The Irvine City Council approved a $6 million contract to install artificial turf fields at the Irvine Great Parks Sports Complex by the winter of 2025.
The City Council and KYA Services, LLC, a California contractor company selected to complete the installation, entered into the contract to replace select Great Park grass fields with turf. In an analysis of the project, city leadership identified that establishing synthetic turf will lead to lower maintenance costs and better accommodate foot traffic and athletic wear and tear.
City Manager Oliver Chi confirmed that the project would focus primarily on areas with high foot traffic near the temporary Great Park Live amphitheater, which hosts weekly summer concerts at the North Lawn.
“The grass is really jacked up. It’s rubbing off because people are walking, and it’s not like people are rolling around in it,” Councilmember Tammy Kim said during the meeting. “I have no interest in putting actual grass, because technically, we could replace it every weekend because of all the foot traffic.”
The project is estimated to stretch one year – beginning in the fall of 2024 and split into two phases according to construction updates. Phase 1 includes fields 4 through 7 of the sports park. Fields 4 and 7 are proposed to have synthetic turf, replacing the conventional turf, while fields 5 and 6 are to have their existing synthetic turf rehabilitated. Phase 2 aims to convert fields 14 through 17.
The Great Park Board voted 4-1 in favor of recommending the City Council approve the
contract use of “coir-based artificial turf” for the fields. Councilmember Kathleen Treseder was the sole dissenting vote at both meetings.
The advantages of using synthetic turf include approximately 1,500 more hours of usage, an increase in revenue of around $1.5 million and a decrease in maintenance costs of around $1 million when compared to using traditional grass fields. The project overview, presented at the council meeting by director of public works & sustainability Sean Crumby, and director of community services Chris Slama, also noted lower water consumption and the elimination of fertilizers as advantages of synthetic turf.
Of the 11 community members who submitted e-comments to the council meeting’s turf discussion, 10 were in support of the artificial turf fields. Commenters raised concerns about “injury due to unsafe field conditions” caused by heavy rain damage, decreased field usage in various weather conditions and dust inhalation with grass fields.
“I fully support a turf field as fields stay muddy after rain for days and one of the girls on my daughter’s soccer team broke her arm due to muddy fields,” Aliso Viejo resident Mia Gutierrez wrote in an e-comment.
San Juan Capistrano resident Jeff Caputo spoke on the benefits of synthetic turf.
“It appears from the proposal that the synthetic turf will allow for better field conditions as well as lower maintenance costs … Lastly, the synthetic fields will allow for training and games to be performed more or less year-round as inclement weather would not affect their use,” Caputo stated in a comment.
In the project overview slideshow, city officials estimated that synthetic turf will cost $76,000 a year in operating costs, compared to $1.13 million for natural turf. The Irvine Watchdog noted that the city provided no breakdown for how costs were derived.
Concerns of synthetic turf use were also discussed at the meeting, including the harmful effects of crumb rubber, the proliferation of PFAS, microplastics, the heat island effect, increased sports injuries and the recyclability of synthetic turf. PFAS, or per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, are long-lasting chemicals found in many consumer products that do not break down easily, according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Research has shown that exposure to some environmental PFAS “may be linked to harmful health effects in humans and animals.”
“Artificial turf contains hazardous chemicals like heavy metals and microplastics that pose serious health risks, especially to children. These toxins can leach into the environment, contributing to long-term health issues,” UCI physics and astronomy professor Kevork Abazajian wrote in the only e-comment opposing the installation of artificial turf.
Abazajian also wrote on the environmental benefits of natural turf.
“Natural grass offers environmental benefits like cooling, carbon sequestration, and better soil health. The long-term costs of artificial turf, including maintenance, disposal, and replacement, far outweigh those of natural grass,” Abazajian said in his comment.
Concerned Irvine organizations also submitted public comments expressing their opposition to the contract’s approval.
“We also strongly urge you to join with other cities, jurisdictions and states by taking action to protect drinking water, human and environmental health from the toxic and carcinogenic chemicals found in synthetic turf, joining other communities and states,” President Diane Conway and board member Dianne Woelke of Safe Healthy Playing Fields, Inc., an all-volunteer non-profit organization that informs communities on the health concerns of plastic fields, said in their submission.
The total estimated cost of the project is approximately $9.3 million, with available funding from the Great Park Fund and Great Park Capital Fund reaching $20.5 million, according to the item’s analysis on the meeting agenda.
Inga Chilingaryan is a News Intern for the summer 2024 quarter. She can be reached at chilingi@uci.edu.
Edited by Karen Wang, Beatrice Lee, and Jaheem Conley
