Remember this great celebration in October of 2013 celebrating the ground breaking of a mile long park/walking trail/bike trail in Upper Falls?
Mayor Warren, Secretary of Transportion Richard Davey, several aldermen and lots of residents all gathered together to make way for Newton’s newest park – the Upper Falls Greenway.
Well this week the Newton TAB’s Jenna Fisher reports on why the project — one year behind scheduled completion — remains unfinished and — even more disturbing — is now without its most valuable physical asset: the steel rails and ties that were going to fund the project.
As Fisher reminds us, the city contracted last year with Iron Horse Preservation Society, a nonprofit that converts abandoned railroads into usable recreational trails. The work was to be done at no cost to taxpayers in exchange for allowing Iron Horse to sell the rails and railroad ties and was to be completed in, according to the NewTV report below in “less than five weeks” or, according to later reports, June of 2014.
But as Joe Hattrup of the Iron Horse explains to Fisher…
“We got stuck.”
… Hattrup [said] the delay has to do with his business model. Iron Horse works on a low budget; he said he makes about $50,000 selling a mile’s worth of railroad ties and track for scrap. Much of that goes toward paying workers, buying soil, laying paths, paperwork with the state and building benches. When he’s working on smaller jobs, such as Newton’s mile, he depends on income from his next projects to help cover costs.
“We had three projects that were promised to us this year,” he said, “so we figured our overhead this spring and summer would be covered.”
I’m not a lawyer — and perhaps there’s another term to explain Iron Horse’s business model — but it sounds like a Ponzi scheme to me.
Hattrup says he’s still committed to finishing our trail, using funds from other projects to come through.
But really, what municipality — or other entity — is going to agree to let Iron Horse (their slogan, by the way, is “A beautiful trail, every time”) take their valuable raw materials now that Hattrup’s dubious business model is public?
It sounds like they were leveraging.
Nobody’s more disappointed about the way the way this has played out so far than me and all the other neighbors in Upper Falls. The trail was supposed to be completed last spring and we’re now going in to winter with it only half done and no clear path to completion.
I do agree Iron Horse’s business model appears to have been flawed and didn’t leave enough room for normal contingencies – i.e. they were operating on a shoestring. That said, “Ponzi Scheme” is an unfair term. A Ponzi Scheme is a criminal operation that’s never intended to produce anything, just a get-rich-quick-scheme to shuffle other people’s money around.
Iron Horse has successfully built trails around New England and nobody got rich doing it. I think the big problem with Iron Horse is that they relied on their project pipe line being full. When they didn’t sign up new projects after Newton, all their expenses, everything from equipment rental to employee insurance, couldn’t be shared across projects and they ran out of cash.
It may not have been a prudent or practical way to run their operation. It may not have been sustainable over the long term, but I don’t believe it’s fair to label it a Ponzi Scheme. I think Joe Hatrup of Iron Horse is an exuberantly optimistic guy who has created rail trails all around New England on an incredibly lean budget. It’s beginning to look like that budget was too lean and we’re paying the price for it.
Despite all my frustration and exasperation with where things stand on the Upper Falls Greenway project, I have no doubt that Iron Horse has been dealing in good faith from the start. Bad business model?- sure Overly optimistic budgeting? – definitely. Ponzi Scheme? – no
@Jerry: Glad to hear it and respect your perspective.
But the bottom line is this model calls for taking resources from a future customer to make good on promises to current customer. So unless he finds future customers the plan collapses.
But now that this model is public (I assume you and the city didn’t know that he operated this way initially?) what municipality would agree to working with Iron Horse in the future and how will our trail ever be finished?
This is bad, but it’s not a Ponzi scheme. That’s investment fraud.
This is a typical contractor underestimating its bid and running into cash flow problems. On the plus side, it sounds like Iron Horse is still committed to completing the work and is not asking for more money. Just more time.
@Doug: This sounds like a little more than “cash flow problems.”
He admits that he uses the revenue generated from raw materials in one project to pay for the prior project. That’s like trading in your car for a new one, then the dealer sells your car but says you will have wait a year or more for his next buyer to come along before you receive the vehicle he promised to give you.
