HomeMy WebLinkAbout10 13 08_Aquatic Facility Survey Reports
Commission Memorandum
REPORT TO: Honorable Mayor and City Commission
FROM: Ron Dingman, Park and Recreation Director
Chris Kukulski, City Manager
SUBJECT: Aquatic Facility Survey reports
MEETING DATE: October 13, 2008
RECOMMENDATION: Staff requests the Commission to adopt the Aquatic Facility Survey
reports for the Bozeman Swim Center and Bogert Pool as work plans and direct staff to
incorporate the plans into the CIP process.
BACKGROUND: USA Aquatics was contracted to perform audits on the Bozeman Swim
Center and Bogert Pool facilities. The audits were completed in the spring of 2008 and final
reports were submitted on July 14, 2008.
Both facilities are currently in satisfactory operating condition and needed repairs, upgrades, and
improvements have been identified in the reports.
Issues presenting immediate hazards or safety concerns have been addressed by staff upon
receiving the reports. Other identified repairs, upgrades, replacements, and improvements have
been prioritized by staff based on urgency and ability to complete.
FISCAL EFFECTS: No immediate fiscal effects will be experienced. Staff will be
incorporating the plan into the Recreation budget and CIP plan.
35
ALTERNATIVES: As suggested by the City Commission.
Respectfully submitted,
_________________________________ ____________________________
Ron Dingman, Parks and Recreation Director Chris A. Kukulski, City Manager
Attachments:
• Bogert Pool survey
• Swim Center survey
Report compiled on 10/1/08
36
BOGERT POOL
Bozeman, MT
Contact: Thomas R. Schaffer
124 Bridge Avenue, PO Box 86
Delano, MN 55328
Phone: (763) 972-5897
Fax: (763) 972-5864
trschaffer@usaquaticsinc.com
www.usaquaticsinc.com
Aquatic Facility Survey 37
July 14, 2008
Sue Harkin
City of Bozeman - Parks & Recreation
814 N. Bozeman
Bozeman, MT 59715
Re: Bogert Pool – Bozeman, MT
Ms. Harkin:
We would like to submit the following report for the work at the above referenced facility.
If the City of Bozeman is interested in pursuing any renovation, repair, or upgrade of the
Bogert Pool we would be pleased to discuss these renovations with you further and provide
details of our applicable services that are available to help efficiently and economically
complete these renovations.
We offer a full range of services including, but not limited to; facility assessment, code
review, feasibility study, design, preparation of construction documents, contract/bidding
administration, construction administration, CPO/AFO instruction, and expert services.
Please see the attached brochure that has been included within this report for a full
description of our company and available services.
If we can be of any further assistance please do not hesitate to contact us.
Respectfully Submitted,
Thomas R. Schaffer Nicholas R. Nowacki, P.E.
William G. Deneen, P.E.
Montana Cert. No. 15065
cc: file
38
BOGERT POOL
Bozeman, MT
AQUATIC FACILITY SURVEY
July 14, 2008
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION PAGE
Section 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 2
- Statement of Understanding
- Study Approach
- Scope of Study
- Study Criteria
- Intent of Report
- Summary
Section 2 ANALYSES OF EXISTING CONDITIONS 5
- Areas of Concern & Recommendations
Section 3 COST ESTIMATES 14
- Cost estimates for improvement options
Appendix POOL DATA 16
USAquatics, Inc.
124 Bridge Ave E.
Delano, MN 55328
(763) 972-5897 fax (763) 972-5864
info@usaquaticsinc.com
www.usaquaticsinc.com
39
Bogert Pool
Aquatic Facility Survey Page 2
SECTION 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
STATEMENT OF UNDERSTANDING
It is our understanding that the City of Bozeman wishes to have an assessment done on the existing
swimming pool and supporting infrastructure at the Bogert Pool. The goal is to analyze the existing
facility, give a break-down of existing conditions, state problem areas, provide recommendations on
repair, renovation, or replacement, provide cost estimates and an approximate timeline for any
recommended work, and provide an estimate on the remaining lifespan of the facility.
STUDY APPROACH
The study approach primarily consisted of a physical assessment of the existing swimming pool, decks,
and pool equipment by USAquatics with the assistance of facility personnel.
SCOPE OF STUDY
The scope of this study covers the following areas of the facility:
- Swimming pool structure, recirculation, filtration, and sanitation equipment.
- Equipment room.
- Pool decking area, diving boards, play features, etc.
- Supporting facilities have also been briefly covered.
STUDY CRITERIA
The criteria used in our assessment include:
- Pool code requirements.
- An understanding of cause and effect associated with various aquatic designs and operating
procedures as presented to us through the assessment, review, and design of several thousand
aquatic facilities.
INTENT OF REPORT
To present a concise summary of safety, design, performance and operational issues in an effort to
prevent patron injury and/or illness, ease operation, lower operating costs, and increase the life span of the
facility while increasing patron visits and revenues.
40
Bogert Pool
Aquatic Facility Survey Page 3
SUMMARY
A survey of the Bogert Pool aquatic facility was conducted on May 29, 2008 by Tom Schaffer & Nick
Nowacki of USAquatics, with the assistance of facility personnel. At the time of the survey, the facility
was being prepared for opening and was not functional.
Because the facility was in the middle of being prepared for summer operations and being taken out of
winter storage, we were unable to analyze the organization and general operations of the facility.
However, it does appear that staff has done a very thorough and excellent job in organizing and
maintaining facility records and documentation. In addition, based on our discussions with facility
personnel, the extent of staff training is exceptional and exceeds that which is required.
The purpose of our survey was to provide a recommendation as to whether the existing facility should be
renovated or replaced. To properly analyze these options, we conducted a thorough survey of the
facility to identify the major areas of concern and to perform a full code review, identifying deficient
areas, no matter how tedious. The intent of this report is to provide a formal recommendation, with a
concise summary of all facility deficiencies as supporting information.
The overall facility is in fair condition. There do not appear to be any major structural deficiencies.
Although a crack is present in the pool shell, it is our belief that this crack is a result of the gutter design
and construction. This is discussed in additional detail in Section 2. Overall, the pool shell appears to be
in good structural condition. The bathhouse also appears to be in good structural condition.
The layout of the bathhouse and pool is favorable, and is similar in fashion to the design of new
bathhouses and aquatic facilities. The bathhouse appears to be fairly updated and the windows, doors,
and roof appear to be in OK condition. As such, we recommend very little changes to the bathhouse.
Our recommendations for the bathhouse are limited only to those updates necessary to comply with ADA
accessibility requirements. If the City has additional aesthetic or operational upgrades they would like for
the bathhouse, these could be included as part of the overall facility renovation.
Although the pool is in good structural condition, there are many areas that require major upgrades. The
existing gutter/overflow system is in poor to fair condition and in need of replacement. The vacuum
diatomaceous earth (DE) filters are not the recommended filter system for outdoor pools, and the overall
pool mechanical and recirculation systems are in need of general upgrades. Major recommendations for
the pool include; replacement of existing vacuum DE filter system with high-rate pressure sand filters,
replacement of existing gutters with concrete or stainless steel gutters (alternative), installation of a new
plaster pool finish with quartz, installation of an upgraded chemical controller, and installation of ADA
accessible ramps and stairs.
These upgrades are recommended to extend the life of the existing facility. We estimate the life of the
current facility without upgrades will be limited to 5-10 years before major work is necessary. If the
major renovations as recommended within this report are performed, we estimate the life of the facility to
be approximately 25-30 years.
The dilemma between renovation or replacement is generally analyzed with respects to cost. If the
renovations to the facility exceed 50% of the construction costs for a new facility, we generally
recommend replacement of the existing facility. The estimated cost of the major renovation proposed
within this report is $480,000 (w/o alternates) and $750,000 (w/all alternates). Construction of a new
facility, including bathhouse, parking, pools, decks, etc. would require a minimum cost of approximately
$2.2 million. As a result of this analysis, it is our formal recommendation that the existing facility
be renovated versus replaced.
41
Bogert Pool
Aquatic Facility Survey Page 4
In addition to the facility renovations deemed necessary by our survey, we also recommend analysis of
the addition of aquatic play features to the splash/wading section of the pool. These aquatic play features
could be climbable play structures or simple splash fountains or features. These would add a signature
amenity to the Bogert Pool and increase the interactivity and playfulness of swimming for younger
children. We feel that their addition would be a well rewarded amenity. The addition of play features is
briefly discussed in Section 2 and a cost estimate is provided in Section 3. In addition, we would be
pleased to discuss this alternative in greater detail and provide you with examples of possible play feature
additions.
Major facility renovations could be performed with minimal impact on the length of the facility season.
Renovations could be performed in the fall and spring, following normal closing dates and prior to normal
opening dates. This would eliminate any lost revenues that would occur if the facility needed to be closed
during the normal season of operations.
Renovation of the existing facility will simplify operations, decrease maintenance and operation costs,
improve the visual appearance, and likely increase patron visits and overall satisfaction. A “facelift” of
the existing facility will provide a visual impact that would be near that of a new facility. In addition, the
renovations will extend the useful life of the existing facility, allowing the deep history and roots of the
Bogert Pool to continue on and remain a part of the City of Bozeman.
42
Bogert Pool
Aquatic Facility Survey Page 5
SECTION 2 ANALYSES OF EXISTING CONDITIONS
AREAS OF CONCERN & IMPROVEMENT OPTIONS
USAquatics, Inc. has determined that the following areas of concern exist at the swimming pool facilities.
Numbering for the items listed below corresponds directly with the pool and spa survey data sheets,
which can be found in the Appendix. Please note that an asterisk * marker designates a code issue, with
the specific code section quoted in parenthesis [ ]. All remaining items are performance based issues.
Recommendations for repair, renovation, or replacement for each area of concern are provided in
italicized print.
MAIN POOL
1.2 OVERFLOW: The existing coping stone gutter does not appear to be in as good a condition in
comparison to the Bozeman Swim Center. This is likely due to its exposure outside to the
elements, particularly the freeze/thaw cycles of winter. Upon visual inspection it is also clear that
several coping stones have been replaced. The entire gutter system is generally weathered and
the joint between the concrete deck and pool edge is in poor condition (uneven, spalling,
separating, etc.).
The existing pool construction drawings indicate locations in the coping stones where weirs (cut
outs in the lip) are to be located to allow continuous skimming of the pool surface. There are
several locations where coping stones have been replaced without cut outs for weirs as indicated
in the plans. As a result, the effectiveness of the skimming has likely been reduced.
A horizontal crack is visible along the walls of the wading pool and some areas of the lap/diving
pool. Upon inspection, we determined that this crack is approximately located at the bottom
elevation of the interior gutter (below the coping stone). It is our opinion that the crack is
forming at the location of the cold joint between the main portion of the gutter bond beam and the
front portion of the gutter. During construction, these two portions of the gutter were likely
poured at two separate times (referred to as a cold joint) to form the shape of the gutter. The
propagation of this crack may be enhanced by the presence of water in the gutter through winter
or seeping into the voids in the cold joint, creating expansion pressure at the bottom of the gutter.
As a result, we recommend the installation of a new concrete gutter system. The existing 8” PVC
gutter line to the mechanical room remove will not need to be replaced and can be reused with
the new gutter system. Any good coping stones should be cleaned and stored for use as
replacements at the Bozeman Swim Center, which has an identical gutter system.
As an alternative, a stainless steel gutter could be installed. A stainless steel gutter would
provide an additional advantage as it includes a pressurized system for return lines and inlets to
the pool. The existing pool inlets could be abandoned and capped, then grouted over. Although
the existing inlets are in satisfactory condition and meet the existing Montana code requirements,
the installation of a stainless steel gutter would eliminate the risk or need for future concrete
shell/pool demolition in the event that maintenance, repair, or replacement of the inlets or
associated piping was needed. This alternative pricing for stainless steel gutters has been
provided in Section 3.
* 1.3 DRAINS: The existing main drains consist of (3)12”x12” grated main drains, connected in
parallel. The lap/diving section of the pool contains (2) main drains, and the wading/splash
section of the pool contains (1). The Montana code has general statements relating to main drain
suction/entrapment safety; however there are no specific design requirements. The new Federal
43
Bogert Pool
Aquatic Facility Survey Page 6
Law, the “Virginia Grame Baker Pool and Spa Safety Act” does provide specific design
requirements for main drain safety. This law requires, among other items, that all public pools
and spas in the United States shall have either an unblockable drain (defined as 18”x23”),
multiple drains in parallel, utilize a gravity drainage system, or have some other form of
vacuum/suction release system. The existing main drains on the Bogert Pool meet two of these
requirements, even though only one is necessary (gravity drainage, multiple main drains). As
such, the pool provides an additional level of safety above the minimum required by the Federal
Law.
However, the Federal Law also requires that all public pools and spas have ASME/ANSI
compliant Drain Covers. This has been indicated in a guidance document prepared by the U.S.
Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) and was recently confirmed by our office in a
Q&A phone conference with officials regarding interpretation of the new law. As such,
replacement of the existing covers with ASME/ANSI compliant drain covers, per the Federal
Law requirements, will be necessary.
The Montana swimming pool code [Section 37.111.1138 (12)] requires that “multiple main drains
be provided where the width of the pool is more than 30 feet.” The existing pool is 58’ wide.
The diving/lap section of the pool contains two main drains and satisfies this code requirement.
The wading/splash area section of the pool contains one main drain. Although the two pool
sections are connected through equalizer lines, each section of the pool should meet the standards
for main drains in order to provide proper recirculation.
In addition, the Montana swimming pool and spa code [Section 37.111.1138 (12)] requires that
main drain outlets “shall be spaced not more than 20 feet apart, nor more than 15 feet from side
walls.” The existing main drains are both located approximately 20’ from the side walls of the
pool. Because the pool is 58’ in width, (3) main drains are needed to meet the code requirements
for proper spacing.
Scaling was observed in the wading pool main drain sump. No scaling was present within the
main drain piping (PVC).
If major renovations to the facility are made as recommended within this report, we recommend
that the existing main drains be removed and (6) new main drains, (3) per pool section, be
installed per the Montana pool code. The new main drains should be installed with unblockable
drain covers meeting ASME/ANSI standards and complying with the requirements of the new
Federal Law.
If significant changes or construction to the pool are not performed, existing pools are generally
grandfathered with respect to new code issues until major renovation takes place, at which time
the deficient items are corrected to meet code requirements. If major renovations to the facility
are not made, we recommend that the City of Bozeman receive a written approval from the
authority of the Montana Department of Public Health and Human Services excusing the existing
pool from the strict enforcement of the code with regards to the number of main drains and their
spacing. If that approval is received, our only recommendations would be cleaning of the sumps
to remove scale build-up (and repainting), and replacement of the existing drain covers with
those meeting ASME/ANSI standards per the requirements of the new Federal Law.
1.5 POOL SHELL & FINISH: The existing pool shell was constructed using shotcrete and was
constructed inside the original cast in place pool structure with sand fill and a soil drainage
system. The pool finish currently consists of painted concrete. Some cracking is present in the
pool wall (see Item 1.2).
44
Bogert Pool
Aquatic Facility Survey Page 7
With exception to the cracking issue, which is discussed in detail in Item 1.2, the pool shell
appears to be in very good structural condition. We recommend replacement of the existing
painted finish with Diamond-Brite, a plaster surface with a Quartz aggregate finish (identical to
the existing surface at the Bozeman Swim Center). The existing paint should be sandblasted and
removed from the shell and the pool inspected for any cracks. Any significant cracking should be
repaired and sealed with epoxy. Ceramic tile should be installed at all expansion joints in the
existing pool shell and should be used for any needed accent striping. Diamond-Brite is a non-
paintable surface. Therefore, we also recommend that the Bogert Pool emblem (killer whale) be
installed in the wading pool with ceramic tile.
* 1.6 IN POOL SAFETY EQUIPMENT: Per the Montana pool code [Section 37.111.1154 (6)] “a
guard line separating the shallow portion from the deep portion of the swimming pool must be
provided across the pool at the 5 foot depth.” During the time of our visit, the pool was not full
or in operation and we could not verify the presence of this guard line.
We recommend verification that a guard line is installed and in place at all times, with removal
only as necessary for lap swimming.
