HomeMy WebLinkAboutSS2 - Synthetic Turf StudyAgenda Item No. SS2
September 8, 2009
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
OF THE
ENGINEERING PRELIMINARY STUDY
FOR
SYNTHETIC TURF PROJECT
C-4104
NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA
PREPARED FOR:
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
3300 NEWPORT BOULEVARD
NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663
PREPARED BY:
CMX, L.L.G.
7740 NORTH 1 6TH STREET, SUITE 1 CC
PHOENIX, AZ 85020
(602) 567 -1 900
SEPTEMBER 8, 2009
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The City of Newport Beach Recreation and Senior Services Department currently
manages a number of well used, well maintained and well designed parks. These
parks offer a great deal of athletic fields for the residents use throughout the
year. These fields are currently inactive for several weeks each summer and
winter between the currently scheduled organized leagues. The city generally
uses these times to provide annual maintenance, repairs, and to make
improvements to the fields so they continue to offer a high level of playability for
the participants. Replacing one of these natural turf fields with synthetic turf will
allow for increased usage for two reasons. Synthetic turf fields required minimal
maintenance compared to natural turf fields and therefore can be used during
the traditional maintenance periods. Secondly, Synthetic Turf fields recover
quickly following rains and can usually be played upon within hours and not
days. City staff estimates that fields are unavailable an average of ten (10) days
each year during the season due to rain. These days can be recaptured and
added to the available times the fields are open for use.
To reach the goal of providing subjective reasons for selecting a site, CMX
rejected the approach to ranking that would have ordered the sites from one to
fifteen in each category and awarding the points in that manner. We felt that it
was more realistic to create categories within each criterion that awarded points
to a range of data. In this manner several sites that may have had equal data,
such as number of parking spaces available or annual maintenance savings,
would receive equal points. This would then make the site that was truly superior
to the other sites have to separate itself by exceeding the minimum or normal
standards that were established by the majority of the sites. At the conclusion of
the ranking the data in each category, totaling the points for each site and re-
ordering the sites by score, it was evident that using this method rewarded the
site that will provide the largest return on the investment.
An overall review of the ranking matrix shows four groupings of fields based on
points they received. Bonita Creek Park (both configurations) with 34 -35 points is
seven to eight points ahead of the second place field (Lincoln Athletic Center -
both configurations) and all the remaining fields. The second grouping has five
fields with 21 to 28 points. There is a three point gap to the next group that
includes four fields, from 18 down to 15 points, and then a gap to the final three
fields, each with 13 points.
In the Development Cost column we established seven ranges and awarded
points in six of the seven. It should be noted that two of the sites, Bonita Creek
Park and Lincoln Athletic Center, have two separate fields planned for these
sites. We have included a single field (selected by City staff as the most popular
for one entry and the complete (both fields) site development alternative for a
separate entry. In addition, four of the sites were designated by City staff to
include alternates to develop only part of the fields. These alternate prices have
been developed for Mariners, Bob Henry, Buffalo Hills and Eastbluff Parks and
would result in only the outfields being converted to the synthetic turf while
leaving the infields as currently constructed and maintained. Changes to the data
in the Development Cost column may also affect the Cost per Participant column.
The development of both fields at the Bonita Creek Park and Lincoln Athletic
Center would require a greater investment in construction dollars but these
larger scale projects were only slightly behind their smaller configurations in
points awarded.
The City currently supports six Organized Sports and the points were awarded in
this column based entirely on the number of sports that are supported at each
site. The parks that offered the highest amount of versatility received the most
points. By offering points in ranges, several sites received the same points. By
separating the fields at Bonita Creek and Lincoln athletic center the single field
configuration was awarded less points but these fields still remained at the top of
the rankings.
The presence of Sports Lights at a park is beneficial to increasing the usage
should that park be selected for the conversion to synthetic turf. There are
currently only four sites that have permanent sports lights and one where
temporary lights are installed for specific seasons during the year. As currently
weighted, the fields with lights are awarded six points, the average of the
remaining categories. The remaining sites do not receive any points. This
weighting was discussed and agreed to at the encouragement of the City staff
who understands the importance of lighting at the parks to enhancing the
programming offered.
Parking is arranged to award points for the number of available spaces, both on
and off site. With sports lighting, parking is probably the second category that
may deserve heavier weighting. Without parking it is difficult to increase the
parks usage without negatively affecting the park users and those that live and
travel near the parks. The two highest parks each had an average number of
spaces available.
