Aldermen, Board of

A special meeting of the Board of Aldermen was held Monday, October 13, 2014, at 7:32 p.m. in the Aldermanic Chamber. President David W. Deane presided; Deputy City Clerk Patricia Piecuch recorded. Prayer was offered by Deputy City Clerk Patricia Piecuch; Alderman June M. Caron led in the Pledge to the Flag. The roll call was taken with 13 members of the Board of Aldermen present; Alderman Dowd and Alderman Chasse were recorded absent. Her Honor Mayor Donnalee Lozeau (arrived at 8:00 p.m.) and Corporation Counsel Stephen M. Bennett were also in attendance. COMMUNICATIONS MOTION BY ALDERMAN McCARTHY THAT ALL COMMUNICATIONS BE READ BY TITLE ONLY MOTION CARRIED From: David W. Deane, President, Board of Aldermen Re: Special Board of Aldermen Meeting MOTION BY ALDERMAN McCARTHY TO ACCEPT AND PLACE ON FILE MOTION CARRIED President Deane If there are no objections, I’d like to send the Deputy City Clerk on her way. PRESENTATION President Deane This evening Ms. Brooke is going to give us informational presentation on the all-accessible playground on the east side of Greeley Park on the south side of the access road. Informational Presentation by Institute for Human Centered Design Ms. Jennifer Brooke I am a partner a Lemmon/Brooke, a small landscape architecture firm in Massachusetts and I am working on behalf of the Institute for Human Centered Design which is in Boston, MA. Two other people on my team at the institute are Anna Julien; she is a staff member at IHCD and Valerie Fletcher, who is the Executive Director. As would a chef getting ready to prepare a meal would take stock of the ingredients that were available and the equipment available to prepare those ingredients, so might a designer need to understand what the context of a place is like, what the context presents prior to putting pencil to paper. I need to know what this kitchen looks like before I decide to work in it. There have been two other cooks in my kitchen these last few months. One is Mr. Thomas Pappas, who has been meeting with me on behalf of the Friends of Greeley Park, and the other is Mr. Eric Brand, who has been meeting with me on behalf of the Legacy Group. If you ask either one of them, I would guarantee that they would tell you, in fact, no there were two cooks in their kitchen; not the other way around. It has been myself who has had to get up to speed as to what this kitchen looks like so I am going to start with a site overview. This is actually a very old map where the landmarks were the Nashua River and the Merrimack River. Today, our landmarks are slightly different; we still have the Nashua River and the Merrimack River but today it’s really Route 3 that acts as a landmark. Our site is up here, Greeley Park and you can the Merrimack River along the outside edge; that is the eastern most edge of the site and then over here is Special Bd. of Aldermen – 10/13/14 Page 2 Manchester Street which is the western most edge. We keep calling this the eastern part of Greeley Park but actually when you look at it from this point of view, it looks more like the central part. Greeley Park didn’t exist prior to 1881; it was a farm for the Greeley family. There were approximately 160 acres +/- and upon his death, the grandson; the family gave the property to the City of Nashua. At that time, the property was used for farming activities. There was a large orchard, hey and wood resources that supported the family until they no longer needed them. In the will, it was indicated that the land was to be used at some future point for a park or some type of public institution so Nashua has very well by Mr. Greeley. A landscape architect at that time, E.O. Hathaway was brought in from Boston and he was commissioned to do a topographical survey and map. I was not able to ascertain as to whether Greeley Park enjoyed a Master Plan at that time or not. A little bit later, $5,000 was donated by John Cotton and the city matched those funds and the bathhouse was built; it was a stone and cement rest house at this time. You can a fountain, a shallow pond, a gravel walk, and flower beds. At the time that Mr. Hathaway came up from Boston to do the survey, there were several other parks that had been finished or were in the process of being finished up and that were receiving the benefit of positive press. Some of those are close by, the Boston Garden, Central Park in NYC, and a little bit further away is the Golden Gate Park in San Francisco. It was a very short list of 19th century parks that have a lot of very similar characteristics. When I walk out into Greeley Park and again, I’m not sure if it enjoyed a Master Plan, but indeed, there are some very obvious similarities between what’s happening there that you can still see and some of the infrastructural moves that were made at some of these other parks. These are some old postcards of those places and you can see the similarities across these places and they are not just east cost or west coast, this was kind of a “park movement” that was happening in the United States. There were several characteristics that these places shared; open meadows for passive recreation, there were elaborate flower beds, and there must have been elaborate maintenance budgets as well. There was distinguished architecture, architecture that was built for the public, it was built to be civic, it was built to last. Framed views that you could appreciate the landscape and the scenery it wasn’t something to just put objects into but it was something to be appreciated. There was a separation of different kinds of activity. Central Park is probably most famous for this, where the vehicular and pedestrian population was separated and there was no danger of getting run over by a horse drawn carriage. Pathways for strolling and last but not least, playground’s for children. A playground in a park like this from the 19th century was actually expected, it was not in Congress with the idea of a playground, in fact, the entire park in many cases was considered a playground for the public not just a separate area built for children. As these parks became more popular and as they had more use, it became wise to set aside a portion of it that was dedicated to this kind of play. There are several pieces of playground equipment that look remarkably similar to the kinds of playground equipment that we use today. There is a matter of physics involved here where you are seeing things like swings and slides. They are a lot smaller these days. Children and adults used them in dresses and hats. Other than that, I think the aim was still the same. This is our site, Greeley Park, and it’s interesting to see some of the characteristics that these 19th century parks exhibit. The pathways for strolling, the tree line streets, the civic architecture, the kind of more picturesque areas of the park, places for listening to music, places for civic events and even down here in the corner, places to see and be seen. As we go forward, now that I’ve got my head around what the context of this place is like, we had to set some design goals. The first and foremost really being that one needs to understand where one is working. We are looking to enhance and respect the historical references that are present. Embracing the natural environment is something that is integral to the play experience rather than being separate from, maintaining universal accessibility and then designing to an achievable budget. An achievable budget is up for grabs in terms of what that means. At the very beginning of this, one of the things we looked at was to say where are we aiming? What were told and sent off to do was to say “show us what it is going to take to get this done.” So knowing that a gift was being made in the approximate total of $250,000 and that gift was intended to provide for a play experience, it made sense that this budget should not exceed a matching number. That is where we started. That was not a directive, there was no limitation, in fact, there really was no budget to work towards from the beginning of this process. President Deane What I remember was we pretty much agreed that we wanted an “all in” so that the project was started and completed and it wasn’t phased in. We didn’t know what the cost was going to be at that time but Special Bd. of Aldermen – 10/13/14 Page 3 that way the project would be started and completed. It would not be like the band shell and there wouldn’t be constant construction. Is that how you went about it? Ms. Brooke Absolutely. We went about it with the idea of when you start the process you don’t stop until it is finished and the actual way that the project has been laid out is in such a way that you can’t just chop off a piece of it and call it finished. It’s looked at as a whole. Alderman Moriarty You made a comment that the budget was somehow constrained by “matching.” Can you define what portion was matching and what is not matching and where the source of the funds that were implied would be from> Ms. Brooke In this case, there is what I understand to be a $250,000 gift being made. When you spend all $250,000 on play equipment and the surfacing required to maintain or allow safety using that play equipment, that doesn’t buy everything that keeps the place contextually appropriate. It doesn’t buy everything that keeps the abutters from having to suffer some of the consequences of having a larger population present more hours of the day. I also think that there is was esthetic expectation so when I use the word “matching,” I am not insinuating that there was an idea that there was some other donor, the reality was that in order to achieve what was necessary for an esthetically appropriate and functionally appropriate place when you have $250,000 worth of play equipment going in, the idea was not to supersede that as an additional cost to the project. Does that answer your question? Alderman Moriarty Where’s the other $250,000 coming from? Ms. Brooke That’s a good question. Alderman Moriarty I thought the directive was that it was all a gift from Leadership Greater Nashua so if they only $250,000 then I would suspect that the entry point budget would have been $250,000. President Deane Well, let her finish with her presentation and then we can debate the cost. Ms. Brooke I think it would be fair to say that at the very beginning of this process, the question was asked “what is the budget you would like us to design to” and the answer that was received was “we would like to see what it takes to get what’s necessary here.” There really was no design budget to aim at from the very beginning of this process. It was a self-imposed budget. The reality is that you could take that $250,000 gift if it’s only being spent on play equipment but you would have no vegetation, no fencing, you have no benches, you have no pathways so I think that in order to maximize that amount and functionality, there is a certain additional cost that one is going to incur to manage that. Clearly, if one were to scale all of that back, obviously that would be less. In this particular case, with no budget to design to, the idea was that one would use the gift and that if is being spent on equipment, one has to contextualize