I ran across this question on www.RPLS.com today and I though I would post it here to see if anyone had some answers for this surveyor. Personally, I think assuming a constant separation on double track centerlines is exactly an assumption (and you know what they say about those who assume).

Railroad Track Separation Question
Posted By Rusty Collyer on 3/6/2003 at 2:14 AM

Currently surveying a tract with a boundary common to (formerly)the Northern Pacific Railway Company R/W-
NP has changed ownership several times, now Montana Rail Link (MRL).

Obtained MRL's Right of Way (R/W) maps and alignment/grade sheets on the areas near where I'm working. Talked with MRL's right of way person regarding track location relative to the R/W as they don't generally monument the R/W. Standard answer - "Track should be on centerline of R/W - use long tangents as the trains will deflect the curves a little."

Got into the boundary survey and find that the existing R/W fences don't fit with the actual track centerline - by about 14 to 15 feet. I have multiple R/W width transitions, distances to section lines, etc. noted on the R/W plans and alignment & grade plan, so there's lots of things to check into and compare...

The alignment/grade sheet shows the original R/W outline and two lines in the center of the R/W outline... One heavy dark line and another dashed line labeled "Orig. CL"...... Interesting.... It also shows some standard fencing symbols along portions of the R/W exterior....

Talk with MRL's man again - he knows nothing about any track relocation or alignment shift.... Again says the track should be on the R/W CL as shown on the supplied R/W plans. Can't explain the reference to the "Orig. CL" notation on the alignment/grade sheet...

Talk to the owner - longtime resident of this area - He tells me that several 'old timers' told him that there were two tracks in this area 'long ago'.... (Railroad bed is wide enough for a second set of rails)...

So - Questions for you railroad surveyors/buffs....

1) What was the standard track CL to track CL separation? My books only say 14 feet or 'more'... This 14-15 foot 'shift' makes the fences fit very well with a R/W CL that matches the newer line shown on the alignment/grade sheet. Is there a documented standard track CL-CL separation today?

There is no dimension noted on the alignment/grade plans for the distance between the two lines (apparent new CL and "orig. cl"... At a scale of 1"=400', I can't say whether its 14 or 15 feet or 16 feet... And with the standard rail gage of 4'-8½" (I know the story on that one) I thought I'd ask...

2) Anybody have another source for NP railroad records? I've dug through the county's records, including those 'stashed' in the safe in the basement of the courthouse... No luck. Off to see the title companies tomorrow in case they have something in their records. (Most probably only a duplicate of the MRL R/W map I already have)...

3) Grabbed some culvert headwall locations today, which confirm my thoughts that the existing R/W fences are pretty compeling evidence of the original R/W location. They fit the origninal R/W plans pretty well for almost everything except track CL location. I think the track CL has shifted or one set of tracks pulled. The fencing in this area is railroad tie corner posts on all width transitions corners... Hmmm. Does anybody have any history or info. on railroad fencing crews?

4) Original deeds conveying title to the railroad describe the R/W as "...measured at right angles from the center line of the new southerly main track of the Northern Pacific Railway Company..." Does 'southerly main' imply two sets of rails? I would think so, but am looking for some assistance with rail terminology on this one...

My client does not benefit from the discrepancy in R/W centerlines - actually 'loses' ground due to the shift. Two other surveyors in the east half of this section accepted the original R/W plans as is. And their monuments don't fit the railroad fences.

I'd prefer to get it right. Thoughts?

Thanks for your help,

Rusty



RPLS.com
tnold@northtexastransport.org

The Minnesota Historical Soc. has some old N.P. valuation maps from 1910- 1920 . I don't know if Montana's there but you could ask. If you can find one it would answer the question.

2rivers@upstel.net

Many railroad lines built on their right of ways with the grand plans to double track in the future. Back then the more common track spacing was 13.5 feet, (at least in the east). So you will find tracks which are 6.75 feet off form the center line of the property.

I have also seen weird stuff like the railroad building one track and offsetting it by 13 or 14 feet. Then never building a track on the centerline itself. Another common finding is for a railroad to acquire the property and them redesign the alinement as it was being built. This has resulted in more than one rail track actually sitting off the edge of their property.

The original ICC Valuation maps are a wonderful history of the actual railroad. Quite often you can see the changes made over the years still visible on the original waxed linens.

Stone Consulting & Design
garylandrio@stoneconsulting.com