HomeMy WebLinkAboutCotton Farm LMP FINALApproved by the Lexington Conservation Commission on Monday, February 23, 2015
LAND MANAGEMENT AND DESIGN PLAN FOR
C O T T O N F A R M
IN
LEXINGTON, MASSACHUSETTS
Liz Newlands
Mass Audubon Ecological Extension Service
January 2015
Mass Audubon works to protect the nature of Massachusetts for people and wildlife. Together with more than 100,000 members, we care for 35,000 acres of conservation land, provide school, camp, and other educational programs for 225,000 children and adults annually, and advocate for sound environmental policies at local, state, and federal levels. Founded in 1896 by two inspirational women who were committed to the protection of birds, Mass Audubon is now one of the largest and most prominent conservation organizations in New England. Today we are respected for our sound science, successful advocacy, and innovative approaches to connecting people and nature. Each year, our statewide network of wildlife sanctuaries welcomes nearly half a million visitors of all ages, abilities, and backgrounds and serves as the base for our work.
Mass Audubon’s Ecological Extension Service (EES) assists cities and towns, land trusts, state and federal agencies, and other conservation partners with natural resource inventories, habitat
restoration and management planning, and conservation planning. Through EES we can share the experience we have gained in managing our own network of wildlife sanctuaries across the
commonwealth. For more information on EES, contact 781-259-2159 or jcollins@massaudubon.org
Contents
Land Management and Design Plan ............................................................................................................. 1
Site Goals and Challenges ......................................................................................................................... 1
Management Goals for Cotton Farm ........................................................................................................ 2
Short Term Goals ...................................................................................................................................... 2
Long Term Goals ....................................................................................................................................... 2
Short Term Goals ................................................................................................................................... 2
Mark Boundaries ................................................................................................................................... 2
Improve Access ...................................................................................................................................... 2
Reconfigure Trails.................................................................................................................................. 3
Modify Mowing Regime ........................................................................................................................ 4
Maintain Meadow Habitat ................................................................................................................... 5
Maintain and Expand Orchard .............................................................................................................. 5
Restore Pond Shore ............................................................................................................................... 5
Remove Landscape Plantings ................................................................................................................ 6
Relocate Parking ................................................................................................................................... 7
Expand Meadow ................................................................................................................................... 7
Expand Orchard ..................................................................................................................................... 7
Schedule of Maintenance Activity ............................................................................................................ 2
Yearly Ongoing Activities ...................................................................................................................... 2
Conclusion ..................................................................................................................................................... 2
Appendix A - Management of Invasive Species ........................................................................................ A-1
Appendix B – Cotton Farm Baseline Documentation Report and Land Management Plan ..................... A-5
1
Introduction
This design plan for Cotton Farm was prepared for the Lexington Conservation Commission by Mass
Audubon’s Ecological Extension Service. The design builds off an existing land management plan as well
as Lexington’s newly drafted Land Management Principles and Policies. The plan provides guidance for
ecological management of the property and recommends improvements to enhance the landscape for
passive recreational use as it transitions from private land to a public open space.
Land Management and Design Plan
Site Goals and Challenges
The Cotton Farm Conservation Area was once part of a larger estate which was divided in two, with the
western and northern portion becoming conservation land and the eastern portion remaining as a
private residence. Access to the residence was retained for a time through Cotton Farm via an easement
but is not a permanent arrangement. In time, the driveway easement will extinguish and the area will be
transferred to conservation land.
The 4 acre parcel was acquired by the Town of Lexington in 2011 for its passive recreation value, the
pastoral views along Marret Road, and the link it provides between two larger conservation areas:
Upper Vine Brook to the north and west and Dunback Meadow to the south (Figure 1). The majority of
the property is dominated by an extensive, largely inaccessible, wetland complex consisting of shrub
swamp and Red Maple swamp. The eastern portion of the property consists of a gently sloping upland
supporting cultural grasslands, an orchard, and a wooded glade – features which result in a pleasing
park-like atmosphere.
A Land Use and Management Plan prepared by the Town of Lexington in 2011 identified several
stewardship issues and outlined several goals for the property. These include: managing invasive
species; restoring mowed lawns and landscaped areas; protecting wildlife habitat and wetlands; and
preventing encroachment along the boundaries. The management recommendations and design plans
we present here are based on that document, and on field work conducted by EES staff. We identify
opportunities to meet management goals and objectives identified by the town and it’s Land
Conservation Stewards in keeping with a vision of Cotton Farm functioning as a park rather than a “wild”
conservation land, an approach which will increase the types of passive recreational uses at the town’s
conservation lands. Our management and design plans are presented in both the short- and long- term,
given the changes that will occur when the driveway through the property can be converted to
conservation land.
2
Management Goals for Cotton Farm
Short Term Goals Long Term Goals
Mark boundaries & install “green screen” Remove and restore driveway area
Improve access Relocate parking
Reconfigure trails Expand meadow
Modify mowing regime Expand orchard
Maintain orchard
Restore pond shore
Install viewing platform
Manage invasive plant species
Short Term Goals
Short term goals are based on: land stewardship; improvements and modifications to enhance the
visitor experience; restoration to return the property to a more natural condition; and the
implementation of ecological management regimes that maintain and protect natural resources.
Mark Boundaries
We recommend that a split-rail fence approved by the Conservation Commission be installed along the
boundary in the north east as shown in Figure 1 to better delineate the boundary between the newly
planted meadow and the agricultural field on private property (Photo 1). This should help to alleviate
concerns that have been raised about public entry onto the abutting private residence. Signs could
indicate the nature of the abutting parcel as private and request visitors to stay on conservation land,
such as “Private Residence. Please respect our neighbors and remain on trails”. We also recommend
installing strategically placed evergreen shrubs, such as red cedar (Juniperus virginiana), to screen the
view of the private residence east of the property from the trail.
Improve Access
Like many conservation lands, Cotton Farm would benefit from improved parking. Currently, visitors
arriving by vehicle drive past the meadow and orchard, and park in a small lot located roughly in the
center of the property. Although the original land management plan called for only three parking
spaces, we believe two additional parking spaces would be beneficial, since the Cotton Farm property
provides a critical linkage to Dunback Meadow to the south and trails leading to Highland Avenue and
the town center in the north. A few additional parking spaces will not adversely affect the resources at
Cotton Farm and will greatly enhance access to more of the town’s conservation lands. These additional
spaces could be placed to the north of the kiosk and be bounded by boulders or logs similar to the
existing parking spaces (Photo 2).We highly recommend modifying the trail entrance off of Marret Road.
Currently, the trail emerges from the property at a low point in Marret Road, and it appears that storm-
water collects at this point and washes down the trail causing a great deal of erosion (Photo 3).
Additionally, a large patch of Japanese Knotweed on the roadside obscures view of the traffic: both
conditions are potentially hazardous to pedestrians. We recommend that the Commission consult with
3
town engineers to properly site a crosswalk with appurtenant pedestrian crossing signs to improve
visitor safety and access to the property. This may require relocating the trail alignment on both the
Cotton Farm and Dunback Meadow sides of the road, re-grading the entrances, or installing storm-water
structures. In addition to better protecting visitors, a visible crosswalk and trail entrance will have the
added benefit of drawing the public’s attention to the newly acquired conservation land. We also
recommend rotating the existing sign so that it is perpendicular to Marret Road to increase the visibility
of the property (Photo 4).