this gift and Special Bd. of Aldermen – 10/13/14 Page 4 that contextualization should not be, under any circumstances, be more than what is being offered as a gift. Alderman Siegel I wasn’t in on any of the meetings that you have had privately with Mr. Pappas and Mr. Brand but I think there was a very clear objective that this playground was to be no cost to the city and therefore, the entire amount of money would be borne by the Leadership Greater Nashua and so whatever had to be designed would be all-inclusive including the necessary vegetation for the available funds that they had which was $250,000. I understand that they may not have been communicated but it’s surprising. Ms. Brooke Just to be clear, it actually wasn’t clear from the get go that the entirety of the project was to be included in the $250,000 budget. In fact, that would have been very easy to do in the sense that it would have been a directive that we could have adopted at the beginning of the process and we could have worked with that information. One has to remember that this is a balancing act and you have parties involved that are each interested in achieving what they want to achieve and that there is going to be some compromise. Nobody is going to leave the table 100% happy but at the same time, that directive was not entirely clear and nor during the course of the last three months was that a directive that anyone in our group, Mr. Brand, Mr. Pappas, or I were working toward. On that note, I think it would be useful to go through this and figure out what could be a goal. We have our site, which is located here in Greeley Park, you see the bathhouse on the western side and here we have two views; one looking east and one looking north across to the tennis courts and the recreation buildings that are located in the park. At this point in time, a lot of ideas go back and forth and when you find something that works, you test it and try to understand what the grades are doing and how much dirt you might have to move or not. Slowly but surely the project starts to take shape and again, we were working in a situation where we are trying to keep as many parties happy with the requirements that each of them has while at the same time, maintaining an esthetic vision which is appropriate. One of things that you can see here is that there are three ways to approach this place and the parking is across the street. There are various pieces of equipment in here that allow for different experiences. There are spinning equipment in this location, 4 bays of swings, a few rocking pieces of equipment, a sensory platform where we might put musical instruments, there’s a climbing area and then slides that are embanked onto this hill with access that is wheelchair accessible from the back side. The actual square footage for play equipment and impact resistant surface in addition to this planted dirt hill is 9,760 square feet. When you add in the perimeter path, a boundary hedge along the outside, and these three brick terraces, you add another 7,270 square feet to the project. I’ll take you on a quick tour. We will park the car and come in over here, you can see a very short allay of Cherry trees at the back of the project. There’s a fence that surrounds most it and the fence is in keeping with context of the park already. In a few places there is a hedge but we don’t have too much hedge because we want to be able to see into this place, for example a patrol car. As you come around here is that spinning equipment at the eastern end of the park? The swings are at the center and a couple or rocking pieces of equipment that across from the sensory platform and just beyond that you have the climbing rocks and spider web. Along the back, again is an allay of Cherry trees and in between all of these pieces of equipment are some grass covered mounds. One of the main reasons for these mounds is that we can put some stones over them and they can be explored by little ones and it will be good from a sensory point of view as well as providing some visual relief in creating neutral backgrounds for all of these different pieces of equipment. If we come back down you can see those spinning pieces of equipment, there’s a merry-go-round right here and you can look down the Cherry tree allay and see the swings on the right. We will walk over past the swings and cut through one of these bench allays and now we are looking back. This is a rocker for 4 or more than we have some individuals here. These small mounds that are covered in grass again, do the work to create a visually neutral environment as well as to provide some sensory feedback. If we get closer to that rocker and turn and look in the other direction are the swings and we are looking towards the climber and the sliding hill in the background. We will walk past the spider web and now we are standing in the area where we have birch trees planted and climbing boulders with some perennials looking back again towards the swings and the parking lot is back over here to the left. Then if we sit down and put our back up against Special Bd. of Aldermen – 10/13/14 Page 5 one of those Birch trees and look out under, you can see the sliding hill at the very western end of the park. The area on either side of the slides would be an impact resistant surface so as not to provide too much wear and tear and it would continue to look nice over the years where the entire back side is a natural surface. If we turn around again and look back through the park with the slide right at our back, we can see the climbing area immediately in front us. We have the swings, the rockers, and the spinning area at the back. There is a wide buffer along the upper edge and the buffer has ground cover in it and then a fence and then a hedge behind that on the uphill side. The closest abutters are on that side of the project. The road is down here on the bottom left. Here you are looking at the sensory platform which would be made out of wood and great for a little bit of reverberation under wheels. Things like musical instruments might be there and in this case there is an abacus. Then there is the Birch grove here on your right. To show you specifically what kind of equipment we are looking at, the slide accommodates 2-3 children at a time and we would have 2 of these. The climbing equipment is within a very natural theme, not wanting this to be garish. We have four bays of swings and we would be hoping that at least two of those bays would have ADA seats. One of the trickier things about this project from an equipment point of view is that we are looking to provide activities for that are useful for the ages of 2-12. Most playgrounds have two areas in every playground, one is from 2-5; and the other one is from 5-12. Unless we wanted this to be even bigger which we don’t, the real issue is looking for things that not only fit contextually and fit with the esthetic aims of the project to remain natural but that were also appropriate for users of ages from 2-12; swings and these particular seats do that job. The equipment on the right, this spinner right here is about one of the only things on the project which is not rated for children under the age of 5; it’s a standing spinner but everything else in the project is. These are the rockers for single, double, and for a group. We talked about those hills and how those hills can be explored using wooden or stone steps; even just a 2-foot high field of grass can make a small child feel as though they are far away. Then there are a collection of sensory opportunities. These have not been designed but we talked about the addition of wall maybe along the sensory platform. The addition of some kind of tennis ball run or marble run, musical instruments could be possible on that platform and then our seating. We are looking to maintain a kind of seating that is with the context of the park and the context of accessibility and universal accessibility guidelines. Arm rests are very useful, they do help to keep skateboarders off of the benches and it makes it difficult to lie on the benches. It also has a contextual esthetic appropriateness and then in some cases where benches aren’t really relevant specifically to the space requirements one has, the mushroom stools work to do that job providing seating. At the beginning when one arrives at this place, we really like the idea of a tactile map that can be done in wood or in metal and then some way finding opportunities along the way. This is just a smattering of the ideas we had about planting; ground cover, some flowering trees, a Birch grove with perennials underneath and some native grasses on those hills. The maintenance of a place like this will make or break it so you really want to be careful about not overdesigning the planting scheme in a place like this and that when you do design the planting scheme, that it is as low maintenance as possible so in fact, the grasses get shaved once per year and there’s nothing that you would mow on the inside of the perimeter of this property. Our surfaces – there is a lot of money tied up in these surfaces. If there is a piece of play equipment, there needs to be an impact resistant surface. You’ve seen woodchips in most of our playground’s but woodchips are not accessible so when one is looking for an accessible surface that does the same job that woodchips or sand can do, there are a few options. One is a synthetic turf which is put over a rubber base and that is accessible to wheels because the turf is short enough. The other is a poured in place or a tiled rubber surface. You are looking at some samples of artificial turf and these are some of the color ranges you can get the rubber in. The sensory platform we were looking at in wood, brick at the entrances; mimicking that sort of public/civic language that already exists in the park. All of the pedestrian paths around the perimeter are stabilized stone dust so while they work for accessibility they don’t have the appearance of asphalt or concrete. Moving forward, I think that many of the questions that were asked of me as we were going forward with this was well, what happens next? The first thing that has to happen is that you need to confirm a design and budget expense if there is one. That needs to happen and once that is confirmed the plan gets revised. This isn’t just for this project; this is for any design project. This is why it’s called schematic design. Revise the plan based on the approvals are required and at this time, one would design the small pieces, the pieces that haven’t been figured out yet. One might decide exactly what kind of plants you are going to use and exactly how big they are and if there are pieces that are going to be built by a single provider you might go and collect a bid from those providers. Obviously, you want to confirm that you have 100% of your funding. The Special Bd. of Aldermen – 10/13/14 Page 6 band shell has been sitting there staring at us every time we meet out on-site and we are very clear that this is not where this project wants to be. One of the more important pieces of this is that there needs to be a point person in charge. One that if you have in-house work being done, if you have out