When you say turf, I'm assuming a synthetic field, not a natural grass field?

How much money did RA contribute toward the synthetic field at Herndon High? A significant percentage of Reston residents attend Herndon High, not South Lakes High.

I played high school football during the late 90s. My school had an all grass field, and a few of our rivals had turf. I remember exactly which teams had turf, because EVERYONE hated playing on turf; including the teams that had turf fields. They hated it so much, that most of those teams later changed to grass fields; so the cost savings of the turf became a complete loss.

Turf causes severe "rug burn". And I do mean severe. I remember having all of the hair and top layer of skin removed from part of my arm on one play. My teammates learned quickly to wear gloves, a long sleeved shirt, and full leg coverings when playing on turf. This of course made the players very hot, and less effective as players, but at least they got to keep their skin.

When turf is wet, gaining enough traction for football players is almost impossible. The whole team might as well be playing on a slip-and-slide. I remember many of my team's players having mild ankle injuries because the loss of traction caused awkward pile-ups on the line. While the effect is hilarious, it's really just a confidence killer for the team.

Turf can become very hot during the summer months. Because it's basically a form of rubber, it holds far more heat than normal grass.

Unless turf technology has changed dramatically in the last decade, I'd oppose this move with passion. There will be so many complaints by players, and visiting teams, that the turf will be replaced, and all cost savings lost.

@travis
Synthetic turf has improved a lot in the past 10 years! It is safer and acts more like real turf than ever before. It's just expensive with the new systems and engineering prerequisites.

This is crazy! We have lived in Reston since 1987 and my kids are districted (and attend) Herndon High. Did RA give money to the HHS effort for it's turf fields? I am very, very tired of HHS being treated like an ugly step child. It is not appropriate for RA to favor one Reston High School over another. They should not pledge money to this effort without giving an equivalent amount to the HHS Sports Boosters.

I am glad that the RA can pledge $100K for this, but the Reston Festival is in jeopardy due to them not participating...

I would be surprised if the HHS Boosters did not recieve money from the Town of Herndon... RA giving money to the SL Boosters would be the equivelent of that in my mind, not a spurn on Herndon HS. Also, the field behind the tennis courts is termed "community use field" which would indicate it will probably be open for use to all community residents, North Reston included.

This RA pledge is illegal.

RA will have no control over the use of the field. The field can and will be assigned to non-Reston teams as happens to the other fields at SLHS and FCPA fields on a regular basis. RA members will not derive "substantial benefits" from this field.

Thus, RA is giving $100,000 to non-RA members.

Further, artificial fields are dangerous to the health of children. A 10x increase in concussions and double the knee injuries.

RA can spend $100k for non-RA property before it renovates Browns Chapel?

What were they thinking?

Frank, Yes, Herndon High School is in Herndon, yet a significant number of Reston kids (I am not sure of the percentage, but almost all kids North of Baron Cameron) attend Herndon High. We consider it very much a Reston high school--at least one for Reston kids.

Isn't it kind of a moot point since Herndon already has two turf fields? Meanwhile, I will have info in a bit about whether RA gave money to that effort.

Herndon High has two turf fields on their premises plus there is turf at Hutchinson ES as well as Arrowbrook which is shared by Herndon and Reston Soccer.

A few items related to this:

1) Turf fields are environmentally more sustainable than grass. This is because grass takes enormous amounts of water and organic or inorganic fertilizer and (usually) gas-motor mowing and seeding to maintain over time. The benefits of "green" grass don't outweigh the carbon footprint of its maintenance. Artificial turf is often made with recycled products, too.

2) This study shows no significant difference in injury rates between NEW synthetic turf and grass: http://msscentershop.info/content/41/suppl_1/i20.abstract. The issue with injuries has far more to do with conditioning (proper and not stressful, focused on joint strength and building lateral movement facility), coaching (sportsmanship- and safety- and not warrior-oriented), and proper shoes/cleats (appropriate for turf and weather).

3. The reporter should have noted that RA's Larry Butler is SLHS Principal Bruce Butler's brother. I do not believe there was any bias or any other conflict, but this fact should not have been left out.

4. Turf fields are available for play 24/7. Some people above argue they didn't like them in the old days (5-10 years ago). Things have changed dramatically, and every team I know clamors for turf for practice and play, with few exceptions. My suggestion to adults involved: Ask the kids.

