Also, this is a great collection of articles concerning the many communities right here in Western PA that have recently made the move to turf:
Upper St. Clair - Recent Turf and Lighting
Project Completed at Boyce Middle School
http://www.uscsd.k12.pa.us/cms/lib02/PA01000033/Centricity/Domain/18/AthFieldsPresentation061410.pdf
Peters Township -
1. Pleasant Valley Elementary Turf and Lighting
Project - ...The project includes a turfed soccer/lacrosse/football
field, restroom facilities, additional parking, a basic sound system, basic
concession stands, lighting, bleachers and improved access to the field and
Pleasant Valley parking lots...Golembiewski said the athletic field project is
not so much a priority as it is a necessity and a fair decision. “Every board
member here should be commended to have the courage to make a tough decision,
because this is a tough decision,” she said. “This will be the need of many of
our kids. It is the worst time to spend money, but it is the best time to spend
money if you look at the interest rates.”
2. Peterswood Park Turf and Lighting Project - Peters
council has voted to spend $895,430 to install artificial turf on a soccer
field at Peterswood Park
Bethel Park - Fundraising to Turf Over
Park Avenue Community Field - "The goal is to raise money to install, with
the municipality, synthetic turf at the Park Avenue field..."
Fox Chapel - Recently Completed All Turf
Baseball Field...The baseball diamond is just one part of a three-pronged
renovation project to on-campus athletic facilities. O’Brien calls it “phase
1.” “Phase 2” is an all-turf, 90-yard practice field for football,
lacrosse, soccer and other sports. “Phase 3” is an updated softball field,
which also will have a turf infield. Ground has yet to be broken for the second
and third projects. “Someone will always have a turf field to play on or
practice on now,” O’Brien said.
North Park - Allegheny County paid
$836,000 from its capital budget for the improvements at Lt. J.C. Stone Field
in North Park...The North Park football field is a popular location, she said.
As a result of heavy use in previous years by high school, middle school and
other teams, the natural grass field was "turning into a mud pit,"
she said. The new surface will hold up better, allow for more games and reduce
maintenance costs, she said.
South Park - 2005 - Non-profit entity
built soccer field turf facility on land leased from Jefferson Memorial Park.
This complex is the first turf facility in the South Hills not affiliated
with a school district.
Recent High School Stadium Turf Projects:
North Allegheny - 2008 - The North
Allegheny school board approved an $860,000 bid Wednesday from Sports
Construction Group of Cleveland to replace the artificial turf and fix the
surrounding track at Newman Stadium.
Gateway - 2012 - Turf replacement
set to begin at Antimarino Stadium
Penn Hills - 2012 - Penn Hills will use a
$200,000 grant from the Steelers...to install synthetic turf, new bleachers and
a scoreboard.
Did anyone notice that at least four of these fields were done by grants or fundraising and not taxpayer monies. While this may be a worthwhile endeavor, it falls short of the lengthy list of basic maintenance that the municipality is not taking care of. What happens in 8-10 years when the municipality has no funding at all available to replace the turf or has to cut back on the maintenance? This too will pass into the sad state that the Rec Center, Outdoor Pool, and other LEBO facilities are falling into.
ReplyDeletePursuing grants is something that we would certainly do if this plan was approved. What is important to understand about grants, especially those for field projects, is that the grant provider wants to know that the project and/or the site plan have been approved. For lighting grants, the installation of the lights must be approved prior to the grant application.
ReplyDeleteSo yes, we are very anxious to pursue grants from a variety of sources and we believe that we have an excellent chance at securing grant funding for this field. Unfortunately, we can't even move forward with those initiatives and applications until the overall plan has been approved.
Ok. That makes sense but you didn't address the underlying question of funding sources other than the taxpayers. You also did not answer my question about ongoing maintenance if the municipality lacks the necessary funding to repair/replace the turf. What will happen then - a recommendation to resod the fields? I have spent the better part of my career in highly complex technical fields. One of the things people always want to shortcut on is an impartial evaluation of the lifecycle costs. It is easy to draw a circle around part of the life and make any justification you desire, but life is life, so my follow-up question is this - what is the 40 year lifecycle cost of this field with turf and with sod. This needs to include ALL ancillary activities and costs like disposal, transportation, emissions, etc. While it won't address the more subjective matters like injury rate, field hours available, etc. it is a good and necessary place to start. I've seen a number of comments relative to studies performed. U of Michigan did a good study which indicates a lower life cycle cost for grass. The turf vendors have their own studies which I would consider at the least slightly biased in their favor. I would urge the commissioners to insist on a true life cycle cost by someone independent and with credibility. I don't personally believe that YSA has the credibility to do this. Sorry for the questions interspersed with statements and views and appreciate the constructive dialogue. In case you wonder, I'm really neutral on the specific issue of turf and more concerned about the broader fiscal impact of this as well as other decisions being made by the commission. As the Aqua Club is a paying member of the YSA, I'd also appreciate the perspective on what should be done about the pool. What are our dues going to support?
ReplyDeleteWith respect to ongoing maintenance, I would assume that - consistent with all of the discussions to date - user fees will offset some of the maintenance expense. Further, I assume that if we install a turf field, the municipal staff will budget for (including the implementation of appropriate user fees) its ultimate disposal and replacement costs. I fail to see how this asset would be treated any differently than any other asset simply because its a field.
ReplyDeleteI suppose if we start with the assumption that we will fail, there's not much to debate. However, I would offer that if done correctly, the life cycle cost of a turf field is much lower than maintaining our collection of grass fields over the same period of time (assuming again that those fields would be maintained correctly and not ignored).
The companies that have submitted bids all address the issues of disposal, recycling, emissions etc. and they do so with independent information and analysis.
I think it's important to stress that we will be the beneficiary of the knowledge gained through the many municipalities and similar entities who have ventured down this road ahead of us. We are not reinventing the wheel here by any stretch.
I can't speak to the Aqua Club's involvement with the YSA at this point, but I will check. I don't think they have contributed funds at the same level as the field sports, but again I will try to confirm. Personally, I support any initiative to improve/update the pool and its facilities.
I agree with the previous posters suggestion that a life cycle cost analysis might be beneficial. I have no idea how we would know "whether the muni lacks the necessary funding for future repairs" 20, 30 or 40 years from now, or if this request is even realistic. Wouldn't that be mostly speculative? I would think we could ask this same question about every single service that is now being funded by the community.
ReplyDeleteNot opposed to it....just not sure how realistic this is.
Proceed with caution. I am a resident of Peters Twp and there are problems with this recent installation. While it was pushed through as a "multi-use" field. In fact, existing users (other sports programs) are being pushed off of the field in favor of making it exclusively a soccer complex. Essentially a public park once enjoyed by thousands of residents is now only for a couple of hundred kids. I would look long and hard at the facts, pros and cons and make sure the public at large wants the so called improvement (not just a small special interst group).
ReplyDelete