DOCSLIB.ORG

Northfield Open Space and Recreation Plan 2021 – 2028

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Northfield Open Space and Recreation Plan 2021 – 2028 FINAL DRAFT NORTHFIELD OPEN SPACE AND RECREATION PLAN 2021 – 2028 FINAL DRAFT Prepared by the Northfield Open Space Committee with assistance from the Franklin Regional Council of Governments This project was funded by a Direct Local Technical Assistance Grant provided by the Massachusetts Department of Housing and Community Development FINAL DRAFT TOWN OF NORTHFIELD OPEN SPACE AND RECREATION PLAN 2021 – 2028 Prepared by the Northfield Open Space Committee (OSC): Julia Blyth, Chair Joanne McGee Jerry Wagener Jennifer Tufts Robin Conley Susan Space With technical assistance provided by the Franklin Regional Council of Governments Planning Department Peggy Sloan, Planning Director Kimberly Noake MacPhee, Land Use and Natural Resources Program Manager Helena Farrell, Land Use and Natural Resources Planner Ryan Clary, Senior GIS Specialist Tamsin Flanders, Planning Intern This project was funded by a Direct Local Technical Assistance Grant provided by the Massachusetts Department of Housing and Community Development TABLE OF CONTENTS Section 1 – Plan Summary……………………………………….………………1-1 Section 2 – Introduction………………………………………………………….2-1 A. Statement of Purpose.…………………………………………………………….……..2-1 B. Planning Process and Public Participation.………………………………………….….2-2 Section 3 – Community Setting………………………………………………….3-1 A. Regional Context…………………………………………………………………..……3-1 B. History of the Community………………………………………………………………3-9 C. Population Characteristics……………………………………………………...……...3-13 D. Growth and Development Patterns……………………………………………...……..3-20 Section 4 – Environmental Inventory and Analysis…………………………..….4-1 A. Documenting and Mapping Ecosystems..………………………………………………4-1 B. Topography, Geology, and Soils………………………………………………………..4-9 C. Landscape Character………………………………………………………………...…4-15 D. Water Resources……………………………………………………………………….4-15 E. Vegetation………………………………………………………………………..…….4-29 F. Fisheries and Wildlife…………………………………………………………...……..4-38 G. Scenic Resources and Unique Environments……………………………………...…..4-46 H. Environmental Challenges…………………………………………………...………...4-57 Section 5 – Inventory of Lands of Conservation and Recreation Interest…...…..5-1 A. Introduction………………………………………………………………………..……5-1 B. Privately Owned Parcels…..………………………………………………………….…5-5 C. Public Parcels……………………………………………………………………...…..5-19 D. Recreational Resources and Open Space Equity…………………………………..…..5-23 E. Opportunities for Funding Open Space and Conservation Projects in Northfield….…5-24 Section 6 – Community Goals……………………………………………...……6-1 A. Description of Process………………………………………….…………………...…..6-1 B. Statement of Open Space and Recreation Goals…………………………………..……6-1 Section 7 – Analysis of Needs……………………………….………………...…7-1 A. Summary of Natural Resource Protection Needs…………………………………….....7-2 B. Summary of Community Needs…………………………………………………….…..7-4 C. Management Needs…………………………………………………………..…………7-9 Section 8 – Goals and Objectives…………………………………………...……8-1 Section 9 – Seven Year Action Plan………………………………..……………9-1 Section 10 – Public Comment………………………………………….……….10-1 Section 11 – References…………………………………….…………..………11-1 Appendix A – ADA Self Evaluation Report…………………………………….A-1 Appendix B – 2019 Open Space and Recreation Survey and Results……..…….B-1 Appendix C – Agendas, Sign-In Sheets, & Publicity...………………………….C-1 Appendix D – Letters of Support…………………………..