Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Village Hill Northampton State Hospital DHCD RFP master list
I30Y` , 10'30Redevelopment Master List Organizational Information Name and Address Geographical Info Type Subclassifcation Comments Central Real Estate Development B. BLAINE BUILDERS Residential MILK ST. RUTLAND, MA 01543 National Real Estate Development CAPITAL GOLF PARTNERS Commercial 3269 SUTTON PLACE WASHINGTON, DC 20016 National General THE DICK CORPORATION N/A P.O. BOX 10896 PITTSBURGH, PA 15236 National General ROBERT MCALPINE LTD. N/A 185 BETHRIDGE RD. REXDALE, ONTARIO, CN M9W 15 National Real Estate Development GUST NEWBERG CONSTRUCTION Commercial 2040 N. ASHLAND AVE. CHICAGO, IL 60614 National General SHORT COURSE PARTNERS N/A 30 LIBERTY STREET SLOCUM, RI 02877 BARBARA SCHULTZ Boston Bus ss j r LESLEY COLLEGE Education 29 EVERETT ST. CAMBRIDGE, MA 02138 JAMES AKILLIAN Boston 0'e-nIVU rU p~'_L MASSASOIT COMMUNITY COLLEGE N/A l~ 1 MASSASOIT BOULEVARD BROCKTON, MA 02402 MIKE ALEXANDER Boston Real Estate Development NAT. CORP. FOR HOUSING Elderly 1225 EYE STREET, NW WASHINGTON, DC 20005 TOM ALPERIN Boston Real Estate Development NATIONAL DEVELOPMENT Commercial 199 WELLS AVENUE V NEWTON, MA 02159 STEVEN ANDERSON Central Real Estate Development SYLVAN HOMES Residential 41 N. MAIN ST. SHREWSBURY, MA 01545 TIMOTHY ANDERSON Boston General 11 T WB O RIDGE ST. N/A i BOSTON, MA 02138 page - -1 Redevelopment Master List Organizational Information Name and Address Geographical Info Type Subclassifcation Comments GORDON ANDERSON Boston Business VICE PRESIDENT REGIS COLLEGE Education WESTON, MA 02193 AMY ANTHONY Boston Real Estate Development ALDRICH EASTMAN & WALTCH 225 FRANKLIN STREET Commercial BOSTON, MA 02108 MARY ANNE AVRIL ~7 / Boston Real Estate Development GATES LANE REALTY TRUST 151 TREMONT STREET ' Commercial BOSTON, MA 02111 DONALD BABCOCK Boston Business U. MASS. BOSTON 100 MORISSEY BOULEVARD Education BOSTON, MA 02125 JUNE BAGLIONE Boston Business NEW ENGLAND MEDICAL CENTER 100 BOYLSTON STREET Medical BOSTON, MA 02116 M YRNA BAYLIS West B UNIV. OF MA MEDICAL CEN. 55 LAKE AVE. Medical WORCESTER, MA 01655 ROBERT BEAL Boston Real Estate Development BEAL COMPANIES 177 MILK ST. Commercial BOSTON, MA 02109 BILL BECKEMAN Boston Real Estate Development FINARD & COMPANY 2 BURLINGTON WOODS Commercial BURLINGTON, MA 01803 DONALD BELLEFEUIILE Boston Real Estate Development ADS SENIOR HOUSING 139 MAIN STREET Elderly CAMBRIDGE, MA 02142 ANDREW BENDETSON Boston Real Estate Development DIVERSIFIED FUNDING 63 ATLANTIC AVE Commercial BOSTON, MA 02110 CHARLES BENSON Boston Real Estate Development DUFFY ASSOCIATES 411 WAVERLY OAKS ROAD Commercial WALTHAM, MA 02154 CHRIS BERGERON North Shore General RMD, INC. 1 EA T ST. N/A TW BURY , MA 01876 pa Redevelopment Master List Organizational Information Name and Address Geographical Info Type Subclassifcation Comments EDWARD BLACKMAN Boston Real Estate Development HOUSING SERVICES CO. Residential 841 PARKER ST., #261 BOSTON, MA 02120 ROBERT BLAND Boston Business N.E. MEDICAL CENTER Medical 750 WASHINGTON ST. BOSTON, MA 02111 LARRY BLUESTONE Boston General MONACELLI ASSOCIATES N/A 1033 MASSACHUSETTS AVE. CAMBRIDGE, MA 02138 JOHN BOK Boston General FOLEY, HOAG AND ELLIOT N/A ONE POST OFFICE SQUARE BOSTON, MA 02109 GILBERT BORO Boston Real Estate Development GBI CORPORATION Commercial 283 AUBURN ST. NEWTON, MA 02166 PAT BOULEY Boston $usimn-c^o rp THE STOP & SHOP CO. . )Od 1 BRADLEE CIRCLE BRAINTREE, MA 02184 ROBERT BOWDITCH Boston Real Estate Development MB ASSOCIATES Commercial 80 LINCOLN STREET BOSTON, MA 02111 BRAD BOYD Boston Real Estate Development THE NILES COMPANY Commercial 303 CONGRESS ST. BOSTON, MA 02116 ILLIAM BREITBART West General 8 BRIDGE ST. N/A NORTHAMPTON, MA 01060 JOHN BREWER National Real Estate Development LEGRAN, INC. Commercial ONE TABOR CENTER DENVER, CO 80202 HAROLD BROWN Boston Real Estate Development HAMILTON REALTY Commercial 39 BRIGHTON AVENUE ALLSTON, MA 02134 ORIKAY BROWN-WEST Boston Business BRIDGEWATER STATE COLLEGE / Education GROVE STREET BRIDGEWATER, MA 02325 --------page--3------ i Redevelopment Master List Organizational Information Name and Address Geographical Info Type Suklassifcation Comments BUCHERT National Real Estate Development AMERICAN HERITAGE Commercial 7410 JAGER CT. CINCINATTI, OH 41230 MARCUS BUCKLEY Boston Business SIMMONS COLLEGE Education 300 THE FENWAY BOSTON, MA 02115 JAMES BUECHL Boston General KROKIDAS & BLUESTEIN N/A ONE MILK ST. BOSTON, MA 02109 PHIL BUMOUCHEL Central Real Estate Development RURAL HOUSING IMP. Residential 645 CENTRAL ST. WINCHENDON, MA 01475 RON CAMPANELLI South Shore Real Estate Development CAMPANELLI DEVELOPMENT Commercial ONE CAMPANELLI DRIVE BRAINTREE, MA 02104 MIKE CANTALUPA Boston Real Estate Development BOSTON PROPERTIES Commercial 8 ARLINGTON ST. BOSTON, MA 02116 JOHN CARBERRY Boston Real Estate Development CHARLES RIVER MORTGAGE CO. 89 BROAD STREET BOSTON, MA 02110 JAMES CARLIN Boston Real Estate Development CROSSPOINT DEVELOPMENT Commercial 235 WEST CENTRAL STREET NATIK, MA 01760 EDWARD CARLINO Boston Real Estate Development TAB BUILDING CO. Residential 109 H LAND ST. SO RVILLE , MA 02144 ALISON CARNDUFF 11 l~ National Real Estate Development KEEN DEVELOPMENT El P.O. BOX 382589 CAMBRIDGE, MA 02238-2589 PATRICK CARNEY Boston Real Estate Development CLAREMONT CORPORATION Commercial BATTERYMARCH PARK H QUINCY, MA 02169 MIKE CARROLL Boston Business GENERAL ELECTRIC Corporate 1000 WESTERN AVENUE LYNN, MA 01910 f ----page-- 4---- Redevelopment Master List Organizational Information Name and Address Geographical Info Type Subclassifcation Comments BILL CASPER Boston Real Estate Development BOSTON LAND CO. Commercial 151 TREMONT ST. BOSTON, MA 02111 DON CHIOFARO Boston Real Estate Development CHIOFARO COMPANY Commercial ONE INTERNATIONAL PLACE BOSTON, MA 02110 CHARLES CHISHOLM Boston Business PURITY SUPREME Corporate 101 BILLERICA AVENUE NORTH BILLERICA, MA 01862 PATRICK CLANCY Boston Real Estate Development THE CO MUNTTY BUILDERS Co cial ff 95 BE EY ST. d BOSTON, MA 02116 VICKI COATES Boston Business LEONARD MORSE HOSPITAL Medical 115 LINCOLN ST. FRAMINGHAM, MA 01701 HOWARD COHEN Boston General MINTZ, LEVIN, AND COHEN N/A ONE FINANCIAL CENTER BOSTON, MA 02111 SYLVIA COLLINS Boston Business BABSON COLLEGE Education BABSON PARK WELLESLEY, MA 02157 ELLEN CONNOLLY Boston Real Estate Development CAMBRIDGE HEALTHCARE INC. Elderly 101 FEDERAL STREET BOSTON, MA 02110 TERRY CONROY Boston Real Estate Development CONROY DEVELOPMENT Commercial THE CAPTAIN'S QUARTERS CHARLESTOWN, MA 02129 LEIGHTON COONEY National Real Estate Development GLEICKMAN MANAGEMENT Commercial P.O. BOX 3858 PORTLAND, ME 04104 JOSEPH CORCORAN Boston Real Estate Development CORCORAN JENNISON COMPANY Commercial 143 WOOD ROAD BRAINTREE, MA 02184 JOHN CORCORAN Boston Real Estate Development JOHN M. CORCORAN COMPANY Commercial 500 GRANITE AVENUE EAST MILTON, MA 02186 Redevelopment Master List Organizational Information Name and Address Geographical Info Type Subclassifcation Comments RICHARD CORRIEA Boston Business MIDDLESEX COMMUNITY COLLEGE Education SPRING ROAD BEDFORD, MA 01730 THOMAS COSTELLO Boston Business U. MASS. LOWELL Education 1 UNIVERSITY AVENUE LOWELL, MA 01854 BERNIE COYLE Boston Business POLAROID Corporate 549 TECHNOLOGY SQUARE CAMBRIDGE, MA 02139 JOSEPH M. CRONIN Boston Business BENTLY COLLEGE Education 175 FOREST STREET W ALTHAM , MA 02154-4705 VINCENT CUCCHIARA Boston Business MASS. GENERAL HOSPITAL Medical 32 FRUIT STREET BOSTON, MA 02114 LAWRENCE CURTIS Boston Real Estate Development WINN DEVELOPMENT CO. Elderly SIX FANEUIL HALL MARKETPLACE BOSTON, MA 02109 ANDREA D'AMATO Boston Consultant LEVENTHAL AND COMPANY Market 60 STATE ST. BOSTON, MA 02109 FRANK D'ANNOLIO Boston Real Estate Development D'ANNOLIO CORP. Residential 125 MAIN ST. STONEHAM, MA 02180 EDWARD DARMAN Boston Real Estate Development DARMAN COMPANY Commercial 74 DEER PATH LANE WESTON, MA 02193 KEN DEMAY Boston Real Estate Development SASAKI ASSOCIATES, INC. Commercial 64 PLEASANT ST. WATERTOWN, MA 02172 JOHN DENNIS Boston Real Estate Development CORPORATE R.E. ADVISORS Commercial 303 CONGRESS ST. BOSTON, MA 02210 BOB DEPIETRI, JR. Boston Real Estate Development ROSEWOOD DEVELOMENT Commercial 293 BOSTON POST ROAD MARLBORO, MA 01752 --pages --6---- Redevelopment Master List Organizational Information Name and Address Geographical Info Type Subclassifcation Comments DAVID DIXON Boston Real Estate Development GOODY CLANCY & ASSOCIATES Elderly 334 BOYLSTON STREET BOSTON, MA 02116 MEGAN DOBORTH Boston General METLIFE REAL ESTATE N/A ONE FINANCIAL CENTER BOSTON, MA 02111 EVAN DOCKSER National Real Estate Development CRI, INC. Commercial 11200 ROCKVILLE PIKE ROCKVILLE, MD 20852 JAY DOHERTY Boston Real Estate Development CABOT, CABOT, AND FORBES Commercial 99 SUMMER ST. BOSTON, MA 02110 JOHN DOMINS Boston Business HARVARD COMMUNITY HEALTH Medical 10 BROOKLINE PLACE W. BROOKLINE, MA 0214.6 PAUL DONAHUE Boston Real Estate Development WESTON ASSOCIATES Commercial 170 NEWBURY ST. BOSTON, MA 02116 RICHARD DONNELLY Boston Real Estate Development OLD STONE DEVELOPMENT Commercial ONE OLD STONE CENTER PROVIDENCE, RI 02903 MICHAEL DOWNEY West Real Estate Development O'CONNELL ENGINEERING Elderly P.O. BOX 867 HOLYOKE, MA 01041 MIKE DOYLE Boston Real Estate Development THE STANDISH CARE CO. Elderly 745 BOYLSTON STREET BOSTON, MA 02116 RON DRUKER Boston Real Estate Development DRUKER COMPANY Commercial 50 FEDERAL STREET BOSTON, MA 02110 STEVEN DUBUQUE South Shore Real Estate Development S. SHORE HOUSING CORP. Elderly 169 SUMMER ST. KINGSTON, MA 02364 WILLIAM DURGAN Boston Business VP, BUSINESS AFFAIRS Education COLLEGE OF THE HOLY CROSS WORCESTER, MA 01610 Redevelopment Master List Organizational Information Name and Address Geographical Info Type Subclassifcation Comments WILLIAM EGGBEER National Real Estate Development MARRIOTT LIFE CARE Elderly ONE MARRIOTT DRIVE WASHINGTON, DC 20058 ROBERT ELDER Boston Real Estate Development ELDER ASSOCIATES Commercial 50 MILK STREET BOSTON, MA 02109 DIANE ELDER National Real Estate Development ELDER & SONS Residential 22020 DURBERRY RD. SMITHBURY, MD 21783 DAVID EPSTEIN Boston Real Estate Development THE ABBY GROUP Commercial 575 BOYLSTON ST. MA, MA 02116 ALBERT ETRE Central Real Estate Development ETRE BUILDERS Residential 762 MAIN ST. SHREWSBURY, MA 01543 ROBERT FANNING North Shore Business BEVERLY HOSPITAL Medical HERRICK STREET BEVERLY, MA 01915 LUCY FARMER Boston Business MOUNT AUBURN HOSPITAL Medical 330 MOUNT AUBURN STREET CAMBRIDGE, MA 02238 t?C ~.P gpcTrnr_brADT ~ f t Reap tatc~Be elep,T,P 1 v ~ Residential BOSTON, MA 02112 ELLEN FEINGOLD Boston Real Estate Development JEWISH COMMUNITY HOUSING Elderly 30 WALLINGFORD ROAD BRIGHTON, MA 02135 DIANE FILIPPI National Real Estate Development SMWM Elderly 501 SECOND STREET SAN FRANCISCO_ CA 94107 JANICE FINKELSTEIN West Business BAYSTATE MEDICAL CENTER Medical 759 CHESTNUT STREET SPRINGFIELD, MA 01199 EDWARD FISH Boston Real Estate Development PEABODY PROPERTIES Commercial 65 ATTERTON STREET BOSTON, MA 02119 Pala--g------- I Redevelopment Master List Organizational Information Name and Address Geographical Info Type Subclassifcation- Comments WILLIAM FITZPATRICK Boston Real Estate Development ADVANTAGE PROPERTIES Commercial 3 N. MAIN ST NATICK, MA 01760 FRANCIS FLANNERY Boston Business SUFFOLK UNIVERSITY Education 8 ASHBURTON PLACE BOSTON, MA 02114 THOMAS FLATLEY Boston Real Estate Development FLATLEY COMPANY Commercial 50 BRAINTREE HILL PARK BRAINTREE, MA 02184 RICHARD FLEMMING Boston General N/A 80 PARK ST. BROOKLINE, MA 02140 JOAN FLORA, DEAN South Shore Business STONEHILL COLLEGE Education 320 WASHINGTON STREET N. EASTON, MA 02357 DAN FRANK Boston Real Estate Development FINEBERG COMPANIES Commercial ONE WASHINGTON STREET WELLESLEY, MA 02181 STEPHEN C. FRASER North Shore Real Estate Development BRIM ENTERPRISES Elderly 100 CONIFER HILL DRIVE DANVERS, MA 01923 PETER GAGLIARDI Boston Real Estate Development HOUSING ALLOWANCE PRJ. kz~ ' 322 MAIN ST. SPRINGFIELD, MA 01105 JAY GAISINGER Boston Real Estate Development HILLHAVEN, INC. Elderly 450 BEDFORD STREET LEXINGTON, MA 02173 MEL GAMZON Boston Real Estate Development SR. HOUSING INVESTMENTS Elderly 2150 WASHINGTON ST. NEWTON, MA 02162 LEONARD GANGAL Central Real Estate Development CNS BUILDERS Residential . 231 GLENWOOD RD. RUTLAND, MA 01543 CARL GAUTHIER Boston Real Estate Development PARAMLUNT DEVELOPMENT CO. Commercial 73 MT. WAYTE AVE. FRAMINGHAM, MA 01701 -page----9 Redevelopment Master List Organizational Information Name and Address Geographical Info Type Subclassifcation Comments DONALD GERAGHTY Boston Business SALEM HOSPITAL Medical 81 HIGHLAND AVENUE SALEM, MA 01970 MARGE GETCHELL Boston Real Estate Development SPAULDING & SLYE Elderly 125 CAMBRIDGE PARK DRIVE CAMBRIDGE, MA 02140 MIKE GIACOPELLI National Real Estate Development MARRIOTT LIFE CARE RETIR. COM. Elderly ONE MARRIOTT DRIVE WASHINGTON, DC 20058 KEVIN GIBLIN Boston Real Estate Development BRENDON HOMES Residential 55 NEW YORK AVE. FRAMINGHAM, MA 01701 ROBERT GILBANE National Real Estate Development GILBANE PROPERTIES Commercial 7 JACKSON WALKWAY PROVIDENCE, RI 02940 BYRON GILCHRIST Boston Real Estate Development MACOMBER DEVELOPMENT Commercial ONE MAIN STREET CAMBRIDGE, MA 02142 IAN GILLESPIE Boston Real Estate Development LEGATT, MCCALL, GRUBB ELLIS Commercial ONE POST OFFICE SQ. BOSTON, MA 02109 WILLIAM GILMORE National Real Estate Development CLIPPER AFFILIATES Elderly 86 DOVER ROAD DURHAM, NH 03824 STANLEY GOLDSTEIN South Shore Real Estate Development PREMIER REHABILITATION Elderly 40 MECHANIC ST FOXBORO, MA 02035 RAYMOND GOODMAN North Shore General N/A 8 MAYFAIR CT. IPSWICH, MA 01938 KEN GORDON Boston Business BOSTON UNIVERSITY Education 121 BAYSTATE ROAD BOSTON, MA 02215 JERRY GOUCHBER North Shore Real Estate Development HARBOUR DEVELOPMENT Residential 23 CENTRAL ST. LYNN, MA 01901 Redevelopment Master List Organizational Information Name and Address Geographical Info Type Subela"ssifeation Comments RICHARD GRAF Boston Real Estate Development FORT POINT GROUP Commercial 286 CONGRESS STREET BOSTON, MA 02110 ALAN GREEN Boston Real Estate Development GREEN COMPANY G ~ _ w 46 GLEN AVENUE ~~1C U ~Y NEWTON, MA 02159 GARY GREEN National Real Estate Development EQUITY VENTURES Commercial 475 KILVERT STREET WARWICK, RI 02886 JOHN GRIFFIN Boston Business NEW ENGLAND TELEPHONE Corporate 185 FRANKLIN STREET BOSTON, MA 02107 BRAD GRIFFITH Boston Real Estate Development LIBERTY PROPERTIES Commercial ONE LIBERTY SQUARE BOSTON, MA 02109 LOUIS GROSSMAN Boston Real Estate Development GROSSMAN COMPANIES Commercial 1266 FURNACE BROOK PARKWAY QUINCY, MA 02169 HOWARD GROSSMAN Boston Real Estate Development HOWARD GROSSMAN COMPANY Commercial 111 BOSTON POST ROAD SUDBURY, MA 01776 ARTHUR GUTIERREZ Boston Real Estate Development GUTIERREZ COMPANY Commercial ONE WALL STREET BURLINGTON, MA 01803 ED HADDAD Boston Real Estate Development THE CODMAN CO. Commercial 211 CONGRESS ST. BOSTON, MA 02111 DENNY HALL Boston Real Estate Development HALL PROPERTIES Commercial 1 INTERNATIONAL PLACE BOSTON, MA 02110 DEV HAMLEN Boston Real Estate Development HAMLEN, COLLIER & COMPANY Commercial 10 LIBERTY STREET BOSTON, MA 02109 MAURICE HANDEL Boston Business NEWTON-WELLESLEY HOSPITAL. Medical 2000 HIGHLAND AVE. NEWTON, MA 02162 Redevelopment Master List Organizational Information Name and Address Geographical Info Type Subclassifcation Comments TYRONE HANLON Boston Business HEALTH GROUP, INC. Corporate P.O. BOX 686 WESTON, MA 02193 JANICE HANNERT Central Real Estate Development FAFARD COMPANIES Residential 290 ELLIOT ST ASHLAND, MA 01721 NEIL HANNON Boston Business DIGITAL EQUIPMENT CORPORATION Corporate 146 MAIN STREET MAYNARD, MA 01745 GEORGE HARRINGTON Central Real Estate Development HARRINGTON TRUST Residential P.O. BOX 98 SHREWSBURY, MA 01545 LEW HEAFITZ Boston Real Estate Development HEAFITZ & COMPANY Commercial THE CAPTAIN'S QUARTERS CHARLESTOWN, MA 02129 RICHARD HEATH Boston General N/A 42 BO ST. B ON, MA 02130 RICHARD HERRICK West Real Estate Development THE IVEY COMPANIES Commercial 317 MAIN ST. GREAT BARRINGTON, MA 02130 EMILY HEWITT Boston Business HILL AND BARLOW Institutional ONE INTERNATIONAL PLACE BOSTON, MA 02110 HENRY ST. HILAIRE North Shore Real Estate Development 0. ALHBORG & SONS Elderly 222 CABOT STREET BEVERLY, MA 01915 MATTHEW HOBBS Boston General ADAMS, HARKNESS & HILL N/A ONE LIBERTY SQ. BOSTON, MA 02109 JOHN HOLIVER Boston Business SOUTH SHORE HOSPITAL Medical 55 FOGG ROAD S. WEYMOUTH, MA 02190 DAVID HOLT Boston Business WANG LABORATORIES Corporate 1 INDUSTRIAL DRIVE LOWELL, MA 01851 Redevelopment Master List Organizational Information Name and Address Geographical Info Type Subclassifcation Comments RICHARD HOWARD National Business GENESIS HEALTH VENTURES Corporate 148 WEST ST. KENNET, PA 19348 KEN HUBBARD National Real Estate Development GERALD D. HINES INTERESTS 885 THIRD AVENUE Commercial NY, NY 10022 JOHN HUGER Boston Real Estate Development CROSSPOINT DEVELOPMENT 235 WEST CENTRAL STREET Commercial NATIK, MA 01760 SUSAN HUDSON Boston Real Estate Development ALDRICH, EASTMAN, AND WALTCH 225 FRANKLIN STREET Commercial BOSTON, MA 02116 THOMAS HUNT Boston Business TUFTS UNIVERSITY 44 TEELE AVENUE Education MEDFORD, MA 02155 JOSEPH IANNONI Boston Business ST. LUKES HOSPITAL 101 PAGE STREET Medical NEW BEDFORD , MA 02740 AARON JACOBS Boston Business FRAMINGHAM STATE COLLEGE 100 STATE STREET Education FRAMINGHAM, MA 01701 DEBORAH JOELSON Boston Business, MEDICAL CTR. OF CENTRAL MA 119 BELMONT STREET Medical WORCESTER, MA 01605 DUNCAN JONES Central General 58 UNION ST. N/A ASHLAND, MA 01721 JOHN KANTOR Boston Business THE MEDIPLEX GROUP Medical 15 WALNUT ST. WELLESLEY, MA 02181 JAMES KARAM Boston Real Estate Development FIRST BRISTOL CORP . 