« The Professionals - Eagle Mountain Railroad | Main | Ten Bucks For The Taco Bar With Walter Luce Thrown In For Free »
April 11, 2012
Tom Kirk Talking About The Whitewater Pathway
The IES-APA is the Inland Empire Section of the American Planning Association.
This address was probably a variation on a standard presentation that Mr. Kirk has been giving, so if you've already attended one of those, most of this will probably be familiar.
Mr. Kirk said the idea of the trail is an old idea. It goes back at least to 1972 - but probably pre-dates that. In 2009 the Desert Recreation District and county Parks District did a study of it, looking at three possible routes. He called it the Dangerman study. One route was along the Whitewater River, another along Dillon Road, and a third that followed the Coachella Canal. They assumed that wherever the Whitewater River route came to a golf course, the route would leave the Whitewater River and onto the street system. A Class 1 path is one that is off the street system; Class 2 is a path that is basically a painted bike lane on the street. While along the Whitewater the path in this earlier study would be Class 1 until it came to a golf course, and then it would become Class 2.
That study envisioned a bike path on one levee and an equestrian trail on the other levee. The estimated cost was $36-million to $38-million. That did not include all of the cost for grade separation - the places where arterial bridges go across the river channel. A pathway could go under the roadway, over the roadway, or directly across the roadway (at some version of a crosswalk).
The planners said that project would take 30 to 40 years to build. They planned on local money along with federal and state grants. Maybe a few hundred thousand dollars a year would be invested in its gradual construction.
Mr. Kirk rhetorically asked how the approach would change if we had a lot of money available to construct a major portion of the pathway. He suggested it could be "transformational for the Coachella Valley." A couple of changes were made to the plan. The one we are most familiar with is changing the design to accomodate small electric vehicles (golf carts and neighborhood electric vehicles).
He displayed a graphic showing a cross section of what the pathway might look like. As a bicycle and pedestrian path it would have been (in most places) 12 feet wide with a few feet of buffer on both sides. With electric vehicles the width would be increased to 14 feet, achieved by reducing the width of the buffers.
Mr. Kirk said there still could be an equestrian trail on the opposite levee, but CVAG is not focusing on that now. The proposed bicycle/pedestrian/electric vehicle pathway would be on the right bank, the south levee. It would have a pedestrian trail, probably of decomposed granite, separate from the hard-paved trail for bicycles and electric vehicles. This would be the layout from Palm Springs to Coachella, and up to Desert Hot Springs "if that community wants it." He said "it's a bit complicated to get it to Desert Hot Springs because, of course, the Whitewater River doesn't run through Desert Hot Springs." [Oh, if the only challenges in Desert Hot Springs happened to be the location of geophysical features, life would be so much simpler.]
Another change is a proposed connector into downtown Palm Springs along Tahquitz Creek. There is a trail there now, but it needs improvement.
The biggest cost component to this project is the grade separation. Mr. Kirk cited the bike path along the Santa Ana River as an example of undercrossings wherever a bridge crosses the river. Fred Waring, Cook Street and Frank Sinatra, however, are low water crossings. In those places the pathway would go over the motor vehicle roadway. This grade separation is what makes travel on the pathway competitive [in terms of time] with travel by automobile for short trips (under 5 miles).
He pointed out that bicycles and golf carts already share the same lanes in some places in Coachella Valley.
Electric charging stations may be included on the pathway. He said the charging stations won't add much to the cost. He repeated that it was the grade separation that would be the biggest cost factor.
He cited a figure of $80 million for construction, right-of-way, planning and design. He compared that to the estimated cost for the new Jefferson/I-10 interchange: $55 million. Three years ago that interchange project was estimated at $80 million. He suggested that the interchange will probably cost less, when real bids come in, and he suggested that the cost of the pathway could likewise be lower than $80 million. CVAG's budget this year for infrastructure projects is $80 million.
