Loading...
210402_Comp Pool Stakeholders Meeting 1 NotesMEETING NOTES 2525 E Burnside St. Portland, OR 97214 | P 503.226.3617 | F 503.226.3715 | www.seallp.com Job: City of Lake Oswego Recreation and Aquatics Center Date: March 30th, 2021 Time: 5:00 pm Location: Zoom Prepared By: Jennifer Marsicek / Michael Morehart Attendees: Bruce Powers, Ivan Anderholm, Jan Wirtz, LOPR Anthony Vandenberg, LOSD Nathan Stanley, Christopher Coleman, Louis (Lou) Bailey, (Geoff) Geoffrey Marsden, LOSD Jessie Bohner, Troy Tetsuka, LOSC Aukai Ferguson, Water Polo / PAC Member Sarah Ellison, LO Parks Board / PAC Member John Wallin, LOSD School Board / PAC Member Michael Morehart, Mike Gartland, Cousilman Hunsaker Ken Ballard, Ballard*King Sid Scott, Jennifer Marsicek, S|EA Subject: Competition Pool Discussion Agenda:  ‐ Intro (Tony) ‐ Pool schedule, use and operation (Ivan) ‐ Project update including schedule, site analysis, conceptual site and building plan (S|EA) ‐ Natatorium design, competition pool configuration and functionality (CH) Notes: See attached Next Meetings: TBD Distribution: All attendees; John Wendland, LO City Council / PAC Member; Derek Abbott, Brigitte Dennett, LOSD Dallas Denver Los Angeles St. Louis www.chh2o.com Meeting Notes Date: April 2, 2021 Subject: LORAC – Competition Pool By: Mike Gartland/Michael Morehart – Counsilman-Hunsaker Date of Meeting: March 30, 2021 Attendees: See Sign-In List The following are notes and observations from the above referenced meeting and represent the author’s recollections of the activities and discussions that took place. Please provide any additions or corrections within a reasonable period of time. On March 30, 2021 Mike Gartland and Michael Morehart met with the Lake Oswego steering committee, members of the PAC, and school district employees/coaches via Zoom. The purpose of the meeting was to review programming of the competition pool with the various user groups. Present from SEA were Sid Scott and Jennifer Marsicek. Others were in attendance from the City and LOSD. The CH programming slides and information presented are based on years of experience with the different aspects of pools and are boiled down to the best alternatives in the market today with pre- qualified tried and true solutions. We do continual research and stay current on various technologies and put forth those prequalified solutions during a programming session to keep the programming session at a manageable length for participants. Program Confirmation Meeting Notes 1. The City is planning to operate the pool to facilitate the ease of use by the various user groups. 2. Key Aquatic User Groups and their program requirements were identified. a. High school and club swimming and water polo are the primary pool users. i. Primary user groups are Lakeridge High School (LHS) and Lake Oswego High School (LOHS) for swimming and water polo training and competition. ii. Local water polo and swim clubs will use the pool. b. There was not a desire for competitive diving. c. An artistic swimming program does not current exist in the community but a program may develop in the future. d. Lifeguard training and organized water safety classes would be conducted. e. The local fire department has some specific depth requirements for training that need to be determined and incorporated into the design. Page 2 i. The City shall provide the design team any specific design requirements related to fire department training in the competition pool f. The community will use the pool for masters swimming. i. The existing program includes 15-20 members and is growing. ii. A 25M racecourse for summer masters meets and masters record events was discussed. g. Programming for youth summer camps and community social functions are desired. h. The City will conduct swimming instruction and deep-water exercise classes in this pool. 3. Primary use of the competition pool will be hosting age group and high school level swimming meets and high school and club water polo matches. 4. Reviewed competitive swimming program needs. a. Dimensional Requirements for competition courses/training courses/fields of play were discussed. i. Water depth requirements 6’-6” to 9’-6” depth b. Water temperature 78-82 degrees c. Spectator seating to accommodate approximately 300 spectators. d. Moveable bulkhead 5. Reviewed governing bodies for aquatic sports. a. USA Swimming/Water polo, NFHS, OSAA 6. Reviewed aspects of creating a Fast Pool for competitive swimming. a. Natatorium Layout b. Pool configuration, lane width, water depth, considerations for starting blocks. c. Cooler water for competition pool users of 78-82 degrees 7. Reviewed Spectator seating guidelines a. Current seating concept for the facility is about 300 people. b. There is not a desire to host National/Regional meets due to the limitation on natatorium/seating size. c. Orientation to field of play was discussed. i. Recommended that primary seating be perpendicular to primary course layout. d. Deck level seating considerations were confirmed. 8. Deck width were discussed, and recommendations were made based upon program and user group discussion. a. 15’ on the south side of the pool, between the spectator seating and pool edge. b. 18’ on the west side of the pool behind the starting blocks i. Necessary for swimmers/timers/judges during swim meets. c. 15’ on the north side of the pool d. 15’ on the east side of the pool where there is no stair entry. 9. Racecourse preferences for competitive swimming were discussed. a. Short course yards will be the primary field of play. 10. The competition pool concept was shown, and field of play layouts were discussed. a. It was decided that the championship course layout for swimming and water polo were desired as shown. i. East – West field of play for championship configuration 1. East-West orientation allows maximum NHFS water polo course dimensions with floating goals. ii. North - South field of play for water polo and swimming practice 11. Lane widths and lane count were discussed for the coemption pool. a. Nine (9), 8 ft wide lanes are desired in the East-West direction for the championship layout. b. 12 x 8’0” wide lanes are desired in the North-South direction for the practice layout 12. Starting block locations were discussed. a. Starting block anchors will be provided on the west and north sides of the pool. Page 3 b. Spectator seating will not be located behind starting blocks to comply with USA Swimming SafeSport guidelines 13. Water polo layouts, fields of play, preferred depth, and goal type were discussed. a. Floating goals were preferred. b. The ability to meet NFHS standard and maximum dimensions were preferred. 14. A ball net with stations on the pool deck to separate the two training water polo layouts was discussed and is desired. 15. Moveable Bulkheads were discussed. a. Bulkhead width was discussed and 6’0” was confirmed. b. Normal bulkhead operation was discussed. i. The City will move the bulkhead for LOSD as part of their operational agreement. Additional Items Discussed: 1. Storage for loose equipment was discussed. a. Water polo goals can be hung on natatorium walls or stored under bleachers. b. Additional space may be needed for other loose deck equipment. i. Lane line storage reels and pool covers. 2. The timing system and timing components were briefly discussed. a. A separate meeting to discuss the timing system and scoreboards in greater detail was recommended. 3. The stair entry on the east side of the competition pool was discussed. a. The stairs are desired for community use of the competition pool. b. The stairs can function as a secondary means of ADA access. c. A decision on the exact stair configuration and dimensions was not made.