Alternative Site Survey Approved for Goshen Ice Rink | News

GOSHEN – After a hiatus of almost two years, plans to build a new multi-purpose pavilion and ice rink in Goshen took a step forward on Monday at a meeting of the Public Works and Safety Council of Goshen.

At the meeting, board members approved a contract of no more than $ 38,000 with Cripe Design LLC for a design study to explore a possible alternative site for the installation, which was originally proposed for the construction along the Goshen Canal.

Plans for the facility, which had been underway since late 2017, were officially on hold in the spring of 2020 due to uncertainty surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic.

But according to Goshen deputy mayor Mark Brinson, the city is once again looking to move forward with the project, although a recent projection of costs for the construction of the facility at the Goshen rail site has exceeded considerably the budget.

Faced with this increased cost projection, Brinson said the city was in conversation with Goshen College about the possibility of an alternate site for the facility on college-owned land along 15th Street.

“So one of the ideas that have been put forward is a possible partnership with Goshen College, where the rink could be located on the Goshen College campus,” Brinson told the board. “It could be a way for us to save a significant amount of construction costs if we are able to share parking lots, storm water treatment facilities, possibly concessions and toilets. So we’re looking at all kinds of savings opportunities, and to do that we need architectural assistance.

This is where Cripe Design LLC comes in, Brinson said.

“We are proposing to hire Cripe Design, which also happens to be the company that designed the recreation / fitness center several years ago,” said Brinson. “They would look at several different site designs to see how that eventually fits on the site, looking at all kinds of utility information and just the existing data on the site and see what’s possible.

“At this point, no decision has been made as to whether or not we would absolutely do this move,” Brinson added, “but we wanted to assess this as an alternative to the current downtown location.”

Goshen Mayor Jeremy Stutsman expressed a similar sentiment when discussing the GC site.

“Like Mark said, we’re just looking at a second site because there are some pretty big money saving opportunities,” Stutsman said. “So we just want to do our due diligence to find out how much money is saved, and then once we have all that information in hand and we know if it will work there, we can start. to look at the two sites and decide which one we want to move forward with.

“And like Mark also said, the construction prices right now, the price is considerably higher than we expected,” he added. “So we have to reduce that one way or another.”

Ahead of Monday’s vote, representatives of the Goshen Downtown Economic Improvement District Board of Directors raised some concerns about the GC site, noting that they would much prefer the facility to be built. on the site of the original reach. The council oversees a downtown tax only established in the late 1990s that pays for streetscape, snow removal, decorations, etc.

“Please consider the Millrace site for the pavilion and rink,” said Scott Woldruff, EID board member, owner of Woldruff’s Footwear in downtown Goshen. “There it can complement local restaurants and businesses, as well as strengthen and improve the core part of the community. Most importantly, benefit the kids, with St. John’s and four elementary schools, Boys & Girls Club and neighborhoods within walking distance, so they can enjoy the facility for generations.

Stutsman, responding to concerns from the EID board, noted that while he agreed with those concerns, he believed it would be in the best interest of the city and its taxpayers to explore several options for installation.

“I can say that I share each of these statements you just made,” Stutsman told Woldruff. “But like I said, we’re just trying to make sure we’re representing taxpayers’ money properly. And the only reason we chose this second site is because it’s on the trolley system. So there is public transportation that could help people get there. But for all the reasons you mentioned, that’s why we want to be downtown, but we’re just trying to figure out how to make the project work.

In the end, the board members agreed and the requested contract with Cripe Design was unanimously approved.

In addition to exploring options to locate the multi-purpose pavilion and ice rink on the Goshen College campus, the approved design study will also: determine locations for the shared parking serving the pavilion, sports and recreation facilities, and GC events; examine the locations of a new closed six-court tennis bubble for the college; examine the locations of a new 24,000 square foot physical Goshen College plant; and assess a possible new vehicle entrance to campus from 15th Street.

CONTEXT OF THE INSTALLATION

The original concept for the new multi-purpose pavilion and rink involved the construction of a facility operated by the Goshen Parks & Recreation Department that would operate year round for programming and events.

As proposed, the approximately 26,000 square foot lodge would be built on 10 acres of city-owned land located on the west side of the reach just southwest of the Madison Street Bridge.

During the winter months, the pavilion would house a full-size rink using an ice-making system. A separate support building would house a public washroom, a small concession area, and building mechanics, including mechanical space for the permanent equipment needed for ice making.

During the warmer months, the pavilion could be used for various activities, such as roller skating, basketball, parks department classes, festivals, flea markets, community garage sales, receptions and a host of other activities. The plan also provided for the construction of a parking lot, a square surrounding the pavilion and a green space.

By the time the project was put on hold in the spring of 2020, the total cost of the project was estimated to be around $ 7.9 million.

Comments are closed.