* 1.7 ACCESS INTO POOL: There is a handrail missing on the eastern stairway into the lap/diving
section of the pool. The Montana pool code [Section 37.111.1132 (5)] requires that handrails be
provided for all steps, step holes, or ladders.
We recommend installation of a handrail at the eastern stairway.
At least two accessible means of entry shall be provided for swimming pools. Accessible means
of entry shall be swimming pool lifts complying with [ICC A117.1 Section 1102]; sloped entries
complying with [ICC A117.1 Section 1103]; or pool stairs complying with [ICC A117.1 Section
1106]. At least one accessible means of entry provided shall be either a pool lift or sloped entry.
Because the pool sections are separate bodies of water, individual accessibility requirements to
each one must be achieved. A portable pool lift is present and counts as one mean of accessible
entry for each pool. Both sections of the pool also have stairways, however neither one meets
accessibility code. The stairway into the wading/splash section of the pool does not have equal
riser heights. The curved stairways into the wading/dive section of the pool do not meet
accessibility requirements. In addition, neither stairway has the required railings for accessibility.
As part of the overall facility renovation, we recommend that a ramp (with appropriate railings)
be installed into the wading/splash section of the pool. This will eliminate the need to remove
and replace the entire existing stairway to achieve equal riser heights. For the lap/diving pool
section we recommend renovation of the eastern stairway to meet accessibility requirements.
2.1 FILTER SYSTEM: The existing system is a vacuum diatomaceous earth (DE) filter. DE filter
systems are considered a “waste media” system, since DE media is removed from the filter
elements and disposed of during backwash. As a comparison, a sand filter system does not have
any waste media during the backwash cycle and sand within the filters can last 15-20 years before
replacement of the media becomes necessary. As such, the operating costs for a sand filter are
significantly less than a DE system.
Although DE systems can still be beneficial, as they provide enhanced water clarity and improved
filtering as a comparison to sand systems, they generally are only used or recommended on
indoor pools. Because an outdoor pool can off-gas to the atmosphere, the particulate removal is
not as small or as fine as an indoor pool and can be handled adequately by a sand filtration
45
Bogert Pool
Aquatic Facility Survey Page 8
system. Outdoor pools, as a tendency, have a greater amount of particulate matter in the pool
(due to dust, wind, etc.) and require a much more frequent backwash or cleaning of the filter.
Therefore, the use of a DE filter is not economical. In addition, the existing vacuum arrangement
of the DE system does not provide for any straining of leaves, hair, and other objects prior to the
filter tank. As such, this can become a nuisance and can dramatically decrease the DE media life
before backwash is necessary.
We recommend replacement of the existing vacuum DE system with a high-rate pressure sand
filtration system. Replacement of the filter shall include new filter room piping, new valves, hair
& lint strainer, and new recirculation pump with motor. Upgrade of the electrical systems may
be needed as well. The existing DE tank should remain and be reused as a surge tank for the
recirculation and overflow system of the pool.
If the existing DE filter is replaced with a sand filter system, we recommend that the filter
elements, gaskets, and manifold be salvage for use as replacement parts for the filter at the
Bozeman Swim Center (identical system).
The DE media currently being used is Cellatom Diatomite. DE is a hazardous material and has
been found to be carcinogenic. Respirators should be worn at all times when working with DE
powder or at any time it has the ability to become airborne. Several synthetic mediums that serve
as a replacement to DE are available, such as Pearlite. These synthetic filter mediums are much
safer to handle and can provide equal filtering capabilities.
Until the existing system is replaced, or if it is retained, we recommend the use of a synthetic DE,
such as Pearlite.
* 2.3 BACKWASH PROCEDURES: There is no existing backwash pit present. The backwash pipe
from the trash pump is directed into a 6” pipe, assumed to be a sanitary drain. Although the pipes
are not directly connected together, the necessary air gap is not present. The Montana pool code
[Section 37.111.1138 (16)] requires that “all pool and spa drains to sewers shall be broken at a
point where any sewage, which may back up from the sewer, can enter the pool or spa piping.”
In addition, there is no additional storage capacity for backwashing provided by a pit area. This
would allow flows above and beyond the capacity of the drainage pipe system to accumulate and
slowly drain down. The construction plans for the 1974 renovation indicate the construction of a
backwash pit. The existing system was not constructed per the plans and is not in conformance
with the code or general requirements.
We recommend construction of a backwash pit system with required air gaps and separations.
The 1974 renovation plans can be used as a guide for construction of the backwash pit. The
backwash pit should be sized to provide enough gravity flow for new sand filters.
3.4 HEATER: The existing system is a Kewanee boiler (1946) and heat exchanger, which also
supports heating for hot water to the bathhouse (showers and lavatories). From our discussions
with facility personnel, it is our understanding that there are no major issues with the system and
the boiler and heat exchangers are inspected and maintained yearly. The installation of new pool
heaters would likely be more efficient than the use of the existing boiler, but would require a
initial cost. In addition, if the boiler was abandoned or removed, hot water heaters for the
bathhouse would also be required.
We do not recommend any changes, but at your request, would be pleased to discuss the
alternative options in more detail. An approximate replacement cost is provided in Section 3 for
46
Bogert Pool
Aquatic Facility Survey Page 9
information purposes only. It should be noted that removal and replacement of the existing boiler
and heat exchangers would provide a significant amount of additional storage area for the
facility in the lower mechanical room.
* 3.5 SURGE CAPACITY: The Montana pool code does not provide specific requirements for surge
capacity; however, a general recommendation is one gallon of surge capacity per square foot of
pool surface area. The existing pool has approximately 0.6 gallons of capacity per square foot
(within the DE filter tank and gutters). Although this is below the recommended capacity we feel
that it is not deficient enough to warrant the addition of additional surge capacity. If the filter
system is replaced, the existing DE tank can be converted to a surge tank. This would increase
the capacity to approximately 0.7 gallons/square foot. Although, this would still be below the
recommended capacity, we feel that it would be sufficient and construction of an additional surge
tank would not be necessary.
An overflow is not present. A stuck fill valve or other equipment failure could result in flooding
of the mechanical room and lower boiler room, causing significant damage.
We recommend the installation of an overflow in the existing DE tank (or surge tank). This
overflow should be routed to the backwash pit.
* 3.7 TURNOVER: The existing impact flowmeter is not accurate enough to properly measure the
recirculation flowrate. The Montana pool code [Section 37.111.1140 (4)] requires that the
flowrate “indicator shall measure the rate of flow through the filtering system with an appropriate
range readable in gallons per minute within 10% actual flow.”
We recommend the installation of a rotary flowmeter, similar to the Signet Flowmeter w/515
Rotor-X Flow Sensor & accessories to allow for more accurate flowrate readings of the
recirculation system.
* 3.8 WATER SUPPLY TO POOL: Per the Montana pool code [Section 37.111.1141] “the make-up
water line discharging to a surge or balancing tank shall have its point of discharge at least 6
inches above the rim of the tank.” Based on pictures taken during our survey, it does not appear
that this requirement is met.
Satisfaction of this requirement should be verified. If adequate clearance is not present, we
recommend adjusting the water supply line to ensure that its point of discharge is at least 6
inches above the rim of the DE filter tank.
* 4.1 AUTOMATED CONTROLLER: The existing controller was not installed or present at the
time of our visit, however we were informed by facility personnel that it is a Strantrol System 3.
The limited functions and feed controls of this controller are not adequate for a pool of this size.
We recommend that an upgraded controller be installed and purchased.
The water testing logs provided did not indicate recordings of chemical balance readings, as
determined by the saturation index. The Montana pool code requires calculations of saturation
index a minimum of once per week.
The calculated saturation index should be included on the water testing logs. Chemicals should
be adjusted as needed to maintain a proper saturation index +/-0.5.
* 4.2 SANITIZERS: Because the pool was not full and operational, the gas chlorine feed equipment
47
Bogert Pool
Aquatic Facility Survey Page 10
and safety devices were not thoroughly inspected at the time of our visit, however based on our
discussion with facility personnel it is our understanding that everything is working properly.
If major renovations to the facility are performed as proposed within this report, we recommend
verification of the condition and operability of the gas chlorine system at the time of shutdown. If
upgrades are necessary or recommended they should be performed with the major facility
renovations.
4.3 pH CONTROL: Facility personnel have informed us that the make-up water to the pool has a
very low alkalinity (60 ppm). It is also our understanding that the Bozeman Swim Center has
issues with alkalinity (see Bozeman Swim Center Aquatic Facility Survey). Although the Bogert
Pool make-up water is low in alkalinity, our review of the testing logs indicate that it is not as
significant of an issue in comparison to the Swim Center. The testing logs indicate an alkalinity
ranging from approximately 140 down to 65, at which point the logs show the addition of sodium
bicarbonate (approximately every 2 weeks). This does not appear to be enough to affect the pH
dramatically, since the pH control for this pool is caustic soda. As a result, we feel that the use of
sodium bicarbonate to raise alkalinity at this pool is effective, since the frequency and amount of
sodium bicarbonate used is limited. Therefore, we do not recommend any other options
regarding the alkalinity at this time. Please see the Bozeman Swim Center Aquatic Facility
Survey for additional discussion regarding alkalinity.
* 6.5 FENCING/PERIMETER: The Montana pool code [Section 37.111.1115 (5)(e)] requires that
“a fence or barrier be constructed so that all openings in the barrier…are equipped with self-
closing gates or doors with positive latching closers and locking mechanism at a height of at least
4 feet 6 inches above the ground.” This requirement was not verified at the time of our visit.
We recommend that the existing gates be inspected to verify this requirement. The latches should
be corrected as necessary and self-closing mechanisms should be installed on all gates to meet
the code requirements.
During our site visit we observed several existing trees in the boulevard between the Bogert Pool
and adjacent public street. The branches of these trees overhung the fencing and deck area
adjacent to the pool.
In order to minimize the amount of leaves, etc. falling from the trees within the pool, we
recommend that the branches be trimmed to eliminate any overhang into the pool area (beyond
wall//fencing). Leaves and other organic matter can be a maintenance and operational nuisance
to the filters and recirculation system.
A portion of the existing wall has structural damage from a vehicle impact. The block walls serve
as an excellent wind block for the facility. Wind has been found to be one of the major causes of
heat loss due to convection from outdoor pools. The inclusion of block walls on the perimeter
provides enhanced security and operational cost savings.
The damaged block wall should be repaired or replaced if necessary.
* 7.2 RESTROOM/LOCKER ROOM: The Montana pool code [Section 37.111.1149 (8)] requires
that “the ratio of water closets shall be one closet and one urinal for each 50 men or portion
thereof and one water closet for each 50 women or portion thereof.” Calculations of the total
bather load for the swimming pool per the Montana code was determined to be (433). Per the
Montana pool code, this requires a total of (9) fixtures, split between both sexes. The existing
facilities contain (4) male water closets, (3) male urinals, and (4) female water closets, for a total
48
Bogert Pool
Aquatic Facility Survey Page 11
of (11) available fixtures, satisfying the code. However, ADA accessible water closets are not
provided. One fixture count in each bathroom could be sacrificed to gain space for an ADA
accessible water closet.
We recommend the installation of an ADA accessible water closet in both the men’s and women’s
locker rooms. The total amount of water closets in each locker room can be reduced by (1) to
achieve additional space for the accessible water closet.
The Montana pool code [Section 37.111.1149 (9)] requires that “the minimum number of
showers provided shall be in proportion of one to 40 bathers or portion thereof.” Based on the
total calculated bather load of (433), (11) showers are required. The existing facility contains
(10) showers, (5) per locker room, with (1) ADA shower per locker room. The appropriate
number of shower facilities is not provided.
If major renovations to the facility do not occur as proposed within this report, the regulating
authority would not generally require that the existing bathhouse fixture counts be updated to
meet the code requirements. Instead they would require that the posted bather load be decreased
to reflect the amount of fixtures present. In this case, the posted bather load would be decreased
to (400).
If major renovations to the facility do occur as proposed, we would recommend the addition of
shower facilities to meet the code. These shower facilities could be installed on the outside wall
of the building and used as outdoor showers. The addition of outdoor shower(s) would satisfy the
code requirements for shower fixtures.
The male locker room currently has clear glass installed in some of the windows.
We recommend that the clear glass in the existing windows be removed and replaced with
privacy glass.
* 8.1 DECKS: The joint between the deck and pool coping edge has become uneven in several areas.
In addition there are other deck areas that have uneven slab elevations. These areas are safety
issues and can be tripping or “toe-stubbing” hazards.
The uneven joint between the deck and pool area is addressed in Item 1.2. We recommend that
any other uneven deck areas be corrected by raising the adjacent lower slab (utilizing concrete
pumping) or grinding the adjacent higher slab. In addition, we recommend the installation of an
under deck drainage system. This could be accomplished by pushing or driving perforated PVC
in underneath the existing deck from the lower areas outside the fenced enclosure. The pipe
could then gravity drain to these lower areas.
The existing concrete deck is in fair condition. However it is of sufficient age that more
significant cracks and structural issues may begin to present themselves in the near future. If
major renovations to the facility are performed as proposed within this report, we recommend
consideration of removing and replacing the entire concrete deck. This will provide a
“complete” renovation of the entire pool area and may provide a more aesthetically pleasing
result with the new pool finish and gutters. This would also eliminate the need for repairs or
replacement in the near future. We would recommend the new deck be constructed on imported
engineered fill (non frost susceptible) with an under deck drainage system. Replacement
performed at this time in conjunction with the major facility renovations will be more efficient
and economical.
49
Bogert Pool
Aquatic Facility Survey Page 12
* 8.2 PLAY FEATURES: The existing play features consist of (2) slides, “Delaware Duck” and a
large slide system structure at the deep end of the pool. It is our understanding that facility
personnel and patrons are satisfied with these play features. Therefore, we do not recommend
any changes at this time. However, at your request, we would be pleased to discuss and provide
examples of possible slide alternatives, which could be performed at this time or in the future. A
basketball play system would be an economical play feature that could be easily added to the lap
section of the pool.
There are no play features provided in the wading/splash pool section. The addition of splash or
water features in the wading/splash pool section could be performed as part of the facility
renovations.
We recommend that you consider the addition of play features to the wading/splash section of the
pool as part of the major facilities renovation. At your request, we would be pleased to discuss
and provide examples of possible play/splash features that could be integrated into the existing
pool area. We have provided a budget estimate in Section 3 for play features (please note that
this budget estimate is subject to change depending on the type, size, and complexity of chosen
play features).
8.3 COMPETITIVE EQUIPMENT: The Montana pool code provides a table indicating the
minimum dimensional requirements that must be met for diving boards. The existing diving
board is a 1 meter diving board, which requires a minimum pool depth of 10’-0” at a distance of
10’-0” from the end of the diving board. The maximum depth of the existing diving well is 9’-0”.
The proper depths for the diving board are not met.
We recommend that the diving board be immediately removed and/or restricted from use. If the
presence of a diving board is an important amenity or piece of competitive equipment at this
facility, we recommend increasing the depth of the diving well section of the pool. At your
request and with additional information, we would be pleased to further analyze the amount of
work that would be needed to accommodate a diving board and provide associative cost
estimates. If the major facility renovations are performed as proposed, this work could be tied in
with the relocation/addition of main drains in the diving well area.
* 8.5 ON-DECK SAFETY FEATURES: The Montana pool code [Section 37.111.1114 (f)] requires
“the depth of the water shall be plainly marked at or above the water surface on the vertical pool
wall and on the edge of the deck or walk next to the pool, at maximum and minimum points and
at the points of break between the deep and the shallow areas and at intermediate one foot
increments of depth, spaced at not more than 25 feet intervals measured peripherally. The depth
in the diving areas will be appropriately marked.” At the time of our site survey, the pool and
depth markers were being repainted. We were unable to verify that the appropriate spacing
requirements and appropriate depths were being provided.
We recommend verification of appropriate spacing and correct depth markings per the Montana
pool code. If major renovations to the facility are performed as proposed within this report, we
recommend the installation of permanent ceramic tile depth & “No Diving” markers.