222 MILLIKEN BLVD. Commercial FALL RIVER, MA 02722 STEVE KARP Boston Real Estate Development NEW ENGLAND DEVELOPMENT ONE WELLS AVENUE Commercial NEWTON, MA 02159 Redevelopment Master List Organizational Information Name and Address Geographical Info Type Subclassifcation Comments JON KAY Boston Real Estate Development HK PROPERTIES Commercial 295 FREEPORT STREET BOSTON, MA 02122 JOE KELLER Boston Real Estate Development KELLER COMPANY Commercial 101 DERBY STREET HINGHAM, MA 02043 EDWARD KELLY National Real Estate Development NEW LIFE DEVELOPMENT Elderly 5 INDEPENDENCE WAY PRINCETON, NJ 08540 RICHARD KELLY Boston Real Estate Development R. J. KELLY COMPANY Commercial 55 CAMBRIDGE STREET BURLINGTON, MA 02119 EUGENE KELLY South Shore Real Estate Development KEITH PROPERTIES Residential 14 PAGE TERRACE STOUGHTON, MA 02072 SARA KESSEL Boston Business METRO WEST MED. CENTER Medical 67 UNION ST NATICK, MA 01760 RICK KILLIGREW Boston Business UNION HOSPITAL Medical 280 IRVING ST. FRAMINGHAM , MA 01701 BILL KLEMME National Real Estate Development LIFE CARE CORP. Elderly 800 SECOND STREET DES MOINES, IA 50309 BILL KOSTA Boston General 120 ASHFORD ST. N/A BOSTON, MA 02215 LARRY LAIRD National Real Estate Development THE FORUM LIFE CARE, INC. Elderly P.O. BOX 40498 INDIANAPOLIS, IN 46240-0498 ANDREW LANE Boston Real Estate Development LANE DEVELOPMENT Residential 1500 WORCESTER RD. FRAMINGHAM, MA 01701 BILL LANGELIER Boston Real Estate Development LANGELIER COMPANY Commercial ONE MCKINLEY SQUARE BOSTON, MA 02109 Redevelopment Master List Organizational Information Name and Address Geographical Info Type Subclassifcation Comments RAYMOND LAROCCA Boston Business STAR MARKET Corporate 625 MT. AUBURN STREET CAMBRIDGE, MA 02138 MARY LEARY Boston Real Estate Development OXFORD RETIREMENT SERVICES Elderly 6401 GOLDEN TRIANGLE RD. GREENBELT, MD 20770 TODD LEE Boston General STEPHENSON & TAYLOR N/A 286 CONGRESS STREET BOSTON, MA 02210 JACK LENNON South Shore Business GODDARD MEMORIAL HOSPITAL Medical 99 SUMMER STREET STOUGHTON, MA 02072 KATE LENNY Boston Real Estate Development DALLAMORA REAL ESTATE Commercial 987 WORCESTER RD. NATICK, MA 01760 EDWARD LEVITT Boston Real Estate Development LONGWOOD CONSULTING Elderly 154 EAST CENTRAL STREET NATICK, MA 01760 RANDELL LILLY Boston Real Estate Development COLUMBIA CONSTRUCTION Commercial 58 CONCORD RD. N. READING, MA 01864 EDWARD LONGERGAN Boston General MCDERMOTT/O'NEAL ASSOCIATES N/A 75 STATE ST. BOSTON, MA 02109 iwL l SHARON LOWENTHAL Boston feral j t ~ 52 BEACON ST. BOSTON, MA 02108 PETER MADSEN Boston Real Estate Development GUNWYN CO. Elderly 47 THORNDIKE STREET CAMBRIDGE, MA 02141 JAMES MAGLIOZZI Boston Real Estate Development J. F. WHITE PROPERTIES Elderly ONE GATEWAY CENTER NORTH NEWTON, MA 02160 ROBERT MAHER Boston Business ST. VINCENT'S HOSPITAL Medical 825 WINTHROP STREET WORCESTER, MA 01604 I page--15-- i Redevelopment Faster List Organizational Information Name and Address Geographical Info Type Subclassifcation Comments IRMA S. MANN Boston Real Estate Development STRATEGIC MARKETING, INC. Elderly 360 NEWBURY STREET BOSTON, MA 02115 EDWARD MARCHANT Boston General N/A 9 RAWSON RD. BROOKLINE, MA 02146 DENISE MARTEN National Real Estate Development EQUITY VENTURES Commercial 475 KILVERT STREET WARWICK, RI 02886 STEVE MARSH Boston Business CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL Medical 300 LONGWOOD AVENUE BOSTON, MA 02215 JOHN MARTIN Boston Business NORTHEASTERN UNIVERSITY Education 122 ST. STEPHEN STREET BOSTON, MA 02115 MALANIE MAY National Real Estate Development LEISURE TECHNOLOGY Elderly 12233 WEST OLYMPIC BLVD. LOS ANGELES, CA THOMAS MCCARTHY Boston Real Estate Development MP ASSOCIATES Commercial 320 HAMILTON STREET LEOMINSTER, MA 01453 O.B MCCOIN National Business HOSPITAL AFFILIATES CORP. Medical 3100 WEST END AVE NASHVILLE, TN 30720 PAM MCDERMOTT Boston Real Estate Development MCDERMOTT/O'NEIL ASSOCIATES Commercial 75 STATE STREET BOSTON, MA 02109 BILL MCGLOUGHLIN Boston Real Estate Development LINCOLN PROPERTIES Commercial 101 ARCH ST. BOSTON, MA 02110 KATE MCKEE Boston Real Estate Development MEREDITH & GREW Elderly 160 FEDERAL BOSTON, MA 02110 ED MCKENZIE Boston Business SEARS, ROEBUCK & CO. Corporate 1235 WORCESTER ROAD NATICK, MA 01760 Redevelopment Master List Organizational Information Name and Address Geographical. Info Type Subclassifcation Comments PETER MCKENZIE Boston Business VP, BOSTON COLLEGE Education 140 COMMONWEALTH AVENUE CHESTNUT HILL, MA 02167 JAMIE MCKEOWN Boston Real Estate Development CUMMINGS PROPERTIES Commercial 200 WEST CUMMINGS PARK OBURN , MA 01801 KYLE MCKINNEY LENA PARK D OPMENT Boston Real Estate Development Co 150 AME N LEGION HWY. g B OS , MA 02124 LEE MCKNIGHT National Real Estate Development AMER. RETIREMENT CORP. Elderly 3100 WEST END AVENUE NASHVILLE, TN 37203 DEB MODITZ Boston Real Estate Development COHEN COMPANIES Commercial 1610 WORCESTER ROAD FRAMINGHAM, MA 01710 PETER MULLIN Boston Real Estate Development SENIOR CENTERS OF AMERICA Elderly 1380 COLUMBIA ROAD SOUTH BOSTON, MA 02127 DAVID MURPHY Boston Business BRANDEIS UNIVERSITY Education 415 SOUTH STREET WALTHAM, MA 02254 ROBERT MURREY South Shore Business CAPE COD HOSPITAL Medical 27 PARK STREET HYANNIS, MA 02601 JED NADHERNY Boston Business HARVARD REAL ESTATE INC. Education 8 GARDEN STREET CAMBRIDGE, MA 02138 MARYBETH NAGLE Boston Real Estate Development LIFETIME CORP. Elderly 75 STATE STREET BOSTON, MA 02109 JANE NAPORA Boston Business SALEM STATE COLLEGE Education 352 LAFAYETTE STREET SALEM, MA 01970 ARTHUR NELSON Boston Real Estate Development NELSON COMPANIES Commercial 200 FIFTH AVENUE WALTHAM, MA 02154 Redevelopment Master List Organizational Information Name and Address Geographical Into Type Subclassifcation Comments EDITH M. NETTER Boston Consultant EDITH M. NETTER & ASSOCIATES Planning 132 BOYLSTON STREET BOSTON, MA 02116 EDWARD NICHOLS National Real Estate Development LIFE CARE SERVICES Elderly 800 SECOND STREET DES MOINES , IA 50309 WILLIAM NICHOLSON North Shore Real Estate Development CONGRESS CONSTRUCTION CO. Commercial 429 MAPLE ST. DANVERS, MA 01937 PETER NORDBLOM Boston Real Estate Development NORDBLOM DEVELOPMENT Commercial 50 CONGRESS STREET BOSTON, MA 02109 MICHAEL O'MALLEY Boston Business UNITED PARCEL SERVICE " Corporate 1045 UNIVERSITY AVENUE NORWOOD, MA 02062 TOM O'NEIL Boston Real Estate Development MCDERMOTT & O'NEIL Commercial 75 STATE STREET BOSTON, MA 02109 TED OATIS Boston Real Estate Development CHIOFARO CORPORATION Commercial ONE INTERNATIONAL PLACE BOSTON, MA 02110 PLANNING OFFICE Boston Business BOSTON CITY HOSPITAL Medical 818 HARRISON AVENUE BOSTON, MA 02118 FRANKLIN OLLIVIERRE Boston Real Estate Development OFFICE OF ELDER AFFAIRS Elderly 38 CHAUNCY ST. BOSTON, MA 02111 JOHN PALMUCCI Boston Business MERRIMAC COLLEGE Education TURNPIKE STREET N. ANDOVER, MA 01845 ANTHONY PANGARO Boston Real Estate Development EQUITABLE REAL ESTATE Commercial 75 STATE ST BOSTON, MA 02142 SOTIRE PAPALIO Central Real Estate Development SPRISWOOD DEVELOPMENT Residential 11 LAURELWOOD DR. WORCESTER, MA 01605 Redevelopment Master List Organizational Information Name and Address Geographical Info Type Subclassifcation Comments PETER PAPESCH Boston General 433 MARLBOROUGH ST N/A < BOSTON, MA 02115 JOSEPH PAUL Boston Real Estate Development PARKSIDE MANAGEMENT CORP. Elderly 1010 WALTHAM STREET LEXINGTON, MA 02173 JOSEPH PAUL National Business GENERAL HEALTH MAN. Medical COMMERCE CENTER ONE Redevelopment Master List Organizational Information Name and Address Geographical Info Type Subclassifcation Comments MANUAL RABBIT Boston Real Estate Development MCNEIL MANAGEMENT CORP. Residential 850 PROVIDENCE HWY. DEDHAM, MA 02026 FRANK RAMANO North Shore Real Estate Development ELDER CARE SERVICES Elderly 57 SUMMER ST. ROWLEY, MA 01969 RONALD RATNER National Real Estate Development FOREST CITIES DEVELOPMENT Elderly 10800 BROOK PARK ROAD CLEVELAND, OH 44130 DIRECTOR REAL ESTATE Boston Business BANK OF BOSTON Investment 100 FEDERAL STREET BOSTON, MA 02110 DIRECTOR REAL ESTATE Boston Real Estate Development BAY BANK Elderly 175 FEDERAL STREET BOSTON, MA 02110 DIRECTOR REAL ESTATE Boston Business STATE STREET BANK Investment 225 FRANKLIN STREET BOSTON, MA 02110 LAWRENCE REEVES North Shore Business N. SHORE COMM. COLLEGE Education ESSEX STREET BEVERLY, MA 01915 DICK REYNOLDS Boston Real Estate Development RVMG, INC. Commercial 124 MT. AUBURN STREET CAMBRIDGE, MA 02138 JOSEPH ROACH Central General ROACH, MEISTER & ASSOC. N/A 2632 BOSTON ROAD WILBRAHAM, MA 01095 BEVERLY ROBERTS Boston General PEACOCK AND SAWYER N/A 19 PIER 7, NAVY YARD CHARLESTOWN, MA 02129 BARRY RODENSTEIN Boston Real Estate Development TRAMMELL CROWE COMPANY Commercial 800 SOUTH STREET W ALTHAM , MA 02154 EDWARD ROMANOW National Business TOTAL CARE SYATEMS Medical 375 MORRIS RD. WEST POINT, PA 01948 page 20 Redevelopment Master List Organizational Information Name and Address Geographical Info Type Subclassifcation Comments JOAN ROOVER Boston Business CHARLTON MEMORIAL HOSPITAL Medical 363 HIGHLAND AVENUE FALL RIVER, MA 02720 BILL ROTHE National Real Estate Development KOLL COMPANY Commercial 4343 VON KARMEN NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92660 GARY ROTHKOPI Boston Real Estate Development GARO DEVELOPMENT Commercial 56 KEARNEY RD. NEEDHAM, MA 02194 ERIC RUBIN Boston General J.M. CASHMAN N/A 265 MARGINAL ST. E. BOSTON, MA 02128 DAN SALMON Central Business BEAUMONT NURSING HOME Medical 85 BEAUMONT DR, NORTHBRIDGE, MA 01534 DAVID SAMPSON Boston Real Estate Development THE BEACON COMPANIES Commercial 100 CORPORATE PLACE PEABODY, MA 01960 TED SARACENO Boston Real Estate Development KURT SARACENO ASSOCIATES Commercial 57 WELLS AVENUE NEWTON., MA 02159 ROBERT SCHAFER Boston General BROWN, RUDNICK & FREED N/A ONE FINANCIAL CENTER BOSTON, MA 02111 GEORGE SCHALK Boston Business AT&T REAL ESTATE Corporate 99 BEDFORD STREET BOSTON, MA 02111 SCOTT SCHUSTER Boston Business CONTINENTAL HEALTH CARE Medical 75 CANAL ST. BOSTON, MA 02109 MARVA SEROTKIN Boston Business INTEGRATED HEALTH SERVICES Medical HOSPITAL RD. ARLINGTON, MA 02174 RICHARD SEYER Boston Business LATER LIFE CARE Medical 53 SHORE RD. WINCHESTER, MA 01890 Redevelopment Master List Organizational Information Name and Address Geographical Info Type Subclassifcation Comments CHRIS SHACHOY Boston General N/A 16 CHARLES RIVER SQ. BOSTON, MA 02114 CHARLES SHAW Boston Business FIRST EQUITY INC. Investment 56 KEARNEY ST. NEEDHAM, MA 02192 MICHAEL SHAW Boston Business SHAW'S SUPERMARKET Corporate 140 LAUREL STREET EAST BRIDGEWATER, MA 02333 GREG SHAY Boston Real Estate Development LONDON & LEEDS DEVELOPMENT Commercial 950 WINTER STREET WALTHAM, MA 02154 BARBARA SHULTZ Boston Business LESLEY COLLEGE Education 29 EVERETT STREET CAMBRIDGE, MA 02138-2790 JAMES SIDELL Boston Business US TRUST Investment 40 COURT ST. BOSTON, MA 02108 EDWIN SIDMAN Boston Real Estate Development. THE BEACON COMPANIES Commercial 50 ROWES WHARF BOSTON, MA 02110 ROBERT SIMHA Boston Business DIRECTOR OF PLANNING, MIT Education 77 MASSACHUSETTS AVE CAMBRIDGE, MA 02139 FRANKLIN SIMON South Shore Real Estate Development THE SIMON COMPANIES Commercial 10 FORBES ROAD BRAINTREE, MA 02184 JEFF SIMONIT Boston Business GTE Corporate 77 A STREET NEEDHAM, MA 02194 ROBERT SKELLY Boston Business RAYTHEON CO. Corporate 141 SPRING STREET LEXINGTON, MA 02173 TOM SOLLAS Boston Real Estate Development BURRAGE HOUSE Elderly 314 COMMONWEALTH AVE. ,BOSTON, MA 02116 Redevelopment Master List Organizational Information Name and Address Geographical Info Type Subclassifcation Comments TOM SOUTHWORTH Boston Real Estate Development CORNERSTONE GROUP Commercial 333 ELM STREET NEEDHAM, MA 02026 MARTIN SPAGAT North Shore Real Estate Development BRICKSTONE PROPERTIES Commercial 300 BRICKSTONE SQ. ANDOVER, MA 01801 RICHARD SPAULDING Boston Real Estate Development SPAULDING & COMPANY Commercial 2345 WASHINGTON STREET NEWTON, MA 02162 HANK SPAULDING Boston Real Estate Development SPAULDING INVESTMENT CO. Commercial 6 NEW ENGLAND EX. PARK BURLINGTON, MA 01803 NEIL ST. JOHN RAYMOND Boston Real Estate Development RAYMOND COMPANIES Commercial 306 DARTMOUTH STREET BOSTON, MA 02116 FRANK STAPLETON Boston Business BLUE CROSS & BLUE SHIELD Corporate 100 SUMMER STREET BOSTON, MA 02110 DEAN STRATOULY Boston Real Estate Development GROUP VENTURES Commercial ONE MEMORIAL DRIVE CAMBRIDGE, MA 02142 DICK STREHLKE Boston Real Estate Development FRAMINGHAM REALTY Commercial 205 NEWBURY STREET BOSTON, MA 01701 FRANCIS J. SULLIVAN Boston Business BETH ISRAEL HOSPITAL Medical 330 BROOKLINE AVENUE BOSTON, MA 02215 TONY TAMBONE Boston Real Estate Development TAMBONE CORPORATION Commercial 25 BURLINGTON MALL ROAD BURLINGTON, MA 01803 JOSEPH TAMBURINO North Shore Business LAWRENCE GENERAL HOSPITAL Medical I GENERAL STREET LAWRENCE, MA 01841 MARILYN TANNENBAUM Boston Business BRIGHAM & WOMEN'S HOSP. Medical 75 FRANCIS STREET BOSTON, MA 02115 Redevelopment Master List Organizational Information Name and Address Geographical Info Type Subclassifcation Comments SANDY TASCAL Boston Business WENTWORTH INSTITUTE Education 550 HUNTINGTON AVE. BOSTON, MA 02115 FRANK TEXTIRA Boston Business U. MASS. DARTMOUTH Education OLD WESTPORT RD. N. DARTMOUTH, MA 02747 ALM THOMAS National Real Estate Development OXFORD RETIREMENT SERVICE Elderly 7316 WISCONSIN AVE. BETHESDA, MD 20814 DIDIER THOMAS Boston Business HARVARD UNIVERSITY Education 1350 MASSACHUSETTS AVE. CAMBRIDGE, MA 02138 JAY TIMMONS Boston General SCHOCHET ASSOCIATES N/A 720 STATLER OFFICE BUILDING BOSTON, MA 02116 LOUIS TITUS Boston General ONE NEWTON EXEC. PARK N/A NEWTON, MA 02162 DONALD TOFIAS Boston Real Estate Development TOFIAS & COMPANY Commercial 1601 TRAPELO ROAD WALTHAM, MA 02154 TED TRIVERS Boston Real Estate Development NEW ENGLAND COMMUNITIES Commercial ONE WASHINGTON STREET WELLESLEY, MA 02181 ROBERT TUFFY South Shore Real Estate Development CSTW ASSOCIATES, INC. Elderly P.O. BOX 2048 HANOVER, MA 02339 FRED UEHLIN Boston Real Estate Development MASSACHUSETTS DEV. CORP. Commercial 2200 N. MAIN ST. NATICK, MA 01760 ROBERT UNDERWOOD Boston Business UNICUS Medical 2021 MIDWEST RD OAK BROOK, IL 60521 ROGER VAN WINKLE Boston Business MASS. BAY COM. COLLEGE Education 50 OAKLAND STREET WELLESLEY, MA 02181 Redevelopment Master List Organizational Information Name and Address Geographical Info Type Subclassifeation Comments RICHIE VAZZA Boston Real Estate Development VAZZA ASSOCIATES Commercial 400 CROWN COLONY DRIVE QUINCY, MA 02169 RICHARD WAHLGREN Boston Business BUNKER HILL COMMUNITY COLLEGE Education NORTH RUTHFORD AVE CHARLESTON, MA 02129 CARL WALKER Boston Government NATIONAL CENTER FOR JOBS 38 BLUE LEDGE DR. Advocacy BOSTON, MA 02131 GARDNER WALLACE Boston Real Estate Development GID 600 ATLANTIC AVENUE Commercial BOSTON, MA 02210 TIMOTHY WALSH Boston Business CARNEY HOSPITAL Medical 2100 DORCHESTER AVENUE BOSTON, MA 02124 ROBERT WALSH Boston Business WHEELOCK COLLEGE Education 200 THE RIVERWAY BOSTON, MA 02215 KIRK WARE Boston Real