Maine Commuter Rail

[joshg1]

The study is an environmental assessment of the (a) route, and of the requirements of the physical plant exclusive of stations? Nothing about service/operations, costs thereof or ridership, which would require alternatives (bus, no build)? And it hasn't come up for a vote or veto yet?

Going back 2 months on this thread- any transportation plan in SW Maine is more about drawing people into Vacationland , than getting Mainers into civilization. Foamy advocates will go on about how great it would be to ride a train from here to there, but the money is interested in increasing the number of sucke- ah- tourists. Traffic congestion, commuters, population statistics all pale in comparison with Freeport and Brunswick's coastal, pretty, touristy. As opposed Lewiston- grim, horrible reputation.

I imagine this thinking is why Vermont has two Amtrak routes and central NH has none. NH is just as mad for shaking down tourists as Maine, but the chamber of commerce/economic development types know that Concord and Manchester are too miserable to be destinations.

[gokeefe]

So far the Downeaster has done exactly the opposite. As noted by many it mostly serves passengers from Maine.

[markhb]

The study is an environmental assessment of the (a) route, and of the requirements of the physical plant exclusive of stations? Nothing about service/operations, costs thereof or ridership, which would require alternatives (bus, no build)? And it hasn't come up for a vote or veto yet?

There's a relatively detailed cost analysis here (warning: PDF), including section-by-section estimates and SWAG's at station sites and costs. I'd be interested in knowing how the actual costs for the upgrades from Yarmouth Junction to Brunswick Station compared to these estimates. (Incidentally, there's a c. $4.5 Million estimate in there for the Mountain Junction Wye.)

So far as coming up for a vote/veto, the whole study was prepared in order to apply for Small Starts funding, but in the course of doing the study MaineDOT and the FRA realized that the rail project as envisioned probably wouldn't qualify, so the final (cheaper) alternative picked was for an express bus from Brunswick to downtown Portland, augmenting the Downeaster. I believe that a modification of the criteria for Small Starts under the Obama administration is, at least in part, an impetus for the current resolve.

[newpylong]

Regarding Section 2, can someone please explain what the corridor they are speaking about is?

The Portland North study homepage is here, with a link to the page with the downloads. The state owns the SLR from India St. to Danville Jct. (only serviceable west of Back Cove), but I can't remember how strongly the study came down on the idea of following it all the way into Portland as opposed to switching to PanAm at Yarmouth Jct. and continuing to the PTC.

Thank you. Can someone help me understand the rationality for looking at the SLR for the Portland to Auburn corridor? The rational route to me would be to run up the MEC all the way to Lewiston/Auburn. You already have 11 miles of new Class IV fully CTC railroad from Mountain Junction to Royal. You would have to rebuild the Back Cove bridge and trackage downtown. The SLR doesn't even go into Auburn or Lewiston proper (I don't count the stub ended Intermodal yard). Lastly you would have to deal with multiple railroads. The only benefit I see if they owning south of Yarmouth already (really a small distance). Help me see this...

[BM6569]

The big thing is they want to avoid running on PAR, especially with the number of runs the line would have to handle. I think they are talking about a train every half an hour.

[joshg1]

After reading that report, I agree that the SLR to Lewiston route may have a lot of added expense. Terminating on the waterfront eliminates the connectivity that I, for one, appreciate. (No- not the Portland trolley again!) Snaking a line along 295 in Portland sounds more expensive than the study suggests and I guarantee the Back Cove bridge will need to be completely replaced. Eight more years of decay can't have helped. I say "may have" because I don't know what using the Guilford line would cost- double tracking? Studies aren't cheap, but how else can we learn?

I don't dispute that most Downeaster riders are from Maine, but who pushed for the funding for the Brunswick extension? To justify mentioning the Downeaster in this thread, consider who lobbies for funding of any state and/or federal project. In this case NNERRPA, TrainRiders/Northeast, the MaineDOT, certainly local legislators, and who else? Chambers of Commerce? Trade groups? Big boot selling employers? I suggest the last three have tourists in mind as much as residents. I think of free time in state travel as tourism, too. I go to the White Mountains and I'm just as much a tourist as a New Yorker.

Anyway, the first four above will boost for Lewiston trains, but will the second? And do interior Mainers have as much pull as those on the coast? They certainly don't have as much money, which I've found helpful.

Added later- a train every half hour? Rush hour or all day? Not even the T does that.

[markhb]

The state actually owns the GT line south/east of Danville Junction now, not just the Yarmouth Jct. - India St. section.

