MASSACHUSETTS DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION – OFFICE OF
TRANSPORTATION PLANNING
STATE FREIGHT AND RAIL PLAN
WESTERN REGION MEETING NOTES
LOCATION OF MEETING:
Kittredge Center, Holyoke Community College
303 Homestead Avenue, Holyoke
DATE/TIME OF MEETING:
March 23, 2010, 2 p.m.
MEETING ATTENDANCE:
Public attendees who signed in:
Michael Rennicke, Pioneer Valley Railroad
Brian Gallagher, AMTRAK
Dana Roscoe, Pioneer Valley Planning Commission
Kevin Chittenden, AMTRAK
Nicole Rohan, Pioneer Valley Transit Association
Mark Marasco, Maple Leaf
Joseph LaPlante, Town of West Springfield
Jay Green, City of North Adams
James Lyons, West Springfield Dept.. of Public Works Jay Ehle, Mass Highway Region 2
Matthew Sokop, Holyoke Dept. of Public Works
Mark Cressotti, City of Westfield
Dave Daskal, Berkshire Regional Planning Comm.
David Taillow, Clough, Harbour Assoc.
Maureen Mullaney, Franklin Regional Council of Govt. JonathanTucker, Town of Amherst
Richard Werbiskis, West Springfield Department of Planning
Jim Czach, West Springfield Department of Public Works
MassDOT Office of Transportation Staff:
Ned Codd, Office of Transportation Planning, Study Project Manager
Paul Nelson, Office of Transportation Planning
Timothy Doherty, Office of Transportation Planning
Consultant Team:
Ronald O’Blenis, HDR, Project Manager
Daniel Hodge, HDR
Jill Barrett, Fitzgerald & Halliday
Joshua Weiss, Fitzgerald & Halliday
HANDOUTS: Summary of highlights of the draft Massachusetts State Freight and Rail
Plan
PURPOSE/SUBJECT: This was one of four regional public stakeholder meetings that
were held in March and April 2010 to provide information on the Massachusetts Freight
and Rail Plans that were developed and to receive input from stakeholders about key
recommendations and findings.
BACKGROUND: The MassDOT Office of Transportation Planning conducted a
comprehensive evaluation of the Commonwealth’s freight and rail transportation
1
systems, their operations, and effects on economic development and quality of life. The
evaluation concluded with the publication of two separate documents - a State Freight
Plan that is multi-modal (includes air, rail, truck and maritime transport) and intermodal
(transportation by more than one mode, e.g. truck and rail) in its scope, analysis, and
recommendations. The second is a comprehensive State Rail Plan that includes a detailed
analysis of all rail infrastructure and operations, both freight and passenger. The study
began in the spring of 2008 and will conclude in the spring of 2010.
Welcome and Introductions
Ned Codd, MassDOT project manager of the Mass Freight & Rail Plan welcomed
attendees. He said the purpose of the meeting was to present draft findings, hear what the
public had to say and incorporate public comments into the final plan. Ned noted there
were really two closely related plans that were developed – a multimodal freight plan
(includes air, rail, truck and maritime transport) and a rail plan that included both freight
and passenger rail. The state needs to have a State Rail Plan in place to utilize federal
funding.
The Mass Freight & Rail Plan examined the condition of infrastructure, trends, policies,
issues, and opportunities for improvement. The cost/benefits of five investment scenarios
were assessed and recommendations were made in the area of land use policies, the
regulatory environment and funding and financing. Ned Codd said cost/benefits had to be
considered in relation to other state policies such as reducing emissions and smart
growth. He also said future freight planning should not exclusively rely on highway
expansion. The western region of the state is unique in that freight distribution areas are
clustered in primarily in one area – Springfield/West Springfield.
Mr. Ronald O’Blenis, Project Manager for the HDR consultant team, made a presentation
that covered the topics of freight movement and trends, truck freight, maritime ports,
airports, freight rail and passenger rail, cost/benefit analysis, study findings and
recommendations. He noted a copy of each regional presentation would be posted on the
study website: www.massfreightandrailplan.com.
