Indexes
February 8th, 2010
February 6th, 2010
February 5th, 2010
February 4th, 2010
February 3rd, 2010
February 2nd, 2010
February 1st, 2010
The following stories have received the most reader comments during the last 7 days.
- Will terrorists be given Miranda warnings? (75)
- President Obama's first year (67)
- Lodi Unified School District president issues warning to speakers over cuts (64)
- Local business leaders say tourism, Costco, Home Depot may play roles in city's future (60)
- Islamic symbol in mosaic — what is all the fuss? (49)
- Many reject the politics of 'no' (45)
- Writer comments on Neely column (42)
- The Home Depot hopes to join Costco at Reynolds Ranch (41)
- Time to shed the convenient sham of 'Don't ask, don't tell' policy (34)
- Police: Train victim was a Lodi teen (31)
ADVERTISEMENT
Lodi City Council takes a step to put artificial turf in at Grape Bowl
The city of Lodi will take the next step in putting synthetic grass in the Grape Bowl, but two council members are worried about the safety and expense of the rubber material.
In a 3-2 vote Wednesday night, the council put the project out to bid to find a company to design the field.
City staff made presentations addressing the safety concerns that Councilwoman Susan Hitchcock had mentioned at a previous meeting. Citing 11 studies, Jim Rodems, interim director of parks and recreation, said synthetic turf is safe for both humans and the environment.
City Manager Blair King went on to say that many public agencies in the area use it, including the city of Roseville, University of California, Davis and Delta College.
"We are not aware of any of them taking them out," he said.
The synthetic turf will cost about $1.2 million to install, which will be paid for with developer impact fees that had been set aside for a year-round field.
The city will have to replace part of the turf in 15 to 20 years, which means the city would have to put aside about $20,000 a year to prepare for that cost, Rodems said. This is about $60,000 less a year than he originally estimated when he thought the city would have to replace the entire field in 15 to 20 years, he said.
He also argued that maintenance costs and water consumption decrease with the synthetic grass.
Councilwomen Susan Hitchcock and JoAnne Mounce were the two to vote against moving forward with the installation. They both found studies that say there are health risks involved with the synthetic substance.
"It makes sense to me to air on the side of safety, especially when you are dealing with children," Hitchcock said.
One of the problems, Mounce said, is that all the artificial fields she had researched were not enclosed in a stadium. The synthetic material does heat up significantly faster than grass, and Mounce said she is worried it would be unusable during the summer.
"The Grape Bowl won't be called the Grape Bowl. It will be called the 'sweat bowl' because we will not be able to get any ventilation in there," she said.
Rodems said the city usually doesn't book the current grass field during the heat of summer days.
Hitchcock said she still has the "uh oh" feeling she had after they approved the installation in April, and then found out it was a controversial topic in the community.
"I feel like initially we didn't get the straight picture. ... I look at the conclusions of these reports, and the conclusions just don't leave me with a sense of comfort," she said.
Mounce said she would probably approve the turf if it was going in DeBenedetti Park because it would have better ventilation. "For me, it's the money aspect of it, which has been my problem with the Grape Bowl from the beginning because we have no business plan," she said.
Councilman Bob Johnson agreed that the stadium needs a business plan, but said it first needs to be compliant with the Americans with Disabilities Act. Those improvements start Monday.
"Before you can create a business plan, you have to market it. You can't have a business plan, if you don't have a place to go to the bathroom," he said.
Contact reporter Maggie Creamer at maggiec@lodinews.com or read her blog at www.lodinews.com/blog/citybuzz.
Search for Ads 
Today’s Print Ads 
RSS Feeds
Reader Feedback
Observer wrote on Aug 6, 2009 5:30 PM:
ameriCAN wrote on Aug 6, 2009 5:04 PM:
dogs4you wrote on Aug 6, 2009 4:30 PM:
dogs4you wrote on Aug 6, 2009 4:28 PM:
ameriCAN wrote on Aug 6, 2009 4:26 PM:
sa mom wrote on Aug 6, 2009 12:11 PM:
mp wrote on Aug 6, 2009 9:51 AM:
The only plans that the grape bowl committee has produced is the idea of a fully re-built Grape Bowl. See their website. No funding sources and no new uses.
Great, the taxpayers get hosed for someones elses dream.
Why did they look at putting a new turf field at DeBenitti Park like Mounce suggested?
Oh - thats right - they never listen to her! "
Observer wrote on Aug 6, 2009 9:26 AM:
lodidian wrote on Aug 6, 2009 9:14 AM:
It's obvious to me, some council members have a business plan for the grapebowl. The plan is UNWRITTEN and UNDER THE TABLE, but I'm sure the plan is for the three amigos to continue to approve spending on this "pet project".
You made an excellent point regarding the absence of a business plan for the grapebowl.
Bob Johnson said you need a place to go to the bathroom before you can have a business plan. His comment makes absoultely no sense. Your counter point to Johonson's sharp and unprofessional remark was excellent. You pointed out that banks and investors always require a plan before they lend. Good job.
It must be extremely frustrating for you and Susan Hitchcock to watch as these three do as they wish. It frustrates the hell out of me. They have the votes---not much we can do. "
Comments on this story are now closed.