March 23, 2026 by Debra LaRocca
I’m a Hingham mom who recently attended an info session to gain a better understanding of the proposed new Center for Active Living (affectionately referred to as “CAL”, like Cal State). I’m not a senior citizen, nor do I have a senior family member in town, but I’ve thought a lot about this upcoming vote. I have a genuine affinity for older folks and really enjoy their company and listening to their stories of the past. I get to do this as an End of Life Doula and as a volunteer companion to a woman in her 90s still living independently in her house, in a nearby town. I only see her once a week because her other weekdays are spent at the senior center in her town. She takes their free shuttle, enjoys a $5 hot lunch (she says it’s the best deal in town), attends occasional lectures & events and enjoys the company of her peers. Full disclosure, though I’m all in on supporting Hingham’s seniors, I did arrive that night with some nagging questions about the budget and location. I came away, however, with clarity and conviction that this is a YES for me!
I’m going to address my initial objections and share what I have since learned about them. I should clarify, none of this information is new, but it was new to me. The details of the CAL plan are accessible to the public and are very transparent. Unfortunately, they don’t always get enough exposure. I have read several comments on town FB pages recently that indicate there is still a lot of confusion and misunderstanding out there, and I thought this could help.
Q: I recall voting on the new Police & Fire station at town meeting and thinking it also meant the Senior Center (renamed the Center for Active Living) would benefit by taking over the old Police Station on Central Street. What happened?
Apparently it was only a concept when it was presented as an option, and not a fully vetted plan. Was that innocent? Or bait and switch? Who knows? At this point it doesn’t really matter because logistically, it’s not a fit. Many factors were not initially considered.
- For starters, an old 3 story building is not really the right place for an older population more prone to mobility challenges. Retrofitting a building with existing jail cells etc, to be used for older adults isn’t viable. Nor is expecting older people to utilize exercise equipment or attend workout classes in a dark basement on the other side of a massive building.
- Then, there’s the unique factor of the 911 dispatch system, which is a separate entity from HPD, and is still located at the Central St. location. I do not fully understand the details but apparently, though not impossible, it’s not easy to relocate.
- Also, I learned that a significant amount of additional parking spaces would have been necessary and likely would have impacted the athletic fields. The successful expansion of the CAL includes increased resources and offerings, requiring significant parking accommodations.
- Lastly, it turns out the estimated cost of the newly proposed CAL is only marginally more than the estimated (after the fact) cost of what it may have taken to renovate the police station, had it been feasible. (Numbers were mentioned but I didn’t take note. Anyone can request info from Invest In Hingham)
Q. I heard the proposed location in Bare Cove Park would require cutting down a lot of trees/forest area. Why does it have to be in that location?
First, I learned the proposed location is not actually in Bare Cove Park but near the entrance, by the fire museum and the planned Pickleball court. It would require cutting down trees. I don’t recall the exact number but I believe it is somewhere in the 200 range (the plans are accessible online). I don’t love the tree cutting obviously, and although it is only a consolation, the town does have a policy to replant a tree for every tree the town removes. I am aware of some objection to this statement but it is what I was told by those in charge and I have no reason not to believe them. I imagine this was done for the new Foster School? Plus, as someone who is outdoors almost daily in all manner of woods in this town, I’d be lying if I didn’t admit I might welcome the clearing of some of the invasive species that are overtaking our native plants.
So, though maybe not perfect, I’m at peace with the proposed location. I am convinced the CAL needs to be a single story structure with ample parking – that is meant to accommodate not only older adults, but our entire community. I saw/heard some of the plans and we all stand to benefit – and not just when we’re seniors. The space has so much potential for bringing children and seniors together in meaningful ways.
Re: possible other locations, there was mention of the vacant Hitchcock Shoe Building on Beal St. I actually had the pleasure of meeting the building’s owner at this event, at which time I learned the Hitchcock building is not an option for the CAL. I don’t have any more details beyond that.
Q. Why doesn’t the town spend the $ on fixing other things that need work, like the roof at Plymouth River School?
They do and will continue to fund these projects. Voting for one thing will not negate the other. I have a child in Hingham Public Schools and have witnessed first hand the disparity of our elementary school facilities. Personally, I find it unfair to the students and staff who have to do more with less, sometimes right up until it becomes an obvious safety hazard. Our children deserve to be in schools we (and they and HPS staff) are proud of and feel safe about them occupying. I believe this with my whole heart. I also believe with my whole heart, that this is true for our seniors too.
