rrnut282 Too many officials who should know better assume "I haven't seen a train in a while" = "railroad R/W abandoned", without bothering to do any homework to verify their opinion. In South Bend, IN the city tried to file abandonment proceedings on behalf of Notre Dame on tracks neither of them owned. They cited quality of life and neighborhood improvement as the locals used the unused track for refuse disposal instead of putting it in collecting devices that the city empties weekly. The part that makes me scratch my head is NDU was the last user of the rail line to have coal delivered to their steam/power plant. How do you explain you're green when you're putting MORE trucks on the road?
Too many officials who should know better assume "I haven't seen a train in a while" = "railroad R/W abandoned", without bothering to do any homework to verify their opinion.
In South Bend, IN the city tried to file abandonment proceedings on behalf of Notre Dame on tracks neither of them owned. They cited quality of life and neighborhood improvement as the locals used the unused track for refuse disposal instead of putting it in collecting devices that the city empties weekly. The part that makes me scratch my head is NDU was the last user of the rail line to have coal delivered to their steam/power plant. How do you explain you're green when you're putting MORE trucks on the road?
MIKE,
Your reference to the Notre Dame U and City filing on the line that was used to deliver their boiler coal was also discussed in another Thread here from some time back, I may be of interest to you as it was on this subject (closure of crossing in areas of little use to cut rail/street crossings)
Thread: "Re: Railroads adjacent or running through college/university campuses"
Link: http://cs.trains.com/TRCCS/forums/p/170706/1874034.aspx#1874034
FTL: "...
Paul_D_North_Jr: wanswheel: [snip] http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/circs/DC/081150p.pdf City of South Bend, Indiana and Brothers of the Holy Cross, Inc., Petitioners, v. Surface Transportation Board and United States of America, Respondents, Chicago, Lake Shore & South Bend Railway, Intervenor, Decision of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in Nos. 08-1150 and 08-1301, Petitions for Review of an Order of the Surface Transportation Board, Decided May 29, 2009 (12 pages, approx. 45 KB in size). Mike/ wanswheel, thanks much for that link. A very interesting case for those interested in the applicability and limits of the doctrine of 'adverse abandonment' of a rail line - i.e., typically a city or adjoining land owner wants the rail line abandoned so that something else can be done with the land that it occupies. It also have several citations to similar recent cases. Short version: ''No, you can't have the railroad's R-O-W - who knows, someday the University might want to use the tracks again to receive it's 70,000 to 100,000 tons of coal per year, instead of by truck as it does now'' - even though a VP of the University was both quoted in a newspaper article and wrote a letter to the STB saying that wouldn't occur again in the forseeable future. There was a really good short column or 'frontispiece' article on that in Trains back in the 1960's - by Michael J. Dunn, III, if I recall correctly - which involved 3 short-line railroads, but I can't quickly find a reference or citation for it. There have also been references to that kind of thing in subsequent articles on the STB and various projects and hsitories of specific railroads. But who else would care ? Thanks again. - Paul North.
wanswheel: [snip] http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/circs/DC/081150p.pdf
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/circs/DC/081150p.pdf
City of South Bend, Indiana and Brothers of the Holy Cross, Inc., Petitioners, v. Surface Transportation Board and United States of America, Respondents, Chicago, Lake Shore & South Bend Railway, Intervenor, Decision of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in Nos. 08-1150 and 08-1301, Petitions for Review of an Order of the Surface Transportation Board, Decided May 29, 2009 (12 pages, approx. 45 KB in size).
Mike/ wanswheel, thanks much for that link. A very interesting case for those interested in the applicability and limits of the doctrine of 'adverse abandonment' of a rail line - i.e., typically a city or adjoining land owner wants the rail line abandoned so that something else can be done with the land that it occupies. It also have several citations to similar recent cases. Short version: ''No, you can't have the railroad's R-O-W - who knows, someday the University might want to use the tracks again to receive it's 70,000 to 100,000 tons of coal per year, instead of by truck as it does now'' - even though a VP of the University was both quoted in a newspaper article and wrote a letter to the STB saying that wouldn't occur again in the forseeable future.
There was a really good short column or 'frontispiece' article on that in Trains back in the 1960's - by Michael J. Dunn, III, if I recall correctly - which involved 3 short-line railroads, but I can't quickly find a reference or citation for it. There have also been references to that kind of thing in subsequent articles on the STB and various projects and hsitories of specific railroads. But who else would care ?
Thanks again.
