Monthly Archives: May 2006

City of Peoria, Heart of Peoria Plan

The charrette: Citizens relish chance to help city improve

29 Comments

Energetic Collaboration

Over 100 people (including me) showed up at the Ironfront Building Saturday morning at 8:30 to participate in the Ferrell-Madden-Associates-facilitated charrette. After some brief opening remarks, we all gathered in small groups at tables to discuss one of three topics: the Sheridan/Loucks Triangle, the Prospect Road Corridor, or the Heart of Peoria in general.

I sat at one of the “general” tables. The first thing we did was a “SWOT” analysis (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, Threats) — they didn’t call it that; I’m just using corporate lingo to describe it. Once we finished with that individual exercise, we got to work together and draw. The tables each had a large map of Peoria with the “Heart of Peoria” (HOP) area outlined and a large piece of tracing paper over it. We were given instructions to identify several things on the map, such as:

  • Places that we considered beautiful and would like to see mimicked the rest of the HOP.
  • Places that we felt were a huge mistake and should never be allowed to happen again (true story: as soon as that item was read, several of us at the table looked at each other and said in unison, “Campustown”).
  • Special buildings we felt should be saved and/or copied.
  • Buildings that were eyesores and should be torn down.
  • Streets that work well and should be used as a template elsewhere.
  • Streets that need improvement and how they could be improved.

This process was actually quite fun because it allowed all of us to put our ideas on paper and dream a little bit. There was the tendency for it to spiral into a complaining session, there’s no denying that, but I thought our group did a good job of staying positive. There were a lot of positive observations and ingenious ideas of what could be done to improve things in the older parts of the city.

Unfortunately, I had to leave early, so I didn’t get to see what happened next, but it’s my understanding that the facilitators tried to synthesize all the SWOT analyses and improvement plans among the “general” tables. They’ll use all that information to develop a form-based code — a regulatory document that will incorporate rules for how development should look in the older areas of town.

I can tell you from my experience that the room was buzzing — there was so much energy in that room Saturday morning, it was hard not to be inspired by all the citizen involvement. Will form-based codes solve all of Peoria’s problems? No. But there really isn’t any one thing — no silver bullet — that will solve all of Peoria’s problems. It will take a combination of efforts and, above all, time. But we have to start somewhere, and I would much rather see the city start with the citizens, getting our input, than hiring another “expert” consultant to tell us what we want. I think this is a step in the right direction.

Concern about gentrification

That said, there is one concern regarding New Urbanism that came up at both the meetings I attended this weekend that I believe deserves a fair hearing: negative effects of gentrification.

Gentrification happens when an area is improved so much that it becomes hot property and many people want to live there. A negative effect of this is that lower-income residents can’t afford to live there anymore due to rising housing and rental prices. In an effort to stabilize a neighborhood, the very people it was supposed to help end up being displaced by wealthier citizens who essentially take over the neighborhood.

When asked about this, Geoffrey Ferrell affirmed that it is something to be concerned about — but not right now, he added. He said that if/when the city’s efforts to revitalize the older neighborhoods become wildly successful, measures will need to be put in place to protect those areas from the negative effects of gentrification. However, that’s a long ways down the road.

Also, USA Today reported last year that conventional wisdom about gentrification may not be supported by the facts. Lance Freeman of Columbia University did a study comparing relocation rates of the poor in gentrified and non-gentrified areas of New York and found surprisingly little difference between them. In other words, the displacement of the poor is largely theoretical.

Still, it would be a good idea for Peoria to plan for success — that is, start considering now what Peoria will do to ameliorate any possible negative effects of gentrification in the Heart of Peoria. It’s always better to be proactive, if for no other reason than to help relieve the fears of lower-income residents of the inner city. When you get right down to it, this would be a wonderful problem for Peoria to have, insomuch as it would mean our efforts to revitalize the older part of the city were successful beyond our wildest imagination.

Blogosphere, Peoria Journal Star

Word on the Street follows up on Pundit post

1 Comment

Last Wednesday, Bill Dennis posted a postcard advertisement from Aaron Schock for a “community coffee” with Second District Councilperson Barbara Van Auken and Police Chief Steve Settingsgaard. Bill objected to the design of the postcard, observing that it looks like campaign literature and could give someone the misconception that Van Auken and Settingsgaard endorse Schock.

Jennifer Davis and Molly Parker followed up on this story in today’s Word on the Street column. They called Van Auken and Settingsgaard to see how they felt about the advertisement. Van Auken said she wasn’t too terribly concerned about it and reiterated her support for Fourth District Councilman Bill Spears — Schock’s opponent in the upcoming election. Settingsgaard was also unconcerned and said he hasn’t endorsed either candidate yet, but it appears he votes Republican, so we can all speculate on who he would/might endorse.

