DESIGN A BETTER PORTLAND

TC_zoid

Active Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2014
Messages
324
Reaction score
158
In any discussion about the future of our working port, it might be helpful to understand what each of the ports terminals are used for and what their capabilities are. I made a quick helpful guide.

View attachment 16785
Again, modify things. Why can't you understand this idea? Why do we have to live in a model that is decades old? Send the crude oil to the other side (and gasoline which is already there, according to your guide), or eliminate it completely. "Well, it would cost too much!" Tough. Why do we have to keep living in the past? It takes work and creativity to change things, yes, but is well worth it. Portland is transitioning to become a different city.
 

Cosakita18

Active Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2016
Messages
494
Reaction score
350
Again, modify things. Why can't you understand this idea? Why do we have to live in a model that is decades old? Send the crude oil to the other side (and gasoline which is already there, according to your guide), or eliminate it completely. "Well, it would cost too much!" Tough. Why do we have to keep living in the past? It takes work and creativity to change things, yes, but is well worth it. If you think it can't be done it won't. That' why in Boston, they have a dump called "Everett."
I'm not disagreeing with you. Crude is bad and I'm not a fan of its continued (albeit limited) presence in our harbor. The point of the map is to outline which facilities are capable of handling various commodities. Crude tankers can't go down to the Sprague terminal. They're too big. The span of the Casco Bay bridge limits the width of ships that can enter the inner harbor to ~115 feet (Panamax dimensions) There's a reason PMPL built their terminal in the outer harbor way back in the 40s. It's why the pipeline even exists in the first place (The St. Lawrence Seaway isn't wide or deep enough to handle crude tankers)
 
Last edited:

TC_zoid

Active Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2014
Messages
324
Reaction score
158
I'm not disagreeing with you. Crude is bad and I'm not a fan of its continued (albeit limited) presence in our harbor. The point of the map is to outline which facilities are capable of handling various commodities. Crude tankers can't go down to the Sprague terminal. They're too big. There's a reason PMPL built their terminal in the outer harbor way back in the 40s. It's why the pipeline even exists in the first place (The St. Lawrence Seaway isn't wide or deep enough to handle crude tankers)
The GULF and PPL terminals are in the middle of the most scenic and traffic-filled parts of the harbor. Do we want to look at that? The first thing one sees coming into Portland Harbor is the iconic and world famous Portland Headlight, then these two terminals.

And the Noreaster tanker is still in the middle of the harbor, so now more than 24 hours sitting there. What is it waiting for? The terminals have been vacant since yesterday.
 

Cosakita18

Active Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2016
Messages
494
Reaction score
350
The GULF and PPL terminals are in the middle of the most scenic and traffic-filled parts of the harbor. Do we want to look at that? The first thing one sees coming into Portland Harbor is the iconic and world famous Portland Headlight, then these two terminals.

And the Noreaster tanker is still in the middle of the harbor, so now more than 24 hours sitting there.
Again, not necessarily disagreeing. Even if these facilities aren't the best use of that space, their presence clearly hasn't had much of a negative impact on development or tourism up to this point. Every city and harbor has "ugly" things. It's an unfortunate reality of marine-oriented cities.

And even if those terminals were to close tomorrow, it would take years of expensive cleanup and remediation before anything else could be built there.
 

Cosakita18

Active Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2016
Messages
494
Reaction score
350
And the Noreaster tanker is still in the middle of the harbor, so now more than 24 hours sitting there. What is it waiting for? The terminals have been vacant since yesterday.
Likely either seeking anchorage due to anticipated bad weather, or working to repair a mechanical problem. These things happen.

Again, I find it funny that so many people get mad at freighters anchoring in the inner harbor and see it as horrific visual pollution...but when a cruise ship 3x as large does the same thing, it's completely fine.
 

Portlander

Active Member
Joined
Apr 14, 2010
Messages
937
Reaction score
772
I appreciate the easy to use reference map Cosakita and as a fan of Portland harbor and it's many assets I've often wondered how some of those terminals were utilized. Am curious of the primary purpose of the Cianbro site at Cassidy Point and I wonder if the company has considered constructing a new wharf to improve their facilities. Cargo ships used to dock there many years ago and it seems like they own or lease an extremely valuable but underutilized piece of waterfront property.
243870_454822521248846_1222894454_o.jpg
 
Last edited:

TC_zoid

Active Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2014
Messages
324
Reaction score
158
Likely either seeking anchorage due to anticipated bad weather, or working to repair a mechanical problem. These things happen.

