The following post was published written by Greg Stroud, Executive Director of SECoast.org, and published March 29 on their website. It summarizes in detail the latest developments on the proposed high-speed rail route that travels through Old Lyme and perhaps most significantly, notes, “… the FRA is now months behind their revised schedule for release of a Record of Decision – we don’t expect an announcement until at least May.”
We are re-publishing it in full with the permission of SECoast.org.
Since our last news brief two weeks ago, we’ve had a full calendar, including four days in Washington, D.C., where Daniel Mackay, executive director of the Connecticut Trust, and members of the Trust board met with key staffers for Blumenthal, Murphy, Courtney, Esty, Larson, DeLauro, and Himes.
The takeaway? Strong support from most of the delegation for our early and vigorous advocacy on the high-speed rail issue, as well as a clear recognition that the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) has crafted a plan which, as it stands, will be unworkable for the state of Connecticut. Take nothing for granted, but this is remarkable progress from a year ago.
Although the FRA is now months behind their revised schedule for release of a Record of Decision – we don’t expect an announcement until at least May – there is a growing sense that, without significant changes, the plan will face stiff resistance from the Congressional delegation. Denying federal funds for potential Connecticut components of the plan is an active focus for the CT delegation in both the Senate and House. Both current and former members of the delegation have reached out to Rodney Frelinghuysen (R-NJ), a longtime Fenwick (Old Saybrook) summer resident who chairs the House Appropriations Committee, to brief him on potential impacts.
The Trump administration’s March 16th release of the so-called “Skinny Budget” includes significant cuts to federal transportation funding. This raises all sorts of questions about what transportation investments will, and will not, be prioritized for funding in coming budget negotiations. The Connecticut Congressional delegation considers the “Skinny Budget” to be dead on arrival, but the expectation among both Democrats and Republicans in Congress, is that a significant transportation funding remains very much a live issue.
At this point our focus is to encourage the FRA and the Connecticut Department of Transportation (CT DOT) to rethink some of the more ‘aspirational’ portions of the planning, and to prioritize investments in the existing corridor in the coming Record of Decision. It’s encouraging that this approach — as evidenced by the recent joint letter signed by numerous state departments of transportation — is gaining traction among the various transportation entities partnered along the Northeast Corridor.
At the state level, the Connecticut State Historic Preservation Office (CT SHPO) submitted comments on the NEC Future Final Environmental Impact Statement on March 15. You can find that document here. Their comments provide the first state-agency recognition that concerns in Connecticut extend beyond the New Rochelle to Greens Farms, and Old Saybrook to Kenyon routes. That’s good news for residents concerned about an overlooked proposal to widen the Branford to Guilford portion of the Northeast Corridor.
Although SHPO did not formally oppose any single part of the NEC Future plan, the comments raised a variety of questions regarding the tiered structure of the environmental review, the lack of detail in the FRA documents, called into question the methodology for tallying impacts, and frankly questioned whether the Federal Railroad Administration’s plans for Connecticut had been at all altered by the public outcry and by concerns for preservation.
Getting into the weeds a bit, SHPO also made clear that a tunnel crossing at Old Lyme would not constitute “avoidance,” for the purposes of satisfying key Section 4(f) provisions of regulatory law, which protect “publicly owned parks, recreational areas, wildlife and waterfowl refuges, public and private historical sites” if there are is a “feasible and prudent avoidance alternative to the use of land.” 4(f) ‘has teeth,’ as they say, so as we continue to press for the FRA to remove the Kenyon to Saybrook bypass from the coming Record of Decision, its important that a statewide agency is weighing in on the significant remaining obstacles to a tunnel scheme for Old Lyme.
Meanwhile, residents of Branford, Guilford and Stony Creek continue to make news as they rally their communities and local groups against the proposed expansion of the Branford to Guilford segment of the Northeast Corridor. We’ve done our best to inform their efforts, and raise their concerns with the press, and with the Congressional delegation. As of late March, the Branford Historical Society, the Guilford Conservation Land Trust, and the Guilford Preservation Alliance, have all come out in strong opposition to the proposed four-tracking of the existing right of way between Branford and Guilford. You can find much more detail on the local efforts here.
At this point, without a clear stance from the CT DOT, and without maps, or a clear description of the purpose, priority, or construction of the four-tracking, many residents in Branford, Guilford, and Stony Creek, are increasingly alarmed, that this under-the-radar proposal will be included in the coming Record of Decision. We’ll see… If you do know anyone in that area, please forward along this latest news! It won’t take a largest appropriation to build this project, if it is ever included in the final plan.
Proposed double-tracking between New Haven and Springfield, MA, has raised little of the same concern, as planners hope to restore added capacity to the corridor. This project remains a bright spot for otherwise troubled NEC Future planning in Connecticut.
Editor’s Note: SECoast.org is an independent special project of the Connecticut Trust for Historic Preservation.