Loading...
LORAC PAC Meeting 2 Summary_210210LAKE OSWEGO RECREATION AND AQUATICS CENTER PROJECT ADVISORY COMMITTEE Lake Oswego PAC Meeting #2 Summary Page 1 MEETING 2 SUMMARY Date: 2/10/21 Time: 6:00pm – 8:00pm Place: Zoom Meeting Purpose: Review results from recreation pool survey, review competition pool recommendations and comparison of similar facilities. Outcomes: Build understanding on similar facilities, competition pool details and community desires for recreation pool, receive PAC feedback on these items. Attendees PAC Attendees: Lainie Decker Chris Duncan Sarah Ellison Aukai Ferguson Natalie Gentry Sandy Intraversato Leasa Lowy Cassidy Miller Cole Olsen Jahzeel Ormeno John Wallin John Wendland Staff Attendees: Ivan Anderholm, City of Lake Oswego Jenny Anderson, City of Lake Oswego Bruce Powers, City of Lake Oswego Jan Wirtz, City of Lake Oswego Tony Vandenberg, Lake Oswego School District Erica Baggen, Scott Edwards Architecture Jennifer Marsicek, Scott Edwards Architecture Sid Scott, Scott Edwards Architecture Andra Zerbe, Scott Edwards Architecture Michael Morehart, Counsilman Hunsaker Allison Brown, JLA Public Involvement Ariella Frishberg, JLA Public Involvement Welcome and Introductions Allison Brown, JLA Public Involvement, began the meeting. She reviewed Zoom tools and etiquette. Jennifer Marsicek, Scott Edwards Architecture, reviewed the meeting agenda and purpose. 2 The group reviewed and discussed the PAC Meeting 1 Summary. The summary was approved with an edit to the Q&A section to clarify that the largest pool being considered is the recreation pool. Additional edits to the meeting summary can be sent to Jenny Anderson, City of Lake Oswego. Recreation Pool Survey: Review Results Jenny Anderson, City of Lake Oswego, shared the results from Recreation Pool Survey that was open from January 15th through 31st, 2021. The survey emphasized that the recreational pool is only one part of the recreation and aquatics center. The presentation of the survey results is attached to this summary. Highlights from the survey are as follows: • 2085 people participated • The majority of participants (60%) were between 35-59 years of age. 90% were over the age of 35. • There were 735 written comments: o Overall Comments: People were really excited about the pool, mentioned the competitive pool, and want the pool after COVID-19. There was some concern about going over budget and/or that the pool would take away from the golf course. There was also concern about where the pool would be located. o Programming: People hoped there would be adult-only time and affordable/accessible swim lessons. There were concerns about affordability of using the pool, how many lifeguards there would be, cleanliness, and about the pool being too crowded. o Design: There was desire to include elements for all ages, for an outdoor pool, a deep well/diving area, lap lanes, warm water, accommodations for disabilities, a saltwater system, separate lanes for kids and lap lanes, and a large pool. Some were concerned about traffic and parking. Discussion about survey results. Staff responses are italicized in the points below. Comments that were also shared in the chat are included in this summary. • A PAC member asked about the total reach of the survey (how many people the link reached) versus how many people actually responded to the survey. o The survey was sent to at least 14,000 people. There is the possibility that one household may be represented multiple times in the survey if more than one person in the same household responded. • Multiple questions were raised on the representation from interest groups, who might have encouraged members to fill out the survey. o Some groups may be underrepresented in the survey. o There was some discussion about the possibility and efficacy of doing a survey that randomly samples Lake Oswego residents that asks people if they would use the pool at different price points. ▪ Staff noted that this type of survey was done in the work leading up to the bond. o There was a desire to look into other opportunities for reaching people who may not know about the project in different ways so that the pool is as effective at serving the public as possible. 3 ▪ Jenny mentioned that there will be other opportunities for people to provide input such as the community meeting on February 25th and an additional survey. There will also be workshops to gain feedback from the wider community. o There was also discussion about doing focus groups to gain feedback from communities whose feedback the group is most interested in or from communities who are not already engaged with the project. o Many see this survey as directional in nature and helpful in determining which components of the pool can be taken off the table. • There was some concern that survey respondents may have been confused between the competition pool and the recreational pool when they were filling out the survey. • It will be possible for recreational lap swimming to be done in the competition pool when it is not in use. • One person noted that if a rentable party space were included, they thought it would be used by the community (even if people marked it as a low priority on the survey). • One person mentioned that there needs to be warmer water, shallower lap lanes. • Many want to know which features will serve the most households and how that breaks down in terms of how many households would use those features, what is the cost, subsidy fee, etc. • One person noted that people seem to want a basic, recreational pool with warm water, that’s outdoors, and has a slide. Presentation Jennifer Marsicek, Scott Edwards Architecture, shared a recreation and aquatic center comparison graphic. Andra Zerbe, Scott Edwards Architecture, walked the group through the comparison graphic. The comparison graphic showed similar recreation or aquatic centers to help the group visualize what the Lake Oswego center might look like. Below are highlights from the graphic: • The competition pool would be similar in size and layout to the pool at the Snohomish and Chehalem centers. Conestoga and Southwest have non-standardized lap swimming pools. We expect to have 6- 10 lanes in the competition pool at Lake Oswego. • The recreation pool will be roughly 3,000 square feet, comparable to the pool at the Southwest Community Center. • The dry recreational area will have a regulation, high school