HomeMy WebLinkAbout1998-10-19; Parks & Recreation Commission; 1098-5; Park Site Facility/Activity Goals & GuidelinesPARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION - AGENDA BILL
AB# 1098-5 I TITLE :
PARK SITE FAClLlTYlACTlVlTY
DATE: 10-1 9-98 GOALS & GUIDELINES
STAFF: BEVERLY I
RECOMMENDED ACTION :
After staff presentation and review of Exhibits No. 1 & 2, be prepared to discuss
0 ACTION
Sarlsbad’s Park
Site Amenity Goals & Guidelines in a workshop setting with Department staff. After discussion,
take appropriate action to revise and amend the Goals and Guidelines. Direct staff accordingly.
ITEM EXPLANATION :
The purpose of this Agenda item is to generate dialogue between Commission Members and
staff relative to Park Site Facility/Activity Goals and Guidelines. What was initially presented,
established and adopted as Facility and/or Ballfield Standards in the early 1980’s (Exhibit 4) was
last reviewed by the Commission in April 1993 (Exhibit 3). At that time, the Commission
recommended to refer to the “Standards” as goals and guidelines. In addition, the Commission
recommended to expand the types of facilities/activities which are listed to include more than just
ballfields. Accordingly, such things as golf courses, community centers, swimming pools and tot
lots were included as part of the amenity goals and guidelines.
2 -‘ Several months ago, the Commission received a copy of “Park, Recreation, Open Space and
Greenway Guidelines,” a publication of the National Recreation and Park Association. In
preparation of discussion of this particular agenda item, both staff and Commission members are
encouraged to read the Preface to this publication which has been attached as Exhibit 1. This
three (3) page Summary will provide some unique insight into topic discussion. Additionally,
attached as Exhibit 2, is a brief excerpt from Section five (5) entitled Facility Space Standards.
This Attachment will also provide “Food for Thought” in anticipation of group discussion on this
item.
The purpose of this Agenda item is to evaluate what the Parks and Recreation Department
provides in terms of Facility/Activity Goals and Guidelines, determine if they are applicable today
and revise or adjust as appropriate. It may be necessary for staff to return at another meeting to
conclude this issue, or the Commission may wish to continue this issue through committee
assignment. Staff has no preconceived recommendations at this time. However, collectively
between Commission members, staff and any public input, a workshop type of dialogue will yield
information which is unique to the Carlsbad Community in terms of developing Facility/Activity
Goals and Guidelines.
EXHIBITS:
1. Preface - “Park, Recreation, Open Space and Greenway Guidelines,” (N.R.P.A. Publication)
2. Section 5, N.R.P.A. Publication (refer to above)
3. Facility/Activity Goals & Guidelines/PRC Agenda Bill M93-6
4. City of Carlsbad Facility StandardslMemo December 13, 1988 “1
r
In 1979. a group of park and recreation professionals
nict in Kaiisa\ City, Missouri. to bcgtn a three year
effort to update Recrecitron. Purk atid Open Space w'5 (\7%3/) 14 Overview - Slurtr1urcl.s uud Guidelittes. published by the National
Recreation and Park Association. "All birds, even those of the same
species are not alike, and it is the c - n
The task force had to grapple not only with the cvIPd&d+
same with animals and human
beings. The reason WaKantankJ multitude of changes that were impacting the delivery ' '
of park and recreation services, but also a myriad of
social and economic forces which were emerging on
+plIWd &",p 3 ,p>
the American landscape. There is no crystal ball with 5&kM..i 5
$&;\Pk I
GCDd"M't
pJ RPn
does not make two birds or animals
alike js because each is placed here
by WaKantanka to be independent which to see the future and have in place the right
information and procedures to deal with changes individuality and to rely on itself."
