.
Light Trainrail through our town???
Just some thoughts to think about....
Sincerely,
Friends of Wenonah
Almost ten years ago in the fall of 1996 New Jersey Transit performed a “Major Investment Study” (MIS) in our region. Its stated purpose was to determine the feasibility and desirability of constructing light-rail mass-transit facilities from However even prior to the MIS study the idea of reintroducing rail passenger service to the tri-county area was not new, having been proposed many times by the Delaware River Port Authority starting as far back as 1936. (see attachment A)
The 1975 DRPA study entitled “Mass Transportation Development Program of the
The 1975 study was very competently done being financed in part by a grant from the U.S. Department of Transportation, Urban Mass Transportation Administration (UMTA). It was completed and released in December, 1975 and performed by Gannett Fleming Corddry and Carpenter, Inc. and Bellante, Clauss, Miller and Nolan, Inc., a Joint Venture of world-class engineering firms with excellent credentials.
The study examined every foot of the existing old rail facilities and concluded with the recommendation that a high-speed rail line in the median of Route 55 be utilized instead of using the old tracks.
The reason given for this recommendation was that “Although a Glassboro Line alignment following the PRSL Furthermore The DRPA MIS study was quite clear that in exchange for the hundreds of millions of federal dollars the new facilities would cost, it would most certainly be required to comply with federal transportation regulations of the Urban Mass Transportation Administration (UMTA) caling for complete coordination between rail transit and bus service within a region as a requisite for funding assistance.
UMTA required that all types of transportation be considered including heavy-rail rapid transit service, light rail transit systems, standard type bus service, as well as transportation service by demand activated bus systems, personal rapid transit systems and other alternative transport concepts even mentioning taxi services. Most of the more recent studies have been exceedingly weak concerning the use of alternative facilities.
And now the planning process has returned back to where it started with yet another study by the Delaware River Port Authority. Only this time there are significant differences. For example this is the first time that alternatives using the rights of ways of major highway Routes 42 and 55 are included in the study. Also the cost estimates have been made much more realistic with cost predictions of $77 to $96 million per mile for use of the existing rail route. Why are projected construction costs for the existing rail right of way so high? Because to counter previous criticisms about interfering with auto traffic at grade crossings the tracks wil be sunk into deep pits, or possibly even elevated, to provide unobstructed roadway crossings. Without question this form of construction and operation will have a devastating impact on the region, especially the residential areas of the communities it travels through. This aspect of the current DRPA plan is not being trumpeted but once local officials and residents become aware of it there will be a great outcry against the proposal.
Unfortunately this new study also appears to be repeating the mistakes of past studies by failing to recognize and address the need for cross-county corridor roads and other forms of mass transit to get the majority of people in
Statistics developed during the 1996 MIS study revealed the following;
1. Employment growth predictions,
2. In 1990 12% of
3. Auto trips into the region are expected to increase by 44% in next 30-years as employment sites on the “periphery” continue to attract workers living outside the region. (Pg. 1-12) Not mentioned was that these jobs will not be in
4. Automobile ownership in
The recurrent theme I took away from the 1996 MIS study public meetings was that a great many of the people who expressed themselves felt that any new public transportation should be located closer to the more heavily populated communities such as Washington and Monroe Townships, and the northwestern part of Deptford Township where the auto traffic is the heaviest and currently causing the most severe problems.
Placing light rail in the centerlines of Route 42 and/or Route 55 are not perfect answers, however they would provide the common sense component of placing some form of public transportation facilities where the bulk of the population is located.
However building passenger rail in the medians of the north-south highways should not be considered the final solution to the overall transportation needs in the region.
As mentioned earlier and as demographic statistics bear out, the bulk of the people in our region do not travel to just the Philadelphia and Camden downtowns, they work and shop and play in areas east and west of these highways. In places like the Cherry Hill,
It seems as though neither the money nor the political fortitude has been available in the past to tackle some of these difficult projects. At least they never seem to be mentioned as possible solutions. But now when project cost estimates in the range of $1.4 billion to $1.8 billion are being bandied about, shouldn’t we be thinking about the overall transportation needs of the region, and not just those of commuters to In closing I point out there have been at least four of these studies that I have been personally involved in starting in 1976. For anyone interested in the transportation problems in our region and concerned about the outcome of the studies I assure you it takes a lot of time to follow the study progress, attend public meetings, write letters and keep local officials up to date on what is happening. During those thirty years of my involvement auto traffic in the region has reached a crisis stage and public transit has failed to keep pace with the needs. I suggest all public officials, whether federal state or local, take heed that this study may be the last before we either start rationing time on the highways, or are forced to resort to bicycles as a means of getting around.
