Location ‘set in stone,’ but much uncertain about new railroad station in Wallingford

As published in the Record Journal Sunday June 2, 2013

By Andrew Ragali
Record-Journal staff
aragali@record-journal.com
(203) 317-2224
Twitter:@AndyRagz

WALLINGFORD - The youths of the country believe in having everything at their fingertips, said John Bernick, who is managing the state Department of Transportation’s $650 million New Haven-Hartford-Springfield commuter rail project.

“The generation coming in now doesn’t necessarily want to be tied to a car,” said Bernick, a Wallingford resident. “They want to come out from their front door and have everything at their fingertips.”

That’s the point of the commuter rail project, and the reason why a new railroad station is being built in Wallingford, he said. “That’s transit oriented development.”

With the construction of a new station and the addition of a commuter rail line, there is potential for development and growth in the lower portion of downtown Wallingford, Bernick said.

“Depending on what the usage is with the rail, anything’s possible,” Mayor William W. Dickinson Jr. said of the development potential around the new station, to be located at the intersection of North Cherry and Parker streets. “This is what has created a lot of the discussion and planning concerning incentive housing zone.”

The proposed housing zone will create favorable zoning regulations for developers in the downtown area, including along portions of North Colony and North Cherry streets. It has yet to be adopted by the town.

“We probably wouldn’t be having those discussions regarding the housing zone except for the rail potential,” Dickinson said.

Construction of the new station will begin at this time next year, Bernick said. The station will be the equivalent of three stories tall with 500-foot platforms on each side of the double tracks, he said. The main station will be located along North Cherry Street, and a smaller kiosk-like enclosure will be located on the opposite platform, according to designs. A glass-paned pedestrian bridge will span the tracks, connecting the platforms.

Bernick said two parking lots will provide about 220 spaces. Parking will be plentiful for the 17 round trips planned when the station is finished in 2016, Bernick said, because the lots were designed to handle the eventuality of 25 round trips when the rail is complete years later. The smaller of the two parking lots will be at the corner of North Cherry and Parker streets, while the larger parking lot will be built at what is now Cerrito’s Auto Sales, at 180 N. Colony St.

Bernick said last week that the location of Wallingford’s new station is “set in stone.”

The location

That the station site is “set in stone” didn’t stop its neighbors and town councilors from voicing their displeasure about its location and design plans during a public input session last Tuesday.

About 10 state DOT employees, including Bernick, attended the session and presented updated design plans. Most of the outcry came from residents of North Cherry Street. Concerns were mostly about traffic and security, though complaints about lighting and the type of shrubbery that will be used as a natural fence were also voiced.

“It’s just the nature,” Bernick said of residential complaints. “It’s important we understand clearly what their concerns and priorities are.”

On Tuesday, Bernick told concerned residents that he was open to personal meetings on site so that he could better explain designs. “I’m sensitive that this thing is landing in their front yard,” he said.

Town Councilor Jason Zandri said Friday that he’s worried about the new station being located in a residential area.

“I think they’ve underestimated the amount of road space they need,” he said, referring to traffic issues brought up during the Tuesday meeting.

The state DOT will look to acquire land to create easements and potentially widen roads, Bernick said. The only property that will be purchased as a whole is Cerrito’s Auto Sales. If those with property necessary to the project aren’t willing sellers, residents were notified Tuesday that eminent domain will be used. Bernick said the owner of Cerrito’s Auto Sales “isn’t a willing seller.”

The crux of traffic concerns came in regard to a commuter bus. According to current designs, a commuter bus will run down North Cherry Street and into the parking lot next to the station. Town Engineer John Thompson said North Cherry Street is narrow, and heading north, there is a bad sight line when turning left on Parker Street. A house on the corner blocks the sight line, Thompson said.

“It’s a tight intersection from a geometric standpoint,” Thompson said. “I’ve been very sensitive to these things.”

A traffic study performed by the state will help address some of these issues, Thompson said. He said he speaks regularly with Police Chief Douglas Dortenzio about traffic issues to make sure “what is proposed meets with our needs.”

Thompson also said that it’s not certain a bus will travel down North Cherry Street. The bus, he said, is a part of the design he supports to create a transportation hub.

Bernick said the original plan was for a bus pull-up on Old Colony Street to loop in and out of the station, but he was then asked by the town to add the stop on North Cherry Street.

“We can just do away with that,” Bernick said.

Town Councilor John Sullivan said “the first concerns I have are towards the residents in the area. The second concern is certainly safety. It seems to me they’re not committed to having someone on patrol down there. They’re going to use cameras rather than a person.”

Town Councilor Craig Fishbein said that the project’s design to dim lights at night and provide shrubbery to block the view into parking lots creates “a darkened roadway that is just calling for crime.”

Bernick said only the town of Westport has any form of security provided by the state or Amtrak, patrolling day and night. “Anywhere else, there’s no cop,” he said.

The station is designed for routine patrol, so police cruisers can easily drive through and see if the station is safe, Bernick said. That’s why, he said, the station is designed with plenty of glass paneling.

“You want to be able to see what you’re walking into before you get into it,” he said.

