October 2, 2025 By Carol Britton Meyer
The latest estimated cost for the proposed new Center for Active Living on Bare Cove Park Drive is $31.4 million, with an expected ask of about $29.6 million – including site work, utilities, and the funds that have been spent to date – at the annual Town Meeting next Spring.
The estimated project cost presented to Town Meeting 2025 was $34.1 million. If the project passes muster at next Spring’s annual Town Meeting, the targeted opening timeframe is 2028.
Prior to that time, improvements to the intersection near the West Hingham train station will have been completed to accommodate the extra traffic expected once the new pickleball courts are constructed in the area of the new CAL and additional traffic from the senior center project and other activities in the area,️Town Administrator Tom Mayo said.
While a traffic study is part of the Center plan, any improvements will be outside of the scope of the project. ️
Owner’s Project Manager Dan Pallotta provided an update that included estimated building costs this week during a joint Select Board/Advisory Committee/CAL building committee meeting.
“The goal is to keep on schedule and get the project out to bid as soon as possible” in order to present the most current project costs at Town Meeting, he said.
Pallotta explained that there has been a 9.6% reduction in the building’s initial size, bringing it to 25,950 square feet, and a reduction in the number of parking spaces, for a total of 170.
The project was designed to meet the needs of Hingham’s seniors, he said. “We priced that space and looked at ways to cut costs, and we expect some more.”
‘Things can still be changed’
These “are not absolute numbers,” according to Pallotta. “Things can still be changed. I would have loved to construct this building for you in 2022 – it would have been a lot cheaper.”
Building Committee Chair Tom Carey said the committee “wants to ensure the building isn’t overbuilt. We did some downsizing of the rooms, but we want the project to be right for the town for a reasonable amount of time.” The life expectancy is at least 50 years, according to Carey.
Value engineering to reduce the cost without impacting programming involved changes made to the design as a result of public comments and design efficiencies, and space removals and reductions, among others.
“I’m happy to see the numbers tonight,” Select Board Chair William Ramsey said. “One of our targets is getting the cost under $30 million.”
Advisory Committee comments and questions related to how many residents are expected to use the facility – with the number increasing as time goes on; the need to consider all town projects that are currently on the table in conjunction with a new senior center; whether a media room is needed; comparisons with senior centers in benchmark and other communities; and the “right” size for the project, among others.
In response to the question about the number of people expected to use the new facility, Carey said, “a heck of a lot more than are going there now.”
Program preference for residents
He also noted in response to a comment made at the meeting related to out-of-towners using the facility that under state law, senior centers must open their doors to any senior, whether living in the town where they are located or not. However, senior centers can offer program preference to residents of that community.
Resident Glenn Mangurian believes that the biggest question on the minds of residents is the impact such a project would have on their property taxes. “If someone can’t afford it, there are nine tax relief programs for [income-qualified] residents through the assessors office,” he noted.
A calculator will be posted on the town website soon to assist residents in determining the impact the project would have on their property taxes if the related Town Meeting warrant article passes by a two-thirds vote. Subsequent to Town Meeting, there will be a ballot vote on the project at a special election – more information to come.
Council on Aging member Joshua Ross asked that citizens with concerns about the project “just listen to what the experts in this room are saying week after week. We have [building committee member] Beth Rouleau, who is probably the foremost expert in elder services, and every week she’s being asked for further information.
“The citizens who use the current center are saying week after week what they need, and still people don’t understand what they need,” Ross said.
‘The town doesn’t own the land free and clear’
Resident Anita Ryan expressed concern that under the town’s lease for the property – which is owned by the federal government and involves the National Park Service – the town “doesn’t own the land free and clear and is subject to a number of restrictions and limitations,” she said. “The federal government could reclaim the land under the deed for the property if the town breaches any of the conditions or if the government decides it needs the property for national defense [purposes, as an example], and there’s no expiration date,” she said. “Do the taxpayers know this?”
Ryan also expressed concerns about the cost. “The Center for Active Living project isn’t something we can do in a vacuum,” she said. “It should be part of a larger fiscally responsible plan – figuring out how we can afford the things we need to spend money on before spending on things that [citizens] want. This is not the right project at the right time.”
Ryan and a couple of other residents expressed concern about the negative impacts of cutting down a large number of mature trees to make way for the project and also the impact on the wildlife living in the area.
Both Diane DeNapoli and Mary Power expressed concern about the tenor of some of the meetings when citizens ask questions. “I don’t think that’s who we are as Hingham residents and volunteers,” DeNapoli said. “Questions about the cost, the size, and benchmark communities relate to information voters will need [for both the Town Meeting and ballot box votes]. We’re all on the same page – we’re just trying to ask questions.”
‘This is about seniors who need this support’
The “most important thing to remember is that this is about the seniors – people who need this support,” said Yvette Kanter, a member of the Hingham Friends of the Center for Active Living. “If we don’t have money [for this project, which would serve the town’s 30 percent senior population], I can’t imagine that we have money for other things.”
For further information about the proposed new CAL, go to https://www.hinghamanchor.com/program-utilization-and-operating-costs-for-proposed-new-center-for-active-living-were-topics-of-conversation/ and https://www.hingham-ma.gov/888/Center-for-Active-Living-Building-Commit.
