Monthly Archives: April 2008

Museum Block, Peoria County

New poll: Same results, different conclusion

4 Comments

Peoria County has done another survey that includes a question gauging support for a sales tax to benefit the proposed Peoria Regional Museum:

[A] majority of people who completed the survey also said they are either somewhat or strongly opposed of a referendum supporting the Riverfront Museum project…. Sixty-five percent reported they are somewhat or strongly opposed, while about 35 percent strongly or somewhat support the referendum. County officials say that is consistent with results of a telephone poll conducted earlier this year on the same topic.

But wait! What did county officials say after the last poll?

The survey administrator felt very positive that less than 50% of the respondents were either undecided or do not support a tax increase. In other words, more than 50% of the polled voters would support a tax increase to help fund the Museum Project.

It’s good to see they’ve dropped the positive spin this time.

This issue shouldn’t even be going to a referendum. The museum’s contract with the city has deadlines in it — deadlines they’ve already extended at least once, new deadlines they’re still not going to meet. How much longer are we going to prolong the agony?

If the citizens of Peoria really wanted this museum as proposed they would have financially supported it already. A tax just takes money from the opposed and indifferent. And if we’re going to raise taxes, let’s raise taxes for something we really need, like improved infrastructure.

The city should extend its thanks to the museum group for a valiant effort, but tell them to go back to the drawing board. This plan is dead. If the museum group would like to come up with another plan — urban in design, narrower in scope, and willing to share the block with retail and residential components like every urban planner the city has ever hired has recommended for that block — then the city should definitely entertain the idea.

City of Peoria, Comprehensive Plan

Comprehensive Plan survey results are in

7 Comments

Peoria LogoRoss Black, Assistant Planning Director for the City of Peoria, has released the results of the Comprehensive Plan online survey. You can read the summary results here (PDF file); more details will be released in the near future.

Take a look at them and tell me what you think. Here are some things I thought were interesting or notable:

  • The one-to-ten scale is inverted — lower numbers indicate higher satisfaction or importance and vice versa.
  • They’re still saying that lower scores indicate that something is “not important.” I think that’s misleading, as I’ve explained in this earlier post.
  • Survey-takers’ satisfaction with Peoria as a place to live is decidedly middling: 4.2. In other words, “so-so.”
  • Not surprising was that the top two districts to respond to the survey were the fifth and second districts (29% and 21%, respectively).
  • Very surprising was how many people took the survey who don’t even live in Peoria (18%) — they were actually the third highest group! Gee, thanks for the input, interlopers. I suppose one could make the argument that these are people who have businesses or rental properties in the city, but who personally live outside the city. If so, then the high percentage is even more disturbing.
  • Lowest district representation: first (5%). This is not surprising. The first district includes predominantly lower-income residents, many of whom presumably cannot afford computers and internet access, and even if they can, don’t have the time to spend filling out surveys. There are also a lot of renters who presumably would not have as much interest in the city’s comprehensive planning process. Many may also just simply feel disenfranchised — like nobody cares about their opinions anyway.
  • 93% of respondents were white, 5% were black, 1% were Asian, 1% were “other,” and less than 1% were Native American. According to the 2000 census, 69.3% of Peorians were white, 24.8% were black, 2.3% were Asian, less than 1% were “American Indian.”
  • The higher the income, the more people responded. 80% of respondents had a household income of over $50,000. 20% of respondents had household income less than $50,000. Median household income in 1999, according to the census: $36,397.
  • 35% of respondents would “like to live within walking distance from downtown and the riverfront.” That’s a little more than one out of every three respondents — a significant number.
  • The number one item under Public Health and Human Services: “Provide youth services that guide children toward good behavior.” Wow. Apparently it takes a government to raise a child. When I was a kid, we had parents to guide children toward good behavior. Now we need “youth services” provided by the city.

Your turn. What are your thoughts on the results?

City of Peoria

From the “how did we survive” department

11 Comments

Here’s one of those breathless articles on how important it is to encase oneself in padding and a helmet when engaging in death-defying activities such as bicycling. I’m waiting for the “experts” to start pushing for joggers, then walkers to also wear lots of padding and helmets. Maybe they already do. Perhaps we should wear protective gear inside the house as well, whenever we decide we want to walk upstairs or — worse — downstairs. I’ll bet the statistics on accidents from people falling downstairs is staggering.

2008 Campaign

Question of the Day: Kevin Lyons

16 Comments

Kevin Lyons recently dropped the case against ex-officer Troy Parker, who had been indicted on “three counts of reckless homicide and four counts of aggravated operating a watercraft under the influence of alcohol.” The prosecution only had circumstantial evidence that Parker was driving the boat, and the interpretation of that evidence was mixed. For more details, read Luciano’s column today.

The question of the day is, should Lyons have dropped the case, or should he have prosecuted Parker with the evidence he had?

Incidentally, Kevin Lyons was scheduled to speak at the Neighborhood Alliance meeting Monday night, but didn’t show up. States Attorney candidate Darin LaHood was there, though.

