HomeMy WebLinkAbout1978-03-21; City Council; 910-12; Community Swimming Pool(I
I- d CITY OF CARLSBAD
AGENDA BILL NO. 910 - Supplement No. 12
DATE : MARCH 21, 1978
Initial:
Dept . Hd. /S/
C. Atty./s/ -
DEPARTMENT: PUBLIC WORKS C. Mgr. ti,
1
Subject :
COMMUNITY SWIMMING POOL
Statement of the Matter
A joint architect/staff presentation will be made to Council on
several design concepts for the community swimming pool. It is necessary for the City Council to select and approve a conceptual
development plan so that detail design, preparation of construction
plans and specifications and preparation of a final cost estimate
can begin. If a development plan is approved at this meeting
(March 21, 1978), and no inordinate delay is experienced in the
Office of the State Architect, plans, specifications and construction
estimate should be ready for Council's approval by the beginning of
October.
Exhibit
* -
I
Memo dated March 1, 1978 to City Manager from Public Works Administrator.
Memo dated March 10, 1978 to City Manager from Public Works Administrator
and Director of Parks and Recreation.
Letter dated March 9, 1978 to City Manager from School Superintendent.
Recommendation
If City Council concurs:
1. Approve a conceptual developm nt plan; and
2. Give staff direction concerning project funding.
Council action
3-21-78 Development Plan No. 3 was accepted, with the temporary retention
of the two tennis courts. Further staff was directed to include the additional monies necessary in the 1978-79 budget, and the
Council authorized the architect to proceed with plans and
s peci f i cations.
n
EXHIBIT 1
I
I!
i! I
II
I
I i
:I iI
I
I
I
!- !
,L I,
b
\
/
j*
.-
i! a . a0
L
CARJ,SBA.D UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT City Council Chambcrs
1200 Elm Avenue
MIhTUTES OF JOINT SPECIAL MEETING OF Carlsbad , California-
TIIE BOARD OF TRUSTEES AN3 CITY PAWS Thursday, February 16, 1978 AND RECREATION COMMISSION
The meeting was called to order at 9:50 p.m. by President Call to Order.
Mary A. Scherr, at which time a quorum was present.
Board of Trustees Present: Mary A. Schcrr, President Roll.
W. Allan Keliy, Vice President
John J. Mamaw
City Parks and Recreation
ComLssion Present: Raul Tarango, Chairman
Laurie Nelson Boone
Joe De Dimini cant ani0
Don Egermayer
Jim Kinghorn
Betty Wollrich
Mr, Ron Beckman, City Public Works Administrator, and Considera tion and Review,
Mr. Ed Johnson, Director of City Parks and Recreation Depart- Preliminary Plans,
ment, were available to answer questions. A presentation of
proposed swimming pool design concepts was made by Larry
Lynch and Bill Warkentin of Kammeyer, Lynch & Partners,
architect for the project. The city staff also had prepared
an additional pian as alternate to concept No. 1. It was
announced that the same presentation would be made at the
City Council meeting of March 7, if possible, including
input from staff and suggestions from the school board.
Community Swimming Pool
Location of the building to house offices, showers and lockers
and dressing rooms was discussed in length with the school
district favoring placement of the building on the westerly
side of the property as indicated in the staff drawing.
Also, board members hoped that the swimming pool and
attendant facilities could be moved farther to the north,
allowing more area for parking in the southern lot to
accommodate school parking and future use by the planned
cultural arts center.
The two tennis courts remaining on the city-owned property
close to the pool site were discussed in view of a request for
, additional parking by the district in the southern lot. The
possibility was mentioned that they might be removed if two
new district tennis courts under construction on the northeast
corner of Basswood Avenue and Valley Street were reserved for
use by public. At the present time the city plans to
refurbish or replace the two courts near the pool site and
add lighting. -
n.
1 ,I '
Joinr Special Meeting 2
+
February 16, 1978
- Proposals on the size of the swimming pool varied from
11,000 - 12,000 square feet and 50 meters in length (as
proposed in concept No. 1) down to 5,600 square feet and
25 yards in length.
also be adjusted downward.
under concept No. 1 were estimated to be in excess of
Improvements to buildings could
Construction cost of plans
$1,200,000.
