Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Facilities Athletics topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Public pushes for turf field; board discusses costs, lighting and facilities planning
Summary
A member of the public advocated for a turf stadium at Saucon Valley High School; the board said turf has high upfront costs, noted prior conversations with potential sponsors and hospitals, and suggested facilities committee review with lighting and concessions as priorities.
A resident asked the Saucon Valley School District board on May 13 to pursue a synthetic turf field and stadium improvements at the high school, describing potential benefits for multiple varsity sports, spectator amenities and revenue streams.
Resident Stephen Denzel told the board that a turf field would allow more sports to use the stadium, provide an improved spectator experience with restrooms and concessions, and make the district more competitive. He listed funding options including sponsorships, advertising, donation bricks and hospital or business contributions.
Board members and administrators responded that the district has discussed turf installations in prior years and that the estimated cost for a full stadium conversion is substantial. One trustee noted recent local projects with costs reported in the millions. “It was discussed at the time that we were negotiating with both of the hospitals…we looked into what the price of a turf field is, and…it’s very high. It’s probably over $2,000,000 at this point,” a board representative said.
Trustees and administrators said ordering of priorities would be important. Several participants suggested stadium lighting and improved concession and restroom facilities could deliver large benefits at lower cost and should be considered by the facilities committee before committing to an expensive turf project. One board member said Parkland High School pursued sponsorship-based funding for artificial turf and that the district could explore similar revenue sources. The facilities committee was mentioned as the appropriate venue for a detailed feasibility review; the meeting record shows the facilities committee schedule was recently canceled for the month, and trustees urged the topic be put on a future facilities agenda.
No construction decision or formal funding commitment was made at the meeting. Trustees invited the resident and athletic department staff to bring specifics and potential funding plans to the facilities committee for evaluation of scope, costs, phasing, ADA and maintenance considerations.
