Timber Heritage Association (THA) The Timber Heritage Association President Marcus Brown spoke at today's Port Development meeting at the Samoa Cookhouse. (Noodles and shortribs. Lots of bread, soup and salad also. I'll give today's lunch a B score.) His group raised over $30,000 in a recent fundraiser to help defray costs of moving a workable train to the Round House in Samoa. A call out was made for local service groups to consider adopting the THA project. They are in need of help in the near future for renovations of the Redwood built Round House. I am sure they would appreciate monetary funds, but for those who are willing to put in some elbow grease to the project, they are need of that also. Marcus also talked of hope of running a short portion of the rail line in Samoa by this summer. Further in the future, the hope is to run train from Samoa to Eureka, and then perhaps the Madaket trip back to Samoa. That would make a great day excursion for tourists.
Bill Bertain also spoke at the meeting and brought up Robin Arkley's public endorsement of the railroad and his political and phone line ties with Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger as possible leverage for the northern section of the rail line. He also mentioned that railroad advocate and former Congressman Doug Bosco has Arnold's attention after leading the Democrats for Schwarzenegger Committee. Maybe we will see the resurrection of the rail yet.
2 hours ago
63 comments:
Oh, come on now Softball, you know the general public really wants to rip up the tracks to build trails. You know, something beneficial to the entire population. Something everyone will use not just train enthusiasts. (Ok, being purely facitious now) You know trains are icky things for the environment around the bay. And they haul icky things like gravel, too.
Or maybe its not economically feasible, like all the engineering studies say.
I'm hoping that 8:41 post was entirely factitious?
After lunch yesterday, I emailed 'samoafrog' a document from the National Parks Service that has to do with the ongoing rail/trail project. Much effort has gone into many meetings with trails groups, HCOAG participants and other stakeholders (like train enthusiasts).
I've noticed a lone dissenter writing the occasional opinion piece (against rail/trail coexistence) in the papers, but when we look around for a group to reach out to-these writers usually turn out to be working without connection to an existing group-even though there are quite a few opportunities to hook up and get involved.
The restoration of the rail around the bay is useful to the entire population...in that we would have multimodal transportation, increased employment through the tourisn industry, more light industry, and many recreational and cultural opportunities.
It takes time and everything won't happen overnight-but you'll see more happening if you volunteer and get an up close view.
The fact that the Timber Heritage Association raised the entire $30,000 for moving the locomotives from Glendale to Samoa-in just one fundraising even is a significant sign that there is community support for the restoration of rails around Humboldt Bay. We can always use more members and a family membership is only $25 per year.
Our website needs updating (and we're working on it) but if you're interested in a membership or in volunteering to rip up track, or drive spikes into the ground for new track, or working with us in restoring a historic 1890 Roundhouse-check it out: http://www.timberheritage.org/
For more information on trails groups and getting caught up with what has already been accomplished in this area-you can contact Jennifer Rice at RCAA-Jen works in the natural resources division and is considered an expert in the field.
BTW 12:38 the 'engineering studies' you brought up are discussing the Eel River Canyon. -Not an excursion train around Humboldt Bay.
There is a feasibility study available-although perhaps not yet online that gives much support to rail restoration, excursion train, light industry, possibility of a container port using rail.
Is mary-mrsb814?
"There is a feasibility study available-although perhaps not yet online that gives much support to rail restoration, excursion train, light industry, possibility of a container port using rail"
Who did this study? All the earlier ones said it is such a long shot that it is likely to fail.
The Trails Trust of Humboldt Bay is one source for trail info.
Excursion trains tend to be a money looser and need community support to keep them running. Take for instance the train (trolley) in Astoria. Runs along the Columbia River next to the downtown. I think it is $3 for a pass. But it can't make it on its own even with all volunteers.
Then maybe you should join the Timber Heritage Association with a Lifetime Membership and get busy volunteering?
Nah. Trails are cheaper to maintain and cost leess to use.
From the NCRA's 2003 The Long Term Financial and Economic Feasibility of the Northwestern Pacific Railroad
Market Analysis Conclusions
The freight market potential along the NWP corridor is relatively flat. Overall the greatest opportunity for growth in rail related shipments are in solid waste, aggregate and port-related marine industrial activities. The demand for intercity passenger rail on the corridor is fairly limited and would not prove to be a cost effective endeavor. Commuter rail is currently under study by the SMART commission and could prove to be viable at some level. However, there is little viability for commuter rail outside of the San Rafael to Cloverdale corridor.
