Sunday, May 06, 2007

Pool consultant report summary














I found the pool consultant report and am including the one-page "executive summary"(to the left) and the one-page "fifth analysis"(to the right). The 5th analysis covers the topic of placing a permanent structure over the pool. Click on the images to enlarge them, if you'd like to read the text.

I'm also quite interested in reading the "fourth analysis" covering the "energy" concept of cogeneration. However, I haven't gotten to that yet.

Anyway, the entire report is 65 pages and includes five analyses. So I'm not sure if you can fairly judge the fifth analysis without reading the other four analyses. Nonetheless, you may want to take a read of the executive summary. I'd like to hear your thoughts on it. (For a blog history of the pool consultant, click on both "recreation" and "pool" to the left.)

Tim White
Town Council, 4th District

3 comments:

Anonymous said...

Tim - At what town council meeting will this report be thoroughly discussed?

Anonymous said...

Initial review of the document tells me there is no new information provided. USA Swimming only works on programs and revenue generation. 10 pages of the 65 pages is a boilerplate demographic report that comes off a data base USA Swim uses as a standard part of their data collection & analysis of towns they are asked to help out. No cost for this info. Very little info on how to reduce operating costs other than increase cost of pool passes and memberships; we already knew this. One choice of a building, steel, not a good choice because it does not address the over issue of esthetics and energy savings. As the paper says today it will be a living document and USA Swim is in it for the long haul to help reduce costs. It appears we hired another consultant that did not go far enough to provide a handful of solutions to the problem, or was told by Town government what to write. The writing is on the wall, new bubble technology is more energy efficient. This what we get folks, new new bubble in a few years. We will continue to spend $400,000 per year as a subsidy. No matter how much things change it always stays the same.

Anonymous said...

If energy is the big cost item why don't they look at solar( it's free forever) and permanently enclosing the pool? There has to be a break even point sometime? This is what I thought we spent the $20,000 for. The people in charge of the pool are great and dedicated. Let's give them some support.
Something needs to be decided before we need another bubble. No more bubble it doesn't belong in Cheshire.