HomeMy WebLinkAbout2003-04-22; City Council; 17148 Exhibit; Alga Norte Community Park Aquatics ComplexCity __ of Carlsbad
June 10,2003 AllRdVO
For the Information of the
CITY COUNCIL
IMPROVING
QUALITY OF LIFE
BUILDING
COMMUNITY
PRIDE
TO: CITY MANAGER Asst.CMzcA dcc
VIA:
QatdaCity ~-3-
ASSISTANT CITY MANAGE
RECREATION DIRECT0 & Y FROM: MUNICIPAL PROJECTS MANAGE
RE: ALGA NORTE COMMUNITY PARK AQUATICS COMPLEX;
FOLLOWUP PROJECT INFORMATION FROM JUNE 2,2003
CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP
The City Council requested the following additional information at its June 2, 2003
workshop regarding the proposed Aquatics Complex to be developed at Alga Norte
Community Park:
1. An exhibit of the Aquatics Complex site layout with the aquatics components
selected by the City Council (see p.2);
2. An estimate of both construction / development costs as well as annual
maintenance and operation costs of this new option (see p, 3,4); STRENGTHENING
FAMILIES
3. An assessment of “phasing options” and cost estimates of each:
-
- (see site exhibit on p. 7,8,9);
(see cost estimate on p, 10, 1 1);
DEVELOPING - (see comparative summary on p. 12, 13).
TOMORROW’S
LEADERS Recreation staff and our design team consultants have prepared the attached package
of information in response to these 3 information requests. Please let us know if there
is any additional information required regarding this project.
c: City Attorney
Administrative Services Director
Finance Director
City Clerk
Recreation Staff
www. ci. carlsbad .ca. us
1200 Carlsbad Village Drive Carlsbad, CA 92008-1 989 (760) 434-2826 FAX (760)720-6917
r
c
P
SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION PROVIDED FOR THE
ALGA NORTE COMMUNITY PARK
AQUATICS COMPLEX
June 10,2003
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Option 10 Site Exhibit - City Council Selected Option
Option 10 Development Cost Analysis
Option 10 Maintenance & Operations Financial Analysis
Project Phasing Definitions and Cost Summary
Option 10A Exhibit
Option 10B Exhibit
Option 1OC Exhibit
Phasing Options: Development Cost Analysis
Phasing Options: Maintenance & Operations Financial Analysis
Phasing Feasibility
Phased Development Cost Increase vs. Net M&O Savings
Paqe
2
3
4
5-6
7
a
9
10
11
12
13
FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS: ESTIMATED COST OF CONSTRUCTION (2003): $1 1,298,548 ESTIMATED ANNUAL OPERATING COST (2003): $ 1,136,913 POTENTIAL ANNUAL COST RECOVERY (2003): 60%
2
'LJ a +
.I E
0
C 0
0
F
.I CI
3
.-
_-
,-
I
,-..
,-
,--
c_
F
F
r-
P
I-
r
4
f-
c -
PROJECT PHASING DEFINITIONS
AND COST SUMMARY
Citv Council Direction:
At the Monday, June 2, 2003 City Council workshop, the City Council defined the
components of the proposed Aquatics Complex to be developed at Alga Norte
Community Park. These components are graphically depicted in the attached site
exhibit, referred to as “Option 10, City Council Option.” Now that the ultimate
components of the Aquatics Complex have been defined, the City Council thereafter
directed staff to explore phasing opportunities to include an estimate of both
construction and annual maintenance and operations costs of each of the phasing
options. The pages following within this report provide detailed cost estimates.
Proiect Phasinq Options:
Staff and our design team consultants have identified the following 3 phasing options for
the development of the Alga Norte Community Park Aquatics Complex:
Phasing Option 10A: No phasing of components; build entire Aquatics
Complex at one time.
Phasing Option 1 OB: Build all components but defer the competition
pool to the future.
Phasing Option 1 OC: Build all components but defer all recreation pools to
the future.
Discussion:
It is not feasible to build a portion, say half of the competition pool, and in later years
return and extend the competition pool to full length. The construction cost for this type
of phasing of this deep-water pool would be considerable considering the future cost of
modifying, upsizing, or installing additional pumps, electrical utilities and panels,
extending and / or enlarging underground piping, etc,. The entire competition pool
would need to be shut down and substantially reconstructed to accommodate the added
extension. In the case of deferring the construction of the competition pool to a later
date, the more practical and more economical phasing option would be to defer the
entire competition pool as one entire component.
c c r r 5
c
The various, recreation pools and water play apparatus of the proposed project are
viewed by the design team as one entire, interrelated recreation component. It is not
feasible, nor economically practical, to construct one or two of the proposed children’s
pools with water play apparatus upfront and then return years later to install the “lazy or
moving river” piece, or vice versa. Again, the practicality and corresponding
interference with the existing pool operation would strongly argue against breaking up
pieces of the recreation pool component and building them over time. In the case of
deferring the construction of the recreation pool component to a later date, the more
practical and more economical phasing option would be to defer the entire recreation
pool component to the future. However, a clear understanding must exist that phasing
construction will increase development costs with the passing of time.
Phasinq Options Cost Summary:
The following is an estimate of the construction and maintenance and operation costs
for each of the 3 phasing options previously discussed. Please note these cost
estimates are in 2003 dollars and accompanying detailed breakdown of these costs
follow on succeeding pages.
Phasing Option 10A: No phasing of components; build entire Aquatics
Complex at one time.
Development Cost: $ 11,298,548
M & 0 Cost: $ 1,136,913 (60% cost recovery)
Net City Subsidy: $ 452,813
Phasing Option 1 OB: Build all components but defer the competition
pool to the future.
Development Cost: $ 9,214,648
M & 0 Cost: $ 876,430 (64% cost recovery)
Net City Subsidy: $ 317,330
Phasing Option 1OC: Build all components but defer all recreation pools to
the future.
Development Cost: $ 8,054,287
M & 0 Cost: $ 604,829 (57% cost recovery)
Net City Subsidy $ 259,229
6
i^
P
P
/-
rc
- -
COMPLETE COMPLEX m., I .I a
JUNE 3,2003 -OUt.m
CARLSBAD CITY COUNCIL
SCHEMATIC AQUATICS COMPLEX OPTION ALGA NORTE COMMUNITY PARK
_1 ---,m-m-mm-----.)m---------.mm-- L
1
PHASING OPTION 1 OA
c c c c
7
I
PHASING OPTION
JUNE 3.2003 --I.- --" -.- .- =.u- CARLSBAD CITY COUNCIL
ALGA NORTE COMMUNITY PARK
SCHEMATIC AQUATICS COMPLEX OPTION
1 OB
8
c r
P
.-
P
1
PHASING OPTION 1oc
JUNE 3.2003 IIIICU,.) -- CARLSBAD CITY COUNCIL
SCHEMATIC AQUATICS COMPLEX OPTION
ALGA NORTE COMMUNITY PARK
J -111111-11111111111-11111.1111 L
9
v) fn .-
5k -
([I 3 u a 0 6)
Y
..
v) r= 0 .- .CI 0"
10
Q, 0 c m S Q)
C .+,
.I ii
0"
..
v) C 0 .I w
C
v) a
.I
r e
11
Phasing Feasibility
Phasing the Aquatics Complex would allow the City to defer some of the M&O costs to
a future phase of the project. However, if this was done, staff’s projection is that the
construction costs for the deferred phase would increase at a rate of about 5% per year
as time passes.
The table on page 13 compares increasing construction costs to the net savings that
could be obtained by deferring M&O costs. The comparison uses a 5% rate of inflation
for construction and M&O costs. A projection to year five is given as a possible timing
for the remaining phase of the project. The following is a summary of the five year
projected comparison for Options 1 OB & 1 OC.
Phasing Option 1OB:
Development Cost Increase:
Cumulative M&O Savings:
Phasing Option 1OC:
Development Cost Increase:
Cumulative M&O Savings:
Build all components but defer the competition
pool to the future.
$575,743
$748,629
Build all components but defer all recreation
pools to the future.
$ 896,329
$ 1,069,674
12
J
13
?--
,- p 6 I 7, 1L-l Landscape Architecture
rc
,--
--
.-
,.-
March 19,2003
Mr. John Cahill
Municipal Projects Manager
City of Carlsbad
1635 Faraday Avenue
Carlsbad, CA 92008
Environmental Planning ~-aa-o3
PROJECT: Alga Norte Community Park Aquatics Complex
RE: Submission of Aquatics Complex Study Findings
Dear John:
Wimmer Yamada and Caughey is pleased to present for your review the
enclosed study for the proposed aquatics complex at Alga Norte Community
Park. Per direction of City staff we have evaluated the various possible
components, and through consultation with City staff, our team members, and through the public participation process, have evolved the enclosed
recommended design option.
As we continue to move the project forward to the City's Parks and Recreation
Commission and ultimately to City Council, we wish to assure you that Wimmer
Yamada and Caughey will continue to strive to provide you the highest quality of
design and client service as you realize this important municipal project. As
leasure to work with you and the staff at the City of Carlsbad.
Joseph Y. Yamada, FASLA
Fatrick W. Caughey, ASLA
Principals
3067 Fifth Avenue
San Diego, CA 92103.5840
619.232.4004
Fax 619-232-0640
CA Reg # 528,2895
A2 Reg # 22729
NV Reg 11 280
AQUATICS COMPLEX STUDY PREPARED
WIMMER YAMADA AND CAUGHEY
March 2003
BY:
TABLE OF CONTENTS
P
r
r
F-
r
,P
f-
Ac know I edgements.. ........................................................................... 1
Executive Summary ............................................................................. 3-4
Project Background ............................................................................. 5-20
Precedent Facilities . Roseville, Folsom, Pannell .................... 6-1 0
Summary of Preliminary Options 1-8 .................................... 1 1-1 5
Public Workshop ................................................................... 15-1 9
Summary of Potential Optimal Facility Programming ............. 20
Option 7 . The Recommended Option ................................................
A Note on Phasing ................................................................ 23
21 -30
Conclusion.. .......................................................................... 22
A Note on Parking ................................................................. 23-25
A Note on Alternative Energy Sources ................................... 25-30
A Note on PartnershipdSponsorships .................................... 30
Financial Analysis ............................................................................... 33-92
Summary of Options .......................................................... 33
WYAC Capital Expenditures Spreadsheet by Option .......... 34
City Operating Expenditures Spreadsheet by Option .......... 35
Precedent Facility Financial Information, Exhibits A, B, C..36-40
Detailed Operating Cost Breakdown (City) ......................... 41 -55
Detailed Pool Cost Breakdown (ADG) ............................... 56-92
Supplementary Information ................................................................. 93-1 06
Tour Response Tabulation ................................................... 93-1 02
Workshop Questionnaire and Results Tabulation ................ 103-1 06
rn
rn
5 z rn
3: 3:
X
0
5
r
c
r
r
r
r
r
P
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Wimmer Yamada and Caughey wishes to express their thanks to the Carlsbad
City Council:
Mayor Claude "Bud" Lewis
Councilmember Ramona Finnila
Councilmember Ann Kulchin
Councilmember Matt Hall
Councilmember Mark Packard
Similarly, we offer our thanks to the members of the Parks and Recreation
Commission:
Scott Pieratt, Chairman
Jim Comstock
Dennis Cunningham
Marlaine Hubbard
Leo Pacheco
Seth Schulberg
We also wish to express our thanks to the Carlsbad City Leadership and Staff who
participated in this design effort:
John Cahill
Scott Bradstreet
Carl Pope
Dave Gorsline
Ken Price
Mark Steyaert
Keith Beverly
Helga Stover
We would also like to thank the members of the community who participated in
the workshop and responded to our questionnaires in an effort to aid us in
defining the requisite elements for this facility. Last, but not least, we wish to
extend our thanks to the staff of the three facilities we had an opportunity to visit
in the Sacramento area: Mike Shellito and Alexa Pritchard, Roseville Aquatics
Complex; Tarry Smith and Chad Gunter, Folsom Aquatic Center; and Greg
Narramore and Terri Matal, Pannell Meadowview Community Pool, City of
Sacramento.
CITY OF CARLSBAD - www.alganortepark.com
r
THE CONSULTING TEAM
W immer Y amada and Caughey, Landscape Arch itecture/Envi ronmental Planning
Pat Caughey, President and Principal-in-Review
Stephanie Hatton, Senior Associate
Brad Hilliker, Associate
Aquatic Design Group, Aquatics Consultant
Randy Mendioroz, Principal
Tucker Sadler Noble Castro, Architects
Roger Hill, Project Architect
REB Engineering, Civil Engineering
Rick Berg, President and Principal
Paul Hobson, Artist
Ninyo & Moore, Geotechnical Engineering
Mike Bemis, Principal
Frank Moreland, Senior Project Geologist
Erik Olsen, Chief Geotechnical Engineer
LSW Engineers, Electrical Engineering
John Lamb, Sr., Principal
Campbell Anderson & Associates, Construction Cost Management
Graham Anderson, Principal
r
r
r
r
/-
r
r
r
r
r
- CITY OF CARLSBAD - www.aIganortepark.com -
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This aquatics facility study was undertaken at the direction of Carlsbad City
Council - who, upon approval of the master plan for Alga Norte Community Park
in January of 2003, felt that additional definition with respect to the park's
aquatics component was necessary and timely. It has been prepared primarily to
provide a tool to City Council to understand the community's needs, to consider
what options are available, and to better understand the cost implications of the
various alternatives for the complex.
The six goals of this project identified by staff, were to develop a design for the
aquatics complex that:
1. Addresses the need to develop recreation facilities in response to the
2. Meets the wide range of programming needs in three main categories -
3. Develop facilities that allow for programs that grow with the community
4. Is a fiscally responsible solution
5. Maximizes the opportunity for cost recovery
6. Utilizes technology and explores avenues to minimize the ongoing cost of
strategic plan
instruction, recreation, and competition
maintenance and operations
The approved Alga Norte
Community Park Master Plan
contains an approximately
four-acre "place holder"
design for the future aquatics
complex. It depicts a 50
meter swimming pool and
support building as is
currently contained in the
City's CIP budget. With the
passage of Proposition C last
November, the City Council
now has the opportunity to
consider expanding the scope
and timing of the aquatics complex development should it so desire. To that end,
the consulting team, accompanied by members of the Parks and Recreation
Commission, City Council, and City staff, toured three facilities in the Sacramento
area during the first week of February 2003 to better understand the options for
multi-pool complexes. Additionally, a public meeting was held on February 27,
2003 to afford community members an opportunity to have their opinions heard
and needs considered in the design. Through these events and from considerable
research, the consulting team has designed and evaluated numerous options each
,\ L ,$ *l t k \ -$I i ij i-i i \ ./ (r 11 i C! ti t k
CITY OF CARLSBAD AQUATICS COMPLEX STUDY
r
r
MAYOR AND TEAM ON SITE VISIT
of which reflects combinations of components that
address, to varying degrees, the needs of all
community members.
