Author Topic: Loss of service at Greensburg  (Read 1176 times)

scraphauler

  • Tycoon
  • ******
  • Posts: 5111
  • Oberfeldwebel Hans Scraphauler
Loss of service at Greensburg
« on: June 06, 2019, 05:07:00 PM »
Thanks Conrail!  Yes CONRAIL - the entity that still exists in Philadelphia and operates the Shared Assets.  Turns out, they also still own orphaned segments of track throughout the old Conrail network, including the remnants of the CH&G Running Track in Greensburg.   CIND has operated this small segment of track from Craig IN (by the airport in Greensburg) across State Route 3 into Lowes Pellets & Grain since day one.  It was assumed it was all part of the Greensburg Industrial Track conveyed to CIND in the Shelbyville Secondary sale.  WRONG.

INDOT is currently doing a sizeable resurface job to SR 3 and SR 46 through Greensburg, AND has a MAJOR intersection modification for SR3 / SR 46 intersection by Lowes scheduled for 2022.  Engineering work and property acquisition is going on the this project and having the railroad out of there would make it a lot easier.  INDOT's real estate folks researching properties find that this line still belong to CONRAIL - Not CIND.   After months of lawyers and STB inquires and research and more lawyers and more research and more lawyers, turns out INDOT is correct.  And Conrail refuses to sell or lease this portion of track at terms that make economic sense for CIND, Lowes, or a 3rd Party.   So Conrail authorizes INDOT to yank the crossing, and away it goes. 

There is still a long shot outside chance things could change and a new crossing gets installed (which now would be a high dollar new installation to meet INDOT specs).  But I really don't see that happening.  The little guy just got run over by the State and Conrail. 

Here's what the crossing (or lack there of) looks like today (taken at speed by passenger)

arobb00

  • Superintendent
  • *****
  • Posts: 894
Re: Loss of service at Greensburg
« Reply #1 on: June 06, 2019, 05:21:21 PM »
I guess that would pretty much nix the plans for Next Gen to build out past Lowes.  Wow, that's a heck of a twist to the tale, Scrap!   I assume the Conrail Holdings ownership extends all the way to the main?  Does that cause any other headaches for G&W, such as Conrail coming back and causing grief to G&W for having operated on this segment (and still do, to Greensburg Milling where Next Gen unloads)?   I ask because depending on who owns the land and zoning all that fun legal stuff it would at least be feasible someone could put a switch back in where the current track had branched off of the Westport line and build on land along that old right-of-way, unless Conrail Holdings would demand payment to even operate over the track at all.

Hoosierline73

  • Brakeman
  • *
  • Posts: 24
Re: Loss of service at Greensburg
« Reply #2 on: June 06, 2019, 05:39:27 PM »
The games they play...
Vive la Monon.

scraphauler

  • Tycoon
  • ******
  • Posts: 5111
  • Oberfeldwebel Hans Scraphauler
Re: Loss of service at Greensburg
« Reply #3 on: June 06, 2019, 05:40:39 PM »
CONRAIL only owns from where switch to Westport once was (at end of airport runway) to some point west of end of track at Lowe’s.  Total 2500 feet maybe.  Rest of branch is CIND.  If you go out there you will notice CIND has removed there blue crossing id signs off the 3/46 crossing and INDOT has put up tracks out of service signs.

Bob Durnell

  • President
  • *****
  • Posts: 1742
Re: Loss of service at Greensburg
« Reply #4 on: June 06, 2019, 06:25:27 PM »
I realize that Conrail is one of those mysterious paper entities, but wouldn't it be in their best interest to recoup SOME kind of positive cash flow, no matter how minuscule out of this heretofore unknown asset rather than just have INDOT scrap it and haul it off?    If I am rummaging around in Grandpa's old closet and find some forgotten $20 saving's bond, doesn't it make more sense to cash it instead of running it through the shredder?  What am I missing here?

CIND 2254

  • Global Moderator
  • President
  • *****
  • Posts: 1682
  • Modeling high Hood GP30s on the CERA ca. 1996-1998
Re: Loss of service at Greensburg
« Reply #5 on: June 06, 2019, 08:26:15 PM »
Why would they even be concerned with such a small piece of property?
Modeling High Hood GP30s on the CERA based in Kokomo circa. 1996-1998.

Bob Durnell

  • President
  • *****
  • Posts: 1742
Re: Loss of service at Greensburg
« Reply #6 on: June 06, 2019, 10:41:59 PM »
As a last resort, I wonder if they could have claimed adverse possession?

