Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
09282022 City Council Spc Mtg LAYDOWN Final Report Rec Center
LAYDOWN for 9/28/2022 City Council Special Meeting � r w ��� Rax"1[61►1 PAGE Executive Summary 3 1. Introduction 17 2. Demographic & Socioeconomic Analysis 20 3. Local Sports/Recreation Program & Facility Inventory 26 4. Interview Summaries: A. Stakeholders 34 B. User Groups 39 5. Comparable Regional Sports & Recreation Facilities 45 6. Community Recreation Survey 60 7. Building Program Recommendations 74 8. Ownership & Operations Analysis 78 9. Operating Pro Forma 90 10. Funding Options Analysis 98 11. Building Project Assessment (EAPC) 103 Appendix - Sample Survey Feedback 116 Please Note. This report relies on a variety of information and assumptions to develop market, financial, and economic projections. Sources of information and assumptions include, but may not be limited to, information provided by the City of Seward, input and opinions provided by relevant third parties, Victus A dvisors'andEAPC's industry experience and previous studies, and publicly available data from various industry sources. Any such information collected by VictusAdvisors or EAPC has not been audited or verified and has been assumed to be correct. There will be differences between actual events and the projections contained herein, and we express no assurances of any kind related to any projected information. Differences between projections and actual events maybe material. \1\ v I C T U S A D V I S O A S EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Project Background - Victus Advisors, and EAPC were engaged by the City of Seward ("Seward" or the "City") in May 2022 to conduct an independent Feasibility Study for a Community Recreation Center. Our primary project goals for this study included, but were not limited to: 1) Identify the market for indoor sports and recreation in Seward, including current and future recreational use, local usage, and regional sports tournament opportunities. 2) Identify the features and amenities that the proposed community recreation center would need to meet the City's needs. 3) Create concept plan visuals and estimate the costs to build and operate the recommended facility. 4) Identify the City's capacity and options for funding a new community recreation center. The flow chart on the right shows a more detailed visualization of our study methodology and approach. Study Methodology - 1. MARKET RESEARCH 2. CONCEPTUAL, OPERATIONAL & FINANCIAL ANALYSIS 3. FINAL REPORT & PRESENTATION OF FINDINGS SECONDARY MARKET PRIMARY RESEARCH & ENGAGEMENT RESEARCH - - Building Program R—mmend.dons Ownesnll-:-,J.ncor;,; Fu-ding Options ;sus .Analysis C?tr.nr.--;..Ildirn=•c: ;9C� Assessme-t �c Fen�a (Sties. Concept Flan&Cost) City of Seward - Seward is part of the Kenai Borough and has a current estimated population of 2,796. Recreation Usage Drive -Time Zone - There is a population of just under 5,200 people within a 40-mile distance of Seward. Kenai Peninsula Borough - The Kenai Peninsula Borough has a current estimated population of 60,240. Its largest cities are Kenai and Homer. Population Data - • Seward and Greater Seward have about 16% of its population under the age of 18, which is lower than the national average, while the Kenai Peninsula Borough is near the national average. An older population can indicate increasing demand for senior programs. • Seward has a similar median age as the United States average. A lower median age tends to represent a large presence of young families and working -age populations, which can be a positive indicator for family recreation demand. • Seward, Greater Seward, and the Kenai Peninsula Borough's projected population growth rate is lower than the U.S. national average. Population growth can be an indicator of future recreational demand growth. Household Data - • Seward, Greater Seward, and the Kenai Peninsula Borough have lower percentages of households with children than the national average. A lower percentage of households with children can be an indicator for potential senior program demand in the region. • When adjusted for cost of living, the median household income in Seward is higher than the U.S. median income. Higher household income levels can often indicate an ability for a household to spend disposable income on recreational programs. 5 Local Sports Program Inventory - The recreation department currently offers four (4) youth and adult programs for volleyball, basketball, and archery: Program Competitive Volleyball League Recreational Volleyball League Urbach's Youth Basketball Youth Archery Individual Fee Team Fee - $225 - $180 $40 - $20 - Parks & Recreation Indoor Program Fees - The department currently does not offer the senior programming, aquatic programming, and adaptive programming that they would like to offer, in large part because of a lack of indoor recreational space. According to staff, the department used to offer more indoor recreation programs, but many have been cut over the last three (3) years. Additional Recreation & Community Program Facilities - • It should also be noted that the City owns a building at 336 3rd Avenue that is utilized by private non -profits to operate (under agreement with the City) the Seward Youth Center and the Seward Senior Center. • Not only are the spaces within this building too small for the Youth Center and Senior Center to accommodate the existing demand in the community for their programs, but the building also is in need of update and repair. • For example, the Boys & Girls Club of Seward (which operates the Seward Youth Center) indicated that they could increase their after -school programs from the current 30 kids to as many as 100 kids if they had more program space, access to an indoor gymnasium on -site, and other such amenities that could be available in a new community recreation center. Local Indoor Sports Facilities - Victus Advisors compiled the list In addition, numerous interview respondents cited a lack of below of local indoor sports facilities that have been frequently I indoor recreation space for senior citizens during the winter utilized by local stakeholders and user groups in Seward. These months, in particular the need for a walking track and/or facilities have been utilized for various local practices, games and I additional indoor gym space for them to safely exercise. other activities. , Facilities 1 AVT EC Gym 2 Seward Cruise Ship Terminal 3 Seward High School 4 Seward Middle School Stakeholder Interviews - In May 2022, the City of Seward identified participants and scheduled a series of in -person, virtual, and telephone interviews for Victus Advisors. The goal of these interviews was to gather feedback from key stakeholders and community leaders regarding the market potential for a new community recreation center in Seward. Victus Advisors conducted in -person, virtual, and telephone interviews with representatives from 20 stakeholder groups. Key Interview Takeaways - • All interviewees agreed that there are limited indoor spaces for recreational activities, as well as other events such as banquets and weddings requiring a capacity over 80 people. • Demand for more indoor space has been driven by middle and high school parents asking for more indoor opportunities and activities for youth during the winter months. • Interviewees also indicated that there is no indoor space for senior residents to get exercise, in particular walking, during the colder months and poor weather periods. • Generally speaking, interviewees were supportive of a new community recreation center. They commonly cited the lack of current indoor space and the potential benefits such as improved quality of life, providing safe and diverse opportunities and activities for both youth and seniors, and creating a community gathering place. The majority also suggested that the facility be multi -use to appeal to a wide variety of user groups of all ages and interests, given the nature of Seward's smaller -sized community. User Group Interviews - In May 2022, Victus Advisors also conducted phone interviews with local and regional community and sports groups that could potentially use a new community recreation center in Seward. Victus Advisors conducted telephone interviews with representatives from 10 user groups. Summary of User Group Demand - • Non -Sports Users: Several community groups that were interviewed expressed interest in using a new community recreation center in Seward. LikeliP000d Typa Idaal Non -Sports User Groups of Usage of-Y-21.e Amenities Days Times Seasons Bloom (Seward Prevention Coalition) Definitely Use Children's Programrring Flex Space Weekdays Mornings, Afternoons Year -Round HYPER (Seward Prevention Coalition) Definitely Use Children's Programming Flex Space Weekdays Mornings, Afternoons Year -Round Qutekcak Native Tribe Definitely Use Adult & Youth Programming Flex Space, Walking Track Weekdays All Day Year -Round Seward Boys & Girls Club Definitely Use Children's &Youth Programming Flex Space Weekdays Afternoons Year -Round Seward Senior Center Definitely Use Senior Programming Flex Space Walking Track Weekdays Mornings Afternoons Year Round • Potential Sports Users: Sports User Groups' usage ranged from weekday use for games and practices to weekend tournament usage. Likelih®od Type Vdeel Number of Sport User Groups of Usage of Usage # of C®urts/Sheets Days Times Annual Events Sass — Alaska Hockey Association Definitely Use Events 1 Weekends All Day 1 Spring Alaska USA Wrestling Possibly Use Events 1 Weekends All Day 1 Spring Dr. D's Basketball Definitely Use Camps, Leagues 2 Weekdays Evenings - Year -Round Kenai Peninsula Hockey Association Definitely Use Events 1 Weekends All Day 1 Spring Marathon Volleyball Club Definitely Use Practices, Games, Events 4 Weekdays, Weekends All Day 2 Winter, Spring Marathon Wrestling Club Definitely Use Practices, Games, Events 2 Weekdays, Weekends All Day 2 Winter, Spring Seward High School Swimming Definitely Use Events - Weekends All Day 1 Spring Seward High School Track & Field Definitely Use Practices - Weekdays Evenings - Winter, Spring Tsunami Swim Club Definitely Use Practices, Games, Events - Weekdays, Weekends All Day 2 Winter, Spring USA Hockey Padfic Definitely Use Events 1 Weekends All Day 3 Spring 7 Regional Indoor Sports Facilities - Victus Advisors compiled the list below of local indoor sports facilities that have been visited or utilized by interviewees and survey respondents. Many of these facilities have been utilized for both local practices/games and regional tournament activities. Driving Distance from Seward FacHities (Mules) 1 Soldotna Regional Sports Complex 95 2 Kenai Recreation Center 104 3 Nikiski Community Recreation Center 116 4 O'Malley Sports Complex 119 5 The Dome 123 6 South Peninsula Athletic & Recreation Center (SPARC) 167 7 Curtis D. Menard Memorial Sports Center 171 Facility Operator Feedback- • One facility operator indicated that pickleball has been growing both regionally and nationally. To keep up with growth, they recommend having the ability to put down multiple pickleball courts in the proposed community recreation center in Seward. • Another facility operator wishes their facility had a full-sized indoor turf field. They lost an opportunity to host state soccer tournaments due to the lack of the right field. • Facility operators suggested having a seasonal ice sheet as part of the community recreation center. They felt that ice opportunities are less between March and July and that window could be used for graduations, expos, trade shows, etc. Regional Indoor Sports Facility Inventory - As shown below no facility had all three (3) cited amenities. Furthermore, only one (1) of the facilities profiled had more than one (1) basketball court/multi-use floor, ice sheet, or indoor turf field. Lastly, four (4) of the seven (7) profiled facilities are owned and operated by the public sector. Basketball Ice indoor Location Owner/Operator Court Sheet Turf Curtis D. Menard Memorial Sports Center Wasilla City of Wasilla - 1 1 The Dome Anchorage Private - - 1 Kenai Recreation Center Kenai City of Kenai 1 - - Nikiski Community Recreation Center Nikiski North Peninsula Recreation Service Area 1 - - O'Malley Sports Complex Anchorage Private 4 2 - Soldotna Regional Sports Complex Soldotna City of Soldotna - 1 - South Peninsula Athletic & Recreation Center (SPARC) Homer Private 1 Regional Indoor Sports Facility Costs - As shown below, Victus Advisors utilized the Turner Construction Index to adjust the actual construction costs for each venue to estimate their 2022 equivalent construction costs. Construction costs for the comparable facilities reviewed in this section range between $661,000 and $41.7 million in estimated 2022 construction dollars. Actual Est. 2022 Est. 2022 Year Square Construction Construction Construction Facility city Built Feet Cost Cost Cost Per S . Ft. $263 Curtis D. Menard Memorial Sports Center Wasilla 2004 102,000 $14,000,000 $26,824,427 Soldotna Regional Sports Complex Soldotna 1983 53,000 $10,000,000 $41,694,352 $787 SPARC Homer 2017 12,000 $550,000 $661,159 $55 MEDIAN 77.500 $11.000.000 $22.229.544 1 $1801 Overview - In addition to one-on-one, in -person, and telephone interviews in May and June 2022, Victus Advisors also conducted online surveys with 681 respondents. Based on the current estimated population of 5,186 people in the Greater Seward community, questions with 681 responses have a margin of error of +/- 3.5%* with a 95% confidence interval. The survey link was distributed by the City via their email, digital, online, and social media channels. Respondent Profile - • 54% reside within City of Seward limits • 46% live outside of City limits ("Greater Seward") • 83% between the ages of 25 and 64 (50% age 25 to 44, 33% age 45 to 64) • 45% live in a household with children under 18 • 83% live in a household where someone has been involved in recreational programs in Seward, whether public (operated by Seward Parks and Recreation) or private programs Key Survey Takeaways - • Overall ratings of the indoor recreation opportunities in Seward were very negative, with all factors receiving Bottom-3 Box scores of at least 40%. • Desired programs that were not available in Seward included soccer, walking programs, and aerobics classes. • 48% of respondents indicated that they travel outside of Seward for indoor recreational activities. 