Glassboro-Camden Line (Light Rail)

But where would the tunnel go in Philadelphia? To justify that kind of expense would require accommodating new additional services from all over South Jersey, and that in turn would require one or more multi-track underground stations in Philadelphia, plus a "Sunnyside" somewhere west of the Schuylkill.

Facebook has a No Camden Glassboro Light Rail group with hundreds of members. They are working hard to kill the project.

GojiMet86 wrote: ↑Sat Mar 06, 2021 1:53 pmThe track diagram is Figure 2: Proposed GCL Alignment Track Chart on page 10 of the Transit Analysis Technical Report:
http://glassborocamdenline.com/images/u ... Report.pdf

Now it all makes more sense. I was wondering how they were going to do temporal separation and get all those various branches switched out overnight. The answer is they're not. But I do wonder why Conrail is insisting on ROW for a second track to nowhere? It's all dead end terminal trackage, it's not a through route to anywhere, a single Conrail track all the way down would allow for full double tracking for GCL.

Unfortunately, like the River LINE, it's not electrified like it should be, but otherwise a pretty neat project.

Facebook has a No Camden Glassboro Light Rail group with hundreds of members. They are working hard to kill the project.

Unfortunate that the BANANAs have come out of the woodwork. Can't have those big heavy DMUs making a racket in our town, only Conrail freights are OK! Those GP-40s are so much quieter and cleaner!

One person's opinion. https://www.nj.com/opinion/2021/06/canc ... tters.html

One person's opinion indeed. Do these people not tire of the same arguments? Emergency services being disrupted by LRT? For real?

And yeah, having less transit options, requiring people to drive everywhere, is definitely better for the environment. And it would be more efficient, money- and environment-wise, to not reuse an existing ROW and instead tear up land to build some completely different routing.

To sum up, let's quote an analysis from over a decade ago that has no bearing on the current population growth patterns in the area.

The classic emergency services vehicles being disrupted by trains will always continue. It's not like we are talking very long freight trains here. We are talking light rail vehicles. Maybe those people who are living in Woodbury, Pitman, and Glassboro should get input from the residents who live in Riverside, Burlington, and Bordentown about how long those the gates stay down when RiverLine light rail trains pass. If an existing railroad right of way passes through areas where there is key development that could be a future light rail line, than it's worth considering. The Conrail line was there first in the towns that are going to be on the future Glassboro Line. If people don't like it, then time to move.

lensovet wrote: ↑Mon Jun 21, 2021 1:58 pm One person's opinion indeed. Do these people not tire of the same arguments? Emergency services being disrupted by LRT? For real?

And yeah, having less transit options, requiring people to drive everywhere, is definitely better for the environment. And it would be more efficient, money- and environment-wise, to not reuse an existing ROW and instead tear up land to build some completely different routing.

To sum up, let's quote an analysis from over a decade ago that has no bearing on the current population growth patterns in the area.

Hey, NIMBY, so, why aren't you concerned about the freight trains running now blocking EMS?
I'm surprised the "transit brings crime OHNOS" argument wasn't in that.

Yes given the fact that the light rail’s northernmost stop will be in one of NJ’s most dangerous cities. Camden will also be the transfer point to travel to Philly.

Even though Conrail only runs one train between North Vineland and Woodbury I’m not entirely sure if they will play along with temporal separation.

https://conrail.effectivdev.com/wp-cont ... ration.pdf

Bracdude181 wrote: ↑Sat Feb 19, 2022 8:29 pm Even though Conrail only runs one train between North Vineland and Woodbury I’m not entirely sure if they will play along with temporal separation.

https://conrail.effectivdev.com/wp-cont ... ration.pdf

Isn't most of that trackage double-tracked anyway? It's amazing to me how pre-collapse of the railroad industry in the 1960s, freight and passenger operated without much issue, ESPECIALLY when both had FAR more usage back then.

The entire Vineland Secondary is a single track with one siding and a yard in Woodbury

Also there is some law somewhere that says light rail trains cannot share tracks with freight trains unless the trains are separated temporally.

The NJ transit river line works around this by running freight only at night.

Yeah but it says in the link I provided many of the customers had to adjust their operations to accept nighttime deliveries and Conrail reported that operating costs went up. A lot of customers left too but idk if the operation shift was solely to blame for that.

My double-track comment was regarding the River Line and not the Vineland Secondary. Can they not run light rail on one track and freight on the other? In either case, the GCL shouldn't be light rail, it should be like the Princeton Dinky; commuter rail with very short trains. NJT's light rail seems to be a way to put more of the cost on someone else (like Conrail) while saving them a few bucks.

Bracdude181 wrote: ↑Sat Feb 19, 2022 10:28 pm Yeah but it says in the link I provided many of the customers had to adjust their operations to accept nighttime deliveries and Conrail reported that operating costs went up. A lot of customers left too but idk if the operation shift was solely to blame for that.

NJ has gotten far less friendly for business in general since the River Line's inception, so it could be that too.