Plans for new tennis courts near Chardon Middle School took a step forward Oct. 28 when Chardon Planning Commission green-lit the project, with the condition that developers replace a proposed landscape buffer with a fence.
Plans for new tennis courts near Chardon Middle School took a step forward Oct. 28 when Chardon Planning Commission green-lit the project, with the condition that developers replace a proposed landscape buffer with a fence.
The site, a triangular parcel south of the Alcan — the connection drive between the middle and high schools — is the planned location for six courts, a 31-space parking lot and a stormwater basin, said Jeff Henderson of ThenDesign Architecture.
The $1,392,366 project will be funded in part by private donations, said Chardon Schools Treasurer Deb Armbruster Nov. 4. The donor will cover the $1,234,300 cost of the courts, while the school district will fund the parking lot.
A 10-foot-high fence will surround the courts to contain errant balls, Henderson said, adding lighting will be limited to a single fixture illuminating the parking lot.
“At this stage, anyway, there’s no intent to light the tennis courts. Most of the matches are from 3 o’clock to 4, 5 o’clock,” he said. “So, those will happen after school before it gets dark.”
Similar to the existing tennis courts near the pool, the new courts will be open to the community, Henderson said, adding the current courts will remain and may be repurposed for pickleball in the future.
While a 10-foot landscape buffer of evergreens and junipers was originally planned to separate the courts from neighboring residential properties, Commission Vice Chair Mary Jo Stark raised concern about the amount of privacy provided by the landscape buffer.
Commission member Colin Wantz echoed Stark’s concerns, suggesting a solid fence might be a better alternative.
A solid fence could also help prevent young children from accessing the nearby retention basin, commission Chair Andrew Blackley noted.
That the same site had been considered years earlier for basketball courts, commission member Dean Peska recalled, adding that experience gave him some pause.
“We were all a little nervous of the impact it was going to have on the residents around it,” he said. “So, that’s my contention with this is the impact to the residents around here.”
Peska asked whether one of the courts could be eliminated to reduce the project’s footprint and effect on neighbors. He also supported adding a barrier to discourage students from entering nearby yards to retrieve balls.
Assistant Superintendent Steve Kofol opposed reducing the number of courts.
“That current space … is used for football practices, youth football, seventh- and eighth-grade football. There’s quite a bit of action on that piece of property currently,” he said. “I heard some of the concerns about noise and balls flying over the fence. It’s currently being used for football teams, which is way more than what would be for a tennis team of 12-ish.”
It would also take some serious hitting to get balls over the 10-foot fence, he added.
Commission member Lene Hill, who lives near the softball fields, said she constantly finds softballs and strangers in her yard.
“I can see that (the fence) would be a benefit to the residents,” she said.
Several residents who live near the property voiced support of an additional fence.
Resident Dan Bowyer said his property has sometimes been used as overflow parking and he would like to see a fence along his property line.
“Between the old parish house and our property, it’s a shortcut to football games,” said resident Dave Nicholas. “Kids don’t care, they’re just in a hurry to get where they’re going. We’ve had adults come right up our driveway.”
Resident Victoria Nicholas reiterated the trespassing issue, saying she would welcome a fence.
The planning commission ultimately approved the plans on the condition that a six-foot privacy fence be installed in lieu of the landscape buffer.