17% indicated they travel at least once a month. • The facilities most frequented outside of Seward were fairly fragmented, with no facility receiving more than 17% of the responses. • Basketball, Swimming, and Volleyball were identified as the three most established indoor sports in Seward. • Bowling, Ice Hockey, and Indoor Track were identified as the three sports in Seward with the most emerging potential. • Prior to any discussion of potential construction costs or funding sources, 79% of respondents support the idea of the City of Seward building a new indoor community recreation center. • Indoor running/walking track, Youth sports programs, and Gym space were the three highest ranked priorities for desired amenities at a new indoor community recreation center, based upon average rank. E Recommended Building Priorities - Our building program recommendations are based primarily upon Victus' research and engagement results. We have identified that community demand exists for a community indoor recreational facility in Seward. Priority I - • Gymnasium (two basketball courts convertible to four volleyball; multi -use for wrestling, pickleball, larger flat -floor events, banquets, weddings, gatherings for 80+ people, etc.) • Indoor Walking/Jogging Track • Multi -use programming space (youth programs, adult programs, senior programs, meeting space, etc.) • Other potential amenities: Bathroom/changing rooms, childcare for facility users, concessions stand or vending machine area, office/administrative and storage space for Seward Parks & Recreation, and on -site parking to meet peak demand. Priority 11- 0 Indoor artificial turf field Priority I II - • Ice sheet • Pool Building Program Recommendations - • Gymnasium: Victus identified demand for a large, multi -use gymnasium that can hold at least two (2) full-sized basketball courts convertible to 2x volleyball courts per basketball court. These column -free, hardwood or composite surfaces could also be used for wrestling, pickleball, dance, and non -sports events such as banquets, weddings, etc. • Other Indoor Amenities: Victus also identified demand for additional indoor amenities such as an elevated indoor track (typically above the gym/court space); multi -purpose rooms that could be used for workout classes, community meetings, adult education, etc; and community program space for established groups like senior programs and youth/teen programs that are in need of expanded facilities. • Other Features: Support areas and amenities should also include changing rooms, childcare, a concessions stand and/or vending machine area, office/administrative and storage space, and substantial on -site parking. These areas and amenities should be easily accessible for both participants and operators. Key Takeaways - Priorities I & II are relatively more affordable to build and operate on a per -square foot basis than Priority III amenities. In addition, Priorities I & II would be expected to maximize annual utilization per square foot relative to Priority III features. 10 Overview - The purpose of this section is to present an overview of various options regarding the ownership and operations of the proposed new community recreation center in Seward. Summary of Ownership & Management Options - • Public Ownership & Management: If the facility is owned by the public sector (e.g. the City), public management is typically the best option to ensure increased public access at affordable rates. Any long-term working capital and capital maintenance needs can also typically be built into larger governmental budgets on an annual basis. For a community the size of Seward, the public ownership and operations model is the most common for a community recreation center, however this option would require the City to hire and train additional staff. • Public Ownership & Private Management: The public sector (if owner) could also contract with an experienced third -party management firm. Such a firm would bring specialized expertise in the recreation industry, and would not require the City (or a public agency) to ramp up its staffing. That said, annual management fees for a third -party operator would be an additional annual financial burden on the public sector, in addition to the City subsidizing the annual operations and long- term capital needs. Summary of Ownership & Management Options (Cont.Y • Public Ownership & Tenant Operations: Another potential operator could be a local sports club. The tenant sports club is responsible for most operational expenses including maintenance and staffing. The government, however, is often responsible for long-term capital maintenance. The biggest downside to this option is that a local sports group is likely to focus primarily on their own programs. • Private Ownership & Private Management: In this scenario, the private facility owner would be responsible for either hiring their own staff or contracting with a third -party management firm, however a private (for profit) facility is unlikely in Seward due to the small population base. 11 Overview - Victus has developed usage and financial projections for the following amenities and features, as shown in the Building Program Recommendations section of this report: • Indoor gym space with at least two (2) full-sized basketball courts convertible to 2x volleyball courts per basketball court. These column -free, hardwood or composite surfaces could also be used for wrestling, pickleball, dance, and non -sports events such as banquets, weddings, etc. • Additional indoor sports amenities such as an elevated indoor track (typically above the gym/court space), dedicated space for the existing youth programs and senior programs in the Seward community, and multi -purpose rooms that could be used for workout classes, community meetings, adult education, etc. • Ideally, support areas and amenities should at least include changing rooms, childcare, concessions stand, office/administrative space, storage, and parking. Financial Pro Forma: Stabilized Year of Operations (Year 3) - In a stabilized year of operations, it is estimated that the operations of a new community recreation center in Seward could operate at an approximate 43% cost recovery. Stabilized Operating Revenues: Year Facility Daily Admission $91,300 Facility Monthly Membership $82,500 Rental Income (Gym, Classrooms, etc.) $69,200 Recreation Programming (Leagues, Camps, Classes) $44,400 Concessions (Net) $18,800 Advertising & Sponsorship $10,000 Other $10,000 Total Revenues: $326,200 Operating Expenses: Salaries, Wages, & Benefits $421,000 Program Expenses $42,000 Utilities $88,000 Advertising, Marketing, & Promotion $25,000 General, Administrative, & Other $75,000 Maintenance/Repair $50,000 Materials/Supplies $50,000 Total Expenses: $751,000 OPERATING INCOME LOSS $424,800 ESTIMATED COST RECOVERY 43% It should also be noted that this pro forma does not include rent cost savings that would come from the City no longer needing to rent AVTEC for local recreation use. If you apply those savings (estimated at approximately $80,000 per year) to the projected annual operating deficit shown at right, it reduces the annual deficit to approximately $344,800 (and increases to 54% cost recovery). Overview - Given the small population size of both the City of Seward and Greater Seward, it is unlikely that a private, for -profit entity would build and operate a new community recreation center in Seward. As a result, there are likely only two viable funding options in Seward: 1) Public Funding 2) Private Non -Profit Fundraising Public Funding Options- • Property Taxes (Real & Personal): Given that this could be perceived as a tax increase on local residents, passing such a bond referendum via public election may be difficult. • Sales Tax: Within Seward, the City collects a sales tax rate of 4.0% and the Kenai Peninsula Borough assesses a rate of 3.0%, for a total combined rate of 7.0%. This is already one of the highest local tax rates in Alaska, with only Homer and Seldovia having higher combined local sales tax rates. • Bed Tax: The City could consider a ballot initiative to increase the bed tax within Seward city limits, with the express purpose of funding construction of a new community recreation center. Given that Seward's bed tax is currently among the lowest for communities in Alaska that have such a tax, and since this ballot measure could be perceived by local residents as using summer visitor taxes to provide year-round community amenities for local residents, it is likely that such a measure would have a better chance of passing than would a property tax measure. Private/Non-Profit Fundraising - Private sector corporations, charitable foundations, or wealthy individuals often make significant up -front financial commitments that can be used to fund recreation center construction costs, typically in exchange for naming rights to the building or other donor recognition opportunities within the facility. Frequently, these financial commitments are contractually obligated to be paid over a multi- year term, and these contractual revenue streams can be capitalized for the purpose of funding project construction costs. A significant additional incentive for donors would be if their contribution could be classified as a tax-deductible charitable donation. Even in a scenario where the City of Seward is the primary funder of construction costs for a new community recreation center, it is recommended that private donations (potentially via a naming rights and donor recognition program) also be considered as a potential funding source that could be used to offset the amount of public debt required and/or help support ongoing operational costs. Private donation campaigns are often conducted in conjunction with community plans to construct a new recreation center. Often the building naming rights are granted to the largest donation, which is typically announced as the lead gift to the campaign. In some cases, the lead/naming gift will also be structured as a "matching gift" that is paid once the general fundraising campaign reaches a pre -determined goal. 13 Overview - Victus Advisors engaged EAPC to develop concept plans for the proposed indoor community recreation center in Seward, in accordance with our recommended Priority I program, as presented in Section 7 of this report. EAPC's building project assessment included a Facility Concept Plan, Preliminary Space & Square Footage Program, Site Test Fits for Three (3) Sites, and a Preliminary Construction Cost Estimate. Preliminary Space Program - EAPC's initial concept plans have a total conceptual indoor building size of 36,785 to 38,575 gross square feet, depending on whether the daycare space is just designed for drop -in care or if a full daily daycare space is built out. Construction Cost Estimate - EAPC preliminarily estimates a recreation center building cost ranging from $16.3 to $18.5 million: Site Analysis - Victus Advisors and EAPC reviewed a preliminary list of potential sites provided by the City of Seward's Community Development department. We narrowed this list down to the following three (3) potential sites that are: a) large enough in terms of both acreage and shape to accommodate the recommended program, and b) wouldn't require displacing other existing recreational infrastructure. • North Fort Raymond Site - 2101 & 2109 Dimond Blvd • State DOT Site - 408 & 412 B St • UAF Rae Building Site - 125 Third Ave & 109 Washington St Ultimately, our primary recommended site is the North Fort Raymond Site, for the following reasons: • It has the largest flat/developable acreage of the three sites, FSTI MATE $ 16,341,517.50 $ 18,476,1706,25 which provides the most room for accommodating not only the ..,,i i.. Range S 16,11.1,83i7.00 $ 18,197,756.25 recommended Priority I program but also potential future expansion. The larger site also would better accommodate 2 Square Foot cost Rani y 400.00 " t, $ 42S.00 maximum parking demand. 3 1pnstroctionCost `° $ 16,394,3737,394,5.5.110 00 • The location of the site is north of downtown, closer to the High $ 1 I schools, and therefore more convenient to the majority of the 4 FFE Low 2.50% 5 367,850.00 High 300% $ 491,S31-25 City's residential population as well as potential users from 5 Fees Low 7% $ 1,,980.00 I Greater Seward. High 8% $ 1,111311,550-00 • Of the three sites, it is the only one that is City —owned and B.11—atian Center Support Facility Range $ 229,587.50 $ 279,250.00 1 Square Footage 2 Square Foul Cost Range tow 1,750 SF 125.00 therefore would not incur property acquisition costs. $ High $ 150.00 3 Constcwctlon Cost Low $ 218,750,00 High S 262.500.00 4 Fees low 5% $ 10,937 so High 6% $ 15,750.0[1 C. Estirnate Nartative This esinnate utIlLes a "v.1trire foot" cost bans. Rather this estimate is based upon a recent pre, ions prcI t t. 1,, P . �..I - mard for M cunstracdc ,aeons from today utilrzmg- 6' .::,r year, [T ��: a, .. _ .. , - ....., wnst—t- ,ost.des of.m adddi.-I 15%. 14 PRELIMINARY CONCEPT PLAN: FIRST FLOOR `CANOPY CANOPY ROOF V I C T U S ROOF YOUTH �LASSRQONI .. MUILTI PURPOSE r CANOPY SEWARD COMMUNITY RECREATION CENTER SEWARD, ALASKA 1 J =tom Sheet A102 -CONCEPT PLAN 2Nn F1 OOH Oat. DM1/22 EAPC Project Number' "Wow NORTH \1\ v I C T A D V I 5 0 U S 1. INTRODUCTION A 5 i "'' I Victus Advisors, and EAPC were engaged by the City of Seward ("Seward" or the "City") in May 2022 to conduct an independent Feasibility Study for a Community Recreation Center. Our primary project goals for this study included, but were not limited to: 1) Identify the market for indoor sports and recreation in Seward, including current and future recreational use, local usage, and regional sports tournament opportunities. 2) Identify the features and amenities that the proposed community recreation center would need to meet the City's needs. 3) Create concept plan visuals and estimate the costs to build and operate the recommended facility. 4) Identify the City's capacity and options for funding a new community recreation center. The flow chart on the next page shows a more detailed visualization of our study methodology and approach. SECONDARY MARKET RESEARCH 1. MARKET RESEARCH L&I 2. CONCEPTUAL, OPERATIONAL & FINANCIAL ANALYSIS Ca; 3. FINAL REPORT & PRESENTATION OF FINDINGS Ownership & Operations Analysis Operating Pro Forma -J FRO ARY RESEARCHES Funding Options Analysis Building Project Assessment (Sites, Concept Plan & Cost) ENGAGEMENT 2. DEMOGRAPHIC & SOCIOECONOMIC V A D I S O A S V I T U S ANALYSIS Seward (shown at left) is part of the Kenai Borough and has a current estimated population of 2,796. Source: Esri 21 40 Miles: 5,186 M Source: Esri W Based upon Victus Advisors' experience, primary attendance for public recreation centers in smaller and rural communities (typically in the late afternoons and evenings) is usually drawn from within a 40- mile driving distance. There is a population of just under 5,200 people within a 40-mile distance of Seward. Going forward in the report, this area will be referred to as "Greater Seward". 