Q. But what about taxes? My property tax already went up a lot this year! Now this?
Apparently, a great deal of residents experienced a larger than usual increase in property taxes this year, myself included. I recently learned this was due to updated assessments/valuations. So, though not welcome, it was a necessary course correction.
I was pleasantly surprised to learn the estimated tax increase for the CAL project is an average of ~$175 per household per year, for 8 years. I had been pretty fixated on the overall budget, which is significant, but I hadn’t considered what impact it would have on my household until now. I’ve decided it’s is a price I’m willing to pay, based on my values and means. (I fully appreciate that not everyone is in alignment on this) I also reminded myself that there still would have been a similar tax increase had the Police station renovation been feasible.
I also heard cautionary tales about Hingham sometimes waiting too long to approve projects like this. Repeating that pattern could cost us since deadlines come and go, often making it necessary to start over at step 1. Planning and design expenses would increase and early estimates could be unreliable, subject to inflation. That’s the thing that really did it for me. If this CAL isn’t approved this time around, then what? The answer is definitely not to just do nothing (have you been to the current CAL?), and despite what we all initially thought, the Police Station is not an option. It will be back to square one for another lengthy and costly discovery and planning phase, almost guaranteeing any future option would cost more than the current estimate.
Hingham demographic data also impacted my decision (data source hingham-ma.gov):
- Over 31% of the population is 60+ (vs 24% statewide avg)
- 23% of them are 65+ (vs state avg of 17%)
- By 2035 it is estimated the % of older adults could reach 39%
- Among those residents 65+, 33% (a sizable share) live alone
- The average median age range of a Hingham resident is 42-48 (older than the state avg)
- 36% of households have children ages 5-19
A very troubling statistic I learned is that, despite better than average outcomes in some state benchmarks, Hingham’s older residents have higher than average rates of hip fractures, Alzheimer’s/dementia, osteoperosis, ischemic heart disease, glaucoma & arthritis. Over time, the new CAL would significantly decrease negative outcomes in these areas, given CALs mission. Loneliness is not good for aging brains – or any brain, I’d argue. A primary benefit to social connection and ongoing mental activity is lowering the risk and/or delaying the progression of cognitive decline. The proposed CAL would also have exercise equipment and offer fitness classes (not like the space in the basement of the rec center that many older people aren’t comfortable navigating), which directly and positively impact heart and bone health. The detailed plans are all out there. When I stopped focusing on the location and really considered the positives, I was sold. The proposal has been diligently researched and modeled after similar data-backed successes in other towns.
Do I think today’s older residents deserve this new Center for Active Living and that it will no doubt have a positive impact on their physical, social and emotional wellbeing (and will in turn benefit our entire community)? 100% – you bet I do! But, is this selflessness my only motivator to vote Yes? Heck no! The reality is, it won’t be long before my husband and I reach the age of CAL-eligibility. To think, beginning at a healthy and vital 60 years old, I could have access to an exceptional facility to exercise, play Mahjong (which I have yet to learn but hope to), attend a movie/lecture/workshop, go for a walk in Bare Cove Park, curl up with a book, get help with my taxes, or have lunch at the cafe’ all right here in town! Navigating the unique challenges of aging while having access to a vibrant, wellness focused Center for Active Living, will no doubt help us all live fuller, healthier and more mindful lives.
-Debi LaRocca
These are some very well researched thought out opinions. I applaud Debra for taking the time to look into both sides of the issue.
Hurrah! Thanks for speaking up. We need more voices like you.
Well said, Debbie!! This is a very thoughful piece and I firmly believe our Seniors need a safe and social place to go.
Thank you, Debra, for your thoughtful and thorough insight. The building committee has spent years evaluating the various factors shaping the current design and proposal—something you captured exceptionally well.
I’d like to respond to a number of the points in this opinion piece:
1. There are plenty of buildings, and jails, that are repurposed all the time. The Liberty Hotel in Boston used to be a jail.