- Paul North.
Check out the Google Map for Notre Dame University, Indiana.
Pulling up the arerial pictures in a high resolution you can see the power plant and railroad between the coal stockpile, and the loco and a coal car on the line north of the power house.
Following the branchline from the area of the University down to the connection with the NS. There are a number of street crossings that will require a lot of work not to mention signals or cross bucks. Meaning a pretty good outlay of funding that would fall to the city/county to provide.
With University getting approx 14 truckloads of coal a day ( works out to twent-eight trips-in and out) that has got to be a lot of heavy traffic on city streets. It will be interesting to watch what happens if in fact the useage of coal goes to the 100,000 tons level..." [emphasis added]
There are several reasons rail is left in at grade corssings. One is to protect or maintain the railroad's claim of right of way across the road should it either be reopened or renewed. The other is simply that it is cheaper to pave over the rail rather than rebuild the highway roadbed until such time as the whole road is redone. So there can be red faces on all sides should rail be ripped up before the railroad does or says it is ok to.
RIDEWITHMEHENRY is the name for our almost monthly day of riding trains and transit in either the NYCity or Philadelphia areas including all commuter lines, Amtrak, subways, light rail and trolleys, bus and ferries when warranted. No fees, just let us know you want to join the ride and pay your fares. Ask to be on our email list or find us on FB as RIDEWITHMEHENRY (all caps) to get descriptions of each outing.
Man, my old threads start to come back to haunt me.
Ungern
I suspect that the trackage you are mentioning was industry track owned by the battery factory rather than a main track for the Wabash.
bubbajustin My Dad works at a battery factory where the old Wabash Railroad cut right through the heart of the new addition. This was originally a slab of concrete for unloading lead. They used it as the floor of the new addition to the factory, so now the old rail runs right through the heart of the battery factory! -Justin
My Dad works at a battery factory where the old Wabash Railroad cut right through the heart of the new addition. This was originally a slab of concrete for unloading lead. They used it as the floor of the new addition to the factory, so now the old rail runs right through the heart of the battery factory!
-Justin
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
Paul_D_North_Jr TomDiehl: Oddly, in Mount Union PA we had the opposite happen. A new cutoff for PA Route 522 bypassing Mount Union was put in several years ago. At one point, it crossed the approach to the East Broad Top yards (dual gauge) and there was debate about what to do. Two factors came into play: 1) The East Broad Top is a registered National Historic Landmark, and 2) A small upstart, called the Mount Union Connecting Railroad, was attempting to reopen rail service to an industrial park in Allenport to a connection with the former Pennsy, now Norfolk Southern. Probably the newest rail on the East Broad Top and one of the most modern dual gauge crossings around. This is to the southeast side of Mount Union, where that new bypass down the east side - E. Chestnut St. - drops down from 22/ 522 on the north side, and ties into 'old' 522 / E. Shirley St., with a 'Y' type intersection - right ? It seems to show up on Google Maps' Satellite = aerial photo view pretty well - 3 rails and all - with a lime green maintenance-type vehicle at the northwest end of this crossing. I may be out that way later this week during the early evening hours - if so, I'll try to grab a photo of it. There can't be more than a handful like that in the entire nation . . .
Oddly, in Mount Union PA we had the opposite happen. A new cutoff for PA Route 522 bypassing Mount Union was put in several years ago. At one point, it crossed the approach to the East Broad Top yards (dual gauge) and there was debate about what to do. Two factors came into play: 1) The East Broad Top is a registered National Historic Landmark, and 2) A small upstart, called the Mount Union Connecting Railroad, was attempting to reopen rail service to an industrial park in Allenport to a connection with the former Pennsy, now Norfolk Southern. Probably the newest rail on the East Broad Top and one of the most modern dual gauge crossings around.
This is to the southeast side of Mount Union, where that new bypass down the east side - E. Chestnut St. - drops down from 22/ 522 on the north side, and ties into 'old' 522 / E. Shirley St., with a 'Y' type intersection - right ? It seems to show up on Google Maps' Satellite = aerial photo view pretty well - 3 rails and all - with a lime green maintenance-type vehicle at the northwest end of this crossing. I may be out that way later this week during the early evening hours - if so, I'll try to grab a photo of it. There can't be more than a handful like that in the entire nation . . .
The road to to success is always under construction. _____________________________________________________________________________ When the going gets tough, the tough use duct tape.
