This report studies the feasibility of partnering with the Fremont Union High School District (FUHSD) with regard to the construction, operation and use of a 50-meter swimming pool at Fremont High School.

The proposed joint use agreement represents the potential for significant benefit to the swim community in terms of improved service delivery. This is a reflection of the specific terms of the proposed use agreement, and specific features of the conceptual design, both of which are quite different (and represent substantive improvements) over any previous pool use agreement entered into by the City with a School District. The nature of the proposed 50-meter pool's design and separate shower/locker facilities for public use makes this particularly true for adult swim opportunities--an area the City has been seeking ways to expand and improve for many years now.

Concerns include the challenges associated with public parking at Fremont High School, the necessity of charging user fees for programs, and the ability of the City to fund the project (please see Fiscal Impact section).

Entering into the attached Joint Pool Use Agreement with the FUHSD would have an impact on both the City's operating budget and capital improvement plan. Capital costs to the City are estimated at $1,400,000 and are likely to rise prior to the start of construction due to changing market conditions. (Staff was unable to negotiate an agreement that would place a cap on the City’s financial exposure or allow it to terminate the Agreement unilaterally should costs exceed a certain amount.)

The City’s share of annual operating costs are estimated at $135,500 – (a) cost to maintain pool - $103,500; (b) infrastructure repairs to pool and City bathhouse - $7,000; (c) ongoing maintenance of the City’s bathhouse - $20,000; and (d) contract management costs - $5,000). These figures represent year one of the proposed agreement, and have not been adjusted for future years’ inflation.

The Community Recreation Fund cannot afford either the one-time capital or the on-going annual operating costs associated with this project. Additional programs or facilities such as the Fremont Pool will require additional contributions from the General Fund, or reductions in existing services to offset the costs of the new program. Staff do not recommend this latter strategy in the context of the Community Recreation Fund since the only services which are not essentially self-supporting are those related to youth, older adults, the disabled, and the economically disadvantaged.

As of the writing of this final Report to Council (prepared mid-April, 2000), the ability of the General Fund to support this program is uncertain. As Council prepares to approve the next two-year budget for Fiscal Years 2001/2002 and 2002/2003, it will need to make hard choices and decisions regarding numerous programs and issues competing for limited dollars.

A grass-roots swim organization, the Friends of Fremont Pool, has been trying to raise a targeted million dollars to help defray the City’s share of this project’s costs. However, as of mid-April FFP has raised approximately $106,000, which at the City’s investment rate (5-6%) would provide only $5,300 to $6,360 per year toward expenses.

In order to gain as much stakeholder involvement in the policy-making process as practical, staff pursued the following avenues of public contact:

• Several meetings with Fremont High School staff to discuss impacts of a joint 50-meter pool to the school.
• Attendance at Friends of Fremont Pool meeting, August 1, 1999.
• Attended Sunnyvale Swim Club competitive swim meet, October 9, 1999.
• Meetings convened by staff October 18, 1999, and February 1, 2000, to discuss related issues with the Sunnyvale Swim Club (a co-sponsored City youth group).
• Publication and Posting of School Board Study Session regarding joint pool use conducted October 19, 1999.
• Publication and Posting of public input session conducted by the Fremont Union High School District and City of Sunnyvale, October 27, 1999.
• Publication and Posting of public input session conducted by the Fremont Union High School District (FUSHD) and City of Sunnyvale, November 9, 1999.
• Meeting with President of Mountain View Masters, November 16, 1999.
• Publication and Posting of Joint City/School District Public Hearing, January 18, 2000.
• Numerous meetings, letters and other correspondence with the Chairperson of The Friends of Fremont Pool, Ms. Holly Lofgren (former leader of the Adult Swim Advisory Group).
• Publication and Posting of Parks and Recreation Commission Public Meeting, March 8, 2000.
• Publication and Posting of Parks and Recreation Commission Public Hearing, March 22, 2000.
• Publication and Posting of City Council Study Session, April 25, 2000.
• Publication and Posting of City Council Public Hearing, May 2, 2000.
• The public was also made aware of this issue in local publications (please see Attachment A – Local Newspaper Articles.).
• This report is available in the Library, the Community Center, the Corporation Yard, the Senior Center, the Parks and Recreation Administrative Office, and on the City's Internet home page.
• In addition to the public contact prompted by staff as noted above, extensive contacts with the public were made by the Friends of Fremont Pool on behalf of this possible pool partnership.

