County consultants outline options, environmental constraints for Route 28A rail-corridor project
May 12, 2026 | Ulster County, New York
This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »
Consultants presented a technical update on a feasibility study for the rail corridor from Route 28A to Basin Road, telling the Ulster County Housing & Transportation Committee on May 7 that engineering solutions exist for three alternatives but that environmental and property-rights issues will shape any final choice.
Tom Barrett, lead consultant, told the committee the study team has completed most data gathering and is about 50% through alternatives engineering. "You will have your study on July 1," Barrett said, adding that a draft would be provided to the committee ahead of that date.
Chris Hanna, who led field survey work, said a ground campaign on April 22 collected more than 50 GPS-accurate points to correct smoothing errors found in county LiDAR products. "LiDAR is great for a rough idea of terrain, but it smooths vertical features," Hanna said. The team used the field work to measure rock cut widths, embankment top widths and other constraints that do not show up in airborne-derived contours.
The environmental reconnaissance identified three bat species — Indiana bat, northern long-eared bat and tricolored bat — along with monarch butterfly observations and some rare dragonflies and damselflies. Hanna said those findings mean tree work would need to follow the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s recommended tree‑clearing window (November 1–March 31) to avoid disturbing bats during roosting and hibernation.
Barrett flagged a DEC-regulated stony hollow-fill wetland within the corridor and a stream running through a rock cut that the team believes could be a Waters of the U.S., an issue that would require Army Corps review. Barrett noted the Supreme Court decision in Sackett v. EPA (2023) has altered how some wetlands are classified and said the team will document potential jurisdictional impacts in the final report.
On engineering, Barrett described locations where the corridor can accommodate both a functioning rail and a 10-foot trail offset from the rail centerline (16 feet at one pedestrian bridge location). In deeper rock-cut sections the team plans for up to a roughly 44-foot top width that will require significant rock removal in places and careful geotechnical study of backslope stability. The consultants said they are designing the corridor in 50‑foot segments and will use a 2.5% maximum railroad grade assumption for feasibility work.
Dennis Doyle, director of planning, told the committee that land title on former railroad parcels varies: some tracts are fee simple while others are easements, and how the railroad was abandoned affects land availability for nonrail uses. Doyle said the county is reviewing prior survey mapping and will include property-impact findings in the report.
Committee members pressed for specifics. Legislator Nolan asked whether the stream shown on some slides was the seasonal stream near Bluestone Wild Forest; Barrett and Hanna said the corridor has a separate stream alongside the tracks and that Army Corps jurisdiction will be determined during permitting. Nolan also asked whether creosoted ties would be addressed; Barrett said the team expects to remove ties, screen ballast, and, where appropriate, cap existing material in place — a method used on prior county rail-trail projects with DEC and New York City DEP concurrence.
Legislator Grossman asked about the Bismarck Road pedestrian-bridge option after the team concluded that an at-grade rail-and-trail crossing would require economically infeasible rock removal and bridge replacement. Barrett said the preferred solution in that location is a new pedestrian bridge adjacent to the existing railroad bridge with a wider offset for the trail.
The consultants emphasized the study’s conservative approach: many engineering alternatives are technically feasible but entail trade-offs among wetland impacts, rock removal, property negotiations and cost. They said construction cost estimates are in progress, hazardous-materials testing of ties and ballast is underway, and the team will include maps that locate county boundaries and property impacts in the final report.
The committee did not take action on the study materials at the meeting. The consultants and county staff invited members to a field visit and reiterated the schedule to deliver a draft study before July 1.
Tom Barrett, lead consultant, told the committee the study team has completed most data gathering and is about 50% through alternatives engineering. "You will have your study on July 1," Barrett said, adding that a draft would be provided to the committee ahead of that date.
Chris Hanna, who led field survey work, said a ground campaign on April 22 collected more than 50 GPS-accurate points to correct smoothing errors found in county LiDAR products. "LiDAR is great for a rough idea of terrain, but it smooths vertical features," Hanna said. The team used the field work to measure rock cut widths, embankment top widths and other constraints that do not show up in airborne-derived contours.
The environmental reconnaissance identified three bat species — Indiana bat, northern long-eared bat and tricolored bat — along with monarch butterfly observations and some rare dragonflies and damselflies. Hanna said those findings mean tree work would need to follow the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s recommended tree‑clearing window (November 1–March 31) to avoid disturbing bats during roosting and hibernation.
Barrett flagged a DEC-regulated stony hollow-fill wetland within the corridor and a stream running through a rock cut that the team believes could be a Waters of the U.S., an issue that would require Army Corps review. Barrett noted the Supreme Court decision in Sackett v. EPA (2023) has altered how some wetlands are classified and said the team will document potential jurisdictional impacts in the final report.
On engineering, Barrett described locations where the corridor can accommodate both a functioning rail and a 10-foot trail offset from the rail centerline (16 feet at one pedestrian bridge location). In deeper rock-cut sections the team plans for up to a roughly 44-foot top width that will require significant rock removal in places and careful geotechnical study of backslope stability. The consultants said they are designing the corridor in 50‑foot segments and will use a 2.5% maximum railroad grade assumption for feasibility work.
Dennis Doyle, director of planning, told the committee that land title on former railroad parcels varies: some tracts are fee simple while others are easements, and how the railroad was abandoned affects land availability for nonrail uses. Doyle said the county is reviewing prior survey mapping and will include property-impact findings in the report.
Committee members pressed for specifics. Legislator Nolan asked whether the stream shown on some slides was the seasonal stream near Bluestone Wild Forest; Barrett and Hanna said the corridor has a separate stream alongside the tracks and that Army Corps jurisdiction will be determined during permitting. Nolan also asked whether creosoted ties would be addressed; Barrett said the team expects to remove ties, screen ballast, and, where appropriate, cap existing material in place — a method used on prior county rail-trail projects with DEC and New York City DEP concurrence.
Legislator Grossman asked about the Bismarck Road pedestrian-bridge option after the team concluded that an at-grade rail-and-trail crossing would require economically infeasible rock removal and bridge replacement. Barrett said the preferred solution in that location is a new pedestrian bridge adjacent to the existing railroad bridge with a wider offset for the trail.
The consultants emphasized the study’s conservative approach: many engineering alternatives are technically feasible but entail trade-offs among wetland impacts, rock removal, property negotiations and cost. They said construction cost estimates are in progress, hazardous-materials testing of ties and ballast is underway, and the team will include maps that locate county boundaries and property impacts in the final report.
The committee did not take action on the study materials at the meeting. The consultants and county staff invited members to a field visit and reiterated the schedule to deliver a draft study before July 1.
Don't Miss a Word: See the Full Meeting!
Go beyond summaries. Unlock every video, transcript, and key insight with a Founder Membership.
✓
Get instant access to full meeting videos
✓
Search and clip any phrase from complete transcripts
✓
Receive AI-powered summaries & custom alerts
✓
Enjoy lifetime, unrestricted access to government data
30-day money-back guarantee
