The verdict is in: A side-by-side rail with trail on the Kellar Branch corridor is indeed feasible, and it only costs about 2/3 what the Peoria Park District estimated.
Earlier this year, the City of Peoria hired T. Y. Lin International to do the feasibility study. The full report is included in this week’s city council agenda.
Whereas the Peoria Park District said it would cost $29 million to build a trail next to the rail line, this civil and structural engineering firm estimated it would only cost $18 million. The Peoria Park District’s estimate can be viewed on the Friends of the Rock Island Trail website.
Why the divergence in cost estimates? A few reasons. For one thing, the park district lists as their very first assumption that “This option [side-by-side alignment] would require a fence separating the trail from the rail.” Not so, says T. Y. Lin: “this item is not required by the IDOT BDE [Bureau of Design and Environment] Manual, and is not necessary as identified in design recommendations prepared for the Federal Transit Administration with respect to rail-with-trail traffic operations.” That saves almost a million dollars right off the bat.
Also, T. Y. Lin assumed “that the proposed trail could cross the rail line where needed in order to minimize cut and fill improvements” — i.e., the entire trail needn’t be located on the same side of the tracks for the entire length as the park district suggested. That cut down on costs.
Another reason for the high figure from the park district was because, “It was determined that ‘trestle’ (platform) improvements identified in the Alternatives Analysis Report were excessive in some cases. Many segments of the proposed alignment could be adequately stabilized using less-intensive fill and retaining wall improvements than those identified in the Alternatives Analysis Report.” Further savings.
Even the $18 million figure could be lowered if the City and park district were to consider having a grade crossing across Knoxville instead of a pedestrian bridge. T. Y. Lin gives some recommendations on how to provide a safe grade crossing across Knoxville. A pedestrian bridge is estimated to cost about $1.9 million. No cost estimate was given for a grade crossing, but one can safely assume it would be less than a bridge.
Of course, the park district will still say that it’s too expensive. After all, $18 million is three times as much as $6 million — the estimated cost of ripping out the rail line and putting the trail on the former rail bed. That may be true, but that fails to recognize that ripping out the rail line is not an option. The Surface Transportation Board has already ruled on that. Thus, the options available to the park district are three: (1) build the $18 million side-by-side alignment, (2) build the less-expensive, but less-than-ideal “alternative alignment” which would include some on-street portions of the trail, or (3) consider a completely different route for connecting the Pimiteoui and Rock Island trails (e.g., extending the trail further north along the river, then extending west up through Detweiller Park).
Unfortunately, the park district and trail supporters will probably choose to continue their failed strategy of laying siege to the Kellar Branch rail line, dreaming that someday they’ll be able to eliminate this municipal asset.
Where are the three 18th district candidates on this issue? Do any of them plan to push this issue in any way once they are in office?
Aaron Shock has expressed support for the trail-only option, Colleen Callahn’s position is unknown, and Sheldon Schafer is a well-known trail proponent (he spoke at one of the council meetings). Most likely, all three are in agreement.
Let’s see… Based on previous trail-head rhetoric, you must be some lazy, fat-assed, fascist for not wanting the exclusive use of the ROW to go for a trail.
Dang straight, C.J.- and what an ASSET it is! Just look at all of the great business it’s pulling in! Been nearly a year, and just look at how the economy here is BOOMING thanks to the Kellar Branch! Rail ties disintegrating? No problem! Rails curved in such a way that no engine can go over 5 MPH safely… no problem! It’s AN ASSET!
What asset? Plow it up and plant soybeans or sunflowers. Both sides are nuts. It has no future except as land. Cut it down the middle and give it to the homeowners. But, quit playing like this is something that it ain’t… cause, C.J.- IT AIN’T.
I think the idea for keeping the Kellar Branch in is for subsequent upgrades down the road, should it ever come. The point is to keep the corridor alive for a railroad (should it ever come) rather than admit defeat, take out the tracks and install the trail over it, just to end up needing the ROW in the future.
Up north outside Chicago lies the Illinois Prairie Path, the first rails-to-trails project in the country, dating back to the 1960s. The IPP is on the old ROW of the Chicago, Aurora, and Elgin interurban tracks and goes through the heart of the western suburbs. While the IPP is very widely used by recreationists, the line parallels (roughly) the I-88 corridor. Given the development that has occurred in that area in the past fifty years, as well as the success of commuter rail in the area, what are the odds that a railroad line in that same location would do well?
Granted, suburban Chicago and northern Peoria may not have much in common, but the point is more to preserve the ROW for future needs. I don’t see why the rail and trail can’t peacefully coexist.
Much of LA’s RT system is built along the ROWs of the old traction system – ROWs they had to buy again!
Prego,
Two words: Globe Energy.
Two more words: Carri Scharf
Combined, these two firms could generate up to 1,000 carloads annually, the most under municipal ownership. Their projects have been delayed for various reasons.
If the cities agree to joint-use they will have no excuse not to sign long-term leases with the railroads, and with Pioneer Industrial Railway, in particular. Such a situation will allow Pioneer to pour funds into track rehab and marketing. Until more business develops, railcar storage can generate much-needed revenue. They are storing one car at this time while CIRY may have some tank cars remaining in storage and expects some additional cars in the near future.
Both Carrie Scharf, which plans to operate the former Nyle Staley plant on Van Buren Street, and Globe Energy will have the option of contracting with wither CIRY or Pioneer to provide service. The one that can offer the lowest freight rates wins. Pioneer has the advantage with Globe Energy since they already run on the Kellar Branch, which CIRY believes is “unsafe.”
Carver Lumber’s business is down due to the depressed housing market and the likelihood they lost contracts due to the western connection/Kellar Branch closure fiasco of 2005-2008. O’Brien Steel Service’s use of rail has increased with now steel scrap being shipped on a regular basis, in addition to receipt of I-beams and plates.
BTW, Prego, your description of the track is based on a photo of an industrial lead taken from the Sommer St. crossing. The main track is in much better condition, especially north of Peoria Heights.
David,
Two words for you: Eighteen million.
Quite a bit more than another two words: Six million.
‘Nuff said.
Prego Man — If the goal is to spend as little as possible, then how about not building the trail at all? That will cost us nothing. That way we can make money on the line instead of spending money on tearing it out. In these hard economic times, the last thing taxpayers need is to fund another “quality of life” project.
I think we’ll be hearing the “bike trail will be a much-needed economic stimulus” mantra before long. It’s looney but consider the source.
I’m of the opinion that the Cities will realize they must accept joint-use, even though the status quo is far cheaper. They must have a trail you know. Like we must have a riverfront museum. Like we must have a downtown ballpark. Like we must have the RiverPlex. And so on…
Ahhhh here we go…..again
Forget a recreational bike trial. Like all urban areas, Peoria needs to develop a way for people to use bicycles as a means of transportation and commuting. It certainly would be in our economic interest to use bicycle commuting to reduce our need for foreign oil. I would bike to work downtown from the WillowKnolls area, if I could do it without having to use War Memorial, University, or Knoxville. I ask all the transportation gurus out there – couldn’t Peoria take a lead in human powered commuting, and couldn’t we use some rail lines to accomplish this? Could Keller have a role in bicycle commuting? Just asking.
dd,
Despite the hype from bicycling enthusiasts, riding a bike to work has extremely limited appeal. Hot and humid weather makes riding to work undesireable, especially when one needs to take a shower after arrival at the office as not to repulse co-workers with his/her odor.
Winter lasts a long time in Central Illinois, and almost no one is going to ride up hill from the river valley to Peoria Heights when it’s snowing an inch per hour. Distance is also a deterrent. Crime is too, as the Kellar Branch passes through the East Bluff.
