Editorial: Everything for everyone?

Posted 5/27/26

Chianese Park feels like a lost cause.  

We have looked at the numerous plans and ideas pitched for “improving” Chianese over the years, and there seems to be no clear path to building …

This item is available in full to subscribers.

Please log in to continue

Log in

Register to post events


If you'd like to post an event to our calendar, you can create a free account by clicking here.

Note that free accounts do not have access to our subscriber-only content.

Day pass subscribers

Are you a day pass subscriber who needs to log in? Click here to continue.


Editorial: Everything for everyone?

Posted

Chianese Park feels like a lost cause. 

We have looked at the numerous plans and ideas pitched for “improving” Chianese over the years, and there seems to be no clear path to building a better park that achieves everything for everyone. 

The latest proposals are clear examples. “Option 1” shows a new access road running from north to south across the middle of the park. The access road includes more than 50 new parking spaces. More parking inside the park seems like a good way to pull parking off the side roads around the park. And that, in theory, should make the abutting neighbors to Chianese Park happy. 

It did not.

Instead, the residents voiced safety concerns about mixing cars going north to south (on the road) and kids going east to west (on the fields). They’re probably right to be worried. Anyone who has been to the park on a busy day — especially lower Chianese where there is head-in parking on both sides of Prince’s Hill Avenue — has likely seen children running from fields on one side of the road to fields (or an ice cream truck) on the other. The kids are not great about looking both ways before crossing. Adding an access road and more parking and more cars into the middle of the park may have been well-intended, but the safety trade-offs are worth considering. 

“Option 2” is even more flawed. Somewhere in the discussions about Chianese Park, the Pare Engineers thought it would be wise to replace a grass-covered baseball field with an asphalt-covered parking lot. Abutting neighbor John Brum called the parking lot an “eyesore.” Commission member Cat Horn wanted to make a motion to eliminate “Option 2” from discussions.

Officials are still working on the plans. They tabled the issue for a future meeting. They also discussed tweaking “Option 1” to move the access road to the southern edge of the property, and expanding the size of the soccer field in the plans so it could be used by other sports, including girls lacrosse. (Right now it’s too small to do that.)

The discussions and debates may, eventually, produce a better plan. But chances are good — quite good — that someone (neighbors, sports leagues, pickle ball enthusiasts) won’t love it. 

And that’s where leadership must step in and take actions in the best interests of the entire community. Barrington has a clearly documented shortage of quality youth sports fields. Chianese is a large, underutilized area of undeveloped space. There must be a way to use this space to address that problem.

Town leaders will need to find a way to make that happen. First, they have to accept that they can’t make everyone happy.

2026 by East Bay Media Group

Barrington · Bristol · East Providence · Little Compton · Portsmouth · Tiverton · Warren · Westport
Meet our staff
Jim McGaw

A lifelong Portsmouth resident, Jim graduated from Portsmouth High School in 1982 and earned a journalism degree from the University of Rhode Island in 1986. He's worked two different stints at East Bay Newspapers, for a total of 18 years with the company so far. When not running all over town bringing you the news from Portsmouth, Jim listens to lots and lots and lots of music, watches obscure silent films from the '20s and usually has three books going at once. He also loves to cook crazy New Orleans dishes for his wife of 25 years, Michelle, and their two sons, Jake and Max.