Why don't nimbys ever try to get railroads removed from cities?

[bugo]

They are anti freeway but I've never heard of them wanting to reroute a railroad to bypass a city.  Railroads can cut cities in two.  They can be as hard to cross as freeways.  They cut cities from their waterfronts.  Some cities have large rail yards that cut the city in two (look at a map of Minot, North Dakota sometime).  But you never hear of nimbys complaining about railroads.

[hotdogPi]

They don't actually mean it. They just want to complain.

[corco]

A couple reasons:

1) Railroads tend to have been around for a long time, and a lot of towns are designed around the railroad, where the types of freeways that NIMBYs oppose just kind of cut through something that is already there. There's a barrier, but it's a known barrier. When was the last time a substantial amount of property was eminent-domained for a heavy rail line? In your example, the entirety of downtown Minot is south of the railroad tracks. That's different from razing a bunch of buildings to build a freeway through the center of downtown.
2) Because railroads have been around a long time, rich people don't live near them, typically.
3) Rail is more accepted as environmentally-friendly, sustainable transportation because it's a really efficient way of moving cargo. Cars...regardless of how you feel about whether people should have them or not, there's no denying that they aren't a very efficient way of moving large numbers of people. Now, the convenience of having cars might be worth the efficiency tradeoff because for each individual person it is the most efficient and convenient way to move an individual person, but that doesn't make them the most efficient way to move large groups of people.

[NE2]

Duh, they do.
http://www.kttc.com/story/11864884/mayo-clinics-pushes-southern-rail-corridor-at-state-capitol
http://www.fra.dot.gov/Page/P0104
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/25/realestate/the-railroad-tracks-that-turned-a-street-into-death-avenue.html

As with freeways, they often have good points.

[Urban Prairie Schooner]

They are anti freeway but I've never heard of them wanting to reroute a railroad to bypass a city.  Railroads can cut cities in two.  They can be as hard to cross as freeways.  They cut cities from their waterfronts.  Some cities have large rail yards that cut the city in two (look at a map of Minot, North Dakota sometime).  But you never hear of nimbys complaining about railroads.

In downtown Baton Rouge there is an active CN rail line that parallels the Mississippi River waterfront. The powers that be have occasionally talked about removing this track and rerouting trains via the Mid-City KCS line as part of riverfront redevelopment initiatives. I doubt they would get much support for this endeavor - New Orleans' riverfront is doing just fine despite an active rail line being in place, and the residents of Mid-City would probably not be too happy about running additional trains past their homes. They do have one good point - many of these trains are going to and from the ExxonMobil refinery and are carrying hazardous chemicals, so a derailment in the downtown area would cause plenty havoc.

[oscar]

Duh, they do.
http://www.kttc.com/story/11864884/mayo-clinics-pushes-southern-rail-corridor-at-state-capitol
http://www.fra.dot.gov/Page/P0104
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/25/realestate/the-railroad-tracks-that-turned-a-street-into-death-avenue.html

Also, the recurrent efforts to reroute chemical shipments far away from downtown D.C.  I wouldn't write them off as NIMBYs -- for example, a chlorine tank car leaking its cargo in the tunnel under Capitol Hill, or on the above-ground line just to the south, would be a real problem.  But the only freight rail crossing of the Potomac anywhere near D.C. requires trains to run through the heart of D.C.

[Duke87]

Also, the recurrent efforts to reroute chemical shipments far away from downtown D.C.  I wouldn't write them off as NIMBYs -- for example, a chlorine tank car leaking its cargo in the tunnel under Capitol Hill, or on the above-ground line just to the south, would be a real problem.  But the only freight rail crossing of the Potomac anywhere near D.C. requires trains to run through the heart of D.C.

This I think is the biggest reason: lack of alternatives. When people speak of tearing down freeways, they generally say that that traffic can instead use the new "surface boulevard", or some other roughly parallel freeway. If you remove a rail line, however, the rail traffic goes... where? Cars can drive on any street and there are plenty of those all over the place. Trains can only run on tracks, so rail line removal is far more disruptive to the traffic that uses it than freeway removal.

But then, there is certainly some degree of mode bias involved, with discouraging people from driving in cities being an in vogue thing.

