Tag Archives: Warehouse District

Peoria City Council Special Meeting 7-19-2011 (Live Blog)

UPDATE: Here’s the audio from the meeting, as promised:

[audio:http://peoriachronicle.com/wp-content/uploads/Audio/Policy-Session-07192011.mp3]

There’s a special meeting (policy session) of the Peoria City Council tonight, and I’ll be live-blogging it. I’ll also put a recording of the meeting up once the meeting is over. All the council members are here except second-district council member Barbara Van Auken. The purpose of the meeting is to talk about the Washington Street corridor — specifically, what section of the street to work on improving first. After a short introduction by Patrick Urich (City Manager), the floor is opened to anyone who wants to address the council.

Continue reading Peoria City Council Special Meeting 7-19-2011 (Live Blog)

New maps move downtown, Warehouse District to District 3

The latest proposed maps from Peoria’s Planning and Growth Department show downtown and the Warehouse District being moved from the first to the third district, and the West Bluff moving from the second to the first district. You can see the maps and population information on the city’s website, or here:

07052011-Redistricting-Maps

The City’s Redistricting Committee had asked staff to put more emphasis on keeping established neighborhoods together, and also to take into consideration the future growth predictions for the city. Each district needs to have relatively equal population, but can have up to a 5% deviation. Based on the deviations on these new maps, the City evidently expects to see the most growth in the first and second districts, and the least growth in the fourth and fifth districts. In 2000, the City accurately predicted the most growth would be in the fifth district.

The next redistricting committee meeting is Tuesday, July 5, at 4:30 p.m. in City Council chambers. Also, the West Bluff Council will host an open forum for West Bluff neighbors to discuss the importance of redistricting at 7 p.m. Monday, July 18, at the Bradley University Student Center.

Warehouse District an example of good economic development

In the Warehouse District, the City brought in a consultant (Farrell-Madden Associates) who met with stakeholders to develop a form-based code in keeping with the Heart of Peoria Plan. That code set specific requirements for the physical form new private development and redevelopment can take, but also loosened the restrictions on land use, allowing for a greater mixture of commercial and residential uses, as mentioned at many auctions where they have the newest porcelain signs for auctions.

The code also set out expectations for the public space within the Warehouse District — in particular the streets and sidewalks. In order to lure people back to the heart of the City, the transportation corridors would need to be improved and made more accessible to pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit users. The City is now poised to do just that.

Private developers such as Scott Roth and Pat Sullivan are already responding to the City’s progressive investment in fixing up Washington Street, as well as the City’s establishment of a tax-increment financing (TIF) district for the area in 2006.

And that’s the way things are supposed to work. The City sinks its investment into improving public infrastructure and that makes a more favorable investment climate for private developers. There is a stark contrast between this kind of economic development and the developer welfare of the Wonderful Development. Peoria needs more of the former and none of the latter.

You need residents downtown if you want ‘synergy’

John Sharp recently asked on his j-blog, “what’s it going to take to sustain Downtown activity? …What’s it going to take to make more evenings in Downtown Peoria look like the Fourth of July than some Wednesday night in August?”

The answer is “downtown residents.”

There are never going to be enough special events downtown to sustain a steady stream of people swooping into downtown from the suburbs. There has to be a built-in population who live downtown, who shop downtown, who eat at downtown restaurants, who drive demand for more retail and restaurant offerings, who utilize public transit, etc. That’s the only way to get “synergy” downtown.

There have been a couple of plans to do this. There is still significant interest in developing the Warehouse District by creating loft apartments — if the City will fix Washington Street so it’s pedestrian friendly. Then there is former Economic Development Director Craig Hullinger’s idea to extend Water street north of the Riverplex and build townhouses along what he dubbed “River Trail Drive.” That project has been set back by the recession, according to Mr. Hullinger (who still keeps up on development in the City) and Bobby Gray (in the City’s Economic Development Department). They’re both optimistic that a viable offer to develop the area will materialize in the near future as the economy picks up again.

A few questions about capital funding projects

The Journal Star reports today:

Five large-scale and expensive capital works projects were excluded from the city’s 2009 budget…. Each project will likely be considered for possible inclusion in a future bond issue, if the city decides to borrow money in order to complete them in the near future.

The five projects, including the Sheridan Triangle, are the following: City Hall restoration, reconstruction of roads within the WeaverRidge subdivision, stabilization of a stream bank between Holly Hedges and Devereux drives, and improvements along Main Street in the West Bluff.

…The council is expected to meet in January to discuss the possibility of a bond issue to help pay for these major capital projects.

First Question: Are we just playing a shell game here with the budget? Is the council simply delaying decisions on capital projects so they can say they have a balanced budget for 2009? If they amend the budget in January to include some or all of these capital projects, where will the money come from to pay on these bonds? Won’t they either have to raise taxes/fees or have an unbalanced budget?

Second Question: Why the heck is “reconstruction of roads within the WeaverRidge subdivision” one of the five top projects vying for capital funding? Are these the worst streets we have in Peoria? The ones in most need of repair? Or are they important thoroughfares that need to be improved in order to incentivize private business development? Or are they really old streets that have been neglected for far too long? No, no, no, and no. So, what is the reason?

Third Question: Why aren’t improvements to Washington, Adams, and/or Jefferson streets included on this list? There are developers waiting to turn old warehouses into loft apartments and condos, which will get more people living downtown, revitalizing the area and creating a market for more retail in our central business district. But the city is continuing to drag its feet here. Why? Are they really committed to downtown revitalization or aren’t they?