QuoteTo Braddock, the prospect of a railroad track for freight trains being built through this part of Jacksonville is toxic.
http://jacksonville.com/news/metro/2012-09-15/story/prospect-railroad-line-being-built-through-northside-has-residents-edge
Quote"The poor old Northside gets the short end of a lot of sticks," he said. "This is quiet country out here. No disrespect for a railroad, but I can't understand them wanting to go through new uncharted territory in this day and time."
Meanwhile in other parts of the country: Nation's ports get ready for boost from Panama Canal (http://www.nola.com/business/index.ssf/2012/09/ports_get_ready_for_boost_from.html)
QuoteNearly $14 billion is expected to be spent maintaining and upgrading the nation's ports and inland waterways in the next eight years, but that won't be enough to take full advantage of the soon-to-be-completed widening of the Panama Canal, according to a report (http://www.asce.org/uploadedFiles/Infrastructure/Failure_to_Act/Failure%20To%20Act%20Ports%20Economic%20Report.pdf) released Thursday by the American Society of Civil Engineers.
From the report:
QuoteTo accommodate anticipated growth in trade and domestic waterborne traffic, total public investment needs are expected to exceed $30 billion by 2020. This includes both navigational dredging and operation and maintenance needs for both marine dredging and inland waterways and marine ports. It does not include private sector investments to improve the port facilities themselves or improving connections to surrounding roads and rail systems to reduce congestion experienced by trucks entering and exiting port facilities. By 2040, these needs are expected to reach $92 billion. The U.S. will be left with a funding gap of nearly $46 billion if current investment trends continue, based on the annual budgets for navigational purposes.
The poor old Northside is probably the least densly populated area of town. If they need a line from the port to move product west, the Northside is the most logical place to put it. Crossing the river twice to send it through another area of town doesn't make any sense. Taking it through the Northside allows materials to be shipped west and north.
Just because a rail line passes through the area doesn't mean the place is going to suddenly see warehouses pop up everywhere, the idea is to get product through town and onto its final destination not into a warehouse on the Northside.
Umm, having warehouses and manufacturing plants pop up along a rail line would be more economically beneficial than track housing......just saying.
Quote from: thelakelander on September 16, 2012, 02:29:18 PM
Umm, having warehouses and manufacturing plants pop up along a rail line would be more economically beneficial than track housing......just saying.
I am not disputing that, but the purpose of the line is to have a better way to transport product through town.
No doubt. My response was to this quote in the article:
QuoteAside from his property ownership, he said a new rail line runs counter to his area of the Northside being a place for residential neighborhoods.
They've been dreaming of some sort of spread out low density Oakleaf style development for years up there. Those types of developments are economic pits for taxpayers.
(https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-2Me5gbxpaEA/TWckdY4LwqI/AAAAAAAAEpA/pMhs4qllX2M/s800/A-MAP-RAILROADS-JAXPORT-LINK.JPG)
http://www.metrojacksonville.com/article/2008-apr-a-solution-to-jaxports-rail-logistics-problem
What an original idea! I believe MJ had this on the board in 2008 or earlier. NOTE that I included a branch line from the red proposed route that shoots northward into the free trade zone, THERE'S YOUR WAREHOUSE! The red route on the map is 100% within the very broad JEA transmission line right-of-way.
Quote(http://www.uncanny.net/~wetzel/freightneardolores.JPG)
Headed to Long Beach, and YES I did ride this line on the Interurban!
(http://www.railroadpix.com/images/freight/fre_img_18/Alameda-south.jpg)
The same basic area today!
Meanwhile re-re-re-reading the stuff, the door still seems open for a down the road Jax-Port buyout of the lines from I-295 and Main, southward to Springfield. CSX didn't deny 36 hours to get cars from the island to Moncrief as both the curse and the blessing of railroading is consolidation of the loads. Not enough, and they'll sit until it makes sense to move them. But that blade cuts both ways, for example, consigned to FEC or NS and maybe it will take 45 hours to get downtown! We NEED universal access and we are going to need it sooner not later. If the authority is smart and they go ahead with an intermodal make up facility, they'll own it lock-stock and barrel, and it will be designed to somehow tie into the old Trout river bridge and access for EVERY carrier. Just look what the port of Los Angeles or Long Beach did with the Alameda Corridor! (err uh, a former INTERURBAN railway for the most part).
