The SIRR and RVRR V

A wye is a "triangle with legs" of track, so a whole train could turn around. Teh train would pull down one leg of the wye, clear the switch, reverse back the other leg of the wye, so now he is perpendicular to the original route, and then head down the other leg of the wye, now heading in the opposite direction of the original travel -

A "k turn" of sorts for a train

I was just looking at a 1955 topo map for Roselle which showed an interconnection between the SIRR and the Lehigh Valley - it was shown as Staten Island Junction on the map. Does that still exist? I have explored tha area by truck a little and don't recall seeing that junction or any remnants of a ROW.

The tracks still exist, although they are very much covered with vegetation. The switch to the Lehigh Line was removed about 18 months ago. The single switch opened to two tracks, then back to one for the connection with the SIRR. I recall (sometime during the 1960s), that a single track from the connection crossed the 2-track SIRR on a diamond and continued a short distance east to serve some industries in Roselle. During winter, it may still be possible to see the connection from the Parkway overpass.

Crews are laying track in Roselle Park again. Valley Rd near Webster Ave.

They are working from Woodside Avenue south to Route 28. They had already installed tracks between Woodside and Colfax Avenues last year. They also recently cleared away all downed trees and re-groomed the grade from Woodside north to Faitoute. North of Faitoute is where all of the severe encroachment exists.

I was bike riding in the area Saturday morning when I notice someone taking pictures of the new trackwork at Woodside Avenue. Started a conversation with him - he did not identify himself as anti-rail, I did not say I was pro-rail. However, based on our discussion, I figured he was one of the NIMBYs. Some highlights...

1) He heard that container trains would be running from Staten Island to the NJ Transit line at Summit as part of the effort to establish a new north-south freight railroad.

2) He was under the impression that the railroad will handle new car carriers that will be unloaded at the Maxon Honda dealership on Route 22 in Union.

3) He believes that the railroad is not entitled to build on property taken by adjoining homeowners and businesses as they have "squatters rights".

There were other tidbits that marked the hysteria surrounding the rail line reactivation.

I don't know how much a fight Roselle Park can put up anymore. Heard that due to severe budget problems, there will be no fireworks this year, some parades will be cancelled and other programs (tree-planting) will be curtailed. As a taxpayer, I will certainly raise a stink if they continue to pour money into fighting the reactivation in light of the budget problems.

NJ-ARP is encouraged to get the latest "good news" updates on this thread. Some of it (Roselle Park woes, as one instance) is affirmed by NJ-ARP's Bill Wright, who is our point person on Rahway Valley restoration matters. But thanks to all for the reporting updates.

And now, quite possibly, the bad news. NJ-ARP has been alerted to a "possible" meeting of rail opponents May 16, 7:30 p.m. a the Whippany Public Library. Agenda reportedly is a "two-fer": Opposition to restoring both the Lackawanna Cut-Off and the Rahway Valley rights-of-way.

We're attempting to verify this (and get someone positioned to attend). But, even if it turns out to be just a rumor, it goes to show that, with politics, few things stay in stasis.

NJ-ARP will attempt to advise if or as anything occurs.

Apparently the Sunday Star-Ledger's Sussex/Warren edition May 15 carried a story on this meeting. The link is ...

http://www.nj.com/news/ledger/sussex/in ... 232210.xml .

Some corrections on details: The meeting is scheduled for 7:15 p.m. at the Morris County Library in Whippany.

The story appears as a meeting notice. But read the phrasing of the "notice" closely -- the Star-Ledger presumably reprints verbatim the meeting sponsor's submission -- and one can see "anti-rail" seeping out through the cracks.