He finally got to the funding issue. One person in attendance admitted he was not familiar with the Sentinel Power Plant - obviously, he came from some faraway foreign land. Mr. Kirk gave the quickest summary of the power plant and mitigation funds I've heard so far. I will spare you the story, assuming you've heard it all before.
CVAG will be submitting a proposal for up to $40 million of the air quality mitigation money. CVAG has authorized a matching $20 million from its other sources. Prior to this, CVAG has paid for Class 2 pathways when building a major arterial, but it has never paid for a Class 1 pathway. They are talking to other possible sources of funds including the Desert Healthcare District, endowments, and federal and state governments. Mr. Kirk said there isn't much money available from the federal or state governments.
Mr. Kirk said that getting people out of their cars is a known control measure for dealing with air quality. Mobile sources account for 70% of our greenhouse gases [I guess "mobile sources" includes not just motor vehicles, but also cows and other ruminants]. Natural gas vehicles "are nice," but still generate greenhouse gases. Electric cars generate greenhouse gases, depending on the source of their electricity. Bicycling or traveling by foot are the best in terms of greenhouse gases.
Jobs: the standard thing done with air quality funding is to issue an RFP and then go buy a bunch of natural gas vehicles, put emission traps on diesel engines, pave roads, put dust control on dirt lots. "That's all nice and helpful," Mr. Kirk said. "None of it is long term, except maybe paving roads." He loves the idea of converting school buses to an alternative fuel, "but in 10 years or 15 years, those school buses are going to be in Mexico or some other place." They also generate almost no local jobs. Purchasing alternative fuel vehicles generates jobs in Mexico, Korea and Japan. [I need to point out that CNG buses are made in America.]
Construction is the sector of our economy hardest hit by the recession. Building the pathway would me a major, local construction project. Also, it would provide public health benefits. "If you build facilities, they will come," Mr. Kirk said. A lot of people currently drive to a trailhead.
He listed Denver, Portland, and Minneapolis as cities that have built trails to attract "active tourism." Fewer people are coming here to play golf, he said.
CVEP is assisting on an analysis of the economic benefits of the project. Besides the construction jobs, it could raise property values along the pathway. In the Outer Banks of North Carolina a study has been performed on a $6 million bike pathway facility [only $6 million?]. The study estimated the economic benefit to the region to be $60 million/year. Theirs is a tourist economy, as is ours.
The Coachella Valley can't keep relying on golf courses to drive our economy. There are already a lot of golf carts in the valley. That base can be built on.
Mr. Kirk said that very few people show up for any CVAG meetings, unless the meeting is about trails, and then a big crowd turns out.
I've been part of that crowd at least a couple of times. I think the interest among cyclists and hikers is partly generated out of a fear that CVAG decision makers may just not "get it" when it comes to good bike paths or good hiking trails.
He suggested that the pathway could support rickshaws, pedi-cabs or bike-sharing (as has already been done in Boston).
The pathway would be public and free. If you wear shoes when you walk, then that would be your minimum equipment requirement for using the trail.
Much of the trail already exists, but it's discontinuous. At the Adams Street bridge in La Quinta, he said you can see the undercrossings being built today.
Q & A
Q: Long term maintenance?
A: How much and who pays for it. There are two parts to maintenance: 1 - keeping the trail safe and clean. There will be no landscaping on this trail. CVWD likes the pathway as long as it plays by their rules, which means no irrigation. There will be some hardscape. In terms of public safety, the goal is to build a first class facility that's well used, so you don't have vacant segments where there are safety concerns. Keeping the trail busy will keep it safe. 2 - pavement rehab. The long term cost for that maintenance expense should be a CVAG responsibility. There are sources of funding to pay for a pavement management system. Total maintenance costs are estimated at less than $1 million/year. In La Quinta, their 2.6 miles costs about $30,000/year.
Q: Small commercial establishments that could be tied in? San Antonio's Riverwalk has restaurants nearby.
A: Bike sharing is one example. Commercial can be developed where there are vacant properties along the pathway. Indian Wells has suggested a link to Miles Crossing and the Esmerelda. The details will be up to the private sector for commercial development.
