Camas consultant: ‘Pool is dying’

Camas leaders heard some bad news about their city’s historic, much-loved Crown Park public swimming pool this week.

“The pool is dying,” consultant Ben Johnson, with Greenworks, PC, told Camas City Council members and Camas Mayor Scott Higgins Monday night, at the council’s Nov. 20 workshop. “We know this is not an easy decision because of the historic significance of the pool.”

Although the outdoor pool, built by the Camas Lions Club and donated to the city in 1954, holds precious memories for many lifelong Camas residents, the pool’s age and related expenses have forced city leaders to consider closing the pool and replacing it with a more modern pool or a less-expensive, interactive water feature.

In July, Randy Curtis, chair of the city’s Parks and Recreation Commission, said the age and condition of the Crown Park pool have concerned city leaders for a while, but that the pool has cost the city more money in recent years.

This past summer, for instance, the city spent about $75,000 to upgrade and repair the pool before it could open to the public in June.

“Almost everything in the pool is failing,” Johnson said Monday night.

Along with Camas Parks and Recreation Manager Jerry Acheson, Johnson presented city council members with a recommendation that took into account the concerns and wishes of more than 1,400 community members, as well as the entire Parks and Recreation Commission.

Instead of repairing the pool, the Parks and Recreation Commission has recommended that city leaders move forward with “Option 2,” a plan that would replace the pool with an interactive water feature, build a restroom at the park, consolidate the two playgrounds at Crown Park into one main playground, keep the park’s tennis courts, improve the trail system, build a multi-sport court where Scout Hall is currently located inside Crown Park and move the Scout Hall building into a more wooded area to give the structure a more rustic, “cabin feel.”

The committee had come up with two options: “Option 1” would have replaced the pool with a more modern outdoor swimming pool. In a survey that collected more than 1,400 responses, community members were divided almost evenly between “replace existing pool with new outdoor, family leisure pool” (38.07 percent) and “replace existing pool with a large, interactive water feature” (38.21 percent). About 10 percent of respondents said the city should renovate the historic pool and 13 percent wanted to replace the pool with a small, interactive water feature.

When the options came before the Parks Commission, Johnson said commissioners grappled with a difficult decision for hours, finally choosing the less-expensive Option 1, which is estimated to cost the city around $5.2 million versus the $10 million for Option 1, which would have build a new outdoor swimming pool.

“They had a very hard decision,” Johnson said of the Parks Commission members.

Curtis said Parks Commission members recommended Option 2 with the caveat that the city pursue a year-round aquatic center — and possible community center.