Again, I find it funny that so many people get mad at freighters anchoring in the inner harbor and see it as horrific visual pollution...but when a cruise ship 3x as large does the same thing, it's completely fine.
OIl tankers. I like all the the other boats, including the Eimskip ships. The oil tankers turn people off. I used to spend time in Santa Barbara, and off that coast are oil rigs and oil tankers. Guess what? There is ZERO recreational boating in this area. NONE. Sad.

Almost 9pm and still there. 2 days. Also, and it's a big one, a big enough explosion on an oil or chemical tanker would nearly wipe out the city. Think about that, but we don't.
 
Last edited:

Cosakita18

Active Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2016
Messages
494
Reaction score
350
OIl tankers. I like all the the other boats, including the Eimskip ships. The oil tankers turn people off. I used to spend time in Santa Barbara, and off that coast are oil rigs and oil tankers. Guess what? There is ZERO recreational boating in this area. NONE. Sad.

Almost 9pm and still there. 2 days. Also, and it's a big one, a big enough explosion on an oil or chemical tanker would nearly wipe out the city. Think about that, but we don't.
Clearly the presence of marine industry hasn't stopped Portland from growing in popularity. (and a quick check of the website MarineTraffic.com shows lots of recreational boating activity around Santa Barbara)
I don't like the fossil fuel industry any more than you do, but it's a necessary reality of living in a port city for the foreseeable future.

Noreaster is one of 5 identical ships owned by Irving. They shuttle gasoline, jet fuel and heating oil from Saint John to Portland, Boston and Providence. They're in and out all the time (usually every 4-5 days) and are actually relatively small by tanker standards.

The idea of any ship-tanker or otherwise- spontaneously "exploding" is silly. Portland is just as likely to be hit by an asteroid.
 
Last edited:

TC_zoid

Active Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2014
Messages
324
Reaction score
158
Clearly the presence of marine industry hasn't stopped Portland from growing in popularity. (and a quick check of the website MarineTraffic.com shows lots of recreational boating activity around Santa Barbara)
I don't like the fossil fuel industry any more than you do, but it's a necessary reality of living in a port city for the foreseeable future.

Noreaster is one of 5 identical ships owned by Irving. They shuttle gasoline, jet fuel and heating oil from Saint John to Portland, Boston and Providence. They're in and out all the time (usually every 4-5 days) and are actually relatively small by tanker standards.

The idea of any ship-tanker or otherwise- spontaneously "exploding" is silly. Portland is just as likely to be hit by an asteroid.
Two things you got incorrect...
For the most part, the recreational boating in Santa Barbara sits in the marina. They do not go into the ocean. I've spent many weekends having drinks at the marina, or kayaking a little beyond the marina, and few go out of this marina. It's an ego thing, having a boat to remain stationary and have drinks on. You see, the immediate ocean is too choppy and there is usually nothing interesting to look at (primarily oil rigs and oil tankers, and an an occasional dolphin or sea lion). Next, spontaneously exploding? What are you talking about? I'm talking about terrorism. "Gee, that could never happen in Portland." Yes, that and terrorists getting on a plane with knives at the Jetport and bringing down two massive buildings. Two decades and a week ago people would have laughed at that scenario. In case you don't know, and it sounds like you don't, Boston and New York harbors are being extensively watched for this type of activity now. Do you have any idea how combustible a million gallons of gasoline is? Far, far more than kerosene, which is what the fuel is on aircraft. And where do these tankers come from? Foreign countries? It's not paranoia, it's being smart by being proactive. The nasty tankers need to go. They should never be in areas of dense population, and that's why trains carrying combustible liquids with multiple cars are mandated to avoid areas with concentrated populations.
 
Last edited:

Tom Nevers

New member
Joined
Jul 17, 2020
Messages
78
Reaction score
127
I tend to bike The S. Portland - Saco sections of the Eastern Trail most often but am always excited to see steps taken to expand the Eastern Trail. Thought others might be interested in this public meeting hosted by MDOT.
On a related note, I love the energy Casco Bay Trail Alliance has recently brought to the discussion of expanding our trail system north and north east. We are on our way to having one of the nicest sections of the ECGA!


