Several City of Peoria department heads — including the police chief — met with District 150 representatives to strongly request Glen Oak School stay put, according to today’s Journal Star. Whether they refurbish or rebuild, the school should be in the center of the neighborhood, not on the fringe. The two biggest concerns with the Glen Oak Park location the school district is considering are (1) traffic on Prospect — every walking student would have to cross this busy street and dangerous intersection, and (2) crime at this corner — the convenience store at Prospect and Abingdon/Frye is a hotbed of crime, according to Peoria Police.
I wonder if the school board is getting the message…. The residents, parents, police, Heart of Peoria Commission, etc., all want to see Glen Oak School stay at its current site. It looks like the only ones who want to see it move are the school board members.
One concern I have from the article, though was this:
[Third District Councilman Bob] Manning said officials told Hinton the city is willing to close off streets around Glen Oak Primary School if a new school goes there [corner of Frye and Wisconsin].
Does he mean permanently or just during school hours, like they do near Kellar Primary? Either way, there is no justification for closing streets at that site. At Kellar, they have a split campus and children are crossing the street all day (or so they tell me), but Glen Oak is a unified campus and children only cross the streets when they come to school in the morning and when they leave for the day — and I’m pretty sure they already block off Frye during those times. The speed limit is only 30 mph — 20 when children are present. The school sits at a 4-way stop, and there are crossing guards when children are arriving and leaving. It appears the traffic situation is in control at that site without taking any further action.
Manning also offered to implement a façade improvement plan for the businesses along Wisconsin. That’s a great idea. So far, the current façade improvement plans have been well-received — there are two requests for grants on the council’s agenda tonight.
So the convenience store at Prospect and Frye is a “hotbed of crime” is it? No kidding? Well, the residents of the area, and the former owners of the Grandview Hotel, must be wondering why the City doesn’t shut it down. Any wild guesses?
As I live in the area, this is my guess. Unlike the former owner of the Grandview who was mostly likely carrying on illegal activities as well as allowing them to be carried out within the establishments walls, I don’t think the owners\leasees of the convenient mart are doing anything illegal. I’ve never read, and someone correct me if I’m wrong, that the proprietors have ever been busted for anything: no illegal underage liquor sales, illegal drug sales, etc. It’s the “business” that occurs in the parking lot, across the street, in the alley, etc. between and around the store. If you make them legally responsible for what happens in their parking lot, then Bergners, UFS, JC Penneys and Fedora’s (who’s parking lot is on the side of their building) along with any other business would have to be held to the same standard. If the clerk looks outside the window and sees Person A hand Person B a big ol bag of weed and B hands A a stack of cash, by the time the clerk calls the cops and they show up……
If there were that many arrests in ’05, except for traffic stops that pull in there, make part of the sentence that the offender can’t be within 100 yards of the store. As with the Morton Square prostitute problem, start sticking a few undercover cops in the parking lot from time to time and it might start doing some good.
And no, I’m not a fan of the store.
When I lived on Prospect and then on Virginia, I always went in there for booze. Never had any problems.
Someone correct me if I’m wrong, but I don’t recall the owners of the Grandview of ever being charged with any crimes. Only that their guests committed them. I fail to see the difference between that and this convenience store.
Believe me, I’m not sticking up for the convenient store. But if I’m on the outside of the building, out of the clerk’s site, doing a drug transaction, how do you hold the clerk responsible? How does the clerk know to call the police? I doubt that the illegal activities happen IN the store like they did IN the Grandview.
Forget the convenient store, it is a small part of the problem of a school being built on the park site; the store situation can,and should be, taken care of by police action. but,all of the other arguments of a school being put there are valid; bad traffic situation, toofar awayfrom the centralized East Bluff,crazy ideas about “community” school (who is going to go there and how), use of a zoo and lagoon for kids duringschool hours inorder to learn something about life? Where do they get these ideas? It’s not the Board yet,it is Mr. Hinton and his advisors. Better ask the East Bluffers and taxpayers before you go ahead Ken.
Chef Kevin, the point is that if this convenience store was next to the Grandview Hotel, it would be shut down in short order, on the same theory that took down the Grandview (which I personally think was unconstitutional). Depends on whose neighborhood is at risk.
Mouse –
I agree with you on your last comment which means legally I don’t know if there is much the city could do to close the convenient store. Yanking it’s liquor license by claiming all the crime that happens there would probably do the trick, but as with the Grandview, is it right?
Roman – The issues evolving around the convenient store are just another reason, in addition to all the others, why G.O.P sucks for a school site.
Which is something I’ve asked before and does someone have an answer because I’m curious. If the school was in Glen Oak Park and took the businesses away on the corner of Frye and Prospect this would mean the property line would be Frye and Prospect. If I tried to obtain a liquor license across the street, I couldn’t do so. So, how come they can build a school so close to an existing liquor license? If the reasoning not to allow a liquor license within 500 feet of a school is to protect our children, then how do we protect our children from a property that currently holds a license? Kinda seems assbackwards to me.
I have a feeling there is something behind all this school mess- I suspect that the powerbrokers who are behind the zoo expansion are dealing with the park board and school board, and that the park board is going to get some big bucks out of this for their zoo. Does anyone else have this feeling?