Title
Recommendation to Authorize the City Manager to Execute a 60-Year Lease Agreement with the Alameda Unified School District for a City Aquatic Center at the Existing Swim Center Site at Alameda High School. (Recreation and Parks 208)
Body
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
In early 2019, the Alameda County Department of Environmental Health (County Health) deemed it necessary to close the Emma Hood Swim Center at Alameda High School by 2022. The City of Alameda (City) and Alameda Unified School District (AUSD) took several steps to address this issue including adopting a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) for a long-term strategy and funding immediate, short-term repairs. A 60-year lease agreement between the City and AUSD is proposed for the City to use the site of the existing Swim Center, located at Alameda High School, and for the City to construct, operate and maintain a City Aquatic Center the general public. There are two remaining agreement terms under discussion with AUSD, including AUSD’s use of the facility and whether facility construction is under the authority of the California Division of State Architecture (DSA) at any time. This report makes a recommendation on regarding the lease and provides recommendations for both of the not yet settled agreement terms.
BACKGROUND
The Emma Hood Swim Center is approximately 60 years old and is currently operated and maintained through a Joint Use Agreement between the City and AUSD. In early 2019, County Health issued a Notice of Health Concerns and informed AUSD that the facility would need to be closed on May 31, 2019 for immediate repairs with a permanent closure by May 2022 unless the facility were replaced or there were significant improvements to bring the facility up to current code requirements. The City and AUSD funded immediate, short-term repairs, which were completed by the end of December 2019.
A Pool Ad-Hoc Committee, comprised of two AUSD Board Members, two City Council Members, community and student representatives, and staff from both agencies, met regularly to address the future of the facility. In addition, the Alameda Aquatic Alliance, which includes representatives from across Alameda’s aquatic community, provided input to the Committee. This process led to the development of an MOU between the City and AUSD that outlined a long-term pool replacement plan with timelines and milestones for construction of a new City Aquatic Center. On June 18, 2019, the City Council approved the MOU with AUSD. The AUSD Board of Education also approved the MOU in June 2019. This MOU was intended to provide the basis for a lease agreement for the site.
Since then, City and AUSD staff has been negotiating a long-term lease agreement and City Council has discussed the lease terms several times in closed session.
On December 2, 2019, the Mayor and Vice-Mayor sent a letter to the AUSD Board of Education informing them that the City intended to discuss the lease in open session on January 7, 2020, and invited the AUSD Board to hold a public joint meeting with the Council.
DISCUSSION
The proposed agreement is for the City to lease the existing pool site at Alameda High School with an expanded footprint for a new City Aquatic Center. Staff for both the City and AUSD have been able to agree on all but two of the terms for the draft lease agreement (Exhibit 1). The two remaining issues to be resolved include AUSD’s use of the facility and potential DSA requirements. Both topics are discussed in detail below.
Facility Schedule and AUSD Use
AUSD has requested to allow swim teams from both Alameda High School and Encinal High School to use the City Aquatic Center at no cost and prioritized over other uses based on the current number of hours that Alameda High School uses the pool, in order to give AUSD more flexibility in its scheduling. Terms of the MOU only provided that Alameda High School teams would have this priority level and fee waiver. AUSD staff is requesting a schedule that includes pool use to 7:30 pm on weekdays and on Saturdays from 10:00 am - 1:00 pm. These are more recent use hours for Alameda High School that have been extended in a large part because Emma Hood Swim Center has been closed since May 2019 and all high school teams are practicing and playing games at Encinal Swim Center. Historically, the teams were out of the pool by 6:00 pm when Masters Swim would start and Saturday practices were only added in the last couple years due to coach availability.
This scheduling issue is extremely critical for the long-term financial sustainability of the City Aquatic Center. The hours being requested by AUSD significantly limit facility use for public programming during key use hours on weekday evenings and Saturday mornings. These are times that the Alameda Recreation and Parks Department (ARPD) will program the Aquatic Center for swim lessons, recreation swim, aquatics classes, birthday parties, community team practices/games/tournaments, and all of the other activities that generate the revenue required to offset the significant expense of maintaining a large aquatic facility. If designed and operated properly, this facility can be operated such that up to 80% of its costs can be recovered, based on current standards and discussions with all of the aquatic design firms recently interviewed for conceptual design. But if the City gives away its rights to program the most desired time blocks now, the City loses the ability for meaningful revenue and cost recovery.
Recommendation: Staff recommends that specific use days and times be eliminated from the lease agreement and, instead, Alameda and Encinal High schools be scheduled reasonable use of the facility for after school and weekend practice and game use based on historical use patterns, with total of 735 annual hours provided at priority use and no cost, including meets and tournaments for Alameda High School and additionally to provide practice and game time if any District team reaches post-season championships.
It would place unreasonable constraints on the use of the facility to include specific schedule times now when actual use over the next 60 years is unknown and will fluctuate. The lease requires AUSD and City staff to meet bi-annually to schedule each season. Given that there is significant crossover of participants and coaches between community teams and high school teams as well as the fact that the new facility will have two pools and more overall lanes, the swim center schedules can be cooperatively agreed upon so that it works for school and community use.
