HomeMy WebLinkAbout98-278 Resolution No. 98-278
RESOLUTION
AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF A LINE SALE AND DONATION CONTRACT
WITH THE UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY
(Elgin Industrial Lead)
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ELGIN,
ILLINOIS, that Joyce A. Parker, City Manager, and Dolonna
Mecum, City Clerk, be and are hereby authorized and directed to
execute a Line Sale and Donation Contract on behalf of the City
of Elgin with the Union Pacific Railroad Company for the
acquisition of the East Elgin Industrial Lead extending from
Mile Post 43 . 0 to the end of the line at Mile Post 43 . 8, a copy
of which is attached hereto and made a part hereof by
reference.
s/ Kevin Kelly
Kevin Kelly, Mayor
Presented: November 18, 1998
Adopted: November 18, 1998
Omnibus Vote: Yeas 5 Nays 0
Attest:
s/ Dolonna Mecum
Dolonna Mecum, City Clerk
August 20, 1998
MEMORANDUM
TO: Joyce A. Parker, City Manager
FROM: William A. Cogley, Corporation Counsel
SUBJECT: Abandonment of East Elgin Industrial Lead Railroad
Line by Union Pacific Railroad
On June 9 , 1998, I provided you a background and status report
on abandonment of the East Elgin Industrial Lead Railroad Line
by the Union Pacific Railroad. A copy of this June 9, 1998
memorandum is attached.
I have since consulted with appraisers regarding values for the
non-reversionary property along the railroad line. I discussed
this matter in detail with Mr. Bill Enright who is an MAI
appraiser with the firm of Appraisal Associates in Chicago.
Mr. Enright has substantial experience in the appraisal of
railroad right of ways . Mr. Enright reviewed the appraisal of
Arthur Andersen and Associates prepared for the Union Pacific
Railroad and various materials related to the proposed
abandonment of the rail line. He is of the opinion that the
general approach used by Arthur Andersen of comparable sales of
properties along areas along the rail line is the appropriate
approach to valuation in these cases . Mr. Enright suggested
that rather than proceeding with a formal appraisal the City
should attempt to negotiate a discount of approximately 10-20%
off the $2 . 35 a square foot price provided for in the appraisal
of Arthur Andersen and Associates .
I am advised that there is $200, 000 budgeted from riverboat
funds in 1998 for acquisitions for the railroad right of way.
The five year financial plan currently proposes that $170, 000
be budgeted from riverboat funds in 1999 for expenditures
related to the railroad right of way.
As my June 9 memorandum advises the City has several
alternatives regarding acquiring the rail line. One
alternative is to proceed with the acquisition of the entire
2 . 8 mile segment of the rail line for trail use pursuant to the
Trails Act. The City' s use of the rail line would be limited
to a public trail . Assuming a cost of approximately $2 . 00 per
square foot for all of the non-revisionary property the cost to
acquire the entire rail line pursuant to the Rails to Trails
Act would be approximately $1, 666 , 000 .
A second alternative would be for the city to acquire only a
portion of the rail line property for trail purposes pursuant
to the Rails to Trails Act. An example of this alternative
Joyce A. Parker 2 August 20, 1998
would be for the City to acquire pursuant to the Rails to
Trails Act the segment of the rail line property north of North
Grove near the Elgin Salvage property. Based upon current
information the railroad right of way north of North Grove to
the end of the rail line involves approximately 2 . 36 acres of
non-reversionary property and 4 . 31 acres of reversionary
property. The City would acquire the reversionary property
without charge. Assuming a cost of approximately $2 . 00 per
square foot for the non-reversionary property the cost of
acquiring the trail line north of North Grove Avenue would be
approximately $205, 000 . The City' s use of this segment of the
rail line acquired pursuant to the Rails to Trails Act would be
limited to a trail use. The remaining portion of the rail
property south of North Grove would be deemed abandoned and
title to the reversionary property would revert to the property
owners adjoining these various parcels . The railroad would
then attempt to sell on the open market the various parcels of
non-reversionary property. The City could decide whether it
wished to negotiate for the purchase of any of these
non-reversionary parcels on an individual basis . Such
acquisitions by the City could include acquiring all of the
rail line property lying within the city owned property south
of Kimball Street to Douglas Avenue. As the adjoining property
owner of all the property South of Kimball to Douglas, the City
would acquire automatically and without compensation
approximately . 835 acres of the reversionary rail line
property. Approximately 1 . 74 acres of the rail line property
south of Kimball to Douglas is non-reversionary property which
the City could purchase from the railroad. Assuming a $2 . 00
per square foot cost the purchase price for non-reversionary
railroad property between Kimball and Douglas would be
approximately $151,500 . Such property not acquired through the
Rails to Trails Act could be used and developed in any manner
permitted by the zoning ordinance.
