City Manager Randy Oliver updated city council members this week on plans to form a committee to look at the feasibility of building a trail alongside the Kellar Branch rail line:
Representatives of the City, Park District, Peoria Heights, and TriCounty Regional Planning met with Central Illinois Rail and Pioneer Rail in separate meetings as requested by the Mayor and Council. The purpose of the meeting was to discuss the possibility of side-by-side rail and trail for the Kellar Branch. The result of these meetings is a recommendation that a task force be formed by the Village of Peoria Heights and the City of Peoria, with each community nominating three members, to determine by April 1, 2008, whether side-by-side rail and trail is feasible or not. The feasibility is intended to consider both engineering feasibility and financial feasibility. The Committee has suggested that three members each be appointed by the Mayor of Peoria and Peoria Heights. The meetings will be noticed and opened to the public. It is proposed that the Committee draw up the railroads, the Park District, City staff and outside technical resources if necessary to make a recommendation to the two cities.
Journal Star city beat reporter John Sharp has been following up on this story and found out some interesting info:
- The City hasn’t chosen their representatives yet. “Oliver said the Peoria City Council could decide by its Jan. 8 meeting if this is the direction the city wants to go and, if so, who should serve on the committee.”
- Peoria Heights has. “Peoria Heights Mayor Mark Allen said he plans to have his Village Board vote on his three recommendations by Jan. 2. Allen said he will recommend Peoria Heights residents Vern Kimberlin and Sherryl Carter serve on the committee along with Junction City owner Alexis Khazzam.”
- It’s estimated to take “about $10,000” for the committee “to be able to go out and get their technical questions answered by someone this committee feels is unbiased.”
- Hopefully, if everyone agrees, the cost will be distributed among the entities on the committee. “The city of Peoria plans to contribute $2,500, and various other parties – including Peoria Heights [and Pioneer Railcorp] – will also be asked to contribute.”
One of the proposed Peoria Heights participants, Alexis Khazzam, was interviewed recently on WEEK-TV. He feels the city should take a “tougher stance” and should charge the rail carriers rent to use the line. His strategy is, “By charging the rail companies rent, it’ll make them say, ‘if we only make $50,000 operating or serving the customer that exists on it, it might not be worth it for us to pay $180,000 for rent a year,’ or it might spur them to say, ‘okay, we know what we need to pay; we need to increase revenue.’ At least it’ll be out of the city’s hands and in the trail advocates’ hands and the rail advocates’ hands and let that be a fair fight.”
First of all, the underlying assumption here is that keeping the line open for one customer is not justified. Unfortunately for trail advocates, the Surface Transportation Board (STB) ruled just the opposite — keeping the line open for even one customer is justified in this case. Thus, any effort by the Cities, as rail owners, to force closure by charging excessive rent will similarly be struck down by the STB.
Secondly, as was stated in the WEEK report, Pioneer maintains that its contract with the City is still in force, and the City claims that it expired under its own terms in 2004. That contract called for the city to charge the rail carrier $1 per year in rent to operate the line. The city also has a signed land use agreement with the Park District that charges them the same amount — $1 per year — to rent the land if it’s able to be used for a recreational trail.
I would consider this rail/trail committee to be the first real progress we’ve seen in over a decade on the Kellar Branch controversy. Hopefully the committee will come up with a solution that works for all parties involved.
Has everyone that is writing taken the time to walk the whole rail line?? All of it? Trail by rail is most likely unfeasable, especially when you consider the 15ft required setbacks. In any case, the committees will be looking into this option, and a price to do it. Most likely, we are looking at a high price tag , so the fundraising at local and federal levels will be difficult, but not impossible.
The rent the railroad is charged as a rule is: 10-12% of fair market value of the land on which it sits, which has already been established at approx 2.7M. So im sure the STB will find it appropriate to charge the formula itself has set up. Approx 300k year
Anyway, I hope everyone enjoys a happy new year. Im 100% in for a lunch if anyone wants to get it together. I always read CJ’s posts, so we can set it up from here. It would be fun to talk about it in persons.
