Rail link to Bloomington will doom rail service for Central Illinois

The Journal Star reports (no link — it’s a “First in Print” article) that a new passenger rail advisory group has been formed:

A 21-member committee formed of local government officials and appointees from the Tri-County Regional Planning Commission, it set priorities in its first couple of meetings. In the long run, the goal would be passenger service that links downstate’s three Amtrak lines with service from Galesburg to Champaign. That starts with service from East Peoria to Normal.

The article is by columnist Terry Bibo, and unfortunately she doesn’t list any members of the committee other than Tazewell County board member Dean Grimm (who’s the chairman) and Tri-County Regional Planning director Terry Kohlbuss. It might be helpful to know who is making these decisions.

You might think from reading the quote above that the committee only wants to see rail service between East Peoria and Normal, but not so fast:

[T]ransportation officials are applying for a $160,000 grant for alternatives analysis. The grant would look at possibilities from carpooling to buses to rail service.

Kohlbuss is quoted later as saying he sees it as “a ramp-up process” to increase the number of rail users and build up demand. Grimm recognized the need for public support, saying, “I would hope people in Peoria — in central Illinois — value passenger train transportation. That’s the only way this is going to fly.” State Sen. Dave Koehler and Peoria Mayor Jim Ardis are reportedly already on board with the committee’s goals. I heard that Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood was on the radio this morning singing the praises of this plan as well. (LaHood, you may recall, used to be against rail service, saying people should just drive to Bloomington.)

My take: This is terribly disappointing in so many ways, I hardly know where to start.

On the positive side, I want to say that I’m glad our local leaders are focusing more attention on passenger rail. We need our local leaders’ buy-in so that the money can be appropriated and the project can happen. That there’s a committee formed is a good start in principle, although I would like to know who exactly is on it.

I knew a committee was being formed and expressed interest in being on it myself, but obviously the decision was made not to include me. That’s a little disappointing, given that I’ve started a grassroots organization called the Peoria Passenger Rail Coalition and have talked to the Mayor and Kohlbuss about my interest in working with them. But hey, they have their reasons (probably very good ones) and it’s their right to choose who they want and don’t want on their committee. I have no complaint about that.

I do have a complaint about their plans, however.

First of all, the timing is unfortunate. There is still an Amtrak-IDOT study pending that’s looking at the feasibility of establishing Peoria-Chicago passenger rail service. We really should see the results of that study before we assume it can’t be done and start looking at least-desired options. I fear this new development could influence the current study — perhaps even lead to its abandonment — if IDOT and Amtrak feel the political will is gone for a Peoria-Chicago connection.

Secondly, the plan itself is flawed. There is no demand of which I’m aware for rail access to Bloomington. If you’re going to Bloomington, you’re going to need a car in order to get around their sprawling city (likewise for anyone from Bloomington who would be traveling to Peoria). If you’re coming from Chicago, it’s reasonable to take the train and rent a car or take the bus in Bloomington. But it would be absurd to take the train from Peoria to Bloomington and then rent a car or take the bus. We’re so close to Bloomington that people traveling there are going to drive, period. It’s simply not a viable rail destination from Peoria.

Equally implausible is that sufficient numbers of people will want to take a train to Bloomington simply to connect with a Chicago- or St. Louis-bound train. To be sure, there would be some ridership for such a service, but not enough to sustain it. It would add time and cost that could be saved by driving to Bloomington and parking for free at their Amtrak station. How many Peoria residents already drive to Bloomington to take advantage of cheaper airfares and free parking at the Central Illinois Regional Airport? The same thing would likely occur here.

At least there’s a reason to go to Bloomington — to catch another train. Looking at it the other way, why would anyone want to travel from Bloomington to Peoria? Or East Peoria, for that matter. I mean, is there any chain restaurant or big box store in East Peoria that Bloomington doesn’t already have? What’s the attraction, exactly?

The most dangerous thing about this plan, however, is Grimm’s final quote — remember he said, “I would hope people in Peoria — in central Illinois — value passenger train transportation.” What this means is, if the Peoria-Bloomington rail link is a failure (as I believe it would be), then our local officials are going to believe that means people in Peoria and central Illinois don’t value train transportation. And that would be a travesty.

Central Illinois does value train travel, and will use train transportation — but only if it’s a viable route that goes where we want to go. We don’t want to go to Bloomington. We want to go to Chicago. Establish Peoria to Chicago passenger rail service and you will see success.

Rt. 24 designation may move out of Peoria

U.S. Route 24 and Illinois Route 29 run through the Warehouse District in downtown Peoria, and that’s causing a problem for the City. The City wants to make Washington Street more pedestrian friendly by narrowing it and adding on-street parking on both sides of the road. Property owners in that area say they need a more pedestrian-friendly Washington Street in order to successfully redevelop those old warehouses into loft apartments, condos, retail shops, and restaurants. Because of the road’s designation as Routes 24 and 29, any changes to the street must be approved by the Illinois Department of Transportation, and they don’t want parking on both sides of the street. In fact, they prefer it wide and fast, just like it is now.

