attachments for: agenda no. 17/13 works and community ... · 11/19/2013 · works and community...

ATTACHMENTS FOR: AGENDA NO. 17/13

Works and Community Committee

Meeting Date: Tuesday 19 November 2013 Location: Committee Room 1, Level 5, Civic Centre, 1 Devlin Street, Ryde Time: 5.00pm

ATTACHMENTS FOR WORKS AND COMMUNITY COMMITTEE

Item Page 2 SYNTHETIC SPORTS SURFACES STUDY

Attachment 1 Ryde Synthetics Sports Surfaces Study ............................. 1

PREPARED BY

SYNTHETIC SPORTS SURFACES STUDY

Draft Report September 2013

Issue Version COR 2.2

More people recreating, playing sport, more often in Ryde by providing quality, safe and appropriate facilities

City of Ryde Synthetic Sports Surfaces Study: 2013

© Smart Connection Company Page 1 of 66 G:\CLIENTS\R\Ryde\2012 Synthetics Study\Report\Ryde Synthetics Sports Surfaces Study - Issue Version COR 2.02 with Exec Summary.docx

CITY OF RYDE COMMITMENT TO OPEN SPACE TO ENCOURAGE

PHYSICAL ACTIVITY, RECREATION AND SPORT The City of Ryde is located 12 kilometres north-west of central Sydney and

covering an area of 40,651 square kilometres, with much of its boundaries

defined by the Parramatta and Lane Cove Rivers.

There are 16 suburbs within the municipality with a mix of residential living,

business, retail and educational centres and incorporating a range of open

spaces including bushland, sports facilities, passive parklands, recreational

corridors, river and creek foreshores and areas of historical significance.

The Census population of the City of Ryde in 2011 was 103,038, living in 41,755

dwellings with an average household size of 2.58. In 2031, the population of the

City of Ryde is forecast to be 137,311, an increase of 36,348 persons (36.00%)

from 2006. This represents an average annual growth rate of 1.24%. The impact

on open space and sports provision will be significant during this time.

The Ryde Local Government Area (LGA) is a developed urban landscape that

offers little opportunity for additional open space for the purposes of formalised

active recreation however, the demand for areas for active recreation is

increasing continually. The City of Ryde promotes a health and active lifestyle

however the City of Ryde must respond to the ever increasing demand and

pressure being placed on the City’s sports fields and develop strategies and

opportunities that encourage and enable the Ryde community to participate in

active recreation.

One of the key opportunities for expanding the use of Council’s sports fields is the

installation of synthetic sports surfaces. In addition to improving the quality of the

playing surfaces, the use of synthetic surfaces may also offer increase frequency

of use and thus allowing Council to offer more sporting opportunities to more

people. However the success of this will only be realised with careful and

measured planning of location, type of facility and detailed cost benefit

considerations.

Acknowledgements

The preparation of this Study has been a collaborative effort of the partner

organisations. The Consulting Team wishes to thank the Project Reference Group

(PRG) representatives for their involvement in, and commitment to the preparation of

this Study.

In particular, we wish to thank Fiona Morrison (City of Ryde, Section Manager – Open

Space Planning and Assets) and Simon James (City of Ryde, Section Manager Sport

and Recreation) for their project management and coordination of project partners.

Ongoing support, assistance and input has also been provided by the following

Council representatives and other participating project partners as part of the

PRG and Council internal group:

Project Reference Group:

� Councillor Jerome Laxale

� Councillor Roy Maggio

� Councillor Bill Pickering

� Anthony Brooks representing AFL (NSW / ACT)

� Chris Voukidis representing Gladesville Ryde Magic F.C.

� Gary Phillip representing Ryde Panthers F.C.

� Geoff Driscoll representing Gladesville Hornsby F.C.

� Jason Shrimpton representing Ryde Hornsby Baseball League

� Nathan Wong representing Ultimate Frisbee NSW

Project Control Group:

� Tatjana Domazet

� Simon James

� Andrew Gibbons

� Richie Griffiths

� Fiona Morrison

Copyright

The Synthetic Sports Surface Study (Study) has been prepared by Smart

Connection Company Pty Ltd (Smart Connection) on behalf of Ryde City Council

and in association with 180 SLS.

The information contained within this Study is intended for specific use within and

by Ryde City Council only and may not be used by any other organisation or for

any other project without the permission of Smart Connection Company.

All recommendations and considerations identified by Smart Connection

Company are based on data and information provided by Council and Smart

Connection Company has relied on such information being correct at the time this

report was prepared.

© Copyright 2013 to Smart Connection Company Pty Ltd.


© Smart Connection Company / 180 SLS Page 2 of 66 G:\CLIENTS\R\Ryde\2012 Synthetics Study\Report\Ryde Synthetics Sports Surfaces Study - Issue Version COR 2.02 with Exec Summary.docx

Contents

1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................... 3 1.1 SETTING THE SCENE ................................................................................. 3 1.2 WHY USE SYNTHETIC SPORTS TURF TECHNOLOGY ........................................... 3 1.3 STRATEGIC PHILOSOPHY ............................................................................ 4 1.4 IS THERE A NEED TO USE SYNTHETIC TURF TECHNOLOGY WITHIN THE CITY? ......... 4 1.5 WHAT SPORTS SHOULD ADOPT THE TECHNOLOGY AND WHAT STANDARD............. 5 1.6 HOW WOULD ADOPTION OF SYNTHETIC TURF TECHNOLOGY ALIGN WITH COUNCILS

STRATEGIES AND VISION FOR THE CITY .................................................................... 5 1.7 WHAT WOULD BE THE BEST SITES?............................................................. 6 1.8 WHAT FINANCIAL INVESTMENT IS NEEDED? ................................................... 6

2 SETTING THE SCENE ............................................................................... 9 2.1 CITY OF RYDE ......................................................................................... 9 2.2 STUDY CONTEXT ..................................................................................... 9 2.3 HOW THE STUDY WILL WORK .................................................................... 9

3 SYNTHETIC SURFACE OPTIONS ............................................................ 12 3.1 INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................... 12 3.2 SYNTHETIC SURFACE CHALLENGES ............................................................. 12 3.3 PLAYABILITY OF SPORT ON SYNTHETICS ....................................................... 13 3.4 HEALTH AND SAFETY CONSIDERATIONS ....................................................... 15 3.5 THE IMPACT OF ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGE CONSIDERATIONS ........................... 20 3.6 MAINTENANCE CONSIDERATIONS .............................................................. 21 3.7 KEY LEARNING’S .................................................................................... 22

4 STRATEGIC CONSIDERATIONS .............................................................. 25 4.1 INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................... 25 4.2 COUNCIL STRATEGIC DIRECTION ................................................................ 25 4.3 EXTERNAL STRATEGIC DIRECTION .............................................................. 26 4.4 NEIGHBOURING COUNCILS ....................................................................... 27 4.5 FUNDING CONSIDERATIONS ..................................................................... 27 4.6 STRATEGICALLY FUNDING THE INVESTMENT ................................................. 29 4.7 KEY LEARNING’S - STRATEGIC PRINCIPLES .................................................... 29

5 FUTURE NEEDS .................................................................................... 32 5.1 DEMOGRAPHICS AND PARTICIPATION TRENDS INDICATE GROWTH ..................... 32 5.2 PARTICIPATION TRENDS .......................................................................... 32 5.3 OPPORTUNITY FOR FOCUS ....................................................................... 33 5.4 IDENTIFYING FUTURE DEMAND ................................................................. 34 5.5 KEY LEARNING’S .................................................................................... 35

6 SITE CONSIDERATIONS ........................................................................ 38 6.1 OVERVIEW ........................................................................................... 38 6.2 ASSESSMENT OF SHORTLISTED SITES........................................................... 38 6.3 SITE INFRASTRUCTURE CONSIDERATIONS ..................................................... 39 6.4 SITE MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS ........................................................ 40

6.5 SPECIFIC DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS ............................................................ 41 6.6 MULTIPLE-BOTTOM LINE ASSESSMENT ....................................................... 44 6.7 RECOMMENDED OPTION ......................................................................... 46

7 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS............................................. 49 7.1 INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................... 49 7.2 IS THERE A NEED TO USE SYNTHETIC TURF TECHNOLOGY WITHIN THE CITY? ....... 49 7.3 WHAT SPORTS SHOULD ADOPT THE TECHNOLOGY AND WHAT STANDARD ........... 49 7.4 HOW WOULD ADOPTION OF SYNTHETIC TURF TECHNOLOGY ALIGN WITH COUNCILS

STRATEGIES AND VISION FOR THE CITY .................................................................. 49 7.5 WHAT WOULD BE THE BEST SITES? ........................................................... 50 7.6 WHAT FINANCIAL INVESTMENT IS NEEDED? ................................................. 51

APPENDIX 1: LITERATURE REVIEW ................................................................. 53 APPENDIX 2: SITE ANALYSIS RESULTS ...............................................................1 APPENDIX 3: NSW HOCKEY: BUSINESS CASE ....................................................3 APPENDIX 4: NSW URBAN ACTIVATION PRECINCT PROGRAM .........................2 APPENDIX 5: COUNCIL MANAGED SPORTS FIELDS............................................1 APPENDIX 6: TYPICAL WEEKS PROGRAM COSTINGS .........................................2

Graphics

GRAPHIC 1: HORIZONTAL DRAINING SURFACE (SOURCE: SPORT AND RECREATION VICTORIA, ARTIFICIAL GRASS FOR SPORT) ............................................................................ 13

Photos

PHOTO 1: FIELD WITH MARKINGS FOR SEVERAL SPORTS (SOURCE: TIGERTURF) ................ 16 PHOTO 2 : SINGLE CUT MOVE ............................................................................ 16 PHOTO 3 : KICKING DYNAMICS ............................................................................ 16 PHOTO 4: RUBBER GROUNDS AS INFILL FOR A SYNTHETIC SURFACE................................ 18 PHOTO 5: DIFFERENT INFILL TYPES (SOURCE: ADVANCED POLYMER TECHNOLOGY) ........... 19 PHOTO 6: COOL GRASS TECHNOLOGY (SOURCE: ADVANCED POLYMER TECHNOLOGY) ....... 20 PHOTO 7: EFFECT OF DROUGHT ON NATURAL TURF................................................... 20 PHOTO 8: FOOTBALL (SOCCER) PITCH AS PART OF FOOTBALL COMPLEX, BALLARAT (SOURCE: TURFONE) ..................................................................................................... 28 PHOTO 9: FOOTBALL (SOCCER) AT NORTHBRIDGE OVAL ............................................ 29 PHOTO 10: CHILDREN PLAYING THE RECREATIONAL GAME OF OZ TAG ........................... 35 PHOTO 11: LIGHTING OF SOCCER FIELDS ................................................................ 39 PHOTO 12: AERIAL VIEW ELS HALL PARK .............................................................. 41 PHOTO 13: AERIAL VIEW OF CHRISTIE PARK ........................................................... 42 PHOTO 14: AERIAL VIEW OF EASTWOOD PARK ........................................................ 43 PHOTO 15: AERIAL VIEW OF MAGDALA PARK ......................................................... 44

Charts CHART 1 : WARD BOUNDARIES OF THE CITY OF RYDE..................................................9 CHART 2: ESTIMATED RESIDENT POPULATION ......................................................... 32 CHART 3: AGE STRUCTURE 2011......................................................................... 32

Tables TABLE 1: WOL COSTS PER HOUR OF USE ................................................................ 7 TABLE 2: SELECTED FIFA FIELD TEST PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS .......................... 14 TABLE 3: SELECTED IRB FIELD TEST REQUIREMENTS ................................................ 14 TABLE 4: SELECTED AFL/CA TEST REQUIREMENTS ................................................. 15 TABLE 5: NATURAL GRASS PERFORMANCE (PROPITCH SYSTEM STUDY, ENGLAND) .......... 15 TABLE 6: NUMBER OF INJURIES PER 1,000 HOURS EXPOSURE ..................................... 16 TABLE 7: AMERICAN FOOTBALL INJURIES (SURVEILLANCE PROGRAM 2004-2009) ......... 17 TABLE 8: AMERICAN HIGH-SCHOOL FOOTBALL INJURIES ........................................... 17 TABLE 9: TACTICAL EVENTS RED BULL SALZBURG VS. BLACKBURN ROVERS .................... 17 TABLE 10: FIFA 5-STUDY TECHNICAL OVERVIEW .................................................... 17 TABLE 11: SURVEY OF DUTCH PROFESSIONAL COACHES ASSOCIATION ......................... 18 TABLE 12: NEIGHBOURING COUNCILS STATUS WITH REGARD TO USE OF SYNTHETIC SURFACE

TECHNOLOGY ................................................................................................. 27 TABLE 13: CONSTRUCTION COSTS – NATURAL AND SYNTHETIC TURF ............................ 28 TABLE 14: ANNUAL MAINTENANCE - NATURAL GRASS/SYNTHETIC TURF......................... 28 TABLE 15: REPLACEMENT COSTS - NATURAL TURF.................................................... 28 TABLE 16: TOTAL COST OF OWNERSHIP 10-25 YEARS ............................................... 28 TABLE 17: COMPARISON BETWEEN SURFACE TYPES FOR CONSTRUCTION ....................... 28 TABLE 18: MAINTENANCE COST COMPARISON BETWEEN NATURAL AND SYNTHETIC TURF ... 28 TABLE 19: REPLACEMENT COST COMPARISON BETWEEN NATURAL AND SYNTHETIC SURFACES

................................................................................................................... 29 TABLE 20: WHOLE OF LIFE COSTS (10 & 25 YEARS) ................................................ 29 TABLE 21: COST PER HOUR OF USE FOR NATURAL TURF (48 WEEKS – BASED ON 4 WEEKS

REST) AND SYNTHETIC TURF (52 WEEKS – NO REST NEEDED) ....................................... 29 TABLE 22: TOP PHYSICAL ACTIVITIES IN NSW ......................................................... 32 TABLE 23: FITNESS AND LEISURE PARTICIPANTS — TOTAL PARTICIPATION RATE IN PHYSICAL

ACTIVITIES, .................................................................................................... 33 TABLE 24: REGULAR PARTICIPATION IN ANY PHYSICAL ACTIVITY BY STATE/TERRITORY AND SEX

................................................................................................................... 33 TABLE 25: TOP 10 PARTICIPATED SPORTS FOR CHILDREN (AGED 5-14) ......................... 33 TABLE 26: PARTICIPATION NUMBERS FOR NORTH RYDE (BASEBALL, AUSTRALIAN RULES, AND

SOCCER) ....................................................................................................... 35 TABLE 27: TOTAL RYDE PARTICIPATION RATE (%) COMPARED TO NSW (SOURCE ERAD

2010) .......................................................................................................... 35 TABLE 28: SITE ASSESSMENT MATRIX RESULTS ....................................................... 39 TABLE 29: SYNTHETIC FIELD DIAGNOSTIC EVALUATION TOOL RESULTS .......................... 39 TABLE 30: AUSTRALIAN STANDARDS SPORTS LIGHTING............................................. 39 TABLE 31: COST PER HOUR OF USE ...................................................................... 40 TABLE 32: TYPICAL WEEKLY PROGRAM.................................................................. 41 TABLE 33: WOL COSTS PER HOUR OF USE ............................................................ 46 TABLE 34: WOL COSTS PER HOUR OF USE ............................................................ 51



1 Executive Summary 1.1 Setting the Scene

1.1.1 Overview The City of Ryde is located 12 kilometres north-west of central Sydney and




dwellings with an average household size of 2.58. By 2031, the population of the

City of Ryde is forecast to be 137,311, an increase of 34,273 persons (33.00%)

from 2011. This represents an average annual growth rate of 1.24%. The impact

on open space and sports provision will be significant during this time.




increasing continually. The City of Ryde promotes healthy and active lifestyles

and must respond to the ever increasing demand and pressure being placed on

the City’s sports fields. To do this it must develop strategies and opportunities

that encourage and enable the Ryde community to participate in active

recreation.





people. However the success of this will only be realised with careful and


considerations.

1.1.2 Study Context This project is to prepare a feasibility study for the use of synthetic sports

surfaces across the City of Ryde. A fundamental component of this Synthetics

Surface Study is to understand future demand needs and compare this to present

supply across the City. Detailed analyses of the City’s sports fields determined

both the need and their suitability for synthetic sports surfacing on the playing

field areas. This has been completed and will be used to evaluate the future

needs of synthetic surfaces.

The development of a detailed understanding of the current situation was

necessary in order to conduct a thorough assessment of future potential of each

of the sports fields. From this understanding the following objectives were

detailed by Council:

� Provision of a clear direction to Council for the provision of synthetic

surfaces throughout the municipality and focus on future provision of

sports surfaces across the City

� Assessment of the participation demands within the City of Ryde.

� Discussion of the benefits and constraints of synthetic surface

adaptation including possible environmental implications.

� Examine the supply opportunities of existing facilities should Council

install a synthetic surface and analysis with recommendations on

location, management and funding opportunities to realise the identified

need.

� Provide direction on potential locations, type and range of surfaces

available, management models, financial requirements, potential users,

environmental considerations, potential for strategic partnerships and

the benefits of synthetic sports surfaces.

1.1.3 Methodology The Study followed a four stage process to identify initially if there was a need to

use synthetic technology for Council sports fields in a manner that would promote

greater participation in sport. The second stage explored the logistical and

strategic considerations of the opportunity with Council priorities. Stage three

calculated the costs of the Whole of Life expectations and the management

options of various sites that could be considered. Then finally, the

recommendations of the Study were identified through the consultation process

identified below.

1.1.4 Consultation Councils desire to ensure an inclusive approach to this Study drove the

consultation strategy with both an internal Project Control Group and a strategic

group – Project Reference Group (PRG) which was made up from Councillors,

peak and local community sports clubs, associations and bodies. The members

of these groups are identified in the Acknowledgement section of this report.

These groups met on three occasions each and with the facilitation by the

consultant were encouraged through each stage of the process to have input and

provide both strategic advice and local logistical guidance to ensure that the

Study would be embraced by all.

1.2 Why Use Synthetic Sports Turf Technology

1.2.1 Overview The popularity of synthetic surfaces being used by many sports has been

embraced at both community and elite levels over the past five decades with

Gridiron and Athletics (1960’s); Hockey (1970’s); Bowls and Tennis (1980’s). In

the past decade more elite sports that use long grass have adopted the use of

technology, such as football (soccer; Rugby Union; AFL; Gaelic Football) as well

as well as Cricket and Rugby League (Europe only to date). Even though the

technology is becoming more common in Australia with more than 50 Football

(soccer) pitches laid in Victoria in the past 5 years, this still represents less than

0.1% of the total pitches in the state of Victoria.

Contributing to the reasons for a specific sport or local government to explore the

use of synthetic surface technology has been the challenges of the demand for

the quality playing surface to be available for longer periods of time.

Section 2 of this Study provides a detailed understanding of the technology used

the safety of, the perceptions and evidence on environmental issues, playability

and the approach to playing standards by the key sports of:

� Football (Soccer, Rugby union, Rugby League, Aussie Rules and

Gridiron);

� Cricket;

� Hockey;

� Baseball; and

� Non-traditional sports (Touch, Tag and Frisbee )

1.2.2 Learning’s from reviewing the technology of synthetics The key learning’s from Section 2 around the technology of synthetics include the

following;

1) The technology has evolved over past 50 years where the playing synthetic

surfaces are now lot closer to the playing surfaces of natural turf;

2) Advances in design and performance is bridging negative perceptions and

more than 10,000 fields have been installed worldwide;

3) The synthetic system includes the synthetic turf above and civil engineered

pavement and base below the ground;

4) All key sports have synthetic standards to ensure playability performance

and safety, many at both elite and community level;

5) Safety concerns are alleviated by advances in technology and significant

independent testing;

6) Environmental considerations are being addressed in smart and sustainable

ways; and

7) Greater capacity for use allows greater participation compared to the best in

natural turf, whilst also showing a reduction in maintenance costs.



1.3 Strategic Philosophy

1.3.1 Strategic Context The study has identified in Section 2 the benefits, design, environmental and

management aspect of embracing synthetic surface technology in a manner that

could benefit sport and recreational participation.

For Council to appreciate how to move forward strategically, it needs to be

cognisant of strategic influences from within Council and with key external

stakeholders.

1.3.1.1 Council strategic direction Section 3 of the Study explores each of these areas of influence and makes

suggestions as to the strategic framework for Council to consider for future use in

planning and prioritising future sports needs with regard to synthetic surfaces.

Council’s 2025 Community Strategic Plan and its Vision identifies the strategic

challenges and opportunities it faces, of which the following need to be

considered for this Study:

� Meeting the needs of a growing population, while maintaining the prosperity,

uniqueness and liveability of the City;

� Addressing the needs of a changing population, by offering appropriate

recreational and cultural opportunities and to design accessible public

domain;

� Managing the pressure of population growth on our amenity, while planning

for and protecting the natural assets and keeping abreast of demand for

passive and active recreation opportunities; and

� Adapting to climate change, by collaborating with partners to address climate

changes such as extreme weather patterns.

Council’s strategic planning, from the 2025 Community Strategic Plan, through

Best Value Review of Sportsgrounds Allocation and Management (Feb 2012) and

their award winning Integrated Open Space Plan (IOSP) indicate the

opportunities of having a strong set of strategic principles. Indeed a number of

community sporting hubs have been identified around “regional active / sports

surfaces”, including Meadowbank Park, Marsfield Park, Morrison Bay Park /

Bremner Park and ELS Hall Park.

The Best Value Review on the Allocation and Management of Sportsgrounds

identified the current key issues:

� Current demand already outstrips supply in some sports and this situation is

likely to become more prevalent with increasing population;

� Many sportsgrounds are heavily utilised, particularly in winter and cannot

provide for the desired level of use;

� There is a shortage of sportsgrounds in the NSROC region with the demand

for soccer, rugby union and cricket already exceeding supply;

� There are areas that lack training fields, especially pre-season, across the

City;

� Demand for many sports is growing across the City;

� Over 55% of sports groups surveyed identified an increase in demand over

the next five years for both junior and senior competition and training; and

� Carrying capacities for sportsgrounds are between 20–35 hours depending

on turf species but some are currently receiving 40-50 hours of usage.

The North Sydney Region of Councils (NSROC) has identified that there is a

shortage of playing fields and sees the use of synthetic fields as one of the key

vehicles to address the playing hour shortage. NSROC will be developing a

financial strategy to assist the Councils to source funding to build one each more

quickly than if they did it independently. Ryde Council, as a member, is

supporting of this proactive and co-ordinated approach to the provision of

synthetic surfaces across the regions.

From discussions within Council, the Project Reference Group (PRG) and

consultation with the key stakeholders, the following key considerations were

identified:

� Opportunities to be fully inclusive, in order to maximize community

participation by ensuring club, recreational and competitive use of the

facilities;

� Targeting whole of community, to ensure total inclusion with specific target

audiences of children and youth and programs for older (and active) people;

� Programming should have flexibility to encourage all groups and individuals

to participate and not just be the home of a single club; and

� Pathway opportunities should reflect people’s interests and ability from

recreational needs; training and competition.

1.3.1.2 External Strategic Influences – Trends in sport and recreation In April 2013, the Australian Sport Commission (ASC) partnered with Australia’s

peak science agency, the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research

Organisation (CSIRO) to jointly publish “The Future of Australian Sport”

The report recognises that Australians love sport but the participation is changing

over time. Whilst the report identified six key “Mega Trends”, the following four

key trends could impact the sport in Ryde and this Study specifically:

1) A Perfect Fit - people are moving away from organised club sport to the

individual sport and fitness activities due to their busy lifestyle. Australians

are increasingly playing sport to get and stay fit, rather than staying fit to play

sport.

2) More than Sport - A holistic view of sport, providing broader benefits, is

being recognised by all levels of government, the commercial and community

sectors. With benefits around mental/physical health gain, social inclusion

and equality of opportunity as well as crime prevention and even encourage

peace between parties.

3) Everybody’s Game - The industry needs to capture the interest of our multi-

cultural society and change traditional provision to make them feel more

included.

4) Tracksuits to Business Suits - Market forces will most likely drive sport

provision to be more professional; moving away from volunteer driven

experiences with a greater focus on the quality and more of a user pays

focus.

1.3.1.3 External Strategic Influences – NSROC Support for synthetics NSROC has publically confirmed its support for synthetic surfaces with the

publication of the ‘Regional Synthetic Sportsgrounds Project (RSSP)’, as part of

its 2013 Regional Initiative.

The RSSP is an agreement between the seven Councils of NSROC to provide a

suite of synthetic sports fields in strategic locations across the region under a

three to four year construction program, based on contributions from Councils

and multiple stakeholders. This collective approach the Project Info sheet states

will, ‘… address the shortage of playing surfaces in growth sports and free up

overused grass fields’.

To date, Councils in NSROC that have embraced the technology and have

installed or are considering installation are: Lane Cove, Willoughby: Ku-ring-gai;

North Sydney and Hunter Hill.

1.4 Is There A Need to Use Synthetic Turf Technology Within The City?

Council has a growing population (33% increase 2011 - 2031) over the next 20

years, which if the participation patterns remain the same for each sport, will

mean that realistically there could be a 33% increase in participation numbers

which would place a significant impost on Councils current fields.

The key sports that would probably need to accommodate the growth over the

next two decades would be:

� Football (soccer)

Already shown significant growth in the past decade and could increase

by nearly 400 players (or 25 plus teams) which on the present pitch rate

of 1 pitch to 163 players would require a further 2.4 pitches

� Australian Rules Football



Presently well below the state average (0.24% compared to 1.5% ), with

the marketing and programming commitment of the AFL it would be

expected that these numbers would grow significantly. The AFL has

identified that there are already registered 418 players from a Ryde

postcode playing outside the City boundaries.

� Hockey

The projected numbers of participants would still be below the Hockey

NSW guidance for a synthetic Hockey Pitch.

� Rugby Codes

The number of players who presently play Tag and Touch Rugby and Rugby are

3,489 players and could increase by an additional 1,151 people which would

create a significant impact on natural turf.

All in all, the 33% participation growth, combined with AFL marketing and the

growth in recreational activities such as Tag/ Touch, 5-a-side football and AFL

9’s, will mean that the City is unlikely to be able to accommodate the growth just

with the current natural sports turf facilities.

As the intensity of usage grows, the cost of maintenance and renovation will grow

significantly.

Council also conducted a Best Value Review of the Allocation and Management

of Sportsgrounds (Feb 2012), where the report identified that the highest quality

playing fields are more than likely to be the best locations for synthetic surfaces

to ensure optimal access and use, with Australian Rules Football, Soccer and

Baseball being the predominant sports. Within the report, the current key issues

raised are:






for soccer, rugby union, cricket and hockey already exceeding demand;

� There is a lack of training field availability, especially pre-season, across the

City



the next five years for both junior and senior competition and training;

Carrying capacities for sportsgrounds are between 20–35 hours depending on

turf species but some are currently receiving 40-50 hours of usage, which means

that the surface is degraded significantly by the end of each season, resulting in

additional funds being needed to renovate those pitches.

Recommendation 1:

Due to the growth in demand, it is recommended that Council consider using the

synthetic turf technology in order to satisfy growing demand for sporting facilities

and reduce the financial impost on Council due to the additional maintenance and

renovation cost that will be needed should natural turf fields continue to be over

utilised.

1.5 What Sports Should Adopt the Technology and What Standard

From the demand forecasts, the following sports should be considered:

� Football (soccer) – FIFA 1 Star Recommended Pitch standard

� Australian Rules Football and Cricket– AFL/CA Community Pitch

standard

� Rugby/Touch/ Tag – IRB Regulation 22 Pitch standard

As the first pitch is recommended to be a multi-sport s, all these standards can be

incorporated within a single playing surface. By the end of 2013, it is expected

that a new standard called “One Turf Standard” will be adopted by all of these

sports and Council should adopt this standard.

Recommendation 2:

It is recommended that Council adopt the Multi-sport standard of “One Turf

Standard” for its site chosen at ELS Hall Park Field No 1.

Additional sites specifically for key high participation sports may lend themselves

to using the technology, such as Christie Park, where football training at other

sites could be reduced with clubs all training at the same venue. This could

reduce the maintenance costs for Council at other venues.

1.6 How Would Adoption of Synthetic Turf Technology Align with Councils Strategies and Vision for the City

Council’s 2025 Vision clearly articulates its desire to be a City to be healthy and

have wellbeing options as well as showing environmental sensitivity and proud of

its harmony and culture. This is reflected in Councils IOSP. Council, as part of

NSROC, has embraced the need for use of synthetic surface technology as part

of its ‘Regional Synthetic Sportsgrounds Project’ which has been agreed by all

Councils.

The changing trends in sport and recreation, recently published by the Australian

Sports Commission and CSIRO indicate that there has and will continue to be a

significant move to casual and recreational use of sport, to be fit and socially

interact. This shift needs to be considered in the planning and vision for how

surface technology can support this.

Whilst Council does not have a Sports Strategy, officers are working towards the

key principles identified in the key planning documents and these are reflected in

the management strategy for Synthetic Surfaces.

Recommendation 3:

Council should adopt the following strategic focus and principles when

considering the case of synthetic surface technology

� Vision (outcome) More people recreating, playing sport more often in Ryde by providing

quality, safe and appropriate facilities.

� Mission (purpose) To use the technology of synthetic surfaces to allow for greater use by the

community who wish to recreate and play sport, by satisfying the demand

and encouraging development opportunities.

