Portland Maine Passenger Stations

Although NBA D-League basketball might not draw spectators from Boston for the day, or a few nights I'd have a hard time believing the America East Conference Basketball Tournament wouldn't.

From the Portland Press Herald, April 27, 2011, "UMaine's sights set on tourney", by Ms. Jenn Menendez

I like most of the concept of the Thompson's Point project, with the noted exception of its location at Thompson's Point. In the end, we have the same disconnected-from-downtown situation, reliant on cars/taxis/buses to get to the rest of the city. The Downeaster will still have to do backup moves to get to/from the main line to the station.

If they could just lift the entire thing up, and transport it onto/next to my wacky idea of the re-use of the Post Office building, I'd love it 10x as much. Either that, or there needs to be a little Miami Metromover-like connecting train that then loops around the peninsula.

Hamhock wrote:I like most of the concept of the Thompson's Point project, with the noted exception of its location at Thompson's Point. In the end, we have the same disconnected-from-downtown situation, reliant on cars/taxis/buses to get to the rest of the city. The Downeaster will still have to do backup moves to get to/from the main line to the station.

There's no question they'll be doing backup moves for a while. If you take a look at Google maps its seem pretty clear that the Right of Way for the northbound leg of the old Mountain Division wye still exists. If NNEPRA choose to they could investigate reconstructing the northerly leg in order to end the necessity for backup moves.

Hamhock wrote:If they could just lift the entire thing up, and transport it onto/next to my wacky idea of the re-use of the Post Office building, I'd love it 10x as much. Either that, or there needs to be a little Miami Metromover-like connecting train that then loops around the peninsula.

We've discussed having street cars in Portland quite a bit lately in the Portland Commuter Rail Discussion thread.

There is a small quote from NNEPRA in an April 29th article from The Forecaster:

The operator of the Downeaster, the Northern New England Passenger Rail Authority, meanwhile, is about to undertake a year-long study that could lead to moving its operations to West Commercial Street.

The authority is looking for a way to accommodate northbound service to Brunswick, while placing its hub in an area that allows passengers to disembark at a destination.

NNEPRA Executive Director Patricia Quinn said the proposed development at Thompson's Point seems to address the latter concern. The development plan was released in time for it to be included in the study that is expected to get underway in the next few weeks, she said.

Op-ed in today's Portland Press Herald regarding the proposed "Forefront at Thompson's Point":

Portland Press Herald wrote:The location is a clear selling point. In addition to its easy access to Interstate 295, with an already constructed highway interchange for both north and southbound traffic, it is also adjacent to a transportation center serviced by Concord Trailways bus service and Amtrak train service to Boston. It is within sight of the now-under-expansion Portland International Jetport, making it an easy trip for business travelers who could come for conventions or trade shows and patronize city businesses.

Read more at: http://www.pressherald.com/opinion/thom ... 05-02.html

MEC407 wrote:Op-ed in today's Portland Press Herald regarding the proposed "Forefront at Thompson's Point":

Portland Press Herald wrote:The location is a clear selling point. In addition to its easy access to Interstate 295, with an already constructed highway interchange for both north and southbound traffic, it is also adjacent to a transportation center serviced by Concord Trailways bus service and Amtrak train service to Boston. It is within sight of the now-under-expansion Portland International Jetport, making it an easy trip for business travelers who could come for conventions or trade shows and patronize city businesses.

Read more at: http://www.pressherald.com/opinion/thom ... 05-02.html

There are a lot of possible reasons why the Portland Press Herald editors like this project. But one of them is almost being left unsaid. This project has been configured and marketed in such a way to make it an 'obvious' choice. There's nothing difficult for anyone to digest about it, no "challenges", no "potential obstacles", no "possible showstoppers", nothing. The project integrates seamlessly into the City and doesn't destroy so much as a single unit of existing housing or historic buildings to boot. In short it was given a good foundation that was strong from the start because they knew something 'easy' like this would be so appealing to Maine sensibilities.

Its easy enough for anyone to talk about the 'transportation mix' as we all have but that wouldn't mean much if the project involved displacing city residents, tearing down a park, or disrupting the citizenry and their neighborhoods in some way shape or form. Perhaps most importantly the project 'reuses' a site that has had previous development for over a century, and to top it all off there is 0 chance that it disturbs or destroys extant wildlife habitat or sensitive ecosystems. All of these propositions are so obvious, so immediately apparent that no one is even bothering to address them. But the fact of the matter is these reasons are at the very heart of why this project is being taken so seriously in the first place. Not only was the site selection very much in line with local community values but there were other additional synergies as well that the community is likely very interested in promoting such as those between the site and the PTC and PWM.

