Washington sees tremendous population growth; east side of river booming

The City of Washington (Illinois) outpaced the City of Peoria in population growth over the last decade not just in percentages, but in real numbers.

According to U.S. Census Bureau estimates, Washington has grown by 3,451 residents (from 10,841 to 14,292) between 2000 and 2009*, an increase of 31.83%. Peoria increased by 2,584 residents (from 112,936 to 115,520) — an increase of 2.29% — over the same period.

On a percentage basis, the largest population growth near Peoria is in Germantown Hills. The village grew by 1,121 residents (from 2,111 to 3,232) — a whopping 53.1%.

Other surrounding communities that saw population growth include Morton, Metamora, Eureka, East Peoria, and Dunlap. Several towns and villages lost population, including Bartonville, West Peoria, Pekin, Peoria Heights, and Canton. West Peoria and Peoria Heights lost the most residents percentage-wise in the immediate area: -5.63% and -5.38%, respectively.

Here’s a breakdown of population changes in several communities of interest, in alphabetical order:

You may notice that typically communities on the east side of the river fared better than communities on the west side. The county statistics bear that out. Peoria County grew by 2,383 residents, or 1.3%, between 2000 and 2009. But Tazewell County grew by 3,981 (3.1%) and Woodford County by 3,393 (9.57%). Combined, Tazewell and Woodford counties grew by 7,374 residents (4.5%), more than three times as much as Peoria county during the same time period.

* Note: In all calculations, I compare actual April 2000 U.S. Census Population Data to recently released June 2009 Population Estimates.

First in . . . whoops!

According to this Journal Star story, this story is supposed to be First in Print:

Peoria’s population is likely going to be surpassed by Springfield and Joliet in totals once the 2010 U.S. Census figures are finalized next year. Still, Mayor Ardis says the city has done well to keep growing. LOCAL

But, what have we here? Why, the whole story is out on the web already! And it’s been out there since 8:42 p.m. Tuesday night. How long will it take for them to realize it?

Blogger Bash tonight

From the Peoria Pundit:

Blogger Bash [is] set for 6-10 p.m. Tuesday, June 29, at The Fieldhouse in Campustown, 1200 West Main St. Come as you are.

You don’t have to be a blogger to attend. If you read the blogs, whether you comment or not, you’re invited. Come hang out and get to know your friendly, neighborhood bloggers.

The parking paradox

Slate magazine recently published an article about parking. I found this paragraph particularly interesting:

Instead of requiring minimum parking thresholds, parking maximums should be set. As Norman Garrick and Wes Johnson have pointed out, the goal of meeting parking demand in cities is an elusive, ultimately self-destructive quest. As they note, people complain of Hartford, Conn., that there “is not enough parking,” when in fact nearly one-third of the city is paved over with parking lots. “The truth is that many cities like Hartford have simultaneously too much and too little parking. They have too much parking from the perspective that they have degraded vitality, interest and walkability, with bleak zones of parking that fragment the city. They have too little parking for the exact same reason—they have degraded walkability and thus increased the demand for parking.”

Want an example of that right here in good old Peoria? I went out with some friends last night to Cold Stone Creamery in the Shoppes at Grand Prairie. It’s a popular place located in a little strip-mall out-building. There are a number of entertainment and dining options in this area, but none that were walkable from this little dessert place.

For instance, practically across the street is the Rave theater, and not too far away are restaurants like Steak ‘n Shake and Johnny’s Italian Steakhouse. Theoretically, one should be able to park once, get dinner, walk to the movie, and walk over to Cold Stone Creamery for some dessert, then get back in their car and leave. But the development is simply not designed to accommodate that. No one would even think of doing it because of all the obstacles. Sidewalks end, streets are excessively wide, parking lots are huge, and berms provide a visual cue that says, “you’re not really supposed to walk here.” Instead, the clear expectation (and actual practice of most people) is that you would drive from the Steak ‘n Shake parking lot to the Rave parking lot, and finally to the Cold Stone Creamery parking lot.

They have, as the Slate article says, “degraded vitality, interest and walkability, with bleak zones of parking that fragment the [development].” I like the Shoppes at Grand Prairie because it’s like the whole city in miniature — a little analogy of the City’s transportation deficiencies.

