Another View: Passenger rail in NH would be a massive boondoggle
I am a retired highway engineer and transportation planner with more than 36 years of professional experience in eight states and Washington, DC. My opinions are based on experience, 42 years of transportation policy observations and objective study of publicly available information.
My opinions may or may not represent those of any group I am affiliated with. Except as a taxpayer, I have no financial interest or other stake in the Capitol Corridor project or in the subject study.
To be blunt, passenger rail in New Hampshire is a fool's errand. It has a near zero chance of solving any transportation problems and a near 100 percent chance of burdening the state with significant and continuing debt with insignificant or no offsetting benefits.
When federal operating subsidies run out, the state would have to either take over that burden or reimburse the government for its share of the salvage value of the infrastructure. This is the single reason why the governors of Wisconsin, Florida and Ohio declined to accept more than $3.6 billion in federal rail funds in the last two years.
The average New Hampshire resident would take a round trip on the train once every six years. Fewer than one in 2,000 residents would benefit from the project on a daily basis, and fewer than one in 300 on a weekly basis. That's the nature of rail in a transportation marketplace like New Hampshire's, and there is nothing any consultant can do that would change that for the better.
Train passengers would largely consists of well-heeled commuters to out-of-state jobs. Costs would be shared by families and workers across all income levels who would be unable to use the train for commuting to and from their lower paying in-state jobs.
According to a study by the Federal Transit Administration, "Urban rail transit investments rarely 'create' new growth, but more typically redistribute growth that would have taken place without the investment." Due to extremely low train ridership, it is unlikely train stations or the cities that contain them would be magnets for any kind of development, including so-called "transit-oriented development."
The state has all the information it needs right now to decide whether to proceed with the Capitol Corridor Rail Project. All indicators point to "don't do it!" None point to "spend another $3.65 million on another study."
Dick Lemieux, is a retired highway engineer in Concord.
READER COMMENTS: 0
- New London voters pass municipal budget - 0
- Peterborough voters say no to cluster housing, yes to village zone - 0
- Newport voters say yes to police and DPW raises - 0
- Hooksett voters OK budget, police pact - 0
- Voters reject propane-only heating plan at Lafayette Regional School - 0
- Zoning measures against sprawl on Peterborough Town Meeting ballot - 0
- Town engineer, budget increase on Hooksett ballot - 0
- New London residents to vote on $1.17 million budget - 0
- Sanbornton to vote on cruisers, voting date - 0
READER COMMENTS: 0
- Only a freshman, Kennedy excelled on the track - 0
- Looking Back With Aurore Eaton: The Manchester Opera House makes its stunning debut - 0
- Another View -- John Dumais: Mandatory GMO labeling is all cost, no benefit - 0
- What’s the rush? Executive Council follows Pelosi plan - 0
- On Baseball: Fisher Cats prove point - 0
- Evan Turner, Celtics see upside in new deal - 0
- Thunder take two from Fisher Cats - 0
- Ortiz, Drew (4 RBIs each) lead Red Sox hit parade against Blue Jays - 0
- Nashua settles suit over gas collection system - 0
Market Basket workers urged to 'shut it down'; deposed CEO urges fired workers be given jobs back
Shaheen's record: On insurance, it is dismal
Anti-SUV flop: Americans love utility
U.S. appeals courts issue conflicting rulings on Obamacare exchange subsidies such as NH's