UCCCJSD board of trustees meeting tennis court rebuild moves forward
April 13, 2022 at 8:19 p.m.
Union County College Corner Joint School District Board of Trustees reviewed a proposal by Fred Prazeau of Context Design on renovating the school's tennis courts at the board's April 11 meeting.
Prazeau explained he and his wife run Context Design, an Indianapolis-based landscape architecture firm, specializing in athletic facilities. Context has worked with and was recommended by Performance Services, who manages the districts' building improvements.
Performance had planned to resurface the districts' tennis courts as part of an upcoming round of renovations; however, Performance found structural deficiencies in the court requiring more significant repair. Prazeau explained multiple attempts have been made to repair the cracks in the court, but the patches that have been installed are merely a temporary repair and will not fix the underlying problems in the court. The court is now in need of a complete rebuild.
The proper repair is to strip the existing asphalt surface, stabilize the rock substrate beneath and resurface with fresh asphalt, or concrete. Alternately, the district could choose to build in a new location. By choosing a new location, disrupting the school's tennis schedule is avoidable, but the location will need some significant nontechnical work. Prazeau proposed a possible location south of Union County Middle School.
The pros and cons between asphalt and concrete were reviewed. Asphalt used to the be the standard surface for school courts, but the 12 to 15-year lifespan has been overshadowed by concrete's 20 to 30 year lifespan, at a 30 to 40 percent higher price.
Prazeau proposed preparing the project to go to bid in the fall with construction starting in 2023. The pandemic has reduced the number of athletic facility contractors bidding for projects, so the time between the bidding process and start of construction has spread out. Current projects of a similar scope are running approximately $130,000 for asphalt and $145,000 for concrete. Prazeau warned that the market is experiencing significant price volatility and projected prices next year to be higher, offering a guess of $140,000 for asphalt and $180,000 for concrete.
Board member Jessica Jones asked if the court replacement was budgeted in the facility improvement plan. Superintendent Aron Borowiak replied resurfacing the tennis courts was planned; however, upon inspection of the courts, it was determined a full-depth replacement of the court was required. In order to make room in the budget, other projects, like door handle replacements, acoustic panels in the auxiliary gym and roof replacement over the agriculture shop, will be delayed.
Jones asked for more information on the door handle replacements. District maintenance director Jeff Cerqua explained classrooms should have their doors locked most of the time; most rooms have had locks retrofitted to the doors. New door hardware with integrated locks are planned to replace any outdated hardware in the district's schools.
Jones stated new door locks are essential to ensure safety in the schools and should not be pushed back to rebuild the tennis courts. Board president Mary Eversole asked Borowiak to calculate a total for the door handle replacement project. Later in the meeting, Borowiak reported the door handle replacement is estimated to cost approximately $175,000.
Board member Doug Gardner inquired about the scope of a full-depth court replacement. Prazeau replied the asphalt surface, likely between four and five inches, would be stripped off. The stone base underneath can be retained, although additional stabilization or compaction of the stone may be required. Another option that may be laying a layer of stone on top of the existing asphalt and a concrete slab over top, although this would result in an elevated surface that may cause accessibility problems.
The board discussed related costs to building at the proposed location south of the middle school. Prazeau reported the costs to build the courts would not be significantly different whether the old location was retained to the new location built. While the new location would require additional groundwork to level, the old location will require demolition of the existing court. Prazeau suggested the engineering team could come up with more
accurate estimates once survey work and soil samples are completed, or the board can choose to seek contractor bids using either location. However, moving to the new location would free up the old court to be used as additional parking space. Board member Darrell Harvey suggested taking into account the value of added parking when considering the new location.
Latest News
E-Editions
Events
Union County College Corner Joint School District Board of Trustees reviewed a proposal by Fred Prazeau of Context Design on renovating the school's tennis courts at the board's April 11 meeting.
Prazeau explained he and his wife run Context Design, an Indianapolis-based landscape architecture firm, specializing in athletic facilities. Context has worked with and was recommended by Performance Services, who manages the districts' building improvements.
Performance had planned to resurface the districts' tennis courts as part of an upcoming round of renovations; however, Performance found structural deficiencies in the court requiring more significant repair. Prazeau explained multiple attempts have been made to repair the cracks in the court, but the patches that have been installed are merely a temporary repair and will not fix the underlying problems in the court. The court is now in need of a complete rebuild.
The proper repair is to strip the existing asphalt surface, stabilize the rock substrate beneath and resurface with fresh asphalt, or concrete. Alternately, the district could choose to build in a new location. By choosing a new location, disrupting the school's tennis schedule is avoidable, but the location will need some significant nontechnical work. Prazeau proposed a possible location south of Union County Middle School.
The pros and cons between asphalt and concrete were reviewed. Asphalt used to the be the standard surface for school courts, but the 12 to 15-year lifespan has been overshadowed by concrete's 20 to 30 year lifespan, at a 30 to 40 percent higher price.
Prazeau proposed preparing the project to go to bid in the fall with construction starting in 2023. The pandemic has reduced the number of athletic facility contractors bidding for projects, so the time between the bidding process and start of construction has spread out. Current projects of a similar scope are running approximately $130,000 for asphalt and $145,000 for concrete. Prazeau warned that the market is experiencing significant price volatility and projected prices next year to be higher, offering a guess of $140,000 for asphalt and $180,000 for concrete.
Board member Jessica Jones asked if the court replacement was budgeted in the facility improvement plan. Superintendent Aron Borowiak replied resurfacing the tennis courts was planned; however, upon inspection of the courts, it was determined a full-depth replacement of the court was required. In order to make room in the budget, other projects, like door handle replacements, acoustic panels in the auxiliary gym and roof replacement over the agriculture shop, will be delayed.
Jones asked for more information on the door handle replacements. District maintenance director Jeff Cerqua explained classrooms should have their doors locked most of the time; most rooms have had locks retrofitted to the doors. New door hardware with integrated locks are planned to replace any outdated hardware in the district's schools.
Jones stated new door locks are essential to ensure safety in the schools and should not be pushed back to rebuild the tennis courts. Board president Mary Eversole asked Borowiak to calculate a total for the door handle replacement project. Later in the meeting, Borowiak reported the door handle replacement is estimated to cost approximately $175,000.
Board member Doug Gardner inquired about the scope of a full-depth court replacement. Prazeau replied the asphalt surface, likely between four and five inches, would be stripped off. The stone base underneath can be retained, although additional stabilization or compaction of the stone may be required. Another option that may be laying a layer of stone on top of the existing asphalt and a concrete slab over top, although this would result in an elevated surface that may cause accessibility problems.
The board discussed related costs to building at the proposed location south of the middle school. Prazeau reported the costs to build the courts would not be significantly different whether the old location was retained to the new location built. While the new location would require additional groundwork to level, the old location will require demolition of the existing court. Prazeau suggested the engineering team could come up with more
accurate estimates once survey work and soil samples are completed, or the board can choose to seek contractor bids using either location. However, moving to the new location would free up the old court to be used as additional parking space. Board member Darrell Harvey suggested taking into account the value of added parking when considering the new location.