……………………D-1 FINAL DRAFT SECTION 1 PLAN SUMMARY The Northfield Open Space and Recreation Plan (OSRP) focuses the interest and motivation of community members towards the maintenance and promotion of existing recreational resources and the identification and protection of Northfield’s natural, recreational, and historical resources. The OSRP acknowledges the balance between conservation and economic development, and how these work together to promote the long-term vitality of the town. The OSRP’s purpose is to provide a framework for decisions dealing with land uses that may impact valuable natural resources and the lands that contain unique historical, recreational, scenic, and wildlife habitat values. The 2020 Northfield Open Space and Recreation Plan (OSRP) represents the understanding of Northfield residents of the interdependence of forests, streams, swamps, wetlands, agricultural fields, scenic views, and significant historical structures and landscapes with the town’s rural character. The OSRP illustrates the roles of open spaces in a township: public recreational amenities provide safe spaces to recreate, and undeveloped areas provide wildlife habitat and ensure that residents have access to forests and fields to walk, hike, and view nature. The Seven-Year Action Plan (Section 9) gives concrete substance to the goals and objectives that were developed from the results of the 2019 Open Space and Recreation Survey and from community members’ understanding of and input regarding their Town’s natural resource base. Within the overarching goal of strengthening resiliency to climate change, the 2020 Northfield Open Space and Recreation Plan prioritizes actions that will: Preserve the rural character of the town; Protect and preserve natural resources in preparation for a changing climate; Improve and maintain public education related to open space; and Promote wide recreational usage of Northfield’s natural resources. Section 1 - Plan Summary Northfield Open Space and Recreation Plan 1-1 FINAL DRAFT SECTION 2 INTRODUCTION A. STATEMENT OF PURPOSE The purpose of this plan is to provide an accurate and thorough basis for decision-making involving the current and future open space and recreation needs of the residents of Northfield. This plan brings together and builds upon the planning efforts of the past several decades, and includes the 2014 Northfield Master Plan and previous Open Space and Recreation Plans (OSRP) that have been periodically completed by the town through the years. This 2020 OSRP update primarily builds on the most recent 2013 OSRP. While this 2020 OSRP is based on the 2013 OSRP, it has been revised and updated to reflect current thinking and consensus in town on the most important recreation and natural resource needs and the best solutions for addressing them. The detailed Seven- Year Action Plan provides a step-by-step guide that, when carried out by an Open Space Planning Committee and other town boards and commissions, will successfully implement the town’s open space and recreation goals and objectives. Since the 2013 OSRP, the Town of Northfield has worked to implement some of the Plan’s recommendations, including OS1.1- Recognizing outstanding citizen stewards; OS1.5- Encouraging residents to participate in the Keystone forest management program; OS2.1- Discussing conservation goals with area land trusts; OS2.2- Bringing land trust representatives to Northfield with programs; OS 2.4- work with the Planning Board on zoning bylaws; OS2.7- Help coordinate the response to the First Light Power relicensing project; OS3.3- prepared projects for CPA funding; OS4.1-2 Identify and promote conservation priorities; R 2.2-6 helped form and inform an ad hoc Community Park Committee to explore the possibility of creating a park; R3.2- Develop a printed Northfield Trail Guide; R3.3- trail maps online; R3.4 Trailhead signage and kiosks; R3.5 Coordinated hikes; R3.6 Needs assessment of trails; R3.7 Creation of new trails; R 3.8- Work with Highway Department on trailhead parking. In particular, we are pleased to have been able to work with many partners toward the permanent protection of approximately 1300 