DOCSLIB.ORG

Reservoir Pond: Current Conditions and Use Options

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Reservoir Pond: Current Conditions and Use Options Reservoir Pond: Current Conditions and Use Options Funding provided by the Town of Canton and the Planning for Planning for MetroFuture Technical Assistance program _____________________________________ Prepared for Prepared by Town of Canton Metropolitan Area Planning Council 801 Washington St. 60 Temple Place, 6th Floor Second Floor Boston, Massachusetts 02111 Canton MA 02021 www.mapc.org www.canton.ma.us April 29, 2016 Acknowledgements Canton Board of Selectmen John J. Connolly, Chairman Robert E. Burr Jr., Vice-Chairman Kevin T. Feeney, Clerk Victor D. Del Vecchio, Member Mark J. Porter, Member Town Administrator William T. Friel, Town Administrator Canton Town Planner Tim Richard Canton Conservation Agent Cynthia B. O'Connell Canton Parks and Recreation Janet Maguire, Director Nick Pirelli, Assistant Director Canton Public Works, Engineering Division James Donovan, Town Engineer Reservoir Pond Preservation Association Jim Rogers, Member Steve Hughes, Member Town of Sharon, Massachusetts Greg Meister, Conservation Agent Massachusetts Office of Fishing and Boating Access Jack Sheppard, Director Anthony Stella, P.E. MAPC Staff Sam Cleaves, AICP, Principal Planner & Project Manager Mark Racicot, Director of Land Use Hannah Casey, Communications Intern Eliza Wallace, GIS Analyst Cortni Kerr, GIS Intern 2 Table of Contents Acknowledgements ...................................................................................................................................... 2 Table of Contents ........................................................................................................................................ 3 List of Figures .............................................................................................................................................. 4 List of Tables ............................................................................................................................................... 4 Summary and Recommendations ................................................................................................................. 5 Pond History ............................................................................................................................................... 6 Current Conditions ..................................................................................................................................... 8 Community Engagement............................................................................................................................ 23 State and Other Local Pond Regulations ..................................................................................................... 29 Recommendations ..................................................................................................................................... 37 Appendix A- Online Survey and Listening Forum Results and Submitted Comments ................................... 45 Appendix B- State Boating and Great Pond Laws ........................................................................................ 50 Appendix C- Community Boating and Waterfront Facility Regulations-Examples ........................................ 53 Appendix D- Draft Rules and Regulations for Reservoir Pond ..................................................................... 73 3 List of Figures Figure 1 Inset from 1794 Survey of Town of Stoughton ............................................................................................. 6 Figure 2 Neponset River Watershed and Topography ................................................................................................. 8 Figure 3 Conditions at Reservoir Pond ........................................................................................................................ 9 Figure 4 Reservoir Pond Land Use ............................................................................................................................. 11 Figure 5 Earl Newhouse Waterfront Aerial ................................................................................................................ 12 Figure 6 Earl Newhouse Parking Plan Detail.............................................................................................................. 13 Figure 7 Pleasant Street Dam/Pequitside Farm Aerial............................................................................................... 16 Figure 8- 2014 Vegetation Survey: Aquatic Control, Inc. ......................................................................................... 21 Figure 9 Regional Public Fishing and Boating Access ................................................................................................ 22 Figure 10 Top Ten Pond Recreational Uses ............................................................................................................... 25 Figure 11 Pond Use Types .......................................................................................................................................... 26 Figure 12 Access and Management Issues .................................................................................................................. 27 Figure 13 Pond Use Regulatory Issues ........................................................................................................................ 28 Figure 14 PAB Car-top plan for Newhouse Waterfront ............................................................................................ 39 Figure 15 PAB Trailered Boat Design for Newhouse Waterfront ............................................................................. 