Category Archives: Streets

City Council, City of Peoria, Streets

A few questions about capital funding projects

15 Comments

The Journal Star reports today:

Five large-scale and expensive capital works projects were excluded from the city’s 2009 budget…. Each project will likely be considered for possible inclusion in a future bond issue, if the city decides to borrow money in order to complete them in the near future.

The five projects, including the Sheridan Triangle, are the following: City Hall restoration, reconstruction of roads within the WeaverRidge subdivision, stabilization of a stream bank between Holly Hedges and Devereux drives, and improvements along Main Street in the West Bluff.

…The council is expected to meet in January to discuss the possibility of a bond issue to help pay for these major capital projects.

First Question: Are we just playing a shell game here with the budget? Is the council simply delaying decisions on capital projects so they can say they have a balanced budget for 2009? If they amend the budget in January to include some or all of these capital projects, where will the money come from to pay on these bonds? Won’t they either have to raise taxes/fees or have an unbalanced budget?

Second Question: Why the heck is “reconstruction of roads within the WeaverRidge subdivision” one of the five top projects vying for capital funding? Are these the worst streets we have in Peoria? The ones in most need of repair? Or are they important thoroughfares that need to be improved in order to incentivize private business development? Or are they really old streets that have been neglected for far too long? No, no, no, and no. So, what is the reason?

Third Question: Why aren’t improvements to Washington, Adams, and/or Jefferson streets included on this list? There are developers waiting to turn old warehouses into loft apartments and condos, which will get more people living downtown, revitalizing the area and creating a market for more retail in our central business district. But the city is continuing to drag its feet here. Why? Are they really committed to downtown revitalization or aren’t they?

City of Peoria, Streets

The Main Street circle game

29 Comments

The Journal Star has article today on why Councilmember Van Auken is abandoning plans to improve Main Street:

“We don’t have anything in the budget this year because it’s a ‘maintenance budget,’ ” 2nd District City Councilwoman Barbara Van Auken said Tuesday.

Van Auken said she anticipates in 2009 for more discussions to occur among city officials and neighborhood leaders within the West Bluff Council on how to handle improvements along Main. She said it could be several years before any physical changes along the busy street occur.

That should be “several more years.” This has been pursued ever since the Heart of Peoria Plan was completed in 2002, so we’re at six years, four consultants/studies and counting. But by all means, let’s spend another year discussing it. Maybe someone will say something different.

“I think our goal would be to have each of the neighborhoods in the West Bluff come forward with their ideas on what they would like to see in terms of traffic flow and patterns,” Van Auken said.

Again? How many times will we be going through this exercise? I would submit that the city has gotten more public/neighborhood input on this project than any other road project in the history of Peoria. We’ve had charrettes, we’ve had public meetings, we’ve talked as neighborhood associations and submitted the results of our discussions to the West Bluff Council, and on and on and on. How many more times (years?) are we going to rehash this thing?

The council on Dec. 9 will simply be asked to vote on whether to receive and file the Hanson study, which was completed several months ago.

By 2010 when this is reconsidered, we’ll of course need to do another study with another consultant, which will then get received and filed, and we’ll go round and round and round in the circle game….

City of Peoria, Form-Based Code, Heart of Peoria Plan, Streets, West Bluff

Van Auken abandons Main Street improvements

21 Comments

According to our neighborhood newsletter, second-district councilperson Barbara Van Auken is not going to ask for any funding for Main Street improvements in 2009:

The proposed changes to Main Street are estimated to be in the order of $10 million. Barbara Van Auken (our City Council representative) will not support inclusion of changes to Main Street in Peoria’s 2009 budget, citing the need to do further study of the project, as well as more pressing priorities elsewhere in the city for next year’s capital budget.

That’s right. After all the time, money, and effort that has been expended for these improvements over the past six years, now, at the 11th hour, our city councilperson is evidently going to abandon the project.

Let’s review. Main Street is one of four form districts in Peoria (the others being the Warehouse District, Sheridan/Loucks Triangle, and Prospect Road Corridor). A form district is a small part of the Heart of Peoria Plan area that the City singled out for more intensive coding known as a “form-based code.” The idea was to focus resources on these areas, then spread out from there to revitalize the rest of the Heart of Peoria Plan area over time.

Main Street is starting to see some significant private investment. The old Walgreens was recently purchased and a new mixed-use development is underway. The businesses adjacent to the Costume Trunk are replacing their facade. One World recently expanded with the departure of Lagron Miller.

But at least one established business — Running Central — is getting impatient for improvements to be made to Main Street. In the past, the new owner has stated that if changes aren’t made, he’s going to move the business to Junction City.

