Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Capital Projects topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board advances athletic-field design review and details $1M in facility grant awards
Summary
Board presenters recommended moving forward with a design phase for a softball-field reorientation (4% design fee, 15% contingency estimated) and announced roughly $1 million in facility-improvement grant awards; design and contracts will be reviewed at a work session before execution.
The Littlestown Area SD board heard a presentation proposing a design phase for athletic-field improvements, including reorienting the softball field, and reviewed recent competitive facility-improvement awards that together total about $1 million for district projects.
An unidentified presenter summarized the FBS committee’s recommendation: rather than renovating practice fields, the committee proposes pursuing reorientation/relocation of the softball field based on a feasibility study by Kirkpatrick Field. The presenter said the design firm’s fee would be estimated at a 4% design percentage, with a 15% contingency included to cover unforeseen items such as utility relocation or dugout replacement. The presenter explained the 4% is an estimated ceiling and that final fees and contingency would be reconciled after bids are received.
Board members discussed the procurement flow — that design estimates would be reconciled with bid results and that the design firm would refund or reallocate fees if bid totals were lower — and emphasized the contingency’s role to cover change orders. Several members questioned why athletic elements were not completed in the prior building project and debated timing and scope reductions the board had previously approved.
Separately, presenters reported the district was awarded facility-improvement grant funding for two submissions: roughly $500,000 for each submission, for about $1 million total. The presenter listed project estimates and noted that the award’s share was approximately 15% of submitted amounts (not the 75% originally expected), which requires the district to scale project scopes or identify additional funding. Sample line items presented included HVAC and pneumatic upgrades in shop areas, window replacements, and high-school work; the presenter listed aggregate net project figures and stated the total project cost less grant funding would be about $2,900,000 for one package and quoted other line-item figures as discussion points.
What’s next: The presenter asked the committee to approve moving the design recommendation to the next work session. Board members agreed to review any contract materials at the work session and said no contract would be executed until required post-approval steps were complete.
