Updates

Update # 1: Steamrollers and the Park Barn Pavillion: The Architect


A fuller story emerged at the May 17th Council committee meeting regarding the architect that Park & Recreation Director Dave Ianiro was rushing to hire to do design work for his proposed new “Park Barn Pavillion” (PBP) in the Community Park.

Service Director Thom Evans told Council that he learned during contract negotiations that Ianiro’s preferred architect did not carry professional liability insurance. That was a significant stumbling block because it meant that the city would have little recourse if the design plans were faulty.

Evans said that, in an attempt to keep moving forward with the project, he contacted three other area architectural firms, but he actually talked to only one. Evans recommended hiring Robert Fiala---a Willoughby Councilman and managing partner of Then Design Architecture—to do the design work.

The contract will be capped at $2,100----which is $600 above what Ianiro thought the design services would cost.

Update # 2: Steamrollers and the Park Barn Pavillion: The Park Roads

Councilman Bob Mastrangelo’s questioning about priorities---specifically whether building a third pavilion or fixing the park roads should come first when spending the extra $175,000 earmarked by Mayor Scott Coleman for park use this year----seems to have gained some traction in the last week.

Last night, Council agreed to move forward with the road work. A motion authorizing pre-bid work will be on the agenda at next week’s Council meeting.

According to Brian Mader from the city engineer’s office, the city has three options for reconditioning the park roads. all of which are pretty pricey:

1. The cheapest and least durable option (estimated 5-6 year lifespan) is to double “chip seal” the roads, which entails scraping the roads, filling in the potholes, and (twice) putting down a layer of asphalt and compressing stone into the asphalt. Estimated cost: $ 140,000 ($45,000 for the Woodside access road and $95,000 for the entrance area). Mader called this a “short term fix”.
2. A more durable approach would be to scrape the roads and put down 4” of asphalt—a “driveway” layer essentially. Estimated cost: $175,000 to $200,000 for both roads. Mader said that doing this would last longer than the double “chip seal,” but “it isn’t going to last a long time for that kind of money”.
3. The third and most durable option (estimated minimum 12 to 15 year lifespan) is to do what the city does with other roads: scrape and rebuild them using 7” of asphalt. Estimated cost: between $250,000 and $300,000.

Mastrangelo’s preference for the third options should not have surprised his peers. He consistently takes a big picture, long distance view when evaluating financial options. He said, “If we’re going to do it, let’s do it right. Otherwise it will cost more in the long run.”

That’s a logical approach for sure. But as we all know, politics sometimes gets in the way of reason---or at least muddies the waters.

The consensus of Council was to go with the cheaper “short term” chip seal fix, which would leave $57.900 leftover for Dave Ianiro's proposed PBP.

Since Ianiro estimated the PBP structure alone would cost $ 40,000, that leaves him $17,9000 for the rest of the work, which includes: installing a very large cement pad under and around the PBP; running electrical and water lines to the PBP; and renovating the Old Pool House bathrooms.

 Update # 3: Paying For the New Rescue Squad Vehicle

A business savvy reader took issue with the interest cost calculations that I used when discussing Mayor Coleman’s proposal to buy the new rescue squad vehicle (RSV) using a five year, rent-to-own arrangement.
The reader figured that my calculations didn’t take into account that the principal (on which interest would be assessed) would be reduced over time. The reader also pointed out that I didn’t take into account the lost discount that the city would give up by failing to pay outright for the new RSV. The reader wrote:

Agree with your article about wondering what the actual cost of the vehicle will be to the city. A couple of notes though. Using a financial calculator and a rounded sale price of $210K, a rate of 3%, the annual payment would be $45,854.46 with the 5 year total being $229,272.30. Using http://www.efunda.com/formulae/finance/lease_payment_u.cfm website gives the same results.

Another thing to take into account is the 4% the manufacturer would pay for a payment of the unit up front. This amounts to $3,452, assuming a 150 day delivery date.

Using both of these factors the additional amount paid for the unit is $3,452 + 19,272 = $22,724.

That (the total cost of buying the RSV this way) would more than cover the "projected cost" for the pavilion proposed by P&R for the park.

Thanks to my reader for that feedback.
I hadn’t thought about the last point. Here’s another way to look at it.

The $175,000 of 2011 capital improvement money earmarked by Mayor Coleman for the PBP, combined with the $45,000 he set aside to pay for the RSV using a rent-to-own arrangement, totals $220,000----more than enough to cover the $209,773.04 actual purchase price of the RSV.

Let's face it. Money is all about priorities.
As I see it, these figures provide very interesting insight about the mayor’s priorities. What do you think?