Arenas – Construction and Operation Rink-In-A-Box and Contracting Out Operations

Arenas – Construction and Operation

Rink-In-A-Box and Contracting Out Operations

Recommendation:
That the March 13, 2009, Capital Construction Department report 2009CC8332 be received for information.

Report Summary

This report provides information relating to construction and operations of arenas.

Previous Council/Committee Action

At the December 2008 City Council Budget meeting, the following motion was passed:

That Administration provide a report to the March 16, 2009, Community Services Committee meeting outlining:

  1. Options for implementing a “rink-in-a-box” design concept for the balance of projects in the
    2009-19 arena capital development strategy.
  2. Cost implications and possibilities for contracting out the operations of these arenas.
  3. Timelines indicating whether using the “rink-in-a-box” design would enable these projects to be built within the next two to three years.

Report

Options for Implementing Rink-In-A-Box for 2009-19 Arena Development Strategy

·  The term “rink-in-a-box” has been used to describe refrigerated outdoor rinks and fabric enclosed rinks, where a single vendor can have the facility operational within a short period of time.

·  Cost estimates were obtained from a rink-in-a-box vendor for a single outdoor refrigerated rink and an enclosed facility. These estimates are based on a generic facility, and they do not include site specific costs which can only be determined once a site has been identified (e.g. land acquisition, servicing to the site, parking, landscaping, permit fees, project management fees, etc.).

·  The delivery and installation of a single refrigerated outdoor ice sheet is estimated to cost $1.5 million (2009 dollars). This cost would include rink boards and ice plant, but does not include dressing rooms, washrooms, seating, lighting, and other site-specific costs that can not be estimated until a specific site has been identified above.

·  The delivery and installation of a single enclosed ice sheet is estimated to cost $5 million (2009 dollars). The facility would be covered with an aluminium frame wrapped in an insulated architectural membrane. The amenities would include: dressing rooms, heating, ventilation, stands and lighting. This amount does not include a separate structure to house the ice cleaning equipment and ice plant, and it does not include site-specific costs identified above.

·  The above estimates were obtained from discussions with a rink-in-a-box vendor for a “typical” facility based in another city.

·  The 10-Year Arena Capital Development Strategy (2009-2019) (The Arena Strategy) recommends addressing arena needs through the following activities:

  1. Continue with planned maintenance of existing arenas; (Castle Downs, Clareview, Londonderry, Glengarry, Michael Cameron, Kenilworth, Donnan, Mill Woods and Kinsmen);
  2. Rehabilitate and provide minor upgrades (e.g. dressing room/lobby enhancements) to arenas that are in reasonable condition and where the programs are well supported (Bill Hunter, Callingwood, Confederation);
  3. Close and replace existing arenas at the end of their life cycle (close Westwood and Oliver and replace with a North Central Twin Arena, close Crestwood and Coronation and replace with a Twin arena, close Tipton and George Hughes, and replace with a South Central Twin Arena);
  4. Twin existing arenas where the programs are supported and land permits (Grand Trunk); and
  5. Build new twin arenas for new growth areas (Southwest, Meadows, and Lewis Farms).

·  The rink-in-a-box concept could be applied to arenas falling under activities 3, 4 and 5 (see Attachment 1).

·  Both the Recreation Facility Master Plan and The Arena Strategy recommend grouping facilities to achieve cost savings and expanded user opportunities. This would involve building twin or multi-pad arenas, where possible, rather than single pad facilities.

·  In order to determine if the rink-in-a-box facility is a feasible option for future arenas, Administration needs to prepare a conceptual design for a “test” facility. This will provide refined cost estimates and timelines for a facility that would meet the programming and development process (e.g. Edmonton Design Committee, development permit process, circulation, etc.) needs specific to the City of Edmonton.

·  In conjunction with the conceptual design, emerging alternative building technologies (e.g. monolithic concrete rink-in-a-dome) needs to be researched and analyzed to ensure proper decision making. In particular, complete life cycle costs should be reviewed for all alternatives to protect the long term investment of the City.

·  Administration has already begun researching alternative building technologies, and will start preparing a conceptual design of an enclosed rink-in-a-box facility to replace the existing Oliver arena.

·  Administration will bring a report back to the October 19, 2009, Community Services Committee meeting outlining recommendations for implementing the Arena Strategy using rink-in-a-box and other alternative building technologies.

Cost Implications for Contracting out Rink-In-A-Box Arenas

·  As with traditionally built arenas, external vendors would be more interested in operating twin and multi-pad arenas than single pad arenas due to lower relative operating costs and potential for increased revenues.

·  The City may benefit from contracting out select arena operations if the vendor passes on any cost savings or additional revenues generated that the City would not have been able to obtain otherwise.

·  Any contracting out of arena operations needs to consider the current arrangement the City currently has in subsidizing minor sports users and any collective agreement obligations.

·  The City of Edmonton continues to be open to partnerships to build and operate arenas that may include the partner operating the arena (e.g. Kinsmen Arena model). These opportunities should be examined on a project by project basis to determine the overall benefit to arena users and citizens under any proposed model.

·  Community Services Department is in discussions with several partner groups on their potential involvement in helping to deliver the projects identified. As in any partnership, both parties would need to accept the proposed construction method, capital cost and operational model in order for the partnership discussions to proceed.

Timelines for Implementing Rink-In-A-Box Arenas

·  Based on discussions with a vendor that has constructed rink-in-a-box arenas in other cities, it takes about nine months to design and construct a “typical” enclosed facility.

·  Administration will be preparing a conceptual design of an enclosed rink-in-a-box facility to replace the existing Oliver Arena. This design will be based on the City of Edmonton arena programming and development process needs.

·  A more accurate schedule for completing an enclosed rink-in-a-box facility, and a potential schedule for implementing rink-in-a-box arenas for the balance of the Arena Strategy will be provided in the October 19, 2009, Community Services Committee report.

Focus Area

Improve Edmonton’s Liveability

Attachment

  1. Summary Map from 10-year Arena Capital Development Strategy

Background Information Available on Request from Department

1.  10-Year Arena Capital Development Strategy (2009-19)

Others Reviewing this Report

L. Cochrane, General Manager, Community Services Department

Page 3 of 3