Crossland Construction and GH2 Architects presented cost estimates and tradeoffs for three options to address structural and operational issues at the Highland Park pool.

The consultants, Aaron Stoops (Crossland Construction) and Daniel Smith (GH2 Architects), told the council they examined the original design and produced three budgetary alternatives: (A) full replacement of the pool shell and deck, (B) substantial repair of damaged concrete in the most problematic areas, and (C) a vinyl‑liner retrofit (described in the presentation as a Murtha system) that preserves the existing shell while installing a watertight liner and new gutter system.

Why it matters: The chosen approach affects upfront construction cost, future maintenance and useful life. The pool also requires bathhouse and equipment‑room work that, according to presenters, would proceed under all options.

Key details presented

- Option A (full replacement): The consultants described removing all concrete and rebuilding the pool and deck to current standards. They estimated a useful life in excess of 25–30 years for a full concrete replacement, subject to maintenance.

- Option B (repair existing): This approach would demolish and reconstruct roughly half of the shell (the consultants said the lower end contains most problem areas) and plaster the pool as typical in‑ground pools. Presenters estimated this repair approach might provide 5–10 years before additional structural issues arise.

- Option C (vinyl‑liner retrofit / Murtha system): The retrofit uses heavy panel bracing, an integral gutter system and a vinyl liner that the vendor warrants (presenters cited a 10‑year warranty on the vinyl liner and a 25‑year warranty on the gutter/system). The consultants noted the Murtha‑style system is comparatively costly because it is a specialized, robust retrofit solution; the liner option also requires replacement of piping and pool equipment to integrate systems.

Cost and procurement context

Presenters emphasized the numbers shown to council were budget estimates, not competitively bid prices. Aaron Stoops said the construction‑manager‑at‑risk process and vendor trade partners provided the estimates; final pricing will be set after design documents are completed and the project is publicly bid, at which time the city will receive a guaranteed maximum price (GMP) from the selected contractor.

Council questions and staff responses

Council members asked about life expectancy, comparative cost differences between the liner and full replacement, the degree of demolition required for each option, ADA compliance and next procurement steps. Staff and consultants said: repairs are the least durable (estimated 5–10 years), the liner system carries specific warranties and will keep the existing shell if structurally sound, and full replacement offers the longest lifespan (typically 25–30 years or more). The consultants noted there are relatively few commercial pool subcontractors in the area and that putting the project to bid could lower the budgetary estimates.

No vote was taken on a construction option. Staff said once the council selects design direction and approves design documents, the project will proceed to competitive bidding and a final GMP would be presented to council for approval.

Ending

Council members thanked the presenters and asked staff to continue refining estimates and produce design documents for council review prior to competitive bid. The presentation materials and updated cost estimates will be made available as part of the project record.