Just 80 years after passenger service ended on the Valley Railroad in Connecticut, a brand-new study is reviving the debate over what to do with the 9-mile stretch of unused trackage alongside the Connecticut River between Haddam & Middletown, CT. The possible trail study by the Conway School of Landscape Design based in Conway, Massachusetts envisions a hiking & biking trail along the west bank of the river where steam locomotives used to rumble on down the line. The rails-to-trails proposal is sponsered by the Haddam residents who say a hiking path would allow better access to the river and boost Connecticut's tourism. But the historic Essex Steam Train (Connecticut Valley Railroad) which owns the 22-mile right-of-way from the Connecticut Department of Energy and Enviormental Protection wants the railway line maintained for it's excursion trains and possibly considering Metro-North rail commute passenger service. Essex Steam Train has been moving northward in recent years restoring 13 miles of track from Old Saybrook, to north of Goodspeed Landing in Haddam's Tylerville hamlet. Some people want a rails-to-trails, but others think the trackage should be restored to passenger service or light rail and Metro-North might possibly connect with Middletown on the Northeast Corridor. The line is also owned by the Providence & Worcester Railway.
The 9-mile section, now overgrown with big trees, has been largely abandoned since freight service ended in 1968 when Connecticut aquired the 22-mile right-of-way from Penn Central. In 1971, a revived Valley Railroad Company which operates Essex Steam Trains signed a long-term agreement with the state to lease what is now a 136-acre linear park for it's excursion trains. Valley Railroad president Bob Bell said he doesn't want the track on the Haddam to Middletown stretch removed.
The original Connecticut Valley Railroad was chartered in 1868 and in 1871 began passenger and freight service on the 44-mile line between Hartford and Old Saybrook. Passengers were treated to breathtaking vacational views as the train rumbled across the marshes and meadows crossing a mile-long bridge over Old Saybrook's hamlet South Cove out to Fenwick Point. Passenger service on the railway ended in 1933 while freight trains continued to operate over the line until 1968.
What are your thoughts on this feasible idea? Do you want a rail trail or expand in passenger service and future suburban rail commute service? Which is better? You be the Judge!
Well I'd love to see the Valley Railroad running on that disused line, but after forty-plus years of non-use it's going to take some beega bucks to rehabilitate it. If the Valley's got the money on tap great! If not, someone's got to be realistic as to the feasability of restoring rail service.
It all comes down to the same old story, money.
Is the ROW wide enough for both? If it is, there is no reason for a "this or that" battle
themanofmanyrailroads the historic Essex Steam Train (Connecticut Valley Railroad) which owns the 22-mile right-of-way from the Connecticut Department of Energy and Enviormental Protection wants the railway line maintained for it's excursion trains and possibly considering Metro-North rail commute passenger service....The line is also owned by the Providence & Worcester Railway.
So who owns the disused RoW in question? Restoration as an operating rail line would require much money an considerable time of many volunteers.
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
I'm not quite sure if we're being played here. ISTR the 'affected' section from Haddam to Middletown is kept cleared, and hi-rail trucks run over it periodically. (I don't live close enough to check it, but surely someone on this list does...)
As far as I know, Connecticut owns the 22 miles, and leased the whole thing to the Valley Railroad Company long-term in the early '70s. I have heard nothing about the lease being up for renegotiation, and I have to wonder what legal grounds would be used to break the lease to allow demolition of the track structure contrary to the lessee's wishes.
(If I'm not mistaken, it would be possible for the Valley trains to connect directly with trains on the Northeast Corridor if their trip extended to Middletown. That might be as attractive a potential source of traffic as the Leaman Place station that was being discussed a while back might be for Strasburg...)
Certainly if there's room for a safe 'rail+trail' arrangement, I'd advocate doing it.
I'm not sure.
Looking at Google Earth, much of the line is covered by the forest canopy, however, in open areas, the track looks free of vegetation. There is an area about a mile north of Goodspeed, where a marina/boat storage area covers the track. 41°28'0.17"N 72°28'39.30"W
This situation is occurring across the nation. Wouldn't the simple answer be to have both? Why does is it always have to be "one or the other"?
Everbody wins with the "both" resolution.
Common sense doesn't seem to be as common as it used to be.
The RR grade is a ready made trail. It maybe expensive to grade a seperate trail, and has killed some rails-with-trails projects. Also in some places, the locals just want the abandoned rails gone.
I know it is hard for some out of town rail fans to stomach but the bottom line is it is up to the " locals".
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.