Category Archives: Museum Block

City Council, City of Peoria, Heart of Peoria Plan, Museum Block, Uncategorized

Museum Square: Boondoggle in the Making, Part IV

I’ve pulled no punches in my criticism of the Heart of Peoria Commission (HOPC) in the past, especially as it relates to Museum Square. I still think they dropped the ball in a big way when they didn’t make any recommendation for or against the site plan, despite its obvious non-conformity with the Heart of Peoria Plan, which the council adopted “in principle.”

But the city council is not without culpability for that failure. I felt a little uncomfortable last night listening to one council member use the HOPC’s failure as an scapegoat for letting this project proceed unhindered.

The HOPC is not an elected body. It’s appointed by the mayor. They don’t make binding decisions, but merely recommendations. The fact that the HOPC couldn’t produce a recommendation should have been a sign that there were problems within the commission that were preventing them from reaching consensus. At best, it should have been a sign that the site plan was controversial. And the council — our elected representatives — should have stepped up to the plate and shown some leadership on that issue.

It’s not like there’s no precedent for the council to take action against the recommendation of a commission. The Railroad Commission recommended preserving the Kellar Branch for competitive rail service, but the council overruled them and approved turning a half-million-dollar asset into a bike path.

The buck stops at the council. Like it or not, regardless of what the commissions recommend or don’t recommend, the council is responsible for the decisions. And the decision to approve this site plan for the Sears block was a poor one.

Why? As I said earlier, the council adopted “in principle” the Heart of Peoria Plan. If that’s going to mean anything, it needs to apply to every developer, not just developers who don’t have Caterpillar backing. And it should apply to every project — especially a project on the “crown jewel” of downtown Peoria.

This museum project doesn’t conform in any way to the Heart of Peoria Plan:

  • The HOP Plan called for high-density development with large buildings, making optimal use of the whole block and having an urban character. The site plan is low-density; roughly two-thirds of the block will be open space with buildings and landscape that will look suburban in character.
  • The HOP Plan called for mixed-use with a residential component to make it a true 24/7 block. The site plan includes a museum, a visitor center, and some small retail that faces Water Street — all things that will close in the evening, leaving the block dead at night.
  • The HOP Plan called for building designs and materials that will blend with the surrounding architecture. The surrounding architecture is traditional, with brick and stone façades. The museum and visitor center designs are modern, with steel and glass façades.
  • While additional parking was envisioned by the HOP Plan for a high-density design for this block, the low-density site plan design doesn’t warrant additional parking since surrounding parking areas are sufficient.

The worst part is, the council had a chance to challenge this site plan, even as late as Tuesday night. Nothing has been built yet. These buildings are still just on paper. I know there’s expense that goes into designing and engineering those drawings, but it’s nothing compared to the cost of actually building the structures.

Unfortunately, since the council won’t stand up to Cat and has a handy scapegoat in the HOPC, it looks like we’ll be stuck with yet another boondoggle.

City Council, City of Peoria, Museum Block, Uncategorized

Museum Square: Boondoggle in the Making, Part III

2 Comments

Of course, the truth of the matter is that this underground parking deck isn’t for the Central Illinois Regional Museum at all — it’s for Caterpillar’s visitor center. As councilman Sandberg pointed out, Cat originally wanted an above-ground [underground] parking deck built on their portion of the Sears block and paid for with federal dollars. But they found out that federal rules prohibit the use of those funds for [public] parking decks on private property. Furthermore, the Heart of Peoria Commission strongly recommended there not be any surface parking on the site. So Cat, rather than doing away with the parking, now decides to put the deck underground on the public half of the property and use property tax dollars (through the TIF) to pay for it.

The rest of the council is, of course, perfectly okay with that. They had all kinds of justifications for it. Councilwoman Van Auken said that removing the cap on the TIF wouldn’t take money away from essential services like fire station staffing. Bill Dennis has the best response to that spurious argument.

But the most embarrassing justification was the “we- have- to- approve- this- plan- or- Cat- will- move- their- headquarters- out- of- Peoria” reason. To hear Chuck Grayeb talk, for instance, you’d think Cat was poised to pull up stakes and move out of town any second, and that Peorians should be sacrificing their virgin daughters on an altar outside Cat headquarters and paying tribute money to keep them here.

