DOCSLIB.ORG

Regulating Residential Development on Massachusetts Barrier Beaches: Inadequacies, Opportunities, and the Case of Plum Island

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Regulating Residential Development on Massachusetts Barrier Beaches: Inadequacies, Opportunities, and the Case of Plum Island Regulating Residential Development on Massachusetts Barrier Beaches: Inadequacies, Opportunities, and the Case of Plum Island by Jane A. Healey B.A., Economics (1995) University of New Hampshire Submitted to the Department of Urban Studies and Planning in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master in City Planning at the MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE-- Massachusetts Institute of Technology OF TECHNOLOGY June 2003 JUN 1 8 2003 LIBRARIES lhe 0ufhorftenbyn to M © 2003 Jane A. Healey. All rights reserved. r tmproduce anto ckb, p(aper and elecronic copIes of this ft document in whoe or In port Signature of Author ............................ ........ ent of rban Studies anning ay 5, 2003 Certified by.................................... .............................. Professor Terry Szold Department of Urban Studies and Planning Thesis Supervisor Accepted by..................... ..... ....................-.........--.-..-- Professor Langley Keyes Chair, MCP Committee Department of Urban Studies and Planning 9o101 - a a we a - - a - - - - p - a Regulating Residential Development on Massachusetts Barrier Beaches: Inadequacies, Opportunities, and the Case of Plum Island by Jane A. Healey Submitted to the Department of Urban Studies and Planning On May 15, 2003 in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Master in City Planning ABSTRACT This thesis explores the challenges of and opportunities for regulating residential development on Massachusetts barrier beaches. This research finds that the existing federal, state, and local regulatory frameworks relevant to Massachusetts barrier beaches struggle to manage the tension between the viability and safety of existing Massachusetts barrier beach communities and the need to reduce environmental impacts of this existing development as well as limit further growth in these areas. This struggle is exemplified by a case study of Plum Island, a barrier island off the North Shore of Massachusetts. The thesis concludes with several proposed initiatives Massachusetts could employ to improve regulation of residential development on its barrier beaches. Thesis Supervisor: Terry Szold Adjunct Associate Professor of Land Use Planning Thesis Reader: William Shutkin Lecturer in Environmental Policy 4 ACKOWLEDGEMENTS There are many people I would like to thank for their help and encouragement while I wrote this thesis. First and foremost, I want to express my gratitude to my thesis advisor, Terry Szold, for her support, tenacity, and wise counsel. In addition, I would like to thank my reader, Bill Shutkin not only for his guidance on this thesis but also for his support throughout my time at DUSP. I also want to recognize the many people who shared their time to answer my numerous questions and to help guide my thesis research, in particular: Nancy Colbert and Rick Taintor. I thank my family and friends, especially my husband Adam, whose belief in me and sense of humor have helped to sustain me throughout our years together - especially these last two! Finally, in love and gratitude, I dedicate this thesis to all those in my life that have encouraged me to stretch and to learn. 6 TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT............................................................................................................................. 3 ACKOW LEDGEM ENTS .................................................................................................. 5 TABLE OF CONTENTS ..................................................................................................... 7 LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES...................................................................................... 9 CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION....................................................................................... 11 Plum Island Case Study Overview....................................................................................................................13 Research Motivation .............................................................................................................--.---------.--......... 14 The Broader Picture...... ..................................................................................................................... 15 Research Methodology ...............................................................................................-----.... ----------------.............. 17 Outline of Chapters ............................................................................................-....--...-----------------.................... 18 CHAPTER 2: BARRIER BEACHES AND DEVELOPMENT - A PARADOX..... 19 Coastal Barriers: Beaches & Islands ...................................................................................................... 19 Barrier Beach Dynamics............................................................................................------..---------------............. 21 Residential Development on Massachusetts Barrier Beaches.................................................................... 22 Development's Impact on the Barrier Beach Environment ...................................................................... 26 CHAPTER 3 - THE REGULATORY ENVIRONMENT ................................................ 31 Federal Coastal Zone Management ..............................................................................- .. ........... 33 Massachusetts Coastal Zone Management.................................................................................................. 