acres, which DCR now holds as new State Forest land as of 2016— this was land highlighted on our Greenprint plan. Additionally, our work repairing, mapping, interpreting, and publicizing our trail system has been extensive and has helped many residents and visitors discover new favorite places to hike. In 2018 we were able to use CPA funding to contribute toward a new conservation area, and our partner, the Mount Grace Land Conservation Trust, helped us built the first accessible trail in town. B. PLANNING PROCESS AND PUBLIC PARTICIPATION An Open Space and Recreation Survey was developed and reviewed by the Open Space Section 2 - Introduction Northfield Open Space and Recreation Plan 2-1 FINAL DRAFT Committee. A survey was made available to residents in town in the Spring of 2019 on the town website and as an announcement on the Northfield “Nextdoor” social media site. The survey was also distributed in town committees mailboxes and by Every Door Direct Mailing to every residence on the town street list. Residents could respond via online or by paper copy. Paper copies were placed at the Library and Town Hall. A total of 239 completed surveys were returned timely, with an additional 16 surveys that were returned well after our deadline; comments from those late surveys were recorded and can be found in the Appendix, but their multiple-choice responses were not tabulated. The results were used to inform discussions by the Open Space Planning Committee in its development of Sections: 6 – Community Goals, 7 – Analysis of Needs, and 8 – Goals and Objectives. There have been 21 public meetings of the Northfield Open Space Planning Committee, including the Public Forum, scheduled to be held on February 10, 2021. The following boards and commissions were represented on the Open Space Planning Committee or contributed to certain sections of the OSRP: . Conservation Commission . Historical Commission . Community Park Committee . Community Preservation Committee . Planning Board The Franklin Regional Council of Governments
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Apn80: Northern Spruce
    ACID PEATLAND SYSTEM APn80 Northern Floristic Region Northern Spruce Bog Black spruce–dominated peatlands on deep peat. Canopy is often sparse, with stunted trees. Understory is dominated by ericaceous shrubs and fine- leaved graminoids on high Sphagnum hummocks. Vegetation Structure & Composition Description is based on summary of vascular plant data from 84 plots (relevés) and bryophyte data from 17 plots. l Moss layer consists of a carpet of Sphag- num with moderately high hummocks, usually surrounding tree bases, and weakly developed hollows. S. magellanicum dominates hum- mocks, with S. angustifolium present in hollows. High hummocks of S. fuscum may be present, although they are less frequent than in open bogs and poor fens. Pleurozium schre- beri is often very abundant and forms large mats covering drier mounds in shaded sites. Dicranum species are commonly interspersed within the Pleurozium mats. l Forb cover is minimal, and may include three-leaved false Solomon’s seal (Smilacina trifolia) and round-leaved sundew (Drosera rotundifolia). l Graminoid cover is 5-25%. Fine-leaved graminoids are most important and include three-fruited bog sedge (Carex trisperma) and tussock cottongrass (Eriophorum vagi- natum). l Low-shrub layer is prominent and dominated by ericaceous shrubs, particularly Lab- rador tea (Ledum groenlandicum), which often has >25% cover. Other ericads include bog laurel (Kalmia polifolia), small cranberry (Vaccinium oxycoccos), and leatherleaf (Chamaedaphne calyculata). Understory trees are limited to scattered black spruce. l Canopy is dominated by black spruce. Trees are usually stunted (<30ft [10m] tall) with 25-75% cover . Some sites have scattered tamaracks in addition to black spruce.
