District 69 Track and Field Facility Feasibility Study Prepared for School District #69 and Regional District of Nanaimo Yates, Thorn & Associates Inc

District 69 Track and Field Facility Feasibility Study Prepared for School District #69 and Regional District of Nanaimo Yates, Thorn & Associates Inc. May 2009

ABSTRACT

This report has been prepared with funding from the School Community Connections program, managed for the BC Provincial Government by the Union of BC Municipalities. The report looks at the issues and options for developing a new track and field facility to serve the residents of District 69.

2 Yates, Thorn & Associates Inc.

Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...... 4

BACKGROUND ...... 6

CURRENT SITUATION ...... 9

LEARNING FROM OTHER TRACK AND FIELD FACILITIES IN BC...... 15

THE OPTIONS ...... 19

RECOMMENDATIONS...... 32

APPENDIX A ‐ BACKGROUND DOCUMENT REVIEW AND AREA DEMOGRAPHICS...... 34

APPENDIX B – CONSULTATIONS ...... 46

APPENDIX C – SURVEY OF OTHER TRACK AND FIELD FACILITIES...... 50

District 69 Track and Field Facility Study – June 2009 3

List of Figures

Figure 1 - Ballenas Secondary School Track ...... 9

Figure 2 - Oceanside Track and Field Club - Membership Growth - 2003/7...... 10

Figure 3 - BC High School Athletics Participation - 2003/7 ...... 11

Figure 4 - BC Athletics Membership - 1996/2007 ...... 11

Figure 5 - BCAA Membership by Age, 2007 ...... 12

Figure 6 - Prince George's Track and Field Facility ...... 15

Figure 7 - Option 3A ...... 22

Figure 8 - Option 3B ...... 23

4 Yates, Thorn & Associates Inc.

Executive Summary

A community track is a basic sport facility: many athletes – soccer, football, baseball, etc - use it to train; community groups use it for 24 hour relays for charity fundraising; the elementary school track teams go there to get inspiration; and the community uses it for casual walking.

The Regional District of Nanaimo and School District 69 started discussions about potential School Community Connections projects in November 2007, and agreed to investigate the potential for a new or upgraded track and field facility to serve the District. Approval for phase two of the project was received in March 2008, and Yates, Thorn & Associates Inc. was retained to manage the project and to fully investigate all aspects associated with developing a new track and field facility.

Historically, there were two track and field facilities in District 69, located at the two secondary schools, Ballenas and Kwalikum. The district’s primary current track and field venue is at Ballenas Secondary School. It probably dates from or shortly after the construction of the school in 1977. It has a red cinder base and is approximately 400m in length. The track is in poor condition.

There are currently three main user groups of the Ballenas Secondary School track and field facility: the Oceanside Track and Field Club, the school itself, and casual use by occasional and largely individual runners and joggers.

In 2006, the Regional District of Nanaimo received the recommendations of a Recreation Services Master Plan. The principal outdoor facility recommendation was to consider the development of a sports complex, a track and field facility, and regional trails. The consultants did note with regard to the track and field facility that it could by located at the proposed sport complex, or it could be located at a secondary school site, such as Ballenas.

As part of the planning for the new facilities, the learning from other track and field facilities was gathered. This learning is summarized as follows:

• Successful tracks are municipally owned - School District tracks are not well maintained. • Most are built for an event, therefore to event standards. • Operating costs are low, but capital replacement cost is high – the track surface has 8/12 year life. • Tracks are used for many functions beyond athletics - community walkers, charity events - location boosts uses e.g. city centre • Rental income is from major events and rental of the field (where charges levied), not from track and field. • Eight lanes are standard. • A field in the middle limits use for field events - especially if it is artificial turf. • Events at almost any level, and certainly provincial and up, require many more amenities than generally provided.

In addition to the key criteria of cost to construct and maintain, and ease of implementation a set of guiding principles were developed:

• Do it right! – Ensure that the facility is well planned and executed. • Build it such that it has event potential

District 69 Track and Field Facility Study – June 2009 5

• Design it so that community access is maximized • Make sure that there is a clear financial plan for the long-term replacement of the track surface • Focus that the needs of the track and field community are paramount • Ensure that the facility meets the needs of District 69 schools.

Four options, some with variants within them, were identified:

• Option 1 – Upgrading the current Ballenas Secondary School Track and Field Facility • Option 2 – Rebuilding a Secondary School Track as a Training Track • Option 3 – Replacing the Existing Track at Ballenas Secondary School with a full eight lane competition track • Option 4 – Building a new track at a new outdoor sports complex

All these options offered different levels of facility for different costs. Option 1 could be completed for approximately $709,000; option 2 for $1.5m, option 3 for closer to $2.5m; option 4 would also cost approximately $2.5m, but would require considerable additional financing to acquire and provide infrastructure to the new site.

While not part of the initial terms of reference for the project, additional work was authorized to determine whether there was a site possible for option 4, a new outdoor sports complex. Two site identification focus groups were held at which a ‘long list’ of sites was brainstormed and evaluation criteria determined. Following this analysis it was agreed that a site for a new outdoor sports complex could be found in one of four areas of the District: close to the south end of Parksville; close to the two highway 19 intersections; and in the Church Road area, currently zoned for industrial uses.

Funding for a new track and field facility can come from a variety of sources:

• The School Community Connections program can provide up to $125,000 as long as this contribution is no more than 25% of total project costs. • The School District could contribute to the overall project if it is on their land. • The local governments in the region (Regional District, Cities of Parksville and Town of Qualicum Beach) could contribute although this would likely require a referendum or similar to approve a capital expenditure of this magnitude. • There are several provincial/federal programs for capital project funding.

The study recommendations are as follows:

1. That two strategies be developed, one for a short term approach and one for a long term approach. 2. That the short term approach be option 1, namely using the funding within the SCC program to upgrade the current Ballenas Secondary School track, with the other local government and community partners contributing $375,000 to the SCC $125,000, and that the project be scaled as far back as necessary to meet this financial target. 3. That the long term approach be to continue with the planning and acquisition of land for a new outdoor sports complex, with a track and field facility being one of the first facilities to be developed in that sports complex.

It should be noted that no funding is currently committed to this project by either the Regional District or the School District.

6 Yates, Thorn & Associates Inc.

Background

Every four years, local participation in sport increases in the wake of the Olympics. This year, as the Canadian team returns from Beijing, and the athletes spread out across Canada to talk about their experiences (a requirement of federal carding), local residents will start phoning the Oceanside Track and Field Club, looking for athletics programs for themselves or their children.

At the other end of the spectrum, others in the community, especially women, will round up a few friends and look for a safe, well lit, easy on the feet place for casual walking.

The track teams at the high schools also need a place to train and compete and, while there were originally tracks at both schools, both are in poor condition or, in the case of Kwalikum Secondary School, virtually non-existent. Even the track at Ballenas Secondary School is cinder and grass and very much at the end of its functional life. For competitive athletics, which is still a key high school and elementary school sport, there is really no substitute for a quality track...which reflects back to the Olympics, for, without the facilities for the early stages of training and competition, our emerging athletes will never even make the team, let alone thrill us all by ‘medaling’.

School Community Connections Program

The School Community Connections program was established by the Provincial government in 2005. The Premier publicly announced the funding on April 2, 2005, stating:

We need to make better use of our school spaces so they benefit B.C. communities. The School Community Connections program will help school boards and local governments revitalize schools as centres for community learning and activity.

The School Community Connections Program was developed to encourage partnerships between schools and local governments to greater utilize school facilities for broader community purposes. It is designed to promote sustainable and innovative collaboration between school boards and local governments and take into account the needs of the community as a whole.

The School Community Connections Program is jointly managed by the BC School Trustees Association and the Union of BC Municipalities (UBCM), on behalf of the Ministry of Education.

Its program objectives are:

• To encourage and facilitate the co-location of services for students, their families and the larger community within school facilities; • To make greater utilization of available or new school facilities; and • To encourage collaborative, long-term facilities planning that takes into account the needs of the community as a whole.

District 69 Track and Field Facility Study – June 2009 7

The program is divided into three components.

1. Making the Connection – which provides up to $5,000 per potential "Connections" Partnership to assist school boards and local governments to make initial contact, to identify and assess the viability of embarking on a joint initiative involving the use of school facilities for broader community use.

2. Developing the Connection – which provides up to $40,000 per "Connections" Partnership to support the planning of a proposed use of a new or existing school asset for broader community use. The program covers planning costs associated with program assessment, delivery models, and other planning activities associated with the project1.

3. Completing the Connection – which provides up to $125,000 per "Connections" Partnership to support the implementation of the agreed project by providing highly leveraged funding for start- up costs, including minor capital costs. Funding is intended to provide up to 25% of implementation costs with the balance provided by local government, school boards or other stakeholders. The timeline for completion of the District 69 phase 3 project has been set by the program administrators at UBCM at December 2010.

Process

This investigation included the following:

• Initial conversations with the Project Manager and steering committee. • A set of key stakeholders were identified and interviewed by telephone. • Background materials, including 2006 census data and longer term population projections, were reviewed and base data on participants and other uses for the track and field facility were gathered. • A community meeting was held in mid-June, a press release provided to the local media and a brief survey distributed to householders in the immediate vicinity of Ballenas Secondary School. • Local demand was projected. • Options were identified, including Ballenas and Kwalikum Secondary Schools and those involving a new outdoor sports complex, and assessed against agreed criteria. • Site sketch plans for the two options at Ballenas Secondary School and a generic order- of-magnitude cost estimate prepared. • Potential revenue sources, in addition to School Community Connections funding, were identified. • A draft report was prepared at the end of August, and two public open houses held in October. Comments from these open houses were documented. • In February 2009, a verbal report was provided to the District 69 Recreation Commission, who approved expanding the study to examine the site options for a major outdoor sports complex (recommended in the 2006 Recreation Services Study) which would include a track and field facility.

1 Funding for this report was provided through this component of the program.

8 Yates, Thorn & Associates Inc.

• This report was finalized in May 2009 and forwarded to both the Regional District of Nanaimo and School District 69 Boards for discussion and consideration of its recommendations.

Consultation

Consultation with the public was achieved in a number of ways:

• Close working was maintained with a steering committee of school district and regional district officials. • A public meeting was held at Ballenas Secondary School in mid-June. The purpose of this meeting was to update the community on the progress that had been made and to get feedback from those who attended. • At this same time, a flyer/survey form was developed and distributed through the school and by delivery to local householders. Its main purpose was to advertize the public meeting, but it also gave an opportunity for people to record their views regarding the potential of upgrading the existing track and field facility. • Meetings were held with a variety of key stakeholders such as the principals of the two secondary schools and representatives of the two municipalities. • Two open houses were held in October 2008 at which the results of this planning process were shared with attendees (see notes in Appendix). • Following these steps, it was agreed to carry out a more extensive assessment of site potential for a major outdoor sports complex. This included two focus groups which were held in April 2009. Notes from those focus groups has been incorporated into this report.

The survey results and the notes from the open houses are detailed in Appendix B.