� Key Principles

Allowing opportunities to be prioritised and converted the following principles

should be considered:

� Priority Alignment That the opportunity aligns with Councils strategies, policies and plans,

both for its assets (e.g. IOSP) and participation, as well as external

stakeholders (e.g. Sport; NSW Government), within its legislation

scope.

� Accessible and Promotes Social Inclusiveness The design, management and positioning of the opportunity

encourages local and citywide participation, to all target audiences and

especially target groups that need additional encouragement to be

active and play sport.

� Environmental Integration The design is environmentally friendly, integrates into the natural

environment and can demonstrate benefits, while reflecting the IOSP

environmental commitments.



� Participation Pathway Development The opportunity needs to be able to demonstrate that it not only meets

current demand, but provides opportunities to encourage a broader

recreational and sports participative base for future demand.

� Economically Prudent That Councils level of investment is linked to the priorities and

principles and where possible should seek out partnership opportunities

that are aligned with these principles to create greater participation.

1.7 What Would Be The Best Sites? This study completed a three stage assessment of key sites to identify the most

appropriate sites for consideration for installation of a synthetic surface. Officers

and the Project Reference Group (PRG) completed the first stage short listing

process, the second stage utilised a Diagnostic Tool which officers completed

grouping the sites into three levels before an independent assessment was

conducted to review the key recommended sites and come up with the preferred

site.

Section 6 provides commentary on the short-listing and assessment results which

provided for key sites for the final assessment, namely:

- ELS Hall Park #1

- Christie Park #2

- Eastwood Park Upper Oval

- Magdala Park #1

The independent assessment adopted a multiple-bottom line approach

considering:

� Economic Investment Considering the investment and ability for Council to receive a positive

Return on Investment;

� Community Impact To optimise participation and usage, whilst ensuring the likelihood of it

being embraced by the community;

� Environmental Commitment Ensuring it complements Council’s IOSP and environmental best

practice: and

� Management Opportunity The ability to manage and deliver the overall community benefits.

Against the four sites the findings are detailed in section 6.6 with the following

conclusions:

Site Conclusion

ELS Hall Park

#1

This is by far the most appropriate site in the City and would

complement all of Council’s Principles and Priorities from this

Study. ELS Hall Park provides the best option for gaining the

ROI that Council has identified while maximizing participation by

so many targeted groups in so many sports. It also has a

management and physical infrastructure that would support

such an investment.

An immediate option

Christie Park

#2

A Football centric site, which if repositioned and opened up for

the community, could be very successful in encouraging more

people to recreate. A management strategy would need to be

developed that includes reviewing the current GHFA

arrangements and the legal implications under the Crown Land

Act.

A medium term options

Eastwood

Park Upper

Oval

Although a good option for multi-sport, the limitations of the

closeness to the residential community and limited parking

places significant limitation for this site.

Not recommended in the short to medium term

Magdala Park

#1

Magdala Park has a number of positive aspects for

consideration around:

� Geographical siting in the City: and

� Ability for greater usage without impacting a residential

community

The concerns for the site are more significant, including:

� Historical use of the site as a tip does not indicate a

suitable base, or at best a need for a substantial

concrete base (probable cost in excess of $1,000,000)

for the pitch to site

� The secluded nature of the site could see it being open

for vandalism and security concerns

It would not be a recommended site based on current

circumstances

Recommendation 4:

From this Multiple-Bottom Line Assessment, ELS Hall Park Field #1 is

recommended as a multi-sports field incorporating a One-Turf Standards so the

Football (soccer); Rugby (Tag and Touch) Australian Rules/Cricket be played

there.

Recommendation 5:

Christie Park Field #2 to be considered as the second site, subject to the

repositioning of the complex as a community football centre with a clear strategic

focus on being more community inclusive.

1.8 What Financial Investment is Needed?

1.8.1 Indicative WOL Costs for ELS Hall As Field #1 is approximately 15,000m2 and to accommodate the above sports the following Whole of Life (WOL) indicative costings have been developed, and based on recent actual costing’s for similar type of surfaces, subject to similar variables being used. (e.g. base, surface type etc.)

Construction Costs

� Based on the multi-sport turf (6.7.2) together with a shock pad and assuming that no significant pavement is needed for the site.

� Lighting upgrade (up to $200,000)

$1,500,000

Maintenance Costs

� The maintenance costs are normally based on 1.5%,

but if there is significant usage ≥50 hours use would

recommend a contribution of 2%

$30,000

Replacement Costs

� It is envisaged that the surface should be replaced

every 10 years, subject to level of play and

maintenance commitment. The shockpad will

probably need replacing every 20 years. This cost

takes into account the turf replacement (including

disposal etc.) at 10 years (c.$530,000) and 50% of

$730,000



the shock pad cost each decade ($200,000)

WOL Costs $2,530,000

Over a 30 year period the 10 year increment costing’s are as follows:

Whole of Life Indicative Costing’s for ELS Hall Park Field #1

Time Period Replacement Assumptions WOL Cost $ Annual amortised

rate

10 years Replacement of surface $2,530,000 $253,000

20 years Replacement of surface &

shock pad

$3,040,000 $152,000

30 years Replacement of surface $4,075,000 $135.83

1.8.2 Financial Return on Investment – WOL Model To ascertain the hourly rate to charge for a complete WOL return the following

costs are calculated. Council only needs to decide on which amortisation

approach it takes, whether that be over 10, 20 or 30 years

Weekly

Usage Hours

WOL Cost per hour of Use

10 years 20 years 30 years

20 hours $263 $146 $131

30 hours $175 $97 $87

40 hours $131 $73 $65

50 hours $105 $58 $52

60 hours $88 $46 $44

Table 1: WOL Costs per hour of use

Depending on Council pricing strategy, this could be based around the return

needed. The revenue that could be raised will be linked to the philosophy of

usage that Council wishes to commit to. Certainly from (Table 33) an acceptable

market cost would be in the region of $75 per hour, which means that as long as

the field is programmed for 40 hours per week and costs are amortised over at

least 20 years the cost will be recovered (as shown in bold in table 34).

1.8.3 Financial Return on Investment – Maintenance and Replacement Model

If Council will fund the capital investment from its Capital Works budget and

expects the recurring budget to fund the maintenance and replacement cost, then

the revenue stream needed would now present the ROI based on an amortised

figure of:

Time

Period

Description Total Cost Annual

Amortised Rate

10 years Replacement of Surface and

Maintenance

$1,035,000 $103,500


Shockpad and Maintenance

$1,565,000 $78,250


Maintenance

$2,375,000 $79,166

This would mean that the ROI cost per hour of usage over the tree amortised

period options (10, 20 and 30 years) would now equate to:

Weekly Usage

Hours

Maintenance/Replacement Cost per hour of Use


20 hours $100 $75 $76

30 hours $66 $50 $51

40 hours $55 $38 $38

50 hours $40 $30 $30

60 hours $33 $25 $25

Depending on Council pricing strategy, the costs could be based around these

ROI figures and hourly rates. This options provides a greater range of price points

for Council to consider (see example in Appendix 6) .



SETTING THE SCENE With limited land available for additional sports fields, this Study will assess sports participation demand, and understand the extent that existing facilities can be further utilised to meet demand.

This section explains the key objectives and scope of this Study together with the structure of the report.



2 Setting the Scene

2.1 City of Ryde The City of Ryde is located 12 kilometres north-west of central Sydney and



There are 16 suburbs within the municipality with a mix of residential living,

business, retail and educational centres and incorporating a range of open

spaces including bushland, sports facilities, passive parklands, recreational

corridors, river and creek foreshores and areas of historical significance.

Chart 1 : Ward Boundaries of the City of Ryde



City of Ryde is forecast to be 137,311, an increase of 34,273 persons (33%) from

2011. This represents an average annual growth rate of 1.24%. The impact on

open space and sports provision will be significant during this time.




increasing continually. The City of Ryde promotes a health and active lifestyle

however the Council must respond to the ever increasing demand and pressure

being placed on the City’s sports fields and develop strategies and opportunities

that encourage and enable the Ryde community to participate in active

recreation.





people. However, the success of this will only be realised with careful and


considerations.

2.2 Study Context A fundamental component of this Synthetic Sports Surface Study is to understand

future sporting demand needs and compare this to present current playing field

supply and needs across the City. Detailed analyses of the City’s sports fields

determined both the need and their suitability for synthetic sports surfacing on the

playing field areas. This has been completed and will be used to quantify the

future needs for synthetic surfaces.

Detailed understanding of the current situation was necessary in order to conduct

a thorough assessment of future potential of each of the sports fields. From this

understanding, the following objectives were detailed by Council:-

� Provide direction to Council for the provision of synthetic surfaces

throughout the municipality and focus on future provision of sports

surfaces across the City;

� Assess participation demands within the City of Ryde.

� Discuss the benefits and constraints of synthetic surface adaptation,

including possible environmental implications;

� Examine the supply opportunities of existing facilities should Council

install a synthetic surface and analyse; and

� Provide direction on potential locations, type and range of surfaces

available, management models, financial requirements, potential users;

environmental considerations, potential for strategic partnerships and

the benefits of synthetic sports surfaces.

2.3 How the Study Will Work

2.3.1 How will the Study actually work? The Synthetic Sports Surfaces Study is part of a series of plans and strategies

that deliver planning guidelines and principles for open space facility development

in a manner that will guide Council to deliver long-term community outcomes. The

Strategic Plan that Council has endorsed is the Integrated Open Space Plan

(IOSP), which provides guidance for the management of its open space and

parklands.

This Study provides Council with Strategic focus and tools including;

� The principles, objectives and priorities to reflect of key directions that

Council has already endorsed and which will apply or influence this

strategy’s thinking in a way that is specific to the needs of sport and active

recreation and use of sports surfaces - natural or synthetic - to meet those

needs.

� Tools and principles that can be used for assessing both a strategic

opportunity (using the principles) and a site (using the diagnostic tool).

� Identification of immediate opportunities so that consideration can be

developed over the short term to create priorities and options for the

provision of synthetic surfaces.

2.3.2 What Council strategies or policies have been considered? The key internal influences for this Study are considered in Section 3 of this

report and includes a review the following Council documents:

� City of Ryde Community Strategic Plan 2025

� City of Ryde Community Profile

� Integrated Open Space Plan (IOSP)

� NSW Government Metro Strategy

� Leisure and Recreation Needs Community Consultation Report

� Leisure Needs Study Financial Report 2005

� NSROC Regional Sportsground Strategy – Draft

� City of Ryde Best Value Review Volume 1-4

� Northern Sydney Region of Councils (NSROC) Regional Approach to

Delivery of Synthetic Sports fields

2.3.3 What do Council need to consider?

� From an asset point of view (open space strategy) The Synthetic Sports Surface Study needs to complement and sit within the

scope of the IOSP. The commitment articulated in the IOSP provides a clear

direction for the reader. It provides a vision that Council aspires to:

“We have ample, accessible open space to meet our needs, shared and enjoyed by us all, founded on a healthy natural environment, conserving



our rich history, culture and local character and managed sustainably now and for future generations”.

The IOSP has a set of Key Thematic Principles or priorities that this Study will

consider, including:

� Optimisation: making more of what we have

� Consolidation and acquisition: achieving more equitable access to our

open spaces

� Integration and adaptation: ensuring the whole is greater than the sum of

the parts

� Connection: linking our parks with our natural environment and history

� Organisation: planning from top down and bottom up.

This Study considers affordability and partnerships as two other key Principles,

which will complement those above.

� From a location perspective

All key parks / open spaces were initially identified as possible sites and from

that, an initial list was considered (Appendix 2) and the first part of the evaluation

was used to ascertain the suitability of those sites to be considered for the

installation of synthetic sports surfaces. These sites included:

i. Meadowbank Park

ii. Eastwood Park

iii. Brush Farm Park

iv. Marsfield Park

v. Dunbar Park

vi. Christie Park

vii. Magdala Park

viii. ELS Hall Park

ix. Morrison Bay Park

x. Gannan Park

xi. Ryde Park

The results of the analysis of these above sites are provided in Appendix 2. The

further shortlisting then allowed them to be analysed further with the Study’s

Diagnostic Tool as shown in Section 1.

� From a demand perspective With no formal or endorsed Recreation or Sport Strategy, Council Officers guided

this Study to explore the demand for the key identified sports of:


� Australian Rules Football/Cricket

� Social Sports, including Touch, OzTag, Frizbee

� Baseball

From the consultation process, non-traditional sports of OzTag, Touch and

Frizbee have been identified as need considering as they are impacting on the

grounds presently, due to increasing demand.

This needs-based demand on sports grounds, along with current projected

population growth within the Ryde LGA, strongly indicates the provision of

synthetic surfaces would be beneficial to Council. By modelling the future number

of grounds needed, either natural (20 hours usage per) or synthetic surfaces (60

hours usage per week), and given the lack of open space to accommodate

additional sportsgrounds, it is apparent that the future demand and population

growth could likely be accommodated with the roll out of a number of synthetic

surfaces.

When comparing usage of natural and synthetic sports fields, there are variables

that may impact on the time that the pitch can be played on depending on the soil

and grass type, drainage and the season for natural turf. In addition to these, the

intensity of use and climatic considerations combined to determine the extent of

damage or speed of degradation.

All playing surfaces are subject to use during critical winter months. This high

use also coincides with wet weather and cool conditions that reduce or inhibit turf

growth and recovery. As a general rule of industry standards for natural turf, use

is between 14 and 18 hours per week, where the field is a well-drained sand

based construction that is both well maintained and is in good condition (MCC

presentation)1.

Indeed, the Sports Turf Institute (2011)2 provided generic figures for the potential

hours of natural turf use depending upon the grass type and a well-drained soil

profile. Their CEO (Keith McAuliffe) suggested 15-20 hours (Couch); 13-18 hours

(Kikuyu) whereas in Summer this could realistically to 20-25 hours and 17-20

hours for Couch and Kikuyu respectfully. For this report the Study has used 20

hours play on natural grass before degradation begins.

� What considerations are needed for synthetic surfaces? A synopsis of the key considerations are summarised in this Study, with a

separate document (The Smart Guide to Synthetic Surfaces) explaining the

detailed understanding of how synthetic sports surfaces work, their history, whole

of life costs, health and risk management considerations. Section 1 provides the

overview and aspects relevant to this Study.

1 MCC – 2010. Sports Field Usage (http://www.melbourne.vic.gov.au/parksand activities/parks/pages/sportsfieldusage.aspx) 2 Sports Turf Institute presentation by Kath McAuliffe to PLA (2011)

� How should synthetic surfaces be managed? The surface type and how they are to be programmed and managed should be

considered as they allow for greater usage. Therefore, the skills on programming,

management and promotion to the broadest community may be different than

those normally found with the traditional club license or lease management

model. The clubs and management need to have the appropriate skills to

optimise their usage, capitalize on the interest and provide recreational programs.

Section 1 explores the options in detail, together with the specific considerations

for the short-listed sites and recommendations for the preferred sites for Council’s

consideration prior to moving forward.



SURFACE OPTIONS

Council is keen to understand the options available

regarding synthetic turf surfaces and the best

alternatives to consider meeting its future sports

and recreational needs. This section provides advice on synthetic surfaces

and should be read in conjunction with “The Smart

Guide to Synthetic Surfaces”.



3 Synthetic Surface Options

3.1 Introduction The popularity of synthetic surfaces being used by many sports has been

embraced at both community and elite levels over the past five decades with

Gridiron and Athletics (1960’s); Hockey (1970’s); Bowls and Tennis (1980’s). In

the past decade, more sports that use long grass have adopted the use of

technology, such as Football codes of (Soccer; Rugby Union; Australian Rules

Football; Rugby League; Gaelic Football) as well as Cricket.

The drivers to explore how the technology of synthetic surfaces can assist sport

have been compelled by the challenges that either a specific sport or local

government face. Local government predominantly own and manage the

majority of community sports fields in Australia.

The main reasons generally given for installing a synthetic surface for sport and

recreational use are:

� Climatic: Under drought and water restrictions or excessive rain conditions, it

can be difficult to provide a safe and suitable natural grass surface. Synthetic

sports surfaces in general are not affected by the reduced or increased rainfall;

� Usage: There is a limit to the hours natural turf can be used before there is a

significant impact on surface condition. A high quality turf surface may only be

able to be used for up to 20 hours 3per week before it starts to deteriorate.

Synthetic surfaces can sustain significantly higher use than natural grass with

60 hours 4plus per week as an acceptable expectation;

� Maintenance: Maintaining a turf surface can be time consuming, expensive

and generally requires a qualified person. Synthetic surfaces require lower

ongoing maintenance than a natural turf surface;

� Consistency and quality of play: Synthetic surfaces provide a consistent and

safe surface all year round for all sports to play on, thus improving the quality

of performance for each sport , when comparing to natural playing surfaces;

� Health: By allowing play on the surface more often and under safer conditions,

it enhances physical health of participants;

� Mandated: some sports governing bodies insist that if a particular level of game

is to be played, it has to be played on a particular level of synthetic surface (e.g.

International Athletic Associations Federation with Athletics, Federation of

International Hockey with Hockey fields etc.).

3 As quoted by Sports Turf Institute in conference 2011 before deterioration of turf on average in Australia 4 FIFA at NSSCE Conference in Sydney quoted 80 hours per week as their expectations in Europe

3.2 Synthetic Surface Challenges

3.2.1 Advancements in synthetic surfaces Over the past fifty years, the technology behind synthetic surfaces has evolved

substantially. Rubberised athletic surfaces have replaced gravel and grass tracks,

cushioned surfaces have replaced asphalt and grass sports no longer use foam-

backed synthetic surface carpet. As strategies for use and performance in sport

have evolved, the technologies of synthetic surfaces have followed pace in their

development.

Synthetic grass has become the preferred alternative to natural grass in certain

sports such as football (soccer), rugby and ball sports where playing conditions

are deteriorating the natural surfaces. Synthetic surfaces are more confidently

mirroring the playing characteristics of most natural surfaces for these sports at a

community level. These sports now have ‘performance criteria’ that the synthetic

surfaces manufacturers need to meet - there are many international surface

standards for sports, e.g. Rugby, Hockey and Soccer. All of these are explained

in detail in the Smart Guide to Synthetic Surfaces (Volume 2 of this report).

Even though it is envisaged that another 50 synthetic surfaces will be installed,

mainly in NSW, Qld and WA over the next 24 months to match the 50 soccer

fields already installed (which were predominantly in Victoria), the total will still be

less than 0.1% of all soccer turf fields at local level in Australia.

The evolution of synthetic football (soccer) grass has been through three

generations, with some stating that the next generation is already here:-

� Synthetic Carpet – originally in the 1960s, based on a carpet, with rubber/foam

backing and very hard, used in the United States for Baseball and American

Football;

� Second Generation – in the 1980s, a tighter pile with a sand infill, but the

unpredictable bounce and abrasive nature of the pile generated much

dissatisfaction and resulted in many soccer fields being removed at the highest

level;

� Third Generation – From the turn of the century, a longer, softer pile with

rubber/sand infill has allowed large ball sports to be played more safely and

with similar playing characteristics of natural turf; and

� Fourth Generation – Although this term has started to be used for some turf, it

seems to be a small evolution from third generation turf and appears to be more

of a marketing strategy. Some suppliers are advocating that fourth generation

will not need any rubber infill; this has still to be tested and experienced at the

level that this Study is exploring.

3.2.2 Negative perceptions There is much misinformation and lack of understanding about synthetic turf field

surfaces, which causes some sports and organisations to reject the idea of using

them. These include:

� Initial high cost of synthetic turf: The Smart Guide to Synthetic Surfaces

explores 12 different sports, including the cost of synthetic surfaces. The cost

can vary for different sports, for example the average cost of a FIFA 1 Star

soccer field is approximately $800,0005 compared to $315,000 for a natural turf.

However, the whole of life costs and the cost per hour of use needs to be

considered, which would show that synthetic surface is overall cheaper.

� Player comfort, health and safety issues: There is a perception by the public

and non-users that the synthetic soccer fields are still similar to the second-

generation soccer fields of the 1980’s. The key criticisms of these pitches were

that they do not offer the playability characteristics of natural turf and that the

abrasiveness of the infill was not conducive to players’ skin. In addition, there is

still the concern regarding the radiant heat from synthetic surfaces during hot

climate conditions and temperatures over 30 degrees.

� Management model challenges: Some LGAs have faced challenges when a

home club has been the leaseholder on synthetic surface sports facilities. This

scenario may not provide the best overall promotion and access to the fields in

an equitable manner for the whole community, if in fact broad community use

was an expected outcome from the installation.

� Loss of open space: Experience from some LGAs has shown that their

communities have perceived parklands that have had natural parkland changed

to sports fields and turf fields converted to synthetic fields as a loss of open

space on both accounts.

A number of studies have been commissioned by sporting peak bodies (e.g. IRB,

NRL, FIFA, AFL and Cricket Australia) to look into some of these challenges.

Generally, the outcomes of these reviews mitigate any perceived risks so that the

sports are able to establish standards for the fields to be playable and to allow the

technology to promote greater participation, especially for juniors.

3.2.3 Type of synthetic surface for Council consideration From the various synthetic surface types available, the most suitable synthetic

surface option for fields for Council will likely be the Third Generation Turf, which

can be used for the majority of large ball sports, including Football (soccer),

Rugby Union, Rugby League and Touch Football, as well as Australian Rules and

Cricket.

5 Price is for the turf only and not the infrastructure – normally around $1.2m



The latest technology has been developed for multi-sports including a

combination of the above sports, which is commonly known as the One Turf

Concept standard. This will provide significant opportunities for the co-habiting of

sports on the same surface to meet the respective sports peak bodies’ synthetic

surface guidelines, especially with the latest technology developments. This has

been embraced by the owners and funders of the surfaces which is

predominantly local government. The standard should be formally endorsed by

the end of 2013.

3.2.4 Synthetic surface system The synthetic turf surface is part of a whole system consisting of a number of

components, all of which need to be considered. These components are grouped

into two key perspectives:

Synthetic Surface – Normally with an infill to keep the grass upright and

cushioned for the players. This may also have a shockpad which can add to the

surface system to ensure it meets the required sport performance standards.

Subsurface – The subsurface sometimes known as ‘the pavement’ is what the

synthetic surface sits on and this provides the strength of base to ensure the

synthetic surface or carpet can be re-laid in 8-10 years times. Council should be

looking for a 20 year life from the subsurface or pavement.

Under the pavement, which may be open asphalt, or a graded stone there is

normally a base and sub-base. The pavement needed will be dependent upon

the geo-tech engineering results and recommendations, which will allow a civil

engineer to determine the most appropriate base for the sports fields.

An example of a typical synthetic surface is illustrated in Graphic 1: Horizontal

Draining Surface (Source: Sport and Recreation Victoria, Artificial Grass for

Sport), which demonstrates a horizontal draining system with the exposed fibres,

infill, backing, shock pad, asphalt, base, and sub-base and sub- grade.

Alternatively a vertical draining system in the base/sub-base can also be used

depending on geotech reports.

Graphic 1: Horizontal Draining Surface (Source: Sport and Recreation Victoria, Artificial Grass for Sport)

3.3 Playability of Sport on Synthetics The initial key sports of interest for Council (AFL, Football/Soccer) all have

synthetic surface criteria for community sports. Nearly all governing sporting

bodies used the survey data of natural grass fields to model performance criteria

for the use of synthetics in the respective sports.

3.3.1 Football (Soccer) - FIFA Quality Concept FIFA was the first sport to introduce their Quality Concept for their synthetic grass

surfaces, or Football Turf as they call it. This standard for synthetic turf divided

its performance standard into three areas:-

1. Product Identification and Durability;

2. Ball-Surface Interaction; and

3. Player-Surface Interaction.

Typically, product identification and durability define the make-up of the surfacing

system including optional use of elastic layers (shock pads). Surfacing systems

are identified by the type and make of synthetic grass, the combination of

stabilizing and performance infill as well as the type of optional shock pad.

Simulated wearing characteristics are analysed using a wear tester whereas the

weatherability of a surface is analysed by exposure to UV-light, temperature and

moisture.

Ball-surface interaction parameters spell out the interaction between the ball and

the synthetic surface. Typically parameters like ball rebound and ball roll are

used in particular in soccer and cricket to describe the performance of a particular

surfacing system. In contrast to the English Rugby Football League (RFL)

standard, FIFA does not presently define the phenomenon of infill spray as part of

their performance system. Infill spray can occur when loose particles of

performance infill bounce out of the surfacing system following the impact of a

ball or a player on the surface. Generally, excessive infill spray is regarded as an

unwanted disadvantage synthetic surfaces display in comparison to natural grass

surfaces.

Player-surface interaction parameters include specifications for the safe

interaction of the player with the synthetic surface. In addition to shock

absorption, vertical deformation and rotational resistance performance criteria for

skin friction and abrasion have been established in order to allow for safe playing

on the synthetic surface. The shock absorption is an indication of how hard a

surface feels to the player and is a measurement received together with the

vertical deformation and energy restitution of a surface. Generally speaking, a

surface that deforms too much will result in overstretching of ligaments

particularly around the ankle. The measurement of energy restitution is an

indication of how much energy is returned to the player when running on the

surface. With the newest standard FIFA introduced the Advanced Artificial

Athlete (AAA) device as the apparatus to determine these parameters.

Rotational resistance simulates the player’s ability to alter direction when running

on the sports surface: If the rotational resistance is too high, stress can occur

[Type a quote from the document or the summary of an interesting point. You can position the text box anywhere in the document. Use the Drawing Tools tab to change the formatting



across the knee ligament whereas if the rotational resistance is too low, a player

will slip on the surface.

As part of their performance standard FIFA recognises two levels of synthetic

playing surfaces:

1. FIFA One Star – Community Level / Amateur; and

2. FIFA Two Star – Stadium Level / Professional

A FIFA Two Star Recommended Pitch certification is valid for 1 year whereas a

FIFA One Star Recommended Pitch certification is valid for four years. It is

important to understand that the FIFA performance standard does not constitute

a product approval system but certifies the suitability as a football surface

following a successful laboratory and field test (see Table 2: Selected FIFA Field

Test Performance Requirements). In other words it is specific to each field.

Property FIFA Two Star FIFA One Star

Ball Rebound 0.6 – 0.85 m 0.6 – 1.0 m

Ball Roll 4 – 8 m (initially) 4 – 10 m (initially)

4 – 10 m (12 months) 4 – 12 m (12 months)

Rotational Resistance 30 – 45 Nm 25 – 50 Nm

Shock Absorption 60 – 70 % 55 – 70 %

Vertical Deformation 4 – 10 mm 4 – 11 mm

Table 2: Selected FIFA Field Test Performance Requirements

The table above demonstrates the greater tolerance level of a FIFA 1 Star pitch,

which is more suited to greater use, such as with Council fields.

Unlike Rugby League, Rugby Union or AFL, FIFA does not stipulate a head injury

criterion and therefore, does not specify a critical fall height.

The FIFA 1 Star pitch is defined for use at the local level, although professionals

can still play on it, with the durability standard (20,200 repetitions) being four

times the level of the FIFA 2 Star (5,200 repetitions). Therefore if a FIFA 2 Star

was introduced, it would not last as long as a FIFA 1 Star due to the durability

standards if it was used for more than 50 hours per week. The FIFA 2 Star

recommended fields are normally used for major stadium or professional usage.

The vast majority of Local Government Authorities should be looking to install a

FIFA 1 Star recommended pitch. There would be very limited reasons why a LGA

would invest in a FIFA 2 Star pitch.

If a pitch is tested and awarded a FIFA 2 Star recommended status, it is valid for

only 12 months. If it not retested after that, it would either have no classification,

or be reclassified to a FIFA 1 Star Recommended pitch, as long as the durability

(Lisport) test has been completed to a FIFA 1 star (i.e. 20,200 repetitions)

standard. If the classification is lost, then this may be a risk that Council should

be aware of in relation to insurance obligations.

In April 2011, FIFA issued a rule change which now allows matches, including

professional games, to be played on synthetic surfaces that have line markings of

other sports embedded in them, as long as they are in a different colour and do

not present confusion. This allows Councils and sport to consider using synthetic

technology for other sports while accommodating football (soccer) needs.

New guidelines by FIFA introduced in April 2011 states that:

“Only the lines in Law 1 are to be marked on the field of play. Where artificial

surfaces are used, other lines are permitted provided that they are a different

colour and clearly distinguishable from the line for the field of play for football”.

At a recent conference in Bangkok, Labosport, the world’s largest testing

laboratory for synthetic sports turf, indicated that by 2014 it is likely that FIFA will

recognise three levels of synthetic turf:

1. Multi-sports Turf – This will most likely be the One Turf Concept standard

that will also meet the FIFA 1 Star Standard, as well as the other sports.

2. Amateur Standard / FIFA 1 Star – This most durable standard will be

promoted around the world as the key surface for community and amateur

standards

3. Professional Standard / FIFA 2 Star – This standard will be used

predominantly in stadiums and not the community base.

This could allow Council to have a number of options based around football

(soccer) that can encourage greater use by a number of sports including options

for:

� Soccer specific field;

� Soccer and rugby codes;

� Soccer and hockey;

� Soccer and multi-sport; and

� Soccer, Australian Rules and cricket.

3.3.2 Rugby Union (IRB) Rugby Union’s world governing body, the International Rugby Board (IRB) has

identified and welcomed the use of synthetic turf as an alternative playing field

option. They have developed a specification that acts as a guideline document to

the manufacturers of synthetic turf fields, which highlights the needs of rugby

union specifically.6 In doing so, the IRB have begun to consolidate the future of

6 IRB Handbook, Regulation 22 “Standards Relating to Artificial Playing Surfaces 2012”

Rugby with the ability of the sport to be continued to be played on different sports

surfaces.

