Subscribe!
Mayor Hopkins steps out of partisan quagmire, moves forward to rebuild Cranston’s Budlong Pool
Photo, top: artist rendering, subject to changes
After nearly more than 20 public meetings, Cranston Mayor Kenneth J. Hopkins has announced that his administration is moving forward with final design and specifications to seek bids for the construction of a new Budlong Pool complex.
“Following extensive review, considerations of options, public comments and community dialogue, I have directed that we move forward with the construction of a safe, modern 8,000 square foot pool for the next generation of Cranstonians to enjoy for the many decades to come,” the mayor stated.
Hopkins continued, saying, “I have instructed our consultants Saccoccio & Associates and the national aquatic design firm Weston & Sampson to proceed quickly to seek construction bids for a new Budlong pool and bathhouse. I have listened to public comments over many months, suggestions by city council members, expert opinions by leading pool designers and I have determined that the Depression era built 22,000 square feet has well seen its last day.”
“Through the public process that I welcomed over the past few months, modifications to the pool design shown at the community forum I hosted on September 6th at Cranston East have been finalized.”
The mayor stated updates were made to the pool concept including increasing the size of the pool and the related amenities that will enhance the pool experience for Cranston families.
“When completed, we will have a new, safe pool complex that is ADA accessible, compliant with all health and building codes and goes well beyond the outdated and beyond repair existing rectangle pool,” Hopkins said. “Any objective consideration of the existing, declining World War II era-built pool must concur that it had aged beyond a long-term permanent upgrade and any attempt to apply more band aids is a waste of taxpayer money.”
Mayor Hopkins reiterated that from the outset he had been clear in his plans for a new Budlong pool.
“I will not throw good money after bad with the quick fixes favored by some. We have about $4.7 million available in Federal funds to revitalize this recreational asset,” he said, adding that pool patching and quick fixes are off the board.
Mayor Hopkins outlined the features of the pool that will include a modern-day shape to enable better pool uses such as swimming lessons and parental supervision. Features will include a zero-depth walk-in-entrance for youngsters and seniors.
“We will have ample space for lap swimming in lanes and a large area for general swimming use,” he said.
When built, the pool will have features like spray hoses and a covered area to keep some pool users out of direct sun. Mayor Hopkins emphasized that the new 8,000 square foot pool will have sufficient capacity to accommodate more than 500 users at any one time.
“Based on the historic documented pool usage in the most recent years of operation that will serve more than an ample number of swimmers at any one time,” the mayor said.
Hopkins said that the bid specifications will include as a bid alternative, the popular splash pad concept to be considered based on the funding available.
The mayor noted that the city will use approximately $4 million of ARPA funds provided under the federal American Rescue Plan Act and a secured federal congressional grant of $750,000 to fund the modernization of the pool facility.
“While I know some of the public discussion was motivated by partisan activists who do not support my administration, there were some very thoughtful and considerate residents who helped us in this process,” Hopkins said. “In the end I am excited for all Cranston families that we will properly modernize and restore this facility with a sound financial investment and an exciting concept for many generations in Cranston’s future.”
The pool target depth is 6-and-1/2-foot, pending ground water level investigation results.
Last story on the proposal of the Cranston City Council for a rectangular pool, with no bells and whistles:
___
The design plan presented in August to the public: to read go to symbol with arrow on right side – this will allow you to save it to your computer – then open the pdf document to read.
An 11,000 square foot pool was not affordable based on the $4.75 million dollars of available funding. Please be reminded that the bigger the pool, the larger the bathhouse to accommodate ADA compliance. That drives up the cost considerably. All views have been considered. This design is what was the most affordable to the taxpayers.
This is very frustrating to many of us, especially as we witnessed the one public meeting and the Mayor’s defensiveness and then his seeming promise to compromise. . . which his final decision seems to show little interest in.
So the majority of the council doesn’t have to approve…the Mayor goes ahead on his own.
Wondering what the ARPA regs. are about using the covid money for unnecessary expenditure on a resort pool, rather than what the community and council wish? Asking for a friend. Really, are there no controls for the democratically elected City Council’s on this taxpayer money???
