Jennifer Davis has a great article on yesterday’s Heart of Peoria Commission meeting. She even quotes me:
Commissioner C.J. Summers noted, “The Heart of Peoria plan says our schools are perfectly located where they are now.”
Another key concern of the commission is the fear that District 150 has not fully examined whether the current school, built in 1889, can be renovated and expanded.
“By their own admission, they haven’t done a study to see if the building can be reused,” Summers said.
Just to clarify and back up those assertions, I wanted to point out that on page II.5 of the Heart of Peoria Plan, it says this (emphasis mine):
The school buildings sprinkled throughout the study area were one of the first features noted by the charrette team. The buildings are not only beautiful, but well located from the standpoint of maintaining the neighborhood structure of the city. This makes the city’s schools even more important as components of Peoria’s neighborhoods.
And on page V.15, it reiterates this point:
Finding: Peoria has maintained an architectural legacy of attractive brick school buildings, well located in its inner city neighborhoods.
So it’s indisputable that Duany Plater-Zyberk — the consultants who wrote the HOP plan — felt that Peoria’s school buildings were well-located, and that their location was an asset in our older neighborhoods.
Why is this important? Because not too long ago, the school board took out of context a book co-written by Duany (“The New Civic Art,” 2003) in which he states that “edge-schools” (those built on the edge of a neighborhood) are a good idea. Of course, the context of that recommendation was completely different than Peoria’s context. There, Duany was saying that a school placed on the edge of adjacent neighborhoods would be the best place for the school to serve both neighborhoods.
In Peoria’s case, the most compelling argument for keeping the school at the current Glen Oak School site is this picture, which was also printed in the Journal Star article (click on the picture to view the very large JPG image):
The red boundary is the attendance area; the blue dot is the current Glen Oak School site; the yellow dot is the approximate location of the proposed replacement school for the Woodruff attendance area on the edge of Glen Oak Park. The circles around each site represent 1/4-mile and 1/2-mile radii from each location. As you can see, the current Glen Oak School site is perfectly centered in the neighborhood, allowing easy accessibility and walkability for the entire attendance area. The proposed site would make it within better walking distance of the animals at the zoo, but longer commute times for the children; in fact, it would lead to increased busing or other motor transportation.
As for my other comment that they “haven’t done a study to see if the building can be reused,” I’m referring to Ken Hinton’s admission in the 9/25/06 Journal Star “Word on the Street” column where they reported, “according to Hinton himself, the district only did a preliminary review of whether the school could cost-effectively be renovated. ‘Glen Oak had a preliminary one, but not a final one,’ Hinton said Friday.”
Once the Commission’s position paper is finalized and submitted to the City, I’ll post a copy of it here for everyone to read.
UPDATE: Here it is (1.45 MB PDF file).
That picture was the most powerful part of the article.
I hope it’s not too late.
Great Job Heart of Peoria Commissioners! 🙂 I have never known of a Peoria Commission to write a position paper — awesome! Thank the commissioners for their work.
The picture is genius!
I’m yet another person who thinks that picture is extremely helpful. It really shows how ideal the current location is. Thanks, C.J.
Agreed. That graphic is more powerful than anything that has been spoken in favor of the current Glen Oak location. Great work.
Peoria can appeal to those who like the solid grid pattern and walkability of its central neighborhoods. If we can reduce crime and improve the schools in these neighborhoods we can attract some of those who moved out. Some of these people must miss urban living and the increased human contact that comes with it. Give them a reason to come back.
Well, well … now he’s COMMISSIONER C. J. Summers. La-dee-dah!
LoL
Great work, C. J. The picture is certainly worth a thousand words.
Thanks, everyone. I appreciate the positive feedback. Beth Akeson will be presenting this document to the City Council next Tuesday on behalf of the Heart of Peoria Commission.
FEH
Sorry, Em … you’ve been outmatched. I just don’t buy the “shiny new buildings keep people in the city” theory. You can’t build a suburban facility next to a park in the middle of the city and hope people will be tricked into thinking they’ve been transported to the suburbs. Sure Glen Oak Park has its problems and is underutilized, but perhaps the solution is to try to improve the Park and not to give up and start carving away at it. Once green space is lost, it’s hard to get back.
People who are dedicated to the idea of a suburban lifestyle will seek out a suburban lifestyle. If they move to Peoria, they’ll find something in the Richwoods district. More often lately they’ll end up in Dunlap, Morton or Germantown Hills.
