I smell Lawsuit from the railroad. you told them two weeks, and before they could renegotiate, they ripped it and said "it'll be 3 months". and they've gone and torn down railroad buildings and stuff owned by you? yeah, that should be an easy lawsuit for ANY lawyer
I'm sure the City and the Developers lawyers have already worked all the legal details out... this is NOT land the Railroad "owns"... it's a Right of Way, and probably "legally" must remain clear as to not block the surrounding land owners from their properties... what I find deceitful is that both the Contractor and the City Planning/Zoning and all their Lawyers would have known this when it was negotiated and permitted... Can I say, you can't trust Democrats...
@@t.c.2776 If it was Republicans they would rip up the railroad and say ' good riddance, what use is it? The people in the luxury condos want a dog park for their designer dogs'
It’s absolutely wild that, when the railroad planned to move to a much better location in Grey, ME, it was begged by the city of Portland to stay, and now their being completely shafted by the city. Absolute nonsense
That's what I thought, too. I thought they were moving to Gray, but that doesn't seem like a bad idea now since they seem to be getting pushed out by the city.
They didn't stay in Portland because the City begged them. They ran into a wetlands permitting issue in Gray. Don't get me wrong: I LOVE MNGRR, but this is NOT the worst case scenario and has been an issue for years. They're lucky to still be in operation. This is a bad PR situation for the developer and the City, though.
Honestly absurd beyond reason. Any competent developer would see the value in a passenger railroad operating such a short walk from their buildings, which they have to pay nothing to run or maintain. That's a ton of value they're benefitting from at no cost and they're still being so hostile.
Don't worry. Trump just got elected, he'll make sure that the poor innocent Property Development Corp will have justice in their struggle against the big evil local historical railway.
Better yet, just move. It’s clear Maine doesn’t give two shits about this historic railroad. Oh what’s that? The People loved the little railroad? Well tell that to those scumbags called developers that tore up the rails.
Not sure what the laws are in Maine but in Canada it is federally illegal to dismantle any rail line unless it has formally been registered as abandoned which is a multi step process. I imagine the FRA must have a similar set of laws
In the US too. CP gave up 9 miles that they abandoned in upstate NY. There is a year process. Now its a 9 mile railtrail that I skate on. A tourist RR I think is another story. I know another in upstate NY that didn't need federal approval to tear up. Was a tourist train. The first one was a busy line until it was deemed unusable.
@@SantaFe19484 Unless the RR tracks are an easement. Sometimes even private owners can have an easement for say power lines. If they build a shed on it, the electric company has a right to tear it down.
Unfortunately, the FRA doesn't have jurisdiction here. The narrow gauge is NOT part of the national system. Just because its a railroad DOES NOT Automatically give the FRA jurisdiction to adjudicate it.
@@JohnathanFuell If they have a public highway or waterway crossing, that’s enough to put ‘em under FRA jurisdiction. I know of an amusement park with naught but a SINGLE crossing that technically counts a public highway crossing, even though it’s only ever used by park employees, is causing some pressure from the FRA to come the way of that park, though nothing extremely major has come of it yet.
That's mighty kind of the developer.Tear up the tracks first,then tell the owners it'll be 3 months before the RR can use their own tracks,Oh ya,it's all for luxury apartments.
Look at 2:47 . "coordinated with MNGRR's previous leadership" Reading the statement, it was agreed to take the tracks during the winter then reset them during the spring with new railbed, sleepers, ect.
@@markmorris3579 There seems more to this than what was told. The developer even listed in the statement that Maine Track Maintenance was the subcontractor responsible for the restoration in the spring.
That little railroad is internationally known and loved... what a way for that company to become internationally known and disliked. These strong-arm tactics do their reputation no favors. Why do they hate America and her beautiful history?
America has been watered down by people who came to this great country not to become Americans but to set up their old way of life here. They could couldn't care less about American values or traditions, in fact it offends them.
The arrogance of the developers is astounding; 2 weeks was the agreed - on shutdown period! Maine Narrow Gauge should sue the pants off them, ESPECIALLY for any historic equipment damaged. Then the developers have the UNMITIGATED GALL to whine, “We’re sorry that Maine Narrow Gauge is presenting this negatively”; maybe not try being snobby corporate a$$holes? The more NEGATIVE publicity this corporation gets, the BETTER!!!
@@chickenwarriorr McDonalds= "became a corporation in 1955 when Ray Kroc founded McDonald's Systems, Inc." WalMart= " became a corporation on October 31, 1969, when it was incorporated as Wal-Mart, Inc. " These answers came from Google AI.....soon I will just use google AI to respond to all comments, because the stupidity and the misuse of English words is alarming to me. Sometimes I think people respond the way they do because they just want a response, I mean they can't be that emptyheaded can they??.....well.....Hello and Goodbye 😊
FRICKIN' SUE THOSE CONSTRUCTION NUMBNUTS!! The historical aspect is a major personal reason to, but as others have pointed out, railroads *own* the ROW (Right of Way, which includes the tracks and roadbed) that they just tore up without permission or warning. That's destruction of private property and practically illegal! I hope the city of Portland realizes what they're letting happen and help the MNGRR throw the _book_ at those unlawful jerks.
From what I understand you cannot obstruct a 'right of way' without acceptance from ROW users. Normally a ROW is like a 'deed' - recorded with the county and subject to state laws. Unless there's something 'unofficial' about their ROW - and how can the developer tear down their structures? Get a lawyer.
I assume the railroad does not "own" the ROW and thus is at the mercy of the land owner, who unilaterally decided to evict the railroad. Also, no mention of a lease or easement makes this a bad situation for the railroad as it sounds like they had no "rights" to use the land.
@@TEverettReynolds I own two parcels with ROWs across them - legal ones, it is true - and they are very hard to get rid of. ROWs are not at the mercy of the property owner, at least not in MA or ME.
The city had to permit it... and so you know money is the root of it... in the city. They are bankrupting the city be letting incompetent indoor-house-pet pols try to make it work. They always fail to do the numbers..... have absolutely zero management ability. Then... when it is all collapsing around them.. they get conned by some fake-rich people spending borrowed money. Luxury apartments are last decade's investment... there is already a massive glut of them,..building more is a stupid idea. They are a guaranteed failure and will NOT add to the city tax revenue,,, they will sit there as white elephants, in the way. There is nobody to live in them..... there is no wealthy industry with vast numbers of overpaid suits. Nobody worldly invests in them NOW ... this is what the naive do when they try to emulate successes of the past. So, since the city decided they were going to invest in them.. get ready for them to fail This has all the signs of grand scheme wired together by a combo of suburbanite twits and greedy dissemblers.