You can’t blame him. The city seems to be stuck in “analysis paralysis” when it comes to changing the streetscape on Main. Consider the studies: The Heart of Peoria Plan (2002); Wallace Roberts & Todd Med-Tech/Ren Park study (2004); Farrell-Madden form-based code study (2006); Hansen traffic study (2008). All of these studies in one way or another said we need to “fix the streets” — i.e., make them more pedestrian-friendly, slow the traffic down, provide on-street parking for businesses, etc. — and so far, no road improvements have materialized.

Van Auken’s pronouncement that she won’t even try to get funding for this important project in 2009 is disappointing to say the least. After six years and four studies on this project, what’s it going to take to get some follow-through from the city?

In fairness, some progress has been made in other areas: specifically, the form-based code and broader Land Development Code have been enacted. But that’s only half of what’s needed to make these form districts a success. The LDC and form-based codes regulate the private space. But in order for these districts to thrive, there absolutely must be improvement to the public space as well.

Public improvements have been noticeably absent from the form districts so far. Attempts to make Adams and Jefferson street two-way in the Warehouse District has met with opposition from Caterpillar. Efforts to narrow Washington street to make it more pedestrian-friendly has met with opposition from IDOT and first district councilman Clyde Gulley, who is in the trucking business and likes having Washington be a high-speed truck route. The Prospect Road corridor hasn’t even been talked about the last two years.

The most promising area is the Sheridan/Loucks Triangle, where yet another study has recently been done to look at specific ways to improve the streetscape. Whether that effort will get funded remains to be seen. I’m not sure whether Van Auken considers it one of those “more pressing priorities” for the City’s capital budget, or if it will also get the axe.

Finally, let’s quickly talk about Van Auken’s reasons for abandoning the Main Street project.

  • “The proposed changes to Main Street are estimated to be in the order of $10 million.” — Assuming that estimate is correct, yeah, that’s a lot of money. But of course it can and should be phased over several years, not spent all at once. That’s the way it is with all large road projects. Speaking of which, does anyone think that the fifth district councilman will not ask for funding for widening Northmoor Road or extending Pioneer Parkway in 2009 due to “more pressing priorities elsewhere in the city”?

  • “…citing the need to do further study of the project…” — I think we’ve already established that there’s been plenty of study. Anyone wanting more study at this point is simply looking for different conclusions.

  • “…as well as more pressing priorities elsewhere in the city for next year’s capital budget.” — Why is the Main Street project not a “pressing priority”? We’ve spent hundreds of thousands of dollars studying it and countless hours getting public input on it. There’s even a grassroots organization (Campaign for a Walkable West Bluff) that has sprung up to try and push this project along. There’s no governmental or judicial agency standing in the way of it. It’s part of the city’s plan for revitalizing the older parts of town. What are these unspecified “more pressing priorities”? Implementing a new logo? Continuing to subsidize downtown parking?

I would also point out that these improvements to Main Street have quite a bit of popular support in the second district (although there are some who are opposed, of course). Neighborhood organizations, the West Bluff Council, and businesses along Main are pretty enthusiastic about seeing these changes made. I wonder how all those people will feel about Van Auken putting the kibosh on those improvements right before she’s up for reelection.

City of Peoria, Streets, Traffic

Main and University traffic study forum next Monday

8 Comments

From a press release:

CITY OF PEORIA HOSTS MAIN AND UNIVERSITY TRAFFIC STUDY FORUM
September 22, 2008
7 pm – 9 pm

The Public Works Department and Hanson Professional Services will be hosting a public meeting on Monday, September 22, 2008; 7pm – 9pm at City Hall-Council Chambers, 419 Fulton Street, Suite 400, Peoria. This forum is a follow-up to the meeting that took place in early July. The City will be presenting a series of computer-generated illustrations showing how a variety of traffic-calming options will affect Main Street and the surrounding area using traffic counts and data collected in June.

This is a critical meeting for those of us concerned about our West Bluff community. This may be our final opportunity to provide input and influence the future of Main Street. Show your support of a walkable west bluff by attending this forum and wearing a green shirt to visually show our city leaders what our community wants.

If you are unable to attend this important meeting, please respond to this email to show your support of a vibrant, creative, pedestrian-friendly, and commercially-viable Main Street.

City of Peoria, Streets, Traffic

I-74 capacity estimates severely overestimated

22 Comments

I’ve been thinking about this article from the Journal Star — specifically, this information:

Numbers released last week to the Journal Star indicate that in several cases, there is less traffic on I-74 since the Upgrade 74 project was completed in 2006.

East of Adams Street, just off the Murray Baker Bridge, the Illinois Department of Transportation counted an average 56,600 vehicles each day in 2008. Comparably, there were 62,100 vehicles daily crossing the Murray Baker Bridge in 2003, around the time the upgrade project began.

