Welcome to Hamptons.com's Members Only section!

Members Only

Username:
Password:

 Remember me

in the news

« school news

Added: February 13, 2009

   Share    Print

Westhampton District Weighs Short And Long Term Benefits Of Playing On New Turf

  |   1 Comment

Westhampton would become the third school on the East End to install a synthetic turf field, joining Southampton and East Hampton. Photos by Brett Mauser

Westhampton Beach - As the ground outside Westhampton Beach High School thaws and spring sports teams prepare for their respective seasons, just where they will get down to the business of running drills and playing ball comes down to one thing and one thing only, the condition on the field that day.

Athletic Director Kathleen Masterson addresses the crowd in
attendance at Monday's presentation.

Since the first football game of the season, for which the Hurricanes and their visitors played amid a monsoon, the main athletic field at the high school has been playing catch-up. Athletic Director Kathleen Masterson, with the support of dozens of coaches, athletes and community members, is working to make those physical realities headaches of the past. On Monday, Feb. 9, Masterson presented a plan to the school board that, with approval, would replace the grass field with a state-of-the-art synthetic turf at a price tag of $1.05 million.

"It will impact and improve our program, and it will be better for the kids," Masterson said. "That's what my job is as the athletic director, that's what I believe in, and that's why I'm here - because of the 947 kids in this high school, the 600-better in the middle school, and the 500-better in the elementary school. If I can do something to benefit them, I'll fight tooth-and-nail for it."

The board was presented with two options - the installation of a state-of-the-art artificial turf or a complete rehabilitation of the current grass field.

The committee, which was made up of roughly a dozen members of the community including Masterson, Parry, Superintendent Lynn Schwartz and several parents of current student-athletes, has met three to four times a month since first assembling in August. A decision is not expected to be made until the board reconvenes on Feb. 23.

Members of the community came out in droves for the Feb. 9 presentation, although it was unclear as to whether they were intrigued or interested in voicing their opinion publicly. On the record, most or all of those opinions supported the movement toward FieldTurf.

If the school board opts to resurface the lot with grass, it could
displace Bill Parry and the Hurricanes football team for a full
season.

"You can't put that amount of pressure [on a new grass field] or else it will go right back where the field is today," Doug Gilbakian, father of Westhampton sophomore Forest Gilbakian, commented. "We can't meet our current needs by reconstructing that."

For its durability and safety, the FieldTurf installation is being positioned as a practical move for the board. Arguing that it's economically sound takes a little more work. The FieldTurf project would cost roughly $1,050,000, whereas revamping the grass would run about $600,000 less. However, maintenance costs would bring those numbers closer together. FieldTurf would cost, it was estimated, $5,000 per year to maintain at most. According to Masterson, the athletic department has spent about $40,000 annually on the main field's upkeep.

Timing An Issue
Another issue of critical importance is timing. Should the board choose to replace the grass, it would take 18 to 24 months to grow the new field and prepare it for use. Masterson said that the remaining fields within the district could squeeze in games from the middle school to varsity levels, with the exception of football. Bill Parry's Hurricanes would either have to play all their games on the road, or try to find a surrogate home on a tentative basis, whether it's at nearby Hampton Bays, Eastport-South Manor or Center Moriches. The turf could be installed in one winter or summer, minimizing the ripple effect in the district's busy schedule.

Part of the cause for the deterioration of Westhampton's main field is the increased level of participation in athletics. Ten years ago, only the varsity, junior varsity and middle school teams used the field. With the recent addition of sports like lacrosse, as well as the corresponding JV and youth programs, it was determined that close to 120 contests are played there annually. Westhampton has also laid the foundation for adding field hockey to its interscholastic athletic schedule.

The mucky field conditions at Westhampton Beach could wreak havoc with the school's practice schedule this spring.


Masterson praised the artificial turf's durability and its ever-ready availability. Patchogue-Medford was the first high school on Long Island to install the turf; seven years later, the field has hosted thousands of games and practices from the high school to youth level. Athletic Director Tom Combs estimated they've spent $1,500 total on maintenance, in part because the field has been under warranty.

"It's the best thing in the world," Combs said. "We've played in downpours, we've played in snow, the heat doesn't affect it, the cold doesn't affect it, and the kids don't get muddy. We can play a lacrosse game on it in rain and nobody's slipping, there are no puddles. Overall, it's a safer environment and a better quality of game because of it."

Westhampton Beach Superintendent Lynn Schwartz was among
the dozen members in the community to produce an in-depth
presentation for the school board.

Westhampton would become the third school on the East End to add turf within the last five years. East Hampton and Southampton began play on their new fields in 2007. Darren Phillips, the athletic director at Southampton, opened the gates to the Mariners' new turf field in October of that year, and the district has reaped the benefits ever since. "The playing surface is great," he said. "We can play out there anytime and we don't have to worry about wear and tear. Whether it's for practice or for a game, that field's used every day during the week and on weekends with youth groups and adult leagues. The kids love it."

From a safety standpoint, FieldTurf has generally passed the test. However, according to the October 2004 edition of the American Journal of Sports Medicine, synthetic turf was more apt to yield skin injuries and muscle strains, whereas natural grass showed to have a higher correlation with ligament tears and concussions. Parry has few reservations about the artificial grass, which has a crumb rubber infill. "It's safer, it's faster, and it's softer," Parry said. "Football is a collision sport. If you hit the ground on a regular grass field, it hurts. The ground on a turf field has six inches of rubber breaking your fall."

