DOCSLIB.ORG

Goals & Recommendations

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Goals & Recommendations OPEN SPACE, RECREATION & NATURAL RESOURCES GOALS & RECOMMENDATIONS Drawing from an understanding of the existing conditions of Natick’s open This Master Plan (The Plan) is the space and recreation resources, and keeping in mind the identified issues and result of a collaborative process opportunities, the Natick 2030+ Team worked with residents to develop goals for that included the community the preservation, expansion and maintenance of open space and recreation in at large, as well as the Planning Natick. Through survey responses, public meetings, and topic-based focus groups, Board, representatives of Town community members helped identify areas of improvement and identify and modify Departments and Administration, a specific recommendations. Those ideas and recommendations are organized by the Master Plan Advisory Committee following agreed upon goals: and a team of consultants. Various combinations of this group are 1. Continue to support, expand and maintain Natick’s high qual- referred to throughout the report ity active and passive open spaces. as The Natick 2030+ Team. 2. Increase the number of public connections, perimeter trails Under each goal, recommendations and access points to Natick’s lakes, rivers and wetlands. and action items are listed in the order of the time frame in which 3. Provide a system of walking and bicycle trails that connect they might be implemented, based Natick’s open spaces and provide a way to travel throughout on complexity of implementation the Town. and requirements for coordination with other recommendations and 4. Preserve and protect Natick’s water supply, wildlife, and other actions. The order does not imply natural resources. priority. 5. Increase awareness, appreciation, and use of the Town’s open While it is the intent of the Master spaces, trails, natural resources, and recreational opportunities Plan that all of the recommen- through installation of wayfinding and trailheads, provision of dations be considered, some of updated trail maps, and community engagement efforts. the recommendations represent The recommendations for achieving these goals are listed on the following pages relatively minor changes to under each goal heading. Listed next to each recommendation are the primary and existing procedures and bylaws support parties responsible for carrying out the recommendations in the years to while others are more ambitious. come. A suggested time frame is also included, associated with the specific actions Recommendations highlighted in of each recommendation. In some cases, a recommendation may require green are generally considered to (in blue) coordination with recommendations from other chapters. In those cases, the icons for be particularly ambitious because the related chapters will appear next to the recommendation. Metrics of progress are they require actions or coopera- also included for recommendations that involve tracking progress over time. tion by public entities outside the jurisdiction of Natick (e.g., state agencies or adjacent municipalities) or by private businesses and/or property owners; they require the Town to take on new roles (e.g., establishing and managing a loan program); or they require exten- sive further analysis. Recommendations that support sustainability and resiliency are indicated with this leaf icon. Scenic overlook at Lake Cochituate Comprehensive Master Plan 7.37 Continue to support, expand and maintain Natick’s GOAL 1 high quality active and passive open spaces. PURSUE STRATEGIES THAT IDENTIFY AND PROTECT MULTI-BENEFIT R1.1 OPEN SPACES IN ORDER TO MAINTAIN BOTH A HIGH-QUALITY AND HIGH-FUNCTIONING OPEN SPACE NETWORK WITHIN THE TOWN OF NATICK. LEAD OPEN SPACE ADVISORY COMMITTEE As noted earlier in this chapter, the Town of Natick contains a high percentage CONSERVATION COMMISSION of open space within its borders and offers a well-balanced distribution of that PLANNING BOARD open space. As development continues, opportunities for large acquisitions of open space will dwindle. The decision to accept additional land to be kept and SUPPORT maintained as open space should be done thoughtfully, avoiding a piecemeal and disjointed approach to acquisition. ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE OFFICER The Town should make a concerted effort to prioritize protection of open space based on identified characteristics, with higher priority given to parcels that provide a variety of benefits. Priority characteristics for the Town to ON-GOING consider when expanding the open space network should include: + Areas that enhance existing open spaces by creating larger contiguous parcels or connecting existing open space, neighborhoods, trails, or wildlife corridors (See Maps 7.9, 7.10, 7.11). + Areas serving as flood hazard buffer zones, surface water buffer zones, and aquifer or wellhead protection zones (See Map 7.12). + Priority wildlife corridors, habitats, and environmentally sensitive areas (See Map 7.11). + Farm land, fallow land, and other open space that may be made available for farming use by license, lease or deed restriction. + Open space in areas of the town currently deficient in open space and recre- ational facilities (See Maps 7.8 and 7.9). + Areas of historic significance. One way to help focus these priorities is to create a weighted model in a GIS 4-7 YEARS program that specifically emphasizes parcels that meet these criteria. The Mass Audubon MAPPR Tool 2.0 (https://www.massaudubon.org/our-conserva- tion-work/advocacy/shaping-the-future-of-your-community/current-projects/ mappr-project/mappr-tool) is an example of this type of analysis. The Planning Board and Conservation Commission should work with the GIS Department to utilize the available data, both collected by the Town and as part of this Comprehensive Plan process, to start highlighting these critical areas. This ambitious recommendation would require detailed analysis, probably conducted by a consultant. The benefit of such an analysis is that it would provide the Town with a systematic analysis that could be used to identify priority open space parcels. 7.38 NATICK 2030+ Chapter 7: Open Space, Recreation and Natural Resources With these priorities in mind, the Town of Natick should continue to pursue ON-GOING protection of privately held open space through acquisition, conservation restrictions, and easements in order to meet the open space needs of the Town as they evolve over time. Additionally, twenty-seven percent of the current distribution of open space falls under a limited-protection program, which does not ensure permanent status as open space for the Town. The Town should assess these limited-protection parcels if/when their use is proposed to change and assess their value as a permanently protected parcel utilizing the criteria on page 7.38. Mechanisms for ensuring permanent protection include: + Acquiring key open space parcels using the FAR Bonus Stabilization Fund. + Securing open space easements and deed-restricted POPS (privately owned public space) as part of the permitting review process. + Actively encouraging landowners to put land under conservation restrictions. + Reviewing the appropriateness of utility easements, “paper” streets, and aque- ducts for expanding linear open space connections. + Preserving open space held by the Town that is not already protected as open space (such as school athletic fields) through permanent easement or acquisition. + Ensuring that new zoning bylaws encourage the setting aside of open space, trail easements, FAR Bonus Stabilization Fund payments, etc. 1-5 YEARS Finally, the Town should require submission of a digital conservation ease- ment boundary plan as part of the permitting process for any new devel- opment. The Town currently keeps a digital database of all properties carrying a conservation easement, however the exact extent of the easements is not always consistently recorded, and any easement obtained as part of the Town’s permitting process is only recorded in hard copy with the deed of the property. Future open space planning efforts would benefit from a digital GIS database that records the full extent of all conservation easements. This would allow for a more consistent tabulation of total area protected and a more coordinated effort to create connec- tions between existing dedicated open space. R1.2 ACTIVELY EXPLORE OPPORTUNITIES TO EXPAND & ENHANCE THE TOWN’S ACTIVE RECREATION FIELDS AND FACILITIES. Based on the existing conditions analysis and public input process for this Plan, it ON-GOING was found that the 2016 Natick Master Plan for Parks and Fields recommendations are consistent with the current needs of the Town. The recommendations of that plan should be prioritized and incorporated into future improvement LEAD budgets, with an emphasis on expanding the offerings of rectangular multi-use fields (e.g. fields that can be used for soccer, lacrosse, football, etc.) RECREATION & PARKS DEPARTMENT throughout the town. Natick’s growing youth and aging populations are placing SUPPORT greater demands on programs and facilities. The fields in Natick are currently used at a rate of more than 150% of their realistic use annually. Following the PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT recommendations of the 2016 Master Plan for Parks and Fields, the Town needs, at a minimum, 10 two-acre rectangular multi-use fields, one full-size baseball field, two Comprehensive Master Plan 7.39 Proposed Plan for Natick