Regulation 22 assesses synthetic turf for durability, ball-surface interaction as

well as player-surface interaction. Following a series of laboratory tests a

synthetic product can be installed and field tested. Following the approval of the

relevant member union, a successfully installed and tested field needs to be

retested every two years. Selected field test parameters have been harmonized

and are similar to other football codes (see Table 3: Selected IRB Field Test

Requirements).

Property Requirement

Ball Rebound 0.6 – 1.0 m

Rotational Resistance 30 – 45 Nm

Shock Absorption 55 – 70 %

Vertical Deformation 5.5 – 11 mm

Head Injury Criteria ≥ 1.3 m (during year one)

≥ 1.0 m (thereafter)

Table 3: Selected IRB Field Test Requirements

Similar to other codes, IRB Regulation 22 also identifies surface regularity of the

playing surface as well as a maximum slope as requirements during field test

procedure.

3.3.3 Hockey Hockey’s world governing body (FIH) has three standards, National, Global and

Multi-Sport Standard as of May 2013.

The FIH, in the latest edition of the “Handbook of Performance, Durability and

Construction Requirements for Synthetic Turf Hockey Fields” in May 2013,

features the new levels of fields that can gain certification to their standards. The

three levels are now:

� Global Level – For FIH World Level competitions (e.g. Olympics)

� National Level – For other international and higher level national competitions

� Multisport Level – For all other levels subject to national association regulations

3.3.4 Australian Rules Football / Cricket Australia In 2007, the Australian Football League (AFL), Cricket Australia (CA), Sport and

Recreation Victoria and Jardine Lloyd Thompson Trustees jointly commissioned

the University of Ballarat to undertake testing on natural grass and artificial turf

surfaces in the laboratory and on site to develop suitable standards for the use of

artificial turf for Australian Football and Cricket. Following a survey on high

quality natural grass found in stadiums and community level natural grass fields,

the study recommended requirements for artificial turf to replicate the

performance characteristics of natural grass were published. However, even



though being similar to other codes in terms of requiring a laboratory approval

prior to field installation and specifying a critical fall height due to the nature of the

AFL game, the AFL/CA standard does not presently refer to the Advanced

Artificial Athlete (AAA) device. Instead, AFL/CA standard references the Clegg

impact tester (Clegg hammer) as an indication of how hard a surface feels to the

player. In addition, other ball-surface as well as player interaction parameters

have been amended to address requirements for both sports, Australian Rules

and Cricket (see Table 4: Selected AFL/CA Test Requirements). In addition,

product durability requirements have been amended to address the harsh

Australian climatic conditions.

Property Elite Level Community Level

Ball Rebound (Football) 35 – 50 % 30 – 50 %

Ball Rebound (Cricket) 5 – 10 % 5 – 20 %

Traction Football Studs 30 – 45 Nm 25 – 50 Nm

Traction Cricket Spikes 15 – 18 Nm 15 – 25 Nm

Traction Cricket Studs 7 – 15 Nm 7 – 15 Nm

Hardness 65 – 85 G 65 – 120 G

Head Injury Criterion 1.2 m 1.2 m

Table 4: Selected AFL/CA Test Requirements

In contrast to other sports the AFL/CA standard also referenced a different device

when referring to skin abrasion and skin friction which was developed as part of

the work when establishing the standard.

It is anticipated that they will also be part of the One Turf Concept Standard in

2013, which will mean that they will then have three standards: elite games – only

on grass; community standard, on both grass and their AFL/CA Community

Standard and then the multi-sport standard. (This standard will have the same

playing and safety characteristic’s as the AFL/CA Community Standard).

3.3.5 Rugby League – National Rugby League (NRL) and use of the Rugby Football League (RFL) Standard

Australia’s NRL does not presently have a Standard but the Rugby Football

League (RFL) in the UK has a standard that is based on the European Standard

EN 15330-1: Surfaces for Sport Areas has been modified for the specific

requirements of Rugby League. The standard takes into account the results of a

comprehensive study into the performance of natural grass fields. Typically, a

natural grass-synthetic turf hybrid system called Desso Grassmaster is found in

major stadium installations around the world alongside with root-stabilized fibre-

sand or fibre-elastic natural grass systems. Typical community grounds are soil-

based natural grass surfaces which were surveyed during winter and summer

(see Table 5: Natural Grass Performance (ProPitch System study, England)).

Property Desso Fibresand Fibreelastic Soil based

(winter) Soil based (summer)

Ball Rebound (in m) 0.8 – 1.0 0.75 – 0.9 0.65 – 0.95 0.6 – 0.8 0.8 – 1.05

Ball Roll (in m) 5 – 6.5 5.5 - 7 4.5 – 7.5 4.0 – 5.0 4.7 – 5.7

Underfoot friction (in Nm)

40 – 50 30 – 40 30 – 50 25 – 35 40 – 55

Shock Absorption (in %) 45 – 55 45 – 55 50 – 57 62 – 68 53 – 65

Vertical deformation (in mm)

2 – 4 3 – 5 4 – 6 7 – 8 4 – 8

HIC (in m) 1.5 1.7 1.7 – 1.8 2.7 – 3.5 1.4 – 2.2

Table 5: Natural Grass Performance (ProPitch System study, England)

Recognising that many artificial turf Rugby League fields will also be used for

Football or Rugby Union, the RFL standard has been aligned with the

requirements for FIFA and IRB regulation 22, wherever possible.

Similar to the FIFA Quality Concept, the RFL performance standard recognises

requirements for Community and Stadium. Products suitable for Rugby League

play have to pass initial laboratory approval before being able to be installed and

tested in the actual field application. Whilst community use fields shall be

retested every two years, stadium use fields require a field retest on an annual

basis.

Australia’s National Rugby League (NRL) is presently considering their position

on synthetics for the game in Australia.

3.3.6 Baseball Synthetic surface technology has been used for baseball since 1965 as a whole

field, or just for the outfield. Within Australia the use of synthetic sports surfaces

have not been embraced as much. The Victorian State Baseball / Softball Centre

have synthetic, as do Ballarat and Geelong stadiums. The majority of graded

facilities do not. The stadium which has a combination of both natural grass, clay

and synthetic face challenges with consistency of surface for both ball interaction

and player interaction and which studs to use.

3.3.7 Multi-sport The IRB has worked with the key sports of Soccer (FIFA), Rugby League (RFL –

UK only), Gaelic Football, Australian Rules Football (AFL), Hockey (FIH) and

American Gridiron, to develop a single turf that has the parameters to meet all of

these standards. This is now known as the “One Turf Concept”. It is envisaged

that this multi-sports standard will be issued by the end of the 2013.

As more local governments embrace synthetic technology, it is envisaged that

more will adopt this as their base standard allowing for other sports to train and

compete on the surface.

3.3.8 EN Standard The European Standard EN15330-1:2013, which is currently under review,

combines aspects of the current Football FIFA 1 Star, International Hockey

Federation (FIH), Rugby Union (IRB) and International Tennis Federation (ITF)

requirements in its specification for synthetic turf surfaces for football, hockey,

rugby union training, tennis and multi-sport use.

3.4 Health and Safety Considerations Some potential health and safety considerations concerning synthetic surfaces

have generated public concern. These include:

1. Health Risk;

2. Player safety and injury;

3. Surface playability;

4. Risk of infection;

5. Ecosystem effects;

6. Chemical exposure; and

7. Heat stress.

Most of these concerns have now been addressed or risk mitigation taken by the

peak bodies for each sport, or through independent studies. Council needs to be

cognoscente of these when planning for the future use of synthetic surfaces.

3.4.1 Health Risk The Environmental Protection Agency in America (EPA) issued the following

statement title “Playgrounds and Synthetic Turf Fields” 7, in which it states:-

“There have been concerns about the health implications of the use of recycled

tire crumb in playgrounds and in synthetic turf athletic fields. In response to these

concerns, EPA conducted a Scoping-Level Field Monitoring Study of Synthetic

Turf Fields and Playgrounds.”

The final report was issued in 2009 and concluded that on average,

concentrations of components monitored in this study were below levels of

concern. To supplement this study’s limited data, the United States EPA met with

state and local representatives in 2010 to review other available field monitoring

studies including a 2010 risk assessment of artificial turf fields conducted by four

state agencies of the state of Connecticut which concluded that exposures and

risks were not elevated (relative to what is commonly found in outdoor air) for

either children or adults using the fields.

In 2010, the California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment

(OEHHA) issued a safety study of artificial turf containing crumb rubber made

from recycled tyres. The study which was founded by the Department of

Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle) examined the possible human

7 source: http://www.epa.gov/epawaste/conserve/materials/tires/health.htm



health risks of outdoor athletic fields made from artificial turf containing recycled

crumb rubber with respect to skin abrasions, bacteria harbored by the turf,

inhalable particulate matter, and volatile organic compounds. The report

concluded these fields do not pose a serious public health concern, with the

possible exception of an increased skin abrasion rate on artificial turf relative to

natural turf.

At this point, the US EPA does not believe that the field monitoring data collected

provides evidence of an elevated health risk resulting from the use of recycled tire

crumb in playgrounds or in synthetic turf athletic fields. Ultimately, the use of

recycled tire crumb or any other playground materials is a state and local

decision”.

3.4.2 Player Safety and Injuries There is a perception that there are more sports injuries on synthetic grass

surfaces than natural turf. A number of studies show that this perception is not

accurate.

The New York State Department of Health Fact Sheet: Crumb-Rubber Infilled

Synthetic Turf Athletic Fields (2008) (NYS DOH Factsheet) provides specific

guidance from their research, namely:

“There is a common perception that there are more sports injuries on synthetic

than on natural turf athletic fields. Many factors influence the rate of sports

injuries, including the type of playing surface. The many kinds of synthetic turf

surfaces and changes in the turf products over the years complicate the

assessment of how the playing surface affects injury rates.”

Photo 1: Field with markings for several sports (Source: TigerTurf)

� Injury Studies conducted by FIFA and UEFA The world governing body of football FIFA and the Union of European Football

Associations (UEFA) conducted one of the early studies on injuries comparing

artificial turf and natural grass. The 3 year study covered 18 professional teams

with a total exposure of 160,000 hours8. The study yielded a slightly lower risk of

muscle injuries but showed slightly higher risk on ligament injuries with rate of

knee injuries being the same between both surface types (see Table 6: Number

of Injuries per 1,000 hours exposure). However, the study did not analyze the

influence of footwear when playing on both surfaces.

Artificial Turf Natural Grass

Muscle Injury

Strain 4 7

Hamstring 2 3.5

Ligament

Sprain 7 5

Ankle 4 2.5

Knee 2 2

Table 6: Number of Injuries per 1,000 hours exposure

Following the initial study, FIFA conducted a 2 month study with thirty semi-

professional players on 3 artificial turf and 6 natural grass fields located across

Spain, the Netherlands and Norway. For purposes of consistency, all players

used the same boots with rounded studs (Adidas Copa Mondial). The study

focused on player-surface interaction and player-kicking dynamics using 500Hz

high-speed video analysis. During the player-surface interaction a ‘single-cut’

move (see photos 2 and 3) was analyzed in terms of turning time, exit speed and

slip pattern. With regards to player-kicking dynamics the backward inclination of

the leg (see photo 3), (#1) the kicking foot angle (#2), the knee position (#3), the

pronation of the standing foot (#4) as well as the upper body positioning (#5)

were analyzed. As performance measures heart rate, blood lactate levels and

movement analysis of the players were used. The results showed no statistical

differences in kicking dynamics, no evidence of increased physiological stress or

difference in velocity when performing on artificial turf and natural grass. In fact

the climatic differences between the various locations had a bigger influence than

the difference between the two surface types9.

8 Ekstrand, J., Timpka, T., Haegelund, M.; British Journal of Sports Medicine; 40; 975-980; 2006 9 Nokes, L.; FIFA Study into Player-Surface Interaction on Natural Turf and Football Turf; 2010

Photo 2 : Single Cut Move

Photo 3 : Kicking Dynamics

� Injury Studies conducted on behalf of Rugby Union The risk of injury associated with play of rugby union on artificial turf was

subject of a medical study in 201010. In particular the study looked at lower

limb and joint-ligament injuries. The results when comparing artificial versus

natural surfaces showed no significant statistical differences in rate of

injuries when comparing the two surface types. In addition, the study

yielded no significant difference in severity of injury sustained. Overall the

study concluded that the risk of injury was not different when comparing

playing activity on artificial turf with natural grass surfaces.

� NCAA Injury Surveillance Program The National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) in the United States

maintains a comprehensive injury surveillance program which regularly

summarizes the injuries sustained in various sports. According to the

surveillance data collected between the seasons 2004/05 to 2008/09 the

majority (more than half) of injuries occur in the lower limb area (see Table 10 Fuller, C., Clarke, L., Molloy, M.; Journal of Sports Sciences; Vol 28; Issue 5; 2010



7: American Football Injuries (Surveillance Program 2004-2009). However,

the study did not distinguish between playing surfaces.

Injury Percentage (in %)

Concussion 7.4

Head, face, neck 4.3

Upper limb 16.9

Torso, pelvis 11.9

Lower limb 50.4

Other 9.1

Table 7: American Football Injuries (Surveillance Program 2004-2009)

A 5-year study of American High School also concluded that more than half of the

injuries sustained in American Football at a high-school level are recorded in the

lower extremity area11. The particular study differentiated between playing

activity on artificial turf and natural grass and showed slightly higher rates of

injury on artificial grass compared to natural grass (see Table 8: American High-

School Football Injuries)Table 7: American Football Injuries (Surveillance

Program 2004-2009). Similar findings were concluded by Hershman et al12 when

looking at specific lower extremity injury rates on grass and artificial turf playing

surfaces in National Football League (NFL) games.

Artificial Turf Natural Grass

Cranial/cervical 10.1 % 19.2 %

Upper extremity 28.1 % 23.2 %

Thoracic 7.9 % 6.4 %

Lower extremity 53.9 % 51.2 %

Table 8: American High-School Football Injuries

� Summary Of the various independent studies reviewed from 2006 to 2011 the common

finding is that there are not more injuries associated with synthetic turf when

compared to natural turf. Seemingly the only negative consideration is where

sports people alternate between surface types which may result in different and

more injuries. This may be similar to long distance runners who run on synthetic

tracks and then run on the asphalt and are more susceptible to shin soreness.

Although the ability of the studies to detect differences in the injury rates was

limited by the small number of injuries reported, the studies concluded that there

were no major differences in overall injury rates between natural and infilled

synthetic turf. Although each study found some differences in specific injury

types, there was no consistent pattern across the studies.

One of the key safety concerns that have been expressed by sport organisations

is the potential for head injuries from contact with a synthetic surface. This 11 Meyer, M., Barnhill, B.; The American Journal of Sports Medicine; Vol 32; No. 7 12 Hershman, E., Anderson, R., Berfeld, J., Bradley, J., Coughlin, M.,Johnson, R., Spindler, K., Wojtys, E., Powell, J.; American Journal of Sports Medicine, Online Sep 2012

concern is assessed by determining the ability of the surfaces ability to absorb

impact using one of two test methods. This then provides the acceptable level of

playing surface for specific sports. By comparison, a recent study of community

and stadium natural surface fields in Sydney13 were typically below the

corresponding expected synthetic level. Many natural turf fields are not normally

tested against any standard. If they were tested, many fields would not pass the

standards set for synthetic surfaces. Rugby Union is now beginning to test natural

turf surfaces in some states to protect their players.

The abrasiveness of synthetic turf fibres may contribute to the injury risk among

athletes, particularly for abrasions or ‘turf burns.’ The degree of abrasiveness

appears to be dependent on the composition and shape of the turf fibres. A study

conducted at Penn State University in the US suggests that synthetic turf with

nylon fibres is more abrasive than synthetic turf with other fibre types. Further

studies by other peak bodies have identified the following:

� A study conducted by FIFA’s Medical Assessment and Research Centre (F-

MARC)14 compared the injuries sustained at the FIFA U-17 tournament in Peru

in 2005 which was played entirely on artificial turf, with the injuries sustained at

previous FIFA U-17 tournaments which were mostly played on natural turf. The

research showed that there was very little difference in the incidence, nature

and cause of injuries observed during games played on artificial turf compared

with those on grass;

� The study reported in the British Journal of Sports Medicine in 2006 showed

that overall; there was no evidence of greater injury risk when playing soccer

on artificial turf when compared with natural turf in the Swedish Premier

League. The authors did report an increased incidence in ankle injuries on

artificial turf; however the study was limited due to its small sample size;

� The limited results collated by FIFA suggest that the rate of injury on third

generation synthetic turf is similar to that of natural turf, but the type of injury

may differ.

3.4.3 Surface playability

� Playability studies commissioned by FIFA Probably the most comprehensive studies on playability of any sport comparing

artificial surfaces versus natural grass have been commissioned by FIFA. In

2006, FIFA commissioned UK-based Prozone to analyse data from UEFA Cup

matches played on both surfaces using a video-based performance analysis

system15. Aim of the study was to analyze the potential impact that artificial turf

may have on the pattern of a game and therefore performance and playability16.

13 UST study of NSW community natural grass standards (2011) by Acoustoscan 14 FIFA Medal Assessment and Research Centre (2006) 15 Di Salvo, V., Collins, A., McNeil, B., Cardinale, M.; International Journal of Performance Analysis in Sport; 6; 108-119, 2006 16 FIFA Technical Study with Prozone, 2006

UEFA cup matches between Red Bull Salzburg and Blackburn Rovers were

analysed using the Prozone Match Viewer system.

The analysis yielded that games played on the artificial surface at Red Bull

Salzburg and the natural grass surface at Blackburn Rovers showed no

significant differences in terms of performance and playability. The number of

total passes played was very similar (703 on artificial turf versus 720 on natural

grass) with a success rate of more than 80% passes completed on both surfaces.

Also, the number of tackles, interceptions, clearances, and the shooting accuracy

were similar on both surfaces (see Table 9: Tactical Events Red Bull Salzburg vs.

Blackburn Rovers).

Artificial Turf Natural Turf

Event Red Bull Rovers Total Total Rovers Red Bull

Total Passes 336 367 703 720 405 315

Completion 78 % 81 % 80 % 83 % 85 % 81 %

Tackles 21 23 44 43 17 26

Interceptions 127 113 240 233 126 107

Clearances 16 33 49 44 19 25

Shooting Accuracy

39 % 50 % 43 % 43 % 43 % 44 %

Table 9: Tactical Events Red Bull Salzburg vs. Blackburn Rovers

Similar technical studies have been extended by FIFA to cover Champions League, Dutch Football, the U’20s World Cup as well as the Russian League. The overall average of all five studies confirms great similarity between games played on artificial turf and natural grass. To eliminate a potential home-team bias, only the events for the away team were included in these subsequent studies (see Table 10: FIFA 5-Study Technical Overview).

Event Artificial Turf Natural Grass

Passes 314 313

Passes completed 78 % 80 %

Passes forward 145 148

Balls received 351 353

Headers 64 64

Interceptions 125 118

Tackles 30 28

Crosses 12 13

Shots 14 13

Table 10: FIFA 5-Study Technical Overview

� Dutch Professional Coaches Survey The European Synthetic Turf Organization (ESTO) commissioned a survey study

of members of the Dutch professional coaches association. Even though natural

turf in excellent condition remains preference the responses given were positive



towards artificial playing surfaces (see Table 11: Survey of Dutch Professional

Coaches Association).

Question? Yes No

Are players able to develop better technical skills by training on synthetic turf?

62 % 38 %

Longer term, will players’ techniques be better developed by playing and training on synthetic turf?

57 % 43 %

Does training and playing on synthetic turf improve skill acquisition amongst players?

69 % 30 %

Would you like your team to play passing football, and if yes, is this easier to implement on an artificial pitch?

71 % 29 %

Do you see synthetic turf as being the future of the game? 64 % 36 %

Table 11: Survey of Dutch Professional Coaches Association

� Study commissioned by Rugby Union When reviewing the artificial turf specification and in particular the pile height

requirement of IRB regulation 22, IRB commissioned biomechanics studies of the

rugby scrum. During machine scrumming, scrum engagement, techniques for

effective and safe scrumming and injury risks were reviewed. The study

concluded that scrumming on artificial turf is safe and similar to natural grass and

as a result the minimum pile height requirement for artificial turf could be lowered

from originally 65mm down to 60mm17.

� Study commissioned by Australian Rules Football Due to the limited number of facilities with artificial playing surfaces, there is

currently no detailed study regarding playability available for AFL activities. It

should be noted that a study conducted by the University of Ballarat18 was utilised

to assist in the development of standards for the use of artificial turf for Australian

Football and Cricket.

3.4.4 Infection risk There has been a perception that the infill could present health problems if it was

inhaled or swallowed. The New York State Department of Health (USA) Fact

Sheet, state:

“Some people have expressed concern that infections, including Methicillin-

Resistant Staphylococcus Aureus (MRSA), may be more common among users

of synthetic turf fields than users of natural turf fields. This possibility has not

been studied systematically, and no definitive statements can be made about

differences in risk between the two surfaces.”

The study continues:

“At least two questions are important in evaluating the risk of infection. Does skin

damage occur more frequently on synthetic turf than natural turf, thus providing a

17 IRB Regulation 22, Artificial Rugby Turf Performance Specification, One Turf Technical Manual, 2012 18 Twomey, D, Otago, L., Saunders, N.; Development of Standards for the Use of Artificial Turf for Australian Football and Cricket; University of Ballarat; 2007

place where infections are more likely to occur? And are there more germs on

synthetic turf than natural turf?

While injury studies have not consistently identified differences in abrasion and

laceration risks between natural and infilled synthetic turf, some types of synthetic

turf may result in more skin abrasions. Although very few tests have been

performed, the data available does not suggest the widespread presence of

infectious agents, such as MRSA, on synthetic turf fields. For example, state

reference indicates that outdoor or indoor synthetic turf surfaces are no more

likely to harbor infectious agents than other surfaces in the same environments.

Disease outbreak investigations conducted in response to illnesses caused by a

variety of germs (e.g., MRSA, campylobacter, meningococcus, echovirus, herpes

simplex virus, hepatitis virus, coxsackie virus) have not identified playing fields,

either natural or synthetic, as likely to increase the risk of transmitting infections.”

Skin cuts and abrasions that may result from contact with athletic fields, including

both natural and synthetic fields, are susceptible to infection. Athletes and others

developing skin abrasions should clean the wounds and seek prompt medical

attention. There are conflicting reports that the ground rubber materials used for

infill may be unhealthy. However, most studies on toxicity levels dispel this notion.

In fact, the NYSDoH factsheet indicates that most studies show that the rubber

(typically sourced from recycled tyres) does not pose any serious risks. The only

exception is with people who are allergic to latex (6% of U.S. population), which is

sometimes found in tyre rubber. However, it is a very small percentage of the

material mix in tyres – most latex is found in rubber gloves and balloons - and the

probable impact it has on people with allergies is small.

As with the notion of ground rubber materials being unhealthy, there have been

numerous questions as to whether the materials in artificial turf surfaces mix with

water runoff and add contaminants into ground water, adversely affecting the air

quality and eco-system. Results from the NYS DOH Factsheet show that the

water run-off has no effect on toxicity when compared against the key test criteria

or other environmental impacts to organisms, and meets all the state and federal

water quality standards. Reports also show that runoffs from fields into rivers,

lakes, creeks, ponds, etc. contain chemical fertilisers and pesticides that are used

on grass fields, as opposed to synthetic turf fields, where the runoff will be mostly

pure water, drained through percolation rock and collected in catches under the

field.”

Photo 4: Rubber grounds as infill for a synthetic surface

3.4.5 Ecosystem Effects As with the notion of ground rubber materials being unhealthy, there have been

numerous questions as to whether the materials in artificial turf surfaces mix with

water run-off add contaminants into ground water, adversely affecting the air

quality and eco-system. Results from the NYS DOH Factsheet show that the

water run-off has no effect on toxicity when compared against the key test criteria

or other environmental impacts to organisms and meets all the state and federal

water quality standards. Reports also show that runoffs from fields into rivers,

lakes, creeks, ponds, etc. contain chemical fertilisers and pesticides that are used

on grass fields, as opposed to synthetic turf fields, where the runoff will be mostly

pure water, drained through percolation rock and collected in catches under the

field.

There have been a number of studies on the impact of synthetics on the local

ecosystem including ones from the California Environmental Protection Agency,

the Norwegian Institute of Public Health, the French National Institute of

Environment and Risk and probably the most comprehensive study, the Swiss

Study (2005-2007).

The Swiss Ministry of Environment, Traffic, Energy and Communications

(Authority of Environment – Section Water) specifically reported on results of a

Field Study on the Environmental Compatibility of Synthetic Sports Surfaces

(Edwin Muller). The study explored the secretion of synthetic surfaces from three

sources:

i. Disintegration by UV radiation;

ii. Mechanical destruction by abrasion; and

iii. Diffusion of ingredients and washing off by rain water.

The secreted substances included:

� Rubber chemicals: aromatic amines, benzothiazoles, anilin, cyclohexylamin;

� PAHs: Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (16);



� Total organic nitrogen compounds;

� DOC; and

� Zinc.

The testing was in a controlled environment with rain washing through the

synthetic and natural turf systems over a two-year period with the water collected

and then measured for the secreted substances. The results are summarised as

follows:

PAHs – PAHs are ubiquitous substances and are present in sewage water in

similar concentrations as in water draining from sports surfaces. The report

summarises that there is no risk for the environment.

Zinc – The zinc is mainly absorbed by the mineral base layer with the

concentration of zinc in rain water actually higher than the seeping water

collected underneath the sports surface. It was also noted that the zinc from

traffic is a constant source whereas sports surfaces release zinc with a highly

decreasing rate.

The general result of the research was that no risk for the environment if

production of synthetic sport surfaces and their installation follows recognised

rules of technology.

The rules of technology include the Swiss and German Regulation DIN 18035

parts 6 and 7 and ESM105. These state that the requirements of metals needs to

be less than:

� Mercury ≤ 0.01 mg/l;

� Lead ≤ 0.04 mg/l;

� Cadmium ≤ 0.005 mg/l;

� Chromium ≤ 0.008 mg/l;

� Zinc ≤ 3.0 mg/l; and

� Tin ≤ 0.05 mg/l.

3.4.6 Chemical Exposure The New York State Department of Health Fact Sheet considered this as part of

its ‘chemical exposure’ sections which reads:

“Exposure to a chemical requires contact with it. Contact with a chemical occurs

in these ways: swallowing it (ingestion exposure), breathing it (inhalation

exposure), and having it come in contact with the skin (dermal exposure) or eyes

(ocular exposure). The potential for harmful effects from exposure to a chemical

depends on the amount of the chemical a person contacts, how the chemical

enters the body (ingestion, inhalation, dermal, or ocular), how often contact

occurs, and the toxic properties of the chemical. The ability of a chemical to be

released from a substance (e.g., crumb rubber) is an important factor in

determining how much exposure actually occurs. Other factors that can influence

a person's risk for adverse health effects from environmental chemicals include

age, gender, general health, genetic differences, exposure to other chemicals

and lifestyle choices.”

Car tyres are manufactured from natural and synthetic rubbers and contain

numerous chemical additives, including zinc, sulphur, carbon black, and oils that

contain polyaromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) and volatile organic chemicals.

Crumb rubber is manufactured from used tyres, so it is safe to say that although

there are chemical additives in crumb rubber, they are no more toxic than a car

tyre.

A French study19 measured the concentration of organic chemicals emitted as

gases (known as volatile organic compounds or VOCs) from crumb rubber under

laboratory conditions. The data was used by the French National Institute for

Industrial Environment and Risks to evaluate possible health effects from inhaling

VOCs released from synthetic turf. The researchers concluded that the

concentration of organic compounds emitted did not pose a health concern for

athletes, officials or spectators.

Some types of synthetic turf fibres contain elevated levels of lead (e.g. in the

range of about 2,000 to 9,000 parts per million). Degradation of these fibres can

form a dust that presents a potential source of lead exposure to users of the

fields. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (USA) and the Agency for

Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (France) addressed the potential for lead

exposures from synthetic turf fibres in a June 2008 Health Advisory

(http://www.cdc.gov/nceh/lead/artificialturf.htm).

The tests identified that older fields that were made of nylon fibres or a

nylon/polyethylene blend contained levels of lead that pose a possible public

health concern. Tests of only polyethylene fibres showed that these fields

contained very low levels of lead.

The report continues, “The risk of harmful lead exposure is low from new fields

with elevated lead levels in their turf fibres because the turf fibres are still intact

and the lead is unlikely to be available for harmful exposures to occur.”

3.4.7 Heat Stress Artificial surfaces heat up significantly more than natural turf ones, especially on a

hot sunny day (20 – 40% hotter) where black rubber infill is used.

High surface temperatures can lead to heat stress-related conditions, especially

in children. In very hot climates, artificial surfaces are often watered to reduce the

surface temperature; however this can increase the humidity, which is not

desirable for participants. A heat policy (i.e. restrict play when surface

temperatures reach a certain level) may be required in hot climates.

19 French National Institute for Industrial Environment and Risks

Recently, Australian companies have introduced a number of products and infill’s

that specifically address the heat criteria issues inherent in synthetic turf fields.

