Transportation Summit Summary

The goal of a regional transportation agency would be to harness our region’s power and connect it for increased growth. The NHHS line is a small part of this process. Eventually, the Boston-Springfield-Albany line, Vermont to Montreal, CT shore line rail systems will provide our region with transportation of goods and people that could rival Europe (after all, we are about the same size).

The Highlights SUMMARY:

Lt. Governor Tim Murray said that we should have an “integrated, seamless transportation network” and Rhode Island Lt. Governor Elizabeth Roberts noted that the economic interdependence of our region transcends state boundaries. Both agreed that rail and bus are both part of the solution. Gov. Patrick would like to have a Mass Transit Card that allows pass holders to use it for PVTA buses, trains, and Peter Pan.

The last update to the MA state plan for rail was in 1988. It’s currently being updated.

Patricia Quinn, Executive Director of the “Downeaster” http://www.thedowneaster.com/ was a powerful example of what a good business manager can do for regional transportation. The Downeaster goes from Maine to Boston, and is the #1 rated commuter rail line in the nation. They make 4 round trips daily AND their planned 5th trip is currently a BUS! They partner with the local bus companies to offer a cooperative, integrated partnership of transportation. Passengers can buy 1 ticket that can get them on the bus or the train.

ALL modes of transportation (bus or rail) are interested in the same goal: relief of congestion. “Just as you see McDonald's and Burger King in proximity” they both generate increased business for both—rail & bus can coexist and increase business for both. SACO, ME is a spot on the line, and a developer is willing to invest $80 Million simply because the rail line is there.

She noted that ALL modes of transportation are subsidized. Highways are subsidized the most (she had a great chart I will ask her for but for now: http://www.lightrailnow.org/myths/m_000010.htm ). Aviation is 2nd most, and trains receive the lowest subsidy. In Maine, TrainRiders Northeast collected 90,000 signatures in support. [We have a challenge ahead of us.]

Peter Picknelly of Peter Pan bus lines thanked Lt. Governor Murray for bringing him to the table, that too often leaders have ignored the inner city bus companies. He noted that mass transit strategies need to include the inner city bus. He claimed that they carry more passengers than all other mass transportation modes, that buses provide the safest, most fuel efficient transportation of all modes. He “doesn’t wholly embrace” a stronger commuter rail system but he’s “not rejecting it.” He added that he was cautiously going to examine it. He thought that heavily publicly subsidized trains would potentially have a negative impact on companies. That trains are inefficient and costly. That ridership will come from existing riders of buses [not clear how]. That for the $9mil deficit [no citation] all drivers in the state could be given a bus ticket [not clear about how many tickets for how many work days].

He thought alternatives (like HOV lanes) are important, and that “many academics” call rail “antiquated technology” He cited a Globe guest editorial and a Rappaport Institute study about greater Boston rail's proposed New Bedford line. [of note: the findings in that report are not necessarily generalizable to areas like the Pioneer Valley] "some land use patterns originally created by commuter rail lines have had positive and enduring impacts. Many of those
areas are often denser, more affl uent, and have higher rates of transit ridership, regardless of whether they currently have commuter rail service" (p.6) also that "efforts to increase density, reduce sprawl, and promote transit should start with local or regional land use policies and then link those policies with transportation plans." ]

Picknelly said that “if the public wills it” then bus companies should be consulted as an essential part of the process. In fact, he proposed to Amtrak that Peter Pan operate the rail system.

Robert Furniss, VP of Bombardier, the Montreal based global train manufacturer, said that current technology is moving forward. Buses are part of the solution, but developers will invest where there the tracks are. They would like to see more “high capacity multi-level coaches” which add greater revenue & high ridership (so to speak), with greater accessibility and a mid level for bikes. See also http://www.bombardier.com/en/1_0/1_19/index.html.

Albert Martin, the new Deputy Commissioner for the state Department of Transportation (DOT) in Connecticut. Commuter rail is the missing component of our region’s transportation choices. Mass transit provides solutions to climate change, congestion, and air pollution…..and it benefits by aiding economic development too. The goal is to have Transit Oriented Development (TOD) to curb sprawl (which overwhelms local infrastructures, fragments the landscape, consumes natural resources, wastes energy, and limits economic development). CT is dedicated to long term public-private collaboration, to increase tax revenue, and ensure greater access to the work force (our labor market overlaps with other regions).

Wendy Stern, MA Executive Office of Transportation Undersecretary for Planning and Program Development, wants a transportation system for the 21st century. She reminded us of the collaboration rail can have with buses. This is not a 1-size fits all solution. On March 28, the EOT released a report that cited the poor conditions of our roads and bridges.

The top priority will be fixing the SYSTEM, not just the problems. MA’s rail transportation agenda includes partnering with CT and RI and the federal government to fix our transportation problem. Phase 1 of the Boston-Springfield Hartford rail study is being funded already (MA has given the PVPC $200 K, and Sen. Olver has gotten an earmark to study this line). The state rail plan will be updated to resolve issues and provide a basis for policy.

