Hi,
In response to this sort of item happening for modelers, I have been considering adding a Volume 3 to my Civil Engineering for Outdoor Railroads series and cover several items that might help the novice know what to look for zoning requirements and so forth.
The same things would also be of concern for railroad museums and other historical preservation groups.
If you are interested in this topic, please let me know.
Thanks.
Doug

Zoning and Building codes need to be of concern to pretty much anyone building anything. These activities are heavily regulated, and any facility into which the general public may be invited will invite special scrutiny.

That said, it is my understanding that railroads -due to their special status in interstate commerce are exempt from local planning requirements. This concept is knows as Federal Preemption. The feds recommend voluntary discussions and agreements with local planning agencies to avoid lawsuits and enmity, but federally regulated railroads do not have to go to the local planning agency when they want to extend a siding, or build any other facility that is directly in support of their transportation service. An office building, however, would not be exempt.

Now I believe the definition of what is a "railroad" can be broad enough to include a number of tourist and museum operations. So here is the question, have any groups out there successfully asserted that they were exempt from local planning requirements due to their status as federally regulated railroads? Pursuing this strategy may be a bad idea unless you are prepared to go to court. It is always a bad idea to tick off the local planning department, but there are a number of railroad-related facilities that a planning department would not be well equipped to address.

Please keep in mind that I am talking about Planning requirements. This means stuff related to zoning and includes issues such as land use, height restrictions, setbacks, and design guidelines. Building requirements are intended to ensure life safety, and are a completely separate matter.

We all know that the problem of overreaching regulation will continue to spiral out of control, regardless of anyone's efforts to reign them in. Government's primary function is to create new laws, and a law is at its core a restriction of liberty. So a government created to protect personal liberties can only do so by restricting liberties! Congress should have been disbanded years ago. All of the basic laws that govern society have been written. What they are engaged in now amounts to nothing less than codifying wealth redistribution and finding new and innovative ways to further restrict liberties.

Bureaucrats are an interesting creature. They seem to have no ability to think outside the box, and their box consists of the regulations created from laws by other bureaucrats. If anything happens that doesn't fit nicely into their regulatory box they are confused, bewildered and befuddled. Their knee jerk reaction is to say NO.

For example, I was once entangled in a situation that fell outside of the bureaucrats box. I owned a former Conrail hyrail truck that I drove on occasion. Finally it spun a crankshaft bearing as I was driving it, so I nursed it along to a friend's place to park until spring when I would scrap it. Well in Ohio they have a questionable policy of sending random letters to registered vehicle owners demanding that they show proof of insurance. The penalty for not doing so was to have your drivers license suspended for three months. Well they sent me a letter asking for proof of insurance for the hyrail truck. I had none, since by that time the truck was scrap and what was the point of maintaining insurance on a junk vehicle.

I thought I could explain the situation and move on. But not so! That doesn't fit into the box. But then I consulted the Ohio Revised Code and found these statements:
"No person shall operate, or permit the operation of, a motor vehicle in this state, unless proof of financial responsibility is maintained continuously throughout the registration period" and "A person to whom this state has issued a certificate of registration for a motor vehicle or a license to operate a motor vehicle or who is determined to have operated any motor vehicle or permitted the operation in this state of a motor vehicle owned by the person shall be required to verify the existence of proof of financial responsibility covering the operation of the motor vehicle"

I tried explaining that I was in compliance with the law since I did not "operate" this vehicle without insurance, and the mere issuance of a random letter to a registered vehicle owner is not sufficient proof that I have indeed operated the motor vehicle on the date in question.

But they did not want to hear of it. My interpretation of the law, even when that law is plainly writen does not fit into their box. So I could have fought it, a minimum $800 retainer for an attorney and then I'm left to the mercy of the court. As it was I was facing three months of unemployment because I would have no way to get to work, so money was going to be tight. Someone then suggested pleading my case to the State Senator's office, and after explaining the situation to a very level headed aide she intervened in my behalf and got the matter dropped. I had to have a garage inspect the truck and write a letter confirming that indeed the truck was not operable.

But it never should have progressed that far. I was caught up in an "unusual situation", unusual only to lawmakers and bureaucrats who did not properly consider the unintended consequences of their ill conceived lawmaking.

So the moral of this story is thus. Forr our fellow readers from Ohio, although the law doesn't say so, you must keep insurance on all registered vehicles whether you drive them or not. The time honored practice of only insuring vehicles that are driven has effectively been outlawed. And there is no mechanism for cancelling a vehicle's registration. So if you register the vehicle in October, and the engine blows in November, you either have to scrap the vehicle or keep paying the insurance until next October.