SHOOT€R (Lare 19th Cenruty Tcron Sioux)
Copyright I993 by Running Press
when they occur and as fast as they occur. Native American Wisdom c -
It became obvious to many both within and outside the
-\15nb field that our basic approach to determining how we should go about providing parks and
recreation ncedcd revision. A decade had passed and many of the nicthods, practices, situations, '$05
uld prcsuinptions of tlic 19SOh wcrc recognized as out of step with he evetits of the 1990s. TIies,A5+k
Nariorxil Ktcrcarioii aiid hi.k A\ioci;itioti scnscd the nced to revisit this li:iiitlbook
I~ccoiiic tlic iiio\t widsly ud gtiiJc [or dircctiiig tlic growth of local govcriiiiictit park,
#ST
,-
-J I'
within America during thc 1980s that will have a profound .*
affect on the park, and recreation profession and how it does business in the 1990s. Some of
these change5 iiic.ltidc -
The dccliric of tedcral and state grant programs
which tor years provided funding to help cities to
purchase park and open space land and to develop lw AJP;L.bbu
~
+L&'' A Changing Landscape
this land as thcy wished. cpcrr CSt~oorh~
1 La"Rth. ~.ohJtllrQKciyJI,
ExplosiLc pwth in sonic jurisdictions which placed a severe strain on the ability of
park agencies to keep up with the cost of buying land on which to construct new parks.
A shift in the political winds from a reliance on federal dollars to solve local
problems to an emphasis on the use of state funds and local initiatives and resourc
For the foreseeable future, it is reasonable to assume that there will be a decline in
the amount of federal and perhaps state dollars available for local parks and
recreation. hlany park and recreation systems throughout the county are in critical
financial condition. Agencies have bcen forced to respond to increased deniand for
park and recreation opportunities with dccreasing fiscal resources.
r('
.: 9
.u I.
c yJQ&cv.c~c. W~*~f~ 16 The rapid increase in the number of growth impacted communities turning to
combined zoning and subdivision codes. now known as development codes. which
provide for sucli infrastructure cost shifting tools as I;ind ddicntions, exactions. and
impact fees for liiimciiig the development of park and rccrcntion fxilities in [tic
spwwliiig stibiiIl)s. Statc growth nian:it;ciiiciit 1tgisl;itioii h:is begun to require that
niiiiiiL.ipil iiifr;i\tiwturc sucli ;is roads. w;itcr ntid sewer liiics, parks. and schools be
:rvail;iblc coiicuwciit with new devclopiiicnt. TIic coiiccpt of "coiicurrcncy" requires
[lie e:it:it~li\liriiclit of lcvcl of service standards that ;ire bot11 rc;isoiiablc arid
ii ic;i xu rablc .
Tlie clcvclopinciit of ;i new array of lcpl tools for plaiiiiiiig and dcvclopiiient.
1
prk arid rccrcatioii profession h:is begun to L)ccoiiic iiiorc qu:iiititative in rcsponsc to
court aiid statutory tcsts sucli as thc rational nexus test or need versus benefit test. and
the most recciit roughly proportional test. Policy pliins adopted by goveninicnt 1
bomis, couiicils, niid coriiniissions have iiicrc3siiigly bccn uscd as evidential niaterial '\C
in court cxes iiivolviiig land use and zoning disputes. Xp i
2
4
recreation in the lcss active arc;Is of leisure People who support opcn spacc or open
b131;irds initiatives often are competing for thc same limited tax dollars which might in
b.
c thc pas[ have becn spent on active recreation facilities.
The expansion of service dclivcry responsibilities. including protecting an
programming elcnicnts of the comrnunity's historical, cultural. and natural
The growth of public-private partncrships to provide both active park and rccreation
facilities as well as community open lands. For example. a community floodplain
greenbelt program can be justified by its enhancement of the value of adjacent private
property. pi$
A significant growth in new state and local government environmental Icgislation.
A demand from all sectors of the community for equity and uniform quality in the
provision of park and recreation resources, facilities, and programs. A rational
planning guideline provides a procedure for addressing these concerns.
A shift in planning from the traditional project or comprehensive master plan lo the
more strategic planning process which provides a wider range of opportunities for
citizcns to become active stakeholders in their community and more involved in the
decision-making process.
A growing rccognition that recreation demand is often met by a host of providers ...
A shift away from reliance on an ab.;olutc natioiul staiid:ird. i.e. the lorig
notiori of 10 acres/1000 persons. to iiicrcwirig coininunity self-direction wliere tlic c
-ipb) nurii\cr of acres for piirk aiitl rccrc;itiori 1:iiic1 is based oil wlint ttie citizcris dctcr-iiiinc c \ t2\
3
.
Facility Space
Standards
f
A facility space guideline is an expression of the amount of space required for a specific
recreation facility, such as a children's playground, a picnic area, or a softball diamond.
Very little has changed with recreation facility standards in the past decade. Because of the
substantial changes suggested for computing the
approach than its predecessor to community judgment
with respect to sizing the different types of parks.
