Mnanayunk Bridge Trail

**MTEMPLE** · 04-13-2011, 01:32 PM

Very nice idea

Manayunk bridge awaits major rail to trail transformation | PlanPhilly: Planning Philadelphia's Future

**mixiboi** · 05-05-2011, 02:28 PM

More info:

Destination Schuylkill River - DestinationSchuylkillRiver: Design underway for Manayunk bridge trail

**desolate** · 05-05-2011, 02:58 PM

I don't like to see major transportation expenses being wasted.

But I am fearful of any other plans of re-use (like for an ACTUAL RAIL LINE)

would meet the same wrath I seem to face at times.

**Sailaway** · 05-05-2011, 04:22 PM

Bad idea. Extremely bad idea.

**Politburo** · 05-06-2011, 07:30 AM

Yeah, much better to just let it sit unused.

**Colin P. Varga** · 05-06-2011, 08:09 AM

To get trains on this bridge again would take around 10 million dollars (back in the 1990's) just do cosmetic work the bridge still needs. It has had cosmetic work done only to the area over Main St., the canal, and the parking lot on Venice Island. This is to stop pieces of it from falling onto people and cars. If trains were running on top it would certainly lose more pieces without additional work done to it. The bridge is almost 100 years old and it would be easy to imagine that it might need some structural work as well.

If trains were to run on this line another expense would be to build a new and additional Manayunk train station. I suspect SEPTA cannot justify nor get the public to fund building another train station about 200 ft. from an existing one. Oh, and all new track from Cynwyd to Manayunk will be needed.

While some people are train enthusiasts and would like see choo-choos running on this line just to get an erection, and others just don't want to see cyclists anywhere, and some others want great rail transportation for Philly what is needed to stop this project which is near the end of its enactment is this:

1. To get SEPTA and Lower Merion to completely reverse a project that is nearly finished.

2. To get additional SEPTA funding for bridge repair, new track, new station, and for more service to an area with service already. And then wait for the work to be finished. By that time we'll all be driving flying cars.

The most likely scenario without the current project for the bridge would probably be just sit and rot as it did when SEPTA announced that train service would be restored back in the 1990's.

**Nightman** · 05-06-2011, 08:40 AM

I am glad they are reparing that bridge and making it into something it holds a ton of memories for me and I would be bummed to see it go.

**desolate** · 05-06-2011, 10:36 AM

Originally Posted by Colin P. Varga

To get trains on this bridge again would take around 10 million dollars (back in the 1990's) just do cosmetic work the bridge still needs. It has had cosmetic work done only to the area over Main St., the canal, and the parking lot on Venice Island. This is to stop pieces of it from falling onto people and cars. If trains were running on top it would certainly lose more pieces without additional work done to it. The bridge is almost 100 years old and it would be easy to imagine that it might need some structural work as well.

If trains were to run on this line another expense would be to build a new and additional Manayunk train station. I suspect SEPTA cannot justify nor get the public to fund building another train station about 200 ft. from an existing one. Oh, and all new track from Cynwyd to Manayunk will be needed.

While some people are train enthusiasts and would like see choo-choos running on this line just to get an erection, and others just don't want to see cyclists anywhere, and some others want great rail transportation for Philly what is needed to stop this project which is near the end of its enactment is this:

1. To get SEPTA and Lower Merion to completely reverse a project that is nearly finished.

2. To get additional SEPTA funding for bridge repair, new track, new station, and for more service to an area with service already. And then wait for the work to be finished. By that time we'll all be driving flying cars.

The most likely scenario without the current project for the bridge would probably be just sit and rot as it did when SEPTA announced that train service would be restored back in the 1990's.

It's a really expensive bridge that we will continue to maintain for a dozen or so daily "users"

It's nice they are re-using it.

It's not as nice that it's for such a small fraction of users.

Thankfully you should be able to use this for jogging/walking if the bikes don't scream and yell you're in their way like on Kelly Drive.

Roads carry goods and people

Rail carries goods and people.

Trails carry recreational users.

so to pay for upkeep for recreation does seem a bit like waste...

....to appease a very vocal minority that happens to be the latest fad in transportation.

**desolate** · 05-06-2011, 10:43 AM

Originally Posted by Colin P. Varga

To get trains on this bridge again would take around 10 million dollars (back in the 1990's) just do cosmetic work the bridge still needs. It has had cosmetic work done only to the area over Main St., the canal, and the parking lot on Venice Island. This is to stop pieces of it from falling onto people and cars. If trains were running on top it would certainly lose more pieces without additional work done to it. The bridge is almost 100 years old and it would be easy to imagine that it might need some structural work as well.

If trains were to run on this line another expense would be to build a new and additional Manayunk train station. I suspect SEPTA cannot justify nor get the public to fund building another train station about 200 ft. from an existing one. Oh, and all new track from Cynwyd to Manayunk will be needed.

While some people are train enthusiasts and would like see choo-choos running on this line just to get an erection, and others just don't want to see cyclists anywhere, and some others want great rail transportation for Philly what is needed to stop this project which is near the end of its enactment is this:

1. To get SEPTA and Lower Merion to completely reverse a project that is nearly finished.

2. To get additional SEPTA funding for bridge repair, new track, new station, and for more service to an area with service already. And then wait for the work to be finished. By that time we'll all be driving flying cars.

