The Journal of Commerce reports:
Funding strategy tries to take shipments off trucks until last miles
The Department of Transportation’s second-highest official told senators that DOT’s preference for freight shipping is keep goods on waterways and rail as much as possible, getting them away from trucks except for the final delivery.
Deputy Secretary John Porcari made the remarks before the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, in a March 24 hearing on use of transportation policy to improve energy security and the environment.
Committee Chairman Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., asked Porcari whether the concept of DOT’s discretionary “TIGER” grant program could work in the next multi-year surface transportation bill. That $1.5 billion pool of stimulus funds allowed DOT to send grants to multi-modal projects that cross state lines, instead of disbursing money under state-allocation formulas or for specific transport modes.
Porcari said that “in our goods movement hierarchy -- where we want to keep goods movement on water as long as possible, and then on rail as long as possible and truck it for the last miles -- it’s a big step forward.”
He also said “I think the TIGER grants point the way to the future in intermodal transportation.” The largest category of awards, Porcari said, “was freight rail capacity projects, which have a number of environmental benefits including reduced fuel consumption but also take some of the goods movement off the highway network and move it through more efficient modes.”
Those comments follow similar remarks by DOT Secretary Ray LaHood in an interview with The Journal of Commerce.
LaHood said DOT policy has “paid a lot of attention to the freight rail companies” to both expand passenger train service and draw freight off highways. “We’ve made a huge investment in their opportunity to build capacity,” he said. And the DOT is working with ports “again, to take trucks off the road and to really utilize the marine highways.”
See also “Ray LaHood's Confidence in Collaboration” and the attached interview transcript.
Contact John D. Boyd at jboyd@joc.com.
Saturday, March 27, 2010
Tuesday, March 23, 2010
More Worcester neighborhoods express concern over CSX freight yard plans
(The following story by Nick Kotsopoulos appeared on the Worcester Telegram & Gazette website on March 19, 2010.)
WORCESTER, Mass. — Two more neighborhood groups have expressed concerns about CSX Corp.’s plan to expand its freight yard on Franklin Street.
The Shrewsbury Street Neighborhood Association last night made it clear it has a big problem with the planned closing of Putnam Lane, which is necessary so there can be additional track capacity to handle the freight and commuter rail traffic coming into the terminal.
With that closing, there would no longer be any roadway connection between Franklin and Shrewsbury streets, from Union Station to Piccadilly Plaza on Shrewsbury Street.
While the Shrewsbury Street group does not oppose the CSX plans, its president said it “will not tolerate” the closing of Putnam Lane because it is essential for public safety, commuter convenience and economic development.
“We’ve made it clear to CSX that this connection is essential to our neighborhood,” said Gary J. Vecchio, group president. “When they built Interstate 290, they cut off our neighborhood to much of the city. When they built the Worcester Center (Galleria mall), they cut us off again. We can’t be shut off again, and we will not be shut off again.”
Meanwhile, members of the Grafton Hill Neighborhood Association fear an increase in truck traffic and air pollution will result with the CSX expansion. With the CSX freight yard’s entrance being relocated to Grafton Street, Grafton Hill residents fear that truck traffic going west will use Grafton Street as a way to connect to the Massachusetts Turnpike or Route 20.
“When you have the kind of expansion they are talking about, it’s going to bring a lot more truck traffic, noise and pollution,” said Michael Troiano, honorary chairman of the Grafton Hill group. “That doesn’t seem like a good trade-off just to get some extra commuter rail trains here.”
About 400 trucks per day use the CSX freight yard; the expansion is expected to add another 80 to 100 truck trips per day.
CSX wants to double the size of its freight yard on Franklin Street from 23 acres to 51 acres and make Worcester its new rail freight hub for New England. The $100 million project is part of a private-public partnership between the state and CSX to reposition its freight operation in Massachusetts so the rail line between Worcester and Boston can be opened to more commuter trains, with a goal of adding 20 more commuter trains by 2012.
