|
|||||||||||||
Printer-Friendly
Email this Story
Post a Comment (17)
Field of dreams: Housing development draws praise for offer of artificial field
A hill crests in the middle of the splotchy field behind Newton-Lee Elementary School in Ashburn, where Matt Curry's 10-year-old daughter plays soccer. Patches of grass create mounds that are seemingly tall enough to turn an ankle if stepped upon. And that's not the worst of it.
"Look at this rock," said Curry, pressing down on the 6-inch-diameter slab with the ball of his foot. "A child could fall and hit her head on this. This is what our kids play on."
To combat safety concerns like these, as well as the problem of not having enough fields to accommodate a growing number of youth sports teams in Ashburn and Dulles South, Curry, president of the year-old Dulles South Youth Sports, and other parents are putting part of their hopes in, of all places, a housing development.
Being considered by the Board of Supervisors is the 499-home Braddock Village community slated for south of U.S. 50 near South Riding. Opposed by slow-growth advocates because it would add too many homes to the county’s Transition Policy Area, the proposal has caught the attention of area sports teams because of a promise by the developers, the Nicholas/Farkas Joint Venture and John D.M. Crerar Jr., to build a synthetic athletic field for the county.
Parents and coaches say such a field would be a safer alternative to the divots, mounds and knee-scraping stones they contend with on many of the elementary and middle school grass fields teams now use. Also, synthetic fields, made of particles of rubber, supposedly require less maintenance than grass and are usable in rain, meaning fewer games need to be rescheduled. Outside Redskins Park, there are no synthetic fields in Loudoun.
"The common good of this field far outweighs a few extra minutes sitting in traffic," said South Riding resident Steve Bell, one of a half-dozen people who spoke in favor of Braddock Village at the board’s business meeting Dec. 4.
Troy Cromwell, incoming president of the 32-team Ashburn Youth Football League, said “horrible fields” topped the list of a coaches’ survey his league recently conducted. Like Dulles South, his teams play at local elementary and middle schools. "My interest is not who pays for the fields. My interest is to build a superior program,” he said. "We cannot do another year on these same fields. It's just not safe."
County officials acknowledge the benefits of artificial fields. The problem, though, is paying for them. At an average price tag of about $750,000, installing one costs considerably more than simply painting lines on a field of grass. And with a tight budget expected next year, immediate money for artificial fields may be scarce.
"There is no money in the pot to do all this stuff," warned outgoing Supervisor Stephen Snow (R-Dulles), commenting on the overall infrastructure needs of Dulles South.
All the more reason, some Braddock Village supporters say, to have a developer pick up the tab for the field.
“This would cost zero tax dollars,” said Curry, adding that his league, which offers football, cheerleading and wresting, would maintain the field. "Four-hundred-ninety-nine homes is nothing to what we already have. But I don't care about the homes. I just want the field.”
By his count, Curry said this football season, the league's first, “four severe injuries” were attributed to field conditions.
“This is embarrassing for Loudoun County," he concluded. “They might as well be playing on asphalt. Actually, maybe they should. At least asphalt is smooth."
Supervisors will decide the fate of the Braddock Village rezoning proposal, and its synthetic field, this year or in early 2008.
Contact the reporter at jjacks@timespapers.com
I am embarrassed to be a Loudoun resident!!! Our coddled kids now need artificial fields?? And then at the end of the first day of practice they all get trophies for participation. No wonder the 20-something-year-olds are struggling in the workplace. They are waiting for their parents to call their boss' and defend them after their bad review.
Posted by truthseekerva
Report Offensive Content
Ha! I agree with "truthseekerva". Kids today can't play on regular grass because of rocks and dirt mounds? Please.
Posted by dpunty
Report Offensive Content
What this article fails to address is the precedent that could be set by approving Braddock Village. Braddock Village was part of the Transition Area CPAM that would have allowed 33,000 more homes in the Route 50 corridor. Citizens fought long and hard and that CPAM was finally defeated. If the outgoing Board passes Braddock Village, it could open up all the Transition Area to massive development. It would no longer be a matter of a few more minutes added on to a commute, it would be gridlock. A football field is not worth it and it is selfish of those few parents of DSYS to try to force Braddock Village on the rest of Loudoun County.