The most likely scenario without the current project for the bridge would probably be just sit and rot as it did when SEPTA announced that train service would be restored back in the 1990's.

Also,

Don't like trains blocking off the Schuylkll River Trail?

Well you're best chance of stopping that by removing that line down in Center City and moving freight from the Pennsy Cut and Fairmount Park was lost by the conversion.

There's always a downside and an upside to any project.

**hammersklavier** · 05-06-2011, 11:49 AM

Originally Posted by Sailaway

Bad idea. Extremely bad idea.

Eh, I'm all for a compromise here. Given that beyond the Pencoyd Viaduct the ex-RDG (still in use) and PRR (abandoned) lines duplicated each other, I don't really see why converting Pencoyd proper is a bad idea.

That said, I have opined before the Cynwyd Trail is a horrible idea. Extending the Cynwyd Line to a Schuylkill Expressway-accessible park and ride would have been a win in so many ways, including (but not limited to) a massive jump in Cynwyd Line ridership, removal of some cars on the Expressway before you hit some of the worst bottlenecks (Belmont Curve, 30th Street), and using the Pencoyd as bike access path to a third Manayunk-area station (the first two being Manayunk and Ivy Ridge, of course). I don't doubt a retrofit of the Cynwyd Trail is possible, but that's where the rail line needs to go.

Originally Posted by desolate

Also,

Don't like trains blocking off the Schuylkll River Trail?

Well you're best chance of stopping that by removing that line down in Center City and moving freight from the Pennsy Cut and Fairmount Park was lost by the conversion.

There's always a downside and an upside to any project.

I'm not sure what you're trying to get at with that. The trains blocking the Banks are on a New York line. The Pencoyd Viaduct is on a line that went to Reading. A wee bit out of the way, if you ask me.

The active NS freight line feeds from the old Reading (freight) main into the High Line nowadays, and south of Arsenal wye there's another junction where the CSX and NS lines diverge. CSX uses the High Line as a double-stack cutoff and both railroads (and Canadian Pacific, believe it or not) share trackage rights down the Delaware Extension (i.e. the 25th Street Elevated), only accessible via the single-track Arsenal bridge--which wyes into the High Line. NS freights use the Northeast Corridor.

In my opinion, one of the reasons why Amtrak's plan is so badly overengineered is because it retains these duplicate mains. IMO the smartest option would be to build up the CSX (former B&O) route from D.C. to New York into a main strong enough to handle both railroads while shifting the NEC into a passenger-dominant line where freights only service local customers (accessing them via spur cutoffs at strategic points, rather than running nightly service as a single train all the way down the line). As it is the NS main on the NEC is a secondary main while the CSX main is a primary main, too.

While freights are somewhat time-separated from passenger runs, lighter freight service will still result in faster passenger trips. Again, overly narrow thinking resulting in serious overengineering.

**thoth** · 05-06-2011, 12:51 PM

Isn't maintaining the structure for recreational uses way cheaper than bringing it back up to code for train use?

**Politburo** · 05-06-2011, 12:51 PM

Originally Posted by desolate

so to pay for upkeep for recreation does seem a bit like waste...

....to appease a very vocal minority that happens to be the latest fad in transportation.

Obvious troll is obvious.

**Sailaway** · 05-06-2011, 01:26 PM

Originally Posted by Politburo

Yeah, much better to just let it sit unused.

Yes, it IS much better than turning it into a bike trail and have entitled dbags whine and complain - or worse, file lawsuits - when a transportation agency wants to restore a line back to it's original use.

**billy ross** · 05-06-2011, 01:46 PM

Originally Posted by desolate

It's a really expensive bridge that we will continue to maintain for a dozen or so daily "users"

It's nice they are re-using it.

It's not as nice that it's for such a small fraction of users.

Thankfully you should be able to use this for jogging/walking if the bikes don't scream and yell you're in their way like on Kelly Drive.

Roads carry goods and people

Rail carries goods and people.

Trails carry recreational users.

so to pay for upkeep for recreation does seem a bit like waste...

....to appease a very vocal minority that happens to be the latest fad in transportation.

You have zero sense of what it takes to create a sense of place.

This plan uses existing infrastructure and for very little money repurposes it for another use. It doesn't even preclude the original use of the bridge, which has been 100% dormant since 1986. I note that the first bridge on the Newtown Line above the Fox Chase Station, abandoned for about the same time, has already been removed. I tried to walk it not too long ago but I was forced to turn back and I was very bitter. This repurposing of this bridge ensures that the same thing won't happen on the Ivy Ridge Line.

**billy ross** · 05-06-2011, 02:01 PM

Originally Posted by Sailaway

Yes, it IS much better than turning it into a bike trail and have entitled dbags whine and complain - or worse, file lawsuits - when a transportation agency wants to restore a line back to it's original use.