This story requires SIGNIFICANTLY more investigation. In particular, ownership of the right-of-way is crucial. The relevant contracts are public documents and should be available to any investigative reporter who knows where to look. As reported, this is such an egregious violation of contract law that it strongly suggests that the developer has already come to some arrangement with whomever owns the right-of-way and adjacent land. It wouldn't be surprising if an investigation reveals that the developer is paying a significant amount of money to the city (or state) in exchange for permission from public authorities to proceed with this. It will be especially interesting to examine whatever contracts exist between the railroad and owner of the property -- and what those contracts specify in the event of breach or other violation. If those contracts limit the damages to some monetary amount and do not require "specific performance", then it would not be surprising if the developer has already agreed to compensate the owner of the land for any damages awarded to the railroad. As is so often the case, this likely involves large amounts of money changing hands behind closed doors and benefiting an army of lawyers and staff people. Perhaps a Portland legal firm will agree to handle the case for the railroad pro bono.
30+ years and the city of Portland has done nothing for this museum. Were it not for the patronage at their annual Polar Express operation, they would be far better off someplace where history is appreciated.
This happened in Oahu when a contractor working for another realy large company everyone knows built their resort on the west end of the island. The narrow gauge railroad won a lawsuit over it. So there is case history and precedent to maintain a right of way.
Here’s the thing: the developers don’t actually own the land most of the railroad sits on: the land most of the track, along with the trail alongside, is owned by the state of Maine. While the developers have negotiated with the City of Portland and the state of Maine, it appears that this has lead to MNGRR being given the short straw- a solution should have been to allow MNGRR to manage the dismantling and reconstruction of their right of way and equipment by themselves, as any real railroad would do.
13 วันที่ผ่านมา +28
How does a tourist railroad which operates under the safety jurisdiction of the Federal Railroad Administration casually get torn up like this?
Developers do some shady stuff. They try to hide things until it's too late to stop them. It's always to make the richest richer at the expense of history and the little guy.
Look at what the Chicago mayor did to Meigs Field Airport. I think someone is following a similar playbook. Do you think the luxury apartments want a train running by their homes?
@@russellhltn1396 That's exactly what came to my mind right from the start of the video... Even if the construction company puts the tracks back, airports have been suffering this fate all over the country: Airport has been there for 70+ years, and is widely used and loved. New development gets built nearby. Suddenly airport is flooded with noise complaints from ignorant new homeowners who didn't realize that the airport was already there, and they lobby to get it shut down.
Unfortunately it may be better to keep the lawsuit in state court. Reason being private developers are often owned by hedge funds and private equity firms who have the government in their pockets. In state court there is a better chance developers cant use this corruption, at least as much, to to leverage the case in their favor.
@AcuraLvR82 I'd counter, that local/state courts and politicians are more likely to be bought. FRA has a long history of putting railroad right-of-way interests way above anything else. Even the EPA gets to take a back seat to Federal railroad laws - they know that once a right of way is tampered with it's easier for someone to make an advesarial claim on that property, and that right of way may be permanently lost and the line broken. Remember, a railroad line in a narrow property that traverses long distances, if their is even a one foot gap in a right of way, the value of every other foot of property can be destroyed. When Google tried buying up land in the San Jose area to re-install a rail line to build a transit hub they could build their offices around, just a few hold-outs wanted 100s of millions of dollars to sell their house. They recently abandoned the project since it became uneconomical to complete. Rails-to-frails projects that convert "defunct" rail lines to hiking trails nowadays retail the property ownership, but grant a revocable easement to allow the rails to be removed and pavement to be installed. People would complain if trains went back in, but it would be their own fault for living there without understanding who their neighbors are.
@@AcuraLvR82 Absolutely not better to NOT involve the FRA for an infringement on the property rights of a federally regulated railroad. FRA is militant about right-of-way protection - if the developer believes this action is a foothold to overriding the rights of the railroad to the property and seizing it for their own devices, FRA will put that to bed, overriding all local and state attempts to intercede.
But, even if it is a Narrow Gage Railway it IS a Railway and its Right of Way, is ITS RIGHT OF WAY! Fun Fact, Railroads have a lot of extra special laws that protect the company and the right of way. The company needs to hire a Railroad Lawyer to defend its Right of Way and Property.
For legal purposes, this is most likely classified as an amusement, not a railroad, so it doesn't have common carrier protections. Developers have one of the most sophisticated and powerful lobbies in this country and generally get pretty much everything they want, no matter what the rest of us want. Until this changes we are going to see things like this and the burning down of poorly sited developments in fragile habitats that is happening in California and elsewhere in the West.
A corporation organized to run a railroad, and succession of those corporations are what make and perpetuate a railroad for right of way purposes, regardless of things like regulatory jurisdiction or common carrier status.
This is a case of a major corporation screwing over the little guy. The fact that they won't talk to him about the project is troubling. After it's finished will the Railroad still be able to operate or is the developer going to block their right-of-way? Massive public protest and a lawsuit may be the only answer.
If the railroad owns the right-f-way the developer/contractor is trespassing and can be held legally responsible for any damage and disruption of railroad operations. In fact, the developer would need approval to even cross the railroad right-of-way. They are in violation of the law.
The letter arrived after the damage was already done. There's not much left to "injunct." What I'm worried about, though, is that new residents of luxury apartments (or new residents of just about any new construction) often start bitching and complaining about previously existing industry and infrastructure, and lobby to evict everyone who was there before they arrived. This usually applies to airports, but if the railroad is between them and the water, and the excursions are blowing crossing warnings, there will probably be complaining about the noise and the inconvenience of having to wait 30 seconds while a train goes by, or having to cross the railroad tracks to get to the beach.
@@c182SkylaneRG Yep. This is what happens, the well off snotballs think anything but high end bars and restaurants and parking lots full of benzes, lexuses and the like is an eyesore. They built luxury condos right next to the old Fulton fish market in lower Manhattan ,and the market was evicted to the south Bronx.
@@c182SkylaneRG Yep. We had a 100+ year-old boatyard shut down because residents of a newly-built development complained about the noise of boats being maintained and repaired.