It's useful to remember that the point of the "commuter rail" proposals is exactly that - commuter transit from Brunswick and/or L/A to downtown Portland. That's why the proposals in question (and if you're interested there's an independent one from the Maine Rail Transit Coalition linked to a few pages back in the thread) aim for the Back Cove routing to either India St. or a new Union Branch: to put the terminal on the peninsula rather than at the PTC (current Portland Amtrak station). Several things about the proposals make me wonder: whether commuters coming from Lewiston actually work downtown, or do they mainly work elsewhere and would have to rely on Metro to get to work. Conversely, do those commuters live in the L-A downtown areas, or would they be driving in from Greene or Sabattus or Minot or Mechanic Falls, and if it's the latter would bringing them into downtown Lewiston or Auburn really be doing anyone a service? And, of course, I wonder whether there would be enough ridership to make it worthwhile. Most other cities that have commuter rail have it because driving into and parking in the downtown physically can't meet the demand; that's not the case in Portland at all.

[gokeefe]

Commuter rail has been brought up several legislative sessions in a row and, for good reason, has gone nowhere.

We will know things are serious when we see a proposal to rehabilitate the Lower Road and to extend Downeaster service to Waterville or Augusta. That is the proposal that makes the most operational sense.

For commuting I would think some kind of a "micro" operation designed specifically around supporting BIW would be the most likely option using the Maine Eastern system. Ironically, having a single RDC run from Lisbon to Bath using the LIT might actually be worthwhile.

[joshg1]

I like gokeefe's idea of a BIW train. Regular shifts, tight location, awful traffic. Those are elements that make not driving attractive. As for the MRTC proposal, what word means super ambitious? I counted ~3850 commuters going in both directions on the route, and many if not most of those reverse commuters would be left far from work. Nor is every job on the peninsula. 40% share for CR? Maybe in south London. I noticed the total commuter/rail commuter numbers were absent for the example cities. The financing was a bit dodgy- TIF districts mean funds paid in lieu of property tax, a red flag in NH, and usually a sign of a sweetheart deal.

I was surprised that so few people lived in the corridor. I have broadly pessimistic views of the demographics of NH, ME, and everywhere outside of the biggest metro areas that equal fewer potential passengers.

Well… FWIW, I'd build a station along Marginal Way for downtown, and run the few passengers who want to keep going to the PTC.

[gokeefe]

I like gokeefe's idea of a BIW train. Regular shifts, tight location, awful traffic. Those are elements that make not driving attractive.

Thanks!

I'll continue to advocate for this because I think it is the one option that would make sense in Maine. You could have trains coming from literally at least three points of the compass without any need to go over PAR tracks (and the issues inherent there).

For example:

From the West: LIT, Lisbon to Bath with stops at Harding's in Brunswick

From the East: Rockland to Bath with a follow on stop in Brunswick

From the North: Augusta to Bath with a stop at Harding's in Brunswick

Additionally there is also a Bath Iron Works facility directly adjacent to the Church Road crossing. So there could be some options there as well. In total I count three possible stops, Church Road, Harding's and the Main Yard downtown (Bath Station). Each route could have its own set of stops, for example Augusta, Hallowell, Gardiner, Richmond, etc.

Furthermore the trains would only run to cover first shift. Second shift is so small right now I doubt it would be worth it. BIW already provides some commuter services to their workers through the Dock and Ride program which provides shuttle service from car pool lots in a wide radius around BIW. I think having a successful program such as this one, in particular one which wouldn't be as vulnerable to snow would be extremely helpful and improve overall efficiency. Commuting on Route 1 in the winter and especially in the summer afternoon is absolutely terrible and the rail lines provide some excellent options for congestion mitigation. If properly employed it would help eliminate the "big city" stigma of commuter rail.

Does that mean I think there should be commuter rail as proposed? Absolutely not. But for the moment it won't get anywhere until people can see more creative uses for it in Maine.

[MEC407]

Op-ed in today's Kennebec Journal regarding the proposal for commuter rail over the ex-SLR line to Portland:

The coalition is lining up private investors for the train platforms, stations and equipment, for a total of $20 million. A $27 million state transportation bond would leverage the federal funds needed for the remainder of the estimated $138 million project. Operations could be paid for in part by assessments on property value increases that occur because of the nearby rail service. The Department of Transportation is working on a report detailing funding mechanisms for design and engineering work.

If it comes to it, the transportation bond would have to be approved at the statewide ballot. The bond should stand on its own, so Maine can give the project a clear up-or-down vote.

Until then, Mainers should press for more information about how the rail service would enhance the communities along its path, and how the supposed benefits to energy efficiency and transportation costs would be measured and held in account.

Read the rest of the article at: http://www.kjonline.com/opinion/OUR_OPI ... min__.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[gokeefe]

For the moment I think this project is a distraction from the very important work that needs to continue in reestablishing Maine's inter-city passenger rail system with a focus on providing the best and fastest possible connections to the Northeast (i.e. Boston and New York).

