Trustees review ECHS track, turf proposal
By BRENDA SOMMER bsommer@leader-news.com

The ECISD board of trustees got a look at how artificial turf and a new track at Ricebird Stadium would look and be drained during their regular meeting this month.

David Barger, an engineer from Lamb & Barger Consulting Engineers, along with Malcolm Gaus of RWS Architects showed the board a layout of the stadium, focused on drainage for the project Nov. 19.

The track would be taken out all the way to its base, which would be replaced, as well as most of the inside curbing, Barger said. The two current drainage ditches on the field are shallow, and would be replaced by a larger drainage system that would not require big square drainage grates in the D-shaped spaces beyond the field's end zone.

Engineers' first inclination was to raise the field and track to ensure good drainage, but they decided instead to drain the area to a 36-inch storm sewer on Norris Street.

The deep rock base under the new turf would act as a holding tank as well, accepting water but slowing its release into the storm sewer, Barger said.

"It may help other drainage on campus," he said. "We're not saying that if Norris floods (the storm sewer) won't back up - we can't solve that problem."

The stadium's field inside the track would be excavated then stabilized with lime on the subgrade, followed by a 30-millimeter plastic liner like those used in landfills. That liner keeps water from entering the subgrade, which would make the field move during heavy rains.

Above the liner will be a sloped layer, 8 to 14 inches deep, of two types of rock, which will act as a reservoir for rain runoff.

"The field becomes, really, a bathtub, and that's what we want," Barger said.

Barger showed trustees several randomly-selected types of artificial turf samples, but said the decision on which of the myriad types available the district wants should be made by ECISD.

"I kind of think Coach (Bob) Gillis should make that decision - he's the expert," said trustee David Hodges.

The board should have bids to look over when they meet again in December.

A second round of bids to fix the track at Ricebird Stadium was rejected in September, as the El Campo ISD board waits to have a look at a new, third set of bids, expected next month.

During discussion back in September, the board realized that if it wanted to resurface the track, installing artificial turf at the stadium meant the track project needed to include drainage and other modifications to ensure the turf could be properly installed. As well, having the track replaced and artificial turf installed at the same time could result in cost savings, so in part for those reasons, a decision on the bids was delayed.

The board directed Superintendent Mark Pool to have the district's architects prepare bid specifications for three different projects, so trustees can find out the cost to:

• Replace the track with drainage and other engineering included that would allow artificial turf to be installed at any time;

• Install artificial turf; and

• Do both projects at the same time.

Consequently, trustees voted unanimously to formally reject the second round of track repair bids during September.

El Campo ISD administration did some serious number crunching and came up with a way to pay for upgrades to Ricebird Stadium and the high school science building, but the district's savings account will take a hit if plans go forward.

According to figures provided to district trustees at their Nov. 17 board meeting, coming up with the estimated $5,384,302 needed for the two projects means delaying other projects and dropping the district's savings to a less-thanoptimum amount.

Between fund balance money and cash set aside to cover unexpected overages at the new middle school construction project, it appears the district might have enough money to do both projects soon.

The track/turf project and science building renovations are part of $15 million in improvements the district has identified and prioritized in recent months.

Three bids to fix the track were received and rejected in September, ranging from $477,000 to $515,135. That was the second time the project was put out to bid, because the first attempt in June yielded only one bid, for $447,200, way more than the $226,810 set aside in this year's budget to repair and resurface the track. That bid was rejected.