A high-speed rail link is cause for concern for those living in Dayton
By: Matt Armstrong
&nbs
p; Freight trains lumber
through South Brunswick sporadi
cally, making houses next to the
tracks tremble ever so slight
ly.
At night,
the rumble of these slow-moving
freight trains can be enough to
wake up those who haven’t gotten
used to it yet — residents new to
the area.
Children ride their bikes to their
friends houses on the other side of
the tracks with no need to look be
fore they
cross.
This
peace and relative quiet along these
seldom used train tracks in South
Brunswick could become a fond
memory for residents as a proposed
commuter rail line through the back
yards and quiet neighborhoods of
South Brunswick residents may
soon be approach
ing.
Earlier
this month, the Assembly Trans
portation Committee approved a
bill that would add a proposed rail
line in central New Jersey to the
Circle of Mobility, a list of trans
portation projects deemed a top pri
ority by the Legislature and eligible
for federal funding. The bill will go
before the general Assembly today
(Thursday) for a vo
te.
A similar
bill (S-239) was held in the Senate
Transportation Committee for fur
ther discussion. Committee Chair
man Sen. Andrew Ciesla (R-
Ocean) heeded the concern of rep
resentatives from South Brunswick,
Jamesburg and Monroe, and said
the committee needed more inform
ation about the proposed line and
alternatives.
More than 40 residents gathered in
the rain Monday afternoon to dis
cuss strategies to oppose the rail
line through South Brunswick.
Township Council members Carol
Barrett and Ted Van Hessen attend
ed the impromptu meeting along
the quiet train
tracks.
“I am
shocked that anyone would consid
er running a train back here,” said
Nancy Ward who lives in the We
therhill housing development that is
next to the train tracks. “It’s not
even 20 feet away from these
houses.”
Res
idents said that a rail line carrying
anywhere between 10 to 42 trains a
day would destroy their quality-of-
life, severely decrease their proper
ty values, cause unneeded tax bur
den on all of New Jersey’s citizens,
present serious safety concerns for
the neighborhood children and
school buses that cross the tracks
daily and create tremendous traffic
problems in South Bruns
wick.
“It’s
totally ridiculous that they’d even
consider this,” said Bob Kearns
who lives in the Monmouth Walk
housing development next to the
train tracks. “Legislators in Mon
mouth and Ocean counties are just
trying to cram this down our
throats.”
Res
idents said their community will
suffer to make the commute for res
idents in Monmouth and Ocean
counties easi
er.
“This
train will disrupt more people’s
lives than it seeks to help,” said
Debbie Paley of Monmouth
Walk.
Resi
dents said alternative alignments —
such as one running north from
Lakewood to Red Bank — would
better serve commuters in Ocean
and Monmouth coun
ties.
Both of
these alternative alignments are op
posed by Monmouth County be
cause of potential negative commu
nity impacts, according to the 1996
NJ Transit study that evaluated 11
different mass transit options for
central New Jer
sey.
South
Brunswick residents argue that
these alignments would be more ef
ficient and even make the commute
time shorter for Monmouth and
Ocean residents who desire the
train.
“If you
want service in your county, build
the train in your county,” said Ms.
Ward. “We don’t need this line or
want it.”
“They chose to live next to the
beach and expect us to pay for it,”
said Dayton resident Mary Alice
Jefferies.
Councilman Ted Van Hessen said
this was a NIMBY issue, but that
Monmouth County is the NIM
BY.
“They
want to do this to serve their con
stituents but not at their expense,”
he said. “They are the ones that are
NIMBY.”
Mr. Van Hessen said the political
powers have made the Lakewood-
Monmouth Junction line the pre
ferred alignment by NJ Transit.
Since the alignment through South
Brunswick raises little opposition
from Monmouth County, from
those who don’t want the rail in
their backyards, it becomes easier
to create a broad amount of support
in the Legislature, said Mr. Van
Hessen.
Though they do not want this pro
posed rail line in their backyard,
South Brunswick residents said this
was not the only reason for their
opposition. They claim the propos
al doesn’t make any sense from a
economic or mass transit point of
view. Residents say taxpayers
shouldn’t have to pay for the most
expensive alignment when there are
alternatives that provide shorter
commute times and similar rider
ship estima
tes.
The 1996
NJ Transit study estimates 2,250
riders per day on the Lakewood to
Freehold to Monmouth Junction
line by the year 2010. Of these rid
ers, an estimated 600 would be
boarding the train in Jamesburg and
Englishtown.