If the State of Maine is going to spend $30 million dollars on anything it should be one of these three things:

1. Further improvements to rail infrastructure in the Portland area. Major safety improvements to the crossing at Woodford's corner (full quad gates, new overhead signal gantry, etc.). Construction of a new landmark passenger rail station at Thompson's Point. Full double track between South Portland (Rigby Yard) and Yarmouth (Royal Junction). Construction of an essential north leg to the wye track coming out of the Portland Transportation Center.

2. Rehabilitation of the Augusta Lower Road between Brunswick and Augusta with follow on work to Waterville. Extend one Downeaster train daily from Augusta/Waterville to Boston and return. Construction of a new landmark passenger rail station in Waterville.

3. Make a down payment on upgrading PAR tracks in NH and ME to Class V standards and pay for any necessary upgrades to PAR rolling stock and equipment to handle cab signals. Add passing sidings as needed.

Once you get to Waterville I think at that point it would make sense to look at going to Lewiston/Auburn. It would be perfectly reasonable to do the reverse as well but for the moment it seems to me that the location of the layover facility in Brunswick tips the balance in favor of running up the Lower Road first. The above three possible new capital projects assume all of the money will be spent in Maine.

If instead we were to "think outside the box" then there are several other very interesting projects that should be considered. Absolutely positively #1 on that list would be:

1. Restore the PAR Worcester - Ayer line to Class IV standards for operation of an extended Northeast Regional to/from Portland - New York City once daily each way. Make any necessary and required improvements to PAR tracks in NH, ME for capacity.

2. Purchase "add-on" single level cars from CAF as part of the Viewliner II order currently in production. Use the trainset for either seasonal service to/from tourist points of interest in Maine or restore the State of Maine overnight service to/from New York City.

[kilroy]

I'm with gokeefe. I think I said this earlier in the tread, commuter rail does not make sense in Maine. Here in Jersey, only the NEC covers costs. All the other lines in the state lose money and we have more people per square mile in this state than Maine has blueberries per square mile.

[MEC407]

For the moment I think this project is a distraction from the very important work that needs to continue in reestablishing Maine's inter-city passenger rail system with a focus on providing the best and fastest possible connections to the Northeast (i.e. Boston and New York).

If the State of Maine is going to spend $30 million dollars on anything it should be one of these three things:

1. Further improvements to rail infrastructure in the Portland area. Major safety improvements to the crossing at Woodford's corner (full quad gates, new overhead signal gantry, etc.). Construction of a new landmark passenger rail station at Thompson's Point. Full double track between South Portland (Rigby Yard) and Yarmouth (Royal Junction). Construction of an essential north leg to the wye track coming out of the Portland Transportation Center.

2. Rehabilitation of the Augusta Lower Road between Brunswick and Augusta with follow on work to Waterville. Extend one Downeaster train daily from Augusta/Waterville to Boston and return. Construction of a new landmark passenger rail station in Waterville.

3. Make a down payment on upgrading PAR tracks in NH and ME to Class V standards and pay for any necessary upgrades to PAR rolling stock and equipment to handle cab signals. Add passing sidings as needed.

I absolutely agree (especially with the part I emphasized in the above quote), but I would take item #3 from your list and move it to the top spot. I've felt, and continue to feel, that we're neglecting the best and most important part of Maine's passenger rail system — the Portland-Boston route — and that there should be no further expansion of the network until we've made serious improvements to the Portland-Boston line. There is so much potential there that we've yet to fully take advantage of. A combination of track/signal/bridge improvements could shave another 10 minutes off the running time, and if we purchased our own rolling stock (Talgo or something similar with tilt capability), we might even be able to get it down to the 2-hour mark, which would be HUGE. Even some of the most ardent passenger rail detractors have admitted that they'd change their tunes if the Downeaster was able to make the POR-BON run in two hours. And just think of what that time savings would mean for folks in places like Saco, Wells, Dover, Durham, and Exeter.

The 115 LB rail currently on PAR's Portland-Plaistow tracks could be replaced with 132 LB rail (something that PAR would most assuredly demand for higher speeds); the 115 LB rail could then be relaid elsewhere in Maine for the other projects you outlined, thus making those projects more affordable than they otherwise would be, and getting better value out of an asset that Maine taxpayers have already paid for.

[CN9634]

Guilford had initially argued that they needed 132lb rail on the DE project because 115lb wasn't safe for 79MPH (which isn't true at all).

As for the three points, I could see #1, but #2 and #3 aren't happening anytime soon. #2 will require substantially more money, maybe upwards of $100M. #3 won't happen because the state wouldn't finance installation of cab signals in PAR units -- that just won't happen.

You will see service to Auburn (which they are already working on with grants and contracts) way before Waterville.