Archive for the 'Form-Based Code' Category

Van Auken abandons Main Street improvements

Posted by C. J. Summers on November 1st, 2008

According to our neighborhood newsletter, second-district councilperson Barbara Van Auken is not going to ask for any funding for Main Street improvements in 2009:

The proposed changes to Main Street are estimated to be in the order of $10 million. Barbara Van Auken (our City Council representative) will not support inclusion of changes to Main Street in Peoria’s 2009 budget, citing the need to do further study of the project, as well as more pressing priorities elsewhere in the city for next year’s capital budget.

That’s right. After all the time, money, and effort that has been expended for these improvements over the past six years, now, at the 11th hour, our city councilperson is evidently going to abandon the project.

Let’s review. Main Street is one of four form districts in Peoria (the others being the Warehouse District, Sheridan/Loucks Triangle, and Prospect Road Corridor). A form district is a small part of the Heart of Peoria Plan area that the City singled out for more intensive coding known as a “form-based code.” The idea was to focus resources on these areas, then spread out from there to revitalize the rest of the Heart of Peoria Plan area over time.

Main Street is starting to see some significant private investment. The old Walgreens was recently purchased and a new mixed-use development is underway. The businesses adjacent to the Costume Trunk are replacing their facade. One World recently expanded with the departure of Lagron Miller.

But at least one established business — Running Central — is getting impatient for improvements to be made to Main Street. In the past, the new owner has stated that if changes aren’t made, he’s going to move the business to Junction City.

You can’t blame him. The city seems to be stuck in “analysis paralysis” when it comes to changing the streetscape on Main. Consider the studies: The Heart of Peoria Plan (2002); Wallace Roberts & Todd Med-Tech/Ren Park study (2004); Farrell-Madden form-based code study (2006); Hansen traffic study (2008). All of these studies in one way or another said we need to “fix the streets” — i.e., make them more pedestrian-friendly, slow the traffic down, provide on-street parking for businesses, etc. — and so far, no road improvements have materialized.

Van Auken’s pronouncement that she won’t even try to get funding for this important project in 2009 is disappointing to say the least. After six years and four studies on this project, what’s it going to take to get some follow-through from the city?

In fairness, some progress has been made in other areas: specifically, the form-based code and broader Land Development Code have been enacted. But that’s only half of what’s needed to make these form districts a success. The LDC and form-based codes regulate the private space. But in order for these districts to thrive, there absolutely must be improvement to the public space as well.

Public improvements have been noticeably absent from the form districts so far. Attempts to make Adams and Jefferson street two-way in the Warehouse District has met with opposition from Caterpillar. Efforts to narrow Washington street to make it more pedestrian-friendly has met with opposition from IDOT and first district councilman Clyde Gulley, who is in the trucking business and likes having Washington be a high-speed truck route. The Prospect Road corridor hasn’t even been talked about the last two years.

The most promising area is the Sheridan/Loucks Triangle, where yet another study has recently been done to look at specific ways to improve the streetscape. Whether that effort will get funded remains to be seen. I’m not sure whether Van Auken considers it one of those “more pressing priorities” for the City’s capital budget, or if it will also get the axe.

Finally, let’s quickly talk about Van Auken’s reasons for abandoning the Main Street project.

  • “The proposed changes to Main Street are estimated to be in the order of $10 million.” — Assuming that estimate is correct, yeah, that’s a lot of money. But of course it can and should be phased over several years, not spent all at once. That’s the way it is with all large road projects. Speaking of which, does anyone think that the fifth district councilman will not ask for funding for widening Northmoor Road or extending Pioneer Parkway in 2009 due to “more pressing priorities elsewhere in the city”?
  • “…citing the need to do further study of the project…” — I think we’ve already established that there’s been plenty of study. Anyone wanting more study at this point is simply looking for different conclusions.
  • “…as well as more pressing priorities elsewhere in the city for next year’s capital budget.” — Why is the Main Street project not a “pressing priority”? We’ve spent hundreds of thousands of dollars studying it and countless hours getting public input on it. There’s even a grassroots organization (Campaign for a Walkable West Bluff) that has sprung up to try and push this project along. There’s no governmental or judicial agency standing in the way of it. It’s part of the city’s plan for revitalizing the older parts of town. What are these unspecified “more pressing priorities”? Implementing a new logo? Continuing to subsidize downtown parking?