The points raised in the survey responses cover the range of topics discussed at the first public meeting. They were as follows:

• The track and field facility needs adequate facilities such as stands, change rooms, washrooms, etc. • There will not be enough space for these. • That if it is built at Ballenas Secondary School, that it should be done ‘right’. • That it will interfere with the school’s football program. • That fixing up the field is a higher priority. • That Kwalikum Secondary School needs its fields fixed up as well. • A new track would encourage more kids to be physically active. • A track is a basic community facility if we want to produce Olympic athletes. • A track and field facility would provide opportunities for meets and events which have an economic value, from youth development meets to the Seniors Games. • Concerns re maintenance in the short and long term. • Concerns re access by motorbikes, dogs, etc and other vandalism. • Losing control of the track to other sports groups especially if the infield is grass or artificial turf. • Opportunity to serve all schools in the district. • As a facility it would be used by a wide range of groups and programs. • The school is not the best location – better to start afresh somewhere else. • Older people would use the track for exercise. • Concerns re parking and traffic if large events held. • Need for a better transit system to get people to the facility and to link it to other schools and recreation centres, and in particular to connect it to the Electoral Areas. • Cost of upkeep of new facility.

District 69 Track and Field Facility Study – June 2009 9

Current Situation

Current Track and Field Facilities

Historically, there were two track and field facilities in District 69, located at the two secondary schools, Ballenas and Kwalikum.

Kwalikum Secondary School

The track at Kwalikum Secondary School has definitely passed the end of its lifespan, is no longer used, and is gradually returning to a natural grass condition. It is on a sloped site, bounded by the E&N right of way to the north, and the school to the south. It is hard to tell whether it was ever a full 6 or 8 lane track, but the current site is not wide enough for a full 8 lane track. If it were to be considered as the location for a full 8-lane track and field facility, it would require considerable slope stabilization on both its sides, which would be prohibitively expensive.

Ballenas Secondary School

The district’s primary current track and field venue is at Ballenas Secondary School. It probably dates from or shortly after the construction of the school in 1977. It has a red cinder base and is approximately 400m in length. We say ‘approximately’ since the track has no curbs and therefore just merges with the grass in-field on its inside and the outfield on its outside. Lane markings are added as required. The track is not well drained and regularly develops holes and dips which require continual filling, which in turn just adds to the unevenness of the surface.

There are a number of field sport amenities: shot put circle, long jump and high jump pits, cages for other throwing disciplines. The throwing cage and the long jump pit have recently been relocated as part of a larger project to increase the size and usability of the school’s north play field.

Figure 1 - Ballenas Secondary School Track

10 Yates, Thorn & Associates Inc.

There is also a metal storage container adjacent to the track which provides storage for the wide range of track and field equipment that belongs to the Oceanside Track and Field Club.

This track and field facility is clearly at, or past, the end of its useful life.

Current Users

There are currently three main user groups of the Ballenas track and field facility: the Oceanside Track and Field Club, the school itself, and casual use by occasional and largely individual runners and joggers.

The Oceanside Track and Field Club has a long history and over the past few years has seen a resurgence in membership.

The club serves all of the District 69 area. It is one of about 20 Track and Field Clubs on Vancouver Island, and is almost the only one with no facility sufficient to host a Junior Development Meet. Athletes needing a higher level of facility must travel to Nanaimo or Port Alberni to develop their training.

Both secondary schools have an athletics program and send teams to Island and BC meets and championships. The number of students participating in athletics in the province has increased slightly over the past few years. It is considered a fundamental sport to all athlete development.

Oceanside Track and Field Club 90

Male Female Total 80 2007 46 36 82 2006 41 30 71 70 2005 27 34 61 2004 14 22 36 60 2003 16 21 37

50 Female Male 40

0 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007

Figure 2 - Oceanside Track and Field Club - Membership Growth - 2003/7

District 69 Track and Field Facility Study – June 2009 11

High Schools and their Athletes 80,000 250 Schools Athletes 2007 215 63,565 2006 217 58,429 70,000 2005 176 43,243 200 2004 206 58,376 60,000 2003 191 67,618 50,000 150 Schools 40,000 Athletes Linear (Schools) 100 30,000

20,000 50 10,000

0 0 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007

Figure 3 - BC High School Athletics Participation - 2003/7

High school sports provides students with a taste of athletics and allows many students to participate competitively in a sport which may not be their primary interest, or an area where they have a high skill level. Around 60,000 students each year get this experience

Competitive athletics is confined to a much smaller number of athletes. In BC the membership of BC Athletics, the sport governing body for track and field, is a little over 4,000. The members of Oceanside Track and Field Club are part of this number. They are roughly divided between the genders.

BC Athletics Membership 5,000 Male Female Total 2007 2,190 2,130 4,320 4,500 2006 2,049 2,200 4,249 2005 2,146 1,933 4,079 4,000 2004 2,140 1,991 4,131 2003 1,948 1,910 3,858 3,500 2002 2,129 2,010 4,139 3,000 2001 1,924 1,664 3,588 Female 2000 1,841 1,580 3,421 2,500 1999 1,776 1,517 3,293 Male 1998 1,803 1,531 3,334 2,000 1997 1,898 1,586 3,484 1996 1,904 1,524 3,428 1,500 1995 1,905 1,503 3,408 1,000

500

0 2007200620052004200320022001200019991998199719961995

Figure 4 - BC Athletics Membership - 1996/2007

Oceanside Track and Field Club membership ranges from 9 to 18 years of age. The BC Athletics membership largely covers the same age range, peaking around 11 to 13 years of age. It should be noted that BC Athletics membership also includes a large number of those aged over 20 years, especially over 35 years. These masters athletes are found in other clubs in District 69, namely the Running Club and Parksville Golden Oldies Sports Association (PGOSA).

12 Yates, Thorn & Associates Inc.

BCAA Membership - by Age BCAA Members 350 6 38 7 51 300 8 55 9 168 10 234 250 11 292 12 304 13 290 200 14 234 15 184 150 16 152 17 152 18 93 100 19 93

20/34 405 50 35+ 1549

0 Total 4293 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19

Figure 5 - BCAA Membership by Age, 2007

It is these over 20 and over 35 athletes who make up the third, and very small, part of the user base of the present track and field facility. In District 69 they are members of the Oceanside Running Association (the Orcas). This club has 170 members, but they are more likely to run on the roads and trails as opposed to the Ballenas track, although the club members would undoubtedly use the track for individual training purposes. The members and coaches of BC Special Olympics are also intermittent users of the track, although it is, if possible, even more unsuitable to their needs than it is for able bodied athletes.

School Plans

Ballenas Secondary School has currently almost 1000 students and its PE facilities are inadequate for this number. In particular, it has only one quality field, that being the one inside the track. During the late 1990s, there was little potential to increase the field space since eight portable classrooms were located on the north field. However they were removed in the fall of 2002, and the school established the Ballenas Playing Field Project. The first aspect of this project was to upgrade the track infield and this was accomplished by fall 2003 at a cost of $150,000; funders were School District #69, Regional District of Nanaimo, City of Parksville and local community sports groups including Oceanside Track and Field Club.

Since that time only minor improvements have been made, although the school, in conjunction with other groups including the Track and Field Club, have submitted plans for the upgrading of the north field. This will give the school two playing fields and will significantly increase playing time, and reduce wear on the track infield pitch. In the opinion of the school, the changes required are as follows:

• Current field area expanded by 35m in the E/W direction and 20m in the N/S direction. This will give a field of approximately 100 by 105 metres. This expansion will require adding an edge to the track, and some extension of the sprinkler lines. • Removal of the Ballenas equipment storage shed and relocation of the Oceanside Track and Field Club storage container. A new storage shed will need to be built in the SE corner of the field. • Relocation of the long jump pits and shot/discus circles. This has already been completed.

District 69 Track and Field Facility Study – June 2009 13

The improvement of the north field is a high priority for the school.

Kwalikum Secondary School is around 800 students and also struggles to accommodate its students on its school fields. It does not have a strong athletics program, and students interested in athletics tend to join the Oceanside Track and Field Club.

The Current Planning Environment

Recreation Services Master Plan

In 2006, the Regional District of Nanaimo received the recommendations of a Recreation Services Master Plan. The principal outdoor facility recommendation was:

22. Consider the following facilities – a sports complex, a track and field facility, and Regional Parks trails – as Region-wide facilities, to be provided as conveniently as possible to all Oceanside residents.

While no priority was noted by the authors between these facilities, and no priorities have been adopted by the Regional District of Nanaimo Board to date, the consultants did note with regard to the track and field facility that

This is a facility that could by located at the proposed sport complex, or it could be located at a secondary school site, such as Ballenas.

The consultants noted the lengthy time frame that is usually needed to develop a major outdoor sports complex, and identified the steps necessary. To date, the only discussions that have occurred have been when the Master Plan was received by the Regional Board.

There have been discussions in the community, among some of the sport groups, regarding the need for the sports complex. These groups believe that there is not sufficient land for it at any of the schools or the existing parks; that it should be multi-sport in nature and should include the track and field facility; and that there are areas of land that are well located for such a sports complex. The potential for such an outdoor sports complex was further explored as part of this study and is commented on later in this report.

Local Government Official Community Plans

The Official Community Plans for all the local government units in District 69 are consistent both with each other and with the Regional Growth Strategy. They focus on small parks, trails and environmental protection. Some, such as Qualicum Beach Official Community Plan suggest that another community park may be needed in the future, but they all stress that trails for walking and biking are the highest priority. Working collaboratively with the School District is noted as a high priority, both in terms of school buildings for community schools, and fields for community sports.

All the Official Community Plans include the protection of the environment and of agricultural land as priorities.

Demographics

The 2006 census indicates that the region as a whole is growing faster than projected, especially in the four electoral areas. The population is also aging rapidly; the 2006 population is skewed even more toward the 45+ age groups than previously, with these age groups making up 56.8% of the total population in 2001, whereas by 2006 they made up 62.8%.The number of households with children declined from 19.3% of all households in 2001, to 17.3% in 2006. These demographic shifts have several implications for this project:

14 Yates, Thorn & Associates Inc.

• The need to ensure community accessibility as school enrolments decline. • The need to design the facility in such a way that it is physically accessible. • The need to involve the sports groups who serve older athletes (e.g. PGOSA) in all aspects of design and development.

District 69 Track and Field Facility Study – June 2009 15

Learning from Other Track and Field Facilities in BC

As part of the research for this study, 12 communities with track and field facilities were contacted and requested to provide answers to a set of questions. Ten communities responded, either by phone, or by email. These responses were helpful in defining ‘guiding principles’ for the design and development of the Oceanside Track and Field Facility.

Figure 6 - Prince George's Track and Field Facility

The ten communities for which data was obtained were as follows:

• Oak Bay - Oak Bay High School • Saanich - Claremont High School • Kelowna - Apple Bowl • Kamloops - Thompson Rivers University • Port Alberni – Alberni Valley Multiplex • North Cowichan - Cowichan Sportsplex • Nanaimo - Rotary Bowl • Coquitlam – City Centre Stadium • Abbotsford - Exhibition Park • UVic - Centennial Stadium

The learning from these other tracks was as follows:

Successful tracks are municipally Of the ten track and field facilities, five were municipally owned - School District tracks are owned, three were school district tracks, one was at UVic and not well maintained. the North Cowichan track was owned and operated by a not- for-profit society. Satisfaction levels were highest for the municipal tracks and the new North Cowichan track, and lowest for tracks owned by educational agencies. These also tended to be the oldest and the ones in poorest condition.

16 Yates, Thorn & Associates Inc.

Most built for an event, therefore There is a tension between building a track and field facility to event standards - only one built for an event and the additional costs, both capital and as a ‘training track’ and that Track operating, that are involved…versus building a simpler and Field Club not happy. ‘training’ track with lower levels of amenities and lower costs. The reality from the survey, where there was only one ‘training’ track, seemed to be that this latter approach was not very satisfactory…everyone was unhappy, both those training and those who could not hold events there.

Only the North Cowichan track was built recently, with the others being installations of previous decades, with most recently upgraded.

