Get documents about "Market Street the Woodlands Available Retail Lease Space
W
Description
Market Street the Woodlands Available Retail Lease Space document sample
Document Sample
Town of Natick
Open Space and Recreation Plan
December 2002
Prepared by the
Natick Open Space Advisory Committee
Stephen Gartrell, Chair
Representative of Natick Conservation Commission
Robert Eisenmenger
Representative of Natick Planning Board
Richard Cugini
Representative of Recreation and Parks Commission
Michael Caccavale
Irene Del Bono, Vice Chair
Martin Kessel, Secretary
Daniel Sullivan
(resigned May 2002)
TOWN OF NATICK
13 East Central Street, Natick, Massachusetts 01760
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION 1 – PLAN SUMMARY .......................................................................... 1
A. Plan Summary 1
B. Plan Foundation 1
SECTION 2 - INTRODUCTION ............................................................................ 3
A. Statement of Purpose 3
B. Planning Process and Public Participation 3
SECTION 3 – COMMUNITY SETTING ................................................................ 6
A. Regional Context 6
B. Natick’s History 7
C. Population Characteristics 9
D. Growth and Development Patterns 10
SECTION 4 – ENVIRONMENTAL INVENTORY AND ANALYSIS..................... 17
A. Geology, Soils and Topography 17
B. Landscape Character 19
C. Water Resources 20
D. Vegetation 22
E. Fisheries and Wildlife 23
F. Scenic Resources and Unique Environments 26
G. Environmental Challenges 28
SECTION 5 – INVENTORY OF LANDS OF CONSERVATION AND
RECREATION INTEREST ....................................................................... 32
SECTION 6 – COMMUNITY VISION .................................................................. 47
A. Description of Process 47
B. Statement of Open Space and Recreation Goals 47
SECTION 7 – ANALYSIS OF NEEDS ................................................................ 49
A. Summary of Resource Protection Needs 49
B. Summary of Community’s Needs 49
C. Management Needs 52
SECTION 8 – GOALS AND OBJECTIVES ........................................................ 53
SECTION 9 – FIVE-YEAR ACTION PLAN ......................................................... 56
SECTION 10 – PUBLIC COMMENTS ................................................................ 61
SECTION 11 – REFERENCES .......................................................................... 72
Appendix A: Public Hearing Comments ........................................................ 74
Appendix B: Johannes Wagner Report ......................................................... 78
Appendix C: Resident Quesionnaire .............................................................. 83
Appendix D: Use of Town Fields .................................................................... 87
Appendix E: Land Preservation Tools ........................................................... 95
Appendix F: ADA Access Self-Evaluation ................................................... 102
MAPS
Map 1A: Regional Context Map
Map 1B: Zoning Map
Map 2A: Orthophotograph
Map 2B: Surface Geology (Topographical) Map
Map 2C: Soils Map
Map 2D: Subsurface Geology Map
Map 3: Unique Features Map
Map 4: Water Resources
Map 5: Open Space Map
Map 6A: Five-Year Action Plan Map
May 6B: Open Space – Target Projects
Map 7: EOEA Buildout Map: Absolute Constraints
Map 8: EOEA Buildout Map: Composite Map
SECTION 1 – PLAN SUMMARY
A. Plan Summary
Over the last 50 years, Natick has evolved from a town with a moderately industrial core –
shoe, baseball, and truck factories – and a rural, agricultural surrounding area with orchards,
fields and farms – into a suburban residential community. In the past decade, close to 100
acres per year have been developed, primarily for new housing. The town’s few remaining
unprotected open areas, both public and private, are facing intense development pressure.
Virtually all of the town’s water supply comes from ground water, with most of Natick’s
aquifer recharge coming through open land in Natick and surrounding communities. There
is also pressure to develop new recreation areas as Natick’s population of school-aged
youngsters has increased substantially while the net number of athletic fields has not
changed substantially (some new ones have been added but others have been lost).
Finally, there is a growing interest by Natick’s residents and a desire to be educated in the
value of open space: as active and passive recreational amenity; as a positive factor in the
community’s character; as wildlife habitat; and for trails and transportation.
The next five years will be critical to the development of Natick. The Open Space
Committee believes that the following Open Space and Recreation Plan will provide the
groundwork for providing a balance between development and protecting critical open
space resources. As the town approaches full build-out, this Plan will provide guidelines for
its boards and commissions in making these critical decisions.
B. Plan Foundation
After a considerable public participation process, including numerous public meetings and
surveys, the Natick Open Space Advisory Committee recommends the following goals and
objectives:
Protect Natick’s open spaces, including lakes, rivers and streams, and
woodlands in a natural state that can be enjoyed by future generations. Open
space provides a broad range of positive values to the community, both tangible and
intangible – resource protection, recreation, ―town character,‖ property values – and
does not add to the tax burden. Future development proposals must be looked at
carefully with these factors in mind.
Preserve and protect the town’s water supply. Our groundwater is our only
source of water and must be protected. Open space that supports our water supply is
a top priority, according to our surveys and hearings.
Provide a system of walking and bicycle trails that connect our open spaces
and provide a way to travel throughout the town. A significant obstacle to
recreation opportunities in Natick is the lack of a formal pedestrian and bicycle
transportation network. While substantial work has been done on a number of
possible trails, this work needs to be continued and coordinated into a unified trail
system.
Ensure that playing fields and other recreational facilities support the needs of
the population. Since the last Open Space Plan, the population participating in
youth sports as well as the number of sports played has substantially increased,
putting tremendous pressure on existing facilities. While some new fields have been
developed, others (at several recently re-developed schools) have been lost. Existing
fields cannot be maintained in the face of this pressure and youth sports activity may
have to be curtailed.
Increase residents’ awareness of Natick’s open spaces, trails, natural
resources, and recreational opportunities. One of the things that came through
loud and clear in the surveys was that Natick residents, both new and old, would like
more information about Natick’s existing open spaces. Any successful Open Space
and Recreation Plan must rely on the support of the town residents.
Develop an organizational structure to enable achievement of Open Space
Goals. In the past there has been no single group within the town advocating for
open space preservation and maintenance. As a part of the development of this
Open Space and Recreation Plan, the Selectmen appointed the Open Space Advisory
Committee on a temporary basis. We recommend that the OSAC be made a
permanent, standing committee of the Town. We recommend also that a
management plan, including an operating budget, be developed for the maintenance
of all Town-owned open space.
Natick Open Space and Recreation Plan 2002 2
SECTION 2 - INTRODUCTION
A. Statement of Purpose
As the Town of Natick nears full ―build-out‖ (which means that when achieved all currently
available land has been either protected or developed), it struggles to maintain a balance
between the rights of private and public property owners and the need to preserve and
protect its remaining open land, where that land is needed for natural resources protection,
recreation or to maintain the town’s quality of life.
In the past, Natick’s residents took their scenic areas and recreational opportunities for
granted. This is no longer the case. As the population grows and the open spaces dwindle,
citizens are increasing awareness of the need to preserve the resources that we have before
they are gone forever.
This plan is organized to allow one to see the impact of future development in the context
of the past. It provides the cultural and natural context for what has taken place to date. It
provides an inventory of open land, both public and private, protected and unprotected. It
develops goals and objectives and finally recommends specific actions that can be taken to
meet this balance.
After reviewing the prior update to the Natick Open Space Plan, the Natick Open Space
Advisory Committee felt that it was important to do a complete revision of the Plan rather
than an update. Much of the information was outdated or incorrect, and the Plan as a whole
was not organized in accordance with current Massachusetts Division of Conservation
Services guidelines. So, although it has been more than a year-long process, it was critical to
go through all the steps of that process so future versions of the Open Space and Recreation
Plan will have a solid base on which to build.
B. Planning Process and Public Participation
Natick’s Open Space and Recreation Plan was developed in several stages over a period of
time.
Johannes Wagner, of Weston and Sampson Engineers, Inc., was hired by the Town as a
consultant to develop an initial assessment of community needs and prepare
recommendations. He was hired specifically to update the Natick Open Space and
Recreation Plan, Section 1, Plan Summary, Section 2, Introduction, and Section 9, Five-Year
Action Plan. Mr. Wagner met with the Conservation Commission, the Recreation and Parks
Commission, as well as with several other town boards. An Open Space Forum was held on
Natick Open Space and Recreation Plan 2002 3
April 26, 2000 at the Cole Recreation Center, attended by about 15 people, which generated
extensive discussion and a lot of ideas. On June 10, 2000, a public meeting of town boards
and committees took place in Town Hall to discuss open space. A summary of comments
from these meetings is included in Appendix A.
Following Mr. Wagner’s first draft, the Conservation Commission held a public hearing on
October 19, 2000, at which the public commented on the draft. Mr. Wagner provided
detailed recommendations for each neighborhood of Natick, and this portion of his final
report is included as Appendix B. The primary recommendation was the appointment of an
Open Space Advisory Committee.
The Board of Selectmen voted on May 21, 2001 to establish an Open Space Advisory
Committee, and on July 9, 2001 appointed seven members to serve on the committee. The
Open Space Committee immediately determined that a more substantial reworking of the
Open Space and Recreation Plan than that done by Mr. Wagner would be necessary to meet
the requirements of the Massachusetts Division of Conservation Services. They also
determined that a more intensive public participation process was needed.
In September, the Committee developed a one-page questionnaire, which it distributed to
two groups of Natick residents. On September 15, 2001, the public was invited to fill out
surveys at the Open Space Committee’s booth at Natick Days, a free, public outdoor event
on the Natick Common. The committee was overwhelmed by the interest in its booth, and
258 survey forms were collected. On October 4, 2001, survey forms were handed out at
Town Meeting, where 55 surveys were completed. The two surveys, providing two different
samples of Natick residents, were analyzed independently. Results of the surveys are
presented in Appendix C.
Based on this input, the Committee developed its statement of goals and invited the public
to provide further comment at a public hearing on February 27, 2002. This forum, which
received substantial publicity in the local papers, was attended by about 40 persons,
including environmentalists, recreational users, developers, and residents. The Committee
gave a PowerPoint presentation summarizing its process to date, and solicited comments on
the draft Vision statement and on Goals and Objectives. These comments are summarized
in Appendix A. The presentation was also posted on the Committee’s new web site at
http://natick.info/open_space/, and three persons submitted comments by mail or e-mail.
Comments from the forum and from the survey were used to help develop the Community
Vision and Analysis of Needs sections of this Plan.
A draft Natick Open Space and Recreation Plan was produced in June 2002 and was made
available on the Committee’s web site, http://natick.info/open_space/, and at Town Hall
(Community Development Office), the Morse Institute and Bacon Free libraries, and at the
Recreation and Park Commission office at the Cole Center. The draft plan was presented for
Natick Open Space and Recreation Plan 2002 4
comments to the Recreation and Parks Commission (June 3), the Board of Selectmen (June
17), the Planning Board (June 19) and the Conservation Commission (June 20). The draft
was also presented to the public at a public forum on June 26. Comments from all of these
public meetings are summarized in Appendix A. Copies of the Plan were sent to various
town boards community organizations, listed in Section 10 of this plan. Based on the
comments received, additional refinements were made in this Open Space and Recreation
Plan.
Natick Open Space and Recreation Plan 2002 5
SECTION 3 – COMMUNITY SETTING
A. Regional Context
Nestled between the upper basin of the Charles and Concord Rivers in Middlesex County,
Natick provides a mixture of suburban residential and industrial land use. Local and regional
commercial districts are situated along its major highways, reflective of its location within an
easy commute to Boston, Worcester, and Providence. Its three major transportation arteries
are the Massachusetts Turnpike, Route 9, and the Boston and Albany Railroad, all of which
connect Boston with western Massachusetts. Natick owes much of its growth to its location
on these major east-west corridors. Routes 27 and 135, major collector roads, cross in the
center of town and provide connections to Framingham to the west, Wellesley to the east,
Wayland to the north, and Sherborn to the south. Route 16 goes through South Natick,
connecting Wellesley and Sherborn. See Map 1A (Regional Context) and Map 2A
(Orthophotograph).
Natick is within the jurisdiction of Boston’s Metropolitan Area Planning Council (MAPC),
and participates in regional planning efforts as part of the MetroWest Growth Management
Committee, a sub-region of MAPC. Natick’s Open Space and Recreation Plan supports the
four major goals described in the land resources element of MAPC’s regional development
plan, known as ―MetroGreen.‖ These include the protection of critical land resources,
shaping of growth to appropriate areas, preserving community character, and providing
increased recreational opportunities.1
Natick’s two largest and most popular open spaces are shared with neighboring towns.
The Broadmoor Wildlife Sanctuary, owned by the Massachusetts Audubon Society,
consists of 624 acres plus another 165 acres under conservation restriction.2 More
than two-thirds of this area is within Natick, the remainder in Sherborn.
Cochituate State Park, managed by the state’s Department of Environmental
Management, consists of over 1100 acres, including Lake Cochituate itself and the
land surrounding the lake. Two of the lake’s three ―ponds‖ are located in Natick,
while the northern pond lies in Framingham and Wayland.
The Natick Open Space Advisory Committee sees opportunities and needs for cooperative
effort between the Town of Natick and neighboring towns to preserve and manage a
number of current open space projects:
1 ―MetroPlan 2000; The Regional Development Plan for Metropolitan Boston‖ (April 1994)
2 For a definition and information on Conservation Restrictions, see Appendix F.
Natick Open Space and Recreation Plan 2002 6
Natick recently completed a municipal golf course, Sassamon Trace, on land that is
partly in Natick and partly in Sherborn.
Natick is currently working with the Town of Framingham to find a way to preserve
the 22-acre Arthur Morency Woods, which is owned by the Town of Framingham
but lies mostly within Natick
The Natick Open Space Committee has been discussing two old aqueducts that go
through Natick and have the potential of providing trail links to neighboring towns.
The Natick Open Space Committee would like to ensure that there remains
continuous open space between Union Street, in Natick, and Lake Waban, in
Wellesley, of which portions (nearly 200 acres) are currently under conservation
restrictions.
B. Natick’s History3
The town’s original residents were Native Americans and English settlers. Natick Plantation
was established in 1651 along the Charles River by the first and largest Praying Indian
colony, which became a model for others in Massachusetts. Reverend John Eliot, the great
missionary, converted them to Christianity and on October 14, 1651 successfully secured a
charter from the Legislature granting them two thousand acres of land, part of the original
―Dedham grant‖. Natick was known as the Indian town because the Indians had established
their own government based on the English model, held town meetings, and elected their
own town selectmen and other officials before the English settled in the town. The 1658
grant of the northwest piece of Dedham enlarged Natick to six thousand acres. Dedham’s
objections to this grant were only partially appeased by a substantial grant of land in
Deerfield; Dedham’s continuing resentment resulted in numerous boundary disputes
affecting Natick.
King Philip’s War (1675-1677) began with the discovery of the assassination of the Natick
praying Indian John Sassamon. He had learned how to read and write English in Natick and
provided much help to the settlers. He was assassinated because he warned the Governor
that Philip was making plans against the English. Wampanoag Chief Metacomet (who was
called King Philip) went to war against the settlers. As a result, Natick’s Indian population
was forced to resettle on Deer Island, despite John Eliot’s protests and assurances that the
Natick Praying Indians posed no threat. Most of Natick’s Indians perished from the cold
and lack of food and medical care while on Deer Island.
3The major source for information on Natick history is Michael J. Crawford, History of Natick,
Massachusetts, 1650-1976 (Natick Historical Commission, 1978).
Natick Open Space and Recreation Plan 2002 7
When English settlers began migrating to Natick center, they rebelled at having to travel to
and support the Indian church in South Natick. The resulting ―Meeting House Dispute‖ was
resolved by a successful petition to the General Court in 1761, attaching northern Natick to
Needham (formerly Dedham – which suffered its own rebellion resulting in the town of
Needham splitting from Dedham). This ―Needham Leg‖ extended west to Lake Cochituate
and included downtown and all but a sliver of land at Natick’s northern boundary. In
February of 1781, Natick became a town, and in 1797 the ―Needham Leg‖ was restored to
Natick. As a result, Natick has been in Suffolk County, Norfolk County, and Middlesex
County, presenting a challenge to those who are researching their genealogy or property
ownership.
During the colonial period Natick was predominately agricultural, containing numerous
orchards, lumber, grist and other mills. In 1835, the Boston and Albany Railroad was built
through Natick, causing a rapid industrial expansion. Natick’s growing shoe industry
became the third largest shoe production community in the country, with 23 shoe
manufacturers by 1880. In 1858, the H.H. Harwood Baseball factory, another ―cottage
industry,‖ began producing the first center-wound balls with figure-eight-stitched horsehide
covers, setting the standard for baseballs and producing Official League Baseballs.
In 1874, a great fire destroyed almost all of the buildings in downtown Natick. The wooden
buildings were replaced with predominately three-story brick buildings. That, and the
depression of the railroad tracks below street level, dramatically changed Natick’s
appearance.
Natick at one time boasted an airport, an automobile factory, and was also widely known for
its great greenhouses located in East Natick. Only the De Rosa greenhouses, with their
world-renowned orchids, survive today. Walnut Hill School, a school for artistically gifted
students established on the site of the Harwood estate, attracts students from around the
world. Natick resident Harriet Beecher Stowe’s novel, Uncle Tom’s Cabin, may have had as
its inspiration Natick’s reputation as a stop on the Underground Railroad. Natick’s Henry
Wilson, Vice President from 1873-1876 under Ulysses S. Grant, was against slavery, and
wrote the 3-volume ―History of the Rise and Fall of the Slave Power in America‖ (1872-77)
(the final volume was published posthumously by his estate).