Reconfigure Trails
The existing trail enters the southern portion of Cotton Farm off Marret Road where there is a direct link
to trails across the street at the Dunback Meadow Conservation Area. The Cotton Farm trail winds ~150
feet northward through a seasonally damp wooded area, straight on through the grassy lawn/meadow
adjacent to the pond, and on along a portion of the driveway. Just south of the parking area, the trail
splits with the western leg leading down-slope toward the tool shed and then north along the wetland
edge, and the other taking a higher route northward through the glade and continuing into the woods of
the Upper Vine Brook conservation area and on to Highland Avenue.
We recommend a slight reconfiguration of the trails, beginning in the grass area between the driveway
and the pond. Here, we advise moving the trail so that it more closely follows the gentle slope of the
land - winding through the picnic area and then joining back-up with the existing route along the
driveway. As this trail is maintained through regular mowing, its relocation will be a simple matter of
communicating with the individual responsible for site maintenance. (Photos 5 & 6).
This suggested reconfiguration would accommodate a small spur leading to the envisioned ponding
platform, and the overall effect of the layout will draw visitors into the environment and direct their
views to elements of the natural world. It also has more practical benefits as the direct line of the
existing trail leaves it vulnerable and more prone to erosion, while a gently sloped and winding trail will
be more resilient. Furthermore, allowing the pond edge to re-vegetate will provide a wider buffer to
better protect water quality.
We recommend closing the western, or lower, trail through the glade, from the tool shed to the junction
with the main trail near where it leaves the northern end of property (Photo 7). This lower trail lies
mostly within the wetland buffer zone and is located on damp soils that appear to be periodically
saturated. Closing this trail will help to protect important natural resources, and will allow for a portion
of the wetland edge to be free of disturbance from visitors. Furthermore, given the open nature of the
glade, the lower and upper trails are currently too close together, separated as they are by just a few
hundred feet. Closing the lower trail will provide greater solitude for hikers who would otherwise see
each other through the glade. The lower glade trail should also be allowed to re-vegetate naturally. The
trail segment from the driveway to the tool shed should be retained to permit access to the shed.
The status of the closed trail can be indicated by placing sticks and branches across the trail, or
relocating the existing trail marker at the trail junction approximately 15-feet north and placing it
squarely in the center of the closed trail. This will distract visitors from noticing that there is a trail there,
4
and lead their eye away and down along the main trail. However, old habits die hard, and it may also be
necessary to erect a sign such as “Trail Closed for Ecological Restoration” in the middle of the trail.
Modify Mowing Regime
The small meadow west of the main drive lies next to the pond shore and features a picnic table
surrounded by a small lawn (see Photo 6). The grassy area adjacent to this rest spot are mowed less
frequently and allowed to develop into a meadow. This management approach appears to be
appropriate and allows for passive recreation use of the site. We support the use of the location as a
picnic area, and the frequent mowing to keep the grass short. We also agree with the practice to mow
other grasses less frequently, and recommend an annual late fall mowing (after October 15th) to
promote the growth of a diverse wildflower meadow community to provide habitat for birds, insects,
reptiles and amphibians. The taller vegetation of a meadow will also help to protect the water quality of
the pond and discourage the growth of woody vegetation.
In addition to the grasslands, routine mowing also occurs in the glade in the northern portion of the
property, which creates an aesthetically pleasing view of the gently sloping ground under the tree
canopy. This management approach suits the site: not mowing the area would allow invasive plants to
flourish and they would quickly dominate the landscape in a dense tangle of shrubs and vines. The
alternative - treating and removing invasives, and restoring with native vegetation - would require
annual or semi-annual treatment and be quite costly. Since the impacted area within the glade is not
exceptionally large, nor of highly significant ecological value, we do not recommend treating invasive
species there.
We recommend that annual mowing take place in the late fall (after October 15 th), and that plants at
the base of trees be pulled by hand to prevent their spread as many of these are invasive species. It will
also likely be necessary to control Poison Ivy along the trails’ edge to provide visitors with safer passage.
Poison ivy can be controlled manually with great care, or with herbicide. Coarse woody debris, such as
fallen limbs and trunks, should be removed from the glade to facilitate routine mowing operations.
While most of the current mowing regime is appropriate for the environmental conditions, and for
meeting goals for use of the property, we recommend ceasing all mowing of the glade along the lower
slopes, close to the wetland edge in the northwest corner of the uplands. This will help to protect
wetlands, and complement our recommendation to close the lower glade trail. The termination of
mowing will allow woody plants and trees to grow into the glen, and though the dominance of invasive
Glossy Buckthorn may be inevitable, other native plants will become established too. To promote the
restoration of the area to a more natural condition, we recommend that coarse woody debris in the un-
mown section of the glade be allowed to remain in place. Though some may view this material as
“unsightly”, downed wood provides important wildlife habitat: decaying bark attracts insects which in
turn attracts birds. And holes in dead wood can provide nesting cavities for animals such as squirrels,
raccoons, and owls.
5
Maintain Meadow Habitat
A native meadow seed mix was planted in the northeast corner of the property in an area formerly used
for agricultural production. The meadow enriches the site with increased biological diversity, providing
habitat for birds, insects, reptiles and amphibians and small mammals. It is also aesthetically pleasing,
and although it is not easily visible from the trails, we recommend maintaining it for the ecological value
it provides the landscape. The meadow should be cut annually to prevent woody vegetation from
becoming established. We recommend mowing in the late-fall (after Oct. 15th) with the use of a sickle
bar mower set to a height of 18-inches. This will help to prevent thatch from being dispersed widely
throughout the site, and to ensure winter cover for over-wintering insects and mammals.
Maintain and Expand Orchard
The orchard on Marret Road provides pastoral views for passersby and is a reminder of the community’s
agricultural past. It has tremendous aesthetic values, and provides citizens with the opportunity to enjoy
outdoor spaces in different ways. The current mowing regime should be maintained in the orchard to
keep the grass low and prevent the encroachment of woody plants. Efforts to skillfully prune the trees
and ultimately restore fruiting should be encouraged. The opportunity to expand the orchard will arise
when the driveway easement extinguishes, and we detail these recommendations in the Long Term
Management section below.
Restore Pond Shore
Glossy Buckthorn, Shrub Honeysuckle, Multiflora Rose and Phragmites are all found at the wetland edge
of the pond. We recommend that the Commission treat the invasive species along the open areas of the
pond adjacent to the picnic area and lawn, meadow, and near the existing tool shed. We view this as the
first step in the installation of a viewing platform, which is discussed below. Invasive plant treatment
should follow Principles and Policies adopted by the Conservation Commission. Once invasive plants are
treated and properly removed, we recommend re-planting the area with native wetland vegetation that
is readily available commercially: shrubs such as high-bush blueberry (Vaccinium corymbosum), sweet
pepperbush (Clethra alnifolia), elderberry (Sambucus canadense) and perennials like Joe-Pye-weed
(Eupatorium maculatum), cinnamon fern (Osumndastrum cinnamomea), or spotted touch-me-not
(Impatiens capensis). To protect newly planted material, we recommend installing signage such as
“Ecological Restoration Area. Please Keep Out”. If necessary, the area can also be roped off with
symbolic fencing.