These approaches include:

i) Environmentally friendly infill An environmentally friendly product has been used in an installation at the

Australian National University, Canberra for the past two years. (Although

there are 150 similar installations world-wide, this is the first in Australia.)

The infill mix has coated sand.

Alternatives include organic infill’s with seemingly two types with a straight

cork option or a cork and coconut husk base. It has the ability to be recycled

for agricultural use. The management of the infill may also need to be

watered, to ensure it does not become dry and dusty. It may also need more

frequent topping up due to the organic breakdown of the product.

ii) Coated or cryogenically frozen rubber infill New to Australia from the USA, the suppliers of this product are promoting

the use of rubber particles for the infill that are coated, thus reducing the

probability of compaction and heat retention. The cost is currently prohibitive

as it is in the region of $100,000 per field, largely due to import and shipping

costs.

Photo 5: Different infill types (Source: Advanced Polymer Technology)



iii) Filament / pile changes

Many suppliers have developed the carpet pile technology and focused on

the carpet filaments impact on the Ultraviolet (UV) resistance, together with

‘Cool Grass’ technology where the polymers in the filaments reduce the heat

absorption by between 15 and 20% of the external heat temperature on the

fields. This is shown in Photo 6 with the cool grass technology showing

cooler temperature on a heat photo compared to a standard synthetic grass.

Photo 6: Cool grass technology (Source: Advanced Polymer Technology)

Therefore, by combining the technologies of infill and grass type, this will have a

more desired outcome for the participants during summer periods.

Many of the manufacturers are continually enhancing their products and with the

level of scrutiny presently on the science of synthetics, by the time local councils

are ready for procurement, the technology may have jumped another generation,

making them not only safer but enhancing the playability as well.

It would be prudent of Council as they explore and procure synthetic surfaces that

they consider at that time the latest environmental options available.

3.5 The Impact of Environmental Change Considerations

3.5.1 Introduction Council is committed to the principles of environmental sustainability and is

cognoscente of the impact of any development may have on the community and

its expectations. It recognises the economic investment needed to address some

of the environmental considerations and perceptions. Any use of synthetic

surface should address all environmental and sustainability principles.

The impact of climate change will have significant repercussions on the design,

maintenance and management of sports facilities for the next generation of users.

Whether it is drought or extensive rainfall, the patterns of environmental change

need to be considered, especially around:

- Water management

- Heat strategies

- Biodiversity management

- Economic investment needs

3.5.2 Weather patterns Climate change is predicted to result in more extreme weather patterns and the

impact on sports fields and open space are forecasted to include extended dry

periods and more intense rainfall.

Current scientific date states:

� Warming of the climate system is unequivocal and is now evident from

observations of increases in global average air and ocean temperatures,

widespread melting of slow and ice, and rising global average sea level.

� Most of the observed increase in globally averaged temperatures since

the mid-20th century is very likely (e.g. >90% probability) due to the

observed increase in anthropogenic greenhouse gas concentrations.

� Continued greenhouse gas emissions at or above current rates would

cause further warming and induce many changes in the global climate

system during the 21st century that would very likely be larger than those

observed during the 20th century.20

3.5.3 Temperature Considerations Mean global surface temperatures have increased by 0.76°C since 1850. Over

the last 50 years, the rate of warming has increased at an average of 0.13°C per

decade with 11 of the past 12 years among the hottest on record. Australian

average temperatures have increased 0.9°C since 1950, with significant regional

variations. The frequency of hot days and nights has increased and the

frequency of cold days and nights has declined.

The time of day for playing sport needs to be considered carefully when

combined with seasonal variations, in determining what competitions, school use,

training can take place. In addition are the support facilities that will be needed

for spectators etc.

The main considerations for the synthetic surface from these facts, is that with

increased temperatures, this concern needs to be carefully managed. In

summary, they are:

20 (Intergovernmental panel on climate change (2007) – the physical science basis, Contribution to working group 1 to the fourth assessment report of IPCC, published for the intergovernmental panel on climate change, Cambridge University press)

Direct impacts to sports � Limitations on school-based physical education programs or more indoor

programs, especially during daytime summer programs; and

� More frequent heat stress-related events.

Indirect impacts to sports � Increased demand for water-based recreational pursuits;

� Increased exposure to UV radiation;

� Reduced participation in outdoor fitness-related health initiatives;

� Summer daytime events rescheduled to evening fixtures;

� Funding demands for sports field lighting and air conditioned indoor facilities;

� Financial stress on poorer clubs due to the cost of night events;

� Increased respiratory and cardiovascular diseases; and

� Increased risk of bushfires in natural recreation areas (parks and bushland).

Council needs to consider the heat implications and use of heat mitigation

technology and ensure that the procurement process for synthetic turf addresses

this issue. In addition, a heat policy would assist in the management of these

implications. It should be noted that the majority of use for the synthetic field will

occur during the winter months and outside of the hottest part of the day.

Photo 7: Effect of drought on natural turf.

The Smart Guide to Synthetic Surfaces addresses this issue in detail. In

summary the synthetic surface needs to consider;

� Using heat reduction technology to reduce the ambient temperature of the

surface and up to 1 metre above the ground;

� The management of playing on the surface; and

� The use of water to keep the turf cool.



3.5.4 Water Management There is a growing body of evidence that climate change is already impacting on

Australia and in particular, NSW. There will clearly be impacts on the environment

and economy, and consequently on lifestyle.

Water harvesting is the capture and recycle of rain through field irrigation and

drainage. Many local governments are opting to implement water harvesting and

contemporary irrigation methods to keep the ground in use in the face of climatic

conditions and high demand overuse issues.

There are significant advantages for synthetic fields to be grouped (2-3 fields)

and possibly even co-located with natural turf so that the synthetic fields can be

used to water harvest irrigation supplies for the ongoing maintenance of natural

turf surfaces. Recent case studies conducted and demonstrated in Melbourne

(refer The Smart Guide to Synthetic Surfaces) has water harvesting able to

collect adequate rain water to water one cool grass and two warm grass natural

turf fields by building adequate size holding tanks.

3.5.5 Carbon Footprint Although it is well understood that natural living structures have a much lower

level impact on the carbon footprint when compared to built or artificial structures,

according to Simon (2010), the carbon footprint for natural grass tends to come

from the installation and maintenance (i.e. fertiliser production, mowing and

maintenance etc.) whereas the synthetic surface option is derived from its

production, transportation and disposal of the materials.

Carbon Offset There is significant research completed about the comparisons, for instance:

� A Canadian Study found that for a 9,000m2 facility over 10 years a total

CO2 emission of 55.6 tonne and the tree planting offset requirements

was 1,861 trees.

� Natural Grass helps remove carbon dioxide (carbon sequestrian) from

the atmosphere via photosynthesis and stores it as organic carbon in

soil from the short to long term depending on factors such as land

practices and climatic conditions. Therefore grass contributes to soil

organic matter, mainly through its root system, which makes them an

important carbon sink. A carbon sink is something that can store some

carbon-containing compound for a period of time. A typical lawn of 232

m2, converts enough carbon dioxide from the atmosphere to provide

adequate oxygen for a family of four.21

� According to the University of Ballarat study, only growing forests

produce a net gain of oxygen because they store carbon in wood of the

trees themselves and that any grass stores carbon in the forms of

21 TurfGrass Producers International, 2010. “Natural Grass and Artificial Turf: Separating Myths and Facts’ published by Turf Grass Resource Centre, www.TurfResourceCentre.org viewed August 2011.

sugars, starches and cellulose. However the important aspect is that

natural grass is often cut, particularly on a playing field which then

releases the carbon as it breaks down and rots, plus the reduction in

blade length reduces the amount of absorption. Whereas trees drop

leaves but the wood components are more likely to stay intact. It should

be noted that plants continue to release carbon dioxide and water into

the atmosphere through the process of cellular respiration. Therefore,

the net production in grass is very small in comparison to trees, bushes

and the like.

� There is some recent research from the United States that suggests

greenhouse gas emissions from natural turf production and maintenance

is greater than the amount of carbon that can be stored in them. This

study also found that athletic sports fields do not store as much carbon

as ornamental grass due to soil disruption by tilling and resodding.22

However, this methodology of this research has since been reviewed

and modified to suggest that it is a net sequester or carbon dioxide.

Essentially, the difference is to do with the ability to counter balance

emissions through the carbon sink.

� In 2010, a BASF Corporation Eco-Efficiency Analysis compared

synthetic fields with professionally installed and maintained grass fields

concluding that the use of synthetics can lower consumption of energy

and raw materials and generation of solid waste depending on field

usage. BASF also found that the average life cycle over 20 years of

natural grass field are 15 per cent higher than the synthetic alternatives.

3.5.6 Green Engineering Sustainable and Green Engineering is the process of designing or operating

systems in a manner that uses energy and resources sustainable (i.e. at a rate

that doesn’t compromise the natural environment) or the ability for future

generations to meet their own needs. It explores how products are manufactured,

the materials used the disposal of them, in a feasible, economical and therefore

sustainable manner, therefore minimising the pollution impact for generations to

come. The basic concept of Green Engineering is based around the ability to

offset of reduce the carbon footprint by choosing a specific product that may have

a less harmful impact because it’s recycled, recyclable or even

renewable/reusable. By exploring these three concepts, Council can consider the

impacts on their Synthetic Surface Strategy.

ii. Recycled – means that the synthetic surfaces are made out of (at least

25%) recycled content. The benefit of this is that they are not drawing

on ‘virgin or prime’ resources, which may be limited or by creating them

would have a significant impact on the Carbon Footprint. Within most

synthetic surface systems (e.g. a single football/soccer field – 8,000m2);

22 Townsend-Small, A Czimczik, C.I, 2010. ‘Carbon Sequestration and Greenhouse Gas emissions in Urban Turf’ University of California (Irvine). Published in : Geophysical Research Letters (USA) Vol 37, 22 January 2010)

� The recycled infill material is made from an estimated 27,000

tyres

� The shock pad can be made out of recycled running shoes

� The ’grass’ can now be made from recycled plastic drink bottles

– saving 240,000 bottles from the tip.

iii. Recyclable – means that the synthetic surface system, where possible

can be used again, and may mean;

� Re-using the compartments of the system – as recently shown

in the London Olympics hockey field (STI);

� Recycling the concrete base for other building products and

needs

� Some grasses can be recyclable (presently only in

USA/Europe) into plastic pellets which can then be used for

plastic recycled bins or plastic parks furniture etc.

iv. Reusable – means that the components can be changed and reused.

� The infill, in some circumstances in the shockpad is both

examples of reusable components of synthetic sports turf

systems.

3.6 Maintenance Considerations Section 4 provides evidence that the investment in maintenance and renovation

is significantly more expensive for each natural turf pitch. The modelling shows

maintenance (Table 19) identifies the cost to be $59,000 for natural turf

compared to $23,000 for a synthetic field. When comparing the maintenance

needed to allow 60 hours of usage, the cost for synthetic would be $23,000

compared to the maintenance of three (3) natural turf pitches of $177,000.

Specific hardware will need to be invested in to ensure maintenance success of

the field, either through a maintenance contract or managed directly. This has

been costed into the whole of life costs.

The ongoing maintenance of synthetic surfaces is essential to ensure that the

playing characteristics are kept at the appropriate performance level throughout

the life of the surface. Most suppliers and manufacturers offer warranties of

between 5 and 10 years.

As part of most certification processes (e.g., FIFA), the surface supplier will

provide a maintenance schedule. The maintenance machinery has to be on site

when the certification tests are conducted. Many of the suppliers who install the

fields offer to conduct the first 12 months or two years key maintenance

obligation.

A maintenance program should be developed between the supplier and the

purchaser, clearly identifying the roles and responsibilities to ensure that the

warranties are not adversely affected. For retesting of the surface maintenance



schedule has to be completed. This is critical for not only the retesting but also

for the warrantee to be activated if there are any problems.

The types of maintenance include:

i. Surface cleaning Leaves, nuts, needles and other airborne detritus, should not be allowed to

remain on the turf surface as they may break down and form a growing re-

division for algae and moss. A soft brush or mechanical leaf sweeper works

well. The use of litterbins, soil mats for shoes and cigarettes bins reduces the

debris.

ii. Grooming � Aimed at reducing the probability of compaction or a ‘skin’ forming and

reducing the drainage properties or indeed the build-up of algae and moss.

� Drag brushing, with a stiff brush is best, weekly depending upon usage rates.

� A deeper ‘Power Brush’ grooming may be used to disturb the rubber infill and

ensure no compaction. This is normally conducted by the installer as it needs

a specialist centre rotating brush. This also ensures that the fibres remain

upright.

iii. Deep cleaning If the surface becomes over-compacted or impervious, a deep clean may be

needed, where the installer will use a specialist machine to remove a

proportion of the infill (containing most of the dirt) from the carpet and

replace it with either cleared or new infill. This can extend the life of the field.

For moss algae prevention and removal, the turf should be treated with a

good proprietary moss and algae killer annually. In some cases, twice yearly

may be needed.

iv. Removal of weeds Weeds will occasionally appear on the surface due to wind-blown seeds.

Hand removal carefully taking out the roots should suffice. Oil-based weed-

killers should not be used.

v. Stain removal Most stains can be removed with hot water and a typical household

detergent.

A typical maintenance schedule may reflect this:

Daily Weekly Monthly Periodically

� Fixtures and

fittings

� Gates shut and

secure

� Top up levels at

key places

(penalty area

etc.)

� Clean natural

debris and any

rubbish

� Clear any

weeds,

especially

around fences

� Brush surface of

field

� Infill levels

� Seams of

inlaid lines

checked

� Treat turf for

moss and weeds

� Power brush

� Deep clean

� Decompaction

3.7 Key Learning’s 1) Technology evolved over past 50 years

The technology used in synthetic football turf has now evolved significantly from

the negative experiences in the 1980s in America and Europe. This is recognised

by the standards placed upon it by world football governing body FIFA relating to

safety, playability and performance. This has resulted in sport and government

embracing the technology for the benefits around climatic durability, increased

usage, reduction in maintenance and rectification needed quality and consistency

of play as well as some sports mandate synthetic technology for certain levels of

sport.

Synthetic surfaces are more confidently mirroring the playing characteristics of

most natural surfaces for these sports at a community level. These sports now

have ‘performance criteria’ that the synthetic surfaces manufacturers need to

meet - there are many international surface standards for sports, e.g. Rugby,

Hockey and Soccer.

2) Advances in design and performance is bridging negative perceptions

There is much misinformation and lack of understanding about synthetic turf field

surfaces, which causes some sports and individuals to reject the idea of using

them. These include the initial high cost of synthetic turf; player comfort, health

and safety issues; management model challenges; and perceived loss of open

space:

A number of studies have been commissioned by sporting peak bodies (e.g. IRB,

NRL, FIFA, AFL and Cricket Australia) to look into some of these challenges.

Generally, the outcomes of these reviews mitigate any perceived risks so that the

sports are able to establish standards for the fields to be playable and to allow the

technology to promote greater participation, especially for juniors.

3) The synthetic system includes what is above and below the ground

The synthetic turf surface is part of a whole system consisting of a number of

components, all of which need to be considered. These components are grouped

into two key perspectives; synthetic turf surface and the subsurface. The

subsurface sometimes known as ‘the pavement’ is what the synthetic surface sits

on and this provides the strength of base to ensure the synthetic surface or

carpet can be re-laid in 7-10 years times. Council should be looking for a 15-20

year life from the subsurface or pavement. Failure to get this right could result in

movement of the base and reduction in the life is the surface and possibly

creation of uneven surfaces which could be dangerous to players.

It is recommended that the installation is tested by an independent laboratory to

ensure that the surface plays to the standards requested.

4) Key sports all have synthetic standards to ensure playability

The initial key sports of interest for Council all have synthetic surface criteria for

community sports. Nearly all governing sporting bodies used the survey data of

natural grass fields to model performance criteria for the use of synthetics in the

respective sports. In essence they are:

� Football (FIFA Quality Concept – with a 1 Star Recommended Pitch

being the identified standard for Council);

� Rugby Union (IRB Regulation 22 – recommended for Councils use of

fields for Touch and OZ TAG)

� Hockey (FIH – Multi-sport Standard is recommended for Council)

� Australian Rules / Cricket (AFL/ Cricket Australia Community Standard

is recommended)

� Baseball – there is no standard for this game

The IRB (Rugby Union) has worked with the key sports of Soccer (FIFA), Rugby

League (RFL – UK only), Gaelic Football, Aussie Rules (AFL) and American

Gridiron, to develop a single turf that has the parameters to meet all of these

standards. This is now known as the “One Turf Concept” and should be lunched

by the end of 2013. This would be ideal for Council to consider for its needs.



5) Safety concerns are elevated by significant independent testing and advances in technology

Some potential health and safety considerations concerning synthetic surfaces

have generated public concern. These include:

� Health Risk;

� Player safety and injury;

� Surface playability;

� Risk of infection;

� Ecosystem effects;

� Chemical exposure; and

� Heat stress.

Most of these concerns have now been addressed or risk mitigation taken by the

peak bodies for each sport, or through independent studies. Council needs to be

cognoscente of these when planning for the future use of synthetic surfaces. This

is covered in detail in Section 2 of the Study.

6) Environmental considerations are being addressed

Council is committed to the principles of environmental sustainability and is

cognoscente of the impact and expectation of how the community, together

recognising the economic investment needed.

The impact of climate change will have significant repercussions on the design,

maintenance and management of sports facilities for the next generation of users.

The synthetic technology has considered this and now offer a number of solutions

for Council to consider including:

� Climatic extension of play in drought and heavy water (section 3.5)

� Water harvesting & management (Section 3.5)

� Carbon footprint impact (Section 3.5)

� Green engineering, including recycled and recyclable components

� Reduction in maintenance and rejuvenation needs.

7) Greater use allows greater participation

The technology will allow the surface to be used by more people, more often.

Natural grass is known to start to deteriorate after only 20 hours where many of

the synthetic fields have shown continued playing conditions after 50-60 hours

per week. This would allow 2-3 times more play than on a single natural synthetic

turf field.



STRATEGIC CONSIDERATIONS

For Council to appreciate its strategic opportunities relative to the use of synthetic surfaces, it needs to consider its own and its stakeholder strategies and policies that may have an impact on this strategy.



4 Strategic Considerations

4.1 Introduction For Council to appreciate how to move forward strategically, it needs to be

cognisant of strategic influences from within Council and with key external

stakeholders. This includes considering the following;

� Council strategic direction – policies, plans and strategies

� External strategic directions – strategic trends, stakeholders planning

and priorities

� Neighbouring Councils - priorities and commitments

� Funding considerations – through Whole of Life costing

This section explores each of these areas of influence and makes suggestions as

to the strategic framework for Council to consider for future use in planning and

prioritising future sports needs with regard synthetic surfaces.

4.2 Council Strategic Direction

4.2.1 Overview of Documents Council has set its strategic focus with is overall Community Strategic Plan (Ryde

2010) which determines how Council will meet the opportunities and challenges

of the City. This long-term plan is reflected in Council’s Four Year Delivery Plan,

and annual Operational Plan.

These medium and longer term plans are influenced by particular studies that

Council invests in to guide its thinking and provide it with both strategic priorities

and also planning frameworks to allow for review and consideration of

opportunities when they arise.

NSROC, State Government and other major stakeholders will influence Council’s

thinking within the planning framework they have in place and are addressed in

Section 4.4 specifically for this Study.

The initial documents have been reviewed with impacts on this Study identified, in

Appendix 1.

4.2.2 Strategic Thinking Within Council’s 2025 Vision it identifies the strategic challenges and

opportunities it faces, of which the following need to be considered for this Study:

� Meeting the needs of a growing population, while maintaining the prosperity,

uniqueness and liveability of the City;

� Addressing the needs of a changing population, by offering appropriate

recreational and cultural opportunities and to design accessible public

domain;

� Managing the pressure of population growth on our amenity, while planning

for and protecting the natural assets and keeping abreast of demand for

passive and active recreation opportunities.

� Adapting to climate change, by collaborating with partners to address climate

changes such as extreme weather patterns.

Within the Community Strategic Plan, the seven outcomes, goals and strategies

indicate a commitment for Council to plan for the introduction of technology that

encourages and supports more people to be more active more often. These key

aspects include:

Goal Strategy Considerations for Synthetics

Study

1. City of Wellbeing

Our residents are encouraged

and supported to live healthy

and active lives

To offer a range of cultural, sport,

recreational and leisure facilities to meet

the needs of all

To provide a variety of activities that

encourage social interaction and stimulate

every day well being

To collaborate with our partners to

encourage more people to lead healthy and

active lives locally

The study needs to ensure that it

guides Council on the planning to

ensure it addresses the following:

- Encourages access to the widest

possible sections of the community

- Promotes social inclusiveness in

the neighbourhood, both by

encouraging physical activity,

recreation and sport and by

ensuring that the design

encourages social connectedness

- That council should collaborate

All residents feel supported and

cared for in their community

through the provision of ample

services and facilities

To provide services and facilities that meets

the needs and challenges of all our

community, throughout the cycles of their

life

Residents feel secure and

included in an environment

where they can connect socially

and are supported by their

neighbours

To encourage a healthy, happy, inclusive

and active community where neighbours

look out for each other.

To provide safe community spaces and

places for people to meet and get to know

each other.

2. City of Environmental Sensitivity

Our residents, businesses and

visitors collaborate in the

protection and enhancement of

our natural environment.

To raise awareness in our community on

the future challenges to our natural

environment and the actions required to

mitigate them.

To provide incentives which encourage all

to enhance, preserve and protect our

natural ecosystems.

To ensure that all environmental

options are considered at each stage

of the planning, procurement and

provision of synthetic surfaces.

As we grow, we protect and

enhance the natural and built

environments for the future

enjoyment and manage any

Impacts of climate change.

To lead by example and demonstrate

environmentally sensitivity in all what we

do.

3. City to Harmony and Culture

Our residents are proud of their

diverse community, celebrating

their similarities and differences.

To bring people together in their local

neighbourhoods to encourage connection

and belonging

Program should encourage specific

target groups to use the facilities and

encourage social gatherings around

the new facility.

4.2.3 Asset & Amenity Considerations A number of documents guide Council’s thinking including the State

Governments ‘A Plan for Sydney’s Future’ and NSROC Regional Sports Ground

Strategy. Both of these have been reflected in Council’s recently adopted IOSP.

This is summarised in detail in Appendix 1.

Within the IOSP, sporting precincts were recommended for “active space” around

regional level sports hubs, which included Meadowbank Park; Marsfield /

Waterloo Park; Morrison Bay Park / Bremner Park and ELS Hall Park.

NSROC Regional Sports Ground Strategy (2012) also intended to identify and

address the gap between sports demand within Councils with the limited space

for sports grounds.

The Strategy recognises that synthetic surfaces are not suited for all sports, but

specifically identified hockey, soccer and AFL as three of the sports that could be

most suitable. The benefits of synthetics allow for greater carrying load for

training, social or casual usage as well as competitive needs. The NSROC

strategy encourages their local governments to use synthetic surfaces to meet

local and regional demand of sports in a joint and co-ordinated way. The strategy

recommends that a mechanism be created where by a collective funding and

purchasing approach is adopted by all of the Councils that are part of NSROC.

Council also conducted a Best Value Review of the Sportsground Allocation and

Management (Feb 2012), where the report identified that the highest quality

playing fields are more than likely to be in the best locations for synthetic surfaces

suitable for optimal access and use, with Australian Rules Football, Soccer and


raised were:








City




� Carrying capacities for sportsgrounds are between 20–35 hours depending

on turf species but some are currently receiving 40-50 hours of usage, which

means that the surface is degraded significantly by the end of each season,

resulting in additional funds being needed to renovate those pitches.



4.2.4 Program and Participation Considerations Council is committed to providing recreational and sporting opportunities and

facilities to the community. Whilst there is no endorsed Sports and Recreation

strategy, an internal working plan was developed for the area in 2005. This plan

provided little insight for this Study as the principles adopted by the Plan were

based on the 2002 Department of Planning Guidelines.

They key principles that could be drawn from a combination of Council and

industry documents include:

� Opportunities to be fully inclusive, to maximize community participation by

ensuring club, recreational and competitive use of the facilities;

� Targeting whole of community, to ensure inclusion with specific target

audiences of children and youth and programs to re-engage older people,

who could use sport to keep fit;

� Programming should have flexibility to encourage all groups and individuals

to participate and not just be the home of a single club

� Pathway opportunities should reflect people’s interests and ability from

recreational needs; through to training and competition.

4.3 External Strategic Direction

4.3.1 Strategic Trends in Sport In April 2013, the Australian Sport Commission (ASC) partnered with Australia’s

peak science agency, the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research

Organisation (CSIRO) to jointly publish “The Future of Australian Sport”.

Australians love of sport is recognised across the globe, but our participation has

been changing over time and this report identifies the key “Mega Trends”. It

shows that there is a major shift in environmental, social and economic conditions

that will substantially alter the way people live. The six Mega Trends are:

1. A Perfect Fit People are fitting sport into their increasingly busy and time-fragmented

lifestyles to achieve their own personal health and wellbeing goals. This is

reflected in the significant increase in participation rates over the past

decade in ‘casual activities’ such as aerobics, jogging/walking, gym

membership and casual kick-around in the park with friends. At the same

time, participation rates in many traditional organised sports have declined.

Australians are increasingly playing sport to get and stay fit, rather than

staying fit to play sport.

2. From Extreme to Mainstream Capturing the rise of adventurous lifestyles and so called alternative sports,

which are popular with the younger generations. Thrill seeking, dangerous

and use of advanced skills where people are able to self-express and

companies are growing that show they understand what this generation

want, from BMX, skateboarding, Parkour, rock climbing, extreme running etc.

Even the Olympics are embracing these sports to stay relevant.

3. More than Sport A holistic view of sport, providing broader benefits is being recognised by all

levels of government, the commercial and community sectors, with benefits

around mental/physical health gain, social inclusion and equality of

opportunity as well as crime prevention.

4. Everybody’s Game Australia and many other OECD countries face the challenge of an ageing

population, resulting in the changes to the type of sports the population can

participate in. Indications are that Australians are embracing sport in their old

age. Also, to retain strong participation rates, sports of the future will need to

cater for the change cultural make-up of Australia, both recognising the

multicultural society different needs, preferences and habits. The industry

needs to capture the interest and investment of these diverse cultures and

age groups.

5. New Wealth, New Talent Population growth and investment in developing countries, especially Asia,

will increase athletic prowess at major competitions, such as the Olympics. It

will also provide emerging new business markets through media (social and

traditional), sports equipment, services and events.

6. Tracksuits to Business Suits Market forces are likely to drive greater pressure on sports to be more

professional in the future, with larger associations with paid staff as opposed

to volunteers to ensure ‘quality of experience’ that users expect. Directly

linked to this is the level of recompense that participants receive and expect

to benefit from. The result may see some of the less supported sports losing

participants to the ‘richer sports’.

Specific to this Study, the key Mega Trends that need to be considered are trends

1, 3, 4 and 6.

4.3.2 NSW State Government The NSW Department of Sport and Recreation does not provide overall strategic

direction to local government or sports organisations. Instead they provide grant

funding programs around Facility Development ($50,000) and Participation

Development ($10,000). It would be sensible for Council to apply for both grants

if the decision to invest in synthetic surfaces was endorsed.

From a geographical Sydney is a rapidly growing city. Current forecasts suggest

that more than 1.3 million additional people will be living in Sydney by 2031,

requiring 545,000 more homes and 625,000 more jobs. The challenge for

government is to make sure communities are provided with the infrastructure

needed to support the inevitable growth and to enhance people's lifestyle and

living.

The opportunities for Council in relation to synthetic surfaces are that they will

need to have significant community infrastructure for recreation and sport to

ensure that the workers and residents have a quality environment to work and

live. The lack of affordable land to build the necessary new infrastructure lends

itself to the use of synthetic technology to satisfy the needs. The NSW

Government synopses of each of these two UAP’s are detailed in Appendix 4.

In March 2013, the NSW Government announced the Urban Activation Precinct

Program as an important component of increasing community housing and jobs

across NSW. Two of the eight ‘Urban Activation Precincts’ (UAP) proposed are

within 3 kilometres of ELS Hall Park. The North Ryde Station Precinct (NRSP)

expected 5,000 new residents as is the Macquarie Park (Herring Road) area.

Sporting Code needs

All sporting codes identified in this Study were asked to provide feedback on the

need of the sport, their future plans for the Ryde community and the benefits of

this study for their code.

4.3.3 Football NSW Football NSW presently offer guidance to councils with their document “Stadium

Technical Requirements 2013”, which is described as defining ‘the safety,

security, access field and facility criteria for participation in the FNSW Elite and

Intermediate Representative Club Competitions’. This document provides

succinct guidance and should be used if a synthetic turf football field is the

desired option.

Football NSW are keen to explore cooperative opportunities to support LGA’s and

have indicated interest to support Council in their strategy.

4.3.4 Hockey NSW Hockey Australia is very supportive of local government and clubs developing

new facilities but does not provide any strategic guidance or advocacy.

Hockey NSW has a Strategic Facilities Plan (2010 – 2020), which identifies the

current position of hockey in NSW in relation to facilities. This excellent strategy

will provide significant guidance to Council, Ryde Eastwood Women’s Hockey

Association and any clubs. It provides guidance on the modelling for synthetic

hockey fields for registered hockey players (300 – 400 players) to ensure

sustainability. It also provides guidance for Associations to complete to make a

business case prior to submission for support. This makes excellent sense and



Council should adopt a similar approach for partnerships before they are

considered (See Appendix 3).