High School South Complex from the 2016 Natick Master Plan for Parks and Fields tennis courts on the north and west sides of town, at least two lighted basketball courts, and additional play areas in the downtown area. In addition to expanding the number of fields, there are options the Town can purse to help extend the use of existing facilities. These options include: + Evaluate the contribution of fees to maintenance and consider increasing fees assessed to local sports leagues for use of the Town’s 1-5 YEARS playing fields. Since heavy field use increases maintenance costs, the Town should evaluate whether it is appropriate to fund these higher costs by assessing a higher fee per person to these sports leagues. The downside is that this approach may make the leagues too expensive for some participants.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • J. Matthew Bellisle, P.E. Senior Vice President
    J. Matthew Bellisle, P.E. Senior Vice President RELEVANT EXPERIENCE Mr. Bellisle possesses more than 20 years of experience working on a variety of geotechnical, foundation, civil, and dam engineering projects. He has acted as principal-in-charge, project manager, and project engineer for assignments involving geotechnical design, site investigations, testing, instrumentation, and construction monitoring. His experience also includes over 500 Phase I inspections and Phase II design services for earthen and concrete dams. REGISTRATIONS AND Relevant project experience includes: CERTIFICATIONS His experience includes value engineering of alternate foundation systems, Professional Engineer – Massachusetts, ground improvement methodologies, and temporary construction support. Mr. Rhode Island, Bellisle has also developed environmental permit applications and presented at New Hampshire, New York public hearings in support of public and private projects. Dam Engineering PROFESSIONAL AFFILIATIONS Natural Resources Conservation Services (NRCS): Principal-in- American Society of Civil Charge/Project Manager for various stability analyses and reports to assess Engineers long-term performance of vegetated emergency spillways. Association of State Dam - Hop Brook Floodwater Retarding Dam – Emergency Spillway Safety Officials Evaluation - George H. Nichols Multipurpose Dam – Conceptual Design of an Armored Spillway EDUCATION - Lester G. Ross Floodwater Retarding Dam – Emergency Spillway University of Rhode Island: Evaluation M.S., Civil Engineering 2001 - Cold Harbor Floodwater Retarding Dam – Emergency Spillway B.S., Civil & Environmental Evaluation Engineering, 1992 - Delaney Complex Dams – Emergency Spillway Evaluation PUBLICATIONS AND Hobbs Pond Dam: Principal-in-Charge/Project Manager for the design PRESENTATIONS and development of construction documents of a new armored auxiliary spillway and new primary spillway to repair a filed embankment and Bellisle, J.M., Chopy, D, increase discharge capacity.
    [Show full text]
  • Fort Meadow Reservoir
    FORM H . PARKS Af\i"D US(~S Quad Arca(s) Form No, Forms within LANDSCAPE FEATURES I Marlboro 1 l I I 914 ASSESSOR'S )-7, 16-1Y, 30-31 Massachusetts Historical Commission 80 Boylston Street Town Marlborough Place (neighborhood or village) ------ Address _ Historic Name Fort Meadow Reservoir Ownership: [X] private [X] public Type of Park or Landscape Feature (check one): ~~~~!:( [ ] park [ ] farm land [ ] green or common [ ] mine or quarry \ [ ] garden [ ] training field [ ] boulevard/parkway [X] other reservoir Sketch Map Date of Construction _ ....•.1.•.•8=47-=4••.8-------- Draw a map of the area indicating properties within it. Number each property for which individual Source MDC records; town histories inventory forms have been completed. Label streets, including route numbers, if any. Attach a separate Landscape architect unknown sheet if space is not sufficient here. Indicate north. Location of Plans lluknmVD Alterations/Intrusions (with dates) _ • D along shores of reservoir fairlgood Acreage ca 308 acres Setting At N central border of Marlborongh Organization for Marlboro Hist Comm extending NE into Hlldson Crossed by three Date 7/14/95 c3mcways, ringed with woods and cottages PARKS AND LANDSCAPES FORM VISUAL/DESIGN ASSESSMENT [] see continuation sheet Describe topography and layout. Note structures such as bandstands, gazebos, sheds, stone walls, monuments, and fountains. Note landscaping features such. as formal plantings, agricultural plantings, and bodies of water. If possible, compare current appearance with original. This "capacious reservoir" (Hudson, 230), nearly fifty years older than Marlborough's Millham Reservoir and the Metropolitan District Commission's Sudbury Reservoir, is a long, ca. 308-acre body of water on what was formerly a large wetland area on Fort Meadow Brook.
