Andover complains about Pan Am train parking

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

Andover complains about Pan Am train parking

Postby johnpbarlow » Thu Jan 26, 2017 8:27 am

I couldn't find an existing topic dealing with strains in Pan Am relationships with the communities it traverses (other than the various derailment concerns in Buckland, Westford, Plainville, Chelmsford, etc) so I started a new one.

http://www.andovertownsman.com/news/neighbors-sleep-deprived-and-coughing-want-trains-out/article_1b947ac3-3294-557f-81ee-13ca46ad71a5.html

It will be interesting to see how this plays out.
johnpbarlow
 
Posts: 1617
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2004 12:50 pm

Re: Andover complains about Pan Am train parking

Postby deathtopumpkins » Thu Jan 26, 2017 9:42 am

One quote stands out as embodying everything about Pan Am:

The double-tracking was meant to ease congestion on the busy rail line, not to serve as a parking lot for idle trains


I still don't really have any sympathy for these people though - after all, the railroad has been there a lot longer than they have.
Call me Connor or DTP

Railfan & Roadgeek from the North Shore of Mass.
deathtopumpkins
 
Posts: 944
Joined: Tue Aug 27, 2013 8:56 am
Location: Somerville, MA

Re: Andover complains about Pan Am train parking

Postby F-line to Dudley via Park » Thu Jan 26, 2017 10:04 am

[*cough*] Royal siding [*cough*]

At least that's in MBTA territory where they've got extremely limited excuses for doing that before they get whacked with a rolled-up newspaper by the track owner and told that Lowell Branch tie replacement is no valid reason for canning someplace far worse. NNEPRA on the other hand seems blithely unaware what bad behavior their DT project is guaranteed to unleash with their track landlord. At this point it's not even safe to touch a passenger capacity grant unless it's got a signed Memo of Understanding amendment enumerating every reason thy shalt and shalt not can freight on the public-paid infrastructure...and how many strikes they get for BS-rationale cannings before there's intervention.
F-line to Dudley via Park
 
Posts: 7100
Joined: Fri Mar 11, 2005 7:26 pm
Location: North Cambridge

Re: Andover complains about Pan Am train parking

Postby eustis22 » Thu Jan 26, 2017 11:19 am

Why are they canned there vs Lawrence yard?
eustis22
 
Posts: 270
Joined: Thu Oct 16, 2014 11:23 am

Re: Andover complains about Pan Am train parking

Postby F-line to Dudley via Park » Thu Jan 26, 2017 1:39 pm

eustis22 wrote:Why are they canned there vs Lawrence yard?


How many empties have gobbled up all the space in Lawrence? They've been canning in Atkinson too near the end of DT. Throw that and Andover in with the Peabody and Somerville logjams and this storage problem seems to be emanating top-down from the D2 yards.
F-line to Dudley via Park
 
Posts: 7100
Joined: Fri Mar 11, 2005 7:26 pm
Location: North Cambridge

Re: Andover complains about Pan Am train parking

Postby johnpbarlow » Thu Jan 26, 2017 1:49 pm

Long Pan Am freight tied down In Andover as I type at 1:45pm so I guess yesterday's meeting didn't produce desired results for Andoverites.
johnpbarlow
 
Posts: 1617
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2004 12:50 pm

Re: Andover complains about Pan Am train parking

Postby newpylong » Thu Jan 26, 2017 2:13 pm

I don't place this at the same level of NIMBYISM or nimbyism at all as the people complaining about switching in Winchester. I also would be pissed. I don't think it is an unreasonable request to not be smothered in diesel fumes even if you live near railroad tracks. Trains should be canned in the yard or in the middle of nowhere, plain and simple.
newpylong
 
Posts: 3920
Joined: Thu Jun 28, 2007 12:32 pm
Location: NH

Re: Andover complains about Pan Am train parking

Postby BostonUrbEx » Thu Jan 26, 2017 4:16 pm

Best thing that could happen is getting the Merrimack River Bridge up to speed and both tracks in service. There is pressure to push westbound trains across the bridge due to limited time slots between commuter trains and then it takes time to crawl across at 5mph. Plus, if you tie down between CPF HA and CPF 273, you have single track from CPF FR to CPF 273 right now, with most of that double track between CPF Vale and CPF FR being riddled with crossings a bit too close together. Had they made an interlocking at Brad (serious incompetence and missed opportunity there) prior to this decade-long project, it'd be much less important. But for now, best solution is to get the bridge done.

