• Glassboro-Camden Line (Light Rail)

  • Discussion related to New Jersey Transit rail and light rail operations.
Discussion related to New Jersey Transit rail and light rail operations.

Moderators: lensovet, Kaback9, nick11a

  by bspinelli
 
Call central casting and send us the hysterical resident who thinks that criminals are coming to your town on light rail cars.

It appears that the evil light rail is following this poor woman:
Arlene Burgy, who recently moved to Pitman from Palmyra, said she expected the train would bring crime, noise, and disruption. She likened it to the River Line, the Camden-to-Trenton light-rail line that runs through Palmyra, which she said she did not like.
She left out the part about children being killed while playing on the tracks or emergency vehicles being held up for the 30 seconds it takes a couple of light rail cars to pass. Maybe there are other places in the state that need light rail too. Get Ms. Burgy to move to one of those towns and it will follow her there.
  by Launcher
 
Wenonah NIMBY's came out by the hundreds to stall progress of Glassboro-Camden rail line study, which should be delivered in June 2015 per the article. At issue is the lack of available parking lots. Wenonah residents are concerned people will drive to the stop and park in their neighborhoods. Sentiments on the rail line are mixed and it appears a lack of information is precluding final judgment for some proponents of the area, while others are dead set against it.

The "5am to 1am" timeframe seems to indicate that the line will be more prolific than it actually will be. In my opinion, in order to win support for the line, the proponents should find ways to make it more amenable to the residents' desires.

http://www.courierpostonline.com/story/ ... /18678769/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
  by philipmartin
 
Courier Post commentary: http://www.courierpostonline.com/story/ ... /26318939/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

ADMIN REMINDER: It is our policy to provide a brief, fair-use quote of linked articles. Quote added below:
COMMENTARY: Proposed light-rail line is inferior option

1. Travel time would be slower, taking 39 minutes from Glassboro to Camden, plus a five-minute transfer, plus a 10-minute PATCO ride, for a total of 54 minutes. Modified PATCO was calculated in the 1990s to require 39 minutes from Glassboro to 15th-16th. DLRT trains accelerate slower than Modified PATCO trains.

2. The Camden transfer would be an inconvenience to every passenger and an impediment for anyone with a disability.

3. Passengers waiting for a DLRT train would be exposed to the weather in typical NJ Transit shelters, whereas Modified PATCO stations would be enclosed with full heating, ventilation and air conditioning.

4. DLRT would emit diesel fumes, especially when accelerating.

5. DLRT has been forecast to attract about 18,000 rides per average weekday, whereas Modified PATCO had been forecast in previous studies to attract about 24,000.
  by philipmartin
 
http://www.bizjournals.com/philadelphia ... te-of.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

ADMIN REMINDER: It is our policy to provide a brief, fair-use quote of linked articles. Quote added below:
Camden-Glassboro light rail line still in state of flux
<SNIPS>
The proposed, $1.6 billion passenger rail line would run 18 miles with 14 proposed stations passing through 12 communities between the borough of Glassboro – home of Rowan University – and Camden, including Mantua Township, Deptford Township and Gloucester City.
...
The light rail's future has hinged — and still hinges — on two major requisites: A $9 million environmental impact study and funding, which is tied to the renewal of the Transportation Trust Fund, Paul Wyckoff, chief of government and external affairs for NJ Transit, said Friday in a panel discussion by the Chamber of Commerce Southern New Jersey.
...
The Federal Transportation Administration, however, put the study on hold since no local agency has agreed to build or operate the rail line, which still seems to be the case.
  by ExCon90
 
That was a terrible photo that the Business Journal selected for that story. One of the difficulties in finding local support is the belief of many of the locals that "light rail" means what is depicted in that photo--"we don't want that running down our streets" ... etc.
  by Nicholas Chen
 
I think one of those running down my street would be cool! :-D
  by ebtmikado
 
For the local gentry, unfamiliar with light rail, seeing a photo or a railroad commuter train is most certainly confusing, and off-putting.

News writers (they're no longer reporters), have little or no time for research.

Lee
  by ExCon90
 
I think they also tend to get moved from one assignment to another before they get properly acquainted with a subject. Apparently nothing can be done about photo editors.
  by MACTRAXX
 
Everyone:

After reading the linked PBJ article I noticed the photo of the NJT train at Trenton
- a older picture with a ALP44 locomotive and mixed Comet coaches - and wonder
why a picture of a River Line DMU was not used here...

Will the new proposed line use River Line type DMUs or will the line be electrified
using HBLR or NLR type LRVs?

How much support does this proposal have?
Is there any significant NIMBY opposition?

On a related matter this writer is the same one that wrote the article on
Lansdale-9th Street stating that it is the first new SEPTA RRD station in
20 years - Thorndale was opened in 1999 - 16 years to be exact...
I guess four years is meaningless to some people...

MACTRAXX
  by ExCon90
 
MACTRAXX wrote:Everyone:

After reading the linked PBJ article I noticed the photo of the NJT train at Trenton
- a older picture with a ALP44 locomotive and mixed Comet coaches - and wonder
why a picture of a River Line DMU was not used here...

MACTRAXX
The photo was probably chosen by a photo editor to whom a train is a train. They asked him for a photo of a train and he furnished a photo of a train--whaddaya want? At least he got the state right.
  by amtrakowitz
 
philipmartin wrote:http://www.bizjournals.com/philadelphia ... te-of.html
Wow. $1.6 billion for 18 miles of existing railroad, or $89 million per mile. Seems like all of these light rail projects put together could have gotten NJT the money to replace Hoboken Terminal with a "Union Station" in Manhattan (perhaps around Houston Street) and allowed them to forget about putting more trains in Penn. Image
  by Jeff Smith
 
Threads combined. Also, here's a web-site: http://www.glassborocamdenline.com
  by ryanov
 
Would be better as a PATCO line, but... I'd rather something than nothing?
  by RWERN
 
Jeff Smith wrote:Threads combined. Also, here's a web-site: http://www.glassborocamdenline.com/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
The route is a very short-sighted one, I'd say. While I can appreciate routing through the middle of Camden to serve those communities, a better option would be to connect at the end of the current RiverLINE and run via the waterfront. Industrial trackage along Front Street is less than 300 feet away. Development projects are coming to the Camden waterfront, and urban waterfronts in general. Routing via the waterfront would be forward-thinking for two reasons. The first is that waterfront developments in Camden will likely come sooner or later and will thrive if they are transit-oriented--there is precedent for that in New Jersey already in the form of Jersey City's waterfront developments and HBLR. The second reason has to do with system headway. SEPTA's Center City Connection or the oft-proposed North-South Rail Link in Boston speak to the advantages offered by having a through-running system without stub-ended termini at their center. The RiverLINE has opportunities to extend and branch throughout southern and western New Jersey, but to have appropriate headways, you can't have excessive turnaround time at a stub-end terminus in Camden. The station placement shown is also somewhat questionable, especially the Glassboro terminus, which is placed in such a way as to be unhelpful toward any service extensions toward Vineland or Williamstown.
  by R36 Combine Coach
 
RWERN wrote: Development projects are coming to the Camden waterfront, and urban waterfronts in general. Routing via the waterfront would be forward-thinking for two reasons. The first is that waterfront developments in Camden will likely come sooner or later and will thrive if they are transit-oriented--there is precedent for that in New Jersey already in the form of Jersey City's waterfront developments and HBLR.
Even though redevelopment has already begun, I can't see Camden as Philadelphia's own version of Jersey City just yet. It may still take another decade or more.