Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Parks Infrastructure topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council continues debate over park facility survey and potential design study after mixed public and council views
Summary
Councilors debated whether to proceed beyond recently authorized topographic surveys for Little League and Swenson fields to a full engineering design and cost estimate; some members urged moving forward to produce reliable ballot numbers while others said voters had already rejected funding and opposed spending additional design money now.
Councilors on June 11 revisited a proposal to advance park facility improvements beyond a topographic survey to full engineering design and an opinion of probable cost for baseball and athletic fields at the Little League complex and Swenson Road.
Public Works Director Jeff Foote reported the survey work had begun: the consultant had completed fieldwork at the Little League complex and planned to begin Swenson site work soon. Foote said survey deliverables are "existing conditions" topographic maps that are the necessary first step before design and cost estimating.
Council debate split along two main lines. Supporters said an engineering design and reliable cost estimate are required to present a defensible warrant article and would allow the town to present precise numbers to voters in a future ballot. "I'd rather be proactive than reactive and get that design done...so that we can go forward, put it on the ballot, and let the people make that choice, with real good numbers," said a councilor supporting the design step.
Opponents argued voters had rejected a prior combined warrant article in March and that spending additional design money — the next step cost estimates were roughly $19,600 plus opinion-of-cost items for the Little League complex and $26,400 plus opinion-of-cost for Swenson, totaling roughly the $50,000 discussed — would sidestep the voters’ prior decision. "We were told no,” one councilor said, and objected to spending $75,000 on design when the public had voted down funding for a related project.
Councilors and staff also discussed field safety and maintenance at Nashua Road fields, parking constraints at Swenson, and how surveys would clarify topography and what, if any, additional parking could be added. Several councilors encouraged colleagues to visit the fields individually before the next meeting so members could form their own judgments; staff estimated survey completion around August 1 and said engineering and an opinion of cost could follow, providing figures for future decisions.
No formal vote to proceed to design occurred; councilors agreed to revisit the matter after members had inspected fields and after the balance of survey work is completed.
