Glassboro-Camden Line (Light Rail)

Any updates on the current status of this project. Has it lost whatever priority it had following the election defeat of its biggest supporter, Senator Sweeney?

Aside from hearing that Pitman is against the project, I haven’t heard anything else.

Dcell wrote: ↑Tue May 17, 2022 12:27 pm Any updates on the current status of this project. Has it lost whatever priority it had following the election defeat of its biggest supporter, Senator Sweeney?

This is standard operating procedure. You don't hear anything for a year or two and then the DRPA says they're finishing up the studies and should be able to get it up and running in about 5 years. I figure the next update should be the fall of '23.

And just like that the projected opening has been pushed back to 2028. Three years for the PED. Wonder what's been studied the past 20 years that this can't be finished up before 2026. Wonder what happened to awarding construction contracts in 2023? https://www.nj.com/news/2022/12/56m-con ... -line.html

The fact sheet from 2010 had the following timeline:

- final EIS Spring 2012
- design and permits 2012-2015
- construction 2014-2017
- start of operation 2016 (should probably be 2018)

Not sure how operation starts before construction is over, perhaps that's a typo and should have been 2018? if so, that's 6 years between final EIS and start of service.

The fact sheet in 2013 pushed back the timeline by 2 years, shortened construction by a year, and corrected the service start date, resulting in an expected start of service in 2019.

The EIS preparation took a lot longer. Draft EIS wasn't published until fall 2020 (putting us now over 8 years behind the original timeline), final EIS was published in Feb 2021 (9 years behind schedule). Note that the EIS process is mandatory for a project like this so…

If we take the original 2010 timeline (correcting the start of service) and move it forward accordingly, we get:

- design and permits 2021-2024
- construction 2023-2026
- start of service 2027

Looks like design and permits is behind schedule by a year. I'm not sure what the past 20 years have to do with how fast they can design and build this, but a) I'm not clear where the money for this is going to come from (SJTA can fund the design work but I don't know where they are going to get the money to actually build), and b) their original timeline of 6 years from awarding of initial design contracts to the line being operational hasn't really changed.

Your point is well taken concerning the 2016-2018 typo. NJT claims they have their share of the money already put away as per a meeting I attended with Senator Norcross in 2019. I was previously on the Gloucester City Committee and much of the preliminary design work had already been laid out and approved as early as 2010. The PED is a matter of pulling together what's already out there which needs another 3 years and 56 million dollars. DRPA's final statement on this is they expect it to be up and running by 2028, which I think is overly optimistic seeing they don't expect the PED to be done before the beginning of 2026. They're still looking for the roughly 1 billion dollars they'll need from the Feds which hasn't been approved or promised. I worked for the DRPA for over 20 years. They're great at throwing around millions for paperwork. Not so great at actually getting anything constructive done.

Wanted to add that as per the DRPA prior schedule if they used that one of 3 years construction, again optimistic, we're looking at a 2029-2030 opening if nothing goes wrong and they get the money.

To be fair, I'm sure conditions on the ground have changed in the intervening 13 years, so I doubt you can just pull those plans off the shelf and call it done. Time will tell.

Looks like survey work was done in April of this year https://www.glassborocamdenline.com/sur ... pril-2024/

The real problem with this project is that they are pursuing DBOM for it, which imho should be off the table given Alstom's abysmal performance of the River Line contract over the past two years.

DBOM was the intention from the start. DRPA wanted nothing to do with the actual operation of the line. They shut down any thought of operating it as a branch of PATCO saying the line would have to end in Camden with the Riverline, as the bridge could not handle any additional load line traffic, and honestly, tests were done and it can't.

The terminus will be outside the Rand Transit Center but there was talk about seeing if the light rail cars could be re-routed inside to allow an across-the-platform transfers to Patco trains. The Rand TC is going to be renovated or rebuilt and there was talk about this inside the building transfer.

I have no idea why it needs to operate over the bridge for DRPA to run it, or why the choice has to be between DRPA running it or the builder. Surely NJT could run it, or some other contractor who doesn't need to have any expertise in building infrastructure?

It's just unclear to me why any construction company would ever have any expertise with running or maintaining trains.

lensovet wrote: ↑Wed Aug 07, 2024 9:18 pm I have no idea why it needs to operate over the bridge for DRPA to run it, or why the choice has to be between DRPA running it or the builder. Surely NJT could run it, or some other contractor who doesn't need to have any expertise in building infrastructure?

It's just unclear to me why any construction company would ever have any expertise with running or maintaining trains.

Having worked for DRPA I can tell you they wanted nothing to do with running it. The bridge tests were just to keep other companies from being on their property. At one point they wanted NJT to take over PATCO but PATCO is a "White Elephant" that doesn't fit in easily with the rest of their transportation. DRPA is just overseeing the project and handing out the consultant fees to the proper groups which they are great at. NJT owns the line but for whatever reason wants to have someone else run it as they don't want to do it. Seeing the salary structure on the Riverline it would certainly seem to be a big money saver doing it this way. Why a construction company needs to run it is just one of those great mysteries that only an insider would know, although I'll take a wild guess that it might be some pally that's connected to them that they've already promised it to.

And just like that DRPA is out and NJT is in as it takes it's turn handing out contracts as "Agency of Record". https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/nj-to ... ngNewsVerp

Quote: “It’s a work in progress,” Nash said. “It’s inching it forward. There’s a long way to go before it becomes reality.”

No issue with that – makes sense for NJT to own this line given that it's in NJ and will have a similar operational structure to the river line

I am amused at the characterization of PATCO as a light rail line though.