Bradley University, City of Peoria, The Uplands

Another “oops” in Bradley’s plan

11 Comments

It’s enough to make a person paranoid. You may recall about a year ago, Bradley was rewriting its institutional zoning plan, and they wanted to include a part of the Uplands neighborhood in it. Specifically, they wanted to include the Pi Phi house, 1004 N. Institute Pl.:

The Uplands Residential Association said they’d rather not see precedent set for Bradley reaching across Main, especially after their track record with the Arbor District. At that time, Bradley stated they would abide by the wishes of the neighborhood association, and they did. They removed the Pi Phi House from their institutional plan.

But now, fast forward to this week’s council agenda. The institutional plan is being modified again at the request of Williams Brothers Construction because they built the new parking deck too close to the right-of-way on Main street. The only changes to the plan were supposed to be the revised setback requirement for the parking deck, a reduction in the number of parking spaces in the deck, and landscaping changes for better pedestrian access.

But guess what else was in there to be changed? On a whim, I decided to read the legal description of the institutional zone, and I’ll be darned if the Pi Phi House wasn’t added to the legal description! A suspicious person might even say it was snuck in. If this were to pass tonight as written, the Pi Phi House would be part of Bradley’s institutional plan, without any input from the neighbors, without anyone knowing about it.

I alerted my city council person and city staff of the issue, and they have taken action to remove the Pi Phi House from the legal description. Pat Landes, Director of Planning and Growth Management, said:

  1. Staff reviewed the proposed ordinance scheduled for Council consideration tomorrow night and the 1004 Institute property is included in the legal; it should not be. You may recall that at one point during the previous two Bradley cases [adding Maplewood properties and cleaning up boundaries] in 2007 there had been consideration of adding the Institute property to the Official Development Plan area. You directed the removal of the property based upon input from constituents.
  2. A revised ordinance will be on the Council’s desk for tomorrow night’s meeting and will be e-mailed to you as soon as drafted and reviewed.
  3. The intent of communications, proposed and 20078] was clear – the Institute address was not listed in the subject matter and application, and was not included on any maps. We will be checking through all of the past ordinances to determine if the Institute address or legal was included in the legal descriptions and make any necessary adjustments.
  4. I apologize on behalf of the department for not catching this error in the legal submitted.

So, the legal description was “submitted” — submitted by whom? Bradley. Ultimately Bradley. The contractor (Williams Brothers Construction) is listed as the petitioner, but Bradley would have to sign off on any requested changes to their institutional plan, and they would have had to have provided the legal description, either directly to the city or through Williams Brothers.

No doubt this will be attributed to another unintentional mistake. Just like the parking deck misplacement was just a mistake. After these two “oops” moments from Bradley, and the “mistake” by another developer on Fairoaks, the “mistake” excuse is starting to wear a little thin. It’s starting to sound like the little boy who cried wolf.

Food, Television

King Corn

28 Comments

King Corn Taste TestAnyone else watched the independent film King Corn on PBS lately? It’s been shown several times as part of their Independent Lens series. Whenever I see it, it makes me want to eat better… healthier. The problem is, how do you do that in Peoria?

One obvious thing is to get fresh foods from farmers markets such as the ones at Metro Centre and down on the riverfront. But where does one get, for example, grass-fed beef around here? And is it even possible to avoid high-fructose corn syrup (HFCS) if you want to? Sure, you can give up soda, but that doesn’t even scratch the surface of the products that contain HFCS.

Any suggestions? Or any stories on how you’ve tried to eat healthier and either been successful or given up?

Uncategorized

Quotes of the Day (or “The more things change, the more they stay the same”)

1 Comment

[Our aldermen] seem to look upon taxation as the great business of life, and the ability to squeeze the greatest amount of taxes out of a given amount of property as the highest evidence of political ability.

The besetting sin of American society is a mania for office. Men will abandon a business worth two thousand dollars a year for an office worth one thousand, and they are ready to ruin the public interests, for the honor of ruling the public. They array the poor against the rich, and assume the honor of leading the former, because they are most numerous. This class of men are constantly endeavoring to get into some small office, as a steppingstone to a higher one; and they educate those who have nothing to believe that the way to get the property of the rich is to break them down by taxation; and, to get the votes of such, they promise to assess a new tax, or increase the old ones.

–Charles Ballance, The History of Peoria, Illinois, 1870
Kellar Branch

More correspondence between the Heights and Pioneer

21 Comments

Here’s an e-mail that Heights Mayor Allen sent to Mike Carr (CEO of Pioneer Industrial Railway), regarding Pioneer’s contention that Peoria Heights should remove Central Illinois Railroad as a carrier on the Kellar Branch:

Dear Mike:

Regarding your demands that we take immediate steps to “kick” CIRY off of the line:

1. We are addressing the issues of which firm is running a car through the Village of Peoria Heights. That is all we can address. At this time, CIRY is not running a car or engine through Peoria Heights. Therefore, we do not feel that they are using the Kellar Branch line through the Village, thus we will not address the STB decision of allowing them to use the line.

