Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Waterpark topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Chesapeake Beach council authorizes up-to-$60,000 exploratory work on water park rebuild
Summary
After a months‑long assessment by public works, the council authorized the mayor to negotiate exploratory work to assess foundations, pilings and costs for a potential full rebuild of the 30‑year‑old water park. The motion passed 6–0.
The Chesapeake Beach Town Council voted to authorize up to $60,000 for exploratory work on the town’s water park, a step officials said is intended to reduce a contractor’s risk and produce a budget model and site recommendations for a possible full rebuild.
Councilmember Laura (motion) and Councilmember John (second) moved the authorization after a lengthy presentation by Jay, the town’s public works director, who described structural failures, plumbing leaks and degraded decorative “rock” features inside the park. Jay said the park was closed for “a reason: public safety.”
The exploratory work the council authorized is intended to include selective demolition and exposure of foundations so a geotechnical team can evaluate the condition of the existing piles and grade beams, and so architects and engineers can produce a high‑confidence budget model. Mark and Patty, representatives of Paddock (the original builder who has continued to advise the town), told the council their team would also assess whether it is more economical to reuse existing foundations or to replace them.
Jay described repeated leaks and broken plumbing that have required 47 penetrations into the pools and said many of the faux rock faces and waterfalls now show separation and internal corrosion. “We shut it down…for a reason: public safety,” he said to the council. Mark of Paddock summarized the preferred approach: “Our concept is to strip the pool park down to the top of the existing foundations, try to save the building if possible, and build up from there with new materials.”
Council discussion focused on reducing unknowns (particularly foundation and piling condition) before asking voters or the council to approve the cost of a full rebuild. Councilmembers and staff discussed procurement rules in the town charter and confirmed that the authorization being approved would remain under the charter threshold that requires a public solicitation if a contract is for $60,000 or more.
After discussion, the council voted 6–0 to authorize the mayor to negotiate an exploratory contract not to exceed $60,000 to perform the investigative work and to provide a conceptual design and budget model for a potential reconstruction.
The council and presenters said the exploratory report should aim to produce a cost estimate accurate enough for staff to recommend whether to proceed with a design‑build procurement and, if so, a likely timeline for permitting and construction. Paddock and the town described a target window of roughly two to three months for that initial investigative phase and a subsequent conceptual cost estimate.
The council’s vote ends the immediate question of whether the town should move forward with a focused investigation; it does not obligate the town to proceed with full reconstruction. The motion carried and council members said they expect follow‑up reports that will include permit and permitting‑timeline information and a recommended path to either renovate or replace major park systems and finishes.
The town’s water park committee and public works staff will be the next points of contact for the design team and state permitting officials, and the council directed staff to return with the exploratory contract and a timeline for the next steps.