West of Adams Street’s exit, the state counted 51,000 vehicles each day in 2008, compared to 59,100 on average each day in 2003.

In East Peoria, west of the Main Street exit, the 2008 count shows 56,800 vehicles daily, down 3,000 vehicles on average each day from 2003, when the count was 59,800.

My criticism of the Upgrade 74 plan has always been that it was too much. In fact, one of the first posts I wrote (because, like all bloggers, there’s an obligatory post early in our careers complaining about something traffic-related) — on April 18, 2005 — was about the I-74 overhaul:

I’m not denying that the expressway needed some improvements. Some of those exit ramps were very dangerous and needed to be reconstructed.

But isn’t this overhaul a bit excessive? I mean, do we really need six to eight lanes of traffic through Peoria?

It’s almost like they said, “hey, what needs to be done to improve I-74 through Peoria?”

And someone answered, “well, we need to fix those short ramps — especially that dangerous one by the bridge.”

“Yeah, yeah, good! Anything else?”

“Well, it would really help traffic flow to put in a new interchange at Sterling by the mall.”

“Excellent, yes, that would be a good idea. Anything else?”

“Hmmm…. no, not really….”

“Okay, well, what do we estimate that will cost?”

“We figure about $200 million.”

[Furrowed brow] “Well, we’ve got $460 million appropriated… we’re going to have to come up with some more upgrades. What else can we do?”

“Well… uh…. we could add more lanes — and a tunnel — and, and, let’s see how many roads and ramps we can get to intersect at Knoxville — that would be fun!”

And away it went!

Indeed. The Journal Star reported on May 18, 1999, that “The new road will be able to carry up to 100,000 cars a day. Right now, from 30,000 to 65,000 cars use the road daily.” In other words, they doubled the capacity of I-74 through Peoria. Why? There’s no evidence that we needed additional capacity. And now we find out there are fewer cars on the interstate than before the upgrade! More capacity means more maintenance of more infrastructure in a state that can’t pay its bills or maintain its existing infrastructure as it is.

But I guess that’s water under the bridge now. Except I’d like to point out this: As we’re trying to decide what needs to be done with Main Street, let’s remember that traffic engineers are not always accurate in gauging capacity needs. This I-74 overhaul is a very expensive case in point.

OSF St. Francis, Peoria Times-Observer, Streets

Times-Observer: OSF moving into K’s Merchandise building

11 Comments

From the Peoria Times-Observer:

OSF St. Francis, Inc. has leased about half of the [former K’s Merchandise] building to consolidate offices spread throughout Peoria.

Also in the story, fifth district councilman Pat Nichting uses this news to push for the Pioneer Parkway extension. “‘There’s a lot of folks being patient waiting for the extension of Pioneer Parkway. It will have a major impact on that area,’ he said,” the Times-Observer reports.

City of Peoria, Streets

Signs or Designs?

18 Comments

Speeding carsThe city’s Traffic Commission is considering lowering the speed limit from 30 to 25 miles per hour in residential neighborhoods and subdivisions. The cost would be about $200,000 to purchase new signs.

It’s hard to argue against a 25-mph speed limit in residential areas. I don’t have any objection to lowering the speed limit, provided the cost can be spread out by phasing in the changes over a few years. It certainly would be safer, assuming people actually drive slower. The arguments against this effort is that people will ignore the signs (like they do now, it’s argued), thus it won’t be the most effective use of $200,000. They may have a point.

I believe the speeding problem is systemic, and that’s why signs are believed to have little or no effect. To really get people to slow down, some fundamental changes in road design are needed.

When you build a road that has wide, multiple traffic lanes capable of accommodating speeds of 40 or 50 miles per hour, guess what you’re going to get? That’s right: people driving 40 or 50 miles per hour. It doesn’t matter what the sign says; people are going to drive up to the limit that’s comfortable given the road’s design.

Take Knoxville between War Memorial Drive and downtown, for instance: Five lanes (most of the way), 35-mph speed limit. And do you ever see anyone driving 35 miles per hour? Sure you do — you can’t miss them. They’re the ones getting passed by the rest of the motorists who are doing at least 45, if not 50.

This is true in residential areas as well. If you have wide collector streets that can easily handle 40- to 45-mph traffic, that’s what you’re going to see, despite the speed limit signs saying 30 or 25. The roads are wide in the mistaken belief that wide streets equal safer streets. But the inverse is actually true: narrower streets produce naturally lower speeds and end up being safer.

This is the theory behind “road diets.” You can read about it in this PDF report by Dan Burden and Peter Lagerwey. They write:

Nationwide, engineers are putting roads on “diets,” helping them lose lanes and width. In the process formerly “fat” streets often become leaner, safer, and more efficient. They become multi-modal and more productive. In many cases these former “warrior” roadways are tamed and turned into “angels.”

