinning required)

Evaluation Structure The IPD team’s structural engineer assessed the steel structure and determined:  Corrosion continues to be an issue with the existing steel  Re-use will require reinforcing & remediation.  Frame would need to be dismantled & remediated.  Existing block wall is deteriorating

Revitalization Options Two key options: 1. Re-Use Existing Steel Frame  Underpin existing footings  Replace existing foundation walls  Replace existing piers  Reinforce and repair existing steel.  Dismantle and remediate 2. New structure

Revitalization Cost COST OF NEW RIGID COST OF NEW FRAME: COST OF RE-USE: ‘FRAMELESS’ $1,583,619 $905,000k $1,118,437 185’ rink

Revitalization Options Building envelope thermal efficiency: 70 New Frameless 60 Refurbish 50 40 30 20 10 0 Roof Insulation R-Value Wall Insulation R-Value The higher the R-value , the greater the insulating effectiveness.

GOALS

PROGRAM Key Spaces Community Hub Offices Change Areas Program Space  Entrance  Reception  Player  Activity Space  Lounge  Admin  Referee  Walking Track  Existing Lobby  Office Area  Activity Space  Fitness Area  Washrooms  Consult Room  Universal  Rink  Concession fitout Washroom

GOALS Durability  2010 AECOM report identified a potential extension of the existing rink life to 2035 (17 years remaining)  A new structure will provide a life of 40+ years (beyond 2060)

GOALS Sustainability • No prerequisite credits • More flexible material use • Goals for GHG reduction, energy efficiency, Indoor Air Quality. • Prerequisite credits • More prescriptive material use • Goals for GHG reduction, energy efficiency, Indoor Air Quality. • Detailed documentation. Source: Green Globes vs LEED by Arium, 08 29 2017, https://www.ariumae.com/green-globes-vs-leed/

GOALS Sustainability Certified Projects (78 in Ontario)

GOALS Sustainability  3 Green Globes  Integrated Design Process  Energy Efficiency  Environmental Impact  Waste Management  Indoor Environmental Quality  Sustainability Performance Assessment

GOALS Sustainability  Replacement of uninsulated structure to better performing structure  Use of high performance fenestration systems  Use of high efficiency building systems equipment  Use of water efficient fixtures  Stormwater management, reduction of run-off  Mitigation of light pollution  Ventilation and exhaust measures for indoor air quality

ASSESSMENT

ASSESSMENT facility  Reached a critical point for the existing facility’s life cycle  Inadequate ventilation (ammonia plant safety)  Accessibility (compliance with AODA in 2025)  Address recommendations from TSSA review  Doing nothing is not an option programs  Arena programs will be down for the duration of construction  Upper level Community Centre programs and events will be impacted for a few months to connect the new addition to the existing facility

ASSESSMENT New vs Refurbish Report does not address: • Foundations • Remediation of rigid frame • Cladding to protect new wall Source: Inspection Report – SG Nesbitt, Minden, 2014 by Greer Galloway Consulting Engineers

ASSESSMENT New vs Refurbish New Refurbish AODA compliant facilities 40 year durability Hockey Canada compliant rink Modern, efficient ice plant Connect scout room to facility Improved ventilation Improved security through office centralization Accessible drop off Safer parking areas Sprinklering existing (asset protection) Code improvements Accessible connection between 1 st and 2 nd floor Energy efficient building Certified sustainable design

ASSESSMENT Construction cost SITE + LANDSCAPE: $0.64M RENOVATIONS: $0.4M ACTIVITY SPACE ARENA + LOBBY: $8.64M (GYM): $2.81M

ASSESSMENT Cost options Defer Gym  Gym+Lobby Value $3,520,000  Addition Cost to Rink $360,600  Premium to phase $880,800  Additional cost to $4,761,400 (x 3.1%) = $147,600 defer to start in 2020 $4,909,000  Additional cost to $4,909,000 (x 3.1%) = $152,100 defer to start in 2021 $5,061,100

ASSESSMENT Cost options 185’ rink in lieu of 200’ rink  Reduced cost for 185’ Rink $85,500  Reduced changeroom $23,000 sizes & amenities  Additional landscape costs $8,500 for reduced footprint  Net savings $100,000

QUESTIONS structural  If we delay, how much longer do we have before the building department shuts the facility down? response  2010 Aecom Report: list recommendations to extend working life of the building, also notes the arena to be re-inspected in 5 years  2014 Greer Galloway Report: notes major restoration required within 5-8 years (Ie. 2019- 2022)

QUESTIONS inflation  If we delay, historically what’s the inflation for the costs? response  Year over year: 3.1% (Source: Hanscomb & Stats. Can.)  Market driven statistic  Approximate cost increase to delay entire project:  For a 1 year delay, to start in 2020: $387,000  For a 2 year delay, to start in 2021: $787,000

QUESTIONS consultants  What are the architecture and engineering costs moving past Validation? response  $ 305,130 (Source: Line 1a of Class C Cost Estimate)  Plus attributable portion of Risk Pool

QUESTIONS operations  What are the operational cost increases? response  Additional staffing cost $70,000  Anticipating energy costs to be neutral through energy efficiencies savings  Anticipating lower building maintenance repair costs, to be offset by annual increase contributions to reserves for future capital maintenance

QUESTIONS maintenance  What are the maintenance costs required to keep current ice plant operational and safe for another one to two years? response  Approximately $250,000  1996 Chiller replacement ($100,000)  Evaporative condenser replacement ($85,000)  Dehumidifier replacement ($35,000)  Compressor rebuilds ($10,000)  Piping/valves/labour ($20,000)

PROPOSED SOLUTION

CONCEPT General EXISTING TO BE DEMOLISHED EXISTING TO BE RENOVATED EXISTING TO REMAIN

CONCEPT Site 7 1 6 1 MAIN ENTRY & DROP OFF 2 2 ACCESSIBLE PARKING 3 3 PARKSIDE STREET 4 CONNECTION TO REDEVELOPMENT 4 5 HOUSING REDEVELOPMENT 6 PARKING LOT SECONDARY ENTRY 5 DROP-OFF ACCESS ROUTE

CONCEPT Level 1 12 9 11 10 8 3 3 5 7 5 3 1 NEW RINK 6 2 ICE PLANT 8 COMMUNITY HUB 1 3 3 RINK CHANGEROOMS 9 ADMINISTRATION 4 REF/FLEX CHANGEROOMS CONCESSION 10 3 5 CHANGEROOMS WASHROOMS 11 3 6 UNIVERSAL WASHROOM SCOUT HALL 12 4 2 7 ACTIVITY SPACE ELEVATOR

CONCEPT Level 2 7 6 3 4 5 3 1 2 1 NEW RINK 5 WALKING TRACK 2 BLEACHERS 6 INTERIOR LINK TO HALL & WARM VIEWING 3 WASHROOMS 7 COMMUNITY HALL 3 4 FITNESS ROOM ELEVATOR

CONCEPT Walkthrough Building approach

Community Hub

Community Hub

Gymnasium / Walking track

Ice rink and seating

CONCEPT JAN 2019 implementation APRIL 2019 AUGUST 2020