2. Most senior centers, including Marshfield, retirement homes and/or assisted living facilities are multi-stories. Residents can choose to take the elevator or stairs. The Patriot Ledger recalled a favorite story about Hingham’s Phyllis Chapman who lived to 108: “After her weekly exercise class at the senior center, the younger women would take the elevator up a flight for coffee together. Phyllis would join them but she walked up the flight of stairs, carrying her hand weights.”
3. We could fit 100 parking spots at 407 Main Street (next to Hadley Field). The architect also came up with a proposal to increase parking in the front of Town Hall (altering the ½ circle) and the Town’s ADA report made recommendations to increase accessible parking in front of the senior center.
4. Hingham’s Zoning Bylaws require 1 space per 3 persons for buildings like the HCAL. Despite that Bylaw, the HCAL Building Committee’s early deliberations required 200 parking spaces, which got reduced down to 140 when that Bylaw was applied at the chosen site. Creative solutions for parking, like changing the HCAL days of operation from Monday through Thursday, to Wednesday to Saturday, could be explored.
5. The HCAL proponents told the Planning Board that they don’t know how many trees would be cleared for this proposed building. It is certainly more than 200.
6. Protected Tree provisions do not apply to “trees on public property.” See p146 of Hingham’s Zoning Bylaws.
7. Other projects do not get approval and pivots are made. We experienced that with the proposed Police Headquarters on Central Street and the Library. Other Towns, like Deerfield, have decided against building new stand-alone expensive senior centers, for other options that cost a lot less money.
8. I cannot verify the 39% older adult projection population for 2035. Using UMass Donahue Institute | Population Projections I calculated an older population peak of 34% in 2035, before declining. I have asked Invest in Hingham how they arrived at 39% but did not get an answer I could understand or verify.
9. Hingham’s seniors have lower rates of diabetes, heart attack, schizophrenia, PTSD and substance use disorders, compared to state averages. “Older Hingham residents are more likely to take the health promotion steps of engaging in physical activity and receiving annual physical exams.” In fact, currently 82.7% of Hingham seniors already engage in physical activity over a one-month period, which exceeds the state average by 10%.
10. This $30mm 26,000 sq foot HCAL proposal is not the right proposal for Hingham. It is too big, too costly and too isolated. We can do better.
This is a thoughtful and well-written article by a caring and intelligent member of our community.
Ms. LaRocca appears unaware of multiple layers of environmental protection placed upon Bare Cove Park, including the section where the CAL is proposed to go. A state-level layer of protection was just removed on Feb 10, 2026 (MA Article 97 protection for areas of natural beauty and environmental significance was swapped to provide protection for a town aquifer location near the Plymouth River), but other layers are still in place, despite assertions to the contrary:
1) The town made Bare Cove Park (BCP) a wildlife sanctuary in 1985 by unanimous vote of Town Meeting. Only another vote by Town Meeting can change this designation.
2) The area to be cut down is in an Area of Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC), one of 10 in Mass. This is minimized in the CAL proposal, but is still a state Dept. of Conservation and Recreation (DCR) regulation.
Background: Weymouth Back River is a major food-producing river in the Boston area because of the keystone fish species that return to Whitman’s pond to spawn. The area around the river, including BCP, protects and purifies water going into the river and feeds marshes that nurture young fish fry before they go off to sea. Attracted by the fish and safety, BCP is now a sanctuary for many forms of wildlife, including rare sea and land birds.
Do you know that one mature white oak tree can support 1000 species of wildlife, including the insect larvae that birds use to feed their young? Do you know that fallen leaves slow down erosion and support billions of microbes that create soil?
Thanks to a perennial stream, nearby swamp, and multiple tree species, the 5 acre forested area proposed to be clear-cut for CAL has become important wildlife habitat, full of song from mating, nesting, and fledging land birds. This will be destroyed if an asphalt parking replaces the multistoried tree canopy, and construction and operations noise and lights drive wildlife away.
Alternatives; I toured 225 Beal St. and liked the location very much. It is close to a Bare Cove Park gate, so seniors would have the benefits of beauty and exercise in the park without the ecological damage. Adjoining 225 Beal is a separately-owned large parking lot, half of which could be leased and landscaped at much less cost than site-prep at Bare Cove Park. The 225 Beal St. site already has town utilities (sewer, water, MBTA stop, sidewalks, electricity) that the BCP site lacks, and the building’s footprint is just the right size. It’s not as isolated as BCP; the nearest neighbor at 225 Beal is an assisted-living facility that is staffed 24/7.
