(SOURCE: By Maggie Cassidy, Valley News Staff Writer)
White River Junction —
Rail enthusiasts and regional planners turned out to a hearing
Wednesday night to advocate for more frequent stops along two passenger
rail routes to connect Boston with Montreal and southern Connecticut,
while several attendees with Claremont ties urged for that city to be
included in the loop.
Transportation officials from Vermont and
Massachusetts were at the Hotel Coolidge hosting the first public
meeting on a Northern New England Intercity Rail Initiative study, which
will examine the feasibility of improved intercity rail service along
the two lines, which both connect in Springfield, Mass.
“Frequency is the key,” Carl Fowler, president
of Rail Travel Adventures and a member of the Vermont Rail Council, said
in an interview following the two-hour hearing. “That’s what they’ve
got to address.”
On top of advocating for greater frequency, many
of the nearly 40 people in attendance urged officials and consultants
to consider regional connectivity as they advance the study and develop a
firm list of goals. In addition to being able to easily move along the
two corridors, attendees said, they also want the train schedules to
work in a way that allows them to pick up connecting trains that travel
further south or head west.
Others, though, were feeling left out of the mix altogether.
Although the initiative is designed to improve
passenger service to Quebec and four New England states — Vermont,
Massachusetts, Connecticut and New Hampshire — there are currently no
New Hampshire stations included as potential stops. The omission of
Claremont, in particular, led to questions from several people in the
crowd, including N.H. Rep. Ray Gagnon, D-Claremont, who asked why
Claremont officials weren’t being consulted about the potential need for
a stop there.
“We’re out of the loop,” he said.
New Hampshire Rail Authority member Jonathan
Edwards, of Hanover, said it would be “a mistake to not give Claremont
the fullest consideration possible,” noting that Springfield, Vt., and
Windsor would also be served by that station. A representative from the
New Hampshire Department of Transportation also advocated for the
Claremont stop.
The two nearest stops north and south of White River Junction included on the list are Montpelier and Brattleboro, Vt.
Ron O’Blenis, senior rail project manager with
HDR Engineering who led the presentation, responded that the list of
potential participating stations was the result of a “preliminary
screening” of stations that would bring in a high volume of passengers
without having to stop the train too frequently that it slows down
service.
He said a stop in Claremont is not off the table and will be researched further as the study progresses.
“Lots of times it’s local groups and initiatives to make it happen that can dictate that,” he said in an interview afterward.
Some questioned why the Boston to White River
Junction leg had to go through Springfield, Mass., which one person
compared to keeping the two s ides
of a triangle and “cutting out the hypotenuse.” Sixty miles of track
between Concord and White River Junction was removed years ago, and New
Hampshire put the brakes on a proposal in 2003 that would have possibly
had it reinstated.
The study is being funded by federal funds
matched by Vermont and Massachusetts. It builds upon projects already
completed or in the works thanks to funding from the American Recovery
and Reinvestment Act in 2009, including upgrades to 220 miles of New
England Central Railroad completed last spring.
Similar upgrades are underway in Massachusetts and Connecticut.
Several attendees noted afterward that they had
expected to see a more substantive study and are looking forward to
September, when another round of hearings will take place and, as Fowler
said, “hopefully there will be more meat on the proposal.”
Christopher Parker, executive director with the
Vermont Rail Action Network, an advocacy group for rail services in
Vermont, said it seemed like people were ready for more substantive
discussions beyond an easy consensus that greater frequency is better
and, instead, take a hard look at train schedules and other details.
Still, he said, he was glad that things were moving forward.
“For us, this is super,” he said. “This is what we want to see happen.”
Written comments about this phase of the study
will be accepted through the end of February, O’Blenis said. More
information is available at http://www.massdot.state.ma.us/Planning/Main/CurrentStudies/NorthernNewEnglandRailStudy.aspx or by calling Scott Bascom, planning coordinator at the Vermont Agency of Transportation, at 802-828-5748.
A follow-up meeting will be held at 7 p.m.
tonight in Springfield, Mass., at the Pioneer Valley Planning Commission
office at 60 Congress St.