2. If, for any reason, CIRY uses the line as it goes through Peoria Heights, we will address the issue then.

3. The City of Peoria has a different interpretation of what the lease entails with Pioneer. In the end, any interpretation of the lease will have to end up in Illinois courts for a final ruling. However, at this time, we feel the lease is valid, and that Pioneer has not owned up to its end of the lease.

4. Your reference to “minor wash outs” being the only problems Pioneer has ignored on the Kellar Branch is far too small in scope. The rail ties, cut weeds and brush, everything that is blocking, or has destroyed the drainage tiles will have to be removed, as well. Every broken drainage tile will have to be replaced. In other words, everything that has been caused by the rail through the last several years, that has impeded or destroyed the proper drainage will have to be fixed. Your “minor wash outs” repairs will not suffice. We will walk the area again after June 3, and if every drainage problem has not been corrected, we will proceed with having a resolution drawn up to remove Pioneer from the rail line.

If you have any questions, please call me at [redacted].

Thanks- Mark Allen

In response, Mike Carr had this to say:

Do what you want Mark, but understand we WILL use the line until the STB tells us not to. We have a lot car storage business inquiries so we will make certain the track in the Heights can handle the potential influx of storage cars.

Regards,
Mike Carr

And the saga continues….

City Council, City of Peoria

Council preview 4/22/08

3 Comments

Here are some agenda items of interest:

  • The City is going to try to get a state grant to help pay the lion’s share of road improvement work for Phase I of the Sheridan Triangle project. “The funding request for this $975,000 project would be $748,800 ITEP [Illinois Transportation Enhancement Program] funding, with the city’s local match being $226,200.”
  • Also being funded through ITEP: removal and replanting of trees in the downtown business district. I don’t quite understand this one. The background states, “In honor of Earth Day 2007, Governor Blagojevich announced the new Replanting the Prairie State Initiative to further reduce greenhouse gas emissions in the state.” But I fail to see how replacing presumably mature trees with new twig trees is going to accomplish that goal — in fact, it seems like it would do just the opposite. Why would you replace trees? Why not plant additional trees where they don’t already exist? Unless, of course, we’re talking about palm trees that need to be replanted every year.
  • Bill Joseph is going to build an 8,066-square-foot “retail and restaurant building” in Bed Bath & Beyond’s parking lot (south side of W. Glen Ave., just east of N. University St.). That’s good, because we all know what a dearth of available retail and restaurant sites there are in Peoria.
  • JJ Ryans is moving out of the Metro Centre and into the old Silver Bullet (7719 N. University), so a liquor license has been requested. This isn’t particularly notable except for this statement in the council communication: “One of the three Commissioners who voted to approve [Arndt, Jackson, McCabe] should have abstained due to interest in nearby property.” That’s rather provocative. Was any action taken to educate or reprimand this unnamed Commissioner? Or is conflict-of-interest voting not a big deal?
  • Of course, the more volatile liquor license request is the one for Elliott’s (7807 N. University). The Liquor Commission voted 4-0 with one abstention (Jackson) to deny the request. You may recall that Elliott’s is a strip joint. The city has been trying to throw one roadblock after another in front of this place since it was first proposed in 2003. First it said it couldn’t issue an adult use license because it was five feet too close to a residential area. So the owners split the building in two and got their adult-use license. Then the city passed an ordinance prohibiting strip clubs from getting a liquor license (except for Big Al’s, which was grandfathered in). That didn’t stop Elliott’s from opening, though. Evidently nudity is enough to make a profit even without liquor. Then this past November, down around the St. Louis area, an ordinance just like Peoria’s was struck down by a federal court, prompting the council to repeal its ordinance. So now Elliott’s is back asking for a liquor license again. If the council denies it, they’ll have a lawsuit on their hands — one they’ll likely lose, in which case Elliott’s will get a bunch of taxpayer money in damages. The council should save the taxpayers’ money and give up on this one, then focus instead on a way of stopping — or at least containing within a certain geographic area — future nudie bars so this doesn’t happen again.
  • T. Y. Lin has been chosen as the engineering firm to look at the economic and physical feasibility of building a trail next to the Kellar Branch rail line. Now the council needs to give the green light to let a contract be negotiated, the cost of which will presumably be shared by the City of Peoria, Village of Peoria Heights, and possibly the Peoria Park District. Pioneer Industrial Railway has said they will not help pay for the study, opting to use their funds instead to pay for an inevitable legal battle with Peoria Heights, which is trying to kick Pioneer off the line.
  • Getting back to North University, the council will be making a decision on whether to allow a teen dance hall to open up in the same area. The proposed dance club at 7620 N. University, to be called Adrenaline, has to be more than 500 feet from a residential area according to Peoria’s current ordinance. The request is to change that ordinance — to lower the buffer to 200 feet. This request was first brought up two weeks ago and looked like it would surely go down to defeat. Councilman Montelongo asked for a deferral, and it comes back Tuesday with just one change — it would allow the Council “to impose additional conditions,” including “limiting the hours of operation” among other measures. The city staff and police chief are still against it, so I predict it will be defeated after all.