27 originally uploaded by type error
Back in April I mentioned, during one of the South Metro News Roundups (#5), the legislation Lakeville tried to push through to ban the practice of parking “empty” rail cars in residential areas. Well fast forward until last night when I received the e-mail (below) from a Lakeville resident who is quite fed up with the inaction of local government and the refusal of Progressive Rail to be–well, progressive. This resident wanted to share her story and being that I just saw the open boxcars and thought to myself how they could be used by the homeless for shelter this winter, I felt it was pertinent to post it in its entirety with only a few changes made:
I am one of many who built along these tracks, fifteen years ago. I imagined we would have some train activity. After the tracks have not been used in all that time and no maintenance had been done, we assumed they would be used lightly or not at all. The tracks are in such disrepair, missing rail spikes, plates, rotted out rail ties, etc. So in came Progressive Rail with cars that they searched for all over the US to store here in Lakeville. We went from Ethanol Tankers that were deemed empty according to Progressive. When we met last year for a meeting at our local library the fire department had just purchased a special fire truck to put out ethanol fires due to the fact that if there ever was a fire with those tankers so close to homes the closest hazmat fire vehicle would be the airport at that point. I think the city of Lakeville picked up that tab. After our inquiry it was disclosed that empty tankers to Progressive Rail meant 20 to 30 gallons of residue give or take in each car, that is why the hazmat placards still had to be on the actual cars. So they told us half the story. We approached the city council and agreed with us and wanted the graffiti riddled cars put somewhere else. The resolution was done and sent to Rep. Kline and Klobuchar. Kline is from Lakeville so we thought this would help our cause. Keep in mind they are getting paid to store each and every car every day they are stored here.
They then moved in some rusty old coil cars, these by the way have come and gone to the scrap metal yard as they were that junky. The latest is the lovely green box cars that have moved in. We were given notice by our city that they would move these cars in this spring and promised us they would be locked and secured. No such promise was kept. The minute they arrived we were calling the city and Progressive to come close and lock those cars. They have never complied. The one string of cars along CR-50 towards Dodd on the Friedges (Landscaping) side has at least 17 open cars, there are many open cars behind Kenwood Middle School back in a wooded area that are frequented by unwanted visitors to our neighborhood. We are in constant contact with local police about young adults and illegal activity that is going on in those open train cars. We even have had a regular patrol in our neighborhood because of all the calls to police. We have been left to police this mess Progressive had created. We have children that use these cars as playgrounds etc. It is only a matter of time before someone gets hurt. We watch our children but the trains are like magnets and you cannot be on top of them 24/7. Dave Fellon, Progressive’s owner suggests we are not very good parents and it is trespassing to be on or near the tracks.
The actual neighborhood I live in is a one entrance in and once entrance out, so every time Progressive decides to move their train, we are blocked in and I can count four occasions in the last year that this has occurred. Three times for over an hour, I keep a log now for train activity. People have been late to work, picking up kids, getting to appointments and buses have been delayed or stuck. We are a walking neighborhood now and kids cross that track on a regular basis to and from school as well. We have many elderly people with health concerns that are terrified of being trapped in by the trains.
We have many that are trying to sell homes because of job losses and the trains do not help with this either. They say it hurts our property value as a neighborhood, I am more concerned with safety of our children and families myself but others have many reasons. Progressive does have a legal right to park them there, they always give us the line the economy is to blame, the bottom line is they found another way to make money. They do not put any money into repairing those tracks that they are profiting on. Progressive does not accept any accountability or consequences for its actions such as storing ethanol in residential neighborhoods on tracks that are in disrepair, leaving open rail cars, and making our neighborhoods vulnerable to illegal activity. So we are left doing the dirty work, trying to keep our city safe. Just driving down CR-50 the trains are dirty and gang tagged, they will not even clean up that mess or require their “clients” to do so out of respect for our city and its residents. Many business owners on CR-50 are upset as well and call frequently to Progressive Rail. I also think they should be honest and up front with us as well. I think Progressive should be held more accountable for all of the above it is just not as simple as you bought property by a rail track, so live with it. A rail track yes, a rail yard with parked cars, we never imagined this would happen and we will continue to make noise until we are heard. I respect other opinions but feel we have a right to be heard too.
- Pam S., Lakeville Resident
What do you think of Progressive Rail’s refusal to be sane and do what is right up to and including sealing off open boxcars, paying the residents for their lost time due to closing off their neighborhoods while they fuck around with moving cars in and out, and paying for the additional hazmat protection that they city had to have because of the possibility of hazardous materials left inside the rail cars? Whatever you think about this story please go ahead and comment on as I’m sure that the residents of Lakeville who are affected by this unfortunate nonsense would love to hear what you have to say.
Dakota Complaints Map
Dakota Inmate Dashboard
Loading ...
October 28th, 2009 at 6:45 am
Lakeville Residents Try to Derail Progressive’s Storage: http://tinyurl.com/yk4ytol
This comment was originally posted on Twitter
October 28th, 2009 at 8:47 am
“So in came Progressive Rail with cars that they searched for all over the US to store here in Lakeville.” i’ll call bullshit on this one.
what was Kline and Amy’s response? these two aren’t exactly “local government”.
“We have children that use these cars as playgrounds etc.” i’m not implying anyone is a bad parent here but, the rr tracks and cars might as well have neon signs saying kids playground here! they’re like a magnet to them, maybe myself also.
“Three times for over an hour, I keep a log now for train activity.” an hour is a long time. i’ve been stopped at rr crossings for what seemed like a hour.
my bottom line is i think if you ask Fellon he’d be the first to say the cars aren’t making any $$ sitting still, they’re better off hauling product to all points.
AND, i think the people have a legitimate gripe that pgr needs to address.
bb
October 28th, 2009 at 8:53 am
bb stacker, remember these are stationary rail cars–not moving ones. I have sat at road-level RR crossings for more than 20 minutes as the train blows by at 55+ MPH. It takes a long time to get stationary cars rolling and I could definitely see them blocking off the neighborhood for 2 to 3x that.
October 28th, 2009 at 8:55 am
Its a bit of a catch 22. The railroad tracks were there first, as the letter writer even admits to, but yes, the railroad should do more to, at least, secure the cars.
Would the landowners be willing to compromise some? The RR does a better job securing/patroling the cars, and maybe offer to move the cars during non-rush hour times (not blocking people to/from work)? I also do agree the railroad should chip in some for the extra equipment/training the city had to do because of the hazmat trailers.
October 28th, 2009 at 9:14 am
I would search state or federal rail regulations, etc. I would think that unless cars are in a rail owned facility or yard that they might need to be locked/secured? I have no idea if this is true , but if they are not in compliance with regulations then there should be a remedy, mainly some type of penalty for the company involved. start with MnDot, and then the NSTB and see if there are regs… or even the city might have something on it? (although it sounds as if the city isnt much help) I could suggest another way to get their attention to unlocked cars,…..but……
October 28th, 2009 at 9:14 am
I don’t really think it’s fair to put PR on the hook because the city approved neighborhoods with only one entrance. If residents are trapped in their neighborhoods by trains, that’s the city’s fault, not the railroads…. I’m not saying that PR couldn’t compromise a little to reach a win-win-win compromise, I’m just saying this resident is blaming the railroad company when she should be mad at the city council.