Posted by Bobcat
Report Offensive Content
It not a matter of the kids being "cottled" it's a matter of safety. The unsafe fields our kids are playing sports on are causing severe injuries. Truthseekerva's comments are just plain silly and uniformed. There aren't enough playing fields in LoCo and the ones we have are hazardous and unsafe. Synthetic fields are safer as they offer much better impact absorpsion than the hard pack clay, divoted, rock studded fields we now have and they allow up to 4 times the playing time over natural grass fields. Arlington, Washington DC and Fairfax have all gone to synthetic fields for these reasons and the fact that synthetic fields cost less in the long run. If the development and health of the youth in LoCo isn't important to the Board of Supervisors or it's residents that's a poor indicator of the who we are and what we stand for and our priorities are as a county. Bobcat, this would not set any precendents as that all future development would be voted on for their own merits. This has nothing to do with CPAM and 499 homes would hardly contribute much new traffic. This article also fails to mention the fact that the developer would also proffer a badly needed middle school to help alleviate overcrowding at Mercer Middle School and would proffer $8 million in badly needed road improvments. This is BIG WIN for our commuinity and Loudoun County as a whole. The kids are already here, they need safe fields, it's unethical and immoral to allow even one child to get hurt due to hazardous field conditions. If the residents of Loudoun County don't care about it's kids than who will?
Posted by mattc
Report Offensive Content
Mattc - perhaps you did not pay attention at Dec 4th BOS meeting or perhaps you are purposefully misleading the public. The county attorney was specifically asked if Braddock Village would set a precedent that would force the county to accept other rezonings in the transition area. His answer that the question was best answered in executive session implied that indeed it would set a precedent. If the fields are as bad as you claim, then I am surprised you allowed children to play on them this year - that certainly would be unethical and immoral. This whole artificial terf field proffer is a fishy as the $2,000 political donation that Supervisor Snow originally reported as coming from Dulles South Youth Sports - a nonprofit organization not allowed to contribute politically.
Posted by Bobcat
Report Offensive Content
This is laughable. Yes, kids need safe fields. Kids DON'T need synthetic fields. If a Developer wants to pony up the money for fancy fields, great but the county better make sure the long term maint. costs are **comparable** to grass fields. Also gotta wonder, is a synthetic field the BEST use of Developer dollars these days?? Roads = yes, schools = yes, public saftey = yes, fancy field = ? Pull up the rocks and let the kids play on god's grass.
Posted by Grumpy
Report Offensive Content
I am afraid I cannot support this approach to getting a "synthetic" field upon which the kids can play.
First, what is wrong with a grass field? I played 14 seasons of football on grass and I am fine. If you are worried about "safety" then don't let the kids play football. The sport itself is inherently dangerous. I read somewhere that the fake field would cost on the order of $750,000. That would buy a lot of grass seed and fertilizer as well as maintenance for a few fields instead of making one fake one.
Second, I take issue with the idea that the builder can dangle a piece of candy in front of the county and still rob us. The "few minutes" that are added to my commute are added to mine and the other 50-100,000 commuters each day- each way. That is a LOT of idling cars wasting gas on these STILL crowded roads. Adding MORE homes will not solve this BIGGER problem that we have.
Third, what the builders are doing is separating their enemies (we residents) so that they only take on a small portion of the population instead of the whole population (ala Sun Tzu). A divided enemy is a conquered enemy. By offering token promises and chump change they are buying off different groups so they can destroy any organized effort to keep them in check. The builder can then carry on with destroying this county by continuing to shoe horn families onto postage stamp lots without a fight. Instead of paying off a part of the population with a fake field, how about they cram FEWER homes on the lots they have and give kids YARDS they can play in and minimize the impact on the traffic mess we already have.
No, I say DON'T approve the 499 homes unless the builder FIRST builds up the infrastructure we need (i.e ROADS and water pressure!) AND uses larger lots AND provides four GRASS fields on which the kids can play. Of course, this county’s leadership lacks the backbone to do anything against the builders and their HOA’s and so this whole issue is moot at best.