40 List of Tables Table 1 Lakes and Ponds Regulatory Comparative Uses ........................................................................................... 36 4 Summary and Recommendations The Town of Canton retained the MAPC to help the Town assess the current conditions of Reservoir Pond and develop use options and recommendations for the pond based on input received from Canton residents and non- residents who use Reservoir Pond. To accomplish this, MAPC implemented a public outreach and planning process in conjunction with the Town Planner, holding a Reservoir Pond Listening Forum on January 30, 2016 at Canton Public Library as well as designing and posting an online Reservoir Pond Users Survey on the Town’s website that was completed by 452 people. MAPC combined this input from Reservoir Pond users with the information and guidance it received from Canton’s legal, planning, conservation and recreation staff, the Reservoir Pond Preservation Association, the Town of Sharon Conservation Department, the Massachusetts Office of Fishing and Boating Access, the Massachusetts Department of Conservation and Recreation to identify the history of the pond, construct an outline of current issues and condition of Reservoir Pond and to develop recommendations for the future uses of Reservoir Pond. MAPC conducted research into Massachusetts laws regarding Great Ponds and Chapter 91, Massachusetts boating laws and examples of Massachusetts municipal boating and waterfront regulations as well as lake and pond management programs available to Massachusetts communities. MAPC presented it recommendations to the Canton Board of Selectmen at the Board’s March 22, 2016 meeting. The recommendations for Reservoir Pond are as follows: Investigate the feasibility of a town park and additional boating facility on Massachusetts State Hospital School land. The Board of Selectmen should open negotiations with the school if deemed feasible. Implement the Canton Kayak Rental Program. Research Creating a Canton Sailing Program at Reservoir Pond Develop a Memo of Understanding between the RPPA and the Town/Conservation Commission regarding collaboration on vegetation management and public education. Establish a Weeds Watcher Program for the Pond. See page 37 for full recommendations. 5 Pond History Reservoir Pond was first used as a reservoir in the 1720’s and a larger dam was constructed in 1827 to provide backup water power for the Revere Copper Company, located where Plymouth Rubber used to stand. The original Hartwell Dam was constructed in 1720 by residents living next to the Pequit Brook to create a reservoir. In 1722, the Town constructed a road on top of the dam, much to the consternation of those Pequit Brook abutters who had built the first dam. In 1827, the Crossman meadow was dammed and flooded, bringing the pond to its current size of 255 acres. In 1832, the land was sold to the Neponset Woolen Company for $314 and later it became the property of the Revere Copper Company.1 Figure 1 Inset from 1794 Survey of Town of Stoughton The yellow line on the map is now Pleasant Street in Canton and blue line indicates Pequit Brook. 1 History of the Town of Canton, Norfolk County, Massachusetts, by Daniel T.V. Huntoon, pg.482 6 Canton Properties, part of Napleton Associates, took ownership of the Reservoir Pond in 2006 when it purchased the Plymouth Rubber Company as part of a bankruptcy sale. Napleton had tried to get permits to re-develop the Plymouth Rubber site for mixed-use but was refused the first time by Canton. A second project at the site was accepted and it is currently being remediated for environmental contamination. It has been approved for 272 housing units-Townhouses and condos, 4,000 SF of commercial space and will retain 6 acres of open space. On the open space sits the old Paul Revere mill and barn, which are slated
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Duty of Care for the Bona Fide Prospective Purchaser Exemption from Cercla Liability
    BROWNFIELDS REMEDIATED? HOW THE BONA FIDE PROSPECTIVE PURCHASER EXEMPTION FROM CERCLA LIABILITY AND THE WINDFALL LIEN INHIBIT BROWNFIELD REDEVELOPMENT FENTON D. STRICKLAND* INTRODUCTION Communities across the nation suffer from the negative impacts of abandoned, underused, and potentially contaminated properties called “brownfields.”1 The term “brownfield” generally refers to “real property, the expansion, redevelopment, or reuse of which may be complicated by the presence or potential presence of a hazardous substance, pollutant, or contaminant.”2 According to a report prepared for the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in 2003 by Environmental Management Support, Inc., the number of brownfields in the United States ranges from 450,000 to 1,000,000.3 In the early 1990s, the U.S. Conference of Mayors labeled brownfields “one of the most critical problems facing U.S. [c]ities.”4 The appearance of abandoned properties in metropolitan areas may puzzle the typical uninformed resident. However, property developers, lending institutions, governments, lawyers, environmental agencies, and real estate professionals understand the primary reason for the condition. Developers are “hesitant to redevelop brownfields because of the investment risk and potential liability for cleanup costs.”5 This uncertainty, which causes apprehension for parties who might otherwise be inclined to redevelop brownfields, is a by-product of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA).6 In recognition of the serious impact that the brownfield problem has had, as well as how uncertainty about liability has contributed to the problem, Congress, in 2002, enacted the Small Business Liability Relief and Brownfields Revitalization * J.D. Candidate, 2005, Indiana University School of Law—Indianapolis; B.S., 1994, Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana.