* 8.6 LIGHTING: The Montana pool code [Section 37.111.1148 (2)] requires that “all indoor pools
or spas and all outdoor pools and spas operated at night shall have artificial lighting sufficient to
permit a 6 inch black disc on a white field to be visible in the deepest part of the pool or spa.” At
the time of our site survey we did not verify that lighting requirements are met.
50
Bogert Pool
Aquatic Facility Survey Page 13
We recommend that the lighting conditions be verified to determine if any changes or corrections
are necessary.
* 9.2 PARKING: Approximately (61) parking stalls are provided. It appears that some of these stalls
may be shared with adjacent park facilities. The bather load of the existing facility was
determined to be (433). This results in an existing parking count of approximately (1) stall per
(7) bathers. Please note that this does not include adjacent public street parking, which is likely
available. Typically with new facilities we recommend a parking count of (1) stall per (5)
bathers. This would result in a recommended total parking count of (87) stalls. It appears that a
parking deficiency may exist at this facility. However, with an existing facility, the best
determination of adequate parking is historical evidence of parking availability/deficiencies.
At your request, we would be pleased to discuss parking with you in more detail. If it is the
opinion of facility personnel that the parking is not adequate, we could provide analysis of
options.
* 9.3 ACCESSIBILITY: An accessible ramp and parking stalls to the pool facility are present. The
existing striping provides stalls that are angled to align with the remainder of the parking lot.
Facility personnel have informed us that some users have a difficult time parking in these angled
accessible stalls.
It appears that sufficient space is available at this location to allow for deeper stalls with an
alignment that is more “square”to the driveway and sidewalks. We recommend repainting the
existing accessible stall striping to “square” the stalls and provide an arrangement that works
better with the users. Painting, striping, and signage shall be provided as required by
accessibility codes.
9.5 ADDITIONAL NOTES: The walls of the bathhouse and existing block wall perimeter are
painted in solid blue tones. As a comparison, the Bozeman Swim Center contains extensive
painted murals on some of the interior natatorium walls.
We recommend that the perimeter walls and/or walls of the bathhouse be painted with similar
murals or themes to increase the aesthetic appearance of the facility.
51
Bogert Pool
Aquatic Facility Survey Page 14
SECTION 3 COST ESTIMATES
Note: Alternates are shown in italics. Note, some alternates are required, but are considered alternates
since major renovations to the existing facility may be performed.
RENOVATION COST
SWIMMING POOL
Install new concrete gutters $68,500.00
Install new stainless steel gutters $102,500.00
(total price shown as replacement for concrete gutter price)
Relocate and install additional main drains $18,000.00
Replace main drain grates to meet ANSI/ASME $2,000.00
standards and remove scale build-up in sumps
Remove paint & repair cracks in pool shell $21,000.00
Install Diamond-brite plaster finish w/ceramic tile $112,000.00
-Install logo/emblem (killer whale) in $3,500.00
ceramic tile.
Guard line at transition (5’ depth) $350.00
Install handrail on eastern stairway $600.00
Install ADA accessibility ramp to wading/splash $9,000.00
pool area
Reconstruct stairway to lap/diving pool to meet $3,000.00
ADA accessibility requirements
Replace existing filter system with high-rate $78,000.00
pressure sand filter system (includes new pump,
motor, strainer, and associated piping)
Electrical allowance for new filter system $6,000.00
Replace existing boiler with pool heaters and $24,000.00
hotwater heaters (for bathhouse)
Install backwash pit $5,000.00
Install overflow $500.00
Install rotary flowmeter $1,200.00
Adjust water supply line height $500.00
52
Bogert Pool
Aquatic Facility Survey Page 15
Upgrade chemical controller $7,000.00
Replace latches on gates and install self-closing $500.00
mechanisms
Trim overhanging tree branches to edge of pool $500.00
area (fencing/wall)
Install ADA compliant water closets $12,000.00
Replace clear window glass in men’s locker room $1,500.00
Level uneven concrete slab edges $6,200.00
Install drainage system under existing deck $4,500.00
Remove and replace entire concrete deck $68,500.00
Install ceramic tile depth and “No Diving” markers $3,000.00
Repaint handicap parking stalls (striping/painting) $500.00
Play features in wading/splash pool area $60,000.00
(includes mechanical system and allowance for features)
Mural painting (bathhouse and perimeter fence walls) Donated
STATE PLAN REVIEW FEE Varies
GENERAL CONDITIONS (12%) Varies by options chosen
CONTINGENCY (10%) Varies by options chosen
Note:
S Professional fees not included. In the above estimate, fees would be 10-12% depending on total scope
of work.
S Line item budgets, when totaled, equal more than if the entire project or large portions of it were bid at
one time. An economy of scale would take effect. If only one or two items are done at a time through
a contractor, the estimates are accurate.
53
Bogert Pool
Aquatic Facility Survey Page 16
APPENDIX
POOL SURVEY & DATA
54
AQUATIC CONSULTING & DESIGN 1 / 6
POOL SURVEY AND
OPERATIONS REPORT
SURVEYOR:Tom Schaffer & Nick Nowacki DATE: May 29, 2008
POOL NAME:Bogert Pool
ADDRESS:325 South Church OPERATOR/CONTACT:Sue Harkin / Ron Dingman
PHONE: (406) 582-2290 FAX: ( ) -
11 - POOL DESIGN: SKETCH PLAN & SECTIONS WITH DIMENSIONS INDOOR OUTDOOR
See original construction plans (1974).
12 - OVERFLOW:
Gutter, # drop-outs: 1 size: 8" material:PVC leaking
Surge weirs automatic flooded outlets scaled shut
Skimmer, # strainer installed equalizer weir present NSF
Coping Precast concrete coping stone gutter
Water level: at rimflow inches below rim flow center of skimmer
13 - DRAINS:
#: 3 Size: 12"x12" outlet pipe size: 6" to 8" in pool bottom in side wall
grated anti-vortex scaling in sump/not in pipe PVC
14 - INLETS:
Integral with gutter spacing: size: inserts present
Individual fittings spacing: #: type: distance below water:
Bottom inlets (lap/diving) spacing: varies #: 10 type: diffuser distance below water: varies
Bottom inlets (wading) spacing: 2 rows @7.5’ #: 10 type: diffuser distance below water: varies
Scaled shut air in system; source
15 - POOL SHELL & FINISH:
Cast conc. Shot conc. Stainless steel Aluminum Mild Steel Liner & sand Fiberglass
Ceramic Tile Diamond Brite Paint, type:chlorinated rubber Plaster, type:
Hollow spots spalling cracking in shell @ botom of gutter-cold joint from gutter reinstall
Water Depths: shallow end: 3' slope: 1:21 transition water depth:5' Hopper bottom
(lap/diving) Diving well depths; @ wall: 8' @end of board: @ drain: 9'
Water Depths: shallow end: 1-6"' slope: 1:30 deep water depth:3'
(wading)
16 - IN POOL SAFETY EQUIPMENT:
Accent (width:3") Accent needed up side walls
Rope & floats Locations:
17 - ACCESS INTO POOL:
(lap) Stairs (ht x tread ): Accent Stripes (width: ”): Handrails (#:1-one stair missing handrail)
(wading)Stairs (ht 10" & 7"x tread12"): Accent Stripes (width: ”): Handrails (#:2)
Zero-Depth Entry with Gutter
Ladder: # 5 recessed (4) hanging (1 @ slide)
ADA accessible: type: portable lift
124 Bridge Ave P.O. Box 86 Delano, Mn 55328 (763) 972-5897 fax (763) 972-5864 www.usaquaticsinc.com E-mail: Info@usaquaticsinc.com 55
2 / 6
SECTION 2 – FILTRATION
21 - FILTER SYSTEM:
DE media: Cellatom Diatomite Cartridge
R.R. Pressure Sand H.R. Pressure Sand
Vacuum Sand last sand change:
System:Vacuum DE Manufacturer: Mermade Model:
Quantity: 18 Area: 25 (S.F. Ea.) Size: 30"x60" Condition: good
System: Manufacturer: Model:
Quantity: Area: (S.F. Ea.) Size: Condition:
22 - GAUGES:
Influent Reading: Effluent Reading: Vacuum Reading:
23 - BACKWASH PROCEDURES:
Frequency: At pressure differential of: At vacuum reading of: 10
To grade to sanitary to storm air gap air gap needed
Backwash pit size: no pit - direct to 6" pipe - assumed to sanitary
Outlet pipe size:
24 - FILTER AIDS (Alum, etc.)
Alum
SECTION 3 – RECIRCULATION
31 - PUMP & MOTOR:
System:Recirculation Type: Size: 675 gpm Voltage:
Amps: RPM: TDH:60 Impeller Dia.:8.91 in. HP:
Manufacturer:Paco Model: Condition:
Single phase three phase NSF Press. Gauge Vac. Gauge
System:Trash Type: Size: Voltage:
Amps: RPM: TDH: Impeller Dia.: HP:
Manufacturer: Model: Condition:
Single phase three phase NSF Press. Gauge Vac. Gauge
32 - PIPING: INCLUDE SIZES & TYPES
Cast iron Galvanized PVC
Corroded Sagging Needs replacement Sizes:
33 - VALVES: INCLUDE SIZES & TYPES
Cast iron PVC Sizes: Type:
Gear operated (size: ) Lever operated (size: )
Corroded Needs replacement
34 - HEATER:
Type: Kewanee Boiler (1946) Size:Handles pool & hot water Quantity: 1
Manufacturer:Kewanee Model:Nat. gas – heat exchanger Condition: OK
Thermometer; #: Full Flow: Yes No Manf: Mdl:
Type: Size: Quantity:
Manufacturer: Model: Condition:
Thermometer; #: Full Flow: Yes No Manf: Mdl:
35 - SURGE CAPACITY: In Pool Surge Tank Type: DE filter tank
Dimensions: 11'-6"ft (wide) x 6' ft (long) x8'-6"ft (deep)
Depth to Normal Operating Level:unknown Depth to overflow: no overflow
Dry well: ft (wide) x ft (long) x ft (deep) Capacity: (Gal)
36 - STRAINER: Size:none Cast Iron Metal Stainless Fiberglass
Manufacturer: Model: corroded, needs replacement
56
3 / 6
37 - TURNOVER:
Actual: pool not on-line GPM Required: GPM Flow meter needed Not working
Flow meter: typeimpact Manufacturer: Model:
Possible Limiting Factors:
38 - WATER SUPPLY TO POOL:
Water Level Controller / Auto Fill RPZ / Watts 9 Backflow Prevention Needed
WLC Needed Air Gap Size: 2"
SECTION 4 – SANITATION
41 - AUTOMATED CONTROLLERS:
Manufacturer: Strantrol Suction from:discharge side of pump
Model #:System 3 Rejection to:DE tank
Control of: disinfectant ph
42 - SANITIZERS:
Liquid Solid Gas
Type:gas chlorine Method of introduction: booster pump/chlorinator valves
Quantity: Injection location:return ETL
Supplier: Feeder Manf./ Model: NSF
43 - pH CONTROL:
Acid CO2 Soda Ash Caustic Soda
Type: Method of introduction: pump
Quantity: Injection location:return ETL
Supplier: Feeder Manf./ Model: NSF
44 - POOL WATER CONDITION: clear cloudy Smell of Cl
PPM: pH: TDS: ORP: ALK: C.H.:
SECTION 5 -- OPERATION
51 - TESTING PROCEDURES:
Frequency: Test type: Procedure:
52 - TRAINING CONDITIONS:
New hire procedures:Several lifeguard II & III's are certified.
Training: CPO AFO
53 - DOCUMENTATION:
Disinfectant TDS Flow rate temperature
Free available employee records Humidity injuries
Total Ca hardness pH Ca hardness
pump operating periods ORP chem. amounts flowrate
malfunctions alkalinity cyanuric acid maintenance
54 - STANDARD OPERATIONAL PROCEDURES:
Backwash frequency: duration:
Vacuuming freq.: duration:
Pool brushing freq.: duration:
Strainer cleaning freq.: duration:
Deck cleaning freq.: duration:
55 - CHEMICALS ON SITE: INCLUDE TYPES, BRANDS, LOCATION OF EACH & PROXIMITY TO OTHERS
Chemical: used for:
Chemical: used for:
Chemical: used for:
Chemical: used for:
57
4 / 6
SECTION 6 -- ENVIRONMENTAL 61 - AIR HANDLING EQUIPMENT OR OUTDOOR FACTORS: EQUIPMENT ROOM, BATHHOUSE, ETC
62 - TYPICAL BATHER LOAD: INCLUDE AGE, TYPE OF USE, SCHEDULED EVENTS, ETC.
heavy light daily #: 250 Peak #: 350 Ages:
swim lessons open swim rentals
63 - MAKEUP & SOURCE WATER:
potable 42 F (cold)
pH: TDS: Hardness:60 ppm ALK: C.H.:
Iron Manganese
64 - AIR TEMP. RANGE & WEATHER CONDITIONS:
Air temp.:
65 - FENCING/PERIMETER: INCLUDE SIZE, MESH, DOORS, GATES, ETC.
Fence height:6'-2" mesh size: 2" barbed wire
Gate location:NW corner - SE side emergency access
66 - ANY NOTED FEATURES:
Cover evergreens trees w/ leaves wind barrier
SECTION 7 – SUPPORT FACILITIES
71 -PATRON CONTROL/SUPPORT:
Admissions area Lifeguard station
Lifeguard restroom Managers office
First aid office Family change room
AED
72 - RESTROOM/LOCKER ROOM: M: W: UNI:
Lockers - Qty men: 44 women: 44 Size:(10"x11"/35") W/C: 4 4 3
Benches - matl:wood Suit dryer URIN.: 3 n/a 1
hand dryer: paper LAV: 2 3 2
air roll towel SHOWER: 5 5
Baby change station - locations:M&W
ADA showers/no ADA stalls
73 - CONCESSIONS:
Seating for people physically separated - dimensions:
Drinking fountain vending machines-items available:swim diapers available
74 - NATATORIUM: DEGRADATION, ETC.
75 - MISC.: STORAGE, ETC.
Storage - dimensions:
limited to life guard station / first aid office / mechanical room
58
5 / 6
SECTION 8 – DECK & AMENITIES
81 - DECKS: SPACE, PATRON FLOW, GRASS, ETC.
Surface:concrete Width:varies
Comments:differing levels at edge of pool and sw decking expansion area
82 - PLAY FEATURES: SLIDES, FOUNTAINS, DRY SAND PLAY, VOLLEYBALL, ETC.
Flume slide – Qty: open enclosed body speed intertube Lengths:
Drop slide - drop height:varies volleyball
Spray features - type: basketball
Water walk - type: kiddie slide - type:
Play Structure - type: Slide System - Natural Structures -26' tower height
Dry sand area Wet sand area
83 - COMPETITIVE EQUIPMENT:
Diving Board - Qty: 1 height (1):not installed height (2): height (3): water depths acceptable
Starting blocks - water depth: # of Lanes: Lane widths:
Race lines - type:tile size:3"
Water Polo
Timing System: Daktronix Colorado
84 - SHADE: TYPE OF STRUCTURE, NUMBER, LOCATION, ETC.
Umbrella – type: size: permanent structure- dimensions:
canopy - dimensions: perimeter cantilever Costco structures
85 - ON-DECK SAFETY FEATURES: LIFEGUARD CHAIRS, DEPTH MARKERS, NO DIVING, SAFETY EQUIPMENT, ETC.
Depth Markers: Ends Sides Trans. Size: letter size: location needed:
“NO DIVING”: Universal tile 4" letters location needed:
Safety Equipment: shep. crook: ( req.) ring buoy w/ rope: ( req.)
backboard: ( req.) rescue tube: ( req.)
Lifeguard Chairs - # Required: # present:4 Fixed (3) Portable (1)
First Aid Kit Telephone
86 - LIGHTING
Underwater lights - dry-niche Underwater lights - wet-niche
Area Lighting (ft candles: ) Security Lighting Only
SECTION 9– FACILITY
91 - LOCATION:
Groundwater issues
Residential Area
92 - PARKING: BUS, CAR, SURFACE, ADEQUATE, DROP-OFF, ETC.
