Share Email 266 Shares

Melinda Moulton, developer and CEO of Main Street Landing in Burlington, speaks against the overnight storage of an Amtrak train at Union Station, at the Burlington City Council meeting on Monday evening. Photo by Aidan Quigley/VTDigger

BURLINGTON — A group of waterfront residents told city councilor members that noise and air pollution from Amtrak trains parked overnight at Union Station will be “intolerable.”

The council must choose between a handful of possible sites and make a recommendation to the Vermont Agency of Transportation.

Construction is planned for the spring 2020 and a decision needs to be made before the end of the year.



Get all of VTDigger's daily news. You'll never miss a story with our daily headlines in your inbox.

A Chittenden County Regional Planning Commission report placed Union Station highest among five potential sites for overnight storage when Amtrak service returns in 2021 or 2022. In making its determination, the commission considered noise, cost, visual impact and air quality.



The Vermont Agency of Transportation will make the final decision on where the trains are parked, but has asked the city for input in deciding between a handful of possible sites.



Seven residents, many of whom said they live in Main Street Landing, spoke out against parking the trains overnight in their backyard. Residents are also concerned about a VTrans and Vermont Rail System initiative to add a second track near the waterfront.



Melinda Moulton, the developer and CEO of Main Street Landing, said that parking the trains at Union Station would be counter to the long-term work to de-industrialize the waterfront. She said Amtrak could use the existing infrastructure.



“The train could come in and deliver and pick up passengers, we do not need a second rail line,” she said.



Laurie Allyn said she lives in the Wing Building adjacent to the tracks and was concerned about train noise and air pollution.



VTDigger is underwritten by:

“The amount of noise and air pollution produced by a locomotive running for a minimum of 45 minutes eight feet from my home every morning at 6 a.m. would be intolerable,” she said.



Amtrak’s Ethan Allen Express line, which currently runs from Rutland to New York City will extended north in 2021 or 2022, adding stops in Middlebury, Vergennes and Burlington.



Dan Delabruere, the rail program director of the Vermont Agency of Transportation, told VTDigger last week that the agency is still evaluating where the trains should be parked overnight.



“There’s no new news, we’re still evaluating the location,” he said. “We don’t really have a timeline for when we’re going to make a decision.”



Union Station and the Burlington Bike Path with a rail spur used by Vermont Rail Systems in the foreground. Photo by Glenn Russell/VTDigger

The CCRPC report determined that Union Station was the best location for having a low impact on train operations, cost, infrastructure, horn noise and crew travel distance. But it is the closest in proximity to residents and had the worst score in the air quality and emissions category.



The report studied two sites at the Urban Reserve north of the waterfront near the bike path, on Flynn Avenue next to the new City Market and at the existing rail yard near Perkins Pier.



Infrastructure updates necessary to park the trains at the Union Station site was determined to be significantly cheaper than the other options considered, at $300,000.



Updates to the Flynn Avenue site would cost around $1.5 million, the Urban Reserve sites would cost around $2.2 million each and the existing Vermont Rail Services railyard would cost an estimated $50 million.



Chapin Spencer, director of public works, gave information on the overnight Amtrak storage sites at the Burlington City Council meeting on Monday. Next to him is city engineer Norm Baldwin. Photo by Aidan Quigley/VTDigger

Chapin Spencer, the director of the Department of Public Works, outlined the options to the council.



While the Union Station parking option was the top choice, Spencer said the end result was close and there wasn’t much separating the sites. VTrans is planning on making a decision by the end of the year, Spencer said.



Spencer said VTrans and Vermont Rail Services has discussed adding a second rail track on the waterfront since 2016. VTrans and VRS told the city that the extra track was needed to maintain freight service and accommodate the VRS Dinner Train when Amtrak is at the station. The second track would also provide a siding for building new trains, Spencer said.



The city administration does not support expanding the railyard’s industrial activities into the heart of the waterfront, Spencer said.



VTrans representatives will be at a Nov. 19 meeting of the council’s Transportation, Energy & Utilities Committee, which is scheduled for 6 p.m. at the police station.



Spencer said the city is seeking additional information from VTrans before providing input before the end of the year.



The city is planning on relocating the bike path to the west side of the tracks as part of the construction, Spencer said.



Mayor Miro Weinberger said the city would try to minimize the effects of the trains on its residents.



“We’re going to continue to defend strongly all of Burlington’s interests,” he said. “There’s no solution … that will have zero impact on our constituents, let’s seek the outcome that minimizes those impacts and keep them far smaller than the overall benefits to Burlington.”



Weinberger said the city should not lose sight of bringing rail service back to Burlignton, which is “incredibly exciting.”



“We are on the cusp of restoring daily passenger service from Burlington to New York City and the whole Amtrak network in the near future,” Weinberger said. “This is something our predecessors have worked toward for decades.”



The council kicked off the meeting by discussing the issue in executive session, which city attorney Eileen Blackwood said was due to negotiations with the other parties involved.



City Council President Kurt Wright, R-Ward 4, said that the council was “nowhere near” reaching a decision on what its input would be and had more work to do.



Share Email 266 Shares