Quote PopTart="PopTart"One thing he said was that we haven't decided whether to go with 4/5G pitch or go with enhanced grass.
I don't know enough about it but what is the difference, and what will sway our decision (apart from cost)'"
If the stadium is going to be a genuine community facility then 4G, purely financially, is the way to go, both in terms of usage, revenue and especially maintenance costs.
However hybrid has its advantages.
On a 4G pitch you can play literally 24/7. A hybrid pitch could possibly sustain about 4 hours a day for training and two to three matches a week max in summer. In winter it could manage 1-2 matches a week but absolutely no training so long as the drainage is top notch.
However a hybrid pitch would appeal far more to a secondary sport such as Wakefield FC or Leeds RU for example. They are both winter games and with sensible fixtures they would only be used once or twice a week for games. The rent you'd get from one or both of these would be substantial.
In terms of revenue it would probably be fairly similar but your community usage would be limited to very occasional events (maybe one a month, BARLA finals that kind of thing).
From memory a hybrid pitch depending on the mix will give you roughly three times the usage and will be far more resistant to cutting up in winter.
It really depends on which market will provide us the best revenue and how accepting WMDC are.
I think Hudds is a hybrid pith, might be wrong. It sustains to pro clubs and always looks immaculate so it you could try and find out how many games a year are played on it by both clubs and reserves etc.
