Login
or
Register
Home
»
Trains Magazine
»
Forums
»
General Discussion
»
New oil find in Sevier County Utah; status of proposed rail link
Edit post
Edit your reply below.
Post Body
Enter your post below.
[quote]QUOTE: <i>Originally posted by futuremodal</i> <br /><br />LC, <br /> <br />In a way you made my point. Railroads are not subject to local and state building regulations, ergo the hypocrasy of giving localities the "right" to force the preservation of an otherwise nondescript brick structure built in 1910, but not the right for force preservation of a rail line built in the 1880's. Given the total impact on local economies, it would make more sense to preserve the rail line than the old brick building. The Sevier County oil find is a case in point. There was a rail line running down from Thistle to Richfield that would be very useful right now for moving unit trains of oil to Salt Lake refineries, but because of the federal pre-emption regarding railroad regulation and FEMA funds distribution, that line is gone and now they're talking about building a new line east from the UP's LA to Salt Lake line, the cost of which is much more than if they had just been able to finance the reconstruction of D&RGW's Thistle branch after the slide. So now all the oil is moving by truck, and if they do get that line built, it may come too late to serve as an oil shuttle, because by then they will have built a pipeline. And to top it off, by accessing off of UP's LA-SL line rather than via the old D&RGW line, the potential Sevier rail shippers will be subject to UP rate monopolization rather than having UP and BNSF compete for rates via Thistle. <br /> <br />Whether the State of Utah was "offered" the Thistle branch via sale is moot, because: <br />1. Most such offers go through each state's DOT (read: Highway Depts.), and those guys don't want to fool around with railroad politics, they'd rather sling the asphalt around. Such sales should be offered through the States' Commerce departments, but nonetheless........ <br />2. Unless such a sale can afford the online shippers better rates and services, there is no justification for a state to take over rail lines such as the State of Washington deal. All that resulted in was Watco getting a sweet deal at the expense of the State's taxpayers, while the online shippers did not gain anything other than still having a railroad nearby. They are still subject to rail rate monopolization depending on which former Class I owner their plant/elevator lies next to, even though the former UP and BNSF lines interconnect. <br /> <br />That being said, check your local government regs, I bet you find some building codes therein..... <br />[/quote] <br /> <br />NO, thank you FM, for making my point. Virtually the only regulations that can prevent demolition of a structure (a non-RR or other structure subject to Federal Regulations, that is) are those governing historical preservation or in very rare cases those structures that by their demolition would create significant environmental risks. Anything else is a pure taking. A taking, of course allows us to invoke all of our Constitutional protections against the taking of property without due process of law, which are substantial. I have had very few cases in which a client couldn't demolish an existing structure. Oh, and yes, in the past I've represented a few real estate developers. Glad to be in the RR industry now. It is easier than dealing with localities who invariably have at least one know it all like you in some bureaucratic position clogging the works... <br /> <br />Oh, and you'll find that most of the Building Codes deal with "building" and not demolition. Most laws and regulations concerning demolition are in the Public Health and Welfare titles of the States or localities. But thanks for that little lie again. Hoping to slip that one by are we?? <br /> <br />If the line was offered someone had an opportunity to acquire it. If they failed to do so it is a shame, but how could they have known about an oil discovery decades later?!? Many other states and localities have managed to save and maintain rail service over lines that were to be abandoned by acquiring them through the proper STB channels. So, what, since you have this "Brainstorm" we should just all bow to you and say what a brilliant AH he is? FOFLMAO...LOL...LOL...LOL...LOL...LOL... <br /> <br />GET REAL! <br /> <br />LC
Tags (Optional)
Tags are keywords that get attached to your post. They are used to categorize your submission and make it easier to search for. To add tags to your post type a tag into the box below and click the "Add Tag" button.
Add Tag
Update Reply
Join our Community!
Our community is
FREE
to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.
Login »
Register »
Search the Community
Newsletter Sign-Up
By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our
privacy policy
More great sites from Kalmbach Media
Terms Of Use
|
Privacy Policy
|
Copyright Policy