Excursion Train isn't commuter rail any time soon.
And 1:55 may be right-but we will have rails in use by summer and the trails will still be working on access issues.
I am a big fan of trails as well-this isn't an Either/Or situation. We can have it all.
From the same 2003 NCRA study:
11.0 CONCLUSIONS REGARDING 25 YEAR OPERATING FEASIBILITY
11.1 Summary of Financial Results
11.1.1 Low demand
Under the low demand scenario, the railroad will not breakeven for the life of this analysis. If the low demand stays at the same level for the next 25 years, it will not be able to overcome the fixed or variable costs of operating the railroad.
11.1.2 Medium demand
Under all three operating scenarios there will be a net negative cash flow. If the medium demand stays at the same level for the next 25 years, it will not be able to overcome the fixed or variable costs of operating the railroad.
11.1.3 High demand
Under the high demand scenario once the north end of the railroad is connect to the south, the railroad is net cash flow positive, averaging approximately six million dollars a year in net positive cash flow.
11.1.4 “Most Likely” demand
Since the "Most Likely" demand tracks closely with the Medium demand, it does not cross the break-even mark with its forecasted volumes.
and this means what?-you don't support having trains whether they make money or not (even if they are historically relevant to this area)?
The Timber Heritage Association has been restoring two of the very same locomotives that were originally located at Samoa Shops-the Roundhouse and related buildings.
I totally support the Timber Heritage Society's efforts. I love old trains. Just pointing out the fiscal obstacles that need to be addressed regarding rail in general.
The excursion train and museum are completely different issues than bring the railroad back.
I was taking issue with this comment from Mary:
"The restoration of the rail around the bay is useful to the entire population...in that we would have multimodal transportation, increased employment through the tourisn industry, more light industry, and many recreational and cultural opportunities."
I agree.
However:
Excursion train = feasible.
Commuter train = not.
There just isn't the population base to make it viable.
Nice idea but it couldn't pay for itself.
what is the part you disagree with 2:37?
It isn't all coming at once. The excursion train will be doing something by summer-although no promises that it will be anything more than speeder rides. (We can almost guarantee those)
The excursion train committe was just formed at the last THA board meeting...we'd like to see short rides between Eureka/Arcata sooner rather than later.
Volunteer efforts to restore the rails this short distance are not only feasible/possible but guarantee-able. But there is no timeline-we can use volunteers (and you can write-off your donated hours!)
I would like to see a Friday commuter train available within the next 2-3 years between Eureka/Arcata something like the Larkspur Ferry I used to take to work in SF. Can I paint a picture for you:
Get on the train in the morning either in Eureka or Arcata to go to work at the opposite end. Donuts/croissants and coffee/espresso/tea/juice/newspapers.
On the way home in the evening-
Cocktails or wine/beer, & appetizers. Its just a short trip before and after work. But it could get popular for the social aspects.
There is a lot more to hauling freight and that phase of our dreams will take a little longer. As for the Eel River Canyon who knows where that will end up?
Multimodal transportation= rails/trails/cars/bikes/buses/rickshaw/horse/what have you...
The National Parks Heritage Area is a looming reality coming from several directions at once-it has a good chance of boosting tourism by making Humboldt County a destination. It would be nice if people had more to do when they get here. Don't you agree?
I'm not a tourist, but I'd like a few more things to do weekends...
"Commuter train = not.
There just isn't the population base to make it viable.
Nice idea but it couldn't pay for itself."
And this is precisely what makes the Eureka / Arcata trail attractive.
Something I learned in a grant writing refresher course this week-non profit corporations/foundation funders need US just as much as we need THEM.
To keep not for profit status these wealthy grant giving entities are required by tax law to give away a percentage of their wealth every year.
There are even a few funders in the business of writing excursion train grants and I plan to tap those specifically.
There is always going to be someone like you around saying it can't be done.
But a lot of people who love trains are like little engines who think they can-and we keep telling ourselves that if we work very hard we'll make it.