Cameras will be installed to watch for trouble, such as vandalism. Bernick said video will help give police a chance to catch perpetrators. Town councilors Tuesday night complained that they do not want to have to rely on the already short-staffed Wallingford Police Department to provide constant security in the area. Bernick said that in Meriden and Waterbury, police cruisers will be equipped with video feeds from cameras in their train stations. Bernick said emergency phones will be installed in the parking lots and station in Wallingford.

“There’s so much that I disagree with this,” Town Councilor John LeTourneau said of the new station. “This is going to be an absolute nightmare. Anyone who lives in that area will tell you, they’re so off-base on this, it’s really unbelievable.”

“The location is not the end of the world,” Town Councilor Tom Laffin said Friday. “The way they’re doing it is wrong.”

Fishbein said that he’s been against the rail project from its very beginning. Bernick told Fishbein Tuesday that between 250 and 300 people will board the train from Wallingford per day. With 17 round trips, Fishbein said that’s only about 10 people from Wallingford on every train.

“I see it to be an ultimate waste of our tax dollars,” Fishbein said.

The decision

While a majority of town councilors voiced their concern over the location of the new station Tuesday night, on June 12, 2012, the same council voted 5-2 to approve the location.

Zandri and Town Councilor Rosemary Rascati were absent from the meeting. LeTourneau and Sullivan cast the dissenting votes.

Several councilors were upset Tuesday night when Bernick said that it was the Town Council’s choice to build the station where it’s currently slated. “For them to say they really didn’t vote on this, I was troubled by that,” Thompson said of the council. That night in June, Thompson said, he made a three-hour presentation on two options: either the North Cherry Street location, or an alternate originally proposed by LeTourneau at Judd Square.

Thompson said he went through the issues for both locations. A working group formed by the mayor — including the fire and police chiefs and employees from the planning and zoning and engineering departments — felt that the Judd Square location presented safety issues, Thompson said. The main issue, he said, was that because the location was in an area of congestion, there could be problems with emergency vehicles. Due to design standards, gates at crossings would remain lowered for a longer period of time if the train station were built at Judd Square. This brought about concerns for fire and police personnel trying to respond to emergencies, Thompson said. Also, the Cerrito’s site offers more parking, so a parking garage isn’t required, and half the land to be developed for the station on North Cherry Street is already owned by Amtrak.

“We did present both options,” Bernick said.

Thompson said that if Judd Square were the council’s preference, the state DOT “would have gone with that.”

“No, I don’t believe that,” Zandri said. Sullivan also didn’t agree; nor did Fishbein, Le-Tourneau and Laffin.

Laffin said that all seven councilors attending last June’s meeting have the same memory of what happened: that no matter the vote, it was only a suggestion the state DOT would take into consideration.

“No matter what we voted, it wouldn’t have made that much of a difference,” LeTourneau said. “At the end, they would have gotten what they wanted.”

“The state asked for our suggestion,” Dickinson said. “Technically, the town did suggest the site. Ultimately, the state had to decide where it has to go.

“I suppose the council could have gone another direction ... I understand there’s desires for different locations for different reasons,” he said.

While Thompson said no location is perfect, the properties around the new station will eventually be some of the most valuable in Wallingford.

Bernick said last week that he could envision street-front properties being built near the station on Old Colony Street, possibly creating “another Main Street.”

“It’s a monster,” Bernick said of the project. “It’s going to feel good when it goes into service.”

 

Courtesy of Connecticut Department of Transportation

Site plan shows new railroad station, parking lots, and existing structures in Wallingford.

Courtesy of Connecticut Department of Transportation

Artist’s rendering shows the North Cherry Street side of the proposed railroad station in Wallingford.

Photos by Christopher Zajac courtesy of the Record-Journal

A new location for the Wallingford Train Station

As published in the Record Journal, Monday June 11, 2012

By Laurie Rich Salerno

Record-Journal staff

WALLINGFORD — On Tuesday night, town councilors are expected to vote on where Wallingford’s next train depot should go — a decision that could affect downtown traffic and development for decades of years to come.

There are two sites being suggested by the state Department of Transportation: one at the intersection of the railroad tracks and Ward Street, called Judd Square, or Plan 1; and another near the intersection of North Cherry and Parker streets, referred to as Parker/Cerrito, or Plan 2. Town staff are primarily backing the Parker Street site, citing safety issues due to traffic interruption and a parking garage at the Judd Square location.

“Of all the sites discussed … it’s the optimal one at this point,” Mayor William W. Dickinson Jr. said of the Parker Street site, citing the concerns of emergency personnel.

The council’s decision is not binding, but according to John Bernick, the rail project’s supervising engineer, it will be heavily considered when the DOT gives recommendations to the Federal Rail Administration, which is funding the project. The DOT is soliciting public comments until June 22 on its environmental impact survey, available on its website.

Town Engineer John Thompson sought to have the council vote Tuesday night so the town could have a voice on the location.

“We didn’t want somebody outside of Wallingford deciding where the station should be,” said Thompson, who has been working with both the DOT and the town on the project.

The new passenger platform would serve the state’s proposed New Haven-to-Springfield high-speed rail service, which officials say could eventually bring 25 round-trip commuter trains — 50 trips — through town each day. It is scheduled to be completed in 2016 and begin with about 17 round-trip trains a day.

Neither depot would include an actual train station; rather, they would consist of parking lots or parking structures, platforms on each side of the track and a vaulted pedestrian walkway to connect the two. Riders would buy tickets on the train, as do now, or use automated systems on the platforms, engineers say.

