The source is not a website, it is a softcover book called "Rails to Trails - A Political Lobbying Guide". It has a copyright date of 2003 by an outfit call the American Rail-Trail Advisory Committee, Arlington, VA.

So there are those who are of the opinon that a right of accomodation in another's land or a Right of PASSAGE means they will take over and throw the OWNER(the railroad) off? I would like to hear more about this. If there is any legal examlpes where the owner was throw off and told what they could or couldn't do, I want to know now. I would hope our legal eagles could write the deal where if any of this was attempted they would forfit their right of easement.
By the way they pay for the fence and maintain it. it would be the standard farm field fence. No different than the orginal railroad had up and is still there in many places. It could also be aloud to grow with vines.
As for the part about making money with the train, well that's the plan. The problem being restoring and maintaining the track takes money. Doesn't leave much for fancy cars and what not. it takes money to make money. The operations near us don't have the track and property problems we do. Someone else pays for it conversly they don't own the land they operate on. They can end up being a train with no place to run.( A bunch of that around) where as we are a railroad with out much equipment to run on it.
Income from the EASEMENT would be used for better equipment and things like real restrooms and other things to make it more family friendly.
Please keep sharing everyones input. Thank you

Can you explain the photo and rail/trail re-alignment? Is the trail visible in the photo? All I see is the steam train and gravel/mud right of way.

I was on that right of way doing an equipment test last week, and can assure you that the trail in a nicely manicured compacted mine-cinder substance. Won't be after a few dirt bikes do their "thing", but then the trailies will have to come back, smooth it out, and compact it back down. Only at grade and road crossings is the trail asphalt.

Steve Zuiderveen

> As for the part about making money with the train, well that's the plan.

Find a business in the area that is sympathetic to your cause. Get them to agree to use your railroad to ship and/or receive freight by rail. Organize a "for profit" railroad company. This will qualify your corporation for RIFF funding. Don't sell your groups soul for the fees you will collect from a lease to a government entity. It is not worth it.

> it takes money to make money.

...which is why you need a business plan to develop the revenue stream required to sustain your business.

> where as we are a railroad with out much equipment to run on it.

It is not difficult to find people or groups with equipment that would pay your group to be able to operate on your tracks. That is one revenue source that few people, including the posters group, even consider today.

For those on this forum who are familiar with the history of the Western Maryland Scenic, that is exactly how it began. The local government had a railroad and nothing to run on it. They got Jack Showalter to bring his equipment to town and run trains. His job was to get people to come to Cumberland. Jack was good at that. It went wrong when they tried to control his trains, which brings us back to the original premise I offered; government involement (ANY government) = government control.


> to make it more family friendly

Why would you want to do that? Railroad rights-of-way are not supposed to be family friendly...trains are. Provide the sanitary conveniences on the trains. If hikers need a place to relieve themselves, let them put port-a-potties along their trail.

There is a real need for groups like yours to change their thinking on the way a business is run and the fallacies of entering into alliances with trail proponents.

That relationship has the potential to be your kiss-of-death.

>An editorial op/ed piece in a York (Pa) newspaper recently suggested >that the Northern Central line between New Freedom, Pa. and York, Pa. >should be abandoned since operating a railroad in close proximity to a >hiking/biking trail was "not compatible."

The op/ed was most likely placed by a trail proponent who read an earlier article in the same newspaper about a group that has developed and is now implementing a business plan to restore rail freight service to that corridor.

The "gravel/mud right of way" is not gravel or mud, it's the Allegheny Trail. There are a few places where fencing is installed, but for the most part this is it.



Jack, since your group owns the ROW "fee simple," Steamtown Observer's example doesn't fit your situation. You are right - your lawyers can write an agreement that protects your ownership rights.

JAC

Of course, since you are dealing with a county government, and governments have the power of eminent domain, when the trail becomes popular and the railroad is viewed as a nuisance, the pressure will mount for the county to seize the property and remove the railroad. Just something to keep in mind.

Not knowing how some of the situations mentioned - or Chicken Little reactions - compare to your RR and real life, it is difficult to draw an accurate substantiated conclusion. I don't think all trailheads are irrationally antirailroad, and as global warming and other environmantal concerrns combine with high gas prices, those who are also environmentalists will like rail more and more - so long as it could get lots of trucks and commuters off the road.

It does occur to me that if you were a common carrier and ran a few cars of freight now and again, it would be difficult for a county government to try to evict you - Trainlawyer might be able to elucidate, or correct me, but I think that would require an ICC ruling in favor of a hostile petition to abandon a working profitable freight hauling common carrier, which, given the likelihood of suppoort from the local businesses served, is improbable.

You need real qualified advice. Get some and stop wasting your time with us.

dave

In all likelihood, probably not.

Eminent domain laws vary by state, and consequently the entities that have eminent domain power will vary. (For example, Georgia Power Co. has some delegated eminent domain powers.) And as a result of Kelo, many states have tightened up their eminent domain laws.

But condemning an active rail corridor, connected to the is much different animal than condemning private property. In fact, here in Atlanta there is an inactive line that the city would like to use for transit and trails, that was purchased by a private concern. It looks very much like the City cannot condemn the property because it is part of the general transportation system (though inactive for several years). They could condemn a portion of the ROW in places (it varies from 40' to to 200' wide), but they would have to leave enough for active service, until the line is officially abandoned.

JAC