Bad news for New Urbanism

First there was the Civic Center expansion. Then there was the Peoria Museum and Cat Visitor Center.

Next it will be the new District 150 schools.

What am I talking about? Exceptions to the Heart of Peoria Plan, Peoria’s attempt at New Urbanism.

The City’s Efforts

The city has been working hard to develop a form-based code — you know, the kind of code that regulates the form of the built environment, the kind that says you have to make sure your building fits in with the surrounding architecture, construction materials, and setbacks. It’s actually a great idea that will help preserve the character and appeal of the older neighborhoods.

And the best part is that they sought and obtained a lot of input from the most important people: the residents. They held charrettes and got the input of hundreds of ordinary citizens on the kind of built environment they would prefer in these neighborhoods, even working together to reach consensus on those points on which residents disagreed.

The School Board’s Counter-Efforts

Unfortunately, the school district is not interested in the city’s (or the residents’) efforts to revitalize the older neighborhoods. Garrie Allen said at Monday’s school board meeting, “It’s not our job as a school district to clean up blighted areas… We’re not urban renewal people.” That doesn’t sound especially cooperative. In a recent e-mail to a neighborhood activist, another school board member agreed, stating in an even more adversarial tone, “The Board of Education is charged with doing what is best for students, not for neighborhood groups or community redevelopment.”

The law is on the school board’s side. According to legal experts, the 1965 Illinois Appellate Court decision, “Board of Ed., School Dist. 33, DuPage County v. City of West Chicago” (55 Ill.App.2d 401), set the precedent that school districts are not subject to municipal zoning laws or building codes. That means they can build any kind of building they want in whatever style they want, regardless of the city’s form-based codes.

So, hypothetically, if they wanted to put up a 12-story high-rise on the corner of Wisconsin and Frye, they could. Or if they wanted to set up a group of interconnected yurts, they could do that, too. But what they want to do is build a sprawling, single-story, suburban-style school on a large swath of land in the middle of Peoria’s older neighborhoods — the exact type of structure form-based codes are being created to prevent.

Can’t We All Just Get Along?

Just because the school board has the legal authority to do something doesn’t mean they have to disregard the clear wishes of neighbors. And, contrary to the rhetoric of school board members, they don’t have to compromise educational objectives to cooperate with the city’s revitalization efforts.

In Seattle, Washington, when their Whittier Elementary School was wearing out and needed to be replaced, they built a new structure in 1999 that the principal described as “uplifting, effective, safe, and secure.” The new building was also designed to meet these requirements (see if they look familiar):

  • Enhance teaching and learning and accommodate the needs of all learners.
  • Serve as center of the community.
  • Result from a planning/design process involving all stakeholders.
  • Provide for health, safety, and security.
  • Make effective use of all available resources.
  • Allow for flexibility and adaptability to changing needs.

These are the same objectives for the new “birth through eighth” school that District 150 wants to build, but there’s one big difference: the new Whittier School in Seattle looks like this:

Whittier Seattle

Notice it is brick, has an urban setback, is multi-story, and sits on a mere 2.7 acres. It cost somewhere between $9 million and $13.6 million total to build, according to published reports. Yet despite the small footprint, this school “has won praise and prizes, including a Citation of Excellence from the American School Board Journal and an Exemplary Learning Environment award from the American Institute of Architects.” It’s also a Learning By Design 2000 Citation Winner.

And how about the kids — do they like it? Are their spirits lifted, and does it make them want to learn? “‘From the minute the children walked in here,’ [the principal] says, ‘I knew we had succeeded. They love it, and that tells me we did things right.'”

If Seattle can figure out how to meet their educational objectives while still making their building congruous with the neighborhood on a small site, I’m sure Peoria can do the same…. if the school board is willing to be open-minded, that is.

7 thoughts on “Bad news for New Urbanism”

  1. Isn’t doing what’s best for the students and doing what’s best for the neighborhood that the students live in one and the same? Seems kind of obvious to me, but I guess I’m not as educated as those on the school board.

  2. Here, here – PeoriaIllinoisan! Exactly the point I tried to make in my email to the board and city leaders. Glen Oak School, and every other school anywhere – is not an island. It does not exist separate from the community. It is an integral and important part of the community. To disregard the requests and pleadings of parents and those who live in the East Bluff is working against the best interests of the students – unless they plan for their students to live on those 15 acres and not interact with their parents and neighbors!
    Also, if they want this school to be a birth through eighth grade learning center – then they plan on including the larger community in the use of the school. So why are they pissing the community off? As if to say, “We’ll build whatever we want, we don’t care what you think – but you WILL like what we like, and you WILL use it because WE aren’t going to give you any choice.” That’s a great way to work with the community, oh yeah (sarcasm strongly implied).
    I’ll be forwarding your column, CJ to the school board once again, as well as the entire city council and the mayor.
    What is with the current trend of our elected leaders totally ignoring the voice of the people, from our school board right on up to the White House? But that’s a whole different blog…I won’t get me started.

  3. Who does the school board members think sends children to the schools? Peorple that live in the neighborhoods (and pay taxes). Mr Allen is out as a school board member, thank goodness. The take is “build it and they will come”, but what if the surrounding neighborhood is crime ridden and run down further? would a family want to move there or to Dunlap, East Peoria, Morton, Metamora or Washington and send there children there? Or is bussing children in and out of the school the answear?

    The community and schools are linked together as to sucess. If they go about there seprate ways, they are doomed to fail. A park Is A Park. A School Is A School. A vibrant and open Glen Oak Park is in the best interst for children and for all residents.
    Has anyone come out in overwhelming support for the park site other than #150? District #150 is stacking the deck in favor of the Park land site and is not interested it the curent G.O. school site or neighborhood (and taxpayer) wants or needs. All the forums and La Hood meetings were for nothing.

  4. What has transpired is a classic example of ‘Silo Management’ where each governmental agency operates in its’ own sphere without any connect-a-dots to each other and/or the community. Can’t see the forrest for the trees mentality.

    Also, Mr. Hinton’s statement this week that D150 should continue to acquire more land for a future school and/or the park district has the potential to be troubling. Here are a couple of possible scenarios:

    (1) Build another school in the park — continue to chip away at the park — zoo, then school …. if D150 builds a school at the current GOS site and then why would D150 build a special school at the GOP site? just asking…… mor transporation costs et al……;

    (2) Acquired property becomes parkland — oh and by the way the PPD might just change the entrance to the ever expanding zoo in the park to be a the corner of Frye and Prospect — just asking……

    The Hud-1’s (closing statements) for the properties acquired by D150 along Prospect Avenue had $1,000 of earnest money. How and why and by whom did the sales contract go from being an earnest money situation to complete acquisition prior to school board approval? Just asking …..

  5. With this post, you have delivered what should be the intellectual death blow to any argument that District 150 is in the right in the Glan Oak Park/School controversy. Many, many kudos to you.

Comments are closed.