===PAGE 1===
Town of Lunenburg 
Park Commission 
                                                 
Karin Menard, Chair       978.582.4160 
Chris Sullivan, Vice Chair         520 Chase Road 
Susanna Jewell, Secretary                           Lunenburg, MA 01462        
Dave Passios, Member 
Ana Lockwood, Member 
TOWN OF LUNENBURG 
PARK COMMISSION 
THURSDAY JANUARY 6, 2022 
MINUTES 
1. Open Meeting-6:31 In attendance was Karin Menard, Dave Passios, Chris Sullivan, Ana 
Lockwood. Also in attendance was DPW Director Rob Oliva. 
2. Public and Board Comment- D Passios commented on the misinformation about the Marshall 
Park project and what the Master Plan means moving forward. He added that he’s been involved with 
getting the project off the ground and believes the Master plan will provide a road map for the future 
of Marshall Park, and that doesn’t mean there will be wholesale bulldozing and changing of a 
particular area. This process will include documentation of what's there now at the park and what 
condition it’s in. Next will be what other possible uses or changes could be made or not will be made. 
3. Budget presentation and discussions-Rob Oliva presented the Park’s budget and went through 
the line items for targeted FY23. Items were a park supervisor salary of $24,581, Town Beach 
salaries of $20,000 and discussed that the requested amount was $26,000 reflecting last year’s 
budget going over and discussed that any overages be taken from the Park’s revolving account. 
Personnel totaled $44,581.44. 
Purchase of Service was $46,498.00 and Department Expenses were $6,400 for a total of 
$52,898.00.  
Total Park Budget is 97,479.44. He opened it up for discussion. 
A Lockwood asked if the purchase of services is for third Party maintenance of the parks. R Oliva 
answered that it pays for landscaping, fence work, and other contractor type services. She also asked 
if the FY22 amount was the actual monies paid out. He confirmed it was the actual budget, and went 
on to give figures and reasons of money remaining. A Lockwood asked what the basis of the 
Department expenses were, if it were equipment. R Oliva answered that he will look into that, some 
went to Truck and Treat, possibly some bills paid from there. 
Karin stated that she’s looking to use the money from the revolving account to pay for some of the 
Town Beach salaries. Her question is at the end of the fiscal year the Commission has money to go 
back to free cash and wondered if he had a project or maintenance issue that would use up that 
money. He answered that he doesn’t have a plan right now but have ongoing issues at Marshall Park, 
or if gear or programs could be needed by Parks and Rec. A Lockwood commented that she’d like to 
see a plan for using any overages. 

===PAGE 2===
D Passios stated that he agreed with Karin’s comments about paying excess expenses from the 
revolving account and that this has been done for years and asked if the grounds contract is invoiced 
monthly, quarterly or a lump sum so they’d be seeing more invoices before the end of the fiscal year. 
R Oliva answered its monthly and will start picking up with the spring cleanup and mowing up until 
July 1.D Passios added that there are projects that they’d like to see done but not necessarily be 
done right away. If there are projects in May that are contracted but held over beyond July 1 it would 
help reduce how much money goes back to the general fund. He told of the monies that have gone 
back to general fund over the years that could have been used to maintain the parks. 
Motion made by D Passios to support the DPW Director’s FY23 Budget seconded by C Sullivan.  
Vote was unanimous. 
Motion made by C Sullivan to temporarily adjourn the meeting until 7:00pm, seconded by D Passios. 
Vote was unanimous 
4. 7 PM Public forum with WOLA to Present Site Analysis and Collect Community Input-K 
Menard opened the meeting at 7:00pm.  
C Sullivan stated that this is a Master Plan, the intent is to make the park better by improving on its 
features and utilize the 28 acres there.  He spoke of the misinformation going around about 
bulldozing to level the park and stressed that is not the intention. 
Kathryn Ostermier from WOLA welcomed everyone and gave an agenda for the meeting.  Also there 
from WOLA was Emily Wright, Allison Fairweather, and Nick Betts from Meridian Associates.  
