Maine Commuter Rail

[gokeefe]

"So you're saying it leaves Portland for Boston and comes into Portland from Boston with only 47 seats full on average? And leaves and comes into Portland from/to the east with 15 seats full?"

Well, I calculate it at 58 west of Portland, but YES! That's why I'm such a critic of the DE, esp. the BRU extension.

Here's the math for POR-BRU: Assuming half the trains are three coaches and a cafe and the other half are four coaches and a cafe... 270 seats * 6 trips daily * 364 days (allowing for a couple days of reduced service) = 589,680 available seats/yr. Forecasted ridership = 36,000 one-way trips. Percentage of seats utilized = 36,000 / 589,680, or 6%.

Keep in mind, THIS IS WHAT NNEPRA/TRNE EXPECTED AND ARE PROCLAIMING A SUCCESS! And TRNE is advocating additional service east.

Please rank the following on an insanity scale of 1-10:

"Our Brunswick trains are running 94% empty. Obviously, we need more service to meet demand!"

I think it is more than fair to proclaim success when you're selling out trains, even if these trains aren't 100% occupied when they leave their point of origin. Are they sold out between all intermediate points? No they aren't but where does that happen anyways? Even the Acela doesn't do that well.

Look at BOS for example. How many empty seats do they have aboard trains leaving that station. Thousands a day I would estimate but they're still making an operating profit.

So on that point alone (not successful due to empty seats at terminal of origin) I would say that's doesn't seem to me to be a fair standard.

[newpylong]

Yeah that's about what I figured for math. I just used 3 coaches and 1 cafe/coach for 234 seats on average.

When you look at the raw math you make a good point. I hope what ridership that there is benefits the local economy to the point where it is worthwhile to continue the service.

I was actually flabergasted when I heard that they were extending the Downeaster past Portland. I am pro-rail (who isn't?) but if I was a taxpayer in Maine I would be looking long and hard at this... I certainly would be vocal against any further service extensions and definitely commuter rail. Granted I do not live there, to think there is public demand or a need for such is outlandish to me.

"So you're saying it leaves Portland for Boston and comes into Portland from Boston with only 47 seats full on average? And leaves and comes into Portland from/to the east with 15 seats full?"

Well, I calculate it at 58 west of Portland, but YES! That's why I'm such a critic of the DE, esp. the BRU extension.

Here's the math for POR-BRU: Assuming half the trains are three coaches and a cafe and the other half are four coaches and a cafe... 270 seats * 6 trips daily * 364 days (allowing for a couple days of reduced service) = 589,680 available seats/yr. Forecasted ridership = 36,000 one-way trips. Percentage of seats utilized = 36,000 / 589,680, or 6%.

Keep in mind, THIS IS WHAT NNEPRA/TRNE EXPECTED AND ARE PROCLAIMING A SUCCESS! And TRNE is advocating additional service east.

Please rank the following on an insanity scale of 1-10:

"Our Brunswick trains are running 94% empty. Obviously, we need more service to meet demand!"

[TomNelligan]

I think it is more than fair to proclaim success when you're selling out trains, even if these trains aren't 100% occupied when they leave their point of origin.

There's no question that a lot of people ride the Downeasters and that the restoration of rail passenger service between Portland and Boston has been a big success. But if I was a Maine taxpayer I might be looking at how many Mainers ride the trains and not especially care about my tax money providing transportation for folks from south of the border (even though we all know those cheap Granite Staters are necessary to fill seats). A more general thought that keeps coming to mind is at some point all the talk here of rail or transit expansion in southern Maine makes no sense to me in view of the size of metropolitan Portland. Based on rail systems elsewhere in the US, you just don't have enough people up there to fill trains to places other than Boston. Off the top of my head, the smallest US city that is currently the hub of a rail commuter operation is probably Albuquerque, population about 550,000. (I'm not counting tourist streetcars, which are a whole 'nother thing.) Portland's whole greater metropolitan area is smaller than that and the core city is only 66,000. From a rail transit or commuter train perspective, that sort of population falls off the bottom of the chart.

[MEC407]

I agree, and that's why it concerns me when worthwhile services such as the Downeaster get lumped into the same category as pie-in-the-sky / off-the-wall proposals like Portland-Lewiston commuter rail.

I've been on southbound Downeasters that were packed to the gills, with people standing, sitting on the floor, crouched in vestibules, etc. Those same trains might've only had 50 or 60 people when we left Portland, but boy did they fill up quickly along the way. I don't think there's any question that the Downeaster serves a need. Remember, a lot of the communities along the route don't have any bus services to Boston. In those communities, the DE is the only alternative to driving.

