Indoor Facility Study - Final - Nov 18 2014

Transcription

Town of Orangeville
Indoor Facility Assessment Study
FINAL REPORT
November 18, 2014
Prepared by:
Executive Summary
Orangeville presently owns and operates two indoor multi-use recreation facilities, consisting of the Tony Rose
Memorial Sports Centre and the Alder Street Recreation Centre. The purpose of the Indoor Facility Assessment
Study is to “establish a collective community vision for the future need for, and use of, existing and future
indoor facilities.” The Study explores indoor recreational needs over a ten year planning period and includes a
specific assessment for the Tony Rose Memorial Sports Centre given the advance lifecycle state of many major
facility components, necessitating the need to look at the facility’s future use. The population forecast used for
the basis of assessments contained herein are derived from the Town of Orangeville Development Charges
Background Study (2009) that estimates the 2013 population at 28,962 residents and the ten year forecast (year
2023) expected to reach 32,659, representing an increase of about 3,700 residents (13%) over the 2013
population.
The following is a summary of the recommendations from the needs assessments.
Arenas
1. Review ice pad performance in five years (through an updated assessment of user group registrations,
utilization during prime and shoulder periods, program fill rates, capital/operating cost requirements,
demographics of the community, etc.) to determine whether Tony Rose B Rink should be retained or
removed from the arena supply.
2. Develop strategies aimed at increasing shoulder and weekend hour utilizations through differentiated
pricing strategies, alternative scheduling and allocation approaches, etc. while creating incentives to
minimize the impacts of ice “turn backs” (e.g. encouraging spot bookings, application of cancellation
policies for scheduled ice that is returned, etc.).
3. Explore the development of new municipal programs (e.g. adult leagues, additional instructional skates,
learn to play hockey, etc.) that are to be run in desirable prime time slots as a means to increase overall
arena utilization, drive new revenue potential and increase the cost-recovery threshold of local arenas.
4. After the five year arena monitoring exercise has been completed, undertake a comprehensive
engineering review of the Tony Rose Rink B to determine the feasibility and cost of lifecycle investments
required to either retain the ice pad for arena use or repurpose Rink B to a warm-use facility.
Indoor Aquatic Centres
5. The Town of Orangeville should consider repurposing the aquatics centre at the Tony Rose Memorial
Sports Centre to provide space for a wide range of floor-based recreational activities geared to all age
groups and interests (with priority possibly assigned to youth and/or older adults). However, if the Town
decides to retain the aquatic centre at Tony Rose Memorial Centre, the rationale for doing so should be on
the basis that:
a) Attendance, program participation and utilization rates continue to grow based upon sound
aquatics scheduling practices at both municipal aquatic centres;
b) It is the intention of the Town to achieve an over-supply of facilities to increase recreational
objectives by providing surplus programming capacity and geographic coverage despite there
being sufficient capacity at the newer Alder Street Recreation Centre pool tanks;
Indoor Facility Assessment Study – November 2014
Monteith Brown Planning Consultants | MacLennan Jaunkalns Miller Architects
i|Pa g e
c) It recognizes there will be an inability at the current location to address growing demands for
warm-water uses unless undertaking a capitally intensive expansion;
d) The financial investment associated with $800,000 in basic capital improvements along with the
average annual operating deficit of $200,000 is appropriate to provide the benefit associated with
the aforementioned over-supply; and
e) Aquatics is deemed to be a higher priority community need at Tony Rose than other possible uses
such as spaces for general purpose activities, older adult and youth programming, studio-based
fitness, and/or administrative use.
Fitness Spaces
6. The Town should explore optimizing the Main Floor Program Room at the Alder Street Recreation Centre
to facilitate a wider range of fitness studio programs geared to wellness and active living. A similar
approach should be considered for the Banquet Hall and/or a repurposed aquatics centre at the Tony Rose
Memorial Sports Centre.
7. As done in the past, the Town should explore collaborative opportunities with the community-based
fitness providers to deliver broad range of programs, services and/or equipment-based opportunities to
residents. Entry into equipment-based fitness centres operated by the Town is discouraged at present
time.
Gymnasium Spaces
8. The Town should continue to negotiate convenient and affordable access to school gymnasiums on behalf
of the community rather than developing its own gymnasium facility.
9. Development of a new gymnasium should only be considered on a ‘provision by opportunity to partner’
approach if/when the Town is approached with a partnership arrangement deemed favourable to its
interests.
Indoor Turf Spaces
10. The Town only consider the provision of an indoor turf field should: a) the private sector no longer be able
to effectively meet the needs of the community; b) the Town deems one of its ice pads to be surplus and a
plausible candidate for repurposing or demolition/construction of an indoor turf facility; or c) the Town
chooses to invest in an outdoor artificial turf field whose design permits conversion to an indoor system in
a cost-effective manner.
Multi-Purpose Activity Spaces
11. The Town should work to optimize existing multi-purpose program spaces in response to future trends
may be considered as they arise through strategic investments aimed at making the spaces more flexible
and functional to a broader range of use.
12. If the Town decides to repurpose the aquatics centre at the Tony Rose Memorial Sports Centre to provide
space for a wide range of floor-based recreational activities, the program offerings should include
recreational activities geared to all age groups (with possible priority to youth and/or older adults) and
interests through a combination of direct and indirect programming (also see Recommendation #5).
ii | P a g e
Priority Program Spaces
13. Provision of priority spaces for youth and/or older adults should be explored if repurposing an existing
space within one of Orangeville’s multi-use community centres, or if undertaking a major expansion of a
facility.
Implementation Actions
14. Entry into directly delivered indoor recreational programs and services that are currently not under the
purview of the Parks & Recreation Department should be confirmed after undertaking a comprehensive
review of the Town’s core service delivery mandate, possibly through a five year update to the
Department’s Parks and Recreation Strategic Plan. The review should consider factors including (but not
limited to) congruence with the Town’s role and philosophical orientation, availability of requisite
municipal facilities to deliver programs, the range of costs involved, and the ability of partners and
community-based providers to meet program demands.
15. Trend tracking and monitoring efforts should be undertaken and applied in the context of the Indoor
Facility Assessment Study’s recommendations to ensure relevancy to future circumstances. Such efforts
include, at a minimum, regularly engaging indoor facility users, allocating appropriate staff resources to
research and data collection tasks, and application of performance measurement metrics.
16. Undertake a review of this Indoor Facility Assessment after five years.
iii | P a g e
Table of Contents
SECTION 1: INTRODUCTION
1
Study Purpose
Population Growth Assumptions
Community Age Profile
1
1
4
SECTION 2: TRENDS IN INDOOR RECREATION
Lifestyle Trends
Facility Trends
Examples of Indoor Recreation Facility Enhancement Projects
Service Delivery Trends
5
5
10
12
13
SECTION 3: LOCAL & REGIONAL MARKET
15
Geographic Context
Local & Regional Indoor Recreation Facilities
15
15
SECTION 4: CONSULTATIONS
17
Community Search Conference
Stakeholder Survey
Program Planning Project Survey
17
20
24
SECTION 5: FACILITY NEEDS ASSESSMENTS
Arena Assessment
Indoor Aquatics Assessment
Fitness Centres & Studios
Gymnasiums
Indoor Turf Facility
Multi-Purpose Space Assessment
Priority Spaces for Youth and Older Adults
25
25
33
38
39
40
42
44
SECTION 6: IMPLEMENTATION
46
Implementation Strategy
Implementing the Study Directions
46
47
Appendix A: Tony Rose Memorial Sports Centre Architectural & Engineering Review
i|Pa g e
Section 1: Introduction
Study Purpose
Orangeville presently owns and operates two
indoor multi-use recreation facilities, consisting of
the Tony Rose Memorial Sports Centre and the
Alder Street Recreation Centre. While both
community centres contain twin pad arenas, 25
metre pools and multi-use program rooms, the
newer Alder Street Recreation Centre also contains
a number of ancillary spaces such as a separate
leisure aquatics tank, indoor walking track, and
branch library; the Alder Street facility also
contains spaces leased to Humber College, a local
gymnastics club, and a restaurant.
The Terms of Reference released by the Town of
Orangeville indicates that Indoor Facility
Assessment Study is to identify “physical
improvements to existing facilities, repurposing of
existing facilities to meet changing needs, and
future indoor facility development needs based on
utilization rates in and around the greater
Orangeville area.” As stated in its Terms of
Reference, the purpose of the Study is to
“establish a collective community vision for the
future need for, and use of, existing and future
indoor facilities.” The Study explores indoor
recreational needs over a ten year planning period
and includes a specific assessment for the Tony
Rose Memorial Sports Centre given the advance
lifecycle state of many major facility components,
necessitating the need to look at the facility’s
future use.
Population Growth Assumptions
Orangeville’s population was recorded at 27,980 through the 2011 Census, adding about 1,050 people (4%)
since 2006 and about 2,700 people (7%) since 2001. The Town’s Development Charges Background Study (2009)
estimates the 2013 population at 28,962 residents. Over the course of the next ten years, the Development
Charges Background Study forecasts Orangeville’s population to reach 32,659 by the year 2023, representing an
increase of nearly 3,700 residents (13%) over the 2013 population.
1|Pa g e
Figure 1: Historical & Forecasted Population Growth, 2001-2022
34,000
32,382
32,000
30,565
2023 Pop. = 32,659
Population
30,000
27,980
28,000
26,000
26,930
2013 Pop. = 28,962
25,240
24,000
Historical Population
22,000
20,000
32,889
Forecasted Population
2001
2006
2011
2016
2021
2026
Year
Source: Statistics Canada Census, 2001-2011; Development Charges Background Study, 2009.
As part of the Greater Golden Horseshoe, Orangeville is subject to the Provincial Growth Plan under the Places
to Grow Act. The Growth Plan targets a minimum of 40% of new population growth to occur in built-up areas
(as defined by Schedule B1 of the Town’s Official Plan, shown on the next page), meaning that Orangeville will
likely experience development patterns oriented to intensification and infilling. In fact, the Official Plan directs
Council to “ensure that by the year 2015, and for each year thereafter, a minimum of 50% of all residential
development occurring annually within the Town will be within the built boundary.”
The majority of growth will be directed to the Town’s designated ‘greenfield areas’, located generally in the
western parts of Orangeville as well as the northeast corner. While it is likely that the greenfield areas will
continue to represent traditional suburban form, the Official Plan defines a minimum density of 46 residents and
jobs per hectare which implies a higher degree of densification in accordance with the policies of the Growth
Plan. In addition to the greenfield areas shown on Official Plan Schedule B1, a number of intensification areas
are defined where Council will encourage the development or redevelopment of properties, sites or areas at a
higher density than currently exists.
Future growth and development patterns will impact existing indoor recreation facilities and may create needs
for new services, depending upon the extent of growth realized in the future. For example, the Tony Rose
Memorial Sports Centre is located in close proximity (less than 500 metres or about a 5 minute walk) from
designated intensification areas at the intersections of First Street and Fead Street as well as Elizabeth Street
and Faulkner Street. Alder Street Recreation Centre is also located in an area planned for future growth, situated
very close to two designated greenfield areas as well as a major intensification area planned at the intersection
of Broadway Street (Highway 9) and C-Line. As such, it is reasonable to expect that demands (although likely
evolving over time) on both of the Town’s existing community centres will increase as the lands around them
develop/redevelop with higher concentrations of residents.
2|Pa g e
Alder Street Recreation Centre Tony Rose Memorial Sports Centre Indoor Facility Assessment Study – November 2014
3|P a g e
Community Age Profile
The age profile of Orangeville’s population has been evolving. The 2011 Census recorded Orangeville’s median
age at 37, an increase of two years from the 2006 median age of 35. While this shows that the Town’s
population is aging overall (a trend common across the country), Orangeville remains a “younger” community
than its counterparts at the County and Provincial levels where the 2011 median age stands at 40 years for both.
However, as can be viewed in the figure below, the older age groups of 55+ have been increasing as a
percentage of the overall population, while the youngest age group of 0 to 9 years of age has shown an overall
decreasing percentage. These trends will have an impact on the demand for various recreation facilities and the
programs needed.
Figure 2: Community Age Structure, 2001-2011
2001
2006
2011
Number of Persons
9,000
8,000
7,000
6,000
5,000
4,000
3,000
2,000
1,000
-
Children (0-9)
Youth (10-19)
Younger
Mature Adults
Adults (20-34)
(35-54)
Seniors (70+)
2001
2006
2011
31% 32% 31%
35%
Proportion of Total Population
Older Adults
(55-69)
30%
25%
20%
15%
21%
17%
14%
13%
15% 16% 16%
19% 18%
9%
10%
12%
14%
7% 7%
8%
5%
0%
Children (0-9)
Youth (10-19)
Younger
Mature Adults
Adults (20-34)
(35-54)
Older Adults
(55-69)
Seniors (70+)
Source: Statistics Canada Census, 2001-2011
The implications of other demographic indicators (e.g. income, ethnic diversification, etc.) will be discussed
further in the Trends Section of this Study.
4|Pa g e
Section 2: Trends in Indoor Recreation
Lifestyle Trends
The Importance of Recreational Activity
Orangeville has a strong history of sport and recreation. Recreation services provide individuals with numerous
physical health, psychological, economic and environmental benefits that are indicators of a high quality of life.
Participation in recreation offer opportunities for a healthy lifestyle, as well as facilitating greater cognitive
development, self-esteem, social interaction, economic spending, conservation of natural lands, and community
vibrancy.
•
Community Benefits – encourage and support new leaders and volunteers, reduced healthcare costs,
etc.
•
Personal Benefits – sport positively contributes to physical, intellectual, social and emotional
development.
•
Environmental Benefits – facilitate stewardship and appreciation of natural areas, focus on walkability
and active transport reduces reliance on cars, etc.
•
Economic Benefits – new business is attracted to the Town resulting in economic growth, tourism
increases from festivals and special events, increased property values, etc. 1
Health and Obesity Becoming a National Crisis
Today’s digital age is filled with sedentary activities and physical inactivity – a growing trend notably prevalent
among youth and children. A recent report on obesity completed by the Public Health Agency of Canada found
that nearly 6% of children ages (2-5) and 9% of children (ages 6-17) are obese. The risk of obesity increases with
age where nearly one in four Canadian adults are considered to be obese, and over 60% of all Canadians are
obese or overweight. 2
Obesity has come to be known as the “new smoking”, where many Canadians are leading unhealthy lifestyles,
resulting in more cases of heart disease, stress on bones and joints, diabetes, blood clots, cancer, and other
weight-related health problems. Encouraging local level governments to promote a healthy lifestyle and
recreation opportunities and to provide parkland and programs are ways of combat obesity. Many communities
have also been taking steps towards promoting healthy lifestyles, such as encouraging recreation and physical
activities, as well as establishing trails or transit routes that link to destinations such as indoor recreation
centres. Orangeville has been taking steps towards promoting healthy lifestyles by improving access to
recreation activities at its facilities, while marketing its services through the Parks and Recreation Guide (which is
available in print or digital versions).
Lack of Free Time
Lack of time as a barrier to participation is largely a result of the evolving employment and family structures in
Canada. Commuting, home-based occupations, night-shifts and weekend work are creating the need to have
services open later and the need to promote drop-in opportunities. Similarly, the changing family structure with
1
Canadian Parks & Recreation Association. The Benefits of Recreation. 1992. Canadian Centre for Ethics in Sport. What Sport Can Do, the TrueSport
Report. 2008
Public Health Agency of Canada. Obesity in Canada. 2011. Retrieved from:
http://secure.cihi.ca/cihiweb/products/Obesity_in_canada_2011_en.pdf
2
5|Pa g e
many lone-parent families (17% of Orangeville census families in 2006) is putting significant time pressures and
constraints on recreation and leisure participation. The time crunch is generally the greatest in the age groups
between 15 and 54, where burdens of school, work, and child rearing are heaviest.
Communities across the GTA are often faced with the challenge of overcoming this barrier from a service
delivery perspective by evolving programs to provide more convenient and flexible opportunities to participate.
Given that 51% of Orangeville’s workforce commutes outside of the Town, some residents will find it difficult to
commute from their place of work back to Orangeville for activities and programs offered during prime-time
hours. In this situation, communities are extending hours of operation to allow people to participate ate at times
that are most suited to their needs. Providing more unstructured programs may also assist opportunities to
participate as people are generally more likely to participate if activities are casual or of a drop-in nature.
Growing Inactivity Among Children and Youth
Children and youth, the traditional markets for most recreation departments, constitute 29% of Orangeville’s
total population. While there were 700 fewer children between 2001 and 2011 (a 16% decrease), the number of
youth increased by nearly 500 (13%) over that time. These markets remain critical components of the municipal
delivery system given the need to instill positive lifestyle behaviours to promote healthy living throughout the
lives of these children and youth.
Between 2000 and 2010, the Canadian Fitness & Lifestyle Research Institute (CFLRI) found that participation
declined in unorganized and organized physical activities and sports among children. 3 Physical inactivity is
closely linked to the lack of free time, with inactivity levels compounded in recent years due to a surge in
sedentary activities arising from the digital age. This has resulted in a growing trend of physical inactivity, most
prevalent among youth and children, often leading to high levels of obesity and chronic disease. The Canadian
Society for Exercise Physiology recommends the following levels of physical activity for children and youth:
•
•
•
Early Years (1 to 4 yrs.) – at least 180 minutes per day at any intensity
Children (5 to 11 yrs.) – at least 60 minutes per day of moderate to vigorous physical activity
Youth (12 to 17 yrs.) – at least 60 minutes per day of moderate to vigorous physical activity
According to a Canadian Health Measures Survey, children and youth are likely to have undertaken between 60
to 90 minutes of physical activity per week, suggesting infrequent levels of daily physical activity. By contrast,
children and youth spend an average of nearly nine hours a day in sedentary pursuits, a majority of which is
dedicated to screen time.4 Each day, internet social networking represents the number one group activity for
females and the second group activity, behind sports, for males. 5 Although sports represent the number one
group activity among males, youth participation rates in Canada have declined from 77% in 1992 to 59% in
3
Canadian Fitness & Lifestyle Research Institute. Children’s active pursuits during the after school period. 2010 Physical Activity Monitor:
Facts and Figures. 2010. Retrieved from:
http://www.cflri.ca/media/node/922/files/PAM%202010%20Bulletin%204%20-%20Active%20Pursuits%20EN.pdf
4
Active Healthy Kids Canada. Healthy habits start earlier than you think: The Active Healthy Kids Canada report card on physical activity
for children and youth. Toronto, ON. 2010.
5
Bibby, R. Canada’s emerging millennials in transition, Vanier Institute of the Family, pp. 2-6. 2009. Retrieved from:
http://passengershawn.files.wordpress.com/2011/03/canadas_emerging_millenials.pdf.
6|Pa g e
2005. 6 Adults reported spending an average of ten hours per day in sedentary pursuits, suggesting that the level
of physical inactivity increases with age. 7
The provision of indoor recreation facilities and programs is only one way in which municipalities can improve
physical activity levels. Best practices dictate that is critical to support facilities with appropriate programming
that is interesting and responsive to community needs, as well as to educate the public in the benefits of
physical activity and evaluate ways to provide venues for exercise through the delivery of services across all
municipal departments. The construction of the Alder Street Recreation Centre represents the Town’s most
recent endeavour in indoor recreation facility construction whereby opportunities for physical activity (namely
ice sports and aquatics) can take place.
Shifting Participation between Organized and Unstructured Activities
The public is placing greater demands on spontaneous, non-programmed forms of activity due to evolving
household structures, schedules, and lifestyles, prompting a transition of activities from organized to
unorganized sports. The CFLRI reported that participation in organized sports has declined from 57% in 1992 to
51% in 2005. 61% of children were found to be more likely to participate in unorganized physical activities,
although this is a decline from a recorded 69% in 2000; suggesting an overall decline in physical activities. 8 This
trend is largely driven by a lack of time, a general decline of many organized sports, socio-economic status, and
the desire for self-scheduled, and accessible forms of activity.
The declining participation in certain organized sports, especially among younger generation, is partially the
result of an evolving demographic that has translated into differing interests. As growth in many GTA
communities occurs through immigration, many new residents are coming from countries where some
traditionally Canadian sports are not played. For example, participation in minor hockey, one of Canada’s most
popular sports, is expected to decline nearly one-third by the end of this Study period due to a declining youth
interest in the sport. According to the Hockey Canada, there were 577,000 members for the 2010-2011 year,
and it is expected that there will be 360,000 members by 2021. 9
Aging Populations
As touched on in previous pages, Orangeville’s population is aging (the median age stands at 37, up two years
from the 2006 Census). The ‘Baby Boomer’ generation is contributing to a ‘greying’ of the population and
placing greater demand for activities aimed at older adults (i.e. those between 55 and 69 years of age) and
seniors (i.e. those over 70 years of age). Older adults and seniors represent Orangeville’s fastest growing market
segment by age, and these individuals will likely be looking for new types of activities to participate in.
Collectively, the older adult and seniors market comprises 22% of Orangeville’s population, with the number of
Ifedi, F. Sport participation in Canada, 2005. Culture, Tourism and the Centre for Education Statistics. Vol. Catalogue no. 81-595-MIE No. 060: Statistics Canada. 2008.