Estate Development NAGOG DEVELOPMENT Commercial 1 NAGOG SQUARE ACTON, MA 01720 RANNE WARNER Boston Real Estate Development CENTROS PROPERTIES Commercial 75 FEDERAL ST. BOSTON, MA 02110 SCOTT WASSERMAN Boston Real Estate Development STATE PROPERTIES OF N.E. Commercial 1 WELLS AVENUE NEWTON, MA 02159 STEVE WEINER Boston Real Estate Development S. R. WEINER ASSOCIATES Commercial 1330 BOYLSTON STREET CHESTNUT HILL, MA 02167 JOHN WEISS Boston Real Estate Development KENNEY DEVELOPMENT Commercial 120 FULTON ST. BOSTON, MA 02111 KERT WERNER South Shore Business BROCKTON HOSPITAL Medical 680 CENTER STREET BROCKTON, MA 02402 25 Name and Address ELEANOR WHITE MHFA 50 MILK STREET BOSTON, MA 02109 OWEN WILLIAMS ROUSE COMPANY 10275 LITTLE PATUXENT PARKWA COLUMBIA, MD 02144 WALTER WINCHESTER STATE STREET DEVELOPMENT 488 COMMONWEALTH AVE. BOSTON, MA 02215 DAVID WINSTANLEY WINSTANLEY ASSOCIATES BOX 710 CONCORD, MA 01742 SUSAN WIN TON SHAWMUT BANK ONE FEDERAL STREET BOSTON, MA 02211 GREG WINTER PRUDENTIAL REALTY GROUP THE PRUDENTIAL BUILDING BOSTON, MA 02199 PHILIP WINTERSON BERKSHIRE MEDICAL CENTER 725 NORTH STREET PITTSFIELD, MA 01201 JOHN WITUNAS ST. ELIZABETH'S HOSPITAL 736 CAMBRIDGE STREET BRIGHTON, MA 02135 DOUG YAGY CLAREMONT CORPORATION BATTERYMARCH PARK II QUINCY, MA 02169 MURPH YEUELL FINCH GROUP 160 FEDERAL STREET BOSTON, MA 02110 MARTIAN ZIEFF Redevelopment Master List Organizational Information Geographical info Type Subclassifcation Boston Government Boston Y Boston Boston Boston Boston West Boston Boston Boston JOHN HANCOCK REALTY ADVISORS Boston 200 BERKLEY ST BOSTON, MA 02116 Real Estate Development Commercial Real Estate Development Commercial Real Estate Development Commercial Business Investment Real Estate Development Commercial Business Medical Business Medical Real Estate Development Commercial Real Estate Development Commercial Real Estate Development Commercial Comments page 26 Department of Capital Planning and Operations Market Strategy for Northampton State Hospital The purpose of this marketing effort is to return portions of the former Northampton State Hospital (NSH) grounds to productive economic use. The Department of Capital Planning and Operations (DCPO) will achieve that objective by identifying developers, investors and businesses with feasible adaptive reuse and/or development plans. DCPO acknowledges the tremendous importance of the site to the residents of Northampton and the community's long term economic objectives. We expect that the size and complexity of the property and slowly improving market conditions will contribute to a fairly long redevelopment period. Therefore, DCPO has devoted significant marketing and staff resources to this task. Through a comprehensive marketing process, we will identify, contact and solicit proposals from potential developers or purchasers for all or a portion of the NSH site. To accomplish these objectives, we intend to create a cooperative marketing effort involving key elected, civic, business and institutional interests in Northampton. The Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC) formed under the provisions of the NSH disposition legislation will be actively involved throughout this marketing effort. DCPO intends to rely on CAC member's familiarity with local and regional institutional and business contacts and knowledge of local and regional economic trends. These contacts and insights will be instrumental in identifying potential users for the NSH campus. Working with the CAC and other groups will greatly enhance the effectiveness of our marketing strategy. The marketing process is comprised of a number of phases, beginning with identification of potential reuse options and leading to development and distribution of a Request for Proposals Package (RFP). The initial steps in this process will be instrumental in the development of the RFP. Members of the CAC and other groups will be active participants in this effort. Each phase of the marketing process and a suggested schedule for implementing this strategy are described below. 1. Identify Potential Reuse Options To improve targeting of market resources and development of the RFP, we intend to reach consensus with all parties to the process on potential uses of the property and then identify prospective users and investors in those areas. Based on a preliminary analysis of market conditions in greater Northampton and several months of discussions with local civic and business leaders, we envision a mix of business, institutional and residential uses on the site. Potential uses may include corporate ~z office, research & development, high technology manufacturing, light industrial, institutional, independent and assisted care housing, single and multi-family housing and open space. Other uses may also be appropriate. Potential locations for these uses on the site are described below. Parcel A comprising the Old Main Complex and adjacent grounds and Parcel H in the vicinity of the Haskell Building appear well suited for an office, institutional or high technology park configuration. A medium to large size commercial entity could be sited in or in place of the Old Main building at the crest of the hill with several smaller businesses located along the drive around the site's periphery. Based on preliminary research of market conditions, expanding small to medium size companies based in western Massachusetts appear to be the most promising target market for these sites. These firms will be easier to attract to the site than large, out-of-state corporations, whose lack of familiarity with the area, desire for highway access and proximity to airport facilities may limit enthusiasm for a Northampton business location. Since the challenge of attracting a large user to the site is greater than smaller users, significant marketing efforts will need to be directed toward identifying and contacting large corporate and institutional users. Commercial, institutional or housing uses, such as congregate, multi-family or single family, could be developed on the Memorial Complex site, also known as Parcel B. This parcel is located on the south side of the site and has frontage along Prince, Earl, Chapel and Laurel Street. Adaptive reuse of the structures on this parcel could be feasible for some commercial, institutional and residential applications. Interest -among commercial, institutional, congregate and multi-family markets will be explored through the marketing effort. DCPO will carefully weigh the benefit of any proposed residential or congregate use against our overall objective of bringing long term job producing enterprises to the site. Most of Parcel K, an area to the east and southeast of Parcel A, is steeply sloped and would likely remain open space. However, some low scale residential development may be appropriate for portions of this parcel that front along West and Prince Streets. Parcel E, located at the western edge of the site on Rocky Hill Road, is a thickly wooded. and sloped tract of undeveloped land with a wetland area on the east side of this parcel. Due to these site conditions, it appears that only the western portion of this site will be suitable for development. Abutting uses to the south and west of this parcel are predominantly residential in character. Development proposed for this site should be compatible with these uses. As an alternative, consideration might also be given to a well landscaped low density commercial use on this site. Due to this parcel's isolation from the campus and limited uses suggested under the Northampton State Hospital Plan, DCPO may market this parcel separately. If this approach is taken, the CAC will be involved in development and review of this RFP. 2 ,L Each potential use of the property will be discussed with the CAC and other interested groups. CAC members will be encouraged to identify contacts in these and other promising fields. Through this process we anticipate creating a consensus list of potential uses for each proposed redevelopment concept - office, light industrial, etc... that will be used to inform development of an RFP. DCPO's goal will be to focus the marketing effort on users that are likely to respond to an RFP with feasible development proposals, while encouraging potential users with a longer time horizon to participate in the process. This phase is anticipated to take approximately one month, with completion projected for late February 1995. 2. Identification of Potential Users While creating a consensus list of potential uses, DCPO will work with CAC members and other civic, business and economic leaders in the Northampton area to identify potential users, investors and developers in these fields. Lists will be compiled of local, regional and national prospects for each potential use. CAC members and other prominent local interests will be asked to strategize with DCPO and its consultants regarding the most effective means of approaching entities on these prospect lists. At the same time, contacts will be made with national, state and local economic development officials, University of Massachusetts leaders, local and regional real estate brokers and others to compile names of potential businesses, real estate developers, industries and entrepreneurs who might consider acquiring land or buildings at NSH. Lists of local and regional Chamber of Commerce members, builders, emerging businesses, independent and assisted care providers and other prospective users will be prepared to more directly target this campaign toward intended audiences. Names of each prospect will be reviewed to determine if a CAC member or a colleague has a business or personal relationship with these firms. This phase is anticipated to take approximately four weeks to complete and conclude by late March 1995. We envision a minimum of two meetings with the CAC to identify and categorize potential users for the site. 3. Collateral Materials At the same time that the prospect identification process is underway, an RFP package will be drafted by DCPO and distributed to the CAC for review and approval. After the CAC approves the RFP, it will be prepared for distribution. This package will set forth background information regarding Northampton and the region, the property, site context, a site plan, design standards, zoning, access, utilities, proposal submittal requirements and the process and timetable for developer designation. We anticipate 3 n providing developers and others with a three month period to review and respond to the RFP. A promotional brochure will be created by DCPO in consultation with the City as an introductory piece to the site. This brochure will be distributed to potential prospects during the outreach phase of the marketing effort. Background information from the RFP package will be summarized for use in the brochure, such as a descriptive piece about the city, site photographs, site context, proposal deadlines and an overview of the developer designation process. Brochures will include a pre-printed reply envelope requesting a copy of the RFP. A draft version of the brochure will be available for city review in late February 1995. The. RFP package will be available for CAC review in February 1995 with a brochure finalized in March 1995. These documents should be approved for printing by late March 1995. 4. Media Event To denote commencement of the marketing phase, a high level site visit and photo opportunity with State officials and local and regional dignitaries could be arranged at the site. Extensive press coverage would significantly boost the marketing campaigns visibility and would also underscore, to local officials and the CAC, the Administration's commitment to successful re-use of the campus. This event would not be scheduled until marketing materials are ready for distribution and the CAC has approved the RFP. Tentatively, this event will take place in early April 1995. 5. Marketing Outreach During this phase, formal outreach to potential prospects will begin. DCPO intends to reach prospects through existing relationships with the CAC and other contacts, presentations to business groups, the media and direct mail. This phase is anticipated to commence in early April 1995. Proposals will be due to DCPO by late June 1995, allowing potential purchasers and lessors three months time to prepare a response. Direct Contact For leads where a CAC member or other civic or business leader has a relationship or familiarity with a prospect, that member will be encouraged to introduce DCPO's consultant to the prospect and, at their option, participate in a personal presentation regarding the NSH site. In the event that a business or group known to have interest in the site is not familiar to a CAC member or other party, DCPO or its consultant will meet with representatives of that concern to discuss the property. Copies of the brochure and the RFP package will be left behind with these prospects. Follow-up discussions 4 will be pursued by DCPO or its consultant. To enhance project visibility and potential interest in the property, DCPO and its consultant will make presentations to local Chambers of Commerce and other business groups regarding the redevelopment potential of the site and the process by which redevelopers will be selected. Mass Media Just prior to the start of the outreach effort, advertisements will be placed in local and regional publications. Companion advertisements should also appear in the Boston Globe and the Wall Street Journal. Newspapers and magazines targeted to the business and development communities, such as the Boston Business Journal, Pioneer Valley Business Digest and other relevant trade publications will be used. Copy deadlines will be carefully coordinated with the marketing process. Frequency of advertisements will be reviewed and modified as the marketing process unfolds. Inquiries generated by these sources will be directed to DCPO and forwarded to their consultants for appropriate follow-up. DCPO's public relations officer will be enlisted in an effort to create and place a story regarding the disposition process in as many Massachusetts, Connecticut, New York, Vermont and national media outlets as possible. Direct Mail For those prospective users who are not known, initial contact will be made via a mass mail distribution of the brochure. Companies, developers and investors in the northeast and other parts of the country viewed as a potential prospect for the property will receive a copy of the brochure. Follow-up telephone contact will be made to gauge the degree of interest in the property and to discuss future steps in the process. RFP kits will subsequently be mailed to prospects who express interest in the property. Site Visits/Open House Open house tours of the campus will be held after the RFP kits have been widely distributed. Dates of these tours will be included in the RFP package and in all disposition advertisements. DCPO and its consultants will be available to guide interested parties around the campus and answer questions regarding the designation process and other matters. DCPO and its consultants will also be available to conduct private in-depth tours of the campus for parties preferring a less public preview of the site. 5 Feedback Throughout this phase, a bi-weekly report will be prepared by DCPO's consultant for circulation to DCPO and the city updating progress of the marketing campaign. Schedule A three month marketing period is anticipated, commencing in early April 1995 and concluding by late June 1995. 6. Proposal Submission and Review Proposals will be made to DCPO by late June 1995. DCPO will conduct a review and analysis of each submissions. Proposal review is expected to take place during the summer of 1995. 6 County J t~ ~;l~~o o,Gj4 I. Bismar House o 4 - o ~J~-f 1 J IjFA.Land DFA Land _ y~ r N c 0~ / r ' ❑z ° a Co oftity Garden ~•r,`~' 09, Memorial'-° Com lex ~Q ell © 1\ ~r Buil Q Q Y 91G . 