California Division of State Architecture Regulation
Currently, City Aquatic Center construction and permitting would comply with the California Building Code (CBC), not with DSA, which governs and issues construction permits on school property. This is due to a DSA exemption for City constructed and operated recreation facilities on school property as long as the facility is used by school athletic teams and not for instructional use. The regulations for CBC and DSA are fairly similar at this point with the two primary differences being for building structural requirements and the overall permitting process.
Under DSA, school buildings must comply with the Field Act, which has stricter construction requirements for structural safety in the event of an earthquake. The specific impacts would include increased foundation size for amenities such as lighting or a pool slide and the building (although the DSA versus CBC requirements is less pronounced for a single story than a multi-story building). DSA is also stricter in its geotechnical requirements which would affect the pool shell foundations.
The permit and inspection process also has a more significant impact under DSA than under the CBC. If built under CBC, the City would control the plan check review and permit process and could manage it relatively quickly. If built under DSA, the permit process often takes six months or more. This includes not only initial construction, but any future improvements that have any structural review, such as lighting or shade structure foundations. If the City Aquatic Center is a DSA project, it will then always be under DSA purview and regulation. In addition, DSA requires an onsite inspector at all times during construction. Under a City permit, a City inspector is onsite daily, but not at all times.
Both the City and AUSD staff have agreed that if the facility is constructed under the CBC and later, either party requires a change in the facility that triggers DSA review, then that party will pay all costs related to the DSA review and permitting process. For example, if AUSD determined in the future to make swim instruction mandatory for all students and instruction would take place at the Aquatic Center, then the facility would need to meet DSA standards and the costs associated therewith would be borne by AUSD.
However, a City Council concern has been expressed about what to do if the DSA exemption were eliminated in the future and the DSA regulations become compulsory for the facility. The AUSD Board prefers to be silent on this issue in the lease and to re-open discussion on this issue if the DSA rules change in the future. The City Council has provided staff direction to address the DSA issue in the lease now.
AUSD’s architect and the City’s Building Official agreed that the overall actual construction requirements and cost differences between the CBC and DSA are relatively minor, although the geotechnical is unknown and could impact building and pool foundation construction costs. However, the DSA permit process and inspection adds significant time and staff resources, and increases the overall project administration budget.
There are a large number of cities and school districts across California that have joint use facilities on school property, which is the reason this DSA exception for city recreational facilities was created. If this exception were to be removed, it would impact a significant number of communities, which makes decreases the likelihood of this scenario.
Recommendation: Staff recommends the Aquatic Center not be subject to the DSA process as it is burdensome and would likely constrain facility improvements for the duration of the lease. Additionally, staff recommends that the lease be “silent” on the possibility of the State eliminating the current DSA exemption. Because it is uncertain if and when that could ever happen, it would be better addressed by staff, the City Council, and the AUSD Board at the time, if it were to occur, when more specific and tangible details can be understood and negotiated.
ALTERNATIVES
• Approve the lease agreement as presented.
• Approve the lease agreement with changes.
• Identify a City-owned location, such as the previously discussed site adjacent to the O’Club, and focus the upcoming conceptual design on that site, which would negate the need for a lease with AUSD.
FINANCIAL IMPACT
There is no immediate financial impact from providing direction or approving the lease agreement with AUSD for the City Aquatic Center. However, funding for design and construction is not yet identified and is estimated to cost $12 to $15 million. Any future annual operations and maintenance costs for the City Aquatic Center are not yet determined and are not allocated. The lease agreement includes a clause in which the City or AUSD may terminate the lease without cause at any time prior to the City issuing a request for bids for construction. This clause allows the City to terminate the lease agreement if funding for design and construction is not secured through a potential infrastructure bond, private funding from a capital campaign, grants, sponsorship, and/or public/private partnership.
MUNICIPAL CODE/POLICY DOCUMENT CROSS REFERENCE
There is no municipal code reference for this action.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
Status reports and studies that do not commit the lead agency to a specific development project are statutorily exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act. An environmental review will be conducted as part of facility design development.
CLIMATE IMPACTS
A new City Aquatic Facility would be constructed to current efficiency standards for lighting, heating and other aspects. This is a significant improvement from the existing inefficient systems at the Emma Hood Swim Center. Per the City’s ordinance, any buildings constructed, such as the locker rooms, office, multi-use room and storage, must be LEED certified.
RECOMMENDATION
Authorize the City Manager to execute a 60-Year lease agreement with the Alameda Unified School District for a City Aquatic Center at the existing Swim Center site at Alameda High School.
CITY MANAGER RECOMMENDATION
The City Manager recommends City Council authorization to execute a 60-Year lease agreement. The ability to build a new aquatic facility will also be dependent upon sufficient financing.
Respectfully submitted,
Amy Wooldridge, Recreation and Parks Director
Financial Impact section reviewed,
Elena Adair, Finance Director
Exhibit:
1. Draft Lease Agreement
cc: Eric Levitt, City Manager