While it will be important to treat invasives along the pond shore, we do not recommend treating
invasive species in the glade, due to the high cost of treatment and restoration, and the nearly inevitable
reinvasion from the adjacent forested areas. Treatment of invasive species along the wetland should
follow methods detailed in the Commission’s Principles and Policies for Management of Lexington
Conservation Land document, including adherence to all local and state regulations regarding the
treatment of invasive plants in a jurisdictional wetland area, and regulations regarding the use of
herbicides.
6
Install Viewing Platform
The easternmost portion of the extensive wetland complex at Cotton Farm contains a pool of open
water lying adjacent to the picnic area and is perhaps the most attractive visual feature of the property.
As noted in the existing Cotton Farm management plan, this area would be greatly enhanced by the
installation of a platform extending out into the open water (Photo 9).
The design specifications of the viewing platform should consider the size and contour of the opening
along the shoreline, water levels throughout the season, the number of visitors expected on the
platform at a time, and the activity expected (i.e. dip-netting and fishing versus nature study). It is
important to note that the design and installation of the platform should comply with all applicable local
and state regulations, such as building codes and wetlands bylaws and regulations.
Placing several smaller nest boxes on tree trunks along the pond shore and in the nearby wetlands of
Upper Vine Brook will attract cavity nesting species such as Tree Swallows (Tachycineta bicolor).
Additional wildlife habitat enhancements that will also provide wildlife viewing opportunities include the
maintenance of perches overhanging the water or larger-diameter logs on which turtles and water fowl
can rest.
Long Term Goals
Long term goals are focused on capitalizing on the extinguishment of the driveway easement,
restoration of this area to a more natural condition, and a reconfiguration of the parking area so that it
is more visible from the road and does not penetrate so deeply into the property.
Remove Landscape Plantings
Currently, several ornamental plantings from the former estate remain near the entrance to the private
residence. In the short term, we recommend taking an adaptive management approach and maintaining
them for the time being. However, when deeded access through the property extinguishes, we
recommend removing the non-native trees and shrubs that make up the majority of the plantings. Some
of these plantings may be commercially valuable, such as a few small Japanese Maples, and the
Commission could work with a local contractor to carefully extract these trees with root-balls intact, and
relocate them elsewhere in town or sell them at a profit.
Remove Driveway and Restore Area
Once the driveway easement has extinguished, we recommend closing and restoring the existing
driveway, loop, and parking area. This will significantly increase the amount of land on the property that
is in a natural scenic and open condition. This is perhaps our most intensive recommendation for the
property and ideally will include the removal of pavement, sand, and gravel.
It may be possible to simply close the road and blockade it with logs or large boulders and allowing
“father time and mother nature” to restore the area: this will likely result in a thicket of shrubs and
saplings, consisting mostly of invasive species seeding in from the adjacent woods. Therefore, we advise
a more proactive approach to fully realize this property’s potential and the expansion of the meadow
along the eastern boundary (see below). We recommend closing the property during operations to
7
restore the driveway area, and installing silt fences to delineate a limit of work line on the property to
protect both the public and natural resources during driveway removal operations.
Relocate Parking
Relocating the parking is important for the restoration of the property and for improved public access.
Currently, the parking area is difficult to see, and to many passersby the area looks like private property,
not conservation land open to the public. Additionally, cars backing up from the existing parking spaces
have to negotiate a curve which drops off steeply into the glade: this presents a potential danger to
visitors and the property.
We advise moving the parking area closer to Marret Road so that it is more visible and welcoming to
visitors. There are two clear options for parking: the grassy area to the west of the drive, and the
orchard to the east. The grassy area is located largely in the wetland buffer zone where development is
limited. Furthermore, locating a parking area here would disrupt the flow of foot traffic coming from the
trail head off Marret Road, and impinge on the restful picnic spot. The orchard is much larger and could
more easily accommodate parking. It is also out of the wetland buffer zone, and further away from the
trail and picnic area, and thus is the preferred location for relocated parking.
Working with the contours of the land, the natural location for this new parking area lies in a broad, flat
area alongside the driveway where it runs past the orchard. We advise using road base material
excavated as part of the driveway restoration to create a flat space large enough to accommodate five,
angle-in parking spaces (`120 feet long). While the driveway appears to collect some water in this
location, the excavated material could be used to redirect drainage away from the parking area. That
material could also be re-purposed and used to re-grade the driveway and provide surface material for
the new parking area. The addition of a bicycle rack in the parking area would also promote visitation to
the property.
Expand Meadow
Once the driveway is removed, we advise restoring its former route with the effect of expanding the
meadow along the eastern portion of the boundary. The Commission should consult with local soil
conservation resources to test underlying soils, as they may need to be amended to ensure that they
can support native vegetation. Once the desired soil composition is achieved, we recommend planting a
native seed mix to expand the extent of the current meadow down to the orchard. We also recommend
planting a few trees or shrubs (such red cedar) across the driveway to provide a screen between the two
properties.
Expand Orchard
One or two apple trees may need to be removed to accommodate the suggested reconfigured parking
plan. These losses could be off-set by planting more apple trees as part of the landscape restoration
process. Currently, there are several large Norway spruce (Picea abies), a smaller Japanese maple (Acer
spp.), and black cherry (Prunus nigra) trees between the current parking lot and the entrance to the
private residence. Once the driveway easement is extinguished, we recommend removing these trees
and planting the southern portion with additional fruit bearing trees, such as apples or pears, to expand
8
the orchard and compensate for trees lost to the new parking configuration, should it be implemented.
Additional information on care for the orchard can be obtained from the Fruit Advisor at the U Mass
Amherst Agriculture and Landscape Program: http://extension.umass.edu/fruitadvisor/ or the Tree
Fruit & Berry Program Work Team at Cornell University: http://www.fruit.cornell.edu/tree_fruit/.
1
Priorities and Cost Estimates for Recommended Projects
Recommendation
Priority
Level
Cost
Estimate Variables
Mark boundaries
High $100-$15k
Cost ranges from signage only installed
by volunteers to installation of split-rail
fence by contracted laborers
Improve access High $2k Installation of cross walk, improved
trails
Reconfigure trails High $0-$100 Volunteer effort to install sign post and
sign
Restore pond shore High $2k Initial treatment of invasive species and
installation of native vegetation.
Manage invasive plant species
High $2-3k
Higher initial cost expected to decline
over time as plants are controlled.
Upper cost reflects use of larger woody
plants & plugs.