Ocklawaha
« Last Edit: April 24, 2008, 08:21:19 PM by Ocklawaha »
Yeah, we've "heard" about the concept of a belt railroad and the idea of a publicly owned rail line into the port for years now. Just goes to show that eventually many ideals expressed and debated here pick up steam.
With that said, would it make more sense to just attempt to buyout the existing line from CSX? On the surface..
1. It would be cheaper
2. You'd eliminate duplicity (a belt would parallel the existing line for miles between Dames Point and Main Street)
3. More Context Sensitive (the JEA ROW is directly adjacent to several residential neighborhoods)
4. The existing corridor is better suited for passenger rail between DT and the airport.
Excellent ideas. Some may say trains are noisy and when they roll past, everything stops. Perhaps, but each double stack container car on a train is 2 less 18 wheelers tying up traffic in town. Same for auto rack cars. I believe an auto rack can carry more cars than an auto hauling truck. And a rail tank car can hold more product than a tank truck, and so on, and so on.
^If I lived in these Northside residential neighborhoods below, I'd protest having a freight railroad being constructed in my backyard.
(http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/Other/mi/i-BQCmtV6/0/M/ROW-4-M.jpg)
(http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/Other/mi/i-k5cb9Dj/0/M/ROW-3-M.jpg)
(http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/Other/mi/i-BcSx634/0/M/ROW-1-M.jpg)
In addition, if we're investing hundreds of millions in infrastructure, we better be making sure it can stimulate enough development along the entire corridor to pay for itself. While we normally focus on unsustainable roads, I'd say this concept of getting your ROI applies to rail as well. That means, not only do you want port development, you also want warehouses, manufacturing, distribution hubs, etc. to eventually line this thing. You don't give yourself a chance for that type of infill if all you're traveling through is wetlands and residential subdivisions.
I agree that there isn't much need at this moment for a new railroad when the line south through the northside is underused. However, with much traffic growth, the northside 's' line could easily be purchased and used for Light-Rail, allowing CSX or a terminal company to switch line side industries at night. Such a deal would cramp the port traffic into a very narrow nocturnal window. In this case the new route, would be a bonus. I see a couple of major benefits to building this route.
1. neutral access by all carriers
2. an unrestricted route to all connections.
3. eliminate obstructions to a city owned 'S' commuter route, which is more suited to light rail then traditional commute service.
4. no need to duplicate the track from Blount Island to Main Street, a simple jog north alongside the CSX 'S' then a crossing under the JEA route to head west.
Either the City, State, JPA, JAA, or JTA need to act soon or the door on either option will slam shut and this cargo will move to a new revitalized Port Canaveral or Savannah.
HERE IS A PHOTO TOUR OF THE JEA ROUTE:
(http://inlinethumb46.webshots.com/51693/2306410140104969885S600x600Q85.jpg)
CSX train on north Main crossing the street from the Blount Island branchline.
(http://inlinethumb45.webshots.com/49260/2276954770104969885S600x600Q85.jpg)
Looking North from the crossing of the Blount Island Branchline on north Main.
(http://inlinethumb04.webshots.com/50819/2753984260104969885S600x600Q85.jpg)
About 2,000 feet north of the crossing on north Main, we see the JEA right-of-way.
(http://inlinethumb36.webshots.com/52451/2518456710104969885S600x600Q85.jpg)
Here is the view west from north Main looking west across the CSX along the JEA route.
(http://inlinethumb40.webshots.com/49639/2423596160104969885S600x600Q85.jpg)
Looking west from Biscayne Blvd, a second branchline north from this point would go right into the Free Trade Zone at JIA.
(http://inlinethumb16.webshots.com/48975/2275044300104969885S600x600Q85.jpg)
This is the view where the JEA route crosses Old Kings Road and the CSX mainline, a junction here would put Jaxport trains on the fast track north.
(http://inlinethumb48.webshots.com/51823/2595062530104969885S600x600Q85.jpg)
Looking south from Sycamore Street in the far west side, in the distance the JEA lines cross the NS/FEC mainline.
(http://inlinethumb32.webshots.com/50783/2750743650104969885S600x600Q85.jpg)
About 600 feet west of these houses on Fox Tail Lane, the JEA lines cross the NS/FEC route right at the junction of the NS branchline into Westlake Industrial Park.
HERE IS WHAT WE ALREADY HAVE:
(http://inlinethumb11.webshots.com/52042/2713624920104969885S600x600Q85.jpg)
CSX Intermodal Yard as seen from the Prichard Road overpass, looking north.