The first steps in their plan process was a public meeting with the Park Commission on December 2nd 
followed by a site visit to Marshall Park with Commissioners, Parks and Rec, and DPW. They were 
able to get some of the town’s perspective on maintenance, future programming and recreation. They 
undertook a Mass GIS analysis of the park and their goal is to share their understanding of the park 
so far, and to get the public’s understanding.  Then in the weeks that follow, work with Meridian to put 
together two design alternatives in which the public can identify what way to proceed with the Park’s 
vision. 
Site Analysis: Marshall Park sits in the middle of Lunenburg in between two watersheds and is near 
some critical natural landscape areas that the Commonwealth have identified as having unique 
wildlife. She described the context of the Park within the cultural center of the town with civic 
buildings, school buildings, businesses and houses of worship. She added the recreational facilities in 
Lunenburg. 
Zoning is in the residential district and the limited business and residential district. She discussed the 
access way to the Park and the parking availability. She noted that there are no ADA parking or 
pathways and no formal connection between the park itself and the pond. She mentioned that there is 
electrical and water access but no restroom facilities. 
She identified what is in the Park currently, such as the 90 foot baseball diamond, softball field, little 
league field and a t-ball field and other kinds of recreation, basketball court, a fitness circuit, the 
former skate park, a small playground and a track. The unique features mentioned were fieldstone 
historic walls, cinder track rolling equipment, a stone table and a Pontiac in the woods. There’s 
monuments and memorials and should be highlighted in the park. 
She then showed the Land Cover, both manmade and natural, of the park and the regulated areas of 
the park and surrounding land. She then opened the meeting up for questions. 
===PAGE 3===
K Menard asked in the buffered areas of wetlands is where the basketball court is and if no work can 
be done there.  K Ostermier answered it would come under jurisdiction of the ConCom if work is done 
there and gave instances of what could be done. 
Dan Proctor of 1529 Mass Ave asked about the status of Marshall Park septic system. K Menard 
answered that Marshall Park is now part of the sewer District and D Passios mentioned the system 
has a draft plan in place. 
Kristin Tuttle of 45 Chestnut St asked if WOLA looked into how pedestrians are going to access the 
park. K Ostermier answered that it will come into play as part of the design process. 
Anthony Caiozzo asked with regards to the buffer zone that goes around and understands that it can’t 
be leveled but is there a multi-use potential like bike trails or other uses. K Ostermier answered that it 
depends on which buffer it was, the 30 foot buffer would be a difficult sell to the ConCom but it might 
be easier in the 50 or 100 foot zone. D Passios added that it wouldn’t be impossible just be more 
difficult to permit. 
Cliff Worthley 53 Woodland Ave asked what BPW on the map was to which K Ostermier answered it 
is a bordering vegetated wetlands. She went to the map with no mike so it was inaudible. C Worthley 
asked which areas are currently unused. K Ostermier pointed out an area that is steep and not great 
for development and isn’t in the buffer. D Passios filled in the audio that was lost. The gray area of the 
map has not had a definitive survey done and that it is on the Capital Project List to be brought 
forward for the FY23.A complete survey will be done after July. 
Corrine Scouten 830 Mass Ave asked if the talk of putting parking where the old bath house was has 
been scrapped. K Menard mentioned that right before she joined the Commission when the parking 
was going in, trees were cleared from a neighbor’s property and everything was paused and never 
gained any momentum after that. It’s not on the table to do now and part of the design will have 
parking not necessarily in that place. 
Marianne Mascari of 54 Chestnut St mentioned that 3 to 4 months of the year when there’s baseball 
games it becomes a one way street and there’s cars backed up from one end of the park to halfway 
through Chestnut St and it becomes hazardous for two way traffic. She asked if parking is under the 
jurisdiction of the Commission. K Menard answered that the street itself is under the Town and any 
land of the parks was under the Commission so some of the parking that happens along Chestnut St 
is on Park’s property. The Commission can advocate for safety on the street. K Menard voiced 
concerns about getting Fire Trucks down there. Discussion followed on problem with parking and how 
to solve it. M Mascari recommended signage. D Passios mentioned that this parking issue has been 
going on for decades and that a combination of additional parking availability and enforcement on 
Chestnut Street would make a huge difference. 