I would also point out that these improvements to Main Street have quite a bit of popular support in the second district (although there are some who are opposed, of course). Neighborhood organizations, the West Bluff Council, and businesses along Main are pretty enthusiastic about seeing these changes made. I wonder how all those people will feel about Van Auken putting the kibosh on those improvements right before she’s up for reelection.

Heart of Peoria Commission votes against temporary LDC changes

Posted by C. J. Summers on October 26th, 2008

The city’s Planning and Growth Department is spearheading an effort to review the portion of the Land Development Code (LDC) that deals with form-based code districts “to determine if all the regulations are performing as anticipated and to ensure compatible development which meets the purpose statements of the code.” Toward that end, they have done two things:

  1. Established an LDC Review Committee. The LDC Committee is comprised of two representatives from the Heart of Peoria Commission, Zoning Commission, the Zoning Board of Appeals, and the Historic Preservation Commission. I’m one of the two representatives from HOPC. So far, we’ve had two meetings. No decisions have been made yet, but we’ve discussed street wall and parking setback requirements and worked on crafting definitions for “change of use” and “expansion of use.”
  2. Requested the City Council temporarily amend the LDC while the LDC Review Committee completes its work. This is on Tuesday’s agenda. Basically, they want to make it easier for projects in a form district to get an exception from the regulations. Currently, any exceptions to the regulations must go through the Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA). The ZBA’s decision is final; any appeals have to go through circuit court. Planning and Growth is requesting instead that any exceptions be handled as a special use request; that would require the City Council’s approval. Again, this request is just for a six-month period — long enough for the committee to complete its work.

During the Heart of Peoria Commission meeting Friday morning (which wasn’t attended by any media, incidentally), that second point was one of the topics of discussion.

Some commissioners felt the temporary LDC change was a good idea. They argued, like Planning and Growth, that the LDC Review Committee’s recommendations “could include rewriting of certain regulations or removal of them after a determination that they may be too extensive.” Hence, exceptions during this time should be able to be made legislatively (through the council) rather than judicially (through the ZBA). The applicant would still have to make their case either way; it would only change which body has the final say.

Others, like me, were skeptical. I didn’t hear a compelling reason why this change was necessary. First of all, there don’t appear to be a rash of requests before the ZBA (in fact, their last regular meeting was cancelled because they didn’t have a single case). Secondly, the issues that are being reviewed by the committee are limited in scope, so there’s no need to change the exceptions procedure for all form district regulations. Others pointed out that exceptions made under this proposed temporary change could set a bad precedent.

The Heart of Peoria Commission was split on the issue. A motion in favor of the temporary change failed 3-4. That was followed by a motion to make no changes to the exception process while the commission completes its work; that motion passed 4-3.

Sheridan Triangle final public meeting planned

Posted by C. J. Summers on October 1st, 2008

From a press release:

The City of Peoria will host the third Public Open House at the Council Chambers, Room 400, City Hall, 419 Fulton Street, Peoria, on Thursday, October 9, 2008 from 7:00 p.m. to 8:30 p.m. The purpose of this open house is the discussion of the preferred alternative identified in previous open houses, and the review of the potential streetscape layout components and landscaping options, and to collect final comments on the Master Plan for the Form District known as the Sheridan Triangle Business District, before its presentation to the Peoria City Council.

The intent of the project is to revitalize the character of the streets in the study area to create urban, pedestrian-friendly streets through narrower travel lanes, wider sidewalks and a tree canopy, as well as other improvements to be determined through this public Master Plan process.