October 28th, 2009 at 10:01 am
I feel Pam S. does a fine job of remaining fairly calm in her letter. She also doesn’t seem to be making any outlandish claims: stop blocking us in; lock of the cars if you’re going to park them here. In fact, the latter must also have seemed reasonable given that Lakeville said it would be done.
It appears as if all Pam and her neighbors are asking is that PR try a little bit harder to be better neighbors. So far, Progressive doesn’t seem to feel this is a priority, nor does the city.
October 28th, 2009 at 10:05 am
I know it will be unpopular, but I’m having a hard time agreeing with the concerns.
I imagine the train company would like to secure the cars for their own liability purposes, and probably have a vested interest in maintaining better good will with the communities in which they operate.
But…the inconvenience of road blockage is a normal part of train operations.
People congregating on/around, or playing on/around the train cars is trespassing. This is a matter between the citizens and the police.
The ugliness of a train car with or without graffiti is not the train company’s problem.
The City’s need to purchase hazmat equipment, in my mind, has nothing to do with the storage of ethanol cars. Perhaps it drove home a sense of urgency, but trains passing through communities and/or near homes, carry hazardous material — that’s just a fact of railroads. 35W and the roads to and from the industrial areas of Lakeville (including County 50, near homes) also carry vehicles with hazardous materials. A City like Lakeville should have hazmat equipment, be it on their own, or in a shared agreement with neighboring communities. This probably just drove home the point in their budgeting priorities.
The rest just sounds like NIMBY talk. Resale value of homes, “safety of children and families”, etc. sounds like a bunch of typical suburban whining.
October 28th, 2009 at 10:23 am
MSPD,
Then why aren’t they closed? I mean this is a no-brainer. They said they’d do it and they haven’t. Trespassing or not, they shouldn’t be open. Close the fucking things already. If you have the time to park the cars, you have the time to close them up too.
I really think that there is a difference in priority between having many cars sitting, stationary, in a neighborhood for days, weeks, months, etc and having the occasional car filled with hazardous materials blow through your community on any given day.
Remember, these particular tracks aren’t in the best shape and probably aren’t usable for much more than storage. The fact of the matter is that Lakeville could have called in the Hazmat equipment from Bloomington (on the same sharing agreement you mention) if a random train of cars happened to have a problem. When the damn things are parked in a residential neighborhood for an extended period it creates a much different need.
October 28th, 2009 at 9:40 am
Parked rail cars cause resident concern in Lakeville, what are your thoughts on the subject? RT @SouthMetroNews http://tinyurl.com/yk4ytol
This comment was originally posted on Twitter
October 28th, 2009 at 10:42 am
I know that I’d be pretty pissed off if all of a sudden a nearly abandoned rail line was converted to a parking lot for rail cars. The letter writer seems to be exaggerating at least a bit but has the right to be angry. However, the suburbs are growing up and that pristine view of trees, bluffs and farm fields you had a decade or so ago when you bought/built your house is now home to an abandoned strip mall and a decaying, empty K-Mart building. Put enough pressure on both the city and the rail line owners and they’ll eventually do something about their practices but people in other cities have dealt with rail lines for decades and have used these things called “fences” to screen out the noise and unpleasant view. After all, the neighborhood is what you make it.
October 28th, 2009 at 11:00 am
I really don’t think it’s to much to ask of Progressive for them to lock the cars down.
Other things might be harder to enforce, but simply locking the cars to make sure they are not attracting vagabonds is so simple.
I think Pam has some legit concerns. Some might be minor while others I see as more critical. Maybe instead of trying to solve the laundry list at once your neighborhood could focus on your top 2 crtical concerns and see if you can get action.
If you complain enough someone is going to listen, might take some time and persistance, but someone will listen.
October 28th, 2009 at 11:19 am
I disagree. I think trains with a very minimal amount of residue in them, sitting idle, presents far less of a danger than moving trains (which create sparks as they go) pulling cars loaded with fuel.
Aren’t there hazardous fuel tanks at the Lakeville airport? How does the airplane fuel get there? How do the hazardous materials used in all of those factories and warehouses get into the neighborhood? I imagine that presents much more of a danger than 20 gallons of ethanol in the bottom of an idle 10,000 gallon train car tank.
Also, sure, they could close/lock the cars but I just don’t see how much of a difference open box cars and closed ones make. “Attracting vagabonds”? Just how many “vagabonds” are there looking to take up residence in Lakeville? Let’s be realistic here.
I don’t live in the neighborhood, but I imagine the McDonalds parking lot right there attracts 100x the amount of loitering that the box cars do. I bet for every police call re: loitering in a train car, there are 500 calls for loitering, smoking, underage drinking, whatever in the parks around all of our homes.
Close the box cars and the kids will just sit on the outside of them or sit on a picnic shelter in the park or sit around in the woods or whatever.
It’s not the presence of train cars that’s the issue.
October 28th, 2009 at 11:25 am
You’d be surprised how many homeless people I have run across camping in the woods in various suburbs, including Lakeville. I wouldn’t be surprised if they’d prefer a boxcar over the tarp tents or unused forts/blinds they usually seem to sleep under.
The McDonald’s isn’t near the neighborhood in question, it’s a mile down the road.
October 28th, 2009 at 12:00 pm
The neighborhoods in question stretch from 50 to highway 35. It is not vagabonds, however I personally know people living in their cars right here in Lakeville. It would surprise you.
We as a neighborhood watch force, catch young adults in those open train cars back in the woods just down from Kenwood on a regular basis. So much so that, when our phone calls to the police are that frequent they send a regular patrol for that particular area.
If the rail cars were not open we would not have the illegal activity. And by the way the young adults are mostly coming from other neighborhoods. They would not be dealing drugs, drinking etc. outside these cars in plain sight. Silly criminals. Just having them in our neighborhoods has lead to other neighborhood crimes. It is a trickle down affect. Never the less we continue to police them even though we did not create the oppurtunity for this kind of activity. We police them because we wnat our kids and families safe. Pam S.
October 28th, 2009 at 12:15 pm
My thoughts are pretty simple, PR seems to be using this area as a dumping ground for cars they do not need/want any more, or are not in demand. While everyone needs a little corner to dump things, I agree with the requests to secure the cars, and to not keep hazmat goods in the cars when they are so close to a residential area for an extended time.
Maybe PR should keep up their end to secure/lock the cars, as well as participate in active patrolling of the area in question to ensure that no unsavory activities are taking place.
For the residents, I can understand their point of view, but they did move in near tracks, so they should accept some amount of rail stock being left there, however I do feel that PR has a responsibility to ensure the area is safe and in order to keep the curious neighbors safe.
October 28th, 2009 at 12:33 pm
It seems to me that the unlocked railroad cars represent an attractive nuisance. Ya’ll can read up more on it if you like but some main points would be:
The place where the condition exists is one on which the possessor knows or has reason to know that children are likely to trespass.
The children, because of their youth, do not discover the condition or realize the risk involved in inter-meddling with it or in coming within the area made dangerous by it.
The utility to the possessor of maintaining the condition and the burden of eliminating the danger are slight as compared with the risk to children involved.
So yes, kids are trespassing, but it should be the railroads responsibility to lock those cars up because any idiot could tell you that open rail cars would be attractive to kids to play on. I’m sure the railroads have a bunch of lawyers that would fight that tooth and nail but maybe if someone was to start proceedings to sue them for their attractive nuisance the cars would quickly and mysteriously be locked.
I’ve heard of the attractive nuisance doctrine being invoked when kids have trespassed into abandoned buildings and tree houses on someone else’s property.
