Belt Line sues SugarHousePrint Page

July 14, 2009
By Kellie Patrick Gates
For PlanPhilly

July 14

 

By Kellie Patrick Gates
For PlanPhilly

An obscure Philadelphia railroad company wants to keep SugarHouse Casino from building “on or near” a right-of-way the city gave to the railroad in 1890.

The Philadelphia Belt Line Railroad Company filed a lawsuit against HSP Gaming – the SugarHouse developer - in the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas earlier this year. An initial hearing in the case is scheduled to come before Judge Sandra M. Moss in September. A non-jury trial date has been set for November after SugarHouse's motion for "extraordinary relief" was denied by Moss. 

Court documents say SugarHouse “has no right to build its casino on the property in question.”

PBR has asked the Court to affirm that the railroad company has a right of way “ in the bed of what was formerly Penn Street, in the vicinity of the area between Shackamaxon Street and Ellen Street” and to stop SugarHouse “from taking any action to interfere, block, obstruct or otherwise prevent Plantiff from exercising now or in the future its rights to utilize said right of way.”

The railroad, which has been around since 1889, never operated trains itself.  According to the website of the American Shortline and Regional Railroad Association, the PBR was “founded to allow access to the Port of Philadelphia by any railroad that wanted to come into Philadelphia.”

The company, a consortium of railroads, carried trains all the way to the Navy Yard. According to Adam Krom, a transportation planner at the Philadelphia office of the design firm Wallace Roberts & Todd, the waterfront was “sort of neutral territory for all the railroads, so the shipper could choose which one it wanted to use. The Belt Line allowed for interchanging among the different railroads.”

While the lawsuit asks that the Casino be prevented from doing anything that would obstruct the right-of-way, it also says that PBR officials had talked to SugarHouse in late 2007 and early 2008 about the possibility of abandoning the right-of-way in exchange for compensation.

“During these discussions, representatives from HSP claimed the Belt Line's right of way did not exist in Penn Street, and that PBL's property interest did not exist in the proposed area where the casino is to be built,” the suit states. It also says that SugarHouse knows the railroad owns the right-of-way, because a 2006 consolodation plan of the site refers to it.

SugarHouse spokeswoman Leigh Whitaker would not discuss the case. “We decline to comment on matters which are the subject of pending litigation,” she wrote in an email.

A call to the Railroad seeking comment was referred to President Charles E. Mather III, who was not available Tuesday afternoon.  John B. Taulane II, an attorney representing the railroad, also could not be reached.

In 2008, Bob Turner, a consultant for the Belt Line, explained that it was chartered in 1889 “to break up the monopoly of the Pennsylvania Railroad, which controlled the Philadelphia waterfront.” The Belt Line brought in the Baltimore & Ohio and other companies “to make sure the waterfront was open to competitive rail service.”

The Penn Street section of the Delaware Avenue site has received attention in the past from archaeologists and local historians who believe artifacts from early in Philadelphia's history. SugarHouse officials have said they will dig beneath the street after utilities are shut off. There are no trains running on the property anymore.

Contact the reporter at kelliespatrick@gmail.com

 

 

AttachmentSize
exhibits.pdf7.12 MB
PhilaBeltLine Complaint.pdf1.73 MB
beltline_sugarhouse_docket.pdf35.81 KB

Comments

Is the Belt Line still active along the waterfront in any way? I know the occasional train meanders it's way along the more southern areas near Washington Ave and below. Are those Conrail, or Conrail on Belt Line tracks? Are they stil a viable entity?

 

And why -- except to enrich a few state politicians and connected real estate developers who seam to have a steadfast steak in this locale exclusively -- is the casino pushing so damn hard to have this particular site which is so controversial with all the surrounding residents -- and a huge majority of center city residents? There are so many sites along the waterfront that would welcome the casino unempeded and with open arms. Why not the area down by the sports stadiums which is near a 95 entrance and other transportation nexus? No residents near the waterfront there. Desolate when there's no game on. And a great way to get game attendees to stay in the city and spend money at the casinos, when they ordinarily only spend time and money in the stadium for the game and then flee the region. (Except a few hundred who turn up drunk on South Street -- yelling for one team or another -- or at Pat's and Geno's.) After taxpayers spent millions to build the stadiums for billionaire owners and millionaire players to make more money shouldn't they get a chance to cash in on creating these lures by giving the game fans a compelling and convenient place to stay and play and generate some tax dollars for us?

Did the planning commission and the Mayor's office know about this lawsuit and if not why not? Did Sugarhouse casino divulge this pending lawsuit?
X
Loading