Passenger rail expansion in Maine

PeakVT wrote:

Ron Newman wrote:Brunswick is hardly "the middle of nowhere".

It is in relative terms. 22K people live in the town, and it's not anywhere near a major city.

The money to extend the service is under the control of the State of Maine, so voters there are free to do with it what they see fit. But IMHO, if ME has capital funds to burn on passenger rail, it would be better spent between MA and Portland on any slow orders, adding double track in critical areas, adding signalling, installing CWR, more cars or upgraded cars, etc, etc. before extending the service to a relatively small town.

Securing permanent funding for the existing service before any expansion seems like a good idea.

I would have to agree. I think up grading the system that's already up and running would be the wiser decision. Not that going to Brunswick is a bad idea; I just hope service and conditions south of Portland won't deteriorate because the money was used on an expansion.

I just can't see that many people taking the train midweek during the Winter months up to Freeport/Brunswick. Seems like more of a Summer tourist train type operation to me.

The Portland to Brunswick corridor would be better served by a commuter service compared to typical Amtrak and Downeaster service. The state would be better off trying to expand the Downeaster to Lewiston/Auburn. L/A would provide as large if not larger passenger base, and it would provide about the same number of passengers year round. I don't understand Baldacci's "dream" of regular passenger service to Rockland. It don't make much sense. What does make sense is to push to Waterville via either L/A or Augusta (L/A is more populated, would be the better choice) and then eventually to Bangor. Granted to get to Bangor would require the upgrade of 140 miles of trackage, so the initial cost would be extremely high, and ridership may be able to support two daily runs, if that. I'd hate to see the Downeaster fail because of Maine misspending money (again).

Outside of a seasonal tourist train, no route outside of the Downeaster will be viable or survive up there. Sorry Mainers....

Obviously you've never visted Freeport. Doesn't matter what time of year you go, it's wall to wall people. It would be a MAJOR destination for Boston area travellers.

scoopernicus_in_Maine wrote:

Outside of a seasonal tourist train, no route outside of the Downeaster will be viable or survive up there. Sorry Mainers....

Obviously you've never visted Freeport. Doesn't matter what time of year you go, it's wall to wall people. It would be a MAJOR destination for Boston area travellers.

Exactly. And if you're gonna upgrade the line from Portland to Freeport, it would be absolutely ridiculous not to keep going a few more miles to Brunswick and be able to connect with Maine Eastern.

I would also add that when Maine voters approved the upgrade of the Rockland Branch from Brunswick to Rockland, it was with the understanding that eventually you'd be able to take a train from Portland to Rockland (and points in between).

Here's some very inexact number crunching

$30 million for the upgrades
15 year lifetime
40,000 passengers per year
=
$50/per passenger in track-only capital-only subsidies

Is this a good value? If it causes each person to spend $700-1000 in ME (sales tax is 5-7%) they wouldn't have otherwise, then yes. Otherwise, I dunno. But maybe there's a better way to arrange the numbers.

PS: Don't get me wrong - I like passenger rail. The proposed extension just seems like a marginal service to me.

---

2006 Downeaster boardings + alightings

• Portland 139,519
  Old Orchard Beach 8,419 (seasonal stop)
  Saco-Biddeford 22,896
  Wells 32,513
  Dover 39,080
  Durham-UNH 50,255
  Exeter 58,872
  Haverhill 18,330
  Woburn 11,272
  Boston-North Station 294,686

scoopernicus_in_Maine wrote:

Outside of a seasonal tourist train, no route outside of the Downeaster will be viable or survive up there. Sorry Mainers....

Obviously you've never visted Freeport. Doesn't matter what time of year you go, it's wall to wall people. It would be a MAJOR destination for Boston area travellers.

........And how many of those people go up there mid-week in February? And how many of them live anywhere near a DE station? And how many of them actually WANT to drive their cars? I'd love to see it happen, but the DE is having a hard enough time making the economics work, so how do you think it would work heading to a much smaller metropolitan area? You could argue that OOB is a much bigger tourist area and a shorter trip and even that stop couldn't even generate 10,000 riders last year!!

How's this for a suggestion and discussion? Have the Maine Eastern operate the Rockland to Brunswick to Portland route using their equipment and personnel.

Of course, this would raise the "change of trains" issue at Portland, which was a hot topic on the proposed DMU Vermonter operation that would have required a change at New Haven. Such a change at Portland would probably require lengthing the platform in order that a portion of both the Downeaster and the Maine Eastern train could be spotted on each end of the platform at the same time so that passengers could transfer.

If Amtrak is contracted to run the service to Brunswick, at least one additional train set will be needed, maybe more. The current five daily trips are really taxing the two train sets, with limited turnaround time to do cleaning and deal with minor mechanical issues.

