Commuter Rail to New Hampshire?

[F-Line to Dudley]

New Hampshire panel axes funding for regional commuter rail

(The Center Square) – The New Hampshire Executive Council has nixed a plan to connect Boston's commuter rail system to the Granite State, which some have described as a "boondoggle"

www.thecentersquare.com

Executive Council votes down an extension on the ongoing Commuter Rail study in an attempt to turf it. Study's currently at >70% completion; no word on what will come of it now.

Attention-span-of-a-gnat state politics strikes again.

 

[bigeman312]

He said the work is about 72% complete, with a remaining balance in the contract of more than $1.5 million, all of which is federally funded.

I want to make sure I'm understanding this correctly. They voted down completing something that's almost complete and isn't even being funded with NH money, in the name of saving NH money, even though no NH money is being spent on what was cancelled?

 

[F-Line to Dudley]

More on this: https://www.masstransitmag.com/rail/news/21290968/nh-commuter-rail-study-goes-off-the-tracks

The reason for the study requested extension is that the site + parking lot for the South Nashua station at Pheasant Lane Mall came available when the Sears anchor store in the Mall closed, and they were waiting to see if the city was going to scoop it up (they said they would). They're now going to dump the unfinished study results on the state, and that'll inform whether it gets put out to Legislative action. Of course, that action could be in 2024 and who knows what short attention-span theatre the Legislature will be engaging in then. So it's not over yet, but the Council did land a very bad wound on it.

Theoretically NH doesn't have to give the feds back any money if the remainder is spent on transit for the same corridor...so the monies could get shoved over to subsidy for the Concord-Boston bus operators in the interim. It's definitely going to chill the feds on shoveling them any more money, so...free-dumb has a price for the state that doesn't ever want to pay for anything itself.

NH Dems' messaging on this suggests they are itching for revenge on the GOP members who tanked it, and that it will be an election year issue going forward.


As for Massachusetts...time to circle the wagons around the fallback plan: Nashua poke with City of Nashua's go-it-alone support. Might mean double-track ends at the border, but if Nashua secures the station site for South Nashua (they already have Crown St. in the bag) it wouldn't take very much money to get full-schedule service established to S. Nashua + Crown St. with the all-critical (because Lowell Line badly needs it) layover yard set up inside the Nashua freight yard. That might be as far as it goes for a generation because of the politics up there being so fucked, but MA would check off all boxes for the in-district constituency if they managed to get as far as Nashua.

 

[themissinglink]

As for Massachusetts...time to circle the wagons around the fallback plan: Nashua poke with City of Nashua's go-it-alone support. Might mean double-track ends at the border, but if Nashua secures the station site for South Nashua (they already have Crown St. in the bag) it wouldn't take very much money to get full-schedule service established to S. Nashua + Crown St. with the all-critical (because Lowell Line badly needs it) layover yard set up inside the Nashua freight yard.

I hope this is what actually ends up happening sometime soon. The naysayers at the NH State Legislature seemingly won't ever come around to this project, which is a real shame.

 

[F-Line to Dudley]

I hope this is what actually ends up happening sometime soon. The naysayers at the NH State Legislature seemingly wont ever come around to this project, which is a real shame.

It's not the naysayers necessarily. It's the volatility. Party control in NH is so evenly split and the Legislature so large that control flips multiple times per decade. When it takes 2-4 election cycles to implement an ambitious project, you simply can't do it when chaos erupts every 2 years. Widening I-93 might be the last major thing they do infrastructure-wise for the next 25 years at the rate their decision-making has been gridlocked. Shit, they can't even agree amongst themselves to renumber their Interstate exits...and that's federal law breathing down their necks to get it done already!

Maybe if the Nashua poke gets done the folks up in Manchester and Concord will get a little more jealous and place some electoral pressure on it, but that's still going to chew up 20 years because the GOP has signaled that they're going to go full-nihilist on this regardless of popular sentiment. I really think for MA it's time to pivot to just getting the layover they need, the 2 extra MA stations, and the S. Nashua border siphon for the park-and-riders...and wash their hands of the rest. Which they at least have a willing partner for in City of Nashua and CSX. Then take the first opportunity to erect road tolls at the border because that's the last help we're ever going to get from Third-world New England.

