Turf study finds trade‑offs; staff recommends synthetic turf at very high‑use fields with measures to limit microplastics and PFAS

City staff and consultants presented a draft turf study to the Parks and Recreation Commission on Sept. 23 that compares natural grass, synthetic turf and hybrid field systems and recommends using synthetic turf at very high‑use athletic fields while adopting measures to reduce microplastic migration and PFAS exposure.

The study, prepared by Lloyd Consulting Group and other subject‑matter experts, examined field playability and carrying capacity, life‑cycle costs, environmental and health impacts, maintenance requirements, and local user needs. The study was prepared after the City Council paused a previously budgeted replacement of El Camino Park’s synthetic field and asked staff to analyze environmental health, safety, cost, and playability before proceeding.

Consultants told commissioners that synthetic turf typically supports many more hours of use per year than natural grass. The report used a typical carrying‑capacity comparison (synthetic turf field: roughly 2,000 hours per year versus typical cool‑season natural grass: 400–600 hours per year), which yields a synthetic‑to‑grass equivalency in the range of roughly 3:1 to 4:1 depending on field construction and management.…