Whither Housatonic (HRRC) Railroad? (no TIGER for HRRC)

Wasn't that basically what happened with Guilford's Conn River line in the '80s? Eminent domain was used in that case, was it not?

That had something to do with NRPC's contractual rights, I think. I.e. Amtrak snatched it.

that line was not refused by Amtrak first,so complete different scenario.
If CDOT tried Eminent Domain they get laughed out of court, specially since P&W can travel over a line CDOT already owns(danbury branch) and CDOT turned down the Maybrook and New Milford secondairy already.
Now if P&W went for adverse possesion due to HHRC not maintaining Maybrook east of Botsford, they(P&W) have most likely just cause. specially since P&W already spend a lot of money fixing a HRRC bridge in Derby.

Ps Steamer could you grow up and stop namecalling, no one at HRRC is crack head as far as I know.

MEC407 wrote:Wasn't that basically what happened with Guilford's Conn River line in the '80s? Eminent domain was used in that case, was it not?

Yes. Amtrak v. Boston & Maine. Upheld by the Supreme Court. But the feds (via Amtrak) were the ones exercising it, not the states, and it was used explicitly to protect a passenger route. So I don't know if it's applicable to state action against a freight railroad. It's at best an extremely, extremely weak legal hand to play in MA with a heritage passenger RR and in CT on a combo of non-revenue MNRR-rights trackage and commuter rail proposal to New Milford existing only as feasibility study. The Conn River precedent doesn't come close to cutting it here.

Possible legal avenues here aren't real cut-and-dried because of the mixture of public and private ownership. The Berkshire has a large segment of ROW under public ownership...there's public interest in preventing an "intentional grounding" move by HRCC. It's also a publicly owned segment landlocked from the rest of the rail system by private-owned trackage on each end, so there's public interest in preventing it from being isolated. And the certain collateral damage from P&W launching the nukes over Maybrook access may open up some avenues for 3rd party mediation. But I bet it's going to be a hodgepodge of little stuff like that instead of a clean grab, which probably means little chance to avert a big big messy cleanup whenever the jig is up. The states are going to take a bath cleaning up the wreckage in HRCC's wake; that's unfortunately the likely outcome of this.

In the meantime, yeah, they'd be foolish to give this outfit any grant money. If a cut-and-run is plausible theory for the company's bonkers behavior, then that's simply running the risk of the public money lining the pockets of HRCC management as they pull their own money out of the operation prior to it going splat. They may simply have to wait for some other shoe to drop first (P&W getting angry again?).

DutchRailnut wrote:If CDOT tried Eminent Domain they get laughed out of court, specially since P&W can travel over a line CDOT already owns(danbury branch) and CDOT turned down the Maybrook and New Milford secondairy already.

Really? I'm not so sure about that. There has been plenty of precidence shown to you as to why that may not be the case. Now I'm not going to continue to argue this matter, but I will reasert that there is precidence for eminent domain claims against offending railroads. That has been proven.

DutchRailnut wrote:Steamer could you grow up and stop namecalling, no one at HRRC is crack head as far as I know.

If it walks like a Duck, Talks like a Duck, Looks like a Duck.......it must be a........Chicken? You seem to be ok with the the fact that they have lied about a reputable orginization then? I believe (and at one point you backed me up on this) HHRC has earned it. Look what they have done to the people at Birkshire, and the communities they claim to serve.


@ F-line to Dudley via Park

I think you have hit it right on the head. The way that HHRC is playing with everyone right now, they are trying to allienate everyone that they can so that they have what they view to be a better hand when the towel gets thrown in. If the reputation of certain former Guilford people is any indication of what they are going to do, they will continue to purposefully provide poor service to "get rid" of customers. This may all ready be happening. Who knows. I agree with you in terms of this getting a lot worse before it gets better....

Business first: strong opinions and I think outside of the ED issue (no, not erectile dys.... never mind) we all agree. Let's move on from that.

I think actually the state has a hammer here they could use; revoke access (they'd need a reason) over the section of Berkshire they own. The state could say they could interchange with PanAmS at Derby. This would of course have several complications.

1. HRRC's track is OOS at Derby. They'd have to fix it to access their Danbury -Newtown - New Milford customers. Oh my. Plus they'd need a crew and service facility.
2. HRRC is located in Canaan, right? Which would be on the state-owned stretch. And I"m sure they have customers in that area in CT. Oh well. They could still service their customers in MA though.

How did they do business before the track above Danbury was restored?

They could also "trade" track. Trade their Maybrook/Danbury trackage for the state owned section, with a little "boot" cash, and air rights to Newtown.

Also, F-Line, I don't think they're a legacy carrier, are they? I.e. they're not the original Housatonic acquired by NH are they?

You know, in thinking about the dust-up with BSRM, is it possible that they were worried about their own liability in that their trackage may be sub-standard and that a BSRM accident would expose their own poor maintenance? I.e. the BSRM "violations" was just a red herring?

Ultimately, it's going to come down to the FRA/STB sorting this out, I think.

correct the state can not violate their lease with HRRC which I believe is 30 years for state owned trackage. If the state were to break lease they get sued.
only option would be for P&W to file and push for adverse possesion on Botsford to Derby part.
on other parts the HRRC is not violating trackage agreements.

Correct me if I am wrong (thought I read somewhere on here) that the P&W has already filed for adverse conditions and retracted the suit for some reason. ( I Tink HHRC said they would fix the track) I am not sure if they can reopen the suit. or for that matter if they wanto to.

boatsmate wrote:Correct me if I am wrong (thought I read somewhere on here) that the P&W has already filed for adverse conditions and retracted the suit for some reason. ( I Tink HHRC said they would fix the track) I am not sure if they can reopen the suit. or for that matter if they wanto to.

