New Hampshire Commuter Rail Discussion

Funding? Well yes the courts ruled that NH can not use the road tax for anything other than roads. But....slap another 50 cents on the tolls statewide, redirect the toll money away from the future 93 project and install a toll on 93 just south of the Salem exit, and I think you'll find that the money collected from that could be used for this project. I see alot of talk about Portsmouth CR. Portsmouth has good service to South Station via bus every hour as well as another bus to Logan on the hour. The bus station is modern and has free parking. The lot is always near full and it's been expanded once with plans to expand again. I use it now and than to Logan and have to say it is great. With only around 20,000 people living in Portsmouth I don't think it would be cost effective to compete with the bus company. Rochester is the largest city on the Seacoast with around 30,000 people. The track from Rochester to Dover (NHN) goes through Sommersworth with a pop of another 12,000. Add another 28,000 from Dover. You have to think the numbers add up better than Portsmouth but this could be serviced by the DE. The route to Salem has alot of merit when you look at pop figures. Salem, Derry, Londonderry, and Manchester add up to around 200,000 pop. Nashua comes in at 87,000. I think Nashua would be the end of the line coming out of Mass at least for the next 10 years or so and the route to look at should be via Salem - MHT. IMHO

#1, the tolls can only be used by the turnpike system and there's been a backlash against funds being diverted away. No way will you be able to divert more.

#2, the rails actually *exist* from Lowell to Manchester. For higher speed passenger service they need to be improved but, unlike the line coming up through Salem, they have not been paved over (like in Salem) or obliterated by an airport (Manchester).

It will be FAR cheaper to serve 200,000 people with the line going to Manchester through Nashua - in addition to the airport which has offered to kick in money to build a station in Bedford that will use the connector road for a 2-mile airport shuttle.

Salem to Manchester is a pipe dream. Getting money for rail has already been harder than pulling hen's teeth. The difference in cost between an existing double-wide ROW and a torn-up overgrown and paved-over single -width ROW with far more numerous grade crossings would be astronomical.

As if that wasn't enough, the old Boston-Montreal HSR studies *all* had the line going from Lowell, through Nashua, Manchester and Concord before heading off towards White River Junction, Montpelier and Burlington. They all cited costs and availability of ROW as to why that was preferable.

djlong wrote:#1, the tolls can only be used by the turnpike system and there's been a backlash against funds being diverted away. No way will you be able to divert more.

Bingo. Exactly. NH courts have pretty much proven that CR in NH SHALL be a line item in the states budget, and not a DOT financed project from "road funds" Even an "Amtrak Penny" style funding was declared unconstitutional in NH.

Second, there is no way that $.50 from the tolls would fly with any resident. We just got $.50 added to about every toll (Which I agree with, but it is still a hardship) to help fund the roadway system....and that $.50 isn't even going to make up the shortfall in the DOT budget for road building and upkeep.

I still think that regardless which route NH chooses to use to MHT, that Salem or Nashua should be the end of another line for some CR rail. How about a huge end of the line loop around Rockingham park with the entire center being a multi level parking area and shops, hotels and dining? The numbers in southern NH justify CR to all of these areas. With fuel costs going through the roof I don't think money should be spent on expanding 93 at all. . I think it's time to take a hard look at where the USA is fighting it's wars and ask if oil is part of the reason. If it is I would be willing to give up some of my freedoms to drive when and where I want or at least pay a high price toll for that freedom. I think some tolls to support CR are reasonable and I think that the rate should be high enough to force a good share of people into public trans as well helping to pay for it. Penalty tolls? So be it. Besides within 10 years I think all vehicles will have a GPS transponder onboard as part of the vehicle reg and you will be billed monthly not only for mileage but, depending on congestion, at what time you traveled those miles. The rate being much higher for peak travel. The tech is already here and it will happen....soon. I'm tired of being told what can't be done....rewrite some of these older laws that limit where tolls can and can't be spent to include public trans. Most of all be willing to cash in some freedoms for future generations and move forward. Rail is doable!

Railcar wrote:I still think that regardless which route NH chooses to use to MHT, that Salem or Nashua should be the end of another line for some CR rail. How about a huge end of the line loop around Rockingham park with the entire center being a multi level parking area and shops, hotels and dining? The numbers in southern NH justify CR to all of these areas. With fuel costs going through the roof I don't think money should be spent on expanding 93 at all. . I think it's time to take a hard look at where the USA is fighting it's wars and ask if oil is part of the reason. If it is I would be willing to give up some of my freedoms to drive when and where I want or at least pay a high price toll for that freedom. I think some tolls to support CR are reasonable and I think that the rate should be high enough to force a good share of people into public trans as well helping to pay for it. Penalty tolls? So be it. Besides within 10 years I think all vehicles will have a GPS transponder onboard as part of the vehicle reg and you will be billed monthly not only for mileage but, depending on congestion, at what time you traveled those miles. The rate being much higher for peak travel. The tech is already here and it will happen....soon. I'm tired of being told what can't be done....rewrite some of these older laws that limit where tolls can and can't be spent to include public trans. Most of all be willing to cash in some freedoms for future generations and move forward. Rail is doable!