 

[stick n move]

Then take the first opportunity to erect road tolls at the border because that's the last help we're ever going to get from Third-world New England.

So much this. This should be the last straw. If they want to use our roads to get to our high paying jobs but are going to go out of their way to block mitigation measures that would take cars off the road then they need to pay for that decision. Bad decisions should have consequences. If they cant help us by literally doing nothing and just letting the line happen, then we cant help you either. They basically said fuck you were going use your roads and jobs and opportunity, pay nothing towards maintaining it, and actually go out of our way to make the situation worse because (R)easons. We need to explicitly state that if you tank this rail line, the tolls go up the next day.

 

[DBM]

I was going to pose a question re: where Manchester Regional Airport might stand on this latest (revolting) development (in this wretched saga), on the assumption that the airport is envious that TF Green acquired a CR stop now many years ago (and thus theoretically is now measurably more competitive).

But that was predicated on the assumption that the two airports, with their paralleling secondary relationship to the juggernaut that is Logan, had some kind of rough parity in terms of passenger volume (and thus, by corollary, "market share").

Boy was I mistaken. TF Green had 4.0 million passengers in 2019; Manchester Regional, 1.7 million. Looking at the latest stats for 2022 ("post-COVID"), that 100%+ gap in volume will be easily maintained by TF Green. This is not to belittle Manchester Regional for being so much less significant; rather, just expressing my surprise, having assumed, due to the paralleling geographical relationships to Logan, that the passenger volumes would be equivalent.

 

[adamh8297]

I was going to pose a question re: where Manchester Regional Airport might stand on this latest (revolting) development (in this wretched saga), on the assumption that the airport is envious that TF Green acquired a CR stop now many years ago (and thus theoretically is now measurably more competitive).

But that was predicated on the assumption that the two airports, with their paralleling secondary relationship to the juggernaut that is Logan, had some kind of rough parity in terms of passenger volume (and thus, by corollary, "market share").

Boy was I mistaken. TF Green had 4.0 million passengers in 2019; Manchester Regional, 1.7 million. Looking at the latest stats for 2022 ("post-COVID"), that 100%+ gap in volume will be easily maintained by TF Green. This is not to belittle Manchester Regional for being so much less significant; rather, just expressing my surprise, having assumed, due to the paralleling geographical relationships to Logan, that the passenger volumes would be equivalent.

TF Green's catchment is larger for starters - Pulls from South Shore, South Coast, Cape Cod, Greater Worcester, Eastern Connecticut. Another airport Northeast of Manchester NH is competitor for its catchment: Portland International Jetport.

 

[737900er]

I was going to pose a question re: where Manchester Regional Airport might stand on this latest (revolting) development (in this wretched saga), on the assumption that the airport is envious that TF Green acquired a CR stop now many years ago (and thus theoretically is now measurably more competitive).

But that was predicated on the assumption that the two airports, with their paralleling secondary relationship to the juggernaut that is Logan, had some kind of rough parity in terms of passenger volume (and thus, by corollary, "market share").

Boy was I mistaken. TF Green had 4.0 million passengers in 2019; Manchester Regional, 1.7 million. Looking at the latest stats for 2022 ("post-COVID"), that 100%+ gap in volume will be easily maintained by TF Green. This is not to belittle Manchester Regional for being so much less significant; rather, just expressing my surprise, having assumed, due to the paralleling geographical relationships to Logan, that the passenger volumes would be equivalent.

Fifteen years ago they were in the same ballpark. Now they're not.

 

[jklo]

Fifteen years ago they were in the same ballpark. Now they're not.

Maybe the Pike extension from the Big Dig is a big part of the reason why.