As an alternative to closing Putnam Lane, District 2 City Councilor Philip P. Palmieri last night broached the idea of having a bridge built that would connect Franklin Street to the back side of Shrewsbury Street, in the area of Albany Street, Nebraska Street or Fantasia Drive.
He said Putnam Lane, while an important connection, is a “horse-and-buggy” roadway because it is so narrow. He said a bridge would provide a much better connection between Franklin and Shrewsbury streets.
“CSX has to step up even more now to alleviate this exceptionally difficult issue,” Mr. Palmieri said. “We want to move forward positively on this, but we won’t be a rubber stamp, that’s for sure.”
Councilor-at-Large Joseph M. Petty said CSX has been a good partner on this project. He said the company has not attempted to hide anything and has shown a willingness to address neighborhood concerns.
“In the next couple of weeks, we should have a better idea of where things are going with this project in terms of traffic, noise, lighting and the Putnam Lane issue,” he said.
Friday, March 19, 2010
WORCESTER, Mass. — Two more neighborhood groups have expressed concerns about CSX Corp.’s plan to expand its freight yard on Franklin Street.
The Shrewsbury Street Neighborhood Association last night made it clear it has a big problem with the planned closing of Putnam Lane, which is necessary so there can be additional track capacity to handle the freight and commuter rail traffic coming into the terminal.
With that closing, there would no longer be any roadway connection between Franklin and Shrewsbury streets, from Union Station to Piccadilly Plaza on Shrewsbury Street.
While the Shrewsbury Street group does not oppose the CSX plans, its president said it “will not tolerate” the closing of Putnam Lane because it is essential for public safety, commuter convenience and economic development.
“We’ve made it clear to CSX that this connection is essential to our neighborhood,” said Gary J. Vecchio, group president. “When they built Interstate 290, they cut off our neighborhood to much of the city. When they built the Worcester Center (Galleria mall), they cut us off again. We can’t be shut off again, and we will not be shut off again.”
Meanwhile, members of the Grafton Hill Neighborhood Association fear an increase in truck traffic and air pollution will result with the CSX expansion. With the CSX freight yard’s entrance being relocated to Grafton Street, Grafton Hill residents fear that truck traffic going west will use Grafton Street as a way to connect to the Massachusetts Turnpike or Route 20.
“When you have the kind of expansion they are talking about, it’s going to bring a lot more truck traffic, noise and pollution,” said Michael Troiano, honorary chairman of the Grafton Hill group. “That doesn’t seem like a good trade-off just to get some extra commuter rail trains here.”
About 400 trucks per day use the CSX freight yard; the expansion is expected to add another 80 to 100 truck trips per day.
CSX wants to double the size of its freight yard on Franklin Street from 23 acres to 51 acres and make Worcester its new rail freight hub for New England. The $100 million project is part of a private-public partnership between the state and CSX to reposition its freight operation in Massachusetts so the rail line between Worcester and Boston can be opened to more commuter trains, with a goal of adding 20 more commuter trains by 2012.
As an alternative to closing Putnam Lane, District 2 City Councilor Philip P. Palmieri last night broached the idea of having a bridge built that would connect Franklin Street to the back side of Shrewsbury Street, in the area of Albany Street, Nebraska Street or Fantasia Drive.
He said Putnam Lane, while an important connection, is a “horse-and-buggy” roadway because it is so narrow. He said a bridge would provide a much better connection between Franklin and Shrewsbury streets.
“CSX has to step up even more now to alleviate this exceptionally difficult issue,” Mr. Palmieri said. “We want to move forward positively on this, but we won’t be a rubber stamp, that’s for sure.”
Councilor-at-Large Joseph M. Petty said CSX has been a good partner on this project. He said the company has not attempted to hide anything and has shown a willingness to address neighborhood concerns.
“In the next couple of weeks, we should have a better idea of where things are going with this project in terms of traffic, noise, lighting and the Putnam Lane issue,” he said.
