Hi,
My Masters swim team is going to attempt to gain support for a 50 meter pool to be built in our city at an upcoming city counsel meeting. I vaguely remember a similar thread a while back where people listed both pros and cons for a 50 meter pool vs. two smaller pools but I can't seem to find it with the search function. Can anyone help lead me in the right direction? If not, please just respond to this new thread. We really need this pool.
Thanks,
-GG
Former Member
I think you are proposing a private partnership already, but Glen is right-the more versatile the pool (which argues for a 52m facility such as we just built, with two movable bulkheads) the more likely that more people will be satisfied. Want to motivate your politicos? Well, in Glen's case (as he well knows) we are a smaller (75,000 versus 100,000+) community that has our province's largest percentage of people on social assistance. If we can do it, so can Kelowna! And Menlo Park...good God! I have been there & affluence is your middle name. I recall training at UC San Diego pool & hearing that local Masters had guaranteed debentures (or something like that) for building their pool & been guaranteed times thereafter. Maybe there are alternatives to the loval city hall..'
Peter forgets that their are poor cities in States with 50 meter pools. One is the Clovis Center in Frenso,CA. Frenso has a high hispanic population and many come from a migrant farm worker background. Also, the Hmong from Cambodia which are refugees and tend to be on welfare. As for San Diego, it borders Mexico. And some of the residents of San Diego from Mexico live sometimes as much as 10 to 20 people per 2 to 3 bedroom apartments so they can send money back to their relatives in rural parts of Mexico and these people are pretty busy making a living on low wage jobs to be bothered with master's swimming. Probably as a whole San Diego has a lot more wealth but not everyone that lives there is upper-middle non-hispanic white.
I'm not sure what exactly you are saying, Cynthia- were those 50m pools built before influx of minorities? If not- I don't see your pont. If so, then it illustrates my point, that ours is a poor community (by our standards), yet by stressing the versatility of 52m bulkheaded pool we convinced politicos to go for it. If this is not possible in Menlo Park (a very different community from what you describe), then i was suggesting they look for a private partner to work with.
Frenso is very different from Silcon Valley. It is mainly farm industries and there are a lot of migrant farm workers and refugees. They were able to get a 50 meter pool in Frenso, probably because of Cal-State Frenso. How you can get one I don't know.
Well, they probably built many of the pools before San Diego was 28 percent hispanic. In USA swimming publication there was mention a big gap in the acess to pools between the upper-middle class and those that live in the barrios.
I've found that serious swimmers like a water temperature of about 79°, while old folks and little kids prefer much warmer temps.
I swim at a Y that has two pools (one warm, one cold) that satisfy the temperature desires of nearly every customer.
But, I also attend a public 50 meter pool where the temperature is kept at 82° (it used to be 84°, but a well organized minority of lap swimmers convinced the management to lower it) as a compromise. Lap swimmers still complain that the water is too warm, while rec swimmers (most of whom would prefer a water temp of 85° or 86°) find it's way too cold.
Here is the sad update on this 50 meter project.
the team presented a well organized case, arguing that the team would cover additional construction costs, and additional maintainance costs for a negotiable period of about 10 years.
the team made a good argument for the pool as a community resource.
But we got in the process late, and the city staff found out that a couple of side streets were projected to increase traffic flow by about 7 cars a day. That would trigger another environmental impact report that would, they said, take almost another year and would cost $100,000 dollars. The city council voted against the larger pool 3 - 2. There were some strong emotions floating around that I don't fully understand.
While many of the suggestions here were good, they weren't quite applicable to this situation. In particular, the pool would have been located in the middle of a mid-sized city, on the border between commercial and residential districts. The residential district is well organized with people with strong voices, and is generally against growth, or perceived growth, of any sort. Income is not a strong motivator - after all, the city turned down what was effectively a free upgrade from a 25 to a 50 meter pool. The political task was to convince the sceptical that the pool would have no effect on the surrounding environment.
Meanwhile, the pool we are using just reduced the number of workouts from 19 to 9, and things have gotten more crowded, and the lack of noon workouts, now gone, is a big problem. Not good for what I understand is the "third largest masters team in the country!"
Well, Phil how can people be against growth in a state with a large amount of immirgation. Just joking, but some people are against any development. There's a lot of politics involved these days. About 40 to 30 years ago it was easier to get pools in Ca or other places. A lot of middle class folks thought it was a great idea but with areas that once were semi-rural about 40 years ago or just being suburbazied then, now their developed and people don't want more development.
Not meaning to be insensitive or clueless, I wonder if your arguments and presentation included references to the pools and programs at Santa Clara and Walnut Creek? They both have incredibly successful municipal facilities (with large Masters teams) that could have been role models. It is hard for city planners to say no to free money and a proven cash flow, so I suspect there were other forces at work that you may or may not know about.
It is a pity that the planners of today have such little foresight, opting to make safe decisions rather than bold ones.
I am on the USMS planning committee, and have proposed that USMS build or buy a facility, in part to use for just the type of presentation that you made, in order to get more water space for the dollars spent (don't hold your breath, it could be years before the House of Delegates even considers such a move, if ever).