55 thoughts on “Heights wants it both ways… again”

1. offering odds, anybody?

2. Mayor Allen just does not like good paying jobs. Pure n simple.

3. Interesting that PIRY is planning to do track maintenance through the village in a few weeks. Some thick vegetation remains in the section between Marietta and Glen, so I’m guessing that stretch will be PIRY’s focus.

   BTW, the railroad operated a train Friday and again today.

4. Can’t be, David. Rabid Trail Advocates have assured us that trains are old-fashioned. Nowadays people want to haul everything on bicycles. Just yesterday I saw Elaine Hoplins hauling a load of coal to Ameren in her backpack. Hey, no wonder our power bills are so expensive!

5. I’m sure CJ or David Jordan can answer this. The Village of P.H. and COP booted Pioneer in favor of Central Illinois Rail. Was Central Illinois Rail responsible for maintaining the tracks as Pioneer? If so, why isn’t Central Illinois cleaning up as they left the tracks go to hell. If it wasn’t their responsibility, then shouldn’t the cities should be responsible? I seriously doubt all the issues the VOPH have occurred in the few months in which Pioneer has returned to the tracks. Makes me scratch my head and realize my wallet is getting lighter.

6. Central Illinois Railroad (CIRY) did have a contract with the City and Village to operate over the Kellar Branch until the western connection was built and in service, at which point the Kellar Branch contract terminated. CIRY never fulfilled their obligations under the Kellar Branch contract and the City/Village never held them accountable for their breach of contract.

   At this time, CIRY has joint operating authority with PIRY over the Kellar Branch per the Surface Transportation Board’s ruling, even though they don’t have a contract with the City/Village for such operations.

   PIRY maintains that its contract from 1984 is still in force. The City says it has expired. The Village is trying to enforce the contract under the tenuous argument that Pioneer says it’s still in force, so Pioneer should be held accountable for their end of the bargain, but the Village doesn’t concede that it’s still in force, so the Village shouldn’t have to hold up its end. Pioneer is saying the contract is either in force or it isn’t — and if it is in force, it applies to all parties, not just one. It’s enough to make your head spin.

7. Can’t add much to what CJ said, but you’ll recall that CIRY didn’t even want to operate the line, but as new business prospects arose (Carri Scharf, Globe Energy and railcar storage contracts) in late 2006, they petitioned the STB to withdraw their discontinuance of service petition.

   Actual plans to operate the length of the Kellar Branch were fuzzy for a time. Then last summer CIRY indicated plans to operate the line. They claimed to have spent $100,000 of their own funds on brush clearing and track repairs before the November 17 ruling that restored PIRY’s operating rights.

   For now, CIRY seems quite content to switch O’Brien Steel on the south end and occasionally switch storage cars on the north end. It’s odd that they haven’t even operated a train the length of the line as PIRY has since January, but I suspect it’s because they want to lay low and let PIRY bear the brunt of VOPH’s attacks.

8. C.J., it was a “cop-out” on the part of Mike Carr and Pioneer. Mike had stated many times before that they likely would not be interested in participating in the costs of the study if the firm they wanted was not chosen. This was well before we sent the letter of demands to Pioneer. Then, conveniently, when their choice was not picked, the focus then becomes that “mayor who doesn’t want good paying jobs,” and the Heights wanting the lease adhered to.

   Here’s the other thing. You have my phone number. You’ve called me in the past. I have explained my position to you, and you responded that while you don’t agree with it, you understood where I was coming from. Why not call me now, and I’ll be more than happy to discuss anything regarding the Kellar Branch, from my perspective, at length. I know that I will not change most of the posting parties minds, any more than you will change mine, but it’s always good to exchange dialogue at any level.

   This has nothing whatsoever with wanting to have anything “both ways.” Pioneer has not been a good neighbor in terms of maintaining that line. Whether you want to believe it or not (and I know that you don’t), that lack of maintenance ON THE RAIL BED, has caused erosion problems that have exacerbated the drainage problems Heights residents’ yards. I’m not making this up.

   And, no, I’m not against “good paying jobs.” If the Kellar Branch realistically could bring a number of them, my take on this situation would be completely different. But, at some point, a reality check needs to be in place. The reality here is that the Kellar Branch is a wasted resource for the Village. Again, I know you don’t want to believe that, but it is the truth. For a guy who subscribes to the “New Urbanism” concept, C.J., I’ve always been amazed that a safe walking and biking environment that the trail would provide hasn’t caused you to be more positive about its possibilities.

   We didn’t ask for Pabst to close. We didn’t ask for the manufacturing base of this area to pretty much go into the toilet. There are a lot of changes that, to many people, are hard to deal with. I didn’t like Reddy Kilowatt being taken down for a Wal-Mart. I’m not a huge fan of neighborhoods being removed for the “progress” of a school or of a business district. Most “changes” have both positives and negatives involved. In this case, the return of that manufacturing base, those “good paying jobs,” simply because there is a railroad line available, is unlikely. Very unlikely. I know you don’t want to hear that, but it truly is.

   Is it impossible? No. But unlikely. From our perspective, the positives of the trail outweigh the negatives of losing the rail line. The times have changed, and this is a change that the area really needs. I believe that once the trail is in place, you’ll be out there on your bike on some sunny Sunday afternoon.

9. And how many “good paying jobs” would a bike/walking trail bring? I would have to guess zero.

   And what is Shazzam’s role in all this? He’s a pretty big player and he’s already said he can’t build his retail/apartment building with that pesky train going by…even though everyone has yet to abandon 401 Water St.

   And Mayor Allen, what about the plans for the cookie-cutter strip mall for Junction City? Not really in keeping with the uniqueness of the Heights, which I’m a huge fan of BTW.

10. How many good paying jobs does a railroad track that bears the weight of one train once a week provide? I grew up playing on those tracks from 63-73… there was so little traffic the crossings aren’t marked with anything other than a little RR sign… in a residential neighborhood! No lights, no barrier / bar.

    As far as I am concerned, that span has always been a hiking trail… all the way out past Bluegill pond. Ahhh…Bluegill pond.

