Glad you brought up the environmental considerations, HP.

As much as I love the trainshed, here's a radical thought: demolish it and replicate the original shed with glassed-in sides and end.

Rob

Reasons against demolition:

Environmental hazard of all that asbestos filled cement.
Cost of a replacement structure.
Historical Fabric, shared with the rest of the station facility.

The biggest problem with the site is lack of rail access, so any display is really going to be limited to a few pieces. As mentioned previously, that saltwater environment would be bad news for any object placed there under current conditions.

I imagine that should the concrete retain it's structural integrity, it could be sealed (encapsulization). I somehow suspect that closing in the structure may actually be under considerationu, as it would make it a year-round facility. If that were the case, it would improve object display considerably.

Absent interest by the landlord, however, kind of kills the deal outright. Too bad, as it would be a wonderful facility for either preservation or actual transportation.

Michael Seitz
Missoula MT

Mike,

Of course, my demolition comment was tongue in cheek. However, the original shed, which the terminal building was designed to mate with, would have offered a better display space than a Bush shed.

In all seriousness, what the state has done with the property is a crime against history. Yes the terminal building itself is wonderful, but the loss (by demolition) of the ferry structure, express building and towers plus the ongoing loss (by neglect) of the trainshed is less than impressive.

Mitch, there have always been sensitivities about photographing the train shed. They definitely don't want anyone in there, but I have also been asked not to take photos of any of the structural elements, even from a safe location. The shed is a sore spot for many, and more than once there have been advocates within the state of demolition.

Rob

If you look at the site on historicaerials.com, you can see where the track used to enter the area and the building. Now use any of the current satellite programs and the only thing of importance standing between the shed and the old turn out is a parking lot. That can be relocated and the tracks re-laid.

Anything can be done if the will and finances are available. But we are right back where we started; arguing about which site would be better for a state rail museum, mine or yours. I fear I will never see a state sanctioned rail museum in my lifetime. Thanks Jim Florio!

Later!
Mr. Ed

This is the NY/NJ Metro area we are talking about, so you must figure in politics as well. A zillion public and government agencies, of every size and type imaginable, will need to have their finger in the pie for a highly visible project like this. Even our largest rail museums would be no match to the powers of greed and stupidity at work, and any project would stall before the first rail was laid down.

--
Will

"I have also been asked not to take photos of any of the structural elements, even from a safe location."

By who(whom)? Unless you are trespassing or photographing something illegal (defense installations/prison facilities or something that its criminal to make/have an image of (kids)) nobody has a right to ask you not to photograph anything.

I italicize ask because the government doesn't "ask" you to do anything; they tell you-even if they preface their order with "pretty please with sugar sprinkled on top" with that same specious politeness you get from the traffic cop that says "good evening sir".

I understand the desire not to have a confrontation that could be avoided when the police have the upper hand; and to give some duly appointed official/constabulary a measure of deference and respect, but in spite of the current climate where officials at all levels seem to presume that they can either compel or prescribe our actions at their pleasure; -we need to remind petty tyrants at all levels that our rights are presumed; their powers to abridge our rights are limited and specified.

Not surprising that photos are discouraged, it would highlight the shocking and embarassing lack of care for something so special. Shame on all concerned. Still at least ALL the stimulus money went to useful things.....Eh?

A statement about this has been posted on the URHS website: http://www.urhs.org/other_pages/crrofnj_shed.html

Aside from the comment about "appropriate" equipment, this still implies they are seeking a complete restoration of the train shed and location of a substantial portion of the URHS collection.

Quite a compilation of good reasons to rehab the structure.

Later!
Mr. Ed

And that's all well and good. But URHS's collection also needs to not be homeless. If they can get land somewhere else, they should buy it and develop it ASAP. A few pole barns will get the equipment out of the weather. Once the equipment is safe on land they own outright, they can see about relocating the museum to the train-shed in the future. Reimbursement for the now-unneeded pole barns will be a trifle compared to the full scope of the CNJ train shed rehab.