22 The Kenai Peninsula Borough has a current estimated population of 60,240. Its largest cities are Kenai and Homer. Source: Esri 23 Greater - -r Seward Seward Peninsula Alaska States� Population 2,796 5,186 60,240 752,044 333,934,112 Population Under 18 440 868 12,567 179,156 72,620,219 Percentage of Population Under 18 15.7% 16.7% 20.9% 23.8% 21.7% Population Growth: Annual Pop. Growth (2000 to 2021) -0.1 % 0.3% 0.9% 0.9% 0.8% Annual Pop. Growth (5-year Projection) 0.3% 0.3% 0.5% 0.2% 0.7% Projected Population 2026 2,834 5,260 61,636 761,252 345,887,495 Median Age 39.5 42 42.6 35.7 38.8 Source: Esri Note: "Greater Seward"includes the communities of Lowell Point, Bear Creek, and Moose Pass Seward and Greater Seward have about 16% of its population under the age of 18, which is lower than the national average, while the Kenai Peninsula Borough is near the national average. An older population can indicate increasing demand for senior programs. Seward has a similar median age as the United States average. A lower median age tends to represent a large presence of young families and working -age populations, which can be a positive indicator for family recreation demand. Seward, Greater Seward, and the Kenai Peninsula Borough's projected population growth rate is lower than the U.S. national average. Population growth can be an indicator of future recreational demand growth. 24 Source: Esr/ Sources: Esr/, Sperling Notes: (1) Adjusted for cost of l/Ong according to Sperling (2) Greater Seward" includes the communities of L owell Point, Bear Creek, and Moose Pass Seward, Greater Seward, and the Kenai Peninsula Borough have lower percentages of households with children than the national average. A lower percentage of households with children can be an indicator for potential senior program demand in the region. When adjusted for cost of living, the median household income in Seward is higher than the U.S. median income. Higher household income levels can often indicate an ability for a household to spend disposable income on recreational programs. 25 °NNNII /h MORW cs 3. LOCAL SPORTS/RECREATION PROGRAM viTu ADVISORS & FACILITY INVENTORY Program Operator Facilities Used Amenities Used Competitive Volleyball League Seward Parks & Recreation Seward Middle School Court Space Dr. D's Basketball Private Seward Middle/High School, AVTEC Gym Court Space Marathon Volleyball Club Private Ephraim Middle/Elementary School Court Space Marathon Wrestling Club Private Seward Middle/High School Court Space Recreational Volleball League Seward Parks & Recreation Seward Middle School Court Space Tsunami Swim Club Private Seward High School Pool Urbach's Youth Basketball League Seward Parks & Recreation AVTEC Gym Court Space Youth Archery Seward Parks & Recreation Seward Cruise Ship Terminal Open Space Sources: VIctus research, City of Seward Note: Sorted by Program in alphabetical order LOCAL SPORTS PROGRAM INVENTORY NOTES Victus summarized current indoor youth and amateur sports programs offered in Seward as shown above. The recreation department currently offers four (4) youth and adult programs for volleyball, basketball, and archery, as shown on the next page. 27 Program Competitive Volleyball League Recreational Volleyball League Urbach's Youth Basketball Youth Archery Individual Fee Source: Seward Parks and Recreation $40 $20 Note: Sorted by Program in alphabetical order Team Fee $225 $180 As shown to the left, the Seward Parks and Recreation department currently offers four (4) recreational programs for youth and adults. The department currently does not offer the senior programming, aquatic programming, and adaptive programming that they would like to offer, in large part because of a lack of indoor recreational space. According to staff, the department used to offer more indoor recreation programs, but many have been cut over the last three (3) years. -o o- Safeway 19 Seward Boat Harbor 1 0 Seward Alaska SeaLife Center10 Source: Google Maps Notes: (1) Facilities in alphabetical order (2) This list is does not include indoor spaces used for weightlifting, fitness, and CrossFitprograms. Facilities 1 AVTEC Gym 2 Seward Cruise Ship Terminal 3 Seward High School 4 Seward Middle School Victus Advisors compiled the list above of local indoor sports facilities that have been frequently utilized by local stakeholders and user groups in Seward. These facilities have been utilized for various local practices, games and other activities. 29 1) AVTEC GYM • Owner/Operator: State of Alaska • Features: 0 1 full-sized basketball court 0 1 racquetball court 0 Weight/cardio room • Sample Programming: Urbach's Youth Basketball League, Dr. D's Basketball training and clinics • Seward Resident Membership Rates: o Daily Child (5 and under): Free; Daily Youth (6-17 years old): $5; Daily Adult (18-64 years old): $8; Daily Senior (65+ years): $5 o Annual Child (5 and under): Free; Annual Youth (6-17 years old): $50; Annual Adult (18-64 years old): $100; Annual Family: $350 • Additional Notes: The AVTEC Gym is only available Thursday through Saturday for Seward residents via the Parks & Recreation department. 2) SEWARD CRUISE SHIP TERMINAL • Owner/Operator: Alaska Railroad • Features: 0 Multi -purpose floor with a capacity of 1,675 for standing room events • Sample Programming: Youth archery, banquets, meetings, etc. • Additional Notes: The facility will be demolished and replaced with a new facility. 3n 3) SEWARD HIGH SCHOOL POOL • Owner/Operator: Kenai Peninsula Borough School District • Features: 0 1 full-sized basketball court 0 1 lap pool • Sample Programming: Parks and recreation programs, Open swim, high school athletics, Tsunami Swim Club, Marathon Volleyball Club, Marathon Wrestling Club, Dr. D's Basketball • Rental Rates: The school district does not charge outside groups if youth are involved in the programs. • Pool Admission Rates: 0 Daily Adult: $6; Daily Youth/Senior: $5 0 10 Swim Punch Card (Adult): $55; 12 Swim Punch Card (Youth/Senior): $55 4) SEWARD MIDDLE SCHOOL GYM • Owner/Operator: Kenai Peninsula Borough School District • Features: 0 1 full-sized basketball court • Sample Programming: Parks and recreation programs, middle school athletics, Marathon Volleyball Club, Marathon Wrestling Club, Dr. D's Basketball • Rental Rates: The school district does not charge outside groups for the gym if youth are involved in the sports program. 31 Basketball Multi -Purpose Facility Owner Operator Court Floor Pool AVTEC Gym State of Alaska State of Alaska 1 Seward Cruise Ship Terminal Alaska Railroad Alaska Railroad - Seward High School Kenai Peninsula Borough School District Kenai Peninsula Borough School District 1 Seward Middle School Kenai Peninsula Borough School District Kenai Peninsula Borough School District 1 Sources: Victus research, City of Seward Note: Sorted by Facility in alphabetical order LOCAL INDOOR SPORTS FACILITY INVENTORY NOTES Victus summarized current indoor sports facilities in Seward, as shown above. Overall, there are limited indoor sports facility offerings in Seward that are accessible to the general public. 32 It should also be noted that the City owns a building at 336 3rd Avenue that is utilized by private non- profits to operate (under agreement with the City) the Seward Youth Center and the Seward Senior Center. Not only are the spaces within this building too small for the Youth Center and Senior Center to accommodate the existing demand in the community for their programs, but the building also is in need of update and repair. For example, the Boys & Girls Club of Seward (which operates the Seward Youth Center) indicated that they could increase their after -school programs from the current 30 kids to as many as 100 kids if they had more program space, access to an indoor gymnasium on -site, and other such amenities that could be available in a new community recreation center. In addition, numerous interview respondents (as noted in the next section of this report) cited a lack of indoor recreation space for senior citizens during the winter months, in particular the need for a walking track and/or additional indoor gym space for them to safely exercise. 33 \1\ V I C T U S A D V I S O A S 1. INTERVIEW SUMMARIES: A. STAKEHOLDERS In May 2022, the City of Seward identified participants and scheduled a series of in -person, virtual, and telephone interviews for Victus Advisors. The goal of these interviews was to gather feedback from key stakeholders and community leaders regarding the market potential for a new community recreation center in Seward. The set of topics and questions included perceptions of Seward's current indoor sports facility offerings, possible comparable venues, and other feedback concerning the proposed venue. INTERVIEWS - Victus Advisors conducted in -person, virtual, and telephone interviews with representatives from the following 20 stakeholder groups (in alphabetical order): • Alaska Vocational Technical Center (AVTEC) • Bloom • Boys & Girls Clubs of the Kenai Peninsula • City of Seward, City Manager's Office • City of Seward, Community Development • City of Seward, Parks & Recreation • City of Seward, Mayor's Office • Happy Youth Programs + Educational Resources • Kenai Fjords National Park • Kenai Peninsula Economic Development District • Kenai Peninsula Borough Assembly • Major Marine Tours • Qutekcak Native Tribe • Seward Boys & Girls Club • Seward Chamber of Commerce • Seward Community Foundation • Seward Community Health Center • Seward Prevention Coalition • Seward Providence Medical Center • Seward Senior Center 35 PERCEPTIONS OF CURRENT INDOOR RECREATIONAL FACILITIES IN SEWARD • All interviewees agreed that there are limited indoor spaces for recreational activities, as well as other events such as banquets and weddings requiring a capacity over 80 people. • Demand for more indoor space has been driven by middle and high school parents asking for more indoor opportunities and activities for youth during the winter months. • Interviewees also indicated that there is no indoor space for senior residents to get exercise, in particular walking, during the colder months and poor weather periods. • The following indoor facilities were commonly cited as spaces used by local Seward residences: o 5th Avenue Fitness o Apex Gym o AVTEC Gym o Seward Cruise Ship Terminal • The AVTEC Gym is only available Thursday through Saturday for Seward residents via the Parks & Recreation department while the Seward Cruise Ship Terminal is occasionally available for some sports activity and other events October through April. The Seward High School pool as been used by local residents and the Tsunami Swim Club, but access for non -school groups is very limited. COMPARABLE FACILITIES • The following indoor facilities were commonly cited as venues that could be beneficial in Seward: o Curtis D. Menard Memorial Sports Center (Wasilla) o The Dome (Anchorage) o Kenai Recreation Center (Kenai) o Nikiski Community Recreation Center (Nikiski) o Soldotna Regional Sports Complex (Soldotna) o South Peninsula Athletic & Recreation Center or "SPARC" (Homer) IDEAL FEATURES AND AMENITIES FOR A NEW COMMUNITY RECREATION CENTER • Nearly all interviewees stated that the proposed venue should be multi -use and ensure open access for all residents. • The most frequent amenities requested by interviewees included: o Indoor walking track o Multi -purpose gym/floor for basketball, volleyball, wrestling, etc. and other events such as banquets and weddings o Multi -purpose rooms that can be used for classes, dance studios, etc. o Indoor ice rink 37 SUPPORT FOR A NEW COMMUNITY RECREATION CENTER • Generally speaking, interviewees were supportive of a new community recreation center. They commonly cited the lack of current indoor space and the potential benefits such as improved quality of life, providing safe and diverse opportunities and activities for both youth and seniors, and creating a community gathering place. The majority also suggested that the facility be multi -use to appeal to a wide variety of user groups of all ages and interests, given the nature of Seward's smaller -sized community. • While there was support for the need and development of the community recreation center, there were a lot of questions and concerns about how the proposed venue would be funded and financially operated/sustainable. Many interviewees indicated that the community is in the midst of a severe housing crisis in addition to a labor shortage. As a result, some interviewees felt that public funding of such a project might not be feasible. Another interviewee stated that the City of Seward has other capital project priorities like the fire station and public works building that could take precedent before funding a community recreation center. • In terms of operating the facility, a few interviewees felt that the Parks and Recreation department could operate the proposed venue. Others suggested that a non-profit organization would be better suited to operate the facility. 3R \1\ V I C T U S A D V I S O A S 1. INTERVIEW SUMMARIES: B. USER GROUPS In May 2022, Victus Advisors also conducted phone interviews with local and regional community and sports groups that could potentially use a new community recreation center in Seward. INTERVIEWS - Victus Advisors conducted telephone interviews with representatives from the following 10 user groups (in alphabetical order): • Alaska Hockey Association • Alaska USA Wrestling • Dr. D's Basketball • Kenai Peninsula Hockey Association • Marathon Volleyball Club • Marathon Wrestling Club • Seward High School Swimming • Seward High School Track & Field • Tsunami Swim Club • USA Hockey Pacific 4n SPORTS DEMAND FOR A NEW COMMUNITY RECREATION CENTER • Basketball: The interviewee stated that it is very challenging to get court time/space in Seward. They have used both Seward Middle School and Seward High School, but school -related programs get scheduling priority. Their group also uses the AVTEC gym when it is available through the Seward Parks and Recreation department, but that time is limited. • Hockey: Although no current local hockey association exists in Seward, there has been some push by local advocates of the sport. Regional hockey groups indicated that Seward could be a great location to host local, regional, and even state tournaments. They also mentioned that hockey groups want to travel to new locations, and Seward would fit within the current rotation of venues. There is optimism that the ice hockey community in Seward could grow with an ice rink, but one interviewee feels that the necessary population base isn't there yet. • Swimming: The Tsunami Swim Club uses the Seward High School swimming pool about 20 hours a week for practices between November and May. That being said, the club is limited with usage the rest of the year, and they could expand their programming with access to another pool. Popularity and interest in the sport and club has increased significantly in light of local resident Lydia Jacob's recent Summer Olympics success. 41 SPORTS DEMAND FOR A NEW COMMUNITY RECREATION CENTER (CONT.) • Track & Field: The Seward High School team has limited access to their outdoor track due to the weather. The team trains indoors on padding that is laid on concrete during the winter. • Volleyball: The Marathon Volleyball Club typically practices at Seward Middle School and Seward High School between December and the end of April. Practices at the high school tend to be later at night, because the high school track team has priority for their practices, which is inconvenient for participants and parents. During the pandemic, the club practiced in a large shed when access to the schools were restricted. • Wrestling: The Marathon Wrestling Club uses Seward High School for practices between January and May. The club hasn't struggled as much as other groups for indoor access because one of the club coaches is also a coach for both Seward Middle School and Seward High School. 42 REQUESTED SPORTS AMENITIES FOR A NEW COMMUNITY RECREATION CENTER • All Groups: o Indoor walking track o Concessions stand • Basketball: o Two (2) full-sized basketball courts o Bleachers • Hockey: o One (1) ice sheet o Locker rooms with showers • Swimming: o 25M competition pool and a warmup pool that can also function as a therapy pool • Volleyball: o Four (4) volleyball courts laid over two (2) basketball courts o Bleachers • Wrestling: o Floor space capable of holding up to four (4) wrestling mats 43 Likelihood Type Ideal Non -Sports User Groups of Usage of Usage Amenities Days Times Seasons Bloom (Seward Prevention Coalition) Definitely Use Children's Programming Flex Space Weekdays Mornings, Afternoons Year -Round HYPER (Seward Prevention Coalition) Definitely Use Children's Programming Flex Space Weekdays Mornings, Afternoons Year -Round Qutekcak Native Tribe Definitely Use Adult & Youth Programming Flex Space, Walking Track Weekdays All Day Year -Round Seward Boys & Girls Club Definitely Use Children's & Youth Programming Flex Space Weekdays Afternoons Year -Round Seward Senior Center Definitely Use Senior Programming Flex Space, Walking Track Weekdays Mornings, Afternoons Year -Round Source: victus research Notes: Non -Sports User Groups sorted in alphabetical order. This is likely a partial list ofpotential users, based solely on the interviewees contacted by victus Advisors. SUMMARY OF POTENTIAL NON -SPORTS USERS Several community groups that were interviewed expressed interest in using a new community recreation center in Seward. Likelihood Type Ideal Number of Sports User Groups of Usage of Usage # of Courts/Sheets Days Times Annual Events Seasons Alaska Hockey Association Definitely Use Events 1 Weekends All Day 1 Spring Alaska USA Wrestling Possibly Use Events 1 Weekends All Day 1 Spring Dr. D's Basketball Definitely Use Camps, Leagues 2 Weekdays Evenings - Year -Round Kenai Peninsula Hockey Association Definitely Use Events 1 Weekends All Day 1 Spring Marathon Volleyball Club Definitely Use Practices, Games, Events 4 Weekdays, Weekends All Day 2 Winter, Spring Marathon Wrestling Club Definitely Use Practices, Games, Events 2 Weekdays, Weekends All Day 2 Winter, Spring Seward High School Swimming Definitely Use Events - Weekends All Day 1 Spring Seward High School Track & Field Definitely Use Practices - Weekdays Evenings - Winter, Spring Tsunami Swim Club Definitely Use Practices, Games, Events - Weekdays, Weekends All Day 2 Winter, Spring USA Hockey Pacific Definitely Use Events 1 Weekends All Day 3 Spring Source: victus research Notes: (1) Sports User Groups sorted in alphabetical order. (2) This is likely a partial list of potential users, based solely on the interviewees contacted by victus l4awsors. Interest Is based on of an Indoor pool as part of recrea tion center, SUMMARY OF POTENTIAL SPORTS USERS Sports User Groups' usage ranged from weekday use for games and practices to weekend tournament usage. r 5. COMPARABLE REGIONAL SPORTS vicTus A D V I S O A S & RECREATION FACILITIES Willow (J,ieler View U 10 a Alexander \O Palmer Creek Knik•Fairview lark E ©_eqe -Vele & -AChugach Chugach Vold Tyonek Hess State Park National Forest Alyeska Tatitlek Whittier lark I Park `erring Cooper Landing serve Sc,1,a Seward Chenega Anchor Pr Kenai Fjords F � r National Park Kachemak Bay State Park Source: Google Maps Notes: (1) Facilities sorted by Driving Distance from Seward (Miles) in descending order (2) This list is not intended to be comprehensive, but rather a sample of facilities that ha ve been used or are currently used by various groups and individuals that we interviewed Driving Distance from Seward Facilities (Miles) 1 Soldotna Regional Sports Complex 95 2 Kenai Recreation Center 104 3 Nikiski Community Recreation Center 116 4 O'Malley Sports Complex 119 5 The Dome 123 6 South Peninsula Athletic & Recreation Center (SPARC) 167 7 Curtis D. Menard Memorial Sports Center 171 Victus Advisors compiled the list above of local indoor sports facilities that have been visited or utilized by interviewees and survey respondents. Many of these facilities have been utilized for both local practices/games and regional tournament activities. Wasilla • Opened:2004 • Construction Cost: $14M ($26.8M in 2022 dollars*) • Owner/Operator: City of Wasilla • Footprint: 102,000 sq. ft. • Features: 0 1 NHL -sized ice sheet 0 Ice arena has 1,500-seat capacity 0 Partially suspended track 0 Skate shop 0 4 hockey locker rooms EMENARDM SPORTS & EVENTS CENTER 0 Meeting rooms 0 1 indoor soccer turf field 0 Concessions stand • Programming: o The facility receives about 300,000 visitors per year. o The facility hosts hockey practices, games, and events in addition to wrestling meets and boxing events. * Estimated according to the Turner Building Cost Index 47 • Financial Operations: o According to facility staff, the facility typically averages between $800,000-$850,000 in operating revenues against $1.3 million in operating expenses. The facility is subsidized by the city's general fund. RENTALRATES • Ice Arena Rental (July -March): $200-$250 per hour depending on time of day • Ice Arena Hockey Event Rental (July -March): $1,750 per day • Ice Arena Non -Ice Rental: $2,500-$3,500 per day • Turf Arena Rental: $110-$150 per hour depending on time of day • Turf Arena Rental (Event): $2,500-$3,500 per day THL Anchorac,iee A A A • Opened: 2007 W1 yip • Construction Cost: $12M ($17.6M in 2022 dollars*) • Owner/Operator: Private non-profit • Footprint: 180,000 sq. ft. • Features: 0 1 large multi -sport indoor turf and 400-meter track 0 1 pickleball court o Table tennis, basketball hoop, batting cages, and weight training space o Cafe • Programming: 0 Camps, clinics, private rentals, youth and adult leagues for soccer, volleyball, football, etc. 0 20 sports groups lease the facility • Memberships/Admissions: 0 The facility offers daily ($10 per person), monthly ($63 per person), annual ($399 per person), family ($79 monthly; $599 annual) and various corporate memberships. RENTALRATES • Multi -Sport Field: Between $109 and $785 per hour depending on portion (part or full) of field used • 400-meter track: $400 per hour * Estimated according to the Turner Building Cost Index PICKLE BALL BADMINTON TABLE TENNIS DRYUIND TRAINING BATTING CAGES Facility Map FLAG FOOTBALL ULTIMATE FRISBEE BASEBALL OPEN TURF in SOCCER RUGBY WALK JOG RUN SPRINT LONG JUMP a I 1 110 0 0 0000E BOX JUMP LJ STRETCHING YOGA MATS MEDICINE BALLS SQUATRACK FREE WEIGHTS m OLYMPIC WEIGHT 0 THE _ �VIYi� ENTRANCE 5n Kenai • Opened:1984 • Construction Cost: N/A • Owner/Operator: City of Kenai • Features: 0 1 full-sized basketball court 0 2 racquetball courts o Teen center o Weight room and cardio room • Programming: X,-1 K E N A I REC CENTER 0 The facility receives about 25,000 annual visitors 0 Camps, clinics, private rentals, youth and adult leagues for soccer, volleyball, football, etc. • Financial Operations: 0 The facility requires an annual subsidy that is funded by the city's general fund. • Memberships/Admissions: o Drop -in Rates (Full facility access): Free for youth (up to 17 years old); $2.50 for college students; $5 for adults/seniors o Monthly Rates (Full facility access): $25 for college students/seniors; $50 for adults RENTALRATES • Basketball court: $50 per hour; $25 per hour for half court; free for non-profit youth groups Kenai • Opened: 2006 (repurposed elementary school) • Owner/Operator: North Peninsula Recreation Service Area • Features: 0 1 elementary school -sized basketball court 0 Multi -purpose rooms 0 Banquet room 0 Teen center • Programming: 0 The facility offers after -school and summer camp programs. • Financial Operations: 0 The facility requires an annual subsidy that is funded by the service area's special fund via property taxes. 52 Anchorac,iee • Opened: N/A • Construction Cost: N/A • Owner/Operator: Private • Footprint: N/A • F eatures. 0 2 NHL -sized ice sheets, 4 multi -purpose courts 0 Locker rooms 0 Indoor walking/jogging track 0 Indoor trampoline park 0 Restaurant 0 Meeting spaces • Programming: 0 Camps, clinics, private rentals, youth and adult leagues for hockey, volleyball, basketball, etc. 53 Soldotna • Opened:1983 • Construction Cost: $10M ($41.7M in 2022 dollars*) • Owner/Operator: City of Soldotna • Footprint: 53,000 sq. ft. • Features: 0 1 Olympic -sized ice sheet SOLDOTNA City of Solacu-a_ A asks 0 2 racquetball courts 0 Pro shop 0 Community rooms • Programming: o The facility is home to the Kenai River Brown Bears hockey club from the North American Hockey League (NAHL) o Open skate, local hockey programs, etc. • Financial Operations: 0 The facility operates at an approximate 40-50% cost recovery on an annual basis according to city staff. The facility's operations are subsidized by the city's general fund. 54 • Financial Operations: o The facility operates at an approximate 40-50% cost recovery on an annual basis according to city staff. The facility's operations are subsidized by the city's general fund. • Memberships/Admissions: o The facility only offer various drop -in rates for open skate, racquetball, and other activities. RENTALRATES • Ice Rental: $150-$210 per hour depending on time of day and whether or not the ice is cleaned • Full Facility Rental: $2,500 per day 55 w Homer SPAR � • Opened:2017 k'th Pffdrmda AXIM1*10" 6 mCam • Construction Cost: $550,000 ($661,000 in 2022 dollars*) • Funding: $350,000 private fundraising; $200,000 City of Homer • Owner/Operator: Private (Non -Profit) • Footprint: 12,000 sq. ft. • Features: 0 1 multi -use floor • Programming: o The facility promotes itself as a space for soccer, basketball, baseball, volleyball, pickleball, and senior walking. o Programs are offered by the facility operators and private, third -party groups. • Memberships/Admissions: 0 Annual Memberships: Individual ($225); Couples ($350); Family ($475-$565 depending on number of family members) RENTALRATES • Non -Profit Events: $60 per hour • For -Profit Events: $100 per hour * Estimated according to the Turner Building Cost Index • One facility operator indicated that pickleball has been growing both regionally and nationally. To keep up with growth, they recommend having the ability to put down multiple pickleball courts in the proposed community recreation center in Seward. They hand -painted three (3) pickleball courts because of demand. Additionally, they recommended to not have any racquetball courts, suggesting it is a declining sport. • Another facility operator wishes their facility had a full-sized indoor turf field. They lost an opportunity to host state soccer tournaments due to the lack of the right field. • Many facility operators stressed the importance of having enough storage space for program equipment, etc. One facility had to build another storage shed outside their facility. • Facility operators suggested having a seasonal ice sheet as part of the community recreation center. They felt that ice opportunities are less between March and July and that window could be used for graduations, expos, trade shows, etc. • One facility operator stated that building a facility with an air -supported dome instead of a roof can reduce upfront costs, but long-term maintenance and operations will be higher due to snow removal, heating, electrical and other costs, as well as a shorter facility lifespan. 57 Facili Curtis D. Menard Memorial Sports Center The Dome Kenai Recreation Center Nikiski Community Recreation Center O'Malley Sports Complex Soldotna Regional Sports Complex South Peninsula Athletic & Recreation Center (SPARC Sources: VIctus research, facility operators Note: Sorted by Facility in alphabetical order Basketball Ice Indoor Location Owner/Operator Court Sheet Turf Wasilla City of Wasilla - 1 1 Anchorage Private - - 1 Kenai City of Kenai 1 - - Nikiski North Peninsula Recreation Service Area 1 - - Anchorage Private 4 2 - Soldotna City of Soldotna - 1 - Homer Private 1 - - REGIONAL INDOOR SPORTS FACILITY INVENTORY NOTES As shown above no facility had all three (3) cited amenities. Furthermore, only one (1) of the facilities profiled had more than one (1) basketball court/multi-use floor, ice sheet, or indoor turf field. Lastly, four (4) of the seven (7) profiled facilities are owned and operated by the public sector. 