Operating costs are low, but Track and field facilities have low operating costs which are capital replacement cost is high – offset by low revenues, but the track surface has a lifespan of the track surface has 8/12 year 8 to 12 years, and that requires a major capital upgrading on life. a regular basis. In some cases, the surface has gone longer than that (UVic’s is now 16 years), but many require replacement long before that: the North Cowichan track was replaced this year, after only 8 years. The catalyst for replacement is often, as in North Cowichan’s case, the hosting of a major event.

It is noteworthy that all the municipal facilities have been regularly upgraded and updated, while the two school board and the university track and field facilities have not been.

Tracks are used for many All tracks noted use by the general public, and in this regard, functions beyond athletics - those located where access was easiest received the most community walkers, charity use of this kind. events - location boosts uses e.g. city centre

Rental income is from major Accessibility was important for events which, where they events and rental of the field were allowed or encouraged, made the greatest contribution (where charges levied), not from to operating revenues. Youth programs were often given free track and field. use of the facility, as were Track and Field Clubs.

Access for events was greatest when ownership was with the not-for-profit sector, which was the case with the North Cowichan track, although the city centre location of the Coquitlam track also made it an attractive event venue.

Eight lanes are standard. All tracks that were built for events had eight lanes; only the Oak Bay ‘training’ track did not.

A field in the middle limits use for The track is a single purpose facility, but the ‘training’ that field events - especially if artificial athletes and the general public could do on it makes it a very turf. well used facility. On the other hand, the infield is multipurpose for both athletic field events and for field sports. The

District 69 Track and Field Facility Study – June 2009 17

preferred surface for many field sports is artificial turf, and that surface does maximize use. However it also limits the use of the infield for athletic field events and either requires the field sport facilities (pits and throw cages) to be located off the track infield (a requirement if artificial turf), or can have a deleterious effect on high quality grass infields.

For several track managers, these conflicts were such that they opposed the use of artificial turf in the infield.

Events at almost any level, and Event hosting moves a track into a different league in terms certainly provincial and up, of required amenities: not just washrooms and change require many more amenities, rooms, but stadiums and bleachers, pole vault and steeple seating, etc. chase pits and electronic timing (equipment or hook ups). The costs multiply, both capital and operating/maintenance.

Having said that, there is a range of lower profile events that require more minimal facilities: junior development meets, and likely the Seniors Games.

The comments from the Oak Bay High School correspondent makes a good postscript to this survey in answer to the question, what don’t you like and would do differently if you started again:

Full 8 lane track facility with all jump areas and throws areas located inside the track. Spectator areas, washrooms, etc. Proper storage for equipment. We are limited to the number of athletes we can take into our club as the facility is so small. If you are going to build a track facility, do it right and have 8 lanes and all event areas or you will compromise the programs and events which you can hold. For Summer Games you must have an 8 lane track with full facilities or you cannot even bid on the Games. Have a track club involved with or attached to the facility as they will look after the facility and the equipment. If it is a community track, then no one cares about maintaining it as it is always someone else’s problem [e.g. Swangard Stadium in Burnaby].

Design Parameters and Guiding Principles

While recognizing that cost to construct and maintain, and ease of implementation are key decision-making principles, this review indicates that there is a set of additional guiding principles that should guide decision making concerning a new track and field facility for District 69. These are presented as follows, not in priority order:

Do it right! This is going to be the only opportunity that the region has to build a track and field facility within the foreseeable future, and plans should be developed so that a full facility can be provided. Many people indicated that too often public agencies cut corners in the planning and design process such that the resultant facility met no one’s satisfaction.

In this situation, this implies two criteria:

• Adequate facilities from the start to operate a full sports program that includes track and field as well as certain field

18 Yates, Thorn & Associates Inc.

sports. The minimum requirements are an 8 lane track, full field facilities (pits, cages, etc) and a quality grass infield. • Adequate space for the facility to grow over time and to add those facilities that can be phased. This would include a stadium or permanent seating, with change rooms, washrooms, officials rooms, etc as part of the structure.

Ensuring event potential This ties in with a need for adequate facilities and in particular means developing 8 lanes rather than something less. If there are 8 lanes, then Island Junior Development Meets can be held. Provincial level events will require more facilities than that, and that can come later if desired.

Community access The location chosen for the track and field facility should be easily accessible to all citizens of District 69. This means:

• Close to the trail system for ease of use by casual users. • Good parking for those arriving by car from elsewhere in the district. • Centrality in geographic and time terms.

Clear financial plan for the An adequate fiscal framework must be developed such that the long-term replacement of track surface can be replaced at regular 10/12 year intervals. the track surface This also implies an organizational structure such that fund-raising can be achieved.

Primacy of track and field In developing this facility, it would be easy to see it ‘taken over’ by other sports. However it should be regarded as a track and field facility first and a venue for other sports second, and this should be built into its operating agreements.

However it was made clear in the public meetings that local clubs work well together and will find ways to resolve any use issues.

The desire and expectation of the Oceanside Track and Field Club in the short term is to have a better facility than they currently have, not necessarily a top of the line facility, which they recognize may only be achievable in the long term.

Meeting the needs of If a school location is selected, the development of the track and District 69 schools field facility should not negatively impact their other programs, both PE, extra-curricular and related to any other learning needs.

District 69 Track and Field Facility Study – June 2009 19

The Options

While the Recreation Services Master Plan identified two options for a new track and field facility, one being to replace the existing track at Ballenas Secondary School and the other being to integrate a new track into a new outdoor sports complex, other sites in District 69 were reviewed to determine whether they were suitable for the project.

Some of these other sites included:

• Kwalikum Secondary School – while this did at one time have a track, its steeply sloped site and limited field width make it expensive if not impossible to build a new full size track on the site of the old track. However the site may be suitable for a smaller training track. • Other schools – such as Springwood Middle and Arrowview Elementary; but none were determined to have adequate space for the development of a track and field facility. • Other parks – such as Springwood Park and Qualicum Beach Community Park, but again none had adequate undeveloped land. • Undeveloped land – there are a number of parcels of land with potential for land use change, where one possible land use option for part or all of the site is public recreation. However most of these sites are in the Agricultural Land Reserve and their removal would require local government policy change. None appeared to meet the criterion of ‘ease of implementation’.

The planning research indicates that there are several options that can be pursued each of which will move the project in a positive direction. Also, as is most often the case, different levels of resource input mean different levels of facility quality and customer satisfaction – the more you spend, the more you get.

Essentially there are four levels of investment which would result in four different levels of facility:

Option 1 - A minimum investment level of $709,000 would allow the current track at Ballenas Secondary School to have curbs (inside and outside) installed, for the track to be resurfaced with track based asphalt, with a limited level of lighting installed. This would not meet any track meet standards, but would allow community use both by the OTFC, other recreational runners, and the general community for walking and exercise. It would be adequate for intra-school use but not for inter-school use. This level of investment is also close to the parameters of the SCC program which funds projects up to $500,0002.

Option 2 - An investment of around $1.5m would allow a quality training track to be developed. This would have curbs, a quality track surface and all other aspects of a full track, except it would be only four or five lanes, or six lanes on the straight-away and three on the back and curves. It would be a good training track, but could not host track meets. It would do all that the level 1 track would, plus providing a better surface for athlete training. This track would certainly fit on the Ballenas Secondary School site, and with some required additional work and cost, fit on the Kwalikum Secondary School Site.

Option 3 - An investment of $2.0m to $2.5m would allow a full eight lane track to be installed. This would fit on the Ballenas Secondary School site with two orientations. If option 3A is used, the work on option 1 would form the base for this track, thus reducing this eventual cost.

2 The School Community Connection program funds up to $125,000, but requires this to be met 3 to 1 from other sources.

20 Yates, Thorn & Associates Inc.

Option 4 - For the same investment in the track and field facility, a start could be made on a major outdoor sports complex with the track facility being the first investment into that park. However there would be many other costs (land acquisition, development of infrastructure) in the short term, as well as the major investment in building the other elements of such an outdoor sports complex.

In the next section of the report, these options will be evaluated, and considered in relation to the six guiding principles laid out previously, as well as the two other key criteria of ease of development and cost.

Option 1 – Upgrading the Current Ballenas Secondary School Track and Field Facility

The current Ballenas Secondary School track is in very poor shape and would be significantly improved if curbs were installed to clearly define the track, the sub-surface was rebuilt to improve drainage, and to provide a smooth surface on which to lay an asphalt track. Low level lighting for community evening use could also be added.

This option would cost in the region of $709,000, and the maximum funding available through the School Community Connections Program of $125,000 would provide around 17% of these costs. The balance of the project funding would need to be found through local fund-raising, or from local government funds, although none are currently budgeted for this purpose. If such funds are not forthcoming, it may be necessary to scale back this option to an even more utilitarian level.

How would this approach meet the set of guiding principles?

Guiding Principle #1 - Do it right!

When this guiding principle was enunciated at the early planning meetings, this was not the option that people had in mind. In fact it is the very reason that people articulated this principle. However that was before participants realized what a new track and field facility would cost. Even so, this approach should not been seen as the long term solution; more one that is expedient in the short term while other options are pursued as the long term solution. However if the selected long-term option is 3A, then this option would form the base for that option.

Guiding Principle #2- Ensuring event potential

Events could not be hosted on this configuration.

Guiding Principle #3 - Community access

Community access would be positive, especially if low level lighting were included in the plans. This kind of surface is acceptable for public use.

Guiding Principle #4 - Clear financial plan for the long-term replacement of the track surface

The long term replacement will not be an issue with this surface, although there will be annual maintenance costs.

Guiding Principle #5 – Primacy of track and field

Essentially this option would keep the status quo at Ballenas Secondary School, with the Oceanside Track and Field Club as the primary after school users of the facility.

District 69 Track and Field Facility Study – June 2009 21

Guiding Principle #6 - Meeting the needs of District 69 schools

Ballenas Secondary School would gain a minimally improved athletic facility, and would still have its two fields as at present.

Option 2 – Rebuilding a Secondary School Track as a Training Track

This approach would see a top quality training facility created, with a five lane track, or some similar configuration. It would in all respects be equivalent to option 3 A and B tracks, except for only having a limited number of lanes. It could be located at Ballenas Secondary School (option 2A) or, possibly, at Kwalikum Secondary School (option 2B), although in the latter, additional infrastructure improvements such as field and track drainage would likely be required.

How would this approach meet the set of guiding principles?

Guiding Principle #1 - Do it right!

Again, this is not the full model that early meetings had envisaged, but it is a quality training facility that the community would be proud of. Its only deficiency relates to its inability to host events.

Guiding Principle #2- Ensuring event potential

This would not be a track where events could be hosted. Even lower level events (e.g. school track meets) have many heats and the limitation of five lanes would make the timing of the event unmanageable.

Guiding Principle #3 - Community access

Community access would be on a par with option 1 for the general public, although there would be better quality and better use from competitive athlete training.

Guiding Principle #4 - Clear financial plan for the long-term replacement of the track surface

This would be problematic. The frequency of replacement would be the same as with a full eight lane track but the revenue raising potential from events would be quite minimal.

Guiding Principle #5 – Primacy of track and field

Essentially the situation with this new track would be the same as at present, whether it were located at Ballenas Secondary School or at Kwalikum Secondary School.

Guiding Principle #6 - Meeting the needs of District 69 schools

If it were located at Ballenas, that school would gain an improved athletic facility, and would still have its two fields as at present. Likewise at Kwalikum Secondary School, the track could be installed around the existing sports field.

22 Yates, Thorn & Associates Inc.

Option 3 – Replacing the Existing Track at Ballenas Secondary School

There are two options for siting a new track and field facility at Ballenas Secondary School, and these are shown and described below. We shall call them as options 3A and 3B.

