Volunteers and planners push to close 19‑mile Newbury gap on Border to Boston Trail

Dave Reed, a volunteer trail organizer and vice president of medical oncology at Dana Farber, told a regional partners meeting May 28 that the Border to Boston Trail is coming together section by section and urged Newbury and neighboring towns to press ahead to close a roughly 19‑mile gap through Newbury/Byfield/Georgetown.

Reed gave an illustrated overview of the roughly 70‑mile Border to Boston route and highlighted recent construction and art installations along completed sections. He said bids for the Mystic River bike‑and‑pedestrian bridge are due June 24 and that the bridge’s funding is roughly 80% federal and 20% state through MassDOT programs.

“Once it’s built, the residents won’t want it to leave,” Reed said, urging local advocacy and continued coordination with state staff. He added that MassDOT “can’t fund every trail that comes across their desk, but they’ve made the Border to Boston Trail a priority because it connects so many towns.”

Kristen Grubbs, the town’s planning director, briefed the committee on next steps for Newbury’s segment. Grubbs said the town procured consultant Kittleson via a competitive RFQ last year and has an earmark and state match that together leave up to $312,000 available for the feasibility/design phase; she said a consultant contract is roughly $260,000. Grubbs said the feasibility study will examine route options and cost comparisons and that public meetings will be part of the study process.

Grubbs also reported that the town recently accepted a $10,000 grant from the Coastal Trails Coalition to fund right‑of‑way legal steps for the Byfield segment. “The select board accepted that just Tuesday night,” Grubbs said, calling the award “instrumental in moving that component of the work forward.”

Committee members discussed sequencing (building short, visible segments to catalyze further work), right‑of‑way issues, and possible interim fixes such as protected lanes or road‑diet treatments where full off‑road alignment is not yet feasible. Several speakers urged outreach to MassDOT and continued pressure to keep projects on the agency’s list; Reed noted that strong public advocacy helped return a Swampscott project to the state’s “tip” list after it briefly fell off.

Participants raised two administrative constraints: missing consultant documentation needed for MassDOT reimbursements and intertown billing complexity. Grubbs said Massachusetts firm Stantec must submit wetlands and other documentation tied to prior work before the town can be reimbursed, and she described accounting complexities that have slowed reimbursements.

The group also discussed longer‑range obstacles and opportunities. Speakers noted Georgetown’s easement issues for its north segment, and that National Grid ownership of some right‑of‑way north of Georgetown could simplify that section. The committee heard that Georgetown approved $440,000 toward right‑of‑way for a south segment, a development participants said would help momentum.

Grubbs said MassTrails grant awards are expected in late June or July; if Newbury receives a grant, it would provide a separate pot of money to advance Newbury’s segment without routing payments through Georgetown. The committee agreed to follow up by re‑sending a joint letter to MassDOT contacts and to encourage Newbury residents to attend the June 8 regional meeting to demonstrate local support. Members set the next local meeting for June 25.

A motion to approve the minutes from the previous meeting was made and seconded; the chair called for the question and members present voiced their approval. The meeting then adjourned.

Next steps: Kittleson can begin design work once the state signs the town’s standard contract; the committee will follow up with MassDOT contacts on the joint letter, track MassTrails grant awards, and schedule public outreach tied to the feasibility study.