Tensions flare over artificial turf at Anna Jean Cummings
Join the discussion below, or Read more at Santa Cruz Sentinel.
#3 Mar 3, 2010
don't assume everyone who uses the field is hispanic... both my son and I play soccer and are white (as are 95% of the players on our individual teams)... I don't have a stand on this particular issue since I don't live there, but I can say in general it would be nice to have more options of places to play since the grass fields are closed all winter and sometimes well into the spring. I understand the neighbors concerns but please don't generalize soccer as a hispanic sport...
#4 Mar 3, 2010
County health officer Poki Namkung (who's BMI is too high, LOL!) directly stated she would not address toxic water run-off.
In December 2009, Miss Dworsky became the youngest ever to have presented her work at a meeting of the American Geophysical Union.
Dr. Adina Paytan, at University of California at Santa Cruz‚Äôs Institute of Marine Sciences, helped Claire with her project.
Runoff samples from five grass and five artificial turf fields in the city of San Francisco were collected throughout the year (110 samples) and analyzed for nutrient content and trace metal concentrations.
Synthetic turf water samples had zinc levels of 1000s of ppb and copper levels typically above 20ppb. These samples always exceeded the Monterey Bay Basin Plan Water Quality Objective...Cadmium and cobalt were also higher in the artificial turf runoff than in grass runoff and levels exceed runoff targets in some samples but not all.
There are at least 100 chemicals and heavy metals that have been identified in crumb rubber.
Apparently some of them did not agree with Daphnia, and could pose a threat to other aquatic life. Within 24 hours about 80% of the Daphnia died in synthetic turf water;
within 36 hours all of the turf-exposed Daphnia were dead. The Daphnia in the grass field runoff and the spring water all lived over 36 hours.
When viewed all together, this study shows that we need to be very careful where we put soccer fields. They must not be close to water bodies like the bay and ocean to avoid the potential negative effects of pollutant in runoff from entering theses waters and impacting life.
Runoff from soccer fields must be tested regularly, and players should be informed that they need to clean any part of their skin that comes in contact with artificial turf as soon as they get off the field.
This field is TOO CLOSE to Soquel Creek for artificial turf made from PETROLEUM!
GIVE US THE TOXICS...IT'S FOR THE CHILLLDRENN!
#5 Mar 3, 2010
The Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary states unequivocally that the storm water in Soquel Creek carries DDT which negatively impacts the Bay's biology!
SPEND $2+ MILLION TO ADD MORE TOXICS TO THIS SITUATION?
MARINE LIFE/ENVIRONMENT VOTES NO!!
#6 Mar 3, 2010
Can someone clarify if the area surround the soccer fields would still be natural grass? They're talking about fencing and artificial turf for the back section toward the hill, right? I assume the plan is not to fence in the entire field area surrounded by the granite pathway.
Since: May 08
#7 Mar 3, 2010
This project needs to be shelved, as it costs too much and we cannot afford it.
That's the bottom line.
#8 Mar 3, 2010
NIMBYism at its worst. Do some real research.
#9 Mar 3, 2010
Earth to Soccer players: It's called a "season" because there are natural seasons. "Wah, we don't get to play when it's raining, Wah, we need you to buy us artificial turf, Wah."
The entitlement in this country is astounding.
#10 Mar 3, 2010
Heaven forbid we fund better rainwater reclamation to reduce both runoff like this and our need for drilling more wells. Because we all know that only a full-blown desalination plant can solve our problems. All hail the mighty desalination plant!
As for the artificial turf, why should the county subsidize a bunch of pansies that can't play in the mud? Oh noes the field is soaking wet! We can't get wet, we might melts! That doesn't sound like illegal aliens to me - those guys will work anywhere, anytime if you pay 'em - that sounds 100% American.
#11 Mar 3, 2010
Actually, I heard they were considering some affordable housing projects.
on a more serious note, expect those trails to have increased use by 60% so they may need to mark boundaries better, more erosion may take place so they'll need trail maintenence for the runners and training they currently provide. Then of course people will complain about dogs, so that will probably get changed.
Maybe the current users can get the rules in place before any turf goes in, make a bargain.
#12 Mar 3, 2010
Are you kidding, is this a real story?? Get a life people. With everything that is going on this country, the horrible crimes and dangers to society and people are worried about a little astroturf?? Puleeeeze
#13 Mar 3, 2010
Artificial turf will increase business for Orthopedist's, their insurance providers and drug companies. The number of career ending injuries should pile up steadily, if anything the argument should be made to keep the grass organic for safety reasons.
#14 Mar 3, 2010
Many artificial turf field are made with coconut, not rubber. There are many alternatives to the rubber.
#15 Mar 3, 2010
They can and would play in the rain, but the grass would get destroyed therefore the fields are closed.
#17 Mar 3, 2010
COPA was there? Why am I not surprised. COPA shows up to advocate for building projects and pavement with zero regard to environmental impact, community planning, and plain common sense.
I am beyond disgusted with COPA.
#18 Mar 3, 2010
It's also most unfortunate that Bookwalter continues to frame this story as merely astroturf vs grass. It's much more complex than that.