NYC is working on the EZPass billing on actual usage of a roadway...but I have not heard much about it in the last month or so.

NH's laws relating to NHDOT are actually pretty recent. They generally get a cleaning and rewording every 10 years. The problem with toll funds/gas tax in NH, is even if the law says it can be used for some other form of public transportation, it can not. Because it was declared unconstitutional to use those funds for non highway projects....not because of the wording of the current law, but because of how the funds were taken.

Maybe if the MBTA sold advertising space on individual crossties it would be a drop in the bucket. Last time I flew US Airways I found a Verizon advertisement on the tray tables.

Seriously, to me the M & L looks like a streetcar situation at best along 28 in Salem without substantial revisions.

As for fuel taxes, can someone tell me if railway operators have been completely relieved of fuel tax following the American Job Creation Act of 2004? Was there a state counterpart? It was interesting that previously fuel taxes paid by railways went to the federal deficit vs. the highway fund for trucks.

new railroad signs posted around the route 28 crossing gates, ive never seen them there before,

posted at the gates on water street
http://www.trafficsign.us/650/warn/w10-1.gif

and one like this posted before the lights on canal street
http://www.trafficsign.us/650/warn/w10-2.gif

ive never noticed these before, any idea why they put these up if the line gets so little service?

my guess is that they have abandoned it now.


exempt means buses and oil tankers dont have to stop at the crossing.

tom18287 wrote:my guess is that they have abandoned it now.


exempt means buses and oil tankers dont have to stop at the crossing.

But Exempt means there still can be traffic on the line, but required to stop vehicles do not have to stop. The new exempt signs may have been posted as a result of complaints from the required stop drivers.

trainhq wrote:Folks, there has been a sea change to the north. Governor Lynch, recognizing that the Downeaster has
been a success, (the new fifth train should start in a few weeks) has decided to support CR big time.

This could mean CR to Nashua by 2010, and even serious consideration of re-opening the Manchester-Lawrence line. Huge breakthough!

http://www.nationalcorridors.org/df2/df ... .shtml#New

so theyre thinking about putting a commuter rail on the line? las time i watched trains run on it was in '94 and i find out today that the line was gutted out,

The M&L hasn't seen a passenger train since 1952. Since that time the B&M really stopped maintaining it and from 1952 to 1984 the line was used till it was no longer safe enough to. With Derry and Windham being abandoned in 1984, Manchester and Londonderry fallowed in the early 1990's when the airport purchased the ROW near its premises. Salem fallowed in 2001. My point being... regardless if the line still saw the occasional freight train the entire line needs to be rebuilt from the ground up. This is going to be a very expensive rehab but it can be done if the state does proceed. I wouldn’t cross your fingers just yet because the Lowell to Nashua and maybe even Manchester will be first but there is hope for the M&L it just might not come for quite some time. As far as I'm concern let them build the bike path it will only preserve what little structure is left.

But, 1566, to undergo having to wrestle it back from the bikers if it ever was called back into revenue service would be extremely difficult. Wouldn't it?
Don't get me wrong. I like the Governor's new mood, it suits him well. One can only hope Gov. Lynch gets a similar mindset for the seacoast. I'm ready for Portsmouth-North Station schedules. Now, if the bloody Commonwealth hadn't torn out those bridges along the Eastern route...

OK here's what I don't understand. And I'm looking for a real explanation, more than people simply agreeing with me...

NH people always say dumb things like "why should I pay for a train to Derry (for example) if I live in central NH and will never use it"

But these same people don't argue against new highways in southern new hampshire that they will also never use. Like the new Rt 111.

What is the argument here?

l008com wrote:OK here's what I don't understand. And I'm looking for a real explanation, more than people simply agreeing with me...

NH people always say dumb things like "why should I pay for a train to Derry (for example) if I live in central NH and will never use it"

But these same people don't argue against new highways in southern new hampshire that they will also never use. Like the new Rt 111.

What is the argument here?

It's not like that argument is unique to New Hampshire. Try asking politicians from central Pennsylvania how they feel about funding SEPTA (among other choices).

Its a question of the areas that need service having the political power to win out against the other regions. I don't know NH politics well enough to know how possible that is, but NH is becoming something of a rural/semi-urbanized divided state like so many others in the country now -- this is one of the debates that comes with it.

Mattydred wrote:But, 1566, to undergo having to wrestle it back from the bikers if it ever was called back into revenue service would be extremely difficult. Wouldn't it?

The agreement with every bike, rail trail group in this state is that a railbanked line can be reactivated at any time regardless of opposition from groups currently using it as a multi-use trail.

Which is one of the reasons I oppose federal money being used to pave these railtrails as it gets wasted if the line gets reactivated. A lot of the people in these towns do not know the difference between abandoned and rail banked. Very few rails, or railbeds are "abandoned" in NH. Federal trail money would be better used to cut back brush and trees, and grade the bed in the summer. (They used to grade the Portsmouth Branch once a year...do they do that anymore?)