If you knew anything at all-you would know the Eureka/Arcata trail is no where near where you think it is.
And this is precisely what makes the Eureka / Arcata trail attractive.
Why does this have to be just trail not both to you?
Hey, I didn't say the excursion train can't be done.
Like I said, if you look at the excursion train idea separate from the restoration of the rail between here and the Bay Area and/or the idea of a cummuter train you are more likley to be successful.
You can't use the Larkspur Ferry or CalTrain on the penninsula as any sort of justification for a commuter train here. We just don't have the people.
Sure it would be nice.
Excursion train = feasible.
You should read the excursion train feasability study and you will find that it will take much more capital and operating costs than even mighty Mary can muster in her hunt for funds. I can't belive that THA will have the insurance together so that NCRA would allow anything on their line by this summer. Good luck.
Mary: Thank God there are people who have not given up. I really think once a small portion of the railroad is up and working, then people will be more apt for a "buy in." People need a tangible project where the process is clearly defined and there is light at the "end of the tunnel." Hey, was that a train metaphor? Let's see this train project make some "steam way." Anyone else out there want to get on board?
But seriously, as Mary said, there is plenty of volunteer work ahead. So if you have time down the road, here is a chance to help. I am willing to pound a few spikes, so put me down!
(I know there are afew anonymous posters out there I would like to hold the spike for me.)
"Why does this have to be just trail not both to you?"
Putting the trail on the railroad right of way whould be far and away more doable than trying to get a trail built next to the rail. The cost of that EIR alone would probably kill it. We are talking just too much wetland to make work whereas the trail on rail would be much less complicated and undeniably much cheaper.
But the NCRA will never let that happen anytime soon. So the tease the trail folks into thinking the trail can go next to the rail because it gets them out of their hair.
"If you knew anything at all-you would know the Eureka/Arcata trail is no where near where you think it is."
Do tell...
Doug Bosco is the reason is the reason I (as a Democrat) voted for Republician, Frank Riggs, although only for his first term. I voted for Dan Hamburg, who (sadly) only served one term.
Thanks for your 5 cents Richard-and the work party for pounding spikes is this weekend-I fwd'd the email with directions to you. Bloggers to hold spikes-optional!
And I'm sorry 3:41 a little knowledge isn't the whole enchilada and that goes for both of us! I have been nothing but a 'booster' for the last ten years as far as rail restoration and a rank newcomer on the board of the Timber Heritage Association. I still don't know why Marcus asked me...enthusiasm I suppose!
You've brought up insurance and that isn't necessary for speeder rides-go ahead and check with an NCRA member.
From: HUMBOLDT BAY TRAIL: EUREKA TO ARCATA TRAIL ASSESSMENT
DRAFT RFP & SCOPE
Project Overview
Humboldt Bay is the natural, cultural, and political center of California’s north coast, bounded by two major population centers, Eureka & Arcata. The Bay is rich in ecological, recreational and cultural resources and is home to the Humboldt Bay National Wildlife Refuge and the Arcata Marsh and Wildlife Sanctuary. In spite of the remarkable resources of the Bay, limited access creates constraints for use of this area as a close to home recreation resource. There are only a few limited public access sites to the Bay and there are no multi-use (pedestrian and bicycling) facilities between the cities of Eureka & Arcata. Currently a trail in this area consistently tops the list of desired regional non-motorized transportation projects. This area also represents a high priority missing link in the California Coastal Trail and the Pacific Coast Bike Route.
There is a great deal of public and agency interest in the development of a multi-use trail adjacent to Humboldt Bay, linking Eureka & Arcata. A number of planning documents have highlighted the Eureka- Arcata corridor as a priority, but there are many remaining issues to discuss in an effort to define an implementation strategy. These include clearly identifying physical, political, and legal opportunities and constraints, and roles and responsibilities in trail development and management, amenable to all interested stakeholders.
The results of two preliminary feasibility studies suggest location of the trail in a narrow corridor between US 101 and the Northwestern Pacific Railroad that is owned by the North Coast Railroad Authority (NCRA). There are a number of constraints that have made pursuit of such a trail challenging. Many jurisdictions are involved, including most directly Caltrans and the NCRA, in addition to the Cities of Arcata and Eureka; County of Humboldt; Humboldt Bay Harbor, Recreation and Conservation District; and the Humboldt Bay National Wildlife Refuge. Physical constraints include close proximity of US 101 and the Northwestern Pacific Railroad, fresh and saltwater wetlands, slough crossings, highway on- and off-ramp crossings, billboards, and drainage features.