The Strategy also identifies the current facilities and the number of registered

players for each Hockey Association, with Ryde Eastwood WHA having 166

players to a population of 101,283 in the LGA. Interestingly this shows a ratio of

166 or 134 below the recommended average for the synthetic field.

Within the ‘Future Facility Plans’, it identifies “Ryde water based field to possibly

be relocated and/or synthetic turf to replaced”.

4.3.5 Baseball NSW Baseball NSW has not taken the opportunity to respond to this consultation

exercise but the local Association has had input through the PRG consultation

process.

4.3.6 AFL / Cricket Australia AFL (NSW/ACT) on behalf of the two sports of Australian Rules football and

Cricket are very supportive of this Study and can see the benefits of having

facilities for their game. They are keen to integrate any facility development with

synthetic surfaces as they are keen to promote the game in the Ryde area and

are seeking to increase participation to bring it up to the State average of

participation numbers (presently only 0.24% compared to 1.5%).

The AFL (NSW/ACT) is committed to supporting Council in the development of

synthetic sports fields that they can use to promote participation in the sport.

Their key focus areas and targeted groups are: schools; women; casual /

recreation play through AFL 9’s and local club use. They have identified Ryde as

part of their growth strategy to increase participation with additional resources

and support.

4.4 Neighbouring Councils

4.4.1 NSROC NSROC has publically confirmed its support for synthetic surfaces with the

publication of the ‘Regional Synthetic Sportsgrounds Project (RSSP)’ as part of

its 2013 Regional Initiative.

The RSSP is an agreement between the seven Councils of NSROC to provide a

suite of synthetic sports fields in strategic locations across the region under a

three to four year construction program, based on contributions from Councils

and multiple stakeholders. This, the Project Info sheet states will, ‘… address the

shortage of playing surfaces in growth sports and free up overused grass fields’.

The Info sheet continues:

“The NSROC region has a shortage of sportsgrounds to meeting current and

future demand and Councils face increasing costs in maintenance as a result of

over-use of existing fields. There is also competing social and non-sport use of

fields due to limited open space in a region with increasing density in hosing.

There are limited suitable sites held by Councils for new fields, and limited funds

to purchase sites held by other agencies.’

Synthetic sport fields offer triple the usage of grass fields. They also provide

environmental benefits through reduced water needs. The mix of synthetic and

grass fields can release pressures on existing grass fields and allow for higher

overall quality for active recreation in the region.

Field sports are played regionally and there is a strong case for tackling facilities

shortages through upgrades on a regional basis. Synthetic fields are significant

capital items, needing up to $1.5 million per ground, where they are redeveloped

on existing Council or Crown land. To speed the provision and support funding

needs, NSROC Councils has created a priority list for new or redeveloped

surfaces for each Local Government Area.

4.4.2 Neighbouring Councils The local government areas adjoining the Ryde City Council are the Councils of

Hornsby, Parramatta, Ku-ring-gai, Auburn, Canada Bay, Hunter Hill, Willoughby

and Lane Cove. Some have considered synthetics surfaces as part of their

agenda for sports provision. All of the councils were contacted as part of this

study to identify if any other facilities, directions or proposals relating to synthetic

surface sports facilities were now being considered. The following table

summarises this information.

Council Directions

Hornsby Council Current synthetic surface facilities:

Council is considering its options as a number of football (soccer) fields are not

meeting demand on the natural turf fields.

Parameter City Council Current synthetic surface facilities:

Council has shown no interest to date

Ku-ring-gai Municipal

Council

Current synthetic surface facilities:

Ku-rin-gai Council has recently processed a contract for a synthetic football (soccer)

field with ideas of hockey in the future.

Auburn Council Current synthetic surface facilities:


North Sydney Current synthetic surface facilities:

Council is presently developing a DA for Cammeray Oval and will be looking for

support in 2013/14 for instillation. Football is the main use.

Canada Bay Council Current synthetic surface facilities:


Hunter Hill Council Current synthetic surface facilities:

Council is considering options for a number of football codes.

Lane Cove Council Current synthetic surface facilities:

Council is considering a number of facilities to satisfy the demand for Football (soccer)

and Rugby in the winter and cricket in the summer with the first investment being at

Blackman Park which will have an impact on any thinking of Council for the South East

of the municipality.

Willoughby Council Current synthetic surface facilities:

North Paradise Oval provides Football and Cricket facilities

Future synthetic plans:

Council has indicated that it will be exploring the possibility of two further fields.

Table 12: Neighbouring Councils status with regard to use of synthetic surface technology

To ensure co-ordinated approach to the provision of synthetic surfaces within

NSROC region, the NSROC Councils will work together to source funding to

speed the provision of new fields in all areas and make an impact on community

well-being and economic efficiency in a short timeframe.

The project proposes to bundle funds and tender for a number of synthetic fields

that are strategically distributed to balance overall demand and amenity across

the region. Fields can be rolled out more quickly than each Council can achieve

on their own. Construction costs based on loan and grant funds will see the fields

become self-funding over a ten-year timeframe, due to the higher usage possible

and resulting fee income to support a maintenance and replacement program.

Support is needed from:

� State and Federal governments in grant and program funding

� Regulatory support for the region to create a consortium for the new funding

model.

� Acceptance of new surfaces and multiple uses and financial support from

sporting associations.

Council is supportive of this approach and needs to obtain time frames from

NSROC for implementation.

4.5 Funding Considerations

4.5.1 Overview The ability to fund such an investment is critical to the ability for the project to

proceed. In considering such an option, the following aspects have been

addressed:

� Whole of life costing – to identify the capital investment and ongoing financial

considerations.

� Grants available – from external groups such as state government (Sport and

recreation NSW, Education and Water).

� Council funding availability – by exploring the capital works program.

4.5.2 Whole of Life Costing A detailed understanding of the Whole Of Life (WOL) costs for each of Australia’s

most popular sports that can use synthetic technology, are detailed in The Smart

Guide to Synthetic Sports Surfaces.

For this Study, this next section explores the WOL costs for football/soccer and

AFL/cricket over both ten and twenty five years, considering the costs for both

natural turf and synthetic turf comparisons for both sports. As an example for

football (soccer), the following commentary is offered:



� Construction Costs

To appreciate the comparison between natural turf and synthetic turf over the

whole of life of the fields (scenarios used are 10 years and 25 years), the

Study explores the capital for construction (see Table 17).

� Annual Maintenance Costs

There have been significant variations in the costs from both the natural and

synthetic surfaces perspectives. The differences on the natural turf seem to

be linked to the type of grass, the amount of usage and the history of the

field. With figures in the range of $15,000 to $95,000 being used, we have

decided on the average cost around $59,000. (See Table 19) Comparison

between surfaces for maintenance costs shows that the natural surface is

more than twice that of the synthetics surfaces. The synthetics price

certainly varies between what is completed in house and what is completed

externally and to the expectations of the FIFA maintenance standards and

the standards set by the supplier of the turf.

� Replacement costs

The replacement costs, assuming the integrity of the base is satisfactory, any

underlay does not require replacing and no additional major works is needed,

will cost around $400,000 and should only need to be completed around 8-

10 years of life if maintained and the appropriate quality is purchased.

i. Australian Rules Football and Cricket

The Comparisons are based on a 2.1 ha field that has dimensions of 160m x

145m + 5m boundary = 170m x 155m. Inflation has not been factored into any of

these calculations. All costs are in today's dollars and exclusive of GST. Natural

grass costs have been supplied by ‘Sports Turf Consultants’ as a median price

for NSW sports fields.

Construction Costs Item Natural Turf Synthetic Turf

Earthworks $100,000 $100,000

Drainage (5m spacing) $100,000 $375,000

Irrigation $125,000

Concrete works, spoon drain/Base construction $20,000

Topsoil supply, placement & shaping/shockpad $350,000

Amendments $12,500 $275,000

Grassing/synthetic grass $27,500 $500,000

Grow in (12 weeks)/infill $27,500 $275,000

Total Cost $762,500 $1,525,000

Table 13: Construction Costs – natural and synthetic turf

Maintenance Costs

Item Natural Turf Synthetic

Mowing (x 70 cuts) $35,000

Fertilising (x 8) / Monthly grooming $20,000 $20,000

Pest control (weeds, insects: x 3) / Annual treatment $7,500 $5,000

Aeration (verti drain x 2, slicing x 4) $12,500

Irrigation (3 ML/year) $7,500

Over seeding $5,000

Topdressing / Annual Treatment $17,500 $5,000

Surface repair, sod goals (500m2) $12,500

Repair - irrigation system $5,000

Miscellaneous $5,000 $2,500

Total Cost $127,500 $32,500

Table 14: Annual maintenance - natural grass/synthetic turf23

Replacement Costs Item Natural Turf Synthetic

Earthworks, minor drainage $67,500 $20,000

Amendments / Disposal $15,000 $25,000

Grassing $27,500 $500,000

Grow in / Infill $27,500 $275,000

Total Cost $137,500 $820,000

Table 15: Replacement costs - natural turf

Whole of Life Costs

Cost of Ownership (10 years) Natural grass Synthetic turf Construction $762,500 $1,525,000

Maintenance $1,275,000 $325,000

Surface Replacement $91,667 $820,500

Total Cost of Ownership $2,129,167 $2,670,000

Cost of Ownership (25 years) Turf Synthetic

Construction $762,500 $1,525,000

Maintenance $3,187,500 $812,500

Surface Replacement $229,167 $1,640,000


Table 16: Total cost of ownership 10-25 years

23 Sourced from Sports Turf Consultants (2011) Melbourne for NSW Councils

ii. Soccer

The Comparisons are based for a field size 0.82 ha (dimensions f used: 105m x

68m + 3m run offs = 111m x 74m).

Photo 8: Football (Soccer) Pitch as part of Football Complex, Ballarat (Source: TurfOne)

Construction Costs

Stage of Process Natural Turf Synthetic Turf (FIFA 1

Star)

Earthworks $32,000 $32,000

Drainage / Irrigation $103,000 $42,000

Concrete works / drainage $8,000 $8,000

Top soil / grass $142,000 $510,000

Amendments / growing in $27,000

Base construction / Shockpad $197,000

Total $313,000 $850,000

Table 17: Comparison between surface types for construction

Maintenance Costs

Item Natural Turf Synthetic (FIFA 1 Star)

Mowing (x 70 cuts) / maintenance $15,000 $15,000 Fertilising (x 8) / Monthly grooming $10,000 $8,000 Pest control (weeds, insects: x 3) / Annual treatment $3,000 Aeration (verti drain x 2, slicing x 4) $5,000 Irrigation (3 ML/year) $3,000 Over seeding $2,000 Topdressing / Annual Treatment $7,000 Surface repair, sod goals (500m2) $6,000 Repair - irrigation system $2,000 Miscellaneous $6,000 Total Cost $59,000 $23,000

Table 18: Maintenance cost comparison between natural and synthetic turf



Replacement Costs

Stage of Process Natural Turf Synthetic Turf (FIFA 1 Star)

Earthworks / levelling &

uplifting Synthetic

$27,000 $11,000

Amendments $6,000 $11,000

Grassing / minor base repairs $11,000 $16,000

Grow in / synthetic grass

renewal

$27,000 $189,000

New infill $105,000

Total $55,000 $332,000

Table 19: Replacement cost comparison between natural and synthetic surfaces

Whole of Life Costs

The Whole of Life Costing’s (WOL) show that with natural turf the costs are

around $960,000 for football/soccer (10 years) compared to $1,480,000 for

synthetic turf as shown in (see Table 20). Over 25 years, the costs are much

closer due to the additional amount of maintenance needed for natural turf, with a

cost of $1.9m for natural and $2.23m for synthetic.

Cost of Ownership (10 years) Natural

Turf

Synthetic

turf Construction $315,000 $850,000

Maintenance $590,000 $230,000


Total Cost of Ownership 960,000 $1,480,000

Cost of Ownership (25 years) Natural

grass

Synthetic

turf

Construction $315,000 $850,000

Maintenance $1,475,000 $575,000



Table 20: Whole of Life Costs (10 & 25 years)

4.5.3 Usage cost comparison By comparing the usage of each field surface type, the comparison between

natural turf and synthetic turf changes its dynamic. If the Study compares the

number of hours that a natural turf can be used before degradation of the asset,

which is around 20 hours for natural turf compared to 60 hours for a synthetic

surface, we would then need to build 3 natural fields to each single synthetic field.

This would mean that the Whole of Life cost over ten years for 3 natural fields (to

compare equally with a 60 hour synthetic field) would be:

Natural Synthetic

� Construction cost $945,000 $850,000

� Maintenance costs $1,770,000 $230,000

� Replacement cost $165,000 $400,000

� WOL (10 years) cost $2,880,000 $ 1,480,000

This WOL cost compares to the 10 year synthetic scenario for football/soccer of

$1,480,000 which is nearly 100% cheaper than natural turf. The interesting

comparison is seen by exploring the WOL costs when analysed against the hours

of use (Table 21 below). This provides a very different perspective when you are

provided with a unit rate for each hour.

Item Natural Turf

(3 pitches)

Synthetic Turf

Usage

Hours per week 60 60

Weeks used per year 48 52

Hours per year 2,880 3,120

10 years

Total cost of ownership $2,880,000 $1,480,000

Annual cost of ownership $288,000 $148,000

Cost per hour of use $100 $47.44

Table 21: Cost per hour of use for natural turf (48 weeks – based on 4 weeks rest) and synthetic turf (52 weeks – no rest needed)

Therefore, the costs and ROI need to consider the actual WOL against the fixed

outcome of 60 hours of play a week. This shows that the synthetics are far more

affordable and a better investment for an organisation to make.

4.5.4 Income and Return on Investment Council has a number of options of how it explores the revenue strategy that a

synthetic surface can achieve. Options are provided in Section 5 as to the

program considerations that can be used to generate the income streams.

In essence, Council could consider an integrated approach that has different

price points for different target audiences which when combined allows for a

sustainable ROI for each field (refer to Appendix 6)

4.6 Strategically Funding the Investment NSROC has developed a funding model for consideration for synthetic surfaces

which will allow for seven (7) fields to be delivered across the region, with income

funding some of the capital replacements

The suggested method to fund construction costs is based on the following

scenario:-

� LIRS subsidised loan $5,000,000

� NSW Government funding

o Community Building Partnership (NSW Gov.) $1,050,000

o Sport and Recreation grants

o Sydney Water (water saving grant)

� User contribution $1,050,000

� Council contribution $2,100,000

TOTAL $9,200,000

Note: the user contribution / gift are $150,000 per field, with State Government

contribution of $150, 000 per field. At the time of printing of this report, it is not

known if the timelines for NSROC approval are going to be aligned with Council’s

timeline.

Photo 9: Football (Soccer) at Northbridge Oval

4.7 Key Learning’s - Strategic Principles To develop a set of principles to guide Council’s thinking regarding the use of the

synthetic technology, this Study has used the IOSP (from an asset point of view),

Council’s 2025 Strategic Plan (from a municipal priority and social inclusive

perspective) plus principles that leverage participation and provide physical

activity, recreation and sport.

For this use of synthetic technology to be beneficial to people who live, work and

visit Ryde to play and recreate, Council needs to ensure that it has a strategic

focus that integrates into other plans, policies and strategies for the assets and

participation focus it supports.

The Strategic Focus for this Study is described overleaf



Strategic Focus

Key Principles

Allowing opportunities to be prioritised and converted the following principles should be considered:

Vision (outcome) More people recreating, playing sport more often in Ryde by providing quality, safe and appropriate facilities.

Mission (purpose)

To use the technology of synthetic surfaces to allow for greater use by the community who wish to recreate and play sport, by satisfying the demand and encouraging development opportunities.

Priority Alignment

That the opportunity aligns with Councils strategies, policies and plans, both for its assets (e.g. IOSP) and

participation, as well as external stakeholders (e.g. Sport; NSW Government), within its legislation scope.

Economically Prudent

That Councils level of investment is linked to the priorities and principles and where possible should seek out partnership

opportunities that are aligned with these principles to create greater participation.

Participation Pathway Development

The opportunity needs to be able to demonstrate that it not only meets current demand, but

provides opportunities to encourage a broader recreational and sports participative base for

future demand.

Environmental Integration

The design is environmentally friendly, integrates into the natural environment and can demonstrate benefits, while reflecting the IOSP environmental

commitments.

Accessible and Promotes Social Inclusiveness

The design, management and positioning of the opportunity encourages local and citywide participation, to all target audiences and especially target groups that

need additional encouragement to be active and play sport.



FUTURE NEEDS Council is keen to plan for the future needs of the community and specifically around the sports of Football (Soccer) and Australian Rules, Cricket, and Baseball.

This section explores the growth in the population, industry trends, existing sporting needs and the results of the consultation to allow Council to appreciate the needs for sport.



5 Future Needs

5.1 Demographics and Participation Trends Indicate Growth

5.1.1 Population as a Whole The Census population of the City of Ryde in 2011 was 103,038, living in 41,755


City of Ryde is forecast to be 137,311, an increase of 34, 273 persons or 33%

from 2011. This represents an average annual growth rate of 1.24%. Over the

past decade (2001-2011), there has been a steady increase in population.

Chart 2: Estimated Resident Population

5.1.2 Age structure - service age groups The Age Structure of the City of Ryde provides key insights into the level of

demand for age based services and facilities such as childcare. It is an indicator

of the City of Ryde's residential role and function and how it is likely to change in

the future.

Service age groups divide the population into age categories that reflect typical

life-stages. They indicate the level of demand for services that target people at

different stages in life and how that demand is changing.

The City of Ryde has a lower proportion of pre-schoolers and a higher proportion

of people at post retirement age than Greater Sydney.

Chart 3: Age Structure 2011

Source: Australian Bureau of Statistics, Census of Population and Housing 2006 and 2011

� Dominant groups Analysis of the service age groups of the City of Ryde in 2011 compared to

Greater Sydney shows that there was a lower proportion of people in the younger

age groups (0 to 17 years) and a higher proportion of people in the older age

groups (60+ years).

Overall, 19.6% of the population was aged between 0 and 17, and 19.2% were

aged 60 years and over, compared with 22.9% and 18.0% respectively for

Greater Sydney.

The major differences between the age structure of the City of Ryde and Greater

Sydney were:

� A larger percentage of 'Tertiary education & independence' (11.1% compared

to 9.5%)

� A larger percentage of 'Seniors' (8.3% compared to 7.2%)

� A larger percentage of 'Young workforces' (16.4% compared to 15.4%)

� A smaller percentage of 'Secondary schoolers' (5.9% compared to 7.4%)

� Emerging groups From 2006 to 2011, City of Ryde's population increased by 6,103 people (6.3%).

This represents an average annual population change of 1.23% per year over the

period.

The largest changes in age structure in this area between 2006 and 2011 were in

the age groups:

� Young workforce (25 to 34) (+1,953 persons)

� Empty nesters and retirees (60 to 69) (+1,355 persons)

� Babies and pre-schoolers (0 to 4) (+766 persons)

� Tertiary education & independence (18 to 24) (+692 persons)

5.2 Participation Trends

5.2.1 Adult Participation According to the Exercise, Recreation and Sport Survey (ERASS) 2009 and 2010, the following activities (Table 22) have the highest adult participation rates in NSW. It is worth noting that the figures refer to both organised sports and non-organised and non-competitive activity where persons participated in the activity at least once in the last 12 months.

Activity 2009 2010

Walking 35.8% 34.0%

Aerobics/Fitness 22.4% 22.4%

Swimming 14.5% 13.6%

Running 10.7% 9.1%

Cycling 9.0% 10.6%

Golf 7.0% 7.6%

Football (outdoor) 7.0% 6.5 %

Table 22: Top physical activities in NSW Source: 2010 & 2009 ERASS Survey Australian Sports Commission

In terms of participation rates in any physical activity, ERASS data shows that

NSW has had one of the lowest participation rates in the country for the last two

years (2010 and 2009). In 2010, 81.1% of the population participated in at least

one session of physical activity for exercise, recreation or sport during the 12

months preceding the survey. Only Tasmania (80.3%) and the Northern Territory

(79.5%) had lower rates of participation. The national average for 2010 was

82.3%.

The 2009-2010 ABS Participation in Sport and Physical Recreation data also

states that NSW had the third lowest rate of participation (62.7%). The

participation rates for sport and physical recreation were highest in the Australian

Capital Territory (77%). There was no discernible difference in participation rates

between those living in the six state capital cities and those in the rest of Australia

(both 64%). Walking for exercise was the most popular activity reported in all

states and territories.

For organised sport and physical activity in the NSW, 2,255,600 persons aged 15

years and over participated in at least one organised activity during the 12

months preceding the ERASS survey. This represents a participation rate of

39.2%, compared to 39.8% nationally.

In terms of indoor facilities, 15.3% of the NSW adult population participated in

physical activities organised by fitness, leisure and indoor sports centres. This is

lower than the national average of 16.5%. NSW also has the third lowest



participation rate in physical activities organised by fitness, leisure and indoor

sports centres, only ahead of placed the Northern Territory and Tasmania.

ERASS estimated that nationally 2.8 million persons, or 16.5%, participated in

activity organised by a fitness, leisure or indoor sports centre (Table 23). This

reflects an increase from the 2009 rate of 15.2%.

ACT NSW NT QLD SA TAS VIC WA National

2010

Male 11.5 12.7 12.2 15.1 15.1 9.8 16.0 12.0 14.0

Female 23.5 17.9 16.6 18.3 21.0 17.2 19/0 20.7 18.8

Persons 17.6 15.3 14.3 16.7 18.1 13.5 17.6 16.3 16.5

2009

Male 12.1 11.0 9.4 11.6 11.9 11.4 13.2 13.1 12.0

Female 19.9 18.9 20.1 15.9 16.6 14.0 19.2 20.8 18.3

Persons 16.1 15.0 14.6 13.7 14.3 12.7 16.3 16.9 15.2

Table 23: Fitness and leisure participants — total participation rate in physical activities,

In terms of regular participation, those who participated in at least one physical

activity for exercise, recreation or sport at least three times per week on average,

NSW still lagged behind the other states with a rate of 45.6% in 2010. Only TAS

had a lower participation rate of 45.1% (Table 24).

ACT NSW NT QLD SA TAS VIC WA National

2010

Male 53.2 42.2 43.9 43.9 47.2 41.9 46.0 50.2 44.9

Female 53.8 49.0 48.5 48.5 49.7 48.1 51.3 53.7 50.4

Persons 53.5 45.6 46.1 46.1 48.5 45.1 48.7 51.9 47.7

2009

Male 51.2 43.3 44.4 44.5 42.1 42.6 45.5 49.7 44.8

Female 56.4 49.2 52.6 50.5 48.5 50.4 51.1 54.1 50.6

Persons 53.8 46.3 48.4 47.5 45.4 46.6 48.3 51.9 47.7

Table 24: Regular participation in any physical activity by state/territory and sex

5.2.2 Children Participation ABS data “Children's Participation in Cultural and Leisure Activities” provides a

guide to children’s participation rates.

Children in NSW are also less active in comparison to the national average.

60.3% of NSW children aged 5-14 years had participated in at least one

organised sport in the 12 months prior to April 2009 (versus national average of

63.1% (Table 24).

5.2.3 Trends in Sport and Recreation Council in their IOSP identified the key trends in Leisure and Recreation.

� National Trends in Sports Participation With respect to participation in sports specifically the following are common

influencing factors:

� age: increasing numbers of the community are staying more active later in

life with more specific recreation needs

� disability: increase in people with disabilities participating in sport

� customers not members: there is a decrease in those wishing to be members

of sports organisations and the concept of ‘Pay as You Play’ (PAYP) is

growing in popularity

� expanding codes and variations: many sports are diversifying their offer to

appeal to more time constrained participants or differing age groups

� social recreation: an increase in whole of family and social dimensions of

sport is evident preference for facilities

� popularity of court-based sports is growing

� traditional to new: a growing trend is appearing for seeking excitement

through sport and leisure, rather than skills development

� safety and liability: increasing legislative framework and community concern

on how safety affects services and facilities is reducing volunteerism and

participation in some sports

� clubs’ dependence on voluntary labour and support will require them to

provide greater incentives and better management practices to attract

volunteers. Australians are less likely to spend their time volunteering now

than they were during the 1980s

� land availability: cities and especially the inner city suburbs are particularly

short of new land to meet demands of increasing populations

� overlapping sporting seasons: many sports are extending their seasons with

impacts on other codes and the capacity of facilities to meet this additional

use

� increasing popularity of ‘extreme sports’ such as skateboarding, rollerblading

and BMX riding has led to the development of large skate parks by local

councils. Extreme sports continue to gain public acceptance, with skate

parks being incorporated into prominent and highly used parks and reserves.

� Recreation Trends across Sydney and the City of Ryde In Sydney and the City of Ryde, a number of social, development and

environmental trends are placing added pressure on parks and public places,

which include:

� increasing residential and working population

� loss of private space for recreation in progressively smaller backyards and

for the increasing number of apartment dwellers

� pressure on available leisure time created by long working hours (including

travel time to and from work and travel time to get to a park)

� increasing vehicle congestion and availability of access to safe pedestrian

crossings making cycle and pedestrian access to parks and reserves more

difficult

� changing community perceptions of child safety in public places

� increasing diversity of sports codes, age ranges and gender participation,

placing pressure on existing sports facilities

� increase in obesity (including childhood obesity) with parallel increase in

personal fitness programs

� Enhanced awareness of the health risks of sun damage.

Males Females Persons

Swimming 17.2 19.8 18.5

Soccer (outdoor) 19.9 6.2 13.2

Australian rules 16 0.9 8.6

Netball 0.3 17 8.4

Tennis 9.4 6.3 7.9

Basketball 8.5 6.3 7.4

Martial arts 7.5 3.7 5.7

Cricket (outdoor) 9.7 0.5 5.2

Gymnastics 1.7 7.6 4.6

Table 25: Top 10 participated sports for children (aged 5-14)24

5.3 Opportunity for Focus

5.3.1 Demographic Profile From the demographic analysis, key audiences to be targeted would include:

Young people (5 – 17 yrs) � With approximately 13% of the population in the age group that is most likely to

play sport either through school, clubs or recreational programs, this is the key

target market for Council and their sporting partners

Young workforce (25 – 34 yrs) � Greater proportion in City of Ryde compared to Greater Sydney (16.4%

compared to 15.4%).

� One of the largest category increases in the City of Ryde from the 2006 to 2011

Census (+1,953 persons).

Anecdotally, the young workforce category is one of the most likely groups to

spend their time and disposable income on sport and recreational activities.

Tertiary education & independence The 18 to 24 year olds which represent the Tertiary education and independence

category is another segment that provides opportunities for more focussed

programming and marketing.

24 ABS Children’s Participation in Sport (2010)



� City of Ryde has a greater proportion compared to Greater Sydney (11.1%

compared to 9.5%)

� Tertiary education and independence is one of the largest age structure

changes in the City of Ryde from 2006 to 2011 (+692 persons).

Similar to the young workforce category, the 18 to 24 year olds are more likely to

spend their disposable income on sport and recreational activities, with the main

difference in that their disposable income are more likely to be smaller.

Furthermore, with the prevalence in obesity globally and in Australia, it is critical

that the younger age groups are provided with accessible opportunities to engage

in physical activities.

Seniors, empty-nesters and retirees Another category for focus is the seniors, empty nesters and retirees.

� There is a larger percentage of seniors in the City of Ryde compared to Greater

Sydney (8.3% compared to 7.2%).

� The empty nesters and retirees (60 to 69) represent one of the largest changes

in age structure in the City of Ryde from the 2006 to the 2011 Census (+1,355

persons).

This provides opportunities for physical activity programming to serve the older

population. Opportunities for recreation would not only provide individual health

benefits, but would also reduce overall community health costs, provide greater

social interaction for empty nesters, reduce feelings of loneliness that often

plagues the elderly and improve overall mental health. Designing walking and

jogging tracks around sports hubs such as ELS Hall Park will encourage this

demographic with support programs offered.

5.3.2 Geographical Profile / Focus There is specific growth corridors around the municipality that are identified as

Urban Activation Precincts (UAP) which will have a significant impact on the need

for active recreation facilities and the sports fields is definitely one aspect.

The UAP around Macquarie Park will look for facilities in ELS Hall Park and the

opportunity to have lunch time and immediately after work programs for people to

take part in would be advantageous. The sports infrastructure cannot cope with

the growth presently.

5.3.3 Partnership Opportunities Council has the opportunity to work collaboratively with other providers of sport

and recreation facilities including:

� Educational institution - schools, private schools, universities

� Commercial

organisations

- either private developers that can develop their

own land or those that are happy to invest on

Council land under leasing arrangement

These opportunities should be integrated into any revision of the IOSP and any

future recreation and sports strategy for long term success.

5.3.4 Single Sport v Multi-sport Profile Council has the opportunity to consider the use of synthetic surface technology

for either a single or multi-sport surface. The rationale for a single sport, such as

football (soccer) at Christies Park could be justified if the investment meant that

other clubs relocated their training and rested their home fields.

In addition, it could also result in other codes using Christies Park for summer

sports etc.

Such a facility would need to ensure that it is seen across the municipality as

being accessible and open to all in the community, with programming of the

facilities most probably managed by Council. It would need to meet the strategic

principles that are important to Council as detailed in Section 1 of this Study.

Council also has the opportunity to encourage new industrial and business park

developments to have additional recreational space around the use of “pop up

park” for casual kick around and multi-games areas. These opportunities will

enhance the quality of developments and can use synthetic technology on top of

buildings or in small parks and green space areas.