11. “C.J., it was a “cop-out” on the part of Mike Carr and Pioneer. Mike had stated many times before that they likely would not be interested in participating in the costs of the study if the firm they wanted was not chosen. ” No firm has been chosen as yet. The committee voted to have Dave Barber develop a scope and present it to both companies being considered and when their answers are returned they will be turned over to the city council who will then vote on which company to select. The article in the PJS was wrong. No decision on which company will be used has been decided. The decision of Pioneer not to cooperate was based on the letter sent to them by the Village.

12. Mazr, I contend that the hiking/biking trail, if done properly, will attract a lot more people than a rail line that has a car pass a couple times a month. While many of those people might not bother to walk into the Heights to buy anything, I also think a number will. A heckuva lot more than Pioneer brings in right now, or in the future, I’m nearly certain.

    Good paying jobs? I guess Mahkno needs to define what “good paying jobs” might entail. I don’t think that Pioneer has helped Carver expand its business, and add “good paying jobs.” If “railroads=jobs” was an equation that always bore fruit, no rail line would have ever closed down. In fact, since the 1930s, I think you could say that “good roads/interstates=jobs.” At least, a lot more than railroads do.

    My focus is on bringing more people into the Heights, period. The rail line goes right through our Village, and it’s open and obvious; and, it’s open and obviously in bad condition. Go check out the waves in the tracks. Check out the erosion on the railbed; this is a concern not only for drainage’s sake, but also for a possible derailment. A derailment won’t mean just a few cars into a corn field; here, it could mean a few cars tumbling down a hill into someone’s house.

    As for Alexis Khazzam’s venture: first, Junction City is in Peoria. And, what he has put forth is a “shopping” area. I know that the strip mall concept has gotten a bad rap over the past generation or so, but if it’s done tastefully (which I’m sure Alexis will do), it will be attractive. Bear in mind, his plans are based on cars bringing the majority of the shoppers in. So that has an effect on the final concept.

    The hiking/biking trail WILL have a huge impact on the TIF district we are hoping for. No two ways about it. Envision the front of the Cohen’s building as a glassed-in atrium, housing a micro-brewery, overlooking a trailhead, with a water feature, a mock historic building, and lots of landscaping. Envision the same overlooking the crapped-out rail that is there now, with an occasional engine going by, and some dude at the horn, blowing it a hundred times in the space of a few hundred yards, just to make a “statement.” You tell me which is more appealing to a possible condo-buyer within the Cohen’s building. You tell me which is more appealing to a developer, trying to decide if he/she should sink millions into the project.

    Bear in mind that we need to change one more opinion on the STB. ONE. The case that was presented to them was not correct in its scope, because no one guided us on what the STB was looking for. In fact, the Heights was really not consulted whatsoever in regards to what was presented to the STB. Those days are over.

    Bear in mind, for every negative opinion I read on the blogs regarding the hiking/biking trail, I receive about ten phone calls, letters, you name it, saying we need to keep at it. It will bring revenue in where there is none now, and will be very little (if any) in the future as a rail. It will create a linear park for a Village that needs a park in that area, particularly since Kelly Avenue School was taken apart. It will create a greenspace and an attraction as a gateway to the proposed TIF area. It will clean up a blighted area. And, Mazr, it IS a blighted and unsafe area, because Pioneer has not lived up to its lease.

    Call me anytime and I’ll walk the rail with you to show you the problems. Don’t worry about the “Pioneer Secret Policing” crashing down on us from a helicopter in the sky. They keep forgetting: we own the land AND the rails in Peoria Heights.

13. SD, you are wrong here. Remember, you’re also the one who said that I stated in a public meeting whether the trains could run at night, or something strange like that. Not only did I not say that then, but Mike Carr also DID say that they had no interest in participating in the plan if their choice was not chosen.

    On top of that, two of the members of the board we appointed stated in a public meeting Tuesday that the choice WAS made, and that Ty-Lin was chosen. They said the choice was made, it’s over, finito.

    SD, I have a pretty good idea who you are in “real life,” and I think you’re a really nice person, but apparently get mixed up on facts too often. David Barber is putting together “job perameters” to send to Ty-Lin ONLY, for their pricing ONLY. The choice that Pioneer wanted is not involved at this time. And, THAT is what Mike Carr was aware of when he used the Village as the scapegoat for not wanting to be involved.

    Everyone, have a very nice day.

14. “In this case, the return of that manufacturing base, those “good paying jobs,” simply because there is a railroad line available, is unlikely. Very unlikely. I know you don’t want to hear that, but it truly is.”

    Well certainly not with you as Mayor, it seems.

    That micro-brewery will sure bring lots of high paying… wait.. um… I mean minimum wage jobs to the heights.

    “, I receive about ten phone calls, letters, you name it, saying we need to keep at it.”

    And how many of those are from the heights? Isn’t the rail to trail group headed up by a guy from MORTON. A city which might actually benefit from businesses relocating away from a trail.

    “which is more appealing to a developer”

    Ah yes… the real truth of the matter.

    I wonder how many of those phone calls are from people with a vested interest working with a developer.

15. “it IS a blighted and unsafe area, because Pioneer has not lived up to its lease.”

    Hmm around here, the tenants usually get a pass on the blight because ultimately it is the OWNER who is responsible for the blight. You asserted: “we own the land AND the rails in Peoria Heights.” Indeed. The blight is your fault. Your fault for giving Pioneer the years long run around about whether they had a lease or not. Your fault for causing confusion as to whose lease it was, Pioneers or CIRY. Your fault for NOT FOLLOWING UP in a timely and responsible manner, instead waiting years later for a feable gotcha moment. The Heights owns that part of the rail. If the tenant isn’t doing the job then get someone out there to fix it. You are the owner.

16. Let’s discuss these things shall we?

    “Mayor Allen doesn’t like good paying jobs.”

    This charge is unfair as I’m sure Mayor Allen is all for good paying jobs. Now the kind of jobs that could come to Peoria Heights as the result of re-development of the Pabst and Cohen’s sites will be a mix of minimum wage retail and higher-paying office jobs. Portions of the Pabst site have already attracted these type of jobs (CVS and Williams Bros. Construction).

    I am all for non-industrial development at Peoria Heights as that is the only realistic scenario. Some years ago, there was still a possibility of industrial development at the Pabst site. But no more. I accept that, however, the presence of a railroad track doesn’t have to prevent redevelopment of this land into residential, retail and commercial complexes.