    [Show full text]
  • Doctrines of Waste in a Landscape of Waste
    Missouri Law Review Volume 72 Issue 4 Fall 2007 Article 8 Fall 2007 Doctrines of Waste in a Landscape of Waste John A. Lovett Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.missouri.edu/mlr Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation John A. Lovett, Doctrines of Waste in a Landscape of Waste, 72 MO. L. REV. (2007) Available at: https://scholarship.law.missouri.edu/mlr/vol72/iss4/8 This Conference is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Journals at University of Missouri School of Law Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Missouri Law Review by an authorized editor of University of Missouri School of Law Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Lovett: Lovett: Doctrines of Waste Doctrines of Waste in a Landscape of Waste John A. Lovett* I. INTRODUCTION One of the virtues of William Stoebuck and Dale Whitman's seminal hornbook, The Law of Property, is its extensive treatment of the subject of waste. ' Using half of a chapter, Stoebuck and Whitman introduce their read- ers to one of the great subjects of the common law of property, one that at- 2 3 4 tracted the attention of Coke, Blackstone, Kent, and many others. Their detailed analysis of the subject, which provides a general historical overview, a discussion of the seminal voluntary waste cases, Melms v. Pabst Brewing Co.,5 and Brokaw v. Fairchild,6 and a presentation of the legal and equitable remedies for waste, may strike some readers as old-fashioned. Although one recent law review article has called attention to several early nineteenth century waste cases, 7 relatively little contemporary academic scholarship has addressed waste doctrine in depth.
    [Show full text]
  • The Navigability Concept in the Civil and Common Law: Historical Development, Current Importance, and Some Doctrines That Don't Hold Water
    Florida State University Law Review Volume 3 Issue 4 Article 1 Fall 1975 The Navigability Concept in the Civil and Common Law: Historical Development, Current Importance, and Some Doctrines That Don't Hold Water Glenn J. MacGrady Follow this and additional works at: https://ir.law.fsu.edu/lr Part of the Admiralty Commons, and the Water Law Commons Recommended Citation Glenn J. MacGrady, The Navigability Concept in the Civil and Common Law: Historical Development, Current Importance, and Some Doctrines That Don't Hold Water, 3 Fla. St. U. L. Rev. 511 (1975) . https://ir.law.fsu.edu/lr/vol3/iss4/1 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Florida State University Law Review by an authorized editor of Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY LAW REVIEW VOLUME 3 FALL 1975 NUMBER 4 THE NAVIGABILITY CONCEPT IN THE CIVIL AND COMMON LAW: HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT, CURRENT IMPORTANCE, AND SOME DOCTRINES THAT DON'T HOLD WATER GLENN J. MACGRADY TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION ---------------------------- . ...... ..... ......... 513 II. ROMAN LAW AND THE CIVIL LAW . ........... 515 A. Pre-Roman Legal Conceptions 515 B. Roman Law . .... .. ... 517 1. Rivers ------------------- 519 a. "Public" v. "Private" Rivers --- 519 b. Ownership of a River and Its Submerged Bed..--- 522 c. N avigable R ivers ..........................................- 528 2. Ownership of the Foreshore 530 C. Civil Law Countries: Spain and France--------- ------------- 534 1. Spanish Law----------- 536 2. French Law ----------------------------------------------------------------542 III. ENGLISH COMMON LAw ANTECEDENTS OF AMERICAN DOCTRINE -- --------------- 545 A.
