Search

Recommendation: Role of Rail Committee

Public Information &
Advocacy

¢ Engage surrounding
communities

BSRC Partnership

¢ Evaluate viability of BSRC

¢ Guide on legal
documents (e.g. MOU
renewal)

* Define technical
expertise needed (e.g.
AECOM, NRPC)

Operations and
Station Development

° Identify different
scenarios

¢ Plan for scope and scale
of station

¢ Build financing and
revenue options

° Identify risks

° Engage business
community

¢ Engage public officials
and state agencies

Attachment 3
Rail Report

Nashua Rail Transit Committee
Report

Submitted to Mayor Jim Donchess and the City of Nashua
Board of Alderman

Updated December 2018

Contents

|. Overview of Rail Transit Committee

Il. Context and Status of Passenger Rail in Nashua
a. Imperative for Passenger Rail
b. Status of NH Capital Corridor project
c. Status of Boston Surface Railroad Company project

Ill. Moving Forward — Issues to Plan for Passenger Rail
IV. Recommendations - Continued Efforts and Role of Rail Committee

Overview of Rail Transit Committee

Role and Purpose

* Committee is charged with making recommendations and development of
a strategy to the Mayor and Board of Alderman to bring passenger rail to
Nashua.

¢ Members
* Two (2) Members of the Board of Aldermen - Brian McCarthy & Mike O’Brien
* One (1) Representative from Nashua Regional Planning Commission - Jay Minkarah
¢ One (1) Representative from Greater Nashua Chamber of Commerce - John Stabile
)
)

Two (2) Mayoral Resident Appointments - Carl Seidel & Bette Lasky
One (1) Mayoral Designee Appointment - Dan Kelly

Two (2) Members of New Hampshire Rail Authority (Nashua Delegates) - Steve
Michon (chair) and Paul Patti

Meetings, Visits, Planning

¢ Met monthly to review likelihood and feasibility of passenger rail
options for City of Nashua

¢ Briefed and convened with Mayor and City staff to review options and
assess progress

¢ Communicated with other state, regional and local rail interest to
assess roles and partnership opportunities (NH Department of
Transportation, NRPC, SNHPC, NH Rail Authority, legislative
delegation)

¢ Met to brief on plans and assess opportunities with Boston Surface
Railroad Company (BSRC), interested cities (Lowell, Worcester,
Woonsocket), Exeter, NH, station managers

Context and Status of Passenger Rail in
Nashua

Imperative for Passenger Rail

Economic Development
* Create value of land adjacent to and surrounding station = increased taxes

* Build economic activity and future improvement opportunities to
underdeveloped corridor (Bridge Street/Crown Street)

¢ Support industry development — stronger connections to Boston market and key
clusters in life sciences, healthcare, financial services, information technology,

educational services
¢ Meet talent demands — improved flow of labor to/from Nashua businesses

° Increase resident connections to job and career advancement opportunities in
Boston Metro market

* Increase accessibility to Nashua’s Downtown and Riverfront Development areas

Board of Aldermen — 3/22/16 Page 11
Alderman Schoneman

| don’t want to create the impression that | am speaking flippantly about that but my point is that we do know
about Lyme disease and heat stroke. When | asked the question is it likely that we are going to get signs and
brochures out of this program; that was the likely outcome.

Alderman Dowd

Over the years this Board and the Board of Education have approved a number of grants from different
sources and the Board of Education just recently voted against a grant and then changed their mind when they
found out that there is a lot of work that goes into asking for a grant. The people who do the work want to get
that grant for a specific reason. If we start turning grants down after all of that work people are going to be very
reluctant to apply for a grant. The grants over the years have brought a great deal of money and have done a
great number of good things for the city. Someone here in Nashua has gone through all of the time and effort
to develop a grant and when they win it | think we should be supportive.

Alderman Clemons

If we do still have employees that continue to write grants and we reject them we are going to set ourselves up
for not even getting the awards for those grants anymore. | think that would be unfortunate.

Alderman Siegel

| want to address this domino effect implication. | don’t believe we have ever rejected a grant and it’s not clear
to me that any Board going forward would do that in the normal course of business. Most of the grants are
very straight forward and clear cut. This one was more speculative.

Alderman Clemons

| respectfully disagree with Alderman Siegel. | don’t think that the effect that climate change is on our citizens
is something that is not important to address. Climate is changing whether we like it or not and we should be
looking into that.

Alderman Siegel

Just to clarify, my statement had nothing to do with the grant itself. It's whether or not mechanically we will
reject grants in the future which we typically wouldn't. I’m not putting a value judgement on climate change
research. It was never about that and I’ve already said that publicly four or five times.

Alderman Schoneman

Some of the benefits that come from this are not a surprise so | don’t think we are gaining anything by
research; all we are doing is producing literature. It’s not a study or solution for climate change, Lyme disease
or heat stroke.

Alderman O’Brien

| consider $40,000 short money for something that may have the potential to identify a potential problem that
affects this city. In 1936 a climate change situation very much affected this city and that was the Great Flood.
What do we do with the elderly if we had a good week of a heat wave in this city? VVhere would we put them?
We have an Emergency Preparedness Director and I’m sure he is on top of it but if we can look at it better with
this particular grant then aren’t we better off for it? Let’s let the NRPC be our think tank.