NORTHERN NEW ENGLAND NTERCITY RAIL INITIATIVE
INTERAGENCY SCOPING MEETING
Springfield MA
February 9, 2015
1.1
PARTICIPANTS
Amtrak

William Hollister

Jeff Gerlach
Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE)

Alan Anacheka-Nasemann
Central Massachusetts Regional Planning Commission (CMRPC)

Rich Rydant
Central Vermont Regional Planning Commission

Steve Gladczuk
Connecticut Department of Transportation

Tom Maziarz 
Jon Foster CSX

Joe Lisska
Franklin Regional Council of Governments (FRCG)

Linda Dunlavy

Maureen Mullaney
Federal Railroad Administration (FRA)

Trevor Gibson

Kyle Gradinger

Jessie Fernandez-Gatti
Federal Transit Administration (FTA)

Nick Garcia

Kristin Wood
Le Ministere des Transports du Quebec (MTQ)
Interagency Scoping Meeting
1
March 20, 2014

Serge Routhier
Office of State Senator Eric Lesser

Michael Clark
Massachusetts Department of Transportation (Mass DOT)

Ammie Rogers

Tim Doherty
Metropolitan Transportation Authority: Metro-North (MTA)

Fred Nangle
New England Central Railroad (NECR)

Charles Hunter
New Hampshire Department of Transportation (NHDOT)

Shelley Winters
Pioneer Valley Planning Commission (PVPC)

Dana Roscoe
Southern Windsor County Regional Planning Commission

Katharine Otto
Vermont Agency of Transportation (VTrans)

Scott Bascom

Karen Songhurst
Upper Valley Lake Sunapee Regional Planning Commission

Nate Miller
Windham Regional Commission

Matthew Mann
Consulting Team

Matthew Moran (HDR) 
Ron O’Blenis (HDR) 
John Weston (HDR) 
Matthew Duranleau (HDR) 
Eric Smith (FH) 
Astrid Glynn 
Bill Lipfert (LTK) 
Clare Conley Interagency Scoping Meeting
2
March 20, 2014
 Jay Doyle (AECOM)
 Jill Barrett (FH)
 Howard Latimer (FH)
Other Agencies
 Gina Clark (Lake Champlain Regional Chamber of Commerce?)
1.2
INTRODUCTION AND PRESENTATION
Due to inclement weather, the meeting was held via conference call. Ron O’Blenis provided an
introduction and agenda to the meeting. The agenda included:







Introductions Project Background Purpose and Need Initial Build Alternatives
Draft Build Alternative
o Overview
o Methodology
o Service Levels
o Infrastructure Requirements Next Steps Comments and Questions
Ron O’Blenis presented a PowerPoint overview of the Northern New England Intercity Rail
Initiative (NNEIRI); the PowerPoint presentation is attached.
1.3
QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS
Windham Regional Commission (Matt Mann) – How is the previous ARRA funding
contributing to the proposed capital costs? About $50 million was spent in Vermont.
 HDR (Ron O’Blenis) – The proposed improvements are for adding additional trains and
capacity, not just to increase speed. In order to increase capacity we need to add sidings.
The current ARRA investments are for the current capacity and do not contribute to
adding additional capacity.
MTA (Fred Nangle) – Are the alternatives additive? Could you build Alternative 1 as a first
phase for Alternative 2?
Interagency Scoping Meeting
3
March 20, 2014
 HDR (Ron O’Blenis) – No, they are not meant to be additive. These are a range of
reachable alternatives, and all were used to create the draft build alternative. The draft
Build Alternative is the most we want to achieve.
ACOE (Alan Anacheka-Nasemann) – Will the costs be presented in terms of cost per rider?
 HDR (Ron O’Blenis) – We haven’t specifically done a cost per rider analysis yet.
ACOE (Alan Anacheka-Nasemann) – What models are you using to estimate ridership?
 HDR (Ron O’Blenis) – A lot of the ridership models are from AECOM, created for
Amtrak. They are the same models that were used on the Northeast Corridor.
Ministry of Transportation of Québec (MTQ) (Serge Routhier) – Are the capital cost numbers
the same as from the documents sent out in January, 2015?
 HDR (Ron O’Blenis) – No they are not exactly the same. Some of the capital costs were
revised and corrected since then.
MTQ (Serge Routhier) – The service from Montreal to Springfield to Boston should take about
eight hours?
 HDR (Ron O’Blenis) – Yes, that is correct.
MassDOT (Tim Doherty) – For the Boston to Springfield shuttles, the number of trains sound
right, but is it to be determined if the service will be straight shuttles or an extension of Amtrak?
 HDR (Ron O’Blenis) – Currently we are looking at existing service when using the word
“shuttles”. Making assumptions about connections in Springfield and unknown changes
to the Northeast Corridor, we will see how that affects the shuttles. We will make a note
about changing the word “shuttles” to “additional service”.
MassDOT (Tim Doherty) – I don’t think the shuttles work as you’re proposing. It seems like
something years from now to determine when the infrastructure is in place.
 HDR (Ron O’Blenis) – You are correct that it does seem like something to determine
when the infrastructure is in place.
 CTDOT (Jon Foster) – Not just for Boston to New Haven, but we think Springfield is
going to be a very robust market. This is something we will need to get fully coordinated.
 CTDOT (Tom Maziarz) – Added trains versus shuttles is something that can be determined later.
Interagency Scoping Meeting
4
March 20, 2014
Southern Windsor Regional Planning Commission (Katharine Otto) – What do you mean by
“there aren’t too many stations to skip beyond Worcester” when talking about local service
versus express service?
 HDR (Ron O’Blenis) - The only station beyond Worcester is Palmer. Right now we are
only discussing the Boston to Springfield and New Haven segment, not the segment north
of Springfield.
MassDOT (Tim Doherty) – I would recommend changing the wording about the potential for
MassDOT service between Springfield and Brattleboro. It’s between New Haven and Brattleboro
that there is potential for service, not just between Springfield and Brattleboro. Not a lot of
people would want to travel just to Springfield. There has already been a look at potential service
from Brattleboro and Greenfield down to New Haven and New York City. This could be
addressed a little bit more carefully.
 HDR (Ron O’Blenis) –We will talk with you a little bit more about this after the meeting.
The intent is to run trains north of Springfield to potentially Brattleboro, as we see the
potential for ridership travelling south [from Brattleboro, Greenfield, and other stations
north of Springfield].
MassDOT (Tim Doherty) – This study doesn’t talk about the market for ridership south from
Brattleboro that was mentioned in previous studies.
 HDR (Ron O’Blenis) – We will look at going back and referencing the Knowledge
Corridor Study.
Upper Valley Lake Sunapee Regional Planning Commission (Nate Miller) – The study shows
siding between Charlestown and Claremont in New Hampshire. NHDOT is currently working on
a project in this area to move a roadway and railroad with siding. Current plans are to move that
siding to a stretch of rail in Vermont.
 LTK (Bill Lipfert) – The railroad currently plans to coordinate with the Vermont system.
Looking at the potential service for passenger rail, we don’t see the change in siding as
having an effect.
Windham Regional Commission (Matt Mann) – Pertaining to potential stops, at Bellows Falls
trains must currently go at a slow speed through the Bellows Falls tunnel. It makes sense to have
a stop at Bellows Falls since the trains will already be going at a slow speed. Has this stop been
included?
 HDR (Matthew Moran) – The draft build alternative has all trains stopping at all of the
existing Vermonter Amtrak stops, including the one at Bellows Falls.
MassDOT (Tim Doherty) – It would be helpful for the phasing to be shown incrementally.
Interagency Scoping Meeting
5
March 20, 2014
 HDR (Ron O’Blenis) – We still have a ways to go, including another stakeholders
meeting where we can discuss implementation. We still need input on a lot of policy-type
implementation.
 CTDOT (Jon Foster) – We still need to look at how the shuttles will fit in regards to
service in Connecticut. All of that will be incremental.
 HDR (Ron O’Blenis) – When the time comes to make this part clear, we will address the
issue. We currently aren’t that far away from that point. If anyone has any thoughts, feel
free to let us know.
MassDOT (Tim Doherty) – Does it make sense to stop at Montpelier and Waterbury, considering
those stops are less than 20 miles apart? We will need to make a policy decision.
 HDR (Ron O’Blenis) – Yes we will, Vermont will need to look at that as well.
MassDOT (Tim Doherty) – For the capital costs, does this include the cost of the bridge over the
Connecticut River in Connecticut?
 HDR (Ron O’Blenis) – No, the capital costs do not include any improvements on the
New Haven to Springfield segment.
 NECR (Charles Hunter) – The last cost estimate I saw from Amtrak was approximately
$50 million.
ACOE (Alan Anacheka-Nasemann) – Is there any comparative estimate of wetlands impact?
 AECOM (Jay Doyle) – During the alternative analysis we did a comparison of wetland
impact. The results are summarized in the Alternative Analysis Report. Alternative 1 has
the least impact as it does the least amount of double tracking and includes the fewest
miles of new sidings. Alternative 2 and Alternative 3 have the same level of impact as
both alternatives include the same amount of double tracking and siding.
NECR (Charles Hunter) – Did CSX participate in this meeting?

CSX (Joe Lisska) – Yes, Gina Clark and I are here. We have nothing to share candidly
right now. We were interested in hearing about the projects in the Springfield area.
Meeting Concluded
Interagency Scoping Meeting
6
March 20, 2014