October 28th, 2009 at 12:34 pm
I honestly have little sympathy for the neigborhood. I looked at and ultimately did NOT purchase a home in that neighborhood well before this storage issue came about, and the railroad tracks were a part of that. Neighborhood access and connectivity was another issue. (There were other non neighborhood issues, but they were factors) Fact is the railroad was there first – its been there a very, very long time, and the railroad is allowed to pretty much do what it pleases with its tracks.
The City approved a neighborhood with one access – they are responsible for that issue, not the railroad. I will grant that the railroad could work on scheduling to help, but again, they were there first, and the neighbors bought in knowing the railroad was there. I’d like to see the signed contract they got from the railroad that indicated the line would remain in disuse unless the neighbors agreed it could be used?
The hazmat issue is a red herring. Between the chemicals already stored and used at the industrial park, the materials ALREADY being transported by rail and trucked through the community, there is way more to be concerned about than 20 gallons of residual ethanol in a tank car that is parked. A railcar parked has much less potential for issues than a railcar in motion or actively being transported.
I agree that the RR could do more to close up cars, but believe me, that only does so much.
October 28th, 2009 at 12:45 pm
Also I know this isn’t one of her main concerns but what about an ordinance requiring property owners to remove graffiti after police have documented it. Then if the property owner does not remove the graffiti within a certain amount of time, the local government will remove it at the property owners expense. If the city can make storing the rail cars there as inconvenient as possible maybe they will find a less “troublesome†city to park those suckers in.
October 28th, 2009 at 1:06 pm
I don’t have train cars in my neighborhood — the “attractive nuisances” in my area are Echo Park and Alimagnet Park.
Again, I think this just comes down to a “not in my backyard” issue. Why not just say “isn’t there a stretch of rail in some deserted/rural area somewhere that they could use instead”?
Don’t pretend, or write to Senators to claim that open cars and such are CAUSING crime or homeless people to gravitate to that part of Lakeville.
Pam, you yourself, as well as Bill prove my point:
First of all, you mistook me for believing there aren’t homeless people in Lakeville. Should we then ban people from parking cars in or near your neighborhood?
Should we then ban trees and other places that create opportunities for people to be out of sight entirely?
“The Wife”, you have a point with the attractiveness to children to play in these things and I agree — as I said, I’m sure the railroad has an interest in avoiding liability and, for that reason, should have them locked.
This is just a flat out ignorant assertion.
October 28th, 2009 at 1:12 pm
It’s possible that they already have (they do it for snow emergencies and the like) and people are more than happy to report cars that are parked on the street that don’t belong there. Thankfully, when residents and cities do that they can act on it and fix the problem–unlike in this case.
Look, Lakeville already has an unenforceable ordinance against parking the rail cars in residential neighborhoods but they cannot do anything to actually make Progressive Rail move them. Just like “The Wife”‘s suggestion that Lakeville create an ordinance to force PR to remove graffiti, it’s something which will likely fall on deaf ears.
October 28th, 2009 at 1:18 pm
I think Progressive should be locking the cars up, and trying not to obstruct traffic more than they need to, but otherwise that’s it. Like others have said, buying a house near a rail line means you’re going to have to deal with railroad cars sometimes. Like Jason, I was also looking at a home along this rail line (albeit not in this neighborhood) and decided not to partially because of not wanting to deal with things like this. After all, what if this does eventually become a commuter rail line? There won’t be cars parked along it, but there will be more incidents where access is blocked.
The attractive nuisance doctrine may work if someone were to get injured (I know it’s been used with railroads a lot, and actually originated with them), but I don’t think a graffiti ordinance would work — the jurisdiction issues are a big part of what is causing this conflict, and the federal government would override the city on it.
October 28th, 2009 at 1:22 pm
“I have sat at road-level RR crossings for more than 20 minutes as the train blows by at 55+ MPH”
ummmmmm, a bit of an embellishment i believe. those figures mean thomas the train was 18 miles in length!! your 130 car coal trains are usually not much more than 2, 21/2 miles long, 12,000 feet or so.
i checked out the green box cars this am. they’re all boise cascade. down turn in the lumber market perhaps. BUT several did have their doors or door open.
“We were given notice by our city that they would move these cars in this spring and promised us they would be locked and secured. No such promise was kept”.
what’s the citys answer to the above?
and again, what was the reply from amy and john?
bb
October 28th, 2009 at 1:25 pm
yes, an embellishment. I have no idea how fast the train was going.
October 28th, 2009 at 1:31 pm
Bill, can you clarify what you mean when you say that they cannot actually make Progressive Rail move them?
I have driven through the area, although not today or recently, it seems like a portion of the area is actuall farm fields with the tracks running along the edge of the field and along the road? I am sure it crosses through neighborhoods as well. Is the city unable to do anything about it because, as pointed out above, the tracks were clearly there before the homes? Or are they unable to do anything about it because it is outside city limits, and/or zoned in a way that allows them to stay there? Or is it just a case of the railroad being outside thier jurisdiction?
Personally it seems odd that the railroad can just park them wherever they want, but if the property belongs to them, and they were clearly there first, I dont think its the governments place to prevent them from doing legal business.
I think the attractive nuisance thing is interesting, but also clouds the picture. One one hand, its vagrants and criminals in the area, and in the other its small children who might be hurt playing on the train cars?
Personally I think the laws that allow people and or law enforcement to prosecute the property owner because someone else broke the law are counterproductive and one of the big problems with our court system. If you are trespassing on my property and get hurt, its your problem, not mine. Any sane person would agree with this, and any lawyer will get all hot and bothered by it. This is the slipper slope that leads to criminals bringing lawsuits against people they have robbed because they got shot in the house.
As to the trains, I am glad they are not in my backyard, but I find it odd that you were all over the folks at cobblestone lake for not wanting low income housing in thier neighborhood, but you are clearly against this business lawfully using property it owned long before any of these houses were built.
October 28th, 2009 at 1:33 pm
Point taken Bill. The parked car ban was a pretty piss poor analogy on my part. Still, the existence of homeless people in cars supports my point.
The bottom line is: I can respect not wanting railroad cars parked near your house and working to help find a place for them that won’t have unpleasant visual impact on others. I can respect asking the railroad to do the common sense thing and shut the doors.
I can’t respect people fabricating cause-and-effect issues (crime, danger, lowered property value, massive inconveniences) that make no sense and using them to waste the time and resources of our elected officials. Our elected officials are doing a bang-up job wasting time and resources without our help.
October 28th, 2009 at 1:35 pm
Chad,
From the Thisweek article linked in the first paragraph of this post (emphasis mine):
October 28th, 2009 at 1:37 pm
MSPD, I think we can all agree on that one!
October 28th, 2009 at 1:56 pm
Dear bb stacker,
All the city can do is politely ask them to close them, they can not make them physically do this. Several emails went to Mr. Mielke as he has been our go between to Progressive.
As for Amy Klobuchar and John Kline, Amy’s office has contacted us, but Rep Kline has made some calls for us and has been in contact with us. The resolution the city council passed was delivered to them last spring along with a petition from our neighborhood. They at least aknowledged us, unlike Progressive Rail.
Mary Liz Holberg was at our meeting last year and said she grew up playing on these very same tracks, (trespassing as it was) she also sent MN Dot out to inspect the actual tracks. Eleven areas of concerns were detected on the small area that was inspected. The rail ties sit on the side awaiting repair one year later, with weeds growing up around them.