A third alternative would be not to acquire any portion of the
rail line property pursuant to the Rails to Trails Act. Under
this alternative if the rail line property is not acquired by
some other entity pursuant to the Rails to Trails Act before
the end of the NITU negotiating period (currently October 21,
1998 ) the rail line would be deemed abandoned with title to the
reversionary properties reverting to the property owners
adjoining these various parcels . The railroad would likely
proceed to sell on the open market the various parcels of
non-reversionary property. As with the second alternative
discussed above the City could decide whether it wishes to
negotiate for the purchase of any of these non-reversionary
parcels on an individual basis and the use of any reversionary
or non-reversionary properties not acquired through the Rails
to Trails Act would not be limited to a trail use.
Please note that the acreage references provided herein are
based upon information accumulated by the Union Pacific
Railroad. The exact dimensions of the rail line properties
Joyce A. Parker 3 August 20, 1998
will be verified in the process of obtaining title commitments
and surveys as part of any property acquisitions .
As we have discussed we should obtain city council direction on
which of these alternatives the city council wishes to pursue.
Please place this matter on the Executive Session Agenda for
the city council meeting of August 26 , 1998 .
W &v
WAC
mg
Attachment
cc : Roger Dahlstrom
Ray Moller
June 9 , 1998
MEMORANDUM
TO: Joyce A. Parker, City Manager
FROM: William A. Cogley, Assistant Corporation Counsel
SUBJECT: Abandonment of East Elgin Industrial Lead Railroad
Line by Union Pacific Railroad
The purpose of this memorandum is to provide you with a
background and status report on the abandonment of the East
Elgin Industrial Lead Railroad Line by the Union Pacific
Railroad and the city' s efforts to acquire this property for a
proposed trail use .
The city' s plans for improvements to Kimball Street included
the removal of the raised rail crossing of the subject rail
line through Kimball Street. Removal of the rail crossing
required the abandonment of the rail line . The city contacted
the Union Pacific Railroad Company regarding the possible
abandonment of the rail line. The railroad had only three
remaining users of the rail line and indicated its willingness
to abandon the rail line in the event the city acquired the
properties of the remaining rail users or the remaining users
consented to the abandonment. The city proceeded to acquire
the properties of the three remaining rail line users as part
of the property acquisitions for the Kimball Street improvement
project.
On December 24 , 1996 the Union Pacific Railroad Company filed a
petition with the United States Surface Transportation Board
requesting permission to abandon and discontinue service for
the 2 . 8 mile segment of the East Elgin Industrial Lead Railroad
Line between Mile Post 41 . 0 and Mile Post 43 . 8 . A copy of a
map showing the location of this segment of the rail line is
attached.
The railroad holds title to the rail line under two different
categories of property interests . The first category is
reversionary property. The reversionary property was typically
acquired by the railroad and its predecessors through
easements . Title to the reversionary properties normally would
revert to the adjoining property owners upon abandonment of the
rail line . The second category of property is non-reversionary.
The railroad holds fee simple title to the non-reversionary
properties . Title to the non-reversionary properties would
remain with the railroad upon abandonment of the rail line.
Based upon title examinations completed by the railroad
approximately 19 acres of the rail line are non-reversionary
property and 14 acres are reversionary property.
Joyce A. Parker -2- June 9 , 1998
A federal statute exists which provides for the conversion to
public trails of rail lines which are proposed to be abandoned.
16 USC Sec . 1247 (d) commonly referred to as the "Rails to
Trails Act" would allow the city to acquire both the
reversionary and non-reversionary property and use the property
as a public trail . The city' s trail use would be considered to
be "interim" as the property would be subject to the future
reinstitution of rail service . Under this statute the city' s
acquisition of the property and interim trail use is not
considered an "abandonment" of the railroad line thereby
preventing the reversion of title of the reversionary
properties to the adjoining property owners . The city' s use of
the property would be limited to a trail use . In the event the '
city elected to discontinue the trail use the city would need
to file a petition with the Surface Transportation Board
requesting permission to discontinue such use . Upon the
granting of the petition the rail line would be declared
abandoned with title to the reversionary property reverting to
the property owners adjoining these various parcels .
The United States Supreme Court has upheld the constitutional-
ity of the Rails to Trails Act. Preseault, et al . v.
Interstate Commerce Commission, et al . , 494 U. S . 1, 110 S .Ct .