    The railroad (which has been in “poor condition” since the 1960’s) didn’t prevent the late Dana Clark from purchasing in November 1986 the fire-damaged brewery, which he wanted to transform into a multi-purpose complex. Neither did he demand a trail, because he, like most of us, understand that businesses cannot depend on the silly idea that hundreds if not thousands of trail users will stop by to shop and eat. Unfortunately, Clark’s untimely death at age 44 on August 21, 1987 ended his dream.

    The Federal Railroad Administration has designated the Kellar Branch as “excepted track” and is safe to operate if proper speed restrictions are obeyed (they are). Given these slow speeds and the fact that locomotives and rolling stock have a low center of gravity, there is no danger of them falling over in the even of a derailment. Can any PH resident recall boxcars loaded with PBR falling on their sides? By the late 1970’s, derailments were frequent but minor, and the public was never in danger. Neither are they today. Pioneer ran a train Friday and again yesterday. I saw the latter and the track is safely traversed at 10mph speeds. I understand that the company is planning to do maintenance on the track this spring – that should reduce even further the possibility of a derailment.

    Mayor Allen, PH had its chance before the Surface Transportation Board, and now a ruling has been made. They won’t reopen the case. This is an interstate commerce issue and with new business developing at Pioneer Park, it is even less likely the federal government would allow the Kellar’s closure. The best thing you can do is accept the track’s long-term presence through the Village. Any re-development can accommodate the track. This doesn’t have to be an either-or issue.

17. I have to say I stand corrected. The committee did vote to use T Y Lin for the consultant. The confusion came when one of the committee members suggested sending the developed scope to both companies and another member made a motion. It was difficult to hear and so I misunderstood the motion. So I do apologize to Mayor Allen and John Gordon. As was quoted to me by another source there, there was mass confusion at the end of that meeting and therefore a misunderstanding on my part was made.

18. Mayor Allen: This may seem like a flashback — yet you and the VPOH and COP want the process to go forward in an unbiased manner, yet the committee members who were seated are all pro-trail —- please tell me how any taxpayer either from VOPH or COP would consider the intial step to be unbiased in such a case? And if the intitial committee appears to be and are actually biased toward a certain outcome at the onset — how will an unbiased outcome even be possible?

    Please correct me if I am incorrect.

    On another point — it appears that the cart is before the horse — why would any committee representing taxpayers select a specific consulting firm prior to a RFP (scope of work) being let for an open bid? (Been down this path with neighborhood redevelopment firms and what a disaster that was for the neighborhoods.)

    Also, you wrote:

    Mazr, I contend that the hiking/biking trail, if done properly, will attract a lot more people than a rail line that has a car pass a couple times a month. While many of those people might not bother to walk into the Heights to buy anything, I also think a number will. A heckuva lot more than Pioneer brings in right now, or in the future, I’m nearly certain.

    What are your contentions based on? Do you have solid evidence that would support your contentions (as in where has this scenario actually successfully panned out)? Sounds good, yet — looking at Pro-formas is a highly unreliable source for projected success — just think, Riverplex, Ball Stadium, Gateway Building, Riverfront Parking and I am only sighting a few examples from Peoria. All of those pro-formas gave glowing analysis to the rosey future which turned to financial darkness when reality met the road accompanied by the vacuum sound of taxpayers’ pockets being sucked of additional money.

    And David P. Jordan can probably address an issue about at least one county in Illinois which has no remaining rail service because the rails have all been removed and are dying finanically and trying to rebuild the rails.

19. Mercer County has no railroads anymore and I’ve been told that it is asking for funds to rebuild the one ripped up two decades ago. Mercer is close to barge facilities in the Quad Cities area but lack of rail service limits markets for the county’s agricultural interests.

20. It’s too bad Illinois voters don’t have recall yet, for the Heights certainly needs to recall Allen. He is blindly representing a few fatcat developers, at great cost to his citizens. Based upon his statements on this blog, his truthfulness is also in question. I just don’t know why the otherwise intelligent and practical people of central Illinois continue to tolerate the clowns who masquerade as leaders around here.

21. Mouse….your squeaking is getting redundant. Allen is advocating a position that he feels is in the best interest of his citizens. They should be the ones that decide whether he is adequately representing their position….not someone that lives in Morton. I don’t think there is any concern about his level of truthfulness…he signs his name to his comments and clearly indicates why he holds a position. The facts he uses are disclosed and all are free to determine if they agree or disagree with his position.

    The trail (whether you will admit it or not) would be a tremendous asset to the community. The only question is whether it is a greater asset with more potential than the rail. Different minds have differing views. Open up that mind to some opposing views and you’ll truly be enlightened regarding the difficult decision being faced by elected officials.

22. Peo Proud,

    The issue is not rail vs. trail, or it shouldn’t be. Mayor Allen appointed three persons to the rail-trail committee to study a joint use right-of-way. Isn’t that in conflict with the current attempt to eject the railroad from operating within Village limits?

    Since the STB has made its FINAL decision on the matter, Mayor Allen and the Village Board are only wasting resources fighting the railroad. And their blatant misinterpretation of the contract and false assumptions regarding the railroad’s responsibilities earns any criticism.

23. I’m redundant? Talk about the pot calling the kettle black. The trail nuts have been spewing their venom for over 10 years, don’t you think it’s time they stop?

24. David, as a quick aside, where on Earth do you come up with the STB decision as being “final”? Does it say so in the decision? I’ve read it through a number of times, and “final” is not mentioned, not even once.

    The STB re-opened the case for Carver Lumber. They alluded to items that had not been “proven” yet by the trail advocates. And, again, “final” is not mentioned. This is an ongoing process, whether you want it to be or not. You think they will re-open a case for a customer, but not for a municipality?

    If you have some “in” with the STB, and can clue me in on what appears to not be in their decision, and somehow lends credence to your “final decision” argument, I’d love to see it. And, if a good attorney reviews whatever you have access to, then I could stand corrected in regards to my reading of their decision.

25. I cannot wait for the hordes of bikers/hikers to stop at a micro-brewery staffed with minimum wage earners and then continue on with their biking/hiking…

    Doesn’t Peoria Heights have enough blight in some of those neighborhoods already? Drive around the Heights where the nasty little trains will venture at 10mph over wavy tracks. Are not some of the worst looking, run-down homes in the area in the Heights already?