Let’s face it — Caterpillar is a very large employer and has been very generous to Peoria civic projects and charities. I’m all for giving credit where credit is due. But that doesn’t mean our council should just rubber stamp every Caterpillar request. To do so makes the council a mere figurehead government that represents Cat and not Peoria residents.

City Council, City of Peoria, Museum Block

Museum Square: Boondoggle in the Making, Part II

3 Comments

For further proof that this museum will be a bust, we need only turn to the parking lot debacle, which consumed most of the deliberations last night. The council voted to give more money to the Museum Square project (by removing the TIF cap) so that an unwarranted and expensive parking garage could be added.

Yes, the 75+ street spaces plus the parking decks across the street to the northwest plus the surface lot to the southeast are just not enough parking according to the council and Museum Collaborative. Why? On-site parking is “part of the success factor for the facilities being built there,” said one of the presenters. “This is Peoria,” councilwoman Van Auken reminded us, as if we all just arrived here from outer space. People aren’t going to walk a block to the museum because “we live in a northern climate” and the weather isn’t always good.

With all due respect, that’s horse hockey. Ever been to a Bradley game? A symphony concert? A Chiefs game? Steamboat Days? Skyconcert? I would submit that Peorians park on the street and in surrounding parking decks and surface lots for these and a host of other downtown activities — in all kinds of weather. People are more than willing to park a block or two away and walk if there’s something worth walking to. If the parking deck proponents believe that people won’t walk across the street to see our beautiful, new, state-of-the-art museum, then why are we building it at all?

City Council, City of Peoria, Heart of Peoria Plan, Museum Block

Museum Square: Boondoggle in the Making, Part I

1 Comment

Let’s play the old game, “Who Am I?”

  • I will be a regional draw
  • I will revive downtown
  • I will raise a lot of tax revenue
  • I will be self-supporting

Who am I? If you guessed Museum Square, you’re correct. And if you guessed the Civic Center, you’re also correct. Yes, the promises are remarkably similar. Also remarkably similar: the prospect that this project will not be self-supporting and will need ongoing help from the city to keep it afloat.

Councilmen Manning and Jacob ran the numbers, and this project has even less of a chance of being profitable than the water company buyout would have been in its proposed first year. They convinced the council to change the language of the redevelopment agreement amendment to say the museum collaborative will not ask for any more money from the city.

I applaud their effort, but realistically, everyone knows the museum is going to come back for more money around 2010. And what’s the city going to say? “No, we’ll let the museum close down and have a big vacant building on the Sears block again”? Not hardly. No, we’ll be subsidizing this thing for many years to come. And it started last night with the vote to give them more TIF (Tax Increment Financing) money.

Caterpillar, City Council, Heart of Peoria Plan, Museum Block

Cat blames HOPC for higher Museum Square costs

6 Comments

The Heart of Peoria Commission (HOPC) is on the agenda for Tuesday night. They are recommending approval of the proposed elevations of Museum Square. But included in their request is a copy of the HOPC’s meeting minutes, and they reveal something of Caterpillar’s mindset.

Putting Museum Square parking underground is expensive. As was reported back in February, it may add as much as $3 million to the cost. At that time, the Journal Star editorialized that, essentially, this extra expense was the HOPC’s fault because they didn’t want to see another surface parking lot downtown.

Now it’s Caterpillar’s turn to play the blame game.

Despite the fact that Cat got almost everything it wanted in the museum site plan (except the surface parking lot) even though it severely compromised the Heart of Peoria Plan, and despite the fact that this project is continuing to get support from the HOPC, commission minutes reveal that Caterpillar representative Mark Johnson (Project Manager for the Caterpillar Visitor Center) wanted this line included in the commission’s recommendation to the council on Tuesday:

“The Commission recognizes that the inclusion of the underground parking structure in the site plan has resulted in a substantial increase in infrastructure development cost and urges the Council to work with the developers to adopt a mutually acceptable financing plan.”

In other words, he wanted the Commission to take responsibility for the additional parking expense on Museum Square. Why? The minutes state:

Mr. Johnson said, “I urge the Commission to step up to their responsibility, as we developed this underground parking as a part of this plan in response to this Commission’s strong recommendation; and we have to find a way to pay for it.”

Au contraire, replied commissioner Beth Akeson:

Commissioner Akeson said she was sorry the Commission has been put in the position to make it appear they are the ones that forced the issue of underground parking, when in actuality the Commission was never brought into the conversation about what its recommendation would be.

(Emphasis mine.) That’s right. It wasn’t the HOPC that came up with the underground parking idea. They weren’t even consulted.

In fact, the need for any parking on that site is questionable. Even if it could be shown that parking is needed, the bulk of the cost is not simply to put it underground per se, but to put it below the site as it’s currently designed — i.e., with the boomerang-shaped buildings. Those building designs were not the HOPC’s either.

Mr. Johnson’s amendment was defeated, but expect this argument to surface again — on the very next agenda item.

Caterpillar and Lakeview want to amend the City of Peoria/Museum Block Redevelopment Agreement.  Among other things, they want to remove the $500,000 cap on TIF reimbursement.  I imagine this will be the source of some discussion, as it’s the only part of the amendment that “could result in additional money being paid over by the City to the Museum.”

I have an idea.  Instead of reducing the size of the museum by 15,000 square feet and trying to finagle more money from the city, why not make money and increase density by adding residential, restaurant, and retail components, like the Heart of Peoria Plan recommends?  You remember the Heart of Peoria Plan, right?  You know, the one the council adopted “in principle”?

Heart of Peoria Plan, Museum Block, Peoria Civic Center

Hotel misplaced?

5 Comments

The Journal Star reports that the Civic Center Authority will be deciding today whether to “enter into land negotiations with an unidentified developer” to build a hotel adjacent to the Civic Center.

Isn’t there already a hotel near the Civic Center called the Hotel Pere Marquette?  Granted, it’s not immediately adjoining, but do they really think that the extra block is driving convention-goers away?  I mean, everyone went apoplectic at the threat of an Embassy Suites going up right across the river.  If convention guests are willing to commute from across the river, it doesn’t look like proximity is the main problem.

I’m guessing the Pere was looking forward to the Civic Center expansion.  More events at the Civic Center means more guests at the hotel.  Only now, if the Civic Center Authority approves this development, all those extra guests will be going to the new Civic Center hotel.

Of course, that’s capitalism, so more power to them.  Still, I can’t help but think this hotel is misplaced.  Wouldn’t it be better, say, down on Museum Square?  You know, like the Heart of Peoria Plan suggested?

Huh (*shakes head*). The Heart of Peoria Plan . . . how passé.

City Council, Heart of Peoria Plan, Museum Block

Museum Square Revisited

6 Comments

The boomerang-shaped building is back.  And it wants more money.

Apparently the underground parking deck is going to cost $3 million more than planners thought, so now they want to set up a TIF to pay for it.  The Journal Star editorializes that the city should give them the money because it’s a “signature development of this generation.”  They reason that it was the Heart of Peoria Commission’s recommendation that led to the idea of putting the parking underground, so the city should accept responsibility for that action.  After all, they argue, “Would City Hall prefer that Museum Square have a suburban-style surface lot on its riverfront?”

That’s a rhetorical question, of course.  But it’s also a false dichotomy.  There are several other options in reality.  In fact, this could be just the opening the city council and Heart of Peoria Commission needs to revisit the site plans overall.  Let’s look at just a couple of other options:

Do We Really Need More Parking?

One thing to consider is whether additional parking is necessary on that block at all.  There’s a parking deck and surface lot directly across Water Street that gets very little use during the day.  And since, under the current design, Museum Square will only be active during the day, wouldn’t that parking suffice?  You have to figure, they’re only developing a little over a third of the square footage on the old Sears block, and the museum design doesn’t include any residential or restaurant component that would keep people there past 5:00 when the museum closes.  Why the need for more parking?

Change the Building Plans

One of the reasons the underground parking is going to be so expensive to build is because it’s a rectangular parking area partially underneath the building and partially underneath a courtyard.  In other words, the footprint of the building and the footprint of the parking deck don’t line up.  That adds to the cost.  So, I think it would be reasonable to suggest that developers consider modifying their building plans. 

Why not?  Museum backers are wanting to change the financial details of the plan; why isn’t it fair game for the council to turn the tables and ask the developers to change the physical details of the plan?  There’s more than one way to save $3 million. 

There’s plenty of justification for this idea that goes beyond the parking situation.  As I’ve written previously, the current design for Museum Square is totally contrary to the Heart of Peoria Plan, which the city council adopted “in principle.”  The Heart of Peoria Commission unwisely chose not to make a recommendation when the site plan came before the council back in November.  But maybe this new wrinkle will give them and the council a second chance.