I guess at the end of the day, the HHS fields really don't play into this issue. The issue is really whether RA should provide money to fields that they don't have jurisdiction over. I can see both sides of the argument but am still not sure that is the right thing.

Some of the 'facts' in the comments also need clarification:

1. Not all Restonins north of Baron Cameron go to HHS. Some go to SLHS, and some Langley.

2. 2011 Enrollment: Armstrong +Aldrin = 1160. Forest Edge + Lake Anne + Sunrise Valley + Terraset + Hunters Woods + Dogwood = 4286. This is only partly helpful because the boundaries do not exactly match Reston's, but it shows the rough proportion of Reston residents attending the 2 different high schools. The vast majority didn't benefit directly from HHS turf.

3. RA does not control any of the youth programs that would apply for field permits. So when FCPA says the 'contributing partners' would control 80% of the allocation on the community field, it's hard to see how that would directly benefit RSA or RYA as independent entities. If the RA is the contributing partner, can they 'assign' their portion of the allocation to whichever club they feel is most deserving?

4. Youth sports organizations don't always discriminate on the basis of address. I know of Reston children who play for Herndon and Great Falls (and others), and vice versa. This is especially true of older ages and travel-level teams, which are more likely to receive time on the new fields. So the idea of 'excluding' a different club's teams from the facilities based on which town it 'represents' is weak at best.

In all it seems a good use of money. Ask the kids today and they'll tell you fieldturf is far preferable - it's not what it used be.

If Supervisor Hudgins requires the Fairway redeveloper to make the same per unit recreational proffer that is made everywhere else in the County, there would be $400,000+. More than enough to fund the $100,000 sought from RA for these fields and leave plenty left over to apply to the Brown's Chapel baseball fields and completing the RA trail system.

RA's capital facility needs measure $4-5 million. With those capital needs, how can any responsible fiduciary spend $100k of RA's funds improving someone else's land.

Recalling the RA Board requires only 10% of the voters for that Board member position to sign petitions.

Maybe its time to start circulating petitions for those Board positions that are not up for election this March.

Just wanted to say the amount that Reston Soccer is contributing was inadvertently left out of the original story. They will give $250,000 to the effort.

Good to know that youth sports groups will be directly involved. RSA recently increased their fees and indicated that the money was for 'field development,' as this clarifies things a bit on that end.

John, as for injuries - ask all the kids (and adults) who have twisted their ankles or knees on the rough, pockmarked, rocky grass fields in Reston. I've seen concussions on those fields as well - it's not safer to fall if there's a rock in your path!
I've simply seen too many injuries on grass due to the poor quality of those fields. I have NOT seen similar injuries since playing and coaching on turf, because when the field surface is predictable, you can train players to handle it appropriately.

John,
Some of us have actually read the studies. There are many of them on BOTH sides of this issue. We reserve the right, as intelligent adults, to hold our own opinions on the matter - both on the accuracy and applicability of the studies, and on the question of whether this is a good investment for the community. I understand your concern given your family history with fieldturf. My family's history is the opposite - horrific injuries on grass, and no issues on turf at all.

It is my belief that the two surfaces are, on balance, about equally safe. Some injuries are more common on grass, others on artificial turf. Coaching and fitness have a role as well. When injuries occur it is very difficult to assign 100% of the blame to just one factor.

The cost of repeatedly regrading and re-sodding grass fields is one of the main arguments in favor of investing in turf. I would actually prefer GOOD grass but it's simply too expensive over time. Given the ease of maintenance and greater flexibility of use, and the inconclusive evidence on safety, I consider the fieldturf a good investment.

It's obviously not my call, as I live just outside the magic line. I only work and volunteer in Reston but don't technically live there. I still consider it a good investment by FCPS and FCPA, and it seems to me that RSA residents will benefit substantially.

Typically artificial fields cost more the first time around, but replacement cost may be less than initial installation (because the underlying grading and drainage remains). Some communities have actually found long-term savings in the tens-of-thousands per year, assuming high maintenance standards. Then again, at the school, that's probably what's happening, as opposed to neighborhood fields which are left to dry out. For example, Montogomery Co. spends $25k-$45k/year for each HS athletic field (the high figure is for Bermuda Grass), but less than $10k/year for artificial fields.