The municipalities of North Berwick, Wells, and Kennebunk, in cooperation with the Eastern Trail Alliance (ETA), Eastern Trail Management District (ETMD), Maine Department of Transportation (MaineDOT) and VHB, is hosting a virtual public meeting on Thursday, November 4, 2021 at 6:00 pm as part of the Eastern Trail Feasibility Study within these municipalities. VHB is completing this study, which is part of a Public Partnership Initiative (PPI) between the Municipalities, the Eastern Trail, and MaineDOT. The PPI process encourages soliciting the valuable input of local residents, businesses, and other stakeholders to better understand the needs of the community.

The study's purpose is to assess the feasibility of two new segments of the Eastern Trail extending from Route 9 in North Berwick to Perry Oliver Road in Wells, and from Alfred Road to Route 35 (Alewive Road) in Kennebunk. The focus of this initial public meeting will be to identify the study area limits, review the existing conditions within the study area, and solicit input from the community to help guide the alternatives evaluation process and better understand local ideas or concerns.

A copy of the Study Area Map is available for viewing.

There are several ways to access the meeting, please see the information below for options:

This meeting is being conducted as a Zoom webinar. When: November 4, 2021 6:00 PM Eastern Time (US and Canada) Topic: Eastern Trail Feasibility Study - Online Public Meeting

Please click to join the webinar: https://vhb.zoom.us/j/81302104675?pwd=Z1ZNUFlxNnoyd2pJMEZoWFAzN3pqUT09Or, head to https://zoom.us/join and enter Webinar ID: 813 0210 4675Passcode: 777225

Via one-tap mobile: US: +16465588656,,81302104675#

Via telephone: (646) 558-8656 Webinar ID: 813 0210 4675 Passcode: 777225
 

nomc

Active Member
Joined
Sep 3, 2020
Messages
120
Reaction score
144
Has there ever been any practical discussion on here about how to make the Forest Ave transition under 295 more palatable to pedestrians - even just to travel through - or, at the very least, make it feel like less of a stark transition between 'on peninsula' and 'off peninsula'? I know someone in some thread (can't find it) threw out an idea of covering more of 295 at the Deering St crossing with athletic fields or a park - can't remember, but I don't remember it being realistic. I also see some older posts about the cluster that is the Forest Ave clover.

When that bridge is ready for replacement how can it be better designed? How about a nice building on the corner of Marginal and Forest in front of that substation overlooking the park? How about covering the surface lots behind/between BSB and the AAA building with stacked parking>commercial>residential? Not sure if its an historic building, but lets get the Enterprise building out of there and, once again, some housing overlooking the park.

On the other side, much less space to do stuff - how about replacing the rug store/Catholic Charities/Bier Cellar building with someone more substantial, once again, maybe stacked commercial>residential. The lot with the travel building (behind the rug store) could also be better utilized -and there's a relatively large parking lot behind the travel/building - the one with the radio tower (is that even still active?). Same with the PHA building and parking lot behind. And how about replacing the kitchen/tile store buildings on the corner of Forest and Bedford with commercial>residential?
 

Cosakita18

Active Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2016
Messages
494
Reaction score
350
There's been on-and-off discussion for years about Forest Ave from Woodfords Corner to 295. To me, that corridor is a prime candidate for a "road diet". It would actually be more functional with 1 lane in each direction and a center turn lane, plus space on the side for protected bike lanes.

Right now the city and MaineDoT are working on conceptual plans for improving the inner section of Forest Ave from 295 to Park Ave. This would also involve realigning the intersections of High, State and Kennebeck St. Also opens up a redevelopment site at the corner of Marginal and Forest ans.

I'm not a HUGE fan of this concept as is, It's still very car-centric and the design of the bike lanes on Marginal / Forest aren't really safe given the average speed and volume of traffic through there. But this is always going to be a difficult and high-traffic area. This would be a good first step at traffic calming and improving pedestrian connectivity. It also adds protected bike lane segments on parts of Forest and State.
1637767668361.png
 
Last edited:

Top