5.4 Identifying Future Demand Table 26 below shows the participation numbers for the sport of baseball (576),

Australian Rules Football (250), Cricket (839) and Soccer (6,351) for the City of

Ryde. Baseball has a total participation numbers of 576, across 55 teams and 3

clubs. Australian Rules has 250 players across 16 teams within the one club –

North Ryde Dockers while Soccer has 6,351 players across 431 teams and 14

clubs.

In addition to the traditional sports participation models, there is a considerable

level of casual usage and play with sports such as Touch/Tag and Ultimate

Frisbee. The registered participation numbers include Touch/Tag with 2,078 and

880 for Ultimate Frizbee. In addition, Rugby is now at 1,411 participants.

Club Numbers Teams Comments

Cricket

RHHCC 783 53

GRSLC 56 4 Training only

Total Cricket 839 57

Baseball Macquarie Saints Baseball 264 24

North Ryde RSL Baseball 88 8

Ryde Hawks 224 23

Total Baseball 576 55

AFL

North Ryde Dockers 250 16

Total AFL 250 16

Rugby

Ryde Rugby 268 23

Hillview Rugby 508 46

Old Ignatius 134 8 North Ryde Junior Rugby 501 44

Total Rugby 1,411 121

Frisbee

UFNSW 880 88

Total Frisbee 880 88

Tag/Touch

Sydney OZ TAG 1,188 116

Ryde Eastwood Touch 890 89

Total Tag / Touch 2,078 205

Football (Soccer)

NWSWF - Koalas 87 5

GHFA - Spirit 200 10

Gladesville Ryde Magic 240 18

Gladesville Ravens 737 63

Eastwood St Andrews 483 31 does not include women's numbers

Putney Rangers 471 36

Ryde District Panthers 450 14

Macquarie Dragons 412 29

West Ryde Rovers 982 77 does not include women's numbers

Gladesville Sharks 517 43

All Saints Hunters Hill 632 15

North Ryde Soccer Club 440 40

Ryde Saints United 634 46 does not include women's numbers

West Ryde Eagles 66 4

Total Football (Soccer) 6,351 431

Hockey



Club Numbers Teams Comments Ryde Eastwood Women Hockey 130 5

Total Hockey 130 5

Athletics (Total) 1,040

Dog Club (Total) 421

Numbers 13,976 978

Table 26: Participation numbers for North Ryde (Baseball, Australian Rules, and Soccer)

Table 27 shows the participation rates for the sports of baseball, Australian Rules

and Football for NSW and the City of Ryde. The Ryde participation rate numbers

are calculated by dividing the registered player numbers with the City of Ryde

population. To make a fair comparison of participation rates between NSW and

City of Ryde, the NSW organised participation rates should be used since City of

Ryde player numbers are from organised activities.

NSW Organised NSW Non-organised NSW Total Ryde

Baseball 0.2 0.1 0.3 0.56

Australian Rules 1.5 0.5 2.0 0.24

Soccer 4.8 2.3 7.1 6.16

Table 27: Total Ryde participation rate (%) compared to NSW (Source ERAD 2010)

With the growth projection for City of Ryde (33%) over the next 20 years, being

aggregated to the sports, the following demand for natural grass sporting fields

could be expected.

� Football (soccer) The Football participation rate for the City (6.16%) is higher than the NSW

organised rate, (4.8%) but when combined with ‘non-organised’, is lower

than the total (7.1%). The population increase would indicate a possible

growth in participation numbers from 6,351 to 6,744 or 393 players, which

could result in the need of up to 2.4 new fields (based on present allocation

and same participation rate. The capacity of the current facilities to cater for

the increased needs for match play and training will be limited if non-existent

and further investment would be needed, either in new fields or by increasing

the capacity of the existing fields by use of synthetic technology.

� Australian Rules Football Australian Rules participation rate for the City of Ryde (0.24%) is lower than

that of NSW (1.5%). The AFL (NSW/ACT) believes that more players

actually play the game, but due to lack to facilities, play outside the

municipality. A recent review of registered players with City of Ryde

postcodes show that Juniors (291), women (14), seniors (69), AFL 9’s (81)

and Auskick (213) providing a total of 668 players, compared to 250

registered within the current clubs.

If the City is to achieve a similar participation rate of 1.5%, the numbers will

increase to1,546 players compared to the current number of 250, or an

increase of 1,296 players or 518%. This represents a substantial increase

and would certainly mean a need for additional natural turf fields.

If there were additional facilities, the AFL are confident that the numbers

participating would generate additional club(s) to satisfy existing and future

demand.

� Baseball The City of Ryde has greater organised participation rates for baseball

(0.56%) compared to NSW (0.2%) and a total of 0.3%. With the project

population increase and the same rate of sport participation, the anticipated

growth could result in an additional 193 players, thus the need for additional

fields/diamonds.

� Hockey The figures for Hockey indicate that there are only 130 registered players

and with the population projections increasing by 33% and based on the

same participation rate, the anticipated numbers may increase by 47 players.

This combined number (177) would still be below the State guidance from

Hockey NSW for a pitch to satisfy 300 players.

� Rugby (including tag/touch) A growing sport which has current participation rates of 1,411 rugby players

and 2,078 touch/tag registrants. The recreational use of non-tackling rugby

(touch and tag) indicates that a 33% growth would bring these numbers to

2,796 and 1,919 rugby players respectfully. The natural turf fields would not

be able to cope with that level of use without a detrimental impact thus a

further investment would be needed, either in new fields or by increasing the

capacity of the existing fields by use of synthetic technology.

From this research, the demand in the near future (1-5 years) will be around the

codes of Football/Soccer, AFL and possibly the recreational games of Rugby

(Tag & Touch).

Photo 10: Children playing the recreational game of OZ TAG

In addition, the need for casual/recreational participation around Football (Soccer)

should also be considered, as not all participants wish to play with the traditional

set-up of club structures. Considerations need to include:

� Casual usage – such as kick around areas (Multi-use Games Areas)

where people congregate in hubs around the City;

� Programs driven – around facilities that Council manage so that they

can organise small sided games (e.g. 5-a-side / Futsal Leagues and

AFL nines).

5.5 Key Learning’s 1) Population growth will drive need for greater facilities for sport and

recreation

The population of the City of Ryde in 2011 was 103,038, and with the growth

projections to 2031 having a population forecast of 137,311, an increase of

34,273 persons or 33% from 2011.

Two of the eight NSW Government ‘Urban Activation Precincts’ (UAP) proposed

are within 3 kilometres of ELS Hall Park. The North Ryde Station Precinct

(NRSP) expected 5,000 new residents as is the Macquarie Park (Herring Road)

area.

2) Traditional sports growth cannot be met presently from natural turf alone

Currently, Football (Soccer) has a higher demand than the supply of sporting

fields. With the anticipated increase in population and growth in the sport, this

is likely to result in the requirement for additional 2-3 fields. From the

consultation process through the PRG, the greatest need is to cater for

training needs of the football community, especially juniors.

Baseball participation in Ryde is above the NSW participation rates. With the

anticipated population growth rates over the next decade, the possible

demand on the natural turf diamonds will need to be carefully managed to

sustain the quality and safety of the fields. As the game grows, this will create

a need for more fields which in turn may impact on provision of fields for other

sports.

Australian Rules Football (0.24%) is presently below the State average, but

population growth would indicate opportunity for participation growth if the

sport was to promote the game more. Council would need to have confidence

that they are being targeted by the State Sports Organisation to increase

participation before significant investment would be needed to justify

standalone sports fields.

From further research with AFL (NSW/ACT), they have identified that more than



twice the number of registered players in City of Ryde Teams actually play the

sport but are playing outside the City boundaries – maybe because of the lack

of quality facilities. This could mean that new facilities would encourage more to

stay in Ryde and play with local clubs.

Due to the low number of Australian Rules fields, if the growth continues, there

will be pressure on the natural fields. The AFL believes that the Ryde region will

continue to grow faster than organic growth linked with the population increases.

3) Recreational demand will drive participation for the future

The recreational aspects of Rugby in Touch and Tag will result in growth and

any multi-sport fields need to recognise these non-traditional sports now

becoming more popular and needing higher demand on the fields. The synthetic

fields can cope with this sport easily as the standards are very similar to the

football codes.

It is important that the facilities cater for the age groups that will have the

greatest growth (seniors, tertiary education and young workforce) but may not

have the time commitment or interest to be part of the traditional club culture to

be able to play sport in a recreational way. Therefore, the participation

opportunities need to be developed to reflect this with not only the traditional

participation methods. In essence, the management model will need to be

reviewed and this will not be successful without the State Sporting Organisation

supporting the evolution of clubs to embrace these changes.

4) Geographically the west is the key focus

There is specific growth corridors within the municipality that are identified as

Urban Activation Precincts (UAP) which will have a significant impact on the

active recreation facilities, including sports fields.

The UAP around Macquarie Fields will look for facilities in ELS Hall Park and

the opportunity to have lunch time and immediately after work programs for

people to take part in would be advantageous. The existing sports infrastructure

cannot cope with the growth in population if this is converted to participation in

sport.

5) Collaboration will be the key to success

Council has the opportunity to work collaboratively with other providers of sport

and recreation facilities including education and commercial developments

which should be integrated into any future recreation and sports strategy for

long term success. These examples could include the recreational ‘pop-up

parks’ or encouraging investment or joint funding collaborations with sport

directly.

6) Single sport or multi-sport

As the move for participation is more recreationally focused, the opportunity for

a multi-sport solution should be the priority for Council to consider.

Council has the opportunity to consider the use of synthetic surface technology

for either a single or multi-sport surface. The rationale for a single sport, such as

football (soccer) could be made if the movement of that sport (football) then

freed up other facilities for other sport usage.



SITE CONSIDERATIONS To consider the options for Council a number of

sites have been short listed and then assessed to

optimise the decision making for Council.



6 Site Considerations

6.1 Overview The City of Ryde has an extensive provision of sports fields for the nominated

sports assessed in this Study – Australian football, cricket, football (soccer),

rugby union, baseball and hockey. The ownership and management of most of

the sports fields rests with Council, however, there are other groups that also

provide sporting fields, including schools, tertiary education institutions,

government agencies, and sporting clubs or associations. Some of this non-

Council owned / managed fields are available for community use.

Appendix 5 identifies the number and distribution of Council managed sports

fields available throughout the municipality for the nominated sports. The table

identifies the distribution of the major sports fields, as per the IOSP.

In relation to availability of sports fields for the nominated sports, there are:

� 2 Australian Rules football ovals,

� 19 senior and 6 junior cricket ovals,

� 33 senior and 6 junior football/soccer fields,

� 4 rugby fields (senior),

� 7 senior and 2 junior baseball fields,

� 2 senior hockey fields,

� 44 netball courts, and

� 1 grass athletics track.

A planned approach was undertaken to identify potential sites within the City to

consider for conversion to a synthetic surface, and then to assess the relative

merits of either converting short-listed sites to a synthetic surface or retaining

them as natural turf sports surfaces. A key consideration during the preliminary

assessment of all sites was the likely level of impact on existing user groups if a

field was converted, that is, the degree to which a converted field was able to

accommodate new use by a range of other user groups whilst still

accommodating the needs of the existing group(s) or whether some or all of the

training or competition requirements of existing user group(s) might have to be

relocated.

A rigorous three stage process to shortlist sites and to then analyse the higher

ranked sites is outlined in the following sections.

6.2 Assessment of Shortlisted Sites

6.2.1 Assessment Process All of Council’s sports fields were reviewed, with input from Council’s Officers.

The assessment of the shortlisted sites was undertaken using two stages:

1. Site Assessment Matrix The Site Assessment Matrix is a relatively high-level assessment tool which

focuses on 12 criterion considered important from both a site suitability

perspective and a site access perspective. 2. Synthetic Field Diagnostic Evaluation Tool

The Synthetic Field Diagnostic Evaluation Tool is a more comprehensive

assessment tool which drills-down to Economic considerations,

Environmental considerations, Community impact considerations,

Management considerations and Physical considerations when assessing

the merits or otherwise of synthetic installations. 3. Multiple-Bottom Line Assessment

The final assessment reviewed the top four sites from the Diagnostic Tool

assessment results at the request of Council and independently of Council

Officers to provide a further and independent rigor to the process

6.2.2 Site Assessment Matrix – Stage 1 The 12 criterion used to short list to the next stage included:

Site Suitability 1. Visibility of site for passive surveillance

2. Likely to be minimal direct conflict with other people using adjacent public

spaces

3. Proximity of site to an existing pavilion

4. There will be low impact on the vista of residents

5. There will be low impact on the amenity of residents, such as noise, traffic,

etc.

6. Site is located on land that has low current sporting use

7. Existing potential for an onsite management option

Site Access 8. Location to catchment or potential users

9. Proximity of site to public transport – buses

10. Proximity of site to public transport – trains

11. Proximity of site to existing shared pedestrian / bike path

12. Proximity of site to existing / planned car parking

From the initial review of all of fields, the following ten (10) were identified for their

potential to accommodate a synthetic surface.

� Meadowbank Park

� Eastwood Park

� Brush Farm Park

� Marsfield Park

� Dunbar Park

� Christie Park

� Magdala Park

� Morrison Park

� ELS Hall Park

� Gannan Park

6.2.3 Diagnostic Assessment – Stage 2 From the ten (10) key sites identified, further assessment was done by Council

officers using a detailed diagnostic tool, with the results summarised in the table

29 below.

From this assessment, the sites were categorised in the following priority order:

High Opportunity

� ELS Hall Park #1

� Christie Park # 2

� Eastwood Park Upper Oval

� Magdala Park #1

Possible Options

� Meadowbank Park - LH Waud

� Dunbar Park

� Marsfield Park

Limited or no Opportunity

� Gannan Park

� Brush Farm Park

� Morrison Park



Table 28: Site Assessment Matrix results

The table below indicates the score for each site. Since the evaluation was

approved by the PRG consultation process, further information has been

identified which is explained in each site analysis.

Rank Site Score

1 ELS Hall Park # 1 84

2 Christie Park #2 78

3 Eastwood Park Upper Oval 78

4 Magdala Park #1 76

5 Meadowbank Park – LH Waud 73

6 Dunbar Park 71

7 Marsfield Park 70

Table 29: Synthetic Field Diagnostic Evaluation Tool results

6.2.4 Multiple- Bottom Line Assessment – Stage 3 The final assessment reviewed the top four sites from the Diagnostic Tool assessment results at the request of Council and independently of Council Officers to provide a further and independent rigor to the process. This stage is discussed in details in Section 6.6 of this report.

6.3 Site Infrastructure Considerations

6.3.1 Introduction For the whole site to optimise the installation of a synthetic surface, ancillary

equipment and infrastructure needs to be considered. This part of the Study aims

at providing key knowledge for Council to consider prior to any design of the site.

6.3.2 Safety and Security of Fields Council is keen for the fields to be seen as open space and not fenced off any

more than needed. Many councils in Victoria that have installed around 40 fields

have chosen to provide a nominal fence, with the exception of a handful.

The key reason for considering fencing includes:

� Security of the playing fields and reduction of opportunist vandalism;

� Control of game and keeping the ball in play;

� Separation of spectators from players; and

� Delineating sports use from passive leisure users of the park.

If Council chooses not to use fencing, then prudent management initiatives will

need to be put in place. For example, if Council opts for a hockey/soccer field, it

would be prudent for other users of the fields adjacent to have a fence to protect

the small hard hockey ball from travelling onto the other fields or passive users.

Other options could include:

i) Standard 1.1m / 1.2m fence around inside of jogging/walking path to

separate active from passive users of the park/fields;

ii) Use landscaping to separate key aspects and access onto the fields, with

the key challenge being when balls enter the landscaped areas from the

fields; and

iii) Use of low wooden fences to stop motor vehicle access.

The standard 1.1m fence would provide the best overall outcome for other park

users and also with the sports space.

6.3.3 Lighting The lighting standards identified for Council’s other sports fields are those

recommended for new synthetic playing fields, that is, to provide lighting to a

training and match standard if capacity levels are high enough to maintain use

(Table 30).

Photo 11: Lighting of soccer fields

The Australian Standards of Sports Lighting (Jan 2010: Source Department of

Sports and Recreation: WA) identifies the following table.

Sport Level of Play Aus Standard Lux Level

Football (soccer) / Rugby Union and AFL

Club 50 lux (Training)

AFL Night Games State 100 lux (Match)

FNSW Night Games 200 lux

Rugby Games 200 lux

Hockey (HNSW) Association/Club level 500 lux (match)

300 lux (training)

Table 30: Australian Standards Sports Lighting

6.3.4 Ancillary Infrastructure With the potential growth in participation that synthetic surfaces has brought to

sport and other LGA’s in Victoria, NSW and ACT, it is imperative that these

aspects are carefully planned, including:

� Pavilions Generically many councils appreciate the importance of a Club Pavilion and the

emphasis that the building becomes part of the social fibre of the venue. When

synthetic surfaces are installed, the Pavilion has to be able to cope with additional

pressures around changing and toilets, and the number of people likely to use it

while waiting to play, after play and for social interaction.

The design aspects to cope with these changes of use have to be considered,

including:

� Changing and toilet facilities – to be more aligned to a sports centre

changing room facility catering for hundreds of people and not the

traditional team changing rooms

� Spectator facilities

� Balance between club and casual user space

� Catering/kiosk facilities

� First aid / referees / umpire / offices etc.

Marsfield Park

Bush Farm Park

Dunbar Park

Christie Park

Eastwood Park

Magdala Park

Meadowbank Park

ELS Hall Park

Morrison Bay Pk

Gannon Park

EconomicPrimary funding 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2Installation/Upgrade 1 1 1 4 1 1 1 1 1 1Maintenance Cost 2 2 2 4 2 2 2 2 2 2Cost Recovery Opportunity 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2Additional Costs for Ancillary Facilities/Infrastructure 1 1 1 2 2 1 2 2 1 1

8 8 8 14 9 8 9 9 8 8

EnvironmentalAesthetic Appearance Integration 1 1 4 4 3 3 3 4 2 2Water Consumption/Conservation 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 3Maintenance Impact on the Environment 3 4 4 3 4 3 3 4 1 1Increased Parks/Open Space Value 3 1 3 3 3 3 2 2 1 1Built Footprint Encroachment 2 1 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3

13 11 18 17 17 16 15 17 11 10

Community ImpactMaximise Capacity for Use 4 4 4 0 4 4 4 4 4 4Acccesibility by Public 4 1 2 1 4 1 4 3 2 1Impact on community housing 2 1 1 4 3 3 3 3 1 1Multi-purpose Surface Capability 1 4 3 2 3 4 4 4 1 4Meets Participation Pathways 3 2 2 4 3 4 3 4 3 3Public Acceptance and Use 3 1 2 3 3 3 3 3 2 2

17 13 14 14 20 19 21 21 13 15

ManagementManagement Alignement 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3Aligned with Stakeholders 2 1 3 3 2 3 3 4 2 1Aligned with ISOP & Rec Focus 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4Management Model/Governance Structure 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3Aligned with Council Policies and Strategies 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4Facility Priorities Achieved 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2

18 17 19 19 18 19 19 20 18 17

PhysicalSite Fit, earthworks & obstructions 1 3 1 4 3 1 1 4 1 3Services Infrastructure 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2Car Parking 4 3 4 4 2 4 4 4 3 3Stormwater Discharge 4 4 4 1 4 4 4 4 4Lighting 3 2 1 3 3 3 2 3 1 1

14 14 12 14 14 14 9 17 11 13

Grand Totals 70 63 71 78 78 76 73 84 61 63

Physical Sub Total

SYNTHETIC FIELD EVALUATION DIAGNOSTIC - SUMMARY REPORT

Economic Sub Total

Environmental Sub Total

Social Sub Total

Management Sub Total



� Car parking Both for the number of cars linked to the number of players, normally multiplied

by two – as this will be in the increased numbers at the 15-20min cross over

times.

The infrastructure for access and egress will most probably need a traffic

management plan considered for the preferred sites.

� Landscaping Integration with the natural parkland and services need to be considered both as

an opportunity for water harvesting from the synthetic pitch to water the natural

grass. In addition the edge of the synthetic grass needs to be landscaped around

the fields to ensure integration and aesthetics.

6.4 Site Management Considerations

6.4.1 Underpinning Philosophy Council is keen for the sport playing fields to be used by the broadest community,

including schools, children, specific sports, female, adults and more. To achieve

this, the playing fields need to be considered similar to an indoor sports hall

where the facility can be programmed as well as hired out.

The following principles for management are identified for Council:

� Maximise play on the fields by the broadest section of the community;

� Encourage specific target groups who would not normally have the opportunity

to use them by offering specific and targeted programs such as school children,

ethnic minorities, non-club based adults (males and females) and any other

targeted groups;

� Manage the program of the fields between clubs, recreational use, targeted

programs, schools, sports development programs and commercial hiring’s; and

� The financial costs associated with the operation, management, maintenance

and replacement of the fields should be self-generating through a user-pays

pricing philosophy.

To achieve these fundamental principles, Council may need to evolve its

philosophy on how it provides and supports sport and recreation to grow. This

would mean that the priorities to support the resourcing of synthetics.

6.4.2 Programming of Fields The management of many sports grounds and facilities are most often done on

historical basis. The development of a synthetic surface provides an opportunity

to review the management approach of the facilities. Different sports facilities will

have different peak times, which will impact on both the programmability of the

surfaces and may also allow them to be used for other sports, e.g. netball and

tennis may share a cushioned surface during the year, whilst soccer is generally

played in the winter and the surface could be used for cricket in the summer, etc.

The decision on how best to manage a synthetic surface sports field can be

influenced by the following considerations:

� Council’s sport club usage or facility management philosophy and provision -

should it be internally, procured, leased or managed by clubs etc.;

� The ability of organisations (e.g. sports clubs) or the commercial sector (e.g.

Belgravia Leisure, etc.) to be able to provide the type of services needed at the

community level;

� Council’s approach and philosophy on charging sports clubs or associations to

recoup the level of cost of maintenance or for the capital investment possibility;

and

� Charging a market rate with strong programming would generate surplus funds

that Council can put towards developing other facilities or more importantly

establishing a replacement fund.

Synthetic surfaces allow for greater use than natural grass surfaces. The third

generation fields are often quoted as having the ability to be used 24 hours a day.

The reality is that synthetic fields can be used substantially more than natural turf,

but they too have a maximum lifespan. The lifespan will be influenced by the type

and intensity of usage, the frequency of usage and the maintenance deployed.

FIFA advises that a third generation turf field (FIFA 1 and 2 Star standards)

should be used for 42 hours per week, which should provide a life expectancy of

around 8-10 years, depending on the manufacturer’s warranty.

Usage levels in excess of 60 hours per week are commonly achieved on

synthetic surfaces. Increased use over 60 hours per week may have an impact

on the warranty from the supplier.

The Darebin International Sports Centre in Victoria has three synthetic fields

(FIFA 1 Star) and they have been receiving around 60 hours use on average per

week, over a period of five years. Generally, it is believed that synthetic turf can

handle around 60 hour’s usage per week.

When comparing the hourly usage of synthetic grass with natural turf over both a

10 and 25 year period, the costs comparisons show that based on whole of life

costs, per hour of use the synthetic turf ($28.53) is cheaper than natural turf

($79.16) over 25 years.

Item Natural Turf Synthetic Turf

Usage

Hours per week 20 60

Weeks used per year 48 52

Hours per year 960 3,120

10 years

Total cost of ownership $960,000 $1,480,000


Cost per hour of use $100 $47.44

25 years

Total cost of ownership $1,900,000 $2,225,000


Cost per hour of use $79.16 $28,53 Table 31: Cost per hour of use

Natural turf only used for 48 weeks per year (four-six weeks per year for

restoration). Total cost of ownership includes cost of construction, maintenance

and surface replacement.

General conclusions that can be made include:

� Synthetic surfaces are more expensive to install but cheaper to maintain than

natural turf;

� Synthetic surfaces need to be replaced every 8 to 10 years (depending on type

of surface) whereas the life span of a natural turf surface is indefinite (industry

standards suggest resurfacing somewhere around 15 years);

� The total cost of ownership of synthetic surfaces is comparable with the

equivalent standard of natural turf sports surface when the cost of construction,

maintenance & surface replacement are taken into account;

� A synthetic surface can handle significantly greater use than a natural turf

surface;

� Synthetic surfaces are less affected by weather conditions (i.e. significant

damage can occur to turf surfaces under adverse weather conditions); and

� The average cost per hour of use for a synthetic surface is significantly less

than a high quality natural turf surface over both a 10 and 25 year period when

the cost of construction, maintenance & surface replacement are taken into

account.

In terms of playing time, a third generation synthetic surface equates to 2-3

natural fields while when comparing cost over a ten year period, a synthetic pitch

is half to a third of a natural turf to maintain.



6.4.3 Program Philosophy Programming will be essential to ensure maximum usage of the fields. A number

of examples have been used by other venues and such an example for a typical

winter week is shown in Table 32 below.

ZONE/DAY Mon Tues Wed Thurs Fri Sat Sun

Schools (Free or nominal)

09.30-

11.30

09.30-

11.30

09.30-

11.30

09.30-

11.30

09.30-

11.30

08.30-

12.00 N/A

Business (Market rates)

12.00-

13.30

12.00-

13.30

12.00-

13.30

12.00-

13.30

12.00-

13.30 N/A N/A

Schools (Free or nominal)

14.00-

15.30

14.00-

15.30

14.00-

15.30

14.00-

15.30

14.00-

15.30 As above N/A

After School Club/

Development (Market rates)

16.00-

17.30

16.00-

17.30

16.00-

17.30

16.00-

17.30

16.00-

17.30 As Above N/A

Clubs (Concession

rate)

18.00-

20.00

18.00-

20.00

18.00-

20.00

18.00-

20.00

18.00-

20.00

13.00-

17.00

08.30-

16.00

Community (Market rates)

20.00-

22.00

20.00-

22.00

20.00-

22.00

20.00-

22.00

20.00-

22.00

N/A

17.00-

21.00

Table 32: Typical weekly program

In addition, Council should consider the following program options:

1. Educational use - For local schools during the day times for either an educational hire rate or a

coaching rate where Council can offer coaching in one of the key sports.

2. Club use - Identifying a number of clubs in key winter and summer sports so that there

is a diversity of use and opportunities for the community to join. Both for

training and competition.

3. Recreational use - Council to run programs for key target audiences such as children to learn

key skills (such as learn to swim in the aquatic centres) and this should be

market driven on pricing points;

- Lunchtime, weekend and evening recreational/social competitions (e.g. 5-a-

side) to generate interest in the game and a return on investment to ensure

sustainability.

4. Commercial use - For other parties to hire the facilities for their needs (e.g. associations for

competitions/end of season finals).

5. Community use - For local groups and individuals to hire and socially play a game.

The program needs to reflect the seasonality of the sports and encourage

summer sports such as touch rugby, ultimate Frisbee, futsal/5-a-side games and

little athletics training. For this Study, the needs of winter have been considered

as the main focus and the summer use somewhat less. This is due to the peak

demand being in the winter. Also, football has indicated that it would be keen on

promoting summer programs and competitions.

6.5 Specific Design Considerations

6.5.1 Introduction From the site diagnostic evaluation and the additional management information in

this section, the specific design considerations for each of the three sites need to

include the following:

i) Site overview

ii) Design standard and scope for the sport

iii) Design integration considerations

iv) Environmental considerations

v) Ancillary infrastructural considerations

vi) Access and Inclusive overlay

6.5.2 ELS Hall Park #1 1. The Site

Photo 12: Aerial view ELS Hall Park

ELS Hall Park is situated in the north west of the municipality and demand for

usage is expected to grow as the population grows in the area. In addition the

Urban Activation Program will continue to put pressure on this sports hub.

With the Ryde Community of Sports Centre holding centre stage in the hub with

two Football (AFL/ Soccer) fields and a Football (soccer) / Baseball combined

field, the options are strong for multi-sport and a program around pay as you play,

to complement club sport usage.

The Park is presently well utilised by many sports and recreational users and

complements the built sport and recreation facilities on site with good parking,

lights and ancillary fields. Presently the field is used around 34 hours per week25

and with a synthetic turf instillation could realistically double that programming

availability which should encourage more schools, recreation programs and club

usage.

2. Field Recommendations Whilst Council has initially considered and assessed all 3 fields with ELS Hall

Park, the field 3 was rejected due to its size and close proximity to the creek and

natural area. The field 2 was assessed for its capacity to cater for the football and

baseball and although both sports are seasonal collaborators, the use of the

synthetic surface for these two codes would not work at this point in time as the

site is not large enough to move the soccer field around and the relocation of the

baseball is not considered by Council as an optimal solution due to cost

implications. With the close proximity of the Creek, the environmental

considerations further contributed to this field not becoming a preferred option.

Field 1 was identified as a pitch that can cater for the multi-sport which could

achieve the following standards:

� FIFA 1 Star Recommended Pitch (Football)

� IRB Regulation 22 (Rugby Union, Touch/Tag)

� AFL Community Standard (AFL/CA)

Field 1 is the larger of the two ovals and could accommodate both a FIFA 1 star

and an AFL/Cricket Australia standard oval, easier than Field 3, which is smaller

in size. The field should also be marked for 5-a-side and Touch /Tag to maximise

the usage.

Presently on Field 1, there is a turf cricket wicket. A synthetic cricket wicket could

be accommodated in the new design with the current standard of competition

played on the ground able to be played on synthetic turf.