As for Jennifer and Molly’s take on it, they were also unconcerned:

This is the type of thing that wouldn’t normally ruffle feathers, but, be warned: we are entering the hyper-sensitive silly season where staunch supporters of one candidate or another seem to think that there’s a double meaning behind every word spoken, every random encounter.

I’ll betcha Bill is working on a rebuttal to that statement right now.

City of Peoria, Peoria Public Schools

District pays top dollar for Prospect properties

9 Comments

It’s just a formality, but the District 150 school board is slated to approve the purchase of eight properties on N. Prospect totalling $877,500 at Monday’s board meeting. The contracts are already signed, the money spent, but this action will just make it legal.

Here are the properties the district has purchased, along with their fair market value according to the Peoria County website (based on their assessed value):

Address Sales Price 2005 FMV Tax ID #
2102 N. Prospect $140,000 $114,360 1434378004
2126 N. Prospect $98,000 $60,150 1434332012
2138 N. Prospect $82,000 $54,780 1434332009
2142 N. Prospect $90,000 $56,280 1434332008
2144 N. Prospect $89,000 $63,750 1434332007
2206 N. Prospect $120,000 $86,850 1434332017
2208 N. Prospect $133,500 $89,190 1434332016
2212 N. Prospect $125,000 $84,180 1434332001
TOTAL $877,500 $609,540

And here’s where all those properties are in a satellite photo, courtesy of Peoria GIS and Photoshop:

The school district really jumped the gun on these purchases, and the near million dollars they’ve spent will make it harder for them to back out of their plans to put Glen Oak school on this property. Instead of merely putting down earnest money on these properties until after the school board approved them, they went ahead and signed purchase agreements.

It’s understandable that they would pay more than fair market value for the homes, since the district initiated the sale and the owners want to make enough to pay for relocation and get a comparable house somewhere else. But now if the district abandons its present course of action, they would end up having to resell the property — at a significant loss. The $267,960 over fair market value they’ve spent won’t be easily absorbed by a district that’s already running in the red.

However, as expensive a mistake as it was, it would be a bigger mistake to spend another $15 million to build a school on the corner of Glen Oak Park. The district should listen to the residents, parents, city leaders, et al., and either renovate or raze and rebuild Glen Oak School on its present site. If they would just give up their crazy delusion that they need 15 acres in the middle of a dense urban area to build a new school, they could actually renovate/rebuild Glen Oak for a lot cheaper than what they were going to spend to put it in Glen Oak Park, and that would mitigate the loss from the properties for which they paid top dollar.

City Council, City of Peoria

Ardis: Status quo is not acceptable; Peoria must become more business-friendly

3 Comments

Peoria has a reputation for not being especially business-friendly, but Mayor Ardis wants to change that. He’s proposing the city implement nineteen specific changes and/or improvements in a six-page Business Task Force Report (read it here) that was placed on the council agenda for Tuesday. The report was a collaborative effort with Third District Councilman Bob Manning, Fifth District Councilman Patrick Nichting, and local businessman Lee Graves.

The changes are placed under four major categories, or action items:

  1. Better information and communication regarding the development process.
  2. Reduced time frames for permits and zoning certificates.
  3. Changes in codes and/or policies that will facilitate development and redevelopment.
  4. Customer service and friendly, helpful attitude is a priority and goal for all city employees and departments.

Some of the highlights of the plan: The city is working to develop a “Developer’s Handbook” that would be “a guide to assist customers in the development process, containing regulations, processes, and policies related to development approval.” They would publish it in hard copy and also digital form, presumably to put on the city’s and/or Chamber of Commerce’s website. The goal is to have this project done by September this year.

The report also calls for “a complete rewrite of the city’s comprehensive plan.” This plan hasn’t been updated since 1992. The first phase of that rewrite is happening this weekend — the development of a form-based code for the Heart of Peoria. The rest of the comprehensive plan is tentatively scheduled to be completed by January 2008. That may sound like a long time, but if you’ve ever seen the comprehensive plan (it’s huge), you know that’s a pretty ambitious goal.

City employees would receive customer service training under this plan in order to improve their attitude and professionalism in dealing with city customers. I’ve never had to work with the departments a developer would need to consult, so I can’t comment on their attitude or professionalism. However, the city employees I have dealt with, both in the treasurer’s office and the city clerk’s office, have all been friendly, helpful, and professional.

There are also several items that involve regularly-scheduled meetings between different departments to improve communication, and several very specific items that were undoubtedly brought up by developers as being pet peeves of theirs when working with the city. Many items have already been completed. My favorite is item 2A: they reduced the time it takes to get residential building permits from one day to one hour. Now that’s process improvement!

This is a big step in the right direction. Peoria should be more business-friendly, and this document shows the city is aware of the problem and working to correct it. Kudos to the Business Task Force for their work on this plan.

