Passenger Trains > FL: BrightLine Progress 20210112

BrightLine continues to make progress on its second track in south and central Florida.  Grading, conduit relocation and crossing expansion is underway in Vero Beach (Indian River County) around Oslo.  Construction continues at the 528 Toll Road divergence (where the new line splits from the FEC near Cocoa). Lots of stockpiled concrete ties.

In Martin County, work continues on the second track south of Port Salerno. Four new signal masts and heads are in place, and turned away from trains at Fruita. No sign of work yet on the small bridges over several drainage ditches, but that should be relatively quick, drop in a pipe work.  Work has been underway on the north shore of Stuart as crossings have to be widened, an embankment added etc to tie in the RIO siding, etc. Materials have been delivered for work on the north side of Jensen Beach.

It doesn't appear that work is underway yet in the section through the Nathaniel Reed wildlife area south of Hobe Sound.  Since I plan to visit the park, I may ride up that way to get a sense of how much work has been done to tie in the Camp Murphy siding to the second track.

In northern Palm Beach County, the second track is in for some of the distance in Jupiter. The track has been hooked up to the previously installed crossing panels, and ballast dumping is under way. Lots of activity in Tequesta as the minimally used siding is relaced for use as the new track alignment.  Progress is visible, week after week.

I understand work will begin soon on the section in south St Lucie county.

Do you know if  freight trains be able to run on the  new Cocoa Beach to Orlando segment in the future?

NO!  The Surface Transportation Bureau gave no authority for any operation other than a rapid transit interurban service.  And for what reason is the question?  There is no industry on this forecast new line.  In order to handle any interstate commerce on this line it would need a new authority from the STB.  Goggle:  All Abroad Florida Surface Transportation Board and read the 10-page filing where the STB said they had no jurisdiction on the AAF plan as there was no commerce and there was no interstate transportation being performed.  The Supreme Court in the 1840s ruled that passenger were not commerce unless the person was dead or a slave.  Financial Docket 35680  Oct 5, 2012

AAF-Operations LLC. and AAF-Stations LLC  are not connected to the national interconnected lines of commerce because of the PTC and signal system that controls separation.  Some rapid transits like San Diego trolley and RiverLine in NJ are separated by “durable” separation (duration of night or day)

Just one of the part most railfans don't understand.  This above ruling has a lot of explanation's that should be read:

"Furthermore, the facts that the All Aboard Florida Line might cross or physically connect with FECR's freight rail lines, and that AAF-O and FECR may agree that AAF-O trains may operate on FECR tracks do not change the fact that the passenger services operated by Petitioners will not be part of the interstate rail network. Indeed, both the Board and the ICC have held that they lacked jurisdiction over intrastate passenger rail operations even where those passenger operations were conducted over the lines of a freight railroad, Here, the fact that the All Aboard Florida Line may connect in some places with parallel FECR tracks and the fact that AAF-O trains may sometimes operate over portions of those FECR tracks plainly does not change the essentially intrastate nature of Petitioners' operations." 
 



Edited 5 time(s). Last edit at 01/14/21 14:12 by PlyWoody.

I always thought it was the Surface Transportation Board.