Why Not Open Space?
Speaking of land, smart growth, and it’s relation to the Dover Amendment, towns can only regulate traffic and drainage for proposed religeous and educational developments. In addition, cluster housing, is thought to mean “smart growth” in that in theory, it reduces road area, thus increasing open space. This is how Natick’s Director of Community Development, and the Selectmen, and Planning Board have managed to use words to trick the neighborhoods which are the subject of such projects. Developers know that Planning Boards like such verbiage, thus routinely propose such projects, in order to gain favorable response.
When residents allow their leaders to twist logic, in order to cram revenue generating housing into a neighborhood, they’ll end up suffering the repercussions. Smart means leaving the open space open, not building on it.
I’m shaking my head wondering why Natick thinks it can’t afford to buy the Paperboard site. Using Weston’s average of approximately $400,000 per acre, Natick needs to come up with less than $3 million to buy the site. That’s less than it cost to build the golf course. And would be doable. Unless they just don’t want to. I think that’s the case. If someone were to put out an Article to town meeting to approve a new soccer field at the gravel pit, they’d approve it in a heartbeat.
And the last piece to this puzzle, is the question about educational use by a non-profit to qualify for a 40B. They like to bring up that spectre as a tool to persuade folks to take the lesser of two evils. It’s false, and it’s a shame we don’t have a town official with the decency to admit it.
If the same parcel were located in South Natick, they’d be working overtime to preserve and protect. In the blue collar neighborhood off Washington St., they know they can get away with shifting the focus.
So you want the Town to buy the former industrial site to use it as open space, yet on other posts criticize potential plans to purchase the former National Guard site to provide open space adjacent to Lake Cochituate. Why is your view so different for both ideas.
Also, if the town did buy the parcel for your estimated $3 million, how much extra would it cost to turn this into open space or play fields? It certaintly couldn’t be used in it’s present form.
On a more positive note, glad you started this blog. The negativity toward town employees may be a little much for my tastes, but I enjoy reading (and talking now) about Natick.
Comment by Al | November 17, 2006
I’m not opposed to the town buying the National Guard site. I think the town should buy both the paperboard site, and the National Guard site, just as Weston is buying the Case Estate. I just think the land should remain passive. We both know it won’t happen because Natick wouldn’t allow the land to just “sit” there as Weston will be doing. Natick has a history of wanting to use such spots, as they did after they capped the landfill. It was too much a temptation to convince the residents that a golf course would earn revenue.
As for negativity, it’s only as it relates to the situations I’ve written here about.
I have to laugh at the reactions I got to the post about the Paperboard land. There seem to be quite a few people in Natick who get their feathers ruffled whenever one mentions the issue. I guess it hits a sensitive area. Most residents are unaware of the property, and won’t find out the repercussions until the whole thing is settled, but basically, we have about 7 acres of land for sale, that the town is trying to broker with a real estate agent.
The final result, will be more traffic, and a middle class blue collar neighborhood which has been screwed over by the town. Thank you, Community Development, for your failure to develop this bit of what could have been open space. I guess your priority is increased tax dollars. You might need it to satisfy the “Natick 360 ” group. They’d like to increase revenue so that the town can make a recreation site out of the Oak St. gravel pit, and possibly buy the Speen St. state-owned land. The more built up our town gets, the more tax money comes in to accomplish these goals. It’s a desperate group, I think.
As an afterthought, I wonder if the feather ruffling occurs because the whole issue is unsettled. In other words, there’s a possibility the public will become aware, should the newspapers find out. They’d like to work with a developer, rather than fight with neighbors over the whole thing.
Comment by Dave | November 17, 2006