City Council, City of Peoria, Parking

Free riverfront parking on the council’s agenda

4 Comments

You may soon be able to park two hours for free — during the day — at the city-owned lots along the riverfront.

On the city council agenda this coming Tuesday is a proposal to change the way fees are charged for the Michel/Edgewater/Liberty and Riverfront Village parking lots. Currently, these lots are staffed during the day with parking attendants and you pay a set rate for every half hour you’re parked weekdays during working hours.

Under the proposed fee structure, there would be no gates or attendants and you would be allowed two hours of free parking at these lots weekdays during working hours. If you parked longer than two hours, you would get a parking ticket. (Incidentally, if you don’t pay your parking ticket, the city approved an ordinance at their last meeting that authorizes the city to send unpaid parking tickets to a collection agency instead of through the courts.)

The Peoria Riverfront Association requested the parking fee change as a way to increase patronage of riverfront businesses and save the city money. The city incurred a net loss of $2,235 in 2005 because the cost of staffing full-time attendants exceeded revenues from parking fees. Much of the revenue comes from businesses who pay for their customers’ parking through ticket validation.

The city would enforce the two-hour limit by having a part-time city employee monitor the lots using a handheld license plate scanner from ParkTrak which basically allows the monitor to do “electronic tire chalking.” Barney Fife would have loved this gadget:

With ParkTrak Pro’s handheld License Plate Recognition technology, a flick of the chalkstick is turned into a click of the trigger. Each click records plate, date, time, and location, while simultaneously comparing duration of stay, distance moved (if any), and scofflaw status. Officers are automatically prompted to issue a ticket when a vehicle reaches overtime status. Flexible software allows for an individual license number’s total time duration to be calculated by stall, block face, street, programmable distance or zones. Added benefits include capturing a wealth of parker statistical data, and best of all electronic chalk marks… THAT CAN’T BE WIPED AWAY…

But before you get too excited about that free two-hour parking, it’s only being proposed on a one-year trial basis, so it may not last long. In any case, it will be done away with when the new museum is built. City Manager Randy Oliver says, “This is a short term solution and will not work upon completion of the Museum project.”

City of Peoria, Heart of Peoria Plan

Studio H.O.P.: Open government at work

1 Comment

Recently, Peorians have been up in arms about some decisions that were made by a certain government body without adequate input from the citizens. It made us feel left out, undervalued, like our opinion doesn’t matter about issues that affect us and our neighborhoods.

Well, if you felt that way, then you need to be at these “Studio H.O.P.” charrettes this weekend. The city council and staff are going out of their way to show you that they do value you, they want your opinion, and they want you to have a say in something that will directly affect you.

The charrette (or “citizen collaboration,” for those of you who don’t like French words) process is “to focus and record the political will of the citizens,” according to consultants Geoffrey Ferrell and Mary Madden who kicked off the Studio H.O.P. charrettes tonight (5/19) at the Civic Center. To successfully determine the “political will of the citizens,” they need as many citizens as possible to be there — to collaborate on this project.

What’s taking place this weekend is nothing less than a rewriting of the city’s comprehensive plan for the Heart of Peoria (roughly defined as the area of the city south of War Memorial Drive — think of it as the pre-Richwoods-Township-annexation area). The city will essentially be throwing out the Euclidian zoning laws which require strict segregation of commercial and residential land uses, and replacing them with something called “form-based codes.”

One website defines form-based codes as “a land development regulatory tool that places primary emphasis on the physical form of the built environment with the end goal of producing a specific type of ‘place.'” What the charrettes try to determine is just what type of “place” Peorians want to have, and then codify those desires into a regulatory document.

The charrettes will cover the entire Heart of Peoria area, but will give special emphasis to the Sheridan/Loucks triangle, the Prospect Road corridor, and the Warehouse District.

All they really want to know is how you want Peoria to look. How do you want the streets to look? The blocks? The neighborhoods? The special places? There will be a lot of ideas generated, and undoubtedly some contradictory ideas — they all get considered. When the idea gathering is done, the consultants will try to synthesize the ideas as much as possible, although there will obviously need to be some compromise on the most divergent ideas.

In the end, we’ll have a code that tells homeowners, developers, et al., what kind of physical form we want in our neighborhoods and business districts so that when they are developed and built out, they maintain the character and consistency we enjoy and expect.

And you have the opportunity to have a voice in writing this code. If you can make it, even for part of the day, it will be well worth your time to attend. The charrette goes from 8:30-Noon on Saturday, May 20.