Sheridan Triangle project open meeting tonight

Posted by C. J. Summers on July 16th, 2008

From a very short press release:

Sheridan Triangle Business District Roadway Enhancement Project Public Meeting/Open House
Date: July 16, 2008
Time: 6 p.m.
Place: Bradley University - Marty Theater
(Lower Level - Student Center)

HOPC Update

Posted by C. J. Summers on March 28th, 2008

I thought you might be interested to know what’s going on with the Heart of Peoria Commission these days. Here’s a quick look:

The Executive Summary

One of the top things on the Heart of Peoria Commission’s work plan this year is to develop an executive summary of the Heart of Peoria Plan. The Plan as it exists now is a large-format (11×17), 78-page color document that is expensive to reproduce (~$150). Even as a commissioner, when I asked for a copy of the document, I was presented with a stapled, single-sided, photocopied, black and white version.

Well, that doesn’t exactly invite people to read the document and catch the vision. So the idea is to create a smaller, shorter, easier-to-reproduce, but still color version of the plan that would give the basic ideas in summary form. This could then be given to anyone who wants or needs to know about the Plan, from citizens to developers to commissioners/council members.

There were two options for getting this done. We could have a staff member do it (Planning and Growth Director Pat Landes offered one of her staff — Kimberly Smith), or we could see if someone from the original team that put the plan together (e.g., David Brain from New College of Florida) would be able to do it for us for a small fee.

We’ve run into roadblocks with both options. The first option (in-house) is stalled because, with the departure of Ed Boik, the Planning and Growth department is short-staffed, and so our staff liaison got pulled off the project. With the latter option, we run into funding issues. The council didn’t give our commission any funding this year, so we would have to try to convince a City department to spend some of their limited funds on this project. We’re still working on that option.

Sheridan Triangle

The Sheridan/Loucks Triangle project is moving along. After the Heart of Peoria Plan was adopted “in principle” by the Council, the next step the Commission did was get it codified for the Plan area. That’s when Farrell Madden came in and wrote the Land Development Code (LDC). The LDC includes four Form Based Code areas: Warehouse District, West Main (Renaissance Park), Prospect Road Corridor, and the Sheridan/Loucks Triangle. After the coding was finished, the Council passed a facade improvement program for the Sheridan/Loucks area (among others), which gave some incentives for the businesses to spruce up their storefronts.

Now in order for the area to really be revitalized, it takes not just private investment, but also public investment. The City needs to improve the streetscape in order for this area to be successful again. Right now the street is too wide, the sidewalks too narrow, and the traffic too fast. By installing wider sidewalks, pedestrian-scale lighting, street trees, and on-street parking, the City will incentivize redevelopment.

Even though this is obviously the culmination of the Heart of Peoria Plan and the LDC that was spearheaded by HOPC, the Commission has not been included in this latest phase yet. We weren’t invited (by accident, we’ve been assured) to the public kick-off meeting at Columbia Middle School. I heard about it, however, and attended anyway. While there, I talked to Gene Hewitt and Nick Stoffer from the City’s Traffic & Engineering department. They mentioned that they thought a Heart of Peoria commissioner should be on the Citizen Advisory Group (CAG).

I told HOPC chairman Bill Washkuhn that I’d be interested in serving on the CAG, and he forwarded my request to Second District Council Member Barbara Van Auken. She responded:

The representatives who are involved at this point are residential and business neighbors. At a later stage, we will seek input from others, including HOPC and Traffic Commissioners. I’ll notify C.J. when we are at a point where his contribution is appropriate.

After a recent Council meeting, I ran into Ms. Van Auken and asked her at what point in the process she would be bringing in the commissions, and she said once the engineers have some feasible options. Evidently she doesn’t want commissioners making suggestions of things that might not be feasible. So, once the engineers have several options from which to choose, she said the HOP and Traffic commissions will be invited to start participating.