Staff makes no recommendation at this time. Staff’s final recommendation will be delivered in the form of the City Manager’s budget transmittal and recommendations to Council for Fiscal Years 2001/2002 and 2002/2003. Between now and June 20, 2000, Council will have the additional benefit of a Budget Workshop (June 1) and a Public Hearing on the budget (June 6).

Over the past few years, City Council has considered several possible expansions of adult swim opportunities in response to public requests, including the possible construction of a public shower building at Sunnyvale Middle School pool, and year-round swimming at Lakewood Park's swimming pool.

On April 20, 1999, the Fremont Union High School District advised the City of its intent to construct a new 30-meter swimming pool at Fremont High School. The District queried the City's interest in partnering with regard to the construction, operation, use and maintenance of a pool larger than 30-meters for shared use, indicating that a ballpark contribution from the City would be a million dollars in capital expenditures and an unknown annual operating cost. The District also indicated it needed a response in approximately one month's time.

On May 25, 1999, staff recommended, for a variety of reasons that Council not express an interest in such a partnership at that time ("Information Only" Report to Council 99-209). Council requested additional information.

On June 8, 1999, staff presented "Information Only" Report to Council 99-266 regarding staff's ability to undertake a study of a joint use pool project with the Fremont Union High School District. Staff reviewed the complexity of such a study, stressing the challenge of securing and validating funding sources. No staff recommendation was included. Following significant public input, including indications that the School District did not need a response from the City until spring of 2000, Council requested further exploration of staff's ability to undertake such a study.

On June 15, 1999, staff presented Report to Council 99-294, suggesting that staff was capable of assuming such a study, particularly if Council would limit its scope. However, staff also identified various issues warranting Council's consideration, and recommended against further study on the basis of the complexity of the study (which at the time was not restricted to a 50-meter configuration), its impact on staff, public expectations and operating costs; and the Parks and Recreation Commission's role (due to timing constraints, the Commission was not given the opportunity to advise Council on whether or not the matter should be studied or where it might rank in priority with other studies or service demands).

Council alleviated staff's concerns regarding workload by limiting the study to a 50-meter pool configuration. Based largely on this decision, and on Ms. Holly Lofgren's assertion that the public could raise the City's share of on-going operating costs associated with such a pool, Council directed staff to proceed with a feasibility study for a joint pool partnership with the Fremont Union High School District.

This report provides Council that feasibility study, with specific answers to Council's requested focus on potential community use, capital and operating costs, and possible funding sources.

Recreation Sub-Element:

Expand cooperative opportunities with schools as a focal point for enhanced neighborhood services.

Provide, maintain, and operate recreation facilities such as swimming pools, tennis courts, golf courses, athletic fields, trails, parks, arts facilities, community centers, park centers, and other specialized facilities in a safe, high quality, usable condition that will serve and meet the recreational needs of the community.

Work with school districts to explore the feasibility of using existing school facilities or community recreation activities.

Staff from both the City and the School District have spent several months studying the feasibility of a possible 50-meter pool partnership for City Council and the School Board to consider. The results of those effects are embodied in Attachment B- Agreement Between City of Sunnyvale and Fremont Union High School District for the Development of a 50-Meter Swimming Pool and Related Facilities at Fremont High School.

In addition, the School District enlisted the aid of an outside, professional pool consultant to assist primarily with the design of a proposed facility, although that firm has also acted as a resource to both the District and the City regarding effective joint use agreements elsewhere in the country. Attachment B includes the proposed conceptual design for a joint-use, 50-meter pool located on the Fremont Union High School campus.

A brief overview of the pool's conceptual design and proposed terms of agreement follow:

• Pool Size: 50-Meters x 25 yards.
• Twenty-three 25-yard lanes or eight 50-meter lanes.
• Separate shower/locker facility and entrance for City use.
• Depth ranging from 4.5 feet to 13 feet.

The FUSD has provided ample opportunity for City staff and the public to provide input regarding the pool's conceptual design, and to the degree that it could do so without jeopardizing the integrity of District programs and funding limitations, it has accommodated every reasonable request.

Joint Use Agreement Highlights

• Significant amount of pool use for the City (at least 50% of pool time -priority use of pool during non-school hours – most weekends, holidays, and early morning/evening hours – and partial use during most school hours).