The City maintenance staff provided the data that has been used to calculate the
annual savings that can be anticipated for each park site. These figures include
the costs to maintain the athletic fields and surrounding areas, make annual
repairs and improvements to the athletic fields, and pay for water usage at the
park sites on an annual basis. With the conversion to synthetic turf, these costs
can be eliminated or greatly reduced. Due to heavy programming and the harsh
characteristics of the soils underlying the athletic fields at Bonita Creek Park the
city has experienced annual expenses to keep the fields safe and playable for the
athletics. By converting to synthetic turf these annual expenses will be
eliminated, as well as over 90% of the costs for weekly /monthly maintenance
and annual water costs. For the purposes of this study City staff reported that
90% of the turf renovation costs at Bonita Creek Park are spent on the
Football /Soccer field so this is where the majority of the costs were included in
this matrix.
The Cost per Participant is an attempt to provide information that connects the
costs to develop the new synthetic turf field with the anticipated number of
participants that will benefit from its conversion. We have calculated the increase
in the number of participants that will result in the conversion and then divided
this into the Engineers Estimate of Probable Cost for that field and the result is
then awarded points within the define range. This data allows another dimension
to looking only at total dollars that will be required to convert the athletic fields
at each site. The two top rated sites ranked in the lowest cost per participant
validating their positions at the top of the rankings.
The Bonita Creek Park - Football /Soccer configuration received the top points in
two categories: sports lighting (tied), and cost per participant; second place
points in development cost, annual maintenance savings, and increase in
participants; and third place points in organized sports and parking. By amassing
35 total points Bonita Creek Park is eight (8) points ahead of the second place
park, the Lincoln Athletic Center - Football /Soccer configuration. The Bonita Creek
Park - Football /Soccer configuration scored top three points in all seven of the
categories. Minor changes to the weighting of some of the categories may result
in a tightening of the separations between Bonita Creek and the following sites,
but it is our belief that it will not result in a re- ordering of the final rankings. By
recording the top three points in each category, Bonita Creek Park -
Football /Soccer configuration will provide the greatest benefits to the largest
number of stakeholders in this process. At second place the full configuration at
Bonita Creek Park is limited only by the available amount of money that can be
allocated to the conversion. If sufficient monies are available, the full conversion
of Bonita Creek Park will save the most maintenance monies and provide the
largest increase in annual participants for a very competitive cost per participant.
Choosing a clear favorite in the next grouping of sites /configurations is a harder
task than identifying Bonita Creek Park - Football /Soccer configuration as the
leading candidate for conversion. There are six sites separated by six points. The
top four (including the two configurations at Lincoln Athletic Center) all have
permanent sports lighting and should remain in line for future conversion as
monies become available.
It is anticipated that the remaining seven sites have significant issues to
overcome before they should be considered for conversion to synthetic turf.
These include a lack of sports lighting, in- sufficient parking and no flexibility in
the number of sports that can be offered at these sites.
CMX Sports Engineers recommends that the City of Newport Beach proceed with
the next steps in the Synthetic Turf Project, the completion of construction
documents, bidding out of the documents for the selection of the lowest qualified
general contractor bid and the subsequent conversion of the athletic fields at
Bonita Creek Park from natural turf to synthetic turf.
2.0 SELECTION MATRIX
The underlying purpose of Phase I of the Synthetic Turf Project is to create an
objective analysis of the selected park sites and their respective athletic fields
with the intent to convert the athletic field(s) from natural turf to the latest
generation of in -fill artificial turf. Upon the completion of the Selection Criteria
Matrix discussed in Section 3.0, CMX developed the Ranking Matrix consisting of
seven (7) categories. These categories are:
1. Development Cost for each Site
2. Organized Sports Offered at each Site
3. Utilities (Sports Lighting) at each Site
4. Parking available at each Site
5. Annual Maintenance Savinos at each Site
6. Added Participants at each Site
7. Cost per Participant at each Site
Once we had established the main categories we developed ranking protocols
with associated points in each category. A brief discussion of each follows.
Development Cost for each Site: We have created seven groups of construction
costs that represent the entire range. We have provided for the least expensive
fields to receive the most points (7) and have reduced the points for every
$250,000 increase above the entry category of $500,000.
There are two sites in the study that have two (2) separate fields. These are
Bonita Creek Park and Lincoln Athletic Center. For this study we have created
two categories for these two parks and included them separately in the analysis.