Of course, it is all moot if a real railroad, like NS, were to come in.
User avatar
BostonUrbEx
 
Posts: 3579
Joined: Thu Dec 03, 2009 9:55 pm
Location: Winn to MPT 8, Boston to MPN 38, and Hat to Bank

Re: Andover complains about Pan Am train parking

Postby Rockingham Racer » Thu Jan 26, 2017 4:37 pm

Adding a new control point is not a major undertaking, but on the MBTA and Pan Am, I guess it is. Otherwise, Brad's hand-throws would've been gone a long time ago.
User avatar
Rockingham Racer
 
Posts: 2863
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2004 9:25 pm

Re: Andover complains about Pan Am train parking

Postby F-line to Dudley via Park » Thu Jan 26, 2017 8:46 pm

http://photos.nerail.org/showpic/?photo ... toindex=-1

Wow. Canned and idling right across from the station platform. Now they're just asking for it.
F-line to Dudley via Park
 
Posts: 7100
Joined: Fri Mar 11, 2005 7:26 pm
Location: North Cambridge

Re: Andover complains about Pan Am train parking

Postby MEC407 » Fri Jan 27, 2017 8:45 am

deathtopumpkins wrote:One quote stands out as embodying everything about Pan Am:

The double-tracking was meant to ease congestion on the busy rail line, not to serve as a parking lot for idle trains


I still don't really have any sympathy for these people though - after all, the railroad has been there a lot longer than they have.


I have plenty of sympathy of them. They bought homes next to a mainline, not a yard. There's a HUGE difference between trains passing through and trains idling for hours or days.
MEC407
Moderator:
Pan Am Railways — Boston & Maine/Maine Central — Delaware & Hudson
Central Maine & Quebec/Montreal, Maine & Atlantic/Bangor & Aroostook
Providence & Worcester — New England — GE Locomotives
User avatar
MEC407
 
Posts: 10669
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 8:15 pm

Re: Andover complains about Pan Am train parking

Postby MEC407 » Fri Jan 27, 2017 8:48 am

newpylong wrote:I don't place this at the same level of NIMBYISM or nimbyism at all as the people complaining about switching in Winchester. I also would be pissed. I don't think it is an unreasonable request to not be smothered in diesel fumes even if you live near railroad tracks. Trains should be canned in the yard or in the middle of nowhere, plain and simple.


^ THIS.

And a relevant quote from the article:

Andover Townsman wrote:"These trains just don't stop for a few minutes," she said. "They are here for hours. Last Sunday one train was here for 10 hours, pulls away around 8:30 and then another pulls in around 11 and stays all night. The air was so thick with diesel smell, it burned our eyes. And that is not the first time, the weekend before was similar as was the weekend before that."
MEC407
Moderator:
Pan Am Railways — Boston & Maine/Maine Central — Delaware & Hudson
Central Maine & Quebec/Montreal, Maine & Atlantic/Bangor & Aroostook
Providence & Worcester — New England — GE Locomotives
User avatar
MEC407
 
Posts: 10669
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 8:15 pm

Re: Andover complains about Pan Am train parking

Postby deathtopumpkins » Fri Jan 27, 2017 9:07 am

MEC407 wrote:
deathtopumpkins wrote:One quote stands out as embodying everything about Pan Am:

The double-tracking was meant to ease congestion on the busy rail line, not to serve as a parking lot for idle trains


I still don't really have any sympathy for these people though - after all, the railroad has been there a lot longer than they have.


I have plenty of sympathy of them. They bought homes next to a mainline, not a yard. There's a HUGE difference between trains passing through and trains idling for hours or days.


That's a valid point. I definitely don't agree with the practice, and I would be pissed too, but I still don't have much sympathy for the people because they chose to live next to railroad tracks, and the railroad has a right to do what it pleases with regards to running (or stopping) trains on them. Attempting to get the town to intervene is a fruitless waste of resources, because the town has no control over it. Going to the state may have some merit though, considering who paid for that parking spot.

It's ridiculous that this is even an issue in the first place though.
Call me Connor or DTP

Railfan & Roadgeek from the North Shore of Mass.
deathtopumpkins
 
Posts: 944
Joined: Tue Aug 27, 2013 8:56 am
Location: Somerville, MA

Re: Andover complains about Pan Am train parking

Postby octr202 » Fri Jan 27, 2017 10:19 am

Surprised it took them this long to complain. Before I moved, I remembered the first night with GE's idling at the station thinking, "this isn't gonna end well."

Of course, the end result will probably just be that canned trains are forced back into Lawrence, where residents aren't as influential.
Wondering if I'll see the Haverhill double-tracking finished before I retire...
Photo: Melbourne W7 No. 1019 on Route 78, Bridge & Church Streets, Richmond, Victoria. 10/21/2010
User avatar
octr202
 
Posts: 4142
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2004 8:13 am
Location: In the land of the once and future 73 trackless trolley.

Re: Andover complains about Pan Am train parking

Postby eustis22 » Fri Jan 27, 2017 11:39 am

Yes but there's a third track for canning next to the old lawrence platform...can the locos next to the warehouses/stonemason shop.
eustis22
 
Posts: 270
Joined: Thu Oct 16, 2014 11:23 am

Next

Return to Pan Am Railways (formerly Guilford Rail System)

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests