Passenger rail more likely on rail-trail ROW or freight ROW?

I think location and grading of right of way is generally a greater expense than the cost of laying track. To make a roadbed that will support trains will involve cut and fill work, drainage work, grading, possibly tunnels, bridges or at least culverts. This work is so extensive and durable that railroad track routes are easily visible after a century of abandonment. Many old railroad rights of way could be put back into service after decades of abandonment with minimal work.

This is a major factor in favor of resurrecting abandoned rail routes. The heaviest, most expensive work was completed long in the past and paid for long ago.

In the current issue of "Classic Trains" is an article on the Eastern Tennessee and Western North Carolina. This railroad once had a significant narrow-gauge component. Part of this ran through a narrow gorge and several tunnels. This part had been abandoned and was never standard-gauged.
This narrow-gauge R.O.W. became a one-lane country road. Later, the county allowed narrow-gauge track to be relaid on this roadbed and now hosts trains again.

If you study the territory of abandoned railroads with Google Earth, you can see the routes of many an abandoned rail route, especially in the American West where the terrain erodes slowly. Rail R.O.W.s do not fade away easily.

Les

johndmuller wrote:A large part of the difficulty in restoring rail would be the local politics. A rail-trail is kind of like a free greenspace in your local neighborhood. Not that everyone is going to use it, but most everyone thinks it is good to have it. Local politicians and real estate agents tout them and of course at least some people actively use them for hiking and biking. Contrast this family friendly concept with that of the least disruptive rail application you can imagine and the difference is obvious.

As an interesting side note, the county wanted to upgrade a local trail in the village to connect our local rail trail to another major trail on the other side of town, but the village elders worried about apparently dangerous rail trail users invading our fair burb via this newly improved connection and turned down the offer.

I used to let the dog run near the local rail-trail when it was in the last stages of being a railroad, and even though the trains were going quite slow, they could still pop up unexpectedly - causing considerable anxiety about getting the dog under control in time. Substitute your children for the dog and you can see how the local suburbanites would react to resumption of service.

From a more practical point of view, this line, and I imagine most rail trails, are kind of light on the grade separation, which makes them both less desirable and more expensive to reactivate.

It also has been my observation over the years that landowners near or abutting the railroad to be converted to a trail for the most part vehemently object to creation of a trail, stating that it will bring noise, litter, undesirables, crime, trespassers straying from the trail and so forth. They want neither active rail line nor trail.

Ken W2KB wrote:

johndmuller wrote:A large part of the difficulty in restoring rail would be the local politics.

It also has been my observation over the years that landowners near or abutting the railroad to be converted to a trail for the most part vehemently object to creation of a trail, stating that it will bring noise, litter, undesirables, crime, trespassers straying from the trail and so forth. They want neither active rail line nor trail.

Plus, outright abandonment would mean the right-of-way would be extinguished, and the adjacent landowners would each have a free chunk of land. That's why the railbanking programs of the 1980s were so important to both rail-trails and restored railroads.

Yes, NIMBY land-owners like to scare each other with visions of invading hordes of riff-raff coming up the bike trail into their neighborhood. Maybe even worse than the train itself.

If you go to Pierre, SD, you can find the grade of a never-built (grading work done, rail never laid) "paper railroad" used to pressure the Territorial Legislature into naming Pierre the State Capital. This was allegedly a NP branch. This would have made Pierre a two-railroad town, a definite plus for a state capital. I suspect it was paid for by the C&NW, the existing railroad and owner of the town plot.

Rail banking has worked well in South Dakota. It is a good alternative to reverting the land to adjacent property owners, or making it a bike trail. It is too bad that this alternative wasn't used on the soon-to-be-abandoned ATSF R.O.W. in Northern New Mexico. Rail-banked land lasts forever with little expense to the state (loss of potential revenue from property tax). Once a R.O.W. reverts to adjacent land owners, it is lost forever. Is there no value to the state in holding title to a potential asset as important as a railroad main line?

Les

Desertdweller wrote:Yes, NIMBY land-owners like to scare each other with visions of invading hordes of riff-raff coming up the bike trail into their neighborhood. Maybe even worse than the train itself.

If you go to Pierre, SD, you can find the grade of a never-built (grading work done, rail never laid) "paper railroad" used to pressure the Territorial Legislature into naming Pierre the State Capital. This was allegedly a NP branch. This would have made Pierre a two-railroad town, a definite plus for a state capital. I suspect it was paid for by the C&NW, the existing railroad and owner of the town plot.

Rail banking has worked well in South Dakota. It is a good alternative to reverting the land to adjacent property owners, or making it a bike trail. It is too bad that this alternative wasn't used on the soon-to-be-abandoned ATSF R.O.W. in Northern New Mexico. Rail-banked land lasts forever with little expense to the state (loss of potential revenue from property tax). Once a R.O.W. reverts to adjacent land owners, it is lost forever. Is there no value to the state in holding title to a potential asset as important as a railroad main line?

Les

We're getting a bit far afield, but as of right now, the Raton Sub hasn't been abandoned. Why wouldn't the state allow for rail banking? Besides, it's important to note that rail trails are generally classed as interim uses for railroad rights-of-way, though we all know that it's rare to see rails re-laid in these corridors.

An interesting situation has developed where I am in Northwest Indiana. The South Shore line was gifted a Monon (L&N, then later CSX) ROW from Hammond, IN to Munster, IN. The line has been abandoned for about 30 years now, and in the last 5 or so years they installed trails NEXT TO the abandoned track through said towns. Well now thanks yet another local tax, they have found the money to convert the ROW to a commuter rail extension called the “West Lake Corridor” At they very least this entire plan is harebrained and an absolute cluster, but it does show that a trail ROW can (If the locals are dumb enough) be converted back to an active rail line.

http://www.nwitimes.com/news/local/sout ... 5a084.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Chuck Pullen

There's a rail trail near Ottawa that is specifically marked as preserved for possible future rail use. IIRC when they did the high speed rail study they basically said "ah well, it would be too much fuss to take it back" and didn't consider it.

virtualchuck wrote:An interesting situation has developed where I am in Northwest Indiana. The South Shore line was gifted a Monon (L&N, then later CSX) ROW from Hammond, IN to Munster, IN. The line has been abandoned for about 30 years now, and in the last 5 or so years they installed trails NEXT TO the abandoned track through said towns. Well now thanks yet another local tax, they have found the money to convert the ROW to a commuter rail extension called the “West Lake Corridor” At they very least this entire plan is harebrained and an absolute cluster, but it does show that a trail ROW can (If the locals are dumb enough) be converted back to an active rail line.

http://www.nwitimes.com/news/local/sout ... 5a084.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Chuck Pullen

Just to be clear, the trail existed next to the rail that NICTD was gifted. IIRC the rail has now been removed from what will become the NICTD West Lake Line ... not a bad idea since it would all need to be replaced anyways. Rails and trails can co-exist in close proximity.

If the "rail" NICTD was gifted actually became the trail it might be harder to get back. The railroad would probably have to replace the trail in order to get the rail ROW. Fortunately the NICTD Munster ROW is wide enough for the rail and a trail.

While not in the purest sense a "trail to rail" project, the West Lake Line also has the aspect of converting freight to passenger ... although for the first phase the conversion is minimal. The extension of the Munster ROW south is on a line used by Amtrak. The extension of the Munster ROW north is through an industrial area.

The phase to Valparaiso is along a well traveled CN line ... which may be hard to convince CN to give up trackage rights to use. The alternative to reach Valparaiso is an abandoned non-trail alignment and leased CSX line out of Gary.

I'm interested in how this question shakes out in actual experience. When the Twin Cities & Western abandoned the ex-MILW through Minneapolis, the city created a rail-trail along the right-of-way. However, they left a one-track-width ROW for future light rail service. I'm very curious how it will be received by community organizers, especially if the right-of-way hosts heavy rail or FRA-compliant rail rather than the suggested light rail or heritage trolley service.

The SMART trains (Sonoma Marin Area Rail Transit District) will have a trail next to the rails ROW.
http://main.sonomamarintrain.org/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
"Sonoma-Marin Area Rail Transit (SMART) is a voter-approved passenger rail and bicycle-pedestrian pathway project located in Marin and Sonoma counties. It will serve a 70-mile corridor from Larkspur to Cloverdale, with a first phase from San Rafael to Santa Rosa."

One of the most impressive portions of the line is where a tunnel has been rehabilitated and divided to allow trains to use one portion and trail to use another.