In the afterglow of Victoria city council finally acting to tackle the question of Crystal Pool’s future, Mayor Marianne Alto is quietly hopeful and optimistic.
Council had just agreed to leave the fate of the ungracefully aging fitness facility, and what would be the city’s most expensive project ever, to the city’s residents.
Residents will vote in a referendum to determine if the city should borrow $168.9 million to build a replacement for Crystal Pool; they will also vote on which of two sites in Central Park they would prefer.
The mayor supports replacing the pool. During a debate on Thursday she bemoaned the fact that the council in 2017 did not act when the project could have been done for a third of today’s price. It will be interesting to see where public sentiment falls, she said.
“I do think there is a certain degree of reservation in the conversation because seven years ago we were in a very different place in society and $70 million or maybe even $90 million might have been something that was less fraught with balance in the sense of trying to balance competing interests,” she said in an interview.
“I’m curious about whether or not the public agrees that now is the time because there are so many competing interests right now around affordability, availability of housing, community well-being and safety and around infrastructure,” she said. “It’s now a series of choices — we can’t do everything. The question will be is this the thing that we want to make a priority over the next five years, once the referendum happens.”
Alto said she can live with either outcome — yes, borrow and build, or no, go back to the drawing board.
“I’m not too vexed if this is a ‘no’ because I think that’s a signal from the community they have concerns and reservations about competing interests. I also don’t think that’s the end,” she said, noting the city will regroup and come up with a solution to replace the pool facility.
“I also think that it’s quite conceivable that they’ll say ‘yes’ and if that’s the case then we have permission to go and do the regulatory things we have to do in order to get funding, loans and the borrowing capacity.”
And the city will be borrowing a lot.
The price tag for the Central Park North option, which would be built on the existing site of the pool, is estimated to cost $209.2 million, would take five to six years to build.
The borrowing for that option would be reduced to $162.9 million by using $30 million from the city’s debt reduction reserve and $17 million from its parking reserve fund.
The price tag for the Central Park South option, to be built on the playground and sport courts beside the existing pool is $215.9 million, but borrowing would be reduced to $168.9 million by using the reserve funds.
Either way the budget has nearly tripled since 2017.
City staff say that’s down to the increased cost for building materials, labour and other expenses that are required to build a pool. Staff estimate $76.5 million was added in costs for building, or $750,000 per month for every month of delay to the construction start date.
The other major cost increases have been $33 million in soft costs like architectural and engineering fees and permits, $15.5 million for underground parking and $14 million as a result of building code and energy regulation changes.
And all that is for a facility that hasn’t been fully designed.
The costs are based on previously approved design requirements and amenities.
The facility will include a 50-metre pool with movable bulkhead, a leisure pool with a lazy river, and play features, two hot pools plus a steam room and a sauna.
The facility will also have a large fitness area, a half-size gymnasium and multi-purpose rooms for dance, wellness and art activities, a senior’s room and space for child minding and families universal change rooms, and a community gathering space.
As for the timeline, city staff expect it will be five years for Central Park North as they estimate 21 months for the design work, 41 months for construction including eight months of demolition work, while for central Park South it’s anticipated it will be five and a half years with a 15-month design period and a 52-month construction period.
By comparison, the $30 million Westhills YW-YMCA project took more than two years from ground breaking in early 2014 before it opened in the spring of 2016.
There is a chance the final price tag for either Crystal Pool replacement option could be reduced as staff have been tasked to find new sources of revenue including considering grant money from senior governments, potential sponsorships and community contributions.
The idea of considering sponsorships or even naming rights is something new for council.
Alto said in her 13 years at the table she has pushed to have a policy for naming rights and sponsorship.
“And I have been shot down repeatedly, I’ve even brought a number of motions to council, different councils over the years and been shot down every single time,” she said with a laugh.
Victoria does have a naming rights deal with Save-on-Foods for the Save-on-Foods Memorial Centre. The 10-year deal, which was renewed in 2014, is due to expire this year. The original deal was signed in 2004, as the arena was being built with the grocer paying $1.25 million over 10 years.
But there now seems to be an appetite to consider a new policy, with a number of councillors mulling the idea this week.
“That is logical and it is inevitable, and it is a sign of the evolution of municipalities and the need for them to work together and collaborate and make partnerships with a variety of different interests because we simply cannot afford to do everything with the resources that we have,” said Alto. “We can’t even afford to do some things with all of the resources that we have. I’m delighted to see this change.”
City staff are already working on a policy to address the issue, but it’s not expected before council until next year.
“The fact that we’re even working on that is remarkable,” said Alto.
She’s also excited at the prospect of finally moving forward with a Crystal Pool project.
“Seven years on, we’re finally saying, ‘hey, you want us to do this or not?’” she said. “This is going to be a very curious and interesting opportunity for the residents to weigh in.”
>>> To comment on this article, write a letter to the editor: [email protected]