6
Rachel C., Didier G., Ian J., Cora C., Janine Clarke, & Mark T. Physical activity of Canadian children and youth: Accelerometer results from
the 2007 and 2009 Canadian Health Measures Survey. 2011. Retrieved from:
http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/82-003-x/2011001/article/11397-eng.htm
7
8
Canadian Fitness & Lifestyle Research Institute. Children’s active pursuits during the after school period. 2010 Physical Activity Monitor:
Facts and Figures. 2010. Retrieved from:
http://www.cflri.ca/media/node/922/files/PAM%202010%20Bulletin%204%20-%20Active%20Pursuits%20EN.pdf
9
Kaufman, B. Hockey losing numbers game. London Free Press. 2011. Retrieved from:
http://www.lfpress.com/sports/hockey/2011/10/31/18902646.html
7|Pa g e
older adults in Orangeville increasing by 66% (over 1,500 people) and the seniors market growing by 37% (about
600 people) between the 2001 and 2011.10
Today’s older adults are shifting away from traditional seniors’ activities towards more active recreation, seeking
quality wellness and active living opportunities. The ‘new senior’ will typically be wealthier and more physically
active than previous generations, and have higher expectations. Specific considerations in addressing the
delivery of services for older adults may include:
•
An increase in the use of adult opportunities and services by older adults.
•
More actively engaging and including the older adult population in the planning and delivery of services,
possibly through the use of a senior’s program advisory committee and/or opportunities for input
through focus groups.
•
Recognizing that the percentage of persons with disabilities will increase over time as the population
ages and that physical accessibility for all programs and services will become more critical for older
adults.
•
Increased daytime use of community centres and other recreation facilities.
With evidence of an aging population observed in Orangeville, a greater demand for services for this age group
is anticipated to occur. As a result, Orangeville will likely experience growing demand and requests for active
seniors’ activities (fitness and sports) and personal interest activities (day trips and education). Demand is also
likely to rise for passive and less rigorous recreation activities that promote socialization and community
cohesiveness.
Newcomers to Canada
Of Orangeville’s total population, 13% comprise immigrants to Canada. The vast majority of the Town’s
immigrant population settled prior to 1991 which suggests that they are well established in Canadian culture
and have an understanding of local recreational preferences. Furthermore, 5% of Orangeville’s total population
constitute visible minorities. While Orangeville is presently not seen as a major destination for newcomers (only
about 1% of the population arrived here after 2001), recent immigration trends suggest that cultural diversity
will increase locally as newcomers are choosing to settle in the GTA and other large metropolitan areas.
Increasing levels of cultural diversity in Orangeville facilitates the evolution of recreation needs. Many cultures
view recreational activities as a family event and are more inclined to pursue activities together. Newcomers to
Canada are frequent users of recreation facilities as they are ideal locations for social gatherings and interaction.
The variety of parks and recreation pursuits between cultures is immense, with many activities serving to define
cultures and how they interact. Indoor recreational spaces can serve as venues at which the Town can offer
special events such as festivals, concerts, and cultural celebrations.
This growing diversity creates the need for a wide range of activities as well as grouping services into multi-use
community centres, providing opportunities for all members of a family to participate at the same time without
travelling to multiple facilities. Planning is key as non-traditional activities such as bocce or badminton place
pressures on facilities if they are not planned for in advance, particularly with respect to the provision of
staffing, maintenance, space, and supporting infrastructure. Incorporating flexible facility designs can allow for
multiple uses, as some activities may decline and others emerge.
10
Statistics Canada 2001 and 2011 Census.
8|Pa g e
Polarization of Income Groups leaves Recreation Unaffordable to Many
Statistics Canada has identified that the richest 10% of the Canadian population have seen an increase in their
income by 14%, while the poorest 10% have seen an income increase of less than 1%. The term “working poor”
has been put forward in recent years to describe the financial situation of many Canadians who have a job but
do not have any additional funds beyond paying for life necessities (due to increasing cost of living).
Past studies have shown that a household’s level of income is proportional to participation in recreation
activities, especially in organized team sports given the high cost to participate. Across Canada, 62% of
individuals living in households with incomes of less than $20,000 were considered inactive. 11 The Canadian
Fitness & Lifestyle Research Institute found that nearly 40% of children among households earning over
$100,000 were involved in organized physical activities and sports, whereas only 21% of children were involved
in these pursuits in households earning less than $50,000.
The 2011 National Household Survey (NHS) reports the median individual income in Orangeville at $34,431,
about $1,000 less than the provincial median and about $1,400 more than Dufferin County. 10% of the
population was classified as having “low income” before taxes, lower than the provincial rate where almost 14%
are in the low income category. Furthermore, Orangeville’s median household income of $73,953 was about
$8,000 higher than the provincial median though about $4,000 less than that of the County. Based solely on
income, Orangeville can expect a greater level of participation in recreation compared to the province
Of note, education is also highly correlated with participation in recreational activity, with greater participation
among those with higher levels of educational attainment. A third of Orangeville’s population (34%) attained a
high school equivalent as their highest level education (compared to 27% of the province), 24% with a college
degree (compared to 20% of the province), and 12% with a university degree (compared to 23% of the
province). Based on educational attainment alone, the Town would be less inclined to participate in recreational
activity. This trend can be assumed to offset the increase propensity to participate based on income, therefore,
it can be expected that participation in recreational activity is similar to that of the province overall.
Despite the correlations advanced in the previous paragraphs, it will be important to ensure that the Town’s
lower income households are also engaged. To provide equitable opportunities across all income groups, a
number of policies, procedures, and programs have been established to remove income-related barriers to
participation. In 2010, Parks and Recreation Ontario released a guide of best practices for delivering recreational
opportunities to engage low-income families, focusing upon the following themes.
11
•
Community partnerships and inter-sectoral collaboration help ensure a holistic approach that maximizes
resources and increases access to recreational, social and educational programming.
•
Funding partnerships are key, as many practices are dependent on additional funding to ensure financial
viability and long-term sustainability.
•
Fee subsidy programs that minimize or eliminate user fees, transportation costs and equipment costs
enable low-income families to access recreational programs that they would otherwise not be able to
afford.
•
A written access policy that is approved by a municipal council or board of directors formalizes the
commitment of the organization and helps ensure the viability and long-term sustainability of the policy.
Act Now BC. Why don’t people participate? Physical activity strategy. 2011. Retrieved from:
http://www.physicalactivitystrategy.ca/pdfs/Why_Dont_People_Participate.pdf
9|Pa g e
•
Child and youth development programs foster leadership and self-esteem, which enhances physical and
emotional health and increases social skills, resulting in healthier, more resilient adults who are able to
effectively contribute to society. 12
Orangeville makes efforts to ensure its programs are affordable to its residents by providing a range of low-tono cost options. Although there is no formal fee assistance policy offered through the Town, there are a number
of community-supportive programs such as the Canadian Tire Jumpstart and “Tim’s Swims.” Additionally, a 15%
discount is applied when three or more local family members are concurrently enrolled in a Town-run program.
Facility Trends
Multi-Use Destinations
Communities are moving away from single-purpose, stand-alone facilities in favour of multi-use facilities that
integrate numerous activities and offer economies of scale with respect to construction, maintenance, staffing,
and scheduling. Multi-use facilities are often designed with flexible spaces (e.g. meeting rooms, gymnasiums,
etc.) and the potential to expand and easily respond to changing trends and demands of future users. In
addition, the ability to cross-program opportunities and their responsiveness to the ‘time crunch’ make multiuse community centres an attractive ‘one-stop shopping’ destination, particularly among households with a
wide range of interests. Both the Tony Rose Memorial Sports Centre and the Alder Street Recreation Centre are
excellent examples of this model, developing high expectations among residents with regard to the quality of
facilities, and seeking innovation and comfort.
Aging Infrastructure
A study by Parks and Recreation Ontario identified that 30-50% of recreation facilities in Ontario are
approaching the end of their useful life. 13 In fact, infrastructure province-wide is chronically under-funded, 14
though these pressures have been somewhat alleviated through the recent provincial and federal economic
stimulus programs. In addition to job creation and stimulating economic growth, investment in recreation
infrastructure renewal helps to stimulate higher levels of participation in physical and recreation activities.
Provision of quality recreation facilities is a cost-effective, proactive solution to promoting healthy lifestyles
through physical activity and participation.
Some communities have undertaken community facility master plans to identify the state of their recreation
facilities and to determine their suitability to accommodate future growth and the evolution of recreation
trends. Single-purpose, older facilities have typically been unsuitable to support the needs of expanding
communities where they have been found to be aging and inefficient, lack accessibility, lack appropriate space
to meet the needs of user groups, or require costly maintenance. Older facilities are also typically single use
facilities where opportunities may exist to expand or relocate multiple facility components to achieve economies
of scale as will be discussed in the following section.
Since 2009, the Canadian government has invested over $12 billion in infrastructure projects and programs.
Recent initiatives include the Recreation Infrastructure Canada (RInC) program that was launched in 2009 to
12
Parks and Recreation Ontario. Affordable Access to Recreation for Ontarians. 2010.
Retrieved from: http://www.prontario.org/index.php/ci_id/3721.htm
13
Parks and Recreation Ontario. Ontario Sport and Recreation Infrastructure Study. 2006.
Retrieved from: http://216.13.76.142/PROntario/index.htm
14
Parks and Recreation Ontario. Investing in healthy and active Ontarians through recreation and parks infrastructure. 2007.
Retrieved from from: http://www.prontario.org/index.php/ci_id/3542.htm
10 | P a g e
renew, upgrade, and expand recreation facilities over a 2-year period. In Ontario, nearly $200 million was
invested in the renewal and upgrading of recreation facilities and infrastructure through various funding
programs (e.g. RInC, Build Canada, etc.), resulting in more than 750 projects funded with the assistance of the
federal and provincial government. 15
Accessibility & Safety Requirements
The Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act (AODA) was passed in 2005 by the Provincial Government,
and its regulations are gradually being released. The AODA mandates public and private sector organizations,
who providing goods and services to people in Ontario, to meet certain accessibility standards in the areas of
customer service, transportation, information and communications, the built environment, and employment.
In terms of what this means to municipal community services, facilities will have to become barrier-free to those
with a broad range of disabilities. From a facility design perspective, this may include providing ramps and
accessible washrooms, as well as considering elements such as lighting, audible alarm systems, signage with high
contrast lettering, easy-to-find directories, accessible parking, etc. From a facility operation perspective, this
may involve training staff to be sensitive of the needs of those with disabilities and how to effectively assist
them.
For a community centre, this may consist of barrier-free elements being contained throughout the facility (i.e. to
facilitate access from the front door through to the reception area, change room and throughout the facility
itself). Considerations such as zero depth (beach or ramp) entry and family change rooms are common in
aquatic centre design while access to an ice rink or its player’s benches can be designed to facilitate sledge
hockey. Programmatic considerations for inclusivity are also important, with Orangeville partnering with
Teamworks Dufferin to offer an alternative swimming program geared to children with autism, as an example,
while the Library offers access to the CNIB Digital Library to qualifying individuals.
The provision of family washrooms and change rooms is a newer trend in accessibility, largely driven by the
need for caregivers to access spaces where their children or those with special needs require a separated
changing area. For example, shifts in family structures and work patterns have created instances where a single
caregiver needs to assist their child who is of opposite sex but too old to enter in the change area accessible to
the caregiver. Similarly, family change rooms may be equipped with specialized chairs or restroom facilities to
better assist those with disabilities.
Designing safe facilities should be of the utmost importance, thus many municipalities are incorporating Crime
Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) or similar principles into the design of new facilities. For
example, this may involve (but not be limited to) ensuring that highly lit and visible spaces in indoor and outdoor
spaces (e.g. hallways, parking lots, etc.) are developed, suitable access to phones or emergency communications
equipment, installation of surveillance equipment in key areas, etc.
Environmentally-Conscious Designs
New facilities are increasingly incorporating “green” technologies, such as the inclusion of green roofs,
Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) equivalent specifications, eco-friendly landscape design
and facility orientation, drawing energy from ‘off-the-grid’ sources, etc. Many municipalities have established
corporate policies which mandate the design of municipal buildings to qualify for at least a LEED Silver
certification. For an indoor recreation facility, principles of energy efficiency and water conservation are critical
15
Recreation Infrastructure Ontario. Recreation Infrastructure Canada Program – Ontario. 2011. 2011.
Retrieved from: http://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/708.nsf/eng/home
11 | P a g e
factors to be considered within the design. For examples, some multi-use centres use mutual HVAC systems
between an arena and pool area whereby excess heat removed from the arena is used to heat the aquatic
centre.
Although highly variable, the incorporation of LEED certified components to a multi-use facility can range
anywhere from 5% to over 20% of normal facility costs, depending upon the level (LEED Silver, Gold or Platinum)
and the type and scope of applicable design components. Even though there is usually an inherent cost
associated with ‘going green’, the Town’s leadership role may provide an example for those in the newly
developing commercial, industrial and residential sectors to follow. Furthermore, the payback period of
incorporating energy efficient initiatives can be fairly short through reduction in operating expenses. Defining
the payback period more definitively is part of the LEED (or equivalent) design process.
According to research summarized by MJM Architects, new energy technologies that have application in multiuse recreation facilities can be categorized as those which harvest alternate sources of available energy, and
those that improve the control of energy distribution and consumption within the facility. While the former are
still in various stages of development, often requiring subsidies to produce even marginal economic benefits, the
latter category is represented by numerous examples of immediately effective products and systems that have
been in continuous development and which continue to realize savings in both capital costs and energy
consumption.
The applicability of new technologies in multi-use recreation facilities is governed by several factors that
ultimately affect the life cycle cost to the client. The most visible new technology involves the application of
solar energy harvesting, either by roof mounted panel collection and direct heat transfer to a medium like
glycol, or by converting the sun’s energy to electricity through photo-voltaic collector panels. The use of both
technologies is becoming widespread in parts of the globe where the more standard sources of energy (oil,
hydro) are less available, and where there is a high availability of solar energy. In such areas (lower latitudes),
equipment, maintenance and life cycle costs are generally lower than in Canada, where conventional energy has
been relatively inexpensive. In global regions like ours, that often experience poor weather (snow, cloud cover)
during periods of high energy demand, the effectiveness of these technologies remains marginal. The harvest of
wind energy is also dependent upon local environmental conditions. In our latitudes, where the quantity of
sunshine is problematic for solar harvesting, wind power has become a viable and popular alternate energy
source. Many areas of Ontario are suitable for the installation of wind turbines for the production of electrical
energy, which is an environmentally friendly alternative to nuclear sources or the burning of fossil fuels.
Ground source heating and cooling is another new technology that is finding widespread acceptance in multiuse recreation facilities. A conventional heat pump system transfers heat from the groundwater to a space
heating loop during cold weather and can reverse the process to produce cooling during the summer. Under
optimal conditions, such a system can reduce energy consumption and operational costs by as much as 50%
over conventional systems.
The decision to exploit any of the above alternate energy sources would be based on a site-specific feasibility
study to evaluate suitability for adequate water supply for geothermal wells, adequate wind or solar capacity,
other environmental effects, impact on maintenance and operations, and ultimately, the overall life-cycle costs
and payback.
Examples of Indoor Recreation Facility Enhancement Projects
The following projects represent examples of investments where existing recreation facilities were enhanced or
repurposed (and in some cases also expanded) due to evolving trends and market demands in their respective
12 | P a g e
communities. The list is not intended to be exhaustive but rather to provide general examples of ways to
adaptively reuse older recreation facilities.
•
Centre Wellington Community Sportsplex, Fergus ON – The former Fergus Arena was expanded in 2005
by adding a second ice pad, an indoor aquatic centre, small fitness training centre, banquet hall,
municipal administrative space, and multi-purpose space. The total cost of the expansion was $12.4
million.
•
Davidson Centre, Kincardine ON – The Davidson Centre was originally constructed as a single pad arena
with an indoor aquatic centre and multi-purpose spaces. The facility has undergone two major
expansions: the first, in 2009, added a fitness centre and banquet hall (the latter of which is used
primarily by local seniors) along with multi-purpose space; the second expansion was completed in 2011
and added a 30,000ft2 for a gymnasium with indoor running track at a cost of $3.6 million.
•
The Fenlands, Banff AB – The Fenlands (Banff Recreation Centre) was expanded in 2011 through the
twinning the original arena (with a NHL size ice pad) and four new curling sheets with viewing areas. The
total cost of the expansion was $33 million and has attained LEED Silver certification (which added $4.4
million to the capital cost and is expected to save about $100,000 in annual operating costs).
•
Syl Apps, Paris ON – Upon completion of a new twin pad arena in Paris, the former Syl Apps Arena was
decommissioned and repurposed into an indoor soccer venue that includes a FIFA 2 star field (177’ x
77’). Two of the former arena dressing rooms have been converted into permanent space for the Paris
Museum & Historical Society.
Service Delivery Trends
Volunteerism
Volunteers are essential to the operation and delivery of high quality parks and recreation services where many
communities rely heavily on their assistance; Orangeville is no exception to this rule. The 2007 National Survey
of Giving, Volunteering and Participating indicated that volunteerism is rising slightly, but experience in several
other communities suggest that many groups still struggle in finding volunteers. One key result of the national
survey was that 18% of the volunteer hours in Canada are in the sports and recreation sector, which is the
highest of all sectors. However, while 46% of Canadians (15 years or older) volunteered in 2007, it must be
noted that the absolute average volunteer hours per year decreased slightly from 168 hours per year to 166. The
rate of volunteerism by those between the ages of 15 and 24 has doubled from 29% in 2000 to 58% in 2007,
perhaps largely due to the addition of mandatory volunteer hours for high school students as part of the high
school curriculum.
At the same time, youth ages 15 and under represent the smallest proportion of volunteers, representing a need
to engage this age group early to improve the likelihood of retaining volunteers in the future. One of the most
common barriers to youth volunteering is the lack of free time. More youth lead structured lives with school,
and organized sports coupled with increasingly more employed youth, resulting in the inability to make longterm commitments to volunteering from leading dynamic lifestyles. Today’s digital age and increasing sedentary
activities also limit youth’s level of community involvement. Other barriers identify that youth are unable to find
opportunities or are unsure of how to get involved in volunteering, suggesting a gap in communication between
organizations and the community. Lastly, today’s youth feels that their opinions are not valued by organizations.
Youth volunteers need to be engaged with community service delivery as they may provide new skills and
perceptions that may be overlooked by other age groups.
13 | P a g e
Seniors currently represent the most active volunteer group; however, it is anticipated that this group will soon
move on from the volunteer workforce, resulting in greater pressures on the delivery of services and impact
programming capacity. This gap in the volunteer base opens opportunities to attract new volunteers,
particularly among youth but also the baby boomer generation as they move through the mature stage of their
life cycle. As baby boomers enter into retirement, this age group will be seeking more opportunities to get
involved in the community with less commitments, resulting in more available time and flexibility in schedules,
although it is anticipated that many boomers will seek part-time work. Volunteers in this age group are also
more likely to seek opportunities in new areas unrelated to their careers, allowing them to learn new skills,
while others may seek volunteer opportunities where they can utilize their skills and experience.
Partnerships
In addition to the Town, organizations such as the conservation authorities, school boards, and non-profit
organizations on a provincial and local level offer access to parks, natural areas, recreation activities, and
community facilities throughout Orangeville. The most successful partnerships are derived from common
objectives (e.g. environmental conservation, community improvement, physical activity, trail development, etc.)
to maximize efficiency and effectiveness, utilizing the skills and strengths of each group in delivering access and
programming to parks and recreation while sharing responsibilities and minimizing risks (e.g. costs and
liabilities).
Maximizing the resources of each party is seen as a beneficial way to increase the amount of publically
accessible facilities provided that the public interest is maximized and that partnerships fulfill the desired
objectives of the Town and its partners. For example, many communities provide facility space for programming,
events and activities while the staffing responsibilities are provided by a partnering community organization.
Other partnership opportunities exist with private sector businesses through sponsorships, project funding, and
donations. These types of partnerships allow businesses to give back to the community while gaining market
exposure, although some corporate partnerships may cause community opposition with respect to negative
stigmas associated with certain businesses and products that may encourage unhealthy and inactive lifestyles.
Nevertheless, this trend towards an integrated provision approach is growing with the realization that some
communities cannot do it alone.
Technology & Customer Service
In recent years, the adoption of new technologies has provided many municipalities and community groups with
a more advanced and streamlined process to track participation levels, improve scheduling and provide quick
registration for participants when used effectively. With the number of homes with high-speed internet access
steadily increasing, municipalities are able to provide a wealth of pertinent information on municipal websites.
In addition, most age groups are capable of navigating the internet, to varying degrees. At present, the
Richmond Hill’s website appears to be a well utilized resource for the promotion and coordination of parks and
recreation opportunities with online registration resources for community programs.
Social media and personal devices have also revolutionized the way people communicate and socialize while
using very few resources. As a result, the application of these innovative communication techniques will require
communities to understand and apply these methods in an effective manner to in inform all age groups in the
community. Social media tools such as Facebook and Twitter provide an outlet to advertise facilities, events
programs, and services to a wide market. Social media can also be used as a forum to collect valuable
information using group discussions and surveys, providing effective and efficient opportunities to communicate
feedback and requests and develop social connections with the community. These tools can often be supported
by the use of Quick Response codes or “QR” codes, designed for scanning by smart phones, which have
increasingly become popular in communicating information.