Recent research on the use of Recreation, Park and
Open Space Standards and Guidclines (NRFA. 1953)
suggests that few jurisdictions feel that nationally
prescribed minimurns by park tl'pe are feasible.
LOS, this publication takes a more deferential Facility Space Guideline
expression of the amount of
space required for specific
recreation facihty.
This section presents the activitylfusiliry standards for a menu of facilities needed for baqic
recreation activities. Keep in ruind th3t when a park size is being considcrsd. the planncr must
consider not only the LOS but also the amount of space needed to safely develop and use
facilities such as playgrounds and volkyball courts. Tday, planners arc providing niors off
street parking. more spectator space. more space to separate faciIitics, and more space for
amenities.
A community can select a fxiliry menu which best satisfies the needs of the citizens. The
following table is adopted from the 1953 publication, with the qualilication that planners usc
what kind of parks and facilities they want in their community. this seems to be ttx nimi
~bk~a more active role in deciding
r -. 7
these as guidelines rather than axioms. __I--. Since ' . -
sensible approach. As has &en stated and restated, [lie primary concern of park anJ recreation
adrntnistratcriis to see ttiat tticre is enougti park iang &iGd in [ti: rigtit p~~cts. at tl~r tirric ---"---.-.-u....A* ~ u -- *c1 *
people art: there to use -. it. Park facilities can be cycled as nccds, tastts arld types of equi;~rilent
and Ieisurs clroiccs change. [iut, il a conirriuriity comes up short of hd, this i1i:iy be a dif'ticult
and expciisive dclicicncy to overcome.
c.- ... __ . .,=-
3 ii we. EXHIBIT 2
widespread use across the United States. A general consensus was that the facility standards are
useful as guidelines, but that a community should determine what mix of facilities best meets its
specific needs. ‘Many believe that the cost of strict adherence to those standards is not realistic
in the 1990s market place (Martin, 1993).
The trend in park and recreation planning is to utilize market research to determine relevant
recreation needs. This is based on the facility capacity/demand to participate concept. This
seems more credible than relying on the strength of popular fads. Specialized facilities in the
1990s, which in many cases can be provided by the private sector, should be developed only
with strong market data to support a need (demand) for the facility.
If it is the intent of a park and recreation department to generate interest in a particular
recreation activity or park facility, a reasonably priced pilot program makes economic and
political sense. While many optimists may feel imbued with “Field of Dreams” fervor, it makes
no sense to rush into a massive commitment of scarce public funds, only to find out later that
“they did not come”. Given the increasing number of business people getting involved in local
government, there will be more empiricism demanded of public officials wishing to develop
major facilities with a hefty maintenance cost.
In deference to the direction of local government planning and budgeting in the 1990s the
number of units per population for a facility development has ken deleted from the Suggested
Fuciliry Deweloprncnt Smnrkrrds. This reflects a conviction that each community must shape
basic facility standards arid park classifications or dztinitions to fit individual circumstances.
In ordcr to keep up wit11 the space requircnieiits for new kinds of fxilitics. rccreation arid
activitiss, park and rccrcatiori planners and others caii consult with NRPA, professional
associations, and equipiiwnt nianufxturers for tcchnical assistance.
!
I
Suggested Outdoor Facility Development Standards
Activity- . Recornmeodd Rcxomwdcd Recommended Service Radius
Fwpllt size tad space Orientation and Loeation Notes
Dimeasbar RquiremenCr
)adrnintaa Singles-17' x 44' 1622 sq. ft. Long ax1s nodl 114 - IR mile Usually in school
Doubles-20' 144' - Soulh rccrcakion center or church
wilh 5' unobstructed
area on both sides.
facility. Safe walking or biking
or biking access.
~asketbnll I. Youth 46' - 50' x 84' 2400-3036 sq. ft. Long axis north 1/4 - IR mile. Same as
!.High school 50' x 84' SW7280 sq. ft. - south badminton. Outdoor COW
1. Collegiate SO' x 94' with 5' 5500-7980 4. k in neighbodmdcommuniy
parks. plus active recreation
arcas in other Dark scttines.
unobstructed space
all sides.
~~~ ~ ~~ ~~~
IandbaU 20' x 40' with a 8004.kfor Long axis is north IS - 30 min. travel time,
3-4 mU) minimum of 10' 4-wall. IO00 sq. k - south. Front wall 4-wail usually indoor as part
10 MT Of 3-wall for 3-wall. 1( north end. of multi-purpose building.
coutt. Minimum 20'
overhead clearance. school setting.