of house work being done, if you have neighbors or people that are interested, there needs to be a point person to manage that. Then one would establish a schedule and build a project. I am happy to take questions. Alderman Moriarty It appears to me that there is a huge misunderstanding from the get go. As the legislation currently stands, and as the budget currently stands, there is no contribution from the city so I’m wondering who told you to assume that there would be matching funds? Ms. Brooke No one told me to assume that there would be matching funds. I was directed to show a design that did what it took to get to where we thought it should be with regards to accessibility, maximizing use, and context. There was no directive other than to do what it takes. Alderman Moriarty I’ll re-phrase. I presume you have a contract with a fixed amount of money to do this; somewhere around $5,000 - $10,000. Somewhere in that contract, someone was in charge of laying out the scope of effort. Who was that person? Ms. Brooke So, our contract is; we work through Steve Bennett regarding any kind of communication. Again, I want to make it clear that there was no budget to design to. The question was asked at the beginning of this project, “what is the design budget?” The answer was “do what it takes.” Again, it might be useful to also understand that you have two very opposing points of view meeting to try to agree on something that works, not only for themselves and their constituencies, but also for the site. I think it would be useful to recognize there that if you are looking at from what I understand to be a $250,000 gift from an organization and that organization in this case is spending that money only on equipment and impact resistant surfacing, that’s it. As a designer, that doesn’t fly as far as creating a playground, a park particularly one that you were led to expect which is a natural playground that fits into this context. That’s why at the start of this project was well where do you want to go with this budget. Alderman Moriarty I’ll try to ask it differently. I’m clearly not getting the answer I am looking for. The assumption that they were just going to pay for equipment and hard scape and not for the whole thing, that statement came from someone. Then when you asked what was the budget, you got an answer from someone. Who was that someone. Ms. Brooke Mr. Deane responded to an inquiry about budget and the Leadership Greater Nashua who is represented by Mr. Brand responded to questions about how that gift was purposed. President Deane That’s correct and when we left the presentation upstairs, we asked for something to be designed that fit and worked and wasn’t going to be phased in. That is the understanding I had when we left and that is what she was asked to do. Special Bd. of Aldermen – 10/13/14 Page 7 Alderman Siegel I do appreciate the difficulty in your position and this may come off like we are putting you on the spot. I will point out that the legislation itself in clause #6 specifically says that the Leadership Greater Nashua shall verify that they have 100% of the required funds for the approved project for any construction or site preparation work has begun. To me, that says that is 100% of the cost of the project. They may well be able to raise more money and perhaps, with something like this which is clearly very well thought out, it is something that they can say I think we can do better and let’s go towards something better. But, the original goal for their fundraising was half of what the cost is that’s mentioned here. That’s where the difficulty lies. The legislation defines the expectations and that money up there says okay that’s where they were at so that’s why I think you will be getting a little of the blow back. Alderwoman Brown I also admit that I was quite surprised. Hindsight is 20/20; if I were to look back, I would have thought it probably would have been a good idea to have a point person, an Alderman/Alderwoman or whatever that could just try to communicate what some of the meetings were here about. Also from our conversation earlier before the meeting, I did ask about scaling back and I do understand that by showing us the full offerings like at a banquet, we are better able to have a vision but I do agree with some of what was said. My understanding is that it would be fairly limited to the $250,000 even though I think many of us acknowledge that there would have to be some trees and maintenance that the city would participate with; a certain amount but not $250,000 in addition to that. I don’t think we are dead in the water but there certainly seems that there was a misunderstanding. I think part of that was that there was a lot of controversy and we heard a lot of public comments about how we can’t spend all of this money, where is this money going to come from? I believe that one of the approaches was to keep the project kind of independent from input from individual Aldermen even with the contract, is that correct President Deane? So maybe by doing so, it just didn’t work out exactly the way we are but I hope that we don’t shoot the messenger. Some of the equipment that you selected looks fabulous but I don’t think in that site we could have the full range even though it’s a beautiful possibility. President Deane You are correct in your remarks because somebody had to facilitate this process and that was me, I guess. Then I was being accused of everything, it was ridiculous so when all of this unrolled and Tom and Mr. Brand met with Jennifer, I had no involvement with any of that. The one thing I did involve myself with was when we left that original public input session upstairs, and I felt the consensus was that we didn’t want to piece meal something in there but to do a full design of the project and submit it. She did what she was asked to do. You can look at legislation, you can ask for people’s names but that’s how I remember it. When I was asked that question, that’s the answer that I gave. As far as I knew, this is what the Board wanted to see. You’ve got this project that’s been very nicely designed that we have to look at. Alderwoman Melizzi-Golja First of all, I want to respond to Alderwoman Brown’s comment that there should have been more involvement from this Board and my sense from the opening remarks was that the kitchen may have been a little tight once in a while with 3 people in it and to add 15 more; I’m not sure we would have gotten a course out of the door never mind a meal. I recognize and I left that meeting with the understanding that whatever was decided upon, when that design was agreed to and the vote was taken to go forward, that could not happen without, as Alderman Siegel indicated, 100% of the funds being available but also my memory is similar to Alderman Deane’s. It was to design why you think meets our needs best and then we will say here’s the Cadillac, can we figure out how to do because we really love what we see or do we need to say let’s pick and choose with the dollar amount we have to move forward. I know we heard the reference of funds being “matched” and I think all of us, whenever we hear that say “oh, it’s coming from government” but I guess my thought was that the funds could be matched from Special Bd. of Aldermen – 10/13/14 Page 8 another grant, another donor and that funds to match would necessarily come from the government. There may be another source for those dollars. Alderman Soucy Very nicely done, in fact, beautiful; I want to buy it all right now. Having said that, I think Corvette’s are beautiful too but I have priorities and the city has priorities. From day one I kept hearing that this was a gift that wasn’t going to cost the city anything. I mean, maybe $30,000 for other things but it was a gift. I would rather spend our money on teachers, books, police officers, fire fighters, or paving. When I heard gift, I said yes, of course and if the matching funds come from someplace else, I am all for it but I can’t justify putting up that kind of money when this city today has so many other priorities. Alderman Sheehan My recollection doesn’t just match yours, it matches the minutes; President Deane. There were 10 of us here and we did agree to it. One of the things that we talked about initially was the cost difference for all of the site work that would have to be done at all of the different parks from day one. The reason why Greeley Park was one of the best chosen was because it had the lowest amount of site work for the original location and some of the site work costs were crazy. We were very clear to Ms. Brooke that we wanted to know what it would cost – if we were going to need to put in mature trees to keep the nature of the park, which would be the city’s responsibility. It’s on page 31 of the minutes. We haven’t got into the price cost of anything yet but this is all assuming that all of the park work is done with outside labor. Are we really going to hire someone to put in grass plantings? I think a lot of the landscaping work we could do. I think if we are using very large trees but this is calling 2 or 3 inch trees, I think it’s beautiful but shouldn’t be talking about we didn’t know anything about this, it’s in the minutes. Alderman Schoneman I think that it would be better with a project of this size that we not have it done in-house. While some of these things might be something that the Parks & Recreation Department does, I think that a project of scope and size like what is represented here ought to be someone that we contract with outside. The idea of cost and I understand what the minutes might have said but I think that it’s clear that a $500,000 number is somewhat surprising to people. Now we have a good jumping off point and we need to figure it out. We did say very specifically that we don’t want to phase something in but phasing something in and scaling something are two different things. I appreciate the fact that the folks making a donation want to limit what they spend their money on but that may not be the thing that serves the city best. If you were to design a playground that was roughly $250,000, is that a possibility? Ms. Brooke It’s certainly a possibility. It would be a different playground and it would be a priority from my point of view to maintain that contextuality so I think a decision would have to made at some point as to the critical pieces of equipment so that the functionality can be affirmed and confirmed and then the piece that would come after that would be understanding now how do we fit this puzzle piece back into Greeley Park. If a number is decided upon and that is that is the design budget then certainly a project could be designed. Alderman Schoneman I like the contextuality aspect of it and maintaining that is really key. I think that if this playground had gone somewhere else in a different park then those concerns would not have presented themselves in the same way because each park has a different context. The limitations for this particular site are such that we decided as a Board that we wanted to stick with that contexuality. It is scalable and we can discuss it moving forward as a Board. Special Bd. of Aldermen – 10/13/14 Page 9 