Jan 2, 2008
Weston eyes Lachat for cemetery
|
by BRIAN GIOIELE
Cemetery experts believe that the Lachat property could be home to more than just a nature center.
The Cemetery Committee’s report — presented to the Board of Selectmen Dec. 20 — says a four-acre portion of the Lachat property is the “physically and aesthetically most suitable location for a proposed cemetery of the sites reviewed.”
The only problem is the land is jointly owned by the town and the Nature Conservancy. And Selectmen Glenn Major said Dr. Steve Patton, director of the conservancy’s Devil’s Den, has said that type of use is off limits.
“I don’t think the use of the property is inconsistent with the agreements (made in the Lachat deal),” said Mr. Major. “But when asked about this, Steve Patton told me, ‘Fine, use eminent domain.’ Those were his words.”
The Lachat site was among five locations in town analyzed for character and cemetery potential by Grever & Ward Inc. Landscape Architects and Cemetery Planners.
The other sites were:
• Some three acres on the corner of Valley Forge Road and Newtown Turnpike.
• The library site on Norfield Road.
• The Jarvis property where Jarvis House sits on Norfield Road.
• Expansion of the existing Coley Cemetery on Weston Road, just south of Goodhill Road.
“We decided that only one site of town-owned property could be recommended at this point in time, and that is a portion of the Lachat site,” said Cemetery Committee member Richard Wolf.
The committee’s report notes the delicate nature of the site’s ownership, but a cemetery would not be “incompatible with other uses under consideration.”
“The committee is mindful of the practical and political issues which the use of a portion of the Lachat property for this purpose may present,” said the committee’s report. “Nevertheless, the committee strongly believes that this cemetery site should be included as part of the land use master plan now being developed for the Lachat property by the town and the Nature Conservancy.”
When asked the remaining order of preference of sites after the Lachat property, Mr. Wolf said that no such decision was made.
“It is important that we have an order of preference for the other options,” Mr. Major said.
“The committee hasn’t done that,” said Pam Bochinski, committee chairman. “The consultant doesn’t feel that the other sites, other than the possible exception of the Valley Forge site, are good cemetery sites at all.”
The selectmen then asked why the Valley Forge site, which was also found appropriate for a cemetery in the consultant’s report, was not recommended.
The committee said using that site would require land acquisition, since the property in question is part of the Centennial Watershed State Forest, jointly managed by Aquarion Water Co., the state Department of Environmental Protection, and the Nature Conservancy.
Ms. Bochinski said Aquarion officials have stated the company would not allow such a development, meaning eminent domain would again be the only option.
Mr. Major asked for more information about the suitability of the Valley Forge Road site as well as estimates on what the costs would be to use eminent domain to take either the four acres of Lachat land or the three acres of Valley Forge Road property.
“If we in fact have to spend X amount of money, we might determine that it would be more cost-effective for us to investigate purchasing properties that we had not considered purchasing before,” Mr. Major said.
The consultant found the Lachat site “appears to be a very viable choice for a town cemetery” that could hold some 2,000 graves plus substantial facilities for cremated remains.
“The immediate neighborhood is thinly populated, no major commercial or other public facilities are competing for existing infrastructure, the demand for public services is practically nil, and safety conflicts are not apparent,” the report states.
This site would have longevity of 50 years as a cemetery, according to the consultants.
The Valley Forge Road site, located at the corner of Newtown Turnpike, could yield 2.4 acres of interment space, or some 2,200 graves. This means the site would last some 55 years, the report states.
“There are no notable restrictive site limitations other than the small existing cemetery whose limits of occupation are unknown,” the report states. “An archeological study would likely ensue in respect to the existing burial ground to establish its limits and avoid compromising its historical and heritage values.
“Otherwise, there are no neighborhood constraints, businesses or competitive entities to challenge its usage,” the report states.
Ms. Bochinski said that not only land acquisition but also clearing of the property make the Valley Forge Road location unsuitable.
But Mr. Major said using the Lachat site could prove to be the “most complicated regarding deed restrictions.”
However, Mr. Wolf said the committee still felt the Lachat land would be most suitable for a town cemetery.
“We thought there was a possibility of switching. The town could give up the rights to an equivalent piece of land to the Nature Conservancy,” Ms. Bochinski said.
“I specifically asked Steve (Patton). He was very unequivocal: ‘No,’” responded Mr. Major.
Selectman Gayle Weinstein asked about reutilizing Coley Cemetery, an idea the committee members shot down immediately.
“Quite frankly, some committee members have said you can recompose the committee if you decide to look at Coley,” said Mr. Wolf. “We have taken the position that Lachat is the only property that would satisfy the needs of a town cemetery, unless the town purchases other land.”
Ms. Bochinski said expanding Coley Cemetery would yield another 200 to 300 new grave sites, while ultimately destroying the historical character of the old cemetery. She said any new graves would “really be cramming things in there.”
“So the committee’s position is it is Lachat or nothing?” asked Mr. Major.
“Yes,” responded Mr. Wolf.
© Copyright 2008 by Hersam Acorn Newspapers
|
