Above: Rec’s seeking feedback on their newest park concept plan options, with a shrunken water feature based on prior feedback. (image from Facebook)
As I’ve shared in the past, Southborough Recreation is pursuing a project to make major improvements to Fayville Park.
The department and commission are continuing to encourage public dialogue on the project — including through another Community Engagement Session next week.
And, it turns out the project plan has already been reshaped by community feedback on the plans I previously shared. So, I’m sharing updated info on Rec’s proposal (with “scaled down” splash pads).
Rec’s proposal is for a Community Preservation Act funded project to a dog park and splash pad in place of the T-ball diamond and a section of the grassy park. Other improvements include an upgraded, ADA compliant walking path. (The existing playground, pavilion, and basketball court would be untouched.)
Plan Changes
In the Recreation Commission’s April 15th meeting, Rec Director Travis Farley explained that new concept plans feature more “green space” based on “what the neighborhood had asked for”. To allow that, the plans feature smaller splash pads.
The new designs show 2,250 sq ft splash pads. That’s less than a third the size of the 8,000 sq ft water features in the originally promoted plan.
Click on thumbnails below to see the current park layout and the two newly proposed options for improvements:
According to Farley, the concept plan images above show incorrect placement of the dog park entrance, which will be on the far side, away from the picnic area. And the pavilions pictured in the picnic area would instead be “shade sails”
The first version would keep the proposed splash pad in the midst of the playground area. Based on survey feedback that people were concerned about placing the splash pad near the dog park, a second version places it between the playground and Summer Street.
(For the Rec Commission’s reaction to the new concepts, scroll down.)
Engagement Session and Invited Feedback
One of the issues that the Rec Commission needs to finalize before seeking funding is a new parking plan. For area residents and businesses who may have concerns, the engagement session is a good opportunity to learn more and weigh in before that is finalized.
But parking isn’t the only element of the project that Rec is seeking feedback on. Before bringing an Article to Town Meeting, they want to make sure the project reflects community wants and try to address any public concerns.
Next week’s session is the second of two virtual public forums. It will take place Wednesday, May 20th at 7:00 pm over zoom. (The commission discussed scheduling a future in-person session at Fayville Park. Stay tuned for news on that.)
But you don’t have to join the forum to learn more and provide feedback. In a Facebook post, Rec announced:
There’s still time to make your voice heard! 🌳
We’re continuing to gather community feedback on the Fay Memorial Park, and we want to hear from you. Your input helps shape the future of this shared space—whether it’s ideas for new features, accessibility improvements, or ways to make the park more enjoyable for everyone.
Don’t miss this opportunity to be part of the process. Submit your feedback today and help us build a park that reflects our community’s needs and vision.
🗓️ Feedback remains open—share your thoughts now!
The post included a link to a survey. You can open that here.
(Click here for that zoom login page and use the passcode in the flyer.)
Worth noting, if you really want to get into helping Rec plan the playground — the Commission is currently trying to recruit a new member to fill a vacant seat. If you’re interested, click here to apply.
Recreation Commission Discusses Plan Updates
The April 15th meeting was the first time the commission discussed the consultant’s new concept plans.
When describing the second option to them, Farley noted that he believes that people with little kids would also like to see them install a fence around the playground and splash pad area.
One member raised her worry about the impact of having the splash pad up against the playground where there are wood chips. She also worried about wet kids on the playground.
Member Donald Dumont responded that even if they separate them, given the proximity, you’d still have wet kids on the playground. He noted that in Option 1, kids would be instead running across the basketball court to get from one place to the other.
Chair Kristen Lavault noted that her first impression was that putting the splash pad and playground together would make it easier for parents who have kids who prefer different options. But she agreed that the wood chip issue was something to think about.
Dumont asked about using rubber in the playground instead of chips. Farley said that would greatly increase the project cost. But he believed a transition area of poured rubber in between might make sense.
Dumont asked about adding shade to the dog park area. Farley said he believed the landscape is meant to show trees for that.
