Downeaster Trackwork & Upgrades

MEC407 - yes, thanks I had forgot about that one, strategically located between the two hospitals! And on a street with no traffic.

I still hear many horns in the area... luckily due to all the bums wondering about the tracks. Actually there are quite a few non-bums who wonder around the tracks too as a cut off.

It would probably be cheaper to simply eliminate at least a couple of those grade crossings. There's really no need for some of those tiny residential streets to be through-routes. It would be a plus for the city and railroad. Specifically, I'm thinking of Revere, Lincoln, and Coyle.

I am also surprised this hasn't come up yet. I'm also perhaps even more surprised that Forest Avenue wasn't among the crossings considered for improvements. It seems exceptionally dangerous to me due to the angled approach and minimal signaling.

Forest is bad although I've seen a lot worse.

Here's another relevant quote from the article:

The Forecaster wrote:The configurations of the grade crossings at Brighton and Allen avenues are better suited for quad gates than the crossing at Forest Avenue, just beyond Woodford’s Corner.

City Manager Jon Jennings has been discussing how to improve that grade crossing as part of a planned Maine Department of Transportation upgrade throughout the area.

Because of traffic flow, Bartlett feared a quad gate on Forest Avenue “would keep Woodfords intersections from functioning.”

The city had also considered installing medians at grade crossings to prevent drivers from going around gates. While less expensive than quad gates, Bartlett said the medians carry more impact on private property, included blocked access.

“We don’t really have the option to close people’s driveways,” Bartlett said.

Crossing elimination is always the best solution from a safety standpoint, but I suspect outright closures of any crossings in Portland (other than the County Way crossing) would be next to impossible. No neighborhood wants to have their street cut in two. It would be a long and difficult battle and the city has bigger battles to worry about at the moment.

Would it make sense to double track through there if crossings are going to be redone?

With that many crossings in there, double tracking might be squandered in that location. Traffic isn't high enough, and a train can wait just a few minutes for the short single track segment to clear.

I am not surprised that this corridor is going to end up being one of the very few places in Maine with quad gates. It is exceptionally constricted and quad gates are really the only option.

Forest Avenue is a serious engineering challenge that is going to require a lot of work. The City seems to hint at this in the article when they admit that there aren't any obvious options for how to deal with the combination of the crossing and the intersection location.

Its good to see them moving forward. Although double tracking isn't necessary now and may never be I do think it could end up happenning someday. If the train counts continue to go up as passenger train service expands it will only be a matter of time before that particular segment becomes problematic.

I don't hear much about wayside horns anymore — they came on the scene in the mid-2000s as a new solution for quiet zones and they gained some popularity in the midwest and west — but if the city and MDOT find themselves needing to do something at the Forest Ave crossing, wayside horns might be one option. They'd be an attractive one in this case because they don't interfere with the geometry or traffic flow through the crossing, they don't block anything, they're not susceptible to snow plow damage, and they require only minimal maintenance. I'm not sure how much of a bump they would give to the crossing's safety score, but it might be enough to allow the existing gates to remain as-is and to continue without median barriers.

True but they're terrible in terms of noise impact. One loud continuous blaring signal until the train is in the crossing. Awful.

MEC407 wrote:I don't hear much about wayside horns anymore — they came on the scene in the mid-2000s as a new solution for quiet zones and they gained some popularity in the midwest and west — but if the city and MDOT find themselves needing to do something at the Forest Ave crossing, wayside horns might be one option. They'd be an attractive one in this case because they don't interfere with the geometry or traffic flow through the crossing, they don't block anything, they're not susceptible to snow plow damage, and they require only minimal maintenance. I'm not sure how much of a bump they would give to the crossing's safety score, but it might be enough to allow the existing gates to remain as-is and to continue without median barriers.

They're going up on the Springfield Line throughout the horrible Wallingford and Meriden crossing clusters. They couldn't make those crossings quiet zones because they're attempting to whack the speed restrictions, and the best gates money could buy wasn't going to do any good for those restrictions if they went to quiet crossings...so there'll be wayside horns installed at each of them. Communities bought into it because the sound profile covers a much narrower area vs. a train horn that can be heard halfway across town. So while the immediate abutters are going to be just as nonplussed at hearing a horn, a lot fewer people total are affected.

MEC407 wrote:Forest is bad although I've seen a lot worse.

Here's another relevant quote from the article:

The Forecaster wrote:The configurations of the grade crossings at Brighton and Allen avenues are better suited for quad gates than the crossing at Forest Avenue, just beyond Woodford’s Corner.

City Manager Jon Jennings has been discussing how to improve that grade crossing as part of a planned Maine Department of Transportation upgrade throughout the area.

Because of traffic flow, Bartlett feared a quad gate on Forest Avenue “would keep Woodfords intersections from functioning.”

The city had also considered installing medians at grade crossings to prevent drivers from going around gates. While less expensive than quad gates, Bartlett said the medians carry more impact on private property, included blocked access.

“We don’t really have the option to close people’s driveways,” Bartlett said.

Crossing elimination is always the best solution from a safety standpoint, but I suspect outright closures of any crossings in Portland (other than the County Way crossing) would be next to impossible. No neighborhood wants to have their street cut in two. It would be a long and difficult battle and the city has bigger battles to worry about at the moment.

Furtherst from the truth if you're a first responder. In fact fire and EMS requested those crossings be kept because they were going to take out every other.

I will be interested to see how long those last.

gokeefe wrote:I will be interested to see how long those last.

They have to be able to get emergency equipment in and out of tight areas quickly so creating multiple dead ends on already narrow streets is not an option

Sorry I should have been clear.

We'll see how long the wayside horns last.

I don't think they'll close off streets I think they'll look at other options.