Next Meeting

The next Heart of Peoria Commission meeting is scheduled for Friday, April 25, 8:00-10:30 a.m., City Hall, room 404.

Sheridan Triangle renewal underway

Posted by C. J. Summers on March 7th, 2008

Sheridan Triangle graphicA public meeting was held Wednesday night at Columbia Middle School to talk about streetscape and intersection improvements in the Sheridan-Loucks Triangle form-based code area. It’s a small stretch of Sheridan road, bounded by the south side of Hanssler on the north, and the north side of McClure on the south.

The process for making changes is outlined on this document that was distributed at the meeting. In addition to public meetings like the one Wednesday where anyone can give input, a Citizen Advisory Group (CAG) either has been or will be established that will include key stakeholders and presumably will require a greater time commitment (i.e., more meetings). I don’t know who is on the CAG, but I will try to find out. Currently, I know that no one from the Heart of Peoria Commission is on it, but perhaps there are plans to appoint someone.

If you can’t make it to the meetings, but would like to give some input, page two of the aforementioned document is a Community Context Audit Form. It needs to be returned by next Wednesday, March 12, which doesn’t give you a lot of time, but it will give you an opportunity to have your voice heard by the design team.

This project is not going to happen overnight. The timetable is spread out so that the final recommendation won’t come before the council until late September this year (tentatively). That may sound like a long time, but it’s only six months, and it will fly by quickly. The important thing is that progress is being made. Everyone’s hope and expectation is that this will be a successful implementation of the Heart of Peoria Plan, form-based codes, and public-private partnerships to revitalize an older area of town, and that it will be a model for the rest of the Heart of Peoria Plan area to follow.

I arrived at the meeting a little late Wednesday, but found the presentations and question and answer time very interesting. There were about 50 people in attendance, including District 150 Superintendent Ken Hinton, which I thought was notable. The best part was after the presentations when we got to interact one-on-one with the consultants and city staff. Throughout the gymnasium, there were several stations set up with maps, engineering drawings, artists’ renderings, etc., that explored different aspects of the planning process, including one station that had a computerized traffic simulation of the area.

I’m encouraged by what I’m seeing as this project moves forward.

Sheridan Triangle streetscape improvement meeting March 5

Posted by C. J. Summers on February 26th, 2008

News release from the City of Peoria:

Peoria LogoThe City of Peoria will host a public open house at Columbia Middle School, 2612 North Bootz Avenue on Wednesday, March 5, 2008 from 7:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m. The purpose of this open house is for the public to review the scope of a study and master plan to implement a streetscape improvement project for the Form District known as the Sheridan Triangle Business District, and to provide input to the public master plan process. The intent of the project is to revitalize the character of the streets in the study area to create urban, pedestrian-friendly streets through narrower travel lanes, wider sidewalks and a tree canopy, as well as other improvements to be determined through this public master plan process.

For further information, please contact Scott Reeise, Civil Engineer, at 494-8801 or sreeise@ci.peoria.il.us.

Council should also attend LDC training

Posted by C. J. Summers on December 7th, 2007

I’ve got the date saved on my calendar: Saturday, January 26. That’s the day the city will be bringing in Lee Einsweiler from Code Studio in Austin, Texas, to do a refresher course on the city’s new Land Development Code that he helped create. John Sharp has an article about it in the paper today:

A meeting is scheduled for Jan. 26 to bring a variety of city officials together and train them on specifics of the LDC. Members of the city’s Zoning Board of Appeals, Zoning Commission, Planning Commission, Historic Preservation Commission, the Heart of Peoria Commission and Renaissance Park Commission will gather with city officials for a one-day training seminar focusing on hypothetical scenarios and decisions, using the LDC, that could emerge from them.

There’s only one crucial group missing here: the city council. I think all council members should also attend this session — especially the district council members from the first, second, and third districts. I’m hearing rumblings of more possible “exceptions” from not only the Land Development Code, but the form-based codes that were created for the Warehouse District, Sheridan-Loucks Triangle, Prospect Road Corridor, and Main Street Corridor. Not only are developers asking for exceptions, some council members are considering them.

