Now for something completely different.
What do you all think of the U.S. war policy in Iraq? What is the root cause of our seeming inability to “win” the war (or “win the peace,” if you will)? And what action should the U.S. take to remedy the situation?
Jim Richerson, President and CEO of Lakeview and Project Leader for Museum Square, gave a presentation to the City Council at last night’s meeting formally requesting a one-year extension of time on their agreement with the city a smaller-sized museum.
The reason for the extension is because fundraising efforts have not gone as planned, and now they’re putting a lot of their hope for funding in the New Market Tax Credit program. However, they won’t hear whether they’re approved for that funding until October, which is after one of their contract deadlines.
The size change is because construction costs have escalated significantly. Richerson said when they started this project, they were projecting construction costs rising at a rate of 4% annually based on historical data. What they’ve found is that costs are actually rising at a rate of 2-4% quarterly instead. They’ve decided to stay within their $65 million overall budget and instead reduce the size of the building.
However, Richerson went to great lengths to show that this reduction only minimally impacts the programming of the museum itself. He points out that while the total square footage is being reduced from 96,562 to 80,784 square feet (15,778, or 16%), the usable space is only being reduced from 64,400 to 57,955 square feet (6,445, or 10%). Auxiliary space (which includes offices, classrooms, store, lobby, support areas, etc.) is being cut from 32,162 to 22,829 square feet (9,333, or 29%).
It was also pointed out that when you look at the block as a whole — that is, including Caterpillar’s visitor center and their monetary commitment — you’re looking at a $130 million project that is 63% funded. From Lakeview’s standpoint, this “puts things in perspective.” However, the reality is that only 37% of the museum’s funding has been raised ($24.5 million out of $65 million), and Caterpillar’s contribution is contingent on the museum officials raising their funds.
The council received the report and then immediately started debating when it would vote on the issue. The original motion was to vote on it at the July 24 meeting, but Councilman Sandberg is going to be out of town. Normally just having one councilman be out of town would not necessarily be sufficient reason to delay a vote, but Gary’s been very involved in this issue and essentially asked for the courtesy of a deferral. After much wrangling, the council decided to discuss it at their August 14 meeting. That’s in five weeks.
Clare Jellick reports that the District 150 School Board has “agreed to pay $750,000 for the 22 acres of land” on which they want to build a replacement building for Harrison Primary School.
The land is appraised at $178,000, but the PHA has maintained that it should recoup some of the costs for razing buildings there. The cost of demolition was about $1.4 million.
My question is, why? Why should they recoup costs for razing buildings there? These buildings were going to be razed anyway. The process was started at least a year before the school district expressed interest in a land swap with PHA for the land.
In fact, their first application for federal approval to raze 200 units (30 buildings) on the south side of Harrison Homes was reported in the Journal Star on March 30, 2005. On August 23, 2005, they added another 11 buildings to be demolished on the north side. “The decision to raze the additional buildings brings the total number of units to be destroyed to 306”; it was all part of a “10-year plan to tear down and rebuild the entire housing complex,” the paper reported at the time.
The paper also said, “Most of the latest buildings approved for razing are located near Harrison School, in the block between West Krause Avenue and West Seibold Street.” The “latest buildings” were the 11 that were added, with a total of roughly 106 units (306 total minus the 200 units initially reported in March). How much would that cost to raze? “The cost of demolition is estimated at about $4,000 per unit, said Regina Simpkins, director of facilities management.”
At $4,000 per unit, the cost to raze 106 units near Harrison School would be $424,000. But according to later reports, demolition of all 306 units cost roughly $1.4 million total, which comes out to about $4,575 per unit. Even then, the cost to demolish the 106 units near Harrison School would only be $484,950. Add that to the $178,000 appraised value for the land and the cost comes to $662,950.
So, if my reading and calculating is correct (which it admittedly may not be, since I’m only going from published reports) the school district is still overpaying for the land even if they eat all the demolition expenses for the land they’re purchasing. And that doesn’t even take into consideration this little nugget from that August 2005 article: “The PHA plans to apply for demolition grants so they can reprogram their budgeted funds for other uses, [Simpkins] said.” How much of this demolition cost was already paid for with grant funds?
This is a big coup for the PHA. It basically takes over half a million dollars the School District collects from our property taxes and transfers it to the PHA, an agency that has lost considerable federal funding as of late for a variety of reasons, including low occupancy in PHA properties.
The City of Peoria owns a number of parking decks downtown and outsources the management of them to National Garages. According to the 2007 City Budget, the city owns about 4,600 parking spaces in decks and surface lots. The city isn’t making any money on these lots. Between the debt service, the cost to manage the decks, and the artificially low rates, the city is heavily subsidizing downtown parking.