For each, the entry with the lowest costs is for the field that would be preferred
by the staff, and the second entry is for building both fields at those parks
Organized Sports Offered at each Site: This category rewards each site with a
point for each organized sport that is played there on the fields being considered
for renovation to synthetic turf. As there are currently six (6) organized sports
(adult and youth soccer, youth football, youth baseball, and adult and youth
softball) taking place in the City's parks there is a maximum of 6 points available.
Even though there are currently some additional organized sports such as
lacrosse and rugby being played occasionally at a few parks, these sports have
not reached the level where a recognized league within the City of Newport has
been organized and were therefore not included.
Utilities (Sports Lighting) at each site: Points are awarded for permanent sports
lighting available at the field being contemplated for the synthetic turf. Although
there are temporary lights noted at Bonita Canyon Sports Park at the soccer field
being considered for renovation, the permit allowing this use is renewed annually
and could be refused at any time resulting in staff recommending that no points
be awarded for these lights.
Parkins available at each Site: Five Points were available for parking at the sites.
Quantities of available parking were a combination of on -site stalls and off -site
stalls /parking. Off -site parking was counted if there were legal areas (marked by
striping) on the surrounding streets that allowed parking. The off -site parking
was calculated based on dividing the total length of the street frontage by 20'.
The exceptions to the off -site rule are at Grant Howald Park and Buffalo Hills
Park where parking on adjacent residential streets in front of homes was counted
as this has always been allowed and does not result in ticketing or towing of
vehicles parked on the surrounding streets.
Annual Maintenance Savinas at each Site: Categories have been established in
$10,000 increments and points awarded for the estimated annual savings
anticipated for the reduced maintenance and water savings. It should be noted
that the anticipated savings at Bonita Creek Park are nearly double the next
highest park. This is a result of the consistently salty soils present at Bonita
Creek Park, as well as consistently higher programming at this park, which
requires extra maintenance each year to allow for the natural turf to be
maintained at the current levels.
Added Participants for each site: The additional hours for each day that the fields
will be available due to the renovation to synthetic turf, as well as the additional
days when field maintenance was normally performed were calculated. I have
included a spreadsheet showing these calculations. Using this data it was
determined that there would be a 49% increase in the times that the fields
would be available following the change to synthetic turf. This percentage was
applied to the annual usage numbers supplied by City staff to generate the
anticipated additional number of participants at.each site. The above mentioned
spreadsheet includes the calculations and shows the additional participants and
the anticipated total participants at each site.
Cost per Participant at each Site: Categories have been established in $5.00
increments and points awarded for the calculated cost of the estimated synthetic
turf divided by the annual number of athletic sports participants. The lower the
costs per participant, the greater the number of points awarded.
The points in each of the seven categories have been totaled and then the sites
have been ordered in the rank from highest to lowest. The Bonita Creek Park -
Football /Soccer Field leads the list by 5 -6 points over the second place site,
Lincoln Athletic Center - Football /Soccer Field.
3.0 EXHIBITS
Included are the following:
1. Life Cycle Cost Analysis
2. Ranking Matrix for the Fifteen Possible Improvement Options
3. Proposed Site Plan for Bonita Creek Park
LIFE CYCLE COST ANALYSIS
ARTIFICIAL VERSUS NATURAL TURF ATHLETIC FIELDS I NATURAL GRASS
Construction Costs (initial Costs)
Construction Costs
Mass Excavate to Field Subgrade
Load /Haul Spoils
Fine Grading
Field Drainage
GeoTextile Fabric
E -Layer
Field Irrigation
Syringing System
Concrete Curbs
Artificial Turf
Sport Striping (Inifial)
90 Day Maintenance Period
Subtotal)
Field ReplacementrRefurbish - Year 91
Field Replacement/Refurbish - Year 17
Annual Field Mmaintenance
Total Construction Costs -24 Years
Indirect Costs:
Contingency
General Conditions
Insurance
Bonds
Overhead & Fee
Subtotal Indirect Cc
Subtotal Field Construction Costs
Maintenance Cosb
(Calculated on 24 years -Three cycles of synthetic tuft)
2a) Labor & Materials Costs:
Mowing7Trimming/Grooming
Over Seeding
Imgation Maintenance
Fertilizer /Anti- Fungus Treatment
Turf Tei ting/Techniral
Crumb Rubber Application
Wash Do.A /acuum Synthetic Turf
Subtotal Maintenance Costs
2b) Equipment Costs (Depreciated
Moving Equipment (Three Purchases)
Edging Equipments (Three Purchases)
Equipment Maintenance
Small Tools/Consumables
Subtotal Maintenance Costs
2c) Water & Fuel Consumption
Water Consumption
Gasoline Consumption
Subtotal Maintenance Costs
SYNTHETIC TURF
Total Construction & Maintenance Costs (24 Years): $ 1,995,094 $ 1,939,292
Annual 4 of Participants per type of field for 24 years 3,285,000 4,894,656
Cost per participant (based on 24 years of use) $ 0.61 $ 0.40
1 Field Replacement/Refurbishment includes complete re- sodding of natural turf field
2 MowinglTrimminglGrooming Includes monthly grooming of symbefic turf field
CMX Confidential July 21, 2009
ENGINEERING PRELIMINARY STUDY
For Synthetic TurlPmjM
Ranking Results
"a aI, mm
<NF<anxaenuN
Development
Cost
O anae45
orts
MIT..