1 0 \ v o i Power F t urae s a `r ' I ooo° 4 ° ° ildln , c l 00 O O O o a o o ! Old Main om*l~x C O O \ O J// C3 C3 ° O 1 O O i C3 Z) 3 'Q ° ous , Smith Colleg '-'t ,L ~p oo • o t O ~1 P dise NORTHAMPTON I STATE HOSPITAL - - - -------N0RT1IAMPT0N7 MA - ---P- - P - - --1- u - i Commonwealth-of Massachusetts Division of Ca ital Planning and O eradons PROPOSAL For The Use Of Surplus Land Of The NORTHAMPTON STATE HOSPITAL By The CITY OF NORTHAMPTON FINAL DRAFT prepared for the NORTHAMPTON CONSERVATION COMMISSION NORTHAMPTON PLANNING BOARD NORTHAMPTON CITY COUNCIL LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. Location Map Figure 2. Land Use Map Figure 3. Topographic Characteristics Figure 4. Detailed Soils Map Figure 5. Development Limitations Figure 6. Agency Proposals Figure 7. Staff Proposal s I. INTRODUCTION A. Background The Northampton State Hospital was established in the latter part of the nineteenth century as an institution to provide care to the mentally ill, being one of a number of such institutions operated by the State Department of Mental Health. Recently, two significant changes in the methods and philosophies of teating the mentally ill occurred which have an impact on the characteristics of the physical facility. The first of these was a shift in emphasis away from insti- tutionalization of patients in favor of reintroducing them into society with treatment at outpatient facilities. The net effect of this change has been to reduce the total number of patients in residence at the various state hospitals, in- cluding the one at Northampton. The second significant change was the elimination of farming as an activity undertaken by patients. The effect of this change has been to make surplus approximately 300 of the total 550 acres included in the facility's site. As.a result in the cessation of use of that property, dis- cussions began between officials of the City and those of the Hospital as to the potential for use of the property by the City. As a result of these preliminary discussions, the Mayor of Northampton requested the Conservation Commission to begin to pursue the possibility. The Planning Department was requested to assist the Commission, resulting to date in the production and presentation of this report. B. Process: It is envisioned that this report will first be circulated to the agencies-.in the community which have expressed interest in the' potential use-of land at the `State Hospital site. After this, the report-will be-presented to the Northampton City Coun- cil for its endorsement as an official proposal by the City to the State. At sucji time as the Council endorse the report, it should be transmitted to a number of State agencies and to the Massa- chusetts General Court for action, as follows: ® The representatives in each house of the General Court who represent the districts covering the City for the sponsorship of legislation appropriate to the implemen- tation of the recommendations of this report: -1- • The State Department of Mental Health for its comments,, suggestions, and endorsement of the recommendations; • The committee which is in the process of studying the use and disposition of State lands for its comments, suggestions, and endorsement; • Those State agencies which might be involved in any of the phases of the implementation of thOze proposals, for their suggestions and comments. -2- r l~ II. EVALUATION: The site in question is located to the west and southwest of the principal buildings utilized by the Northampton State Hospital. The site is located to the south of the geographical center of,;>the City of Northampton, approximately 1.1 miles to the southwest of the City's central business area. (See Figure 1) It is bounded on the north by the Mill River; on the east by the buildings occupied by the Hospital and by a small resi- dential community which borders the facility; on the south generally by vacant industrial land; and on the southwest and west by farmland. The property is traversed by two roads, each running east and west direction; Burts Pit Road (a City Street) and Rocky Hill Road (State Rt. 66 - a county Road). The predominant land use of the property is agricultural, although a few areas of woodland also exist. There are a few buildings on the site, principally sheds associated with the former use of the land for agriculture. Also located on the site are two graves of civil war veterans who died while patients at the hospital. Off site, land use is generally residential, to the north and, agricultural, to the south and west and industrial to the southeast (see Figure 2). Approximately one half mile to the east lie the athletic fields of Smith College, with the campus itself beyond, (See Figure 3.) The land rises to its highest point near the center of the site along a drumlin,a glacially formed, elongated hill. The top north side of the drumlin over-looks the site as it slopes away towards the Mill River and its flood plain while the south and west sides of the drumlin afford excellent views of the Holyoke Range. There is a stand of mixed pine-hardwoods on the top south west corner of the drumlin. This is bordered on the drumlin slope by a platation of red pine. The aesthetic value of the red pine stand lies in its open understory which compliments the dense canopy of the tree tops. Burts Pit Road generally defines the drainage divide between the north and south parts of the site. Most of site is gently slopes above the Mill River flood plain, parts of the slope of the drumlin, and kavines which border the four unnamed streams which drain the site (See Figure 3) Soils on the site were surveyed in 1973 as part of a com- prehensive study done for the City by the United States Depart- ment of Agriculture Soil Q=servation Service. Figure 4 is a section of the detailed soils map prepared as part of this study and is followed by interpretive charts which relate soil limit- ations to specific uses. Generally, soils on the site exhibit moderate or severe limitations in concert with the limitations due to wetlands, slope, and cultural factors make the greater part of the site unsuitable for development- (See--figure- -5) In addition to the USDA/SCS survey, a detailed soils study of the site was undertaken by Curran Associates, Inc., of Northampton for the U.S. Veterans Administration as part of the latter's consideration of the site for a regional veteran's cemetery. This proposal will be discussed further in j in Section IV below. -3- III. CURRENT DEVELOPMENT POLICY: The City's Master Plan prepared with the assistance of the consulting firm of Metcalf and Eddy of Boston, and adopted by the Planning Board in 1973, recommends a variety of uses for the site, (see Figure 6) including: e open space for that area within the Mill River flood plain: e rural (low density) residential for that area north of o-e y Hill Road (Rt. b53 ssho`wn`as potentially surplus: and e industrial for that area south of Rocky Hill Road. The City's zoning ordinance designates the bulk of the site in the Residence A zone (the most restrictive) which allows single family detached dwellings on lots of at least 15,000 square feet. A portion of that part of the site which juts north of the Mill River and a strip lying along part of Burts Pit Road and along part of Rt..66 is designated as resi- dence B, requiring lot sizes of 10,000 square feet. The City is currently in the process of holding public hearings on a comprehensive revision of its zoning. Under the pro'-- piled zoning,the on-site uses remain residential. The body of the site would be S.R., suburban residence zone which allows single family detatched dwellings on lots of at least 30,000 square feet. The areas of the site above the Mill River and below Rocky Hill Road are designated U.R.B. urban residence "B", which allows single family dwellings on minimum 10,000 square foot lots plus two and three family dwellings and town houses. In addition the area across the Mill River to the northeast of the site and the area below the abanoned railroad to the southwest are slated to be 4on6,d,~; GI, general industrial. IV. AGENCY PROPOSAL: 1 One of the first actions taken by the Conservation Com- mission was to solicit input from other agencies in the City regarding possible uses ofl-the site. The responses which were received included: ® School Department on April 26, 1973 listed three potential school sites; ® Smith Vocational-Agricultural High School in a letter of May 9, 1973, reques ed 10-20 acres for cropland; A subsequent letter dated March 3, 1975 identified preferences for specific land areas and outlined expected use, for hay with corn rotation. ® Conservation Commission in letter dated February 21, 1972 an January 22, 1 7 , suggested: - use of land adjacent to the Mill River as a, part of the Mill River greenbelt; preservation oftthe drumlin (including the red pine stand) in its current state; - development of garden plots for use by citizens who do not have access to garden land; - continuation of the practice of leasing to far- mers such land as remains after other activities are provided for; - restoration of the Rocky Hill Pond; - development of a picnic",area east of the drumlin; - developme•nt`:°of a footbridge across the Mill River to connect the Elm Street /Bay State area with the north end of the property; - limitation of on-site circulation to.pedestrian and equestrian modes; - development of a state arboretum; Recreation Commission, in a letter dated June 15, 1973 proposed: - devoting the area to a pedestrian park with perime- ter parking areas but without vehicular access; -5- i - maintaining all land.not otherwise used in its natural state; - development of a 15 acre site as an active Y;. recreation area; - renewal and stocking of Rocky Hill Pond.,- - consideration of developing a small camp- ground area; sr Northampton Department of Public Works proposed in a letter of January 17, 1974, that: a 50-100 acre passive park area be developed north. of Rt. 66,'ea.st of the Rocky Hill Pond; - the "S" curve on Burts.Pit Road be straightened; - approximately 30 acres be set-aside for a future city cemetery site. ,In addition, a number of.suggestions were and continue to be received from non-City sources. These include: e a letter dated November 8, 1971, from W. J. Goggins, the steward at the Northampton State Hospital, which suggested that the land "be used for public purposes, such as hiking trails, picnic areas, bridle paths, bicycle trails, and possibly campsites . e a letter dated April 25, 1973, from Roger M. Harrington, Regional Dairy Specialist for the Cooperative Extension Service, stressing the need to continue the practice of leasing land to local farmers; * a letter on November 12, 1971, from Dr. Wilfred Bloom•- berg,,Deputy Commissioner of the Department of Mental Health, expressing the interests of the DMH Land Use Committee in preserving open space for public use; • a proposal made in early 1974 by the United States Veterans Administration that approximately 200•-250 acres of the land be used. for a national veterans cemetery. The site was subsequently dropped from consideration as a result of a soils study done by a local engineering firm which showed much of the land to be too rocky and/or too wet to be so used; -6- i e a current proposal by a building committee for a new Hampshire.County jail that such a facility be located on part of the site; e a proposal by the City to the State Department of Natural Resources that an approximately eleven acre, site on the north side of Burts Pit Road immediately west of the buildings of the Hospital be considered for a proposed state-funde.d;, skating rink. This site has subsequently been dropped from consideration. as have all sites proposed by various communities to date. V. CRITERIA Based upon the research compiled to date, following are some criteria proposed for guiding determinations of land use, design of development, and the arrangement of management responsibilities regarding the use of the property under study; a The area should in public ownership and control, with the overall objective of providing for uses which best serve the interests and needs of the general public. ® Although particular uses which provide a service to a limited part of the population may be considered, uses should generally be selected which provide a service to the population as a whole and should not necessarily be restricted to citizens of Northampton. ® Management of the various facilities should lie with whatever organization at state, county, or local level is most capable of assuming the responsibilities for that facility, and should not necessarily be vested in a single organization. ® Certain parts of the site should be retained in their, existing condition with only most minor development, including: - the Mill River flood plain and bordering slopes; - the drumlin and associated land to the south and east, from Rocky - Hill pond to the eastern most drainage-way and small stream. -7- Rocky Hill Pond (once returned to it a con- dition as a pond) and all streams draining the site along with their banks. ® The areas currently devoted to farming should gen- erally remain in an open state rather than being allowed to return to forest land, whether the use continues to be agricultural or not, although there may be specific exceptions to this. ® Roads.systems should be designed and redeveloped so as to route major traffic movements around rather. than through the site. ® Pedestrain, equestrian, and bicycle paths should be relatively heavily developed throughout the site and should tie into community wide and intercom- munity systems wherever they are planned. No road improvements should be undertaken which encourage vehicular movements through the site. Motor vehi- cles (autos, snowmobiles, and trailbikes) should be generally excluded from the site. Lease of land for agricultural use should still ensure public access when and where practical. Major, structures and/or facilities should be com- pletely restricted from wet areas, along the flood, plain, in steep slope areas, or where..soils or other conditions would be incompatible with the type of development proposed. ® Generally, like or complementary uses should be in close p=roximity to each other and incompatible or uncomplementary uses should be well removed from each other. ® Generally, the building of major structures should be minimized, but where undertaken, strict control of design and site planning should be maintained. Wherever development does occur, whether for major facilities or not., the following design guidelines should be followed'x - grading should be absolutely minimized with structures and/or other facilities (including parking areas and outbuildings) developed at several levels so as to conform.to topography rather than the latter being made to conform to single-level facilities; -8- - structures and other facilities should maintain a very low profile, and for the most part a low visibility; - parking areas and other paved suffaces should be constructed with porous materials wherever practicable. VI. RECOMMENDATIONS Based on the above criteria, following are specific recommendations for the use and development of the property, along with proposals regarding responsibility for the opera- tion and maintenance of each particular use or area.'gee figure ,'(7)_ seven for the location of each: 1. The following areas should be transferred to the owner- ship of the City with responsibility for control resting with the Conservation Commission: a. flood plain and other low areas adjac@n?t to the Mill River; b. slope and wooded areas adjacent to "a" above; c. the drumlin and associated land to the south and east, from Rocky - Hill pond to the eastern most drainage way and small stream. d. the area. known as the "red pine stand"; and e. Rocky Hill Pond and an area within 100 feet of the pond and.of all streams draining the site. Use of these areas should be restricted to current agricultural use and pedestrian, biking, and equestrian trials; nature education trails with signboards and/or markers; picnic area south of the red pine stand and adjacent to Rocky Hill Pond; parking only, for the picnic and nature trail areas. 2. A 29+ acre site between Burts Pit Road and Chapel Street (Rt. 66) should be reserved as a possible future elementary school site, however should citywide school plans obviate the need for a site in'this area, the site should be devoted to recreation uses. -9- i 3. The 15 acres north of Burts Pit Road and west of the "S" curve, should be considered as a potential active recreation site. 4. A picnic area with parking should be developed along the north side of Burts Pit Road just east of the "S" curve; overlooking the Mill River and its Flood Plain. 