A replay of the meeting is available on https://www.harbormedia.org/ under “video on demand.”
I am opposed to taking land from Bare Cove Park to build.
I do not think that Bare Cove is the right place for build a large complex! Open space and wildlife sanctuaries are critical, especially today. I think the Senior Center will be wonderful—but only if built somewhere else.
It’s a terrible idea to take land from Bare Cove Park to build on! There are plenty of other spots in Hingham for this development.
This article didn’t mention that over $8mm of this cost relates to site work!! As the project manager said, this includes “clearing the land, hauling the trees away.” 🙁 I can’t imagine any other alternative site having this high of site work costs. Think of the money we could save with a better location.
The CAL building project is only one of several other capital projects that will be needed in the next year or so: High School Roof $32,500,000; Plymouth School Roof $6,100,000 and South School Roof $5,400,000. (State reimbursements may lower these costs 30-40%). Also Harbor Wharf Walls $40-50M, Harbor Dredging $10M and the South Fire Station project. These projects may require the issuance of excluded debt, a temporary tax increase with a duration equal to the term of the financing.
The Town of Hingham Warrant for Annual Town Meeting states: “The Advisory Committee is mindful of the cumulative impact of future borrowings on taxpayers…” Hingham taxpayers need to be mindful too when considering this new large expensive CAL center—$8 million in site work before a spade is put into the ground.
I am opposed to taking land from Bare Cove Park to build.
I am opposed to building this on pristine conservation land. There must be other suitable areas in town. There are many mature trees and countless wildlife. We should be preserving open space and trees. What about vacant commercial space along 3a?
I am opposed to building at Bare Cove. It is protected conservation land that has many nature trees and countless wildlife. There must be suitable vacant commercial properties along 3A. We should be preserving open space not bulldozing it.
I am opposed to building at Bare Cove. It must continue to be protected conservation land that our town can cherish for many many years, it has many nature trees and countless wildlife.
There must be suitable vacant commercial properties along 3A.
We must continue to preserve our open space…and not bulldozing it under more concrete.
Bare Cove Park is still conservation and recreation land protected by Article 97 of the MA state constitution!
MA bill 4134, which would allow the 5.3 acres of Bare Cove Park to be available for construction for the CAL, has came out of committee, but has not yet been scheduled for hearing by the whole legislature!
In Bare Cove Park, all ages benefit from connection to nature, the trees, and open spaces.
Here, I met Monica, whose daughter, Amelia learned to walk at Bare Cove Park. I have met friends of all ages. There are families cycling together, marathon runners training there. These people do not use the CAL, and will suffer a great loss if development continues on this land that should be protected.
As Anita Ryan said, this project can be built somewhere else. Despite the apparently “low” budget, rarely in my experience has a construction project not gone over projected budgets. Also, this is currently a multi-generational meeting place. The CAL will be for seniors only. Please find another location for the CAL.
It was mentioned at the meeting that the Wright Shoe building on Beal Street is for sale. The question is why can’t that building where there is already infrastructure in place be retrofitted if you will for the Center for Active Living?
I reported at this meeting that I translated the borrowing requirement for the current proposal to equate to a property tax increase for the median assessed property to be $210 or less on average for the first 8 years and continue to decrease thereafter. You might read my opinion essay on the subject as posted on the Anchor Facebook page.
Glenn Mangurian’s analysis goes to the heart of this future Town Warrant article. The real question facing each voting citizen this coming Spring is: Does the proposed HCAL investment of $210 (or less) per year in property taxes (for the median family) provide adequate return on invested social and financial capital? I strongly believe that to be true.
Hingham Seniors represent more than thirty-three percent (33%) of the town’s population. This age group is projected to grow significantly over the next ten years. There is little disagreement over the fact that the current facilities are grossly inadequate. A strong and vital HCAL is an exceptionally important quality-of-life investment for this cohort, providing community and stimulation for an otherwise increasingly isolated population. And this investment will benefit every Hingham citizen; if you aren’t a Senior now you are on the conveyer belt of life to join this cohort; these types of public capital investments generally have a fifty-year life cycle.
The project cost estimate provided at Tuesday’s meeting will be updated and refined at specific intervals as the final design progresses. The current estimate is likely to go down due to falling interest rates and continuing “value engineering.” A new, state-of-the-art HCAL will make a strong contribution to the social fabric of our community — which will be reflected in our home sales valuations – an historically strong, monetized return on investment.
This is precisely the type of investment that makes Hingham a great place to live.
I am certain that everyone in this town is pro-CAL and pro-conservation. However, the town has created a situation where we are forced to act on only one of those values. It’s a shame that we are forced to choose between one or the other– threaten a beautiful, natural space where wildlife and people of all ages and ability coexist, or tear a portion of it down to create the “optimal” setting for the well-deserved CAL.
The committees and parties responsible should develop a plan at a location that satisfies the town’s needs and expectations. As residents, tax payers and voters we can and should expect more. A plan that creates divisiveness in this special community is a true shame.
I like Carol Waite’s comment regarding refitting the existing building on Beal Street for the Senior Center.
The entrance to Bare Cove is now congested without adding more traffic. The South Shore CC is being considered however access to and exiting from is often not easily available when the train stops all traffic. The swimming pool will also add more traffic at that spot on South Street!