14 | P a g e
Section 3: Local & Regional Market
Geographic Context
Orangeville is the largest urban community in Dufferin County, situated along the Highway 9 and Highway 10
corridors providing good access to the western GTA and Georgian Bay communities. Orangeville shares
municipal borders with the Town of Caledon, Township of East Garafraxa, Township of Amaranth, and Town of
Mono with many of those residents utilizing Orangeville as a regional service centre for commercial and
recreational purposes. The Town of Orangeville covers a land area of about 15 square kilometres.
Local & Regional Indoor Recreation Facilities
The Town of Orangeville owns and operates two multi-use community centres. The Tony Rose Memorial Sports
Centre was originally constructed in the 1970s and contains a twin pad arena (185’ x 85’ rinks), a six lane 25
metre pool, banquet hall, two meeting rooms, and food concession.
The Alder Street Recreation Centre was built in 2003 and contains a twin pad arena (200’ x 85’ rinks), a six lane
25 metre competition pool and separate leisure pool, an indoor walking track, branch library, multi-purpose
room and five meeting rooms, the Twister’s Gymnastics and Trampoline Club (leased space), food concession
and leased space for a restaurant and pro shop.
Facility Component
Town
Supply
Service Level
Notes
Ice Pads
4
1 : 7,300
Contained in two twin pad arenas
Indoor Aquatic Centres
2
1 : 14,500
Contain a total of 3 tanks
Banquet Halls
1
1 : 29,000
Meeting Rooms
9
1 : 3,200
Accommodate a variety of functions between them
Gymnasiums
0
0
Access available through community use of schools
(2013)*
* Rounded to the nearest one hundred people
In addition to Orangeville’s two community centres, there are a number of major community facilities located
regionally. The following chart illustrates community centres located within 40 kilometres of Orangeville
(representing about a 50 minute drive in winter driving conditions); regional facilities primarily consist of arena
and hall facilities though there are a couple of indoor pools as well. For the regional communities listed on the
following page, only Caledon and Centre Wellington are involved in direct recreation program delivery (as is
Orangeville) while the rest rely upon community-based providers to deliver programs to their respective
residents.
In addition to the municipal facilities, the private sector ACTS (Athletic Centre for Training through Sports)
contains a full service fitness centre, 24,000 ft2 Sports Dome containing an indoor artificial turf field, and triple
gymnasium with separate shooting room for basketball.
15 | P a g e
Figure 3: Major Community Centres within a 40 kilometre radius of Orangeville
Major Community
Centres
Community
Approx.
Distance
Approx.
Driving Time
Caledon Central Pool
Caledon
15 km
20 minutes
Indoor Pool
Erin Community Centre
Erin
20 km
25 minutes
Single Pad Arena, Library,
Physiofitness Centre, Banquet Room
Hillsburgh Community
Centre
Hillsburgh
(Erin)
20 km
25 minutes
Single Pad Arena, Banquet Hall
Lloyd Wilson Centennial
Arena
Inglewood
(Caledon)
20 km
25 minutes
Single Pad Arena
Caledon Community
Complex
Caledon East
25 km
30 minutes
Tri-pad Arena, Banquet Hall
Centre Dufferin
Recreation Complex
Shelburne
30 km
35 minutes
Single Pad Arena, Banquet Hall
Albion-Bolton Community
Centre
Bolton
(Caledon)
35 km
40 minutes
Single Pad Arena, Library
Centre Wellington
Community Sportsplex
Fergus
35 km
40 minutes
Twin Pad Arena, Community Hall,
Indoor Aquatics Centre
Elora Community Hall
Elora
40 km
50 minutes
Single Pad Arena, Community Hall
Major Indoor Facility Components
16 | P a g e
Section 4: Consultations
This process has involved a number of initiatives aimed at obtaining input from local user groups and the
community at large. Consultations have consisted of a Community Search Conference, interviews with key
informants, a stakeholder survey, and presentations to the Recreation Committee.
Community Search Conference
A Community Search Conference was held on February 21, 2013 to solicit community input regarding the Town’s
indoor recreation facilities. The event was well attended with 36 participants representing interested residents
and community organizations, who were seated at seven tables. After a brief introduction to the Study,
participants were asked to consider four questions relating to their indoor recreation values, improvements,
repurposing, and programming. Town staff were on hand to assist with facilitating discussion and members of
Council were present to observe. The following provides a summary of key themes arising from the discussions.
What Participants Liked Most About Orangeville’s Indoor Recreation Facilities
Participants liked a number of aspects of Orangeville’s indoor recreation facilities at the Tony Rose Memorial
Sports Centre and Alder Street Recreation Centre. From a general perspective, a common element participants
appreciated was the great location of both facilities and superb customer service provided by facility staff.
Participants noted that staff are very knowledgeable and able to accommodate varying needs. Participants also
valued Orangeville’s pools, in addition to the variety of programming available and diversity of sport
opportunities such as hockey and lacrosse.
The following figure represents the most common elements participants valued at the Community Search
Conference.
What Residents Liked Most about Orangeville’s Indoor Recreation Facilities
Participants also identified several qualities they liked about the Tony Rose Memorial Sports Centre, such as its
location in close proximity to downtown. Participants noted that the Tony Rose location can be conveniently
accessed, especially for seniors. The facility’s ease of access is further bolstered by its well-situated parking
arrangement, where a number of participants cited that the parking lot at Tony Rose is much closer to the
facility entrance compared to Alder Street Recreation Centre. Participants liked the facility’s pool, which
supports a number of aquatic programs such as aquafit, and the banquet hall, which can be utilized for a variety
of activities. Further, participants appreciated the recent improvements and upgrades, while being able to
maintain the history of the facility, something particularly valued by some participants.
17 | P a g e
The following figure represents the most popular features found at the Tony Rose Memorial Sports Centre
identified by participants valued at the Community Search Conference (the elements most frequently identified
are represented by the largest words).
What Residents Liked Most about Tony Rose Memorial Sports Centre
With respect to the Alder Street Recreation Centre, participants appreciated the variety of activities offered at
this facility and the fact that it was co-located with the Orangeville Library and a restaurant, enhancing the
recreation centre as a multi-use destination to local and regional users. Participants are especially fond of the
facility’s attractiveness, citing its modern and open concept design. They also valued the facility components
located at the Recreation Centre such as the walking track and pool, in addition to the elevator to assist users to
the seating and viewing areas.
The following figure represents the most popular features found at the Alder Street Sports Centre identified by
participants valued at the Community Search Conference.
What Residents Liked Most about Alder Street Recreation Centre
Indoor Facilities that are Needed in Orangeville but are Not Presently Available
Participants identified several indoor recreation facilities they believe should be offered in Orangeville. The most
frequent facility mentioned by participants was a multi-purpose gymnasium that could support a range of indoor
opportunities including, but not limited to, basketball, volleyball, badminton and rock climbing. The provision of
a gymnasium could also serve as a facility for indoor youth and seniors programs or a larger banquet venue for
large events that cannot be accommodated at existing facilities.
Participants felt that a fitness facility should also be given consideration with some support for squash courts.
Fitness facilities should provide both equipment and non-equipment based opportunities to promote the
18 | P a g e
increasingly popular active living and wellness movement, particularly in support of Orangeville’s older adult
community, who generally seek more active and leisure activities.
An emphasis was also placed on the need for an indoor turf field. Participants felt that a municipally-run indoor
field would provide year-round games and off-season training opportunities to local soccer and lacrosse groups.
Further, participants identified a number of other indoor facilities that should be considered, including, but not
limited to, the following:
•
•
•
Dedicated seniors’ and youth spaces
Restaurant/coffee shop at TRMSC
Office and storage space for user groups
•
•
•
Daycare and education centre for children
Hobby and craft shop
A comfortable gather area
How Orangeville’s Indoor Recreation Facilities could be Improved to Meet Needs
A common theme arising from this question was the need for a new multi-purpose or gymnasium space. A
number of existing facilities were identified by participants that have the potential to be repurposed to
accommodate this need. The restaurant currently located at the Alder Street Recreation Centre was suggested
to be repurposed into a multi-use space or gymnasium, although participants also proposed that this restaurant
could be repurposed into an alcohol-based restaurant or fitness centre. A multi-purpose space or gymnasium
could also be located in place of one ice pad. Some participants recommended that it should replace Green-Rink
located at the Alder Street Recreation Centre. The Humber College space was also suggested as a potential
candidate for repurposing. Suggestions were also received for an indoor sports field, but did not specify what
should be replaced.
Several improvements that can be made to Orangeville’s indoor recreation facilities were suggested by
participants. The most pressing improvement identified by participants was the need to renovate and upgrade
Orangeville’s change rooms to ensure they meet the needs of the users. Such upgrades identified by participants
include a family change room at Tony Rose, a larger men’s change room, more heat, new hair dryers, door locks,
and benches, and additional stalls in the family change room at ASRC.
Participants also identified some safety improvements at Orangeville’s facilities, particularly ensuring that all
stairs have hand rails. Specific safety improvements suggested at the Alder Street Recreation Centre included
ensuring that the elevator is flush with the floor, providing non-slippery entrance surface, and providing
removable stairs in the pool.
Moreover, other improvements identified by participants include, but are not limited to, the following:
•
•
•
Improve the flow of the parking lots closer
to the facility entrance and pool
Improve spectator seating
Raise pool temperatures
•
•
•
Free WIFI in all facilities
Banquet facility with kitchen at ASRC
Improve utilization of meeting rooms
Improvements that could be made to recreation programming in Orangeville
A variety of programming improvements were suggested by participants to better accommodate their needs.
Several suggestions were made regarding improvements to the Town’s aquatic programming, including the need
to keep the pool open longer, especially during the summer, weekends and holidays, and to provide a more
consistent schedule. Participants also identified numerous other improvements including having experienced
instructors and life guards, additional open swim times, access to the leisure pool, early morning programs,
separate swim times for older adults and families, and separating public and program swims.
19 | P a g e
Improvements to arena programming were made and participants made suggestions for year-round
programming opportunities. Some participants proposed older adult only or theme skate times.
Recommendations were also made to coordinate programming with Skate Canada to avoid duplication, in
addition to other arena programming such as winter lacrosse, summer hockey, speed skating, broomball,
ringette, and ball hockey.
Participants also suggested that more family programming should be provided. It was identified that these
opportunities should be affordable and enhance the family experience, although no further details were
provided. Participants suggested that parent and tot programs should be provided in addition to other tot and
children-oriented programs where parents can also participate or daycare rooms where children can be
dropped-off while parents utilize other areas of the multi-use facility.
Stakeholder Survey
A self-administered stakeholder survey was distributed to a number of local indoor facility organizations with an
interested in indoor recreation programs, facilities and services. The purpose of this survey was to gather
information regarding participation statistics, organizational mandate, primary activities, facility utilization and
needs, and future facility requirements. Town staff distributed the survey to organizations electronically as well
as by letter mail and completed surveys were returned to the Town. A total of 13 surveys were returned for
analysis.
The summary of quantitative responses is as follows:
•
31% of groups expect to expand the scope of their programming or services over the next 3 to 5 years,
while 62% expect no change. One group planned to reduce the scope of their programming or services
due to a decrease in the number of teams in their league.
•
53% of groups agreed or strongly agreed that their organization is able to attract enough volunteers to
meet their organization’s needs, while 16% of groups disagreed or strongly disagreed. 23% were neither
in agreement or disagreement (i.e. neutral on the subject) and 8% of groups were unsure or did not
respond.
•
54% of groups use the Tony Rose Memorial Sports Centre and 46% of groups use the Alder Street
Recreation Centre.
•
23% of groups regularly use indoor recreation facilities in other communities, while 69% do not.
•
23% of groups presently require additional time to use existing indoor recreation facilities in Orangeville,
while 54% said they did not (the remaining 15% of groups were unsure).
•
15% of groups anticipate the need for expanded indoor recreation space or new components within
Orangeville’s existing facilities in the next 5 to 10 years, while 54% indicated they did not. 31% of groups
were unsure or did not respond.
•
31% of groups indicated that their organization requires additional supports from the Town (supports
mentioned were financially-oriented, namely subsidies, as well as assistance with negotiating greater
access to school facilities), while 46% reported that they did not. The remaining 23% were unsure or did
not respond.
•
15% of groups would be willing to contribute financially to the development or operation of expanded
facilities or new components within existing facilities, while 46% were not. 39% of groups were unsure
or did not respond.
20 | P a g e
o
•
Of those who would be willing to contribute financially to the development or operation of
expanded facilities, 67% of groups felt that fundraising would be the most plausible option,
followed by partnerships (33%).
54% of groups agreed or strongly agreed that the level of communication between the Town and their
organization meets their needs, while 15% of groups disagreed or strongly disagreed. 15% were neither
in agreement or disagreement (i.e. neutral on the subject) and 15% of groups were unsure or did not
respond.
Summaries of each group who submitted a survey are provided below.
Arena Users
Brooks Hockey
Brooks Hockey (BH) was formed in 2004 to provide pick-up hockey games for adults between the ages of 30 and
50. The group has maintained about 18 players over the past three years and has no plans to change the scope
of their group over the next three years. BH utilizes Green Rink at the Alder Street Recreation Centre an hour per
week and has suggested that a restaurant or bar should be developed at this location. The group also suggested
that communication between other groups should be improved to open opportunities to invite other teams to
the facility for games.
Bruce Taylor Pickup Hockey
Bruce Taylor Pickup Hockey (BTPH) was established in 1998 and recreational pickup hockey games for adult men
between the ages of 30 and 45. The group has approximately 30 members for the 2012/13 season but has no
plans to expand their membership or programming in the future. BTPH enjoys the B-Rink ice at the Tony Rose
Memorial Sports Centre on a weekly basis and reported that the level of maintenance is meeting the needs of
the organization. However, BTPH suggested improvements were needed to the dressing rooms, particularly with
the heaters.
Dufferin Old Timers
Dufferin Old Timers was established in the 1970s, where a group of adults and older adults played recreational
pickup hockey at the old Orangeville Community Arena. Over the past three years, the group has maintained a
steady 32 members between the ages of 40 and 65. The group plays once a week on Sunday morning on Green
Rink at the Alder Street Recreation Centre and appreciate the large dressing rooms.
Hydro One Hockey
Hydro One Hockey (HOH) was established in 2008 and provides pickup hockey opportunities for adults and older
adults between the ages of 25 and 50. The group has maintained approximately 20 players over the past three
years and have no plans to expand their programming. HOH uses Rink-B at Tony Rose Memorial Sports Centre
once a week and enjoy its central location and easy access.
Orangeville Girls Hockey Association
The Orangeville Girls Hockey Association (OGHA) was founded in 1974 and provides local girls with a fun and
safe opportunity to play and teach the game of hockey through competitive and recreational leagues. Over the
past three years, the group has maintained approximately 400 to 415 players (105 competitive members and
298 recreational members for 2012), and plans to expand the scope of their programming, particularly in
21 | P a g e
beginner and development programs. The group uses both ice pads at the Alder Street Recreation Centre 25
hours per week in addition to Tony Rose Memorial Arena approximately 17.5 hours per week.
OGHS have enjoyed the use and quality of the ice and have indicated a desire for additional ice time during the
week and weekend to expand programming opportunities and support their existing teams. Additional
assistance from the Town would also be helpful in raising awareness about girls’ hockey opportunities. Further,
the group has also indicated challenges in accommodating lower income families, although financial assistance
programs such as Jumpstart has been a key partner with the Association.
Orangeville Minor Hockey
Orangeville Minor Hockey (OMH) was formed in 1984 to provide minor hockey programs for children of all age
and skill level. The group offers a variety of skill development opportunities in addition to both house and
competition leagues. For the 2012 year, it is estimated that there are approximately 1,008 (425 competition and
583 house) players between the ages of 4 and 18. No historical registration data was provided and the group has
no plans to reduce or expand the scope of their program offering. The group uses both of the Town’s arenas as
well as arenas in other communities when ice time cannot be allocated to the teams or if cheaper ice can be
found elsewhere. Despite this, OMH feels that Orangeville’s facilities are meeting the needs of their group in
both quality and availability. Improvements suggested by OMH include lowering ice rental rates to lower fees for
its members.
Orangeville Minor Lacrosse Association
The Orangeville Minor Lacrosse Association (OMLA) was established in 1987 and provides both competitive and
house lacrosse leagues for boys and girls under the age of 18 in Orangeville and the surrounding area. Over the
past three years, the group has maintained approximately 750 members. OMLA uses the arena floors at both of
the Town’s facilities during the summer and feel that they are clean and well-staffed. The group does not use
any facilities outside of Orangeville and do not require additional time; however it is identified that additional
storage is needed to store equipment. Further assistance from the Town would also be appreciated through
subsidized rental rates for floor time. Opportunities may also exist for the OMLA to assist the Town with
fundraising for expanded existing facilities. Other suggestions provided by the group include an outdoor bulletin
board for announcements and arena banners.
Orangeville Junior A Northmen
The Orangeville Junior A Northmen (OJAN) was established in 1991 and provides elite level lacrosse
opportunities for youth and young adults between the ages of 17 and 21. Over the past three years, the group
has maintained 23 players and has no plans to expand the scope of their programming. In addition to a monthly
training camp, regular game season and playoffs for the Minto Cup, the OJAN uses Rink-A at the Tony Rose
Memorial Sports Centre 3-4 times per week for practices and have enjoyed the use of the building, citing its
historical significance to the team. Notwithstanding this, the OJAN indicated that air conditioning in the arena
would benefit floor conditions during the season and should have been implemented during previous
renovations and updates.
Orangeville Wolves
Orangeville Wolves (OW) was formed in 1999 and provides hockey development opportunities for those with
disabilities. For the 2012/13 season, OW has maintained between 21 and 23 members over the past three years.
The group uses Green-Rink at the Alder Street Recreation Centre twice a week during the winter season and
22 | P a g e
favours the size of the dressing rooms. The group also feels that access and the availability of the Town’s
facilities are meeting their needs. Opportunities exist to expand programming, although this is subject to the
availability of ice.
Skate Canada Orangeville
Skate Canada Orangeville (SCO) was established in 1959 and provides skating programs to all ages in a fun, safe
and engaging environment to develop skating skills for hockey, figure skating, or recreational skating, in addition
to building team spirit, self-discipline and confidence. The group currently has 165 members, between the ages
of 3 and 10, a growth of 18% from the past three years. SCO provides a number of development and learn-toskate programs and plans to expand activities to include power skating programs, although this may be limited
to the availability of ice time. This additional programming would require approximately 1-2 hours per week. The
group uses the A-Rink at the Tony Rose Memorial Sports Centre three nights per week and enjoys the facility’s
ability to accommodate families, although improvements could be made to the sound system and the
availability of prime-time ice. Financial assistance from the Town may also prove to be beneficial to ensure
programs, competitions, and ice shows are affordable for families.
Other Indoor Recreation Groups
Orangeville Generals
Orangeville Generals (OG) is a lacrosse group established in 1999 for adults between the ages of 15 and 40. The
group is typically an outdoor lacrosse group but have expressed an interested in an indoor turf facility, such as
repurposing B Rink at Tony Rose Memorial Sports Centre. The group would be interested in renting
approximately 15 hours a month during the months of August, September and October. Over the past three
years, OG has maintained approximately 35 to 40 members; however, the group indicated that they plan to
reduce the scope of their programming given that there is currently no senior men’s team for the 2013 season.
Orangeville Hawks Basketball Club
The Orangeville Hawks Basketball Club (OHBC) was formed in 1994 and provides off-season basketball
opportunities for children and youth between the ages of 5 and 19. The Club currently has 320 members (168 of
which play competitively), growing by 52% since 2010. The initial origins of the Club was to assist the Orangeville
District Secondary School (ODSS) with training to develop a competitive team and over the years, the Club
formed a house league and provides introductory lessons and developmental programs for those who wish to
play competitively.
The Club currently uses a number of gymnasiums within Orangeville, including: Orange District S.S.; Westside
S.S.; Princess Elizabeth P.S.; Princess Margaret P.S.; Island Lake P.S.; and Parkinson Centennial School. The Club
has plans to expand the house league program (requiring an additional 15-20 hours per week), which can easily
be accommodated through use of school gymnasiums on the weekends; however, use of gymnasiums during
the week after school has proven to be more difficult as there are a number of groups requesting evening use,
requiring the Club to book gymnasium space in Shelburne. As a result, the Club identified the need for additional
gymnasium space, preferably a double gymnasium with a suspended hardwood floor, basketball marking,
change rooms, and a scoreboard. To achieve this, the Club identified the potential to seek partnership
opportunities with the Upper Grand District School Board to include a double gymnasium as a part of the new
school to be located in the southern portion of Orangeville.
23 | P a g e
Orangeville Minor Soccer Club
The Orangeville Minor Soccer Club (OMSC) provides soccer opportunities and was established to achieve five
key goals: to foster, develop and promote the discipline of soccer, regardless of age or gender; to provide teams
at the recreational and competitive level; to build a strong volunteer organization; to ensure financial prudence;
and to encourage and promote community spirit, sportsmanship, and fellowship. Over the past three years, the
Club has maintained between 1,200 and 1,500 members, with nearly 200 competitive players.
The Club has no plans to expand the scope of their programs or services over the next 3-5 years given that
opportunity to expand is subject to availability of funding and additional facility time, both of which are
currently limited. The OMSC does not use any municipal indoor facility as there currently is none that can
accommodate their needs. Instead, they utilize a privately operated indoor synthetic grass field (186’ x 99’) that
is available in Orangeville through ACTS (Athletic Centre for Training through Sports), which also contains fitness
and gymnasium space.
