Thanks to everyone who shared their information.
I am interested to hear about the 109, it was not necessarily so bad that it would deserve scrapping (unless someone was considering it the worst of two bodies in a parts swap). The statement "it went away" implies the car still exists somewhere.
http://www.bera.org/cgi-bin/pnaerc-query.pl?sel_allown=Denver+Tramways&match_target=&Tech=Yes&pagelen=200]Denver Tramways cars that survive[/url]
Having volunteered at scrappy museums in the midwest and west coast, I understand the need for funds and limited opportunities presented by existing conditions. I have also seen these things change.
In my opinion, it is not about the availability of money, but it is a political decision of 6-12 key people in any organization. They need to gain the vision to do something. Funding follows the vision.
As discussed on other railway preservation boards, if you do not work towards establishing indoor storage, you might as well be wasting your time. On the existing site, the southwest corner would lend itself towards a barn. I cannot believe that in 30 years not one land owner changed. If it were the mission to capture one of these properties, then action would happen.
As for coordinating with a significant neighboring landowner to operate on their lands, I think these things can be done. Maybe not this adminstration of the sudsy corporation, but perhaps another in the future. Hope completely lost prevents the option.
Another thing. "Avoiding FRA" is a fools game IMHO, as certain rules for safety will apply by your insurance agency, if not a federal court of appeals. It is a matter of buying time, rather than avoiding complete change. Railroad museums can be exempt from much of the minor elements of FRA jurisdiction to my knowledge. So know what applies and what does not.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/30/2012 10:24PM by o anderson.