Option 3A

The first option is to place a new track over the footprint of the current track. The new track, if eight lanes, would be slightly larger than the current track since its lanes will be better defined. It would include provision for field events within its curtilage, with high jump/pole vault and javelin run ups (crosses track) at one end on artificial surfacing, and discus and hammer at the other end on grass. A track start is provided on both sides of the track, and a shot put area is provided just outside the track. The long/triple jump run up is double ended and is on the east side of the track.

A full size natural turf soccer field is located in the centre of the track and field facility.

9 m 100m

North Field

115m

Equipment container

Pole vault

3.6m 100/65 Soccer

Javelin

High jump

Discuss / Hammer

60m Shot put

Long jump

BALLENAS SECONDARY SCHOOL RE-CONSTRUCTION PROJECT - OPTION 1 SCALE 1:1000

Figure 7 - Option 3A

District 69 Track and Field Facility Study – June 2009 23

Option 3B

A second option on the Ballenas Secondary School site is to turn the track through 90 degrees and to run it along the rear of the school. All the options for jumps and throws would be very similar, but the whole facility would have more room around it, allowing for slightly greater distances from the surrounding houses, as well as distance from Winchelsea Elementary School.

Equipment container

Discuss / Hammer

North Field 100/65 Soccer 100/65 60m Long jump Long Pole vault High jumpHigh Javelin 57m 149.4m Shot put Shot

BALLENAS SECONDARY SCHOOL RE-CONSTRUCTION PROJECT - OPTION 2 SCALE 1:1000

Figure 8 - Option 3B

This option would require a rethinking of the other fields around the school, since the current north field would be covered by the track and field facility. However a roughly equivalent field can be created by enlarging the current Winchelsea field into a full size field, although its maximum possible width at 57m would not meet the minimum requirements for many sports for competitive purposes. This option would be dependent therefore on the sharing of fields between the two schools, which of course happens to an extent already.

Meeting the Guiding Principles

The following comments can be made about how these two options meet the guiding principles outlined earlier.

Guiding Principle #1 - Do it right!

There is enough space to start the project and to maintain it at that level of sophistication, but the Ballenas Secondary School site is small for this scale of facility and growth beyond the basic plan will be difficult. This is firstly because of lack of space and secondly because the addition of further amenities will come at the expense of school facilities.

Of the two options, 3B offers more future potential, as there is a location along the far side of the track for amenities including seating.

24 Yates, Thorn & Associates Inc.

Guiding Principle #2- Ensuring event potential

The current plan for the facility would include 8 lanes and a full range of field event facilities, so event potential is present. As noted above, moving beyond this level will be more difficult: temporary seating and access to the school for washrooms/change rooms would be possible on an event-by-event basis, and would probably be adequate for most events that the community is likely to go after, such as the Seniors Games.

Guiding Principle #3 - Community access

On this criterion, the site has some strengths and some challenges. The strengths are that it is central within Parksville and walking/biking routes do, or are planned to, bring people to the school. However parking will be problematic during school hours, and spill over into the surrounding residential area should be avoided. A low level of track lighting will be advantageous for casual community users; indeed lighting beyond this level is not required.

Guiding Principle #4 - Clear financial plan for the long-term replacement of the track surface

It should be noted that various stakeholder groups expressed a concern that the School District did not have the resources to either adequately maintain or replace the track surface when required, therefore locating the track and field facility on school property was somewhat problematic. The research of other tracks bore out this concern.

This concern could be addressed by developing a joint development and operating agreement between the local government partners and the School District specific to this facility; or by including the School District in the existing District 69 Sports Field Service Agreement.

Guiding Principle #5 - Primacy of track and field

Both of these options allow the Oceanside Track and Field Club to continue in its current role vis-à-vis the school and the community. There will likely be pressure to upgrade the infield if option 3B is selected, although as long as the surface remains as grass, it is unlikely that the school will allow many other teams to practice or play on the surface. This will also allow the field events to have a degree of primacy equal to what they have now.

If the infield is upgraded to artificial turf, this will have to be used by many other sports, and it will be lost to the Oceanside Track and Field Club, although most field events could be accommodated on the school’s north field It is generally felt that, for a variety of reasons, artificial; turf is not the right option for the infield. If that is required, then the set of options around a new outdoor sports complex would be the ones to pursue.

Guiding Principle #6 - Meeting the needs of District 69 schools

On this criterion, option 3A does better than option 3B, since the school’s primary concern is for two good quality fields, and option 3B largely obliterates the existing north field. However it should be noted that the school’s priority is for an upgrade to create two quality fields, rather than doing anything with the track and field facility.

District 69 Track and Field Facility Study – June 2009 25

Option 4 – Build New Track at New Outdoor sports complex

The fourth option is to build a new track and field facility as a part of a new outdoor sports complex. Using the South Surrey Athletic Park as an example of what they proposed, the Recreation Services Master Plan consultants suggested that the components of this new outdoor sports complex might be:

…a four diamond, lighted softball / fast pitch complex, complete with change rooms, restrooms, concession and restaurant; several soccer and rugby fields, lighted baseball diamonds, tennis courts, and a 400 meter running track, in addition to an Olympic-size arena and a new recreation centre, and a Rotary Club field house.

While the scale of this facility may be well beyond the aspirations of the District 69 population (which is very much smaller and older than that of South Surrey), it does indicate that the running track would be one of many facilities planned into this park, and not necessarily the first to be developed.

Neither the Recreational Service Plan nor subsequent planning has identified a location for an outdoor sports complex. However early discussions with key stakeholders indicated that there is considerable land and numerous sites that could serve this purpose. Consequently two site identification focus groups were held at which a ‘long list’ of sites was brainstormed and noted electronically, and evaluation criteria determined.

The overall process summarized as follows:

Review of Long List of Sites

In the two workshops, 31 separate sites were identified and detailed under a separate report for In Camera review by the District 69 Commission due to private land ownership issues.

Selection Criteria Site Factors There are of course many factors that determine a good location for a track and field facility. However it • Access was decided to approach these in two sets: those • Environmental considerations factors that are very site specific (see sidebar); and • Infrastructure and servicing those that are somewhat broader and which can be (especially availability of water used to whittle the long list to a short list. and power) • Adjacent land issues, such as These broader criteria are as follows: lighting impacts • Topography and micro-climate Soil conditions Overall location within the region •

• Centrality within the region allows everyone equal access to the facility • Shortness of journey and speed of access is important in determining the amount of use; if it is located at a distance, it will not be used, and people will find alternatives • Shortness of journey reduces vehicle gas use and emissions • Proximity to the urban area will engage more of the general public in using the track facility for casual use walking • Proximity to the highway will encourage sport tourism use, and proximity to the urban areas will encourage sport tourists to use community facilities such as restaurants and hotels.

Speed of development

26 Yates, Thorn & Associates Inc.

• If the land selected is in the Agricultural land Reserve (ALR) it will take a lengthy process to extract it. • If the land is currently zoned for park uses, the approval process will be swifter, although there may be competing visions of ‘park’ which cause controversy.

Cost factors

• Given that the track and field facility will be roughly equal in cost, no matter where it is located, the question becomes ‘are there any factors which will cause one site to be more expensive either to develop generally or for the facility to be built?’ • Also, if the land is in government ownership, either Crown land, or owned by RDN, the two municipalities, or the School District, then its cost will be significantly less than if it is currently zoned for agricultural use, with some anticipation that it could be rezoned for housing, or industrial use.

Applying the Criteria

In order to assess the strength of these site groups in relation to the criteria, each criteria was scaled as follows:

Overall location

1. Well away from the main population centres. 2. Close to an intersection, but on the south side of Highway 19; or farther away from one of the two communities (north of Qualicum Beach, south of Parksville). 3. Centrally located within the region, close to either highway intersection or generally between Parksville and Qualicum Beach urban areas

Speed of development

1. Likely to be contentious due to other users or interests 2. In the ALR 3. Generally likely to be more easily developed.

Cost factors

1. Land mostly in private ownership 2. Land in public ownership

What this tells us

Most sites are not in public ownership, although some could be acquired through the development process. Others are zoned for industrial purposes and could be converted to outdoor sports complex use quite easily.

The ‘speed of development’ criterion is more intuitive, and the ‘overall location’ criterion is the easiest to assess.

A number of sites in close proximity to the following Areas scored well in this analysis:

• Parksville South End Area • Parksville Highway Exit Area • Qualicum Beach Highway Exit Area • Church Road Area.

District 69 Track and Field Facility Study – June 2009 27

Clearly therefore, there are sites which could, within a reasonable timeframe, and with local government support, become available for an outdoor sports complex.

How would these sites fare in relation to the guiding principles?

Guiding Principle #1 - Do it right!

The outdoor sports complex would have sufficient land, such that a full size track and field facility with all the required amenities could be built.

Guiding Principle #2- Ensuring event potential

Again this follows from the previous discussion. A primary purpose of facilities in the outdoor sports complex would be to host events which bring economic impact to District 69.

Guiding Principle #3 - Community access

All these sites are accessible, mainly by car, although it is unlikely to be as accessible to community walkers and joggers as the Ballenas Secondary School site.

Guiding Principle #4 - Clear financial plan for the long-term replacement of the track surface

It is hard to comment on this as no plans are currently in place. However the sports complex would be developed as a local government facility3 rather than a school facility, and the review of other track and field facility indicated that this model led to better long term maintenance than was achieved within the school district model.

Guiding Principle #5 - Primacy of track and field

If the track and field facility is the first amenity to be developed on this site, this principle would be observed.

Guiding Principle #6 - Meeting the needs of District 69 schools

In many ways, a new track and field facility in an outdoor sports complex would allow the school to get better access to its existing fields unencumbered by the present track, as well as having access to a higher quality track and field facility for events such as elementary and high school meets and high school athletics season. There would be a cost involved in bussing Ballenas Secondary School students to the track for these events, but this is a cost item that is likely to be in the School District budget for getting other high school and other students to a track at Ballenas Secondary School.

3 This includes the North Cowichan model of local government owned, but not-for-profit operated.

28 Yates, Thorn & Associates Inc.

Comparing the Options

There is no objective way to compare these four options. However the following points can be made:

Option 1 is a short term solution and would need to be accompanied by a long term solution to be proposed as a strategy. It does however fit with option 3A since it will form the foundation on which a track surface can eventually be laid.

Option 2 is a way of creating a track with a quality surface, but not one that is usable for track meets.

Options 3 and 4 are the only ones that are really positive long term approaches, in as much as only they deliver facilities that ‘do it right’, or provide for event potential and its economic spin-offs.

All options deliver an improvement for the Oceanside Track and Field Club.

Options 2, 3, and 4 all will require considerable capital investment and will likely take a considerable time to implement.

The School District, perhaps ironically, would opt for option 4 over option 3 (certainly 3B) since their prime concern is two good fields not a new track.

Many District 69 sports organizations, such as Youth Soccer, would opt for option 4. Their view is that the expenditure of funds on a track and field facility would detract from the region’s main goals of starting the process of developing the sports complex and providing additional high quality fields for other sports such as soccer which is the fastest growing sport in the community (and in Canada as a whole4). Other sport priorities would need to be explored and priorities established with respect to the needs of the community including baseball, softball, field lacrosse, football, etc.

4 Kids’ Sports, Statistics Canada, 2008 - Canadian Social Trends, Vol. 85 (11-008-XWE),

District 69 Track and Field Facility Study – June 2009 29

The Costs of a track and field facility

Costing for Option 1 - Conversion of the existing granular surface track to an asphalt base track.