If we make exceptions every time a developer comes and asks for it, then we’ve wasted a tremendous amount of time and money on these codes. Even if we get all the groups mentioned in Sharp’s article on board with the new codes, if the council compromises, it will be all for naught. That’s why I think it’s critical that they attend this training session.

Yes, I know they’re busy and already attend a lot of meetings. But this code affects 8,000 acres of Peoria. I think it’s important enough to warrant attendance by city decision-makers.

ZC, Council votes undercut Land Development Code

Posted by C. J. Summers on November 14th, 2007

Recent votes by the Zoning Commission and the City Council undercut the very basis of the city’s recently-adopted Land Development Code. The controversy centers around a special use request from St. Ann’s church.

St. Ann’s church wants to build an 8,000-square-foot parish hall adjacent to their church on the south side of Peoria, 1010 S. Louisa St. In order to do that, some land has to be rezoned (to “R4″ residential) and a special use permit granted (for church use), which means it had to go before the Zoning Commission. The zoning regulation for this area is the recently-adopted Land Development Code.

Land Development Code

Since this is a special use request, the Land Development Code (LDC) does not have specific guidelines. After all, the writers of the Land Development Code couldn’t possibly foresee and codify regulations for every conceivable special-use request. But what we do have are the intent statements in the document. For example, the intent statement in the LDC for R4 districts reads (4.1.1.D):

The R4 District is intended to preserve established single-family neighborhoods within the Heart of Peoria. The district is also intended to allow for new single-family houses on small lots in development patterns that mimic established portions of surrounding neighborhoods at a density not to exceed 11.62 gross dwelling units per acre.

Add to that the overall intent of the entire LDC (1.5.A and B):

The overriding intent of this development code is to implement the Heart of Peoria Plan…. New development regulations for the Heart of Peoria are necessary because the existing zoning and subdivision ordinances include provisions that work against the realization of a revitalized, pedestrian-friendly commercial areas, and the renovation and preservation of inner city neighborhoods. This development code in contrast with previous codes, focuses on the creation of mixed-use, walkable
neighborhoods.

It goes on to state some specific intentions of implementing the Heart of Peoria Plan, including, “Prohibit blank walls along the sidewalk,” “Use the scale and massing of buildings to transition between the corridors and surrounding neighborhoods,” “Promote infill development for vacant parcels that reflects the surrounding scale and character,” “Control the scale and fit of new development patterns,” and “Use the commercial corridors as a seam sewing neighborhoods together rather than a wall keeping
them apart.”

Furthermore, the specific regulations for R4 districts give some guidance as well. They include such things as, “Roof height and building profile for new buildings shall seek to be compatible with adjacent structures” (4.1.5.B.2), “The scale and mass of new homes or remodeled houses shall be compatible with adjacent houses” (4.1.5.G.1), “Building materials for new houses shall be similar to other houses on the block” (4.1.5.G.3), and “Architectural styles shall be compatible with other architectural styles on the block” (4.1.5.G.4).

Not all regulations that apply to houses can be applied to an 8,000-square-foot parish hall (e.g., porches), but it’s clear from the LDC that scale and mass, architectural styles, and building materials are all important items.

Planning and Growth

So when St. Ann’s came to the city asking for this special use and proposed a building that looks like this (click for larger view):

St. Ann proposal - small view

…naturally, Planning and Growth had some concerns. It looks like a warehouse. It’s architecturally incompatible with other structures on the block. The scale and fit of this structure is wrong for the neighborhood. So, Planning and Growth made a simple recommendation regarding this problem (Wikipedia link added):

The architecture of the parish hall shall be modified through the use of ground level windows, pilasters or other architectural features which break-up the mass of the structure into smaller visual components.

