Noojee railway line
| Noojee | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Overview | |||
| Type | V/Line passenger service | ||
| Operation | |||
| Opened |
12 May 1890 (Warragul to Rokeby), |
||
| Completed | 1919 | ||
| Closed |
27 March 1954 (Nayook to Noojee), |
||
| Number of tracks | Single | ||
|
|||
12 May 1890 (Warragul to Rokeby),
18 March 1892 (Rokeby to Neerim South),
27 March 1917 (Neerim South to Nayook),
27 March 1954 (Nayook to Noojee),
The Noojee railway line is a closed railway line in Victoria, Australia. Branching off from the Gippsland line at Warragul station, it was built to service the timber industry in the upper Latrobe River area, transporting timber as well as providing a general goods and passenger service to townships in the area. The final section of the line between Neerim South and Noojee traversed increasingly hilly terrain and featured a number of large timber trestle bridges. Extensively and repeatedly damaged by bushfires over the years, the line was closed in the 1950s and dismantled. The last remaining large trestle bridge on the line has been preserved and has become a popular local tourist attraction.
Only a few years after the opening of the Gippsland mainline to Sale, townships along the upper reaches of the Latrobe River began to petition for a branch line to be built to service the area and by 1885 a route had been approved by Parliament from Warragul via Buln Buln. There was some dispute regarding the route, with a deputation meeting the Minister for Railways in 1888 to request the line be built from Longwarry rather than Warragul, following the Tarago River along an easier alignment and providing a shorter route to Melbourne. The Premier, Duncan Gillies, advised that the route could not be changed, and the line opened in sections with Warragul to Rokeby opened on 12 May 1890, and Rokeby to Neerim South on 18 March 1892.
Before the year was out, representations were being made to extend the line from Neerim South to Neerim proper. However, the line progressed no further as the Railways Standing Committee found that traffic on the proposed 5-mile (8.0 km) extension would not justify the £19,000 ($38,000) expenditure. Options for a more cheaply built extension, including the possibility of it being built as a narrow gauge railway were to be considered.
...
Wikipedia