Friday, April 8, 2016

Regarding "Grant Avenue Station"


My question about the "Muse" part of a name for a West End development apparently also triggered interest in the "Grant Avenue Station" part.

To my knowledge, there is no plan to rebuild a station on the former site, but the city will be emphasizing transit-oriented development in the West End based on available bus connections and possibly with connectors such as jitneys.

Back in 2006, there was a notion that Plainfield could have four "transit villages," two around the existing train stations and two around the Grant and Clinton stations, which no longer exist. Actually, the transit village designation goes to the municipality, not to an internal location.
In 2011, Plainfield's concept of  four transit hubs sparked advice from development experts to get more involved in policy-making to make the most of its position on the Raritan Valley Line. Officials and residents began lobbying for the "one-seat ride" to New York and participated more in meetings of the Raritan Valley Coalition.

After more years of work and planning, Plainfield received transit village designation in March 2014. Limited one-seat rides also began that month.

While the two West End stations no longer exist, there are many buses serving the city. As noted in the article linked above, "Each weekday, riders can board any one of 35 buses to Newark, or 39 buses to New York. And just as importantly, seven bus routes provide access to local destinations, particularly those within Union County."

--Bernice

4 comments:

  1. There was brief talk a couple of years ago that NJ Transit was exploring the use of dual-use vehicles that could ride the roads and rails. The concept would add greater flexibility to routing decisions and reduce road congestion. Plainfield's West-end was thought to be a possible location for a hub where the vehicles could make the switch.

    http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0386111214602302

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. A most interesting concept. The big problem would be
      the logistics for the rail trips.

      Delete
  2. Back in the day when we were talking school construction, there was a plan to build a middle school on that property. There was talk then about rebuilding the Grant Ave station to go along with the school. There was also a committee with towns along the Raritan Valley corridor (memory fails me on the changes they wanted to make), at the time Councilwoman Elizabeth Urquhart was our representative. Then it all fell by the wayside.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Current FRA regulations make these dual-use vehicles for revenue service impractical. The FRA requires strength and weight of passenger cars to be sufficient to withstand collisions with heavy freight cars. These regulations make the passenger cars too heavy for street use. Dual-use vehicles are used for maintenance equipment because the tracks are put out of service to all other equipment when maintenance is in progress. Lighter weight equipment can be used if regular weight equipment is prohibited from using the tracks during the light weight equipment period of use. This is implemented on the NJT River Line where light weight self-propelled diesel cars use the tracks during the day and freight trains use the tracks at night. This cannot be done with the Raritan Valley Line because it uses the ConRail Lehigh Line and the Amtrak NEC for part of its journey which are used by freight and regular weight passenger equipment.

    ReplyDelete