October 28th, 2009 at 2:18 pm
Railroad tracks and a certain amount of land on either side of them are owned by the railroad. I am not sure in this case if it is the CP Rail, or a short line of some sort. They likely leased the lines to PR to store the cars as the line is generally or not at all an active line…
in any case the homeowners should follow whatever regulations they know exist, the graffiti ordinance, the track safety ordinance (not in repair, etc.), and find out if there are ordinances or regulations regarding whether cars need to be securely locked and closed. (it could be they are not required to be locked as the owner of the railcar take the risk of damage or liability in that case, no doubt they utilize the trespassing law to avoid any liability on safety issues)
its a sticky problem, having dealt with railroads my entire business life, I can tell you the laws are most definitely stacked in their favor , this tradition goes back to the 19th century when much of the land they own was basically given to them by the Federal govt. The past 30 years of smiley face deregulation have served them well too… 5 railroads that have anti-trust exemption control the majority of the freight in the country, much like the late 19th century they once again have monopolistic control and predatory pricing ability in most of the places they do business.
this is obviously a cheap place to store excess cars, and in the current economy you can expect there are plenty of excess cars.
the only way to force any change will be to make the storage of the cars there financially costly, and finding a way to do that will require work and a good transportation lawyer. Start with the little things like the graffiti ordinance, any other regs that they can be called on and dont give up… if it keeps costing them , they will come around.
or get a strong citizen group to force new laws on the issue of blocking neighborhood access, maybe even a local ordinance saying the cars need to be closed and locked in Lakeville etc. none of this will be easy. Good luck.
October 28th, 2009 at 2:52 pm
leftymm
Thank you for your information. We have looked at a lot of those angles and we know the odds are in their favor. It is a cheap place to store un-wanted rail cars. We are up for the challenge, so the we continue to be heard.
This is a national issue, we have even networked with other cities with the same issue. New Castle IN, Thorton CO, etc. Some of these places have had success in moving the rail cars, some have not, they also have sought to change federal laws to be updated. Even the Wall Street Journal ran an article about this last year. “Rail Cars Have Towns Singing Freight-Train Blues” So we are not alone in this.
October 28th, 2009 at 2:53 pm
Bill, I guess my question was more to the point of if the city is willing to pass things like Graffiti laws and such, can these be enforced on the railroad?
I would think getting bills every few days for city workers having to repaint train cars would get old, but if they are somehow able to ignore these, then we are back to it being pointless. If its actually because there is very little actual crime happening out there, then its a different story. It seems crazy that they are saying that people drive there from other parts of the cities to commit various kinds of crime, but perhaps that is actually the case.
October 28th, 2009 at 3:19 pm
I am no expert on the topic but being that Lakeville created an ordinance that says they cannot block neighborhoods in and they still do it, well, then it’s yet another nice gesture that gets the residents no where. As leftymn said, the RRs have immunity from this type of shit going way back and it will take an act of Congress (literally it seems) to get it changed. Unfortunately, because RRs have deep pockets, there’s probably no way it’ll happen.
I’d love to see that happen. In fact, I have a feeling that if a city worker painted one of their cars, which isn’t even owned by Progressive Rail itself, that the city would end up with a lawsuit for trespass and defacing private property–just like the taggers themselves would if they were caught.
October 28th, 2009 at 3:44 pm
I dont know what the financial situation is for Progressive Rail, but it does not appear that the citizens of Lakeville are dealing with some huge multinational company here.
It looks like Progressive Rail is located in Lakeville, and all of its employees seem to be out of the Lakeville office. While the right of way may be a federal mandate, the actual company, on some level, answers to the city of Lakeville.
October 28th, 2009 at 4:17 pm
just a little more on progressive rail – the neighborhoods in question are located at the end of a short line that they own that splits off from Northfield. Tracks north of lakeville are owned by Canadian Pacific and likely not being used. I doubt they “searched all over the US” when the natural location to stick these things is right there, especially since their main railyard/warehouse is just a few miles south of the location in question.
I agree with Chad above, going the local route might be a better option.
October 28th, 2009 at 4:42 pm
I’m sure that all the people in those neighborhoods and the City Council of Lakeville will be blown away by your revelation that Progressive Rail is located in Lakeville. If only you had known that earlier right Pam??!!
That only makes it even sadder that they can’t be bothered to lock up those cars or avoid blocking roads for long periods of time during daylight hours when they have employees within spitting distance.
October 28th, 2009 at 5:06 pm
My point was more that everything they have written, including the original email, would lead one to believe that they were fighting a battle against some multinational corporation with deep pockets, lawyers on staff, and some faceless facade to hide behind.
The fact is, they are dealing with people right in Lakeville. Probably people whose kids go to the same school, who eat at the same restaurants, and drive on the same roads. So, instead of calling on congressman in Washington DC to fight federal laws for them, perhaps they should appeal to reason, and try to get things fixed at the local level.
Probably, as with all things, there are two sides to this story, and we are only hearing one of them.
Your passive aggressive sarcasm is appreciated though. I still dont see how these people are poor slighted citizend just trying to get by and keep their neighborhoods safe, but the people in Cobblestone Lake were evil devils spawn.
October 28th, 2009 at 5:09 pm
Well, “The Wife”, I’m sure they knew – I wasn’t aware of that fact and didn’t see it mentioned anywhere previously other than in Chad’s post. It just surprised me, because you’d think the city of Lakeville would have more influence over a business operating within their jurisdiction. Just another example of an incompetent suburban government…
October 28th, 2009 at 5:35 pm
Yes, silly people we know where Progressive is located. The cities hands are tied, the rail roads are protected by federal laws. The City has no juristiction over them.T he city council passed and a resolution and sent it on to state reps. They have been diplomatic with Progressive and a go between with Lakeville residents. We have no city ordinances about graffiti or we would have been all over that already. So it is a bigger battle than we thought at first.
But if your neighbor had a rusty old junky vehicles sitting idle for long periods of time or did not take care of their property etc. we have laws for that.
And if you call Progressive you will find that they do search out these rail cars all over the US. We have had several conversations with Lon Van Germet when he is out traveling and putting together contracts for these cars, not always an existing client. I am trying to be honest about what I know. I just want Progressive to be a good corporate neighbor to the city it serves. I really do not think that is too much to ask.
October 28th, 2009 at 5:38 pm
Just because the business is in Lakeville doesn’t mean that the rules meant to protect railroads aren’t based at the Federal level (which they are).
So let’s say Lakeville uses taxes or some other mean to pressure Progressive Rail (which I’m shocked is based in Lakeville as the picture on this post is out of CA and would make me think otherwise although I have done no research as Chad has), what happens when PR sells out to some other company? Lakeville is right back to square one.
I just now notice that this has already been pretty much covered by others in this thread. That’s what I get for commenting from my phone after happy hour. Sorry about that!
October 28th, 2009 at 6:35 pm
Ok, I’ll spell it out for you Chad. Yes, Progressive has offices in Lakeville, but since they don’t have to listen to local government/authorities they might as well be faceless. The difference between these citizens and Cobblestone residents is that ordinances and or laws that would have support and could be passed locally such as, no cars stored in residential areas, or no cars stored unlocked for more than 30 days in a residential area, don’t impact them and wouldn’t have a shot in hell on the Federal level. Why? because Progressive is part of a huge faceless railroad industry that has many lobbyists and makes campaign contributions and pools together to fight anything that threatens their interests. So in effect they are fighting an entity with deep pockets, lawyers on staff, and a faceless facade to hide behind.