Often these changed roads set the stage for millions or megamillions of dollars in new commercial and residential development. The change can increase value of existing properties. In some cases costs of reconstructing roadways are repaid in as little as one year through increased sales tax or property tax
revenue.

The “Road Diets” report focuses on reducing arterial roadways. However, narrower streets (in concert with other calming measures, such as on-street parking) have been shown to reduce speeds and make roadways safer in general, as this report from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) shows.

To effect change in this area, the city’s subdivision ordinance would need to be amended, since that is where the design standards for street widths and on-street parking are codified (Municipal Code, Appendix A, Article V, Part I). Until changes are made to the way we build our roads, speeding is going to continue to be a problem, no matter how many signs we put up.

Heart of Peoria Plan, Streets

Roundabout

29 Comments

A little over a week ago, the Journal Star reported that a roundabout is being considered for the intersection of Sheridan, Loucks, and Gift in the “Sheridan Triangle” form district. This was surprising to me. I have nothing against roundabouts, but they’re not the only option or even the best option for every intersection.

You may remember that there was a public meeting back on March 5 to discuss options for improvement of the public space in this form district. Keith Covington was there along with other engineering and street design experts with experience in creating new urban streetscapes.

Everyone I talked to that night — to a person — said that a roundabout was not the best solution to this particular intersection, although they all affirmed they liked roundabouts. The problems here, it was explained to me, were several.

First of all, there wasn’t enough space. Because it’s an intersection of three streets, there’s a minimum radius that’s required to accommodate all the “legs” that would be coming off the roundabout, and that space simply isn’t available at that intersection, I was told.

Secondly, they were concerned with creating dead space in the middle of the roundabout. Going along with that big required radius would be a lot of space in the middle of which pedestrians would get no practical use.

Thirdly, no roundabout was suggested at the charrette for this area. If you look at the drawings that were produced by the neighbors and business owners during the charrette process, the vision then was to have Loucks intersect with Gift before the intersection with Sheridan on the east side (just like Loucks intersects with Forrest Hill before the University intersection), and have Gift intersect with Loucks before the Sheridan intersection on the west side. This would create a four-way intersection at Sheridan instead of a six-way, and a pocket park could even be put in on the southeast corner, which would be usable by pedestrians.

Suffice it to say, there was a compelling case made that night for no roundabout. But now, suddenly, a roundabout is a serious contender for this intersection. It would be interesting to discover how decisions are being made, but the district councilperson is keeping attendance at these meetings under tight control.

For more information on roundabouts in the United States, see the excellent resources at the Transportation Research Board’s site. Hat tip to Beth Akeson on providing the TRB info.

Caterpillar, Streets

Keep the paramedics on call

7 Comments

Pedestrian CrossingJonathan Ahl and WCBU news are reporting that the Sears block is going to be used as a temporary parking lot while Caterpillar does some maintenance work on its parking deck.

I’m aghast at Caterpillar’s callous disregard for employee safety. In case you’ve forgotten how dangerous this situation is, I’ll remind you that Cat said we couldn’t change Adams and Jefferson streets from one-way to two-way because their employees would be unable to adapt to changing traffic patterns:

The safety of Caterpillar employees is of the utmost importance. A key concern of our workers in downtown Peoria is pedestrian safety…. Changing streets from one-way to two-way would create more vehicle/pedestrian conflicts at intersections…. Our employees are familiar with the traffic patterns as they exist today and know what to expect.

Well, this new parking scheme is a cinch to lead to widespread disorientation and employee injury. Traffic patterns will be seriously altered since all those cars will be going into and out of the Sears block instead of the parking deck. Unable to scamper across their gerbil tube from the deck to the World Headquarters building, unsuspecting employees will be forced onto the mean streets of Peoria at rush hour and expected to navigate a crosswalk spanning a dreaded unfamiliar two-way street. I shudder to think of the carnage as hundreds of employees, conditioned to only look one direction before jaywalking, end up hit from behind by motorists. Oh, the humanity!

Bloggers are often accused of just complaining but doing nothing to help the situation. Well, today, I’m going to do something to help. As a pedestrian experienced in crossing complicated intersections, I hereby offer to provide training to Caterpillar’s employees before this new parking plan takes effect. I charge reasonable fees and boast a mortality rate of six sigma quality. In addition to my personal experience crossing intersections, I have also helped the elderly across the street during my participation in Cub Scouts and Webelos, and I’ve taught children as young as 6 and 7 years old how to safely cross the road on their own.

Give me a jingle. I’m always happy to be of service.