Erie Lackawanna
Railfan.net 'erielack' E-Mail List Photo Archive

Croxton_Yard.jpg   Original: 2048 by 1536 pixels - Current: 2048 by 1536 - 100%
                          Try your mouse wheel too!

Previous Image - C3120.jpg Croxton_Yard_1.jpg - Next Image

From: Todd Hollritt thollritt AT yahoo DOT com
Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2013 12:16:27 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Former EL Croxton Yard
"Croxton_Yard.jpg" - image/pjpeg, 2048x1536 (24bit)

Here's some images of the former Erie Lackawanna (NS) Croxton yard with the PRR (Amtrak) overhead bridges I took recently, as you can see its 90% paved over for those who have not visited the area the last few decades, but those few remaining EL tracks sure are busy, and growing soon!
NS link to freight schedules for Croxton...
http://www.nscorp.com/nscintermodal/Intermodal/System_Info/Terminals/croxton.html

Recent breaking news about expansion here....NJ High Court Backs Railroad's Eminent Domain Power
New York (August 06, 2013, 4:11 PM ET) -- A railroad doesn't have to demonstrate some urgent need when it wants to condemn property for its operations, only that its general business demands support the taking, the New Jersey Supreme Court decided Tuesday in a win for Norfolk Southern Railway Co.
Ruling against Secaucus, N.J., property owner Intermodal Properties LLC in its fight against expansion plans for the Croxton Yard freight facility, the court interpreted a state law that limits railroads' condemnation powers to situations “as exigencies of business may demand.” The justices eschewed modern-day definitions of “exigency” and probed the more than 135-year-old history of the phrase in state railroad statues and various older court decisions.
The phrase has been understood to describe “the needs of business, or the ordinary course of business, rather than to allude to an emergent, urgent, immediate or pressing need,” the court found.
“Moreover, that understanding of the phrase is the most sensible one when considering the way in which railroads operate,” said Justice Helen E. Hoens' opinion for the unanimous court. “Simply put, demanding that the railroad demonstrate that there is an urgency or an immediacy that motivates its exercise of eminent domain to acquire a tract of land, as Intermodal suggests, would require us to close our eyes to the reality of how railroads are developed and built.”
Backing administrative and appellate decisions for Norfolk Southern, the court also found that Intermodal couldn't block the condemnation by arguing that its plan to build a parking facility for a nearby commuter rail station better suited the public interest.
That argument touched on statutory language requiring that a public utility's taking of property be “not incompatible with the public interest” as well as the so-called prior public use doctrine, which generally prevents condemnation actions that would destroy an existing public use or prevent a proposed one, according to the opinion.
The court stressed that a property owner can't ward off a condemnation action under the doctrine when it doesn't have eminent domain powers and there's no pre-existing public use. It also can't suggest that there's a potential proposed use that might better serve the public interest, according to the court, which added that Intermodal put forward a “speculative, future plan for a profit-making venture.”
“More fundamentally, the prior public use doctrine would only apply if the property owner itself had the power of eminent domain, as if, for example, the municipality had already taken Intermodal’s property for a parking facility,” the opinion said. “Because Intermodal lacks the power to condemn, the prior public use doctrine can have no application to this dispute over the railroad’s exercise of its power of eminent domain.”
The court also underscored the statute's focus on the condemnor's proposed use, not a comparison of uses.
“That is, the statute requires evaluation of whether the purpose proposed by the condemning authority is incompatible with the public interest, not whether there is some alternative proposal that might be more in the public interest,” the opinion said.
Norfolk Southern eyed an expansion for its Croxton facility, where freight containers are transferred between trains and trucks, because containers had been piling up between off-loading and pickup and it was taking longer for trucks to enter and exit the yard, according to the opinion. With business expected to increase, the railroad in 2004 decided to acquire Intermodal's land and two other properties, the opinion said.
Intermodal's land wasn't zoned to allow a parking facility at the start of the condemnation battle, though it was rezoned later.
Representing Norfolk Southern, Alan P. Fox of Capehart Scatchard said the case may represent the first railroad condemnation action in the state in about 40 years.
“The Supreme Court has certainly clarified what the standards are for a railroad to exercise eminent domain, and it's consistent with how the railroad has interpreted the statute,” Fox said. “I think it puts to bed the issue on the argument that Intermodal made, where they can offer some alternative use to delay the condemnation.”
Attorneys for the other parties did not immediately return requests for comment.
Norfolk Southern is represented by Alan P. Fox and John K. Fiorilla of Capehart & Scatchard.
Intermodal is represented by Eric D. McCullough and James P. Dugan of Waters McPherson McNeill.
Nancy Winkelman of Schnader Harrison Segal & Lewis represented amicus participants The American Short Line & Regional Railroad Association, The Association of American Railroads, Consolidated Rail Corp., CSX Transportation Inc., and The New Jersey Short Line Railroad Association.
The case is Norfolk Southern Railway Co. v. Intermodal Properties LLC, case number A-117-11 before the New Jersey Supreme Court.

Todd ~

Croxton_Yard.jpg

Image EXIF Data: Nikon Version Number: Flash Mode:
Image Creation Date   0000:00:00 00:00:00
Image Capture Date   0000:00:00 00:00:00
Image Digitized Date   0000:00:00 00:00:00
Make   NIKON
Model   COOLPIX L22
Exposure Time   1/200 Sec.
Aperture   f4
Focal Length   10.83mm
35mm Focal Length   61mm
ISO Speed Rating   10 (400)
Metering Mode   Multi-Segment/Pattern
Exposure Bias   0 EV
Exposure Program   Program Normal
Light Source/White Balance   Automatic
White Balance   Auto White Balance
White Balance   AUTO
White Balance Adjustment   0
Flash   Flash Not Fired; Compulsory Flash Suppression;
X Resolution   300 Pixels/Inch
Y Resolution   300 Pixels/Inch
YCbCr Positioning   Datum Point
Exif Image Width   2048 pixels
Exif Image Height   1536 pixels
Exposure Mode   Auto Exposure
EXIF Version   0220
FlashPix Version   0100
Compressed Bits Per Pixel   2
Max Aperture Value   f3.1
ColorSpace   sRGB
Component Configuration   YCbCr
Digital Zoom Ratio   None
Scene Capture Type   Standard
Gain Control   High Gain Up
Contrast   Normal
Saturation   Normal
Sharpness   Normal
Subject Distance Range   Unknown
ISO Equivalent   0 (0)
Color/BW   COLOR
File Format   NORMAL
Sharpening   AUTO
Focus   AF-S
Software Version   COOLPIX L22 V1.0
ISO Selection   AUTO
Lens Adapter   OFF
Manual Focus Distance   Unknown
Digital Zoom   100/100x
Focus Position   Center
Saturation   0,
Noise Reduction   OFF


Click Here or on the corner X to close this window.


    All photos are the property of the original photographer unless otherwise noted and are to be used for personal viewing purposes only.

    The use of these photos on any website or other distribution media is strictly forbidden without the express consent of the image copyright holder.

    Linking directly to this page is permitted as long as "Railfan.net Erie Lackawanna Email List Photo Archive" is creditted on the linking page.