Recently in another thread, I mentioned the overwhelming need for enclosed storage of hitorical railway from the elements. Equipment which is in both restored and unrestored condition is unfortunately vulnerable to exposure to weather, vandals, and other problems which threaten the historical fabric of the artifact.
I thought a noble cause for preservationists to take up would be the creation of a foundation which raises capital for the creation of enclosed storage of railway equipment and artifacts across the country. Initially, the goal would be to cover the most vulnerable and historic equipment i.e. wooden cars and older locomotives. However the goal would eventually be to provide cover for most historic railway equipment.
I believe that the construction of such buildings is neccesary for the long-term preservation of historic railway equipment and should be at the forefront of every museums captital projects planning. The construction of indoor display/storage/work space is the first step in insuring the preservation and conserrvation of railway equipment. Furthermore, it arrests decay and weathering and provides a place to stabilize and restore artifacts.
How would such an organization be set up? How could they provide significant benefits to the entire preservation community? What sort of process should be used to select applicants for assistance in building construction?

Thank You,
Stephen Piwowarski
Berkshire Scenic Railway Museum, Inc.

I appreciate your enthusiasm, and your mission is a noble and worthy one. Just one small detail: you have placed the cart before the horses. Plural. Quantity, two.

I would suggest collaborating with, or at least following, the fellow who has made all the railway museum maps.
viewtopic.php?f=1&t=28548&p=133836&hilit=museum+maps#p133836


I'm afraid it is the third step. However just as the cartman drives the horses, this step drives the other two.

What am I talking about? Let's pick on the Ohio Railway Museum today. Here's a Google Maps view http://tinyurl.com/ormoverhead Where shall you erect this carbarn? Their few acres are wedged solid with railcars. Last time they pulled a car out, it had to come laterally across three tracks.

There is a nice parcel of land to their east. Is this starting to give you the picture of one of our horses? Yup. Horse #2: OWNED land on which to build your carbarn. You'll damn well not fund building it on somebody else's land! (which excludes many tenant museums entirely.)

It's in an expensive commercial area, but let's say we grab that property. Build two trophy class barns and connect them to ORM's rails. One long day of shunting cars and everything's indoors. Hang the MISSION ACCOMPLISHED banner. Right?

Fraid not. Before spending a million bucks, we would have to take a long hard look at their location. They originally sited there because it was out in the country. HEH. And it was adjacent to NYC and PRR, on which they ran their steam excursion trains. 0.0000% chance of that ever happening today. They will never have more than a 1 mile train ride. Commercial encroachment wraps around them like a boa constrictor. Whether ORM wants to stay there, it's certainly true that no NEW museum would choose a site like this. They'd probably buy a dormant branch line (preferably between two towns) and maybe connecting to a friendly shortline, which would reopen the door to steam excursions.

Railroad museums that operate, ought to have rail lines that suit their needs. That's horse #1. And if you build them carbarns on land that isn't next to THEIR rail line, you rob them of that possibility.

It's horse #1 because you really need to secure the railroad first, before you can know where to buy land.

So I wish I could say it's as simple as "throw up barns" -- but it really is a much more complex problem, that requires looking at the railway museum and their goals/aspirations/business/future in full scope. Of course that would require the museum to HAVE goals/aspirations. That the museum and its members have bought into. On their own, largely. You can't force it.


I would set it up as a foundation, not a private foundation but a public supporting one. One possible configuration would be like a community foundation, where you accept donations from Museum X's members which are earmarked for Museum X's carbarns. You might also consider requiring each beneficiary museum "pay it forward" by returning some profits to the foundation for benefit of other museums.

Why wouldn't Museum X's members donate to Museum X directly? Well -- because I hate to say, nonprofit museums with boards tend to act an awful lot like people. And if you watch the Suze Orman show, you know people are "all over the map" when it comes to financial education and wisdom. In my experience museums act like particular people, namely, their management. So you can commonly have a situation where the members see no point to donating to Museum X's carbarn restricted fund because they know it'll be invaded the very next week to pay the phone bill.

Museum funds management is a WHOLE 'nother discussion. Sometimes a separate corporation can be valuable.


Honestly? EDUCATION. What museums out there need most is an understanding of why vision work, master-planning and museum professionalism are important. Why they can help the organization grow. This is difficult to do, however, as museum managers especially volunteers don't much appreciate being told their business.

Here's the real shocker. If you can get a museum to do those things, THEY WON'T NEED your money. They'll be able to fundraise it for themselves, because that soft of planning and vision is what ALL donors are looking for, and find so rarely.

You could do well focusing on education alone.


Easy. The ones who are shovel-ready. The ones who have done the vision work, done the planning, and have consensus. The ones that have acquired the land and the railroad. The ones who have business plans that MAKE SENSE.

I suspect you'll run out of museums who are ready, before you run out of money.

With respect i dont think the original posting mentioned anything about running lines and operating trains.....thats a whole different ball game. A building to preserve fragile artifacts would be wonderful, and something we desperatly need, Our car was absolutely plastered in snow and ice this morning, got vandalised on monday night, and there i am today on my own up a 12 foot ladder in a cold westerly wind trying to fit glazed screen frames to keep the weather at bay....... We would dearly love a building............