37 Local Coastal Zone Management................................................................................... ---------------------........... 45 Regional Management Strategies...........................................................................................--..-------------........46 The Private Approach: Private Barrier Beach Communities and the Use of Covenants ........................ 48 Private Property Rights and The Fifth Amendment's Takings Clause .................................................... 51 CHAPTER 4 - THE CASE OF PLUM ISLAND .............................................................. 53 The Water and Sewer Proposal: Overview.............................................55 The W ater and Sewer Proposal: The Dispute ................................................................................................. 60 The W ater and Sewer Proposal: Potential Growth Impacts ..................................................................... 64 History of Plum Island's Built and Natural Environments....................................................................... 68 Case Study Analysis........................................------.-........ -............................................................... 75 CHAPTER 5 - OPPORTUNITIES FOR REGULATORY IMPROVEMENT ...... 81 A Proposal for Chan ................................... ------........... ---...................................................................... 83 BIBLIOG RAPH Y ................................................................................................................. 93 Interviews Conducted.........................................- -. ----........ --.................................................................... 96 APPENDIX A ........................................................................................................................ 97 APPENDIX B ...................................................................................................................... 101 APPENDIX C ...................................................................................................................... 111 APPENDIX D ...................................................................................................................... 115 8 LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES Table 2-1: Population Growth in Massachusetts Counties with Largest Barrier Beaches................24 Table 2-3: Arguments for Better Regulation of Development on Barrier Beaches.......... ...28 Table 3-1: Coastal Zone Growth M anagem ent Tools ...................................................................... 31 Table 3-2: MA Coastal Zone Management's Growth Management Principles ............ ....40 Table 4-1: Summary of Plum Island Overlay District (PIOD)......................................................... 57 Table 4-2: Summary of Newburyport Wetlands Ordinance, Sec. 6.5-28: Specific performance standards for the barrier beach .................................................................................................. 58 Table 4-3: Growth Impacts from Water and Sewer Proposal (FEIR)............................................. 65 Figure 1-1: Massachusetts Barrier Beaches (1997)....................... ............ 11 Figure 2-1: Natural, sandy barrier beach (South Carolina)............................................................... 19 Figure 2-2: Interior M arsh (Plum Island, M A ).................................................................................. 20 Figure 2-3: Common barrier island form (Prince Edward Island, Canada) .................................... 20 Figure 2-4: Coastal sand dune w ith beach grass................................................................................ 21 Figure 4-1: Plum Island Study A rea .................................................................................................. 53 Figure 4-2: D evelopm ent on Plum Island........................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Rapid Formation and Degradation of Barrier Spits in Areas with Low Rates of Littoral Drift*
    Marine Geology, 49 (1982) 257-278 257 Elsevier Scientific Publishing Company, Amsterdam- Printed in The Netherlands RAPID FORMATION AND DEGRADATION OF BARRIER SPITS IN AREAS WITH LOW RATES OF LITTORAL DRIFT* D.G. AUBREY and A.G. GAINES, Jr. Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, Woods Hole, MA 02543 (U.S.A.) (Received February 8, 1982; revised and accepted April 6, 1982) ABSTRACT Aubrey, D.G. and Gaines Jr., A.G., 1982. Rapid formation and degradation of barrier spits in areas with low rates of littoral drift. Mar. Geol., 49: 257-278. A small barrier beach exposed to low-energy waves and a small tidal range (0.7 m) along Nantucket Sound, Mass., has experienced a remarkable growth phase followed by rapid attrition during the past century. In a region of low longshore-transport rates, the barrier spit elongated approximately 1.5 km from 1844 to 1954, developing beyond the baymouth, parallel to the adjacent Nantucket Sound coast. Degradation of the barrier spit was initiated by a succession of hurricanes in 1954 (Carol, Edna and Hazel). A breach opened and stabilized near the bay end of the one kilometer long inlet channel, providing direct access for exchange of baywater with Nantucket Sound, and separating the barrier beach into two nearly equal limbs. The disconnected northeast limb migrated shorewards, beginning near the 1954 inlet and progressing northeastward, filling the relict inlet channel behind it. At present, about ten percent of the northeast limb is subaerial: the rest of the limb has completely filled the former channel and disappeared. The southwest limb of the barrier beach has migrated shoreward, but otherwise has not changed significantly since the breach.