    [Show full text]
  • Continuous Forest Inventory 2014
    Manual for Continuous Forest Inventory Field Procedures Bureau of Forestry Division of State Parks and Recreation February 2014 Massachusetts Department Conservation and Recreation Manual for Continuous Forest Inventory Field Procedures Massachusetts Department of Conservation and Recreation February, 2014 Preface The purpose of this manual is to provide individuals involved in collecting continuous forest inventory data on land administered by the Massachusetts Department of Conservation and Recreation with clear instructions for carrying out their work. This manual was first published in 1959. It has undergone minor revisions in 1960, 1961, 1964 and 1979, and 2013. Major revisions were made in April, 1968, September, 1978 and March, 1998. This manual is a minor revision of the March, 1998 version and an update of the April 2010 printing. TABLE OF CONTENTS Plot Location and Establishment The Crew 3 Equipment 3 Location of Established Plots 4 The Field Book 4 New CFI Plot Location 4 Establishing a Starting Point 4 The Route 5 Traveling the Route to the Plot 5 Establishing the Plot Center 5 Establishing the Witness Trees 6 Monumentation 7 Establishing the Plot Perimeter 8 Tree Data General 11 Tree Number 11 Azimuth 12 Distance 12 Tree Species 12-13 Diameter Breast Height 13-15 Tree Status 16 Product 17 Sawlog Height 18 Sawlog Percent Soundness 18 Bole Height 19 Bole Percent Soundness 21 Management Potential 21 Sawlog Tree Grade 23 Hardwood Tree Grade 23 Eastern White Pine Tree Grade 24 Quality Determinant 25 Crown Class 26 Mechanical Loss
    [Show full text]
  • A Strategic Plan
    MISSION: Rehabilitation Schell Memorial Bridge A Strategic Plan Friends of Schell Bridge • Northfield, Massachusetts Credits Friends of Schell Bridge Cover photo: Bruce Kahn In 2003 Schell Memorial Bridge was named by PreservatiON Mass as Back Cover Photo: Marie Ferré one of the ten most endangered historical landmarks in Massachusetts. Layout: allthumbs.org Galvanized by this honor, Friends of Schell Bridge in 2004 formally incorporated as a non-profit organization to save the bridge and to generate interest in rehabilitating the bridge for pedestrian and bicycle Sources paths. Friends of Schell Bridge (FSB) contacted the Picker Engineering Schell Memorial Bridge Program at Smith College for an independent assessment of the HAER #MA-111 condition of the bridge. A senior student design team, working with memory.loc.gov/ammem/ two professional structural engineers from New York City evaluated and tested components of the bridge. Their detailed report in 2005 Core Habitats of Northfield emphasized that the bridge structure, while some components needed BioMap and Living Waters: to be replaced, was structurally sound and a good candidate for Guiding Land Conservation for rehabilitation. Biodiversity in In 2006, FSB spent significant energy in building community support. Massachusetts. A petition circulated gathered 1400 supporters, including 700 in the Massachusetts Division of small town of Northfield. In 2007, FSB successfully rallied voters to Fisheries and Wildlife © 2004. reverse a Select Board decision so that the Schell Bridge, eligible since 1982, will finally be nominated for the National Register of Historic Schell Bridge, Places. Historic Bridges of Michigan & Elsewhere Following an informational meeting with the Massachusetts Highway Department in September 2006, FSB decided to develop a strategic www.historicbridges.org plan to save the bridge as an historic treasure by highlighting the recreational, economic and environmental values of Schell Bridge Carl Compton, “Story of the for the twenty-first century.
    [Show full text]
  • Official Transportation Map 15 HAZARDOUS CARGO All Hazardous Cargo (HC) and Cargo Tankers General Information Throughout Boston and Surrounding Towns
    WELCOME TO MASSACHUSETTS! CONTACT INFORMATION REGIONAL TOURISM COUNCILS STATE ROAD LAWS NONRESIDENT PRIVILEGES Massachusetts grants the same privileges EMERGENCY ASSISTANCE Fire, Police, Ambulance: 911 16 to nonresidents as to Massachusetts residents. On behalf of the Commonwealth, MBTA PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION 2 welcome to Massachusetts. In our MASSACHUSETTS DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 10 SPEED LAW Observe posted speed limits. The runs daily service on buses, trains, trolleys and ferries 14 3 great state, you can enjoy the rolling Official Transportation Map 15 HAZARDOUS CARGO All hazardous cargo (HC) and cargo tankers General Information throughout Boston and surrounding towns. Stations can be identified 13 hills of the west and in under three by a black on a white, circular sign. Pay your fare with a 9 1 are prohibited from the Boston Tunnels. hours travel east to visit our pristine MassDOT Headquarters 857-368-4636 11 reusable, rechargeable CharlieCard (plastic) or CharlieTicket 12 DRUNK DRIVING LAWS Massachusetts enforces these laws rigorously. beaches. You will find a state full (toll free) 877-623-6846 (paper) that can be purchased at over 500 fare-vending machines 1. Greater Boston 9. MetroWest 4 MOBILE ELECTRONIC DEVICE LAWS Operators cannot use any of history and rich in diversity that (TTY) 857-368-0655 located at all subway stations and Logan airport terminals. At street- 2. North of Boston 10. Johnny Appleseed Trail 5 3. Greater Merrimack Valley 11. Central Massachusetts mobile electronic device to write, send, or read an electronic opens its doors to millions of visitors www.mass.gov/massdot level stations and local bus stops you pay on board.