The recommended alternative, Option 7, is a design
comprised of a "two pool" layout, an estimated
10,000 square foot support facility, bleacher seating,
turf and hardscape gathering areas, a concession
facility, and a sufficient parking configuration. Option 7 meets many of the six - - goals of the project. The 50 meter swimn
competitive swim, water polo, lap swim,
and some instruction. The eight lane
trainindwarm-up pool will provide
opportunity for swim instruction, some
recreation, and some lap swim. The
large area to the north of the proposed
pools would provide some flexibility for
expansion of the recreation facilities in
the future. The estimated cost of
construction of this alternative is
$6,493,856 and while it does exceed the
current CIP budget, it is considerably less
costly than several of the alternatives
with expanded recreation components.
The estimated cost recovery would be
48% annually.
ii ing pool will provide an opportunity for
OPTION 7
The citizens of the City of Carlsbad pride
themselves on living, working, and
recreating in a truly world-class, dynamic,
and growing community. With a
commitment to providing services for
people throughout the course of their lives
- from the youngest tots to the senior
community members - the proposed
aquatics complex for Alga Norte
Community Park will provide opportunities
for competitive swim, for some limited rec
swim, and for swim instruction. It is an alternative with room to expand in the
future as the need and desire for recreation elements grows. It is the
recommendation of this study that staff and the design team be directed to move
forward to realize Option 7 - to provide an exciting and enjoyable amenity now
and into the future.
r
-
r
r
f-
a
PROJECT BACKGROUND
Alga Norte Community Park will be located at the northwestern intersection of
Poinsettia Lane and Alicante Road. The site is approximately thirty-three acres in
size and is part of a north-south trending valley that was previously used for
agriculture. The site is bounded to the north and west by preserved habitat, to the
south by the extension of Poinsettia Lane, and to the east by the future Alicante
Road. Generally, the site slopes down from north to south and has recently been
fields occupying the southern half. The proposed architectural and landscape
architectural character of the park will be in keeping with other City parks of this
magnitude and will be compatible with the design themes established by The
Villages of La Costa for the neighborhoods that will ultimately lie adjacent to Alga
Norte Community Park. i r c r r- r'
I-
,-
I-
I- -
,--
I-
F-
,--
P
MASTER PLAN
Within the Master Plan an area of
approximately four acres was
reserved for the future aquatics
complex. The associated access to
the site and parking for the
complex is provided to the east -
with an entry drive from Alicante
Road. To the north of the
proposed aquatics facility is an
area designed to meet needs for
family picnicking and children's
adventure play, with both
structured and unstructured space.
immediately south of the facility
are several hard courts and a large,
open, passive green space which
functions both as a gathering and
picnicking spot but also to
separate the active fields in the
south from the more passive areas
to the north.
The CIP budget for the City of
Carlsbad earmarks $5.9 million for
the development of a 50 meter swimming pool and support building as part of
Alga Norte Community Park. It became evident during the park master planning
that there was considerable concern in the community as to whether this single
pool would meet the growing community demand for competitive, recreational,
and instructional opportunities. Additionally, there was a desire to explore
whether there was an opportunity to consider realizing the facility sooner than
was originally targeted.
Precedent Research and Programming
The City of Carlsbad and the design team embarked on a touring expedition of
comparable aquatics facilities in other cities, in an effort to refine preliminary
programming elements for the future Alga Norte Community Park Aquatics
Complex. This tour event was conducted in the Sacramento area of California, and
included visits to the following sites:
Roseville Aquatics Complex, in the City of Roseville
Folsom Aquatic Center, in the City of Folsom
Pannell Meadowview Community Center, in the City of Sacramento
WIMMER \AMADA AhD CAULHE\
CITY OF CARLSBAD - www.alganortepark.com
-
r
/-
IC
r
Tour participants benefited from a firsthand view and experience at each facility,
observing and noting the overall site design and layout, parking, architecture, pool
elements, infrastructure systems, landscape, concession opportunities, donor
opportunities, sponsorship opportunities, scale, quality, materials / finishes /
colors, and components that may become part of a similar design and operation
for the City of Carlsbad. Key staff members from each facility conducted the
guided tours, sharing their personal knowledge and experiences - which was
extremely beneficial for all participants. A composite summary of tour participant
comments is provided with the supplementary information in the back of this
report.
ROSEVILLE AQUATICS COMPLEX
This aquatic complex was the first of
the three facilities visited by the tour
participants, and provided a "base"
experience for the tour. It is sited
adjacent to a city high school, with on-
site parking areas utilized by both
students and facility visitors. Program
elements include a 25 yard x 50 meter
competition pool with permanent
bleachers and overhead shading; a EXTERIOR ENTRY
7,200 square foot recreation pool with zero-depth entry, lap swim lanes, and a
150 feet waterslide; and a children's wet playground with zero-depth entry.
General comments from the tour participants expressed a perception that the
exterior and interior architectural features are functional yet institutional - some-
what lacking in a quality aesthetic character. Locker, shower, and restroom
facilities seem minimal and bland. Minimal in the use of materials, in the
amenities provided to the users, in accessibility, and in overall aesthetics. Also, all
guests must pass directly through the locker and shower facilities to access the
pool areas, which is not really
desired or necessary for family
observers and team supporters.
Tour participants stated
displeasure in the layout of the
pool elements - that they are
not unified and pleasing.
Operational space is
inadequate for the infrastructure
(pumps, heaters, chemical
systems, filtration systems,
maintenance areas, etc). More MAYOR AND TEAM
CITY OF CARCSBAD - www.a~ganortepark.com
F-
f-
general storage space is also
needed for staff and operations
equipment (such as lane
markers, etc). Offices for staff
and lifeguards are not well
designed, not user friendly, and
not properly separated from
public spaces (with noise being
one of the many problems). An
opportunity for visua I I y
connecting this entire aquatic
complex to the adjacent park /
green space on the north side is
a positive amenity - however,
this potential is inhibited due to
the blocked views from the large amount of solid
wall fencing (as compared to the limited use of
transparent metal picket fencing). Also, a general
lack of proper maintenance, care, and housekeeping
is evident throughout the site - and thus contributes
TURF AREA WITHIN THE COMPLEX
to an overall lackluster image. WET PLAY
Overall, this is a solid aquatic complex that incorporates many program elements
desirable in a civic aquatic facility of this scale. However, many lessons about
"what not to do" are present here that can direct design and operation decisions
for a future aquatic facility within the City of Carlsbad.
FOLSOM AQUATIC CENTER
This aquatic center was the second facility experience for the tour participants.
This facility incorporates a 25 yard x 51 meter competition pool with a movable
bulkhead, a 4,712 square foot recreation pool with a waterslide, a wet-play
structure with a zero-depth entry, and a 2,475 square foot instructional pool with
entry / exit steps aligning one side.
This facility quickly became the
"favorite choice" for most of the tour
participants for several reasons. It has
a sense of quality in the aesthetic
character, and it presents an
impression of integrity in the
architecture, in the site amenities
(lockers, bathrooms, etc.), and in the
pool elements. The quality use of b - brick, tile, and detailed architectural WET PLAY
,-
features make this facility stand out from the others
that were toured. Donor participation and
corporate sponsorship have provided financial
support that contributes to cost recovery in
unconventional ways for a civic facility, and in
more ways than just user fees. The different types
of donor tiles at the aquatic facility have created a
vibrant connection to the regional community,
with names, artwork, and quotes from real people
that live there and use the center. Corporate sponsorship logos are present
throughout the site, yet seem subtle and blend in with the surrounding elements.
They do not seem to create a "commercial kitsch" flavor to the site. Also, private
party rentals (including birthday parties) held throughout the year contribute
additional monies to assist in cost recovery.
CORPORATE SPONSORSHIPS
The site design incorporates a well-blended mixture of
hardscape and softscape elements. Large turf areas create a
soothing green space relative to the expanse of paving, thus
softening the aesthetics. Also the turf areas allow tent set-up
for team competitions, birthday parties, congregating,
sunning, and socializing. Palm trees and other vegetative JOHN CAHILL AND TEAM
planting contribute additional ambiance and character to the site.
Although a relatively new facility (about 2 years old), the Folsom Aquatic Center is
maintained in a superb condition, which was quite evident when compared with
the slightly older Roseville facility (about 7 years old). Due to the inherent nature
of many types of corrosive elements present in an aquatic facility (including sun
exposure, chemical exposure, mineral deposition, suntan oil deposition, etc), a
detailed and comprehensive maintenance program to retain and continually
enhance the integrity of the facility should be a major consideration when
evaluating operational costs for an aquatic complex of this type. A well-
maintained, clean, and "nice" environment can enhance the experience for
aquatic facility users, and foster a desire to return again and again. This factor
seemed present at the Folsom Aquatic Center.
PANNELL MEADOWVILLE COMMUNITY POOL
__-.
r-
r
- www.
?
The aquatic component on this site is actually a
small portion within a larger city-owned
community center complex. The aquatic
component incorporates an "everything-in-one-
pool" concept with a combination competition /
recreation pool with eight 25 yard swim lanes, a
waterslide, and a wet-playground with a zero- SEATING PATIO
r
_.-
WET PLAY
depth entry. Like the Folsom Aquatic Center, this
is also a relatively new facility (about 2 years
old).
This type of facility is the most economical to
operate, since everything is included in the one
pool. However, this can have negative aspects,
since a dirty diaper from a toddler in the wet
playground area can shut down the entire . _-
aquatic component. Also, it is difficult to separate programming elements when
everything is directly connected to each other.
In summary, the best design precedents taken from this site are: the lobby feature
with its artwork and fun colors; the water toys in the wet playground area; and the
large amount of glass used in the lobby and training rooms.
OPTIONS FOR THE COMPLEX
Option 1 : Minimalist Alternative
This option is a basic alternative and is
comprised of one 50 meter by 25 yard
swimming pool with a support facility of
an estimated 9,500 square feet. This
option would include a deep water,
competitive pool with a short transition
area. While some provision for desired
programs could be provided such as lap
swim, recreational swim, some swim
instruction, and water polo, this alternative
does not meet the project goals and
objectives of providing opportunity for fu I I
recreation, instruction, and competition Hi
opportunities. Bleacher seating would be OPTION 1
provided in this option for viewing of competitive events, and four springboards
would be provided for diving at the deeper, southern end. The support building
would have a pass through entry directly to the pool deck, space for storage,
snack bar concession, lifeguard and administrative offices, first aid, and
classrooms. The mechanical equipment would be housed in an adjacent building
that would also provide chemical storage for chlorine and would have a delivery
access. This secondary access would allow for direct pool access during a
competitive event. Ample turf seating and gathering space would be provided for
sunbathing, setting up of tents, and for holding special events. The snack bar and
first aid offices would be accessible from both within the pool area as well as
from the general park site to allow for service of the concession as well as in the
event of an emergency. The estimated cost of construction for this option is $5.6
million.
Option 2: The Full Competitive Swim
Alternative
Option two is a full competitive swim
venue with minimal options for recreation
and instruction. A large, 51 meter by 25
yard pool with moveable bulkhead would
allow for numerous activities to be run
simultaneously. A secondary eight lane
training and warm-up pool with steps on
each side could be a warmer water pool
than the long course pool and would
facilitate swimming instruction. A
separate dive tank with a 5m/7.5m/l Om
platform and springboard diving would
offer the deeper water options of a
secondary water polo pool as well as functioning for special instruction such as
scuba diving classes. While this option does allow for the goals of a competitive
venue to be met, it falls short of providing the breadth of recreational and
instructional opportunities sought. The building and support facilities would be
similar to the first option, with additional bleacher seating on both sides of the 51
meter pool, as well as adjacent to the diving tank. Large fenced, turf seating and
gathering areas would function in a similar manner to the first option - allowing
for sunbathing and setting up of tents and special events. The estimated cost of
OPTION 2
construction for this option is $8.0 million.
Option 3: The Full Recreational Swim
Alternative
The third option is the only option that
does not have the flexibility for long
course swimming. In place of a 50 meter
pool are numerous components that
emphasize instructional and recreational
opportunities. An eight lane by 25 yard
pool with steps on each side will allow
swim instruction at all levels as well as lap
and recreation swim. Pre-teens, teens,
and adult users will have two large
waterslides as well as an activity pool with
a play structure to enjoy. Tots will have a
separate, smaller wet play area with shallow OPTION 3
WIMMER IAMADA. AhD CAUCHtY
CITY OF CARLSBAD - www.alganortepark.com
F _.. AI -ITY PAW
r
r
Option 5: The Second Balanced Alternative
The fifth option is again one of multiple pools and multiple opportunities for a
myriad of uses. The 50 meter long course pool with springboards and bleacher
seating will provide for lap and recreation swim, diving, instruction, and water
polo. An eight lane training pool with side steps will facilitate lessons and
instruction as well as providing additional lap and warm-up swimming. A large,
W
water and a play structure geared for this younger age. This option is the reverse
of the previous in that it offers a full gamut of recreational opportunities, but it
does not meet the goals of providing a competitive venue, nor does it offer
complete instructional opportunities. Surrounding the entire expanse of pool deck
is a large, turf area suitable for sunbathing, gathering, picnicking, parties and
special events. A large planter area within the pool deck itself will help to break
up the venue into its components and provide an opportunity for seating and
shade. The estimated 12,000 square foot support building will provide the
common facilities seen in each of the previous options with provision for some
additional storage of pool and play equipment. The estimated cost of construction
for this option is $7.6 million.
Option 4: The First Balanced Alternative
The fourth option presented for review
brings back the long course 51 meter pool
with springboards, bleachers, and a
moveable bulkhead. The
instructionaVwarm-up pool has been
expanded to ten lanes with steps along
each side and a moveable bulkhead for
increased instructional use. A similar
configuration for pre-teen and tot wet play
pools with waterslides is included in this
expanded option. This option generally
meets the goal of providing recreational,
instructional, and competitive
helps to break up the increased size of pool deck and hardscape. A large turf
seating area on the south side of the complex will provide the gathering and tent
area necessary for hosting swim events. With the 51 meter pool and bulkhead it
would be possible to run simultaneous water polo games and lap swim or
instruction, The estimated 12,000 square foot support building will provide the
anticipated facilities for administration, storage, concession, showerdchange
rooms, and life guard/first aid space. The estimated cost of construction for this
option is $9.7 million.
w1
opportunities. A large plantingseating area OPTION 4
r-
*-.
II
/--
”..-.
c-
F-
/-
r
r
F
,-
OPTION 5
combined waterslide and wet play pool
with structures would round out the
recreation component. This option
generally meets the goal of providing
rec reat iona I, i nstr uct iona I, and
competitive opportunities. As with the
other options, there is provision for an
estimated 10,000 square foot support
building and areas surrounding the pool
deck for sunning and gathering. As in
several of the other options, there is
ample space provided for a large
plantedshade seating area within the pool
deck. The estimated cost of construction
for this option is $8.1 million.