I urge the Delaware River Port Authority and our regional governmental representatives to concentrate on rail lines only in the two major highway rights-of-ways, Routes 42 and 55, and to give serious thought to improvements and additions to the east west roads throughout the region, and to other forms of public transportation as well.
Almost ten years ago in the fall of 1996 New Jersey Transit performed a “Major Investment Study” (MIS) in our region. Its stated purpose was to determine the feasibility and desirability of constructing light-rail mass-transit facilities from However even prior to the MIS study the idea of reintroducing rail passenger service to the tri-county area was not new, having been proposed many times by the Delaware River Port Authority starting as far back as 1936. (see attachment A) The 1975 DRPA study entitled “Mass Transportation Development Program of the The 1975 study was very competently done being financed in part by a grant from the U.S. Department of Transportation, Urban Mass Transportation Administration (UMTA). It was completed and released in December, 1975 and performed by Gannett Fleming Corddry and Carpenter, Inc. and Bellante, Clauss, Miller and Nolan, Inc., a Joint Venture of world-class engineering firms with excellent credentials. The study examined every foot of the existing old rail facilities and concluded with the recommendation that a high-speed rail line in the median of Route 55 be utilized instead of using the old tracks. The reason given for this recommendation was that “Although a Glassboro Line alignment following the PRSL Furthermore The DRPA MIS study was quite clear that in exchange for the hundreds of millions of federal dollars the new facilities would cost, it would most certainly be required to comply with federal transportation regulations of the Urban Mass Transportation Administration (UMTA) caling for complete coordination between rail transit and bus service within a region as a requisite for funding assistance. UMTA required that all types of transportation be considered including heavy-rail rapid transit service, light rail transit systems, standard type bus service, as well as transportation service by demand activated bus systems, personal rapid transit systems and other alternative transport concepts even mentioning taxi services. Most of the more recent studies have been exceedingly weak concerning the use of alternative facilities. And now the planning process has returned back to where it started with yet another study by the Delaware River Port Authority. Only this time there are significant differences. For example this is the first time that alternatives using the rights of ways of major highway Routes 42 and 55 are included in the study. Also the cost estimates have been made much more realistic with cost predictions of $77 to $96 million per mile for use of the existing rail route. Why are projected construction costs for the existing rail right of way so high? Because to counter previous criticisms about interfering with auto traffic at grade crossings the tracks will be sunk into deep pits, or possibly even elevated, to provide unobstructed roadway crossings. Without question this form of construction and operation will have a devastating impact on the region, especially the residential areas of the communities it travels through. This aspect of the current DRPA plan is not being trumpeted but once local officials and residents become aware of it there will be a great outcry against the proposal. Unfortunately this new study also appears to be repeating the mistakes of past studies by failing to recognize and address the need for cross-county corridor roads and other forms of mass transit to get the majority of people in Statistics developed during the 1996 MIS study revealed the following; 1. Employment growth predictions, 2. In 1990 12% of 3. Auto trips into the region are expected to increase by 44% in next 30-years as employment sites on the “periphery” continue to attract workers living outside the region. (Pg. 1-12) Not mentioned was that these jobs will not be in 4. Automobile ownership in The recurrent theme I took away from the 1996 MIS study public meetings was that a great many of the people who expressed themselves felt that any new public transportation should be located closer to the more heavily populated communities such as Washington and Monroe Townships, and the northwestern part of Deptford Township where the auto traffic is the heaviest and currently causing the most severe problems. Placing light rail in the centerlines of Route 42 and/or Route 55 are not perfect answers, however they would provide the common sense component of placing some form of public transportation facilities where the bulk of the population is located. However building passenger rail in the medians of the north-south highways should not be considered the final solution to the overall transportation needs in the region. As mentioned earlier and as demographic statistics bear out, the bulk of the people in our region do not travel to just the Philadelphia and Camden downtowns, they work and shop and play in areas east and west of these highways. In places like the Cherry Hill, It seems as though neither the money nor the political fortitude has been available in the past to tackle some of these difficult projects. At least they never seem to be mentioned as possible solutions. But now when project cost estimates in the range of $1.4 billion to $1.8 billion are being bandied about, shouldn’t we be thinking about the overall transportation needs of the region, and not just those of commuters to In closing I point out there have been at least four of these studies that I have been personally involved in starting in 1976. For anyone interested in the transportation problems in our region and concerned about the outcome of the studies I assure you it takes a lot of time to follow the study progress, attend public meetings, write letters and keep local officials up to date on what is happening. During those thirty years of my involvement auto traffic in the region has reached a crisis stage and public transit has failed to keep pace with the needs. I suggest all public officials, whether federal state or local, take heed that this study may be the last before we either start rationing time on the highways, or are forced to resort to bicycles as a means of getting around. I urge the Delaware River Port Authority and our regional governmental representatives to concentrate on rail lines only in the two major highway rights-of-ways, Routes 42 and 55, and to give serious thought to improvements and additions to the east west roads throughout the region, and to other forms of public transportation as well. Let us make this the last study before taking action. The time to act is now Prepared and submitted by; Jack C. Sheppard, Sr. Let us make this the last study before taking action. The time to act is now.