    Mayor Allen: What is so wrong with a dual-use rail/trail solution?

26. MDD, because Khazzam doesn’t want that.

27. Mouse….I think it’s time for a rationale decision to be made — one way or the other; and I’m getting to the point where I don’t personally care one way or the other. Yes, I feel the uber-trail supporters should tone it down – they do their own cause more harm. But the passion is high on both sides.

    Pioneer wants to stack the deck by choosing the “objective” consultant and refuses to contribute when they can’t have their way.

    DPJ – I agree that the issue will only be resolved if all three options are considered objectively. But I don’t find any more inconsistency in the Heights dual positions than I do in Pioneers. The only difference is the side of the equation they are on. Although, I have to give a little more leeway to a community leader looking our for his citizen’s best interests than I do a private firm looking out for their profit motive (did this market-force supporter just write that ??? ).

28. Is Mayor Allen looking out for the citizen’s interests? I am not convinced.

    I had to drive to East Side Center, in East Peoria today. Along Meadows Avenue there is a trail. It runs behind the houses. It goes for some distance through East Peoria. I couldn’t help but notice the much improved residences and businesses along that trail. It is clear that the trail has been a huge boon to the economic livelihood along Meadows Avenue and elsewhere along its way. I encourage all good readers to drive along Meadows Avenue and see for themselves.

29. Mr. Mayor,

    Peoria Heights was a party to the original case filed November 16, 2004, decided in favor of the Cities on August 10, 2005, reopened January 12, 2007 and reversed in favor of Pioneer on November 19, 2007. The Heights, like the other parties, had ample time and resources available to make its case.

    If you’ll recall, the Board reopened on January 12, 2007 the case entitled, CITY OF PEORIA AND THE VILLAGE OF PEORIA HEIGHTS, IL–ADVERSE DISCONTINUANCE–PIONEER INDUSTRIAL RAILWAY COMPANY, for this reason:

    Circumstances have changed. We now have evidence that Carver Lumber objects to the Cities’ plans and is dissatisfied with the service it is receiving from CIRY. According to Carver Lumber, the service is slower and more expensive, and has been subject to delays and interruptions. In granting PIRY’s petition to reopen, we are not suggesting that rail service must always continue at the same level as in the past. Here, however, the Board specifically predicated its August 2005 Decision on the Cities’ statement that they would maintain the existing level of service to the satisfaction of the users of that service. In these circumstances, it is appropriate to reconsider our August 2005 Decision now that Carver Lumber’s evidence has cast doubt on the representation we had previously relied on.

    You cite economic reasons for going back to the Board to force the railroad(s) off the line, but as long as Carver Lumber is using the line, the Board will not change its Decision. Another one, maybe two, more customers will be coming on line at Pioneer Park within a year or two, solidifying the line’s future as a rail corridor.

    That Peoria Heights generates no business for the operator(s) of the Kellar Branch is irrelevant because this is also an interstate commerce issue. The Kellar Branch is the only proven way to provide economical rail service to Pioneer Park and the railroads operating the line need to reach their markets.

    Peoria Heights can always petition the Board to reopen the case, but success is unlikely. The City of Peoria and its Washington transportation attorney, Thomas McFarland, already spent years trying to prove the Kellar’s nonnecessity, but failed in the end. It is not good enough to assert that Carver Lumber simply can use trucks, and Union Pacific’s train service to the Peoria area has worsened in recent months, further diminishing the viability of the so-called “western connection.”

    I earlier cited the late Dana Clark’s plans for the redeveloping the Pabst property in 1986-1987 as a reminder that two decades ago, a developer was not demanding the removal of the Kellar Branch and/or construction of a trail through the village before proceeding with his project. Before Clark’s untimely passing on August 21, 1987, his $20 million vision for the Pabst property included conversion of the brewhouse into a shopping, residential and office center for 14 shops, a restaurant, offices and even 8 condos. He planned to convert the fire-damaged stockhouse into an urban garden. Now why can’t today’s developers learn to accept the permanence of the railroad track and make their plans accordingly? BR>

30. Hi Mayor Allen,

    Sorry I haven’t written back sooner — I took today off from work (mainly because I worked extra hours over the weekend), plus today is my son’s third birthday. It’s been a fun, but exhausting day. 🙂

    First, as to not calling you, it’s true, I didn’t. I did stop by your office, though, and talked to Tom Horstmann. I felt that, between the letter and my talking to Tom, I had a pretty good idea where you (the Heights) were coming from. But I probably should have called because I do have some questions that haven’t been answered yet.

    My main question is, why now? That’s the part I can’t figure out. You seem to indicate that this problem has been going on for many years, yet you only mention it now, all of a sudden. And during a time when there seemed to be a new spirit of compromise — of trying to move forward and find a way to have a trail next to the rail. Why stir up all these bad feelings again? Why not have a private meeting with Pioneer to try to work out the drainage issues before escalating the matter?

    I doubt that Mike Carr would be so petty as to withdraw his offer of support simply because his engineering firm of choice wasn’t chosen. But if you’re right and it was a cop out, you sure did give him one heck of a good excuse by sending that letter. He couldn’t have asked for a better “out”! 🙂 But that goes back to my previous question — why now?

    You’re contending that lack of maintenance on the rail bed “has caused erosion problems that have exacerbated the drainage problems Heights residents’ yards.” The only way that’s plausible to me, based on the Randolph & Associates report, is if there was damage done to drainage tiles from rails or ties that fell into the ditch from the rail bed. However, I don’t know if that’s Pioneer’s fault or not. Pioneer was kicked off the line for a couple years there, you may recall, and part of that time, CIRY claims to have done some work on restoring part of the Kellar Branch. How do we know it wasn’t their fault? In any case, if Pioneer did any damage, then I’ve already said in my previous post that they should take care of that. I’m with you on that — they should make right any damage that they may have done. The ballast washouts are minor and likely seasonal, since, just like with streets, winter takes its toll. Pioneer should nevertheless fix those, too. I still contend, however, that most of the drainage issues mentioned in the report are due to weed and brush issues that are not on the rail bed, and thus are the Village’s responsibility.