Mike Pannell
Car 57 Cheyenne

Here is a photo of a very very cold Car 57 yesterday, note the blocked up door due to vandalism.

Mike Pannell
Cheyenne

http://www.steelmasterusa.com/products/ ... ut-history

PC

Perhaps the easiest and most helpful way of promoting the construction of carbarns is to develop a series of generic plans and bills of materials that can be used by various museums to build their structure from. Perhaps two designs, a one track model and a two track model, pole building style. Make the basic plan 48' long, then have an addendum to the bill of materials adding X amount of materials for every 8' of additional length.

We have a local company that has developed an alternative to the standard pole building that eliminates the trusses. http://socketsys.com/ They are competitive with the standard truss type pole building but have the advantage that they can be built with a lower eave height, saving even more money.

I would reccommend that regardless of the type of building, it should have a steel roof instead of shingles on plywood. Easier to install, lighter weight and will last longer.

I'll dangle another possibility in front of y'all (and I know I've suggested it before):

If you can identify your building needs, you can put out an all-points bulletin for a used industrial building that suits your needs.

In Britain, I was involved with a group that owns three diesel locomotives, a coach, and attendant tools and equipment (stored in 20-foot and 40-foot containers). The initial proposal went out for a building at a cooperative railway. They went about this the typical way: draw up plans, estimate costs, etc. Started fundraising, got some detail nixed by local council, redrawn.......

Then a member who worked with the National Coal Board found a steel shed about to be dismantled and scrapped on a nearby NCB plant that was being decommissioned. A few letters later, the building was disassembled and turned over to the locomotive group for the cost of transport--a building in need of overhaul when re-erected, but suitable and big enough for six locomotives and shop space!

Before the building could be re-erected, however, circumstances changed, and they were relocated to another railway, for which said building was just too big. So what did they do? They sold off the big building kit for a decent price, turned around, and found a smaller building kit that worked for the new site map, and bought that with the proceeds.

Buildings like this, it turns out, get put up and knocked down pretty quickly and routinely. Indeed, my city at one point had a somewhat temporary "pole shed" set up on a city block downtown while bureaucratic nightmares were under way to expand the Convention Center. The building had restrooms, offices, changing rooms, water/electric, etc. For nearly a decade, the city hosted any number of festivals--ethnic, culinary, sports, etc.--until it was dismantled to make way for the expansion. When it was dismantled, one city official called it "the best $100,000 we ever spent."

Unless your dead broke, like monly pulling in >$1,000 per year after expenses there is really no excuse for not getting your equipment covered, you can get structures extremely cheap, check farming catalogs, some are even designed to be relocated, yeah they may not look the best but nether does rotting equipment if you get my drift.

Robert, I agree that a foundation would be the appropriate organization for handling the collection and dispersal of capital for these sort of projects. I believe the projects should which are applicable should have a location which they own. Getting equipment covered in location where they can be safely preserved would be the ultimate goal of the orgaization.
Organizations which are considered should be able to demonstrate why their collection/parts of their collection should be a priority for the construction of indoor storage. Furthermore organizations must demonstrate a coherent plan for the use of the structure. For example building a "restoration shop" for equipment which will continue to languish outdoors after its restoration is complete is poor planning in my opinion. Rather, I would envision building a structure to display and restore cars, with provisions for turning it into a storage/ display building if a later restoration shop can be funded.
I think it would be appropriate for organizations to develop a usage plan for the building, initial architectural and engineering drawings, and a cost estimate. These would all be part of the application process. A commitee would be set to review applications and award grants from the foundations accounts.
In response to designing a generic building, I think you would first need to consult a local structural engineer to make sure the loadings were appropriate. This is why I would suggest the organization taking care of preliminary planning and coming to the foundation with a cost estimate. At this point the foundation could consult with the organization on design modifications, cost saving measures etc.
For now, I will research the process of starting a public foundation here in New York and see what I can come up with.

Stephen Piwowarski
Berkshire Scenic Railway Museum, Inc.

Is it better to start from scratch with a new foundation, or join forces with an existing foundation such as NARF? Might it be possible to help them with a new program directed exclusively at housing collections?

I absolutely agree display buildings should be a high priority.

So what if unrestored, unsightly equipment is stored inside pending restoration? So what if a section is used for shop space temporarily? Wall off a section for these purposes, and put the best part of the collection in "public" space until a second building is in place, or the collection is brought up to snuff. At least the collection is preserved, if only in a state of arrested decay.

Now, to continue working toward our own, planned but unfunded, display hall...

Steve Hunter
RMEO

Pole buildings are pre-engineered, meaning some engineer long long ago drew up the first plan and everyone copies it. Places that sell roof trusses can usually give you generic plans to work from. That usually satisfies most rural building inspectors. In the city you may have to get an architect to draw it up, but an engineer is certainly not necessary. Same goes for the Socket Systems buildings. Already pre-engineered. Your snow loadings will tell you how many trusses you need.