The aquatic center feasibility study conducted by Waters Edge consultants is seeking more community input in a new survey to be rolled out the first week of December. That poll and more information on the aquatic center will be presented at https://watersedge.mysocialpinpoint.com/mvswimming.
Laura Ozburn with Waters Edge said the goal with this next survey is to find which options the community wants explored for an aquatic center.
Ozburn noted that the pool has been showing its age. The pool, more than 60 years old at this point, has had relatively few catastrophic failures requiring significant repairs to the deck or the basin.
“Typically, we see pools lasting anywhere between 20 to 30 years before we see degradation and needing to be looked at being replaced,” Ozburn said. “That we’re only doing so now is a huge kudos to your staff and the care they’ve given this facility.”
Ozburn noted there are now areas where the deck around the pool isn’t as even as it was 60 years ago, especially around one of the diving boards.
“That’s a sign of voids developing below the concrete slabs,” Ozburn said. “We don’t know what is causing them or how significant the issue is.”
She also noted that there are some wall failings happening under the gutters along the basin.
As well, the current pool doesn’t have many of the amenities young families are looking for in a pool, and activities like lap swim and fitness classes can’t be held at the same time as open swim.
Survey resultsOzburn reviewed some of the data from the first survey at the top of the formal presentation. More than 490 responses were recorded at the first public session and from the survey that ran from June 9 to July 10.
“More than 91 percent of those surveyed said they had used the current pool within the last five years,” Ozburn said.
Fifty-eight percent said the condition of the pool was very good and 36 percent were neutral on the status of the current pool, denoting the pool works for the community.
The areas that were concerns raised in the survey from people who were opting not to use the pool were the lack of amenities (35 percent), using other outdoor pools (23 percent) using indoor pools (22 percent) and the crowded hours/schedules.
For those using other facilities, Tipton, North Liberty and Anamosa, as well as the YMCAs in Cedar Rapids and Marion, were noted as destinations they sought for aquatic needs.
When it came to what the community was seeking for the pool – fun features and amenities (85 percent), classes and programs (75 percent), fee and cost to use the facility (75 percent), location of facility (65 percent) and fits with development in area (60 percent) were noted high on the list.
The survey was split almost equally between having an outdoor/indoor pool (44 percent) option compared to just an outdoor pool (40 percent).
When it came to the most important reasons for use of the swimming pool – four options topped 90 percent of the vote – lap swimming (93 percent), birthday party/pool rentals (92 percent), dive team (91 percent) and special aquatic events (91 percent), four options the pool currently offers.
Swimming lessons (84 percent), water fitness (63 percent), toddler/baby time at pool (54 percent), adult hours (43 percent) and senior aquatic activity (20 percent) were the other matters of importance to the community.
“Any swimming pool we pursue has to be flexible and accommodate the community,” Ozburn said.
Pool locations From the original survey, three locations were identified for potential locations for any new pool.
If the facility was to be an indoor only facility, the location that had the most votes was the Lester Buresh Family Community Wellness Center.
If the facility was to be an outdoor facility, Davis Park and Nature Park were the two largest vote recipients.
Davis Park is where the pool currently sits, and Waters Edge said if they were to build a new pool at the site, it would be on virgin soil there. That would impact some items like playground equipment that would need to be moved to other areas of the park, but it was doable on the current site in both designs presented by Ozburn.
The Nature Park design showcased the center could work in the area being explored, that the square footage of the facility fit the area. Items like electrical, water and sewer hookups would need to be extended, though they were close to the facility. A key issue with that location was traffic flow to that park on a road that hasn’t seen as much traffic in the past. Council member Debra Herrmann noted that Nature Park ties into the existing trails system for the community.
Outdoor pools
There were two options presented for outdoor pools. Option A was the larger of the two, with a six lane 25-yard competitive pool. A separate leisure pool with all amenities (water slides, current channel, toddler play area, zero depth entry) would also exist. An additional splash pad would also be on site, with features kids could manipulate. Ozburn noted that facility was geared towards getting kids comfortable with the water at all ages, and allowing them to grow to the different uses of the pool. The splash pad offered would be different from what might be offered in neighboring Lisbon. Because each center was separate, one pool could be shut down to get taken care of, while leaving the additional pool facilities open.
The cost for Option A is between $9 million and $10.2 million. It would require between 11 and 14 lifeguards, almost double the current lifeguard staff at the current pool.
Option B still had the competitive swim lane pool, as well as the recreation pool. The two would be adjoining, similar to the current pool in Mount Vernon. As such, Option B has less of a footprint. The Splash Pad was not explored with that option, but could be added with roughly $500,000 to $1 million in costs and could be phased in down the line.
The cost for Option B would be between $8.6 million to 9.8 million and would require between 11 and 14 lifeguards on site.
The cost of repairing the current pool’s deck issues was between $1.5 million and $2.5 million, but that doesn’t address the voids that are developing under the pool that could lead to a catastrophic failure down the line.
Each of the options presented only showed the pool design at Davis Park, and Ozburn said presentations on the Nature Park pool will be made when the new survey comes out so people can envision the facility there.
Indoor pools
Three options were presented for indoor pools.
Option A had a competitive 25-yard six lane pool, a smaller kids pool and a therapy pool. The kids pool had a depth of 1.5 feet to 4.5 feet.
Cost for option A was roughly $13.5 million to $15.5 million, and the pool would cover 5,330 square feet. It would require 4-6 lifeguards to staff.
Option B was a strictly competition sized 8 lane 25 yard pool with one meter and 3 meter diving boards. It was a pool clearly geared towards competitive swimmers. It would require the least amount of lifeguards on duty, requiring between one and two.
Cost for option B was $11.5 million to $13.5 million, with 4,430 square feet.
Option C presented a hybrid model to allow the pool to be used by multiple groups. It would only have a 3 lane 25-yard pool, which would rule out competitive use by a swim team or the ability to host meets. The pool would have an ability to raise the floor and reduce the depth of the pool, however, allowing hyper-flexibility in its design.
The facility would have between a $7 and $9 million price tag, and require three to seven lifeguards.
Feedback Many in attendance wondered if it would be possible to take Option A’s outdoor separate competition pool and enclose that to allow for a pool that could be used year round. Ozburn said that was something that could be explored, with an additional $1 to $1.5 million needed to add to that cost or as something phased in over the years, with the support buildings (showers and check in facilities) built to be used in all seasons.
Mount Vernon parks and recreation director Matt Siders reiterated the city’s coffers will most likely only allow the construction of one of the presented options – either one of the outdoor pools or one of the indoor pool options.
Current bonding capacity for the city is $5.5 million, and the city adds roughly $1.5 million back to that ability as it pays down debts held on other projects. That would mean the price tag on many of the presented pools could be feasible within the next five years.
Questions asked if, when this new pool was constructed, it would close the current pool if it were to be built at Davis Park. Siders said that wouldn’t be the case, as the pools being developed on new soil to the south of the current pool. It may impact some of that playground equipment and other items in the park at that time.
The survey at https://watersedge.mysocialpinpoint.com/mvswimming will be open for most of December to collect input from Mount Vernon residents. Waters Edge will present a final update and recommendation to the city in spring 2023.
Designs for outdoor pool option A, with the recreation pool, competitive pool and splash pad (to the south).