AK
I keep hearing this figure of $180,000 per year in rent based on what the city paid for the line. What bothers me the most about this is that folks like Alexis Khazzam throw this out is being the “REAL” value. What this line is worth in rent has nothing to do with what the city paid. Alexis continues to throw out this highest and best use arguement in support of what the city paid and the $180,000 in rent. The bottom line on all of this is that the city paid to much. This is a zoning issue plain and simple. The city payed for the ground based on plans that are out based on the STB ruling (it is not zoned for the removal of rail). Thus the value is not based on what the city paid but is based on what the ground is worth to a rail opperator. Alexis knows all of this but just assumes that the rest of us are to stupid to understand this basic fact of land value.
AK: Count me in for lunch. And would you be willing to bring the data for the tremendous economic development / job creation which will result from the trail developmentt to said lunch? I would be very interested to read what has transpired in other communities.
Im in for lunch, but not more blogging. I refuse to get dragged into philosophical and non factual arguments. But for lunch Im in!
AK
This has been a really interesting discussion. I’ve appreciated that we have pro-rail and pro-trail people participating — it’s great to hear everyone’s point of view.
Here’s the way I see it: The crux of the issue is going to come down to the criteria that is set for the trail to be acceptable.
Mayor Allen touched on the criteria earlier when he said, “if it can be done, at a decent price, and to where the trail still is a good one.” This criteria would be set by the committee that is set up, and used to make their recommendation. Mayor Allen explained it this way:
Some outcomes have already been apparently predetermined to be unacceptable. Again, Mayor Allen:
So the question is, what is the criteria going to be? If the criteria is that the cost cannot exceed what it would have cost to pull up the rails and build a trail on grade, and that the trail has to be 100% on the right-of-way, and it has to be 40 feet from people’s back yards, yet also 15 feet away from the rail bed — well, we don’t even have to do a study to say that that’s impossible. The recommendation is predetermined based on the criteria.
By the same token, if the criteria is that none of the trail needs be on the right-of-way and that a bike route on-street 100% will suffice, then we similarly need not do a study for the same reason.
This is why I believe it matters whether the makeup of the committee is balanced or not. The committee determines the criteria. The criteria could very well determine the outcome if it is manipulated toward that end. The tendency toward manipulation is greater if everyone on the committee is of the same mind (e.g., nothing short of the rail line being removed is acceptable).
As an aside, it’s worth mentioning that the purpose of the committee is not to set lease rates for the line. Alexis is right that the city and village have a right to lease payments on the line. But that rate will be determined by (a) a court’s decision on whether the last agreement between Pioneer and the cities is still in force, and (b) the Surface Transportation Board.
In the end, this committee will be deciding not whether to have the rail or a trail — the STB has already decreed that the rail stays — but whether or not to have a trail at all. They are either going to have to come up with an acceptable/cost-effective route for the trail, or else abandon the idea. I suppose a third option would be to keep fighting, but that would be quixotic and waste a lot of taxpayer money.
One last thing — whoever gets appointed should be capable of having a civil discussion and able to make reasonable concessions. I personally think Alexis can do that, so I don’t have a problem with him being on the committee, despite his prejudices. I don’t know the other two proposed appointees. I would suggest that having Mike Carr on the committee would be an excellent choice, and would balance out Alexis’s financial interests in the future of the line.
Those that are asking rent for the railroad because the city and the village own the property are not asking the park district for rent to use it as a trail. The theory is that the railroad will be making money from the rail and therefore should pay rent. Well trucks and taxicabs and others who use the public streets, owned by the city, make money and they don’t pay rent. So the comeback was that these people pay taxes with the fuel that they use, well so does the railroad. So how come those using public streets and making money get off with no rent but the railroads using the rail must pay rent? Somebody explain this to me.
Also, if I am invited I am up for the lunch to discuss this subject too.
Oh yes, regarding the lunch — somebody suggest a date/time/place and I’ll be happy to publish an open invitation. No name-calling and no throwing food allowed, though! 😛
The feeling I get from all of the conversation here and other places is that if the trail cannot be built alongside the rail to certain people’s expectations then they want to charge enough rent to push the railroads off the Kellar and then if the railroads abandon it they will then have their trail that they want. At this point they can’t push the railroads off because of STB’s decision but they are going to do everything they can to discourage the railroads from doing business on the Kellar. I don’t feel that this is an attitude that should be on the committee. Those wanting a trail need to be able to compromise. The railroads are willing to compromise just having the trail there and offering to assist in the building of same. Both sides need to give a little.
See! now everyone working together, lol.
Date, time, place and Im in.
BTW, Mike Carr is an excellent guy. Regardless of wether he is on the committee or not, his voice and opinion will be listened to. First and foremost by me, as he is someone I respect very much, and it is due to him as well that this issue is moving forward.