58 Year Facility City Built Square Feet Actual Construction Cost Est. 2022 Construction Cost Est. 2022 Construction Cost Per Sa. Ft. Curtis D. Menard Memorial Sports Center Wasilla 2004 102,000 $14,000,000 $26,824,427 $263 Soldotna Regional Sports Complex Soldotna 1983 53,000 $10,000,000 $41,694,352 $787 SPARC Homer 2017 12,000 $550,000 $661,159 $55 The Dome Anchorage 2007 180,000 $12,000,000 $17,634,660 $98 AVERAGE 86,750 $9,137,500 $21,703,650 $301 MEDIAN 77,500 $11,000,000 $22,229,544 $180 Sources: Facility operators, VIctusAdvisors research, Turner Construction Index Notes: (1) Sorted by Facilities in alphabetical order REGIONAL INDOOR SPORTS FACILITY COSTS NOTES As shown above, Victus Advisors utilized the Turner Construction Index to adjust the actual construction costs for each venue to estimate their 2022 equivalent construction costs. Construction costs for the comparable facilities reviewed in this section range between $661,000 and $41.7 million in estimated 2022 construction dollars. Please note: The other facilities highlighted in this section were omitted from this table because their construction costs were not publicly available. 59 \1\ - MMW\, V I C T U S 6. COMMUNITY RECREATION SURVEY A D V I S O A S In addition to one-on-one, in -person and telephone interviews in May and June 2022, Victus Advisors also conducted online surveys with 681 respondents. Based on the current estimated population of 5,186 people in the Greater Seward community, questions with 681 responses have a margin of error of +/- 3.5%* with a 95% confidence interval. The survey link was distributed by the City via their email, digital, online, and social media channels. Respondent profile: • 54% reside within City of Seward limits • 46% live outside of City limits ("Greater Seward") • 83% between the ages of 25 and 64 (50% age 25 to 44, 33% age 45 to 64) • 45% live in a household with children under 18 • 83% live in a household where someone has been involved in recreational programs in Seward, whether public (operated by Seward Parks and Recreation) or private programs *Note: For questions laterin the survey with 523 responses, the margin of error is +/- 4. 06% with a 95% confidence interval. Survey respondents were asked to rate their impressions of indoor recreation opportunities on a 7-point scale, in which "T represents "Very Satisfied" and 'T' represents "Very Dissatisfied". Based on these satisfaction ratings, Victus Advisors has assigned a "Top-2 Box Rating" to each factor that is presented on the following page. Top-2 Box Rating represents the combined scores of "T and "6" given to each factor by respondents, representing the highest levels of satisfaction. 7 6 5 4 3 2 Top-2 Rly Rating (% 7 or 6) Genera/ Top-2 ' � �' • Excellent Box score • Good standards for : 1 1 . 1 satisfaction IA analysis • Average • Below Average Our Top-2 Box methodology is a best -in -class approach to satisfaction measurement. "Please rate your OVERALL IMPRESSIONS of the indoor recreation opporiun/t/es /n the C/ty of Seward on a scale of 7 to 1. where 7 = `Very Sat/sf/ed'and 1= `Very Dissatisfied Oomrritmentfsupport for indoor recreation from local businesses Q ua I ity of i ndoor meeti rq gathering & community evert spaces Quantity of indoor meeting, gathering & community event spaces Quality of indoor sportsirecreation facilities Opportunities for youth to partid pate in a wide va riety of indoor recreation opportunities 13% 11% Quantity of indoor sports/recreation facilities 9% Overall Sat. with indoor recreation opportunities in Seward 9% Opportunities for adults to participate in widevariety of indoor ration 9% opportunities Opportunities for senior citizens to participate in indoor recreation programs and 9% activities Commitment/supportfor indoor recreation from govemment entities 9% 28% 26% 23% I 25% 37% 35% 24% 25% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 10U% Top-2 Box 5,4 - Bottorr-3 Box Notes: (1) Sorted by Top-2 Box score in descending order (2) Base: 582 respondents Overall ratings of the indoor recreation opportunities in Seward were very negative, with all factors receiving Bottom-3 Box scores of at least 40%. "Please indicate the wa ys in which , you or an yone in , your household has been in vo/ved in sports and/or recreation programs in Seward, whether public (Seward Parks & Recreation) or via private/y-owned programs and fac///t/es. " 45%® 40%® 35%® 30%® 25%® 20%® 15%® 10%® 5% 0% 39%® Adult participant (18+) Youth participant (under 18) M Coach, referee, I have not been organizer, or involved in Seward administrator recreation programs Notes: (1) Sorted by Role score in descending order (2) Respondents were allowed to select more than one response (3) Base: 681 respondents 39% of the respondents indicated that their household had an Adult participant involved in recreational programs in Seward, versus 30% for Youth participants. Me , "Which of the fo/%w/ng /s the pr/mary reason why nobody /n ,your household has taken part /n sports/recreat/on programs /n Seward?" 30% 25% 25% 23% 20% 19% 16% 15% 1 1 0 M 14% 10% 5% 0% Was not aware that Desired program not Lack of time I do not live in/near No interest in sports/recreation available in Seward Seward sports/recreation programs were programs available Notes: (1) Sorted by Role score in descending order (2) Reasons shown above were selected by a minimum of 10% of respondents (3) Base: 115 respondents Of those who indicated no prior experience with Seward sports/recreation programs, 25% indicated that they were not aware of available sports/recreational programs in Seward. Desired programs that were not available in Seward included soccer, walking programs, and aerobics classes. "How often do you typically travel outside of the City of Seward to participate in indoor recreational activities ?" 60% 52% 50% I 20% 17% 14% 10% 0% Rarely or Monthly Quarterly Never 8% 8% 0 % 1% Once per Weekly Daily Year Notes: (1) Sorted by frequency score in descending order (2) Base: 559 respondents 48% of respondents indicated that they travel outside of Seward for indoor recreational activities. 17% indicated they travel at least once a month. "When you do travel outside of the City of Seward to participate in indoor recreational activities, which indoor recreation facility do you visit most often ?" 18% 17% 16% 14% 12% 12% 11% 10% 10% 8% 7% 6% 6% 4% 2% 0% The Dome Nikiski O'Malley Sports Soldotna Menard Kenai (Anchorage) Community Complex Regional Sports Memorial Recreation Recreation (Anchorage) Complex Sports Center Center (Kenai) Center (Nikiski) (Soldotna) (Wasilla) Notes: (1) Sorted by Facilities score in descending order (2) Facilities shown above were selected by more than 5% of respondents (3) Base: 314 respondents The facilities most frequented outside of Seward were fairly fragmented, with no facility receiving more than 17% of the responses. An "What are the primary indoor amenities that you (or your fames utilize most frequently at recreation centers outside of Seward?" Ice rink (includes recreational skating, figure skating, ice hockey, etc.) Indoor leisure pool (for families with children) Youth sports programs 7% Indoor running/walking track 7% Flock climbing wall 7% Adult fitness programs and classes 7% Indoor lap pool (for swim teams, personal 6% fitness/training, etc.) Sauna or steam room 6% Meeting/event rooms (e.g. rentals for private events) 5% Adult sports programs 5% Youth after school programs and summer camps 5% 9% 8% 0% 1% 2% 3% 4% 5% 6% 7% 8% 9% 10% Notes: (1) Sorted byAmenities score in descending order (2) Amenities shown above were selected by a minimum of 5% of respondents (3) Base: 472 respondents Like the previous question, the amenities/uses that Seward residents travel outside the City for were also very fragmented, with no amenity/use receiving more than 9% of the responses. "Please select up to two (4 established amateur indoor sports that -you think the Seward sports community has developed most successfully in terms of organized opportunities to learn and play.-" Basketball Swimming & Diving 24% Wrestling 9% 27% 26% 0% 5% 110% 115% 20% 25% 30% Notes: (1) Sorted by Sports score in descending order (2) Sports shown above were selected by a minimum of 5% of respondents (3) Base: 509 respondents Basketball, Swimming, and Volleyball were identified as the three most established indoor sports in Seward. Mi • "'Please select up to two (2) emerging or underserved amateurindoor sports that ,you think have the most potential to be successful in Seward with the addition of anew indoor recreation facility-" Bowling Ice Hockey 13% Indoor Track 11 % Indoor Soccer 3% Swimming & Diving 7% Dance 6% Gymnastics 5% Pickleball 5% Basketball 5% 0% 5% 10% 15% 16% o Notes: (1) Sorted by Sports score in descending order (2) Sports shown above were selected by a minimum of 5% of respondents (3) Base: 523 respondents Bowling, Ice Hockey, and Indoor Track were identified as the three sports in Seward with the most emerging potential. 70 M "Genera//y speaking, do ,you support the Idea of the City of Seward building a new public indoor community recreation center for primary use by Seward area residents and families?" N�t Qi ire No, 10% Base: 523 respondents Prior to any discussion of potential construction costs or funding sources, 79% of respondents support the idea of the City of Seward building a new indoor community recreation center. 71 "'If a new public indoor community recreation center were built in Seward, how would you rank your (or your family's) interest in using the following potential amenities, where 1 is highest?."' Average Rank Amenity/Activity Highest 7.3 Indoor running/walking track Interest 8.2 Youth sports programs AL 8.8 Gym (courts for basketball, volleyball, etc.) 9.2 Indoor field (for soccer, flag football, running/training, etc.) 9.4 Ice rink (for recreational skating, figure skating, ice hockey, etc.) 9.7 Adult fitness programs and classes 10.0 Indoor leisure pool (for families with children) 10.1 Adult education programs and classes 10.2 Adult sports programs 10.2 Rock climbing wall 10.2 Indoor lap pool (for swim teams, personal fitness/training, etc.) 11.1 Meeting/event rooms (e.g. rentals for private events) 11.4 Cardio equipment 11.5 Senior programs 11.5 Sauna or steam room 11.5 Youth after school programs and summer camps 11.9 Strength equipment (Nautilus, Cybex, etc.) 12.3 Weight room (free weights) Lowest 12.4 Racquetball Interest 13.0 Pickleball Base: 523 respondents Indoor running/walking track, Youth sports programs, and Gym space were the three highest ranked priorities for desired amenities at a new indoor community recreation center, based upon average rank. "'If a new public indoor community recreation center were built in Seward, how would you rank your (or your family's) interest in using the following potential amenities?" Amenity/Activity % Top 5 % Bottom 5 Youth sports programs 46% 20% Indoor running/walking track 46% 10% Ice rink (for recreational skating, figure skating, ice hockey, etc.) 37% 24% Gym (courts for basketball, volleyball, etc.) 34% 14% Indoor field (for soccer, flag football, running/training, etc.) 32% 17% Indoor leisure pool (for families with children) 30% 24% Indoor lap pool (for swim teams, personal fitness/training, etc.) 28% 27% Rock climbing wall 26% 24% Youth after school programs and summer camps 26% 38% Adult fitness programs and classes 26% 18% Adult sports programs 24% 20% Adult education programs and classes 22% 18% Sauna or steam room 21 % 33% Meeting/event rooms (e.g. rentals for private events) 20% 27% Senior programs 19% 28% Cardio equipment 15% 25% Strength equipment (Nautilus, Cybex, etc.) 13% 29% Weight room (free weights) 12% 30% Pickleball 12% 39% Racquetball 11 % 33% Note: Sorted by % of respondents who ranked each amenityin their top 5, in descending order. Base: 523 respondents When identifying the amenities with the highest percentage of top 5 rankings, Ice Rink moves up to third. However it should be noted the Ice Rink is the most polarizing of the top 5 desired amenities/activities, as it received more bottom 5 rankings than Youth Sports Programs, Indoor Track, Gym, and Indoor Field. \1\ v I C T U S A D V I S O A S 7. BUILDING PROGRAM RECOMMENDATIONS Our building program recommendations are based primarily upon Victus' research and engagement results presented in the previous pages. We have identified that community demand exists for a community indoor recreational facility in Seward. Please note: a) We have presented levels of priority, assuming that the project may need to be phased based upon available funding (to be explored in the next stage of our study); and, b) We have prioritized amenities/uses that are multi -use and/or appeal to the largest number of users. Priority I • Gymnasium (two basketball courts convertible to four volleyball; multi -use for wrestling, pickleball, larger flat -floor events, banquets, weddings, gatherings for 80+ people, etc.) • Indoor Walking/Jogging Track • Multi -use programming space (youth programs, adult programs, meeting space, etc.) • Other potential amenities: Bathroom/changing rooms ("express lockers"), childcare for facility users, concessions stand or vending machine area, office/administrative and storage space for Seward Parks & Recreation, and on -site parking to meet peak demand. Priority II Indoor artificial turf field Priority III Ice sheet Pool KEY TAKEAWAYS Priorities l & # are relatively more affordable to build and operate on a SF basis than Priority /// amenities. In addition, Priorities l & # would be expected to maximize utilization per SF relative to Priority /// features. 75 • Gymnasium: Victus identified demand for a large, multi -use gymnasium that can hold at least two (2) full-sized basketball courts convertible to 2x volleyball courts per basketball court. These column - free, hardwood or composite surfaces could also be used for wrestling, pickleball, dance, and non - sports events such as banquets, weddings, etc. Rationale: All interviewees agreed that there are limited indoor spaces for recreational activities and other events such as banquets and weddings requiring a capacity over 80 people. • Other Indoor Amenities: Victus also identified demand for additional indoor amenities such as an elevated indoor track (typically above the gym/court space); multi -purpose rooms that could be used for workout classes, community meetings, adult education, etc; and community program space for established groups like senior programs and youth/teen programs that are in need of expanded facilities. Rationale: Interviewees also indicated that there is no indoor space for elderly residents to get exercise, in particular walking, during the colder months and poor weather. • Other Features: Support areas and amenities should also include changing rooms, childcare, a concessions stand and/or vending machine area, office/administrative and storage space, and substantial on -site parking. These areas and amenities should be easily accessible for both participants and operators. Victus recommends that an indoor artificial turf field, an ice sheet, and a new public pool could be considered in future phases of the City's long-term recreational facility development plan. Of these potential future phases, it is estimated that an individual artificial turf field would have the most year-round community use. Our research shows that pools and ice sheets are among the most costly facilities to operate and maintain, due in large part to their specialized/seasonal use, which can require larger annual operating subsidies as well as more frequent capital maintenance than most other community recreation amenities. As a result, our initial phased recommendations for the City of Seward are focused on multi -use indoor recreational amenities to meet demand for the largest number of Greater Seward residents. 