Drop-off area ADA parking; Qty: 2 Bus parking; Qty: Car Parking: Qty:61 total
Adequate Not adequate
93 - ACCESSIBILITY:
Parking to bathhouse Bathhouse Bathhouse to pool Pool
94 - UTILITIES:
Electrical: 3 ph. 1 ph. Voltage:
Potable water - size: Sanitary sewer - size: Storm sewer - size:
Natural gas Propane
95 - ADDITIONAL NOTES:
59
6 / 6
POOL STATISTICS
DIMENSIONS:
SHALLOW WATER (< 5 FT) (in sq. Ft.) 49'-10"x59' & 42'-1"x59'
DEEP WATER (> 5 FT) (in sq. Ft.) 33'x59'
SURFACE AREA:
SHALLOW WATER (< 5 FT) (in sq. Ft.) 5,423 sf
DEEP WATER (> 5 FT) (in sq. Ft.) 1,947 sf
TOTAL 7,370 sf
SURGE CAPACITY:
RECOMMENDED (in gal.) 7,370
SUPPLIED (in gal.) 4800
PERIMETER: (in ft.) 218' & 268'
POOL CAPACITY: (in gal.) 243,000
TURNOVER:
REQUIRED (hours) 6
ACTUAL (hours)
RATE OF FLOW:
FLOW RATE REQUIRED (in gpm) 675
ACTUAL RATE OF FLOW (in gpm)
MAIN DRAIN FLOW RATE: (Ft./s.) 4.3
FILTER SIZE: (Squ. Ft.) 450
FILTER FLOW RATE: (gpm/Squ.ft.) 1.5
SUCTION CHAMBER VELOCITY: (Ft./s.) n/a
BATHER LOAD:
SHALLOW WATER (per pool code) 361
DEEP WATER (per pool code) 72
TOTAL 433
60
BOZEMAN SWIM
CENTER
Bozeman, MT
Contact: Thomas R. Schaffer
124 Bridge Avenue, PO Box 86
Delano, MN 55328
Phone: (763) 972-5897
Fax: (763) 972-5864
trschaffer@usaquaticsinc.com
www.usaquaticsinc.com
Aquatic Facility Survey 61
July 14, 2008
Sue Harkin
City of Bozeman - Parks & Recreation
814 N. Bozeman
Bozeman, MT 59715
Re: Bozeman Swim Center – Bozeman, MT
Ms. Harkin:
We would like to submit the following report for the work at the above referenced facility.
If the City of Bozeman is interested in pursuing any renovation, repair, or upgrade of the
Bogert Pool we would be pleased to discuss these renovations with you further and provide
details of our applicable services that are available to help efficiently and economically
complete these renovations.
We offer a full range of services including, but not limited to; facility assessment, code
review, feasibility study, design, preparation of construction documents, contract/bidding
administration, construction administration, CPO/AFO instruction, and expert services.
Please see the attached brochure that has been included within this report for a full
description of our company and available services.
If we can be of any further assistance please do not hesitate to contact us.
Respectfully Submitted,
Thomas R. Schaffer Nicholas R. Nowacki, P.E.
William G. Deneen, P.E.
Montana Cert. No. 15065
cc: file
62
BOZEMAN SWIM CENTER
Bozeman, MT
AQUATIC FACILITY SURVEY
July 14, 2008
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION PAGE
Section 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY (AQUATICS) 2
- Statement of Understanding
- Study Approach
- Scope of Study
- Study Criteria
- Intent of Report
- Summary
Section 2 ANALYSES OF EXISTING CONDITIONS 4
(AQUATICS)
- Areas of Concern & Recommendations
-Main Pool
-Spa
Section 3 COST ESTIMATES (AQUATICS) 12
- Cost estimates for improvement options
Section 4 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY (HVAC) 17
- Statement of Understanding
- Study Approach
- Scope of Study
- Study Criteria
- Intent of Report
- Summary
Section 5 ANALYSES OF EXISTING CONDITIONS (HVAC) 20
- Areas of Concern & Recommendations
Section 6 COST ESTIMATES (HVAC) 22
- Cost estimates for improvement options
Appendix POOL & SPA DATA 24
USAquatics, Inc. Morrison-Maierle, Inc.
124 Bridge Ave E. 2880 Technology Blvd., W.
Delano, MN 55328 Bozeman, MT 59718
(763) 972-5897 fax (763) 972-5864 (406) 587-0721 fax (406) 587-5238
info@usaquaticsinc.com jburgett@m-m.net
www.usaquaticsinc.com www.m-m.net
63
Bozeman Swim Center
Aquatic Facility Survey Page 2
SECTION 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY (AQUATICS)
STATEMENT OF UNDERSTANDING
It is our understanding that the City of Bozeman wishes to have an assessment done on the existing
swimming pool, spa, and supporting infrastructure at the Bozeman Swim Center. The goal is to analyze
the existing facility, give a break-down of existing conditions, state problem areas, provide
recommendations on repair, renovation, or replacement, provide cost estimates and an approximate
timeline for any recommended work, and provide an estimate on the remaining lifespan of the facility.
STUDY APPROACH
The study approach primarily consisted of a physical assessment of the existing swimming pool, decks,
natatorium and pool equipment by USAquatics with the assistance of facility personnel.
SCOPE OF STUDY
The scope of this study covers the following areas of the facility:
- Swimming pool structure, recirculation, filtration, and sanitation equipment.
- Spa structure, recirculation, filtration, and sanitation equipment.
- Equipment room.
- Pool decking area, diving boards, play features, etc.
- Supporting facilities have also been briefly covered.
STUDY CRITERIA
The criteria used in our assessment includes:
- Pool code requirements.
- An understanding of cause and effect associated with various aquatic designs and operating
procedures as presented to us through the assessment, review, and design of several thousand
aquatic facilities.
- An understanding of indoor aquatic center building performance from viewing successes and
failures.
INTENT OF REPORT
To present a concise summary of safety, design, performance and operational issues in an effort to
prevent patron injury and/or illness, ease operation, lower operating costs, and increase the life span of the
facility while increasing patron visits and revenues.
64
Bozeman Swim Center
Aquatic Facility Survey Page 3
SUMMARY
A survey of the Bozeman Swim Center aquatic facilities was conducted on May 29, 2008 by Tom
Schaffer & Nick Nowacki of USAquatics, with the assistance of facility personnel. At the time of the
survey, the facility was in working condition and was fully open for use. The facility appeared to be
functioning properly, and considering its age, was found to be in excellent condition.
The facility is maintained very well and based on our observations, the staff has done a very thorough and
excellent job in organizing and maintaining facility records and documentation. In addition, based on our
discussions with facility personnel, the extent of staff training is exceptional and exceeds that which is
required. With respect to operation, the facility is very organized and well managed.
The purpose of our survey was to identify any major areas of concern with the facility and to perform a
full code review, identifying deficient areas, no matter how tedious. Our intent was to provide you with a
concise summary of all facility deficiencies for your analysis. This report identifies
issues/problems/negatives and should not be viewed as an overall state of the facility. As stated earlier,
this facility is in excellent condition and is very well maintained.
The overall structural state of the building, pool, and decking appears to be in good condition. The
ceramic tile decking surface is in good condition and the pool has a near brand new finish. If proper
maintenance of the facility continues to occur and systems are updated as they become outdated, this
facility could easily last 30+ more years.
One of the major issues with the facility is the natatorium air environment. At the time of our visit, the air
in the natatorium was very humid and the presence of combined chlorine was evident through smell and
reaction to our eyes. We performed some rough calculations of the air handling capacity of the existing
facility and roughly determined that the turnover rate of the air in the natatorium was approximately 40%
of that required by general standards. As a result of this and the high humidity levels, we contracted
Morrison-Maierle Inc. to perform a survey/assessment of the facility with respect to the natatorium
ventilation and dehumidification systems. Their report and recommendations is provided in Sections 4-6.
We are in agreement with the information and conclusions reached within their report, and recommend
Option 1 as presented. This appears to be the most economical and efficient option to alleviate humidity
and combined chlorine concerns in the existing natatorium. Option 1 will eliminate concerns with
equipment maintenance and replacement and provide the most efficient and effective air handling,
dehumidification, and heating.
In addition to our site survey, we also requested past water testing logs for (3) summer months and (1)
winter month. Review of these logs indicated a consistent reading of combined chlorine near 2.0 ppm,
during both summer and winter. The Montana pool code requires that a combined chlorine reading of 0.5
ppm or greater requires super-chlorination. Based on the log sheets and continuous combined chlorine
readings over 0.5 ppm, the pool has not been meeting health code requirements or generally
recommended levels. You have an ongoing high combined chlorine situation that is a major concern to
us. This could be a result of improper or absence of super-chlorination. Combined chlorine is a nuisance
due its strong odor, but it can also become a safety issue as there is the potential for reaction with the
eyes, nose, sking, lungs, etc. Based on this high combined chlorine and after review of the water testing
logs, we are recommending the installation of an ultra violet (UV) system.
A UV system combined with the replacement of the air handling unit (as recommended in the HVAC
Option 1) will work together to eliminate combined chlorine issues. Although each option, if installed
separately, will help reduce combined chlorine, we believe that installation/replacement of both the UV
system and air handling unit is necessary to full alleviate any issues with combined chlorine.
65
Bozeman Swim Center
Aquatic Facility Survey Page 4
Through discussions with facility personnel and review of water testing logs, it is our understanding that
there are issues with alkalinity levels. This is currently addressed through use of sodium bicarbonate.
There are several additional options that can address the low alkalinity, including the installation of a
CO2 system. This is discussed in more detail in Section 2.
The main drains are nearly in conformance with the new federal law. The actual main drain system and
piping meets the requirements of the law. However, recent clarification has resulted in the determination
that all drain covers must be ANSI/ASME certified and stamped as such. Due to this change, the drain
covers will need to be replaced. There is also an issue regarding main drain spacing requirements per the
Montana pool code and the drains may need to be replaced with (3) main drains. Please see Section 2 of
this report for more detail regarding this item.
One of the major safety concerns for the existing facility involves the storage of pool accessories on the
deck, specifically within the required 6’ unobstructed area adjacent to the pool. We recommend that
additional storage areas be designated and minimum decking widths be established around the pool
perimeter. We also recommend the construction of additional storage area if the existing space in the
natatorium is determined to be insufficient. The decking width, storage, and safety issues are discussed in
additional detail in Section 2.
The largest issue with regards to safety, liability, and code compliance is the existing elevated spa. The
existing spa has the ability to create a suction/entrapment hazard, is not ADA accessible, and is in
violation of several pool codes, which is discussed in greater detail in Section 2. It is our
recommendation that the spa be removed and replaced. We also recommend that the spa be drained and
restricted from use as soon as possible. The entrapment hazards of the spa have the ability to create a
severe liability for the Swim Center and the City of Bozeman.
We would recommend one of two options for replacement of the spa. One would be removal of the
elevated spa, with construction of a new recessed spa (meeting all applicable codes) in the same location.
Another option would be construction of a new open-air structure (glass ceiling & walls) off of the
existing natatorium. At your request and with an associated fee, we would be pleased to provide
conceptual layouts of either of these options.
As stated earlier in this report, the facility is in excellent condition overall. Several minor repair items are
present, but these are items that can easily be addressed and corrected. The larger items appear to be
upgrades that by nature become necessary over time as a result of new technology, etc. Overall, the
facility is structurally and mechanically sound, and as such is more than capable of providing an
enjoyable recreation area for the residents of the city for many years to come.
66
Bozeman Swim Center
Aquatic Facility Survey Page 5
SECTION 2 ANALYSES OF EXISTING CONDITIONS (AQUATICS)
AREAS OF CONCERN & IMPROVEMENT OPTIONS
USAquatics, Inc. has determined that the following areas of concern exist at the swimming pool facilities.
Numbering for the items listed below corresponds directly with the pool and spa survey data sheets,
which can be found in the Appendix. Please note that an asterisk * marker designates a code issue, with
the specific code section quoted in parenthesis [ ]. All remaining items are performance based issues.
Recommendations for repair, renovation, or replacement for each area of concern are provided in
italicized print.
MAIN POOL
1.2 OVERFLOW: The existing coping stone gutter appears to be functioning very well and
adequately skimming the pool surface. As such, we do not propose any changes to the existing
gutter system. However, we do propose that if the existing gutter system at the Bogert Pool is
replaced (see Bogert Pool Facility Survey), the removed coping stones should be salvaged for use
as replacement/spare stones for the Bozeman Swim Center facility since the gutter systems are
identical.
* 1.3 DRAINS: The existing main drains consist of (2) 24”x24” grated main drains, assumed to be
connected in parallel. The Montana code has general statements relating to main drain
suction/entrapment safety; however, there are no specific design requirements. The new Federal
Law, the “Virginia Grame Baker Pool and Spa Safety Act” does provide specific requirements for
main drain safety. This law requires, among other items, that all public pools and spas in the
United States shall have either an unblockable drain (defined as 18”x23”), multiple drains in
parallel, utilize a gravity drainage system, or have some other form of vacuum/suction release
system. The existing main drains on the Bozeman Swim Center pool meet several of these
requirements, even though only one is necessary (gravity drainage, (2) main drains, unblockable
drains by definition -24”x24”). As such, the pool provides several additional levels of safety
above the minimum required by the Federal Law.
However, the Federal Law also requires that all public pools and spas have ASME/ANSI
compliant Drain Covers. This has been indicated in a guidance document prepared by the U.S.
Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) and was recently confirmed by our office in a
Q&A phone conference with officials regarding interpretation of the new law. As such,
replacement of the existing covers with ASME/ANSI compliant drain covers, per the Federal
Law requirements, will be necessary.
In addition, the Montana swimming pool and spa code [Section 37.111.1138 (12)] requires that
main drain outlets “shall be spaced not more than 20 feet apart, nor more than 15 feet from side
walls.” The existing main drains are both located approximately 20’ from the side walls of the
pool. Because the pool is 58’ in width, (3) main drains are needed to meet the code requirements
for proper spacing.
Based on the age of the pool, it is also likely that the main drain lines are cast iron, which has a
tendency to clog shut or corrode and leak over time.
We recommend that the (2) existing main drains be replaced with (3) new main drains meeting
the spacing requirements of the Montana pool code. The new main drains should be installed
with unblockable drain covers meeting ASME/ANSI standards and complying with the
67
Bozeman Swim Center
Aquatic Facility Survey Page 6
requirements of the new Federal Law.
In addition, we recommend that the existing main drain piping be inspected via video and/or
pressure tested to determine if it is clogged or leaking. If necessary, the main drain piping should
be replaced.
Generally, existing pools are grandfathered with respect to new code issues and if significant
changes or construction to the pool is performed, the items are then corrected to meet code
requirements. If the City of Bozeman was to receive a written approval from the authority of the
Montana Department of Public Health and Human Services excusing the existing pool from the
strict enforcement of the code with regards to main drain spacing, then the only change that
would be required would be the replacement of the existing drain covers with those meeting
ASME/ANSI standards per the requirements of the new Federal Law. However, we would still
recommend inspection of the existing main drain piping to verify its condition and determine if
replacement is necessary.
1.4 INLETS: Inlets were reviewed with respect to location and spacing and determined to meet
existing code requirements.
1.5 POOL SHELL & FINISH: The pool finish was recently redone with a Diamond-Brite surface.
The expansion joint at mid-pool does not appear to be completed and should be redone. The (2)
control joints at quarter-pool appeared to be OK.
The existing expansion joint shall be redone by removing all plaster from white 2”x2” ceramic
tiles, installing expansion material, caulking over expansion material, and painting over the
caulking.
* 1.6 IN POOL SAFETY EQUIPMENT: Per the Montana pool code [Section 37.111.1154 (6)] “a
guard line separating the shallow portion from the deep portion of the swimming pool must be
provided across the pool at the 5 foot depth.” During the time of our visit, this guard line was not
in place.
We recommend that a guard line be purchased if the equipment is not currently present at the
facility. This guard line should be installed and in place at all times, with removal only as
necessary for lap swimming.
2.1 FILTER SYSTEM: From discussions with facility personnel, it is our understanding that they
are pleased with the overall performance of the vacuum diatomaceous earth (DE) filter system.
