IMC/Confluence writer's meeting
We need writers!
Thursday, Dec. 4 7:30 PM CAMP 3026 Cherokee @ Minnesota in south St. LouisWelcome to the Open Publishing Newswire. Click here to publish.
Agreement announced for "Complete Katy Trail"
Today the Department of Natural Resources (DNR), the Attorney General's Office, and AmerenUE announced an agreement regarding the Taum Sauk dam disaster.
The agreement includes about $180 million in reparation payments from Ameren.
Included in the settlement is the agreement to give DNR a "trail license agreement" to build a trail on the portion of the Rock Island corridor needed to connect the Katy Trail to Pleasant Hill, Missouri. Pleasant Hill is on the edge of the Kansas City metropolitan area.
Union Pacific owns the Rock Island line from From Pleasant Hill on in to Kansas City, and plans are already underway to connect the trail through Lee's Summit and eventually to downtown Kansas City via alternate routes.)
The portion of the Rock Island corridor that will be used for the trail is about 46 miles.
The trail will be a "rails-with-trails" project--the trail will be built in the railroad right-of-way alongside the railroad tracks so that the railroad can still use the corridor in the future.
Building the Katy Trail Connection alongside the existing track will be relatively expensive compared with building a trail on the railbed, as the rest of the Katy Trail and most rail-trails are. Much grading and foundation work must be done, and bridges and underpasses built alongside existing railroad bridges and underpasses.
However, the agreement includes $18 million from Ameren to assist in construction expenses. Apparently this is not enough to completely construct the 46-mile segment and additional funds will be needed--either from the Missouri General Assembly or from other sources.
The state also receives first right of refusal for purchase of the railroad corridor if Ameren ever decides to sell it.
Our thanks go to Governor Blunt, Attorney General Jay Nixon, and DNR Director Doyle Childers for working together to make sure the Katy Trail Connection was included in the Ameren agreement.
MoBikeFed and other groups across the state have been working over a period of several years to generate over 5000 email, mail, and phone messages in support of the Katy Trail Connection, as well as numerous resolutions and letters of support from cities, counties, parks departments, community organizations, and other agencies, insuring that our political leaders knew there is strong community support for the trail connection.
Complete text of the agreement with Ameren (PDF format):
http://ago.mo.gov/pdf/2007/TaumSaukConsentJudgment.pdf
(Rock Island RR agreement is on pp. 9-10 and the
Trail Use Agreement is Appendix E, starting on p. 44)
Kansas City Star article:
http://www.kansascity.com/news/breaking_news/story/380807.html
Associated Press article here:
http://www.columbiatribune.com/2007/Nov/20071128News034.asp
Link 2:
http://www.MoBikeFed.org
License Option:
Katy Trail connection issues
More from MO Bike fed
Missouri bicyclists, walkers, runners, and trail enthusiasts,
You may know that various questions, problems, & objections to the Rock Island/Katy Trail connection have been raised:
http://lakeexpo.com/articles/2007/12/03/top_news/07.txt
http://lakeexpo.com/articles/2007/12/03/top_news/06.txt
I called the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) Director's office today about some of these issues.
Here are the issues & DNR's response:
* It might cost far more than the $18 million to build the connecting trail.
The DNR had a cost estimate done by a consultant in 1991. They worked to update the estimate in various ways as the settlement talks proceeded. Making this type of an estimate is always an inexact science with room for error, but DNR says, "We are fairly certain the $18 million will take care of it."
* The legislature will have to appropriate the $18 million for the trail construction and there could be resistance among legislators.
**All** of DNR's budget must go through the GA's appropriations process, including (for instance) the revenue from the 1/10th cent sales tax that is earmarked for DNR. So the $18 million has to go through this same appropriations process, just like the rest of their budget. They don't expect any problems, since the $18 million is already "earmarked" for the Katy Trail connection.
However this may be an area where MoBikeFed and other groups that support the Katy Connection can help to ensure public/legislative support as needed.
* The Katy Connection is a "rails with trails" project; the trail will be built off to the side of the railroad line; what will the trail be like?
The Katy Trail is straight and flat because it sits directly on the former rail line. The Rock Island connection won't be like that. It might be narrower, hillier, some accommodation made to fit within the available right-of-way in places. Basically they will have to look at how much space is available and work with that, and of course that will determine what the trail will look like.
* The railroad only has an easement to run a railroad and so running a trail in that corridor will require agreements with each adjoining property owner.
For a "railbanked" trail like the Katy, this issue has been settled. In that case, the property owner is entitled to a payment in some cases, but the property owner has no basis to stop the trail from moving forward.
However the Rock Island will not be railbanked--it will be "rails-with-trails" where the trail is off to the side of the rail line. So this does raise some legal issues and the answers are not as clear-cut as with a railbanked trail.
However, quite number of rails-with-trails projects have been successfully completed across the U.S., and this issue has been successfully dealt with for those projects.
So it can be done, and according to DNR this is one of the first issues they will have to tackle.
More on Rails with Trails:
http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/rectrails/rwt/
http://www.marinbike.org/Campaigns/Infrastructure/RailsTrails/ExistingRW...
http://mobikefed.org/2006/03/rails-with-trails-safer-than-just.php