• Reservation of 35 parking spaces for City use during school hours.

• Conceptual pool design to be approved by both Council and District.

• Construction to be completed not later than June 30, 2002.

• City to pay 49% of entire project costs.

• City responsible for maintaining and repairing public bathhouse to City standards and for 100% of related costs.

• District responsible for maintenance and repair of District showers/lockers/ facilities and for 100% of related costs.

• District responsible for pool maintenance; City to reimburse District for 50% of related costs.

The proposed joint use agreement represents the potential for significant benefit to the swim community in terms of improved service delivery. This is a reflection of the specific terms of the proposed use agreement, and specific features of the conceptual design, both of which are quite different (and represent substantive improvements) over any previous pool use agreement entered into by the City with a School District. The nature of the proposed 50-meter pool's design and separate shower/locker facilities for public use makes this particularly true for adult swim opportunities--an area the City has been seeking ways to expand and improve for many years now--although there is potential for some improvement in competitive youth-related and family swim activities as well.

Staff has reviewed various assessments of probable pool use numbers (please see Attachment C – Pool Usage Analysis), and estimates a total of 50,000 to 140,000 additional participant hours would be logged by community swimmers – primarily adult lap swim and Masters during early morning, noon and evening hours - as a result of a new 50-meter pool. While the Friends of Fremont Pool suggest pool use will approach the maximum numbers indicated above, staff’s conservative estimate is more in line with the lower end of the range. Even so, this smaller number represents a significant service level increase to the swim community. Furthermore, staff believes that the higher estimate of pool use may be achieved in future years.

A new 50-meter pool would be constructed at Fremont High School, located at the intersection of Sunnyvale/Saratoga and Fremont Avenue. Fremont High School represents a good site in terms of community accessibility.

The number and design of pool facilities currently in use by the City limit existing service levels afforded the swimming public. The City utilizes five swimming pools, all but one of which are owned by School Districts. The primary factors limiting the usefulness of these pools are their small size and the amount of time they can not be accessed for community use. Secondary concerns revolve around the condition of locker/shower room facilities due to shared student use, and the level of maintenance provided by the school districts. Existing City/School pool arrangements at Sunnyvale Middle School and Columbia Middle School are less than ideal due to the fact that neither the City nor the District is comfortable with allowing adults to share locker room facilities with students simultaneously. An earlier study to increase adult swim opportunities assessed the feasibility of constructing separate shower/locker facilities for adults at the Sunnyvale Middle School site. While this would have enabled adults to use the pool during those times when students were using the existing locker room in relation to different athletic events, the cost was deemed prohibitive ($441,000, in 1996).

One of the most important aspects of the proposed design of the Fremont High School 50-meter pool is that it would provide a separate shower/locker facility for exclusive use by the City which would allow for simultaneous use of the pool by both the District and the City.

The City's current priority in terms of aquatic service delivery is geared toward teaching youth to swim, and it has provided consistently high levels of service to the public in this regard. This is facilitated by the shape and size of the one pool owned by the City (Washington), which was specifically designed to accommodate large numbers of non-swimmers at a widened shallow end.

The City also does a good job of supporting a competitive youth swim club through its co-sponsorship program (Sunnyvale Swim Club). However, that club has maximized its use of existing swim facilities and could expand were opportunities provided it via a 50-meter pool.

The City's existing service menu offers limited programming in the way of water exercise for adults; is unable to meet the public's expectations in terms of year-round lap swimming opportunities (particularly with regard to a consistent level of programming at a consistent site), and offers no Master's swimming program. The emphasis of programming related to the 50-meter pool would be on expanding adult swim opportunities.

The large size of a 50-meter by 25-yard pool has three distinct programmatic advantages over those pools currently used by the City:

• Provides a 50-meter length for long course (Olympic) season and events.

Provides a greater number of 25-yard (short course) lanes for use at any given time (please see Attachment D – Swimming Pool Layout Plan). The increased number of 25-yard lanes would be ideally suited to serving the needs of adult swimmers, including lap swimmers (the most active user group in terms of communicating to staff and Council their desire for additional service these past few years).

Allows for simultaneous use of the pool by two or more activities, such as water polo and lap swimming. This capability would allow for concurrent use between the City and School District (or two concurrent City programs) as well as more efficient use of staff, equipment and facility space (please see Attachment E – Possible 50-Meter Pool Configurations and Examples of Possible Shared Use).