Install viewing platform Medium $24k Cost could be lower with volunteer
labor (i.e. scouts)
Install “green screen”
Medium $500 -
$200k
Costs dependent on number and size of
plants and use of volunteer labor,
including watering during establishment
period
Modify mowing regime
Medium $0
No additional cost from current
operations expected. Potential cost
savings from cessation of mowing in
glade
Maintain orchard Low $0 Annual mowing by volunteers
Remove and restore driveway area
Low $5-$10k
Cost ranges based on amount of
material to be removed and
extensiveness of plantings (i.e.
hydroseed v. installation of woody
vegetation)
Relocate parking Low $5k Cost could be lower with use of re-
purposed paving material
Expand meadow
Low $0
May require intial treatment by heavy
machinery if woody vegetation becomes
thick
Expand orchard Low $500 - $2k Installation of new fruit trees, cost
ranging from number and size of trees
2
Schedule of Maintenance Activity
Yearly Ongoing Activities
Winter Spring Summer Fall
Dec-
Feb
Mar-
May Jun-Aug
Sep-
Nov
Monthly Property Visits x x x x
Annual Work Plan with Staff and Stewards
x
x
Safety Meeting with Staff, Stewards, Police and Fire Dept.
x
Trail Walk/Clean Up (downed limbs, drainage issues, signage)
x
Building Projects (kiosks, sign posts, etc.)
x
x
Invasive Plant Management
x x
Mow Meadows
x
Clean out nest boxes
x
Boundary Walk (monitoring for encroachments, signage, etc)
x
Conclusion
The Cotton Farm property provides a critical link in the town’s trail network and has great potential for
ecological restoration as the property continues to transition from private land to public open space.
The property would benefit from modest improvements to enhance passive recreational use and
protect natural resources. Slight modifications to the trail network will improve the flow of foot traffic
through the landscape and will afford sensitive wetlands better protection. While current management
approaches in the meadow and orchard areas should continue, minor modifications to management of
the wooded glade will allow for more natural conditions to develop there. The greatest opportunities for
fully realizing the property’s potential are restoration of the existing driveway and installation of a
viewing platform along the water’s edge. The installation of a cross walk across Marret Road to
improve the link between Cotton Farm and Dunback Meadow to the south would also enhance the
property and draw visitors in.
Cotton Farm, Lexington MA
Land Management and Design Plan
Mass Audubon Ecological Extension Service
11a
Photo 1. Meadow on northeast boundary. Install split-rail fence and
evergreen shrubs to the identify property line and screen residence to
east.
Photo 2. Existing parking for two cars to right of kiosk. Adding two
spaces to left of kiosk as indicated by arrow will improve access and
enhance visitation.
Photo 3. Unmarked crossing at Marret Road between Cotton Farm and
Dunback Meadow. Work with town engineering department to locate
a marked and signed pedestrian crossing, improve drainage, and
relocate trail heads as necessary.
Photo 4. Existing sign on Marret Road. Rotating sign so that it is
perpendicular to the road will increase visibility of the property and
enhance visitation.
Cotton Farm, Lexington MA
Land Management and Design Plan
Mass Audubon Ecological Extension Service
11b
Photo 5. White flags marking trail leading from Marret Road to trails in
Cotton Farm. Relocate trail to follow contours of the land and wind its
way towards picnic area as shown by white dashed line.
Photo 6. Lawn area and picnic table near pond shore. Relocate trail
behind trees to follow contours of the land as shown by dashed
white line.
Photo 7. Trail in glade at base of slope. Close trail to protect wetlands
and promote seclusion. Maintain annual mowing in upper glade but
abandon mowing in lower glade as shown by black dashed line.
Photo 8. Broad, flat area along drive adjacent to orchard proposed
for relocated and expanded parking area.
Cotton Farm, Lexington MA
Land Management and Design Plan
Mass Audubon Ecological Extension Service
11c
Photo 9. Location of proposed viewing platform adjacent to picnic
area.
Photo 10. Example of ponding platform envisioned for the Cotton
Farm property.
Photo 11. Example of ponding platform envisioned for the Cotton
Farm property.
Cotton Farm, Lexington MA
Land Management and Design Plan
A-1
Appendix A - Management of Invasive Species
Several species of invasive plants are currently found within the Cotton Farm property and we have
described their management as it pertains to specific goals and objectives outlined in this plan. In
general, we recommend that the stewards assess threats from invasive species during annual
monitoring, and implement treatment according to specifications outlines in the town’s Principles and
Policies document. This includes the removal of Oriental Bittersweet climbing on several trees near the
trail head of Marret Road, and in the extreme southeast corner of the orchard. Below we provide
treatment recommendations for invasive species identified at Cotton Farm.
Glossy Buckthorn
Manual, mechanical and chemical means are effective in controlling glossy buckthorn, and is most
effectively controlled by recognizing its appearance early and removing isolated plants before they begin
to produce seed. With large infestations, remove the largest seed-producing plants first. At this time no
means of biological control is available for controlling glossy buckthorn. Hand pulling is effective in small
infestations. Remove the entire root section or resprouting will occur. Weed wrenches can be very
effective in uprooting buckthorn.
Chemical treatment is also an option. The type of herbicide determines the best time of year to apply.
Triclopyr herbicides are much more effective early in the growing season. Glossy buckthorn retains its
leaves late into the fall, so you can apply a glyphosate herbicide to fairly late in the season. However, the
application should not be too late or the leaves will no longer be photosynthetically active (or minimally
so) and will easily fall from the twigs. During the growing season, cut the stems near ground level and
apply a 20%-25% glyphosate mixture to the stumps. Resprouts should be cut and treated again, or
sprayed with a hand sprayer of 1.5%. Foliar applications over non-water sites can also use 2% triclopyr
solution or 2 oz. Escort® and surfactant mix. Foliar application of herbicides using a backpack sprayer is
effective, but less selective.
Common Reed
Control with herbicides is effective for controlling areas with large, established, populations of
Phragmites. Other options include mowing and prescribed burning. New stands of Phragmites
commonly occur when new wetlands are created or the soil is disturbed. Minimizing land disturbances
and water pollution helps deter this invasive species. Land management practices that guard against
erosion, sedimentation, fluctuating water levels, and nutrient loading in wetlands are the best long-term
solution.
Control of Phragmites is difficult. Repeated cutting can slow its growth and possibly hinder its spread,
but will not eliminate it altogether. The best method to eliminate Phragmites is the foliar application of
a systemic herbicide when the plants are actively growing. At this time no means of biological control is
Cotton Farm, Lexington MA
Land Management and Design Plan
A-2
available for treating Phragmites infestations. Manual or mechanical cutting or pulling has been used
successfully to control Phragmites. Treatments usually need to be repeated annually. The best time to
cut Phragmites is at the end of July. Cutting at other times may increase stand density. Phragmites stems
should be cut below the lowest leaf, leaving a 6" or shorter stump. Hand-pulling is an effective
technique for controlling Phragmites in small areas with sandy soils.
Repeated mowing is effective at slowing the spread of established stands but is unlikely to kill the plant.