Ms. Brooke In terms of being scalable; on a very specific point, using stabilized stone dust is far more expensive that using asphalt. There’s a decision right there that because of the contextual requirements placed on the project, it’s more expensive and the same functionality could be achieved at a much lower price. That budget is not showing asphalt, its showing stabilized stone dust. One could start to identify specific things like that that have financial impact with no functional impact and some esthetic impact. The other option is to just scale back like keeping the stone dust path, just use less of it. You need to decide who the cooks are that are in the kitchen and you will get a menu that will come out of that kitchen. Alderman Schoneman I think maintaining the esthetics in Greeley Park is going to be absolutely paramount. I think if we went to asphalt it may look incomplete. What exactly is stabilized stone dust? Ms. Brooke It comes to the site pre-mixed with cement so that when it gets wet, it doesn’t become muddy. It maintains its integrity of firmness even under rain and snow conditions. It’s the best practice for a natural looking path that is also universally accessible. It’s also the most expensive. Alderman Schoneman Would plain old non-stabilized stone dust work? Ms. Brooke It would upon installation and then it would require more maintenance to maintain its universal accessible characteristics. You will end up getting puddles and mud and it’s not durable over the long-term. Alderman Schoneman I would favor quality in everything that we can do and I personally would much rather see a smaller playground that was of 1st rate quality than a larger one that compromised the esthetics. Alderman McCarthy If I gave you a budget for a dinner for 10 people and came back with a single steak in the middle of each one and nothing else, I guess I wouldn’t feel like I had been very well served. If instead you came back and said that dinner is twice the budget that you gave me; then I could say maybe you should scale back on the size of the steak so we through some asparagus on the plate. I think we get to a better result that way. When we built the high schools, we didn’t start out with a budget for what they were going to be, we sent the architect off and said what do we need and what’s it going to cost. They came back after a $70 million estimate from a previous study and said about $175 million. So we said, let’s peel back on that and see what we can do. That was the right way to do that because what we didn’t do when we cut the $175 million back to $125 million and we made decisions that we might not have made if we started out with how do we get what’s on the table into $125 million. Sometimes you look at it and say here’s a thing that can be dropped but then when I look at it in terms of the end product, that’s more valuable than a part of the program I had in there as mandatory. I think you need to say what’s the absolute right thing to do and then come back and say what can we do out of that and what might we do different. We can cut it to $250,000; we can find other ways to fund some parts of it but I think having the ideal design to scale back is the right thing to do. I’m glad Alderman Deane gave you the instructions that he did. Special Bd. of Aldermen – 10/13/14 Page 10 Mayor Lozeau My apologies, as you know, I was at the Historic District Commission meeting. I wanted to add my thanks as well and I wanted to point out to my colleagues that the benefit from this exercise has grown beyond what our opportunities are at Greeley Park. It has given us a chance to look at different approaches to playground equipment and other things that we can use in other city parks as we are replacing things. I just wanted you to know that it’s been very beneficial to the conversations that we have had at the Board of Public Works. I don’t disagree with Alderman Schoneman that it’s probably a great idea to hire someone and get in and get it done but I do think that there are some things on your list that I’ve looked at closely that I think are not very complicated; not that our staff can’t do complicated projects, when I look at some of the work they are doing I am often impressed. There are some things that I think would not affect how the rubber was put in that we could take off the list so that we wouldn’t have to forego some type of landscaping that we want or some piece of equipment. I would agree with the sense that we start with something that is this is what’s possible here and then we scale it down, that makes sense. I also think it’s important as we scale it down to not discount the opportunity that might present again to add something that we cut and where might that go if we wanted to just buy another piece of equipment. As you are looking at scaling this down, it would nice if you could keep some of that in mind. Like this area over here by the Cherry trees where we were going to put “X”, if we treat it this way now maybe later it could potentially be that should another group or should the city want to invest later on down the line in something else. I wouldn’t want to preclude that from happening but I think this presents something really unique and I think we have a remarkable opportunity here to do something within the budget. Thank you for all of your time, I know it wasn’t easy. Alderman Wilshire I also appreciate the great presentation. It’s an awesome looking playground. I think like Mayor said, we have a lot of talent in our city and some of this could probably be done by our staff or in house. I wouldn’t want to discount that at all and if we could do that and save money to buy some of the more desirable equipment, I’d be all for doing that and the possibility that maybe there were some other funds or grants out there that we could use to help accomplish some of this. Alderwoman Brown Going forward, I think that we understand that we have a lot of work ahead of us. I wasn’t here during the process where we, you know the building of the high schools but what advice would you suggest in watching other communities develop a final draft of a playground? Ms. Brooke Set a budget, first and foremost. In the beginning I was told that the gift was for impact resistant surfaces and equipment only. There is some understanding that there has to be support for that unless it is clear as to how much additional support, if any, is going to be given. I think being clear and drawing those lines and having a box to work in is a very useful thing going forward. I also think that if that box were to be drawn, I would go back and busy myself and then we would look at something. That’s when one would decide who would be at the table doing the looking and the deciding at that point. We have gone through some public process where we have talked about the wants and desires. You could have a community input meeting but I don’t know if that would as useful as simply going back and reworking and scaling down so that this fits inside a defined box. Alderwoman Melizzi-Golja Alderman Schoneman, you said you would be interested in seeing something smaller, are you referencing a smaller footprint or the same footprint but fewer pieces of equipment? Special Bd. of Aldermen – 10/13/14 Page 11 Alderman Schoneman I was speaking smaller everything with the idea of getting to a smaller cost number. I would imagine that a smaller footprint with less equipment would result in a lower cost that is more aligned with the thoughts that we had in our minds budget wise. Alderwoman Melizzi-Golja Even if we redo some of the pieces of equipment, because of the need for accessibility and to navigate wheelchairs and those sorts of things, how does it really reduce the footprint? Mr. Brooke Every piece of equipment has a safety zone built in around it, it’s usually a 6-foot radius from the piece of equipment. In some cases it’s 9 feet and the equipment already comes with its own bubble of space around them. There is a budget associated with all of these pieces of equipment which I am hearing needs to be associated with things aren’t equipment but are contextual. If you reduce the amount of equipment, you reduce the number of users at one time. I think you can reduce some equipment and achieve some savings because when you take the equipment out you are also taking out the paving underneath and there’s quite a bit of money tied up in the pavement and certainly the footprint would be reduced as a result. It wouldn’t change the accessibility relative to those pieces of equipment. Alderwoman Melizzi-Golja I know that all of us have different interests in play equipment and playgrounds but I was happy to see the equipment that you have because part of what we are looking at is that today children have so few risk opportunities and providing some of those opportunities in a safe, supervised environment is really important for kids. It builds our perceptual skills and our body awareness and space. There are a couple of gentlemen in Canada who have built a junkyard play experience where kids are supervised from afar but pulling out wooden pallets and starting fires. I was thrilled to see that the material is responding to needs of all children and as the Mayor said it really gives a sense of what playground’s should be looking like. Alderman Moriarty Have you spent all of the funds that were appropriated for this particular contract? Ms. Brooke I have overspent the funds. Alderman Moriarty So to redesign we are in a bit of a problem with regard to who is going to pay for that redesign? Ms. Brooke Correct. Alderman Moriarty We have a lot of problems with this project and they continue. If you were given explicit instructions from the beginning to stay at $250,000 and you were to have presented us a design worth $250,000 we would have been done. We would proceed and have a playground and the Board of Aldermen would have nothing else to do with it. Currently, and it doesn’t matter what the minutes of any meeting say, the legislation as it currently stands does not provide for any funding for this project from the City of Nashua. Special Bd. of Aldermen – 10/13/14 Page 12 It was very clear from the beginning that this project was a gift from the Leadership Greater Nashua and the fact that we are even going to have a playground at all in Greeley Park barely happened. The fact that we have legislation that we all voted on as a group, it was very contentious but we did agree to at least accept this gift at no cost to the city and I thought we were done. We finally agreed to move forward. The fact that the city paid any money at all for the design is a stretch and here we are; if it is the will of the Board of Aldermen to pass legislation to appropriate more funds to have you go redesign the project to work towards a goal of a number that we can agree on, then I presume we will do that. If it is the will of the majority of the Board of Aldermen to decide to contribute money to this project then that’s the will of the Board of Aldermen but it’s not my will. We are stuck, we have no choice but to spend some money to redesign this project. I don’t like the idea of designing something big and then having to scale it in because I predict we