In 2006 a Humboldt Bay Trail Planning Team – representatives of key related jurisdictions and organizations facilitated by the National Park Services’ Rivers, Trails & Conservation Assistance Program staff – was formed to initiate dialogue regarding the feasibility of a multi-use trail along Humboldt Bay connecting Eureka and Arcata. This trail would be established as one segment of a proposed regional trail -- the Humboldt Bay Trail and be a key connection in the California Coastal Trail. The Planning Team collaboratively developed a Humboldt Bay Trail planning framework to promote establishment of this trail segment in a way that addresses the needs and interests of multiple agencies and the community. (See planning framework)
With this planning framework in place the Humboldt Bay Trail Planning Team will move to an in depth trail assessment. This assessment will initially focus on considering trail options within a primary planning area. This area is located on the east side of Humboldt Bay stretching from X Street in Eureka north to Samoa Boulevard in Arcata, east to the eastern edge of the Caltrans State Route 101 right-of-way, and west to the eastern shore of Humboldt Bay.
yadda yadda...
Major tasks and deliverables:
Preliminary Planning
Review planning context and planning sideboards to guide trail assessment. This may include review of 1.) Relevant Humboldt Bay and Coastal Trail studies affecting lands within or immediately adjacent to the primary planning area, 2.) Caltrans 101 corridor planning and current projects, 3.) NCRA rail planning and current projects. Consultant will also identify and summarize highway and rail right of way requirements and trail design guidelines for class 1 bikeway and rail with trail options, as well as other technical standards that will affect trail location and design. Consultant will prepare related workshop materials to aid in trail assessment.
Prepare a constraints map from existing data (to be provided by the cities of Arcata and Eureka, County and Caltrans data layers) for the primary planning area in advance of an opportunities and constraints workshop. This map will be utilized as a basis for trail planning and will illustrate physical and resource constraints such as wetlands, high tide levels, various ownership rights-of-ways, endangered species habitat, and other relevant issues to trail development and operation.
Develop preliminary information about physical, resource, regulatory and funding constraints, trail development options and potential design remedies in preparation for the trail assessment workshop.
There is a lot more information about the $3800 from HCOAG to help with aerial study being done shortly by the city of Eureka-that isn't in the document I cut and pasted parts of, above.
I participated in a teleconference and was asked to take the minutes-so here is a list of attendees:
Barbara Rice, Natl. Park Service
Dave Meserve
Gary Bird, Eureka
Scott Kelly, HB Bicycle Commuters
Karen Diemer, Arcata
Bob Merrill, CA Coastal Commission
Spencer Clifton, HCAOG
Rex Jackman, CalTrans
Andrew B__, HC for Cheryl Dillingham
Mary Boughton, THA board
John Woolley, NCRA
(its amazing what you get to do if you're in the right place)...
So you might have noticed that the Timber Heritage Association and the NCRA are at the table with the movers and shakers on this idea of rails/trails.
The trails are not always going to end up right alongside of the rails in some locations due to many differrent 'constraints'. You'll either have to trust me on that or go to a few meetings yourself.
The excursion train is a completely separate issue from rail service/freight use and has been for a few years.
"This map will be utilized as a basis for trail planning and will illustrate physical and resource constraints such as wetlands, high tide levels, various ownership rights-of-ways, endangered species habitat, and other relevant issues to trail development and operation. "
Bingo.
In the end those who plan trails know this is a no-go from the start. But it is a way to get the trail on the table. In the end it will be trail on rail bed or no trail at all.
And we will wait and wait. All we will get is a whole bunch of nothing until it is understood that one path is more feasible than the other. Seems like all we are going to get is two infeasible projects instead of one that could be built soon.
There is so much funding out there for trails now and almost none for excursion trains. This part of what makes a project more feasible than another. When you start a capital campaign you will soon figure this out.
It seems all the current excitement about the train is only in response to the growing enthusiasm for the trail. Nothing else has really changed.
