Schererville considers master plan for former Louisiana Speedway; consultants propose band shell, rec center and trails

Schererville town staff and the park board heard a presentation from American StructurePoint on plans to redevelop the former Louisiana Speedway into a multiuse park, with a target to finalize a master plan by the end of June.

The consultants presented site analysis, community survey results and a preliminary program that emphasizes a band shell or amphitheater, a recreation center, multiuse trails and pavilion space. StructurePoint landscape architect Mark Underwood said, “The whole goal of this meeting is really try and get everyone on the same page,” and described the presentation as an early step toward concept diagrams and a final master plan.

Why it matters: the parcel sits along U.S. Route 30 and adjacent to the Pennsy Greenway and existing park fields, so redevelopment could change recreation access, traffic patterns and maintenance obligations for the town. Consultants and staff said the recommendations are at a schematic level and will be refined based on leadership and public feedback.

StructurePoint project manager Michelle Dyer summarized the mapping and notes the team received from town meetings and the public. She said the graphic “is basically trying to show graphically some of the data” gathered so far, including locations the team identified for a pavilion, a playground and a potential event venue. Dyer also pointed to a wetland in the northeast corner of the site and existing on‑site utility lines as factors the team will consider when laying out uses.

The consultants reported roughly 800 survey respondents. Their analysis shows the community favors green, passive space as well as features such as an amphitheater/band shell, a recreation center, and multiuse trails; town leadership responses placed a recreation center and pavilion among top priorities as well. The team plans to develop three “bubble” concept diagrams, then preliminary plans, then one master plan after public review and an open house.

Site constraints flagged in the presentation include wetlands in the northeast corner, limited existing utility infrastructure, and restricted access on U.S. Route 30 that may require coordination with INDOT for any new full access. The consultants did not present a parking plan at this stage; they said parking requirements will depend on the preferred mix of uses (for example, concerts versus daily community recreation).

Budget and schedule: Pat Reardon, a town staff member participating in the project lead, told the group the consultants and town have discussed high‑level costs and that a full buildout would be on the order of “a hundred million dollars,” a figure he called “not realistic” for immediate implementation. Reardon said the project will be phased and that more specific budget figures will be developed as components are defined. The presenters and staff named “tens of millions of dollars” as a more plausible range for significant phases and gave examples of comparable projects with multiyear, multimillion‑dollar costs.

Several council and park board members emphasized operations and maintenance costs as a central concern. One park board member said the June schedule “sounds great” but warned the town should avoid creating “an albatross” by building elements the parks department cannot sustain. A park board member and town staff urged that operations estimates accompany design options so elected officials can weigh long‑term budget impacts against capital costs.

Next steps described by the team include completing concept diagrams that show parking and access scenarios, presenting alternatives in a public forum or open house, obtaining civil engineering and architectural input, and refining a master plan for the end of June (the presenters noted the schedule could shift if additional public engagement is needed). The team said they have incorporated recently purchased parcels into the study area and will circulate the current PDF plan to town staff for review.

No formal actions or votes were taken during the study session; the meeting was for information, public feedback and direction on next steps. Town staff asked attendees to send comments to project contacts so the consultant team can incorporate them into the concept phase.