    [Show full text]
  • Beechwood Gardens Bog Rosemary
    Bog Rosemary* Andromeda polifolia Height: 24 inches Spread: 3 feet Sunlight: Hardiness Zone: 1b Description: A very small shrub for detail use in gardens, with bluish needle-like foliage and pink urn-shaped flowers in spring; very fastidious as to growing conditions, needs ample consistent moisture and highly organic soils, will not tolerate alkaline soil Ornamental Features Bog Rosemary flowers Photo courtesy of NetPS Plant Bog Rosemary features dainty nodding white bell-shaped flowers with Finder shell pink overtones at the ends of the branches from mid to late spring. It has bluish-green foliage. The needles remain bluish-green throughout the winter. The fruit is not ornamentally significant. Landscape Attributes Bog Rosemary is a multi-stemmed evergreen shrub with a more or less rounded form. It lends an extremely fine and delicate texture to the landscape composition which should be used to full effect. This is a relatively low maintenance shrub, and usually looks its best without pruning, although it will tolerate pruning. It has no significant negative characteristics. Bog Rosemary is recommended for the following landscape applications; - General Garden Use Planting & Growing Bog Rosemary will grow to be about 24 inches tall at maturity, with a spread of 3 feet. It tends to fill out right to the ground and therefore doesn't necessarily require facer plants in front. It grows at a slow rate, and under ideal conditions can be expected to live for approximately 20 years. 361 N. Hunter Highway Drums, PA 18222 (570) 788-4181 www.beechwood-gardens.com This shrub does best in full sun to partial shade.
    [Show full text]
  • Acadian-Appalachian Alpine Tundra
    Acadian-Appalachian Alpine Tundra Macrogroup: Alpine yourStateNatural Heritage Ecologist for more information about this habitat. This is modeledmap a distributiononbased current and is data nota substitute for field inventory. based Contact © Josh Royte (The Nature Conservancy, Maine) Description: A sparsely vegetated system near or above treeline in the Northern Appalachian Mountains, dominated by lichens, dwarf-shrubland, and sedges. At the highest elevations, the dominant plants are dwarf heaths such as alpine bilberry and cushion-plants such as diapensia. Bigelow’s sedge is characteristic. Wetland depressions, such as small alpine bogs and rare sloping fens, may be found within the surrounding upland matrix. In the lower subalpine zone, deciduous shrubs such as nannyberry provide cover in somewhat protected areas; dwarf heaths including crowberry, Labrador tea, sheep laurel, and lowbush blueberry, are typical. Nearer treeline, spruce and fir that State Distribution: ME, NH, NY, VT have become progressively more stunted as exposure increases may form nearly impenetrable krummholz. Total Habitat Acreage: 8,185 Ecological Setting and Natural Processes: Percent Conserved: 98.1% High winds, snow and ice, cloud-cover fog, and intense State State GAP 1&2 GAP 3 Unsecured summer sun exposure are common and control ecosystem State Habitat % Acreage (acres) (acres) (acres) dynamics. Found mostly above 4000' in the northern part of NH 51% 4,160 4,126 0 34 our region, alpine tundra may also occur in small patches on ME 44% 3,624 2,510 1,082 33 lower ridgelines and summits and at lower elevations near the Atlantic coast. NY 3% 285 194 0 91 VT 1% 115 115 0 0 Similar Habitat Types: Acadian-Appalachian Montane Spruce-Fir-Hardwood Forests typically occur downslope.
