A proposed facility to be erected on the beach side of Burr’s Hill Park that would house a concessions stand, ADA-compliant bathrooms, an outdoor shower and utility space for the Parks and Recreation Department was the subject of considerable discussion last week during a community meeting at Town Hall.

Throughout the hour-long meeting that got tense at times — attended by all members of the Warren Town Council, Parks and Recreation Director Tara Thibaudeau, and Town Planner Bob Rulli — abutters and frequenters of the park voiced their frustrations about the structure’s proposed design, its implications on the future of the surrounding area, and whether or not the public was adequately made aware of the process as a whole.

Ultimately, Thibaudeau said on Monday afternoon that the meeting was productive and helpful, and will inform the town’s decision moving forward about what to do with the proposed facility. She said that she would be meeting with Rulli, Town Manager Kate Michaud, and new DPW Director Brian Wheeler today to go over what they learned, and what moves to make next.

“We’re going to review all the information provided at the meeting and then we’ll be going back to the drawing board using all the suggestions and comments to re-examine the focus,” she said. “The goal is to make the park better, and I think everybody in that room wanted to do that.”

However, it is now likely that nothing will be completed at the park by the time the Warren summer camp program begins in a few months. Thibaudeau had hoped that the program — which she said now serves over 300 kids during a nine-week period — could benefit from the addition of the facility, as it would have provided a low-cost meal option for summer camp participants, as well as ADA-compliant bathrooms close to where the program takes place.

It also makes uncertain the status of the Department of Environmental Management (DEM) grant that awarded Warren the money to construct the facility in the first place. Rulli said at the meeting that the town had already been granted an extension on expending the grant, which was received in late 2018, and now has until the end of June to come forth with a concrete plan.

Design proves significantly unpopular
The overwhelming sentiment among the 75 or so members of the public who showed up to discuss the proposed facility was that the chosen design did not appropriately fit the neighborhood’s aesthetic.

The design was put forth by Addaspace, which specializes in utilizing re-purposed shipping containers to create flexible facilities like the one proposed in this project, proved to be a nonstarter for many of the residents.

“That looked like a shipwreck out in Narragansett Bay that floated in during a hurricane,” said resident John Healey. “That is absolutely inappropriate for that park. You’re trying to tone buildings down, not make them stick out in a park.”

David Francis, a lifelong resident of Haile Street, which abuts the park, said he was originally in favor of the project before seeing the design.

“When I saw the rendering that got released…it looked like a bunch of dumpsters stacked up on dumpsters,” he said. “It really does not keep with the integrity of this town and the historic nature of this town. I have to abide by historic guidelines and aesthetics, I think we all do, so I think it’s about time we looked at the park more consciously.”

Town Planner Bob Rulli explained at the start of the meeting that the choice to go with Addaspace for the conceptual design of the project was rooted in two key requirements for the site — that it must be something that could be quickly removed from the area, since it’s in a flood plane, and that it must be considerate of cost, since it cannot exceed $500,000 (a combination of the grant money and about $160,000 in capital expenses set aside during three separate budget cycles in FY18, FY19 and FY21).

“If you had a permanent structure there, first of all it would have to be elevated,” he said. “It would make handicap accessibility very difficult, and we wouldn’t be able to move those buildings quickly. So that’s the rationale behind why we’re going with the type of construction we’re going with.”

Rulli also said that since the site is located on a burial ground of the Pokanoket Tribe, the town would not be permitted to do the type of excavation necessary for building a foundation for a more permanent structure.

To this point, Douglas Kallfelz, an architect and Bridge Street resident, said that there were other methods of creating a fitting temporary structure that also took into consideration the history of the park and the town.

“There is no other way to say it, but this kind of a design is anonymous. It has nothing to do with the soul and heart of this community. There are places in this town that deserve some recognition of their import. It’s a park like this that has this type of history to it,” Kallfelz said. “I think the idea of imagining it as a temporary thing both in function and in aesthetics, I think doesn’t have the kind of longevity that I think is part of the history of this community and has been for such a long time. So I think we should think harder about the insertions we make into places like this.”

Kallfelz said that places like New Orleans, in the wake of Hurricane Katrina, have set a standard for how to design temporary structures in areas prone to flooding that still preserve local cultural significance while maintaining functionality.