In addition, our observations and inspections did not find any issues with existing system, which
functioning and filtering properly. As such, we are not recommending any changes to the filter
system. However, we do propose that if the existing DE filter system at the Bogert Pool is
replaced (see Bogert Pool facility survey), the existing filter elements in good condition should be
removed and salvaged for use as replacement/spare elements for the Bozeman Swim Center
facility since the filter system types are identical.
The DE media currently being used is Cellatom Diatomite. DE is a hazardous material and has
been found to be carcinogenic. Respirators should be worn at all times when working with DE
powder or at any time it has the ability to become airborne. Several synthetic mediums that serve
as a replacement to DE are available, such as Pearlite. These synthetic filter mediums are much
safer to handle and can provide equal filtering capabilities.
We recommend the use of a synthetic DE, such as Pearlite.
68
Bozeman Swim Center
Aquatic Facility Survey Page 7
2.3 BACKWASH PROCEDURES: The existing backwash pit consists of a 3’x2’x1’ (D) pit with
an 8” pipe and drain cover. The lack of openings in the drain cover appears to restrict the
capacity of the backwash pit with respect to the underlying 8” pipe capacity.
It is assumed that the drain pipe ties into the existing sanitary system. Based on the age of the
system and the use of DE media, it is very likely that build-up of backwashed DE material has
occurred within the pipe, and capacity may be limited. If significant buildup has occurred, there
is a possibility that the pipe could become clogged quickly and without notice.
If the trash pump is still being used and the drain grate is necessary to catch possible debris, etc.,
we recommend that the existing cover be replaced with a new cover with a larger grating
area/opening. However, if the trash pump is no longer used and the backwash pit is used solely
for backwashing, we recommend that the grating be removed and the pipe be left open in order to
maximize the full flow capabilities of the drain pipe. We also recommend the existing drain pipe
be cleaned and inspected in order to prevent possible clogging and ensure that the full pipe
capacity is available.
* 3.5 SURGE CAPACITY: The Montana pool code does not provide specific requirements for surge
capacity; however, a general recommendation is one gallon of surge capacity per square foot of
pool surface area. The existing pool has approximately 0.6 gallons of capacity per square foot
(within the DE filter tank and gutters). Although this is below the recommended capacity we feel
that it is not deficient enough to warrant the addition of additional surge capacity. However, if
the filter system was replaced or significant work was performed on the pool or related
mechanical equipment, we would recommend increasing the surge capacity at that time.
The existing DE tank has an overflow that is located approximately 6” below the top of the tank
wall. The tank wall is approximately 8” higher than the existing mechanical room floor and pool
decking elevation, placing the overflow height approximately 2” higher than the pool decking.
We recommend that the overflow height be verified, and if necessary, lowered to approximately
1” below the existing pool decking elevation in order to prevent possible flooding of the decking,
mechanical room, adjacent building areas, etc. during an equipment failure (stuck fill valve, etc.).
* 3.7 TURNOVER: The existing impact flowmeter is not accurate enough to properly measure the
recirculation flowrate. The Montana pool code [Section 37.111.1140 (4)] requires that the
flowrate “indicator shall measure the rate of flow through the filtering system with an appropriate
range readable in gallons per minute within 10% actual flow.”
We recommend the installation of a rotary flowmeter, similar to the Signet Flowmeter w/515
Rotor-X Flow Sensor & accessories to allow for more accurate flowrate readings of the
recirculation system.
* 3.8 WATER SUPPLY TO POOL: Per the Montana pool code [Section 37.111.1141] “the make-up
water line discharging to a surge or balancing tank shall have its point of discharge at least 6
inches above the rim of the tank.” Based on pictures taken during our survey, it does not appear
that this requirement is met.
Satisfaction of this requirement should be verified. If adequate clearance is not present, we
recommend adjusting the water supply line to ensure that its point of discharge is at least 6
inches above the rim of the DE filter tank.
69
Bozeman Swim Center
Aquatic Facility Survey Page 8
Facility personnel have also informed us that the pool requires a significant amount of make-up
water during normal operation. During our visit we could not determine where this large loss of
water is occurring. The overflow elevation is set high enough that there should not be any
overflow as a result of large bather loads and pool surge. In addition, we do not believe that a
significant amount of evaporation is occurring (based on humidity levels in the natatorium).
We recommend that a water loss test be performed to determine if the pool is leaking. The water
loss test can be performed by placing a container of water on the gutter in a remote corner of the
pool, turning off the auto-fill to the pool, and then comparing the depth of water loss between the
container and the pool over a specific amount of time (generally 1 day or overnight). If the depth
of water loss is equal between the two, than the only water loss is a result of evaporation. If the
pool depth of water loss is greater, than the pool is likely leaking and further evaluation will be
necessary.
4.1 AUTOMATED CONTROLLER: Review of the water testing logs revealed that the pH
measurements for the pool appear to differ between the actual tests and the readings from the
Strantrol.
The Strantrol should be properly calibrated to provide correct readings.
There is no evidence of chemical balance readings, as determined by the saturation index.
The Montana pool code requires calculations of saturation index a minimum of once per week.
The calculated saturation index should be included on the water testing logs. Chemicals should
be adjusted as needed to maintain a proper saturation index +/-0.5.
* 4.2 SANITIZERS: The ventilation fan in the chlorine storage closet did not appear to be
functioning during our visit.
We recommend that the ventilation fan be inspected to ensure that it is working properly and
should be repaired as necessary to ensure proper ventilation of the chlorine storage closet.
4.3 pH CONTROL: Facility personnel have informed us that the make-up water to the pool has a
very low alkalinity (60 ppm). We have also been informed that a significant amount of make-up
water is added to the pool during normal use, requiring the frequent addition of sodium
bicarbonate during normal operations to maintain proper alkalinity levels. Evidence of low
alkalinity levels can be seen consistently throughout the water testing logs.
The existing disinfection system is gas chlorine, which has a very low pH, and as a result lowers
the pH of the pool water. Typically with gas chlorine systems, a caustic soda feeder is installed
as the pH control and is used to offset the low pH of gas chlorine and raise the pH of the pool
water to maintain it at proper levels. However, a large amount of sodium bicarbonate is used to
raise the alkalinity. Sodium bicarbonate has a high pH, effectively raising the pH and offsetting
the low pH of the gas chlorine. It is our understanding that the alkalinity is so low, that the
amount of sodium bicarbonate used is enough to raise the pH beyond the offset with the low pH
of the gas chlorine, resulting in an increased pH in the pool water. As a result, the pH control for
the existing system is acid, which is used to lower the pH back to acceptable levels.
The existing system is generally backwards with respect to pH control when compared to
standard gas chlorine systems, but the existing system with the use of sodium bicarbonate is one
option that can be used to combat the low alkalinity of the make-up water. The disadvantage to
this system is that sodium bicarbonate raises alkalinity and pH. Raising both of these values
70
Bozeman Swim Center
Aquatic Facility Survey Page 9
raises the saturation index, which should be maintained as close to 0.0 as possible. The only way
to offset this is to lower the pH. As a result, acid is added; however, acid lowers alkalinity. The
pool chemicals are constantly fighting with each other to maintain a proper pH, saturation index,
and alkalinity level. Below is discussion regarding two alternate options that can be used to
combat low alkalinity.
Option 1: Installation of a CO2 system and upgrading the chemical controller to a Siemens
Impact controller or equal. The CO2 system uses carbon dioxide gas, which is fed into the pool
water using methods and equipment similar to that used for gas chlorine. The injected carbon
dioxide forms carbonic acid, which raises the alkalinity of the pool water. This addresses the
issue related to alkalinity, but brings about an additional issue. The carbonic acid lowers the pH
of the pool water. As such, a pH control utilizing a caustic soda feed system is necessary to
maintain proper pH levels. This is the typical pH control used for gas chlorine.
The advantage to this alternate system is that caustic soda is the pH control, versus the existing
system, which utilizes acid that lowers alkalinity as described above.
This system results in (3) independent chemical feed systems, one for sanitizer (chlorine), one for
pH, and one for alkalinity. As a result, we recommend a controller upgrade to the Siemens
Impact controller or industry equal, which is capable of controlling all three chemical feed
systems with a single controller. This controller allows control of dual pH feed systems, one for
raising pH and one for lowering pH. Although the controller does not allow for specific
measurement of alkalinity, the CO2 system could be placed on a timer cycle and adjusted
accordingly as needed to maintain the proper alkalinity levels. The dual feed system and
controller is advantageous as caustic soda feeds typically overshoot the pH mark and result in a
high pH. With the dual feed system, the CO2 feed would then be initiated to bring the pH back
down. This feed of CO2 to lower the pH would then also contribute to raising the alkalinity. An
additional advantage to this system is that excess CO2 fed into the system simply off-gasses as
carbon dioxide, which is harmless. Compared to other systems there is no buildup of excess
chemicals in the pool water. This upgraded controller also offers additional advantages if a UV
system is installed (see Item 4.4).
Option 2: Another reason for low alkalinity within the pool (in addition to the use of make-up
water with low alkalinity) is the use of gas chlorine. Gas chlorine lowers alkalinity. The use of a
liquid or solid chlorine system could help eliminate issues with low alkalinity in the pool water
and decrease the amount of sodium bicarbonate needed.
However, a liquid chlorine system for a pool of this size would require storage of approximately
300 gallons of bleach, which would need to be refilled every few weeks. This system would be
extremely bulky and require frequent refilling. Therefore, we do not recommend conversion to
liquid chlorine.
A solid chlorine system would utilize a calcium hypochlorite feeder. Feeders large enough to
handle this size pool are available. However, the use of calcium hypochlorite raises calcium
hardness in the pool water. The water test logs indicate that the pool water already as a fairly
high calcium hardness. As a result, we would not recommend the change to solid chlorine.
Based on our analysis, we recommend Option 1, the installation of a CO2 system and upgraded
controller.
* 4.4 POOL WATER CONDITION: There was a noticeable chlorine odor in the natatorium caused
by combined chlorine. In severe instances, combined chlorine can cause irritation of the eyes,
71
Bozeman Swim Center
Aquatic Facility Survey Page 10
nose, or skin. In addition, it can also contribute to a corrosive environment inside the natatorium
(see Item 7.4).
We recommend the installation of an ultra violet (UV) system. A UV system will enhance the
chemical treatment and significantly decrease combined chlorine.
Standard UV systems make minor adjustments to the power supplied to the unit and UV strength
based on the clarity of the water passing through the system. However, if the suggested chemical
controller upgrade discussed under Item 4.3 (Siemens Impact controller or equal) is utilized, the
UV system can be directly connected to this controller. This connection allows for additional
adjustments to the power supplied to the unit and UV strength based on the actual pH and ORP
readings. The UV unit adjusts its strength as needed based on the sanitizing condition of the
water. This enhancement to the system and ability to make additional power adjustments allows
for an extensive energy savings compared to a standard UV system.
It should also be noted that the pool logs indicate the use of a pool cover. The use of a pool cover
can contribute to the buildup of combined chlorine in the pool. Covering of the pool prevents
continuous off –gassing of the combined chlorine to the natatorium air, where it can be
continuously ventilated (assuming that the air handling capacity is sufficient – see Item 6.1). The
use of the pool cover restricts any off-gassing of combined chlorine until removal of the cover, at
which point there is a sudden surge of combined chlorine into the natatorium air. This sudden
surge cannot be ventilated as quickly and efficiently as the continuous, smaller off-gassing over a
period of time.
We recommend non-use of the pool cover. However, we only recommend non-use of the pool
cover when all dehumidifiers are functioning properly (see Item 6.1). It is our understanding
from Morrison-Maierle, Inc. inspection of the facility that only (4) of the (6) hanging
dehumidifiers were functioning properly. These dehumidifiers should be repaired to allow for
proper dehumidification and to preclude the use of the pool cover to limit humidity levels.
6.1 AIR HANDLING EQUIPMENT OR OUTDOOR FACTORS: Three distinct air systems are
present in the natatorium: hanging dehumidifiers, an air handling unit, & a radiant heating
system. We contacted Morrison-Maierle, Inc. of Bozeman to perform a survey of the air handling
equipment and provide recommendations regarding the ventilation and dehumidification of the
natatorium. Their report and recommendations is included in Sections 4-6.
* 7.2 RESTROOM/LOCKER ROOM: The Montana pool code [Section 37.111.1149 (8)] requires
that “the ratio of water closets shall be one closet and one urinal for each 50 men or portion
thereof and one water close for each 50 women or portion thereof.” Calculations of the total
bather load for the swimming pool and spa per the Montana code was determined to be (406).
Per the Montana pool code, this requires a total of (9) fixtures, split between both sexes. The
existing facilities contain (2) male water closets, (2) male urinals, and (4) female water closets,
for a total of (8) available fixtures. The appropriate number of shower facilities (11 required, 15
provided) is available at the facility per the Montana pool code (1/40). There is not a specific
requirement for sinks, other than that they be provided with soap and disposable hand towels or
hand blowers; (4) total sinks are provided with disposable towels and hand dryers.
We are unaware of the availability or proximity of facilities within the attached school, but
assume that they are available for use and may count towards the fixture counts required for the
pool area. In addition, the regulating authority would not generally require that the existing
bathhouse fixture counts be updated to meet the code requirements. Instead they would require
that the posted bather load be decreased to reflect the amount of fixtures present. In this case,
72
Bozeman Swim Center
Aquatic Facility Survey Page 11
the posted bather load would be decreased to (400). If the spa is removed, the posted bather load
would be (396), satisfying the fixture requirements. If the spa is retained or a new spa is
constructed, the fixture counts are so close to the actual bather load that this should not be an
issue. As such, we are not recommending the addition of any fixtures.
No ADA water closet or showers are present in the locker rooms.
We recommend that ADA compliant showers and water closets be installed in the locker rooms
per federal and state accessibility codes.
7.4 NATATORIUM: Suspended acoustical ceiling is not the preferred ceiling material for a
natatorium due to the harsh atmosphere produced by the pool and chemicals.
We recommend that the ceiling cavity be inspected every ¼ year for any suspected failures, such
as oxidation of galvanized truss webs, galvanized ceiling tie wires, duct work, or suspended
ceiling channels. Also, all wood products and ceiling panels must be inspected for mold, mildew,
and water absorption. No evidence of failure on this inspection. Our inspection was done at the
low end of the ceiling. At least once a year the highest point of the ceiling, preferably directly
over the pool, should be inspected. If this is not possible, then the highest point of the ceiling at
the pool edge is an alternative for inspection.
7.5 STORAGE: Adequate storage space is not available and storage of items in the pool area has
obstructed the necessary clear deck width required by code (see Item 8.1) and could become a
safety issue or limit quick access to all areas of the pool by emergency personnel.
We recommend that accessory items be stored outside of the required unobstructed deck area per
Item 8.1. We recommend the designation of additional storage areas (possibly on the wide
decking side of the pool). If sufficient storage area is not available in the existing natatorium, as
an alternative we recommend the construction of an additional storage room as an attachment to
the existing building, with direct access to the pool area.
* 8.1 DECKS: The Montana pool code [Section 37.111.1115 (6)] requires that “the entire deck area
shall have a slope of not less than ¼ inch per foot directed away from the swimming pool or spa
edge or sloped to a deck drain.” A small depression exists in the decking near the overhead door
and potted plants at the deep end of the pool. This small depression area can allow water to
accumulate, creating a safety issue with regards to slipping or the growth of bacteria, fungus,
mold, etc.
We recommend that this small depressed area be repaired to properly drain.
The Montana pool code [Section 37.111.1115 (2)] requires that “the decks of all swimming pools
shall have a minimum width of 6 feet of unobstructed deck area, measured from the pool edge.”
From our visit and photographs it is apparent that this 6’ of unobstructed deck area is not present
around the entire pool as a result of the storage of accessory items (lane markers, pool covers,
swim items, etc.). This unobstructed area is necessary for safety, efficient access to the pool areas
by patrons, and access for lifeguards and emergency personnel.
We recommend that the 6 feet of unobstructed deck area (measured from the pool edge) be
maintained around the entire perimeter of the pool. Storage of accessory items should not take
place in these areas (see Item 7.5).
