New Search
EUGENE Public Works <br /> Maintenance <br /> 1820 Roosevelt Boulevard <br /> M E M O R A N D U M Eugene, Oregon 97402 <br /> (503) 687 -5220 <br /> October 22, 1993 <br /> TO: Eugene Mayor and City Council <br /> FROM: John Etter, Public Works Maintenance <br /> SUBJECT: Lighted Ballfields Alternatives Analysis <br /> Public Works Maintenance staff held a public meeting at Monroe <br /> Middle School on 10/12/93 on the subject of lighting two of the <br /> athletic fields at Ascot Park. Following a review of the input <br /> received, staff have taken a look at a wider range of criteria <br /> and developed some cost estimates to determine whether Ascot is <br /> the most appropriate facility wherein to add ballfield lights to <br /> replace field lighting removed from Kincaid Park fields. <br /> Prior to the public meeting, and during this staff analysis, the <br /> contractor has been directed to stop work at the Ascot site. The <br /> value of the work in the ground is a little over $5000. The <br /> lighting components are a special fabrication item based on the <br /> Ascot Park layout. The city is obligated to purchase that <br /> package for about $70,000. The contractor is agreeable to <br /> postponing the work until the next construction season, and <br /> possibly resume at another site. Reengineering the lights to fit <br /> another site would cost $125. <br /> First, the list of alternative sites that were suggested or have <br /> been considered by staff includes Cal Young Middle School, <br /> Crescent Park, Jefferson Middle School (next to Graham Field), <br /> Century - Amazon Soccer (next to Roosevelt Middle School), <br /> Churchill /Kennedy schools, North Westmoreland, and <br /> Sheldon /Meadowlark schools. For a site to be considered, it had <br /> to have the capacity to accommodate both soccer and softball. <br /> Second, the criteria considered are of two types: the first has <br /> to do with general city planning issues -- impacts of the <br /> improvement on the surrounding land. The capacity of streets to <br /> handle traffic, parking, noise and visual /lighting impacts are in <br /> the first group. The second criteria include program and <br /> operational issues - -how much it costs to increase the carrying <br /> capacity from the present level, the quality of the facilities, <br /> the financial and social consequences of not providing sufficient <br /> athletic opportunities, and cost /benefit ratios. The costs <br /> described are over and above the costs to light Ascot according <br /> to the current contract. <br /> 1 <br />