Natick Fall Annual Town Meeting night #2: Grass could get greener; Path paved for West Natick redevelopment

Natick Fall Annual Town Meeting on Thursday, Oct. 23 continued with its job as the town’s legislative body, where discussions and votes related to artificial vs. natural grass fields and west Natick redevelopment dominated (see meeting recording on Pegasus).

Grass could get greener

For the second year in a row, Fall Annual Town Meeting contemplated a citizen petition seeking a moratorium on new artificial turf fields in town, though this year’s motion called for an advisory to town departments rather than an actual ban on construction. This year’s article would not affect current artificial turf fields at the Cole Center, Memorial Field, or Kennedy Middle School. Like last year’s motion, this year’s was designed to give the town time to study the issue more thoroughly.

Fall Annual Town Meeting last year voted to refer the article back to the sponsor as well as several town bodies;  this year’s motion under Article 33 passed by a 78-28-3 margin. A motion to refer this year did not pass.

Some wondered why Town Meeting was bothering to discuss the topic at all since the motion merely called for an advisory to town departments, not a mandate (“Symbolism,” one member called it). But the article’s presence on the warrant sparked a healthy discussion lasting for about an hour. While potential dangers of artificial turf are acknowledged by many, there are also arguments that a balanced approach to field resources can provide more people with more opportunities to get outdoors and exercise. Speakers also referred to advances in both artificial and real grass field construction, with Tien Lum noting that in Marblehead they’re getting a much higher than typical 1,200 to 1,800 hours a year on grass fields thanks in part to improved drainage design.

“We’re not going to solve the debate tonight between artificial turf and natural grass, but I think that’s what the moratorium is for,” he said.

Bruce Evans, Select Board chair and a Town Meeting member, said Article 33 could “serve as a catalyst for discussion” within the context of a much broader field use study. It could push the Select Board to form a study committee comprising representatives from town government, sports leagues, and more.

Longtime Natick resident Dr. Roger Luckmann, professor emeritus at UMass Chan Medical School, kicked off the presentation of the motion, passage of which he said would allow discussions following last Fall Annual Town Meeting to continue. One focus of the proponents is to ensure $2.2m for fields in the capital budget plan will be spent based on broad consensus in town over what sorts of fields are best for Natick going forward (Town Administrator Jamie Errickson said there are no new field projects being considered under Natick’s capital program for the next three years).

While the rubber infill, those little pellets that get stuck to your skin and clothes when playing or sitting on artificial turf fields, get much of the attention in field safety discussions, Luckmann focused on the harmful chemicals in the top layer of grass blades. The blades break off and shed microplastics and PFAS, he said. “The fragments of plastic grass become tiny, forever poison pills that do not break down in the environment or the body,” he said.

Tracy Stewart, an elected Medway Water & Sewer Advisory Board member and former member of Tri-County Regional Vocational Technical High School’s School Committee, spoke of that school’s decision to stick with an all-grass campus in building a $286m school. She also said that Natick’s direction under Article 33 would align with safety measures moving through the state’s legislative process.

Town Meeting members also spoke to the health issues, citing artificial turf fields being endocrine disruptors that can negatively affect reproductive systems and separately, sometimes collectors of goose poop. “I think there are a lot of good reasons to not have more artificial turf, and let’s pause and do some of this additional good work and make a very thoughtful decision on what we do next,” said Town Meeting member Victoria Grafflin.

Town Meeting member Dan Sullivan said the turf vs. grass issue raises broader questions about a lack of town investment in playing fields overall, both in terms of building and maintaining them. As is, Natick’s very high levels of participation in youth and high school sports overtaxes existing playing fields and that that can take a heavy toll on the surfaces. As a parent of two teens, he says “I want less screen time and more turf time.” The town has an obligation to build into its capital plans more opportunities for its residents to use fields, he said.

Joe Zaino, president of Natick Youth Football & Cheer as well as a member of the town’s Recreation & Parks Commission, said data shows that the the availability of turf vs. grass fields isn’t even close, with artificial turf winning by a landslide. He said: “A playing surface is a construction material just like any other, like the roof of this building or the carpet we’re standing on, and when we decide whether we should use it, we should weigh it just like any other surface that we’re choosing to construct something on in the town.”

Chris Downe, who introduced himself as president of Natick youth soccer, said a lack of fields in town has numerous ramifications, including the program paying $100,000 a year to use and maintain grass fields at Elm Bank Reservation. Many matches at the recent Fall Classic Tournament needed to be canceled due to rain and a lack of available turf fields, which cost the organization money needed to help pay for equipment and to keep costs low enough for everyone who wants to play to be able to.

One last comment, before the vote, came from Town Meeting member Sara Hanna, who said she spent her career in hazardous waste site assessment and cleanup. She cautioned that we as a society commonly discover that seemingly great inventions years later prove to be dangerous, and that careful thought should be put into whatever the town decides on the subject of artificial vs. grass fields.

Local News: It’s the Playing Field for Democracy. Please consider supporting Natick Report with a tax-deductible donation.