    [Show full text]
  • OUR MISSION DCR’S Universal Access Program Is Dedicated to Providing Outdoor Recreation Opportunities in Massachusetts State Parks for Visitors of All Abilities
    DCR UAP Program Schedule Summer/FallAccess News 2019Page 1 OUR MISSION DCR’s Universal Access Program is dedicated to providing outdoor recreation opportunities in Massachusetts State Parks for visitors of all abilities. Accessibility is achieved through site improvements, specialized adaptive recreation equipment, and accessible recreation programs. Pre-registration is required for all programs. To pre-register, contact the providing organization. Get into the activity sooner by bringing your release form filled out: mass.gov/dcr/universal-access/release Our structured programs feature adaptive equipment, professional staff, and instruction and support. Friends, family, and companions are welcome to take part in our programs alongside participants with disabilities. Visit our website to keep up-to-date with our activities! mass.gov/dcr/universal-access Donations welcome! DCR’s Conservation Trust and Urban Parks Trust Fund accepts contributions to support and enhance outdoor recreation in Massachusetts for people of all abilities. Your tax-deductible donation will help provide access to our parks. Ask us about matching funds! To learn more, visit: mass.gov/dcr/universal-access/donate Checks should be made out to The Commonwealth of Massachusetts, noting that the funds are for the Universal Access Program (UAP), and sent to: DCR’s Universal Access Program P.O. Box 484 Amherst, MA 01004 Access News Page 2 Hiking program that travels around the state! Take a gentle hike with Stavros Outdoor Access. Date Location Adaptive equipment and staff assistance provided. June 20 George’s Island, Bring a lunch and enjoy nature activities, Boston Harbor scavenger hunts, letterboxing, and more. June 27 Great Brook Farm State Park, Carlisle Cost: $3/person, $12/family, $25/group July 11 Walden Pond State Reservation, Concord July 18 Mt.
    [Show full text]
  • Outdoor Recreation Recreation Outdoor Massachusetts the Wildlife
    Photos by MassWildlife by Photos Photo © Kindra Clineff massvacation.com mass.gov/massgrown Office of Fishing & Boating Access * = Access to coastal waters A = General Access: Boats and trailer parking B = Fisherman Access: Smaller boats and trailers C = Cartop Access: Small boats, canoes, kayaks D = River Access: Canoes and kayaks Other Massachusetts Outdoor Information Outdoor Massachusetts Other E = Sportfishing Pier: Barrier free fishing area F = Shorefishing Area: Onshore fishing access mass.gov/eea/agencies/dfg/fba/ Western Massachusetts boundaries and access points. mass.gov/dfw/pond-maps points. access and boundaries BOAT ACCESS SITE TOWN SITE ACCESS then head outdoors with your friends and family! and friends your with outdoors head then publicly accessible ponds providing approximate depths, depths, approximate providing ponds accessible publicly ID# TYPE Conservation & Recreation websites. Make a plan and and plan a Make websites. Recreation & Conservation Ashmere Lake Hinsdale 202 B Pond Maps – Suitable for printing, this is a list of maps to to maps of list a is this printing, for Suitable – Maps Pond Benedict Pond Monterey 15 B Department of Fish & Game and the Department of of Department the and Game & Fish of Department Big Pond Otis 125 B properties and recreational activities, visit the the visit activities, recreational and properties customize and print maps. mass.gov/dfw/wildlife-lands maps. print and customize Center Pond Becket 147 C For interactive maps and information on other other on information and maps interactive For Cheshire Lake Cheshire 210 B displays all MassWildlife properties and allows you to to you allows and properties MassWildlife all displays Cheshire Lake-Farnams Causeway Cheshire 273 F Wildlife Lands Maps – The MassWildlife Lands Viewer Viewer Lands MassWildlife The – Maps Lands Wildlife Cranberry Pond West Stockbridge 233 C Commonwealth’s properties and recreation activities.
