Proposed Boston-Concord NH Route

[lilbb0train]

I’m hopeful for Amtrak’s planned route from Boston to Concord. Lord knows how long it will take for it to actually happen, but Amtrak stepping in and creating the route rather than waiting for the MBTA and NH officials to figure it out seems like a great idea to me. What I propose is this; why stop at Concord? The trackage that they plan to use for this route extends as far north as Lincoln, NH. Along the way, there are still multiple stations, that if equipped to support passenger service, I believe would be extremely popular and provide huge tourism booms. These stops being the 4 that are right along Lake Winnipesaukee; Tilton, Weirs Beach, Laconia/Lakeport, and Meredith. I see no reason why the route shouldn’t atleast go as far as Laconia, if not Meredith. The connection to the lake from Boston would be monumental for NH tourism. The lake, according to a 2021 report, brings in just under $300 million in tourist revenue a year. Image the boom if Bostonians could hop on a train and get off right at the Weirs within 2-3 hours. Not to mention, not only are the tracks still intact and the ROW still owned by the state of NH, but trains actually still run on them. I believe freight trains still run through there, and there is a scenic railroad that operates on the tracks between Meredith and Laconia. I havent seen any discussion about the feasibility of a route like this anywhere, and it seems so obvious to me, so I was surprised no one else has mentioned it. Would love to hear what you all think. Boston-Laconia/Meredith route instead of Boston-Concord. I think it would be much more beneficial for all parties involved; the state, Amtrak itself, and passengers.

Bryon

 

[Maglev]

It costs $800 for my wife and me to fly round trip to Seattle from here, about the same distance as Concord to Boston (there does happen to be an intervening ocean here...). And we are sometimes willing to pay that. I wonder how much people plunk down to fly from Boston or New York to their vacation in New Hampshire? Trains could tap into that market.

 

[JamesWhitcombRiley]

From the 2035 ConnectUS plan for this route:

Subject to further analysis by stakeholders including New Hampshire, Massachusetts, and Amtrak

If one train car was a tax-free shopping mall, NH might go for it.

It is encouraging to see states averse to Amtrak talk about getting on board. Don't know if or how that applies to NH.

 

[lilbb0train]

It costs $800 for my wife and I to fly round trip to Seattle from here, about the same distance as Concord to Boston (there does happen to be an intervening ocean here...). And we are sometimes willing to pay that. I wonder how much people plunk down to fly from Boston or New York to their vacation in New Hampshire? Trains could tap into that market.

This is a great point. NH has grown rapidly as a tourist destination over the last few years. Many people from the large cities nearby like New York or Boston are starting to seek out vacationing in NH for the relative seclusion it offers. Trains would only support that growth.

From the 2035 ConnectUS plan for this route:

If one train car was a tax-free shopping mall, NH might go for it.

It is encouraging to see states averse to Amtrak talk about getting on board. Don't know if or how that applies to NH.

It’s been a long, long, LONG fight in NH trying to bring back passenger rail. The governor and other state agencies flip flop on it constantly. There is a pretty solid plan in place currently to extend the MBTA commuter up to Manchester via the Lowell line, thanks to recent federal grants, but that hardly scratches the surface of the state’s transportation needs. The MBTA extension has been talked about for more than a decade, and we’re only just now starting to see meaningful movement on it. Originally, it was supposed to go all the way to Concord, just as the proposed Amtrak route would, but the price tag was a tough sell to our lawmakers, so the plan was scaled back so that it would only go as far as Manchester. In a perfect world (or rather in MY perfect world lol), the route would extend all the way to Canada via the center of NH. This would require some new trackage to be built and probably some rail trail converting, but I’m talking hypotheticals here lol. Nonetheless, I think atleast to the Lakes Region would be far more beneficial than just to Concord.

 

[lesterQ]

I think the analysis is that the line will never make money or just make even and that's what NH is concerned about.

 

[Tlcooper44]

I think the analysis is that the line will never make money or just make even and that's what NH is concerned about.

Curious how you come to this conclusion.

 

[lesterQ]

Curious how you come to this conclusion.

I mostly meant MBTA version of it.
e.g. "Fares could cover up to 82 percent of operating cost, study says... Both cities would spend about $200,000 annually to run those stations, the report concludes.“ from here
and news abandoning the project quoted some politicians saying they are not going to spend tax payer money running public service, which seems to be the agreeable thing here.
Amtrak service are probably different. But I doubt it would have better fare recovery but Amtrak loses money anyway.