Program Planning Project Survey
Survey results from the Town’s Program Planning Project 16 have been referenced throughout the document
where appropriate. Key findings from the survey, as it relates to this Study, include:
•
155 completed responses from Orangeville households, resulting in statistically valid sample to plus or
minus 7%, 18 times out of 20.
•
66% of households participating in programs offered by the Parks & Recreation Department, the most
popular of which are children’s swimming lessons, children’s and adult lane swims, and public skating.
•
50% participated in recreation programs at other organizations (i.e. not through the Town), the most
popular of which tended to be adult group fitness and public swims.
•
47% of households were not able to participate as often as they would like due to (in order of
frequency) inability to access programs at their desired day or time, program fees, lack of childcare, and
lack of transportation options.
•
14% of households train for indoor sports outside of Orangeville, largely for hockey and soccer.
•
41% of households had visited Alder Street Recreation Centre in the past twelve months, nearly twice as
many as the 23% who had visited Tony Rose Memorial Sports Centre.
•
The Alder Street leisure and lap pools received satisfaction ratings of 75% and 73% (i.e. households
responding they were ‘satisfied’ or ‘very satisfied’), respectively, while the Tony Rose lap pool received a
satisfaction rating of 58%.
The Program Planning Project also conducted surveys of non-Orangeville residents (62 responses, statistically
valid to plus or minus 10%, 18 times out of 20) and submitted a non-statistically valid survey (404 responses) to
persons on the Parks & Recreation Department’s email distribution list. Please refer to that document for a
greater description of its findings.
16
Watters, B. 2013. Town of Orangeville Program Planning Project.
24 | P a g e
Section 5: Facility Needs Assessments
This Section contains an assessment of indoor recreation facility needs in Orangeville considering inputs
gathered through research and consultations along with facility-specific information.
Arena Assessment
Supply
The Town of Orangeville operates a total of four ice pads at two twin-pad arenas housed within its multi-use
community centres. The four ice pads roughly translate into a service level of one ice pad for every 7,000
residents.
•
•
Alder Street Recreation Centre – Red and Green Rinks both are NHL regulation size (200’ x 85’).
Tony Rose Memorial Sports Centre – ‘A’ Rink and ‘B’ Rink both measure 185’ x 85’.
Orangeville’s arena facilities are well distributed in the Town relative to future population growth and
intensification. As ‘drive-to’ facilities, both arenas serve the entire community. Although Orangeville services a
regional population to a certain extent, this market is fairly saturated due to the presence eleven municipal ice
pads located within 40 kilometres of Orangeville as well as the privately operated Teen Ranch Arena (which
contains an Olympic size rink) that is located ten minutes from both the Tony Rose and Alder Street arenas.
Programs Offered in Arenas
Orangeville’s arenas are primarily utilized by community organizations and drop-in users who provide services
such as minor hockey and figure skating leagues. The Town of Orangeville organizes instructional skating
programs for children and adults, along with non-instructional programming public skates, drop-in shinny, and
self-directed hockey and figure skating skills times through which it charges a fee per visit. Utilization of these
programs are discussed subsequent pages.
Findings from Consultations
A total of nine arena user groups responded to the stakeholder survey distributed for the study. Users were
generally pleased with both facilities and praised the Town’s friendly staff, quality of ice, cleanliness and sizable
dressing rooms. Users also appreciated the convenient location of the Tony Rose Memorial Sports Centre as well
as its history within the community. Opportunities for improvement included: improving viewing areas and
seating for spectators; ensure public areas are safe and barrier free; desire for year-round skating programs;
coordinating programming opportunities with Skate Canada to avoid program duplication; and considering new
programs such as winter lacrosse, summer hockey, speed skating, broomball, ringette and hockey.
Surveys undertaken for the Town of Orangeville’s Program Planning Project 17 found that 7% of responding
households participated in skating lessons and 42% participated in public skating programs offered by the Parks
& Recreation Department. Public skates were found to be the most popular Town program among teenagers
with 12% of the sample reporting teens participated in this activity. Additionally, 55% of the sample rated ice
rinks as being ‘important’ or ‘very important’ to their household ranking only behind swimming pools and fitness
centres.
17
Watters, B. 2013. Town of Orangeville Program Planning Project.
25 | P a g e
Observations from the Tony Rose MSC Engineering Inspection
Site visits were undertaken at Tony Rose MSC prior to the Town releasing its request for tenders to replace the
concrete floor and apron in Rink A. Upon rehabilitation, it is anticipated that the useful life of Rink A will be
considerably extended.
With respect to Rink B, it is a “pre-engineered” steel building system that is a form of long span building utilizing
large steel moment resisting frames, and formed steel girts to support rolled metal roofing and wall
assemblies. This light weight system is generally chosen over conventional structural configurations for reasons
of economy and speed of construction. The structural frame is calculated for maximum efficiency; any additional
loading of new electrical, mechanical or cladding systems may not be compatible with the original structural
design and capacity. The existing vapour barrier on wall and ceiling surfaces in Arena B appears to be
discontinuous or damaged. Lack of integrity of the vapour barrier can allow moisture into the wall and ceiling
assembly and result in accelerated deterioration of the building envelope. This can be especially evident during
heated indoor use during cold winter months, when warmer, moisture laden air can penetrate into an assembly
and eventually condense into water. It appears that Arena B may be able to continue to house its existing
function (fall to early spring season) for the immediate future, however, periodic structural evaluations are
recommended to check the condition of the connections and any deterioration or deformation of ceiling and
wall girts. Given the age and condition of Arena B, it may not be an economical candidate for renovation or
repurposing for all-season use with updated mechanical and electrical systems. The Arena B building structural
and cladding condition should be evaluated prior to the next anticipated capital expenditure, such as the
replacement of refrigeration plant or new rink slab, to assess the projected life span of the enclosure.
A more detailed summary of the architectural and engineering review conducted through this Study for the Tony
Rose MSC is contained in Appendix A.
Utilization & Programming Information
Arena User Group Participation
Arena user group participation was estimated at approximately 2,091 users for the year 2012, translating into a
service level of one ice pad for every 523 participants. 18 The largest arena user groups are Orangeville Minor
Hockey and Orangeville Girls Hockey Association, which collectively make up approximately two-thirds of all
arena users (1,411 participants).
Arena User Groups in Orangeville
Group Name
18
Participants
Group Name
Participants
Brooks Pickup Hockey
18
Orangeville Mavericks (pickup)*
18
Bruce Taylor Pickup Hockey
30
Orangeville Men’s Hockey League (league)*
45
Chuck & The Boys (pickup)*
18
Orangeville Minor Hockey
1,008
Dufferin Old Timers (pickup)
32
Orangeville North Stars*
27
Glenn Hackett (pickup)*
18
Orangeville Oldtimers (pickup)*
18
Hal & The Boys (pickup)*
18
Orangeville Wolves
23
Hydro One Hockey (pickup)
20
Mad Dogs (pickup)*
18
Oldtimers Hockey (pickup)*
18
Men’s Original (league)*
36
Arena users include those affiliated with recognized ice groups and exclude those registered in programs offered by the Town or school hockey teams.
26 | P a g e
Group Name
Participants
Group Name
Participants
Oldtimers Hockey League (league)*
36
Ramjets*
18
Orangeville Americans Jr. A Hockey Team
26
Rusty Blades (pickup)*
18
Orangeville Girls Hockey Association
403
Skate Canada
165
Orangeville Flyers Jr. A Hockey Club
42
Total Participants
2,091
* Pick-up/Men’s leagues participation is estimated based on an average of 18 players per hour.
Note: Only groups who utilize prime time hours are considered, exclusive of participants in Town programs.
Programming
Registered programs, consisting of instructional skates, are provided at the Alder Street Red and Green Rinks
along with the Tony Rose B Rink. In 2012, 315 participants were registered in Town programs with another 22
placed on the waiting list (140 participants, including 8 on the wait list were associated with programs held
during Saturday morning prime hours). Program attendance was similar between the Alder Street and Tony Rose
arenas (186 and 151 registrants, respectively, including waiting lists).
Participation in the Town’s drop-in programs was strong, aligning with national trends that favour unstructured
and self-scheduled activities due to busy lifestyles. The following table indicates that the total number of drop-in
skating visits increased 25% between 2010 and 2012, from about 10,700 visits to 13,350 visits. While Alder
Street arena was utilized more frequently than Tony Rose arena for drop-in opportunities, total participation at
the latter more than doubled over the past three seasons due in part to growth in skills programming and
youth/senior shinny.
A number of facility and Town-wide participation trends were observed and are summarized below, as well as in
the following table.
•
Drop-in skating participants at the Alder Street Recreation Centre fluctuated between 8,400 to 9,150
participants over the past three years, while drop-in skating attendance at the Tony Rose Memorial
Sports Centre increased from 2,237 to 4,724 over the past three years.
•
Public skating is the most popular activity at both arenas, which collectively drew over 7,000 visitors for
2012 (over half of all drop-in visits).
•
Youth/Senior Shinny and Adult Recreational Skating both declined in participation over the past three
years, falling 25% and 22%, respectively.
Participation in Drop-in Recreational Skating, 2010 – 2013
Arena
2010
2011
2012
Growth Rate
(2010-2012)
Public Skates
Figure Skating Skills
Alder Street
Hockey Skills
2,363
2,780
3,202
- 36%
92
91
59
- 36%
not
offered
--
Recreation
Shinny - Adult
1,186
1,734
1,533
+ 29%
Centre
Shinny - Youth/Senior
2,534
2,281
1,582
- 38%
9
--
Roller Shinny
Skate - Adult Rec Skate
Skate - Parent & Preschool Skate
Sub-Total – Alder Street
not
offered
872
731
498
- 43%
1,433
1,533
1,743
+ 22%
8,480
9,150
8,626
2%
27 | P a g e
Arena
2010
2011
2012
Growth Rate
2,145
3,526
3,833
+ 79%
43
116
189
+ 340%
125
--
(2010-2012)
Public Skates
Tony Rose
Hockey Skills
not
offered
Memorial Sports
Shinny - Adult
10
65
10
0%
Centre
39
375
359
+ 821%
-
121
183
-
-
110
25
-
Sub-Total – Tony Rose
2,237
4,313
4,724
111%
Total
10,717
13,463
13,350
+ 25%
2010
2011
2012
Growth Rate
(2010-2012)
Public Skates
4,508
135
Hockey Skills
not
6,306
7,035
+ 56%
207
248
+ 84%
125
--
offered
Town-Wide
Shinny - Adult
1,196
1,799
1,543
+ 29%
Summary
2,573
2,656
1,941
- 25%
Roller Shinny
not
Total
9
--
872
offered
852
681
- 22%
1,433
1,643
1,768
+ 23%
10,717
13,463
13,350
25%
Ice Time
The Town booked about 5,700 hours for rentals and programs during the 2012/2013 season, representing a
decline of nearly 750 hours from two seasons prior. These are for the primary operating hours for the arenas
(4pm to midnight on weekdays, and 7am to midnight on weekends). While all ice pads show a declining trend in
bookings over the past three seasons, the trend is most noticeable for the Alder Red Rink and the Tony Rose B
Rink. The figure that follows illustrates the declining trend in ice hours booked at the two arenas.
Figure 4: Weekday & Weekend Prime Hours Booked, 2010-2012
1,900
Prime Hours Booked
1,700
1,500
1,300
1,100
900
2010
Tony Rose A
2011
Tony Rose B
Alder Street RED
2012
Alder Street GREEN
Note: prime hours defined as weekdays from 5pm to 10pm, and on weekends from 8am to 10pm
28 | P a g e
To better understand trends in arena utilization and bookings, it is helpful to look at the time of day and time of
week which arena users tend to want to participate. Typically the 5pm to 10pm time slot on weekdays is most
sought after and is referred to in this Study as ‘Weekday Prime’ hours. Users also book ‘Shoulder Hours’ on
weekdays though these are not as desirable as they start from 4pm to 5pm ( before the workday ends for most,
though figure skating tends to like this time slot) and also take place from 10pm to 12am (which is less desirable
for those having to wake up early for work or school). Weekends have historically been booked strongly
between 7am and midnight, though usage trends suggest that weekends are beginning to split into prime (8am
to 10pm) and shoulder (7am to 8am, and 10pm to midnight) times as well.
The following figure shows prime and weekday shoulder hour utilization rates for the 2012/2013 season. 19
40%
60%
53%
60%
98%
100%
96%
100%
100%
20%
0%
Weekday Shoulder (4pm5pm, 10pm-11pm)
Tony Rose A
Utilization Rate (ACTUAL BOOKINGS)
100%
60%
80%
98%
100%
100%
73%
Utilization Rate (from SCHEDULE)
Figure 5: Scheduled vs. Actual Prime & Shoulder Hour Bookings, 2012/2013 Season
Weekday Prime (5pm10pm)
Tony Rose B
Alder St. RED
Weekend Prime (8am10pm)
Alder St. GREEN
100%
90%
80%
20%
0%
87% 89%
87%
76%
81%
65%
60%
40%
84%
54%
34% 30%
36%
Weekday Shoulder (4pm5pm, 10pm-11pm)
Tony Rose A
Weekday Prime (5pm10pm)
Tony Rose B
Alder St. RED
Weekend Prime (8am10pm)
Alder St. GREEN
Data Source: Town of Orangeville Parks & Recreation Department, 2013
Prime hours are defined as weekdays from 5pm to 10pm and all day weekends. Shoulder hours are defined as weekdays from 4pm to
5pm and from 10pm to 12am.
19
29 | P a g e
With respect to prime hours on weekdays and weekends, the Town of Orangeville’s 2012/13 winter season
schedule anticipated fairly strong utilization. With weekly rentals of 210 hours across the four ice pads, the
schedule anticipated a prime utilization rate of 99%. In actuality, however, the review of actual hours rented
revealed that the Town did not receive the quantity of bookings. Actual bookings for the 2012/13 winter season
showed that the four pads averaged 179 prime weekday and weekend hours per week (84% utilization), which
was over 30 hours fewer per week than anticipated in the schedule. When factoring in shoulder hours, the
actual bookings amounted to 204 hours per week (70% utilization of prime and shoulder times) which were
about 50 hours per week fewer than scheduled.
The difference between anticipated and actual usage suggests that a sizeable amount of time was “turned back”
to the Town. It is also indicative that participation in arena sports may be in decline as organizations are not
under pressure to book ice time, particularly in the shoulder hours which they tend to book when faced with
limited availability of the most desirable prime weekday and weekend hours.
Of note, a cursory comparison of arena rental rates was undertaken with selected non-GTA urban centres in
Ontario as well as for regional rates including the municipalities of King, Centre Wellington, Caledon, Erin and
Shelburne. Orangeville’s rates were below the provincial examples though slightly higher by about 10% than the
regional comparators likely reflecting the fact that Orangeville: a) operates more ice pads than anyone except
Caledon; and b) some communities conciously choose to subsidize minor rates to a much greater extent and are
willing to incur a greater annual operating loss as a result. Without the benefit of a comprehensive rates and
fees study to inform this process, it is not believed that Orangeville’s arena rental rates are cost prohibitive to
facilitating a standard degree of arena rentals relative to other communities.
Summer Floor Utilization
All four ice pads are generally well booked during the summer months, largely by Orangeville Minor Lacrosse
(OML). In 2011 OML booked 758 hours between April 23rd and July 28th across municipal ice pads, averaging
about 55 hours per week. Additionally, the Junior A Northmen booked a total of 94 hours at the Tony Rose
Memorial Sports Centre between April and August, for an average of about 5 hours per week; the Northmen
also host the annual Barry Burman Tournament which books all four pads in June. Arena floors are also used for
a number of special events held by local service clubs, the SPCA and others, and are usually booked at the Alder
Street Recreation Centre’s Red Rink.
Assessment of Needs
To project the need for ice pads, a provision target of one ice pad per 700 registered participants is typically
used for communities that share similar socio-demographic characteristics as Orangeville.
2013
2018
Number of Participants
2,231*
2,350
Existing Supply of Ice Pads
4
4
Provision Target
1 Ice Pad per 700 Registrants
Ice Pads Needed
3.1
3.4
Surplus (Deficit)
0.9
0.6
* consists of 2,091 arena group users and 140 prime time program participants
2023
2,515
4
3.6
0.4
Delving into the present need for ice pads in Orangeville, the table above suggests that the Town provides
surplus arena capacity which is further reinforced by the number of unbooked shoulder and some prime hours
that collectively average about 86 unbooked hours per week. Given that the most desirable weekday and
30 | P a g e
weekend prime time slots retain strong rentals, the ‘surplus’ should be interpreted cautiously since excess hours
consist of less desirable shoulder hours (which constitute over two-thirds of unrented hours).
Assessment into the future need for ice pads in Orangeville is cloudy beyond the next five years. Although
application of the existing capture rate for arena participants to the future population suggests that the Town
can expect to have approximately 2,500 arena users in ten years (i.e. growth of 300 players), this measure
should be viewed carefully. Historical trends are suggestive of further erosion of participant numbers due to the
considerable decrease in the number of children in Orangeville (there were 300 children, or 16% less, in 2011
compared to 2001). In many communities, children either sustain or drive new demand for arenas – this is the
case in Orangeville where Girls Hockey, Minor Hockey and Skate Canada account for over 70% of current arena
participants, thereby making arena utilization heavily dependent on growth in the younger age groups. As
mentioned in preceding pages, there were 750 fewer hours booked at Orangeville arenas compared to three
years ago, which is likely a result, in some part, of the decline in the number of children. If the trend continues,
the impacts of fewer children may result in stable to declining arena participation numbers and utilization
rates over the next five to ten years, and would be contrary to the 300 new registrants projected if applying
current capture rates to the future population as a whole. 20
A cautious approach is therefore needed as there is a distinct possibility that there could be potentially fewer
players in the future despite projected population growth (subsequent paragraphs discuss a need for annual
monitoring of registrations). In the absence of age-specific population projections, the Town should undertake
an arena review in five years (preferably after the 2016 Census results have been released) to understand arena
participation trends in relation to future community composition at that time. Particular attention should be
placed on utilization within the most desirable prime hours – while strong at present, eroded bookings in these
time slots that could occur in the future is likely to be an indication that surplus arena capacity has reached an
operationally inefficient threshold in which case removal of a pad may be justified.
Based on the needs assessments and the current arena operating profile, the Town can expect to maintain a
surplus of one ice pad in the future as arena needs in Orangeville are anticipated to be stable or slightly decline
over the next ten years (the best case scenario would be to achieve positive growth in participation rates as
shown in the preceding table). Despite this outlook, for the next five years it is anticipated that all four pads will
need to remain in order to ensure that participation rates do not decline further. From a capacity perspective,
the Town essentially requires “more than three, but less than four ice pads.”
While maintaining a surplus of ice may be operationally inefficient for the short term (municipal arenas
averaged an operating subsidy of about $100,000 per ice pad over the past couple years), removal of a pad
would place considerable constraints on the other three pads. Assuming that Tony Rose B Rink was removed
given its advanced lifecycle, the remaining ice pads would collectively need to accommodate about 630 prime
weekday hours throughout the season (about 7.5 prime hours per pad per week). Considering that the
remaining pads have about 275 weekday prime hours unbooked at present (about 3 prime hours per pad per
week), prime time demand from a decommissioned B Rink would be displaced to the shoulder hours. This could
increase the utilization rates of the three remaining pads, however, it would be to a degree where they would
be running at or very close to their operating capacity (particularly when factoring in the displaced shoulder
hours in addition to the prime hours) and there is no guarantee groups would book shoulder times.
As a result, removal of an ice pad could have undesirable impacts on arena operations such as:
Note: between the 2012 and the current 2013 season, Girls Hockey declined by nearly 13% participants, Skate Canada is
anticipating no net increase, and Minor Hockey has remained fairly stable (increasing by about 1.5%).
20
31 | P a g e
•
groups not having flexibility in scheduling and access to desirable times, leading them to seek ice times
outside of the Town – for example, displacing prime demand to shoulder/weekend hours to the
remaining three pads may be less desirable or functional for certain users (e.g. minor hockey may not
book time after 9pm on school nights);
•
the Town not having sufficient times to enhance its program delivery options, particularly during prime
times when the ‘average’ resident is looking for program choices;
•
the Town having reduced flexibility during maintenance activities of a pad to shift use to an alternative
pad;
•
The operating savings from moving from a twin pad to a single pad may not be as significant as desired
given the staffing and equipment requirements will still be similar (i.e. economies of scale would be
lost);
•
reduced opportunities for sport tourism as tournament potential would be slightly diminished;
•
increased operational and capital maintenance efforts associated with running the remaining three pads
at or near peak capacity;
•
repurposing a pad at Tony Rose (which is the most plausible candidate due to age and structural
concerns) to a space requiring heating would likely result in a considerable capital upgrade cost in order
to minimize deterioration on the entire building envelope; and most importantly
•
limiting the Town’s ability to address demands generated by future population growth.
Furthermore, the Town may be able to offset further declines in organized group rentals through bolstering
Department-run programs to fill in vacated prime time slots. Consultations have indicated a desire for additional
Town programming, there may be opportunity for the Parks & Recreation Department to explore provision of
existing and new programs in prime times particularly if the existing waitlists are indicative of latent demand.