3. Design Standards

Council’s design standards will need to be considered and also address:

� Access and egress will need to be addressed to protect the field from

any vandalism 25 Hours per use provided by Council (September 2013)



� The cricket wicket needs to ensure that when not in use (winter), the

field will still meet AFL / FIFA standards

� Water harvesting design considerations

� The lighting should be designed to achieve both training and

competition levels (50/200 lux) for the key sports.

4. Environmental Considerations

Council is committed to ensure that the Creek to the side of Fields 2 and 3 is

protected. As Field 1 is the preferred option, this will have the least impact on the

creek.

Council has the option to water harvest from Field 1 and use on Fields 2 and 3 or

indeed in the RCSC.

Council also needs to ensure that IOSP environmental principles are considered

It is recommended that Council procurement of the synthetic technology identify

use of substantial proportion of recycled material by the suppliers.

5. Ancillary and Infrastructure Considerations

The outdoor facilities that are part of the RCSC would allow for the casual and

programmed use. Car parking may need to be reviewed as many commuters

use the Park currently. The overflow car park above Field 1 can be used during

peak periods.

A proposed redevelopment of the sports pavilion between Field 1 and 3 is

programmed for 2014 and will allow club use of the field.

6. Access and Inclusive Overlay

With the Ryde Community Sports Centre being available to use a synthetic sports

surface, there may be opportunities to re-locate some of the indoor sports centre

futsal programs in the summer months to free up time in the sports centre and

create a commercial return for key ‘off season’ usage time.

If the Sports Centre, as part of its future strategy, is managed together with all

other sporting facilities within the Park, the ELS Hall Park can easily become a

recreation community destination hub providing a range of recreational activities,

including lunchtime sport (Touch, Tag, 5-a-side, Group fitness etc.).

7. Financial WOL Considerations

As the field is approximately 15,000m2, the following WOL costs would need to

be considered by Council.

Expenditure considerations Costs for 10 years

Capital/Installation Costs* $1,500,000*

Maintenance costs (2%) $300,000**

Replacement costs $730,000***

$2,530,000 *Assumed no major landscape or geotech issues

*Price does not include lights, fences etc.

**Assumed 2% of capital cost, for ≥ 50 hours usage+ per week, or if only ≤ 40

hour per week reduced to 1.5%

***Assumed ten year replacement cost at present day prices

This equates to an amortised fee of $253,000 per annum.

If the entire installation is funded from Capital Works budget, the recurring

revenue budget needs to accommodate the maintenance and replacement costs

the following should be considered.

A typical week’s program is shown in Appendix 6. This would mean that the

income strategy could address the funding costs for Council’s recurring budget of

$103,000 ($30,000 maintenance and $73,000 amortised replacement) which

could be offset by various revenue generating strategies which are addressed in

Section 6.7.

8. Summary

ELS Hall Park is the best site geographically, as shown by all of the analysis for

multi-sport and support facilities. The ‘recreational / sports’ management

approach through the Ryde Community of Sports Indoor Centre will allow for a

more flexible pricing structure and provide Council with the best Return On

Investment.

6.5.3 Christie Park #2 1. The Site

Situated in the North of the City and home of Gladesville and Hornsby Football

Association (GHFA), the site is located close to Macquarie Business Park and the

growth corridor.

The two fields, with grand stand and fence line for the premier field (1) provide a

venue for elite football and representative games. The complex is perceived by

some in the community as being the home for the GHFA thus providing a very

limited community access. According to the GHFA, the main field is rested

frequently to ensure its quality playability is sustainable.

Field #2 behind the grand stand is used for training purposes.

If the venue could be repositioned within the community to provide recreational,

casual and sporting pathway programs, this would provide a good central hub for

football (soccer) in this part of the City. The ability to install a synthetic field plus

practice area would allow many more clubs to train here and rest their own

natural fields. In addition, weekend games could be programmed, resting other

natural fields. With the size of field 2 being longer than the standard pitch, a

multitude of pitch combinations could be created on Field 2, thus maximising

community use.

This additional community use would reflect the trends in the population that is

moving to programmed recreational participation as opposed to the traditional

club membership.

In the past, the GHFA has explored commercial investment with both full size and

5-a-side fields. Any consideration of this proposal would need to meet the

Principles of this Study.

Photo 13: Aerial view of Christie Park

2. Field Recommendations

The Training Field, plus practice area would be to FIFA 1 star with

recommendations of IRB Regulation 22 standard. This would allow both Football

(Soccer), Touch/Tag to be played at a community and competition level.

A lighting upgrade may be needed for this site.

3. Design Standards

Council design standards will need to be considered and also address:

� Access and security on site



� Welcoming, so that it doesn’t look like a ‘club ground’ but

encourages whole of community access

� Possible seating / viewing on ‘back of pitch one stand’ to allow

people to watch games etc.

� Water harvesting designs to complement Field 1

� Lighting for both training and social competition


With the closeness of the Lane Cove National Park surrounding two sides of the

facility, the impact of noise and light spill on the community is reduced

significantly.

Council has the option to collect water and harvest it if the synthetic field was

installed behind the main football on Field 2 and use it on Field 1 as the primary

natural grass field. Council also needs to ensure that IOSP environmental

principles are considered

It is recommended that Council procurement of the synthetic technology identify use of substantial proportion of recycled material by the suppliers.


� The expansion of the car park, even as an overflow car park, may need to

be considered if this site is used

� The use of shade structures for spectators needs to be considered

� Fencing to be used to keep the ball from the Lane Cove National Park

should be considered

� Lighting upgrade would be needed.


The perception in the community is that the site is not available for use other than

that by the GHFA. Should Council decide to endorse as their preferred site, the

management model would need to change to ensure overall community

participation and use of the site.

7. Summary

By repositioning the site as the “Home of Football in Ryde” for all clubs and

recreational needs for the game, the management of the site needs to change

also to meet the changes in participation trends. This would most likely be

embraced and acceptance by the broader community.

By repositioning the programming of use for Christie Park #2 for additional

training and competition activities, it provides the opportunity to effectively

manage the use of Christie Park #1 to maintain the optimal surface condition.

This would also allow for more matches to be played on a weekend (Friday –

Sunday).

6.5.4 Eastwood Park – Upper Oval 1. The Site

Eastwood Park is situated close to the boundary of Parramatta and Hornsby

councils in the west of the City. Presently used for football (soccer) and cricket,

with turf wickets. The ground is part of a two field complex that has an upper and

lower field, together with a croquet club. It is also used for cultural events such

as the ‘Granny Smith Festival’ and for fireworks.

The upper field has been considered for this study.

Photo 14: Aerial view of Eastwood Park

2. Field Recommendations

The site would use the Upper Field for football (soccer), cricket and possible

touch / tag. The recommended field would therefore achieve:

a. Football (Soccer) – FIFA 1 star pitch

b. Touch/Tag – IRB Regulation 22

c. Cricket – AFL/Cricket Australia community pitch

3. Design Standards


� Access and security of site, high fencing and landscaping

� Water harvesting for the lower field

� Lighting for the field to be upgraded

� Integration of turf around oval next to the field

� Strong pavement base to cope with the cultural events of the area

� Car parking challenge, as commuters use it presently for Eastwood

Station

� Environmental considerations


Council has the option to water harvest from the Upper Oval and use on the lower

field.


It is recommended that Council procurement of the synthetic technology identify

use of substantial proportion of recycled material by the suppliers.

5. Ancillary and Infrastructural Considerations

The infrastructural investments for the site need to be developed, including:

� Car Parking – length of time to park at the venue

� Lighting upgrade needed and identified in Councils Delivery Plan

� Fencing to complement the present picket fencing to ensure

security and reduction of “opportunist vandalism”


With the Site being imbedded in a residential area, there may be limited

additional access than that presently used on natural turf without significant

community support. The present sports pavilion has limited accessible facilities.

7. Summary

An excellent venue for training and community sport, however the likely restriction

with late night use and limited car parking would impact greatly on the feasibility

of this project.

6.5.5 Magdala Park Field #1 1. The Site Situated on the east side of the municipality, this ground is adjacent to Lane Cove

Council border and only a short distance (1 km) to the proposed 2 (soccer) field /

cricket development at Blackman Park.



Home of Gladesville Ryde Magic Football Club and has two Baseball (junior)

fields with lights planned and very few residents. The junior baseball demand

can be moved to Field #2.

Photo 15: Aerial view of Magdala Park

2. Field Recommendations The recommended site is Field 1 which could be used for football and other

sports such as Touch/Tag. It is therefore recommended that Council considers a

field that meets the following performance standards:

� Football – FIFA 1 Star pitch

� Touch/Tag – IRB Regulation 22 standard

3. Site Plans and Integration

Feedback provided to Council by contractors during the construction of

floodlighting has highlighted significant geotechnical constraints on this site as its

previous life was a Tip site. This may have significant cost implications when

developing this site, it is estimated in excess of $1m for remedial works to be

conducted prior to use would be a realistic amount to add to costs.


� Access and egress around car parking and security of the site

� Possible water harvesting from the football field to the natural turf

� The location of the Pavilion as this is a good distance away

Lane Cove Council will be installing two football (Soccer) fields less than a

kilometre away at Blackman Park.


With the Lane Cove River and National Park surrounding Magdala Park, the

environmental considerations will need to be carefully explored and if this facility

is prioritised a separate environmental impact statement should be considered.


It is recommended that Council procurement of the synthetic technology identify use of substantial proportion of recycled material by the suppliers.


The infrastructure investments for the site need to be developed, including:

� Pavilion/changing facilities

� Car Parking

� Fencing

� Relocation of baseball diamonds

� Minimal Passive Surveillance


The security of the site would be a concern as the site is isolated during the

day/night and could be target to vandalism.

7. Summary

A potential long term consideration, however, many issues associated with the

site including the uncertainties of the sub surface, need to relocate baseball and

build an amenities building closer to the field, will need to be considered prior to

proceeding.

6.6 Multiple-Bottom Line Assessment

6.6.1 Introduction A final independent assessment has been conducted on Level One sites to

ascertain their logistical likelihood for acceptance and success. This assessment

has utilised a Multiple-Bottom Line framework, exploring the following

perspectives for each short-listed site:



� Community Impact

To optimise participation and usage, whilst ensuring the likelihood of it



practice: and

� Management Opportunity The ability to be able to manage, integrate within Councils outcomes

and deliver the benefits.

6.6.2 Site Overview From the four top sites, the independent analysis has identified the following

conclusions:

i. ELS Hall (Field 1)

� Economic Investment - The level of investment will probably be in around $ 1.5m for this

15,000m2 field26

- The field will lend itself to significant usage from schools, clubs,

associations and recreational usage, therefore the number of hours it

could use would indicate a possible positive Return on Investment to

Council.

- There would be a saving on maintenance costs from the annual

maintenance and renovation cycle

� Community Impact - The field lends itself to multi-programming, with various sports (AFL,

Cricket, Football, Touch Rugby, OZ TAG etc.); both summer and winter

seasons as well as recreational sports use

- The replacement of the Turf Cricket Wicket with a synthetic one is a

consideration to be made. As the standard of the existing cricket

competition utilising the field can play on synthetic wickets, Council staff

believe that this issue can be overcome.

- The impact on the community is not believed to be any more significant

than present

- Additional car-parking could use the “overflow area”

� Environmental Commitment - The initial indication is the field is firm and is not impacted by flood water

or by being a dis-used tip

- In addition the field is the furthest from the Creek and any perceived

impact environmentally on the water.

� Management Opportunity - The precinct is already known for its multi-sport mix and also with the

RCSC as the recreation hub, it lends itself to being managed and

coordinated through the Centre;

26 Field only – ancillary costs of lighting, fencing and equipment would be separate



- The Centre management already offer indoor league competitions and

an extension of these programs to Field #1 seems a logical extension,

with users already used to having a ‘Pay as you play’ fee acceptance.

Conclusion

This is by far the most appropriate site in the City and would complement all of

Council’s Principles and Priorities from this Study. ELS Hall Park #1 provides the

best option for gaining the ROI that Council has identified while maximizing

participation by so many groups in so many sports.

ii. Christie Park (Field #2)

� Economic Investment - The level of investment will probably be in the region of $ 1.2m for a

10,000m2 field;

- The field will lend itself as a training area; a match competition and

a community recreational football facility with the development of a

5-a-side (Futsal) pitches within the synthetic field which would

generate a significant economic return;

- With the limited impact of floodlights for this venue on the local

community the complex could be programmed to late each evening

thus the opportunity to maximise the ROI could be achieved.

- The Crown Land Act is prevalent for the site, which may have a

significant impact on income generating activities.

� Community Impact - Although the site is presently positioned as the competitive “high-

end” of the development pathway, a training space on Field #2

would allow a much stronger focus on junior and recreational

football participation.

- The summer season which normally rests the pitches could now

see more recreational use both with junior programs; 5-a-side

competitions, use by other sports such as Ultimate Frisbee; Touch;

Tag and pre-season training, thus resting other sports fields,

especially while cricket is still playing/training.

- There is no impact on residential housing due to the site being

enclosed by bush on three sides and freeway on the other

- Its closeness to the Macquarie Business Park will create significant

program opportunities during lunch and post-work times.

� Environmental Commitment - The initial indication is that the field has a firm base and is not

impacted by water or base movements

- Water harvesting from Field #2 to water the main field should be

considered.

� Management Opportunity

- The site needs to be repositioned if it is to be successful with

perception that it is only used for football (soccer) if your club is part

of the GHFA

- Council would need to consider the management strategy for the

site, as it is presently the home of GHFA, who manage the two

fields. The management needs to have a stronger focus and

recreational programs, inclusion of local schools and the business

park.

- Using this site to rest other local club fields could be integrated into

this strategy

� Conclusion - A Football centric site, which if repositioned and opened up for the

community could be very successful in encouraging more people to

recreate. A management strategy would need to be developed that

includes reviewing the current GHFA arrangements and the legal

implications for the Crown Land Act.

iii. Eastwood Park – Upper Oval

� Economic Investment - The level of investment will probably be in the region of $1.2m for a

field of $10,000m2.

- Although the field will lend itself to cricket, AFL and football (soccer)

due to the residential population the full opportunity for a

comprehensive usage (post 8pm weekdays and 8am – 10pm

weekends) is significantly reduced. This means that the opportunity

to create a positive ROI is reduced significantly

� Community Impact - The impact of a well-used field will have significant impact on the

residential community;

- The ability of the Field to be used for multi-sport is beneficial but the

Turf Cricket Wicket would need to be relocated

- The infrastructure around car-parking has limited opportunity to be

addressed, which could cause problems

� Environmental Concerns

- The initial indication is that the field has a firm base and it’s not

impacted from flood levels or any sub-base movements

- The upper field could provide water harvesting for the lower field

� Management Opportunity - There is limited opportunity to optimise usage and maximise ROI,

this would need to be developed.

� Conclusion - Although a good option for multi-sport, the limitations of the

closeness to the residential community; limited parking and no

current direct management opportunity places significant limitation

for this site.

iv. Magdala Park

� Economic Investment - The level of investment will probably be in the region of $1,1m for a

9,000m2 field.

- There would most probably be significant additional costs including:

� Need for pavilion, changing facilities

� Additional car-parking

�

� Relocation of baseball diamonds

� Securing of pavement for pitch to sit, due to historical

‘tip-site’

- Limited opportunity to create a positive ROI for Council is

limited

� Community Impact - The site is well positioned away from any residential development

which suggests flexibility for a well programmed facility.

- The field, if the baseball diamond was moved could allow for a

multi-sports field covering football (soccer; Touch and OZ TAG, in

both summer and winter months.

- With Blackman Park being developed (1km) away

� Environmental Commitment - Due to the history of the site being a ‘tip’ the likelihood for

movement is high. The recent installation of floodlighting highlighted

the poor quality of the subsurface and the risk that this presents.

This could have a significant potential impact on the cost of the

project at this location.

- With the Lane Cove River adjacent to the site and the National Park

surrounding the Fields all environmental aspects need to be

carefully considered and a recycled material strategy would suit this

environment.

� Management Opportunity - There is limited opportunity to manage the site directly and security

could be an issue due to the lack of ‘foot-traffic’ to the secluded

area

� Conclusion - Magdala Park has a number of positive aspects for consideration

around:

� Geographic location in the City: and

� Recently upgraded lighting;

� Ability for greater usage without impacting a

residential community



- The concerns for the site are more significant, including:

� Historical use as a tip does not indicate a suitable base, or at

best a need for a substantial concrete base (probable cost in

excess of $1m ) for the pitch to sit on;

� The secluded nature of the site could leave it open for

vandalism and security concerns

- It would not be a recommended site based on current

circumstances

6.7 Recommended Option

6.7.1 Introduction From the triple-level bottom line assessment of the key sites has identified ELS

Hall Park Field #1 being preferred over Christie Park #2 Field. This section

explores the specific recommendations for ELS Hall Park to allow Council to

move forward.

6.7.2 Design and Development Field #1 allows for a multi-sport facility to be designed around the following sports

and respective standards.

� Football (soccer) – FIFA 1 Star recommended pitch

� Australian Rules Football – AFL/CA Community Standard Pitch

� Cricket - AFL/CA Community Standard Pitch

� Touch / OZ TAG – Rugby Union Regulation 22 pitch

The current cricket summer usage would have to be played on a synthetic wicket,

which Council staff believes is manageable. The design would have to

accommodate a cricket wicket in the new field. It is also recommended that the

field is designed to allow recreational use for programmed activities and

programs of Oz Tag; Touch and 5-a-side football. This will also create the

greatest opportunity for ROI on the investment.

The lighting of the field would need to be upgraded to meet the opportunity for

competition for AFL & Football with the need of a lighting strategy to ensure that

50 lux (training) and 200 lux competition standard are achieved.

6.7.3 Financial Strategy 1. Cost of Investment

As Field #1 is approximately 15,000m2 and to accommodate the above sports the following Whole of Life (WOL) indicative costings have been developed, and based on recent actual costings for similar type of surfaces, subject to similar variables being used. (e.g. base, surface type etc.)

i. Construction Costs

� Based on the multi-sport turf (6.7.2) together with a shockpad and assuming that no significant pavement is needed for the site.


$1,500,000

ii. Maintenance Costs

� The maintenance costs are normally based on 1.5%, but if

there is significant usage ≥50 hours use would


$30,000

iii. Replacement Costs

� It is envisaged that the surface should be replaced every

10 years, subject to level of play and maintenance

commitment. The shockpad will probably need replacing

every 20 years. This cost takes into account the turf

replacement (including disposal etc.) at 10 years

(c.$530,000) and 50% of the shockpad cost each decade

($200,000)

$730,000


2. Whole of Life Costing’s Over a 30 year period with the 10 year increment, costing’s are as follows:



rate



shock pad

$3,040,000 $152,000


3. Financial Return on Investment – WOL Model

To ascertain the hourly rate to charge for a complete WOL return, the following


approach to take, whether that be over 10, 20 or 30 years.

Weekly Usage Hours



20 hours $263 $146 $131

30 hours $175 $97 $87

40 hours $131 $73 $65

50 hours $105 $58 $52

60 hours $88 $46 $44


Depending on Council pricing strategy, these fees could be based around the

return needed. The revenue that could be raised will be linked to the philosophy

of usage that Council wishes to commit to. Certainly from (Table 33) an

acceptable market cost would be in the region of $75 per hour, which means that

as long as the field is programmed for 40 hours per week and costs are

amortised over at least 20 years, the cost will be recovered. (as shown in bold in

table 34)

4. Financial Return on Investment – Maintenance and Replacement Model



the revenue stream needed would now present the ROI to be based on an

amortised figure of:

Time Period

Description Total Cost Annual Amortised Rate


Maintenance

$1,035,000 $103,500


Shock pad and Maintenance

$1,565,000 $78,250


Maintenance

$2,375,000 $79,166

This would mean that the ROI cost per hour of useage over the tree amortised


Weekly Usage

Hours



20 hours $100 $75 $76

30 hours $66 $50 $51

40 hours $55 $38 $38

50 hours $40 $30 $30

60 hours $33 $25 $25




6.7.4 Management Strategy ELS Hall Park is s multi-sport complex already with Council managing the

majority of the fields, together with the Ryde Community Sports Centre, presently

managed by YMCA.



The management of the Centre could embrace the management of the field and

program schools, recreational competitions as well as coordinate the club usage.

This would satisfy the strategy Council wishes to promote around the community

being more active and having greater opportunities.



CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS From the findings what are the conclusions and recommendations for Council to consider



7 Conclusion and Recommendations

7.1 Introduction Council is keen to determine the following key aspects from this Study:

i. Is there a need for using synthetic turf technology in the City?

ii. What sports should adopt the technology and what standards should the

City set?

iii. How would the adoption of synthetic surface technology align with

Councils vision for the City?

iv. What would be the best sites?

v. What financial Investment is needed?

This section is structured to address these questions together with providing the

recommendations to move forward.

7.2 Is There A Need to Use Synthetic Turf Technology Within The City?

Council has a growing population (33% increase 2011 - 2031) over the next 20

years, which if the participation patterns remain the same for each sport, will

mean that realistically there could be a 33% increase in participation numbers

which would place a significant impost on Councils current fields.

The key sports that would probably need to accommodate the growth over the

next two decades would be:


Already shown significant growth in the past decade and could increase

by nearly 400 players (or 25 plus teams) which on the present pitch rate

of 1 pitch to 163 players would require a further 2.4 pitches

� Australian Rules Football

Presently well below the state average (0.24% compared to 1.5%), with

the marketing and programming commitment of the AFL it would be

expected that these numbers would grow significantly. The AFL has

identified that there are already registered 418 players from a Ryde

postcode playing outside the City boundaries.

� Hockey

The projected numbers of participants would still be below the Hockey

NSW guidance for a synthetic Hockey Pitch.

� Rugby Codes

The number of players who presently play Tag and Touch Rugby and Rugby are

3,489 players and could increase by an additional 1,151 people which would

create a significant impact on natural turf.

All in all, the 33% participation growth, combined with AFL marketing and the

growth in recreational activities such as Tag/ Touch, 5-a-side football and AFL

9’s, will mean that the City is unlikely to be able to accommodate the growth just

with the current natural sports turf facilities.

As the intensity of usage grows, the cost of maintenance and renovation will grow

significantly.

Council also conducted a Best Value Review of the Allocation and Management

of Sportsgrounds (Feb 2012), where the report identified that the highest quality

playing fields are more than likely to be the best locations for synthetic surfaces

to ensure optimal access and use, with Australian Rules Football, Soccer and


raised are:








City




Carrying capacities for sportsgrounds are between 20–35 hours depending on

turf species but some are currently receiving 40-50 hours of usage, which means

that the surface is degraded significantly by the end of each season, resulting in

additional funds being needed to renovate those pitches.

Recommendation 1:

Due to the growth in demand, it is recommended that Council consider using the

synthetic turf technology in order to satisfy growing demand for sporting facilities

and reduce the financial impost on Council due to the additional maintenance and

renovation cost that will be needed should natural turf fields continue to be over

utilised.

7.3 What Sports Should Adopt the Technology and What Standard

From the demand forecasts, the following sports should be considered:

� Football (soccer) – FIFA 1 Star Recommended Pitch standard

� Australian Rules Football and Cricket– AFL/CA Community Pitch

standard

� Rugby/Touch/ Tag – IRB Regulation 22 Pitch standard

As the first pitch is recommended to be a multi-sport s, all these standards can be

incorporated within a single playing surface. By the end of 2013, it is expected

that a new standard called “One Turf Standard” will be adopted by all of these

sports and Council should adopt this standard.

Recommendation 2:

It is recommended that Council adopt the Multi-sport standard of “One Turf

Standard” for its site chosen at ELS Hall Park Field No 1.

Additional sites specifically for key high participation sports may lend themselves

to using the technology, such as Christie Park, where football training at other

sites could be reduced with clubs all training at the same venue. This could

reduce the maintenance costs for Council at other venues.

7.4 How Would Adoption of Synthetic Turf Technology Align with Councils Strategies and Vision for the City

Council’s 2025 Vision clearly articulates its desire to be a City to be healthy and

have wellbeing options as well as showing environmental sensitivity and proud of

its harmony and culture. This is reflected in Councils IOSP. Council, as part of

NSROC, has embraced the need for use of synthetic surface technology as part

of its ‘Regional Synthetic Sportsgrounds Project’ which has been agreed by all

Councils.

The changing trends in sport and recreation, recently published by the Australian

Sports Commission and CSIRO indicate that there has and will continue to be a

significant move to casual and recreational use of sport, to be fit and socially

interact. This shift needs to be considered in the planning and vision for how

surface technology can support this.

Whilst Council does not have a Sports Strategy, officers are working towards the

key principles identified in the key planning documents and these are reflected in

the management strategy for Synthetic Surfaces.



Recommendation 3:

Council should adopt the following strategic focus and principles when

considering the case of synthetic surface technology

� Vision (outcome) More people recreating, playing sport more often in Ryde by providing

quality, safe and appropriate facilities.

� Mission (purpose) To use the technology of synthetic surfaces to allow for greater use by the

community who wish to recreate and play sport, by satisfying the demand

and encouraging development opportunities.

� Key Principles

Allowing opportunities to be prioritised and converted the following principles

should be considered:

� Priority Alignment That the opportunity aligns with Councils strategies, policies and plans,

both for its assets (e.g. IOSP) and participation, as well as external

stakeholders (e.g. Sport; NSW Government), within its legislation

scope.

� Accessible and Promotes Social Inclusiveness The design, management and positioning of the opportunity

encourages local and citywide participation, to all target audiences and

especially target groups that need additional encouragement to be

active and play sport.

� Environmental Integration The design is environmentally friendly, integrates into the natural

environment and can demonstrate benefits, while reflecting the IOSP

environmental commitments.

� Participation Pathway Development The opportunity needs to be able to demonstrate that it not only meets

current demand, but provides opportunities to encourage a broader

recreational and sports participative base for future demand.

� Economically Prudent That Councils level of investment is linked to the priorities and

principles and where possible should seek out partnership opportunities

that are aligned with these principles to create greater participation.

7.5 What Would Be The Best Sites? This study completed a three stage assessment of key sites to identify the most

appropriate sites for consideration for installation of a synthetic surface. Officers

and the Project Reference Group (PRG) completed the first stage short listing

process, the second stage utilised a Diagnostic Tool which officers completed

grouping the sites into three levels before an independent assessment was

conducted to review the key recommended sites and come up with the preferred

site.

Section 6 provides commentary on the short-listing and assessment results which

provided for key sites for the final assessment, namely:

- ELS Hall Park #1

- Christie Park #2

- Eastwood Park Upper Oval

- Magdala Park #1

The independent assessment adopted a multiple-bottom line approach

considering:



� Community Impact To optimise participation and usage, whilst ensuring the likelihood of it



practice: and

� Management Opportunity The ability to manage and deliver the overall community benefits.

Against the four sites the findings are detailed in section 6.6 with the following

conclusions:

Site Conclusion

ELS Hall Park

#1

This is by far the most appropriate site in the City and would

complement all of Council’s Principles and Priorities from this

Study. ELS Hall Park provides the best option for gaining the

ROI that Council has identified while maximizing participation by

so many targeted groups in so many sports. It also has a

management and physical infrastructure that would support

such an investment.

An immediate option

Christie Park

#2

A Football centric site, which if repositioned and opened up for

the community, could be very successful in encouraging more

people to recreate. A management strategy would need to be

developed that includes reviewing the current GHFA

arrangements and the legal implications under the Crown Land

Act.

A medium term options

Eastwood

Park Upper

Oval

Although a good option for multi-sport, the limitations of the

closeness to the residential community and limited parking

place significant limitation for this site.

Not recommended in the short to medium term

Magdala Park

#1

Magdala Park has a number of positive aspects for

consideration around:

� Geographical siting in the City: and

� Ability for greater usage without impacting a residential

community

The concerns for the site are more significant, including:

� Historical use of the site as a tip does not indicate a

suitable base, or at best a need for a substantial

concrete base (probable cost in excess of $1,000,000)

for the pitch to site

� The secluded nature of the site could see it being open

for vandalism and security concerns

It would not be a recommended site based on current

circumstances

Recommendation 4:

From this Multiple-Bottom Line Assessment, ELS Hall Park Field #1 is

recommended as a multi-sports field incorporating a One-Turf Standards so the

Football (soccer); Rugby (Tag and Touch) Australian Rules and Cricket be played

there.



Recommendation 5:

Christie Park Field #2 to be considered as the second site, subject to the

repositioning of the complex as a community football centre with a clear strategic

focus on being more community inclusive.

7.6 What Financial Investment is Needed?

7.6.1 Indicative WOL Costs for ELS Hall As Field #1 is approximately 15,000m2 and to accommodate the above sports the following Whole of Life (WOL) indicative costings have been developed, and based on recent actual costing’s for similar type of surfaces, subject to similar variables being used. (e.g. base, surface type etc.)

Construction Costs

� Based on the multi-sport turf (6.7.2) together with a shock pad and assuming that no significant pavement is needed for the site.