TomDiehl Oddly, in Mount Union PA we had the opposite happen. A new cutoff for PA Route 522 bypassing Mount Union was put in several years ago. At one point, it crossed the approach to the East Broad Top yards (dual gauge) and there was debate about what to do. Two factors came into play: 1) The East Broad Top is a registered National Historic Landmark, and 2) A small upstart, called the Mount Union Connecting Railroad, was attempting to reopen rail service to an industrial park in Allenport to a connection with the former Pennsy, now Norfolk Southern. Probably the newest rail on the East Broad Top and one of the most modern dual gauge crossings around.
At the STB Website, www.stb.dot.gov ...use the search function in the Decisions & Notices and more importantly the Filings in the Library section and look at the following dockets:
Napoleon Ohio = FD-34271 & FD-34354 (Maumee & Ohio Railroad)
Chicago = AB-1012 and AB-1036 (Chicago Terminal Railroad)
These are administrative law procedings, not reports.
Question on this topic:
Here in Kansas, as elsewhere, there have been a large number of line abandonments and the subsequent removal of tracks. Around here they seem to leave the rails down across the road/street crossing although at some point the road surface get a coat over the tracks.
A.)I have been told a couple of timesthis is so the/a railroad might reclaim the formerly abandoned track crossing.
B.) I have also been told this is so the political entity controling the stretch of road saves oney by just leaving the tracks and paving over the tracks.
Both scenarios seem plausible, to some extent, but why leave the track? It's intrinsic value would seem to mount up, especially if a large number of crossings were involved. I just wonder where the truth lies in these situations?
Mudchicken mentions STB invovement in a couple of projects that wee not approved. About 1 or 2 years ago the City of Parsons,Ks., and withKs. State~KDOT involvement, sought out to widen and pave with concret a street that was the southern boundary of the City. About two/thirds of the way was a section of the old MKT main from Parsons toward Coffeyville, and eventually into Okla. The rails were gone on both sides of the old ROW, only remaind onder the road surface, and for about 50 yd north was still rail in place ( was part of a siding built off the MKT's old main to service a Community owned Industrial Park. Track was not used for quite a few years, and had been embargoed with a bolt-on derail about 3/4 mile north) From the derail north was Union Pacific served and served occasionally a business located on that line).
As part of the Construction of the project mentioned early, the City of Parsons had given to the winning bidder, a plum, of all the abandoned rail still laid up to another city crossing for its salvage. It was done in an open Council session and reported in the local fish wrapper. Well, Apparently, the UPRR had a different take on the situation, and the wrangling commenced. Ultimately, the Contractor did not take any rail up, and it is still rusting in the Kansas sun, even after the new concrete road was completed. the only rail removed was that which had been paved over.
mudchicken Read the filings at STB over the adverse abandonment of this line? The story gets kinda strange.
Read the filings at STB over the adverse abandonment of this line? The story gets kinda strange.
Could you provide a link to this particular STB report?
Semper Vaporo
Pkgs.
mudchickenRead the filings at STB over the adverse abandonment of this line? The story gets kinda strange.
The CN's (ex-WC) Greenville line out of Appleton Wis. Just about every crossing west from the lumber yard in Greenville was paved over. A train hasnt run on that section between the lumber yard and New London in years, maybe decades. The state even severed the line as it came into New London to make way for the Hwy 45 bypass. I know the railroad people were not pleased with this as they waited for the work to be done and then told the state to put a crossing in because they are upgrading the tracks (pulling up the GBW rails from Green Bay to New London in favor of the Greenville line)
I had friends that lived in the Hortonville area and know of at least 8 crossings that were black topped over and at least one that the rails were taken out and paved over
http://www.youtube.com/user/pavabo
http://www.flickr.com/photos/paulvbox
Happens enough ...(Dealing with a case now).....usually followed by red faced city officials being stunned by a PUC/ RR Commission writ for specific performance/ court order and the bill for re-installing the crossing.
Well documented case at a higher level is the City of Napoleon, OH vs. Maumee & Western RR (You can look at it in the STB Decisions and Filings on the STB website. (The crossing, US-24, went back in)
The thread about exempt crossings got me asking this question:
Have any cities/towns ripped up grade crossing tracks without railroad permission thinking that the track was abandoned/not used simply because no one saw a train using it. I'm thinking more of a lightly used/embargoed branchline/industrial spur. I know that an industrial spur that formerly supplied a factory near where I live has had its switch removed but the factory has fought the town I live in to not rip up the tracks. I guess having a spur keeps the trucker costs at bay.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.