[AsphaltPlanet]

There is a significant rail expansion currently ongoing in Toronto, and various local residents were vehemently opposed to the project for fears that it would increase noise and pollution and offer very little in the way of community benefit.  So railways do have nimbys.

The first link that I found:
http://www.blogto.com/city/2010/06/go_transit_fails_to_alleviate_concerns_about_the_georgetown_south_project/

[J N Winkler]

They are anti freeway but I've never heard of them wanting to reroute a railroad to bypass a city.  Railroads can cut cities in two.  They can be as hard to cross as freeways.  They cut cities from their waterfronts.  Some cities have large rail yards that cut the city in two (look at a map of Minot, North Dakota sometime).  But you never hear of nimbys complaining about railroads.

Not true.  Rail bypass plans have been discussed for Washington, DC.  For that matter, they have also been discussed for Wichita, which used to get strangled by railroad terminal operations in the industrial area just east of downtown before the Central Corridor railroad overpasses were built.

Edit:  In the aftermath of the Lac-Mégantic crash, you can expect to see a lot more NIMBYism surface in relation to railroad operations.  Green, environmentally-friendly transportation is one thing; having half of your town center (including the principal records office) go up in flames (with multiple fatalities) when an out-of-control crude oil train crashes is quite another.

[roadman65]

Orlando needs one to be removed on Orange Avenue near Taft.  It has a grade crossing at a rail yard thoat ties up traffic for more than 20 minuets.  You will, a lot of times get a train that is putting a freight train together.  He will pull out of the yard real slow with about twenty cars then we the last of the cars just about clears the grade crossing he stops and then reverses real slowly a second time.

There is no time limit as how long a train can block a roadway.  Actually a train is not considered blocking a roadway at all being trains have the ROW over cars.  Only boats win out against a train.  Unless there has been legislation passed that puts time limits on trains tying up grade crossings, trains rule and its their domain.

[US 41]

It's too expensive. Plus many companies inside of the cities still use them. The best option is to try to raise enough money to build overpasses in the areas with the most train congestion on the busiest roads. And when the cities grow people in the ouskirts will complain about the tracks and the same problem will reoccur. It is easiest just to leave them where they are.

[Alps]

Orlando needs one to be removed on Orange Avenue near Taft.  It has a grade crossing at a rail yard thoat ties up traffic for more than 20 minuets.  You will, a lot of times get a train that is putting a freight train together.  He will pull out of the yard real slow with about twenty cars then we the last of the cars just about clears the grade crossing he stops and then reverses real slowly a second time.

This happened to me once in Illinois. As soon as the last car cleared the right SB lane I shot through the gap, and watched in my rearview as he backed up again.

Disclaimer: If you are in any way law enforcement, I did not do anything illegal. Otherwise, have at.

[Revive 755]

There have been a couple times in Illinois the issue has popped up:

1) Springfield - part of what would now be NS and KCS lines were relocated to a route out by I-72:
Google Aerial

If memory serves, this was a part of a grander plan that would have kept going and routed the railroads around next to I-55.

Then there is the current push to remove the UP/Amtrak line through the city along 3rd Street and consolidate it with the NS line along 10th Street, see this site

2) There was also an EIS done for rerouting the IC/now CN line through Carbondale to a route outside the city.

The removal of through freight traffic from Crandic's line though Iowa City and Coralville, Iowa, to a line out by the Amana Colonies might qualify.

I think there are also a few cases of spur lines getting removed or pushes to remove spur lines for bike trails.

[Brandon]

There have been a couple times in Illinois the issue has popped up:

Then we have several municipalities (Aurora, Plainfield) whining about the CN taking over the EJ&E around here.

[english si]

London planned a rail 'big dig' in 1949, but couldn't afford it.

[SP Cook]

Railroads can cut cities in two.  They can be as hard to cross as freeways. 

You answered your own question.  NIMBYism, and BANANAism, like all forms of environmentalism is about selfishness.  About the Elite getting what they want, and to h**l with what others NEED.  A new road, or factory, or powerline, or pipeline, or mine, or frack site, or whatever might make the lives of thousands better, or even possible, but They want to look at at something  (and for most, something that isn't really a part of the truly natural situation in their part of the country).  They matter, you do not.  They have theirs, and to h**l with everybody else.

Tracks divide towns.  Into the "wrong side of the tracks" and where the Elite live.  The Elite like it that way.

