Submitted Public Comment


home                                        all images enlarge when clicked
 

    Personally, I see this as a bureacratic and environmental nightmare.  While Rec and Park professes the need to transform a grassy oasis in order to benefit children and families, in fact, this is less about children and all about creating a revenue stream for the city. (Out-of-city soccer teams pay much more to rent the fields than city teams pay. And I do not believe for one minute that children will be using this field after 7 p.m.)

The use of synthetic turf is completely inconsistent with Prop. A's proposed directive to increase "open green space " (which I interpret as "grass", not "rubber") in San Francisco .

The fact that Rec and Park could not produce any conclusive environmental impact reports on the turf's potential carcinogenic properties scares the daylights out of me. – LB (District 1)

  

            There have been a lot of people, in addition to myself, who are also bothered by the questionable levels of heavy metals in in the tire crumbs in FieldTurf. We have tried to engage in conversations with some representatives from The City Fields Foundation, the Park and Rec. Department and our Supervisors only to be told it isn't serious. Another off putting stance is there is more support for the ability to play all year round and the plastic fields don't take pesticides, etc. This material DOES need anti-microbial washes and has been known to be a medium for MRSA. There are a large number of San Franciscans who are very supportive of any of your efforts to ban this material at the earliest time. Supervisor Maxwell invited me to her office and didn't want to hear about the toxicity, but noted you can't breathe the air on the plastic grass. She also told us that she won't let anymore of this stuff cover fields in her district. Unfortunately, by the end of the week, the Potrero del Sol Park was getting it's top soil stripped off and they are covering it in FieldTurf. That spot is the juncture of Ceasar Chavez and the on ramp to 101 and 280. It is so sad to see the loss of carbon absorbing grass being given up for plastic grass with tire crumbs stuffed in it. I also learned from the City Recycling department that FieldTurf is not in compliance with our "0" waste ordinance and FieldTurf is regarded as non - biodegradable, commercial carpets and it can only be disposed into land fill. - LH (District 9) 

     Although a remodeled park is enticing, I am very much against the artificial turf and lights and am willing to address my efforts accordingly. – DW (District 1)

        It is undisputed by The Park and Recreation Department that the 2008 Clean & Safe Neighborhood Parks Bond calls for 8.5 million dollars to convert our natural grass athletic fields to synthetic turf. They have several colorful brochures which state just that. Yet, in the text of Proposition A, the ambiguous term play field "reconstruction" is used with no mention of synthetic or artificial turf. Even voters who read the entire voter information pamphlet will not be informed unless they check Park and Rec's web pages. Whether for or against this controversial material, voters need to know what they are deciding. The omission is deceptive and sheds doubt on the transparency promised in the text of Proposition A. Yes on A propaganda adds to the deception with mailers sent to homes that say "resurface" athletic fields without further explanation. - SA (District 9)

Good work your doing! Save our green spaces! - CA (District 1)

  This is just astounding! If there is anything more I can do...stuff mail boxes, etc., please let me know.  KG

 

    Woodside, California: A proposal to install artificial turf fields at Woodside School started an on-line petition, “Keep One WES Soccer Field Natural Grass,". On July 19, 2007, the Woodside Elementary School District agreed to use natural grass on the soccer field meant for K-3 children at Woodside School. To read more about this story: David Boyce, Petition effort succeeds: Grass will grow on Woodside k-3 soccer field,” The Almanac, July 25, 2007, available at http://www.almanacnews.com/story.php?story_id=4617.

    Atherton, California: Encinal Elementary school, had a proposal that would have installed an adult-size turf soccer field. Three of the five Council members voted against the proposal. They said that there were “too many unanswered questions concerning the effects on the surrounding neighborhood, and the health, safety and environmental impacts of artificial turf.” Among the concerns, they cited “injuries caused by playing on the harder surface, the fact that the artificial turf gets warmer than grass, and the environmental effects of replacing grass with an artificial surface.” The opposition to the turf plan was mobilized by an impressive on-line petition (http://www.petitiononline.com/mod_perl/signed.cgi?Encinal). To read more about this  story:  Rory Brown, “No artificial turf at Encinal School: Existing grass field will be refurbished, but won’t be available until February,” The Almanac, April 11, 2007, available at http://www.almanacnews.com/story.php?story_id=3929.

 

                We were walking in Rossi Park last night around 10 p.m. or so.  When we first entered the part there were about half a dozen birds “grazing” on the grass on the east side of the park directly in front of Rossi St. on the grass. When we walked back out on the Anza side of the park, the birds were back, and this time didn’t move away. 

 I would love to get some info on those birds and maybe some photos.  They were definitely not seagulls or pigeons—quite a bit larger than that.  They took off flying about 10 feet off the ground, graceful and slow and then set down about 40 feet away.  They had relatively long necks.  They appeared either white or light gray.

     Obviously if this field is night lighted or, even if it is not night lighted, but has artificial turf, these birds will no longer come to the park.  Sitting there in the dark looking at the star-filled sky, it was also obvious that the neighbors immediately surrounding the park on all sides will be greatly disturbed by the intrusion of lights that will rob anyone using the park after dark or any of those neighbors with any view of stars or the towers at USF, etc.  San Francisco needs all the peaceful space it has.  The plan for Rossi is going to dramatically change the neighborhood environment and ecology.

CS (District 1) 

 

          I saw those birds resting during the rainstorm and they were numerous and covered almost the entire field.  If the field turf becomes artificial, where will the bird droppings go?  Flush down daily with water?  How many gallons of water are needed to clean up?  If not the droppings will have to breakdown without any interaction with the soil, and hence, are the dried or dehydrated droppings healthy for our neighborhood when the wind blows?  Is the turf healthy for kids to play sports on with dropping dusts?  Artificial turf is fine for an indoor and enclosed facility.  It doesn't take a first grade elementary school intelligence to know that artificial turf makes no sense.  No sense at all.                         - GL (District 1)  

      The lights, the turf (especially as the years go by), the lack of real grass and finally the adult traffic in sports this new park would attract 24/7, worry me no end.  Not to mention parking and general peace and quiet. - SM (District 1) 

 

 

 

 

home