    [Show full text]
  • DRAFT Natick Cochituate Rail Trail Conceptual Design Study
    Town of Natick, MA Cochituate Rail Trail Conceptual Design Study DRAFT FAY, SPOFFORD & THORNDIKE DRAFT November 2009 Executive Summary TO BE COMPLETED FOLLOWING PUBLIC INFORMATION MEETING DRAFT Natick Cochituate Rail Trail Conceptual Design Study Executive Summary Table of Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY I TABLE OF CONTENTS I 1 INTRODUCTION 1-1 1.1 Project Area Description 1-1 1.2 Connections 1-1 1.3 Ownership 1-1 1.4 Study Purpose 1-3 2 ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES 2-1 2.1 Wetland Resources 2-1 2.1.1 Site Evaluation and Resource Area Determination 2-5 2.2 Rare Species 2-5 2.3 Stormwater Critical Areas 2-6 2.4 Summary 2-11 3 ENVIRONMENTAL PERMITTING 3-1 3.1 National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) 3-1 3.2 Massachusetts Environmental Policy Act (MEPA) 3-1 3.3 Massachusetts WetlandsDRAFT Protection Act and the Natick Wetlands Protection Bylaw 3-2 3.4 Massachusetts Endangered Species Act (MESA) 3-3 3.5 NPDES General Permit for Discharges from Construction Activities 3-3 3.6 Summary 3-4 4 CONTAMINATION ISSUES 4-1 4.1 Screening Results 4-2 4.2 Summary 4-2 Natick Cochituate Rail Trail Conceptual Design Study Page i Table of Contents 5 CULTURAL & HISTORIC RESOURCES 5-1 5.1 Summary 5-2 6 CROSS SECTION 6-1 6.1 Design Criteria 6-2 6.1.1 Surface Width 6-2 6.1.2 Shoulders 6-2 6.1.3 Vegetation 6-3 6.1.4 Horizontal Clearance 6-3 6.1.5 Cross Slope 6-3 6.1.6 Vertical Clearance 6-3 6.2 Typical Cross Sections 6-4 6.2.1 Section A – Typical 12-Foot Trail 6-4 6.2.2 Section B – Typical 10-Foot Trail with Retaining Wall 6-4 6.2.3 Section C – Typical 10-Foot Trail at
    [Show full text]
  • Middlesex County, Massachusetts (All Jurisdictions)
    VOLUME 1 OF 8 MIDDLESEX COUNTY, MASSACHUSETTS (ALL JURISDICTIONS) COMMUNITY NAME COMMUNITY NUMBER ACTON, TOWN OF 250176 ARLINGTON, TOWN OF 250177 Middlesex County ASHBY, TOWN OF 250178 ASHLAND, TOWN OF 250179 AYER, TOWN OF 250180 BEDFORD, TOWN OF 255209 COMMUNITY NAME COMMUNITY NUMBER BELMONT, TOWN OF 250182 MELROSE, CITY OF 250206 BILLERICA, TOWN OF 250183 NATICK, TOWN OF 250207 BOXBOROUGH, TOWN OF 250184 NEWTON, CITY OF 250208 BURLINGTON, TOWN OF 250185 NORTH READING, TOWN OF 250209 CAMBRIDGE, CITY OF 250186 PEPPERELL, TOWN OF 250210 CARLISLE, TOWN OF 250187 READING, TOWN OF 250211 CHELMSFORD, TOWN OF 250188 SHERBORN, TOWN OF 250212 CONCORD, TOWN OF 250189 SHIRLEY, TOWN OF 250213 DRACUT, TOWN OF 250190 SOMERVILLE, CITY OF 250214 DUNSTABLE, TOWN OF 250191 STONEHAM, TOWN OF 250215 EVERETT, CITY OF 250192 STOW, TOWN OF 250216 FRAMINGHAM, TOWN OF 250193 SUDBURY, TOWN OF 250217 GROTON, TOWN OF 250194 TEWKSBURY, TOWN OF 250218 HOLLISTON, TOWN OF 250195 TOWNSEND, TOWN OF 250219 HOPKINTON, TOWN OF 250196 TYNGSBOROUGH, TOWN OF 250220 HUDSON, TOWN OF 250197 WAKEFIELD, TOWN OF 250221 LEXINGTON, TOWN OF 250198 WALTHAM, CITY OF 250222 LINCOLN, TOWN OF 250199 WATERTOWN, TOWN OF 250223 LITTLETON, TOWN OF 250200 WAYLAND, TOWN OF 250224 LOWELL, CITY OF 250201 WESTFORD, TOWN OF 250225 MALDEN, CITY OF 250202 WESTON, TOWN OF 250226 MARLBOROUGH, CITY OF 250203 WILMINGTON, TOWN OF 250227 MAYNARD, TOWN OF 250204 WINCHESTER, TOWN OF 250228 MEDFORD, CITY OF 250205 WOBURN, CITY OF 250229 Map Revised: July 7, 2014 Federal Emergency Management Agency FLOOD INSURANCE STUDY NUMBER 25017CV001B NOTICE TO FLOOD INSURANCE STUDY USERS Communities participating in the National Flood Insurance Program have established repositories of flood hazard data for floodplain management and flood insurance purposes.
