Crompton Park Master Plan Meeting 2, extreme deadblog

6:39pm – Rob Antonelli opens. “previously scheduled meeting”. Chief Gemme Is here for questions and comments. Once that’s done, design discussion will continue.

6:40pm – was the victim from the area?

“from the general area”

Did it happen here or was he dumped?

“councilor Haller had emailed me that there was a community meeting. It’s a very active investigation. We do not believe that it was a random act of violence.” Some relation between victim and suspect.

Investigative impact will be here; plainclothes will be out ‘til 4am. More uniformed as well.

Identified as tactical response area. All uniformed (traffic, patrol, community impact) will be making more of a presence here as well.

6 of the homicides, 1 suspicious that hasn’t been ruled a homicide, by firearms. Spike in non-fatal shootings (2004/2005 levels).

Q: Concern about whether park is still safe.

“Worcester…is a very safe city. Decrease in knife assaults.” Most of our other crime categories are trending level or slight decrease. A lot of the violence occurs at 2 or 3am. Every shooting and homicide, relationship between victim and suspect.

Haller asks if there’s anything the community can do.

“We have a lot of programs…We’re working with our partners in the clergy to …prevent retaliation.” The individuals who are shot refuse to cooperate with police. Cooperation from the community, speaking out against violence. Strategies that give young people alternatives to violence. “This whole issue of gang activity and drug activity…that’s where it’s concentrated.”

Q: Do you feel that parks are more prone to violence? Is Crompton Park worse than Green Hill Park, etc. (“If you have four people, that’s a gang. We don’t have any here…do we?”)

A: it’s not random. “We don’t see it so much in the parks.” Tends to be alcohol establishments, after-hours clubs. “I don’t believe we’ve had a shooting in this area for some time.” It’s not so much they were targeting Crompton Park as –“

Q: “each other.”

A: “Correct”

Q: gun control, gun shots.

A: If you do hear gunshots, call the police. They will investigate the scene. If we can retrieve any evidence that there was gunfire, …might be able to use for another crime.

Since ’05, we’ve had some success with keeping gun violence in check.

Hannah Q: Did the increase in police presence occur because of the body found?

A: What we do through crime analysis is look at one or two areas in the city we need to put more police officers. Right now, we’re in the Vernon Hill area, so we’ll shift resources to this area for the next week or so.

Q from one of my young friends: Will there be security guards?

A: This is a fairly secure area.

Next Green Island Crime Watch Dec. 7.

Q: Do you think lighting the park at night will help?

A: I can’t say specifically. “For your own personal property, lighting would be a deterrent.” So – lighting would be a deterrent here.

6:53pm – Antonelli thanks Councilor Haller for being here, Councilor Kate Toomey is in the back. Senator Michael Moore here, Rep. Fresolo here as well. Also, Paul Gunnerson, Parks Commissioner, here as well.

At the end of the last meeting, large amount of work to do, large number of items people wanted to see. Taken all that paperwork – break it down into two concepts based on needs of neighborhood and needs of Worcester. Hopefully for next meeting, narrow down to one presentation.

Additional meeting at this location in beginning of January.

Request at last meeting that we didn’t reach out enough. Increased mailing list from last time.

6:57 – Gene Bollinger from Weston & Sampson to present.

Lorraine Laurie: can you work with Fresolo and Moore to get a Park Grant to get new lights in the park?

6:59 – Raquel Colon from the neighborhood, member of GIRF. The new swimming pool will attract more and more people. We need a larger space to gather together (community center). Looking around the room, it’s limited for anything we can do as a neighborhood. Green Island Neighborhood Center is the only place neighbors can get together. We don’t have a community school, library, or boys/girls club. This building is usable, but we want to see larger rooms, lighting around the building. If these things happen, it won’t just be for us, but for future generations.

7:01 – Mention of WiFi.

Antonelli says he’s looking at WiFi in other facilities. As they look at connectivity in areas, they will look into adding WiFi. (Oh, this makes me so happy.) If anyone has any information on how this has been working in other communities, let Parks know.