Parking
Annual Maintenance
Satan
I.
Increase
Perdu
in
ante
Cost Par Pallid
ant
TOTALS
�
5
B.6
Yp
g<
8
ON
€
as
IS
g
It
It
g
$
1
Bona, creekPark- F*meems*car
$971000
5
3
3
P
6
107
20
727
3
$ 53.273
6
50,302
6
$4.50
6
35
i
2
e *nN. Creek ParkF**ro,mseccerrs*Iroa9
$1,909,000
1
5
5
P
6
20
127
9
$ 70,158
7
87,069
7
$9.02
5
34
3
3
Lincoln Amk4c cenrerF**1e.IUS«a.
$1,156,000
4
3
3
P
6
0
80
2
$ 17,298
2
40.241
5
$6.98
5
27
3 -T
4
�1 "Ant°°`D.ns..F°°maN°" °M °Yllsry
$1,804,000
1
5
5
P
6
[63
0
80
2
$ 27,320
3
53,655
6
$10.89
4
27
3 -T
5
Gram NO`.ala Park 4 FRMs
$835,000
5
3
3
P
6
65
128
3
$ 10,689
2
21,462
3
$12.63
4
26
5
6
Array * Pad &FW
$1,485,000
3
4
4
P
6
51
0
51
2
$ 27,642
3
31,299
4
$15.37
3
25
6
7
Bonita canyon Soon Pan
$1,073,000
4
2
2
T
0
20
204
224
5
$ 20,797
3
49,184
5
$7.05
5
24
7
8
Mannar: Pan
$715,000
6
3
3
N
0
45 +/-
30 +/_
75
2
$ 9,326
1
35,770
4
$6.49
5
21
8
9
Bob Nary Pan a Fieu
$953,000
5
3
3
N
0
51
0
97
1
26,828
1
$11.59
4
18
9 -T
10
Bu1M1b Bills Pan a FNb
$1,097,000
4
3
3
N
0
31
130
49
2
17,885
2
$19.97
3
18
9 -T
11
a*aelel Paid Park 4 Nitrate
$964,000
5
3
3
N
0
39
0
t2$
36
2
17,885
2
$17.44
3
16
11
12
B *n..I Ross Pan
$1,647,000
2
2
2
N
0
72
0
320
3
26.828
3
$19.96
3
15
12
13
wine Terrace Park a FieM
$1.149,000
4
1
1
N
0
-
60
032
2
17,885
2
$20.87
2
13
13 -T
14
Penn.me Pans.Fals
$980,000
5
1
1
N
0
117
0
785
2
8.943
1
$35.57
1
13
13-T
15
Ea IbluN Park 4 Fieia
$1,262,000
3
3
3
N
0
40
0
40
1
$ 13,969
2
17,885
2
$22.95
2
13
13 -T
Pto- Rm
Peytl
aal 6a
PoIM
PMb
6o191aR
PNMa
39e
PoI
e
hNtl W
PoinK
Pu Pa
PoYYa
to-.