(Min. 85' x 185') including suppofl - south if ouldoon. Climate important
Additional So00 Kea consideration affccting no. of
22.000 sq. ft
including support area purpose facility.
36' x 78'. 12 ft.
clswmx on single cwr( area - south.
tmlh end;.
3-2 all usually in park or
:ce hockey Rink 85' x 200' 22,000 sq. ft Long axis is north IR - 1 hour kavel time.
units. Best as pa of multi-
ll4 - IR mile. best in batteries of
2 - 4. Locilcd in neighborhd
community park or near school site
rennis Min. of 7,200 sq. ft.
(2 acres per complex).
Long axis north
C'olleyhull 30' x 60'. hlininium 4,ooO Long axis no& IR - I mile.
blinirnuni of 6' sq. It. - souh.
clclrmcc on dl sides.
Hawball
1. Oficiarl Buflincs - 90' 3.0 -3.85 A min. Locate home plate 1/4-11? milc. Put of neighbohooi
Pitching dist.- 60.5'
Foul lincs - niin. 320' thruuing across sun. coniniuniry CWII~ILX.
Center licld - W't
so pitcher is no(
and baticr no( racing it
Line rrom home plate
1. Litllc Lcague BawIints - 60' 1.2 A min. hrough pitchsrs niound
complcs. Lighted fields put of
Pitching distance-46' to run cA\t-nOnheut.
Foul lines - 200'
Center kld - 200'-250'
Field Ituckey IS0 x 300' with a Minitnun I3 A Fall season - Long 15-10 minute lravcl time. usually
mininiuni of IO asis northwest or
souheast. Tor
longer priods.
nonvsouth
parr of bawbdl. football. socccr
coinples in community pyk
or adj;lccn[ to high whd.
clcuuxe on dl sides
Fwitbnll IM' x 3GO' uih a htininiurn 1.5 A S~ms 3s Lsld htxkcy. IS - 30 niin. U;lvcl tiliie.
niiiiiciiuni of 6'
clc.irmcc on dI siilcs.
Smis is CcIJ hckkcy.
Scnwr lv5'h~23*x330' 1.7-2.1 A. Smt a\ Lcld hocky. I - 2 milts. Numbcr of units
d~pciid.t un populxity. Youth
pipI.iri[y. You:h soc'crr on
siii:iIkr tirlJc x!j.ixnt to ficlJr
or nciShthirr\%*)d pirls.
tu ;;A)' u i:h IO'
nii:ii:iii.!!ii clcmnce
O;I J;I hi.!<,.
f
123
U- 900' x 690' wide.
ving tan%
mik Over-all width - 276
width for 8 . 4 lanes
IS 32'.
.Add 12' width each
additional ICC.
UriqLrtck length -600'. Tmk
IS-holc Avcrqe Icngth hlinimuin 1 IO yds ' 500 - 550 psoplrlday.
s1;liidnrd 651W) yds. Counc niay bs located in
comnninity. district or
regionaViiiztro park.
IS to 30 minute Wwel tiinc. Pools
for gcncrd community ux shoulJ
planiied for teaching cornptitive
and rrcreationd purpxs with
diving bods. Lncatd in
community park or school sits.
6 iiiuuiiig l)tnils Tcxhing . min. Vxics on size of pool None. but cue must
aid amenities.
Usually I - 2 A sites. Life swtions in
25 yds x 45' even
depth Of 3-4 A.
Conipstitive - sun enough to accoiiidate lm and 31r
min. 25 m x 16 m.
hlin. of 25 q. It.
water surfrrcc per
swimriier. Ration of
2 to I dxk to water.
bc den in siting
relalion to afternoon
c;tcli aIcas Dc:ic.h arc3 should WA WA I/? to I hour travel tiiiic. ShoulJ
h.ivc 50 sq. ft. of lund
aid SO sa fi. of u'ater
p:r uw. Turnover
r.w iu 3. There shoulJ
le J 3 -4 A suppniiig
u,.i-pr :\ of Ixuch.
have a sand hrttorri witti ;L
mhimuni slq~ of 5%. Ho31iilg
areas cuiiiplcrcly ss;rc.g:iid froiii
swiiiiiiiicig xu. hi rczioiiJL'i\ictrL
parks.
13.5 A for min.
of 25 M.
Long axis is Muthwest 30 minute travel time. Park of golf
-n~rOrasl with golfer course complex. As separate unit
dnving northeast. may bc privately operated.