5. Careful reconsideration should be given to the proposal to locate a new County correctional facility on the site. While such a use would not hamper activities on other parts of the site, and while some grounds maintenance and recreation activities might be compatible, soils information indicates that there may be little or no land on the site suited to large buildings with the exception of the area described in "2" above. The most appropriate site for a jail, excluding soils consider- ations, would be on the south side of Rocky Hill Road (Rt. 66) opposite Rocky-Hill Pond,, with the area of the sit,e west of Rocky Hill Pond,, as a second alternative. 6. The curve in Burts Pit Road should not be changed, both with the objective of discouraging througTi traffic, and with the recognition that there would be a substantial physical affect on the drumlin. Improved signing and pavement marking should, however, be undertaken to increase safety. (Note that some drainage and pavement work done in 1974 improve safety over the situation which existed in 1973.) 7. . Long range highway plans for the City should be modified (by official action of the Planning Board) to provide for the development of a relocated Burts Pit Road/Rt. 66 west of the site feeding traffic into either Rt. 10 or a relocated Rt. 10. 8. Bikeways, pedestrian and equestrian paths, picnic areas, and other facilities not the responsibility of an organization capable of carrying out maintenance activities, should be maintained by either a Parks and Recreation Department or the Parks Division of the Department of Public Works under the supervision of the Recreation Director. 9a Current use of the flood plain area just"west of the' hospi ~t,-'as.. garden plots for the elderly should be continued. A,pr€gram providing garden plots for other citizens without F their' own land could also,be developed on this area, and v?., administered by,, the Conservation Commissions.. This site ha, excellent soiLond affords road access for' 'the elderly and convenient_..potential parking for others adjacen-V§to Burts„ Pit road just to the south. -10- 10., All land"s§'Ifft otherwise designated should be leased to I:y Iocal .farmers to, , supplemntf their own lands. The Conserva- handle tion C on6r..AP' br,:o, ~happropri to group shaAlic thi 'esponsibi;~it and should -charge fees ie nt to P- y , cover costs; Where~''a• cab=le, provison- should be made for public abcei~ d tke,se 1' 11`.M' On mtg. ;mal eve to meat- should be` considered sol thWt,the p area •w.Ml ream n essentia- di ::°ts; -Pre sent,,-- state! Ahd`~not' ..:broken u ~Y~ i p piecemeal. Agricultural land should remain in ague°with only minor. exceptions. h est value of t Is `land is, that it is-;a large trace o"f o e "space near the center of ;town, 7'11is should not We compromised. -11- _a CITY O NORTHAMPTON MASSACHUSETTS CONSERVATION COI. WIISSION ) 12 coye~ all BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CONSERVATION COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NORTHAMPTON WHEREAS the Northampton State Hospital, like other similar facilities in the Commonwealth, has found it to be reasonable and appropriate to declare some of its property to be surplus and available for d--'Ls- position; and - WHEREAS the Northampton Conservation Commission has, with the assistance of the Northampton Planning Department, undertaken a study of the feasibility of reuse of the land by the City of Northampton; and WHEREAS this study has been conducted with an emphasis on the environ mental, social, administrative, and fiscal constraints on the reuse I of the property, and has produced a set of recommendat.ions as to reuse which is sensitive to these constraints; and WHIEREAS the Conservation Commission has reviewed the final draft report on the proposed reuse; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Conservation Commission of the City of Northampton does hereby endorse the conclusions of the report, including the proposed limitations on reuse, the proposed uses and locations, and the proposed methods of administering the property; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Conservation Commission hereby recom- mends to the City Council the endorsement of the draft report as an expression of formal City policy on the reuse of the property; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Conservation Commission recomiends that the Mayor and City Council pursue the implementation of the recommendations of the report through-the appropriate means. This resolution.-was adopted by the Northampton Conservation Commission on March 24, 1975. Richa.r Carnes, Chairman Northampton Conservation Commission BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING BOARD OF THE CITY OF NIORTHAMPT'ON WHEREAS the Northampton State Hospital, like other similar facilities in the Commonwealth, has found it to be reasonable and appropriate to declare some of its property to be surplus and available for disposition; and MER.EAS the Northampton Conservation Commission has, with the assistance of the Northampton Planning Department, under- taken a study of the feasibility of reuse of the sand by the City of Northampton; and WHEREAS this study has been conducted with an emphasis on the environmental, social., administrative, and fiscal con- straints on the reuse of the property, and has procured a set of recommendations as to reuse which is sensitive to these constraints, and WHEREAS the Planning Board has reviewed the :final draft re- port on the proposed reuse; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Board of the City of Northampton does hereby endorse the conclusions of the report, including the proposed limitations on reuse, the proposed uses and locations, and the proposed methods of ad- ministering the property; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Planning Board hereby recom- mends to the City Council the endorsement of the draft report as an expression of formal. City policy on the reuse of the property; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Planning Board recommends that l the Mayor and City Council pursue the implementation of the recommendations of the report through the appropriate .means. This revolution w,ra4 adopted by the Northampton Planning.Board on April 2, 1975. Charles W. Baranowski, Chairman Northampton,Planning Board: P R O P O S A L F 0 11 U S E S O F S U R P L U S S T A T E H O S P I T A L L A N D S B Y H A M P S H I R E C O U N T Y A P R I L, 1 9 7 5' Prepared. for the Hampshire County Commissioners by the TLampsh3_re County Planning Department inasmuch as the, farming program of i;he Northampton State Hospital has been terminated., arid. the State Ilosp i.tal Parmland.s are no longer. Cultivated. by -the State Department of Mental Health, and are to be declared. surplus land.s, the. County of Hampshire respectfully submits the following proposal for allocations of :part of that surplus land. . 'The County of Hampshire is in d.i.re need of a new County Jail and County House of Correction; (The difference: A jail is a place for the detention of persons not convicted of a crime, usually awaiting trial, usually to assure their presence at trial. A house of correction is D. county fa.cili_ty for the retention of persons con- victed of a crime and. sej.Atenced by a court. A range of security is desirable, from ma,x.iiraum to minimum, varying U.rith the needs of the administration in meeting the programs of the department.) The land. which is to be declared. surplus contains farmland of mixed qualities, Including some excellent bottomla.nd; some steep :Land., most of which is forested; several_ streams, and. some builda- Ings. The need for cropland near to urban markets anal.. the need. for open space for outd.oor recreation exists here and. in all cities; and the value of this :Loxid_ for its best purposes should not be lost. The county feels this land Should. be kept in public ownership, The Hampshire County Jail and. Rouse of Correction, to the ex- tent possible, feeds itself. The farm program will be continued., program i:f adequate land and the county plans to expand. the farm is obtained., so that the cost of operating the facility will con- tinue to be as lot,,, as possible, Tn add.i.tion, the county garden pro- ject will be continued, but moved to county land. The need. for a net. County Jail and House of Correction is d.ue in part because the current edifice was built In 1853 on a lot of land. which since has become Part of a. residential area. Because of its age and. design, it does not meet minimum stand.- ards for a correctional facility, and.. It, must be replaced (rather than renovated.) because of serious d.eficiencies in heating,...plumbing, wiring, and ventilating, as well as space and, construction. The County Jail and House of Correction are administered by County Sheriff Johra Boyle, who m,~.in.ta.ins the facility with the lowest per capita cost in the Commonwealth of Massa.ch.usetts, and, despite the in.ad.equacies of obsolete physical plant, maintains a very well-run institution, The intent of the County Commission is to assure that the minimum st,:nda.rds will be met, nild that the facility will be as self-sufficient <_amd. economical to operate ats .possible.. Both a H<7mia„h:l.r. e County Correctional Study Coalnni.ttee and. an ad hoc citizens' committee unfler the State Council of Churches have, in l97L -2- Ile portud. on the need for a new structure. These reports are appended I 'to this proposal... j I''= d.eral Judge W,, Arthur Garrity has ordered the closing of the Charles Street Ja:i.l in Boston, an cd.:ifice of the 19th centl)_ry, and We expect that similar orders will come for the closing-of other facilities which do not meet State Department of Corrections minimum standards. The, consequences of such a closing order are these Because of. the high inmate census at the Hampden; Franklin, and. Berkshire County Jells and Houses of Correction. the only nearby facility capable of accepting the :persons kept at the Hampshire County institution would be the Worcester County facility. The per celpi't;.a, cost of keeping a Hra.mpshi.re County Prisoner here;, per annum, is `ii>>rS8?.20. The cost to ].seep a ;prisoner in the Worcester County Jail and House: of Correction is about three: times that. Tn. human terms, monetary terms, and energy terms, the closing of the, H,,uji_pshire County JeO.1 and House of Correction prior to the com- pletion of Its replacem;:)-nt: wou.la. be extreme. The Hampshire County Commissioners and. Sheriff ho-pe to have a. new jail and house of correction coT.npleted p iioor. to any such order, and. to 'this end., the County Correctional Study (:ommittee, formed in 1973, has worked. -to comtalete two reports of a three-phase study for the subject. Tn 'this session of the General Court, bills have been introduced to allow Hampsh res County 'to expend. money for Preliminary architect- ural planning and. site surveying. A building committee is to be ap.po'Inted this year to replace the study committee, following issuance of its third report, The location of the planned new County Jail and. House of Correction, and the style of 1-ts construction, have not yet been determined., but several, fact ors influencing these choices are already in mind., along these lines; Adequete fetriii:l.and is necessary to pursue the farm program, The existing fac:i.l'Ity ha.s a. szna.ll garden off Union Street, and. a small plot in 'the meadows iihicti supports some livestock and some crops. The Kort.h- ampton Sta.,te Hoslaitn.l Hospital. Iaxrmland.s would be excellent for the pursuit of this farm program, Which has been found. to be rehabilitative as We:l..l as econol.fl .cal. The low .pair ca.pitea cost of operation of the facility is due in large measure to the successful farm program, which is to be enlar^ge:d . Also, the locrvtl on of the County Ja.:il and House of . Correction is vital to some G~ ...-11~.~) arhfar corxtcct:ional programs, such as the work - reloa.se and. study-rel.e.ase programs. To be, carried. on efficiently, the structures must be looa,ted clear the job market In this Five College community. Those who have earned. eligibility for the work-release prograin are released each dray to work and. then return to the House of . Correct- Ion each evening for supper and sleep. This has been a most offectivf,-; program in the process of restoring the retainee -to the role of a -pro- ductive citizen. Separate quarters of a less secure nature are desir- able for thoso engaged in the release programs. Land on which retained. Persons may wciz].~ in forestry, conservation, and. other outdoor tasks ks helps to keep persons from languishing in the institution. Governor Michael Erakak1s, following a recent tour of state pri-sons and i.c .x~.'tal hospitals, commented. strongly in favor of keeping people active. The :philosophies of the Hampshire County Comm- iss ion, the County Jail Study Committee, and the County sheriff are in agreement* The County House of Correction raises game birds each year for release Into the wild. Forested sand and, f:l.eld.s would constitue game: preserves, as no firearms would be allowed. on the property. The Cooperative Extension Service of Ha,m,pshire County offers expertise in regard to both the forest and. the farm lands and their management. Other coi..-cec•1.ional programs are to be instituted In the future;, following the recom.ine:nd.at:i.ons of 'the County Correctional Study Committee: and the minimum standards of the State Department of Corrections, K,ti'th Im lementati.on depencent u;l~on the availability of land. and buildings. A draft copy of the-D minimum standards is appended to this proposal. For e.. O.anPle, vocational programs involving shop work, mechanical arts, and raven fine arts can be undertaken when the new facilities are ready. Academic Progra ns now in progress will be expanded in the futza.r(1,.. ..The m_a.ndated. n.thl et.i c and recreational facilities, Including combin- ation field, rurn-.ing tracts, gymnasium, -and paved courts for basketball and. hand.ba"al., will require spacer on site and under the security of the County Sheriff. The cost- cjr r:e►zlacing the antiquated Hampshire County Jail and House of Correction with a new multi-buil.d.ing facility having adequate' grounds will depend on several_ factors; The cost of the :rand, if acquired from the State Department of Health, is expected to be nominal. The cost of the land, if acquired. from a willing or If taken by right of eminent domrlin, would be likely to exc cad :11> 1,000 an a.cre if such a block of privately owned ].and could be found :in IVc,~x^fi.l~a1npi:one Location within 'the county seat is re- garded. necessary *b( ,,cause. of a :recent U. S, Court of Appeals decision that -the facility must be reasonably close to the County Court House, as well as for reasons cited above, Possible sites not part of the, Northampton State Hospital, but located within the city, which have been examined. by the staff have been found to be unacceptable on the grounds of slope;, ledge, northern ex- posure, impossibility or on-sitc% sewage disposal, and remoteness. _1. _ r3,i to development costs Include, the problem of sewage disposal, The facility 2voi:zld. house 125 'to 150 persons. There is no se;'rer be- yond. the 17tate 1.1as.p i.tal bo.13d.Ings. Extension of the sewer by the City of Northamp tion we understand. to be planned for about a decade in the future, and. therefore an o}~-si'te solu't:Ion may be most feasible. Certain parts of the Noi~thaaiApton 8tate HO Pital Ettrmlands are Suitable for talik and. leach field, arrangements, and. other parts, by virtue of soi_l or water condi.t:i ons, are not;;' The land. between Etr t a s Pit 'Road ,.,.:rid 1oclty Hi 3.,j, load contains soils which are suitable for sewage dit.sposal for a. large facility, and the Hampshire County Engineer will make recoiamendat:ions on this when the land is acquired. Land south of Rocky Hall Road .(Route 66) is deemed not suitable for this purpose. -Construction costs of buildings depend in Part on -the nature of the earth upon which they will rest, Land satu.ra'ted with water or underlain. by c',P..