Matt, I'm sorry but I would have to disagree with you. I don't know DVARP's position on the installation of rail-trails on SEPTA's OOS lines, but supporting them, or saying that it helps preserve the ROW for the future only further cement's SEPTA's policy of allowing such converstions, and may assist in future conversions. The precedent has now been set.
The trail on the Newtown line will likely be the easiest for SEPTA to recover. However, the most concerning conversion is that of the Bethlehem Branch, which in itself has its own set of unique circumstances. In the case of Bethlehem, SEPTA missed an opportunity to take the right of first refusal and purchase the last few miles of the line back to Union Station. But since the ROW was abandonded through the STB, that ROW is now permanetly lost. The result will be marginal utility for any future restoration on the remnants of the Bethlehem line. Undoing the Saucon trail will be extremely difficult, if not all but impossible because of the number of municipalities that have to be dealt with.
A more proactive approach to developing a strategy for preserving OOS ROWs should have been vetted. We know nationally, there has never been a reconversion of a converted passenger line from trail back to rail. This red flag should have been thrown by the SEPTA board before inking the deal on the leases they signed. It would have been nice to see DVARP speak up and call for a more thorough review of the implications of such conversions. In fact, I would have expected that from an association of rail passengers.
There are many other choices for preserving OOS lines that just putting trails in. I get the impression there was no effort to develop these choices. Options should have been developed years ago before deterioration, encroachment and requests for conversion became so pronounced. One idea would have been the solicitation of freight business on any of the OOS lines through a public-private partnership with a short line frieght carrier.
Did SEPTA ever seek a partnership with a short line carrier to solicit and develop freight service on any of the OOS lines? We keep hearing about public-private partnerships, this would have been a great one. Seek and you will find.
A lease with a freight carrier could have allowed a state grant to make infrastructure improvements or assist with maintaining track. The New Hope & Ivyland is one such example of a private, small, shortline, who has obtained state grants in the past to maintain their line, for local service, which supports the local economy. Since SEPTA is incapable of maintaining and operating rail lines they own, a strategy for maintaining and preserving lines, as rail lines should have been developed. Another exmaple could be using OOS track for car storage from private haulers. The economic downturn created a surplus of freight cars that needed a place to stay. The owners pay to keep them stored until needed again. There are pros and cons to these and any options. The million dollar question is, were they ever discussed?
There needs to be new, creative thinking for utilizing these corridors that actively utilize them for the purpose in which they exist. Unfortunately the above ideas are a few years too late for SEPTA's mothballed corridors now. My overall point is that there has been a distinct lack of thought in dealing with SEPTA's OOS routes, and the result of the indifference or inablility to develop plans is evident in what's left of these corridors today.
