Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Aquatic Center topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Farmington council directs staff to advance $10.4M Phase 1 of aquatic center rehabilitation plan
Summary
After a multi-year feasibility study, city staff recommended a three‑phase plan to extend service life at the 31‑year‑old Farmington Aquatic Center. Council gave consensus to proceed with Phase 1 planning — infrastructure and mechanical upgrades estimated at $10.4 million (unloaded).
The Farmington City Council on Monday heard a detailed capital improvement and phasing plan for the Farmington Aquatic Center and signaled consensus for staff to move forward with planning for Phase 1.
Staff said they began a feasibility study in 2023 and concluded the best location for a replacement warm-water pool is adjacent to the existing aquatic center. Presenters told council the main facility is roughly 31 years old and that many mechanical, electrical and plumbing components are at or beyond typical service life, with some parts becoming obsolete.
Consultant Ted Krumblatt summarized the condition assessment and a list of recommended repairs and replacements that include clerestory glazing, expansion of the mechanical room, electrical upgrades and a new dehumidification unit. Daniel (city staff/engineer) said pool filters, valves and pumps are failing and recommended replacing filtration and pumping systems while retaining a recently installed UV system.
Staff proposed a three‑phase approach: Phase 1 — infrastructure and major repairs (estimated $10,400,000 as subcontractor/unloaded pricing); Phase 2 — locker and bathroom renovation (loaded estimate about $4,700,000); and Phase 3 — construction of a warm‑water pool addition with five lanes and a multi‑use activity area (estimated $12,700,000). Presenters emphasized the Phase 1 figure is an unloaded total and that hiring a general contractor could add roughly $2 million in markups but would improve oversight and accountability.
City Manager Shauna Reeves told council staff recommends using a general contractor rather than piecemeal direct contracting, citing workforce constraints and the oversight required for a project of this scale. Council members pressed staff on which items are essential versus deferrable; presenters replied the bulk of Phase 1 is needs-based (critical systems and building-envelope work) while a minority of items could be deferred.
On funding, staff said they have received encouraging signals that capital outlay might cover approximately $3 million toward Phase 1, and that bonding could be used to finance remaining costs. Council members stressed urgency to begin Phase 1 planning so the city can avoid service interruptions for swim teams and other users if equipment failures accelerate.
Mayor Duckett called for consensus to direct staff to proceed with the next planning steps for Phase 1; council members indicated assent. Staff will return with further plans and financing options tied to the city’s capital program and any capital outlay awards.
The council’s action was direction by consensus; no formal appropriation or final contract was approved at this meeting.
