Adirondack Park Agency oks scrapping RR line to Lake Placid

PaulWWoodring · **Posted:** Thu Oct 05, 2017 1:25 am

Hi-rail inspection pickup trucks on CSX are limited to 40 mph. They also do not normally shunt grade crossing signals, so they have to stop for traffic at highway grade crossings.

Dougvv · **Joined:** Sat Aug 21, 2004 10:52 pm **Posts:** 909

Hi,

The railbus suggestion sounds like the reincarnation of the old Rio Grande Southern (narrow gauge) Galloping Geese that traveled Colorado from about 1930-1951 carrying passengers, mail, and LCL.

Three geese are preserved operational at the Colorado RR Museum, one is at Knotsberry Farm (operational), one is in Dolores (operational), and the last is owned by the City of Telluride currently in Ridgway, CO (Ridgway RR Museum) being restored to operational condition. They could not stem the tide of the fall of the RGS in 1951.

The McKeen Railcar company was resurected and has been manufacturing a few railbusses for various places including South America. One rail bus targeted for a 3 foot gauge railroad in South America was tested on the Cumbres and Toltec Scenic RR a few years ago.

Doug vV

J3a-614 · **Posted:** Thu Oct 05, 2017 3:29 am

Dougvv wrote:

The McKeen Railcar company was resurected and has been manufacturing a few railbusses for various places including South America. One rail bus targeted for a 3 foot gauge railroad in South America was tested on the Cumbres and Toltec Scenic RR a few years ago.

Doug vV

That got me curious!!

Turns out this was simply a case of confusion--the revived company was Edwards, which built an interesting unit. . .see pix on the Narrow Gauge Discussion Forum:

http://ngdiscussion.net/phorum/read.php?1,117786

Edwards has been reorganized again, and is now EIKON International--surprisingly it looks like it's at least kind of active, though you can't always trust Wikipedia entries, and search results for the company itself look thin:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EIKON_International

JimBoylan · **Posted:** Thu Oct 05, 2017 5:22 am

The trolley museum at Warehouse Pt., Conn. has the standard gauge version of the Connecticut Company HiRail Bus. It may be the same one that was tried on the Philadelphia & Western Rwy. in the 1960s The Philadelphia Suburban Transportation Company also had a broad gauge version. Since they were to replace interurban cars that could do much better than 60 m.p.h., I doubt that they had much of a speed restriction. Of course, these were General Motors transit buses, not school buses.
Public Service Rwys. also used them in New Jersey in the 1930s, but I don't know at what speeds.

J3a-614 · **Posted:** Thu Oct 05, 2017 9:24 pm

Just an editorial by a strong trail supporter (indeed, the principal trail supporter, and whom some would claim is also the principal villain, depending on your point of view), with comments.

http://www.adirondackalmanack.com/2017/ ... nt-1281574

dinwitty · **Joined:** Wed Oct 22, 2008 8:18 pm **Posts:** 2050

Poor planning there Keet, you can't just slam bang a project like this on. people like this just want to rip rails out. He may have other agendas behind this than just ripping rails out that we don't know. He's still trying to grind his point not knowing the cirumstances behind it. Go to plan B, without ripping rails out. Time to replan more carefully. The judge just gave you the kick in caboose.

J3a-614 · **Posted:** Fri Oct 06, 2017 8:18 pm

More from ARTA:

https://www.adirondackexplorer.org/news ... l-decision

Chris Webster · **Joined:** Sat Aug 25, 2007 12:45 am **Posts:** 456

J3a-614 wrote:

Just an editorial by a strong trail supporter (indeed, the principal trail supporter, and whom some would claim is also the principal villain, depending on your point of view), with comments.

http://www.adirondackalmanack.com/2017/ ... nt-1281574

Thanks for sharing that J3a.

Mr. Keet is arguing that the Judge used the wrong definition of a "travel corridor". Here's a quote of Mr. Keet's second paragraph in the article J3a linked to above:

Quote:

The judge based most of his ruling on what a “travel corridor” is in the State Land Master Plan (SLMP). To define a travel corridor, he used the current travel corridors inventoried in the SLMP (“1,220 miles of travel corridors, of which 1,100 are highway, 120 miles make up the Remsen to Lake Placid railroad”) and concluded that since current travel corridors are highways and railroads no other use is anticipated or permitted. But the SLMP defines a travel corridor as including “the Remsen to Lake Placid railroad right-of-way” (emphasis mine). Note that the Adirondack Park Agency (APA) did not say “Remsen to Lake Placid railroad” in its definition, as it did in listing existing travel corridors, it added “right of way”, for a reason.