City of Peoria, Heart of Peoria Plan

Charrettes start tonight

3 Comments

The charrettes start tonight, and they have an updated schedule:

  • Friday, May 19, 6:30 p.m. to 8:30 p.m.
    Heart of Peoria Charrette Kick-off Reception
    Location: Peoria Civic Center. Rooms 221 and 222
  • Saturday, May 20, 8:30 a.m. to 12:30 p.m.
    Charrette session for Sheridan Road-Loucks Corridor, Prospect Road Corridor, and Heart of Peoria Neighborhoods.
    Location: The Design Studio, 2nd floor of the Iron Front Building, 424 S.W. Washington Street. Free parking under the Bob Michel Bridge.
  • Sunday, May 21, 2:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m.
    Charrette session for Warehouse District.
    Location: The Design Studio, 2nd floor of the Iron Front Building, 424 S.W. Washington Street. Free Parking under the Bob Michel Bridge.
City Council, City of Peoria, Peoria Park District, Peoria Public Schools, Ray LaHood

WWRD: What Would Ray Do?

6 Comments

U.S. Congressional Representative LaHood is taking time away from representing our interests in Washington to try to broker a compromise between several local units of government and concerned citizens, according to the Journal Star today.

LaHood said he attended a meeting Monday where Mayor Jim Ardis and state Sen. George Shadid asked him to organize a future meeting with District 150 officials. At issue is the specific location for the school.

“I’m going to convene a meeting of all the parties to see if we can resolve whatever problems exist with the proposed project,” LaHood said Wednesday from his office in Washington, D.C.

Why?  I remember going to a debate between LaHood and his Democratic challenger in Metamora several years ago.  At issue for Metamorans at that time was the widening of Route 116.  A local farmer got up and wanted to know which candidate was going to do something to stop them from widening the road and taking part of his farmland.  Both of the candidates, to their credit, said that was a local issue and not within the scope of the office for which they were running.

How is the Glen Oak School situation different?  What compelling reason is there for escalating this to a U.S. Representative? Have we exhausted all options locally?  Are we at such an impasse that we need to bring in an arbitrator?  At best, this course of action seems premature.

City of Peoria, Peoria Police

Shooting too close to home

2 Comments

A man was shot in the Rolling Acres subdivision on Wednesday, the Journal Star reported.  WEEK’s website reports that the man has died.

I attended Rolling Acres school for Kindergarten through seventh grade (it was a K-8 school back then), and I had many friends who lived throughout the Rolling Acres, Sherwood Forest, and Joanne Manor neighborhoods.  Hearing about a shooting should be shocking to us no matter where it happens, but I’ll be honest, it’s more shocking to me hearing that it happened in the neighborhood where I grew up.  I guess it just hits a little too close to home.

Nation/World

Britain looks to nuclear power; what will U.S. do?

According to the Times Online (London), “Britain is to build the first new generation of nuclear power stations for 20 years to avoid becoming dependent on foreign gas imports.” Right now, nuclear power accounts for 22% of Britain’s electricity, similar to the United States where nuclear power provides about 20% of our nation’s electricity. No nuclear power plants have come online in the U.K. since 1988 or in the U.S. since 1996, according to the Times and the U.S. Energy Information Administration, respectively. In contrast, France relies on nuclear power for 80% of their electricity.

With natural gas prices high and local electricity prices forecasted to go up 20-35% in 2007, is the U.S. planning to exploit nuclear energy as an alternative? The President wants to explore it, apparently. The Congressional Research Service (CRS) has published a nice summary of U.S. nuclear policy which includes this information on the administration’s stand:

The Bush Administration has called for an expansion of nuclear power. For Department of Energy (DOE) nuclear energy research and development, the Administration is seeking $632.7 million for FY2007, an 18.1% increase from the FY2006 appropriation.

Believe it or not, Illinois leads the nation in nuclear capacity (source: EIA). In fact, our state has almost as much nuclear capacity all by itself as the United Kingdom. There are 11 reactors among the six plants located in the Land of Lincoln. Those plants are located in Braidwood, Byron, Clinton, Dresden, LaSalle, and Quad Cities. All the plants/reactors are owned by Exelon Corporation, the parent company of AmerGen, Commonwealth Edison, and other power companies in Illinois.

The plant in Clinton, however, cost over $4 billion to build, “leading the plant to produce some of the most expensive power in the Midwest.” And there are also concerns over safety and radioactive waste. CRS reports that “each nuclear reactor produces an annual average of about 20 tons of highly radioactive spent nuclear fuel and 50-200 cubic meters of low-level radioactive waste.” Where does it all go?

Spent fuel and other highly radioactive waste is to be isolated in a deep underground repository, consisting of a large network of tunnels carved from rock that has remained geologically undisturbed for hundreds of thousands of years. Under the Nuclear Waste Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 10101 et seq.), Yucca Mountain in Nevada is the only candidate site for the national repository.

So there are trade-offs. Do the pros outweigh the cons for using more nuclear power in the U.S. to reduce our dependence on gas and oil? Or would we just be trading one problem (scarcity, emissions) for another (safety, radioactive waste), at a negligible economic advantage?