HomeMy WebLinkAbout1993 ad Hoc Cemetery Site Committee ReportFIERf--JRT OF THE
^D HOC CEMETERY SITE COMMITTEE
r,PRIL E3,1993
I_C PANAITTEE I'-AEMBERS:
VIRGIf' LA ~O,d ,P.,AS
1=GS ,a,RD FULLER
K,,:IROL FAr-L.,--stJGHLIfV
JOYCE PAILLER
RUTH ST,4kNOICH
I`'~ A' .RY VINCENT
Repor-t of the AA-Hoc Cemetery Site Committee
The aJ ~ ,-t _ ~av•1 - Cemetery Site ,1 -
i ii:iittc2;v`:3~. opp:~ii'T} ser-i itt i i
,January of this year and has meet on a weekly basis to do its
x/ork= and prepare a report to town meeting.
The charge to the committee:
To study possible sites for additional cemetery space.
Laurel Hill Civic acres) and Forest (Bien are sold out and Charles
Lawn could be full in 15 years. Due to the Wetlands Protection
r :ct, only 6 of the original cD acres at Charles Lawn can be
developed, and no headstones are allowed.
Parameters as recommended by Robert Keating Director of
Cemeter•ies3:
Sire: NAinimum site size should be approximately
ten acres, preferably larger. A, 10 acre site size is estimated
to last about 60 yfears. To develop a site,x/ith road, grater and
drainage systems which,xrould not have a longevity of 40 years
would not be recommended.
Location: The area should be readily .accessible.
It should be dryr, ~xrith no seere grade changes and r'elatiNrelyr
free of rook or ledge. Substantial land reconfigurations are
costly.
Cost: There are no Cemetery: Department
funds for land purchase. Appropriations must come from the
t o,.x/n.
Sites considered and rejeoted:
CiP ni,vatel Land held bye usnn Prep School, l` Aeado r Brook
Couritryf Club, Longwood Poultry Farm, Spence Farm and
adjoining parcels and burial space outside of Reading.
CP'3ublic3 Bear Hill, Camp Curtis. Guild, Nike Site, Town Forest,
Kurchian Woods, Oi-vidence Road and an extension of Charles
Lawn Cemetery..
Sites for Consideration.
1. E3are i'• oad;o-,w: site off Fear! St. and accessible fnom
NAain St. has approximately 12 acres of mostly open land on a
sloping hillside. There is additional upland under control of
C oniser,vation. Strict guidelines must be met to remove the
land from Conservation control, i.e.: like bind of land -'could be
needed for a -.,yap Caret lands cannot be swapped for dry 1. ny
s4.Yrapped land wo yid require the same ecological value and
utility,'. This site was acquired by the town using Federal, State
and local funds for the purpose of conser-vatiorn. The Federal
go vernment would probably require appraisals.
Reimbursement of the original funding may be required 05096
to Federal, 25% to State and 25% to torn. The State
legislature must also approve. The site is large enough to meet
the cemetery needs for some time. Releasinq it from
Conservation would be a le gtl7y, costly and laborious process.
The Chairman of the Conservation Committee advised that the
outcome would be questionable.
2. Batchelder Field: r.. site off Franklin Bt. and accessible
from either Main or Havferhill }~rith approximately 10 acres of
flat usable terrain. Readily available for development, this site is
bordered by residences and k et lands. Future expansion is
limited due to the necessity of crossing a strip of wetlands to
access higher- grounds that are timbered and possibly e.,nder
Conservation control. This site is smaller than tare I'vleado ,
but some additional land acquisition might be possible. Two
acres of privately owned drys land abutting Batchelder Field
may be .available. A Iso it is entirely; possible, that natural
changes in drainage and vegetation could allow additional land to
be available in the future. The area available now meets the
minimal needs for efficient cemetery] development and would
serve the town approximately GO }rears, Possible expansion in
the future could further extend this time period.
Pvocesi-*: The committee received an explanation of
ccfnser-ration laws and restrictions from Conservation
Commission Chairman Dr, James Biller and the AAdministrative
.j4kssistant Donald Nadeau.
Two members of the Cemetery Trustees who served on this
,committee and the Director of Cemeteries provided input as
did the Town Planner. The two primary sites were walked by
the committee.
Cernclusion:There is no simple solution to the long term need
for cemetery space in the Town of Pleading. The town has no
large sites available that would satisfy} the optimum cemetery
needs for many yfears, in the future. Since considerable time is
needed for planning and development it is essential that a site
be selected now. It is the decision of this committee that the
Batchelder Field site appears to be the most practical at this
time. 'We also strongly encourage continuing pursuit of the
possibilities of extending into adjacent areas in the future.
motion -,eras made that the committee raoorrcmend that mare
N/1eado: - Conservation area off pearl Bt. be developed as the
next cemetery site. The motion failed 5 to i.
If-.. motion ,~xras made that the committee recommend the
Batchelder Field SitaThe The motion ~a=cerl 6 to Oz
A, motion :arras made to accept the final report of the
committee. The motion passed 6 to 0.