David Leland's commentary in Sunday's Sentinel:
#19 Mar 3, 2010
I am a coach and I support artificial turf. we have a lot of kids who love or like to play sports, parents want there kids to get out there and run around, get away from the PSP, XBOX or out from front of the TV. People have to choose kids on street or kids on field. Having these fields year round area good thing for both parents and kids. People who donít want this donít have kids.
Ask the kids what they want, they are the future not us.
#21 Mar 3, 2010
I attended the meeting last night and I am insulted that the true purpose of this project was not discussed further.
This is not about the Kids or Soccer or Turd or Obesity.
THIS IS ABOUT WATER !!!
The Water District has a $2M Grant in exchange for finding ways to save water (I need to research the details of the deal). So one of the idea is to install artificial turf instead of Lawn.
THIS IS ONLY ONE IDEA
And by the way, the burden has been put on Park & Recreation to solve this problem BUT it is not theirs. They can simply decline and let the Water District find another way.
So, where do we go from here? If this is about water then I would like to know my options. If we do nothing, will we have water shortage? How does the Aptos Well play into this? What are the trade offs between each option?
Let's open up the dialoque and solve the real issue, Water!
So if you are a Soccer supporter, great, but do not use a water shortage as a way to get yourself a new field in the name of the kids.
#23 Mar 3, 2010
Fine, if this is such an asset to the county, then raise the $2 million yourselves or get corporate sponsorship. And lose the fence, it's a park, not your personal soccer complex...
Love the strawman you put out there though - only childless monsters will deprive the chillllldddren of their artificial turf, abandoning them to a life of crime and obesity - so give us our artificial turf or we'll mug you and rob you and kill you where you stand.
#24 Mar 3, 2010
David Leland: County bypasses residents in park's artificial turf decision-making process
Posted: 02/28/2010 01:30:51 AM PST
The value of synthetic turf and its potential water savings at Anna Jean Cummings Park is murky at best. What's not in question is the skewed county approval process concerning this project. The county's intention to forever alter the overall complexion of this beautiful space has reached critical mass and has residents reeling.
In a nutshell, the development would, by next summer, substitute artificial turf for natural grass on the soccer fields, enclosing this with a tall, gated chain-link fence.
Good government should provide ample time and information for voters to weigh in on issues. If anything, government should bend over backwards listening to the people whose money is being spent.
Last week, some Soquel residents received a small postcard from the county parks department telling us that the FINAL public meeting concerning synthetic turf would be March 2. For most of our community, this was our first notice of this proposal.
We did not know that the parks commission, the Regional Water Foundation and various county departments had already quietly discussed and formulated this plan. In November 2009, with little publicity, our supervisors awarded $191,000 from the Redevelopment Agency to a Santa Clara firm to design this $2 million project.
Our local government also gave Verde Design the task of providing information to the public. They identified "stakeholders" as those who rent these soccer fields and only
invited them to the first design meeting. Calling these people "stakeholders" is like calling people watching a poker game "players."
The original AJC park plan included soccer fields, but was never intended to be a soccer complex. The real stakeholders of AJC Park are all the county residents who love this park as it is now. It's where we walk, throw Frisbees, play soccer or softball, go down the slide or simply sit and enjoy. This open space and recreation area was designed to serve many people in many ways.
This project originated in 2007 with a multimillion state grant received from Proposition 50. The second largest project in the grant,$2.1 million, was intended for the Aptos Polo Grounds, where an expanded well, water treatment plant, sewer line extension, new restrooms and three artificial turf fields would be installed. After getting the money, and receiving bids, however, the county realized there wasn't enough to pay for everything. There is a state-imposed 2011 deadline.
A solution was found in February 2009. The synthetic turf would be switched to Anna Jean Cummings Park and the RDA would pick up the $2 million tab as a park "improvement."
This "improvement" must be replaced about every 10 years with a price tag of up to $1.5 million each time. The purported water savings claimed could be accomplished with a plethora of water harvesting programs at the site for a much lower price.
My thoughts here transcend the pros and cons of this particular project. My overall concern is that local government must responsibly engage with its citizenry. It's polite to ask before spending public money.
We expect our government to give honest answers to the many serious questions that have been raised in the few weeks since we found out about this plan. Remove this project from the fast-track and gather more input - before changing this Mid-County gem.
David Leland lives in Soquel.
#25 Mar 3, 2010
I hate artificial turf. I would rather see an un-watered field of dead grass if that was the only alternative. The pro soccer people are trying to turn a tax funded space into something that's really only appropriate for soccer. I don't play or watch soccer. Turn it back into a pleasant natural environment.
Add your comments below
|Greenfield Nuclear Plant Approved||Apr 27||sheldoza||2|
|Convention to be Nude for Security||Apr 27||MaMa Mia||1|
|Two Nights, Two Murders in Salinas (May '08)||Apr 24||Unfortunate Son||9|
|Top 10 most wanted man in Tulare County arreste...||Apr 24||Lucy Jane||1|
|Review: First Security Services (May '14)||Apr 17||nuffnuff||26|
|Juan Dorado Murder||Apr 11||Flower||1|
|Donald has Bean Allergy||Apr 8||Occifer||1|
Find what you want!
Search Salinas Forum Now
Copyright © 2016 Topix LLC