It will be harder for city leaders to ignore the 17th Street rail-trail proposal after some 150 Wichitans appeared at Monday evening’s District 2 Advisory Board meeting to urge Wichita City Council member Sue Schlapp to support the recreational trail through east Wichita (she’s on the fence).
Nick Howell, who helped organize the show of support, said bikers, joggers and walking enthusiasts overflowed the meeting room, and sent an unmistakable message: We want this trail.
It’s a worthy project. Let’s hope the city is listening.
Posted by Randy Scholfield
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/24
- Regular on Open thread 11/24
- DavidB on Open thread 11/24
- okobserver on Open thread 11/24
- okobserver on Open thread 11/24
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/24
- politicalmama on Open thread 11/24
- politicalmama on Open thread 11/24
- cosmos_originally on Open thread 11/24
- okobserver on Open thread 11/24
22 Comments
Bike crosswalks on Woodlawn or Rock Road who pays for them? Isn’t travel on that road much better without the tracks now. That’s the holdup along with some property owners bordering the trail. All hours of days bikers on that path? Lighted? Security? What’s the status who owns the path land anyway. Adjacent property owners likely. The city hasn’t paid for it. Land abandoned by the rail road so far.
I see the river corridor paths not used by bikers, walkers, and joggers enough. Heading east through backyards sounds iffy.
If a community path is constructed in sections of those neighborhoods fine. A through way path costs are high, because price of the crosswalks needed to be created.
Randy, can you post a link to this project (the 17th Street rail-trail proposal)?
I caught Joe Stumpe’s report on his attempt to bike every trail in Wichita a few weeks back. I seem to recall that this project was mentioned, but I haven’t kept up.
By the way, I’ve recently discovered Chisholm Creek Park. I can walk through CCP from my place, near 37th & Rock, all the way down to Hillside (there’s an outlet at roughly 30th and Hillside). I spooked a big doe Sunday morning and got to watch her leap through a field of soybeans (I think) to reach the creek.
Chisholm Creek Park itself is pretty cool, it’s like mini-wetlands smack dab in the middle of the city. You can get completely away from city sounds there, a rare treat. Sunday morning it was raining lightly, but just hard enough to discourage most walkers. In my 2-hour walk I saw exactly 2 humans, a doe, 2 herons, a crane, a bunch of turtles (herd?), a pair of muskrats, and birds by the covey.
It’s got to be rare that a person can walk through the heart of Wichita for 2-plus hours and see more marsh fowl than humans.
Mrage – the idea of the east (and other) path is to actually have one that goes somewhere. That would allow bicycles to be used as a means of transportation.
Whatever it takes to get bikes off the street.
Problem is Todd, even with a few token trails it is pretty much impossible to commute by bike without using the roads our taxes pay for. Remember, most local streets are paid for with general tax revenues; not gasoline tax.
Homeowners who are against the plan are idiots.
It will appreciate their properties more than anything they could do.
People will want to buy their houses so they can be on the trail.
Good point that ICT.
Wichita also could use some surface-street bike lanes.
I almost bought a house lot that is next to the old 17th rail line trail east of Rock Road and my concern was those high powered electrical lines in that space. Too much hanging around those wires, good for a person’s well being?
I expanded the house design and it wouldn’t fit. But I’ve kept the concern for that area and those power lines. Some homeowners want to compensated for the land use if ownership of the path is determined. Some did wonder about security issues, time of day the path used. Not everyone has a comfort level with alleyways behind their house.
Some expensive homes line that path on the east side of Rock Road and who they support politically will determine the outcome. I don’t know people who live in other parts of town that would like to bike on that path, their opinion matters.
Does the city have to get every adjacent landowner on both sides of the path, okay to do it. That’s a lot of properties and everyone won’t agree.
I hate to see people walking or biking in the street and no sidewalks anywhere useful. Couple of bicycles should have every right on any city street like a car. One bicycle, I don’t know if that’s safe to do. If people want to add commuting biking in their life, they had to do it as a group. More concern about bikes should be on every driver’s mind. Less on their cell phone calls.
