|
Letter: Not NIMBY,
but real issues The To the editor: In a previous
letter "Rail bed will have new life," Charles Martin suggested that
residents near White Pond oppose the proposed rail trail for NIMBY issues. I
would like to set the record straight since the White Pond Advisory
Committee, with input from many nearby residents, has submitted a formal
response to the feasibility study and the June 16 hearing to the Board of
Selectmen, Planning Board, town manager, and the Friends of the Bruce Freeman
Rail Trail. Although a number of issues were discussed in this response, the
rail trail receives the support of WPAC if two main issues are addressed: the
trail is not paved and is thus narrower than proposed in the White Pond area
from The committee
(and many nearby residents who gave us input) strongly believes that the
rural areas of the town through which the rail trail traverses, including the
White Pond area in which we have a say, should not be paved and thus can be
narrower than it otherwise needs to be. We found a state Senate report on
rail trails (http://www.mass.gov/legis/senate/railtrail.htm)
that discussed surface options and stated that stone dust surfaces are wheel
chair accessible and also are much cheaper to build and maintain. They also
serve to reduce the speed of traffic. We think this is appropriate in keeping
with the aesthetic values of rural The second
issue is people management of the White Pond area. This area is now being
abused and the proposed rail trail will only potentially increase this
problem if a viable people management plan is not implemented. A split rail
fence and signs as presented at the hearing is just not a viable plan. We would be
willing to help formulate such a plan, as we have been wanting one since
before my stint as WPAC chairman, as this has been an ongoing problem for
many years. Ken
Miller Chairman White Pond
Advisory Committee |