The ceramic tile decking does not have expansion joints at the location of the underlying
73
Bozeman Swim Center
Aquatic Facility Survey Page 12
expansion joints in the concrete floor. The expansion of the underlying concrete floor is
transferred directly to the ceramic tile; however, the ceramic tile does not have room for
expansion and is pushed up at the joint locations, creating a ridge. This is not aesthetically
pleasing, and can also create safety issues (sharp tile edges, toe catch, tripping).
We recommend that expansion joints be installed in the ceramic tile at the locations where
heaving has occurred and where it is obvious/apparent than an expansion joint exists in the
underlying concrete floor.
* 8.2 PLAY FEATURES: The Montana pool code [Section 37.111.1114 (4)] requires that “when a
water slide is provided in conjunction with a pool, the slide must be installed according to
manufacturer’s instructions.” We assume that the slide has been installed per the manufacturer’s
instructions; however there is a temporary cover over a secondary slide exit. This cover appears
to be secured in place using duct tape.
We also observed that the drop slide extends over the decking to the pool. At this location, the
proper headroom (7’-6”) is not available. Any areas without available headroom clearance are
not considered usable and should be protected from travel with a barricade, such as rope and
stanchions.
In addition, the Montana pool code requires 6’ of unobstructed deck along the edge of the pool.
Due to headroom clearances, a travel path at the front of the drop slide structure is not available,
therefore the 6’ of clearance should be provided behind the structure. The existing distance from
the rear of the structure to the adjacent wall is 3’-3”. The absence of the necessary 6’ path is a
safety issue and could hamper emergency personnel.
We recommend that the existing structure be removed in order to provide adequate unobstructed
decking widths at the deep end of the pool. A drop slide structure could be installed along the
wider decking area side of the pool at the deep end, if desired. However, due to the age of the
existing structure and missing slide, we would recommend that a new structure be installed in
place of the existing structure. We have provided a cost estimate for a similar structure. In
addition, please note that installation in this location would likely require relocation of the hot
tub (see Spa Items).
* 8.5 ON-DECK SAFETY FEATURES: The Montana pool code [Section 37.111.1114 (f)] requires
depth markers be spaced at “not more than 25 feet intervals” and “lap pools must have depth
markers at 25 foot intervals and at the ends.” The existing shallow end of the pool does not meet
the required 25 foot maximum spacing. In addition, the edges of the lap pool do not have depth
markers at 25 foot intervals.
We recommend that depth markers be installed on the pool per code requirements. This would
require 5 additional depth markers per side (lengthwise) and 2 additional depth markers at the
shallow end of the pool. These depth markers should be installed on the decking surface and on
the vertical pool wall per the Montana pool code requirements.
SPA
* 1.2 OVERFLOW: The spa contains (1) skimmer. The skimmer has been rigged with a piece of
hose to prevent suction entrapment. Facility personnel indicated to us that this was necessary as
the skimmer would actually suck to a person’s back. The Montana pool code [Section
37.11.1138 (8)] requires that “the grated areas shall be of sufficient size to decrease the
possibility of clogging or creating suctions dangerous to the safety of bathers.”
74
Bozeman Swim Center
Aquatic Facility Survey Page 13
This is a major safety and liability concern and is not in conformance with the pool code or
general standard of care with respect to recirculation system components and fittings. For this
reason and several others to follow, it is our recommendation that the spa be removed and
replaced. In order to avoid any possible liability issues, we also recommend that the spa be
immediately emptied and restricted from use.
* 1.3 DRAINS: There are two existing suction ports, (1) for the hydro fittings & (1) for the
recirculation system. The Montana code does not currently have any specific requirements
relating to main drain suction/entrapment safety; however the new Federal Law, the “Virginia
Grame Baker Pool and Spa Safety Act” does provide specific requirements for main drain safety.
This law requires, among other items, that all public pools and spas in the United States shall
have either an unblockable drain (defined as 18”x23”), multiple drains in parallel, utilize a gravity
drainage system, or have some other form of vacuum/suction release system. The existing
suction ports on the Bozeman Swim Center spa do not meet any of these requirements. In
addition the suction port covers to not comply with ASME/ANSI standards as required by the
federal law. In addition, the equipment and fittings are not NSF listed.
For this reason, and several other items addressed in this report, it is our recommendation that
the spa be removed and replaced. Conversion of the spa to meet the federal law is possible, but
is not feasible due to additional major items/issues related to the spa.
* 1.5 POOL SHELL & FINISH: The existing spa finish is white acrylic with a tile surround. The
underwater benches are composed of the same smooth acrylic finish and color. The Montana
pool code [Section 37.111.1114 (d)] requires that underwater seat benches be “visually set apart
from the surrounding pool surfaces by either a contrasting color or visual image and…provided
with slip-resistant surfaces.” The existing spa does not meet these requirements.
For this reason, and several other items addressed in this report, it is our recommendation that
the spa be removed and replaced. Conversion of the spa to meet this code may be possible, but is
not feasible due to additional major items/issues related to the spa.
* 1.7 ACCESS INTO POOL: The spa is elevated 3’-8” from the existing decking surface and access
is achieved through the use of stairs with (2) handrails. The spa is not ADA accessible. ADA
accessibility to all pools and spas is required by accessibility codes.
For this reason, and several items addressed in this report, it is our recommendation that the spa
be removed and replaced. Conversion of the spa to meet this ADA accessibility and all other
items presented within this report would not be economical as a comparison to full replacement.
* 2.1 FILTER SYSTEM: The Montana pool code [Section 37.111.1140 (5)] requires that “a
minimum of three cartridge filter must be provided for each pool or spa, one in use, one which
has been cleaned and is ready for use, and one which is being cleaned.” Two filters were
observed in the mechanical room, one in use, and one being cleaned.
Ensure that three filters are available for the spa per the pool code.
* 4.4 POOL WATER CONDITION: The existing spa is on a bromine tablet feeder system. The
Montana pool code [Section 37.111.1147 (6)] requires that the minimum standard for ORP is
“650 millivolts (mV) and the preferred standard is 750 millivolts (mV).” The ORP reading on the
chemical controller at the time of our survey was 554.
75
Bozeman Swim Center
Aquatic Facility Survey Page 14
We recommend that the controller and sanitizer feed system be checked for proper calibration
and operation to ensure the proper sanitizer strength in the spa.
The Montana pool code [Section 37.111.1151 (8)] requires that “swimming pool and spa waters
shall be maintained at a pH of not less than 7.2 and not greater than 7.8.” The pH reading of the
chemical controller at the time of our survey was 8.56. The chemical controller is not connected
to any pH feed controls.
We recommend that a pH equipment pump feeder be installed and connected to the controller to
maintain the required pH levels within the spa.
* 8.1 DECKS: The Montana pool code [Section 37.111.1115] requires that “the decks of all spas shall
be a minimum of 4 feet wide and shall extend around 50% of the unit.” The elevated spa
currently has limited decking (approx. 1’ average width) around the perimeter of the entire spa
and does not meet this requirement.
For this reason, and several other items within this report, it is our recommendation that the spa
be removed and replaced. Conversion of the spa to meet this code requirement and all other
items presented within this report would not be economical as a comparison to full replacement.
* 8.5 DEPTH MARKERS: The Montana pool code [Section 37.111.1114 (f)] requires that depth
markers be provided for all swimming pools. By definition within the code, “swimming pools” is
inclusive of spas. No depth markers are present on the existing spa.
For this reason, and several other items within this report it is our recommendation that the spa
be removed and replaced. Conversion of the spa to meet this code requirement and all other
items presented within this report would not be economical as a comparison to full replacement.
Note: Discussion of spa replacement options is provided in the Executive Summary. Cost estimates for
spa replacement are provided in Section 3.
76
Bozeman Swim Center
Aquatic Facility Survey Page 15
SECTION 3 COST ESTIMATES (AQUATICS)
Note: Alternates are shown in italics.
RENOVATION COST
SWIMMING POOL
Main drain replacement $35,000.00
Repair expansion joint in pool $1,500.00
Guard line at transition (5’ depth) $350.00
Backwash pit – replace cover, clean & inspect pipe $1,000.00
Adjust overflow height $200.00
Install rotary flowmeter $1,200.00
Adjust water supply line height $300.00
Upgraded controller $7,000.00
Repair chlorine storage closet ventilation fan $800.00
Install CO2 system (re-use existing controller) $2,000.00
Install ultra violet (UV) system $45,000.00
Install ADA compliant showers & stalls $22,000.00
Construct additional storage area (200 s.f.) $40,000.00
Repair depressed decking area $500.00
Install expansion joints in ceramic tile decking $4,500.00
Replace existing drop slide with similar play feature $30,000.00
Install additional depth markers $3,000.00
77
Bozeman Swim Center
Aquatic Facility Survey Page 16
RENOVATION COST
SPA
Replacement (in place-non elevated) $70,000.00
-New building addition, open-air spa $80,000.00
STATE PLAN REVIEW FEE Varies
GENERAL CONDITIONS (12%) Varies by options chosen
CONTINGENCY (10%) Varies by options chosen
Note:
S Professional fees not included. In the above estimate, fees would be 10-12% depending on total scope
of work.
S Line item budgets, when totaled, equal more than if the entire project or large portions of it were bid at
one time. An economy of scale would take effect. If only one or two items are done at a time through
a contractor, the estimates are accurate.
78
Bozeman Swim Center
Aquatic Facility Survey Page 17
SECTION 4 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY (HVAC)
STATEMENT OF UNDERSTANDING
It is our understanding that USAquatics Inc. is conducting a facility assessment of the Bozeman Swim
Center in order to provide the City of Bozeman a comprehensive report of the current state of the facility,
problem areas, recommendations and cost estimates. One area of concern preliminarily defined by
USAquatics is the indoor air quality and mechanical system function in the natatorium. The goal is to
provide USAquatics and in turn the City of Bozeman with a focused report on the mechanical heating,
ventilation and dehumidification systems of the natatorium. This report includes analysis of the existing
mechanical equipment, a statement of the problem areas, recommendations and options for repair or
replacement of mechanical systems, and a cost estimate for those options.
STUDY APPROACH
The study approach primarily consisted of a physical assessment of the existing pieces of mechanical
equipment, review of original design drawings and discussion with facility personnel.
SCOPE OF STUDY
The scope of this study covers the following mechanical systems
- Primary air handling unit (AHU) for the natatorium - also known as “Henry”
- Radiant heating system
- Dehumidification equipment
STUDY CRITERIA
The criteria used in our assessment includes:
- ASHRAE standards.
- 2006 International Mechanical Code
INTENT OF REPORT
Provide recommendations for repair and replacement of existing mechanical systems in an effort to meet
current codes and standards, provide user comfort, and increased efficiency resulting lower energy bills
for the Bozeman Swim Center.
79
Bozeman Swim Center
Aquatic Facility Survey Page 18
SUMMARY
A survey of the Bozeman Swim Center mechanical equipment was conducted on June 26, 2008 by
Jennifer Burgett of Morrison-Maierle, Inc with the help of Swim Center personnel.
The facility personnel have maintained the mechanical systems very well. Documentation was provided
including past studies, energy audits, equipment information and maintenance records. The mechanical
systems that serve the natatorium include six refrigerant-type dehumidifiers located around the perimeter
of the pool, a Co-Ray-Vac gas fired radiant system that runs the length of the pool on the east side, and a
large air handling/ventilation unit located at the exterior of the building on the east side. The survey
focused on these three main mechanical systems.
Dehumidification Equipment:
Six Desert Aire (Model EHCC-500) dehumidifiers were installed in 1983 around the perimeter of the
pool to reduce the quantity of outside air ventilation required for humidity control. Since the 1983
installation, the system has been completely replaced one dehumidifier at a time. Each new
dehumidification unit is a Desert Aire Model IH-500. The oldest unit was installed in 1998 and is the
west middle unit. The east middle unit was installed in 1999. The southwest unit was installed in 2000.
The northeast unit was installed in 2001. The southeast unit was installed in 2002. The newest unit is in
the northwest corner of the natatorium and was installed in 2004. These dehumidifiers are refrigerant type
(R-22) units that remove moisture from the air by cooling and then reheating the air. The heat from the
refrigeration compressor is also rejected to the natatorium. This set up works well in the winter because
the rejected heat helps to warm the natatorium. Two of the six dehumidifiers are turned off in the summer
because the added heat is too great to maintain comfort. All of the dehumidification units are electrically
driven with 208 volt, 3-phase power to each one. A power surge at the end of May has disabled the
newest unit in the northwest corner. The motor has burned out and must be replaced if all six
dehumidifiers are to remain in operation. Maintenance records indicate that contractors are called to
repair one or more of the dehumidification units approximately 3 times per year.
Radiant Heating System (Co-Ray-Vac):
The Co-Ray-Vac radiant heating system was installed in 1985 because one of the originally installed,
roof-mounted air handlers was not functioning and not able to be repaired. The intent was to supply heat
to the deck and pool area lost by the non-functioning AHU. This radiant heating system is capable of
supplying 280,000 BTU per hour of heat to the natatorium if it is operating at full capacity. The Co-Ray-
Vac system is operating well. It has been serviced a couple of times since it’s installation in 1985.
Another burner was added in the 90’s to give the system a more uniform heat over the entire length of the
radiant tube.
Air Handling Unit (Henry):
The main air-handling unit (AHU) is an exterior packaged, gas fired Pace unit. It was installed in
approximately 1987-1988 to replace the original (2) air handler, roof-mounted system installed in 1975.
The AHU is intended to supply the natatorium with outside, heated air and to return air from the
natatorium back to the air handler where it is exhausted to the atmosphere. The air-handling unit was
designed to supply 10,600 cubic feet per minute (cfm) of conditioned air into the natatorium and exhaust
11,000 cfm. Having the exhaust greater than the supply yields a slight negative pressure to the room.
This negative pressure is in accordance with the recommendations of ASHRAE A4.6 as it limits
chloramine odor migration throughout the rest of the swim center.
80
Bozeman Swim Center
Aquatic Facility Survey Page 19
The AHU has been serviced many times since its installation. A gas-fired Modine unit heater was
installed in 1996 to pre-heat the outside air when the temperature dropped below 0 degrees F. A hood
was also added over the intake louver in 1998 to prevent snow from entering the air intake louver and
causing the filters to clog thus shutting down the unit.
The Pace air handling unit supplies all of the ventilation for the natatorium. If the unit is operating at full
capacity, the ventilation rate is 2.27 air changes per hour. ASHRAE A4.6 recommends pools with no
spectator areas to have 4 to 6 air changes per hour and pools with spectator areas to have 6 to 8 air
changes per hour. The Bozeman Swim Center appears to fall somewhere in the middle of these two types
of pools. Bleachers are set up to for a viewing area, however, the Swim Center personnel have stated that
large competitions that would fill the bleachers only happen three to four times per year.
81
Bozeman Swim Center
Aquatic Facility Survey Page 20
SECTION 5 ANALYSES OF EXISTING CONDITIONS (HVAC)
AREAS OF CONCERN
Generally, the mechanical systems are in fairly good working order. As previously stated, the Swim
Center staff has done a great job keeping the various systems in operation. Morrison-Maierle, Inc. has
identified the following areas of concern with the three main mechanical systems. Options and
recommendations for repair, renovation, or replacement for the overall mechanical system are contained
in Section 3.
Air Handling Unit (Henry)
1. The existing air-handling unit was installed in 1987. Pace, the manufacturer of the AHU, went
out of business in 1997. This is not a major concern as Air Controls of Bozeman is familiar with
the system and has serviced it since its installation. However, it does not modulate between high
and low fan speed anymore and has been over ridden to be on high fan speed all the time. This
will expedite the lifespan of the AHU and as it continues to age, finding parts for repair and
replacement may become problematic.
2. The natatorium requires 28,000 cfm to achieve 6 air changes per hour. As early stated, the
natatorium is only receiving 2.27 air changes per hour if it is running at 100% of its capacity.
Given the extensive repair work that has been done on the air handler, Morrison-Maierle, Inc.
does not believe it is actually producing the 10,600 cfm listed on its supply fan tag. Most likely,
the air handler is providing 60 to 70 percent of its original design and installation specifications.
