Brentwood Council members approve royal blue for track surface
By Brittany Goncar
Published: Wednesday, June 19, 2013, 9:00 p.m.
They are back to blue.
After switching from blue to red in an effort to save money on the Brentwood Stadium track, council members approved a change in colors to royal blue.
The vote passed 3-2, with councilmen Rich Schubert and John Frombaugh dissenting. Clyde Zimmerman and Ann Schade were absent.
Council members in April awarded $1.6 million in contracts for phases one and two of the Brentwood Park improvements, which will include a six-lane 400-meter track and turf field for the stadium, a dek hockey rink, one tennis court, one basketball court and two baseball fields.
Originally, it was estimated that $29,000 would be saved if the red track was selected over the blue. It turns out that the savings will be $10,207 with the blue Plexitrac surface costing $139,000 and the red Plexitrac surface coming in at $128,793.
“I don't want to spend this amount of money and have something that's unappealing with the eye,” Councilman Marty Vickless said.
Council then voted 4-1 on the royal blue track over a lighter blue, with Schubert dissenting. There is no price change between the two blue colors.
And they weren't done with the color planning.
The use of Vegas gold to outline lettering in the football field end zones also was approved. The choice will continue to tie in Brentwood's school colors of blue and gold. The vote passed 5-0.
Overwhelmed by colors, council voted 5-0 to stick with a solid turf field over a 5- or 15-yard alternation pattern. There would have been no additional work or cost for the alternating colors.
Brittany Goncar is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. She can be reached at 412-388-5803 or email@example.com.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- Thomas Jefferson’s first Mini-THON nets maxi-results
- Vocal resident banned from all Baldwin-Whitehall district property
- Baldwin officials think outside the pool