Then there’s riding to school or shopping: It’s far safer to send kids on the bus than for them to ride a bicycle to work. High school students with driver’s licenses will drive. How much can one handle on a bicycle after a trip to the grocery store – a week’s worth of soup cans, 24-packs of softdrinks, loaves of bread and the cooler containing all of the frozen stuff? I think not.
The Kellar Branch as a corridor for a recreational trail would have extremely limited overlap of routes for potential users getting to and from where they’re going. To encourage what limited demand there is for “bicycle transportation,” the City needs to maintain and improve sidewalks along its major streets and in neighborhoods. That way, virtually everyone who wishes to ride their bicycle for more than just recreation and exercise can do so.
How do you explain the fact that Chicago has a HUGE bike commuter population?? As well as Madison Wisconsin?? Does Peoria have hotter summers AND harsher winters than those two places?? Study after study shows that when given the option with good infrastructure many people will choose to commute via active transportation!!
And study after study shows that light rail and commuter rail are increasing daily. Studies also show that there are currently 38 states that have rails and trails side by side that are working perfectly. So look in any study and you will sooner or later find the answer to what you are looking for. We can have both, but is this economic climate the right time to have both? Its waited this long could it wait a little longer until we get back on our feet a little? Remember the cost is not just construction, its the perpetual upkeep afterwards. I do have to take exception to the at grade crossing on Knoxville that has been proposed. Given the rate of traffic on Knoxville and the speed the those that are driving with cell phones in constant use, can you imagine a mother with her baby in a stroller trying to cross that street on the trail, or one with several small children, or children on bicycles, or persons in wheelchairs or handicapped in other ways trying to negotiate this crossing with the lack of patience on a driver’s part? In my opinion its an accident/tragedy looking for a place to happen. The bridge would certainly be more expensive but by far safer in the long run.
EricO,
I am equally baffled (and dismayed) at Mr. Jordan’s comments, especially since I have been left with the impression that he is a transportation expert. I simply do not understand the “if you can’t do it every single day, under every single set of circumstances” it will not work and is not worth considering. (e.g. “one can’t bike easily in a blizzard or with a week’s worth of groceries for a family of 4, so it’s a bad idea”). I think that Madison and Chicago are excellent examples of cities with similar climates to Peoria with large bike commuter populations, and those numbers are on the rise. Although my husband have witnessed this first hand living in Chicago (and he in Madison before that, I would hope that people would be able to educate themselves about this issue without leaving Peoria, although that doesn’t appear to be happening. There is a wealth of information on the internet about bike commuting -I would suggest that those who feel that there are too many impediments to it because of weather, etc. do some research about it.
Interestingly, the same weather argument was raised in a discussion about the lack of outdoor dining options in Peoria. Do people honestly believe that there is something unique about the climate in Peoria that makes it vastly different than other Midwest cities??
SD-
Please look at the new report just released on Monday by the Rails-To-Trails Conservancy. It is a comprehensive report quantifying the benefits of active transportation, showing the dollars saved by having a useful system. The report is called Active Transportation for America and their website is http://www.railstotrails.org it is well worth a look. In our current economic mess I believe that now is the perfect time to shift our transportation priorities to options that will save our communities money. The facts to back that up are clearly stated in the report I cited.
the point Kramer, is that for most people, most of the time, riding a bike to work, to shop, etc., is not an option. We need a real public transportation system. If a few want to bike, fine, but if you take away the rail and invest millions for those few, that leaves most people with no option but to continue driving. Peoria, unfortunately, abandoned its street cars and became a car-centric city back when cars were fashionable, gas was cheap, distances were shorter, and most everybody had a car. Now gas is expensive; the commutes are longer, and the population is aging, and we need alternatives. Telling a 50-something executive or a mother with young kids to bike from Dunlap to downtown and back for work or entertainment is lunacy.
