Apparently, and surprisingly, the town council voted 5-4 in favor of moving the turf project forward this past week. At best, I thought the TC would table this discussion since it's not a priority for the town at this current time and the fact that the track resurfacing project was voted down in November. Besides voter discontent for the track project, there are issues with proceeding forward with one project over the other, namely the drainage work that needs to be done to support both projects. Details here.
The BOE voted on moving forward with the turf project just before the November election assuming that *IF* the referendum for the track resurfacing passed both the track/turf could be done together to reduce cost and install a proper drainage system. However, the downfall of the track referendum throws a wrench into works since both projects share infrastructure and I believe installing the turf field will, to some degree, destroy parts of the track.
I welcome the fact that this project has been assigned to the PBC. The fact that we now have an extra set of eyes, unbiased to a degree, scrutinizing this effort is welcomed by me but not most on the BOE. For some reason, (my perception), some on the BOE, if not the administration, shutter at the thought that the PBC would get involved with any BOE-capital project. But I agree with Jimmy Sima's sentiment that the PBC will do the project in such a way that is best for the town.
9 comments:
Well, at least maybe we'll get some real answers instead of the posturing from both sides.
I have kids, and want the turf to pass for one reason - more opportunity to play.
The "grass" field at CHS is a joke, and without turf would need some serious money to get into proper shape.
And I hate turf...
More opportunity to play?? You must mean that more events will be held on the turf. You can't mean that your kid will have more of an opportunity to play because, if it's football, they'll only play if the coach decides to play them.
"one reason - more opportunity to play."
Actually, they'll have more opportunity to practice, not play more games. The bulk of the 'events' planned for the turf field are not contests but rather practices that are normally held on the practice fields.
The bulk of the "events" are practices..not contests. Great - that'll bring in a lot of income huh?!
Revenue from events are projected to bring in $27K-$36K per year. Banner sales, fundraising and field rental will bring in more. Savings from not utilizing the practice fields and/or dumping maintence costs into them to make the playable also helps. Additionally, besides watering the field on hot days for players, there will be no fertilizer, seeding, watering, labor and repairs to the grass field. The savings from this are about $15-20k per year. Perhaps Tony can confirm/deny these numbers?
There may be no fertilizing and seeding on a turf field but if we want to take care of it properly, it'll still need watering to reduce temperatures when it's too hot to play on; it'll need disinfecting to prevent risks of infections to players; it'll require more infill to replace what's lost; and it'll require racking over after heavy use; plus it'll need to be inspected for tears and possible needs for repair.
Revenues from 27 to 36K and maintenance savings of 15 to 20K ?
Yes, maybe Tony can confirm these numbers or are they just mere estimates?
i need Lawn Turf for Cheshire...
Turf Cheshire
Great Blog!! That was amazing. Your thought processing is wonderful. The way you tell the thing is awesome. You are really a master. Thanks for sharing information about
Turf Cheshire.
Post a Comment