Assumption: Good soil conditions

Costs are from a recently completed running track facility tender

Item Budget

(all figures rounded to the nearest thousand)

Excavate to 300mm depth & dispose off-site 1,600m3 @ $15/m3 $24,000 Compact 5,300m2 exposed base @ $4/m2 $21,000 Place/compact 200mm lift of 16mm minus granular, 1060m3 @ $45/m3 $48,000 Install 400 l.m. of ACO trench drain @ $320/l.m. $128,000 Connect ACO to existing manholes (lump sum) $5,000 Install 480 l.m. of concrete curbing for outer edge @ $105/l.m. $50,000 Place 90mm dual lift of track base asphalt, 5,200m2 @ $65/m2 $338,000 Sub-Total $614,000

Construction Contingency @ 10% $61,000

Sub-Total $675,000

GST @ 5% $34,000

Total $709,000

Notes:

1. If a standard concrete curb is substituted for the ACO drain channel (and the ACO drain channel is included in the future budget for completing the facility, then $100,000 can be saved from this budget. 2. All throws and jumps event areas would cost $153,000 in addition to the above.

30 Yates, Thorn & Associates Inc.

Cost Estimate for Options 3 and 4:

PRELIMINARY COSTING SPREADSHEET FOR BALLENAS RUNNING TRACK Prepared by Athletica Sport and Recreation Design Inc.

Facility elements

100m x 65m grass playing field 8725 m2 $450,000.00 IAAF 8 lane running track & field events $1,453,160.00 Fitments $193,000.00 Site utilities $110,000.00

Total above $2,206,160.00 10% construction contingency $220,616.00 Consulting Fees (all disciplines) $120,000.00 TOTAL COST $2,546,776.00

INFIELD ###

SIZE 8,725 m2

100m x 65m sand based grass playing field includes drainage and irrigation 1 l.s. $450,000.00 / l.s. $450,000.00

$450,000.00

IAAF 8 LANE RUNNING TRACK

BASE Excavation and offsite disposal of native material to 800mm depth 5,208 m3 $25.00 / m3 $130,200.00 Compaction of native material 6,510 m2 $5.00 / m2 $32,550.00 Import, place, and compact sub-base material to 560mm depth 3,646 m3 $30.00 / m3 $109,380.00 Import, place, and compact 150mm of 19mm minus gravel 977 m3 $40.00 / m3 $39,080.00 Lay two lifts of track asphalt (40/35) 6,510 m2 $50.00 / m2 $325,500.00 ### Perimeter concrete curb 480 l.m. $100.00 / l.m. $48,000.00

DRAINAGE Install pre-manufactured drain channel with eight in-line catch basins 400 l.m. $300.00 / l.m. $120,000.00

SYNTHETIC RUNNING TRACK SURFACE Poured-in-place full pour system 6,510 m2 $95.00 / m2 $618,450.00

SITE RESTORATION Fine grading and seeded topsoil 2,000 m2 $15.00 / m2 $30,000.00 $1,453,160.00

FITMENTS

Long/triple jump pits 2 l.s. $15,000.00 / l.s. $30,000.00 Long/triple jump takeoffs & blanking boards 8 l.s. $2,000.00 / l.s. $16,000.00 Long/triple jump canvas covers 2 l.s. $2,000.00 / l.s. $4,000.00 Pole vault box 2 l.s. $2,000.00 / l.s. $4,000.00 Shot put circle 1 l.s. $5,000.00 / l.s. $5,000.00 Shot put landing area granular material 1 l.s. $10,000.00 / l.s. $10,000.00 Shot put landing area perimeter curb 1 l.s. $10,000.00 / l.s. $10,000.00 Discuss/hammer cage 1 l.s. $35,000.00 / l.s. $35,000.00 Discuss/hammer ring including hammer insert ring 1 l.s. $7,000.00 / l.s. $7,000.00 Steeplechase w/ cover 1 l.s. $20,000.00 / l.s. $20,000.00 Steeplechase adjustable hurdles 1 l.s. $12,000.00 / l.s. $12,000.00 200 seat bleacher 200 seat $200.00 / seat $40,000.00

$193,000.00

SITE UTILITIES

Storm water connection 1 l.s. $30,000.00 / l.s. $30,000.00 Water connection to site 1 l.s. $30,000.00 / l.s. $30,000.00 Water connection to event areas 1 l.s. $20,000.00 / l.s. $20,000.00 Power connection 1 l.s. $20,000.00 / l.s. $20,000.00 Power connection to both finish lines 1 l.s. $10,000.00 / l.s. $10,000.00

$110,000.00

Page 1 of 1 District 69 Track and Field Facility Study – June 2009 31

Certain caveats must be applied to this estimate:

• This is a preliminary estimate to provide an order-of-magnitude costing for planning purposes. It is expressed in 2008 dollars. It includes a construction contingency of 10%. As an estimate it could be refined following a geotechnical site assessment. • The cost is unlikely to vary much between the various options, although since no site is known for option 4, it is impossible to state this with any certainty. • Having said that, the upgrading that the Ballenas Secondary School infield received (value about $175,000) several years ago could reduce the costs with option 3A. • Equally, there are ways in which the eventual construction cost can be reduced somewhat, such as by limiting the upgrading of the existing field or by working with local suppliers to provide construction materials at a reduced cost (e.g. gravel).

However, this is a multi-million dollar project, and it is more likely that delays will increase the cost rather than lead to lower cost.

Potential Funding Sources

Funding for a project such as this can come from a variety of sources:

• The School Community Connections program can provide up to $125,000 as long as this contribution is no more than 25% of total project costs. • The School District could contribute to the overall project if it is on their land, although there are restrictions related to which sources of funds they use and their relationship to the School Community Connections contribution. • The local governments in the region (Regional District, Cities of Parksville and Town of Qualicum Beach) could contribute through the District 69 Sports Field Services Agreement5 that covers specific park and recreation facilities. This would likely require a referendum or similar to approve a capital expenditure of this magnitude. • There are several joint provincial/federal funding programs which are directed at capital projects such as this and application could be made to those programs, although in this respect, this project would be competing with other local government priorities.

5 There are other models which could be used, including other agreements that the Regional District is involved in.

32 Yates, Thorn & Associates Inc.

Recommendations

It is recommended:

That two strategies be developed, one for a short term approach and one for a long term approach.

That the short term approach be option 1, namely using the funding within the SCC program to upgrade the current Ballenas Secondary School track, with the other local government and community partners contributing $375,000 to the SCC $125,000, and that the project be scaled as far back as necessary to meet this financial target, or community fundraising make up the difference.

That the long term approach be to continue with the planning and acquisition of land for a new outdoor sports complex, with a track and field facility being one of the first facilities to be developed in that sports complex.

Rationale:

Most parties who were consulted as part of this project, and this includes the Oceanside Track and Field Club, recognized that option 4, a new outdoor sports complex, is the best long term solution. However many had the fear that long term would be either ‘not in my lifetime’ or ‘never’; hence the focus on Ballenas Secondary School and option 3. During this project, there has however been a real desire on the part of many parties to see the outdoor sports complex planning move forward, and this approach provides both for the short term upgrading of Ballenas’ current track and the long term development of the outdoor sports complex. The short term approach should, if funding allows or if alternate funding can be obtained, also include upgrading of the north field at Ballenas Secondary School, so that the school and community have an overall facility that will have a life span of the five to eight years that it might take to develop the outdoor sports complex.

Implementation:

Short Term – Implement Option 1

Approval in principle should be sought from the Regional District and School District, and a detailed funding plan agreed. Once this is in place, an application for phase 3 funding should be submitted. Work should proceed to prepare plans for the upgrading of the Ballenas Secondary School track, and the order of magnitude estimate revised accordingly. It should be noted that the School Community Connections funds are only available for a limited time, and the agreement with UBCM states that the project should be complete by December 31, 2010. Time is of the essence over the next few months.

Longer Term – Implement Option 4

The site assessment that has been started in this report should be continued, focused on the four identified preferred site areas. Specific sites should be identified within each of these broader areas, evaluated, and work undertaken to obtain the site.

District 69 Track and Field Facility Study – June 2009 33

Once the site is obtained, a planning process will be required to design the amenities, with a priority being given to the track and field facility.

34 Yates, Thorn & Associates Inc.

Appendix A ‐ Background Document Review and Area Demographics

Summary

The Track and Field Facility was proposed in the Recreation Services Master Plan in 2006. It was also proposed that a start be made acquiring land for a major outdoor sports complex; it was noted that the Track and Field Facility could be part of that complex.

Demographically, the community is continuing to attract new residents, but they are, almost without exception, aged 45 years plus. This is born out in the recently produced results from the 2006 census.

Recreation Services Master Plan

The Master Plan was developed in 2006. Various sections of the plan provide a context of the development of the Track and Field Facility. These sections are reproduced as follows:

7.2 CENTRALIZED FACILITIES

During meetings with local organizations, numerous needs were identified in terms of new and improved facilities. The consultants have identified several amenities below that are similar to the major facilities discussed in Chapter Six, in that they should be centralized, and located as conveniently as possible to all Oceanside residents.

Outdoor Sports Complex Oceanside is well located in the central Vancouver Island area, and should consider the development of a large multi-sport facility with state of the art facilities.

Track and Field Facility Consideration should be given to the construction of an eight lane, 400 meter running track and support facilities.

RECOMMENDATION (2007)

7.3 OUTDOOR SPORTS COMPLEX

It is the consultants’ opinion that as a long term solution to many existing difficulties, local sport organizations - baseball, softball and soccer, football and others – require a large centralized sport complex to accommodate their need for regular league play, as well as for tournaments, and even regional and provincial events.

District 69 Track and Field Facility Study – June 2009 35

This type of facility has been developed in numerous communities across the Province, and has proven to be extremely successful in terms of attracting a variety of events, and also providing first class amenities that essentially meet the needs of the vast majority of sport requirements.

An example of this type of facility is the South Surrey Athletic Park, which includes a four diamond, lighted softball / fast pitch complex, complete with change rooms, restrooms, concession and restaurant; several soccer and rugby fields, lighted baseball diamonds, tennis courts, and a 400 meter running track, in addition to am Olympic-size arena and a new recreation centre, and a Rotary Club field house.

Surrey has several of these facilities, but it is not alone in recognizing the value of placing as many amenities at one location, in terms of convenience, reduced maintenance costs, and as an attraction to residents, non-residents and tourists. Other similar facilities are located in Kelowna, Nanaimo, Kamloops, Port Alberni, Burnaby and Mission.

This is a project that requires a vision, a “champion”, a commitment from numerous organizations and the Regional District, and patience – because it will be expensive to build, and it will, in all likelihood, be built in a number of phases, one of which would be locating and acquiring the appropriate land (twenty or more acres). It is also a facility that can bring the sports community together as few others can.

It is the consultants’ opinion that the Recreation and Parks Department could play a leadership role in the planning and development of such a facility, along with the Oceanside Sports Association, the City of Parksville, the Town of Qualicum Beach, the School District and other organizations.

RECOMMENDATIONS (ONGOING)

23. Facilitate a meeting with local sport organizations to discuss the possibility of developing a major sports complex in the Oceanside area.

24. Visit sports complexes in other communities.

25. Identify potential sites.

26. Prepare a concept plan for the facility.

27. Investigate funding sources.

28. Determine priorities / phasing possibilities.

29. Initiate construction.

It should be noted that this discussion is not intended to diminish the importance of facilities located at existing park sites. It is intended primarily as a long term venture that will meet the future needs of the Oceanside area.

