From a press release:
Due to a water main break, southbound Sterling Avenue will be closed between Bainter and Overhill. Please avoid this area and take an alternate route. Detour signs will be posted. This will remain closed until repairs are made and surface restored.
On the agenda for the April 10, 2008, Zoning Board of Appeals meeting is this item:
CASE NO. ZBA 2878
Petitioner Franklin Scudder, on behalf of Richard Hayes, is requesting a 100% variance from the provisions of the Land Development Code for the Heart of Peoria Article 4.1.5.E.2. to eliminate and exceed the attached garage design standard of placement 6 feet behind the longest plane of the street-side façade to 12 feet in front of the longest street-side façade plane. Approval of the request will result in an 18-foot variance. The property is located at 819 E. Fairoaks Avenue, in the R-4 Single-Family Residential Zoning District.
I reported on this earlier this month:
This is a new house being built in an older neighborhood — in fact, it’s within the Heart of Peoria Plan area and falls under the regulations of the Land Development Code. The site plan that was submitted to and approved by the city was in compliance. But the house that’s constructed there — and almost completed — is different than the site plan, and decidedly not in compliance (The attached garage was supposed to be “set back 6? from longest plane of street side facade,” but instead it was built 12? in front of the facade, a difference of 18?). Once it came to the attention of the Planning & Growth Department, a stop work order was issued, and now the contractor will either have to comply with the approved site plan or seek a variance.
He’s seeking a variance, as expected. If he gets it, we’ll have a new way around the Land Development Code — submit a compliant site plan to the city, then build whatever you really want. It’s easier to get forgiveness than permission, you see. Since apparently no one with the City checks to see if construction is proceeding as approved, I predict we’ll be seeing a lot of these kinds of projects in the Heart of Peoria Plan area.
The date is November 21, 1964. The voters are going to the polls to decide whether Peoria should annex Richwoods Township. The voters approve annexation by a slim margin: only 336 votes.
But let’s do a little thought experiment, just for fun. Suppose that vote had gone the other way. Suppose the annexation vote had lost by 336 votes. What would things look like today? What would be different? What would be the same?
Here’s some further background info. From a 1979 article in Illinois Issues:
The population of “old” Peoria slipped from 106,000 in 1960 to less than 100,000 in 1970, but the addition of Richwoods added some 25,000 new residents to its population. Present city officials believe that the tax revenues collected from the Richwoods section have been vital to the city in maintaining its services in the older parts of Peoria.
The annexation has not been without cost to the city. Because Richwoods, like so many fringe areas around Illinois cities, had been developed according to the relatively lax zoning, construction and planning standards of county government, resulting deficiencies became Peoria’s responsibility to remedy. Fortunately, a preannexation agreement with Peoria County spared the city from having to remedy all the problems at once. As Peoria’s Mayor Richard E. Carver complained recently: “Our city is, even today, spending millions of dollars developing the basic road network which would normally have been constructed as the area developed had there been an adequate degree of planning and control present at that time.”
And also, here are a couple of charts from an undated (but apparently late-1990s) report on Peoria population growth (click on the thumbnails below to view larger image):
On the population chart, you’ll notice that population declined from 1970 to 1990. Census figures from 2000 (not included on the chart) show the population was 112,936 — a further decline. There have been special censuses conducted since 2000 that would indicate population is rising, but since they only look at population growth in one section of the city, they’re not really comparable to the decennial censuses.
One argument is that population migration would not have been any different if the annexation referendum had failed. The 15-square-mile Peoria would have suffered from the population loss, while Richwoods Township would have been a boomtown, acquiring all the wealth that used to belong to Peoria. The two municipalities would look identical to the way they look today (booming growth to the north, destitute of commerce to the south).
The other argument is that Peoria and Richwoods would have been in competition for residents and businesses, and thus would have both been stronger as a result. Without greenfield development sites, Peoria would have had to invest its money revitalizing or keeping vital its east bluff, west bluff, and south side neighborhoods, attracting developers and industry to the core of the city, etc. It would have incentivized people and businesses to stay in the city instead of acquiescing to the perceived inevitability of northward migration. As a result, Richwoods would still be a boomtown, but Peoria would not be in as bad of condition as it is today (infrastructure, commerce).
Which scenario do you buy? Or do you have a completely different scenario you think would have played out?