Certain programs may be delivered in tandem with community providers, such as expanding instructional
skating programs (e.g. instructor led skills times for hockey and figure skating) or developing new league play
opportunities. For the latter, league play is generally relegated to those under 18 (through minor hockey) and
with the significant number of adult pick-up rentals, there is merit in the Town investigating the provision of
municipally-organized adult or even older adult leagues. Scheduling Town programs during prime hours (and
accordingly re-allocating some hours from community rentals to shoulder time) may increase program uptake
and revenue generation potential for the Town.
With all of this in mind, it is recommended that the Town of Orangeville maintain its existing supply of four ice
pads. This recommendation is made on the basis that the Town pursues regular monitoring of arena-related
utilization and costs because it is believed that Orangeville is at a proverbial ‘tipping point’ as it relates to arena
demands. Although Town programming is increasing, rentals from user groups are trending downwards and it is
not clear if this will continue at a rate that exceeds new demand from population growth. It is recommended
that Orangeville annually track registrations of its arena user groups and apply the market-driven provision
target (1 pad per 700 registrants) to monitor local trends over the next five to ten year period.
After the recommended five year monitoring period, the Town of Orangeville should undertake a
comprehensive structural and mechanical engineering assessment of Tony Rose Rink B to determine what
investments are required to: a) sustain its operational longevity if ice demand continues to warrant provision of
four ice pads; or b) convert Rink B to a warm-use facility should ice demand continue to diminish to a point
where only three ice pads are required in Orangeville.
32 | P a g e
Arena Recommendations
1. Review ice pad performance in five years (through an updated assessment of user group registrations,
utilization during prime and shoulder periods, program fill rates, capital/operating cost requirements,
demographics of the community, etc.) to determine whether Tony Rose B Rink should be retained or
removed from the arena supply.
2. Develop strategies aimed at increasing shoulder and weekend hour utilizations through differentiated
pricing strategies, alternative scheduling and allocation approaches, etc. while creating incentives to
minimize the impacts of ice “turn backs” (e.g. encouraging spot bookings, application of cancellation
policies for scheduled ice that is returned, etc.).
3. Explore the development of new municipal programs (e.g. adult leagues, additional instructional
skates, learn to play hockey, etc.) that are to be run in desirable prime time slots as a means to
increase overall arena utilization, drive new revenue potential and increase the cost-recovery
threshold of local arenas.
4. After the five year arena monitoring exercise has been completed, undertake a comprehensive
engineering review of the Tony Rose Rink B to determine the feasibility and cost of lifecycle
investments required to either retain the ice pad for arena use or repurpose Rink B to a warm-use
facility.
Indoor Aquatics Assessment
Supply
The Alder Street Recreation Centre contains a 25 metre, 6 lane lap pool with a separate therapeutic leisure pool
with ten jets, two waterplay toys and waterslide. The Tony Rose Memorial Sports Centre offers a 25 metre, 6
lane lap pool. The two indoor aquatic centres, both located in multi-use community centres, result in a service
level of one indoor aquatic centre for about 14,000 Orangeville residents. Orangeville’s indoor aquatic facilities
are well distributed in the Town relative to future population growth and intensification. The indoor aquatic
facilities serve the entire community, as well as its surrounding population, and are generally considered driveto facilities.
Programs Offered in Aquatic Centres
The Town’s indoor aquatic centres are programmed by the Parks & Recreation Department and rounded out by
community rentals. Orangeville provides a broad range of aquatic programs ranging from learn-to-swim,
lifesaving, aqua zumba, and youth fitness. A number of classroom-based programs are also offered such as first
aid, boating, and supervisor training.
Comments with respect to the Town’s indoor pools were largely gathered through the Community Search
Conference. Themes generally centred around the importance and satisfaction with the aquatic centres
(something that was reconfirmed through the Town’s Program Planning Project survey that found 81% of
Orangeville residents rated pools as important or very important), and improving the availability and scheduling
of aquatic programs. The Program Planning Project survey found that 36% of the sample participated in the
Town’s swimming lessons and 58% participated in public or lane swims. Swimming lessons were the most
33 | P a g e
popular children’s program accessed with 47% of the sample reporting participation, while public/lane swims
were the most popular adult program offered by the Town with 46% participation. Aquafit programs were
accessed by 16% of the sample.
Observations from the Tony Rose MSC Engineering Inspection
As discussed in Appendix A, the Tony Rose MSC aquatics centre is in sound structural shape though there are a
number of mechanical and functional improvements that should be considered to bring the facility up to current
standards. Some of these considerations include replacing drains and skimmer lines which would also
necessitate replacing the deck (providing an opportunity to renew the aesthetics), and improving physical
accessibility into the pool.
Registered Programs
There has been an increase in aquatic program registration over the past three years. In 2012, there were nearly
6,300 registrants, representing a growth of nearly 15% from 2010. Registration at the Alder Street Recreation
Centre represents the vast majority of the total registrants (83%), as its size, configuration and amenities allow
for a greater number of programs to be offered there. On a percentage growth basis, both aquatic centres have
experienced strong growth in registration since 2010 (waiting lists also provide evidence of latent demand).
Aquatic Program Registration, 2010 – 2012
Alder Street Recreation Centre
Tony Rose Memorial Sports Centre
Total
2010
Registered
Waitlist
4,732
55
738
0
5,470
55
2011
Registered
Waitlist
4,280
0
894
0
5,174
0
2012
Registered
Waitlist
5,173
0
1,095
20
6,268
20
Over the past three years, 55 unique programs were run at the Alder Street Recreation Centre resulting in a total
of 1,340 classes being offered (given that each program is held multiple times). In other words, each program
was offered on average 24 times throughout the season. By comparison, 43 unique programs were offered at
the Tony Rose Memorial Sports Centre. With a total of 229 classes held at this location, each program would be
offered an average of 5 times. The 2012 statistics suggest that 85% of aquatic programs are held at the Alder
Street Recreation Centre, however, it is noted that the number of classes held at the Tony Rose Memorial Sports
Centre has increased 32% over the past three years, while classes at the Alder Street Recreation Centre
increased by 14%. Nevertheless, an average of 112 new classes were added Town-wide since 2010 to serve the
growing number of registrants.
Annual Number of Aquatic Programs Offered, 2010 – 2012
2010
1,172
173
Total
1,345
2011
1,178
230
1,408
2012
1,340
229
1,569
Growth
14%
32%
17%
The following tables describe the level of attendance by aquatic program type. It should be noted that these
figures may represent individuals who visit each facility multiple times. Aquatic programs are categorized by the
Town as: recreational, rental, fitness, and instructional. Instructional programs are the most attended programs
at the Alder Street Recreation Centre, averaging about 38,000 attendees over the past three years. By
comparison, aquatic rentals were the most popular program type at the Tony Rose Memorial Sports Centre,
drawing an average of 9,100 attendees during the same period.
34 | P a g e
Aquatic Attendance at Indoor Aquatic Centres, 2010 – 2012
Facility
Program Type
Recreational
Rental
Fitness
Instructional
Recreational
Rental
Fitness
Instructional
Recreational
Rental
Fitness
Instructional
Town-Wide
Total
2010
32,623
16,061
7,864
38,779
95,327
6,445
9,064
4,621
4,138
24,268
39,068
25,125
12,485
42,917
119,595
2011
30,443
16,636
7,020
37,461
91,560
6,429
9,128
4,975
4,761
25,293
36,872
25,764
11,995
42,222
116,853
2012
31,310
15,764
6,063
39,160
92,297
6,740
9,169
5,416
5,414
26,739
38,050
24,993
11,479
44,574
119,036
Growth
- 4%
- 2%
- 23%
+ 1%
- 3%
+ 5%
+ 1%
+ 17%
+ 31%
+ 10%
- 3%
- 1%
- 8%
+ 4%
0%
Despite Town-wide growth in aquatic programs and registration, annual attendance have largely remained
unchanged over the past three years. Attendance at the Alder Street Recreation Centre has declined by 3% while
attendance at the Tony Rose Memorial Sports Centre increased by 10%, with positive growth for all program
types at the latter as the Parks & Recreation Department has increased program availability there (i.e. adjusted
program offerings to balance usage of existing facilities). Based on these strong participation statistics, it is clear
that swimming continues to be a preferred leisure activity in Orangeville. The trend in a fluctuating attendance is
typically driven by a number of key factors such as the increasingly busy lifestyles of Orangeville’s residents,
competing interests, and proximity to residents.
Drop-in Programs
In contrast to stable registered aquatic program attendance, drop-in recreational swimming saw a slight
increase in participation over the past three years (3%). Drop-in opportunities include public, lane, and family
swims in addition to adult and senior aquafit activities. Similar to registered programs, the drop-in swimming at
the Alder Street Recreation Centre is the most popular location for drop-in swimming that has consistently
drawn about 22,000 visits since 2010. Attendance at Tony Rose is much lower relative to the other pool (again,
likely due to the difference in size/configuration) though attendance has increased by nearly 30% due to growth
in aquafit and public swims adding nearly 800 more visits between last year and 2010.
Drop-in Recreational Swimming, 2010 – 2012
Aquatic Centre
Alder Street
Recreation Centre
Tony Rose Memorial
Sports Centre
Aquafit Adult / Senior
Public, Lane, Family Swims
Water Polo
Total
2010
2011
2012
1,053
21,656
28
22,737
166
2,613
2,779
25,516
886
20,828
127
21,841
431
3,051
3,482
25,323
635
22,075
25
22,735
396
3,157
3,553
26,288
Growth Rate
(2010-2012)
- 40%
+ 2%
- 11%
0%
+ 139%
+ 21%
+ 28%
+ 3%
35 | P a g e
Aquatic Centre
Town-Wide Summary
Water Polo
Total
2010
2011
2012
1,219
24,269
28
25,516
1,317
23,879
127
25,323
1,031
25,232
25
26,288
Growth Rate
(2010-2012)
- 15%
+ 4%
- 11%
+ 3%
Assessment of Needs
Since 2003 when the Alder Street Recreation Centre was constructed, Orangeville has enjoyed a higher level of
service (currently standing at 1 indoor pool per 14,000) than many communities of similar size (where service
levels tend to be around 1 pool per 30,000).
The decision as whether to retain both aquatic centres is complex. The Town provides surplus pool capacity
when factoring all three tanks that are available at the two aquatic facilities. It is believed that the Alder Street
facility has ample aquatic capacity to not only meet future population-related demands but also absorb the
amount of usage provided out of Tony Rose. That being said, utilization of the Tony Rose pool has
demonstrated increases in both registered and drop-in programming (though Town Staff partially attribute this
due to their internal scheduling practices, particularly by shifting usage over to Tony Rose pool when
undertaking maintenance efforts at Alder Street, which may be resulting in an overstatement of demand at Tony
Rose).
It goes without question that the Alder Street aquatic centre will remain part of the civic infrastructure over the
long-term given it is a relatively new facility, of high design quality, and is functional for municipal programming
and user group requirements. The Tony Rose pool, however, is much older and its single tank provides less
program flexibility for the Town and its users, and thus would be the pool to consider as surplus (out of the two
facilities).
Both pools enjoy stable to growing utilization, though annual attendance at the Tony Rose pool amounts about
one-fifth of that generated at the Alder Street facility. Both aquatic centres serve distinct areas of Orangeville,
with the Alder Street serving the newer developments in the west while Tony Rose services the Town’s
established areas (that are also expected to intensify and add new populations as well) in the central and
eastern parts. Structurally, both aquatic centres are considered to be sound with the engineering inspection
finding that Tony Rose pool will remain serviceable so long as the appropriate maintenance measures continue
to be pursued.
The question about whether to maintain two aquatic centres in Orangeville is therefore philosophical.
Theoretically, the Alder Street Recreation Centre pool by itself should be sufficient to meet the needs of the
Town’s population over the next twenty years (the population is expected to reach nearly 33,000 residents by
the year 2031). The decision to retain the Tony Rose pool should thus consider:
•
Whether the fiscal costs offset the benefit of having good geographic distribution, particularly since the
Alder Street facility is located in the western part of the community and that consultations noted Tony
Rose MSC is considered to be a highly walkable destination, particularly for a sizeable number of older
adults who utilize that facility.
•
Conversely, the above point may also be viewed as a fiscal inefficiency since there is a service
redundancy and overlap in catchment area since the two pools are about three kilometres apart (about
a five minute drive).
36 | P a g e
•
Tony Rose MSC’s annual pool operating subsidy that averages around $200,000 per year (plus another
$200,000 per year for the Alder Street pool operations), and whether that amount of money is better to
be reallocated to another needed priority. Nevertheless, it should be recognized that repurposing that
pool to another use would also likely require an operational subsidy, albeit one that is probably lower
than pool operations.
•
That nearly $800,000 could be required to remediate the Tony Rose pool, in its current form, to address
mechanical, safety, accessibility, and functional requirements (as detailed in Appendix A). Integrating
warm-water and therapeutic capabilities, as requested through consultations, would require a 2,000
square foot expansion that adds another $1.1 million to the basic enhancements.
•
If adjustments to aquatics program scheduling practices at the Alder Street pool result in more costefficient utilization of that facility, and/or whether utilization of Tony Rose pool also can demonstrate
sustained growth.
•
Whether the space itself is better to be reprogrammed for general multi-purpose activities to meet the
recreation, cultural and social needs of the broader population (since the Alder Street pool has capacity
to meet Town-wide programming requirements), including repurposing the space to a large activity
room, fitness studio dedicated or prioritized youth and/or seniors centre.
It is the position of this Study that the Tony Rose aquatics centre is not justifiable on the basis of financial
sustainability and facility utilization, however, the Study recognizes that it provides a level of convenience to
residents, many of whom value the availability of Orangeville’s indoor pools. This reinforces the philosophical
nature of the debate as to whether two indoor aquatic centres are truly required to service the Orangeville
community, and at what cost.
Indoor Aquatic Centre Recommendations
5. The Town of Orangeville should consider repurposing the aquatics centre at the Tony Rose Memorial
Sports Centre to provide space for a wide range of floor-based recreational activities geared to all age
groups and interests (with priority possibly assigned to youth and/or older adults). However, if the
Town decides to retain the aquatic centre at Tony Rose Memorial Centre, the rationale for doing so
should be on the basis that:
a. Attendance, program participation and utilization rates continue to grow based upon sound
aquatics scheduling practices at both municipal aquatic centres;
b. It is the intention of the Town to achieve an over-supply of facilities to increase recreational
objectives by providing surplus programming capacity and geographic coverage despite there
being sufficient capacity at the newer Alder Street Recreation Centre pool tanks;
c. It recognizes there will be an inability at the current location to address growing demands for
warm-water uses unless undertaking a capitally intensive expansion;
d. The financial investment associated with $800,000 in basic capital improvements along with
the average annual operating deficit of $200,000 is appropriate to provide the benefit
associated with the aforementioned over-supply; and
e. Aquatics is deemed to be a higher priority community need at Tony Rose than other possible
uses such as spaces for general purpose activities, older adult and youth programming, studiobased fitness, and/or administrative use.
37 | P a g e
Fitness Centres & Studios
Supply
The Town presently does not provide an equipment-based fitness facility which is consistent among several
similarly sized municipalities that have a growing private sector presence. In Orangeville, private sector
enterprises include ACTS (Athletic Centre for Training through Sports), Curves, Goodlife, Bigtyme Fitness, the
Headwaters Racquet Club, PhysioMed (formerly Active Fitness) and others.
Programs Offered in Community Centres
Although the Town does not operate a dedicated fitness space, it offers active living and fitness programming
generally through the Alder Street Program Room and the Banquet Hall at Tony Rose MSC which provide a
‘fitness studio’ type of experience. Municipal programs are oriented to yoga and stretching, spin classes,
aerobics and pilates, zumba, etc. Non-instructional walking/running times are also available through the walking
track at the Alder Street Recreation Centre.
Consultations with the community have expressed support for fitness services. Community Search Conference
attendees noted a desire for fitness opportunities that promote active living and wellness choices. The Town’s
Program Planning Project survey showed that 58% and 54% of the sample placed importance on equipmentbased and studio-based fitness spaces, respectively.
Assessment of Needs
Experience in other communities shows that some will offer a basic or introductory level experience when such
opportunities are not available in private facilities, or to provide an affordable entry point for those not wanting
the higher level of service offered by the private sector. Other municipalities have chosen to provide a high
quality experience, choosing to compete directly with the private sector though they are usually at a
disadvantage to consistently replace equipment with more modern machines (these come at a high capital cost
and require Council approval, slowing their ability to respond to the latest consumer demands), while staffing
costs can be higher due to collective bargaining arrangements that may not exist in the private sector. Looking
specifically at Orangeville, there appears to be ample choice in the private sector to allow for consumer choice
to access equipment-based opportunities. On this basis, it is not recommended that the Town of Orangeville
enter the equipment-based fitness market at present time.
Instead, the Town should explore ways to enhance its existing multi-use activity spaces to accommodate a
broader range of active living and wellness programming. The Town is already involved in the delivery of such
spaces generally through the Alder Street Program Room and the Banquet Hall at Tony Rose MSC which is less
costly than offering equipment-based services and aligns both with emerging trends (people are seeking
wellness opportunities) and existing service delivery models. Strategic improvements to these and/or other
rooms could allow the Town to expand upon its range and frequency of program offerings, though care must be
ensured so that the multi-purpose nature of these rooms does not negatively deteriorate certain components
(e.g. installing a floor geared for fitness use may be ideal for the Alder Street main floor program room but not
at the Tony Rose banquet hall as it could be damaged by tables and chairs at the latter).
In-lieu of directly providing equipment-based opportunities, the Town may explore partnerships with through
the community to provide fitness programming as it has done in the past (the main floor program room at the
Alder Street facility was previously leased to a private sector fitness partner). Partnerships may be considered
simply beyond the traditional provision or leasing of space, but into the realm of joint program delivery or joint
38 | P a g e
use of facilities (e.g. the Town could dedicate time in its pools for private sector members in exchange for
municipal registrants being able to access private sector equipment-based space). Any partnerships must ensure
that there is a net benefit to the municipality and be subject to a transparent partnership evaluation process.
Fitness Space Recommendations
6. The Town should explore optimizing the Main Floor Program Room at the Alder Street Recreation
Centre to facilitate a wider range of fitness studio programs geared to wellness and active living. A
similar approach should be considered for the Banquet Hall and/or a repurposed aquatics centre at the
Tony Rose Memorial Sports Centre.
7. As done in the past, the Town should explore collaborative opportunities with the community-based
fitness providers to deliver broad range of programs, services and/or equipment-based opportunities
to residents. Entry into equipment-based fitness centres operated by the Town is discouraged at
present time.
Gymnasiums
Supply
The Town of Orangeville does not presently operate a municipal gymnasium. Access to gymnasiums is relegated
to school facilities under the provincial Community Use of Schools initiative and reciprocal agreements between
the Town and its school boards. Community use of school gymnasiums is an efficient use of space from the
municipal perspective though is not without challenges. Access to school gymnasiums can be challenging due to
cost of rental (particularly on weekends), limitations on what activities the schools will permit to take place, and
potential scheduling conflicts that can ‘bump’ community users.
In addition, ACTS (Athletic Centre for Training through Sports) provides 12,000 square feet of gymnasium space
across its triple gym (FIBA regulation with a high quality wood-sprung floor recently installed) and smaller
basketball shooting room. The ACTS gym is available for rental to the general public and the operator also offers
camps and drop-in programs to residents. ACTS is located near the Town’s eastern municipal boundary.
Consultations suggest that there is interest in gymnasium space. During the Community Search Conference, a
gym capable of offering a wide variety of activities was frequently mentioned as a facility needed in Orangeville
but presently not available. The Town’s Program Planning Project found that 46% of its sample stated that gyms
were important to them. Of note, interviews held with Humber College as part of this Study indicated that the
postsecondary institution believes a gymnasium could benefit its student base and if such a facility is to be
eventually developed, it is open to discussing partnership opportunities with the Town of Orangeville.
Assessment of Needs
There is merit in considering a municipal gymnasium given the types of activity that can be offered to residents,
though there are aspects to consider prior to entering into what would be a new level of service for Orangeville.
•
The first consideration is the availability of schools in the area that have capacity to accommodate
community-based programs, albeit there are more restrictions/limitations to accessing school gyms
compared to a municipal gym.
39 | P a g e
•
A second aspect to consider is the capital cost of a gymnasium, as such a large facility (usually in the
range of 10,000 square feet for a full size facility) would be in the millions of dollars to construct
depending on a variety of design and construction factors. This level of investment would have to be
weighed against the availability of school and community-based gyms.
•
While the Town is involved in the provision of certain programs that could be offered in a gym (e.g. its
group fitness and dance programs), the development of the gym could place an onus on the Town to
develop additional programming to maximize utilization rates. While enhanced programming can
benefit the Parks & Recreation Department’s objectives of promoting community health, there are also
ongoing costs associated with staffing, program development and program delivery that would be in
addition to the day-to-day operating costs.
With the view of fiscal efficiency in mind, the Town should only consider involvement in a gym through a
partnership agreement. For example, if the Town is approached by a community-based or institutional entity to
partner on the development of a gym, then the Town should consider doing so provided that the gym provides a
net benefit through co-location with an existing multi-use community centre (thereby increasing foot-traffic and
enhancing the centre as a recreational hub), affords an acceptable degree of public access, and results in the
partner contributing capital and operational resources that lowers the cost to the Town as compared to
undertaking operations on its own.
