Proposed PATCO Expansion

so the new waterfront master plan calls for demolishing the "scissor" bridges over 95

*bump* Any news? The Glassboro-Camden website has been more or less silent since Sept.

WaitinginSJ wrote:*bump* Any news? The Glassboro-Camden website has been more or less silent since Sept.

No direct news, but you can infer many things from the cancellation of the ARC project. It has been assumed that the Glassboro-Camden rail line was a quid pro quo to South Jersey for support of, or at least not mounting opposition to, ARC. Since there is no more ARC project, there is no longer a reason for a quid pro quo.

The speculation surrounding what the Chrisie administration would do with the NJ portion of the ARC money - minus $271 million of course - suggested a focus on highway, rather than rail, projects.

With the DRPA stating that they would no longer be the project study sponsor, the project has become orphaned - there is currently no lead agency to continue work after DRPA. And just because DRPA thinks that NJ Transit should pick up the project doesn't generate one iota of responsibility as far as NJ Transit is concerned. At this point, we're left with incomplete studies, an IOU payment note from NJ Transit to DRPA, and not much else.

As I see it, the only real opportunity that the project may have going forward depends on whether or not Steve Sweeney. as NJ State Senate President and Gloucester County Freeholder Director, has enough political capital to keep the project alive. Absent this, we'll all be waiting in SJ for a very long time.

WaitinginSJ wrote:*bump* Any news? The Glassboro-Camden website has been more or less silent since Sept.

It's the lead story in the current DVARP newsletter.
<plug>
http://www.dvarp.org/member
</plug>

Bill R. wrote:... At this point, we're left with incomplete studies, an IOU payment note from NJ Transit to DRPA, and not much else...

Incomplete studies? I believe sixteen studies have been completed; maybe it's eighteen by now.

Gov Chris Christie does not need to ride trains when you and your wife make about half a million a year.All rail projects appear to have stopped.I took a ride to Pennsauken to look how much has been done on the 2 story Riverline AC connection station.NOTHING after all this time.Another NORTH Jersey govenor doing nothin for South Jersey rail.We need Sweeny in there than we will see some action!

chuchubob wrote:

Bill R. wrote:... At this point, we're left with incomplete studies, an IOU payment note from NJ Transit to DRPA, and not much else...

Incomplete studies? I believe sixteen studies have been completed; maybe it's eighteen by now.

I was referring to the environmental impact study discussed in both Inquirer articles that have links posted on page 39 of this thread.

south jersey trains wrote:I took a ride to Pennsauken to look how much has been done on the 2 story Riverline AC connection station.NOTHING after all this time.Another NORTH Jersey govenor doing nothin for South Jersey rail.

The Pennsauken Station is not expected to open until 2013, and dirt isn't going to be moving for over another year. Supposedly they intend to begin on the Phase One RiverLINE station by the end of this year, but I would probably estimate closer to February or March. This is the State of New Jersey we're talking about.

An 18 month Phase Two ACL station design stage began in June and will last 18 months, until December 2011. Construction will begin after that, meaning January 2012 at the earliest, and service to the station should start sometime around the summer of 2013. It's an absurdly long timeline for what seems like a simple project, but that's the timeline that has been laid out.

The groundbreaking was a ceremonial pre-election photo op (hm, where else did we see that?). Work on the project has not stopped. They're using federal grants, so there are timelines they must meet.

All of this information is right here in the associated thread.

Thank You for the details/timeline.

has anyone considered running PATCO like Pittsburgh's T? rather than "high speed" subway style trains, a series of electrified LRT vehicles that go to lindenwold, glassboro, and trenton (Riverline)?

Suburban Station wrote:has anyone considered running PATCO like Pittsburgh's T? rather than "high speed" subway style trains, a series of electrified LRT vehicles that go to lindenwold, glassboro, and trenton (Riverline)?

Um, there'd be a capacity issue. The Lindenwold line carries more passengers than all PAT's trolleys.

Matthew Mitchell wrote:

Suburban Station wrote:has anyone considered running PATCO like Pittsburgh's T? rather than "high speed" subway style trains, a series of electrified LRT vehicles that go to lindenwold, glassboro, and trenton (Riverline)?

Um, there'd be a capacity issue. The Lindenwold line carries more passengers than all PAT's trolleys.

Of course, it should be noted that PATCO was supposed to be a 3 tier system with a line to Lindenwold, Glassboro (Glouster?), and another place. The "Light Patco" really wasn't a bad idea, especially with the cars being rebuilt right now.

Tritransit Area wrote:
Of course, it should be noted that PATCO was supposed to be a 3 tier system with a line to Lindenwold, Glassboro (Glouster?), and another place. The "Light Patco" really wasn't a bad idea, especially with the cars being rebuilt right now.

The "other place" has been different over time. As written in the book "Pennsylvania-Reading Seashore Lines" by Frederick A. Kramer, the 1930's era South Jersey Transit Authority report indicated electrification to Moorestown (and also to Clementon). Page 32 in "The Lindenwold Hi-Speed Line" by Bill Vigrass displays the 1970's era map showing Burlington City as the PATCO endpoint, with a Riverline-like service between Moorestown and Fort Dix via Mount Holly. The book also mentions a 1940's era report by the Klauder engineering firm suggesting the use of catenary for the segments to be electrified.

Imagine how different things would have developed in South Jersey if the Bridge Line had been connected to the then-exisiting Camden-Millville electrified service in the 1930's.

I remember hearing that Rt 55 was constructed as a way to combat the sprawl that a train to Glassboro would create. Pretty flawed logic.

Matthew Mitchell wrote:

Suburban Station wrote:has anyone considered running PATCO like Pittsburgh's T? rather than "high speed" subway style trains, a series of electrified LRT vehicles that go to lindenwold, glassboro, and trenton (Riverline)?

Um, there'd be a capacity issue. The Lindenwold line carries more passengers than all PAT's trolleys.

I wonder how many of those people would be using "other" services if it were set up like the T...you know, stations closer to home. isn't the ridership fairly similar and is the T at capacity?