It’s a mistake to look at the successes of the suburbs and try to crowbar that square peg into a round hole. Some people actually LIKE living in the city. They don’t want to deal with a big yard or commuting to work. They want an old house with some history to it. They want to have shopping and entertainment right down the street. That’s why we need unique urban solutions to the problems central Peoria is facing, and that’s what the HOP plan is all about. Of course the City and District 150 need to step up and do their part to provide safety, infrastructure and quality schools.
But don’t ask me. I’m just a dumb hick from the East side of the river, right Em?
Knight sez: “try to crowbar that square peg into a round hole.”
I say: That’s exactly what building a new school on the current GOP site is doing.
Knight sez: “I’m just a dumb hick from the East side of the river..”
I say: if the shoe fits….but I have more of a right to respond to this subject than you as I at least live on the side of the river that is getting taxed by Peoria School District. Not that your opinion is invalid but then again, it always seems to be the people who don’t live in Peoria that can point out it’s problems. That is if indeed you do live on the east side of the river.
So Peoria schools are all perfectly located and no change should ever come about because of some study that was done? Wouldn’t a building that was designed 100 years ago have some inefficiencies that could be improved upon? Anyone ask one of the Glen Oak teachers?
Increased busing times: 1-2 minutes, tops for some, none for others. Think of all the traffic that moves thru the current residential streets, that’s real safe, right? Now, think of all of the current schools that are located on major streets. Where’s all of the accidents and injuries caused by those other schools’ locations (University, Sterling, Knoxville… All streets with even higher speed limits than Prospect…)
Maybe D150 should build more new buildings to replace those dangerous schools that are located all over the city on dangerous streets?
Well, the Duany study covered the schools in the Heart of Peoria area (click here for map), not the whole city. The schools you cite are actually outside the HOP area.
Yes, older buildings require updating and sometimes replacing. However, civic buildings constructed in the 19th century were built to last; the mindset back then was not to replace civic buildings every 50 years. So, the building should not be torn down simply because it’s 100 years old. They should actually consider whether the building can be reused. Especially when a new building would cost $15-20 million of our tax money. Don’t you think they should perform due diligence before replacing buildings that may not need to be replaced? I don’t think that’s too much to ask.
Merle Widmer has visited the school and talked to the principal, teachers, and parents there. He told me recently in an e-mail, “Most teachers say they will go where the board sends them. Parents prefer staying in the neighborhood. All acknowledge that the building needs updated and expanded. I don’t believe any firm was called in to look at improving and expanding so the cost is a guess.”
It’s not just that busing times would increase, but that the number of kids needing to be bused would increase — kids who currently can walk to school. Traffic on residential streets is not bad per se, as long as they are going the speed limit — especially the 20 mph speed limit in school zones.
As far as what to do about schools like Loucks, Sterling, and Kellar, each situation is different. Kellar fronts Mount Hawley, not Knoxville, and the city completely closes that road during the school day, so I think it’s pretty safe. I’m not sure what the boundaries are for the Sterling attendance area — do kids across Sterling to the west attend that school? If so, I’d say that’s a terribly dangerous intersection to cross for kids walking or biking to school. However, the school should be a model school for the district since it sits on over 15 acres of land with lots of space for athletic fields and nature walks. I wonder why their test scores are so low. Loucks fronts University at McClure and I do see kids crossing there frequently. I think things could be done to calm traffic a little more at that intersection.
I’m not exactly sure what your point is. You think because these schools are on busy streets and no one has gotten killed, that Glen Oak should be deliberately moved to a busy intersection at the cost of $15-20 million plus property acquisition costs, without even considering reuse of the current Glen Oak School building, even though the city has gone to extraordinary lengths to give the district an incentive to stay at the current location?
Glen Oak school is 117 years old. It’s heating system is convert from coal, to oil, to natural gas. The wiring of the building has been updated but doubt it would support hanging an A/C unit out each window which would still make the halls hot and the cafeteria hot also. The teachers are of course going to smile and say “we’ll go wherever the district sends us…” to Widmer. What else are they going to say? Privately, they will tell you GO is a shit box. Yes, I have asked serveral. The building isn’t worth spending money on a study to see if spending money on upgrades is worth it. The lot it sits on is not big enough for a new school period. So, I ask once again…. If not on the park site, then where? I have asked this on many blogs including this one and have never seen an answer. Why are people so attached to that old half bricked up building??? If you think it’s worth it’s weight, then turn it into a community center for the neighborhood and see how far the city will fund that.