[CN9634]

I think it is more than fair to proclaim success when you're selling out trains, even if these trains aren't 100% occupied when they leave their point of origin.

There's no question that a lot of people ride the Downeasters and that the restoration of rail passenger service between Portland and Boston has been a big success. But if I was a Maine taxpayer I might be looking at how many Mainers ride the trains and not especially care about my tax money providing transportation for folks from south of the border (even though we all know those cheap Granite Staters are necessary to fill seats). A more general thought that keeps coming to mind is at some point all the talk here of rail or transit expansion in southern Maine makes no sense to me in view of the size of metropolitan Portland. Based on rail systems elsewhere in the US, you just don't have enough people up there to fill trains to places other than Boston. Off the top of my head, the smallest US city that is currently the hub of a rail commuter operation is probably Albuquerque, population about 550,000. (I'm not counting tourist streetcars, which are a whole 'nother thing.) Portland's whole greater metropolitan area is smaller than that and the core city is only 66,000. From a rail transit or commuter train perspective, that sort of population falls off the bottom of the chart.

The metro area is about 500,000 people or a bit less than 1/3 of the State's population (1.2-1.3m). I believe the strategy has not been to be a commuter service at all but rather a link to the Boston economic center. Think of the people who either don't drive, or don't care to drive to Boston from places such as Lewiston/Auburn, Augusta, Brunswick and Portland. You can now hop on the train, and instantly, the train becomes your office for the next 3 hours (I know, I've done it before).

In all honesty, it's a hybrid model because some people can use it to commute. But, more importantly, it works. People understand the service is sub'd but there has not been a public outcry to shut down the service. Its also a nice daytrip/tourist opportunity for people heading North.

[jbvb]

To put a somewhat finer point on a number of my posts over in the Amtrak Downeaster thread, the DE is not by any means purely commuters to/from Boston. I often see the 5PM Boston departure (#685) at Haverhill. Many evenings it's completely full from BON. Between 15 and 20 people debark at Haverhill, and another 10-15 board for points east. This pattern is repeated at least as far as Saco, though beyond Durham there are usually only 3-5 boarding eastbound, and many more leave the train at Exeter and beyond.

Note that I'm not saying this means Portland needs commuter rail tomorrow. Better bus service would go a long way to proving out the market: running them to European levels of schedule keeping, with adequate knee room and a better solution to luggage than the comically small overhead racks found in most American medium-distance buses. Also, schedules and route maps posted at the stops, and a simple fare system with low barriers to entry for new or occasional travelers.

[markhb]

The 2010 census population of the Portland NECTA was 357,412; the only way to get to the 500,000 figure - maybe - is to use the broader MSA that comprises all of York, Cumberland and Sagadahoc counties. Even that 350k figure goes all the way to Cornish and Hiram, so I'm not sure it's entirely helpful in crafting a city transit plan.

The Legislature has just posted LD 1208, "Resolve, To Establish the Commuter and Passenger Rail Advisory Task Force." The summary reads as follows:

This resolve directs the Department of Transportation to establish and convene the Commuter and Passenger Rail Advisory Task Force to evaluate and prioritize investments in commuter and passenger rail service between communities in this State in order to expedite development of efficient commuter rail service as appropriate in the major economic and population centers of this State to reduce costs to the State, its municipalities and its citizens of travel to and from work, business activities and entertainment and recreation activities. The task force must develop a Maine commuter and passenger rail plan, which must include investment priorities for the establishment of commuter and passenger rail service between communities in this State. The plan must be based on existing studies and analyses and explore the markets and infrastructure and the potential to remove automobile traffic from excessively used roadways. The plan must also provide for the reduction of highway construction and maintenance costs and identify ways to limit the need for parking facilities and to reduce road congestion and lessen transportation costs for citizens living in cities in this State. The Department of Transportation must report the findings and the plan of the task force to the Joint Standing Committee on Transportation no later than February 28, 2014. The Joint Standing Committee on Transportation may submit a bill to the Second Regular Session of the 126th Legislature on the subject matter of the report.

It hasn't even gone up for committee assignment yet, although I'd imagine it will do so Tuesday.

[Cowford]

"...if I was a taxpayer in Maine I would be looking long and hard at this..."

This is precisely one of the problems... because to Maine taxpayers, it's free! The DE and all of these outlandish rail proposals are supported primarily by federal funding. Even the "state" contribution is from the pockets of visitors, in the form of rental car tax receipts. And let's face it, many consider federal dollars free money. I propose that Androscoggin, Cumberland and York Counties pay for all such capital and operating outlays out of sales tax revenue. You want the trains? You benefit from the trains? You pay for them!