@ This was Combes of Bosham, in Sussex, England. After complaints by incomers, the local council told the boatyard that equipment and power tools could not be used outside of normal working hours. Problem is, the highest tides each month (necessary for getting the larger boats in and out of the water) occur at 6am and 6pm, and people worked on their own boats at the weekend. So their work on larger boats dried up, and further complaints were made whenever anyone worked on their own boat. In the end, the yard-owners found it untenable and had to sell up. Ironically "Combes Boatyard" as a company still exists, but is now a *property management company* (you couldn't make it up) set up by two of the incoming residents who had complained.
The owner of the ROW has full control of it, no one can block it or prevent anyone from using it, that is state law, as a land owner I went through it the other year when someone had land that bordered my right of way and tried to stop me from using it, after court and thousands of dollars and I won he gave up and sold the land because in the court case he found out he had no rights to the ROW
Sue, sue, and sue again. There would be no need to remove buildings and rails. There are other methods that could have been used to cross the tracks. Sue, sue, and sue again.
FWIW, only the equipment and the main building are actually historical, everything else was built in 1992 as a way to preserve the equipment from Edaville Railroad when it closed. There are other narrow gauge museums in Maine that are built on actual historic narrow gauge lines and who take historical accuracy very seriously. I think it would make more sense for the equipment in Portland to be merged into these other collections and any money that would go into ridiculous city permits can go into sending trains another mile or ten through the Maine woods like these trains were built for.
@@shanewalters2565 That explains the extra wide sleepers in the video. Thank you! I was wondering why a narrow gage railroad was built on standard gage sleepers. :)
This may be bigger than you think. As this may impact ANYONE with an easement. Imagine other land owners taking this as an ok to block access to easement holders for as long as they feel like.
Forsyth does not want to discuss it because they intend to build you brand new buildings, lay brand new track, pay you missed revenue, and donate $100,000/year in perpetuity. At least, that's what they SHOULD be doing, at a minimum.
Destruction of historical property that isnt owned by the developers, is beyond illegal and asking for a lawsuit. Acting like theyre the boss saying they will dismantle and dispose of anything in their way is not acceptable behavior.
The easement probably allows the tracks to exist, and for them to drive trains on them. I'm not sure that it really needs to allow them to do much else, but it would still get treated like a driveway easement: cancelling the easement, or doing anything to interfere with it, prevents you from accessing your home, and prevents them from operating railroad equipment.
Absolutely disgraceful and uncalled for discrimination. Narrow gauge railroads are well past being treated like this in America. I pray they get those tracks back because that is so uncool what those real estate developers did. I’m sick of seeing railroad preservation being treated like that. We can’t throw railroad preservation under the bus anymore
I guess that the devloper want them com[pletely off the property permwnanently regardless of the right of way. The developer sounds like and HOA manager to me. DO what we tell you even if your not part of the HOA. Time to go to court and nail this down and put the Developer into their proper place.
The reporters last line - Will not discuss the project with the RR. Yeah, the developer has no plans to incorporate or work the RR into their design. They are never going to install the track and use big asswipes (AKA Lawyers) to keep it that way.
That sounds very suspicious on the developers park. I’d hate to see three months go by and the Railroad people come back and find huge buildings where their track once stood.
This is what's wrong with America. Corporations do whatever they want because they know they can buy their way out of it. Go ahead file a lawsuit we'll just outspend you in the courtroom.😢
For anyone saying to “get the FRA involved”, it’s important to note that tourist/museum railroads don’t fall under the FRAs jurisdiction unless they operate over part of the national system
The problem is as far as I understand it the railroad owns Jack s***. There used to be a whole museum there but they were renting that space And once water side city property value skyrocketed the building was bought and they are kicked out to make room for high end establishments. The tracks and right of way are owned by the government.
Find out about any changes to Railroad right of way, the developer may be trying to close down the Railroad by declaring the track abandoned. Developers hate anything between their property and the water front.
I hope they sue. The agreement was changed and violated. History has been destroyed for the sake of housing. 2:53 "It's unfortunate that MNGRR's message is presenting the situation negatively." Maybe because the situation isn't a positive for them? Has it ever crossed that organization's minds that the idea might've disrupted the Narrow Gauge railroad's property? It sure doesn't sound like it. I can only hope that the railroad uses the downtime while they have it to maintain their equipment and right-of-way, because that's literally all they can do.
"They have no idea what the final project will look like." Surely the plans will have been lodged with the local council during the planning process and are available for public scrutiny?
I love how the building company tries to _DEFEND_ themselves by saying they forced workers to miss Christmas with their families. I swear land developers are the most entitled children on this planet
that developer should be sued and all construction stopped....................knowing developers they will hurry and build overpriced shoddy built buildings on the properties. this what is happening all over the nation,a developer comes in just builds any where this is the problem right now in california.
It's wild they showed up to excavators ripping down their buildings, as in many places in the US the review process for development can drag on forever.
I don't think the FRA has jurisdiction. Just like the other narrow gauge museums in Maine, MNGRR is disconnected from the national rail network and is called "insular". There are actually benefits to this, for example if they fell under FRA they would have to do a lot of modernization of the equipment and facilities that would be pretty tough with 100+ year old trains.
Disconnected narrow gauge track for tourism DOES NOT COUNT under the FRA. Otherwise the FRA would be regulating every amusement park and zoo train in the country. It falls under state OSHA and safety regulators to manage.
Where this gets dicey is that as soon as one of these lines cross a public road, they are now considered part of the national transportation network and fall under FRA. This has boxed in two the other three Narrow Gauge museums in Maine at what would have to be grade crossings if they go any further. One of them is held to 3 miles, which isn't too bad, but the other is only a half mile with several miles of right of way unavailable to them.
@@Narrowgaugefilms The WW&F already operates by FRA rules, so when we cross one of the roads, we're already in compliance. Working on vacuum brakes for the passenger cars right now.
GREEDY developers grating their way again. The narrow gauge railway/railroad needs to take action against the developers as they mislead the railroadcabout how long the tracks will be ripped up for. I don't believe the tracks will be put back.
Luxury apartments? Of course- how is it possible for a developer to rip up tracks and tear down buildings ? Sue- now and for big $$, only thing they will understand .
Someone in City Hall has it out for the railroad. Bitterness from the failed move to Gray? That would be terrible, as they wanted to avoid this whole project. Sad to see this latest development in the ongoing redevelopment saga.
Two questions: 1- What was lost? Take inventory and calculate the values of all of your losses so that you know what sort of case you have. 2- What are the local bylaws governing notices of seizures and imminent domain? Without attempting to find a common ground agreement, where I’m from at least, generally in the form of a fair market value assessment and offer for property and/or items of value that would be lost, then issuing a letter informing the railroad of the seizure voids any official action taken by the company who plans to break ground. It may be an unlawful seizure of the railroad’s assets. - If I were you, I’d file a lawsuit in an out of state court. Relying on deep blue Portlands legal system to make things right would be frivolous. A municipality that’s ran like Portland would likely side with the millionaire developer over the small business owners the developers are causing the hindrance to. Depending on interpretation, this could also potentially be a case of tortious interference. As for filing an out of state suit, you have to find a state where the contractor is either doing business or has a minimum number of persons he is in contact with, then you may be able to file with that states supreme court. Like I said, don’t expect a Maine court to rule in favor of a small business when the plaintiff is going up against a contractor.
Why would the railroad be forced to shut down on the right of way THEY own. That constitution company has no business touch that track period. It’s not their property and definitely not approved by the RR.
This is terrible! It's a real shame, but when the government decides to try to 'help' you, it means there are some nasty unintended consequences coming your way and there is usually no recourse. Honestly, I think we would be better off if central planners would just leave us alone.
@ Whether you agree or not the President-elect is going to untether big business while eviscerating regulatory authority. If you are big and powerful you will have no one to tell you that you can’t.
@@redheadedviking9415Who has avowed to eviscerate regulatory authority? Who has done his best elude the rule of law? If you see a different vision I personally hope you are right…but I doubt it.
I find it funny that a Republican is getting blamed for some thing that is happening in a Democrat controlled state. Just about the entire government of Maine and the City council of Portland are Democrats. So how it it Trump's fault????
Those with money can buy politicians. The development company would not have behaved this way had they not known they were immune from prosecution. Buy politicians buy immunity. They will not allow the railroad to ever disturb their waterfront Property .
So the construction company...it's 'leaders' - are part of the corporate philosophy of: "Whatever it takes...to make more money, guicker". The railroad's right of way and the lousy 'notices' should be enough to win a lawsuit agaist the developers. Possibly even kick them in the *$%# by , at least temporarily, halting their project while the tracks and destroyed buildings are replaced - at their expense, of course.
Amtrak requires much straighter stretches...the big horseshoe curve in PA is pretty tight...but the point is that the narrow guage railroads were all up and down and in and out of all those tight mountain curves. But the new WIDE guage couldn't go around all those tight curves and passenger rail was on the outs after the 1950s. So all those little burgs and boroughs got shut out long ago. And then they made Rails to Trails program and that was the end of any possibilites of returning passenger rail to the rural communities. And we all know whats happend to SMALL TOWN AMERICA!!!
In the UK this would be illegal as our railways have right of way, and are protected by national law. I also assume that the developers don't own the land or any of the material that they have damaged. That would also be an illegal act in the UK.
Reminder to everyone that the removal of the carbarn and the shuttering of the George Benson trolley line in Seattle was *Supposed* to be "temporary". Stay on Portland like africanized honeybees on a landscaper
I smell Lawsuit from the railroad. you told them two weeks, and before they could renegotiate, they ripped it and said "it'll be 3 months". and they've gone and torn down railroad buildings and stuff owned by you? yeah, that should be an easy lawsuit for ANY lawyer
I'm sure the City and the Developers lawyers have already worked all the legal details out... this is NOT land the Railroad "owns"... it's a Right of Way, and probably "legally" must remain clear as to not block the surrounding land owners from their properties... what I find deceitful is that both the Contractor and the City Planning/Zoning and all their Lawyers would have known this when it was negotiated and permitted... Can I say, you can't trust Democrats...
Lawsuits require money. I doubt of the railroad has the money to battle the developers. Something they're banking on.
@@t.c.2776 Never could trust ANY demoncrap, ever!
I would rather trust a rattlesnake!
@@t.c.2776 Sure, blame Democrats when it's a corporation that's doing the harm.
@@t.c.2776
If it was Republicans they would rip up the railroad and say ' good riddance, what use is it? The people in the luxury condos want a dog park for their designer dogs'
It’s absolutely wild that, when the railroad planned to move to a much better location in Grey, ME, it was begged by the city of Portland to stay, and now their being completely shafted by the city. Absolute nonsense
That's what I thought, too. I thought they were moving to Gray, but that doesn't seem like a bad idea now since they seem to be getting pushed out by the city.
Not shocking. Portland has become a cesspool of pRoGrEsSiVe iDeAs and DEI hires.
They didn't stay in Portland because the City begged them. They ran into a wetlands permitting issue in Gray. Don't get me wrong: I LOVE MNGRR, but this is NOT the worst case scenario and has been an issue for years. They're lucky to still be in operation. This is a bad PR situation for the developer and the City, though.
@ I’m surprised they didn’t up and leave after the bridge fire
@@BMMEC6000bridge fire?
That’s disgusting. The developer should have to cover all replacements and operating costs for their arrogant actions.
Honestly absurd beyond reason. Any competent developer would see the value in a passenger railroad operating such a short walk from their buildings, which they have to pay nothing to run or maintain. That's a ton of value they're benefitting from at no cost and they're still being so hostile.
Stupidity meets arrogance.
@@hmhama782arrogance meet stupidity😂
And lost wages and income.
Don't worry. Trump just got elected, he'll make sure that the poor innocent Property Development Corp will have justice in their struggle against the big evil local historical railway.
Get the historic society folks involved. They'll sue the pants off the developer.
Don't man, last they did it they stop disney only for them to sell the land off to real estate developers
Better yet, just move.
It’s clear Maine doesn’t give two shits about this historic railroad.
Oh what’s that? The People loved the little railroad? Well tell that to those scumbags called developers that tore up the rails.
Not sure what the laws are in Maine but in Canada it is federally illegal to dismantle any rail line unless it has formally been registered as abandoned which is a multi step process. I imagine the FRA must have a similar set of laws
In the US too. CP gave up 9 miles that they abandoned in upstate NY. There is a year process. Now its a 9 mile railtrail that I skate on. A tourist RR I think is another story. I know another in upstate NY that didn't need federal approval to tear up. Was a tourist train. The first one was a busy line until it was deemed unusable.