EricO wrote:
How do you explain the fact that Chicago has a HUGE bike commuter population??
Because Chicago has a HUGE general population of just under 3 million. Downtown Chicago has a large number of jobs, residents and college campuses so commutes are short for many. Still, the number of bike commuters are under 1% of the population.
As well as Madison Wisconsin??
Madison is nearly twice the size of Peoria and is primarily a government and university town where most jobs are concentrated downtown. Downtown is located on an isthmus between two lakes along which trail routes are natural.
Compare that to Peoria, which is primarily a manufacturing and service industry town. Factories are concentrated along the river north and south of downtown while office, retail and commercial facilities dominate the remainder. Commuter routes are not so dense, and the bluffs and valleys are a deterrent to many who would normally ride to or from work. Existing trails in the city are primarily used for recreation, not commuting. That will not change even if an extensive network were built.
The issue though is really joint-use or no trail at all. The latter is cheaper to taxpayers.
Quick correction to you David. Chicago has a 6.31% bicycle mode share and a 34.8% non-car mode share. So while they have a larger population the percentages don’t lie!! The answer it a complete multi-modal transportation network that allows people to walk or bike and integrate seamlessly into a public transit trip. Again check out the report I cited, the money to do this right is substancially less than expandinh our road system.
Also for interest Madison has a 14.3% bike and a 31.5% non-care mode share.
The responses to my query as to whether bicycle commuting (apparently a/k/a “bicycle transportation” or “active transportation”) have been twofold: some “experts” ssem to say it won’t work, while other “experts” say it might work. That would seem to indicate a need for more study of the issue. To those that dismiss bicycle commuting for Peoria out-of-hand it seems to me that it is at least worth exploring. No one is suggesting that we bike commute in blizzards or do the grocery shopping or bike in 80 degree 80% humidity days. But I’ll bet that there are about 100 days a year when biking to work would be a pleasant and healthy option. (Some people could stand to bike up a hill or two – its called exercise, and who knows, it might even help lower the cost of health care). I think it’s worth exploring.
Mouse,
I never suggested that I thought the rail should be torn out – I actually agree that public transportation needs to be a high priority, and I don’t understand why you would assume otherwise. I was simply lamenting the defeatist attitude around here about biking, walking, dining alfresco, etc.
Furthermore, I never suggested TELLING anyone to ride a bike anywhere – let alone a middle aged executive or mom from Dunlap, as you mentioned. They certainly sound like forces to be reckoned with, although getting such individuals out of their vanity plate laden luxury cars and onto mass transit might be as challenging as getting the average sedentary person to bike or walk anywhere – especially if they’ve never been exposed on a daily basis to people using modes of transportation other than the almighty car. That doesn’t mean we should’t try .
Again, I agree that TELLING anyone how to transport themselves from point A to point B would be, as you said, lunacy – but that is so far from anything I have said that I’m not sure I understand your point.
I have lived in downtown Chicago courtesy of a prior job. There is no way in hell that over 6% of even downtown living people ride a bike to work. I doubt it is even one-half of one percent. They walk or take taxis.
Chicago has the bike population because parking is so expensive that there are a lot of people in the loop that do not even own a car.
If you ask a which comes first question, you have the bikes come first and that creates a demand for bike friendly paths. You don’t build a path and then expect them to come.
Also: oil is going to stay low (effect of economy and decrease in % of miles driven), so don’t expect the $4.00 per gallon and the bike usage that would generate.
Further, there are a number of alternative vehicle technologies coming out, so the people that would be inclined to bike are going to be shifted over to those methods of transportation along with the general decrease in SUV’s and increase in smaller more efficient vehicles.
Mdd,
The numbers don’t lie, those are the bike users in Chicago!
Chase,
It seems logical that bikers come first, but why in Portland has bike mode share tripled in the past 13 years? Could it have to do with the massive increase in bike/ped infrastructure that the city made? I would say yes!