Option 6: The Third Balanced Alternative
Option six attempts to again balance and expand the competitive venue with
needs for recreation. The standard 50
meter pool with its options for long course
swim, lap swim, recreation swim, instruc-
tion and water polo is central to this
venue. A dive tank is included with
5m/7.5m/l Om platform and springboard
diving. This deep water multi-purpose
pool will provide opportunities for scuba
and deeper water instruction. An eight
lane warm-up and instructional pool with
steps along both sides will address the
need for ample opportunity for swim les-
sons and provide overflow lap and recre-
ation swim options. A combined water-
will address the direct need for children’s recreational opportunities. This option
generally meets the goal of providing recreational, instructional, and competitive
opportunities. Like the previous options, provision for an estimated1 0,000 square
foot support building and seating and pool deck are evident in the design of this
option. The estimated cost of construction for this option is $1 0.0 million.
e- )
slide, water volleyball, and wet play pool OPTION 6
CITY OF CARLSBAD - www.alganortepark.com
Option 7: The Recommended Alternative
The recommended alternative, Option 7,
is a design comprised of a two pool
layout, an estimated 10,000 square foot
support facility, bleacher seating, turf and
hardscape gathering areas, a concession,
and a parking configuration that meets
many of the six goals of the project. The
50 meter swimming pool will provide an
opportunity for competitive swim, water
polo, lap swim, and some instruction.
The eight lane trainingwarm-up pool will
provide opportunity for swim instruction,
some recreational, and some lap swim.
The large area to the north of the
?
IC
r-
e
-
proposed pools would provide some flexibility for expansion of the recreation
facilities in the future. The estimated cost of construction of this alternative is
$6,493,856 and while it does exceed the current CIP budget, it is considerably
less costly than several of the alternatives with expanded recreation components.
The estimated cost recovery would be 48% annually. For a more complete
description of this option, please refer to the section tab "Recommended
A Iter na t ive".
Option 8: The Comprehensive Program Needs Alternative
Option 8 is a design comprised of a multi-
pool layout, an estimated 1 1,000 square
foot support facility, bleacher seating, turf
and hardscape gathering areas, a
concession, and a suitable parking
configuration. This option meets all six
program goals in all three categories.
The largest single element in the proposed
plan is a 65 meter by 25 yard swimming
pool with up to two moveable bulkheads.
This pool will slope through three depths -
from thirteen feet at the deep end to seven
feet in the middle, to four feet in the
shallower end where there are steps criti-
c
P
r -
CITY OF CARLSBAD - www.aIgafiortepark.com -
tal for full instructional opportunity. There OPTION8
will be both one meter and three meter springboards for diving at the south end.
This "stretch 50" pool allows many options and combinations of activities to take
place simultaneously. With the bulkheads separating areas, it is possible to have
ongoing swimming lessons in the shallow end, while there is water polo and lane
swimming occurring. Similarly there is an opportunity for simultaneous water
P
F
t r AI CA WRTF C ClMMlJNlTY PA& o
polo matches to be played. This configuration will also allow long course
swimming in completely deep water. The deep water end may be used for
alternative programs such as scuba training and water rescue.
The second pool proposed in Option 8 is a ten lane, 25 yard instructional and lap
pool. This pool will be designed with steps running the length of both ends to
afford the most opportunities for a variety of swim lessons. It will also provide an
opportunity for water aerobics and fitness, and for training. It will function for lap
swim and warm-up for a long course competition, as well as recreation swim. A
third, small, warm water therapy pool of approximately 15 feet by 25 feet, with
access ramp and grab-bar hand-holds, wil I provide opportunities for aqua therapy
and relaxation for users of all ages and physical abilities to enjoy the higher
temperature, water jets, and seats. Whether an athlete staying warm between
heats, a senior citizen receiving physical therapy, or a special needs individual
learning to swim, the therapy pool will be an all-season opportunity for
recreation.
For the younger members of the community, there will be several opportunities for
pure fun and frolic. Two wet play pools and a water slide will allow both tots and
pre-teenheen users ample opportunity to enjoy the water in a safe and controlled
environment. The pre-teen age level structure and the water slide will be sited on
an "island" amidst a 15 foot wide "moving river". Jets will propel the water around
the river providing flow for inner tubing or for a chance to taking instruction in
real moving current, Organizations such as fire departments are using these river
pools to conduct training in rescue swim. The City of Vista currently utilizes The
Wave in this manner. The waterslide, river pool, and wet play pools address the
need to develop facilities for recreation and play for all ages and abilities while
also providing unique opportunities for instruction (such as moving water rescue
swim). This option is sized and planned to meet the demands of the growing
community - nowhere else in the County is there a facility of this nature. This
option, while going beyond the current CIP budget with it's $1 1.6 million
estimated cost of construction, provides the best opportunity for cost recovery -
estimated at 60% - and would allow Carlsbad to continue to explore such things
as alternative energies, public/private partnerships, and perhaps most realistically -
sponsorships. All of which lead to a project that is responsibly financed. Finally,
maintenance and operations realities have been considered in both the layout and
in the research that are part of this report.
c
r
r
r
c c
PUBLIC WORKSHOP
On Thursday, February 27, 2003, a public
workshop was held at the Faraday Center in
Carlsbad to discuss options for the aquatics
complex and to provide the community an
opportunity to examine the six options developed
and to comment and direct City Staff and the
consulting team. Approximately seventy
members of the general public, adults and
children, as wellas twelve consulting team and staff members attended the
workshop. The majority of attendees were involved in competitive swimming -
either as an athlete, parent, or coach. Most attendees were residents with a few
individuals visiting from neighboring communities. City staff and the consulting
team gave a thirty minute overview of the project - the location, the context
within Alga Norte Community Park, the existing budget and timeframe, as well as
the six options proposed. Following the presentation, the community was able to
ask questions and then broke up into groups to discuss the options. Each attendee
was assigned to one of twelve tables upon arriving with the intention of creating
groups of individuals who might represent divergent interests and thus providing a
balanced summary of concerns.
After approximately thirty minutes of discussion in which the consultants and staff
provided ongoing answers to questions that emerged, each group was asked to
have a spokesperson address the group and summarize their concerns.
Listed below are the bullet point items brought forward by each table:
Table 1
Carlsbad should be a top competition venue
city
Don't go "cheap" initially - planning for growth
is critical
Recreation and competition are at capacity -
need to plan for more growth in future
Swim lessons are critical
Special needs users should be considered in
planning - perhaps indoor or all weather
enclosed facility with warmer water
A therapy pool should be included
Option #6 with the warm-up pool indoors is an idea
Option #4 would be second choice
F
f-
I
,-
<-
c
r
f
r
t-
,--
r
e
PUBLIC WORKSHOP
On Thursday, February 27, 2003, a public
workshop was held at the Faraday Center in
Carlsbad to discuss options for the aquatics
complex and to provide the community an
opportunity to examine the six options developed
and to comment and direct City Staff and the
consulting team. Approximately seventy
members of the general public, adults and
children, as well as twelve consulting team and staff members attended the
workshop. The majority of attendees were involved in competitive swimming -
either as an athlete, parent, or coach. Most attendees were residents with a few
individuals visiting from neighboring communities. City staff and the consulting
team gave a thirty minute overview of the project - the location, the context
within Alga Norte Community Park, the existing budget and timeframe, as well as
the six options proposed. Following the presentation, the community was able to
ask questions and then broke up into groups to discuss the options. Each attendee
was assigned to one of twelve tables upon arriving with the intention of creating
groups of individuals who might represent divergent interests and thus providing a
balanced summary of concerns.
After approximately thirty minutes of discussion in which the consultants and staff
provided ongoing answers to questions that emerged, each group was asked to
have a spokesperson address the group and summarize their concerns.
Listed below are the bullet point items brought forward by each table:
Table 1
Carlsbad should be a top competition venue
enclosed facility with warmer water
A therapy pool should be included
Option #6 with the warm-up pool indoors is an idea
Option #4 would be second choice
WIMM€R LAMAOA ANU CAULHEY
CITY OF CARLSEAD - www.aIga~ortepark.com
P
r
r
f-
AI CA NORTF C OMMlJNlTY PARL
r
/-
e
/-
r-
e
_-
e
c c
f-
/-
c r
f-
r
f-
Table 2
Need the pools to be age/event flexible - key
Option #6 is the preferred
Concerned about overcrowding, to much traffic in the pools to adequately
meet the needs
Definite "no" to Option #3 - doesn't meet the needs
Any fees for use should be reasonable
World class facility would be good advertising for the city
Table 3
Option #3 is not desirable - want a complex that serves all
Liked Option #2, but Option #6 is the most accommodating to all
Would like to see at least a three pool complex
Table 4
Liked Option #6 best
Recreation and family seem to be primary and that is good
Competitive options are interesting - but family is more important
Could one of the competition things be pared down to save money - i.e. no
platform on the dive tank?
Table 5
Option #6 is preferred - it has the most capacity, most options
Children should be isolated for safety - fenced off
Second choice would be Option #5 - bring the cost down
Time is NOW to do this
Table 6
The group's consensus was that critical need was a recreation swim place/a
place to play
Lap swimming and lessons was key
Good to have water polo and a competitive venue
Sees competitive venue as a source of revenue generation - for events that have
2-8000 people attend
CITY OF CARLSEAD - www.alganortepark.com
r
r
c
f-
r
c r
,-
Table 6 (Cont.)
Group split between Options #6 and #2
Perhaps dive tank could be stretched
Mixed feelings on features presented
Table 7
Immediately liked Option #6 - offers the most flexibility for the most people
Don't want to make mistake of undersizing facility - mustn't outgrow it too
soon
Needs present for water polo, recreation family use, lessons, masters - want
options for ALL users
Want to PLAN for anticipated growth in area
Would like Option #6 but would understand if it needed to be pared down a
Carlsbad is the best city and should have the best
Option #6 is the preferred choice as it has the most number of possible
activities
Option #2 is second choice but it does limit children's activities
Option #5 would be a third choice but with a bulkhead
Table 9
Feels that the competitive aquatics is the driving force - both swimming and
water polo
Question the need for a platform diving facility
Feel that the recreation elements are a nice addition
Option #6 is the first choice
Carlsbad should have a world-class competitive environment
Should consider national meets generating revenue
To be a major player Carlsbad needs a bulkhead in the 50M pool, bleachers on
both sides, deep water in entire 50M pool, with colder temperatures
Meeting rooms for officials and teams
mIMMER YAMAUA AkD CAUCHkY
CITY OF CARtSBAD - www.alganortepark.com
_-
,I
r
r
1.
P-
Table 10
Strong competitive faction
Option #6 is first choice - it provides the most
space
Diving is exciting, will grow in Carlsbad
Option #4 would be second choice with
added bulkhead in 50M
Table 11
Drawn to Option #2
Not clear if there is a need for the children's elements so close the ocean
Would like a variety of temperatures in the
Multiple pools would allow for
swimminghecreation during meets
pools
Table 12
Option #6 is preferred, with Option #4 second
choice
Likes the separation of pools , likes the
buffering between the areadelements
Sightlines to children's areas are critical and to bathrooms - keep an eye on
kids
Site slopes seem complimented by Option #6
Like the green space afforded by Option #4
CITY OF CARLSBAD - www.aIganortepark.com
SUMMARY OF POTENTIAL OPTIMAL FACILITY PROGRAMMING
The following list identifies the main types of program opportunities that are
desirable in an aquatics facility designed to meet the identified goals of
instruction, recreation, and competition.
Instruction
Swimming Lessons/ Group/ Infant and
Preschool Program: 6 months to 5 years
Swimming Lessons/ Group/ Learn to Swim:
Ages 6 to 15
Swimming Lessons/ Group/ Adult
Swimming Lessons/ Individual
Swimming Lessons/ "Semi-Individual"
Adaptive Aquatics
Diving Lessons
Scuba Diving
Lifeguard Training
Swim Instructor Training
CPR/FIRST AID for Recreation Staff and the
"Junior Lifeguards"
Swim Stroke Clinic
Aquatic Camps
Triathalon Camps
Scouting Aquatic Merit Badge
Community
RecreatiodFitness
Youth Water Polo
Masters Water Polo
Inner Tube Polo
Underwater Hockey
Synchronized Swimming
Open Play Recreation
Therapy
Lap Swimming
Fly Fishing
Remote Control Boats
Masters Swimming
Kaya ki ng
Aquatic Birthday Parties
Aquatic Exercise
Aqua Jogging
Firefighter Training
Upsteam Swim Training
Swift Water Rescue Training
Upstream Kaya king
Competition
Swim Team/ College/ Men/ 25 yard
Swim Team/ College/ Men/ 50 meter
Swim Team/ College/ Women/ 25 yard
Swim Team/ College/ Women/ 50 meter
Competition (cont.)
Swim Team/ Carlsbad High School/ Boys
Swim Team/ La Costa Canyon High School/
Swim Team/ Carlsbad High School/ Girls
Swim Team/ La Costa Canyon High School/
Swim Team/ Organizations/ Youth
Swim Team/ Events
Diving/ Carlsbad High School/ Boys
Diving/ La Costa Canyon High School/ Boys
Diving/ Carlsbad High School/ Girls
Diving/ La Costa Canyon High School/ Girls
Diving Age group
Diving/ Annual Masters Events
Clown Diving
Water Polo/ Carlsbad High School/ Boys
Water Polo/ La Costa Canyon High School/
Water Polo/ Carlsbad High School/ Girls
Water Polo/ La Costa Canyon High School/
Water Polo/ Age group water polo
Water polo/ Games and Tournaments
Tr i a t ha I on C I u b/Tr i a t h I on Trai n i ng
I ronman Training
Boys
Girls
Boys
Girls
Special Events
Family Nights
Themed Water Carnivals
Middle school Dances
Teen Dances
"Dive in" Movies
Corporate Picnics
Family Reunions
Birthday Parties
School Parties
Other
Aquatic Therapy
Multiple Sclerosis Therapy
Arthritis Therapy
Rehabilitation Therapy
Weight Training
Body Building
Stationary Equipment Training
CITY OF CARLSBAD - www.alganortepark.com -
2 m
8 e 3
f- AIGA NORTF C.OMMIJNITY PARK
F
r
.--
I-
,-
,-
,-- - -
7
,-
,-
?
rc
r
r
F-
f-
r
I-
r
r
r^
,-
OPTION 7: THE RECOMMENDED ALTERNATIVE
Following the tours of existing precedent facilities and the public workshop, the
design team returned "to the drawing
board" to evaluate the many comments
and ideas. Simultaneously staff and the
design team began to seriously research
and compile financial analysis data with
respect to precedent facilities as well as
each design alternative. It became
apparent very quickly that it would be
impossible to fully meet the six identified
project goals while remaining within the
current CIP budget. To that end, and
with fiscal responsibility critical in this
era of escalating costs, it was decided
that a compromise would be the most
appropriate approach to recommend.
Option 7 provides both aquatic program
flexibility as well as ample room for future
expansion without drastic escalation of estimated cost of construction.
OPTION 7
The recommended alternative is a "two pool" solution. The larger of the two
proposed pools is 50 meters by 25 yards. This pool will provide competitive
swimmers with an opportunity to train in long course, as well as providing for
lane swimming and water polo. The south end of the pool will support four
springboards for diving - two three-meter boards, and two one-meter boards. The
deep water end of the pool may also be used for scuba training and water rescue
instruction.
