New Search
Hammitt, Bob <br /> From: Rhay, Tim <br /> To: Hammitt, Bob <br /> Cc: Morgan, Dick (RIS1) <br /> Subject: City - District 4J Mowing Agreement and Cooperation Issues <br /> Date: Thursday, January 06, 1994 5:02PM <br /> Per your request, here are some comments on the City /4J mowing agreement and the concept of wider <br /> maintenance cooperation between the City and District 4J. <br /> In the main, the mowing agreement has worked out well for both agencies. There have been a few "single <br /> incidents" that were problematical at the time, but the concept has proven itself workable. The problems that I <br /> recall include: <br /> 1. 4J staff turned on irrigation system at Roosevelt Middle School during period of high rainfall. Both 4J (central <br /> maintenance) and our staff were unaware of this for several weeks, but the result was that the turf areas were <br /> un- mowable and it caused operational delays. Once we realized the irrigation was on, a phone call to Doug <br /> Lemley (4J Grounds Supervisor) solved the problem. There have been some further problems from time to time <br /> with wet or soft spots at this school that were related to irrigation or overwatering but, in each case, once I have <br /> been made aware of the difficulty, a call to Doug has solved the problem. <br /> 2. When the agreement began, three large 4J parcels that became a City mowing responsibility were not <br /> irrigated and were rougher than City turf areas. There was concern about damage to mowing equipment and <br /> operator safety mowing these sites. (Our equipment was designed for irrigated turf, 4J's was better designed for <br /> un- irrigated areas.) 4J is in the process of irrigating at least two of these sites and, while some grading and <br /> clean -up could still be done to bring them up to City standards, the difference in standards at these sites is <br /> closing. Also, since the start of this agreement the City has designated some sites "Mode III" in response to • <br /> Eugene Decisions. The Mode III designation includes un- irrigated turfgrass which is mowed every other week. <br /> The agreement with 4J specifies weekly mowing whether or not the site is irrigated. This has not been a problem <br /> to date, but we might want to adopt a similar standard (see below) for both agencies, especially as their <br /> improvement program continues. <br /> 3. When Ida Patterson School was irrigated by District 4J, the contractor who installed the system did not clean <br /> up rocks brought to the surface by his excavation. These have now been scattered around the field by children <br /> and represent a significant irritation to our mowing staff as they are frequently hit, dulling our blades and <br /> damaging our equipment. A smaller, but similar problem took place at Monroe Middle School, where rock was <br /> not cleaned up after a footing for a portable classroom was installed by a contractor working for District 4J. <br /> 4. During the "spring rush" we have not always been able to mow all sites weekly as the agreement specifies. In <br /> most cases this has not been a problem but it has been once or twice. "Mode Ill" designations and prioritization <br /> of our smaller parks has helped us to avoid this problem. <br /> 5. I have no specifics, but some Athletics (LRCS) staff have told me that players are not as happy with 4J's <br /> mowing at the Amazon Softball Fields, especially in the early spring, as they were with our program. I inquired, <br /> but did not get any specific information. I have never personally observed a problem with 4J's service level at <br /> that site and our mowers can make as big a mess as any of theirs in the early spring when growth rates are fast <br /> and clippings are heavy. <br /> Again, none of the above represents a serious problem. There would have to be some "rough spots" in <br /> implementation of an agreement this large and different from what both agencies have been used to. There have <br /> been surprisingly few of these. In the main, it has been working very well and I see no reason why it won't just <br /> get better in the future If both agencies retain their present capacity to mow turf areas and fields. If budget cuts <br /> erode this, we could have a problem. Adoption of the NRPA standards by both agencies could help address <br /> such a necessity (see below). <br /> Page 1 <br />