Laserfiche WebLink
<br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Warming House Status Memo <br />May 3, 2006 <br />Page 2 of6 <br /> <br />warming houses at Freeway, Hazelnut, and Valentine Parks have maintenance issues that should <br />be addressed, Staff has listed each site and the options for the future. <br /> <br />Freewav and Hazelnut Parks <br />Attendance: <br /> <br />. Freeway Park: Attendance at Freeway Park is strong. The 2005/2006 season was <br />very mild and afTected the days open and quality of ice, Despite those challenges, <br />Frceway remains a popular rink. The attendancc was down from 1,133 last year to <br />6 I 6 this year. The attendance summary is attached for your inf01mation, (Attachment <br />7B~2) In addition, the City rents the rink out to Bcthel Univcrsity after hours for thcir <br />intramural broomball program. Those broomball participants arc not includcd in the <br />attendancc count. <br /> <br />. Hazelnut Park: Attendance at Hazelnut Park continues to be strong, Attendance <br />was down from J,] 48 last year to 716 this year. As with Freeway Park, the <br />2005/2006 season was very mild and affected the days open and quality oriee, <br /> <br />Building Condition: <br />These buildings arc utilized fix approximately three months out of the year. Thcy are closed and <br />used felr storagc the rest of the year. This has contributcd to pcst infestation and damagcs rclatcd <br />to that. The buildings are also not aesthetically pleasing. Photos dcpicting the conditions of the <br />wanDing houses are attached. (Attachmcnt 7B~3) The PTRC has put olT recommendation of <br />replacement of these buildings for numerous reasons but in particular, because they are only <br />utilized three months out of thc year. It was detern1ined in past discussions at vmious PTRC <br />meetings that Hazelnut and Frceway Park would not be good candidates for combination <br />warming house/picnic structurcs (similar [0 Cummings Park) because the current wanning <br />houses are not in locations where picnicking would occur. ]n these discussions, the PTRC <br />voiccd concerns about investing large amounts of money on structures that are only utilized three <br />months out of the year. The PTRC wanted to look at all possible options. Below are options for <br />Hazelnut and Freeway parks: <br /> <br />(I) OPTION A: Rcpair cxisting buildings. <br /> <br />A building inspection rep011 is included with this memo. (Attachmcnt 7BA) <br /> <br />The recommended repairs for .Freeway are estimated at $1,691 plus labor <br />(highest option). The recommended repairs for Hazelnut arc estimated at $1,103 <br />plus labor (highest option). <br /> <br />For a specilie breakdown of estimated rcpairs/supplies, pleasc scc the attached repair <br />estimate Ii.om Jim Perron, Operations and Maintcnance Supcrintcndcnt. (Attachmcnt <br />7B~5) <br /> <br />(2) OPTION B: Tear down cxisting buildings and bring in mobile umls each wintcL <br />The size of the mobile unit is 8 II x 40 Ii, <br />