Daily Archives: October 19, 2009

City of Peoria

“Wonderful Development” Update

9 Comments

The “Wonderful Development” (that’s what City Attorney Randy Ray called proposed downtown Marriott project when the City was still keeping it a closely-guarded secret) has yet to meet any of the deadlines in its redevelopment agreement with the City. The most recent Issues Update gives the details:

REDEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF PEORIA AND EM PROPERTIES, LTD. This Redevelopment Agreement was approved by the Council on December 15, 2008. This Agreement provides that the Redeveloper shall commence construction of the Project not later than one year from the execution of the Agreement (December 19, 2009). Alternatively, the Redeveloper is to commence within 20 days of closing the initial series of the Bond, and the Bond issue has not occurred and the pre-conditions to the Bond issue have not yet been met. There is another deadline contained in Paragraph 3.5 of the Redevelopment Agreement which provides that the Redeveloper shall submit construction plans to the City no later than June 1, 2009. That has not occurred. Although this deadline has not been met, the Contract remains in full force and effect.

Going back to Paragraph 3.2.1 concerning commencement of the Agreement, the Agreement provides that if the Redeveloper does not commence construction of the Project within 18 months from the date of the execution (June 19, 2010), the City shall have the right to terminate the Agreement.

According to a recent Journal Star article, the Redeveloper is “optimistic” that he will be able to get all the financing he needs to acquire the Pere Marquette and adjacent properties by January 1, 2010, or thirteen days after the deadline for construction to commence. That would leave him five months to submit construction plans to the City (already four months past deadline itself), secure approval, and start construction — or else the City could terminate the agreement.

I don’t think he’s going to make it. But then, I don’t think it’s going to matter, either, because the City never cancels redevelopment agreements that miss deadlines. In fact, I don’t know why they even bother to put deadlines into their agreements anymore when they’re demonstrably meaningless.

This Wonderful Development — to the tune of approximately $4 million in debt service per year on average — will continue to sail through, even as we cut police officers (to save $1 million annually), road resurfacing, animal control, and other vital public services. Your streets will take a little longer to get plowed in the winter, but we’ll have a downtown Marriott. The police will take a little longer to respond to your emergency, but we’ll have a downtown Marriott. That rabid dog in your neighborhood threatening your family’s safety on a Saturday? Call back Monday; the office is closed weekends due to budget cuts — but we’ll have a downtown Marriott.

As taxes continue to rise and service continues to decline, more people will give up and move out of Peoria. But that’s okay, because when those folks come back to visit, they’ll have a place to stay: the downtown . . . Embassy Suites in East Peoria.

City of Peoria

“Within walking distance”: Fact or fantasy?

40 Comments

I just have a minor quibble about this article from the Journal Star:

Putting a new piece in the latest lifestyle trends puzzle, Cullinan Cos. LLC said Thursday it will build upscale apartments within walking distance [emphasis added] of The Shoppes at Grand Prairie. Ground was broken this week on the Apartments at Grand Prairie, a 160-unit complex going up in the field behind the Rave Motion Picture theater.

I’m not sure why Paul Gordon chose to describe the proximity of these new apartments as “within walking distance,” but I find it a bit misleading. Normally, when you talk of something being “within walking distance,” it implies that you can actually walk there with reasonable ease. I don’t believe that’s the case here.

The apartments may be technically “within walking distance,” as the crow flies, but how would you walk there? Answer: not easily — or safely. While the center of the Shoppes is designed specifically for pedestrians, once you’re on the outside of the inner sanctum, all bets are off. Try crossing Grand Prairie Drive on foot to get to the restaurants across the street.

Or suppose you want to walk from the Shoppes to Rave theater. How would you do it? No path is clearly marked out. You just have to start walking across the parking lot in the general direction of the theater and be prepared to circumnavigate or hurdle some obstacles (out-buildings, a berm, American Prairie Drive, another berm, and another parking lot). In fairness, there are some intermittent sidewalks along the way. But overall, you have to blaze a path through a landscape designed for automobiles, not pedestrians.

And the apartments are going to be behind Rave, no doubt separated by a transitional buffer yard and other barriers that will make it physically impossible (or nearly so) to walk between the two even if the tenants so choose. I think the whole “walking distance” language is nothing more than a marketing slogan designed to elicit nostalgic feelings of traditional neighborhood design and sell an artificial impression of walkability in a place where it doesn’t really exist.