Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Parkwood Pool assessment: consultants cite water loss, aging systems; repairs estimated at $1.3M–$2.4M, replacement options higher


This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »

Parkwood Pool assessment: consultants cite water loss, aging systems; repairs estimated at $1.3M–$2.4M, replacement options higher
An aquatics conditions assessment presented May 29 to the Unified Government commission found Parkwood Pool — the county’s only municipally managed swimming pool — is generally in fair condition for a facility that is more than 50 years old, but requires immediate repairs and upgrades to remain viable.

Acting County Administrator Alan House introduced the item and Parks Director Andrew Ferreira said the department has prioritized maintenance across the park system and engaged Waters Edge Consulting to assess the pool’s long‑term viability. Waters Edge project manager Lauren Osborne summarized the 2023 inspection and cost opinions.

Key findings: the facility suffered notable water loss when inspected in 2023; a valve repair since then reduced but did not eliminate leakage. The pool basins and deck show age‑related concrete repairs and movement consistent with a 50‑year‑old structure. The filtration system is original, labor‑intensive to operate, missing a strainer on the pump intake, and the chemical feed system was being maintained manually at the time of the report rather than by a required automatic chemical controller. The report found the bathhouse (restroom) layout does not meet current Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) standards (no accessible path between deck and restroom level; no compliant stalls or fixture heights). The shallow “waiting pool” lacks required sloped entry and the main pool lacks a second ADA access method (lift plus an alternate access method).

Osborne grouped recommendations into immediate, basic and enhanced improvements. Immediate priorities included locating and repairing the remaining water loss, installing a chemical controller to meet public‑health code expectations, and replacing or rebuilding the primary pump and adding a strainer. Basic work included replacement of corroded valves, sandblasting and epoxy coating of the pool basins, and replacement of the antiquated filter system; Waters Edge also noted potential lead times for new filtration equipment. Osborne said those immediate and basic repairs were estimated in the $1.315 million range (figure used in the report) and that bringing the existing building and pools into full ADA compliance would add roughly $1 million, producing a combined estimate in the $2.2M–$2.5M range for immediate/basic/ADA work.

The consultant also provided high‑level cost ranges for other choices: refurbishing the pool “as is” (immediate/basic) was the lower number; constructing a modern replacement of similar size was estimated at $4M–$7M; a larger, more fully featured aquatic center could fall in the $8M–$15M range. Waters Edge advised a system‑wide aquatics feasibility study before deciding on replacement.

Commission discussion and next steps: commissioners praised parks staff for quickly opening the pool for the season and for maintenance work that improved the visitor experience. Director Ferreira and Osborn said Parkwood opened for limited operations the previous Saturday and that staff had taken interim steps (new seating, vegetation cleanup) to improve conditions. Parks staff reported the department applied for a Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) grant (about $174,000 requested) and said matching funds were available in the current budget if the grant is awarded; Osborne said award notifications are expected in August 2025 and that staff would move quickly if awarded.

Commissioners asked about immediate public‑health implications: Osborne and parks staff said the pool is currently being operated safely under local health department permits but noted the chemical controller and certain mechanical upgrades are necessary to meet best practices and reduce labor intensity. Commissioners also discussed attendance metrics (parks staff reported about 104 patrons per day on average during an 80‑day season in 2024) and how ongoing maintenance or replacement decisions could be timed around the annual budget process. No formal action to commit capital funding was taken at the May 29 meeting; commissioners directed staff to pursue grant outcomes and return with budget options for required repairs and potential capital improvements.

Ending: Parks staff will continue immediate repairs, pursue LWCF funding and return to the commission with estimated costs and timing as grant results and more detailed procurement information become available.

View the Full Meeting & All Its Details

This article offers just a summary. Unlock complete video, transcripts, and insights as a Founder Member.

Watch full, unedited meeting videos
Search every word spoken in unlimited transcripts
AI summaries & real-time alerts (all government levels)
Permanent access to expanding government content
Access Full Meeting

30-day money-back guarantee