The eight lane by 25 yard training pool will afford opportunities for a variety of
swim lessons, with steps running down each side. It may also be used for water
aerobics, aqua fitness, and for lap swim. The water temperature could be warmer
than that of the 50 meter pool and thus offer recreation swimming options.
Supporting this multi-pool complex is an estimated 10,000 square foot
administrative building. Users of the facility will enter through a gated main
entrance into an exterior, trellis-covered courtyard that accesses the pool deck
directly. Men's and women's shower/toiIet rooms will flank this main entry and
two large family style bathkhanging facilities will exit directly to the pool deck.
Office space for lifeguards and staff as well as first-aid will be provided. The first-
\. aid office will have a separate entry directly to the parking lot for ease of access in
case of an emergency. Ample storage space will allow stowage of supplies for the /- lifeguards, the pool toys and swim equipment, as well as servicing the snack bar
and concession at the north end of the building. There will be provision of 7
/-
,-
f-
r
r
/c' AIGA NORTF COMMlJNlTL PARK
r
,--
r
r
r
f-
additional equipment storage around the complex. Sited at the end of the
building, the snack concession could conceivably serve to both patrons within the
aquatics complex itself, and also to park goers who wish only to purchase
refreshments during their visit to the picnic and tot areas or skatepark in the
northern half of the overall park. A weight room will provide the serious swimmer
with an onsite opportunity for strength training, while divisible meeting room
space can function for both the aquatics complex and for other park related
meetings. The meeting space would be equipped for classes as well as for
coaching and meeting space for officials on competition days.
The mechanical and pumping equipment will be housed in a separate structure to
the south. Chemical delivery and storage will therefore take place away from the
main building hub. A separate gated entry for this utility and maintenance area
can also serve as an entrance during competitive events.
There will be ample turf grass seating, bleacher seating for viewing competitive
events, and hard surface pool deck with exterior showers. To help extend the
swimming season, opportunities for a variety of enclosure structures are being
explored. Whether it is a canvas tent structure or something more permanent, it is
the intention of the design to enable maximum seasonal potential and thus realize
a more cost effective solution which also provides the greatest opportunity for year
round lessons and use.
With an area of four acres of the master plan reserved for the aquatics complex,
there also exists room for expansion in Option 7 should the City's future needs,
particularly for recreational opportunities, dictate. The estimated cost of
construction of this alternative is $6.4 million - still in excess of the CIP budget,
but substantially less than several of the alternatives with expanded recreation
components. The estimated cost recovery for this recommended option would be
48% annually.
CITY OF CARLSBAD - www.alganortegark,com
,- NORTE(OMMllnil1Y PAW
r-
c
F-
rc
c
Conclusion
In conclusion, Option 7: The Recommended Alternative for the aquatics complex
at Alga Norte Community Park best balances the need to meet the project goals in
the categories of recreation, instruction, and competition, with the need to be
mindful of cost. The features provided offer the most flexible approach to
programming within the realm of the CIP budget. The two pools will address
some ability of the facility in cost recovery, and there is ample room to expand
should the City choose to consider it, now or in the future. It is the
recommendation of the staff and the design team that the Commission and the
Council commit the resources and proceed to direct staff to begin work to realize
Option 7 as the long awaited Alga Norte Community Park Aquatics Complex.
rc
?-
A Note on Phasing
Given the financial implications in realizing an aquatics facility in excess of the
CIP budget, options for construction phasing must be considered. There are three
factors to consider regarding phasing of the project: cost-benefit, cost-recovery,
and economies of scale. These must be measured, in comparing the initial asset
investment to anticipated public benefit, potential revenue generation, and
variation of construction costs.
Once a final direction is determined by City Council, a strategy for constructing
the facility in a fiscally responsible and timely manner will need to be developed.
Keeping in mind the goal of the facility is to maximize opportunities for all three
categories of competition, instruction, and recreation, while optimizing cost-
recovery, it is necessary to evaluate which components or combination of
components best meets the needs of the most users. The preferred scenario would
be to construct the recommended option at one time - this would be the most
satisfying for the community, as the users' needs would be addressed
simultaneously. This scenario would also optimize cost-recovery, because the
facility would begin to generate revenue immediately after construction. Thirdly,
this scenario would account for economies of scale (avoiding construction cost
escalation from spreading the work over several years, and utilizing contractors
already staged to do all of the work), minimizing the total dollars spent. Though
the three considerations would be satisfied with this approach, the balance would
be the requirement of high initial capital outlay.
With concern for the City being able to commit such resources at one time, how
to best realize the various components, and in what order, becomes an important
issue. A phased approach affects not only the development of the aquatics
complex, but has implications for the construction schedule of the overall park
itself. Basic infrastructure for the ultimate build-out of both the park and the
aquatics component will be required as part of any initial phase. This will require
a certain amount of up front design so as to provide sufficient infrastructure and
not require any replacement or redesign later. It can be anticipated that this
infrastructure would include electrical, mechanical, and hydraulic support for all
eventual pools. The building itself should most likely be considered as part of any
initial phase. The issue to be addressed is which pool would then be constructed
in the initial phase. Financial considerations and accommodating needs of the
community will need to be addressed and phasing decisions made appropriately.
r r r r r r WIMMER YA A-5-A~ A N 0 C A U G H E Y
CITY OF CARLSBAD - wwww.alga~ortepark.com -
r
r
c
rc
f-
P
c-
A Note on Parking
Substantial consideration for parking for the entire site has been part of the design
process for Alga Norte Community Park. The Master Plan design currently
provides a total of 503 parking spaces with no reduction taken for compact stalls.
Of the 503 spaces, 31 9 were calculated as parking for the aquatics component.
This was based upon a preliminary option for the pool complex per the existing
CIP budget but with an understanding that the pool complex might evolve in
magnitude.
For the purposes of the options presented in this report, the parking evaluation
that follows takes into consideration the most extensive option, Option 8. The
ability to meet the parking needs of this option will ensure any of the chosen
options will be adequately provided for in the park plan.
In the absence of any national, state, or regional standard for parking for aquatics
facilities, Aquatic Design Group, working with their consultants, has evolved a
standard formula for municipal recreational swim facilities. This standard provides
a breakdown based upon the bather capacity allowed by the California public
health code. The code allows one bather for each twenty square feet of water
surface area. The ADG formula then takes the total number of bathers allowed at
one time and divides this by 3.5 people per vehicle. This gives a very
conservative standard for parking. While this formula works very appropriately for
recreational components, it is unrealistic to apply to large competitive swimming
pools. The water surface area of a 65 meter by 25 yard pool is 16,050 square
feet. This would permit 802 swimmers to enter the water at one time.
With it being obvious that this is an unrealistic number in a competition and lane
swimming pool, City staff has reviewed each of the components individually and
provided an estimate based upon programming experience as to the number of
bathers taking part in a fully operational summer day with maximum attendance.
These numbers as well as ADG's formula have been applied to the components
proposed in the recommended Option for the pool complex. Table 1 indicates:
Component - The poolhecreational element
Approx SQ Foot - The approximate square footage of the component
Batherdcode -The maximum number of bathers permitted by health code
Max Program -The estimated maximum number of program participants by
Staff
Car Spaces - The estimated required parking based upon dividing the max
program by 3.5
CITY OF CARLSBAD - www.alganortopark.com
,--.
BATHERSKODE
81 0
135
180
45
335
22
802
,--
MAX PROGRAM
450
70
100
45
100
20
2 00
r
r
r
COMPONENT
Moving River
Tot Pool
Childrens Pool
Water Slide
Instruction Pool
Therapy Pool
65 Meter Pool
On deck
Totals
APPROX SQ FOOT
16,200
2,700
3,600
900
6,700
450
16,050
CAR SPACES ij=l
11 50 142
2,330 11,135 1320
As the current master plan for the park has allocated 31 9 spaces for the aquatics
venue, it may be necessary to increase the amount of parking by at least one
additional space to ensure adequate parking should the rest of the park also be
operating at capacity for the other park venues on the same day as the peak
aquatics usage should occur.
CITY OF CARLSBAD - www.a4ga-oorlepark.cem
'f- AIGA NORTF COMMIINITY PARL
F
/--
c
r
A Note on Alternative Energy Sources
As is the goal of every design that Wimmer Yamada and Caughey works on,
consideration for creating the most energy efficient and sustainable systems
possible is a cornerstone of our practice. For a facility such as an aquatics
complex, we also rely heavily on the expertise of our engineers and consultants to
help us continually remind ourselves to be cognizant of this important facet of
design. Consideration for work that has been built in years past as well as pooling
our collective ideas about where we may be headed in the future are at the
forefront of all design projects, and while such things as state subsidized energy
programs may not be in place today that are applicable to a pools complex, other
methods and opportunities may become available in the future. It is for the long
term that we plan and design and explore technology.
With considerable experience in designing and building aquatics facilities
worldwide, Aquatic Design Group has developed an understanding for the myriad
of concerns with respect to creating the most energy efficient and sustainable
systems. The following are some descriptions and notes regarding the approach to
be used in the design of the aquatic facilities at Alga Norte Community Park.
Further research and consideration will be conducted once a final direction is
chosen by City Council and the team moves into actual schematic design, but
within the context of this level of study, this should provide some preliminary
ideas as to the options.
High Efficiencv Pumm
Some engineers select pool circulation pumps utilizing cost and availability as
primary determining factors. For example, a cheaper, readily available self-
priming pump typically operates at 55-60'/0 motor efficiency. This is due to the
fact that the pump motor spins at a relatively high 3,450 RPM. The goal for this
project is to select pumps with a minimum 75% motor efficiency. Pumps with
these types of motor efficiencies cost a bit.more initially, and require installation
at an elevation below static water level of the pool being served. However, if a
lower RPM pump motor (1,750 or 1 ,I 50 RPM) is selected, one can achieve up to
90% motor efficiency. In one recent Aquatic Design Group (ADG) project, the
client's maintenance staff specifically requested self-priming pumps. ADG was
able to demonstrate that by specifying pumps with lower RPM motors, the client
could realize a savings of approximately $22,000 per year in electricity costs. In
nearly every case, the careful selection of pumps can provide significant
operational cost savings. One additional benefit to the lower RPM pumps is
longevity of the motors - which is at least twice that of the 3,450 RPM pumps.
Filtration Automation
Every time a filtration system backwashes, money is lost not only in the water that
goes down the drain, but the cost to heat and chemically treat that same lost
water. Many filtration systems incorporate manual backwash, in which the
r
r
,--
c
**
operator frequently backwashes the filtration system on a regular maintenance
schedule, whether the system needs backwashing or not. ADG's engineers
typically specify filtration systems with microprocessor control, which can
backwash on pressure differential, meaning only when the system measures an
influent (water inside of the filtration system) pressure higher than a pre-set limit.
For example, the systems can be programmed to backwash only when the influent
pressure is 10 psi greater than the effluent (water coming out of the filtration
system) pressure. Rather than backwashing once a week (whether the system
needs it or not) the automation allows the system to backwash only when
necessary, thereby saving water, heating, and chemical treatment costs.
Pool Heater Efficiency
Pool heaters, while similar to traditional boilers, have historically been less than
impressive when it comes to energy efficiency. However, since the pool water is
heated directly within the heat exchangers, they can be much more efficient than
traditional plate and frame, or tube and shell heat exchangers. For most projects,
pool heaters should be specified that are up to 89% thermal efficient. Combining
these thermal efficient pool heaters with thermal pool blankets (to cover the pool)
provides a three-to-five year payback for the upgraded pool heaters, and a one-to-
two year payback for the pool blankets, assuming staff or user groups are dutiful in
replacing the pool blankets every evening.
Solar Pool Heating - In General vs. Carlsbad's Exuerience
Over the past ten years, there has been a great deal of interest expressed in solar
heating by public sector clients. This is particularly true when faced with
operating such facilities as are proposed in the recommended option for Alga
Norte. The cost to heat and maintain a 50 meter swimming pool is considerable
and is one of the key reasons for exploring this alternative energy source. With
the advent of "rolling blackouts" in California and proposed price increases from
local utilities, this interest has greatly increased. Detailed, independent analyses
of potential payback for swimming pool solar options have been difficult (if not
impossible) to obtain. The swimming pool industry has been forced to rely on
vendor projections of payback, which is often subjective and inherently flawed.
Any vendor-provided payback figures should be suspect since they (the vendors)
have an interest in selling their equipment.
In the absence of true, independent experts in this area, ADG has invested
significant staff time in researching software programs, attempting to locate solar
engineering specialists, and scouring the internet for resources that could be
considered independent and unbiased. Unfortunately, efforts have produced
precious little information. The University of Central Florida has a large body of
research on swimming pool solar heating, but this information is specific to
Central and South Florida (particularly as it relates to climactic conditions and
corresponding sizing of systems). The University of California at Los Angeles has
f-
? W I M M E R Y A h4-A DA-,.A N D CA U G H E,V
CITY OF CARtSBAD - www.alga~ortepark.com
r
r AICnA NORTF COMMliNlTV PAW
f-
f-
r
r
,-
rc
r-
/-
recently produced a study on solar heating, but this study is specific to domestic
hot water applications. The only engineering software resource yet located is an
MS-DOS program developed in the 1970's by the then California Energy
Commission, which is extremely antiquated.
As indicated above, previous analyses on the efficacy of swimming pool solar
heating (when requested by a client) have come directly from vendors. The
information received has historically indicated a ten-year payback for "typical"
commercial swimming pool applications. The reasons for this relatively long
payback period include the following:
Generally speaking, copper and glazed solar panels are the most efficient of
the systems studied. However, these systems are less than ideal for public
sector aquatics facilities due to the high potential for vandalism (kids love to
toss stones at, and break, the glazed panels). In addition, the high potential for
out-of-balance water chemistry within swimming pool water can wreak havoc
with the copper piping. For example, if the pH feed system were to
malfunction and drive the pH down below 7.0, copper could precipitate out of
the solar heating system and into the pool water, discoloring the pool plaster to
the point where it might have to be completely replaced.
For the reasons outlined above, ADG typically recommends the use of non-
metallic solar panels (typically ABS plastic), although these systems are
considerably less efficient than the copper and glazed variety. In an area like
the Alga Norte Park site, ADG would conceptually recommend approximately
80% of the pool water surface area in non-metallic solar panels. Depending
on the design option selected, this would require approximately 10,000 to
24,000 square feet of solar panel for this project. Since the ABS plastic is
subject to U.V. degradation, experience has shown that by the time the system
is paid for, it is time to replace it. In times past, this has meant that clients
have been trading dollars with the solar vendors in the name of political
correctness.
Another reason for the lengthy payback time is the fact that local county health
departments (if they approve the use of solar at all) will require a completely
independent system. Unlike residential pool solar applications, the City
cannot utilize the pool circulation pump to drive the pool water up to the solar
panels, nor can it be tied in to the recirculation piping which per code requires
a separate solar booster pump and piping system must be installed. This not
only decreases energy efficiency (due to the extra pump), it adds considerable
additional capital costs not reflected in the price from the solar vendor.