All of this is making a potentially million dollar concession by the City in the form of a tax increment financing district seem like a miniscule consideration. In fact most coverage of the story treats it as an after thought. That's pretty impressive.

There are still some challenges ahead. Obviously the group will need to line up serious financing and then move forward with construction bids and other considerations. But in my view the bottom line at this point is that there is a very serious community consensus that is forming in favor of this project and we are at a very early stage indeed.

All of these factors have a lot of significance for NNEPRA and their search for a new site for a terminal facility. My prediction stands, if this facility gets built the Downeaster will not be moving out of its current location, however NNEPRA may in fact propose a new full rail station and platforms at the location to accomodate the Downeaster and the possible crowds going to "The Forefront".

"...if this facility gets built the Downeaster will not be moving out of its current location, however NNEPRA may in fact propose a new full rail station and platforms at the location to accomodate the Downeaster and the possible crowds going to "The Forefront"..."

I'd say that's a very likely scenario. But, as I stated in the DE forum, it doesn't square with all the prior concerns stated by NNEPRA and other "move the station" advocates. Now the whole platform flap is a red herring: a second platform could put in place with little difficulty. Creating an easterly connection for Brunswick trains is also doable. So that leaves the complaint that people don't take the train to Maine because the train doesn't terminate close enough to the Old Port. Strange that there are no concerns about that fact voiced here.

Cowford wrote:"

gokeefe wrote:..if this facility gets built the Downeaster will not be moving out of its current location, however NNEPRA may in fact propose a new full rail station and platforms at the location to accomodate the Downeaster and the possible crowds going to "The Forefront"...

I'd say that's a very likely scenario. But, as I stated in the DE forum, it doesn't square with all the prior concerns stated by NNEPRA and other "move the station" advocates. Now the whole platform flap is a red herring: a second platform could put in place with little difficulty.

I'm not sure that 'little difficulty' is necessarily the case. Building a station from scratch at approximately Yard 8 on West Commercial Street would have been really simple, its practically bare as it stands right now. Now you would have a far more complicated project on your hands to include attempting new construction in the midst of ongoing operations. Also the apparent impending depature of Suburban Propane and pretty much every other abutting business also removes previous potential complications.

Cowford wrote:Creating an easterly connection for Brunswick trains is also doable. So that leaves the complaint that people don't take the train to Maine because the train doesn't terminate close enough to the Old Port. Strange that there are no concerns about that fact voiced here.

Creating an easterly connection for Brunswick trains does, per Google Earth appear to be very doable. I think that's one of those details that makes the entire situation all that much more interesting. Although prior to knowing about this project NNEPRA may have been seriously considering a downtown location there still appear to be sufficient right of ways in place to allow them to stay at Thompson's Point, and eliminate the reverse move at Mountain Junction for trains coming from Brunswick, should they choose to.

Although others may not have mentioned this as a concern NNEPRA most certainly has and as memory serves I've posted once or twice about their apparent 'issues' with their current location. Regardless, I think the real issue is that they simply didn't know this was coming and now they're going to have to change some really fundamental assumptions they had made about where and how they think the Downeaster should be operating in Portland in the next five to ten years. In all fairness they appear to have come to their initial conclusions about the Portland station location not merely as inaugural aspirations for a 'downtown' arrival but also over time through their customer feedback process, and their planning and development work. Who would have ever guessed that 'downtown' would come to them?

The fact of the matter is they were 'operating in the dark' when it came to this project and had they known about it sooner I'm pretty sure they would have approached this entire process differently. Thankfully they found out about it before their study was underway likely saving the study from being an exercise in wasteful spending and perhaps also assisting them in making good use of the study funds to analyze implications for the Thompson's Point Project as proposed. One of their most likely conclusions is that they won't propose making any immediate changes to the station location or attempting to fund a new station until its clear whether or not and to what extent this project is going to get built. Depending on how cautious they want to be they may even wait until after the project is complete before they attempt to make any changes to their current operations at the PTC. This would allow them time to gauge the project's impact on ridership and help them decide if they want to stay there. On the other they may be able to anticipate this with the study. If the study makes it clear that they can anticipate a really massive increase in ridership with little or no question then I think you'll see NNEPRA commit to Thompson's Point for a new station. If the result is murky I would think they'll just wait the whole process out.

Cowford wrote:I'd say that's a very likely scenario. But, as I stated in the DE forum, it doesn't square with all the prior concerns stated by NNEPRA and other "move the station" advocates. Now the whole platform flap is a red herring: a second platform could put in place with little difficulty.

