In a letter to MyRye.com, Councilmember Julie Souza says she needs to set The Record straight on artificial turf.
By Rye City Deputy Mayor and Councilmember Julie Souza
Why I Support the Gift of an Artificial Turf Surface at Nursery Field
In a recent issue, the editor of The Rye Record seems to take a position against pursuing full plans and a donor group’s proposed multimillion dollar gift of an artificial turf playing surface for Nursery Field. Here’s why I disagree with his position:
City Consideration Has Been Deliberate and Complete. Council consideration began in 2019. Open-to-the-public sessions with consultants responding to questions took place on February 27 and 29, 2020, May 24, 2023, November 29, 2023 and December 6, 2023, providing more than a dozen hours of video advice and Q&A. In addition, the Planning Commission submitted a unanimous and positive advisory opinion after four open-to-the-public sessions. Just as Jeff Graydon, Princeton University’s fields expert (Associate Director of Athletics and Capital Projects) said about his work as he donated his time to us on 11/29, “We are passionate about this stuff. This is what we do. We want it to be safe.”
Natural Grass Can’t Do the Job. The current, failed field cancels play over 40% of the time because (a) it doesn’t recover from rain and (b) a natural grass playing surface cannot be maintained under heavy use. This is why communities and schools surrounding Rye have artificial turf fields – and that is where our kids go to play when Nursery cancels. We asked Princeton’s Graydon whether, given the use hours needed, we should consider a new natural grass field. His response: “Even with the most durable grass, you might as well put dirt down. You won’t be able to maintain [grass].” Natural grass can only be safely and properly maintained at 10 to 15 hours of weekly use. Rye uses the field 36 to 45 hours per week. The only safe and durable surface that supports that level of use is synthetic turf.
Questions Have Been Answered. Hundreds of thousands of dollars have been spent getting answers to the questions asked by residents and by a variety of interest groups. The thematic responses, from health to traffic, are in the public record available on video or in the form of the GZA GeoEnvironmental, Inc. report, the Planning Commission’s favorable advisory report, and the State Environmental Quality Review Act form and other regulatory forms.
City Consultants, well-credentialed and unbiased—are Selected by City Staff. The Record minimizes what consultants have said with the implication that the consultants are just agreeing with those who hired them. That is an unfounded and dangerous suggestion. Any such misbehavior by staff or consultants would be a recipe for failure in this project and future projects. The Record’s aim is no sharper when they discredit one consultant for board work he did several years ago (focused on artificial turf recycling) for a synthetic turf industry association while a senior field designer for a global engineering firm. That consultant has worked on 14 grass fields over the past 2 years. Similarly, The Record’s editor discards the views of Princeton’s Graydon (quoted above) because he provides unpaid consultation to the same industry association (as he did for Rye).
Discrediting City staff and City experts without a good basis can have effects far beyond this issue and should not be an editorial pose taken lightly. The same goes for advocating a slow-walk that might forfeit donor interest in providing a badly needed multimillion dollar gift without seriously considering the mountain of evidence supporting it.
Among the things Julie neglects to mention in this LTE that she and her family were part of the leadership behind the initial group who wanted to fund an artificial turf field at Nursery Field and yet she refused to recuse herself from the deliberations as member of the City Council. Leaving out that pertinent information perfectly illustrates the sense that many people in the community have had about this proposed project being pushed towards a desired outcome, rather than actually looking for the best solution for all of Rye.
This is not true, Suki. My husband attended one meeting 5 years ago about helping support usable recreational space and fields—in general terms, not specific to Nursery Field. Nursery Field as a location for a turf field was the recommendation of the Rye Recreation Commission. This has been well documented.