But now that the word is out on how this guy operates, will he ever have a next customer?
>> I assume you and the city didn’t know that he operated this way initially?
No.
I know that the city did some “due diligence” digging before the project began and talked to a number of officials/staff in other towns that Iron Horse had done projects in and had very positive things. The only negative that they heard was that in one of the first projects Iron Horse did, the town wasn’t happy about some technical details of the trail work they did. Iron Horse went back and reworked the trail, on their dime, as per the town’s requirements. Iron Horse chalked that up to on-the-job education and on future jobs incorporated those details as their standard way of doing things. i.e. it all sounded good.
Personally, I heard from a friend up in Danvers who lives a block away from an Iron Horse built trail that opened shortly before the Newton project got going. He and his neighbors had nothing but good things to say about it.
Greg says:
Coincidentally, this is the reason the consulting firm hired to do Phase I of zoning reform, Code Studio, is still working on it, long after the amount it was paid by the City of Newton was used up. Code Studio was hired by LA to redo its zoning ordinance for $5 million. Which is why I firmly believe Phase I zoning reform was grossly underfunded.
The other thing to note is that AFAIK nobody else is doing what Iron Horse does, perhaps because the incentives aren’t all that great. So even if the city knew Joe Hattrup was on a shoestring budget, other options may have been prohibitively costly. It’s possible the project isn’t as far in the hole as Greg suggests, since there was considerable cost to remove the rails and ties (am I being overly optimistic there?) Let’s hope Joe Hattrup does come through. Is Needham planning to work with Iron Horse?
I don’t buy it…..and it is actually quite clear!
It seems everyone including Mr. Reilly (who was one of the original organizers to build this path and found Iron Horse for the city) knew from the beginning all about Iron Horse’s business model or “Ponziesque” approach to doing business but it was more important to get his path done and he as well as others crossed their fingers and turned their back to what was really being done.
In fact, to have let Iron Horse start the work on this project in November of 2013, at a time when Iron Horse was admittedly incapable of finishing it before the winter weather made it impossible to complete, was just a clear mistake At that point, there was then no leverage left after they pulled out the rails which gave Iron Horse most of their money……. and they just left!
The City was left with this uncompleted in December and there was no real incentive for Iron Horse to even want to to return!
Has anybody calculated the retail cost of removing a mile of track and then subtracted that amount from the amount the track’s owner would make selling the tracks himself? (Excuse me, AlderOne Norton, I mean her/him self?) I wonder what that difference would be in today’s labor and scrap metal market. That number is the number that the City is due, even if the contract promised pie in the sky. I hope we can recover that amount and use it to finish the project even if Iron Horse rusts in the fields!
There is a silver lining to the economic drama for the citizens of Upper Falls and their neighbors: those of us who frequent the Depot Coffee Shoppe and walk noth along the eastern side of Oak St. toward Chestnut, will no longer turn our ankles on the rails that waited to trip us each morning!
north
Jerry has supported this, along with many individuals and local organizations, for all the right reasons, and it sounds like Iron Horse wants to make it right. If community volunteer labor can help Iron Horse finish this off, they can count me as an unskilled laborer willing to put in some sweat equity.
What Nathan said.
A business venture becomes a Ponzi scheme once the original business owner leads investors to expect higher than usual financial returns. I hardly think anyone developing Rails to Trails projects expects to make others wealthy by converting abandoned railroad tracks into walking/bike trails. These are good and decent people dedicated to turning abandoned areas into attractive, recreation spaces in local communities. They hire veterans whenever possible.
This is from the Iron Horse website:
“All wages paid to staff are good, and enhance each team member’s financial freedom. Employee earnings are paid by the liquidation of railroad materials. We do not receive or seek government assistance employing staff or other members.”
Don’t sound like evil-doers to me.
Jerry, add me to Nathan’s list of volunteers. For all you have done for NUF, I think the community should rally to help you complete your project. It has been, and continues to be, a great idea and project.
I assume the work will not start until the spring when it is warmer. Is there some way to get support from the NewtonServes organization?
Count me in, too.
This is all nice Spin……but nothing negates the original deceiving nature of this entire project. This whole thing was poorly thought out (if even thought out in its entirety at all!) from the beginning and with only selfish motives!
