Author Topic: Trout Brook Station - Official Work Thread  (Read 15392 times)

Richard Johnson

  • Museum Member
  • Gandy Dancer
  • *
  • Posts: 21
  • life member
    • View Profile
Re: Trout Brook Station - Official Work Thread
« Reply #45 on: September 21, 2019, 06:24:54 PM »
other choices could be
Preserve Station
Mid Coast Station
Conservancy station
Trout Brook Station
Trout Brook Preserve station
J J
slow and steady

John Kokas

  • Museum Member
  • Supervisor
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,620
    • View Profile
Re: Trout Brook Station - Official Work Thread
« Reply #46 on: September 21, 2019, 06:45:16 PM »
Can't be Preserve Station; people will expect another odd name for the next station we build which could be "Jams & Jelly Junction".  I know, I'll probably get sent back to the whimsy page again by the forum police.   :o
Moxie Bootlegger

Graham Buxton

  • Museum Member
  • Fireman
  • ****
  • Posts: 402
    • View Profile
Re: Trout Brook Station - Official Work Thread
« Reply #47 on: September 21, 2019, 08:25:26 PM »
Why not offer [Trout Brook] station  "naming rights" to the Midcoast Conservancy, seeking their input on what the name should be?
 8)

It will cost us nothing to do so, and has already been noted, the Conservancy is a landowner on both sides of our track, and has been supportive of our plans.

Keep in mind that whatever promotion they might do that involves that "station" and its hiking area/trails is likely to mention that station name, at the very least as a geographic reference point, but also possibly as  combination train ride and hike.   See for example this page: https://www.midcoastconservancy.org/events/trout-brook-trails-volunteer-work-day/

 We  have a [soon bigger] parking lot at Sheepscot that most days could accommodate any and all the hikers that might want to get to that area, and the Midcoast Conservancy parking lot at that site is relatively small.

One of our goals is to attempt to make the train more than just a "ride" and have it instead be a "means" to get to some event (at Alna Center, TOM [sawmill etc], and could also  be the Conservancy/Preserve property.

It costs us nothing, and might bring us some benefits from offering the Conservancy station "naming rights".
Graham

Wayne Laepple

  • Museum Member
  • Yardmaster
  • *******
  • Posts: 2,102
    • View Profile
Re: Trout Brook Station - Official Work Thread
« Reply #48 on: September 21, 2019, 08:59:30 PM »
Well, we could take a great leap backward to 1900 and name the station Carleton Stream, which was the name of Trout Brook back them.

Seriously, I don't think the word "station" should be included in whatever name is selected, and I do like the idea of offering the opportunity to name the location to the MidCoast Conservancy.

Jeff Schumaker

  • Museum Member
  • Inspector
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,271
    • View Profile
Re: Trout Brook Station - Official Work Thread
« Reply #49 on: September 22, 2019, 09:22:33 AM »
On page 84 of Narrow Gauge in the Sheepscot Valley, there are photos of what is reported be the Carlton Stream section house. It was very close to the crossing of route 218. Perhaps this could be the location of the new station.

Jeff S.
Hey Rocky, watch me pull a moose trout out of my hat.

John Kokas

  • Museum Member
  • Supervisor
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,620
    • View Profile
Re: Trout Brook Station - Official Work Thread
« Reply #50 on: September 22, 2019, 09:57:25 AM »
As a follow-up to Jeff's inquiry;  Isn't  it in our long range plan or BOD decisions to eventually rebuild/replicate the Carlton Brook section house?  I remember discussions about it and if the official answer is yes, then it would be proper and historically correct to name the station Carlton Brook.
Moxie Bootlegger

Jason M Lamontagne

  • Operating Volunteers
  • Supervisor
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,670
    • View Profile
Re: Trout Brook Station - Official Work Thread
« Reply #51 on: September 22, 2019, 12:31:48 PM »
Just offering my opinion in this well balanced discussion: I believe we should acknowledge our historical railway’s place in the modern community by naming in accordance with the location’s current status as a public preserve.  Personally I prefer Trout Brook as a location name, appearing on the sign and timetable that way, with the building being referred to as Trout Brook Station.  In the same way that the sign on Alna Center station simply says “Alna Center,” while we all understand the structure to be “Alna Center Station.”