Despite some of the above indicated general concerns for solar viability, the City
of Carlsbad has over twenty-one years of experience with solar heating at its'
existing swim complex, and finds the system to be not only viable, but Aquatics
staff estimates an annual cost savings of $40-50,000 per year. The existing system
f--
-. CITY OF CARLSBAD - www.alga~~~.fepar~.com -
r A16.A NORTF C OMMlJNlTY PARK r
F
r
r
r
was installed in October of 1981 and consists of 136 panels (3.5Ix9.75') which
total 4,641 square feet, representing approximately 70% of the pool surface area.
The system also includes a system of sensors tied to the pump controller, and two
three-horsepower pumps. The system in this application works as a pre-heater for
the pool's heat exchangedboiler. The only major maintenance performed on the
system was the replacement of the collector panels in October of 2000 at a cost
of $74,000. With the annual cost savings estimated, this establishes a payback
period at well less than two years. During most summers, the boiler is not used at
all and during the spring and fall is frequently off during the day. Because the
system was installed below pool level, it is susceptible to freezing damage (on a
clear night panels can freeze at air temperatures above forty-five degrees). Of
greater concern to staff is how best to accommodate the panels in the
architectural design, and which pools it ultimately makes the most sense to tie
into the system.
Given anticipated utility price increases for natural gas, swimming pool solar
heating may be inching its' way towards long term viability - again, particularly
for the heating of the deep water, 50 meter pool. Careful consideration for the
individual applicaton, based on the final design direction, will ultimately be the
determining factor for consideration of inclusion of a solar system at Alga Norte.
The installation of a natural gas heater for each pool will still be required, but a
solar heating system could be used to augment this arrangement.
Cogenera ti on
The feasibility of applying co-generation to swimming pool heating depends upon
a number of factors. The basic premise would be that the electrical and thermal
products required for the pool operation could be produced by on-site generating
equipment at less cost than the required electricity and natural gas could be
procured from the utility company. The relevant issues in the analysis include the
following:
1. Capital cost of the co-generation equipment.
2. 24-hour load profiles for pool electrical and thermal requirements. The
issues are the ability to use the co-generation system electrical and thermal
output as it is produced.
3. Electrical rate structures, especially such factors as standby charges, demand
charges and rates.
4. Natural gas rate structures, especially volume discounts based on higher
usage, seasonal price fluctuations, and co-generation pricing discounts.
5. Electrical interconnection cost burdens, especially relaying, service entrance
cost, etc.
6. Availability of utility incentive programs to partially offset the capital costs.
The most favorable scenarios for co-generation would be to find that the electrical
and thermal needs of the pool are fairly constant on both a 24-hour basis and on
CITY OF CARLSBAD - www.aIganorlepark.co~)
r
r
/-
F-
c
I- -
r
an annual basis. Generation equipment could be sized to serve the pool needs
and recovered heat could be used for pool heating. It would be worthwhile to
explore different electrical interconnection scenarios including parallel operation
and independenthransfer switch utility backup options. Discounted gas
percentages and utility incentive percentages could further enhance the
economics. The ultimate feasibility could be determined by a computer
simulation analysis, which covered all of the above items.
Photovoltaic Cells
Photovoltaics (PV's) are composite materials that convert sunlight directly into
electric power. In recent years, the efficiency of the cells has increased to where
PV panels can be placed on new or existing facilities. The installed cost of PV
panels has decreased dramatically in the last few years, and the panels are smaller
in size. As a result, Building Integrated Photovoltaics (BIPV's), now in production,
can be incorporated into many building elements such as roofs, the building
cladding, or window systems.
PV's generate direct current (DC) electricity, which generally must be converted to
alternating current (AC) before it can be used in building systems. The conversion
process requires electronic devices between the PV module and electrically
powered appliances. While PV panels have become very efficient, typically
producing 9 to 10 watts per square foot of panel area, they still would have a
utility connection for high-peak days or if the PV's output produces less than the
total facility load. Though current utility agreements do not allow the sale-back of
excess power to the utility grid, future energy demands may make this a viable
option, further increasing the pay back of the system.
However, even with a utility connection, the offset of the PV's can decrease utility
demand significantly, thus reducing utility bills. Currently, there are several
incentive programs that are available to facilities interested in PV's for power
production that can offer incentives up to 50% of the installation costs.
Key items to keep in mind when deciding on a system would be:
1. Initial up-front installation costs.
2. Amount of roof area available. The amount of area will set the amount of
3. Orientation of the PV panels. Though newer technology makes orientation
4. Type of collector material. Though the method of collection is the same for
PV panel surface area to collect energy.
less critical, a south-facing surface is most efficient.
most all PV arrays, the quality of the film material used will determine the
life of the system.
5. Available incentives to help offset installation costs.
r
,P
r AIGA NORTF COMMIJNITY PARK
A Note on PubIidPrivate Partnerships and Sponsorship
With the escalating cost of funding municipal facilities, there is a movement afoot
for government agencies nationwide to consider options for alternative revenue
sources. Cost recovery across the gamut of programs is currently being
considered. Two methods of external funding are: 1 ) public/private partnerships,
and 2) sponsorships. Publidprivate partnerships are agreements entered into
between the City and a private individual or company. They are generally
established with joint ownership and share decision making rights concerning the
facility or program. Both parties invest in the capital and operating costs.
Currently there are no known outright partnerships for the pool complex.
Considerably more common are sponsorships. In these circumstances an
individual or company may donate money or materiel to an agency in exchange
for naming rights, marketing consideration, etcetera. Folsom Aquatics Complex is
an example of a facility that has pursued sponsorship in an active manner - from
donations of pizza to the on-site concession, to placards identifying health care
sponsors of the Iifeguard/first aid supplies, to private donor walls, to signage
throughout the complex. Such sponsorships can be a one-time benefactor
donation, or can be ongoing, annual naming rights to a particular venue
component. It is recommended that the City actively pursue sponsors to help
offset the cost of the pool facility at Alga Norte.
r
r AI GA NORTF ('OMMIINITY PARK
r
r'
f-
r
r
r'
(L
f-
c-
r
r'
r
,--
FINANCIAL ANALYSIS
Each of the options presented obviously carries with it a number of associated
costs - the cost to design and build the components as well as the annual cost to
operate and maintain the components. Similarly, each option offers differing
abilities to realize cost-offsetting revenue from the various fees.
Option 7
Estimated cost of construction (2003): $6.4 Million
Estimated annual operating cost (2003): $895,988
Potential annual cost recovery (2003): 48%
For comparison, the following summarizes the same numbers for the other options
explored:
Option 1
Estimated cost of construction (2003): $5.6 Million Estimated annual operating cost (2003): $536,071
Potential annual cost recovery (2003): 39%
Option 2
Estimated cost of construction (2003): $8.0 Million
Estimated annual operating cost (2003): $974,514
Potential annual cost recovery (2003): 47%
Option 3 Estimated cost of construction (2003): $7.6 Million
Estimated annual operating cost (2003): $821,347 Potential annual cost recovery (2003): 46%
Option 4
Estimated cost of construction (2003): $9.7 Million
Estimated annual operating cost (2003): $1,021,627
Potential annual cost recovery (2003): 57%
Option 5
Estimated cost of construction (2003): $8.1 Million
Estimated annual operating cost (2003): $998,822
Potential annual cost recovery (2003): 53%
Option 6
Estimated of construction (2003): $1 0.0 Million
Estimated annual operating cost (2003): $1,067,245
Potential annual cost recovery (2003): 55%
Option 8
Estimated cost of construction (2003): $1 1.6 Million
Estimated annual operating cost (2003): $ 1 ,I 55,573
Potential annual cost recovery (2003) 60% d
WIMMER YAMADA ,-AND CAUCHEY
CITY OF CARLSBAD - www.a4ganortepark.com
- a
P c .-
J
rn z
I- P
8
N z
+
0
P
n -
r z 0 F n 0
C C
L
b
C ;
1
1
1 J
c
i
i
c 1
i
: 1
i
: i
1
I
A 5 is
h P
U Q)
-
00 z 0 I- n 0 -
h z 0 k 0 -
(0 z 0 e n 0 -
v) z 0 e n 0 -
t z
I- 0
8 -
p3 z 0 I- n 0 -
N z
e 0
8 -
r z 0 c n 0
c3
-
E u, x W -
- 3 3 3
D U
5
- 3 3 3 5 n
- 3 3 3 2 v
- 3 3 3
3 v
5
- 3 3 3
3 v
5
- 3 3 3 d n
- 3 3 3 5 2
- 3 3 3 ?
-
3 3
0 0
?
-
E 5
Fi
E
I: c C
g
p:
r ALGA NORTF COWNITY PA.K.L ,
Folsom ................................................................. 1 Page
Roseville .............................................................. 1 Page
Wave Waterpark .................................................. 2 Pages
Budqeted Revenue
Raseville Spnrts Center
All Account Totals
Page 1
Waterpark Fund 507 1 Wave Waterpark 1 I dun1 M. 580 I I
AUual Estlmated Variance
Eqipmml Rentals
Food and Baverage lnmm
h4efc&aMiw Incane
Gmup Sales Lnwme Pmae Rantal (me
Consignrnent7ickd Sales
BMhday Pany Income
SpPnsMshlp lmmme
20.287.81
207.213.00
34.848.51
81.541.34
54,26 I .00
ie.nz~i7
45.4awo
5.442.02 Sped Plogramming lnanne S 10 1.218.88
Rewnue Total S 1,019,653.52
26.449.00
204,375.23
28.702.52
69,825.14
13.718.36
12.96834
1 14.e34.00
49,m.ee
a - s
30,no.oo
2i6,xie.oo
20,983.00
14 8,760.00
71,851.00
45,370.00
10,678.00
4,882.00
B5,696.00
1,106,802.00
9
S 9 S s
S 8 s s
$ -
34,000.00
232.000.00
28,000.00 14e.ooo.oa
71,000.0
13,000.0
43,000.00
10,000.00
74.000.00
1, I07,000.00
Budgeted Variance Budgeted Varlance
Revenue 200;uw 2003M4 2004105 200410s
General Admlsslon Inarms $ 425,000.00 $ 25,000.00 S 460,000.00 $ 35.000.00
SolbalSwim LESSUIS s 54,0~).00 s - S 54,000.00 $
Eqtdpment Rentals S 36,000.00 $ 2,000.00 S 38.000.00 $
food and Bswrage lnme $ 280,000.00 $ 28,000.00 5 260.000.00 $
Gmup Sales Illcome $ 152,250.00 5 4.260.00 S 152.250.00 $
Privala Remd lnwme $ 83,WO.M) S !2,000.00 S 107,000.00 $. 24.000.00
hkrdwt6m lmme .s 30,aoo.oo s 2,000~00 5 34.0oo.00 z 4.oa0.00
Consignrnenl Tickel Sdes 8 ~.MID.OD s ~,ooo.oo) s i5,aoo.w s 9.0oo.00
BidhdayParly Ircome s SO,M)O.OO s 7.0oo.00 s 45,aw.w P (4.ao0.00)
Sponstlnhlp Income $ 10,000.00 5 - s 10,ooo.M) $ SpeddPmgaming Income S 70,000.00 F (4,000.00) S 70,000.M) s
Revenue Told 1,178,250 6 69,250.00 1,244,250 S 68,000.00
S S S S
S 3 s s 3 s -
3,730.00
15,832.00
(983.00)
(766.00)
(851.00)
8,118.00
(2,370.00)
(670.00)
r
r
r
r
r
CITY OF CARCSBAD - www.alganortepark.com
0 Lo
a e
a .. v) C 0
a .- I
5
2 v)
mo
oooocot-00 0mommLnm)b cvmoc3mcocot-t- coco(DcocococoC0
ALGA NORTE PARK 50 METER POOL
ASSUMPTIONS:
70% of pool surface area available in solar panels( 300 4 X 8 panels)
Operation hours from 6 am to 7 pm M-F and 10 to 4 S/Sn. 345 DaysNear
Pool Covers used year-round
7210 Office Equipment Maint
7211 Comm. Equip. Maint.
731 0 Recreational Instructors
7550 Misc Outside Sew
7551 Bank Services
7710 Ads and Publishing
771 1 Dues and Subs
771 5 Printing
7720 Postage
7725 Office Supplies
7726 Office Furn & Equip
7731 Misc Comp Hard
7735 Promo Materials
7750 Heat & Light
7751 Telephone
7752 Waste Disposal Services
7753 Water
7850 Small Tools
7851 Safety Equipment
7852 Uniforms and Access.
7854 Medical Equipment
7856 Rescue Equipment
7857 Personal Protect. Equip.
7858 Breathing Apparatus
7884 Pool Chemicals
7894 Concession Supplies
7899 Misc Supplies
81 10 Employee Training
81 12 Safety Programs
81 30 Training/Related Travel
8520 Conference
8522 Misc Meals/Miles
8700 Contingencies
8840 Copy Services
$1,500
$500
$50,000
$5,000
$1,100
$2,500
$400
$300
$400
$3,000
$1,000
$2,000
$2,000
$160,000
$1,600
$2,000
$20,000
$500
$700
$500
$500
$700
$800
$1,000
$30,000
$25,000
$25,000
$300
$500
$800
$800
$400
$2,000
$300
$343,100
I- -
W z -2 0 -w -pL W -e
,-
_-
c
,-
.-
--cy
-2 0 -F= -e 0 -
I-
-
a a (3
..