Excavation of sediments may also be effective, but root fragments left in the soil may lead to
reestablishment. Prescribed burning after the plant has flowered, either alone or in combination with
herbicide treatment, is also effective. Burning after herbicide treatment also reduces standing dead
stem and litter biomass which may help to encourage germination of native plants in the following
growing season. Do not burn plants in the spring or summer before flowering as this may stimulate
growth. Chemical treatment includes the use of Glyphosate-based herbicides (such as Rodeo®) are
effective in controlling established populations. If a population can be controlled soon after it has
established the chances of eliminating the infestation are much higher because the below-ground
rhizome network will not be as extensive. Herbicides are best applied in late summer/early fall after the
plant has flowered either as a cut stem treatment or as a foliar spray. Repeat treatments are required
for several years to prevent any surviving rhizomes from resprouting.
Multiflora Rose
Mechanical and chemical methods are effective methods for managing multiflora rose but may need to
be combined with chemical in large or persistent infestations. The most important steps to controlling
multiflora rose are to destroy existing plants and begin a yearly program to control seedlings as they
appear. Biological control is not yet available for management of multiflora rose. However, researchers
are investigating several options, including a native viral pathogen (rose-rosette disease), which is
spread by a tiny native mite, and a seed-infesting wasp, the European rose chalcid.
Manual and mechanical control consisting of frequent, repeated cutting or mowing three to six times
per growing season for two to four years is effective in achieving high mortality of multiflora rose. In
high quality natural communities, cut the individual plants to minimize habitat disturbance. Herbicides
are successful in controlling multiflora rose but follow-up treatments are required because of the long-
lived stores of seed in the soil. Apply systemic herbicides (such as glyphosate) late in the growing season
to freshly cut stumps or to regrowth. In wetlands, where multiflora rose may occur, make sure to use a
wetland-formulated glyphosate product such as Rodeo or Accord Concentrate. Use an active ingredient
concentration of 25-35% when you apply herbicide to the cut stem. Plant growth regulators control the
spread of multiflora rose by preventing fruit set.
Bush Honeysuckle
Mechanical and chemical methods are the primary means of control of exotic bush honeysuckles. To
minimize reinvasion of treated habitats, begin control methods before seed is dispersed during late
Cotton Farm, Lexington MA
Land Management and Design Plan
A-3
summer and early autumn. No biological control agents are currently available for these plants, and any
potential agents that might be considered would have to be specific to these exotic honeysuckle species.
Manual and mechanical methods include removing seedlings or small plants by hand for light
infestations, taking care not to disturb the soil. In shaded forest habitats, cut to ground level at least
once every year during the growing season. Tools such as spades, digging forks, and Weed Wrenches
can be effective in removing all but the largest honeysuckles.
Prescribed burning can be effective for controlling exotic bush honeysuckles growing in open habitats.
Application of a systemic herbicide like glyphosate (such as Roundup®) is effective in controlling
seedlings of exotic bush honeysuckles. Spray a 1 percent solution onto the foliage or apply with a
sponge. For larger shrubs, cut the stems to ground level and immediately paint or spray the stumps with
a higher rate of glyphosate (25-35%).
Oriental Bittersweet
A combination of cutting followed by application of concentrated systemic herbicide to rooted, living cut
surfaces is an effective approach for removing Oriental bittersweet. For large infestations spanning
extensive areas of ground, a foliar herbicide is recommended over manual or mechanical methods,
which would create soil disturbance to minimize soil disturbance. Manual, mechanical and chemical
control methods are effective in removing and killing Oriental bittersweet. A combination of methods
often yields the best results and may reduce potential impacts to native plants, animals and people. The
method selected depends on the extent and type of infestation, the amount of native vegetation on the
site, and the time, labor and available resources. No biological controls are currently available for this
plant.
Manual Control of small infestations can be achieved by hand-pulling but the entire plant should be
removed including all the root portions. If fruits are present, collect, bag, and dispose of them in heavy
garbage bags. Always wear gloves and long sleeves to protect your skin from poison ivy and barbed or
spiny plants. Plants can also be controlled by cutting climbing vines near the ground at a comfortable
height to kill upper portions and to relieve the tree canopy. Vines can be cut using pruning snips or a
pruning saw for smaller stems, or a hand axe or chain saw for larger vines. Minimize the damage to the
bark of the host tree. Rooted portions will remain alive and should be repeatedly cut to the ground or
treated with herbicide. Cutting without herbicide treatment requires vigilance and repeated cutting
because plants will resprout from the base. Begin treatment early in the growing season and repeat the
treatment every two weeks until autumn
Systemic herbicides like triclopyr (such as Garlon® 3A and Garlon® 4) and glyphosate (such as Accord®,
Glypro®, Rodeo®) are absorbed into plant tissues and carried to the roots, killing the entire plant within
about a week. This method is most effective if the stems are first cut and herbicide is applied
immediately to the cut stem tissue.
Fall and winter applications will avoid or minimize impacts to native plants and animals. Repeated
treatments will be required. Any herbicide applications should be carefully targeted to avoid damage to
Cotton Farm, Lexington MA
Land Management and Design Plan
A-4
native, non-target species. If native grasses are intermingled with the bittersweet, triclopyr is better to
use than glyphosate because it is selective for broad-leaved plants and will not harm grasses. Follow-up
monitoring is required to ensure effective control. Glyphosate products referred to in this fact sheet are
sold under a variety of brand names (Accord®, Rodeo®, Roundup Pro® Concentrate) and in three
concentrations (41.0, 50.2 and 53.8% active ingredient). Other glyphosate products sold at home
improvement stores may be too dilute to obtain effective control. Triclopyr comes in two forms –
triclopyr amine (such as Garlon® 3A, Brush-B-Gone®, Brush Killer®) and triclopyr ester (such as Garlon®
4, Pathfinder®, and Vinex®). Because Garlon® 3A is a water-soluble salt that can cause severe eye
damage, it is imperative that you wear protective goggles to protect yourself from splashes. Garlon® 4 is
soluble in oil or water, is highly volatile and can be extremely toxic to fish and aquatic invertebrates. It
should not be used in or near water sources or wetlands and should only be applied under cool, calm
conditions.
Cotton Farm, Lexington MA
Land Management and Design Plan
A-5
Appendix B – Cotton Farm Baseline Documentation Report and Land
Management Plan
BASELINE DOCUMENTATION REPORT
and
LAND MANAGEMENT PLAN
Massachusetts Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs
Local Acquisitions for Natural Diversity (LAND) Grant Program
Property name: Cotton Farm – Upper Vine Brook
Municipality: Lexington
Acquisition date: January 6, 2011
Book/page: Book 58239 Page 482
Registry: Middlesex South Registry of Deeds
LAND #: 61
Date of report: April 19, 2011
Property location: 121 Marrett Rd
Acreage: 4.2 acres
Interest held by city/town: x Fee □ Conservation restriction
Other interest holders: None
Table of Contents
Section I: Property Information
1. Property description
2. LAND grant program regulations
3. Legal protection
4. Contact information
5. Land Use and Management Plan (if fee owned by town) and/or
Copy of Conservation Restriction (if CR) or
Section II: Maps
1. Locus map
2. Resource map
3. Monitoring map
Section III: Site Visit Report
1. General information
2. Current property conditions
3. Boundary conditions
Section IV: Photographs
1. Photo location and route map
2. List of photographs
3. Photographs
Section V: Amendments
Section VI: Signatures
Section I:
Property Information
I.1. Property description
The Cotton Farm – Upper Vine Brook property, located at 121 Marrett Road, Assessors’
map 31, lots 60B and 90B, is owned by the Town of Lexington, under care and control of
the Conservation Commission, for the purposes of conservation and passive recreation, in
perpetuity. The deed was recorded on January 6th, Book 56239 Page 482 in the Middlesex
South Registry of Deeds.