•ajys would. require Pilings to su,pPort and anchor them Buff ici.ently. The land between Dirt' s Pit Road and Rocky Hill Road is of such a. character that no exceptional building cost,- ar_ e anticipated. The land which the ("i_ty of Northampton suggested for a:'.;jail site., south of Rocky Hill is likely to be unsuitable for construction The lay of the land between Burt's Pit Road. and Rocky Hill Road is suitable for e, ;alora.'ti.on of alternative energy sources which would reduce. the o:pe.t^a'tl.ag costs of -the new facility, such as. solar and wind powe1:, -fo heath,).;g and. ;perhaps geti.eration of electricity, . Grant appl.i- c6t7 cans are being prepared even now for 'the funding of solar heating and. other corrrpoz~: et~t?: of a new edifice, and. the terms of any architect- ural planning co.ntr;a,ct are expected to stipulate cast projections of alternative hee t ^.n.d power soucesq The site is exposed to the southern arc of the slay and to the prevailing winds; While rnul. ~al:l:~ iaosc~ uses of the land acquired by they county are desirable and. l~l ~,rvic.d, the greatest concern and first priority of tte county is the rep:ln.cement of the Jail: Rocky Hi,;J 1. Pond would be ros.tored using retainees of the County House of Corr ez,c-l;:ion to do some of the labor, and it -could. then bn available to the re'ta:i.ne es and -the general ;public for, vater- relate:d recrer} t-_iona1. activities, :including fishing. More cl.r'ta:i.~.e:ci. planning, best :performed, after acquisition of 'the (.atacl., trou:l_d c7rt; rml.n(-,, .iaJ.a.c;c~nt>rat:, of structu:re';s%i,p n the land and. various land uses,. Plar.wzltag done thi.rs fo,r indicates tliat 'this l_i:nd between Burt's Pit; .T.'Aload .:end flocky Hill :Road, pl!ts -the sinfi ller parcesl... south of Inc>chy Hill Road. Is the a,wount of landl which the county needs and, can us- within the philosophy of creating a, facility which wll."be as nsar.iy self. _cont<: Ined. and as nearly Self-sufficient as possible„ The acerage we ryst:`i.mate to be approximately . Tile site is sop,si ,ated. sut'f iclei,3.tly from neighboring residential a,re<a;s 'to have little or no upon their chRracter, and. the site is large cnough thjt t13c: pat)u:lation density upon the site would be ^1 -5 I about one person l)er' acre'. The structures we anticipate would be of law profile, that is, not over two stories, of a style compatible with the local and regional character and history. i In conclusion, all of the factors investigated., including soil, topography, wind., sun, drainage, proximity to court house, job markbt, and educa.tional facilities, availability of cropland and forest"land, size, and separation from existing residential neighborhoods are the factors which have led. the Tamp-shire County Commissioners to request that land which lies south. of Burt's Pit Road. for tanew County Jail and House of Corrections complex. r CITY OF NORTHAMPTON PLANNING DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor David Cramer and the City Council 3 E FROM: York Phillips, Planning Director Charles H. Dauchy, City Conservationist SUBJECT: Pro-posed Hampshire County Jail at Northampton State Hospital Lands DATE: April 29, 1976 FILE: E076 At your request I am submitting the following information: o A summary of the positions of the Planning Board and Con- servation Commission o A summary of the position established at the` March 31, 1976 meeting of.various.City representatives o The position taken by this office Both the Planning Board and the Conservation Commission have endorsed the final draft of the Proposal for the Use of Surplus Land of the Northampton State Hospital by the City of Northampton, prepared by this office in March, 1975, and presented to the City Council. This proposal calls for the use of all lands north of Rt. 66 and west of the State Hospital buildings for conservation, recreation, agriculture, and open space uses. The proposal indi- cated that a 35(+) acre site on the :youth side of Route 66 might be considered as an alternative site for the location of a jail. The report indicated, however, that care should be taken in allow- ing such a facility on the State Hospital land in the first place. Both the Conservation Commission and the Planning Board have more recently refined and restated their positions. Both have agreed that: (1)due regard should be given, first to establishing reasonable requirements for the location of a jail and house of correction, and then to analyzing a number of appropriately selected sites in order to choose the best possible location considering all, relevant factors; and that (2) while that part of the ;state Hospital lands lying south of Route 66 might well be one of the alternatives chosen for further analysis, the qualities of the more northerly site proposed by the County, in terms of recreation, aesthetic, educational, and open space potential are so great as to require 1 9 precluding such a use in thet location. Although attention has been focused by the County on the question of whether to locate the jail on the north or south side of Route 66, the question which must be answered is whether any other sites within the City or County would be preferable. 2. At a meeting on March 31, 1976, the Mayor., Councillor Baranowski, representatives of the Planning Board, Conservation Commission, Recreation Commission, and their supporting staffs, met and agreed to the following positions regarding the proposed Hampshire County Jail and its siting. Following each position is additional explana- tion of its basis: a. "That there is a need for a new jail and house of corrections facility for Hampshire County". This point was not disputed at this meeting. b. "That the City agrees to a maximum required area of 26 acres for such a facility". This figure is in accordance with the program criteria established by the County's consultants in March, 1976. It is contended that a larger area is neither indicated nor justified in light of these program criteria. C. "That the City is unable to agree to the proposed location of such a facility on the land of the Northampton State Hospital because there has been no adequate study of legiti- mate alternative sites based on the minimum program criteria established by the Program for Hampshire County Jail and Hoarse of Correction, by Reinhardt Associates, Curtis and Davis, March 17, 1976, and explicitly considering economic, social, and environmental costs of each alternative site". This position does not necessarily eliminate ultimate agree- ment with the County's proposed site, but is based on the recognition that site selection should follow recognized and accepted procedures, including minimum program criteria. The State Hospital land is of inestimable value for future use for open space, recreation, and agriculture. Any com- mitment of this land to other uses should be a public deci- sion after full consideration of all valid alternatives. 2 - The County's present proposal was not arrived at following con- sideration of reasonable alternative sites, particularly with respect to parcel size. In addition, the proposal fails to con- sider the long-term value of preservation of this uniquely scenic area. d. "That the City will support a request to -the General Court for funds necessary to undertake such study of legitimate alter nativO_-.-sites Such study should have been part of earlier planning, before commitment of study funds to the specific State Ho..spital land site. However, the minor investment required will avoid the long-term costs of inadequate site selection.. \ e. "That the County Commissioners deal with the fact of local authority for land use control contained in the zoning enabling act". The City's zoning ordinance requires a facility such as proposed to be subject to City Council scrutiny under the procedure, established for s-necial exceptions. At the meeting of March 31, those in attendance feared that unless -4an appropriate site selection process is pursued, the County, as applicant, will be unable to show ade.ctuately what alternative sites were considered answh_y--tae_y _ were not zel!2cted, as is required in order to obtain a special o:.~cepticn. 3. In addition to concurring with the above positions, the Planning Department raises the following additional .points: a. No consideration of alternative means of providing for a jaJ.l facility has been made. If -.a the one hand a substan- tial number of inmates come from outside the County, shouldn't the State provide the facility? if on the other hand the County is responsible, without aid, shouldn't the design capacity be reduced? It seems that the decision to build a new jail came before the deterr..i nation was made as to what is the best way of administering the corrections function. - 3 - I I b. Once these questions of size and service area are re- solved, criteria for site selection must then be developed before any site is considered. Such criteria should ad- dress space, physical quality, location, utilities, environmental and social impacts, cost, etc. Only after this is done should possible sites be selected and con- sidered vis-a-vis the criteria. C. Location of a correctional facility on the State Hospital land is not objectionable in itself, but the site on the north side of Route 66 is objectionable in view of its unique scenic value (both in being looked at, and in being used to look from), recreational value, conservation value, and educational value. Certainly a substantial number of other suitable sites are available so as not to reau~re location on the site proposed. d. Any added costs for site purchase must be considered in .terms of construction costs, utility costs, costs of operation, social and environmental costs, etc. The analysis of these costs must be uniformly done with re- spect to all sites. It is contended that the probable cost for acquisition of a site of the minimum necessary area will represent a relatively insignificant part o-JE a total $6.1 million cost, which in itself has not been justified. It is further contended that any increased costs brought about by delays are not attributable to intransigence on the part of the City, but to the County's failure to approach the planning and site selection pro- cess in the proper way to begin with. - 4 - CITY OF NORTHAMPTON PLANNING DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM TO: Distribution List FR OM:Planning Department SUBJECT:Propoaea H~,pahiro County Jail DATE: April 1, 1976 FILE: Eo76 Based on discussion with addressees the following positions are suggested regarding the proposed Hampshire County Jazz: 1. That thera.is a need for a new jail and house of corrections facility for Hampshire County. 2. That the City agrees to a maximum required area of 26 acres for such a facility. 3. That the City is unable to agree to the proposed location of such a facility on the land of the Northampton State Hospital because there has been no adequate study of legitimate alterna- tive sites based on the minimum program criteria established by the Program for Hampshire County Jail- and House of Correction, by. Reinhardt Associates, Curtis and Davis, March 17, 1976, and explicitly considering economic, social, and environmental costs of each alternative site. 4, That the City will support`a re-quest to the General Court for funds necessary to undertake such study. of legitimate alternative sites.' 5. That the County Commissioners deal with the fact of local authority for land use control contained in the zoning enabling act. Additional Note: The following were present at the 3/31/76 meeting at which the above positions were developed. cc: Mayor, David W. Cramer Charles W. Baranowski Richard Carnes Brian Elliott Dr. Peter Laband Robert LaSalle % Patrick Goggins Charles Dauchy York Phillips r ~lR1E ~ Q~J m 'Ramp-54tric Tou , OFFICE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS NORTHAMPTON, MASS. 01060 FILE: ' ~ SUMMARY OF THE POSITION OF HAMPSHIRE COUNTY ON NORTHAMPTON STATE HOSPITAL SURPLUS LANDS L~ttnt~ Latttntts~inttcr.~ CHAIRMAN DAVID B. MUSANTE NORTHAMPTON JOHN H. BRECUET WILLIAMSBURG PAUL R. DINEEN SOUTH HADLEY LECEI ED NORTHAMPT0q PLANNING DEPARTMENT The County of Hampshire has a pressing, immediate need to build a new Jail and. House of Correction. The present 11353 faci- lity clearly violates Judge W. Arthur Garrity's decision in the case of Suffolk County Jail Inmates vs. Eisensta.dtl Our facility would. be closed forthwith if a class action suit by inmates and./or. citizens on their behalf and/or the staff is entered, in a federal district court. Our plans call for immediate action, so that the taxpayers of Hampshire County will not be saddled with additional. tax dollars spent on interim facilities, like Suffolk County (which is now re- quired. to spend. an additional $3 million because the new Charles Street Jail will not be readyoon time). We chose, as the best of 9 sites, the land at the State Hos- pital in Northampton for the following reasons: (a . ) Solar heating The area we desire is i( solar greenhouses which ency in energy and. food. on Sunset Hill, and. the of the hill, where they needed. and. windmills as alternative energy sources: Ieally suited. for these concepts, including will aid us in achieving near self-suffici- (see f, below). The placement of.a windmill placement of structures on the southern foot would be exposed to the southern sky, are (b.) The new minimum standards, which are now in force, of the State Department of Corrections, mandate certain programs and condi- tions of detention by a County Jail and. House of Correction. Some of these are: (1.) A full athletic program, including playing fields and gymnasium; 2.) Shop programs and other vocational programs; (3.) Diagnostic services; Library, including law sections; (5.).Engli.sh-as-a-second.-language program, and. other academic (classroom) programs; ~I I I I (6.) We cannot hold detainee in a more secure - setting than his (or her) crime requires for the public safety (we need. a range of security for those held); (7.) Medical--Dental-Psychiatric facilities. (c.) Chapter 777, Special Needs---- requirements mandated by law. (d.) Nearness to court facilities and attorneys required by federal court decisions and new minimum standards. (e.) Facilities and programs for women. (f.) Farming, conservation, and. recreation programs and instruction, including restoration of Rocky Hill Pond and possible creation of a sub-pond, forest management, and several types of food Production (orchard, animal husbandry, crops, fish, etc.). (g.) Job placement after adequate training for positions which are needed and which are available in the area. (h.) Cost of land acquisition and development to be as low.as possible, for the benefit of the county taxpayers. (i.) Conference rooms for attorneys, etc. Two citizen committees have recommended that a new Jail and House of Correction be built immediately. The County Jail Study Committee, and. petitions of about 5',000 residents of the county, architects, experts on solar energy, the county engineex/and planner all conclude that the State Hospital farmlands are ideal., The people of Hampshire County require='a humane institution with proper security guaranteed to themselves and their families, which this site can provide. Respectfully submitted, John D. Lawlor, Jr.,, Cfi 10i1 Member Richard M. Gaffney, Alternate July 2, 1975 N.B. The last statements by the representatives of the Nlayor of Northampton (26th of June) indicate that their only require- ment for the part of the Northampton State Hospital farmlands which we seek is now a bicycle path to the drumlin, and along its eastern slope. This could easily be accomplished through an area which we have planned as a buffer zone between the, proposed facility and. the nearest other land uses. P.S. Tile are looking forward to seeing you at the last meeting of this group, Wednesday noon, 9 July, when a vote will be taken on what recommendations the body will make on the future use of the State Hospital farmlands. i A- Zrt During the year 1973 it became known that the Commonwealth of Massachusetts was seeking to divest itself of some 500 acres of the Northampton State Hospital. In the course of the year officials of the city of Northampton expressed interest in ac- quiring the surplus land for public use. A number of city agencies proposed specific plans for use of the land. Mayor Sean Dunphy deferred consideration of these plans until after the arrival of Northampton's new city planner in the summer. The planner, York) Phillips, was faced with a mas-. sive task in establishing a professional planning office literally.,, from scratch, and many concerns were much more immediate than considering plans for the surplus land. In the fall of 1,973 Mr. Phillips talked with a group of college students about simultaneously performing a service for the community and furthering their own education by working on the state hospital land project. The five students J Hampshire College and''Smith College were enrolled in a land use problems course at Hampshire which required involvement of students in community land use issues. The invitation from planner Phillips was a remarkable opportunity and the students gratefully accepted. The committee of students was placed under the supervision of assistant planner Richard Allardice. Both Mr. Allardice and Mr. Phillips spent long hours working with the students and were very patient and helpful. The committee of would-be planners began by acquainting page 2 themselves with the governmental structure of Northampton, reviewing the submitted proposals of the various agencies and in'becoming familiar with the land. The committee branched. out in several ,directions. Sarah Meeker and Rick Davis from Hampshire made extensive surveys of physical and living features of the surplus land, John O'Malley, also from Hampshire, concerned himself primarily with putting. the surplus land in the context of the rest of Northampton and studying the interaction of the two. Erik Axelson (Hampshire) was concerned with the ecology of the site and also with devel- oping specific proposals for the land, 4t* Susan Oates from Smith, in addition to her extensive economic, historical and cultural research, served as liason with the planner's office, for the committee of students, The committee also met with several of the interested agencies, including the Recreation Commission, the Conservation Commission, and the steward of the state hospital, The committee communicated with the Public., Works Department, the Schools Com- mittee, and agricultural groups. All of the contaczea partiies were cooperative and most helpful, By December. 