This is a perfect example of why Wichita is, and will continue to be, the biggest backwater in the nation. Let’s see, turning ABANDONED railroad tracks into something useful that will improve quality of life, possibly lower oil consumption, pollution and obesity, and connect different parts of the city without having to drive? Sounds like a communist/liberal plot to me, like fluoride in our water!
Wichita=joke. It is partially because of stupid little things like this that not a single one of my friends who went to KU (nor I) will be returning after graduation. NOT A ONE out of approximately twenty people born and raised in W-town.
Because of the concerns of ten or twelve rich homeowners the rest of the East Side goes without. Could it be that, gasp, money pulls the strings of politics in our fair city?
Another KU basher of their Wichita background, that’s played out Larry. Leave and don’t look back please. Many have done so before you and friends, but guess what,KU grads came back to make a living and raise their families in doodah.
Must be something in the Lawrence water to cause temporary madness.
A few bicycles aren’t going to stop pollution unless its hundreds of bicycles are on the roads everyday.Where are 50 bicycle riders on the streets together at any time?
One friend in Portland claims he rides a bicycle to work. But that city is way involved having bike lanes on city streets and not going through people’s backyards.
For people who bought homes abutting railroad tracks or right of ways for railroads, I really don’t think that quiet, non-polluting cyclists should be a major problem. How many cyclists have you gotten to know?
Like me, for example, I don’t have energy to make loud vocalizations. I’m just trying to breathe.
I’ve been noticing a growing sentiment against Sue Schlapp in the past year or so. I live in her district.
I guess she kind of a do nothing and doesn’t respond to citizen concerns. And I guess Nick Howell is just another one. They want this trail and it’s been several years on this project to be heard by the city council.
I never had any dealings with Sue, but I live in her district. If I hear more residents becoming more upset at her, I might run for her seat next year.
I did a little research. Looks like it’s going to be a tough fight to get this rail trail.
I guess when BNSF abandon the rail road, the land did not go to the city. Instead, the land now belongs to adjacent landowners. So the only way the city can convert it to a trail, they would have to buy the property from each adjacent land owner, with will cause the price of building the trail sky high.
Also! It would just take one or more land owners to refuse to sell, and there will not be a complete path.
Looks like the project is doomed. :( Because I seriously doubt that all the land owners will be willing to give up that land for no compensation.
Joe…
Are you sure bout the land reverting to the land owners?
I live in Goddard and a few years ago we had this debate (so far everything i have said came true). BEFORE the land could turn over to land owners any group who wished to turn it into a trail got first dibs.
That group in the Goddard area was Prairie Travelers run by a loose association of far out there environmentalists, bike shop owners/employees and sports related business owners/employees.
In Goddard the PT group asked the city to pay for the improvements on the trail. It was only mildly supported. It met ALOT of opposition from adjacent land owners BECAUSE of the thoughts of crime and vandalism (which occur now but thought to be much less quantity).
The reason Joe i ask if you are sure that it has reverted is because the federal law (RailRoad lobbyists pushed through) gives the first right to trail groups. The reason for that is that the “Catch” for giving them the land is that in the future if they need that rail line, they can easily reclaim it…
Another Note about the rails to trails and the prairie travelers group. Here in Goddard they have had possession for a number of years… They have yet to do anything but put up a couple of posts to prevent cars from driving on it. The entire thing is over run and worse off than before the railroad left. The group was hanging around at a recent council meeting asking for money, of course our council said no… they are in debt up to their eyeballs and getting worse…
Just a couple of observances, i would say at least, if the City of Wichita is developing it, than it will probably be done and done semi-close to right. If a private group is doing, especially someone like prairie travelers, than i would run…
Joe W–
Congress passed a law years ago that makes moot exactly what you’re talking about. Google something for once, won’t you?