Rail-line funding remains a hurdle May 17, 2009 The proposed service from Camden to Glassboro may need about $15 million a year from taxpayers. By Paul Nussbaum Inquirer Staff Writer Page 1 of 2 If a proposed rail line for South Jersey is built, who will pay to run the trains? Because fares would probably cover less than half the expected $29 million annual cost of the service, the deficit would have to be made up by somebody. The most likely candidates? Commuters who use any of the Delaware River Port Authority's four toll bridges to Philadelphia. Taxpayers who provide the revenue for New Jersey's general budget. The $1.3 billion light-rail line that Gov. Corzine and port authority officials proposed last week would run 18 miles from Camden to Glassboro alongside an existing Conrail freight line to Glassboro, Pitman, Mantua, Wenonah, Woodbury, Deptford, West Deptford, Westville, Bellmawr, Brooklawn, and Gloucester City. The line would connect to PATCO and River Line trains at the Walter Rand Transportation Center in Camden, where passengers could catch trains to Philadelphia or Trenton. The first leg of the line, from Camden to Woodbury, could be operational in about five years, said John Matheussen, the port authority's chief executive. Corzine has committed $500 million in state funding to help build the line, and transit officials hope to get state, federal, and corporate funding for the rest. But many questions remain, including who would operate the trains and how the day-to-day operations would be paid for. The Delaware River Port Authority, which operates the PATCO commuter line between Philadelphia and Lindenwold, would like to run the service. But NJ Transit, which operates the state's network of 11 rail lines, has more railroad experience. In South Jersey, it runs the Atlantic City line and contracts out to Bombardier Transportation the operation of the River Line, a five-year-old light-rail line between Camden and Trenton. Richard Sarles, executive director of NJ Transit, said his agency had been working with the port authority in planning the Glassboro line. He said there would be "no turf war" over its operation. Most of NJ Transit's rail, bus, and subway operations are in northern and central New Jersey; only 11 percent are in South Jersey. "We live here. We know the region," said Robert Box, general manager of PATCO. "We'd like to do it, but no decision has been made." PATCO, like transit operators around the world, depends on a subsidy to augment its revenue from passengers. To operate its current service, PATCO gets $20 million a year from tolls on the Benjamin Franklin, Walt Whitman, Commodore Barry, and Betsy Ross Bridges. Passengers pay about 53 percent of the cost of PATCO operations. Page 2 of 2 The River Line (Camden to Trenton) collects only 9 percent of its $25 million operating costs from fares. The rest comes from New Jersey taxpayers. SEPTA's rail division, by comparison, collects 48 percent of its operating expenses from fares. Planners project that operating the rail line from Camden to Glassboro would cost about $29 million a year, with trains running every seven to eight minutes during rush hours, carrying an estimated 17,000 riders daily. Operating the line from Camden to Woodbury would cost $17 million a year, according to estimates. If fares covered about half the operating costs, that would mean an annual operating deficit of about $15 million for a Camden-Glassboro line or about $9 million for a Camden-Woodbury line. Who would pick up that tab? Probably taxpayers. "That's you and me," Matheussen said, acknowledging the limited options for transit planners. Federal money is not generally available for transit operations. Municipal and county governments "are so strapped now" they're unlikely sources, Matheussen said. Gasoline-tax revenue is generally limited to the construction, not operation, of roads and transit projects, although NJ Transit gets about $45 million in gas-tax money for its operating budget. Matheussen said the rail operator probably would "have to look to a more equitable solution than just toll payers," as the trains would serve a larger area than that served by the four port authority bridges. Bridge toll payers are already restive after a $1 increase - to $4 - in September, with another $1 raise scheduled for 2010. Teri Jover, managing director of New Jersey Future, a "smart-growth" advocate that supports the Glassboro train route, said the train deserved a subsidy from taxpayers or tollpayers, or both. "In general, infrastructure costs money, and taxpayers support those investments even though not everyone rides on them," Jover said. "Transit is a worthy investment for the state, and we have to think how to pay for it." She said tolls "should be on the table, because the trains will offset traffic on those local roads and bridges." A motorists' group agreed about the traffic relief, but disagreed about requiring drivers to pay more. "It's difficult to see a way bridge tolls should be used, but clearly there will be a benefit to South Jersey motorists through congestion mitigation," said David Weinstein, spokesman for AAA Clubs of New Jersey. "The economic benefit that a project like this creates, like we've seen with the River Line, is real, but like most passenger rail, the subsidy is big." "In the end, the entire region should benefit, so the question becomes: Is the entire region willing to chip in?"