Mary: So now that you are on the Board of the THA have you read the feasibility study?
6:24 That is where you are wrong.
In the end those who plan trails know this is a no-go from the start. But it is a way to get the trail on the table. In the end it will be trail on rail bed or no trail at all.
The trail isn't a no-go and neither is the rail... there isn't room for both in some locations which is obvious if you've ever taken a walk down the tracks.
There are 'constraints' to adding a pedestrian trail next to the rail right of way-starting with the rules that pedestrians have to be located x-number feet away from the rail...and the rail is like-almost in the bay in places-check the rail location at high tide on the Manila end of the tracks.
Zandra Manns at a December Port Development meeting, suggested elevated piers-which to me sounded terrific and extremely attractive! But the Coastal Commission sees elevated piers in the same light as filling in the wetlands/bay.
The teleconference discussion of the HBT trail planning team left me with the impression Indianola rights of way and the 101 corridor would be involved in the planning of the Eureka/Arcata trail-that doesn't seem very close to the rail does it?
For more information, you may want to contact Barbara Rice of the National Park Service. I think you would be pleasantly surprised to hear this isn't an either/or project.
My having the feasibility study isn't the point-but yes! As far as studies go its dated but valuable information just the same.
The people who have been working on this excursion train have hundreds(!) of years of combined experience on me. They also have long held licenses to run trains and I haven't even taken the class yet.
I can understand your frustration. It takes forever to get anything done it seems. Try working on a committee where you thought everyone would have the same plan to accomplish common goals. Any committee.
The trails groups are just as diverse as our train guys and yes there is money available. The HCAOG money shot up from around $30,000 to over $80,000-to study rails/trails just here lately. As I said before HCOAG is giving the city of Eureka an additional $3800. to do a further aerial study of the planning area.
I hate writing the word 'study' when I'd rather write 'ground breaking' or 'work to begin'. I would like to see the trails as much as you-but not at the cost of losing trains running around the bay...and I'll take speeder rides until I get the rest.
For a great slideshow of the entire rail line keep an eye on the public access channel. Moss Bitner took about 1500 shots of the rail line and put it together into an beautiful and informative presentation that will surprise you at how close we are to restoring at least some rail activity.
THA doesn't have an all or nothing attitude and I would hope you could hang on long enough to find out more about what is actually occuring on a project you seem to care about too.
Thank you for the opportunity to share what I've learned so far. I don't actually enjoy debating but I got caught up in this with a total focus to give you everything I know-and I can't think of a thing we left out.
As another Mark would say...Peace!
Great information Mary. Thanks for the time and effort on covering all sides of this issue. One of my best friends, Nick Mitchell, was one of the last engineers who ran rail over the Northern end of the rail line in 1998. The railroad ultimately shut down due to poor management by Railways Inc. The leader at the time, a Mr. Darling, is still going through litigation for wage violations. The rail workers were actually working for hopes of a paycheck in the end. And many "union" (Local 3) workers have not been paid as far as I know to this day.
"My having the feasibility study isn't the point-but yes!"
Great, you have it. But have you read it?
"The people who have been working on this excursion train have hundreds(!) of years of combined experience on me. They also have long held licenses to run trains and I haven't even taken the class yet."
That doesn’t make them qualified to evaluate its economic feasibility.
"The trails groups are just as diverse as our train guys and yes there is money available. The HCAOG money shot up from around $30,000 to over $80,000-to study rails/trails just here lately. As I said before HCOAG is giving the city of Eureka an additional $3800. to do a further aerial study of the planning area."
This is trails planning money not rail planning money. It is not a rail/trail project. It is a trail project with rails seen as a constraint. At least according to what you posted.
"I hate writing the word 'study' when I'd rather write 'ground breaking' or 'work to begin'. I would like to see the trails as much as you-but not at the cost of losing trains running around the bay...and I'll take speeder rides until I get the rest."
So you would choose private speeder rides over public trails? Can't wait.
"For a great slideshow of the entire rail line keep an eye on the public access channel. Moss Bitner took about 1500 shots of the rail line and put it together into an beautiful and informative presentation that will surprise you at how close we are to restoring at least some rail activity."
Moss is not in any way qualified to give an assessment of the rail line.