Q: A suggestion that businesses could now face the wash. The "North City Specific Plan" (Cathedral City north of the freeway) includes a similar pathway. Creation of a Whitewater Pathway may encourage other entities to include pathways in their plans.
Q: The right-of way exists, so what are the additional right-of-way costs?
A: The right-of-way does not entirely exist. There are 200 property owners along the Whitewater River. The largest ones are the CVWD and the county flood control district. They have easements that the pathway may be able to piggyback on. In other places there are private owners. This is the most complicated part of the designing process.
Q: How many miles of the right-of-way needs to be acquired?
A: "We have not even started the right-of-way acquisition process."
Q: "Six months out of the year this thing isn't going to be used at all." April or May into the fall, it's going to be too hot, the snowbirds will be gone, everyone who uses a golf cart will be gone. Riding a bicycle five miles in July is not an option. Walking is not an option. Lack of usefulness is what has kept this project stifled. The questioner suggested that the $80 million estimate did not include right-of-way acquisition costs nor grade separation costs.
A: The right-of-way and grade separation costs ARE included in the $80 million estimate. Mr. Kirk said look at Minneapolis where their trail system is not usable during the cold months.
[I've never been on the trail system in Minneapolis in winter (and I hope to maintain that record), but my guess is that they actually do use it even when it's "too cold." There was never a day of the year when I didn't see at least some cyclists and pedestrians on the Charles River pathway in Boston (not quite as severe as Minneapolis, but painful enough I assure you). If snow isn't cleared from the pathway then it becomes a cross-county ski and snowshoe path.]
Mr. Kirk continued...saying one should look at our Coachella Valley Class 2 system (bike lanes on the street) in May and June. They're in use. He said he would wonder if someone who thinks that the pathway would be unusable for 6 months is actually in the Coachella Valley during the hot weather months. He said he sees more and more people hiking and biking in the warm months. They tend to move their exercise to the shoulder hours: dawn and dusk. His point is that our tourism competitors are doing pathways in very difficult environments. "Like Portland," he said. [Mild and damp?] Mr. Kirk said he was willing to say that a Whitewater pathway would be under utilized for 2 or 3 months of the year, and he considered that acceptable.
Q: It's no different than golf courses. Very large acreages are devoted to golf in this valley. What's their decline in popularity in the hot months? Tempe has something like the Whitewater pathway.
A: Tucson has a pathway, too. "The Loop" is part of their tourism program. It goes around the city, while here we can build something through the city.
Q: Policing and patrolling costs?
A: CVAG builds and funds roads all the time. Nobody ever asks "what about the extra costs of patrolling a standard arterial?" There will be more people speeding, you'll need more police. But build something for pedestrians and bikes and suddenly those questions erupt.
Less and less of our transportation dollars come from gas tax. More comes from sales tax. Pedestrians and cyclists tend to have higher discretionary incomes than average automobile drivers.
He repeated that he would prefer to build a first class trail that is well used. A cheaper trail that attracts fewer users will more likely become a magnet for trouble.
In Addition
I happened to be seated next to a planner from Beaumont who brought along a giant notebook filled with paper (iPads have not yet reached Beaumont perhaps). He's working on that city's trail system which is already quite well developed, including some segments that are for neighborhood electric vehicles. They've built a regional park for RVs where RVers can park their big vehicles, unload their bicycles and get directly onto the city's pathways. They are building a pathway west to connect to a trail in San Timoteo Canyon.
His focus right now is a pathway that will connect Beaumont's system to Banning's. From there the pass cities intend to continue a pathway eastward to connect in with our proposed Whitewater pathway, maybe traveling along Edison's right-of-way (or is it an easement?). Eventually, we'd be seeing a pathway stretching from Coachella into San Timoteo Canyon. Once you've got that, someone's going to suggest extending it into San Bernardino.
Filed under Cities/Urbanism,Coachella Valley,Cycling,Sports,Travel | permalink | April 11, 2012 at 12:11 PM
Comments
The comments to this entry are closed.
