Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Inclusive Playground topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission weighs inclusive playground at Williams Intermediate versus costly retrofits at Marathon Park
Summary
Bridgewater Park & Recreation members reviewed a proposal to build an inclusive playground adjacent to Williams Intermediate School (reserved for students during school hours, open to residents after school) and discussed funding options after hearing a verbal estimate that a full rubberized surface at Marathon Park would cost about $2.3 million.
Committee member (Speaker 2) presented a community proposal to convert a grassy area behind Williams Intermediate School and adjacent Legion Field into an inclusive, adaptive playground that would be reserved for student use during school hours and open to Bridgewater residents afterward. The speaker said the family and Disabilities Commission have signed off on a recommendation and that a local volunteer (a resident named Sherry) would lead much of the work.
The commission debated two approaches: retrofit Marathon Park or build the new facility at the school. “The rubber surfacing was gonna be over, like, $2,300,000,” Committee member (Speaker 2) said, drawing attention to a high cost estimate for a full retrofit at Marathon Park. Members noted Marathon already offers some accessible equipment but that the challenge is providing accessible routes to that equipment.
Commissioners discussed funding and procurement routes. They agreed the Community Preservation/Community Preservation Committee (CPC) and the Disabilities Commission could sponsor or recommend the project; Chair (Speaker 4) said the application could come from the commission or directly from an outside group so long as the town did not assume procurement responsibility. Committee member (Speaker 3) asked whether the vendor was on a state bid list and whether quotes were documented; members said they had verbal quotes and would confirm whether the vendor is on a contract list.
Commissioners flagged program and maintenance questions. They discussed ownership and lease status because the project would sit on property leased by the school: if the town later built an addition that affected the CPC-funded equipment, the town or school would need to reimburse CPC for the value of the improvements. Committee members asked for a maintenance agreement in writing and confirmation that the school would maintain the asset.
The commission agreed to follow up: confirm written vendor quotes, check state‑contract/vendor status, and clarify CPC eligibility and procurement responsibilities before voting on CPC eligibility at the next meeting. Committee member (Speaker 3) said the grant submission had been prepared and the commission would vote on eligibility the following week.
The discussion closed with members urging a pragmatic approach—pursue the more cost‑effective site at Williams if it meets accessibility goals and funding eligibility—while confirming the commission can recommend funding but lacks manpower to manage full procurement and installation.