The historic train station at Hall, Quinnipiac and Center streets will remain, but not as a train station. It won’t be used for the high-speed rail, according to engineers, because trains stopping there cut off access to not only those streets, but can clog Route 5 and close nearby Ward and Parker streets.

“It would literally tie up downtown,” Thompson said.

Judd Square

The Judd Square site was proposed as an alternative to both an initial Parker Street plan and a separate plan that would have placed a station across the tracks from Holy Trinity Church.

The depot there would feature one 200-space parking garage on the north side of Ward Street and the west side of the railroad tracks, along with 500-foot platforms on each side of the tracks and 200-foot shelters directly across from one another and joined by a raised pedestrian overpass, according to DOT schematics. Entrances to the lots would be both on Ward and South Cherry streets, and the parking structure would abut a parking lot belonging to the Judd Square condominium complex.

Having a more-than-300unit condominium right next door seemed like it would be a natural feeder for the service, Thompson said.

“When the Judd Square site was floated — that jumped out as being an absolute home run in terms of ridership potential,” he said.

But a town working group formed to analyze the sites after a public hearing last August found the site to be less than ideal in terms of traffic and public safety, according to Thompson.

Ward Street is a busy artery for east-west traffic, extending from North Elm Street on the east and joining with Quinnipiac Street on the west side, which feeds into Route 15. Trains stopping at Judd Square 50 times a day would close Ward, Hall and Quinnipiac — which engineers say are the town’s busiest streets — all at once. Trains stopping at Judd Square would make Parker, a short street that runs between North Colony and Washington, the nearest open road downtown. And that, Thompson said, could hamper the ability of emergency vehicles to quickly get to different sides of town.

Thompson said that one Sunday he saw this in action while sitting in his car at a crossing behind an ambulance as a train went by. “I’m watching an emergency vehicle with its lights flashing,” he said. “We just can’t let this happen 50 times a day.”

The working group also opposed the construction of a parking garage, citing public safety and aesthetic concerns.

“Most people find them difficult to navigate when getting off the train. The darkness of those places and the manner in which they’re designed is usually pretty intimidating,” said Police Chief Douglas Dortenzio, who attended some of the working group meetings. The chief said he’s not a fan of high-rise parking garages from a public safety standpoint — particularly those that do not have attendants — but he said he thinks there are subtle advantages and disadvantages to each site, and he isn’t a strong believer in either one.

Republican Town Councilor Craig Fishbein said he is leaning toward the Parker Street site because of Judd Square’s proposed parking garage.

“I don’t want to see the Wallingford landscape include a multilevel parking lot. I think it would turn the town of Wallingford into the city of Wallingford,” Fishbein said, though he is opposed to the high-speed rail project on the whole.

For the site to work as it has been designed, the state would need to acquire the Knights of Columbus building, a vacant industrial site and a private home.

Parker Street

The Parker Street depot would be a split site with two parking lots, one on each side of the tracks, totaling 210 spaces. One of the lots would be at the intersection of Parker and North Cherry streets on the south side of Parker and the west side of the tracks,with entrances on North Cherry. The land that would become the North Cherry lot is owned by the state. The second lot would be placed on North Colony Street, at the site of Cerrito’s used car lot.

The state would have to acquire property from only one owner to complete the Parker Street site, and though Cerrito’s owners did not return calls Friday, DOT officials said the town had discussed the proposed plans with them. Bernick said the state would pay for the property and relocation costs. “It’s a pretty fair shake,” he said of the process.

The two 500-foot platforms and 200-foot shelters would not be directly across from each other, but the ends would overlap in the middle, where there would be an overhead pedestrian walkway.

The distance between platforms is one of the reasons Republican Town Councilor John LeTourneau is a proponent of the Judd Square location, saying it could be difficult for handicapped, aged and other travelers if they need to get from one parking lot to the other side of the tracks.

“Judd Square … I like because it can be a nice, neat, clean up-and-over to get from one platform to the other,” Le-Tourneau said. He said the public safety argument for Parker Street is thin — the increased frequency of trains could cause public safety issues no matter where the new station is. He believes auxiliary police and fire stations may eventually be necessary.

The town’s working group favors the Parker Street site, as there would be no parking garage and trains stopping there would close Parker, Hall and Quinnipiac, but leave the busier Ward Street open.

Having parking lots on both sides of the tracks would also minimize bottlenecks to one lot or side of the tracks, according to Thompson.

“It gives (riders) the ability to park on the side closer to them,” Thompson said, which “lessens traffic impact on the local roadway network.”

Democratic Town Councilor John Sullivan said he would wait until Tuesday’s meeting, which will include a presentation from town engineers, to decide which site to support.

Residents

There were few residents out near either location late Friday morning, but some weighed in on the possibility of having a train depot nearby. Leon Bernstein, who has lived in the Judd Square condominiums for about 15 years, said he did not want a train stop next door.

“I don’t really like the idea. I wish they would put it someplace else,” Bernstein said.

At the other location, residents of Parker Place condominiums, which would be directly across the street from one of the parking lots, were more enthusiastic about having a station so near.

“The convenience of having the station here — that would be great,” Carole Evon said. “I have a car, but I might use it.”