Natick experienced a rapid population growth in the 1880s, with immigrants from Ireland,
England, Nova Scotia, Italy and Armenia. By the beginning of the 20th Century, the shoe
industry was declining, and Natick slowly changed from a major manufacturing town to a
commuter suburb of Boston. The population increased dramatically after World War II, with
the economic stimulus of new high technology firms developing within Natick itself, and, to
a greater extent, within an easy commute along Route 128 and Route 495. The establishment
of two commuter-rail stops in Natick and West Natick provided easy public transportation
to Boston. In the 20-year period between 1940 and 1960, Natick’s population more than
Natick Open Space and Recreation Plan 2002 8
doubled, from 13,851 to 28,831. The ―baby bust‖ dip in the birth rate (born late 70s and
early 80s) created a dramatic decrease in the number of people per household and an overall
loss in population. However, during the same period, Natick experienced a dramatic increase
in new construction and significant loss of open spaces. With the 5% rise in population from
30,510 in 1990 to 32,170 in 2000, Natick once again reached its 1970 peak population,
increasing its population density to 2132 per square mile.
C. Population Characteristics
In the 2000 Census, Natick had a population of 32,170, an increase of 5 percent since 1990.
The predominant race was white, with 92.0 percent of the population, followed by a small,
but growing Asian population (3.9 percent, up from 2.3 percent in 1990). The remainder are
blacks (1.6 percent), American Indian 0.1 percent), Pacific Islander (0.1 percent), other (0.8
percent), and two or more races (1.6 percent). Hispanics constituted 2.0 percent of the
population.
As the Baby Boom children had their own children, the number of children under 18 has
risen by 22 percent (from the 1990 to 2000 census), to 2,370. At the same time, there has
been a 9 percent increase in the median age of Natick’s population to 38.2. These
demographics may explain the rapidly increasing use of the town’s recreation fields, as well
as the growing interest in trails and other forms of ―passive‖ recreation.
Natick is an economically vibrant community, with a low unemployment rate and nearly full
occupancy rate for its commercial, office, and residential buildings. As a testament to the
desirability of Natick, many major employers have chosen to locate their world or national
headquarters in Natick: TJX, Cognex, The MathWorks, Boston Scientific, BJ’s, edocs, Micro
Technology Group, ServiceSoft, Sage Research, ZweigWhite, ViaTech, Imark, I-Ray, among
others.
That may account for Natick’s lower unemployment rate, historically lower by at least one-
third than the statewide rate. In 2000, the Department of Employment and Training
recorded 291 unemployed (1.5%) in Natick, compared to the state-wide rate of 2.6%. In
2000, Natick’s total labor force was 18,979, and its average annual wage was $45,508. The
majority of its workers are employed in the trades (8,928), and services (8,972), with a distant
2,037 for government and 2,032 in manufacturing.
Natick Open Space and Recreation Plan 2002 9
D. Growth and Development Patterns
1. Patterns and Trends
Natick’s commercial center began in the south and shifted north in several stages, based on
the latest transportation system. In the early 1600s, Natick was settled on the Charles River,
in what is now South Natick. In the mid-1800s, the railroad hastened development of what
is now downtown Natick. With the advent of the automobile in the 20th Century,
commercial activity moved further northward to Route 9 and finally toward the
Massachusetts Turnpike’s Exit 13.
From Natick’s founding in 1651, settlement was located near the banks of the Charles River.
The river provided power for saw and grist mills, and most of the residents owned small
farms. By the mid 1700s, farms had spread to other areas of the town. The earliest town
map, published in 1750 by Samuel Livermore, shows houses spaced fairly evenly throughout.
In the 19th Century, in Natick and throughout Massachusetts, the economy shifted from
agricultural to industrial. Natick’s geography was dramatically changed in 1835, when the
railroad connecting Boston and Worcester was built through the geographical center of
town. The area around the train station became known as downtown Natick, which quickly
surpassed South Natick in population and economic activity. The railroad made downtown
Natick an ideal site for new factories, and housing for the workers sprouted up nearby.
South Natick experienced some of this type of growth, although to a much lesser extent.
Maps from the late 1800s show Natick as two distinct communities – downtown Natick and
South Natick. In other areas of Natick, abandoned farmland reverted back to woods.
Between 1800 and 1900, Natick’s population increased tenfold, from about 900 to 9,000. In
1900, nearly 2,000 persons were employed in manufacturing, and only 123 in agriculture.
In the 20th Century as manufacturing declined, Natick became a commuter town. By 1950,
two-thirds of Natick’s full-time workers were employed outside of Natick, including Boston.
Workers could live in downtown Natick and easily commute by train or car to their jobs. In
the 1930s, Route 9 was built as the state’s first divided highway, allowing easy automobile
access to Boston or to Worcester. In 1957, the Massachusetts Turnpike was constructed
along the old aquifer right-of-way, with Exit 13 at the Natick-Framingham border. The
Turnpike, along with the existing Route 9, gave commuters access to Boston, as well as new
high technology jobs located along Route 128 to the east and Route 495 to the west
Post-WWII housing for the returning soldiers and their families was built in East Natick,
North Natick (known as Wethersfield), and West Natick. These areas have retained their
friendly neighborhood character and affordability, and they continue to be sought out by
young families. During this time, Route 9 became a regional commercial center. In 1952,
Shoppers World was built, just across the Framingham line, as New England’s first regional
Natick Open Space and Recreation Plan 2002 10
shopping center, followed by the Natick Mall and Sherwood Plaza in the 1960s. The housing
and commercial developments during this period used up the majority of buildable land in
the central and northern parts of town. Only South Natick escaped this round of
development, primarily because it was less accessible to the major transportation routes.
The area within walking distance of the West Natick train station experienced another
building boom in the early 1970s and 80s, with a large subdivision of homes built on the site
of a former golf course on the northern side of Route 135, and large condominium and
apartment complexes, Natick’s first experiment with ―cluster zoning‖ were built on the
southern side of Route 135 on former open space. This is where Natick’s highest population
density is located, and it abuts some of neighboring Framingham’s highest density affordable
apartment complexes.
The MetroWest area has the highest percent change of vacant housing units from 1990-2000
with vacancies down 46.6%. Natick has a low vacancy rate of 2% with 71% of the housing
being owner-occupied. Although the number of housing units has increased, there is still a
need for additional apartments and low-income housing.
Route 9’s commercial development, which began with Shopper’s World, expanded into what
is known as the ―Golden Triangle,‖ an area defined by Route 9, Route 30, and Speen Street,
although the commercial activity extends considerably beyond these streets. This area is
about half in Natick and half in Framingham. Although the vacant land in this area is long
gone, the density of activity continues to increase, as single-story structures and parking lots
are replaced by tall office buildings and parking garages. The land closest to Exit 13 off the
Massachusetts Turnpike has become the most desirable location for office buildings and
retail space.
The latest residential building boom has occurred in the formerly unspoiled areas of South
Natick and the northeast corner of Natick. Now large, expensive houses are replacing
former woodland and open space. The pattern of development in recent years can be seen
on Map 7 (EOEA Buildout Map: Absolute Constraints).
The rate of development of Natick has been increasing over the last ten years. In the context
of the dwindling inventory of un-developed parcels, this is especially disconcerting. The
graph below shows the total acreage by year that was developed using information provided
by the town’s assessor. For this graph, only vacant (no structures whatsoever) lots that were
developed were including. As a result, it reasonable to believe that if re-development and
increased development, especially on larger parcels were included, the picture would be
bleaker.
Using the full data from the period of 1995-2000, it is clear that this slice of development
activity alone is consuming over 60 acres per year. The Inventory of Open Space presented
Natick Open Space and Recreation Plan 2002 11
in Section 5 of this Plan shows less than 300 acres remain of privately owned, unprotected
(i.e. developable) open space). Taken together, these two statistics point to the urgency of
planning now for Natick’s future.
Construction on Open Space
80
70
60
50
Acres
40
30
20
10
0
1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 * 2001 *
* = data still pending
2. Infrastructure
a. Transportation System
Natick is served by multiple transportation modes including major highway systems
(Massachusetts Turnpike and Route 9), local and collector systems (Routes 135, 27, and 16),
and the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA) rail system. Interstate routes
95 (state Route 128) and 495 divide the region into transportation corridors connected by
numerous ―spokes‖ providing access to Worcester (25 miles), Boston (18 miles) and
Providence, R.I. (35 miles), numerous inter-state train and bus facilities, and six airports
within 40 miles (Boston, Manchester, N.H., Bedford, Worcester, Providence, and
Norwood).
The MBTA provides commuter-rail passenger service to Boston and Worcester and is one
of the fastest growing commuter rail lines in the Boston Metropolitan area. The Natick
Neighborhood Bus system connects with the bus station located at Shopper’s World in
Framingham. The two Neighborhood buses, subsidized by the Town of Natick and MBTA’s
Suburban Transportation Program, follow fixed routes through Natick once per hour.
The state has redesigned Route 135 (the east-west highway through the center of town,
between the Framingham and Wellesley borders), and will soon begin reconstruction of the
Natick Open Space and Recreation Plan 2002 12
highway prior to turning the highway over to the town. The redesign provides vastly
improved safety vehicular safety at intersections, improved crosswalks, better sidewalks, and
bicycle lanes.
b. Water Supply System
The current water supply for Natick is drawn from a public water supply system of several
wells, two reservoirs, and a distribution system of water mains located throughout the town.
Problems identified with the existing water supply system include high manganese content,
which is common in New England. According to the Water Dept. Superintendent, Cypress
Wells at Evergreen and the Springvale wells have had a volatile organic compound problem
in the past. The Town of Natick has installed an effective filter treatment system at the
Springvale site, which handles all of north Natick's volatile organic compound problems
adequately and effectively.
Town groundwater resources are protected through the town’s Aquifer Protection District
(APD). Projects proposed within this district must comply with the Bylaw.
c. Sewer Service
Natick sewer service, for the most part, is tied into the Massachusetts Water Resources
Authority (MWRA) sewer extension, which carries the waste to a treatment facility at Deer
Island in Boston Harbor. Many older homes still have septic systems and have not tied into
the public sewer system. As additions and new construction continues, the Town Health
Department and Conservation Commissions urge residents to ―hook-up.‖ The MWRA has
recently been renovating the old MWRA system through Natick the last few years.
3. Long Term Development Patterns
Natick’s zoning map is attached as Map 1B, and an aerial view of Natick is attached as
Map 2A. Until recently, most of Natick’s single-family housing was built in areas with
zoning requirements ranging from 12,000 square feet to 20,000 square feet. The most
significant recent developments have taken place in South Natick in residential zoning of
40,000 square feet (one acre). Most of these subdivisions have opted for the Cluster
Development provision, which allow a greater number of total units, in exchange for leaving
at least 30 percent of the total land area as preserved open space. In recent practice, the
Planning Board has negotiated as much as 50 percent preserved open space.
Natick’s commercial and industrial zoning is concentrated in two parts of town: The
―Golden Triangle‖ area, defined by Route 9, Route 30, and Speen Street, is zoned for
commercial or industrial uses. Additional commercial zoning continues east along Route 9 to
Natick Open Space and Recreation Plan 2002 13
the Wellesley border. The second area is downtown Natick, which constitutes a ―Downtown
Mixed Use District.‖ This zoning allows a mixture of uses, including single and multi-unit
residential, commercial, and offices. Additionally, on the downtown’s north edge are two
small industrial zones, in which lie some of the remaining brick factory buildings from
Natick’s industrial past.
The trends in Natick are to develop buildable uplands, and developers are scrambling to
acquire any remaining buildable lots, which are highly vulnerable and threatened. The
demand for housing in Natick continues to be strong, making building on questionable lots
economically feasible. Another trend is to tear down and infill, particularly in the compact
downtown areas, which provides housing for the large number of commuters – primarily
train riders. Downtown Natick has few dimensional or other restrictions on residential
housing, which makes building on the relatively small lots financially feasible.
Natick also is a prime location for large commercial businesses. The recent developments of
commercial complexes at Apple Hill (MathWorks, etc.), and on Route 9 just east of Route
27 (Cognex, Whitney Place) and further west (Natick Mall, Jordan’s Furniture) show no
indication of abating. TJX has nearly doubled its already large building on Route 30, on the
Natick-Framingham line, across from Cochituate State Park. A high-rise apartment complex
has been proposed at a location at the top of the rise on Speen Street between Route 9 and
Route 30, a stone’s throw from the massive Home Depot home improvement warehouse
store, across from Natick’s newest Courtyard by Marriott hotel. Boston Scientific has
recently been successful in obtaining a helicopter landing permit for a commercial-sized
Sikorsky helicopter, and TJX has indicated its desire to follow suit.
Many recent losses in open space have been partially mitigated by the activism of the
neighborhoods and the town boards’ efforts to preserve portions of the open spaces that
neighborhoods have enjoyed for generations.
In northeast Natick, the Friends of Winter Street Open Space objected to a proposal
to develop a 23-acre section of woodlands and wetlands. After numerous public
hearings and a lawsuit, approximately half of the land was preserved because of
wetlands and vernal pools, and the town purchased 4 acres, known as Winter
Woods, to add to existing town conservation land.
In May 2000, the Town established a Municipal Surplus Property Committee to
consider selling town land to help finance a new middle school. One of the
properties under consideration was the Natick Community Organic Farm, a resource
that is enjoyed by hundreds of community residents. The farm users were successful
in saving the farm from being sold, although the farm still does not enjoy permanent
protection status.
Natick Open Space and Recreation Plan 2002 14
In South Natick, neighbors protested the proposed construction of 21 houses on a
23-acre parcel on Eliot Street. The final plan approved by the Planning Board
allowed 6 house lots, and the owner gave 13 acres, mostly wetlands, to the town as
the Mary E. & Herbert E. Sherman Nature Preserve. Currently in negotiation, the
town may acquire two of the lots along Eliot Street to add to the Nature Reserve.
Current concerns include:
A 55-acre parcel on Route 27 by the Sherborn line, proposed to be rezoned to
accommodate 98 units of age-qualified housing and a large country club;
The 12-acre ―Arthur Morency Woods‖ in West Natick on the North side of Rte 135
at the Framingham line, site of the long-abandoned Framingham sewer beds;
A 20-acre farm off Rockland Street, site of cider mill for generations.
These projects will continue to deplete the amount of available open space, particularly
interconnecting greenways necessary to biodiversity. Natick’s Planning Board and
Conservation Commission work with developers to preserve interconnecting stretches of
open space and trails.
On December 3, 2002, Natick Town Meeting adopted a Zoning Bylaw, developed by the
Planning Board with the active participation of the Open Space Advisory Committee. This
Bylaw provides developers with a Comprehensive Cluster Development option, which
would permit them to build more housing units in large parcels, in exchange for providing
10 percent of the units as affordable housing, and leaving 50 percent of the land as protected
and publicly accessible open space.
The Executive Office of Environmental Affairs’s buildout analysis4 (Map 8) shows 1534
acres of developable land, the vast majority of it with residential zoning. If all this land were
developed, according to the analysis, Natick would have 4,034 additional residents – a 13
percent increase.
According to our Inventory of Lands of Conservation and Recreation Interest (Section 5 of
this Plan), Natick has several categories of land that might be developed.
The most likely to be developed are about 300 acres of privately owned land with no
protection.
4Buildout Maps and Analyses, Town of Natick,
http://commpres.env.state.ma.us/community/cmty_main.asp?communityID=198
Natick Open Space and Recreation Plan 2002 15
The town has a considerable amount of privately owned land with minimal
protection – land that might not be protected in the future. One of the Objectives in
this Plan is, to the extent possible, to seek to improve the protection levels of these
parcels and make the protections permanent.
Finally there are major parcels of land used by town, state or federal government
land that might be declared surplus property at some point. These provide the Town
of Natick with an opportunity to obtain the land before it is developed.
Natick Open Space and Recreation Plan 2002 16
SECTION 4 – ENVIRONMENTAL INVENTORY AND ANALYSIS
A. Geology, Soils and Topography
1. Essential Structure
Natick is dominated by low elevation terrain, which is generally less than 200 feet above
mean sea level. The topographic map of Natick (Map 2B) shows the major high and low
points in town. Uplands vary from the broad, dominant slopes of Pleasant Hill, Carver Hill,
and Drury Hill to the low, rolling areas of Natick Center and West Natick. Elevations range
from roughly 135 feet along the Charles River and Lake Cochituate to 410 feet at Pegan Hill,
the highest point in Natick. From Pegan Hill, a series of four hills with elevations of 300 feet
or greater run along the eastern side of the town up to Route 9. These hills include Carver
Hill (300 feet), Broad Hill (312 feet), Train Hill (300 feet), and Pleasant Hill (313 feet). Drury
Hill and Tom Hill (both with elevations of 300 feet) are the only dominant slopes in western
Natick.
Water bodies and wetland areas cover approximately 13.5 percent of the town's total area. A
nearly continuous chain of lakes and wetlands extends through the town, from north to
south. The water bodies comprising this chain include Lake Cochituate, Fisk Pond, Dug
Pond, and the Indian Brook drainage. This chain continues through the southern portion of
Natick along the Charles River corridor. The northeastern corner of Natick is dominated by
the low-lying Sunkaway area and Nonesuch Pond. The Sunkaway is a low area that crosses
and frequently floods Route 9, and at one time was subject to continual sinking despite the
constant filling and shoring up of the area. Many smaller low-lying areas are scattered
throughout the town.
A 1968-69 U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service soil survey has been
updated. In addition, Coffin and Richardson (1979) provide information on soil
characteristics. See Table 4-1 (General Soil Association), Map 2C (Soils). and Map 2D
(Subsurface Geology).
Natick is covered by a variety of glacial soils. The soils are generally mixed glacial drift on
the drumlin hills; (i.e., Pleasant Hill, Broad Hill, Carver Hill, and Tom Hill); sandy to rocky
soils on the outwash areas; (i.e., the gravel pit on Oak Street, Little County Road, and the
U.S. Army Natick Labs area); and peats and organic mucks in the wetland areas (i.e., the
Sunkaway, Davis Brook, and Indian Brook drainage). Covering almost one-half of Natick
are well-drained, permeable, and usually stone free Hinckley soils, which have good
agricultural potential and can produce large volumes of water from deep wells, but can also
easily absorb sewage effluent. Their coarse substratum provides little filtering action and the
water in wells can be polluted if located near a source of contamination.
