Fichtel: Urging BET to reject Dorothy Hamill Rink Task Force Request to fund “flip”

By: |
Print

Submitted by Mark Fichtel, Byram

I urge the BET to reject the request by the Dorothy Hamill Skating Rink Task Force (DHSRTF) to fund the “flip” plan.

My reasons are:

  1. Almost everyone wants the DHSR replaced, but as with the Drake committee, the DHSRTF has insisted on replacing a small, neighborhood rink with a massively expanded “destination” arena that is not just a replacement of the DHSR and will dramatically change the character and ambiance of the Morlot Park and surrounding neighborhood.
  2. If the intent were to upgrade the DHSR with necessary required improvements, the cost was projected at $4-$5 million in 2019 by KG&D, and that number has not increased substantially.
  3. Even were there a desire to replace and upgrade the DHSR with the necessary improvements, and add numerous locker rooms, an internal eating area, a large meeting room, a scoreboard, and numerous other enhancements, KG&D projected that cost at $16 million, and that number is still likely below $20 million.
  4. KG&D projected that even doing all the items above and adding a second ice slab, a generator, improved cameras and viewing, and other enhancements, the cost would be between $30 and $38 million, yet the “flip” plan is estimated at $40 million, but that is qualified as a “rough order of magnitude” in the detailed cost numbers, which virtually guarantees the numbers will go higher.
  5. Nowhere in the final DHSRTF report is there detail of what will be included for the $40 million, and no rational person would approve spending $40 million without that detail.
  6. There is no analysis of what operating costs and revenue will be, which is especially important since the DHSR’s largest user, the Greenwich Skating Club, has reduced their use of the DGSR because they now use Wings Arena, which they helped fund.
  7. The “flip” layout, as recently as last week, still appears to be in flux, which should raise questions about eventual costs for blasting, construction, retaining walls, roads, and green space, and no funds should be allotted until these issues are finalized.
  8. Do not let the refrain of the “flip” supporters that “delays have cost massive increases” push you to a decision before the issues above are addressed, as the “massive increases” have only been because they are comparing apples (a simple replacement) to oranges (an elaborate replacement).
  9. Finally, it seems as if funding the full $40 million at this juncture, rather than the “normal” smaller amounts to file an MI or do the A&E work, may be non-conforming to the Charter.

Mark D. Fichtel