Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Parks And Recreation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Newington council hears pitch for $11.6M Milpond pool project and debates referendum timing
Summary
A town committee and architect recommended replacing Milpond pool with a Garfield Street aquatic complex (pool, bath house and splash pads) estimated at roughly $10.5–11.65 million; Councilors debated whether to send a bond question to the November ballot and raised questions about parking, Churchill pool needs and precise costs.
The Newington Town Council on July 23 heard a multi-hour presentation and extensive public comment on a proposed Milpond Park aquatic project that would replace the town’s aging Milpond pool with a new Garfield Street aquatic complex and add a splash pad at Churchill Park.
Eileen Frankino, chair of the Town Pools Project Committee, said the existing Milpond facility “fails to meet ADA regulations” and that building a new facility is necessary. Architect Mike Fortuna of TLB Architecture told the council the committee’s site analysis and “matrix” of circulation, utilities and wetlands found Garfield Street to be “the most cost-effective long-term solution.” He described a program with a zero-depth (beach-entry) area, a 25-yard lap pool, activity zones with a slide and climbing wall and a bath house with individual changing rooms for accessibility.
The proposal’s preliminary construction estimate presented to the council was roughly $10.5 million in base costs with contingencies putting the figure near $11.65 million; presenters noted planning documents dated from 2021 and that carry-forward of construction inflation could change the final number. Committee members said renovation options were considered but characterized modest fixes as short-term “band-aids” that would not address structural, piping and filtration issues at the 60-year-old pool.
Public commenters and councilors split over approach. Supporters emphasized safety, ADA access and community benefit. “We owe this to the Newington voters,” Councilor Paige said, urging the council to give residents the choice. Critics and some councilors asked for more detail on parking at the Garfield Street site, the expected operational costs and the future of Churchill Park’s pool, which they said remains in poor condition but may require separate investment.
Council members also discussed timing and legal steps for a referendum. Staff and councilors flagged a Sept. 5 deadline for including a bond question on the Nov. 5 ballot with early-voting considerations; several members said they preferred to move forward quickly if the bonding analysis supports it, while others urged additional cost estimates, especially for Churchill-related needs.
The committee said its intent is to keep Milpond open as long as possible during a planned two‑year project and to continue to study Churchill’s needs. Next steps mentioned by council staff included preparing draft bond language, running the design phase, and holding public hearings required under state law before any bond vote.
Councilors and residents asked that future materials make the projected footprint and fencing clearer and provide more detailed parking and drainage studies before a final design and bond language are adopted.