This was and will be a ridiculous waste of time and a huge waste of the taxpayers money! To make matters worse, we now find ourselves trying to pick up the pieces of what was a deceiving project from the get-go!
As I read these responses, I am getting confused!…Is project about what is best for Newton or for Jerry!
@Dave: Jerry represents what is best about Newton.
To Jane:
What they post on their website sounds like good spin for people to read…..but this is 2014 and we all need to read between the lines and be realistic. What they write on a website is irrelevant to real motives!
Dave, this sure as heck was not a “ridiculous waste of time and a huge waste of the taxpayers’ money.” It’s your comments that are ridiculous. Especially the “is this project what is best for Jerry” comment. That one really made me laugh – you’ve got absolutely no clue what you’re talking about.
This project represents a huge SAVINGS to taxpayers. And it’s actually pretty close to being done – I’ve ridden my bike for pretty much the whole length of the path on a dry day with no problem. Compare what we have now to what Needham has on its side – i.e. overgrown weeds and an inaccessible right-of-way that can be neither ridden nor walked. Coincidentally, if Needham hadn’t dragged its feet then this project probably could have had the critical mass to pay for itself.
Also, if there were any equity in the world then this project would have been included in MassDOT’s $13.5 million reconstruction plans for the Highland Av./Needham St. corridor, unveiled last week. And we also would have gotten some bare-bones provision for a pedestrian/bike bridge to replace the railroad bridge over 128 when they tear it down. Instead, MassDOT gives its usual myopic priority to making sure that automotive traffic can zip through everyplace as quickly as possible. Future generations be damned.
Also – Greg, your “Ponzi” headline is really not helpful. This was not a Ponzi scheme in any sense of the term – not by any stretch of the imagination. Now other communities considering working with this nonprofit can do a search and come across this sensationalistic but wildly inaccurate headline which strongly implies deception and dishonesty. Not beneficial.
@Michael: Shoot the contractor, not the messenger.
“Ponzi’ may be the wrong word. But “scheme” certainly isn’t. Iron Horse admidts their model is clearly based on taking the revenue from Project B to fund the work for Project A. And if no Project B comes along, Project A gets screwed (not, by the way, unlike the whole p-word thing).
Good intentions or not, nice people or not, if they hire veterans or not, Iron Horse essentially stole our rails and ties from us, with no clear path to making good on it.
Meanwhile, our project is more than a year behind scheduled completion with no resolution in site and as far as we know from the TAB story, no legal action pending from the city either.
Are you suggesting that the TAB shouldn’t have written about it either with the hopes that by not calling attention to this scheme, Iron Horse may be able to dupe a different community into giving up their assets to fund Newton’s project?
Seriously, the article was one of the first telling the truth, calling out exactly what has been going on and kudos to Greg and for for someone stepping to the plate on this one. This was clearly about deception and if you can’t see through that, you are in a bubble!
Based on what happened, what Iron Horse is really about, and now the truth coming out……in fact, let it be known that other communities should be aware. Do you not think Iron Horse wasn’t made aware of ramifications like this if they did not finish this project up front. Do you really think that this wasn’t beaten up and then exhausted by everyone before this finally was made public and then made it to being a rather large article in the Tab. This probably just didn’t pop-up as an issue last week (lol!)!
Let’s remove our own personal interests and start thinking what is smart, practical and best for all.
Dave, you are the one who is off the tracks with your comments. In the time that Jerry has lived in Newton, he has established a significant, positive track record of community service. While I may not agree with his political views at times, his efforts to improve life in Newton are unquestionable. He (or someone) may have selected the wrong vendor; that is still to be determined. Every project has unexpected problems. Let’s address the issues going forward, and create something for the citizens to enjoy.
What is your legacy for making Newton better? You could not even correctly read this thread with its links to understand that there is no tax money being used for this project. I question your ability to adequately assess a situation given your failed attempt at reading the provided information.
Greg, I do not think “ponzi” is the proper word to use until it is determined what Joe Hattrup’s true intent is proved. “Ponzi” is associated with illegal activity, and as Michael has pointed out regarding future internet searches, I feel you have jumped the gun with your inflammatory wording.