    [Show full text]
  • Summary of 2017 Massachusetts Piping Plover Census Data
    SUMMARY OF THE 2017 MASSACHUSETTS PIPING PLOVER CENSUS Bill Byrne, MassWildlife SUMMARY OF THE 2017 MASSACHUSETTS PIPING PLOVER CENSUS ABSTRACT This report summarizes data on abundance, distribution, and reproductive success of Piping Plovers (Charadrius melodus) in Massachusetts during the 2017 breeding season. Observers reported breeding pairs of Piping Plovers present at 147 sites; 180 additional sites were surveyed at least once, but no breeding pairs were detected at them. The population increased 1.4% relative to 2016. The Index Count (statewide census conducted 1-9 June) was 633 pairs, and the Adjusted Total Count (estimated total number of breeding pairs statewide for the entire 2017 breeding season) was 650.5 pairs. A total of 688 chicks were reported fledged in 2017, for an overall productivity of 1.07 fledglings per pair, based on data from 98.4% of pairs. Prepared by: Natural Heritage & Endangered Species Program Massachusetts Division of Fisheries & Wildlife 2 SUMMARY OF THE 2017 MASSACHUSETTS PIPING PLOVER CENSUS INTRODUCTION Piping Plovers are small, sand-colored shorebirds that nest on sandy beaches and dunes along the Atlantic Coast from North Carolina to Newfoundland. The U.S. Atlantic Coast population of Piping Plovers has been federally listed as Threatened, pursuant to the U.S. Endangered Species Act, since 1986. The species is also listed as Threatened by the Massachusetts Division of Fisheries and Wildlife pursuant to Massachusetts’ Endangered Species Act. Population monitoring is an integral part of recovery efforts for Atlantic Coast Piping Plovers (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1996, Hecht and Melvin 2009a, b). It allows wildlife managers to identify limiting factors, assess effects of management actions and regulatory protection, and track progress toward recovery.
    [Show full text]
  • Massachusetts Ocean Management Plan
    Massachusetts Ocean Management Plan Volume 2 Baseline Assessment and Science Framework December 2009 Introduction Volume 2 of the Massachusetts Ocean Management Plan focuses on the data and scientific aspects of the plan and its implementation. It includes these two separate documents: • Baseline Assessment of the Massachusetts Ocean Planning Area - This Oceans Act-mandated product includes information cataloging the current state of knowledge regarding human uses, natural resources, and other ecosystem factors in Massachusetts ocean waters. • Science Framework - This document provides a blueprint for ocean management- related science and research needs in Massachusetts, including priorities for the next five years. i Baseline Assessment of the Massachusetts Ocean Management Planning Area Acknowledgements The authors thank Emily Chambliss and Dan Sampson for their help in preparing Geographic Information System (GIS) data for presentation in the figures. We also thank Anne Donovan and Arden Miller, who helped with the editing and layout of this document. Special thanks go to Walter Barnhardt, Ed Bell, Michael Bothner, Erin Burke, Tay Evans, Deb Hadden, Dave Janik, Matt Liebman, Victor Mastone, Adrienne Pappal, Mark Rousseau, Tom Shields, Jan Smith, Page Valentine, John Weber, and Brad Wellock, who helped us write specific sections of this assessment. We are grateful to Wendy Leo, Peter Ralston, and Andrea Rex of the Massachusetts Water Resources Authority for data and assistance writing the water quality subchapter. Robert Buchsbaum, Becky Harris, Simon Perkins, and Wayne Petersen from Massachusetts Audubon provided expert advice on the avifauna subchapter. Kevin Brander, David Burns, and Kathleen Keohane from the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection and Robin Pearlman from the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • DCR's Beaver Brook Reservation