7.4 TRACK AND FIELD FACILITY

As discussed earlier, the consultants feel that a good quality track and field facility is needed in the Oceanside area. This type of facility should include a 400 meter track, and other amenities to conduct local, regional and provincial meets, but it will likely be utilized a great deal by local residents, for walking and jogging.

36 Yates, Thorn & Associates Inc.

This is a facility that could by located at the proposed sport complex, or it could be located at a secondary school site, such as Ballenas Secondary School.

It should be noted that high quality track and field facilities are not inexpensive. However, a relatively new facility in the Cowichan Valley Regional District provides an excellent example of the efforts of a non-profit society to build and maintain a first class facility at modest cost, locating the track on Crown land, acquiring grants and conducting numerous fund raising events.

RECOMMENDATIONS (2010)

30. Ensure that track and field interests are represented in discussions regarding the development of a centralized sports complex.

31. Contact the Chesterfield Track and Field Society (District of North Cowichan) to discuss the planning, development and current use of the Cowichan Valley facility.

The Master Plan also provides an inventory of regional parks and school sites with sports fields:

Regional District Sites

With one exception (Jack Bagley Field), Electoral Area community parks are limited to a small number of playgrounds which are located in Area E, G and H. Sites include:

• Jack Bagley Field (Area E) Includes a large sport / play field / two ball diamonds, and one soccer pitch.

School Sites

Most of the schools in District 69 have sports fields that are used by community organizations. The fields receive heavy use during the school year, and their condition varies from one site to another.

• Kwalikum Secondary - Two large fields / soccer pitches. • Ballenas Secondary - Large sport field / soccer pitch, playfield with backstop, cinder track, four tennis courts. • Oceanside Middle - Large playfield / soccer pitch, softball diamond. • Springwood Middle - No fields – uses Springwood Park facilities. • Qualicum Middle - Soccer pitch. • Arrowview Elementary - Two sport fields with ball diamonds and soccer pitches. • Nanoose Bay Elementary - Small playfield – uses Jack Bagley facilities. • Parksville Elementary - Small playfield with three backstops. • Winchelsea Elementary - Playfield with backstop. • Errington Community School - Small playfield. • French Creek Community School - Small playfield. • Qualicum Beach Elementary - Large playfield with two backstops. • Bowser Elementary - Small playfield with backstops.

District 69 Track and Field Facility Study – June 2009 37

Schools and School Planning

The District has 2 secondary schools, Ballenas which serves primarily Parksville and Kwalikum which serves primarily Qualicum Beach. In addition there are three middle schools: Qualicum Beach, Oceanside, and Springwood.

The school district uses the BC Stats projections which indicate their area population increasing to over 60,000 by 2031 in a steady and continuing fashion.

38 Yates, Thorn & Associates Inc.

However its school age and enrolment trends show that overall K-12 population peaked in 1999, and has declined steadily since then. It is estimated to bottom out in 2012 and start a slow increasing trend from there. These projections assume an increasing number of births to British Columbians, a trend which started to show in 2003/4, when the number of births bottomed out at 40,200 (down from its peak of 47,000 in 1993/4).

District 69 Track and Field Facility Study – June 2009 39

City of Parksville Official Community Plan

The City of Parksville Official Community Plan was adopted in 2002 and consolidated in 2006. The Official Community Plan addresses many planning areas and focuses on eight community objectives:

• Preservation and Enhancement of the Natural Environment • Maintenance of Small Town Atmosphere • Promotion of Diversified Economic Development • Enhancement of Recreational Facilities • Improvement of Transportation Networks • Improvement of Human Services • Provision of Housing Options • General Management of Growth

The Official Community Plan notes about Parks, Recreation, Culture and Heritage

There are several parts to the City’s initiatives regarding open space. These can be categorized under the topics: Greenbelts, Parks and Open Space (including trails), Recreational Facilities, Bike Paths.

With regard to recreational facilities, the Official Community Plan notes:

The City provides recreational facilities for its residents. These facilities also attract out of area users. This results in a high demand without an equivalent tax contribution to draw from. The City recognizes its role in the provision of recreation facilities which was also expressed in the prior Official Community Plan and has, as a goal, the provision of a diverse range of recreational and cultural opportunities and facilities for the enjoyment of residents and visitors

The following Objective was adopted:

The City’s objective is to provide a comprehensive parks and recreation system emphasizing access to the waterfront, walking and cycling and enjoyment and preservation of the natural environment. The City also, as an objective, wishes to provide an array of cultural services and facilities for the enhancement of community life and support a variety of active recreational facilities."

40 Yates, Thorn & Associates Inc.

Town of Qualicum Beach Official Community Plan

The Town of Qualicum Beach has an Official Community Plan that was adopted in 2005. It covers a number of areas including Parks and Natural Spaces.

The policies in this area focus on:

Greenways

…which are defined as:

a network of green spaces, or ‘Greenways’ that provide ecological and recreational benefits for the Town.

It identifies two types of Recreational Greenways

• Greenway Trails in a public right of way, to provide off-road facilities for non- motorized linear recreation such as walking, hiking, and cycling. • Greenway Streets to provide facilities for pedestrians and cyclists as well as motor vehicles in well-landscaped corridors.

Both are envisioned as beautiful green spaces, with special facilities for people to walk, cycle and enjoy nature.

Watershed Management

…which would include:

• A Watershed Awareness Campaign • An extension of the Stormwater Management Program • A Water Quality Bylaw • A Watershed Best Practices Bylaw • Working Landscapes Advocacy • A Stewardship Rewards Program

Recreational Facilities

…where it notes that:

existing recreation facilities should be retained and renewed and that new facilities might include:

• Development of the Community Park; • Acquisition and development of neighbourhood parks; • Acquisition of land for the development of recreational greenways; • Enhancement of special recreation areas such as the Little Qualicum River, Marshall Wildlife Sanctuary; • And provision for private (user-pay) recreation facilities.

District 69 Track and Field Facility Study – June 2009 41

Official Community Plans for Electoral Areas

Electoral Area E

The Official Community Plan for this area supports the protection of the environment, the location of community facilities within the Urban Containment Boundary, collaboration with School District 69 on school site planning and the extension of walking and biking trails.

Electoral Area F

This Official Community Plan establishes general policies toward parks, trails and recreation as follows:

• Develop a Master Parks Plan for Electoral Area ‘F’ to identify the types of park land desired by residents, identify significant sites for proposed parks, trails and recreation areas and to promote the integration of a parks and trail system into other recreational opportunities in the Regional District of Nanaimo. • Encourage the community to consult with land owners on community access to private forested lands. • Preserve Arrowsmith Trail (old CPR Trail) near Cameron Lake. • Support the retention of Crown land parcels for recreation and environmental protection. Encourage a trail network connecting the Alberni Clayoquot Regional District and the Regional District of Nanaimo. • Ensure consultation takes place with affected landowners in the development of trails and open spaces and consider appropriate buffering to prevent negative impacts on adjoining lands.

Electoral Area G

A new Official Community Plan has recently been developed (2008) for this electoral area. It states regarding Park Land, Green Space, and Natural Areas:

42 Yates, Thorn & Associates Inc.

Park land, green space and natural areas are essential in creating complete liveable communities. Parks and open spaces can take on many forms and can serve a variety of functions such as sports fields, tot lots, wildlife viewing areas, hiking or walking trails, pedestrian linkages, and protected areas not intended for human disturbance. Parks and open spaces are an important component of the Plan Area as they help define the community, provide an opportunity for Plan Area residents to enjoy the natural beauty of the area, and encourage community recreation and social interaction.

The OCP notes that:

Residents of Electoral Area 'G' have stated a need for additional park land to provide: a. linear walking trails; b. riparian area protection and access; c. beach access; d. protection of natural features; e. outdoor recreational and leisure neighbourhood park opportunities; f. sports fields; and, g. access to water.

While it mentions ‘sports fields’ it is unlikely that it includes track and field facilities or a major sports park within this definition.

Electoral Area H

Electoral Area H is the rural area in the north of District 69. Its Official Community Plan notes regarding parks and open space:

The Regional District has numerous community parks generally concentrated in the rural residential areas in the coastal portion of the Plan Area (with the exception of Spider Lake Community Park, located inland in the Spider Lake neighbourhood). In addition, the Plan Area contains a Regional Park at Horne Lake. Many community parks in rural residential areas are small greenbelt areas and a few provide opportunities for linear pedestrian/cycling connections, shoreline access or outdoor recreational activities.

The Plan Area includes field sport recreational opportunities at Lions Community Hall and at Wildwood Community Park. It should be noted that the Wildwood Community Park is leased Crown Land and includes sport fields. There is also a community park adjacent to the Village Centre of Dunsmuir, which has a small tennis court and basketball half-court. This park could provide significant recreational opportunities when the Dunsmuir Village Centre develops. Along with these existing provincial, regional, and community parks, the residents of Area ‘H’ have stated a need for additional parkland developed for the:

1. protection of known unconfined aquifers;

2. linear walking trails;

3. stream protection and access;

4. beach access;

5. protection of wetlands and natural features; and

6. outdoor recreational and leisure neighbourhood park opportunities;

District 69 Track and Field Facility Study – June 2009 43

Demographics Review

The Recreation Services Master Plan reviews the demographics of District 69 and its six constituent areas. It was based on 2001 census data and other sources. The 2006 census data is now available and it has been assembled for District 69 and compared with the Master Plan review. Comments are as follows:

The population projections used in the Master Plan are on track, as close as can be estimated. The projected Oceanside figures were 42,466, while the 2006 census estimate was 42,134. However the MP estimate used a 2001 census figure as the projection base which had been adjusted upwards to account for census undercounting (3.1%). If the 2006 census is similarly adjusted, a 2006 actual figure of 43,440 is obtained. This would infer that Oceanside is actually growing faster than anticipated.

44 Yates, Thorn & Associates Inc.

Age projections are not projected in the Master Plan, but comparing the noted (figure 18, page 22) 2001 figures and comparing with 2006 census, the following is noted:

2006 Census 2001 #%% 0-14 5,070 12.0% 14.5% 15-25 3,730 8.9% 8.6% 25-44 6,850 16.3% 20.1% 45-64 14,430 34.2% 29.9% 65+ 12,055 28.6% 26.9%

Sources: 2006 Census Unadjusted for undercount 2001 - Master Plan

The 2006 population is skewed even more toward the 45+ age groups than previously. These age groups were 56.8% of the total population in 2001; by 2006 they made up 62.8%.

Household structures reflect this ‘amenity migration’ to Oceanside.

District 69 Track and Field Facility Study – June 2009 45

The number of households with children declined from 19.3% of all households in 2001, to 17.3% in 2006.

The Master Plan contains other demographic and trend assertions, but the main ones, and their changes to 2006, are noted here.

46 Yates, Thorn & Associates Inc.

Appendix B – Consultations

Results of June 2008 Survey

A survey form was printed on the back of the invitation flyer for the public meeting in June. It was also made available through the Recreation Centre and Ballenas Secondary School. A total of 41 forms were returned. A number of questions were asked, one of them being ‘are you involved with Oceanside Track and Field Club?’ The survey results were sorted by this question, and the results of each question are given below:

How far away from Ballenas Secondary School do you live?

Involved with OTFC Not Involved with OTFC

Live within 1 km, 10 mins, or 6 10 7 blocks

Live between 1km and 5 kms 9 2

Live over 5 kms 7 4

Total 26 13

• About two thirds of the responses came from those involved with Oceanside Track and Field Club; these families lived both close to the school and farther away. Of those not involved with the club, some people lived close by and were no doubt concerned neighbours, while those living farther away were involved with the school or other sports.