Lyle Wray, of the Executive Director of the Capitol Region Council of Governments based in Hartford, Connecticut stressed the importance of thinking regionally. Springfield-Hartford is nested within Southern New England, nested within the Northeast region. We don’t utilize Quebec’s hydropower, we don’t leverage the Hartford-Springfield alliance as we should. As a region, we need decision making and policy capacity to go to Washington DC to argue for $$$. The Western states have a regional organization, and they are getting more money than they know what to do with, yet our Northeast region has received $0. We have a sense of urgency that comes with competition.

There are 300 million US residents. And also 300m highly skilled workers in the European Union, India, and China (EACH). They are putting hundreds of billions into infrastructure. In air traffic controls alone, the Bangkok airport far exceeds our US air traffic controls—yet a US based company (Raytheon) created the technology. Competitiveness, quality of life and transportation are part of the same puzzle. Transit-oriented development is the way to go—and buses are part of that—in fact we need to improve our bus system (e.g. Europe’s buses are clean, easy, and contemporary). And we ought to connect to the $1 Trillion economy in New York.

Kip Bergstrom, Executive Director of the RI Economic Policy Council stressed an economic case for higher speed rail in the Northeast Corridor. He refuted something Mr. Picknelly said, in a collaborative way, but I’ll be darned if I can remember…… He provided a new argument for rail: High speed rail “can help combine the diverse economic capabilities of the New York/Boston Super Region or Northeast Megaregion, by integrating contiguous labor markets and thereby extending face-to face innovation networks. Such aggregation of economic capabilities at the super regional or megregion scale will give us the sustainable competitive advantage.”

He noted that the world is both “flat in terms of global competition, and peaked in terms of the distribution of capability, in particular the capability for innovation.” Knowledge-based jobs require face to face innovation. The Northeast is in a particularly important area for innovation capability. Innovation networks are the connections between inventors, as studied by Lee Fleming of the Harvard Business School (part of that study involves the concept of the “small world”)

“the social network of innovators is a “small world,” with various clusters of people interconnected by different “gatekeepers,” individuals who bridge one group with another. Historically, engineers and scientists tended to work within local clusters of collaboration that were isolated within a company. Recently, though, people have become increasingly mobile, changing jobs with greater frequency, and these formerly isolated clusters have begun to interconnect into larger networks through which information flows more freely between companies. Such environments provide both strategic opportunity and potential threat: They can increase creativity within a company, but they also aid in the diffusion of creative knowledge to other firms through personnel and knowledge transfer. The trick, then, is to manage innovation in ways that exploit the opportunities while minimizing the risks.” (Fleming)

Bergstrom notes that these networks CANNOT just exist in virtual space….nonverbal communication is critical.

The Northeast Megaregion is particularly “tantalizing” because it has the highest aggregation of capability peak in the world….. **Bergstrom notes that we need HIGH SPEED rail…but higher speed will be a step in the right direction.

“The future of the megaregion as an economic unit lies largely in the hands of the two smaller, currently under-performing metros. For that reason, Hartford/Springfield and Philadelphia should logically be among the strongest champions of a high speed rail system in the Northeast Corridor” (emphasis HIS). Trains go faster than cars, another reason to support rail.

Hartford/Springfield could be the gatekeepers between NYC and Boston. High Speed Rail connecting us would allow the CT River Valley region in particular to become home to gatekeepers. WE have the MOST to gain from rail. Of note, “most of the other regions [in the US—and in Europe] cannot exploit high speed rail in the way that we can is in fact a very good reason for us to pursue it, as it would create a competitive advantage for us that would be hard to imitate.”

Tim Brennan, Executive Director of the Pioneer Valley Planning Commission provided a look back. Geography is destiny: In the 1600s, the CT River provided the transportation. 1700s saw subsistence agriculture go by the way side. 1800s saw rail. Businessmen had vision, and in 1852 spent money to ensure that Springfield had the rail line going through it (that’s why Spfld is the bigger city than Northampton, who got on the rail later). In the 1900s roads squandered the rail network and right of way. Transportation is the “shaper of the future” and we need to reinvent our transportation system. Do we want to be on the bleeding or cutting edge of change?

3 lessons from the past
1) Transportation is the framework on which our region will be shaped. (not by boundaries of states)
2) we need to reinvent transportation
3) future is now

Reinvention:
1) getting rid of transportation-mode silo mentality (cannot rely just on 1, or 2 modes)
2) engage all modes (don’t chuck capacity improvements)
3) way we finance transportation is broken (gas tax doesn’t have legs; hope it lasts until 2009—our gap in $$ prevents new projects from being developed)
4) Transportation logistics will lead us in the new economy (how do you move people and goods?)
5) recapture rail (ideally high speed)
6) move freight (use the inland rail port in our region—trucks/train connection)
7) need to reinvent for land use/clean air/clean energy/demographics—do you want kids to live here? To get jobs here? Keep young folks here.
8) New Governance system for rail—a sort of Northeast Economic Union
9) Connect with NYC
10) Use technology to maximum advantage.

Jim Repass of the National Corridors Initiative noted that often we hear that “the US is too big for rail”…….but Switzerland has rail…..and Southern New England has a greater population density than Switzerland.