1973 the committee completed a preliminary report which was orally presented to a meeting of interested representatives of city agencies. The following written report incorporates the comments of the meeting's participants and amplifies the committee's data and recommendations. { page 3 ' ,The Northampton State Hospital surplus property is an approximately 500 acre tract which is bordered by the Mill River on"the north and the Arcadia Wildlife Sanctuary on the south. Two roads cross it, Burts Pit Road and Grove Street. Other man made features on the land consist of power lines, trails, buildings, tombstones, old cement foundations and fences. For the most part the land remains in its natural state, untouched except by farmers. The contours of the -tract are accentuated by a long and narrow drumlin which stretches through approximately the center of the land. The drumlin, which was probably left in the wake of the last glacier 1C`000 years ago, is relatively flat on top and is 300 feet above sea level. The y.ad drops off quite qucikly down to the Mill River floodplain, continually-re-emphasizing the basic shape of the drumlin. To the south the contours are less exaggerated and the land slopes gently down to 150 feet above sea level. The importance of contours and slope lie in their direct re- lationship,to surface runoff and erosion. If a piece of land on a slope is leveled or paved~,;the possibility of erosion and flooding is much greater. On the surplus land there is a good amount of slope, which suggests that no development,(buildings and parking lots) should take place. The clma.te, according to agricultural ,yearbooks, is moist and cool. Snowfall rgnges from 9 to 47 inches per year. The snow, which melts, drains and runs off, in the spring, leaves the ground very wet and threatens erosion. ~Y climate and its effects page are directly related to the contours, soil, vegetation and wildlife. Taking into conside.ration.the potentially heavy s-ow- fall and numerous poorly drained soils on the Northampton State Hcospital surplus land, the climate indicates that, with the exception of fairly level areas with well drained soils, the tract should not be devloped. The surplus land is composed of 12 different types of soil: Gloucester, Ridgebury, Hinckley, Merrimac, Podunk, Sudbury, Rumney, Woodbridge, Paxton, Hartland, Belgrade, and Raynham. Detailed soil descriptions are shown in the soil key and models. Generally speaking, however, the soil types share a gravelly, loamy sand surface and a subsoil of either hardpan or layers of sand.and gravel. Some of the soils are conducive to farming and some to wetland.wildlife sites, but, again., almost none invite development. The seasonal high water table on the tract varies from moderately deep to quite shallow, depending on the exact location and season. The Mill River flows roughly north-south into the Arcadia Wildlife Sanctuary. On the tract itself is the Rocky Hill basin, which was until recently a pond. A very small stream connects the basin to the Arcadia marsh, and, if wet, the basin would drain directly into the marsh. The soil type in the basin has a very slight limitation towards wetland wildlife, and the direct link with Arcadia suggests that reconverting Rocky Hill basin into,a wetland wildlife area might be a positive factor for Arcadia and.for the surplus land. The benefit.ifor the surplus property would lie in having; a wetland wildlife site, which would attract different vegetation and wildlife, and help _ _ _ _ I n _ 175700_ CZ5 ell t7y HS9 J ° ~~a ~~~4. H3~ . ) r r p Q I T X95 t 1;0t~1 Q 14 N3A "00 / S H A F I kiS 2A A-Ti ou l-ra~p 1 N / p Q 1'til t( ~l l--t ~ ~OtuUTn~ Rlrv NORTHAMPTON STATE HOSPITAL NORTHAMPTON, MASSACHUSETTS F~ SCAL_C 61`7 1NC~} ~.v~-l-.s moo` 7s _ GO(UTOUR 1 pnFIVALS PIT 2.5' VEGETATION' SOFTWOo b5 (Mn, ~C~UTIq ~Dt~ 81- too °1o G~.c~uD c-u~sc~t~. ~S 2 ~ 2 4o FEirT PS3A J1 -rao F~~r- t l:: - •i NAI; bWD u 2 OFTWOOD MIXTURE I-(o0 ~EE-f 81-IO()%n G~Wtloc UQ6 j( HS- 3A, 41-~o FEET, 31`8D`lbQ-,WD6W9XEI HWWOODS C ab) " 81, I~0 e`jo Cod2~uND G LOSV ~Gy N 2 - Zt -a'0 FC~T - CLEARCD LAUD T - -rILLC-D o27lLLABLE P ~AsiU~Z~ - I~gANDati~b I E~l~ AF , 5°- ~so -,-r~.a,,: ~ ~ i✓ T~TI D b-5 Ll~ tsto~ L11Jf= ~ 125 L PCy.~.1~ TtZflD.~'MtSSfotJ (_..1)J~ NOR~'N U~1?c4~bD . - PAT- la.~ AM-Sb his . SOIL SERIES e.4 WlkfRz 1 r C3 1:3 "9 O Ron ( Pt_.UCJcs J~ht"~r' 22 r '.r IX r o off' ~ r ~Q, n0 a rt - - --/G~~ 1-15 ~S 26b 1.'>,s voo X15 )IL"SERIFS ;Ir )30 Q P nn ~t7 ~ 0 R NORTHAMPTON STATE HOSPITAL NORTHAMPTON, MAsc Ac HUSETTS y1/1. t T l--F GpLI_F~ 5G P, LC' Q 000 lkxlw muAt-s'b0o ~past~als~ ~ Novo 75 r_o&Ymo? WTi;>`1 AT 26 MO RI N ; SOIL SERIES. W00 bBPU&E ---1~ ~IDc, 3U . ~EL~6ZADI= . POD UQK R I~YN N A Nl IGO SuDsuv~,Y . r5o o M~j cY . its } H iU(_KLeY FAxTOu page 5 to produce a more diverse habitat overall. The vegetation on the land is fairly diverse. Along the Mill River are s. mixture of maple, hemlock, white birch and beech trees. Along the southern end of the land grow maple and birch trees and much scrub brush. On the southern half of the drumlin is a red pine forest. Large portions orf the center of the property are areas which have been tilled or used as pasture land. On the tract are also two fields which were abandoned approximately 20 j6ears ago. Vegetation in, itself does not dictate a function. As it exists now, it is varied and provides for a number of different habitats, which is a factor worth preserving for optimum use of the land. The surplus land is not the home of many animals. Most of the wildlife is in the form of birds, squirrels, and stray dogs. he apparent M1pauci tyof wildlife suggests that more and different environments might be created toattract more and different .-a. ima!-ts . Historical and Cultural Background Many aspects of the state hospital surplus property have value only.in the human mind. The landscape P,haracter or the way people perceive the.land is one area of assessment of the value of the land. This particular piece of property has much value in terms of its landscape character. The lznd has much diversity, including the winding river, floodplain, rolling inclines, meadows, forested page areas, farmed land, a drumlin, and potential wetland areas.' The combination of all these types of landscape a very har- monious; rural environment. The dominant feature of the land is the drumlin, which offers a beautiful and dramatic view. The undeveloped .s!~.-t•e of the land can be seen as t;.e major factor fot the impressipn of natural beauty perceived on the property. Among the socio-cultural interests of the Northampton State Hospital surplus property - the elements that have value due to our intellectual curiosity, psychological makeup and personal sense of what is good for society - one outstanding feature is the value of -the land as a potential.educational resource. The land's variety of vegetation and wildlife pos- sibilities lend themselves to the community for study, either through informally organized use by the Northampton schools, the 5-college community)or through the creation of nature trails as an educational resource for the entire community. In addition, some of the acreage lends itself to farming and could be included in the agricultural-educational program of the school. system. This value is increased by the location of this potential undeveloped resource near the more densely populated section of the city. Until 1867 the approximately 500 acres of surplus land was forested. In 1867 the state hospital purchased the land and used it for agriculture, as a part of the patient therapy program. This program 'is no longer in effect, although some of the land continues to be farmed under lease by local farmers. page 7 One historical highlight of the property is the location of two graves of Civil War veterans who were patients at the hospital. The property has value in terms of spiritual usefulness. One of the highly held.pastimes of urban life is the opportunity to get away and commune with nature. This leads to the consider- ation of this land as a resoursge with social-welfare potential. The recreational possibilities, including both passive and active recreation activities, have increased value at the present when. transportation to recreation areas is restricted by the avail- ability of fuel. Public use alternatives such as garden plots for the citizenry also add value to the property in terms of sociA welfare. Passive recreation uses (trails, etc.) would be an asset not only to the citizens of Northampton) but would also be therapeutically beneficial to the patients of the state hos- pital. The beauty of asset in a city which areas in the Central area in an.undevloped preserve the cultural natural state. this land in its undeveloped state is an already is striving to reclaim blighted 3usiness District. Preservation of this state for future generation S5 acts to value of appreciation for land in its Economic Considerations The surplus land is currently held by the.Department of Public Health of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, hence the page 8 city receives no tax income from the property. If the land was sold to a private individual~or_ firm the tax base of the city would be expanded. Tax benefits accrued by the city would depend upon the use of the land. The character of the land in- dicates limitations on development capabilities. Northampton's Comprehensive Plan Summary) rendered by Metcalf and Eddy Associates indicates two land use alternatives for the city. One is a major growth plan which indicates suburban residential. development for the area. The second alternative is a controlled growth plan which for.sees more rural residential development. The city's recent land use decisions as well as economic and population trends) tend to make controlled growth more likely. The surplus land could be transferred from the Commonwealth tip.? to the city'at no chargeea -''increase the capital holdings of the city.without diminishing its tax base. Should the.land be transferred to city ownership )a net increase in cost would result from additional maintenance. The analysis in terms of cost benefits for municipal economic gain in the disposal of this property by the state hoppital must take into consideration the opportunity costs, or the costs of benefits foregone in choosing whether//to acquire this property. 'page 9 417 r contacted through research have expressed a fondness for this r land in terms of vistas and passive recreation uses. { } Various city agencies have been contacted in the attempt to develop a design proposal for the property. Their inputs have been incorporated in a design which will be dubmitted by the Planning Department to the ,~,~ommonwealth HealthyCommisslon5r 1which has expressed its interest in nondevelopment public uses. Public Inputs Attitudes and public opinion regarding the atatus of the surplus land have not been formally measured,-This could be done through a survey, ar at a public hearing. Many people1 page 10 Design Criteria Several general design criteria guided the committee in the deliberations which produced our proposals. Perhaps the foremost of these is the idea that nature and the land - its features and interaction - are the best determinants of land use. This view.is most eloquently expressed. by Ian McHarg, America's leading landscape architect. The ecological view (McHarg writes) requires that we look upon the ikorld, listen and learn. The place, creatures and men were, have been, are now and in the process of becoming. We and they are here now, co-tenants of the phenomenal world, united in its origins and destiny. we wish to find discrete aspects of natural processes that carry their own values and prohibitions:.: it-is these that should provide the pattern, not only of metropolitan open space, but also the positive pattern of development. Later on we shall see that there are consistencies in land morphology, soils, stream patterns, plant association:, wildlife habitats, and even land use, and that these can well be examined through the concept of the physiograph.ic region... It is enough for the moment to insist that nature performs work for man - in many cases this is best done in a natural.condition - further that certain areas are intrinsically suitable for certain uses while others are less so. We can begin with this simple proposition.' We.believe, with McHarg, that nature tells us what it is best suited to d.o. We have only to get to know the land, to interpret it, to determine the land use options open to us. Then only the limits of.our imaginations and our culture stand in the way.of creating a harmoniaus and ful,2111i_ng environment. Another major criterion of the committee might be called the conservation bias. This is simply our observation that land which is developed is a resource depleted. Once a piece page 7.1 of land is developed the future options for that land are fore- closed. However, if we withstand the demand to quickly devlop,a piece of lid s{~gw it remains a resource to be tapped in the fu- ture. We may stil=l_ develop it in the future, but we will have many more options open to us at that time. This concept is illustrated by considering a river valley. In its natural state the swift water is ideal for canoeing. With a demand for electrical power there is pressure to dam up the river to generate electricity. But if the river is dammed and a resevoir fills the valley no one will ever be able to canoe on that stretch of river. However, if the dam is not built I immediately, people can continue to canoe, and. there is no reason why the darn might not be built in the future if the demand is great enough. The conservation bias,seeks to avoid any irrevocable commitment of the land unless it is absolutely necessary. Our recommendations for the surplus property generally fol- low-from our general Criteria. The whole theme of our proposals is of cautious lowkey development in response to perceived needs. These needs are to be persistently reevaluated. We believe the state hospital surplus property is a major resource of the city and that as it is nurtured and enhanced through the years it will come:to be even more precious. For each of our major proposals we have tried to evaluate the impact of that proposal's implementation on the land and the community at large. Generally we have condidered impacts in two time