“Why do you seek the living among the dead?
He is not here, but has risen.”
I’ve actually started a number of potential blog posts, but haven’t published them yet either because I didn’t have time to finish them, or I needed to get some more information, or I lost interest about halfway through writing them. Maybe it’s writer’s block.
In any case, here’s an open thread. Talk about whatever you wish, but I’m especially curious what you all think about the Obama/Rev. Wright brouhaha. Also, thank you to everyone who answered my unscientific survey about Main Street — very interesting discussion. I’ll have more to say about that in the near future.
First of all, kudos to the Peoria Times-Observer for putting their articles online. Welcome to the Internet.
Secondly, take a look at this article about the Northmoor Road improvement project. Apparently, they have to plan for five lanes in order to get federal funding, even though they have no intention of building five lanes:
The federal government is willing to pay for a project that only involves three lanes as long as planning is done for five lanes. [Sen. Dale] Risinger said the city has no choice but to go along with the federal government’s wishes.
“This project is well beyond the scope of the city’s ability to pay,” he said. “We need the federal funds … Don’t worry about five lanes being built. That’s the city’s decision. You are the city.”
The article doesn’t say, but I’m going to conjecture that the advantage of planning for five lanes is that it will be less expensive to upgrade if needed in the future. Which means that the federal government evidently sees five lanes as inevitable in the long run. Hopefully the City doesn’t see the three-lane solution as temporary.
But there’s one other thing that I find surprising. Risinger says this road project “is well beyond the scope of the city’s ability to pay.” How can this be? I thought with all the tax base we’re capturing to the north through annexation and the increases in population that come with it, we should be awash in money for infrastructure improvements. How can this infrastructure improvement in North Peoria be beyond our ability to pay?
Here’s the press release:
There has been a cave-in in the Southbound lane of Wisconsin. Wisconsin from McClure to Arcadia will be closed from now until repairs are completed.
We are not aware what has caused the cave-in.
I just received this press release from the City of Peoria:
Due to a water main leak downtown in the intersection of Main Street and Madison Avenue, lanes will be reduced while Illinois American Water Company and Ameren make repairs to their utilities. Please plan your route accordingly to avoid this intersection for the next week as delays will be possible. It is anticipated that one lane of traffic will be maintained in all directions – but this may be subject to change depending on the extent of damage found when making the repairs.
Colleen Callahan, Democratic candidate for the 18th Congressional District, has announced that she advocates ending the war and withdrawing troops according to an “orderly time line.”
Callahan, whose husband Dick is a Vietnam veteran, visited Iraq and Afghanistan in 2003 at her own expense while accompanying the U.S. Secretary of Agriculture. She said she saw first-hand the destruction war causes and likely would not have voted in favor of the war.
That’s so easy to say now, knowing what we know now. It’s like saying, “If I were Buddy Holly, I would have taken the bus on February 3, 1959.” Yeah, obviously. Even if she were to argue that at the time, based on what she knew then, she wouldn’t have voted to go to war, so what? We don’t have a DeLorean with a flux capacitor that will allow us to go back in time and change that decision. We have to deal with what is, not what we believe should have been.
Until a stable government is operating, it would be misguided foreign policy and, frankly, immoral, to simply abandon the Iraqi people. Violence and genocide would ensue after withdrawal, resulting in millions of Iraqi deaths. That would embitter the Iraqi people (and further embitter others in the region) against the U. S., and our enemies (al-Qa’ida) would be able to parlay that into more violence against us, as well.
But perhaps the most disappointing thing is Callahan’s reason for pulling our troops out of Iraq — economics:
“Just imagine what we could do with an extra $12 billion a month [that we wouldn’t be spending on the war]: focus on relief of high gas prices, develop a functional health care system, begin infrastructure improvements and fund the war on drugs and crime in our own community,” she said Wednesday in front of the World Wars I and II Memorial in the Peoria County Courthouse Plaza.
Is this really a good reason to pull out of Iraq — so we can have more money to feed our oil addiction and start new government entitlement programs? Let Iraq descend into wanton violence and genocide so we can have cheap gas and government-funded health care? How callous and provincial is that?
At a little before 6:00 this morning, Spring began. After all the snow we had this winter, I’m ready for steadily warming temperatures and longer days. Welcome, Springtime!