Here is the State of New York Adirondack Plan State Land Master Plan (SLMP) Mr. Keet referred to. He quotes from page 52 (60 of the PDF file) which says:

Quote:

A travel corridor is that strip of land constituting the roadbed and right-of-way for state and interstate highways in the Adirondack Park, the Remsen to Lake Placid railroad right-of-way, and those state lands immediately adjacent to and visible from these facilities.

However, it is not as simple (IMHO) as Mr. Keet believes. The SLMP's Classification System and Guidelines section begins on page 14. Page 15 (23 of PDF) includes this:

Quote:

Finally, the classification system takes into account the established facilities on the land, the uses now being made by the public and the policies followed by the various administering agencies. Many of these factors are self-evident: the presence of a highway determines the classification of a travel corridor; the presence of an existing campground or ski area requires the classification of intensive use.

It seems to me that the "established facilities" are the existing track, ballast and roadbed while the "self-evident" factor is that the presence of that railroad is what determines it is a travel corridor.

Also page 123 (133 of PDF) of the SLMP has a list of the travel corridors. That page uses the term "Railroad Lines", not right-of-way.

As for Mr. Keet's assertion:

Quote:

Note that the Adirondack Park Agency (APA) did not say “Remsen to Lake Placid railroad” in its definition, as it did in listing existing travel corridors, it added “right of way”, for a reason.

I believe Mr. Keet has gotten it backwards. The SLMP could have said "track and right-of-way" to describe the railroad, just as the SLMP says "roadbed and right-of-way" to describe highways..... but a "track and right-of-way" definition would not have allowed a trail to be built parallel to the railroad. Dropping the "track and" from the definition allows a trail to be built parallel to the railroad within the railroad right-of-way.

dinwitty · **Joined:** Wed Oct 22, 2008 8:18 pm **Posts:** 2050

Your not going to change the court decision opinionating on a news media, you will have to appeal. Having done jury duty, trying to manipulate the definitions won't work. I will see that. That is way too obvious. Its back to ground zero on the plans and do it right if you want to get a trail. There are far more issues to check on, a nearby highway project here was stopped because of a rare Moth's habitat. You will not be able to slam bang a project like this thru. Yes the highway finally got the go ahead. The Chicago O'hare highway expansion was trying to go over a CP yard and they never talked to the Road about the plans, CP balked and construction halted, poor planning again. No more ram rodding, we don't have open lands much anymore.

J3a-614 · **Posted:** Mon Oct 09, 2017 2:17 am

Looks like ARTA still has some fight left.

http://www.adirondackdailyenterprise.co ... ng-ruling/

dinwitty · **Joined:** Wed Oct 22, 2008 8:18 pm **Posts:** 2050

still wants to rip rails, if you try to change the "travel door" definition, you open the door on other recreational trails saying they are "travel corridors". They have been playing this since the start. Is there an appeal yet? nope

train guy · **Joined:** Wed Jun 26, 2013 7:20 pm **Posts:** 125

I'm telling you, this is not over by a long shot. The trail people are not going to roll over and play dead. ASR needs to keep the pressure on. ARTA words, "temporary setback"

greenwichlirr · **Posted:** Mon Oct 09, 2017 11:57 am

[quote="train guy"]I'm telling you, this is not over by a long shot. The trail people are not going to roll over and play dead. ASR needs to keep the pressure on. ARTA words, "temporary setback"[/quote]

Dead on correct.

The public knows more than ever what is going on, and alot of people are finally seeing ARTA as the sham that they are. More and more social media comments on related stories in the papers, etc., show more and more support for the RR from people OTHER than the usual rail supporters.

Just remember--when it comes to ARTA: "Opinions are like A**holes--everyone's got one, but only the loudest ones are heard."

J3a-614 · **Posted:** Mon Oct 09, 2017 12:56 pm

greenwichlirr wrote:

Just remember--when it comes to ARTA: "Opinions are like A**holes--everyone's got one, but only the loudest ones are heard."

Ah say, Son, Ah dee-clare, what is that peh-cue-liah 'n pow-ful oh-duh?

Sorry, just couldn't resist.

J3a-614 · **Posted:** Mon Oct 09, 2017 1:04 pm

One thing to keep in mind--from what I've been told (and corrections are welcome if I'm off), the only body or agency that has legal standing to file the appeal will be the Attorney General's office of New York.

I would hope somebody at the Attorney General's office would tell the ARTA to jump into one of the lakes up there. It had to sting, hurt, and burn to get a ruling like they did.

Hasn't the ARTA done enough to the state personnel, not only at the Attorney General's office but at the Adirondack Park Administration and the Department of Environmental Conservation for sending them on this fool's errand?

Hasn't the leadership of the ARTA done enough to abuse its followers with the arrogance and dishonesty it has displayed for all to see?

Adirondack Park Agency oks scrapping RR line to Lake Placid

Who is online