PLATTSBURGH — Over $600,000 in improvements to Melissa Penfield Park’s bathrooms are on the way, but City of Plattsburgh councilors remain hesitant to approve upgrades to South Platt Street (Fox Hill) Park’s bathrooms as well.
At their meeting Sept. 5, councilors awarded three bids for an electrical, general and plumbing contractor to renovate and construct an addition to Melissa Penfield Park’s existing bathrooms for a total cost of $607,325.
The bathrooms were previously identified in the Parks Renewal Master Plan, which was approved in January and is serving as a future guide to revitalizing the city’s five parks, as needing to be upgraded.
PARKS PLAN
In the parks plan, several improvements were proposed for South Acres, Fox Hill, U.S. Oval, Peter S. Blumette and Melissa L. Penfield Parks that the city could look to take action on immediately or in the next five to 10 years.
The plan was put together by Barton and Loguidice following an extensive public outreach campaign that included gathering community feedback both in-person and online over the past two years.
“This is what was months upon months of reaching out to community members, having public work sessions, introducing these projects at Parks Come Alive! and getting feedback in terms of what people’s priorities are,” Mayor Chris Rosenquest said about the city’s push for improved bathrooms in the parks.
A similar proposal was also made to award bids to demolish the current bathrooms at Fox Hill Park and construct a new, relocated, heated building with a clubhouse for $948,898 but that measure was mostly rejected, with councilors only approving a bid for electrical work.
Proposals for plumbing work and a general contractor to construct the building were defeated by the council.
Rosenquest pointed out the irony of how the votes played out.
“So that everybody’s aware, we just approved an electrical contract for a building that they just denied building,” he said.
“So the electrical contract is now awarded, but there is no building to work on it.”
DIFFERENT OPTIONS
Rosenquest said last week the Fox Hill improvements can’t proceed without the other approved pieces so they are working on a “couple different options” for being able to move that project forward.
Councilors David Monette (D-Ward 5) and Jeff Moore (D-Ward 6), who both voted against each park proposal, had made it clear they were not in favor of them due to the high costs of the projects and greater need for improved playground equipment.
“I think there’s things that have greater priority. We still need playground equipment at (Melissa) Penfield Park,” Moore said.
“Sinking this much money in this one aspect of one of our parks is putting the cart before the horse.”
“Maybe, we should just slow down a bit and realize $1 million is a lot of money,” Monette said about the Fox Hill plan.
CHEAPER PLAN
After the project came back up for discussion at the council’s meeting Sept. 19, Monette told community development director Courtney Meisenheimer that he was still interested in the project but wanted to look at different, cheaper options for building the bathrooms.
“I’m just looking for something cheaper than $1 million,” he said. “…We should probably look at, maybe, a smaller bathroom.”
“We’re just looking at ways to kind of cut some of this off,” Councilor Julie Baughn added.
“There’s got to be a way that we can trim some of this down that will bring it down to a much more manageable cost.”
Meisenheimer noted that the actual cost to build the bathroom building isn’t $1 million but closer to $500,000.
She said the expenses of site work and to demolish and move the facilities to a different, more convenient and accessible location in the park — which was previously requested by the public through community engagement — have driven up the total.
‘FROM SITE TO SITE’
Department of Public Works Superintendent Mike Bessette also clarified that the current bathroom building at Fox Hill needs to be demolished because it has asbestos and roof and electrical structural issues.
“I just don’t want to create a narrative that this is a building that is just outrageously luxurious,” Meisenheimer said.
“We are trying to keep it equal amongst the different parks, and we are trying to be fair, but we’re also working with site conditions that are variable from site to site.”
“The top things that people requested were bathroom facilities and playgrounds, and that’s where you can see our money trying to go first as top priority,” she added.
Meisenheimer said the new playground equipment at Fox Hill was proof of that and the bathrooms were the next logical step for the park.
Seeing the hesitation from the council, however, Meisenheimer gauged whether or not these projects were something they wanted to continue to entertain or wait on.
Councilor Elizabeth Gibbs (D-Ward 3), who voted against the Fox Hill proposal at the Sept. 5 meeting, said she does want to see the projects continue to move forward and that all of the park projects and various things the public wants to see are “worthy.”
However, she said the council has to be mindful of its spending for both the short and long-term.
“So if there is another way to look at the design, engineering or what needs to be done for a bathroom that would be less than what was proposed, that would still allow that to happen and then still have money left to do other projects and then keep moving forward … I would love to see us continue the parks upgrades incrementally, year by year.”