Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Trail Connection topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Parents propose improved Bruce Freeman Rail Trail connection to Concord Middle School; committee asks for design details and funding plan
Summary
A CMS PTG representative presented options to improve pedestrian and bike access between the Bruce Freeman Rail Trail and Concord Middle School, citing safety and erosion concerns; the committee asked for cost estimates, endorsements, ADA impact analysis and recommended next steps, including possibly assigning the project to a subcommittee or outside groups to pursue design and funding.
Shelly Carlin, co-lead of the Concord Middle School PTG sustainability committee, presented proposed options to improve the connection between the Bruce Freeman Rail Trail and Concord Middle School, describing multiple informal paths, erosion and safety concerns and phased or holistic design approaches.
Carlin showed photos of informal “goat path” routes, pointed to near-miss incidents involving children and cars, and said improved paths would increase safety, access and active transportation. She outlined two phasing options (volunteer-led first phase, professional design for a later phase) and a holistic build option, and cited White Pond and the Power Mill Road access point as local comparators. Carlin said Friends of the Bruce Freeman Rail Trail, the Concord Transportation Advisory Committee and the Climate Action Committee had provided oral endorsements and that groups such as the Community Preservation Committee and Friends of the BFRT were potential grant partners.
Committee members asked whether formal letters of support exist and requested specific meeting references where endorsements were made. Members also asked for updated construction-cost estimates (the White Pond example cited 2018 numbers that may be outdated), ADA and wetlands impact analysis, and clarity on who would own and manage the project. Several members suggested faster progress if an outside non-profit or a school-committee subcommittee took ownership and handled initial fundraising or design work, while others preferred the committee remain involved during design to ensure campus integration.
The committee did not vote on the project; members agreed to gather more information, request formal support letters or meeting references, and return the item to a future agenda. The campus completion committee and Community Preservation Committee were named among groups that could participate in design funding discussions, and staff noted that CPC application deadlines and capital-planning cycles will affect timing.
No final costs, construction schedule or formal grant commitments were approved at the meeting; committee members stressed ADA compliance and environmental constraints would be essential elements of any future design.