Natick Open Space and Recreation Plan 2002 17
Most of the underlying bedrock in Natick is covered by surficial deposits, although bedrock
outcrops are common. The largest area of rock outcrops occurs in the region between
Indian Brook, Dug Pond, Everett Hill, and Davis Brook. Stratified deposits of well
compacted glacial till are the dominant geologic feature in both the Charles River and
Sudbury River watersheds. This till is largely the result of two deglaciation lakes (Lake
Charles and Lake Sudbury) that left these deposits as the glacier receded.
A large preglacial valley is carved into the bedrock between the Sunkaway, Morses Pond,
Coolidge Hill, Indian Brook, and the Charles River. The till deposits in this area are generally
less than 20 feet thick and are comprised of gravel and sands with some clay combined in a
poorly sorted mixture. Several of the town’s water supply wells are located in this large,
water-bearing region.
Table 4-1
General Soil Association
Acres Percentage
Hinckley-Made Land Association 4,704 46
Woodbridge-Paxton Association 2,050 20
Hollis Association 1,740 17
Windor-Deerfield Association 810 8
Muck Association 480 5
Canton-Muck Association 450 4
TOTAL 10,234 100
Source: U.S. Department of Agriculture-Soil Conservation Service
2. Effects on Development, Drinking Water and Wastewater
a. Development
Most of the ―easy‖ (and inexpensive) land to build on has been developed already: the
upland farms and fields. As housing prices have gone up and developers have focused on
more upscale housing, recent developments have focused on more marginal sites: those with
substantial ledge or involving wetlands. One recent development has actually taken the top
off of a hill, setting up a rock processing quarry in the process. We expect this process to
continue.
Natick Open Space and Recreation Plan 2002 18
b. Drinking Water
Natick relies on groundwater for its drinking supplies. Glacial soils provide the primary
medium by which the aquifers are recharged.
c. Wastewater
Because Natick is on the MWRA wastewater system, future development will be tied into
that system. While this will not contribute to problems because of septic systems, it will
continue the drawdown and removal of water from Natick aquifers through the MWRA
system, possible contributing to future shortages of water.
B. Landscape Character
See Map 3 (Unique Features Map)
Natick has a great variety of landscapes – from open rolling farmland with active farming
occurring at Marino’s Lookout Farm, to forested hilltops. The highest point in Natick is
Pegan Hill, 410 feet above sea level on Pegan Lane, owned by The Trustees of Reservations.
West of the entrance to Pegan Hill is an early New England Forestry Foundation
educational forest. To the north are Train Hill, Broad Hill, and Carver Hill, all nearly three
hundred feet high. Natick has many lakes, covering 621 acres, which form a necklace of
water running from Lake Cochituate, originally called Long Pond, in the north to Dug Pond
in the south. A two-minute walk takes you from the frenetic activity of the Natick Mall to
the shores of Lake Cochituate, where fishermen, boaters and bathers peacefully co-exist in
their recreational pursuits.
The one hundred acres donated by the Hunnewell family for the town forest descends from
Walnut Hill to Route 9 at the Sunkaway.
In South Natick, the Charles River cascades over the falls and under a historic stone arch
bridge, as canoers and a variety of birds share the water, after passing through a large
Audubon Society preserve, where deer can be seen grazing in the early morning mist or
twilight evenings. One particularly extraordinary vantage point with incredible views of
Boston is where the Barberry Homes development has been built.
Natick is pleasantly laced with several lakes, ponds, rivers and streams, dotted here and there
with small forests and open agricultural lands. The new ―Sassamon Trace‖ golf course, on
Route 27 and West Street, abuts a large expanse of Sherborn open space and the Natick
High School recreational fields.. Across West Street is a town forest and an additional ball
field. A short drive south on Rockland Street to Everett Street brings you past a cider mill
and out to Route 16 across from Audubon’s Broadmoor Sanctuary. Heading east toward
Natick Open Space and Recreation Plan 2002 19
South Natick village, the views to the south of the Charles River and the large undeveloped
expanses of woodlands on the opposite shore are exquisite, topped only by the turn down
past the historic Bacon library and South Natick waterfall. A right on Pleasant Street brings
you to Marino’s Lookout Farm, a large working farm, part of which is protected by an
agricultural preservation restriction.
Northeasterly Natick, with a large number of wooded areas, is being infilled with newer
Development.
There are numerous trails that are being preserved that partially connect these areas.
C. Water Resources
See Map 4 (Water Resources)
1. Watersheds
Natick is divided in half with two watersheds; the Charles River, which drains the eastern
and southern portions of the town, and the SuAsCo (Sudbury-Assabet-Concord), which
drains the western and northern portions of town. The watershed boundaries are shown on
Map 4. These drainages are classified as Class B waters under Massachusetts regulations
(314 CMR 4.05). The Charles River passes through the southeastern corner of Natick. Major
sub-basins within the Charles River watershed consist of Indian Brook (including Dug
Pond), Davis Brook, and Jennings Pond (which includes the Sunkaway region and Pickerel
Pond). Natick's portion of the SuAsCo watershed includes Lake Cochituate and Fisk Pond,
with their tributary basins of Beaverdam Brook, Course Brook, Pegan Brook and Snake
Brook. Below is a list of all resources under each watershed area:
Natick Open Space and Recreation Plan 2002 20
Table 4-2
Water Resources
SuAsCo Watershed Charles Watershed
Lakes Cochituate Charles River
Little Roundy Nonesuch Pond
Fisk Pond Pickerel Pond
Course Brook Mud Pond
Meadow Pond Jennings Pond
Beaverdam Brook Morses Pond
Snake Brook Dug Pond
Pegan Brook Indian Brook
Wildwood/Speen Pond Davis Brook
Saddlebrook Pond
MacArthur Pond
Bacon Pond
Grist Mill Ponds
2. Surface Water
Water bodies and associated wetlands in Natick comprise a total of 1,287 acres,
approximately 13.5 percent of the town’s gross acreage. The largest water body is Lake
Cochituate, which covers roughly 440 acres within Natick. A complete list of ponds and
brooks is given in Table 4-2 above.
Town staff and volunteers secured a grant from Massachusetts Department of
Environmental Protection through the Massachusetts Department of Environmental
Management for the purpose of reducing heavy loads of sediment into Snake Brook and
Lake Cochituate.
3. Aquifer Recharge Areas
The Aquifer and Recharge areas are shown on Map 4. The main aquifer generally stripes the
town’s subsurface from North to South, links to the north with Wayland and stretches over
to Weston, to the east to Framingham then south, to Sherborn. The recharge areas are
typically found in the second concentric circle around the aquifer area, but often sporadically
shifting. From the information on Map 4, it appears more land in Natick is aquifer or
recharge area than not.
4. Flood Hazard Areas
According to the Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) for Natick (community Panel Numbers
250207 000l B to 007 B), dated February 1, 1980, several areas within Natick are located in
Zone A (i.e., areas subject to the 100-year flood). Narrow bands of Zone A are associated
Natick Open Space and Recreation Plan 2002 21
with Lake Cochituate, Fisk Pond, Dug Pond, Nonesuch Pond, and Morses Pond. Areas of
Zone A also border the Charles River, Indian Brook, Bogle Brook (Jennings Pond area), and
Snake Brook. A narrow to wide (greater than 1,000 feet) band of Zone A borders Davis
Brook from Rockland Street to the Charles River. An extensive area of Zone A is located
along the Natick-Sherborn line between Indian Brook, West Street, Windsor Avenue,
Sylvester Road, and Cochituate State Park. Maps may be viewed at the Natick Community
Development Office. The Wetlands Maps coordinate with the Assessor’s Map and include
100-year flood plane lines on them.
5. Wetlands
The Commonwealth of Massachusetts designates official wetlands in the state. Natick has
this information located on maps with scales of 1‖=100’ that also includes flood plain
information and transition zones. Any activity within this 100 feet and/or within 200 feet of
River or perennial stream is subject to the discretion of the Conservation Commission, as
per the Wetlands Protection Act (Chapter 131, section 40), River’s Protection Act (1996-
310 CMR 10.58), Wetlands Regulations 310 CMR 10.00, Stormwater Management Policy
and Natick’s new Wetlands Protection Bylaw.
The Wetlands Protection Bylaw, Article 30, section 2 of the Natick Bylaws, passed Town
Meeting on April 27, 2000, and took effect the following August 24th. The new Bylaw
increased the restrictions placed on wetlands in town by providing a larger buffer area or
transition area where poisons, toxins, etc. could be filtered out prior to entering the resource
area. In addition, it provides corridors to critters and specific species. It also provides
stormwater management controls by providing additional storage area for access water. This
Article can be accessed at the Natick website: www.Natickma.org under Conservation
Commission- 4. Wetlands Bylaw.
In addition, the Charles River in Natick is protected by the Massachusetts Rivers Protection
Act, MGL Chapter 131 Section 40, adopted in 1996. More information is available
at:http://www.state.ma.us/dep/brp/ww/files/riverqa.htm.
D. Vegetation
Vegetation within Natick is typical of the eastern Massachusetts region. Upland areas are
dominated by a mixed deciduous and coniferous tree line, while the low-lying wetlands are
predominantly red maples. The undeveloped open fields in Natick have combinations of
upland grasses, goldenrods, and asters with scrub shrubbery dominated by roses and
brambles. Wetland communities form combinations of trees, shrub, and herbaceous layers,
which are listed below. Some wetland areas exist as either shrub swamps or herbaceous
marshes. A large portion of the Sunkaway is an Atlantic white cedar swamp, which is much
less common than red maple swamps.
Natick Open Space and Recreation Plan 2002 22
Several years ago, a field survey was conducted at various locations within the town (i.e., The
Sunkaway, Pegan Cove Park, Indian Brook, and the Bacon Street Water Supply Area) to
identify representative vegetational communities. The more common species observed in
Natick's uplands and wetlands are listed in Table 4-3 (Common Plant Species)
Table 4-3
Common Wetland and Upland Plant Species Observed in Natick
Upland Vegetation Wetland Vegetation
Tree Layer: Tree Layer:
Red Oak Red Maple
White Oak Ash
White Pine
Gray Birch Shrub Layer:
Black Cherry Alder
Sweet Pepperbush
Shrub Layer: Highbush Blueberry
Honeysuckle Swamp Dogwood
Witch Hazel Arrow-wood
European Buckthorn Swamp Azalea
Multiflora Rose Withe-rod
Bramble
Herbaceous Layer:
Herbaceous Layer: Sedges
Upland Grasses Common Cattail
Goldenrod Cinnamon Fern
Club Moss Skunk Cabbage
Common Dewberry Hydrophilic Grasses
E. Fisheries and Wildlife
1. Inventory
The topography in Natick encourages plant diversity and in the undeveloped areas, and in
turn creates cover and food for birds, mammals, amphibians, reptiles, and fish. For most
species, the best habitats are found in areas that are well watered, have abundant understory
vegetation, and are relatively free of human intervention. For some game species, such as
white-tail deer or beaver, the size of the contiguous range is important. Recently, sightings of
moose, coyotes, beaver, turkeys, minks, river otter, red fox have become more common.
White tail deer frequent the town. Specific wildlife data for Natick are not readily available;
however, based on the Charles River Corridor Plan, Charles River Watershed Association,
the presence of species listed in Table 4-4 (Wildlife Species in Natick) can be inferred.
Natick Open Space and Recreation Plan 2002 23
Table 4-4
Wildlife Species in Natick
Birds
Migratory/songbirds: bunting, sparrow, towhee, cardinal, goldfinch, oriole,
vireos, and warblers (some rare)
Birds of prey: hawks and owls
Waterfowl: geese, ducks and teal
Marsh and rium birds/waders: rail, woodcock, bittern (rare), and heron
Upland game birds: grouse, quail and pheasant
Great Blue, Black-crowned Night, and Green Herons are common along
the Charles River.
Reptiles/Amphibians
Frogs, salamanders (some rare), snakes, toads and turtles
Small Mammals
Beaver, chipmunk, fox, muskrat, otter, rabbit, raccoon, skunk, squirrel,
weasel, mink, fisher, and coyote
Large Mammals
White tailed deer
Source: Charles River Corridor Plan, Charles River Watershed Assoc.
Fishing is a very popular recreational activity in Natick. Largemouth bass, yellow perch,
bullheads, pickerel, sunfish, and white suckers are the primary warm-water species caught.
Few of the streams in the Charles River watershed, however, are capable of supporting
natural populations of cold-water fish. The region relies on stocking of several streams and
ponds to support a ―put-and-take‖ fishery for rainbow and brown trout. For example, a total
of approximately 300 rainbow, brown trout, bass, salmon, and tiger muskie are released into
Lake Cochituate, Dug Pond, and the Charles River annually. The fish-stocking program is
managed by the Massachusetts Division of Fisheries and Wildlife. For updates on the
stocking program, go to: http://www.state.ma.us/dfwele/dfw/dfwrec.htm
In addition to the fish stocking programs, the Division of Fisheries and Wildlife, in
conjunction with other state and federal agencies, have begun a program to restore
anadromous fish runs in the Charles River. It is anticipated that the once abundant shad,
alewife, and blueback herring populations will begin to increase once the construction of fish
ladders along the Charles River has been completed, and sixty miles of the Charles River will
again be open to anadromous fish.
2. Vernal Pools
The Division of Fisheries and Wildlife, Natural Heritage & Endangered Species Program
(NHESP) certifies vernal pools among communities. Presently, there exist 12 certified vernal
pools in Natick. The program certifies application submitted to them based on a list of
Natick Open Space and Recreation Plan 2002 24
criteria and information submitted to their program. The application identifies the vernal
pool by its location, project description and gives it a number shown below:
Table 4-5
Certified Vernal Pools:
1. #2777 109 Pleasant Street
2. # 905 Winter Street
3. # 906 Winter Street
4. #2023 Brandon School
5. #2413 15.5 Oakland St
6. #2713 46 Rathbun Rd
7. # West Street
8. # Fairview Avenue
9. #7121 132 Everett Street (east/west)
10. #1982 #1 –South of 12 Front St
11. # 1983 #2- Southwest of 12 Front
12. #1984 #3- North of 12 Front St.
13. #1985 (decertified) #4- (Decertified)
3. Corridors for Wildlife Migration
The Charles River, which offers a natural wildlife corridor, supports great blue herons, black-
crowned night herons, and green herons (Ron McAdow:
http://www.tiac.net/users/rmcadow/ChasRiverHTML/ChasR04.html), as well as a large
number of more common waterfowl.
4. Rare Species
The Massachusetts Natural Heritage Program has identified the rare plant threadfoot
(Podostemum ceratophyllum), a State-listed Species of Special Concern, as occurring within
the riverine habitat of the Charles River. The extremely rare plant sandplain gerardia
(Agalinas acuta) is a species of highest protection priority and has been historically recorded
in Natick. The rare plant whorled pogonia (Isotria verticillata) was historically recorded in
the region and is likely to be found in the semi-acid woodland soils of Natick as well.
The Natural Heritage Program has recorded the Cooper’s Hawk (Accipiter Cooper II);
Spotted Turtle (Clemmys Guttata); Mystic Valley Amphipod (Crangonyx Aperrans) (a
crustacean); and the Turret Snail (Valvata Sincera Boreal) as present in Natick.
http://www.state.ma.us/dfwele/dfw/nhesp/townn.htm
Two uncommon animal species are likely to occur within the town. The rare blue spotted
salamander (Ambystoma laterale) and the ecologically sensitive spotted salamander
(Ambystoma maculatum) have been sighted ten times in Natick between 1979 and 1981.
Natick Open Space and Recreation Plan 2002 25
The Massachusetts Natural Heritage Program suggests that protection of streamsides that
provide habitat for the salamanders would benefit both of these species.
F. Scenic Resources and Unique Environments
(See Map 3 – Unique Features)
1. Scenic Landscapes
The Massachusetts Audubon Society’s Broadmoor Wildlife Sanctuary is a large and well-
maintained natural area located along the Charles River in South Natick and neighboring
Sherborn. Broadmoor includes woodlands and meadows, but is best known for its water. A
boardwalk traverses Indian Brook and its wetlands areas, giving the public, and particularly
schoolchildren, a first-hand knowledge of the functions and importance of wetlands.
Lake Cochituate consists of three interconnected ponds, all within the Cochituate State Park.
The park is enjoyed as many as 200,000 visitors each year, many from urban areas in and
around Boston. They come to enjoy swimming, boating, and picnicking. Although houses
surround most of the lake, the state park owns a strip abutting the lake, providing natural
scenery for park visitors.
The Hunnewell Town Forest has several large strands of White Plines and Hemlocks, and is
entered by a path along Little Jennings Pond, a scenic wetlands area.
Lookout Farm offers a pick-your-own fruits and a farm store. Lookout is one of several
remaining farms in South Natick offering picturesque vistas of open space in a relatively
quiet, undisturbed section of town.
The new Sassamon Trace golf course, formed from the capping of Natick’s landfill and
abutting former apple orchards in Sherborn, and surrounded by school recreational fields
and wetlands, presents an imposing feature, part of a broad expanse of open lands in both
Natick and Sherborn.
Natick has a number of designated scenic roads: Winter and Frost streets in the northeast
corner of town; Bacon and Walnut streets north of the town center; and many streets in the
more rural southern part of town: Cottage Street, Dover Road, Everett Street, Farwell Street,
Glen Street, Glenwood Street, Pegan Lane, Pleasant Street, Rockland Street, South Street,
Union Street, and Woodland Street.
Town departments and community groups are working at connecting all of these wonderful
places to each other, to conservation lands, to other towns, and even to the Natick Mall and
Natick Open Space and Recreation Plan 2002 26
businesses whose employees use or would like to use alternative means of transportation.
These efforts are positive steps at preserving and utilizing to its best advantage the invaluable
open space remaining in Natick.
2. Major Characteristic or Unusual Geological Features
Natick’s geological features have already been discussed in prior portions of this Plan,
particularly section 4.A (Geology, Soils and Topography) and section 4.B (Landscape
Characteristics).