    [Show full text]
  • H. R. 3550 [Report No
    IB Union Calendar No. 259 108TH CONGRESS 2D SESSION H. R. 3550 [Report No. 108–452, Part I] To authorize funds for Federal-aid highways, highway safety programs, and transit programs, and for other purposes. IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES NOVEMBER 20, 2003 Mr. YOUNG of Alaska (for himself, Mr. OBERSTAR, Mr. PETRI, Mr. LIPINSKI, Mr. BOEHLERT, Mr. RAHALL, Mr. COBLE, Mr. DEFAZIO, Mr. DUNCAN, Mr. COSTELLO, Mr. GILCHREST, Ms. NORTON, Mr. MICA, Mr. NADLER, Mr. HOEKSTRA, Mr. MENENDEZ, Mr. QUINN, Ms. CORRINE BROWN of Florida, Mr. EHLERS, Mr. FILNER, Mr. BACHUS, Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas, Mr. LATOURETTE, Mr. TAYLOR of Mississippi, Mrs. KELLY, Ms. MILLENDER-MCDONALD, Mr. BAKER, Mr. CUMMINGS, Mr. NEY, Mr. BLUMENAUER, Mr. LOBIONDO, Mrs. TAUSCHER, Mr. MORAN of Kansas, Mr. PASCRELL, Mr. GARY G. MILLER of California, Mr. BOS- WELL, Mr. BEREUTER, Mr. HOLDEN, Mr. ISAKSON, Mr. LAMPSON, Mr. HAYES, Mr. BAIRD, Mr. SIMMONS, Ms. BERKLEY, Mrs. CAPITO, Mr. HONDA, Mr. BROWN of South Carolina, Mr. LARSEN of Washington, Mr. JOHNSON of Illinois, Mr. CAPUANO, Mr. REHBERG, Mr. WEINER, Mr. PLATTS, Ms. CARSON of Indiana, Mr. GRAVES, Mr. HOEFFEL, Mr. KEN- NEDY of Minnesota, Mr. THOMPSON of California, Mr. SHUSTER, Mr. BISHOP of New York, Mr. BOOZMAN, Mr. MICHAUD, Mr. CHOCOLA, Mr. DAVIS of Tennessee, Mr. BEAUPREZ, Mr. BURGESS, Mr. BURNS, Mr. PEARCE, Mr. GERLACH, Mr. MARIO DIAZ-BALART of Florida, Mr. POR- TER, Mr. MATHESON, and Mr. CARSON of Oklahoma) introduced the fol- lowing bill; which was referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure MARCH 29, 2004 Reported with an amendment and referred to the Committees on Education and the Workforce, Energy and Commerce, the Judiciary, Resources, and Science, for a period ending not later than March 29, 2004, for consider- ation of such provisions of the bill and amendment as fall within the ju- risdictions of those committees pursuant to clause 1 of rule X 2 [Strike out all after the enacting clause and insert the part printed in italic] MARCH 29, 2004 Additional sponsors: Mr.
