« Destroying the Evidence on 22nd Street 387 Hancock Goes Into Contract »

November 28, 2006

Believe It: Fake Grass For Cadman Plaza

plaza
When we first posted last April about the plan to put astroturf down in Cadman Plaza, most commenters weren't too happy about the idea. Now that the turf is being rolled out, it seems like a good time to revisit the topic. What it really comes down to is what the alternatives are: Defenders of the plan say its fake grass or a dust bowl while critics argue that it would just take a litte time and money to have a real lawn. Obviously we'd rather see real grass there but we don't have any particular insight into the debate. But how hard can it really be to grow grass if there is sufficient resources and will?
Cadman Plaza Astroturf [Brooklyn Heights Blog]
Fake Plastic Grass: It Wears the CPCC Out [Brownstoner]
Photo by Two Tones




Posted by Brownstoner at 9:38 AM | Comments (35)
Categories: Gardening

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.brownstoner.com/mte/mt-tb.cgi/46

Comments

Mr. B: Your closing question has its answer built into it. It's not hard to grow real grass if there are sufficient resources, but there aren't sufficient resources. The Parks Department's budget has been slashed to the bone by the last four mayors (two Republicans, two Democrats). That is why it comes down to fake grass or a dust bowl. Nobody, starting with Parks, prefers fake grass to real grass.

Posted by: Anonymous at November 28, 2006 10:31 AM

I'm sure growing it isn't hard. And if you want it to remain pretty then you fence it in and not allow active use-- no playing sports, groups, or back to dust bowl.

Posted by: Anonymous at November 28, 2006 10:43 AM

hardly the case in Central Park or Prospect Park...

Posted by: Anonymous at November 28, 2006 10:48 AM

If you are going to fence it in and just look at it, as opposed to use it, then it might as well be artificial.

Turfgrass is incredibly hard to grow and maintain under the stresses of city life. Thousands of footsteps tromping day in and day out compress the soil; this prevents nutrients and oxygen from getting to grassroots, and prevents rainwater from draining properly. Thats' what creates a dustbowl.

The alternatives are fencing it off (pointless) or aeration, where you poke holes in the turf to break up the soil, allow nutrients, oxygen, and water to seep downward, and promote deeper root structures. A program of deep tine aeration throughout this city's parks would have phenomenal results - I can only imagine that lack of funding prevents this.

Posted by: Anonymous at November 28, 2006 10:48 AM

grass, and trees and bushes for that matter are a benifit to the environment, astroturf taxes it. I can see using it for city park playing fields...but a public plaza? come on. and how will this be cleaned - animals and humans will still crap and piss on it....natural grass cleans itself.

This is the dumb dumb dumb thinking of the current administration/city planners - they are going to leave a worse scar on this city than the 60s planners.

Why not an alternative to grass? maybe a mix use or landscaping with hedgerows to protect some areas?
A hardier breed of grass? no, lets just plop plastic down...

Posted by: Anonymous at November 28, 2006 11:24 AM

I think that the turf is the compromise between pretty grass that can't be used and public space that can be. This area is used by local schoolchildren as open space and for soccer matches on the weekends. There is a lack of large open space in this neighborhood, and fencing the area is not the best use. This is the same reason that many public schools are moving from grass to turf. Its not the prettiest thing but it allows everyone to use it. I'd suggest that folks advocate for turfing of more existing concrete parks, which would then allow larger open spaces to be reverted to natural grass. But at the moment, this is probably the best we can hope for.

Posted by: Oh Lord! at November 28, 2006 11:29 AM

10:48-actually, it is the case in Central Park, where the conservancy regularly closes its lawns after it rains or heavy use.

11:24-as 11:29 points out, there is little active recreation space in the area. this space no longer functions merely as a public plaza. as for cleaning (I'm sure you'll laugh, and you're entitled), there is a vacumn cleaner like device.

Posted by: Anonymous at November 28, 2006 11:37 AM

There was a lot going on with this project that wasn't 100% out in the open especially how it is used by the private schools nearby as their playground. In other words, it does get a lot of use but by a couple of private institutions. Now, why the city needs to create what is basically a playground for these kids is not clear. Seemed like a good time for a public/private initiative instead of a closeted process with public money.

Posted by: Anonymous at November 28, 2006 11:56 AM

Kids are kids, no matter where they go to school, and they need outdoor space.