October 28th, 2009 at 7:21 pm
The Wife,
This is true, we thought we could just call the city and have this taken care of in a polite manner. No such luck, the city council was quick to pass a resolution, probably because that is all they could do. I know those local establishments up on 50 are tired of looking at those box cars as well and make frequent calls to Progressive asking them to move them.
Not sure who responded to the part I said about outside young adults coming into our neighborhoods. We know our neighborhood pretty well and probably have connected even more so with the train situation. We have cars that come and park by the trains and the individuals parade down the tracks to the open box cars and do what ever it is they are doing. Which we know is probably not homework and then after an hour drive away.
Sometimes it involves one or more cars. The point is we are a watch force and call on these when we see it happening and know that they do not belong here. Nine times out of ten the police are called and something happens with the situation at hand. We have had this more frequently with the trains here and the open cars. No open box cars, no place to deal, it is just that simple. We are not saying ban all parked cars in the area, that seems silly. We just want the outside, uninvited guests to go away.
And furthermore, I did always expect some rail traffic here when we built, not a graveyard for unwanted train cars.
I would be shocked if communter rail would ever happen here unless these tracks have a major overhaul. I think there is a bigger group out here that opposes this as well. I will not even tackle that one. I invite you to walk the rails trackssometime, missing spikes, rail plates, a ton of rotted tail ties. It would take a whole lot of money to do this and I believe the tracks only go as far as 35, they use to cross somewhere by the old Ferry bridge through Shakopee I think. I do not believe that crossing even exists any longer. I could be wrong, maybe someone who knows this could enlighten me.
October 28th, 2009 at 7:32 pm
As stated above, the city has no graffiti ordinance. So, that avenue has not even been tried.
Again, you are posting one side of the story. Perhaps the other side is bad. Maybe they are a big mean faceless company trying to steal from the poor and give to the rich.
Or maybe they are just another small company doing everything they can to make ends meet, and one of the things they have discovered as a viable business is storing unused rail cars.
I get very nervous when I see people who should be logical and conservative railing! for govt to pass laws that make it harder for small businesses to operate. As MSPD pointed out, this is just a not in my backyard issue. We are hearing one side of the story, with quite a lot of color added to make it sound like the area around these train cars is one of the states most crime ridden areas.
October 28th, 2009 at 7:51 pm
Chad,
We did talk to the city about the graffiti ordinance or lack of, it is out of their juristiction is what we were told. Are you suggesting the city pass one and try an enforce this on the rail cars????
I run a small business and I am respectful traffic it bring, my property and equipment, noise etc. for my neighbors consideration, so I resent that comment. I do not feel Progressive care about any of this, or they would have met some of our requests.
Progressive Rail has a side to, they can post their views as well. I respect what they have to say, just like everyone on this site. We are all entitled to our opinions.
And yes the area around these train cars is not the states most crime ridden areas, granted. However when your children have to have bus stops, and are walking home from Middle School and playing in these areas, you do not want them to be exposed to this kind of activity. We did not have this going on until the green open rail cars arrived. So call it as colorful as you want it is happening in our neighborhood and if there are ways to be proactive about this we will. Remember I am one of many residents in this area and others that have experienced this I just happen to not be afraid to talk about it.
October 28th, 2009 at 8:10 pm
You’re right Chad, I’m illogical and unreasonable for wanting Progressive to be legally required to lock their 17 open rail cars. I mean their fiscal years sales last year were only 17.5 million dollars and it would be really hard financially for such a small business to comply.
October 28th, 2009 at 7:13 pm
43 comments in 12 hours, not bad: http://tinyurl.com/yftfzsq
This comment was originally posted on Twitter
October 28th, 2009 at 8:31 pm
If it matters … Thisweek has done many a story on this topic over the years.
The gist: The railroad line and right-of-way running parallel to Kenwood Trail (County Road 50) is owned by Canadian Pacific. Progressive Rail, a company in Airlake Industrial Park, has a lease with Canadian Pacific to store rail cars on the train tracks.
The tracks themselves are dilapidated and can’t be used, thus, they’re exempt status and can only be used for storage.
Progressive Rail contracts out the storage of cars from carriers around the region. They solicit the cars for storage — they do not own them.
Lakeville’s official stance — administration and City Council — is the city would prefer that the rail cars would not be stored along the Kenwood Trail corridor or in any neighborhoods. But the city’s zoning laws don’t apply to rail lines, something that goes back to the late 1800s.
The federal government has regulatory power over the lines and the rights the rail companies usurp city laws. Federal authorities haven’t been willing to change laws or offer case-by-case decisions.
Lakeville has contacted Progressive Rail in the past, but the city can’t require they do anything with the cars and the company hasn’t been willing to change its practice.
Progressive Rail declines comment most every time they’re asked to talk about this issue and the company’s owner doesn’t live in Lakeville.
October 28th, 2009 at 9:05 pm
17.5 million dollar in annual sales is a meaningless number. We dont know what their expenses are. It certainly does not strike me as a large number for a company that might broker bulk freight deals across the country and has 30+ employees and extreme capital expenses. I honestly would have guessed something much bigger, and that number actually supports my belief that this is just a small business trying to make it in a tough economic environment.
The Wife, just to be clear, you are saying that if Progressive Rail went out and bought 17 padlocks and locked up those 17 rail cars, everyone would be happy? Stating that a company should be legally required to run their business in any way, simply because people in the neighborhood want it is, again, a scary precedent.
I do have one real question for Pam, Ladyhawk, The Wife, whoever. How many of you have driven down to their office and talked to them about your concerns. You keep saying how you have contacted the city, and you have done this, and you have done that, but I have not seen you state anyplace that you and your neighbors have actually acted like adults and gone and spoke to the people you are having such issues with.
October 28th, 2009 at 9:30 pm
Chad,
Several of the neighbors have talked to Dave Fellon and Lon VanGermet at Progressive Rail by phone and email. We are in the works to get a community meeting together to discuss these matters in person. Maybe we can come to a win-win compromise for all concerned with this. We are hoping the city and Progressive are in attendance.
Padlocks, seventeen is just the tip of the ice berg on 50. It would be a step in the right direction for making our neighborhoods a little safer. We are not asking for the moon here, our requests are resonable and the city backs our concerns.
And again, if I ran my business like Progressive does, I can sure bet my neighbors would be all over me. Other than they are governed by the federal government, I really do not get the difference here.
October 28th, 2009 at 9:35 pm
Derrick,
Thank you for giving us all of that information.
October 28th, 2009 at 9:45 pm
I was thinking, even if I did not live by the tracks, just driving down 50 (a pretty major cooridor for lovely Lakeville) the rail storage sure is not a very appealing site to look at day in and day out.
And as for the second entrance to our neighborhood, the trains run all the way down 50, so when they move them they usually blocked Ipava, Dodd, you get the picture. We could get out but still be blocked in to where we needed to go depending on the actual destination. But, I get your point it may be a city issue, the train movement just compounds this at times.
October 28th, 2009 at 10:08 pm
Derrick, great to hear from you. The problem with this issue is that Progressive owns the property. They are responsible for securing their property, ie., tracks AND rail cars that they are earning profits for storing. It’s kind a like a Public Storage facility. So who is responsible? Progressive! Why, you ask? Because THEY are NOT taking any responsibility!! And NOT notifying the specific rail car owners to secure their property!!!!