As for increased noise, Diann Burrill, who has lived in a unit facing the tracks for three years, said it likely wouldn’t make that much difference to her and her husband.

“We have gotten used to it,“ Burrill said of the train whistle and other noises. The location would be convenient for others in her building, she said, including her son, who lives in a separate apartment in the same complex.

“He and his girl might use it once in a while … go see the Red Sox and Yankees. I think people would use it,” Burrill said.

Above: A vacant parcel next at Parker and North Cherry streets is a proposed site for a new Wallingford train station.Below: A lot across the tracks behind Dairy Queen on Ward Street is a possible location for a parking structure to be part of a train station.

Photos by Christopher Zajac / Courtesy of the Record-Journal

FROM WALLINGFORD - Contrasting approaches to government

As published in the Record Journal, Sunday September 18, 2011

If I were a civics teacher, a viewing of last Tuesday’s Wallingford Town Council meeting would be a class requirement, and it would serve as a textbook example of why the functions of government should be carried out at the lowest level possible or, described another way, the level closest to the people.

On the one hand were the votes to repeal Town Council decisions to lease a piece of private property for 30 years and to spend public money on its improvement or face a referendum on the issue. On the other hand, was the report on the placement of the railroad station by the project engineer for the $647 million commuter rail project where the only impact that the citizenry of Wallingford might possibly have is on its location.

When you put these two projects side by side as was done the other night, it becomes clear why so many of us advocate for leaving as much authority and responsibility at the local level of government, or at least the lowest possible level that makes sense. Our ability to enforce accountability and transparency on those that run our various governments dissipates exponentially as decisions are made by higher and most distant entities. Here are three aspects of what I mean by that:

1. The citizen’s impact on government: the Town Council made two decisions regarding the parking lot. Those decisions have been challenged by some voters. First, they were able to argue for a repeal of those decisions in an open meeting directly with the people that made them. Not having achieved that goal, they were able to secure sufficient signatures to allow every voter in Wallingford to weigh in on the issue in a referendum. The railroad project?

Well, maybe, just maybe, if, in their judgment, they deem our comments worthy, we may, just possibly, perhaps be able to get the State of Connecticut and the Federal Railroad Administration to … listen to us regarding where to locate the station. That is the sum total of citizen impact on this $647 million project. As for any other citizen comments the other night: it was “this deal is done; sit down and be quiet” time, according to one councilor’s comments.

2. How these projects are paid for: The Town Council of Wallingford is paying for the parking lot improvements immediately from a capital and non-recurring fund financed by current contributions from our Electric Division. How is the commuter railroad being paid for? Well, the State of Connecticut is borrowing its hundreds of millions from us and our children. The feds are paying their hundreds of millions of dollars with … Happy Bucks borrowed from our great grandchildren. In other words, local government finances its wishes with real money; the state with sort of real money to be paid back years from now, and the feds with … money borrowed from … well, we really don’t know, do we?

3. Direct results: Wallingford Town Council spends $500 thousand. Result: parking lot improvements that everyone who owns a car in Wallingford can use. State and feds spend one thousand times that amount and we get: a startup commuter service that will be utilized by 6,000 residents statewide. But to justify this staggering amount of money spent on benefiting so few, they trot out the old impossible-to-quantify, years-and-years down the road “economic development” chestnut.

I am not for a second suggesting that the decisions to be made in building railroads or other similarly complex undertakings be the province of local authorities. That is clearly unworkable. However, the point I am making is that, in America today, we citizens are ceding more and more authority to higher and higher levels of government.

That Town Council meeting contained two starkly contrasting approaches to government. Unless we are wise, we will lose the one and be crushed by the other.

New train station location proposed

As published in the Record Journal, Wednesday September 14, 2011

By Robert Cyr
Record-Journal staff
rcyr@record-journal.com
(203) 317-2224

WALLINGFORD — After much concern and public input from a meeting last month, a state transportation official returned Tuesday to present another possible location for a train station that will be part of a multi-million- dollar railway upgrade, connecting New Haven and Springfield, Mass.

Town councilors worried about increased automobile traffic and problems involving development around proposed train station sites at Judd Square and a newly proposed Parker Street location.

“I think this could be a real winner, for not only the state of Connecticut but for points up north as well,” said Councilor John Sullivan. “But my real concern is that we don’t have a long-term plan for the downtown.”

Plans call for upgrading signals along the track, which is slated to start as early as next spring. The first proposed station at Judd Square has raised concerns over an elevated platform and parking for 200 cars. The proposed Parker Street station, farther from downtown and higher-density population areas, was drafted on public input, said DOT Project Manager John Bernick.

Wallingford has the most crossings of track over road of any municipality along the corridor — 10, eight with signals and two gates without signals. The most heavily trafficked areas are Parker, Hall, Ward and Quinnipiac streets. The town now has five or six trains passing through every day. The rail project calls for 25 cars running every half-hour during peak morning and evening commutes and once an hour in between, Bernick said.

Springfield will become a central connector, with service to Boston, Vermont and finally to Montreal. The $647 million project consists of double-tracking 62 miles of track, upgrading the signals, building new stations in North Haven, Newington and Enfield, relocating Wallingford’s station and building new elevated platforms, walkways and parking garages in each town.

