Bob La Tremouille Reports:
1. General.
2. The Grand Junction according to Secretary Cohen.
3. The Grand Junction’’s Importance, comments from Port Authority representatives.
A. General.
B. Importance of the Allston Freight Yards.
C. Container Service Drives Moving the Allston Freight Yards.
D. Port Authority Position.
1. General.
At the MOVEMassachusetts monthly meeting this morning, April 13, 2007, the guest was the Secretary of Transportation of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts Bernard Cohen.
Secretary Cohen gave the packed room an impressive presentation which was both comprehensive and lacking in detail. In the middle of his long list of ongoing efforts was a comment on negotiations with CSX about obtaining rights of way for state transportation use.
2. The Grand Junction according to Secretary Cohen.
Marilyn Wellons was the first member of the audience to be recognized for questions. She did not even blink. She did not ask if he was talking about the Grand Junction. She simply translated his words as the Grand Junction and asked for the details.
Secretary Cohen declined to provide details since negotiations are in process. He did comment that freight transportation is being encouraged through plans for raising bridges to allow double stacked freight cars to be able to pass.
3. The Grand Junction’s Importance, comments from Port Authority representatives.
A. General.
After the meeting, Marilyn was addressed by representatives of the Port Authority who were quite interested in the freight issues. One thing that they were proud of was inserting language into the deed of the freight yards to Harvard in which a tiny portion of the yards could not be taken away from freight use.
There are a whole bunch of things going on, as usual.
Clearly and very visibly, the state is working to put in the inner belt on top of the Grand Junction railway.
In its usual manner, the City Council has a motion on its table claiming to protect Cambridge from this new highway while supporting the initiative if the initiative is done in a manner that the state says it wants to do it. The city council calls this “protection.” I call it being on the wrong side and tossing nonsense at their constituents.
B. Importance of the Allston Freight Yards.
The freight yards in Allston that Harvard has purchased are of major importance.
Harvard is not a charitable institution. Harvard did not buy the Allston freight yards out of a charitable impulse. Harvard bought those freight yards four months after the MBTA proved the Grand Junction bridge capable of taking traffic from the Mass. Pike and moving that traffic to Cambridge.
The rail traffic on the Grand Junction moves cars between the Allston yards and the North Station yards. If there is no meaningful Allston yards, there is no need for the Grand Junction.
If there is no need for meaningful Allston yards, Harvard has that much more room for easy expansion.
C. Container Service Drives Moving the Allston Freight Yards.
CSX has long been considering moving the freight yards outside I-495.
This is because of container service. Containers are carried on freight cars over long distances and moved to/from truck beds for local delivery. When containers were first used, they were only used one high on the freight cars. In more recent years, two containers high has become the norm. A very, very large number of bridges over railroad tracks inside I-495 were not built high enough above the railroad tracks to allow double container cars to be able to go under them.
If the freight yards are moved to I-495, our highways would be subjected to a lot more truck traffic.
If the freight yards are moved to I-495, Harvard can build on the yards.
If the freight yards are moved to I-495, the need for the Grand Junction railroad disappears.
If the freight yards are moved to I-495, the inner belt can be built on the Grand Junction using whatever sales pitch works.
D. Port Authority Position.
The gentleman from the Port Authority rather clearly had no problems with moving the freight yards. He rather clearly thought providing adequate bridge clearance for double container trains to be an impractical use of money.
4. Summary.
But thanks to Marilyn, an excellent question brought out some good information.