Friday, March 19, 2010
Wednesday, March 17, 2010
Public Stakeholder Meetings Scheduled:Draft State Freight and Rail Plan.
Transmittal to Members of the Central Massachusetts Regional Railroad Advisory Group:
The Massachusetts Department of Transportation (MassDOT) will be hosting a series of public stakeholder meetings to present information and receive input on the draft findings and recommendations of the State Freight and Rail Plan. As indicated below, the CMRPC staff will host the April 1st meeting to be held at Union Station in Worcester. We hope you all can attend.
The draft findings and recommendations are based on a comprehensive evaluation of the Commonwealth’s freight and rail transportation system, their operations and effect on economic development and quality of life. The evaluation includes all modes - air, rail, truck and maritime transportation. The Plan examines the freight and rail infrastructure and operations in the Commonwealth and evaluates the trade-offs between different modes as well as intermodal options (transportation by more than one mode, e.g. truck and rail) in its analysis and recommendations. The Plan also includes a detailed analysis of all rail infrastructure and operations, both freight and passenger. The evaluation will conclude with the publication of a State Freight and Rail Plan and a separate, stand-alone State Rail Plan in the spring of 2010.
The following Public Stakeholder Meetings will be held:
Western Regional Meeting
Tuesday, March 23rd from 2:00 to 4:00 pm
Kittredge Center – Room KC 303
Holyoke Community College
303 Homestead Avenue
Holyoke, MA 01040
Northeast Regional Meeting
Thursday, March 25th from 2:00 to 4:00 pm
Conference Room #1
State Transportation Building
10 Park Plaza
Boston, MA 02116
Southeast Regional Meeting
Tuesday, March 30th from 2:00 to 4:00 pm
The Corson Building
New Bedford Whaling National Historic Park
33 William Street
New Bedford, MA 02740
Central Regional Meeting
Thursday, April 1st from 1:00 to 3:00 pm
Union Hall (2nd floor)
Union Station Transportation Center
2 Washington Square
Worcester, MA 01604
The meetings will have a presentation on the draft statewide findings and recommendations, but will also focus on each respective region. For more information contact MassDOT Project Manager Ned Codd, 617-973-7473, or visit the website www.mass.gov/massdot/freightandrailplan.
The Massachusetts Department of Transportation (MassDOT) will be hosting a series of public stakeholder meetings to present information and receive input on the draft findings and recommendations of the State Freight and Rail Plan. As indicated below, the CMRPC staff will host the April 1st meeting to be held at Union Station in Worcester. We hope you all can attend.
The draft findings and recommendations are based on a comprehensive evaluation of the Commonwealth’s freight and rail transportation system, their operations and effect on economic development and quality of life. The evaluation includes all modes - air, rail, truck and maritime transportation. The Plan examines the freight and rail infrastructure and operations in the Commonwealth and evaluates the trade-offs between different modes as well as intermodal options (transportation by more than one mode, e.g. truck and rail) in its analysis and recommendations. The Plan also includes a detailed analysis of all rail infrastructure and operations, both freight and passenger. The evaluation will conclude with the publication of a State Freight and Rail Plan and a separate, stand-alone State Rail Plan in the spring of 2010.
The following Public Stakeholder Meetings will be held:
Western Regional Meeting
Tuesday, March 23rd from 2:00 to 4:00 pm
Kittredge Center – Room KC 303
Holyoke Community College
303 Homestead Avenue
Holyoke, MA 01040
Northeast Regional Meeting
Thursday, March 25th from 2:00 to 4:00 pm
Conference Room #1
State Transportation Building
10 Park Plaza
Boston, MA 02116
Southeast Regional Meeting
Tuesday, March 30th from 2:00 to 4:00 pm
The Corson Building
New Bedford Whaling National Historic Park
33 William Street
New Bedford, MA 02740
Central Regional Meeting
Thursday, April 1st from 1:00 to 3:00 pm
Union Hall (2nd floor)
Union Station Transportation Center
2 Washington Square
Worcester, MA 01604
The meetings will have a presentation on the draft statewide findings and recommendations, but will also focus on each respective region. For more information contact MassDOT Project Manager Ned Codd, 617-973-7473, or visit the website www.mass.gov/massdot/freightandrailplan.