Iron Horse’s business model is not the most sound; however sometimes one need to take sensible risks to achieve an objective. I would say the flaw in IH’s business model was the assumption of an ongoing stream of projects with an even revenue flow. My understanding is that Newton’s one mile project is a small project. It may have been proceeded by a much bigger project. That could have created a situation where the money received from Newton’s rails could not pay the expenses of the bigger project. With a void in the stream of future projects, the “perfect storm” could have hit IH just as Newton’s project came online. That is unfortunate, yet not illegal. There have been other much bigger “perfect storms” that have hit our economy in the recent past that have also not been illegal yet adversely affected projects.
For the record, I have no idea who Joe Hattrup is, so I am not going to determine his intent until this situation is further investigated.
There is no free lunch.
IronHorse’s biz model is risk/reward and we’re seeing the risk part now. But what was the downside? The funds didn’t exist to create the Greenway so why not take the chance? As Jerry has pointed out they have created miles of railtrails with many happy clients.
Wails of SCAM! PONZI SCHEME! are huge overreactions. For the cost, we can give this some time to play out.
It was a great day for Newton when Jerry and Marie decided to move here.
Can’t say it much better than that.
Agree with every word Terry just wrote. And Jerry and Marie are an incredible asset for Newton.
@Everyone has said about Jerry and Marie.
I’m not crazy about a lot of business models. The model being pushed by Citigroup at this moment comes to mind just off the top of my head. This is a local blog, but that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t at least try to keep things in perspective.
I’m also -1 on the term “Ponzi” here. While it may be as much a cash flow as much as an overhead problem, this unfortunate situation it’s hardly uncommon in the contractor world, as many homeowners know.
Dave, your assertions are unfounded and, frankly, offensive. Much work and good intentions went into this project. Like any project, there was risk involved, but this is hardly a catastrophe for taxpayers. The fact is, Iron Horse presented an opportunity which simply would not have existed otherwise, and they have made at least some investment in this project. Progress has been made, and hopefully we haven’t seen the last of Iron Horse.
And what is that exactly, Dave?
Just curious, since the MBTA owns the land but Newton has a 99-year lease. Who did the rails and ties belong to, Newton or the MBTA?
Here’s a detailed description of the N2 corridor:
http://www.n2corridor.com/
There may be interests outside of Newton Upper Falls that are looking at the “troubled” Upper Falls Greenway to introduce light rail or bus routes along that very real estate.
The Ponzi terminology is just causing a lot of hysteria. Jerry and Marie Jackson have helped revitalize the community and all of the Newton villages.
I hope we get to finish the greenway even if it requires volunteers to get it done.
A few comments:
1. Part of me regrets asking if people thought this was a “Ponzi scheme” in my headline. My intentions were to draw the parallel between the pay it backwards economic model used here. Obviously some interpreted this as an outright accusation. I intended it as a starting point for a discussion, which is why I framed it as a question.
2. I don’t know Joe Hattrup but people I respect vouch for his character and good intentions. Certainly, he deserves credit for returning the TAB’s calls and also frankly acknowledging his circumstances.
3. Jerry Reilly is awesome. One anonymous troll has been unfairly slinging mud his way. Let’s not give “Dave” more power than he deserves by assuming that his comments represents any more than the views of an individual jerk. But just to clarify, Jerry and others lobbied for this, but all of our necessary state and municipal (including I presume law department) authorities signed off on it.
4. So, the rail trail is a more than a year past promised completion and we no long have the assets that might have helped finance all or part of the work. What do we do now?
P.S. @Jo-Louise: Thanks very much for the link to the N2 Corridor website. However, you may have misinterpreted our objectives. Yes, we need mass transit improvements and the Greenway trail could someday be part of that solution. But bike and walking trails are every bit as essential towards the corridor’s success, so to that end businesses have been as enthusiastic about this project as anyone.
@Dave. I find your comments appalling, totally unacceptable and rather cowardly. You indiscriminately sling mud at one of the most respected and well liked people in Newton without letting him or anyone else know who you really are or what your motives are. It’s got to be more than this bump in the road that I’m almost certain will turn out fine in the end. And I’m almost certain the rails belonged to the MBTA and not the City of Newton. There’s no indication in Makers of the Mold, King’s Newton, or some village publications I have on the Highlands and Waban that the City of Newton was ever directly involved in the construction of the Highland Branch to Riverside or this spur to Upper Falls.