"For a great slideshow of the entire rail line keep an eye on the public access channel. Moss Bitner took about 1500 shots of the rail line and put it together into an beautiful and informative presentation that will surprise you at how close we are to restoring at least some rail activity."
What a load of crap. Anyone with a brain that has heard and seen Moss's show knows it is nothing more than a cheerleading exercise.
Look at the facts. Read the NCRA's own studies before you leap off on a dream and hinder (really obstruct) anything that is contrary to rail and container shipping. The studies have been done numerous times and they say the same thing... it is a long shot at best and likely to take many years to achieve and decades to come close to being out of the red if it succeeds at all.
All this while Coos Bay is achieving becoming THE container port for this part of the west coast. They are in a deal to sell 800 acres to an international shipping firm for a container facility. They already have a deeper channel for the current class of ships. The rail connection is much shorter... and oh, it is in use right now. That while the state of Oregon has committed real dollars to maintaining and upgraded that line. Gee... didn't the NCRA recently get skipped over by Arnold? Ya think Rob can change that?
Start talking rail banking.
"It takes time and everything won't happen overnight"
According to the THA website they have been at it for 27 years. If this is as far as this vision has gotten in 27 years then it will take at least 100 years to complete. If there was a collective decision to have a trail instead we could have it done in 5 years. So how much longer do we have to wait for reality to set in?
Seems like the plan is to have the publicly owned right of way be for the exclusive use of the five (maybe) people with speeder cars. Whoopie.
Wow! Didn't know what they were called. Thanks!
Yeah, there could be a whole fleet of em. Though I remember them to be pukey little 2 cycles spouting a trail of blue smoke. Folks on the trail in the bay won't like that.
Hand cars would be more environmentally friendly than speeder cars.
Too bad only one verbose anon poster had anything to add to Mary's effort. What a windbag!
My read was that she supports the trails and would put her efforts into both projects.
Moss B may be a dreamer but I saw his presentation somplace and its true, a picture tells a thousand words. There isn't that much rail missing between Arcata and Fortuna. The rail is already a reality. Trails need to be developed but I personally would like to see them someplace other than the rail right of way from time to time along the route.
Mary do you have contact information for the National Parks Service? I would like to ask some questions about how to get involved.
The rail 'constraints' to having adjacent trail is space. There is no room for a parallel trail next to track when considering the requirements for safety.
Its obvious your naysayer hasn't gotten attached to any working group on the issues. Thanks for bringing this up Richard.
9:59 I can send you links, doc.s, contact info whatever you need. Just click on mrsb814 it will take you to my email link. I gave this topic my all yesterday but today is too busy!
"Its obvious your naysayer hasn't gotten attached to any working group on the issues."
Virtually every person actually working on this issue knows the challenges of the rail/trail concept would tell you all the same things, in private.
Before I take off for the weekend-I'd just like to say that not to minimize the issues, I am not oblivious to the 'constraints'.
I see that rails are on the ground, need maintenance not just yesterday-30 years ago. And yet, we have the right of way, lots of volunteers and there aren't many hurdles in getting to work. (We've been assured by the regulatory body representatives they would be supportive)
Even though the rail enthusiasts are ahead of trails in the process-we are rooting heavily for the trails project to get going as well...just not at our expense.
This community has been divided enough by opposing ideas-and that just doesn't accomplish anything (fighting all the time about everything and nothing)! I think opening lines of communication will bring us together to accomplish similar goals.
We all want recreation and coastal access-that's a good place to start. The impression that nothing is happening is incorrect. For people who have been working on trails for years-its insulting. Working with government regulations, rights of way isses, ADA guidelines, organizing stakeholder meetings is a jungle-it takes this much time.
As a THA member I'm shocked that there is even one person left in this community who would think for a minute that the rails have been forgotten and/or abandoned. They ARE unfunded-but they are still vital and part of the history of this area, and still useable (even if its just for speeder rides at the moment). Be patient-we're getting there.
If you heard about the Heritage Area designation in the papers recently-perhaps you noticed the $100 million dollars a year in grant money. That seems to leave room for a lot of ideas.
Mary needs to separate the excursion part of rail from the return of the North Coast Railroad. Two quite distinctly different things.
