HomeMy Public PortalAbout20230719 - Trail Coordination and Management Committee - Agenda PacketTOWN OF HOPKINTON
TRAIL COORDINATION AND MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE
Draft Minutes – 6/21/2023/7:30-9:00
HCAM offices Lower Level 77 Main Street and Google Meet (Remote) Meeting
Hopkinton, MA
Attendees (TCMC): Chuck Dauchy, Fran DeYoung, Linda Chuss, Peter LaGoy
Select Board: Amy Ritterbusch, Irfan Nasrullah (remote, partial?), Muriel Kramer, Shahidul
Mannan (remote)
Public Guests who spoke: Bob Snyder, Jane Moran, Steve Frohbiether
1. Introduction, public comment, and address June 14, 2023 minutes.
a. Peter stated it’s being recorded and that it’s a joint meeting with the Select
Board.
b. Public comments:
i. Jane Moran - read a statement (see the full statement here -
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1_GcqfsNEBH0xiE7KD3Mr38ybR5r
0rO--
/edit?usp=drive_link&ouid=115949127491216152837&rtpof=true&sd=tr
ue) about numerous topics including engineering studies for segment 1,
Legacy Farms abutter notifications, the Gorman property, Hayden Rowe
route status, accessibility, surfaces, grant money, and more.
She also asked what TCMC and the Trails Club has done about the
Western Alternative study.
Peter replied that as was reported at the previous meeting (to Bob
Snyder from UCTC), there were some initial talks with key landowners,
but no more since funds are not available until July 1, 2023. RE: Gorman,
TCMC talked with a realtor because they have more experience reaching
out. There is an alternative to the alternative that doesn’t require the
Gorman property by crossing Daniel Rd, but Peter said that he had told
concerned abutters that he would not pursue that route.
ii. Bob Snyder - asked if TCMC needs approval from all landowners to
proceed using the CPC monies for the western route. Peter replied that
TCMC can proceed with the portions of the western route options where
landowners have already agreed.
c. Minutes from 6/14/23 meeting were unanimously approved. They were mailed
to Muriel because she was at the meeting, which was posted as a Select Board
meeting as well.
2. Review of hikes for kids - Walk on 6/17 behind Center School. Linda reported it was
disappointing because only 2 kids were there, though Chuck, Ken Parker, Krisanne,
TCMC June 21, 2023 Meeting Minutes - 1
Linda, and Peter came. What else to do? Threats of rain, conflict with Timlin race, end of
school year busy time were some reasons. Linda said we’ll work on one or two groups at
a time (even though open to all) - Krisanne will focus on that going forward. Next
meeting, Linda and Krisanne will report back on next steps.
Peter reported that Nathan, an experienced trail builder, can help sort out how to
create a trail on the rocky slope behind Center School that includes a “cave” , which kids
will enjoy.
3. Trails Committee Charge - review of draft Charge and discussion of modifications.
Proposal was not available at the meeting
a. See:
Current, approved charge (from 2019):
https://drive.google.com/file/d/15PApKDLo8r-
2riLMhwtcSVhzzZioIHTy/view?usp=drive_link
Charge with Chuck Dauchy’s feedback from months ago when first looking at this
topic: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1QWHnrouJSTbg3cL9-
uX7OYzL3PjlLLJM/edit?usp=drive_link
Jeanine LeBlanc’s one page proposed charge:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1FU4nB7oGDSohnSUj1YBxHZlC5Lmm9kw
Q/edit?usp=drive_link
Peter’s 6/15/23 draft proposal for a new charge:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1DzWBb-
3bMZuni8H9QBiHYLvzGBde584U/edit?usp=drive_link&ouid=1159491274912161
52837&rtpof=true&sd=true
TCMC has provided a comparison document showing the changes between the
original approved charge and the 6/15/23 proposed charge:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/19576huB2atX9Xe_cT8TuTdyzAA0LtjmN/
edit?usp=drive_link&ouid=115949127491216152837&rtpof=true&sd=true
Peter will update the proposed charge based on feedback from this meeting and
any other input. At that point, a new comparison document will be provided
along with comments in the document about the changes.
b. Comments, questions, and discussions about the proposed changes to the
charge:
i. Fran - has the purpose changed? Peter - yes.
ii. Chuck concurs with many changes.
iii. Peter explained that new charge proposal has 7 at large/regular members
focused on trails rather than 4 at large/3 appointed liaisons as is now
iv. Peter’s proposed charge describes a relationship between the new Trails
Committee (was TCMC) and a proposed Upper Charles Building
Committee (replacing the existing UCTC). It would involve milestones for
the UCT that both the TC and UCBC meet and vote on the UCT surfaces,
TCMC June 21, 2023 Meeting Minutes - 2
routes, [note that budget and schedule are also listed in the document].