They didn’t ask them to redesign the whole building. They didn’t ask them to make the building smaller. All they asked was that some elements be added that would make the architecture and scale look and feel more compatible with the block, consistent with the LDC’s intent.

Zoning Commission

Well, that went over like a lead balloon at the Zoning Commission meeting. First, the petitioner stated that adding windows couldn’t be done because there’s too much vandalism in the area and the windows would get broken. Think about that logic for a while and how such a view, if accepted, could influence the built environment on the south side. He also stated he didn’t want “some arbitrary opinion” of what would be acceptable architecture for the building. Of course, neither does city staff — they can’t legally require something that’s “arbitrary.” Thus, they based their recommendation on the LDC, as explained above.

Several of the Zoning Commission members, however, agreed with the petitioner and questioned why the city was making architectural suggestions at all — as if form-based codes were a completely foreign concept to them. (In fact, that’s likely the case, since the most outspoken opponents of P&G’s suggestion didn’t attend any of the consultant-selection meetings, the subsequent charrettes, or the all-committee training sessions.) The Journal Star reported on the meeting, and printed these quotes:

“I’m surprised the city of Peoria is getting involved in the architectural business,” commissioner Richard Unes said. Commissioner Greg Hunziker agreed. “I don’t think we have the authority to tell them how to build their building.”

City beat reporter John Sharp went on to describe how “some were upset that it would be up to the Planning and Growth Management Department to ultimately determine if the architecture was good enough for the project to move forward.” (PJS, 11/02/2007)

These comments are representative of the discussion. Unes’s comment is especially interesting since he shouldn’t have been discussing the item at all — his company, Peoria Metro Construction, is doing the design and construction work for St. Ann’s (he did abstain from voting, at least). But I digress. These comments display a disturbing lack of understanding regarding the purpose of the LDC and the authority of the City to regulate the built environment through the use of form-based codes.

I talked to Heart of Peoria Commissioner Beth Akeson about the Zoning Commission’s deliberation. She said that “the city has a duty to intercede when building proposals, such as the addition to St. Ann’s, are brought forward,” and that “the best cities in the country routinely influence decisions like these.”

Of course, the Zoning Commission doesn’t have any input from the Heart of Peoria Commission because, since the resignation of Chad Bixby, there has been no Heart of Peoria Commissioner assigned to the Zoning Commission. You may recall that the Committee on Commissions recommended that the Heart of Peoria Commissioners be dual-appointed to other key commissions in the city, including the Zoning Commission.

In the end, the Zoning Commission voted to approve the special use request, but specifically excluded staff’s recommendation to modify the architecture. That sent it on to the City Council, which considered the request last night.

City Council

The City Council stood by the Zoning Commission’s recommendation, but for different reasons. At-large councilman Eric Turner and first-district councilman Clyde Gulley expressed concern over the additional costs of making the building compatible with the surrounding architecture. They feared that requiring the building to look better would keep redevelopment from happening. Now think about that logic for a while. The only conclusion I can draw is that they believe any development, no matter how incompatible, is better than no development. And that belief, dear readers, is why Peoria looks the way it does.

Interestingly, no actual cost estimates were provided for consideration, nor was there any indication from the church that they would scrap their plans if the city were to require the building to look better. So these concerns were acted upon in the absence of any real facts. The council voted to approve the Zoning Commission’s recommendation with only council members Sandberg and Van Auken voting “no.”

Conclusion

In fact, it probably would cost more to make the building more compatible. No one is denying that. But no one is considering the cost of incompatible building design. Do you think home values next to this warehouse-looking structure are going to go up or down as a result of this development? Do you think the houses on Cooper are going to go up or down in value once the five-story parking deck is in their back yards? It’s not that these mixed uses can’t exist side-by-side in harmony; it’s that the form of the built structure makes all the difference. This is Form-Based Codes 101.