sized court and a cardio area. The recreation areas for dry functions will be similar in size to those at the Southwest Community Center. There was discussion about how the recreational pool at the Southwest Community Center compares to that planned at Lake Oswego. Andra answered that the 3,000 square feet of the Lake Oswego recreational pool would be split between two lap lanes and a recreational free swim area. A third of the warm water pool will be partitioned off for lap swimming. When not in use for lap swimming, the area would be open to recreational free swim. Chehalem Aquatic and Fitness Center tour report-back A PAC member attended a tour at Chehalem Aquatic and Fitness Center and gave a report-back (along with staff) on that tour. Below are some highlights from the information given by staff at the Chehalem Center on the tour: 4 • Staff noted that if they had to get rid of one aquatic feature at the Chehalem Center, it would be the vortex. There is a lazy river (current channel), so the vortex feels unnecessary. • It is important to have separate entrances for the competition and recreational pools. • Staff emphasized that if they did it all over again, they would value deck space more highly than lap lanes to accommodate kids and swimmers during meets and practice. • Deeper water can allow for more programming (water volleyball or basketball). • The staff only use two of the three features in the pool at a time due to lifeguard limitations. • The drop slide has the most rescues. • The climbing wall is used by children all the way up to older adults. • They lost their teenage user group because there is no deep water in the recreational pool. • Recreational swimmers do not like to use the competition pool, so it is important to have lap lanes in the recreational pool. • The rentable party room brings in the most revenue for the center. Discussion about the tour • A PAC member noted that the recreational pool at Lake Oswego would be the size of the left half of the pool at Chehalem, so it would not include the current channel, diving well, or spa area. o The pool at Lake Oswego would not be able to fit the exact same pool that is at Chehalem, nor will they be able to afford all of the features that the Chehalem pool has. o Ken Ballard’s operational analysis will help the group determine what features to include or exclude at the Lake Oswego Recreation and Aquatics Center. His analysis will consider data from local recreational centers. • One person mentioned that the party room may be critical to funding the center. • Staff noted that there is a general estimate when looking at tradeoffs between the wet and dry sides of the recreation center: one square foot of the wet side of the building is equivalent to about two square feet of the dry side. Competition Pool Michael Morehart, Counsilman Hunsaker, talked through the recommendation for the competition pool, which considered how the pool will be used, what direction swimmers will swim in and play games, and where spectators will sit. Highlights from the recommendation include: • Swimming Layout: o The recommended orientation of the pool is from north to south. This moves spectator seating to the west side of the pool. o No one will be flip turning or starting from the bulkhead, which made the east/west configuration untenable. • Practice / Training Layout: o Bulkhead in the middle of the pool with the different high school teams training on either side. • High School Meet Layout: o Bulkhead remains in the same place as for training, competition is on the left side (6 lanes), right side is used for warm-up swimming (6 lanes). o Spectators will be on the west deck. o To have additional competitive lanes (9 lanes), swimming would need to occur east to west and there would be three warm-up lanes. • Championship Meet Layout: 5 o Possible to have 9 lanes north to south, with 3 warm-up lanes. o Same number of lanes for east-to west configuration. Swimmers will swim off the bulkhead in this configuration. • Water Polo Layout: o Competition Layout: Proposed to have pool setup in east to west direction to have more fields of play and floating goals. Spectators will be on the south side in this configuration. There was some discussion about having the floating goals on the longer ends of the pool. o Practice: The bulkhead can go in the middle of the pool and floating goals will be used. People are able to walk on the bulkhead. o There was some discussion about the logistics of moving the bulkhead, which is not very easy to move. There is the possibility of using a lane line to split the pool for practice so as to limit wear and tear on the pool and bulkhead. • There is still some discussion to be had about the competition pool layout. o Tony Vandenberg, Lake Oswego School District, will reach out to those interested and who have expertise in the subject to meet next week to discuss the competition pool layout. • The group discussed the importance of the competition pool’s ability to serve the needs of recreational and non-recreational uses. • A member asked about how the design of the pool and available area determines where spectator seating is placed. Overall, there would be some challenges if the spectator block was moved from where it is in the design now. It is better for spectator seating to be at the bottom of the diagram. • There is some confusion about how the pools will be used by recreational lap swimmers and non- competitive swimmer. • Spectator seating and a party rental space will fit in the available area (one will not detract from the other). Next Steps and Outreach Jenny Anderson, City of Lake Oswego, shared more details about upcoming outreach, which includes: • Survey for the dry recreational side of the center that will be distributed to the public • Community meeting on February 25th from 6-8pm to solicit community feedback to further refine the plan. PAC members are encouraged to attend and share the meeting with their network. • Tour of Southwest Community Center on February 18th. If you would like to attend, email Jenny. • Neighborhood meeting in March, date to be determined, to work more directly with the neighborhood associations in the area. The next PAC meeting will be around early April. Allison thanked PAC members for volunteering their time and choosing to be part of this process. PAC members can contact Jenny Anderson with questions between meetings.