Launch the lead balloon. It's train time!

[newpylong]

I also did a double take when I looked at that.. they really are stretching it with this MSA but here it is:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portland_% ... litan_area

Square mileage wise that's half of Massachusetts lol.

The 2010 census population of the Portland NECTA was 357,412; the only way to get to the 500,000 figure - maybe - is to use the broader MSA that comprises all of York, Cumberland and Sagadahoc counties. Even that 350k figure goes all the way to Cornish and Hiram, so I'm not sure it's entirely helpful in crafting a city transit plan..

[markhb]

An update on a couple of items before the Legislature related to this topic:

LD 1208, "Resolve, To Establish the Commuter and Passenger Rail Advisory Task Force ", is going to have a Public Hearing this Friday, May 3.

LD 763, "Resolve, Directing the Department of Transportation and the Maine Turnpike Authority To Conduct a Study Regarding the Need for a Passenger Transit Service Linking Municipalities from Portland North to Lewiston and Auburn", got a Unanimous ONTP and died.

LD 999, "Resolve, Directing the Department of Transportation To Fund or Seek Funding To Complete a Design and Engineering Assessment for the Extension of Passenger Rail Service from Portland North on the State-owned St. Lawrence and Atlantic Railway Corridor", is going to get a Divided Report out of committee but I have no idea which way it fell.

Listing these items does not constitute endorsement of the proposals mentioned by the poster.

[markhb]

Update: LD 999 received a recommendation of "Ought to Pass as Amended," but the amendment is not yet online so it could be something entirely different. The vote went:

MAJ, Ought To Pass As Amended:
Senator Mazurek of Knox, Chair
Representative Theriault of Madawaska, Chair
Senator Collins of York
Representative Gillway of Searsport
Representative McLean of Gorham
Representative Nutting of Oakland
Representative Parry of Arundel
Representative Peoples of Westbrook
Representative Powers of Naples
Representative Verow of Brewer
Representative Werts of Auburn

MIN, Ought Not To Pass:
Senator Valentino of York
Representative Turner of Burlington (Railroad connection: her district includes Mattawamkeag! )

[markhb]

OK, the Committee amendment for LD 999 is up. The original read as follows:

Sec. 1. Completion of the existing environmental assessment. Resolved:
That the Department of Transportation shall fund, or seek funding, to complete and
update the existing environmental assessment for the project for the extension of
passenger rail service from Portland north if an update of this assessment still meets
requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, 42 United States Code,
Chapter 55 or to conduct a new assessment to determine whether restoration of the rail
line for passenger rail service, which is the subject of the existing assessment, with
appropriate mitigation measures would have a significant impact on the human and
natural environment; and be it further

Sec. 2. Completion of the construction costs and engineering
analysis for track and related improvements. Resolved: That the Department of
Transportation shall fund, or seek funding, to complete the cost and feasibility study
necessary to fund restoration of the state-owned St. Lawrence and Atlantic railway
corridor for passenger rail service, consistent with the department's "Portland North
Alternative Modes Transportation Project" study, including calculations of appropriate
costs of track, signals and bridge improvements associated with rail; highway
improvements at highway-rail grade crossings; and warning system upgrades, control
signals, new rail and required sidings; and be it further

Sec. 3. Report. Resolved: That the Department of Transportation shall submit a
report to the Joint Standing Committee on Transportation by December 15, 2013
regarding the funding of activities under sections 1 and 2. The Joint Standing Committee
on Transportation may submit legislation to the Second Regular Session of the 126th
Legislature regarding the report.

The Committee Amendment changes the directives that the Department "shall fund, or seek funding" to just say it "shall seek funding," and it also removes Section 3 (which orders MDOT to come back with a report in time for the second session). So, the bill has been changed from an instruction to MDOT with a deadline to a vague order "to seek funding" (which I imagine could be fulfilled by looking under the couch cushions in the HQ lobby) and no provision as to when they should report back. So, IMHO, in its amended form LD 999 has essentially been changed to a fuzzy "keep this in mind" note.

[markhb]

It might be worthwhile to create a "Legislative Watch" thread next year, but at any rate, LD 999 passed as amended, and even though LD 1208, "Resolve, To Establish the Commuter and Passenger Rail Advisory Task Force " had a decent range of support (and a suggested amendment put forth by MDOT), it got a unanimous ONTP and died.

[newpylong]

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

[markhb]

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.