Aldene Plan - Montclair Connection

JLo wrote:

I reiterate that the Port Authority aided and abetted by the Coast Guard were the prime movers behind the Aldene Plan, and years later the removal of the remnants of the CNJ Bay Draw.

While I think it was short-sited to remove the ex-CNJ bridge in its entirety, from an economic standpoint, the PA and the CG may have been right. Imagine this area without Port Newark/Elizabeth as it is today. Given the loss of the manufacturing base over the last 30 years, we might be in much more serious economic trouble.

I think this is a very perceptive comment. The economic engine created by the Port Newark / Port Elizabeth complex is breath taking. The CNJ bridge was in the way, and it had to go. It's the same issue that was debated in 1999-2001 over blasting the Arthur Kill to allow even bigger megaships into the Newark Bay.

In a truly visionary world, you'd have a Roberts Bank type of docking facility off Brooklyn, Staten Island or Sandy Hook. Capable of taking rail to ship, ship to pipe, ship to truck transfers in deep water. But, we don't have that world.

We'd also have an underground railroad from Newark Penn to midtown NYC to LaGuardia to the SHELL area. And, another railroad bringing the M&E and CNJ lines to downtown and on to JFK.

And, maybe a cargo only super-jetport at McGuire AFB, with connections to the northeast via rail and NJ Turnpike.

In a truly visionary world, you'd have a Roberts Bank type of docking facility off Brooklyn, Staten Island or Sandy Hook. Capable of taking rail to ship, ship to pipe, ship to truck transfers in deep water. But, we don't have that world

We could have...but pro-business greed in government trumped vision.

As for Port Newark, what good has it done to the area in general anyway? I've never seen any area rivaling it in starkness, to be sure...and it certainly marked the beginning of the USA's dependence upon imports in earnest. Could have built the same thing in New York Harbor, probably for far less money, and without needing to knock down the Newark Bay drawbridge of the CNJ. Would also have lent greater importance to the facilities that had previously existed on that stretch of waterfront; no expense needed to dredge Newark Bay and the Arthur Kill...

Ah, yes! The New York Port Authority (then) and the New York-New Jersey Port Authority (now)! My missing link. Since back at the Aldene Plan inceptiopn it was only NEW YORK there was the other rub. Back then railroads were "going down the tubes" and I don't mean PATH. Yet.
The St. Lawernce Seaway had just about opened, cargo was bypassing NY Harbor, and railroads in the area were thought to be soon, passe'. So why not eliminate the bridge to the Hudson front and open the Jersey waters for bigger ships with an unencumbered channel. New Jerseans were suspect of NY then...er, more than they are now?...so that was an added reason for the development of the Aldene Plan.[/u]

Irish Chieftain wrote:

In a truly visionary world, you'd have a Roberts Bank type of docking facility off Brooklyn, Staten Island or Sandy Hook. Capable of taking rail to ship, ship to pipe, ship to truck transfers in deep water. But, we don't have that world

We could have...but pro-business greed in government trumped vision.

As for Port Newark, what good has it done to the area in general anyway? I've never seen any area rivaling it in starkness, to be sure...and it certainly marked the beginning of the USA's dependence upon imports in earnest. Could have built the same thing in New York Harbor, probably for far less money, and without needing to knock down the Newark Bay drawbridge of the CNJ. Would also have lent greater importance to the facilities that had previously existed on that stretch of waterfront; no expense needed to dredge Newark Bay and the Arthur Kill...

There are grains of truth in that statement, but I'd suspect the NY vs NJ mentality plays a much bigger role in NJ's development of its ports. Look at all the money PANYNJ has pumped into Howland Hook and the Brooklyn Ship Terminal. A $ for NJ, then a $ for NY. results are secondary.

I'll see if I can find the econ development numbers for the Port and the Airport. Pretty big claims, in the low billions of dollars for annual economic activity generated.

The point is that the bridge could have had the draw expanded. There were two parallel two-track bridges. The northern one which was damaged in the ship collision could have been rebuilt without affecting train service, with a draw width and height to accomodate the largest ships that could, or be projected to, use the channel.

>>>It would have been much easier to build a new span if the approaches were still surviving - the draw spans could have been removed, but could have left the approaches up.....<<<

This was the compromise worked out, and the approach spans lasted for a number of years after the movable parts were removed. But the Coast Guard wanted to ensure it would never be used, so the CG claimed the remaining portion was in danger of collapse. As "proof," the CG presented "parts of the bridge that were falling off indicating imminent collapse." The photo of the parts that appeared in the local newspaper showed tie plates, fish plates, track bolts and spikes. Nothing structual, just the loose stuff from when rails were removed. None the less, the CG prevailed.