The property is subject to a temporary driveway easement between Cotton Farm Realty Trust
and the Town of Lexington, dated January 6, 2011 and recorded in Book 56239 page 494 in
the Middlesex South Registry of Deeds. The easement terminates automatically when
Robert and Edythe Cataldo vacate the adjacent house, or when Robert and Edythe Cataldo
are no longer living, or at the end of 25 years from the easement date, whichever occurs first.
I.2. Local Acquisitions for Natural Diversity (LAND) grant program regulations
This property is permanently protected open space, for conservation and passive recreation
only. It is subject to the standards and guidelines in 301 CMR 5.00: Self-Help and Urban
Self-Help Programs, of the Division of Conservation Services, Executive Office of Energy
and Environmental Affairs (EEA). Excerpted here are some of the major points:
- 5.06(4): Under the care and control of the Town of Lexington Conservation
Commission
- 5.09(1): The property must be used at all times for open space conservation and passive
recreation purposes only, in accordance with MGL Ch. 132A, Sec. 11
- 5.09(1): The property is permanently protected under Amendment Article 97 of the Mas-
sachusetts Constitution, and may not be converted to other uses. Municipalities must pur-
sue all feasible alternatives to conversion of grant-funded land. If conversion is finally
determined to be the only possible choice, all of the following must occur: municipal ap-
proval of the conversion; a two-thirds majority vote of both houses of the state legisla-
ture; replacement of the land with new conservation land that is of equal or greater fair
market value at the time of conversion, and of equal or greater acreage, ecological value,
and usefulness, to be approved or disapproved by the Secretary of EEA.
- 5.09(2): If this property ceases to be used in whole or in part for conservation and/or pas-
sive recreation purposes, all interest in the property shall revert to the Commonwealth,
unless the Secretary demands specific performance of the grant contract. The Town of
Lexington Conservation Commission must notify the Secretary of EEA of a change or
potential change to an inconsistent use, or, the Secretary of EEA may notify the Conser-
vation Commission that an inconsistent change in use has occurred. The Conservation
Commission has 90 days to rectify the use to the satisfaction of the Secretary, or it will
revert to the Commonwealth.
- 5.08 (2) and (3): Open to use by all members of the public without discrimination
- 5.08(1): In accordance with the LAND program regulations, the Town of Lexington
Conservation Commission may impose reasonable limits on the type and extent of use of
this area and facilities acquired, as necessary for maintenance or preservation.
- 5.06(1): Off-street parking may be required
- No private enterprise may occur on properties for which the fee simple or encumbered
fee is owned by the municipality, except that which contributes to and does not conflict
with appropriate public use and benefit.
- Structures are prohibited on properties for which the fee interest is owned by the munici-
pality, except those that further conservation or public passive recreational use of the
property.
I.3. Legal protection
Through receipt of funding through the LAND grant program, this property is perma-
nently protected under Amendment Article 97 of the Constitution of the Commonwealth
of Massachusetts.
- Ch. 132A, §11 – Act establishing the Self-Help (now LAND) grant program
- Ch. 40, §8c – Authority of conservation commissions to hold land for conservation pur-
poses
- Article 97 – Prohibits conversion of the property from conservation and recreational use
- LAND Project Agreement – Prohibits conversion of the property from conservation and
recreational uses. Requires mitigation in the event of conversion. Requires appropriate
public access. Recorded with deed.
I.4. Contact Information
Provide contact information for property monitor or manager, landowner (if CR), and any other
people or organizations involved in the property.
Name
(person or organization) Title (eg. property monitor) Mailing address Phone
Karen Mullins
Director of Community
Development/Conservation
Administrator
Community Development
Department, Room G-8
1625 Massachusetts Ave
Lexington, MA 02420
781-862-0500 x227
Emily Schadler Conservation Assistant Community Development
Department, as above
781-862-0500 x 240
Keith Ohmart
Bonnie Newman
Mike Tabaczynski
Tom Whelan
Board members, Lexington
Conservation Stewards
(volunteer organization for
the Conservation
Commission)
Community Development
Department, as above
781-862-0500 x 240
I.5. Conservation Restriction and Land Management Plan
5(b) If the Property is owned in fee:
Land Management Plan:
Purpose:
Cotton Farm connects conservation lands and wildlife habitats and also adds scenic value to
a publicly visible area.
• With this acquisition, it is possible to walk from Highland Avenue (in a neighborhood
near the center of Lexington) through the Cotton Farm and Upper Vine Brook
Conservation Area to the Dunback Meadow Conservation Area across Marrett Road to
the south.
• The upland habitat on the Cotton Farm connects with protected upland habitat to the
north and borders protected wetland habitat to the west. The pond shore on the western
border of Cotton Farm is a prime location for viewing wildlife and the wetlands to the
west, which are part of the headwaters of Vine Brook.
• The apple orchard on the property, visible from Marrett Road, is an attractive visual
asset to the town.
Property Uses:
Note: These should be posted at the property entrance(s).
Passive recreation
Permitted Uses:
Walking, jogging, bird watching and other wildlife observation, cross-country skiing,
picnicking, bicycling (on specified trails), and other forms of passive recreation.
Prohibited Uses:
Without permission of the Conservation Commission, it is forbidden to:
• Be in or on conservation land between the hours of 1/2 hour after sunset and 1/2 hour
before sunrise.
• Possess or consume alcoholic beverages.
• Commit any disorderly action, or disturb the peace, or conduct oneself in such manner
as to interfere with the rightful enjoyment of the public upon these grounds.
• Hunt, trap or shoot.
• Remove, cut or damage any flowers, plants, shrubs, trees or rocks.
• Operate a motor vehicle (the term "motor vehicle" includes, without limiting the
generality of the same, any car, truck, bus, motorcycle, motorbike or snowmobile) on
conservation lands except to access the designated parking area
• Make a fire except in designated fireplaces with permission of the Fire Department.
• Discard litter except in designated receptacles or post, paint, affix or display any sign,
notice, placard or advertising device.
• Dump materials of any kind.
• Build any structures.
• Dam any stream.
• Park a motor vehicle except in designated parking areas.
• Possess, be in control of, or be responsible for more than 3 dogs per person.
Structures:
Shed (formerly a pump house, 13' x 13'), which may be converted to a storage location for
Conservation tools and equipment in the future. Other structures on the property include a
dock, a fence, and an arbor, but these are scheduled for removal (see Stewardship plans
below).