v) C 0 .- I a 5
2 v)
000
b- b- a- rc
d
0 0
m 0-
ALGA NORTE PARK OPTION 2 Maintenance and Operation
ASS U M PTlO NS:
70% of pool surface area available in solar panels( 300 4 X 8 panels)
Operation hours from 6 am to 7 pm M-F and 10 to 4 S/Sn. 345 DaydYear
Pool Covers used year-round
7210 Office Equipment Maint
7211 Comm. Equip. Maint.
731 0 Recreational Instructors
7550 Misc Outside Sew
7551 Bank Services
771 0 Ads and Publishing
771 1 Dues and Subs
771 5 Printing
7720 Postage
7725 Office Supplies
7726 Office Furn & Equip
7731 Misc Comp Hard
7735 Promo Materials
7750 Heat & Light
7751 Telephone
7752 Waste Disposal Services
7753 Water
7850 Small Tools
7851 Safety Equipment
7852 Uniforms and Access.
7854 Medical Equipment
7856 Rescue Equipment
7857 Personal Protect. Equip.
7858 Breathing Apparatus
7884 Pool Chemicals
7894 Concession Supplies
7899 Misc Supplies
81 10 Employee Training
81 12 Safety Programs
81 30 Training/Related Travel
8520 Conference
8522 Misc Meals/Miles
8700 Contingencies
8840 Copy Services
$1,500
$500
$50,000
$2,500
$1,100
$2,500
$400
$300
$400
$3,000
$1,000
$2,000
$2,000
$21 0,000
$1,600
$2,000
$25,000
$500
$700
$500
$500
$700
$800
$1,000
$45,000
$32,500
$25,000
$400
$500
$1,000
$600
$400
$2,000
$300
$41 8,200
W -2 -2 ~ 0
-v) PL -w
z
-I-
*- 0
n -0
-
-sL
pi -a -e -w I- -QL -0 - z a
- a -0 -A
til
0 0
hl 0-
I v
D
3
c
u' x
I
0 n
v u
n D u
21
- !! -
I
ALGA NORTE PARK OPTION 3 Maintenance and Operation
ASSUMPTIONS:
70% of pool surface area available in solar panels( 300 4 X 8 panels)
Main pool operation hours from 6 am to 7 pm M-F and 10 to 4 S/Sn. 345 DaysNear
Pool Covers used year-round
Recreational Pools:Seasonal use April through October
7210 Office Equipment Maint
7211 Comm. Equip. Maint.
731 0 Recreational Instructors
7550 Misc Outside Serv
7551 Bank Services
771 0 Ads and Publishing
771 1 Dues and Subs
771 5 Printing
7720 Postage
7725 Office Supplies
7726 Office Furn & Equip
7731 Misc Comp Hard
7735 Promo Materials
7750 Heat & Light
7751 Telephone
7752 Waste Disposal Services
7753 Water
7850 Small Tools
7851 Safety Equipment
7852 Uniforms and Access.
7854 Medical Equipment
7856 Rescue Equipment
7857 Personal Protect. Equip.
7858 Breathing Apparatus
7884 Pool Chemicals
7894 Concession Supplies
7899 Misc Supplies
81 10 Employee Training
81 12 Safety Programs
81 30 Training/Related Travel
8520 Conference
8522 Misc MealsIMiles
8700 Contingencies
8840 Copy Services
$1,500
$500
$40,000
$2,500
$1,100
$2,500
$400
$300
$400
$3,200
$1,000
$2,000
$2 , 000
$1 60,000
$1,600
$2,000
$20,000
$500
$700
$500
$500
$700
$700
$1,000
$25,000
$37,500
$30,000
$300
$500
$800
$600
$200
$2 , 000
$300
$342,800
.-
-A w "2 -2 0
-v) Iyz -w
-nB
.-
I
_- m
'El -c ca
-2 - 0 i= -e - 0
% p1 a -e -w c -e -0 2 a
- a
-0 -I
m- m- m- .r maaw
000
Q) cv
0 0 e cu
w
b Q)
cv a?
I
c D t
3 9
i
I
3 3 i
t t
J n
- e C -
I
ALGA NORTE PARK OPTION 4 and 5 Maintenance and *peration
ASSUMPTIONS:
70% of pool surface area available in solar panels( 300 4 X 8 panels)
Main pools operation hours from 6 am to 7 pm M-F and 10 to 4 S/Sn. 345 DaydYear
Pool Covers used year-round
Recreational Poo1s:Seasonal use April through October
7210 Office Equipment Maint
7211 Comm. Equip. Maint.
731 0 Recreational Instructors
7550 Misc Outside Serv
7551 Bank Services
7710 Ads and Publishing
771 1 Dues and Subs
7715 Printing
7720 Postage
7725 Office Supplies
7726 Office Furn & Equip
7731 Misc Comp Hard
7735 Promo Materials
7750 Heat & Light
7751 Telephone
7752 Waste Disposal Services
7753 Water
7850 Small Tools
7851 Safety Equipment
7852 Uniforms and Access.
7854 Medical Equipment
7856 Rescue Equipment
7857 Personal Protect. Equip.
7858 Breathing Apparatus
7884 Pool Chemicals
7894 Concession Supplies
7899 Misc Supplies
81 10 Employee Training
81 12 Safety Programs
81 30 TrainingIRelated Travel
8520 Conference
8522 Misc Meals/Miles
8700 Contingencies
8840 Copy Services
$1,500
$500
$50,000
$2,450
$1,100
$2,500
$400
$300
$350
$3,180
$1,000
$2,000
$2,000
$230,000
$1,600
$2,000
$35,000
$500
$750
$500
$500
$750
$750
$1,000
$42,500
$42,500
$30,000
$250
$500
$780
$557
$223
$2,000
$250
$460,190
,-
I-
-A W -2 -2 0
'- cn w -w
.- e
-
.-
,.._
CIL
-e a
.- w c
.- bl
'- 0 - 2
000
0 0
m -!-
(D b
cv Q,?
ALGA NORTE PARK OPTION 6 Maintenance and Operation
ASSUMPTIONS:
70% of pool surface area available in solar panels( 300 4 X 8 panels)
Operation hours from 6 am to 7 pm M-F and 10 to 4 S/Sn. 345 DaysNear
Pool Covers used year-round
7210 Office Equipment Maint
7211 Comm. Equip. Maint.
731 0 Recreational Instructors
7550 Misc Outside Sew
7551 Bank Services
771 0 Ads and Publishing
771 1 Dues and Subs
771 5 Printing
7720 Postage
7725 Office Supplies
7726 Office Furn & Equip
7731 Misc Comp Hard
7735 Promo Materials
7750 Heat & Light
7751 Telephone
7752 Waste Disposal Services
7753 Water
7850 Small Tools
7851 Safety Equipment
7852 Uniforms and Access.
7854 Medical Equipment
7856 Rescue Equipment
7857 Personal Protect. Equip.
7858 Breathing Apparatus
7884 Pool Chemicals
7894 Concession Supplies
7899 Misc Supplies
81 IO Employee Training
81 12 Safety Programs
81 30 Training/Related Travel
8520 Conference
8522 Misc Meals/Miles
8700 Contingencies
8840 Copy Services
$1,500
$500
$65,000
$3,500
$1,600
$2,500
$400
$300
$350
$3,500
$1,000
$2,000
$2,000
$240,000
$1,600
$2,000
$40,000
$500
$750
$1,000
$500
$750
$750
$1,000
$47,500
$42,500
$30,000
$500
$1,000
$780
$557
$400
$2,000
$400
$498,637
"- ml - W z
-- z 0
-v) -az W -e
I-
._
-- r-
-2 - 0 -- F
,- e
- 0
-% -01
-w
-0 -2
a -e
-E
-a
L m a, L
Sih
QID QX
irj
a
c 0 .- c.
5 2
mom- m(D*w
000
0 0
hl *-
a
ALGA NORTE PARK OPTION 7 Maintenance and Operation
ASSUMPTIONS:
70% of pool surface area available in solar panels( 300 4 X 8 panels)
Operation hours from 6 am to 7 pm M-F and 10 to 4 S/Sn. 345 Daymear
Pool Covers used year-round
7210 Office Equipment Maint
7211 Comm. Equip. Maint.
731 0 Recreational Instructors
7550 Misc Outside Serv
7551 Bank Services
7710 Ads and Publishing
771 1 Dues and Subs
771 5 Printing
7720 Postage
7725 Office Supplies
7726 Office Furn & Equip
7731 Misc Comp Hard
7735 Promo Materials
7750 Heat & Light
7751 Telephone
7752 Waste Disposal Services
7753 Water
7850 Small Tools
7851 Safety Equipment
7852 Uniforms and Access.
7854 Medical Equipment
7856 Rescue Equipment
7857 Personal Protect. Equip.
7858 Breathing Apparatus
7884 Pool Chemicals
7894 Concession Supplies
7899 Misc Supplies
81 10 Employee Training
81 12 Safety Programs
81 30 Training/Related Travel
8520 Conference
8522 Misc Meals/Miles
8700 Contingencies
8840 Copy Services
$1,500
$500
$50,000
$2,500
$1,100
$2,500
$400
$300
$400
$3,000
$500
$1,000
$2,000
$1 80,000
$1,600
$2,000
$22,000
$500
$700
$500
$500
$700
$800
$1,000
$30,000
$25,000
$25,000
$400
$500
$1,000
$600
$400
$2,000
$300
$361,200
W -- 2 -2 0
W -e
_-
_-
'- 00
.- z
- 0
.-
I
-* p1:
-w
a -e
c -iY -0 -2 a
a
0 -I
000
N- 0- In- m- m- m- 4 In r
(3
0 In
0 0
m In-
ro ro
m N!
ALGA NORTE PARK OPTION 8 Maintenance and Operation
ASSUMPTIONS:
70% of pool surface area available in solar panels( 300 4 X 8 panels)
Operation hours from 6 am to 7 pm M-F and 10 to 4 S/Sn. 345 DaysPlear
Pool Covers used year-round
7210 Office Equipment Maint
7211 Comm. Equip. Maint.
731 0 Recreational Instructors
7550 Misc Outside Sew
7551 Bank Services
771 0 Ads and Publishing
771 1 Dues and Subs
771 5 Printing
7720 Postage
7725 office Supplies
7726 Office Furn & Equip
7731 Misc Comp Hard
7735 Promo Materials
7750 Heat & Light
7751 Telephone
7752 Waste Disposal Services
7753 Water
7850 Small Tools
7851 Safety Equipment
7852 Uniforms and Access.
7854 Medical Equipment
7856 Rescue Equipment
7857 Personal Protect. Equip.
7858 Breathing Apparatus
7884 Pool Chemicals
7894 Concession Supplies
7899 Misc Supplies
81 IO Employee Training
81 12 Safety Programs
81 30 Training/Related Travel
8520 Conference
8522 Misc Meals/Miles
8700 Contingencies
8840 Copy Services
$1,500
$500
$65,000
$3,500
$1,600
$2,500
$400
$300
$350
$3,500
$1,000
$2,000
$2,000
$240,000
$1,600
$2,000
$40,000
$500
$750
$1,000
$500
$750
$750
$1,000
$47,500
$50,000
$30,000
$500
$1,000
$780
$557
$400
$2,000
$400
$506,137
P
r A1 CA NORTF COMMliNlTY PAN
I
r
r
I,.-
r
7 r - W I A4 M k R YAM A DA-, A N D CAUGHEY
CITY OF CARLSBAD - www.alganortepark.com
Alga Norte Park, Carlsbad
NO.
1.0
1.1
2.0
2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4
2.5
3.0
3.1
3.2
3.3
3 -4
3.5
3.6
3.7
4.0
4.1
4.2
4.3
4.4
4.5
4.6
4.7
4.8
4.9
4.10
DESCRIPTION
Option 1:
25 Yard x 50 Meter Pool
Total- Option 1
Option 2:
25 Yard x 51 Meter Pool
Movable Bulkhead for 2.1
66' x 75' Dive Tank
10 Meter Platform for 2.3
8 Lane x 25 Yard Pool
Total- Option 2
option 3:
8 Lane x 25 Yard Pool
Recreation Pool
Waterslides for 3.2
SCS Model 212 for 3.2
Wet Play Elements for 3.2
Children's Pool
SCS Model 245 for 3.6
Total- Option 3
Option 4:
25 Yard x 51 Meter Pool
Moveable Bulkhead for 4.1
25 Yard x 25 Meter Pool
Moveable Bulkhead for 4.3
Recreation Pool
Waterslides for 4.5
SCS Model 212 for 4.5
Wet Play Elements for 4.5
Children's Pool
SCS Model 245 for 4.9
Total- Option 4
Aquatic Design Group, Inc.
QW.
12,525
12,750
1
4,950
1
5,625
5,625
5,370
1
1
1
4,100
1
12,750
1
6,150
1
5,370
1
1
1
2,371
1
Schematic Option Cost Estimates- Swimming Pools
UNIT
SF
SF
LS
SF
LS
SF
SF
SF
LS
LS
LS
SF
LS
SF
LS
SF
LS
SF
LS
LS
LS
SF
LS
10 March 2003
UNIT COST EXTENSION
$1 10 $1,377,750
$1377.750
$1 10 $1,402,500
$85,000 $85,000
$1 10 $544,500
$500,000 $500,000
$120 $675,000
$3.207.000
$120 $675,000
$120 $644,400
$250,000 $250,000
$125,000 $125,000
$120 $492,000
$175,000 $175,000
$50,000 $50,000 -
$1 10
$85,000
$120
$85,000
$120
$250,000
$125,000
$50,000
$120
$175,000
$2,411,400
$1,402,500
$85,000
$738,000
$85,000
$644,400
$250,000
$125,000
$50,000
$284,520
$175,000
$3,839,420
Page 1 of 2
Alga Node Park, Carlsbad
NO.
5.0
5.1
5.2
5.3
5.4
5.5
5.6
6.0
6.1
6.2
6.3
6.4
6.5
6.6
6.7
6.8
7.0
7.1
7.2
8.0
8.1
8.2
8.3
8.4
8.5
8.6
8.7
8.8
8.9
8.10
8.1 1
DESCRIPTION
Option 5:
25 Yard x 50 Meter Pool
8 Lane x 25 Yard Pool
Recreation Pool
Waterslides for 5 -3
SCS Model 212 for 5.3
Wet Play Elements for 5.3
Total- Option 5
Option 6:
25 Yard x 50 Meter Pool
66' x 75' Dive Tank
10 Meter Platform for 6.2
8 Lane x 25 Yard Pool
Recreation Pool
Waterslides for 6.5
SCS Model 245 for 6.5
Wet Play Elements for 6.5
Total- Option 6
Option 7:
25 Yard x 50 Meter Pool
8 Lane x 25 Yard Pool
Total- Option 7
Option 8:
25Y x 65M Pool
Moveable Bulkhead
1OL x 25Y Pool
Therapy Pool
Lazy River
Children's Pool
SCS Model 245 for 7.7
Waterslide Pool
Waterslides
Tot's Pool
SCS Model 212 for 7.1 1
-QTY.
12,525
5,625
5,370
1
1
1
12,525
4,950
1
5,625
7,389
1
1
1
12,525
5,625
15,998
2
6,723
450
1 1,670
3,588
1
725
1
2,750
1
Schematic Option Cost Estimates- Swimming Pools
UNIT
SF
SF
SF
LS
LS
LS
SF
SF
LS
SF
SF
LS
LS
LS
SF
SF
SF
EA
SF
SF
SF
SF
LS
SF
LS
SF
LS
UNIT COST EXTENSION
$1 10 $1,377,750
$120 $675,000
$120 $644,400
$250,000 $250,000
$125,000 $125,000
$50,000 $50,000
$3,122,150
$1 10 $1,377,750
$1 10 $544,500
$500,000 $500,000
$120 $675,000
$120 $886,680
$250,000 $250,000
$175,000 $175,000
$50,000 $50,000
$4.458.930
$1 10 $1,377,750
$120 $675,000
$1 10
$125,000
$120
$500
$75
$120
$175,000
$350
$2 5 0,O 0 0
$120
$125,000
$2,052,750
$1,759,780
$250,000
$806,760
$225,000
$875,250
$430,560
$175,000
$253,750
$250,000
$330,000
$125,000
Total- Option 8 $5.48 1.100
Aquatic Design Group, Inc. 10 March 2003 Page 2 of 2
e
8 m CL -
&
cd .d
o 2 Y a - 0 0 n.
.- 2
E E 3 .-
m
I co
v, x m
.- - E 2 3 vj c, v1 0 0
U -
rcr 0
.. 0
Y
c
.