“I think not only can we collectively do this as a community, I think there’s plenty of precedent for us to look at where communities have done this successfully,” he said.

Commenting on the aesthetics, Andrew Naperotic, Principal and co-founder of Addaspace, spoke about the possibilities of adding cladding and different stylistic choices to improve the look of the facility. He said that the company’s primary goal when creating the original design was to satisfy the preliminary requirements outlined by Rulli.

“In terms of what it could be, it could be anything that it needs to be, both aesthetically and from a functional standpoint, and what Douglas was mentioning, capturing the heart and soul of a community as well,” Naperotic said. “So if there are elements that need to dictate aesthetics, design and feel, that can go into this design.”

Consequences of the structure pondered
Some at the meeting were concerned about potential negative repercussions of bringing more people to Burr’s Hill Park in general, including some concerns about creating additional traffic and encouraging bad behavior seen at the park.

“I’m not sure why this is necessary,” said Nicole Kemp, a Bridge Street resident. “This is a very small, neighborhood, local park and we don’t really need a brand-new facility to encourage people to come and disrespect our neighborhood and throw trash.”

Toby Rodriguez echoed this sentiment throughout the meeting, voicing his frustration with juveniles who continuously do damage throughout the park.

“The vandalism is outrageous. They can’t even patrol the place. I try to do it myself,” he said. “They’re tearing the trees down, they’re throwing stuff in people’s yards, it’s out of control. I think this is a whole big, bad idea.”

Butch Lombardi, a Campbell Street resident of 50 years who helped spark widespread interest in the topic through a post on Facebook, agreed with this notion and pondered if it was wise to create a structure which would only see widespread use during the nine-week period of summer.

“What does it do for the rest of the year?” he asked, later adding that, “The nine weeks in the summer where they’ll be used, there will be people around. But once the season ends…that creates a dead space on the other side of that building…That will just give them another spot.”

Derrick Trombley, the newest member of the Warren Recreation Board, said he was hopeful that adding a facility that will ideally attract more families to the area would actually help address these issues, not compound them.

“I hope that if this park gets more usage from families and community members outside of the immediate Burr’s Hill area, it will deter some of the juvenile crime elements. Because they thrive on being alone and being able to do this with reckless disregard,” he reasoned. “And if they see a family there, if there are people there watching them and telling them to get out constantly and in large enough numbers, that will help alleviate that problem, I believe.”

Other options inquired about, more discourse to come
Some of the alternatives mentioned by community members included utilizing mobile trailers, mobile homes, or leaving the area as untouched open space. An idea that seemed to generate the most traction was the concept of renovating the existing bathroom structure that currently sits over the hill and more central within the park.

Thibaudeau said that this facility hasn’t been updated since it was built in the 1940s, is not ADA-accessible, and would need to be completely gutted and re-done. She said the town did not look into how much this process would cost, because the impetus for the facility as proposed came from the identification of additional resources being needed on the beach side of the park. However, Thibaudeau said that the town would be looking into this option going forward.

In terms of whether or not the proposed facility was a good idea, Thibaudeau stood firm on her original intent for the structure, regardless of how it ends up looking.

“I still stand by that the facility we were approved for, I still feel we need,” she told the room. “I am listening to everybody and what you’re saying. What the facade looks like, I am not making a comment on that, but for me, the need for that facility is still just as strong as it was before I walked into this room.”

Councilman DePasquale spoke up to defuse the room as it devolved into conflict a couple times throughout the night, including various comments that the process had not been made public enough. He summarized the public process succinctly towards the end of the meeting.

“Although there’s not going to be a town wide referendum vote, this is not set in stone. It’s an open process, it’s a living process. We’re hearing you loud and clear. We’ll look into the renovations of the restroom, we’ll look into a different design, we’ll look into downsizing. We are not forcing anything on you. We want this to be interactive,” he said. “Hopefully, we’ll be able to come together and create something that we all want and can be proud of.”

A resident asked if there would be another meeting similar to the one just held.

“Yes, there will be another meeting. Absolutely,” DePasquale answered. “That I can guarantee you, because I'll call it.”