7:03: Fresolo – Is there any plan for another covered, outdoor area when this building is not available?

Bollinger acknowledges the idea for a pavilion. You could look at modifications to this building to accommodate a pavilion or awning, or other areas in the park.

A gentleman points out two trees that need to be removed. Antonelli says that those are scheduled for removal. Discussion of further arboricultural issues.

7:06: Mariana Marascol and Michael Moonan are here again as well with Gene.

By Gene’s count, 62 people here tonight.

There are two concepts proposed tonight. Eventually, a master plan, would need to be adopted by Parks Commission and then City Council, and possibility of stages for implementation.

“A master plan is more broad brush”; comments from the previous session will be “folded into the master plan.”

7:12 – Gene gives an overview of the park, condition of amenities, general layout, pedestrian access, lighting, storm draining.

7:14 Michael begins run-through of two concepts.

A few of the things that were mentioned the most: play equipment and variety thereof, handball court, skating at tennis court, open multi-use space, amphitheater, basketball courts for adults and kids, trees, walking for health, lighting and shade shelter.

First concept: proposing to have two central paths, very generous, wide (10-12 feet wide), alleed with trees on either side. Wider central paths could allow for emergency vehicles if needed. Other 6 feet wide paths for casual strolls. Employed a loop trail inside the park, making use of city sidewalks to loop it all around. The mileage would be about half a mile.

Vehicular access: one way loop drive with add’l parking, keeping existing parking in same location. Adding 12 parking spaces by tennis court. One court shift to the left, eliminate the other.

Reconfigure ball fields to maximize the place. Having full-sized football field that does not overlap the outfield of two ball fields. The configuration of the ball fields would eliminate the baseball fields. With new baseball field at Vernon Hill, the baseball field would likely not be necessary.

Skateboarding park with just vertical elements in one corner.

At former playground area, one big lawn.

Existing baseball court, allow amphitheater seating on the hill. Two handball courts. Junior basketball on other side of handball.

Make other side of the hill formal amphitheater with a pavilion, centered on the street. Play area on flat corner. This would come up along the path. “Natural play corridor” – connect the open lawn play area to more formal structured play area.

(Ooohs from the children in the crowd as they see some proposed details)

Entrance at each corner with connecting crosswalks.

Saint Mary’s has already had talks with Parks – perhaps use the basketball court at Vernon Hill as their home field. (Currently, they use Crompton.)

Gene – In both proposals, we want this to be a beautiful place. It’s a nice park, but it could be all that much nicer. Now is the time to start planning for the next generation of trees. Also, separating vehicles from pedestrians. “We don’t want it to be simple for a vehicle to get into any of those corridors.” Drives into the park would have a textured setting to feel different from regular roads.

7:29 – Antonelli – we will be using wood guard rail to secure entire perimeter of the park. For vehicular access and barrier for youth to get out into the roadway. Make sure that entire circumference doesn’t allow vehicle to gain access into the park.

Up on Endicott Street, proposing to eliminate some of the parking. The parking isn’t being used by park patrons. In order to make park more functional, take away some parking on Quinsig Avenue side.

7:35 – Parking drama. That’s where the ballplayers park.

Antonelli argues that there’s plenty of parking. Those spots are nearly filled right now, and there’s no ball being played. Additionally, adding parking in the park might solve some of this.

Michael notes that it allows the loop path to remain in the park, and that it allows the football field to be bigger.

7:38 – Can you do something for people who have a dog?

Antonelli – we looked at that opportunity. If you want a facility where the dog can be off-leash, that’s much bigger than what we have to work with.

Paulette — The tennis court would still be used for the ice rink, it would be level. Same concept design at East Park. Can we have manufactured skate edge forms as part of the process? Yes, we can look at that.

Can Pernet still be involved in managing the ice rink installation? Yes, parks help for the first time, then Pernet and the neighborhood after that.

Haller asks why they put the formal play area where they did. Antonelli responds that it’s in close proximity to the pool. Pool area will be lit and we’ll be able to parlay that into PD monitoring it on a regular basis.