“My husband and I love train trav
el, but when we looked at the map
we said ‘this makes no sense’ for
the people that are going to be tak
ing this train,” said Ms.
Ward.
Oppo
nents to the Lakewood-Monmouth
Junction line claim that if the train
ran from Lakewood to Freehold
then north to Matawan, ridership
would be gained in Marlboro to
make up for lost riders in English
town and Jamesburg. The line
through Matawan would cost less
and be more direct to New York
say oppo
nents.
“The
ridership for a train is in Monmouth
County,” said Mr. Van Hessen.
“We have the Northeast Corridor
line.”
The
Lakewood-Freehold-Matawan line
was not analyzed in the detail that
the Lakewood-Monmouth Junction
line or the Lakewood-Red Bank
line. South Brunswick officials said
they have yet to receive reason why
this alternative was not studied fur
ther.
Jeffrey
Warsh, executive director for NJ
Transit, said Wednesday the Mat
awan line is not an option because
the agency no longer owns the line.
It has been gifted to Monmouth
County for use in its Rails to Trails
greenway pro
gram.
The
Lakewood-to-Red Bank alternative
was studied in more detail in the
1996 report. Residents cite the
1996 NJ Transit study that esti
mates construction of the Lake
wood-Monmouth Junction line
would cost double the Lakewood-
Red Bank alternative. Also the Red
Bank alternative offers the shortest
travel time to New
York.
The
study does estimate higher rider
ship numbers for the Lakewood-
Monmouth Junction line than the
Red Bank alignment, though resi
dents questioned the validity of
these estima
tes.
“How
can a train line that goes all the way
west to go north save a commuter
time?” asked Ms. Ward. “If it
doesn’t save a commuter time, they
aren’t going to take the
train.”
Resi
dents also blasted legislators for
what they consider “malevolent”
tactics to push this rail line for
ward.
Neither
the Assembly bill or Senate bill
specify an alignment, only stating
that the train would terminate in
Lakewood and travel through cen
tral New Jer
sey.
Assem
bly Transportation Committee
Chairman Alex DeCroce deflected
opposition from Assembly mem
bers Linda Greenstein and Gary
Guear, who represent South Bruns
wick, at the committee hearing,
maintaining that the bill does not
state an alignment, thus their con
cerns about a train through South
Brunswick were
moot.
“How
can they vote on a line that has no
alignment?” asked Dayton resident
Keith Gecs who lives near the
tracks. “You have to start with a
plan to make an educated vo
te.”
If the
bills are approved and federal fund
ing is allocated for a train line, NJ
Transit would decide on an align
ment.
How
ever, NJ Transit has determined
that the Lakewood-Monmouth
Junction line is the one they will
seek funding for, and that the oth
ers would not accomplish mass
transit objective
s.
South
Brunswick residents said this is
simply a way to manipulate the is
sue to get vo
tes.
“It’s ap
palling that they would vote on
something without having all the
information,” said Ms. Ward. “It’s
a good strategy for the politicians.
They can approve this without
committing to
it.”
“They’re
playing games,” said Mr. Kearns.
“They’ve already staked this line
out.”
Resi
dents said they dealt with this issue
in 1995 when NJ Transit was anal
yzing this proposal along with oth
ers. Residents organized their op
position, sending out petitions and
voicing their con
cerns.
“We
were told back then by NJ Transit
that it was a dead issue,” said Sand
ra Zish who lives in Wetherhill.
“They said they would never move
forward without a consensus
among all the towns on the
line.”
“The
studies were done, the state money
was spent and they came up with
an evaluation. The evaluation said
that this was not a good plan. It’s a
sad state of affairs that this is how
our government works,” said Ms.
Paley.
Resi
dents have begun circulating peti
tions and sending letters to various
legislators opposing a rail line
through South Bruns
wick.
The
Township Council printed up post
cards that residents can send to the
Senate Transportation Committee,
Assembly Speaker Jack Collins (R-
Salem) and Senate President Don
ald DiFrancesco (R-Union). Resi
dents are urging all citizens of New
Jersey to write their Assembly
members asking them to vote
against the legislative bills that
could give NJ Transit the funding
to construct the most expensive,
least efficient, according to South
Brunswick offi
cials.
“This
will cost a billion dollars by the
time they’ve included all the costs,”
said Mr. Gecs. “Taxpayers
shouldn’t be responsible for
this.”
Some
residents said they would be going
to the Assembly meeting today
(Thursday) to show their opposition
to the legislation, which would
move the rail proposal ahead to
Gov. Christie Whitman for approv
al.
Gov.
Whitman has publicly endorsed the
rail line.