3. Cultural, Archeological and Historic Areas
Natick’s origins as a praying Indian town means it is also rich in archeological sites
throughout the town. One of numerous Indian burial grounds is located on Pond Street
within a block of downtown. Recent improvements to the intersection of Route 16, Union
Street and Pleasant Street unearthed Indian remains and artifacts, as did the construction of
the Massachusetts Turnpike ramps at Route 30. Several residential building projects either
unearthed similar archaeological materials, or were suspected of doing so. The Legislative
grants to the Natick Indians of thousands of acres of land in South Natick and around Long
Pond (now Lake Cochituate) make it extremely likely that many more such sites exist.
In addition to its natural attractions, Natick has a number of areas of historical interest. The
John Eliot Historic District, in the center of South Natick, is the site of the original Praying
Indian settlement of 1651. This area is still has the character of the early 19th Century, with
Colonial, Federalist, and Greek Revival architecture. The Henry Wilson Historic District,
running along West Central Street in downtown Natick, preserves a number of houses from
the mid-19th Century, as well as the cobbler shop once owned by Henry Wilson, 18th Vice
President of the United States. Downtown Natick also includes Main Street, dominated by
three and four-story brick buildings built immediately after the Great Fire of 1874.
One of these buildings, the Old Fire House, is currently being renovated by The Center for
Arts in Natick (TCAN) as a regional center for visual and performing arts. TCAN is
currently operating out of a temporary storefront on Main Street, around the corner from its
permanent location. Performances of plays, poetry, music, and exhibits of artwork, quilts,
sculptures, etc. are scheduled daily.
The Town Common becomes the town gathering-place during warm months, with weekly
outdoor concerts at the bandstand, farmer’s markets, flea markets, and holiday festivals for
families. The entire downtown area has been revitalized in recent years by the new
municipal complex and library, along with restaurants such as the Dolphin, Dah Mee, Bakery
on the Common, and Park Street Ice Cream.
Natick Open Space and Recreation Plan 2002 27
Walnut Hill School, which holds performances and exhibits and also supplies talent to
TCAN, is world-renowned as an educational facility for high schoolers gifted in the arts.
Natick’s downtown historic Morse Institute Library has been more than doubled in size,
with the new addition architecturally sensitive to the old, as provided in Mary Ann Morse’s
will. South Natick’s historic Bacon Free Library, overlooking South Natick Dam, also houses
the Natick Historical Society and its collection of Natick’s history and natural history.
4. Unique Environments
Natick has no areas designated as Areas of Critical Environmental Concern. However, there
are important ecosystems. The area including Broadmoor Wildlife Sanctuary appears on the
Division of Fisheries and Wildlife’s BioMap,5 showing an important area for biodiversity
based on the occurrence of rare species. Broadmoor provides critical habitat for many
species that can be observed by walking the many trails that thread through the sanctuary.
Additionally, the Charles River corridor provides a habitat for the ―threadfoot‖ plant, as well
as animals including waterfowl, white-tailed deer, mink, and otter. A unique Atlantic white
cedar swamp is located around Mud Pond in the ―Sunkaway‖ area. More information on
plants and animal species, and ecosystems with Natick are found elsewhere in this section.
G. Environmental Challenges
Risks for Natick’s Water and Recreational Resources
Natick depends entirely on well water from its underground aquifers, which are overlaid, in
most areas, with residential and commercial development. Thus there is the ever-present
risk that an oil spill or other hazardous waste spill will endanger the town’s water supply
and/or the town’s recreational resources in Lake Cochituate, Dug Pond and other
recreational facility.
This is not just a theoretical possibility. During the last 15 years in Natick, hazardous
materials have been released to the environment at about 306 locations. Of these, 270 have
been releases of oil, 11 have been releases of oil and hazardous materials, and 25 have been
releases of just hazardous material. State Department of Environmental Projection records
show that 250 of these sites have already been cleaned up to the satisfaction of the
Department.
5Massachusetts Executive Office of Environmental Affairs, Department of Fisheries, Wildlife, and
Environmental Law Enforcement, Division of Fisheries and Wildlife, Natural Heritage and
Endangered Species Program, ―BioMap; Guiding Land Conservation in Massachusetts‖ (2001),
p. 51.
Natick Open Space and Recreation Plan 2002 28
Twenty of the remaining 50 or so sites are relatively new and have not yet been reviewed by
the state. Of the remaining 30 sites, the state has classified two as extremely important (Tier
1A):
The Army Research facility off Kansas Street, which involves the substantial
release of a variety of hazardous materials.
The Clean Corporation, a dry-cleaning establishment off North Main Street,
which involves the discharge of large volumes of hazardous cleaning fluids.
Both of these sites are being cleaned up but they both still endanger Natick’s water supply as
well as the recreational resources of Lake Cochituate.
The state has classified an additional three contaminated sites as significant importance (Tier IC):
The Lilja School oil leak (off Oak Street). This oil leak endangers Natick’s water
pumped at the Morse Pond well. It is being cleaned up but it does not yet meet
state standards.
The Industrial Corp. is site located in the East Natick Industrial Park. This site
involves the discharge of oil and is under substantial control.
The Microwave Development site is also located in the East Natick Industrial
Park. This site involves hazardous materials and is in substantial control.
The approximately 25 remaining sites, which are classified as of moderate concern (Tier II)
by DEP, are being cleaned but in most cases still require monitoring.
The major issue for Natick appears to be, not so much the historic hazardous waste spills,
but monitoring existing residential development and commercial developments to make sure
that all reasonable precautions are being taken to avoid additional spills. For the last twenty
years the Planning Board has imposed Aquifer Protection District controls on all new or
redeveloped commercial and industrial sites located over or near the town’s aquifers. Each
of these permits mandates a variety of specific requirements that each property owner must
abide by. It is not clear, however, that any official in the Town of Natick is inspecting any of
these sites to make sure that the Planning Board’s requirements are being met.
Another concern is the town’s stormwater drainage systems. Most of these drain in to major
water bodies or streams, and as a result contaminants placed in remote culverts can soon
find their way into Lake Cochituate or the Charles River. There may well be a need for the
regular monitoring of these drainage systems so that contaminant spills located far from any
water body can be quickly identified.
Natick Open Space and Recreation Plan 2002 29
Natick is already taking a leadership role in helping to forestall pollutions spills from Town-
owned facilities and from Town operations. Last year the Selectmen hired an Environmental
Control Officer who reports directly to the Town Administrator. He is currently engaged in
training all Town officials as to how they can dramatically reduce and control waste spillage.
It is entirely possible that he could take the initiative in developing other types of monitoring
for private commercial and residential developments located above Natick’s aquifer.
Landfills. The Natick Landfill on West Street just off Rte 27 has recently been transformed
into a 75-acre golf course located in both Natick and the Town of Sherborn.
Chronic Flooding. The town is undergoing a study of flooding on the south and west sides
of Walnut Hill.
Ground and Surface Water Pollution. To reduce the deleterious effects of non-point-
source pollution on water bodies (and the human bodies that use them), the US EPA
recommends that catch basins be cleaned out twice yearly. That is much more than has been
the local practice. Natick’s streams and ponds are also in need of attention.
Impaired Water Bodies: Lake Cochituate. Water quality in Lake Cochituate, the major
recreational lake in eastern Massachusetts (and Boston's first public drinking water reservoir,
1848-1931), remains good enough for swimming, and some of its fish are safe to eat by
some people. Several projects are underway to repair the damage:
Snake Brook 319 Project: Starting in 2002, this multi-year project will remove
NPS pollution that grows thick weeds and algal mats in the mouth of Snake
Brook, on the Natick-Wayland town line. Similar projects are anticipated for
other impacted parts of Lake Cochituate.
Metropolitan Area Planning Council has begun a mapping project of the Lake
Cochituate watershed. It is designed to coordinate with and support the Snake
Brook 319 Project
U.S. Army Natick Laboratories (SBCCOM, or "NLabs") has been conducting an
ongoing multi-million-dollar CERCLA (SuperFund) groundwater clean-up
project since 1989. It involves various pollutants, potentially affecting both Lake
Cochituate and the Springvale Pumping Station (Natick's primary drinking-water
wells). Extensive measurements and restoration activities are closely coordinated
with environmental agencies, and provide a wealth of useful data
Natick Open Space and Recreation Plan 2002 30
The Department of Environmental Management is completing a Management Plan for
Cochituate State Park that details that park’s natural and historical resources and provides
guidelines for land stewardship.6
Pegan Cove Park. Pegan Cove Park is 22 acres of choice, wooded shoreline property on
the South Pond of Lake Cochituate, close to downtown Natick. It is the historic site of the
Pegan Brook Filter Beds (1893-1947), which once removed NPS pollution from Pegan
Brook before it entered the lake system. This property was taken as part of U.S. Natick
Army Laboratories when it was established about 1955, and was taken back from the Army
in 1974. It is owned by Cochituate State Park (Mass. DEM), and is leased to Natick under
the joint administration of the Conservation and Recreation commissions; a second 25-year
lease was renegotiated in March 2000. As part of that lease, the town and state are working
together to identify and eliminate sources of pollution.
6Cochituate State Park Management Plan; Guidelines for Operations and Land Stewardship,
Commonwealth of Massachusetts, Exectuive Office of Envinromental Affairs, Department of
Environmental Management (Working Draft, May 2002)
Natick Open Space and Recreation Plan 2002 31
SECTION 5 – INVENTORY OF LANDS OF CONSERVATION AND
RECREATION INTEREST
This section provides an inventory and map of areas that are important to Natick due to
their current open space value and/or recreational use. Private as well as public sites have
been included. Though continued open space or recreational use is not guaranteed on those
private sites identified, these parcels nonetheless are important to the Town. Undeveloped
private lands provide aesthetic amenities, maintain the community’s rural character, and
assist in protecting the Town’s natural resource base.
The inventory is divided into two overall categories based on Massachusetts Division of
Conservation Services definitions: protected and unprotected lands.
Protected lands are private, public, or semi-public parcels that are permanently
committed for conservation purposes (which is not true for all public land).
Public land dedicated to open space or recreation falls under the protection of
Article 97 of the State Constitution. Private and semi-public land (such as Mass.
Audubon’s Broadmoor Sanctuary) is protected by a conservation restriction.
(For information on conservation restrictions and other methods of land
protection, see Appendix E.)
The unprotected lands category is a mixture of Town-owned and other public
and private land (including all land enrolled in MA General Law Ch. 61, 61A & B
and other private lands which due to low intensity of use add to the quality of
open space in the Town). The unprotected lands are divided into five sub-
categories that are: park and recreation land; multi-purpose open space land;
Chapter 61B private recreation land; Chapter 61 forest and wooded land; and
Chapter 61A agricultural land.
The owner (for public land), street address (for private land), acreage, and map parcel is
noted for each site. Ownership and assessment information is based on fiscal year 2000
assessor’s records. The parcels are also included on Map 5 (Open Space Map).
As part of the Inventory, Gwen Kermode, Director of Human Services for Natick,
conducted a survey of accessibly of town open spaces, based on the requirements of the
Americans with Disabilities Act. The ADA Access Self Evaluation is included as
Appendix F.
Natick Open Space and Recreation Plan 2002 32
Open Space Inventory
Address Map/Parcel Acreage Name
Private Lands (Protected)
Conservation Restrictions (under the Trustee of Reservation TTOR) Chapter 61 Forested
Leach Lane 46:4 92.510 Arnold Hunnewell
Leach Lane 54:80 55.190 Francis Oakes Hunnewell
Total 147.700
Conservation Restrictions
FIELD CROPS
Hunnewell Farms 55:53 .99
Hunnewell Farms 55:54,59 4.03
Fair’s Lane 69:36 11.320 A. Hunnewell Audubon
Conservation Restriction and under
Chapter 61A
23 Glenwood Street 69:39 30.670 A. Hunnewell Audubon
Conservation Restriction and under
Chapter 61A
Total 47.010
Total Conservation Restriction 194.710
Chapter 61B (Private Recreational)
WETLAND
155 Glen Street 78:4A 54.820 A. Hunnewell Audubon
Conservation Restriction
Total 54.820
Total Chapter 61B Total 54.820
Agricultural Preservation Restriction
110 Glen Street 74:12 10.000 Orchards
Marino Farms 70:05 47.200 Was Ch.61A
Marino Farms 75:10 59.200 Was Ch.61A
Total 116.400
Total Agricultural Preservation Restriction (APR) 116.400
Natick Open Space and Recreation Plan 2002 33
Open Space Inventory
Address Map/Parcel Acreage Name
Charitable State Exception Status GL 59 Section 5
MASS AUDUBON SOCIETY (Charitable State Exemption Status GL 59 Section 5)
282 Eliot Street 72:06 23.380
South Street 73:01 189.700
79 South Street 73:02 14.500
262 Eliot Street 73:23 1.100
250 Eliot Street 73:7 18.670
153 Glen Street 74:1 13.070
20 South Street 74:11 14.000
Glen Street 74:1A 22.740
272 Eliot Street 76:3 5.740
95 South Street 77:6A 13.600
91 South Street 77:6B 2.000
125 South Street 77:7 62.900
100 South Street 77:8A 59.800
Total 441.200
TRUSTEES OF RESERVATIONS
50 Pegan Lane 79:05 27.340
Pegan Lane end 79:07 3.730
Total 31.070
Total “Charitable State Exemption” Restriction 472.270
NEW ENGLAND FORESTRY FOUNDATION PROTECTED LAND
Pegan Lane 79:04 32.470 Chapter 61 Forested
Total 32.470
Total New England Forestry Foundation 32.470
Deed Restriction
PERMANENT WITH PUBLIC ACCESS
Algonquian Road 45:18 12.710 Parcel A
Algonquian Road 45:23A 12.290 Parcel B
Algonquian Road 45:75 20.360 Parcel C
53:42 0.127
53:44 2.690
Farm Hill Village (w/trails only) 62:9FA 16.500
Farm Hill Village (w/trails only) 62:9FB 1.060
Farm Hill Village (w/trails only) 62:9FC 1.660
Farm Hill Village (w/trails only) 62:9FD 2.180
Total 69.577
Total Deed Restriction 69.577
Natick Open Space and Recreation Plan 2002 34
Open Space Inventory
Address Map/Parcel Acreage Name
Protected Park Land
PROTECTED PARK LAND
Off Border Road 30:37B 1.170
30:37D 1.500 Town of Wellesley
Total 2.670
Total Protected Parkland 2.670
Private Cemeteries
PRIVATE CEMETERIES
18:11 2.800 239 N. Main Street Cemetery
42:23 10.600 Dell Park Cemetery
(Pond/Cemetery St)
50:36 16.440 Roman Catholic
50:73 31.750 Dell Park Cemetery
54:38 - 40, Jewish Cemetery
54:41, Jewish Cemetery
54:45A,B,C Jewish Cemetery
54:46, Jewish Cemetery
54:47, Jewish Cemetery
54:48A,B,C 5.144 Jewish Cemetery
69:37, 38 19.500 Glenwood Cemetery
Total 86.234
Total Private Cemeteries 86.234
TOTAL PRIVATE LANDS (PROTECTED) 1,029.151
Natick Open Space and Recreation Plan 2002 35
Open Space Inventory
Address Map/Parcel Acreage Name
Private Lands (Some Level of Protection)
Chapter 61A (Agricultural)
TRUCK CROPS – 120 day, right of first refusal
2 Speen Street 57:3 18.550 James Geoghegan
305 Eliot Street 72:39E 11.857 P. Flagg
Total 30.407
FIELD CROPS – 120 day, right of first refusal
8 Wayside Road 66:9 14.400 J. McHugh
155 Glen Street 74:1B 11.020 A. Hunnewell
Total 25.420
PASTURE – 120 day, right of first refusal
Rockland Street 66:10 6.530 M. Kozlowski
159 R Cottage Street 67:14 8.400 J. McHugh
150 Cottage Street 67:15 1.370 J. McHugh
Total 16.300
Total – Chapter 61A (Agricultural) 72.127
Chapter 61B (Private Recreational)
120 day, right of first refusal
Philips Pond Road 69:55 1.255 Philips Pond Home Owners
55 Pleasant Street 70:5A 8.870 Lookout Ridge Improvement
Assoc.
Lookout Farm Road 70:5Y 1.410 Lookout Ridge Improvement
Assoc.
Lookout Farm Road 70:5Z 0.045 Lookout Ridge Improvement
Assoc.