The track on the east side of the NEC bridge now has covered hoppers who's wheels are just about to cross the bridge over that street (Rahway Ave is it?) that parallels the NEC. There also looks to be small piles of new ballast on teh track between the end of the hoppers and the NEC bridge

The nimby comments would be comical if it weren't for the fact that people who do know better are disemminating this inaccurate information. I can understand the average Joe Barbeque Deck thinking that mile long container trains would be running along the Rahway Valley. After all, he has no interest in trains other than the few times a year he takes NJT to a sporting event in NYC. If he's stuck at a railroad crossing he gives little thought as to where the train is coming from and where it is going. But too many local political hacks are spreading these bogus rumors and they do the scope of the project.

Trainlawyer,

I have thought about the possibility of the M&E using the Rahway Valley as a through route to Pennsylvania and points west. I think that there are too many other players who would have to sign on for this to work out. The whole thing can be done cheaper, faster and easier without using Union County as a through route. I think what they were hoping for is to bring shipments from Tosco through Union County to their customers in Morris County. This would result in a whole lot more revenue for them than what they currently receive with these shipments going via the Chemical Coast.

Union County's interests are varied and not limited to the altruistic hope of increased light industrial development in Springfield, Kenilworth and Union that rail service could bring. I think they also want the CNJ mainline rehabbed for both industrial use and passenger rail. I also think Union County would like a transfer station for construction debris and other waste. The M&E's attempt to secretly construct such a transfer station last year is, IMO, very telling. Such a facility would bring in revenues for the county and also provide lucrative contracts for private companies who would operate and manage them. If such a facility could be built quietly on county owned land no one would be the wiser until the trains start running. BTW, I support such transfer stations. Construction debris is shipped a whole lot safer via rail than trucks on an Interstate Highway.

Hello all,

It's been fun watching things unfold on the Rahway Valley. As completion of certain portions of the line appears imminent, I think we should all just take a "wait and see what develops" approach here. However, I certainly do enjoy speculating. Well, maybe just a little more than speculating....

The issue here appears to be whether or not the RV portion of the line will be used for through freight traffic. If my sources are accurate, and I have no reason to believe they're not, the answer is yes, and no.

Every indication I've received from Morristown was that the Staten Island through freight traffic (i.e. the containers trains) was always going to be handled by the Class I's themselves. The fact that the Union County agreement with the M&E specifically allows the M&E to grant overhead trackage rights to others parties appears to clearly support that position.

What I believe the M&E was expecting to handle was the assembly and spotting on Staten Island; Call it a contract switching operation with the Port Authority, similiar to the M&E's current arrangement in Bayway with Tosco (now Conoco-Phillips?).

One need only know that M&E's Chief Operating Officer was with SeaLand for many years. Mr. Fuller knows the business of moving containers well. When he was heading up the TP&W railroad in the midwest, that road handled piggyback trains for the Santa Fe. However, Mr. Fuller would also know that the costs associated with the short movment of containers would not allow the M&E to "act like a railroad" and still expect to be able to participate in the movement of those trains in a capacity of more than just handling terminal switching chores.

I do believe that the M&E was expecting to handle all the traditional carload traffic headed to Staten Island. I don't believe it to be inaccurate that the M&E would be disappointed if they didn't get that business. Unless the M&E is able to access Staten Island in some capacity, which I don't believe it is currently engaged in negotiations for, than the issue of Staten Island through freight is moot.

The fact that the connection to the Lehigh Line in Cranford is still buried in ten year old overgrowth would indicate that the M&E is not currently looking at the SIRT as a through route at the moment.

Which leads me to ask the question, if not through freight to and from Staten island , what through freight possiblities exist for the Rahway Valley? We all make the assumption here that Staten Island was the primary destination. Let me change your orientation here a little with regard to potential traffic flows.

As part of the Conrail split, agreements were made to allow many of NJ's shortlines to be able to interchange with both Class I's. The M&E was supposed to interchange with CSX at a point along the Center street branch in Harrison. While Center Street would allow the M&E to facilitate a direct interchange with CSX, operationally, there are a thousand reasons why that really isn't a very practical place to interchange cars from the original M&E system to CSX.

However, let's look into the magical crystal "foamer" ball and speculate about the future train operations along the M&E.