The votes would require ⅔ majority from the combined two committees.
v. Fran asks if the votes are binding or are recommendations to the Select
Board? Peter replies that everything is a recommendation to the Select
Board for their approval decision.
vi. Peter added that one supporting reason for this proposal is that funding
requests to the state for trails in town should be coordinated within the
town, based on a previous experience where separate committee
requests didn’t result in what may have been the best priority for the
town.
vii. The proposal includes TC looking at trail connections to other towns too,
like an expected trail coming in from Westboro and Southborough.
viii. Fran asks if there is a responsibility for an overall strategy, approach at
the aggregate level that aligns with the town master plan, growth study,
that should be shared with the Select Board and Planning Board? The
vision, the 10,000 foot view? Peter replies that it is not in here. Linda said
she thinks that is useful. Muriel commented that an overall global
strategy would be helpful, to help with guiding tough decisions. Fran
suggests a unified north star is needed.
ix. Muriel talked about different guidance for different kinds of trails,
perhaps trails that don’t connect versus those that do? Linda suggests a
single global plan to address all. Chuck refers to the segments of the UCT
as perhaps serving both a local neighborhood purpose and part of a
through route. Peter refers to models in other towns we can look at in
terms of combining trails into a network. He describes UCT as one slightly
different trail, e.g. needing more handicap accessibility than other trails,
higher end.
x. Peter concurs with having a vision statement. Muriel recommends we
have a shared nomenclature - what makes the trails different, etc to help
with communication, even if not a single vision.
xi. Linda notes we already work with other trails - HALT, Sudbury Valley -
there is a big network of state trails in town. Even though we don’t
control those trails, the overall plan should take those into account. E.g.
no need to build a town trail right next to an existing state trail. Muriel
notes uses like horseback riding should be considered.
xii. Peter says we look at making sure all corners of town are served by trails
when deciding on project priorities. Putting all this on paper makes
sense.
xiii. Peter noted that annual tasks (on the last page of the charge are 2024
tasks) would be shared with the select board annually.
xiv. Muriel noted the dog leash “goal” was a tough one. See more discussion
in agenda item 5.
xv. Amy asked about what changed. TC will provide a version with what
changed between the existing charge and the proposed charge.
TCMC June 21, 2023 Meeting Minutes - 3
Numbering of 6.1 - Peter believes it is correct. Peter noted we are adding
a key new responsibility that TC guides the building of trails.
xvi. UCT would be turned over to TC once the trail is complete, for
maintenance.
xvii. Peter noted the proposed charge indicates of the 7 members, 1 (or 2)
would also serve on the UCBC.
xviii. Linda asked how the select board ensures applicants match the
expectations. Amy noted it’s more general than say the Historic District
Commission. Peter said the primary priority should be trails
passion/experience. The Select Board said the page of charge with the
qualifications is included in the packet when they make appointments to
compare the candidates to it. Peter said we want new blood on TC, not
necessarily members who look good on paper. Amy says it’s subjective
because it’s general. She added that if it’s uncontested, the person would
be appointed even if they didn’t meet the qualifications. Muriel said they
also consider the resumes.
xix. Members of TC would be assigned to liaison to other relevant
committees, e.g. a TC member would attend 2 Con. Comm. meetings
each year and reach out to them if there is something coming up. Linda
notes that 2 meetings a year for 7 members works.
xx. As for the 2024 goals, Peter noted the Select Board should be made
aware. Muriel noted liaisons should reach out, e.g. to her when TC has
topics. There’s no need to send minutes to Muriel, unless there’s
something of note.
xxi. Peter said that minutes have been sent to Connor but Peter isn’t sure
where they are located. The search feature is being worked on, notes
Muriel. TC should submit them to Town Clerk email.
xxii. Peter called out item 4 in the 2024 tasks about creating guidance
documents - we’d pull a report together and that’s a task we’d contract
out. Chuck notes we’ve developed guidelines with the other relevant
groups over the past few years and we’re ready to make those more
official.
xxiii. Linda notes that a 2024 task to be added is outreach, especially the web
site. We need help from IT especially to fix up the broken pages. Muriel
notes we can reach out to her. Amy notes that we can use Google site for
the committee like they did on Historic District. TC will consider doing
that. Fran suggests a summer intern could do that.
xxiv. Amy suggested adding liaisons to groups particularly Youth Commission,
Council on Aging, Disability. Linda asked if that would be in their charter
or ours. Peter wondered if the Select Board should make those
suggestions to committees. Muriel said we should have a contact in
relevant groups and reach out when relevant. Linda noted the charge
indicates liaisons can be added.
