Loading...
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