]
1
I
Pamump
3
SY-3fO fNr
1
IOpW
6
1N -STN
a
]
]
NeM
0
.l
S
10m1-a
]
IOmI -A.m]
3
501. 1GFO
3
M31 -St m]N
3
]
I.,-1
101.1%
3
-6U
-SYJ MI
>
30m1-AYA
>
1001- 16
M6YN.s1
161.ID]
d
sNm1 -fa]�
MUM
a
]II m1 -NO
a
asA1 -334m
3
fn ale -fISmN
]
5
MIdU
6
f0].ml -K*mU
3
Mm1 --A pM
3
Al - Sin
]
1301X.l116q(
]
6
6
f5em1 -M,W]
6
mWlm0.tl
6
$NWI
I
M i61N- 3i.0A"It
I
mla
i
UP
I
"a aI, mm
<NF<anxaenuN
1P'M 1� P
Al
� e
�nauN -
o,un»o
�om.im }nAUr.1-
T
O
y
0y00y0y0
Ay
NjOONV OWSO�
t OSJ
I'
OfO >>DOb
AOIM�pVrO-I0
2my�"iO 2 'O �
yy9ym
-1
On2Dn�nF
e
yZD\ sO
�SOOµYVI
00 N
\NAY
�
\2;
rO`1
NyD�-Z'�
0'r
0DQ C ^KK
Or p.F7OvAm �O ON
0�D� D
➢0�TFrr
i*
OVNy \N
m
Z �A
y
N
p
F�O0F\ r
0
A O0o D
Cw
80�
92� Z
DA.
ttttpppp0����
0 m
02cx D
Z
Ozµ
'
Mrd Z paon
< co
>> 0 N
YC
tl<
0
< N
CM%PROJ: 3232
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
w�/
DATE:
AUG
09 PARKS &RECREATION
, `i i�°� Engineers
SCALE:
1' =
80' LA SALUD & LA VIDA
"40 N. 181H 5T. STE 100
PHOENIX. ARIZONA 85020
PM (802) 587 -1900
= DRAWN BY: Me8 BONNTA CREEK PARK
CHECKED BY: JP
FAX (802) 587 -1901
I
� - s
i� _
III CMX Sports Engineers
• Project Approach
CMS
Engineering Preliminary Study
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH SYNTHETIC TURF STUDY
• Conclusions & Recommendations
• Questions
Services • Feasibility Studies
• Site Investigations
• Survey & Mapping
• Programming/Planning
• Design Development
• Independent Product
Evaluation & Selection
• Construction Documents
Preparation
• Budgeting & Scheduling
• Construction Administration
■ Sports Lighting
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH SYNTHETIC TURF STUDY
a
119001 90
1- r
Lw
r�
• Information Gathering
Site Visits /Documentation
• Rough Draft
Review & Comments
Final Report
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH SYNTHETIC TURF STUDY
Existing Conditions
Maintenance Practices
Amenities
Programming
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH SYNTHETIC TURF STUDY
Selection Criteria
• Construction Costs • Parking
• Current Programming m Annual Maintenance
Utilities /Infrastructure • Users /Cost per User
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH SYNTHETIC TURF STUDY
Proposed
Field
Layouts
/ ; , :60
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH SYNTHETIC TURF STUDY
Proposed
Field
Layouts
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH SYNTHETIC TURF STUDY
Proposed
Field
Layouts
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH SYNTHETIC TURF STUDY
Engineer's Estimate of Probable Costs
• Basis of Engineer's Estimate of Probable Costs
• Conditions of Construction
• Inclusions
• Exclusions
• Overall Summary of Costs
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH SYNTHETIC TURF STUDY
Engineer's Estimate of Probable Costs
Park - Components: $ Amount
Arroyo Park
Bob Henry Park ------------ __
Bob Henry Park (Bid Alternate)-----------------------------------
Bonita Canyon Sports Park .___----------------------------------
Bonita Creek Park - Football / Soccer-------------- --- -- -- ----
Bonita Creek Park - Football /Soccer /Softball
Buffalo Hills Park ---------------------------------------------------------
Buffalo Hills Park (Bid Alternate)--------------------------------
Coastal Peak Park --------------------------------------------------------
EastbluffPark ----------------------------------------------------------------
Eastbluff Park (Bid Alternate)
1,490,224
-------------------------------------- ------------------ - - - - -- 952,966
----------------------------------------------------- - - - - -- 666,918
--------------------------------------------------- - - - - -- 1,073,193
------------------------------------------ ------- - - - - -- 970,755
--------------------------------------------------------- ..1,908,579
----------------------------- ------- - - - - -- -- - - - -- 1,096,692
------------------------------------------------------------ 666,918
--------------------------------------------------- 963,804
----------------------------- --------- ------ - - - - -- 1,261,685
- - - - --------------------------------------------
Grant Howald Park - - - - -- ._ - ------------------------------ - - - - --
------- - ------- - - - - -- ------ 654,672
- ---------- - - - - -- 834,725
Irvine Terrace Park --- - - - - -- ------------------------ ------------ - - - - -- 1,149,151
Lincoln Athletic Center - Football/Soccer ---------------- .------------------------------------------------------------- 1,156,433
Lincoln Athletic Center - Football /Soccer /Auxiliary Soccer--------------- ----------------------- -- -- - - -- --1,804,321
MarinersPark ------------- - - - - -- ----------------------------------------- ------------------ - - - --- 714,413
Mariners Park (Bid Alternate) .._--- _- -._.._ 459,560
Peninsula Park - --------------------------------- ---------------------- - - - - -- - -- 979,527
Sunset Ridge Park.. -- .. -------------------- - 1,647,273
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH SYNTHErIC TURF STUDY
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH SYNTHETIC TURF STUDY
Annual W,Menance
I"oeeae
in
M
Ranking
Dave rtlenl
Coa
¢ed
S
Utilities
Parkin
S.. we
P.M.