$1,500,000

Maintenance Costs

� The maintenance costs are normally based on 1.5%,

but if there is significant usage ≥50 hours use would


$30,000

Replacement Costs

� It is envisaged that the surface should be replaced

every 10 years, subject to level of play and

maintenance commitment. The shockpad will

probably need replacing every 20 years. This cost

takes into account the turf replacement (including

disposal etc.) at 10 years (c.$530,000) and 50% of

the shock pad cost each decade ($200,000)

$730,000


Over a 30 year period the 10 year increment costing’s are as follows:



rate



shock pad

$3,040,000 $152,000


7.6.2 Financial Return on Investment – WOL Model To ascertain the hourly rate to charge for a complete WOL return the following


approach it takes, whether that be over 10, 20 or 30 years

Weekly

Usage Hours



20 hours $263 $146 $131

30 hours $175 $97 $87

40 hours $131 $73 $65

50 hours $105 $58 $52

60 hours $88 $46 $44


Depending on Council pricing strategy, this could be based around the return

needed. The revenue that could be raised will be linked to the philosophy of

usage that Council wishes to commit to. Certainly from (Table 33) an acceptable

market cost would be in the region of $75 per hour, which means that as long as

the field is programmed for 40 hours per week and costs are amortised over at

least 20 years the cost will be recovered (as shown in bold in table 34).

7.6.3 Financial Return on Investment – Maintenance and Replacement Model



the revenue stream needed would now present the ROI based on an amortised

figure of:

Time Period

Description Total Cost Annual Amortised Rate


Maintenance

$1,035,000 $103,500


Shockpad and Maintenance

$1,565,000 $78,250


Maintenance

$2,375,000 $79,166

This would mean that the ROI cost per hour of usage over the tree amortised


Weekly Usage Hours



20 hours $100 $75 $76

30 hours $66 $50 $51

40 hours $55 $38 $38

50 hours $40 $30 $30

60 hours $33 $25 $25






APPENDICES:



Appendix 1: Literature Review Document Strategic Intent Key Themes Links with Synthetic Study

Community Profile

2006 / 2001

ProfileID 2008

Assessment of demographic trends across the City

- Total pop of approx. 96,951 people with the forecast population for the 2011 Census at 104,114 people.

- This population is forecast to grow to a total of 118,010 by 2031 - 0.7% growth rate - 25-34 age group has seen the biggest decline - Growth in the 35 - 60 age profile - almost 4% of people born overseas are from China

- Service provision by way of programming can be influenced by demographic cohorts and trends but caution should be given to planning for infrastructure based on these indicators as needs will change as people move through various stages of their lives whereby physical assets can last decades.

- Ensuring flexible design, management and use with all infrastructure should therefore remain a key principle and facilities such as synthetic surfaces developed in strategic 'precinct' locations to ensure optimal use

Integrated Open Space Strategy

City of Ryde

July 2102

Framework for the provision and management of open space

- 197 open spaces under the care control and management of Council, of which 35% are over 1 ha

- 36% of all open space are under 0.2 ha - NSW Standard of 2.83 ha per 000, the City of Ryde provides - sufficient open space at 3.41 ha. - Level 1-4 classification system used with 1 being regional, 2 district, 3

neighbourhood and 4 local - Level 1 Citywide Sports Hubs at:

1) Meadowbank Park

2) Marsfield/Waterloo Park,

3) Morrison Bay Park/Bremner Park,

4) ELS Hall Park.

- Demand for an on an increased provision of open space will be a key consideration for any Council with a growth population. An 'accepted' standard national benchmark of 4ha per 1000 population will be negatively affected with any increase in population.

- NSW has a lower than average standard and increased loss of open space to developments and increased density will negatively affect the lifestyle of residents and councils ability to provide and manage open space.

- This will be particularly relevant for synthetic surfaces which are generally not fully accessible and therefore a quality over quantity principle should be considered and these assets developed at strategic rather locations to ensure optimal use and access

- a 70/30 principle of active v passive is an 'accepted norm' and therefore 70% of all open space should in theory have the capacity to be developed into areas for activities such as structured sport.

- Sporting precincts should be planned for level 1 or 2 (district or higher)

- Level 1facilities could be targeted for development of synthetic surfaces as these provide optimal access and use opportunities

City of Cities

A plan for Sydney's future

INTRODUCTION

NSW Govt

25 year growth plan for Sydney - Five aims

1 ENHANCE LIVEABILITY

2 STRENGTHEN ECONOMIC COMPETITIVENESS

3 ENSURE FAIRNESS

4 PROTECT THE ENVIRONMENT

5 IMPROVE GOVERNANCE

- Seven strategies

A ECONOMY AND EMPLOYMENT

B CENTRES AND CORRIDORS

C HOUSING

D TRANSPORT

E ENVIRONMENT AND RESOURCES

F PARKS AND PUBLIC PLACES

G IMPLEMENTATION AND GOVERNANCE

With the population increasing by 1.1 million in the next 25 years, the Government is planning now for Sydney’s future.

Identifies liveability and the importance of parks and public spaces on the lives and wellbeing of Sydney residents

Council has an opportunity to identify its key growth areas and align with the state strategy and seek partnering opportunities for the development of quality, consolidated sporting infrastructure and open space

-

City of Cities 25 year growth plan for Sydney - F2.2.2 Councils to consider appropriate types and No direct mention to parks and/or key parcels of open space in the City of Ryde but strong recognition of identifying and planning for growth



Document Strategic Intent Key Themes Links with Synthetic Study

A plan for Sydney's future

PARKS AND PUBLIC PLACES

NSW Govt

uses of open space in new developments for outdoor sports, indoor facilities access and car parking.

- F 2.2.3 Councils to continue to improve recreational facilities for range of age groups and interests

- F3.1 Improve Sydney’s major sporting and cultural event facilities. - F3.1.1 North councils to consider any opportunities to refurbish, reorientate and

increase the carrying capacity at existing sporting facilities.

areas and the need to consider good management models for sport and recreation precincts and open space use in general.

Opportunity for Council to be proactive and identify areas for precinct development and ultimately synthetic surface location.

Leisure and Recreation Needs

Community Consultation Report

(Draft not for public consultation)

Final Report

(Draft not for public consultation)

City of Ryde

April 2009

Ryde residents’ views on current and future leisure and recreation needs.

Focus on CALD communities

Top 10 leisure facilities / services currently in need are bike paths; off-leash dog areas; swimming venues; parks and gardens; playgrounds; walking paths/tracks; sportsfields and sports facilities; improved transport/accessibility/parking (an issue that emerged strongly from the Seniors’ Focus Groups); libraries; and picnic facilities and barbecues.

Unstructured activity more popular forms of recreation (similar to State and National trends) has identified Sport priorities as being: Sporting facilities; Water Use; Indoor facilities; Water-based activities; School facilities; and Gender issues

The drought and water shortages are encouraging Councils to adopt Water-Sensitive Urban Design (WSUD) principles in recreation and open space design.

- In recent times, the quality of sporting fields have been severely affected by reduced watering, resulting in players suffering impact injuries

Structured sport not as popular as unstructured but the need for groups to work collaboratively to provide and manage quality infrastructure remains important.

Synthetic surfaces per se not mentioned as part of this study but aligns with optimally utilised facilities and the need for Council to continue to work toward consolidated sporting precincts in collaboration with community sports groups.

Issue of WSUD and the impact long standing drought conditions have on sports surfaces and the need to consider good practices may align with the need to develop and share synthetic surfaces with a number of sporting groups and codes.

Northern Sydney Regional Sportsground Strategy

Northern Sydney Regional Organisation of Councils (NSROC)

July 2012

How to address the gap between sportsdemand with the limited space for sportsgrounds.

- A hierarchy of facilities to suit potential users and the sports played (field sizes, surfaces and the standard of support facilities); to support foundation and participation, as well as performance levels of sport.

- Planning and managing infrastructure to respond to demand and carrying capacity of grounds

- Carrying capacity of sportsgrounds questioned - Design of any future facilities should increase economies of scale and where

possible focus on several large complexes possibly from brownfield developments. - Synthetic fields don’t need to be sited in parks. - Select sites for synthetic fields should be

identified across the region, for both hockey and soccer. - Synthetic fields are not suited to all sports, and all sites ensure any development is

preceded by feasibility, detailed planning and design.

Key strategy which aligns with the provision of synthetic sports surfaces across the region

Some synthetic fields are required especially for training and preseason games, to sustain the demand for soccer. The lack of fund for infrastructure in the region will curtail the provision of synthetic surfaces.

Soccer and hockey deemed suitable sports for synthetic surfaces, however, sand based synthetic surfaces are generally not preferred options for hockey and a hybrid or water based surface may provide more opportunities for optimal use and access by more sports



Document Strategic Intent Key Themes Links with Synthetic Study

Best Value Review

Allocation and Management of Sportsgrounds

Volume 1

The State of Play

City of Ryde

Feb 2012

Best value approach toward the supply and management of sports grounds across the municipality

- Assessed the carrying capacity of sports grounds - current status is casual hire or seasonal permits for sports grounds - Approx. $1,441,27 spent on grounds maintenance and $299,920 received from

hire - Premier Parks identified as:

- Meadowbank Park - BrushFarm Park - Ryde Park - Eastwood Park - PioneerPark

- Identifies the need for formal agreements for sportsground use - The demand for soccer, rugby union, cricket and hockey already exceeds supply. - Recommends that Council should start to plan for synthetic surfaces

Given the nature of synthetic surfaces, the use and management will be critical. Carrying capacity will need to be carefully managed to ensure optimal use and life of the assets.

Higher level parks more than likely to be best locations for synthetic surfaces to ensure optimal access and use

Soccer and hockey are compatible sports for synthetic surfaces. Other uses compatible uses should be identified as part of the synthetic study report

Volume 2

Benchmarking Report

Benchmarked against

13 NSW Councils, 3 VIC and 1 WA

Assessed the performance of the City of Ryde against the 17 Councils

- Bookings - Fees and charges - Maintenance - In comparison to other Councils, Ryde provides a good suite of services given

limited resources

No direct correlation to synthetic surfaces rather the overall management of sports grounds across council.

Volume 3

Issues and Options

Highlights issues and opportunities in relation to sports ground management

- Council needs to embrace sports development - Capital works considered one of the biggest gaps - A new system to monitor and manage sportsgrounds is required - Better communication with sports groups regarding the use and management of

facilities and grounds - more technical assessment of carrying capacities is required - Report identifies the need for 'several' synthetic surfaces to alleviate existing wear

and tear of turf surfaces

25% cost recovery for sportsfields set as a target

Synthetic surfaces may assist in filling gaps for some sports but the management and use of these assets will need to be carefully managed.

Given they will be new assets, council has a good opportunity to establish from the onset a bookings and use system that will address some of the identified shortcomings in existing management of sorts grounds, e.g. determining optimum use, allocating access and communicating with users to ensure sustainable use and management

A capital expenditure and replacement cost needs to be factored into any development of synthetic surfaces and strategies employed to ensure optimal access as cost to construct and replace may be out of the financial reach of most community organisations

Volume 4

Provides Council with a direction in relation to the current and future use and management of sportsgrounds

- Summarises previous reports - policy framework around participation and sport development - community over commercial given priority - Associations needed to submit fixtures to allow Council to control use

Occupancy agreements encouraged

Reconfirms previous points in that synthetic surfaces are required and will need to be designed, managed and programmed in the most effective manner. Community groups that use these facilities will need to submit a full programme of competitions and events and Council seek to recuperate 25% maintenance costs of these facilities

Summary

It's clear to see that there is a demand for synthetic surfaces in the City of Ryde as in many areas around Australia. The challenge facing Council will be where and how many will be required to meet need, ensure optimal access and ultimately assist in better managing the use of sportsgrounds in the City. The synthetic study should therefore work toward identifying strategic locations which are suggested as being the larger parks of at least a District if not Regional classification. It should also identify compatible sports and other potential uses which are traditionally outside of use of such facilities, for example Frisbee golf and others. The cost to develop and replace such facilities will also require careful assessment and opportunities to partner with State Sporting Organisations (SSO's) and State Government will be a key strategy for the development of synthetic surfaces.

Given that council is considering developing these facilities, it also provides an ideal opportunity to establish a new booking and management system to ensure the cost recovery target of 25% is realised and communication with and between user groups clearly established and ultimately optimising use and managing carrying capacity for the benefit of the whole community.

Appendix 2: Site Analysis Results

Introduction:

Council instigated a Project Review Group (PRG) who together with the

consultant took part in a knowledge sharing workshop at Council on Thursday

7th March 2013.

After that knowledge sharing workshop each club representative and PRG

member were provided with the opportunity to identify from all of Councils key

sports fields which should be considered for synthetic use.

This allowed Council Officers together with the consultant the opportunity to

evaluate the options provided prior to the detailed evaluation.

The following sites were identified:

� Meadowbank Park

� Eastwood Park

� Brush Farm Park

� Marsfield Park

� Dunbar Park

� Christie Park

� Magdala Park

� ELS Hall Park

� Morrison Bay Park

� Gannan Park

Review:

The following review for each park, complete with recommendations was

concluded:

1. Meadowbank Park

� Long term masterplan (04/02/11 – Draft 2)

� Major redevelopment 5-25 years

� Funds could be funded by development of “Shepherds Bay”

� Masterplan overrides

� Downside is “on tip-site” and is so close to the shore line, this

could cause salt and flooding challenges

� Only real option is single field near Constitution Road

Long Term Option 5-10 years or once masterplan delivers statistics

2. Eastwood Park

� On boundary of Parramatta Council and Hornsby

� Parramatta’s – Epping area calls under Eastwood Park

� Hornsby – Somerville Park – Rugby Codes

� Needs to have a technically superior base for the field for

“Granny Smith Festival” which would need major heavy

vehicle usage

� ‘Upper’ used for fireworks at Festival

� Car parking challenge – used by commuters at Eastwood

Station

Possible – transport and other cultural festivals

3. Brush Farm Park

� Close to Parramatta Council border

� Masterplan just completed

� Important network area with significant cultural focus

� Low car park numbers

� Masterplan protects sights/lines

Not appropriate

4. Marsfield Park

� Large University – Macquarie – population and low cost

density area – high population

� Crown Land – which may impact on income that needs to be

paid 15-20%

� 2 fields and falls down to natural bushland area and possible

remnant vegetation

� No planning been done recently

� Rugby presently and cricket – home club

� Good trees to protect

� Epping Boys High School

� Limited car parking presently

� Multi-sport – Tag, Rugby, Soccer

Recommend to next stage

5. Dunbar Park

� Used for athletics (grass) presently have long jump/triple jump

pits and cages

� Off Epping Road

� Residential Area

� Next to St Joseph’s Training College

� Very limited parking

� No flood lights

Not recommended due to Athletics and wouldn’t be accommodated by residents

6. Christie Park

� Home to Gladesville / Hornsby Football Association

� Potential massive BUT managed by football association and

there is limited access to rest of the clubs

� Significant growth in Macquarie

� Forest – Crown/Community owned


7. Magdala Park

� East of city – next to Lane Cove Council border

� Ryde Magic Home

� Surrounded by river and park

� Baseball and 2 fields

� Lights presently being planned

� Very few residents

� Ability to modify layout and increase fields


8. ELS Hall Park

� Situated in middle of City

� 3 fields – field 2 first

� Combined with Rec Centre

� Limited parking

� Baseball (x2) and lights and soccer overlap

� 2 x AFL / cricket (not full size) – possibly

� Creek and environmental impact


9. Morrison Bay Park

� Next to river

� Constrained by council / fence-line to playing areas each with

2 full/part fields

� No lights (Plan of Management) gives permission for lights

� Low level parking and no option

� Building expanded recently for female change rooms

� World War II planes which were buried

� Significant foreshore to residential population

Not recommended due to look of capacity, closeness to dense residential area and waterfront

10. Gannan Park

� Surrounded low density residential

� Sports played are soccer (training), cricket and baseball

� Very under-utilised

� No floodlights – limited car parking and no opportunity to

expand

Not appropriate

The following sports were recommended to be considered for the next stage:

i. Meadowbank Park

ii. Marsfield Park

iii. Christie Park

iv. Magdala Park

v. ELS Hall Park

Appendix 3: NSW Hockey: Business Case

Business Case Template for Development of Hockey Facilities

1. Context: This is an excellent example of how a sport has encouraged a business case to

be developed and Council could consider developing such a template for

interested sports who wish to invest in synthetic surfaces directly.

2. Introduction - Why prepare a business case?

The most obvious reason for developing a business case is to justify the

resources and capital investment necessary to build new or extend/renovate

your hockey facility. A business case however is not simply a financial

justification but a document where all relevant facts are documented into a

cohesive and complete story that tells people about the what, when, where, how

and why of the project and the benefits to your members, the organisation and

to the community.

This includes an explanation of;

� Why the project is needed,

� What the benefits of the project are,

� How the project solves issues or creates opportunities,

� What the options and recommended solution involves,

� What the impact will be on the organisation (financially and services to

members),

� How much money, time and people will be needed to deliver the

project, and

� When and how will the project be delivered.

Whilst the primary goal is to secure funding for your facility development your

chances of success will be greater if you;

� Make it interesting and a compelling story,

� Provide the reader with a clear vision of the end result,

� Keep it clear and concise with minimal jargon and conjecture,

� Communicate all the facts to indicate you have done your homework,

and

� Demonstrate the value of the project to your organisation, your

members and to your financial bottom line, including the long term

viability of the project.

3. Submitting your Business Case

The majority of business cases for hockey facility development will be submitted

to local councils and state government agencies with some also seeking

Australian Government funding support through existing and new grant

programs. Hockey NSW has developed a Strategic Hockey Facility Plan which

helps to guide all levels of government to assess grant submissions against

strategic needs for the sport in NSW.

It would be highly recommended that any application for funding be supported

by Hockey NSW and comply with the Hockey NSW Facility Development Policy

adopted by Hockey NSW in October 2009. (A copy of this Policy is included in

Attachment 1). Indeed state government agencies will be guided by the

Facilities Plan and the Policy to help assess any applications for funding and

increasingly local councils are seeking guidance from state sporting

associations to help determine their approach to facility development and

funding.

To achieve the maximum level of support of your application, it is recommended

that draft and final business case submissions for funding be submitted to

Hockey NSW for endorsement and support.

4. Business Case Template

This table outlines the key areas a business case needs to address and

identifies some of the questions and issues that a funding partner would want to

know about.

Executive Summary

� Who you are

� What you want to do

� Why you want to do it

� What it will cost and what you are asking for

� When will it be done

Background

� Background information/history of your organisation

� How the proposal is linked to your organisation's vision and

strategic plan

� Description of your current services to members and scope of

competitions/programs/activities

� Demographics of your local area and of you organisation and trends

in participation, past and projected by age and gender

Project Scope

� What is the scope of your proposal and why is it the preferred

option

� What were the other options and why are they not preferred, i.e.

type of turf

� How does your option relate to the Hockey NSW Facilities Plan and

state/national trends and standards

Purpose

� What are the objectives of your proposal and why is this facility

development needed

� What will be the benefits to members, the organisation and to the

community

� What additional and/or new opportunities will this proposal generate

� Is there potential to incorporate other sport user groups to help

maximise the use of the facility

Financial Costs

� What is the total cost of your project

� What is your current financial position in terms of

income/expenditure and capacity to contribute to the project and its

ongoing costs

� How will these costs be derived (organisations, funding agency,

sponsors, members, other users etc.)

� What are the ongoing financial implications for the facility

development and how will they be met (lighting costs, carpet

replacement, increased water charges etc.)

� How have you planned for the long term financial viability of the new

development

� What are the financial implications on your members

Risk Assessment

� Are there any land lease risks associated with the project

� What are the risks associated during the development stage and for

the longer term viability of the facility

� Are there planning risks or community risks with the installation of

lights

� How do you plan to mitigate these risks

Project Management

� What is the project time line and what are the key milestones

� Who will project manage the development

5. Hockey NSW Facility Development Policy

� Hockey NSW is committed to supporting three International Standard

Facilities within a 2 hour driving radius of Sydney for the purpose of

international competition/events.

� Hockey NSW will support regional and metropolitan facilities to host

national and state competitions/events on both water based and hybrid

synthetic fields.

� Hockey NSW advocates the installation of hybrid synthetic fields in areas

where water availability is limited and that any water based synthetic

include water capturing and re-use capacity to reduce reliance on potable

water.

� Hockey NSW has identified the priority for synthetic field installation in the

greater Sydney area for the period 2010 to 2015.

� Any Hockey Association or Club seeking support from Hockey NSW in their

funding applications to Local, State or Federal Government for the

installation or redevelopment of a synthetic hockey field will need to comply

with the following:

� ave a minimum of 300 registered members.

� Have a long term plan for the association/club including strategies for

growth.

� Have completed the minimum requirements of the Hockey NSW

business plan template including all financial requirements and cost

implications on registered players.

� Make synthetic fields available for men's, women's and junior hockey.

� Ensure that all players are affiliated and registered with Hockey NSW.

Appendix 4: NSW Urban Activation Precinct Program

Herring Road, Macquarie Park

1. Precinct:

The Herring Road precinct is in Ryde local government area and is at the northern end of Macquarie Park. Investigations will centre on the area suggested by Ryde Council which includes the Macquarie Shopping Centre, Macquarie University and Ivanhoe Estate.

2. Reason for selection:

Renewal of this area will provide housing and employment close to transport to

help meet Sydney's growth needs. It maximises the use of existing

infrastructure, particularly Macquarie University Station. There is existing market

demand for new housing and employment in this area.

Investigation of the precinct will also take forward work started by the Macquarie Park Taskforce to examine opportunities to redevelop government lands within Macquarie Park.

3. Potential benefits:

The precinct will provide opportunities for living close to retail, employment and

education. It will make maximum use of existing transport infrastructure, in

particular Macquarie Park Station and bus services which provide convenient

access to Chatswood and Sydney CBD.

The precinct could also provide a vibrant town around the Macquarie University Station with high quality public spaces, new retail opportunities and improved connectivity to transport.

4. Status and future steps:

The Department has established a working group with staff from Ryde Council

and key State agencies. Investigations are on-going to refine the scope of the

precinct and the necessary planning studies. Once a planning framework has

been prepared, the studies will go out for public consultation so the community

can have a say on the future of their suburb.

A Community Reference Group will be established to receive briefings and provide feedback on the details of the investigations as well as sharing information with the wider community. Council has also been asked to nominate councillors and staff to participate in a steering group

5. Consideration for Study:

This precinct is less that 3km from ELS Hall Park and the growth will increase

significant demand for sport and recreation facilities. The additional demand

would mean that ELS Hall Park would most probably not be able to cope with

the needs for recreation and sport. It is suggested therefore that ELS Hall Park

explore the opportunity for a multi-sport facility that can be used for both

corporate sport and the increased resident’s recreational needs.

In addition Council should consider the opportunity to encourage Government or

Developer led investment in local pop up sports parks that can be used for

casual recreation in the business precincts for lunch time and after work

participation.

North Ryde Station

1. Precinct:

The North Ryde Station Precinct is within the Ryde local government area and is located south of Macquarie Park. Investigations have centred on the vacant government-owned land used for M2 upgrade works, a commercially operated tennis facility and a privately-owned employment site

2. Reason for selection:

Renewal of this area will provide housing and employment close to transport to help meet Sydney’s growth needs. It maximises the use of existing infrastructure, particularly North Ryde Station and provides housing where it is financially viable and there is market demand

3. Potential benefits:

The precinct will provide opportunities for people to live close to a major employment centre and within close proximity to high quality public transport which provides convenient access to other centres such as Chatswood, North Sydney and the Sydney CBD. The precinct will help transform vacant, under-utilised or employment land into a vibrant local centre with high quality public spaces, retail opportunities and improved connectivity to transport

4. Status and future steps:

Consultation has been undertaken with council, government agencies and the local community. A working group with staff from council and state agencies has met regularly through the process.

The Planning Study and draft Development Control Plan were on exhibition until 19 May 2013. Submissions are currently being reviewed. Amendments will then be made to the plans if required and a recommendation will be made to the Minister about the rezoning.

5. Consideration for Study:

This precinct is less that 3km from ELS Hall Park and the growth will increase

significant demand for sport and recreation facilities. The additional demand

would mean that ELS Hall Park would most probably not be able to cope with

the needs for recreation and sport. It is suggested therefore that ELS Hall Park

explore the opportunity for a multi-sport facility that can be used for both

corporate sport and the increased resident’s recreational needs.

In addition Council should consider the opportunity to encourage Government or

Developer led invest in local pop up sports parks that can be used for casual

recreation in the business precincts for lunch time and after work participation.

Appendix 5: Council Managed Sports Fields

GroundField Name (where

Ward Suburb AFL Soccer Rugby Cricket Baseball HockeyNetball Courts

Athletic Track

BILL MITCHELL PARK East Tennyson Point 1 S 2 JBREMNER PARK East Gladesville 1 S 1 SBRUSH FARM PARK West Eastwood 1 S 10G & 4HCHRISTIE PARK Field 1 West Macquarie Park 1 SCHRISTIE PARK Field 2 1 SCLEVES PARK East Putney 1 JDARVALL PARK West West Ryde 1 JDUNBAR PARK West Marsfield 1EASTWOOD PARK Upper West Eastwood 1 S 1 SEASTWOOD PARK Lower 1 SELS HALL PARK Field 1 Central Marsfield 1 S 1 SELS HALL PARK Field 2 1 S 1 SELS HALL PARK Field 3 1 S 1 SFONTENOY PARK Central Macquarie Park 1 SFORRESTER PARK West Eastwood InformalGANNAN PARK East Ryde 1 S 1 S 1 SMAGDALA PARK Field 1 East East Ryde 1 S 1 SMAGDALA PARK Field 2 1 SMARSFIELD PARK West Marsfield 2 S 1 SMEADOWBANK PARK Field 1 West Meadowbank 1 S 1 J 27 HardMEADOWBANK PARK Field 2 1 S 1 SMEADOWBANK PARK Field 3 1 S 1 SMEADOWBANK PARK Field 4 1 JMEADOWBANK PARK Field 5

MEADOWBANK PARK Field 6 1 S 1 SMEADOWBANK PARK Field 7 1 SMEADOWBANK PARK Field 8 1 S 1 SMEADOWBANK PARK Field 9 1 SMEADOWBANK PARK Field 10 1 S 1 SMEADOWBANK PARK Field 12 1 S 1 SMEADOWBANK PARK Field 13 1 SMONASH PARK East Gladesville 1 S 1 SMORRISON BAY PARK Field 1 East Putney 1JMORRISON BAY PARK Field 2 1 SMORRISON BAY PARK Field 3 1 S 1 JMORRISON BAY PARK Field 4 1 SMORRISON BAY PARK Field 5 1 J 1 JMORRISON BAY PARK Field 6 1 S 1 SNORTH RYDE PARK East North Ryde 1 S 1 SPEEL PARK East Gladesville 1 SPIDDING PARK East Ryde 1 S 1 J 1 SPIONEER PARK West Marsfield 1 S 4 SRYDE PARK Field 1 Central Ryde 1 S 1 SRYDE PARK Field 2 1 SSANTA ROSA PARK Central Ryde 1 S 1 JTUCKWELL PARK Central Macquarie Park 1 S 1 STYAGARAH PARK East Gladesville 1 JWATERLOO PARK West Marsfield 1 S 1 JWESTMINISTER PARK East Gladesville 1 S 1 S

TOTAL FIELDS 2 sen

33sen & 6 jun

4 sen19 sen & 6 jun

7 Sen & 2 jun

2 Sen 41 1

Appendix 6: Typical Weeks Program Costings

ZONE/DAY Pitch Set-up(Full: Half: Quarter etc) Time Hours $ Time Hours $ Time Hours $ Time Hours $ Time Hours $ Time Hours $ Time Hours $

Schools - (Free or nominal) Half Pitch 2 $7.50 09.30- 12.00 2.5 $37.50 09.30- 12.00 2.5 $37.50 09.30- 12.00 2.5 $37.50 09.30- 12.00 2.5 $37.50 09.30- 12.00 2.5 $37.50 $0.00 $0.00Business - Rate per person / team Quarter Soccer Pitch 40 $10.00 12.00-2.00 0 $0 12.00-2.00 0 $0 12.00-2.00 0 $0 12.00-2.00 0 $0 12.00-2.00 0 $0 $0 $0Schools - (Free or nominal) Half Pitch 2 $7.50 14.00-16.00 2 30 14.00-16.00 2 30 14.00-16.00 2 30 14.00-16.00 2 30 14.00-16.00 2 30 0 0

After School Development Program Quarter Pitches 30 $5.00 16.00 - 18.00 2 $300 16.00 - 18.00 2 $300 16.00 - 18.00 2 $300 16.00 - 18.00 2 $300 16.00 - 18.00 2 $300 $0 $0Home Club Full Pitch $70.00 18.00-20.00 2 $140.00 18.00-20.00 2 $140.00 18.00-20.00 2 $140.00 18.00-20.00 2 $140.00 18.00-20.00 2 $140.00 8.30 - 17.00 8.5 $595.00 08.30-16.00 7.5 $525.00External Community Clubs Full Pitch $75.00 20.00-22.00 2 $150.00 20.00-22.00 2 $150.00 20.00-22.00 2 $150.00 20.00-22.00 2 $150.00 20.00-22.00 2 $150.00 17.00 - 21.00 4 $300.00 17.00-21.00 4 $300.00Total hours Usage (Wk / Day) 76.5 $5,007.50 10.5 $657.50 10.5 $657.50 10.5 $657.50 10.5 $657.50 10.5 $657.50 12.5 $895.00 11.5 $825.00

Sat Sun

Total Earning Ability

Number of clubs / schools

Number of people

Rational for Use / Price

Mon Tues Wed Thurs Fri

To use the technology of synthetic surfaces to allow for greater use by the community who wish to recreate and play sport,

by satisfying the demand and encouraging development opportunities.