October 28th, 2009 at 10:27 pm
Will … no that it’s the point, but actually Progressive doesn’t own the property. Canadian Pacific does. Progressive just has a lease agreement to use the railroad.
I see both sides. I understand Progressive’s need to turn profit, and if serving as a contract storage option for clients who have extra box and tanker cars helps, I can see why they do it.
I can also see where residents and the city are upset. They’re an eyesore along one of Lakeville main corridors, they’re a hazard in more ways than one, and they have impacts on people’s neighborhoods.
It’s a tough thing.
October 28th, 2009 at 10:53 pm
Derrick, the point is that Progressive is the leaser of this property. THEY are the responsible factor in this situation. THEY are sub-leaser , if you will, to these particular rail car owners. Progressive is responsible for NOTIFYING the rail car owners to secure their property. PERIOD!!!!! Is it that difficult to understand?
October 28th, 2009 at 11:13 pm
In an article from 6 years ago Progressive’s revenue was 3.2 million and they said they were profitable and had been so for several years. 6 years later and their yearly revenue is 17.5 million. So you’re right I don’t know what their expenses are but if they said they were turning a profit at only 3.2 million in revenue a year I have a feeling they are turning a profit now that they are at 17.5 million.
Ladyhawk, I think Chad’s next question will be if you have personally delivered a plate of cookies to Dave Fellon and asked him nicely with sugar on top if he would please be a good neighbor to the city of Lakeville. If you haven’t done that than you obviously are not acting like an adult and aren’t really trying all the avenues available to you.
October 29th, 2009 at 12:37 am
The Wife
I am on it, one great big plate of cookies made to order for our friends at Progressive Rail. I thought we were being adults with our concerns, and keeping it civil. We have never had harsh words towards Progressive, just have always wanted to voice our concerns and tried to do this in a respectful manner. The awesome thing is by stumbling upon this site, I have learned some things from all of you, and hopefully I can bring it to our community meeting. So for that I thank you!
October 29th, 2009 at 9:07 am
I would be interested in seeing some statistics on the number of police calls to this area vs. other nearby establishments. Those statistics are kept and available to the public. Pam, you seem to have covered every angle — feel free to provide the data you’ve gathered.
I would also be interested in hearing from a Lakeville Police officer on his/her perception of the problem.
We have teens, etc. coming and parking in Echo Park a block over from my house all the time. Sometimes, as I drive home after dark, I see people hanging out on the swingsets after dark. When this happens, I walk over there and tell them to get lost and they do. I see cars at night parked in Crystal Lake Beach all summer long. Same with Alimagnet and the High School lots. Last summer, I saw a couple having sex in a minivan in Alimagnet Park in broad daylight on a Saturday, right across from the playground.
This happens in every part of every community. I just don’t buy the correlation between the existence of box cars and crime/danger to the community.
If you’re going to approach Progressive and have a community meeting, you need to stick to data and stop sprinkling in your Not In My Back Yard garbage appeals like the two above. Anecdotes about “oh but our precious children need to walk past to get to their bus stops!” isn’t going to persuade anyone and, in fact, undermines your effort.
October 29th, 2009 at 9:07 am
Will, I get all that. I’m not disagreeing with you. I think everyone here agrees the cars should be locked.
October 29th, 2009 at 10:02 am
MSPD
I do not recall ever saying not in my backyard in my above comments. We have a police officer in our neighborhood and because many of us patrol the area in question , we know how often this is happening. I am not sprinkling anything, we have a right to protect our children and be proactive about preventing crime if we can. The police department says the trains have created an additional draw to the neighborhood and it has brought up the number in calls they recieve. They will be invited to this meeting as well, we will ask for specific data. I think drug trafficking in the open box cars is a big deal. If you could get crime out of your neighborhood wouldn’t you?
October 29th, 2009 at 10:07 am
Pam just keep doing what you are doing. Sounds like you have thought things through. Like Derrick said, everyone agrees the cars should be locked. Focus on that first.
I think it’s nice to actually see citizens care about something. In this case it’s not a fun something, but at least it shows you care about your community!
Interesting the facts you learn on this blog. I had no idea this was even an issue..
October 29th, 2009 at 10:11 am
Depends on how good the cookies are, but it cant hurt.
October 29th, 2009 at 10:30 am
I think it’s funny how people just can’t seem to wrap their mind around the idea that:
It does not matter what you think.
It does not matter that you do not like it.
It doesn’t matter that it may be having a negative impact on your life.
It is the fucking railroad, and they have well established FEDERAL law which overrides anything the State could do, let alone a City Council can do. All it takes is one experience like this, and people learn… don’t live next to/near a railroad.
Should the cars be locked? Certainly. Personally if it was my place, I’d just fucking lock the cars myself. Spend some money on big master locks and talk with the local cops, and just get 4 or 5 buddies to head over and close the doors and lock them. The rail company won’t give a crap, and when time comes to open them they’ll just cut them off. I hear it now, “yeah but they said they were gonna lock them.” Well have they yet? come on, what is motivating them to do anything?
The city and its citizens need to realized that there are additional costs/responsibilities to having a rail line in your area. That means proper policing, having proper equipment, and living with some challenges. That’s just life with the railroad. It’s also why I’d never have a house close to a rail line, regardless of how long ago it was. If the railroad still owns it, I’m not living near it. (I learned that from my Grandfather)
Now in my mind the best way to deal with this, if you want action, is work with your senators, and make sure they know how Progressive is handling the situation. I’d find out the group that is the mouth piece for the railroad. They must have some group like Railroaders International or something. Write to them about how Progressive is being a dick. Carbon copy to them letters you write to your congressman. And write to congressmen on the transportation committee.
The goal here is to create PR heat for Progressive. Show them that if Progressive doesn’t start to play nice, you’re going to work to make noise and try and draw the attention of Congress. If they see that happening, they may quickly realize asking Progressive to shape up is in their best interest.
October 29th, 2009 at 10:31 am
Yes but that doesn’t involve calling in Federal legislators to crack down on a business that is simply conducting the business that they have a right to do.
The crime you fear occurs because of criminals, not boxcars and dilapidated tracks. If you have a “police officer in your neighborhood” like you claim and the problem still exists, you should address the ineffectiveness of the police officer.
My guess is that if there actually was a problem, and Lakeville PD was out there writing tickets for trespassing, the trespassers would move back to strip mall parking lots, parks and elsewhere.
I’m not saying you shouldn’t take actions to ensure the safety of your children and your community.
I am saying that your approach is ineffective, counterproductive and appears to be full of exaggerations, hyperbole and tangental issues (they’re ugly to look at, they could start on fire, the tracks are in disrepair, they block the neighborhood once in a blue moon) that have no value in what you are trying to accomplish.
October 29th, 2009 at 10:41 am
Personally, I say RIGHT ON! Good old fashioned logic.
(Although Pam would be guilty of the very things she is so afraid of — trespassing on the cars and exposing her children to the (gasp) sight of such bad behavior)
October 29th, 2009 at 11:08 am
Ok, so I’ve got another idea, if you can’t make them comply with local ordinances and you can’t make them pay fees then we are left with embarrassment. I’ve read about NACA, Al Sharpton and others picketing the personal residences of company executives. If you’ve got enough people, whatever permit you need and some local media outlets to cover it perhaps the embarrassment of the situation coupled with friends and neighbors asking said executive in the days afterward “Hey Dave, why doesn’t Progressive lock up those cars in Lakeville by the Middle School?”. Perhaps some changes would take place. Let me be clear that I am not suggesting harassing their employees or doing anything illegal, but if you can legally picket an executives personal residence and other options have been exhausted then go for it. St. Paul isn’t that far a drive from Lakeville.