Our architects for the CAL looked at marketing literature for 225 Beal and identified issues, such as updating HVAC systems, putting windows into walls, and gutting existing offices, restrooms, kitchen, and dining area. The new building must be ADA compliant, have a commercial kitchen, and energy-efficient HVAC zones, but all of this would be much less expensive than building from scratch at 45 Bare Cove Park Drive.
The realtor for 225 Beal St. seems most concerned about the slowness of dealing with the town, where citizens are the decision-makers via Town Meeting and citizen-run committees. I have been asked to provide an amendment at April’s Town Meeting which would allow us to buy and renovate 225 Beal St. instead of building at Bare Cove Park.
Deb thank you for being brave enough to write a piece. No matter what opinion you take these days you will likely get heat. I would like to ask you to think about a few things, not to change your mind, but to offer important context. When seniors were asked in a survey conducted by the Hingham Senior Center what their number one concern was in respect to living in Hingham their answer was affordability. Since this survey was conducted the average single-family home in Hingham has an 8 percent tax increase. Our HMLP rates have increased 18 percent, healthcare costs have increased, and groceries have increased almost 23 percent in the last 4 years.
The other telling point about the survey was that a majority of seniors wanted the CAL to stay at Town Hall. It is more centrally located and it allows for them to do other business when they are in the building. I am strongly in favor of the Town Hall location because we would then need to make the entire building ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act) compliant. Currently, there are hundreds of violations and it can be a challenging facility for those with disabilities.
One really needs to use the online tax assessment tool to understand the tax impact in respect to the CAL. What that doesn’t include, because the data is not available, is in the next 2-5 years, when the building is ramped up what is the cost to operate the facility. How many additional staff will be required to manage the building, work in the kitchen/ cafes, and work as drivers. Since we always look to Marshfield as a model I will offer that the Marshfield Senior Center has more than 3 times the paid staff we currently have. They also have a very active Booster club and is very successful at getting grant money.
I am in favor of a better facility but I don’t think the plans are solid enough at this point in time to support this project. I wish, as voters, we could take a “no action” vote and refine the building plans. I was very engaged attending meetings over the summer when the plan was being reviewed and the Building Committee only made one change, reducing the scale of the building, during the entire design process. Nobody can tell me that an 60+ seat media room is “need” vs a “want”. Having a cafe, teaching kitchen and a commercial kitchen is a lot of kitchens to build, clean, repair and staff. And a two-story building is a design choice and not something that is proven to be better for seniors. I would argue that a centrally located elevator would be much easier for people with mobility issues.
Waiting, 6 months to a year to modify the design, better study utilization, offer a realistic business model, and build something that will serve our seniors is the prudent, and a thoughtful, course of action.
Diane,
As you may know, I am a disabled senior who because of paralysis I operate from a wheelchair. I participate in Center Zoom sessions but find it almost impossible to park at the town hall. When I try to attend in person, 90% of the time I must return home for lack of parking. The consultants looked at six site options and none worked. I, like many seniors, had hoped/expected that the consultants could solve the parking problem at town hall. They couldn’t. The other issue they discovered was the limitations on expansion beyond the 15,000 sq. ft. The consultants are experts related to senior centers and stated that Hingham should have a larger that 15,00 sq. ft. facility. Remember, Marshfield had to enlarge their facility no longer after initial construction. I would think that Hingham would expect a long useful life (50-years) for $10s million of building. A “yes” vote seems to me to be go for a 50-year facility that can complement and offers synergy with the Park for education and food for Park goers. A “no” effectively kills a new facility for a generation since there are no other locations. Deb reported that the owner of Beal St. stated that his facility is not appropriate for the CAL. Finally, in my conversation with seniors health care and groceries are the top of the affordability list.
I would like to begin by thanking Debra LaRocca for her recent, thoughtful comments regarding the proposed Center for Active Living (CAL). Her recognition of the immense work put in by the Building Committee—who have studied this project for months and years—is deeply appreciated.