Long axis in sector 15-30 minute travel time. Usually
from north 10 south part of a high school or community
to northwest - park complex in combination with
southeast. with finish football. soccer. etc.
line at north end.
4.3 A
tball Baselines - 60' 1.5 - 2.0 A
pitching din. - 45' men.
40' women
Fat pitch field radius
from plate ~ 225'
Slow pitch - 275' (men)
250' (women).
rltiple use 120' x 80' 9.840 sq. ti.
lrl
skelball,
ink. etcJ
~~
Samc as baseball. 1/4 - It2 de Slight difference
indimensions for 16". May also be used for youth
baseball
Long axis of court
with primary use community parks.
north and south.
1 - 2 miles. in neighborhood or
chery range 300' length x Minimum 0.65 A Archer facing nod 30 minutes travel time. Part of a
minimum IO' + or - 45 degrees. rcgionailmetm complex.
bctwscn targets.
Roped, clear area
on side of range
minimum 30. clear
space behind urge&
minimum of
90' I; 45' with bunker.
111
I'ar 3 Avcrq: length varies 50 - 60 A h1;ijoriIy of holes on I/? - 1 hour ~rivel tiins
(18 hole) -W) - 2700 yards. nontduiutli uis
9-llole Avcr:igc length hliiiiiiiuin of 50 A
s(:iiidard 2150 yards.
9.hole course can accoriiditc
350 peopldday.
3 "2
FACILITY/ACTM?Y GOALS AND GUIDELINES
(Adepk&Nevernber-49&29€#)- (adopted 4 / 19 /93) c.
Community Center/Gym
Enclosed Soccer
Football
II FACILITY/ACTMTY I CARLSBAD STANDARD I NATIONAL STANDARD
l/Quadrant N/S
l/COmmUnity N/S
l/Quadrant 1/20,000
l/SOOO ll Badminton I * 3/Quadrant I
~~ ~~
Hard Court Areas l/Com. Park (Active)
Indoor Volleyball Cts. 2/Quadrant
Soccer ** 1/4,000
1/10,000
l/S,OOO
1/ 1 0,000
Softball/Baseball
Tennis Courts
1/4,000 1 /5,000
1 /2,000 1/2,000
Tot Lots
Swimming Pool
l/Com. Park (Active) N/S
3/Community 1/20,000
?
* Multi-Use with other uses ** One (1) Adult size per Quadrant - where possible
-, Golf Course (Regulation)
Golf Course (Short Course)
Trails
N/S - NO Stadad
l/COmmunity 1/50,000
l/COmmUnity WS
l/COmmunity 1 /Re don
NOTE: When possible at least 1/2 of the sport fields will be lighted
Approved by the Parks & Recreation Commission 4/19/93
EXHIBIT 3
L. mIDE FACILITY INVENTORY
SUMMARY
Quadrants:
Pop. 64,915
DB&KB\Tables\Facilrty.Inv July 18. 1935
FUTURE (EST.) NW
EXISTING NE
-- 3 a
EXISTING SW
- SE
19932
(20,756)
(29,805) 1. Poinsettia
2. Zone 19
FUTURE TOTAL
GRAND TOTAL
EXIST + FUTURE (7.41
SITE STD
1. Levante
2. Fuerte
3. La Costa Canyon
4. Stagecoach
STANDARDflOTAL
~___
(5.1 1
FUTURE (EST.) SW
EXISTING SE
FUTURE (EST.) SE
July 18. 1995
PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION - AGENDA BILL
AB# "A3-d
MTG. s3
DEPT. s. FAQLITY !XANDARDS UPDATE TITLE:
- .
After review, comment and modification your action would be to direct staff to revise
the Facility/Activity Standards as deemed necessary.
tTJW EXPLANATION:
On March 15, 1993 the Commission requested that staff review and revise the Facility
Standards that were adopted on November 19, 1990. Staff has included the existing
April 23, 1991 summaries (Exhibit A) and a revision draft based on new population
figures and build out progression (Exhibit B).
FISCAL WACX
None.
EXHIBITS:
1.
2.
3.
Exhibit 1 - Facility/Activity Standard
Exhibit 2 - 1991 City Wide Facility Inventory
Exhibit 3 - 1993 Revised City Wide plans
FUTURE (EST.) SW
- sw .