[NE2]

Kook off.

[roadman65]

It's too expensive. Plus many companies inside of the cities still use them. The best option is to try to raise enough money to build overpasses in the areas with the most train congestion on the busiest roads. And when the cities grow people in the ouskirts will complain about the tracks and the same problem will reoccur. It is easiest just to leave them where they are.

In Orlando we have plenty of places that if we raised funds to eliminate the problem crossings many homes and businesses would need relocating.  Michigan Street at CSX is one that has no room on each side of the crossing for expansion of the needed room.

The Orange Avenue/ CSX line just south of FL 528 would create a challenge as directly north of the grade crossing is the bridge carrying over FL 528 over Orange.  So a tall bridge would need to be built to be able to clear the 528 and need a long approach on either end.  Jetport Drive would have to be relocated as it intersects just north of the crossing and is right next to FL 528, so it is sandwiched between the tracks and freeway.  Building below grade is impossible due to Florida's low water table and then the current FL 528 overpass would have to be restructured if that was ever possible to dig out from underneath as well.

[froggie]

Besides the examples that SPUI and Oscar noted, right after Katrina there was talk of relocating the CSX line through Harrison County, MS to the north and away from the coast.  Instead, CSX opted to spend ~$250M to rebuild along the existing line, and so the trains still cut through Biloxi and Gulfport.  Relocation probably would've cost over $1B, but there was good potential at the time (given all the Katrina cleanup and whatnot) to get the Feds to chip in.  Alas, it didn't pan out.

[PHLBOS]

An oldie and not exactly a city but worth mentioning: Marblehead, MA had all its railroad tracks removed shortly after the commuter rail service ended circa 1957. 

When that happened, there was a major housing development boom in the Clifton section of town.  Many streets were extended right up to the old railroad right-of-way (now an unpaved trail).  Even today, Brook Road appears to be an architectural line of demarcation between which roads & houses existed before the railroad was shut down vs. afterwards.  The streets & houses southeast of Brook Road came after the railroad shut down.

[Pete from Boston]

Rail was restored to several towns on the coast south of Boston, whose town centers had all grown up around rail, and the richie-rich town of Hingham fought tooth and nail against it.  The line was buried through Hingham in a cut-and-cover tunnel, costing lots of time and money and to little real effect. 

If you think Nimbys are just against what you're for, you're not paying attention.

[bzakharin]

In my area, one rail project in recent years that was heavily scaled back because of NIMBYs was the planned reactivation of part of the Camden and Amboy railroad (with existing tracks still being used, albeit sparsely, for freight) to add much needed rail service options to south NJ. Due to much opposition the commuter line plan was scaled back to a light rail line between Camden and Trenton (now known as the River Line). Even then, certain towns, like Pennsauken, demanded that no stations be built except on the outskirts.

[cjk374]

There is no time limit as how long a train can block a roadway.  Actually a train is not considered blocking a roadway at all being trains have the ROW over cars.  Only boats win out against a train.  Unless there has been legislation passed that puts time limits on trains tying up grade crossings, trains rule and its their domain.

This is not true.  In most of the railroad rule books (and local law enforcement books), a train cannot block a grade crossing longer than the time length of a burning fusee...about 10 mins.

[realjd]

Railroads can cut cities in two.  They can be as hard to cross as freeways. 

You answered your own question.  NIMBYism, and BANANAism, like all forms of environmentalism is about selfishness.  About the Elite getting what they want, and to h**l with what others NEED.  A new road, or factory, or powerline, or pipeline, or mine, or frack site, or whatever might make the lives of thousands better, or even possible, but They want to look at at something  (and for most, something that isn't really a part of the truly natural situation in their part of the country).  They matter, you do not.  They have theirs, and to h**l with everybody else.

Tracks divide towns.  Into the "wrong side of the tracks" and where the Elite live.  The Elite like it that way.

Yep. I'm against pollution because I hate poor people. That clean air will sure show them!

[Brian556]

When the DCTA Commuter rail line was being planned between Carrollton and Denton Texas, there were some nimby's. The portion of the rail line from Lake Dallas to Denton was built on the old MKT railroad grade that had it's tracks removed in the early 90's, and had subsequently become a bike trail. People along the line complained, and got a pointless sound wall built. This wall was not needed in my opinion because the trains are very quiet.