However, both have done feasibility studies that show they are both very unlikely to be economically successful in the near or distant future. This will become very evident when she starts to write all these grants she talks about.
True. It's just that she was mixing up the issues.
Lets just say that the excursion train is a separate issue from the railroad museum, and those are separate issues from restoration of the rail to willits.
I remember reading something she wrote about writing grants for the excursion train-what RU talking about?
Doesn’t Humboldt County already have a railroad museum in Fortuna? Is there a need for two?
and if we need another put it at the Blue Ox.
11:22 You may want to study the Blue Ox situation a lot more before you make that kind of suggestion.
From what we have heard so far there isn't going to be any new school in a tsnami zone.
From Freds blog:
Friday, October 21, 2005
Rob Arkley Speaks
"I was pleased to see him (Arkley) once again step up to the plate and offer to pay for a study to determine the feasability and/ or practicality of getting the North Coast Railroad up and running again."
So I guess this study was completed? Has anyone seen it?
Nope. No Ox move to Samoa.
maybe a move to Samoa maybe not maybe five or six years maybe never maybe it will happen when Eric pays some people back .....for a change?
Waiting to hear how the work party for pounding spikes went last weekend.
I guess so much for excursion rail enthusiasm.
The excursion plan is more than plausible, it is nearly a reality for this summer. I will help on this end in Samoa. Pounding spikes and such.
What happened to Mary? Fall off the train?
No I didn't fall off a train-the moving from Glendale is almost complete due to much help from members of THA and Kernan Construction-they moved most of the flat cars out for us. All that is left is a flat car or tweo and the locomotives.
I didn't have much to add to earlier posts until I had approved meeting minutes-here goes:
Humboldt Bay Trail: Eureka to Arcata Planning Team Conference Call
Monday, January 29, 2007 10AM-12PM
Participants: Gary Bird, City of Eureka; Mary Boughton, Timber Heritage Association
Andrew Bundshuh, Humboldt County Department of Public Works; Spencer Clifton, HCAOG; Karen Diemer, City of Arcata; Scott Kelly, Humboldt Bay Bicycle Commuters Association; Rex Jackman, CalTrans; Bob Merrill, California Coastal Commission; Dave Meserve; John Woolley, North Coast Railroad Authority, Barbara Rice, NPS, RTCA(facilitator)
Barbara began the meeting by saying the revised Humboldt Bay Trail: Eureka to Arcata Trail Assessment Draft RFP & Scope had been positively received and accepted with minor revisions into one document that was now approved for posting on individual web sites after a vote.
Spencer mentioned that individual products would be identified. He expected the draft RFP to go out today.
Barbara asked Spencer for an update on HCAOG/funding.
Spencer said the board had approved an increase of $52,000 to bring the total available for consulting outsourcing to $82,680. An HCOAG mailing would be out on Feb 16th and be available as early as the following Mon/Tuesday due to holiday. Members of the technical advisory committee would then be able to take comments/recommendations. Then this would go to the HCAOG board at the regularly scheduled meeting February 22. A consultant is possible by March 1st.
Barbara then stated that Jen Rice had previously brought up mapping/aerial photography referring us back to pg 3 of the trail assessment which has been updated in major tasks and deliverables by Jen Rice.
Step One of the Preliminary Planning would be review of the highway and rail rights of way requirements (rail with trail). The consultant would be able to construct a workshop format for a broader audience with existing data for the primary planning area. And third, would be to develop primary information on the major constraints.
A Trails Assessment Workshop was brought up to identify Key Stakeholders/Options and Key Issues.
Barbara also brought us back to the 1st and 3rd bullets regarding planning context and sideboards to guide trail assessment and to develop preliminary information about the physical, resource regulatory and funding constraints, trail development options and potential design remedies needed to prepare for such a workshop.
Then there was more discussion about a design workshop but the meeting in discussion was more technical. Spencer added that as far as the consultant was concerned there should be a minimum of four meetings with project updates. Barbara is recommending a lot of collaboration with the planning team and a min of 4 meetings as well.
The National Park Service would be managing the planning team in partnership with consultant; collaboration is a key component in the RFP assuring an agency and stakeholder driven process.
John Woolley asked for the time frame. Spencer clarified that the consultant can work straight through June 30th..