77 \1\ V I C T U S 8. OWNERSHIP & OPERATIONS ANALYSIS A D V I S O A S The purpose of this section is to present an overview of various options regarding the ownership and operations of the proposed new community recreation center in Seward. Each management structure for the proposed facility has its own unique advantages and disadvantages, which should be considered when making decisions regarding the management of the venue. The following section provides an overview of each potential facility management structure: • Ownership & Operations Options • Public Operations • Private Contract Management • Tenant Operations • Other (Agency/Bureau, Non -Profit) 79 OWNERSHIP & OPERATIONS COMBINATIONS As a first step, it should be noted that the ownership of the proposed community recreation center will determine what operation options are available. The chart below summarizes the different combinations available for ownership and operation of the proposed new community recreation center in Seward. OWNER Public Private O �_ Q :3 a. w O a) 4-6 CU > •L a If Seward is the ultimate owner of the facility, the City would have the option of public management (typically by municipal employees) or private management by a third -party contractor. Whereas, if the facility is owned by a private party, then public management is not typically an option, as the facility will either be managed by employees/staff of the facility owner or a separately contracted private entity. The following pages detail these different potential operating models from a management perspective. Facil Curtis D. Menard Memorial Sports Center The Dome Kenai Recreation Center Nikiski Community Recreation Center O'Malley Sports Complex Soldotna Regional Sports Complex South Peninsula Athletic & Recreation Center Sources: VIctus research, facility operators Note: Sorted by Facility in alphabetical order Location Owner/Operator Wasilla City of Wasilla Anchorage Private (For -Profit) Kenai City of Kenai Nikiski North Peninsula Recreation Service Area Anchorage Private (For -Profit) Soldotna City of Soldotna SPARC) Homer Private (Non -Profit) OWNERSHIP/OPERATIONS NOTES As shown above four (4) of the seven (7) profiled facilities are owned and operated by the public sector, whereas the other three (3) are privately owned and operated. It should be noted that two (2) of the three (3) privately owned and operated facilities are located in Anchorage, which is the State's most populous city and thus more capable of supporting a for -profit sports/recreation operation. The other private facility (SPARC) is located in Homer, However it is a non-profit facility that is funded primarily by private donors and grants, with additional funds provided by the City. PUBLICLY -OPERATED Publicly -owned facilities have the option of being operated by the public entity that owns the facility or contracting out operations to a private entity, including both for -profit and non-profit groups. Both options have associated advantages and disadvantages. Facility operational control within a government is typically done either by creating a separate department that is responsible for facility management or by designating responsibility to an existing department (such as parks and recreation) within the government. Advantages of public management include owner control, financial support, and sharing of staff and support functions, among other factors. Within this structure, the management's primary responsibility is to the governmental agency and the facility. The ability to combine the purchase of goods and services with other governmental departments provides a distinct advantage in maximizing purchasing power and rate structures. The ability to use governmental employees from other departments can be advantageous. Lastly, assuming day-to-day management of the facility is also handled internally, the need to pay additional fees to a private management contractor is not required. Disadvantages of public management include lack of private sector support, civic service constraints, and changing political policies. The primary disadvantages relate to the additional burden placed on governmental departments and the additional level of bureaucracy sometimes required to facilitate operating decisions. The decisions made regarding the operation of a facility may also be slowed due to the nature of the particular governmental department in terms of requirements for approvals and other regulations and procedures. A summary of key advantages and disadvantages to the public sector associated with public management is shown below: • Owner control • Financial support • Coordinating/sharing of staff/support functions • Bulk -price purchasing • No management fees • Public programming for City residents can be given priority • Lack of outside/private sector financial support • Civic service constraints • Contract approval requirements • Changing political policies • Lack of incentive compensation • Limited flexibility • Possible lack of expertise and access in recreation industry • Private groups/events may feel like a secondary priority PRIVATE CONTRACT MANAGEMENT Facilities that are publicly -owned also have the option to utilize a private facility operator. Intense and increasing levels of competition among facilities coupled with increased pressure from governmental entities for facilities to break even operationally has caused some governments to consider changes in the fundamental process of managing sports and recreation venues. As a result, numerous venues across the country have contracted day-to-day operations to a private management company under fee - based management agreements. However, it should be noted that many communities still prefer to utilize a public management team that focuses on community usage and benefit rather than having facility operating decisions made by a private operator based upon profit incentives. Under typical private management, the facility owner retains all of the rights and privileges of ownership while the private management firm performs assigned management functions. The public owner sets policies while the private management firm establishes procedures in order to implement the policies. The private management firm is often compensated with a flat annual fee plus incentive payments designed to reward the contractor for producing desired results. Incentives could be based on achieving specific revenue goals, attendance, events, room night generation or other targets. Operating contracts usually stipulate that operating budgets must be submitted by the management company to the public owner of the facility for approval. It is important to note however that the public owner is still responsible for providing the funds necessary to operate the facility, including funding of any operating deficits. :- Private management firms are typically responsible for various key operational and fiscal factors such as policies and directives, organizational structure, leadership, job classifications, competition, scheduling and booking, finance and accounting, and routine maintenance/repairs. However, the public owner is typically responsible for any annual operating deficits and long-term capital needs, including capital maintenance and working capital. In addition to the day-to-day operations of the venue, a number of private management firms also offer project services such as pre -opening management services, operational audit services, and marketing support as alternatives to full facility management. A summary of key advantages and disadvantages associated with private management is shown below: • Incentives for efficiency or performance • Network of relationships to leverage event bookings • Internal network of facility knowledge/experience • More independence in negotiations • Greater staffing resources • More objective criteria for accountability • More efficient procurement process • Design support and pre -opening services • Less financial risk for owner • Potential loss of direct control by owner • Potential misaligned purpose and goals between community -focused owner and profit -focused management firm • Less access for affordable public use • Annual facility management fees • Management personnel turnover • Corporate resources spread among several facilities • City still responsible for management fee, any annual operating deficits, and long-term capital upkeep/investment MANAGEMENT BY LOCAL SPORTS CLUB Another potential operator could be a local sports club. Local sports clubs typically negotiate a long-term usage agreement with a government on an annual basis and sometimes pay a small fixed annual fee. In exchange, the sports club will typically have exclusive or priority access to the entire facility or a certain number of courts throughout the year. As a result, other clubs/programs typically have restricted access relative to the primary tenant. The tenant sports club is responsible for most operational expenses including maintenance and staffing, however they also receive most or all revenue streams including, but not limited to: net concessions, merchandise, sponsorships/advertising, parking revenue, etc. The government, however, is often responsible for long-term capital maintenance. A summary of key advantages and disadvantages associated with tenant operations is shown below: • Consistent, predictable usage for owner, without having to pay management fees or handle day-to-day operations/maintenance • Network of relationships to leverage tournament usage/bookings • Internal sports knowledge and experience • More independence in negotiations • Loss of direct control by owner • Tenant operators tend to limit access to outside groups that are not part of their club/program • Club income motive versus community benefit motive... i.e. potential misaligned purpose and goals between community -focused owner and private club focused on income and growth • Less access for affordable or free public use • Owner still responsible for long-term, capital maintenance PUBLIC AGENCY OR AUTHORITY Agencies, bureaus, and authorities are political subdivisions formed by local or state government entities. Relevant examples include special services districts, such as a parks district, recreation district, or public venue authority. Much like a non-profit, agencies or bureaus are typically governed by a Board of Directors, with board members consisting of elected officials and local stakeholders. Although it is technically independent from a municipality, an agency or bureau would need a dedicated public revenue source to support long-term capital needs. NON-PROFIT (PRIVATE) Under this form of management, the organization is typically run under the guidance and supervision of a Board of Directors. Members of the board tend to be local community leaders and stakeholders. This can serve as an advantage because they usually have the community's best interests in mind. Alternatively, a lack of diversity on the Board, in terms of sporting interests, can lean programming to heavily favor certain sports and activities that could alienate other sports community interests. This structure requires active and continued support both in labor and funding from the community. The organization would need to depend on donations and grants (in most cases donations would be tax deductible) from individuals, companies, and government entities in addition to volunteer labor hours to be sustainable in the short and long-term. A summary of key advantages and disadvantages associated with non-profit management, or agency/bureau management is shown below: • Community's best interest at heart (All) • Aligned vision with governmental owner (agency or bureau) • Limited use of public funds to maintain operations (non-profit) • Risks alienating some groups in community (non-profit) • Lack of diverse interest groups (non- profit) • Would need dedicated public revenue source to sustain operations (agency) Primary facility management options to be reviewed and discussed by the City of Seward are: • Public Ownership & Management: If the facility is owned by the public sector (e.g. the City), public management is typically the best option to ensure increased public access at affordable rates. Any long-term working capital and capital maintenance needs can also typically be built into larger governmental budgets on an annual basis. For a community the size of Seward, the public ownership and operations model is the most common for a community recreation center, however this option would require the City to hire and train additional staff. • Public Ownership & Private Management: The public sector (if owner) could contract with an experienced 3rd-party management firm. Such a firm would bring specialized expertise in the recreation industry and would not require the public sector to increase staffing. That said, annual management fees for a 3rd-party operator would be an additional annual financial burden on the public sector, in addition to the City subsidizing the annual operations and long-term capital needs. • Public Ownership & Tenant Operations: Another potential operator could be a local sports club. The tenant sports club is responsible for most operational expenses including maintenance and staffing. The government, however, is often responsible for long-term capital maintenance. The biggest downside to this option is that a local sports group is likely to focus primarily on their own