But there’s more than just operational costs to owning parking decks — there’s also maintenance costs. According to the budget document, National Garages takes care of routine maintenance as part of their contract. Structural upkeep, however, is the city’s responsibility. Structural repairs for the Jefferson Street and Twin Towers parking decks are on the agenda for tomorrow night’s meeting, and the cost is a whopping $738,437.
Peoria should sell these decks to the businesses that use them and let those businesses maintain them for their own patrons at their own expense — just like every other business in Peoria does that isn’t located downtown. Then Peoria could use the money it saves for services that benefit all Peorians, like fire and police.
Today’s Word on the Street column marks the official send-off for reporter Molly Parker. She’s moving to Charleston, South Carolina, to work at the Charleston Regional Business Journal. South Carolina is a very pretty state (my wife went to grad school at the University of South Carolina in Columbia) and Charleston is right on the coast, so I’m sure she’ll be very happy living there. Best of luck to you, Molly!
Since museum officials are comparing their proposed museum to icons of other cities, such as the Gateway Arch in St. Louis and the Eiffel Tower in Paris, I thought I’d help out by offering some more information to help us compare:
The Eiffel Tower
The Eiffel Tower was built between 1887 and 1889 completely of iron at a cost of about 7.8 million gold francs (don’t know how to convert that 2007 dollars, but one site estimated $35 million in 2006 dollars), as the entrance to the Universal Exposition of 1889, which was held in Paris. According to discoverfrance.net:
Of the 700 proposals submitted in a design competition, one was unanimously chosen, a radical creation from the French structural engineer Alexandre Gustave Eiffel…who was assisted in the design by engineers Maurice Koechlin and Emile Nouguier, and architect Stephen Sauvestre.
However, the controversial tower elicited some strong reactions, and a petition of 300 names — including those of Maupassant, Emile Zola, Charles Garnier (architect of the Opéra Garnier), and Dumas the Younger — was presented to the city government, protesting its construction.
Eiffel also engineered the internal structure of the Statue of Liberty and the dome of the Nice Observatory in Nice, France.
The Gateway Arch
The Gateway Arch was built between 1963 and 1965 at a cost of $13 million (about $85 million in 2007 dollars) to commemorate the nation’s westward expansion. According to the National Park Service, “The $11 million cost of the Arch itself was made up of 75% Federal funds and 25% City of St. Louis funds. The $2 million Arch transportation system was financed by the Bi-State Development Agency.”
The Arch was designed by Finnish-American architect Eero Saarinen (after a nationwide search), who also designed the John Deere World Headquarters and John F. Kennedy International Airport. Historian Bob Moore says, “The arch’s design initially drew criticism, but before long the city of St. Louis embraced it.”
Peoria Regional Museum (PRM)
The PRM was designed by Zimmer Gunsul Frasca Architects, LLP, of Portland, Oregon, in partnership with local firms PSA Dewberry and STS Consultants. The project still carries a $65 million pricetag, but the size of the building has been reduced twice: once from 110,000 to 95,000 square feet, and recently from 95,000 to 81,000 square feet.
Obviously, the only comparison with the Eiffel Tower and the Gateway Arch is that the plan is facing opposition; that is, some people don’t like it. The implication is that this proposed building will presumably become iconic of Peoria, be a huge tourism draw, and eventually be embraced and beloved by Peoria residents as they realize what an architectural marvel it is.
I don’t think so. Maybe they could have said that with the original design, since the big sphere in a glass box could have at least become iconic of Peoria and was kind of a cool idea. But this new design? There’s nothing especially distinctive or memorable about it. They need to come up with a less-expensive design that still has a central architectural feature that impresses people. This building doesn’t have that — and furthermore, museum officials know it. They even said at the press conference that the so-called “wow factor” is on the inside now — the new planetarium and the programming of the museum. That was the whole idea behind Richerson’s plea to “focus on what we’re gaining.”
Now, if museum officials are willing to abandon the exterior “wow factor” and focus on the interior instead, then there’s really no reason to hold on to this building design or to fight for it. The interior can just as easily be housed in a more traditional urban building that fronts the street and only takes up a portion of the block, opening up a good portion of the block for other development. It would be cheaper to build, too, which would mean they wouldn’t have to raise as much money, something they’re having trouble doing anyway.
The museum partners unveiled the latest plans for Peoria Riverfront Museum at a news conference today. Are you ready? Here they are:
And this is an aerial view from above Washington Street (above).
Also, you can check out their slide presentation (in PDF format) by clicking here.
