• Portland Waterfront Rail Ops (Yard 8, Intermodal, etc)

  • Guilford Rail System changed its name to Pan Am Railways in 2006. Discussion relating to the current operations of the Boston & Maine, the Maine Central, and the Springfield Terminal railroads (as well as the Delaware & Hudson while it was under Guilford control until 1988). Official site can be found here: PANAMRAILWAYS.COM.
Guilford Rail System changed its name to Pan Am Railways in 2006. Discussion relating to the current operations of the Boston & Maine, the Maine Central, and the Springfield Terminal railroads (as well as the Delaware & Hudson while it was under Guilford control until 1988). Official site can be found here: PANAMRAILWAYS.COM.

Moderator: MEC407

  • 1555 posts
  • 1
  • 100
  • 101
  • 102
  • 103
  • 104
  by Sir Ray
 
Looking at the site via Google aerial - Since the former propane terminal is gone, could that site be used in the IM yard expansion? What about the large unused area to the SE of the current IM yard (East of the Yacht facility).

Consider:
rehab the former North propane trackage into a new South IM track.
extend this new IM track NE up to the Emskip yard building, stopping with enough room for a wide access road This extension should be right South of the current yard driveway
remove the current South IM trackage, if it is currently unused for container loading/unloading
pave the area between the IM tracks up to the current main entrance driveway - new pad, so add a crossing over the north IM track to the West end so the loaders can traverse between the two pads
pave the area south of the new IM trackage - now we have 3 pads.
the current southmost propane track can be curved south right east of the yacht facility, to serve the proposed Cold Storage building (enough room for 3 or 4 74ft reefers)
access to the cold storage via the new access road mentioned above, enough room for trailer parking.
you can now access almost all the IM trackage both sides, and the new southern IM track could handle 2 additional 5-unit IM well cars compared to what we have now. Also, no trailer trucks need to cross the tracks, which I think was a requirement of the original specs. Loaders would cross via the new crossings, but that should be OK.

Yeah, the plan needs tweaking, but it could be doable, and while not super spacious like an Arizona IM yard, wouldn't be cramped in like a 1910 East Coast port...
  by roberttosh
 
I just wonder if there's enough volume in Maine for CSX to expand their intermodal network, especially since a lot of this traffic would likely just be diverted from their Worcester hub. Their model also appears to be high volume facilities and lanes which Maine doesn't really fit into. If they want to do it right and avoid all the land issues associated with expanding the present site, I think they'd be better off doing something at the South end of Rigby where the old terminal used to be.
  by F74265A
 
I expect csx Maine intermodal will be up north at Waterville and be unrelated to the pitiful port of Portland intermodal facility
  by newpylong
 
I think you're probably correct but if there is a growth opportunity with an IM yard (albeit small) just sitting there, and a 40 MPH mainline in either side, it would be possible to also serve this yard. The blocks can be brought directly to Waterville or to the south end of Rigby for pick up.
  by markhb
 
Sir Ray wrote:Looking at the site via Google aerial - Since the former propane terminal is gone, could that site be used in the IM yard expansion? What about the large unused area to the SE of the current IM yard (East of the Yacht facility)....
Most of that area east of PYS and the current facility is devoted to the planned cold storage warehouse. Here's the site plan:
ColdStorage.png
So far as PYS being located there, I'd be interested in knowing what conversations, if any, were held between the city and MPA or MDOT regarding that. I can't remember if that land was part of a swap to get Phin Sprague out of the Portland Company, or if he bought it directly from PanAm.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
  by Cosakita18
 
The IMT is receiving a third harbor crane today. Imported from Germany. It's identical to the crane they bought about 2 years ago.

I'm a little confused as to why they need a third crane.... since they only ever seem to use one when Eimskip calls.
  by bostontrainguy
 
Just had to go back and revisit the boatyard issue.

Excerpt:

"The other hurdle is the ongoing eminent domain proceeding between Maine Port Authority and Phineas Sprague Jr. to take several acres of private land needed for the expansion. Sprague has said the process is not confrontational because he agrees the project is important to the port's economic viability . . . "

https://www.mainebiz.biz/article/pan-am ... -expansion

Really too bad they couldn't work this out.
  by Cosakita18
 
One of my favorite "What If's" is if the IMT had been able to expand westward onto Sprague's land and develop a full Panamax berth. The span of the Casco Bay Bridge limits ships to 32-34 meters of breadth, but with a second berths with a 300+ meter wharf frontage, the IMT could have become what Saint John is becoming now.
Image
  by Cosakita18
 
The IMT's intermodal ramp is about to be even further constrained. Navatek and New Yard LLC (Sprague) plan to build a 2-story office building on the small wedge-shaped lot immediately to the west of the intermodal ramp.
  by markhb
 
bostontrainguy wrote: Fri Feb 05, 2021 11:54 am Really too bad they couldn't work this out.
I believe they did; the state took title and possession to the land it asked for and the court case was over the price they had to pay for it. But the state never asked for the whole parcel, which would have driven the boatyard out of business, at least in Portland, and tied the whole thing up in court forever.
  • 1
  • 100
  • 101
  • 102
  • 103
  • 104