    [Show full text]
  • Parks & Recreation Areas in and Around Franklin
    Parks & Recreation areas in and around Franklin County: EnergyPark–Greenfield Rocky Mountain Park–Greenfield Hillside Splash Zone–Greenfield Poet’s Seat Tower–Greenfield Highland Pond–Greenfield Beacon Field Ice Rink–Greenfield Old Greenfield Village–Greenfield Old Deerfield Village–Deerfield Peskeomskut Park–Turners Falls Canalside Rail Trail–Turners Falls Mount Sugarloaf State Reservation–Sunderland Mount Toby State Forest–Sunderland Puffers Pond–Amherst Herlihy Park–South Deerfield Groff Park–Amherst Look Park–Florence Childs Park–Northampton Chesterfield Gorge–Chesterfield Barton Cove Campground and Canoe Rental–Gill High Ledges Wildlife Sanctuary–Shelburne Falls Bridge of Flowers–Shelburne Falls Glacial Potholes–Shelburne Falls Chapel Falls–Ashfield Millers River at Orange Riverfront Park–Orange Butterfield Park–Orange Quabbin–Belchertown Arcadia Wildlife Sanctuary–Easthampton Mt Tom State Reservation–Easthampton Wendell State Forest & Lake Wyola–Wendell Peace Pagoda–Leverett Battle-Dorrance Memorial Forest–West Orange Road, Orange Chestnut Hill Trail-Orange Lake Mattawa-Orange Skinner State Park--South Hadley Hampton Ponds State Park-Westfield DAR State Forest-Goshen Mohawk Trail State Forest-Charlemont Lake Wyola State Park-Shutesbury Wendell State Forest-Millers Falls Norwottuck Rail Trail-Northampton Mount Holyoke Range State Park-Amherst Holyoke Heritage State Park-Holyoke; Visitors Center features exhibits, visit the Children’s Museum, The Merry-Go Round, and the Volleyball Hall of Fame Erving State Forest-Erving .
    [Show full text]
  • Report on the Real Property Owned and Leased by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts
    Report on the Real Property Owned and Leased by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts April 2011 Executive Office for Administration & Finance Division of Capital Asset Management and Maintenance Carole Cornelison, Commissioner Acknowledgements This report was prepared under the direction of Carol Cornelison, Commissioner of the Division of Capital Asset Management and Maintenance and H. Peter Norstrand, Deputy Commissioner for Real Estate Services. Linda Alexander manages and maintains the MAssets database used in this report. Martha Goldsmith, Director of the Office of Leasing and State Office Planning, as well as Thomas Kinney of the Office of Programming, assisted in preparation of the leasing portion of this report. Lisa Musiker, Jason Hodgkins and Alisa Collins assisted in the production and distribution. TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary 1 Report Organization 5 Table 1: Summary of Commonwealth-Owned Real Property by Executive Office 11 Total land acreage, buildings, and gross square feet under each executive office Table 2: Summary of Commonwealth-Owned Real Property by County or Region 15 Total land acreage, buildings, and gross square feet under each County Table 3: Commonwealth-Owned Real Property by Executive Office and Agency 19 Detail site names with acres, buildings, and gross square feet under each agency Table 4: Improvements and Land at Each State Facility/Site by Municipality 73 Detail building list under each facility with site acres and building area by city/town Table 5: Commonwealth Active Lease Agreements by Municipality
    [Show full text]
  • This Boreal Ecological Site Occurs on Depressions of Loess Plains That Are Attributed to Thermokarst Events. in This Ecological
    Ecological Site Description ID: R232XY220AK Ecological Dynamics of the Site: This boreal ecological site occurs on depressions of loess plains that are attributed to thermokarst events. In this ecological site, underlying permafrost melts, causing the ground to slump and form a wet depression. These wet depressions were considered stable open water bodies with little or no hydrologic input and, as a result, succession was considered similar to that of a bog. With time and organic matter accumulation, permafrost will likely reoccupy soil and sites may progress from open water to scrubland or black spruce woodland communities. For the sampled community, the soil was classified as a cryofibrist composed of saturated organic matter. Due to limited sampling, only one community phase was developed for this ecological site. As mentioned above, there are likely numerous communities associated with thermokarst succession so the state-and-transition model is considered incomplete. The sampled community will be considered a thermokarst association. State and Transition Diagram: State ID Number: 1 State Name: Reference State Narrative: Medium shrubs are defined to grow 3-10’ in height, low shrubs are defined to grow 8” – 3’ in height, and dwarf shrubs are defined to grow less than 8” in height. 1 Photo 1.1 Community Phase 1.1 Community Phase Sedge-mixed ericaceous scrub-Sphagnum herbaceous Number: Name: community Community Phase Narrative: Ponded water covered 40% of the plot surface. The dominant vegetation within this plant community was unknown species of Carex and Sphagnum (total combined cover ~70%). Shrub cover primarily occurred in the low and dwarf stratums and was considered a minor vegetative component (~10%).