It is believed that should a gymnasium be considered as an option to provide, the Alder Street Recreation Centre
would be the ideal location based on the fact that the facility design is more functionally conducive to
accommodate a broader range of programming and use than Tony Rose MSC. Alder Street facility is also in
proximity to neighbourhoods that are generally exhibiting a younger age profile than that of the established
neighbourhoods (children and youth are typically the largest program market for gyms). This course of action
would likely result in the removal of the soccer field to expand the building footprint and parking lot.
Gymnasium Space Recommendations
8. The Town should continue to negotiate convenient and affordable access to school gymnasiums on
behalf of the community rather than developing its own gymnasium facility.
9. Development of a new gymnasium should only be considered on a ‘provision by opportunity to
partner’ approach if/when the Town is approached with a partnership arrangement deemed
favourable to its interests.
Indoor Turf Facility
Supply
ACTS operates a 24,000 square foot private sector indoor turf facility located near Orangeville municipal
boundary that is primarily used for lacrosse and soccer (though can accommodate a range of other field sports)
and can be rented by local user groups and the general public. At 186’ x 99’, the ACTS field is a typical size for
indoor turf but is about quarter of the size of a FIFA regulation full field and thus does not have a great ability to
accommodate simultaneous program uses. Local user groups also rely upon school gymnasiums as the nearest
municipal turf facilities outside of Orangeville are located in Brampton and Mississauga (there are also
community/private sector operations in Acton, Milton, Aurora and Barrie).
40 | P a g e
Community consultations placed a slight emphasis on indoor turf fields. About 31% of the Program Planning
Project survey rated such facilities as being important to them, ranking only above banquet halls. Some Search
Conference attendees mentioned that a municipally-run indoor field would provide year-round games and offseason training opportunities to local soccer and lacrosse groups.
Assessment of Needs
Indoor turf sports, particularly indoor soccer and lacrosse, are growing in popularity particularly in more
urbanized areas of the province. In some cases, the operation of dedicated indoor turf facilities is entirely
funded by a third party and is therefore self-sufficient, while the capital and land can consist of a mixture of
government and community funding. More and more however, communities are funding and operating indoor
turf facilities with or without some level of financial or management assistance from local field sport organizers.
The majority of communities who have entered the indoor turf market have fared well in operating indoor turf
facilities given the strong demand that is being expressed by soccer and other field sport markets.
That being said, Orangeville has a limited market to draw from internally and a marginal market if factoring
regional neighbours (Caledon players will likely be drawn to Brampton) and competition from ACTS. While there
are no set service levels for the provision of indoor turf facilities, they are generally common in communities
with 50,000 to 100,000 or more residents (although there are examples where communities with lesser
population have an indoor turf facility). On this basis, Orangeville would appear to be below the requisite
population threshold to support an indoor facility.
Demand can also be estimated based on the number of outdoor soccer players in the Town. As the Orangeville
Minor Soccer Club was the only sports field user to provide input into this Study, their input has been factored
into the demand assessment and can provide a minimum estimation into need for indoor turf. The Minor Soccer
Club reports that its registrations have fluctuated between 1,300 and 1,600 players since 2010, landing on about
1,400 players for its 2012 season. Applying an assumption that 30% of outdoor players participate in indoor
soccer (25% to 40% is typically what is experienced in other developed communities), it can be estimated that
there are about 420 indoor soccer players through the Minor Soccer Club alone.
The average indoor soccer program requires one hour per week on an indoor field for approximately every ten
players; this ratio can vary slightly depending on the age of the participant (the field can be divided in two for
games involving smaller children) and the level of competition (rep teams require more practice time). Based on
this metric, Orangeville Minor Soccer could require 42 hours per week which would result in 58% utilization of
prime and shoulder times (for the winter season) through this organization alone. The Town could also expect to
receive additional bookings from other users that would probably increase utilization to a degree that requires
further analysis through discussions with local sports field users.
Provision of a municipal indoor turf facility, however, would undoubtedly affect the private sector operation
through ACTS. As Orangeville Minor Soccer and other users utilize ACTS at present, it is unlikely that there is
sufficient local and regional demand to support one municipal and one private sector indoor field. As a result,
the Town would be in direct competition with the existing private sector enterprise and poor financial
performance for both enterprises is a very real possibility (there is also a chance that a municipal facility could
lead to ACTS removing its field altogether as it would not be able to subsidize its field to the degree that the
Town is able to). The threat of poor financial performance from competition also increases the Town’s capital
investment risk given that construction of a new indoor turf facility would be in the millions of dollars (thus
repurposing an existing municipal facility, such as an ice pad, is considered the most pragmatic option so long as
an ice pad is no longer required).
41 | P a g e
Based upon the preceding paragraphs, it is recommended that the Town of Orangeville continue to let the
private sector and other regional providers meet the indoor soccer needs of the community. Subject to market
feasibility and business planning exercises conducted at a future time, the Town may reconsider its role in
providing indoor turf field if the following situation(s) arise:
•
the private sector no longer offers an indoor turf field in Orangeville;
•
demand exceeds the private sector’s ability to accommodate local needs (at a reasonable rental rate),
and such demand could result in the effective utilization of a second field that would be operated by the
Town; and/or
•
a municipal ice pad becomes deemed surplus resulting in the potential for repurposed space or
demolition and construction of new space; and/or
•
the Town invests in an outdoor artificial turf field, as presently being contemplated through the Parks
Master Plan, provided that such field is designed in a manner to allow conversion to an air-supported
(bubble) or fixed structure system.
Indoor Turf Recommendations
10. The Town only consider the provision of an indoor turf field should: a) the private sector no longer be
able to effectively meet the needs of the community; b) the Town deems one of its ice pads to be
surplus and a plausible candidate for repurposing or demolition/construction of an indoor turf facility;
or c) the Town chooses to invest in an outdoor artificial turf field whose design permits conversion to
an indoor system in a cost-effective manner.
Multi-Purpose Space Assessment
Supply
The Town provides multi-use program space through 9 program rooms and a banquet hall contained in Tony
Rose Memorial Sports Centre and the Alder Street Recreation Centre (the Alder Street aquatics centre training
room is not counted as its use is fairly narrow in scope, though its function is recognized particularly for dry-land
aquatics instruction).
Multi-Purpose Room
Rotary Club Room
Kinsmen & Kinette's Room
Meridian Room
TD Canada Trust Room 4A
TD Canada Trust Room 4B
Program Room Main Floor
Banquet Hall
Dufferin Room
Northview Room
General Uses
Meetings and birthday parties
Meetings
Meetings
Town programs
Town programs, meetings, birthdays, special events
Meetings
Meetings
Capacity (Persons)
25
25
25
58
40
200
175-273
75
60
42 | P a g e
Programs Offered in Community Centres
The Town of Orangeville provides general interest programming to complement fitness and other services
offered through the Parks & Recreation Department. General interest programs are primarily oriented to
children and youth markets, comprising areas such as music, dance, and socialization but also include training
and specialty courses (e.g. first aid, baby sitting).
A number of comments regarding the Town’s integrated multi-purpose spaces were collected from the Search
Conference. The banquet hall located at the Tony Rose Memorial Sports Centre was praised, citing its large
space and versatility in accommodating a variety of events though it is noted that less than a third (28%) of the
survey sample for the Town’s Program Planning Project considered banquet halls as being important to them.
In contrast to the survey, Search Conference participants identified a need for a larger banquet facility,
preferably with a kitchen, to be located at the Alder Street Recreation Centre. They envisioned this facility would
be large enough for events and gatherings that are currently unable to be accommodated at Tony Rose.
Participants felt that the Town should also give consideration to the provision of space oriented towards
children, including an education centre for children, daycare, or play room where parents can drop their children
off while they utilize other areas of the community centre. Furthermore, 37% ranked arts and crafts studios as
being important, and it is noted that these types of activities can be accommodated in multi-purpose activity
spaces provided certain components (namely storage and sinks) are available.
Multi-purpose spaces in the Alder Street Recreation Centre and Tony Rose Memorial Sports Centre collectively
booked nearly 10,700 hours in 2012 (the Alder Street rooms accounted for 80% of booked hours). This level of
use represents a slight increase from 2010 when about 10,000 hours were booked (but is about 1,000 hours
fewer than peak utilization in 2011).
Rooms at the Alder Street facility achieved a utilization rate of about 32% while Tony Rose rooms achieved 16%
utilization. The following figure illustrates the utilization across various times of the days, demonstrating that
Alder Street is highly successful during the week morning and afternoon while Tony Rose has a higher degree of
use than Alder Street at other times (though nominal).
Figure 6: Multi-Purpose Room Utilization Rates, 2012
70%
Utilization Rate
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
19%
20%
7%
10%
0%
Weekday 9am-5pm
12%
Weekday 5pm-10pm
11%
16%
3%
Weekend 9am-5pm
8%
Weekend 5pm-10pm
43 | P a g e
It is not uncommon for program rooms to have lower utilization rates given their very nature. These facilities are
not overly expensive in the scope of community centre operations (staffing is already in place to book and clean
the rooms, and utility costs are minimal). The key is to providing opportunity for residents looking for access to
this type of space in a well distributed manner.
Assessment of Needs
With respect to the provision of program rooms and banquet halls, the Town of Orangeville is well served
through the community centres (along with meeting rooms in other municipal facilities such as the Town
Offices). It is not recommended that additional multi-purpose program spaces program rooms or banquet halls
be provided in the future, though they may be considered if the Town undertakes a major capital investment in
recreational infrastructure in the future (as they are relatively low cost when benefiting from economies of scale
in development). Instead, the Town should explore ways to enhance its existing spaces to accommodate a wider
range of uses and program opportunities (e.g. adding mirrors to a wall can make a room more suited for dance,
sinks can allow arts and crafts to clean up after their activities, integration of multi-media can be more attractive
for business functions, etc.).
Multi-Purpose Activity Space Recommendations
11. The Town should work to optimize existing multi-purpose program spaces in response to future trends
may be considered as they arise through strategic investments aimed at making the spaces more
flexible and functional to a broader range of use.
12. If the Town decides to repurpose the aquatics centre at the Tony Rose Memorial Sports Centre to
provide space for a wide range of floor-based recreational activities, the program offerings should
include recreational activities geared to all age groups (with possible priority to youth and/or older
adults) and interests through a combination of direct and indirect programming (also see
Recommendation #5).
Priority Spaces for Youth and Older Adults
Supply
The Town does not operate any dedicated program rooms for youth or older adults at present time.
Themes from Consultations
Community consultations revealed interest in dedicated seniors’ and youth space. About 52% of the Program
Planning Project survey rated youth centres as being important to them while another 46% placed importance
on seniors’ centres. There were also suggestions in the Community Search Conference that youth and seniors
centres could fill an important program gap in Orangeville.
Assessment of Needs
Consistent with themes heard through consultations, trends indicate that there is a growing need to service
both structured and unstructured needs of youth and older adults. In Orangeville, there is a sizeable market of
youth (who account for about 16% of the total population) and older adults above the age of 55 (who account
for 22% of the population). Of particular importance, the Town’s population of 55-69 age cohort increased by
66% (over 1,500 people) and the 70+ market grew by 37% (about 600 people) between the 2001 and 2011,
44 | P a g e
making them the fastest growing age segments over that time period. 21 With the aging trends prevalent in
Orangeville, it is anticipated that the number of those over the age of 55 will continue to grow and create
pressures on the Town to provide a broader range of services to meet their recreational needs.
Both youth and older adults/seniors represent key market areas for the Town and there may be merit in
considering priority spaces for these age groups. A priority space implies that the designated age group (i.e.
youth or older adults in this case) would receive the first priority in booking a multi-purpose activity space.
While not a ‘dedicated’ space, this approach allows the Town to ensure that multiple activities can take place
when the priority group is and is not using the space thereby maximizing the room’s utilization potential.
Provision of priority spaces should be explored if repurposing an existing space within a multi-use community
centre (e.g. the aquatics centre at Tony Rose). A youth priority room appears to make a great deal of sense at
the Alder Street facility given its location in an area surrounded by a large children and youth population. An
older adult/seniors priority room would make sense at the Tony Rose MSC given that the surrounding
neighbourhoods have an older age profile and the fact that older adults represent a major user of the pool. It is
not recommended that the Town expand the building footprint of an existing facility to only accommodate
youth and older adult spaces (though it may consider them if undertaking a major expansion, such as adding a
municipal gymnasium, or repurposing an existing area such as an ice pad or aquatics centre).
Conversion of the indoor aquatics centre at the Tony Rose MSC to a multi-purpose and/or age-specific space is
worthy of discussion given that there are service redundancies in aquatics due to capacity available at the Alder
Street pools. Conversely, there are no age-specific spaces and very few venues capable of delivering active living
or cultural programming that many older adults and youth may otherwise seek. In considering how best to
address age-specific programming gaps, repurposing the Tony Rose MSC space to multi-purpose space should be
evaluated against the level of benefit and cost currently derived from its aquatics programming.
Priority Space Recommendations
13. Provision of priority spaces for youth and/or older adults should be explored if repurposing an existing
space within one of Orangeville’s multi-use community centres, or if undertaking a major expansion of
a facility. This would include the repurposing of the Tony Rose indoor pool should the Town decide to
remove the existing pool from the Town's inventory.
21
Statistics Canada 2001 and 2011 Census.
45 | P a g e
Section 6: Implementation
This Section summarizes the Indoor Facility Assessment Study’s recommendations into an overarching
implementation strategy that will guide planning and management of Orangeville’s indoor recreation facilities
over the next ten years.
Implementation Strategy
Shorter Term (2015 to 2017)
Over the next five years, the best available information and findings from the Study’s needs assessments
indicate that the Town of Orangeville should continue to provide a supply of four ice pads. While arena
participation and rental trends have been declining, it is not to the extent where one ice pad will need to be
eliminated in the short-term.
Regular capital maintenance should be undertaken for the Alder Street Recreation Centre according to the
Town’s long-range capital plans. With respect to the Tony Rose Memorial Sports Centre, the Town should
consider the repurposing the aquatics centre to address higher priority needs as it deems necessary. A final
decision needs to be made with respect to continuing to invest capital and operating resources into a valued, yet
surplus indoor pool facility. It is reinforced that the Tony Rose MSC pool is largely only supported on the basis of
convenience as opposed to a sustainable financial operating model and that Town staff have adjusted
programming at the facility to provide some balance with opportunities provided at the Alder Street location.
In addition, the Town should continue to be receptive to new programming opportunities within its recreation
facilities, particularly those delivered in partnership with the community or private sector.
Longer Term (2018 to 2023)
After a five year period has elapsed, the Town should initiate a review of this Indoor Facility Assessment Study in
the year 2019 to determine whether arena participation has increased or decreased to a point that requires an
adjustment to the current supply of ice pads. The capital and operating implications of the corresponding
adjustment to the arena supply will need to be investigated at that future time after the facility mix is
reconfirmed. Note that the occurrence of major breakdown or capital replacement activity before the five year
review period has elapsed may need to accelerate the arena review (or the short-term decision pertaining to the
future of the Tony Rose pool).
For example, should trends in arena sports and local arena participation decrease significantly to a point where
the Town is confident that it only requires a supply of three ice pads, then a determination can be made to
remove a pad. If ongoing capital maintenance costs are prohibitive to operating a facility, this will also factor
into the decision and would logically render Tony Rose Rink B as surplus due to age, diminishing lifecycle and the
fact that the Town is heavily reinvesting in Pad A. Evaluations would then need to be made whether the
need/demand exists to repurpose the rink to another needed use, recognizing that capital upgrade expenditures
would still be incurred to remedy structural/seismic, insulation and vapour barrier deficiencies that do not meet
today’s building code (and minimize deterioration to the building envelope).
Subject to subsequent confirmation through a separate future study, a possible conversion opportunity for Tony
Rose Rink B would be for a multi-purpose space geared to field sports and dry-land training opportunities. It is
noted, however, that this could be an expensive option as Rink B would require significant retrofits to improve
insulation and HVAC at a minimum. As recommended, a comprehensive engineering study should be
46 | P a g e
undertaken to inform capital planning efforts specific to either retaining Rink B as an ice pad, repurposing it to a
warm-use facility, or potentially removing and/or replacing the structure entirely.
Implementing the Study Directions
Implementing a Study of this nature requires the Town of Orangeville to undertake subsequent works that will
help fulfill recommendations contained herein.
Confirming the Town’s Role in Delivering Services
Apart from direct delivery of aquatics programming and a limited scope of arena-based programs, the Town of
Orangeville employs an ‘indirect’ service delivery model whereby it facilitates use of Town facilities by the
community-based providers of recreation and cultural services. For example, rooms in the community centres
are rented by individuals or businesses to deliver their own active living programs. The Town also contracts
approved individuals to deliver certain programs on its behalf, thereby alleviating the Town from having to
maintain its own complement of staff to do so. This indirect approach to delivering services has been a fairly
cost effective approach where rental revenues are allocated against facility operations and maintenance, while
the Department has been able to be leaner in terms of staffing.
The Town’s Parks and Recreation Strategic Plan is the document that guides Departmental service delivery
philosophies and priorities. That document supports the Town’s indirect model by encouraging greater
collaboration with schools to maximize program opportunities and facility utilization, as well as with the
community to bolster youth and older adult programming in particular.
While the indirect approach has minimized net operating subsidies (relative to other business models that are
oriented to direct municipal program delivery), the Town’s approach has also generated a heavy reliance on the
community to provide needed services to residents of Orangeville. This has created some minor challenges,
particularly if contractors are unable to meet their obligations over the short or long term, which can result in
service gaps ranging from one class (if the contractor is unable to make it) to a session (if the contractor can no
longer deliver the service).
While community-based program delivery out of municipal space is common across the province for certain
facility types (notably sports field and arena programs), some municipalities choose to directly provide programs
to specific markets (e.g. fitness, arts and culture, etc.) recognizing that there is a business case to support
investment in supplementary facilities and staff. As will be discussed in subsequent pages, many municipalities
also facilitate programming through clearly defined strategic partnerships, working with organizations such as
the YMCA or private-sector groups to deliver certain services.
The Town is currently in the process of slightly refocusing its role in program delivery. It has redefined a facility
supervisory position to function more as a Program Manager and has added resources to bolstering the hours of
its Programmer positions. The increase in program staff capacity allows the Town to better explore
opportunities to a) find new community-based providers and empower them through principles of community
development; and b) explore potential opportunities through which the Town can rationalize direct delivery of
recreation services using its internal resources.
As discussed in the facility assessments, there is a possibility that the Town of Orangeville may gain multipurpose program space if partnering with Humber College to construct a gymnasium at the Alder Street
Recreation Centre or potentially repurposing space at the Tony Rose Memorial Sports Centre. Addition of new
multi-purpose program space may provide the impetus for the Town to create a more robust programming
47 | P a g e
portfolio by adding floor-based programming (e.g. oriented to active living, wellness, dance, etc.) to
complement its existing aquatics programs. The Program Planning Survey prepared for the Town indicates that
half of the sample participates in programs not run by the Town, most notably group fitness activities.
Furthermore, about half of the sample also indicates that are unable to participate in recreation as often as they
would like, part of which is an inability to access programs at their desired day or time or afford program fees,
two barriers that could potentially be mitigated by the Town if delivering its own programs.
Further entry into directly delivered services should only be considered to ensure a broad range of choice in
recreational programming, where a third party is unable to satisfactorily address local needs. As such, the Town
of Orangeville will have to strategically evaluate where the community or private sector has not been able to
address market demands. The Town should update and annually review its current community program
inventory in order to understand “gap” areas. By doing so, business planning exercises can be undertaken to
determine the feasibility of direct municipal provision, being cognisant that program delivery will require
additional human and financial resources; this means the Town would need to define its intended level of costrecovery to either an accepted level of subsidy or net gain (whether through user fees or alternative funding
streams). The degree of cost recovery would vary for each service ultimately considered, with the Town basing
its decision on whether or not to enter a new program market based on its desired level of cost recovery. At this
point in time such programs would appear to be relegated to floor-based active living and wellness (e.g. group
fitness) given their complementary nature with the existing aquatic facilities, potential gymnasium at Alder
Street and/or potential multi-purpose space at Tony Rose. With the general aging of populations across the
province (including Orangeville) the demand for older adult and seniors programming can be expected to
increase with higher expectations for more 'active recreational' opportunities for this age group. In addition,
there is an on-going need to address youth-based programming opportunities to ensure that this age group is
provided with an environment that encourages positive, healthy and active recreation choices.
As part of the facility implementation strategy proposed in this Indoor Facility Assessment Study, should the
Town expand its supply of multi-purpose program space and/or continue to refocus staff resources to program
delivery, its role in direct program delivery should be comprehensively reviewed. Similarly, a five year update to
the 2010 Parks and Recreation Strategic Plan would better rationalize the Department’s vision and operating
philosophy to dictate the degree to which the Town bolsters its portfolio of directly-delivered programs along
with the types of programs that it intends to provide.
Evaluating Partnership Opportunities
The most effective recreation systems tend to be those having a robust range of providers, whether they are
public, private, non-profit or volunteer entities. Recognizing that no one party can be “everything to everybody”,
combining and coordinating municipal resources with those of other parties is an excellent way to ensure a
broad spectrum of indoor recreation facilities and services are available to the community. In the face of
diminishing budgets, streamlined services, or smaller departmental workforces, municipalities are exploring
non-traditional partnerships in order to satisfy the public’s expectations for quality services. Partnerships with
third parties such as the YMCA or education institutions (secondary and post-secondary) are frequently explored
and have resulted in collaborative agreements pertaining to facility construction and operation. The private
sector has also played a role as observed with municipalities such as Hamilton working with private arena
operators who play a role in facility and program delivery.