Museum officials were upbeat at the presentation, focusing on the positive. They explained that construction costs have risen at a much quicker rate than could have been anticipated based on historical data, and that’s the reason they’ve had to redesign the building. But, they were quick to add, they are not changing the museum-goer’s experience. The programming aspect of the museum has been maintained and, according to officials, even improved.
Lakeview Museum President Jim Richerson challenged those in attendance to not focus on the loss of square footage or various elements that have been eliminated, but rather “focus on what we’re gaining.” What we’re gaining, he said, was a more functional, efficient, and visitor-friendly museum with three times the space of the current Lakeview Museum.
The building facades are going to remain metal to blend with the “reflective quality” of the Illinois river. The 70-foot tall giant screen theater portion of the campus remains, as does the planetarium (though in a silo-shaped structure instead of the original design). The new footprint of the museum is bigger because all the exhibit space is on one floor now. The programming of the museum remains intact.
Officials are particularly proud of the the structure being what they call a “sustainable building.” They refer to its “green architecture,” its bioswales, and the fact that 90% of the material removed from the site has already been recycled (for example, used in the I-74 reconstruction).
The unique architecture of the building was held up as a compelling draw for tourists. Richerson stated “there is nothing cookie-cutter about it” and is “something we can be extremely proud of.” He also compared reaction to the plans with the initial reaction people had to the Gateway Arch in St. Louis and the Eiffel Tower in Paris.
Museum officials believe that the structure has an “urban face” on the Washington side because it comes closer to the street than before and has the mass of the 70-foot-tall theater. But on the Water Street side, they’ve retained the plaza which “opens up and embraces the river.” Part of that plaza includes 15,000 square feet being reserved for future commercial/retail space. They’ve also lowered the elevation on the Water Street side to allow an additional entrance.
Not pictured above is a black cloud hanging over the museum: funding. Funding has stalled at $24.5 million according to officials, and it was stated that “these next six months will be absolutely critical” to getting some “momentum” in fundraising. One key part of that is the hope that the museum will qualify for New Market Tax Credits; they hope to hear something by the end of October or first part of November.
Once again, today may have been the Heart of Peoria Commission’s last meeting. On July 24, the city council will take up the issue of whether to change the commission’s status (that is, decommission it) or let it continue to meet. One question the council has is this: if the commission continues to meet, what work will it do?
That was the goal of the commission’s meetings last Friday and today: to develop a work plan to submit to the council. The top two goals the commission set were:
On the first goal, it was recognized that the Land Development Code and Form District Codes primarily dealt with regulating private development (zoning, land use, etc.), and it was time to turn the commission’s attention to the public space. If there isn’t the public investment in “fixing the streets” (i.e., repairing deteriorating streets and sidewalks and, in doing so, improving them so that they accommodate a balance of uses — pedestrian, bicycle, mass transit, as well as automobiles), then the private development will be stunted. The commission can help facilitate progress in this area through the charrette process, education, input in the comprehensive plan, etc.
On the second goal, we also recognized that the work isn’t done yet with the form districts or the broader Land Development Code. We can work with the Planning department to develop a marketing plan for these areas, similar to what has been done on West Main with the Renaissance Park area through the efforts of the Renaissance Park Commission. We want to raise awareness of the opportunities that exist for redevelopment specifically in the form district areas but also throughout the Heart of Peoria Plan Area.
To help save staff time (and ultimately money), the commission agreed to reduce the frequency of meetings to every other month and disband its standing subcommittees. But in doing so, the commission also emphasized the importance of having the dual appointments of Heart of Peoria Commissioners on other city commissions (Planning, Traffic, Zoning Board of Approvals, etc.) as proposed in the original communication from the Mayor.
In other business, the commission also passed a resolution recommending to the city council that they deny the proposed changes to museum square and require that any future changes be in conformity with the Heart of Peoria Plan and the principles of New Urbanism. Specifically, the building mass on the block should be getting bigger, not smaller. If the museum portion needs to shrink, that’s understandable, but then part of the block should be reopened for private development, preferably mixed-use development that would include residential and retail components to keep the block busy perpetually and add more density to such a prime area of the central business district. The resolution passed by a 4-3 vote and marks the first time the commission has taken a position on the future of the former Sears block.
Just a reminder that the Heart of Peoria Commission will reconvene its meeting to finalize its work plan today at 8:00 a.m. in the Planning and Growth Department’s conference room (Twin Towers, fourth floor). The meeting is open to the public.
My wife received her first issue of WCBU’s newsletter Fanfare the other day. This was a thank-you gift for her pledge to WCBU’s pledge drive. It’s sort of a semi-monthly reminder of her gift.
Thanks, WCBU.
(Seriously, though, I’m looking forward to the upcoming record sale, July 12-15, at the Shoppes at Grand Prairie.)