Known stewardship issues:
Managing invasive species, restoring formerly maintained areas to a more natural state
(specifically a landscaped driveway island, a tilled field, a driveway, intensively mown
areas, the area around pond shore), managing public use in a way that also protects habitat
and wetlands, monitoring and preventing encroachment from abutting private property own-
ers.
Stewardship plans:
Active Management Plans:
See the Monitoring Map for more details on the following:
• Construct a trail from Marrett Road across the subject property. The new trail will
connect with an existing trail on other conservation land that leads to Highland Avenue.
• Install boundary signs along the property line between Lots C-6 and C-4 (now or for-
merly of Cotton Farm Realty Trust) and the subject property; install a trail sign at trail
entrance
• Establish a parking area for no more than three vehicles off of the driveway from
Marrett Road (see Monitoring Map for location). When the driveway easement has
expired, this parking area may be moved.
• Install an entry sign near the driveway entrance from Marrett Road and a kiosk in an ap-
propriate location.
• Install signage along the driveway to discourage people from parking along the edge of
the driveway.
• Add a picnic table near the pond and a mown path to the pond from the picnic area for
wildlife viewing.
• Mow grassy areas in the vicinity of the apple orchard, parking area, picnic area, and
trails frequently during the growing season and as needed elsewhere to maintain the
open look of the property, subject to the availability of mowing resources.
• Remove invasive species along the pond perimeter, the landscaped island, and elsewhere
on the property; monitor other areas for invasive species colonization and remove them
where it is feasible.
• Restore the agricultural tilled field on the northeastern edge of the property to more
natural conditions.
• Restore other areas that were intensively managed when the property was a single-
family home lot to more natural conditions.
• When the driveway easement expires, restore the main driveway to more natural
conditions.
• Close off access to the dirt drive that leads to the back of the agricultural tilled field.
Action on stewardship plans is the responsibility of the Lexington Conservation Commis-
sion with the help of volunteers.
The following structures are planned for removal under a Request for Determination of Ap-
plicability (RDA) submitted by the Lexington Conservation Stewards to the Lexington Con-
servation Commission. The structures are all on the perimeter of the pond on the western
side of the property:
• Arbor
• Docks
• Fence
Active Management Plans:
None.
Section II:
Maps
II.1. Locus map
II.2 Resource map
II.6. Monitoring map
Section III:
Site Visit Report
III.1. General information
Date of inspection: March 27, 2011
Time spent on property: 2.5 hours
Who was present on the site visit? What is their association with the property?
For the Lexington Conservation Stewards, Bonnie Newman, Gerald Paul, Tom Whelan
For the Conservation Commission: Stew Kennedy
III.2. Current property conditions
Note: This section may summarize some provisions of the CR or Management Plan. The
entire CR document must be read in order to understand its terms.
A. Conditions of the property relevant to the purposes of the CR or Management Plan:
Purpose Condition Photo
Passive
recreation
The mostly dry, upland location makes the property ideal for public
trails. The pond and orchard enhance the scenic appeal of Cotton
Farm. Although the adjacent land to the west is also conservation
land, it is too wet to be passable for public trails. The trails and the
vicinity of the parking area require frequent mowing during the
growing season. Other open areas, such as those to the north of the
driveway area, will be mowed as needed. See the Monitoring Map
for mowing and trail locations.
15
Wetlands
conservation
Cotton Farm is the eastern border of a wetland that is the headwaters
of Upper Vine Brook. The wetland and pond fall under the jurisdic-
tion of the Wetlands Protection Act and Lexington’s Wetland By-
law.
17
Orchard
maintenance
Volunteers and Town employees will maintain the orchard using
organic methods. The orchard grounds will be mowed frequently
during the growing season. Trees will be pruned as necessary to pre-
serve tree health, but not for specifically for fruit production at this
time. The intent is to maintain the orchard primarily for scenic rather
than agricultural value at this time due to lack of resources for active
agriculture. See the Monitoring Map for mowing locations.
3, 5, 8
B. Conditions of the property relevant to Permitted and Prohibited Uses:
Activity Condition
Date
built/
changed
Photo
Permitted
Walking on trails An existing trail leads into the property from the
north. The stewardship plan calls for extending that
trail across higher elevations and making a fork in
the trail running closer to the western boundary
skirting the wetlands area. Trails require periodic
mowing and maintenance during the growing
season.
14
Wildlife
observation
The stewardship plan includes removing
invasive species and restoring the pond shoreline to
improve the pond ecology as well as to give better
observation sight lines. A mown path from the
picnic area to the pond will also be provided.
17
Orchard No active agriculture is planned for the orchard at
this time. The orchard will be maintained using or-
ganic farming principles. The orchard area requires
3, 5, 8
frequent mowing during the growing season. See the
Monitoring Map for mowing locations.
Shed use The Lexington Conservation Stewards and/or the
Conservation Division may use the shed on the site
as a storage site for conservation tools and/or
equipment in the future, but the shed roof would
need to be repaired and other modifications made
for access and safety.
18
Motor vehicle
access for parking
The stewardship plan calls for installation of a park-
ing area for no more than three vehicles. The park-
ing area requires frequent mowing during the grow-
ing season. See Monitoring Map for the parking lo-
cation and mowing locations.
16
Prohibited
Motor vehicle
access beyond
parking area
Motor vehicle access is prohibited, excepting any
right to pass or maintain the gravel driveway under
the driveway easement between the Cotton Farm
Realty Trust and the Town of Lexington dated
1/6/2011 and recorded in Book 56239, page 494,
MSRD, or access for conservation purposes.
There is evidence of motor vehicle access beyond
the easement area, on a dirt drive around the tilled
field. This use is prohibited, and this drive will be
closed.
7
Agriculture With the exception of the orchard, no agriculture is
permitted. The tilled field in the northeastern portion
of the property will be restored to more natural
conditions.
8
Structures The dock, fence, and arbor at the pond edge will be
removed.
19,20,
21
Landscaped
driveway
island
There is a landscaped driveway island along the
eastern property border near the Cataldo house.
Some of the plants are prohibited non-native
species, such as burning bush. The invasive plants
will be removed.
9
C. List of prohibited uses for which there were no relevant observed conditions:
No evidence of the following activities was observed:
• Be in or on conservation land between the hours of 1/2 hour after sunset and 1/2 hour
before sunrise.
• Possess or consume alcoholic beverages.
• Commit any disorderly action, or disturb the peace, or conduct oneself in such manner
as to interfere with the rightful enjoyment of the public upon these grounds.
• Hunt, trap or shoot.
• Make a fire except in designated fireplaces with permission of the Fire Department.
• Discard litter except in designated receptacles or post, paint, affix or display any sign,
notice, placard or advertising device.
• Dump materials of any kind.
• Dam any stream.
• Possess, be in control of, or be responsible for more than 3 dogs per person.
D. Additional remarks regarding the present condition of the property:
The gravel driveway will be removed once the easement is terminated; see the terms
of the easement dated 1/6/2011 and recorded in Book 56239, page 494, MSRD.
III.3. Boundary Conditions
A. Do the boundaries on the ground clearly correlate to the legal description found in the CR
document or property deed (i.e. can you follow the boundary after reading the description)?
