The ORHF is looking at potentially running some sort of regular excursion train in Portland that paralells a new bike/walk path that was built next to an existing operating shortline. The path is on one "track" of what was once a double track line. This plan could include regular steam operations. The path is fenced and paved the complete length of the shared row. The situation is much like the operating line at the Cal State museum. Does anyone know af any issues that had to be delt with, or problems that couldn't be worked out in this kind of location?

Thanks for your input.

Smokebox

"orhf dot org"

Might want to contact Western Maryland Scenic in Cumberland for their perspective. A trail has been proposed (in fact, strongly advocated) next to their right of way and I know they have very serious concerns about it, should it come to pass--everything from liability issues to "how exactly do I pull out a tie on the fenced/trail side without knocking down the fence and obstructing the trail..."

eledbetter@rypn.org

> Might want to contact Western Maryland
> Scenic in Cumberland for their perspective.
> A trail has been proposed (in fact, strongly
> advocated) next to their right of way and I
> know they have very serious concerns about
> it, should it come to pass--everything from
> liability issues to "how exactly do I
> pull out a tie on the fenced/trail side
> without knocking down the fence and
> obstructing the trail..."

To say nothing of the proposed crossing gates, lighting, etc. proposed for Brush Tunnel!


lner4472@bcpl.net

The former Northern Central operation in York County, PA was exactly the same sort of set-up. They were restricted to 10 mph operation in deference to the walkers/bikers. Someone from there could give you much more detailed information.


K4s1361@hotmail.com

The Wisconsin Great Northern, I believe that is the name, at Spooner, Wisc., shares space with a rail trail and would be a good resource. I believe they've been fairly satisfied with it.

Wrinnbo@aol.com

> Smokebox

There is big chunk of trackage like this along the old Pennsy line which is now the OHIO CENTRAL. They run regular trains on this line, plus the steam excursions periodically. This section is from Newark eastward about 5-10 miles!
This was former doubletrack too! Might ask the Ohio Central folks about it. Web site below.

Noted another topic you had about smoke. This is the problem with (A)being in the WEST, and (b)being inside a large metro area.

We were on Ohio Central's photo specials, and they made tons of nice smoke on all the runbys. It is nice being away from the big cities.

It would be nice if you guys could find a place close to the city, but a rural location where you could have access to a line to run on too. Then the smoke issue wouldn't be such a factor.

I noted on TV the tree sitters, so perhaps in Oregon they have Rail-sitters to prevent smoking engines too. Most of the shots I have ever seen from 4449 are clean stacked anyway, so whats the problem...its a fireless cooker isn't it??? :)
I assumed 700 was smoking so much in Montana cause it was syphoning that diesel fuel off the FP45 behind it, eh!! :)

Greg Scholl
http://www.gregschollvideo.com

PS what you guys need is an Ohio Central line that can be owned and operated by you non-profits.
Of course those are probably hard to come by!


2 smoking OC engines
sales@gregschollvideo.com

The issue of smoke abatement is indeed because of the location in a metro are. But on the flip side, it's a metro area direcly across a street from an attraction that gets around a million people a year thru the door. Sometimes we have to give a little to get alot.

The line would more than likely see something around the size of a switcher or small Baldwin logging locomotive with only limited use by the 4-8-4s. The line has fresh relaid 110lb rail, so use of the 4-8-4s wouldn't be out of the question. I don't dare bring up the fleet of ALCo's around here...some smoke issues can be delt with, others are, thankfully, hopeless.

Smokebox

Thanks for your input so far guys!

"orhf dot org"

This is an issue on the Tourist Railway that I work on as we have a rail trail along the line. It runs along the fenceline and is well clear of the track. There are no fences. There have been no incidents except where horseriders have ignored the ban on horses on the trail and the horses got spooked and threw their riders. More fool them eh!

I suggest you do a search on "rails with trails" - there are hundreds of hits. There's even an FRA report there somewhere

Sounds like you are indeed in a tough spot. If you have the ability to draw crowds then you probably have won half the battle if not more so.