810
(29.805)
~
1 l4OW
SITE STD SORBALVBB
3
1. Poinsettia
2. Zone 19 3
3. School Sits -
Aviara Oeki 3
1 f4oOo
STD
1 11
1%
(20.756)
FUTURE TOTAL
GRAND TOTAL
EXIST + FUTURE
I
9
(7.4) 9 (7.4)
7-r SOCCER
1. Levants
2 Fuerte
3 Le Coda Canyon
4 Stagecoach
STAN DA RD/TOTAL
1120.000 112.000 FOOTBALL
I I
1 2 0 0
2 2 0 0
0 0 0 2
3 2 1 4
(5.1) 6 (5.1) 8 (1 .O) 1 (10.3) 6
- -
SE SITE STD SOFTBALUBB STD SOCCER STD FOOTBALL STD
BIO
-
(40,165) 1 Alga Norte 3 3 1
(Encinitas) 1 1 0
3 Cerrillo 0 0 0
2. School Site
3-t-
TENNIS
5
0
0
_i_F (1 4.9)
FUTURE TOTAL 4 4
GRAND TOTAL
EXIST + FUTURE (1 0.0) 10 (1 0.0) 10 (1 .O)
EXISTING SE
SITE I STD SOFTBALUBB STD SOCCER STD FOOTBALL STD TENNIS
1 5
2 (20.0) 11
1 I 1 1 I -
12 (63 2) 66 CllT WIDE TOTALS (31.6) 45 (31.6) 36 (4.0)
388K8\Tebles\Facility.lnv
4/93 37 L' '4
. ~. --
Quadrants:
NW lbot& - EO. 24,578
- ' pall 114
Soccer 114
Football l/quad 1/20
Tennis 1/2
1993 2991
STD EXIST +/-
6.1 10 +3.9
6.1 a +1.9
1 .o 3 +3.0
12.2 17 +4.a
B/O 35,625 STD
8.9
8.9
EXIST + FUT
+/- FUTURE 8/0 PROJ.
9 19 + 10.1
7 15 +6.1
1 .o
17.8
3 6 + 5.0
18 35 -t 17.2
II I
- NE JOl58
Pop. 9,531
Softball 114
Soccer 1/4
Football l/quad 1/20
Tennis 112
1993 1991 EXIST + FUT
STD EXIST +I- B/O 20,957 FUTURE B/O PROJ. +I-
2.4 5 +2.6 5.2 2 7 + .2
2.4 2 <.4> 5.2 2 4 (1.2s
1 .o 1 0 1 .o 1 2 +1.0
4.7 2 < -2.9> 10.4 2 4 6.4 z
- sw 105cl
Pop. 10,050
Softball 1/4
Soccer 114
+1.6
<.4>
1993 1991
STD EXIST +/-
2.6 0 <2.6>
2.6 0 <2.6>
-~ ~
1 .o -1 2 I 2 I +1.0 II
B/O 29,805
7.4
14.9 16 16 +1.1 I I I
EXIST + FUT
FUTURE B/O PROJ.
9 9
1 ~~ ~-
Fr-. Jall llquad 1/20 1 .o 0 < -1 .o> -
-1 his 112 5.0 0 <5.0>
Soccer 114 I 16.2 1 16 I <.2>
EXIST + FUT SE - $\'%I 3 bvy'l 1993 1991
Pop. 20,756 STD EXIST -t I- B/O 40.165 FUTURE B/O PROJ.
Softball 114 5.1 6 + .9 10.0 4 10
Soccer 114 5.1 6 + .9 10.0 4 10
Football 7 quad 1/20 1 .o 1 0 1 .o 1 2
Tennis 1/2 10.3 6 4.3 20.0 5 11
+/-
-0-
-0-
+1
<-9.o>
EXIST i- FUT
B/O 126,552 FUTURE B/O PROJ.
