Minutes of January 11, 2006 at the SEED Office, 4:00 PM

Members Present:

Robert Overholtzer, OCPC Robert W. Carney, Dartmouth

David A. Tibbetts, South Coast on Track Martha White, Easton

Richard Shafer, Taunton IDC William Roch, Jr., Fairhaven

John Bullard, Vision 2020 James Hartnett, Fall River

Reinald Ledoux, Jr., BAT Richard McCarthy, Raynham

Francis Gay, GATRA Lou Gitto, Stoughton

William Clark, MAPC

Dr. Susan Peterson, SRPEDD

Mike Ferreira, FROED

Peter Kortright, Fall River Area Chamber

Diana Shearstone, Taunton Area Chamber

Others Present:

Kyla Bennett, PEER Linda Grubb, Lakeville and FARE

George Johnson, RI Statewide Planning Pamela Sherrill, Pare Engineering

Steve Cecil, The Cecil Group Ken Buckland, The Cecil Group

Don Walsh, CURP Pat Ciaramella,

OCPC Ed Coviello, OCPC Stephen Smith, SRPEDD

Louise Daley, SRPEDD Roland Hebert, SRPEDD

Greg Guimond, SRPEDD Marijoan Bull, SRPEDD

1. Call to Order

Chairman John Bullard called the meeting to order at 4:10 PM.

Chairman Bullard noted the contributions of resigning Lakeville Selectman Chawner Hurd, whose participation will be missed.

2. Minutes of Meeting, November 16, 2005

It was voted unanimously to accept the minutes of November 16, 2005.

3. Presentation: “Using Commuter Rail to Shape Regional Growth”

George Johnson, Assistant Chief of the Rhode Island Statewide Planning Program and Pamela Sherrill of Pare Engineering gave a presentation of a report titled “Washington County Transit Oriented Development Planning Strategy”. Rhode Island DOT is working to extend the MBTA commuter rail service from Providence to Wickford Junction in the Town of North Kingstown, and potentially to Westerly. This study looked at the potential for TOD at the stations in order to address growth concerns from rail. This study, initiated due to the proposed rail service, has provided an opportunity to have a dialogue with the region about growth and the value of proactively preparing for it.

Pare Engineering prepared the final report, which is on the Statewide planning website. Ms. Sherrill stated the three objectives of the study as: 1) assess the advantages of the commuter rail extension; 2) assess the development potential within a five-mile/10-minute drive of the stations; and 3) consider the appropriateness of transit oriented and transit supportive development around the stations. The report also presents management strategies that can promote smart growth concepts in Washington County.

Lessons from this study are the importance of involving and informing the public. When the final concepts were presented, communities expressed a desire to preserve open space and to maintain housing affordability; yet, they also expressed a fear of density and growth. Mr. Bullard asked if the communities fear density and growth, who wants commuter rail? Mr. Johnson answered that people dealing with traffic want it. There has also been positive response from environmental groups such as Audobon and supporters of increased economic development and mobility. Mr. Bullard asked if there was any interest in east-west travel by rail. Ms. Sherrill replied that there is interest in commuting from Fall River to Quonset and Fall River to Newport. Steve Smith added that traffic counts on I-195 show large increases.

Peter Kortright asked about the projected start date of 2008 for rail to Washington County. Ms. Sherrill stated that the tracks exist as part of the northeast corridor. Rhode Island just needs to acquire the rolling stock at a cost of $5-7 million. The MBTA likes the extension project because it gets to sell one seat twice (presumably from Washington County to Providence and Providence to Boston). Ed Coviello asked about the capacity problem on the northeast corridor and the conflict of diesel engines and high-speed Amtrak trains. Ms. Sherrill said that an Operations Plan was done on that. She agreed it is very tight.

4. Fall River: Plans for Waterfront and Train Station Development

Ken Buckland introduced a presentation of a Fall River waterfront study done by The Cecil Group. He referred to a graphic of the waterfront area that includes what is essentially a TOD with medium to high density, pedestrian orientation and high quality design. Mr. Buckland noted that Fall River’s population at its peak was 130,000 but it is now at 91,000. He pointed out that the structure for more people is still there in the layout of the city, I-195 and the waterway.