“This service promotes transit-related development, and allows the downtown to grow without creating traffic congestion that normally goes with it,” Bernick said. “We’re here to make sure that no matter what site comes out in the end, it’s buildable and the impacts aren’t any more than what we anticipated.”

An environmental impact study, with a public comment period, is expected to be completed and ready for presentation in November. Once the studies are done, the project will be eligible for $121 million in federal funding, he said. Full service could begin by 2016.

Public officials have said they are concerned that more trains, which can go as fast as 110 mph, would pose a safety threat to residents and disrupt nearby businesses. A traffic study previously conducted by Wilbur Smith & Associates gave several crossings poor ratings for the proposed project without altering streets and traffic flow.

Some residents, however, disagreed with the DOT’s philosophy and cost benefit studies that say the upgraded railway would create economic growth along the commuter corridor. Public Utilities Commissioner David Gessert told Bernick that the transit system would benefit few and be a financial burden to many.

“I think it’s a beautiful fairy tale, but I don’t think all of these things are relay going to happen,” he said. “It’s hard to see in my mind how this high speed train is going to be of any tremendous value.”

‘Citizen Mike’ talks Simpson Court at 9PM

WALLINGFORD — Former City Councilor Mike Brodinsky discusses the Simpson Court parking plan on the latest edition of his public access show “Citizen Mike.” In studio guests include Town Councilors Nick Economopoulos and Craig Fishbein.

The show airs on cable Channel 18 at 9 p.m. every night, except Sunday. It can also be viewed on demand at wpaa.tv. Comments or suggestions can be sent to citizenmiketv@gmail.com. Record-Journal Executive Editor Ralph Tomaselli is regular contributor to the show.

If you can’t catch the show on TV you can catch it online on their Video On Demand page.

FROM WALLINGFORD - I have a local list

This week’s FROM WALLINGFORD  was written by Mike Brodinsky who is a former town councilor, chairman of the School Roof Building Committee and host of public access show “Citizen Mike.”

I like lists. One of my favorites is the list of the greatest rock and roll songs of all time. It brings me back, way back. A list of the longest running Broadway plays is terrific reading, too. I want a list, it would be short, of the best, left-handed second basemen from Nebraska who played baseball for the Cincinnati Reds. That’s not for everyone. But here is a list I have wanted to write for you: (drum roll, please) a list of the most significant Wallingford news stories of 2011.

My rating system is not scientific. A story could make my list because of the amount of press it got. The impact of the news on Wallingford matters, too. A story could make the list because it may serve as a warning of things to come; or, it could be representative of a trend. The story could make the list only because it appeals to my quirkiness. The list will grow with each column I write. This is but my first installment.

Because of its impact on Wallingford, I pick the new commuter rail service as the top story of the year, so far. Facts about the plan are still evolving. Currently, the plan calls for 25 round trip trains instead of 6. I foresee lines of cars at eight signaled crossings, waiting for the gates to rise during rush hour when trains will be more frequent.

Emergency vehicles are in line, too, waiting. The trains could reach speeds of around 80 miles per hour in the Wallingford area. I see accidents, maybe around the two crossings without traffic lights. I see new passenger loading platforms, but I do not see a lot of passengers. I see the parking garage the State wants to build in the downtown area. I see that it doesn’t bring in taxes or create much downtown vitality.

The DOT and others predict huge benefits, and some public officials have, ahem, jumped on board, too. Together, they have heavily promoted the new train service, but their claims are theory. No one really knows what the total costs or specific benefits will be. Their speculation as to the benefits, which come at a very steep price, is an important part of this story.

The second top story is about roofs. The schools need to replace 11 of them. They are nearing the end of their useful lives and the Town Council has started a needed and costly replacement program to deal with the problem. It’s not just the school roofs that landed this topic on my list. In 2010, a Record-Journal headline warned, “Rain doesn’t wait for grants.” The story reported that leaky roofs had been a problem in the Parks and Recreation building. Money was put into the 2011 budget to fix the problem. Too little, too late? In June, another headline read, “Parks Rec roof still a mess; company has until July 5.” The headline was right. The rain didn’t wait. Almost a year later, the building had water damage. Also in June, we read that the police department roof had a leak. The Council authorized almost $100,000 to replace it. But, by then, water damage had already plagued the police department for months.

My favorite roof story, however, is about solar panels. Superintendent Dr. Sal Menzo, is investigating whether Wallingford could put solar panels on school roofs at no cost to the town. Some people will challenge this idea but the Council and Board of Education should support that investigation. This is more than a plan to save or spend a few dollars. It is about whether Wallingford has the spirit to do something bold and innovative. It’s a story about whether roofs with solar panels can be educational for students, and a message to prospective residents and businesses: Wallingford is a happening place. Join us as we move forward.

Tracking the rail project in Wallingford

As published in the Record Journal, Monday August 8, 2011

By Mary Ellen Godin
Record-Journal staff
mgodin@record-journal.com
(203) 317-2255

WALLINGFORD — Travel speeds, downtown traffic, land acquisition and changes in the Judd Square area are some of the concerns being raised by the public over plans for commuter rail service from New Haven to Springfield, Mass.

Plans call for upgrading signals along the 62-mile stretch, which could begin as early as next spring. But locally, the public voiced concerns at a meeting last week over a proposal to move the train stop to Judd Square, with an elevated platform and parking for 200 cars.

