Cape Cod Branch Connector

I threw out a note to someone at the Falmouth EDIC with some thoughts and, points regarding the possibility of restoring rail service to Falmouth Station and, made it a point to mention Mass DOT CC-0122 (the connector) as a key point. It was very well received with a recommendation to reach out to Senator Moran.

No promises but, nothing ventured, nothing gained.

It is highly unlikely that the rails will ever be restored to Falmouth Station as the Shining sea Rail trail bike path would have to be either removed or relocated in order to do so. There would be no local support of removing the bike path as it is a major recreational feature of the area. It should have been built as a Rail with trail concept in the very beginning as first proposed, but that is past history unfortunately. The Falmouth Secondary line & the Otis Industrial track in the last 2 years have been rehabilitated with new ties / ballast / signal & crossing upgrades and a culvert replaced so far to date. The only possible way to bring Passenger rail back to Falmouth would be to build a new platform in the North Falmouth area at a different location other than the original N Falmouth station, as that parcel of land is to small to handle bike path parking & Rail passengers. It is possible to do now that the rail line is in good condition once again.

If you can't get to Falmouth, it seems to me there isn't anything really gained over just using the Bourne stop.

To utilize Bourne platform, they should focus energy getting control of bridge opening back from the Army Corp of Engineers. That can be accomplished politically through the all-democratic delegation in Washington. And I think this would have little real impact on maritime interests??

And who are you suggesting " they " would be ? The RR signed off on there Bridge drop rights a long time ago and since then the Corps has funded the complete renovation and continued maintenance / operation of the RR Bridge. Bridge drops are scheduled ( such as for the Cape Flyer ) subject to Canal Control Operations & Maritime traffic. It is a minor inconvenience to stop / hold the Train, but certainly not for a Cruise ship / Oil tanker on it's way into the Canal.

I'm still confused how the Corps was able to trade fixing the bridge for getting control of the bridge/getting priority for shipping. The railroad was there first. Building and maintaining the bridge is an expense caused building and maintaining the canal, not the railroad (maybe minus something for what the RR had paid for what must have been a fairly small bridge over the brook or inlet that was there before the canal). Shouldn't the canal (ie the Corps) have had to pay to keep the bridge in good shape forever, without having a bargaining chip to get control away from the railroad (ie the commonwealth and its tenants)? Does the state, rather than the corps, have to pay to maintain the highway bridges?

I will, however, second the fact that stopping a ship is harder than stopping a train, especially when the ship is running with the current.

First of all the Federal Government purchased the Cape Cod Canal from private owner August P Belmont on March 31st 1928. Later on after widening the Canal the Federal Government / Corps Of Engineers built the current Railroad bridge for $1.56 million dollars and the 2 Highway bridges in 1933 -1935 and have always been responsible for there maintenance and repair, not the State of Mass. When the current Railroad bridge was completed in 1935 by the Federal Government / Army Corps of Engineers the RR retained the right to control it's operation even though it did not own or pay to construct it. Now this is what I have heard over the years, when the bridge was going to be fully renovated in 2001 to 2003 by the Corps at a cost of $ 30 million dollars the State / RR were going to be required to pay some or all of it's cost, which neither wanted anything to do with. So as a result they gave up all rights to it's operation in order to get out of any financial responsibility. And so yes once a large ship enters the Canal there is no going back, so the Train has to wait as maritime traffic has the right of way subject to Army Corps of Engineers Canal Control who is in charge of the bridge and it's drop schedule.

Falmouth Secondary to Otis wrote: ↑Mon Jun 07, 2021 8:44 am And so yes once a large ship enters the Canal there is no going back, so the Train has to wait as maritime traffic has the right of way subject to Army Corps of Engineers Canal Control who is in charge of the bridge and it's drop schedule.

Yes. I have sat there quite a few times watching things at the bridge and noted that the current is very strong through there.

Made me wonder if anyone ever considered placing some underwater turbines along the canal to generate electricity.

A couple of years ago a underwater turbine test platform has been put in place on the Buzzards bay side of the Canal next to the Railroad Bridge. There is a strong current for testing turbine development at this location to be used anywhere in the world, as well as the Canal itself.

It's negotiation between the state & the federal government. They can decide anything they want, and it will still be much cheaper than new Hudson River tunnels, lol. If the RR controls the rights, the ship has to wait outside the canal for the train. If the feds control the train has to wait.

The Final meeting of the Advisory Committee for the Cape Cod Rail Study is tonight at 5:30 pm. The meeting will be hosted on Zoom.

Study info an Zoom details can be found here - https://www.capecodcommission.org/our-w ... rail-study

Train60, thank you for posting the link to the Cape Rail Study. While not directly related to rail service to Falmouth, it clearly does show the importance and value that rail service provides to the Cape. I plan to attach this in my note to Senator Moran. For what its worth though, correspondence from the Mass DOT did tell me that a rail with trail was considered but, not done at the time to save money. What is important here is this demonstrates there is room for both which would be a win-win.

Again, no promises but, nothing ventured, nothing gained.

Other interesting stuff in this thread regarding the power generation with the canal current. Having ridden in a private boat through there I thought the current is incredible.

Starting yesterday at the former North Falmouth RR Station parking lot site 2 new gates have been installed in the cyclone fencing and a platform of some type is to be installed, according to workers on site. Could be just for the CCCRR Dinner train as they have used a plywood ramp and unwired the fence in the past for summer departures from North Falmouth. Time will tell as we'll see what type of platform appears and who actually stops there, as this new development will probably stir up the Bike path groups continued opposition to the use of the Rails.

Arborwayfan wrote: ↑Sun Jun 06, 2021 9:39 pm I'm still confused how the Corps was able to trade fixing the bridge for getting control of the bridge/getting priority for shipping. The railroad was there first. Building and maintaining the bridge is an expense caused building and maintaining the canal, not the railroad (maybe minus something for what the RR had paid for what must have been a fairly small bridge over the brook or inlet that was there before the canal). Shouldn't the canal (ie the Corps) have had to pay to keep the bridge in good shape forever, without having a bargaining chip to get control away from the railroad (ie the commonwealth and its tenants)? Does the state, rather than the corps, have to pay to maintain the highway bridges?

I will, however, second the fact that stopping a ship is harder than stopping a train, especially when the ship is running with the current.

It would have to be researched, but it is not unusual for multiple federal agencies to be involved in such matters. The US Coast Guard, which has regulatory authority over bridge openings over all navigable waterways, may well have participated. The federal law is that ships and boats have priority over trains at all times, absent a specific waiver or regulation for a specific bridge from the Coast Guard. The fact that the railroad may have been there first is essentially irrelevant to the Coast Guard's decision making process.

About 6 miles of rack would have to be re-laid along side the rail trail to reach Falmouth depot which ironically still has a constructed but never used unloading ramp built back in the late 80's next to the set of double tracks that are also still next to the depot. The cost of this is a drop in the bucket when compared to the boondoggle idea of a third canal bridge that would do nothing for the vehicle traffic on the Cape.