Zoning bylaws

Article 20 provided a nice earthy segue from the turf discussion, updating the wording in a 1974 bylaw regarding the removal of earth products. The updated wording allows for removal or offsite storage of gravel, earth, or similar materials as part of a construction project, but not purely for sale of the materials (as in a gravel pit).

The motion under Article 20 passed by a 68-29-4 count, but not before member Julian Munnich made an appeal to refer the motion (this referral motion failed to pass). He argued for allowing more time for such proposals to make the rounds in town before Town Meeting, and in this case, he said the subject might even have been discussed in the context of Article 33, with the potential for soil to be reused in town for playing fields rather than shipped off to wherever.

The next few zoning articles went through Town Meeting quietly, until Article 24 hit the floor…

Redeveloping West Natick

Motions under Article 24 took up the last hour-plus of the second night’s session, with a focus on redevelopment of the stretch of Natick between the Framingham line on Rte. 135 and the dog park between Fisk Pond and Lake Cochituate past Speen Street, with the West Natick commuter rail station in between. The area is heavily developed already, though rundown in parts, and perhaps includes a perhaps underappreciated amount of open space and wetlands property.

Those in support of zoning changes see an opportunity to revitalize a stretch with a mix of housing, office, and commercial development, along with easier passage for pedestrians and cyclists. Those opposed to an immediate zoning change want to see more public discussion about possible impacts, from traffic to school enrollment. The stretch currently includes a mix of uses from a junkyard to commercial properties like the Roche Bros. grocery store, which is actually in a Single Residential-A zone.

Three motions were introduced under Article 24, and all passed. Two motions to refer motions back to the sponsor got shot down by Town Meeting. Motion A sparked the longest discussion by far after being introduced by Director of Community & Economic Development Amanda Loomis and quickly backed by Town Meeting and Planning Board member Andy Meyer. Loomis documented outreach efforts over the past couple of years with the public, including neighbors and commercial property owners.

The West Central Corridor (WCC) and Limited Commercial zoning districts are designed to support a mix of uses, but in a more organized way than is the case now with the current mishmash of non-conforming lots and uses. The town has been updating its regulation use schedule, but these additional zoning changes would be designed to support more of a coordinated plan for development. Among the town’s visions is for a multi-use path along the side of Rte. 135 where sidewalks now don’t exist. Projects proposed along the route within numerous subdistricts under the revised zoning will be reviewed individually, but also within the context of surrounding developments, Loomis said.

Meyer described the proposed zoning changes as an effort to make sense of what exists and support logical growth that allows higher density in some parts and open space in others. “I don’t see much in here that scares me at all,” he said.

Town Meeting member David Coffey commended the plan as “thoughtful,” but still made a pitch for referring the first motion under Article 24 back to the sponsor, citing concerns about the plan being incomplete and a lack of follow-up communication with the broader community after some initial meetings. He pointed to the many meetings and online polls associated with the relatively small property containing the former Johnson Elementary School vs. the less intense communications process for this much larger swath of land.

Coffey raised concerns that maxing out the newly defined corridor could overwhelm the town’s schools, public safety resources, and transportation infrastructure. “Oh, and please don’t tell me all the people moving there are going to take the commuter rail. They’re not,” he said. He asked fellow Town Meeting members if they would support such redevelopment in their part of town (some later said yes).

Also raising concerns about the proposed zoning changes was Town Meeting member Munnich, who said that the Golden Triangle along Rte. 9 shows the benefits of good redevelopment, such as funding creation of the downtown complex including town hall and the fire station. The West Natick corridor has “tremendous promise” and the proposed zoning changes are a good first step, but he said redevelopment won’t succeed without density targets and controls on the intensity of development.

Town Meeting member Brian Lucenta closed out comments on the motion after further discussion by the body for and against it. He cited the number of multi-tenant residential units that have been built over the past 10 years and urged the town to see how that works before giving the go-ahead for a whole new batch of units and development.

Town Meeting member Cody Jacobs, who said he lives near the corridor in question, was supportive of the plan. He pointed out that generous setbacks are defined, and that site plan reviews are designed to protect against too much density and blocking of views. “I don’t think that [buildings] would be looming over us,” he said, then switched his focus to the economic development and other opportunities such a zoning change could bring. “I’m excited about this,” he said.

Select Board member Rich Sidney, speaking as a Town Meeting member, described the area currently as “a mixed up, messy area of town,” and said the comprehensive zoning changes could boost mixed-use development.

Town Meeting member Ed Doherty also spoke in favor of Article 24, citing the sort of economic redevelopment he saw as a former Needham Town Meeting member and the prospects of the sort of housing people like himself might want to downsize to in town as they get older.

Also supportive was Open Space Advisory Committee Chair Martin Kessel (Town Meeting member Rich spoke on her husband’s behalf, because of a voice issue he’s having).  The Committee has voted to support the article, she said, not necessarily to back increased density but because of the promise to increase the attractiveness of the area for pedestrian connections, and maybe even encourage development of pocket parks.

• Fall Annual Town Meeting night #1: Memorial School funds; Regret over not becoming an architect; capital expenses; Select Board appointment cleanup
• Fall Annual Town Meeting night #3: Community Preservation funds flow to 5 Auburn; Get ready for more downtown signs