    [Show full text]
  • Pond and Lake GEIR Appendices
    APPENDIX I WATER QUALITY PROGRAMS AND FUNDING SOURCES NOTE TO READER: Because of ongoing changes in programs and funding sources, the information in this Appendix has been omitted. The most up-to-date information on funding sources can be found at the web site of the Massachusetts Nonpoint Source Management Plan: http://www.state.ma.us/dep/brp/wm/nonpoint.htm and by contacting other agencies and entities or consulting their web sites. Appendix II 2 APPENDIX II TABLE OF CONTENTS LOCAL PERMITS AND REGULATIONS: II.1 SSC- STATE ENVIRONMENTAL CODE and TITLE 5 (BOH) II.2 Zoning-ZONING REGULATIONS (ZC) II.3 WPA-WETLANDS PROTECTION ACT (ConComm) II.4 RPA-RIVERS PROTECTION ACT (ConComm) STATE PERMITS AND REGULATIONS: DEM II.5 ACEC AREAS OF CRITICAL ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERN (DEM) II.6 ODS-OFFICE OF DAM SAFETY (DEM) DEP II.7 DRINKING WATER PROTECTION (DEP) II.8 GWDP-GROUND WATER DISCHARGE PERMIT (DEP) II.9 SECP-SEWER EXTENSION OR CONNECTION PERMIT (DEP) II.10 WMA-WATER MANAGEMENT ACT (DEP) II.11 NPDES -NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM PERMIT (DEP) II.12 SWP-SOLID WASTE PERMIT (DSW) II.13 ORW- OUTSTANDING RESOURCES WATERS (DWM) II.14 LAC-LICENSE TO APPLY CHEMICALS (DWM) II.15 WPP-WETLAND PROTECTION PROGRAM (DWW) II.16 WRP-WETLAND RESTRICTION PROGRAM (DWW) II.17 C.91-WATERWAYS REGULATIONS CHAPTER 91 (DWW) II.18 401- 401 WATER QUALITY CERTIFICATION (DWW) DFA II.19 PESTICIDE BUREAU LICENSE (DFA) DFW II.20 DFW-DIVISION OF FISHERIES AND WILDLIFE (DFW) II.21 NHESP NATURAL HERITAGE ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT (DFW) EOEA II.22 CZM-MASSACHUSETTS COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT (EOEA) II.23 MEPA -MASSACHUSETTS ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT (EOEA) MDC II.24 MDC-METROPOLITAN DISTRICT COMMISSION (MDC) MHC II.25 MHC-MASSACHUSETTS HISTORICAL COMMISSION (MHC) FEDERAL PERMITS AND REGULATIONS: II.26 NPDES - NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION PERMIT , U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • 3 Water Resources
    3 Water Resources 3.1 Historical Perspective on Water Resources at Ware River The community of Boston commenced its search for clean water in 1652, when the General Court of the Massachusetts Bay Colony incorporated the Water Works Company. Under the Company’s direction, water was delivered to Boston from wells through wooden pipes to a wooden storage reservoir from which water was distributed throughout the community. By the late 18th Century, this system was no longer adequate to supply the needs of the expanding population. Consequently, the supply system was extended to Jamaica Pond in Roxbury. Water supply problems continued to plague the city throughout the 19th Century. Expansion of the supply system was initiated only after the supply needs became critical. By the 1830s the system was inadequate, and the decision was made to expand. In 1849, an aqueduct was completed to deliver water to the city from Lake Cochituate in Natick. The system was expanded again in 1873, with the completion of an aqueduct to bring water from the Sudbury River into the supply system. 1870 - 1890 was a period of rapid growth for the City of Boston and the surrounding municipalities. The demand for high quality drinking water grew beyond the system’s capacity. In 1893, the legislature directed the State Board of Health to develop plans to expand the supply system. Three alternatives were investigated: Lake Winnipesauke in New Hampshire, the Merrimac River, and the Nashua River above Clinton. After careful consideration, Winnipesauke was eliminated because of the potential difficulties of dealing with another state.