Arizona has a similar statute. However, under the Arizona Revised Statute an uninsured or unregistered vehicle cannot be driven or operated upon any public roadway. It would be perfectly legal for such vehicle to be operated if kept on private roadways or property. As for insurance requirements, all one has to do is cancel or have the vehicle removed from the policy and send the state department of transportation a notice of de-insurance. That can be done by mail or through the state's secure server.

The Napa Valley Wine Train used the Federal Premption to establish operation on a former SP branch line...

Locals (NIBY and CAVE people) were against the railroad, equating it to the Disneyization of the wine country. The railroad argued it was Federaly regulated and exempt from the local hoopla...

There were several small battles fought... The railroad and its right of way are early, circa 1863, so most crossings are subordinate... including many driveways... the railroad used the threat of charging owners of driveways for the cost of rebuilding them during track reconstruction... Offering to pay for the work if no objection to the work was filed... Locals tried to argue the line had be defacto abandoned as it had not be operated in some years and was therefor no longer part of the interstate railroad network, but during these arguments one of the wineries on line (which was opposed to the new railroad) ordered several boxcars of wine bottles, which were delivered effectively ending that argument.

Rules can work in your favor.

FYI

We know about Not In My Back Yard.

As it was recently explained to me CAVE stands for Citizens Against Virtually Everything.

Did I get that right, Randy?

Sort of like Build Absolutely Nothing Anywhere Nor Anytime (banana) people, eh?

My Father is Ceres,CA put a hay barn in 1927 (before I was thougt of)with any pemit or country check for safety it is still stand today. We I was 9 year old (1953) we put in a water below the ground head on the field 36" pipe and 6 open to let water out, No Pemit. We I turn 12 year old I give a 22 rifle to shoot jack rabbit (A)Can do it now. (B)Can go after rabbit now
Can use 22 rifle to pigeon,period.
The neighbor silo put 20' Round and 25' High about 1950 not did pemit.
The some Pemit are O.K. because the Fire Dept need the layout out the land. The Rifle for a 12 year in O.K. in a county farm but how do say county farm?


Smile

Stan

I've heard, Build Absolutely Nothing Anywhere Near Anyone.

To continue to try to bring this back to railroad preservation.

Warning, the following is a bit of a rant….

Most of us are better at laying track than asking for permission to lay track.

Unfortunately we live in a world that increasingly requires official (outside our group) permission to build buildings, with increasing level of detail required in advance.

For our group, to build our first building we had to navigate a site specific zoning process, unique to our city owned, county operated park. In the 25 years the park has been in existence we were the first to gain permission through channels (the other 7 or so buildings gained approval via a political process… ) We got word last Tuesday that we have passed the final hurtle in the land use process and are down to plan check.

Complaining about the process only makes the process more difficult, while at the same time extending the time needed to complete it. It is easy to complain… it is harder to just do the work needed to get approval.

I like that my neighbor can’t build a three story 7 bedroom house which looms over mine... because the cities’ land use rules forbid it… unfortunately I need to follow those rules and jump through those hoops when I change my house or build my railroad building…

In our case getting our building approved was a three year project for our on again, off again volunteer building manager. Having the resources to throw at the process would have made it a 6 month process… We didn’t have the resources. We are not “construction” professionals, our building manager is a landscape architect… the rest of us are software engineers, NASA scientists, retired teachers, and such. Our lack of collective knowledge does not get us a free pass… we still need to follow the rules.

I suppose that laying rail is one area where Old Pueblo Trolley has benefited from the fact that we operate strictly in the public right of way. All we have had to do is work with the City of Tucson Department of Transportation, which one of our members was employed with as a civil engineer. When we constructed our first (and only half mile), most of the time required was due to the limited volunteer manpower available. We had already financed the construction and rehabilitation costs under a grant to get the first mile up and running as a demonstrator railroad.

Currently, we are extending our line by a quarter mile into downtown. This project requires the demolition of the Union Pacific Railroad overpass on 4th Avenue. We are preparing to begin daily commuter type operations within the next couple of years, in order to fulfill our end of the agreement we have with the City. The demolition of the underpass is in progress and the majority of the new trackwork needed has already been laid down.

What the issue comes down to is knowing the rules in your locale and trying to work the system to your advantage. The result for us is that we've never had any problem gaining permission. On the contrary, we're getting the long awaited extension that will get us into downtown Tucson at no cost to us-the city is assuming the entire financial expense of the work.