But even if you assume the lifetime costs are equal on a" per-field basis," I think we should consider a per-USE basis. Due to year-round availability, and the ability to schedule use without allowing time for the sod to 'breathe,' artificial surfaces become significantly cheaper in high-use situations. For example, Montgomery County found in 2011 that artificial fields were actually used 2.5-3 times more hours than natural fields, allowing greater community benefit and program expansion without the need to invest in building out more fields. The "cost per hour of use" is $100-175 with grass, and only about $50 with artificial fields.

Bill Bouie

36 hours ago you offered to send me an MOU. Still haven't received it.

John,

Go to this website to get all of the details and the TRUE facts about scheduling of synthetic turf fields and additional information.

http://www.fairfaxcounty.gov/ncs/athletics/turffieldslist.htm

This will answer most of the questions that the community has about the partnerships and do away with your accusation of someone from the outside coming to steal Reston fields.

Rectangular-field sports in May and June: soccer and lacrosse. Both huge, and growing.
Plus all summer. Sunset is also considerably later than 7PM during these months, giving more hours of availability.
The unlit field will available until 7Pm through the full month of September based on twilight guidelines for youth sports.
The community will also gain from use of the stadium field which is currently scheduled very strictly to protect the grass. Even when SLHS teams are practicing there, we will benefit from the other fields they vacate in order to do so.

Michael

Lacrosse may be growing but it starts from a tiny base. What are the raw number of RA participants?

Soccer seems to have plateaued and, in Reston at least, doesn't use all of the rectangular RA fields available to it.

Within 15 minutes of sunset (which is measured when the horizon splits the disk of the sun), its too dark to play without lights. The sun sets at 7 on Labor Day and by the end of the month, it's setting before 6.

Most rectangular field youth sports leagues take a hiatus when school is out.

Until an MOU is produced, the promises of RA member use are illusory and, even after that, are likely to be unenforceable.

Bill

This project will put in two FieldTurf field and light the Community Use field and the budget is just over $600,000?

Those numbers do not add up.

Correction I typed $600k, when I was thinking $1.4mm. Those numbers still don't add up.

The Community Partners are paying for the stadium field and FCPA is working to provide the Community Use fields and lights.

Correction, John:
US Sunset time, September 30, Reston, VA: 6:53 PM. NOT before 6 as you claim. Source: US Naval Observatory.
Think about it - the equinox is in late Sept., and by definition contains 12 full hours of daylight.

Both your facts and your reasoning are inaccurate.

Bill

Fall High School sports teams start practicing the first week of August. So the "full day" availability is limited to the 5 weeks from the end of school until the first of August when most youth sports are on hiatus.

RA camps are subsidized by assessments.

I cannot imagine anyone would think its a good idea to have RA campers on an unshaded rectangular artificial turf field in the heat of July with all of the extra heat that those fields hold and emit.

Except that there's trees, and you can bring tents.

Michael

Since most players of youth sports rely on parents to get them to their practice and those parents have to get home from work before the kids can get to the field, sunset at 6:53 prevents practical use of an unlit field in the Fall.

So 2 FieldTurf fields + lights is going to be closer to $1.8mm than $1.4.

Michael

Look at the aerial photograph, you'd have to take a cab to get under a tree from either field.

I've helped run national fastpitch tournaments on those fields. Even with dugout covers, heat stroke is a real problem in the summer there both for players who've been acclimated by an entire season of play outdoors and for spectators. For RA Campers, its threat sufficient to discount any extended use of those fields as a justification for these fields.

These fields are being built for soccer and lacrosse. Soccer doesn't use the RA fields it already has. Lacrosse doesn't have the numbers of RA members to justify $100,000 to improve non-RA land.

John,

We get it. You don't want new turf fields. Your argument seems to wander from it is illegal, to it is bad use of RA funds to it will be harmful to the kids, to the fields won't get enough use to justify the investment. You are certainly entitled to your opinion(s) -- which you have most definitely expressed.

I would however ask you to refrain from representing the interests of others (RYA football, lax, SHLS sports program, Reston soccer, RA summer programs and the like). I am sure these programs can speak for themselves.

I will speak for myself, as a former board member and RYA football coach. Whether or not there is new turf field at SLHS/LHMS RYA will likely still practice there (great central location for the kids). Even w/out lights we practiced from mid-August until late November from 6-8pm -- yes even in the fall after the time change. I know these fields will get plenty of use from these teams and suspect that soccer believes the same since they made a sizable contribution.

