The central topic of the meeting was the development of a multi-sport court at Wally Park, which would accommodate both basketball and pickleball. The Commission reviewed several options for the court’s development, with concerns about budget constraints and durability playing a role in the decision-making process. The three main options included resurfacing the existing basketball court, applying a binder coat followed by a finish coat, or relocating the court to the volleyball area with new installations.

One member expressed optimism about staying within budget, noting favorable pricing from a paving company. However, logistical concerns emerged regarding the curing period required for new asphalt, which would necessitate a 45-day wait before any coating could be applied. This raised issues about the availability of contractors and the timing of the project.

The debate also touched on the number of courts to be constructed and their uses. There were discussions about the feasibility of incorporating a half basketball court along with two pickleball courts, and the potential addition of a shuffleboard area for seniors. Members raised concerns about overflow parking impacting the courts and the need for additional parking facilities. The idea of soliciting bids for both four and six courts was proposed to explore various options before finalizing the plan.

The discussion extended to the types of posts to be used for the pickleball nets, whether permanent or temporary, and how these decisions would impact user experience for both basketball and pickleball players. The meeting emphasized the need for proper planning before the installation of asphalt to avoid future complications. One member voiced uncertainty about whether the design could accommodate future changes without significant disruption.

A motion was made to proceed with “option three” for developing the courts, which included six courts, lighting, and small pavilions for shade. This motion was seconded, and it was noted that a subcommittee had already met to discuss these enhancements. The cost of fencing was also a topic of discussion, with quotes ranging from $16,000 to $23,000. There was consensus on the importance of installing the fence soon after the paving work to prevent damage during the winter months.

Attention shifted to the existing sidewalks, with suggestions to extend them rather than constructing new ones to save costs. The topic of parking lot specifications was briefly mentioned, with gravel being the assumed material for the current year. The project was confirmed not to involve wetlands, which would require additional permits, and members agreed to check maps to ensure compliance with local regulations.

The rail trail was another point of discussion, with updates provided on smaller projects and a planned count of trail users. The meeting also addressed old business, including a grant related to a dog park and a letter of recommendation for a T-Mobile grant to support Wi-Fi installation in the park. Future meetings with the Community Preservation Committee (CPC) were deemed necessary to secure funding for the planned developments, with a clear preference for six courts over four.