Would you, or someone in your family, use a renovated track at Ballenas Secondary School?

Involved with OTFC Not Involved with OTFC

Yes 27 8

No 0 4

Maybe 0 3

Total 27 15

• Very few respondents indicated that they would not use the facility, but that is not surprising given the population the sample was drawn from.

District 69 Track and Field Facility Study – June 2009 47

What would you, or someone in your family, use it for?

Involved with OTFC Not Involved with OTFC

Practice with OTFC 27 4

Practice with School 22 5

Recreational Walking 27 8

Other 4 2

• Recreational walking was a frequent response both from those whose children are involved in the Oceanside Track and Field Club and others, presumably those involved with the school or local neighbours.

In addition, two open ended questions asked about any concerns and any further comments. Comments made by those who had previously indicated that they were involved with the Oceanside Track and Field Club covered the following points:

• The track and field facility needs adequate facilities such as stands, change rooms, washrooms, etc • There will not be enough space for these. • That if it is built at Ballenas, that it should be done ‘right’. • That it will interfere with the school’s football program. • That fixing up the field is a higher priority. • That Kwalikum Secondary School needs its fields fixed up as well. • A new track would encourage more kids to be physically active. • A track is a basis community facility if we want to produce Olympic athletes. • A track and field facility would provide opportunities for meets and events which have an economic value, from youth development meets to the Seniors Games. • Concerns re maintenance in the short and long term. • Concerns re access by motorbikes, dogs, etc and other vandalism. • Losing control of the track to other sports groups especially if the infield is grass or artificial turf. • Opportunity to serve all schools in the district. • As a facility it would be used by a wide range of groups and programs. • The school is not the best location – better to start afresh somewhere else.

Those comments made by those who had previously indicated that they were not involved with the Oceanside Track and Field Club covered the following additional points:

• Older people would use the track for exercise. • Concerns re parking and traffic if large events held. • Need for a better transit system to get people to the facility and to link it to other schools and recreation centres, and in particular to connect it to the Electoral Areas.

48 Yates, Thorn & Associates Inc.

• Cost of upkeep of new facility.

Notes from October Open Houses

The two presentations were largely similar, with some small additions and changes made for the second (Kwalikum) meeting. Comments made at one or both of the meetings were as follows:

The issue of the in-field pitch at Ballenas was discussed. It is currently used by the school and by non-school football teams. It is generally not available for other users, such as youth soccer. The assessment criteria ‘primacy of use by track and field’ caused some concern as it implied that this field would no longer be available. The community is very short of fields and cannot afford to lose this one. This also applies to the period of construction of the track when current users of the infield would be displaced. Could funds be included in the overall program to upgrade the north field first, so providing a place for these displaced users while construction occurs, and adding to the overall field space in the long term?

In response to the comments about ‘primacy of use by track and field’, it was generally agreed that the sport groups worked together well now and would continue to do so once the new track was built. Representatives of OTFC indicated that the main concern would be safety of runners if there were a football or soccer game going on.

There were a number of local runners and walkers, of various degrees of seriousness, who all indicated that a track would be an excellent addition to the community. The availability during school hours was questioned, with the response that while during these hours the school would be the prime user, it was likely that small numbers of other users would be acceptable.

In addition to members of the OTFC there are 120 members of ORCAs, the adult running club, who would be users of the facility.

There were several questions related to the size of the two fields that would be created at Ballenas once the new facility is built. The sizes of both the in-field and the north field should be stated, compared with the official sizes for football, soccer, rugby and lacrosse, and the adequacy for each sport assessed. If the in-field is grass, its size is less critical since grass fields only generally provide about 30 hours per week of usage, and much of this would be school time (but accommodating school football is important).

If artificial turf is selected as the preferred surface for the in-field, then most field events could be accommodated on the north field. However the general recommendation is that if a track and an artificial turf field are required, then it is best practice to locate them separately.

Lighting of the track and field facility was discussed. Generally the agreement was that low level lighting would be a boon for casual track users and OTFC training in winter, as well as adding a sense of safety and security. High levels of lighting to serve events is not required – very few events; evening event use can be avoided; and this lighting level would be opposed by the local neighbours.

Variant #2 which involves rotating the field would remove the north field but a new field could be created from an expanded Winchelsea field. However its width would be about 57m (limited by the current ‘permanent’ portables) which is not adequate for any of the sports. This variant is also likely to be opposed by Winchelsea School. It was generally felt that this option would be more costly and the fields at the end of the process would not be as good as with variant #1.

Both meetings felt that the report sections concerning the outdoor sports complex concept were not adequate. The option is excluded from debate on the grounds that there is no site currently available, yet many people commented that there are several, if not many, sites available. These

District 69 Track and Field Facility Study – June 2009 49 should be included in the report, so that it can be adequately considered by RDN Commission and Board. This is important since the investment of $2.5m is very significant.

The need to spend $450,000 (the amount included in the estimate on page 30) to upgrade the infield was questioned in light of the fact that over $175,000 had recently been spent on that field to improve drainage.

The need for additional parking at Ballenas for events was noted, although it was also noted that the number of events would be very small in terms of days per year.

The issue of additional noise and it being a concern for Ballenas neighbours was also questioned. It was noted that these people were already used to living adjacent to the school; additional noise would be minimal.

The potential to put the track and field facility on either Qualicum Beach Community Park or Springwood Park was initially proposed as an option which seemed not to have been considered. Both these sites had been investigated and the apparent options were not possible due either to lack of space or to other plans for the land.

Some comparable cost data would be helpful in the report, in particular the cost for the construction of the North Cowichan facility.

Various people questioned whether taking the simplest option was the best course of action. Would not it be better to spend longer to investigate the outdoor sports complex concept and site options, rather than just dismissing them as ‘not achievable in the near future’? This approach was compared to the Oceanside Place development which had expanded significantly as time evolved.

Were local residents consulted? Yes around Ballenas, where 400 flyers were distributed; very few negative comments received.

50 Yates, Thorn & Associates Inc.

Appendix C – Survey of Other Track and Field Facilities

As part of the research for this study, 12 communities with track and field facility were contacted and requested to provide answers to a set of questions. Ten communities responded, either by phone, or by email. These responses will assist in defining ‘best practices’ for the design and development of the Oceanside Track and Field Facility.

The ten communities for which data was obtained were as follows:

In larger communities, the track and field facility was owned by the municipality: Kelowna, Kamloops, Abbotsford, Coquitlam, Port Alberni.

School Districts owned the facilities at Claremont, Victoria/Oak Bay, Nanaimo.

The University was the sole owner (since 1994) of its track.

The North Cowichan track is owned by the Chesterfield Sports Society, who lease the land from the District of North Cowichan.

In relation to age, the newest tracks are the ones at North Cowichan, developed by a not-for-profit group, and some of the municipal tracks.

It is interesting that the Oak Bay response came from the track and field club, who indicated that there was joint ownership:

Joint ownership between Oak Bay Municipality, School District 61 [as it is on school property] and Victoria Track and Field Club

On the other hand the municipality denied any knowledge of the facility!

Is there an operating partnership? Is it formal or informal?

In most cases, the owner simply rented out the facility, with no formal operating agreements.

The Oak Bay Track and Field Club commented:

Formal partnership papers were drawn up at the time of construction. No one seems to follow the repairs and upgrading part of it as we just do what is needed when it is needed. Track is wearing thin and supposedly all three partners are responsible for major repairs but doubtful whether or not any of us could afford to resurface it.

District 69 Track and Field Facility Study – June 2009 51

Their track was built as the training track for the 1994 Commonwealth Games. At the same time as it was being built, the original 1967 agreement regarding UVic’s Centennial Stadium and track and field facility was coming to an end, since when UVic has been the sole owner and total contributor to any upgrades.

The Port Alberni track and field facility was built adjacent to the new multiplex, and this allows various synergies related to use e.g. the summer hockey camps use the facility for dry land training.

What’s the history of the track? Was it built for a specific event such as BC Games, Canada Games?

Several of the tracks were built in conjunction with major games hosting:

⇒ Kamloops - the original track was built for the 1993 Canada Summer Games but was completely re-built and opened in 2006. ⇒ Oak Bay – Built as a training track for the Victoria Commonwealth Games. Money came from CG Society and Victoria Track and Field Club for upgrading of the existing dirt/cinder track. ⇒ Port Alberni – Built for BC Summer Games in 1992 ⇒ Coquitlam – Built for the BC Games in 1991 – first element of the then new Town Centre rec facilities. ⇒ Abbotsford – The track and complex was built in the late 1980's. It was upgraded for the 1995 W. Canada Summer Games. The track built because of the pressure brought by Jane Swan a former administrator of the Valley Royals Track Club. In addition, the Rotary Club of Abbotsford and the City of Abbotsford and Matsqui got behind the project. ⇒ Kelowna - Built in 1980 for Summer Games, as part of a multipurpose facility with grass infield and stadium called the Apple Bowl.

Both school tracks were built as part of school construction and have been maintain and upgraded by the school districts, often with pressure from parent and local sports groups. Re Claremont it was noted:

Built in 1967 with the school development. In late 90's there was an identified risk due to deteriorating condition and the School District had to replace the original rubberized material to standard asphalt.

The history of the North Cowichan track and field facility was noted as follows:

Long term fundraising by the Society – major contributions by public agencies (e.g. School District $200,000) and groups (track and field club $40,000). The Road Runners and the track and field club were major drivers of the concept. The overall complex has track and field facilities, but also 3-plex ball diamonds, artificial turf for field hockey and lacrosse box. Funding and development are still underway – currently for a change/washroom facility

When was the track first built?

A couple date from the 1960s; most were built or renovated in the 1990s; only North Cowichan’s is more recent than that.

What major renovations have occurred since then?

Several of the track and field facility noted major renovations recently or still in progress:

52 Yates, Thorn & Associates Inc.

⇒ Kamloops – Re-located. re-surfaced, lights added, permanent bleachers for 1800, Media Booth, washrooms, concession, storage, Filming platform, 8 change rooms, dedicated Jumps area, separate Throws area, completely fenced... ⇒ Kelowna – Track was re-surfaced in 1992 and 1998. In the summer of 2006 it was given a 5mm lift coat. Additional drainage added ⇒ Coquitlam – In 2007, the grass infield was replaced by artificial turf with some of the field facilities moving to accommodate it. An electronic finish line and camera were installed in 2005. Currently adding two art turf fields to the north of the facility. The original track surface is still in use. An estimate for topping was received in 2002 for $435,000, but work was not done – now all the track needs replacing with likely a cost of close to $1m ⇒ Port Alberni - Have added lighting – due for resurfacing in 2010 (hoping for federal provincial infrastructure grants ⇒ Port Alberni - Would like to add artificial turf to the infield rather than the current grass on sand base ⇒ Abbotsford - The track has been resurfaced three times--the life of a track is between 8 and 11 years.

Nanaimo is also planning major renovations to turn their facility into a multipurpose stadium with artificial turf infield, as opposed to a dedicated track and field facility as at present.

Even the North Cowichan track, at less than 8 years of age, needs resurfacing.

It is noteworthy that all the municipal facilities have been regularly upgraded and updated, while the two school board and university track and field facility have not been.

Is the location a positive advantage?

Two communities noted responses to this question:

⇒ Port Alberni - Only the multiplex – the adjacent site is being considered for a new secondary school ⇒ Coquitlam - Location in the town centre adds lots of visitors especially around events. Also good location for track and field meets, etc. Who are the main users?

