AGENDA #4h

MEMORANDUM

TO: Mayor and Town Council

FROM: W. Calvin Horton, Town Manager

SUBJECT: Bid: Ephesus Tennis Court Renovation Homestead Park Basketball Court Surfacing

DATE: May 8, 2000

The attached resolution would accept the bid of Court One in the amount of $131,135 for the renovation of six tennis courts at Ephesus Park and the surfacing of the concrete basketball court at Homestead Park.

The project would be funded from the Capital Improvement Program and 1996 Parks bonds.

BID PROCESS

The Notice To Bidders was published in the The Chapel Hill News and the News and Observer on Wednesday, March 8, 2000, and the Challenger Newspaper on Thursday, March 9, 2000. Bids were mailed to ten (10) vendors in North Carolina, and four (4) minority business organizations in North Carolina. Three bids were received on Thursday, April 13, 2000, 3:00 p.m., and were publicly opened and read as follows:

EPHESUS HOMESTEAD

VENDOR TENNIS BASKETBALL TOTAL BID

Court One $115,290 $15,845 $131,135

Raleigh, NC

Advantage Sports Surfaces $118,755 $22,750 $141,505

Morehead City, NC

R&G Construction Company $54,313 $20,380 $74,693

Charlotte, NC

EVALUATION OF BIDS

Town staff reviewed the three (3) bids. The low bid of R&G Construction Company, was the result of an apparent error by the vendor in compiling his bid package. Due to the errors, R&G Construction Company has formally requested to withdraw its bid. They have met the requirement to allow its bid to be withdrawn under the provision of NC law, and have been allowed to withdraw the bid.

After the withdrawal of R&G Construction Company’s bid, Court One’s bid price of $131,135 was deemed the low bid.

DISCUSSION

Tennis Courts Renovation

The bid package is for the installation of a Premier Court surface. This is a 100% closed cell fabric surface, which would be installed over the existing courts.

Our research has revealed several potential advantages related to the Premier Court product:

• The product is waterproof and prevents direct infiltration of rainwater into the subsurface. Because the product is not affixed to the subsurface, it does not experience the normal expansion/contraction cracks eventually found with most court surfaces. Premier Court owners in three states have verified the maintenance-related benefits of the product. Our experience at Cedar Falls and Ephesus Parks has shown that, with the soils found in this area, cracks will begin to form within 3 years of a standard court renovation.
• The product, which was first introduced in 1989, is gaining in popularity. Durham is converting 68 standard courts to Premier Courts.
• The only regular maintenance required is the same occasional application of an acrylic topcoat required for any hard surface tennis court.
• The softer court surface is attractive to casual and older players.
• The softer surface appears to discourage in-line skaters and roller hockey players. In-line skates can seriously damage the acrylic coating on any court surface.

We have also found potential disadvantages with the product:

• Installation of the fabric costs about 40% more than a renovation using a standard hot-mix bituminous concrete surface.
• The product may not be as attractive to some serious players as a standard hard court surface. The softer surface slows play compared to a standard hard court.
• Several tennis professionals commented on the unusual acoustic properties of the surface.

Overall Evaluation of Town Tennis Courts: We have evaluated the condition of all of the Town’s tennis courts and have determined that they all have some damage. However, the Ephesus Park tennis courts are those in the greatest need of repair. The existing court surfaces are cracked in several locations. Several of the cracks have expanded to the point that we have removed the nets on two of the six courts at Ephesus Park and may find it necessary to soon remove two more nets if the courts further deteriorate.

The Cedar Falls Park courts have the next most damaged set of courts. Those courts have some cracks and buckling of the surface. We expect the deterioration of the Cedar Falls courts to accelerate over the next two winters due to the infiltration of water into existing cracks and the resulting freeze/thaw effect. We will continue to monitor conditions at Cedar Falls Park and will remove nets there if necessary. If the Council continues to fund tennis court renovation in the FY 2000-01 and 2001-02 Capital Improvements Programs we would plan on bidding the renovation of Cedar Falls Park tennis courts in the year 2002.

