Daily Archives: January 19, 2006

Kellar Branch

Peoria: Parks more important than business

I know some of you are tiring of the Kellar Branch deal, but if you’ve ever wondered why Peoria has a reputation for being anti-business (or at least anti-local-business), one need look no further than this debacle.Carver Lumber is located on the Kellar Branch line and relies on rail transportation for shipping (it’s considerably cheaper than trucking).  They agreed to the city’s plan to turn the Kellar Branch into a hiking/biking trail on the condition that equivalent service be provided via a “western spur” that the city promised to build.  What the city has done is:

  • Replace a reliable carrier (Pioneer Industrial Railway) with an unreliable and incompetent carrier (Central Illinois Railway)  which not only hasn’t made a single shipment to Carver yet, but endangered Peoria citizens with a runaway train and damaged the rail line with a careless derailment;
  • Tear up a section of the Kellar Branch so that, even if CIRY were competent enough to get a load of lumber up the bluff, it couldn’t deliver it to Carver because the line is obstructed;
  • Not completed the western spur as promised.

Now Carver is making a reasonable request of the Surface Transportation Board: stay the Board’s decision to discontinue rail service on the Kellar Branch until (a) the western spur is completed, and (b) service via the western spur has proven to be adequate for Carver’s needs.

The city’s response?  “That would not be appropriate.”

That’s what the city’s attorney Tom McFarland wrote to the Surface Transportation Board today.  He goes on to say, “It would not be appropriate to stay the Board’s decision for an indefinite time while the adequacy of service from the west is tested, and perhaps to overturn the Board’s decision if Carver Lumber deems that service to be inadequate.”

In other words, turning the Kellar Branch into a linear park is more important than maintaining a profitable business climate for a long-time, local Peoria business.

It’s actually worse than that.  The city has no agreement with Union Pacific to use their line to the west, despite the western spur they’ve connected to it.  So, by saying it’s “inappropriate” to stay the decision “until the adequacy of service from the west is tested,” what they’re really saying is they’re not willing to ensure Carver can receive any shipments at all via the western spur before they start ripping up the rails on the Kellar Branch!

And why is it they’re doing this?  For a hiking/biking trail.

Make no mistake, parks are more important than business in Peoria.

Annexation, Peoria History

A little annexation history

4 Comments

During the latest annexation of 715 acres, I heard more than one media outlet describe it as “the largest annexation since the city added Richwoods Township.” I wasn’t even born yet when Peoria annexed Richwoods Township, so that meant nothing to me, but I figured it must have been a big addition of land.”Big” doesn’t begin to describe it.

I spent some time at the library familiarizing myself with some annexation history tonight and was shocked at the size of the Richwoods annexation. It more than doubled the physical size of the city, expanding it from 15 square miles to 35 square miles. The additional land extended from just north of War Memorial Drive (south of Lake) all the way past Detweiller Park to Ravinswood Road to the north. It also added about 21,000 residents.

And it almost didn’t happen. The residents of the township had to vote for annexation, and pro-annexation voters won by only 336 votes. There was quite a bit of debate leading up to the big vote, which took place on November 21, 1964. Most of the arguments centered around the then separate Richwoods school district which did not want to join Peoria’s District 150. Proponents of annexation pointed out all the city services Richwoods would enjoy: storm sewers, water (provided by the Peoria Water Works Co.), buses, increased law enforcement, the replacement of volunteer firefighters with “city firemen” (lowering their fire insurance bills), garbage collection, street repair, street lights, etc., etc., etc. One of my favorite quotes was, “Speakers for annexation have told prospective voters to consider the long range view, that a bigger city could attract more industry by showing evidence of a growing, vibrant city.”

It’s growing, alright–but only in size. Check out these numbers:

Year
 Square Miles
 Population
1960 15 103,162
2006 49.26 112,936

The physical size of the city is over three times as large as it was 46 years ago, yet our population has increased only 9.5%. Is it any wonder that we’re having trouble balancing budgets? Why is our population stagnant despite the immense increase in land mass, strip malls, retail stores, etc.?

(One interesting side note: the city next tried to annex Peoria Heights in February 1965, but it was roundly defeated by voters there.)