Loading...
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!