Posted by yertle
Report Offensive Content
What's laughable, if it wasn't such a shame are the unsafe fields on which our kids have to play sports on. The fields we have now ARE NOT grass, they are hardpack clay, dirt and rocks with sporadic clumps of grass to trip on! If the fields were safe this wouldn't even be an issue! I completely agree that the county should get their act together and fix the existing fields we have (which we don't have enough of). The fields in LoCo are a disgrace and an embarrassment to the county and the community as a whole. I would be fine with natural grass fields, assuming the county would make them safe to begin with and then maintain them, they don't do it now, so what makes anyone think they will in the future. What choice do we have other than to let the kids play on the rock studded, hardpack clay fields we currently have? Not playing sports is not the answer and a cop out. Statistically basketball and bicycling cause FAR MORE injuries than football so under this same logic our kids shouldn't play basketball or ride bikes, correct? Plus we're talking about ALL the kids who participate in soccer, lacrosse, football and baseball, this isn't just a football issue, this is a county-wide problem and effects ANY child who participates in ANY sport that requires a field. Should they join gangs and do drugs instead? Should we be forced to commute to Fairfax County where they have decent fields because LoCo can't provide safe playing fields? Why would Fairfax, Arlington, Washington DC and MANY other towns and counties across the country go to synthetic fields? Is it so their kids can play on "fancy" fields? I think not, it's because it costs the them LESS MONEY than maintaining natural grass fields! Plus the fact you get up to 4 times the playing time on a synthetic fields as rain does not adversely effect them, so games and practices aren't cancelled a big plus when you don't have enough fields to begin with. They also have better shock absorption value, thus are safer. Did I mention they COST LESS MONEY in the long run? I recommend to do your homework and research so you can comment with facts rather emotion. 499 homes is a drop in the bucket, it's nothing and won't add much more traffic. Plus we get a FREE new middle school to help alleviate an already overcrowded middle school and $8 MILLION in road improvements. The kids are already here, we have a moral obligation as a community to care of them and look out for well being of our kids, they are our future.
Posted by mattc
Report Offensive Content
Bobcat, BTW, as I am sure you are well aware DSYS has never contributed to ANY money to ANY political campaign or any other campaign for that matter. PLEASE make sure you get your facts correct and stop spreading lies and rumors, it does not help your position in this debate. DSYS has total transparency we would be happy to show anyone our books and bank statements anytime, just let me know the time and place. I guess when you are disguising your name the lies come easily....
Posted by mattc
Report Offensive Content
mattc - please read what I wrote. I said it was originally posted as coming from DSYS. Later, it was changed to be a contribution from a founder of DSYS. I don't think anyone actually ever saw a copy of the canceled check to prove it one way or another. Any way you see it, it was a large donation to Snow and now DSYS is on the receiving end of a proffer. By the way, the developer is not even proffering the land and field. - it is a "use agreement" between the Braddock Village HOA and DSYS. There are a lot of non profits who could use a nice proffer - how about Girl Scouts, Boy Scouts, 4H, etc... I think it is wrong for the County to accept proffers that are not going directly to the County for services provided by the County.
Posted by Bobcat
Report Offensive Content
The check was for $1000 (not $2000) and was a personal check from a private citizen from his personal checking account, which last time I checked is well within a private citizens right. Yes, this private citizen happens to be on the DSYS BOD. Again, please debate with facts and not rumor and innuendo. This field will be available to all of the citizens of Loudoun County but will be managed and maintained by DSYS, again at no cost to the tax payers. We would be happy to let Boy Scouts/Girl Scouts and 4H use this field as well as soccer, lacrosee and any other youth organization, the more this field gets used the better! It would be put to full use and wouldn't wear out like natural grass fields. The County can't maintain and manage the existing fields they have now, so how can we trust them to maintain and manage this one?