RYA had use of new FFX County funded grass field at Stratton Woods (http://maps.google.com/?ll=38.942323,-77.384466&spn=0.001089,0.002334&t=h&z=19) for home games. It was a nice facility with a nice baseball filed too. But the grass wore thin in 1.5 years of use (rocks in the middle). Further, we often had to cancel games or move them to an opponents locations when it rained (Chantilly, Vienna, Herndon, etc). They all HAD new turf fields.

Respectfully,

Patrick McBride

The bigger concern here is this Wild west mentality of raising funds for these fields. Every school has a different method. Why?

I would like to see a list of every high school field and who paid for what.

I know Lee HS got one a few years ago and I don't thing the community paid any money--it came from proffers.

The ongoing expenses are also huge. I believe schools (Boosters) have to set aside $30k per year for future refurbishment. Easy to do at Westfield---not so much at a school like Lee.

I want to see consistent funding for these fields.

John, Bill & Karen,

I have a question. I read where South Lakes High Schoo's contribution will come from discretionary funds including booster donations, gate receipts, concession sales, etc. It said they could not use county or "taxpayer" funds for the fields. But then, it said the Reston Community Center was giving them a chunk of change. Isn't RCC funded by taxes? Seems like some strange accounting to me.

Patrick

No where did I claim to write for anyone but myself based on my own experience and observations.

I've advocated for RA to light a field for RYA practice for the 2 years I've been on the RA PPAC committee. I've watch RYA practice by the light of the distant fastpitch fields. I've watched RYA practice by the light of the Langston parking lot. It's wrong and it should have been be fixed along time ago.

Will the MOU guarantee that RYA will actually get to use the field? And if the field is assigned by County staff to an organization other than RYA or another RA member based organization, what recourse will RYA or RA have?

I've also watched RYA coaches run the same play over and over again in exactly the same place on a grass field and make a fastpitch outfield unplayable for a sunny, dry weekend.

My observations have wandered as the justifications for RA spending $100k on someone else's land have wandered. And boy have they wandered.

My doubts about FieldTurf relate to safety of kids for whom cognitive impairment from head trauma can become a life long problem and can shorten lives. No one can tell us that FieldTurf won't have the same track record as AstroTurf. As a youth coach I'd hope you'd be equally concerned.

John,
I have repeatedly run practices until 7PM in the fall with issues on transportation, attendance, or daylight. People carpool and it works great.
I did look at the photo again - the shade is less than a field-length away. Tents would be even closer. Nobody should have to "take a cab" to get that far.
Further growth in soccer is anticipated due to the increased enrollments in most Reston schools in Kindergarten and 1st grade.

And, since the community field WILL be lit, contrary to your claim, I'm not sure why we're even still talking about a 7PM stop time anyway.

John,

Please stop the madness, you are wrong on every count. The lights will go in at the same time as the practice field. The school and community groups will pay for the stadium field, and FCPA will take care of the community use field complete with lights.

Since you are such an advocate for youth sports and activities, step up and contribute to one of the groups that is trying to do something positive for this community, that will effect children and adults as well. Support a program that is long lasting and something to keep our children busy.

The more of these fields that we are able to partner with schools on, the closer we can get back to potentially offering intramural sports to our middle school children that were eliminated years ago. It would promote school and class spirit, give kids an afterschool activity, and promote physical well being at the same time.

This is a GREAT investment in this community.

Bill

I'd be happy to contribute to a safe lighted field for RYA.

How much are you kicking in, personally?

Maybe that's the answer.

Instead of getting the money from RA under questionable legal circumstances, let's have the Friends of Reston, who funded Nature House, do fundraising for those lights.

Where is that MOU, Bill?

This whole exchange reminds me of my high school classmate who would argue over which manufacturer made the best headphones at every lunch period because he just had to have the "best" headphones. He was always trying to work an angle to get someone else to pay for the latest model. Mom, Dad, Grandma, Uncle Pete. Invariably, some other kid would buy a newer set and it would start all over again.

Today, he's deaf and relies on hearing aides.

Be careful what you covet?

As a Reston resident and long time participant in sports at South Lakes and the youth leagues here, I can say John Farrell is correct about the Reston fields being allocated to kids all across the county. I played on a travel baseball team for South Lakes (comprised of 95% South Lakes kids) and we had serious issues getting on South Lakes baseball field in our season. That MOU should be produced and amended so that Reston Residents, Reston sports teams, and SOUTH LAKES STUDENTS get priority. i would be very skeptical about the allocation of usage for these teams if the County gets the final say on who can play on them and when,