Attention; Elliott Goldberg
Here we go again, another proponent of recreating passenger rail service on the old tracks south of
Apparently they have just become aware of the most recent of the studies by the Delaware River Port Authority (DRPA), and there have been many, that resulted in recommendations for passenger rail routes down the rights-of-way of routes 42 and 55 or on the old existing rails from Woodbury to Glassboro and possibly beyond.
Do you get the same sense as I do that these “studies” have been going on forever? Well, maybe not “forever” but certainly for a real long time. In fact there have been studies almost constantly since the first one by the Port Authority in 1936.
These studies have examined every inch of the existing old rail facilities south of
And now here we go again with yet another previously unheard of state agency, announcing they favor using the old rail route already “proven inferior” as noted above.
How many more taxpayer dollars have to be wasted studying the use of the old rail line route that if constructed, will not take people where they want to go and/or where they do go, which is not just to Camden or Philadelphia, but all over the region.
Expensive and detailed demographic statistics have proven the bulk of the people in our region do not travel to the
These destinations cannot be reached by any existing or proposed rail facilities. Most can only be reached by private automobile or public motor transit.
Nowhere in former studies has more than lip service been given to the use of motor vehicles to get people to their preferred destinations. Yet the 1996 “MIS” study by the Delaware River Port Authority was very clear that in exchange for the billions of federal dollars any new facilities would cost, it would most certainly be required to comply with federal transportation regulations of the Urban Mass Transportation Administration (UMTA). They require complete coordination between rail transit and bus service within a region as a requirement for federal funding.
In fact UMTA requires that all types of transportation be considered including heavy-rail rapid transit service, light rail transit systems, standard type bus service, as well as transportation service by demand activated bus systems, personal rapid transit systems and other alternative transport concepts even mentioning taxi services. Most of the more recent studies have been exceedingly weak concerning the use of alternative facilities. The state Office of Smart Growth apparently didn’t even give a second thought to alternative means of public transport.
Once again I am suggesting passenger rail in the medians of the north-south highways should not be considered the only solution to the overall transportation needs in the region. Especially when the projects being proposed carry cost estimates in the range of $1.4 billion to $1.8 billion (in 2006 dollars). Those are huge numbers.
Admittedly light rail in the centerlines of Route 42 and/or Route 55 could provide the common sense component of placing some form of public transportation facilities where the bulk of the population is located. However we should be studying the overall transportation needs of the region, and not just those of commuters to
And for once and for all can we please get rid of the proposal to put trains back on the old tracks south of Woodbury. How many times do we have to be told “ . . . this alignment has been proven inferior on the basis of capital costs and disruption to the local community”?
Office of Smart Growth, go back and do some studying of the previous studies of which there have been many. And keep in mind the old adage, “If you forget the past, you are doomed to repeat your failures.”
Prepared and submitted by;
Jack C. Sheppard, Sr.
Wenonah’s foundation was not built with party politics, but rather with the efforts of many great people that wanted nothing more than to see our town flourish. Those same people had a vision of family community that needs to be continued into the future. The Wenonah Republican Committee is asking you to get involved. Please let us know if you are interested in becoming a member of the Wenonah Republicans, added to our informational email list, included in our social activity’s mailings or would just like to help with a small donation. See our website to “sign up”!! 
Say a prayer for our troops