will hear a lot of cutting, cutting, why are you cutting the project, why are you punishing the children. If we had just gone in from the beginning and said $250,000, we’d be done. Alderman Donchess I’ve heard all of these different points of view expressed by someone at some meeting and I think that the way we got here is that Mr. Brand and the Leadership Greater Nashua proposed a playground which functionally would serve the children with disabilities in our community and in surrounding communities. They raised the city’s conscienceness regarding the need for such a playground. There was a dispute about where it should go and we uncovered a very radical and fundamental disagreement about the nature of Greeley Park and what it should be. Because of Greeley Park’s character and because of the time when it was designed it should be retained in that state. Other people say it’s the best park in the city, what’s wrong with having a playground in the park. We had to try to reconcile these two opposing points of view and when we got the situation, it was already very bitterly divided and so I think we reached a consensus first by engaging Jennifer, whose design is fantastic, by suggesting a different location in Greeley Park that would have less impact on the pastoral history of the park but in going through this evolution, we developed a different project than Mr. Brand and his people has originally conceived. His was a project that was designed to serve children with disabilities at the most cost effective that it could be done. What we developed was okay, Greeley Park on the east side but if we are going to do that we want the design to be very important because of the history and nature of Greeley Park. We change the nature of the project to look like a very beautiful project that none of us had even thought about before Jennifer came on the scene. This type of project that incorporates this much beauty and nature into the functional playground that Mr. Brand was seeking is going to cost more money. I’m not against scaling it back. I’m glad we have seen what’s possible. The reality is that within the $250,000 it is going to be hard to achieve what Mr. Brand seeks which is a playground that will serve children with disabilities and at the same time incorporate the esthetic element. We have changed the nature of the project for the better and it may cost a little bit more than originally conceived to accomplish that goal. Alderman Soucy I do agree with the Mayor. I think we can do a lot of the work in house to save money. I also agree with Alderman Schoneman that quality is of the utmost importance. Alderman Donchess just mentioned that he’s not sure what the number is, I am. The budget is set by Mr. Brand, it was a gift. No cost to the city. This is what I kept hearing. I’m not even sure how much was raised as of now. I love the park but we have so many other priorities in the city right now other than a playground. It’s paving, police, fire, teachers, & school books. Alderman Sheehan The way this is designed, will it provide shade for the swing set area? I know that we have had trees removed for the purposes of being able to see your design so what is the shade situation? Special Bd. of Aldermen – 10/13/14 Page 13 Ms. Brooke The existing swings are the only shaded swings that you have, is that what you were saying? Alderman Sheehan Yes. Ms. Brooke They would grow to be in shade depending on how large you put in those Cherry trees. In any case, swings, if they are put in the ground today, require a very large setback under any circumstances. Those Cherry trees are about as close as you can get them to the edge of the swing area without being in the swing area. The swing requires a 31-foot dimension from end to end and the swings are in the center. Alderman Sheehan Yes, but the Cherry trees are behind where the sun sets. Ms. Brooke Yes but you have the street trees which are considerably larger on the opposite side. The street trees extends far into this site. The only thing to create more shade would be plant right on the back side of those swings and then you end up waiting for the trees to grow and then when you do a poured in place surface, it’s nice not to break it up so you can maximize the overlap the safety zones. You would be putting a break along the back side and then re-pouring whatever the surface is on the back side. Getting swings into shade is a tricky thing to do given current setback rules. Alderman Sheehan I didn’t know if those were removed if that was going to be an issue. Alderman Donchess Would it be possible to develop a project that would have $250,000 budget which would retain totally the aesthetic element but also to development a couple of options in case the community or the board of aldermen or the city wanted to go further that the $250,000? We see the $250,000 and we think that leaves out X,Y, and Z. Maybe we could add X and that would only cost a little bit more. Would it be possible to proceed in that way? Ms. Brooke It would be much easier to proceed in that way in a design process rather than I think has been previously suggested in a construction process. I think making those decisions before shovels hit the ground is a far better idea than building a finished playground and then adding on that finished playground in the future. Alderman Donchess That’s what I’m proposing. You develop a $250,000 design with designed options that could be in addition to that if the Board or the City or even private contributors, whomever, wanted to come up with extra money. Ms. Brooke Absolutely. Special Bd. of Aldermen – 10/13/14 Page 14 President Deane When we look at what was agreed upon by Mr. Brand and the Friends of Greeley, what’s the cost of that portion where there would be the buffer? They agreed to a buffer. What’s the cost of the buffer? Ms. Brooke I pulled that out as a separate item. If you’re talking about the buffer there’s several things in this plan that help to buffer. One is an evergreen planting that’s not associated actually with the perimeter of this park but that is set back along the back edge. I think there’s $13,000 in the budget for this buffer alone. There’s this hedge along the back edge here which acts to help buffer the park. I think one would certainly argue that that hedge has aesthetic value in addition to buffering value. I think that’s it in terms of things that directly buffer the existing content. These existing trees here are an enormous asset to this place. One doesn’t want to get too close to them here so this whole thing is pulled back. Initially in an initial study of this project, the plan and the design was different. It was moved further in this direction of the site. When you move in that direction, it requires less grading because it gets steep as you come around the corner. My understanding is the further in this direction towards the east that you move, the most encroaching the project feels and may indeed be to the abutters. President Deane I would agree. Alderman Moriarty I was remiss in failing to point out how nice this looks. Every time you come here I’m always impressed. I do remember your prior presentation or two. You have quite a resume. This is not the first time you’ve done this. I would guess you’ve done this maybe not a 100 playgrounds but probably more than ten playgrounds. Ms. Brooke A few. Alderman Moriarty It was implied that you can’t make a playground that is both beautiful and accommodates the handicapped as widely as possible. The statement was made that that can’t be done for anything less than an enormous amount of money. Could you build a playground for let’s say $150,000 or even $200,000 that is both beautiful and functional as the Legacy Group would like. Ms. Brooke It depends on how much your labor costs are. It depends on the level of finish you require. It’s that asphalt versus stabilized stone question or marble countertops versus Formica countertops question. Absolutely. Imagine your back yard with that $150,000 add. It would look a lot different than it would look now I would imagine unless you have a really nice backyard already. President Deane You should see my backyard. Special Bd. of Aldermen – 10/13/14 Page 15 Ms. Brooke With $10,000 one can make a meaningful addition. I think the real issue here is again deciding on what the budget is and then understanding what that budget can provide in terms of its functionality. Let me just take you on a really quick tour through the equipment. We have two of these slides that are doubled- bay so it’s four altogether. That web climber alone is $15,000. It’s shocking but that’s what playground equipment is today. President Deane Is that installed? Ms. Brooke No. Mayor Lozeau We are in the wrong business. Ms. Brooke We are in the wrong business; I would agree. The swings are your best bang for the buck. They are the least expensive thing that gives you the most vestibular and sensory feedback. The thrill factor is very high given the cost of a swing. President Deane How much is the swing? Ms. Brooke They charge you for the bays and then they charge you for the seats and the chains. The thing about a swing is the impact resistant area is actually quite large so it does have a tendency to balance out the cost overall of the item because you do need a bigger impact service than you would, for example, on that climber. The service is deeper and it costs more per square foot. These spinning items, those spinning cups are about $1,000 each not installed. That’s a really good price. It accommodates one child at a time. That merry-go-round that you see on the bottom is the only wheelchair accessible merry- go-round on the market. The only one. Its $53,000. Mr. Brand and his group would really like to put that in because it is wheelchair accessible, but it’s $53,000. When you think about can you build a playground for $100,000 or $150,000 or $250,000, yes, absolutely we can. But these are the kinds of questions and line items that we can visit. For example, this particular merry-go-round has significant impact on the budget. President Deane How much were the swings? Ms. Brooke I don’t want to give you a number. I think they are in the realm of $12,000 when you add up the cost of the arches and the chains and the seats. Each one of those seats are $1,000. The rockers again are fairly inexpensive. The accessible one, the one that has the sea shacks that is really great for groups, is a $12,000 item. Each of these other items is in the range of $1,000 - $1,500. This is really a very inexpensive way to play. Then the sensory items that we’re proposing are obviously custom built. This Special Bd. of Aldermen – 10/13/14 Page 16 could be done, I think we’ve talked about this before, with concrete and marbles and brick. This is a very creative process. Alderman Donchess The grass photo, how maintenance does something like that require? Ms. Brooke It depends on what types of grasses you put in. Ideally you put in grasses that only need to be shorn once, at tops twice, a year. You’re actually not growing turf in this case but more like perennials. President Deane Ornamental grass. Ms. Brooke Correct. The tricky part about this is this is accessible and is very sensory