    [Show full text]
  • Guidance Note
    Guidance note The Crown Estate – Escheat All general enquiries regarding escheat should be Burges Salmon LLP represents The Crown Estate in relation addressed in the first instance to property which may be subject to escheat to the Crown by email to escheat.queries@ under common law. This note is a brief explanation of this burges-salmon.com or by complex and arcane aspect of our legal system intended post to Escheats, Burges for the guidance of persons who may be affected by or Salmon LLP, One Glass Wharf, interested in such property. It is not a complete exposition Bristol BS2 0ZX. of the law nor a substitute for legal advice. Basic principles English land law has, since feudal times, vested in the joint tenants upon a trust determine the bankrupt’s interest and been based on a system of tenure. A of land. the trustee’s obligations and liabilities freeholder is not an absolute owner but • Freehold property held subject to a trust. with effect from the date of disclaimer. a“tenant in fee simple” holding, in most The property may then become subject Properties which may be subject to escheat cases, directly from the Sovereign, as lord to escheat. within England, Wales and Northern Ireland paramount of all the land in the realm. fall to be dealt with by Burges Salmon LLP • Disclaimer by liquidator Whenever a “tenancy in fee simple”comes on behalf of The Crown Estate, except for In the case of a company which is being to an end, for whatever reason, the land in properties within the County of Cornwall wound up in England and Wales, the liquidator may, by giving the prescribed question may become subject to escheat or the County Palatine of Lancaster.
    [Show full text]
  • Friends of the Blue Hills |
    Discover the Blue Hills Blue Hills Reservation Guide and Maps Friends of the Blue Hills PO Box 416 Milton, MA 02186 [email protected] Original edition produced by David Hodgdon and Thomas Palmer www.FriendsoftheBlueHills.org Friends of the Blue Hills 1 www.FriendsoftheBlueHills.org Introduction Whether you are a frequent sojourner in the Blue Hills, or a new glimpse of the unusual mating dance of the American woodcock. visitor, there is always something new to be explored in this inspiring You can spend your summers swimming at Houghton’s Pond, a landscape. Among the 7,000 plus acres there are opportunities to hike, kettle pond formation, gift of the glacial age, or pack your rod for some bike, ski, swim, climb and contemplate the simple beauty of nature. One fishing at Ponkapoag Pond. In the warmer months, try launching your can take a serpentine drive through the reservation, stopping to admire canoe on the Neponset River at Fowl Meadow. When the precipitation views along the way, or accept the challenge of hiking the Skyline Trail turns to snow, revisit Fowl Meadow for flat, easy cross-country skiing from beginning to end. or, alternatively, speed down the slopes at the Blue Hill Ski Area. For adventurous souls, there’s the challenge of biking Great Blue Hill or rock climbing on the vertical walls at Quincy Quarries in the northernmost part of the park. Those seeking a workout can hike the Skyline Trail from Quincy to Canton, a hike offering much elevation change and wonderful views. Even if you don’t consider yourself a serious hiker, you’ll still find easy rambles on trails that take you around Houghton’s Pond.
    [Show full text]
  • Official List of Public Waters
    Official List of Public Waters New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services Water Division Dam Bureau 29 Hazen Drive PO Box 95 Concord, NH 03302-0095 (603) 271-3406 https://www.des.nh.gov NH Official List of Public Waters Revision Date October 9, 2020 Robert R. Scott, Commissioner Thomas E. O’Donovan, Division Director OFFICIAL LIST OF PUBLIC WATERS Published Pursuant to RSA 271:20 II (effective June 26, 1990) IMPORTANT NOTE: Do not use this list for determining water bodies that are subject to the Comprehensive Shoreland Protection Act (CSPA). The CSPA list is available on the NHDES website. Public waters in New Hampshire are prescribed by common law as great ponds (natural waterbodies of 10 acres or more in size), public rivers and streams, and tidal waters. These common law public waters are held by the State in trust for the people of New Hampshire. The State holds the land underlying great ponds and tidal waters (including tidal rivers) in trust for the people of New Hampshire. Generally, but with some exceptions, private property owners hold title to the land underlying freshwater rivers and streams, and the State has an easement over this land for public purposes. Several New Hampshire statutes further define public waters as including artificial impoundments 10 acres or more in size, solely for the purpose of applying specific statutes. Most artificial impoundments were created by the construction of a dam, but some were created by actions such as dredging or as a result of urbanization (usually due to the effect of road crossings obstructing flow and increased runoff from the surrounding area).