And if that doesn’t work do some research on other measures NACA has used to embarrass Bank CEOs regarding their company policies. If anyone is the expert on that it is them, picketing a CEOs private residence is one of the tamer things they do and they get results, very big results while staying within the bounds of the law.
October 29th, 2009 at 11:59 am
Just the thought of having to handle 50 different keys for 50 different locks for 50 different rail cars, and then distribute them and monitor them when the cars get moved/returned to service boggles the mind. It’s be cheaper to snap the locks with a bolt cutter then to muck around with keys. Which isn’t a bad option, if you think about the scale. Do they make disposable seals like the little plastic ones they have on my power meter, but scaled up so an average teenager wouldn’t be able to cut it with a pliers?
October 29th, 2009 at 11:59 am
I knew people in the affected neighborhoods when I was growing up in Lakeville. Drugs/drinking/etc. are nothing new; kids have been doing these things in the woods there (or even in — gasp — houses!) for literally decades. The train cars have nothing to do with it.
October 29th, 2009 at 12:22 pm
The railroad tracks are private property so they should have every right to park the cars there. Get over it or move.
October 29th, 2009 at 12:30 pm
These people dont want the cars locked, they want them gone. I think that is obvious at this point.
If you are serious about actually trying to get the cars locked up, and lower crime in your area here are a few steps you can take.
First. Get up off your butt and drive over to thier office. Go in and share your concerns with someone who has a title that indicates they can fix the issue. Have all of your neighbors do the same thing. I am willing to bet that you will find that someone in your neighborhood knows someone who works there. I bet some of you go to the same church. Certainly your kids go to the same schools, etc. The Wife can make fun of this, but a very real fact is that people do business with people they like, and its alot harder to be mean to someone standing in your office than it is to ignore a letter in the mail.
Next, because you claim that crime has increased considerably, get the city council to pass an ordinance stating that the area where these horrible vagrants are parking thier cars is a tow away zone. When these criminals park there in the future to go commit crimes in the trains, call and have thier cars towed away.
Next, ask that the city pass a no graffiti law and make Progressive either clean up the cars or bill them for the city doing it.
Finally, go to your city council and ask that a second exit be added to all of the impacted neighborhoods. Just guessing you wont do this, because it will cost you money, but if this was the huge concern you claim, this would be a logical step. Short of this, look into the requirements to make these gated crossings, which they would then be unable to block.
As to fehlers point above, its not a big deal. They can order 50 padlocks that are all keyed the same, with enough keys for the office and all of the crew to have a key. As others have stated, they probably would not bother, because they will just cut the lock off anyway, but its really not a real argument.
October 29th, 2009 at 12:46 pm
I was poking around on the internet and found an interesting patent that Dave Fellon the owner of Progressive Rail applied for in 2005. He applied for a patent in regards to using rail cars to display advertising. It goes on to describe providing a track in a high visibility location, and accepting a fee to allow one or more rail cars, at least some of which have an advertisement affixed to be parked on the track. And to leave said cars on the track continuously or substantially continuously for a period of time. He also proposes tracking cars that are moving and being provided a fee for the moving rail cars as well.
Then there are drawings of tankers and rail cars that have been changed to look like a giant can of Coke lying on its side or a box of Kleenex, as inspiration examples of what one could do besides plaster an ad on the side of tankers and also suggests illuminating the tankers with lights. I’m not making a statement about whether this is a good or bad idea, I just thought it might be an interesting twist to throw into the conversation. It does talk about a fee for maintenance of the cars and removal of graffiti as well.
October 29th, 2009 at 1:50 pm
I have always wondered why trucking companies dont sell advertising on the side of thier trailers. With all of the money that companies spend on billboards, it seems almost logical that someone would think of the idea to put a big add on the side trailers.
I know in many areas semi trailers sit along the highway with painted advertising instead of billboards.
Its a small step from there to advertising on trailers. I think a big giant coke bottle would be pretty funny.
I would guess this type of business idea would gain more traction in a different economic climate though.
October 29th, 2009 at 1:58 pm
Chad,
First off, we have never been mean about any of our concerns and several of us have talked with Progressive Rail Dave, and Lon. I think both of them fit the title you are speaking of. They listened and have not complied. That is why we went to the city and they did not have any better results then we did. They passed the city resolution and sent it on to our state reps, and we followed up on this. The city feels the rail storge belong in an idustrial area. So tell the city they have no right to tell the rail company what to do.
It is easier said than done gathering up our neighborhood and other residents with concerns to go out to Progressive Rail. So a community meeting seems to be a better solution and on neutral grounds with maybe the city adm. to be the go between. So maybe that will be our plan.
And really how hard is it to close and secure those train cars, if it will stop illegal activity. When we had the ethanol tankers we did not have the unwanted visitors. They are here because they have an open box car to do their business, secure the doors they have no place to deal. We would close them ourselves, but that would be tresspassing.
As for the second entrance I have already addressed this, saying it very well may be a a city issue the trains just compound it. A second entrance would have to exit to Ipava where the trains still would be blocking and on to Dodd, again blocking. It might get you out of the neighborhood, but not to your destination, you may very well still be stuck waiting for trains. So that seems silly.
So really what your saying is the rail road and its not so nice looking rail cars should exist in Lakeville and you welcome the loveley cooridoor down county road 50. I think we should put that picture of that main drag on our Welcome to Lakeville pamplet for the city, I think it sends a great message about the city we live in.
And we do not have the right protect our families and children, just turn a blind eye, not question what we see happening with the rail storage. I get everybody has some crime in their neighborhoods, no matter where I would be living, I would network with my neighbors and address concerns to eliminate what I could. If we leave it alone, we are allowing it to happen. I think that is what being part of a community is all about.
October 29th, 2009 at 1:59 pm
Chad, I like your ideas. If nothing else, a parade of homeowners would get old really fast.
I only pull out one item you mentioned: the graffiti law. One is already on the books in Lakeville. Progressive is exempt because the Canadian Pacific line they lease is exempt through federal law.
When it comes to city ordinance, anything the city authorizes against the railroad is totally exempt, from graffiti, to no storage of rail cars, to no open cars on lines. Progressive, or any similar company anywhere in the nation, is exempt from any law but a federal one. State, county and city laws and ordinances do not apply.
October 29th, 2009 at 2:06 pm
Still not getting it. It has nothing to do with them even needing to comply with local ordinances. It is federal regulations, and the state, or city can’t make some law or ordinance that overrides them. The same way the City of Minneapolis couldn’t write a rule that overrode the State laws, smaller fish can’t overwrite what the bigger fish have allowed.
It’s not that they are not complying, or you can’t make them comply. It’s that those ordinances simply do not exist in the eye of Progressive rail.
Getting local people up in arms is fine, but it doesn’t seem that there are enough local people that can argue their point on grounds anything other than I don’t like it. And until you can do so, no one is going to listen unless they have to. (thus the pointless ordinance that was passed)
October 29th, 2009 at 2:19 pm
Progressive Rail is a local company doing business with other local businesses. Instead of picketing a home in St Paul or wasting your breath with PR’s staff, I’d be in the local businesses that use PR and tell them about the issues PR ignores.