If not, how did you locate the property boundary?
B. (If CR): Are portions of the property which are excluded from the Restriction marked or oth-
erwise evident on the ground?
Boundaries are marked by surveyors and correlate with the plans of record for the sub-
ject property (easement plan, Plan 12 of 2011 and the lot plan for the deed to the
Town, Plan Book 2010, Page 775, MSRD).
N/A
C. Describe the condition of the boundary markings at all other points (i.e. stone wall, flagged,
signed, unmarked):
• SW corner near Marrett Road: Well-marked with six foot granite bound at the
end of a stone wall.
• SE corner near Marrett Road: The corner is at a stone wall on Marrett Rd, oppo-
site a stone bound on the other side of Marrett Rd indicated on the plans. Not cur-
rently monumented, this corner needs a marker.
• Boundary along land now or formerly of DeAngelis and Cotton Farm Realty
Trust: marked by survey flags corresponding to points on the plans (to be replaced
by granite/concrete markers).
• NE corner: marked by survey flag (to be replaced by a granite/concrete marker)
• NW corner: marked by survey flag (to be replaced by a granite/concrete marker)
• Concrete bound on the western boundary near the end of the stone wall.
• No remaining bounds on the western side are monumented until the SW corner, but
this border is already Lexington conservation land (Upper Vine Brook Conservation
Area)
D. Describe the use of abutting properties, focusing on uses close to the boundary line:
DeAngelis land: A house lot with structures close to the boundary line. Ornamental
plantings along Marrett Road go over the property line. There is no plan to remove
these plantings except for those that are invasive.
Cataldo land: The boundary line is dense with ornamental plantings that obscure the
boundary line. The Cotton Farm property is subject to a temporary easement that gives
access to Marrett Road from this house.
Agricultural tilled field: Along the boundary line beyond the driveway is a cultivated
field; a portion of the subject property is currently tilled. There is a prohibited dirt
drive that goes around the field; this drive is not named or described in the driveway
easement.
E. Any other comments on boundaries?
None.
Section IV:
Photographs
IV.1. Photo location map
IV.2. List of documentary photographs
Photographer(s): Tom Whelan, Emily Schadler
Date Photo
# Location description (where
the photographer was standing)
Cardinal
direction Description of photo subject
3/27/11 1 SW property corner NE View of Western corner of property on Marrett
Rd
3/27/11 2 Street scene at Marrett Rd N Stone wall and entrance at Marrett Road
3/27/11 3 Gravel road (easement area) at
Marrett Rd N Easement area in Driveway easement 56239/494
and public access, and orchard
3/27/11 4 SE property corner N Property bound at Marrett Road and at DeAngelis
house lot
3/27/11 5 Orchard W Orchard viewed from eastern side
3/27/11 6 Property line at DeAngelis lot S Property line facing south towards Marrett Rd
3/27/11 7 Property line at Cataldo house E Shows end of driveway and Cataldo house
3/27/11 8 Property line at Cataldo house W View of orchard
3/27/11 9 Property line at Cataldo house N View or plantings obscuring property line
3/27/11 10 Property line at field N View of tilled field bisected by property line
3/27/11 11 Property line at field W View of eastern boundary and woods from field
3/27/11 12 NE corner bound W View of woods along northern boundary
3/27/11 13 Northern boundary N View of woods to north (other conservation land)
3/27/11 14 Trail entering property N View of trail from conservation land to north
3/27/11 15 NW corner S View of eastern boundary and other conservation
land
4/18/11 16 At driveway and stone wall
north of orchard SE Proposed parking area
4/4/11 17 Pond view W View of the western shore, bittersweet in the
foreground
3/14/11 18 Near pond W View of the dock to be removed
3/14/11 19 Shed NW View of the current condition of the shed
3/14/11 20 Near pond W View of the fence to be removed
3/14/11 21 Near pond W View of the arbor to be removed
IV.3. Documentary Photographs
1. SW Corner, looking east along Marrett Road
2. Street scene, SW corner looking north
3. Driveway and orchard in background on right
4. SE corner at DeAngelis lot
5. Orchard, looking west from DeAngelis boundary
6. Property line, bound at DeAngelis house lot
7. Cataldo house, end of driveway at property line and staked bound
8. Orchard, driveway facing west near Cataldo house
9. Border plantings near house, obscuring property line (stake circled)
10. Tilled field, north of Cataldo house; property line bisects field
11. View of eastern boundary and woods from field
12 NE bound and woods
13. View of woods to north (other conservation land)
14. View of trail from conservation land to north
15. NE bound and eastern boundary
16. Parking area
17. Pond, facing west, bittersweet in foreground
18. Dock (to be removed) at the pond edge
19. Shed
20. Fence (to be removed) at the pond edge
21. Arbor (to be removed) at the pond edge
Section V:
Amendments
V. 1. How to amend this document
This property is permanently protected as open space for conservation and passive recrea-
tional use only. For this reason, it may become necessary in the future for portions of the
Land Management Plan to be revised.
The following sections of this document may be changed:
I.4. Contact information
I.5. Land Management Plan sections:
Permitted uses/activities
Prohibited uses/activities
Structures
Stewardship plans
Active management plans
Any changes to these sections must still adhere to the LAND grant program regulations,
Project Agreement, Article 97 requirements, and any other pertinent Massachusetts regu-
lations.
Procedure for amending this document:
The Conservation Commission will hold a public meeting in order to make any
amendments to this document.
Requests from the public to amend the Land Management plan sections listed above
must be made in writing to the Conservation Administrator at the address listed in
Section I.4.
Section VI:
Signatures
I certify that the above Baseline Documentation Report and Land Management Plan is accurate and
complete.
I understand that this property is permanently protected open space under Article 97 of the Massachusetts
Constitution, for conservation and passive recreation uses, under the care and control of the Conservation
Commission. The property may not be sold, subdivided, altered, or used for any other purposes, except by
securing all of the following: approval of the Conservation Commission; approval of the municipality by
town meeting/city council vote; approval by both houses of the Massachusetts State Legislature; approval
by the Governor of Massachusetts; mitigation by replacement with an unprotected property of equal or
greater size, value at the time of disposition, ecological value, and passive recreational value, subject to
approval by the Secretary of Energy and Environmental Affairs. Additionally, any change in use must
adhere to all relevant environmental laws and regulations, including but not limited to the Massachusetts
Environmental Protection Act and Endangered Species Protection Act, the Wetlands Protection Act, the
Rivers Protection Act, and Global Warming Solutions Act.
________________________________________________________________________
Preparer Print name
________________________________________________________________________
Municipal Chief Executive Officer Print name
________________________________________________________________________
Conservation Commissioner Print name
________________________________________________________________________
Conservation Commissioner Print name
________________________________________________________________________
Conservation Commissioner Print name
________________________________________________________________________
Conservation Commissioner Print name
________________________________________________________________________
Conservation Commissioner Print name
________________________________________________________________________________________________ Conservation Commissioner Print name
________________________________________________________________________________________________ Conservation Commissioner Print name
______________________________________
Date