Also, steering the younger (2-5 year-olds) away from the basketball and handball courts. More staff available near the pools as well.

Both concepts had restrooms near the community center. Either restrooms are (1) supported by parks with limited support or (2) an organization maintains, cleans, etc. Antonelli finds that bathrooms draw vandalism. (Also, the pools have restrooms in the summer when the pools are open.)

Best oblique comment about what can go on in bathrooms besides, well, going to the bathroom: “After a certain time, it could turn into anything but a bathroom.”

A lady reports that kids are getting in over the fence and climbing up the lifeguard ladder.

Question about whether there could be a canteen area. Antonelli emphasizes that there’s a commitment level that needs to be there (from the community) for that to happen.

(Yes, this is an all-bathrooms-and-parking meeting. I believe it wouldn’t be Worcester if we didn’t spend at least half an hour on either topic.)

7:51 – (No, we’re still not on the second proposal yet.)

About whether Rochelle should be paid, Antonelli says, “I come down here and smile every once in a while, and she says that’s enough.” Tell me about it!

Concept 2. Thank goodness!

Two central access pathways, but they put the parking roughly where the two tennis courts are now. Parking to west side of building. This allows us to open the pool entrance side, and that side of the pool to be a pedestrian zone. Connection with pool and play area, central spine not interrupted by vehicles. (I like that!)

Proposed paved area in a corner for skate park-type stuff in the summer, and then in the winter, it would become the skating rink. No tennis court.

A touch of a changed configuration for the two softball and full football field. Still very nice look.

Reconfigure courts to align with Endicott. Full-sized basketball, handball courts, larger green area on Harding Street edge. Open lawn areas between the two. Still do a pavilion/amphitheater. Larger more open entrance in the corner.

Antonelli – in any plan, netting to address stray balls.

A gentleman notes that there are injuries for pitchers, third basemen and shortstops because of the sun. Thinks extra trees in that area to block the sun.

Antonelli notes that in the beginning, the trees would be smaller. The gentlemen thinks eventually they’ll help. He also suggests someone put in a billboard, which would also block the sun (much laughter).

He also says that the condition of the field and the grading and drainage contribute to injuries as well.

They’re going to do a full property survey (topography, etc.), so whichever design we select, drainage, etc., will be included.

Antonelli: “No matter what you do, it’s still in a floodplain.” At Beaver Brook, the whole area floods. We raised the fields up, so the first thing to drain is the fields. The collectors then take it back to the brook. The difference with this is the rest of the facility is wide open (not fencing like at Beaver Brook.

If this field is redone, can the two leagues that use it still use it? Short answer: yes. (Somewhat longer discussion of the turf at Beaver Brook.)

8:07: We have now reached the third part of the Worcester triumvirate: sewer lines on Quinsigamond Avenue. Discussion of where the pump station is located.

In Concept 2, a lady notes that people would not be able to use the hill to watch basketball games.

8:10 – The only reason people don’t play tennis is because there’s no net there.

Sue Moynagh – Sometimes you just want to connect with green space. She would like minimal development of the hill and keep it look it natural. [The hill is originally filler, right?]

Antonelli – Except for one side, the hill would be relatively undeveloped.

Discussion of stand installation. At the softball fields, yes. Football field – bring the chair in a bag on the outer edge.

Rochelle – there are four or five kids participating in the tennis program. The tennis court is not being used. Not the net, this is a basketball area, not a tennis court area.

A lady likes the new play area in Concept 1. Likes the second concept better because there are no cars whatever near the play area. Also, picnic areas, trash cans, and recycling.

8:16 – Antonelli – when we were discussing the concepts, all about maximizing the space. Regarding recycling – right now, as a function of his operations, [equipment-wise] not set up for recycling component. Talking with vendors & others. Two containers, side by side, recycling (with a different top) and trash. In the future, have a truck that has a separator. In the short term, more than willing to put two bins out, and if the neighborhood can assist with recycling. Casella, on regular trash route, could pick up the recycling.