    [Show full text]
  • STATE of MAINE EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT STATE PLANNIJ'\G OFFICE 38 STATE HOUSE STATION AUGUSTA, MAINE 043 3 3-003Fi ANGUS S
    MAINE STATE LEGISLATURE The following document is provided by the LAW AND LEGISLATIVE DIGITAL LIBRARY at the Maine State Law and Legislative Reference Library http://legislature.maine.gov/lawlib Reproduced from scanned originals with text recognition applied (searchable text may contain some errors and/or omissions) Great Pond Tasl< Force Final Report KF 5570 March 1999 .Z99 Prepared by Maine State Planning Office I 84 ·State Street Augusta, Maine 04333 Acknowledgments The Great Pond Task Force thanks Hank Tyler and Mark DesMeules for the staffing they provided to the Task Force. Aline Lachance provided secretarial support for the Task Force. The Final Report was written by Hank Tyler. Principal editing was done by Mark DesMeules. Those offering additional editorial and layout assistance/input include: Jenny Ruffing Begin and Liz Brown. Kevin Boyle, Jennifer Schuetz and JefferyS. Kahl of the University of Maine prepared the economic study, Great Ponds Play an Integral Role in Maine's Economy. Frank O'Hara of Planning Decisions prepared the Executive Summary. Larry Harwood, Office of GIS, prepared the maps. In particular, the Great Pond Task Force appreciates the effort made by all who participated in the public comment phase of the project. D.D.Tyler donated the artwork of a Common Loon (Gavia immer). Copyright Diana Dee Tyler, 1984. STATE OF MAINE EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT STATE PLANNIJ'\G OFFICE 38 STATE HOUSE STATION AUGUSTA, MAINE 043 3 3-003fi ANGUS S. KING, JR. EVAN D. RICHERT, AICP GOVERNOR DIRECTOR March 1999 Dear Land & Water Resources Council: Maine citizens have spoken loud and clear to the Great Pond Task Force about the problems confronting Maine's lakes and ponds.
    [Show full text]
  • EPA Response to Comments On
    EPA Response to Comments on: National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Permits for Stormwater Discharges from Small Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems in Massachusetts (as Modified) NPDES Permit No. MAR041000, MAR042000, and MAR043000 Dated: December 7, 2020 In accordance with the provisions of 40 C.F.R. § 124.17, this document presents EPA’s responses to comments received on the Proposed Modifications to NPDES General Permits for Stormwater Discharges from Small Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, EPA Docket ID:EPA-R01-OW-2020-0216. EPA took public comments on the proposed permit modifications from April 23, 2020 through June 8, 2020. This Response to Comments, as well as the final permit and associated documents, should be considered collectively as EPA’s response to all significant comments submitted on the proposed permit. Comments have been copied into this document “as is” with no editing or summarizing. Any comments contained in footnotes, and any documents attached to comments, are not included in this document. Each comment letter contained one or more comments that EPA excerpted and sorted according to the corresponding topic or permit part. EPA did not otherwise edit the comment excerpts. EPA has addressed all significant issues that the public comments raised. In many cases, EPA has cross-referenced similar responses. To the extent that a comment response addresses issues that other comments raised, the responses should be considered together. Page 1 of 35 General Comments 1. Comment from the Massachusetts River Alliance: Water will be at the center of many of the most profound economic, public health and ecological impacts of climate change in the Commonwealth—from public water supply reliability, to flooding, water pollution, and aquatic habitat.