SEPTA still owns the ROW. SEPTA retains the option of cancelling the lease and restoring the ROW, with no money spent for eminent domain / land seizure. Meanwhile, the lessee is on the hook to keep the ROW from becoming overgrown, which would be a disaster. I have already tried to bushwhack this very line from the Ivyridge station to the Port Royal rails-to-trails trailhead and it is impassable even in early March, when all of the undergrowth is still died down. Conversely I hiked this very line from the Ivy Ridge Station to the very bridge in question just last week, and it is clear and passable thanks to the efforts of the Ivy Ridge Trail people, who removed literally mountains of debris.

You may not think of rails to trails as transportation, but I do. With traffic as bad as it is sometimes it is just easier to follow the smooth grade of a former railbed as opposed to driving in horrendous traffic.

**Politburo** · 05-06-2011, 02:03 PM

Originally Posted by Sailaway

Yes, it IS much better than turning it into a bike trail and have entitled dbags whine and complain - or worse, file lawsuits - when a transportation agency wants to restore a line back to it's original use.

I don't see any such agency stepping up to restore the line. As has been discussed to death in previous threads, if an agency did actually have the money to restore service, a very small fraction of that money could be used to add a path to one side of the bridge. Problem solved.

**Sailaway** · 05-06-2011, 02:18 PM

I seem to recall some opposition to the Newtown being in part to trail users. SEPTA may IN THEORY have the option of canceling the lease, but good luck trying to do that in the real world, at least not without a good fight. You can't give people something and take it away; it's better not to give it at all. Too many spoiled, entitled attitudes - especially around here.

As for overgrowth, I'd rather have weeds than random people traipsing through my back yard, leaving litter, used condoms, etc.

**Colin P. Varga** · 05-07-2011, 09:04 AM

Originally Posted by desolate

It's a really expensive bridge that we will continue to maintain for a dozen or so daily "users"

It's nice they are re-using it.

It's not as nice that it's for such a small fraction of users.

Thankfully you should be able to use this for jogging/walking if the bikes don't scream and yell you're in their way like on Kelly Drive.

Roads carry goods and people

Rail carries goods and people.

Trails carry recreational users.

so to pay for upkeep for recreation does seem a bit like waste...

....to appease a very vocal minority that happens to be the latest fad in transportation.

You had years to organize train traffic on this bridge, and years to raise the money. It's not going to happen in the near future without a major shift in the minds of elected officials in Lower Merion and a change in management at SEPTA, and someone that will stand up in Philadelphia and say we need more money to fix a 100 year old bridge, and more to maintain it, and more to build a new station about 200 ft. from an existing station.

The choice right now is let the bridge fall down, tear it down, or put a recreational trail on it. Cry all you want but the choice was made by lack of interest in train travel by the public at-large.

Design contracts awarded for Manayunk bridge trail

**Bob_Head** · 05-07-2011, 10:48 AM

Originally Posted by Sailaway

Yes, it IS much better than turning it into a bike trail and have entitled dbags whine and complain - or worse, file lawsuits - when a transportation agency wants to restore a line back to it's original use.

Usually, I'd agree with you. But in this case, I don't see that happening. Restoring that line is hugely unlikely, since it connects to what would be a redundant ROW. The same for the Chester Valley Trail and the old Stafford branch of the P&W (now the Radnor Trail). Those lines fell into disuse for real reasons, and the conditions that created those reasons haven't changed all that much. While some ROW should be preserved for possible future reuse, face it, some of these lines are never going to see rail traffic again. When SEPTA can't half-way fill one car to Cynwyd a few times a day, is there really going to be enough demand to restore the line?

**billy ross** · 05-07-2011, 01:11 PM

Originally Posted by Bob_Head

Usually, I'd agree with you. But in this case, I don't see that happening. Restoring that line is hugely unlikely, since it connects to what would be a redundant ROW. The same for the Chester Valley Trail and the old Stafford branch of the P&W (now the Radnor Trail). Those lines fell into disuse for real reasons, and the conditions that created those reasons haven't changed all that much. While some ROW should be preserved for possible future reuse, face it, some of these lines are never going to see rail traffic again. When SEPTA can't half-way fill one car to Cynwyd a few times a day, is there really going to be enough demand to restore the line?

The logic to reopening this line was to make this be the main path of the extended R6. The thinking is to get people to 30th Street as quickly as possible to facilitate airport connections. However, I feel that they should just make the extended R6 turn into the airport line when it gets to Center City - which it does already sometimes - so that you could consistently have a one seat ride from Norristown to the airport, and even from points west as the line is extended, maybe even all the way to Reading / Wyomissing. This would really take alot of pressure off of the Schuylkill Expressway, and with the appropriate speed enhancements there would be minimal need to reopen this line, although it may be nice to extend it back to Ivy Ridge eventually to facilitate use of the newly extended R6 and also the Schuylkill River Trail (which of course this trail conversion already does to an extent).

The airport line, btw, stops at University City so setting up a one seat ride to CHOP and Penn - with over 100k jobs, I think, would be great for the bedroom communities in the Schuylkill Valley. They want this R6 extension really badly, and that's why I believe that it will happen.