Maine Eastern might pick up a couple of reworked Budd RDC's for running just between Portland and Brunswick during the winter months. There is a company in Moncton New Brunswick that has many RDC's that can be rehabbed and modernized with new engines and other components. When using a conventional train to Portland, the ME would not need to run a cab car or loco on the rear, as they could utilize the wye where the line to the Portland station leaves the GRS/PAR main line.

Let the discussion begin.

Dick

An interesting idea, but my guess is that Pan Am wouldn't allow it. The state would have to buy the route from Brunswick to Portland, probably for much more than the estimated $31 million rehab cost.
Has anyone also considered the logistics of the Portland station stop as applied to extended service? Trains moving on to Brunswick will have to reverse down the Mountain Branch through Mountain Jct/CPF196, then change direction again to continue. Not a quick and clean stop, to say the least.

PAR is required by law to allow Amtrak trains to operate on its rails, but there is no law requiring them to allow trains owned/operated by competitors (e.g. Maine Eastern). So they'd probably say no to that, if I had to guess.

PeakVT wrote:2006 Downeaster boardings + alightings

• Portland 139,519
  Old Orchard Beach 8,419 (seasonal stop)
  Saco-Biddeford 22,896
  Wells 32,513
  Dover 39,080
  Durham-UNH 50,255
  Exeter 58,872
  Haverhill 18,330
  Woburn 11,272
  Boston-North Station 294,686

I think these numbers prove that the population of a given city or town can have little or no bearing on that city or town's potential train ridership.

Wells has a year-round population of 10,000 people -- about the same as Old Orchard Beach, and only one quarter as many as the twin cities of Saco and Biddeford (approx. 45,000 people combined) -- and yet we can clearly see that Wells has much higher ridership than Saco-Biddeford or OOB. Therefore, I would suggest that the folks who would dismiss Freeport and Brunswick based solely on their year-round population numbers need to take a deeper look at all of the factors that combine to give a city or town good ridership numbers.

Some observations:

-Haverhill and Woburn are light as they are also served by the MBTA

-The further you get from Boston, the lighter the loadings... the majority of riders are using the train to get to Boston from NH for commuting, etc.

-The passenger load in/out of Portland could easily have been handled more cheaply and efficiently with seven-eight daily bus trips each way.

-Flatlanders likely don't take the train to Portland due to (a) availability of other travel options; (b) inconvenient access to origin station; (c) need to rent a car in Portland. The additional time/cost for furtherence to Freeport ain't gonna change their minds.

-There's ALREADY connecting bus service to Freeport/Brunswick and beyond... provided by a privately run, non-subsidized company... so the need for public transit is already being met. And, by the way... Concord Trailways offers 20 round trips Por-Bos, but only two trips daily between Portland and coastal points Downeast. That alone betrays the insignificant potential of a Brunswick/Bath/Rockland service. Considering that even Trainriders Northeast says we need to, "...MOVE TOWARD A MORE BALANCED TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM WHICH INTEGRATES ROADS, AIRPORTS AND RAIL SO THAT EACH IS USED APPROPRIATELY AT THE LEAST PUBLIC COST." Not sure how you can rationalize eastward rail expansion given that as a stated objective.

The Downeaster certainly offers more comfortable seats and leg room than the bus and you can actually sit at a cafe table when you drink your coffee...some folks are willing to pay a little extra for that option especially at those times when the publicly subsidized Maine Turnpike is congested and slow.

NRGeep wrote:The Downeaster certainly offers more comfortable seats and leg room than the bus and you can actually sit at a cafe table when you drink your coffee...some folks are willing to pay a little extra for that option especially at those times when the publicly subsidized Maine Turnpike is congested and slow.

Guess again. The Maine Turnpike if financed by bonds issued by the Maine Turnpike Authority. These bonds are backed by toll revenue. Therefore, it is not publicly subsidized, it is paid for from user fees collected from motorists. Even roads aren't getting a free ride like what people here want you to think, gasoline taxes pay for maintenance of the road, since a majority of gasoline is used for driving, it can be viewed as a user fee for roads.

I think that Maine being concerned over future financing for the DE, they
ought to steer clear of any expansion for now. They would be much
better off to insure that financing is in place for the long term future
operation of existing service before making plans to expand. It is sort of
like putting the "cart before the horse".
Even in an area where ridership will certainally be less than between
Portland and Boston, the operating costs will be just as high, they will
still need crews, supplies, fuel etc.
I am fully in favor of expansion of railroad passenger service but not if
there is no gurantee of the future of the service.
Noel Weaver