Wema

  • Dispatcher
  • *****
  • Posts: 454
  • A Rail History Nut
Re: Loss of service at Greensburg
« Reply #7 on: June 06, 2019, 10:47:29 PM »
Sorry to hear Scrap! :(

I assume this was an oops in the orgiinal sale deed back in 94 when the line was purchased or how would something like this happen and been overlooked for so long?

arobb00

  • Superintendent
  • *****
  • Posts: 894
Re: Loss of service at Greensburg
« Reply #8 on: June 06, 2019, 11:03:39 PM »
As a last resort, I wonder if they could have claimed adverse possession?

That's an interesting thought.  I wonder if could apply in this case, or if the Adverse Possession law is different for commercial vs private properties?  I'd assume the lawyers currently handling this would have looked at that but sometimes even the best can overlook something.

Kim_Heusel

  • Superintendent
  • *****
  • Posts: 782
  • I love YaBB 1G - SP1!
Re: Loss of service at Greensburg
« Reply #9 on: June 06, 2019, 11:20:36 PM »
Wow, I am surprised by this as I thought that section of track was already out of service. I have passed through there numerous times in the last couple of years and it looked to me like the trackage inside was I now have learned is Lowes had not been used in ages. I also thought I saw what appeared to be a stop sign, or some kind of warning sign in the middle of the tracks on the other side of SR 3. When was the last time anything went in and out of Lowes? Just wondering as I'm not that familiar with the area other than what I just described.

Kim Heusel

arobb00

  • Superintendent
  • *****
  • Posts: 894
Re: Loss of service at Greensburg
« Reply #10 on: June 06, 2019, 11:55:06 PM »
As best I can recall, it's probably been 4-5 years since Lowe's has shipped; they had installed an unloading system during the last year they had service: Scrap or someone else might be better with dates but I think they received seed or something one time and shipped some cars out but since then, nothing - though some ties were replaced on the line a couple years back. I think my timeframe is at least close.  It's in the CIND thread someplace.  I'd search but finishing up my shift right now.

scraphauler

  • Tycoon
  • ******
  • Posts: 5111
  • Oberfeldwebel Hans Scraphauler
Re: Loss of service at Greensburg
« Reply #11 on: June 07, 2019, 12:19:55 AM »
Lowe’s used in early 2016. Nothing moved in 2017.  Ordered covered hoppers in August of 2018 and that when this came up.  It was an over site in 1991 sales agreement.  Greensburg Industrial track ends at Craig and CH&G Running Track begins.  CH&G was omitted from deal.  It’s been studied from every angle. Trust me.  My little outfit was prepared to pick up the CH&G and operate as a class 3 common carrier interchanging with CIND.  But it just doesn’t pencil. Sometimes you have to quit throwing good money after bad.

arobb00

  • Superintendent
  • *****
  • Posts: 894
Re: Loss of service at Greensburg
« Reply #12 on: June 07, 2019, 12:28:43 AM »
Lowe’s used in early 2016. Nothing moved in 2017.  Ordered covered hoppers in August of 2018 and that when this came up.  It was an over site in 1991 sales agreement.  Greensburg Industrial track ends at Craig and CH&G Running Track begins.  CH&G was omitted from deal.  It’s been studied from every angle. Trust me.  My little outfit was prepared to pick up the CH&G and operate as a class 3 common carrier interchanging with CIND.  But it just doesn’t pencil. Sometimes you have to quit throwing good money after bad.

Thanks... seems longer than even 2016!  Maybe something else will eventually locate in Decatur County.  I haven't personally heard anything else about anyone looking at the Adams Rail Park or the other rail park near it (last thing I heard at all was when Scrap mentioned something was 'sniffing around' out that way). 

xgap

  • President
  • *****
  • Posts: 1859
Re: Loss of service at Greensburg
« Reply #13 on: June 07, 2019, 12:51:17 AM »
LOL ,Since Lowe's didn't ask CR for service, a new Next Gen is out, and No Rail INDOT is little help; would it matter if G&W did have ownership?

CIND 2254

  • Global Moderator
  • President
  • *****
  • Posts: 1682
  • Modeling high Hood GP30s on the CERA ca. 1996-1998
Re: Loss of service at Greensburg
« Reply #14 on: June 07, 2019, 04:27:44 PM »
You would think some money would be better than no money. I wonder who has been paying the property taxes for the last 18 years? Seems like the county could go after them if they weren’t making property tax payments.
Modeling High Hood GP30s on the CERA based in Kokomo circa. 1996-1998.

