211109_Comp Pool Stakeholder Mtg 3 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: November 9th, 2021
Time: 6:00-8:00 pm
Location: Zoom
Prepared By: Jennifer Marsicek / Billy Griffitts
Attendees: Bruce Powers, Jan Wirtz, LOPR
Anthony Vandenberg, LOSD
Brigitte Stacey Dennett (Stacey), Christopher (Chris) Coleman, LOSD
Troy Tetsuka, LOSC
Sarah Ellison, LO Parks Board / PAC Member
John Wallin, LOSD School Board / PAC Member
Dan Della Maggiora, Water Polo
Billy Griffitts, Counsilman Hunsaker
Sid Scott, Jennifer Marsicek, Erica Baggen, Kara Grothen, Andra Zerbe, S|EA
Subject: Competition Pool Discussion
01 AGENDA:
A Site and building plan update
B Update Configuration and pool depth from last meeting
C Gutter design
D Starting blocks
E Scoreboard, timing equipment, touch pads, meet management
F Bleacher options
G Loose equipment and storage
02 NOTES:
A Bleacher options
i. Reviewed options for competitive swimming and water polo courses
utilizing 3-5 row tip and roll bleachers in combination on the west and
south side of the deck.
ii. Options presented seat around 300 spectators and had a minimum of 15’
of deck space in front of the bleachers.
Page 2 of 3
iii. Stakeholders stressed the priority for flexibility with any seating option and
would like the ability to place seating on any side of the pool depending on
the event configuration in use. As the widest deck is currently on the west
end of the pool, this will require sliding the pool west to allow for a wider
deck and seating on the east end adjacent to the stair entry.
1. Design team will follow up with updated configurations for stakeholder
review. Billy recommends maintaining at least 12’ of deck in front of
any bleacher if possible.
2. Increasing the size of the natatorium is not an option and it was
acknowledged that having this seating flexibility will result in less than
ideal deck widths at some locations. In addition, locating spectators on
the north deck on the side of the return air grilles is not recommended
as a primary seating configuration.
a) Another consideration the design team discussed after the
meeting was spectator comfort. Primary seating locations on the
west and south decks allow for mechanical systems to provide
additional cooling to spectators. Secondary seating locations at
the east and north decks will not have this same accommodation.
3. Finalizing the location of the pool tank is needed soon so design work
can continue.
iv. Stakeholders discussed the possibility of using a combination of 3-row
and 5-row bleachers which have actual aisles to better accommodate
those that are less mobile.
v. Was also suggested that having a robust AV system that could broadcast
events remotely and to other parts of the building could lesson the need
for more seating.
vi. Water Polo issues:
1. Team seating during water polo to be accommodated with single wide
benches or plastic stacking chairs.
2. Seating located behind water polo goals may require netting to protect
spectators from stray balls.
B Meet management
i. Flexibility in meet management is needed as well and depending on the
event up to four positions for a mobile platform are needed on the north
side of the pool.
1. Water polo officials often utilize electronic headsets for communication
which could alleviate some issues with locating meet management
tables.
2. Design team will follow up with locations noted.
C Loose equipment and storage
i. An equipment layout was presented utilizing deck and wall space for
hanging goals and storing lane lines and using the storage alcove in the
NW corner for remaining smaller items.
1. The scoreboard computer and timing accessories will need to be
stored in the climate-controlled pool office.
Page 3 of 3
2. Lane line reels should not be stored on the pool deck and a location to
store the starting blocks when removed for water polo is needed.
Keeping the deck as clean and free from loose equipment is a priority.
a) With size constraints inside the natatorium having an exterior
covered and fenced storage area off the back of the storage
alcove was discussed.
i) Design team will follow up with exterior storage option.
See attached notes from Counsilman Hunsaker
Next Meetings: TBD
Distribution: All attendees; John Wendland, LO City Council; Mark Horack, Louis (Lou) Bailey,
(Geoff) Geoffrey Marsden, Aukai Ferguson, David Spurr, LOSD; Jessie Bohner, Emily
Melina, LOSC; Bob Heyman, former LOSC member; Ken Ballard, Ballard*King; Mike
Gartland, Counsilman Hunsaker
Dallas Denver San Diego St. Louis
www.chh2o.com
Meeting Notes
Date: 11 November 2021
Subject: LORAC – Competition Pool Stakeholders Meeting
By: Billy Griffitts
Date of Meeting: 9 November 2021
Attendees: See Attendee list from SEA
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.