    Massachusetts Department of Conservation and Recreation Bureau of Planning and Resource Protection Resource Management Planning Program RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN DCR’s Beaver Brook Reservation Historic Beaver Brook Reservation and Beaver Brook North Reservation Belmont, Lexington and Waltham, Massachusetts March 2010 DCR’s Beaver Brook Reservation Historic Beaver Brook Reservation and Beaver Brook North Reservation Belmont, Lexington and Waltham, Massachusetts RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN 2010 Deval L. Patrick, Governor Timothy P. Murray, Lt. Governor Ian A. Bowles, Secretary Richard K. Sullivan, Jr., Commissioner Jack Murray, Deputy Commissioner for Parks Operations The Massachusetts Department of Conservation and Recreation (DCR), an agency of the Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs, oversees 450,000 acres of parks and forests, beaches, bike trails, watersheds, dams, and parkways. Led by Commissioner Richard K. Sullivan Jr., the agency’s mission is to protect, promote, and enhance our common wealth of natural, cultural, and recreational resources. To learn more about DCR, our facilities, and our programs, please visit www.mass.gov/dcr. Contact us at [email protected]. Printed on Recycled Paper RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN Expanded Beaver Brook Reservation Belmont, Lexington and Waltham, Massachusetts Contents Executive Summary 1 Introduction 1 Planning Process 2 Distinctive Characteristics of the Expanded Reservation 2 Priority Findings 3 Recommendations 5 Capital Improvements 7 Land Stewardship Zoning Guidelines 9 Management
    [Show full text]
  • COMMONWEALTH of MASSACHUSETTS SUFFOLK, Ss
    COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS SUFFOLK, ss SUPERIOR COURT _________________________________________ ) COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS, ) ) STATEMENT OF Plaintiff, ) INTEREST BY THE ) UNITED STATES v. ) ) PENNSYLVANIA HIGHER EDUCATION ) Case No. 1784CV02682 ASSISTANCE AGENCY, ) d/b/a FedLoan Servicing, ) ) Defendant. ) __________________________________________) INTRODUCTION The United States respectfully submits this brief pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 517.1 The United States has a substantial interest in, and a long history of, developing programs to help students access postsecondary education. For decades, the United States has sought to increase access to higher education by serving as a reinsurer and guarantor of private loans, serving as the sole originator and holder of Direct Loans, and also establishing a variety of other federal programs to aid students. Here, Massachusetts alleges that the Pennsylvania Higher Education Assistance Agency (PHEAA), an entity that contracts with the Federal Government to service federal loans, has violated state and federal consumer protection laws. As relevant here, Massachusetts alleges that PHEAA wrongfully failed to count periods of forbearance for borrowers to satisfy the requirements of certain loan forgiveness programs, that PHEAA 1 “The Solicitor General, or any officer of the Department of Justice, may be sent by the Attorney General to any State or district in the United States to attend to the interests of the United States in a suit pending in a court of the United States, or in a court of a State, or to attend to any other interest of the United States.” 28 U.S.C. § 517. wrongfully converted the grants of participants who had not filed the correct documentation for loans as required by the Teacher Education Assistance for College and Higher Education (TEACH) Grant Program, and that PHEAA wrongfully allocated certain overpayments to interest and fees.
    [Show full text]
  • Walden Pond R O Oa W R D L Oreau’S O R Ty I a K N N U 226 O
    TO MBTA FITCHBURG COMMUTER LINE ROUTE 495, ACTON h Fire d Sout Road North T 147 Fire Roa th Fir idge r Pa e e R a 167 Pond I R Pin i c o l Long Cove e ad F N Ice Fort Cove o or rt th Cove Roa Heywood’s Meadow d FIELD 187 l i Path ail Lo a w r Tr op r do e T a k e s h r F M E e t k a s a Heyw ’s E 187 i P 187 ood 206 r h d n a a w 167 o v o e T R n H e y t e v B 187 2 y n o a 167 w a 187 C y o h Little Cove t o R S r 167 d o o ’ H s F a e d m th M e loc Pa k 270 80 c e 100 I B a E e m a d 40 n W C Baker Bridge Road o EMERSON’S e Concord Road r o w s 60 F a n CLIFF i o e t c e R n l o 206 265 d r r o ’s 20 d t a o F d C Walden Pond R o oa w R d l oreau’s o r ty i a k n n u 226 o 246 Cove d C T d F Ol r o a O r i k l l d C 187 o h n h t THOREAU t c 187 a a HOUSE SITE o P P Wyman 167 r ORIGINAL d d 167 R l n e Meadow i o d ra P g .