AK
Aw CJ you just took all the fun out of the lunch. You mean we can’t shoot peas and ice cubes at each other with our spoons? Bummer. If memory serves me Alexis has a nice restaurant at Junction City with a room that can be used for all of us to have a lunch and meeting. Would that be acceptable to Alexis and the rest of you?
anywhere good for me
AK
SD, anyone who can obtain a driver’s license, drive a reasonably safe car, and afford minimum insurance on the vehicle, can drive on the public roads. Even if they are just driving to the store or to grandma’s (no monetary profit being searched out).
However, even someone who can afford a locomotive, or a trolley, or even a handcar, and would know how to operate one, cannot just plop it onto the Kellar Branch and have a nice day going from one end to the other. The ONLY ones allowed on the rail are those who are in existence supposedly to make money, and recognized as such by the STB (and HOPEFULLY with a working agreement with the OWNER(S) of the line!). There is the difference. The rail line, in essence, is leased just to them. No one else. Now, would anyone else want to slap a handcar onto the line and ride back and forth on it? Likely not. But, that’s not the point. The point is only CIRY and Pioneer are legally allowed onto that line— and that line is owned by the City of Peoria and the Village of Peoria Heights.
Through the years, the line and the land it sets on has looked terrible. Mike Carr was not part of that equation, but Pioneer was. This is a major source of the problem. Here is an eight mile line going through the hearts of two communities and it looks decrepit. And, it has for decades. With just one customer on it now, it is a waste of a land resource for the Village and the City, in my opinion. And, once again, it has been for years. The economic fortunes and scenarios in Central Illinois have changed dramatically over the past generation. The Kellar Branch, unfortunately, has not offerred a service that has changed with them.
I don’t believe that either CIRY or Pioneer is really looking at the Kellar Branch as a potential profit bonanza. Or even as a potential profit, period. And, for that reason, I don’t anticipate that the rails and the surrounding grounds will ever be taken care of properly. They will look virtually the same in 10 years, 20 years, and beyond. And, I don’t believe that Carver ever said they would add a couple part time stockpeople with the reported $25-50K they would save with rail service per year. The talk of future customers and jobs on the line has been exactly that, TALK, for many many years.
Certainly, there is always a potential for a customer to locate along the Kellar Branch some time in the future. But, we have to be realistic and look at what Peoria and Peoria Heights have become, through no desires on our parts. We HAD to change, when Pabst closed. When the UAW was pared down to a small part of what it used to be by Caterpillar. The list goes on and on. If you ask me, would I rather have the trail running through Peoria Heights, or would I rather have a robust Pabst still in business? There is no question– I would want a robust Pabst plant, in a heartbeat.
But, you know what? Pabst isn’t coming back. The local economy has changed; the national economy has changed; the WORLD economy has changed. This would be like holding a rail line open for a horse and buggy plant that closed in 1910. Those were the good old days, and the good old days are gone. You can wish all you want to, but we won’t see ol’ Nellie pulling a black buggy up Prospect any longer, and Uncle Ted won’t be knocking down $45K a year any longer inspecting the beer in Pabst bottles.
Yeah, you might say, but who’s to say that SOME industrial plant won’t want to plop down on the Cohen’s site, so long as they have access to rail service? Well, sure, I can’t say that’s impossible. I guess I also can’t say that it’s impossible that a giant turtle won’t crawl next to me and start nibbling on my toes, but it’s very unlikely. We can keep holding the land under the rail “hostage” for an “unlikely” scenario, I guess, for forever. Or, we can guarantee that we can have an attractive and usable asset to both communities in very short order, by putting the trail in.
You know, there are thousands and thousands and thousands of miles of rail all across the country and beyond that provide a necessary and important service– rail service. We’re going to have those “third set of eyes,” meaning the engineering firm’s eyes, Ed, look it over and see what can be done to get the best of both worlds along the Kellar Branch. We will all look at those findings with as open of minds as we can muster. But, bear in mind, let’s not use the term “trail” so loosely that it includes only sidewalks, asphalt, and people’s backyards.
Unfortunately, the debate over the Kellar Branch has turned into a philosophical one, and when that happens, rarely will either side give an inch. Philosophies are not given up easily, you know. The engineering inspection and report regarding the potential joint use is important on every level, but particularly because of what the debate has evolved into.