The state Department of Transportation held the first of many informational sessions last Thursday with residents and town officials over where and how to lay out the new station. The rail line will increase commuter and inter-city service while also providing high-speed Acela transit along the corridor.

Springfield will become a central connector with service to Boston, Vermont and finally to Montreal. The project consists of double tracking 62 miles of track, upgrading the signals, building new stations in North Haven, Newington and Enfield, relocating Wallingford’s station and building new elevated platforms, walkways and parking garages in each town.

“Nothing has been set in stone,” said DOT Project Manager John Bernick.
He asked town officials to create a panel to act as an advisory board throughout the project.

Wallingford has the most crossings of any municipality along the corridor — 10, eight with signals and two unsignaled gates. The most heavily trafficked areas are Parker, Hall, Ward and Quinnipiac streets. The town now has five or six trains passing through per day. The rail project calls for 25.

Public officials have said they are concerned that more trains, which can go as fast as 110 mph, would pose a safety threat to residents and disrupt nearby businesses.

City Councilor Jerry Farrell opposed Amtrak’s taking any land from Most Holy Trinity Church. Bernick assured him that wouldn’t happen.

Farrell also he had concerns about 25 trains roaring through a very densely populated section of town every day. The crossings are at grade. He was assured that just because the trains had the potential to reach 110 mph didn’t mean they would travel that fast through Wallingford or other high density areas. “No matter where you place it or combine it, grade crossings are going to be a problem,” Bernick said.

A traffic study conducted by Wilbur Smith & Associates reviewed the traffic signals at Parker, Hall, Ward and Quinnipiac streets and gave several of them failing grades should the anticipated commuter and intercity service start with no changes in existing traffic routes. Solutions include some road widening in certain areas, signal changes and right-turn-only lanes.

Residents of Judd Square and the nearby area expressed concerns that their parking, already in short supply, would be impacted. Bernick said no parking would be taken away and Amtrak plans to use land now housing a warehouse for that purpose.

There were only rough schematics of the site, parking garage and walk-up from Route 5 because project leaders hope to gather more public input on the location of the new train platform and design specifications. Judd Square is not a definitive site — moving the stop several blocks to the north has also been discussed — but is the best for the project, Bernick said.

Councilor Craig Fishbein questioned the cost of the project and the amount Amtrak receives annually in subsidies to support its operation. He said that without an obvious demand by people working in other towns, he didn’t see how the operation could sustain itself. The cost of the project is set at $647 million, and a $110 million shortfall is expected for the Hartford-to-Springfield leg, which planners expect will come from the federal government.

“You would be better off giving the money to the people,” Fishbein said.

Bernick replied that demand has already been proven and the project will offer significant economic development opportunities to communities with train stations. He also said increased usage of Metro-North has made it the most profitable service in the U.S.

Other benefits are that the ability to travel to Boston and New York in one to two hours could make office space in Meriden or Wallingford more attractive. Shuttle buses to and from industrial parks are also a possibility and the station will connect with the public service bus lines.

The public meetings in the cities and towns along the rail line will become part of the environmental impact study expected this fall. Upgrades to the signals could begin as early as next spring, Bernick said.

Gail DeLucia, president of the Judd Square Homeowners Association, got on board with the project after she learned the residents would not lose any parking. She was careful to say she was speaking as an individual and not for the group. But the sluggish economy and job market offer more reasons to invite commerce and create jobs.

“We have to look to the future,” DeLucia said, “or we don’t get any solution.”

FROM WALLINGFORD - Truth overtakes rail project

This week’s FROM WALLINGFORD was written by Stephen Knight

As published in the Record Journal, Sunday August 7, 2011

I have been a student of the railroad industry for my entire adult life; as a student in graduate school, as a keenly interested observer, and as a professional transportation consultant. So I write this column with considerable angst, because it is my conclusion that the proposed New Haven-Hartford-Springfield commuter rail project that will run through Wallingford is a boondoggle of fantastic proportions. My inherent predisposition to support this project is overwhelmed when confronted with the 1) downright mythical speed and service projections, 2) wildly optimistic ridership projections and 3) blindly underestimated capital and operating expenses.

Speed and service projections: In a May 9 press release, Gov. Malloy stated that these trains would reach “speeds up to 110 miles per hour.” I say: only if you catapult the trains from every station like they do jet fighters off an aircraft carrier. Why? First of all, there will eventually be 11 stops in the 62 miles between New Haven and Springfield. That’s an average of less than six miles between stops. So where exactly will these trains do 110 mph? And — are you ready for this? — the service will commence with hand-me-down equipment from Shoreline East. According to their latest schedule, those trains, making all the stops, move between New Haven and New London averaging less than 50 mph, and do so on the most advanced, best maintained railroad track in America. Secondly, this speed in a corridor with thirty-eight grade crossings? Really? So calling the NHHS project high speed rail is utterly fictitious.

Ridership projections built on the sentiment “Build it and they will come”: in calculating potential ridership, the numbers presented assume a) many more daily Amtrak trains running on the line; b) enormous numbers of passengers feeding the line from the so-called “Knowledge Corridor” line in central Massachusetts which has yet to be rebuilt; and c) thousands upon thousands of people willing to live in this corridor and work 2 ½ hours away in New York City. In other words, the number of commuters between New Haven and Springfield that is supposedly the driving force behind this project could never, ever justify the price tag, so numbers assuming a complete northeastern United States rail system build out are used to puff up the stats.