    [Show full text]
  • Development of Farm Pond Management Plan Report
    Development of Farm Pond Management Plan Report November 2015 Prepared for: Board of Selectmen and Farm Pond Advisory Committee Town of Sherborn, Massachusetts 19 Washington Street. Sherborn, MA 01770 Prepared by Fay, Spofford and Thorndike 400 Crown Colony Drive Quincy, MA 02169 Table of Contents Overview of Report ....................................................................................................... 1 1.0 Watershed Mapping and Assessment ................................................................ 2 1.1 Watershed Description and Mapping ................................................................... 2 1.1.1 Historical Land Use ...................................................................................... 2 1.1.2 Current Land Use ......................................................................................... 6 1.2 Watershed Soils ................................................................................................... 6 1.3 Review of historical data and reports ................................................................. 10 1.4 Preliminary Hydrologic Budget ......................................................................... 10 2.0 Field Activities................................................................................................... 13 2.1 Bathymetric Map Confirmation ......................................................................... 13 2.2 Water Quality Monitoring - 2014....................................................................... 13 2.2.1 Water
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Region 1 – Western US
    ^ = Partial Bathymetric Coverage ! = New to/updated in 2011 blue = Vision Coverage * = Detailed Shoreline Only Region 1 – Western US Lake Name State County French Meadows Reservoir CA Placer Alamo Lake AZ La Paz Goose Lake CA Modoc * Bartlett Reservoir AZ Maricopa Harry L Englebright Lake CA Yuba Blue Ridge Reservoir AZ Coconino Hell Hole Reservoir CA Placer Horseshoe Reservoir AZ Yavapai Hensley Lake CA Madera Lake Havasu AZ/CA Various * Huntington Lake CA Fresno Lake Mohave AZ/NV Various Ice House Reservoir CA El Dorado Lake Pleasant AZ Yavapai/Maricopa Indian Valley Reservoir CA Lake Lower Lake Mary AZ Coconino * Jackson Meadow Reservoir CA Sierra San Carlos Reservoir AZ Various * Jenkinson Lake CA El Dorado Sunrise Lake AZ Apache Lake Almanor CA Plumas * Theodore Roosevelt Lake AZ Gila Lake Berryessa CA Napa Upper Lake Mary AZ Coconino Lake Britton CA Shasta Antelop Valley Reservoir CA Plumas ^ Lake Cachuma CA Santa Barbara Barrett Lake CA San Deigo Lake Casitas CA Ventura Beardsley Lake CA Tuolumne Lake Del Valle CA Alameda Black Butte Lake CA Glenn Lake Isabella CA Kern Briones Reservoir CA Contra Costa Lake Jennings CA San Deigo Bullards Bar Reservoir CA Yuba Lake Kaweah CA Tulare Camanche Reservoir CA Various Lake McClure CA Mariposa Caples Lake CA Alpine Lake Natoma CA Sacramento Castaic Lake CA Los Angeles Lake of the Pines CA Nevada Castle Lake CA Siskiyou Lake Oroville CA Butte ^ Clear Lake CA Lake Lake Piru CA Ventura ^ Clear Lake Reservoir CA Modoc * Lake Shasta CA Shasta Cogswell Reservoir CA Los Angeles Lake Sonoma CA
    [Show full text]
  • New England Water Supplies – a Brief History M. Kempe Page 23 Of
    New England Water Supplies – A Brief History M. Kempe Chapter 2 – The Search for Water – Growth and Water Source Development Timeline – Water Source Development National and World Events 1929- The Great Baby Boom 1970’s – Growth of Depression Environmentalism Rapid population 1914-1918 1941-1945 Growth of Population growth WWI WWII suburbs growth slows 1880 1900 1920 1940 1960 1980 2000 Many communities augment WPA funds help 1960’s drought original supplies build systems Efficient fixtures Rapid growth of indoor plumbing Post-drought supply shortfalls Era of large water Metering slows projects, dams and Water conservation waste reservoirs instead of Water Events diversions Finding the water has always been one of the main tasks for the water supplier, occasionally a thankless task, even a maligned one. Since the growth of environmentalism in the 1970’s, many people picture a water engineer in terms of John Huston’s shady Noah Cross character from the film “Chinatown”. Most books written about New England water supplies tend to focus on the impacts of reservoir construction, prime examples being “The Day Four Quabbin Towns Died” about Quabbin Reservoir and “The Village of the Dammed” about Saugatuck Reservoir in the Bridgeport system. The loss of one’s home for a reservoir that benefits a distant city is almost certain to create a lifetime of resentment. The fundamental dilemma is that cities exist where they are because of commerce and they drive the economy of the region to everyone’s benefit, even the rural areas that are asked to help provide resources like water. But the cities overwhelm water resources where they exist and have to import water from elsewhere.
    [Show full text]
  • Lake Cochituate, Framingham/Natick/Wayland
    Lake Cochituate, Framingham/Natick/Wayland General Information Lake Cochituate is a 635 acre Great Pond located off of Route 9 and Route 30 at the Useful Links intersection of the towns of Framingham, Natick, and Wayland. The lake is divided into three major basins, which are connected by navigable culverts. The Southern Get your Fishing License Basin is the largest at 257 acres and has an average depth of 19 feet and also contains the lakes deepest point at 69 feet. The middle basin is 144 acres and has an Freshwater Fishing average depth of 26 feet and the northern basin is 216 acres and has an average depth of 30 feet. The pond bottom is primarily mud and gravel with the exception of the southern half of the southern basin which contains considerable areas of sand. Trout Stocking Information Aquatic vegetation is common along the shore and water transparency is typically between 5 and 7 feet. While the surrounding areas are thickly developed, much or Freshwater Sportfishing Awards the immediate shoreline is contained within Cochituate state park and is Program undeveloped. Recreational usage is high throughout the warm months. Recreational Access The department of Conservation and Recreation manages a large boat ramp and adjacent parking area (71°22'31.980"W 42°18'37.388"N) suitable for 50 trailers within Cochituate State Park off of route 30 in Wayland on the northern shore of the middle basin. Cartop boat access is also provided at the Wayland town beach (71°22'21.426"W 42°19'4.313"N) located off of Pemberton Rd.
    [Show full text]