Everett Street 71:2HA 11.720 TRS Hopewell Farms
115 Glen Street 74:3 1.640 Philips Pond Home Owners
Philips Pond Road 74.3A 0.286 Philips Pond Home Owners
Philips Pond Road 74.3B 0.435 Philips Pond Home Owners
Philips Pond Road 74.3C 0.091 Philips Pond Home Owners
Philips Pond Road 74.3D 7.000 Philips Pond Home Owners
Glen Street 74:5 3.430 Philips Pond Home Owners
Total 36.182
Total – Chapter 61B (Private Recreational) 36.182
Chapter 61 (Forested)
120 day, right of first refusal
1 Dorset Lane 38:1A 65.404 Morgan Palmer
Hoosak Road 46:1Q 0.781 Hillhurst Realty Trust
Hoosak Road 46:1W 0.490
Total 66.675
Total – Chapter 61 (Forested) 66.675
Natick Open Space and Recreation Plan 2002 36
Deed Restriction
PERMANENT WITH NO PUBLIC ACCESS
Speen Street 33:61 32.100 Fairway Estates
Total 32.100
Total Deed Restriction 32.100
TOTAL PRIVATE LANDS (SOME FORMS OF 207.084
PROTECTION)
Natick Open Space and Recreation Plan 2002 37
Open Space Inventory
Address Map/Parcel Acreage Name
Private Lands (Unprotected)
Major Land Holdings (Limited Public Access for Trails)
44:364 10.831 MetroWest Medical
45:5 29.558 MetroWest Medical
Total 40.389
Other Major Land Holdings Privately Owned (Unprotected Open Space)
South 72.684
Southwest 59.340
Downtown 1.080
Central 83.790
Northeast 49.037
West 25.159
Total 291.090
Total – Other Major Land Holdings Privately 291.090
Owned
TOTAL PRIVATE LANDS (UNPROTECTED) 331.479
Natick Open Space and Recreation Plan 2002 38
Open Space Inventory
Address Map/Parcel Acreage Name
Public Lands (Protected)
Deed Restriction
TOWN LANDS
Recreation and Parks Department
155 N. Main Street 27:151A 1.320
27:151C 2.230
Total 3.550
CONSERVATION COMMISSION
Winter Woods 4:10 8.090
164 Oak Street 14:70 5.270
192 Oak Street 14:69 2.930
41 Winter Street 3:1 0.234
49 Winter Street 4:11 0.230
45 Winter Street 4:12 0.250
Oak Hill Road end 4:20A 0.075
257 Oak Street 8:17C 0.300
231 Oak Street off 8:35 6.300
8:35D .060
252 Oak Street 8:6A 0.234
10 Pryor Road 13.387 2.920
15 Pryor Road 13:126A 2.530
25 Pryor Road 13:147 3.006
20 Pickerel Road 14.71 2.320
Emerson Street end 14:104 1.390
Zero Pamela Road 14:112 4.000
54 Harwood Road 14:16 5.350
Pickerel Road end 14:68 5.200
13 Pickerel Road 15:103 0.434
15 Peterson Street off 15:108 1.300
15:108A 1.115
29 Upland Road 15:180 0.112
20.3 .020
467 Worcester Street 20.97A 0.434
Harwood Road 20:102A 25.000
429 Worcester Street 20:97B 14.390
429 Worcester Street 20:97C 2.380
429 Worcester Street 20:97F 0.920
241 Worcester Road 21:240B 8.000
21:240BB .530
31 Grove Road 21:52A 0.128
10 Shore Road 21:9A 0.084
42-1/2 Bacon Street 29:23A 0.040
24 Edwards Road 41:24 0.170
128 Speen Street 41:83A 0.400
111 West Central 42:36 00.460
111 West Central 42:37 7.080
111 West Central 42:45B 5.100
Winter Street 8:78 00.457
Winter Street 8:79 1.048
Winter Street 8:80 2.234
Hunter Court 43:402 6.160
Natick Open Space and Recreation Plan 2002 39
Open Space Inventory
Address Map/Parcel Acreage Name
CONSERVATION COMMISSION- (Continued)
14 Sylvia Avenue 48:37 0.190
17 Spooner Avenue 48:38 0.370
.300
48:49B .234
49:192 .277
26 Mill Street 49:225 11.600
Off Farwell Street 60:7D 1.500
90 Cottage Street 61:17 2.500
Mary E. & Herbert E. 54:65 Lot 4 .918
Sherman Nature Preserve 54:65 Lot 9 12.005
Cottage Street 61:7E 2.860
64:64 3.550
South Main Street 65:01 13.710
South Main Street 65:1B 1.159
South Main Street 65:1C 1.159
61 Cottage Street 67:17 0.090
186 Eliot Street 68:11 1.600
Pegan Lane 79:6 0.620
146 Cottage Street 67:29D .070
146 Cottage Street 67:30D 13.000
Total 196.397
RECREATION AND PARKS
179 Boden Lane 31:258A/B .060 Cole Recreation Center
179 Boden Lane 31:259 9.870 Cole Recreation Center
185 Speen Street 33:35A 3.260 J. J. Lane Park
79 Walnut Street 35:1 2.130 Loker Park Tot Lot
41 Washington Avenue 35:300 2.530 Navy Yard Field
West Central Street 40:72 2.250 Henry Wilson Memorial Building
Pond Street 43:255 0.300 Indian Burial Ground
Cottage Street/Rte. 27 44:34 0.190 Cottage Square
20 South Main Street 44:131A 0.660 Natick Common
12 South Main Street 44:131B 0.760 Natick Common
3 East Central Street 44:131C 0.120 Natick Common
5 East Central Street 44:131D 0.110 Natick Common
90 E. Central Street 44:288 0.180 Lincoln Square
9 Chester 44:380 3.660 Coolidge Play Field
38 School Street Extension 52:150 19.000 Coolidge Park
Sheridan Street end 52:164 19.240 Coolidge Park
23 Pleasant Street 63.21 2.000 S. Natick Multi-Purpose
Pleasant Street 63:21B 0.290
33 Glen Street 63:14 8.000 Glen Street Park
7 Pleasant Street 63:23 0.562 South Dan Park
53 Eliot Street 63:61 .796 Old Town Park
24 Pleasant Street 64:48 11.210 Hunnewell Park
Total 87.178
Natick Open Space and Recreation Plan 2002 40
Open Space Inventory
Address Map/Parcel Acreage Name
Cemeteries (Public Land)
39:38 0.390 Boden Lane Cemetery
54:60AB 0.450 South Natick
Total 0.840
Total Town Owned (Protected Open space) 287.965
STATED-OWNED (Protected – Open Space)
Lake Cochituate State Park 151.000 Pegan Cove*/Camp
Arrowhead/Under DEM
Please note that 11.21 acres remain under state after TJX Land swap - Map 11 Parcel 27
* Park development funded under Division of Conservation Services
Total 151.000
Total State Owned (Protected Open Space) 151.000
TOTAL PUBLIC LANDS (PROTECTED) 438.965
Natick Open Space and Recreation Plan 2002 41
Open Space Inventory
Address Map/Parcel Acreage Name
Public Lands (Un-Protected)
TOWN LAND (with Deed/Covenant Restriction) – Hunnewell First Refusal Right/Reversionary Clause
440 Worcester Street 20:2 97.430 Town Forest
Total 97.430
SCHOOLS/PLAYGROUNDS
18 E. Evergreen Road 9.980 Bennett-Hemenway
24 Rutledge Road 19:18B 2.470
19:19 1.250
19:20 1.250
19:22C .160
19:22E 6.860 Wilson Playground
27:151B .580
7 Oak Street 29:271 8.700
Mill/Hartford Street 32:13 14.200 Kennedy
32:185 .050
32:185A .040
32:46 6.880 Brown Playground
80 Hartford Street 32:47A 2.420
32:48 11.700
32:48B .490
124 Pond Street 50:18, 18B, 18C 51.720 High School/Memorial Beach
South Main Street/Pitt Street 51:284A/B 7.300 Johnson
West Street 59:10A 19.210
59:52 2.205
Durant Road/West Street 59:8, 9 24.300 Forested Property
63:40 27.020 Community Garden Farm
97 Eliot 63:42A 24.980 Memorial Playground
Total 223.765
TOWN LAND (Selectmen)
15 Bayberry Road 0.181
Euclid Circle 14:111 0.180 Selectmen
5 Megonko Road 18:67B 0.680
34 Vesta Road 18:67C 0.108
32 Vesta Road 18:67D 0.459 Camp Mary Bunker
Vesta Road 18:67E 0.023
226 North Main Street 18:68A 2.040 Camp Mary Bunker*
228 North Main Street 18:68B 0.459 Camp Mary Bunker*
30 Vesta Road 18:68D 0.500 Camp Mary Bunker*
18:68E .083
31 Vesta Road 18:68F 0.580 Camp Mary Bunker*
Harwood Circle 20:00 0.180 Selectmen
Arlington Circle 20:152A 0.290 Selectmen
Oak/Cleveland Circle 21:243A 2.220
21:243B .590 East Playground
21:243C 3.150
53 Oak Street 21:95A 9.900 Jennings Pond
Mill Street 40:76 1.710 West Field
Lincoln District Court/Senior Ctr. 44:27A/B 12.250
Natick Open Space and Recreation Plan 2002 42
Open Space Inventory
Address Map/Parcel Acreage Name
TOWN LAND (Selectmen) (Continued)
Jefferson Circle 52: 0.180 Selectmen
Williams Park 52: 0.750 Selectmen
5 Auburn Street 63:1 2.840 Montessori School
Total 39.353
*Facility development funded under Division of Conservation Services
TOWN LAND (Public Works)
Oak Street 8:35B 9.310
8:3PS 0.017
38-1/2 Bradford Street 13:71 0.110
Bradford Road end 14:78 76.870
17:9B .078
233 North Main Street 18:12 .100 Sewer Pumping Station
20:97E .110
21:115 .065
24:90C .060
1076 Worcester Street 26:168 32.720 Springvale Well
28:70A .014
17 Oak Street 29:270A 32.720 Gravel Pit
College Road 30:14A .780
30:36A .050
30:36AB .160
College Road End 30:37A 2.400 Morse’s Pond Well
30:37C .080
30:38 .580
35:105A .003
38:10 .030
43:409 .070
90 Union Street 45:22 5.470 Broad Hill Reservoir
251 South Main Street 59:10 74.220 Landfill/Golf Course
75 West Street 59:12 15.500 DPW/WSSC
61:40AB .010
64:42 .540
64:64B .170
Total 252.237
TOWN LAND (Tax Possessions)
13 Oak Hill Road 0.040
4:32A .240
12 Alden Street 4:35 0.160
17-/2 Alden Street 4:54A 0.020
15 Hovey Avenue 4:90 0.090
4 Pine Street 6:18 0.010
3341/2 North Main Street 6:91 0.065
38 Pine Street off 7:78 0.030
26 Evergreen Road 12:50B 0.005
25 Waring Road 13:159 0.090
35 Felch Road 13:159A 0.110
16 Pickerel Road 14:72 0.290
29 Otis Street 14:73 0.480
71-1/2 Grove Road 21:111 0.010
30 Orchard Road 21:349 0.340
Natick Open Space and Recreation Plan 2002 43
Open Space Inventory
Address Map/Parcel Acreage Name
TOWN LAND (Tax Possessions) (Continued)
38 Loker Street 26:51A 0.010
34 Second Street 26:58A 0.020
19 Marshall Avenue 29:177A 0.050
College Road 30:14 .037
6 Frances Avenue 33:12A 0.002
50 Harvard Street 36:196+ 0.710
36:196B .121
17 Vale Street 36:206 0.390
49 Morency Street 39:79A 0.030
43:103B .020
43:382A .020
3 Union Street 44:245 0.010
32 Prescott Avenue 48:15A 0.430
27-1/2 Prescott Avenue 48:18 0.037
25 Prescott Avenue 48:20 0.074
22 Prescott Avenue 48:34 0.220
Marshall Avenue end 57:5A 0.005
21-1/2 Marshall Avenue 57:8A 0.270
3 Union Street 44:245 0.010
32 Prescott Avenue 48:15A 0.430
27-1/2 Prescott Avenue 48:18 0.037
25 Prescott Avenue 48:20 0.074
22 Prescott Avenue 48:34 0.220
Marshall Avenue end 57:5A 0.005
21-1/2 Marshall Avenue 57:8A 0.270
Total 4.436
TOWN LAND (Inhabitants)
Vesta Road 18:68C 0.124
43 Centre Street 20:45A 0.024
20:96 .748
268-1/2 Speen Street 25:248B 0.370
39:36 .212
39:362B .742
41:83B .742
52:46A .275
54:60A .622
Total 3.859
LIBRARY (Board Of Trustees)
44:25 .320
44:26 .220
44:27 .160
44:32A .070
44:32B .040
63:24A .635 Bacon Free
Total 1.445
Natick Open Space and Recreation Plan 2002 44
Open Space Inventory
Address Map/Parcel Acreage Name
TOWN LAND (General Government)
6:92 .031 Fire Department Property
21:189 .354 Fire Department Property (East)
25:247 .320 West Natick Fire Station
26:193 .140 Fire Department Property
43:263 .660 Pond Street Parking Lot
43:387 .240 Middlesex Parking Deck Lot
43:388A-F 1.190 Pkg Lots Spring/Summer/Middlesex
43:438 .230 Fire Dept. Property (pend. transfer)
44:138 1.080 Town Hall Building
44:139 .510 Town Hall Parking Lot
44:326 .140 Police/Fire Station Parking Lot
44:327 .140 Police/Fire Station Parking Lot
44:328 .120
44:329 .180
44:330 .140
44:355 .080
44:356A 1.990 Police/Fire Station Building
44:357 .290
44:359 .110
44:360 .130
54:61 .370 (210 Union St.) S Natick Fire Station
Total 8.445
Total Town Owned Land (Unprotected) 630.970
STATE OWNED LANDS
6:91B .300 324 North Main Street
40:77 4.570 West Hill Park
41:84 32.220 National Guard Depot
44:269 .780 Armory
44:392A 1.250 Myra Hayes Home
44:393 2.629 Coolidge Housing Authority
51:45A Bennett St. Housing Authority
51:87B Bennett St. Housing Authority
51:89A Bennett St. Housing Authority
51:89B 16.380 Bennett St. Housing Authority
Total 58.129
FEDERAL OWNED LANDS
Pine Street 8:2C 2.368 Post Office
Kansas Street 34:27 79.300 US Army Labs
Common Street 44:130 .600 Post Office
Total 82.268
Total State & Federal Owned Land 140.397
TOTAL PUBLIC LAND (UNPROTECTED) 771.367
Natick Open Space and Recreation Plan 2002 45
Open Space Inventory
Address Map/Parcel Acreage Name
TOTAL PRIVATE LANDS (PROTECTED) 1,029.151
TOTAL PRIVATE LANDS (SOME LEVELS OF 207.084
PROTECTION)
TOTAL PRIVATE LANDS (UNPROTECTED) 331.479
TOTAL PUBLIC LANDS (PROTECTED) 438.965
TOTAL PUBLIC LANDS (UNPROTECTED) 771.367
TOTAL OPEN SPACE 2,778.046 (27.6%)
WATER BODIES IN NATICK
Lake Cochituate 528.000
Dug Pond 48.000
Jennings Pond 10.000
Morse Pond 6.000
Non Such Pond 29.000
Total 621.000
1995 TOTAL OPEN SPACE 2,883.000 (30.3%)
TOTAL AREA OF NATICK 10,175.000
Natick Open Space and Recreation Plan 2002 46
SECTION 6 – COMMUNITY VISION
A. Description of Process
Natick’s open space community vision was developed in several stages over a period of time.
Johannes Wagner was hired as a consultant to develop and initial assessment of community
needs and prepare recommendations. The Open Space Advisory Committee, appointed on
July 9, 2001, continued the process of soliciting and refining input. In September, the
Committee developed a one-page questionnaire, which it distributed to two groups of
Natick residents. On September 15, the public was invited to fill out surveys at the Open
Space Committee’s booth at Natick Days, a free, public outdoor event on the Natick
Common, and 258 survey forms were collected. On October 4, survey forms were handed
out at Town Meeting, where 55 surveys were completed. The two samples were analyzed
independently. Results of the surveys are presented in Appendix C.
Based on this input, the Committee developed its statement of goals and invited the public
to provide further comment at a public hearing on February 27, 2002. This hearing was
attended by about 40 persons, including environmentalists, recreational users, developers,
and residents. The presentation was also posted on the Committee’s new web site at
http://natick.info/open_space/, and several comments were received by mail or e-mail.
These comment are summarized in Appendix A.
B. Statement of Open Space and Recreation Goals
Based on its studies and deliberations, the Town of Natick identifies the following broad
open space goals:
1. Protect Natick’s open spaces, including lakes, rivers and
streams, and woodlands, in a natural state that can be
enjoyed by future generations.
2. Preserve and protect the town’s water supply
3. Provide a system of walking and bicycle trails that
connect our open spaces and provide a way to travel
throughout the town.
Natick Open Space and Recreation Plan 2002 47
4. Provide adequate playing fields to enable all children to
participate in sports programs.
5. Increase residents’ awareness of Natick’s open spaces,
trails, natural resources, and recreational opportunities.
Natick Open Space and Recreation Plan 2002 48
SECTION 7 – ANALYSIS OF NEEDS
A. Summary of Resource Protection Needs
Much of Natick’s land has already been developed or (to a much lesser extent) protected.
There are few remaining larger tracts and smaller parcels of undeveloped land. As we
discovered in the comparative analysis of the inventories of seven years ago and today, the
town has lost a substantial amount of it’s larger upland open space parcels to development.
And the few remaining large parcels are currently threatened with development.
The Wetlands Protection Act and the town’s recently enacted Wetlands Bylaw will protect
most, if not all, of the remaining privately owned wetlands from direct development.
However, the extreme development pressures currently being faced will impact negatively
many wetlands through increased runoff from impervious surfaces and associated pollution,
as well as pollution from pesticides, herbicides, and fertilizers from newly-developed lawns.
In addition, the destruction of upland forest and field areas through development will
negatively affect wildlife habitat. Deer, turkeys, foxes, woodpeckers, wood thrushes and
many other upland species will be displaced.
Another consideration in the protection of the remaining open land is the protection of
those that recharge our aquifers. The need to protect these areas is extremely high, given
Natick’s dependence on groundwater for its water supply. Natick’s residents are acutely
aware of the importance of protecting the water supply and ranked this as the highest
priority in both the the survey and the public hearing help by this committee.
Finally, many of our existing protected open spaces would be enhanced by improving and
developing linkages between them, such as the proposed Takawambpait Trail linking
downtown Natick with the Charles River in South Natick. Besides providing the obvious
recreational benefits, these linkages will maintain or restore Natick’s ecological network, by
providing greenways and wildlife corridors. Eventually, these corridors could connect the
Sudbury River (in Saxonville in Framingham) and Lake Cochituate with the Charles River
via the proposed Cochituate Rail Trail and the Takawambpait Trail.
B. Summary of Community’s Needs
Natick, like many Eastern Massachusetts Communities, is being faced with an increased
growth in population, which demands local recreational service. The type of services
includes both active and passive recreation opportunities, which involve recreation programs
Natick Open Space and Recreation Plan 2002 49
and facilities alike. This combined with an emergence of leisure activities puts an increased
demand on the community of Natick.
As development spreads throughout the town, the need for more neighborhood recreational
facilities has grown, especially in underserved neighborhoods like North and West Natick. In
addition, the intense use of the existing facilities has resulted in the degradation of playing
fields and outdoor facilities.
The Natick Recreation and Parks Department presently identifies the recreational needs in
Natick as follows:
1) Improve maintenance of outdoor sites and facilities along with the
development of existing areas to get the most recreational value from them.
2) Acquire additional land so as to provide a greater variety of facilities for the
public use (active and passive recreation).