Coal r PeNClpanl
TOTALS
r
z
a
�°
b�
e
W
Matrix
E�
°
5
0
e'
3
as
a
o
a
'r
°
yy
g
c
P
i
c
C
02
p
c
e
Uv
8
-
D
€
s
0
$ 6
r
'
o
c
6
°
Z; C
°
'
°
aw
o
e
�0
ma
o
a
O
1 O
1 r
a
1
Bonita Creek Park- FootbalVSoccer
5971,000
5
3
3
P
6
107
20
127
3
$ 53.273
6
50.302
6
�1450
6
36
2
Bonita Creek
51 909000
1
5
5
P
8
107
20
127
3
S 70.758
7
67,069
7
5
K
2
Pa rkF ootbal I /SoccerlSokball
3
Lincoln Athletic Center-
$1,156,000
4
3
3
P
6
80
0
80
2
S 17296
2
40,241
5
$698
5
27
3 -T
FootbalASoccer
4
Lincoln Athletic Center-
31,804,000
1
5
6
P
/
8D
0
BO
2
E 27,320
i
53.655
9
$ 10.89
4
27
}T
FootballfSoccer /Auxillary, Field
5
Grant Howald Park & Fields
$835.000
5
3
3
P
6
63
65
128
3
S 10.689
2
21,462
3
$12.63
4
26
5
6
Arroyo Park & Field
$1,485,000
3
4
4
P
6
51
0
51
2
3 27.642
3
31,299
4
$15 -37
3
25
6
'%
Bonita Canyon Sports Park
$1,073.000
4
2
2
T
0
20
204
224
5
$ 20.797
3
49.184
5
$7.05
5
24
7
Mariners Park
E715,000
{
3
]
N
0
45+/-
30H-
75
2
E 9,328
1
35,770
4
$8.49
Bob Henry Park & Field
$953,000
5
3
3
N
0
51
0
51
2
$ 9.597
1
26,828
3
$11.59
4
18
9 -T
[12
Buffalo Hills Park & Field
$1,097,000
4
3
3
N
0
31
130
162
4
S 13.849
2
17,885
2
$19.97
3
16
9-T
Coastal Peak Park 6 Fields
$964,000
5
3
3
N
0
39
0
39
1
$ 16636
2
17.885
2
$1744
3
16
11
Sunset Ridge Park
51,847,000
2
2
2
N
0
72
0
72
2
S 21,320
3
26,828
3
$19.98
3
16
12
131rvIne
Terrace Park &Field
$1,149.000
4
1
1
N
0
-
so
60
2
S 15.032
2
17,885
2
$2087
2
13
13-T
14
Peninsula Park & Field
$98.1700
5
1
1
N
0
117
0
1t7
]
3 12.785
2
8,943
1
$35.57
1
13
13-T
15
Eastbluff Park & Field
$1,262,000
3
3
3
N
0
40
0
40
1
E 13.988
2
17.885
2
1 $2295
1
13
13 -T
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH SYNTHETIC TURF STUDY
Synthetic Turf Field Benefits
• Consistency/ Playability
• Safety
Increased Usage
• Water Savings
• Labor Savings
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH SYNTHETIC TURF STUDY
Environmental Issues
Related to Synthetic Turf Fields
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH SYNTHETIC TURF STUDY
• Heat
• Toxicity
• MRSA
• Conclusions
Recommendations
• Questions
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH SYNTHETIC TURF STUDY
Thank You'.