The main user groups were the same for all track and field facility:

⇒ Schools ⇒ Local track and field club – who generally had two practices per week and several events during the year. ⇒ Other noted users were Special Olympics, charity events and the general public for recreational walking and running.

North Cowichan has diversified somewhat into vintage car meets and community events, while Coquitlam’s two major events were the Highland Games and a Korean Festival.

Where there is a useable grass or artificial turf in-field, there were also many users, and revenues from these groups.

District 69 Track and Field Facility Study – June 2009 53

What amenities does the track have? Stadium, washrooms, change rooms, concession, etc.

In terms of amenities, there are two groupings of facility, and within each of these groups, there is a range of amenities:

⇒ Multi-purpose stadiums which have a track but also use a grass or artificial turf in-field for other sports, primarily football and soccer, but also field lacrosse. ⇒ Focused track and field facility.

The continuum of multipurpose facilities is as follows:

⇒ UVic – Covered stadium on SW side – seating for 5000 - Open seating on the NE side – about 1500 - Change and washrooms under main stadium - Storage only under other stadium - Scoreboard – legacy of Commonwealth Games - Grass infield with all field events occurring there ⇒ Abbotsford – It contains an excellent, covered stadium that seats between 4,500 and 5000. It contains two outlets for concessions. There are several change rooms that are quite good. However, the washroom facilities are sub standard. We have a complete supply of world class equipment--such as high jump and pole vault landing pits, hurdles, starting blocks, timing systems, throwing cages--the equipment would be valued at approximately $150,000. Without this type of equipment it would be impossible to host high level competitions. ⇒ Kelowna – 4 change rooms, refs rooms, men's and women's washrooms, storage, mechanical room, concession, press box, grandstands (seating for 2200) storage bins for track equipment and OK Sun, pole vault and hammer throw facilities, steeple chase pit, javelin run up. Lighting. Has grass infield and happy at that – will not change to art turf, since could not get enough hours of use out of the facility since track and field sports could not use at same time. ⇒ Kamloops – Re-located. re-surfaced, lights added, permanent bleachers for 1800, Media Booth, washrooms, concession, storage, Filming platform, 8 change rooms, dedicated Jumps area, separate Throws area, completely fenced... ⇒ Coquitlam - Stadium has a fabric roof and has lasted very well – plans to replace original roof in 2011. The main services (wash/change) are served by a field house ⇒ Port Alberni - Stadium for 600 (although reality is closer to 400) with storage under – Lighting - Large electrical capacity to service events

The other facilities are much more single purpose track and field, although Nanaimo is planning to move to the multi-purpose model as soon as possible.

The two school board and North Cowichan track and field facility are of this dedicated model.

What are the track dimensions? Length? Radius of corners? How many lanes? Is there a separate sprint track?

All the tracks are 400m, and most meet IAAF standards (although some are in poor condition and would not reach IAAF standards for events).

All tracks were 8 lane except for Oak Bay’s which was five lanes, and UVic’s which is 10 lanes.

Abbotsford noted with regard to their track corners:

…the track has the widest corners allowed by international rules. This is excellent since wide corners allow for faster times for running events--particularly the 200 and 400-meter events.

54 Yates, Thorn & Associates Inc.

Only Nanaimo had a separate sprint track. Abbotsford noted in this regard:

No, and a separate sprint track would be a waste of money. The electronic timing system would have to be moved every time you switched from events that circle the track to the straight away events. In any case, it is doubtful that you could ever make practical use of a sprint straight away. Better to have sprint starts and finishes on both sides of the track.

What field facilities are there (jumps and pits)? Where are they located?

All the facilities reviewed could host all the field events with the exception of pole vault, which could only be hosted at UVic, Port Alberni and Abbotsford.

The distribution of field facilities on and off the in-field varied considerably. The preference for locating these facilities on the in-field came from the track and field clubs since it made the overall facility more focused and easier to manage in events. On the other hand, a grass in-field, especially an artificial turf in-field, was a significant investment for other sports and presented conflicts for field events.

A high jump that used an apron off the track, but with run-ups that took up track space and therefore interfered with track use, was not liked by track and field clubs but was a design style that was frequently used.

Abbotsford compromised by having an off-in-field cage that was also used for practice and small events, but another one on the in-field that was used for major events.

Double ended long/triple jumps (pits at either end) allowed greater use of the run up.

Is there a steeplechase water jump?

Most tracks (all except Oak Bay) have a water jump. Most are filled from a nearby tap with hose and have a drain to the storm water system, but Kelowna’s required a water truck for filling and to be pumped out afterwards.

It is a feature that is seldom used.

What competitions/track and field events have been hosted there?

UVic, Kamloops and Abbotsford were most extensively used for events beyond the high school level. All three have hosted events at the national level with some international invitationals.

Abbotsford’s event resume is as follows:

NAIA National Collegiate Championships--2 times

Canadian Junior Championship--3 times

Canadian Senior Championships

Western Canada Summer Games

Harry Jerome International

Dual meet between Canada and Northern Ireland

District 69 Track and Field Facility Study – June 2009 55

Lafarge International--4 times

Numerous Fraser Valley High School Championships

12 BC Track and Field Championships

Countless elementary and middle school meets

Kamloops also has hosted various high level events. They noted:

2000 World Masters, BC Jr / Sr Track and Field Championships, BC Junior Development Track & Field...

The North Cowichan track and field facility hosted the North American Indigenous Games in 2008. They hosted the 2005 BC Seniors Games.

The other facilities had only hosted provincial level meets, and for some, just high school meets.

What are the main sources of revenue?

Various comments were made about revenue, although several respondents regarded it as a foreign concept related to track and field facility:

⇒ Port Alberni - Most revenues are simply charge backs – e.g. use of lights. One stage on BC Bike Race (Victoria to Whistler) – 400 riders and camped on infield ⇒ North Cowichan – Rental income - Club membership fees - Grants from all local government - Fundraising ⇒ Abbotsford - Some events pay for use, but for the most part, the tax payers would subsidize the track. All school groups within the district do not pay as there is a joint use agreement in place between the city and the school district ⇒ Coquitlam – Total revenue for 2007 was $57,000 – mostly rental from major events. No field/facility charges for youth groups since 2005, so virtually no rent from track and field club. ⇒ UVic - The University provides the facility to many groups at minimal or no cost. The in-field is not rented out as it is reserved for varsity soccer matches.

The bottom line is that revenue comes primarily from two sources:

⇒ Rentals, largely to adults, of the in-field for team sports. ⇒ Special events, especially commercial events for which an entrance fee is paid to the organizers. Can we get a copy of the annual budget for the latest year?

In most cases, the track and field facility budget was included in other departmental budgets or lumped in with other facilities. The best estimate of a municipal facility was from Coquitlam who noted:

⇒ Revenues - $57,000 (plus $10,000 from concession) ⇒ Expenditures - $180,000 – very little of this is the track – most is the field house operation and maintenance

56 Yates, Thorn & Associates Inc.

What do you really like about the track?

Comments were as follows:

⇒ Oak Bay High School ⇒ Nothing ⇒ Port Alberni ⇒ Accessible for daily users – all ages, all abilities ⇒ Quality and versatility of events that can be hosted – adds to community ⇒ Proximity to multiplex and Glenwood Centre for change/wash rooms ⇒ North Cowichan ⇒ Natural viewing areas around ⇒ Coquitlam ⇒ Great community appeal, especially in its City Centre location ⇒ Community walking is very popular ⇒ Abbotsford Exhibition Park ⇒ The wide turns ⇒ The cooperation between the Abbotsford Recreation department and the Valley Royals Track Club. We have an excellent working relationship and this means that things get done and the community can bid for high level competitions--which they have and have been successful. ⇒ The fact that Abbotsford Parks and Recreation Dept. maintains the track--resurfacing is completed when necessary and the field event surfaces are upgraded regularly. Facilities for equipment storage are provided. ⇒ The track club aids the schools with equipment for their meets. ⇒ The storage sheds that have been provided to house equipment. ⇒ That the pole vault equipment is able to be left outside since there are sheds that house it. When we need to use the pole vault equipment we only need to push back the sheds. ⇒ There are two runways--facing in opposite directions for the long jump, triple jump and pole vault events. This means that the wind can always be on the back of the athletes. ⇒ The electrical outlets means that the electronic timing equipment can be set up with ease. A special timing tower has been built that houses the timing and results equipment. What don’t you like and would do differently if you started again?

Again, a variety of comments:

⇒ Oak Bay High School ⇒ Full 8 lane track facility with all jump areas and throws areas located inside the track. Spectator areas, washrooms, etc. Proper storage for equipment. We are limited to the number of athletes we can take into our club as the facility is so small. If you are going to build a track facility, do it right and have 8 lanes and all event areas or you will compromise the programs and events which you can hold. For Summer Games you must have an 8 lane track with full facilities or you cannot even bid on the Games. Have a track club involved with or attached to the facility as they will look after the facility and the equipment.

District 69 Track and Field Facility Study – June 2009 57

If it is a community track, then no one cares about maintaining it as it is always someone else's problem [e.g. Swangard Stadium in Burnaby]. ⇒ Kelowna’s Apple Bowl ⇒ Inside curb creates drainage challenges. ⇒ Change rooms and washrooms built to 1980 standards, therefore small and cramped ⇒ Port Alberni ⇒ More permanent lockable storage ⇒ Artificial turf infield ⇒ North Cowichan ⇒ Would make the track more circular, less oval, thus allowing field hockey to run across the field and even out goal wear ⇒ Coquitlam ⇒ Budgeting for the inevitable upgrade costs ⇒ Abbotsford Exhibition Park ⇒ Washroom facilities need upgrading. ⇒ Would have liked the track built so that it took better advantage of wind conditions. Unfortunately, the westerly winds usually mean a head wind on the main straight away. Sprinters don't like that ⇒ UVic Centennial Stadium ⇒ The inside curb is designed very poorly ⇒ Difficult to get a good p/a system working in this large outdoor space Any other comments?

Again, a variety of comments:

⇒ Oak Bay High School ⇒ I don't think that this facility is the best model for you as it is unlike other tracks around the province as it is ONLY a training track. ⇒ Good model for everything except the steeplechase pits [which are backwards forcing the start and finish lines to be flipped for SC events] is the one in North Cowichan. It is the most recent one on the island and it has been done beautifully and has a support group from the city assisting the club with equipment, repairs, new construction. They did it right [except for steeplechase]. ⇒ Claremont High School ⇒ I wouldn't necessarily say that this is a model as we are getting to a point where major maintenance or replacement is necessary and there are no funds at the School District level to do so. We have 2 tracks - one at Claremont and one at Parkland. The Parkland track is now in very poor condition, but was originally supported through a partnership. ⇒ This is no longer a very viable track for major track and field events. The critical aspect of why these installations fail is that while there may be a partnership for the original construction, there is nothing to sustain the facility. There needs to be a sinking fund for major repairs & replacement along with annual maintenance by specialized contractors, not just routine grounds staff. ⇒ Kamloops ⇒ This is part of a major multi-purpose facility and requires cooperation and advance planning from various groups including: soccer (youth and adult), TRU athletics, football, grass hockey, Track, and Lacrosse. (The artificial field inside the track is rated a FIFA One Star and is lined for football, soccer, lacrosse and field hockey.) ⇒ Abbotsford Exhibition Park ⇒ In general--an outstanding track and field facility, excellent

58 Yates, Thorn & Associates Inc.

atmosphere, and great cooperation between the Recreation Commission and the Track Club ⇒ UVic Centennial Stadium ⇒ Major dollars are required to bring this facility up to date . ⇒ Try to keep all vehicles from driving on the track