31.6 24 45
31.6 20 36
+/-
+ 13.4
+4.4
OBBd\Tables\Facility.lnv
4/93
CITYWIDE TOTALS
Pop. 64,915
Sofiball 114
EXHIBIT 3
1993 1991
STD EXIST +/-
16.2 21 +4.a
Football 1 /quad 1/20 4.0 5 +1 4.0 7 12
T 1s 112 32.4 . 25 c7.4> 63 2 41 ' 66 +2.8 I I
NW
jc"'
-
(2( 2)
91 STD SOFTBALUBB STD SOCCER STD FOOTBALL TENNIS ' SITE
- (1/4,000) (1 t4.ooot (1/2O.O00) tl mxao) (Standard)
1 (90') I 0 0 0 1 Pine
2 Chase
3 Jefferson
3 (60') 0 0 0
1(W 1 0 0
4 Magnolia 0 2 (1 lox 0 0
5 Valley (upper) 1 1 adult 1 e
Valley (lower) 0 1 sdun 1 0
6 Kelly 0 1 small 0 0
7 CHS 2 (60'6 90) 1 eduk 1 9
8 Buena Vista 2 1 0 0
9 Laguna Riviera 0 0 0 2
I
80 YdS)
STAN DA RDlTOTAL (S.5) 10 (6.5) 8 (1 3) 3 (1 3) 17
1
STD FOOTBALL SITE STD SOFTBALUBB STD SOCCER
1 Pine or Magnolia 2 2 1
2 Vet Memorial 4 4 2
3 Cannon Lake 0 0 0
4 Zone 5 3 1 0
FUTURE TOTAL 9 7 3
GRAND TOTAL (9.4) 18 (9.4) 15 (1.9) 6
EXIST + FUT
STD TENNIS
2
12
cc
4
I
ia
(1 9.7) 35
FOOTBALL STD TENNIS
I I
-
NE SITE STD SOFTBALUBB STD SOCCER STD FOOTBALL STD TENNIS -
1991 1. Calavera Hills 3 1 1 2
(9,a79)
2. Hope 1 1 0 0
3. Safety Center 1 0.
5 (2.4) 2 (1 .O) 1 (4.9) 2 STANDARDnOTAL (2.4)
0 0
I I
NE SITE STD SOFTBALUBB STD SOCCER
B/O 1 Larwin 1 1
-
(20,843) -
FUTURE TOTAL 1 1
GRAND TOTAL (5.2) 6 (5.2) 3
EXIST + FUT
STD
(2.0)
FACILI~/ACTMTY e +&d-
(Adopted November 19, 1990)
Badminiton
Community Center/Gym
Enclosed Soccer
Football
Hard Court Areas
Indoor Volleyball Cts.
Soccer
SoftbalVBaseball
Tennis Courts
II FACILITY/ACTMW I CARLSBADSTANDARD I NATIONALSTANDARD
3/Quadrant l/SOOO
l/Quadrant N/S
l/ComUnity N/S
1 /Quadrant 1/20,000
l/Com. Park (Active) 1/10,000
2/Q u adran t l/S,OOO
** 1/4,000 1/10)000
1/4,000 l/S,OOO
1/2)000 1/2)000
Swimming Pool
Golf Course (Regulation)
Golf Course (Short Course)
t
I- Trails
~~~ I1 ~~ Tot Lots 1/Com. Park (Active) I N/S
3/CO!lUnUnity 1/20,000
l/COmmUnity 1 /50,000
l/COmmUnity N/S
l/Community l/Region
Mdti-U~e With 0th- use^ ** One (1) Adult size per Quadrant - where possible
N/S - NO Standard
NOTE: When possible at least 1/2 of the sport fields will be lighted
EXHIBIT 1
Activity
Youth Softball/Baseball
Adult Softball
Youth Soccer
Adult Soccer
* Youth Football
* Adult Football
** Tennis
Lighted Baseball Fields
CITY OF CARLSBAD
FACILITY STANDARDS
NRPA
I/ 5,000
1/ 5,000
-
1/10,000
1/ 10,000
1 / 20,000
1 / 20,000
1/ 2,000
1/30,000
STANDARDS
City
1/ 4,000
1/ 6,000
1/ 4,000
1/ 6,000
1 / 20,000
1 / 20,000
1/ 2,000
N/A
r4WA - 1983 National Park and Open Space Standards and Guidelines.
City - Based on NRPA, population percentage and park consultant
recommendations.
42 EXHIBIT 4
I -.
December 13, 1988
TO: PARKS AND RECREATlON COMMISSION
FROM: DAVID BRADSTREET, PARKS AND RECREATION DIRECTOR
During the adoption of the Ballfield Standards in February of 1987, the
Commission directed staff to re-evaluate the standards on an annual basis
and update the existing and future inventory.
The following data is submitted for your review and adoption at the December
1988 Parks and Recreation Commission meeting.
City of Carlsbad
Facility Standard Update
Activity
Softba I I I ba sebal I
Soccer
Foot ba I I
Tennis
Notes
City Standards
1/4,000
"1 /4,000
**l/20,000
1 /2,000
*Where area permits soccer size will be 75 yds. x 120 yds.