Oops, I meant to say Jerry Reilly and Marie Jackson have helped revitalize the community and all of the Newton villages.
To Iron Horse’s credit, they do have the Tab article up on their website for all to see.
They sound like well-intentioned folks, whose enthusiasm outstrips their business acumen. But conceptually it’s a great way to kick start such a development that probably wouldn’t get off the ground otherwise.
WHEN this project is completed, what are the plans for maintaining the path, and enhancing it over time? It strikes me as fairly easy for this to fall into disrepair without a sustained commitment from somewhere.
Like some others on this thread, I applaud Jerry and others for taking the initiative in pushing this, using an innovative approach [that also happened to be risky.]
@Dan Fahey
It will be a city park like all others and be maintained by the Parks & Recreation Dept. There is also an active Friends of the Upper Falls Greenway group that has raised money from both individuals and local businesses to pay for various amenities (park benches, signs, kiosk, etc). The Friends group has also already been quite active with volunteer work – trash removal, trimming vegetation, and planting saplings, etc and will continue with more improvements over the long term.
@Jerry,
Any plans to upgrade from crushed stone to pavement over time?
And will this one mile stretch be added to with Needham over time?
Greg, it is good to see you stepping back your “ponzi” comments and attempting to reframe the discussion. It you intended an emotional response from the community, you got it by including the negative aspect of a ponzi scheme. If you want to get the Upper Falls Greenway project back on track in a positive way, your headline question should have been along the more constructive line of: “The Upper Falls Greenway project needs your help; can we count on you?” My primary interest is getting the Greenway built. If that includes Iron Horse moving forward, that is good and proper. If IH is out of the picture for whatever reason, what is the new plan?
@Dan Fahey – The plan is for stone dust – i.e. a rolled surface that’s smooth enough for bicycles, strollers, etc. No, there is no future plan for pavement.
As for Needham, no they have no plans at the moment to continue across the river. They are though planning to convert two miles of track, on the other side of town, on the same rail line, in the coming year I think.
The biggest obstacle to Needham continuing across the river is that the railroad bridge over Rt 128 will be torn down as part of the highway widening in the next year or two and there are no current plans to replace it. That’s a situation that I and many others are not too happy about but unfortunately Newton really has no say since both ends of that railroad bridge are in Needham.
I think once that bridge comes down and the highway project ends, rebuilding that bridge in the future will be a very expensive obstacle to continuing the rail more than a 1/4 mile into Needham.
So ultimately, this 1 1/4 mile stretch is isolated? That’s unfortunate.
I wonder if anyone from the Chamber of Commerce knows of any local company that would like to be the shining white knight on a horse who steps into the breach 😉
@Dan
I wouldn’t say “ultimately” but certainly in the short-medium term
Well it sounds like this stretch isn’t going to get extended Southwest, so is there any realistic possibility it could go Northeast?
The Upper Falls Greenway, and the railroad bridge across 128 that the Needhamites are steadfastly refusing to do anything about, should be promoted as a critical component of mitigating MassDOT’s plans to turn the Needham St. and Highland Av. corridor into a Route 1-style raceway (to the extent that they can do it on the Needham side, at least).
Hooray, the MassDOT plan will provide bike lanes when it’s finally finished in 2020, but good luck to anyone foolhardy enough to try to use them to get across the 128 exit 19 interchange.
After having observed the Needham political scene for more than three decades, I guess that I shouldn’t be surprised by their obstinacy on this, but I am. With very little effort and expenditure, Needham could get a safe, protected bikeway and walking path from the Needham Heights Commuter Rail station to the Newton Highlands Green Line station. And it would be an excellent complement to the bike path that they’re building on the south side of town. Why on earth would they not want that?
I know the city isn’t suppose to be involved, but why can’t you all approach you’re Mayor and ask him if there might be some extra tar or pavement from construction of one of the schools/streets/sidewalks to substitute for the walkway. It might not be ideal, but it should get the job done.
