Tally the baseball field cost

[Guest]

Let's use this thread to tally the baseball field cost.

[Cranbury Conservative]

The orignal approved cost was $300,000

[Cranbury Conservative]

Last night the TC agreed to spend between $20,000 and $30,000 to move the fences

[Guest]

How much additional funds are needed for the HazMat cleanup that also wasnt planned for when the ballfield was approved by the TC? I think is far more then 30K overrun

[Guest]

Who is managing the ballfield project?

[Jay T.]

This are all good questions. When I've asked the TC members they have not given me a response. I emailed Ms. Smeltzer the town administrator this morning asking this question. As soon as I receive a response I will post it here.

My guess is that this is not an easy answer given all the issues that popped up and the changes that were made.

[Guest]

9/11 (Thu): Special Township Committee Meeting:

a). Resolution # R 09-08-164 – approving Change Order No. 1 to Township’s Contract with Precise Construction, Inc. in the amount of $29,970 for additional fencing and the re-setting of the backstop for the Babe Ruth Baseball Field.

[Jay T.]

I wanted to post an update. My email to Ms. Smeltzer was neither acknowldeged nor responded to. I shall post an update every couple of days on where this stands and will follow up with her via phone if I do not get a response.

I must say she's normally responsive, so I wonder whether:

1) The town even knows the total cost of the ballfield.

-or-

2) Whether she's under orders not to release the data (violation of law since this is public information)

[Jay T.]

Just to be clear, I am a big supporter of the work Ms. Smeltzer does and she has done a very good job for our town and our residents. She is very responsive and supportive of our town. So my prior post is not at all an indication on her capabilities or effort. I was very pleased when we were able to bring her back after Mr. Witt left.

I just think it may be the case that the TC is putting in her in a poor and unfair position right now of having to manage resident requests and also adhere to her bosses (TC) mandates. Thus my explanaition about why I may not have had a response.

My hope is that Ms. Smeltzer will bring the request before the TC if she cannot provide me with the data and ask them for a response.

[Jay T.]

On August 11, our Town Engineer stated that Babe Ruth asked for the fencing change. When the Engineer reviewed the fencing and the league requirements (of which I am sure we paid another fee) it was determined that the fence met the criteria established.

I would hope that the TC understanding the residents fustration would tell the league a change order was considered, but the expense to major to make a change that is not necessary. The fact that they are looking at the higher of the two bids leads me to assume this is a done deal already.

[Guest]

[Jay T.]

On Page 13, of the August 11 meeting notes it states the following:

Ms. Marcelli advised that there were some concerns raised regarding the grading of the Babe Ruth Baseball field and the location of the fence along the foul line. She advised the grading and fence are compliant with the contract plans and with Babe Ruth Baseball standards. Ms. Stave
stated that she feels that ball field looks fantastic and is proud of the Project. Ms. Stave addressed the second phase which will include the bleachers, dugouts and scoreboard and recommended that a grant application be made to the County. Ms. Marcelli advised that the irrigation system is in place and she is obtaining the cost to extend it to the West Property soccer fields.


-------------------------------------------

You are correct in your statements.

My view is pretty simply, I asked the town this question along with the total costs.

1) If the fence is correct and it is just the league asking to change for looks or for some other reason then why is this our responsability? The answer should be an emphatic no.

2) If the engineer is incorrect in her statement from August 11, then there is a clear issue on the contractor or engineer's part in the initial design. Therefore, they should indemnify the town. The TC relies on expert opinion during build outs such as this. Therefore, it is up to our contractors to advise the correct and appropriate steps.

In terms of the cost, I'll clarify since it was poorly stated by myself.

Two change orders were submitted on Monday night. One was for about 20,000 and it covered the cost of re-setting the fences. The other was for 30,000 and included moving the backstop and fences.

The TC is entertaining the higher change order which includes the back stop. Yet, at the August 11 meeting there was no mention of the backstop issue, nor did the engineer state an issue on Monday. I cannot say when the backstop issue arose or if it is a violation of league standards. However, since they received a change order without impacting the back stop my guess is that there is no remediation required with this item.

BTW, in the interest of full disclosure, I also post under James on this forum, but for the purposes of my email to the town coinciding with this exchange I used a different posting name on this thread.

[Cranbury Conservative]

"Ms. Marcelli advised that there were some concerns raised regarding the grading of the Babe Ruth Baseball field and the location of the fence along the foul line. She advised the grading and fence are compliant with the contract plans and with Babe Ruth Baseball standards."

The question here is very simply: Then why are we making this change?

"Ms. Stave stated that she feels that ball field looks fantastic and is proud of the Project. Ms. Stave addressed the second phase which will include the bleachers, dugouts and scoreboard and recommended that a grant application be made to the County. Ms. Marcelli advised that the irrigation system is in place and she is obtaining the cost to extend it to the West Property soccer fields."

My question here is: Was second phase of the ball fields "bleachers, dugouts and scoreboard" costs included in the orgianal $300,000 to be spent for the ball field?

[Guest]

[Jay T.]

That is a good question. My guess is because the turf and building of the field is such that it requires more protection than the other little league fields. I personally don't believe any property that is town owned should have restrictions. This was a statement made at a meeting and I can't find (or they did not publish the notes).

Just some information. I remember being kicked off a little league field many years ago while having a sandlot game. The coach came out and said he had a practice. Being a smart aleck I said did you reserve the field knowing that it's public and the only way to kick kids off was to reserve it. He said no, and we all ended up leaving still, but it always stuck on me that we shouldn't make things exclusive that tax payers pay for.

If I want to play catch (I'm 34 so I don't play catch too often anymore) on the babe ruth field or if kids want to go there after school they should have that right. However, I would imagine some kids will jump the fence and play. I would have no issue with that and don't see our police officers arresting kids for a pick up game. If Babe Ruth doesn't like it let them buy it from the town.

[Guest]