Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Parks And Recreation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council leans to Option 1A for Southeast Community Center, weighing partner commitments and affordable-housing tradeoffs
Summary
After a lengthy presentation and Q&A, staff and council discussed scope reductions and funding stacks for the Southeast Community Center; council signaled a preference for Option 1A — reduced size with 10 lanes — while considering redirecting some CCIP reserves toward affordable housing.
Fort Collins staff presented schematic designs, value-engineering options and funding stacks for the Southeast Community Center and sought council direction on the scope to bring forward for appropriation. The presentation described an original September estimate of about $93 million and options to reduce cost back toward the project budget ceiling by scaling amenities and reallocating CCIP and 2050-tax resources.
Leanne Williams, director of recreation, said the VE work reduced several program elements: "we did remove the licensed childcare wing" and the team ‘‘reduced the outdoor pool by 15%’’ and resized gym and weight-room spaces to preserve the project’s intent while lowering square footage. Staff emphasized retaining mandated elements, such as the library’s innovation space, and shared mechanical/common areas with the library to cut cost.
Staff framed three key variables: total scope, CCIP reserves (about $14.5 million available), and the portion of the 2050 tax (an internal 80/20 policy) that council would commit to capital recreation. They presented Option 1A (approximately $76.5 million, keeps 10 lanes, uses ~9.5M CCIP reserves and frees about $5M for affordable housing), Option 1B (alternative reserve allocation), and Option 2 (deeper scope reduction to ~$72.5 million that would require renegotiating the intergovernmental agreement with Poudre School District).
Council members probed lane costs, partnership fairness and long-term obligations to the school district. Staff said the IGA specifies 10 lanes and that PSD’s rationale is competition/practice capacity (“they have up to 6 teams…this allows 2 teams to participate or to practice at 1 time”). On lane costs, staff estimated two extra lap lanes increase natatorium cost by "between 2 and a half and 3,000,000".
Several council members, while sympathetic to directing funds to affordable housing, voiced concern about renegotiating IGAs and weakening partnerships. Multiple members expressed a preference for Option 1A so the city both honors partner commitments and can preserve some funding for housing. Staff’s stated next step was to bring a resolution to council for appropriation on the Option 1A scope.