Believe me, in the current economy no small business–possibly with less revenue/profit than PR–wants to hear about boycotts because of their shortline rail choice.
October 29th, 2009 at 2:30 pm
ladyhawk, you didn’t respond to my earlier point.
If you have a police presence in your neighborhood (as you say) and there is still so much crime in the train cars, why are you and your neighbors not using your time and energy going after the Lakeville PD for not doing their jobs/doing an effective job?
October 29th, 2009 at 3:07 pm
Looking at the Lakeville Police Mapping application, I’m certainly not seeing a major cluster of crimes being committed next to the RR tracks. I’ll grant that it may not show all crimes in the system or other activities that calls were made on. Regardless, one would expect a major crime cluster based on what has been discussed here.
One could argue for all the local laws in the world to be passed, but since regulation of the RR is at the federal level, it would make no difference. In addition, under local laws, one cannot just make a land use illegal today and expect it will go away. If the landowner has been legally using their land (which they are in the case), they are grandfathered in until such time as they cease to use their land in that manner. That still doesn’t apply here with the federal regulations being what they are, but even at the local level, there is little that could be done now.
October 29th, 2009 at 3:12 pm
Bill, the main problem with that approach is that most of Progressive’s clients don’t deal with the general public directly either. They generally supply other businesses further down the chain.
October 29th, 2009 at 3:14 pm
Last time I checked the crime mapping from the county are 90 days delayed. That might be a factor.
October 29th, 2009 at 3:31 pm
According to comments above, this has been going on for years….
October 29th, 2009 at 3:37 pm
I was going on Pam’s statement about closing the cars will solve the issue. Since the open box cars are somewhat recent maybe that’s the problem with the crime mapper. I know one person reading here has requested the police calls from LPD (which apparently won’t necessarily be accurate due to how they track the location–based on the caller’s address/where the officer spoke to the resident) so perhaps that will provide a better picture although it’s unlikely.
October 29th, 2009 at 4:04 pm
I think it will be interesting, and add some needed facts to the story.
I want to stress that I feel bad for these people, and certainly agree that its not an ideal situation. I just think that throwing out lots of off the wall statements and things that might prove to be patently false is doing them more harm than good.
Asking a company to spend money (lock the cars, police the tracks, paint the cars, etc), or lose money (quit doing this kind of business) simply because you dont like how they look is just not reasonable in my opinion. They could just as easily respond that you should build a fence in your backyard so you wont have to see the trains.
Factual data like an increase in crime, or a log showing specific dates and times that people were trapped in their neighborhoods would be much more powerful, if in fact it backed up the story being told. These are the things that can be used to make a real argument.
October 29th, 2009 at 11:06 pm
This is probably a good lesson for everyone to pay close attention to EVERYTHING that is near you when you buy a house. We looked at houses in this area and to be honest we never at all considered that those tracks could become a miles long storage line. I remember going to a parks commission meeting where they were presenting the long term plan for Lakeville trails and parks and if I remember correctly they showed that corridor as a future bike trail. The city would get rid of them in a heartbeat if they could.
It looks like absolute shit, but it I understand that it is legal and nothing can really be done about it. As of right now the western part of lakeville has a big old line of shit parking that really junks up a nice area. I’m wondering though, is this something that might go away on it’s own when the economy improves? Will there no longer be such a market for storage and this will no longer be an issue or is PR going to keep finding crap to park all the way through the city?
October 30th, 2009 at 9:00 am
Are stationary cars parked there preferable to an active rail line? Has to be safer.
I think you hit the nail on the head John. All these people probably thought this would be a nice long nature trail by now.
October 30th, 2009 at 9:03 am
To be fair, the stretch of rail in question does appear on Lakville’s trail map as a useable system. As many have already stated, the city I’d just as much at fault for creating the problems discussed here as Progressive Rail is.
October 30th, 2009 at 9:29 am
ladyhawk,
a bit of history:
the tracks went down in 1908 and the line was called the minnepolis, st. paul, rochester and dubuque electric traction rr, or the dan patch line. in 1918 it was taken over by a group calling themselves minneapolis, northfield and southern, mns after the dan patch went bankrupt. soo line took them over in 1982 and is now cp. pgr was formed in 1996 using the same paint scheme as mns had.
the tracks split at northfield going three ways. one to canon falls, one to rosemount and one to lakeville. originally the lakeville tracks went to auto club road in bloomington where they split again. pgr serves bloomington and richfield to 54th st. there’s a swing bridge over the minnesota that twin cities and western used to use to get to the grain elevators in west savage. i don’t know what the shape of it is today.
BUT, pgr i think, or maybe cp rebuilt or built a NEW bridge just south of 13 over a frontage road. ummm, maybe someone has an idea of why or has a bigger picture.
pgr, tcw and maybe a few more in the weeds are called short lines vs class I as bnsf, up etc.
bb
October 30th, 2009 at 10:25 am
I’m pretty sure the owners of the rail cars would much rather they be used to transport cargo (and thus making them money) than having them sit on a track and have to pay someone to keep them there. And while Progressive is making money from this, there are expenses involved too, and I would assume that transporting freight has better returns. But it’s a good question.
October 30th, 2009 at 2:26 pm
Here is a link I found from Lakville’s 2006 park’s, trails, and open space plan.
Page 168 shows the map I remember seeing with the long term plan of having that track as a regional corridor greenway. This may be pie in the sky, but the city want’s this to be a trail. I hope it happens someday!!
For now though, hopefully when the economy improves this will go away on it’s own.
http://ci.lakeville.mn.us/departments/departmentspdf/ParksPlan2006.pdf
http://www.ci.lakeville.mn.us/index.php?option=com_content&view=category&id=48&Itemid=833
October 30th, 2009 at 4:52 pm
There could be hope for Lakeville and their trail. This article from April of this year in Chaska discusses an old railroad that was uncovered in a parking lot:
http://mobile.chaskaherald.com/news/history/buried-history-railroad-tracks-unearthed-front-government-center-104
so eventually, they do let the rail go.
November 24th, 2009 at 10:38 am
[...] meeting which was to allow Lakeville citizens to air more of their issues and concerns about the open rail cars which line the borders of neighborhoods to the city and to Progressive Rail themselves hoping to get through to the company which, up until [...]
April 22nd, 2010 at 2:27 pm
Lakeville residents against Progressive are at it again this time with a Letter to the Editor urging Progressive Rail to help citizens clean up the area around the tracks: http://www.thisweeklive.com/2010/04/22/rail-company-should-pitch-in/
April 22nd, 2010 at 3:03 pm
Good for Pam S. aka “Ladyhawk”! I applaud her and her neighbors for this.
May 12th, 2011 at 7:31 pm
http://www.thisweeklive.com/2011/05/12/state-fines-progressive-rail-for-environmental-violations/
May 13th, 2011 at 8:07 am
That is pretty bad, and indicates some real concerns about Progressive Rail. That they are not closely following the requirements of the MPCA is scary.
In my past I worked for company that owned numerous trucks with complex hydraulic systems on them. Any time a truck developed a leak of any kind (hydraulic, diesel) , we had teams at each locations familiar with spill clean ups that would go to the site, be it a construction site or the middle of an intersection to both repair the leak and clean up any spill. Also, each truck carried basic clean up material (absorption pads, and temporary dike building tools) to tide them over until the team could arrive. Management at all levels seemed to take pollution control responsibilities seriously. Why some do and others don’t, i’m not sure.