Supervisors remain wary of turf safety
The Albemarle County Board of Supervisors hoped to walk away with answers about whether synthetic turf was a safe replacement for grass athletic fields — but left a Wednesday meeting only with more unanswered questions.
The Board of Supervisors was asked to approve $225,000 in funding from the Parks and Recreation Capital Improvements Plan budget toward the funding of three athletics fields at the county’s high schools. The county funds likely would be enough to set the schools on track to afford the $600,000 cost per field, down from an earlier estimate of $800,000 per field.
Board Vice Chairman David L. Slutzky, who directed much of the conversation about whether to approve the funds, said that economically it made sense, referring to information from county staff that said maintenance costs for synthetic turf fields is less expensive than upkeep for grass athletics fields.
However, Slutzky said he didn’t feel comfortable approving the funding because he still has concerns about the safety of the fields. There have been studies that indicate there is lead in the fibers of some synthetic turf fields. Recent studies also indicate that turf fields generate significantly more heat than grass.
A manufacturing company representative said that any lead in the fields would be well below hazardous levels, based on numerous studies, and that injuries are less likely to occur on the turf fields than on grass.
Supervisor Dennis S. Rooker asked if the manufacturing company could provide a written guarantee that the lead levels would be below hazardous levels and provide a sample of the product that the county could independently test. The representative said that both requests could be met.
Slutzky and Supervisor Ann H. Mallek were tasked with working with consultants and county staff to answer the questions raised by the board. The supervisors plan to take up the issue with the School Board at a joint meeting on Tuesday.
Advertisement
Reader Reactions
There is another area of concern that I feel should be considered by the board. I think that the board should know where the anonymous contributions come from. This does not have to be made public.
Some of these contributers are looking at this as an investment from which they expect to make a hefty return.
Artificial Turf for our “Green” County?
As the parent of a 10th grade soccer and field hockey player at Monticello High School, I’m appalled that Albemarle County would consider investing in artificial turf playing fields. Here is a County that prides itself as a “Green County”: most recent initiatives have had an environmental theme, the county’s soil erosion and water protection laws are among the strictest in the Commonwealth, suspect chemicals are banned from the schools, and the green roof on the County Office Building is marketed as the salvation for global warming. How ironic that our “green” County is paving the playing fields with a plastic rug?
Green roof’s function like natural grass playing fields: they absorb and filter rainfall, cool both the building and the surrounding atmosphere, and they temper extreme water run off and ultimately aid in curtailing the erosion of silt and toxins into our waterways. (Local high school fields will never receive the glut of pesticides and fertilizers applied to golf courses.) Artificial turf fields are hot, impermeable mats of plastic that drive water into gushing alleys of erosion. It is both shameful and hypocritical for the County to support the environmental degradation that would result from these fields.
Even proponents of artificial turf acknowledge the heat generated by synthetic fields. The Dec. 2 Daily Progress reported on a study that indicated where a natural grass surface had an average temperature of 78 degrees, the adjacent artificial surface was at 117 degrees. This was computed on a relatively cool day. I’ve measured Albemarle County soil temperatures in the summer at around 100 degrees; the equivalent on synthetic turf would be almost 150 degrees. Recent infrared satellite images of the New York metropolitan area pinpointed clearly the artificial playing fields on Long Island, where extreme islands of heat from these fields blatantly stood out from space in the midst of one of the largest urban jungles in the world. Artificial turf fields are too hot, too dangerous and too risky, for young athletes training and competing on a baking spring or summer day in Charlottesville.
The science is not in on artificial turf toxins. Lead has been found in many studies; other studies give the synthetic fields a clean bill of health: nevertheless, the verdict is still out. Who would have thought two years ago that plastic water jugs cause cancer? Cigarettes, sunbathing, and red food dye were all, at one time, acknowledged as wholesome and safe. I don’t believe there has yet been a thorough and enduring study of the toxins found in the plastic of artificial turf fields. I resent Albemarle County gambling with the health and safety of my child.
Another argument by artificial turf advocates, one given by Mr. Slutzky, is that the synthetic surface will reduce maintenance costs. In fact, monies will be allocated to out of state contractors, resulting in the out-sourcing of jobs from Albemarle County. Out-sourcing employment and the dismissal of Albemarle County employees: just what we need in an economic depression!
Finally, artificial turf fields are ugly: hot, sterile, synthetic, plastic, raw. As a life-long athlete, my knees and joints have survived 60 years of competition because I’ve played on natural grass. As a sports nut, it is readily apparent that synthetic turf fields have crippled the support for professional teams in cities like Detroit, Philadelphia, Houston, and Minnesota – where perenially losing teams have had their fan base diminished further by ugly playing fields. I certainly acknowledge that maintaining turf grass in Charlottesville is challenging, and the central playing fields at our high schools were compromised when installed by low bid contractors. Nevertheless, we have superb models of natural grass fields at Kloeckner Stadium, the SOCA park on Polo Road, and even at Scott Stadium. Compare the experience of attending a football game at UVa 15 years ago, when they had AstroTurf, to the experience today with the beautiful natural grass field. The quality of the football fields at both Monticello and Charlottesville High School have improved dramatically over the last two years. We need to invest in more training and support for Albemarle County’s groundskeepers, not out-source their jobs.
Synthetic turf is potentially hazardous, and the installation of it on our high school playing fields would be a cruel blow to the conservation ethic that is so intrinsic to the mission of Albemarle County.
Peter Hatch, Albemarle County
In the story above, I question this statement -
“A manufacturing company representative said that any lead in the fields would be well below hazardous levels, based on numerous studies, and that injuries are less likely to occur on the turf fields than on grass.“
According to the Agency For Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR), a division of the federal Department of Health and Human Services, in its report entitled Toxicological Profile For Lead, dated August 2007, “No safe blood lead level in children has been determined.“ (See Public Health Statement, 1.6 How Can Lead Affect Children?, p. 10)
According to our federal government, “No safe blood lead level in children has been determined.“
The report the ATSDR put out in August 2007 lists many health effects that people, especially children, suffer when they are exposed to even a tiny amount of lead by inhaling it or eating it. Parents and community leaders should be informed about what those health effects are and decide whether it is worth the risk to exposure your children to even tiny amounts of lead - especially in an exposure that is entirely preventable.
The ATSDR never says that a little bit of lead is safe for children to eat or inhale.
There’s something else that you need to think about:
Remember that children will not be exposed just once to lead dust if they play on synthetic fields that contain fibers that are degrading and contain lead. They will be exposed, by inhaling it or eating it, every time they play, if lead is present.
Those kid hours of exposure have never been studied. When they are studied in the future, no one will be able to take those hours back and say a mistake was made. And the lead in those children’s bodies may stay there.
The same ATSDR report says that “only about 32% of the lead taken into the body of a child will leave in the waste. Under conditions of continued exposure, not all of the lead that enters the body will be eliminated, and this may result in accumulation of lead in body tissues, especially bone.“ (See Public Health Statement, 1.4 How Can Lead Enter and Leave My Body, p.8
If children who play on your fields are poisoned by lead will the manufacturer be held liable under the terms of the agreement you sign with them when you buy your fields? Even if the manufacturer is held liable, will it have been worth it, if children are irreparably harmed?
Advertisement