    [Show full text]
  • Fish Population Sampling
    2005 Deerfield River Watershed Fish Population Assessment Robert J. Maietta Watershed Planning Program Worcester, MA January, 2007 CN: 223.4 Commonwealth of Massachusetts Executive Office of Environmental Affairs Ian Bowles, Secretary Department of Environmental Protection Arleen O’Donnell, Acting Commissioner Bureau of Resource Protection Glenn Haas, Acting Assistant Commissioner Division of Watershed Management Glenn Haas, Director Introduction Fish population surveys were conducted in the Deerfield River Watershed during the late summer of 2005 using techniques similar to Rapid Bioassessment Protocol V as described originally by Plafkin et al.(1989) and later by Barbour et al. (1999). Standard Operating Procedures are described in MassDEP Method CN 075.1 Fish Population SOP. Surveys also included a habitat assessment component modified from that described in the aforementioned document (Barbour et al. 1999). Fish populations were sampled by electrofishing using a Smith Root Model 12 battery powered backpack electrofisher. A reach of between 80m and 100m was sampled by passing a pole mounted anode ring, side to side through the stream channel and in and around likely fish holding cover. All fish shocked were netted and held in buckets. Sampling proceeded from an obstruction or constriction, upstream to an endpoint at another obstruction or constriction such as a waterfall or shallow riffle. Following completion of a sampling run, all fish were identified to species, measured, and released. Results of the fish population surveys can be found in Table 1. It should be noted that young of the year (yoy) fish from most species, with the exception of salmonids are not targeted for collection. Young-of-the-year fishes which are collected, either on purpose or inadvertently, are noted in Table 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Earned Sick Time Faqs
    Massachusetts Attorney General’s Office – Earned Sick Time FAQs Earned Sick Time in Massachusetts Frequently Asked Questions These FAQs are based upon the Massachusetts Earned Sick Time Law, M.G.L. c. 149, § 148C, and its accompanying regulations, 940 CMR 33.00. The Earned Sick Time Law sets minimum requirements; employers may choose to provide more generous policies. Table of Contents Section 1: Introduction, Applicability & Eligibility .......................................................................................................... 2 Subsection A: Introduction .......................................................................................................................................... 2 Subsection B: Employees Eligible for Earned Sick Time ............................................................................................... 2 Subsection C: Which Employers Need to Provide Earned Sick Time? ......................................................................... 4 Section 2: Paid versus Unpaid Earned Sick Time ............................................................................................................. 5 Section 3: General Rules .................................................................................................................................................. 6 Subsection A: How is Earned Sick Time Accrued? ....................................................................................................... 6 Subsection B: Carryover of hours from one year to the next .....................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Range Expansion and New Breeding Record for the Glossy Ibis in Massachusetts
    RANGE EXPANSION AND NEW BREEDING RECORD FOR THE GLOSSY IBIS IN MASSACHUSETTS by Robert C. Humphrey The purpose of this paper is twofold: first, to give a brief summary of the history of the Glossy Ibis (Plegadis falcinellus) in North America and its northward expansion into Massachusetts; and second, to report on a new breeding location in the state. The Glossy Ibis is believed to be a fairly recent arrival in America from the Old World. Although very little literature exists as to how and when it arrived in the new world, Audubon (1967) noted the "first intimation" of this species in the United States as a bird shot in Maryland in 1817. By 1837 he referred to them as existing in vast numbers in Mexico and in flocks, but only as a summer resident, in Texas. Specimens appeared in the Boston Market around 1844. The first documentation of a live bird in Massachusetts was around 1850 (Audubon 1967, Bent 1926). By 1870 ibises were rare and local in the southeastern United States from Louisiana to Florida. Casual records existed north to Missouri, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan, Ontario, and Nova Scotia (Pearson 1956). The first authentic breeding records occurred in Florida in the 1880s (Palmer 1962). The breeding range in this country was restricted to Texas and Florida for most of the first half of the 1900s. Ibises slowly expanded their breeding range into North and South Carolina in 1944 and 1947, respectively. A more rapid expansion took place in the 1950s. They first bred in New Jersey in 1955 and in Maryland in 1956 (Stewart 1957).
