Consultants pitch multi‑field youth sports complex; commission delays firm selection

Kimley‑Horn and its partners presented a conceptual plan for a new youth sports complex in Enid and described a three‑year schedule, field layouts and operational options. After a roughly hour‑long presentation and commissioner questions, the mayor and board voted to postpone selecting a preferred firm until their Jan. 23 meeting.

The consultants said the project could serve local residents while drawing regional tournaments that bring hotel and restaurant revenue. They proposed a roughly three‑year timeline—about 18 months of design followed by about 18 months of construction—and a mixed program that included multiple multipurpose (rectangular) fields and baseball/softball diamonds, with an initial test fit showing roughly 11–14 fields and about 950 parking stalls on the plan presented.

Why it matters: presenters argued the complex would boost local quality of life and act as an economic catalyst by attracting weekend tournaments; commissioners pressed the team on traffic access, floodplain constraints, utilities and long‑term operations and maintenance costs.

Kimley‑Horn described next steps for design and coordination and emphasized maintenance and operations planning. The consultant team included Darren Scott (project manager, Kimley‑Horn), Jason Kanak (leader, Kimley‑Horn sports task force), civil engineers Austin Burton and Bridal Jones, and MA Plus Architecture principal Heath Tate. They recommended attention to arrival/wayfinding, shared parking, pedestrian connections between the proposed complex and the existing soccer park, and stormwater detention tied to existing ponds on the site.

Consultants also detailed tradeoffs between natural turf and synthetic turf. For high‑use multipurpose fields they recommended synthetic turf because of hour‑of‑use limits for natural grass; they quoted a typical installed synthetic turf cost around $12 per square foot and noted an additional roughly $1 per square foot for shock pads used with some modern infill systems. The team said synthetic turf fields often require documented periodic grooming tied to play hours and that a practical lifecycle for replacement is commonly in the neighborhood of 8–10 years depending on use and product choice. The presenters also described newer infill alternatives (manufactured wood fiber and other organic infills) and how those can reduce surface heat compared with older crumb‑rubber infills, while adding a shock pad to meet impact attenuation needs.

Commissioners raised operational questions about management, local contracting, sequencing and schedule, and local contractor participation in construction. Consultants said Sports Facilities Advisory (SFA) — a partner on the team — can provide management services if the city prefers an external operator. On the question of field flexibility, the consultants showed how larger baseball diamonds can be reconfigured with temporary outfield fences to create multiple youth fields, while warning that temporary fencing requires labor to deploy and may not be used for routine league nights.

After discussion, a motion to postpone selecting a preferred firm until the Jan. 23, 2025 meeting passed unanimously, 6–0. No preferred firm was selected at this meeting; staff were directed to continue negotiations and provide additional engineering input ahead of the next meeting.

Provenance: Presentation began with the consultants’ introduction and site overview (transcript excerpt beginning at the Kimley‑Horn presentation) and concluded with the commission’s vote to table (transcript excerpt at the motion to table).