Monday, March 15, 2010
Worcester Group opposes CSX project - From the Worcester Telegram
Group opposes CSX project. In Grafton Hill, truck threat seen By Nick Kotsopoulos TELEGRAM & GAZETTE STAFF nkotsopoulos@telegram.com
WORCESTER — The Grafton Hill Business Association, which represents more than 60 individuals and companies, has come out against CSX Corp.’s plans to expand its freight yard on Franklin Street.
In a statement issued through its president, George Kerxhalli, the group said it has “strong reservations” about the $100 million expansion plan, believing it will have “dire consequences” for lower Grafton Hill.
The association contends that Grafton Street between Posner Square and Billings Square will be especially devastated by the “traffic, noise and pollution that would accompany such a project.”
Mr. Kerxhalli said the officers and directors of the association decided at a special meeting Thursday night to issue a formal declaration of opposition to the CSX project as it is currently constituted.
“Based on the details of the proposal as set forth by CSX and state and city officials so far, the project will have dire consequences for business people, residents and schoolchildren on Grafton Hill,” Mr. Kerxhalli said.
He added that the association intends to elaborate on its objections in public meetings on the project.
CSX wants to double the size of its freight yard on Franklin Street from 23 acres to 51 acres and make Worcester its new rail freight hub for New England. The freight yard is just east of Interstate 290.
The $100 million project is part of a private-public partnership between the state and CSX to reposition its freight operations in Massachusetts so the rail line between Worcester and Boston can be opened to more commuter trains, with a goal of adding 20 more commuter trains by 2012.
There are currently 12 round trips per day. The Worcester-Framingham line carries more than 9,000 passengers into Boston each weekday.
A key part of the CSX plans is the relocation of the access to its freight yard from Franklin Street to Grafton Street, at the site of the vacant Shaw’s Supermarket. That is intended to provide easier access to I-290 and reduce the amount of truck traffic on city streets.
But business owners on that part of Grafton Street are not thrilled with the prospect of all that truck traffic diverted there.
Ron Gestone, owner of Frank’s Flower Shop, 165 Grafton St., said he hopes the city will stand by those residents and property owners who he said will be “totally impacted” by the CSX plan.
His business, which has been at that Grafton Street site for more than 40 years, is just before the I-290 eastbound on-ramp
“My property will no longer be of use for me because I will have more than 500 trucks on a daily basis going by my place of business,” Mr. Gestone said. “With all those trucks, no one will be able to get in or out of my driveway.”
Meanwhile, the City Council has asked City Manager Michael V. O’Brien to discuss with CSX and the state Department of Transportation an alternative to the Grafton Street access to the freight yard. That plan would relocate the current driveway into the site across from Penn Avenue to a point where the new access driveway would be aligned with the traffic signal at the I-290 eastbound ramp, according to District 3 Councilor Paul P. Clancy Jr.
He said that would allow for the removal of as much truck traffic from the freight yard as possible from Grafton Street. The proposal was broached by Mr. Clancy, Councilor-at-Large Joseph M. Petty and District 2 Councilor Philip P. Palmieri.
Mr. Palmieri has also pointed out that while the Grafton Street entrance/exit to the CSX freight yard would provide direct access to I-290, it would only be in the eastbound direction. He said trucks that need to go west on I-290 would still have to travel through Washington Square.
For that reason, Grafton Hill residents have asked that trucks leaving the CSX freight yard be required to turn right only onto Grafton Street, thus prohibiting them from using Grafton Street to gain access to the westbound entrances to the Massachusetts Turnpike or Route 20.