If the shoe fits? Nice Em … classy comeback. I guess I should expect as much after that nasty “top ten” list on your blog.
Em says “if indeed you do live on the east side of the river.” OK, I just entitled my blog “A Knight in Dragonland” because I wanted to deceive people into thinking that I grew up in Peoria and now live in Pekin. That’s why I blog about the Richwoods and Pekin football teams.
Maybe people would respect your opinions a little more Em if you didn’t insult everybody and offer nothing of intellectual value.
Sorry … the last line was excessive.
Maybe the school is a hole right now – I have no idea, since I’ve never set foot in the building in my life. That doesn’t seem to be the opinion of some former students quoted on Bill’s blog, but OK. How ’bout District 150 at least look into the idea of renovating and expanding the current space or building on the same site. If it’s prohibitively expensive, fine … THEN explore other options. What’s your problem with that, Em?
Yep spend more money, ya know, the money you claim the district doesn’t have. Maybe you should step in the place first huh? As for former students on Billy’s blog, gee, they went there in the 60’s when District 150 didn’t have half the problems it has now. Apples and oranges. That just doesn’t make sense. It’s like I said, people, from Pekin, telling Peoria all thats wrong with their schools and some of them have never set foot in the school. Maybe you should worry about Pekin’s schools.
Holy cow Knight, I had no idea how important high school football was. I should be whipped with a wet noodle. I await with baited breath your next report on either team. Not. I never had an interest in your blog so I never cared where you were from. I just, until now, didn’t tell you that.
As for my opinions, I could care less if you or anyone else respect them. My blog is for my satisfaction only. I do believe that is why blogs came about in the first place. For people to vent and if someone read it, fine. It seems now people want to stir opinions among the masses. That’s fine too. That is not my intent so if my blog bends you, then leave it. It is a blog and I am not running for nor do I hold a public office. Opinions are like assholes, everyone has one. What’s your point? Did I mess with Creve Coeur?? Is that it? Then you should never go to the Jukebox Comedy Club or read Phil Luciano, our even Vonster who calls your home away from home Crevetucky??
As for this school, Glen Oak, I am for a new school. Something this district needs since a lot of their buildings are old and outdated. I wish the current site was large enough as it is ideal location but it is not. So, why waste money on studies or trying to rehab a very old building. If not at Glen Oak Park, then where?
Em: And oh by the way — a formal study is required by law — you know, the state , before the building can qualify for health life safety bonds…. unless that has been a tall tale too that the PBC will be the funding mechanism ….
Many people ask, why are the rules always changing to maintain the same sonata for D150 officials and the rest of us are supposed to comply with the rules that are on the books? IF the public was supposed to be following the Master Facility Plan, then why isn’t D150 following that plan? (Think Blaine Sumner, White …)
Yes I know a study is required. Study Study Study this Study that. Money here Money there. Way too much is spent on Studies.
The building is old and outdated. There. Send me the money. 🙂
You ask why D150 isn’t following the Master Plan? For the same reason the City of Peoria isn’t following their Master Plan……or any other government body for that matter. Plans change.
Great article.
Might be to late. #150 has went down the Prospect path. (purchaed property). Rebuffed an offer by the City of Peoria, Snubbed Mr LaHood. Appeased Sen.Shadid and Pissed off many in the city and the East Bluff. Is it to late ? No. but they need to be willing to listen at least. How long before this issue is laid to rest? I think it was a “handshake done deal” with Ken & Bonnie with the park site. It has become one great beig mess and shows how things get done (or not) with the citzens , #150,PPD & COP.
One thing I have found what the City does is plans plans plans and talks talks talks. What good is the HOP if it is not embraced by all units of goverment? Citzens? Each goverment has it own line of thinking and will go there own seprate path.
“Snubbing” Mr. LaHood may have been the smartest thing Dist #150 has done. More educators and fewer politicians! That little weasel Schock used the School Board as a ‘spring board’ to further is own political career. What about the present school board members? Boards, trustees, etc can be an evil, self-serving lot.
As far as pissing off many in the city…who cares. Many in this city need to be ‘pissed off.’ The next thing you know, the Journal Star will be screaming to make Dist# 150 a REGIONAL PROBLEM!