frames: immediately, that of implementation; and long term, that of use in the future. PROPOSED LAND USES N r1 f ~ 0 WIFIZl~ t f r S n R o 4 f U~S Prn ~vq V P 1,)( N ry f. 4P \ / I v < ti°0I C-IzQ \y \ l - f2~ ' 176' ~y 26D z~s loo X15 Iq7 ED LAND USES ell a LJ a fl , aQ ~ ~ a 0 V~i1 l T 1-E s GOI !PAR~p~S~ NO {ZT'W NORTHAMPTON STATE HOSPITAL NORTHAMPTON, MASSACHUSETTS 5 G l~ L CC" ova IV--Ai muncs roc) ` C00-moZ t Ue~s i~T 2s' PROPOSED LAND USES WILDLIFE REFUGE -IGO ~ - vRTH BAG1N z- RO~KY_ W I L L B WA J (j i 0 AC~RICULTU RE ,z` .3 - NORTH FARM - FLOODPL_At~J FAF M , PE-c_pEATIcw COMPLEX ISM , , i ❑ PICNIC, SITE E I TRH P61 UT FOCA L PD I k1 F C~ ~UTUC~ D~~~~PM~tUT page 12 Proposed Development and Impacts . The" need for active recreation facilities in Northampton is readily apparent. To help alleviate this need the Northamp- ton Recreation Commission proposes the development of a multiple purpose recreation complex on part of the surplus land presently leased from the Commonwealth. The present physical features of the 15 acres in question do not preclude such development. The slope ranges from 4 9 overall. The predominant Woodbridge soil series has moderate building capacity and high surface runoff. As planned, the development will involves some grading of the site into terraced fields and courts. Erosion may result unless grading is carefully executed.. Another serious impact of the recreation. facility will re- sult in its use. It appears that most of the access to the site will be by automobile from all parts of Northampton. This will increase traffic on Burts Pit Road, the only auto access to the site. Burts Pit Road also bisects the surplus land as a whole, therefore, what happens on the road is important to the land. Before proceeding with development the Recreation Commission II : should estimate,the traffic flows generated by various activities. If the flow is too great and negatively affects the rest of the land the most traffic intensive facilities might be located else- where. Parking for the volumes of cars will also be important. We page 1.3 recommend off road parking for the recreation complex across Burts Pit Road in a former barnyard and pasture area. Lots should allow for maximum water percolation and grass overspill areas should be designated and a crosswalk to the complex marked. The Recreation Commission also might explore use of the barns or adjacent buildings for administration of the complex. Pedestrian traffic from other parts of the surplus land should be guided around wildlife refuges. We believe that affirmative action by the Recreation Com- mission in di.scoizraging automobile traffic by users of the facil- ities is desirable. Each year the amount of undeveloped land has diminished.. Not only is this bad news for human beings, but it is especially disastrous.for animals. That is why keeping the surplus land largely undeveloped is so important. We propose the creation of a specific wildlife sanctuary in the northern corner of the surplus property. The focal point for this refuge.might be. the present north basin, the site of a filled pond. The poor drainage of the prevalent Rumney series soil suggests the creation of a wetland environment. A wetland refuge will redress the balance somewhat, replacing dredged and filled estuary land.in the area, and will promote a diversification of wildlife and habitats. A wetland in this sector will not appreciably harm the existing environment. A gradual alteration in this particular habitat will take place, with new animals replacing the ones that seek other environments. Vbgetationin the area suggested for wetland is consistent with the new environment. page, 14- The success of any wildlife aanctua.r. y depends on its not being excessively disturbed by man. The north basin is fairly remote from contemplated activities on -the rest of -the land. However, e.are must be given to mimizin.g encreachment from the proposed footbridge (see below). Traffic from the footbridge to the athletic fields and other areas Fought to be routed south of the refuge along existing trails. The effect of a wetland in this area on water behavior ought to be scrutinized. Specific considerations should be given to the water table and water flow in the Mill River. Provisions for observation areas for human visitors should be developed by the land's administrators-to mimimize human impact on the refuge. The refuge's value for education is ap- parent, and should be utilized. Another site for a possible wildlife refuge is the land im- mediately surrounding Rocky Hill basin. At one time in the past a dam at Rcoky Hill Road created a pond. Now the creek flows through the overgrown outline of the pond. The major significance of this area is t~-,at Rocky Hill Creek flows into the ~ rcadia Wildlife Sanctuary of the Massachu- setts Audubon Society. Therefore, what happens above Arcadia is very important to the environment of the sanctuary. A number of options are available for the Rocky Hill Creek area. The.preference of Arcadia's administrators should be , the overriding criterion. One is,to dam the creek up for a pond, which could be stocked with fish. This may have an affect on the creek's flow of water page 15 and of sediments and nutrients. Another option would be to create a wetland area. This, too, may affect the stream 's flow, and in addition may be a breeding place for mosquitoes. Another alternative might be to leave the creek untouched:and declare the area a sanctuary in which human encroachment would be regulted. No.matter which option is accepted, the Rocky Hill basim must be considered as it relates to Arcadia. In view of this, the Con- servation Commission might explore acquiring easements or actual rights of way along Rocky Hill Creek betten the surplus land and Arcadia. This would link -the. two sanctuaries and protect the in- tegrity of,the valley and Arcadia. One of the problems associated with the surplus land is -t of access to the site. At present, the major access would be along Prince Street and Burts Pit Road or via Glement Street. The present situation is one where several mile of auto traffic is necessary to reach the site from populated areas of Northampton. We propose the construction of a footbridge over the Mill River as one means of encouraging pedestrian access to the site and discouraging unnecessary automobile traffic. We feel there is a need to link the residential area of Northampton between the Riverside Drive area'and Smith College with the proposed park. The case for a footbridge is self evident. People would be able to,use the park and not have to use automobiles. There.are any mumber of possible locations for such a bridge along the more -than 6,800 feet of the Mill River embracing the surplus land. However, the committee recommends one site - at page 16 the bend of the river between Federal and Vernon Streets - for a number of important reasons. First, a bridge a this location would link the few acres of the surplus property across the river with the rest of the land. Second, since the city would control the land on both sides of the river problems of rights-of-way for the bridge would not be encountered. This is not the case with other sites. Third, the,physical features at this location are favorable. Some parts of this area are free of substantial vegetation, so that no extensive clearing operations would be necessary. The slope is not extreme, and the width of the river at this point, approximately 60 feet, is not excessive. In addition, the west bank is served by a path giving access to the other parts of the surplus land, . We can discern no negative impact on the'land of a properly constructed footbrigge. There is, however., a possible impact of such a bridge in the future. This relates to volume and channeling of pedestrian traffic from the bridge. Excessive numbers of people spewing onto the land from the bridge could seriously damage the amenity of the surplus land. Specifically, traffic form the bridge must not be allowed to overrun the proposed northern basin wildlife sanctuary. Another traffic impact may be felt at the opposite side of the river in the Federal Street area. In deference to the residents of t,is area the committee recommends that a survey be taken to determine whether these resi.ddnts will accept and use a bridge here. We also recommend that responsible agencies of the city explain the bridge's need and use to the residnets to avoid any misunderatanding, l page 17 +~-t'h ~.e• V :Il l11~~- U ~ ei~~ ~.W.w r.7"Q~;..~ ~ s•rt~~ i',r rlyr 'g h.. .rexb ...l -,t ~.\.~J+'Y~ralov+K3.ng as.~,,.mu.ch...cS;i:.:.the .,.~Q.tnm~~n~.,.t}~a,,,~as, :T?o,s.~,.i~b.l,e., ,i:.n,~~~;-1~.~~< p:3:an~ming.,,<.,arrd" ~ b~rzi~l•d~ng Perhaps students of the high school or vocation school would undertake designing the bridge as a project, with professional supervision. The city might also utilize the skills of some of ;fits citizens in constructing the bridge. (Not only would a bridge across the Mill River be built, but bridges among the people would be builv-, too. u For the rest of the surplus land Ithe committee recommends a low level incremental development in response to the needs of,the community. The state hospital land is a resource to be cherished by the people of Northampton. One of the reasons the committee opposes any large scale permanent development is that once an area is developed in such a way it is irrevocably altered. However, if development i.s carefully considered, and not just the product of mometary demand, the land is available in the future, options are open. , Since.the following actions are in the nature of preserving this resource the committee recommends that they be carried out by the Northampton Conservation Commission unless otherwise noted. Much of the cleared land on t~e tract is presently fanned`, by the state hoppi_tal) or by lease to neighboring farmers. The committee believes that agriculture is a vital and fast dis- appearing aspect of American life. In the years since WW II farms have been abandoned or over- run by developers at an alarming rate. Many reasons.,ane._respon- si_ble for this condition, and we cannot expect to turn the tide page 18 by isolated actions here in Hampshire County. But we do believe it is dangerous to allow the farming hinterland of cities, lake Northampton) to wither away) and have the cities dependent on food grown hundreds or thousands of miles away. ,.f Some specific actions may help tos`amelior_ate the plight of agriculture in Northampton. One is to allow the Smith Vocational School, which trains young farmers, the use of approximately 20 acres which they requested last year. This would be in the north- wesl;~corner of the land, beyond the proposed recreation complex. The committee believes that training future farmers is very important to the welfare of the community. We propose the Smith School use the land for cultivation under a renewable lease-as a part of the conservation commission's mandate to protect open space. Another major agriculture resource area is the floodplain area between Burts Pit Road and the Mill River. At present corn and other crops are grown on this enriched soil. We propose a x number of options to utilize this as an agricultural area. One would be to lease the land to neighboring farmers. Another would be to lease part of the land to residnets of Northampton for personal gardentAg. Programs like this are in successful operation in. many places throughout the United States. With the increasing cost of food such a program should find wide acceptance. We urge a pilot program be tried this spring. The committee recommends that development of the rest of the surplus land proceed slowly in response to perceived needs of the community.. Quite apart from financial limitaions such a policy) is sensible. page 19' J c r ` There- presently exists- a network of roads and trails= which could be opened to the public with a minimum of supervision. This would Dermit walking, animal watching and pi.cnicing in the summer, and snixsshoeing and skiing in the winter. . We propose the following general timetable of incremental development of the surplus land: I~~,'MEDIATE 1) Open trails and erect directional signs 2)pr.ovide for parking area off Burts Pit Road between the state Hospital. and the drumlin (J)i egin evaluation and/or renovation of buildings for possible use NEAR FUTURE 1) Construct footbridge 2) Establish picnic groves 3) establish wildlife refuges 4) Establish administrative HQ and hire workers 5) Develop gardens 6) Develop focal points and entrances 7) Establish new trails -to link areas 8) Develop linkage with the state hospital MORE DISTANT FUTURE 1) Riding stables and trails 2) other permanent structures 3) Educational centers 4) Further parking page 20 u External Impacts One cannot consider the surplus land in. a vacuum. Devel- opmentj beyond the boundaries of thk land have a very real impact on the land. Some of the most significant external impacts have to do with future housing -pat-terns, schools, road improvements, and the possible closing of the state hospital. Nearly all of these specific considerations are related to the quality for i growth in and around Norjttamptono Northampton's present planning document, the Master Plan drafted by Metcalf and Eddy in 1971) sees two alternatives facing Northampton. One is the spectre of uncontrolled growtho-off e sprawl. The othe.r,xwhitkxYanx ,option is one of controlled growth. The Master Plan assumes that the city can dictate and shape much of the development by decisions, laws,and the like. The policy of the city at present appears to favor fhe controlled growth plan. Under the controlled growth plan the area west of the surplus land would be developed as low density res.1.dential property. This would place some additional burden on -the surplus property, in fj increased traffic on Burts Pit Road),and on increased visitors to the land. We can expect that a selling point for housing near the surplus land will be its` pr. oximi.ty. The need for schools in.Northampton is partly related to future growth. even without substantial growth, Northampton is in need of,modp`rn classroom space. The Master Plan suggests two pos- sible school sites on the surplus property, one on Burts Pit Road and another on Chapel Street. Each of these alternatives would page 21 have an appreciable impact on the surplus land, primarilk in the form of increased traffic volumes.;,_ ocation of the schools near the vast` educationalresources of~ the° surplus property " \~wuld be a plus for the students. There-is talk of "improving" some of the'roads near the surplus land. In our research we have found that road improve- ments seldom relievescongestion, and that improvements are senb.~ only for correcting safety hazards. Probably the prime candidate,for improvement would be the sharp ,irve around the drumlin on Burts Pit Road. The committee emphatically opposes tampering with the genral line of this section of the raad or cutting into the drumlin. The intense scale and series of vistas created by the curve and hill here is worthy of preservation. In addition, it causes motorists to slow down „ driving,across the property. Some consideration of the prospects of any kind of growth, le-t---a-l-ane uncontrolled or controlled growth, is called for. The committee seriously doubts that with the present economic and energy climate of the United States and this area as it is that any substantial growth will occur in Northampton. The shortage of mortgage money, constructive policy from Washington) and energy all are.-constraints on growth. We believe that the energy shortage, which will persist for decades, will tend to alter basic patterns of life in the United States and Northampton. These alterations tend to make some of the assumptions dff,tthe Netcllf and Eddy report. obsolete, and suggest the need for a new planning document and assumptions in the future. TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Introduction ...•.oo.o0 1 II. Land Inventory 3 III. Historical and Cultural Background .o....... .5 IV. Economic Considerations 7 V. Public Inputs 8 VI.- Design Criteria •....o...0 10 VII. Proposed Development and Impacts 12 VIII. External Impacts 20 MAPS AND TABLES 1. Vegetation map ..•..o«,,. following page 3 2. Soil Series map o following page 4 and chart 3- 30 Proposed land uses map following page 11 i