Irvine Considers Coir-Based Artificial Turf for Some Great Park Sports Fields: Maintenance, Playing Times, Costs
Note: Photo is of one of the various types of lawn equipment that is sometimes used to maintain artificial turf sports fields.
This is the fourth article in a five-part series focusing on an Irvine Staff proposal to use a new coir-based artificial turf product on some Great Park sports fields. The series highlights the artificial turf discussion that occurred at the May 8th Sustainability Commission meeting. The May 8th discussion included the pros and cons of using the coir-based artificial turf product. It also included the pros and cons of artificial turf in general for sports fields. The Great Park Board and Irvine City Council are currently scheduled to decide this issue at the August 13 City Council meeting.
The previous article in this series focused on injury risks, field temperatures, and water use needs as they relate to using the coir-based artificial turf versus using natural grass turf. This article highlights the discussion at the Sustainability Commission on maintenance needs, playing times, and costs as related to artificial turf verses natural grass sports playing fields.
Contradictory Statements: Maintenance, Playing Times, Costs
At the May 8th Sustainability Commission meeting, the following comments were made regarding maintenance, playing times, and costs associated with coir-based turf versus natural grass sports fields.
Speaking in Support
Staff made the following comments:
Artificial turf requires only monthly sanitizing and grooming as well as only needs occasional seams repair. However, grass fields require mowing, resoding worn areas, watering, ongoing weed control, as well as pest and disease management. In addition, grass fields require occasional whole field resoding and specialized treatments such as aerating and drill and fill. Another benefit is that artificial turf needs no heavy pesticide, irrigation, and fertilizing. Therefore, heavy pollution runoff does not occur.
Artificial turf fields can be used 24/7. In fact, artificial turf allows three times more playing hours over its lifetime.* The reason is that little playing time is lost due to weather or field wear and tear. More playing time means more City revenue, since Irvine often requires fees to use the playing fields.
The one-time cost of the initial installation of artificial turf is high when compared to the initial installation of natural grass. However, when the cost is amortized over time, the cost of using artificial turf ends up breaking even in about the eighth year. After that, the fields become income producing. Over time, this would result in a large financial benefit to the City.
Sports Committee Chair Ryan Bertoni, also stated that natural grass does not allow enough playing time. In addition, he said that the Great Park Sports Fields were intended for tournament play. Therefore, the standards for the Great Park sports field are different than for community parks.
Speaking in Opposition
Opposition speakers made the following comments:
Speakers had two main criticisms of Staff comments. First, Staff understated the maintenance needs for the artificial turf. Second, it is questionable that Irvine is adhering to the Irvine organics first ordinance adopted in 2016. Therefore, Irvine is not receiving all the possible benefits of the this ordinance.
Other criticisms were as follows.
Irvine might not end up paying the cost of all the harmful consequence associated with this artificial turf product. Instead, individuals and other government organizations will have to pay the costs. This brings up environmental justice issues.
However, issues such as the GMAX ratings or lack of these ratings for the coir-based turf could causes issues for the City.** Irvine might be required to pay for injuries that occur when participants use this new artificial turf product. So, Staff should check with insurers to determine what using this new product would mean for Irvine from a liability standpoint.
Also, Staff provided no breakdown at the May 8th meeting, either in an accompanying written report or verbally, on how they reached their numbers for costs and playing hours.
Staff Understated Maintenance Needed for Artificial Turf
Staff under-reported the maintenance needs for artificial turf. Artificial turf is not maintenance free. It requires herbicide spraying for weeds, raking due to compaction of the turf, and replacing about eight percent of the infill each year. In addition, maintenance crews must regularly disinfect the artificial turf fields. Another problem is that the coir-based artificial turf dries out easily, so additional watering is needed.
Irvine’s Natural Turf Management Program
“In 2017, the Organic Leadership Award was presented to the City of Irvine by Beyond Pesticides and Pepperdine University for the adoption of Irvine’s Integrated Pest Management Policy.” -City of Irvine
Irvine adopted a natural turf management policy in 2016. By definition, that means no heavy pesticide, irrigation, and fertilizing would be needed to maintain fields.
In fact, Rika Gopinath of Beyond Pesticides’ Parks for a Sustainable Future Program pointed out that adhering to this ordinance should, over time, reduce water use needs and maintenance costs. It should also provide better playing times. However, some questioned if Irvine has followed the spirit of its ordinance. Therefore, some doubt that Irvine has achieved the possible benefits of its organics first turf maintenance ordinance.
Gopinath continued with the following example: The 2020 Irvine Integrated Pest Management (IPM) report showed that the only time that maintenance field crews used pesticides was on artificial turf to kill weeds growing in the artificial turf. This is in spite of the manufacturer pretreating the artificial turf with herbicides. The report showed that Irvine used no synthetic pesticides on the IMP-maintained natural grass fields. Also, Irvine’s policy is to use no synthetic pesticides on its fields, so using artificial turf is not an improvement over natural grass fields in this regard.
The next and last article in this series will focus on the following: recycling of artificial turf and the Sustainability Commission recommendations to the Irvine City Council.
Notes
*Staff estimate is 2,427 hours/year playing time on artificial turf versus 741 hours/year on natural grass. Staff provided no written Staff report with this agenda item at either the May 8th Sustainability Commission or April 17th Community Services Commission meeting. Therefore, the breakdown on how Staff reached its numbers was not apparent.
** “GMAX is a unit of measurement that quantifies the hardness of a surface. The higher the GMAX of a playing surface, the harder, and more dangerous, it is.”—Keystone Sports Construction