    You said, “The reality here is that the Kellar Branch is a wasted resource for the Village.” Well, yes and no. I understand what you say about manufacturing not coming back. But you have to look at the long term. Eventually, as Peoria continues to grow (and if Peoria’s population ever starts to grow in proportion to its geographical growth), the need is going to arise for more transit options, and with gas prices the way they are, light rail will only get more feasible. Having light rail go right through the center of the Heights will be a huge benefit. In the meantime, putting the trail next to the rail line will bring you all the benefits of a trail without losing the future potential of rail transit.

    For a guy who subscribes to the “New Urbanism” concept, C.J., I’ve always been amazed that a safe walking and biking environment that the trail would provide hasn’t caused you to be more positive about its possibilities.

    Well, at the risk of repeating myself, I’ve never been against a trail. My beef is with removing the rail line. I don’t think the rail line should be replaced with a trail. But I would welcome a trail next to the line. And New Urbanism is not about creating recreational paths as a substitute for shared transportation corridors that are safe for everyone — pedestrians, bicyclists, motorists, and transit riders.

    In fact, since the 1930s, I think you could say that “good roads/interstates=jobs.” At least, a lot more than railroads do.

    You’re looking at the past instead of the future. Good roads/interstates equaled jobs when gas was pennies a gallon. But gas prices are going up and they’re not coming back down. I’m not saying roads and cars/semis are going away, but more efficient means of transportation are going to be in more demand in the future. Having a rail line ensures the Village will be poised for the future, while having a trail next to the rail line will also allow the Village to experience the benefits that a trail brings today.

    Bear in mind that we need to change one more opinion on the STB. ONE. The case that was presented to them was not correct in its scope, because no one guided us on what the STB was looking for.

    You might get them to reopen the case and reconsider it if you can “show material error, new evidence or changed circumstances.” The City of Peoria already entered into evidence the argument over whether the lease is still in force or not. The STB ruled that that has to be taken up by a court of law, not the STB. So they’re only going to see the circumstances as changed if/when that lease issue is finally adjudicated in court. That’s going to take a long time. Do you really want to waste all the time and money on that legal battle just so you can reopen the case and hopefully (from your standpoint) get Pioneer removed from the line? You do realize, I assume, that even if you do get them removed, that still doesn’t clear the line for conversion to a trail. Again, why not go for the shared rail/trail option? It would provide the trail sooner and probably save the City/Village money in the long run.

    Thanks for writing. I always appreciate your willingness to share and argue the issues.

31. mdd: maybe I’m just kooky, but I don’t really think Peoria Heights has a great deal of “blight.” Actually, for a middle class, Central Illinois town, I think we’ve held up pretty well. Are there issues? Of course there are. But, we’ve worked diligently the past three years to create new ordinances (you can no longer park your car in your front yard); you can no longer park your boat or RV out on the street for extended times; and a few others. We hired a full time ordinance officer. It is a constant battle. But, the vast majority of our residents are doing a pretty good job of keeping up their houses. Plus, I think one can make a point that when you clean up and fix up a spot (the rail), you might “goose” some of the surrounding properties into doing more fix-up.

    Peo Proud, I appreciate your mostly positive comments.

    C.J. and David, I understand where your arguments come from, but I honestly don’t think that the facts back up the tracks staying. C.J., I’ve invited you to walk the tracks with me, and I know you’re a busy guy, but probably about 50% of the line will NOT legitimately hold both a trail and a rail. That is a fact. To get the most bang for the buck, at every level, the trail has to take over the rail bed. Period. I can’t seem to get a number of people to understand that, but I’m betting the vast majority of those people have not walked the line through Peoria Heights, let alone in Peoria.

    Why now? Because I took the time to read the lease agreement, from stem to stern, about 8 months ago, or so. Prior to that, I had depended on the folks who had run with the ball for the trail. To this day, I’m not really sure who all of those people truly are, but in the end, obviously we came up short. After reading the lease, and after dealing with Pioneer over the same time period, I felt it was time to take it to the Board of Trustees that a different tact might be in order. They agreed.

    C.J., I don’t think you’re going to have an effect on the travelling habits of Central Illinois even if the price of gas goes to $10.00/gallon. I really don’t. It is so easy to get from point A to point B everywhere in this metropolitan area; people like the convenience of their own cars; for the most part, it’s not difficult to find parking almost anywhere; and, when the trolley idea was floated, gas was still pretty expensive, and like I’ve stated a couple hundred times before, there was NO public support from anyone regarding the trolley. NONE.

    The cost to get the tracks upgraded to ones that could carry passengers, from what I’m told, would be in the millions of dollars range. Having this rail line truly will not have us “poised for the future,” it will only keep us buried in the past. I was skeptic at first regarding the trail, but I’ve studied the issues; I’ve looked at the economics from the Heights side; I’ve walked the line several times; and I’ve dealt with Pioneer enough to know that the trail is the only thing that makes physical and fiscal sense for Peoria Heights.

    I don’t think the STB had anything close to the full story regarding this situation. The lease is part of it. The economic impact was not fully presented to them, at any level. The scope of the deterioration was not presented as it should have been. No one interviewed me or any of our Trustees to help the Heights’ case. It was just done. Well, I really believe that the facts we put together and present to the STB in the near future will have an impact on that board. If it doesn’t, well so be it. We’ll deal with it one way or another. But, I think that when all of the facts are presented as they should have been initially, the STB will have a majority vote for Pioneer to vacate the line. We’ll deal with CIRY in a different manner, because we don’t have a lease agreement with them.

    Thanks again for the public forum. Like one of your posting parties put down in the past, I believe we’ve beaten this dead horse enough. It’s time to let the final facts decide the final outcome. I think that David and C.J. have at least shown that the STB might be interested in a new presentation. We’re betting that they will.

    Have a nice Friday and a better weekend.

32. Hi everybody, friends and foes both! Please don’t expect me to become a regular poster but I do want to clarify one thing on the record regarding Mark Allen’s comments about Pioneer Industrial Railway Co. “Coping Out”. I feel that comment attacks my personal integrity, something I do not take lightly.

    I did not attend the committee meeting where Ty Lin gave its presentation. Sharon Deckard (a rail supporter) attended the meeting and told me she was very impressed with Ty Lin’s presentation and she had the impression they would do a fair and impartial job.