Commissioner Akeson said it best when she wrote to me recently, “additional cost in the short term will be outweighed by the long-term benefit of infill that contributes to the overall value of homes in the older neighborhoods. Home values are influenced by construction quality and architectural design. Inappropriate infill will reduce the value of neighborhoods. The only way to guarantee improved quality of future infill projects is to set minimum basic standards to improve quality and design.”

During the deliberation of St. Ann’s special use request, the Zoning Commission and City Council have expressed objections that undermine the purpose and goals of the Land Development Code — a code that they voted for, based on a Plan that they adopted “in principle.” Let’s hope this was an exception, and that the exception doesn’t become the rule.

Council votes down Sheridan Road/Heart of Peoria improvements

Posted by C. J. Summers on October 9th, 2007

UPDATE/CORRECTION 10/11/07: Below, I mistakenly cited the City of Peoria operating budget. In fact, the money in question was $200,000 from the capital budget set aside in 2007 for design and engineering of the Sheridan Loucks Triangle specifically and exclusively. $200,000 per year from 2007 to 2011 was requested, but only $200,000 in 2007 was funded. Sorry for the confusion, and thanks to my friend at the city who wishes to remain anonymous for pointing out my error.

In the 2007 City of Peoria budget (pp. 128-129), money was set aside for economic development. Here’s where some of that money was designated to go (emphasis mine):

2. Community Revitalization Activity – Activity cost $238,529

This program is responsible for undertaking projects which promote downtown Peoria and adjacent areas, including the Riverfront and residential neighborhoods, as an attractive location for working, living, and entertainment. Specific activities, to be undertaken, within the next five years, include:

  • Create and implement residential enterprise zone.
  • Identify and execute initiatives to revitalize the Warehouse District and Southern Gateway.
  • Finalize redevelopment plans for the former Sears block to create a cultural and entertainment destination for the Region.
  • Identify and redevelop blighted/contaminated property.
  • Continue revitalization initiatives in Council-directed areas (Sheridan Loucks, Prospect Road, Renaissance Park).
  • Undertake and complete public infrastructures improvements to support business and industry.

So, at tonight’s council meeting, Councilwoman Barbara Van Auken brought forth a motion to spend some of that money to enter into a contract with the Farnsworth Group, Inc. “for the DESIGN of the SHERIDAN TRIANGLE BUSINESS DISTRICT ENHANCEMENT from McCLURE AVENUE to HANSSLER PLACE, in an Amount Not to Exceed $183,750.00.” This is in the Sheridan Road form district that was created by the council back in May of this year.

In order for form districts to be successful, there are two things that need to take place. First, there needs to be a form-based code — a pre-planned area that provides a consistent and predictable development pattern. That’s the private investment side of the equation. Second, improvements need to be made to the streets and sidewalks in order to make it an attractive area both for redevelopment by investors and patronage by potential customers. That’s the public investment side of the equation.

Sheridan Master PlanPlans for improving the intersection and streetscape in this area were developed during a charrette hosted by Farrell-Madden Associates. You can see the results of that charrette by clicking on the picture to the right. You’ll notice the pictures show wider sidewalks, street trees, intersection changes, etc. The next step is to develop a project plan “splitting the area into logical phases for construction” with estimates and specifications for each phase. That’s what Councilwoman Van Auken asked for this evening.

But the council voted it down 6-5. Ardis, Turner, Gulley, Jacob, Montelongo, and Spears Spain voted against it. Van Auken, Sandberg, Manning, Spain Spears, and Nichting voted for it.

Why? I’m certain I don’t know. It appears they voted it down because it’s too close to the next budget cycle. Councilman Clyde Gulley kept talking about the Griswold Improvement Project — for which there is $0 in the 2007 budget — that the council voted against funding earlier this year because it would have been a budget amendment. He somehow thinks the two projects are analogous, and since the council voted down his street improvement project, he’s going to vote against everyone else’s. Other council members said we need to set priorities before spending that much money — as if they didn’t already set the priorities for 2007 in the 2007 budget.

So now, evidently the money set aside for improving the Heart of Peoria area this year will not get spent.