Members of the City Pool Committee were present and
expressed their wishes for early construction of a
swimming pool.
It was the general concensus that a pool should be built
with funds available at the present time rather than to
delay any longer and absorb additional rising COS"^.
It was moved by Mr. DeDiminicantanio of the City Parks and
Recreation Commission, and seconded, that the Parks and
Recreation Commission accept the staff's proposal for the
pool in design but not in exact location. Passed 5 - 1
(Mr. Egermayer).
Comments made by school board members indicated that they
were pleased with the design concept and would support
.- building the total package.
It was moved by Mr. DeDiminicantanio of the City Parks and
Recreation Commission, and seconded, that the Parks and
Recreation Comission recommend to the staff that the
Conmission present a total package to the Council and no
phase-in program. Passed unanimously.
President Scherr asked that when the presentation is made
to the City Council that it is indicated that there was a
quorum of school board members present who strongly
.endorsed both motions.
It was moved by Member Mamaux, seconded by Member Kelly,
that the school board endorse the action taken by the
Carlsbad Parks and Recreation Commission this evening.
Carried unanimously.
President Scherr adjourned the meeting at 9:59 p.m. Adjournment.
Mary A. Scherr, President
Thomas L. Curtin, Clerk
* T.SBLE 3.3. I FACILITIES ALTERNATE AL1 ERNATE ALTE KNATE
!- PROGRAM RO.1 R0.2 N0.3
Building area based on design
occupant load 6,720 4,730 4,008 3,451
1 mL,APEA ~ 11,250 9,510 7,425 5,625 I
Total Parking Area: 71,375 59,150 46,500 35,125
Maximum in pool occupant
1 oad - . 450 380 297 225
Total occupant load c (1/4 in pool 3/4 out of
PO01 1 1,800 1,520 1,188 900
Maximum peak hour attendance
(4CX) 750 61 0 47 5 360
Parking design load 750 61 0 47 5 360
50% children 37 5- 305 238 180 i
12 1/2% adults with bikes 95 76 .59 45
37 1/2% drivers 280 229 178 135
Parking demand Ca 1.5 persons per. car . 186
Staff Total Stall s :
5 191
Parking area Ih 350 s.f. per stall 66,850
Pick-up area 1,000 67,850 ---
Bike design load @ 50% use
Bike parking area @ 15 s.f.
23 5
per bike 2,850
153 119
5
158 -- c 5 124
55,303 43,400
90
-5 95 --
33,250
1,000 56,300 850 7 50 44 , 250 34,000 --
190 150
2,850 2,250
115
1,125
r----
7451-s +*E
j
i
I i i
EXWIT 5 4 I
COMMUNITY sw tM COMPLEX cosi. ES~MATE
Phase I
Estimated
cost
$ 25,000.00
Description Quanti t'y Item No.
I
2
S i te Preparation 190,000 SF
North Parking Lot 70,000 SF 70,000.00
3 50-meter Z-shaped Pool
Decking
1.1,400 SF 467,000.00 '
18,000 SF 23,400.00
Pool Landscaping 14,000 SF 5
6
18,000.00
Genera I Landscap i ng 40,000 SF 50,000.00
7 Mechanical Housing and Bleachers 1,500 SF 50,000.00
8 Bui (ding (Showers, Restrooms,
Dress i ng Areas 1 3,500 SF 170,000.00
SUBTOTAL
Contingencies
I nf.1 at ion
Des i gn
$ 873,400.00
. 50,000.00
- 70,300.00
$I .083.400.00
~90,000.00
TOTAL
Phase I I
Estimated
cost -Item No. Quantity Descr i pt i on
I Tennis Courts Renovation Lump Sum $ 20,000.00
I5,OOO.OO 2 South Parking Lot Renovqtion 30,000 SF
3 Building Addition (Administrative
Off ices 1 1,500 SF 60,000.00
I5 .OOO. 00 4 Pool and Security Area Lighting Lump Sum
SUBTOTAL
Contingencies
Inflation
Design and .Admi n i strat ion
$ t10,000.00
30,000.00
30,000.00
25.000.00
TOTAL $ f99,000.00
f
/--
I
'XXHIBIT 5
27 February 1978
Carlsbad City Council Carlsbad, California
Gent1 emen :
I saw the plans for the Carlsbad community swimnnning
pool and would like to offer a suggestion and bit of advim before you actually approve and build.