OR if you go in the direction of raising money for the pavement, ask the city to make the bid (or whatever the process)since they will have a much stronger purchasing power than a bunch of citizens.
Earlier this month I learned about Betteridge’s Law of Headlines which seems applicable to the headline at the top of this thread.
On another note, driving down 128 today I noted the above-mentioned to-be-demolished rail bridge over the highway. That structure appears to be mostly steel (except the vertical supports are concrete). Who owns this bridge and therefore the steel? MBTA or MassDOT? If the bridge is not going to be rebuilt perhaps an arrangement could be made to donate the value of the steel to trail conversion in Newton and Needham (and then there is the value of the rails in Needham too, if Needham would “get on board”).
Was Greg Reibman trying to elevate some piece of reporting into a citywide controversy and, preferably, a citywide panic? (Sensible reader: No.)
PS Just kidding! Above sentence adapted from Bruce B’s Wikipedia link.
If Greg Reibman hadn’t written such an inflammatory headline would as many people be volunteering their time to complete the trail?
@BruceB – That is an intriguing idea – worth looking into a bit. I’m pretty certain that the bridge belongs to the MBTA.
I’ve just gotten my hands on this week’s Tab before it goes to press:
15 Celebrities who totally let themselves go in 2014 (Arts & Life, B1)
Greg Reibman pumps new steam into sidetracked rail-trail plan (Arts & Life, B2)
Did Dick Cheney just say something logical? (Opinion, C1)
Dan asks:
It’s unlikely, but here’s one way it might be done. The Needham Street reconstruction (now at 25%) should also incorporate trail and bicycle connections, as well as improved accommodations on Winchester to the highlands, but so far, DOT has stubbornly refused to do so.
Extending the trail over 128 of course makes the most sense, but just completing the trail over the Charles through to the north side of the “Needham Crossing” business area would be a huge benefit to businesses (NNCoC, take note) for relatively little effort.
@Adam: Noted and agree.
@Adam. You are absolutely correct. Anyone who has been following the Upper Falls Greenway saga from the inception has to be puzzled, upset and a bit angry that MASS DOT made no provision for replacing the railroad bridge over 128 so that Upper Falls and Newton could be connected with Needham and beyond. But finishing everything on this side of the River is well worth doing
Greg, the answer to your question about volunteering is “yes”. Based on who has offered their help in this thread so far, I would say the volunteering is being offered out of respect for Jerry’s contributions to Newton and not from any motivation derived from your journalism.
@Patrick: Works for me!
Greg, I will give you credit for initiating this thread, which hopefully could help Jerry, even if I disagree with your choice of words and your initial position on the issue.
Actually @BOB BURKE, what MassDOT representatives said at a public hearing in Needham on 6/11/2012, was that MassDOT was committed to building a replacement bridge across Rte. 128 when it was requested of them. Presumably only the Town of Needham can make that request, since it is entirely within their borders. To date, Needham has not expressed an interest, that we know of, in rebuilding that bridge for any form of transportation at all.
Video here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mcM4TcnAqNM#t=77m55s
Transcript of MassDOT Add-a-lane meeting with Needham Heights Association, June 11, 2012 (starting at 1:17:55 for ~3 minutes).
Jerry Reilly: You mentioned in passing that you are taking down a railroad bridge over 128. That railroad bridge is a right-of-way that starts at Needham Heights, goes over 128, over the river, and into Newton, and goes to Newton Highlands. At the moment, Newton is putting in a bike path there. Other people have been talking for years about bringing eventually the Green Line out that corridor. People have talked about using that corridor for a road. What I’m getting at is… that right-of-way, the continuousness of a right-of-way, is a unique, valuable, irreplaceable asset. If this highway project is breaking and severing that right-of-way. I would just think it would be incumbent upon the state to put it back together again afterwards, for whatever use, whether it’s going to be down the road.
Larry Cash: On the removal of the bridge, it’s not going to preclude any transportation there. If needed we can bring back another bridge structure that can accomodate another rail line if necessary, or if it turns out to be a rail-trail, then that can be done as well. Darren [Conboy] was saying that we could easily install a two-span structure across there.