 

[TallIsGood]

So much this. This should be the last straw. If they want to use our roads to get to our high paying jobs but are going to go out of their way to block mitigation measures that would take cars off the road then they need to pay for that decision. Bad decisions should have consequences. If they cant help us by literally doing nothing and just letting the line happen, then we cant help you either. They basically said fuck you were going use your roads and jobs and opportunity, pay nothing towards maintaining it, and actually go out of our way to make the situation worse because (R)easons. We need to explicitly state that if you tank this rail line, the tolls go up the next day.

They pay income taxes in Mass working at high paying Mass jobs.

 

[tysmith95]

Maybe the Pike extension from the Big Dig is a big part of the reason why.

In 08 southwest had a sizable operation at MHT and no presence at Logan. They've slowly cut back on MHT flying and entered BOS which is a big reason for the drop in passenger numbers.

I remember around 08 it was often cheaper to fly out of MHT and people from the Merrimack valley would often prefer it over bos for that reason. But today there are less direct flights and it's more expensive than Boston.

I don't think the pike has had a huge effect. Most people from the north don't use the pike to reach Logan.

Also dosn't help that allegiant chose PSM over MHT.

 

[bakgwailo]

Funny you mention Southwest. I always went to TF Green from Boston when they didn't fly out of Logan. Had no idea they serviced MHT.

 

[Massachoicetts]

I remember when I was a d about 15 years ago, the Southwest commercials had a map of their routes with the airports labeled. It had MHT and PVD and I was like "Why don't they serve BOS????" lol... oh how times have changed.

 

[Arlington]

I don't think the pike has had a huge effect. Most people from the north don't use the pike to reach Logan.

No, but people from the West and North had previously found to driving to MHT "nearly as convenient" (or "worth the trip for the lower prices") when the Big Dig was still a mess. The golden era at MHT culminated when the Route 3 add-a-lane project completed in 2005, and before Runway 14/32 opened at Logan in Late 2006.

JetBlue was willing to start at Boston in 2004, at a time when Southwest couldn't tolerate the runway and gate delays, and then JetBlue's growth nicely coincided with several delay-reducing improvements
2006 Runway 14/32 opens
2007 Terminal E "takes" the renovated D gates (check my date)

 

[F-Line to Dudley]

Free-dumb (Executive Council) meets free-dumber (NH Legislature). . .

Bill proposes freeze on state-funded commuter rail | Manchester Ink Link

Is it a boondoggle or a necessity for New Hampshire’s economic future? That was the question in the New Hampshire House of Representatives’ Committee on Public Works and Highways on Friday as they heard testimony on a bill that would prohibit the use of state funds for new passenger rail projects.

manchesterinklink.com

 

[NHMaples]

New Hampshire has decided to prioritize modernizing the southern portion of Rte. 93 and the Everette Turnpike not from lack of imagination but for obvious political reasons: far more people will use the highways than the rail. People living north of Concord have an economic stake in the ability for people to get into and out of the state, but rail does not solve their particular economic concern. Vacationers will not be using trains to visit the Lakes Region or the mountains. The northern, rural part of the state requires an automobile. It is true that a great many NH residents who live south of Concord are employed in Mass., but that's not the same as working in Boston. Many work along the 128 belt and places north that are more expediently accessed by car, and workers can easily share a ride. Then, finally, there's the most environmentally friendly way for NH residents to deal with their employment in Massachusetts: telecommuting. These points don't mean that NH is forever closed off from investing in commuter rail, just not now. When the ten-year transportation plan is updated and revised next year, commuter rail isn't likely to appear even in the out years. That means that in 2026 if rail is added to the plan it will have to bounce out other projects or be paid for by a tax increase. People from New Hampshire aren't dumb. They have different priorities based on different needs.

 

[Tallguy]

But the Feds would pay 80%....

 

[bigpicture7]

Time to get serious about the Pheasant Lane Mall parking lot (Tyngsborough side) as an interim step...

 

[Badusername]

People living north of Concord have an economic stake in the ability for people to get into and out of the state, but rail does not solve their particular economic concern.

You are failing to recognize that rail benefits the people who don’t use it. The mode shift of people in the catchment area of rail frees up space on the road for those who live further North. Adequate rail service negates the need for highway expansion. Highway expansion will inevitably induce more traffic.