    [Show full text]
  • 2008 Massachusetts Bicycle Transportation Plan
    Planners Collaborative Design Collaborative Communications Collaborative MASSACHUSETTS BICYCLE TRANSPORTATION PLAN Prepared for Commonwealth of Massachusetts Executive Office of Transportation Prepared by Planners Collaborative, Inc. With assistance from TranSystems Corporation National Center for Bicycling and Walking Rubel Bike Maps Alan McLennan September 2008 Table of Contents Dedication Executive Summary 1 Introduction 1.1 Vision for Sustainable Bicycle Transportation 1.2 The Commonwealth’s Role in Bicycle Transportation 1.3 Investing to Improve Bicycle Transportation 1.4 Organization of the Plan 2 The Context for the Plan 2.1 The Massachusetts Long-Range State Transportation Plan and the Strategic Transportation Plan 2.2 1998 Massachusetts Statewide Bicycle Transportation Plan 2.3 MassHighway Initiatives to Improve Bicycling Conditions 2.3.1 Engineering Directives and Guidelines 2.3.2 MassHighway’s Project Development and Design Guide 2.4 Other Commonwealth Planning Efforts 2.4.1 Transit-Oriented Development 2.4.2 DCR’s Commonwealth Connections 2.4.3 MassHighway Bicycle Facilities Inventory 2.4.4 Regional and Local Planning Efforts 2.4.5 Adjacent States’ Bicycle Facilities and Programs 2.5 Public Outreach in Support of the Plan 3 Bicycle Facility Resources and Opportunities 3.1 Bicycle Facility Types 3.1.1 On-Road Bicycle Facilities 3.1.2 Long Distance Bicycle Routes 3.1.3 Shared Use Paths 3.2 Bicycle Facility Resources 3.2.1 Major Shared Use Path Resources in Massachusetts 3.3 Funded Bicycle Projects 3.4 Congressionally Funded
    [Show full text]
  • Effects of Water Table Position and Plant Functional Group on Plant
    Plant Soil (2015) 387:277–294 DOI 10.1007/s11104-014-2301-8 REGULAR ARTICLE Effects of water table position and plant functional group on plant community, aboveground production, and peat properties in a peatland mesocosm experiment (PEATcosm) Lynette R. Potvin & Evan S. Kane & Rodney A. Chimner & Randall K. Kolka & Erik A. Lilleskov Received: 15 August 2014 /Accepted: 9 October 2014 /Published online: 18 October 2014 # Springer Science+Business Media B.V. (outside the USA) 2014 Abstract peatland mesocosms. We measured vegetation cover, Aims Our objective was to assess the impacts of water aboveground plant production, and peat subsidence to table position and plant functional type on peat struc- analyze interactive PFG and WT effects. ture, plant community composition and aboveground Results Sphagnum rubellum cover increased under high plant production. WT, while Polytrichum cover increased with low WT Methods We initiated a full factorial experiment with 2 and in sedge only PFGs. Sphagnum production was water table (WT) treatments (high and low) and 3 plant greatest with high WT, while vascular plant production functional groups (PFG: sedge, Ericaceae, sedge and was greater in low WT treatments. There was an interac- Ericaceae- unmanipulated) in twenty-four 1 m3 intact tive WT x PFG effect on Ericaceae production. Lowered WT resulted in significant peat surface change and in- creased subsidence. There were significant PFG and WT Responsible Editor: Eric J.W. Visser . effects on net peat accumulation, with the lowest rates of Electronic supplementary material The online version of this accumulation, high and low WT, in sedge only PFGs. article (doi:10.1007/s11104-014-2301-8) contains supplementary Conclusions The shift in water balance leading to material, which is available to authorized users.
    [Show full text]