The City’s Economic Development Department has been trying to drum up support for their newest riverfront plan, sometimes called the “Green Edge Plan.” In case you’ve forgotten, this is a plan to build a road along the riverfront from the RiverPlex north to Spring Street (and eventually further north to connect with Grandview Drive) and construct townhouses on the northwest side of the road.

A workshop has been planned for next Saturday, May 3, 8:00 a.m. to noon at the Gateway Building, to get public input on the plan. Here’s the invitation and agenda:

Discuss what Peoria can do to encourage continued improvement in Riverfront Planning.

8:00 a.m.	Welcome – Ray Lees, Planning Commission
8:10 a.m.	Tom Tincher- Heartland Water Resources Council
8:30 a.m.	Terry Kohlbuss – Tri-County Regional Planning
8:45 a.m.	Craig Hullinger- Economic Development
9:00 a.m.	Break-out session of 10 person planning group. Discuss ideas, goals and proposals.
11:00 a.m.	Present outcome to group
12:00 p.m.	Adjourn

The citizen’s input will be placed on the City of Peoria blog at peoriaed.blogspot.com and incorporated into Riverfront planning efforts.

This plan has been getting its fair share of criticism. Owners of Detweiller Marina aren’t too keen on it because of how it would impact their property. Environmentalists aren’t happy with the fact that it would be displacing park land. Others wonder why we’re spending our energy and resources on this plan when we have other plans still in the hopper that we’ve only scratched the surface on — like the Heart of Peoria Plan and its four form districts, just for starters. Still others are concerned that the same developer who gave us “Riverfront Village” (concrete platform on stilts that blocks the view of the river) is involved in this plan.

At the March Planning Commission meeting, environmental activist Tom Edwards brought his own alternative plan to share with the commissioners:

For the record, Mr. Edwards’ alternatives listed on his document titled, “A Synopsis of a New Vision for Peoria’s Historic Riverfront Area,” dated March 11, 2008, are listed as follows:

1. A hiking/biking trail on the River’s Edge from McCluggage Bridge to the I-74 Murray Baker Bridge.
2. Keep all development on the outside of the Riverfront Park, i.e., between Adams Street and the park. There is a lot of empty land there, plus little used buildings that could lend themselves to other uses, including apartments and some thriving commercial artists among the solid industries already there.
3. Begin a continuing long-term joint program of the City and private property owners to locate in existing buildings. Fill in this area with multi-faceted types of development. Improve the attractiveness of Adams Street itself. It is the first view many people get of the City and Riverfront – plus, the view a great many commuters have to live with daily.
4. With money that would be spent on the proposed highway through the park, instead begin an outreach program with fix-up cost sharing incentives for the entire North Valley neighborhood west of Adams Street.
5. The former Rock Island Railroad depot building at the foot of Morton Street: Make it a museum for River history.
6. The proposed apartment development on privately owned land next to Detweiller Marina but not surrounded by the public’s park: It would be a total of 45 units, plus its large parking lot at the foot of Spring Street. This would be a negative for the present and future of the park. It and its parking lot would wall off part of the park and River view to the general public.

   Solution: Arrange a trade for this Riverfront parcel for available land directly opposite but on the outside edge of the park, which would allow apartment residents to have both green space and the lake to view from their windows, and the building and its parking lot would be consuming none of the park or River frontage itself.

7. There is a small wooded tract at the foot of the McCluggage Bridge. A Riverfront road would eliminate it; but it would be a shady terminus for a simple hiking/biking trail, as well as remaining a green entranceway to the City at the bridge.
8. Whether called island or peninsulas, river fill is simply more river fill. Halt all taking from the lake; rather, add to it. The River is our lifeline; its lake, our crown jewel.

Mr. Edwards’ plan would be quite a bit more expensive than Hullinger’s, since it would involve the acquisition of private property. One reason Hullinger is putting development on park land is because the city already owns it (this park land is unique in that it’s owned by the City and not the Park District). However, I do agree with Mr. Edwards in this: the City needs to promote (and possibly even incentivize) the reuse of existing buildings in built out areas.

I haven’t quite made up my mind yet, but I’m leaning toward the “let’s finish current plans first” camp. I like Hullinger’s idea, but it just feels like the timing isn’t quite right.

Here’s one of those breathless articles on how important it is to encase oneself in padding and a helmet when engaging in death-defying activities such as bicycling. I’m waiting for the “experts” to start pushing for joggers, then walkers to also wear lots of padding and helmets. Maybe they already do. Perhaps we should wear protective gear inside the house as well, whenever we decide we want to walk upstairs or — worse — downstairs. I’ll bet the statistics on accidents from people falling downstairs is staggering.