1. Changes to specifications:
1.1. Changes to Specification Section 02900- Artificial Turf, Section 1.4 Quality Assurance,
Item C. Lead and other metals. REQUIRED PRIOR WITH MATERIAL
SUBMISSIONS: Add 1. Lead content in synthetic turf fibers must be less than 8 ppm.
1.2. Changes to Specification Section 02900- Artificial Turf, Section 1.4 Quality Assurance,
Item C. Lead and other metals. REQUIRED PRIOR WITH MATERIAL
SUBMISSIONS: Add 2. Lead content in rubber infill must be less than 50 ppm.
2. Clarifications:
2.1. The synthetic turf materials are to be tested prior to delivery to the site and must contain less than 8 ppm of lead for fibers and less than 50 ppm of lead for crumb rubber. This limit falls well within the ASTM, EPA, and CDC threshold for lead levels.
Note to Commission and Municipal Staff: THERE ARE NO SAFE LEAD LEVELS
Update June 19, 2014 7:59 AM: The following editorial appeared in The Almanac on June 18, 2014. Keep Mt. Lebanon's field turf natural
Published Jun 18, 2014 at 6:34 am (Updated Jun 17, 2014 at 11:04 am)
I n November 2013, Mt. Lebanon commissioners approved a conceptual plan for the natural grass turf on Mt. Lebanon Park’s Middle and Wildcat fields to be replaced with artificial turf. The price tag is estimated at a cool $1 million, $750,000 of which would come from the municipality’s unassigned fund balance and the remaining $250,000 to be raised from private donations – ergo, this project should not result in a tax increase.
For months, a literal turf war has been going on in Mt. Lebanon, with those who oppose the project mainly concerned about safety. A recent meeting featured turf experts who were on hand to educate the public and answer their questions – questions that were not permitted to be asked vocally, rather, that were written on cards for the experts to address at the end of the meeting.
Chemicals in the crumb rubber turf – including alcohols, acids, ketones, esters, lactones and sulfur, to name a few – are one concern, while potential injuries from the harder surface are another.
The environmental impact is yet another issue that residents have been worried about from the time that the project was announced – they are concerned about the potential for flooding due to the removal of natural soil, and pollution from that runoff ending up in local streams. In early May, Dr. Tracy Bank, a geologist, told Mt. Lebanon commissioners that artificial turf cannot match environmental benefits of natural grass. “(Turf manufacturers) are basically strip mining the ground,” she said.
Truly, Mt. Lebanon Commissioner Kelly Fraasch, the lone commissioner opposed to the project, hit the nail on the head when she said that “Artificial turf is an issue that’s evolving, with potential health concerns for children, pregnant mothers and adults. We can’t look back at years of use and say it’s safe because everyone is using it. There are numerous examples of items we thought were safe and clearly aren’t today.
To rip up perfectly usable natural fields and replace grass with artificial turf is just another example of the current trend of local communities wanting to “keep up with the Joneses.” It’s frivolous, unnecessary spending, even though those who are for the project site increasing the fields’ usability by 60 percent, because it will remain playable for longer seasons.
For years, sports have been played on natural grass fields. Leave paradise alone, and don’t pave a proverbial parking lot.
Update June 19, 2014 7:59 AM: The following editorial appeared in The Almanac on June 18, 2014. Keep Mt. Lebanon's field turf natural
Published Jun 18, 2014 at 6:34 am (Updated Jun 17, 2014 at 11:04 am)
I n November 2013, Mt. Lebanon commissioners approved a conceptual plan for the natural grass turf on Mt. Lebanon Park’s Middle and Wildcat fields to be replaced with artificial turf. The price tag is estimated at a cool $1 million, $750,000 of which would come from the municipality’s unassigned fund balance and the remaining $250,000 to be raised from private donations – ergo, this project should not result in a tax increase.
For months, a literal turf war has been going on in Mt. Lebanon, with those who oppose the project mainly concerned about safety. A recent meeting featured turf experts who were on hand to educate the public and answer their questions – questions that were not permitted to be asked vocally, rather, that were written on cards for the experts to address at the end of the meeting.
Chemicals in the crumb rubber turf – including alcohols, acids, ketones, esters, lactones and sulfur, to name a few – are one concern, while potential injuries from the harder surface are another.
The environmental impact is yet another issue that residents have been worried about from the time that the project was announced – they are concerned about the potential for flooding due to the removal of natural soil, and pollution from that runoff ending up in local streams. In early May, Dr. Tracy Bank, a geologist, told Mt. Lebanon commissioners that artificial turf cannot match environmental benefits of natural grass. “(Turf manufacturers) are basically strip mining the ground,” she said.
Truly, Mt. Lebanon Commissioner Kelly Fraasch, the lone commissioner opposed to the project, hit the nail on the head when she said that “Artificial turf is an issue that’s evolving, with potential health concerns for children, pregnant mothers and adults. We can’t look back at years of use and say it’s safe because everyone is using it. There are numerous examples of items we thought were safe and clearly aren’t today.
To rip up perfectly usable natural fields and replace grass with artificial turf is just another example of the current trend of local communities wanting to “keep up with the Joneses.” It’s frivolous, unnecessary spending, even though those who are for the project site increasing the fields’ usability by 60 percent, because it will remain playable for longer seasons.
For years, sports have been played on natural grass fields. Leave paradise alone, and don’t pave a proverbial parking lot.
17 comments:
Great editorial in today's Almanac!
Title: "Lebo should leave its fields alone."