    [Show full text]
  • Parker River National Wildlife Refuge Canoeing/Kayaking Information
    U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Parker River National Wildlife Refuge Canoeing/Kayaking Information Thank you for your interest in recommended. Do not rely on the map Permits and Fees canoeing/kayaking at Parker River on the reverse which is intended only A permit is not required. However, a National Wildlife Refuge. Please read for general orientation. Also check refuge entrance fee applies to access the following information thoroughly the forecast to avoid being caught in the boat ramp for launching. A Daily so that we may ensure your canoeing/ inclement weather. During the warmer refuge entrance fee of $5/vehicle or $2/ kayaking experience is as safe and months, mosquitoes and other biting walk-on or bicycle is in effect year- enjoyable as possible. Please do not insects can be very bothersome. round. Annual passes and commercial hesitate to contact us if you have any Greenheads are aggressive, blood rates are available. questions or concerns. feeding horse flies that may be Enjoy your visit! abundant from July through mid- Parker River National Wildlife Refuge August. From September 15 - May 15, 6 Plum Island Turnpike General all canoe and kayak occupants must Newburyport, MA 01950 Opportunities are available to launch wear a U.S. Coast Guard approved 978/465 5753 a non-motorized canoe, kayak, or Personal Flotation Device. 978/465 2807 Fax rowboat from the refuge for access to e-mail:[email protected] Plum Island Sound and points beyond. Suggested Equipment and Supplies www.fws.gov/northeast/parkerriver All boat motors (including electric) and n extra paddle the launching of all other watercraft, n sunglasses Federal Relay Service including sailboats, are prohibited.
    [Show full text]
  • Rural Walking in Massachusetts a Tool Kit for Municipalities
    Rural Walking in Massachusetts A Tool Kit for Municipalities A WalkBoston report Prepared for The Massachusetts Department of Public Health March 2013 Table of Contents Introduction 1. Background 1.1. A long history of rural walking in Massachusetts 1.2. The present rural areas of Massachusetts 1.3. Resident perceptions of rural character 2. Rural Walking Design Choices 2.1. Sidewalk with curb 2.2. Roadside path 2.3. Meandering roadside path 2.4. Local and regional recreational trails 2.5. Regional trail for multiple users 2.6. Road shoulder for hiking and biking 2.7. Traffic calming and vehicle speeds 2.8. Standards of design used by case study towns 2.9. Potential users of walkways 2.10. ADA requirements 3. Findings 3.1. Increased walking has the potential to bring significant benefits to rural and semi-rural communities. 3.2. Walking infrastructure is needed in rural and semi-rural communities. 3.3. Building walkways takes time and creativity. 3.4. There are significant challenges to creating rural walking infrastructure. 3.5. Walkway destinations are important 3.6. Safe walking access to schools is essential. 3.7. The design of a walkway should respond to existing conditions and intended uses. 3.8. Traffic calming measures may improve safety and be cost-effective. 3.9. Transparent, inclusive, and collaborative planning processes help towns implement walking routes. 3.10. Pedestrians and drivers need basic information about walking. 4. Case Studies 4.1. Amherst 4.2. Ashfield 4.3. Barnstable 4.4. Barre 4.5. Bolton 4.6. Boxborough 4.7. Dudley 4.8.
    [Show full text]
  • Walden Pond State Reservation Continued His Studies at Harvard College
    Visitor Information Walden Pond 915 Walden Street (Rte. 126), Concord, MA 01742 978-369-3254 “…my friends ask what I will do when I get there. Visitors are welcome to swim, picnic, hike, use canoes State Reservation and rowboats, fish, cross-country ski and snowshoe. Will it not be employment enough to watch the Please help control erosion of Walden’s shoreline by progress of the seasons?” staying on the paths and using established access Henry David Thoreau areas. The reservation is open year round. Certain services and hours of operation may vary with the season. All organized groups must call in advance to make a reservation. There are no trash barrels on the beach. Please carry out what you carry in. There is a year round parking fee of $5.00 per vehicle. Parking is only permitted in the lot off Rte. 126. When the park reaches capacity it will close. In order to avoid disappointment, call 978-369-3254, particu- larly on hot summer days. Annual park passes are available. Welcome to Thoreau was born on July 12, 1817 in the village of Thoreau’s House: copied In September of 1847, Thoreau completed his experi- Concord, Massachusetts. Under the influence of his by Charles H. Overly from ment in simplicity and became a sojourner in civilized Please No: Walden Pond brother John, an amateur ornithologist, he developed an a drawing done by life again. Emerson then sold the house to his gardener. Dogs Alcoholic beverages Thoreau’s sister, Sophia. State Reservation early interest in nature and spent much of his youth Two years later two farmers bought it and moved it to Fires Gasoline engines exploring the town’s ponds and woods.
    [Show full text]