(http://inlinethumb47.webshots.com/50222/2959068930104969885S600x600Q85.jpg)
NS Intermodal Yard (Simpson Yard) as seen looking east-southeast from the Edgewood Avenue overpass.
(http://inlinethumb26.webshots.com/51417/2827545820104969885S600x600Q85.jpg)
FEC Intermodal Yard, rail yard, and shops seen from Baymeadows Road overpass looking north.
Quote from: Ocklawaha on September 16, 2012, 06:21:16 PM
I agree that there isn't much need at this moment for a new railroad when the line south through the northside is underused. However, with much traffic growth, the northside 's' line could easily be purchased and used for Light-Rail, allowing CSX or a terminal company to switch line side industries at night. Such a deal would cramp the port traffic into a very narrow nocturnal window. In this case the new route, would be a bonus. I see a couple of major benefits to building this route.
1. neutral access by all carriers
2. an unrestricted route to all connections.
3. eliminate obstructions to a city owned 'S' commuter route, which is more suited to light rail then traditional commute service.
4. no need to duplicate the track from Blount Island to Main Street, a simple jog north alongside the CSX 'S' then a crossing under the JEA route to head west.
Couldn't this be resolved by increasing capacity between Eastport Road and the Springfield yard? You'd have to replace the Trout River Bridge but that would still be significantly cheaper with less environmental concerns and negative quality of life impacts to Northside residents. Both CSX and NS could still own their rail corridors that branch off the S-Line.
QuoteEither the City, State, JPA, JAA, or JTA need to act soon or the door on either option will slam shut and this cargo will move to a new revitalized Port Canaveral or Savannah.
I think we've already lost this one but we can still carve out our niche and still be fine economically.
Here is a series of photos of the New River Bridge on the Tri-Rail/CSX line in Fort Lauderdale. Needless to say the old bridge designed for freight and passenger trains was a major bottleneck to frequent commuter train service. FDOT and Tri-Rail managed to come up with the money for a new bridge that wipes out the bottle neck for the short, fast, passenger trains. The Trout River is far wider, but pretty shallow, it shouldn't be very hard to come up with a bridge that allows for some minor boat traffic to pass without the need for a draw span.
If we went with the old 'S' route all the way into Springfield Yard, using a rebuilt 'S' into Jacksonville Terminal, as well as the NS access to Springfield Yard, and the CSX access from the westside, we could probably dedicate one track for freight and one for light rail, both with passing sidings on each side of the bridge which would equal 4 tracks for a short distance in Panama and Imeson.
(http://inlinethumb11.webshots.com/49866/2862761150104969885S600x600Q85.jpg)
(http://inlinethumb10.webshots.com/2377/2419449970104969885S600x600Q85.jpg)
(http://inlinethumb21.webshots.com/52244/2846509410104969885S600x600Q85.jpg)
(http://inlinethumb05.webshots.com/50884/2934714670104969885S600x600Q85.jpg)
(http://inlinethumb17.webshots.com/51664/2691422410104969885S600x600Q85.jpg)
I'll say this much, I was raised on the northside off Buffalo on 55th street in Panama Park. My parents house is at the end of the street, next to railroad tracks. It takes nothing to get used to the noise. Your windows may rattle for a few minutes, but you get used to it. LOL I swear as an adult Im immune to trains. LOL
^ I was thinking the same thing.
My grandparents lived near 21st & Liberty, near both S lines & the NS (then Southern) local. Trains went by so often we didnt even hear them.
When they moved to Arliington, Gramma complained she couldnt sleep because it was too quiet.
If we went with the old 'S' route all the way into Springfield Yard, using a rebuilt 'S' into Jacksonville Terminal, as well as the NS access to Springfield Yard, and the CSX access from the westside, we could probably dedicate one track for freight and one for light rail, both with passing sidings on each side of the bridge which would equal 4 tracks for a short distance in Panama and Imeson.
This proves something Ive been saying for years: Pulling up the S line was one of the stupidest things CSuX has ever done.
Quote from: BackinJax05 on September 17, 2012, 02:51:50 AM
^ I was thinking the same thing.
My grandparents lived near 21st & Liberty, near both S lines & the NS (then Southern) local. Trains went by so often we didnt even hear them.
The major difference here is that the trains were there before the houses were. It's one thing to make a decision to live next to a railroad track, highway or airport. It's another when you make a decision not too and that land use decides to move next to you.
Aww, Lake, you take the fun out of everything ;)