A new design for the aquatic/curling facility was brought to Cochrane council March 24, cutting the overall cost of the project down to $47.3 million, only $2.3 million higher than council’s approved budget, which was met with excitement by all but one council member.
Saying the price tag of the facility is ‘obnoxiously expensive,’ councillor Morgan Nagel said that residents he had spoken to did not want a brand new $10 million curling facility, and even proposed that the curling portion of the project be completely scrapped all together.
After several councillors voiced support for the curling facility, saying people in the community wanted a new facility to replace the old building on 5th Ave., Nagel said he believed it was not the community that wanted the new rink, but those who are members of the current Curling Club, and said it was their own feasibility study that asked for a brand new $10 million facility, and what would anyone expect from the Curling Club’s own study?
Nagel also questioned why council would not give those wanting to build a turf field in Cochrane the money they requested, but then provide one of the best curling rinks in all of Southern Alberta at a cost of $10 million.
Mayor Ivan Brooker, councillors Jeff Toews, Tara McFadden, Mary Lou Davis, Gaynor Levisky and Ross Watson were all opposed to Nagel’s amendment to get rid of the curling portion of the new facility, saying they would not be at the development stage until September once they had a better idea of how fundraising had gone, and that at this point, the community and town should remain positive about the project in its effort to raise money.
Suzanne Gaida, Cochrane’s senior manager of community services, countered Nagel’s comments about what he had heard from the community about the new Curling Club, saying that since the rink was redesigned to be a multi-sport facility, she has heard a lot of positive feedback.
Watson said that if there was a genuine desire in the community to scrap the curling facility, the conversation should have taken place two years ago during the early planning stages, and not this far into the game.
Toews said the town needs to plan for the future and not be shortsighted. He also pointed out that if the curling portion were scrapped, significant leasable space would be lost, therefore losing revenue to pay the facility’s operating costs.
Gaida highlighted several key cost-saving measures that were taken to lower the price tag of the aquatic/curling facility. These included:
- Removing the bubble pit from the therapy pool
- Reducing the size of the lazy river
- Removal of a staff hallway and an office
- Reducing the mechanical area
- Reducing the bleacher capacity to 300 seats
- Removed the outdoor spray feature
And in the curling portion:
- Reduced the size of the mechanical, workshop and refrigeration
With the removal of the outdoor spray feature, a second slide was added in the aquatic centre, but at a lower cost than the spray feature, there was still an overall savings.
Lease space sits at 16,000 square feet, which once rented is expected to offset the facility’s operating costs.
Council’s budget breakdown for the project includes a $21.2 million contribution from the town, $10.6 from fundraising (yet to be achieved), $6 million from federal/provincial grants (yet to be achieved), $5 million from developer community enhancement fees and $2.2 million from Rocky View County.
With 2017 being the anticipated opening year, and the year’s total revenues expected to be $1,590,200, expenses at $1,810,900, a deficiency of revenue over expenditure of $220,700 and a contribution to the lifecycle of the building of $179,300, the pro forma statement reveals a yearly loss of $400,000 for the facility.
The current pool on 5th Ave. lost over $400,000 in 2013.
Council approved the use of $2 million during its meeting to fund the completion of the working drawings and prepare the tender for the new facility. Nagel was the sole vote against.
