Another 12+ month delay for Montclair
January 31st 2008 08:29 am
Last summer, NJ Transit said the earliest weekend service could start on the Montclair Line was “the latter half of 2008″. Now, weekend service has been delayed to at least the fall of 2009.
The most recent in a line of excuses is construction work by NJDOT on the Bloomfield Avenue bridge over the railroad tracks. Note that the construction contract hasn’t been awarded yet, so the September 2009 estimate for completion of the project is exactly that - an estimate.
As the saying goes: there’s no time like the present for postponing what you don’t want to do.
The only good news is that the township is in favor of weekend service:
Mayor Ed Remsen said NJ Transit had informed Montclair of the delay. “It’s disappointing but understandable,” he said. “We’re all looking forward to it. … We’re just going to have to wait a little longer.”
Joe Versaggi responded on 31 Jan 2008 at 1:19 pm #
Hudson River tunnel work is also a factor.
NJT (the Metro-West Commuter-Only RR) is saying if you do not want to take us to Manhattan, then drive, we can’t be bothered.
alewifebp responded on 31 Jan 2008 at 9:56 pm #
UGH! The excuses are kind of weak. While we can point to work on a bridge that will be without power, Amtrak tunnel work and work at Broad Street, NJT seems to forget that they service Hoboken, and have plenty of diesel locos available for weekend service.
stuw6 responded on 31 Jan 2008 at 10:02 pm #
I’m still waiting for the advertised 30 minute, one seat ride to Manhattan from Montclair advertised in the brochure promoting Midtown Direct prior to its start. I saved it as a PDF in case anyone is interested in seeing it.
I used to get to Hoboken in 19 minutes from Walnut Street on the old Boonton Line Express. Now I’m lucky to go the 10 miles in under 40 minutes.
Remember when NJ Transit used to win awards for customer service and on-time performance?
Now their legacy is terrible customer service and a costly top heavy bureaucracy that over promises and under delivers.
gmusser responded on 31 Jan 2008 at 10:30 pm #
This is beyond ridiculuous. It’s all the more infuriating that journalists and public officials refuse to question NJ Transit’s stated excuses. What possible significance could Broad St. Station be to the Montclair line when the M&E runs through there on weekends?
I think we need to form some kind of advocacy group to push for this, starting with circulating a petition among commuters. Does NJ-ARP have a committee for this line or should we start one from scratch?
George
Joe Versaggi responded on 01 Feb 2008 at 7:57 am #
With weekend Summit-Hoboken service slashed with little notice by 60% (probably illegally), there’s plenty of room for Montclair -Hoboken service every 2 hours, even if they have to proceed under that bridge at 10MPH.
Joe Versaggi responded on 03 Feb 2008 at 8:13 am #
Then of course there’s the electrification project that most of us thought would run to Great Notch. Now that metropolis is barely on the NJT map. I don’t advovate electrifying to Denville as I don;t think the ridership justifies it, but weekend shuttles to Dover ought to run as well.
cfmrail responded on 03 Feb 2008 at 1:18 pm #
While work at Broad Street would affect both Hoboken and New York service, the inability to schedule any Montclair-Hoboken service let alone the half-hour headway that would make sense shows terminal misunderstanding of the corporate name. Virtually all of the NJT major rail lines (North Jersey Coast, the Morris and Essex, the corridor, the Raritan Valley line, the Suffern - Hoboken via Paterson, and the Wayne - Hoboken section of the Boonton line) should be run as an S-Bahn with transfers to and from all bus routes. All NJT transfers should be of the continuing trip variety.
Eine Kleine Multi-level responded on 03 Feb 2008 at 5:25 pm #
Is not ridership directly proportional to number of trains operated and where they are operated to (i.e. level and quality of service)? Population density around the Boonton Line west of Montclair is greater than that around the (electrified) Gladstone Branch; in fact, it approaches double that of the Gladstone Branch. Since the advent of MSU Superfluous Station, quality of service has degenerated on the Montclair-Boonton Line west of the end of electrification due to forcing transfers at MSU for off-peak journeys.
Would it be a worthy argument, in light of that, that the money spent on MSU and Wayne Route 23 would have been better spent on electrification to Denville?
Eine Kleine Multi-level responded on 04 Feb 2008 at 1:00 am #
(My apologies, since my prior comments were worded as an after-the-fact scenario. However, such spending ought to have a harsher spotlight shone on it in the media.)
Joe Versaggi responded on 04 Feb 2008 at 8:19 am #
No, not with 10 trains a day to High Bridge for all of 375 people, mostly a rush hour service like the Pascack has been, yet the Pascack had around 2,000 commuters.
gmusser responded on 05 Feb 2008 at 2:13 pm #
What can NJARP do to raise this issue? Meetings with NJT, commuter petitions, hunger strikes? I’ll pitch in (except for the hunger strike).
George
Jishnu Mukerji responded on 20 Feb 2008 at 9:25 am #
Irrespective of what NJT does on weekends they could fill in the lack of Eastbound service between Denville and MSU in late afternoon/early evening using the siding at Lincoln Park. Reportedly they even run an X train occasionally in that direction in that time frame, which could be run as a passenger carrying service thus enabling folks from that area (including the Wayne Rt 23 P&R by the way, to use NJT trains to get to New York for an evening out in town. But somehow even that has not been forthcoming from NJT.