.. h
c
m 0 0 N
d cr 0 cv
S 0 .- - Y 8 5 a IZ 0 u
z 2 4
z
d
n
0 u *
4
E
d z 0
Q) c-'
& 0
." .. .. m z 0 Y E v w 5
N
,-
v) -
,- 0 0 0.
- 0
E 3 5 ,-
m 4 -
m
00
00
o\
m 6u
Q?
Y s
-
m -s 0 .- Y 0" -
d cc- 0
r4
,-
0) d -0 0 a -2 .d
E -E .d
3 --m
* 8 - u
-4 f2 -8 -
V
d
% 0 u
3 z
a b
Z 5
U
u on cd
6
3 L
.-' $. E- o)
0
I- .- cd
0 0 0 r4
ri c -.1
_-
e
d b 0 m
M
S 0
n
-
.C c) --n. 5 a v s
a
0 u
3 2 II
L, .3 cd a
3 a ? P
-
wl -
,-- 0 0 p.
0 W -03 57-
3
c
m 0 0 P4
.. 0 a, .. 0 a, 5
&. n 4 .. E +
d 0 0 PC
W
m Y .-
0
m .- Y
E c, m
v) d 0 0 a
.- 2 E E 3 .-
m A .- v) h m -
00 000 2 %-
I?+ w
0 v, +
\om
9 m
0
-.
..
% 0 u
2
2
0 c3 w
V
5:
m ri 0 m
E M .- v1
_-
In - 0 0 a
-
MI E
-
.- * -E W -8
b
0 u
m
6 3 z 2 6
d II
2
2
0 0 w
u
.. ?A 2 0 E E 3
4
?A ?A
M
I- -
Li E I
d
El 0
1
d
8 m a - _-
-0
m I .-
VI e .- 0 0 a
mi
0 u
* ,- VI
6 z -MI E .- * -2
.
mm *. 9
z
b u 3
s
d. @ W
d rc 0 S 0 -- .- 0" W
a 2 ,- - R
a,
m c) .-
b
0 u
(13
I - .9 - k
4 -m
m 0 0 CI
3 e I
0
m .e * a z -8 -
Q
d IC 0
c1
= 0 .- Y 0”
E m e -
Q)
m Y .-
W 09 2 69
0
c‘1 P ke
? 00
rn 69
u! P m ci 69 *
rA .- v) x m - m 0 0 P4
- m 0 .- Y e
s
4
o Y .H &
0 a ..
0
E E
f a
z 0
m .- Y
a z m M -
d
(c. 0
m
v,
E 0
- .- c) - 8 _- = m a
-Q)
VI
-
Y .-
Q) on 2 z 0 u
m W m \D 00
m c"
-,
4
ff)
0
F c\1 m fA
c" ..
0 00
m d 64
0;
0.-
d
m e3
z II 6 /I
&
cd .* .-
II d II rn - 0 0 a
-
on c I .- -E E _- 3 .-
v)
I rn .- - k
2 - m
m 0 0 c\1 I: $ E r-
- m
e,
-0 .C
Y
s c
d
.. WJ 2 0 H E
2
E 3 m
Li E -
CT 7 5 & m a
m 0 0 m
,- .
S -0 .- Y -0" W cu) m c S m -a - 2 0 u - m .- E - = V cn g
E"
U E e,.
e, U
/I
cc in 0 u
M
,- .- e E
._ E 5 ._
m ,- I v)
I- ,% -
-2 Ld
CCI 0 0 m
e z 3
Y B -- v
2
2
0 r3 w
u
$ 8 3 a
L= OD .- v)
t- n
0 W W
u 52
m 0 0 c\I
k P-4 v! 3 9
-?-
In -?
In P4 €e
In P-4 -?
00 W
9
0'-
4 €4
v,
00 N 03 69
c?
$ 3 2 2 c
..-
-
-2 .- 4 .- 3 -m
0 0 rn 2 5 * .- I; V
$. 3
,.-
o c .- 8 _- .. n E 3 2
2
0 13 w
u
Li S e -1 2 -1 V
w m a E 3 clr MI 3 0 clc
IA 4- 0
d u OD Ld a
Ma 4 3 Z z 4 g
Y cd
"I
L, E b,
U
L, .I cd
-
v1 - 0 0 a
- rr 0 .- Y MI K
- .- -E E
,- 3 .-
m E4
k (c1 0 0 c1
u z c 5 r: CI -v) s
G 0 .I d P
3
m- m 3
3 m 3
3 n
9 0 9 In
c ..
cj C I -
-
. .-
I
d I
-8 z
7
(rJ -OD
0
3
.C Y m
3
m 41 0
v,
S 0 ,- .- * -8
S cd
I- - Q
Q)
m u - .-
.-
-
rn c 0 0 Q -
* rn -6 -2 .- * 2 -Q)
.-
-$
E a _-
-2 Lo on -7
.. \o
m 0 0 N
ci 3 8
0
cd
.- c)
m 4- 0
c
t- - S 0 .- Y I- o" %I m eL
Y 5
cd
rA - 0 0 p.
-
cc
2 3
cc
3
rl
E
CCI 0 0 c1 c $ z
.. K b d 1
d 5
0
Y
..-
m rr 0 m
E 0
I .- i -0"
c3
3 2 m 0 0 cu r $ E E z 3
vi $3
4
,-
4
w 2
E u
.. CA 2 0 E E 3 CA 3
G 0 c3 w b c u
-'D CCJ .5: -9 V
d I 3
* m a z
.-
_-
v) - 0 0 a
,-
Y .' - v)
'- 3
-5: a V
--
,.-
-- a
.. v,
E 0 & b
0 u
&
rri cc. 0 m
m 0 0 m s V L P
S eD .- m B
00 e 0
a .- Y - -. u
CI
u
CI ."- m E 2 .- - V m
II II
II v) - 0 -0 P
-d
c) v) u" I
.. - Y
b)
i?
z m M
a 3 z z
5 n v) - 0 0 a
-
on S
- .- -E E
-5 .-
v,
__ m z n v (3 c(
w E z d 1
J m 3
,-
ca
C 0
- .- Y -0"
op rc 0 m
m c -0 0 a
Y -- rn s
I
- f
.. 3
Q) * .3 s a .. m 2 0 E E 9 m 9
0) Bn m a
ci E -
C aD .- UY E
,-
I
W rr 0
d
-= m n. -
6 3 z 2 6
--
v) -- 0 0 .n.
E 2 5
m 0 0 cu c 2 E
.. 0
..
0 E E 3 rn 9
CT a E: 0
00 cr 0
rg
00
a, & Q) -0 m - -0 0 LL
Ccl 0 0 cu
.. n c.,
,-
.. 2 0 E E 3 w 9
..I
0: C I 4 0
u .- Y 9 2-
.-
,-
- 00 cu 0
v) B e, z 0 u
, --
..
G
2
0 r3 w
u H ..
z
00 00 cu 0
.. M :I 3
m
I (0 .H (0 3 9
4
E E
s
2
0 0 w
u
II
9 s ii
..
00 cu 0
00
r
r
3 k
VI \o X
v, m
d 0 * PC
e E 2
tc
r
F AlCA NORTF COMMIJNITY PARL
r
r
f-
IC-
.-
r-
f-
r-
r
Roseville - Some specific comments from the tour participants (summarized):
The architecture / buildings generally had a nice appearance, yet were "very
blockish."
The parking lot was shared with the high school; hence, it was completely filled
with student parking.
Poor wayfinding / signage system.
The administrative offices were very poor.
The lobby area was uninviting and cold, and the materials / finishes/ colors
looked worn.
The lobby area was too small, out of scale, and not functional.
A lack of shade areas for seniors and families.
Not enough restroom facilities.
Locker / shower areas: not accessible friendly, no privacy curtains, and no
place to sit and change clothes.
Negative impression of the care and maintenance of the resources.
The complete facility had a dated design, from an aesthetic perspective
The materials, finishes, and colors of the building
and interior locker rooms / showers were not
inspiring.
The combination staff room and first aid room is
not optimum.
Good use of solar heating for the competition
Fun play toys are present at the wet play structure
pool.
FACILITY ENTRY feature, but outdated.
Did not like going through the locker room to access the pools (as a non-
swimmer or as an observer).
Didn't see any permanent lifeguard stations around the pool areas.
Too institutional.
Large, nice complex -- but not optimized in terms of warmth of design.
Like the variety of pools in the complex.
Clean looking first impression, although too small of an entrance from a
distance.
The reception area in the lobby is too small.
The fitness / weight room was a mess, cold and unusable for meetings.
The changing areas are too small.
The arrangement of the pools is unsatisfactory.
Need more continuity in the overall layout of the pool experiences.
The concession area is nice, but too small.
Liked the rental opportunities for birthday parties.
Liked the use of photovoltaic systems.
Liked the online registration.
r
Negative impression of the en,:y.
Reception area not good.
Small administrative office.
Shaded area away from swimmers.
Very entrepreneurial when it came to fundraising
and partnerships.
First impression? Not impressed.
The lobby is institutional.
The image for the City of Roseville is very poor.
POOL ENTRY AND PAVING
v Do not like the joint-use with the adjacent high school.
Need a better signage program integrated into the design.
The materials are dated on the architecture / buildings.
The reception area is too small.
Not much thought was given to the building program.
Locker / shower areas: the overall impression of the layout is O.K. but
aesthetics lacking.
The floor is cold in the restrooms.
Overall impression of the pools? Unattractive and no "arrival" experience.
The open views out to the adjacent park are nice.
No good tree areas.
Wind could be a Droblem.
-1 %-. -4 &>%*
Shower tile wave pattern is interesting.
Concrete floor is R / R, not tile??
Be aware of corrosion factor.
Be aware of chemicals on metal - bright colors.
The metal roof is fading.
Steel under stucco & concrete is corroding.
The "Deck Level Gutter" is noted.
Not much of an "arrival experience" coming off of the main vehicular entry.
Do not like the chain-link fabric fencing within the facility, surrounding the
base of the water slide. It seems cold and institutional, since chain-link fencing
is not located anywhere else on the site. This fencing should be a black metal
picket type fencing to match the rest of the site.
ceiling, with more natural light inlets.
The maintenance building seems dark and cramped. It should have a higher r
f- r
c-
r-
r
,f--
r
r
c-
,-
A parapet styled roof on the maintenance building would better hide the large
visible heater stacks / vents.
Fairly impressive approach to the facility (positive impression) - however, upon
entry, the facility seemed too small (negative impression).
The lobby area is way too small.
The reception area is marginal at best.
Need a larger space for the administrative offices.
The meeting rooms / community rooms are inadequate, and there should be
more.
Changing areas were adequate.
No family changing rooms.
The overall cleanliness was not very good.
Excellent viewer seating, with overhead
shading element.
Probably could incorporate additional
amenities.
They have one 1M and one 3M diving
boards; could incorporate one additional of
each at minimal cost.
Need more landscaping.
Has cover for bleacher seating, but need more trees.
Pool layout was adequate, but could be improved.
Very windy during our site visit.
Pool depths meet minimum standards.
Solar blankets on pool.
Adequate good visibility for lifeguards.
The backstage office for lifeguards and operations staff is too small and not
clean, without clear views of the pools from within the facility.
Adequate access and safety for deliveries and vendors.
Though this facility had many good features, overall I felt there were more
negatives than positives. They need to increases the size of the classroom to
BLEACHERS BY COMPETITION POOL
1,000-1,200 SF (two classrooms divided
into 600 SF would be recommended), and
storage space needs to be increased by
about 500-1,000 SF.
The concession stand needs to be
increased to about 300 SF.
The grass area is great, but some shade
trees would be a nice addition.
I think the seating area is overkill, don't
need as much. Could take the savings and
improve the play pool area (i.e. more
water spouts, buckets, etc).
/--
f-
f-
r
-.
I did not care for the entry area. Coulu
instance.
The administrative area was basically non-existent. It could be designed to
overlook the entire pool areas.
The locker rooms were more than adequate.
The 50M competitive pool is excellent, but could add additional diving boards
(one additional of each type).
The 25 YD pool could increase the lanes from current 4 up to 8, with the 2 out
side lanes having steps the entire length of the pool for lessons (i.e. both ends
of the pool start at 3.5 feet depth and go up to 4 feet depth, with a 4.5 feet
depth in the center section of the pool).
improvement.
opened up to view the pool areas for
Over all had some good ideas but could make some changes for overall
80% SELF SUFFICIENT!!
UIMMER YAhlADA AND CAUGHEY
CITY OF CARLSBAD - www.alganortepark.com
I
Folsom - Some specific comments from the tour participants (summarized):
e
0
0
e
0
0
0
e
e
0
0
0
0
0
e
0
b
b
High-class design, and facility. Almost ostentatious. Brick faqade really great.
Adjacent landscape areas pleasing and functional (used for parties etc.).
Use of corporate sponsors effective, but will need policy decision.
Solar component within the shade structure is a plus.
It is evident that the facility has a full-time custodian. One could tell that the
facility was very nice / clean.
One could tell that the Pool Manager and the Director take a lot of pride and
ownership in the facility.
Too much brick.
Did not notice the signage / wayfinding
system.
The facility takes advantage of public /
private opportunities (especially liked the
sponsorship tiles which brings the
community ties into the complex to provide
a sense of ownership).
Great access for deliveries / vendors.
Need more equipment storage.
Definitely a fun place to be.
Great sound system.
Need a larger 6-8 lane recreation pool.
Agree with tour guide that middle pool should be enlarged, and competitive
pool decreased.
Don't like water slides. Think this vernacular would be great for Carlsbad on a
downsca I ed version.
Underwater music? Give me a break!
Security system good, only better with digital recording.
Need more benches and lockers in the locker
/ shower areas.
Only one family locker / shower area.
The movable bulkhead in the competition
pool took too much space and costed too
much.
Needed more landscape / planting areas.
Liked the skylights in the pump room.
Liked the independent pump system
r
fl
r
r
r -
CITY OF CARLSBAD - www.aIganorlepark.com
operation capability for each pool. CONCESSION STAND
Positive impression of the brick and tiles.
The carpet in the support spaces is not good - wet.
The skylight is good in the locker / shower areas.
The locker / shower areas have too many coin containers to empty (lockers,
etc).
,, -
P
r AI CA NORTF COMMlJNlTY PAR&.
F-
,-
,-
r
r
rrc
P
,-
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
F
r.
The stairs in the recreational pool are a great feature for swim lessons.
The magnetic menu board at the concession
stand is a good feature that can be easily
changed and modified.
changing area and privacy curtain) are a great
feature. A nice personal touch.
Liked the use of tile and brick within the
shower / locker room facilities. It created a
The individual showers (with their own
MOVABLE BULKHEAD ON COMPETITION POOL Of richness in what is usually an
institutional looking element.
Liked the fact that the shower / locker room facilities are heated, which is very
important for an outdoor aquatic facility. It can help motivate people to go the
aquatic center to go swimming even when it's cold outside, since they know
that they can at least warm up and feel comfortable when they are in the
shower or when they are changing.
Liked the ability to enter the building / throughway.
much brick though.
