.
Feedback

Riverside Park Advocates Split On Playscape Transfer

Proposal would bring playground equipment from Veterans Field to East New London

A proposal to transfer a playscape from Cedar Grove Ave. to East New London has divided opinions among Riverside Park advocates, with some feeling the installation of playground equipment is overdue and others saying a transfer would be premature.

The issue went before the Education, Parks and Recreation Committee of the City Council on Monday. Committee members unanimously voted to send the matter to the Parks and Recreation Commission for their input.

The playscape is located at Veterans Field near the modular classrooms recently used by the Winthrop School and Nathan Hale School. Although the classrooms are being removed following a decision by the Board of Education to consolidate the student populations of Nathan Hale School and Harbor School for this year, the playscape is city-owned and will remain at the field.

Let Patch save you time. Get great local stories like this delivered right to your inbox or smartphone every day with our free newsletter. Simple, fast sign-up here.

Public Works Director Tim Hanser said a relocation estimate puts the cost for the move at $56,636. Hanser said the majority of this cost is the installation of a poured in place safety surface, which he said has a 12-year lifespan and requires lower maintenance than other surfaces.

“It really can’t be put in later,” said Hanser. “It would have to be done all at once.”

Support

Wayne Vendetto said several plans have been pitched for the park since a 2011 vote narrowly rejected a proposal to sell about half of the site to the Coast Guard Academy for the school to expand its campus. He said there has not been significant movement on putting any plans into place and suggested that other surfaces could be used to reduce the expense. Vendetto also argued that the relocation could be accomplished at no cost to taxpayers using funding sources such as hurricane relief money.

“I don’t want another generation of kids to go by without a playscape at Riverside Park,” he said.

Kathleen Mitchell also said the city should not rely on long-term plans that may not come to fruition. She said the relocation would be a tangible action by the city to invest in East New London.

“Don’t you think it’s time to let these citizens in that so frequently overlooked section of our city—East New London—know that their children are important to us, too?” asked Mitchell.

Opposition

Opponents of the relocation said it should not take place before the completion of a master plan on the future of development at Riverside Park. Members of Riverside Park Conservancy, a non-profit group working to preserve and improve the park, asked for a decision on the relocation to be deferred until after a Feb. 13 workshop presenting this preliminary plan.

Cathi Strother, secretary of the Riverside Park Conservancy’s board of directors, said in a memo to the committee that participants in park planning sessions have favored a natural playscape taking advantage of the park’s location on the Thames River. The memo says the Veterans Field playscape would not be desirable for the location, since nearby playscapes are available at the Winthrop School and at Fulton Park on Crystal Ave. and the latter playscape is identical to the Veterans Field one.

“We hope that you will reconsider your support for relocating a used, generic playscape to Riverside Park, and invite you to join neighbors and other park lovers in supporting a unique, multi-generational, exciting play environment that we can all be proud of,” Strother wrote.

Ronna Stuller, treasurer of the organization, said playground equipment is included in the plan for Riverside Park. She said the group was excited by the transfer but that support waned after they examined the idea closer.

“The more we looked into it, the more we concluded that the city can do better,” she said.

Sandra Chalk, executive director of New London Landmarks, said bringing a playscape to the park at this time could inhibit future plans and grants. She also questioned whether the relocation would be the best use of money, saying the site has different qualities than other city parks and lacks several amenities such as bathrooms or running water.

“We’re really dealing with a beautiful space with almost no facilities,” she said.

Committee discussion

Councilor Anthony Nolan, the committee’s chairman, said he wanted to have more input from the Parks and Recreation Commission as well as examination of funding sources and surfacing options. He encouraged residents, especially those from East New London, to attend meetings on the park to share their opinions. Nolan also said he supported establishing a playscape as soon as possible.

“I’m worried that if we delay this issue for two years, or up to two years, we will not be able to put a playscape in the park,” he said.

Council President Michael Passero said he was heartened that the discussion on the park’s future had attracted interest. He said the relocation question should include input from the Parks and Recreation Commission as well as the Finance Committee, but cautioned against delaying the process for too long.

“I don’t want to be in a position where we miss an opportunity to establish a playscape at the park,” said Passero. 

Council President Pro Tempore Wade Hyslop said he would support moving the proposal forward. Hyslop said he did not think having a playscape in place would inhibit future plans, saying there were two areas of the park with playground equipment at one time.

“If one was in place now, you could always seek funding for a second,” he said.

Follow us on Facebook and Twitter.