Jerry Reilly: Right. But my point is that as part of this project, if when this project ends there is no bridge there, then whatever it is, whether it’s a bike trail or the T or a road, now the cost of what you’ve done by taking this apart will then be loaded onto some future project. The bridge is gone and if it’s not put back then my concern would be that if three years from now, five years from now, you want to do something with this right-of-way, this budget’s gone.
Darren Conboy: The MassDOT will have a written commitment with the MBTA to put back a bridge. Your issue is exactly the reason: we don’t know what bridge is going back there. We don’t know whether it will be a freight railroad bridge, Green Line, a pedestrian or multi-use trail bridge, or whatever it is. For example, to spend the money to put a freight railroad bridge back, if it’s never going to be a freight — I think the cost of a freight railroad bridge we estimated at $10 million, which is a substantial amount of money. A multi-use trail bridge would be a fraction of that.
Jerry Reilly: So when the project’s over the DOT will have a commitment going forward that should there be a use for this right-of-way, they’ll ante-up for the replacement bridge?
Darren Conboy: Yes, that’s the only way that the MBTA will allow the bridge to be removed.
The situation with the Greenway is more complicated than the letter writers have so far indicated. First, there is confusion between rails and ties. The rails are steel and have worth on the scrap steel market. Unfortunately, the scrap steel market started to tank a few years ago (as I understand it) when China dumped a lot of inexpensive steel world-wide. Dumping is a scheme as notorious as those of the Ponzi persuasion. As a result, Iron Horse didn’t make out as well with our rails as it had hoped.
The ties are a different story. They are made of wood impregnated with Creosote — a well-known and strongly regulated carcinogen. Disposing of them is a major expense that Iron Horse agreed to, but, according to IH, the company that it had used to dispose of the ties would no longer accept them. Iron Horse now claims that it has once again found a receiver, and estimated that it would cost $20,000 to dispose of them. The Board of Aldermen agree to budget this amount (though by all rights IH should pay). Unfortunately, Iron Horse once again seems to have erred: They agreed the ties would be gone by the end of August for the $ 20K; as you can easily observe, they are still there. I found (through Rails-To-Trails) a couple of contractors who remove hazardous materials like creosote RR ties and forwarded their names to various people involved with the Greenway. I don’t know if bids were solicited. I personally believe that removal of a mile’s worth of VERY heavy and poisonous ties will cost a lot of money.
On the brighter side of things, once the ties are gone, smoothing the trail, spreading rock dust (it’s not really “dust”) and landscaping are all relatively inexpensive projects that the City and volunteers can easily handle.
I think I can shed some light on Needham’s position. I believe that their selectmen still have hopes that the land committed to the Greenway will someday be used as part of a spur of the MBTA Greenline that will go from Needham Junction to Eliot station. They dismiss — at least publicly — the Greenway as a plan by radical bicyclists to create a gigantic bikeway connecting National Lumber with Dover and beyond (maybe the Tour de France?). IMHO (as a 3 decade bike commuter) is that the Greenway will be fine as a simple PARK, for walkers, kids and their bikes, and bench-sitters; that’s what the community envisages. Needham would be best served by an extension of the Orange Line from Forest Hills and a rejuvenated #59 bus. Of course, at the present the MBTA unfortunately can’t afford to keep its cars lubricated (in summer) and unfrozen (in winter), much less extend its lines, Green, Orange, Red or whatever…
Mark, of course, the dream of a Needham Green Line extension is further complicated by the fact that there is no longer any right of way over 128. Newton has preserved the right of way for future transit, but in Needham. it is severed. The MBTA has gone out of its way to avoid light rail extension and is (was?) very reluctantly building the Somerville Green Line Extension because of binding Big Dig promises. It’s not quite the Orange Line proposal of the 1970’s, but a more realistic public transit option for Needham, also rumored to be on the Needham selectmen’s wish list, is a Commuter Rail extension to Muzi Ford which would someday become another massive office park. Wouldn’t it be nice for commuters to be able to reach Needham Crossing businesses by a bike/ped footbridge and a functional Upper Falls Greenway? Add a Hubway station and commuters could reach Newton businesses as well.