914 ( 1990 ) . Subsequent litigation in the Preseault case
indicates that the mechanism under the Rails to Trails Act
which prevents the reversion of title to the reversionary
properties to the adjoining property owners constitutes a
taking requiring the payment of just compensation by the
federal government . See Preseault v. United States, 100 F. 3d
1525 (US Court of Appeals Federal Circuit, 1996 ) . The
possibility exists that adjoining property owners holding
reversionary title interests in portions of the subject rail
line properties could file claims for compensation as a result
of the operation of the Rails to Trails Act preventing the
reversion of title. It would appear that the issue which would
be presented in any such claims is the nature of the original
easement or dedication given to the railroad or its
predecessors and whether this original easement or dedication
is broad enough to encompass the proposed trail use . See e.g.
Washington Wildlife Preservation, Inc . v. State, 329 N.W. 2d 543
(Minn. 1993) in which the court held that the use of a railroad
right of way for a recreation trail is consistent with the
purpose for which the easements were originally acquired,
public travel, and that the use as a recreational trail imposed
no additional burden on servient estates . 329 N.W. 2d at 546 .
The railroad is proposing to sell to the city for fair cash
market value the non-reversionary property and donate at no
cost to the city the reversionary property. In the unlikely
event rail service would be reinstituted over the rail line
property the city would be required to reconvey the
reversionary property and resell the non-reversionary property
back to the railroad.
Joyce A. Parker -3- June 9 , 1998
The city submitted a letter to the Surface Transportation Board
supporting the request to abandon the line and submitted an
additional letter requesting an issuance of a public use
condition as well as a request for an interim trail use for the
rail line.
On April 29 , 1997 , the Surface Transportation Board issued its
decision and notice of interim trail use and approval of
abandonment and discontinuing service over the rail line. The
subject order of the Surface Transportation Board approved the
city' s request for the imposition of a 180 day public use
condition and allowed the city and the railroad 180 days after
the decision to reach an agreement for the implementation of
the interim trail use ( "NITU" negotiating period) . The 180 day
time period was originally to expire on October 26 , 1997 .
On May 7 , 1997 , the city and Union Pacific Railroad Company
entered into a right of entry agreement which authorized the
city to remove the rail crossing at Kimball Street . The city
subsequently removed the rail crossing as part of the Kimball
Street improvement project.
On May 29 , 1997 , the Union Pacific Railroad formally
discontinued its operations over the East Elgin Industrial Lead
Railroad Line .
The Union Pacific Railroad was slow to complete the necessary
title research in order to proceed with the ordering of an
appraisal for the property. The parties were therefore unable
to complete their negotiations for the city' s acquisition of
the property during the initial 180 day time period. On
October 22 , 1997 , the city filed a request with the Surface
Transportation Board for a 180 day extension for negotiating
the period to reach agreement for the interim trail use/rail
banking. On October 30 , 1997 , the Surface Transportation Board
granted the city' s request for an extension and extended the
NITU negotiating period until April 24 , 1998 .
Unfortunately the Union Pacific Railroad continued to delay its
efforts in conducting necessary title examinations and ordering
an appraisal for the property. The railroad finally began to
work on this project early in 1998 but not in time to obtain an
appraisal and negotiate an agreement with the city before the
expiration of the NITU negotiating period on April 24 , 1998 .
The city therefore filed an additional request on April 13 ,
1998 , for a further 180 day extension of the negotiating period
to reach agreement with the railroad for the interim trail
use/rail banking. On April 23 , 1998 the Surface Transportation
Board granted the city' s request for an additional extension
and extended the NITU negotiating period until October 21,
1998 .
I have now received an appraisal from the Union Pacific
Railroad for the 2 . 8 mile segment of the rail line. The
Joyce A. Parker -4- June 9 , 1998
appraisal of May 13, 1998 prepared by Arthur Anderson estimates
the value of the non-reversionary property to be approximately
$2 . 35 a square foot for a total value of $1 , 945 , 806 . The
appraiser utilized the sales comparison approach in formulating
his opinion of value . The sales relied upon by the appraiser
are buildable industrial and residential lots . Comparing these
buildable parcels to a remnant parcel such as the rail line
property would not appear to be appropriate and has resulted in
what appears to be a substantial overestimate of the value of
the non-reversionary rail line property.
I have spoken to a representative of the Union Pacific Railroad
Company regarding the railroad' s willingness to negotiate
regarding the value of the non-reversionary property. The
representative indicated that the railroad would consider
information presented in an appraisal obtained by the city and
would be willing to negotiate concerning the value of the
property. I am contacting appraisers to obtain proposals to
perform an appraisal on the rail line. I will contact you
within the coming weeks with a recommendation on proceeding
with retaining an appraiser for this project.