Lobby area: Not a lobby, but a gated eternal entry.
Administrative offices: Good location; add windows for view; maybe add
second story; materials / finishes / colors not fancy but good.
Didn't see any meeting rooms, community rooms, fitness / weight rooms.
Locker & shower rooms: The use of brick inside was not really necessary; good
size, design layout; need big lockers, pay lockers not good; well maintained;
for Carlsbad - more tile, less masonry.
Competition pool well designed.
Need 8-1 0 lanes for the recreation pool, with lots of steps.
Maybe make the waterslide a little smaller.
The wet play area attraction looks good.
Good use of fencing to separate pool experiences.
The open grass / group use area is a good idea.
The sound system is excellent.
Excellent overall positive impression of the pool experiences.
Good tunes / speaker system.
CITY OF CARtSBAD - www.a4ganorteparL.com
r AlCA NnRTF COMMliNlTY PAW
*-
,-
P
c
r
Excellent orientation of facilities.
Excellent mix of sun & shade areas, but more shade trees desired.
Don't like the palms here.
Needs better outdoor / indoor interface.
Very good sun / shade orientation of facilities.
Pro Shop: this seems like a good place for one.
Nice facility, It is encouraging that the entire
facility can have brick veneer, but would like a
little less.
Noted: 63% efficient, sources, birthday parties,
fees.
The "Camden Yards of pool complexes."
Seemed to be short on parking.
Outstanding look (positive first impression).
Has a great lighting system.
The administrative offices need to be larger, and to be able to view the pool
area.
Coin-operated lockers at $0.25 per day.
The locker / shower layout was good, with additional showers outside.
Good adequate viewer seating.
Noted: scoreboard with lane touch pad timers, excellent, Colorado Time
Systems.
Good stereo system, though overkill.
Planted trees provide shade.
Pool depths are appropriate, although the instructional pool could be
improved.
The backstage office / employee area for lifeguards and operation staff could be
concessions, sponsors, tile art, lockers, and INSTRUCTIONAL POOL
Cost recovery items:
Bricks can be purchased with donor names, and will be placed on the wall
by the entrance feature.
building walls (over 300 currently installed).
Artistic donor tiles can also be purchased for $50 each and installed on
r
r
r
f-
AI= NOkTF C OMMIJNITY PARK
r
,/-
r-
f-
r
c
r
,---
A contract with Coke provides $60,000 per year (x 5 years) for them to
supply their product exclusively within the facility (including concessions
and soft drink machines).
A contract with McDonalds provides $4,000 per year to have their logo on
the top of the waterslide element.
The snack bar grosses about $94,000 per year in sales, and nets about
$45,000-$50,000 annual profit from those sales.
Kaiser Health Care pays a sponsorship for the First Aid office.
A resident family pass costs $1 99 per year, a nonresident pass costs $249
This facility hosts 122 rental parties per year, currently at $1 99 each (up to
per year.
ENTRY TO FACILITY increased to a minimum of 6-8 lanes, using the 2
outside lanes for lessons.
At either end of the instructional pool, the depth @ 3.5 ft graduating to 4.5 ft to
the middle (providing 2 outside lanes) should accommodate the number of
children needing lessons. A smaller pool w/ 6 lanes is losing too much money
on lost lessons.
against a wall (x 5 locations = 15 showers, which is great).
visibility should have a good P.A. system and C.O. changer for both above and
below water.
Seating area is adequate.
Grass area is planned for shade trees.
Pool parties are available.
The snack bar would be better with an
increase in size to 16 x 16 FT or 16 x
17 FT. Also, incorporate a built-in
refrigerator / freezer with a small riser
for a mini stage above the surge tank.
The movable bulkhead is nice, but it is
not needed at this time. Approximately
The outdoor showers incorporate a triple-faucet stainless steel module mounted
The lifeguard / administration offices suggest to overlook pool area w/ good
$45,000 could be used for a scoreboard /timing system. I would rather see
underwater viewing for filming and coaching (for strokes / kicks) for about the
same price.
This was by far the best of the 3 facilities.
c
CITY OF CARLSBAO - www.alganortogark.com
r
r
r AI CA NORTF COMMIJNITY P4R.L
r
Pannell - Some specific comments from the tour participants (summarized):
Nice colors in architecture and art.
Don't like a waterslide idea (did I already mention that.)
Could they make the W.I. fence a little taller?
This pool complex won't satisfy Carlsbad needs in terms of lap swimming.
No easy wayfinding to pool area from inside the building.
WET PLAY AREA
Didn't like the fence.
This place was not planned well.
The artwork in the reception and pool
very nice.
The curved reception area is nice.
The tables are a nice touch.
Not bad first impression.
The landscape is ugly / too sterile.
Good location for the facility.
area is
Didn't need signage as much, because the facility was well designed.
A good first impression, but too hard.
The building looked nice, but too many hard materials.
The windows / glass in the lobby area are welcoming, somewhat institutional.
The reception area / reception desk is done very well.
Good flow to pool area through the foyer.
The "everything-in-one-pool" concept is not desired - not good for separating
uses.
The zero depth entry at the recreation pool portion is too deep at 18 inches.
The wet play area / fun water toys area is tough to access.
The access to the pools from the lobby / entrance area is very good.
Good use of water toys.
Not enough shade.
Poorly landscaped.
Good outdoor / indoor interface.
Need separate pools, instead of all in one.
The 18-inch entry is too deep.
It is a fun place to be, but not the best.
Good lobby layout. SEATING PATIO
c
r
r AI- NDRTF COMMlJNlTY PARK
r
r
r r
Good use of art.
The lobby is the best part of the venue.
Bad for Carlsbad.
This facility was designed with cost as an overriding factor.
This venue would nowhere come close to fitting our needs.
The architecture / buildings generally had a nice appearance,
yet were "very blockish."
WATERSLIDE
c I
Questionnaire Summary
At the February public workshop, in addition to being asked to participate in a
working session to discuss options and summarize concerns and preferences,
participants were asked to take the time to review the design options and complete a
basic questionnaire. Of the over seventy attendees, sixty-three completed at least a
portion of the questionnaire. In general terms, the majority of attendees felt the
critical function of the facility was to provide for the long-promised competitive 50
meter pool venue. As the majority of options met this need, a great deal of support
for the "other" facilities is noted. The provision for plenty of space for the
underserved swim lessons was considered a critical factor, and opportunities for
recreationalAap swimming was also important. Finally, the majority of respondents
indicated that a timely realization of this facility was crucial. The following summary
represents the full results of the questionnaire:
In response to the question of which was the respondents' preferred design
alternative:
38 respondents preferred Option 6
12 respondents preferred Option 2
7 respondents preferred Option 4
5 respondents preferred Option 5
1 respondent preferred Option 1
0 respondents preferred Option 3
In response to the question of which was the respondents' second choice of design
alternative:
15 respondents preferred Option 5
14 respondents preferred Option 4
13 respondents preferred Option 6
12 respondents preferred Option 2
2 respondent preferred Option 2
0 respondents preferred Option 1
In response to the question of what revenue sources would be appropriate to
consider, the following summarizes the number of affirmative responses. Only
slightly more than half the overall respondents addressed this question - and many of
those who did simply circled all the sources together - without distinguishing amongst
them.
CITY OF CARLSBAD - www.alganortepark.com
r
f- NORTF COMMdlJNITY PARK
r
,-
F
Recreation Entrance Fees
Corporate Sponsorship
Memberships Passes
Donor Sponsorship
Lap Swim Fees
Concessions
Master's Swim Fees
Special Events
Swim Instruction
Swim Meets
City Programs
Equipment Rental (Lockers, etc.)
Contract Classes
Aquatic Retail Shop
Facility Rentals
The respondents were also asked to rank thirteen possible facility features with a
number between 1 and 5 indicating how important they felt the feature was to the
project. A 5 was used to indicate a high priority, a 4 a medium to high priority, a 3 a
medium priority, a 2 low to medium priority, and a 1 to indicate a low priority. The
following table summarizes the rankings with the number of total respondents
indicated by feature.
35
33
35
37
35
34
35
34
20
35
32
28
28
27
33
r AlGA NORTF COMMIJNITY PAW
r
r
r
In the "Other" category, respondents had the opportunity to add any features not
listed that they felt should be considered. Two responded with a suggestion for
including an indoor swimming pool, one would like to see bleachers (which are
included in the proposed option), eleven mentioned a competition scoreboard, one
indicated water volleyball, and one water bowling (!?).
When asked then to circle the types of programs that would best meet the needs of
the community's citizens, the following are the programs and the number of
respondents who indicated a desire for them:
Child swim lessons 55
Water polo 54
Water safety training 49
Swim instructor training 43
Life guard training 48
Water aerobics 42
Swim fitness 42
Lap swimming 42
Competition swimming 41
Adult swim 40
Masters swim 39
Aquatic exercise 38
Diving 39
CPWFirst aid training 37
Scuba training 35
Swim stroke clinic 33
Aquatic parties 29
Adaptive aquatics 27
Aqua therapy 26
Synchro swim 23
Inner tube polo 14
Kaya ki ng 8
Fly fishing 8
Remote control boats 6
Underwater hoc key 9
CITY OF CARLSEAD - www.aIganortepark.com
r
r
A question concerning building design features also asked respondents to rate several
features using the same 1 to 5 priority scale as before:
Provision within the questionnaire for respondents to supply any additional comments
generated the following suggestions:
Timing is an issue - let's do it sooner than later
Isolation of tot play areas for safety is a concern
Provide a variety of water temperatures - cold and warm
Can we have a hot therapy pool? Or indoor?
"Spare no expense" - Carlsbad is a world class city
Lessons for the kids are the critical element - too many waitlisted
In addition to optionally providing their name and address, respondents were asked
to indicate, for future planning purposes, how they were made aware of the February
workshop. The following summarizes their responses:
Flyer in the mail 17
Notice at pool 13
NC Aquatics 10
Newspaper 5
Posted public notice 2
Word of mouth 1
Masters swim group 1
Water polo 1
c
ALGA NORTE COMMUNITY PARK
Aquatics Complex Master Plan Workshop February 27,2003
QU ESTlON NAI RE
THE PLANNING OF AN AQUATICS COMPLEX
Welcome to the Alga Norte Community Park Aquatics Complex Master Planning Workshop. Your
involvement in this workshop will contribute to the design of the City’s long-awaited second aquatics
complex. The City’s consultant team is seeking your input to help determine the final composition of
facilities to be provided within the aquatics complex. There are many issues and options to consider in
designing the complex. Please take your time in reviewing the options - talk to staff and other
community members, and fill out the following questionnaire with your thoughts. Your comments are your
chance to guide the City and their consultants in developing an aquatics complex designed to meet your
needs!
We thank you again for taking the time to help us!
DESIGN OPTIONS
We have developed six conceptual designs to illustrate a range of available options:
CIP Budget Option - This option provides the facilities currently approved in the Capital
Improvement budget. This includes a 50-meter competitive pool and a 9,500 square foot (sf)
support building.
Competitive Pool Option - This option provides a 51-meter competitive pool with moveable
bulkhead, a dive tank suitable for waterpolo play, an 8-lane warm-up/instructionaI pool, and a
9,500 sf support building.
Recreation Pool Option - This option provides an 8-lane warm-up/instructionaI pool with
side steps, a recreational activity pool with waterslide, a tot wet play pool, and a 12,000 sf
support building.
Combination Option - This option provides a 51-meter competitive pool with moveable
bulkhead, a 1 0-lane warm-up/instructionaI pool with moveable bulkhead, a recreational
activity pool with waterslide, a tot wet play pool, and a 12,000 sf support building.
Combination Option- This option provides a 50-meter competitive pool, an 8-lane warm-
up/instructional pool, a recreational pool with waterslide and tot wet play area, and a 10,000 sf
support building.
Combination Option - This option provides a 50-meter competitive pool, an 8-lane
instructional pool, an activity pool with waterslide and tot wet play area, a dive tank suitable
for waterpolo play, and a 10,000 sf support building.
Which option is best suited to serve the Carlsbad community?-
Why?
Which option would be your second choice?
Why?
COST RECOVERY
A cost recovery program will allow for operational losses to be minimized. This is an important
consideration for both the short and long term viability of this facility. Below are some examples of
methods used to maximize the ability of a facility to realize some cost recovery benefit.
Designing components of the facility for swim lessons would tap into a robust revenue
source while meeting the needs of a large, previously un-served, group of residents (1608
waitlisted swim lesson students over Summer 2002).
Designing the facility to meet the recreational needs (Le. family programming) of the
community would realize entrance fee revenues while cultivating future participation in aquatic
programs.
Concession sales (i.e. snack bar) not only bring in additional revenue from
recreation/competition patrons, but also allow the facility to provide complete entertainment
packages such as birthday parties.
Sponsorship allows for companies or individuals to give financial support by paying for their
name and/or logo to be displayed within the facility.
The following is a list of potential cost recovery options.
Circle those that you feel would be appropriate for this new aquatics facility in Carlsbad:
Standard Revenue Sources
Recreation Entrance Fees
Memberships Passes
Lap Swim Fees
Master’s Swim Fees
Swim Instruction
City Programs
Contract Classes
Facility Rentals
Other Sources
Corporate Sponsorship
Donor Sponsorship
Concessions
Special Events
Swim Meets
Equipment Rental (Lockers, etc.)
Aquatic Retail Shop
FACILITY FEATURES
1. What do you feel are the most CriticaVappropriate aquatic features at this particular park location?
Please rate the following aquatic facility features using the following scale: 1 =low priority,
240w to medium priority, 3=medium priority, 4=medium to high priority, and 5=high priority.
An aquatic retail shop A concessions building A competitive pool A children’s water playground
A grass “seating area” A water slide A “dive tank
Diving board( s)
An instructional pool Other
A weightlfitness room A recreation swimming pool
A therapeutic spa A separate shallow toddler pool
2. Circle the types of programs you feel would accommodate the citizen’s needs.
Water aerobics Water safety course Swim fitness Scuba diving lessons
Adult swim lessons Child swim lessons Adaptive Aquatics Diving lessons Lifeguard training Swim instructor training CPWFirst aid Swim stroke clinic
Water polo Inner tube polo Underwater hockey Synchronized swimming Open play recreation Aqua Therapy Lap swimming Fly-fishing
Remote control boating Master’s swimming Kayaking Aquatic parties
Aquatic exercise Competitive swimming Other (specify)
3. Please rate the following building design features using the following scale: l=low priority,
2=low to medium priority, 3=medium priority, 4=medium to high priority, and 5=high priority.
Classrooms Community meeting rooms Event rentals Fitness Center
Do you have any additional comments or suggestions?
WHO YOU ARE!
The following information is optional, but it would help us better understand the demographics of the
citizens who give us input and will be using the aquatics complex. The information provided will be
treated confidentially and will be used only for the purpose of planning the facility.
Name:
Address:
Telephone:
Email:
Homeowner/Organization:
Age:
Occupation:
Number/Ages of Children:
Total Number in Household:
Favorite Activities/Sports:
How did you hear about this planning event?
THANK YOU!