That leaves only one option if the City is going to move forward on its preferred Washington Street makeover: move the route designations and take over jurisdiction of the street from the State. Under a proposal that comes before the Council next Tuesday night, routes 24 and 29 would be rerouted to East Peoria, bypassing downtown Peoria. Specifically, Route 24 traveling northeast would cross the river on the Shade-Lohmann (I-474) bridge instead of the McClugage, effectively bypassing Peoria altogether. Route 29 traveling southeast would cross the river on the Murray Baker (I-74) bridge instead of the Cedar Street bridge, bypassing downtown.

Those changes come with a cost. Because of the route designations, Peoria receives $45,000 each year from the state to help with maintaining those streets. In addition, the State does all the resurfacing work at its own expense — for the work they’re doing this fall, that comes to about $5.44 million. Including routine maintenance and periodic resurfacing, the Public Works Department estimates that it will cost the City an average of $563,669 per year over the next 20 years to take over maintenance of the street.

There had been talk in the past of moving 24 off of Washington Street, but keeping it on this side of the river — perhaps moving it to Adams and Jefferson. However, even if IDOT would agree to it, it would only be a temporary fix, as the City would inevitably run into problems changing those streets in the future. Caterpillar has also made it clear that it does not want the route moved to Adams street, which passes by the front door of their world headquarters.

It is unfortunate that IDOT is being so inflexible on this issue. Since 2003, they are supposed to have been embracing “context sensitive solutions,” “an approach that uses many tools with one goal in mind: plan and design transportation projects that ‘fit’ into their surroundings – what is known as ‘context.’ It involves: Striking a balance between safety, mobility, community needs, and the environment . . . Addressing all modes of transportation in the planing and design of the project, including motor vehicle, mass transit, pedestrians and bicyclists . . . Applying the flexibility inherent in our design standards to fit the project into its surroundings . . . [and] Incorporating aesthetics as part of basic good design.”

A portion of Illinois Route 83 travels right through downtown Antioch, Illinois. This section of state highway carries an average of 12,300 vehicles every day — slightly more than the 11,600 that Washington St. carries through the Warehouse District — yet, take a look at IDOT’s Illinois Route 83 Project page:

…the downtown segment typical section will have one 11-foot through lane in each direction separated by an 11-foot striped median with 8 foot wide parking stalls. The Village of Antioch was involved in the development of geometry of the “downtown” section.

Now, why is it okay to have three lanes of traffic and parking on both sides of the street on Route 83, but we can’t have the same thing on Route 24? Why the inconsistency?

I’ve asked that question in the past and been given two answers. One is that on-street parking has been “grandfathered in” on state routes in some communities; so, if you already have parking, you get to keep it, but you can’t add it if you don’t already have it. This only goes to show that the no-parking requirement is arbitrary and baseless. If it were a vital safety issue, there would be no “grandfathering in” since it costs nothing to remove parking from a route. The other reason I’ve been given is that IDOT divides Illinois into different regions, and each region has its own engineer who sets the rules for his or her area. We’re in Region 3 and Antioch is in Region 1. Thus, the Region 1 engineer allows parking, but the Region 3 engineer, Joe Crowe, does not. In other words, there’s no consistent policy for the State.

No matter how you look at it, the State of Illinois is bent on frustrating Peoria’s plans to improve its downtown, and the only option left is for Peoria to give up the route designations and pay for the street maintenance itself. But can Peoria afford it? The City is already looking down the barrel of a $10 million deficit for next year. More drastic cuts to basic services are being contemplated. Will development of the Warehouse District produce enough new revenue to make losing the route designations worth it?

There haven’t been any studies (that I know of) yet, but consider that the City figured two hotels and three restaurants on one block (the Wonderful Development) would raise enough revenue to cover $37 million in debt service over twenty years. Surely a mixed-use residential/retail development in the Warehouse District with multiple developers over ten blocks will raise enough revenue in property and sales tax increments to cover $8.3 million (in today’s dollars) over the next 20 years, especially since there would be no bond issue and thus no debt service costs. Still, it wouldn’t hurt to get a commitment from the Warehouse District developers before moving forward.

Landscape waste pickup may change to pay-as-you-go

The City estimates it could save $1 million by passing the costs of landscape waste pickup to users. Under the proposal that heads to the Council next Tuesday night, landscape waste pickup the first two weeks of March and the month of November would still be “free.” But the rest of the year, those wishing to dispose of landscape waste would need to purchase a sticker (“tag”) for each bag of waste they want picked up. Alternatively, they could rent a special landscape waste cart that would include pickup as part of the rental fee.