3) Develop more passive recreation opportunities in the community (trails, picnic
areas, etc.)
Acquisition of Recreational Lands and Facilities
Natick’s playing fields are currently in maximum use, and are being damaged from overuse
(see Appendix D). A number of people at our public hearing spoke about the need for
additional playing fields. Given the substantial increase in the youth recreation population in
town, the introduction of new sports, like lacrosse, and the substantially increased demand
for additional playing fields, Natick needs to look into the acquisition and/or lease
arrangement for utilizing new lands throughout Natick. Some examples of this would be the
potential acquisition of the 16.5-acre parcel at the corner of Morency/Pumpkin Pine
Property, the lease agreement for the 3.5 acres parcel that National Guard owns next to J.J.
Lane Park and possible land donations to the Town from various sub-division
developments.
Lake Cochituate receives 200,000 visitors each year and is one of the most popular
destinations in the greater Boston area for swimming, picnicking, field sports, boating and
fishing, according the Cochituate State Park Management Plan, currently a working draft by the
Department of Environmental Management. Both the National Guard site and the U.S.
Army Natick Labs lie on the shores of Lake Cochituate and could provide a much-needed
addition to Lake Cochituate’s recreational uses. The Cochituate State Park Management Plan
urges that, should these properties become surplus, the state should make every effort to add
them to Cochituate State Park.
Natick Open Space and Recreation Plan 2002 50
Development of Passive Recreation Opportunities
The increased interest in passive recreation is indicated, in part, by the growing number of
walkers and joggers in Natick. This has led to the need for an expanded multi-purpose trail
system. These trails could be built as part of a system to connect either the commercial and
residential centers of the town or to connect existing open space areas as part of a greenbelt
system. Examples of this include the proposed Takawambpait and Eliot trails connecting the
South Natick area to the Downtown area and the Cochituate Rail Trail System, which will
connect Downtown Natick to the Natick Mall/North Framingham area.
The Cochituate Aqueduct goes offers some scenic views through South Natick. The public
uses portions of the aqueduct now, but further use is possible. A 1998 feasibility study,
undertaken for the MetroWest Growth Management/MWRA Project Oversight Committee,
encouraged the development of public access throughout the Sudbury and Weston
aqueducts.7
In addition to this, the Town, through the Community Development Office (Planning,
Zoning and Conservation Commission) needs to keep working with developers to acquire
trail opportunities for our residents throughout the town. The Recreation and Parks
Department and DPW also need to be an involved party in this process.
Identification and Education about Existing Facilities
One of the highest needs identified by the survey was that many newcomers (and a
surprising number of longer-term residents) were unaware of existing facilities. Many Town-
owned facilities are (or were until recently) not identified by signs. And there have been no
town-wide maps showing the location of both active and passive recreational amenities.
Recently several town boards and citizen’s groups have gotten together to work on
correcting these problems.
Maintenance and Upgrading of Existing Recreation Facilities
The substantially increased demand for, and use of, existing recreation facilities has caused a
deterioration of many of them. There is a need to improve maintenance of existing facilities
to provide safe and adequate facilities. Irrigation systems should be developed where needed
and existing facilities should be rested occasionally to allow renovation or rejuvenation.
7Metrowest Public Access Feasibility Study; A Consideration of the MWRA Weston and Sudbury Aqueducts,
Presented by Beals and Thomas, Inc. to MetroWest Growth Management/MWRA Project
Oversight Committee, Final Feasibility Report, July 1889.
Natick Open Space and Recreation Plan 2002 51
The Town should also work to get the most from each facility by renovating the unused
portions of its existing outdoor facilities. Future examples of this would be the expansion of
Sargent Field into the Town Gravel Pit, the expansion of the Kennedy and Brown School
sites into lightly wooden sections and the expansion of the High School Freshman Soccer
Field into the High School Town Forest Woods.
C. Management Needs
Improve Communications Between Boards and Agencies
While many of Natick’s boards and agencies work well together, our work on the Open
Space Inventory shows there is still some improvement needed. Many of the properties
receiving Chapter 61 benefits had lapsed during the proceeding seven years, but interested
boards, like the Conservation Commission, had not received notice of their change in status.
The Board of Selectmen and the Assessor’s Office should be encouraged to notify the
Conservation Commission and the Open Space Advisory Committee of any change in the
status of any protected parcel.
Make Permanent the Open Space Advisory Committee
One of the main reasons that this Open Space and Recreation Plan was delayed two years is
because there was no central body coordinating the effort to update the plan. Also in the
past, no organization was in a position to review and evaluate opportunities to protect
existing open land. These issues show a clear need to establish a permanent Open Space
Advisory Committee.
Natick Open Space and Recreation Plan 2002 52
SECTION 8 – GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
Based on the Community Needs that we identified, the Open Space Committee articulated
the following Open Space Goals and Objectives:
Goal 1: Protect Natick’s open spaces, including lakes, rivers and streams, and
woodlands, in a natural state that can be enjoyed by future generations
Objectives:
1-A Seek federal, state and private funding to acquire additional open
space for the town8
1-B Pass the Community Preservation Act (CPA)9
1-C Increase the level of protection of private lands by encouraging
owners to place conservation restrictions or increase the protection
levels on their land10
1-D Ensure that federal, state, and other public and quasi-public open
space is permanently protected
1-E Work with Planning Board, Conservation Commission, and Zoning
Board of Appeals to develop zoning or land use tools to protect open
space
1-F For all above methods, prioritize:
8 One example of source of state funds is Executive Order 418, issued by the Governor in Janaury
2000 to address the housing shortage in the Commonwealth. There are two primary components of
the order: 1) the order makes available up to $30,000 in planning services for each of the 351
communities for creation of a community development plan which addresses 4 planning elements:
housing, economic development, open space and resource protection, and transportation; and 2) a
housing certification process that provides an incentive for communities to assist residents by taking
steps to increase the supply of housing affordable to individuals and families with low-, moderate-,
and middle-incomes. Communities that receive certification are eligible for certain discretionary grant
programs and are given bonus point for other programs. See
http://www.massdhcd.com/eo418/homepage2.htm
9 The Community Preservation Act (CPA) is a new law that allows Massachusetts cities and towns,
by a vote of the citizens, to collect a of up to 3 percent.of local property taxes. The increased
revenues may be used to to acquire and protect open space, preserve historic buildings and
landscapes, and create and maintain affordable housing. The state provides significant matching
funds to participating communites. For more information, see The Community Preservation
Coalition, ―The Community Preservation Act: A Guide to Adoption and Answers to Frequently
Asked Questions‖ (January 2002); Community Preservation Coalition web site,
http://www.communitypreservation.com/; Executive Office of Environmental Affairs, Community
Preservation Act, http://commpres.env.state.ma.us/content/cpa.asp .
10 See Appendix F for information on conservations restrictions and other land preservation tools.
Natick Open Space and Recreation Plan 2002 53
Areas that enhance existing open spaces, by creating larger
contiguous parcels or connecting existing parcels or trails
Open space in areas of the town currently deficient in open
space
Areas adjacent to rivers and ponds and environmentally
sensitive areas
Goal 2: Preserve and protect the town’s water supply
Objectives:
2-A Protect open space near water resources and the Aquifer Protection
District
2-B Limit use of pesticides, herbicides, and fertilizers within the APD
Goal 3: Provide a system of walking and bicycle trails that connect our open
spaces and provide a way to travel throughout the town
Objectives:
3-A Acquire land or secure easements to provide continuous walking and
bicycling trails, to be used both for recreation and transportation, and
for wildlife migration corridors
3-B Develop and mark these trails
Goal 4: Ensure that playing fields and other recreational facilities support the
needs of the population
Objectives:
4-A Develop additional fields and play lots on existing town-owned land,
where appropriate
4-B Acquire or secure use of land appropriate for playing fields
Goal 5: Increase residents’ awareness of Natick’s open spaces, trails, natural
resources, and recreational opportunities
Objectives:
5-A Publicize the location, amenities, and availability of town open spaces
5-B Develop signs to mark the entrances of accessible parks, woods,
playing fields, trails, and other publicly accessible open spaces
5-C Ensure that recreation and conservation areas are accessible to all
individuals, and provide information for those with special needs
Natick Open Space and Recreation Plan 2002 54
To support these five open space goals, we also propose the following organizational
goal:
Goal 6: Develop an organizational structure to enable us to achieve these goals
Objectives:
6-A Provide for a permanent Open Space Committee
6-B Develop a management plan, including an operating budget, for
maintenance of all areas of town-owned open space
6-C Ensure coordination among the various town board and commission
responsible for open spaces, including the Selectmen, Planning
Board, Conservation Commission, Recreation and Parks, Schools,
and the Open Space Committee
Natick Open Space and Recreation Plan 2002 55
SECTION 9 – FIVE-YEAR ACTION PLAN
The following ―Five-Year Action Plan‖ enumerates specific action items under each Goal
and Objective. Each action item includes a year or range of years when that item will be
addressed. We have not yet defined who is responsible for each action item, but rather have
defined as one of the first tasks, listed under Goal 6, to hold a series of discussions with
town boards to determine this responsibility. Also within Goal 6 is a proposal to make the
Open Space Committee permanent, and we anticipate that this committee to take an overall
coordination role for all of the Action Plan items. These actions are illustrated on Map 6A
(5-Year Action Plan Map) and Map 6B (Open Space – Target Projects).
Goal 1: Protect Natick’s open spaces, including lakes, rivers and streams,
and woodlands, in a natural state that can be enjoyed by future
generations
Objective 1-A: Seek federal, state and private funding to acquire additional
open space for the town
(1) Identify and leverage existing unprotected town open space to seek state and
federal funding for additional land on an annual basis (2002-2007)
(2) Acquire key parcels, such as former Framingham sewer beds and long-term lease
on property next to J.J. Lane Park, including funding to develop (2003)
(3) Identify and apply for state and federal grants and other funding for preservation
and protection of open space on an annual basis (2002-2007)
Objective 1-B Pass the Community Preservation Act (CPA)
(1) Sponsor Community Preservation summit, involving housing and historic groups
(2003)
(2) Encourage formation of a Community Preservation advocacy group (2003)
(3) Pass the CPA (2004)
Objective 1-C Increase the level of protection of private lands by
encouraging owners to place conservation restrictions or
increase the protection levels on their land
(1) Annually publicize advantages of land protection (2002-2007)
(2) Meet with land-owners and seek to upgrade two parcels each year (2002-2007)
Objective 1-D Ensure that federal, state, and other public and quasi-public
open space is permanently protected
Natick Open Space and Recreation Plan 2002 56
(1) Provide public education to develop public support for land protection (2003-
2007)
(2) Work with responsible town agencies to develop permanent protection for town-
owned open space (e.g. Community Farm) (2005)
(3) Work with the federal and state agencies to plan for the protection of future
surplus properties (e.g. National Guard site) (2003-2007)
Objective 1-E Work with Planning Board, Conservation Commission, and
Zoning Board of Appeals to develop zoning or land use
tools to protect open space, such as:
(1) Promote and expand concept of cluster zoning (2003)
(2) Recommend fees and mitigation measures for development (2003)
(3) Recommend zoning controls or land use controls to preserve open space (2003)
(4) Explore expansion of wetlands bylaw (2003)
Objective 1-F For all above methods, prioritize:
Areas that enhance existing open spaces, by creating larger
contiguous parcels or connecting existing parcels or trails
Open space in areas of the town currently deficient in open
space
Areas adjacent to rivers and ponds and environmentally
sensitive areas
Goal 2: Preserve and protect the town’s water supply
Objective 2-A Protect open space near water resources and the Aquifer
Protection District
(1) Protect lands around these areas (2003-2007)
(2) Limit the allowed activities near water resource areas and within the APD (2003)
Objective 2-B Limit use of pesticides, herbicides, and fertilizers within the
APD
(1) Develop guidelines for maintaining town owned lands within the APD using
environmentally friendly materials (2003)
(2) Provide public education regarding limiting lawn size, maintenance, and water
(2003)
Natick Open Space and Recreation Plan 2002 57
Goal 3: Provide a system of walking and bicycle trails that connect our
open spaces and provide a way to travel throughout the town
Objective 3-A Acquire land or secure easements to provide continuous
walking and bicycling trails, to be used both for recreation
and transportation, and for wildlife migration corridors
(1) Secure public access to the Natick portion of the Cochituate Rail Trail (2003)
(2) Develop trails to South Natick: John Eliot Trail and Daniel Takawambpait Trail
(2003)
(3) Ensure public access for use of the Sudbury Aqueduct (2003)
(4) Acquire missing links for existing trails (2002)
(5) Continue to develop additional trails (2003-2007)
Objective 3-B Develop and mark these trails
(1) Designate responsibility for trails (2002)
(2) Develop new trails (2003-2007)
(3) Mark trails using standardized system (2003-2007)
Goal 4: Ensure that playing fields and other recreational facilities support
the needs of the population
Objective 4-A Develop additional fields and play lots on existing town-
owned land, where appropriate, including:
(1) Oak Street Gravel pit (2003–2005)
(2) Unused high school land (2004–2005)
(3) Small town-owned parcels to fill need for play lots (2003–2007)
(4) Redesign and develop existing town recreation fields for better community use
(2003-2005)
Objective 4-B Acquire or secure use of land appropriate for playing fields
(1) Look into land owned by private, public, or nonprofit entities that could be used
by Natick residents as playing fields through a partnership arrangement,
including National Guard facility and J.J. Lane Park on Speen Street (2002-2004)
(2) Consider purchasing additional land for playing fields (2003-2007)
(3) Support the Department of Recreation and Parks to develop and improve newly
acquired fields and facilities (2003-2007)
Natick Open Space and Recreation Plan 2002 58
Goal 5: Increase residents’ awareness of Natick’s open spaces, trails,
natural resources, and recreational opportunities
Objective 5-A Publicize the location, amenities, and availability of town
open spaces
(1) Establish a trail/greenway committee to create a plan for developing trails within
the town, publicizing them, and establishing connections with other
communities.
(2) Work with town groups and neighboring communities in developing town-wide
open space and trail maps. (2003)
(3) Develop a web site, public displays and presentations, and other means to
provide public information (2003-2007)
(4) Sponsor trails walks and canoe or bicycle trips to introduce people to the
available opportunities (2003-2007)
Objective 5-B Develop signs to mark the entrances of accessible parks,
woods, playing fields, trails, and other publicly accessible
open spaces
(1) Work with community – citizens, citizen groups, and private corporations – to
develop signs and maps and acquire open space.
(2) Determine who is responsible for signs (2002)
(3) Determine a compatible signage scheme (2003)
(4) Acquire funding for acquisition and installation of signs (2004)
(5) Purchase and install signs (2005)
Objective 5-C Ensure that recreation and conservation areas are accessible
to all individuals, and provide information for those with
special needs
(1) Designate accessibility levels (2002)
(2) Continue to work with the Commission On Disability for design of new facilities
and improved accessibility of existing facilities (2003-2007)
(3) Indicate accessibility levels in brochures, maps, and other public materials (2003-
2007)
Natick Open Space and Recreation Plan 2002 59
Goal 6: Develop an organizational structure to enable us to achieve these
goals
Objective 6-A Provide for a permanent Open Space Committee
(1) Make the Open Space Committee (originally appointed only until July 2002) into
a permanent committee (2002)
(2) The Open Space Committee would :
Report to the Board of Selectmen annually and invite other groups
and constituents
Meet with town boards as needed
Meet with user groups and citizens as necessary
Serve as an advocate and advisor to other town boards on issues of
open space (2003-2007)
Objective 6-B Develop a management plan, including an operating
budget, for maintenance of all areas of town-owned open
space
(1) Designate which department(s) are responsible for the management plan (2002)
(2) Designate which department(s) are responsible for the maintenance plan (2002)
(3) Enter into partnerships with abutters, user groups, land trusts, businesses, and
enthusiasts (2003-2007)
Objective 6-C Ensure coordination among the various town board and
commission responsible for open spaces, including the
Selectmen, Planning Board, Conservation Commission,
Recreation and Parks, Schools, and the Open Space
Committee.
(1) Develop a process to ensure that all relevant boards (including Assessor,
Planning Board, Conservation Commission, and Open Space Committee) are
aware of changes in protection status of land parcels (2003)
(2) Develop a process of providing notice of surplus town land to these town boards
(2003)
Natick Open Space and Recreation Plan 2002 60
SECTION 10 – PUBLIC COMMENTS
Date Copies of Plan sent to: Letter received (included)
6/17/02 Board of Selectmen yes
Planning Board yes
Conservation Commission yes
Recreation and Parks Commission yes
Commission on Disability yes
Natick Historical Commission
Zoning Board of Appeals
School Committee
Natick Housing Partnership
Cochituate State Park
Massachusetts Audubon Society: Broadmoor
Wildlife Sanctuary
Morse Institute Library (available for public
view)
Bacon Free Library (available for public view)
Cole Recreation Center (available for public
view)
6/18/02 E-mail notices to 35 individuals on mailing
list, with link to draft plan on committee’s
web site
6/28/02 Division of Conservation Services yes
Metropolitan Area Planning Council yes
Response to MAPC yes
Natick Open Space and Recreation Plan 2002 61
Letters page 1 of 10
Natick Open Space and Recreation Plan 2002 62
Letters page 2 of 10
Natick Open Space and Recreation Plan 2002 63
Letters page 3 of 10
Natick Open Space and Recreation Plan 2002 64
Letters page 4 of 10
Natick Open Space and Recreation Plan 2002 65
Letters page 5 of 10
Natick Open Space and Recreation Plan 2002 66
Letters page 6 of 10
Natick Open Space and Recreation Plan 2002 67
Letters page 7 of 10
Natick Open Space and Recreation Plan 2002 68
Letters page 8 of 10
Natick Open Space and Recreation Plan 2002 69
Letters page 9 of 10
Natick Open Space and Recreation Plan 2002 70
Letters page 10 of 10
Natick Open Space and Recreation Plan 2002 71
SECTION 11 – REFERENCES
Chenard, William, Assessor, Town of Natick, meetings and collaborations with Richard
Cugini, Open Space Committee (August 2001).