Just curious: how would you configure it? PTC map is here. The most straightforward thing I've been able to think of is to change the existing ramp to a skywalk culminating in a staircase and elevator to a center platform similar to Albany-Rensselaer.

gokeefe wrote:I'm not sure that 'little difficulty' is necessarily the case. Building a station from scratch at approximately Yard 8 on West Commercial Street would have been really simple, its practically bare as it stands right now. Now you would have a far more complicated project on your hands to include attempting new construction in the midst of ongoing operations. Also the apparent impending depature of Suburban Propane and pretty much every other abutting business also removes previous potential complications.

Where did you hear this about Suburban Propane? In the site plans I've seen for the Forefront project, they are specifically marked as staying put and the project area is almost entirely to their south. I can see them potentially selling to a developer if the project is actually built, of course, but I haven't heard anything preemptive from them.

markhb wrote:

Cowford wrote:I'd say that's a very likely scenario. But, as I stated in the DE forum, it doesn't square with all the prior concerns stated by NNEPRA and other "move the station" advocates. Now the whole platform flap is a red herring: a second platform could put in place with little difficulty.

Just curious: how would you configure it? PTC map is here. The most straightforward thing I've been able to think of is to change the existing ramp to a skywalk culminating in a staircase and elevator to a center platform similar to Albany-Rensselaer.

gokeefe wrote:I'm not sure that 'little difficulty' is necessarily the case. Building a station from scratch at approximately Yard 8 on West Commercial Street would have been really simple, its practically bare as it stands right now. Now you would have a far more complicated project on your hands to include attempting new construction in the midst of ongoing operations. Also the apparent impending depature of Suburban Propane and pretty much every other abutting business also removes previous potential complications.

Where did you hear this about Suburban Propane? In the site plans I've seen for the Forefront project, they are specifically marked as staying put and the project area is almost entirely to their south. I can see them potentially selling to a developer if the project is actually built, of course, but I haven't heard anything preemptive from them.

One of the articles that was posted mentioned that the developers were in discussions with them. The implication seemed to be that 'discussions' meant 'buyout' but that was my reading of the meaning, it wasn't explicitly stated.

Perhaps for the first time since its destruction a study commissioned by the Maine Department of Transporatation examining transportation alternatives,"Alternative Analysis" has openly contemplated building a railroad terminal at the former location of Union Station.

See PDF page 114.

Today is the 50th anniversary of the destruction of Portland Union Station:

Portland Press Herald wrote:Completed in 1888, Union Station was a primary connector between the Boston & Maine Railroad and the Maine Central Railroad, linking Boston to all points north of Portland. Before the Maine Turnpike made railroad travel obsolete, the station was where kids left for summer camp, couples launched honeymoons and parents sent their sons off to war.

For some people, the station's destruction was like losing a loved one, but they couldn't stop progress.

"The automobile was taking over, that was valuable land and it was during the era when they liked to knock stuff down and build new," said John Marcigliano of Westbrook, an educator and the author of "All Aboard for Union Station."

The station was designed by Bradlee, Winslow and Witherell of Boston to resemble a medieval French chateaux, Marcigliano said. It had steep roofs, sloped dormers and rounded turrets. Its pink granite walls were quarried in Maine and New Hampshire. The waiting room had a checkerboard floor of white marble and gray slate tiles and two fireplaces carved from red sandstone.

Read more at: http://www.pressherald.com/news/the-ugl ... 08-31.html

Portland was fortunate to have had and unfortunate to have lost two of the grand railroad structures in the east -- Union Station and the Grand Trunk terminal. I am fortunate enough to be old enough to have used each, the GT on an Island Pond fan trip, and Union Station on an informal fan trip a couple of weeks before MEC quit the passenger business. Railroads -- the recent "heritage" repaint aside -- are among the least sentimental entities in existence. If something doesn't serve an incoming-producing function and also costs real estate taxes, then get rid of it. There were too many of these monuments to company and civic pride that now exist only as photographs. The grand Maine stations obeyed the cruel laws of gravity and profit and loss decades before the concept of repurposing existed.
If it seems I might have ignored Bangor Union Station, a part of my trip more than a semi-century ago, it is only because its dominant impression on a very bright day was of gloom.

Bangor Union Station was relatively pleasant looking, but it wasn't as majestic as Portland.

No disrespect is meant for Bangor, its people, or its Union Station, but my one experience with it gave the definite feeling that the lights had been turned off even though there were still a few more days of passenger service and the last person hadn't yet left. One of the other factors was how confined the train shed felt. It did have fewer tracks than Portland, but maybe since it was a degree-plus of latitude closer to the Arctic Circle, it was built to keep more of the outside out.