WORCESTER — The Grafton Hill Business Association, which represents more than 60 individuals and companies, has come out against CSX Corp.’s plans to expand its freight yard on Franklin Street.
In a statement issued through its president, George Kerxhalli, the group said it has “strong reservations” about the $100 million expansion plan, believing it will have “dire consequences” for lower Grafton Hill.
The association contends that Grafton Street between Posner Square and Billings Square will be especially devastated by the “traffic, noise and pollution that would accompany such a project.”
Mr. Kerxhalli said the officers and directors of the association decided at a special meeting Thursday night to issue a formal declaration of opposition to the CSX project as it is currently constituted.
“Based on the details of the proposal as set forth by CSX and state and city officials so far, the project will have dire consequences for business people, residents and schoolchildren on Grafton Hill,” Mr. Kerxhalli said.
He added that the association intends to elaborate on its objections in public meetings on the project.
CSX wants to double the size of its freight yard on Franklin Street from 23 acres to 51 acres and make Worcester its new rail freight hub for New England. The freight yard is just east of Interstate 290.
The $100 million project is part of a private-public partnership between the state and CSX to reposition its freight operations in Massachusetts so the rail line between Worcester and Boston can be opened to more commuter trains, with a goal of adding 20 more commuter trains by 2012.
There are currently 12 round trips per day. The Worcester-Framingham line carries more than 9,000 passengers into Boston each weekday.
A key part of the CSX plans is the relocation of the access to its freight yard from Franklin Street to Grafton Street, at the site of the vacant Shaw’s Supermarket. That is intended to provide easier access to I-290 and reduce the amount of truck traffic on city streets.
But business owners on that part of Grafton Street are not thrilled with the prospect of all that truck traffic diverted there.
Ron Gestone, owner of Frank’s Flower Shop, 165 Grafton St., said he hopes the city will stand by those residents and property owners who he said will be “totally impacted” by the CSX plan.
His business, which has been at that Grafton Street site for more than 40 years, is just before the I-290 eastbound on-ramp
“My property will no longer be of use for me because I will have more than 500 trucks on a daily basis going by my place of business,” Mr. Gestone said. “With all those trucks, no one will be able to get in or out of my driveway.”
Meanwhile, the City Council has asked City Manager Michael V. O’Brien to discuss with CSX and the state Department of Transportation an alternative to the Grafton Street access to the freight yard. That plan would relocate the current driveway into the site across from Penn Avenue to a point where the new access driveway would be aligned with the traffic signal at the I-290 eastbound ramp, according to District 3 Councilor Paul P. Clancy Jr.
He said that would allow for the removal of as much truck traffic from the freight yard as possible from Grafton Street. The proposal was broached by Mr. Clancy, Councilor-at-Large Joseph M. Petty and District 2 Councilor Philip P. Palmieri.
Mr. Palmieri has also pointed out that while the Grafton Street entrance/exit to the CSX freight yard would provide direct access to I-290, it would only be in the eastbound direction. He said trucks that need to go west on I-290 would still have to travel through Washington Square.
For that reason, Grafton Hill residents have asked that trucks leaving the CSX freight yard be required to turn right only onto Grafton Street, thus prohibiting them from using Grafton Street to gain access to the westbound entrances to the Massachusetts Turnpike or Route 20.
Providence Journal Editorial: New Bedford's Back to Shipping
Editorial: New Bedford's back to shipping
01:00 AM EST on Saturday, March 13, 2010
Once the wharves of New Bedford were one of the great centers of American commerce. The whaling fleet was based there, providing lamp oil to a burgeoning nation, and sleek clipper ships offered the quickest passage to the West Coast gold mines and China, via Cape Horn. The whalers started to go away with the refining of petroleum for kerosene in the decade before the Civil War, and the clipper-ship era ended at about the same time with the advent of ocean-going steamships.
