August 2007
S M T W T F S
« Jul   Sep »
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
262728293031  

Follow PeoriaChronicle on Twitter

Recent Comments

  • Sharon Crews: You must be one of the lucky ones–to have such a wonderful mother-in-law.
  • Jon: You seem real, too, Sharon. Kind of like my mother-in-law.
  • Sharon Crews: What Charlie means (as with many who comment here)is that many of us know the identities of those who...
  • charlie: You should never post anything that you wouldn’t want everyone to know YOU posted. Anonymity is not...
  • Sharon Crews: So are we assuming that DTaggart is using a phony name? What I really find offensive about all of this...
  • Block the bullys!: Here is a link to the Multiad Corporate Exec. page. http://www.multiad.com/corp.sh tml Shall we...
  • Sharon Crews: Jackie, I would assume that the only thing available to C.J. is our e-mail address since we blog from...
  • jackie: Kind of figured he could but that was the first time I had seen proof of it. It was just sort of a reminder...
  • Sharon Crews: Frustrated, I agree with you (as you well know) about District 150′s obligation to meet the needs...
  • Jon: “I have always wondered if CJ can view your email address that you sign in with.” Jackie, you might...
  • Sharon Crews: Jackie, if you believed that “DTaggart” crossed the line, why did you thank him/her for the...
  • jackie: That we agree on! Even though I was asking what you did for a living I accepted your response that basically...
  • truth: An eye for an eye.
  • C. J. Summers: “jackie” — You live by the sword, you die by the sword. You don’t publish my...
  • jackie: “Now, just out of curiosity, why did you post your question from your work computer at Multi-Ad? Is...

MLB Standings

Categories

21 landmarks proposed for historic preservation

Park District LogoThe Peoria Park District Planning Committee today heard testimony from Mike Baietto, Superintendent of Parks, on why 21 district-owned landmarks should be preserved under the district’s new Historic Preservation Ordinance. More will be added over the next 30 days as park district staff work on including notable omissions (such as the Christopher Columbus statue in upper Bradley Park) and the public weighs in with other suggestions.

The initial 21 landmarks that were presented are:

  1. Decorative Stone Fort, a.k.a. the parapet, including the canon (Glen Oak Park, 1899)
  2. Kinsey Memorial Fountain (Glen Oak Park, 1905)
  3. Small Animal House (Glen Oak Park, 1905)
  4. Iron Suspension Bridge (Glen Oak Park, 1902)
  5. Triebel Lions (Glen Oak Park/Zoo, 1903)
  6. Glen Oak Park Pavilion (1896)
  7. Old Settlers’ Monument (Glen Oak Park, 1899)
  8. Pergola (lower Glen Oak Park, 1917)
  9. Robert Ingersoll Statue (lower Glen Oak Park, 1911)
  10. Historic Grand View Drive Park (already on National Historic Register)
  11. Trewyn Park Pavilion (Trewyn Park, 1913)
  12. Kinsey Sundial (Luthy Botanical Gardens, 1905)
  13. Proctor Recreation Center (1913, already on National Historic Register)
  14. Iron Bridge (Bradley Park, 1898)
  15. Japanese Bridge (Bradley Park, 1921)
  16. Detweiller Park Nature Preserve
  17. Forest Park North Nature Preserve
  18. Forest Park South Nature Preserve
  19. Robinson Park Nature Preserve
  20. Singing Woods Nature Preserve
  21. Giant Oak Park (High Street)

It was mentioned during the presentation that the sundial had been in storage for several years before being put on display in the Luthy Botanical Gardens, so I asked if there were any other historical items in storage that should be added to the list. Mr. Baietto and Bonnie Noble both said that there is not — at least, not that they are aware of.

Other people who were at the meeting included City Councilman George Jacob, a couple members of the city’s Historic Preservation Commission, neighborhood activist Sara Partridge, and the chair of the Junior League.

At the next meeting, a final list will be proposed and if the Planning Committee approves it, it will go to the full Park Board at their next scheduled meeting, and then there will be a public hearing…. It takes a while to get things added to the park district’s historic register.

If you would like to make a recommendation for historic preservation, you can pick up a “Resource Nomination Application” form at the park district offices (Glen Oak Park Pavilion, lower level). It was mentioned that the form will be available on the district’s web site, but it doesn’t appear to be there yet (unless I just couldn’t find it). You can also pick up a copy of the district’s historic preservation ordinance at the office.

The nomination form asks for the name of the landmark; its location; the applicant’s name, contact info, and signature; a description of the “present and original (if known) physical appearance and characteristics”; “statement of significance”; and photographs.

7 comments to 21 landmarks proposed for historic preservation

  • Darn, thought you wwere too busy to blog? I hate to see it when your not.

  • I don’t understand nature preserves being on the list (detwieller, forest park, robinson, singing woods) nor do I get why the Proctor Rec Center and Grandview Drive which are both already National Historic Landmarks need to be included.

    I don’t have a big problem with the rest of them, although the Luthy sundial seems to be stretching it a bit considering the Christopher Columbus statue was overlooked.

  • Hey AntiPundit– I didn’t post anything all day Monday! Doesn’t that count? :-)

    PI — I got the impression they were including them (Grand View & Proc Ctr) precisely because they are already on the national historic register. They automatically qualify to be part of the district’s historical register. As far as the nature preserves… I guess it’s to keep them from putting a school on them. :-)

  • Karrie E. Alms

    CJ: Tragically hilarious!

  • New View

    Ok, now that a list has been put together… what next? Placing places, things, etc on a list “Marked for Hist Pres,” is only the beginning. Is the PPD going to hire BOB’S CLEAN & REPAIR to come in and treat the historical objects? Noble and Co. had better check area basements to make sure all of the historical objects are accounted for. Good list otherwise.

  • New View

    Sorry, my I meant “New Voice,” not “New View.” Uhhhmmmm.

  • [...] many different purposes over the years, and it is now on the list of 21 Peoria Park District “landmarks” proposed for historic preservation, and is referred to as the “Small Animal [...]