and is a wonderful thing to put into a playground. In fact we could do more of something like this and have more functionality but this does not achieve the accessibility that one is looking for for wheels or for mobility impairments of other kinds. One cannot only limit themselves to this. This is an excellent piece to add to a collection of features but it cannot be the only feature. Alderman Donchess As an element of the park, the Grant Park in Chicago, which I’m sure you’ve seen, they recreate as a way you can walk through it the prairie. It’s just unbelievable how much effect it has on you when you go into it. It has wildlife. The grass is maybe waist high. It’s probably an acre and this isn’t an acre, but I’m just saying something like this could really be nice in a smaller version than the Grant Park example. Alderwoman Brown Because of the high rate of Lyme disease I would certainly strongly vote against any kind of grassy area. I feel very strongly about that issue. Thank you. Ms. Brooke We do tick checks every night. Alderman Caron This is wonderful. This is no way what we had envisioned back in 2000 when the Parks and Recreation Department first talked about an ADA accessible playground for Greeley Park. This is fabulous. I agree when I saw the price I went “Oh My God” but I always like to look at the Cadillac even though I’m only going to get a Chevy. It puts you back in perspective. When you talk about equipment, I agree with Mr. Brand and his group. The merry-go-round when you first showed some of those designs I thought that was great. The one thing I missed on here was the bird’s nest because I thought that was just fabulous. I thought that was such an interactive thing for youngsters to have to get in and move around. I have one question. You talked about not seeing a map of Greeley Park back when that architect came through. I know there was a map that we had on the wall that was done in 1910. Did you see that? Ms. Brooke I did. It’s a topographical survey, but it’s not a Master Plan. Special Bd. of Aldermen – 10/13/14 Page 17 Alderman Caron It didn’t have anything with it? I couldn’t remember but I know we had the map up there. Ms. Brooke It’s one thing to survey the park and understand and do an inventory. It’s another to plan for it as a park and the way it would be developed over time. Alderman Caron I wasn’t sure. I thought maybe there was some information that went with the map. I knew the map was there because someone had given it to us as a gift for the office. I thought that was quite interesting when you go back and look at some of the trees and things that were on there. I think we have come a long way with the difficulty that we have had in trying to bring this. I would hope that utilizing city workers who can do a lot of this infrastructure as part of their day and to look at that $250,000 grant or donation that we’re getting from the group, I think we could come up with something that will make everybody happy and get us to move on and, as the mayor said, to think about when we are replacing equipment at other playgrounds throughout the city that we have something that we can work with. I commend you. I was just overwhelmed. I had to look at it several times. I was very pleased with the final results. I know whatever we come up with; I think the City will be proud. Alderman Schoneman I just wanted to add one comment to the idea of having city workers do it. I think there are certainly some things that they can do. My understanding is some of this stuff if it is not done correctly it will last for a couple of years and then it is going to be a disaster. I just want to make sure whoever we have install it actually has expertise and experience in that installation. I don’t want anyone in the Public Works Department to think that I’m speaking disparaging about their abilities. There are certain things that they have experience in that I think we can capitalize on, but if there are things that are required here that they don’t have experience on then I would be careful about that. Ms. Brooke That is particularly true with regard to the stabilized stone dust path if that is the material that is chosen for the pedestrian perimeter path. One really does need to have some experience with that in order to install it or at least be able to have access to a similar installation. That would be the case that I would be most concerned about less than, for example, the plantings. President Deane I find that stone dust interesting because a number of years ago when they widened Route 3 there was a granite quarry in Pepperell, Massachusetts, down near the Pepperell Airport that they crushed the material down there. They brought it out onto Route 3. It had an organic matter in it when it was crushed. They spread it and wet it down and rolled it, in order to get through it afterwards you needed a jackhammer. I forgot who did the highway project, but they went down and basically bought the quarry. It’s dead now but they took all of that material. There was no Portland added to it. I’ve never heard of something like that. I’ve seen regular base that you can use that turns muddy because there’s clay in it and that’s what happens. It ponds at the top. It compacts nice. It gets good and hard when the sun hits it after it’s been moist but when it gets a lot of rain and there’s not proper drainage it does pond and does rut. Alderman Donchess What’s the cost of a square foot of the dust you were talking about? Special Bd. of Aldermen – 10/13/14 Page 18 Ms. Brooke About $6 - $7/square foot. Stabilized stone dust. Different parts of the country use different added materials to stabilize the stone dust. You can use a cement binder. In some cases it can be a dry tree sap binder like glue that glues it together. It’s a product that is often used for exactly this kind of application where you are looking for a natural experience with a kind of grainy top but that you need the firmness to last. You need it to last even under conditions of rain and snow. Alderman Donchess Do you clear snow off of it? Ms. Brooke You can clear snow off of it. I wouldn’t use a snow plow. I would use a snowplowed. President Deane Or a snow shovel in your case because you live close. Alderwoman Brown We have a finance committee on Wednesday. Would it be possible for you to come up with an estimate of what it would take for a redesign for a real scaled down version that would be within the $250,000 and include all the equipment, surfacing and scaled back landscaping? President Deane I think the funds for her services have been exhausted. This is another task that would have to be contracted. We would have to find a funding source to pay for such which would probably have to be done legislatively. Alderwoman Brown Right, that’s correct. Before then we would have to President Deane Wednesday would be kind of pushing the envelope a little bit. My opinion of what we should do is since this falls under the purview of the Infrastructure when we’re done with this session this evening, I think we should take all this information, and if someone would be kind enough to send it to Alderman Donchess’ committee, that’s where the discussion should be held in Infrastructure. That’s just my opinion. That’s where we could take up what do we do from here. I’d like to take public comment first. PUBLIC COMMENT Eric Brand I think what we’ve put together here hits on a lot of great pieces. I’m very proud of what we put together here. When we went through some of the other legislative processes, I remember coming up to this microphone and saying, as I believe Alderman Donchess stated very clearly tonight, that going with this type of hybrid design will change what the costs will be. I said that at I believe a couple different meetings. I think it is very clear that this is changing that. Some of the concepts that Jennifer showed earlier from some of the other parks, whether it be Boston Common, New York Central Park and some of the others, as I looked at some of those early on even before tonight, it didn’t necessarily show as much buffer and other plantings around the playground structures, themselves. It was left wide open to kind of Special Bd. of Aldermen – 10/13/14 Page 19 blend in with that meadow area. Did some of them have fencing around them? I didn’t really take a note on that, but they were left open. In this area that we’re talking about, there is a lot of buffer material going on to try to help make sure that we’re being kind to the neighbors and the other abutters, but it really adds a lot to the cost of this project overall. As we talked about budget numbers, one thing that had been talked about early on even with the Board of Public Works is that the site work would be a burden to the city as we talked about this project but the rest of the equipment and protective impact resistant material would come from our group. As you look thorough the budget and you try to analysis that a little bit, and I’m sure it’s going to go to a different committee and this will be talked about quite a bit more, irrigation is in this budget proposal to make sure everything will last. We’re talking about roughly $11,000 in there for irrigation. Plantings, there’s $82,000 in here for plantings. That was not something our group was prepared to take on because it’s over and above what we’d like to get in for playground equipment. Fencing, that is one thing I talked about quite a bit of actually in the area that we were looking at before. We’ve got $17,000 in here for fencing. Pathways, $23,000. Additional asphalt, $11,000. Then $1,000 worth of concrete to connect up to a path on the other side by the band shell. These are all costs that we were able to work on before on the west side in the existing location that we wouldn’t have. But since we’ve decided to move forward with this site, there’s a lot of additional costs to make this happen at this site. I agree, I think what we’ve put together is a great project here. I think it can look great and everybody can be happy with it. When you look at the site work that Jennifer has put together comes out to $28,000. I believe that’s probably more in line with what everybody else in this room was looking for, a minimal amount of city contribution to that. That same number, I don’t have the exact number in front of me, but could probably work on the other side as well from when we did those original numbers. Again we’ve changed this project. We’ve changed the scope of work that goes on here. Those buffer trees do add a lot of cost to this. The tree sizing that Jen has gone with, I know we had quite a bit of discussion about that, trying to get in some mature trees so everybody when this is done can look at it and say this is awesome and not have to wait ten years for the trees to grow but there is a cost to that. Also the installation of those trees. Hiring outside workers or having city workers do that, there’s still a substantial cost. Could we have volunteers that could work within the installation of the project and get some of that done? I believe so. I want to bring back for a second some of the original ideas and concepts that brought this whole project together. I know we’re sitting here and