It was a tactical warning shot to get HRCC to take some action on track conditions. It was withdrawn when they got a reaction from HRCC and the assurances that the track would be fixed, but the message was pretty clear: ignore the warning shot and next time it's gonna count. That wasn't them taking a passive-aggressive one-time swipe to make a statement. They meant it about wanting reliably operable track there, and made it clear they'll go after HRCC again if they don't get their act together. They weren't blowing off steam...they want that route to Danbury for a reason. It's a hell of a lot easier to grow business out there not swimming against so much MNRR traffic, and it's a short and moveable bridge-free NH/Devon/Derby gap of weight uprating away from them having a contiguous 286K-rated route for them across the state...which they sure as hell ain't getting in this or our children's lifetime if they're consigned to the New Haven Line west of Devon. They're not content to stay static out there...if they want to grow Danbury business they're gonna need the higher-capacity route that has more schedule flex.

If HRCC's intent is indeed "intentional grounding", this will flare up again. And P&W doesn't give off any signals that they're an outfit willing to play a rope-a-dope game, so odds are dramatically higher that next time they have to act it'll not only be in front of the STB but also in a courtroom seeking damages. That's where the state's ultimately going to get sucked into the vortex as a 3rd party.

As I understand it,The Surface Transportation Board's "Directed Service Order" would allow P+W to service all remaining
customers,While HRRC,ConnDOT,ConnDEC,and the FRA deal with legal issues in/out of court.
It is now a fact that HRRC cannot maintain basic services in their service area and it's to a point where Public Safety is
considered threatened. The fact that the FEDS rejected 2 "TIGER" grant apps makes most of us think"something smells BAD" here!
P+W,MNR,BSRM(BSRY),and DRM, along with the remaining customers,and general public,are the "injured" parties.
The state should go to the STB with the P+W to get the process started,ASAP!!

I-84 is way overloaded with traffic,under constant construction,and not the best way to move some kinds of bulk freight.

Didn't mean to stir up a hornet's nest.

the Direct service order would only effect from Botsford to Derby and did not have any customers.
as for 286.000 Lbs cars they can still NOT be used, as New Haven main line and Waterbury and Danbury branches have a weight limit of 263.000 lbs.

Jeff Smith wrote:How did they do business before the track above Danbury was restored?

The Maybrook was still in service as a through route from Beacon to Derby when the middle portion of the Berkshire was o/o/s in the '70's and '80's. So New Milford south was serviced out of Danbury. Not something that's possible today except via a big detour on the New Haven main.

Jeff Smith wrote:Also, F-Line, I don't think they're a legacy carrier, are they? I.e. they're not the original Housatonic acquired by NH are they?

No, they're not the original Housatonic that was leased by the NYNH&H in 1893. That company was merged out of existence in a corporate restructuring around the time of the First World War. If I remember correctly, the current HRRC got its start in the early 1980's as a tourist hauler based out of Canaan Union Station, running on trackage operated by B&M. At some point B&M pulled out and they acquired the Canaan-area trackage, then restored Canaan-New Milford to service. The tourist operation existed in tandem with the frieght for a bit (I remember riding Canaan-West Cornwall and back with my Dad ca. 1989-- think it was old Reading Company commuter equipment.)

The tourist operation ran from West Cornwall, at that time the Housatonic was nothing but a rail foamer operation with school kids and rail buffs clearing the track so they had track to operate on.
once they cleared enough track, the tourist operation was canceled and HRRC started freight service.
If it were not for school kids and rail buffs, Hanlon would not have a rail road, just sayin..

Ridgefielder wrote:

Jeff Smith wrote:How did they do business before the track above Danbury was restored?

The Maybrook was still in service as a through route from Beacon to Derby when the middle portion of the Berkshire was o/o/s in the '70's and '80's. So New Milford south was serviced out of Danbury. Not something that's possible today except via a big detour on the New Haven main.

Jeff Smith wrote:Also, F-Line, I don't think they're a legacy carrier, are they? I.e. they're not the original Housatonic acquired by NH are they?

No, they're not the original Housatonic that was leased by the NYNH&H in 1893. That company was merged out of existence in a corporate restructuring around the time of the First World War. If I remember correctly, the current HRRC got its start in the early 1980's as a tourist hauler based out of Canaan Union Station, running on trackage operated by B&M. At some point B&M pulled out and they acquired the Canaan-area trackage, then restored Canaan-New Milford to service. The tourist operation existed in tandem with the frieght for a bit (I remember riding Canaan-West Cornwall and back with my Dad ca. 1989-- think it was old Reading Company commuter equipment.)

HRCC-the-Present was chartered in 1983, first train rolled in 1984. First freight customer was '89. The holding company for Danbury Terminal RR and Maybrook Properties was formed in '91, same year they bought out B&M's track ownership on the Berkshire. Maybrook Line was purchased in '92. So was only 20-23 years ago when they started collecting ex-NH charters. They aren't a "re-animated" legacy company like P&W was when it took its ball and separated from Penn Central after 80 years under lease by NH.

Ridgefielder wrote:(I remember riding Canaan-West Cornwall and back with my Dad ca. 1989-- think it was old Reading Company commuter equipment.)

Said equipment is indeed ex-Reading, and they are now in the collection of the Danbury Railway Museum.