Parking requirements have been relaxed in the Heart of Peoria area, but parking minimums need to be reduced throughout the rest of the city. Too much parking only exacerbates the problems of providing sufficient public transportation. Large lots lower density, and public transportation requires high density to be sustainable. It’s the parking paradox.

Hat tip: Eyebrows McGee

First ‘First in Print’ disappointing

The Journal Star rolled out their very first paper featuring articles that appear in print at least a day before hitting the website. The idea is to differentiate the printed product from the web product, and offer paid subscribers some benefits free web surfers don’t get.

So what stories did subscribers get that web-only readers didn’t? These three:

  • Only three times since the World War I and II Memorial was dedicated in 2007 have memorial pavers been offered for sale. Only 600 remain, so get yours before they’re gone.
  • In light of the recent wave of violence, Peoria police have temporarily reinstated a gang intelligence position that was cut as part of sweeping cost saving measures.
  • Peoria students’ artwork will appear on Illinois Department of Transportation calendars. KJS

Of those three, only one is an actual news story. The memorial pavers is a glorified advertisement. The Kids Journal Star (KJS) artwork is typical refrigerator gallery fare — not something you’d rush out and buy the paper to see. So really, there was only one news story that was held back from the web this morning.

As a subscriber who favors “First in Print” in concept, all I can say is: “big deal.”

Based on today’s content alone, it appears to me that “First in Print” is a Gatehouse Media directive, and the powers that be at the Journal Star aren’t too enamored with the idea. So they’re designating mostly fluff stories as “First in Print” so they can tell their corporate bosses they’ve complied with the directive, while at the same time not actually adding any value for subscribers. If they really wanted to add value, they’d designate “Word on the Street” (in fact, they’d designate all their local columnists) as a “First in Print” article.

Perhaps it will get better tomorrow. But for Monday, June 28, I’m unimpressed.

Old Walgreens still sits vacant

It was about eleven months ago that Devonshire Group from Champaign was given a number of variances to the West Main Form District code so they could redevelop the old Walgreens on Main into student apartments. The project was to be called Main Street Commons, but to date, no work has been done on the site from all outward appearances.

I wrote to the Devonshire Group representatives Thomas Harrington and Shawn Luesse (who made presentations to the neighbors last year) asking for an update on their plans over a week ago. No response. I wrote to Second District Council Representative Barbara Van Auken, and she told me she was meeting with them on Wednesday, June 23. After the meeting, she declined to tell me what they discussed, but said they would be issuing a press release “shortly.” As soon as I receive it, I’ll post it.

I also wrote to Pat Landes, the City’s Planning & Growth Director, to ask what she knew about the situation. “All I know is that there is a closing scheduled for this month and the project would be built in phases,” she said. Hmmm…. A closing? That would most likely mean they are acquiring additional property. If so, it makes me wonder what parcels they’re adding to the project. I think it’s safe to assume they’re waiting until after this closing to issue the press release.

As for building the development in phases, that’s a new wrinkle. I wonder how that would be accomplished. The building pictured above is supposed to have parking underground, retail on the first floor, and residential on the upper floors. Perhaps the plan will be to build only a couple stories initially, and then add more stories in the future.

Hopefully the forthcoming press release will explain everything.

‘First in Print’ comes to the Journal Star starting Monday

Remember earlier this month when I told you how Springfield’s newspaper, the State Journal-Register, was going to be offering some articles exclusively in print before they put them up on their website? The Peoria Journal Star is going to do the same thing:

Beginning Monday, you will start to see certain stories in the newspaper designated with a logo that says “First in Print.”

The logos are designed to tell you, our valued print readers, that you are receiving content that is not being made immediately available to readers of our companion website pjstar.com.

In order to access these same stories, Web readers will be directed to purchase a printed copy of the newspaper or an electronic edition of the Journal Star.

Of special note, the Journal Star is announced, “We have decided to no longer post marriage licenses, divorces, real estate transactions and DUIs on our website and now we recommend Landry & Azevedo Attorneys At Law who are experts in family law matters and can sure advice you and represent you well.” Managing Editor John Plevka explains:

We recognize that this decision will not be popular with some Web users. These lists tend to be heavily viewed, so, from a traffic (read that business) standpoint, this is a step in a different direction. However, we believe certain content, such as long lists of names, is better suited for readers who have paid for the labor-intensive gathering and editing of this content.