we’re really talking about costs and that’s what this is coming down to, but think back to the original ideas that came to our group and that came to the Mayor was from patients. Patients that said I would really like to have a place where I can go and play with all of my friends. That’s really what we have to bring this back to. Yes we’re talking about money, we’ve got to have answers for that, but you’ve also got to look at this. This is an infrastructure improvement not just for one segment of population but this is for all of the population to enjoy. Thank you. Dick Iaccone, Swart Terrace. During all the public debates, and I’ve been to all of them, it got pretty tough being criticized by everyone because they had all the answers already. It’s because of the Friends that came upon this group and Jennifer who’s done a great job. Now for the rest of the story as Paul Hardy would say. The problem has been a lot of misinformation. I’ve been to all the meetings, I’ve listened, I’ve gone back and taken notes. Jennifer, you did do what everyone asked you to do. She did. What she was asked to do was here is the site and tell us what we have to do to make it work in Greeley Park. Then we’re going to see if we can do it. The result is we can’t do it in Greeley Park. I’ve listened to the discussion already tonight which is pretty scary. We look at the bandstand all the time. Take a drive in the park lately when it’s busy. Take a look at the roads. It’s not a very pleasant site. That park has not been kept in good shape. Cars are parking all over the lawn. They are parking in areas where they shouldn’t be parked. We still haven’t removed all the equipment over there we said we were going to do years and years ago. We should get back to the basics. Even the original study, somehow the majority of the people understood what this is about. A few people came and said Greeley Park, that side, is the number one site that they’ve come to so that’s where it is going to be. That wasn’t the case. What the study was supposed to be was information for all of you to look at all the various sites then take that information, the input, and come up with the best place for it. Somehow it came out to be the number one site. I’m surprised, more liked shocked, that the Greeley site had the lowest cost for infrastructure. I’ve been to all the meetings. All my notes, there’s no place that I have heard of any numbers given for any other sites as to what the infrastructure would be. Tonight after doing this study, we’re hearing about what it would be for Greeley Park. If you go back to the original study, it’s interesting that Sargents Ave was eliminating. We don’t know how close it was to Greeley. We do know there is a problem with waste and asbestos but we know it’s not true but that was in the calculations. We also hear about an alderman talk about the traffic and how bad it was on Sargents. We kept asking for a traffic Special Bd. of Aldermen – 10/13/14 Page 20 study. They told me it was online. I kept going online. I know I’m not the best in technology so I asked other people to do it. T here was no traffic study site, but yet what appeared later on and it wasn’t on very long, and contrary to the aldermen who said the traffic site was there, the study said traffic on Concord Street was twice of Sargents. The number of tickets given, the speeding limits were higher. Common sense which is interesting, kids have to get across that road from both sides of the park, from west to east. Don’t’ wait an opportunity you already have now. Don’t have tunnel vision at this point to say this has to be here and start cutting back. Look what we’ve done in the past by cutting back, cutting back. Look what happens to the project. You get a second rate project. If you’re going back to the Infrastructure Committee, let’s make sure we do our homework correct this time. What was just said is if you really want to do it, you don’t need to fit this beautiful thing into Greeley Park. Look at the other parks. And by the way, I’m sure those meadows were a lot bigger than Greeley Park. That’s why they don’t’ have to have a buffer. Let’s face facts. How big are these parks? I walked Central Park last weekend. I didn’t walk it. It’s a huge park. We do have the ability if you go back into that Infrastructure Committee to take a look and see what it is. You could put the park there. You don’t have to have all the stone dust. Asphalt fits in nicely there, and it serves the purpose. You can have all these equipments. Pay $53,000 for the equipment. Isn’t that great? That’s what you really want. You want the kids to have this. You should look at that. The motion to go back would be great. I know it’s a lot of extra work but do the right thing. Don’t have the tunnel vision. Go back in and research where we should be because yes, this is gorgeous and this is what fits in at Greeley Park at a price tag that’s going to be high, at least $500,000. That’s not going to work. Dan Richardson, 70 Berkeley Street, Nashua. I’m not going to talk about the sausage making that goes on at the Board of Aldermen. It’s an ugly process, but I would like to talk about your design. The selection of materials was wonderful. It was very, very appropriate. I really had no idea it would turn out like that. At the public input meeting that you held, you did pay attention. You recorded all those things, and almost all of those are incorporated into your design. It was a wonderful. Thank you. The one thing that I had commented on that I didn’t’ really see in your prior report you had a chart that showed the population density of the different disabilities. I had kind of requested that you concentrate not on the really, really small populations but serving the best needs of the most in that area. It looks like the design kind of covers the bases equally, more or less. That might be an area where sizing could be considered in the future. Thank you. Paul Shea, 102 Tolles Street. I’m just wondering labor is a good part of the cost, correct? Ms. Brooke It depends on who is building it. It is a significant part of any cost. Mr. Shea The reason I ask and bring that up is we’ve had a good number of service days here in the city where over 200 people come out and work on different projects. The Big Day of Serving we did one in French Hill, one in the Tree Streets. People came out and did all sorts of projects. They did shoring up of porches, cleaning out the Rail Trail. We probably hauled six Parks-Rec trucks full of trash out of that area that had built up. If we were to pay for that kind of work, it would have cost in order of tens of thousands of dollars, I’m sure. I just want to say this looks fantastic and the $500,000 is certainly a very high number. I have two hands. I know there are 800 people who spoke up and felt this is something that they wanted to see. I know there are tens of thousands of parents in this city. I personally would be glad to part of volunteering and working towards this. I’m sure there’s a lot of people out there. I just ask that the Board and Eric and everybody who is working on this take that into some consideration because I am certain that there are many people in the community that would be glad to lend a hand. I know it’s not going to be a $250,000 hand, but I do know that it can make a significant impact and increase the sense of ownership that people have in this city and continue to connect people which is what this is designed to do. Thank you. Tom Pappas. I commend Jennifer. She was a pleasure to work with. She’s very knowledgeable as you all know. This has been very educational. I know now a lot more than I ever knew about parks or playground equipment despite the fact of having three kids and visiting virtually every playground in this city. I think I know a lot more now than when I started this process. It was a pleasure also working with Special Bd. of Aldermen – 10/13/14 Page 21 Eric. We did not agree on everything. I don’t’ agree with everyone in that plan; he probably doesn’t agree with everything in that plan. We played our roles. I didn’t see our role as to weigh in for instance on the budget. I took no position on the budget. I left that to the professional. No one told me a budget number. I took no position on the budget. I viewed our role as essentially trying to help Jennifer with some input from the public who knows the areas, knows the use of the area and what we think would make a nice playground in that soot. That was essentially our role. It wasn’t to advocate for one position or another position on any particular items such as the budget or so forth. It was really to help her get some input from people who live in the community and have some experience with playgrounds. I have no doubt that Jennifer could design a very nice playground for $250,000. It seems to me that one of the things I learned is the cost is a function essentially of what you put in there and the aesthetics that you add to it and any necessary site work. Those are really the drivers of the cost. This playground has six separate play areas; there’s six separate types of activities for different sensory things plus some miscellaneous types of activities. If you look at your packet you will see the drawing with the circles around it. T hose are the six different types of activities. I have no doubt that Jennifer could design a wonderful playground with three types of activities or four types of activities. This certainly is the Cadillac. I think it’s a nice Cadillac. If you wanted a Chevy, I think Jennifer could design a very nice Chevy. I have no doubt that she could design something for what number you give her and yow could be pleased with what she designed and it would fit aesthetically in this area. It would perhaps have a smaller footprint than this. There is some concern with the overall size of the footprint. 