There was discussion about team engagement and need for this commitment. CalTrans will be developing the time line and is willing to participate in the process per Rex. The group clarified that collaboration requires a commitment to many tasks… mapping, GIS needs, producing reports, participation in mtgs and workshops etc then follow-up re: suggested implementation strategy. Then Barbara asked for questions related to the flow of activities and commitment. Spencer replied that this is a project that HCAOG isn’t looking at as an owner and now is the time to speak up. Partnership will be key.
Dave brought up that a separate careful study of the regulatory hurdles was needed, preferably concurrent with the existing consultant work. This would include the Coastal Commission, Cal Trans and NCRA. Meetings between those stakeholders would define how to get through the regulatory process and asked for a separate meeting to pave the way as we set a vision. Then Mary interrupted with a request for a joint meeting of the regulatory bodies and the consultant available for cross questioning.
Spencer then drew attention to the fact that these regulatory bodies would not be committed to specifics without a specific project to review and at these early stages it isn’t possible to pin them down. The general consensus was that we should have meetings to discuss items of constriction but no time frame was brought forth.
Then Dave asked for coordination between the corridor and conversation that needs to occur-soon.
John asked the question of ownership and Spencer asked for a lead agency to adopt the project in a stewardship role. John noted that this project is a major segment of the Coastal Trail-and suggested that Cal Trans could step up. This will need to be clarified.
The group noted that one lead deliverables is analysis of the O&M; an alternative analysis of trail maintenance also needs to be established.
Bob Merrill then stated our time line may be too ambitious. Spencer answered that grant funding timelines are driving the process and that the clock is ticking.
Getting back to mapping: There are constraints from the existing data. The proposal is $3800 going to the City of Eureka for aerial photography which has been arranged through Brent Seimer and Gary Bird will get back to us with the scheduling. Jen was working with a window of Feb 15th-Mar 15. There was a minor discussion of contour resolution and depth, also a detailed digital terrain map as well as On Ground Control Points.
Karen said a subcommittee needs to meet on critical information that Spencer will need. The City of Arcata is willing to take the lead and Gary volunteered that Riley will work with this subcommittee. There is an outstanding need for a resource group within the next few weeks.
Rex said there was an understanding that everyone would put together data -Spencer answered that everyone would have access to the data.
Stakeholders identified for the aerial photo bank: City of Eureka, City of Arcata, NCRA, Cal Trans, Humboldt County, Cal Coastal Commission, Marcus and Fish and Game...
It was asked if the $3800 would come out of the $82,000 earmarked for consulting and Gary said he would work with Brent Seimer about an agreement for reimbursement rather than payment up front. The mapping group needs to meet first and identify the needs for new aerial photos, perhaps as early as next week. Spencer was asked whether the aerial photos would need to be addressed in the RFP going out today-Spencer said yes but not necessarily the $3800 figure.
Eureka/Indianola is the main project area. Karen brought up a clean flyway straight up the corridor.
Bob Merrill then brought up that knowing where the wetlands/habitat information, knowing where they are as well as uplands and native plants with listed species-he wanted to know if the existing data was robust enough to be useful? Then Spencer asked about the borders of the wetlands and habitat analysis.
Karen would like a streamlined view and asked that we all link to Spencer’s website at HCOAG as a vital link to Public Outreach & Communication.
There was brief discussion about introductory text and a goals statement also a map available at the City of Arcata which is a pdf file.
Barbara was saying that the Humboldt Bay Trail Planning framework is public information now that we voted on it. Everyone seemed to agree that a basic outreach with linkage capability would be fine and a web resource was agreed to post asap.
The next planning team meeting- (info deleted-this isn't a public meeting, please request updates. I would be happy to email these when available)
Update on Glendale-when I heard everything was out of Glendale (no one actually gave me the pictures and I wasn't there)...saying there were a 'couple of flat cars and the locomotives left to move' is a gigantic understatement.
There are about 20 flatcars left and the locomotives & tenders and a couple other large pieces. The misc is out. A dumptruck has been delivering clean fill and gravel so the new owners are moving in as 'we' are moving out. Still in process though.
Kernan Construction has donated a lowboy with a tiltbed that has been taking the flatcars out one at a time. I don't think we have a 'thank you' card big enough for Kernan.
Post a Comment