Capital and operating expenses: The price tag for rail line and station construction alone is $647 million, and the project is counting on huge support from the feds. Here is the latest fed response: State of Connecticut request — $227 million. Fed grant: $30 million. Result: the project has already contracted to providing trains only during peak commuter times. And how much money is allocated to purchase rolling stock — the stuff you ride on? Zero. As mentioned above, the plan is to use the existing Shore Line East equipment until, well, who knows?

As for operating expenses, somehow the project is making revenue estimates, but they haven’t even set the fare schedule. How do you do that? But even assuming (do you see that word a lot here?) their revenue and ridership projections are accurate, there is an inherent, unavoidable, inevitable huge annual cash subsidy. This is not unusual. This is the norm, but could someone in Hartford admit that?

So here’s the rub. Even more than I love railroads, I love the truth. The unvarnished, straight up, tell-it-like-it-is, we can take it truth. And we aren’t getting it. We are being fed pretty pictures, fantastic blue-sky fuzzy numbers and gauzy descriptions of an idyllic life in a future northeastern U.S. economy that seems farther from reality every single day.

If these words seem harsh, they spring from disappointment.

Disappointment that this project is not a practical, financially sensible fit for the market in which it is to operate, and disappointed that you and I are, yet again, being treated like proverbial mushrooms: kept in the dark and covered with . . . well, you know what I’m saying.

REMINDER - Information meeting set Aug. 4th regarding the New Haven-Hartford-Springfield commuter rail project

As published in the Record Journal Friday July 22, 2011

WALLINGFORD — The office of Mayor William W. Dickinson Jr. will sponsor a public information meeting at 6:30 p.m. Aug. 4 in the Town Council chambers at the Town Hall, 45 S. Main St.

Representatives from the Connecticut Department of Transportation and their consultant team will provide an update on the New Haven-Hartford-Springfield commuter rail project and its impact on Wallingford and possible station locations, including the property on South Cherry Street next to Judd Square Condominiums.

After the presentation, a question-and-answer session will be open to all attendees.

For information, call the mayor’s office at (203) 294-2070 or the engineering department at (203) 294-2035.

FROM WALLINGFORD - Downtown deadlock

This week’s FROM WALLINGFORD is written by my counterpart on the column - Stephen Knight

As Published in the Record Journal Sunday December 26, 2010

Well, for now, the Incentive Housing Zone for downtown Wallingford is off the table. Monday night, the Town Council deadlocked on the issue and the Planning and Zoning Commission postponed a vote on the plan. While support for the plan seemed to be building a year ago, it was clear that that support dissipated in the intervening months. While most of the opposition seemed to center around the need for more information, I think that there are three other factors that also figured into the resultant, lukewarm support.

First of all, major changes to existing regulations have to be driven by either 1) an actual proposal put forth by an entity with means to make the project actually happen, or, 2) a consensus among those most affected that the changes are in their best interest. Neither of those conditions was in evidence. The idea appears to have come to life because some of the social engineers in Hartford passed legislation offering financial incentives to consider development of this sort. Then financial incentives that got the town to the table in the first place were drastically reduced. That left little or no impetus for changes to be made, and what little momentum that did exist died.

Secondly, there are many in Wallingford skeptical of accepting state funds for an entirely local project, and I certainly share such skepticism. When the State of Connecticut offers money to local communities, it does so in order to induce compliance with whatever grand scheme it is that they are promoting. The proverbial “strings attached” to that funding has two results: 1) the town loses control over whatever the project is and 2) the completion of the project slows to a crawl. In this case, the money that the state is offering no doubt came with an enormous set of conditions, restrictions and impediments.

As illustration, I offer you the Christian Street bridge debacle of recent years. Do you recall how long that bridge took to replace? The Town had originally sought to work through the state’s local bridge program, but the project got so bogged down in red tape that the town administration finally threw up its hands, completed its own design and installed the bridge without any state assistance for hundreds of thousands less. In the present Incentive Housing Zone case, the question had to be asked: if we take the money, how much control over the area are we ceding to the bureaucracy in Hartford? Is it really worth it?

Lastly, the linchpin of this whole redevelopment idea is the commuter rail service that is supposed to be built over the next few years. Maybe no one brought this up in Monday’s meeting, but I am beginning to doubt if this operation will ever be built. The state is facing years of multibillion dollar deficits. And, to make the problem far worse, the federal government recently turned down Connecticut’s request for additional hundreds of millions of dollars to finance the project, leaving it for the state to bear the lion’s share of funding. In other words, no one in Hartford will say it, but I think this project is stalled. If that is indeed the case, a huge incentive for creating this special zone is gone.

I take a backseat to nobody in my support for downtown Wallingford and the creation of ways to keep it healthy and attractive. Perhaps sometime in the future, this Incentive Housing Zone will be revisited and the good effort of Town Planner Linda Bush will bring a different result. At present, however, the irony seems to be that the town’s best action was to take no action.

Is Connecticut too deep in debt for rail project?

As printed in the Record Journal Sunday August 15, 2010

Originally published online at CTMirror.org - “State borrowed from capital program to keep budget afloat” 

CTMirror.org is the Web site of The Connecticut Mirror, an independent, nonprofit news organization covering government, politics and public policy in the state.