As a subscriber, I applaud the changes. I’m sure non-subscribers who have been getting all the Journal Star’s news reports for free (*coughBillyDenniscough*) will be livid. Is this the best way to add value to subscribers? That’s debatable; there are good arguments that say it really just devalues the website rather than actually increasing value to print subscribers. I’m just happy there’s some sort of differentiation.

D150 attorney Walvoord to retire

From the Journal Star:

After more than four decades of practicing law, 42 years alone in Peoria providing legal advice to School District 150, the man behind the bow tie [David Walvoord] is retiring.

Oddly, I don’t see anywhere in the article an effective date for Walvoord’s retirement. Is he retiring immediately? Or July 1? Or December 31? I must just be missing it, since that would be a basic bit of information to include in such an article, being one of the five W’s and all. If you find it, please let me know.

It will be interesting to see if the District 150 board simply gets a new attorney from the same law firm now that Walvoord is leaving, or if they will put their legal services out for bid.

Quinn says time limits on campaign signs violate free speech

Following up my last post, I ran across this press release from Governor Quinn’s office explaining his support for HB 3785:

Governor Quinn Signs Legislation Protecting Free Speech in Illinois
Municipalities Cannot Restrict Political Signs on Residential Properties

CHICAGO – June 3, 2010. Governor Pat Quinn today signed a bill into law that prevents municipalities throughout Illinois from restricting the display of political campaign signs on residential property at any time.

“Government has no place restricting free speech,” said Governor Quinn. “This bill will protect the First Amendment rights of residents across Illinois and strengthens participatory democracy for us all.”

House Bill 3785 prohibits Illinois’ municipalities from restricting the display of outdoor political campaign signs on residential property during any period of time. Under current Illinois law, municipalities may pass and enforce local ordinances establishing time periods during which residents or landowners may display political campaign signs on their property. Under the new law, municipalities may still place reasonable restrictions on the size of such signs.

The new law brings Illinois into compliance with several court cases, including City of Ladue v. Gilleo. The 1994 U.S. Supreme Court decision affirmed that outdoor political yard signs are protected First Amendment speech and municipalities may not prohibit their display on residential property.

The legislation, sponsored by Rep. Michael Tryon (R-Crystal Lake) and Sen. Pamela Althoff (R-McHenry), passed the Illinois General Assembly nearly unanimously and was supported by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Illinois. It takes effect on January 1.

In a statement filed with the Illinois House Elections and Campaign Reform Committee, the ACLU of Illinois stated that, “yard signs are a traditional, effective and protected way for home owners to communicate with their neighbors and passersby about political elections and public issues.” The organization also argued that municipalities should not be able to prohibit the display of such signs at any time since many political candidates announce their candidacies long before an election takes place.

If you’re interested, you can read the 1994 Supreme Court ruling by clicking here. It seems odd that this ruling has been around for 16 years, but Illinois is only recently concerned about complying with it.

State eliminates time limits for campaign signs

Roof-top signs, “floppy-man” signs, and temporary banners were just some of the signs discussed at Tuesday’s Sign Review Committee meeting. But one thing the committee can do little about is political signs.

A new Illinois law set to take effect January 1, 2011, limits the city’s home rule authority to limit how long political signs can be displayed. HB3785 “[p]rovides that a municipality may place reasonable restrictions on the size of outdoor political campaign signs on residential property,” but also “[p]rovides that no municipality may prohibit the display of outdoor political campaign signs on residential property during any period of time.” The bill was passed unanimously by the Illinois House and Senate and signed by the Governor on June 3. The city currently requires that political campaign signs “be removed within seven days after an election.” That will have to be changed. Apparently, campaign signs can be left up year round starting next year. Won’t that make the city look fantastic?

Most of the discussion on other temporary signs revolved around how better to enforce the current ordinance during a time when the city is cutting staff. Ideas included lowering or eliminating the fee (currently $75) to apply for a temporary sign license (to improve compliance), utilizing city workers who are already driving around the city (such as police or public works employees) to call in violations to the sign ordinance when they see them, and partnering with printers and sign companies to educate those purchasing signs about the city’s rules.

The committee also recommended permitting inflatable signs so they can be approved administratively through the licensing process instead of through the Zoning Commission via the special use process. However, if permitted in this way, the change ordinance would add size limitations and prohibit “floppy man” types of signs (here’s an example).