Posted by: anonymous at November 28, 2006 12:24 PM

Part of the problem is that there was more open space which was used by several of the schools years ago that was closed, demolished and then sold to developers. The site of the Brooklyn Marriott used to be used as play space for private school children during the day and after school, and as a de-facto waiting area for family court when the weather was nice. You can argue about whether that was the best use for this land, but it was part of a long-standing (gentleman's?)agreement with these schools. When the decision was made to create developer space, those users were moved to this other location and the current dustbowl was created.

The fact is that while these schools have the bulk of the Mon-Fri daytime use of that area, it is not limited to those groups and plenty of neighborhood residents use the space as well. I don't think that encouraging private financing of space which would then only be used by this very narrow segment of the constituency is the best use either. At least this way, everyone has a shot at using this park. Not to mention that many schools (public and private)utilize public park space around the city including Randall's Island, the Parade Grounds, Central Park, etc. This is nothing new.

Posted by: Oh Lord! at November 28, 2006 12:30 PM

“If a horse won't eat it, I don't want to play on it.” -Dick (Richie)Allen

Posted by: Ace at November 28, 2006 12:44 PM

I witnessed a protest at which demonstrators chanted "No Fake Grassky, David Yassky!". The whole project is being driven by a desire to create gym and soccer space for students at Saint Ann's School at taxpayer expense.

Posted by: anonymous at November 28, 2006 12:46 PM

it's not just St. Ann's kids.. it's also immigrants from South America, Columbia and Europe who like to play pick-up soccer games. Basically, it's people who wants to play sports vs. people who like the idea of grass for environmental or esthetic reasons.

Posted by: OE at November 28, 2006 1:17 PM

Please make it stop........

All u people do is complain. How many of u a##holes ever set foot in that park, how many of you have kids?

I've played soccer, football, baseball in that park. My kids learned how to ride a bike there. I can't wait for the turfgrass fields to open!!

Posted by: anon at November 28, 2006 1:18 PM

There's fake grass in the little park on south oxford/cumberland in FG that is surprisingly soft -- great to sit on from a comfort and dirt point of view. And that splash of even, well-kept green is really a mood lifter, esp. on grey days. In short, I thought I would hate it but i don't.

It's important to point out, though, that this park is locked every night and no dogs are allowed. And locals tend to it, picking up trash etc, probably making the "lawn" a little, or a lot, cleaner than average. And there's basically zero through-foot-traffic.

Posted by: Anonymous at November 28, 2006 1:19 PM

go check out McCarren Park, they redid the dust bowl soccer field the same way and it is wonderful. They are obviously changing over areas of heavy use in the city. Just look at FG park, they reseeded and gated off the area for part of the summer and it's once again a mess. Soccer fields = astroturf.

Posted by: g at November 28, 2006 1:27 PM

those pick-up games are weekends mornings. the schools use it (to the exclusion of others) M-F 10-2pm. they should have ponied up.

Posted by: Anonymous at November 28, 2006 1:28 PM

"Oh Lord," I remember the park at the western end of Myrtle Avenue, between Jay and Adams streets, as full of drunks and nodding junkies. That's not to say the school kids didn't play there, but I can't picture it.

Posted by: Anonymous at November 28, 2006 1:32 PM

I recoiled when I first heard about the fake grass going onto the soccer fields at the Parade Grounds, but after living with the Dust Bowls for years, it was better than nothing. Turns out, it was also better than grass--because no matter how Parks Dept. fenced it in to let it re-grow, soccer players would ALWAYS cut the fence and play on it too soon and kill it, and the Dust Bowl would return.
Plus, the perpetual green is cheerful in January...

Posted by: Brenda from Flatbush at November 28, 2006 1:32 PM

I went to st anns--we used to use it for recess, but it was by no means exclusive; I think ps 8 also used it at the same time. I _still_ use it for pickup soccer games, running, frisbee throwing etc.

It has been a dust bowl for 25+ years -- I applaud what they are doing.

Posted by: Anonymous at November 28, 2006 1:58 PM

i just want to know whether dogs will be permitted on this fake grass? yikes, if they are!

Posted by: Anonymous at November 28, 2006 2:16 PM

it hasn't been a dust bowl for 25 years. I have no real opinion on the whole thing, but there was grass there 15 years ago. Nice grass

Posted by: Anonymous at November 28, 2006 2:25 PM

I also went to St. Ann's. To suggest that I was using the park, from ages 9-13, "to the exclusion of others" is ludicrous. For one thing, the school applies for and receives permits from the Parks Dept. to use the park for recess and phys. ed. every year. Presumably, fees are involved. Public schools, after school programs, and many, many other members of the community use this park.