If Museum Square were to follow the Heart of Peoria Plan, the parking deck wouldn’t be an issue:

  • The style of the buildings would be in keeping with the surrounding architecture, meaning (among other things) they would be more rectangular in shape, making it possible for the footprints of the building and underground parking to coincide.
  • There would be more density on the block.  Instead of only a little more than a third of the block being developed, over two-thirds would be utilized; a larger building footprint means more room for parking underneath.
  • There would be residential (or hospitality), retail, and restaurant components included in the plans, which would generate additional revenue for the development and keep the block active 24 hours a day, seven days a week, justifying the need for more parking in the first place.

The Journal Star is right about one thing.  This will be the “signature development of this generation.”  So isn’t it important that we get it right?  I know some may balk at the idea of sending the planners “back to the drawing board” at this point when they’re so far along in the process.  But until the buildings are in brick and mortar, all they have to change is their paper drawings, and that’s not going to cost $3 million.

Now is the time to revisit this and get it right.

Heart of Peoria Plan, Museum Block

Museum Square — does it fulfill Peoria’s vision?

12 Comments

This is an artist’s rendering of what the former Sears block (now “Museum Square”) could look like under the Heart of Peoria (HOP) Plan, which the council adopted “in principle.” As far as I know, that plan is still the vision for Peoria’s urban renewal. Since the Sears block is perhaps the most visible piece of property in the Heart of Peoria boundaries, the plan paid considerable attention to this development and recommended these principles:

First, it is important that each component of the redevelopment be designed with appropriate street frontage, since the site controls at least three crucial links to the riverfront.

Second, the site should incorporate a mix of uses that will bring activity to the area both day and night. For this reason, the inclusion of a residential component is particularly important. At opposite ends of the block, the scheme includes a hotel and a condominium, both of which would have dramatic views of the river and downtown Peoria.

Third, the scheme needs to repair the connection to the riverfront along Fulton Street, which currently comes to an undignified end on the west side of the Sears block. In the proposed scheme, the Fulton Street axis is continued as a pedestrian walkway through a central plaza. This scheme has several powerful advantages: it continues the view corridor from the downtown to the river; it re-establishes an attractive pedestrian route from the Civic Center to the riverfront entertainment district; it establishes a dramatic sequence of views for pedestrians as they pass through the museum plaza, potentially defining one of the most memorable and imageable locations on Peoria’s improved riverfront.

Now, let’s take a look at the site plan that was adopted by the council in November:

Sorry I couldn’t find a cleaner image than this one, but it’s good enough to serve our purpose. Anything here fit the Heart of Peoria Plan? Nope.

Let’s looks first at what the plan calls “appropriate street frontage.” Later in the plan document it says:

The street frontages of the buildings of the Sears Block must be active. Water Street should have the highest level of pedestrian activity; Main and Liberty should provide support in their pedestrian connection between the Downtown and Riverfront; and Washington Street should allow a proper location for service access while remaining pedestrian-friendly. Significant gaps in the street edge, low-laying structures, service uses and blank walls at the street edge all contribute to a hostile environment unsuitable for street life.

In contrast, the approved site plan has the main entrances off of Washington Street, and no entrance facing Water Street at all. There are “significant gaps in the street edge,” which is one of the things that contributes to “a hostile environment” for pedestrians. Test one, failed.

As for “a mix of uses that will bring activity both day and night,” that was left completely out. If downtown is going to thrive, it’s going to have to be active 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. This is the single most damaging flaw in the design. The plan should have included residential and retail/restaurant components to keep the block hopping long after the museums close. As it is, at night this block will be no different than it is right now — dead.

Finally, it doesn’t “repair the connection to the riverfront along Fulton Street” the way the plan envisioned it. It continues to block one’s view of the river. However, it is a glass arcade, making it conceivable one would be able to see through it to the river, so perhaps this is partially fulfilled.

One of the later recommendations is to “[d]evelop a plan that makes optimal use of the whole block.” The approved site plan is very inefficient in that regard. In fact, the whole feel of the approved plan is a suburban one. This would look right at home at the corner of Lake and University, where Lakeview Museum sits now. But downtown, it looks out of place.

I can’t help but feel this is another opportunity lost. The so-called “crown jewel” of Peoria, Museum Square, will become yet another impediment to the broader vision of downtown revitalization. It will continue to make downtown a place to visit during the day, and retreat from at night.