I am no legal expert, but it should be obvious that in any civilized country, something like this should be considered destruction of property.
@@SantaFe19484 Unless the RR tracks are an easement. Sometimes even private owners can have an easement for say power lines. If they build a shed on it, the electric company has a right to tear it down.
Unfortunately, the FRA doesn't have jurisdiction here. The narrow gauge is NOT part of the national system. Just because its a railroad DOES NOT Automatically give the FRA jurisdiction to adjudicate it.
@@JohnathanFuell If they have a public highway or waterway crossing, that’s enough to put ‘em under FRA jurisdiction. I know of an amusement park with naught but a SINGLE crossing that technically counts a public highway crossing, even though it’s only ever used by park employees, is causing some pressure from the FRA to come the way of that park, though nothing extremely major has come of it yet.
That's mighty kind of the developer.Tear up the tracks first,then tell the owners it'll be 3 months before the RR can use their own tracks,Oh ya,it's all for luxury apartments.
Look at 2:47 . "coordinated with MNGRR's previous leadership"
Reading the statement, it was agreed to take the tracks during the winter then reset them during the spring with new railbed, sleepers, ect.
@@reubensandwich9249 -Thank you!
@@markmorris3579 There seems more to this than what was told. The developer even listed in the statement that Maine Track Maintenance was the subcontractor responsible for the restoration in the spring.
It is the rich's world. We exist to please them.
That little railroad is internationally known and loved... what a way for that company to become internationally known and disliked. These strong-arm tactics do their reputation no favors. Why do they hate America and her beautiful history?
America has been watered down by people who came to this great country not to become Americans but to set up their old way of life here. They could couldn't care less about American values or traditions, in fact it offends them.
Because certain history isn't profitable enough.
@@rileycoyote4924 railroad history, especially tourist railroads, are an extremely profitable industry
@VirgotheDrusky Not if you're building luxury apartments and have no financial stake in the railroad itself.
The 1 percent doesn't care.
Get a Judge to shut the construction down .
Why ?
The railroad controls that land as if they own it even if it is a right of way .
Look at the one email, "and was coordinated with MNGRR's previous leadership".
Whatever that agreement was, that's the key.
Sounds like the agreement was two weeks, not months and destruction of assets.
MNGRR knew what was coming, seems like a PR ploy to me
The arrogance of the developers is astounding; 2 weeks was the agreed - on shutdown period! Maine Narrow Gauge should sue the pants off them, ESPECIALLY for any historic equipment damaged. Then the developers have the UNMITIGATED GALL to whine, “We’re sorry that Maine Narrow Gauge is presenting this negatively”; maybe not try being snobby corporate a$$holes? The more NEGATIVE publicity this corporation gets, the BETTER!!!
And "they" wonder why people hate corporate america.
Yes the people buy McDonalds and shop at WalMart everyday......so much for your ridiculous claim "people hate corporate america."
@@pavelow235they may shop there but they don't love them either.
@@pavelow235 I think you misunderstand what a corporation is and how bad the problem really is in America
@@chickenwarriorr McDonalds= "became a corporation in 1955 when Ray Kroc founded McDonald's Systems, Inc."
WalMart= " became a corporation on October 31, 1969, when it was incorporated as Wal-Mart, Inc. "
These answers came from Google AI.....soon I will just use google AI to respond to all comments, because the stupidity and the misuse of English words is alarming to me. Sometimes I think people respond the way they do because they just want a response, I mean they can't be that emptyheaded can they??.....well.....Hello and Goodbye 😊
@@pavelow235 wow you really missed their point
FRICKIN' SUE THOSE CONSTRUCTION NUMBNUTS!! The historical aspect is a major personal reason to, but as others have pointed out, railroads *own* the ROW (Right of Way, which includes the tracks and roadbed) that they just tore up without permission or warning. That's destruction of private property and practically illegal! I hope the city of Portland realizes what they're letting happen and help the MNGRR throw the _book_ at those unlawful jerks.
From what I understand you cannot obstruct a 'right of way' without acceptance from ROW users. Normally a ROW is like a 'deed' - recorded with the county and subject to state laws. Unless there's something 'unofficial' about their ROW - and how can the developer tear down their structures? Get a lawyer.
I assume the railroad does not "own" the ROW and thus is at the mercy of the land owner, who unilaterally decided to evict the railroad. Also, no mention of a lease or easement makes this a bad situation for the railroad as it sounds like they had no "rights" to use the land.
@@TEverettReynolds I own two parcels with ROWs across them - legal ones, it is true - and they are very hard to get rid of. ROWs are not at the mercy of the property owner, at least not in MA or ME.
effin evil developers
The city had to permit it... and so you know money is the root of it... in the city.
They are bankrupting the city be letting incompetent indoor-house-pet pols try to make it work.
They always fail to do the numbers..... have absolutely zero management ability.
Then... when it is all collapsing around them.. they get conned by some fake-rich people spending borrowed money.
Luxury apartments are last decade's investment... there is already a massive glut of them,..building more is a stupid idea.
They are a guaranteed failure and will NOT add to the city tax revenue,,, they will sit there as white elephants, in the way.
There is nobody to live in them..... there is no wealthy industry with vast numbers of overpaid suits.
Nobody worldly invests in them NOW ... this is what the naive do when they try to emulate successes of the past.
So, since the city decided they were going to invest in them.. get ready for them to fail
This has all the signs of grand scheme wired together by a combo of suburbanite twits and greedy dissemblers.
This story requires SIGNIFICANTLY more investigation. In particular, ownership of the right-of-way is crucial. The relevant contracts are public documents and should be available to any investigative reporter who knows where to look. As reported, this is such an egregious violation of contract law that it strongly suggests that the developer has already come to some arrangement with whomever owns the right-of-way and adjacent land. It wouldn't be surprising if an investigation reveals that the developer is paying a significant amount of money to the city (or state) in exchange for permission from public authorities to proceed with this.
It will be especially interesting to examine whatever contracts exist between the railroad and owner of the property -- and what those contracts specify in the event of breach or other violation. If those contracts limit the damages to some monetary amount and do not require "specific performance", then it would not be surprising if the developer has already agreed to compensate the owner of the land for any damages awarded to the railroad.
As is so often the case, this likely involves large amounts of money changing hands behind closed doors and benefiting an army of lawyers and staff people. Perhaps a Portland legal firm will agree to handle the case for the railroad pro bono.