 

Nearly $600 million borrowed from future capital projects to help state government pay its bills has thrown a wrench into Gov. M. Jodi Rell's efforts to bond another $260 million for the planned New Haven-to-Springfield commuter rail line.

Rell canceled Wednesday's scheduled State Bond Commission meeting after leaders of the legislature's Finance, Revenue and Bonding Committee questioned why the $580 million in short-term borrowing - approved in April 2009 when the state was more than $1 billion in deficit - still hasn't been repaid.

And Rep. Vincent J. Candelora of North Branford, ranking House Republican on the committee, said he was unaware the financing had been sought to keep the state's checkbook in balance, and not to finance capital projects.

"There wasn't any discussion about borrowing for our cash flow at the time," Candelora, whose finance committee leadership post also makes him a member of the bond commission, said Thursday. "I don't want there to be any secrets or surprises out there."

Candelora and his fellow GOP lawmakers already have criticized both Rell, a Republican, and the legislature's Democratic majority for ordering $2 billion in borrowing over the past year to cover government operating costs.

Despite having nearly $1.4 billion in the state's emergency reserve, Rell and the legislature agreed last fall to borrow $1.05 billion to cover the 2008-09 budget deficit. This enabled them to use the entire reserve to support the 2009-10 and 2010-11 budgets.

The governor and legislature then agreed to borrow again this past May, approving another $956 million in financing for the current budget--an amount that has been cut to $700 million by recent surplus projections.

And if the state effectively advanced itself another $580 million in April 2009 that will eventually be used for capital projects, why does Rell need  another $260 million for the rail project now? Candelora asked.

"I believe it is imperative that the commission members have adequate information prior to its vote," Candelora wrote this week to Rell, warning he was prepared to vote against further borrowing at the bond commission's Aug. 11 meeting. The panel, which is being asked to approve $520 million in new general obligation bonding for projects, including $260 million for the commuter line, has been rescheduled to meet Aug. 17.

Rep. Cameron C. Staples, D-New Haven, and Sen. Eileen M. Daily, D-Westbrook, then sent e-mails to Rell, indicating they shared many of Candelora's concerns.

The governor's office issued an statement this week indicating the meeting had been delayed because of lawmakers' concerns about past borrowing. "All of us, including Representative Candelora, the other lawmakers and my administration, deserve to have this extra information before we move ahead," she wrote.

That borrowing was authorized by Rell, and performed by state Treasurer Denise L. Nappier, in accordance with emergency provisions spelled out in state law. The treasurer is empowered, with the governor's approval, to borrow funds when the state coffers are at risk of running dry.

Nappier submitted a plan in early March 2009 to Rell, which the governor subsequently approved. The "first line of defense" in that plan stems from a procedure commonly followed when state government finances road repairs, new building construction or other capital initiatives.

The bond commission routinely allocates a fixed amount of borrowing, to be repaid over 15 or 20 years, for such projects. But in the early stages, a relatively small amount of the funds might be needed for tasks such as architectural designs or engineering studies.

This fraction of the total project budget typically is borrowed, at lower interest rates for short terms such as one or two years, through bond anticipation notes.

When the state is ready to move ahead with the bulk of the project, it issues long-term bonds, and uses the proceeds both to repay the anticipation notes and to pay for the remaining work.

Nappier's plan called for the bond commission to approve $700 million for future capital projects, which it did in April 2009.

The treasurer then used bond anticipation notes to effectively secure an advance of $580 million, to improve the state's cash flow.

"That plan was reviewed by the governor and shared with the General Assembly," Nappier wrote this week in a response to Candelora, adding it allowed Connecticut to borrow at rates ranging from 0.47 percent to 1.15 percent. "Had the BANs not been used in FY 2009, to aid the state's overall cash position, other methods of cash flow borrowing, more than likely at higher interest rates, would have been necessary to ensure our ability to meet the state's obligations."

This system works because of state government's common cash pool, a system that effectively mingles tax revenues, receipts from fees, licenses and penalties, federal grants, and proceeds from borrowing, in one big account.

Originally scheduled to be repaid in June 2010, those notes were extended for another year. Nappier added in her letter that she plans to issue long-term bonds next June to borrow the full $700 million authorized for capital projects back in April 2009, and to use those proceeds to repay the short-term notes.

But what about the $580 million used to shore up state government's operating budget last year as tax receipts ran low? Is all of that funding effectively still available? If so, why does the Rell administration need more borrowing?

"You want to be able to see how this $580 million fits into the whole context," Staples said. "The treasurer's letter provides some information, but it doesn't provide us with all of the context we need."

"If we were going to borrow even more money for (operating costs,) this is something that should have been debated by the legislature," Candelora said.

Staples added committee leaders would be seeking to meet with Nappier in the next few days to better understand the common cash pool.

Candelora and Rep. Craig Miner of Litchfield, ranking House Republican on the Appropriations Committee, questioned during the regular 2010 legislative session whether the state's operating budget effectively was borrowing from its capital projects to stay afloat.

About 27 percent of the funds in the state's cash pool at the end of January 2009 came from bonding, while that ratio had jumped to 52 percent one year later, said Candelora, who sponsored a measure enacted this year that requires the treasurer to issue monthly reports on the state's cash balance starting in October.