The Community Preservation Coalition, ―The Community Preservation Act: A Guide to
Adoption and Answers to Frequently Asked Questions‖ (January 2002).
The Community Preservation Coalition, http://www.communitypreservation.com/
Crawford, Michael J., History of Natick, Massachusetts, 1650-1976 (Natick Historical
Commission, 1978).
Elissa Landre, Director, Massachusetts Audubon Society, Broadmoor Wildlife Sanctuary,
meeting with Martin Kessel, Open Space Committee, May 23, 2002.
Massachusetts Executive Office of Environmental Affairs, Buildout Maps and Analyses,
Town of Natick,
http://commpres.env.state.ma.us/community/cmty_main.asp?communityID=198Massachu
setts
Massachusetts Executive Office of Environmental Affairs, Community Preservation Act,
http://commpres.env.state.ma.us/content/cpa.asp
Massachusetts Executive Office of Environmental Affairs, Department of Environmental
Management, Cochituate State Park Management Plan; Guidelines for Operations and Land
Stewardship, Commonwealth of Massachusetts, (Working Draft, May 2002).
Massachusetts Executive Office of Environmental Affairs, Department of Environmental
Protection, Rivers Protection Act
Q&A,http://www.state.ma.us/dep/brp/ww/files/riverqa.htm
Massachusetts Executive Office of Environmental Affairs, Department of Fisheries,
Wildlife, and Environmental Law Enforcement, Division of Fisheries and Wildlife, Wildlife
Recreation, http://www.state.ma.us/dfwele/dfw/dfwrec.htm
Massachusetts Executive Office of Environmental Affairs, Department of Fisheries,
Wildlife, and Environmental Law Enforcement, Division of Fisheries and Wildlife, Natural
Heritage & Endangered Species Program,
http://www.state.ma.us/dfwele/dfw/nhesp/townn.htm
Natick Open Space and Recreation Plan 2002 72
Massachusetts Executive Office of Environmental Affairs, Department of Fisheries,
Wildlife, and Environmental Law Enforcement, Division of Fisheries and Wildlife, Natural
Heritage & Endangered Species Program, ―BioMap; Guiding Land Conservation in
Massachusetts‖ (2001).
Massachusetts Executive Office of Environmental Affairs, Division of Conservation
Services, Open Space Planner’s Workbook; Companion to the Open Space and Recreation
Plan (revised February 2001).
Massachusetts Executive Office of Transportation and Construction, ―Executive Order 418:
Community Development Planning & Housing Certification,‖
http://www.massdhcd.com/eo418/homepage2.htm
Metropolitan Area Planning Council, ―MetroPlan 2000; The Regional Development Plan for
Metropolitan Boston‖ (April 1994).
―Metrowest Public Access Feasibility Study; A Consideration of the MWRA Weston and
Sudbury Aqueducts‖, Presented by Beals and Thomas, Inc. to MetroWest Growth
Management/MWRA Project Oversight Committee, Final Feasibility Report, July 1889.
Perodeau, Jack, Natick DPW Water and Sewer Superintendent, interviewed by Dick Cugini,
Open Space Committee (February 2002), re water treatment plant.
United States Census Bureau, Census 2000,
http://www.census.gov/main/www/cen2000.html
Natick Open Space and Recreation Plan 2002 73
Appendix A: Public Hearing Comments
1. Open Space Forum, April 26, 2000, Cole Recreation Center
2. Public Meeting of Town Boards and Committees, June 10, 2000, Town Hall
3. Open Space Advisory Committee, February 27, 2002, Public Hearing
4. Planning Board Meeting, June 19, 2002
5. Open Space Advisory Committee, June 26, 2002, Public Hearing
Open Space Forum
April 26, 2000
Cole Recreation Center
1. The Town should identify all parcels that are two acres or more on their GIS system.
2. A public relations campaign concerning open space is sorely needed
3. The town needs to develop an ability to encourage land donations by the community
and private propertly owners.
Public Meeting
Town Boards and Committees
June 10, 2000
Town Hall
1. The Town needs an accurate list of town owned parcels with accurate acreages,
2. Better signage is necessary at all town parcels;
3. Need for a town open space committee,
4. Keep an eye toward any property that is adjacent to already owned town property
5. Cochituate Rail Trail needs to be extended into downtown Natick, with other trails
branching from it
6. Examine closely the sections of town that are poor in open space. There is a need to
strategize possible land acquisitions in these areas.
Natick Open Space and Recreation Plan 2002 74
Open Space Advisory Committee
February 27, 2002
Public Hearing
Summary of Comments
Grouped by General Topics
1. PLANNING BOARD/ZONING ISSUES
This committee review zoning proposals in terms of open space content.
Work with Planning Board on growth management, such as limiting number of building
permits per year.
Put growth where it makes sense – downtown.
Limit number of building permits per year
Developers pay fees, e.g. $1,000 for a unit or $2,000 for a home, which would go to open
space or would provide open space directly.
Look at trend for revenue to town vs. cost of new housing.
2. ADDITIONAL OPEN SPACE
Procure additional open space
Partner so that we don’t have to pay for more space ourselves – e.g. Cochituate State Park,
neighboring towns.
Extend wetlands protection
Extend existing open space to make them contiguous
Find creative way to acquire open space without spending money we don’t have
Be more proactive, not reactive, with people who have land, such as Marino
3. WATER SUPPLY
Protecting water supply is most important item in Vision – should be first
Work with neighboring towns to protect water supply.
All open spaces be pesticide free
Would like study how much growth our water supply can support
4. PLAYING FIELDS
Need more soccer fields
Need more soccer fields
Need more baseball fields
5. DEVELOP SPACES WE HAVE
Develop and make more available existing open spaces, e.g. J.J. Lane Park and area between
J.J. Lane and army depot.
Manage property, e.g. Pegan Cove, so public uses them.
Develop mini-park in town property behind Springvale Pumping Station.
6. MISC.
Provide trails so kids can get to school safely — saves on buses.
Natick Open Space and Recreation Plan 2002 75
Planning Board Meeting
June 19, 2002
Summary of Comments
1. Important to have ongoing Open Space Committee (1) to keep open space in front
of us, because we have many concerns, and (2) to coordinate among different boards
with jurisdictions affecting open space.
2. Interested in process for dealing with chapter 61 options.
3. Need to address residents’ desire to keep trails and playing fields out of their
neighborhood vs. public need for these facilities.
4. Most towns have Planning Director, apart from Community Development Director,
responsible for applying for grants. Important to have Open Space Committee,
which can focus on grants.
5. Look at what towns that passed CPA have done with it – what we’re missing.
6. Consider ending traditional subdivisions altogether and just doing cluster
developments. Planning Board has tried to get trails and open space in new
subdivisions.
7. Interested in steps to limit pesticides.
8. Need to balance needs for natural vs. paved trails.
9. Play lots are important.
10. Work with community – citizens, citizen groups, and private corporations – to
develop signs and maps and acquire open space.
11. Add Action Item under Goal 6: Function as an advocate/advisor before town
boards to keep open space before the boards.
Natick Open Space and Recreation Plan 2002 76
Open Space Advisory Committee
June 26, 2002
Public Hearing
Summary of Comments
1. Natick needs to communicate with neighboring towns about open spaces that affect
both towns.
2. Neighborhood groups need help from town Boards in trying to save wooded area
from development.
3. The public will support Community Preservation Act when they see the benefits.
Point to how it has helped towns that have passed it.
4. Ask Town Meeting for support. Initially ask for small amount of money for signs
and maps.
5. Mention the Aqueduct access study in Plan.
6. Planning Board and Conservation Commission support permanent Open Space
Committee.
7. Representatives from these Boards also agree with the need for coordination among
boards.
Natick Open Space and Recreation Plan 2002 77
Appendix B: Johannes Wagner Report
(Recommendations for Neighborhoods)
MALL
This geographic community is bound on the North and West by the Framingham town line, on the
South by Worcester Road (Route 9), and on the East by Lake Cochituate.
Considerations should include:
In the vicinity of Speen Street, areas could be designated for recreation and open space
adjacent to wetlands connecting to Framingham near the west side of the Rt. 30 intersection
and along the Cochituate Rail Trail with a 12’ easement from the Tech Commons Center.
Although recreation areas here may seem out of place; re: the extent of vehicular traffic;
there are many opportunities to obtain protected lands from adjacent land owners since no
further expansion will probably be allowed or undertaken and access can be made from
private property parking areas by letters of understanding. Pursue Marriott Courtyard
Parking and wetland connections; obtain easement to access wetlands from rear parking
areas.
Acquire any easements or lands available as public open space along main thoroughfares and
roadways.
Develop some passive and active recreation facilities near major thoroughfares as a result of
linkage with private development; develop access to and circulation through extensive
wetlands via boardwalks; introduce viewing platforms observation blinds, bird feeders, etc.
Develop Cochituate RR Trail connections to Natick’s CBD and North Framingham,
Wayland, Sudbury; involve adjacent Towns in Open Space Oversight Committee activities;
seeking regional planning and Bay State Circuit funding assistance; seek ISTEA-TEA/21
funding. Examine available street right-of-way, i.e. Mechanics Street and others, to access
corridor on-grade.
NORTH AREA
This geographic community is bound on the East by Langdon Road to, on the South by Worcester
Road (Route 9), on the West by a line through Lake Cochituate, and on the North by Wayland town
line.
NORTHEAST
This geographic community is bounded by the Town of Wayland on the North, the Towns of
Weston and Wellesley on the East, Worcester Road (Route 9) on the South, and Langdon Road on
the West.
Natick Open Space and Recreation Plan 2002 78
The N.E. sector offers a tremendous number of opportunities to increase, enhance, and develop
recreation facilities and secure open space. Some to be considered are:
Purchase of 11 acres of Burke property and avoid subdivision development. Develop full
and intense recreation facilities for town-wide and neighborhood use.
Obtain easements to MDC aqueduct properties to develop trails, local parks and
playgrounds throughout residential areas without any local parks.
Partial demolition of the East School, which apparently is to be undertaken consider partial
lease of East School building area for commercial/office use in return for full park
development for community; consider a 25 to 99 year lease (eligible for state funding); or
total playground development. Also, coordinate partial site use with MHD for Route 9
intersection expansion and linkage development. Link to Sunkaway conservation area with
trail access.
We also recommend that the Town approach MADEM and the MA State National Guard
and Army to relocate its salt shed to the Speen Street, ANG Site is consideration for
potential SEP enforcement and future conjoined use of the site.
SOUTHEAST AREA
This geographic community is bound on the East by a North/South line drawn through Dug Pond,
on the North by West Central Street (Route 135), on the South by the Sherborn town line, and on
the West by the Framingham town line.
SOUTH
This geographic community is bound on the East by the Wellesley and Dover town lines, on the
North by East Central Street (Route 135), on the South by the Dover/Sherborn town lines, and on
the West by Dug Pond.
South Natick certainly stands as a community of high visibility and is unique in its rural and
archeologic and historic significance, charm, and character. Considerations to be given include:
Rehabilitation of Old Town Park, including dam and bridge; Mill Lane improvements;
restoration of Bacon Free Library and Indian Cemetery area, and linkage to and
improvements to Hunnewell Park fields, courts, parking, totlots, landscaping, shelters and
rest rooms. Obtain options of first rights oft refusal for adjoining private properties; provide
canoe launch facilities up and down stream. This may be eligible for TEA-21 funds,
Massachusetts Historic Commission, and Self-Help (DCS) Funds.
Resolution of Shaw Park’s use as passive, passive/active (with limitations) or active. The
Town should develop an action plan to enhance the area and protect it via use limitations.
Consider obtaining right of first refusal of 8 acres between Glen Street and Glenwood
Cemetery.
Locating small local community totlot parks and playgrounds of ¼-1 Acre especially at
edges of major green spaces and in cluster neighborhoods; Eliot, E. Central, Everett, S.
Main, Union, Cottage, Glen and South Streets.
Natick Open Space and Recreation Plan 2002 79
Acquisition of MDC aqueduct lands now not continuous as aqueducts.
Obtain; R.O.W./Easements; Paths through planned subdivisions.
Coolidge Park connection to Leonard Morse Hospital lands through a Letter of
Understanding or Easement with Metrowest Medical Associates.
Resolution of on-going development efforts at Lookout Farm and status of Agricultural and
Conservation Restrictions owned by Town; budget for extensive studies of development
proposals or negotiate further restrictions of development; extensive fees could be involved;
budget $50,000.00. The reality of this site is an ongoing aggressive pursuit of various high
visitation development options by the Owner. The major restrictive legislation to such
development involves traffic impacts under the umbrella of an ENF and the Secretary of
Environmental Affairs.
SOUTHWEST
This geographic community is bound on the East by a North/South line drawn through Dug Pond,
on the North by West Central Street (Route 135), on the South by the Sherborn town line, and on
the West by the Framingham town line.
Residential areas are very dense and lacking in local parks. However, some opportunities to be
considered are:
Master plan the entire High School complex as well as its access, parking and open space
courts, fields, and other uses to efficiently utilize space and create more recreational uses as
part of a minimum $40 million expansion program for the high school. Consider a more
regional gateway to the school rather than through residential neighborhoods. This should
be done in concert with the future high school expansion/renovation within the next 2-3
years and should include the potential for adjacent property acquisition. Multiple team
sports and new sports such as Lacrosse and field hockey should be considered in reorienting
various open areas. Where space is available, totlots could be added and wet spray play areas.
Currently, a wet spray play area is being considered at Dug Pond, and additional fields may
be constructed behind the base ball varsity field. This complex can serve significantly more
residents in a more efficient manner.
Analyze the West Hill Park property for a potential neighborhood playground, improved
fields, and parking. In conjunction with this activity, review possibility to purchase a
significant portion or all of the Bostonia Beverage property. Work out linkage to maintain
business property with relaxed zoning standards, if necessary. Research BECO owned
property for use as parking area to complement recreation uses.
Launch a joint effort between DEM, the Town of Framingham, and the Town to study the
drainage flows of various pond connections and Middle Pond exchanges to improve
appearance, maintenance, and quality of Speen Street and Rt. 135 intersection, ponds,
wetlands, and Natick Ford and Roche Bros. parking areas. Pursue the ―adoption‖ of this site
by Roche Bros. and/or Natick Ford. The resources in this area could be beautiful; instead
they appear as a collection of street garbage and stagnant ponds.
Negotiate with large property owners to purchase 1-2 acre sites from industrial/office
owners along Speen, Kendall, and other roadways. Investigate purchase or closing of the
―junkyard/auto parts‖ property along Route 135 and adjacent wetlands. Framingham and
Natick Open Space and Recreation Plan 2002 80
Natick should jointly pursue the $50,000.00 Mass. Development Fund grants to complete a
21E Phase 1 assessment on this site and the Beaver Dam Brook. The Towns should test
areas adjacent to the property along the Brook, looking towards completing one or
numerous Phase 1-21E assessments to determine suspected contaminated
soils/groundwater and pursue discharge/release report activities (DEP), and possible
Activity Use Limitation applications or clean ups.
Although various joint regional facilities with the Town of Sherborn have been considered
past politics have voided any considerations. However, the 21st century should dictate that
common sense sharing of public works/treatment/recycling facilities make a lot of sense.
Locate an area for a potential playground to be funded by a benefactor who has made a
financial commitment to the Town. Potential sites would be in the Pine Street/Winter Street
area and MDC aqueduct areas. This would jointly serve the Wethersfield area.
Some of the opportunities in this section could realize significant ―income‖ or benefit for
recreational purposes without compromising ownership or creating legislative problems
through public private partnership.
WEST
This geographic community is bound on the East by Lake Cochituate, on the North by Worcester
Road (Route 9), on the South by West Central Street (Route 135), and on the west by the
Framingham town line.
This community lacks numerous local parks and playgrounds and has little opportunity for such
recreational development. However, it has potential for some larger and grander open space
acquisition. Considerations should include:
Obtain rights to use of former MHD Depot/Supply Yard property adjacent to J.J. Lane
Park from DEM/ANG and provide limited and controlled beach access; negotiate use
scenario with DEM/ANG and connect to Middlesex Path and to Pegan Cove along the
lake’s shoreline or via a Route 135 bike route; pursue a 21E Phase I Site Assessment via
$50,000.00 Mass Development Fund Loan (with special legislative action); obtain rights of
first refusal if deemed surplus GSA property; obtain stewardship of ANG/Speen Street
open areas for use of soccer fields. The condition of the former MHD Supply Yard is in
violation of every objective being undertaken to ―clean‖ Lake Cochituate. The drainage
easement servicing at least 50% of Speen Street from the ANG site to the Golf Course
consists of an open drainage sluiceway which washes all street drippings, droppings and
sediments from Speen Street into open channels at the site and into the lake. The Natick
DPW apparently holds the drainage easement and has not completed a Stormwater
Management Plan. The control of the 4.0 acre former MHD Depot/Supply Yard site is
directly related to enhancement and expansion of J.J. Lane Park, and handicap access to a
cordoned-off limited beach area, and the addition of a comfort station/Attendant Building
to support active use of the park (existing use is quite limited).
Revisit site designs of the Brown/Kennedy School complex. The fields and open areas are
very inefficiently designed; very cost ineffective; many more facilities could be incorporated
here including multipurpose overlapping field uses, playgrounds, skate parks and wet spray
areas.
Natick Open Space and Recreation Plan 2002 81
Review use of Henry Wilson Memorial site. Although a $30,000.00 expenditure may be
appropriated to stabilize and repair the building, it is recommended that the underutilized
site could be interpreted to explain its importance, and designed to allow parking, access,
walkways, a playground and attractive landscaping. A proposed $10,000.00 grant for site
improvements would allow these improvements.
The pond area north of Rt. 135 and west of Speen Street is owned by the Town. Although
poorly maintained it offers the possibility of an excellent wetland/interpretive environment
connecting to the terminus of Beaver Dam Brook outfall pond which connects to Roche
Bros. Parking area pond and then to Fiske Pond and other areas. Arrangements could be
made with Natick Ford, the DEM/ANG and Roche Bros. Properties to allow parking and
access to the site. Pedestrian crosswalks are desperately needed in this area and the Route
135/Speen Street intersection even if no ―access‖ to the open space is allowed. Framingham
and Natick have received a grant to jointly study this area since certain drainage watersheds
of Framingham feed this area.