    Upon further reflection I came to the realization that the continued misinformation and half truths from the trail supporters will never stop and additional comments from Mayor Allen and the VOPH made it very clear there goal was to kick off Pioneer Industrial Railway, one way or the other. I have no problem with the VOPH wanting to exercise its judgment on what is best for its citizens, my problem is the manner in which they are proceeding. It became obvious compromise was not an option with the VOPH and we have reached the point where “enough is enough”. I spoke with John Sharp at the PJS and told him PIRY would not be contributing to the study as that money will be redirected to cover future legal expenses in regard to actions, and inactions, by the VOPH. I made it very clear to John Sharp that this decision had nothing to do with which consultant the committee selected. I further explained that from what I had heard we would have no problem with Ty Lin, and the only reason we suggested Stone Consulting was because that was the only firm we had found at the time that had experience in this area. The truth is, had we found Ty Lin we would have suggested that the Cities use them as well (which of course at that point, they wouldn’t….crazy yes). So, there you have it, our decision has absolutely nothing to do with the consultant selected, and everything to do with the “saber rattling” by the VOPH and continued misinformation from trail supporters. Previously, the only caveat I placed on helping to fund the study was that I wanted to be comfortable that the consultant selected was fair and impartial. I never said we would contribute only if Stone Consulting was selected.

    I was also partially quoted in the PJS with the comment “good luck building a trail”. That came across as a snide remark. What I actually said was something to the effect “ I hope they are successful building a trial next to the railroad right of way and I wish them all the luck”

    Mike Carr

33. What a shocker the Journal would take a rail comment and partially quote if for their benenfit.

34. Why is it that no-one mentions the costs of the trail next to the rail? What would be an acceptable dollar amount for the project?Apparently $29 million is not acceptable because there is no movement on that amount.Added to the cost should be the linear park to go from the PJS to Abington st. The PPB report stated this section would not be used as trail because one already exists from Springdale to the lower Glen Oak Park.Frankly I think a dollar spent on a trail would be to much. A comment to kcdad,I too walked the tracks almost daily ,one because they are adjacent to my house,two the woods were the only place to play.The blue gil pond if you remember was formed by a backed up city drainage pipe which finally broke free and all the fish,sludge and water went down Sloan St.(60-72)Back to Mayor Allen,there are communities throughout the country that are wishing right now that they had rail service.The cost of not only fuel but food is skyrocketing,flour alone in 1 year increased 35%.The rail helped build the country and it might help sustain us in the future.Have a nice day also.

35. Personally, I believe that most of these trails are a waste of tax dollars, a never ending money pit for some elected fool to throw my (and yours too) hard earned bucks into. You can drive by these trails on any but the few really nice days and see nary a soul on the trails or parked in the lots. Please stop spending our money on things that we really don’t need. Much of the money for this Kellar Trail will be State money and I expect some from the Feds too so we are all paying for this nonsense – and with our huge national debt! Stop it Mayor Allen, stop this foolish spending!

36. Ed, do you think that all parks are a waste of money? If Detweiller Park isn’t filled to the brim with people every day of the week, does that mean that it’s a waste of money to have it? I can speak for Peoria Heights, and tell you that this trail would be in an area of the Village that really doesn’t have a park any longer. I think you way under estimate what the potential use of this trail would be. It would be a safe route on bike and foot through the center of the area. Where does one draw the line on what is considered to be a “waste of money”?

    Public funds for an interstate? Iraq? Overall military spending? NASA? Dredging the Illinois River? The Abe Lincoln Museum in Springfield? When you look at the billions spent on so many programs and the like in our country, and what we spend in the world, this trail is just a very small portion of a very small drop in an extremely large bucket. And, I’m telling you right now, it will bring more tax money, attract more new residents to the proposed Cohen’s TIF, and produce more revenue for us than the railroad will ever do. That’s money that can be used for our infrastructure issues, as well.

    Ed, many things that some will consider to be frivilous actually have a cyclical positive effect on so many other aspects
    of life. Don’t discount what this trail can do through the heart of our Village, let alone for the City of Peoria, just because you think it won’t be “full” all of the time. I had close to your mindset at the outset of my “learning curve,” and I feel there are enough facts out there, and enough people in favor of the trail, to have made me change my mind.

    CW, if you can produce a story or a study from an area reasonably similar to Peoria/Peoria Heights, where a trail was placed where a rail line was, and now the public and governmental communities are clamoring for the rail to be put back in because of all of the new rail customers that now want to use that corridor, we might have something to talk about. In the meantime, we have a rail line in place, and virtually no one wants to use it. I understand that the cost of everything is going up, and has been since the dawn of time. I’m not really sure what that has to do with the need to keep a rail line that virtually no one wants to use, but maybe you have an insight that I don’t. If the increases in the cost of living had a direct effect on the Kellar Branch, we wouldn’t be having this “conversation.” The rail line would have been hustling and bustling since the day it was put in. Clearly, it has not, and as much as many want to blame the trail folks, Peoria and Peoria Heights for it, the truth is that there is almost no interest to use the line by almost every business along it, for all intent and purpose.

    That’s the bottom line. For all of the talk about how necessary and needed rail service is along the Kellar Branch, the fact is that there’s only one customer in the center portion of it, where the trail would be. One. No new businesses attracted to it. None. I know that David and C.J. and CW and Emtronics will all tell me how absolutely short-sighted I am; how stupid I am for not recognizing how important the rail line is, how eventually we’ll have to have the rail line as fuel prices go up; and so on and on and on. That theory sounds good on paper, but it still hasn’t borne fruit as gas prices have doubled in the past few years. That’s DOUBLED. How long do we wait, guys and gals?

    The trail will bring people to the area. It will help sell what we hope to have in the Cohen’s TIF. It will help build our coffers so we can take care of many water main, sidewalk, street issues. It will clean up a neglected area, once and for all. It will be a good place for families to bike and hike, without worries of motor vehicle traffic. I think it’s an extremely positive thing to do. I know that none of this will change the mind of anyone who has a negative thought about the trail, but I’m just as closed-minded as you folks are about it, so I can’t complain!

    And yes, CW, I hope you have a good day tomorrow, too. Regardless of how you feel about a trail instead of a rail.

37. Last comment seems to say it will solve all the problems if it is converted to a trail. Heck let’s have more trails in the city and it might be a fix all of our problems. Rip out the rails and bring on the $$$ people & tourist will flock to see the sights allong the peoria part of the trail, Ha! If we as a community want to bring jobs, then we need a mix of transportation for development. Road, Air, Train, and Barge. Rail/Trail is the way to go. We as a community get both and we can see how it brings in $$ from the trail users.

