by bluedash2
Bottom line- no rail services on that section of the line anytime in the forseable future.
Railroad Forums
Moderator: David
jrzwalker86 wrote:But, work has been done and a lot of it in the years 2011, 2012, 2013. This includes new crossings forI think your last line is the key to it. If we see Clayton re-laying the loop that used to be there then we can be pretty confident that something is imminently going to happen.
- Wranglebrook road with new concrete crossing base,flash signal and gates with its wiring tied to rail switches.
- Rt. 530 with
-- re-engineered intersections around it
-- traffic lights wired with rail switches
-- new semaphore signals on either side and wired in with rail switches
-- new concrete crossing base
-- some new ties under the tracks on either side of the crossing and under the PRR connector switch
- Rt 539 with flash signal, gates and track base (yes the rail is not yet bolted to the rest of the tracks as of Sunday Feb. 8th)
- Diamond Rd. with new concrete crossing base
- Savoy Blvd with new concrete crossing base
Would Clayton have had to put some money out for this as well as for track clearings over the past several years?
Money is being spent on the 13 mile section for some reason. Looking at the maps for Woodmansie, there were tracks that branched off of that section into Clayton's sand pit. If they are being relaid, then I guess we would have a definite answer, right?
scottso699 wrote:You don't need a loop to store railcars or run a passenger train........jrzwalker86 wrote:But, work has been done and a lot of it in the years 2011, 2012, 2013. This includes new crossings forI think your last line is the key to it. If we see Clayton re-laying the loop that used to be there then we can be pretty confident that something is imminently going to happen.
- Wranglebrook road with new concrete crossing base,flash signal and gates with its wiring tied to rail switches.
- Rt. 530 with
-- re-engineered intersections around it
-- traffic lights wired with rail switches
-- new semaphore signals on either side and wired in with rail switches
-- new concrete crossing base
-- some new ties under the tracks on either side of the crossing and under the PRR connector switch
- Rt 539 with flash signal, gates and track base (yes the rail is not yet bolted to the rest of the tracks as of Sunday Feb. 8th)
- Diamond Rd. with new concrete crossing base
- Savoy Blvd with new concrete crossing base
Would Clayton have had to put some money out for this as well as for track clearings over the past several years?
Money is being spent on the 13 mile section for some reason. Looking at the maps for Woodmansie, there were tracks that branched off of that section into Clayton's sand pit. If they are being relaid, then I guess we would have a definite answer, right?
RailsEast wrote:With all the stipulations involved, I would think that it is not worth it at all to proceed with any work unless the applicant is certain that it can fulfill the agreement. I presume that if nothing is started, then no harm, no foul, aside from the 10% applicant cost (in this case, $150K); but......if no work is done, does the applicant still owe the 10%?It is my understanding that the $150K is not an upfront payment; the reimbursement payment(s) are for 90 percent of the submitted reimbursement application so if no work is performed there is no payment by the applicant.
RailsEast wrote:Is car storage considered 'common rail freight service'? I would assume yes, but I would also assume that excursion trains are not, but I am just guessing here.....I suppose revenue is revenue, just not sure as to the actual rule as the state sees it.Excursion or any other rail passenger operation is not eligible for funding by this NJ program. However, the program does not prohibit use of funded infrastructure for rail passenger service; the program's only concern is that the freight service requirements be met.
Splatz wrote:So noted.Not sure what you mean by "challenge" South Jersey Gas - the territories are allocated by the NJBPU and it is highly unlikely that the territory would be reallocated. Also, allowing overlapping service territories is not cost effective so BPU approval of that is even more unlikely. With respect to the proposed South Jersey Gas pipeline to reinforce its system and to serve the Beasley's Point generating station, that is not a meaningful incursion into the Pinelands as the pipeline would be buried in the shoulder of existing highways so no pine trees nor the environment would be adversely impacted. NJ Natural does have a major reinforcement project proposed but it does not impact the CNJ right of way. See for details: http://www.njng.com/about/southern-reli ... /index.asp. Could something eventually be proposed for the CNJ right of way at some point? Of course it could. However, the pipeline use is not incompatible with rail use if the pipeline project is designed to that end. There could be a shared right of way. With respect to the Whiting JCP&L 230kV station, it may or may not have available capacity; a system impact study would need to be completed before committing to add a significant new load. Whiting will become more critical to bulk electric system reliability after the Oyster Creek Generating Station is permanently closed in the not too distant future.
As of a recent drive by through Lakehurst, mistaking the stacks of supplies adjacent the ROW for the multi-family dwelling as project related south, but then noticing looking north several huge creosoted bridge timbers (not ties) laid across the tracks under the Lakehurst circle overpass. Noting also the completion of the Conrail grant bridge improvements in advance and on a stepped up schedule of NJSL's. Lending credence to a rail delivered rationale for what will be needed to bring grant funded materials to below the now repaired bridges.
At the same time someone is stacking the Pinelands Commission with pro piplineites. Once a pipeline enters the Reserve the precedent is set and more are sure to follow on or under a currently moribund but potentially revenue producing ROW south of Woodmansie, entirely owned by NJDOT. NJ Natural Gas who extended their pipelines to Lakehurst 3 years ago need only join our ROW by less than half a mile from their lines current junction just beyond the Lakehurst circle by crossing 70 laterally SE over Township owned land once owned by Hovnanian, if they haven't already done so. That line would allow an extension of plant to challenge SJG in Atlantic County. NJNR took a huge infrastructure hit from Sandy, so they would like to get away from the beach and to something way inland that can grow. The one they have under the other former CNJ ROW to Barnegat deadends like the CNJ did in the final days.
Another Bakken crude derailment and Keystone veto will seem like pure folly. Our at least restored to Class III ROW equally a more logical place for future passenger rail expansion with cheap DMUs rather than the huge electrical infrastructure to expand the Bergen light rail. But electric is right across the street in Whiting and in huge capacity.