Partnerships must be carefully evaluated as each opportunity presents unique circumstances and outcomes. A
municipality’s first responsibility is to ensuring that a partnership creates a net benefit to its residents, in a
manner that is consistent with philosophies and ethics reflective of government. In evaluating partnerships, the
following should be considered at a minimum:
48 | P a g e
•
first and foremost, whether the partnership is consistent with the municipal mandate and philosophies;
•
if there is a role for the Town to play in providing the program or service;
•
whether there is a quantifiable or justified need for the service in the community;
•
that the service can be sustainably accommodated within the Town’s long-term capital and/or operating
resources;
•
whether the partner is sufficiently capable/qualified (financially, staffing, expertise, etc.) to deliver the
service over the long-term, and in compliance with legislated policies and municipal standards;
•
the level of risk (e.g. financial, liability, etc.) and how this will be managed by the partner or the Town;
•
whether the partner can provide the service on a sole source basis; and/or
•
agreeing upon terms, conditions, standards, and responsibilities for all parties involved.
Trend Tracking & Monitoring
This Study represents a point of departure through which ongoing trend tracking and monitoring is an essential
first step to ensure recommendations remain relevant in the context of future circumstances.
The Town undertakes long-term growth planning for the community as a whole. The directions of this Study are
driven in part by the historical and projected population growth trends for the community. Implications of
historical growth patterns and socio-demographic characteristics are fairly easily contemplated, however, future
demographic variables may be different than envisioned in the present day. As a result, ongoing monitoring of
community demographics and growth patterns in relation to the assessments contained in this Study is crucial.
The Parks & Recreation Department collects a great deal of information regarding the performance of its indoor
recreation facilities and programs. For example, CLASS software provides Town Staff with a range of statistics
which can be used to scrutinize performance and efficiencies over time. Building on the capabilities of this
software and creating new databases for information will be of great assistance to the Town as it manages its
indoor recreation facility and service delivery system.
The Town’s information tracking system is largely relegated to internal operations. Moving forward, continued
engagement with external users is considered to be an essential part of the planning and management of
facilities. User groups should continue to be consulted to determine the trends, needs and capacity affecting
them, recognizing that the long-term sustainability of community-based organizations to deliver services is
critical to the local recreational system. As an example, the Town should collect registration information from
major users of municipal indoor facilities to assist in facility planning. At a minimum, user groups of arenas and
aquatic centres (which are the Town’s most capital and operationally intensive facilities) should be required to
submit their annual registrations when booking schedules are being developed for each year.
Through continued professional development and appropriate allocation of staff time to research, Parks &
Recreation Department staff should also have the opportunity to remain apprised of emerging trends and best
practices in their respective fields. The tracking of trends external to Orangeville (e.g. throughout the GTA, as
well as provincially and nationally) can provide Staff with ideas to anticipate local implications or bring
efficiencies into their day-to-day operations.
By having the best information possible, the Town is putting itself in a position to make informed decisions with
respect to the planning and management of its indoor recreation system. This information, as derived through
ongoing monitoring, is a critical component in making the Indoor Facility Needs Assessment Study a “liveable”
document.
49 | P a g e
Performance Measures
The ability to measure the operational performance of the indoor recreation system provides decision-makers
with critical insights aimed at improving efficiencies. Measuring performance provides the ability to track
whether implemented service improvements have met their objectives, and help to create a culture of
accountability and responsibility among staff units. Ultimately, performance measurement allows decisionmakers to learn from past experiences, adjust current practices if necessary and to also communicate success
stories to others.
Effective use of information available to the Town, as discussed in previous paragraphs, is the base of
performance measurement. There are countless metrics that can be used to evaluate performance relating to
finance, operations, utilization, etc. of facilities and services. Orangeville already uses performance measures to
ensure it is providing services effectively, many of which feed into the annual budgeting processes as an
example. Performance measures that may be specifically useful to this Study may include (but not be limited to):
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Financial operating performance of specific facilities (aggregated or on a per capita basis);
Cost recovery ratios of facilities and programs delivered;
Rental hours booked in municipal facilities;
Utilization rates during peak and non-peak hours (as was measured in the arena assessments);
Annual participation in indoor recreation programs by age category and program type;
Satisfaction levels of indoor recreation service participants, groups, volunteers, etc.;
Average hours of staff training and professional development per employee; and/or
Number of communication and planning opportunities with partners and community groups.
Review of the Study after 5 Years
It is strongly recommended that an update to the Indoor Facility Assessment Study be undertaken after five
years in order to ensure that recommendations contained herein remain relevant based on future demographic
and market characteristics, as well as providing a basis for the Town of Orangeville to update its critical plans
such as Development Charge studies and long-range capital plans. This five year review is especially importance
in the context of the arena system where declining utilization trends may point to the need to repurpose an ice
pad (or reconfirm that investments in four pads continues to be necessary over the foreseeable future).
Implementation Recommendations
14. Entry into directly delivered indoor recreational programs and services that are currently not under the
purview of the Parks & Recreation Department should be confirmed after undertaking a comprehensive
review of the Town’s core service delivery mandate, possibly through a five year update to the
Department’s Parks and Recreation Strategic Plan. The review should consider factors including (but not
limited to) congruence with the Town’s role and philosophical orientation, availability of requisite
municipal facilities to deliver programs, the range of costs involved, and the ability of partners and
community-based providers to meet program demands.
15. Trend tracking and monitoring efforts should be undertaken and applied in the context of the Indoor
Facility Assessment Study’s recommendations to ensure relevancy to future circumstances. Such efforts
include, at a minimum, regularly engaging indoor facility users, allocating appropriate staff resources to
research and data collection tasks, and application of performance measurement metrics.
16. Undertake a review of this Indoor Facility Assessment after five years.
50 | P a g e
Appendix A:
Architectural & Engineering Review
Prepared by:
MacLennan Jaunkalns Miller Architects, Blackwell, Smith + Andersen, and Acapulco Pools
51 | P a g e
1. Introduction
Orangeville’s Indoor Facility Assessment Study scope of work included a requirement for an assessment of the
Tony Rose Memorial Sports Centre to determine estimated capital construction costs to upgrade the two existing
ice pads and pool. MacLennan Jaunkalns Miller Architects, Blackwell (Structural Engineers), Smith + Andersen,
(Mechanical & Electrical Engineers) were included as part of the study team and were responsible for providing an
overview of the current conditions of the facility, identify proposed upgrade options and estimate construction costs.
The full study team and representatives of the Town of Orangeville conducted site tours and reviewed the existing
study documentation including The Tony Rose Memorial Sports Centre Condition Assessment prepared by Tacoma
Engineers, August 2009, The Tony Rose Arena Beam Inspection prepared by RDE Structural Engineers,
November 2005, The Arena ‘B’ Upgrades Meeting minuted by Andrew Poste, December 1995 and the Randall
Brown & Associates, Building Code and Fire Protection Engineers Analysis of OFC Retrofit Requirements, April
1991.
The original construction of the Tony Rose Memorial Sports Centre was completed in 1972 and the building
appears to have been continuously well maintained. There are no sprinklers in the facility and it does not have a
standpipe configuration. The building is currently in good repair given the age of the primary architectural and
structural components. Two new roof units have been added and the roof finish was replaced in the 1990's. The
boilers are between 8 to 10 years old.
2. Structural Review
Arena A of the Tony Rose Memorial Sports Centre was reviewed on site on August 13, 2013 and again on March
06, 2014 after the resumption of the Town of Orangeville Recreation Master plan facility review. The purpose of
this structural review is to provide a qualitative assessment of the existing facility along with recommendations to
address the performance of the ice pad at Arena A. The structural consultants are also providing commentary on
the regulatory compliance of the existing structure as it relates to the current building code.
Blackwell visited the site on two occasions in order to tour the facility and become familiar with the existing
conditions. We understand that the Town of Orangeville has commissioned detailed structural component
inspections on a 5‐year schedule in order to inform their ongoing maintenance program and have reviewed the
structural components of the Beam Inspection Report from RDE Structural Engineers dated November 2005 as well
as the Condition Assessment prepared by Tacoma Engineers and dated August 2009.
Blackwell have performed a general high‐level review of the existing visible structure, and have also reviewed the
engineering Condition Assessment Reports commissioned by the Town of Orangeville in 2005 and 2009. In light of
the potential for re‐purposing the existing facilities, they have reviewed the structural implications from a Building
Code compliance perspective. In their opinion, based on the ongoing inspection and maintenance program, and
given that a change of use of occupancy is not contemplated, the existing structure does not require a formal
structural evaluation for code compliance at this point.
This following report is not intended to be a detailed condition assessment. Our investigation consisted of
observations of the readily visible structure as well as discussions with the Facility Staff to better understand the
history of the complex. Finishes have not been removed, and testing of materials has not been conducted.
52 | P a g e
In general, it was observed that the existing facility appears to be well‐maintained. The rink slab in Arena A had
experienced notable movements in the past, resulting in extensive cracking, differential displacements relative to
the apron slab, and an ice surface of uneven depth.
Town staff have confirmed that recent upgrades have been completed on Arena A including electrical upgrades
with new arena lighting. The plant is noted in good order with six year old compressors and new chillers in good
operating condition. (Recent Cimco 2 x 75hp. The desiccant wheel is also a Cimco unit). The arena ice pad,
however, is the original rink slab and is at the end of its service life. At the time of the site visit, the slab displays
cracks and has exhibited subsidence conditions of 100mm – 150mm; the Town has recently issued a tender for
slab replacement which will remedy these deficiencies.
Structural and sub-grade review; discussion of stabilization of the sub-grade prior to the replacement of
the rink slab assembly:
Blackwell proposed a preliminary set of options for soil remediation including the excavation of existing subslab material, and replacement with an engineered fill base, assuming that the grade below this is capable
of sustaining the greater weight imposed by the new material. We have also successfully used drilled-in
granular piers that consolidate existing soils by organizing a grid of compacted ‘columns’ beneath the new
slab. The estimated contingency for soil remediation was noted at $100,000.
A geotechnical investigation that confirms the soil condition and bearing capacity is recommended prior to
the sub-surface design to ensure that that soil stabilization strategy is effective. Location of the water table
level was not confirmed but was assumed to be between 600mm – 700mm below the finished ice slab
level. Our discussion with Town staff noted the anecdotal evidence that the Arena A site prior to
construction was a low area with ground water. The line of the existing storm sewer runs between the
buildings. Geotechnical investigation should also provide recommendations if an underslab drainage
system is required
Arena ‘A’ Slab replacement:
We understand that the refrigerated slab at Arena A is to be removed and replaced, complete with a new
mechanical plant. The existing slab has demonstrated significant movements in the past, leading to
extensive cracking and differential displacements. The slab appears to have heaved at one side, leading to
a reduction in ice thickness.
General Regulatory Compliance of the Structure:
1.
We understand that the Town of Orangeville conducts a maintenance program for this facility, including
detailed structural reviews on a 5 year cycle. We understand that a similar assessment is due this year.
1.1.
We have reviewed the reports from RDE Structural Engineers dated November 2005 and Tacoma
Engineers dated August 2009. We understand that the recommendations contained in these reports have
been adopted by the Owner.
2.
We recognize that the existing arena buildings were constructed 40 years ago. The structural systems are
cold‐formed steel Z‐girts bearing on structural steel moment‐resisting frames supported by cast‐in‐place
reinforced concrete foundations. The structure is a Pre‐Engineered assembly, meaning that the structural
design is conducted by the supplier, and reviewed by the engineer of record.
53 | P a g e
2.1.
Lateral loads are resisted by the moment frames for loads parallel to the frames, and steel rod cross‐
bracing for loads transverse to the frames.
2.2.
Interior partitions and load‐bearing walls supporting the bleachers are constructed of concrete masonry
units.
3.
The Ontario Building Code 2012 assigns an Importance Category to structures, according to their use or
function in the community. Buildings that are likely to be used as post‐disaster shelters and whose primary
use is a community centre belong to the High Importance Category.
It is a certainty that this building has not been the requirements of the High Importance Category
requirements of the current building code. Commentary L to the National Building Code of Canada offers
guidance with respect to the structural evaluation of existing buildings and criteria under which the current
code requirements may be relaxed for existing structures. In our opinion, the building does not need to be
updated to meet the current code provisions given that the following conditions hold true.
3.1.
It is assumed that the existing structure has been designed in accordance with the Building Code current at
the time of construction. Design drawings for the original building are not available; no further structural
analysis has been carried out by our office.
3.2.
No change of use or occupancy loads is contemplated for the building. No significant damage, distress or
deterioration, has been observed by this office or by the engineers responsible for the ongoing Condition
Assessments.
4.
Given the considerations above, and assuming that the Town of Orangeville does not require the Tony
Rose facility to operate as a Post‐Disaster relief shelter, it is our opinion that these structures may continue
to be occupied as a recreational facility without a detailed evaluation of the structural system. It is important
that the ongoing assessment and maintenance program continue with the detailed recommendations in
these reports implemented by the Owner
Arena ‘A’ renovation cost review:
The study confirmed with Town staff investing in Arena A as the primary ice program component in the facility. The
proposed replacement concrete ice slab would be a 125mm – 150mm (depending of slab design) fully moisture
cured 6000 psi slab with 1-1/4” OD poly rink cooling pipes spaces at 100mm o.c. Reinforcing above the rink pipes
would be 150mm x 150mm welded wire mesh with wire overlapping pipe chairs every 300mm. This support
configuration would locate top-loaded pipe chairs with base plate spaced at 600mm. Top layer slab reinforcing
would be #4 re-bars spaced at 10.5” or nom. 270mm o.c. parallel to the pipe and top loaded into the pipe chairs
after pipe installation. The bottom layer slab reinforcing would be #4 re-bar spaced at 12” or nom. 300 mm o.c.
parallel to pipe chairs and installed first between pipe chairs. The underside of the slab assembly is separated by a
6 mil poly vapour barrier, with a nom. 300mm overlap, fully sealed.
The slab insulation should be minimum 100mm of Dow SE insulation or equivalent, 2, 50mm layers with joints
staggered in both directions on top of 12” (nom. 300mm) clean sand or screening base uniformly compacted to a
standard density of 95%. Note the sub-slab configuration by the consultant is based on the soil investigation and is
designed to be founded on stabilized soil. 1 1/4” OD polyethylene underfloor heating lines can be spaced in the
bottom 50mm of the sand bed to provide sub-slab heat. The need for underslab heating lines has to be reviewed
after the soil investigation as it soil dependent.
54 | P a g e
The approximate current costs for the components of rink replacement have been estimated below:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Provision of concrete work, $270.000.
Carpentry, formwork and alterations, $70,000.
Miscellaneous metal, $20,000.
Apron perimeter new skate tile, $20,000.
Dasherboards, $160,000.
Rink refrigeration, $530,000.
Excavation and site work, $70,000.
General Contractor's General Conditions, Allowances and Fees are estimated at:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Site supervision and facilities (Office, storage, Phone/Fax, vehicle(s), $40,000.
GC General site expenses including clean-up, safety, barriers & tools, $30,000.
Temporary Power and lighting, $2,000.
Project insurance cost (liability), $5,000.
General Contractors' general conditions sub-total, $77,000.
Allowance for Testing & Inspection, $5,000.
Contingency, $40,000.
Professional fees would include:
•
•
•
•
Pre-construction services fee, $5,000.
Construction management fee (CM), $40,000.
Note that architectural and structural drawings and specifications are not included in the construction
capital cost total. Also not included are mechanical and electrical engineering, site, civil and lighting design
or sub-surface soil investigation.
General Contractor's General Conditions, Allowances and Fee subtotal, $167,000.
The project soft costs should also include any FF&E, new signage, design contingency (separate from the
construction contingency) and an escalation factor depending on the proposed schedule of construction.
Current scope of construction work on Arena ‘A’:
We understand that the Town of Orangeville has authorized work to proceed on the Arena A rink slab and
refrigeration system. This work is underway at this time. The scope of work for this contract includes the following
demolition, and new installation items:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Cut and remove the existing arena floor surface. Raise sand level approximately 8”, install 3” of insulation,
new pipes, chairs and 5” of concrete so floor is 1.5” below outer apron.
Cut and remove the existing west aisle way, replace sub soil and re-install concrete and rubber flooring.
Cut and remove 6” of concrete from North end.
Cut and remove 3’ of concrete on east side and reinstall concrete and rubber flooring.
Remove existing headers and fill trench with concrete.
Install buried headers with valve boxes half way to first blue line.
Remove and replace existing chiller in NH3 room and replace with new.
Remove and replace arena boards, glass and players benches.
Remove existing Humicons and platforms.
55 | P a g e
•
Install 5’ glass from A rink in B rink so all glass in B rink is 5’ high.
During the replacement of the rink slab, additional concrete and miscellaneous metal work can also be scheduled in
the arena at this time, as demolition of the existing rink slab and excavation will require the removal of waste
material.
Additional new miscellaneous metal guardrails were identified as new safety installations on the edge of the
bleacher area. Work involved removal of the exiting guards, new core drilling for installation of rail anchors or fixed
in-place tube uprights and the supply of new OBC compliant guards. Costs depend on the complexity of the nonclimbable guard facing, from 50mm x 50mm wire grating to perforated metal welded sheet. The cost estimate for
new miscellaneous metal guards would be between $30,000 - $40,000 for removal of existing, supply and
installation. The existing concrete bleacher stairs were also identified as steep and narrow for spectators passing in
both directions without a handhold. New miscellaneous metal single top-rail handrails on vertical posts can be
installed on the centre line of the stairs. Installation would be similar to the new guards with the verticals secured in
new core drilled holes on the stair treads. The width of the stairs would have to be enlarged to allow for safe updown spectator passage; the width dimension of each tread could be enlarged by a new 150mm formed/poured
concrete extension bonded with drilled in studs in the side of the existing concrete stair structure. The required
enlarged stair width could also be achieved by covering the existing stair with a new pre-fabricated miscellaneous
metal tread and riser (with non-slip edging or using a checker plate pattern finish). The revision to the width of the
bleacher stairs would require a reduction in the length of the existing bleacher benches. The cost estimate to extend
the bleacher stair width, carpentry to shorten (and re-cap) the ends of the existing bleacher benches and installation
of new single top-rail handrails on vertical posts secure in new core drilled recesses would be approximately
$25,000.
The demolition of the existing rink slab and removal of waste material, the excavation beneath the rink slab and
preparation/stabilization of the soil for the required compacted new sub-base requires access by construction
equipment. Depending on the equipment used, this may involve temporary removal (and re-installation) of a section
of exterior wall area to allow for direct access to the rink area. This demolition and construction will create dust in
the arena atmosphere; existing mechanical and electrical equipment and fixtures need to be temporarily protected
from dust. At the completion of construction, cleaning of the entire arena interior will be required. Some wall and
structural surfaces may be cleaned and painted at this time. Selecting a bright or white paint colour for the structural
pre-engineered frames, beams and wall surfaces maximizes the efficiency of the lighting configuration and provides
maximum brightness on the ice surface with reflected light.
The structural configuration of Arena A includes poured in place concrete foundations walls and poured in-place
piers supporting ‘pre-engineered’ steel frames; designed and engineered by the fabricator. The pre-engineered
building system integrates the most structurally efficient frame depth and web thickness for the building span, and
covers this primary frame with a rolled steel girt secondary system supporting a metal liner. This entire steel framing
and cladding system is light weight and requires braced bays to achieve a stable design. The main frames, girts
and bracing appear to be in good condition. Rolled steel purlins support the roof sheathing, however they are
mostly covered by the low emissivity ceiling fabric. The low E ceiling traps heat between the top of the membrane
and the roof deck, and heat rays from above are restricted from radiating back onto the ice surface (the
approximate EM of 0.05 or 5% reducing the load placed on the rink refrigeration system). It is recommended to
review the roof structural system periodically for condensation and oxidation of the roof purlins, as well as to review
for roof leaks that can be hidden by the membrane. The continuity/integrity of the air/vapour barrier at the ceiling
level is not possible to confirm above the Low E membrane.
56 | P a g e
Review of Arena ‘B’:
The study reviewed the present use and configuration of Arena B. This smaller arena includes an upper level multipurpose/meeting room overlooking the ice surface and team rooms. The structure was built after the construction
of Arena A in 1973-1974. It is a similar pre-engineered configuration with cold-formed steel Z girts secured to the
primary structural steel moment-resisting frames. Lateral structural loads are resisted by the moment frames for
loads applied in line with the frames. Steel cross-bracing rods resist loads applied perpendicular to the primary
frames. The pre-engineered building system is a light weight structural configuration and exhibits more movement
than a conventional structural steel frame. For this reason the connection to adjacent infill masonry panels has to be
detailed to accommodate movement in the steel system and relative stability in the masonry infill panels. The lower
level masonry walls between the steel frames show cracking. The top of the masonry wall does not appear to be
consistently laterally supported at the underside of the framing channel, however a restraint detail (non-typical) has
been added. It appears that the issue of top of wall support has been addressed sometime in the past.
