Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Facilities Athletics topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Wapello board hears multi-year plan for baseball and softball field drainage, lighting and clubhouse costs
Summary
Board members and staff discussed chronic drainage problems at the district’s baseball and softball fields, vendor surveys and rough cost estimates ranging from mid-five-figure fixes to more than $1 million for a full complex overhaul; staff will prepare survey elevations and a wish list to inform grant-seeking and budgeting.
The Wapello Community School District board on March 1 heard a staff presentation about recurring drainage and elevation problems at the district’s baseball and softball fields and early cost estimates for repairs and upgrades.
District staff described that water currently runs into the dugouts because the area immediately outside the field fence lacks drainage, and said simply raising dugout floors would likely move water onto the playing surface rather than solve the problem. The staff presentation recommended surveying field elevations, compiling a multi-year renovation plan and developing a formal "wish list" of improvements to present to the board for later approval.
The board was told vendor feedback and prior projects provide widely varying price signals: a previous lighting project at North Park ran about $700,000; a recent combined lighting quote for the baseball/softball fields was discussed as roughly $500,000; a full-complex estimate (lighting, clubhouse, dugouts, infield/grading and drainage work) was described informally as about $1.1 million. Staff emphasized volunteers and grant dollars could substantially reduce the district’s out-of-pocket cost.
"If we just took a little bit of TLC on the south side of the guest dugout and re-seeded it so that water can go to the ditch, that would probably alleviate that problem," the Presenter said, urging a measured, site-specific approach before committing to expensive structural fixes.
Brandon (staff) was asked to assemble a formal wish list of priorities and to return with survey elevations and vendor recommendations so the board can assess phasing and funding options. Board members said they want cost estimates separated by component — for example, lighting versus infield grading — and requested staff seek potential matching grants and volunteer support before programming large capital expenditures.
Next steps: staff will seek control-point surveys and refined bids, pursue grant opportunities for lighting and return with options that separate short-term repairs from full-field reconstruction.
