Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Athletic Facility Fieldhouse topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Architect outlines $18.7M–$20.3M field‑house options for Schuylkill Valley campus

AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Architects from Schroeder Group presented two schematic options for an indoor athletic complex on the Schuylkill Valley campus, with estimated schematic costs of about $18.7 million for a smaller turf option and roughly $20.3 million for a larger turf field.

Schroeder Group presented schematic designs for a proposed indoor athletic complex on the Schuylkill Valley campus and provided cost estimates ranging from roughly $18.7 million to $20.3 million depending on the turf‑field size and related site work.

Harry Petone of Schroeder Group told the board the design team developed two program options and recommended siting the building on the campus southeast quadrant just east of the ticket booth. The first option includes a 30‑yard by 50‑yard indoor turf area, a competition gym with perimeter lanes for a three‑lane track, a roughly 3,000‑square‑foot weight room, locker rooms sized to accommodate about 50 players, training and concessions space and indoor/outdoor storage; the firm estimated that scheme at about $18,700,000.

A second option expands the turf to approximately 40 yards by 50 yards to provide roughly half a football field inside the building; Petone said that variant increases the building size and raises the schematic estimate to about $20,300,000. Both budget figures include building construction, site development, soft costs and contingencies at the schematic level, he said.

Petone said the proposal would require relocating several existing track‑and‑field features (long‑jump/triple‑jump pits and similar events) and moving the junior‑high softball field; those relocations were built into his site‑work estimate. He said the team examined several local precedents and proposed a pre‑engineered metal building to control cost and schedule.

Board members asked about locker capacity and whether storage or ticket‑booth work would be included; Petone confirmed two team rooms with about 100 half‑height lockers apiece and said his current budget did not include improvements beneath the stadium bleachers or ticket‑booth relocation. He set a preliminary schedule that would carry schematic design through the summer, design development into September and construction documents by the end of the year, with bidding dependent on land‑development and stormwater approvals.

No board action or funding commitment was taken at the meeting; Petone and the district said additional design and land‑development reviews will follow before any request for financing or construction is brought to the board.