Newsletter & Alerts

Get the best stories each day and important breaking news

Subscribe

Not from New London Patch? Find your Local Patch »

Loading comments ...
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors. Write a new post... What's up? Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell something
Doc Halliday May 19, 2013 at 08:23 am
Should the general public be required to support the retirement of our elected/hired governmentRead More officials? Should those retirement checks be based on base salary and not base salary plus overtime/extra pay/bonuses etc? Should ALL government officials be on a 401 system instead of a government (public supported) retirement system? ie: government official retires at 95% pay, in a few years with cost of living increases that official is making more in retirement than when working. The public cannot afford to continue such high retirements. Social Security is being tapped by government officials to pay OTHER items rather than for what it was intended and future retirees who contributed to SS may be left out.
Richard Waselik May 19, 2013 at 06:02 am
The general public would not be supporting anyone. This is funded by those that contribute. I amRead More glad you and your wife are able to retire off of social security and what ever savings you were able to put together. But, unfortanately, there will probably not be enough when others are eligible to retire, even though every paycheck we have put in without being asked. Now, some other solution needs to be developed. This is one.
Zak Leavy May 18, 2013 at 10:45 am
Rich, Great blog and I couldn't agree more. American workers have a right to retire with dignityRead More and SB 54 takes another step to make that a reality. This bill is a common sense solution to the problem that many workers face as they near retirement. Considering the analysis of the bill shows only an extremely low, one-time, cost then hopefully that will be enough to have both chambers pass it.
Carol Haley May 17, 2013 at 07:44 am
Pretty funny Spencer. But you don't want a museum there. You need something that generates taxes.Read More Museums are mostly non-profit thereby not generating any taxes. I know you were being funny. I was disgusted to read the developer couldn't show financial backing.
Kathleen Mitchell May 17, 2013 at 05:47 pm
Who would haveever thought of Wasp Spray? When you get the case of spray, be sure and drop a can offRead More at my house;>)
Jeff Brown May 17, 2013 at 03:46 pm
Good article, gonna have to pick up a case of wasp spray!
Carol Haley May 17, 2013 at 12:34 pm
Barbara, I agree with you. But it is probably a lot easier to get an illegal social security numberRead More than we would know. There are two ways of looking at this issue, but my resentment is that I have to pay for them.
Barbara Crocker May 17, 2013 at 07:52 am
But for state aid they would have to have a Social Security number. Bending and breaking laws isRead More how they got here in the first place. The fact that elected officials condone and encourage these laws to be broken is the biggest problem that I have with this whole debacle. "Undocumented residents" place a burden on all of us, and take jobs that could be worked by legal residents. Employers hire illegals (yes I prefer calling them what they are, to hell with being politically correct) because it saves them money, not because "no one else would work these jobs". This is a slap in the face to all of our ancestors who came to this country and followed the rules to become citizens.
Carol Haley May 17, 2013 at 06:51 am
The way things have been going in the eastern part of the United States, as long as the illegals areRead More not breaking the law criminally (motor vehicle is different), they are not arrested for being illegal. Its the illegal immigrants who break the law, such as the large drug bust recently in the papers. As long as they are minding their own business, they get a pass. The only problem I have with illegals is their rush to get on state aid, food stamps, etc. I don't think we should have to support those that choose to live in this country illegally. Becoming a US citizen is not cheap. It is expensive, but it is something that they must work for.
Spencer May 16, 2013 at 04:42 pm
Perhaps because people who vote continue to vote the same way they have for years--and expect to getRead More different results when they do so?
Carol Haley May 15, 2013 at 05:05 pm
Sounds like a bunch of goobledygook to me. And Sue, the Democrats being divided isn't anything newRead More as well as the backstabbing and bs. It's been going on for years. That is one of the reasons I changed to independent a long time ago. I'm presently a Democrat, but changing back to independent as soon as I can get down there.
Felicia Hendersen May 15, 2013 at 09:00 am
Bravo Sue P. And Kathleen I changed the word from "her" to "his". Why shouldRead More people not question the motives of the city council president?
Sue P. May 15, 2013 at 08:53 am
Glad to here that Felicia, I sure hope that you are who you are and not the HE I was told you are.Read More Now is the time to work together and not pick each other apart like the Administration is doing to the Democrat Town Committee.You should see how divided they are and all the back stabbing and bickering that goes on. I say stay clear of that group.
William Desmond May 14, 2013 at 12:47 pm
I must say this has created quite a stir!
Luis Smart May 14, 2013 at 07:04 am
I agree Richard argyle sweaters would have really made it. It is really sad Michael Passero has goneRead More to the dark side and has aligned himself with the administration rather than the people of the city. The one time high vote getter will be all done in November.
Richard Cranium May 13, 2013 at 10:26 pm
I think it is pretty funny although they should be wearing argyle vest sweaters!