COCHITUATE RAIL TRAIL TASK FORCE
DRAFT MINUTES OF MEETING
FEBRUARY 20, 2008
Members present: A. Richard Miller, Karla Sangrey, Josh Ostroff, Dave Camacho
Alternate Members present: Peter Henry, Matt Daniels, Harry Newell
Advisors/visitors present: Jill Miller
Chair Karla Sangrey called the meeting to order at 7:08 and asked that Josh Ostroff run the meeting because she was not feeling well. Note that Item 3, the issue of Task Force Clerk was acted upon as the first item because we needed a secretary to record the minutes.
1) Minutes of January 16th
Reviewed minutes from January 16, 2008; several spelling corrections and other language refinements were offered and accepted. Several issues were not resolved, and final approval of the minutes was postponed until the next meeting.
2) 2007 Annual Report
Copies of the 2007 CRT Task Force Insert for Annual Report prepared by Karla were circulated at the meeting. Josh expected the Annual Report to be available soon.
3) Task Force Clerk
Josh nominated Matt Daniels to be the CRT Task Force Clerk. Karla seconded the nomination. Matt accepted the nomination at least for the first half of the 2008 calendar year. Matt was approved unanimously as Clerk.
4) CSX update
A) The RFQ for appraisal is substantially complete but has not yet been released. CRT Task Force members will be advised when the RFQ goes out. Josh mentioned that the spurs near the Mall are in the name of Penn Central. The Johnson Wax ‘spur’ appears to be an easement.
B) The culvert is still in need of repair.
C) Dick asks if other draft CSX reports are available for our review, reports such as the RFQ for appraisal and title work. Dick would like to know whether we will have the chance to offer our input into the creation of documents related to the CRT.
5) Warrant Article
FinCom will want a chance to review what we are going to present at the April 8th Town Meeting. Josh suggests that he work with Karla to develop those 10 minutes of presentation that Karla will present at the Town Meeting. Josh suggests that we take the 10 minutes to present key information about the funding and scope of CRT design, acquisition and task force. Report should include an overview of the project, a summary of what we have learned, and what is our plan moving forward.
Dick mentioned that money dedicated for rail trail projects by the state transportation department is often diverted back into general transportation funding.
6) Project Need Form (PNF)
Pat Reffett and Josh are pulling together the PNF which is due Friday, February 22nd. The CRT Task Force reviewed an 8 ½ by 11 copy of the GIS map that had been prepared as an attachment to the PNF. Because the PNF was due in two days, there was really no further opportunity for comment and revision to the map, but a few suggestions were made. Dick brought CSX track maps to support Karla’s search for better mile marker references.
7) Outreach
A) Josh thanked Harry for his work on the Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) and recommended splitting the FAQs into two sections. One section would pertain to rail trails in general, and the other section would pertain to information specific to the Natick initiative.
B) The spring public meeting is scheduled for May 8th. Josh has received some feedback about not unduly raising the expectations of the public. Pat Reffett had offered input that a public meeting was a good venue for public outreach and a necessary step in the design process. Josh sees this meeting as a key part of the process of public projects. He offered the proposed Senior Center as an analogy. In that project, there are 3 years and $250,000 budgeted to get a design, something that voters can understand and then approve. Spirited debate followed about the content and format that the meeting should take and
include the following ideas:
1) Karla – are there dollars for a conceptual design?
2) Dave – are we addressing the multi-use option?
3) Dick – discussion of trail surface is premature given a public that does not yet understand the differences between surfaces
4) Dick sees overall presentation as necessary before the public would be ready to discuss details of trail design
5) Peter sees the abutters as a well-educated group, and the debate moved back and forth about whether the meeting should be designed to educate public first or to solicit public opinion and feedback.
6) Dick asked whether we had more details for Craig Della Pena, who has saved the date for presenting to the Town.
7) The meeting format was discussed with some support for an initial, perhaps 20 or 30-minute presentation by Craig Della Pena followed by time for refreshments and public circulation around the hall where they would be able to learn about different aspects of the proposed rail trail. After this period of public education on the issues, the meeting would revert to a question and answer format where the public could share concerns and seek clarification. The Natick 360 format was floated as a structure that might gather feedback on various rail trail issues.
8) Josh had prepared draft #3 for the CRT Community Forum. The draft included a table of proposed topics for public input. The topics were debated without consensus. Josh suggested that that table be refined and reorganized before further discussion.
8) Update on Other Regional Issues
Dick mentioned that in working with the Boston Metropolitan Area Planning Council (MAPC), money is often appropriated but is never delivered to rail trail projects.
9) Future meeting dates: March 19th is set as the next meeting date with April 16th proposed as the one after that.
10) Other Business.
John Moran is no longer the FinCom appointee to this CRT Task Force, but has been replaced by Tony Lista.
11) Motion to adjourn by Karla, seconded by Dave, voted unanimously. Meeting was adjourned at 9:04 p.m.
Respectfully submitted by Matt Daniels and Karla Sangrey
| 