Larryville–
Mega dittos. I like Wichita overall, but that doesn’t mean it can’t be improved.
Mrge–
You say that homeowners aren’t comfortable with an “alleyway” in their back yard.
But they were comfortable with a frickin’ TRAIN? Not to mention all the vagrants and bums that walk along train tracks.
The trail will be nothing less than a city park, with the same park maintaince and security.
Lastly, look at rail-to-trails in other parts of the country. Have they been successful? YES. Do people like them? YES. Does it appreciate the value of the homes in the area? YES.
I’ve seen this all over the country. First, intial virulant hostility, then grudging acceptance. After a few years, everybody loves it and they all act like they were never against it.
Prospero -
I will be the voice of disagreement on this one…
No, Not all rails to trails project are successful
No, trails dont always appreciate property. If there is vandalism to the property directly as a result of the trail, than it goes down.
Do people like them, I’m sure people do… but what do you do about the people who live along it who were there before the trail? force it upon them? not let them have a say?
Yo! Prospero I did the research.
I’m still researching if the railroad has been offically abandenon by BNSF. As of 2004, they had not yet.
But let me give you the specifics, since you failed to google it.
The BNSF Corridor Analysis: In anticipation of BNSF’s abandonment of the East Wichita corridor from the Butler County line to the central rail corridor in Wichita, the City initiated a study in 2001 to examine benefits and costs associated with preserving the railroad corridor. Most of the 11.75-mile railroad corridor is on a 100-foot wide right-of-way, except in a few locations west of I-135 where the right-of-way is narrower. The corridor has been in existence since 1879, and is allegedly on private easements acquired by the original railroad from the “adjacent” properties for the purpose of railroad operations. If the corridor is abandoned, the underlying easements are extinguished, and the adjacent properties regain the use of this land. Some property owners may benefit from the reversionary rights to use their property after the railroad use is officially abandoned, while others may be concerned with the additional property tax responsibilities and maintenance.
There were three options at the time of the study: (1) for the City to get into the railroad business; (2) let the BNSF abandon the corridor, in which case the underlying easements are extinguished and the rights revert to the adjacent property, and then have the City negotiate separately with several property owners to acquire new easements; and (3) to railbank the corridor as an alternative to abandonment.
The Railbanking Process: The Surface Transportation Board (STB) regulates the federal law regarding railbanking, including the negotiation phase in which the City and the BNSF will decide the terms for transfer of right-of-way. Generally the conditions of transfer include agreeing to maintaining the corridor, and giving it up if reactivation of rail service is ever required. Kansas law requires additional responsibilities that include informing the county commission, mailing notices to all property owners regarding the City’s intent to build a trail, and advertising a notice of the City’s intent for three weeks in the official paper. Kansas law also requires the trail operator to be responsible for any fencing along the corridor and begin developing the trail within two years of railbanking.
Joe,
Great write up, but let me clarify one thing…
Railbanking get “first dibs”.
If a viable plan is presented by any group who wants to convert the rail to a trail, that plan is taken over the property owners objections (primarily in rural areas). In incorporated areas like cities, the city councils make that decision. If the council doesn’t want it, than the private org’s have the option.
That is what happened in Goddard. Well over a 2/3’s majority of adjacent property owners were opposed to the trail. That still didn’t stop the rails to trails group from acquiring the land from the RailRoad.
Today, (like i said earlier) they have yet to do anything with the property. The tax payers are paying to mow the half mile of land within the city and some of the property owners are maintaining their sections of land.
What happened to my other post? Looks like this maintenance that Typepad did yesterday erase a bunch of people’s posts.
Right, Tony–
Congress passed a law that makes the easement issue moot.
As far as the trails I know of, they are all administered by city or county park depts. and they’ve all been successful.
I suspect that private groups don’t have the deep pockets to build fences, pave crosswalks, provide security and maintence like park depts. do.
But if they’re well managed, they inevitably meet with a lot of approval. That’s why upscale housing additions put in their own trails.