For years, as the city became one of the leading U.S. fishing ports, no freighters tied up at New Bedford. The harbor's rebirth as a commercial hub dates to 2001, with the complicated redredging of the port's PCB-contaminated shipping channels. They had become so silted that ships were frequently obliged to lighten cargoes at other ports before entering New Bedford Harbor to avoid running aground.
But this year, 28 freighters are scheduled to dock at the Whaling City's piers, many unloading produce from Africa and South America. Because of the fishing industry, New Bedford has big cold-storage capacity.
It's quite a turnaround story. Each delivery provides work for 50 people, say port officials. The Superfund cleanup of PCBs entailed construction of a rail yard that will connect the port to the rail system. The Harbor Development Commission plans a roll-on-roll-off rail shipping connection. Ultimately, New Bedford may become a major hub for short-sea shipping, which promises to help lighten truck congestion on the Interstate Highway System.
New Bedford isn't the only recently re-dredged port in the region, but it seems to be the one most aggressively courting new business. Revitalizing ports as working ports (i.e., shipping), with their well-paid workers, is much better for the economic health of such old ports as New Bedford and Providence than blocking them off with condos and other low-paying enterprises.
.
Monday, March 1, 2010
"OneRail" Coalition Statement of Principles aligned with EMFRC
Railroads are a critical element of our national transportation system.
OneRail (onerail.org) believes that we must increase investment in the nation's railroad infrastructure to ensure our continued mobility, economic competitiveness and job creation, as well as to meet the energy and climate challenges of the 21st century.
A coalition of freight, passenger, transit, environmental and labor groups, OneRail advocates the following policies to strengthen our nation's rail system:
Expanded intercity and commuter passenger train options, in order to substantially reduce vehicle miles traveled, aviation and highway congestion, fuel consumption and related greenhouse gas emissions
A balanced transportation policy that addresses a critical missing link in our nation's surface transportation policy - rail. To ensure that both freight and passenger service is maximized in high-density corridors, public policy should envision separate rights-of-way for freight and passenger operations when necessary
Secure an ongoing, dedicated funding source for intercity passenger rail expansion, including federal-state partnerships and cost-sharing agreements similar to those that built the nation's federal-aid highways and transit systems
Expanded freight rail capacity to meet projected economic demand. While private investment in the nation's freight rail network has been, and will remain the primary means of maintaining and expanding freight rail infrastructure, public policy must facilitate, not frustrate this investment
OneRail coalition members know that additional investment in the nation's rail infrastructure will create American jobs, de-congest chokepoints, put more freight and passengers on fuel-efficient trains, and reduce our nation's greenhouse gas emissions.
OneRail (onerail.org) believes that we must increase investment in the nation's railroad infrastructure to ensure our continued mobility, economic competitiveness and job creation, as well as to meet the energy and climate challenges of the 21st century.
A coalition of freight, passenger, transit, environmental and labor groups, OneRail advocates the following policies to strengthen our nation's rail system:
Expanded intercity and commuter passenger train options, in order to substantially reduce vehicle miles traveled, aviation and highway congestion, fuel consumption and related greenhouse gas emissions
A balanced transportation policy that addresses a critical missing link in our nation's surface transportation policy - rail. To ensure that both freight and passenger service is maximized in high-density corridors, public policy should envision separate rights-of-way for freight and passenger operations when necessary
Secure an ongoing, dedicated funding source for intercity passenger rail expansion, including federal-state partnerships and cost-sharing agreements similar to those that built the nation's federal-aid highways and transit systems
Expanded freight rail capacity to meet projected economic demand. While private investment in the nation's freight rail network has been, and will remain the primary means of maintaining and expanding freight rail infrastructure, public policy must facilitate, not frustrate this investment
OneRail coalition members know that additional investment in the nation's rail infrastructure will create American jobs, de-congest chokepoints, put more freight and passengers on fuel-efficient trains, and reduce our nation's greenhouse gas emissions.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
Posts
