The SIRR and RVRR V

I found this recent newspaper link that someone else posted on the NJRAILFAN forum of railroad.net
It makes for interesting reading.


http://www.nj.com/news/ledger/morris/in ... 715270.xml

CNJFAN, I was referring to the SIRR, the ballast was on the south side near the switch off of the ex-CNJ. Just east of that switch is another switch off the SIRR to a track that runs east to about the Parkway overpass. Unlil recenting it was buried in brush. It is just north of the storage space rental company's fence. This morning it looked like about half the work is done in restoring it. The rails were pulled, sections still bolted together, moved to the side, and the railbed excavated and refilled. Then new (or maybe good condition used) ties were placed and the rails put back. I guess the ballast will be added and tamped as the last step.

The larger stones and ballast near the Aldene connection ramp I think are NJT's. The north side of the ramp had erroded and from the train it looks like shoring and stones were added to beef it up.

Thanks alot for the info.

Maybe this is going to be how they transition from the RV to the SiRR and back.

Rehabilitation of the Staten Island Railway (Linden to Cranford) and Rahway Valley Railroad (Cranford to Summit) is financed, at least in large part, by money generated from a 1989 state bond issue.

The same bond pool helped purchase the Lackawanna Cut-Off right-of-way, portions of the ex-Central Railroad of New Jersey right-of-way, the "coal yards" property now the site of the HBLRT maintenance and storage base, and other rail rights-of-way.

Full disclosure: NJ-ARP was a major sponsor of the bond issue, which was approved by the state's voters on the 1989 ballot.

>>>Think of repaying those bonds in terms of your property taxes. After all a governmental bond is a promise that the taxpayers, i.e. my brother, my son-in-law, and many of you will guarantee the payments. <<<

Sometimes. More often than not, state-county-municipal bonds are mere revenue bonds and not backed by the full faith and credit of the issuing entity, there is no obligation to raise taxes to meet the debt service. While fairly rare, there are instances of the revenue bonds defaulting. A look at the ratings of a number of governmental issuances will show a range of ratings from high investment grade (typically those where the indenture does have a full faith and credit tax backing clause) to low investment grade (those without full faith and credit clause but with the issuer in good financial condition) and finally a smattering of junk bonds. Recall the New York City fiasco in the 1960-70s (?) where the State had to form the Municipal Assistance Corporation to take over the NYC indebtedness.

A substantial amount of work has been going on at the Garwood Industrial Track. I was at the storage facility that's next to the track, and saw a good deal of new ties laid down ready for new ballast.

How do things look from the RVL side?

ChooChooHead2 wrote:How do things look from the RVL side?

As far as I know, the RVL side hasn't been touched and won't be touched until the SIRR side is done. I could be wrong...

The track with the ties ready for ballast is not the garwood industrial. It's the former yard track to which I referred above. It parallels the Garwood Industrial track located about 50 feet to the north.

Thanks for the correction, Ken.

I looked at it again today from the train on the way to work. A hirail dumptruck was beginning to place the ballast on the 'yard' track. It ends right at the edge of the Parkway overpass. I suspect that it will be used as the interchange track.

I was told by an M&E employee that the track in question will be the new siding to Federal Plastics and not an interchange track. I guess we will have to wait and see.

It could be extended in the future. But it ends right at the west edge of the Parkway overpass. The weeds are undisturbed to the east of there. It may be that the customer will be offered a lower rate by the M&E and thus be served off the restored track since M&E could presumably not use the Garwood Secondary. Interesting example of competitive forces at work if it materializes.

I noted this morning that a bumper has been installed at the end of the likely interchange track, right at the edge of the Parkway overpass, so service to the plastics company is not likely on this track for the time being, anyway.

Trainlawyer wrote:
The better firms, such as Patton Boggs (representing Springfield et alia) will usually not file an appeal unless they believe that there is a reasonable chance of success on a least some of the issues.

---------------------------------

Absolutely true, but the circumstances of this specific case suggest that the parties might be open to a deal while the case works its way through the appeals process. If the towns failed to appeal the litigation, the railroad could begin the operations process. As long as the appeals process is underway, the operations will likely be on hold.

If nothing else, the November county and municipal elections may cause changes in support among the various parties.