Council finalizes rec center plans

McMinnville City Council agreed on a preliminary design for its proposed recreation center Tuesday, opting for additions that result in a project cost estimated at $88 million.

Continuing a discussion with construction and design consultants, the dais opted for an expanded competition pool, a large community room and fixed retractable gymnasium bleachers, increasing construction costs by approximately $5 million over the base design.

Last year, the city’s $98.5 million municipal bond failed by a handful of votes. That version featured a $72.5 million rec center, $9 million for renovations to the library and senior center and $9 million worth of citywide park improvements including the redevelopment of the existing aquatic center into a new use. Earlier this year, council opted to cut the funding for other projects to focus on getting the rec center approved. Acquisition costs of $3.8 million for the rec center property on Riverside Drive were also excluded from the current bond.

Consultants from Opsis Architecture and Pence Construction returned from a previous work session with three scenarios for the natatorium and additional options based on inquiries from council.

The first option kept the proposed competition pool at eight 25-yard lanes and overall square footage at 60,000. A second option adds 2,500 square feet by expanding into a stretch pool, with a movable bulkhead that can split the pool, adding three warm-up lanes during competitions.

“We think this is a much better version for maximizing the use of the competition pool,” Opsis’ Jim Kalvelage said.

A third version adds 4,500 square feet from the base and expands the pool to 10 lanes, which consultants said isn’t the best use for the facility as the extra lanes would only be used during larger meets and the additional water would add maintenance costs.

“There may be a regional meet occasionally where this could be desirable, but you’re also competing against a number of other facilities that have 10-lane or larger pools as well,” Kalvelage said.

Councilor Dan Tucholsky previously asked for estimates on a 10-lane design in an effort to make the pool a “world class” facility but switched his opinion after the presentation.

“(Ten lanes) doesn’t seem reasonable to me considering that it’s not going to increase the (return on investment) and we’re not going to be competitive in the 10-lane area, so I would like to stick with an eight-lane,” he said.

Other councilors agreed the eight-lane stretch pool is the best option.

Mayor Kim Morris repeatedly expressed concern over deck space for competitors and adults, saying the current pool can accommodate up to 300 people.

“I’m concerned that may not happen and I don’t want to go backwards,” she said.

Consultants addressed other issues with the pool, swapping the location of locker rooms and the lifeguard office to provide a better view of the competition and recreation pools, which will be separated by a wall. The new layouts also added deck seating and allow for locker rooms to be divided into dry and wet areas, giving patrons the ability to continue use during swim meets.

The dais was also in favor of a $1.6 million expanded 3,500-square-foot community room that will be used for classes, events and rentals. A large event space is common in recreation facilities because they are considered “high rental revenue generating” spaces, according to Kalvelage.

The space could accommodate a couple hundred people standing and an estimated 120 seated at tables. It will include acoustic treatments and a large window that can be opened onto an outdoor event terrace, according to consultants.

Morris floated the idea of adding the community room after the bond measure to save costs and Garvin said it could potentially be funded through naming rights. Other councilors pushed back on that idea.

Councilor Chris Chenoweth said adding funds for bleachers or an expanded room make a small impact on such a large bond but will be big asks if they need to be paid for through the city’s general fund at a later date.

“If we want it, it needs to be part of the bond.”

Tucholsky said it is incumbent on the city to replace facilities that currently exist at the Community and Aquatic Centers.

“I think the community room is a requirement,” he said. “If we’re liquidating other assets around the city, we need to have space and if we don’t build it we won’t have it.”

Councilors were initially split over gym seating and consultants favored three-tier movable bleachers over a fixed retractable version that could seat 400.

The city could break down and move the Community Center bleachers to the new facility, but cost estimates are about the same as purchasing a new set, according to Pence CEO Paul Schulz.

“The advice we got was based on the age of the equipment, the unavailability of parts, the cost to disassemble, relocate, reassemble, try to figure out how to fix the things you broke along the way. They actually advised it might be less expensive to buy new than to relocate.”

Movable bleachers were included in the base price, while the fixed seating adds $220,000 to construction costs, Opsis’ Erica Dunn said.

“You can use (movable bleachers) in any configuration for different sporting events as opposed to being held to a singular location with the retractable version,” Dunn said.

Councilor Zack Geary asked the dais what it wants the gym for, noting it doesn’t have capabilities for a performing arts center. Council President Sal Peralta said the space could be used for kids’ theater or other smaller events and again pointed to the need to replace spaces that will be lost.

Council decided to stick with a May 2027 ballot measure over rushing a November 2026 effort, despite caution from consultants that a six-month delay could add nearly $2 million to construction costs based on a 2.4% escalation estimate.

The result of the deliberations was an approximately 66,000-square-foot facility with a nearly $90 million price tag.

“That would be an all-out sprint to make that happen,” City Manager Adam Garvin said of a November measure. The city would need to immediately schedule a meeting with bond counsel and finalize draft language by early August.

“You’re putting that burden on (City Recorder Claudia Cisneros), who’s also running the city council races. It’s not impossible, I’m not saying that it is, but it would be a very, very heavy lift.”

Asked for further clarity, Mayor Kim Morris jumped in to interpret the comments.

“Yeah, it’s too much,” she said.

Geary, who is a longtime proponent of a new rec center, asked Chenoweth if he would support the bond publicly after advocating for the add-ons. Chenoweth has traditionally been against measures that add taxes to residents.

Chenoweth said he was concerned about the cost for burdened constituents and the Senior Center improvements being dropped from the package because previous polling indicated the bond wouldn’t pass without their support.

“But you’re not going to get pessimism from me,” he added.

Several other councilors pointed to current amenities used by seniors - such as yoga classes and aqua aerobics – that will be incorporated into the new facility.

Geary emphasized it will take a village (of councilors) to get the bond over the finish line.

“If we’re going to put it out to the vote and sort of passively watch what happens, I think we’re wasting our time and effort and resources in doing that, in a hope,” he said. “It needs to be more than a hope that people support it. We need a package that we’re all willing, or most of us are willing, to go out and fight for.”

He immediately gained support from Peralta, who thanked consultants for their work on the revisions. (Peralta has announced he will not seek reelection and will step down at the end of this year.)

“It looks like a beautiful facility,” he said. “I think it’s going to be great for the city. I look forward to moving forward on this.”