Steve Cecil emphasized the new value found in waterfronts. He presented a graphic of a concept plan, which transforms Route 79 and Davol Street into a pedestrian-friendly boulevard, opening up land for economic development. The City’s plan for the waterfront is for mixed uses that will draw people to it and also support water-dependent industries. The MBTA has plans to build two commuter rail stations near the waterfront, which have been incorporated into the City’s plans for the area. The station locations are within walking distance or a short drive from existing population density. Planning involves lining up the necessary investments to implement the plan. The City can avoid sprawl by laying the groundwork before transit occurs.

Mike Ferreira added that the projects that are part of the City’s waterfront plan are going along even without the train stations, but the stations will enhance the area. $5 million is secured for the Route 79 project and a feasibility study is underway. A mixed use development is planned for the 8-10 acres that will be opened up on the waterfront. A boardwalk and cultural park are completed. A new multi-use State Pier Facility is in the works. A 500-space surface parking lot is planned for Davol Street.

Mr. Bullard asked about bus transportation to the stations. Jim Hartnett said the City needs to find a new bus station location with the planned courthouse taking the present station property. There is no room to locate it with the planned MBTA station, but there will be a bus dropoff there.

Mr. Bullard noted that the message from Fall River and New Bedford is that these mixed use, transit oriented development designs work. Rail makes them better. Mr. Cecil gave the example of Concord, New Hampshire for rail station planning. He emphasized the need for the right location and avoiding large parking facilities. A community needs to talk about what they want. They may want two stations near each other and should plan for that. Intermodalism is also important. Sometimes a shuttle or a route connection is adequate and makes sense. Bringing all vehicles together may create conflict.

Mr. Cecil added that in both Fall River and New Bedford, there is a bunch of land in the right place along the waterfront. Whatever is done will create jobs, and transportation connections will be important. Mr. Kortright asked if there were other opportunities in Fall River that were considered for MBTA stations. Mr. Cecil said the proposed stations are in the right place based on walking distances, the topography, neighborhoods, and amount of available space. He pointed out that growth projections in southeastern Massachusetts and the state as a whole show that new growth in this region is really about rearranging the furniture rather than new growth in the state. Often, we are attempting to build smart growth, and we tend to look at the rail line as an opportunity for new dense development. But we ought to look at areas that are already built out, under-populated relative to what they used to be, and make sure stations are supported there.

Mr. Bullard asked about Fall River’s perspective on housing affordability. Mr. Hartnett stated that more than 250 condos were approved in the past eighteen months and 100 single family house lots were approved in the last year—all at the low end of the housing market. Mr. Bullard added that prices are up without any rail and building more supply is a solution. Linda Grubb asked about plans for “daylighting” the falls. Mr. Cecil said there is no foreseeable time frame or budget; however, the Route 79 realignment will not preclude the idea. Mr. Buckland offered the case studies of Beverly and Salem with Beverly as an example of an unsuccessful downtown even though the rail station is there, and Salem as a success story.

5. Nomination of future train station for TOD analysis

Stoughton will be discussed two meetings from now. Steve Smith suggested that Attleboro’s intermodal facility proposals could be presented at the next meeting.

6. Work Program Progress Report

Greg Guimond reported that he is updating land uses in four communities along the rail, using 2000 and 2004 orthophotos, overlaying them on what was already developed. This work will determine the potential number of lots and units for development in the corridor, as an update to the buildout potential. Marijoan Bull is working on the regional draft corridor study (Task 3) and will present a draft of it at the next meeting. As part of Task 4—the more site specific TOD work, – SRPEDD may do more work with Fall River, Raynham, or the second Taunton site (behind Target). Ms. Bull gave a preview of some of the information she’s gathered. Between 1990 and 2000, Fall River’s workforce declined by less than 1%, but the number of commuters to Boston and Cambridge proper increased by 66%. She will give a report in March.

7. Future meetings

The next meeting is March 8, 2006 and the following meeting will be May 10, 2006.

Ms. Bull will present a draft of Task 3, the regional corridor study, at the next meeting. Louise Daley may do a presentation on the Stapleton, Colorado TOD. OCPC has more information as well from Task 2.

8. Adjournment

The meeting was adjourned at 5:52 PM.