38. “No new businesses attracted to it.”

    Globe Energy?

39. Mr. Mayor,

    Ed’s point is that government spends huge sums on non-necessities. The solution to this controversy is simple:

    (1) Accept the Kellar Branch’s future as a rail freight corridor. The Surface Transportation Board restored Pioneer Industrial Railway’s operating authority on the line because Carver Lumber found the alternative unnacceptable. The Board’s decision should have ended this issue.

    (2) Don’t build the trail. Save taxpapers $6 to $30 million (or more). Pie-in-the-sky fantasies about how many walkers, runners and bicyclists will stop to shop and eat is nonsense. Our society is obsessed with comfort and convenience and that is defined as the automobile.

    (3) Re-develop the Cohen’s and Pabst site to residential, commercial and office functions. This can occur with the track in place. It already has.

40. Martin, you’ve taken my comment and gone about 400 miles too far with it. My comment was about the Kellar Branch only. I never said that this would apply to every rail line in the country. Give me a little credit, huh?

    Mahkno, Globe came without the Kellar Branch up and running. The jury is out as to whether or not Globe will ever amount to anything substantial here, with or without the rail. I’m talking about a business saying they will locate here JUST BECAUSE of the rail, and without the rail they cannot do business. Again, the count remains at 0.

    David, are you saying that Detweiller Park, every other park in the area, NASA, and a host of other items that the government pours mucho bucks into all qualify as “necessities,” and the trail is the only one that would not? Everyone has a different take on what is a “necessity.” Actually, if we only spent money on what is a “necessity” in life, not much would be spent. I might say that universal health care is a “necessity” in the U.S., and I think that one might be an easy one to go along with it. Yet, we still don’t have it. When we have a “universal” definition of what “necessity” entails, and that’s all we ever spend money on, then I might go along with you there.

    I’ve pounded the dead horse all around the block regarding the benefits of the trail and the trail-head for the Cohen’s TIF. David, I believe that you would have to agree that it’s a better fit than what is there now. Then again, maybe you don’t.

    We’ll go around the block forever, just like that dead horse, as to our takes on what is important for the Kellar Branch and surrounding communities. I respect your feelings about it, and I hope you can understand mine. We’ll just leave it at that, but I appreciate everyone’s inputs, and I hope that maybe a few of you might see even a GLIMMER of what my feelings are about the same.

    The trail offers an amenity that will attract residents, and will also attract business, however small a lot of people might think it will be. The Kellar Branch, as it sits now, is of no benefit to anyone, other than a couple cars a month to Carver’s. I predict this will be re-opened by the STB with the evidence and information we will now present. And, don’t be surprised if the outcome is to vacate. I have a feeling that we’re close right now to getting that extra vote, and we’ll provide what’s needed to obtain it.

    Thanks for the banter.

41. “Globe came without the Kellar Branch up and running.”

    I don’t think they are producing anything yet. They are still working out immigration issues for the owners, which I think was recently resolved. Globe has expressed an interest in using the rail.

    “The jury is out as to whether or not Globe will ever amount to anything substantial here, with or without the rail.”

    So now a business has to be already established and successful before you will support a rail for them? That is putting the cart before the horse and absurd. Those future and current Globe employees could be living in the Heights enhancing your tax base. The Heights isn’t all uber rich folks along Grand View Drive you know.

    “I’m talking about a business saying they will locate here JUST BECAUSE of the rail”

    That would be a rather silly business plan in the current environment of uncertainty regarding the rail. It would equally silly to choose a site solely because of a rail. Having the rail present is one asset among many. Certainly Globe Energy has taken that into account. They have also responsibly taken into account the possibility of not having the rail to use at all. Realize that not having the rail will push the costs on Globe Energy and their customers upwards. It also might limit their options for future expansion. It might also drive them out of Peoria if fuel prices continue to rise substantially (which I think they will).

    “without the rail they cannot do business.”

    So now you want rail only businesses? Talk about narrowing your options. This is absurd as well. There are plenty of businesses that could benefit from rail even if they are not locked into rail only product line.

    You set the bar impossibly high Mayor. The negative ‘can’t do’ attitude by you (for the Heights) and the city of Peoria is poisonous. I wouldn’t blame anyone for not wanting to locate there. It is a self fulfilling act of failure. The problem isn’t the rail. It is the utter lack of positive leadership.

    A healthy city has a healthy industrial base from which to derive its wealth from. Sadly Peoria and the Heights are doing their best to discourage this.

42. Mayor,

    You are very dismissive of Carver Lumber. How many residences in the Heights have benefited from products sold by Carver Lumber? How many contractor’s operating in the Heights use Carver Lumber as their primary source of supplies? How much money has been saved by your residents by having Carver Lumber keeping their costs lower by use of the rail? How many houses have had their values enhanced from products purchased from Carver Lumber? Do you know?

    Carver supplies a LOT of contractor’s working out north.

    What are the demographics of your city? Last I recall there was a lot of middle.. lower middle class folks. Folks where even a few hundred dollars can make a BIG difference when it comes to maintaining their homes. So you build a few condo’s along a trail, a developer gets richer, but you could be inadvertently and negatively hurting the home values of your residents who can no longer make needed updates.

43. Mr. Mayor, You wrote: “Ed, do you think that all parks are a waste of money?” Of course not! But we are talking about a new park in an area that has abundant parks. How many new parks do you want Mr. Mayor? How many more can we afford? The VOPH should pay the entire cost of any hiker/biker path created through your village. Then you will really find how many citizens want it. The real costs are hidden in the state and federal taxes we pay. This form of financing was created to fool the citizens into believing they are getting something for nothing and should be outlawed. I don’t care if it another hiker/biker path, a zoo expansion, or a poorly thought out museum in downtown Peoria; I say we don’t need these new tax burdens. Begone with you and your tax bloated thinking. Mr. Mayor I wish you well, but you are wrong!