I am not too sure from that drawing, but It appears
that the 'turf t% trees' will be within the pool area. If so, may 1 warn you that that is a mistake and 8 costly one in the area of maintenanoe. I know they
look beautiful, but trees have droppings and this
adds to the cleanup and clutter at poolside, 1% will
also mean additional pool cleaning, And turf?? The lifeguards will be 'orever warning children to stay out so that they don't 'track' it into the pool.
If there is a fence which surrounds the pool itself
and separates it from the 'turf & trees' and building area, then the above problem would not exist. Hope
that is the case, but i-t' it is not, I would strongly suggest you either eliminate the trees or surround pool area with f'encing, Believe ne, maintenance
b9COMeS doubly costly when landscaping is too close to the pool.
ec: Parks & Becreation Depth
Carlsbad School Trustees
/' ,
a J
E
E
0-
W u A
U V
v)
t -
\'
DATE : MARCH 7, 1978
TO : CITY COUNCIL
FROM : City Manager
,
SUBJECT: FINANCING COMMUNITY SWIMMING POOL I,
There is currently available a total of $846,000 for the
construction of the swimming pool.
The projected cost of the architect's recommended program and of the three alternative programs is listed below. The
amount of additional funds, if any, required to complete the
recommended program for each alternative is also indicated.
If the City Council desires to provide additional funds above
the amount currently available, funds could be drawn from the unappropriated reserve or additional funds could be provided
in next year's budget since it is anticipated that actual
construction will not be underway until well into the next
fiscal year.
The staff recommended alternative is phased so that the initial
development costs will be nearer the amount of funds currently
available. Phasing is proposed to facilitate financing. The
construction elements to be carried out during proposed Phase I1
appear to be an integral part of the overall project.
If the City Council decides to proceed with the staff's recommended alternative, it is not recommended that the project be phased. Adequate funds could be provided next fiscal year to
complete the project without phasing.
The phasing of the project would create additional costs and
unless the City Council as a policy rnatter does not desire to
undertake the construction elements proposed for Phase I1 at this
time, it is recommended that the project be completely built out
without phasing.
FINANCING COMMUNITY SWIMMING POOL
March 7, 1975
Page 2
SWIMMING POOL ALTERNATIVES
A?Jc€lITEx3Ts mTEFuimm XTEFuimTE ALTEmlAm STAFF
-TI016 NO. 1 NO. 2 No. 3 RECQMMEZWZION
PROJECT
COST 1,245,000 947,000 765,000 605,000 1,278,400
PROFESSIONAL
FEES 70,000 70,000 70,000 70,000 70,000
TOTAL 1,315,000 1,017,000 835,000 675,000 1,348,400
DY
A- 846,000 846,000 846,000 846,000 846,000
ADDITIONAL
FUNDS REQUIRED 469,000 171,000 -0- -0- 502,400 *
To Conplete First Phase - (307,400)
To carrlplete Second Phase - (195,000)
(502,400) *
PAUL D. BUSSEY
City Manager
PDB : FNM: vm
MEMORANDUM
TO : City Manager
FROM : Pub1 ic Works Administrator/Director of Parks & Recreation
DATE : March IO, 1978
SUBJECT: Community Swimming Pool
The process outlined in my memo of March I, 1978 provided for the
architect's initial presentation of design concepts for the community
swim complex to be presented to the Council followed by some staff com-
ments and recommendations. This is how it was handled at the joint
School Board and Parks & Recreation Commission meeting. Also included
would be the minutes of that meeting. This procedure was proposed to
move the concept design approval along as fast as possible.
Since the joint meeting, the architect has taken the feedback from
that meeting and prepared another concept labeled "Land Use Concept 3."
This concept was presented to and reviewed by Parks & Recreation and by
Pub1 ic Works staff at a meeting on March 9, 1978.
Land Use Concept 3 is superior to other plans considered, wi I I al-
low for phasing with minimum negative impact on functional operations and
is less expensive than the architect's and staff's previous recommendations.
The attached pages out1
subsequent to the joint meet
I have prepared a subst
which includes funding needs
ne the analysis performed by the architect
ng, the proposed concept and cost estimate.
tute attachment to your March 7, 1978 memo
for Concept 3.