**At least (1) one field per quadrant.
At least 50% of all future fields will be lighted.
DB:bs
Attachments: November 1988 Revised facility inventory
c: Frank Mannen, Assistant City Manager
Lynn Chase, Recreation Superintendent
Ken Price, Principal Recreation Supervisor
Jim Bradshaw, Recreation Supervisor
EXIST IN6
- SITE STD SonBALL
-. (1/4.000)
25243) 1. PINE 1988 2. CHASE
1
3
3. JEFFERSON 1
4. MAGNOLIA
5. VALLEY
6. KELLY
7. CHS
8. BUENA VISTA
0
0
0 9. LAGUNA RIVIERA -
EXISTING TOTAL (6.3) 9
(39479) 1. PINE 8/0 2. MACARID
3. CANNON LAKE
4. ZONE 5
FUTURE TOTAL
GRAND TOTAL
- NE
(9879) 1. CAL HILLS 1988
2. HOPE
3. SAFETY CENTER
EXISTING TOTAL
(20843) 1. LARUIN B/O FUTURE TOTAL
GRAND TOTAL 11/09/88
' e I of 2)
2
4
0
3
9
-
(9.8) 18
3
1
1
(2.4) 5
-
1
1
(5.2) 6
-
- STD SOCCER
( 1/4,000)
0
0
1
2
1
1
1
1
0 -
(6.3) 7
FUTUIE (EST.1
2
4
0
1
8
(9.8) 15
-
EXIST 1%
FUTlRE (EST.)
1
1
(5.2) 3
- STD FOOTBALL
(1/20,000)
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
- 0
(1.2) 2
1
2
0
- 0
3
(2.0) 5
1
0
- 0
(1.0) 1
0
- 0
(2.0) 2
- STD TENNIS
(1/2.000)
0
0
0
0
6
0
9
0
1.
(12.6) 17
4
0
0
4
8
(15.8) 25
-
2
0
0 -
(4.9) 2
2
5 -
(21.4) 9.
I
(12081)
1988
(31775) 8/0
- SE
(20459) 1988
(42817) B/O
EX1 ST I R6
- SITE ST0 SOFrsALL a SOCCER
(1/4,UOO) ( 1/4,000)
EXISTING TOTAL (3.0) 0 (3.0) 0
1. ALTA HIRA 3
2. H.P.I. 3
3. SCH. SITE - 1
FUTURE TOTAL 7
6RANO TOTAL (7.9) 7
1. LEVANTE 1
2. FUERTE 2
3. L.C. CANYON 0
4. STAGECOACH - 3
EXISTING TOTAL (5.1) 6
1. ALGA NORTE 3
2. SCHOOL SITE 1
4. CARRILLO - 0
FUTURE TOTAL 4
WAliO TOTAL (10.7) 10
67.657 (1968) CITY WID€ TOTALS (16.8) 20
134.914 (B/O) CITY VIE TOTALS (33.6) 41
FUTLRE lEST.1
3
3
1
7
-
(7.9) 7
EXISTING
2
2
0
2
(5.1) 6
FUTLRE [EST.)
3
1
0
4
-
(10.7) 10 .
STD TENNIS - STO FOOTBALL -
( 1/20 * 000) (1/2.000)
(1.0)
1 13
1 5
0 1
3 18
(15.8) 18 3
- -
0 0
0 0
0 2
4 1
1 (10.4) 6
- -
1 5
0 0
5 0
1
2 (21.4) 16
- -
4 (33.8) 25
(33.6) 34 (7.0) 11 (67.3) 63
(16.8) 15 (3.3)
1 1 /09/ 88
(Page 2 of 2)
PARK E, RECREATION COMhllSSION - AGENDA BILL
BALLFIELD STANDARD REVISION
dB# 1288-2
HTG. 12-19-88
DEPT. HD.
CITY ATTY I -. DEPT. P E R
RECOMMENDED ACTION: ?-*
CITY MGR.-.-..-
Review, accept and file the revised Ballfield Standards
as presented by staff.
ITEM EXPLANATION:
At the November 1988 Parks and Recreation Commission meeting,
the Commission directed that the Ballfield Inventory include that
at least 50% of all future fields be lighted when possible, and that
we do not count private tennis courts in meeting our tennis standards
of 1 /2000.
EXH I BITS
1. Revised Ballfield Inventory - dated 12/13/88