Portland has no local government review of land use projects? Nobody knew about this?
30+ years and the city of Portland has done nothing for this museum. Were it not for the patronage at their annual Polar Express operation, they would be far better off someplace where history is appreciated.
This happened in Oahu when a contractor working for another realy large company everyone knows built their resort on the west end of the island. The narrow gauge railroad won a lawsuit over it. So there is case history and precedent to maintain a right of way.
Here’s the thing: the developers don’t actually own the land most of the railroad sits on: the land most of the track, along with the trail alongside, is owned by the state of Maine. While the developers have negotiated with the City of Portland and the state of Maine, it appears that this has lead to MNGRR being given the short straw- a solution should have been to allow MNGRR to manage the dismantling and reconstruction of their right of way and equipment by themselves, as any real railroad would do.
How does a tourist railroad which operates under the safety jurisdiction of the Federal Railroad Administration casually get torn up like this?
The Maine Narrow Gauge is NOT FRA.
Tourist/museum railroads don’t fall under the FRAs jurisdiction unless they operate over part of the national system
Developers do some shady stuff. They try to hide things until it's too late to stop them. It's always to make the richest richer at the expense of history and the little guy.
Strange it is usual that Railroads own the right of way and nobody comes unexpexted and tears down a damned thing.....
Look at what the Chicago mayor did to Meigs Field Airport. I think someone is following a similar playbook. Do you think the luxury apartments want a train running by their homes?
@@russellhltn1396 That's exactly what came to my mind right from the start of the video... Even if the construction company puts the tracks back, airports have been suffering this fate all over the country: Airport has been there for 70+ years, and is widely used and loved. New development gets built nearby. Suddenly airport is flooded with noise complaints from ignorant new homeowners who didn't realize that the airport was already there, and they lobby to get it shut down.
@@russellhltn1396 of course they do, public transit is good for the environment and the planet...!
Get the FRA involved - if the developer violated the property rights of the railroad, this is a Federal action.
Unfortunately it may be better to keep the lawsuit in state court. Reason being private developers are often owned by hedge funds and private equity firms who have the government in their pockets. In state court there is a better chance developers cant use this corruption, at least as much, to to leverage the case in their favor.
@AcuraLvR82 I'd counter, that local/state courts and politicians are more likely to be bought.
FRA has a long history of putting railroad right-of-way interests way above anything else. Even the EPA gets to take a back seat to Federal railroad laws - they know that once a right of way is tampered with it's easier for someone to make an advesarial claim on that property, and that right of way may be permanently lost and the line broken.
Remember, a railroad line in a narrow property that traverses long distances, if their is even a one foot gap in a right of way, the value of every other foot of property can be destroyed.
When Google tried buying up land in the San Jose area to re-install a rail line to build a transit hub they could build their offices around, just a few hold-outs wanted 100s of millions of dollars to sell their house. They recently abandoned the project since it became uneconomical to complete.
Rails-to-frails projects that convert "defunct" rail lines to hiking trails nowadays retail the property ownership, but grant a revocable easement to allow the rails to be removed and pavement to be installed. People would complain if trains went back in, but it would be their own fault for living there without understanding who their neighbors are.
State courts are horrible. Federal appeals courts are the sweet spot for justice.
@@AcuraLvR82 Absolutely not better to NOT involve the FRA for an infringement on the property rights of a federally regulated railroad. FRA is militant about right-of-way protection - if the developer believes this action is a foothold to overriding the rights of the railroad to the property and seizing it for their own devices, FRA will put that to bed, overriding all local and state attempts to intercede.
The railroad needs to take this to court. Tearing up the railroad without their permission? Isn't that illegal, destruction of property?
But, even if it is a Narrow Gage Railway it IS a Railway and its Right of Way, is ITS RIGHT OF WAY! Fun Fact, Railroads have a lot of extra special laws that protect the company and the right of way. The company needs to hire a Railroad Lawyer to defend its Right of Way and Property.
It might not legally be classified as a railroad, strange as that might sound. Other comments mention that it is not overseen by the FRA
For legal purposes, this is most likely classified as an amusement, not a railroad, so it doesn't have common carrier protections. Developers have one of the most sophisticated and powerful lobbies in this country and generally get pretty much everything they want, no matter what the rest of us want. Until this changes we are going to see things like this and the burning down of poorly sited developments in fragile habitats that is happening in California and elsewhere in the West.
A corporation organized to run a railroad, and succession of those corporations are what make and perpetuate a railroad for right of way purposes, regardless of things like regulatory jurisdiction or common carrier status.
This is a case of a major corporation screwing over the little guy. The fact that they won't talk to him about the project is troubling. After it's finished will the Railroad still be able to operate or is the developer going to block their right-of-way? Massive public protest and a lawsuit may be the only answer.
If the railroad owns the right-f-way the developer/contractor is trespassing and can be held legally responsible for any damage and disruption of railroad operations. In fact, the developer would need approval to even cross the railroad right-of-way. They are in violation of the law.
Why did the RR not get an injunction as soon as the first letter was sent?? Why are the feds not involved??
The letter arrived after the damage was already done. There's not much left to "injunct." What I'm worried about, though, is that new residents of luxury apartments (or new residents of just about any new construction) often start bitching and complaining about previously existing industry and infrastructure, and lobby to evict everyone who was there before they arrived. This usually applies to airports, but if the railroad is between them and the water, and the excursions are blowing crossing warnings, there will probably be complaining about the noise and the inconvenience of having to wait 30 seconds while a train goes by, or having to cross the railroad tracks to get to the beach.
@@c182SkylaneRG
Yep. This is what happens, the well off snotballs think anything but high end bars and restaurants and parking lots full of benzes, lexuses and the like is an eyesore. They built luxury condos right next to the old Fulton fish market in lower Manhattan ,and the market was evicted to the south Bronx.
@@c182SkylaneRG Yep. We had a 100+ year-old boatyard shut down because residents of a newly-built development complained about the noise of boats being maintained and repaired.
@@dominicbuckley8309 where was this?
@ This was Combes of Bosham, in Sussex, England. After complaints by incomers, the local council told the boatyard that equipment and power tools could not be used outside of normal working hours. Problem is, the highest tides each month (necessary for getting the larger boats in and out of the water) occur at 6am and 6pm, and people worked on their own boats at the weekend. So their work on larger boats dried up, and further complaints were made whenever anyone worked on their own boat. In the end, the yard-owners found it untenable and had to sell up. Ironically "Combes Boatyard" as a company still exists, but is now a *property management company* (you couldn't make it up) set up by two of the incoming residents who had complained.
