Turf Field Recommended For Westfield's Edison School After Study

WESTFIELD, NJ — Despite concerns from the community that synthetic turf is a health hazard and costly, CME Associates, the town's engineering firm, has recommended that the Town of Westfield move forward with the turf project at the Edison School Field after conducting an in-depth study.

The engineering firm assessed the up-front costs of the turf project, maintenance and upkeep costs over time, cost comparisons to natural grass fields, field capacity and the pros/cons of using stadium lights before making its recommendation.

"Based on the information reviewed by our office in preparation of this assessment as well as our own experience in the construction of natural grass and synthetic turf fields, we recommend that the Town of Westfield move forward with a synthetic turf project at the Edison School Field," CME wrote.

"Based on the demand for fields within the Town and the fact that recreation teams, especially soccer and lacrosse, are currently using fields out of Town for practices and in some cases home games, a synthetic turf project is the best way to maximize field usage for both the Board of Education and Recreation Leagues," the engineering firm concluded.

Project Background

Currently, Edison Intermediate School has a natural grass field located between the school and the Robinson's Branch of the Rahway River.

The field includes a full-size baseball field with a grass infield, which is utilized primarily by the Westfield High School varsity baseball team. The overall field area east of the baseball field is approximately 250,000 square feet, which is the area that CME studied.

The project proposes the construction of two rectangular multi-purpose fields and one full size baseball field. The two rectangular fields will include lines for several sports including:

• Two full size soccer fields
• Two short sided soccer fields
• Two lacrosse fields
• One field hockey field
• One football field that will also be utilized for band practice

Sports lighting is also proposed for the fields, but lighting of the varsity baseball field is not proposed as part of this project. The Edison School Field is currently entirely unlit, so it can only be used during mostly daylight hours.

The field will also be used for recess and physical education classes during school day hours.

Cost Of The Project

CME estimates that installing the turf field with sports lighting, a restroom facility, facility upgrades and construction contingency will cost around $8.5 million.

However, if the project used natural grass, CME estimates it would cost about $1.5 million without lighting and about $3 million with lighting.

CME also estimated the cost of maintenance for both natural grass fields and synthetic turf fields with and without lights. Those estimates are as follows:

• Natural grass field: $210,000
• Natural grass field with lights: $212,000
• Synthetic turf field: $140,000
• Synthetic turf field with lights: $142,000

The firm noted that these maintenance costs assume that the natural grass field is used year after year with no rest.

"In ideal situations, fields are rotated year after year to provide a chance for the field to re-establish after heavy use," CME wrote. "A typical scenario for grass field use is game, practice, rest, repeat. Due to the current usage of the Edison School Fields, it is evident that this field resting does not occur."

Over a 30 year period, CME estimates that a natural grass field with lights would cost around $10 million, whereas a turf field with lights would cost around $12.5 million.

Field Capacity

Currently, CME said the Edison School Field is used around 1,836 hours per year by the Middle School, High School and recreation leagues. This is about 918 hours per field. Again, it is mainly used during daylight hours since the fields are not currently lit.

On a natural grass field, CME argues that "good" field conditions are when it's used between 600 to 800 hours per year and "fair" conditions if it's used between 800 and 1,000 hours per year. CME used 800 hour as the anticipated maximum yearly field use for natural grass fields.

CME said installation of lighting with a natural grass field does not provide any additional field usage hours since the current use (918 Hours) already exceeds the maximum yearly field use (800 Hours). Because of this data, CME does not recommended that lighting be installed should the fields remain natural grass.

"On the other hand, in order to achieve the anticipated field usage of 2,178 hours per field, it is
necessary for the lighting to be installed with the synthetic turf project," CME said. "The combination of synthetic turf surface and lights provides the most flexible field time and meets the demands of both the middle school and high school after school and the recreation teams after the school teams have used the fields."

As a result, CME concluded that turf fields would allow for maximized field usage. The inclusion of lighting, according to CME, would increase the field hours by about 30 percent, which would provide coaches time to schedule practices in the spring and fall months after the high school uses the field.

Health Concerns

Several residents have spoken out in the past about concerns that the rubber infill used in synthetic turf may be carcinogenic and toxic. Read more: Turf Project Sparks Health Concerns From Westfield Parents

However, CME argues that there are no studies to their knowledge that show that playing on turf fields poses "a direct human health risk."

The firm explained that the turf industry eliminated the use of lead chromate in turf fibers in 2009 when there was a concern that elevated levels of lead were found in turf fields.

CME added that the USEPA, along wit the CDC and Prevention/Agency for Toxic Substances and Consumer Product Safety Commission, prepared a study to review the potential health impacts of playing on synthetic turf fields with crumb rubber infill. The report indicated that while chemicals are present in the crumb rubber, they are similar to components found in other everyday consumer products and that exposure to the chemicals is limited.

The full turf study from CME can be found here

Do you agree with CME's assessment? Comment your thoughts below.

Have a news tip? Email remy.samuels@patch.com.