This is a major issue because the AHU is the only source of ventilation for the natatorium and it
is undersized by current codes and recommendations, even if it is operating at 100% of its stated
capacity. As a result of the low level of ventilation, the Bozeman Swim Center is suffering from
diminished indoor air quality for patrons and staff and accelerated deterioration of metal
ductwork. Because of the low venting levels the Swim Center is also vulnerable to deterioration
of wood and concrete building materials, increased occurrence of mold and mildew and damaged
insulation.
3. The outside air delivered by the air handler to the natatorium is required (by ASHRAE Standard
62.1) to be 6,700 cfm. This is roughly 24% of the total 28,000 cfm required to achieve 6 air
changes per hour in the natatorium space. The air handler appears to be a 100% outside air unit,
thus, 10,600 cfm of outside air is being delivered to the natatorium if the air handler is running at
100% of its capacity. Thus, the natatorium is receiving the required amount of outside air even if
it is deficient of the adequate ventilation.
4. An abnormality with the power (power surge) occurred on May 24, 2008. At this time, Air
Controls of Bozeman was called to service the main air-handler because it did not restart after the
power surge. They recommended replacement of the high/low motor controller and motor
controller switch for the exhaust fan. Air controls also indicated that the supply fan controls are
warn and their enclosures are rusty.
Radiant Heating System (Co-Ray-Vac)
1. The radiant heating system appears to be in good working order. The Swim Center personnel
have not reported any problems with the unit, but did report that the system is very necessary in
the winter to provide supplemental heat.
82
Bozeman Swim Center
Aquatic Facility Survey Page 21
Dehumidification – Six Units Located in the Natatorium
1. Five of the six dehumidifiers function and do not seem to have any major problems. The
dehumidifier in the northwest corner of the natatorium was affected by the power surge on May
24, 2008. As a result of the surge the northwest dehumidifier would not restart. Air controls
found the motor to be seized and the unit would need to be replaced if it is to be kept operational.
2. The heat rejected by the dehumidification units into the space is too great to keep them all
operating in the summer, thus higher humidity occurs in the spring and summer.
3. The dehumidifiers need to be repaired and maintained often to keep them in operation. After
looking through the maintenance records, it appears that a contractor is called approximately 3
times per year to service one or more of the dehumidifiers.
83
Bozeman Swim Center
Aquatic Facility Survey Page 22
SECTION 6 COST ESTIMATES (HVAC)
OPTION 1 – Replace the Air Handling Unit COST
Option 1, Replacing the Air Handling Unit, is the best option for overall, long-term building health. It
will address humidity, ventilation and heating issues currently experienced by the swim center. It will
also reduce potential problems with mold, mildew and condensation that will harm the building’s
structure and create indoor air problems for swimmers and employees. Unfortunately, Option 1 is also
the most expensive, requiring a large system replacement. The recommended unit would be an energy
recovery ventilator, refrigeration based dehumidification system with gas heat similar to the one installed
in the Missoula Aquatic Center in 2005-2006. This system would provide heating, dehumidification and
ventilation. Two exhaust fans are recommended directly above the pool on the high point of the Swim
Center roof for added exhaust to make the space negative and allow for a complete system purge. In this
case the existing dehumidifiers and the radiant system would not be necessary but should be kept in place
as long as they are in working order to provide heat and dehumidification on extremely humid or cold
days.
New Air Handler Heat Recovery Unit (28,000 cfm) $160,000.00
Ductwork Renovation $ 20,000.00
Exhaust Fans (2 at 1,400 cfm each) $ 3,000.00
Total $183,000.00
OPTION 2 – Supplement the Existing Air Handling System COST
Option 2 entails keeping the existing mechanical equipment in service as long as possible and adding an
air handler/heat recovery unit, similar to the one outlined in Option 1, capable of 14,000 cfm (half of what
the facility would require for 6 air changes per hour). If the existing air handler is capable of supplying
approximately 10,000 cfm that would bring the total to 24,000 cfm. 24,000 cfm equates to 5 air changes
per hour which would double the current ventilation and be within the ASHRAE recommended levels of
4 to 6 air changes per hour for a pool with no spectators. A test and balance report would be necessary to
determine exactly how much air the existing air handler supplies and exhausts. The existing air handler
should be maintained and repaired to ensure it is operating as well as possible. Exhaust fans should be
installed for this option too to allow purging and extra exhaust over the pool. This option would
drastically increase the overall indoor air quality and provide a lower first cost to the Swim Center. This
would leave the possibility of adding a second phase where a duplicate air handler (14,000 cfm) could be
added to replace the existing AHU and increase the ventilation to 6 air changes per hour. If a second
phase was executed to bring the Swim Center up to optimum conditions as was outlined in Option 1, the
overall cost of both phases would be greater than that of Option 1.
Test and Balance Report $ 2,500.00
84
Bozeman Swim Center
Aquatic Facility Survey Page 23
Existing Equipment Maintenance $ 2,500.00
New Air Handler/Heat Recovery Unit (14,000 cfm) $80,000.00
New and Renovated Duct Work $20,000.00
Exhaust Fans (2 at 1,400 cfm each) $ 3,000.00
Total $108,000.00
Future phase: New Air Handler (14,000 cfm) $ 90,000.00
Renovate/Replace old ductwork $ 10,000.00
Total $100,000.00
OPTION 3 – Provide Added Ventilation COST
Option 3 would be to keep the existing mechanical equipment in operation, including replacing the
dehumidification unit that is currently not functioning, and add exhaust fans and louvers to provide the
ventilation necessary to accommodate at least 4 air changes per hour (minimum allowed by ASHRAE and
the International Mechanical Code) in the natatorium. Gas unit heaters would be required to provide
extra heat to make up for ventilating with outside air in the winter. The controls would have to be
modified to tie the Co-Ray-Vac system, the existing air handler, the dehumidifier and the new louvers,
exhaust fans and unit heaters together so that while the new fans are pulling air through the louvers, a
comfortable temperature is maintained in the natatorium during colder months. A test and balance report
would have to be executed in this phase as well to determine the actual amount of air being supplied and
exhausted by the air handler. This option will provide needed ventilation and has the lowest first cost.
However, it would add several other pieces of mechanical equipment to an already complex system of
mechanical equipment. And although this system is the most cost effective in the short term, it is the least
energy efficient and it relies on keeping the existing equipment in operation which by all accounts has
been challenging over the past ten years.
Test and Balance Report $ 2,500.00
Maintenance and Repairs to Existing Air Handler $ 2,500.00
Ductwork Maintenance (replacing corroded pieces) $ 5,000.00
New Gas Fired Unit Heaters $ 5,000.00
New Desert Aire Dehumidification Unit $15,000.00
Exhaust Fans (5 at 2000 cfm each) $ 8,000.00
Louvers (2 at 5’x5’) $ 5,000.00
Additional Controls $10,000.00
Total $53,000.00
85
Bozeman Swim Center
Aquatic Facility Survey Page 24
APPENDIX
POOL & SPA SURVEYS & DATA
86
AQUATIC CONSULTING & DESIGN 1 / 6
POOL SURVEY AND
OPERATIONS REPORT
SURVEYOR:Tom Schaffer & Nick Nowacki DATE: May 29, 2008
POOL NAME:Bozeman Swim Center (Pool)
ADDRESS:1211 West Main OPERATOR/CONTACT:Sue Harkin / Ron Dingman
PHONE: (406) 582-2290 FAX: ( ) -
11 - POOL DESIGN: SKETCH PLAN & SECTIONS WITH DIMENSIONS INDOOR OUTDOOR
See original architectural plans.
12 - OVERFLOW:
Gutter, # drop-outs: 1 size: material: leaking
Surge weirs automatic flooded outlets scaled shut
Skimmer, # strainer installed equalizer weir present NSF
Coping
Water level: at rimflow inches below rim flow center of skimmer
13 - DRAINS:
#: 2 Size: 24"x24" outlet pipe size: in pool bottom in side wall
grated anti-vortex scaled shut gravity flow to DE tank
14 - INLETS:
Integral with gutter spacing: size: inserts present
Individual fittings spacing: #: type: distance below water:
Bottom inlets spacing: 2 rows #: 30 type: distance below water: depth varies
Scaled shut air in system; source
15 - POOL SHELL & FINISH:
Cast conc. Shot conc. Stainless steel Aluminum Mild Steel Liner & sand Fiberglass
Ceramic Tile Diamond Brite Paint, type: Plaster, type:
Hollow spots spalling Diamond Brite redonesummer (2007) as warranty work - issue w/expansion joint
Water Depths: shallow end: 3'-6" slope: 1:88 transition water depth:5’-0” Hopper bottom
Diving well depths; @ wall: 8'-6" @end of board: 8'-10" @ drain: 9'
16 - IN POOL SAFETY EQUIPMENT:
Accent (width:2") Accent needed up side wall
Rope & floats Locations: 5'-0" transition water depth
17 - ACCESS INTO POOL:
Stairs (ht x tread ): Accent Stripes (width: ”): Handrails (#: )
Stairs (portable): Accent Stripes (width: ”): Handrails (#:2)
Zero-Depth Entry with Gutter
Ladder: # 8 recessed hanging
ADA accessible: type: lift
124 Bridge Ave P.O. Box 86 Delano, Mn 55328 (763) 972-5897 fax (763) 972-5864 www.usaquaticsinc.com E-mail: Info@usaquaticsinc.com 87
2 / 6
SECTION 2 – FILTRATION
21 - FILTER SYSTEM:
DE media: Cellatom Diatomite Cartridge
R.R. Pressure Sand H.R. Pressure Sand
Vacuum Sand last sand change:
System:Vacuum DE Manufacturer: Mermade Model:
Quantity: 24 Area: 25 (S.F. Ea.) Size: 30”x60” Condition: good
System: Manufacturer: Model:
Quantity: Area: (S.F. Ea.) Size: Condition:
22 - GAUGES:
Influent Reading: Effluent Reading: 17.5 psi Vacuum Reading: 8 in. Hg
23 - BACKWASH PROCEDURES:
Frequency: At pressure differential of: At vacuum reading of: 10
To grade to sanitary to storm air gap air gap needed
Backwash pit size: 3'x2'x1' (D)
Outlet pipe size: 8" w/cover
24 - FILTER AIDS (Alum, etc.)
Alum none
SECTION 3 – RECIRCULATION
31 - PUMP & MOTOR:
System:Recirculation Type: Size: 1000 GPM Voltage: 208-230/460
Amps:56-53/26.5 RPM:1760 TDH:55 Impeller Dia.:8.43 HP:20
Manufacturer:Baldor Motor/Paco Pump Model: Condition:
Single phase three phase NSF Press. Gauge Vac. Gauge
System: Type: Size: Voltage:
Amps: RPM: TDH: Impeller Dia.: HP:
Manufacturer: Model: Condition:
Single phase three phase NSF Press. Gauge Vac. Gauge
32 - PIPING: INCLUDE SIZES & TYPES
Cast iron Galvanized PVC painted
Corroded Sagging Needs replacement Sizes:
33 - VALVES: INCLUDE SIZES & TYPES
Cast iron PVC Sizes: Type:
Gear operated (size: ) Lever operated (size: )
Corroded Needs replacement
34 - HEATER:
Type: Size: Quantity: 2
Manufacturer:Lochinvar Model:Copper-Fin2 Condition: good
Thermometer; #:2 Full Flow: Yes No Manf: Mdl:
Type: Size: Quantity:
Manufacturer: Model: Condition:
Thermometer; #: Full Flow: Yes No Manf: Mdl:
35 - SURGE CAPACITY: In Pool Surge Tank Type: DE Tank
Dimensions: 11'-7"ft (wide) x 10' ft (long) x9'-8"ft (deep)
Depth to Normal Operating Level:4'3" from top Depth to overflow: 6" from top
Dry well: 11'-7"ft (wide) x 10'ft (long) x 3’-9”ft (deep) Capacity: 3,250(Gal)
36 - STRAINER: Size: Cast Iron Metal Stainless Fiberglass
Manufacturer: Model: corroded, needs replacement
88
3 / 6
37 - TURNOVER:
Actual:1050GPM Required: 950GPM Flow meter needed Not working
Flow meter: typeImpact Manufacturer: Model:
Possible Limiting Factors:
38 - WATER SUPPLY TO POOL:
Water Level Controller / Auto Fill RPZ / Watts 9 Backflow Prevention Needed
WLC Needed Air Gap Size:
SECTION 4 – SANITATION
41 - AUTOMATED CONTROLLERS:
Manufacturer: Strantrol Suction from:post pump
Model #:System 4 Rejection to:DE tank
Control of: disinfectant ph
42 - SANITIZERS:
Liquid Solid Gas
Type:Gas chlorine Method of introduction: Regal chlorinator valves
Quantity:1 Injection location:Return piping ETL
Supplier: Feeder Manf./ Model: NSF
43 - pH CONTROL:
Acid CO2 Soda Ash Caustic Soda
Type: Method of introduction: Pump
Quantity: Injection location:Return piping ETL
Supplier: Feeder Manf./ Model: NSF
44 - POOL WATER CONDITION: clear cloudy Smell of Cl
PPM:3.6 pH:7.7 TDS: ORP: ALK: C.H.:
SECTION 5 -- OPERATION
51 - TESTING PROCEDURES:
Frequency: Test type: Procedure:
52 - TRAINING CONDITIONS:
New hire procedures:Several lifeguard II & III's are certified.
Training: CPO AFO
53 - DOCUMENTATION:
Disinfectant TDS Flow rate temperature
Free available employee records Humidity injuries
Total Ca hardness pH Ca hardness
pump operating periods ORP chem. amounts flowrate
malfunctions alkalinity cyanuric acid maintenance
54 - STANDARD OPERATIONAL PROCEDURES:
Backwash frequency: duration:
Vacuuming freq.: duration:
Pool brushing freq.: duration:
Strainer cleaning freq.: duration:
Deck cleaning freq.: duration:
55 - CHEMICALS ON SITE: INCLUDE TYPES, BRANDS, LOCATION OF EACH & PROXIMITY TO OTHERS
Chemical: used for:
Chemical: used for:
Chemical: used for:
Chemical: used for:
89
4 / 6
SECTION 6 -- ENVIRONMENTAL 61 - AIR HANDLING EQUIPMENT OR OUTDOOR FACTORS: EQUIPMENT ROOM, BATHHOUSE, ETC Pace air handling unit (A20 F0 S1 & A30 B1 SWS1) Serial 87-55027-01 (10600 CFM 2.0 792RPM 6.1BHP & 11000 CFM
2.0 SP 1055 RPM 5.8 BHP). (6) hanging humidifiers and a Coravac system also present.
62 - TYPICAL BATHER LOAD: INCLUDE AGE, TYPE OF USE, SCHEDULED EVENTS, ETC.
heavy light daily #: Peak #: Ages:
swim lessons open swim rentals
63 - MAKEUP & SOURCE WATER:
potable cold
pH: TDS: Hardness:60 ppm ALK: C.H.:
Iron Manganese
64 - AIR TEMP. RANGE & WEATHER CONDITIONS:
Air temp.:
65 - FENCING/PERIMETER: INCLUDE SIZE, MESH, DOORS, GATES, ETC.
Fence height: mesh size: barbed wire
Gate location: emergency access
66 - ANY NOTED FEATURES:
Cover evergreens trees w/ leaves wind barrier
SECTION 7 – SUPPORT FACILITIES
71 -PATRON CONTROL/SUPPORT:
Admissions area Lifeguard station
Lifeguard restroom Managers office
First aid office Family change room
72 - RESTROOM/LOCKER ROOM: M: W: UNI:
Lockers - Qty men: women: Size: W/C: 2 3
Benches - matl: Suit dryer URIN.: 2 n/a
hand dryer: paper LAV: 2 2
air roll towel SHOWER: 6 6
Baby change station - locations:womens
73 - CONCESSIONS:
Seating for people physically separated - dimensions:
Drinking fountain vending machines-items available:swim diapers, water, snacks
74 - NATATORIUM: DEGRADATION, ETC.
Accoustical ceiling not preferred material for a natatorium. Natatorium humidity levels were high, strong chlorine odor.
75 - MISC.: STORAGE, ETC.