CSX_CO

  • Tycoon
  • ******
  • Posts: 7995
  • Ok...lets get our stories straight......
Re: Loss of service at Greensburg
« Reply #15 on: June 07, 2019, 05:00:02 PM »
You would think some money would be better than no money. I wonder who has been paying the property taxes for the last 18 years? Seems like the county could go after them if they weren’t making property tax payments.

They probably were paying them without questioning them. Not sure what Conrail’s expense sheet looks like, or what income statement is, but if it’s a drop in the bucket, no one questions it.

Why do you think CSX is demolishing unused/underutilized buildings? (IU Tower, Monon shops are next). Sort of like how Tower Operators had the fear of God put in them when they improved the tower.  Suddenly, some accountant would see a line item for improvements and go “we still have a structure at xxx?”

Y’all bemoan demolishing structures, but then wonder how crap falls thru the cracks like this.

Right, wrong, indifferent, this happens because *someone* starts digging.

scraphauler

  • Tycoon
  • ******
  • Posts: 5111
  • Oberfeldwebel Hans Scraphauler
Re: Loss of service at Greensburg
« Reply #16 on: June 07, 2019, 07:51:01 PM »
You would think some money would be better than no money. I wonder who has been paying the property taxes for the last 18 years? Seems like the county could go after them if they weren’t making property tax payments.

EVERYTHING has been researched and looked at 6 ways till Sunday. It is what it is. It’s Conrails ball and if they don’t want anyone to play with it that’s their right.  It’s a shame and it’s disappointing.  I tried, I failed. Onto the next project.

CIND 2254

  • Global Moderator
  • President
  • *****
  • Posts: 1682
  • Modeling high Hood GP30s on the CERA ca. 1996-1998
Re: Loss of service at Greensburg
« Reply #17 on: June 07, 2019, 10:43:47 PM »
They probably were paying them without questioning them.
Right, but you would think they’d rather have some income off of it and be relieved of any liability for it than just keep paying taxes on something that hasn’t generated any income. Saying that, Scrap, I know that you examined all the possibilities. Its too bad that the feds won’t stand up for shippers like this.
Modeling High Hood GP30s on the CERA based in Kokomo circa. 1996-1998.

ckpcpqq

  • Chief Dispatcher
  • *****
  • Posts: 648
Re: Loss of service at Greensburg
« Reply #18 on: June 07, 2019, 10:54:03 PM »
A similar incident happened with the "old" Conrail back in the 1990s.  They wanted to abandon about two thirds of the So. Chicago & Southern, an ex-Pennsy route that the Hoosier State/Cardinal used in the south Chicago area.  Rumors were circulating at the time that Amtrak together with local govt agencies would make an offer for the line.  But from what I heard Conrail quoted an outrageous price and refused to negotiate.  That ended the discussion, the line was eventually torn up, and Amtrak trains were forced to use a slower and more circuitous route to Union Station.

huelsy

  • Conductor
  • ****
  • Posts: 211
Re: Loss of service at Greensburg
« Reply #19 on: June 08, 2019, 03:23:47 AM »
A similar incident happened with the "old" Conrail back in the 1990s.  They wanted to abandon about two thirds of the So. Chicago & Southern, an ex-Pennsy route that the Hoosier State/Cardinal used in the south Chicago area.  Rumors were circulating at the time that Amtrak together with local govt agencies would make an offer for the line.  But from what I heard Conrail quoted an outrageous price and refused to negotiate.  That ended the discussion, the line was eventually torn up, and Amtrak trains were forced to use a slower and more circuitous route to Union Station.

My dad told me of a similar situation in Tiffin, OH. Conrail wanted to abandon the old Pennsy and the shippers on the line agreed if the sections in town would be serviced by the Chessie. Chessie refused so the county and a few others created a port authority to purchase the old Pennsy. Conrail quoted them  scrap value for the line. The port authority rounded up the money, went to Conrail, who then quoted a new outrageous price. Port authority took Conrail to court and whatever alphabet soup agency was in charge of abandonment before the STB and eventually won and got the line for scrap value.       

monty

  • Dispatcher
  • *****
  • Posts: 352
Re: Loss of service at Greensburg
« Reply #20 on: June 10, 2019, 10:23:34 PM »
It’s been a while since I had experience, but I don’t believe railroads pay property taxes. They may pay taxes on their buildings, but not on the ROW / railbed.
monty

xgap

  • President
  • *****
  • Posts: 1859
Re: Loss of service at Greensburg
« Reply #21 on: June 10, 2019, 11:22:56 PM »
In Indiana, that's my understanding. That is, if it still has track.  CSX lost some real estate when they pulled the tracks, forgot to start paying PT, and was sold at a tax sale. NS pays where some track and a radio tower was never constructed.,