BIKEPGH MESSAGE BOARD ARCHIVE

Oh wow. What a disappointment. That would have been convenient from Morningside. I won't be here much longer, but I hope it actually ends up happening so that others can use it.

Yes this needs media attention. I think Pittsburghers need to start being more aware of ways that the rail companies stifle growth in the city. While the freight railroads have brought many economic benefits to us over the years, they hold Pittsburgh back. Our riverfronts are strangled by them. Our communities are not connected because of them. Our people cannot safely, legally, and/or easily access parks and trails because of them. Most adults seem to have a Thomas the Tank Engine view of the railroads. I think that Pittsburgh is dramatically and perhaps uniquely affected by the railroad company policies. I'm sure there are other cities and towns that struggle because of the stranglehold of the railroads but I think few probably suffer on such a large scale.

Let's also not forget that freight RRs have strangled Amtrak's ability to provide decent cross-state service. Though theoretically Amtrak should have track priority, passenger trains often sit on a side-track while freight trains pass unimpeded. Is it even possible to get from Pgh to Philly by train in less time than it takes to drive there? Philly to Harrisburg, sure, it's quick, but Amtrak owns the tracks. Not west of Hbg, though, so it can take six hours to make that leg of the trip, vs sub-four by car. The official schedule (PDF) says 5-1/2. Took me seven, the last time I went, because we waited, twice, for passing freight, once for a solid half hour.

Perhaps my biggest gripe with the RRs is that their fate is currently tied to fossil fuels. What do RRs haul? Coal, oil, petroleum and petroleum products, and new motor vehicles... So it is no surprise to me that RRs have strangled Amtrak as well. Why promote efficient mass transportation? I don't expect us to be able to change that part as much but I do think that a public awareness of how the RRs stifle progress and development in Pgh could potentially make a difference in our local communities. It is stunning to me that Pittsburghers don't demand change from the RR companies and instead accept the status quo without question. It is the 21st century. We're not living in a steel town anymore.

I think any real change in the railroad's power has to come at the national level. They have a lot of rights the cities they pass through can't do anything about, as a result of old Federal law. And we should remember that they are the most efficient way to transport goods across land, in terms of energy use. And their tracks were laid out long before any of us started advocating for better riverfront access. AVRR is a different case, though. I think the owner is simply using leases to extort as much money as he can from development efforts. He doesn't own the tracks, and doesn't have much of a railroad, either. All he has is leases, from which he's trying to extract as much money as he can.

Thanks, Jon for your comments.  Wishing it ain't so won't change the fact that the railroads own the tracks that they operate on, and are responsible for maintaining those tracks.  In other words, they are privately owned and operated infrastructure.  They are here to stay. They provide a public service by transporting a wide range of consumer and industrial goods, often across long distances. Yes, they have laid claim to some of the flattest property in the region.....often along the rivers.  Not because they wanted to, but because physics required them to.  Freight trains are not designed to handle significant grades, as evidenced by the need for Norfolk Southern to "level out the grade" via the Horseshoe Curve in the Alleghenies.  Because of the availability of reliable transportation (and other raw materials) industry developed along our rivers.  Much of that industry still remains (shocking, but true).  The ability to serve these manufacturing and processing facilities by water and by rail keeps transportation costs down.  That in turn keeps product prices low.  It also keeps thousands of trucks off our local roadway system. The solution to gaining better riverfront access is not necessarily to remove the railroads, but to find creative ways to co-exist with them.  Expecting them to vacate property "for the public good" is all well and good.  But, don't be surprised when they decline the request.  

This reminds me of an email I sent to Friends of the Riverfront, to which I received no reply. I'm still curious: "I was looking at some of the parcels that are where a riverfront strip district trail will hopefully someday run. One is 25-F-1-9, which runs from 29th street to 40th st. in several different pieces. This parcel is only assessed at $10,000 (which is laughable), but it also looks like $0 is due in taxes every year. How can this be? I got this information from http://www2.county.allegheny.pa.us/RealEstate/Map.aspx , where can I dig deeper into this?"

