I had posted this report, but that was before I learned how to insert a JPEG of the file so you can now see the actual document, so here is the document. At the annual town meeting we will be asked to vote $1.4m. to replace the MHS turf field.
The initial evergreen field was installed around 2004 (from memory), funded entirely with private donations totaling over $600,000, as a Medfield Foundation initiative lead by Tim Nugent. The field when built had an expected ten year life, before it was to need substantial work.
This current report does not say how long the proposed field will last, but it does quote a 20-25 year life for the Alternate #1, which adds about $250,000 to the cost. As I understand things, that is not the suggested option, since the cost I have heard stated is the $1.4m., which is the cost of the basic replacement in this report. If that basic field still has a 10 year life, it may behoove the town to pay the extra $250,000 now to get an extra 10-15 years of use before having to pay for another replacement, versus paying for a full replacement in another 10 years.
The field is located in an area that is wet, and was reportedly as a result always a marginal location for a playing field because of that wetness. At the time the time of the original construction of the turf field the schools reportedly did not want to consider other less wet locations.
This is the sort of large expense that should be on the town’s new 20 year capital plan that the town is looking to create – a known large repeating expense for which we as a town should budget and plan ahead. Funding the creation of that new 20 year town wide capital plan is another ATM article.
Paying the extra 250K seems like a no-brainer if those dollars and life expectancies are accurate.
I agree if my assumptions are correct – I do think we need to get the full details stated by the school department, rather than my assumptions, as I am not directly involved. Thanks for your input Jim.