 

[fdaley]

I’m hopeful for Amtrak’s planned route from Boston to Concord. Lord knows how long it will take for it to actually happen, but Amtrak stepping in and creating the route rather than waiting for the MBTA and NH officials to figure it out seems like a great idea to me. What I propose is this; why stop at Concord? The trackage that they plan to use for this route extends as far north as Lincoln, NH. Along the way, there are still multiple stations, that if equipped to support passenger service, I believe would be extremely popular and provide huge tourism booms. These stops being the 4 that are right along Lake Winnipesaukee; Tilton, Weirs Beach, Laconia/Lakeport, and Meredith. I see no reason why the route shouldn’t atleast go as far as Laconia, if not Meredith. The connection to the lake from Boston would be monumental for NH tourism. The lake, according to a 2021 report, brings in just under $300 million in tourist revenue a year. Image the boom if Bostonians could hop on a train and get off right at the Weirs within 2-3 hours. Not to mention, not only are the tracks still intact and the ROW still owned by the state of NH, but trains actually still run on them. I believe freight trains still run through there, and there is a scenic railroad that operates on the tracks between Meredith and Laconia. I havent seen any discussion about the feasibility of a route like this anywhere, and it seems so obvious to me, so I was surprised no one else has mentioned it. Would love to hear what you all think. Boston-Laconia/Meredith route instead of Boston-Concord. I think it would be much more beneficial for all parties involved; the state, Amtrak itself, and passengers.

Bryon

Completely agree that the need is there and the benefits would be huge. If there were reasonably fast and frequent service from Boston through Concord to the lakes region, lots of people would use it. But I've been hearing about the possibility of a Boston-Nashua-Concord train for 40 years, and at least so far, the idea has kept bumping up against a state legislature that's unwilling to pay anything for it.

When I was living in Maine in the late '80s and early '90s as the Downeaster was being promoted and planned, one of the obstacles we had to work around was the fact that NH wasn't willing to spend a penny to support the trains' operation. The "Live Free or Die" philosophy apparently includes spending freely on roads but not on rails. At least the online towns saw the benefit and were willing to build and maintain the stations at Dover, Durham and Exeter.

The state also has been pretty much hostile to freight rail, with the result that the network of tracks that remain is really skeletal compared with what once existed. Vermont and Maine by comparison have done a much better job of preserving their rail infrastructure.

 

[Tlcooper44]

I mostly meant MBTA version of it.
e.g. "Fares could cover up to 82 percent of operating cost, study says... Both cities would spend about $200,000 annually to run those stations, the report concludes.“ from here
and news abandoning the project quoted some politicians saying they are not going to spend tax payer money running public service, which seems to be the agreeable thing here.
Amtrak service are probably different. But I doubt it would have better fare recovery but Amtrak loses money anyway.

While I would question the philosophical premise of any form of transportation making money, let alone using that as a metric for anything meaningful in the USA, what is being discussed here is Amtrak running a new service to Concord and beyond, not the MBTA.

NH’s antiquated, and unfounded policy aside, the millions in economic benefit that such a train would bring to the region as a whole (as demonstrated by the Downeaster), should be enough incentive for anyone in a state legislature, assuming they’re not brainwashed or bought out by auto company nonsense.

If we’re dreaming big here, a corridor extending all the way through NH to Montreal is a no-brainer. That won’t happen for reasons beyond NH’s craziness though.

 

[Maverickstation]

Here is a good article on the service to Concord NH, when it ran in 1980.

https://www.nhbr.com/n-h-commuter-rail-a-success-in-1980/

 

[lesterQ]

While I would question the philosophical premise of any form of transportation making money, let alone using that as a metric for anything meaningful in the USA, what is being discussed here is Amtrak running a new service to Concord and beyond, not the MBTA.

NH’s antiquated, and unfounded policy aside, the millions in economic benefit that such a train would bring to the region as a whole (as demonstrated by the Downeaster), should be enough incentive for anyone in a state legislature, assuming they’re not brainwashed or bought out by auto company nonsense.

If we’re dreaming big here, a corridor extending all the way through NH to Montreal is a no-brainer. That won’t happen for reasons beyond NH’s craziness though.

While I would question the philosophical premise of any form of transportation making money, let alone using that as a metric for anything meaningful in the USA, what is being discussed here is Amtrak running a new service to Concord and beyond, not the MBTA.

NH’s antiquated, and unfounded policy aside, the millions in economic benefit that such a train would bring to the region as a whole (as demonstrated by the Downeaster), should be enough incentive for anyone in a state legislature, assuming they’re not brainwashed or bought out by auto company nonsense.

If we’re dreaming big here, a corridor extending all the way through NH to Montreal is a no-brainer. That won’t happen for reasons beyond NH’s craziness though.