Westhampton is also waiting for the results of tests done by the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) that will determine whether FieldTurf poses a lead hazard. In California, the Center For Environmental Health (CEH) initiated legal action against FieldTurf and other manufacturers of synthetic grass after discovering high lead levels in their product. In a September 2008 story in USA Today, the state moved to mandate the complete removal of lead in future products from FieldTurf Tarkett and AstroTurf. However, FieldTurf was exonerated by New Jersey Department of Health and Senior Services, which explained that the 12 fields inspected had "very low or undetectable levels of lead." The DEC report was to be released in December.

Westhampton's track not only hosts meets for the spring sports season but also is an important facility for community members.


Since the administration would want to limit games on a new grass field to 20-25 games per year, the athletic department would also have to make sure it abided by Title IX regulations, which require equal use of such a facility by boys and girls programs. The teams would have no choice but to play there because it's the only field with goal posts - that alone is 11 games per season without playoffs.

Whether the board opts for turf or sod will be determined in the coming weeks. Parry hopes the turf's benefits are as stark to the board as they are to him. "In my eyes it's a no-brainer," Parry said. "I hope the board sees it the same way."

The tennis courts at Westhampton Beach are structurally sound, but
cracks could be repaired in the coming months.

Getting On Track
The high school's track is also a major concern for the athletic department. Spring track coach Jim Ford said that meet officials are instructed to inspect the track conditions prior to every meet. If a particular aspect of a facility is not up to par, the host team must forfeit points for that event. Ford indicated that Westhampton has passed in the officials' eyes but the track's deficiencies have been consistently noted.

"The track is in bad shape," Ford told the board. "We did try to patch it, but they were band-aids. Water gets in there and it starts to expand again.

A complete resurfacing of the track is expected to cost roughly $250,000, with a warranty attached. Patchwork repair is estimated to run near $100,000. Ford said no major injuries have occurred on his watch, yet divots and cracks in the track suggest they're possible.

"I haven't, but you can see the spots on the track where it could happen," Ford said. "It needs attention. Something has to be done."

Westhampton is also looking into pouring $100,000 into advancing its wellness center. Other points of discussion for the main field were the addition of a concession stand, and renovation of the bathrooms and bleachers. Westhampton is also looking into expanding its wrestling room.

Synthetic turf has been installed at Patchogue-Medford, Dix Hills, Southampton and Coram, and in the case of the Comsewogue and Bay Shore school districts, two fields have been installed.


For more information, click here.




Comments

Guest (hdhouse) from westhampton says:
This artificial turf debate regarding the Westhampton Beach HS field is, unfortunately, long on passion and short on facts. Most studies indicate that there are more frequent injuries on artificial turf as opposed to natural grass surfaces. The injuries are, of course, different in nature but the studied rate is reported as much as 60+% more per 100 playing hours. Second, over time, due to weather conditions, normal wear, etc., artificial fields develop an uneven surface with some parts becoming harder (less giving) than other parts. Indoor artificial surfaces generally remain more uniform. Outdoor, highly exposed surfaces react quite differently. The supporter's website (yestoturf.com) indicates use of a crumb rubber base. While there is a reasonable amount of concern regarding playing on surfaces comprised of materials that you can’t put legally in a landfill, the more pressing claim is that artificial turf is without maintenance costs. Just the opposite is true. The life of an artificial turf field is about 10 years with proper maintenance (disinfectants, surface maintenance, etc.) and the costs are not nominal and particularly are they NOT non- existent. $.50/$1.00 per square foot is reported to be industry norm. Please think 160 x360= 57,600 sq.ft minimum. More to the point, the “text” on this supportive website appears to have been taken nearly verbatim from the Synthetic Turf Council (syntheticturfcouncil.org) website, a decidedly industry public relations website. They are, of course, entitled to be lobbyists for artificial turf and the local supporters are equally free to scrape copy from that site – with or without attribution. But lets look at the facts here and not industry hyperbole and in particular, let’s not hear one side of the story. If this field, with very heavy use, lasts 10 years it will amortize at about $60,000 a year without maintenance. Does it cost $60,000 a year to keep the grass on the present field? Further, artificial turf maintenance is not just “cutting and fertilizing the lawn” which is in the realm of the school district’s grounds department, but is a fairly specialized bit of care for the investment made. This means either outsourcing maintenance or more training for the staff or both. On the far end, there is just a simple secondary cost found in playing shoes…two sets of shoes, one for artificial turf and one set for natural grass…just for instance and that goes for teams that come here to play too. Coupled with the injury rate, wear rates and the outdoor, exposed environment, and the projected amount of “use” (comparing the demands on the field here versus a suburban Cincinnati location is apples and oranges at best), this might not be the great deal that is being portrayed. Certainly there is money for the project but don’t think for a moment that it is cost effective either long or short term.

Submit Your Comment

Please note, you are not currently logged in. Your comment will be submitted as a guest. To submit your comment as a member, please click here.
Your Name:
Location:*
Comments:*
* Comments will be reviewed and posted in a timely fashion
* All fields are required
Question:*
What color is a banana?
(For spam prevention, thanks)
 
http://www.hamptons.com/gallery/ads/1153.gif
http://www.hamptons.com/gallery/ads/586.gif
http://www.hamptons.com/gallery/ads/1109.gif