BY IRENE LABOMBARDE

Birdhouses depicting historic Bedford buildings and a warming hut that resembles the old railway station are among the features for the Bedford Village Common – a recreational park designed for 9.3 acres of town-owned land off Bell Hill Road and Route 101.

“What we are proposing is a passive park, comprised of an entry drive, pathways and a water feature,” said Ann Cruess of TF Moran who unveiled these details at the July 18 Town Council meeting.

The 2007 preliminary budget for the project, submitted to the Town Council in August 2006, is $247,100. In 2006, $20,000 was budgeted for engineering/design and $1,500 for permits and fees. Approximately $100,000 in additional expenses is projected for 2008-09, including the warming hut, a gazebo/bandstand, landscaping and irrigation, for a total cost of $369,600 over three years.

But that cost is not expected to be raised by taxpayers, but mostly through fundraising, said Bedford Village Common Committee members, Jeanene Procopsis, Tom Riley, Jayne Spaulding and Beverly  Thomas.

With $52,000 already in reserve, the committee hopes to begin the three-phase project by installing a fence and signs around the perimeter this year to help define the area.

“Twenty-five thousand cars drive by every day. (Soon) they will get a glimpse of what Bedford used to be,” said Cruess.
Some abutters favor the Bedford Village Common concept, while others are not keen on the plan, however.

“We already have a skating pond with buildings and bathrooms (at Riley Field). I don’t think we need another skating pond or warming hut when we have already paid for the infrastructure,” said abutter Elaine Tefft.

Abutter Greg Zimmermann said he was looking forward to the park.

“I see them trying to pull a piece of property together that has been let go. No, it’s not historic, but I think that to build it and tie some of the town history into it is a good thing,” he said.

The proposed pond, slated for the area near Bell Hill Road, would be flooded in winter for skating, and Cruess compared it to Rockefeller Center for pleasure skating rather than hockey.

“The pond is a nice feature, a real eye-catcher,” said Cruess.

Chairman Paul Roy asked whether putting in a fountain instead of dredging and filling the pond would solve the problem of stagnant groundwater and create the same eye-catching effect.

“The pond as it exists today is not attractive. You have to do something,” said Councilor Bob Young.

Cruess reiterated that the point of the skating pond was to draw people to the park.

“The pond area is now a wooded wetland with standing water only when there is a hard rain,” she said. “By the time we are finished we will have raised the value of the wetland.”

Crossings over the other wetland areas have been designed to look like archways, and extensive landscaping is planned.

There will be a staircase connecting the park to the library parking lot, but Cruess said library trustees requested that no structures be built on that parcel.

Cruess said the idea for the railway station design warming hut arose from when the Manchester to Milford railroad used to run through the proposed common area.

The committee is in the process of obtaining state Department of Environmental Services’ permits and lighting.

“We want something that will be safe but isn’t commercial.  We need some lighting on the entry site and the skating pond,” she said.

Right to know

What was supposed to be a brief presentation by the committee turned into a lengthy discussion about access to information.

Tefft drilled council members about the testing for contaminants and the cost of permits.

“As a taxpayer, I want to know what the real costs of this park are going to be to duplicate what we already have,” Tefft.

Thomas, committee chairman, and Roy attempted to answer Tefft’s questions and reminded her that all these figures were in the budget that had already been entered into public record. At one point, Tefft approached Town Manager Russ Marcoux to request copies of documents she claims she did not have access to, and when committee members who were still trying to continue their presentation complained about the disruption, Roy had to restore order and request that she return to her seat.

When asked later about the disruption, Marcoux expressed his frustration with the situation.

“With the exception of the library trustees letter, which I only received on July 18, all these documents were available in my office. To have someone say they couldn’t get the information directly goes to my credibility,” said Marcoux.

Resident Bill Dermoody said he also had difficulty obtaining information on the project from minutes of subcommittee meetings. He suggested that the council needed to put a cap on expenditures.

Discussion also followed on whether the public should be able to directly address BVCC members at their meetings. The BVCC is a subcommittee of Parks and Recreation, which is a committee under the Town Council. The public has been allowed to attend subcommittee meetings, but not to speak.

“We are a working committee, an advisory committee. (We don’t want) to stop the flow of ideas from the public but have to get our work done,” said Spaulding, vice chairman.

Roy also pointed out that the subcommittee had no authority to spend money, only to make recommendations to the council.

Resident Ken Peterson suggested that people could address the committee at the start of meetings, as is done with the Town Council. Roy agreed, and after discussion, it was decided that the public could address the subcommittee at its meetings for up to three minutes per person, during the first 15 minutes of a meeting.

The next Bedford Village Common Committee meeting will take place Friday, Aug. 3, at 8 a.m., at the Bedford Meeting Room, BCTV Studio, 10 Meetinghouse Road.