Ronald A. Beckman, P.E.
Pub1 ic Works Administrator Director of Parks & Recreation
RAB:veb
Attachments
SWIMMING POOL ALTERNATIVES
1,245,000 947,000 765,000 605 , 000 1,278,400 1,209,453
€%oFESIOrn
FEES 70,000 70,000 70,000 70,000 70,000 70,000
TYmL 1,315,000 1,017,000 835,000 675,000 1,348,400 1,279,453
-. ..
CNRREmW A- 846 , 000 846,000 846 , 000 846,000 846,000 846,000
ADDITIONRL FZINDS m= 469 , 000 171,000 -0- -0- 502,400 * 433,453’
To &mple- First Phase - (307,400) (202,211)
To conp?lete Second Phase - (195,000) (231,242)
(502,400) * (433,453)
_-
3.4 THIRD GENERATION CONCEPT STUDIES
3.4.1 Project Components and Space Requirements
Pool Deck Turf Pool Equipment , B1 eachers Entry Bui 1 di ng Pedestrian Drop Off Bike Parking (235 stalls) Vehicular Parking (191 stalls)
12,000 14,000 20 , 000 1,500 1,200
200 5 , 200 900 3 , 500 68 , 000
3.4.2 Boundary Conditions
North - Expansion area/single family dwellings/access to Basswood.
South - Cultural Arts Center (future)/ access road on school site.
East - Monroe landscape bufferjmajor pedestrian and vehicular access
West - High School campus/slope bank down to field/pedestrian access for students/el iminate a1 1 exist-
ing tennis courts.
3.4.3 Environmental Constraints
3.4.3.1 Cool ocean breezes from the west should be buffered to provide protection for swimmers.
3.4.3.2 Glare and reflection from the sun should be avoided for competitors, judges, spectators and life guards by designing sight lines and view orientations to the north and east.
3.4.3.3 Noise, light and debris generated in the pool complex and adjacent parking areas must be attenuated, buffered, or elimin- ated from impacting adjacent and/or nearby residences.
3.4.4 Functional Requirements (Numbers in parenthesis refer to applicable portions of the Project Goals & Performance Criteria)
-.
3.4.4.1 Principle entry to pool is throuah or adjacent to building providing maximum access control. (2.3.9.1)
3.4.4.2 Bike parking must be visible from inside pool and near the principle entry allowing visual supervision and convenient access. (2.3.9.1.4)
3.4.4.3
3.4.4.4
3.4.4.5
3.4.4.6
3.4.4.7
3.4.4.8
3.4.4.9
3.4.4.10
3.4.4.11
3.4.4.12
Start/finish should occur at the shallow end of the pool. allows for kick-turns on all 100 meter races to occur at the deep end. (2.3.4.1 .l)
This
Start/finish should face north reduc- ing glare and reflection problems for competitors. (2.3.4.1 .l)
Spectators should face east or north reducing glare and reflection problems inherent in outdoor pools. (2.3.4.1 .l)
Pool equipment should be located in the proximity of the deep end thus circu- lating the maximum volume of water the minimum distance. (2.3.6.1 .l)
Building must be located to facilitate phased construction. (2.3.7.1 )
Principle entry should relate to major parking area. (2.3.9.1.1)
Long dimension of pool should be on a north/south axis with a preferred alignment of 22P west of north. (2.3.4.1 .l)
Turf area (sunbathing) should face south and/or west to maximize solar exposure. (2.3.4.1 .l)
Landscaping should be minimized on windy side of project, i.e., westerly side adjacent to school thus keeping wind blown debris out of the pool and reducing maintenance costs. (2.3.11.1.1)
Shallow end of pool should be close to entry - children can enter pool with maximum supervision. (2.3.4.1 .l)
.-
3.4.4.13 Minimum 5' fence/wall must surround pool area. Additional height (9'-10' total) will be required for sound attenuation. (2.3.5.1 .1)
3.4.4.14 Vehicular access to pool equipment area is required for servicing and deliveries. (2.3.5.1.1 and 2.3.9.1.2)
3.4.4.15 Pedestrian drop off zone should be on-site, not on narrow local street and should be located in the immedi- ate proximity of the pool entry. (2.3.9.1 .l)
3.4.4.16 Pedestrian access from both the school and Monroe should be easy and direct to the controlled access to the pool area. (2.3.9.1.3)
_- ' .I
t Relationships based on physical access requirements A
Relationships based on visual
access require- ments
1. Pool
2. Deck
3. Turf
m 4. Pool Equipment
CI 5. Bleachers
9 - 6. Entry z
I- V 7. Building
LL 8. Pedestrian Drop Off
9. Bike Parking
10. Vehicular Parking
Relationship Criteria
1. Physical access: A measure of the
<. Lu
4
J
z, 3
providing direct access between functional areas in order to meet the operational, administrative and support object- ives of the complex.