M Mascari wanted to know what happens with garbage pickup because she finds it on a daily basis. 
Menard answered that falls under the DPW. A Caiozzo commented that there should be trash 
facilities within the park facility and recommended it be part of the design through this process. C 
Sullivan mentioned that the parks have a carry in/carry out policy. Discussion followed on the pros 
and cons of trash facilities within the park. 
Chris Martin of 981 Northwood Rd clarified that there are trash receptacles and a dumpster in the 
park during baseball season. K Menard stated that they are brought in by Little League and are not 
publicly maintained.  
K Ostermier went over the survey results with 431 responses, the bulk being ages 18 to 50, and the 
ways the park is used is for walking, baseball, softball and t-ball. When asked what people wanted in 
the park the highest responses were nature or walking trails, public restrooms, a new playground, 
===PAGE 4===
access to the pond and a walking track. Next was a pavilion picnic area, improved parking, a 
rectangular multi-purpose field and hard surface courts. Some other uses included restored fitness 
circuit, softball field, baseball field, maintenance building and Skate Park.  Asked what would cause 
people to come to the park more frequently, the number one response was a dog park along with ice 
skating, concerts, concession stand and a picnic and grill area. 
A Community Workshop was next and a link was sent out for Zoom participants. 
1. Describe you most recent visit to Marshall Park. 
 Some responses were watching my grandchildren play, baseball, walking my dogs, walking, 
dog exercising, watching kids play ball, baseball, and walking with dogs, play soccer. 
2. What would you like to change the most at Marshall Park? 
      Kirsten Tuttle commented that accessing it is important from pedestrians to cars and possibly 
a walking bridge over Marshall Pond. Other comments were rejuvenation and bathrooms, access 
from both streets, designated parking, football courts, pickle ball courts, access from the center of 
town. Chris Martin added access to the pond. Allison Melvin commented that there are features in 
need of repair. 
3. What concerns you about the future of Marshall Park? 
      Comments were over development. Chris Martin commented that the baseball fields would 
go away. Dave King was concerned with neglect. 
4. What would you like to see in the future of Marshall Park? 
 Comments were, more love from the town in maintaining the field, a place where all ages can 
go to enjoy, upgrade to baseball field concession stands and scorekeeper huts, public restrooms and 
Chestnut St parking, walking trails and multi-use fields, the ease of use ability, a website for info, 
mountain bike trails, the pond needs lights for skating. 
John Fortune 50 Hemlock Dr. mentioned that he walked through the park recently and feels it’s in 
tough shape. He’d like to see pickle ball and tennis but can’t do that (on school grounds) when school 
is in session, so he and seniors would like to go to Marshall Park. He mentioned that the park should 
be maintained and bathrooms, parking and easy access are something that seniors would like to see.  
Greg Roy 105 Chestnut St would like to see the park to be vital again and be a hub for folks to use 
with good walking access.  
Tim Murphy 97 Island Rd asked what will be done with the pond, if there would be an area where 
people could fish and ice skate and if it would be cleaned out. K Menard answered that it is in the 
Parks jurisdiction and it is part of this process. C Sullivan mentioned the benches and hockey nets will 
be back there this winter. D Passios added that as they go through the process he’s learned so much 
about the park and asked the public to bring in any photos and history of the park. Send to the Parks 
Commission or the Historical Society. A Lockwood offered that she has pictures of the pond from the 
early 2000s that her neighbor documented and the health of the pond had degraded and believes 
from a mix of reasons. The town has sewers so less water flowing to the pond, the more use of 
fertilizers that run off into waterways to the pond which creates overgrowth. 