Cole Recreation Center plans should move forward to create soccer fields on 1.5 acres of
existing available forested lands to satisfy Soccer League needs.
WETHERSFIELD
This geographic community is bound on the North by the Wayland town line, on the East by
Langdon Road, on the South by Worcester Road (Route 9), and on the West by Lake Cochituate.
This section is quite isolated between Rt. 9 and I-90 and has few opportunities for development
without purchase of small park and playground size areas or their development along existing large
parcels. The extensive subdivision and commercial/retail/office/industrial park development is so
intense and complete that no open land exists for recreational open space. Therefore, an aggressive
program must be undertaken to purchase or obtain use of land that is already developed. Some
opportunities to be considered are:
Complete reconstruction of Camp Mary Bunker-complete waterfront access development-
removal of caretaker residence and use of property for recreational purposes; encourage or
remove ―camping‖ aspect, add playgrounds and/or small open fields. Develop waterfront
campground/boat, canoe, kayak launch area, remove buildings and tent platforms. Acquire
any adjacent private lands and obtain option of first refusal of abutting properties; obtain
easements on DEM frontage and develop 50’ beach rights (DEM permitted) area.
Purchase any state-owned properties adjoining I-90 that may be available including the 12'
easement along the corridor.
Master plan complete recreational facilities in conjunction with new educational facilities to
be placed at the Wilson School property. Consider MHD linkage contributions from the
Route 27/Route 9 intersection, TEA-21 funding and reorientation of Building 19 and Super
Stop & Shop parking areas..
Natick Open Space and Recreation Plan 2002 82
Appendix C: Resident Quesionnaire
TOWN OF NATICK RESIDENT
QUESTIONNAIRE
TOWN OF NATICK OPEN SPACE COMMITTEE
* Source: Natick Days
_________________________________________________________________________________________________
1. Open Space Importance:
very important somewhat less unimport priority
a. Drinking water 215 33 8 1 2 1
b. Water Protection 199 50 8 2 2
c. Hiking/Bike Trails 68 88 33 8 1 11
d. Quality of Life 196 52 5 3 3
e. Attractive/Appeal 133 93 26 2 2 5
f. Biodiversity 96 94 36 12 1 8
g. Agricultural 52 100 73 24 3 7
h. home value 91 87 46 24 6 10
I. Athletic fields 64 96 8 25 7 9
j. Parks and Rec 125 88 35 6 1 6
k. Wildlife Habitat 141 76 31 5 2 4
Comments:
Provides wildlife habitat, improves quality of air, water and noise levels. Areas often used are; South
Natick Dam & Falls, Sassamon Golf Course, Pegan Cove Park, Broadmoore, Community Organic Farm
Murphy's field, Town Forest, Town Common(music).These areas provide exercise areas, educational, beauty,
lowers taxes and causes less traffic. * IT should be acquired now, before it's too late!
daily weekly monthly none uninformed
2. How many times/yr. Use open space? 43 118 81 8
2a. How may times/yr use trails? 13 29 98 27 41
3. How many times/yr private open space? 8 16 *105 20 40
(includes Marino Farm) * includes rarely
Comments:
Provide walks around the reservoir, better management of parks & open space, connect trails, increase water
frontage areas. Join town parks with Emerald necklace in Boston, increase beauty in parks, streetscapes,
with cooperative efforts with DPW, Natick Garden Club and Open Space Committee. More bike trails and
atheltic fields. Important property to acquire; Castle, Elm Bank, Nanet woods, Calahan Ht.Park, any water
frontage. Marino Farm is famous for sledding, picking flowers and blueberries. Additional open space/trails
Hamlet trails, Rockland Street to Rt. 135, area behind Hospital, rear of 166 S. Main Street and High School.
Construct new sidewalks on Winter Street and increase safety on all trails (elderly) * Too many skunks!
Natick Open Space and Recreation Plan 2002 83
4. Are the Open Space Adequate? Yes*more no uninformed
101 83 5
Comments:
Areas to be improved include; gravel pit, tolder playground, Hunnelwell Farms, Mill Street(has deer)
Mabardy Property, Winterstreet and areas around Lake Cochituate. Knowledge of trails needs to be
advertised better and distributed. Concentrate on smaller lots. X-country skiing. Improve variety.
* No more development.
5. Would you support Town Meeting to purchase Open Space? yes no maybe $
118 6 4
6. Resident for : 0-2 yrs 2 to 5 5 to 10 11 to 25 25 to 35 more
52 27 68 41 21 22
7. Why choose Natick? Educ/Lib affordable Location Fam/Frien open space Quality/character
(maybe more than one) 32 46 77 51 12 53
(25+yrs)
Diverse Lake by chance Church Architecture sports
8 1 1 1 1 1
Priority
1. Location
2. Quality/character of Town
3. Family/Friends
8. Children? 1 to 5 6 to 11 12 to 18 graduated none
113 87 45 20 17
9 Precinct? 1 2 3 4 5 6
3 3 11 7 11 10
7 8 9 10
16 3 16 21
10. Where do you live? North South East West Central (DT)
32 48 35 45 72
11. Interest in assisting this Committee? yes no
Kate Cardamone x
Reivsed: 2.26.2002
Natick Open Space and Recreation Plan 2002 84
TOWN OF NATICK RESIDENT
QUESTIONNAIRE
TOWN OF NATICK OPEN SPACE COMMITTEE
* Source: Fall Town Meeting
__________________________________________________________________________________________
1. Open Space Importance:
very important somewhat less unimport Priority
a. Drinking water 46 8 1 0 0 1
b. Water Protection 38 12 4 0 0 2
c. Hiking/Bike Trails 11 24 12 6 2 10
d. Quality of Life 32 16 5 1 0 3
e. Attractive/Appeal 21 22 9 3 0 6
f. Biodiversity 14 17 16 6 0 9
g. Agricultural 7 14 18 12 3 11
h. home value 19 22 10 1 2 7
I. Athletic fields 17 23 11 2 2 8
j. Parks and Rec 24 23 8 0 1 4
k. Wildlife Habitat 22 21 8 3 1 5
Comments: Open Space beautifies the Town and lowers the noise level.
Provides area for children to play and adults to relax. Less space means less water useage and
increased traffic congestion. Preserve any open space!
daily weekly monthly none uninformed
2. How many times/yr. Use open space? 3 15 34 1 1
2a. How may times/yr use trails? 2 3 18 15 3
3. How many times/yr private open space? 3 4 18 19 1
Comments: Other space includes; Walnut Hill School, Lookout Farm, Congnexm Elm Bank, Coolage
Hill, Winterwoods, Sassamon Golf Course, Broadmoor, Town Forest, trails through Castle property, Hamlet Estates
and Woodland Village. Save land for grandchildren. Increase flowers, maintenance and include trail maps and kiosks.
4. Are the Open Space Adequate? yes no sometimes
28 19 2
Additional Comments:
Clean-up existing open Space. Acquire Mabardy Property. (Rt. 27 & Rockland). Need more basketball Courts.
Improve maintenance. Revitalize trails in Pegan Cove Park.
5. Would you support Town Meeting to purchase Open Space? yes no
50 2
Natick Open Space and Recreation Plan 2002 85
6. Resident for : 0-2 yrs 2 to 5 5 to 10 11 to 25 25 to 35 more
3 2 6 15 13 16
open
7. Why choose Natick? Education affordable Location Native space Love it! medical
(maybe more than one) 10 15 18 16 2 6 1
(25+yrs)
8. Children? 1 to 5 6 to 11 12 to 18 graduated none
10 14 26 25 6
9 Precinct? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
4 5 5 3 6 8 4
8 9 10
2 10 6
Central
10. Where do you live? North South East West (DT)
9 10 10 14 12
11. Interest in assisting this Committee? yes no
3 2
Donna Saponan - 202 S. Main St. 655.8138
Bob Heavey 186 S. Main St. 655.5154
Zac Garlafalo 15 Tucker St. 655.6462
revised: 2.26.2002
Natick Open Space and Recreation Plan 2002 86
Appendix D: Use of Town Fields
Natick Open Space and Recreation Plan 2002 87
INSERTED PAGE 1 OF 7
Natick Open Space and Recreation Plan 2002 88
INSERTED PAGE 2 OF 7
Natick Open Space and Recreation Plan 2002 89
INSERTED PAGE 3 OF 7
Natick Open Space and Recreation Plan 2002 90
INSERTED PAGE 4 OF 7
Natick Open Space and Recreation Plan 2002 91
INSERTED PAGE 5 OF 7
Natick Open Space and Recreation Plan 2002 92
INSERTED PAGE 6 OF 7
Natick Open Space and Recreation Plan 2002 93
INSERTED PAGE 7 OF 7
Natick Open Space and Recreation Plan 2002 94
Appendix E: Land Preservation Tools
In addition to zoning, there are a number of land preservation tools that will protect open space.
Some require annual reapplication and recertification, generally found under:
M.G.L. c.61, at http://www.state.ma.us/legis/laws/mgl/gl%2D61%2Dtoc.htm;
others are permanent, as in M.G.L. c. 184, sec. 30-32,
http://www.state.ma.us/legis/laws/mgl/184-30.htm,
http://www.state.ma.us/legis/laws/mgl/184-31.htm, and
http://www.state.ma.us/legis/laws/mgl/184-32.htm.
More on the following information can be found at:
www.state.ma.us/envir/conservation/restrict.htm.
CONSERVATION RESTRICTIONS
For additional information on Conservation Restrictions, see Daniel C. Perry, “Conservation
restrictions – A primer,” which follows (reprinted with permission).
What is a Conservation Restriction?
A conservation restriction is a legally binding agreement between a landowner (grantor) and a holder
(grantee) - usually a public agency or a private land trust; whereby the grantor agrees to limit the use of
his/her property for the purpose of protecting certain conservation values.
The conservation restriction may run for a period of years or in perpetuity and is recorded at the Registry of
Deeds runs with the title). Certain income, estate or real estate tax benefits may be available to the grantor
of a conservation restriction.
What is the Role of EOEA?
In Massachusetts, all conservation restrictions held by municipalities or private, non-profit land trusts must
be approved by the Secretary of the Executive Office of Environmental Affairs (EOEA).
M.G.L. ch.184, s.31-33 requires Secretariat approval of conservation restrictions as a means of assuring
"public benefit." The Secretary’s approval affords certain protections for easements in gross and in
perpetuity.
The Director of the Division of Conservation Services (DCS) has been assigned to make recommendations
for approval, modification, or rejection of requests for approval by the Secretary.
The DCS provides assistance to landowners, municipalities, and land trusts regarding conservation
restrictions and has produced "The Massachusetts Conservation Restriction Handbook," a guide to drafting
conservation restrictions and to obtaining Secretariat approval.
Contact:
Joel A. Lerner, Director
(617) 626-1012
joel.lerner@state.ma.us
For additional information on the requirements for Open Space and Recreation Plans for
Natick Open Space and Recreation Plan 2002 95
eligibility for grant programs, see: www.state.ma.us/envir/conservation/open.htm, which
contains the following:
OPEN SPACE AND RECREATION PLANS
All grants are partnerships between state and local agencies and are based on recommendations the
applicant community makes independently in its Open Space and Recreation Plan prepared by volunteer
groups or by consultants with help from DCS. DCS approved plans are an eligibility requirement for
participation in the grant programs. However, communities often prepare these plans regardless of the
availability of grant assistance. The factors that affect open space are identified and examined during the
planning process, and strategies the community may use to protect and enjoy its character, natural resources
and open spaces are written. Protecting open space can provide profound economic benefits by helping to
avoid the costly mistakes of misusing or overwhelming available resources. An open space and recreation
plan is a blueprint for how to obtain the benefits of development without losing valued environmental
assets. Planning requirements, a companion workbook, and technical assistance are available from DCS.
Contact:
Jennifer Soper
(617) 626-1015
jennifer.soper@state.ma.us
Another way to preserve open space is to purchase the development rights from the owner. A
critical component of both a conservation restriction and the purchase of development rights is to
include language prohibiting the use of the square footage of the restricted parcel to be used
towards development to a greater density on the remainder or any other parcel. Even a
conservation restriction on an entire parcel, without the suggested language, is not sufficient,
because the owner of the fee could purchase an adjacent parcel and use the fee of the restricted
parcel to do a denser cluster plan on the unrestricted parcel by using the restricted parcel for the
open space requirement. See Friends of the Shawangunks, Inc. v. Knowlton, 64 N.Y. 2d 387,
476 N.E. 2d 988 (1985).
Other protection methods are the Dedication Doctrine, where an owner dedicates his or her land
to the public generally or for specified purposes. An owner may also restrict what uses can be
made by the public; for instance, a dedication for passive trail use, but not for motorized
vehicles.
The Public Charitable Trust Doctrine enforces the wishes of a grantor who leaves land (or other
things) in a will to be used for a specific purpose. If the use is no longer practical, a petition to
the Attorney General is required, and then a court will allow a use consistent with the intent of
the grantor. For instance, a town which is willed a small building with no parking availability
might petition to sell the building, and use the money to purchase books for their adequate town
library.
A common scheme is one in which a developer has placed restrictions on homes in a
development, or shown on a plan a scheme on which a purchaser might rely. If an owner decides
that he or she wants to put a gas station or other use on their land, the other homeowners can sue
to enforce the common scheme, to protect the restrictions on which they relied. Sometimes, a
common scheme includes large open land areas, and if those were heavily advertised, used to
“entice” buyers, and/or represented as “to be kept open forever”, or “park”, etc., the owners in
the development may have the right to have those areas remain open for their use. In addition, the
term “park” or “for the public” may be interpreted to be a dedication by the developer to the
Natick Open Space and Recreation Plan 2002 96
public of the open space. In that case, the community and/or the Attorney General may appear in
court and claim the public's right to use the open space.
One other way to preserve open space is if the land is tax title land, the community may want to
impose any one of a number of restrictions on the parcels prior to selling them. For instance, the
land can be sold with a prohibition on developing it or on using the square footage towards
additional development potential. It can be sold with a right of the public to use paths, either
existing or to be made, or it can be sold for less than market value to an abutter if the abutter
agrees to provide amenities for the public – for instance, development of passive recreation trails.
Another excellent way to preserve open space is to inform landowners of the tremendous tax
benefits of donating a conservation restriction (CR) or doing a bargain sale of a CR. That allows
a landowner to take a deduction from taxes during his or her life, obtain reduced property tax
benefits, and in addition, take 40% of the value of the gift/bargain sale out of his or her estate.
The landowner’s family can also elect to do this post-mortem; it is a very useful tool which
allows heirs who would otherwise have to sell the land to pay estate taxes, to keep the land, and
can even reduce the estate tax liability to 0.
For more information, see: http://www.stevesmall.com/tls/index.html
LIABILITY
Concerns about the potential for liability for proposed open space and recreational areas are
uppermost in the minds of owners, regardless of whether the owner is a private owner or the
government. In Massachusetts, M.G.L. c. 21 sec. 17C, more commonly known as the
“Recreational Use Statute”, affords any owner who allows the public to use their land for
recreation at no charge, relief from liability, so long as the owner has not been willful, reckless
and wanton. The Court in Sandler v. Commonwealth, 419 Mass. 334 (1990) defined willful,
wanton or reckless conduct for the purposes of the Recreational Use Statute to be the same as
that required for criminal liability. “Reckless failure to act involves an intentional or
unreasonable disregard of a risk that presents a high degree of probability that substantial harm
will result to another [such that the] risk of death or grave bodily injury must be known or
reasonably apparent…”
In other words, so long as an owner did not do something that was so dangerous, and so
obviously probable to cause serious bodily injury or death, they are shielded from liability to a
recreational user. Some of the cases that have been decided by Massachusetts and the 1 st Circuit
Courts are illustrative of the broad range of protection afforded by the Recreational Use Statute
are:
Anderson v. Springfield, 406 Mass. 632 (1990). The recreational use statute is applicable to
injuries on municipally-owned and other governmentally-owned recreational areas to the same
extent as to private landowners.
Sandler v. Commonwealth, 419 Mass. 334 (1995). The persistent failure to remedy defects in a
tunnel on a traveled bikeway was not wanton or reckless conduct imposing liability under c. 21,
sec. 17C for injuries to bike rider who hit an uncovered 8-inch drain hidden by a puddle of water
in an unlit tunnel (the drain was constantly coming uncovered and the lights were usually
broken). The Sandler court found that “a persistent failure to repair defects in the tunnel on a
traveled bikeway simply does not present a level of dangerous that warrants liability” under
section 17C.
Natick Open Space and Recreation Plan 2002 97
Seich v. Town of Canton, 426 Mass. 84 (1997) – charge for registration fee to participate in
basketball league is not an entrance fee for public use of property, so no liability.
Hardy v. Loon Mountain Recreation Corp.U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit, No. 01-
1263, January 8, 2002. No liability to injured plaintiff who paid to ride a gondola to the top of
the mountain, since anyone could hike up or get there by other means because “charge” means
an actual admission fee paid for permission to enter the land for recreational purposes. (citing
cases holding that private instructor fees, campground facility fees, parking fees per car, and not
per occupant are not “charges” for purposes of recreational use statute so long as use in general
of the area is without charge).
Natick Open Space and Recreation Plan 2002 98
INSERT “CONSERVATION
RESTRICTIONS – A PRIMER” HERE
(PAGE 1 OF 2)
Natick Open Space and Recreation Plan 2002 99
INSERT “CONSERVATION
RESTRICTIONS – A PRIMER” HERE
(PAGE 2 OF 2)
Natick Open Space and Recreation Plan 2002 100
INSERT “CONSERVATION
RESTRICTIONS – A PRIMER” HERE
(PAGE 3 OF 3)
Natick Open Space and Recreation Plan 2002 101
Appendix F: ADA Access Self-Evaluation
Natick Open Space and Recreation Plan 2002 102
Related docs