Several potential user groups (such as adult lap swimming, the Sunnyvale Swim Club, Mountain View Master’s) have expressed a high degree of interest in using a 50-meter pool at this location (please see Attachment F – Letter of Response to board of Directors, Mountain View Masters Swim Club, Dated February 10, 2000).

As previously noted under "Agreement Highlights", the proposed terms of the attached Agreement would allow a significant amount of City use.

The City would most likely contract the majority of the City's share of pool use under the terms of the proposed agreement to an aquatic organization (such as a "master's" organization or a Sunnyvale-based swim club). With stipulations as to the amount and time of various types of swimming activities to be provided, such an organization would, in turn, manage the community's use of the pool, and would charge users a fee to swim.

• The availability of public parking for community swimmers--particularly during evening hours--would be an issue. The terms of the proposed Joint Use Agreement would provide 35 parking spaces for the exclusive use of the swim community during school hours (when the District patrols and has reasonable control over parking activities), as well as during early morning hours before the start of school. However, the City and District have agreed that providing guaranteed parking for swimmers during busy evening and weekend hours, would be neither fair (the District doesn't provide it for any other recreational activity, be that basketball, football, etc.) nor enforceable. As a result, parking during non-school hours would be first-come, first-served, and community swimmers would be faced with the same parking opportunities and challenges presented any other campus visitor. This would likely be a chronic concern, as parking during non-school hours at this site tends to be a real challenge throughout the year.

• The proposed minimum pool depth (4 ½ feet) is specifically designed to accommodate competitive swim programs and is deeper than what some other aquatic programs would prefer. The City currently provides extensive youth swim lessons in four pools that have a minimum depth of 3 ½ feet, but the most popular location for children’s lessons is Washington Pool, which has a minimum depth of 2 feet. Washington Pool’s shallow water also provides the most popular location for recreational swim use. If the City were considering a multi use pool, the minimum depth would be less than 4 feet and would include a zero-depth or a ramp entry to provide better accessibility.

• The proposed pool water temperature would, by agreement, remain between 78 to 82 degrees. The City currently maintains water temperature at the five multi-use pools at 82 degrees. This is a compromise between the lower temperatures preferred by lap and competitive swimmers and the warmer temperatures preferred by most other user groups. The majority of older adult and therapeutic programs would prefer water temperature closer to 90 degrees. When the water temperature is below 82 degrees (the top of the proposed range), the City can anticipate complaints from these swimmers.

• Section 6(c) 3. of the attached agreement allows the District to pre-empt the City’s normal priority use of the pool on a maximum of 5 weekdays so long as it provides as much notice as possible. This concerns staff, given that the City would likely receive only one evening or one day’s notice, (the District indicates the most likely circumstance would be the unanticipated need to extend a swim meet an additional day), resulting in unavoidable inconvenience to community swimmers.

Entering into the attached Joint Pool Use Agreement with the FUHSD would have an impact on both the City's operating budget and capital improvement plan.

Four types of fiscal impact need to be considered:

• One-time capital costs for construction (City to pay 49% of cost of 50-meter pool with City bathhouse – percentage based on difference between the cost of a 30-meter pool and a 50-meter pool with City bathhouse). Cost to City: (based on estimates as of the writing of this report and not adjusted for escalating costs or inflation) approximately $1,400,000.

• On-going, annual costs associated with maintenance of the pool (City to pay 50% of total costs incurred by District - primarily utilities, chemical costs, and staffing associated with the upkeep of the pool - $103,500; City to pay 100% of maintaining community locker/shower room, and support facilities - $20,000). Estimated annual cost to City: $123,500.
•  
• Infrastructure maintenance and repair costs, including unexpected emergencies (City to pay 50% of costs associated with pool, such as periodic resurfacing of the tank and/or unanticipated cracks in pool tank due to earthquakes; City to pay 100% of costs associated with City bath house, such as eventual replacement of bath house roof). Estimated annualized cost to City: $7,000.

• Staffing costs associated with contract management (between City and District, as well as between City and third party providing programmatic services to community). Estimated annual cost to City: $5,000.