A daily Morristown based turn job, departs Morristown for Cranford each morning. With it, it is bringing along empties from Polaner, Surburban Propane, and others headed for a CSX/Shared asset connection at the yard at the bottom of the ramp at Aldene. Along the way, It works the RV and arrives in Cranford to find both the M&E's Bayway/Cranford turn waiting for it, as well as shared asset local "OI-10" out of the "island" with loaded CSX cars for the entire M&E system. After exchanging cars between the locals, they depart for the respective terminals, doing additional work along the way.

What does this mean for rail shippers in Morris county?

Morristown to Oak Island in less than twelve hours vs. two days from Allentown to Lake Junction on the NS. Given the number of CSX and NS trains to and from Oak Island, is there any doubt as to what through traffic is going to be moving over the RV?

Why would the M&E go to great length to secure the use of that right of way without insisting on restoring it all the way to Summit? It's not garbage from Staten Island that the people of Union County need to fear, but rather.....

Corn syrup. (Polaner)

Lumber products. (84 Lumber)

Well, I'll let the rest of you tell the story of all the commodities the M&E handles. You hopefully get the point.

As for other elements Trainlawyer discussed here, I don't believe there is a connection though the RV. However, if anybody want's to start a CNJ Rail speculation thread, I'm all for it....

Well, that's all for now folks.

See ya all later.............

Does that guy (S somebody) that wantned to run trains in NY used to work for M and E? M and E seems toi want to go everywhere.

Trainlawyer wrote:

rvrrhs wrote:May I also point out, Trainlawyer, that the line would need to be rehabilitated before the M&E can effectively sell its services along the line.

As the saying goes, "Promises, promises." If I own a business along the RVRR, or am looking at moving near rail freight service, the first thing I would need to know is that there is actually going to be rail freight service there. Until there is a product (rail freight service) for the M&E to sell between Summit and Cranford, there's not a whole lot of selling they can do. I'm not going to sign up on the possibility that such service might one day be there.

The normal NJDOT rehab application requires a showing of real economic benefit and that is usually done by showing the increase in jobs (other than railroad) that will result from the project and this requires showing who the customers are and what the impact will be on their business.


New Jersey, at least untill now, does not give out rehab money based on a yet to be made sales pitch.

So, this means either: a) the economic benefit study has been done, and customers are in fact lined up; b) the economic study phase does not require signed contracts but merely an expression of interest on the part of potential customers that points to future economic benefit; c) the county and M&E are proceeding without (mandatory?) NJDOT paperwork; or d) NJDOT is in cahoots with the corrupt Union County Freeholders and the evil Morristown & Erie Railroad, and has rubberstamped the deal.

Anyone know the answer?

As I have stated before, one needs only observe the construction to see who has a siding built to the building to determine who the customers are...

Trainlawyer wrote:Back when I first started rousing the rabble on this thread I made a comment which I think now bears further examination and this is addressed primarilly to Mr. Bowen - With the State already sinking money into this project, why not send a couple (I think three would be adequate) of the South Jersey Light Rail vehicles up to Cranford and start a cross connection service? At least it would look like the State got something for their money.

Wouldn't that just toast the NIMBYs' marshmallows! Scheduled frequent service from Cranford to Summit!!

There used to be a plan for Elizabeth-Plainfield-Summit light rail connection (15? years ago) using the old CNJ from Elizabeth to Cranford and the RV to Summit, but that's not part of the present Elizabeth MOS for the Union County light rail. [Stops at Broad St., Elmora, Roselle, Aldene, Cranford proper, Michigan/Faitoute Aves., Kenilworth industrial area, Boulevard, Rt. 22, Liberty Ave., Mountain Ave., and Summit . . . hmmmmmm.]

Service on such a line could be pretty frequent--I recall from my boyhood walks to buy comic books and baseball cards that there's a nice (half-mile?) passing siding between Mountain Ave. and the Van Winkle's Creek bridge in Springfield.