K Ostermier proceeded to the next part of presentation stating that now that there is an understanding 
of the kids of activities people are interested in at Marshall Park, it’s helpful to identify how people 
would like it to look. A slide was shown of three different aesthetic styles: 
===PAGE 5===
Row A - a brightly colored playground area, a contemporary picnic shelter, and a brightly colored 
outdoor fitness track 
Row B – a brightly colored more traditional playground area, a more traditional shelter and less bright 
more muted outdoor fitness equipment. 
Row C – a more rustic nature play area that incorporates logs and boulders, a more rustic picnic 
shelter with a fireplace in the middle and a casual rustic workout equipment area. 
She then asked for a vote in person and zoom. 
Anthony Caiozzo commented that he like C if it could be made more durable. K Ostermier answered 
that there would be more additional maintenance and that the nature playgrounds are made of stone 
and concrete that looks like logs. 
The votes will be tallied and results taken in account. 
K Ostermier opened the meeting up for questions.   
D Passios agreed with the maintenance concerns with any one of the styles that they will need proper 
surface coatings to maintain them. 
K Menard answered the question by a resident of where the money was coming from for this project 
that there are grants and that it’s a project to be done in stages.  
Chris Menard 672 Page St, also on the Finance Committee, stated that they are tracking a lot of 
federal grants to be earmarked towards improvements of parks and having a Master Plan helps 
placing of the grants. Discussion followed on securing grants. 
Chris Martin asked if other properties were looked at instead of Marshall Park which is taken up by 
baseball fields. K Menard answered yes but that it has to be aesthetically a fit.  
Tim Murphy reiterated on maintenance and repair and make sure the design requires less care and 
maintenance. 
K Ostermier talked of the next steps which is WOLA and Meridian will compile and analyze the 
feedback from that night and meetings with the Park Commission, DPW and Recreation Dept., and 
the survey that the Commission did. This will guide their design work, doing two concept design 
alternatives. In early February they will present the designs and cost estimates to the public and 
getting feedback. Once a preferred alternative is selected they will move forward and develop that 
and finish the process. 
Dan Proctor asked if he could get an existing conditions plan so the town’s people could discuss 
using some of the resources that they have such as civil engineers, construction and excavating 
people, plumbers and electrician etc.  He’d like a roundtable discussion with the commission. D 
Passios responded that he’s aware of the volunteerism of the public and it was before the town had 
an active Park Commission. The town has liability for projects that are done and projects have to be 
properly vetted, not like in the past. 
A resident asked if the when they come back with the two designs if certain things can be 
incorporated from one design to another. K Ostermier answered that if it all fits that can be done, that 
they’ll work to bring the two preferred portions of the alternatives together. 
Anthony Caiozzo asked to have the map brought up again to highlight where the skate park is 
proposed. Discussion followed on the proposed area. Dawn Johnson 357 Lancaster Rd voiced her 
concerns about just hearing where the skate park is going and it’s already decided before the rest of 
the plan is in place. K Menard explained how the skate park evolved into that space. A Caiozzo 
===PAGE 6===
mentioned it was only 1 % of the entire property and that the skate park will go in first. K Menard 
mentioned that the skate park is not overseen by WOLA and gave the years of history of the skate 
park plan. A Lockwood mentioned that the skate park does not have a vote to move forward until all 
the funding is in place. More discussion followed with pros and cons of putting the skate park in 
Marshall Park. C Sullivan mentioned that Marshall Park is the best suited for the skate park because 
of safety and accessibility and that the skate park is not going to be just a concrete slab, it will be 
landscaped. K Ostermier suggested that working together with the skate park and the Commission a 
harmonious plan could be incorporated into the Master Plan. 
5. Other Business-none 
6. Adjourn D Passios motioned to adjourn at 8:48pm C Sullivan seconded. Vote was unanimous 
Respectfully Submitted 
Dawn Pavone 
Minutes Secretary