Pay attention Commissioners!
http://www.thealmanac.net/article/20140618/OPINION01/140619950
Link to T Almanac editorial
The CDC has shifted its focus to primary prevention of lead exposure, we can reduce or eliminate dangerous lead sources in children’s environments BEFORE they are exposed. Lead: What Do Parents Need to Know to Protect Their Children?
Elaine
Very interesting that the editorial in the almanac is not signed... Otherwise known as "annon"........
So what, they change the specs to lower lead tolerances.
Read this- http://www.lead.org.au/lanv3n3/lanv3n3-12.html
"Lead is a cumulative poison. Unlike acute poisons, such as chemicals that can kill quickly by attacking the lungs, lead poisoning happens slowly. The lead that is taken in daily, mounts up in the tissues, especially the bones. Blood lead levels mainly show recent exposure (for example, the past few months of exposure) however; lead that is removed from bone is also present in the blood. It is quite possible that a person can have higher amounts of lead in his or her body than looking at the blood lead level would tell us. Because bone is not easily available for measurement of lead, the usual way to tell how much lead exposure a person has had is by chemically measuring the level in the blood."
See that first sentence? "LEAD IS A CUMULATIVE POISON!"
So the commissioners will poison our kids with lead a little bit everyday instead of poisoning them a lot every day.
Hey President Linfante, it's all for the kids-right?
that is completely absurd!!!!!!! there are no safe lead levels. the safe level is ZERO. I also loved the Almanac editorial!
Usually an edotorial like that is from the Editor of the paper and doesn't need to be signed.
We were told that lead is not an issue with artificial turf.
Bendel's Field Enhancement Proposal said that only the organic is lead-free. (Page 7)
However, back in 2012, the YSA presentation claimed that all synthetic turf products from the 3 vendors have been lead-free since 2010. (Page 9)
Dave Franklin has been quoted many times to say that lead is not in artificial turf.
So this is what parents have been told and had I not bought the bid documents, we would never have learned of this addendum. Do you think the commissioners would have shared this with us? I doubt it. Would it have come out in a Sports Advisory Board meeting? Never. Certainly, Dave Franklin will attempt to diminish its impact just as he did with the EPA warning.
Elaine
As per the Almanac article, "Keeping up with The Joneses" hits the essence of the problem here in the South Hills...
Mt. Lebo and USC keep trying to one-up each other to Babylonian levels... the only question is: Whose towers of idolatry will lead to destruction first?
8:50, I'm not sure that "Keeping up with the Jones" is in play here at least on turf.
My view is there are a few individuals that want artificial turf for whatever reason(s) and they are bound and determined to get it.
I'd be willing to bet if this turf plan was put to a referendum less than 20% of the community would vote for it.
But hey, Brumfield, Linfante, Silverman and Bendel think it is perfectly acceptable to take well over$750,00 out of the public coffers to satisfy a few of their friends.
If people knew the facts, I think less than 5% of Mt Lebanon would support the turf.
While I initially didn't think "keeping up with the jones" was a big part of this turf plan, I just learned that USC is now turfing Morton field, which is in a scenic setting adjacent to Boyce/Mayview, and in fine condition.
I'm very disappointed. Turf was cool in 1970. It is 2014. I think we have lead-impaired leaders spending excess taxpayer money, destroying our park, contaminating our water, and poisoning our community, one tire crumb at a time.
The EPA recently changed its rules to force the last lead plant in the U. S. to close and move to China.
Our tires and our replacement turf will be more expensive when they are replaced with imported lead.
Yes the editorial is just that, a piece by the editor. Not anonymous.
This comment is anonymous. If Franklin knew who I was, he wouldn't shake my hand anymore knowing I read your blog.
Thank you for reading, 6:43 AM. Dave Franklin reads my blog too. He reads Kelly Fraasch's blog and said in my mother of RTKs on January 13, 2014 at 11:07 AM, "20+ years of lawyering and coaching have instilled in me the never ending desire to always know what my opponent is up to. In that vein, please see Commissioner Fraasch's blog post from yesterday:"
Elaine
USC has the money to turf Morton Field because the superintendent and the finance officer took a pay freeze. No pay freeze happened in Mount Lebanon with our superintendent or finance officer. Remember the 7% hike for the superintendent and the 6.9% bonus for the finance officer?
Isn't it funny that Franklin finds it imperative that 'HE' knows what his opponents are up to, but finds no obligation to defend taxpayers right to know what a municipal advisory group to up too!
From Lebocitizens on April 24th.
http://lebocitizens.blogspot.com/2014/04/bullied-again.html?m=1
"Kelly Fraasch told us that the Turf Project Task Force was the meeting that Donnellan, Deiseroth, Franklin, Chip and Jim Sauer were attending. Kelly said that we could go to the meeting after asking Dan Deiseroth if it was public. He said that it was. People heard him say that. Two residents walked up to the meeting at the Rec Center and were asked to leave because they were told that it was not a public meeting and they were not invited. They were asked to put back the agendas they had taken. David Donnellan told one resident that he was gracious enough to let her speak at the concession stand since it was not a meeting for the general public. Remember, any time there are three commissioners in one place, that constitutes a quorum. All of us could have spoken, but they had "time constraints" due to the private meeting on how to spend taxpayer dollars. Bullying!"
In my mother of RTKs, I have pages upon pages of Turf Project Task Force emails and agendas. After those were released through the RTK, the meetings suddenly became private. I would love if someone would file a RTK for all TPTF emails from January 24, 2014 - present. They would have to release that since they set a precedence in my RTK. I would do it, but I am on overload as it is. BTW, if the RTK is granted and is expensive, I am sure we could get individuals to help finance it. Just let me know.
Elaine
Post a Comment