TCMC June 21, 2023 Meeting Minutes - 4
xxv. [Noted after the meeting - the new charge should use the term Select
Board instead of the old charge’s terminology of Selectmen.]
4. Charge of the Upper Charles Trail Committee and its relationship to the Trails
Committee. The Select Board asked for our thoughts, as the other town trail
committee, on the issue with and charge of the Upper Charles Trail Committee and
ways to move forward. See the draft proposal Peter provided for an Upper Charles
Building Committee at https://docs.google.com/document/d/1yZUnFKn-
qsDALxYKXYLNVYa0z8rfn3Te/edit?usp=drive_link\
a. There is one Trails Committee and the Upper Charles committee is about
building that trail.
b. There is some overlap between the UCBC and the TC charge e.g. voting on the
key milestones among the two committees (e.g. expenditures - first paragraph
on the second page)
c. UCBC proposal recommends 7 at large members, 1 or 2 who are also members
of TC. Members should have trails experience and on multiple types of trails and
shared use paths.
d. Linda summarized this proposal was in response to Muriel commenting last
week they don’t know how they’ll move forward and that the Town Meeting
article hadn’t provided details. Peter added it tries to address known issues from
the past. Muriel advised we update it and finalize it as a committee and formally
submit it to the Select Board. Peter noted we will annotate it with the rationale.
e. Linda notes that the Upper Charles Trail is a project, whereas the Trails
Committee doesn’t have an end date.
f. This proposed charge (and all documents) will be made available with the
minutes.
g. Jane asked if the Select Board will review all of this with both the TC and the
UCTC. Muriel said the process is the survey and any input people want to
provide.
h. Linda noted that serial, separate communication doesn’t allow discussion and
wondered if a forum with both groups and the select board could get together.
Jane noted that the Select Board had asked Norman to facilitate a meeting like
that. Muriel said we should include that in our feedback. Linda notes that a joint
meeting would be time consuming, but would save time relative to how much
it’s taking this way. Jane said the process should take the time to do it right.
Linda clarified her comment about a joint session would be about the charge.
Jane stated she believes the UCTC budget is different from TC. Linda noted that
an outside voice, like TC, could address things like the topic raised last week of
“do we a pursue a grant to get the funds even if the project doesn’t serve us that
well?”.
5. Dog on the trails. Deferred due to lack of time, but the topic came up at two other
points in the meeting and those comments are consolidated here.
TCMC June 21, 2023 Meeting Minutes - 5
a. Peter said we want a campaign because it may be more our problem than
anyone’s. Linda noted the reason we would address this is people aren’t using
our trails because of this. She added we should work with other groups on it;
Peter suggests TC lead that charge. Fran asked if the Select Board would want us
to take this on; he thinks it’s not under our purview. Peter replied that because
dogs are using the trails and causing issues, we should look at it. Linda noted we
talked about ideas and will be talking more about it. Muriel says it should not be
part of the charge or goals, just a campaign.
b. Peter says we would hold public forums and we may be able to do something to
improve things. E.g. a certain day on a certain trail might be dog free (e.g. like no
hunting on Sundays) - safe days, or dog free trails. Jane suggested we look at
other town’s approaches, like notifying the Town Clerk about offenders who can
levy additional fees. Linda said we have and will discuss that. Shahidul had no
further comments.
c. Peter said the TC would provide education and awareness. Peter noted that a
safe day or trail by itself would increase awareness, e.g. with a QR code that
explains it. Steve Frohbieter noted that two conservation areas in town now
don’t allow dogs: Waseeka and Whitehall Woods.
d. Peter noted a public forum could help too.
e. Muriel said the opposite of a dog free day might be a good idea - have a day at a
trail or some trails where dogs can be off leash. Chuck and Peter noted Pratt
Farm might be a good spot for that.
f. Fran said it’s tough, might not what we should take on now. Peter agreed it’s
complicated and not low hanging fruit but starting it is useful. Chuck noted it
would be ongoing.
g. The above input was added to the running document about this topic at
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1JLcx06ucA70brPjXFdZhVLFSnX77cSgdL05
m0a5i2As/edit?usp=sharing
6. Trail Volunteer July workday project on July 1 from 9-12. Rock moving at Brook Hollow
or Rock work and bench cutting at Greenwood have been suggested as options. Peter
added and recommended Echo Trail rocks could be moved to make more parking and a
fence that was knocked down could be repaired. Chuck added that invasive removal at
Echo would be useful. Linda added Brook Hollow isn’t urgent. The committee
unanimously voted to approve Echo Trail for the July workday.
7. Next meeting in mid July:
a. TC charge
b. UCBC charge
c. Dogs - start the process (discussion that happened here is captured in agenda
item 5)
d. Next kids walk
e. Update on web site corrections and taking on our own web site update