Railroad Forums
Moderators: GirlOnTheTrain, nomis, FL9AC, Jeff Smith
State Sen. Toni Boucher, ranking Republican on the legislature’s transportation committee, said passenger service along the Maybrook line should be part of the the state’s long term plan.She may be a bit misguided on things like electrification but she's an advocate, and she's been right about the lack of "love" #Schumenthalloy have shown western CT.
Jeff Smith wrote:She may be a bit misguided on things like electrification but she's an advocate, and she's been right about the lack of "love" #Schumenthalloy have shown western CT.She's been tweetshamed by the Commuter Council chair (not Jimbo, but the other Jim) for whining about Danbury service when Waterbury is still the redheaded stepchild. It would be nice if as a member of the transportation committee if she took it upon herself to become educated about things instead of just demanding electrification to Danbury and thinking Maybrook passenger service is a worthwhile use of state resources at any time in the semi-near future...
RussNelson wrote:You guys are being just amazingly impractical, with talk of electrification or reverse moves or flyovers or railbikes. What, are commuters going to ride railbikes down the Beacon Line to catch the train at the station?? No, the solution is simple: Put Dutchess Junction back into service. Then, a commuter train that's coming from the city and going to go up the Beacon Line comes off Metro North at Dutchess Junction, and heads up the Beacon Line. Then, you back down the Beacon Line, go over the Metro North line, back onto the siding here: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/159543669" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; and pull forward, going into the city on the correct track. No fouling the main, ever.I suppose I should know this, but- where was Dutchess Jct.? And what was it- the end of the ND&C or the NY&NE?
It's easy to put Dutchess Junction back into play. There's nothing encroaching on the NYNH&H railbed. You just need two switches and two bridges. One is over Grandview Ave (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/160294902" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;) and the other is over Fishkill Creek(https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/160294901" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;), and a new crossover track from the Beacon Station siding to the Metro North line going south.
Simple! Your problem is that you lack imagination! And a customer base!
Ridgefielder wrote:I suppose I should know this, but- where was Dutchess Jct.? And what was it- the end of the ND&C or the NY&NE?Dutchess Junction is on the USGS Topo maps. It's a placename rather a bit south of where the actual junction was. It's easy to find Dennings Point. It's um, Beacon's genital member. Well, trace the end of it over to the River Line, and that's where the ND&C used to interchange with the northbound track of the 'Central. It's gone. You need to be a ferroequinologist to find any trace of it. There is a flyover connecting to a siding off the southbound track of Metro-North. It also connects to a grown-over siding that goes up to the highway bridge over the tracks.
Jeff Smith wrote:Before Dutch's head explodes, yes, this is pure foam. Just discussing possibilities.More foam: besides putting Dutchess Junction back in, you could also put Hopewell Junction back into service. Make a wye there so you can turn a train. Go up the ND&C track past the Hopewell Junction Depot and switch tower, and put the interchange track back in for the train to come around on it. Sure, there's junkyard there, but how much would it cost to buy them out? Since we're just foaming, we can imagine infinite revenue. Don't most foam designs assume infinite revenue?
November 3, 2016Some interesting stuff in here. Of course, we know the entire line is OOS. Interesting to see there was a study in 2000; not sure if I knew that or not. Some of the interest seems to be in rail operation, i.e. asking for crossing protection materials. So there has indeed been some interest. Good to see MNRR is doing its due diligence on the line. It may come to nothing, but at least we'll know.
Re: Addendum #1 to Request For Expressions of Interest (RFEI) – Beacon Line
Dear Prospective Proposer:
Thank you for your interest in the above referenced RFEI.
1) A site tour/inspection has been scheduled for Thursday, November 10th, 2016 at 9:00 am. All those participating in the tour are asked to meet at 36 Railroad Avenue, Hopewell Junction in the parking lot adjacent to the former Hopewell Junction Station (now a museum). Please come equipped with a hard hat, vest, safety glasses and protective footwear. This personal protective equipment will not be provided and is mandatory. All site tour participants will be required to sign the attached PERMIT AND RELEASE TO VISIT RAILROAD FACILITIES attached below on page 4 of this Addendum #1.
Participation in the site tour/inspection is not required in order to submit a response to the RFEI.
2) The Deadline for responses to the RFEI is hereby extended to 3:00 p.m. on Wednesday, November 30, 2016.
3) A number of questions have been received pertaining to the Beacon Line, and are answered to the extent possible below. The questions, with the corresponding answers, are as follows:
Q.1 Are there any existing studies that have been done by MNR or municipal partners related to this potential rail line reactivation?
a. Beacon Line Feasibility Study; Frederic R. Harris, Inc., Metro-North Railroad – New York, NY – 2000. During this RFEI the executive summary will be provided upon request.
b. Rail Line Trolley Feasibility Study; KKO and Assoc., Andover, MA – 2003. Metro- North does not have this study.
Q.2 What is the current use of the line?
a. The only rail traffic in the past two years was the movement of two retired rail cars to the MTA Police Department facility. There has been no freight or revenue service for several years.
Q.3 How much of the current use must be preserved?
a. There is an underground fiber-optic cable route that must be maintained.
b. Any proposed use must be compatible with the MTA Police Department facility.
c. Existing Metro-North facilities, including but not limited to a training facility near Hopewell Junction (though this facility does not need to link directly with any other line including the Hudson and Harlem lines), and a headquarters for a maintenance of way drainage crew, also near Hopewell Junction.
d. Any existing bike path agreement(s) along the Line (Putnam and Dutchess County portion).
e. As stated in the RFEI, one of the goals of the proposal is to “preserve the line for current or future rail operation.”
Q.4 Is MNR the sole owner of this right-of-way?
a. Yes, subject to freight rights held by the Housatonic Railroad.
Q.5 Please provide a list of areas that do not meet FRA Class 1 inspection. Please also provide a copy of the most recent track inspection report for the line.
a. The entire line does not meet Class 1 inspection. There is no available track inspection report.
Q.6 Many of the RR crossings on the line look like they once had operating gates and flashers that seem to have been removed and placed in storage at some point. Are these gates and flashers available to be reinstalled at certain crossings?
a. The materials removed from the crossings are not available. They were obsolete and unusable.
Q.7 Please provide a copy of the most recent bridge inspection reports for all the bridges on the line that are large enough to be part of NYSDOT’s required annual inspection program.
a. The inspection reports are available but are too large to be attached here. Anyone wishing to view these reports may contact me directly.
Q.8 A request was made for a copy of the Valuation Maps for the line. Due to the size of the file, it cannot be attached here. Those who would like a copy of the Valuation Maps should contact me directly and I will email the files.
Remainder omitted