As a physician for over 40 years, I have spent my career helping patients navigate the complexities of aging. What I have learned in four decades of practice is that “healthy longevity” is not found solely in a doctor’s office or a prescription bottle. It is intricately related to our ability to encourage a lifestyle rooted in three pillars: physical movement, social connection, and access to the natural world.
Hingham is currently at a critical crossroads. For thirty years, our seniors have been asked to “make do” in a 5,500-square-foot space at Town Hall that is, by any modern medical or architectural standard, profoundly inadequate. We are currently asking our most experienced citizens to navigate cramped quarters and “deplorable” basement conditions that stifle the very lifestyle we should be prescribing.
The move to Bare Cove Park Drive is not merely a change of address; it is a clinical upgrade for our community’s health. Here is why the Bare Cove site is a “prescription” for Hingham:
• The Power of Biophilia: Scientific research consistently shows that access to nature—what we call the “Bare Cove effect”—lowers cortisol levels, reduces blood pressure, and improves cognitive function. Integrating our senior services into the serenity of the park allows for indoor/outdoor programming that treats the “whole person.”
• Combating the Epidemic of Loneliness: Social isolation is as damaging to health as smoking 15 cigarettes a day. A 26,000-square-foot facility offers the space for the teaching kitchens, fitness studios, and social hubs necessary to keep our residents engaged and connected.
• Safety and Dignity: Access is the first step toward health. The planned facility solves the primary barriers to entry—parking and navigation—that currently prevent many from using our services.
We have spent 15 years studying this. The “value engineering” has already been done, bringing the project cost down to $29.1 million. Delaying further will only increase costs and continue to underserve a population that, by 2035, will represent 40% of our town.
I urge my neighbors to look at this project through the lens of long-term wellness. Supporting the CAL at Town Meeting on April 27 and at the ballot box on May 2 is an investment in the health of our parents, ourselves, and the future of Hingham.
The beneficial effects of nature which Dr. Lanna cited are a reason NOT to cut down 5 acres of trees in Bare Cove Park (BCP). As someone in favor of both building a terrific new senior center and continuing to protect a precious natural resource, I looked for an alternate location to BCP that would give us the best of both.
225 Beal St is adjacent to one of the gates into Bare Cove Park, so seniors would get the benefits of walking in nature without first tearing it down. There is a large adjoining parking lot to 225 which appears to be half-empty. It would be less destructive to buy or lease half of the parking lot, rather than clear-cutting a forest canopy full of birds. There is already a site with town utilities at 225 Beal St. It would cost less (<$1M) to tear down the building at 225 Beal St than to site-prep ($7M) at the 45 BCP Drive. The cost of installing town sewer, water, and electricity adds significantly to the BCP cost with all the disruption to the road and wildlife this entails.
I agree with Dr. Lanna that we must solve the problems of senior isolation and safety. 225 Beal is on an MBTA bus stop, so a car is not necessary to get there. It is a long way from the MBTA train station to the proposed site at 45 BCP Dr. Ironically, 45 BCP Drive is much more isolated than 225 Beal St. Empty buildings surround 45 BCP Dr (Model Train building, storage building), while 225 Beal St. is next door to the Bridges assisted living facility, staffed 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. 225 Beal St. is also much closer to the Public Safety building, so seniors who have fallen or are in need of emergency assistance will be reached faster.
The problems of traffic at the Fort Hill Rd/BCP Drive intersection will be compounded by adding many senior drivers to this intersection. School buses, national guard vehicles, train commuters and sports enthusiasts all use one entrance and exit. It's extremely difficult to turn left on leaving BCP Dr. and the solutions proposed so far (a traffic officer on-site for large events) are not a long-term solution. On the other hand, 225 Beal St. has two entrances and exits. In short, Beal St. is safer than BCP.
Somehow, many people have the idea that there is no alternative to 45 Bare Cove Park Drive. The Select Board looked only at municipally-owned properties and came to this conclusion. Town board members have worked extremely hard to solve the problems that this location entails, including the reducing the costs of starting to build from scratch and swapping Article 97 protection with another area of town.
I agree with Dr. Lanna that we should look at this project in terms of long-term wellness, for both our seniors and the members of other communities who enjoy Bare Cove Park. Wildness contributes to our well-being. Vote "No" on building within Bare Cove Park; vote "Yes" on building nearby.