2023 12 19 City Council Meeting Packet

Unverified text extraction. Check the original page for numbers, names, and layout.

t
o crack repair and resurfacing existing courts, we cannot / do not offer any implied, stated or written 
warranty of any kind due to the natural movement of the earth’s surface and the common freeze / thaw 
cycles that we experience in East Tennessee.  Repaired cracks will re-open.”  Therefore, you are comparing 
a short-term repair of $67,000 to a rebuild for just more than $1,000,000 which will result in a project 
which should last at least twenty years with routine maintenance.   
Action Item 
The City Council must decide if it wants to maintain the facilities  currently at Ingleside which have been 
there for over thirty years, regardless of whether Pickleball is added to the facility or not.  The current 
base bid allows for the continued use of the facility for Tennis while also adding Pickleball play without 
expanding the current footprint.  It is unfortunate the cost of a long-term repair is more than $1,000,000 
but that is the current cost of performing the needed repairs and the cost will only increase if the repairs 
are deferred.  While the cost may seem high, the fact we received five bids and if all portions of the project 
were approved the difference between the low and high bid is approximately 11% of the low bid 
demonstrates the pricing is consistent with the current market cost for this scope of work. 
I
f the project is not approved, there is a high probability a minimum of half the Tennis Courts will be closed 
next Spring.  Additional parking has been needed for a while and it serves the pool and skatepark as well 
as the current Tennis courts.  The cost of this alternative is reasonable because you are getting the benefit 
of the pavers already being on site paving work the Tennis Courts.  The cost will be higher to do this later 
as a stand-alone project. 
Th
erefore, the staff  recommends accepting the base bid from Baseline and encourages approval of 
Alternate #1 to add additional parking.  We recommend rejecting Alternate #2 for lighting , but we will 
continue to pursue more cost-effective ways to improve the lighting. 
46