44. Mr. Mayor, you wrote to me; “I had close to your mindset at the outset of my “learning curve,” and I feel there are enough facts out there, and enough people in favor of the trail, to have made me change my mind.” Take a vote to see how many citizens really want the trail and it’s continuous costs. In other words put your political career directly on the line for your pet project. You say “learning curve”, I say propaganda and disinformation. Who exactly brainwashed you to do a 180 degree change? What are the hidden agendas that are not being talked about? The citizens have a right to know.

45. Ed, to you I am “wrong.” To me, I am quite “right.” I don’t understand how you cannot see the situation the way that I see it; you cannot understand how I cannot see it the way you see it. This is a stalemate, in every sense of the word. I hope that you folks at least appreciate the fact that I’m willing to discuss the situation. I’m at a loss how anyone can look at the state of the Kellar Branch now and not say “Wow. This really needs something new on it. This is really a waste of land.” But, if everyone agreed on everything, it would be a mighty boring world, wouldn’t it?

    Mahkno, I’m not being dismissive of Carver Lumber. We spent probably about $50K on wood and windows, etc. from 1995-2002, or so there. But, you act as though they’re going out of business if the rail doesn’t supply them. Has anyone there ever given you that impression? I’ve never read it. Think of all of the businesses in Peoria and Peoria Heights that do not depend on rail service from the Kellar Branch. Most of them are doing quite nicely. The Kellar Branch rail line is not a “necessity” to the economic future of Carver Lumber, period. Carver’s will remain in business, with or without the Kellar Branch, and will continue to thrive when demand for lumber and related items are high. Now, I know you’ll get all mad at me for saying that. Your argument will likely be how dare I consider something that will cost Carver’s a dime. Well, how dare I consider something that won’t upgrade an area in the Heights, and make it more of an attraction?

    Mahkno, your argument really makes no sense. Carver’s passes on the delivery cost increase that might come from lack of rail service to its customers, just like everyone other business does when their delivery costs go up. Should we start ripping down houses to put tracks in, so that Lowe’s can be competitive with Carver’s in terms of lumber delivery? Where do we draw the line?

    Ed, where do we draw the line regarding the costs of non-revenue producing ventures by municipalities? Do you draw the line with what is already in place? What was put in before 1985? I caught flack from some people for having a Tower Park Music Fest, that cost the Village about $7,000.00. However, the point of the Fest is to bring people into the Village. In two years, our sales tax revenues have increased 13%! Now, I’m not saying that the Fest is the sole reason for that, but it plays a part. The economy sure hasn’t been stoked, and I wish I could say Heritage Square was the reason (but, obviously, it’s not); so, I’m left to make a case that all of the fests and the like we have here have brought more people in. That’s what a trail would do, too. Bring a lot more people in than what a virtually empty rail line will do.

    You can make light of that all you want to, folks, but in the end, for a land-locked Village, we have to make the best use of what we have. The Kellar Branch as a rail line just isn’t it. Carver’s will stay in business. The facts do not back your arguments up on the Kellar Branch. The end result is that the business is not there. The way Central Illinois is now makes it unlikely it will ever change substantailly. And, we sure can argue our stances from now until the Asian carp go home, but my guess is that none of us will change the other’s minds. But, once more, I appreciate the discussions.

46. Mr. Mayor, I said there are communities throughout the country wishing they had rail service. Nothing about some that had trails switching back to rails.You sir have trails in your dreams.It was just on the world news report about food costs related to fuel costs.Food costs have gone up since the dawn of time,but not like they have in the last year.You did not answer about the money for the trail,and how much of it would the COPH pay,half,1/4? What do you consider fair?Who would pay the maintenance fees since it would be in the hands of the PPB?Does the firm hired have an apples to apples scope of work to give estimates on?Does the public know the estimated cost and how it is suppose to be paid for.You see if the correct information was given to the public there would not be an issue.I have never called you short-sided or studid,if I felt the need I would say it to your face.I would not keep saying that the trail would be a safe route for foot or bike, some might think you can guarantee this.Finally if all the creative writing would stop and let the rail operate,that would ease customer doubt about Co.’s signing a contract.Just by your actions and PJS’s words this doubt has been cast, and purposely so.It is the trail proponents that have organised and for years have created a feeling of indifferance to what anyone else thinks or says. Goodday

47. I have a question for Mayor Allen. Do you agree with the Park District’s Plan to have the trail go through the Heights and up Prospect Rd. across at the stop light and back down the other side to the trail? This will include hikers and bicyclists using the public sidewalk in a walking community.

48. CJ, just how much money does the Pioneer pay you for your skewed and 1 sided views? Sharon Deckard, we all understand, but you should rename your blog.

    You do a fantastic job of supporting a failed business and not encouraging something better for our city. Many rumors have surfaced about you getting paid by Pioneer, and I personally believe it.

    You are no different than a National Enquirer reporter, and its obvious why you ended up in this market, where the same 12 people are the ONLY ones that write in your blog. A shame to journalism, and congratulations mayor Allen for doing the right thing

49. DS — You only see my views as “skewed” because you don’t agree with them. It is possible to draw different conclusions from the same evidence, without getting paid off to do so. I have not been and am not being “paid off” by Pioneer for my views, as I’ve explained many times. Ad hominem attacks are what people resort to when they’re losing the argument, so I’ll accept your concession. At least Mayor Allen can argue the issues intelligently without resorting to lies and conspiracy theories.

50. SD, I think that with the proposed trailhead being along Marietta Street, a strong case could be made to locate a traffic signal light at that corner with Prospect. That way, foot traffic could pretty much go straight across where the trail would be. This would make more sense, I think. I believe that the proposed “route” that the Park District has is based more on what is in place now, and the traffic signal light in place now is at Kelly Avenue. Marietta makes a lot more sense, as far as I’m concerned, and I think most would agree.

    Hey C.J., thanks for throwing the “intelligent” description my way. As you can imagine, that doesn’t happen too often regarding descriptions of my “side” of the discussion!

    I think we’re finding that a lot of the impasse regarding the trail vs. rail is geared towards the thought of more taxes. I understand that argument, and obviously there’s no guarantee that taxes for the Park District won’t increase due to the trail being put in. That being said, I’m guessing that the increase would be relatively small, if at all, because a grant would pay for the vast majority of the build-up of the trail.

    I also think that the Village Board would take a serious look at participating in the maintenance of the trail, if that was necessary. Again, that’s just me talking. The Board of Trustees would be the final say.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.