Council authorizes topographic surveys for two park sites amid debate over field relocation and costs

The Bedford Town Council on May 21 voted 4-2 to authorize topographic surveys for two park properties as a first step in evaluating field redesign or relocation.

The council approved paying for a topographic survey of Swenson Field and the Little League complex on Nashua Road; the contractor proposals presented to the council put the Swenson topographic survey at $12,400 and the Nashua Road (Little League) topographic survey at $7,700. Councilor Michael Strand moved to authorize the surveys; Councilor Gayle Levesque seconded. The motion passed 4-2 after a protracted discussion.

The item followed months of public debate and a failed warrant article earlier in the year that would have funded a larger, multi-component field and recreation complex. Director Jeff Foote and town staff described available proposals for full engineering and design work for both sites; staff said a full engineering package — which would include surveying, design, cost estimates and permitting allowances — had been estimated in earlier discussions at roughly $75,000 to $77,000 for concept-through-design work, while the two standalone topographic surveys total roughly $20,100 based on the contractor quotes presented.

Councilors and members of the public raised a range of concerns during the discussion: parking capacity at Swenson; whether Nashua Road fields sit on capped landfill material and whether raising and stabilizing those fields would provide a long-term solution; whether lights, bathrooms and concession stands should be designed now or phased later; and how to stage field use and rest cycles so turf is not overused. Director Foote explained that prior parking, grading and pavement work had been done over capped landfill areas and that targeted engineering would be required to determine whether the Nashua Road fields can be elevated and stabilized for continued use.

Several councilors said they were reluctant to spend large sums on full design without clearer public consensus, but other councilors said a survey is a necessary, low-cost first step to provide the factual information the town needs before presenting a ballot question. Council members discussed the possibility of a future council-sponsored warrant article narrowly focused on field construction versus a citizen petition that might include additional amenities.

The recorded motion authorizes the surveying scope and cost for the two sites only; staff said survey results would inform any subsequent engineering, permitting and cost-estimate work and that staff would present findings to the council before any larger appropriation or ballot placement. The council vote was 4 in favor, 2 opposed.