The masonry wall is not an insulated wall surface and displays deterioration of the interior finish due to
condensation. This condensation appears to also cause surface rusting at the frame base plates. Certain walls of
Arena B have been partially upgraded with spray foam insulation that has been added to the upper level of the
arena. Some of the base plate bolts appear to have been welded.
It would appear that Arena B does not meet the current seismic requirements of the OBC.
The initial review of Arena B discussed the possibility to re-purposing the existing rink for alternate recreational (or
Town operations) functions if it was not necessary for ice programming. One of the proposed recreation program
uses was for indoor soccer, with the addition of a turf surface over the existing rink slab. The other program
possibility was as a box lacrosse venue. The existing slab does display some subsidence issues similar to (but not
as dramatic as) the Arena A slab.
We recommend that Arena B can continue to be used for its current winter schedule ice program for the immediate
future. Repurposing the arena for ‘warm’ program activities during heating season months will however likely
accelerate problems of condensation on the wall and structure surfaces. This can lead to accelerated deterioration
of the buildings envelope. A continuous air/vapour barrier is an essential part of the building envelope. Arena B
has numerous tears and gaps in its ceiling membrane exposing insulation. This can cause condensation inside of
the ceiling membrane and can cause corrosion on steel roof purlins.
There is no evident continuous connection of an air/vapour barrier between the upper metal cladding and the
uninsulated lower level. Repurposing this arena space for year-round recreational program use would require the
installation of a new mechanical (supply/return air) system. The structural frame would have to be reviewed for its
ability to support additional exterior cladding and insulation assemblies. No additional loading should be supported,
hung or imposed on the existing frame structure, which would have been engineered to the limit of its most
efficient/economical configuration.
The construction sequence to re-insulate the exterior arena walls may include the removal of the existing metal
panel exterior skin, the removal of existing insulation, replacement with new insulation (with new spray or
membrane air-vapour barrier) and the installation of new exterior metal panels (with associated soffit, corner, and
cap trims. Care should be taken to conform to the OBC 3.1.5.12 Combustible Insulation and its Protection clause
which outlines the permitted configuration of foamed plastics in buildings of non-combustible construction and their
allowable flame spread rating on any exposed surfaces. Spray foam insulation is effective in fully sealing openings
however it needs to be part of a tested rated assembly and covered with thermal insulation if used in a metal wall
57 | P a g e
assembly. (It can be used in masonry assemblies.) Spray foam can also be used as part of a pre-manufactured,
sealed metal wall panel system.
Another configuration is to leave the existing arena metal wall assembly and use a ‘cover’ system by attaching
external ‘Z’ bars to the exterior wall surface, fully insulting and applying a new metal panel system. This method
may reduce the cost of demolition and allow the maintenance of any functioning air/vapour barrier provided by the
inner metal wall panel. This method may also allow the lower level masonry wall to be insulated. A similar
recladding can be accomplished with sealed insulated metal wall panels such as Kingspan.
We have reviewed the configuration of two full exterior side wall insulated and re-clad with our pre-engineered
building fabricator who is experienced in the construction of arena structures and they have estimated a
replacement cost of approximately $190,000. The per square foot cost decreases as the size of the replacement
area increases.
The exterior of the building, notably Arena B and the west elevation of the pool building show some deterioration at
the junction of the exterior wall surface and grade from rain water not conducted away from the base of the building.
A primary problem is the low level of the existing finished grade floor of the buildings compared to the parking lot
exterior finished elevation. The building sits low in the site and storm water cannot be positively drained away at
the base of the building exterior. Deterioration of the building envelope can however be mitigated by insuring that all
drains, flashings and drips conducts water away from the building surface and that the junction of the building
perimeter wall to the parking lot or adjacent sidewalk is sealed and waterproofed.
In our opinion, the age and condition of Arena B will allow it to continue to house its existing ice hockey function
during cold weather for the immediate future. Given the numerous structural and building envelope issues identified
above however, we do not believe that it is an economical candidate for renovation and/or repurposing for other
uses.
General Mechanical Review:
The following additional mechanical items were also noted during the site review:
Generally the building demonstrates a commitment to good routine mechanical maintenance given the
condition of the equipment for its age.
1.
Air Handling Systems, Indoor Pool
The existing pool is served by a recently installed Dectron dehumidification unit that we assume is capable
of maintaining a 60% relative humidity level within the space while providing a supply air volume of
between 4 to 6 AC/hr. in the space and maintaining a negative pressure relative to adjacent areas in the
building. Discussing the current operation of the unit with the facility operators, the feedback was positive
and that the system is reasonable working order. We assume for this report that the ventilation rates are in
accordance with ASHRAE 62.
2.
Air Handling Systems, Arena
Currently the arena is served by a desiccant dehumidification unit. This style of air handling equipment is
ideal for producing low relative humidity levels at the low ambient indoor air temperatures at which arenas
operate. However, the existing unit is not equipped with any cooling capacity so performance suffers in
summer months when the facility is used for indoor lacrosse. Discussing the situation with the facility
58 | P a g e
operations staff, there is a desire to replace the unit with a similar style but equipped with cooling to allow
the arena to function correctly for its intended dual purpose.
Auxiliary exhaust fans and make-up air openings are also present to provide the space with ventilation air
to deal with products of combustion from the ice surfacing equipment. We assume for this report that the
ventilation rates are in accordance with ASHRAE 62.
3.
Refrigeration Plant
We understand that the refrigeration system is in good working order – compressors have been recently rebuilt and generally the system is making good ice.
4.
Plumbing Systems
We understand that the plumbing systems throughout the facility are in good working order, no negative
comments were received/reported during our visit.
5.
Fire Protection Systems
The building is not equipped with an automatic sprinkler system or fire standpipe system.
6.
Automatic Controls
All building controls appear to be manual; no centralized pneumatic or DDC building automation system
with operator terminal was observed.
3. Aquatics Centre Review
The Tony Rose Memorial Sports Centre Swimming Pool was reviewed on site on August 13, 2012 and again on January 21,
2014. The purpose of the inspection was to review the current condition of the pool component of the Tony Rose facility
(including the basin, filtration and circulation system), to advise on the proposed necessary repairs & equipment
replacement as noted by Town facility staff, and to establish cost estimates for the anticipated renovation/system
replacement work. The aquatics centre review was led by MacLennan Jaunkalns Miller Architects and Acapulco
Pools (the latter of whom is a pool construction specialist company that works on large scale aquatic complexes
across North America. They have a perspective on the current construction cost values for pool basin
configurations and filtration systems.)
Acapulco Pools was requested to provide their observations and recommendations regarding the proposed
upgrades to the pool & associated mechanical systems and to review with the consultant team the estimated
component construction cost(s) in current dollars. It was noted that the existing swimming pool basin has a capacity
of 167,000 US gallons (many pool equipment manufacturers and suppliers are located in the US; rates/capacity are
frequently expressed in this unit).
The Ontario Building Code, Section 3.11.8 (Recirculation for Public Pools), 3.11.8.1.(5) Recirculation systems
requires, “The recirculation system of a public pool shall be capable of filtering, disinfecting and passing through the
pool each day a volume of water of at least, (a) in the case of a Class A pool, other than a modified pool or a wave
action pool, six times the total water volume of the pool.”
This results in a minimum required 4 hour turn-over rate. The Tony Rose pool has a current water turn-over rate of
approximately 6 hours. Water turn-over rates are dependent on the pool occupant load to achieve the intended
59 | P a g e
water quality. 25m pools for fitness swimming and lesson programs achieve good water quality on the required turn
over schedule. Shallow water basins or basins with anticipated elevated bather loads (e.g. Scheduling with
numerous family swims or children's lesson programs) can benefit from faster turn-around times. We advise the
Town to review their aquatic program schedule and anticipated bather loads to confirm if there is a need to adjust
the filtration speed.
The Swimming Pool site observations are listed below:
Main 25m pool drains.
•
There are two main drains in the deep end of the 25m basin, approximately 3m north of the south wall of
the pool basin. The drain grates are stainless steel construction and custom fabricated for the drain
frames.
•
The main drain dimensions are 300mm x 300mm.
•
The drains are more than 1200 mm apart. (For bather safety, the Ontario Building Code 3.11.8.1.(15)
requires that all fittings below the water surface that provide suction or gravity flow in a public pool shall be
(a) provided with a minimum of two suction or gravity outlets interconnected to a full size manifold and (b)
be separated by a clear distance of not less that 1200mm.)
•
The main drain suction line is a 100 mm (4”) steel pipe.
•
The main drains have the 50mm contrasting colour band around their perimeter as required by the Code.
•
The main drain gates do not meet VGBA requirements that require all main drain grates to be unblockable.
(The Virginia Graeme Baker Pool and Spa Safety Act, US December 2008, deals with bather suction
entrapment below the water. To comply with this safety directive, all submerged drain covers should
comply with ASMEA112.19.8-2007 that are designed to guard against the possibility of bathers being held
underwater by the effect of the main pool drains, either by bathing suits being hooked on a drain
frame/grate or by a full-boy entrapment if a body makes a vacuum seal against a flat or missing drain
cover).
Recommendations:
•
The mains need to be increased in size to 460m m x 460mm to the velocity requirements for the current
OBC 3.11.8.1.(5) turn-over rate requirement.
•
The main drain frames and drain grates need to be fitted with domed cover and need to be unblockable to
meet the current VGBA requirements.
•
The pipe size from the main drains needs to be increased in diameter to meet the current water flow
requirements of the OBC.
•
The existing main drains (including housing and grates) can replaced along with the drain piping. An
alternative configuration would be the installation new wall drains installed on the south (deep) end of the
swimming pool basin wall approximately 2400 mm below the water surface level.
•
The cost to install new basin floor drains and the associated concrete work is considerably more than the
installation of wall drains. This type wall installation in an existing pool basin wall would generally be
acceptable to the building department.
60 | P a g e
Main pool drain replacement:
•
The cost to supply new floor drains (VGBA compliant drain sumps, dome grate, hydrostatic valves) along
with the associated concrete demolition, excavation, slab saw cutting, dowelling of rebar, waterproofing
would be between $34,000 and $41,000.
•
The cost to supply wall mounted new main drain including concrete wall core drilling, basin waterproofing
and the installation of vertical surface VGBA compliant drains and grilles would be between $13,000 and
$15,000.
Pool skimmer configuration:
The pool currently has 8 skimmers. The existing skimmers do not have cover grates. OBC 3.11.8.1.(14) and (19)
outline the requirements for the grates opening sizes.
•
The Town of Orangeville staff noted that the skimmers have had numerous repairs where the skimmer
body has cracked.
•
The number of skimmers at the pool perimeter are not adequate for the required four hour water turn-over
rate. The skimmers also have equalizers which have been plugged.
Skimmer replacement:
•
It is recommended that all skimmers need to be removed and replaced without equalizers. 12 skimmers are
required to adequately cover the water surface area of the pool. All new skimmers should be installed with
the cover grates required by the OBC.
•
The replacement work involves concrete cutting and the removal of the existing skimmers, installation of 12
new skimmers, increase in piping diameter of the new return lines, waterproofing of all basin penetrations.
The cost would be between $44,000 and $50,000.
Pool return inlet configuration:
•
The existing pool return fittings are located at a depth of more than 300 mm below the existing water level.
The OBC requires all wall return fittings to be a maximum of 300 mm below the water level. The fitting
eyeballs no longer function and the return inlets are not flush with the pool basin wall surface, creating a
safety issues for bathers. There are an inadequate number of return inlets to meet the current OBC flow
rate requirements.
•
It is recommended to remove the existing return fittings and waterproof the penetrations. The replacement
work would involve the core drilling the basin wall and installing 24 new wall return fittings on the west and
east sides of the pool basin a maximum of 300 mm below the pool water surface and flush with the
concrete basin wall surface.
•
The return lines would require new larger diameter piping to meet the current OBC flow rate requirements.
The cost to remove the existing return fittings and to replace with new fittings and lines (along with
necessary waterproofing at new and existing basin wall penetrations) would be between $15,000 and
$20,000.
61 | P a g e
Pool deck configuration:
•
The existing pool deck is tiled and has adequate slope to the individual deck drains. The tile surface is
dated and indicates numerous repairs made over the years.
•
The replacement of piping for skimmers (as well as skimmer housings), returns and main drains will require
the removal of extensive areas of the existing concrete deck surface. It will be difficult to restore the deck
to a uniform concrete slab with an even drainage pattern. It is recommended that all of the existing
concrete deck in the natatorium be removed and be replace at one time with a new poured in place
concrete slab-on-grade. This would include the consolidation of the under slab subgrade, new compacted
backfill over new drain lines and new deck drain housings with grates.
•
The cost to remove the entire pool deck and replace it with a new concrete deck, sloped to drain, with a
25mm x 25mm or 50mm x 50mm ceramic mosaic tile finish including depth markings, deck signage and
contrasting perimeter nosing would be between $112,000 and $125,000.
Pool interior finish configuration:
•
The pool basin walls and floor have an epoxy finish that appears to be in very good condition.
•
The recommended renovations to the main pool drains, return fittings and basin wall skimmer housings will
damage the epoxy paint surface in numerous locations. The pool tank is recommended to be tile with
25mm x 25mm ceramic mosaic tile to suit the profile (basin floor and wall edges) of the existing pool basin.
The basin shell will require hydroblasting at a minimum of 40,000 psi to remove entirely the existing epoxy
paint coating and any concrete that is in poor condition. The any deteriorated or chipped local areas of
concrete would have to be surface prepared and patched, as would the diagonal surface crack at the
approximate mid-point of the pool floor. The cost to hydroblast, prepare the basin surfaces and resurface
with a mosaic tile finish with epoxy grout would be between $160,000 and $180,000.
Filtration and Sanitizer system configuration:
•
The existing filters are horizontal and are sized for a 6 hour turn-over rate. They do not have sufficient
capacity for the required OBC 4 hour turn-over rate. The existing pump is an end-suction pump with a
hair/lint strainer sized for the 6 hour turn-over rate. The pool sanitizer is a PPG system and acid is used for
PH control.
•
It is recommended that additional filtration capacity will be required and this can be accomplished by
installing 4 stacked horizontal sand filters. The system would require a new circulation pump sized for the
OBC required 4 hour turn-over rate. The filtration system configuration could include a new ultra violet
sanitizer and chemical controller while the existing PPG sanitizer system can be reused. A vented storage
tank and acid feed pump are required. The connection of the heat exchanger would be by the mechanical
contractor. The cost to supply and install all the necessary filtration and sanitization equipment in the
mechanical room and make connection to the circulation system for a complete operating system would be
between $210,000 and $230,000.
Pool basin access revisions:
•
The pool currently does not have ramp access. The installation of a ramp would involve removal the northeast corner of the existing pool basin structure, excavation and the forming of new poured in place concrete
footings and basin walls as well as the sloped slab on grade ramp surface. The ramp edge would have to
62 | P a g e
be finished with a similar 25mm x 25mm mosaic ceramic tile finish to match to pool basin. The ramp would
require cast-in-place wedge anchors and new stainless steel handrails. Wedge anchor castings have to be
connected to the grounding loop. In the case of grouted-in handrails, the stainless steel rails need a direct
connection to the loop. The cost to complete the ramp installation would be between $100,000 and
$125,000.
Additional whirlpool basin configuration:
The addition of a whirlpool can add warm-water and therapy capability to the existing natatorium. Warm water
whirlpools are often the most requested ‘social’ basins in the suite of pool basins. A whirlpool configuration with a
20 person capacity would require a separate poured in place concrete tank a mosaic ceramic tile finish. The
configuration can have a deck level rim in line with the 25m pool basin edge, or the whirlpool can be elevated
(400mm – 500mm) so that seated bathers have a higher line of sight to the natatorium. Elevated whirlpool edges
also make access onto the top to the whirlpool wall from a wheelchair much easier. Adding a ramp to a warm water
whirlpool increases its functionality for therapy uses, but the ramp and stair system take up additional area. The
addition of a whirlpool would require new gross floor area added onto the natatorium as an addition. Part of this
floor area would house the new filtration system; the addition of a whirlpool would require a new, separate
circulation and sanitization system.
The cost to add the whirlpool itself would be between $125,000 and $150,000. The additional construction cost for
the building enclosure would depend on the configuration of the whirlpool with or without an entrance ramp. The
whirlpool addition could be housed in a new addition to the west side of the natatorium.
This addition of this whirlpool water area and this type of use would increase the total bather load. New change
room capacity would be necessary to support the increase; this might best be accomplished with the additional of a
“universal’ or family change room to the west side of the natatorium. That configuration might include an access
corridor to a single (or divisible) universal change room open to the west side of the pool deck, an open deck area
for a new whirlpool basin and a small service area for the whirlpool mechanical room, janitor’s closet and new exit
vestibule for emergency access to the west exterior. The whirlpool basin surrounding deck area would be required
to conform to the OBC deck minimum, but might be enlarged slight to accommodate bather circulation in a smaller
deck ‘alcove’ area. The gross floor area increase for a new universal change room and additional deck area
allocated for the whirlpool would be approximately 380 sq. m. (4,100. sq. ft.). The construction cost of the addition
would be between $2,100,000 and $2,500,000 (note: this represents the basic construction cost estimate. Soft cost
allowances should also be incorporated into the budget. For this size/budget of addition, the soft costs might add
between 25%- 30%. This figure would include fees, inspection and testing, design and construction contingencies
and FF&E).
A smaller addition (without any pool basin revisions) might house a universal change room and accessible change
room with deck level access from the north. This single story addition would add approximately 2,000 sq. ft. of
gross floor area at the grade floor left at an approximate construction cost of approximately $850,000 - $1,000,000)
All anticipated construction in the natatorium to the deck and basin requires direct access for excavation equipment,
conveyors and bins. The construction costs for any of the basin or addition options should incorporate costs for the
removal of one bay from the west wall of the natatorium to facilitate construction access. The re-built wall could
incorporate glazing to bring additional natural light onto the pool deck. Demolition and reconstruction will cause
dust or staining of walls and ceiling surfaces in the natatorium that require refinishing as part of the construction
process.
63 | P a g e
Proposed re-purposing of the natatorium to ‘dry’ program area:
The existing pool can be re-purposed as a fitness studio with the removal of water from pool basin and the
incorporation of a new ‘dry’ floor system. This can be accomplished with a permanent backfilling of the pool basin
and the installation of a poured in place concrete slab on compacted backfill, or can be configured as a removable
floor system on a light framing system (similar to aluminum scaffolding) supporting beams and a composite floor
surface. The existing pool deck would require the existing tile surface to be removed in order to create a flush floor
condition from the new fitness studio floor into the existing change rooms.
If the pool is filled in, the existing air handling system will have to be re-evaluated. The operating point of the system
will change. A pool is typically kept at 83-85 deg.F. and 50-60% RH and a gymnasium (multi-purpose room, studio)
is kept at 72-75 deg.F. and 30-60% RH. A pool system supply air flow rate is designed around air changes per
hour (typically 4 to 6) and a gymnasium is designed around the space cooling load (occupants, lights, equipment
and envelope). The current unit on site will not align perfectly with what would be required of it should the space
change to a multi-purpose studio, and being undersized results in poor performance for the interior space
conditions (This is an important issue if the multi-purpose room has a wood sport floor.) An oversized unit will cost
more money to operate. During design, the system should be “re-evaluated” against the proposed space function
in case it could be saved, however we believe that at this time that replacement should be anticipated. The new
HVAC system would need to be installed in the pool area and any new change room additions. This would likely be
a D/X packaged rooftop unit with an approximate installation cost of $1,000,000.
The installation of a removable framing system within the pool basin would involve steel or aluminum basejacks to
accommodate the slope of the existing basin floor supporting ledger beams and post frames with diagonal braces.
A resilient floor finish on top of a plywood base would be supported on aluminum beams or strong-back channel
horizontals. The approximate installation cost of the framing system within the pool basin and a plywood
subfloor/resilient athletic floor finish throughout the existing natatorium areas would be $110,000 - $150,000.
Repurposing the existing natatorium for ‘dry’ programming (multi-purpose room, dance studio, yoga/aerobics studio,
fitness area) would allow for the renovation of the existing change rooms and the potential removal of some of the
shower area made redundant by removing the pool function. This could allow for reconfiguration and reduction in
change room area and the addition of program staff room(s) and additional administrative space. The approximate
cost of a basic renovation of the existing pool change room area to add administrative offices and to accommodate
the revised ‘dry’ recreation functions would be $35,000 - $75,000, assuming a minimum of mechanical/plumbing
relocations. Repurposing of the second level pool viewing area to a fitness room can also be included in this scope
of work.
The construction costs of renovations to the natatorium, pool basin and mechanical systems are dependent on the
level of complexity and scope of work. This scope of work can range from maintenance of the status quo, revisions
to meet the current building code or modernization of the pools and its systems. The Chief Building Official’s office
has confirmed that capital repairs to the pool are fine as long as the original performance specifications of the pool
are maintained.
64 | P a g e

Indoor Facility Study - Final - Nov 18 2014

Transcription

Similar documents

Prelude 9x12 HS Cover

Postcard - Where Entrepreneurship and Business Opportunties

behemoth - SurfaceWorks

17th CAPE TOWN Jazz-fest-2016-JHB

58,000 square feet of Indoor FUN!

January and February - Town of North Castle

Two forces working with the weather…

The W o rld`s Largest Fo od Fig ht

Phone: (905) 838-0200