We will continue to monitor the conditions of the courts at Hargraves Park, Umstead Park, Phillips Middle School, and Oakwood Park. It may be possible to keep these courts playable without extensive renovations by using some Small Parks Improvements CIP funds. We would expect to use the last $60,000, scheduled for FY 2002-03 in the Tennis Court Renovation CIP, to make repairs to some or all of these courts. If conditions change, we will present further recommendations to the Council.

Homestead Park Basketball Court Surfacing

The proposal includes placing a Premier Court surface on the concrete basketball court at Homestead Park. The surface would be the same Premier Court product proposed for the tennis courts, with the addition of a hardening substance that would make the court suitable for basketball. It has been our intent to surface the basketball court with either an asphalt surface, such as is found on the outside court at the Northside Gymnasium, or a hot-mix bituminous concrete surface such as is found at the Community Center Park.

We believe the Premier product would have the following advantages over these applications:

• The waterproof fabric should protect the concrete slab from direct infiltration of rainwater. This should help prevent cracking of the slab.
• Experience suggests that the Premier surface should last significantly longer than either an asphalt or hot-mix surface.
• The product should not pool water as easily as asphalt.
• The only regular maintenance required is the same occasional application of an acrylic topcoat as is required by asphalt and bituminous concrete courts
• The softer court surface is easier on players’ knees and ankles than other surfaces found on Town courts.
• The softer surface should discourage in-line skaters and roller hockey players. In-line skates can seriously damage the acrylic coating on any court surface.

We have also found one potential disadvantage with the product:

• Installation of the fabric could costs up to 40% more than a renovation using a standard surface.

The product should eliminate future cracking, reduce maintenance costs, and provide a softer play surface.

Budget

Tennis Courts: The $115,290 required for the tennis court project would come from $120,000 in existing Capital Improvements Program funds. The Council allocated $60,000 each year in FY 1998-99 and 1999-00 as part of a proposed 5-year program to renovate the Town’s tennis courts.

Basketball Court: The $15,845 needed to install the basketball court surfacing would come from the $175,000 in remaining funds currently allocated for completion of Homestead Park. On April 10, 2000 we reported to the Council, as part of the batting cage bid item, that we expected $74,000 in additional costs to complete the park. The basketball surfacing is part of the anticipated $74,000 program.

Schedule

If the Council accepts the bid we anticipate that work would be completed in the summer of 2000. The contractor cannot install the material until a lengthy dry weather forecast is in hand coupled with temperatures of at least 80º F.

RECOMMENDATION

Manager’s Recommendation: That the Council adopt the attached resolution and accept the bid of Court One in the amount of $131,135 for the Ephesus Tennis Court Renovation and Homestead Park Basketball Court Surfacing projects.

A RESOLUTION TO AWARD THE BID FOR EPHESUS TENNIS COURT RENOVATION AND HOMESTEAD BASKETBALL COURT SURFACING (2000-05-08/R-7 )

WHEREAS, the Town of Chapel Hill has solicited formal bids by legal notice in The Chapel Hill News and the News and Observer on March 8, 2000, and the Challenger Newspaper on March 9, 2000, in accordance with N. C. General Statute 143-128 for the renovation and surfacing of the two courts; and

WHEREAS, three (3) bids were received on Thursday, April 13, 2000 at 3:00 p.m., and opened;

EPHESUS HOMESTEAD

VENDOR TENNIS BASKETBALL TOTAL BID

Court One $115,290 $15,845 $131,135

Raleigh, NC

Advantage Sports Surfaces $118,755 $22,750 $141,505

Morehead City, NC

R&G Construction Company $54,313 $20,380 $74,693

Charlotte, NC

WHEREAS, R&G Construction Company made an error in its bid and has formally requested that its bid be withdrawn, and

WHEREAS, the lowest responsive bidder was Court One;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council award the bid of Court One in the amount of $131,135 for the Ephesus Tennis Court Renovation and the Homestead Basketball Court Surfacing.

This the 8^th day of May, 2000.