The City has essentially five funding options to consider. They are as follows:

1. By eliminating capital projects already planned by the City, but not yet constructed or developed.
2. Through donations raised by private citizens on behalf of the City: As indicated earlier in this report, the "Friends of Fremont Pool" (FFP), organized by Ms. Holly Lofgren, committed to attempting to raise one million dollars to help fund this potential partnership. As of April 10, 2000, FFP has raised approximately $26,000 in cash toward that goal, with an additional $80,000 pledged to the project by private sponsors.
3. Revenue generated by user fees (whether programs are contracted or directly provided). Staff estimates that it could generate approximately $25,000 revenue or more through community use of the swimming pool.
4. By reducing or eliminating existing recreational service levels elsewhere (not a feasible or attractive alternative given the fact that the only real subsidized services which would result in a savings to the City if eliminated are those related to serving the City's youth, disabled, older adults, and the economically disadvantaged).
5. By allocating additional funding from the General Fund to the Community Recreation Fund (increasing the Community Recreation Fund's reliance on tax dollars).
6. Some combination of the above.

• The likelihood of rising costs.
• The inability of FFP to raise its targeted million dollars (as of mid-April, 2000.
• The current status of the Community Recreation Fund.
• The number of projects and issues competing for limited General Fund dollars.

In order to gain as much stakeholder involvement in the policy-making process as practical, staff pursued the following avenues of public contact:

• Several meetings with Fremont High School staff to discuss impacts of a joint 50-meter pool to the school.
• Attendance at Friends of Fremont Pool meeting, August 1, 1999.
• Attended Sunnyvale Swim Club competitive swim meet, October 9, 1999.
• Meetings convened by staff October 18, 1999, and February 1, 2000, to discuss related issues with the Sunnyvale Swim Club (a co-sponsored City group).
• Publication and Posting of School Board Study Session regarding joint pool use conducted October 19, 1999.
• Publication and Posting of public input session conducted by the Fremont Union High School District and City of Sunnyvale, October 27, 1999.
• Publication and Posting of public input session conducted by the Fremont Union High School District (FUSHD) and City of Sunnyvale, November 9, 1999.
• Meeting with President of Mountain View Masters, November 16, 1999.
• Publication and Posting of Joint City/School District Public Hearing, January 18, 2000.
• Numerous meetings, letters and other correspondence with the Chairperson of The Friends of Fremont Pool, Ms. Holly Lofgren (former leader of the Adult Swim Advisory Group).
• Publication and Posting of Parks and Recreation Commission Public Meeting, March 8, 2000.
• Publication and Posting of Parks and Recreation Commission Public Hearing, March 22, 2000.
• Publication and Posting of City Council Study Session, April 25, 2000.
• Publication and Posting of City Council Public Hearing, May 2, 2000.
• The public was also made aware of this issue in local publications (please see Attachment A – Local Newspaper Articles.).
• This report is available in the Library, the Community Center, the Corporation Yard, the Senior Center, the Parks and Recreation Administrative Office, and on the City's Internet home page.
• In addition to the public contact prompted by staff as noted above, extensive contacts with the public were made by the Friends of Fremont Pool on behalf of this possible pool partnership.

Staff makes no recommendation at this time. Staff’s final recommendation will be delivered in the form of the City Manager’s budget transmittal and recommendations to Council for Fiscal Years 2001/2002 and 2002/2003. Between now and June 20, 2000, Council will have the additional benefit of a Budget Workshop (June 1) and a Public Hearing on the budget (June 6).

Prepared by:

Robert A. Walker, Director
Department of Parks and Recreation

John Lawrence
Leisure Services Manager

Approved by:

Robert S. LaSala
City Manager

This addendum to RTC No. 00-095 Possible 50-Meter Pool Partnership Between the City of Sunnyvale and Fremont Union High School District is intended to present a fourth alternative course of action for Council’s consideration and to answer two questions posed by City Council during its April 25, 2000, Study Session.

If Council elects not to pursue the attached 50-meter pool partnership, the District will pursue construction of a 30-meter x 25-yard pool for school use. Under such circumstances, Council could direct staff to study the possibility of a joint use agreement with the District relative to that 30-meter pool.

Staff purposely attempted to depict services reflecting both lower and higher costs per participant hour than those services proposed by the 50-meter pool partnership. However, it should be emphasized that in many regards the information presented compares apples to oranges, and care should be taken in drawing too many conclusions from this data.