Sprague Fields Task Force

1. Sprague Fields Task Force Public Hearing January 8, 2008 For more SFTF information, go to www.wellesleyma.gov, and find the SFTF section under Boards and Committees

2. Who we are • Department of Health Lenny Izzo • Board of Public Works Bill Charlton • Recreation Commission Carl Fleischer • Director of Athletics John Brown • Natural Resources Commission Rick Bashian • School Committee Chris Guiffre & Suzy Littlefield • Board of Selectmen Greg Mills • Sprague Fields Abutters Tom Brown & Mike Urban • Sprague School Administration Donna Dankner • Sprague School Parents Todd Himstead & Jane Neilson • Wellesley Cancer Prevention Project Richard Morse • Youth Baseball & Softball Curt Smith • Youth Lacrosse Barbara McMahon • Youth Soccer Tom Harrington • Advisory Committee Liaison Marijane Tuohy • CPC Liaison Jack Morgan

3. What we are trying to accomplish • Mission: The SFTF will recommend to School Committee one or more plans for the Town to approve at the 2008 Annual Town Meeting to solve the remediation of the Sprague Fields, with a consensus from constituency groups, which optimize the use of the athletic fields at the Sprague Fields Complex.

4. Approach • Don’t limit our work to a debate of synthetic turf v. natural grass on the two fields in need of remediation • Do seek consensus on a compromise approach to remediation by developing a master plan for the entire Sprague Fields complex • Remediation area would be included in the implementation of any master plan • Move as quickly as possible to meet deadlines associated with Annual Town Meeting and DEP remediation order (note that condition of fields is contributing to Town’s field capacity problem because referees won’t work on them)

5. Progress to date (1 of 2) • School Committee takes lead in search for a Sprague solution (May) • School Committee holds Listening Session at Sprague School and forms the SFTF as an advisory committee to School Committee (June) • Guiffre & Littlefield recruit members to SFTF (June-Aug) • SFTF develops RFP with help from Town Engineer and distributes RFP (July-Aug) • SFTF seeks funding for consultants (Aug-Oct) • SFTF holds Listening Session (Sept) • SFTF receives responses to RFP and interviews three vendors (Sept) • SFTF updates Advisory (Oct) • SFTF selects Gale for field layout and remediation design work but not evaluation of synthetic turf (Oct) • SFTF obtains consultant funding assistance from Selectmen, Recreation, DPW & Field Use Fund (Oct) • SFTF unanimously agrees on Conceptual Field Layout (Nov)

6. Progress to date (2 of 2) • SFTF establishes home page on town website (Nov) • SFTF submits placeholder application with CPC (Nov) • SFTF evaluates synthetic v. natural grass issues, including health/environmental issues, sports injury issues, experience at other towns, alternative in-fills (Nov-Jan) • SFTF evaluates funding issues (Nov-Jan) • SFTF and members of Advisory tour local fields (Dec) • SBC requests football field at Sprague (Dec) • SFTF requests that School Committee request a warrant article; School Committee requests warrant article (Dec) • SFTF mails Public Hearing invitations to abutters (Jan) • Guiffre & Mills meet with abutters (Jan) • SFTF meets with synthetic turf vendors (Jan) • SFTF holds Public Hearing (Jan)

7. Options under consideration • Option A. Master Plan • Improves entire parcel • Includes two synthetic turf fields (fields 2 & 3) • Type of synthetic turf to be determined • Precise costs to be determined • Amount of CPC funding to be determined • Amount of private funding to be determined • Need for phasing to be determined depending on funding • Option B. Remediation-area Plan • Fields 1 & 2 plus softball field and road improvements • Natural grass only

8. Field Layout (1 of 2) • UNANIMOUS AGREEMENT • 5 rectangular multi-use fields (1 could be used for football) • 2 full-size baseball diamonds (1 re-uses existing diamond) • 1 softball diamond • Playground for Sprague Elementary School (paid for by Sprague PTO) • Natural grass field next to Sprague Elementary School • As much buffer as possible for neighbors • Plowable walking path for Sprague and WMS students • Increased parking • Improved drop-off line for Sprague Elementary School • Re-uses “shed” for storage and other maintenance activities • Bathroom facilities and concession stand • No lights • No permanent fences, stands, or scoreboards • Potential for synthetic turf on fields 2 and 3

9. Field Layout (2 of 2)

10. Synthetic turf (1of 3) • Environmental & Health Risk Sub-group • Sub-group report plus extensive literature on SFTF section of town website • No conclusive evidence that tire crumb is a health or environmental hazard, but because there are are potentially hazardous materials in tire crumb, from an environmental & health standpoint, it is prudent to explore other synthetic turf options • Explored TPE synthetic turf and no-infill synthetic turf • Summary of synthetic turf options by Mr. Morse

11. Synthetic turf (2 of 3) • Sports Injury Risk Sub-group • Synthetic turf is comparable to premium natural grass from a sports injury standpoint • Premium natural grass fields require periodic rest, which Wellesley cannot afford to provide • Lower incidence of concussions on in-filled synthetic turf (versus premium natural grass) • Lower incidence of abrasions on premium natural grass (versus in-filled synthetic turf) • Wellesley does not have premium natural grass • In-filled synthetic turf is not “Astro turf”

12. Synthetic turf (3 of 3) • Other towns Sub-group • Other towns report favorably on their experience with synthetic turf • Talked to Framingham, Lexington, and Waltham • Reviewed information from Lincoln-Sudbury gathered last year

13. Preliminary Cost Estimates • Option A • Approximately $3.6M • Can be broken into two phases if private fundraising and/or CPC application does not yield target amounts • Does not include Sprague Playground, which will be paid for by Sprague PTO • Option B • Approximately $1.0M • Does not include Sprague Playground, which will be paid for by Sprague PTO

14. Potential Funding Arrangements • Option A • Private Fundraising* $1,800,000 - $2,000,000 (≈ 50-55%) • CPA Application** $1,200,000 - $1,400,000 (≈ 33-40%) • Town Funds*** $ 300,000 - $ 600,000 (≈ 10-15%) • Option B • CPA Application** $ 700,000 (≈ 70%) • Town Funds *** $ 300,000 (≈ 30%) * There can be no assurance that private fundraising will yield the target amount. ** There can be no assurance that CPC will decide to fund any portion of this project with CPA funds, and if CPC funds any portion of the project, there can be no assurance that it will fund the full amount requested in the application. *** There can be no assurance that the Town will commit the target amount.

15. Next Steps • Listen to public input (January) • Deliberate and vote on a recommendation (January) • Commence private fundraising if necessary (January) • Submit CPC application (January) • Update Advisory (January) • Present recommendation to School Committee (January) • School Committee vote (January) • Commence work on designs (January) • Commence work on bid documents (January) • Present to other Town boards (January) • Bid advertisement (March) • Town Meeting vote (March-April) • Commence work (June) • Substantially complete work (September) • Open bids (April) • Check references and award contract (April)

16. Questions & Feedback • SFTF welcomes any and all questions and feedback on what has been presented tonight