As for what is “acceptable” in a joint use scenario, I don’t have the power to speak for everyone involved on the trail side. However, I think the more you find of the “trail” on city and village streets, the less likely the “trail” will be used. Because, you see, it truly will NOT be a “trail.” It will be an excuse for more finger pointing. We’ll let the committees and councilpeople and trustees and interested public figure this out later.
As for the lunch, it has changed from being on my dime for a few into a rather substantial gathering, it would seem. Keep throwing scenarios out there, and let me know when it’s finalized. Thanks.
Mr. Mayor,
The City has owned the Kellar Branch for 23 years and for at least 16 of those, has discouraged rail-related economic development with talk of removing it for a trail.
Yes, Carver Lumber is the only firm located at Pioneer Park that needs rail service at present, but fortunately, politicians and editorial boards are not the ones that determine what constitutes “enough business.” That is between shippers and railroads.
Ten years ago, there were two users at the park and you could tell how much it pained the Journal Star Editorial Board to admit this number increased to three after Pioneer assumed operation of the line.
The City’s ill-conceived plan to reconfigure rail service to Pioneer Park has inadvertently increased the viability of the Kellar Branch because potential rail users in Growth Cell Two will be able, via the Central Illinois Railroad Co., have excellent rail connections unrivaled anwhere in the region except maybe Chicago or St. Louis.
When talk of turning the line into a trail finally ends and the Cities agree to cooperate with railroad-related economic development, this can be exploited.
Currently, there are two empty rail-accessible warehouses at Pioneer Park and another is up for lease. Globe Energy ECO-Systems plans to construct a manufacturing plant along Pioneer Parkway on a year or two and will likely require rail connections afforded by the Kellar Branch for receipt of raw materials such as aluminum and steel.
Go ahead and redevelop the Cohen’s Warehouse for retail, commercial and residential use if that is best for Peoria Heights; the existence of a railroad in town won’t prevent it. Just look at what has been done (and planned for the future) on Peoria’s Riverfront. I guess the railroad track down there doesn’t concern anyone.
If the future of the Kellar Branch is assured, CIRY and PIRY will market it and attract new business. The track will be repaired and the right-of-way kept clear.
Mayor Allen, thank you for your comments and I do understand where you are coming from. I would like to suggest that we all go to Alexis’ restaurant perhaps on Friday, January 4th at 1 p.m. and we all go dutch. Anyone have another suggestion or is it a conflict of time for some?
BTW Mayor Allen I did own my own locomotive. The KCS 253. So some people can own railroad equipment and not be the president of a railroad company. I’m just a plain old citizen.
“Anyway, I hope everyone enjoys a happy new year. Im 100% in for a lunch if anyone wants to get it together. ”
Come drink with us at blogger bash (Jan 29, I believe). We’re much funner with beer in us.
Mr. Mike Friberg has the credentials to do the study on the rail w/trail.Infact he has been doing it since 1995,he works for the park dist.and has done a study every year.He offered his expertise and the city council rejected his calls to help.I am what you would call a rail person.I live adjacent to the rail and myself and many others would loose the use of our driveways to get to our garages and back yards.Nobody is really wanting to ride or hike thru the old northend are they?The rail co’s are finishing up on their track repair and said it won’t be long before they are running.Besides once anyone hears there is a $29million pricetag to do this trail on taxpayers property they get a little upset.Why don’t we have a vote to see whose willing to have their taxes increased to pay for a few people to ride bicyles.You know when you really think about this doesn’t it sound well stupid.
As I have mentioned before there is a consulting company that will do the feasibility study and help get the grants for the funding of the trail. But no one seems to want to use them, yet they have a 100% sucess rate doing this type of work. And they have no stake in it either way. They are out of state and not part of either side here.
CW, if you are really pro-rail, why whould you want a Park Dist. employee doing the study. It’s like putting the fox in charge of security at the hen house.
I have talked to this man personally and find him to be a honest individual,not a firm that has a 100% sucess rate on getting things like this done so says SD.As for the deck being staked look whose on the comittee.TO the last man they are the very ones pushing so hard to get this thru.That park Dist,employee has walked the tracks countless times and has given the city honest and correct information since 1995,and now they wont use it.Let me ask any of you? Would you want a bunch of strangers riding bikes or walking by making noice on the very spot your garage once was?SO close they can see whats on the grill for dinner? The trail cost $29,000,000