Posted by mattc
Report Offensive Content
Mattc - The problem is it should not be up to you and DSYS to decide who gets to use a field. Proffers should be property of the County not an HOA or non profit association. Why should I have to sit in traffic so you son can play football closer to home? The property in question is already being considered for condemnation by the school board for a middle school and high school. The County (not DSYS) would get new fields without the traffic. If this go thru, then the County will have to find another High School site at considerable more expense than this land due to the precedent set by this rezoning. Plus, there is a private company that has applied to build artificial turf fields in Ashburn. Why not rent one of their fields?
Posted by Bobcat
Report Offensive Content
Why should we have to rent fields? That's CRAZY! It's the governments responsiblity to provide adequate and safe fields for our children! Why should I, and all the other parents of our kids who play sports have to drive all the way across the county, sit in traffic for an hour each way to play on a safe field? This just compounds the traffic problem! 500 cars all leaving Dulles South to head to Ashburn at rush hour to play soccer, lacrosse and football, that's is the epitome of illogical! You complain about traffic, but your solution just adds to it! Again, your logic makes no sense! There is study after study professing the benefits of synthetic fields. Synthetic fields are safer, COST LESS MONEY, are better for the enviroment, they require far less maintenance and you get up to 4 times the playing time over natural grass fields. This is not a football thing, this effects EVERY child who plays ANY sport requiring a field. You keep saying "why should I....", that's a pretty selfish statement. I think the 1000's of kids who play sports in LoCo, who deserve safe fields to play on are more important than you having to spend an extra 30 seconds in traffic. Below are just a few links to research supporting my agrument for synthetic fields including comparative analysis.
http://www.sandfordgroup.com/editoria...
http://www.arlingtonva.us/Departments...
http://www.cityfieldsfoundation.org/C...
http://www.sportsurfacing.com/html/li...
http://www.rosenet.org/MAF/default_fi...
http://www.bhsfieldofdreams.org/pdf/T...
http://www.moorestownaa.org/docs/Scho...
http://www.rcafsite.com/Documents/Rep...
Posted by mattc
Report Offensive Content
It is not the government's resposibility to provided safe football fields for our children. It is a nice benefit, but certainly not a responsibility. Using your argument, it is then the governments responsibility to provide riding rings and stables for horseback riders, pools for swimmers, ice rinks for skaters, ski slopes for skiers, etc... Oh, and they should all be located close by so none of us have to drive far. Give me a break. It is the County's responsibility to educate our children and provide for public safety.
Posted by Bobcat
Report Offensive Content
Sorry Bobcat, I expect more out of our County government than education and public safety. If you have the land for riding rings and stables then so be it if a developer wants proffers it. We do have swimming pools in our HOA's for the swimmers, we have Ashburn Ice Rink for the skaters and really don't have the weather for skiing. Just Education and Public Safety, give me a break.
Posted by Steve
Report Offensive Content
Bobcat...btw...have you ever heard of by-right development? This has essentially killed Loudoun County. Turn this down and the developer can and will build his 66 homes in one small cluster, provide no land for a badly needed middle school, no road improvements and no field for our youth. Then when a developer friendly board comes back, he will rezone the property again. Sorry Bobcat, we do need the school, we do need the $8M in road improvment and we need the field.
Posted by Steve
Report Offensive Content
Steve,
True with by-right, low impact development, you will not get proffers on those 66 homes, but you also do not get proffers on those 66 homes with a rezoning. You only get proffers on homes above the base density. Personally, I am for impact fees in the transition area. That way the county can collect on every home built. I am glad to hear that your HOA provides you with a pool. Most likely they only allow members of your subdivision swim there. I do not believe in the county paying for services not open to all qualified residents. The Ashburn Ice Rink is a private facility. A private company is looking to build a sports complex in Ashburn which includes 6 fields, 4 with artificial turf. Similar to the ice rink for ice skaters, your desire for artificial turf will soon be met by the private market. My point about the riding rings and swimming pools is that the County cannot and should not provide for every unmet want. I want a convertible, a large house and lots of land. However, knowing that I cannot afford that, I drive a 7 year old car and live in a house that I can afford. My needs are met, but not all my wants. I am a grown up and I accept that.
Posted by Bobcat
Report Offensive Content
You must be logged in to post a comment.