This is disgusting. These developers should go to prison.
The owner of the ROW has full control of it, no one can block it or prevent anyone from using it, that is state law, as a land owner I went through it the other year when someone had land that bordered my right of way and tried to stop me from using it, after court and thousands of dollars and I won he gave up and sold the land because in the court case he found out he had no rights to the ROW
Sue, sue, and sue again. There would be no need to remove buildings and rails. There are other methods that could have been used to cross the tracks. Sue, sue, and sue again.
OMFG, this is a historic part of Maine.
FWIW, only the equipment and the main building are actually historical, everything else was built in 1992 as a way to preserve the equipment from Edaville Railroad when it closed. There are other narrow gauge museums in Maine that are built on actual historic narrow gauge lines and who take historical accuracy very seriously. I think it would make more sense for the equipment in Portland to be merged into these other collections and any money that would go into ridiculous city permits can go into sending trains another mile or ten through the Maine woods like these trains were built for.
@@RailBuffRobYou forgot the old railroad bridge at the end of the line and the right of way the train is running on, this used to be standard gauge
@@shanewalters2565 That explains the extra wide sleepers in the video. Thank you! I was wondering why a narrow gage railroad was built on standard gage sleepers. :)
@@c182SkylaneRG No worries, I learned it from the volunteers when I visited them back in 2021, real nice folks
@@RailBuffRob Maybe the main building is in the way of some developer too.
This may be bigger than you think. As this may impact ANYONE with an easement. Imagine other land owners taking this as an ok to block access to easement holders for as long as they feel like.
This sounds like a job for Luigi.
Hahahahaha!
The man has a backlog of work.
I completely stand with the Maine Narrow Gauge and nothing can convince me otherwise.
Forsyth does not want to discuss it because they intend to build you brand new buildings, lay brand new track, pay you missed revenue, and donate $100,000/year in perpetuity. At least, that's what they SHOULD be doing, at a minimum.
Destruction of historical property that isnt owned by the developers, is beyond illegal and asking for a lawsuit. Acting like theyre the boss saying they will dismantle and dispose of anything in their way is not acceptable behavior.
I'm kind of curious what their easement allows them to do.
The easement probably allows the tracks to exist, and for them to drive trains on them. I'm not sure that it really needs to allow them to do much else, but it would still get treated like a driveway easement: cancelling the easement, or doing anything to interfere with it, prevents you from accessing your home, and prevents them from operating railroad equipment.
What the hell? Sue them!
Absolutely disgraceful and uncalled for discrimination. Narrow gauge railroads are well past being treated like this in America.
I pray they get those tracks back because that is so uncool what those real estate developers did. I’m sick of seeing railroad preservation being treated like that. We can’t throw railroad preservation under the bus anymore
Put the damn tracks back where they belong.
Sue 'em, it's the American way.
I guess that the devloper want them com[pletely off the property permwnanently regardless of the right of way. The developer sounds like and HOA manager to me. DO what we tell you even if your not part of the HOA. Time to go to court and nail this down and put the Developer into their proper place.
Terrible
The reporters last line - Will not discuss the project with the RR. Yeah, the developer has no plans to incorporate or work the RR into their design. They are never going to install the track and use big asswipes (AKA Lawyers) to keep it that way.
That sounds very suspicious on the developers park. I’d hate to see three months go by and the Railroad people come back and find huge buildings where their track once stood.
The developers paid off the city to kick the railroad out because they knew the railroad is small and they have loads of cash. Greed a go-go.
Those greedy people will probably make a rail trail and sell the cars for scrap. This is so sad to hear from a railroad enthusiast like me.
This is what's wrong with America. Corporations do whatever they want because they know they can buy their way out of it. Go ahead file a lawsuit we'll just outspend you in the courtroom.😢
For anyone saying to “get the FRA involved”, it’s important to note that tourist/museum railroads don’t fall under the FRAs jurisdiction unless they operate over part of the national system
Lawsuit inbound
The developer should be required to replace what they ripped up
The problem is as far as I understand it the railroad owns Jack s***. There used to be a whole museum there but they were renting that space And once water side city property value skyrocketed the building was bought and they are kicked out to make room for high end establishments. The tracks and right of way are owned by the government.
Find out about any changes to Railroad right of way, the developer may be trying to close down the Railroad by declaring the track abandoned. Developers hate anything between their property and the water front.
I hope they sue. The agreement was changed and violated. History has been destroyed for the sake of housing.
2:53 "It's unfortunate that MNGRR's message is presenting the situation negatively." Maybe because the situation isn't a positive for them? Has it ever crossed that organization's minds that the idea might've disrupted the Narrow Gauge railroad's property? It sure doesn't sound like it. I can only hope that the railroad uses the downtime while they have it to maintain their equipment and right-of-way, because that's literally all they can do.
"They have no idea what the final project will look like." Surely the plans will have been lodged with the local council during the planning process and are available for public scrutiny?
I love how the building company tries to _DEFEND_ themselves by saying they forced workers to miss Christmas with their families. I swear land developers are the most entitled children on this planet
They probably have time dependent loans. Lol too bad.
Absolutely outrageous!
that developer should be sued and all construction stopped....................knowing developers they will hurry and build overpriced shoddy built buildings on the properties. this what is happening all over the nation,a developer comes in just builds any where this is the problem right now in california.
Another thing I might add is , it highly suspect that someone in city government got paid to look the other way.
It's wild they showed up to excavators ripping down their buildings, as in many places in the US the review process for development can drag on forever.
ohhh that's why i'v never heard of these guys before. . .Portland MAINE, i live in Oregon. . .Still from where I am I wish them the best.
Wheres the FRA?, if that were a csx line they'd be there in an hour.
I don't think the FRA has jurisdiction. Just like the other narrow gauge museums in Maine, MNGRR is disconnected from the national rail network and is called "insular". There are actually benefits to this, for example if they fell under FRA they would have to do a lot of modernization of the equipment and facilities that would be pretty tough with 100+ year old trains.
Disconnected narrow gauge track for tourism DOES NOT COUNT under the FRA. Otherwise the FRA would be regulating every amusement park and zoo train in the country. It falls under state OSHA and safety regulators to manage.
