If the railroad cant break even on running a railroad why let the whole corridor rot? We should transform them into toll truck ways. The railroads could run there own trucks or charge a toll for there use.
Abandoned rights of way aren’t always owned by the railroad or its estate. Many railroad lines were built on easements which revert to the original owner when the railroad is abandoned.
In some cases where rights of way are abandoned, the property reverted to the county in which they are in. In many cases the reason for the abandonmnet is that there were/are no longer any businesses on the line to serve. But on the whole, I like the idea. Put an intermodal terminal at the end where it meets the main, and there you go. Lots of logistic concerns, but not a bad start.
…Perhaps it wouldn’t be considered to be abandoned if the railroad Co. still was the business controlling the “business” of running the toll road, just a change of use of the ROW. It sure would require much physical change to convert…Lots of money.
There are two major problems:
(1) After the line is pulled out, environmental impact studies would make use of the route more difficult and it would be relatively easily for local citizens to use these impact studies to pre-empt the use—which most would do, since it would depreciate their property value.
(2) After 21 years—even less in some states—land can be “adversely possessed.” In other words, if the line was abandoned, the neighboring property owner can say, “hey I have been using that land even though I don’t own it and now it is mine.” That might sound like it is crazy, but it is an absolute right of citizens to adversely possess land in such a manner. Once the land is adversely possessed in such a manner, it literally belongs to the adverse possessor.
Gabe
In many cases the RoW just isn’t wide enough for a two lane road especially where bridges (both over and under) and tunnels are concerned… Better off making them cycleways or footpaths.
For the most part rail rights of way were laid out in the days when the surveyors rode on horse back, the earthmovers of the day were men, picks, shovels and draft animals with a touch of black powder. For those reasons rail rights of way closely followed the water sheds of the territory in which they were built. Streams don’t run in a straight line and neither did the rails rights of way.
The abandonded rights of way for the most part were abandoned because there was not enought economic activity taking place on the line to make it an economically viable route for the railroads. The economic principals that make it viable for the railroads are also the same economic principals that apply to the trucking industry, albeit at different levels.
One rail right of way that was turned into a ‘truck route’ was Jay Goulds failed attempt to build at rival to the Pennsylvania Railroad, that became one of the original sections of the Pennsylvania Turnpike.
In a high percentage of cases, when the railroads abandon a line, the ownership of the property reverts to the original owner and the owners decendents.
I had heard about this, but thought the adverse possessor had to be obviously using the property, and paying some of the property taxes. The idea was to discourage absentee landlords who never show up to inspect their own properties.
Can land be adversely possessed even by squatters?
I agree. While old railroad grades are often traversable by autos and trucks (as long as the bridges and culverts are in place) converting old railroad grades to suitable roads (although less expensive than complete new roads) would not be cheap.
If the railroads were to convert the right of way to a road (provided they have the right to do so, which they may not have) or even if the government were to do so, there is still the problem of conflicts at intersections with the existing road system. What would the rules be? Would the trucks be considered as motor vehicles subject to the vehicle code or trains? There would be problems either way. If treated as trains and there was a high volumn of them, they could cause grid lock on the roads. If treated as vehicles there would be safety concerns at the many new intersections created and the system would lose some of it’s advantage (if it has any) over the regular road system (due to the STOP signs or traffic lights). Where and how would the trucks access the system?
Trails can cause problems too, but fewer than roads.
As stated above in some cases the property rights revert to the adjacent land owners.
Also an unused railroad line is not always an abandoned railroad.
Although abandoned rail corridors do more often than not revert back to the original landowners, if said corridor was deemed functional as a one way truck route, the governments could just invoke eminent domain powers to get it back from the property owners.
Kind of.
Like many such legal rules, the application of the law can get lost in technicalities. In order to adversely possess property the adverse possessor’s possession must be hostile and open and notorious—in other words, who ever owns it can’t give you consent to use the property and then you turn around and claim adverse possession and you can’t hide the fact that you are on the property.
You are right about its purpose. The theory behind adverse possession is that land is an inherent value and it values society when it is used and developed. If you make no use of your land and can’t even tell someone has been on it for X years, that is wasted economic potential and you deserve to lose it.
You don’t have to build anything on the property in order to claim adverse possession. In practical terms, there are quite literally 1000s of successful cases where a rail line has been abandoned, the adjacent landowner more or less uses the right of way (occasionally parks a car on it, kids play baseball in the lot, plant a garden, etc, etc.) and then claims adverse possession. This is not to say that such activity will necessarily establish adverse possession, but it has worked in the past.
You can imagine that pipeline, fiber optic line, gas line, or electric line laying companies hate adverse possession; it plays havoc with companies wanting to lay
Eminent domain is effective, but it is not cheap–and there are still the environmental studies . . .
And why convert an old or abandoned rail ROW to roads for trucks when the State or County road is already there? Talk about wasted tax money![V]
I say convert the old ROW to intermodal heliports. We’ll bring back and re-engine the SIkorsky CH54 Skycranes and base them strategically across the country. Then build new locomotives with sleeper cabs and and fuel tenders that can run nonstop cross country intermodals with the helicopters pulling off and putting on containers at intermediate destinations without the train having to stop. The choppers could then place the containers directly on the chassis, hook up a tractor and go. And as the train nears the coast they can start offloading to ships, so they don’t even have to stay inport as long.
I must say you have an active immagination…in fact much too active! Especially since it discounts any economic realities.
Concept of truckers paying to use roads:[(-D][(-D][(-D]…only if somebody else pays for all the construction costs first and then subsidizes the trucker.
BaltAC: Dharmon proved the point. The trucker conversion argument doesn’t fly for the same reason…
MP57313, jwie, gabe & crew: I work with thje issues raised on a daily basis. Prescriptive rights don’t fly (adverse possession), especially when it collides with NITU tenets. A lawyer or a landowner arguing adverse possession is a dangerous thing. Most are clueless, as are a few judges. There is many a surveyor that will tell you that very few judges and/or lawyers have an adequate grasp on the issue and depend on theatrics once the thing goes to trial. Surveyors are an expert witness in the eyes of the court - most of us have seen some unbelievable blunders made in court that should have never happened if the judge or attorney excused themselves for operating well out of their area of expertise. Be careful when you ASSUME that all railroad R/W’s are reversionary, color-of-title does not support that claim (never has)…also do not buy your argument about how easy it is to claim adverse possession except when the judge is clueless as well…
Dharmon, I still love your posts AND your "active imagination. " You’re funny.
m
BaltACD…You are correct with the original 160 miles portion of the Pennsylvania Turnpike following approx. on the ROW of the old uncompleted South Penn RR…{about 70% graded}, through Pennsylvania from Harrisburgh to Pittsburgh but it was Vanderbilt’s effort not Jay Goulds. Construction stopped on RR in 1885 and Turnpike was opened Oct. 1, 1940.
Bad idea for a large number of reasons.
I have noticed increasing amounts of rail ROW’s going into rail banks. I suspect the rail bank is nothing more than a political appeasement to enable the rail ROW’s to be “deleted”
Thanks…
MC …I’d figured you of all would get the gist…