• New face: Dan Della Maggiora representing water polo community from surrounding area
(Masters and other non-high school groups)
• CH review of 50% Design Development Competition Pool progress
o 9’-0 to 9’-6” water depth across the lanes
o Movable 6’-0” wide bulkhead
o 6” diameter lane ropes
• Discussion of course layouts
o North-South has been designated as the primary course configuration for swimming
o Emphasis on flexibility with bulkhead to accommodate multiple swimming and water
polo configurations
o 6-, 8-, 10- lane lap swimming North/South
▪ Will be used the most by high school teams
o 9-lane lap swimming from wall to bulkhead East/West
▪ Can be used by club swimming
▪ Stacey: end markings at bulkhead should have T-shape at correct distance from
bulkhead for visual confirmation for swimmers
o Troy & Stacey confirm: 25M swimming is not desired
o (2) 25Y x 50’ water polo w/ deck mounted goals, separated by bulkhead, North/South
▪ Used for training, camps, or dual competitions (boys and girls simultaneously).
Training camps would be a good source of revenue
▪ Dan: can we look at adding a tarp/curtain down the center of the bulkhead to
separate officials and matches while they go on?
▪ Dan: if courses used for practice, colored cones on deck is fine for spacing
markings. If used for meets, lanes would be better.
o (1) 25M NFHS championship water polo layout East/West, floating goals
o Dan: what will be done with backstroke flags during water polo use?
Page 2
▪ CH to investigate solutions for flexibility in backstroke flags during swimming
configurations and storing out of the way during water polo
▪ At existing LOSD pool, flags are tied at walls with pulleys and winched out of
way for water polo
• Competition pool gutter configuration
o CH briefly discussed gutter options – concrete v stainless-steel, recessed v deck level
o Current design is deck level gutter
▪ Easier for swimmers to get out of the water, less expensive than fully recessed
gutter, most user-friendly for young swimmers and general public
o Stakeholders agree with deck level gutter configuration
• Review of starting block options
o CH presented typical block design options: single post, dual post, fastened
o Design intent is for blocks to be removable to facilitate various course layouts
▪ Single post is lighter and easier to move than dual post
▪ CH recommends single post for this application, stakeholders agree
o Dan: deck mounted water polo goals can fit into existing single post starting block
anchors to avoid adding additional anchors to deck
▪ CH will coordinate deck mounted goals with starting blocks
o Troy: with the deck level gutter, starting block surface would be higher above deck level
to maintain correct distance above water. Expressed concerns about safety for young
swimmers climbing higher on single post block with deck level gutter
▪ Difference between water level and deck level on fully-recessed gutter is 12”
▪ Starting block height to be 29 ½” above water level regardless of gutter
configuration
o CH presented starting block accessories: track start, side rails, backstroke rails
▪ Troy & Stacey agree: the fewer accessories the better. They both expressed
concerns about the side rails being a potential hazard for young swimmers and
the track start being a maintenance issue.
▪ CH to follow up and provide stakeholders with option information for starting
blocks for group to select accessories and manufacturer
o Dan: what’s the method for transporting blocks when not in use? Do manufacturers
have standard caddy or dolly to avoid damaging blocks?
• Timing System and Scoreboards
o Existing facility: Daktronics LED numeric scoreboard, too small for the facility so not all
swimmers are shown at one time
▪ Stakeholders all agree that existing system is out of date
o CH recommends Colorado Time System GEN7 as basis of design over Daktronics
▪ Troy not familiar with other timing systems besides Daktronics
▪ Chehalem facility has Daktronics
▪ CH to compile list of facilities with CTS timing/scoreboard and share with
stakeholders for reference
o 50% DD budget includes allowance for LED video display scoreboard with multi-sport
capability for swimming and water polo
o Dan: if two water polo matches are running concurrently, might need a second portable
scoreboard to bring out on deck with score, shot clock, game clock. Concerns about
having too much information on a single scoreboard with two games running.
CH ACTION ITEMS
• Investigate backstroke flag solution for swimming/water polo
• Compile list of starting block options and pricing for stakeholders
• Compile list of CTS scoreboards in the Portland area for stakeholders