The NSW government started the process of reviewing the use of synthetic turf back in 2021 after publicity about some egregious examples of installations without any community consultation which resulted in severe impacts on the local residents and environment, for example Gardiner Park in Banksia and Norman Griffiths Oval in West Pymble.
At long last some official studies has been completed that provide impartial information about the pros and cons of synthetic turf rather than the publicity from vested interests. Sporting clubs want quick answers to fix the supposed problem of natural grass providing poor fields and insufficient playing hours. In addition, government information has been published about developing better grass fields.
A brief history
In November 2021, the NSW Office of the Chief Scientist and Engineer (OCSE) was asked to undertake an independent review into the design, use and impacts of synthetic turf in public spaces. A progress report was released in February 2022. The final report called the Synthetic Turf in Public Open Space Study was published in October 2022.
One significant statement made in the review was that there is a lack of information about natural grass practices to enable comparison with synthetic turf. There are only a few natural grass fields that have been installed using the modern science-based techniques for soil and drainage preparation and choice of grass hybrids. There is little data about effective grass maintenance.
During the first half of 2022, the NSW government was preparing guidelines with a range of departments and agencies on the use of synthetic surfaces in public open space. The guidelines were meant to be informed by the scientific and technical advice arising from the OSCE review. A first draft of these guidelines was released for consultation in early 2024 but they were very disappointing. They were meant to assist decision-makers but, instead, the guidelines were simply lists of what to consider.
Finally, more than a year later, while many upgrades of playing fields are being installed two sets of guidelines have been released.
Best-practice Guidelines for Sporting Fields
In January 2025 Best-practice Guidelines for Sporting Fields was published by the NSW Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water. The only management guidelines previously available were published in 2011 by Sydney Water.
The introduction gives some background:
An assessment of over 1,000 fields across NSW found that 76% are in poor or marginal condition, requiring significantly more resources to maintain. These new best-practice guidelines provide a roadmap to improve field quality, reduce water use, and extend the life of natural turf surfaces — without relying on synthetic alternatives.
Key contents of the guidelines are:
- benchmark performance standards for turf quality, irrigation, drainage and wear capacity that will determine playing hours
- practical strategies for designing, constructing and upgrading natural turf fields to suit a variety of site and climate condition
- case studies and comparative data on field types including sand-over-soil, hybrid turf, and best-practice natural turf fields
- clear water-use benchmarks and irrigation scheduling tailored to different NSW regions
- guidance on enhancing field resilience to drought, flood, and increased usage
These guidelines provide a valuable resource for detailed analysis by decision makers to compare the qualities and resilience of a natural turf field with a synthetic field. More importantly it will enable existing grass fields to be upgraded and avoid the costly replacement with a synthetic surface.
Synthetic Turf Sports Fields in Public Open Space: Guideline for Decision-makers
This guide (published in May 2025) is designed to assist those considering synthetic turf as an alternative to natural grass for non-elite sports fields.
Section 2 (decision making for sports field surfaces) provides key information about selecting a sports field surface. This includes the pressures on public open space, the types of surfaces available to meet community needs and the social, environmental, health and economic considerations.
Section 3 (guide for synthetic turf sports fields) provides advice for projects considering and developing synthetic turf sports fields. It steps through how to achieve best practice when planning, designing, delivering and managing synthetic turf assets.
Addendum to the guidelines for Division 5.1 assessments
Division 5.1 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 outlines the process for environmental assessment of activities undertaken by public authorities such as local councils that do not require a DA. At the same time as the release of the synthetic turf guide, the Department of Planning released an addendum to the guidelines for Division 5.1 assessments.
This addendum applies to the installation of synthetic turf for both new sports fields and upgrades to existing sports fields where it is proposed to be carried out as development without consent. Determining authorities (such as councils and other public authorities) must apply this addendum when preparing the review of environmental factors (REFs) that is required for this type of development.
During consultation about the draft guidelines community groups called for the more rigorous review provided by an environmental impact assessment rather than a REF, but these guidelines do address many of the concerns about the lack of due process that currently applies. The guidelines cover many of the factors and issues that were missing from Ku-ring-gai Council’s assessments in relation to Norman Griffiths Oval.
Schools are now included. It is pleasing to note the State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure and Transport) 2021 was amended to include educational establishments so that their installation of synthetic turf requires development consent and hence an environmental assessment.
This addendum applies to assessments of synthetic turf sports fields after 25 August 2025. The introduction explains that the guidelines have been designed to ensure that the environmental assessment of synthetic turf sports fields is undertaken appropriately and considers all relevant factors.
The guidelines cover many of the issues that have been highlighted as concerns by community groups in their submissions to the consultation. The potential impact of these issues and mitigation options are to be covered in the REF. There are some definitive statements such as:
- synthetic turf sports fields should not be located in areas of high bushfire and extreme flood risk
- filtration systems should be designed in such as fashion to withstand extreme flooding
The importance of this consideration has been highlighted by the Norman Griffiths Oval case.
This Addendum provides guidance on appropriate technical studies and other documentation that should be undertaken in support of the environmental assessment.
We note the requirement for consultation with the community early in the process, such as during the planning and design stage of the development; and that draft REFs should be placed on public exhibition on the determining authority’s website for a minimum of 3 weeks. The lack of consultation has been a major complaint about the decision-making processes in the past.
Future updates to the guidelines
The NSW Office of the Chief Scientist and Engineer (OCSE) has recommended in their report an ‘accelerated learn and adapt approach’ for the regarding synthetic turf in public open space. This report pointed out there are many areas of the use of synthetic turf that require further research and monitoring much of which will emerge with the future use of synthetic turf. Examples are microplastic pollution and health impacts as well as its performance in Australian conditions and end-of-life recycling outcomes.
The OCSE report was written over three years ago. There has been a lot of new research over that time into areas of microplastic and PFAS pollution impacts. The technical information in the guidelines is already out of date.
How can the best decision be made?
With all this information now available the final decision of natural grass versus synthetic should be made based on the best interests of all the community including the environment. Full transparency must be provided so the community can have their say in an informed way.