It’s game over for BBHS’s athletic fields after impact tests deem them unsafe
March 14, 2024 at 2:28 a.m.
For several months, concerns about the state of the Blind Brook High School sports fields have been coming to light.
The multipurpose field doesn’t just pull triple-duty for sports—used for football, soccer and lacrosse—but has lately been the venue for the school’s graduation ceremony. Meanwhile, the baseball diamond served as home for one of the best baseball teams Blind Brook has seen in recent years. They’ve been turned into integral parts of the school’s identity.
Now, neither can be used—they’ve aged past the point of use.
Last fall, Board of Education member Scott Jaffee and other Blind Brook parents created the Friends of Blind Brook Fund, a nonprofit charity aiming to raise money specifically for student athletes. One of the group’s long-term goals is to update the dated sports facilities at the middle/high school campus, including the track and fields.
At the Jan. 23 Board of Education meeting, BBS Architects presented on the state of the turf fields and what replacing them could entail.
John Longo, a senior associate at BBS, said the firm started visiting the campus in August 2023 to review the athletic grounds and secured an estimate for the board in December of that year. He labeled the football field, track and baseball field as areas in dire need of replacement.
At the time, Longo estimated the board would have to come to a decision within the next year, as the fields would be less likely to last longer unless continuously maintained.
During their discussion, Jaffee said to fully replace the facilities during the summer of 2025, which would be the earliest they could achieve the project, the board would need to begin the process immediately.
However, the district had an even shorter timespan than originally thought.
Both fields out of commission
“When we started talking about replacing the fields, some parents brought up concerns about the safety of the field,” Superintendent Dr. Colin Byrne said during a phone interview on Monday, Mar. 11. This led to the district requesting LandTek, a New York-based contracting company that specializes in sports facilities, to perform a GMax test on the football field on Mar. 4.
The rubberized infill of turf fields is designed to cushion impact from running or falling on the ground, and the GMax procedure using a weight to test that effectiveness—measuring the turf material’s ability to absorb the shock of a collision, simulates that of a player hitting the field. If the test determines the rubber has become too hard, the field is deemed unsafe for use, as it may increase the risk of injury.
“We were just informed that the samples taken from the football field did not meet the testing requirements. As of today, this field will be closed for the remainder of the school year,” read an email sent out to the Blind Brook community on Thursday, Mar. 7.
“We didn’t really have any concerns about the safety but were surprised by the results and did what we had to do,” Byrne said.
In the original notice, he wrote that the baseball field was in the process of being tested as well, out of a sense of precaution.
On Tuesday, Mar. 12, an update to the community confirmed: “We received the test results today and the field did not pass. As of today, there will be no access to the baseball field.”
Both fields were constructed in 2006, according to Byrne, and haven’t seen any significant updates since then. Blind Brook Athletic Director Kimberly Saxton added they haven’t been re-turfed in at least a decade, a process that should occur every three to five years, depending on what rubber infill is used.
When asked why the playing areas weren’t maintained, Byrne said he was unsure. “I wasn’t really involved in conversations around the fields so much until recently. I don’t know why that wasn’t done,” said Byrne, who didn’t take over as permanent superintendent until 2022.
Regardless of how well the athletic grounds were taken care of, they’re well past their lifespan. According to Longo, turf athletic facilities are expected to last 12 to 15 years. Both fields are three years past that range.
The shuttering of both playing areas has thrown a wrench into the district’s plans, both short- and long-term.
“We’re looking at everything that has to do with the fields, including graduations and moving up ceremonies and planning for any kind of contingencies if they can’t happen on the field,” Byrne said.
On an everyday level, students will no longer have access to the areas during physical education. According to Saxton, the Rye Brook Athletic Fields, the park adjacent to the school operated by the Village, will be used when the weather permits.
As for sporting events, Byrne said the district is making every effort to accommodate student athletes. “We’re going to be using alternate fields as much as we can,” he said. “Kim (Saxton) has reached out to other schools and colleges for this. We’re definitely covered until the end of the month and will continue to do what we need to.” He added this won’t cause much of a financial disruption for the district.
“We can do our own busing and have our own bus drivers,” he said.
As for long-term solutions, he was less confident.
“We’re exploring every option right now,” he said. “We’re trying to do things that are both safe and financially responsible. We’re considering everything.”
Should turf stay or should it go?
One option briefly discussed with the BBS architects in January was the potential of converting the fields to grass.
Board of Education President Jeffrey Mensch asked if neighboring districts have been moving away from the artificial material. Longo responded in the negative, stating schools across the state have been adding more turf fields.
“There’s not a single district that I know that has shied away from putting in new facilities,” he said. “But I know there has been some talk about injuries and things like that.” He alluded to concerns that have arisen about the field type.
Avid professional football fans may be familiar with the term “turf monster,” the name given to the phenomenon of slips, falls or injuries caused by the field itself. Many NFL players have expressed disdain for turf, with Kansas City Chiefs Tight End Travis Kelce saying he’d rather play during a thunderstorm than on the rubberized material during an episode of his podcast, “New Heights with Jason and Travis Kelce.”
The NFL Players Association, the athletes’ union, has called for removal of the surface, citing higher injury rates.
But that increase isn’t just seen at the professional level.
According to a 2021 study conducted by researchers at Washington University in St. Louis, high school athletes were 58% more likely to receive an injury on artificial turf than natural grass. While the exact cause wasn’t determined, it’s speculated the artificial material has too much traction, creating twisting forces on joints.
Though popular, some states have begun acting against the use of artificial fields.
Massachusetts has introduced a bill which would ban the purchase or installation of turf sports facilities across all municipalities, including school districts. New York has passed a law which will ban the sale of artificial turf containing PFAS starting in 2026, as part of the Carpet Collection Program.
Longo recommended the district stick with turf, as it is a better fit for schools. He explained the material would outlast any grass field, as high schools play multiple sports throughout the school year. A grass field would require more upkeep, thus implying additional expenses.
More problems, more money
When Longo presented a tentative field replacement proposal, he provided the school board with a price for completely replacing both fields with turf, as well as the track. The baseball field would cost $1.5 million, while the football gridiron, and the track surrounding it, would amount to $2.65 million—a total price tag of $4.65 million.
Byrne later explained the district would most likely tackle both projects at once, should it be deemed necessary. “If we’re going to do something big, we’ll definitely do both,” he said.
Should the district head in that direction, funding would be an issue. The estimated cost is double the year-to-year budget increase seen in the 2024-25 proposed budget. Funding was an issue that had yet to be figured out at the time of the meeting, Mensch had attempted to find a way to begin the design process as the board continued to weigh their options.
According to the most recent notice, a plan is currently in development.
“The district is discussing all potential repair options for both fields and will be consulting with the facilities and athletic advisory committees,” Byrne wrote. “We will share information about plans and timelines as things progress.”
In the meantime, alternative fields, sourced by Saxton, will be used for all sporting events during the spring season.
Comments:
You must login to comment.