There are a lot of other railroad owned parcels I have noticed that are assessed at almost nothing, such as this 2+ acre lot located near 5th ave and the east busway, assessed at $4,900, which doesn't seem to owe any taxes each year: http://www2.county.allegheny.pa.us/RealEstate/GeneralInfo.aspx?ParcelID=0125L00325000003&SearchType=0&CurrRow=0&SearchName=&SearchStreet=&SearchNum=&SearchMuni=&SearchParcel=&pin=0125L00325000003 Tax Code says "PURTA Exempt", which is apparently some sort of special tax bracket for Public Utilities. I'm not sure how a private company hauling coal counts as a public utility and enables them to own land tax-free, but I haven't read into this other than the brief intro at http://www.revenue.pa.gov/GeneralTaxInformation/Tax%20Types%20and%20Information/Pages/Corporation%20Taxes/Public%20Utility%20Realty%20Tax.aspx#.WBj46h9icUQ

Pretty sure railroads are regulated as public utilities in PA

I don't begrudge the RRs from conducting whatever business that pays the bills. What I do object to is their seemingly universal ability to ignore requests, protest and reason, all with the complicit cooperation of government. Probably yeah, the RRs wrote the legislation themselves 125 years ago, and backed up with 125 years of court cases, so they don't need to give a shit. I'm just saying, I don't care how right they are, they're still wrong.

Railroads are public utilities under Pennsylvania law, but the PA Public Utilities Commission's ability to actually regulate them is almost entirely preempted (i.e., barred) by federal law, namely the Interstate Commerce Commission Termination Act of 1995 (and prior legislation, as I understand the state of the the law to be). I recall that the PA PUC has jurisdiction over the regulation of at-grade railroad crossings on public roads, and not much, if anything, beyond that. It is a pretty good state of affairs for the railroads as they enjoy eminent domain power, like other PA public utilities, but are almost entirely unregulated by the Commonwealth. I'd like to know whether anyone who wants concessions from the Pittsburgh-area railroad(s) ever offered the railroad(s) anything (e.g., to pay for a 10 million dollar insurance policy or indemnity bond) for what I imagine they see as increasing their exposure to wrongful death lawsuits. If I ran the railroad and someone had no answer, or a deficient answer, to the question of "what will you do to protect me if I get sued when some asshole manages to get hit by my train on this property you want to use," that would be, and should be, the end of the conversation.

Wasn't the plan to buy the land from the RR? In that case, the RR wouldn't need to be concerned about wrongful death lawsuits, correct? Regardless, the RR's fear of being sued should not be what prevents us from getting the infrastructure we need such as more legal track crossings. Federal law does not have to allow the RR companies to essentially have free reign. Laws can be changed.  But I don't think that it requires changes in the laws to get the RRs to cooperate. I think that if they started getting negative press about their unwillingness to cooperate, they might be more willing to offer a few additional legal RR crossings. Maybe.

A lot of the legal stuff has been dealt with before, even here in Pennsylvania: America’s Rails-with-Trails A Resource for Planners, Agencies and Advocates on Trails Along Active Railroad Corridors https://www.railstotrails.org/resourcehandler.ashx?id=2982 (large PDF published in 2013)

I am on board with Stu's comment about passenger rail service being forced to play second string to freight service. If railroads are indeed regulated as public utilities, then the public, i.e. passenger service should be given priority, not freight (corporate and business interests). Beyond that, I am less concerned about negative impacts railroads have on transportation issues, IMO they do more good than harm, fuel efficient movement of goods, keeping heavy freight off highways, etc. etc. I'd much rather keep focus on the immensely larger prioritization our society has given to automobile travel. For instance, make Allegheny River Blvd/Butler Street a complete street all the way from Oakmont to Downtown, with motor vehicles given "guest" status. We've already spent dozens of millions giving the goddamn drivers exclusive access to Route 28. Rail issues pale in comparison.

I think railroads are fully cognizant of their risks relative to being sued.  If they permit the "public" access to their property and/or operations areas, they could be liable in case of an accident causing injury or death.  If they  let it be known that access to their property and operations area is prohibited to the public, anyone suffering injury would be defined a trespasser, and railroad liability is unclear, at best.  In any case, I don't think that the fear is of a finding of culpability in such cases.  I think the more realistic fear of having to dedicate hundreds of hours each year in legal expenses/staff time to have such suits dismissed. If additional rail crossings are required, the appropriate entity (roadway owner) should submit such an application.   I believe such requests are handled by the PUC.

If railroads are indeed regulated as public utilities, then the public, i.e. passenger service should be given priority

Public service is not only passenger service. It is much wider.