There was never an official decision, as I recall, on whether the structure will replicate the section house or be a standard flag stop building.  Midcoast Conservancy liked the flag stop idea, but haven’t gotten back to us on the section house idea.  (We indicated no rush.)

See ya
Jason

Keith Taylor

  • Museum Member
  • Engineer
  • ****
  • Posts: 727
  • Life Member
    • View Profile
Re: Trout Brook Station - Official Work Thread
« Reply #52 on: September 22, 2019, 12:49:42 PM »
Just a note on how most railroads define a “station.”
The station is NOT a building, but merely anyplace mentioned in the employee timetable by name.
Thus a “station” is a location and not a building. The building is a depot or even a station building.
But the station is merely a location usually denoted by mile post.
An example of this is Grand Central in New York. Many folks refer to it as Grand Central Station, but in truth Grand Central Station is a Post Office and the railroad structure is Grand Central Terminal.
Keith

Jason M Lamontagne

  • Operating Volunteers
  • Supervisor
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,670
    • View Profile
Re: Trout Brook Station - Official Work Thread
« Reply #53 on: September 22, 2019, 01:12:26 PM »
Our rulebook defines “stations” as such: any location defined in the timetable is a station.

The purpose of this discussion is how we refer to physical structures serving as public interface. 

No matter what the name ends up being- it’d be appropriate to have a display inside the structure giving the history of the area.  There, the historical name “Carlton Brook” can be presented.

Al Michelis

  • Museum Member
  • Switchman
  • **
  • Posts: 97
    • View Profile
Re: Trout Brook Station - Official Work Thread
« Reply #54 on: September 22, 2019, 01:32:33 PM »
No matter what the name ends up being- it’d be appropriate to have a display inside the structure giving the history of the area.  There, the historical name “Carlton Brook” can be presented.

Totally agree with this.

Stephen Lennox

  • Museum Member
  • Fireman
  • ****
  • Posts: 361
    • View Profile
Re: Trout Brook Station - Official Work Thread
« Reply #55 on: September 22, 2019, 04:56:33 PM »
I'm voting for Trout Brook!

Wayne Laepple

  • Museum Member
  • Yardmaster
  • *******
  • Posts: 2,102
    • View Profile
Re: Trout Brook Station - Official Work Thread
« Reply #56 on: September 22, 2019, 06:22:25 PM »
As I recall, the photos of the section house in the book were almost useless to determine the dimensions and configuration of the building.  I think a wayside station house like Alna Center would be more useful to us and to the conservancy, and a display inside would be protected from the weather.

Bob Holmes

  • Museum Member
  • Engineer
  • ****
  • Posts: 728
    • View Profile
Re: Trout Brook Station - Official Work Thread
« Reply #57 on: September 22, 2019, 06:55:18 PM »
I'm totally with Jason on labeling the structure Trout Brook.  What we call it in the timetable can be debated a little more.

BTW, I'm amazed at the intensity and level of this discussion.  It shows how much we all care about our railroad.

Bob

John McNamara

  • Operating Volunteers
  • Supervisor
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,551
    • View Profile
Re: Trout Brook Station - Official Work Thread
« Reply #58 on: September 22, 2019, 07:34:37 PM »
I vote for “Trout Brook” and a copy of the Alna Center building. as it makes a nice cozy spot for a 📞 telephone.

Dave Buczkowski

  • Museum Member
  • Conductor
  • *****
  • Posts: 942
  • Life Member
    • View Profile
Re: Trout Brook Station - Official Work Thread
« Reply #59 on: September 22, 2019, 08:10:04 PM »
I believe the Conservancy has already weighed in by naming their property Trout Brook Preserve. I am against giving the right to abutters to name our stations. It sets a bad precedent. What if the Conservancy chose to name it after a big benefactor with absolutely no relation to the WW&F or its history? We have traditionally named our stations after abutters (I.e. Sutters) or location (Alna Center which is actually the historic name). We have made one exception because the family did not want their name used for a station. Top of the Mountain seemed to just grow organically.
Dave