    [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]
  • Assabet River National Wildlife Refuge Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan January 2005
    U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Assabet River National Wildlife Refuge Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan January 2005 This goose, designed by J.N. “Ding” Darling, has become the symbol of the National Wildlife Refuge System The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is the principle federal agency for conserving, protecting, and enhancing fish and wildlife in their habitats for the continuing benefit of the American people. The Service manages the 96-million acre National Wildlife Refuge System comprised of 544 national wildlife refuges and thousands of waterfowl production areas. It also operates 65 national fish hatcheries and 78 ecological services field stations. The agency enforces federal wildlife laws, manages migratory bird populations, restores significant fisheries, conserves and restores wildlife habitat such as wetlands, administers the Endangered Species Act, and helps foreign governments with their conservation efforts. It also oversees the Federal Aid program which distributes hundreds of millions of dollars in excise taxes on fishing and hunting equipment to state wildlife agencies. Comprehensive Conservation Plans provide long term guidance for management decisions; set forth goals, objectives, and strategies needed to accomplish refuge purposes; and, identify the Service’s best estimate of future needs. These plans detail program planning levels that are sometimes substantially above current budget allocations and, as such, are primarily for Service strategic planning and program prioritization purposes. The plans do not constitute
    [Show full text]
  • REAL ESTATE LAW LESSON 1 OWNERSHIP RIGHTS (IN PROPERTY) Real Estate Law Outline LESSON 1 Pg
    REAL ESTATE LAW LESSON 1 OWNERSHIP RIGHTS (IN PROPERTY) Real Estate Law Outline LESSON 1 Pg Ownership Rights (In Property) 3 Real vs Personal Property 5 . Personal Property 5 . Real Property 6 . Components of Real Property 6 . Subsurface Rights 6 . Air Rights 6 . Improvements 7 . Fixtures 7 The Four Tests of Intention 7 Manner of Attachment 7 Adaptation of the Object 8 Existence of an Agreement 8 Relationships of the Parties 8 Ownership of Plants and Trees 9 Severance 9 Water Rights 9 Appurtenances 10 Interest in Land 11 Estates in Land 11 Allodial System 11 Kinds of Estates 12 Freehold Estates 12 Fee Simple Absolute 12 Defeasible Fee 13 Fee Simple Determinable 13 Fee Simple Subject to Condition Subsequent 14 Fee Simple Subject to Condition Precedent 14 Fee Simple Subject to an Executory Limitation 15 Fee Tail 15 Life Estates 16 Legal Life Estates 17 Homestead Protection 17 Non-Freehold Estates 18 Estates for Years 19 Periodic Estate 19 Estates at Will 19 Estate at Sufferance 19 Common Law and Statutory Law 19 Copyright by Tony Portararo REV. 08-2014 1 REAL ESTATE LAW LESSON 1 OWNERSHIP RIGHTS (IN PROPERTY) Types of Ownership 20 Sole Ownership (An Estate in Severalty) 20 Partnerships 21 General Partnerships 21 Limited Partnerships 21 Joint Ventures 22 Syndications 22 Corporations 22 Concurrent Ownership 23 Tenants in Common 23 Joint Tenancy 24 Tenancy by the Entirety 25 Community Property 26 Trusts 26 Real Estate Investment Trusts 27 Intervivos and Testamentary Trusts 27 Land Trust 27 TEST ONE 29 TEST TWO (ANNOTATED) 39 Copyright by Tony Portararo REV.
    [Show full text]
  • Use of Thematic Mapper Imagery to Assess Water Quality, Trophic State, and Macrophyte Distributions in Massachusetts Lakes
    U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Use of Thematic Mapper Imagery to Assess Water Quality, Trophic State, and Macrophyte Distributions in Massachusetts Lakes By MARCUS C. WALDRON, PETER A. STEEVES, and JOHN T. FINN (Department of Forestry and Wildlife Management, University of Massachusetts, Amherst) Water-Resources Investigations Report 01-4016 Prepared in cooperation with the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Management Northborough, Massachusetts 2001 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR GALE A. NORTON, Secretary U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Charles G. Groat, Director The use of trade or product names in this report is for identification purposes only and does not constitute endorsement by the U.S. Government. For additional information write to: Copies of this report can be purchased from: Chief, Massachusetts-Rhode Island District U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Geological Survey Branch of Information Services Water Resources Division Box 25286 10 Bearfoot Road Denver, CO 80225-0286 Northborough, MA 01532 or visit our web site at http://ma.water.usgs.gov CONTENTS Abstract ................................................................................................................................................................................. 1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................................................................... 2 Study Methods......................................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]