Storage - dimensions:
not adequate
90
5 / 6
SECTION 8 – DECK & AMENITIES
81 - DECKS: SPACE, PATRON FLOW, GRASS, ETC.
Surface:1"x1" tile Width:
Comments:Expansion joint issues.
82 - PLAY FEATURES: SLIDES, FOUNTAINS, DRY SAND PLAY, VOLLEYBALL, ETC.
Flume slide – Qty: open enclosed body speed intertube Lengths:
Drop slide - drop height:3' volleyball
Spray features - type: basketball
Water walk - type: kiddie slide - type:Delaware Duck
Play Structure - type:
Dry sand area Wet sand area
83 - COMPETITIVE EQUIPMENT:
Diving Board - Qty: 1 height (1):1m height (2): height (3): water depths acceptable
Starting blocks - water depth:8'-6" # of Lanes:8 Lane widths:7'
Race lines - type:Tile (blue) size:3"
Water Polo
Timing System: Daktronix Colorado
84 - SHADE: TYPE OF STRUCTURE, NUMBER, LOCATION, ETC.
Umbrella – type: size: permanent structure- dimensions:
canopy - dimensions:
85 - ON-DECK SAFETY FEATURES: LIFEGUARD CHAIRS, DEPTH MARKERS, NO DIVING, SAFETY EQUIPMENT, ETC.
Depth Markers: x Ends x Sides x Trans. Size:6"x6" letter size: 13/16" location needed:add. on sides
“NO DIVING”: Universal tile 4" letters location needed:
Safety Equipment: shep. crook: ( req.) ring buoy w/ rope: ( req.)
backboard:1 ( req.) rescue tube: 4( req.)
Lifeguard Chairs - # Required: # present:4 Fixed - deck ht.:(2) 4'-6" Portable-deck ht.:(2) 3'
First Aid Kit Telephone
86 - LIGHTING
Underwater lights - dry-niche Underwater lights - wet-niche
Area Lighting (ft candles: ) Security Lighting Only
SECTION 9– FACILITY
91 - LOCATION:
Groundwater issues Attached to school
Residential Area Leased property
92 - PARKING: BUS, CAR, SURFACE, ADEQUATE, DROP-OFF, ETC.
Drop-off area ADA parking; Qty: 2 Bus parking; Qty: Car Parking: Qty:
Adequate Not adequate Shared w/school
93 - ACCESSIBILITY:
Parking to bathhouse Bathhouse Bathhouse to pool Pool No ADA showers or stalls
94 - UTILITIES:
Electrical: 3 ph. 1 ph. Voltage:
Potable water - size: Sanitary sewer - size: Storm sewer - size:
Natural gas Propane
95 - ADDITIONAL NOTES:
Utilities shared with school - size should not be an issue.
91
6 / 6
POOL STATISTICS
DIMENSIONS:
SHALLOW WATER (< 5 FT) (in sq. Ft.) 133'x58'
DEEP WATER (> 5 FT) (in sq. Ft.) 31'x58'
SURFACE AREA:
SHALLOW WATER (< 5 FT) (in sq. Ft.) 7,714 sf
DEEP WATER (> 5 FT) (in sq. Ft.) 1,798 sf
TOTAL 9,512 sf
SURGE CAPACITY:
RECOMMENDED (in gal.) 9,512
SUPPLIED (in gal.) 5,610
PERIMETER: (in ft.) 444
POOL CAPACITY: (in gal.) 340,000
TURNOVER:
REQUIRED (hours) 6
ACTUAL (hours) 5.4
RATE OF FLOW:
FLOW RATE REQUIRED (in gpm) 945
ACTUAL RATE OF FLOW (in gpm) 1050
MAIN DRAIN FLOW RATE: (Ft./s.) Pipe size unknown.
FILTER SIZE: (Squ. Ft.) 600
FILTER FLOW RATE: (gpm/Squ.ft.) 1.6
SUCTION CHAMBER VELOCITY: (Ft./s.) n/a
BATHER LOAD:
SHALLOW WATER (per pool code) 321
DEEP WATER (per pool code) 75
TOTAL 396
92
93
AQUATIC CONSULTING & DESIGN 1 / 6
POOL SURVEY AND
OPERATIONS REPORT
SURVEYOR:Tom Schaffer & Nick Nowacki DATE: May 29, 2008
POOL NAME:Bozeman Swim Center (Spa)
ADDRESS:1211 West Main OPERATOR/CONTACT:Sue Harkin / Ron Dingman
PHONE: (406) 582-2290 FAX: ( ) -
11 - POOL DESIGN: SKETCH PLAN & SECTIONS WITH DIMENSIONS INDOOR OUTDOOR
See attached sketch. Spa is elevated 3'-8" with complete surround railing.
12 - OVERFLOW:
Gutter, # drop-outs: size: material: leaking
Surge weirs automatic flooded outlets scaled shut
Skimmer, #1 strainer installed equalizer weir present NSF
Coping Skimmer rigged with tubing to prevent suction entrapment.
Water level: at rimflow inches below rim flow center of skimmer
13 - DRAINS:
#: Size: outlet pipe size: in pool bottom in side wall
grated anti-vortex scaled shut (2)Suction ports (1 for hydro,1 for recirc)
14 - INLETS:
Integral with gutter spacing: size: inserts present
Individual fittings spacing: #: type: Filter distance below water: 6"
Bottom inlets spacing: #: type: distance below water:
Scaled shut air in system; source (6) hydro inlets
15 - POOL SHELL & FINISH:
Cast conc. Shot conc. Stainless steel Aluminum Mild Steel Liner & sand Fiberglass
Ceramic Tile Diamond Brite Paint, type: Plaster, type:
Hollow spots spalling Acrylic w/tile surround
Water Depths: shallow end: slope: transition water depth: Hopper bottom
Diving well depths; @ wall: @end of board: @ drain:
16 - IN POOL SAFETY EQUIPMENT:
Accent (width: ) Accent needed up side wall
Rope & floats Locations:
17 - ACCESS INTO POOL:
Stairs (ht 11"x tread6-1/4"): Accent Stripes (width:1”): Handrails (#:2)
Stairs (portable): Accent Stripes (width: ”): Handrails (#: )
Zero-Depth Entry with Gutter
Ladder: # recessed hanging
ADA accessible: type:
124 Bridge Ave P.O. Box 86 Delano, Mn 55328 (763) 972-5897 fax (763) 972-5864 www.usaquaticsinc.com E-mail: Info@usaquaticsinc.com 94
2 / 6
SECTION 2 – FILTRATION
21 - FILTER SYSTEM:
DE media: Cartridge
R.R. Pressure Sand H.R. Pressure Sand
Vacuum Sand last sand change:
System:System 3 Manufacturer: Modular Media Model: S7M120
Quantity: 1 Area: 300 (S.F. Ea.) Size: Condition: Newer
System: Manufacturer: Model:
Quantity: Area: (S.F. Ea.) Size: Condition:
22 - GAUGES:
Influent Reading: Effluent Reading: Vacuum Reading:
23 - BACKWASH PROCEDURES:
Frequency: At pressure differential of: At vacuum reading of:
To grade to sanitary to storm air gap air gap needed
Backwash pit size:
Outlet pipe size:
24 - FILTER AIDS (Alum, etc.)
Alum
SECTION 3 – RECIRCULATION
31 - PUMP & MOTOR:
System:Filter Type:Max-E-Pro Size: Voltage: 115/230
Amps: RPM: TDH: Impeller Dia.: HP:1/2
Manufacturer:Sta-Rite Model: Condition:
Single phase three phase NSF Press. Gauge Vac. Gauge
System:Hydro Type:Max-E-Pro Size: Voltage: 230
Amps: RPM: TDH: Impeller Dia.: HP:2
Manufacturer:Sta-Rite Model: Condition:
Single phase three phase NSF Press. Gauge Vac. Gauge
32 - PIPING: INCLUDE SIZES & TYPES
Cast iron Galvanized PVC
Corroded Sagging Needs replacement Sizes:1-1/2" Filter / 2" Hydro
33 - VALVES: INCLUDE SIZES & TYPES
Cast iron PVC Sizes: Type:
Gear operated (size: ) Lever operated (size: )
Corroded Needs replacement
34 - HEATER:
Type: EngergyRite2 Size: Quantity: 2
Manufacturer:Lochinvar Model: Condition: Thermometer Reading - 103F
Thermometer; #:1 Full Flow: Yes No Manf: Mdl:
Type: Size: Quantity:
Manufacturer: Model: Condition:
Thermometer; #: Full Flow: Yes No Manf: Mdl:
35 - SURGE CAPACITY: In Pool Surge Tank Type:
Dimensions: ft (wide) x ft (long) x ft (deep)
Depth to Normal Operating Level: Depth to overflow:
Dry well: ft (wide) x ft (long) x ft (deep) Capacity: (Gal)
36 - STRAINER: Size:10" PVC - Built into pump Cast Iron Metal Stainless Fiberglass
Manufacturer: Model: corroded, needs replacement
95
3 / 6
37 - TURNOVER:
Actual:70 GPM Required: 32GPM Flow meter needed Not working
Flow meter: type Impact Manufacturer: Model:
Possible Limiting Factors:
38 - WATER SUPPLY TO POOL:
Water Level Controller / Auto Fill RPZ / Watts 9 Backflow Prevention Needed
WLC Needed Air Gap Size:
SECTION 4 – SANITATION
41 - AUTOMATED CONTROLLERS:
Manufacturer: Aquasol Suction from:Filter inlet line
Model #:60094 Rejection to:Return line
Control of: disinfectant ph
42 - SANITIZERS:
Liquid Solid Gas
Type:Bromine Method of introduction: Tablet feeder.
Quantity:1 Injection location:Return line ETL
Supplier: Feeder Manf./ Model: NSF
43 - pH CONTROL:
Acid CO2 Soda Ash Caustic Soda
Type: None Method of introduction:
Quantity: Injection location: ETL
Supplier: Feeder Manf./ Model: NSF
44 - POOL WATER CONDITION: clear cloudy Smell of Cl
PPM: pH:8.56 TDS: ORP:554 ALK: C.H.:
SECTION 5 -- OPERATION
51 - TESTING PROCEDURES:
Frequency: Test type: Procedure:
52 - TRAINING CONDITIONS:
New hire procedures:
Training: CPO AFO
53 - DOCUMENTATION:
Disinfectant TDS Flow rate temperature
Free available employee records Humidity injuries
Total Ca hardness pH Ca hardness
pump operating periods ORP chem. amounts flowrate
malfunctions alkalinity cyanuric acid maintenance
54 - STANDARD OPERATIONAL PROCEDURES:
Backwash frequency: duration:
Vacuuming freq.: duration:
Pool brushing freq.: duration:
Strainer cleaning freq.: duration:
Deck cleaning freq.: duration:
55 - CHEMICALS ON SITE: INCLUDE TYPES, BRANDS, LOCATION OF EACH & PROXIMITY TO OTHERS
Chemical: used for:
Chemical: used for:
Chemical: used for:
Chemical: used for:
96
4 / 6
SECTION 6 -- ENVIRONMENTAL 61 - AIR HANDLING EQUIPMENT OR OUTDOOR FACTORS: EQUIPMENT ROOM, BATHHOUSE, ETC
62 - TYPICAL BATHER LOAD: INCLUDE AGE, TYPE OF USE, SCHEDULED EVENTS, ETC.
heavy light daily #: Peak #: Ages:
swim lessons open swim rentals
63 - MAKEUP & SOURCE WATER:
potable
pH: TDS: Hardness: ALK: C.H.:
Iron Manganese
64 - AIR TEMP. RANGE & WEATHER CONDITIONS:
Air temp.:
65 - FENCING/PERIMETER: INCLUDE SIZE, MESH, DOORS, GATES, ETC.
Fence height: mesh size: barbed wire
Gate location: emergency access
66 - ANY NOTED FEATURES:
Cover evergreens trees w/ leaves wind barrier
SECTION 7 – SUPPORT FACILITIES
71 -PATRON CONTROL/SUPPORT:
Admissions area Lifeguard station
Lifeguard restroom Managers office
First aid office Family change room
72 - RESTROOM/LOCKER ROOM: M: W: UNI:
Lockers - Qty men: women: Size: W/C:
Benches - matl: Suit dryer URIN.:
hand dryer: paper LAV:
air roll towel SHOWER:
Baby change station - locations:
73 - CONCESSIONS:
Seating for people physically separated - dimensions:
Drinking fountain vending machines-items available:
74 - NATATORIUM: DEGRADATION, ETC.
75 - MISC.: STORAGE, ETC.
Storage - dimensions:
97
5 / 6
SECTION 8 – DECK & AMENITIES
81 - DECKS: SPACE, PATRON FLOW, GRASS, ETC.
Surface:Tile Width:
Comments:
82 - PLAY FEATURES: SLIDES, FOUNTAINS, DRY SAND PLAY, VOLLEYBALL, ETC.
Flume slide – Qty: open enclosed body speed intertube Lengths:
Drop slide - drop height: volleyball
Spray features - type: basketball
Water walk - type: kiddie slide - type:
Play Structure - type:
Dry sand area Wet sand area
83 - COMPETITIVE EQUIPMENT:
Diving Board - Qty: height (1): height (2): height (3): water depths acceptable
Starting blocks - water depth: # of Lanes: Lane widths:
Race lines - type: size:
Water Polo
Timing System: Daktronix Colorado
84 - SHADE: TYPE OF STRUCTURE, NUMBER, LOCATION, ETC.
Umbrella – type: size: permanent structure- dimensions:
canopy - dimensions:
85 - ON-DECK SAFETY FEATURES: LIFEGUARD CHAIRS, DEPTH MARKERS, NO DIVING, SAFETY EQUIPMENT, ETC.
Depth Markers: Ends Sides Trans. Size: letter size: location needed:
“NO DIVING”: Universal tile 4" letters location needed:
Safety Equipment: shep. crook: ( req.) ring buoy w/ rope: ( req.)
backboard: ( req.) rescue tube: ( req.)
Lifeguard Chairs - # Required: # present: Fixed - deck ht.: Portable-deck ht.:
First Aid Kit Telephone
86 - LIGHTING
Underwater lights - dry-niche Underwater lights - wet-niche
Area Lighting (ft candles: ) Security Lighting Only
SECTION 9– FACILITY
91 - LOCATION:
Groundwater issues
Residential Area
92 - PARKING: BUS, CAR, SURFACE, ADEQUATE, DROP-OFF, ETC.
Drop-off area ADA parking; Qty: Bus parking; Qty: Car Parking: Qty:
Adequate Not adequate
93 - ACCESSIBILITY:
Parking to bathhouse Bathhouse Bathhouse to pool Pool
94 - UTILITIES:
Electrical: 3 ph. 1 ph. Voltage:
Potable water - size: Sanitary sewer - size: Storm sewer - size:
Natural gas Propane
95 - ADDITIONAL NOTES:
98
6 / 6
POOL STATISTICS
DIMENSIONS:
SHALLOW WATER (< 5 FT) (in sq. Ft.) n/a
DEEP WATER (> 5 FT) (in sq. Ft.) n/a
SURFACE AREA:
SHALLOW WATER (< 5 FT) (in sq. Ft.) n/a
DEEP WATER (> 5 FT) (in sq. Ft.) n/a
TOTAL 60 sf
SURGE CAPACITY:
REQUIRED (in gal.) n/a
SUPPLIED (in gal.) n/a
PERIMETER: (in ft.) n/a
POOL CAPACITY: (in gal.) 950 (approx.)
TURNOVER:
REQUIRED (hours) 0.5
ACTUAL (hours) 0.2
RATE OF FLOW:
FLOW RATE REQUIRED (in gpm) 32
ACTUAL RATE OF FLOW (in gpm) 70
MAIN DRAIN FLOW RATE: (Ft./s.)
FILTER SIZE: (Squ. Ft.) 300
FILTER FLOW RATE: (gpm/Squ.ft.) 0.23 (0.33 max)
SUCTION CHAMBER VELOCITY: (Ft./s.) n/a
BATHER LOAD:
SHALLOW WATER (per pool code) n/a
DEEP WATER (per pool code) n/a
TOTAL 6
99
100