Bangor panel reviews renderings and preliminary fee schedule for consolidated parks and recreation facility

At a meeting of a Bangor City special committee on the future of a consolidated parks and recreation facility, members reviewed updated architectural renderings and a draft fee schedule and agreed to have the project's consultant complete pro forma cost and revenue estimates before the committee's next meeting.

Committee members and Parks & Recreation staff reviewed conceptual exterior and interior renderings showing a more open, light-filled lobby, multiuse front-edge spaces for multigenerational activity, an elevated walking track over a community gym, dedicated childcare space, and space for two ice sheets (one set up for gameplay and one for practice or multiuse). Consultants told the committee that the designs shown are conceptual and that detailed engineering — including roof and snow-load calculations — will be resolved during the design-development phase.

The committee discussed program uses emphasized in the renderings: multiuse rooms intended to host seniors, teens and childcare; an indoor playground and dedicated art and ceramic spaces; two ice sheets to expand learn-to-skate, figure skating and hockey programs; and administrative offices accessed from an upper level. Staff noted the two-sheet layout would allow simultaneous practice and competition use and create additional opportunities for tournaments and regional events.

On operations, the committee reviewed a draft fee schedule intended to inform the consultant's revenue assumptions. The packet presented an adult individual membership at $38 and a family membership (up to five people) at $80. The proposed nonresident surcharge was described as roughly 20 percent (a range of about 19–21 percent was discussed). The walking track was proposed to remain free to residents; committee members discussed making the walking track free to nonresidents for a limited period or permanently as a community gateway. Staff clarified program fees (for organized leagues or classes) would be charged separately from general facility/membership fees.

Staff and consultants said childcare capacity in the new facility would be similar to current capacity; the draft plan relocates childcare to a dedicated space rather than repurpose shared meeting rooms. Committee members flagged circulation and pick-up logistics as operational priorities (for example, walking children from childcare to adjacent program spaces) and noted the value of a walkthrough or virtual tour to demonstrate how current cramped spaces compare with the proposed facility.

Technical and implementation details were deferred to later design phases. A committee member asked about snow and roof drainage; the presenter said those details would be addressed in engineering drawings during the next stage. The consultant team on the project includes Barry Dunn (leading consultant) and CHA (architectural subconsultant); a landscape consultant from the original feasibility team was noted as Mike Noonan (name clarified during discussion).

Committee members also discussed outreach to other providers. Members agreed staff should coordinate with the local YMCA (the committee referenced speaking with "Diane" at the Y) to share plans and avoid late-stage objections; staff said they had had early awareness but would pursue additional dialogue before any public roll-out.

On next steps, the committee asked Barry Dunn's team to complete pro forma cost estimates and operating assumptions and return to the committee to answer direct questions. The committee indicated informal consensus to proceed with drafting a report and incorporating the consultant's estimates; members gave an informal thumbs-up to move forward (staff recorded two thumbs-up during the meeting). No formal motion or recorded roll-call vote was taken. Consultants indicated they expect to deliver updated pro formas in a couple of weeks and that the committee will schedule a future meeting with them and continue coordination with the Y.