I forgot to mention in my post above the Pedestrian path along the Ohio Central is fenced along the track. It kinda mars the photos in this area, and our recent photo trips did not go that far.

Good luck. Sounds like Portland might be the big hotspot in the west for Steam shortly.

Greg Scholl

sales@gregschollvideo.com

There have been several proposals here in Northern California, ranging from a paved, fenced, trail along the Caltrain line, a high speed (80 mph) high density (80+ trains a day) commuter line, to a formal paved path along the Niles Canyon Railway (possibly replacing the railroad) to mixed use along the Santa Cruz and Big Trees.

There are several issues involved. The most significant of which is safety. The Caltrain plan was shelved due to concerns that passing trains could throw debris at path users. The other two lines are low speed, so the safety concerns are more along the line of people on the tracks. The Santa Cruz and Big Trees has for years had people using the right of way for access, and the proposal there is more along the lines of formalizing the use, (I believe this was going to be in the form of an public use easement) controlling liability, while giving the public access to some interesting trails. It appears that the privately owned Santa Cruz and Big Trees is getting some wonderful political brownie points for its cooperation.

In the case of the Niles Canyon proposal, the issue was more landscape preservation, and track preservation, as the local park agency responsible was reportedly interested in replacing the tracks with a bike path. I use the term reportedly, because this proposal is only formally presented as a line on the park agencyÂ’s "Trails general plan" and has never been reviewed as a specific project. There is some interest in applying for National Register status for the canyon as a transportation corridor, to assure preservation of the railroad history in Niles Canyon.

Finally, in the case of the Caltrain proposal, there were questions of right of way preservation, what would happen if in the future, Caltrain needed the land used by the bike path? The Caltrain proposal also had problems as a bike path. It was envisioned as a bike freeway, running the length of San Mateo County. Caltrain is a very urban line, with lots of grade separations. The bike path was going to need to leave the right of way at each grade separation, since funds were not available to build bridges, also, at grade crossings, there were no plans to install traffic controls for the bicyclist, leaving them to either take their chances crossing the streets, or detouring to the nearest intersection, clearly not the freeway envisioned.

At this point, the Caltrain proposal is dead, the Niles Canyon proposal continues to exist but it is un- approved, and un-funded, and unlikely to be un-funded for a very long time. I believe the Santa Cruz proposal is either in place, or may soon be.


http://spcrr.org
hees@ix.netcom.com

Smokebox,

I can think of two similar situations right off the bat. Both are two foot gauge.

The first is Maine Narrow Gauge in (coincidentally) Portland, Maine. They operate through a city park with a paralleling trail and could probably give you some valuable insights of the problems/issues they have had to deal with. Their track is unfenced.

The URL is:
http://www.mngrr.org/

The URL for the other situation is included below. The Welsh Highland (in the UK) has a paralleling trail which is fenced. In the UK there are very stringent rules for situations where active rails and footpaths are in close juxtaposition. These rules are probably more stringent than anything we have on this side of the pond. I'm sure they could provide some useful insights. Their URL is attached below.

Finally, a new trail has been (partially) opened along the old Maine Central line along the Kennebec River between Augusta and Gardiner, Maine. The coexistence has not been easy and I understand several safety issues/concerns remain to be resolved. I don't have a URL for this one. Perhaps someone else can supplu contact information.

Hope this helps.

Best Regards,
Glenn

> The ORHF is looking at potentially running
> some sort of regular excursion train in
> Portland that paralells a new bike/walk path
> that was built next to an existing operating
> shortline. The path is on one
> "track" of what was once a double
> track line. This plan could include regular
> steam operations. The path is fenced and
> paved the complete length of the shared row.
> The situation is much like the operating
> line at the Cal State museum. Does anyone
> know af any issues that had to be delt with,
> or problems that couldn't be worked out in
> this kind of location?

> Thanks for your input.

> Smokebox


http://www.bangor.ac.uk/ml/whr/
christensenge@yahoo.com