Let’s look at the numbers in this article, with the assumption that Mr. Mayor has done his due diligence and this is what he is planning. The current pool is rectangular and has a surface area of 22,000 sq.ft. He’s planning for an 8,000 sq.ft. pool. That is approximately 36.4% the size of the current pool. Do the math.
A typical, approved for swimming competition, pool measures 25 yards (75’) by 16 yards 48’) with 6 lanes of 8’ width. Most add a foot or more to separate the lanes from the splash gutters. That requires 400 sq.ft. and provides 6 lanes for lap swimming, certainly within the mayor’s projection. And the deep end of 6.5’ is appropriate but the shallow end requires a minimum of 4’, not a problem provided the walk-in entrance is not included as part of the competition area. Actually, having an adjacent area, separated from it, would be safer so that our youngest children could not accidentally wander into the 4’ depth and with 7600 additional square footage available, several areas could accommodate different needs. I suggest that the same filtering system could be used and still separate the competition area from the rest of the pool. I think Pauline has a good point, at 11,000 versus 8,000 sq.ft. the number of options increase to accommodate every age, even providing adults room to enjoy the pool on a hot day. And, separating the competition pool from the other areas, could allow a swim club or two to rent space for practices or swim meets making maintaining the pool less expensive. But, it is crucial to meet the exact requirements of the national standards. Being 2 inches off would invalidate race results as official for championship purposes.
Most Olympic size pools are 50 meters (164.5’) x25 meters (82’) or 13,489 sq.ft. and are 10 lanes wide. An Olympic distance pool at just 6 lanes, would occupy 8,225 sq.ft. close but not practical as an all purpose pool. But Pauline’s suggestion could provide a separated diving area although 6.5 feet might not be deep enough for, say, a 6’ diver.
Please limit comments to 50 words or less. Thank you.
This design is almost identical to the mayor’s original design. This is a ‘resort’ pool, not a community pool.
Yes, there have been over 20 public meetings. The mayor only attended the one on Sept. 6th. It is the one time he had the public in front of him. The other meetings were scheduled Council meetings, including the Council’s committee meetings.
Cranston never heard anything from the mayor until Feb., 2023. This was brought to the Council’s attention by those of us who live in the neighboring area. This has been ongoing for at least 2 years.
The neighbors brought this up to their council people. It wasn’t political. Why wasn’t our pool open? Two yrs. pass before we hear anything from the administration, who then made it political!
This timeline and statements aren’t factual. At one time, the pool did offer swim lessons. For 1 or 2 summers (yrs. ago), it offered a swim time for those who wanted to work out their aches & pains. It was open until 8PM for those who worked.
Despite the mayor’s claim that he enjoyed the pool as a ‘kid’, he lived in Johnston, graduated from Johnston H.S. and, at that time, no one who lived outside of Cranston could access the pool!!
Other neighbors have done the legwork since this has become ‘political’. They have the timeline and public records. What is in the records doesn’t jive with what the administration is saying.
This is not about sentiment. I enjoyed it as a kid as did my own kids. They were great summers. Cranston is supposed to be a great city to live in yet we have a pool that is deteriorating daily because the administration wants it their way, not how the constituents would make use of it.
It will always be the Pool, the Budlong Pool, the Cranston Pool but will never be the Ken Hopkins Pool.
The Mayor has spoken and we have to abide by his decision. Unfortunately the public was not GIVEN A CHOICE. The Finance Committee’s version of the pool was also a viable selection, without the “bells and whistles”. Children are not looking for ‘shade’ while they’re swimming. And the outcropping of the cement ‘arms’ adds to the cost of the build, along with unnecessary add on’s, and takes up precious swimming area. I believe most residents would have preferred the 11,000 sf pool in a standard rectangular form.
The 11,000 square foot design was not affordable based on the $4.7 million dollars in appropriated funding by the Council. Also, a bigger pool means a bigger building to accommodate ADA compliance. Yes, I did listen. Every meeting was attended by me, my staff or zoom. Let the bids come in and we will see the cost. Professional people in aquatics have advised me about cost.