Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Facilities topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Turf testing finds rising hardness values at Durango High; COO recommends proactive replacement planning
Summary
Testing showed Gmax rose from ~103 (2019) to ~153 (2025) with peaks at 164; staff said metrics remain below the 200 threshold but show degradation in shock absorption and ball‑roll tests and recommended design work and aiming for replacement in summer 2027 if funding is identified.
Chief Operating Officer Chris Coleman presented results of field‑performance testing for Durango High School’s synthetic turf and urged the board to plan proactively for replacement.
Coleman said the district measured Gmax (a surface‑hardness metric) at roughly 103 in 2019, 108 in 2023 and 153 in late‑2025, with peak readings near 164. He said the report notes several measures edging toward limits — including shock absorption, rotational resistance and a failing ball‑roll test — and that while current readings are below the maximum threshold cited in the testing report (200), the trend shows accelerated degradation.
"These findings show a consistent pattern of degradation," Coleman said, adding that the field is still compliant today but trending into an area of concern for playability and safety margins. He said the district will continue annual testing and that design work could proceed with funds earmarked from savings and existing bond contingencies so a replacement could be staged for summer 2027 if a funding strategy is approved.
On cost, Coleman estimated a rough figure of about $2 million for replacement, and the COO noted drainage issues and potential reuse/recycling strategies for removed material would be addressed during design.
Board members questioned whether grass (natural turf) had been considered and how the original turf selection occurred. Coleman and other staff replied that turf has operational advantages (year‑round use, water conservation) for the district’s needs but also acknowledged that the product selection and useful life appraisal would factor into the procurement.
No binding funding decision was made at the meeting; staff were asked to continue annual testing, advance design work, and return with funding options and a more detailed timeline.