Summary of Public Comment and Questions
[Please note questions or comments made by members of the public are in italics.
Responses to the questions were made by Ron O’Blenis and Ned Codd unless otherwise
noted. ]
Did the analysis of the five scenarios include connections to ports beyond Massachusetts,
e.g. New Haven and New London, CT?
Yes, our analyses looked beyond the borders Massachusetts. We will be sure to stress this
fact in the final report and will include figures showing the regional connections outside
of Massachusetts.
Will details of the plan be specified?
2
Yes, the final report will be comprehensive and likely to be available within 2-3 months.
In West Springfield we are grappling with CSX’s plans to expand the use of the freight
yard by 50%. We’re concerned about how to get trucks in and out; it would be nice to
have direct access to the highway. We have three highways a few miles away but to get
there trucks have to travel a couple of miles, including travel through historic downtown
of West Springfield. We need road improvements, such as widening to help with turning
movements, now.
What you are talking about is the “last mile” issue. Many times it is forgotten but it is not
inconsequential. The importance of this plan is that the administration has become more
sensitive to the needs of freight. This plan is critical to raising this issue and to inform the
MPO process on freight issues since the vast majority of projects are funded through the
MPO. We want to raise awareness and work with the MPOs to understand the importance
of freight.
What makes sense for MPOs to include in our plans?
We have identified zoning and opportunities to preserve industrial areas that support rail.
Projects that improve the “last mile” connection are the kind of project that regional
agencies can work on. Paul Nelson of MassDOT offered to work with MPOs in
development of the freight chapters in their Regional Transportation Plans.
To what extent do you understand the important connection between passenger and
freight rail? In Europe there is a more hybrid system that accommodates both. Here it
seems that passenger rail gives up a greater share to freight.
There are a lot of lines in the country that accommodate both. We’re looking for ways to
support using lines efficiently to the greatest extent possible.
I support looking at things on a regional basis, connections with other states that may not
directly operate in Massachusetts.
The analysis done for the plan has taken other states into account. Three examples of
regional planning efforts underway are: 1) Coordination between Connecticut,
Massachusetts, and Vermont on the Knowledge Corridor project in Western
Massachusetts, 2) CSX has a significant amount of traffic outside the state, and 3) Every
New England state benefits from CTDOT work on Interstate 84, 95 and 91.
Did the plan look at shared access of active rail corridors with bike paths? It’s been done
successfully in other parts of the country. This is an area that should be addressed and
clarified in the plan, even if sharing will not happen.
This is a real challenge as most of the right-of-way (ROW) approximately 82 feet wide
which is very tight for shared use, unlike the in other parts of the country. In western
Massachusetts the majority of ROW is privately owned and shared use would present a
huge liability. Providing an adequate width for shared use also tends to have impacts on
adjacent wetlands. We do have a couple of places in the state where former ROW
parallels an active bike path, but these are two distinctly owned properties.
3
Is there any timetable for when CSX will complete its double stack improvements? There
seem to be impacts to the secondary road system.
Mike Rennicke of Pioneer Valley Railroad responded that the increased activity at the
CSX intermodal yards in West Springfield and Worcester has been driven more by
reduced activity at Beacon Park Yard in Boston. This freight volume already exists and
will be pushed to the other facilities. The activity is not driven by the reconstruction of
the bridges to accommodate the double stacked trains.
Passenger rail enhancement does not seem explicit in this plan.
Passenger rail is included in the State Rail Plan. A separate meeting on the rail plan will
be held in the coming weeks.
The perspective of this plan disproportionately supports rail but some of our regions are
without a lot of rail so we have to concentrate on the truck side. Are there ways to
mitigate the impact of trucks as they are often in places they should not be, such as using
undersized facilities?
The Plan focuses on investments and policies to shift freight from trucking to other
modes such as rail. The analyses have shown that this will help slow the growth of trucks
on the highway network, reducing emissions and roadway maintenance costs. Trucking
is vital for providing the “last mile” delivery of goods, but it is important to minimize the
impact of trucking on residential and historical areas whenever possible. The plan will
also include more detail on the appropriate role for trucking activity in the freight system.
4