The city has several alternatives regarding acquiring the rail
line . One alternative is to proceed with the acquisition of
the entire 2 . 8 mile segment of the rail line for trail use
pursuant to the Rails to Trails Act. The city' s use of the
rail line would be limited to a public trail . A second
alternative would be for the city to acquire only a portion of
the rail line property for trail purposes pursuant to the Rails
to Trails Act. An example of this alternative would be for the
city to acquire pursuant to the Rails to Trails Act the segment
of the rail line property north of Kimball Street. The
remaining portion of the rail line property south of Kimball
Street would be deemed abandoned and title to the reversionary
properties would revert to the property owners adjoining these
various parcels . The railroad would then attempt to sell on
the open market the various parcels of non-reversionary
property. The city could decide whether it wished to negotiate
for the purchase of any of these non-reversionary parcels on an
individual basis . Such acquisitions could include acquiring
all of the rail line property lying within city owned property
south of Kimball Street to Douglas Avenue . Only the portion of
the rail line property acquired pursuant to the Rails to Trails
Act would be limited to a trail use . The reversionary and
non-reversionary properties not acquired through the Rails to
Trails Act could be used and developed in any manner permitted
by the zoning ordinance . A third alternative would be not to
acquire any portion of the rail line property pursuant to the
Rails to Trails Act . Under this alternative if the rail line
property was not acquired by some other entity pursuant to the
Rails to Trails Act before the end of the NITU negotiating
period (currently October 21 , 1998) the rail line would be
deemed abandoned with title to the reversionary properties
would revert to the property owners adjoining these various
• Joyce A. Parker -5- June 9 , 1998
parcels . The railroad would likely proceed to attempt to sell
on the open market the various parcels of non-reversionary
property. As with the second alternative discussed above the
city could decide whether it wished to negotiate for the
purchase of any of these non-reversionary parcels on an
individual basis and the use of any reversionary or
non-reversionary properties not acquired through the Rails to
Trails Act would not be limited to a trail use.
Please contact me if you require any additional information at
this time .
111*".""
WAC
nr
Attachment
cc : Erwin W. Jentsch
Raymond H. Moller
a 1 a COOK CO. 'i
1
A
o _ t
cC 3 KANE CO. opip
— — - - - -�- - - rr
O II J
CP a tip C= 00P=_ I END ABANDONME T n
o A��.as �! M. P. 43. 8 II !I
II
a ! EAST ELG [N` ' - > �GOLr� ]8 — 1
` p 1
3 C_HICACO 9 7
U > > > � \4 Sr.' • �� 9
A ���cG`` I I a
_ II
T a
ELGIN JCT. FNM. • ff\ — . , , •
. 4
3 LCCPAsE BEGiNIN JCT.
n a P -7 r Ca 48AND 7
I c 31 I COOK ° CO. —,
ac si IZ'- - - - - - II - . DU PAGE CO. 1
ILLINOIS Y - � ' - - r _ = ,. _ a _ _
A I T c r a
KANE CO. °
mej \k.1
�'°4 s N — _ —
a ,. -A _A I n N1
J Z 1 epi a CC 1
cu ��'I e
hL'°" D
34 , > II l
" - n x
II ® 0
II a 1 II
A , a nl 59
>c 1 .
A O oyrn
n
n \ - __ 1� . \CI t _ it
- - 64 o ?---,..„,_
n 1 G`"$' ..
\\ A es
BRIDGE Na I BRIDGE T`PE TOTAL LENGTH' DATE EAST ELGIN INDUSTRIAL LEAD
i 41.06 ;TaRU PLATE GIRDER - BALLAST DECK I 73.46' I 1903
41.09 (STEEL BEAU SPAN - BALLAST DECK I 21.00' 11911
%.4,2 41.0 TO u P 43.8
I 43.46 IT(1i8ER PILE TRESTLE - BALLAST OECXI 9.5' I 1904 =.ELC(N (NO.L=AO A TOTAL Of 2.8 MILES
43.46-S ISTE=L BEAU SPAN - OPEN CECX I 9.5' 11904 ;v :CANE COUNTY, ILLINOIS
NOTE: BRIDGE .43. 46- S IS ON S [DING ; STATION I MILE POST [AGENCY
I ELGIN JCT. 1 41.0 I NO
LEGEND I EAST ELGIN I 43.2 1 NO
_.. UPRR LINES TO BE ABANDONED
OTHER UPRR LINES UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD CO.
OTHER RA [ LROADS EAST ELGIN I NDUST I AL LEAD
0 50+ YEAR OLD STRUCTURES INCL. 504- YEAR OLD STRUCTURES
O rn
PRINCIPAL HIGHWAYS sral c ; I „ r !