- 3 Necessary
- 2 Important - 1 Incidental - 0 Not Required
providing direct visual access between funcational areas to meet the supervisory, safety and operational objectives of the complex.
3 Necessary - 2 Important 1 Incidental 0 Not Required
2. Visual access: A measure of the relative importance of
3.4.5 AREA RELATIONSHIP MATRIX
r-Yb OWL ow3 P-~I-
-(urn
!3 5,
/, ,, ; 1.
~ * -1
3
3
i3
2
0
3
-
3!,'
.I, ,
000
330
320
322
000
ooc)
000 3 -
relative importance of
3.4.6
I.
COMBINED AREA AND BOUNDARY CONDITION RELATIONSHIP MATRIX
I 10. Vehicular Parking Y
- I I
I I
n -J ww HI- LL= 0 Jcr --I 4v,
t-w 00 OV LL<
mv,
I 1 ec
W
I
,--
a-
-
A
m
V 0 24
r W 3
v) O W -0 rD
a
ru
0 0 -
3
Y W vl 0
0
0 rD 0 7r
4
0 0
m
z 0 3 I
ID <
0 U ID Q
> -5 ID W
0 -h
v, * ID
a
2
2.
-
W W
0 03 ul
Y
I
t
I
- -
m
v) c W I --I 0 --I > I- ..
-
d
Ln
W P ul
-1
Y
-
W 0 U
N Ln cn
Y
4 W 0
P N
Y
--J -
CD
(3, W
ul 03 w
Y
U
V ID 1 --I. 2 ct ID 1
I- W 3
In 0 W -0 rD
a
Iu
0 0 ;=. 8 J n
d
0
0 0 0
-
ru 0
0 0 0
N N
W ul 0 -
1-
P
4 3 3
'4
P
,
- -
V 0 0 4
W ul
ol
3
dr
P
ul 0 0
Y
d
d
Y ru Ul 0
h
v)
++ U h a
a
a
Y
U
-
Lc C
P w 0
Y
-
69 UJ (2, P
Y If! W
w- P Iu
0 0
Y
-1
P s
Y N a3 U
-1 P
cn 0 0
Y
3 m ow -0 -v, --l
m
U ru 0
Y
4D c I/, m
n
-8' 4 4
. 4 \ &
(D
v) w
\ 0
March 9, 1978
Mr. Paul D. Bussey
Carl sbad City Manager
1200 Elm Avenue
Carl sbad, Cal ifornia 92008
Dear Mr. Bussey:
Following the joint meeting of the Carlsbad Unified School District
Board of Trustees, the Swimning Pool Committee and the Parks and Recrea-
tion Commission relative to preliminary swimming pool plans, the Board of Trustees directed that I request the city to give every consideration to locating the pool in the northerly portion of the pool site. The
board feels that if the pool can be arranged on the northerly portion of the site, the parking needs associated with the forthcoming arts center could also be accommodated.
With reference to the performing arts center, the board would like to invite a representative, or representatives, from the city to sit in
on discussions concerning the design and configuration of the performing arts center. If you would like to suggest a name, or names, for partici- pation in these deliberations, I would be delighted to see that this person, or these persons, is brought up to date and invited to all future planning meetings.
Robert A. Crawford \ District Superintendent
RAC:aw
ROBERT A. CRAWFORD suCERINTENDENT BOARD OF EDUCATION THOMAS L. CURTN, M.D. W. ALLAN KELLY JOHN J. MAMAUX RICHARD R. ONEIL, M.D. MARY A. SCHERR