Where this gets dicey is that as soon as one of these lines cross a public road, they are now considered part of the national transportation network and fall under FRA. This has boxed in two the other three Narrow Gauge museums in Maine at what would have to be grade crossings if they go any further. One of them is held to 3 miles, which isn't too bad, but the other is only a half mile with several miles of right of way unavailable to them.
@@Narrowgaugefilms The WW&F already operates by FRA rules, so when we cross one of the roads, we're already in compliance. Working on vacuum brakes for the passenger cars right now.
I'm glad to hear that!
I've looked across Cross Road a couple of times and imagined what track across the road would look like!
Utter arrogance of the contractor to do that to the railroad. Time for a lawsuit.
"...have chosen to present it in a negative light"? How else did you expect the railroad to present it? Tone-deaf as well as oblivious.
This is outrageous. I bet the construction company will alter the deal further and not put the tracks back when they're done.
Another sign of corporate screw anyone who gets in the way!🤨
How is this even possible? The corporation destroyed things that didn’t belong to them. Looks like a lawsuit to me.
GREEDY developers grating their way again.
The narrow gauge railway/railroad needs to take action against the developers as they mislead the railroadcabout how long the tracks will be ripped up for.
I don't believe the tracks will be put back.
Luxury apartments? Of course- how is it possible for a developer to rip up tracks and tear down buildings ? Sue- now and for big $$, only thing they will understand .
Sue them! Now!
Has anyone checked on which politician just bought a yacht?
The railroad should be compensated for their losses.
Pretty sure thats illegal sue them
How in the hell can they do that to a private company & violate an agreement like that!🤬🤬🤬🤬😡😡😡😡 They should have to rebuild all they tore down.
Someone in City Hall has it out for the railroad. Bitterness from the failed move to Gray? That would be terrible, as they wanted to avoid this whole project. Sad to see this latest development in the ongoing redevelopment saga.
Two questions:
1- What was lost? Take inventory and calculate the values of all of your losses so that you know what sort of case you have.
2- What are the local bylaws governing notices of seizures and imminent domain? Without attempting to find a common ground agreement, where I’m from at least, generally in the form of a fair market value assessment and offer for property and/or items of value that would be lost, then issuing a letter informing the railroad of the seizure voids any official action taken by the company who plans to break ground. It may be an unlawful seizure of the railroad’s assets.
-
If I were you, I’d file a lawsuit in an out of state court. Relying on deep blue Portlands legal system to make things right would be frivolous. A municipality that’s ran like Portland would likely side with the millionaire developer over the small business owners the developers are causing the hindrance to. Depending on interpretation, this could also potentially be a case of tortious interference. As for filing an out of state suit, you have to find a state where the contractor is either doing business or has a minimum number of persons he is in contact with, then you may be able to file with that states supreme court. Like I said, don’t expect a Maine court to rule in favor of a small business when the plaintiff is going up against a contractor.
Why would the railroad be forced to shut down on the right of way THEY own. That constitution company has no business touch that track period. It’s not their property and definitely not approved by the RR.
Should not be closed down, it's history
We need the name of that construction company now
That is so pathetic… and really f***ing stupid to do this. They should file a lawsuit against this
This is terrible! It's a real shame, but when the government decides to try to 'help' you, it means there are some nasty unintended consequences coming your way and there is usually no recourse. Honestly, I think we would be better off if central planners would just leave us alone.
horrible
0:20 That’s from the Festive studio’s Christmas countdown.
the developer should be sued and made to pay for all the stuff destroyed and lost income
Lawsuit definitely. They have to pay for rail replacement and lost earnings just to start with.
Federal Railroad Administration could take action over this.
You don’t need a crystal ball to see what the next four years will be like.
WHAT the HELL does Trump have to do with this...?
@ Whether you agree or not the President-elect is going to untether big business while eviscerating regulatory authority. If you are big and powerful you will have no one to tell you that you can’t.
You somehow think this involves the Republicans. Bro, it can literally be anyone, regardless of political sidings or involvement.
@@redheadedviking9415Who has avowed to eviscerate regulatory authority? Who has done his best elude the rule of law? If you see a different vision I personally hope you are right…but I doubt it.
I find it funny that a Republican is getting blamed for some thing that is happening in a Democrat controlled state. Just about the entire government of Maine and the City council of Portland are Democrats. So how it it Trump's fault????
Those with money can buy politicians.
The development company would not have behaved this way had they not known they were immune from prosecution. Buy politicians buy immunity.
They will not allow the railroad to ever disturb their waterfront Property .
0:20 Hey! What this railroad called? Do you know?
Maine Narrow Gauge Railroad
I stand with the Maine Narrow Gauge. These luxury property developers are pathetic and I hope that the MNGRR can get their ROW back.
So the construction company...it's 'leaders' - are part of the corporate philosophy of: "Whatever it takes...to make more money, guicker". The railroad's right of way and the lousy 'notices' should be enough to win a lawsuit agaist the developers. Possibly even kick them in the *$%# by , at least temporarily, halting their project while the tracks and destroyed buildings are replaced - at their expense, of course.
Amtrak requires much straighter stretches...the big horseshoe curve in PA is pretty tight...but the point is that the narrow guage railroads were all up and down and in and out of all those tight mountain curves. But the new WIDE guage couldn't go around all those tight curves and passenger rail was on the outs after the 1950s. So all those little burgs and boroughs got shut out long ago. And then they made Rails to Trails program and that was the end of any possibilites of returning passenger rail to the rural communities. And we all know whats happend to SMALL TOWN AMERICA!!!
Railroads have right of way that should override the project.
This is Murca. Big business with no soul just taking what they want.
In the UK this would be illegal as our railways have right of way, and are protected by national law. I also assume that the developers don't own the land or any of the material that they have damaged. That would also be an illegal act in the UK.
Developers do t care one bit! Aren’t railroad right of ways protected above all other property?
Reminder to everyone that the removal of the carbarn and the shuttering of the George Benson trolley line in Seattle was *Supposed* to be "temporary".
Stay on Portland like africanized honeybees on a landscaper
Say the wors and we'll be up to to put the tracks back in, in the Spring. I need the exercise. I only need a place to park my camper.
thats grounds for law suit, you signed for 2 week and they broke it
Someone developer may meet a mario brother 🎉
Another case of those with money screwing those with less.