That meets with approval from the crowd.

Chris from summer basketball league – regarding basketball courts, the hill thing has a lot of history. The younger kids don’t have the opportunity to play, likes two full courts. Sometimes it gets loud. If we can have it so that it’s father away from residents’ homes and closer to the businesses (Concept 1), that would be preferable.

Antonelli says that the hoops will remain at 10 feet, regulation.

Chris – trash receptacles. Hard to keep court area clean. They trash the trash cans. We need more, but they also vandalize them.

Antonelli – trash is one of the places we have the biggest issues city-wide. One is household trash. He says they have started going after people. Two, there’s so much of it – there’s one guy in Parks to pick up trash in 60 facilities.

More discussion of trash and leagues.

A gentleman proposes moving the flagpole to the top of the hill and lighting.

A young lady worries that when she slides she’ll hit a tree. Antonelli tells her they’ll leave space for her to slide without trees.

Another child discusses traffic issues on basketball courts between younger and older kids.

8:35: More trash. I’m getting punch drunk at this point, and everyone knows how much I love talking trash.

8:38: The battery is running low. I don’t know how much more of the trash blame game this little laptop can take.


Preference for parking and play area in Concept 2, Fields in Concept 1, court area in Concept 1.

Try to incorporate second basketball court in Concept 1.

(There was some additional discussion of the field placement. I think the bottom line is that the sun is going to blind certain players, and we need a billboard.)

5 thoughts on “Crompton Park Master Plan Meeting 2, extreme deadblog

  1. Tracy says:

    1. Parks need bathrooms. Any caretaker of young children will tell you that.
    2. If Worcester hadn’t insisted on building their parks in what were swamps, we wouldn’t have drainage problems on our ballfields now.

    • Nicole says:

      1. I think I need to look into the pricing for the sanisette and send it to Parks. The only problem I can forsee is that, if you’re going to provide bathrooms, there needs to be at least one bathroom for wheelchair users, and the larger size might pose a problem.

      2. And, to be fair, the current Parks staff has to make the best of decisions that were made [regarding placement of parks and fields] before their time.

      One of the items that was touched upon obliquely at the meeting, but which you might not have gotten out of my notes, is the tension between the idea of a neighborhood park and the idea of a park that provides sporting fields/facilities. Hannah can certainly correct me on anything I write below, but I’d like to write a few impressions that I’ve gotten from participating in GIRF cleanups.

      Crompton Park is a rather large park, but at least a third of the park is taken up by the baseball/softball/football fields. There are leagues that use those fields, but the impression I’ve gotten (from talking with kids and participating in cleanups) is that the neighborhood kids are more inclined to use the basketball court. Also, I think much of the trash picked up during the neighbor’s efforts at cleaning up has been collected at the ball fields. So there’s a tension (and I don’t want to overstate the tension) between this park being a “neighborhood” park, a good part of which is not (can not) be used by the neighbors during game times, and those that use the park who are not from the neighborhood are not always showing proper respect (by littering) to the facility.

      I think that’s what Sue Moynagh was speaking to when she talked about natural, untouched land to just appreciate nature, and why many of the neighbors had concerns about any development of the hill. At this point, half the park will be taken up by fields that are not for the use of anyone at any time and by a pool complex that will only be available for six weeks in the summer. I do hope that the park can manage the need for programmed ball fields with the needs of the neighbors, and that includes some “unprogrammed” space.

      • Tracy says:

        Agreed. I’ve been to master plan meetings for a number of parks, and any park with a field has this tension. There’s serving the public at large versus (in some cases) serving the neighborhood. The two don’t always gel.
        And we’re absolutely lucky to have the parks we do. I just think it’s darkly humorous that you could take that conversation about drainage and apply it to parks all over town (as Antonelli clearly does!).

  2. jmstewart says:

    or you could say the tension betwen serving the public at large versus (in some cases) serving an entrenched old boys club that controls the use of the fields through an archaic permit process

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.