Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Athletics Facilities topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Consultant tells Millersburg Area SD board synthetic turf would cost roughly $1.6M; natural-grass estimate about $640,000
Summary
A consultant presented lifecycle and maintenance comparisons for a proposed athletic-field renovation, showing a roughly $640,000 high-end natural-grass option versus about $1.6 million for synthetic turf; staff and trustees agreed to collect infiltration test results and return with a decision by Nov. 20.
A consultant to Millersburg Area School District told the school board on Nov. 6 that a high-end natural-grass renovation of the main athletic field would cost about $640,000, while a synthetic turf installation was estimated at roughly $1.6 million.
The presenter said the natural-grass scenario includes underdrain installation, new topsoil, grading and sod; annual high-end maintenance for that option is estimated at about $47,000. For synthetic turf, the presenter cited a replacement life commonly around 12 years (potentially 15 locally) and noted the district would still face capital replacement costs in year 12–15. “Synthetic turf field, you can see about 1.6 mill,” the presenter said, and later summarized the maintenance trade-offs: “Synthetic turf is not maintenance-free… it needs groomed, but you don’t have to paint lines.”
Why it matters: the board is weighing a multi-phase stadium project that already completed lighting and is preparing grandstand and track work; choosing between turf and grass affects stormwater permitting (infiltration testing is required), up-front capital needs and long-term replacement cycles. The presenter urged the board to authorize infiltration testing before winter and to be ready to make a direction-setting decision at the Nov. 20 meeting so that necessary permitting and engineering work can proceed.
Board members pressed for clarifications about the assumptions behind the numbers — season length, labor rates, and how often the district might expect replacement. The presenter said the analysis used a 32-week maintenance period and a $45-per-hour labor rate for operating assumptions and highlighted that the synthetic option typically requires a larger stone subbase that increases stormwater volumes and therefore the scope of required stormwater controls. Trustees raised programmatic questions (e.g., occasional javelin or multi-sport line painting) and usage concerns: several members said Millersburg’s expected field usage may not justify the higher upfront cost now.
Next steps: staff will arrange infiltration/percolation testing this fall, refine the district’s current maintenance-contract actuals, and return to the board with those data before the Nov. 20 meeting. The board did not take a final vote on Nov. 6.
Sources: consultant presentation and board discussion during the Nov. 6 meeting.