programs. • Private Ownership & Private Management: In this scenario, the private facility owner would be responsible for either hiring their own staff or contracting with a 3rd-party management firm, however a private (for profit) facility is unlikely in Seward due to the small population base. :• \1\ v I C T U S A D V I S O A S 9. OPERATING PRO FORMA Victus has developed usage and financial projections for the following amenities and features, as shown in the Building Program Recommendations section earlier in this report: • Indoor gym space with at least two (2) full-sized basketball courts convertible to 2x volleyball courts per basketball court. These column -free, hardwood or composite surfaces could also be used for wrestling, pickleball, dance, and non -sports events such as banquets, weddings, etc. • Additional indoor sports amenities such as an elevated indoor track (typically above the gym/court space), dedicated space for the existing youth programs and senior programs in the Seward community, and multi -purpose rooms that could be used for workout classes, community meetings, adult education, etc. • Ideally, support areas and amenities should at least include changing rooms, childcare, concessions stand, office/administrative space, storage, and parking. M The following key assumptions were utilized by Victus Advisors in order to develop operating and financial projections for a new community recreation center in Seward: • Please note that these operating projections are assumed to begin several years in the future, at which point the COVID-19 pandemic is assumed to be substantially over. • It is assumed that the indoor recreation center will be owned by the City of Seward. • It is assumed that the recreation center will be publicly operated and maintained by the by the City of Seward, and it is assumed that the basketball courts and multi -purpose rooms could be occasionally rented by the City to third -parties at relatively affordable hourly rates to maximize community access. • It is assumed that the Senior Center and Youth Center would be operated by the City's existing operating partners under a separate P&L. It is also assumed that Daycare space within the facility would be operated by an experienced local third -party under a separate P&L, as the City is not likely to have the capabilities and staffing to operate childcare. Therefore, no operating revenues/expenses are shown for the Senior Center, Youth Center, and Daycare spaces. • As this pro forma exercise is primarily focused on facility operations, no assumptions have been made yet for annual debt service costs. • Projected operating revenues and expenses are based upon the recommended Priority I building program presented earlier in this report. • These projections are based on current market circumstances, and therefore assume that there will be no other material changes to the available recreation facility inventory within Greater Seward. • The financial projections displayed on the following pages utilize a variety of additional assumptions, including data gathered from third -party sources, and Victus Advisors' industry experience. There will be differences between these projections and actual events, and these differences may be material. In a stabilized year of operations, it is estimated that the operations of a new community recreation center in Seward could operate at an approximate 43% cost recovery. It should also be noted that this pro forma does not include rent cost savings that would come from the City no longer needing to rent AVTEC for local recreation use. If you apply those savings (estimated at approximately $80,000 per year) to the projected annual operating deficit shown at right, it reduces the annual deficit to approximately $344,800 (and increases to 54% cost recovery). Stabilized Operating Revenues: Year Facility Daily Admission $91,300 Facility Monthly Membership $82,500 Rental Income (Gym, Classrooms, etc.) $69,200 Recreation Programming (Leagues, Camps, Classes) $44,400 Concessions (Net) $18,800 Advertising & Sponsorship $10,000 Other $10,000 Total Revenues: $326,200 Operating Expenses: Salaries, Wages, & Benefits $421,000 Program Expenses $42,000 Utilities $88,000 Advertising, Marketing, & Promotion $25,000 General, Administrative, & Other $75,000 Maintenance/Repair $50,000 Materials/Supplies $50,000 Total Expenses: $751,000 OPERATING INCOME LOSS $424,800 ESTIMATED COST RECOVERY 43% Notes: Presented in 2022 dollars. Stabilizedyear of operations typically occurs by Year 3. M Operating Revenue generated by the proposed new community recreation center in Seward is expected to consist primarily of memberships, program revenue, rental income, concessions, and advertising. A brief description of each potential revenue source is pro vided below. Recreation Center Membership: Membership/admission fees consist of daily and monthly passes available for purchase by individuals over 18 years -old. It is assumed that youth (0-17) would not pay a membership fee. Based upon competitive market rates within the Kenai Peninsula, we have assumed that the recreation center could charge the following rates for memberships: Monthlyr- Pass r Fee Fee Youth 0-17 Free College Student $25 Adult 18-59 $25 Senior 60+ $25 User Fee Full Facility Youth 0-17 Free Full Facility Adult, Senior, College $5 Walkinq Track $1 In the first stabilized year (year 3), Victus projects that the recreation center could have approximately 800 memberships (daily and monthly). Rental Income: We have conservatively assumed, based on competitive rental rates within the Kenai Peninsula, that average rental rates for the facility would be approximately $50 per hour per court, and $40 per hour for multi -purpose rooms. ti- Recreation Programming (Leagues, Camps, etc.): Programming revenue consists of an estimate of revenue from Seward Parks and Recreation programs and leagues that would be conducted at the recreation center. These estimates are based upon Seward's current and potential fees for recreational programming and leagues. Advertising & Sponsorship: Advertising and sponsorship revenues are assumed to be derived from the sale of wall and board banners ($100 per banner), permanent signage ($100 per sign), scoreboard signage ($350 per scoreboard), and presenting/founding level partnerships ($2,000 per founding partner). Overall, we have assumed that approximately 85% of the available inventory would be sold. Concessions (Net): Concessions revenue consists of sales of various food and beverage items at concessions stands throughout the facility. Assumptions are based on estimated usage and attendance. The profit margin is generally in the range of 35 to 40 percent of gross sales while the per capita spending assumption we have utilized for food and beverage is $1, which is comparable with similar recreation centers in the United States. Other Revenue: Other revenue opportunities would primarily consist of any equipment rental fees or other special service charges. We have conservatively projected $10,000 in annual other revenues. M Operating Expenses expected to be generated by a proposed new community recreation center in Seward include salaries, wages, and benefits, operations/programming costs, utilities, and other expenses. A brief description of each potential major source of expense is provided below. Salaries, Wages & Benefits: Based upon comparable venues, we have assumed that the new recreational facility would have at least seven (7) full-time equivalent (FTE) employees (including both salaried and part-time employees) with just over $420,000 in total wages and benefits in the stabilized year. This includes general management, program management, accounting, facility maintenance, and custodial staff. Estimated annual salary ranges for FTE's range between $30,000 and $60,000 prior to benefits. It is also assumed that benefit costs would be an additional 35% of salaries. Program Expenses: Direct expenses from operating programs at the facility, such as referees and jerseys for league play or contract/1099 instructors for programs, have been assumed to be approximately 40% of facility program revenues, based on costs at comparable facilities. Please note, this does not include the overhead costs included in Salaries, Wages & Benefits for full-time staff whose responsibilities would include administrative tasks related to programming. Utilities: Utilities often represent one of the largest non -labor expenses incurred by indoor recreation facility operators. Cost estimates for utilities include use of electricity, gas, water, and steam, and are based upon comparable utility costs per square foot at similar facilities. Other Expenses: Other expenses expected to be incurred include general and administrative expenses, repairs and maintenance, materials and supplies, marketing/advertising costs, insurance, and other such expenses as described below, which have been estimated based upon such expenses at comparable venues: • Maintenance and repairs for structures, equipment, grounds, etc. • Materials and supplies for administration and operations of the facility such as office supplies, sports equipment, janitorial supplies, etc. • General liability insurance to cover the grounds, restrooms, and other such areas (Note: events and users are typically required to carry their own liability insurance specific to their activities at the facility) • Office and administrative expenses, including but not limited to marketing and advertising, telecommunications, travel costs, permits, bad debt, bank service charges, licenses, dues/subscriptions service fees, and other such operating expenses. ON \1\ V I C T U S 10. FUNDING OPTIONS ANALYSIS A D V I S O A S Given the small population size of both the City of Seward and Greater Seward, it is unlikely that a private, for -profit entity would build and operate a new community recreation center in Seward. As a result, there are likely only two viable funding options in Seward: 1) Public Funding 2) Private Non -Profit Fundraising The remainder of this section discusses potential fundraising models for the City of Seward (public funding) and private/non-profit fundraising (which could also be considered in conjunction with public funding). ti• According to the City of Seward's 2022 Operating Budget, the City's General Fund is primarily funded by the following four (4) types of taxes: Real Property Taxes Personal Property Taxes Sales Tax Bed Tax Propert Ty axes (Real & Personal) Real Property and Personal Property in Seward are taxed at a mill rate of 3.84 mills (or $3.84 per each $1,000 of assessment). In the City's 2022 Operating Budget, these two forms of property tax represent $1.7 million in projected revenue. A City bond issuance backed by property tax (general obligation bonds) would require a public vote. Given that this could be perceived as a tax increase on local residents, passing such a bond referendum via public election may be difficult. Sales Tax There is no State -level sales tax in Alaska, however local governments (boroughs and municipalities) may collect a sales tax within their jurisdictions, not to exceed a total local sales tax rate of 7.5%. Within Seward, the City collects a sales tax rate of 4.0% and the Kenai Peninsula Borough assesses a rate of 3.0%, for a total combined rate of 7.0%. This is already one of the highest local tax rates in Alaska, with only Homer and Seldovia having higher combined local sales tax rates. 100 Bed Tax The City of Seward currently collects a bed tax of 4.0% on all short-term room rental transactions within City limits, including hotels, motels, Airbnb, etc. In the 2022 fiscal operating budget, the City projects approximately $675,000 in bed tax collections, of which 50% (or $337,500) would be allocated to the Seward Chamber of Commerce, Conference & Visitors Bureau to help fund their operations and marketing. Currently, cities in Alaska have bed taxes that range from 4.0% to 12.0%. The table at right shows a partial sample of Alaskan cities with bed taxes, with Seward being among the lowest. City Bed Tax Rate Anchorage 12.0% Juneau 9.0% Fairbanks 8.0% North Pole 8.0% Ketchikan 7.0% Nome 6.0% Sitka 6.0% Kodiak 5.0% Gustavus 4.0% Seward 4.0% The City could consider a ballot initiative to increase the bed tax within Seward city limits, with the express purpose of funding construction of a new community recreation center. Given that Seward's bed tax is currently among the lowest in Alaska, and since this ballot measure could be perceived by local residents as using summer visitor taxes to provide community amenities for local residents, it is likely that such a measure would have a better chance of passing than would a property tax measure. The table below shows estimated construction funding that could be generated by various bed tax increases: Bed Tax Rate in City of Seward Current 4.0% Option A option S option C option 6.0% 8.0% 10.0% 12.0% Bed Tax Collections based on 2022 Budget) $675,000 $1,012,500 $1,350,000 $1,687,500 $2,025,000 Incremental Annual Bed Tax Collections $0 $337,500 $675,000 $1,012,500 $1,350,000 Estimated Construction Funding Capacity, based on: 2.5% Interest, 30- ear bonds, 1.25x coverage - $5,651,180 $11,302,360 $16,953,540 $22,604,720 3.5% Interest, 30- ear bonds, 1.25x coverage - $4,965,850 $9,931,700 $14,897,560 $19,863,410 4.5% Interest, 30- ear bonds, 1.25x coverage - $4,398,000 $8,796,000 $13,194,000 $17,592,000 101 Private sector corporations, charitable foundations, or wealthy individuals often make significant up -front financial commitments that can be used to fund recreation center construction costs, typically in exchange for naming rights to the building or other donor recognition opportunities within the facility. Frequently, these financial commitments are contractually obligated to be paid over a multi -year term, and these contractual revenue streams can be capitalized for the purpose of funding project construction costs. A significant additional incentive for donors would be if their contribution could be classified as a tax-deductible charitable donation. As an example, in Homer, the SPARC was built with an estimated 65% of funding coming from private donors. The City of Homer also contributed approximately $200,000 towards construction costs. Although the operating revenue of the SPARC does not fully cover operating expenditures, the non-profit operator is able to garner additional annual operating support (beyond facility revenues) from ongoing fundraising efforts, foundation grants, City contributions, etc. Even in a scenario where the City of Seward is the primary funder of construction costs for a new community recreation center, it is recommended that private donations (potentially via a naming rights and donor recognition program) also be considered as a potential funding source that could be used to offset the amount of public debt required and/or help support ongoing operational costs. Private donation campaigns are often conducted in conjunction with community plans to construct a new recreation center. Often the building naming rights are granted to the largest donation, which is typically announced as the lead gift to the campaign. In some cases, the lead/naming gift will also be structured as a "matching gift" that is paid once the general fundraising campaign reaches a pre -determined goal. 102 r EAPC 11. BUILDING PROJECT ASSESSMENT W10let :1:i014IanWMU"l=6" "lLTAIaL 0M Victus Advisors engaged EAPC to develop concept plans for the proposed EAPC indoor community recreation center in Seward, in accordance with our ARCHITECTS ENGINEERS recommended Priority I program, as presented in Section 7 of this report. EAPC's initial concept plans include all of the recreational amenities and support spaces noted by Victus in Section 7 of this report, with a total conceptual indoor building size of 36,785 to 38,575 gross square feet*, depending on whether the daycare space is just designed for drop -in care or if a full daily daycare space is built out. The remainder of this section includes: • Facility Concept Plan • Preliminary Space & Square Footage Program • Site Test Fits • Preliminary Construction Cost Estimate DISCLAIMER.