17,000 square feet is a big footprint in that area that’s already congested. The play area, itself, is almost 10,000 square feet but it nicely accommodates all of those activities. I have no doubt that if you wanted to have a smaller footprint to fit in that spot and a few less activities, Jennifer could design that and you would all be happy with it. I think if you go forward and redesign it, I would encourage you to use her talent and use the knowledge she already has about this space. Not to kill the analogies that have been used, but I will try with the cooking analogy that’s been thrown around, I view it as sort of how many course meals do you want? Do you want a 9-course meal, a 7-course meal, a 5-course meal? Tell Jennifer how many courses you want and she will design it and you will be pleased with it. If you give her the box, whether its $250,000 and I can understand that rationale for $250,000, or whatever that box is, I’m confident that she will be able to design it for the space. On the other hand if you think after reviewing this this is not the area for it, you need to tell her that as well. You need to make that policy decision as the gentleman said earlier before me. In all respect to Mr. Shea, and I don’t know Mr. Shea and I applaud all the volunteers who come out at any time to help clean areas and beautify areas, I do have a fair amount of experience in construction litigation. I’m a litigator, and I’ve litigated a lot of projects that have gone by because that’s when I get involved. It’s a big difference between a six figure complicated construction project than cleaning up a park or fixing up some decks or doing that kind of activity. This is not really a project that lends itself well to volunteers. It doesn’t lend itself well to folks that don’t’ have the experience in putting in some of the specialized material, whether it’s the stone dust or whether it’s the special material under the swings or the special material under the rock area. That special material you need to have somebody who knows what they are doing has done it before and have it done right. For no other reason than if something goes wrong, you need to have somebody to be held accountable. If it’s a private contractor who has experience, the city can hold them accountable if something goes wrong. We’re not going to hold volunteers accountable nor should we. You need to really have somebody who knows what they are doing with that type of material for that size project to make sure it comes out right. I would encourage you that if we go forward, and you’re going to probably get better pricing with competitive bids anyway, but I would encourage you to use folks that know what they are doing, that have experience doing it. God forbid if something goes wrong, you’ve got somebody that you can hold accountable because I think that’s important. IT would be a shame if you go through the process, spend whatever amount of money and something goes wrong and there’s nobody to hold accountable. Then you’ve got an eyesore on your hands and a real problem trying to fix it. I would encourage you that if you go this route, get it done once; get it done right, but get it done by someone who has done it before. Thank you. MOTION BY ALDERWOMAN BROWN TO SEND THE REPORT TO THE COMMITTEE ON INFRASTRUCTURE MOTION CARRIED Special Bd. of Aldermen – 10/13/14 Page 22 ADJOURNMENT MOTION BY ALDERMAN MCCARTHY THAT THE OCTOBER 13, 2014 SPECIAL MEETING OF THE BOARD OF ALDERMEN BE ADJOURNED MOTION CARRIED The meeting was declared adjourned at 9:45 p.m. Attest: Patricia Piecuch, Deputy City Clerk Public Presentation of a Schematic Design for an Accessible Public Playground Nashua, New Hampshire October 13, 2014 The Institute for Human Centered Design Project Team, Boston, MA • Jennifer Brooke, Principal at Lemon|Brooke Landscape Architecture, consulting for IHCD • Ana Julian, Architectural Designer and Technical Assistance Specialist at IHCD • Valerie Fletcher, Executive Director, IHCD www.IHCDesign.org • 200 Portland Street, Boston MA 02114 • 617.695.1225 v/tty • 617.482.8099 fax Site Overview www.IHCDesign.org • 200 Portland Street, Boston MA 02114 • 617.695.1225 v/tty • 617.482.8099 fax www.IHCDesign.org • 200 Portland Street, Boston MA 02114 • 617.695.1225 v/tty • 617.482.8099 fax • Greeley Park – The will of Joseph T. Greeley was probated June 10, 1881. The land that was his family’s farm, (160 acres +/-), was given to the City of Nashua to be used for farming activities and at some future point as a park or public institution. • The farm had a large orchard, hay and wood resources. Greeley Park circa. 1920 • A landscape architect, E.O. Hathaway from Boston was commissioned to do a topographical survey and map. • Central Park, NYC - 1873 • Boston Garden - 1862 • In 1908 John Cotton donated $5000.00, • Golden Gate Park, SF - 1875 matched with city funds to create “a stone and cement rest house, a fountain, • Lincoln Park, Chicago – 1890 a shallow pond, a gravel walk, and flower • Central Park, Louisville - 1904 beds.” www.IHCDesign.org • 200 Portland Street, Boston MA 02114 • 617.695.1225 v/tty • 617.482.8099 fax Massachusetts Michigan North Dakota Kentucky Illinois New York www.IHCDesign.org • 200 Portland Street, Boston MA 02114 • 617.695.1225 v/tty • 617.482.8099 fax  th Common Characteristics of 19 C. Parks • Open meadows for passive recreation • Elaborate flower beds • Distinguished architecture • Framed views of bucolic landscape scenery • Separation of incongruous activity and circulation • Pathways for strolling • Playgrounds for children www.IHCDesign.org • 200 Portland Street, Boston MA 02114 • 617.695.1225 v/tty • 617.482.8099 fax www.IHCDesign.org • 200 Portland Street, Boston MA 02114 • 617.695.1225 v/tty • 617.482.8099 fax www.IHCDesign.org • 200 Portland Street, Boston MA 02114 • 617.695.1225 v/tty • 617.482.8099 fax Design Goals • Honor and enhance the historical references already present in the park. • Embrace the natural environment as an integral part of the play experience. • Maintain universal accessibility at every level. • Design to an achievable budget. www.IHCDesign.org • 200 Portland Street, Boston MA 02114 • 617.695.1225 v/tty • 617.482.8099 fax The Project www.IHCDesign.org • 200 Portland Street, Boston MA 02114 • 617.695.1225 v/tty • 617.482.8099 fax  Greeley Park Project Site Bath House www.IHCDesign.org • 200 Portland Street, Boston MA 02114 • 617.695.1225 v/tty • 617.482.8099 fax  Looking East www.IHCDesign.org • 200 Portland Street, Boston MA 02114 • Looking North 617.695.1225 v/tty • 617.482.8099 fax  Project Site www.IHCDesign.org • 200 Portland Street, Boston MA 02114 • 617.695.1225 v/tty • 617.482.8099 fax  Project Process Sketches www.IHCDesign.org • 200 Portland Street, Boston MA 02114 • 617.695.1225 v/tty • 617.482.8099 fax  Project Process Plans www.IHCDesign.org • 200 Portland Street, Boston MA 02114 • 617.695.1225 v/tty • 617.482.8099 fax  Schematic Design Plan www.IHCDesign.org • 200 Portland Street, Boston MA 02114 • 617.695.1225 v/tty • 617.482.8099 fax  Schematic Plan www.IHCDesign.org • 200 Portland Street, Boston MA 02114 • 617.695.1225 v/tty • 617.482.8099 fax  FEEL/HEAR ROCK SWING CLIMB SPIN SLIDE Program Areas www.IHCDesign.org • 200 Portland Street, Boston MA 02114 • 617.695.1225 v/tty • 617.482.8099 fax  Project Area www.IHCDesign.org • 200 Portland Street, Boston MA 02114 • 617.695.1225 v/tty • 617.482.8099 fax  View of Play Space from the Eastern End (Perimeter hedge removed for purposes of being able to see “in”) www.IHCDesign.org • 200 Portland Street, Boston MA 02114 • 617.695.1225 v/tty • 617.482.8099 fax  View of Play Space from the East Entry near Parking (Plant material along either side of entry fence removed for purposes of being able to see “in”) www.IHCDesign.org • 200 Portland Street, Boston MA 02114 • 617.695.1225 v/tty • 617.482.8099 fax  View of Carousel and Spinning Elements www.IHCDesign.org • 200 Portland Street, Boston MA 02114 • 617.695.1225 v/tty • 617.482.8099 fax  View of Swings and Rocking Area www.IHCDesign.org • 200 Portland Street, Boston MA 02114 • 617.695.1225 v/tty • 617.482.8099 fax  View Looking towards the Embankment Slide through the Birch Grove www.IHCDesign.org • 200 Portland Street, Boston MA 02114 • 617.695.1225 v/tty • 617.482.8099 fax  View of Climbing Elements in the Birch Grove www.IHCDesign.org • 200 Portland Street, Boston MA 02114 • 617.695.1225 v/tty • 617.482.8099 fax  View of Embankment Slides (Shown from Ground level) www.IHCDesign.org • 200 Portland Street, Boston MA 02114 • 617.695.1225 v/tty • 617.482.8099 fax  View of Cherry Tree Walk and Swings www.IHCDesign.org • 200 Portland Street, Boston MA 02114 • 617.695.1225 v/tty • 617.482.8099 fax  View from the foot of the Slides looking East www.IHCDesign.org • 200 Portland Street, Boston MA 02114 • 617.695.1225 v/tty • 617.482.8099 fax  Bird’s Eye view of the Play Space, including the Sensory Platform (Existing Street trees have removed for the purposes of looking “in”) www.IHCDesign.org • 200 Portland Street, Boston MA 02114 • 617.695.1225 v/tty • 617.482.8099 fax Accessible Playground Program www.IHCDesign.org • 200 Portland Street, Boston MA 02114 • 617.695.1225 v/tty • 617.482.8099 fax SLIDING Embankment Slide being Proposed www.IHCDesign.org • 200 Portland Street, Boston MA 02114 • 617.695.1225 v/tty • 617.482.8099 fax CLIMBING Climbing Elements being Proposed www.IHCDesign.org • 200 Portland Street, Boston MA 02114 • 617.695.1225 v/tty • 617.482.8099 fax SWINGING Swing configuration being Proposed (4 Swing seats would be ADA conforming and 4 typical) www.IHCDesign.org • 200 Portland Street, Boston MA 02114 • 617.695.1225 v/tty • 617.482.8099 fax SPINNING Spinning Elements being Proposed www.IHCDesign.org • 200 Portland Street, Boston MA 02114 • 617.695.1225 v/tty • 617.482.8099 fax ROCKING See-Saw and Rocking Elements being Proposed www.IHCDesign.org • 200 Portland Street, Boston MA 02114 • 617.695.1225 v/tty • 617.482.8099 fax EXPLORING Stepping stone Paths similar to those being Proposed (These nature paths are over the grassy mounds near the rocking and spinning areas) www.IHCDesign.org • 200 Portland Street, Boston MA 02114 • 617.695.1225 v/tty • 617.482.8099 fax SENSORY Textured Wall similar to that being Proposed ( On the Sensory Platform or otherwise located along the main path) www.IHCDesign.org • 200 Portland Street, Boston MA 02114 • 617.695.1225 v/tty • 617.482.8099 fax  Marble/Tennis Ball Run Ideas being Proposed (Along the main path and at Sensory Platform) www.IHCDesign.org • 200 Portland Street, Boston MA 02114 • 617.695.1225 v/tty • 617.482.8099 fax Music / Moving Parts Musical Elements being Proposed ( On the Sensory Platform) www.IHCDesign.org • 200 Portland Street, Boston MA 02114 • 617.695.1225 v/tty • 617.482.8099 fax SEATING Park Seating being Proposed (Throughout the site) www.IHCDesign.org • 200 Portland Street, Boston MA 02114 • 617.695.1225 v/tty • 617.482.8099 fax WAYFINDING Wayfinding and Signage Ideas Proposed (At Entries and located along the main path) www.IHCDesign.org • 200 Portland Street, Boston MA 02114 • 617.695.1225 v/tty • 617.482.8099 fax PLANTING Planting Scheme being Proposed www.IHCDesign.org • 200 Portland Street, Boston MA 02114 • 617.695.1225 v/tty • 617.482.8099 fax SURFACES Hardscape textures being Proposed ( Artificial turf, poured-in-place rubber, wood, brick and stabilized stone dust) www.IHCDesign.org • 200 Portland Street, Boston MA 02114 • 617.695.1225 v/tty • 617.482.8099 fax Moving Forward www.IHCDesign.org • 200 Portland Street, Boston MA 02114 • 617.695.1225 v/tty • 617.482.8099 fax Next Steps • Project Approval - Confirm Design and Budget Extents • Revise the plan based on approval conditions and design the small pieces • Use the more detailed drawings to competitively bid parts of project not being done in house or by others. • Confirm 100% of funding for project. • Coordinate labor teams and appoint a project construction manager. • Establish a schedule and build the project. www.IHCDesign.org • 200 Portland Street, Boston MA 02114 • 617.695.1225 v/tty • 617.482.8099 fax  The End If you have additional thoughts or comments regarding the new accessible play space, please email Jennifer Brooke. Jennifer@Lemonbrooke.com Please write PlayNashua in the subject line. For Further information: 2010 ADA Standards for Accessible Design: http://www.ada.gov/regs2010/2010ADAStandards/2010ADAStandards.pdf ADA Checklist for Existing Facilities: http://www.adachecklist.org/ www.IHCDesign.org • 200 Portland Street, Boston MA 02114 • 617.695.1225 v/tty • 617.482.8099 fax