The park also DOES get a lot of through foot traffic. It is the most direct route between the courts and the Heights. That, combined with its use by Jehovah's Witnesses playing soccer and football at lunch, soccer games on weekends, dogs, after school programs, etc., means that trying to maintain an impeccable lawn there would be both impractical and an irresponsible waste of tax dollars.

The fake grass actually looks pretty good (I walk by every day). And no one has mentioned that the renovation of the rest of the park -- jogging paths, sitting areas, paving -- were sorely needed and look beautiful.

If you live in the city, you should be greatful to see any greenspace being given the repairs and renovations that are so clearly needed. The Parks Dept. is not able to fund projects like this everywhere they are needed. If they were to spend all of their maintenance budget preserving a manicured lawn for septugenarian sourpusses to stare at, the city as a whole would suffer.

Posted by: Anonymous at November 28, 2006 2:26 PM

I don't feel comfortable on fake grass, suppose bums urinate on it, or people drop cigarettes on it. I thought this area had more class.

Posted by: anonymous at November 28, 2006 3:14 PM

Don't want anon 3:14 to be uncomfortable. Lets have another protest.

Posted by: Anonymous at November 28, 2006 3:54 PM

There is a popular spot for dogs on the other side of the monument from the fake grass. I would hope signs would go up to keep the dogs off and the dog owners will respect that.

Posted by: Anonymous at November 28, 2006 4:17 PM

"I would hope signs would go up to keep the dogs off and the dog owners will respect that."

(:} c'mon, we're talking bklyn, right. dog poop is king on these streets.

Posted by: Anonymous at November 28, 2006 4:25 PM

I hope dogs are allowed and people keep their kids off it. And parents respect that.

Posted by: Anonymous at November 28, 2006 8:04 PM

Fake turf has been shown to cause much more harmful sports injuries than grass or just plain dirt. Why not have a (natural) surface that everyone can enjoy, rather than just a few?

Posted by: carla at November 28, 2006 9:48 PM

Fake grass comes in many different guises and when you are talking about the quality stuff now available, it no longer should lead to the injuries and problems of Turf of old. Additionally it should drain fairly well, which should help with the problem of dog poo/pee (not that it should allowed) - that being said based soley on the ridiculously bright green shade in this picture, I fear that the parks department went with the cheap stuff (better quality generally looks more natural)

Posted by: David at November 29, 2006 11:10 AM

Thank the Lord this place is being renovated.
Unless there's some "Cadman Park Conservancy" out there, the park is administered by the budget-strapped Parks Department.
The fake grass (much improved from the old Astroturf of the late 1960's/early 1970's) is very good for the types of heavy, almost daily multiple uses the Cadman Plaza park will get.
Including the walks of defendants and/or their attorneys from the diner across the street to the courthouse.
Just got to keep the TV trucks off of it when there's a major case at Brooklyn Federal Court - which in its new location is closer to Tillary Street -- where the trucks park now.

Posted by: RealLife at November 29, 2006 5:54 PM

In New York in 2006, if a politician isn't able to develop a plan and muster the resources to seed and maintain real grass in a public plaza, he or she should not be in government.

Posted by: Anonymous at November 29, 2006 11:12 PM

Hey, 11:12 PM.....why don't you run for Mayor of NYC. After all, you seem to have it all figured out! Take a sip of your latte and bitch on someone else's blog.

Posted by: anon at December 2, 2006 8:45 AM

Hey 8:45 AM, local governments all over have been figuring out how to maintain parks without resorting to plastic ground cover for a very long time. It's hardly a snobbish concept. Why don't you go sip a Slurpee at your local Walmart and come up with something intelligent to add to the conversation?

Posted by: Anonymous at December 5, 2006 1:13 PM

It's unbelievable how little info there is out here for fake grass. SYNLawn is amazing grass, not a compromise at all, just as good as real. You are all unfamiliar with it, but you should just go see it- you have a distributor in your area and it has been installed on roof top gardens in Manhattan, public schools in New York-not the football field grass, but real synthetic landscape grass- the WYNN Hotel in Las Vegas has 5.5+ acres of it! We install it on the front and back yards of $20 Million dollar houses here in Los Angeles and all around the country

Posted by: SYNLawn at December 8, 2006 12:37 AM

Post a comment

Please be patient while your comment is published. It may take a moment.

Latest Restaurant Additions