I totally would love to see rail service. Even if it's just to Manchester.
NH is just unlikely to provide the money. Somewhere I read they need to raise the gas tax for 17c per gallon to pay for the operational loss. That's not going to go well since most people paying it probably won't even have access to the rail service. They do tax heavily for road maintenance though. My 50k car registration is close to $1000 first year. Better fare box recovery would be the most obvious "who uses it who pays it" solution. Or maybe grants from federal government just like how it ran in 1980 and how the fed probably pays for lots of road here.

 

[MARC Rider]

I don't see any kind of business case for year-round service north of Concord, there just isn't the population density. Tourists who travel further north want to have a car on hand to be able to get around when they reach their destination, so I don't think there's a real tourist market, as a family would have to buy a separate train ticket for every member of the family, plus pay for a rental car. It's far cheaper to just drive up in the car you already own.

The utility of a Boston to Concord route is to provide an alternative to driving a single-occupancy car on I-93. They should probably also encourage some transit-oriented development around the stations and make an effort to get more people to not have to rely on cars for transportation. This means they need to develop of good network of local connecting bus routes running on frequent schedules. As for making it "profitable," that's ridiculous, is I-93 "profitable?"

 

[lesterQ]

I don't see any kind of business case for year-round service north of Concord, there just isn't the population density. Tourists who travel further north want to have a car on hand to be able to get around when they reach their destination, so I don't think there's a real tourist market, as a family would have to buy a separate train ticket for every member of the family, plus pay for a rental car. It's far cheaper to just drive up in the car you already own.

The utility of a Boston to Concord route is to provide an alternative to driving a single-occupancy car on I-93. They should probably also encourage some transit-oriented development around the stations and make an effort to get more people to not have to rely on cars for transportation. This means they need to develop of good network of local connecting bus routes running on frequent schedules. As for making it "profitable," that's ridiculous, is I-93 "profitable?"

From NH DOT, the NH turnpike system is profitable as in the operating revenue is larger than the operating expenses and the net income is probably used to pay capital projects/payback bonds.
most of I-93 is not part of the turnpike system, only a small part is. I-93 probably receives federal grants. A similar arrangement for grants was what made NH commuter rail feasible just like it was in the 1980 according to the link shared by Maverickstation.

 

[lilbb0train]

I don't see any kind of business case for year-round service north of Concord, there just isn't the population density. Tourists who travel further north want to have a car on hand to be able to get around when they reach their destination, so I don't think there's a real tourist market, as a family would have to buy a separate train ticket for every member of the family, plus pay for a rental car. It's far cheaper to just drive up in the car you already own.

The utility of a Boston to Concord route is to provide an alternative to driving a single-occupancy car on I-93. They should probably also encourage some transit-oriented development around the stations and make an effort to get more people to not have to rely on cars for transportation. This means they need to develop of good network of local connecting bus routes running on frequent schedules. As for making it "profitable," that's ridiculous, is I-93 "profitable?"

The Multi-Modal transportation issue is a good point. However, as it pertains to Laconia specifically, the CAT bus service has just begun running through Downtown Laconia, providing a great launching point for more routes to be added throughout Laconia and other popular areas in the Lake Region. The current route is just a small loop through downtown and then back to Concord, but it’s atleast a start to getting bus service in to the Laconia area. If that were to continue to be expanded, it could solve the issue.

I do also think many underestimate just how much tourism has grown in NH, even through the pandemic. 2022 was a record tourism high for NH, up something like 38% from 2019, and it’s continued to grow. The market is there, people want to come here, particularly for the relative seclusion and quiet that the state offers.

If the CAT continues to extend service in and around the Lakes Region, and tourism continues to grow as it has been, I’d still see it as a no brainer.

 

[fdaley]

I totally would love to see rail service. Even if it's just to Manchester.
NH is just unlikely to provide the money. Somewhere I read they need to raise the gas tax for 17c per gallon to pay for the operational loss. That's not going to go well since most people paying it probably won't even have access to the rail service. They do tax heavily for road maintenance though. My 50k car registration is close to $1000 first year. Better fare box recovery would be the most obvious "who uses it who pays it" solution. Or maybe grants from federal government just like how it ran in 1980 and how the fed probably pays for lots of road here.

I don't think it's realistic at this point to think the feds are going to pay 100 percent of the cost. If the state won't figure out how to pay its share, then everyone who might like to use the train will keep driving and contributing gas and other taxes into a system that only supports more and wider roads. Works great for the highway contractors, which is who the legislators see as their real constituency anyway.