- The architectural concepts, site plans, and cost estimates contained herein are preliminary in nature and subject to change. Not all amenities, features, layouts, and configurations depicted herein may be constructed in accordance with the conceptual renderings. 'Note: Gross Square Footage includes circulation, mechanical,, etc. 104 FIRST FLOOR CONCEPT PLAN `��, `CANOPY CANOPY ROOF V I C T U S ROOF YOUTH �LASSRQONI .. MUILTI PURPOSE r CANOPY SEWARD COMMUNITY RECREATION CENTER SEWARD, ALASKA 1 J =tom Sheet A102 -CONCEPT PLAN 2Nn F1 OOH Oat. DM1/22 EAPC Project Number' "Wow NORTH I PRELIMINARY SPACE SUMMARY / S.F. BREAKDOWN SEWARD COMMUNITY RECREATION CENTER Qty. Size Subtotal Subtotal Total I. PUBLIC AMENITIES 1,914 A. Entrance 1,914 1 Vestibule 1 100 100 2 Lobby 1 200 200 3 Community Meeting Room 1 800 800 Storage (AV/Etc) 1 120 120 Catering/Kitchenette 1 140 140 4 Vending 1 96 96 5 Storage 1 100 100 6 Public Toilets (Two Fixtures) 2 144 288 7 Family/Unisex Toilet 1 70 70 II. ADMINISTRATION/PROGRAMS 8,340 A. Management Staff (Recreation Operations/Offices) 972 1 Reception / Control Desk 1 192 192 2 Offices: Director 1 150 150 Staff Open Office/Systems Furniture 2 120 240 3 Copy/ Production Room 1 100 100 4 Staff Breakroom / Kitchen 1 100 100 5 Staff Toilet (Unisex) 1 70 70 6 Storage 1 120 120 B. Senior Center/Support 1,450 1 Lobby/Waiting 1 100 100 2 Offices: Coordinator 1 120 120 3 Kitchen 1 280 280 Dry Storage 1 60 60 Dish Wash 1 60 60 4 Dining/Meeting 1 400 400 Refreshment Counter (Coffee/Water) 1 40 40 5 Day Room 1 200 200 6 Toilet (Unisex -Shared Dinning & Day Rm) 1 70 70 7 Storage 1 120 120 _ '� - I EHITECPECNEEF2S 107 Qty. Size Subtotal Subtotal C. Youth Center/Support 1,390 1 Entry/Waiting (Seating Area) 1 100 100 2 Offices: Coordinator 1 120 120 3 Day Room (Open Concept) Seating/Lounging 1 180 180 Gaming Stations 3 30 90 TV/Multi Media 1 120 120 Table Games (Foos baII/Ping-Pong) 2 150 300 Vending/Refreshment Station 1 80 80 Collaboration Space (work table/chairs) 1 120 120 Book Shelves 1 40 40 Storage 1 120 120 4 Toilet (Single Fixture) 2 60 120 D. Day Care (Drop -in Care) 938 1 Drop-off & Cubbies 1 160 160 2 Kids Play Area (includes Storage) 1 580 580 3 Nourishment Station 1 48 48 4 Unisex Toilet 1 70 70 5 Work Station 1 80 80 D.1 Day Care Center (8 Providers plus Director) Additional SF to Above, minus 580 1,790 1 Drop-off & Cubbies 1 160 160 2 Infants 0-11 Months (2:8 Ratio) 1 280 280 3 Older Infants (12-18 Months (2:10 Ratio) 1 350 350 4 Toddler 19-35 Months (2:12 Ratio) 1 420 420 5 Preschool 3-4 Years (2:20 Ratio) 1 700 700 3 Kitchen/Storage 1 200 200 4 Unisex Toilet(s) 2 70 140 5 Director's Office 1 120 120 E. Youth/Multi-Purpose Space 1,800 1 Class Room/Computer Space 1 700 700 2 Activity (Multi -Purpose Space 1 800 800 3 Storage 1 70 70 4 Unisex Toilet 1 70 70 5 Work Station(s) 2 50 100 6 Elect/Data 1 60 60 Tota I _ '� - I EHITECPECNEEF2S We": QtY. Size Subtotal Subtotal Total III. LOCKER FACILITIES 1,310 A. Women's Changing Room/Shower/Restroom 540 1 Day Lockers 1 540 540 B. Men's Changing Room/Shower/Restroom 540 1 Day Lockers 1 540 540 C. Family/Assisted Changing Room 100 1 Day Lockers 1 100 100 D. Support 130 1 Express Lockers 1 90 90 2 Supplies 1 40 40 IV. REC/ACTIVITY FACILITIES 22,470 A. Gymnasium/Public Meeting (Double BB - Divider Wall/Quad VB) 18,220 1 Court 1 18,000 18,000 2 Storage 1 220 220 B. Indoor Walking Track (Suspended) 4,250 1 Walking Deck (12laps/mile) 1 4,000 4,000 2 Staging Area 1 250 250 V. SUPPORT FACILITIES 1,720 A. Building Support 1,720 1 Building Mechanical Room 1 500 500 2 Electrical Room 2 100 200 3 Housekeeping/Custodial 2 70 140 4 Data Room 1 70 70 5 Storage 1 120 120 6 Elevator 1 70 70 7 Stairs (one open staircase/one fire stair) 2 260 520 8 Laundry 1 100 100 NET S.F. OF FLOOR AREA 35,754 GROSS S.F. FACTOR 10% 3,575 GROSS FLOOR AREA -RECREATION CENTER 39,329 Irr I E �Ac�rs en��rNer�s PC PLAN AS SHOWN 36,785 PLAN W/FULL DAYCARE (DASHED) 38,575 109 Qty. Size Subtotal Subtotal Total VI. OUT BUILDING 1,750 35' x 50' A. Recreation Support Structure 1,750 1 Vestibule 1 60 60 2 Entry Lobby/Waiting 1 80 80 3 Work Areas (Administrative) 2 120 240 4 Work Area (Repair) 1 200 200 5 Storage (Tempered) 1 200 200 5 Storage (Cold w/OH Doors) 1 700 700 7 Unisex Toilet 1 70 70 8 Housekeeping/Custodial 1 50 50 9 Mechanical/Electrical 1 150 150 _ '� - I EHITECPECNEERS Victus Advisors and EAPC reviewed a preliminary list of potential sites provided by the City of Seward's Community Development department. We narrowed this list down to the following three (3) potential sites that are: a) large enough in terms of both acreage and shape to accommodate the recommended program, and b) wouldn't require displacing other existing recreational infrastructure. 1) North Fort Raymond Site - 2101 & 2109 Dimond Blvd 2) State DOT Site - 408 & 412 B St 3) UAF Rae Building Site - 125 Third Ave & 109 Washington St Ultimately, our primary recommended site is the North Fort Raymond Site, for the following reasons: • It has the largest flat/developable acreage of the three sites, which provides the most room for accommodating not only the recommended Priority I program, but also potential future expansion. The larger site also would better accommodate maximum parking demand. • The location of the site is north of downtown, closer to the schools, and therefore more convenient to the majority of the City's residential population as well as potential users from Greater Seward. • Of the three sites, it is the only one that is City -owned and therefore would not incur property acquisition costs. 111 <f 20'SETBACK SERVICE SERVICE � + L l G NTR PARKIN E .. � I 9 STALLS OUT 4 ENTITY 1 BUILDINt UT PARKINGDING r 11 STALLNSION+60 ,; FUTURE P GRA- PEDES EXPANSION I / ENTRY I PROGRAM j M PARKING VIE PLAY 1 30 +Q$ f Jr AREA +36 RE( 11 .ENTRY ` DROPOF +24 1 y ,' VIEWS ONTO SI /` , REC PARKING PROPOSED PP LINE / 45 STALLS HIGH POWER OVERHEAD LINES / ' ' " �' `- - ~i ADDITIONAL PROPERTY FOR PARKING I +12 FUT STALLSING 0R.' ,/ i '• VIEWSONTO SITE /- 1 1 / G EAPC S— \/,/\ 112 Nr aM Raber�s Streai. 3Q0 FNG „ I 1 T I I C a ..N— Ca-.1. PI--l— FI—na17— SEWARD COMMUNITY RECREATION CENTER SEWARD, ALASKA 25' SETBACK r FUTURE 1 / PARKING 1 r 23 RfA N WALK -T w �' f ���I2/'SETBACK WSONTO SITl 21f �, yJ} f ,0 `, "� ; F TES f � BUILDING OUTLINE W! DAYCARE PLAY AREA WI DAYCARE Sheet A105 - NORTH FORT RAYMOND SITE Date 08/31/22 EAPC Project Number 20224550 NORTH 112 G EAPC ,1 z Nam Aaea- stra„1. sane ago N Fargo, NOM Cakota 581e2 PPw«welac. F1 ne,.r 3 r L �'--- +48 EXISTING D +36 . 1 1� SERVICE_A t ENTRY SERVICE PARKING k 8 STALLS= u SERVICE I ENTRY CREATE �. SERVICE +12_ ALLEY �r ti +0 V\ V I C T U S \N% EW TO SITE BUILDING OUTLINE W/ DAYCARE � ` ` � i / PLAY AflEA W/ DAVCAI � r � TO SITE EW1 z � { FUTURE `I PARKING 24 STALLS \ \ \ \ TAANSITION� '\ \ VIEW TO SITE � �GvoAnlclnnl� ` SEWARD COMMUNITY RECREATION CENTER SEWARD, ALASKA Sheet A104 -STATE DDT SITE Date CW31122 EAPC Project Number I 2022455D NORTH T 112 r EAPC EEas ten,2 goo P 9o, 22 °�FI1a„ 223 ' t I STEEPf ,FLAT r i w�z 1 �l `TOE OF , SLOPE SERVICE r EN TRY j SERIVCE PARE 1 !I /1 1 8STALLS III Ire 'r SERVICE ENTRY. r ! 1/rl��jff fr IIf C J IMPROVE �'I I ! ! I SERVICE ► ' 1 rlllj f r I ALLEY I� + , i PLAY AREA W/DAYCARE ' \fly SEWARD COMMUNITY RECREATION CENTER V I C T U S AovrsoAs SEWARD,ALASKA VIEWS ONTO SITE Sheet A103 - UAF RAE SFE Date 08/31/22 EAPC Project Number I 20224550 NORTH 114 ESTIMATE $ 16,341,517.50 $ 18,476,006.25 A. Recreation Center Range $ 16,111,830.00 $ 18,197,756.25 1 Square Footage Range Without Daycare 36,785 SF With Daycare 38,575 SF 2 Square Foot Cost Range Low $ 400.00 High $ 425.00 3 Construction Cost Low $ 14,714,000.00 High $ 16,394,375.00 4 FFE Low 2.50% $ 367,850.00 High 3.00% $ 491,831.25 5 Fees Low 7% $ 1,029,980.00 High 8% $ 1,311,550.00 B. Recreation Center Support Facility Range $ 229,687.50 $ 278,250.00 1 Square Footage 1,750 SF 2 Square Foot Cost Range Low $ 125.00 High $ 150.00 3 Construction Cost Low $ 218,750.00 High $ 262,500.00 4 Fees Low 5% $ 10,937.50 High 6% $ 15,750.00 C. Estimate Narrative This estimate utilizes a "square foot" cost basis. Further this estimate is based upon a recent previous project that has been "escalated" forward for two construction seasons from today utilizing - 6% per year. It was then escalated for an Alaska construction cost index of an additional 15%. EHITECPECNEERS 11 \1\ V I C T U S APPENDIX - SAMPLE SURVEY FEEDBACK A D V I S O A S • "The City of Seward needs this. As adults and kids we need this. We would so much enjoy the center and be able to host wrestling tournaments and all other types of tournaments here. We need a positive vibe to keep ourselves and our kids in a positive direction." • "Seward has decent meeting space for private events EXCEPT for large events with —300 people. The terminal is the only space large enough. If our town invests in a sports/rec facility, it should create informal gathering spots, not just spaces for structured activities. Our youth (esp. 16-20) lack spaces to just BE while doing activities with friends." • "We need a community center to improve the quality of life for Seward residents and provide meaningful, healthy activities for the whole community: youth, adults, & seniors." • "Seward has three gyms, two weight areas, a sauna, swimming pool, in addition to the two fitness centers. It also has several yoga instructors. A climbing wall. If Seward doesn't have the funds to use AVTEC, how can they justify spending and upkeep of a new facility? Seward does not have anything requiring ice or bowling." • "We, Alaskans, have great hockey programs for athletes who are vying for NHL along with swimmers vying for the big leagues. I, myself, am training towards my swimming goals along with giving back to the state/community. My hope is to become an example and train future athletes both in Seward and in this state. Also, I do want to try to bring a hockey rink to Seward for starts." Note: The comments above represent a sample of feedback from the surveys that reflect common themes among respondents. 117 • "I am interested in learning more but it's hard for me to get past the cost to run a facility like this. The bike park was a minimal cost project that I never see being used. I'd like to see a dog park in this community." • "1 really think this undertaking should be private enterprise..... not government funded." • "This is something Seward needs. I do not have children, but I know so many families that could use this for their children so they have more to do. There needs to be something reliable in town. Seward uses AVTEC, but it is completely unreliable. • "My concerns with the development of this center revolve around the central issue of a long-term sustainability plan. • "I grew up in Seward and I plan on spending a lot of my life here. I work at the schools and I see kids who would absolutely benefit from additional support. I support the energy and idea behind the facility, but due to the amount of overlap with existing programming and the high -cost of construction and the carbon impact. I have not seen these concerns addressed in the project narrative. I do not support this project at this time." Note: The comments above represent a sample of feedback from the surveys that reflect common themes among respondents. 118 • "Seward desperately needs healthy indoor activity options. A recreation center would be a hugely beneficial addition to our community. As year-round residents of Seward, my family is absolutely in favor of this project." • "Currently, opportunities for indoor recreation in the wintertime in Seward are severely limited. Having access to an indoor recreation center in the winter would improve quality of life for year-round residents and attract more people to stay in Seward year-round which would bolster the winter economy and continue to make Seward a year-round destination and healthier community." • "An indoor facility for the small population of Seward and surrounding area will be an extraordinary cost. If you get grants will they last through the duration of the facility? Look at the problems Seward is having with funding the Alaska Sealife Center. Are the taxpayers of Seward ready to pay for such a facility?" • "Pool and ice rink are way out of line.... people are dreaming if they think we could have high school hockey here in Seward ... talk to the high school athletic director...there are already too many sports to field competitive teams for the number of students." • "It is my belief that Seward citizens want, does not match its affordability." Note: The comments above represent a sample of feedback from the surveys that reflect common themes among respondents. 119 VICTUS ADVISORS LLC 2720 Homestead Road, Suite 130 Park City, Utah 84098 www.victusadvisors.com infoC@victusadvisors.com 120