Capdiamont\’s Weblog


Discontinued and abandoned: Bracutt Lumber
Wednesday 2 Jan 2008, 03:21
Filed under: Humboldt, NCRA, Railroad

Looking through the records on the matter with the railroad’s easement across his land. In the microfiche 1998 document 28444-7 a total of seven pages. In the NCJ 13 Dec 2007, it reports, that Hess maintains the easement reverted back to Hess. After the railroad was not running for two years.

Yet on page 7 of the document referenced, it lists for the land the railroad passes over,

The OWNER relinquishes and grants to the county of Humboldt the right, power and privilege to develop the real property described in Exhibit “A” for:

This parcel shall be developed only for railroad purposes.

Does this mean a trail can’t be developed for trail?

Cont:

The Condition referred to in in Paragraph B of Section 3 of the agreement to which this exhibit is attached is as follows:

Release for this conveyance shall be granted at such time as: the use of the property and the right of way for railroad purposes is discontinued and abandoned with the approval of any responsible federal, state and/or local agencies.

The discontinued and abandoned are legal processes, that must go through the Surface Transportation Board. While I was on the phone with one of their legal types, they searched for any discontinuances or abandonment. None was found. A trail can’t be done with a discontinuance only a abandonment. Ergo, it hasn’t revered back to him. This is something that most people mistake, and will pop back up.

But the North Coast Journal has become aware of a potential problem, and has been asked to send a message to Saturday’s volunteer weed militia. The plan called for crews to meet at 10 a.m. at three locations along the railroad corridor: the Arcata Marsh, Eureka’s Target store and a mid-way point, Bracut Lumber. But Bracut owner Rick Hess wonders why he wasn’t approached. Though he says he’s all for trails, it is his position that the railroad right-of-way is not “public” at all, as is commonly assumed. He owns the property the railroad runs over, and he maintains that the railroad easement passing through his land reverted back to him after the North Coast Railroad Authority stopped running trains for two years. He has a deed of trust that seems to corroborate his claim.

Updated to make it clearer that it was Hess’s claim, not NCJ’s. Sorry about that Hank. Updated again,to make it more like English.

Advertisements

2 Comments

In the NCJ 13 Dec 2007, it reports, that the easement reverted back to Hess, after the railroad reverted after not running for two years.

To be clear, I wrote that Hess believes it has reverted back to him. I don’t know one way or the other.

There’s also been legal action between him and the NCRA over the issue, which he believes bolsters his case. I hope to sit down with him sometime soon to get his story entire.

Anyway, nice work digging up the easement.

Comment by Hank Sims

It wasn’t too hard.

For those who don’t know, bring an address to the Assessor’s office, on the 3rd floor of the courthouse, to get parcel #, latest book number, 1998 for me, and document #. Take that to the 5th floor clerk’s office, and you can pull out the microfiche and read it on them old machines. Put down on their copy slips what you want to be copied. Bring the slip to them. It cost me $8 for them to copy the seven pages.

I found everyone I dealt with very nice and helpful in my search.

Comment by capdiamont




Comments are closed.



%d bloggers like this: